======================================================================== WRITINGS OF W E BEST - VOLUME 1 by W.E. Best ======================================================================== A collection of theological writings, sermons, and essays by W.E. Best (Volume 1), compiled for study and devotional reading. Chapters: 99 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ TABLE OF CONTENTS ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1. 01.0. A Comprehensive View Of Romans 2. 01.00. Introduction 3. 01.000. Panoramic View Of Romans 4. 01.1. SECTION I - Authentication Salutation - Rom_1:1-7 5. 01.2. Commendation Aspiration Obligation - Rom_1:8-16 6. 01.3. The Theme Of Romans - Rom_1:17 7. 01.4. SECTION II - Condemnation Rom_1:18-32; Rom_2:1-29; Rom_3:1-20 8. 01.5.1. Corruption Condemnation Gentiles - Rom_1:18-32 9. 01.5.2. Rejecters Of General Revelation Punished 10. 01.5.3. The Existence Of God Revealed 11. 01.5.4. Subjective And Objective Knowledge 12. 01.5.5. God Revealed In Creation 13. 01.5.6. Punishment On Exchangers Of God's Glory 14. 01.5.7. Punishment On Degraders Of Their Bodies 15. 01.5.8. Punishment Assumers Knowledge God Worthless 16. 01.5.9. Punishment On Those Knowing God Requirement 17. 01.6.1. Guilt And Condemnation Of The Jews - Rom_2:1-29 18. 01.6.2. Judged According To Truth 19. 01.6.3. The Certainty Of God's Judgment 20. 01.6.4. The Righteousness Of God's Judgment 21. 01.6.5. Judged According To Works 22. 01.6.6. No Respect Of Persons In Gods Judgment 23. 01.6.7. All Secrets Revealed In Gods Judgment 24. 01.6.8. Gods Just Judgment On Hypocrisy 25. 01.6.9. Gods Just Judgment On Religious Rites 26. 01.7.1. Gods Just Judgment On Depraved Jews Gentiles 27. 01.7.2. Gods Just Judgment On Jewish Unbelief 28. 01.7.3. Gods Just Judgment On Universal Depravity 29. 02.00. Christ Could Not Be Tempted by W.E.Best 30. 02.01. Introduction 31. 02.02. Christ Was Never Tempted To Sin 32. 02.04. Christ Was Tested Apart From Sin 33. 02.05. Teachers Of Peccability Proclaim Another Jesus 34. 02.06. Jesus Christ Is The Unique Person 35. 02.07. Christ Assumed A Human Nature 36. 02.08. The GodMan Lacked Knowledge 37. 02.09. Teachers Of Impeccability Not Guilty Docetism 38. 02.10. Teachers Of Impeccability Not Guilty Docetism 39. 02.11. Exegesis Of Scripture Proves Impeccability 40. 02.12. Christ Affirmed His Impeccability 41. 02.13. There Was No Sin In the Incarnate Christ 42. 02.14. Christ Did Not Sin During Days Of His Flesh 43. 02.15. Christ Who Knew No Sin Was Made Sin 44. 02.16. Opposite Imputations Are Inseparable 45. 02.17. Sin Are Forgiven And Sin Is Condemned 46. 02.18 Christ Was Both Priest And Sacrifice 47. 02.19. Jesus Christ Is High Priest Forever 48. 03.0.. Doctrine That Christ Was Peccable Is Heresy 49. 03.00. Christ Emptied Himself by W.E.Best 50. 03.01. Christ's Two Sonships 51. 03.02. Christ's Two Begettings 52. 03.03. Christ's Two Advents 53. 03.04. Christ's Two Forms (Part I) 54. 03.05. Christ's Two Forms (Part II) 55. 03.06. Christ In The Form Of God 56. 03.07. Equal With God 57. 03.08. Christ Emptied Himself (Part I) 58. 03.09. Christ Emptied Himself (Part II) 59. 03.10. Christ Emptied Himself (Part III) 60. 03.11. Christ Emptied Himself (Part IV) 61. 03.12. The Form Of A Servant (Part I) 62. 03.13. The Form Of A Servant (Part II) 63. 04.1.0. Christs Kingdom Is Future - Volume I by W.E.Best 64. 04.1.000. Overview 65. 04.1.1. Introduction 66. 04.1.2. Patriarchs Names Recorded In Kings Genealogy 67. 04.1.3. Women's Names Recorded In The King's Genealogy 68. 04.1.4. Preface To Section II 69. 04.1.5. Theocracy - God's Ordained Form Of Government 70. 04.1.6.1 Kings Preceding Division Of Kingdom - David 71. 04.1.6.2. Kings Preceding Division Of Kingdom - Solomon 72. 04.1.6.3. Kings Preceding Division Kingdom -Rehoboam 73. 04.1.7.1. Four Kings In Judah - Asa 74. 04.1.7.2. Four Kings In Judah - Jehoshaphat 75. 04.1.7.3. Four Kings In Judah - Hezekiah 76. 04.1.7.4. Four Kings In Judah - Josiah 77. 04.1.8. A Short Revival Under Zerubbabel 78. 04.1.9. Conclusion 79. 04.2.0. Christ's Kingdom Is Future - Vol II 80. 04.2.01. Introduction 81. 04.2.02. The King's Birth 82. 04.2.03. The King's Mother 83. 04.2.04. The King's Incarnation 84. 04.2.05. The King Of The Jews 85. 04.2.06. The King's Forerunners 86. 04.2.07. Baptism Of The King 87. 04.2.08. The Greatness Of John 88. 04.2.09. John's Message Of Repentance 89. 04.2.10. The Baptismal Formula 90. 04.2.11. Joels Prophecy Of Baptism In Spirit And Fire 91. 04.2.12. Johns Prophecy Baptism In Spirit And Fire 92. 04.2.13. Partial Fulfillment Of Prophecies Joel & John 93. 04.2.14. Complete Fulfillment Of Prophecies Joel & John 94. 04.2.15. The Kingdom Prophesied 95. 04.2.16. The Kingdom Defined 96. 04.2.17. The Kingdom Has Approached 97. 04.2.18. The Kingdom Prepared From Foundation Of World 98. 04.3.0. Christs Kingdom Is Future - Vol III by W.E.Best 99. 04.3.01. Introduction ======================================================================== CHAPTER 1: 01.0. A COMPREHENSIVE VIEW OF ROMANS ======================================================================== A Comprehensive View Of Romans - Volume 1 by W. E. Best Copyright © 1992 W. E. Best Scripture quotations in this book designated “NASB” are from the NEW AMERICAN STANDARD BIBLE, © 1960, 1962, 1963, 1968, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1975, and 1977 by the Lockman Foundation, and are used by permission. Those designated “translation” are by the author and taken from the Greek Text. All others are from the King James Bible. This book is distributed by the W. E. Best Book Missionary Trust P. O. Box 34904 Houston, Texas 77234-4904 USA CONTENTS Introduction Panoramic View Of Romans SECTION I - PAUL’S PRELUDE TO THE EPISTLE Romans 1:1-17 Authentication Salutation 2. Commendation, Aspiration, And Oligation - Romans 1:8-16 Commendation Aspiration Obligation 3. The Theme Of Romans - Romans 1:17 SECTION II - CONDEMNATION Romans 1:18-32; Romans 2:1-29; Romans 3:1-31. Precursory 5. Corruption And Condemnation Of The Gentiles - Romans 1:18-32 Rejectors Of General Revelation Punished The Existance Of God Revealed Subjective And Objective Knowledge God Revealed In Creation Punishment On Exchangers Of God’s Glory Punishment On Degraders Of Their Bodies Punishment On Assumers That Knowledge Of God Is Worthless The following four things are infused by the Devil into worthless minds Punishment On Those Completely Knowing God’s Requirement 6. Guilt And Condemnation Of The Jews - Romans 2:1-29 Judged According To Truth The Certainty Of God’s Judgment The Righteousness Of God’s Judgment Judged According To Works No Respect Of Persons In God’s Judgment All Secrets Revealed In God’s Judgment God’s Just Judgment On Hypocrisy God’s Just Judgment On Religious Rites 7. God’s Just Judgment On Depraved Jews And Gentiles - Romans 3:1-18 God’s Just Judgment On Jewish Unbelief God’s Just Judgment On Universal Depravity ======================================================================== CHAPTER 2: 01.00. INTRODUCTION ======================================================================== INTRODUCTION Every person in whom the Spirit of life dwells is expected to have an extensive mental grasp of the principle of life which comes from God the Father, through Jesus Christ, and by the Holy Spirit. The Father chose certain ones in Christ and gave His Son as an offering for sin to pay the debt for those He chose out from among mankind. The Son died for them, and the Holy Spirit applies that which the Father planned and the Son purchased. Hence, God has come to us through the Son and by the Holy Spirit (Ephesians 1:3-14). Then, we in turn go to the Father by the Holy Spirit of regeneration, made possible through and by Jesus Christ at Calvary. Having heard about the Ephesian saints’ faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, Paul prayed that God might give them a spirit of wisdom and disclosure of truth in the sphere of a full knowledge of Jesus Christ (Ephesians 1:17). The noun epignosis means coming to a definite spiritual understanding of Jesus Christ. Paul was praying in God’s will, because he knew that God had permanently enlightened (perfect passive participle of photidzo) their mental and spiritual understanding that they might have a permanent knowledge (perfect active infinitive of oida) of what is the hope of God’s calling (Ephesians 1:18). This calling is by the sovereign God (2 Timothy 1:9), in Christ (Php 3:14), according to God’s purpose (Romans 8:28), irrevocable (Romans 11:29), personal (Luke 19:5), by means of the gospel (2 Thessalonians 2:14), and those called are commanded to spare no effort to make our calling sure (2 Peter 1:10). There is absolutely no excuse for Christians to say they have neither time nor opportunity for an extensive and exhaustive study of so great a deliverance by Christ’s redemptive work at Calvary. Our salvation comes out of eternity, travels through time, and goes back to eternity. This “so great salvation” (Hebrews 2:3) covers God’s purpose from eternal election to the eternal kingdom. Romans has been called Paul’s Body of Divinity, signifying that the Epistle is the most systematic of all his writings. It’s systematic content should be known by rote for the purpose of meditation. The far-reaching effects of a thorough study of Romans will be evident in the lives of Christians. Since God has set everlasting existence (olam, eternity, everlasting, or forever) in the heart of man (Ecclesiastes 3:11), the things of time can never satisfy the human heart. As Proverbs, which records the laws of heaven for life on earth, sets forth the sufficiency of Divine wisdom, Ecclesiastes reveals the insufficiency of human wisdom. In Ecclesiastes, the heart is described as being too large for the object, the things of time. Solomon, the author of both books, was dissatisfied with the things of time, because he tried everything he considered important “under the sun,” an expression used 29 times in Ecclesiastes. Although the book presents the world at its best, Solomon did not find satisfaction in science (Ecclesiastes 1:4-11), wisdom under the sun (Ecclesiastes 1:12-18), pleasure (Ecclesiastes 2:1-11), materialism (Ecclesiastes 2:12-26), fatalism-the impersonal character of events (Ecclesiastes 3:1-15), deism-belief in the existence of God on the evidence of human reason alone (3:16-4:16), religion (Ecclesiastes 5:1-8), wealth (5:9-6:12), and morality (7:1-12:12). None of these things satisfy, for the reason that God has set everlasting existence in man’s heart. The things of time, which are transitory, can never satisfy. God is referred to only as Creator, not as the covenant God, until Ecclesiastes 12:13-14. These two final verses in Ecclesiastes give the conclusion to the problem of Ecclesiastes 1:1-3, and all the experiences of man “under the sun” (1:4-12:12). Please notice the word “duty” (Ecclesiastes 12:13) of the KJB and “applied” in the NASB are in italics (supplied words by the translators, but not for emphasis as some foolishly think). Ecclesiastes 12:13 may read, “Fear God, and keep His commandments; for this is the whole man.” Reverential fear is the whole man. This signifies the man who God alone satisfies. The New Testament proclaims the same principle. Christ said, “If you love Me, you will keep my commandments” (John 14:15 NASB). In The Song of Solomon, the infinite object is too large for the finite heart, and this is why Jesus Christ alone can satisfy. The book of Proverbs portrays the sufficiency of Divine wisdom. Ecclesiastes reveals the insufficiency of human wisdom. The Song of Solomon describes the love of God for His people. Thus, an infinite object is necessary to give full contentment to finite everlasting existence in man’s heart. The Christian is always hungering and thirsting for righteousness because the everlasting life, which he has as the product of Christ’s redemption, is not infinite. The righteousness for which we hunger and thirst is infinite; but the righteousness wrought by Christ in death, which was first imputed to the elect before it is imparted in us, is not the infinite righteous character of God. Our righteousness which is from God is the righteousness which God’s justice demanded. This righteousness was provided in Christ’s perfect obedience to the law and His perfect sacrifice for sin on behalf of the elect. As God cannot create God, the righteousness He provided for the elect cannot be His inherent righteousness. Therefore, the basic principle of this fact is that every effect must have a cause; and the effect will always be inferior to the cause, since God, the first cause by necessity, is greater than His creatures, even His redeemed people. Christians are new creations in Christ, but God made us new creations (2 Corinthians 5:17). With these facts before us, we understand why Christians hunger and thirst for righteousness and why God shall display in the coming ages the excelling wealth of His grace in the sphere of kindness to us in Christ Jesus (Matthew 5:6; 1 Peter 2:2; Ephesians 2:7). The redeemed finite people of God shall forever take their places at the feet of the infinite Savior and Lord. To suggest that believers become “gods” either in time or eternity is heretical. No Christian accepts the doctrine that all who obey the gospel can enter the celestial kingdom and eventually become gods and goddesses. Paul used the noun righteousness (dikaiosune) 36 times in his Epistle to the Romans. It is a legal term which denotes the character of being right. Therefore, no accusation can be brought against a righteous person, whether he is one of the Persons in the Godhead who is inherently righteous, or God’s people who have been made righteous by Christ’s redemptive work at Calvary. Distinction must be made between the righteous God and those He makes righteous in Christ. As there is a distinction between the Creator and man He created, there is a difference between Redeemer and redeemed, Justifier and justified, Sanctifier and sanctified, Begetter and begotten, and Caller and called. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 3: 01.000. PANORAMIC VIEW OF ROMANS ======================================================================== PANORAMIC VIEW OF ROMANS The Epistle to the Romans is the most systematic of all Paul’s writings. This is not to say there is not an ordered system in his other Epistles, exemplified in Ephesians, but Romans covers a more detailed plan than any of his other Epistles. Let us first get a panoramic view of this great body of divinity. Between the INTRODUCTION, Romans 1:1-17, and the CONCLUSION, Romans 15:14-33; Romans 16:1-27, there are three major divisions: l. Romans 1:18-32; Romans 2:1-29; Romans 3:1-31; Romans 4:1-25; Romans 5:1-21; Romans 6:1-23; Romans 7:1-25; Romans 8:1-39 Paul gave a doctrinal treatise on condemnation, justification through a God-provided righteousness, practical sanctification, and glorification. 2. Romans 9:1-33; Romans 10:1-21; Romans 11:1-36 Paul presented an interpretative essay on God’s choice, rejection, and restoration of national Israel. 3. Romans 12:1-21; Romans 13:1-14; Romans 14:1-23; Romans 15:1-13 Paul emphasized the practical application of his doctrinal teaching in our duty to God (Romans 12:1), ourselves (Romans 12:2-3), the assembly (Romans 12:4-8), the relative duties to others (Romans 12:9-21), civil authority (Romans 13:1-7), claims made on us by others with proper motivation in view of a consummated salvation (Romans 13:8-14), weak Christians (14:1-15:7), and common courtesy (Romans 15:8-13). The following major truths are taught in this Epistle: 1. Justice requires righteousness (1:18-3:20). 2. Righteousness is revealed (3:21-5:11). 3. Righteousness is realized (5:12-8:13). 4. Righteousness preserves (8:14-39). 5. Righteousness is reflected (12-16). Without Biblical teaching one cannot expect Biblical living. This means that without a Biblical foundation there will never be a Biblical superstructure. Furthermore, both the foundation and superstructure have a vital connection with Israel. Jesus Christ came through the Davidic line. Salvation is of the Jews. Through God’s rejection of Israel, the elect Gentiles have been grafted in. But God is not through with Israel. She shall be restored. Without Israel, we could not enter the kingdom. The introduction (Romans 1:1-17) and conclusion (15:14-16:27) contain much more than salutations. In the introduction, Paul went from authentication and salutation (Romans 1:1-7) to his prayer for the saints (Romans 1:8-9), to his desire to personally visit them (Romans 1:10-13), to his ministry in Rome (Romans 1:14-17). In his conclusion, Paul began where he left off in his introduction. He went from his ministry (Romans 15:14-21), to his journey to them (Romans 15:22-29), to urging them to strive with him in prayers on his behalf (Romans 15:30-33), and to the salutations (Romans 16:1-24). The last three verses record the apostle’s benediction (Romans 16:25-27). In the salutations, Romans 16:1-24, sixteen of the twenty-one times in which the Greek verb aspadzomai-meaning to greet, salute, or bid farewell-is used, the inflected form is aorist middle imperative. (The verb is also used five times as a present middle indicative.) An imperative is a command. The point is that Jesus Christ gave us a command not only to love one another (John 13:34; John 14:15; 1 John 4:11) but also to be courteous. Christianity is more than doctrine and ordinances; it is a manifestation of love, not sentiment. May we never forget that our loving Christians is our loving those Christ loves. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 4: 01.1. SECTION I - AUTHENTICATION SALUTATION - ROM_1:1-7 ======================================================================== SECTION I PAUL’S PRELUDE TO THE EPISTLE - Romans 1:1-17 Paul’s introduction to his Roman Epistle has three major subdivisions: 1. Authentication and salutation - Romans 1:1-7 2. Commendation, aspiration, and obligation - Romans 1:8-16 3. Theme of the Epistle-the righteousness of God revealed in the gospel - Romans 1:17 Chapter 1 - AUTHENTICATION AND SALUTATION - Romans 1:1-7 Authentication Paul was establishing the genuineness of his position in Christ. His authentication includes his name-Paul, his being a slave of Jesus Christ, his call by God as an apostle, and his permanent separation for the gospel which was not hidden in the Old Testament. Confirmation begins with the name, Paul. Paul’s Hebrew name was Saul; but Saul was also known by the Gentile name, Paul, which was revealed shortly after his commission to the Gentiles (Acts 13:9). Therefore, the gospel was ordained by God to go by the personal agency of a Jew to non-Jews. The term doulos (slave or servant) means Paul was a slave of Jesus Christ. Some say doulos should not be rendered “slave,” because that translation excludes the element of free will. Did Paul have any choice concerning his call to the apostleship? He had no more to do with his call to the ministry than with his regeneration. There were no volunteers among the apostles, and there is no surrendering to the ministry subsequent to the apostles because all God-called men have been drafted. Others think Paul used the noun doulos in the sense of Abraham, Moses, Joshua, etc., who are called Jehovah’s servants. There is nothing in Scripture to contradict the idea of slavery in Paul’s acknowledgment of Jesus Christ as his Lord and Master. Hidden in the noun doulos is a great truth concerning the nature of true liberty, and that liberty is enslavement to Jesus Christ to whom he belonged by creation and redemption. Such slavery is Christianity. The word doulos expresses the condition of one who is not absolutely free. Paul applied the term to himself (Romans 1:1; Galatians 1:10; Php 1:1; Titus 1:1). The four masters in the world are sin, self, Satan, and the Savior. In Jesus Christ, Paul was no longer a slave to the other three. He was more than a servant. He was a bondslave, bound by love, to Jesus Christ. Paul’s first relationship with God was that of son (regeneration). On the day of his conversion experience, the fruit of regeneration, he asked, “Lord, what wilt thou have me to do?” (Acts 9:6). A son does nothing to be saved, but a bondslave must do all to please Him who saved him. While the unregenerate person is compelled to do nothing to be regenerated, after his regeneration, he is impelled to do everything to please his heavenly Father. The word bondslave involves the idea of belonging to a master and serving him as a slave. The first Christian idea of a bondslave is that the believer is a purchased possession (1 Corinthians 6:20; 1 Peter 1:18-21). This is illustrated by the slave becoming the property of his creditor (Deuteronomy 15:12). However, the slavery had a termination. But if the slave, because of his love for his master, refused to go free, he remained the servant of his master forever (Deuteronomy 15:16-17). This illustrates the second Christian idea of a bondslave, which is the believer’s self-surrender. Spiritual service must always be the product of choice and never that of coercion. Hence, the believer’s surrender is not forced; it is the expression of self-surrender. The new life purchased by Jesus Christ and applied by the Holy Spirit develops in every recipient of grace the sense of eternal debt to Jesus Christ, a personal debt that can never be forgotten and an infinite debt that can never be fully discharged. Paul was called an apostle. The adjective “called” (kletos, called or summoned) must not be translated like a verb. Since the adjective is without an article, it means a definite call at an indefinite time. Hence, Paul’s call to the apostleship originated in God’s purpose; but God’s purpose became a reality by His sending Jesus Christ to personally purchase Paul and also to summon him to the office (Acts 26:12-18). Paul’s call to apostleship, unlike that of the twelve, followed the days of Christ’s ministry. But he did not consider himself to have fallen short of the superapostles (1 Corinthians 15:8; 2 Corinthians 11:5). The apostle Paul had been permanently separated (perfect passive participle of aphoridzo, to separate or to set apart) for the gospel of God. The perfect tense denotes that God’s action was completed in past time with continuing results. Paul was not only separated to the message of the gospel itself, along with all who have been regenerated, but he was also separated for its proclamation. The following are seven things said about the gospel of God in the introduction- Romans 1:1-17. l. The gospel’s source is God (Romans 1:1). 2. The gospel was promised beforehand by the agency of the prophets (Romans 1:2). 3. The gospel concerns the Person and Work of Jesus Christ (Romans 1:3-4, Romans 1:9). 4. The gospel must be preached (Romans 1:9, Romans 1:14-15). (Also see 1 Corinthians 9:16.) 5. The gospel is the power of God which results in salvation (Romans 1:16 a). 6. The gospel is to the Jew first and then to the Gentile (Romans 1:16 b). 7. The gospel is the revelation of God’s righteousness (Romans 1:17). The gospel, by the power of the Spirit of regeneration, forcefully enters the prepared soil of the regenerated heart in a salvation experience (1 Thessalonians 1:5-10). The gospel of God was not hidden in the Old Testament, since it was promised beforehand by the prophets in the Holy Scriptures (Romans 1:2; Romans 3:2; Exodus 12:1-51; Isaiah 53:1-12; etc.). God’s gospel has many facets, but there has not been and never will be another gospel (Galatians 1:6-9). The following are some of the major features of the gospel for consideration: l. God is the Author of the gospel. 2. Jesus Christ is the subject of the gospel. 3. Grace is the character of the gospel. 4. The elect are the recipients of the gospel. 5. The kingdom will be the consummation of the gospel. While the gospel means “good news,” Paul emphatically declared that the term does not mean that which is “new” (Romans 1:2). Some are saying “the gospel of God” is not to be confused with Paul’s gospel-“...the proclamation of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery that has been kept silent in times eternal” (Romans 16:25 -translation). Did Paul preach a different gospel from the gospel that was promised by the prophets? The answer is found in the words of Paul himself in Acts 26:13-23. The “mystery” of Romans 16:25 is not a different gospel from that proclaimed before him, but it was how the Gentiles (non-Jews) could be introduced on the ground of “fellowship” with Old Testament saints (Ephesians 2:11-22; Ephesians 3:1-12). The gospel of God is (1) prophesied in the Old Testament, (2) personified in Jesus Christ, and (3) personalized in the saints-God’s elect. God’s gospel of Romans 1:1 was not God’s afterthought but His forethought. In fact, God cannot have an afterthought; in His infinite wisdom, He knows everything simultaneously. The “holy scriptures” of Romans 1:2 identify the gospel with the promised Son of Romans 1:3-4. Therefore, the gospel is personified in the Son of God. The promise became a Person, and the Person became the good news. This good news is described in Romans 1:3-4. The following are the major points of the good news: 1. The word “made” (genomenou, aorist middle participle of ginomai, to be born, or to come) should be compared with “declared” (horisthentos, aorist passive participle of horidzo, to declare, designate, or determine). The son who was born of the seed of David has been declared the Son of God. Although Jesus Christ was born the unique man, He was unlike the sons of men. Christ’s being the descendant of David proves He is the man approved of God. His being the only begotten Son of the Father proves He is God. 2. The “seed of David” is to be compared with “the Son of God.” The first reveals Jesus Christ as a member of the human race; the second proves He has a nature superior to the human race. Because of His human nature, He can reach the elect; and because of His Divine nature, He can save them. Thus, due to Christ’s hypostatic union, He is our Kinsman Redeemer. 3. “According to the flesh” should be compared with “according to the Spirit.” The first refers to Christ’s incarnation and humiliation; the second applies to His resurrection and exaltation. In these verses, the three Persons in the Godhead are seen within one context. The simple rule of mathematics that things equal to the same thing are equal to each other may be applied to the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit being one. The declaration is by the Holy Spirit, and the resurrection is the proof of the declaration. Paul concluded the validity of his position and apostleship by saying, “through whom we received grace and apostleship for obedience on behalf of His name...” (Romans 1:5 -translation). Grace and apostleship is the proper order, and this order also demonstrates the fact that blessing comes with responsibility “for obedience to the faith.” In the light of the context, the “faith” (pistis) is objective genitive, not subjective genitive. Salutation Following his authentication, Paul greeted the subjects of his Epistle in whom the gospel was personalized (Romans 1:6-7). “Called of Jesus Christ” denotes the source of their calling (Romans 1:6). The genitive case in the Greek is a mark of ownership; therefore, they belonged to Jesus Christ: “and you belong to Christ, and Christ belongs to God” (1 Corinthians 3:23 NASB). “Called saints” (dative masculine plural of the adjective hagios, holy, righteous, or God’s people) refers to position because of imparted righteousness (Romans 1:7). God’s “calling” is sovereign, in Christ, according to God’s eternal purpose, irrevocable, personal, by means of the gospel, and no effort must be spared to make it sure. Regeneration and calling differ; however, they have a vital connection. Regeneration is the work of the sovereign Godhead; God makes a person who is spiritually dead in his trespasses alive with Christ by the Spirit. (See Ephesians 2:5.) The gracious work of the Spirit in regeneration causes the recipient to respond to the gospel call. Calling, therefore, is the Divine summons which appeals to the principle of life already in the individual’s heart that causes his understanding and will to act. While regeneration takes place independent of the understanding and will, calling is made effectual by the understanding and will. Therefore, calling is the bringing forth by the call of the gospel the Divinely given life into light (2 Timothy 1:9-10). Failure to make this distinction is as foolish as a young married woman calling a baby she prenames and hopes to have when she is not even pregnant. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 5: 01.2. COMMENDATION ASPIRATION OBLIGATION - ROM_1:8-16 ======================================================================== Chapter 2 - COMMENDATION, ASPIRATION, AND OBLIGATION - Romans 1:8-16 Commendation Paul’s commendation began with his prayerful thanksgiving for the “faith” of the Roman saints (Romans 1:8). “Above all else [proton, an adverb meaning in the first place or above all else-men is a particle which can be used for emphasis or continuation], I am thanking my God through Jesus Christ concerning all of you, because your faith is being proclaimed in all the world” (translation). The position of the word “faith” before the pronoun in the Greek places the emphasis on faith rather than on the person whose faith it is. The Romans were famous, but their God-given faith must be preeminent. How different this is from what we hear today! What about the praise that is given to some “believers” by religionists? The Biblical understanding of Christianity destroys all human accolades. Aspiration The apostle Paul spoke of “my God” (Romans 1:8), “who is my witness” (Romans 1:9), “my spirit” (Romans 1:9), and “my prayers” (Romans 1:9). His God was the sovereign God of the universe; his spirit was his renewed spirit; his prayers were his strong desire for the Roman saints who he had never seen. Hence, we see in this God-called man the zeal of the apostle, the mind of the teacher, and the heart of the pastor (Php 1:3-7). One must not overlook the order of Paul’s God, his spirit, and his prayers. Apart from one’s recognition of God’s absolute sovereignty and a renewed spirit, he can never pray effectually. There are prerequisites to one’s ability to pray. Prayer is vain unless it is within the rules of Scripture. Prayer was not designed to move God to formulate new purposes, but to conform the believer to God’s purpose. Since prayer is in and of the Spirit, it is the Spirit making intercession for us, with us, and in us according to God’s will (Romans 8:26-27; 1 John 5:14). Prayer always leads to unselfishness, and this was demonstrated in Paul’s life (Romans 1:9-10; Acts 20:24). The spirit of all true service is expressed in Romans 1:11-12 -“For I long to see you, in order that I may impart to you some spiritual benefit that you may be established, and that is to share in mutual encouragement through the faith in each of us, both yours and mine” (translation). Spiritual gifts are imparted to God’s spiritual leaders for the purpose of their imparting spiritual benefits to assembly members (Ephesians 4:11-16). The ministry of pastors/teachers is not exactly mutual with saints in general, but it leads to that which is mutual. Paul’s longing was the beginning of his purpose to go to Rome, and his love led him to make definite plans to pursue and fulfill that purpose. The statement, “through the faith in each of us” (dia tes en allelois pisteos), needs careful study in the light of its context. Since the noun pistis can mean trust or belief, the system of truth that is believed, or faithfulness which results from faith, we need to translate the verse in the light of what the apostle was emphasizing. Was he talking about his faith in the Roman Christians, or was he speaking of his faithfulness in imparting some spiritual benefit to them? Did they joyfully receive Paul’s teaching, and were they strengthened by their faith in Paul or by their faithful reciprocation (allelon, a reciprocal noun)? Paul had commended “the faith” of the saints and expressed his desire to be with them for fellowship; now he spoke of having some “fruit” among them (Romans 1:13). Once again we see an important order: (1) faith, (2) fellowship, and (3) fruit. Without faithfulness, there is no basis for fellowship. The basic meaning of koinonia, the word for fellowship, is close mutual relationship, sharing, or intimacy. The statement that there is only one fellowship in Scripture into which all believers are brought on accepting Christ as Savior is absolute nonsense. The particular kind of fellowship implied in any passage where the word “fellowship” occurs must be interpreted in the light of its context. Philippians gives some interesting examples of various fellowships: (1) fellowship in the gospel (Php 1:5), (2) fellowship of the Spirit (Php 2:1), (3) fellowship of Christ’s sufferings (Php 3:10), and (4) fellowship of giving (Php 4:15). Other examples of fellowship are recorded in Scripture: (1) fellowship with the Father and with His Son Jesus Christ (1 John 1:3), (2) fellowship with fellow believers (1 John 1:3), (3) fellowship with the assembly (Acts 2:42), etc. Faith leads to fellowship; and in turn, it brings strength and encouragement which results in fruit. Fruit is the Christian’s life, not his deeds. We must not confuse fruitbearing with works. Christ’s life in us produces fruit through us. A fruit tree does not struggle to bear fruit, but it bears fruit silently for its owner. Fruit speaks of what we are, and it also represents character. Obligation Paul understood what his obligation involved, and he approached his responsibility with a thrice repeated “I am”: (1) “I am obligated to both Greeks and to Barbarians, to both wise and to foolish” (Romans 1:14 -translation); (2) “So as much as is in me I am ready [prothumos, pro, before; and thumos, intense feeling-ready in mind, prepared, willing] to preach the gospel to you also who are in Rome” (Romans 1:15 -translation); (3) “For I am not ashamed of the gospel, since it is the power of God which results in salvation to everyone believing, both to Jew first and to Greek” (Romans 1:16 -translation). The apostle was effective in these because he was united to the great “I Am,” the Lord Jesus Christ. Without Christ, Paul knew nothing (1 Corinthians 2:2; 1 Corinthians 4:4; Php 3:10); he could do nothing (John 15:5; Galatians 2:20; Php 4:13); he was nothing (2 Corinthians 12:11); and he had nothing (Php 3:7-9). What did Paul have that he had not received from God? (1 Corinthians 4:7). This question must be made personal. Paul declared his indebtedness to people without respect to degree of culture or intellect. The wisdom of the cultured will not save, and the ignorant are not excused. God shall destroy the wisdom of the wise, and He shall set aside the understanding of the intelligent (1 Corinthians 1:19). The apostle’s obligation grew out of his indebtedness to Jesus Christ. From the day he began his earthly sojourn, his debt increased; until on the road to Damascus, he was enabled by the Spirit of regeneration to see that a Daysman had come between the righteous Judge and the unrighteous Saul and that He had paid his debt of sin (Romans 8:1; Romans 8:18-34). Although the forgiven Paul was clear of the sin debt, he now had a debt of gratitude to Jesus Christ that he could never pay. There is no “statute of limitations” that could ever cancel such a debt of gratitude; therefore, all Paul could do was to give himself wholly to the proclamation of the good news of which he was unashamed. Paul affirmed his readiness to preach the gospel. The adjective prothumos (Romans 1:15) reveals the heavy breathing of a runner, or of a parent when his child is endangered. This expresses Paul’s passion to preach (1 Corinthians 9:16). He was ready not only for service but also to suffer (Acts 21:13), and later he was ready to die (2 Timothy 4:6). Preparation is a relative word. We may be prepared for some things but not for others. Paul was ready to preach, and the infinitive “to preach” (euaggelisasthai) is in the aorist tense, the tense of finality and absoluteness. He had a definite message that was absolute in its realm and final in its revelation. At that time, he could not say he was ready to die; that statement came after much preparation and at the close of his ministry. This is a valuable lesson for all Christians to learn. The apostle asserted his boldness when he said, “For I am not ashamed of the gospel.” The conjunction gar is used three times in Romans 1:16-17 -“For [gar] I am not ashamed of the gospel; since [gar] it is the power of God which results in salvation to [eis, accusative of result] everyone believing, both to Jew first, and to Greek. For [gar] in it a righteousness of God is being revealed out of faith to faith, as it has been written: the just one shall live by faith” (translation). Each time the conjunction is used it confirms the preceding clause. Paul was unashamed of the gospel because it results in salvation to everyone believing. In the gospel, a God-kind of righteousness is being revealed. The word of God has an emotional effect on every child of God. He cannot remain stoical in the presence of God’s word. Paul’s emotions are revealed in his going from his position as an apostle before the Lord, which would have been impossible without his first being positionally in Christ, to the moving of his heart in his obligation to Christ for what the Lord Jesus Christ had done for him. Paul was not ashamed of his message, whether he was in religious Jerusalem, philosophical Athens, commercial Ephesus, immoral Corinth, or powerful Rome. No, Paul was not ashamed of his message though it had a Carpenter for its subject, fishermen for its advocates, and commoners for its supporters. The following are persons who are ashamed of the gospel: (1) the worldly wise, because God makes foolish the wisdom of the wise (1 Corinthians 1:18-21); (2) the great and powerful of the world, because it brings all men to the same level (Jude 1:3); (3) the rich, because salvation is without money and without price (Isaiah 55:1-2); (4) the pleasure lovers, because they fear it will destroy their mirth (2 Timothy 3:2-4); and (5) the religionists, because they hate any message that dethrones man (John 6:58-66). ======================================================================== CHAPTER 6: 01.3. THE THEME OF ROMANS - ROM_1:17 ======================================================================== Chapter 3 - THE THEME OF ROMANS - Romans 1:17 Paul’s theme is the righteousness of God which the gospel reveals (Romans 1:17). An unobstructed view of righteousness is an absolute necessity for every Christian. The righteousness of Romans 1:17 is a God-kind of righteousness which no one can receive except by the Spirit of regeneration. It is a provision that is righteous because it has been brought into being by the righteous character of God. A perfect analogy to this God-kind of righteousness is 2 Peter 1:4 -“...partakers of a God-like nature...” (translation). No one has either the same Divine nature or the same righteous character as God. Erroneous views of righteousness in Romans 1:17 are taught: (1) One view is that it is God’s attribute of justice. However, justice of itself would have sealed our damnation. (2) Another view is that it is God’s goodness that He reveals. But this is a departure from Paul’s argument. Why did Paul use the word righteousness if that was true? Paul was unashamed of the gospel because in it a righteousness for the elect is revealed. Justice requires it (Romans 1:18-32; Romans 2:1-29; Romans 3:1-20). This righteousness is revealed (Romans 3:21-31; Romans 4:1-25; Romans 5:1-11). It is realized (Romans 5:12-21; Romans 6:1-23; Romans 7:1-25; Romans 8:1-13). This righteousness is reserved (Romans 8:14-39). It is reflected (Romans 12:1-21; Romans 13:1-14; Romans 14:1-23; Romans 15:1-33; Romans 16:1-27). The following are some points concerning the righteousness of God which give a systematic view of this great subject: 1. The inherently righteous God is the source of this revealed righteousness. 2. The inherently righteous Son of God is the Person in the Godhead who, by His righteous life and death as the God-man, provided a righteousness for the elect. 3. The inherently righteous Spirit is the third Person in the Godhead who imparted the provided righteousness in the elect in regeneration, thus making them finitely righteous in Jesus Christ. 4. Righteous men are those who have had the Christ-provided righteousness imparted in them, because it was first imputed to them in their justification before the inherently righteous Father. 5. The righteousness that is imparted in the elect in salvation is not the mere attribute of justice that effects deliverance from sin; but it is something provided by the obedience of One, Jesus Christ. 6. The provided righteousness is revealed in the gospel, and this message is God’s power resulting in salvation. 7. The righteousness of God in the gospel is being revealed out of faith resulting in the operation of faith, because the righteous person by means of a God-given faith will exercise the functions of life. The soul is the life of the body; faith is the life of the soul; Christ is the life of faith. 8. Having had God’s provided righteousness imputed and imparted, recipients of provided righteousness are continually performing righteousness, because they have been born out of God. 9. Those who are constantly performing righteousness are also constantly hungering and thirsting for righteousness, because their finite righteousness finds satisfaction only in God’s infinite righteousness. 10. The righteous in Christ never tire of magnifying the good news of the inherently righteous character of God the Father who provided a finite righteousness, by the life and death of His Son for the unrighteous elect, without marring God’s inherently righteous character. Various erroneous interpretations of “from faith to faith” have been given: 1. From faith to faith means from one act of faith to another. 2. It means from faith that justifies to faith that sanctifies. 3. It means from the faithfulness of Christ, the source of righteousness, to obtaining this righteousness by faith in Christ. 4. It means from first to last by faith. 5. It means from a lower to a higher degree of faith. 6. It means from the faith God has provided to the faith of man as the receiver. 7. It means out of the faith of one heart into the faith of another. 8. The statement “from faith to faith” is designed to express the idea that God’s plan of justifying men is revealed in the gospel, which plan is by faith, and the benefits of this plan shall extend to all who believe. 9. Out of faith unto faith denotes a growing faith. 10. It means from the faith of the Old Testament to the faith of the New Testament. 11. It means from the faithfulness of God revealing to the faith of man receiving. Let us consider another view. To whom is this God-kind of righteousness-the finished work of Jesus Christ at Calvary-being revealed? Is it not to the one who has been invaded by the gospel? Paul was now giving further explanation of verse 16. The God-kind of righteousness is being revealed to all the powerful gospel has invaded. The gospel is powerful. It invades with force, giving a true conversion experience: “For our gospel did not come to you in word only, but also in power and in the Holy Spirit and in much assurance, as you have known what kind of men we were among you for your sake” (1 Thessalonians 1:5 -translation). The gospel does not come to men in general to inform them of a better objective state of affairs. It invades the elect who have been regenerated, calling them to a life of faith and obedience. God never starts anything He does not bring to completion (Php 1:6). A calling to a life of faith and obedience comes from the faithfulness of the One who “became [aorist passive indicative of ginomai] wisdom to us from God, both righteousness and sanctification and redemption” (1 Corinthians 1:30 -translation). The verb is an aorist passive, point action past time, of ginomai. Therefore, it is the work of Jesus Christ, what God has done for His own. This righteousness is being revealed from the faithfulness of the One who became righteousness to us. It was first imputed before it was imparted. Imputation is a legal term. It was imparted when we were born of God by the Holy Spirit. Imputed and imparted righteousness being revealed (present passive indicative of apokalupto) is by the faithfulness of the One who became righteousness to us (Romans 1:17). It results in our coming to Christ in faith and subsequently living a life of faith. Hence, we go from the initial act of faith in Christ in a true conversion experience, which Paul explained by the gospel invading with power to give the person who has been quickened a true conversion experience, to the individual living the life of faith; he walks by faith and not by sight. Believers are in Christ three ways: (1) We are in Him representatively (Romans 5:16-19). We were crucified with Christ before we existed. (2) We are in Him vitally. This pertains to eternal life (John 15:1-7; Colossians 1:27). (3) We are in Him consciously. We were in Christ vitally before we were conscious of it. We are in Him consciously by faith which is the fruit of regeneration and conversion. For this reason, we have the assurance of our salvation (2 Timothy 1:12; 1 John 5:1-13). ======================================================================== CHAPTER 7: 01.4. SECTION II - CONDEMNATION ROM_1:18-32; ROM_2:1-29; ROM_3:1-20 ======================================================================== SECTION II CONDEMNATION - Romans 1:18-32; Romans 2:1-29; Romans 3:1-20 Chapter 4 - PRECURSORY The division of Romans 1:18-32; Romans 2:1-29; Romans 3:1-20 is characterized by sin. “All unrighteousness is sin” (1 John 5:17). Sin is lawlessness (1 John 3:4). This does not indicate that laws made by men that are not substantiated by Biblical truth must be obeyed. Disobedience to those laws is not sin in the sight of God. Everything which is not out of faith is sin (Romans 14:23). In his use of the word “faith” in this verse, Paul had reference to Biblical principles. In reference to the ability to believe, it designates God-given faith. In connection with Paul’s belief, it signifies Biblical principles. By the law is the full knowledge of sin (Romans 3:20). The full knowledge of sin comes from the word of God, not by laws made by men. This division of Romans records God’s indictment of man on two accounts: (1) Man forsook the glory of God, thus manifesting the nature of sin. (2) Man has corrupted his ways, which is the inevitable fruit of sin’s nature. The doctrine of sin is the foundation of the Christian message. Since the gospel is God’s power resulting in salvation, we must understand from what we have been delivered. That is why Paul began his doctrinal treatise by showing that the whole world of mankind stands condemned before God. Therefore, this section entitled “Condemnation” is given to prove that man has no righteousness acceptable to the righteous God. Paul began his proof of depravity by dealing first with the corruption and condemnation of the Gentiles. He went from the Gentiles in Romans 1:18-32 to the guilt and condemnation of the Jews in Romans 2:1-29; Romans 3:1-8. Finally, in Romans 3:9-20, the apostle showed that the whole world is in a sinful condition and therefore guilty before God. In addition to having no righteousness to stand before God, man is condemned because of his own sin; and he is not only under the wrath of God, but he is also deserving of death. God x-rayed the human heart, and Paul revealed the findings. The entire picture is comprehended in two verses: (1) “For the punishment of God is being revealed from heaven against every kind of ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who are suppressing the truth in the sphere of unrighteousness” (Romans 1:18 -translation). (2) “Who knowing completely the judgment of God, that the ones practicing such things are deserving of death, not only are doing them, but are giving approval with the ones practicing them” (Romans 1:32 -translation). The reality of sin has many witnesses, but all we know about its origin can be stated in few words. Sin entered the angelic realm through Lucifer and the human race through Adam, the first man. The penetration of sin into the angelic realm was different from that of the human race. The sin of Lucifer was internal dissatisfaction with his subordinate position (Isaiah 14:1-32; Ezekiel 28:1-26; 2 Peter 2:4). There is no reference to external influence on him in the form of temptation. Furthermore, there is no representative feature about sin’s coming into the angelic realm; hence, there was no cooperation by the angels with Lucifer in his sin. Had there been solidarity in the angelic host with Lucifer, all the angels would have fallen with him. Since the chosen angels did not fall with Lucifer, they need no redemption. Sin entered the human race through Satan’s deception (Genesis 3:1-6; Revelation 12:9) and man’s disobedience (Romans 5:12; Romans 5:19; 1 Timothy 2:14). The following are distinguishing features of sin’s entrance into the angelic realm and into the human race: (1) Unlike the angels, there was representative solidarity of all mankind with Adam. (2) Unlike Lucifer, Adam was externally tempted. (3) Unlike the chosen angels, there is redemption for the chosen from among mankind. The general attitude of people in these apostate days is that religious leaders should dwell on the attractive virtues of life and leave the monster called sin to wander unnoticed in the absence of its exposure. Sin is what God says it is; therefore, human opinion must bend to the testimony of Scripture. The Greek word for “sin” is hamartia, which means to miss the mark. It is the most comprehensive term for moral and mental obliquity. Sin is divergence from either moral or mental rightness of principle or practice. The word hamartia is used of sin as (1) a principle of action (Romans 5:12-13), (2) a governing principle (Romans 5:21; Romans 6:12; Romans 6:14; Romans 7:8), or (3) a sinful act (James 1:15). Hence, hamartia is a principle which has power to produce an act or acts of sin. There are three major demonstrations of the exceeding sinfulness of sin. The first is the sin which caused the fall of Lucifer, “You were blameless in your ways From the day you were created, Until unrighteousness was found in you” (Ezekiel 28:15 NASB). This is the only verse in Scripture that states the exact origin of sin. All the other references only describe its heinousness. Ezekiel said, “Your heart was lifted up because of your beauty; You corrupted your wisdom by reason of your splendor...” (Ezekiel 28:17 NASB). Pride, which led to insubordination, was the form of Lucifer’s sin. Lucifer was given a place of leadership, but his position led him to thoughts of independence. The quality of eternity is the fact that there is only one will, the will of God. At the beginning of God’s created order, sin began in the highest of His created beings. In addition to the voice of God, there was now a second voice; and it expressed rebellion against the first voice. When Lucifer became unwilling to rule as a subordinate, he became a traitor; when he exalted himself above God, he became Satan (adversary); when he accused God, he became the Devil (accuser). A kind of successfulness that eliminates any thought about either the providence or grace of God generates the reprehensible sin of pride. An example of the former is the rich farmer of Luke 12:16-21. This parable was given by our Lord in answer to His refusal to arbitrate between two covetous brothers concerning an inheritance. Covetousness is an inordinate desire for gain with roots in the depraved nature. Its philosophy is, “what you have is mine if I can get it.” Furthermore, one who demands his dues may be as covetous as the one withholding them. Christ, knowing both were at fault, refused to take sides for the reason that He had a higher mission than the social-liberal concept of religion. In the final analysis, according to the parable Christ spoke, the person who says I will build greater barns, I will store all my fruits and goods, and I will say to my soul, eat, drink, and be merry is a fool. The farmer was a fool because he was not rich toward God; and in all his success as a farmer, he eliminated the God of providence who gives the climate to produce crops. So far as the farmer was concerned, his will alone had produced his wealth. Two wills shall continue in the sphere of mankind until time shall be no more. Paul gave a warning concerning pride in the realm of grace. In giving qualifications for the bishop-one who has oversight in a local assembly-he said, “Not a new convert, in order that not having been puffed up he may fall into the judgment of the Devil” (1 Timothy 3:6 -translation). Apart from study and experience, one can easily become conceited with his position. In 1 Timothy 3:6, the passive voice of the verb tuphoo proves Satan uses the lack of knowledge and experience as his target; and through that hole in one’s armor, he causes pride to manifest itself. Another good example of this pride is found in the seventy who returned from their mission and related their success (Luke 10:17-20). They were taken up with their accomplishments rather than rejoicing in the One who had enabled them. While the seventy disciples were away, Christ saw in prophetic anticipation the completion of both His work and the work to which He commissioned His disciples: “And He said to them: I was observing Satan who has fallen [aorist active participle of pipto, to fall to one’s ruin or destruction] from heaven as lightning” (Luke 10:18 -translation). Unless we can look on what success we may experience from a heart that is above it, we are sure to be lifted with pride. Christ gave the reason for rejoicing when He said to the seventy, “...you rejoice that your names have been permanently recorded [perfect passive indicative of eggrapho, to write or record] in the heavens” (Luke 10:20 -translation). The chief joy of Christians must be that our names are recorded in the heavens, seeing that “our citizenship is in the heavens; from where we also are waiting expectantly for the Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ” (Php 3:20 -translation). The second major demonstration of the exceeding sinfulness of sin was when Adam fell. Sin came not from creation but from the fall. Although God is not the author of sin, one cannot deny that sin is included in His eternal purpose. The order in God’s eternal purpose is as follows: (1) God decreed to manifest His glory. (2) God decreed to create mankind. (3) God decreed to permit the fall. (4) God decreed to elect some from among the fallen. (5) God decreed to provide redemption for the elect. (6) God decreed to apply redemption to the elect. (7) God decreed the perseverance of the elect through their preservation by Him. (8) God decreed the glorification of the elect and the destruction of the nonelect. Therefore, God’s purpose to order things so that sin should come to pass for the sake of His decree is not an argument against God’s hating sin as sin. Sin had no actual existence before it was committed by the creatures God created without sin-Lucifer, the angelic being, and Adam, the first man who was also the representative man. Sin became a reality only when Lucifer and Adam rebelled against the will of God. That which comes from God’s creatures is a secondary consideration; therefore, sin is a secondary rather than a primary consideration. The question is often asked, why did God create man capable of falling? Since God cannot create God, whatever God creates is by nature inferior to the Creator. Therefore, the image of God in which man was created does not imply a perfect representation of God (Genesis 1:27). Jesus Christ alone is the very image of the invisible God (Colossians 1:15; Hebrews 1:3). Since holiness is God’s chief attribute, uprightness must of necessity be the chief attribute of man. Adam was a being created in uprightness (Ecclesiastes 7:29), but his uprightness was unconfirmed. Man’s original state consisted of personality and uprightness. Personality distinguishes man from the animals. It is the ability to know self as related to God and the world and to make decisions concerning moral issues. Adam’s uprightness was mutable. He could not be unchangeably upright, because immutability is proper to God alone and cannot be attributed to any of His creatures. Since Adam’s uprightness was created, it was finite and therefore capable of sinning. It had to be finite because God who is infinite cannot create infinity. Adam’s sin included the whole human race (Romans 5:12-19). This greatly disturbs the natural mind, because it cannot understand how people subsequent to Adam can be guilty of his sin which was committed 6,000 years ago. Before one gets too “worked up” over the representative nature of Adam’s sin, he must stop and consider the representative nature of Christ’s redemption. However, one must be able to recognize the difference between the participation of all mankind in Adam’s sin and the inclusion of only the elect in Christ’s redemption. In redemption, there is no race unity, but there was in Adam. Depravity includes the entire human race; redemption includes the chosen ones from within the human race. All men fell in Adam, but some men are redeemed by Christ. Union in Adam is universal, but union in Christ is particular because it is by election (Ephesians 1:4), redemption (Mark 10:45), and regeneration (John 3:8) based on the eternal covenant of grace (Hebrews 13:20-21; John 17:1-26). The third major demonstration of sin’s exceeding sinfulness is Calvary. Having seen that sin involves every human being who has entered and shall enter the stream of time, we must consider not only its beginning and development, but also its judgement on behalf of the elect. The death of Jesus Christ supposes an offending man and the offended God. Furthermore, it implies that the Offended holds the offender justly bound to suffer penal consequences that are merited by the offense. These facts before us made the death of Jesus Christ an absolute necessity in order for God to forgive the offenders. He chose some out from among depraved mankind. These chosen offenders in themselves cannot satisfy Divine justice. Transgression against God is a capital offense punishable by death. People who oppose capital punishment for a capital crime also take issue with God’s capital punishment on sinners who die in their sins. Justice demands punishment proportionate to the crime. Hence, transgression against God demands no less than death; and since sin against God is a boundless crime, it demands everlasting punishment. To order punishment greater than the crime is an unrestrained exercise of power, and to order punishment less than the crime is a weakness of authority. Worst of all, unrighteousness is revealed in both. The vileness of the sinner is reflected in the elevated rank of the sovereign God he has offended; therefore, sin against God is everlasting. Persons who believe Christ died for all mankind get themselves in an embarrassing doctrinal situation. As God was not obligated to prevent the fall, He was not bound by necessity to redeem man after the fall. In order to redeem man, Christ must die, but not by an antecedent necessity. Salvation of lost mankind was not an absolute necessity in itself; but because God sovereignly chose some from among lost mankind to be saved according to His good pleasure, He was under the necessity to accomplish this deliverance from depravity through the sacrifice of Jesus Christ. This is why Christ said, “O foolish ones, and slow of heart to be believing in all the things which the prophets spoke: Was it not necessary for the Christ to suffer and to enter into His glory?” (Luke 24:25-26 -translation). As the Father was not compelled to redeem man after the fall, Christ was under no obligation to die except to redeem those included in the covenant of grace which was made by the Godhead (Hebrews 13:20-21). Jesus Christ alone as the incarnate Savior could satisfy Divine justice. The sinner is incapable of effecting Divine satisfaction for the following reasons: (1) Sons of disobedience cannot be obedient, since they do not possess grace. (2) Human suffering cannot make satisfaction because it is finite. (3) Human suffering is as incapable as the Old Testament sacrifices of Divine satisfaction. However, Divine justice was satisfied through the death of Jesus Christ for the following reasons: (1) There is such elevation of character in the righteous Godhead - “...Holy, holy, holy, is the LORD of hosts: the whole earth is full of his glory” (Isaiah 6:3)-that all that is done is infinite in its merit. (2) When the Father condescended to give His Son for the elect, the Son condescended to suffer for the elect for the purpose of paying their debt of sin; and the Holy Spirit condescended to regenerate the elect and dwell in them. (3) Justice itself prevents mercy from operating; but when justice is satisfied, the requirement of more would cause it to become injustice. A reply to those who say the price of redemption is for the whole human family, since they claim it was a necessity for Christ to die for all, is that they must admit that it is also necessary for Him to regenerate all for whom He died. But their claim is contrary to Scripture. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 8: 01.5.1. CORRUPTION CONDEMNATION GENTILES - ROM_1:18-32 ======================================================================== Chapter 5i - CORRUPTION AND CONDEMNATION OF THE GENTILES - Romans 1:18-32 Romans 1:18-32 teaches that the punishment by God is being revealed against those who deny God’s character and His righteous standard. Sin falls into two divisions: (1) ungodliness (asebeia, godlessness or impiety), and (2) unrighteousness (adikia, unrighteousness or injustice). Ungodliness refers to the want of reverence toward the sovereign God; unrighteousness applies to the absence of morality. “For the punishment [orge, wrath or punishment] of God is being revealed [present passive indicative of apokalupto, to reveal, uncover, or disclose] from heaven against [epi, dative of disadvantage] every kind of ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who are suppressing [present active participle of katecho, to restrain or suppress] the truth in the sphere of unrighteousness” (Romans 1:18 -translation). The order is significant, since it goes from impiety to immorality. Thus, both the first and second laws are broken by men. When men disregard God, they have no regard for mankind. The following are persons against whom God’s punishment is being revealed: (1) It is being revealed against the rejecters of general revelation (Romans 1:18-21). (2) God’s punishment is being disclosed against those who exchange God’s incorruptible glory for a likeness of God’s creatures (Romans 1:22-23). (3) It is being manifested against those who degrade their bodies to satisfy their hearts’ evil passions, and they are given over to their unrestrained desires as their punishment (Romans 1:24-27). (4) God is manifesting His wrath against those who do not think it worthwhile to have a true knowledge of God. They are given over to a worthless mind as their punishment; and their corrupted, unrestrained minds are filled with all unrighteousness described by a list of horrible sins (Romans 1:28-31). (5) He is revealing wrath against sinners because they have known completely the punishment by God that the ones practicing such things are deserving of death (Romans 1:32). ======================================================================== CHAPTER 9: 01.5.2. REJECTERS OF GENERAL REVELATION PUNISHED ======================================================================== Chapter 5ii - Rejecters Of General Revelation Punished God’s punishment is being revealed against the rejecters of general revelation (Romans 1:18-21). General revelation is a creational revelation in which God is objectively knowable. However, that does not mean that the natural man is capable of receiving this revelation and developing a natural theology by which man can know God in a redemptive sense. Being able to know God apart from revelation in Christ is possible, because creation in itself is a revelation of God’s existence. Hence, there is a revelation of God which precedes the revelation of God in Christ; but faith in the Creator through general revelation is not the same as God-given faith in the Redeemer through the special revelation of God in Jesus Christ by the Holy Spirit through the gospel. There is no competition between God’s general and special revelations, because the first is God’s work in creation, and the second is the work of redemption in His only begotten Son. The major difference in these two revelations is the distinction between the universality of creation’s revelation and the particularity of redemption’s revelation. Furthermore, every human being stands inexcusable before the Creator on the basis of reason. But only the elect of God stand before Him on the basis of the special revelation of God in Jesus Christ made sure by Christ’s substitutionary death. This knowledge, unlike knowledge from creation, concerns grace and truth which exceeds the capacity of human reason. The insufficiency of natural revelation for supernatural understanding of the sovereign God can be understood by considering Adam before his fall. If reason based merely on natural revelation was sufficient for Adam’s rule of life, why did he need further instruction from God pertinent to what he should and should not do? (See Genesis 1:29-31; Genesis 2:16-17.) Since our parents, whose reason was more complete before the fall, needed further instruction, we, whose reason is based on general revelation subsequent to the fall, must have special revelation in order to understand God’s will for our lives on earth. General revelation is both subjective and objective: “Because that which is known [gnoston, an adjective used as a pronoun which is understood by its being in the nominative case-subject of description-of gnostos, which can be either known or capable of being known] of God is evident in them; for God manifested [ephanerosen, aorist active infinitive of phaneroo, manifest or bring to light] it to them” (Romans 1:19 -translation). There are two views of this knowledge. Some say the context would indicate that God’s knowledge is knowable because of what God has made visible among them, thus making the preposition en mean the locative of location--“in them.” The evidence of the immediate context of Romans 1:18-21 and the overall context of Romans 1:18-32 proves the idea of the subjective, “in them,” rather than the location, “among them.” If the latter were true, the translation would have to read, “Because that which is knowable of God is possible among them.” However, Romans 1:18-20, the immediate context, and Romans 1:32 -“Who knowing completely the requirement of God”-prove beyond a shadow of doubt that “Because that which is known of God is evident in them” is the correct translation. Man through general revelation is given a subjective knowledge concerning God which renders him inexcusable: “For the invisible things of Him since [apo, dative of time, when something begins, since] the creation of the world are being clearly seen [kathoratai, present passive indicative of kathorao, to see thoroughly or to perceive clearly], being understood [nooumena, present passive participle of noeo, understand or gain an insight into] by the things made, both His eternal power and deity, with the result [eis, accusative of result] that they are without excuse” (Romans 1:20 -translation). The effect on man is not that he is left without sin, but he is without excuse pertaining to his primitive knowledge of God. Hence, man’s history proves his deterioration, not his advancement. He has regressed from a higher to a lower elevation. The present world of mankind began with the knowledge of God, in that the whole world population stood around Noah’s altar after the flood (Genesis 8:20). General revelation is limited in purpose. The right of revelation must be considered. Since God has all power and wisdom, He has the right to reveal or hide Himself according to His will. God is known in His power and deity by the things which are made, but He has the right to hide His mercy and grace and reveal them to the elect in special revelation. (See Matthew 11:25-27.) The law of manifestation presupposes a hidden power capable of producing the manifestation. If men question the invisible Person behind the visible creation, they are only pretending blindness to God’s power and deity (Romans 1:32). The purpose of general revelation is to render every human being without excuse concerning the existence of God. General revelation is sufficient to accomplish the following things: (1) Nature reveals the fact of God. (2) The invisible God is the Creator and Governor of the visible world. (3) God must be glorified by man. (4) By reason of His eternal power and deity, God demands homage and gratitude. (5) By right of authority, God commands all men to repent. (6) God is obligated on account of His righteousness and justice to punish every unrighteous deed. General revelation is manifested to the mind of man. Nature proclaims the existence of God, but nature is altogether silent concerning what God is to man. Man is responsible to bow before nature’s revelation and desire God’s further disclosure. This was Paul’s message in his address before the philosophers of Athens (Acts 17:16-31). Paul commenced where the philosophers concluded, with “AN UNKNOWN GOD.” He started with the philosophers’ belief in immanence-that which takes place in the mind without any external effect. He then directed their thinking to the transcendent God, the Creator who is able and independent of His creation (Acts 17:24-27). About this transcendent God, Paul said, “To seek God, if perhaps they might grope for [pselapheseian, aorist active optative of pselaphao-the possible but doubtful mood-which means to touch, feel, or grope for as in the dark or search blindly] Him and find Him, though being not far [omnipresent] from each one of us” (Acts 17:27 -translation). The apostle closed his message by showing the overwhelming transcendence of God in His commanding all men to repent, because God has set a day in which He is destined to be judging the inhabited earth in righteousness by a Man He appointed, giving a guarantee to all, having raised Him from the dead (Acts 17:30-31). Since human responsibility is the cause of guilt, and punishment is the consequence of it, God’s justice demands judgment. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 10: 01.5.3. THE EXISTENCE OF GOD REVEALED ======================================================================== Chapter 5iii - The Existence Of God Revealed The reason the universe is what it is can be understood by the Christian. It has been created by the triune God. Anyone who reads, studies, and believes Romans 1:18-32 cannot believe there is a person who, even though he denies it, does not believe in the existence of God. Hence, there is no genuine atheist. This has been proved by people who would debate the subject. In their statements, they deny what they claim to believe. According to Romans 1:32, every person coming into this world believes God exists and that His judgment is just: “Who knowing completely the requirement of God, that the ones practicing such things [the things described in Romans 1:18-32] are deserving of death, not only are doing them, but are giving approval to the ones practicing them” (Romans 1:32 -translation). ======================================================================== CHAPTER 11: 01.5.4. SUBJECTIVE AND OBJECTIVE KNOWLEDGE ======================================================================== Chapter 5iv - Subjective And Objective Knowledge Subjective and objective knowledge are taught in Romans 1:18-20 -“For the punishment of God is being revealed from heaven against every kind of ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who are suppressing the truth in the sphere of unrighteousness, because that which is known of God is evident in them, for God manifested it to them. For the invisible things of Him since the creation of the world are being clearly seen being understood by the things made, both His eternal power and deity, with the result that they are without excuse” (translation). Concerning God’s existence, it has been said that God is more truly thought than He is described and exists more truly than He is thought. The subjective idea of God is less real than the objective fact that God exists. This means God has more of existence than the thought of Him has. An unregenerate person thinks about God, but his thinking about God cannot compare with the objective revelation of God in creation, because his thinking is limited. The invisible things of God from the creation of the world are evident. Since they are evident in every person, every individual is inexcusable before God (Romans 1:20). One whose intellect is enlightened by the Spirit of God will be receptive to the truth of God’s existence, and his emotions will be affected. Since the only necessity known to logic is the negative law of contradictions, the definition of “necessary being” in the logical sense of the term is a being the denial of whose existence would be a self-contradiction. The existence of God cannot be based on abstract laws of logic. Abstract logic cannot establish the existence of any substantive entity. The person who comes to God must believe that He is and that He is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him (Hebrews 11:6). God is righteous; God is holy; God is love; God is just; God is omnipotent; God is omniscient; etc. God’s existence is necessary. In ordinary speech, necessary means necessary for something. (1) God’s existence is necessary for our being here. We would not be here if God had not chosen, planned, decreed, and purposed that we be here. (2) God’s existence is necessary for our salvation. (3) God’s existence is necessary for our understanding. (4) God’s existence is necessary for our sustenance: “For in him we live, and move, and have our being...” (Acts 17:28). We are created by God, saved by God, sustained by God, have understanding as a result of His gift, persevere as Christians because God preserves us, and have hope in the future because God shall glorify us. Whatever God begins, He brings to a successful conclusion. The fact of God’s existence is not causally grounded on the abstract laws of logic, and it is not causally determined by any other fact. Our finite minds are not geared to conceive of an uncaused eternal Being. We apprehend Him because we are the children of God, and we lay hold of this understanding and make it ours because of grace within us. The soul of man answers to the objective reality of God. The things that are made fully manifest to the mind of man show that a cause brought those things into existence. Anything pertaining to God is infinite. We have finite minds, but He enables us to understand to an extent. The order in the world and in man reflects God’s existence. God is methodical. He does nothing haphazardly or without purpose. Some question, If the world was brought into existence by God, where did God come from? Existence itself does not demand a cause. The coming into existence of the nonexistent demands a cause, but God’s existence is eternal. The principle by which an endless series of causes is avoided is in the difference between the Creator and the created. That principle may be arranged by formulating the objective, and then the subjective is better understood. God is so inaccessible that we cannot perfectly know Him. However, God is so greatly manifested by the things He has created that man is without excuse. God’s essence cannot be comprehended, but His existence cannot be denied. The heathen, wherever they are, understand that there is a supreme Being. This may be explained by the shining sun. Before the sun rises, the beauty of creation cannot be seen; but in the light of the sun these things are visible. While the sun reveals these things, it is also revealing itself. Darkness in one’s home is eliminated when a light is turned on. The light reveals the things in the room. At the same time, it also reveals itself. The sovereign God of the universe could not do other than create, because He lives. The first component in God’s decree was to manifest His glory, and that He has done and is doing. The Psalmist portrayed this by calling attention to general and special revelations and the result of both in Psalms 19:1-14. General revelation is referred to in Psalms 94:1-6 -“THE heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handiwork. Day unto day uttereth speech, and night unto night sheweth knowledge. There is no speech nor language, where their voice is not heard. Their line is gone out through all the earth, and their words to the end of the world. In them hath he set a tabernacle for the sun, Which is as a bridegroom coming out of his chamber, and rejoiceth as a strong man to run a race. His going forth is from the end of the heaven, and his circuit unto the ends of it: and there is nothing hid from the heat thereof.” Special revelation is taught in Psalms 19:7-11 -“The law of the LORD is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple. The statutes of the LORD are right, rejoicing the heart: the commandment of the LORD is pure, enlightening the eyes. The fear of the LORD is clean, enduring for ever: the judgments of the LORD are true and righteous altogether. More to be desired are they than gold, yea, than much fine gold: sweeter also than honey and the honeycomb. Moreover by them is thy servant warned: and in keeping of them there is great reward.” The result of general and special revelation is expressed in Psalms 94:12-14-“Who can understand his errors? cleanse thou me from secret faults. Keep back thy servant also from presumptuous sins; let them not have dominion over me: then shall I be upright, and I shall be innocent from the great transgression. Let the words of my mouth, and the meditation of my heart, b e acceptable in thy sight, O LORD, my strength, and my redeemer.” No child of God can face the word of God without relating with the Psalmist. God makes Himself known to all in general revelation, and He makes Himself known to His people in special revelation. As every effect must have a cause, revelation always implies a Revealer. Since God is the Revealer, invisible things are made evident. Neither the world nor any creature could make itself or himself. If man made himself, he would be the cause before he could be the effect. This may be applied in two areas: (1) Approaching the Lord is the effect of having been chosen; the cause is God’s choice: “Blessed is the man whom thou choosest, and causest to approach unto thee, that he may dwell in thy courts...” (Psalms 65:4). Coming to Christ is the effect; the cause is The Father’s giving: “All that the Father gives to me shall come to me, and the one coming to me I will in no wise cast out” (John 6:37 -translation). There is first an eternal gift of all that God chose, and then there is a continual giving. (2) If the first man had made himself, he would not have limited himself. If he had given himself being, why did he not give himself perfection of being? (3) If the first man had made himself, he could have preserved himself; preservation is not more difficult than creation. (4) If the first man had made himself, he would have been able to support himself; but no one supports himself. The need of others is a fact of life. God cannot be found out by our senses. We cannot see gravitation steady the mountains or the principle of life in a seed planted in the ground. We see only the mountains in their places and the plant that springs from the seed. God cannot be found by physical analysis. Love is required to find love. The pure in heart shall see God. Love cannot be found by the use of a microscope; neither can we sweep up music with a broom. Men cannot find God when they use the wrong instruments. By faith we understand that the ages were framed by the word of God. Grounds for belief in God’s existence are “clearly seen, being understood by the things made, both His eternal power and deity, with the result that they are without excuse” (Romans 1:20 -translation). There is universal belief in the existence of God, and it has the force of a natural law. The moral nature of man attests the existence of God. Therefore, man is conscious of responsibility. A frequently repeated question is, can the existence of God be proved by argument? Many philosophers deny that His existence can be proved by argument. Liberals among religionists see no need to prove God’s existence. They believe it is assumed throughout the system. According to this system, the assumption is that no man can prove the existence of God; thus, no man can say that God is. Their opinion is that when we try to prove God exists, we are guilty of making God the object. They assert that when He says He exists, God is the subject and not the object; and God is wholly the subject and not the object. Contrary to the religious liberals, Paul stated that there is a subjective knowledge of God in every man (Romans 1:19). Since the subjective knowledge of God’s existence is an objective fact, it must be revealed and established by evidence. Men do not have the knowledge of God’s holiness, justice, mercy, and love by intuition. They have knowledge of only His power, ability to create, and His wisdom in creation. This is all that is revealed in general revelation. His grace, love, and mercy cannot be known without special revelation. These attributes are revealed only by the Spirit of God in regeneration through the Scriptures He has committed to us. Objection to the atmosphere that sustains man illustrates that one assumes that God exists while arguing that He does not. As a person acknowledges his own existence by doubting it, he admits the existence of God by questioning it. A rationalist may be defined as one who substitutes human reason for Divine revelation. Hence, to be classified as a rationalist, one must have received and rejected some revelation from God. Such men are described in Romans 1:18-32. Paul was talking about the heathen, not Christians. “Therefore, having known God they did not glorify or give thanks to Him as God, but they became vain in their reasonings, and the undiscerning heart of them was darkened. Asserting themselves to be wise they were made foolish, and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for a likeness of corruptible man and of birds and of four-footed beasts and of creeping things; for this reason God gave them over because of the lusts of their hearts” (Romans 1:21-24 a-translation). “And since they did not think it worthwhile to have God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a worthless mind...” (Romans 1:28 -translation). Many today in the field of academic training have been given over to worthless minds. Consider four arguments with their basic meanings. Each comes from a Greek word. (1) The cosmological argument-The word cosmological comes from kosmos, which means world or order of arrangement. The basic principle of this argument is that every effect must have a cause. (2) The teleological argument-The word teleological comes from telos, which means end or design. Its basic meaning is that the eternal being is intelligent. This argument more properly concerns the relation of the intelligent Being to the world than to His existence. (3) The anthropological argument-Anthropological comes from the word anthropos, the word for man. Its basic principle is that man’s mind cannot evolve from matter nor his spirit from flesh. He is an intelligent creature who can think and reason. (4) The ontological argument-This is an argument for the existence of God. It is based on the Greek participle of the verb eimi, to be or exist-being or existing-on, present active participle nominative masculine singular of eimi (Hebrews 11:6). Its basic principle denotes that God is the absolute Being in distinction from an imperfect being. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 12: 01.5.5. GOD REVEALED IN CREATION ======================================================================== Chapter 5v - God Revealed In Creation God is made known in His creation. Religionists are enraged when someone says that God has revealed Himself in Christ and no one can come to God the Father except through Christ by the Spirit. They assert that intolerance and bigotry are greater curses to mankind than ignorance and error. Religionists-none of whom can tell who God is-make up a great portion of religious denominations, nondenominationalists, and fraternal organizations, such as Freemasonry, Odd Fellows, etc. Scripture teaches that no one can believe “God is,” in the sense of Hebrews 11:6, without bringing his own personal comprehension of the Divine Trinity into harmony with the delineations of Holy Scripture. (See John 5:23; Ephesians 2:18; 1 Peter 1:21; 1 John 2:23.) There is no contradiction between “having known God” of Romans 1:21 and “the ones who have not known God [perfect active participle of oida, which means they are in a present state of not knowing God]” (translation) of 2 Thessalonians 1:8. Romans 1:19-21 does not sacrifice anything of the radical antithesis between knowing and not knowing taught throughout Scripture. The knowledge of the heathen in Romans 1:1-32 is not contradictory to the ignorance of the heathen about whom Paul spoke in other Epistles. There is no halfway stop between the darkness of depravity and the light of the knowledge of God in Jesus Christ. One can go from the first to the second only by the way of regeneration. Romans 1:1-32 points to an inescapable confrontation with the revelation of God in creation, and 2 Thessalonians 1:1-12 shows that Christ’s punishment will come on those who are rejecters of the special revelation of God in Christ. Only by distinguishing between general and special revelations can one do justice to the message of Scripture. Scripture teaches both general and particular revelations. There is no competition between God’s general revelation in creation and His particular revelation in Jesus Christ. There is a natural knowledge of God apart from the God-given revelation of Himself in His Son. The natural light of reason receives this knowledge apart from the special revelation in Scripture. There are two kinds of knowledge: (1) Many things can be known by natural reason in the realms of the universe and man. People can even have a natural knowledge of spiritual things. However, reason in itself is not sufficient to be man’s guide. Since Adam before the fall needed special directions from God, how much more does man in a state of depravity after the fall. (2) Some things can be known only by faith, and those things are in the realm of the supernatural. Knowing things by faith is by God-given, not natural, faith. Subjective faith can be either natural or God-given; therefore, faith must be identified. Most people have made a god out of their human faith. Only subjective faith, which is the fruit of regeneration, is the channel through which objective faith (truth of the gospel) flows with a salvation experience. (See Hebrews 11:3; John 6:69.) Paul showed that a subjective knowledge of God through general revelation alone will not bring a person to know God in Jesus Christ, but it does make everyone inexcusable before God. Furthermore, since this subjective knowledge is an objective fact in general revelation, the objective fact is established by evidence. There will be a twofold effect on those who hear the established evidence of the revelation of God in His creation. Although the unregenerate will be exposed to a greater witness of God’s existence, it will not be the means of their conversion because they do not possess the gift of life, which enables people to understand spiritual things. This is not to say they cannot have a human understanding of some spiritual truths. On the other hand, the regenerate, with limited spiritual understanding of the Divine Trinity-Father, Son, and Holy Spirit-will have a clearer understanding of general revelation. The Christian approach to the subject “God and His creation” must begin the way Scripture begins: “IN the beginning God created the heavens and the earth” (Genesis 1:1 NASB). “And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion....So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them” (Genesis 1:26-27). The Hebrew word for God is Elohim. Its plural ending when used of God is described as a plural of majesty rather than a true plural. The plural Elohim is consistently used with singular verbs, adjectives, and nouns. Both the unity of one God and the plurality of Persons are displayed in Genesis 1:26. Going from “God” to “us” and “our” proves the plurality of Persons in the Godhead. This can be illustrated by Genesis 1:27 -“So God created man in his own image....” Notice that God goes from “our” in Genesis 1:26 to “his” in Genesis 1:27. Further testimony to the plurality in unity is seen in God’s creation: “...in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them” (Genesis 1:27). Here, God goes from the singular pronoun “him” (Adam) to the plural pronoun “them” (Adam and Eve). The name LORD (Jehovah, yahweh) God is used in Genesis 2:1-25 beginning with Genesis 2:4. This became the national name used by the Jewish people. He is their God by covenant. God’s name identifies His nature. The Divine Trinity does not assert that there are three Persons united in one Person, or that three Gods are united in one God. Furthermore, the Trinity does not affirm that God merely manifests Himself in three different ways. It cannot be said that the first manifestation sent the second manifestation into the world to die for those chosen by the first manifestation. Neither can it be said that the third manifestation regenerates all of those chosen by the first manifestation and redeemed by the second manifestation. Christians do maintain that another way of saying “God” is that there are three distinct Persons in the Godhead. Father, Son, and Holy Spirit constitute the one true and living God, and yet each Person is God. Each has a distinguishing quality of His own, but one Person is not God separate from the others. This means that each Person with the other two is God, but each of the Persons in the Godhead cannot be either of the others. If this were not true, there could be no distinctions. The terms Father, Son, and Spirit do not express different relations of God to His creatures. They are not analogous to the terms Creator, Preserver, and Benefactor. The Son is of the Father, but the Father is never of the Son. The Spirit is of the Father and of the Son. The Father sent the Son, and the Father and the Son sent the Spirit. The Father operates through the Son, and the Father and the Son operate through the Spirit. Although there are some things attributed to all three Persons, certain acts are predicated to one Person which are never predicated to the other two Persons. In the light of these Biblical facts, anyone who denies the Divine Trinity is not a Christian. All three Persons are eternal, omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent. They are together in creation, incarnation, salvation of the elect, and access of the elect to God, as well as in giving strength, comfort in life, and perfection in glory. As there is order in the Godhead, there is order in God’s creation. Both the cosmos and man demand a cause and explanation. There is a common method used in research that must not be ignored by either theologians or scientists: (1) One must gather and correlate facts, but prejudiced people form their opinions without going to the trouble and time involved in gathering facts. To them prejudice is a great time-saver. (2) One must seek an explanation of the facts that have been correlated, but the lazy who are filled with prejudices or customs need no explanation because they have already formed an opinion. (3) The Christian has advantage over the non-Christian in his searching for an explanation of the facts. While the nonbeliever is seeking to find a hypothesis which seems to fit and explain the data which he has been able to gather and correlate from general revelation, the Christian begins with the Creator who has also given a special revelation in Scripture. The child of God knows the cosmos and man are what they are because they were created by the Divine Trinity. Since the universe is vast beyond man’s comprehension, the believer knows that the cause must be greater than the effect. Knowing that planet earth was populated with creatures for sea, air, and land after their kind before God created man to have dominion over them, the Christian understands that God is the only One who can answer the puzzling questions concerning the cosmos and man. Hence, the more one knows about the nature, character, and order of God, the easier those puzzling questions are answered. But God’s nature, character, and order can never be learned apart from His special revelation, the Holy Scriptures. Therefore, Christians go by grace from general to special revelation for answers which can never be found in general revelation. Those who rely on God’s special revelation recognize that both “revelation” and “mystery” exist concerning God and His creation. “The secret things belong to the LORD our God, but the things revealed belong to us and to our sons forever, that we may observe all the words of this law” (Deuteronomy 29:29 NASB). The fact that man has always quarrelled with God over secret things can be traced back to the one prohibition in the garden of Eden. Man associates secrecy with selfishness, but all nature proves that in Divine administration secrecy and revelation co-exist. For example, God keeps to Himself the secret of germination, but He gives the revelation in the harvest. God does not reveal the life principle, but the fact of life is manifested in the plant, the creature, and man. Ignorance of many things does not indicate that man can be sure of none. Man may be able to have a working knowledge of a particular subject without knowing much about it. For example, one may avail himself of the power of electricity without knowing anything about electrochemistry. Furthermore, a person can be a Christian without being able to give a discourse on theology, anthropology, and soteriology. The man born blind could not answer all the interrogations by the Pharisees, but he could say, “...one thing I have known [perfect active indicative of eido, completed action in past time with a resulting state of knowing], that being blind now I am seeing [present active indicative of blepo, which means to see]” (John 9:25 -translation). Although the healed man was ignorant of many things, he possessed permanent knowledge of his being able to see. Even in his state of being a novice, the healed man knew more than the Jewish doctors of law who interrogated him. He gave an unanswerable argument which completely silenced his interrogators: “The man answered and said to them: Indeed in this is a wonderful thing, that you have not known [perfect active indicative of oida, which means you-second person plural-not only did not know but you are in a state of not knowing] where He [Jesus Christ] is from, and He opened my eyes” (John 9:30 -translation). Following this, the healed man was driven out of the synagogue because of his faithfulness to Jesus Christ. Christ was also driven outside by His own people (Hebrews 13:12-13); and worse than that, Jesus Christ is outside of the Laodicean assemblies today (Revelation 3:20). The healed man worshipped the Lord Jesus Christ after he was driven out (John 9:30). Ignorance is never justifiable in any realm of endeavor. A person working with electricity is obligated to know something about it. Furthermore, a new Christian is warned by Scripture not to be ignorant concerning that which may be a mystery to him. (See Romans 1:13; Romans 11:25; 1 Corinthians 10:1; 1 Corinthians 12:1; 1 Thessalonians 4:13.) When one ponders any problem, he can ask questions for which he may not have a reply. A wise person in this situation will express a humility of mind rather than the stubborn pride of human reason that is without foundation. There is a boldness of speculation which will acknowledge no mystery, but no honest man of theology or any other science will profess to have universal acquaintance with either the universe or man. No one should ever be ambitious of that knowledge which the condition of his nature makes impossible for him to obtain. Finite man is limited in his pursuit; therefore, true wisdom must be content with the knowledge which God has been pleased to reveal of Himself and His creation. However, everything now unknown should not be considered as belonging to the secret things of God, and thus unfathomable by either the man of God or the man of science. This would destroy the Biblical teaching that the man of God should grow in knowledge (2 Peter 3:18), and it would cause the man of science to be indifferent to research. Knowledge, but not a perfect knowledge, of God is necessary, because He is incomprehensible pertaining to His perfection, purpose, works, and providence. Searching after God is a righteous, useful, and endless occupation: “...Canst thou find out the Almighty unto perfection?” (Job 11:7 b). “The secret of the LORD is with them that fear him; and he will shew them his covenant” (Psalms 25:14). The secret of the Lord refers to that which cannot be known unless He sees fit to reveal it. This secret involves the secret of the new birth; therefore, when the heart has been sanctified (set apart) by grace, the mind is enlightened. Three great truths are given in Psalms 25:14 - (1) The origin of fear is God. This fear is the beginning of knowledge (Proverbs 1:7). God puts this fear in the heart so that the recipient shall not depart from Him (Jeremiah 32:40). (2) A secret has been communicated in every heart where reverential fear has been placed by God. (3) The promise is that God will show His people the eternal covenant of grace (Hebrews 13:20-21). The knowledge will not be merely intellectual but also experiential. Like Daniel, the recipient will seek to make Divine wisdom known to others (Daniel 2:16-17). During the time one is exploring some of the trinities of the cosmos and man, he must never lose sight that apart from the Divine Trinity, the Creator of the cosmos and man, he can never have a true perspective of either. The existence of both is the result of God’s creative work. How could the innumerable particles of matter in space rendezvous themselves into a cosmos? Since the cosmos is a reality, it is not coming into existence. How could each creature created “after his kind” evolve into something of a different kind? God did not begin a process without first bringing creatures into existence, each after its kind. Whatever He commanded came by that command to be after “his kind.” The theory of evolution is that of transmutation (a change from one kind to another kind), a constant becoming something different from what it was, thus a change from one species to a different species. Does this mean that man is the product of the amoeba, the one-celled animal that through the process of puckeration (agitation) twisted itself to become two cells? If that were the case, it would be logical to say that the original dodad by its own process of puckeration puckered itself to become two dodads. Ever since then each dodad is wondering which is the dad to the other dodad. That makes as much sense as evolution. Scripture teaches existence and mutation (change within the species). It has been said that dinosaurs are the direct lineal progenitors of fowls. That would mean a ninety foot, eight ton reptile slowly evolved into a ten pound chicken. Is this going from the simple to the complex? The trinity of God is revealed by the universe and man. God is a trinity, and the universe is full of trinities. Man himself is a triune being. Everything we see is made by God and reflects His Being. In God’s decree, the aspect of natural law is necessary to hold His physical creation together: “Because all things were created by Him in the heavens and on the earth, the visible and the invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities; all things have been created [perfect passive indicative of ktidzo] by Him and for Him; and He is before all things and in Him all things have held together [perfect active indicative of sunistemi]” (Colossians 1:16-17 -translation). Hence, a person can learn even from natural revelation, whether or not he knows anything about the Scriptures, that all things are being held together in their places by the sovereign God. God exists in Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. The Father is represented as the source. The Son is eternally begotten by the Father. The Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father through the Son. The Holy Spirit is seen in Christ’s promise to the disciples that the Father would send the Holy Spirit in Christ’s name, and Jesus Christ would send the Holy Spirit from the Father (John 14:26; John 16:7). The characteristics of the Son and the Spirit differ in their work: (1) All outgoing seems to be the work of Christ. All return to God seems to be the work of the Holy Spirit. (2) Christ is the organ of external revelation. The Holy Spirit is the organ of internal revelation. (3) Christ is our Intercessor at the present time in heaven. The Holy Spirit is presently the Intercessor within us. (4) In the work of Christ, the sinner is passive. In the work of the Spirit in the sinner, the sinner is active because he has been made alive. The Father is represented as the source. The Son is eternally begotten by the Father. The Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father through the Son. The Holy Spirit is seen in Christ’s promise to the disciples that the Father would send the Holy Spirit in Christ’s name, and Jesus Christ would send the Holy Spirit from the Father (John 14:26; John 16:7). In the unique Trinity, the Father is Deity invisible. He reveals Himself in the Son (John 1:18). The Son has declared the Father. Deity cannot be manifested without the Father’s being manifested because the Father is Divine. Christ is the express image of the Father (Hebrews 1:3). Hence, Jesus Christ could say, “...he that hath seen me hath seen the Father...” (John 14:9), because in Him dwelt the fullness of the Godhead bodily (Colossians 2:9). The Son assumed a human nature, died, rose from the dead, and works among men through the Holy Spirit. The Spirit, like the Father, is invisible. He reveals the Father in the Son; therefore, He works unseen. There is order in this Divine Triunity. This does not indicate that One Person is first in deity, because all are represented as being God. But the natural order is Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. The natural order in a home where there is recognition of the Divine order is husband, wife, and children. Since God is the God of order, absence of order in the Godhead would be unthinkable. Order in the Godhead can only mean that one is first, another second, and the other third. The order falls naturally in the revelation of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. “For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many), But to us there is one God, the Father, of whom are all things [source], and we in Him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by Him” (1 Corinthians 8:5-6). Paul distinguished heathen monotheism from polytheism, the heathen concept of gods. The term unity is not easily explained. Unity may mean the numerical basis of calculation. It may mean the contrast between one thing and two other things of the same kind. It is also used in the sense of unit. Every one thing is made up of many parts, possesses many qualities, stands in various relations, and, although in itself it is only one thing, is also a part of many other things. Unity often indicates more than the antithesis of many. Although the unity of God means there is one God in opposition to the claims that there are many gods and lords, the phrase implies whatever internal distinctions may be in the essence of God. That essence is one, a whole, a unity in itself. Hence, when we say the Father is God, He is one essence. When we say the Son is God, He is one essence. When we say the Holy Spirit is God, He is one essence. There are three, and yet at the same time one. The Divine Trinity explains the universe, consisting of many trinities in both the cosmos and man. We must understand that God is a Trinity in order to explain the trinities of the universe. The Bible begins with God: “IN the beginning God created the heavens and the earth” (Genesis 1:1 NASB). Since the Divine Trinity is the Creator and Sustainer of both cosmos and man, both reflect the Trinity. Although both cosmos and man demand the Divine Trinity, they do not explain Him. Conversely, the Divine Trinity explains other trinities. We must go from God who is, to the universe which He created, to what the universe is, to what man is. The infinite Trinity has brought the trinity of the universe and the trinity of man into existence. God alone is infinite, and He cannot create infinity. The Divine trinity is not understood by other trinities, but they are understood by a limited comprehension of the Divine Trinity. Since God’s thoughts are not man’s, the Holy Scriptures must never be brought down to the level of the natural sciences of geology, archeology, biology, physics, etc., in order to discover how the cosmos or man came into being. All the different ages, with all the occurrences of each, have been set by God’s word, and all the succeeding ages continue according to God’s eternal decree: “By faith we are understanding the ages to have been set in order by the word of God, so the things being seen [general revelation] have not come into existence out of things existing” (Hebrews 11:3 -translation). There is no human philosophy of the Divine Trinity. All we know is what God has been pleased to reveal. God’s thoughts are not ours, and His ways are not ours (Isaiah 55:8-9). No man has the right to make a philosophy of the Divine Trinity out of his knowledge of either the trinities of the cosmos or man. In view of increasing knowledge in the various sciences related to the cosmos and man, there is great danger unless one sees the universe and man’s relation to it in the light of the Triune God. With all this knowledge, men are incapable of coming to the knowledge of the truth of God, because they have been given a worthless mind pertaining to spiritual things. God’s punishment is being revealed in that very area. If one cannot comprehend the proton, an elementary particle that is a fundamental constituent of the atomic nuclei, what about the electron which moves in its orbit around the proton in the atom a quadrillion times a second? If creation staggers the mind, what about the God who created it? Can we have some understanding of the universe and its origin, structure, unity, laws, energies, etc., apart from the complicated terminologies of the sciences? What is the purpose of the universe? It is for those God chose in Christ before the world began. The earth was created for man. Why is the earth situated where it is in the vast amount of space? We are totally dependent on God who created all things and put all things in their places for the purpose of those He chose in Christ before the foundation of the world. “O the depth of the riches and of the wisdom and of the knowledge of God; how unfathomable are His judgments and His ways untraceable. For who ever knew the mind of the Lord? or who became His counselor? or who first gave to Him, and it shall be repaid Him? Because out from Him and through Him and to Him are all things; to whom be the glory forever: Amen” (Romans 11:33-36 -translation). “Our Lord and God, you are worthy to receive the glory and the honor and the power, because you created all things, and because of your will they exist and were created” (Revelation 4:11 -translation). The universe consists of space, matter, and time. Space times matter times time equals universe. Length times width times height equals space. Energy times motion times phenomena equals matter. Future times present times past equals time. It is possible to see their existence only in the light of the Divine Triunity-Father times Son times Holy Spirit equals God. Man is a vital part of the universe. From the scientific point of view, man consists of nature, person, and personality. Nature times person times personality equals man. Nature is intellect times heart times will. Person is “I who know” times “self who I know” times “I who recognize by myself.” Personality is the visible aspect where the nature and character are revealed. These things are beyond comprehension apart from what the Bible says about man. Man from a Biblical perspective has a higher relation to God than the creation. The universe was created for the purpose of man. Man consists of body, soul, and spirit (1 Thessalonians 5:23). Body times soul times spirit equals man, a trichotomous person. Man’s body enables him to be universe conscious. Soul gives man the ability to be self-conscious. The spirit, which is the highest part of man, attains God-consciousness. Since natural law in God’s decree is necessary to hold our physical creation together, is not the aspect of spiritual law in God’s decree equally necessary to hold our spiritual creation in a fixed purpose and progress until it shall reach its consummation in the image of His Son? The triune God created man after His own image: “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them” (Genesis 1:27). The word creation (bara) is used three times in the creation of man. Hence, the Scripture celebrates the creation of trichotomous man through a threefold “God created.” The God-resemblance in created man was lost in the fall, but it was regained for the elect in redemption and regeneration. The spirit of man is where the holy God dwells by faith because the Christian believes what he neither sees nor feels. The three parts of the tabernacle of Exodus portray the trinity of man. The external part of the tabernacle, which is typical of man’s body, was the only visible part to one approaching the tabernacle. The body is where the spirit and soul dwell. Inside the first room of the tabernacle, called the holy place, was light from the seven lamps of the lampstand. The soul is the holy place where the seven lamps of the lampstand portray our knowledge, perception, understanding, discernment, etc. After passing the veil between the holy place and the holy of holies, there was darkness. By faith the spirit of man is where the holy God dwells, because the Christian believes what he neither sees nor feels. This is the part of man enabled to be God-conscious. Conclusively, the Christian is God-conscious-spirit, self-conscious-soul, and world-conscious-body. Man is an important part of God’s creation. He was the capstone. God gave man authority over His creation, but man forfeited it. Only Christians believe the Divine triunity-Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Anyone who does not embrace the Divine triunity is not Christian. Each Person in the Godhead is not a part of God. Each is God. The Father is God; The Lord Jesus Christ is God; The Holy Spirit is God. Since God is indivisible, each Person is the whole of God. Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are not three ways God acts, but they are three Persons who God is. In this unique Trinity, the Father is unseen. The only manifestation of God has been in Jesus Christ. The second Person in the Godhead is the One who acts. He was born of the virgin, died, arose, ascended, intercedes, will come again, judge, and reign as King of kings and Lord of lords. Christ presently works among men by the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit reveals the Son. The Holy Spirit is invisible. No one has ever seen Him. Paul had been conscious of the world, whether religious or civil, in his unregenerate days. He was conscious of self in his deep conviction and conversion (Romans 7:1-25). The apostle was made conscious of his riches in Christ Jesus in the great doctrinal section of Romans, especially Romans 8:1-39. There is nothing but world-consciousness in the unregenerate. Paul was made self-conscious by the law to which he was exposed, the result of which was that he saw what he was in the light of God’s holy and righteous law. He had a conversion experience that led him to embrace all the riches of God’s grace displayed in the great doctrinal section, and he was God-conscious. His self-consciousness and God-consciousness were the result of the work of grace in his heart. Romans 8:1-39 has been called the greatest chapter in the Bible because of its doctrinal content. It is filled with trinities. The following outline portrays various trinities, most of which are taken from this chapter: I. There is a threefold relation of redemption. A. It is to the elect (Romans 8:1-17). B. It is to the creation (Romans 8:18-25). C. It is to the Creator who is also the covenant God (Romans 8:26-30). II. Redemption is threefold. A. It is external (Romans 8:1-4). B. It is internal (Romans 8:5-27). C. It is eternal (Romans 8:28-39). III. There is a threefold groaning for full redemption. A. Creation groans for liberty (Romans 8:22). B. The Christian groans for likeness (Romans 8:23). C. The Holy Spirit within us groans for our enlightenment (Romans 8:26-27). IV. Redemption is by the three Persons in the Godhead. A. The Father planned it (Ephesians 1:3-6). B. The Son purchased it (Ephesians 1:7-12). C. The Holy Spirit applies it (Ephesians 1:13-14; John 3:8). V. The righteousness of God is by the Divine Trinity. A. It is provided by God (Romans 3:21-31). B. It is imputed through the cross (Romans 4:1-8). C. It is imparted by the Holy Spirit (Romans 8:9). VI. Three major doctrinal truths are taught in the doctrinal section of Romans. A. Justification is taught (Romans 3:24-26). B. Sanctification is taught (Romans 6:1-13). C. Glorification is taught (Romans 8:23-24). VII. The deliverance by God is threefold. A. Justification is from the penalty of sin (past tense). 1. The Savior is seen on the cross in justification. 2. The elect are sons through justification. B. Sanctification is from the power of sin (present tense). 1.The elect are saints through sanctification. 2. Self is on the cross in sanctification. C. Glorification will be from the presence of sin (future tense). 1. The saints will be with Christ on His throne in glorification. 2. The elect will share Christ’s eternal inheritance in glorification. VIII. There is a threefold power of the Holy Spirit. A. He has power over sin (Romans 8:2). B. He has power over the flesh (Romans 8:4). C. He has power over the body (Romans 8:11-13). IX. The Spirit’s power is manifested three ways. A. He saves (Romans 8:2). B. He sanctifies (Romans 8:4-17). C. He sustains (Romans 8:26-27). X. There is a threefold death of the elect. A. We are dead to sin but alive to God (Romans 6:11). B. We are dead to the law and married to Christ (Romans 7:4). C. We are dead to the flesh and led by the Spirit (Romans 8:13-14). XI. There is a threefold aspect to salvation. A. Christ fulfilled the law “for” us in the law aspect (Romans 5:19). B. Christ made the love of God available “to” us in the love aspect (Romans 5:5). C. Christ by the Spirit implants the life aspect provided at Calvary “in” us (Romans 8:9). XII. There is a threefold restoration of all things. A. The soul is restored by regeneration (John 3:8). B. The body is restored by resurrection (1 Corinthians 15:1-58). C. The heavens and the earth are restored by re-genesis (2 Peter 3:12-13). XIII. Access to God may be regarded in a threefold way. A. Access is “to” the Father (Romans 5:1). B. Access is “through” the Son (Romans 5:2). C. Access is “by” the Holy Spirit (Romans 8:26-27; Ephesians 2:18). XIV. Worship of God may be regarded in a threefold way. A. Worship includes singing. 1. Singing includes sound theology. 2. Singing includes true experience. 3. Singing includes good poetry exemplified in the Psalms. B. Worship includes praying. 1. Praying includes the Spirit of adoption, which enables one to cry, “Abba, Father.” 2. Praying must be in the name of Jesus Christ. 3. Praying is by the Holy Spirit. C. Worship includes studying the Scriptures. 1. Studying the Scriptures requires the ability to hear. 2. Studying the Scriptures requires a consideration of the message which is heard. 3. Studying the Scriptures requires appropriation of that which is heard. XV. Living for God is threefold. A. Union with Jesus Christ is necessary. B. Pruning is necessary. C. Service is necessary. In closing the first part (Romans 1:18-21) of Romans 1:18-32, Paul portrayed the unregenerate Gentiles as beginning with a knowledge of God, which proves what we previously said about Romans 1:19. Nevertheless, they did not glorify God or give Him thanks: “Therefore, having known [gnontes, aorist active participle of ginosko, to know or have knowledge of] God they did not glorify or give thanks to Him as God, but they became vain in their reasonings, and the undiscerning heart of them was darkened” (Romans 1:21 -translation). Although the Gentiles knew God, they were without God. They knew God’s existence and some of His attributes, but natural understanding of spiritual things neither begets humility nor motivates gratitude. Both doxadzo, praise or glorify, and eucharisteo, give thanks or be grateful, are aorist active indicative verbs which have been negated by the adverb ouch. The indicative mood states the reality of the appalling fact. The aorist tense expresses the final decisiveness with which praise and gratitude were refused with determination. No line of argument more than man’s lack of reverence for God and his ingratitude for God can be adduced to show the inexcusableness of sin. Such rejection of the fact of God incapacitated the non-Jews concerning moral judgments, which explains the awful crimes we are witnessing in our time. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 13: 01.5.6. PUNISHMENT ON EXCHANGERS OF GOD'S GLORY ======================================================================== Chapter 5vi - Punishment On Exchangers Of God’s Glory God’s punishment is being revealed against those who exchange the glory of the incorruptible God for a likeness of His creatures (Romans 1:22-23). God made man in His image; but man sought to make God in his image; and he sank lower by bowing to creatures lower than himself. Man seeks to satisfy his depraved instincts on his own humanistic level; and when that level does not satisfy, he becomes animalistic in his thinking. God’s description of man forever nailed shut the coffin of the theory of evolution. Evolution is a dead issue to every Christian; therefore, believers who are continually discussing the subject are in no way redeeming the time (Ephesians 5:16). The connection between the rejecters of general revelation (Romans 1:18-21) and their exchanging God’s glory for a likeness of His creatures is another step lower in man’s degradation. Although they were “asserting (present active participle of phasko) themselves to be wise, they were made foolish” (Romans 1:22). The verbs mataioo-“made worthless” (Romans 1:21), skotidzo-“was darkened” (Romans 1:21), and moraino-“made foolish” (Romans 1:21), are aorist passive indicative verbs. The passive voice is used to indicate that the subjects were acted on; therefore, they were neither acting (active voice) nor participating in the action (middle voice). Since men have become darkened in their understanding, they are anxious to exchange (ellaxan, aorist active indicative of allasso, can be either change or exchange-the context determines) (Romans 1:23) God’s glory on their depraved level. Does this mean that God made them worthless in their reasoning, darkened their understanding, and made them foolish? No! But in Romans 1:24, Romans 1:26, and Romans 1:28, we are told that God “gave them over” (aorist active indicative of paradidomi, which means to give over, abandon, or deliver up), signifying that He removed all restraints thus allowing Satan, to whom they had been obedient, to make them more worthless, give them greater darkness of understanding, and influence them to commit greater foolish acts of sin. There are people who pride themselves in their culture and pay slavish tribute to decorum and diplomatic formality, but they utterly fail to acknowledge God for who He is and all that He is doing in providence. Such failure is prevalent in the intellectual, social, and religious realms. This kind of degradation describes men who put light not “under a bushel” but under a “dunghill.” Although men who abuse the light of nature will experience a great punishment in their own sins, those who are exposed to God’s special revelation but reject it will experience a much heavier punishment. No image can ever be made of the invisible God; therefore, God said, “Thou shalt have no other gods before me. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth” (Exodus 20:3-4). Jesus Christ alone is the exact image of the invisible God, and only by a God-given faith can He be seen and understood (Hebrews 1:3; John 1:18). The transition from theology to anthropology is natural. Scripture does not present an abstract revelation of God but a disclosure of God in relation to man. Therefore, the knowledge of man in relation to God is essential to properly understand anthropology. In the consideration of anthropology, the Biblical principle of going from God to man (Genesis 1:1-2; Genesis 1:6; Genesis 1:27) and not from man to God must not be ignored, because it supposes God to account for man and not man for God. It never leaves us with the task of proving God’s existence from man’s existence. Understanding this basic principle eliminates the idea that God can be found by physical analysis. Since love finds love, the “pure in heart...shall see [opsontai, future middle indicative of horao, to see, understand, or experience] God” (Matthew 5:8). As love cannot be found by the use of a microscope or music be collected with a magnet, scientists cannot find God with their incorrect instruments for the search. Man did not come into existence by his own initiative. If he had, he would have been both the cause and the effect. Moreover, if man first made himself, why did he limit himself? If the first man made himself, he would have been able to support himself; and it could not be said, “For in Him [God] we are living [present active indicative of dzao, to live or remain alive] and being moved [present passive indicative of kineo, to move], and are having our existence [present active indicative of eimi, to be]” (Acts 17:28 -translation). Some say the verb kinoumetha is middle voice (we move ourselves) and others say it is passive voice (we are being moved). Surely those who oppose the use of the passive voice have overlooked some passages of Scripture, such as Psalms 119:116-117, Proverbs 16:1-33 :l, Proverbs 20:24, and Jeremiah 10:23-24. The idea of man’s being either above God or equal with Him is excluded by the terms “image” and “likeness” in which man was created (Genesis 1:26-27). A theological fact is that man in his original state was the most excellent of all God’s earthly creatures; but man in his fallen and depraved state is most miserable and despicable. In the study of man created in God’s image, distinction must be made between the wonderful organism called human nature and the direction in which that nature moved in original uprightness. Adam’s original uprightness was finite; therefore, apart from redemptive grace he moved in the power of finite uprightness; and he sinned by the freedom of his will. Hence, Adam lost his original uprightness in the fall, and this loss resulted in the reversal of his nature. His nature remained an instrument of being which now worked against rather than for God. Having fallen in Adam, every person outside of Jesus Christ works against God. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 14: 01.5.7. PUNISHMENT ON DEGRADERS OF THEIR BODIES ======================================================================== Chapter 5vii - Punishment On Degraders Of Their Bodies God’s punishment is being revealed against those who degrade their bodies to satisfy their hearts’ evil passions; and as their punishment, they are given over to their unrestrained desires (Romans 1:24-27). Sins are the fruit of sin; evil acts come from the source, man’s evil nature. The heart, its thoughts, and the imaginations of the thoughts are evil (Jeremiah 17:9; Genesis 6:5; Genesis 8:21). Contrary to modern day psychology, corrupted man defiles society rather than a polluted society corrupting man. One cannot deny that either reacts powerfully on the other, but the corruption in both man and society has the same common source-solidarity with Adam in original sin. Sin is not an evil monster (anything unnatural or monstrous) that creeps on man from without; it is the manifestation of a monstrous nature which comes from within man. There is in every person a degenerate propensity to everything that is evil, but that does not mean there is an equal tendency for every kind of sin. Therefore, the noncommittal of a particular sin is not for the want of a depraved principle, but it is because of either God’s restraining providence from without or His restraining grace from within. At whatever stage we contemplate the sin nature, from the womb to the coffin, it wears the stamp of depravity. Hence, man’s depraved nature must be viewed in a threefold way: (1) in its connection with Adam (Romans 5:12), (2) in its formation in us (Genesis 5:3), and (3) in its fruit in our lives (Galatians 5:19-21). Man by nature can do nothing but sin. If there were no Satan to tempt or evil example to imitate, there is an innate principle in man so that he cannot cease sinning. Depraved man must do what his depraved nature wills, because he not only has the love of sin to motivate him but also the law of sin to constrain him. (See Jeremiah 9:5; John 3:19; Romans 8:2; 2 Peter 2:14.) Every person coming into the world of mankind is a transgressor from the womb. “The wicked are estranged from the womb: they go astray as soon as they be born, speaking lies” (Psalms 58:3). Not only is every person alienated from God as he comes into the world, but his mother conceived him in sin (Psalms 51:5). That means as soon as one begins to exist, he is a child of wrath corrupted by original sin. Hence, he has the guilt of the first sin which has been imputed to him, and he has the nature of sin imparted in him. The subject of depravity is hated by the unregenerate, including the religious unregenerate. Those who oppose the truth of the depravity of infants born into the world make statements based on human reason: (1) They say that infants are simply in the same state as Adam before the fall. (2) They declare that Adam’s sin is no reason why God should impute it to infants. (3) They assert that it is absurd to think that by one man’s disobedience many should be made disobedient. (4) They question, since sin is voluntary and birth is involuntary, how can an infant be a sinner? (5) They argue that an infant being accounted guilty of a sin he did not commit is against all sense of justice. (6) They say that a just God would never appoint a person to hell for original sin. (7) They believe that children are safe until they reach the age of accountability. Such statements satisfy human reason, but one must not lose sight of the fact that human wisdom and Divine wisdom are on a continual collision course. The outcome has always been and always will be that those who assert themselves to be wise shall be made foolish by Divine wisdom (Romans 1:22). Deliberately committed sin (Romans 1:22-23) becomes debasing and disgusting (Romans 1:24-27). Having turned their backs on the continual witness of God in nature, the Gentiles could travel only one direction-down. Their downward course has brought them to the lowest stage of depravity in which they not only practice the worst sins described in Scripture, but they also approve those who practice them. Now, we can understand the meaning of the depraved, undiscerning heart being darkened (Romans 1:21). The witness of God in nature never deviates. It is as though one day took up where the preceding one left it. The Psalmist said, “THE heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handiwork. Day unto day uttereth speech, and night unto night sheweth knowledge” (Psalms 19:1-2). The silent witness of nature creates no heterodoxy. On the other hand, language is different; because in the realm of human responsibility, man creates heterodoxies while saying they are only a matter of semantics. It would be wonderful if men were as consistent in their witness of God’s objective message in Scripture as nature is in its renewal every day and night in its universal proclamation of its message. Romans 1:24 begins with dio, a conjunction which may be translated “therefore,” “for this reason,” or “on account of.” Hence, God gave the Gentiles over for these reasons: (1) their apostasy from God’s punishment being revealed from heaven against every kind of ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, and (2) nature’s consistent revelation of God’s power and deity, which was evident in them. The Gentiles had both an objective and a subjective witness which rendered them inexcusable before the God of creation. God’s punishment is never operative except in His retribution for sin. Here it is against a life of uncleanness, which presupposes the existence of uncleanness, and the penalty consists in the fact that God “gave them over” (paredoken, aorist active indicative of paradidomi, which means to give over, abandon, or deliver up) to a life of uncleanness because of the lusts of their hearts (Romans 1:24). The two prepositions en and eis in the Greek text must be carefully studied in order to properly understand and translate Romans 1:24. “For this reason God gave them over because of [en, the instrumental of cause] the lusts [epithumias, instrumental feminine plural of epithumia, a noun which means lust, desire, or passion] of their hearts [kardion, ablative feminine plural of kardia, the source of their corrupt passions] for the purpose of [eis, accusative of purpose, which denotes action] immoralities [akatharsian, accusative feminine plural of akatharsia, impurity or immorality] to be degrading [atimadzesthai, present passive infinitive of atimadzo, dishonor, treat shamefully, or degrade] their bodies among [en, instrumental of association] themselves” (Romans 1:24 -translation). The degrading lifestyle of the Gentiles did not originate with God’s abandonment; however, God was not completely passive in the terrible development of human degradation. God positively withdrew His restraint, as He did with Pharaoh. Furthermore, God’s abandonment cannot mean a mere permission; it was not a single abstention (neither for nor against), seeing that He positively withdrew all restraint. Having been left to themselves, the corrupt stream that carried them further into degradation was not from without, but it came from within their depraved hearts. As a result, that which was in their hearts by the power of Satan ran wild when God’s restraint was removed. The attitude and action of God in relation to guilt must be contemplated in order to understand punishment. God’s attitude is expressed in His wrath (Romans 1:18). Wrath is God’s antagonism to everything that is evil. The present tense and passive voice of apokalupto, “is being revealed,” pertaining to punishment, proves that God continually brings man’s sin to light. God’s action, which is a manifestation of His attitude, is stated in the expression, “God gave them over.” The Divine verdict on such apostates from general revelation is that the ones practicing such things are deserving of death (Romans 1:32). If men do not retain just thoughts of the glory of God, they will not retain a just idea of the natural honor of man. As a result, they will dishonor themselves as they have dishonored God. Persons given over by God for the purpose of immoralities exchange the truth of God for the lie (Romans 1:25). This is evidenced by their worshipping and serving the creature rather than the Creator. Having declared themselves independent of God, God gave them over to passions of dishonor, evidenced among both women and men. The Bible represents homosexuality as the lowest form of human life. Scripture in the Old Testament portrays it as abomination: “Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination” (Leviticus 18:22). “If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death...” (Leviticus 20:13). Although any kind of sexual perversion is an abomination to God, the unnaturalness of homosexuality makes it the lowest form of life. Surely we have not forgotten Sodom and Gomorrah (Genesis 18:1-33; Genesis 19:1-38). Either practicing or excusing homosexuality is sin. Sodomy is the rejection of God’s design for this world, another illustration of the abandoned ones exchanging God’s truth for the lie. Religious idolatry is expressed in terms of sexual perversion (Ezekiel 16:1-63). The heterosexual relationship of marriage was designed for the propagation of the human race, and it is given as the nearest human illustration of the intimacy which God provides for man with Himself in the covenant of grace (Ephesians 5:22-33). Therefore, whoredom is the concept applied to worshipping other gods; but sodomy is the rejection of any concept of a god to whom man is accountable. Operating from a Biblical foundation, it is imperative that Christians speak definitively about a number of questions being asked today: 1. Is anyone born a homosexual? The answer is “no”. Adoption of a perverted life-style manifests God’s having given that one up to the evil passions of his heart and his exchanging the truth of God for the lie. Medical reports of research concerning homosexuality can never make the eternal word invalid. 2. How should Christians deal with homosexuality? Sins must be called by Biblical names. Euphemisms, such as “gay” and “another life-style,” do not offend Sodomites. Religionists with their sweet nothings give nothing the Holy Spirit can use; furthermore, their thinking they are more caring and loving than God benefits no one. 3. How should assemblies deal with homosexuals? They must excommunicate any member practicing sodomy. No one is of value who does not value God and His truth. 4. What should the attitude of Christians be toward the judicial decisions regarding sodomy? No law passed by men that establishes sodomy as an acceptable, alternate life-style can be honored by Christians. 5. What should the attitude of Christians be concerning sexual diseases? The answer is given in Romans 1:26-27 -“For this reason God gave them over to passions of disgrace; for even their females exchanged the natural function for that which is contrary to nature, and likewise also the males having left the natural use of the female they were inflamed in their desire toward one another, males with males committing shameless acts and receiving in return [present active participle of apolambano, to receive in return] the punishment [antimisthian, accusative feminine singular of antimisthia, punishment] in themselves required by their error which was being proper [edei, imperfect active indicative of deo, necessary, right and proper, or necessity brought on by either circumstances or conduct]” (translation). Venereal diseases, including AIDS, are a manifestation of God’s punishment brought about by immoral conduct (v. 27). God’s wrath is being revealed against all ungodliness and unrighteousness as a warning to the living, but that does not indicate that their punishment stops with death. 6. Is there a contradiction between Romans 1:1-32 and 1 Corinthians 6:9-10? The latter passage states: “Or have you not known that unrighteous ones shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators nor idolaters nor adulterers nor effeminate men [malakoi, nominative masculine plural of malakos, an adjective used as a pronoun describing persons who are perverted by allowing themselves to be misused homosexually] nor homosexuals [arsenokoitai, nominative masculine plural noun of arsenokoites, a male who practices homosexuality]...shall inherit the kingdom of God” (translation). Paul described some of the Corinthians’ former position in those verses: “And some were these things; but you cleansed yourselves, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God” (1 Corinthians 6:11 -translation). According to 1 Corinthians 1:18-31, God saves whom He pleases, such as Rahab the whore, Paul the religious murderer, etc., but those He saves do not continue in the sins from which they have been delivered. The saved are separated from their sins: “...he [Jesus Christ] shall save his people from [apo, dative of separation] their sins” (Matthew 1:21). Therefore, receiving homosexuals into assemblies, ordaining them to the ministry, condoning their life-style, etc., is nothing short of blasphemy. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 15: 01.5.8. PUNISHMENT ASSUMERS KNOWLEDGE GOD WORTHLESS ======================================================================== Chapter 5viii - Punishment On Assumers That Knowledge Of God Is Worthless God is manifesting His punishment against those who do not think it worthwhile to have Him in their knowledge: “And since they did not think it worthwhile [edokimasan, aorist active indicative of dokimadzo, to approve, deem worthy, test, or examine] to have God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a worthless [adokimon, accusative masculine singular of adokimos, not standing the test, unqualified, worthless, vain, or base] mind, to be practicing the things not being proper” (Romans 1:28 -translation). The blindness of the heathen is the same in every age, because it comes from depraved hearts. There is a generic likeness of depravity in all men regardless of the time period. Satan is wise enough to give his slaves substitute gods that will please the various peoples of pagan countries and the races of so-called civilized nations. Whether they are gods of an unrefined nature, such as planets or creatures lower than man, gods of a more refined nature, or the various philosophies of men, they are all false gods. Although the civilized criticize the uncivilized concerning their unscientific knowledge, the civilized are worshipping the gods of their own inventions. Uncivilized or civilized, all unregenerate people are pagans who worship false gods. The civilized trying to improve the uncivilized when they themselves are uncivilized is sad because they themselves are worshipping their own false gods. In Biblical language, the blind are leading the blind, and both shall fall into the pit (Matthew 15:14; Luke 6:39). Although the so-called civilized people of the world outnumber the uncivilized, one cannot escape what the Scripture says about increasing knowledge: “...many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased” (Daniel 12:4). Natural knowledge has vastly increased. It has been said that the first doubling of knowledge took place about 1750. It doubled again by 1900, again by 1950, and again by 1960. Since then it has been developing so fast that no one has calculated the number of times. The inspired word correctly describes man’s knowledge and self-esteem as, “Always learning and never being able to come to a full knowledge of the truth” (2 Timothy 3:7 -translation). With all the addition of knowledge, there has been no advance in knowledge concerning the truth of God; on the contrary, with every expansion of natural knowledge, there has been a multiplication of sin. “And because lawlessness [accusative singular of anomia, wickedness, lawlessness, or sin] is to be increased [aorist passive infinitive of plethuno, used transitively-without a direct object; in the passive voice, it means be multiplied or increased] the love of many shall become cold” (Matthew 24:12 -translation). With an advance of sin, there is an increase in the revelation of God’s present wrath, and wrath is also being stored up by the ungodly for themselves awaiting the day of wrath and the revelation of God’s righteous judgment (Romans 2:5). Paul did not expect things in this world of human depravity and corruption to change for the better. All the promises made by so-called civilized politicians and statesmen about building a better society or world of mankind is empty propaganda. The current of the river of unregenerate people can travel in only one direction-down. How can the so-called civilized people be honest in their attitude in the light of the teaching of Holy Scripture? They can be optimistic only by discounting the truth of God, considering it unworthy of any civilized person; and that is exactly what they are doing. Hence, the stream of unregenerate people is headed for the great fall that goes instantly into the pit of everlasting destruction from the presence of the One they deem unworthy of their consideration. Interpretation should never be more or less than what Divine revelation has recorded. One of the great temptations of assembly members and preachers in our day of “the cover-up” is their withholding some things for fear of offending people. Their excuse is that they must be tactful in order to influence people. Scripture does not teach that Christians can influence unregenerate people to become Christians, but it does teach that sheep recognize and rejoice in God’s truth. The fact that the gospel is God’s power resulting in a salvation experience in the heart which has been prepared by the Spirit of regeneration gives boldness and confidence to God-called servants of Jesus Christ. Bondslaves of Christ are more concerned about pleasing the Captain of our salvation than trying to influence the unregenerate to become believers by “their faith.” God gives people over to a worthless mind when they do not consider the knowledge of God worthwhile. They do improper things and become filled with all unrighteousness. Paul used the perfect passive participial form of the verb pleroo, which means to become filled or full (Romans 1:29). The perfect tense points to a time in the past when God gave them over to a worthless mind; furthermore, they remain in a continuous state of being full of unrighteousness. The passive voice signifies that when God gave them over to Satan by removing all restraint, their being filled was accomplished by Satan himself (Ephesians 2:1-3). Hence, those given over to Satan by God become passive dupes, easily deceived by the Devil. The following four things are infused by the Devil into worthless minds: 1. He indoctrinates them in unrighteousness (adikia, injustice or unrighteousness) (Romans 1:29). Persons filled with no sense of what is right, do only what is right in their own eyes; and they have pleasure in unrighteousness. “The way of a fool is right in his own eyes...” (Proverbs 12:15). “And for this cause God is sending to them a working of error for them to believe the lie, in order that the ones not having believed but having had pleasure in unrighteousness may be judged” (2 Thessalonians 2:11-12 -translation). 2. He instills wickedness (poneria, the baseness and depravity of the heart and mind) in them (Romans 1:29), which reveals the depth of depravity (Luke 11:39; Ephesians 6:12). This evil cancer unconsciously spreads through every fiber of the person who has been given over to a worthless mind. 3. His enduement of covetousness (pleonexia, an inordinate desire for riches, extortion, or overreaching) (Romans 1:29) is the sphere in which the worthless mind works, because it has been trained in its crafty ways: “Having eyes full of an adulteress and unceasing from sin, alluring unstable souls, having a heart which has been trained [perfect passive participle of gumnadzo, to train or exercise vigorously] in covetousness, children of a curse” (2 Peter 2:14 -translation). Please observe the perfect passive form of the verb gumnadzo, signifying that the training of the mind in crafty ways was a finished transaction in past time with a continuing result. 4. Evil (kakia) (Romans 1:29) inserted by Satan is the desire to injure because the mind-set is against everything that is right and just. Following the portrayal of worthless minds which have been filled with the general characteristics of depravity, Paul moved on to describe five specific ways in which depravity manifests itself (Romans 1:29 b). Those specific ways are preceded by the adjective mestous, accusative masculine plural of mestos, which means each of the following sins is full: (1) The sin of envy (genitive singular of phthonos, envy, jealousy, or spite) is full. The unregenerate live in a state of envy, jealousy, and spite. (2) The sin of murder (genitive singular of phonos, murder or killing) is full, indicating that depraved men are homicidal. (3) The sin of strife (genitive singular of eris, strife, fighting, or quarreling) is full. (4) The sin of deceit (genitive singular of dolos, deceit, treachery, craft, or trickery) is full. (5) The sin of malignity (genitive singular of kakoetheia, is made up of kakos, evil, bad, wrong, or troublesome, and ethos, a customary abode, dwelling place, or customary state) is full. In this case, it would be a malicious state of mind. In concluding the list of characteristics and specific ways in which depravity works, Paul described the persons with worthless minds who commit specific sins (Romans 1:29-31). 1. He called them whisperers (accusative plural of the noun psithuristes, one who bears secret slander against another). This noun is used only in this verse. Another noun is used in 2 Corinthians 12:20. 2. He identified them as slanderers (accusative plural of the pronominal adjective katalalos, one who speaks evil of another). 3. He classified them as God-haters (accusative plural of the adjective theostuges, haters of God). 4. He called them insulters (accusative plural of the noun hubris, insult or outrage). Hatred for God is the essence of sin, as the love of God is the essence of holiness. 5. He described them as arrogant (accusative plural of the pronominal adjective huperephanos, arrogant or proud). 6. He characterized them as boasters (accusative plural of the noun aladzon, a boaster or self-exalter). 7. He called them inventors (accusative plural of the noun epheuretes, one who schemes, plans, invents, or contrives) of evil things (genitive plural of the pronominal adjective kakos, bad, evil, or worthless). 8. He analyzed them as disobedient to parents (dative masculine plural of the noun goneus, which means parent, and accusative masculine plural of the adjective apeithes, disobedient or rebellious). 9. He identified them as being without understanding (accusative plural of the adjective asunetos, without understanding or senseless). 10. He called them faithless (accusative plural of the adjective asunthetos, faithless or disloyal in keeping promises). 11. He signified that they are without natural affection (accusative plural of the adjective astorgos, inhuman or lacking normal human affection). (See 2 Timothy 3:3.) 12. He identified them as unmerciful (accusative plural of the adjective aneleemon, unmerciful). Such persons are cruel and unmerciful. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 16: 01.5.9. PUNISHMENT ON THOSE KNOWING GOD REQUIREMENT ======================================================================== Chapter 5ix - Punishment On Those Completely Knowing God’s Requirement God is revealing His requirement against sinners because they have known completely that they are deserving of death: “Who knowing completely the requirement of God, that the ones practicing such things are deserving of death, not only are doing them, but are giving approval to the ones practicing them” (Romans 1:32 -translation). This verse is a summary of Romans 1:18-31. When God’s restraint is removed, all depraved humanity has left is debased instincts. They value corruption more than God, and they give approval with those who think and practice what they think and practice. What can be worse than wicked people admiring themselves in other wicked people? One of the three important things about sinners in Romans 1:32 is that they know completely God’s requirement. What about those who say they do not believe in God? The light of reason that God gives to men to understand other things enables them to understand the existence of God (John 1:9). There is a subjective knowledge of God in every man (Romans 1:21). Existence itself does not demand a cause, but the coming into existence of that which was nonexistent demands a cause. Therefore, the universe owes its existence to a cause outside of itself. A man once began his argument against the existence of God by saying, “I am an atheist, God knows.” One who denies the existence of God is like a man who walks outside his home and declares no one lives there because he cannot see anyone inside. Furthermore, as there is no true atheist, there is a complete knowledge of God’s requirement in every person. The second of the three important things about sinners in Romans 1:32 is that every sinner knows that the ones practicing the things mentioned in Romans 1:21-31 are deserving of death. The relative pronominal adjective “who” (hoitines, nominative masculine plural of hostis, a combination of the pronouns hos, who, which, or what and tis, a certain one or someone) indicates that Paul was speaking of certain ones who had this general witness of God in them (Romans 1:19-20) and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for the likeness of an image of corruptible man and the creatures lower than man. Their rejection of God caused Him to give them over to the lusts of their hearts and a worthless mind (Romans 1:24-28). Consider the testimony of the repentant criminal who was hanged: “And one of the hanged criminals was blaspheming Him saying, If you are the Christ, save yourself and us. But answering, the other rebuking him said, Do you not fear God, since you are in the same judgment? And we indeed justly, for we receive things deserving of what we did; but this one did nothing wrong” (Luke 23:39-41 -translation). The testimony of everyone who stands before the white throne judgment of God will be “guilty as charged.” The last of the three important things about sinners in Romans 1:32 is that the ones sinning by giving approval to others practicing the same sins is the same as the wicked admiring themselves in other wicked people. The unregenerate love those who love them. Christ said to His disciples, “If you were of the world, the world would love its own...” (John 15:19 NASB). As none look with as much interest and pleasure at the works of art as artists, no one approves with so much pleasure the sins of others as the practicer of sin. The great concern of sinners is that evil may continue. It is said that Tiberius, the Roman emperor from 14 A.D. through 37 A.D., took particular pleasure in his old age in seeing other men do evil things ======================================================================== CHAPTER 17: 01.6.1. GUILT AND CONDEMNATION OF THE JEWS - ROM_2:1-29 ======================================================================== Chapter 6i - GUILT AND CONDEMNATION OF THE JEWS - Romans 2:1-29 The non-Jews, whether civilized or uncivilized, were under the wrath of God which is being continually revealed from heaven (Romans 1:18-32). The religious hypocrites (Jews) judging the heathen were also under God’s wrath inasmuch as they could not defend their own evil practices (Romans 2:1-29). Unlike the irreligious heathen, the religious Jews were under greater condemnation because they had more than general revelation; they also had special revelation given to them in the law of Moses. Paul’s expression, “O man,” in his address of Romans 2:1; Romans 3:1-31 is used generically. “Therefore [dio comes from the preposition dia and the pronoun ho; it means for this reason, on which account, or therefore] O man [ho is an interjection used in a direct address to express emotion, and anthrope, vocative case of address, is masculine singular of the noun anthropos, man], you are without excuse, everyone who is judging; for that in which you are judging another, you are passing judgment on yourself; for you who judge practice the same things.... And consider this, O man, the one judging those who practice such things and doing the same, that you shall escape the judgment of God?” (translation). The hypocrisy of one man represents every human being who is a Pharisee. Paul did not identify the man in his personal address until Romans 2:17 -“Since you call yourself a Jew and rest in the law and boast in God” (translation). Judgment by the religious Pharisee was blind and arrogant, because he supposed he was free from condemnation as a result of possessing the oracles of God and enjoying national privileges. He has his representatives among professing Christians who belong to denominational institutions, have Bibles in their homes, and occasionally attend religious services. “O man” is a deathblow to the Woman’s Liberation Movement and all its religious sympathizers. Religious leaders and others are exchanging the masculine gender in the Bible for general terms which deny that man is the head of the woman (1 Corinthians 11:1-16; 1 Timothy 2:10-13). The only true judgment in this world is that permitted to those who uphold God’s revealed standard and faithfully describe sin. All other judgments are prejudicial, blind to the Divine standard, and arrogant because of unwarrantable claims to superior rights. Therefore, contrasts between God’s and man’s judgments must be considered. God’s judgment is according to truth; man’s judgment apart from grace is hypocritical. God personified truth in Jesus Christ: “...I am the way, the truth, and the life...” (John 14:6). Christians are sanctified in the sphere of the truth (John 17:17). The truth men hear shall judge them in the last day (John 12:48). God’s judgment is according to truth (Romans 2:2). Conversely, man perverts truth (Galatians 1:6-9). Man’s judgment draws a veil over his own evil deeds while he condemns the same sins in others. The religious Jews said, “...We have a law, and according to our law He is obligated to die, because He claimed Himself Son of God” (John 19:7 -translation). They were blind but zealous to have Jesus Christ, the One in whom the law was fulfilled, put to death. God’s judgment is certain; man’s judgment may be evaded. There is a future in every past; therefore, none can escape the judgment of God. An evil past futurizes itself in the righteous judgment of God. An evil past, which is common to all by nature, is canceled by redemption for the elect alone. No sinner can have a good future unless Jesus Christ became his substitute at Calvary. All who die outside of Jesus Christ will have their sinful past futurized in everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord (Acts 17:31; 2 Thessalonians 1:8-9; Hebrews 9:27). Men often escape lawful human judgment in time by lying about their guilt and hiring lawyers to lie for them. Although they may escape lawful human judgment, they cannot escape God’s appointed judgment added to their present punishment being revealed from heaven. The following are principles of God’s judgment recorded in Romans 2:1-29; Romans 3:1-8. (1) His judgment is according to truth (Romans 2:1-2). (2) It is certain (Romans 2:3). (3) It is righteous (Romans 2:4-5). (4) It is according to works (Romans 2:6-10). (5) It is without respect of persons (Romans 2:11-13). (6) It unveils all secrets (Romans 2:14-16). (7) God’s judgment is the just condemnation of hypocrisy (Romans 2:17-24), religious rites (Romans 2:25-29), and unbelief of the Jews (Romans 3:1-8). ======================================================================== CHAPTER 18: 01.6.2. JUDGED ACCORDING TO TRUTH ======================================================================== Chapter 6ii - Judged According To Truth God’s judgment is according to truth revealed in Holy Scripture (Romans 2:1-2). “But we have known [oidamen, perfect active indicative of oida, to know, understand, or perceive] that the judgment of God is according to truth on the ones practicing such things” (Romans 2:2 -translation). The perfect verb oidamen, “we have known,” is used in the intensive sense, thus emphasizing the results of knowing in the present, not the point of action of knowing in the past. Jesus Christ is the embodiment of truth-truth personified (John 1:14; John 14:6); and He is the One to whom all judgment has been committed (John 5:22). Persons who have no interest in Divine truth also have no interest in justice. Jesus Christ is incarnate truth, and He has given us the word of truth (Ephesians 1:13; James 1:18). Truth endures not only to all generations (Psalms 100:5) but also forever (Psalms 117:2). Paul was not condemning judgment of others, but he was disapproving of those who do not first judge themselves. Christ’s statement “Judge not” of Matthew 7:1 is not an absolute prohibition. If that were true, the whole world would be given into the hands of the wicked; unrighteousness would flourish; and heresy would abound. Scripture teaches that civil authority includes judges and magistrates (Romans 13:1-7), and the assemblies have the authority to judge false teaching (2 Peter 2:1), false spirits (1 John 4:1-3), false ways (Proverbs 14:12), false professors of faith (Matthew 7:21-23; Luke 8:13; John 2:23-25), and false living by assembly members (Matthew 18:15-18; 1 Corinthians 5:12). All judgment must be in harmony with the principles of Holy Scripture. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 19: 01.6.3. THE CERTAINTY OF GOD'S JUDGMENT ======================================================================== Chapter 6iii - The Certainty Of God’s Judgment God’s judgment is certain (Romans 2:3). No one practicing the evils of Romans 1:18-31 “...shall escape the wrath of God” (Romans 2:3). Punishment in time does not prevent eternal punishment. God has appointed a day in which He shall judge the inhabited earth in righteousness by Jesus Christ (Acts 17:31; Hebrews 9:27). The appointed time for judgment does not mean there will be one combined judgment of sinners and saints, which many call “a general judgment.” There is a difference between “a great white throne [thronos]” of Revelation 20:11 and “the tribunal [bema, judgment seat] of Christ” (Romans 14:10; 2 Corinthians 5:10). The idea of a general judgment makes no distinction between sinners and saints, the degree of crimes, and the different times when the judgments are executed. There will be neither common punishment in hell nor common rewards in heaven. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 20: 01.6.4. THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD'S JUDGMENT ======================================================================== Chapter 6vi - The Righteousness Of God’s Judgment God’s judgment is righteous: “Or are you treating with contempt the kindness and the forbearance and the longsuffering of His wealth, not knowing that the kindness of God is leading you to repentance? But on the basis of your hardness and unrepentant heart you are storing up for yourself punishment in a day of punishment and revelation of a righteous judgment of God” (Romans 2:4-5 -translation). “...Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?” (Genesis 18:25). “...for he cometh to judge the earth: with righteousness shall he judge the world, and the people with equity” (Psalms 98:9). The Greek verb for “treating with contempt” (kataphroneis) in Romans 2:4 is a present active indicative of kataphroneo, a compound verb made up of the preposition kata, meaning down, and the verb phroneo, meaning to think or judge. To think down means to have low or degrading thoughts about God. The Psalmist, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, vividly described Christ’s second advent in Psalms 50:1-23. The mighty covenant God shall cease to be silent at His time. Between the introduction (Psalms 50:1-6) and the conclusion (Psalms 50:22-23), God is disclosed as judging His people (Psalms 50:7-15) and condemning the wicked (Psalms 50:16-21). God’s judgment always begins with His people, whether they are from national Israel under the old covenant or from professing Christendom in the age of the assembly. God’s people are given credit for what they do (Psalms 50:8), but they shall be blamed for the way they do (Psalms 50:9-13) what should be done (Psalms 50:14-15). How horrendous that those in whose midst Christ’s miracles were performed were the very people who crucified the Son of God as an imposter. Furthermore, they challenged Christ to work miracles in support of His claim, but he refused. (See Matthew 12:38-39; Matthew 16:1-4). The wicked are described in Psalms 50:16-21, and the climax of the wicked religionists is given in Psalms 50:21 -“These things you have done, and I kept silence; You thought that I was just like you...” (NASB). This is a Divine commentary on Romans 2:4 -“Or are you treating with contempt the kindness and the forbearance and the longsuffering of His wealth...” (translation). Religionists today who look down on God are those who say God was a man, Christ was peccable, and God cannot do anything for man until man first exercises his will. All these have degrading thoughts about the sovereign God of Holy Scripture, and they shall not escape God’s punishment. Three Greek nouns were used by Paul to define characteristics of God about which the hypocrites were having degrading thoughts: (1) He used the noun chrestotes, which means kindness or that which is right, six times in reference to God (Romans 2:4; Romans 11:22-23 times; Ephesians 2:7; Titus 3:4). In all these references “kindness” seems to be the better translation. (2) The noun anoche, which means forbearance or toleration, comes from the verb anechomai, made up of the preposition ana, up or above, and echomai, to hold back or delay (Romans 2:4; Romans 3:26). (3) The noun makrothumia means patience, patient enduring of evil, or longsuffering. It comes from the verb makrothumeo, which is derived from makros, distant or far off, and thumos, a strong passion or emotion of the mind, anger, or wrath. Although God is slow to become angry, His punishment is sure. Paul understood God’s longsuffering from personal experience, “But because of this [chief of sinners- 1 Timothy 1:15] I was shown mercy, in order that in me as chief Jesus Christ may demonstrate all longsuffering [makrothumia], for an example of the ones destined to believe on Him because of eternal life” (1 Timothy 1:16 -translation). Every Christian can relate with Paul in his recognition of God’s longsuffering to the elect. Subsequent to discussing the hypocrite’s intelligence, reasoning, and understanding in his degrading thoughts about God, Paul showed that God’s judgment grows out of what man by nature is and does (Romans 2:5). Man’s depraved nature is actively engaged in evil. The depravity of the heart is described by the noun “hardness” (skleroteta, accusative feminine singular of sklerotes, hardness or stubbornness). Ezekiel described the unregenerate person as having “a heart of stone” (Ezekiel 36:26). Such a heart is cold, impenetrable, and unyielding to spiritual things. Although the religious hypocrite may not be wallowing in the mire of some of the sins of Romans 1:24-27, he is twice dead: “These men are hidden rocks in your love feasts, feasting together with you feeding themselves without fear, waterless clouds being carried by winds, fruitless autumn trees having died twice who have been uprooted, wild waves of the sea foaming up their shames, wandering stars, for whom the blackness of darkness has been reserved forever” (Jude 1:12-13 -translation). The statement “having died twice” refers first to what man is naturally in Adam and then to what he is by vain profession. Therefore, the Pharisees “encircle sea and land to make one convert, and when he may become one, you make him twofold more a son of hell than yourselves” (Matthew 23:15 -translation). The natural knowledge of spiritual things increases blindness; hence, there is a double measure of punishment for those who die this double death. Paul not only gave the Bible’s description of the hardness of the heart, but he also showed by using the adjective ametanoeton that the heart is unrepentant. This adjective is accusative feminine singular of ametanoetos, which means unrepentant, obstinate, or admitting no change of mind. It is derived from the Greek words a, which negates repentance, the preposition meta, which means with, and the verb noeo, which means to think, consider, or think on. This adjective is used to describe the fact of human depravity. Hence, man is not depraved because he is hardened or impenitent, but he is hardened and impenitent because he is depraved. Therefore, man is condemned because of his depraved nature. In the light of this, man is not condemned for the lack of remedy but in consideration of his innate sinful nature. Man began with a sinful nature when he began to be: “Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, And in sin my mother conceived me” (Psalms 51:5 NASB). The truth of the inborn sinful nature destroys the frequently repeated religious theory, “It is not the sin question but the Son question.” The heart of depraved man is not only hard and impenitent, but it also treasures up wrath-punishment-by its activity in evil. The heart is more than the center of one’s nature; it is the whole of his personality: “The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?” (Jeremiah 17:9). As the natural consequence of the cultivation of moral excellence is moral excellence, the natural consequence of indulgence in sin is sin. This is a warning to sinners. These are common expressions: “Sin and enjoy it because you live only once”; “eat, drink, and be merry, for tomorrow you may die”; “get all the gusto you can because you go around only once.” However, Scripture teaches that the greater degree to which one sins, the greater his punishment will be in eternity. “...you are storing up for yourself punishment in a day of punishment and revelation of a righteous judgment of God” (Romans 2:5 -translation). The verb “store up” is thesauridzo, and it means to store up, treasure up, or accumulate. Christ used both the verb (thesauridzo) and the noun (thesauros) forms for “store up” in Matthew 6:19-21 -“Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy, and where thieves dig through and steal; but store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust destroy, and where thieves do not dig through nor steal; for where your treasure is, there your heart will be also” (translation). Peter used the verb in 2 Peter 3:7 -“But the present heavens and earth have been stored with fire are being kept for a day of judgment and destruction of ungodly men” (translation). The correct attitude toward a precious deposit (thesauros) can come only from a new heart. A new heart means there has been a change in the whole inner nature of man. Thus, the intelligence, darkened by depravity, has been enlightened. The affections, cold, insensitive, and unyielding to spiritual things, are made tender, sensitive, and yielding to spiritual things. The will which was selfish has been changed from self-will to the desire for God’s will. Every Christian can relate with the statement, “No one will ever go to heaven whose heart has not been there before,” because his citizenship is in heaven (Php 3:20). The only true investment for one who has everlasting existence in his heart must be in the eternal kingdom. Conversely, all who live for themselves and the pleasure of sin are not only accumulating a greater degree of punishment, but the present heavens and earth have also been permanently stored with the fire of judgment for their punishment. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 21: 01.6.5. JUDGED ACCORDING TO WORKS ======================================================================== Chapter 6v - Judged According To Works God’s judgment corresponds with man’s works: “Who will give to everyone according to his deeds: On one hand eternal life to the ones who because of perseverance in good work are seeking glory and honor and incorruptibility eternal life; on the other hand anger and wrath on the ones who out of selfish ambition are disobeying the truth, but who are being obedient to unrighteousness, wrath and anger. Tribulation and distress, on every soul of man desiring evil, of the Jew first and also of a Gentile; but glory and honor and peace to everyone doing good, to the Jew first and also to a Gentile. For there is no respect of persons with God” (Romans 2:6-11 -translation). The two terms “according to truth” (Romans 2:2) and “according to deeds” (Romans 2:6) harmonize in the unity of their meaning. “According to truth” is the subjective reality; “according to deeds” is the objective manifestation. What a person is determines what he does, but what he does never makes him what he is in character. Since fruit reveals the nature of a tree, judgment “according to truth” and judgment “according to deeds” indicate the inward and outward reality of the same person or persons. As God’s judgment and man’s judgment are contrasted in Romans 2:1-5, good work and evil work are contrasted in Romans 2:6-10. Negatively, good work is not merely knowing what is good or promising to do what is good. Positively, “good work” (ergou agathou, singular) in Romans 2:7 is the lifelong work that begins with salvation and continues until the Lord calls the Christian home. “Being persuaded of this very thing, that the One who began a good work [ergon agathon, singular] in you shall perform it until the day of Jesus Christ” (Php 1:6 -translation). A good work is according to God’s will: “For God is the One operating in you both to be willing and to be working for His good pleasure” (Php 2:13 -translation). The good work of the Christian must have the following ingredients: (1) The proper “motive” must be the glory of God, for the sake of Jesus Christ, and not to grieve the indwelling Holy Spirit: “...whatever you are doing, be doing for the purpose of [eis, accusative of purpose] God’s glory” (1 Corinthians 10:31 -translation). “For we are not proclaiming ourselves but Christ Jesus as Lord, and ourselves slaves for the sake of [dia, accusative of relationship] Jesus” (2 Corinthians 4:5 -translation). “And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by [en, instrumental of agency] whom you were sealed for [eis, accusative of purpose] the day of redemption” (Ephesians 4:30 NASB). (2) The “manner” must be with great concern of heart: “The word is faithful, and concerning these things I am desiring you to speak confidently, in order that the ones having believed God may be concerned to be engaging themselves in good works. These things are good and profitable to men” (Titus 3:8 -translation). (3) Its “essential element” is the love of God: “For the love of Christ is controlling [present active indicative of sunecho, which means to urge on, impel, or control] us...” (2 Corinthians 5:14 -translation). The love of God “has been poured out [perfect passive indicative of ekchunno, which means we have been permanently endowed with God’s love] in our hearts through [dia, ablative of agency] the Holy Spirit who has been given [aorist passive participle of didomi, to give] to us” (Romans 5:5 -translation). The perfect passive and the aorist passive of the verb for poured out prove that the Holy Spirit and God’s love are permanent possessions of God’s elect; therefore, our hope does not disappoint (present active indicative of kataischuno, to disappoint, put to shame, or disgrace - Romans 5:5 a). Perseverance in good work shall be rewarded. Patience in good work is not the feverish ambition which must see itself in the news and be congratulated in public meetings. Such ambition exhausts itself before the day of God’s righteous judgment; therefore, it receives its reward on earth. Concerning the Pharisees, Christ said, “...I am telling you, they have their reward” (Matthew 6:16 -translation). Spasmodic effort wins no lasting honor in either time or eternity. The Christian life is the lifework of a willing mind and loving heart. That life has the mind of Christ and a heart overflowing with the love of God which has been shed abroad within by the Holy Spirit (Romans 5:5). Such a life motivated Paul to say, “Therefore I am enduring all things on account of the chosen ones, in order that they also may obtain the deliverance in Christ Jesus with eternal glory” (2 Timothy 2:10 -translation). The recipients of God’s grace are given a holy zeal for good works: “Looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of the great God and our Savior Jesus Christ, who gave Himself on behalf of us in order that He might set us free from all sin and cleanse for Himself a special people, zealous for good works” (Titus 2:13-14 -translation). Is the Christian as zealous for righteousness as he was for unrighteousness before God regenerated him? As a Pharisee, Saul was zealous for his own righteousness in his persecution of the assembly and for his ancestral traditions. (See Romans 10:2; Php 3:6; Galatians 1:14.) As a Christian, Paul did not lose any of his zeal, but his zeal had been sanctified by grace. Thus, with zeal burning on the altar of his heart, Paul knew that his zeal was kindled, sustained, and attracted by the grace of the sovereign God. Since zeal is acknowledged as good in the natural realm, is it to become less in the spiritual realm? Since zeal is right in any case, it is more justifiable in the realm of grace. There are three classes of people who resist genuine Christian zeal: 1. THE UNGODLY-Festus said to Paul, “you are out of your mind [maine, present middle indicative of mainomai, to be out of one’s mind, insane or mad, or have no control over oneself]; your much learning is driving you [peritrepei, present active indicative of peritrepo to drive or bring around-made up of peri, around in the accusative case and trepo, to turn, alter, or change] to insanity [accusative singular of mania, meaning madness or insanity]” (Acts 26:24 -translation). Truth stirs people in one of two ways-either for or against it, exemplified in their reaction to Christ (Mark 3:21), the apostles (Acts 2:13), and Christians in general (1 Peter 4:1-5). 2. THE RELIGIOUS HYPOCRITES-Hypocrites (hupokrites, an actor on the stage of life who is playing the role of what he is not in real life) are people pretending one thing while living something entirely different. Christ’s last words in the temple were condemnatory against the hypocrites (Matthew 23:13). The more moral and religious persons are without grace, the more ignorant they are of God, and the more they oppose God’s truth. Hypocrisy originates when obedience is not the outcome of the principle of grace. The further religionists are removed from the teaching of Scripture the more pharisaical they become. Furthermore, the more pharisaical people become the greater their hatred for truth and those who expose them by proclaiming it. Who crucified Jesus Christ? (See Acts 2:22-23.) 3. ASSEMBLY MEMBERS WHO ARE LIVING OUT OF FELLOWSHIP-The Corinthians deserved Paul’s rebukes and corrections in his two Epistles to them. Unless the human element in the assembly is restrained, the spiritual life of the assembly will be greatly affected. Paul vindicated himself by distinguishing his impugners by making a distinction between the deceivers and the deceived. The weapons of deceivers are carnal, even though they mix in a little Scripture with their human eloquence, clever propaganda, charming personality, and personal attention. The deceived are gullible because they are lazy, untutored, and possessed with self-interest. Although in most cases the deceivers are false teachers, the Devil knows there are a great number of weak believers who will be easy prey for deception by his representatives. Many of the Corinthians became a serious burden to the apostle Paul. He said to them, “...I seek not your’s, but you....and I will very gladly spend and be spent for you; though the more abundantly I love you, the less I be loved” (2 Corinthians 12:14-15). (Study 2 Corinthians 9:1-15; 2 Corinthians 10:1-18; 2 Corinthians 11:1-33; 2 Corinthians 12:1-21.) The good worker has a future crown, because good work describes a life of character, which is the fruit of grace. “On one hand eternal life to the ones who because of perseverance in good work are seeking glory and honor and incorruptibility.... but glory and honor and peace to everyone doing good, to the Jew first and also to a Gentile” (Romans 2:7; Romans 2:10 -translation). The future crown consists of glory, honor, and incorruptibility. The present active participle of dzeteo, “seeking,” of Romans 2:7 is the key to the proper understanding of the passage. The one seeking is the person who has been sought and found by the sovereign God; because in man’s natural condition, he does not seek God (Romans 3:11). The Christian seeks glory (doxa, splendor, glory, or revealed presence of God) because it is a distinguishing characteristic of the eternal state. Although the grace of God in the believer is glorious, the sphere in which he lives in time is anything but glorious. He seeks honor (time, honor, recognition, or place of honor- Romans 2:10) which will be given by Christ rather than what is considered exaltation among men. The believer seeks incorruptibility (accusative singular of aphtharsia, imperishability- Romans 2:7), which contrasts the perseverance of the eternal with that which is terminal. After Paul’s description of the Christian and his reward, he contrasted the evil worker and his reward: “On the other hand anger and wrath on the ones who out of selfish ambition are disobeying the truth but who are being obedient to unrighteousness, wrath and anger. Tribulation and distress on every soul of man desiring evil, of the Jew first and also of a Gentile” (Romans 2:8-9 -translation). The Greek noun eritheias (selfish ambition) in Romans 2:8 means selfishness, selfish ambition, or strife (2 Corinthians 12:20; Galatians 5:20; Php 1:16; Php 2:3; James 3:14; James 3:16). The verb form is eritheuomai, which means to serve for hire, to serve a party, have a party spirit, wrangle, engage in strife, or oppose single-mindedness. But Christians are exhorted to have the mind of Christ (Php 2:5); however, religionists who are possessed with selfish ambition oppose single-mindedness. The expression, “...anger and wrath on the ones who out of selfish ambition are disobeying the truth...” (Romans 2:8 -translation) is parallel with those who are of the circumcision. Persons possessed with selfish ambition are guilty of the heinous crime of disobedience to truth. Those who are accomplishing evil shall be punished (Romans 2:8-9). Although God’s wrath (punishment) is being revealed, there shall be an outburst of the execution of God’s wrath. Since wrath is being stored up (Romans 2:5), a sudden outburst of judgment shall come on the wicked, like a huge dam that has been allowing water to be stored until the appointed time for the dam to open and allow the stored water to descend on those below. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 22: 01.6.6. NO RESPECT OF PERSONS IN GODS JUDGMENT ======================================================================== Chapter 6vi - No Respect Of Persons In God’s Judgment God’s judgment is without respect of persons: “For there is no respect of persons [prosopolempsia, a noun derived from the noun prosopon, meaning face, countenance, or appearance, and the verb lambano, meaning to receive; the compound word means respect of persons or partiality] with God. For as many as without law sinned, shall also without law perish; and as many as sinned in the sphere of the law shall be judged by means of the law; for not the hearers of the law are just before [in the sight of] God, but the doers of the law shall be justified” (Romans 2:11-13 -translation). The noun prosopolempsia, used for respect of persons, is described in God’s instruction to Samuel, a compassionate man, who was concerned about King Saul: “But the LORD said unto Samuel, Look not on his countenance, or on the height of his stature; because I have refused him: for the LORD seeth not as man seeth; for man looketh on the outward appearance, but the LORD looketh on the heart” (1 Samuel 16:7). In Romans 2:11, the noun prosopolempsia (respect of persons or partiality) is negated by the adverb ou, signifying that God’s judgment is the same whether persons sin without law or in the sphere of the law. The expression “without law” applies to non-Jews who are without a written code of law; however, they are condemned because they do not live according to the general revelation in creation. On the other hand, the expression “in the sphere of the law” refers to the Jews who were given the law of Moses. None have ever been given license to sin. The Jews are judged because the holy law is God’s definite standard. Therefore, God’s judgment, which is without respect of persons, will be a verdict of guilty on sinning mankind, whether non-Jews or Jews. Paul was not discussing how men are saved, but how they will be judged according to the light to which they have been exposed. The statements “no respect of persons with God” (Romans 2:11) and “God is no respecter of persons” (Acts 10:34) are taken out of context by persons who hate the Biblical doctrine of Divine election and God’s providential government. Their defense against these Biblical facts is the quotation of the previously mentioned verses. They say if these subjects are true, God would be guilty of arbitrariness in election and would fail to treat people equally in His providential government. Pertaining to the doctrine of election, if God did not choose some, all would be lost because all are depraved. Concerning God’s providential government, none can determine which rank or station of life supersedes the others, because all without exception enter this world in the same state of depravity. FIRST-Election does not make God a respecter of persons. This is contrary to the false concept that the doctrine of election makes God guilty of injustice in that He gives to equal persons unequal things. One must understand that God is not bound to save any person, considering that He alone has absolute freedom. No one can go to law with God. He is His own law; therefore, there is no law above Himself. Since God is absolutely sovereign and free, man must view His choice of some as being for God’s own pleasure. Therefore, election originated with God: “Having known [perfect active participle of oida], brethren, that you have been loved [perfect passive participle of agapao], by [hupo, ablative of agency] God, the choosing [eklogen, accusative feminine singular of ekloge, selection, election, or choosing] of you” (1 Thessalonians 1:4 -translation). This verse records the “act,” the “Agent,” and the “object.” The moving cause of God’s election is found only in “the good pleasure of his will” (Ephesians 1:5), and it is called the “election of grace” (Romans 11:5). God’s decree of election is an act of sovereignty, not an act of justice. God is not a respecter of persons in election because He did not choose men according to their character and works. Will any attempt to say God is unjust to choose some from the pit of depravity, when He would have been just had He destroyed all? God saw all people alike, and nothing but the good pleasure of His will balanced His choice. Justice always presupposes debt, but God could not be a debtor to man since man is dependent on God. Therefore, the decree of election is not a matter of right and wrong; it is God’s free and undeserved favor to the unfavorable bound by a sinful nature. No person can ever understand the meaning of the grace of election until he is able by grace to see that he deserves God’s eternal wrath. The worldly ambitious person says, “Blessed is the man who rises to great heights in the eyes of men.” The sensualist says, “Blessed is the man who walks according to his own sensuous desires.” But the Christian says, “How blessed is the one whom Thou dost choose, and bring near to Thee, To dwell in Thy courts...” (Psalms 65:4 NASB). The Greek verb for “chosen” in Ephesians 1:4 is in the aorist tense (completed action in past time), middle voice (sovereignly selected for Himself), and indicative mood (the mood of reality, which makes the choice an established fact). The compound verb eklegomai (or eklego) is derived from the preposition ek, out of, and the verb lego, to speak, say, or gather. In its inflected form, it means “chose once for all for Himself.” SECOND-Providence does not make God a respecter of persons. Concerning God’s providential government, no person is in a position to say which rank or station of life is superior to others. What appears to be partiality in providence, such as circumstances, condition of health, natural abilities, and external advantages cannot be justly determined in the light of the present. Man’s future alone can determine him happy or unhappy. Unhappiness evidences dependence on happenings to make one happy. Since man’s present condition is perpetually changing, even temporal happiness depends on more than externals. Such things as pain, persecution, disappointment, and hardship are often used to discipline God’s people. To the unsaved, they may constitute God’s punishment that is being constantly revealed from heaven (Romans 1:18). Everything done in time was purposed in eternity. Therefore, the time for the execution of that purpose is brought about by the providence of God, signifying that providence is purpose in execution. The noun form for the word providence (pronoia) means provision, foresight, or care (Acts 24:2; Romans 13:14). The verb form (pronoeo) means to have in mind, care for, or take care of (Romans 12:17; 2 Corinthians 8:21; 1 Timothy 5:8). Providence (Divine care or direction) may be considered in three major ways: (1) It may be without means or with means. (2) It may be extraordinary or ordinary, which means either by miraculous operations or by the common course of means. (3) It may be general or particular, which may concern the whole world in general or some in a particular way. For example, some things belong to men in general, such as, “He [God] is giving to all life and breath and all things; and He made from one every nation of men to dwell on all the face of the earth, appointing seasons and the boundaries of their dwelling having been designated.... For in Him we are living and being moved and are having our existence...” (Acts 17:25 b, Acts 17:26, Acts 17:28 -translation). On the other hand, other things belong to the elect in particular: “For to this purpose we are working hard and are contending with dangers, because we have put our hope in the living God, who is the Preserver of all men, above all of believers” (1 Timothy 4:10 -translation). The sovereign God has power over everything He has created. He did not bring something into existence that He cannot control. Living in a day when God is humanized, blessings are materialized, and the gospel is socialized, Christians are a very small minority who appear to have the impossible goal of accomplishing what they preach. Christians, not religionists, encounter the same opposition as Nehemiah and the remnant of Jews when they undertook to rebuild the walls of Jerusalem (Nehemiah 4:1-23). God’s purpose was not obstructed in the case of Nehemiah, neither will it be hindered in His purpose for the “little flock” (Luke 12:32). Nehemiah’s opposition went from Sanballat’s grief (displeasure) to his anger, and then to his conspiracy (Nehemiah 2:10; Nehemiah 4:1-8). God is ruling in the affairs of men. The greatest example of the controlling power of God is seen in the death of Jesus Christ. From all eternity God predestined every detail of that event. (See Acts 2:23; Acts 4:28.) Christians espouse the truth and proclaim it for the purpose of reaching the elect. Although there are many devices in the hearts of men, the counsel of God shall stand; and His purpose shall be accomplished (Proverbs 19:21; Isaiah 46:10). Those who oppose this Biblical fact argue, “If decrees do something to the event, freedom of action in producing the event is impossible.” The Lord does not change the quality but the current of the stream. It continues running according to its natural tendency, but it runs under God’s guidance and subservient to His pleasure. Kings follow their own natural inclinations, but they are guided by God to fulfill His purpose. Regarding Christ’s death, one cannot deny that the time of His death was purposed in eternity (Revelation 13:8), and the execution of that purpose was brought about by the providence of God. No one laid hands on Jesus Christ as He taught in the temple for the reason that His hour had not come (John 8:20). There was an hour for each aspect of His life. In John 12:23, Christ said, “The hour has come [perfect active indicative of erchomai, to come] that the Son of man may be glorified” (translation). (See John 13:1; John 17:1.) A Divine providence by which all things are held together (Colossians 1:17), governed (Proverbs 21:1), and directed is proved by the Being of God, His creation, and perfection. Man has great difficulty explaining that God’s providence cannot be excluded from man’s sinful acts. Two things must be considered as undeniable facts, whether or not we are capable of reconciling them to our own satisfaction: (1) God is not the author of sin (James 1:13). (2) The providence of God has some concern with sinful acts. None can deny that God supports men in their being while they are sinning (Acts 17:28). He did not kill Ananias and Sapphira before they sinned (Acts 5:1-11). He kept Abimelech from committing adultery with Abraham’s wife, Sarah, by appearing to him in a dream and saying, “Behold, thou art but a dead man, for the woman which thou hast taken; for she is a man’s wife....for I also withheld thee from sinning against me: therefore suffered I thee not to touch her” (Genesis 20:3 b, Genesis 20:6 b). However, in the case of David, God did not prevent him from committing adultery with Bathsheba, which was a sin against God (2 Samuel 11:1-5; 2 Samuel 12:13-14; Psalms 51:4). God did not allow Laban to hurt Jacob (Genesis 31:7), but He did allow Shimei to curse David (2 Samuel 16:5-14). Although David had nothing to do with the fall of King Saul, he did have something to do with the fall of Uriah; therefore, he knew his chastening was from God. He said, “...let him curse, because the LORD hath said unto him, Curse David...” (2 Samuel 16:10). Every Christian has a Shimei who is such a trial to him that he wishes him removed. Nevertheless, he must not overlook the fact that God has a purpose in the Shimei in his life. While Shimei was David’s offender, Alexander the coppersmith was Paul’s offender (2 Timothy 4:14). What is true of evil men is equally true of all our ominous surroundings and adverse circumstances, as we like to call them. These are not only appointed by God, but they are also kept and made to operate for the good of God’s people. They are beyond our ability to understand, especially while experiencing trials. But having passed through them, we can look back with the assurance that the God of providence arranged them for our good. No Christian knows just what another believer needs, particularly his trying, searching, sifting, and sanctifying circumstances. God’s providence is designed for Christian humility, submissiveness, contentment, detachment, denial of self, unearthliness, and conformity to Jesus Christ. Therefore, we should say with David, “Let Shimei curse because it is for my good.” If natural sense (the collective faculties of seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, or touching of man by which he perceives, discerns, realizes, or recognizes) alone were considered in reference to God’s providential government, one would not give the Sovereign His rightful place in trying circumstances. Believing that God created man and subsequently assumed the position of a mere observer is a deistic concept of God. Such a person would not proceed beyond Shimei’s cursing David (2 Samuel 16:5-14), Joseph’s envying brothers afflicting him (Genesis 37:17-28; Genesis 45:1-15; Genesis 50:14-21), or the Jew’s hatred manifested in the death of Jesus Christ (Acts 2:23). Rising above the natural sense of discernment is necessary but impossible apart from grace. The spiritual discernment of God-given faith says, “the LORD hath said unto him [Shimei], Curse David” (2 Samuel 16:10); “But as for you, ye thought evil against me [Joseph]; but God meant it unto good, to bring to pass, as it is this day, to save much people alive” (Genesis 50:20); and “This man [Christ] was delivered according to the fixed purpose and prearrangement of God...” (Acts 2:23 -translation). This manifests the difference between the natural man and the Christian. God as governor of the universe and man sometimes punishes one sin with another sin. As it has been shown, Romans 1:1-32 teaches that the removal of God’s restraint in time is a fearful punishment of sin. Plato made the statement that a license to sin is the greatest punishment of sin. He was correct when it comes to sin being punished by greater sins, but he was incorrect when he said it is the greatest punishment. As horrible as the description of sin is (Romans 1:24; Romans 1:26; Romans 1:28; 2 Thessalonians 2:11), the eternal punishment of hell is the greatest. Sometimes God overrules sin for good, as in the case of Adam’s fall for his perfection in grace, Joseph’s being sold into Egypt for the saving of many persons alive, and Christ’s death for the salvation of the elect. “The LORD is righteous in all his ways, and holy in all his works” (Psalms 145:17). People who are unable to distinguish between the perfection of the Creator and the weakness of the creature, or the chief Agent and the instrument, adhere to the visible action without ascending to God who presides over all. “The King’s heart is in the hand of the LORD, as the rivers of water: he turneth it whithersoever he will” (Proverbs 21:1). Kings are ruled and overruled by God who is “higher than the highest” (Ecclesiastes 5:8). Both politicians and religionists think God’s heart is in their hands. Authorities of human government are not viewed in Scripture as having intelligence of a spiritual order. Scripture represents them as “beasts.” Both Old and New Testaments use this word literally and symbolically. Daniel described governmental authorities as lions, bears, leopards, and the fourth beast as being so terrible that he had no name for him (Daniel 7:1-28). John reversed the order in Revelation 13:1-18. He called the fourth beast, too wicked to describe, dragon. All the beasts-governmental authorities-will give their authority to one government under the antichrist (Revelation 13:1-18). Nevertheless, this power will be controlled by God: “For God put [edoken, aorist active indicative of didomi, to put] it into their hearts to accomplish [poiesai, aorist active infinitive of poieo, to do, bring about, or accomplish] His purpose [gnomen, accusative feminine singular of gnome, purpose, intention, or decision], and to bring about [aorist active infinitive of poieo] one decision and to give their kingdom to the beast, until the words of God shall be fulfilled [future passive indicative of teleo, to finish, complete, or fulfill]” (Revelation 17:17 -translation). God works unseen in all the political and social changes of mankind. Therefore, instead of kings, presidents, and politicians preventing the accomplishment of God’s purpose, they are unknowingly fulfilling it. Furthermore, religionists who say God can do nothing for them in a spiritual way until they choose to let Him, deny His sovereignty. Does the depraved will of man control God concerning man’s physical life and sustenance? One who would say “I will live a long time” does not recognize that his breath is in God’s hands. In order to escape the dilemma of making God the cause of sin, one must have some understanding of depravity, grace, and confession. No Christian would ever say, “I did that sinful act because God worked in me to do that which is sinful.” The Christian knows that apart from God’s grace he is nothing and deserves nothing. Therefore, rather than trying to resolve the problem which the natural person has with providence and sin by way of concurrence, he respects the boundaries God has established for his thinking. (See Deuteronomy 29:29.) Scripture never presents providence in its relation to sin by way of argument, but always in a historical setting of God’s sovereignty and man’s responsibility. God-given faith does not flee from responsibility; furthermore, it explains sin as coming from man’s depraved heart. God’s providential government can be trusted, because it is executed according to His eternal purpose. As important as prayer is in the life of a Christian, it can never derange the economy of providence. Prayer must come through the discipline of learning. An informed person who prays seeks strength to meet and not change facts. Much so-called prayer seeks to drag God on man’s side; thus, it is man-centered rather than God-centered. Prayer is power to submit our lives to the will of God. Prayer will not change God’s purpose concerning who shall be saved or when they will be saved. God’s providence does assure us that the elect will be preserved until they are regenerated. (See Jude 1:1.) Although the elect fell in time in our representative human head, Adam, we did not fall in eternity out of our covenant Head, Jesus Christ. Therefore, having been permanently loved and kept by the sovereign God, all the elect are assured of being effectually called at God’s appointed time. The same God who permanently loved and kept the elect for salvation is able to keep the effectually called elect from falling and to make us stand in the presence of Him without blemish in the sphere of eternal joy. This is the good side of providence, and it is wonderfully portrayed against the apostate condition which is also under the control of providence (Jude 1:24-25). God’s providence is not appointed as a guide for one’s life. It should drive us to the word of God. Christians must not murmur against providence. We discover the will of God and our duty under dark and doubtful providence by going to the word of God. Providence in itself is no standard for duty. It may present occasion for sinning, as in the case of Jonah. Any testimony of providence contrary to God’s revealed will must not be accepted. Providence does not justify moral evil. Every sinner loves the good providence of God, but Christians love the God of providence. As mercies are fuel to a sinner’s lust, they are fuel to maintain a Christian’s love and fidelity to God. THIRD-God’s righteousness in judgment proves He is not a respecter of persons. Neither Divine election nor providential government makes God guilty of partiality, as He is charged by the enemies of these two Biblical doctrines. God’s judgment is without respect of persons. Romans 2:11 is connected with its preceding and succeeding verses. The conjunction “For” (gar) shows that “no respect of persons with God” is associated with the preceding verses. The noun prosopolempsia of Romans 2:11, which means respect of persons or partiality, is negated by the adverb ou; therefore, no one can accuse God of being unjust in view of the fact that He is righteous in His judgments: “For the LORD your God is the God of gods and the Lord of lords, the great, the mighty, and the awesome God who does not show partiality, nor take a bribe” (Deuteronomy 10:17 NASB). God, whose understanding is infinite (Psalms 147:5), cannot be bribed because everything past, present, and future is eternally known to Him. There is no succession in His knowledge. The correct way to speak of the God of gods and Lord of lords is, “He is.” One might speak of created man as having been, is, and shall be; he is not now what he was; and he shall not be what he is at the present. However, God is the same now that He was, and He shall be the same as He is now (Malachi 3:6; Hebrews 13:8; James 1:17). Eternity has been defined as duration without beginning or ending and present without past or future. However, “duration” is not a good term on account of it signifies the length of time something continues to exist. Constance, which means perpetual, ceaseless, permanent, or uninterrupted, is the better word. Eternity is not duration; it is ceaseless. Furthermore, eternal signifies more than pretemporal. The terms pretemporal, cotemporal, and posttemporal are expressions used to describe past, present, and future with reference to time. Such expressions are necessary for creatures of time, but they cannot be used with reference to God. That which is temporal to us, whether past, present, or future, is a present fact to the eternal God. All things with respect to God have a known and a real existence; however, since there is no time with God, both are simultaneous to Him. Although future things in time do not coexist with God, He coexists with them: “...I the LORD, the first, and with the last; I am he” (Isaiah 41:4). The eternal God with infinite understanding knows man’s thoughts before their existence. David said, “O LORD, thou hast searched me, and known me. Thou knowest my downsitting and mine uprising, thou understandest my thought afar off [a Hebrew adjective meaning far or remote]” (Psalms 139:1-2). The Lord said to Moses concerning Israel, “...I know their imagination which they go about, even now, before I have brought them into the land which I sware” (Deuteronomy 31:21). Greatness must be ascribed to the God of gods and Lord of lords because He eternally knows every man through and through: “Great is the LORD, and greatly to be praised; and his greatness is unsearchable” (Psalms 145:3). Conclusively, God who knows man through and through cannot be bribed. The Hebrew word shohad means bribe, gratuity, or inducement. Prohibitions concerning the reception of bribes are found in the Pentateuch: “And you shall not take a bribe, for a bribe blinds the clear-sighted and subverts the cause of the just” (Exodus 23:8 NASB). Under the old economy, the Jewish judges had a duty as serious as that of the priests. Since the judges must make judgment on the basis of God’s standard, their judgment would be God’s judgment. Judges must be (1) impartial-“You shall not pervert the justice...” (Exodus 23:6 NASB), (2) judicious-“Keep far from a false charge, and do not kill the innocent or the righteous [capital punishment]...” (Exodus 23:7 NASB), and (3) incorrupt-“And you shall not take a bribe...” (Exodus 23:8 NASB). A bribe is something given or promised as illicit payment for information that would be advantageous to the person offering the payment. People on Wall Street could give many examples of bribes in the Stock Market business. No doubt bribes are common today, but the commonality of a crime does not make it right. The same portion of Scripture (Exodus 23:1-9) warns against following the multitudes, whether irreligious or religious: “You shall not follow a multitude in doing evil, nor shall you testify in a dispute so as to turn aside after a multitude in order to pervert justice” (Exodus 23:2 NASB). This verse assumes that the multitude practices evil. The honest person, because of his own innate tendencies to evil, knows this is factual. Listen to Isaiah, “Your rulers are rebels, And companions of thieves; Everyone loves a bribe, and chases after rewards...” (Isaiah 1:23 NASB). “Who justify the wicked for a bribe, And take away the rights of the ones who are in the right” (Isaiah 5:23 NASB). Listen to Micah: “Her leaders pronounce judgment for a bribe, Her priests instruct for a price, And her prophets divine for money. Yet they lean on the LORD saying, Is not the LORD in our midst? Calamity will not come upon us” (Micah 3:11 NASB). Disregard for Biblical principles leads to fraud and violence, thus indicating that if the price is right a bribe can lead to violence. “Cursed is he who accepts a bribe to strike down an innocent person...” (Deuteronomy 27:25 NASB). David said, “O LORD, I love the habitation of Thy house, And the place where Thy glory dwells. Do not take my soul away along with sinners, Nor my life with men of bloodshed, In whose hands is a wicked scheme, And whose right hand is full of bribes” (Psalms 26:8-10 NASB). Ezekiel said to Jerusalem, “In you they [rulers of Israel] have taken bribes to shed blood; you have taken interest and profits, and you have injured your neighbors for gain by oppression, and you have forgotten Me, declares the Lord God” (Ezekiel 22:12 NASB). (See 1 Samuel 8:3; 1 Kings 15:19; 2 Kings 16:8.) As Saul bribed others to seek the life of David, the Jews of the greater David’s time bribed one of His own disciples to betray the Son of God into their hands. Those who have no knowledge of depravity think it strange that personified goodness (Jesus Christ) could be treated by men in such a manner. Religionists who understand neither depravity nor personified goodness think that virtue needs only to be presented in its true colors in order to be loved by all at once. The thought that all men would love embodied righteousness is false. Virtue was embodied in the Person of Jesus Christ; but all men did not, do not, and will not love Him. The Son of God was despised and rejected by men. Following His rejection, wicked men led Embodied Godliness to Calvary, where they crucified the Son of God between two thieves. The absolutely righteous Lord “spoke to Moses, saying, Speak to all the congregation of the sons of Israel and say to them, You shall be holy, For I the LORD your God am holy.... You shall do no injustice in judgment; you shall not be partial to the poor nor defer to the great, but you are to judge your neighbor fairly” (Leviticus 19:1-2; Leviticus 19:15 NASB). When it comes to judging others, Christians must never consider what others have done or are doing in similar conditions. We must begin with serious self-judgment, and from there judge on the basis of Scripture, regardless of our closeness to or distance from the ones being judged. Furthermore, we must not be swayed by rank, wealth, influence, or the opinions of others. The power of the court of Areopagus at Athens was great. The custom of the court was to make its judgments only at night without light. The reason given for this practice was that the members of the court might not be prejudiced for or against the accused by seeing his countenance and gestures. Truth alone was to be regarded, and no attempt to distort it so as to lose truth or objectivity must be allowed. Since that was the practice in the court of Areopagus, what about the civil, self, and assembly courts of our day? “Respect of persons” [prosopolempsia, partiality or favoritism] means to look with favor on some with regard to their external privileges without any concern for their internal character. This is vividly demonstrated in the realms of society, politics, and religion. Immoral and heretical things are overlooked in the lives of many for personal, political, and religious advantage. Jude warned against this, “These are murmurers complainers, conducting themselves according to their own lusts, and their mouth is speaking boastful things, having men’s persons in admiration for the sake of advantage” (Jude 1:16 -translation). James condemned looking with favor on some with respect to their external privileges (James 2:1-9). The wealthy man must not be given attention above the poor man, but this does not mean that the indolent person is to be regarded the same way as the industrious person. Solomon mentioned the sluggard (atsel, sluggard, slothful, or indolent) six times in the book of Proverbs (Proverbs 6:6, Proverbs 6:9; Proverbs 10:26; Proverbs 13:4; Proverbs 20:4; Proverbs 26:16). “Go to the ant, O sluggard, Observe her ways and be wise” (Proverbs 6:6 NASB). The ant could be called a little preacher with a great message of foresight, diligence, and industry. The ant’s foresight motivates its diligence in providing food for the coming winter. “How long will you lie down, O sluggard? When will you arise from your sleep?” (Proverbs 6:9 NASB). Was not man created with more understanding than the lower creatures? “The soul of the sluggard craves and gets nothing. But the soul of the diligent is made fat” (Proverbs 13:4 NASB). All respect of persons is not sinful. If it were, there would be no place for authority in either civil government or the assemblies of Christ. The following are some ways in which respect of persons is not sinful: (1) There is holy respect of persons with God: “And Abel, he also brought of the firstlings of his flock and of the fat thereof. And the LORD had respect [shaa, the basic idea is to look with interest, gaze at, inspect, or have respect or regard for] unto Abel and to his offering: But unto Cain and to his offering he had not respect...” (Genesis 4:4-5). Abel’s person was accepted prior to his offering, thus teaching that the person must be regarded before his service. Consequently, salvation does not result from works, but good works are the fruit of the one having been created in Christ Jesus (Ephesians 2:10). (2) There is a justifiable respect of persons due to their age (1 Timothy 5:1). (3) Respect is due to those in a God-appointed office in civil government (Romans 13:1-7). While one may bow to the office of king, president, etc., he is not obligated to bow to the person in that office who acts contrary to God’s Biblical principles. (4) Respect is due men of God for their God-appointed office in the local assemblies of Christ (1 Timothy 3:1-16; 1 Timothy 4:1-16). However, Christians are obligated to follow God-appointed leaders only as they follow the Lord. (See 1 Corinthians 11:1; 2 Thessalonians 3:7.) Although salvation is common to all believers (Jude 1:3), we are not equal in gifts and calling (1 Corinthians 12:4-11; 1 Corinthians 12:27-30). The inequality in gifts and calling must be respected because God Himself makes one to differ from another. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 23: 01.6.7. ALL SECRETS REVEALED IN GODS JUDGMENT ======================================================================== Chapter 6vii - All Secrets Revealed In God’s Judgment God’s judgment reveals all secrets: “For as many as without law sinned, shall also without law perish; and as many as sinned in the sphere of the law shall be judged by means of the law; for not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified. For whenever non-Jews who do not have law do by nature things of the law, these having not the law are a law to themselves; who are showing the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness with their reasonings accusing or even excusing among themselves, on the day when God judges the hidden things of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel” (Romans 2:12-16 -translation). The truth that God’s sovereignty does not eliminate man’s responsibility is taught in Romans 2:12-14. Our studies in Romans 1:1-32 have proved that to be true. Divine sovereignty and human responsibility have been called one of the antinomies of Scripture. This word is frequently used, especially when a person comes face to face with two things that are difficult to harmonize. Theologians of the past used it with reference to many passages of Scripture. In theology, it is applied to apparently conflicting doctrines concerning the same subject. There is no Greek word for antinomy. It is an English word that has been incorporated to try to explain some things that human beings do not have the ability to comprehend. Since the limitations of the human mind render it impossible to approach the truth of two apparently contradictory ideas, some say the truth of both is capable of equal demonstration. However, two diametrically opposed opinions cannot be equally demonstrated. Man does not have a free will. His will is enslaved. Therefore, free will and free grace cannot be equally demonstrated. Antinomy is described in a dictionary as a contradiction between two equally logical conclusions. It is defined in another dictionary as opposition between one law, principle, rule, etc., and another law, principle, or rule. In philosophy, it is said to be a contradiction between two statements, both attained by seemingly correct reasoning. Antinomy and paradox are distinct. Antinomy is incomprehensible, whereas paradox is comprehensible. The following are some so-called contradictions appearing in Scripture: (1) God is absolutely sovereign, and man is a responsible being. (2) The Divine and the human are in both the living Word and the written word. In the Divine logos, the Son of God, are the human and Divine natures; and in the giving of Scripture, are the human element and Divine inspiration. (3) Fallible men were inspired to write the infallible word. (4) There is the regular function of natural laws, the laws of nature, and the occasional occurrence of miraculous events in nature’s ordered system. (5) Temporal sin committed in time will result in eternal punishment. (6) Election is Divine, and elected sinners exercise individual faith. The difference between centrifugal and centripetal forces, two opposing things, illustrates an antinomy as far as our understanding is concerned. They appear contradictory. Centrifugal force directs power from the center, but centripetal force directs power toward the center. The supposed contradiction between them keeps the planets, including the earth, in space in their proper orbits. Therefore, the forces are complimentary and contribute to harmonious operation of the universe itself. This is God’s doing. Who will argue about so-called contrarieties? Only our lack of understanding would cause us to call them antinomies. Laziness in the study of God’s word prompts some Christians to label certain truths as antinomies as an alibi. They claim some subjects are so deep they cannot understand them, and they do not consider what God has said. One who desires to know truth will search to find the truth. An unsaved person does not seek to know more about God. The only person who seeks God is one who has been sought and found by God and given grace. We must not learn the term antinomy as an excuse for lack of studying God’s word and doing His will. There is an element of truth in the statement that antinomies of Scripture enable children of God to guard against disturbance over our inability to reconcile all the doctrines of Holy Scripture with one another. But we need to use it with caution. There is no disharmony between God’s sovereignty and man’s responsibility; but in order to understand them, we must realize that God is in control of everything. We must also know that God created man upright, but man fell; nevertheless, God is not responsible for his fall. Furthermore, God has the right to command man to do what he is unable to do. Hence, there is no contradiction. The Creator is not restricted to limitations. God does not answer all questions that curious minds might raise. We are limited in our ability to fully comprehend God’s infinite mind, but we can understand what He wants us to know. Perhaps He never intended that we understand the things we do not understand, but we lay hold of or apprehend what we do not comprehend. Christians are taught to humbly trust God’s veracity. If we could explain everything, we would not trust God’s veracity. We understand by faith things that cannot be understood apart from God-given faith. The Creator is unrestricted by the creatures’ limitations. Creatures must wait for the solution to many mysteries in Scripture and providence. “The secret things belong unto the LORD our God: but those things which are revealed belong unto us and to our children for ever, that we may do all the words of this law” (Deuteronomy 29:29). God has revealed all to which He intends that we be subjected. If He revealed more, we could not know anything about it. The things of His will that are revealed belong to us. If you say the assembly is local and it is also universal, you speak of two hemispheres of the sphere. Man should avoid philosophical system’s explanation of the things of God. They cannot be explained by carnal minds. Therefore, one must rely on the Spirit of God to interpret Scripture. A consideration of God’s absolute sovereignty and man’s responsibility leads Christians to vital interest in God’s eternal purpose-singular. Technically, God has a purpose, a decree; but there are many facets to God’s decree. God has a plan for the ages, and He causes all things to move toward one goal. He governs the actions of men and they subserve His purpose in that goal. Therefore, God is sovereign. Nothing takes Him by surprise. Although the Lord’s temporary dispensations are sometimes altered, His eternal purpose never changes. It is fulfilled according to His design. God alone has the right to determine individuals and nations (Acts 17:26). God’s right to impose law on mankind rises from His absolute sovereignty. Man’s duty to observe that law flows from his responsibility as a creature created by the sovereign God. Creatures owe their allegiance and honor to God. Every knee shall bow in the presence of the Lord Jesus Christ to acknowledge His Lordship (Php 2:5-11). With God’s purpose in view, adversity and prosperity, which are apparently contradictory, exist side by side. “In the day of prosperity be joyful, but in the day of adversity consider...” (Ecclesiastes 7:14). Both are required. God also has set the one over against the other to the end that man should find nothing after him. God’s purpose is executed in all adverse and prosperous things. Spiritual minds alone can comprehend God’s turning men’s sin to His glory. Men sin; but God overrules sin, even the sins of men, for His own glory. He makes the wrath of man to praise Him. God overruled Joseph’s brethren’s intended evil for their own personal good. He overruled in the death of Jesus Christ for the good of His people. Man’s wrongdoing is not allowed to hinder God’s purpose. God overrules the wickedness of men. God’s temporary dispensations, many of which are recorded in Scripture, are sometimes altered. His promised blessings or punishments are withheld suitable to the attitude of those with whom He deals in His providence. The people of Ninevah repented (Jonah 3:10). God gives the spirit of penitence, which is godly sorrow, and man repents. Repentance is the gift of God. The word for repentance in the Old Testament is return. God first turns us, and then we return. In God’s act of saving us, we are passive. God acts and we react. Old Testament history demonstrates God’s sovereignty and man’s responsibility. The heart of Pharaoh, who held the children of Israel in Egyptian bondage, was hardened. God hardened his heart, and he hardened his own heart. God hardened his heart by exposing him to the truth and forcing him to an issue. God did not infuse hardness in Pharaoh’s heart. He only lifted His restraint and allowed him do what his hard heart desired. Therefore, he hardened his own heart. God hardens men’s hearts today by providentially subjecting them to the word of God. As men hear and fail to obey, they harden their own hearts. God does not infuse the hardness. He simply leaves men to the depravity of their own human hearts. God’s sovereignty and man’s responsibility are revealed in the introduction of sin into the human race. God is not the author of sin, but one cannot possibly imagine sin out of all relation to God. God could have prevented sin’s appearance had He chosen to do so, but He did not purpose to do so. Great controversy exists over free will and free grace, which is another so-called antinomy. Free will, as it is believed by the majority, will drive people to methods. For this reason most so-called worship services are designed to affect the emotional part of man. Religionists go from one method to another. Denominationally trained men today are concerned about what they can use and what they can do to get the most people. They believe salvation is dependent on the free will of man, so they must do something to persuade him to exercise his will. If one gimmick does not work, they try another. In contrast to free will, which drives people from one method to another, free grace drives people to the word of God; and they are satisfied, knowing that God has the answer. The Divine order has always been and always will be the mind, the emotions, and then the will. Anyone who tries to reach only the will or only the emotional nature is in error. The true method is to give an exposition of Scripture to reach through the declaration of truth the people God has regenerated. God is always the overflowing fountain. Man is always needy and must wait to drink of God’s fountain. Between man’s natural ability and his spiritual inability rests his responsibility. That is a good statement, but it deserves explanation. Man’s natural ability is that with which he comes into the world. As a result of the fall, man is spiritually unable to do anything of a spiritual nature. Therefore, between his natural ability and his spiritual inability, he is still a responsible individual. A man chained in a prison cell is physically unable to walk. However, his inability is attributable to the one who chained him. Nevertheless, his will is not changed. The body but not the will may be chained. His will, as far as he is concerned, remains free. Hence, man is spiritually incapable of believing on the Lord Jesus Christ. He has neither ability nor will to exercise faith in Christ. He does not have the will to believe because he does not have grace. Since his will is depraved, he acts according to his corrupt nature. He cannot naturally obey the gospel, which is required for salvation. He does not naturally act from foreign but from inward influence. Man still has his faculties, but they are depraved. They are motivated by iniquitous things. Only the grace of God can change that motivation. He is natural and has natural ability, but he has no spiritual ability to do spiritual things. Nevertheless, he is responsible because God is the author of neither his fall nor his sin. God created man upright (Ecclesiastes 7:29). There is no contradiction between the first and last parts of John 6:63, which many claim is another antinomy: “The Spirit is the one making alive, the flesh profits nothing; the words [hrema, which refers more to the spoken message than just to the written message] which I have spoken to you are spirit and are life” (translation). Those who believe this is an antinomy say the spoken word is spirit and life. Does the word itself give life? Those who believe in gospel regeneration answer in the affirmative. When Jesus Christ was here, He spoke. Was everyone who heard Him speak made alive? Only the ones who understand Christ’s words in a spiritual sense will find them living in operation. This was demonstrated by the Thessalonian Christians. When the gospel came to them, it did not come in word only but also in power and in the Holy Spirit and in much assurance, which is a living operation (1 Thessalonians 1:5). Efficacious grace is taught in John 6:63. The first part of the text affirms that the Spirit is the One making alive. In giving us life, He gives us ability to hear the words given. Hence, the Holy Spirit having made one alive in Jesus Christ also makes him sensitive to the living and continuing word of God (1 Peter 1:18-23). The latter part of the text in John 6:63 is not discussing regeneration. This word becomes the instrument of the assurance of salvation; it does not quicken. There is a realm of truth beyond the comprehension of man’s natural powers. We could not understand these things apart from the Holy Spirit. But this reality is never at the expense of the grammatical, historical account of Holy Scripture. As the artist can see and the musician can hear things many could never see or hear, Christians understand things that non-Christians can never see or understand. The Spirit of God does more than work through the sanctified eye and ear gate. He operates through the gift of faith. God’s judgment reveals all hidden things: “...all things are naked and opened unto the eyes of him with whom we have to do” (Hebrews 4:13). God knows the thoughts of every person, not only of the Jews but also of humanity in general. He will bring to light all things of saints and sinners among Jews and Gentiles. Both saved and lost will be judged, but not at the same time. In Romans 2:12-16, the apostle divided mankind into two classes-Jews and non-Jews. In 1 Corinthians 10:32, He divided them into three classes-Jews, non-Jews, and the assembly Jesus Christ is continuing to build in the world today. Neither the law within nor the law without was given for the purpose of justification. However, both do condemn men. That is the purpose of the law. The law was given that men might measure themselves thereby. It measures men but never provides the means of justification before God. God’s judgment, which is without partiality (Romans 2:11), pronounces the verdict of guilty: “For as many as without law sinned, shall also without law perish; and as many as sinned in the sphere of the law shall be judged by means of the law” (Romans 2:12 -translation). Those without law who do not heed their internal witness shall perish. Those within the sphere of the law who do not respect the external witness of the written law shall be condemned. This verse teaches the way men shall be judged, not the way they shall be saved. Paul was not discussing deliverance by the grace of God in this portion of Scripture. Gentiles who are without an external standard shall perish without law, and Jews who have the external standard of the law shall be condemned by that standard. But all are condemned. All men will be judged according to the light to which they have been exposed, whether they sin within or without the sphere of the law: “For this reason through one man sin entered into the world [world of mankind], and death by sin, so also death passed on all men, inasmuch as all sinned; for until law sin was in the world, but sin is not charged to one’s account when there is no law; but death reigned from Adam to Moses even on the ones not having sinned in the likeness of Adam’s transgression, who is a type of the One coming” (Romans 5:12-14 -translation). Although men lived, sinned, and died before Moses, their dying proved they were responsible individuals. The inner law judged every man from Adam to Moses. Although non-Jews are without the written form of the law, they are responsible for their sins: “Because that which is known of God is evident in them; for God manifested it to them. For the invisible things of Him since the creation of the world are being clearly seen being understood by the things made, both his eternal power and deity, with the result that they are without excuse” (Romans 1:19-20 -translation). Law within acquaints men with the knowledge that there is a Creator. Since the Godhead of God is revealed in creation, every man is without excuse before God. “In the sphere of the law” (Romans 2:12) refers to the Jews who had the external law. They heard it read but made no application of it: “for not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified” (Romans 2:13 -translation). The law’s function is to judge, not justify. It was given for the purpose of judging. Since the Jews were subjected to the reading of the law but failed to practice what they heard, they were condemned by the law. The law was given to expose us and show us what we must have in order to pass out of death into everlasting life. It reveals to us our need of deliverance by grace. Regeneration alone can impart the principle of life to an individual. Neither possession of the law nor having heard it read or taught will give safety in the day of God’s judgment. There are three kinds of hearers: (1) Some hear the word but do not understand it. The law is spiritual, holy, and good (Romans 7:12). It is the expression of the holy character of God. That is why we are condemned when we look at ourselves in the light of God’s law which cannot deliver. Men cannot understand the law when it is heard because it is spiritual and must be spiritually discerned (1 Corinthians 2:14). (2) Some hear but do not put into practice what they hear. (3) Others hear and do the things they hear. Hence, there are three types of people. The law shows the need of salvation but does not provide it. The law was never given as a means of the new birth. It is the means by which man must measure himself before God. It condemns and shows man that his need is deliverance by God’s grace. The Jews were measured by law and were taught enough to know their need, but they were saved by sacrifice. Their salvation by sacrifice was before the law was given to them. This Biblical order is revealed in the book of Exodus. Although Jesus Christ had not yet offered Himself as a sacrifice for sin, His sacrifice was typified by all the Old Testament sacrifices on the altar. The Jews were not saved by those sacrifices but by the anticipated sacrifice-singular-of Jesus Christ to which all the sacrifices pointed (Hebrews 10:1-14). Hence, they were saved by faith in the coming Christ, the one perfect sacrifice for sin. Since the theme of Romans is grace-righteousness, not law- righteousness, the statement, “for not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified” (Romans 2:13), should not be confusing. The thesis of Romans is righteousness provided by God. It is first imputed and then imparted. Imputation is legal. Impartation is when the imputed righteousness is actually imparted in the individual. Paul distinguished grace-righteousness from law-righteousness. The Jews professed righteousness but did not possess righteousness. They misconstrued the purpose of the law (Galatians 3:1-29). Grace- righteousness was imparted in Paul by the Lord; and in grace-righteousness, he counted all he had gained under law for righteousness as nothing but refuse that he might stand in Christ, not having his own righteousness but the righteousness that was first imputed to him and then imparted in him by God’s grace in time (Php 3:4-10). Grace-righteousness produces practical holiness-faith, love, obedience, and all dispositions of the nature of grace. Law demands obedience, but no one can obey until he has the life by which he can obey. The non-Jews “are showing the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness with their reasonings accusing or even excusing among themselves” (Romans 2:15 -translation). The Greek word for conscience (v. 15) is a present active participle of the compound word summartureo. It refers to moral consciousness. The noun for conscience, suneidesis, comes from the compound verb sunoido. The prefix means with or together; and oida means to see, be sure, or understand. In Romans 2:15, the verb martureo, which means to testify or bear witness, is prefixed by sun (which is sum, in this instance) and means with. Hence, the noun “conscience” and the verb “bear witness” show that both bear a joint witness. The indwelling work of the law and conscience bear the same testimony, whether it is a written or an unwritten law. The reciprocal pronoun “their,” allelon (Romans 2:15), meaning one another or each other, reveals the interaction of two witnesses-the law written in the heart, or the external law, and the conscience-that either accuse or defend. Their reasonings (logismon, genitive plural of logismos, reasoning or argument) accuse (present active participle of kategoreo, made up of kata, down, and goreo, a verbal attack; it means to speak against) or defend (present middle participle of apologeomai, made up of apo, from, and logos, defend oneself against a charge or make a defense) each other (Romans 2:15). Conscience performs partnership action with the instruction an individual has received. No man discerns rightness and wrongness by conscience alone. His intellect sees agreement or disagreement of conduct with the rule of life either written or unwritten. Information fed into the computer of the mind is processed, and the process either accuses or defends. Conscience experiences pain or pleasure in itself disagreeably or agreeably. Agreement of conscience with the mind produces pleasure. Disagreement of conscience with the mind causes pain, unless the conscience is seared. Before an act is committed, conscience serves as a tutor to advise and teach according to the light that is possessed. This is the reason Paul lived in good conscience before God even before he was regenerated. He was living according to the light he possessed. Properly instructed conscience leads one to consider before he acts. Subsequent to the act, conscience is a judge. There is no escape from it. A fundamentally dishonest man might make a mistake about the truth or falsity of a statement made several years before, but a fundamentally honest man would not make such a mistake. A dishonest man distorts facts and shapes them to his own purpose. He has nothing but memory on which to rely, and his memory is faulty. Dishonest persons distort and pervert things for personal advantage. However, an honest man relies on truth which is always the same. The Christian loves truth. He seeks to live and speak truth. Although he may tell a lie, an indelible impression is made on his conscience so that he cannot forget. His memory will remind him of it as long as he lives. The memory of one who dies in his sins will go with him throughout eternity. People in heathen countries where they have never been exposed to the written law of God intuitively know that murder, adultery, theft, etc., are evil. After an act of sin is committed, the conscience that tutored and advised becomes the source of condemnation to the one without a seared conscience. Conscience becomes one’s judge, and one cannot perjure his conscience. Human conscience is not a member of the body which will return with the members of the body to the dust of the earth. It is a member of the soul which will never return to dust. As the conscience is now an accuser or a defender within, so it will be throughout eternity. Cain killed Abel, and his conscience was affected so that he never forgot that he murdered his brother. Abel’s blood cried out to him. Judas’ guilty conscience caused him to hang himself. Felix’s guilty conscience caused him to tremble before Paul’s preaching. The Bible abounds with such illustrations. Man’s condemning conscience will condemn him throughout eternity if he dies in his sins. All secrets shall be revealed: “For nothing is hidden, except that it may be revealed; nor became concealed, but that it may come into light” (Mark 4:22 -translation). Men may hide things from one another, but nothing is hidden from God. The time in which men sin is the hour of darkness. When the chief priests, captains of the temple, and elders came to take Jesus Christ for crucifixion, He said, “this is your hour [hora], and the power of darkness” (Luke 22:53 b). The word hora in this verse means the time when something took place, is taking place, or shall take place. As there is an hour for sinning, there shall be a day for judging (Romans 2:16). “I am telling you that it shall be more endurable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah in the day of judgment than for that city” (Matthew 10:15 -translation). As heinous as the sin of sodomy is, it is not as heinous as the rejection of the word of the living God. Homosexuality is a sin against God’s moral law. Rejection of God’s message is commensurate with rejection of the Person of Jesus Christ Himself, and there is nothing worse. Since the best have the worst of it now in this world, there will be a judgment that will set things right in order that the best may enjoy the best throughout eternity. This judgment does not presently take place because God is longsuffering, not willing that any of His own should perish but that they come to repentance (2 Peter 3:9). Hidden things are the best evidences of what man is either positionally or conditionally. What we are publicly is not what we are, but what we are when we are alone evidences what we are. God’s knowing what we are thinking is the best evidence of what we really are. That is true of the Christian conditionally, and it is true of the nonbeliever positionally. What we cannot be absolutely sure about is our thoughts, but God knows. Should someone ask you to give a brief history of your life, would you give a true history, or would it be one that would manifest two different persons. Would you tell it like it is, or would you embellish it to sound like you want to be heard. We are what we are before God, and we should want to be before others what we are before God. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 24: 01.6.8. GODS JUST JUDGMENT ON HYPOCRISY ======================================================================== Chapter 6viii - God’s Just Judgment On Hypocrisy God’s judgment is just (Romans 2:17-29; Romans 3:1-8). His judgment of hypocrisy is just (Romans 2:17-24). The religious Jews were hypocrites judging others, but they were not judging themselves: “Therefore O man, you are without excuse, everyone who is judging; for that in which you are judging another, you are passing judgment on yourself; for you who judge practice the same things” (Romans 2:1 -translation). One is hypocritical to judge another prior to judging himself. Although the word “Jew” in Romans 2:17 is singular, Paul was addressing all Jews. The word is used generically. The hypocritical Jews called themselves Jews, comforted themselves in the sphere of the law, and bragged for themselves in God. Their boasting was national assent. Theirs was mechanical reliance in God. Their boasting may be compared with someone boasting of his denominational ties. People hide behind names, creeds, etc., and call themselves this or that when there is no reality. These hypocritical Jews had permanently convinced themselves to be guides of the blind, a light of the ones in darkness (Romans 2:19). But they based their conviction on what they themselves had done and not on what God had done for them. Such persons are unteachable. They were instructors of foolish ones, teachers of babies, having the form of knowledge and of the truth in the sphere of the law (Romans 2:20). The word for “form” in this verse is from morphosis. It is used only twice in the New Testament. The other place is 2 Timothy 3:5 -“Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof....” Hence, their knowledge of the truth in the sphere of the law was in appearance only. In contrast, the regenerated person is not satisfied without hearing the revealed truth that causes him to become established in the faith. This religious nation tried to get others not to do as they did but to do what they said. They taught others but did not teach themselves. They preached that others should not steal but did not know they were stealing in many ways. The same was true of adultery and idolatry (Romans 2:21-22). They should have abhorred the violation of anything sacred. Paul then returned to the way he began his condemnation of these pietists in Romans 2:17. While they were boasting in the sphere of the law, they were dishonoring God through the transgression of the law, because the name of God was blasphemed among the non-Jews through them, as it has been written (Romans 2:23-24). ======================================================================== CHAPTER 25: 01.6.9. GODS JUST JUDGMENT ON RELIGIOUS RITES ======================================================================== Chapter 6ix - God’s Just Judgment On Religious Rites God’s judgment against religious rites is just (Romans 2:25-29). The religious rite of circumcision availed the Jews nothing because they were transgressors of the law (Romans 2:25). Circumcision was a seal: “And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised...” (Romans 4:11). However, a seal or sign is of no consequence when it has been removed from that which it certifies. The Jews were clinging to the symbol of circumcision in the flesh while knowing nothing about what circumcision symbolized. Likewise, many assembly members claim they have been baptized, are members of a certain denomination, were raised in a certain faith, etc. However, all these things are worthless without one’s having first died with Christ and having been made to walk in newness of life. Paul spoke hypothetically of the non-Jews by using a subjunctive verb, “may keep” (phulasse, present active subjunctive of phulasso), with a third class condition conjunction, “if” (ean): “Therefore if the uncircumcision may keep the requirements of the law, shall not his uncircumcision be regarded for circumcision?” (Romans 2:26 -translation). The answer to Romans 2:25-26 pertaining to judgment of those practicing religious rites without having been regenerated is recorded in Romans 2:27 -“And shall not the uncircumcision by nature, the one carrying out the law, judge you, the one who through the letter and circumcision is a transgressor of the law?” (translation). The real Jew is described in Romans 2:28-29 -“For the Jew is not one in outward appearance, neither is circumcision outward in the flesh; but the Jew is one in his inmost being, and circumcision is of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter, whose praise is not out of men but out of God” (translation). He is one who has been circumcised in his heart and not merely in his flesh. Paul gave a Divine commentary on this in Galatians 6:12-15 -“As many as are desiring to make good showing in the flesh, they are insisting you to be circumcised, only in order that they may not be persecuted for the cross of Christ. For the ones being circumcised are not keeping the law themselves, but they are desiring you to be being circumcised in order that they may glory in your flesh. But may it not happen for me to boast except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom the world has been crucified to me and I to the world. For neither is circumcision anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creation” (translation). As the real Jew was not one who was merely outwardly circumcised, the real Christian is not the one who has been baptized as an outward sign; but he is the one who has been quickened by the Holy Spirit of God, thus having been made a new creation in Christ Jesus. The real Jew is described in Romans 9:4-8. There are Jews according to the flesh, and there are Jews according to the Spirit-those who have been regenerated (Romans 11:1-36). ======================================================================== CHAPTER 26: 01.7.1. GODS JUST JUDGMENT ON DEPRAVED JEWS GENTILES ======================================================================== Chapter 7i - GOD’S JUST JUDGMENT ON DEPRAVED JEWS AND GENTILES - Romans 3:1-18 Beginning with Romans 3:1-31, Paul asked two questions but discussed one of them: “What then is the advantage of the Jew? Or what is the profit of the circumcision? Much in every way. For in the first place because they were entrusted with the oracles of God” (Romans 3:1-2 -translation). God has given us His written revelation through the Jews, for which we shall be eternally grateful. The incarnate Word is the Christian’s power. The written word is the believer’s authority. To question Scripture as being God’s word is a denial of authority. The incarnate Word has declared the Father in His word (John 1:18). He told the mind of God. The incarnate Word declared the power of God in His works, the love of God in His compassion, the grace of God in His actions, the holiness of God in His character, the righteousness of God in His death, and the energy of God in His resurrection. The altitude of Scripture shows its Divine origin. Who can scale the heights of this mountain? The blessings show its Divine bounty. Its claims speak of Divine authority. Its diction declares its Divine Speaker. Its freshness tells out its Divine Author. Its order speaks of a Divine plan. Its questions speak of the Divine Convictor. Its wisdom displays the Divine Teacher. Every time the expression “it is written” is found, it is perfect active indicative of grapho, signifying that it stands permanently written. Pertaining to sin, it stands permanently written that none is righteous (Romans 3:10). Pertaining to the sacrifice of Jesus Christ, it stands permanently written that He came to do the Father’s will (Hebrews 10:7). Pertaining to salvation, it stands permanently written that those bringing the gospel of peace are blessed (Romans 10:15). Pertaining to sanctification, it stands permanently written that Christians should be holy (1 Peter 1:16). Pertaining to judgment, it stands permanently written that God will destroy the wisdom of the wise and bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent (1 Corinthians 1:19). The attitude of both the Jews and the believers toward the word of God should be to view it with meekness (James 1:21), let it dwell in us richly (Colossians 3:16), keep it tenaciously by guarding it with our lives (John 17:6), continue in it untiringly (John 8:31), live it out faithfully (2 Corinthians 3:2-3), hold it forth boldly (Php 2:16), and meditate on it prayerfully (Psalms 1:2). What advantage the Jews had in the word of God having been committed to them! ======================================================================== CHAPTER 27: 01.7.2. GODS JUST JUDGMENT ON JEWISH UNBELIEF ======================================================================== Chapter 7ii - God’s Just Judgment On Jewish Unbelief God’s judgment against the unbelief of the Jews is just (Romans 3:1-8). Three questions are raised and answered in these verses. All the questions are actually answered in the answer to the first question. Anticipating the questions, as was Paul’s manner, he answered them before they were raised. In his answer to the third question, “But if our unrighteousness is giving approval to the righteousness of God, what shall we say? is God unjust, the One who inflicts punishment? I am speaking according to man” (Romans 3:5 -translation), Paul’s speaking according to man was his apology for discussing something so contrary to truth. This insertion in the last part of this verse was for Paul’s protection against false accusations that were being brought against him. The apostle answered the question: “Absolutely not; otherwise how shall God judge the world? For if the truth of God by my lie abounded to His glory, why am I also being judged as a sinner? and not as we are being blasphemed and as some report us to say, Let us do evil, that good may come? whose judgment is just” (Romans 3:6-8 -translation). Paul had been condemning the Jews in Romans 2:17. He called them hypocrites. They were religionists, but they were not saved. Their circumcision was of the flesh, but their hearts had never been circumcised by the grace of God. Paul proved his accusations in the last verses of Romans 2:2-29. Knowing the Jews would, in the light of his condemnation, question the advantage of being a member of the chosen nation, Paul answered it: “Much in every way. For in the first place because they were entrusted with the oracles of God” (Romans 3:2 -translation). Stephen, who Paul before his conversion experience had seen martyred, gave a brief historical account of the people of Israel. In his account, he reminded the Jews to whom he spoke that Moses had received from God the living oracles to give to the Jewish people (Acts 7:38). Stephen quoted the historical account and made application of it. The oracles were living to Moses, but they were not living to the Jews to whom Stephen spoke. The whole Levitical system, consisting of the tabernacle, priesthood, and offerings, given to Moses to give to the children of Israel typifies what Jesus Christ would accomplish and what He would be to His people when He came. The whole system was living, because it typified Jesus Christ the living Savior. To Moses, who had the Spirit of God and with whom God spoke face to face (Exodus 33:11), the oracles of God were living. Living oracles were given to a living man-Moses; and Moses was to give those words to the people to whom he ministered. The Lord Jesus had spoken to the same hypocritical religionists within the same nation about Divine election and efficacious grace; but they rejected His words as being offensive to them, murmured among themselves, and turned and followed Him no more (John 6:57-66). Circumstances have not changed in the presence of the proclamation of the written word. The living Father sent the living Savior who spoke these living words to spiritually dead people. Anyone offended by God’s word is spiritually dead. Every person outside of Jesus Christ is ignorant about the most important things in life. Paul’s desire was that the brethren not be ignorant of the exemplary things recorded of Israel. “For I do not desire you to be ignorant, brethren, that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea, and all were baptized to Moses in the sphere of the cloud and in the sea, and all ate the same spiritual food, and all drank the same spiritual drink; for they were drinking of the same spiritual Rock following, and the Rock was Christ. But with the majority of them God was not well-pleased; for they were killed in the desert. Now these things were made examples, so that we should not be cravers for evil things, as those also lusted. Neither be idolaters, as some of them; as it has been written: The people sat down to eat and drink, and rose up to play. Neither may we be committing fornication, as some of them committed and fell in one day 23,000. Neither may we be trying the Lord, as some of them also tried Him and were destroyed by the serpents. Neither be complaining, as some of them complained, and were destroyed by the destroyer. Now these things were happening to them by way of example, and they were written for our admonition, to whom the ends of the ages have come” (1 Corinthians 10:1-11 -translation). The Israelites represented a local assembly made up of saved and lost, and Paul was writing to the local assembly at Corinth, made up of saved and lost, using the Israelites as an example. The Spirit is the One making alive; the body profits nothing (John 6:63). The words that Christ spoke are spiritual and living oracles. The only ones who understand Christ’s words in a spiritual sense, whether they are those who listened to Him in Person or those who listen to the proclamation of the word by others, will find them living in operation. The hearing ear, seeing eye, and receptive heart are possible because God has already made that one alive, thus giving him by grace the ability to hear, see, and receive the word. Nothing in the Christian life is greater than God’s word speaking to our hearts and then their becoming operative as a result of God’s having given us the ability to understand them. The gospel comes to a quickened person not in word only but also in power: “for our gospel did not come to you in word only, but also in power [operative] and in the Holy Spirit and in much assurance, as you have known what kind of men we were among you for your sake. And you became imitators of us and of the Lord, having welcomed the word in much affliction with joy of the Holy Spirit” (1 Thessalonians 1:5-6 -translation). Paul thanked the Lord that this was true of the Thessalonian Christians: “And because of this we give thanks to God unceasingly, because having received the word of God which you heard from us you welcomed it not as a word from men but as it is in truth the word from God, which continually operates also in the ones believing” (1 Thessalonians 2:13 -translation). Hence, the word of God becomes the instrument not only of a person’s initial conversion experience, but it also becomes operative in his life in progressive sanctification. We learn these things from the word of God. Therefore, there is a realm of reality of truth beyond the comprehension of natural powers. Jeremiah described the word of God as being like wheat, fire, and a hammer: “The prophet that hath a dream, let him tell a dream; and he that hath my word, let him speak my word faithfully. What is the chaff to the wheat? saith the LORD. Is not my word like as a fire? saith the LORD; and like a hammer that breaketh the rock in pieces” (Jeremiah 23:28-29). The purpose of wheat is to feed. Fire is felt. A living person cannot read and study the living word without feeling it. The result of feasting on the word is that the affectional nature is affected. An illustration of the word of God being like fire is the words of Jesus Christ burning in the hearts of the two disciples on the road to Emmaus: “And their eyes were opened, and they recognized Him; and He vanished out of their sight. And they said to each other: Was not our heart burning in us while He talked with us in the way, and while He opened to us the Scriptures?” (Luke 24:31-32 -translation). The word is also like a hammer that breaks. The woman of Samaria went to Jacob’s well for literal water, but Christ told her that when she drank of that water she would thirst again. But if she drank of the living water, the water He would give her, she would never thirst again (John 4:13-14). Blessings will flow to others through the one who has been made by the grace of God to drink of the living water (John 7:38). The living word operates in living people. Living persons are in union with the living God the Father by means of the living Son’s redemption accomplished at Calvary. That redemption is applied by the living Holy Spirit in regeneration. Then as living stones, we experience the living word in operation by presenting our bodies as living sacrifices. This is our reasonable service as we are motivated by the living hope of the coming of the living King who shall reign forever. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 28: 01.7.3. GODS JUST JUDGMENT ON UNIVERSAL DEPRAVITY ======================================================================== Chapter 7iii - God’s Just Judgment On Universal Depravity Human depravity is described (Romans 3:9-18), demonstrated (Romans 3:20), and condemned (Romans 3:19). All people enter this world depraved. We are rotten from head to toe: “...the whole head is sick, and the whole heart faint. From the sole of the foot even unto the head there is no soundness in it; but wounds, and bruises, and putrefying sores: they have not been closed, neither bound up, neither mollified with ointment” (Isaiah 1:5-6). The depraved sinner is passive in regeneration. The Greek word for being born from above (gennao) is always in the passive voice. Since it is not in the middle voice, we do not participate in our deliverance. Regeneration is by God alone. Like the leper, we are totally at God’s mercy. We realize that no sin has been committed that we might not have committed, and whatever we blame in others can be found in our own hearts. We know things about ourselves that we would not tell anyone. We recognize Romans 3:10-18 as the true portrait of our own hearts. Fourteen horrible indictments against man are recorded in Romans 3:9-18. The following three things are developed in the indictments: (1) the fact of depravity (Romans 3:9-12), (2) the practice of the depraved heart (Romans 3:13-17), and (3) the cause of sinning (Romans 3:18). The apostle did not exaggerate the account that he gave concerning the depravity of those who were under the law of conscience, the law of Moses, or even under the purer morality of Jesus Christ. FIRST-The fact of depravity is taught in Romans 3:9-12. All without exception are under sin (Romans 3:9). 1. In the first of the fourteen indictments, God described man by saying there is not one righteous (Romans 3:10). This verse summarizes all that follows. 2. In the second of His fourteen indictments, God said that there is not one who understands (Romans 3:11 a). Everyone can talk about religion and give his opinion, even though he has never read the Bible. This is not true in any other science. Sin has incapacitated mankind for making spiritual and good moral judgments. The same thing can be said of mankind that was stated of the people of Nineveh during Jonah’s time: “...Nineveh, that great city, wherein are more than sixscore thousand persons that cannot discern between their right hand and their left hand...” (Jonah 4:11). A person may be an accomplished scientist or a profound scholar, but without the Spirit of wisdom that comes with regeneration, he cannot spiritually discern the things of God (1 Corinthians 2:14). Many local assembly members are destitute of moral and spiritual understanding. People who see no harm in this or that which they desire to do have no sense of guilt, and that is the symptom of an evil conscience. We must avoid the appearance of evil. Many try to see how close to the line of sin they may go. Where is the borderline? One might as well ask how close he can get to the fire without being burned. No true husband would ask how he might give the minimum of love and fidelity to his wife and how he may have the maximum of license. That is not the language of a Christian. Christians cannot serve the Lord and be continually hunting the borderline. No one can understand Biblical things and make Biblical judgments apart from grace and a knowledge of Holy Scripture. 3. The third indictment is that there is not one who seeks after God (Romans 3:11 b). The claim that wherever one goes people are seeking the Lord is erroneous. One in earnest about seeking the Lord has already been given the desire to seek Him. We seek Him because we have first been sought and found by God. 4. The fourth indictment is that all turned away (Romans 3:12 a) This is quoted from Psalms 14:1 -“The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.” The Hebrew word translated fool means the withered one, like flowers, leaves, or fruit. Since the understanding is withered by sin, man has no affinity for God. Everyone has turned from God’s way to his own way: “There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death” (Proverbs 14:12). The way to destruction is broad, and many are going down that path (Matthew 7:13). “The way of a fool is right in his own eyes...” (Proverbs 12:15). He hugs his own brain until he strangles it. He thinks his own wit is better than God’s wisdom. Sin comes with a show of reason; it “seemeth right.” Some doctrinal truths are more important than others, but everything is important in its place. There is a way that seems right, but the ways of death are many, such as willful ignorance, formality, doing one’s best, self-righteousness, etc. But these are not products of grace. He who makes a bridge of his own shadow shall surely drown. 5. The fifth indictment is that together they became worthless (Romans 3:12). This reminds us of Romans 1:1-32. God gives people over to a worthless mind. All homosexuals have been given over to a worthless mind. 6. The sixth indictment is that there is no one who does good (Romans 3:12). Depravity prevents all people from doing anything pleasing to God apart from grace. In the Greek text, the translation of these words is “no not so much as one” in order to emphasize what he had said. Hence, it reads, “There is not one doing good, not so much as one” (translation). SECOND-The practice of depravity is taught in Romans 3:13-17. 7. The seventh indictment is included in the practice of depravity-their throat is an open grave (Romans 3:13). This is taken from Psalms 5:9 -“For there is no faithfulness in their mouth; their inward part is very wickedness; their throat is an open sepulchre; they flatter with their tongue.” Such persons are corrupt in themselves and infectious to others. Unlike diseases, good health is not contagious. Likewise, grace is not contagious. Spiritual health is God-given. The nature and character of persons without grace are described by the open grave. The perfect Greek participle used here denotes a permanent and not a frequent character. 8. The eighth indictment is the second of those included in the practice of depravity-with their tongues they keep deceiving (Romans 3:13). We use such expressions as smooth talkers and slick talkers. They speak flattery and deceit with hypocritical lips. Their speech is contrary to their nature. Their words invent, invite, and entice, so that their listeners are disarmed by compliments. Flattery is their means; hypocrisy is the motive behind the method. The water is sweet only that it might be bitter. It has been said that they are vilest when they are best; they are bitterest when they are sweetest; they are basest when they are noblest; they are most satanic when their ill garb is manifested in the spirit in which they manifest themselves. 9. The ninth indictment is the third of those included in the practice of depravity-the poison of snakes is under their lips (Romans 3:13). Some think the comparison is to the Egyptian cobra. This denotes a poisonous form of speech used for the injection of deadly corruption. The serpent signifies the crookedness of life and the readiness to inject his poison. 10. The tenth indictment is the fourth included in the practice of depravity-their mouth is full of profanity and hatred (Romans 3:14). Vulgarity is the most obnoxious form of speech. Slander is the most deadly, but profanity is inexcusable. 11. The eleventh indictment is the fifth included in the practice of depravity-their feet are swift to shed blood (Romans 3:15). That takes in the whole person. It begins with the head and goes down to the feet. Crime is the fruit of bitterness. Jesus Christ alone can solve the crime problem when He comes as King of kings and Lord of lords. 12. The twelfth indictment is the sixth included in the practice of depravity-destruction and misery are in their ways (Romans 3:16). Destruction is objective. Misery is subjective. 13. The thirteenth indictment is the seventh included in the practice of depravity-a road of peace they did not know (Romans 3:17). There is no peace apart from Jesus Christ, the Prince of peace. God alone has the answer. We do not know what tomorrow will bring, but we know who controls tomorrow. This is the reason the children of God have peace. THIRD-The cause of all that is included in Romans 3:10-17 is recorded in Romans 3:18. 14. The fourteenth indictment is that the cause of sin is the absence of reverential fear before their eyes (Romans 3:18). We have already discussed slavish and reverential fear in a previous chapter. The whole world of mankind is charged with depravity (Romans 3:9-20). The following court scene will summarize these verses: (1) The accused are all under sin. (2) The judge is God. (3) The jury is the deeds of the law. (4) The charge is fourteen violations that we have considered (Romans 3:10-18). (5) The prosecuting attorney is the righteous, holy law of God. (6) The defense is that every mouth is stopped. (7) The verdict is that the accused are guilty before God. In the sphere of the law, every mouth is silenced: “But we have known that whatever things the law says it says to the ones in the sphere of the law, in order that every mouth may be silenced and all the world may become guilty before God; for by reason of the works of the law no flesh shall be justified before Him; for through law is the full knowledge [epignosis] of sin. But now apart from law God’s righteousness has been manifested [perfect passive indicative of phaneroo], being witnessed by the law and the prophets, even a righteousness of God through the faithfulness of Jesus Christ, to all the ones believing; for there is no distinction; for all sinned and are coming short of the glory of the God” (Romans 3:19-23 -translation). This concludes the dark and bleak description of mankind. Preachers must tell people what they are before God whether or not they like to hear it. Since Romans 1:18, we have viewed sinners as helpless and hopeless apart from the grace of God. Against this dark background, God declared the remedy beginning with Romans 3:24. end of document ======================================================================== CHAPTER 29: 02.00. CHRIST COULD NOT BE TEMPTED BY W.E.BEST ======================================================================== Christ Could Not Be Tempted by W.E.Best Copyright © 1986 W. E. Best Scripture quotations in this book designated “NASB” are from the NEW AMERICAN STANDARD BIBLE, © 1960, 1962, 1963, 1968, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1975, and 1977 by the Lockman Foundation, and are used by permission. Those designated “translation” are by the author and taken from the Greek Text. All others are from the King James Bible. This book is distributed by the W. E. Best Book Missionary Trust P. O. Box 34904 Houston, Texas 77234-4904 USA CONTENTS Author’s Remarks 1. Introduction 2. Christ Was Never Tempted To Sin 3. The Doctrine That Christ Was Peccable Is Heresy 4. Christ Was Tested Apart From Sin 5. Teachers Of Peccability Proclaim Another Jesus 6. Jesus Christ Is The Unique Person 7. Christ Assumed A Human Nature 8. The God-Man Lacked Knowledge 9. Teachers Of Impeccability Are Not Guilty Of Docetism (Part I) 10. Teachers Of Impeccability Are Not Guilty Of Docetism (Part II) 11. Exegesis Of Scripture Proves Impeccability 12. Christ Affirmed His Impeccability 13. There Was No Sin In The Incarnate Christ 14. Christ Did Not Sin During The Days Of His Flesh 15. Christ Who Knew No Sin Was Made Sin 16. Opposite Imputations Are Inseparable 17. Sins Are Forgiven And Sin Is Condemned 18. Christ Was Both Priest And Sacrifice 19. Jesus Christ Is High Priest Forever AUTHOR’S REMARKS The title to this book may startle the reader. However, the evidence for Christ’s untemptability should be considered before one closes his mind. The author has never believed that Christ was peccable; but like many others, he has taught that the incarnate Son of God was tempted but due to His two holy natures He never yielded. The reason for the incorrect usage of the verb “tempted” was the incorrect translation of the Greek verb peiradzo when considering Christ. This verb can mean to test, try, or tempt. However, a study of the noun peirasmos and the verb peiradzo will prove there is no justification for translating these words as “temptation” or “to tempt” when they are used in reference to Jesus Christ. The idea that Jesus Christ could be tempted is unfounded in the Biblical concept of Christ’s Person. Since Christ did not have a sin nature, solicitation to do something contrary to God’s will could not be entertained in His holy thought. Therefore, He could not be tempted. A study of James 1:2-15 proves that temptation has no power over a perfect Person, but it does over a depraved person. Unless the reader is willing to consider the Biblical evidence for Christ’s untemptability presented in this book, he need not read any further than this paragraph. The Bible says, “He who gives an answer before he hears, It is folly and shame to him” (Proverbs 18:13 NASB). False principles and false rules of interpretation lie at the foundation of false doctrine. Therefore, Biblical evidence and not human reason must be considered as the foundation of every Biblical question. Hence, everyone who gives his opinion before he hears or reads the Biblical evidence is foolish. The Christian desires to know the truth and abide by its teaching. This book will demonstrate the author’s growth in grace and the knowledge of Jesus Christ (2 Peter 3:18). More than twenty years ago he wrote his first book entitled STUDIES IN THE PERSON AND WORK OF JESUS CHRIST. That book, which is in print, dealt with Christ’s impeccability; but this second work, dealing with Christology, is an improvement over the first. The Lord willing, if the writer adds a later work on the same subject, he hopes by God’s grace that it will be an improvement over the two preceding ones. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 30: 02.01. INTRODUCTION ======================================================================== 1. INTRODUCTION The very heart of Christianity is the Person of Christ. Moreover, the Scriptures focus not only on the Person of Jesus Christ but also on His Work. However, we must ever keep in mind that Christ’s Person preceded His Work, for He is the eternal Son of God. Salvation, the redemptive Work of Jesus Christ, is vitally connected with His Person. His Person and not His Work gives value to His Work. If Jesus Christ is not who the Bible represents Him to be, then His Work as Redeemer and Savior would be invalid. Thus, those who affirm His peccability invalidate His Work. There is such an inseparability between Christ’s Person and Work that any separation would cause one to go astray with respect to both. Thus, the slightest abstract notion of His Person would take from the real essence of His Work. Moreover, an isolated consideration of His Work is impossible because it can only be known in connection with His Person. His Person cannot be isolated from His Work, and His Work cannot be isolated from His Person. The elect understand not only what Jesus Christ does but who He is-the One sent by the Father for their salvation. Without this knowledge, one can only be puzzled by His Work and ask “...Whence hath this man...these mighty works? Is not this the carpenter’s son?...” (Matthew 13:54-57). Failure to know Jesus Christ is failure to understand His Work. Furthermore, failure to see His Work in its correct perspective is failure to understand His Person. The starting point of Christology must be the entire witness of Holy Scripture concerning both Christ’s Person and His Work. The confusion today is not objective but subjective. In other words, the real problem lies in the subjective condition of man’s heart: “The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked...” (Jeremiah 17:9). Our only safeguard is the objective revelation of Scripture, for there is nothing wrong with the objective revelation of Jesus Christ. Man-made concepts of Jesus Christ are easily turned into opposite concepts. For example, “Hail” and then “Crucify”. The Lord Jesus Christ voluntarily humbled Himself (Php 2:5-8). To speak of Christ’s humiliation is permissible, but the better term in the light of the context is self-humbleness. This passage of Scripture does not actually teach humiliation, the act of humiliating, or the state of being humiliated or dishonored - all of which are true. It teaches Christ’s voluntary act of coming into the world. In this, His self-humbleness is displayed. The three different states of Jesus Christ revealed in Php 2:5-11 are glory, self-humbleness, and exaltation. If Christ’s natural-essential-state of glory were removed, there could be no self-humbleness. He was in a state of glory before He entered a state of self-humbleness. He was in the form of God before He was made into the likeness of man. He experienced a state of self-humbleness before He entered into a state of exaltation. Jesus Christ spoke of entering into the glory which He had with the Father before the world began after He had finished the work the Father sent Him to perform (John 17:4-5). He manifested His moral glory during His self-humbleness. But His essential glory was necessary to that moral glory, and His state of self-humbleness preceded His entering into the state of exaltation. There are seven points in our Lord’s vast condescension when He left the glory He had with the Father and came into this world in self-humbleness: 1. He was in the form of God. 2. He emptied Himself. 3. He took the form of a servant or bond slave. 4. He was made in the likeness of men. 5. He humbled Himself. 6. He became obedient unto death. 7. He experienced the death of the Cross. The glory of Jesus Christ is revealed in the fact that He is in the form of God. The form of God is to be understood as the nature and essence of God. This is the only way the Greek word for “form” can be understood in Php 2:6. It describes the Lord Jesus Christ as He was from all eternity. “The form of a servant” of verse 7 signifies that He was really a servant. “In fashion as a man” means that He was really the God-Man. Therefore, His being in the form of God reveals that He is really and truly God, that He shares the same nature with the Father and was possessed with the same glory. He possessed all the attributes of deity. The Holy Spirit revealed, through the apostle Paul, the Person of Jesus Christ our Lord in heaven and on earth in relation to the Father and in relation to man. “Who being in the form of God” or “subsisting in the form of God” reveals Christ’s essential deity, which once having had, can never be diminished. This glory or honor of Jesus Christ could never be given up, but it was veiled by being made into the likeness of men. The self-humbleness of the Lord Jesus Christ is seen in the fact that He emptied Himself. This is a fathomless statement. Eternity alone will suffice to plumb the depths of its meaning. He did not empty Himself of deity. That was essential to His being. He did not become less God by being made in the likeness of men. He veiled the essential glory of His deity, which was His from eternity, to accomplish His redemptive purpose in obedience to God the Father who sent Him into the world. He was not emptied of that fullness of grace which was in Him from everlasting. He appeared with this when He was made flesh and dwelt among men. He was not emptied of the perfections of His divine nature, which were not in the least diminished by the assumption of the human nature. All the fullness of the Godhead dwelt in Him bodily (Colossians 2:9). Although the Lord Jesus, the second Person of the Godhead, took that which He did not have before, He lost nothing of what He had from eternity. The glory of His divine nature was covered; this is what took place when He emptied Himself. It was out of sight, but some rays and beams of it broke out through His works and miracles, which He performed during the thirty-three and one-half years that He walked among the sons of men. His glory as of the only begotten of the Father was beheld by only a few. The minds of the greater number were blinded and their hearts were hardened by not only the miracles they saw Him perform but the words they heard Him speak. They saw no form nor comeliness in Him to desire Him (Isaiah 53:2). The form of God in which He is eternally was hidden from them. They reputed Him as a mere man, as the despised Man, even as a worm (Psalms 22:6). “Being found in fashion as a man” indicates a permanent union of the two natures. Thus, we have the hypostatic union. This hypostatic union is not to be confused with the theophanies, the preincarnate manifestations of the Lord Jesus in the Old Testament. The theophanies were temporary; whereas, this hypostatic union is permanent. The key to the whole subject of the kenosis (Christ emptied Himself) is in the word “likeness.” It is a window through which floods the light of His redemptive purpose in the incarnation. God was sending His only begotten Son “...in the likeness of sinful flesh and as an offering for sin, He condemned sin in the flesh” (Romans 8:3 NASB). “In the likeness of men” of Php 2:7 conveys the full reality of Christ’s human nature. He who had said “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness” (Genesis 1:26) is now made in man’s likeness. What condescension for sinful man to hold in contemplation. The extent of His self-humbleness is manifested in His death. He was obedient unto death. The obedience of the first man, Adam, would have been unto life, but he disobeyed. The obedience of the God-Man was unto death. Adam’s disobedience brought his posterity, and that includes all mankind, a harvest of death. Jesus Christ’s obedience brought His posterity, His sheep, out of death into life. He voluntarily subjected Himself to this self-humbleness. He was not thrust down into it by force. He voluntarily came to do the will of His Father. The exaltation of Jesus Christ far out-distanced His self-humbleness. His exaltation consists of three stages: 1. In the past, God has highly exalted Him (Php 2:9; Ephesians 1:20-23). 2. In the present, He has been given a name which is above every name (Php 2:9). 3. In the future, every knee shall bow and every tongue shall confess that He is Lord to the glory of God the Father (Php 2:10-11). We must never permit ourselves to conceive of Him in the kenosis as any Person other than God who changes not (Malachi 3:6; Hebrews 13:8). In His self-humbleness, He was God manifest in the flesh (1 Timothy 3:16). In what sense did Jesus Christ empty Himself? 1. He took upon Himself the form of a servant, being made in the likeness of men. 2. He humbled Himself and became obedient. This is the sense in which He emptied Himself. However, there was no change in His essential being. He did two things He had never done before, and this helps us to better understand the meaning of “He emptied Himself”: 1. He became dependent. The Son can do nothing of Himself (John 5:19; John 5:30; John 8:28; John 12:49; John 14:10). The very essence of a man and a servant is that He is dependent. This, then, was the grace of the Son in that He willingly submitted Himself in all things to depend on the Father. Therefore, He said, “...I live by the Father...” (John 6:57). 2. He became obedient. He whom all principalities and powers obeyed learned in a new experience the grace of obedience (Hebrews 5:8). His was the open ear. He was the instructed One of Isaiah 50:4. This, however, does not mean He divested Himself of the powers He possessed as God. Liberals conclude the following statements: 1. Because Jesus Christ said “I can of mine own self do nothing” (John 5:30), He was not omnipotent. 2. Because He said “I am glad for your sakes that I was not there” (John 11:15), He was not omnipresent. 3. Because He knew not the hour (Mark 13:32), He was not omniscient. 4. Because the Bible says He “was in all points tempted like as we are” (Hebrews 4:15), He had the capacity to sin. The liberal might as well go all the way and say that because Jesus Christ was man He was not God, and deny the great mystery of godliness - “...Great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh...” (1 Timothy 3:16). What is the meaning of Jesus Christ emptying Himself? Did He divest Himself of His essential glory, or did He veil His essential glory by being made in the likeness of sinful men? He did not become less God because of the incarnation. God manifest in the flesh is the foundation of Christianity. That one should be the God-Man is the great mystery of our faith. When Christianity expresses what she knows of the Lord Jesus Christ, she calls Him the God-Man. Christ’s inner nature and His eternal, historical reality in His appearance before men were not contradictory. The Lord Jesus was born of a virgin, walked among the sons of men, shed His precious blood on Calvary, and arose from the dead. The contrast between what appeared to be and what the Lord Jesus Christ was essentially became sharper and sharper even to the point of His death at Calvary. The Lord Jesus, who is eternal life, sank in death in order to give life to the elect of God (John 10:11; John 10:15). The apostle Peter rebuked the Lord Jesus Christ in Matthew 16:22-23 because the disciples were unable to understand His death. The disciples were ignorant of many truths concerning Christ’s Person. The contrasts in Christ’s life were not reconciled in His death but in His resurrection (Romans 1:3-4). After His resurrection, the disciples saw what Jesus Christ is eternally in nature. He was then proved to be the Son of God with power by His resurrection out from among the dead (Romans 1:4). The Lord Jesus declared, “I and my Father are one” (John 10:30). “Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him” (John 10:31). The Jews told Him they did not stone Him for a good work but for blasphemy. Anyone who does not believe Jesus Christ is the God-Man, one Person possessing two natures, has no mediator. To be mistaken about the Person of Jesus Christ is indeed tragic. One would do better not to touch the study of the Person of Jesus Christ than go outside the circle of Biblical revelation. The Person of Jesus Christ is absolutely beyond our comprehension. The distinctive characteristic of the incarnation is the hypostatic union, the union of two natures in one person. He was not two persons but one Person with two natures. Proper distinction must be made between a trinitarian Person (whether it be the Father, Son or Holy Spirit), a human person, and a theanthropic Person. A trinitarian Person possesses only one nature. Three Persons are in the Godhead. They are one essence, one substance. They have one nature, which is divine. Before the incarnation, the Lord Jesus Christ possessed only one nature, the divine nature. The human person possesses two natures-material and immaterial. His material nature alone is visible. The material body came into existence when God made man from the dust of the earth. The immaterial part of man came into existence when God breathed into that body, and man became a living soul (Genesis 2:7). Man’s immaterial nature is of utmost importance. His material nature will return to the dust of the earth, but his immaterial nature will go to be with the Lord. A theanthropic Person has three natures. Jesus Christ alone is the Theanthropic Person. He has the divine essence, a human body, and a human soul. His human body was assumed, never to be laid aside. He sits today at the right hand of the Father in the same body in which He was glorified. “Nature” denotes the sum total of all essential qualities of a thing-that which makes it what it really is. The nature of the Godhead pertains to all the essential qualities of the Godhead. “Person” denotes a complete substance endowed with reason. Therefore, it is a nature with something added; that added thing is individuality. Nature is invisible and natures are indistinguishable, but persons are distinguishable. Nature is visible only as it is reflected in one’s person. Each Person of the Godhead is God, having the same nature. Nevertheless, the Father is not the Son, the Son is not the Father, and the Holy Spirit is neither the Father nor the Son. Jesus Christ assumed a nature that was not personalized. It did not exist by itself. The distinction between human nature and person is illustrated in Romans 9:21. The potter’s power over the clay denotes the absolute sovereignty of God. A lump of clay consists in one nature. So He took part of that one lump and made a vessel of honor, and He took another part and made a vessel of dishonor. Both vessels came from the same lump. However, when the Creator fashions the lump into vessels, they become personalized in particular vessels. The Lord Jesus Christ is the Theanthropic Person, the God-Man. He existed in the form of God before He came into the world. He did not cease from that form when He took upon Himself the form of a servant. The form of God was veiled with the form of a servant. Therefore, He was in the likeness of sinful flesh with emphasis on the word “likeness.” Many looked upon Him during His life when He walked among the sons of men; and they said, “Behold the man” (John 19:5). One must have grace to penetrate the human nature of Jesus Christ and see the divine nature; and grace enables him to see in Him the Theanthropic Person, the God-Man. The conception of Jesus Christ was unlike that of men. His birth was no different from any other. The virgin Mary signified that He was miraculously conceived in her womb. His entire life differed from the lives of mere men. Therefore, the expressions “Son of Man,” “Son of God,” “Man approved of God,” and “Behold the man” denote One who is not just a mere man. They indicate the Theanthropic Person, the Lord Jesus Christ, who appeared in the form of a servant. The theanthropic personality of Jesus Christ began with the incarnation. He did not exist eternally as the God-Man. There was no modification nor alteration of the Holy Trinity when Jesus Christ came into the world and assumed a human nature. A fourth person was not added to the divine Triunity. There is still just a holy Triunity. The one God condescended to reveal Himself. While there is only one God, there are in the one divine essence three distinct Persons-the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 31: 02.02. CHRIST WAS NEVER TEMPTED TO SIN ======================================================================== 2. CHRIST WAS NEVER TEMPTED TO SIN Temptation has no power over a perfect Person, but it does over a depraved person. Jesus Christ, during His days in the flesh, was holy, harmless, undefiled, and separate from sinners (Hebrews 7:26). To suggest that He had a nature subject to sin is nothing short of blasphemy. On the other hand, depraved men are capable of sin because each one has a mind that is ready to receive an evil suggestion. Man is tempted when he is drawn away by his own lust (James 1:14). The Greek word for “lust” is epithumia. It means lust, desire, craving, or longing. A person is tempted when he is enticed by his own craving for that which is forbidden or unlawful. No one who understands the Biblical teaching concerning the Person of Jesus Christ could entertain a thought that He could desire the unlawful or forbidden. That is why James said, “God cannot be tempted with evil” (James 1:13). The word “temptation” does not always carry the same connotation in every passage where it is used. It comes from the Greek word peirasmos, which means trial, proof, or temptation. The noun is related to the verb peiradzo, which means to test, to try, or to tempt. Both words may be used in either a good or a bad sense. For example, the noun is used in James 1:2 and James 1:12; and the verb is used four times in James 1:13-14. In James 1:2 and James 1:12, the noun would be better translated “trial.” The Christian “endures” an outward trial, but he should “resist” an inward temptation to evil. Hence, the distinction must be made between remaining steadfast under trial and being ensnared by one’s own sinful nature. The former is outward, and the latter is inward. God tried Abraham (Hebrews 11:17; Genesis 22:1), but He did not tempt Abraham. The word “tempt” of Genesis 22:1 should be “tried” or “tested,” because “...God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man” (James 1:13). This means that God is incapable not only of being solicited to sin but of soliciting any man to sin. On the other hand, God does try or test man to prove to him what he really is (1 Peter 1:6; 1 Peter 4:12; Revelation 2:2; Revelation 2:10; Revelation 3:10). Outward trials are from God, but inward temptations are from the evil passion of depraved man. God decreed sin, but He neither solicits nor forces anyone to sin. If God had not ordained sin, Christ would never have been crucified by the hands of wicked men (Acts 2:23). Satan solicits people to sin, but God overrules and makes the evil acts of men work for man’s good and God’s glory. It is interesting to observe the attributes of God that are advanced by sin. God’s mercy pardons sin; His justice punishes sin; His wisdom orders sin; and His power overrules sin. The source of sin is man’s depravity, but God is not the author of that depravity. Those who claim that Jesus Christ had the capacity to sin are forced to admit that He became less than God in the incarnation. Such thinking is in direct opposition to Scripture which states: “...God cannot be tempted [apeirastos, an adjective which means inexperienced in temptation; incapable of being tempted] with evil [kakon, genitive plural of kakos -of evils]...” (James 1:13). God can never be induced to act inconsistently with any attribute of His character. The human nature of the Son of God in His incarnation did not exist apart from the Divine Person. If Jesus Christ had the capacity to sin, the Divine Person had the capacity to sin. His holy, human nature united to His Divine nature eliminates any concept of peccability (Luke 1:35). There can never be any conflict between two absolutely holy natures. The Bible says Christ was made in the “likeness of men” (Php 2:7), but it never says He possessed a “sinful nature” or was nothing more than a mere man. The “lust” (desire, craving, or longing) by which man is tempted is not of God. It is his own lust, which is the fruit of the fall. Evil that is in man is his own. Within man’s heart are evil desires. They are there by nature. The Devil does not introduce them. All Satan does is find out where man is most vulnerable and bombard him with things he craves. The evil suggestion admitted into one’s mind will grow in strength because of the evil desire already resident in man unless it is resisted by grace. This is the question: Did Satan ever find a weak spot in Jesus Christ? Since there was no weakness in Him, He could never be solicited to do anything contrary to His holy character. Therefore, Jesus Christ could not be tempted with evil (James 1:13). It must be understood that evil exists in man before it comes forth from him in action. On the other hand, there was no evil in Christ. He could not be tempted by any suggestion or solicitation from without. To say that Christ could have sinned as to His human nature but not as to His Divine nature forces one to conclude that there was a conflict between His two natures. This was impossible because His human nature was united to His Divine Person. Thus, there was never any conflict in Christ as there is in the Christian (Romans 7:15-25). There are several things to consider in the solicitation to sin. First, there is the attraction by the suggestion of something that is desirable. That which is desired is forbidden. In order for the tempted to have what has been suggested, he must ignore a Biblical precept. However, having been intellectually enlightened as to the advantages to oneself personally, he now begins to rationalize the suggestion. The suggestion and the desire become so strongly united that the person soon is made to feel justified in doing what all along he desired to do. The more the suggestion is rationalized the more desirable it becomes. There is nothing left for the tempted person to do but succumb to what was already in his heart. One cannot deny that the Devil made some offers to Christ in the wilderness. Neither can one deny that the eternal Son was eternally aware of every detail of the offers made by the Devil. But it is nothing short of blasphemy to entertain the thought that the Son of God wanted anything offered by the Devil. Some religious leaders are so full of iniquity that they maintain that the human nature of Jesus Christ was as fallen and rebellious as their own. The Bible teaches that the human nature is corrupt from head to foot (Isaiah 1:6), but it is a sign of spiritual blindness to imagine that Christ’s human nature was tainted with depravity. Christ’s human nature is called “that holy thing” (Luke 1:35). Jesus Christ experienced only the suffering part of peirasmos; whereas, man experiences both the suffering and the sinning parts of temptation. Suggestion can do nothing without lust (desire). Christ had no lust; therefore, He did not suffer the sinning part of temptation. That which inwardly tempts the heart must come from within oneself: “...man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed” (James 1:14). Lust and enticement work together. The Greek word for “enticed” of verse 14 is deleadzo, which means to entrap, to catch with a bait, to allure, or entice. Hence, it can be said that one is enticed to sin when he is entrapped by his own craving. This means there is something in depraved man that is drawn (exelko, to draw out; metaphorically to hurry away-leap) to the lure of something within the temptation. Both “drawn” (exelkomenos) and “enticed” (deleadzomenos) are present passive participles. The passive voice means the subject was acted upon. But in James 1:15, the apostle went on to say, “Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin.” The Greek word for “conceived” is sullabousa, second aorist active participle of sullambano, which means to seize, to apprehend, to conceive, or to become pregnant. This means that when the suggestion is embraced by the assent of the will, sin is brought forth. James is using the language of pregnancy and childbirth. As a child is alive before the actual moment of birth, sin does not begin to be sinful only when it is manifested in a visible action. Jesus Christ did not have a depraved will to give assent to any evil suggestion. Therefore, there could never be any conception, which proves Christ was not peccable. When one understands the Biblical use of temptation, he will have no problem with the so-called “temptation of Christ.” Jesus Christ was not tempted, but He was “tried” to prove to mankind who He is-God incarnate. Temptation, in the English language, is the act of tempting. It is something that tempts, entices, or allures. It is the fact or state of being tempted, especially to evil. On the other hand, the word “test” is the means by which the quality or genuineness of anything is determined, a means of trial. It is the trial of the quality of something. Jesus Christ asserted His own impeccability when He said, “...the prince of this world cometh, and hath nothing in me” (John 14:30). Satan had nothing in the incarnate Word because Jesus Christ “...knew no sin...” (2 Corinthians 5:21) and “...in him is no sin” (1 John 3:5). Therefore, He “...did no sin...” (1 Peter 2:22) ======================================================================== CHAPTER 32: 02.04. CHRIST WAS TESTED APART FROM SIN ======================================================================== 4. CHRIST WAS TESTED APART FROM SIN During the Arian controversy of the fourth century, two Greek words were brought before the religious world. They were homoousion, the same in substance, and homoiousion, of a similar substance. The only difference between the two words was one Greek character, “i” (iota), but what a great difference it made in the Biblical concept of the Person of Jesus Christ. Arianism, a heretical doctrine taught by Arius, was the doctrine that Jesus Christ was not of the same substance, essence, or nature with God the Father. Athanasius, on the other hand, declared that Jesus Christ was of the same substance with the Father. Athanasius declared for 47 years Christ’s homoousion. He was driven into exile five times. His enemies slandered him, and death threatened him. But he continued to declare Christ’s homoousion, “the same in substance, equal in power and glory,” at the expense of having his pulpit undermined. Constantine the Great was so moved by the controversy that he authorized a council to consider the question of Christ’s Person. Hence, a Synod convened in Alexandria for the examination of Arianism. Arius was condemned and expelled by nearly 100 pastors and bishops. There is another controversy over the Person of Christ in the twentieth century. It, too, involves two words, impeccability and peccability. Impeccability means Christ could not sin, and peccability means He could sin. Some uninformed “church members” (religionists) may not feel that the controversy is serious enough to cause divisions. However, God’s elect who have been led by the Spirit of regeneration to embrace the impeccable Savior in a true conversion experience are responsible to cry out against the heresy of peccability. In fact, they, like Athanasius of old, cannot keep quiet when the Person of their Savior is being questioned. Peccability is related to temptability. This means that man is tempted to outward sin by inward sin. Inward sin is the fruit of depravity. The aim of temptation is to persuade man to outwardly manifest inward sin and to bring him to the guilt of his inward and outward sin before others. No person can be tempted to sin without a sinful propensity. Thus, the difference between sin and temptation is revealed. The Bible defines sin as transgression of the law (1 John 3:4). Man is subject to certain desires which are essential to human nature. However, these desires are to be gratified in God’s appointed ways. Adam failed to do this. Therefore, he fell and all his posterity fell in him. Temptation is outward allurement. It suggests to inward depravity the advantage of succumbing to the outward attraction. Thus, man’s inward weakness is influenced to some object of natural desire. Without the restraint of the fear of God (Jeremiah 32:40), a man will submit to fulfilling his inward evil desire. Those who embrace the doctrine of peccability say the impossibility for Christ to sin would destroy the whole meaning of temptation in the life of Christ. Their opinion is that although Christ was without sin, He was not without the susceptibility to temptation. Furthermore, they claim that the area of testing and the potential for falling were in His humanity. They conclude that since He was fully human, He could have made the wrong choice. Peccability teachers have sought to explain Christ’s temptation of Hebrews 4:15 - “...was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin” - in the following way: Imagine a father in days of great poverty who has the opportunity to take some money belonging to another person. He was not guilty of stealing the money, but the thought of a starving family made him feel the temptation. Furthermore, imagine a Christian sentenced to die if he does not renounce Jesus Christ. The love of life would make the Christian feel the temptation. It is therefore conceivable that although Christ was without sin, He was not without susceptibility to temptation. The preceding explanation is false and the truth of Hebrews 4:15 should be considered. The infirmities (astheneiais, dative plural of astheneia, weakness) did not refer to sin. They cover the frailties of human nature. Christ’s human nature was subject to limitations and trials with the one exception that He could have no experimental knowledge of sin. He did not possess a sinful human nature. His human nature was only made in the likeness of sinful nature (Romans 8:3). Christ’s conception and birth protect His human nature from defilement with depravity. “Like as we are” is the translation of kath homoioteta, ablative singular of homoiotes, which means in a similar way, not in the identical way that we are tempted. This form of the Greek word for “likeness” is used only here and in Hebrews 7:15. There, it is translated “after the similitude [likeness] of Melchisedec.” There is a more profound truth than “yet without sin” or “without committing sin.” The Greek word choris is an adjective which means apart from, without, on a distinct footing from, or independently of. The most common interpretation of choris hamartias is “without yielding to sin,” but it has a stronger meaning. In Christ’s statement, “He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her” (John 8:7), the Greek word for “without sin” is anamartatos (used only here), which means without sin or guiltless. In this case, it means he who has committed no sin. However, choris is stronger in meaning than anamartatos. The Greek word choris is used as an adjective with the ablative of separation in every place with the exception of John 20:7. There, it is used as an adverb. Christ was completely separated from sin because there was no sin in Him to be aroused by temptation. The Lord Jesus did not sin because He could not sin. He was impeccable. Therefore, He remained undefiled in a world of sin. Impeccability is united to holiness. This is in direct opposition to peccability which is related to temptability. While no human being is beyond the possibility of temptation because of inward depravity, Christ had no inward depravity with which to struggle. His human will was always subservient to His divine will. He always pleased the Father (John 8:29). Christ’s holiness was one of equality with the Father. Holiness, which is God’s chief attribute, is spoken of more frequently than any other of His attributes. In conclusion, the following are arguments against the heresy of peccability. If Christ could have sinned, He would have been able to sin only by a completely free opposition of His will to the divine. However, that was impossible. The managing possessor of the human will was the Divine Logos. Hence, God would have had to apostatize from Himself, which is ludicrous. To argue that Christ’s human will must be free to choose or He could not have won the moral victory is to make His will mutable. A perfectly free will is determined to act according to its character. Christ’s will could not act contrary to His character: “For such an high priest became us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and made higher than the heavens” (Hebrews 7:26). On the other hand, the sinner cannot act contrary to his character: “Having eyes full of adultery, and that cannot cease from sin; beguiling unstable souls: an heart they have exercised with covetous practices; cursed children” (2 Peter 2:14). Now, who will be bold enough to say Christ was peccable? The inner incapacity for sin in Jesus Christ resulted from the fact that the “I” of the human nature is the Divine Logos. Thus, it is not a human but a Divine self who is responsible for the deeds performed through the Divine will. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 33: 02.05. TEACHERS OF PECCABILITY PROCLAIM ANOTHER JESUS ======================================================================== 5. TEACHERS OF PECCABILITY PROCLAIM ANOTHER JESUS When Christians read the Bible under the influence of the Holy Spirit, they do not dissect Christ’s personality like physiologists dissect the human body. They recognize their discipleship and worship God in spirit and in truth. The incarnation did not make Jesus Christ a dual personality-Divine and human. He was one Divine personality in equal relation to His two natures. Thus, the statement “The Word became flesh” (John 1:14 NASB) implies more than a Divine Person taking a human body, which could have meant no more than a theophany of the Old Testament. The second Person in the Godhead assumed a human body with all that perfect unfallen human nature implies by being born of a virgin. The effect of this fact on regenerate hearts will not be a philosophical statement that “Christ is such an one as ourselves.” Like Thomas, the regenerate will say, “My Lord and my God” (John 20:28). One is correct to say Jesus Christ is “very God of very God” when defending the two natures of Jesus Christ. But the frequently heard statement “very man of very man” ignores the work of the Holy Spirit in the conception of Christ’s human nature in the womb of the virgin. The true humanity of Christ is accepted by Christians without attempting to describe how it was produced. All that Scripture records on the subject of the incarnation should be considered; but one must not go beyond Scripture and let his imagination run wild. There are some “secret things” about the incarnation which God has not decreed to make known. Thus, believers apprehend the fact of the incarnation without comprehending how the conception by the Holy Spirit took place. Those to whom the Son has revealed the Father will believe its validity where human reason doubts. Whether people like it or not, the truth of Christ’s impeccability, like other truths, is a revelation restricted to the elect. Where human reason dominates the thinking of religionists concerning the Person of Christ, the elect to whom Christ has revealed the Father rest in a God-given faith in the Savior’s impeccability. Christ said, “All things are delivered unto me of my Father...” (Matthew 11:27). The verb “delivered” is paredothe, first aorist passive indicative of paradidomi, which means to give into the hands of another or to deliver to one something to keep or use. Hence, God the Father turned over to God the Son the execution of His will. Therefore, only those to whom Christ chooses to reveal the Father will ever come to know Him through the impeccable Christ (John 1:18). Many in Paul’s day and many today have a false view of Jesus Christ. Paul looked forward to the time when he would have the privilege of presenting his converts as chaste virgins to Christ, the heavenly Bridegroom: For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ. But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ. For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him (2 Corinthians 11:2-4). His jealousy for them was the product of an exclusive loyalty. To be espoused (hermosamen, aorist middle indicative of harmodzo, to betroth) to one husband demands loyalty. God will endure no rival. They had been betrothed to Christ. Paul was fearful that they might be turned from exclusive loyalty to Him. The servant of Abraham illustrates ministers of God entrusted with the work of espousing the elect to the impeccable Savior (Genesis 24:1-67). Christ’s ministers, like Eliezer, are properly instructed (Genesis 24:1-9), are zealous for their work (Genesis 24:10-14), are given spiritual discernment (Genesis 24:15-23), declare the things of Christ, typified by Isaac (Genesis 24:53), are faithful to the elect, typified by Rebekah (Genesis 24:56-57), and present the regenerated as chaste virgins to Christ, represented by Rebekah’s being presented to Isaac (Genesis 24:61). Eliezer disallowed anticipated compromise. During the course of instruction, he said: Peradventure the woman will not be willing to follow me unto this land: must I needs bring thy son again unto the land from whence thou camest? And Abraham said unto him, Beware thou that thou bring not my son thither again.... And if the woman will not be willing to follow thee, then thou shalt be clear from this my oath: only bring not my son thither again (Genesis 24:5-6; Genesis 24:8). Likewise, ministers of God must not compromise the message concerning the Person of Jesus Christ. If people do not rise to the truth of Christ’s impeccability, the message must not be diluted to a heretical message of peccability. The message must be relevant to Christ’s impeccability in order for God’s message of the Person of Christ to be relevant. As the servant of Abraham loved Rebekah for Isaac’s sake, ministers of God love the elect for Christ’s sake. Rebekah’s attachment to the servant for a season was for her spiritual adornment during her pilgrimage to meet Isaac. The same is true with the elect of God and their ministers. Rebekah’s desire was to know more about Isaac, her future bridegroom. The desire of the elect is to know more about the Person of Jesus Christ, their future Bridegroom. Like Eliezer and Paul, faithful ministers look upon the sheep under their care as the bride of the impeccable Savior, not as their own bride. On the other hand, the sheep receive their undershepherds, unite themselves to them, obey them, and honor them for their work’s sake (1 Thessalonians 5:12-13; Hebrews 13:7). Paul’s great concern was that the thoughts (noemata, plural of noema - thought) of some might be corrupted (phthare, second aorist passive subjunctive of phtheiro, which means to spoil, ruin, or corrupt) from the simplicity (haplotetos, genitive of haplotes, which means sincerity, or purity of mind-singlehearted loyalty) and purity (hagnotatos, genitive of hagnotes, which means purity of life) in Christ. He warned the Corinthian Christians of one coming and preaching another person as Jesus whom he did not proclaim. Paul did not say another Christ, but “another Jesus.” Hence, the false apostles taught a purely human Jesus. Therefore, one can expect what follows. Another spirit other than the Holy Spirit empowers those who preach another Jesus. Furthermore, another Jesus is the message of another gospel, which is not another (Galatians 1:6-9). Promoters of peccability are preaching “another Jesus” by the power of “another spirit” which results in “another gospel.” As Paul did not preach the same “Jesus” as the false teachers, the preachers of impeccability do not preach the same “Jesus” as the peccability teachers. Unlike the teachers of peccability, demons recognize the absolute holiness of Jesus Christ. There are religious demons: And they went into Capernaum; and straightway on the sabbath day he entered into the synagogue, and taught. And they were astonished at his doctrine: for he taught them as one that had authority, and not as the scribes. And there was in their synagogue a man with an unclean spirit; and he cried out, Saying, Let us alone; what have we to do with thee, thou Jesus of Nazareth? art thou come to destroy us? I know thee who thou art, the Holy One of God. And Jesus rebuked him, saying, Hold thy peace, and come out of him. And when the unclean spirit had torn him, and cried with a loud voice, he came out of him. And they were all amazed, insomuch that they questioned among themselves, saying, What thing is this? what new doctrine is this? for with authority commandeth he even the unclean spirits, and they do obey him (Mark 1:21-27). Demons are usually spoken of as persons being possessed by demons of drunkenness, lust, drugs, dishonesty, etc. They are seldom thought of as religious demons. Mark told of a man in the synagogue who had an unclean spirit. Such a person will not listen to truth. Although the man had come to the synagogue, he had no desire to hear what Jesus Christ had to say. Acknowledging that this Jesus of Nazareth was “the Holy One of God,” he said, “Let us alone; what have we to do with thee, thou Jesus of Nazareth?” The mere external proclamation of the gospel will never find lodgement in the unsanctified ears of man, a man possessed with an unclean spirit. The Holy Spirit of regeneration alone can make a person desire the company of “the Holy One of God.” To say “I know Jesus Christ” is insufficient. Unlike the promoters of peccability, the man with an unclean spirit said, “I know thee who thou art, the Holy One of God.” There was no doubt in his mind that Jesus of Nazareth was absolutely holy, impeccable, not peccable. The Greek word for “know” is oida, second perfect active indicative of oida, which suggests fullness of knowledge. The difference between ginosko and oida is interesting. The word ginosko often suggests progress in knowledge; whereas, oida suggests fullness of knowledge. For example, when Christ said to the Jews, “...ye have not known him,” i.e., the Father, He used the word ginosko. He told them that they had not begun to know the Father. On the other hand, Christ said, “...if I should say, I know him not, I shall be a liar like unto you: but I know him and keep his saying” (John 8:55). Christ used the word oida, which means perfect knowledge, when speaking of His knowledge of the Father. The point is, the man with an unclean spirit had no problem with Christ’s impeccability. What a difference between his confession, “I know thee who thou art, the Holy One of God,” and that of one who said that Jesus Christ must be born again to see the Kingdom of God. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 34: 02.06. JESUS CHRIST IS THE UNIQUE PERSON ======================================================================== 6. JESUS CHRIST IS THE UNIQUE PERSON The truth concerning Jesus Christ is infinite. This unique Person was conceived in the womb of Mary thirty years before Peter’s confession: “...Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God” (Matthew 16:16). Hence, He was conceived in the womb of the virgin before He was conceived in the mind of Peter. His conception in the mind, however, is as necessary to salvation as His conception in the virgin. The Holy Spirit is the Author of both conceptions, in the womb and in the mind. And the angel answered and said unto her, 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). Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost. Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing to make her a publick example, was minded to put her away privily. But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost (Matthew 1:18-20). And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven (Matthew 16:17). Since the Holy Spirit could not conceive a peccable Person in the womb of the virgin, He cannot conceive a peccable Christ in the mind of a person whom He regenerates. Everything God does is perfect. Therefore, peccability is out of the question in God’s work. Those who believe in peccability are forced to deny the miraculous conception in the womb of Mary, the virgin. Furthermore, they are forced to deny that salvation is wholly of God. They must acknowledge that man had not only something to do with Christ’s human nature but he has something to do with the conception in the human mind. Objections to the impeccability of the unique Christ will be answered. Opponents of the impeccability of Jesus Christ say the humanity of Jesus was no different from the humanity of Adam before the fall. They claim that the difference came only by the fall of the first Adam and the victory of the second Adam. The humanity of both Adam and Jesus Christ cannot be apprehended apart from their persons. Adam was a mutable person; Christ is the immutable Person. Adam was a peccable person; Christ is the impeccable Person. Adam’s peccability gave him the capacity to sin; therefore, he fell. Christ’s impeccability made it impossible for Him to sin; therefore, He was never tempted to sin. There is no capacity to sin in infinite perfection. Hence, there was a definite difference between the natures of Adam and Christ. The eternal Son of God was responsible for all that would be done through the instrumentality of the assumed human nature. Thus, everything done through the instrumentality of the assumed nature is attributable to the one Person of the God-Man. Since the Divine nature is the foundation of Christ’s Person, anyone who says Christ could sin says God could sin. Guilt could not be confined to the human nature but would encompass the whole theanthropic Person. To say that Christ’s human nature could have sinned without involving the God-Man is senseless. There is no such thing as a fallen nature. The word “fallen” is applied not to nature but to the Person. Christ’s human nature is undefiled, but that His nature was fallen must ever be disputed. An unusual view of impeccability is that Christ’s Divine nature controlled His human nature. Therefore, Christ had a peccable human nature, but He was an impeccable Person. Although this view affirms the impeccability of Christ, the statements about Christ’s human nature are unscriptural. Christ’s holy human nature was not peccable. How could it be peccable since it was wholly the work of God? One may argue that Adam was solely the work of God, but he fell. This has already been answered by showing that the humanity of both Adam and Christ cannot be apprehended apart from their persons. Adam was created upright (Ecclesiastes 7:29) but mutable. One must never think of Adam’s human nature apart from the mutability of his person. On the other hand, the human nature of Christ - “that holy thing” - was immutable. Thus, we have the mutability of Adam versus the immutability of Jesus Christ. Furthermore, we have the difference between “man” and the “God-Man.” One theologian has denied the impeccability of the God-Man, although he believes in the sinlessness of Christ. He says this does not add up to absolute impeccability because if Christ was truly human, He had to be capable of sinning. The possibility was there. If it was not there, then His sympathy with His people is rendered impossible. The hypothesis that Jesus could have sinned had He chosen is based on mere supposition. It comes from a false understanding of the Person of Christ. To say that Adam fell even though he was perfect as he came from God and had no weakness for sin is a misunderstanding of Adam’s perfection. Adam’s perfection cannot be equated with Christ’s. One is finite and the other is infinite. Infinite perfection is untemptable. The Lord Jesus never felt temptation because He could never be induced to evil. He was tried apart from sin. Building an argument on a supposition is like trying to build a skyscraper without a foundation. To suppose Christ could have sinned is to be suppositious without any Biblical foundation. Another argument against the impeccability of Christ states that if it were impossible for Jesus to yield to temptation, there would be an excuse for Adam. The question is raised, Why did not God make Adam so that he too could not sin? It is far more wonderful for Jesus to resist temptation than to be immune from its power. Amazingly, many fail to distinguish the difference between the finite and the Infinite. The finite has the capacity to sin, but the Infinite does not. How could it be more wonderful to trust a Savior who could sin but did not than one who could not? If Christ could sin but did not, what about His being the same yesterday, today, and forever (Hebrews 13:8)? Trusting an airplane that cannot fall makes more sense than trusting one that can but does not. At this point, it is appropriate to investigate some of Christ’s attributes in their relationship to His impeccability. Christ’s holiness is established (Acts 3:14; Mark 1:24; Hebrews 7:26-27). Holiness is positive virtue which has neither room for nor interest in sin. Moreover, holiness is not only an active attribute which has no interest in sin, but it must take retributive action against sin. Holiness, therefore, is not just a passive freedom from iniquity. Christ is not only holy but He is immutable (Hebrews 13:8). An immutable person is one who “cannot” not “does not” change. Jesus Christ cannot move from one good to another because all good eternally resides in Him. He cannot change from good to better since that would imply improvement. He cannot change from good to bad because of absolute holiness. Therefore, Jesus Christ is not one who was able not to sin, but He could not sin. According to the teaching of those who embrace peccability, if Christ could have sinned during His first advent, He had to change from who He was eternally. But that cannot be. “For I am the LORD, I change not...” (Malachi 3:6). Christ is omnipotent. “All things were made by Him...” (John 1:3). Paul spoke of “Christ the power of God” (1 Corinthians 1:24). “For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: And he is before all things, and by him all things consist” (Colossians 1:16-17). Christ not only created all things but “by him all things consist.” The word “consist” is sunesteken, perfect active indicative of sunistemi, which means to place together or to hold together. Hence, Christ is the controlling and unifying power in the universe. Providence is under His control. To say that Christ could have sinned is to admit that a finite power is capable of overcoming infinite power. Christ is omniscient. He said to the scribes whose thoughts He knew: “...Wherefore think ye evil in your hearts?” (Matthew 9:4). Again, when the Pharisees said, “This fellow doth not cast out devils, but by Beelzebub the prince of the devils. And Jesus knew their thoughts...” (Matthew 12:24-25). God has infinite knowledge (Psalms 147:5). It has been said that omniscience is infinite awareness. God cannot learn because He knows. Therefore, God’s eternal awareness could not be caught off-guard. Another argument against Christ’s impeccability states that there is not a Scripture which says that Jesus could not sin, but many state that He did not sin. Those who believe in peccability say the human Jesus, not His deity, was involved in temptation. They believe Jesus chose to overcome temptation as a man. This argument presents a serious view concerning the Person of Christ. He is not two persons, but one Person with two natures. Jesus Christ possessed only one purpose. Thus, the Divine nature, which is immutable, determines and controls the human nature. This means the human nature never acts independently of the Divine. Many regard Christ’s inability to sin as a threat to His humanity. They say that His temptation cannot be viewed as real if the proposition that Christ cannot sin is true. They fail to understand that the subject of Christ’s impeccability must proceed from His holiness. The negative aspect of holiness is taught (2 Corinthians 5:21; 1 Peter 2:22; 1 John 3:5). The positive aspect of Christ’s holiness is taught (Acts 3:14; Acts 4:27; Acts 4:30; Luke 1:35; John 6:69). Therefore, Christ asked, “Which of you convinceth me of sin?” (John 8:46). Peccability advocates say the power of sympathy does not depend on the experience of sin but on the experience of the strength of temptation to sin, which only the sinless can know in its full intensity. They say temptation implies the possibility of sin. They further state that if it were impossible for Him to sin, He could not sympathize with His people. Their so-called proof text is Hebrews 2:18 and Hebrews 4:15. Christ’s testing has some help in it for the elect: “For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succour them that are tempted” (Hebrews 2:18). The verb “suffered” is peponthen, perfect active indicative of pascho, which means to suffer or to be afflicted. “Being tempted” is peirastheis, first aorist passive participle of peiradzo, to test, try, or tempt. Hence, the text could read, “For in that he suffered, having been tested.” The Greek word for “succour” is boethasai, first aorist active infinitive of boetheo, which means to run to the aid of those who cry for help. Those who are being tested have someone who can bring them help. Temptation in all points like His people was not necessary for Christ to sympathize with them. “In all points” is a restricted statement, as has already been shown. The unrestricted idea of peccability advocates carried to its logical conclusion would mean that Jesus Christ felt the sin of concupiscence. That would be blasphemy. The fullness of the Godhead (theotetos means the totality of all that enters into the conception of Godhood) dwells bodily in Christ (Colossians 2:9). Such fullness (pleroma, those perfections and qualities which fill up the Divine nature) cannot dwell in mere human nature. Christ’s two natures have the same subsistence. In Christ are “hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge” (Colossians 2:3). Therefore, He can represent to Himself how sin affects His people without having been tempted by sin. Christ who was separated from sinners could not be tempted by sensual lust, pride, envy, gluttony, drunkenness, etc. Such temptations would be too wicked to imagine. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 35: 02.07. CHRIST ASSUMED A HUMAN NATURE ======================================================================== 7. CHRIST ASSUMED A HUMAN NATURE A very important point in our study of Christ’s human nature must be considered. Did the Son of God assume “the holy thing” (Luke 1:35) at the time of conception or when Mary gave birth to “the holy thing”? Some believe that the Son of God became the Son of Man when Mary delivered the fully developed embryo. They rely on the double meaning of the verb gennao, which means to either conceive or bring forth. Thus, the verb in Hebrews 1:5 (NASB) - “..Today I have begotten [gegenneka, perfect active indicative of gennao] thee,” - is taught to mean “to bring forth” rather than “to conceive.” They base this view on the next verse: “And again, when he bringeth in the firstbegotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him” (Hebrews 1:6). Connected with this verse, Luke 2:9-14, they say, proves that the angels worshipped Jesus Christ not at His conception but at His birth. Those who embrace this view say the conception was a secret matter lest Satan might interrupt the Divine program. On the surface, this may seem to be irrefutable, but a close examination of the text and the context will refute the argument. Recognizing the controversy over Hebrews 1:5-6, let us neither shirk our duty to study this passage nor be frightened by so-called scholarly works. Hebrews 1:5 consists of two Old Testament quotations: “Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee” is a quotation from Psalms 2:7; and “I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son” is quoted from 2 Samuel 7:14. The word “begotten” of Psalms 2:7 has caused much controversy. The Hebrew word for “begotten” can mean to beget as a father or to bring forth as a mother. Our concern in this study is the way the word is used in Hebrews 1:5. The context indicates that it refers to the Son’s being “brought into the world” by means of the incarnation because reference is made in Hebrews 1:6 to the “firstbegotten” being brought into the inhabited earth again. The Greek word for “begotten” is gegenneka, perfect active indicative of gennao, which means to beget or to bring forth. The word for “firstbegotten” is prototokos, which means “firstborn.” The word for “again” is palin, an adverb which means back, again, or back again. The Father brought forth His Son into the inhabited earth by way of the virgin’s womb, and He will bring the “firstborn” back again-the second coming. But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom (Hebrews 1:8). “The angels worshipping God” of verse 6, therefore, will be fulfilled at Christ’s second coming rather than having been fulfilled at His first advent. The reference to “the heavenly host praising God” of Luke 2:9-14 is not the fulfillment of Hebrews 1:6. The former refers to Christ’s first advent and the latter to His second. Instead of the conception being kept a secret from the angels, the very opposite is true. An angel told Joseph about the conception (Matthew 1:20). Furthermore, the angel Gabriel told Mary that she would conceive (Luke 1:26; Luke 1:31). The Biblical truth of God’s absolute sovereignty is completely ignored when one says the conception was kept secret lest Satan interrupt God’s purpose. God “is in one mind, and who can turn him? and what his soul desireth, even that he doeth” (Job 23:13). As the purpose of God was not thwarted by the fall, Satan cannot interrupt God’s program because God said, “..My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure...I have spoken it, I will also bring it to pass; I have purposed it, I will also do it” (Isaiah 46:10-11). The time the fetus became personalized is important to consider. If the human nature of Christ was not personalized until Mary brought forth the nature in birth, its personalization differs from others mentioned in Scripture. Nature and person are not the same. One nature cannot be distinguished from another, but one person can be distinguished from another. Nature denotes the sum total of all the essential qualities of a thing. Person is a nature with something added. The added properties are independent subsistence and individuality. Christ’s human nature was not impersonal. It was personalized in the Son of God. It can be said that human nature is not actually personal, and that is the reason for the neuter participle being used in the statement “that holy thing which shall be born of thee” (Luke 1:35). The Greek reads to gennomenon hagion. It could be translated “the holy thing being begotten.” An illustration of the differentness between nature and person may be seen in a lump of clay differing from the vessel (Romans 9:20-23). The potter must intervene by taking a piece of clay from the lump and molding it into a particular vessel, having its own peculiar shape and figure. Likewise, human nature, as a whole existing in Adam, possessed all the properties that are requisite to personality, although it was not yet personalized. The difference, then, between nature and person is virtually between nature and form-substance and personality. The title “God-Man” means the second Person in the Godhead took not the person of a man but the nature of man into subsistence with Himself. The human nature of Christ previous to His assumption thereof was not a person. The Son of God did not unite Himself with the depraved human nature of Adam but only with “part of the same.” In reference to the incarnation, the writer of Hebrews said: 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 had the power of death, that is, the devil (Hebrews 2:14). This text states plainly that the Son of God shared with the children “in like manner [paraplesios, adverb meaning in like manner and is used only in this text] the same things” (translation). Sharing (meteschen, second aorist active indicative of metecho, which means to share in or partake of) flesh and blood, He did not share in or partake of Adam’s depravity-original sin. The text restricts His sharing to “flesh and blood.” Human nature, therefore, may signify what it is as it exists in the descendants of fallen Adam or in its unfallen condition in the God-Man. The terms “Son of God,” “the man Christ Jesus,” and “a man approved of God” do not express the personality of a mere man. They express the personality of the God-Man. The Spirit of regeneration is necessary to see something more than a mere man in the theanthropic Person. The personalization of human nature takes place at conception: If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished... (Exodus 21:22). Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me (Psalms 51:5). ...thou hast covered me in my mother’s womb (Psalms 139:13). As thou knowest not what is the way of the spirit, nor how the bones do grow in the womb of her that is with child... (Ecclesiastes 11:5). Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet... (Jeremiah 1:5). And it came to pass, that, when Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb....the babe leaped in my womb for joy (Luke 1:41; Luke 1:44). Those who believe the personalization of Christ’s human nature took place at birth are saying that His birth and His begetting were different from all others. However, as it has already been shown, the begetting was miraculous, but the conception, gestation, and birth were like others. Mary was passive in the begetting, but she was active in the conception, gestation, and birth. There are some who say that the leaping of John the Baptist in Elisabeth’s womb did not indicate life. They call it fetal movement in the sphere of the mother’s emotions. Those who favor abortion are glad to hear “theologians” talk in this manner. Scripture does teach that the Son of God was twice begotten of the Father. He was eternally begotten by the Father, and He was begotten as He entered into the inhabited earth (Psalms 2:7; Matthew 1:20). In His eternality, the second Person in the Godhead received not Deity but Sonship from the Father. In His incarnation, the Son of God received a body prepared for His earthly sojourn as Redeemer of the elect by the Father through the Holy Spirit (Hebrews 10:5; Luke 1:35). ======================================================================== CHAPTER 36: 02.08. THE GODMAN LACKED KNOWLEDGE ======================================================================== 8. THE GOD-MAN LACKED KNOWLEDGE Many say Christ’s ignorance and temptability are important issues in the study of Christology. Having dealt with the so-called “temptability” of the God-Man, a study of His “ignorance” is now in order. “But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father” (Mark 13:32). Many theologians have said this verse has always presented serious difficulties. Some say there was a real ignorance in Christ during His humiliation, and others advocate a holy unwillingness to know. The following are various views of Jesus Christ’s not knowing the day of the Lord: (1) As Man, Jesus Christ knew not the time of His coming; as God He knew that men did not know. (2) Christ knew not because He had no instruction to declare that day. (3) In the incarnation, Christ voluntarily accepted human limitations, including His not knowing the day and hour of the “day of the Lord.” (4) The fact that even the Son, according to His human nature, did not know is in harmony with “He emptied Himself” (Php 2:7). (5) Christ as the Son of Man did not know, but as the Son of God He knew all things. What knowledge He had of future things in His humanity He had from His Deity. (6) The word “knoweth” is sometimes used in the sense of to make known or reveal. Thus, in that sense, Christ did not make known or reveal the day and the hour. (7) Christ’s not knowing the day and the hour is to be understood in the same sense as Christ’s sleeping, fearing, obeying, learning, etc. There are some serious pitfalls that must be avoided in the proper interpretation of Mark 13:32, which states that the God-Man did not know the day and the hour of the day of the Lord. One pitfall is dualism. Jesus Christ is not both a human and a Divine Person. He is a Divine Person who assumed a human nature. The Infinite did not become the finite, but the Infinite did assume the finite. God’s eternal Son did not divest Himself of eternity, but He assumed a nature adapted for time. God is invisible in His Divine nature, but He is made visible in human nature. The Son of God did not empty Himself of the form of God, but He assumed the form of a servant. Furthermore, He did not strip Himself of His Divine attributes. He put them under restriction as the Son of Man. In His human nature, Christ accommodated Himself to the feebleness, growth, and development of that nature. Thus, dualism is proved to be false. The great question has been how the “Word became flesh” and remains the Word (John 1:14). Scripture is clear concerning the fact that the Son of God became the Son of Man while remaining the Son of God. Both titles “Son of God” and “Son of Man” are used throughout the New Testament to speak of Jesus Christ. The title “Son of God” is associated with the Divine nature, and the title “Son of Man” is united to His human nature. The Lord Jesus said: I and my Father are one. Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him. Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me? The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God (John 10:30-33). The Jews thought that Jesus Christ was a mere man who was trying to convince the people that He was God. Their depraved minds blinded them to the Old Testament Scriptures that spoke of “a child being born” and “a son being given” who shall be called “The mighty God” (Isaiah 9:6), the One who “shall grow up before him as a tender plant,” and God’s righteous servant who shall “justify many” (Isaiah 53:2; Isaiah 53:11). The Jews were blind to the Biblical fact that the One they accused of blasphemy was “God... manifest in the flesh” (1 Timothy 3:16), not a mere man claiming to be God. The Bible answers the question of how God can become the God-Man. Man had communion with God when God originally made him. Adam was capable of existing in harmony with God before the fall because he was made in God’s image, after His likeness (Genesis 1:26). However, that harmony was broken by the fall. The fall made the incarnation necessary for the redemption of the elect out from among the depraved posterity of Adam. Hence, the Son of God was made in the “likeness of sinful flesh” (Romans 8:3). At the same time, He retained the image of the Father: Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high (Hebrews 1:3). A seemingly contradictory coexistence in one Person of a human nature-subject to birth, growth, and development-with a Divine nature-not subject to the same development-is to Christians the God-Man. The developing child “filled with wisdom” (Luke 2:40) coexists with “increased in wisdom” (Luke 2:52). The mature God-Man is the One “in whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge” (Colossians 2:3). Coexisting with Him is the one who said He knew not the day and the hour of the day of the Lord (Mark 13:32). The natural mind looks upon these facts as intellectual dualism. They are thought to be inconsistent with any conception one can form of a simple personality. However, these Biblical facts furnish the foundation for the Christian’s hope in the God-appointed God-Man. The one personality in the God-Man has two spheres of existence. The Divine nature is omnipresent, but the human nature is restricted. The Son of Man told Nicodemus that “...no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven” (John 3:13). This statement refutes not only the denial of Jesus Christ’s preexistence but the affirmation of a duality of persons. The human nature the Son of God assumed enabled the God-Man to speak of either nature under whatever name He chose. In His discourse with Nicodemus, He chose to use the name “Son of Man” when speaking of what is proper to the Son of God. He who was invisible in heaven became visible upon earth. He who was restricted in His human nature was unrestricted in His Divine nature; therefore, He spoke of being in heaven while He was upon earth. The omnipresence of the Divine nature and the restriction of the human nature of the God-Man are not more comprehensible than His omniscience in the Divine nature and the limitation of knowledge in the human nature. The following are some Biblical examples of the two spheres of the God-Man: (1) In the God-Man’s infancy, He was “filled with wisdom”; and “Jesus increased in wisdom” (Luke 2:40 Luke 2:52). Thus, wisdom was restricted in only one sphere. (2) Christ said to Nathanael, “Before that Philip called thee, when thou wast under the fig tree, I saw thee” (John 1:48). The omniscience of the Divine nature enabled the God-Man to see Nathanael; whereas, His human nature separated the two by the distance of several miles. (3) Before He reached the grave of Lazarus, Jesus Christ told Martha and Mary that their brother, Lazarus, was dead: “Then said Jesus unto them plainly, Lazarus is dead” (John 11:14). Later, when Christ “was not yet come into the town,” Mary came to Him, fell down at His feet, and said, “Lord, if thou hadst been here, my brother had not died.” The Lord Jesus asked, “Where have ye laid him?” (John 11:30-34). The Divine nature of the God-Man knew Lazarus was dead; however, His human nature did not know where Lazarus was buried. (4) Christ hungered in His human nature (Matthew 4:2). In His Divine nature, He said, “I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever...” (John 6:51). (5) Christ thirsted in His human nature (John 19:28); but in His Divine nature, He said, “...whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst...” (John 4:14). Coming now to the God-Man’s lack of knowledge concerning the day of the Lord, the question is often asked, Is not Christ’s lack of knowledge equivalent with His capability to sin? To affirm that they are equivalent is heresy. The capability to sin, but not lack of knowledge, would indicate corruption of His human nature. The imputation of Adam’s sin to all his posterity cannot apply to Jesus Christ because He is not a human person. He is the Son of God. His human nature is not from fallen Adam; therefore, His Person cannot be counted in Adam. Since guilt is imputed to the person rather than the nature, guilt could never be reckoned to the Divine Person of the Son of God. Having assumed a holy human nature, Christ was not subject to the sentence of death. On the other hand, the God-Man’s lack of knowledge does not indicate any corruption in His human nature. Christ’s conception, birth, and growth were not the fruit of corruption in the human nature. Infallibility does not imply omniscience. According to the Scriptures, infallibility was conferred on the apostles who possessed limited knowledge: For we know in part, and we prophesy in part. But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away (1 Corinthians 13:9-10). For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost (2 Peter 1:21). All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness (2 Timothy 3:16). If Paul, who possessed a fallen nature, spoke infallibly when inspired to give us the Holy Scriptures, although he spoke from a limited knowledge, what about the Son of God who did not possess a fallen nature? Christ spoke nothing but truth, although His human nature possessed limited knowledge. Limitation of knowledge and capability of error are not the same. In the sphere of Christ’s human nature, there was a lack of knowledge, but there was no capability of error. His human nature was subject to His Divine nature. We know that two natures were united in the one Person of Jesus Christ. But to what extent the Divine nature did not overshadow the human is impossible to either know or explain. This is why the incarnation is called a mystery (1 Timothy 3:16). Some things remain a mystery after the incarnation. We do know the human nature was not the residential subject of omniscience. We also know Christ’s first advent was not for the purpose of making known either the day or the hour of the day of the Lord. He was not commissioned as Prophet to make known the time. Christ’s manhood is spoken of as a condition of His prophetical office (Deuteronomy 18:15-22). Christ’s “not knowing the day and hour” of the day of the Lord is better understood if we view the subject in its proper context. The kingdom is covenanted to David’s Son, the Son of Man. The time of the kingdom’s establishment and its consequences are in the Father’s hand (Acts 1:6-7). Therefore, Christ spoke of His lack of knowledge in connection with His messianic relationship to the covenant. The Father had reserved to Himself the times and seasons as a revelation unsuitable for the Son of Man to make known during the time of His first advent. Revelation of the day and hour of the kingdom’s establishment would have prevented the expectation of Christ’s second coming. Faith and hope, with their practical results, are the fruits of the uncertainty of that time. On the other hand, one cannot deny that Jesus Christ had knowledge of the kingdom and its establishment. Predictions are given concerning the Jewish nation and Gentile domination (Matthew 24:1-51; Matthew 25:1-46; Luke 21:1-38). These predictions were also given during the days of His humiliation. Moreover, after His ascension, these same prophecies were verified by the apostles and finally by Jesus Christ in the revelation of Himself. There is an absolute interpenetration of knowledge of the Son with the Father. The knowledge of each was so infinite that each knew the other to perfection: “...no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him” (Matthew 11:27). In the Son of Man, who is also the Son of God, the Divine and human consciousness stand side by side without either suppressing or qualifying the other. The God-Man, therefore, could speak out of either consciousness without any confusion or conflict. Whatever was either said or done by the human nature of the God-Man never had to be stopped or corrected by His Divine nature. Furthermore, whatever was either said or done by the Divine nature was never questioned or resisted by the human nature. Moreover, the Divine nature did not provide some necessary skill to enhance the human nature because it was perfect in its sphere. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 37: 02.09. TEACHERS OF IMPECCABILITY NOT GUILTY DOCETISM ======================================================================== 9. TEACHERS OF IMPECCABILITY ARE NOT GUILTY OF DOCETISM (PART 1) Jesus Christ was not able to sin during the days of His first advent on the earth. Many professing believers say that all the references to Christ’s temptations prove that He was able not to sin. Thus, the issue is between the often heard and read statement of whether Christ “was able not to sin” or “not able to sin.” To some this may seem to make little difference, but the difference is between heresy and truth. The issue could be stated differently. Was there a superior incapacity for sin in Jesus Christ, or did His overcoming of constant temptation prove Him to be the holy One of God? The major point in the life of Christ was the fact that He could not sin. There is unanimity among various denominational creeds concerning the fact that Jesus Christ did not sin, but the Biblical fact that He could not sin is controversial. Diligent students will find great differences of opinion expressed in theological works. Those differences are also found in Reformed works. The fact that Christ could not sin must be approached from Christ’s Person rather than from His human nature. Approaching a study of the Person of Christ by beginning with His human nature is a manifestation of humanism. Does the Bible begin with creation or with the Creator? The Bible begins with God: “IN the beginning God created...” (Genesis 1:1). This statement is neither history nor invention. It is not history because no one was present to record the events for posterity. Furthermore, it was not the work of man’s imagination. Therefore, it had to be a revelation. Humanism starts with a question, but the Bible begins with an assumption. Moreover, the deduction from the assumption is that all truth is a revelation from God, and God does not prove Divine principles to depraved minds. The Person of Christ is a Divine revelation. As the fact of God’s existence is not causally grounded upon the abstract laws of human logic, the impeccability of Christ is not grounded upon humanism. Thus, the subjective idea of God is less a reality than the objective fact. To put it simply, God has more of existence than the thought of Him has existence. As a perfect and infinite Creator cannot be derived from imperfect and finite minds, the absolutely perfect and impeccable Savior cannot be understood by depraved subjectivism. Hence, the heresy of those who argue from what they call the reality of temptation to the ability to sin is evident. They conclude by saying the sinless One associated Himself with the sins of the world. Those who believe Jesus Christ was peccable accuse all who believe He was impeccable of Docetism. There are different forms of Docetism. These forms range from believing Christ had only a phantom body to speaking of Christ’s human nature in such a way as to discredit it from being truly human. Promoters of peccability accuse promoters of impeccability of teaching the latter. The accusation by persons who think Jesus Christ was altogether one as themselves is not difficult to understand. Man’s humanistic concept of God is nothing new. The Psalmist was inspired to testify against Israel: Hear, O my people, and I will speak; O Israel, and I will testify against thee: I am God, even thy God....thou thoughtest that I was altogether such an one as thyself: but I will reprove thee, and set them in order before thine eyes (Psalms 50:7; Psalms 50:21). Since the fall of Adam, man has been impersonating God by saying, “Let us make God in our image, after our likeness.” While those who say Jesus Christ was prone to sin accuse us of speaking incorrectly about Christ’s humanity, the fact is they speak incorrectly about Christ’s Person. The Scriptures will settle the issue. Scripture clearly teaches the following: ...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... (1 John 4:2-3). Christ’s “flesh” (human nature) was not a phantom-an appearance without material substance. Christ was not a ghost walking among the sons of men for more than thirty years. His birth, development, hunger, thirst, and death were not ghostly appearances or apparitions. John spoke not only of seeing but handling the Word of life (1 John 1:1). Christ was seen as the Word in His oneness with the eternal Father. He was not only seen but handled in His human form as the revealer of the Father (John 1:18). Christ’s human nature was in the “likeness of sinful flesh” (Romans 8:3) because the form of a servant which He assumed “was made in the likeness of men” (Php 2:7). The Greek word for “likeness” in both verses is homoioma, which means likeness or resemblance. This noun is used in other Scriptures (Romans 1:23; Romans 5:14; Romans 6:5; Romans 8:3; Php 2:7; Revelation 9:7). Does this word mean that Christ’s human nature was exactly like man’s fallen human nature, or did it have the resemblance of fallen human nature? Opponents to Christ’s impeccability argue that if His human nature was only similar, it was not a true human nature. One might as well argue that fallen man is not truly man since the fall because fallen human nature is not exactly what it was before that fall. Human nature does not have to be fallen to be real. Furthermore, Christ’s human nature, conceived by the Holy Spirit in the womb of the virgin, was real even though it was not brought into existence the same way as that of Adam. Jesus Christ shared the flesh and blood of human nature in the incarnation, but He did not share human nature’s depravity. Christ’s sharing nature’s “flesh” was that He might be “put to death in the flesh” (1 Peter 3:18). His sharing nature’s “blood” was for the purpose of redemption (Romans 3:24-26; Romans 5:9; Hebrews 9:22; Hebrews 10:10-14; Revelation 1:5). On the other hand, if Christ had shared nature’s depravity, He would have been disqualified as the redeemer of the elect. There is a great difference between the descendants of Adam coming into the world “in sinful flesh” and the eternal Son of God coming into the world “in the likeness of sinful flesh.” One must know the difference between words with the prefixes homo (same) and homoi (like). This reminds us of the truth proclaimed by Athanasius and the heresy by Arius. Docetism is the proclamation of a Christ that was incapable of being the Mediator between God and men because He would not be the “man Christ Jesus [anthropos Christos Hiesous]” (1 Timothy 2:5). Peter’s message on the day of Pentecost was “Jesus of Nazareth, a man [andra] approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs...” (Acts 2:22). Unlike those who embrace Docetism, those who embrace the heresy that Jesus Christ was peccable proclaim a “Jesus” who is incapable of being Savior because he himself was in need of salvation. Hence, both views are heretical because they fail to proclaim the Biblical view of the one Mediator between God and men. The true Mediator must possess two absolutely holy natures in order to represent both God and man. Those who teach Docetism deny the incarnation, and those who teach peccability deny Christ’s holy human nature. Opponents to the impeccability of Christ can get no comfort from quoting Hebrews 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....” The Greek word for “tempted” is a perfect passive participle of the verb peiradzo, which means to test, try, or tempt. Since Jesus Christ cannot be tempted, because the word has an evil connotation, the perfect passive participle can be translated “having been tested or tried.” The word that must not be overlooked is the Greek word homoiotes, which means “likeness.” Hence, Christ was tested in the “likeness” (in a similar manner) but not in exactly the same way we are. Proof of this is seen in the fact that we have been “planted together in the likeness [homoioma]” of Christ’s death. This means that our death “to” sin is not identical with Christ’s death “for” sin. Furthermore, the statement that it was necessary for Christ “to be made like [homoioo] unto his brethren” of Hebrews 2:17 does not mean that He was made exactly like His brethren. Those who believe Christ was susceptible to sin teach that He was “made like unto His brethren” when it comes to a nature capable of sinning. Furthermore, they say He was tempted in the same way that fallen men are tempted. To say Jesus Christ was made a sinner like depraved men is blasphemy. Furthermore, to say that Christ could not sympathize with us unless He was tempted as we are is also blasphemy. Jesus Christ must partake of flesh and blood in order to die. Moreover, He must be the “seed of the woman” to be our kinsman Redeemer (Genesis 3:15; Galatians 4:4), the “seed of Abraham” to inherit the promises (Galatians 3:16), and the “seed of David” to claim the theocratic throne (1 Chronicles 22:10; Luke 1:30-35). Does this sound like Docetism? ======================================================================== CHAPTER 38: 02.10. TEACHERS OF IMPECCABILITY NOT GUILTY DOCETISM ======================================================================== TEACHERS OF IMPECCABILITY ARE NOT GUILTY OF DOCETISM (PART II) Docetism can never yield to the incarnation and crucifixion of Christ. Scripture is clear concerning the importance of the incarnation. Thus, the human nature of Jesus Christ cannot be considered as something unimportant in God’s purpose of redemption. Humanism is nowhere so strongly condemned as it is in the Biblical facts of the incarnation and crucifixion of Jesus Christ. Two holy things were united in the incarnation. Clearly, two unholy things cannot make a holy thing. Furthermore, one holy thing and one unholy thing cannot make a holy thing. This brings us to consider two important verses in the study of the incarnation: But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost (Matthew 1:20). And the angel answered and said unto her, 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). Both participles in “conceived in her” of Matthew 1:20 and “born of thee” of Luke 1:35 are from the verb gennao, which means to beget or to generate. The Greek word gennethen of Matthew 1:20 is a first aorist passive participle which means “having been begotten.” The Greek word gennomenon of Luke 1:35 is a present passive participle, which means “being begotten.” The passive voice means the subject is acted upon rather than acting or participating in the action. The angel Gabriel told Mary that she would conceive in her womb and bring forth a Son: “...behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS” (Luke 1:31). The verb “conceive” is future middle indicative of sullambano, which means to conceive or become pregnant. The middle voice means that Mary participated in the conception. There is no contradiction between this verse and Matthew 1:20. Matthew used the word for “begotten” and Luke used the word for “becoming pregnant.” Mary would not only conceive a Son but carry Him during the period of gestation and give Him birth. The Greek word for “bring forth” is future middle indicative of tikto, which means to bear or bring forth. Furthermore, when Mary would give birth to her unique Son, she should call His name Jesus. The Greek word for “call” is future active indicative of kaleo, which means to call. Hence, Mary would call His name Jesus. The conception by Mary did not violate biological law. The Holy Spirit begat, and Mary conceived. The same Greek verb (sullambano) is used when speaking of not only Mary but her cousin, Elisabeth, who “...conceived a son in her old age...” (Luke 1:36). The angel could not tell Mary that the “holy thing” would be “begotten” by her, but he could tell her that the “holy thing” would be “conceived” by her. In the biological sense, the impregnation of Mary was miraculous. The begetting by the Holy Spirit and the conception in Mary’s womb produced “that holy thing.” In biological conception, the male sperm is received by the female ovum. There is no question as to the holiness of the sperm provided by the Holy Spirit. But what about the ovum provided by Mary, who spoke of Jesus Christ as her Savior? (Luke 1:46-47). God brought the first man into the world without either a male sperm or a female ovum. Therefore, it is not unbelievable that God could bring the God-Man into existence without a human male sperm. (See Romans 5:15-19; 1 Corinthians 15:47.) In order for two holy things to be united in conception, Mary’s ovum had to be made holy by the Holy Spirit. This was accomplished by the Holy Spirit coming upon her and the power of the Most High overshadowing her. The verb for “overshadow” is the future active indicative of episkiadzo, which means to overshadow or shed influence upon. This verb is used in connection with not only the impregnation of Mary but the “overshadowing cloud” on the mount of transfiguration (Matthew 17:5). The sperm and the ovum were both holy before they came together in conception. Hence, God united what the Holy Spirit produced with what Mary produced by her sanctified reproductive organs thus forming the God-Man. From this point, faith must venture no further, but God-given faith rests its case with the sanctifying influence of the Holy Spirit upon the virgin, Mary. Without His incarnation, there could have been no crucifixion of Jesus of Nazareth, a Man approved of God, for the sins of the elect (Acts 2:22-23). God with man in the Person of the God-Man condemns humanism. He will be “with us,” the elect, until the end of the age because He was with us in His sacrifice on the cross. Thus, He reconciled us to God by His satisfaction of Divine justice. This Biblical view of the incarnation and crucifixion is as far removed from Docetism as light from darkness. Job asked a question and immediately answered it: “Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean? not one” (Job 14:4). Job had a sense of the need to be clean, but he also knew that neither he nor any other man could make him clean. Bildad asked the same question with a more direct reference to the subject of the incarnation: “...how can he be clean that is born of a woman?” (Job 25:4). Bildad was concerned about how man could be justified with God. He asked, “How then can man be justified with God?” No doubt Bildad knew that man might be justified with man but not with God. He knew the importance of man being justified with God. When man is justified with God, no man can condemn him (Romans 8:33-34). God’s justification of man is on the basis of the impeccable Savior’s word (Romans 3:24-26). The important question is not what man can do to be justified with God but what the eternal Son had to become and do in order for man to be justified with God. We know that a Divine Person had to be united to a human nature (Hebrews 2:11-14; 1 Timothy 3:16; Galatians 4:4; Romans 1:3-4; Romans 8:3; Romans 9:5). That human nature is called “that holy thing” (Luke 1:35). The question is often asked, why is the participle gennomenon (being begotten) neuter? The only answer that can be given is that it refers to the nature. Thus, to gennomenon hagion is translated “the holy thing which is being begotten” shall be called the Son of God. The eternal Son was not “being begotten,” but the nature He was assuming was. Jesus Christ was the “only begotten Son” (John 3:16) before His human nature was begotten for the “only begotten God” (John 1:18 NASB) to assume. The Person of Jesus Christ is one, but His Divine and human natures are distinct. This is not difficult to understand. For example, man has material and immaterial natures. The material is not the immaterial and vice versa. Therefore, the God-Man has two natures, but the natures are preserved without disorder, and His Person is complete without division. Hence, the God-Man may be designated by either Divine or human titles-Son of God or Son of Man. Furthermore, attributes of one nature are attributed to Jesus Christ while His Person is designated by a title applying to the other nature. Divine titles and human actions are attributed to Him: ...feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood (Acts 20:28); ...they would not have crucified the Lord of glory (1 Corinthians 2:8); God...gave his only begotten Son (John 3:16); He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all... (Romans 8:32); And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS. He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest...(Luke 1:31-32). On the other hand, Divine attributes are ascribed to Jesus Christ who is designated by human titles: And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven (John 3:13); What and if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before? (John 6:62); Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen (Romans 9:5); ...Worthy is the Lamb that was slain to receive power, and riches, and wisdom, and strength, and honour, and glory, and blessing (Revelation 5:12). Jesus Christ was no less God-Man when He died, and He was no more than God-Man when He performed His miracles. There was never any conflict between His two natures. The attributes of both natures were accredited to the one Person, but it must be emphasized that what was peculiar to one nature was never attributed to the other. For example, hunger, weariness, sleep, and death could never be assigned to the Divine nature. Furthermore, walking on water, stilling the storm, and raising the dead could never be ascribed to the human nature. These are actions of the one Mediator between God and men performing acts that pertain to both natures. This is not dualism. Christ’s actions as Mediator are in both His Divine and human natures. Some actions involve the attributes of the Divine nature and some the human nature. Whatever actions He performed in either nature could never conflict with His essential nature as the Holy One of God. Therefore, the actions involving the Divine nature are performed in conformity to the inherent principle and power of His Divine nature. Moreover, His actions involving the human nature were performed in conformity to the inherent principle and power of His human nature. Thus, the one Person of the God-Man performed the actions of both natures. Understanding this Biblical fact, one sees the heresy of both Docetism and the belief that Jesus Christ was peccable. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 39: 02.11. EXEGESIS OF SCRIPTURE PROVES IMPECCABILITY ======================================================================== 11. EXEGESIS OF SCRIPTURE PROVES IMPECCABILITY Anyone who gives a correct exegesis of any passage of Scripture will find that his interpretation will agree in principle with everyone else who does the same. An exegete is one who disregards subjectivism and relies on the objective truth in the passage according to its grammatical construction. The grammatical construction of the Biblical text never changes. But ideas formed subjectively change with every “gut feeling,” an expression often heard in our generation. On the other hand, when anyone reads into a passage a meaning which the text will not grammatically allow, it is called eisigesis. An eisigete is one who is either filled with prejudice or follows his “gut feeling.” This is subjectivism. Paul said, “Prove all things; hold fast that which is good” (1 Thessalonians 5:21). The word for “prove” is present active imperative of the verb dokimadzo, which means to prove by trial, to examine or scrutinize, or to approve after trial by discernment. The Greek word was derived from the testing of metals. Thus, it not only means to test but also carries the idea of approving as a result of the test. However, testing is insufficient unless that which is approved is embraced and maintained. There is only one effective way to arrive at the truth. David said that God will teach the “meek.” “The meek will he guide in judgment: and the meek will he teach his way” (Psalms 25:9). The word “meek” carries the idea of humility. The meek or humble prefer suffering wrong to doing wrong. There are two Hebrew words for meekness, one applying to those who patiently suffer without resistance and the other to those who willingly endure with submission what they might escape. Meekness is not weakness. It comes with the knowledge of one’s total dependence upon God. The elect have something to learn, and God has something to teach them. Therefore, the humble person alone is teachable. Christians need to know the difference between passive and meek church members. Those who are merely passive are passive not only to Biblical principles but to putting into practice those to which they have been subjected. Realization that God is the Teacher eliminates pride. Man’s intelligence has assumed a superb confidence in itself, thinking it can solve all problems and surmount all obstacles. Manifesting humility is not in the power of such ignorance because true humility is the fruit of Divine grace. In fact, such ignorance nourishes pride. One who possesses grace has no problem understanding that pride is a manifestation of lack of knowledge. The degree of pride is determined by the degree of destitution of knowledge. The ignorance under discussion is not academic but spiritual. The meek person recognizes that truth is both personal and purposeful. It is not only for us but will have an effect on us. This is the reason the Christian goes from faith to faith, strength to strength, and glory to glory. Thus, “...the path of the just is as the shining light, that shineth more and more unto the perfect day” (Proverbs 4:18). Temptation is not a synonym for trial, although both come from the same Greek word. A synonym is a word having the same or nearly the same meaning as another. Although the Greek verb peiradzo means, according to Greek lexicons, to test, to try, or to tempt, to test cannot be used as a synonym for to tempt in certain cases. The difference between the two is too great, as James 1:2; James 1:12-14 prove. Some may think this writer is laboring to prove a point, but before this discourse is completed the student of Scripture will see the value of such scrutiny. A diligent study of the noun peirasmos and the verb peiradzo is needed because of the way they are used in their translations. Even those who believe and teach that Christ could not sin use the terms “temptation” and “trial” indiscriminately. In many works on Christology, one will find such statements as “Christ could not be tempted because God cannot be tempted.” The same writer may discuss the purpose of Jesus Christ being subjected to the “testings” of Satan. Following this, one may come to reasons why Christ was “tempted.” Such reasons as the incarnation, humiliation, and being able to sympathize with His own who are being tempted are discussed. The writer can sympathize with those who use the terms of “temptation” and “trial” indiscriminately. He, too, has done the same thing. However, after a diligent study of James 1:2-15, the writer saw the need for making a study of the Greek noun peirasmos and the verb peiradzo in every passage where they are used in the New Testament. After such a study, one cannot help seeing the difference between the terms “temptation” and “trial.” Although the writer has never believed Christ was peccable, he has taught that Christ’s temptability does not imply susceptibility. A deeper study into the subject shows one that Christ was not tempted. The verb peiradzo is used in the sense of either to try or test or to solicit someone to do wrong. This verb is used 39 times in the New Testament. In 31 of the 39 times, it is translated “tempted,” “to be tempted,” “tempting,” and “tempt.” In the other eight references, it is translated “prove” (John 6:6), “assayed” (Acts 16:7), “hath gone about” (Acts 24:6), “examine” (2 Corinthians 13:5), “tried” (Hebrews 11:17; Revelation 2:2; Revelation 2:10), and “to try” (Revelation 3:10). In sixteen of the references where the verb is used, Jesus Christ is involved, and two speak of God (Acts 15:10; Hebrews 3:9). The noun peirasmos is used 21 times in the New Testament. It is translated “temptation” in all but one place. It is translated “trial” in 1 Peter 4:12. There are only two verses where the word is used in reference to Jesus Christ (Luke 4:13; Luke 22:28). Since James said, “...God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man” (James 1:13), what is the meaning of the statement “lead us not into temptation” of Matthew 6:13 in the model prayer Christ taught His disciples? The verb “lead” is eisenegkes, first aorist active subjunctive of eisphero, which means “to bring in or into.” The active subjunctive means “do not bring us into.” Would God, who does not solicit men to do evil, teach His disciples to pray “do not lead us into solicitation to do evil”? Since it is contrary to Scripture for God to bring His people into temptation, the noun peirasmos can also mean trial. Is one incorrect to pray that he may be saved from trial? Trial is the common lot of God’s people (James 1:2; James 1:12; 1 Peter 1:6-7; 1 Peter 4:12). The verb “bring” (eisenegkes) of Matthew 6:13 is active. Thus, it represents God as the active Agent who subjects His people to trials but not to solicitation to evil. When this verse is seen in its proper context with the coming kingdom, it is proper to say the Jews will pray to be spared “the hour of trial” (horas tou peirasmou) (Revelation 3:10). That “trial” is not the same as the “common trial” of all saints for all time, Old and New Testament believers alike. This proves that a correct concept of eschatology is necessary for the interpretation of many Scriptures. Since all Scripture is God-breathed (theopneustos), the Spirit of God would not direct inspired penmen to use words that would not apply to either the Son of God or His people. Like many English words, Greek words also can be used in more than one way. The context determines their usage. In all of Christ’s “trials” or “testings,” He had to deal only with that which came from without. Hence, His trials or testings in the wilderness were Divine attestations. The challenge came from God. This is the reason we are told, “Then was Jesus led up by [hupo] the Spirit into the wilderness to be tested by [hupo] the devil” (Matthew 4:1). The verb “led up” is aorist passive indicative of anago, which means to lead up or convey up from a lower to a higher place. The verb in Mark 1:12 is present active indicative of ekballo, which means to thrust forth or to send forth. The verb in Luke 4:1 is imperfect passive of ago, which means to lead or to bring. When a country is united, its only thought is to oppose the enemy without and prove the unity of the country. However, if the country is divided, the first thing is to look for traitors within. There are two natures within Christians. They are described as “...the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would” (Galatians 5:17). (See Romans 7:14-25.) Christians, therefore, have a divided house. There is an inward conflict between the Spirit and the flesh. There is a traitor within as well as without. Jesus Christ had two natures, but both were holy; therefore, there was no conflict within. God’s challenge to Satan, or those working under his direction, was a Divine testimony that nothing but absolute unity of the two holy natures would be found. Wood tested by fire turns to ash. Water tested by fire evaporates. But pure gold tested by fire remains gold. Pure gold has nothing to be eliminated. Christians lose their dross when they are tested, but who will be guilty of blasphemy by saying there was any dross in the God-Man that had to be eliminated by a “fiery trial” (purosis, a fiery test of trying circumstances) (1 Peter 4:12)? There are two laws within Christians (Romans 7:22-23), but there is only one law, the law of God, in Jesus Christ. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 40: 02.12. CHRIST AFFIRMED HIS IMPECCABILITY ======================================================================== 12. CHRIST AFFIRMED HIS IMPECCABILITY The first lesson on the exegesis of Scripture was an introduction to a number of key passages dealing with Christ’s impeccability. Scriptures concerning Christ’s personal claims and claims by the inspired penmen concerning Christ’s impeccability will be exegeted. No apology is in order for disputing with those who believe and teach that Jesus Christ was peccable during the days of His humiliation. The Greek verb dialegomai means to discourse, argue, reason, dispute, or contend. It is translated “reasoned” (Acts 17:2; Acts 18:4; Acts 24:25), “disputed” (Mark 9:34; Acts 17:17; Jude 1:9), “disputing” (Acts 19:8-9; Acts 24:12), “preached” (Acts 20:7), “preaching” (Acts 20:9), and “speaketh” (Hebrews 12:5). Although controversy is often heated and one-sided, it is not an unhealthy sign. Some of the greatest books ever written or sermons ever preached were the result of controversy. Furthermore, some of the greatest experiences in life are the products of controversy. This, however, is no justification for confusion and turmoil in the local assembly. (See Ephesians 4:1-32.) There is no way to avoid controversy in the Christian life. If ordinary life is made up of endless controversy, how much more the Christian life. The believer has controversy in the natural and the spiritual life. However, without a self-evident principle to determine on which side lies the burden of proof, controversy could be endless. This brings us to the importance of semantics. Semantics is the study of signification, classification, and changes in meaning. A good semanticist will be diligent in his research of meaning. Therefore, a study of words is most important in polemics, the art of controversy. False principles and false rules of interpretation lie at the foundation of false doctrine. However, the most important issue in regard to religious questions is not whether they are useful or injurious but whether they are founded on Scripture. Therefore, so-called religious tradition or success is unimportant. Everything which claims validity must submit its exegetical evidence before it can be rationally received. Furthermore, everything believed must rest on Biblical evidence; otherwise, it cannot be rationally retained. The Bible is our only standard; therefore, anything not found in the Scriptures cannot be proved by the Scriptures. Jesus Christ proved His impeccability in His debate with the religious Jews when He said, “Which of you convinceth me of sin?” (John 8:46). The Jews brought ten accusations against the Son of God in John 8:1-59 - (1) “thy record is not true” (John 8:13); (2) “Where is thy Father?” (John 8:10); (3) “Will he kill himself?” (John 8:22); (4) “Who art thou?” (John 8:25); (5) “how sayest thou, Ye shall be made free?” (John 8:33); (6) “Abraham is our father” (John 8:39); (7) “We be not born of fornication” (John 8:41); (8) “thou art a Samaritan, and hast a devil?” (John 8:48); (9) “Art thou greater than our father Abraham, which is dead?” (John 8:53); and (10) “Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham?” (John 8:57). The Jews had no indignation against adultery, nor any love for the law, but they had intense hatred for the Son of God. During the running debate with the Jews, Christ said, “Which [who] of you convinceth me of sin?” (John 8:46). The Greek verb for “convinceth” is elegchei, present active indicative of elegko, which means to put to test; to convict; to refute; to detect, lay bare, or expose; to experience conviction. Hence, the word means more than the accusation of sin. Sin was never experienced by Jesus Christ in all of His trials. Moreover, sin never penetrated His holy conscience. The Jews must go beyond their accusation to prove their charge against the Son of God. The fact that Christ could not be convicted of sin proves His impeccability. The case of Christ’s impeccability is made stronger by the use of a noun rather than a verb in John 8:46. It is not who of you convicts me of “sinning,” but “Who [tis] of you convicts me of sin?” Christ made it plain not only by the verb elegcho but the noun hamartia that sin had never entered His holy conscience. He gave the reason why sin did not enter. The Jews were also challenged to detect or expose any corruption in His holy nature. One of the main points in the debate between Christ and the Jews was with respect to Christ’s human nature. The Jews did not know that Christ was the Son of God and that God was His Father. They asked Him: “Where is thy Father? Jesus answered, Ye neither know me, nor my Father: if ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also” (John 8:19). The Jews boasted of God, but they did not know Him. The knowledge of the Son and of the Father go together. Ignorance of Christ and of God go together. The climax of what the Jews thought of Christ’s human nature is in their seventh accusation: “We be not born of fornication” (John 8:41). This was their way of saying Christ’s conception was illegitimate. Their next accusation is understandable: “...thou art a Samaritan, and hast a devil?” (John 8:48). Unable to answer Christ, the Jews, like all enemies of truth today, resorted to ridicule and blasphemy. One does not fully state the truth of Christ’s glorious Person by saying, “He was able not to sin.” Such a statement is based on the concept that since temptation and sin are distinct, to be tempted is not to sin. The conclusion of this concept is that temptability does not imply depravity. However, the fallacy of this theory simply makes Jesus Christ sinless. One must affirm that Christ was not sinless because He refused to sin but He refused to sin because He was incapable of being tempted. Furthermore, He was incapable of being tempted because He was absolutely holy. No one is lured, enticed, inveigled, or tempted unless he has a weakness within. The aforementioned verbs describe a person whose right way is questioned by suggesting a wrong way. Lure implies the action of an irresistible influence, like the fishing lure used by sportsmen. Entice adds to lure a strong suggestion of artfulness. Inveigle implies the use of deceit and flattery. Tempt means to entice into evil through hope of pleasure or gain. Satan is the master tempter, but to suggest that the Person of Christ could be lured, enticed, inveigled, or tempted “inwardly” is a denial of His absolute holiness. To say that temptation is not sin is failure to distinguish between outward enticement and inward desire. Inward desire is sinful before the outward act is committed. Since there was no inward desire, due to absolute holiness in Christ, everything suggested by Satan was so repugnant He could not entertain such an idea. The holiness of God is opposed to sin in every form and degree: “Thou art of purer eyes than to behold evil, and canst not look on iniquity...” (Habakkuk 1:13). Jesus Christ could not be convicted of sin; therefore, no outward evil suggestion could penetrate the holy Person of Christ. Christ’s statement to the Jews who questioned His nature is applicable to all who do the same today: He that is of God heareth God’s words: ye therefore hear them not, because ye are not of God (John 8:47). The Lord Jesus had already told the Jews that they could not understand His speech because they could not hear His word (John 8:43). Now, He stated the reason: “because ye are not of God.” Hence, the word of God must never be watered down to satisfy depraved minds. Hearing God’s word implies the attention of the body, intention of the mind, and retention of the memory, all of which are the fruit of grace. The fourteenth chapter of John is one of the favorite chapters of Christians. After comforting the disciples concerning His second coming, Christ promised them the Holy Spirit who would be their Comforter between His first and second advents. The Holy Spirit comes not only to regenerate the elect but to promote our hearts in affections, which were formed in us by the communication of God’s love in regeneration. As the Captain of our salvation, Jesus Christ is leading the elect unto glory (Hebrews 2:10). What greater assurance could the Captain of the elect’s salvation give to His own than “...for the prince of this world cometh, and hath nothing in me”? (John 14:30). The Savior of the elect knew that Satan was already gathering his forces to apprehend the Son of God as though He were a common criminal. Judas was at hand, and in him Satan was beginning to make his move. Satan’s one purpose was to thwart God’s redemptive act. The appearance of victory for Satan turned out to be his defeat: 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 had the power of death, that is, the devil (Hebrews 2:14). And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it (Colossians 2:15). Christ’s assertion, “Satan has nothing in me,” is another proof of His impeccability. The Greek text reads, kai en emoi ouk echei ouden - “And in me he has nothing.” In all men, even Christians, there is corruption with which Satan may fasten his suggestions and inflame their corrupt desires. Contrarily, there is nothing in Christ upon which he may fasten his evil suggestions. This verse is not talking about Christ resisting temptation but the fact that Satan has nothing in Christ’s Person that could receive any solicitation to do something wrong. This is impeccability. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 41: 02.13. THERE WAS NO SIN IN THE INCARNATE CHRIST ======================================================================== 13. THERE WAS NO SIN IN THE INCARNATE CHRIST Exegesis of Scripture relating to Christ’s impeccability given by His disciples has a significant order. John spoke of Christ’s impeccability in relation to the incarnation: “And ye know that he was manifested to take away our sins, and in him is no sin” (1 John 3:5). He had no sin nature. Peter spoke of Christ’s impeccability in relation to His earthly life: “...Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps: Who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth” (1 Peter 2:21-22). He did no sin. Paul spoke of Christ’s impeccability in association with His death: “For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him” (2 Corinthians 5:21). He knew no sin. This order will be followed in the remaining lessons on Christ’s impeccability. The apostle John placed great importance on the correct concept of the incarnation: ...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... (1 John 4:2-3). The Greek word eleluthota is a perfect participle of the verb erchomai which means to come. Thus, the perfect participle means “having come” in the flesh, a past completed act with continuing results. The force of the perfect denotes the oneness of His Divine-human Person as an abiding certainty. To confess Jesus Christ “having come in the flesh” is to confess the Godhead dwelling “bodily” in the second Person in the divine Triunity. The word “flesh” is sarki, locative singular of sarx, which refers to Christ’s human nature. The negative clause in the Greek does not use the name “Christ.” John used “Jesus” with the definite article to stress that it was “the Jesus” whom the apostles preached that the spirit of antichrist rejected. Confessing that Jesus Christ has come to the inhabited earth in human nature involves a very important subject. Was Christ’s human nature peccable or impeccable? The verb “confesseth” is homologei, present active indicative of the verb homologeo, which means to confess, speak in accordance with, or adopt the same terms of language. One who believes that Christ’s human nature was impeccable speaks in accordance with Scripture which says: “...he was manifested [ephanerothe, first aorist passive indicative of phaneroo, which means to be personally manifested, Colossians 3:4; 1 Peter 1:20; 1 John 3:5] to take away our sins; and in him is no sin” (1 John 3:5). The word “sin” is a noun, and it means that Jesus Christ was not personally manifested in a sinful nature. Persons who teach that Christ was peccable do not speak in accordance with or adopt the language of Scripture. They believe He could sin; therefore, they are not of God. The Holy Spirit does not apply the work of a “peccable christ” to the hearts of men. Furthermore, He does not lead unregenerate men to embrace a peccable savior in what religionists call “a salvation experience.” Truth never appears without its counterfeits. Tares are found mixed with wheat; hypocrites are found among Christians; false teachers are found working among true ones; and the antichrist will mimic Jesus Christ. Many false prophets had gone out into the world in the days of John’s ministry. Therefore, he was led by the Holy Spirit in his general Epistle to warn believers: “BELOVED, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world” (1 John 4:1). He said the church in Ephesus had tried them who said they were apostles and found them to be liars (Revelation 2:2). There were many false prophets in John’s day, but their number has increased since that time. Apart from the Biblical assurance that God’s sheep hear the voice of the true Shepherd and will not listen to the voice of strangers (John 10:1-7), a novice would not know what course to take, which one to adopt, or with which congregation to associate. However, this does not mean that warning is unnecessary. “Beloved,” John interjects, “don’t be believing every spirit [”believe" is a present active imperative of pisteuo, to believe], but test [present active imperative of dokimadzo, to prove, try, test, examine] the spirits." Hence, God has given His people a formula whereby they may test the reality of the Christian message, the Christian messenger, and the Christian life. John was saying that we should try before we trust. “Don’t be believing every spirit.” There is the spirit of time and the Spirit of eternity. The spirit of time speaks boastfully of man, the world, and life. The Spirit of eternity speaks of sin, righteousness, and judgment. The spirit of the age applauds, flatters, and pleases men. The Spirit of God reproves, rebukes, and convicts. The spirit of the age talks of the greatness of man, the sufficiency of temporal things, and of a reckless life without responsibility. On the other hand, the Holy Spirit speaks of God’s sovereignty, man’s depravity, and free grace provided for the elect in the Person and work of Jesus Christ who has come in impeccable flesh. There are false philosophies taught by false teachers. The spirit of error falls under the following heads: (1) religious traditions, whether Jewish, Roman Catholic, or Protestant; (2) subjectivism, whether new revelations or personal opinions unsubstantiated by Scripture; (3) neglect of the whole counsel of God by majoring on fragments of Scripture used out of context. Every philosophy must bear the test of Scripture. The Bureau of Standards in Washington is important for our physical lives. God’s bureau of standards for our spiritual lives is much more important. All ministers must be tested. One should “try the spirits” to see if they are of God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world. The persons themselves must be tested, not their skill, talent, or conduct. False teachers transform themselves into the apostles of Christ (2 Corinthians 11:13). They masquerade as Christ’s apostles. The Greek word for “transforming” of 2 Corinthians 11:13 is metaskematidzomenoi, present middle participle of metaskematidzo, which means to change the figure of or to transform. This compound verb is made up of meta, which means “with” in the genitive case or “after” in the accusative case, and skematidzo, which means to fashion or transfigure (1 Corinthians 4:6; 2 Corinthians 11:13-15; Php 3:21). The noun skema is used in 1 Corinthians 7:31 and Php 2:8. Satan was an angel of light before his fall into a position of eternal darkness. He is now directing his servants to transform themselves into angels of light to prepare the world for his own transformation as an angel of light again when he appears as the false messiah. His servants become mighty preachers of philosophy, morality, expediency, rites, ceremonies, humanism, etc. Those who deny that Jesus Christ has come in impeccable flesh are not of God, and this is the spirit of antichrist. Three things are stated about such teachers: (1) “They are of the world...”; (2) “...therefore speak they of the world...”; and (3) “...the world heareth them” (1 John 4:5). 1. False teachers are of the world. The preposition “of” (ek) proves that they are out of the world as a source. This is not the world for which Christ died, the world that is being reconciled to God. The source of false teachers is the world that is lying in the evil one (1 John 5:19). This is the world that believers are admonished not to love (1 John 2:15). The world’s system is hostile to God, because its arrangement, adornment, and order have been made evil by depraved men. 2. False teachers speak of the world. They speak of the wisdom that is suitable to depraved minds. It is said that water does not rise above its source. Therefore, false teachers, whose standard is the world’s system, can have nothing to give but a worldly viewpoint. Peccability is a humanistic concept of Jesus Christ that originated in the world. Every unscriptural doctrine is man-made. The Bible speaks of the “doctrines of men” (Colossians 2:22; Mark 7:7). The “doctrines of men” have no place in them for the “doctrine of Christ” - “Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God...” (2 John 1:9). The Greek word for “doctrine” is didache, which denotes either that which is taught or the act of teaching. The doctrine of Christ in this verse refers to Christ as the standard of teaching given by inspired penmen of God. John did not condemn theological progress in the use of “Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ” (2 John 1:9). The Greek word for “transgresseth” is proagon, present active participle of proago, which means that everyone who goes beyond the teaching of Christ is not of God. He goes beyond the limits of sound doctrine. Is teaching the doctrine of peccability going beyond the doctrine of Christ? Jesus Christ said, “Which one of you convicts Me of sin...?” (John 8:46 NASB). Since there is always more in Christ than we have experienced, there is progress in our understanding of the doctrine of Christ. Progress in understanding, however, does not mean that one ceases to “abide” (menon, present active participle of meno, to stay, continue, or dwell), but it means the one who remains not in the aforementioned teaching of Christ can make no claim of knowing God. 3. The world hears false teachers. Unregenerate men of the world listen to their ministry, approve what they hear, and receive it with pleasure. The quality of those who teach and those who listen is expressed. False teachers teach with the approval of false listeners, and they give false listeners what they want to hear. False listeners refuse what they need, because it is not compatible with their nature. They receive what they like, because it is in harmony with their depraved natures. Moreover, they give heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of demons (1 Timothy 4:1). Christians have the responsibility of testing every person who poses as a representative of God: “...mark them which cause divisions and offenses contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them” (Romans 16:17). The two words that stand out in this text are (1) “mark” and (2) “avoid.” The word “mark” (skopein) is a present active infinitive of the verb skopeo, which means to look at, observe, or beware; to mark. The word “avoid” (ekkliete) is a present active indicative of the verb ekklino, which means to turn away from or avoid. False teachers are to be avoided, because they have leprosy of the head. Head leprosy is worse than bad morals. Such a leper is unfit for either communion or companionship. Under the Levitical system, this leper was pronounced “utterly unclean,” and he was to dwell alone outside the camp (Leviticus 13:44; Leviticus 13:46). ======================================================================== CHAPTER 42: 02.14. CHRIST DID NOT SIN DURING DAYS OF HIS FLESH ======================================================================== 14. CHRIST DID NOT SIN DURING THE DAYS OF HIS FLESH Jesus Christ was “...a lamb without blemish and without spot” (1 Peter 1:19). The Greek word for “without blemish” is amomou, genitive masculine of amomos, which means blameless. It is used seven times and is translated “without blame” (Ephesians 1:4), “without blemish” (Ephesians 5:27; 1 Peter 1:19), “unblameable” (Colossians 1:22), “without spot” (Hebrews 9:14), “faultless” (Jude 1:24), and “without fault” (Revelation 14:5). The word refers to Christ’s complete sinlessness in the two places it is used in connection with Him. Peter used another word for amplification in speaking of Christ’s sinlessness. Hence, the word aspilou, genitive of aspilos, means spotless, unblemished, or pure (1 Timothy 6:14; James 1:27; 1 Peter 1:19; 2 Peter 3:14). It is translated “without spot” and “unspotted.” Metaphorically, the word means free from censure (1 Timothy 6:14) or free from vice (2 Peter 3:14). Christ did not sin in word or deed during the days of His flesh on the earth. Furthermore, not having a sinful nature, He could not entertain a sinful thought. Sinful thoughts always precede either a sinful word or deed. A person is solicited to sin when he is “being drawn out” (exelkomenos, present passive participle of exelko, which means to draw out, away; to lure forth) and “being enticed” (deleadzomenos, present passive participle of deleadzo, which means to bait, catch by a bait; to beguile, allure, entice, or deceive) by his own craving (James 1:14). Jesus Christ in His absolutely holy nature could never crave anything evil in His holy thoughts. Therefore, the sinless life of Christ in the flesh proves He had no sin nature. Hence, He did not sin because in Him was no sin (1 Peter 2:22; 1 John 3:5). No guile (dolos, which means craft, deceit, or guilt) (1 Peter 2:22) was ever found in the mouth of Christ because sin was never conceived in His holy human nature. An internal craving for an external solicitation to some evil is necessary for sin to come into external existence. 1 Peter 2:23 states that when Christ was reviled, He reviled not in return. The Greek word for “reviled” is loidoroumenos, present passive participle of loidoreo, which means to reproach, rail at, or heap abuse upon. When Jesus Christ was made the object of abuse and ridicule, He never retaliated (anteloidorei, imperfect active indicative of antiloidoreo, which means to reproach or revile in return). This compound verb is used only in this verse. The imperfect tense used by Peter denotes the continuous negative reaction of Jesus Christ to all the reproach and abuse heaped upon Him by wicked men during the days of His earthly sojourn. An unholy world hates the holy Savior. Christ said to His disciples: If the world hate you, ye know that it hated me before it hated you. If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you (John 15:18-19). There are two different worlds and loves. One is from heaven, and the other is from hell. The world that lies in darkness loves darkness rather than light: And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved [elegchthe, first aorist passive subjunctive of elegcho, to show one his fault, rebuke, lay bare, or expose] (John 3:19-20). The light of Christ has a twofold effect on all those on whom it shines. The night birds flee from the morning light, while the birds of the day welcome the light with singing. Thus, while the child of darkness flees from Christ, the recipient of light “cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God” (John 3:21). The world’s hatred for Jesus Christ resulted in His suffering by the world. The climax of His suffering was Calvary. Christ said, “When ye have lifted up the Son of man, then shall ye know that I am he...” (John 8:28). “Then shall ye know” is a phrase which denotes recognition of the true character of the holy One of God. His holy character was convincingly manifested in the time of His suffering on the cross. Peter spoke of the impeccable life by showing that He did not sin in 1 Peter 2:22-23. There was no deceit in His mouth. He did not retaliate when He was abused; and when He suffered He threatened (epeilei, imperfect active indicative of apeileo, to threaten-used only here and in Acts 4:17) not, but delivered Himself to the One judging righteously. Suffering is the key word of Peter’s epistle. Christ’s suffering is mentioned in every chapter of I Peter. Suffering preceded His glory (1 Peter 1:11). Christ did not retaliate when He was abused (1 Peter 2:23). A puritan preacher said, “To return good for evil is God-like, good for good is man-like, evil for evil is beast-like, and evil for good is devil-like.” The suffering of Christ was substitutionary (1 Peter 3:18). The just One suffered for the unjust. Christ’s suffering has a practical character for Christians (1 Peter 4:1). The death of Christ for sin applied by the Holy Spirit to the elect results in a practical death of Christians to sin. Finally, the sufferings of Christ have a ministerial character for all ministers of God (1 Peter 5:1). Ministerial suffering is the result not of a general proclamation of some subjects but of the whole counsel of God. In 1 Peter 2:21, Peter states that the impeccable Christ has left His people an example: “...Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example [hupogrammos, a copy to write after. It is from the verb hupographo, to trace letters for copying. Metaphorically, the word is used only in this verse as an example for imitation]....” If Christ had been a peccable person, as many believe, His example would have been no different from anyone with a depraved nature. One might as well pattern his life after a mere man. Jesus Christ is more than a mere man. He is the God-Man, our perfect example. The goal of the Christian life is absolute perfection-not mere human imperfection: Not as though I had already attained, either were already perfect: but I follow after, if that I may apprehend that for which also I am apprehended of Christ Jesus. Brethren, I count not myself to have apprehended: but this one thing I do, forgetting those things which are behind, and reaching forth unto those things which are before, I press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus (Php 3:12-14). Paul desired an experimental knowledge not only of the power of Christ’s resurrection but His sufferings (Php 3:10). Paul entered the Christian race by the righteousness of Christ, after which he sought to run the race successfully by knowing experientially the power of Christ’s resurrection, the joint participation in His sufferings, and the life that would radiate a likeness to His death. Paul spoke three times in Romans 6:1-23 of knowing the experimental value of union with Christ. The power of that experiential knowledge always results in one’s counting himself dead indeed to sin and alive unto God. Therefore, he yields his members unto God (Romans 6:1-13). Every regenerated person is given a perfect position in Christ. Although his condition is imperfect, he has as his goal the example of the impeccable Christ. Throughout his Christian life attainment falls short of the goal, but immaturity does not lessen his responsibility to keep his eyes on the goal. Paul discussed the completion of the Christian race: For our conversation is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ: Who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body, according to the working whereby he is able even to subdue all things unto himself (Php 3:20-21). Paul at the outset expressed his confidence that Christ would complete what He had begun (Php 1:6). Some never give any thought to the completion of their salvation until death strikes someone close to them. Others remain in a state of uncertainty. Scripture, however, has commanded us to give diligence to make our calling and election sure (2 Peter 1:10). The Greek word for “diligence” is an aorist imperative of speudo, which is a command to urge on or to hasten to make our calling and election sure. The Greek word for “sure” is bebaios, which means firm, steadfast, sure, or certain. (See Romans 4:16; 2 Corinthians 1:7; Hebrews 2:2; Hebrews 3:6; Hebrews 3:14; Hebrews 6:19; 2 Peter 1:10; 2 Peter 1:19.) Being confident of what God has begun, Paul led us to its glorious consummation. Since the present is not the believer’s principle state, it should never be viewed separate from the future. The present bears the same relation to the future as incompletion does to completion. Three things are emphasized in Php 3:20-21 - (1) Believers possess a precious fact. Our citizenship is in heaven. The word for “citizenship” is politeuma. It is from politeuo, which means to be a citizen. Here it means to be a citizen in heaven. Hence, our citizenship on earth is in the form of pilgrims and strangers. Therefore, our lives on earth are those of suffering for the cause of Christ, because we cannot conform to this world system (Romans 12:2; 2 Timothy 2:12; 2 Timothy 3:12). (2) Believers have a present continuous hope: “We eagerly wait for a Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ” (NASB). Dissatisfaction with this world causes us to eagerly wait for the coming of our Savior, the perfect example for believers. In His character as “Savior,” saints wait for Him. The “blessed hope” of the saints is the coming of Christ (Titus 2:13). This hope has purifying qualities (1 John 3:2-3). (3) Believers have a prospective glory. It will be the consummation of our salvation, which is the redemption of our bodies and being like our perfect example, Jesus Christ our Savior, Surety, and Priest. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 43: 02.15. CHRIST WHO KNEW NO SIN WAS MADE SIN ======================================================================== 15. CHRIST WHO KNEW NO SIN WAS MADE SIN Every Christian is constantly reminded just how little he knows concerning the Bible. On the other hand, he is amazed that he knows even a little. The only “smart” Christians this writer has ever known, over a period of nearly 50 years in the Lord’s service, have been those who only thought they were. To put knowledge of Divine things in its proper perspective, consider what Paul said to the Ephesian saints: “And to know the love of Christ, which passeth knowledge...” (Ephesians 3:19). Paul’s statement that Christians know the unknowable is not contradictory. Christians know by grace what they could not know by nature. They know by faith what they could not know by reason. Furthermore, believers know increasingly what they cannot know perfectly. Having considered some key verses in which Jesus Christ affirmed His own impeccability, let us now study some passages given by inspired penmen. Paul declared that Christ’s impeccability and sacrificial work are inseparable. The first gives validity to the second: “For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him” (2 Corinthians 5:21). Christ’s holiness and His being made sin are inseparably connected. In order for the apostle to protect himself against saying that God is the author of sin in any form, he affirmed that Christ was without sin. If Christ could have sinned, He would not have been absolutely holy. Furthermore, if He had not been absolutely holy, He could not have provided the redemption necessary for the elect to be reconciled to God. The inseparability of impeccability and redemption is associated with the inseparability of the messenger and his message: And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation; To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation. Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you in Christ’s stead, be ye reconciled to God. For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin: that we might be made the righteousness of God in him (2 Corinthians 5:18-21). The messenger of God loves truth for truth’s sake. He always seeks to have a better understanding of truth in order to be a more effective witness for his Lord and Master. The messenger is called an ambassador for Christ. The Greek word for ambassador is the verb presbeuo. It means to be an elder or an ambassador. It is used only twice in the New Testament, and it is translated ambassador in both 2 Corinthians 5:20 and Ephesians 6:20. The office of ambassador is one of not only distinguishing honor but importance. This office takes precedence over everything else in one’s life. The ambassador’s message is a trumpet that does not give an uncertain sound: “For if the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle?” (1 Corinthians 14:8). His message gives a certain sound because God has not only “given” to him the “ministry of reconciliation” but He has also “committed” to him the “word of reconciliation.” The verbs “given” and “committed” differ. The verb “given” is second aorist active participle of didomi, which means to give or bestow. The ambassadors of whom Paul spoke had been reconciled by God through Christ; furthermore, God had given them the ministry (diakonia, work or office) of proclaiming the message of reconciliation. The verb “committed” is second aorist middle participle of tithemi, which means to assign, appoint, or commit as a matter of charge. God had given them the office, and now they were to participate in the word of reconciliation that had been assigned them. Hence, they were to perform the duties of ambassadors. God’s grace and peace are discovered by the regenerate in hearing the message of one occupying the office of preaching. Satan knows this, and he opposes that office. He succeeds by persuading religionists to substitute flesh-tingling and ear-pleasing activities for the office of preaching. However, recipients of grace know the importance of the office and will submit to no substitute. They rely on what Christ said to the seventy: “He that heareth you heareth me; and he that despiseth you despiseth me; and he that despiseth me despiseth him that sent me” (Luke 10:16). In Christ’s prayer to the Father, He said, “As thou hast sent me into the world, even so have I also sent them into the world” (John 17:18). Although everyone does not occupy the office of ambassador, all Christians should be witnesses on behalf of Christ. Hence, those who have been reconciled to God do not speak theoretically. They speak from lives of experience. There is a difference between objective and subjective reconciliation. Distinction must be made between what Jesus Christ did for the elect on the cross and what takes place within them. The former is objective reconciliation, and the latter is subjective reconciliation. Paul spoke of objective reconciliation when he said, “...God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them” (2 Corinthians 5:19). Objective reconciliation was finished when Jesus Christ died. Therefore, reconciliation began with the offended God rather than the offenders. Objective reconciliation presupposes alienation which has been satisfied by the death of Jesus Christ, thus enabling God to look with favor upon the elect. Objective reconciliation was also the subject of Paul’s statement to the Roman Christians: “For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life” (Romans 5:10). Objective and subjective reconciliation are both of God. The objective is through the work of Jesus Christ on the cross, and the subjective is by the Holy Spirit in regeneration. Since there is a difference between the two, how can reconciliation be compatible with universal redemption? Jesus Christ did not die for all men without distinction. Persons who deny distinctive redemption believe there is a reconciliation which of itself reconciles no one but is the basis for the reconciliation of all who will believe. The word of reconciliation, however, teaches that all who were objectively reconciled at the cross will be subjectively reconciled in the time of God’s love by the Holy Spirit (Ezekiel 16:8; John 3:8). The Son of God who became the Son of Man accomplished His legal work, making it possible for the Father to look upon the elect with favor. Moreover, the Holy Spirit works in the elect, regenerating, maintaining, and completing salvation which is of God. Therefore, all who have been objectively reconciled to God have been or will be subjectively reconciled by the Holy Spirit. Their sins will not be imputed to them, and they shall be made righteous (2 Corinthians 5:19; 2 Corinthians 5:21). The exhortation by ambassadors, “be ye reconciled to God,” was not an invitation for the unregenerate to cooperate in their subjective reconciliation. God is the Reconciler both objectively and subjectively. Like the correlation between faith and justification, it was an exhortation for God-given faith to acknowledge the act of the sovereign God in their reconciliation. This brings us to the very heart of God’s reconciling work. The foundation of reconciliation is the One not knowing sin made sin. “Not knowing sin” of 2 Corinthians 5:21 in the Greek text reads me gnonta hamartian. The word “knowing” is second aorist active participle of ginosko, which means “to know.” The word for “sin” is hamartian, accusative of the noun hamartia. Christ was not personally acquainted with sin because He could not know it experientially. The indication is not that He does not know what sin is because God knows all things. Paul was inspired to amplify Christ’s question: “Which [who] of you convinceth [convicts] me of sin?” (John 8:46). He said Christ had not a personal acquaintance with sin. The reason is that He did not have a nature that could relate with sin. Adam knew Eve intimately, but Jesus Christ knew not sin intimately. Two focal points stand out in 2 Corinthians 5:21 - (1) the incarnation and (2) the crucifixion. Because of Christ’s unnatural begetting, He did not possess man’s natural depravity caused by the fall. The virgin birth explains His impeccable human nature and life, which qualified the Son of Man to be the representative of the elect at Calvary. Thus, the sinless Christ became identified with the sinfulness of the elect as their Substitute. That identification was retroactive because it affected all the elect who came before the incarnation and substitutionary death of the Savior. Furthermore, that identification was prospective because it affects all the elect who come after the incarnation and death of Christ. (See Romans 3:24-26.) Therefore, the purpose of the incarnation and crucifixion was that the elect might be made the righteousness of God in Jesus Christ. The verbs for “made sin” and “made righteous” differ. The verb for “made sin” is epoiesen, first aorist active indicative of poieo, which means to make, form, create, declare, or appoint. Jesus Christ was “appointed” by the Father to be the representative at the cross for the elect. The same inflected form of the verb is used in Acts 2:36 - “Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made [epoiesen] that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.” The Son of God was not only “appointed” to be our substitute, but He was “declared” both Lord and Christ. The Father did not make Jesus Christ sinful, but He made Him sin. It would be blasphemous to say Christ was made a sinner, because He knew no sin. He was not guilty because He was not a transgressor. However, the Son of God was treated as though He were a sinner because sin was imputed to Him. Since the reconciling work of Christ accomplished at Calvary was objective, the imputed sins which He carried up in His body to the cross were also objective. Sin always involves guilt, but objective guilt must not be confused with subjective depravity. Christ’s human nature was not subjectively depraved, but by imputation He could bear the objective guilt of the elect upon the cross. As Christ had imputed guilt without depravity, Christians have depravity without guilt. One must demand an interpretation of “Christ made sin” by those who embrace peccability. 2 Corinthians 5:21 is a favorite verse used by followers of modern Pentecostalism, who have so much to say about “divine healing.” One man said as Christ was made sin for us who knew no sin (of His own); likewise, He was made sick for us who knew no sickness (of His own). Another said he will maintain until death that the flesh of Christ was as rebellious and fallen as ours. He said human nature which is corrupt to the core and black as hell is the human nature the Son of God took upon Himself. Others-not Pentecostals-name a catalog of evil things connected with the word “sin.” Such statements are repugnant to Christians. They know from the text and context that “Christ made sin” refers to His redemptive work on the cross and not to the human nature He assumed in the incarnation. Moreover, His human nature was not made sick or corrupted with evil at the cross. The writer of Hebrews used the word “sin” when speaking of judgment: So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation (Hebrews 9:28). The two words “without sin” (choris hamartias) mean without any reference to His personal judgment upon sin. This took place at His first advent, when He stood in the place of the elect of God and was judged for their sins. There will be a judgment upon nonelect sinners for their sin at Christ’s second coming. This advent will not be related to a sin offering. The verb for “made righteous” is genometha, second aorist subjunctive of ginomai, which means to come into existence, to become, to be changed or converted. Christ was “appointed” to be judged for us at Calvary that we might “become” righteous in that righteousness provided in His death. As the payment of our debt was imputed to Christ who became our debtor, His righteousness was imputed to us for whom the debt was paid. As Christ did not deserve the punishment, we do not deserve the glory. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 44: 02.16. OPPOSITE IMPUTATIONS ARE INSEPARABLE ======================================================================== 16. OPPOSITE IMPUTATIONS ARE INSEPARABLE The inseparability of both Christ’s impeccability and His vicarious work on the cross and His holiness and His being made sin have been studied. A deeper study of these truths plus the added inseparability of the opposite imputations of sins of the elect to Christ and Christ’s righteousness to the elect will now be made. The spiritual horizon of most Christians is very small. Hence, the limit of their perception is due to a lack of growth in grace and knowledge of Christ (2 Peter 3:18). Peter was a striking example of his own inspired statement. A long time expired before Simon grew into Peter. The Lord Jesus Christ said to Peter, “...Thou art Simon the son of Jona; thou shalt be called Cephas, which is by interpretation, a stone” (John 1:42). Life is the best visible commentary upon the effect of the truths of the gospel. Grace and spiritual knowledge grow side by side-the practical and the theoretical. Progress is God’s ordained preventive against falling from steadfastness (2 Peter 3:17). When Peter said, “...grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ,” he placed grace before knowledge because it is the means of knowledge. The way to “stand against the wiles of the devil” (Ephesians 6:11) and to “withstand [to resist] in the evil day” (Ephesians 6:13) is to “grow” (audzanete, present active imperative of audzano, which means to grow or increase) in grace and knowledge of Jesus Christ. There is neither standing nor resisting apart from progression. The imperative mood is not only a command. It is the furtherest mood from reality. Growth is possible because of grace; however, Peter contrasted this with one’s fall from his own steadfastness. A person can never be too far advanced in knowledge to live the Christian life without the necessity for being on guard. Peter knew this by experience. There is a sense in which no one can grow in grace. Grace considered as God’s free favor toward the elect in regeneration cannot grow. The regenerated person can never be in grace more tomorrow than he is today. Consequently, there is neither progression nor retrogression in one’s position in grace. On the other hand, there is a sense in which the Christian grows “in” but not “into” grace. Progressive sanctification is growth in grace. The Divine principle within is grace, which enables one to grow. There are degrees in the development of grace in those positionally sanctified by grace. There is no place in the Christian life where one reaches a spiritual plateau from which there is no further progress. Since Jesus Christ is the object of the Christian’s knowledge, one should have no problem understanding that the infinite Savior can never be comprehended, although by grace He is apprehended. Some have the heretical view that Christ was made guilty by being made sin. Two things are associated with guilt: (1) The guilty person has merited his guilt. (2) The guilty person is guilty because of his depraved condition. To say that Christ is connected in a personal way with either is heretical. The sinless Christ was made sin. It was impossible for the sins of the elect to have been transferred to Christ in such a way as to make Him either subjectively sinful or guilty. He was not involved with depravity. First, Christ could not be made either “sin” as such or “a sinner.” Sin is a personal act which affects oneself and others. Christ “who knew no sin” (2 Corinthians 5:21), “who did no sin” (1 Peter 2:22), and in whom “is no sin” (1 John 3:5) could not be made a sinner. Second, guilt is personal and is incapable of being transferred to Christ. No one is truly guilty who is not personally a transgressor. If Christ was in any sense guilty, He deserved to die and His death could have no merit. He was not guilty and could not be made guilty. However, He was treated as though He were, because He was willing to stand in the place of guilty sinners. A view held by others is that the Greek word hamartia cannot be translated “sin offering.” According to them, it can only be translated “sin.” They do not deny that Jesus Christ was made a sin offering, or a sacrifice for sin; but to them, that is not the same as Christ’s being made sin of 2 Corinthians 5:21. They believe Paul’s statement goes deeper into the problem of human sin; hence, human sin is the reason for Christ’s being made a sacrifice for sin. Christ’s being made sin justifies His being made a sin offering. Another view is that the Greek word for “sin” and the corresponding Hebrew word denote both “sin” and “sin offering.” Hence, “They eat up the sin [sin offering] of my people...” (Hosea 4:8). Those who hold this view conclude that Christ was made a sin offering: (1) by imputation, for our sins were made to meet upon Christ - “the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all” (Isaiah 53:6); and (2) by reputation, for He was reckoned among malefactors - “...he was numbered with the transgressors...” (Isaiah 53:12). There is a threefold reason why God’s judgement must come upon sinners: (1) God’s judgment must come upon sinful men because of what they are by nature: “So then as through one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men...” (Romans 5:18 NASB). Men are sinful before they sin. Therefore, their antecedent sinfulness is not misfortune but real guilt. They sinned in Adam (Romans 5:12). (2) God’s judgment must come upon sinful men because of what they have done. Men are judged according to their works (Revelation 20:12). Like the thief on the cross, all men will recognize that they receive the due reward of their deeds (Luke 23:40-41). (3) God’s judgment must come upon sinful men because of what they have not done: And every one that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand: And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell: and great was the fall of it (Matthew 7:26-27). Sin, therefore, is more than failure to do right. Both omission and commission are because of what men are by nature-sinful. There is also a threefold judgment upon sinful men because of what they are, what they have done, and what they have not done. Jesus Christ, having never sinned (1 Peter 2:22), was qualified to stand in the place of the elect who have sinned. Moreover, He in whom there was no sin (1 John 3:5) was able to stand in the place of the elect for what they have not done. Now comes the real test of one’s Biblical concept of Christ’s substitutionary sacrifice. If Jesus Christ was peccable, which means He had a nature capable of sinning, He would not have been competent to stand in the place of the elect who are sinners by nature. Therefore, those who believe in peccability do not have a Savior who can stand in their place because their savior needs one to stand in his place. What a horrible concept of Jesus Christ. Those who believe Jesus Christ was impeccable have a Representative who stood for them at Calvary. In His holy human nature, He was the Substitute for us who have depraved natures. “...He was manifested to take away our sins...” (1 John 3:5). His sacrifice was perfect because He “offered one sacrifice for sins for ever” (Hebrews 10:12). He was our Substitute because He suffered on our behalf - “the just for the unjust” (1 Peter 3:18). He was also identified with us because He “bare our sins in his own body on the tree” (1 Peter 2:24). Jesus Christ, who needed no reconciliation, objectively reconciled the elect to God at Calvary. Finite man cannot make satisfaction to the infinite God who has been injured by his sin. Sin against the infinite God merits infinite punishment. When one speaks of the Infinite becoming finite in the incarnation, he should consider the effect such a theory has on the substitutionary work of Christ on the cross.The infinite Son of God did not become finite in the incarnation. He assumed a finite human nature. Therefore, the infinity of His Person qualified Jesus Christ to compensate for the eternity of retribution which the sin of finite man against the infinite God demands. If Christ had become finite in the incarnation, He could not have made infinite retribution. Hence, the man-made doctrine of peccability has no one who can satisfy Divine justice for sinful men. On the contrary, the Biblical truth of Christ’s impeccability represents Him as the infinite Savior who by one offering for sin made infinite retribution which suffices for the eternality of punishment. The extent of any crime depends on the relation between the offender and the offended. No crime can be greater than sin against God, against whom all sin is committed. As the representative of God’s people, Jesus Christ stood in the place of the elect at Calvary. He was imputatively appointed sin. The sins of the elect were imputed to Christ, and He was made to bear the penalty in their place. The elect who were as lacking of righteousness as Christ was of sin had the righteousness provided by Christ imputed to them. Christ who knew no sin was appointed sin that the elect who knew no righteousness might become righteous in Him. Imputed righteousness becomes the judicial ground for the bestowal of grace. Christ’s obedience provided a righteousness, thus qualifying the recipients for eternal fellowship with God. The righteousness the elect receive through grace is not God’s inherent righteousness. God’s inherent righteousness refers to His unalterable character. The imputed righteousness of Christ to the elect is the grace righteousness provided by Christ in His work at Calvary. The statement “made sin” cannot mean that Christ became inherently sinful. Furthermore, to be made righteous does not mean the reception of God’s inherent righteousness. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 45: 02.17. SIN ARE FORGIVEN AND SIN IS CONDEMNED ======================================================================== 17. SINS ARE FORGIVEN AND SIN IS CONDEMNED Proper distinction must be made between “sin” and “sins.” Sin is the root of which sins are the fruit. The sinful heart is the source of all kinds of evil: For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies: These are the things which defile a man... (Matthew 15:19-20). Sin is condemned but never forgiven; whereas, sins of the elect are forgiven but the elect are never condemned: THERE is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death. 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 (Romans 8:1-3). God remembers the sins of the reconciled no more; but sin, being a constant companion of the reconciled, can never be forgotten until it is removed in death. One of seven things God promised to do for Israel was this: “I will remember their sin no more” (Jeremiah 31:34). On the other hand, Paul spoke of the law of sin in his members which constantly opposes the law of his mind (Romans 7:23). The law of sin which constantly opposes the law of the mind in the Christian is continually known by God. One must not regard the “old nature” or the “new nature” as the man himself. An informed Christian would not regard either Christ’s “Divine nature” or His “human nature” as the God-Man. Nature and person are different terms: “That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit” (John 3:6). The unbelieving ego is identified with the old nature - “that which is born of the flesh is flesh.” The person united to the “new nature” by regeneration is responsible to mortify the deeds of the “old nature” (Colossians 3:5) - “that which is born of the flesh.” The man who was born of the flesh (unregenerate) is the same man who was born of the Spirit (regenerated). The Spirit of regeneration dwelling in the Christian does not make any change or improvement in the flesh. The regenerated person is associated with conditions brought about by grace. Furthermore, the Spirit never leads him to regard himself in the flesh: ...ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his (Romans 8:9). He is not in the flesh, but the flesh is in him. Moreover, the Spirit does maintain the Christian in self-judgment and personal cleansing: But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.... For if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged (1 Corinthians 11:28; 1 Corinthians 11:31). HAVING therefore these promises, dearly beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God (2 Corinthians 7:1). “Perfecting holiness in the fear of God” touches all of the Christian life until Christ’s return. How can one perfect that which is holy? The goal of this perfection must be viewed eschatologically. Absolute perfection in the Christian life will never take place until the great consummation of all things by the King of kings. Therefore, neither the “perfecting” nor the “fear of God” may be neglected in this life. God has chosen us “that we should be holy and without blame before Him in love” (Ephesians 1:4). Christians are to be established in order that they may be “...unblameable in holiness before God, even our Father, at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ with all his saints” (1 Thessalonians 3:13). They can never slacken their vigilance, in view of the return of Christ. For this reason the Bible never speaks of antecedent absolute perfection apart from the return of Christ. The fluctuating course of the Christian life is not easy to explain. We observe a fluctuating condition of life in Peter; whereas, there was in Paul, for the most part, an unwavering condition of life. The same Holy Spirit possessed both men, but one was more steadfast than the other. Scripture is reticent on why one was more vacillating than the other. However, we must beware of a reckless logic that would make God responsible for sin. True faith does not reason in a manner to blame God for one’s vacillating condition of life but ever presses toward the goal: Not as though I had already attained, either were already perfect: but I follow after, if that I may apprehend that for which also I am apprehended of Christ Jesus (Php 3:12). Throughout Scripture, we run into the idiom of struggle. Hence, a confession of guilt by men in grace who have mountaintop experiences with God is common: If thou, LORD, shouldest mark iniquities, O Lord, who shall stand? (Psalms 130:3). Behold, I am vile; what shall I answer thee? I will lay mine hand upon my mouth.... I have heard of thee by the hearing of the ear: but now mine eye seeth thee. Wherefore I abhor myself, and repent in dust and ashes (Job 40:4; Job 42:5-6:5, 6). Then said I, Woe is me! for I am undone; because I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips: for mine eyes have seen the King, the LORD of hosts (Isaiah 6:5). This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief (1 Timothy 1:15). Guilt reveals itself before the throne of grace. Therefore, believers who understand their justification and view their lives against the backdrop of grace are those who have a deeper consciousness of their own sinfulness. Observe the difference in Peter when, after his obedience to Christ following a night of toiling in the energy of the flesh, he said, “...Depart from me; for I am a sinful man, O Lord” (Luke 5:8); and his boastful statement, “...Though all men shall be offended because of thee, yet will I never be offended” (Matthew 26:33). Peter, like many today, wanted the Lord to bathe in his glory, rather than Peter bathe in Christ’s glory. Too many want to encompass the Lord Jesus Christ with their fidelity and love. However, when believers are enveloped with Christ’s love and faithfulness for His own, they will, like Peter as an obedient saint, say, “I am a sinful man, O Lord.” Job came to a new understanding of God. True self-abhorrence does not come from self-examination but from looking away from self to the God of all grace. Job was satisfied with himself until he, through the mystery of suffering and his complaining against God, was silenced by the sovereign God. God asked Job, “Shall he that contendeth with the Almighty instruct him? he that reproveth God, let him answer it” (Job 40:2). Job, silenced by God, said, “Behold, I am vile; what shall I answer thee...” (Job 40:4). The patriarch acknowledged God’s greatness and was well-pleased that God was justified when He spoke and overcame when He was judged (Romans 3:4). The root of all sin, of both saved and unsaved, is the old sin nature - “that which is born of the flesh is flesh” (John 3:6). The old nature with which every person is born will never be anything but flesh. Although the old nature is capable of doing good things, it is not capable of being good. There is no difference between the old nature of a regenerate and an unregenerate person. The impartation of the new nature makes the distinction. Regenerate man has the restraint of grace; whereas, the unregenerate man is without grace. The old nature of the unregenerate may be restrained by culture, but it remains the old nature. Since “freedom” is a favorite topic today, it should be viewed from four perspectives. First, Adam was free to do either good or evil. In his peccable nature, he chose to do evil. Second, the descendants of Adam are free to do only evil. All the religious talk about man’s free will is a misnomer. Free will can be applied only to God; therefore, to apply free will to man is a misapplied designation. Free will is a Divine term which signifies Divine power. There is no law to restrain God because He is His own law. Moreover, there is no power to overcome Him because He is omnipotent. If God acted by any will other than His own, it would cease to be God’s will. If God’s will were determined by man’s will, God’s will would not be free. Those who ascribe salvation to man’s free will know nothing of grace. The first principle the recipient of grace learns is that he has neither will nor power, but God gives both. Hence, the descendants of Adam are free to do according to their fallen nature which is only evil. Third, Christians are free to do good, but they also have freedom to do some evil. If the latter were not true, Christians would not be constantly warned by Scripture. They would not have their own experiences and Bible examples of believers’ sinning. Fourth, consummation of redemption when the old nature is put off in death will render saints free to do only good in heaven. Sins of the elect are forgiven, but sin is condemned. Man is a material and an immaterial creature-body and soul. His fall resulted in spiritual and physical death. Therefore, man’s redemption includes his soul and body. Man’s sins prove to be the fruit of his sin nature. On the other hand, Christ’s being made an offering for sins and sin proves the impeccability of His human nature. Christ did no sin because in Him was no sinful nature. As the God-Man, Jesus Christ was the sacrifice and the priest who offered the sacrifice. He died spiritually and physically for the elect. Christ passively atoned for sins the elect actively committed by being made an offering for sins. The verbs “stricken,” “smitten,” “afflicted,” “wounded,” and “bruised” of Isaiah 53:1-12 signify that Christ was passive. On the contrary, men are passive but Christ was active in death. The verb Paul used when he said he was “ready to be offered” of 2 Timothy 4:6 was the present passive indicative of the Greek verb spendo, which means to be in the act of being sacrificed in the cause of Christ. Jesus Christ used an active verb to speak of His death (John 10:17-18; Hebrews 7:26). How do we reconcile the use of passivity and activity in Christ’s being made an offering for sins and for sin? The two aspects of Christ’s sacrifice are seen in His passivity when the Father “made him sin” (2 Corinthians 5:21), and in His activity when He laid down His own life (John 10:18). There is no contradiction between Christ’s passivity and His activity. The debt of sins was paid by His three hours of suffering in total darkness. At the end of the darkness, Christ cried, “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” (Mark 15:34). Following this, Christ received the vinegar and said, “It is finished” (tetelestai, perfect passive indicative of teleo, which means “it has been finished”) (John 19:30). Some students of Greek say it means “paid in full.” One more redemptive act remained for Christ to accomplish. This act would reflect His activity. “And He bowed His head, and gave up His spirit” (John 19:30 NASB). The verb “gave up” is paredoken, first aorist active indicative of paradidomi, which means to give over, deliver up, commit, yield, or dismiss. The sinful nature resident in every Christian results in physical death, but death has been conquered for Christ’s people by His own death. Hence, the sin nature that has been condemned but not forgiven has been actively conquered in the “death of death in the death of Christ,” as stated by John Owen. Paul manifested a holy boldness when he said, “There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus” (Romans 8:1 NASB). Legal condemnation is behind Christians, but it is before those who die in their sins. Christ’s substitutionary work at Calvary for the elect has positionally placed Christians outside the range of legal condemnation. Hence, according to Romans 8:2, “...the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free [first aorist active indicative of eleutheroo, which means liberated once for all] from the law of sin and of death” (NASB). This verse is to be understood in the sense of a power that is operating in believers, thus delivering them from the power of indwelling sin rather than the guilt of sin. The freedom from condemnation of verse 1 embraces more than freedom from guilt. Furthermore, since sin is not destroyed but condemned in Christians, condemnation of sin in the flesh embodies more than legal judgment in the flesh (Romans 8:3). All who are engaged in the conflict between the spirit and the flesh know the ruling power in them is the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus. Knowing that past sins are forgiven and will never be remembered is wonderful. Furthermore, to know that the sins which we commit in the Christian life, because of the power of the sin nature that resides in us, are not imputed to us is amazing (Romans 4:8). Knowledge that the power of indwelling sin, as well as the penalty of sin, has been once for all judged is awesome. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 46: 02.18 CHRIST WAS BOTH PRIEST AND SACRIFICE ======================================================================== 18. CHRIST WAS BOTH PRIEST AND SACRIFICE The expression “Christ’s passive and active obedience” has been a source of much controversy. There are extreme views of the passive and active obedience of Christ. With proper explanations, nothing is wrong with the phrase. Some have said if there is anything in Christ’s intervention for man’s salvation that may be called “passive,” it must be His death. This is the very opposite to the clearness of Scripture that Christ did not die until He gave Himself in death: He poured out himself to death (Isaiah 53:12 NASB). I lay down My life for the sheep.... I lay down My life that I may take it again.... I lay it down on My own initiative (John 10:15; John 10:17-18 NASB). And He bowed His head, and gave up His spirit (John 19:30 NASB). Christ...loved the church and gave Himself up for her (Ephesians 5:25 NASB). When He had made purification of sins, He sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high (Hebrews 1:3 NASB). He has been manifested to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself (Hebrews 9:26 NASB). The body Jesus Christ assumed in the incarnation was completely under His control not only in His death but after His death. For that reason Christ said, “No one has taken it away from Me, but I lay it down on My own initiative. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up again” (John 10:18 NASB). Jesus Christ was both Priest and Sacrifice. Christ was seen in a variety of types in the Old Testament. For example, the sacrificial lamb, as it was offered by the priest, was a type of the sin-bearer. But, as it has been said, types are the best interpreters of New Testament truths only if one bears in mind that the antitype is always of a higher order and superior nature to what prefigured it, as the substance must excel the shadow. Hence, the Christian has no problem recognizing the superior nature of the God-Man Priest, who offered Himself, over the Aaronic priests, who offered up unblemished lambs. The antithesis is between the priests “standing” daily offering their imperfect sacrifices and Christ “sitting” after having offered one perfect sacrifice (Hebrews 10:1-18). The prayers of Christ during the days of His flesh must be viewed in connection with His priestly office (Hebrews 5:1-10). Many take for granted that Hebrews 5:7 teaches that Christ prayed to be saved from death: Who in the days of his flesh, when he had offered up prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears unto him that was able to save him from death, and was heard in that he feared (Hebrews 5:7). Hebrews 5:7-9 must never be read or studied apart from other verses included in Hebrews 5:1-10. Hebrews 5:7-9 are closed between two affirmations of Christ’s priesthood after the order of Melchisedec. Therefore, His prayers must be recognized as the discharge of His priestly function. The passage does not affirm that Christ prayed to be saved from death but that He offered up prayers “unto him that was able to save him from death.” He prayed for that which God was able to give-salvation from death. What Christ actually prayed for is not stated in Hebrews; but the writer, in stating the substance of the prayer, says the prayer was “heard because of His piety” (NASB). The Greek word translated “feared” in the King James Bible is eulabeias, which means reverence to God. The God-Man did not pray to be saved from “dying,” but He prayed to God who was able to raise Him out from the state of death. Matthew records two prayers by Christ in the garden of Gethsemane: (1) “...O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless not as I will, but as thou wilt (Matthew 26:39). (2) ”...O my Father, if this cup may not pass away from me, except I drink it, thy will be done" (Matthew 26:42). The first prayer was spoken out of His sinless human consciousness. The language was that of His sinless fear of separation from the Father; but at the same time, it was the submission of His human will to the Divine will. Christ learned obedience by the things which He suffered (Hebrews 5:8). To say He learned to be obedient is to admit He was a sinner. Obedience is learned in the school of experience. Hence, Christ learned experientially the meaning of obedience. “Being made perfect” of Hebrews 5:9 was not moral perfection because that was always His. However, this perfection was the appointed end of His human experience in the work to which He was ordained. Christ’s second prayer shows that beyond the submission of the human will to the Divine will lies the silencing of the human will. We learn from Luke 22:42 that Christ’s prayer was one of submission to the Father’s will. Shortly after the Lord Jesus prayed, He said, “...the cup which my Father hath given me, shall I not drink it” (John 18:11). Isaiah foretold of Him, “I was not rebellious, neither turned away back” (Isaiah 50:5). Christ’s human will was revealed in the garden of Gethsemane, as His human soul was revealed many times during the days of His flesh. The High Priest, who was also the Sacrifice, was resigned to the will of God, which was known to Him before the foundation of the world. He had already begun to taste of the bitter cup in the garden and had accepted this bestowment from the Father’s hand. The sins He would bear were those of the elect by commission, but they would become His by imputation. Jesus Christ’s intense suffering began as He entered the garden of Gethsemane, and it did not cease until He dismissed His spirit and left the body for the tomb. Christ invited the disciples to watch with Him, but He did not ask them to pray with Him. He never besought the prayers of men for Himself. Why? There is a different approach for them to God. The sinner must come as a penitent, but Christ was impeccable. There was an essential difference in nature between Christ and men. Christ could go directly to the Father, but men can approach the Father only through Christ and by the Spirit of regeneration. The evidence of Christ’s Deity was greatly manifested when He went into the agony of Gethsemane alone, without fellowship with men in prayer. He had on one occasion asked certain disciples if they were able to be baptized with the baptism with which He was baptized (Matthew 20:22-23; Mark 10:38-39; Luke 12:50). The folly of the disciples’ affirmative answer, “We are able,” can only be comprehended in the light of Christ’s suffering in Gethsemane. He had a baptism to be baptized with, and His soul was “straitened [sunechomai, to be hard pressed from every side] till it be accomplished” (Luke 12:50). Christ’s prayer in the garden was to the Father for the benefit of the elect. Some say Christ’s prayers in the garden of Gethsemane reveal the tension between His human and Divine natures. Was there a strained relationship between them? Admittedly, Christ speaking out of His human consciousness desired life, but one must not overlook the truth that His human will was controlled by His Divine will. This shows that although His human will was different from His Divine will, it was not contrary to it. There was no tension between them. Jesus Christ was like man and at the same time very much unlike man. Submission of the human will silenced it. Conclusively, there was no conflict between the human and Divine wills of the unique Person, the God-Man. Since Christ was both the Sacrifice and the Sacrificer in the office of Priest, as the Sacrificer, He wanted no interruption of His office in death. Hence, “having been made perfect [teleiotheis, first aorist passive participle of teleioo, to reach the end of; to advance to final completeness; to reach the end of one’s course]” (Hebrews 5:9 NASB) as Priest, He reached the completion of His experiential training and actively became the Author of eternal salvation. Jesus Christ’s doing the will of His Father by being subjected to death was not passive endurance. In the volume of the book it was written of Christ, “...Lo, I come...to do thy will, O God” (Hebrews 10:7). Christ not only offered Himself to God as a sacrifice for the elect but, in the offering, He offered the elect with Himself. Hence, it can be said the elect died with Christ when He died. The aorist tenses used in Romans 6:1-11 denote a single and completed past act of Christ’s substitutionary work and the identification of the elect with Him in that work. Some teach that Christ could not be a Priest on earth. They say He was saluted as the Son of God at His incarnation (Psalms 2:1-12), and He was saluted as a Priest forever at His ascension (Psalms 110:1-7). Their proof text is Hebrews 8:4 - “For if he were on earth, he should not be a priest, seeing that there are priests that offer gifts according to the law.” One must note, however, that Scripture does not say that when Christ was on earth He was not a Priest (Hebrews 2:17; Hebrews 5:7-10), but had He remained on earth He could not have discharged His priestly functions. He was not a priest after the order of Aaron. The first tabernacle was not false, but it was incomplete. It was a shadow of the reality. The perfection of the sacrifice is derived from the Person of Christ, the Divine Son of God. He was “obedient unto death” (Php 2:8). The word for “unto” is mechri (mechris before a vowel), an adverb meaning unto, even to, until, or till. It has the force of a preposition with the genitive case of thanatou (death). Does this mean that Christ was obedient up to the point of His death but not in His death? Such belief would be synonymous with Christ’s exhortation to the church in Smyrna to be “faithful unto death” - achri thanatou (Revelation 2:10). Jesus Christ, unlike men, was actively obedient up to the point of death, and as the Conqueror of death, He “cried with a loud voice, and gave up the ghost [edzepneusen, first aorist active indicative of ekpneo, to breath out, to expire, or to die]" (Mark 15:37). If Christ’s active obedience had stopped short of going through death, He would have failed to bring His righteousness through death for the benefit of the elect. Christ who offered Himself not only satisfied Divine justice by bearing the sins of the elect but He also brought His righteousness through death for the benefit of those for whom He died. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 47: 02.19. JESUS CHRIST IS HIGH PRIEST FOREVER ======================================================================== 19. JESUS CHRIST IS HIGH PRIEST FOREVER The Hebrew priesthood was instituted because the people were not qualified to draw near to God in person. Although the priests were ordained to dwell in God’s habitation, their personal consciousness of sin made them afraid. The erection of a special place of worship carried with it the necessity for setting up an order of service. Any deviation from that order resulted in God’s judgment upon them. Hence, the failure of Nadab and Abihu represents the public failure of the priesthood as committed to man’s responsibility. Notwithstanding such public failure, God would have a priesthood maintained by two younger sons, Eleazar and Ithamar (Leviticus 10:1-20). Outside failure never destroys inward maintenance of all that is truly of God. Therefore, Paul’s key word to Timothy, “nevertheless” of 2 Timothy 2:19, came after his description of public failure: Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his. And, Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity (2 Timothy 2:19). As the remaining sons of Aaron show how the priesthood was to be maintained in a remnant, Timothy and all remaining faithful servants of God in every age are to earnestly contend for the faith in the midst of public failure. The name “priest” denotes the idea of a familiar friend of God. The distinctive function of the office was to receive and present to God that which belonged to Him. Before Aaron there was no separate order of priesthood. Every father was the priest of his family. For example, Job is believed to be the most ancient book of the Bible. This patriarch acted as high priest of his family, which was not allowed after the exodus. Aaron was the first high priest of the nation of Israel. As the first, he did not have in himself the proper qualifications for shadowing forth the Lord Jesus Christ, the great High Priest. Therefore, the requisite beauty and glory were placed on him symbolically (Exodus 28:1-43). Arrayed in those beautiful, costly, and Divinely appointed garments, he was symbolically what Jesus Christ is in reality. Thus, Aaron could minister about the tabernacle as a type of Him who is the true High Priest made after the order of Melchisedec, not after the order of Aaron. Jesus Christ is greater than Aaron. His priesthood was after a higher order than the Aaronic. It was after the order of Melchisedec (Hebrews 5:6). The order of Melchisedec is an everlasting one (Hebrews 7:16-17). Jesus Christ is the sinless Son of God. Aaron was sinful. He had to offer a sacrifice for himself before he could offer one for the people (Leviticus 16:6; Leviticus 16:11). If Jesus Christ had been peccable, as many religionists advocate, He would have been no greater than Aaron. Thus, the “better things” of Hebrews would be meaningless, and the author could not have been inspired. Jesus Christ is the forerunner of His sheep (Hebrews 6:20). He was made a High Priest forever after the order of Melchisedec. Conversely, Aaron was not a priest after the order of Melchisedec. Therefore, he could not be a forerunner of Israel. He was only a type of Christ. Jesus Christ was the Surety of the new covenant (Hebrews 7:22), but Aaron was not the surety of the old covenant. Christ served the realities (Hebrews 8:1-5); whereas, Aaron served the shadows. Lastly, Jesus Christ offered a better sacrifice than those offered by Aaron. He offered Himself (Hebrews 10:1-14). Every high priest under the old economy was (1) called by God, (2) taken from among men, (3) appointed in things pertaining to God, (4) to function in behalf of men, (5) to offer gifts and sacrifices, (6) to be compassionate toward the ignorant and those who were out of the way, (7) to offer a sacrifice for personal sins, and (8) not to take the honor of the office unto himself. The great High Priest met every element required in the new covenant. Unlike Aaron under the old covenant, there was no personal weakness in Jesus Christ that required a personal sacrifice. Therefore, Christ was the Surety of the elect not only of the new covenant but also under the old covenant. The covenant God made with Israel made nothing perfect, “but the bringing in of a better hope did” (Hebrews 7:19). This is not difficult to understand, since types were never meant to accomplish that which only the antitype-Jesus Christ-could perform. The legal side of suretyship is even stronger when the Surety becomes the Substitute for the original debtor by having the debt charged to the Surety and the debtor released. For example, Onesimus was legally released before the debt was actually paid to the creditor. This was made possible by Paul assuming the debt. In this way, only, could the Old Testament saints be forgiven before the death of the Testator (Hebrews 9:15-17). In order to understand the greatness of Jesus Christ over Aaron, the following facts must be considered: Jesus Christ was not an accessory with His people for the payment of their debt. Payment of the debt was not conditioned on the idea that His people pay, but that He would pay in case they failed. The Surety must be capable of fulfilling all the obligations of the covenant. The covenant must be kept and the debt paid. Since the Creditor demands payment, the Surety is bound by the covenant and the debtor goes free. Hence, Christ gives assurance that all for whom He is Surety are acquitted. The greatness of Christ’s Person, the sufficiency of His sacrifice, the authority behind His resurrection, the superiority of His priesthood, and His ascension to the Father are a complete pledge of the validity of the better covenant. Jesus Christ was not self-elected but God-appointed as High Priest. He did not take the honor unto Himself. No man has a right to take such an office without God’s appointment. Korah sought the priesthood, but he was not ordained by God (Numbers 16:10). Advantage to oneself is no justification for that which is unlawful. Grasping for unlawful authority is setting aside Divine authority. Every man in his appointed place was important for Israel. It is also important for the church. God is orderly in all His works. Therefore, God called Aaron to be Israel’s first high priest (Exodus 28:1). Concerning His incarnate Son, He also said: “Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec” (Hebrews 5:6). It is in direct opposition to anyone taking this honor unto himself - “...but he that is called [alla kaloumenos, present passive participle of kaleo, to call; means ”but being called"] of God as was Aaron" (Hebrews 5:4). As all lawful priests descended from Aaron, the common priesthood of believers descend from Jesus Christ. The glory of the High Priest was conferred on Christ by God the Father. It was a glory which He did not have before His incarnation. Hence, we see that the purpose in the Word becoming flesh was for the High Priest of the elect to be taken out of men. Jesus Christ possessed a human nature - partook of flesh and blood (Hebrews 2:14) - which enabled Him to “be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people” (Hebrews 2:17). Jesus Christ prayed, feared, learned obedience, and was made perfect “in the days of his flesh.” Christians would be indignant at anyone who would diminish the glory of Christ’s Godhead, but we should manifest the same disapproval toward anyone who would take away from His impeccable human nature. The term “the days of his flesh” (Hebrews 5:7) is used to distinguish His life on earth from His former state in glory. Christ’s human nature is represented by the term “flesh” (John 1:14; Romans 1:3-4; Romans 8:3; 1 Timothy 3:16). The word “days” demonstrates the brevity of His relationship to time, but it in no way means the conclusion of His “days” would terminate His union with the flesh He assumed. The Son of God began His relationship with time by being “made flesh,” but the flesh He assumed enabled Him to be not only the sacrifice for sins of the elect but the Priest who sacrificed Himself. His priesthood did not cease at Calvary because He is a Priest forever after the order of Melchisedec. Jesus Christ prayed as the High Priest. Since the High Priest was taken from men, Christ prayed as the God-Man; because as God absolutely considered, He could not pray. He is presenting Himself before the Father in the office of High Priest. In Hebrews 5:7, the word “prayers” comes from the Greek word deeseis, the plural of deesis, a derivative of the verb deomai, which means to need. The noun is used 19 times and is translated prayer, supplication, and request. The verb is used 22 times and is translated prayed, I beseech, and I besought. The word “supplication” is hiketerias, plural of hiketeria, which means supplication and is used only in this verse. The text says Christ offered up prayers “unto him that was able to save him from [ek] death.” Some say the preposition ek can be translated either “out of” or “from.” This is true, but the context enables us to know which is the correct translation. It is not a question of the Father’s ability but a question of His purpose. If God the Father were to save Christ from the death of the cross, He was able to save the elect without the cross. However, since the Father had given the elect grace in Jesus Christ before the world began (2 Timothy 1:9), that grace was given on the basis of Christ’s death. Therefore, Christ prayed unto Him who was able to raise Him out from the state of death (Hebrews 5:7). He did not pray that He would keep Him from dying. Christ was heard on account of His eulabeias, genitive singular of eulabeia, which means reverence or piety. Hence, Christ’s prayers were never in vain. The word translated “heard” is a compound verb eisakoustheis, first aorist passive participle of eisakouo, which means to accept one’s petition. When Christ raised Lazarus, He said, “Father, I thank thee that thou hast heard me. And I knew that thou hearest me always” (John 11:41-42). Christ was not only heard but His petition was granted. He was not saved from dying, but He was saved out of the state of death. Christ as High Priest learned obedience from the things which He suffered (Hebrews 5:8). The Greek word for “learned” is emathe, second aorist active indicative of manthano, which means to learn or to be taught; to learn by experience. Hence, there are two ways one may learn something: (1) learn something he did not know before, or (2) learn experientially what he knew before. Christ learned experientially what priesthood, suretyship, death, etc., were. Christ as High Priest was made perfect (Hebrews 5:9). “Being made perfect” is one word in the Greek. It is teleiotheis, first aorist passive participle of teleioo, which means to advance to final completeness in preparation for the office of Savior. Therefore, having been brought to the place of completeness, Christ became the Author of eternal salvation. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 48: 03.0.. DOCTRINE THAT CHRIST WAS PECCABLE IS HERESY ======================================================================== 3. THE DOCTRINE THAT CHRIST WAS PECCABLE IS HERESY Religious institutions that embrace the doctrine that Christ was peccable (capable of sinning) are Laodicean organizations. Like the Laodicean Church of Revelation 3:14-22, they may be rich, increased with goods, and feel they have need of nothing. But they are spiritually wretched, miserable, poor, blind, and naked. They are Laodicean because they have closed the door to the impeccable Christ of Holy Scripture. Hence, the impeccable Christ of the Bible is standing at the door of those religious institutions knocking for entrance. Christ’s knocking is not at the door of unregenerate hearts but upon the door of regenerate hearts to repent and come out as witnesses against the apostates-those who have turned their backs on the Biblical truth of Christ’s impeccability. It is absolutely unthinkable to imagine that the Holy Spirit who regenerates the elect would lead the regenerated to embrace a peccable Christ. No one can have a true conversion experience by believing in a peccable savior. Jesus Christ comes into and has fellowship with only those who embrace Him as the impeccable Savior. The teaching that Christ was peccable has become a popular doctrine among religionists. The following list briefly states the beliefs of some who teach that Christ could sin: 1. One believes that depravity was imparted to Christ in birth making it possible for Him to sin and to suffer for sin. Thus, He was more sympathetic to us in our depravity. 2. Another believes that Christ, as man, could have sinned but did not and was tempted but did not yield. The so-called temptation of Christ is regarded as real with a genuine appeal to Him as a man. 3. Still another believes that it was in God’s plan to give Satan occasion to try to cause Christ to sin. Passing this test would prove that Christ is the qualified God-Man. 4. This person says that Christ, being human, found Satan’s offers attractive; and although He did not, He could have chosen to sin. 5. This final view is more subtle. Although He did not experience sin, He was subjected to the temptation. Thus, His intercession for us is with greater understanding. His power of feeling for our needs is greater because He has experienced the strength of the temptation to sin. How can one feel what he has not experienced? The Person of Christ must be distinguished from the person of man. Unlike man’s creation, Christ’s Person was uncreated. Christ did not assume a sinful person any more than God made man deity. Jesus Christ is God’s Man by incarnation, but Adam was God’s man by creation. Jesus Christ is God’s “only begotten” - the unique or only one of His kind - Son; man is not the only one of his kind. The essential Divine nature in Jesus Christ cannot grow; but the God-like nature in the believer does grow (2 Peter 1:4 ff.). Jesus Christ was not born of the virgin with an ego turned away from God; man is born with an ego turned away from God. There was only one ego in Christ, and that one ego always pleased the Father. On the other hand, man’s depraved ego never pleases God. It is incapable of doing so. Christ is the firstborn (Luke 2:7; Colossians 1:15; Revelation 1:5). Firstborn has no reference to the origin of Christ’s existence. He is the One who has brought forth everything. Therefore, He is the firstborn who created man (John 1:1-3). Jesus Christ is the firstfruits (1 Corinthians 15:23). The Greek word aparche primarily denotes an offering of firstfruits. Although the word is plural in the Kings James Bible, it is singular in the Greek text. Jesus Christ is the first in order of dignity, causality, resurrection, and influence. Believers, on the other hand, are a kind of firstfruits of God’s creatures (James 1:18). The Greek word tina (tis) is an indefinite pronoun which means a certain one, some one, or a kind of. While it is true that Christ was “made in the likeness of men” (Php 2:7), it is also true that He is very much unlike men. Demands for a complete parallel between Christ and man can never be met. In Christ’s conception and birth, there was a union of the eternal Son with human nature (John 1:1; John 1:14). This was very much unlike man’s conception and birth. Man is the created creature of God; therefore, he is not eternal. Furthermore, since Adam, man is the product of procreation. Christ’s conception was without a human father. His human nature was from God the Father, by the Holy Spirit, and in the womb of the virgin (Hebrews 10:5; Matthew 1:18-21; Luke 1:35). Man is the product of a man and a woman who conceived man in sin (Psalms 51:5). Human initiation was completely excluded in Christ’s conception, which enables us to understand the total absence of any capability to sin in the Person and Life of Christ. He stood outside of Adam and ordinary generation. Contrarily, man owes his existence to human initiation in the providence of God. He is a sinner by nature. Christ’s earthly life and ministry were never identified with the degradation of sinful men. He identified Himself with the titles and designations which prove His identification was with the elect as the subjects of Divine grace. To suggest that Jesus Christ was identified with fallen mankind, except in His redemptive work, would be blasphemous. Hence, the Son of God never identified Himself with fallen human nature until He did so sacrificially at Calvary. Only at Calvary did “the Holy One” come into personal identification with sin. There, on the cross, Christ identified Himself vicariously and sacrificially with sin. The inspired writer of Hebrews spoke of the incarnation: “...in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren...” (Hebrews 2:17). “In all things” (kata panta) should be taken with “made like.” While Jesus Christ shared in some experiences of men, one must not overlook the truth that there were some things in which He did not share. The same Greek construction is used in Hebrews 4:15 - “...but was in all points [kata panta] tempted [pepeirasmenon - having been tried] like as we are, yet without sin.” Hence, neither “made like” nor “in all things” can be understood to mean in an absolute sense. Both are qualified, if not in the immediate context, in the overall context of Scripture. Christ’s conception and birth were different from His brethren because He was conceived by the Holy Spirit and born of a virgin. Furthermore, His life was different, because, unlike His brethren, He was impeccable. Finally, His death was different because He died for the sins of His brethren-the elect. If Jesus Christ was made in the incarnation like unto His brethren “in all things” without qualification, His brethren were without a standard above themselves. When one examines the text (Hebrews 2:17) closely, he will observe orderly points in his devotion to Christ. First, “it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren.” The Greek word homoiothenai is first aorist passive infinitive of homoioo, which means to make like, cause to be like; passively, to be made like, to become like, or resemble. Who was made like His brethren? He was the “only begotten God [theos]” (John 1:18 NASB). Here, we see His Divine nature, a trinitarian Person. Second, we see His human nature. He had a human spirit, a human soul, and a human body. Third, the union of the two natures is expressed in the passive infinitive “to be made.” This points to the union of both natures in one Person. Christ’s likeness unto His brethren is not what mortal man might imagine. His essential form did not take the form of a servant from Him, nor did this union alter His equality with the Father. Finally, the purpose of the union of the two natures is expressed in the words “to make reconciliation for the sins of the people.” There is a difference between the Sanctifier and the sanctified, even though the sanctified are made one with the Sanctifier by grace (Hebrews 2:9-11). It behoved Christ to be made like unto His brethren. The Greek word for “behoved” is opheilen, the imperfect active indicative of opheilo, which means to owe money, service, or love; duty or obligation. It has been said that to give a gift and call it a debt is not our usual language, but it is the language of heaven. The word implies a necessity. The Son of God was obligated by an eternal decree. He must be about His Father’s business. Since the Sanctifier was obligated to be made like unto us, His brethren, the brethren are obligated to be like unto the Sanctifier. Conclusively, if the Sanctifier was made like unto the brethren “in all things” without qualification, the elect could never have been sanctified because the Sanctifier would have needed sanctification. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 49: 03.00. CHRIST EMPTIED HIMSELF BY W.E.BEST ======================================================================== Christ Emptied Himself by W. E. Best Copyright © 1985 W. E. Best Scripture quotations in this book designated “NASB” are from the NEW AMERICAN STANDARD BIBLE, © 1960, 1962, 1963, 1968, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1975, and 1977 by the Lockman Foundation, and are used by permission. Those designated “translation” are by the author and taken from the Greek Text. All others are from the King James Bible. This book is distributed by the W. E. Best Book Missionary Trust P. O. Box 34904 Houston, Texas 77234-4904 USA CONTENTS 1. Christ’s Two Sonships 2. Christ’s Two Begettings 3. Christ’s Two Advents 4. Christ’s Two Forms (Part I) 5. Christ’s Two Forms (Part II) 6. Christ In The Form Of God 7. Equal With God 8. Christ Emptied Himself (Part I) 9. Christ Emptied Himself (Part II) 10. Christ Emptied Himself (Part III) 11. Christ Emptied Himself (Part IV) 12. The Form Of A Servant (Part I) 13. The Form Of A Servant (Part II) ======================================================================== CHAPTER 50: 03.01. CHRIST'S TWO SONSHIPS ======================================================================== Chapter 1 - CHRIST’S TWO SONSHIPS The Lord Jesus Christ is one Person with two Sonships. He is both the Son of God and the Son of Man. The Son of God in the bosom of the Father was pleased to condescend to become the Son of Man. He willingly assumed human nature in order to reveal the Father, redeem the elect, and communicate the knowledge of God to His people. God alone can reveal God. “No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him” (John 1:18). The Fatherhood of God is not known apart from Sonship: “...No man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him” (Matthew 11:27). Christ’s eternal Sonship is an unoriginated relationship to the Father. Eternal Fatherhood demands eternal Sonship. For example, no human father is older as a father than his son. He became a father at the same time his son became a son. The terms “Father” and “Son,” when speaking of the Godhead, imply co-eternality and co-equality. Christ’s incarnation did not affect the unoriginated relationship. He continued in the bosom of the Father. The “only begotten God,” monogenes theos, remains “with God” in the full sense of John 1:1 - “...the Word was with God....” “With God” signifies distinction in the Godhead. The preposition pros (with) reveals not merely existence alongside of but Person with Person eternally. Only such a Divine Person can reveal the Father. The popular belief that men by nature know the Father is in direct opposition to Scripture (Matthew 11:27; Luke 10:22; John 14:10). Christ is a mighty Teacher. He gives discernment where He finds none. Beginning with the title “Son of God” is the correct approach to this study. Whatever subject one is considering, the approach should always begin with God absolutely considered. In the study of creation, it is “In the beginning God created...” (Genesis 1:1). The study of salvation begins with God, “Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began” (2 Timothy 1:9). Christian living also begins with God: “For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure” (Php 2:13). Glorying in the Son of Man may be compared with the high priest of Israel passing the outer veil of the tabernacle. He enjoyed the first enclosure reserved for the feet of the covenant people. The holy place was for those anointed of God. However, when the high priest went through the second veil, he gloried not only in the Son of Man but in the Son of God. He penetrated the veil which symbolized the human nature of Jesus Christ (Hebrews 10:19-20). He beheld the mercyseat which foreshadowed the Son of God whom the Father sent to be his propitiation (Romans 3:25). As we stand before the Son of Man, it is as though we stood before the second veil of the tabernacle which shrouds the mysteries of the Son of God. Let us not ascend from the Son of Man to the Son of God but descend from the Son of God to the Son of Man. With this approach, we can say with Paul, “...without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory” (1 Timothy 3:16). The gospel of John is unique in that it carries us back into eternity. It presents the Son of God in His eternal Deity and leaves us with a view of Him who has offered Himself on the cross as the Son of Man (John 1:1; John 1:49; John 3:14-16). The Son of God came into the world with those who had been purposed to be His by electing love, but He did not leave the world until He had redeemed them (John 10:11; John 10:15; John 17:1-24). The Father had given them to Him by covenant relationship. John looks deeper into the Person of Jesus Christ than the other gospel writers. In the study of Christian evidences, we study not only the prophecies, birth, life, death, and resurrection of the Son of Man, but we go deeper and touch the heart of Christianity-the Person of Jesus Christ. Therefore, we conclude, “Truly this is the Son of God.” Hence, my hope of eternity is not built upon some little etymological technicality. It is not founded upon the construction of a phrase or the mood, voice, and tense of a verb, as important as these things are in their places. The revelation of God’s glory shining in the face of Jesus Christ by the Spirit of regeneration gives the recipient the ability to say, “...whereas I was blind, now I see” (John 9:25). As I look upon the sun shining, I do not need some person to tell me it Isaiah 93 million miles from the earth, and according to his logarithmic calculation, its light is sufficient to enlighten a hemisphere at a time. Why? I see its light and feel its heat. Hence, having been regenerated by the Spirit, the call of the gospel does not come by the understanding of all the parts of English and Greek grammar. If it did none would be converted. Those things are for the students who have been converted. The Son of God is the eternal Son. Micah’s prophecy concerning Him states, “But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting” (Micah 5:2). The son of God, therefore, is no creature limited by time. He is from eternity. Solomon’s description of the Wisdom of God has great similarity to John’s description of the Divine Logos (Proverbs 8:22-36; John 1:1-5). The book of Proverbs represents the Son of God as the Wisdom of God, but not yet manifested. The gospel of John reveals Him as the Word of God, but He is now manifested. Wisdom may be unrevealed, but the Word spoken is revealed. One may be unusually wise without anyone knowing it, but when he speaks his wisdom is revealed. The Son of God was Wisdom incarnate. As soon as the Word made flesh began to speak, men said, “...Never man spake like this man” (John 7:46). The two metaphors “Word” and “Son” supplement and protect each other. “Word” might suggest an impersonal quality in God, while “Son” might limit one’s conception of a personal yet created being without properly understanding it. Combining the two metaphors gives us the full truth and guards against error. Jesus Christ is the Son, but the Son also being the Word cannot be a created being. Solomon gives several proofs of the Son’s eternality: (1) He was one with the Father - “The LORD possessed me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old” (Proverbs 8:22). (2) He was in the beginning - “I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, or ever the earth was” (Proverbs 8:23). (3) He was before creation - “When there were no depths, I was brought forth; when there were no fountains abounding with water. Before the mountains were settled, before the hills was I brought forth: While as yet he had not made the earth, nor the fields, nor the highest part of the dust of the world. When he prepared the heavens, I was there: when he set a compass upon the face of the depth” (Proverbs 8:24-27). (4) He was God’s fellow and delight - “Then I was by him, as one brought up with him: and I was daily his delight, rejoicing always before him” (Proverbs 8:30). (5) He delights in men - “...my delights were with the sons of men” (Proverbs 8:31). (6) He calls men to hear - “...hearken unto me, 0 ye children...” (Proverbs 8:32). (7) There is danger in rejecting Christ - “But he that sinneth against me wrongeth his own soul: all they that hate me love death” (Proverbs 8:36). The eternal Sonship of Jesus Christ is an absolute necessity in the Christian faith: (1) Eternal Sonship and eternal election stand or fall together (Ephesians 1:4; 2 Timothy 1:9). If the Son of God is not eternal, our election is not eternal. (2) Eternal Sonship and God’s purpose of redemption stand or fall together (1 Peter 1:18-20; Acts 2:23; John 3:16). (3) Eternal Sonship and regeneration stand or fall together (John 5:26). The Son quickens whom He will. (4) Eternal Sonship and preservation stand or fall together (Romans 8:32-39). Mary did not call Jesus Christ “Son of Man.” The angel said to Mary, “...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). This verse has been tortured by depraved men trying to prove that Jesus Christ is not the eternal Son of God. The verb “shall be called” is from the Greek future tense of kaleo-to call. There is a wide difference between “began to be” and “will be called.” The statement “began to be” means that he was not before, but the statement “will be called” means that He who formerly existed is manifested among men as the Person who had been promised as the “seed of the woman.” “That holy thing” comes from the Greek to gennomenon hagion, the holy child or offspring, the subject of the verb “will be called.” The neuter gender has confused some, but the Holy Agency producing the Holy Embryo seems appropriate, since the Son of God was assuming a holy nature. The “Highest Son” - huios hupsistou, the genitive form of hupsistos, highest, loftiest, most elevated, the most high (“What have I to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of the most high God?” - Mark 5:7) - of Luke 1:32 would be called “the Son of God” when He was born of the virgin Mary in Luke 1:35. The virgin could not be told by the angel that the Son of God would be begotten by her, because He was eternally begotten by the Father (John 1:1; John 1:14). Neither could the angel tell Mary her child would be called the Son of Man, because He was never addressed as Son of Man. “Son of Man” was not man’s title for Jesus Christ but His own title for Himself. There is one important thing to observe about the title “Son of Man.” It was never found upon the lips of any but Jesus Christ during His public ministry, with the exception of John 12:34. Christ’s enemies did not understand how the Son of Man could be equated with the Messiah. They could not reconcile how the Son of Man was to be crucified and the Messiah was to be with them forever. The title “Son of Man” is applied to Christ only three times in all the rest of Scripture. Stephen used the title when he saw the Lord Jesus standing on the right hand of God (Acts 7:55-56). The two passages in Revelation are quotations from the Old Testament (Revelation 1:13; Revelation 14:14; Ezekiel 1:26; Daniel 7:13). The Old Testament sheds more light than the New Testament on the manner in which the title “Son of Man” was established. On the other hand, the New Testament is clearer than the Old Testament in its description of the manner in which Christ achieved the title “Son of God.” Such prophecies as 2 Samuel 7:12-14 and 1 Chronicles 17:12-14 predict the time when God would be the Father of Jesus Christ and Christ would be His Son. Both passages are spoken futuristically. A Sonship would be established, and that Sonship was as the “Son of Man.” The New Testament speaks of the “only begotten Son” (John 1:14; John 1:18; John 3:16; John 3:18). Hence, there are two titles for the same Person. “Son of God” is by reason of Christ’s eternal generation, which is never futuristic. “Son of Man” is established by Christ’s incarnation, which is in time. The Greek word for “Son,” in the title “Son of Man,” is not always used to designate the thought of being born of man. The word “son” is often used to carry the thought of “being identified with.” The word huioi is used in Matthew 13:38 - “...children of the kingdom...” (huioi tes basileias); Mark 2:19 - “children of the bridechamber...” (huioi tou numphonos); Mark 3:17 - “...sons of thunder” (huioi brontes); Luke 16:8 - “...children of this world...” (huioi tou aionos); “...the children of light” (tous huious tou photos); Ephesians 2:2 - “...the children of disobedience” (tois huiois tes apeitheias); 1 Thessalonians 5:5 - “...children of light...” (huioi photos), and “...children of the day...” (huioi hemeras). In these verses, “sons” does not mean they were born of the kingdom, of the bridechamber, of thunder, etc.; but it does mean they were identified with the kingdom, the bridechamber, thunder, etc. Therefore, the expression “Son of Man” does not mean that Jesus Christ was born of Joseph. The identification of the Son of God with the sons of men validated the title “Son of Man.” This was due to the hypostatic union of the two natures in one Person. Christologists cannot deny the reality and perfection of the Divine and human natures in the unique Person, Jesus Christ. Furthermore, they cannot confound the two natures or deny the unity of the Person. The Son of Man is the bond between heaven and earth. He is the God-Man, Son to both. He is the Mediator through whom God reaches man and man reaches God. The Lord Jesus affirmed that He possessed human nature, and He also affirmed His preexistence. Other persons are sons of individual men, but Jesus Christ was no man’s son. He is the unique Son of Man. He belongs to no particular people but to His people among all nations and kindreds. The title “Son of Man” is associated with Divine undertakings. Therefore, what is proper to either nature is ascribed unto the Person under whatsoever name He chose to call Himself. The New Testament never states that the eternal Son became a man. It does affirm that the Word became flesh, the Son was sent in the likeness of sinful flesh, Christ was made in the likeness of men, and He was found in fashion as a man (John 1:14; Romans 8:3; Php 2:7-8). Some claim that to deny personality to Christ’s human nature is to deny redemption for mankind. They reason that what Christ did not take He did not redeem. The fact is, however, if Christ’s human nature is also personal, not only does He have two natures but He is two distinct persons. The Son of Man was a Person, but where did His personality lie? The Lord Jesus Christ possessed personality with the other Persons of the Godhead, but no one can say Jesus Christ is the Father or the Holy Spirit. Christ’s human nature does not possess a distinct personality over against His Divine nature. It has subsistence only in the second Person of the Godhead. If the human nature of Christ has a distinct subsistence apart from the Divine nature, the Deity of Christ is denied. Our blessed Lord is one Person with two perfect natures-Divine and human. Hence, the Son of Man was in heaven while on earth: “And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven” (John 3:13). The words “which is in heaven” are omitted in some manuscripts, but they have strong support in the ancient versions. The text refutes the denial of the preexistence and Deity of Christ. It also disproves that the “Son of Man” surrendered His attributes during the days of His flesh on earth. The title “Son of Man” became a reality when the “Son of God” became flesh. Until the incarnation, “Son of Man” was predictive. The eternally begotten “Son of God” was begotten in time. The first begetting was not like a human begetting. It is referred to by many theologians as “eternal generation.” The term does not express the inexpressible, but for want of a better term it is acceptable. The statement “only begotten” comes from the Greek word monogenes. It means only, unique, or single of its kind. The word comes from monos which means single, alone, or only. Hence, Christ’s eternal Sonship is unique, one of its kind. The unique Son of God was sent into the world at God’s appointed time as the sole representative of the being and character of the One who sent Him. “But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman...” (Galatians 4:4). The word translated “sent” - the aorist tense of exapostello - means to send out or forth, to send away, or to dispatch on a service. This interesting word has two prepositions as prefixes. The stem stello means “to dispatch,” apo means “from,” and ex (from ek) means “out of.” This compound word means the eternal Son was sent out from heaven to execute a commission on earth. It refers to the act of one who sends another with a commission to perform a particular work. The word “apostle” comes from apostello. The prefixed preposition apo means the Person sent is to represent the Sender. The second prefixed preposition ex signifies the only begotten Son of God was sent out of the Father’s presence in heaven. Nowhere is it indicated in the Scriptures that God sent forth His Son into the world and anxiously awaited His reaction to the work of the cross. The word for “made” is genomenon, an aorist participle of ginomai - to be subject to or to be born. When the Son of God came into the world, He did not assume a nature which could be laid aside after He had completed His mission. The assumption of Human nature made it possible for the Son of God to experience both suffering and glory as the God-Man. Christ experienced suffering throughout the days of His flesh on earth - “...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). As God absolutely considered, the Son of God could not experience these things; but as the God-Man, the Lord Jesus did suffer these things. God, who demanded the Lamb, not only provided the Lamb but became the Lamb that He demanded. The Son of Man not only experienced suffering, but as the coming Messiah, He shall experience the glory of the kingdom. “When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory....Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world” (Matthew 25:31; Matthew 25:34). The truth that God absolutely considered could never experience the glory of the kingdom in the manner in which the Son of Man shall experience its glory must be repeated. When the Son of Man assumes the kingdom at the time appointed, it will be in view of His being the predicted seed of David (Luke 1:31-33). The Divine nature must not be exalted to the exclusion of the human nature. Christ’s suffering and reigning are both viewed in relation to the God-Man. God absolutely considered is represented in Scripture as reigning, but that reign is not the reign of promise. The kingdom is promised to the Son of David. Jesus Christ is both David’s Son and David’s Lord: “...I am the root and the offspring of David...” (Revelation 22:16). This duality is understandable in terms of the mystery of Christ’s Person. Blind Bartimaeus appealed to the Son of God as the Son of David (Mark 10:46-52). If the Son of Man is not Divine, there is no hope for mankind. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 51: 03.02. CHRIST'S TWO BEGETTINGS ======================================================================== Chapter 2 - CHRIST’S TWO BEGETTINGS The incarnation of Jesus Christ was a change of state but not a change of nature. He was veiled in human flesh. Personal and official glories of the Son of God were both hidden, except where the faith of the elect discovered them. John said, “...we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father...” (John 1:14). The glory of the tabernacle was God tabernacling in its midst. The glory of the church is the only begotten Son of God dwelling in her midst (Matthew 18:20). Only God’s gift of faith sees that glory. The faith of the disciples penetrated Christ’s human nature and beheld the glory of the eternal Son who is full of grace and truth. The Lord Jesus walked through the land unrecognized as the Divine Son except where the light of the Spirit of regeneration enabled one to behold the Light of the world concealed by human nature. Christ’s moral glory, however, could not be hidden. He could not conceal a perfect life which was manifested by His words and works. God is absolute purity, uncontaminated even by the shadow of sin: “...God is light, and in him is no darkness at all” (1 John 1:5). Christ’s twofold begetting is the foundation of the elect of God being begotten again unto a living hope (1 Peter 1:3). The eternal God comes to the elect in time that the elect in time can go to God eternally. This has been made possible by the eternally begotten Son being born in time thus providing the means whereby the elect born in time can be born again for eternity. The twice begotten Son-once in eternity and once in time-obtained eternal redemption for the elect who must be begotten twice in time to spend eternity with God (Hebrews 9:12; John 3:1-8). Unlike the begetting of the elect in time, Christ’s twofold begetting is divided between eternity and time. His eternal begetting is without beginning. The Lord Jesus is the only accepted once-begotten Person in time. God’s elect, however, are twice born in time. They are born physically, and then, born from above. The eternally begotten Son of the eternal Father must be begotten in time to be the Mediator between the holy Father and the elect given to Him in the covenant of redemption. The mystery of the first begetting is a vital part of the mystery of the Son’s second begetting, and both are the foundation of the mystery of the begetting again of the elect. Paul said, “Whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God which is given to me for you, to fulfil the word of God; Even the mystery which hath been hid from the ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints: To whom God would make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory” (Colossians 1:25-27). The Father vindicated the Son’s declaration that He and the Father are equal: “...He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which hath sent him” (John 5:23). The title “Son of God” permeates the first epistle of John. The blood of the Son cleanses (1 John 1:7). The Son is the Advocate with the Father (1 John 2:1-2). The unction causes believers to abide in the Son (1 John 2:20). Faith in the Son gives victory over the world (1 John 5:4-5). God’s record testifies of the Son (1 John 5:9-13). We have life in the Son (1 John 5:12). The Son came to give understanding (1 John 5:20). The Son is the true God and eternal life (1 John 5:20). The title “only begotten Son” has been the source of controversy since the third century after Christ’s death. Origen of Alexandria taught that Christ is from God and not God in Himself; He was generated not in time but in eternity. In the fourth century, Arius taught that God has not always been Father. He believed there was a time He was alone; but the eternal God made the Son a creature before all creatures; and He adopted Him for His Son. This teaching brought about great controversy. The church fathers concluded that the word “begotten” meant an inexplicable relationship and not an event. There is a new theory about Sonship taught today. Some say to apply “begotten” to Jesus Christ in His eternal Deity in the past is a traditional error. Those who embrace this view say “begotten” refers to Christ as born of the virgin in time. They believe the Reformers, in trying to escape Arianism, invented the phrase “eternal generation.” While this view is incorrect, one must understand this revolutionary idea does not deny the eternal Sonship of Jesus Christ. Some boldly proclaim that the Bible says nothing about “begetting” as an eternal relationship between the Father and the Son. They advocate dropping the statement “eternal generation” from the vocabulary of theology. The following are some arguments against the term “eternal generation.” (1) Theologians, trying to escape the difficulty of Arianism, invented the phrase “eternal generation.” (2) “Begotten” refers to Christ’s birth of the virgin in time. (3) God was not known to any man as Father until the Man was here who is called the Son of God (Luke 1:35). (4) The Person spoken of in Hebrews 1:5 is represented as Son. He is called Son because Sonship is related to His Manhood. (5) The assumption that prophetic statements of what Christ would be could be taken as setting forth facts subsisting as actualities at the time they were written would make the Scriptures nonsensical. Hebrews 1:5 is a quotation of Psalms 2:7. The Sonship of Christ does not go back into eternity. (6) Scripture does not speak of “eternal Father” or “eternal Son.” Father and Son are names which could be known only through the incarnation. (7) The one who is eternally God has come into the place and relationship of Son. This involved obedience to the Father. “Eternal generation” is a human term designed to explain, as well as one can, the inexplicable. Explaining the inexplicable can be likened to knowing the unknowable (Ephesians 3:18-19). “Trinity” is a human term used to explain the mystery of the Godhead. Objectors to the use of “eternal generation” use the human term “Trinity.” Hence, they are not consistent. If one human term should be dropped, consistency would demand dropping all human terms. If this is done, interpretation is impossible. Human interpretation falls short of perfection, but all Christians are responsible to interpret. The task of the interpreter is to use materials provided and make them as understandable as possible. Christ existed as Son from all eternity. What is this but eternal generation? God does not generate as man because there is a difference in nature. In human generation, the father exists before the son. However, in the Godhead, the Father and Son coexist. As there is a distinction of the Persons in the Godhead in time, there must be a distinction of Persons by name in eternity. God’s knowledge is infinite (Psalms 147:5). There is no new thought with Him. God knows all things simultaneously. Eternal generation is an anomalous (inconsistent with the accepted or expected) expression to declare the inexpressible. It is acceptable for the want of a better term. It is not objectionable when one considers such Biblical truths as eternal election and eternal justification. The Lord Jesus is eternally the only One of His kind. The Greek word for “only begotten” is monogenes. It comes from two words: (1) monos, which means sole, single, alone, only; and (2) genos, which means kind, class, family, offspring. “Only begotten,” therefore, means the only one of its kind, unique. Everything in the Divine nature is eternal; therefore, the “only begotten” is eternal. The incarnation, baptism, and resurrection were manifestations of Sonship: “Concerning his Son, Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh; And declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead” (Romans 1:3-4). Some hold firmly to the eternal Sonship of Christ, but they refuse the term “only begotten” and substitute “well-beloved.” We have two sources of information for our understanding of “only begotten.” The Hebrew yahidt occurs twelve times in the Old Testament. It is translated “my darling” (Psalms 22:20; Psalms 35:17), “desolate” (Psalms 25:16), “solitary” (Psalms 68:6), “only beloved” (Proverbs 4:3), “only son” (Genesis 22:2; Genesis 22:12; Genesis 22:16; Jeremiah 6:26; Amos 8:10; Zechariah 12:10), and “only child” (Judges 11:34). In the New Testament the word monogenes occurs nine times. Three times the word is used of an “only child” (Luke 7:12; Luke 8:42; Luke 9:38), once of Isaac (Hebrews 11:17), and five times of the Son of God (John 1:14; John 1:18; John 3:16; John 3:18; 1 John 4:9). Some have been confused about the passage in Hebrews 11:17. They say Isaac was not the only son. Ishmael was also Abraham’s son. However, the principle of Romans 9:7 clears up the confusion: “Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.” The word monogenes is not the ordinary word for “beloved” when applied to Jesus Christ. It is the word agapetos which is used in such passages as Matthew 3:17 and Matthew 17:5. If monogenes referred to Christ’s incarnation, such passages as Matthew 3:17 and Matthew 17:5 would have been appropriate places to have used them. The fact is that monogenes speaks of the eternal Sonship of Jesus Christ. All Persons of the Godhead are equal, but they must be distinguished. How are they distinguished? How does one conclude who is number one? Who is number two? Who is number three? There are many references in the New Testament which state the Father sent the Son: “...He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which hath sent him” (John 5:23). “As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me” (John 6:57). “But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law” (Galatians 4:4). There are three different Greek words used for “sending” in these passages. They are pempo (John 5:23), apostello (John 6:57), and exapostello (Galatians 4:4). These words are not used for the sake of variety. Pempo means to send, commission, or appoint. Apostello means to send out or away. Exapostello means to send away from oneself. The Father who sends is greater than the Son who is sent. Christ said, “...I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I” (John 14:28). John 10:30 proves the Lord Jesus spoke of priority of position, not inferiority of nature: “I and my Father are one.” Paul also confirmed the priority of the Father’s position: “...the head of Christ is God” (1 Corinthians 11:3). The Father sent the Son, and both Father and Son are said to have sent the Holy Spirit: “And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father” (Galatians 4:6). Christ said, “But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me” (John 15:26). Since the Father and the Son both sent the Spirit, they are greater in priority but not superior in nature. Each Person of the Godhead has a distinguishing quality of His own, yet the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are one God. The Son is of the Father, but the Father is never of the Son. The Spirit is of the Father and the Son. The Father operates through the Son, and the Father and the Son operate through the Holy Spirit. Some things are attributed to all three Persons; but, on the other hand, certain acts are predicated of one Person which are never predicated of the other two Persons. Neither Person is God without the others, but each with the others is God. The Father elects. The Son redeems. The Holy Spirit regenerates. The title “Son” cannot be restricted to the incarnation of Jesus Christ. “Son” is a term that would not apply to the second Person of the Godhead if He were the Son only in an official or ethical sense. Jesus Christ sustains a relation to God which can be compared only with that which a son among men sustains to his father. The title refers to equality in nature. Therefore, the One who was eternally Son was manifested as Son in time. Three references in the New Testament where the word “begotten” is used to speak of Christ do not mean “only begotten.” The word for “begotten” of Acts 13:33, Hebrews 1:5, and Hebrews 5:5 is gegenneka, the perfect tense of gennao, which means to be the father of, to cause to be born, or to cause to arise, engender, excite. In Acts 13:33, Paul quoted Psalms 2:7 in defense of Christ’s resurrection. Hence, Christ was manifested with power when He rose from the dead. “Begotten” (gegenneka), therefore, means “Thou art my Son, this day have I brought thee forth or delivered thee up from the dead.” In Hebrews 1:5, Jesus Christ is revealed to be greater than the angels. Angels are called sons (Job 1:6; Job 2:1; Job 38:7), but they are not manifested as the Son of God is. The writer to the Hebrews quoted not only a portion of Psalms 2:7 but a part of 2 Samuel 7:14 - “I will be his father, and he shall be my son.” This statement could never be used to speak of the eternal relationship of Father and Son. 2 Samuel 7:14 referred to Solomon in the immediate sense but to the Son of God in the ultimate sense. Solomon was king, but Jesus Christ would be the theocratic King. Finally, in Hebrews 5:5, the validity of Christ’s priesthood is proved. The same Person who said “Thou art my son...,” also said “...Thou art a priest for ever...” (Hebrews 5:6). Christ’s qualification for the office is revealed in the first statement, and the proof of His appointment is manifested by God’s oath in the latter. The priesthood of Jesus Christ is greater than the Aaronic priesthood. Being the Son of God eternally and being manifested the Son of God in time are two different things. The “only begotten” (monogenes) is never used in connection with Christ’s human nature, but the words gennao (to be born, to cause to arise) and prototokos (firstborn) are associated with the incarnation. Having considered the references where “begotten,” gegenneka, is used, let us now investigate the word prototokos. It is used seven times in connection with the incarnation of Jesus Christ (Matthew 1:25; Luke 2:7; Romans 8:29; Colossians 1:15; Colossians 1:18; Hebrews 1:6; Revelation 1:5). The word prototokos comes from protos which means foremost, whether in time, place, order, or importance. The birth of Jesus Christ is superior and therefore has priority over all births, creatures, and events. Christ is said to be the firstborn Son of Mary, firstborn among many brethren, firstborn of every creature, firstborn from the dead, firstborn who shall be brought into the world, and firstborn of the dead. The adjective “superior” and the noun “priority” fit each verse where prototokos is used in connection with Jesus Christ. The human nature of Christ was not eternally in the bosom of the Father. However, the “only begotten” was and is in the bosom of the Father. This destroys the theory that Sonship is related only to Christ’s Manhood. Since the Father gave His only begotten Son, He was the only begotten Son before He was given (John 1:18; John 3:16). Christ said the person who has not believed in the “name” of the only begotten Son is already condemned (John 3:18). The word “name” speaks of Christ’s very being and nature-His Person and Work as revealed to men. Does the word “name” include Christ’s Sonship? We must not forget that God sees future, present, and past all at once. God is one mind. He has a fixed and settled purpose. All history is but one. There is no succession in God’s knowledge, but there is in the revelation of that knowledge to men. Since God’s knowledge is infinite, Sonship was not a revelation to Him who knows everything as present. If one says that Christ is God’s Son by virtue of the everlasting covenant, how can he say a covenant begat Him? Begetting implies a Person, not a compact. A covenant implies the existence of covenant parties. If one says that Christ is the Son of God by virtue of the union of the Divine and human natures, how does he answer the fact that the “only begotten” is never associated with Christ’s human nature? “That holy thing” was not called the Son of God, but the Person clothed in that was (Luke 1:35). If Jesus Christ is the Son of God merely by virtue of the hypostatic union, where is the blessedness of the declaration, “...This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased” (Matthew 3:17)? Finally, if Jesus Christ is Son of God merely by the incarnation, the Holy Spirit would be His Father, “declared the Son of God” would be meaningless, and there would be no uniqueness about His Sonship. That uniqueness is the Son of God becoming the Son of Man while remaining the Son of God. There seems to be some confusion about the title “Son of Man.” Some teach that the human birth of Christ did not make Him the Son of Man. They cite John 3:13 and John 6:62 in defense of their view that the Son of Man descended out of heaven and He ascended up where He was before. The answer to this is not difficult when one realizes that all things have, with respect to God, a known and a real existence. Both are eternally known to God. However, the God-Man did not coexist with the Father, but the Father coexisted with the God-Man. There is no time with God. He is the first and last simultaneously (Isaiah 41:4). Christ’s human nature was neither from heaven nor omnipresent, but the Son of God who assumed the human nature in time was omnipresent. Therefore, the Son of God who became the Son of Man in time did not cease to be the omnipresent Son of God. That is the answer to both John 3:13 and John 6:62. Jesus Christ is not said to be begotten of the Father in any sense except as the Father bore testimony to Him as being His unique Son. Psalms 2:7 has been a verse of much controversy among Bible students. Some feel the controversy is unprofitable. It has been said that the dispute reveals presumptuous curiosity rather than reverent faith. Personally, I believe this is an excuse for lack of study to learn as much as possible about the infinite God. The Psalmist boldly described God’s victory over His enemies. Functions of government are centered in the Son of God. Therefore, God said, “Yet have I set my king upon my holy hill of Zion” (Psalms 2:6). The kingdom predicted is not soteriological but eschatological. The appointed King expressed who He is and what He is able to do by virtue of the Divine decree: “I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee” (Psalms 2:7). Five things must be observed in the text: (1) Jesus Christ is Son. (2) He is My Son, i.e., the Son of God. (3) He is the Son of God begotten. “Begotten” comes from the Hebrew word yalad, which means to bear and bring forth as a mother (Genesis 4:1); to beget as a father (Genesis 4:18). With the second Person of the Godhead, a relation would exist which could be compared with that of a father and a son. The word “generation” is not inconsistent with equality. The Reformers used the word in the sense of individuals having equal status at the same time, not in the sense of procreation. (4) The Son of God is begotten this day. “This day” refers to the time the decree was revealed. Since this was a Divine act, it was eternal. This proves the eternal Sonship which the decree (law or statute) declares. There is no succession, yesterday, or tomorrow but one continuous day in eternity (Isaiah 43:13). The Psalmist is the seer, and the Psalm is a picture of what he saw and heard. (5) The begotten was by saying. Hence, the eternal Son was begotten by the eternal Father in the sense of the Father’s testimony: “...the LORD said...Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.” The argument that “eternal Father” and “eternal Son” are not Scriptural expressions is illogical. It is a fact that both are eternal. Furthermore, it is a fact that God’s knowledge is infinite (Psalms 147:5). Since God understands our thoughts afar off, to say the terms “Father” and “Son” were not understood by God until they were revealed in the incarnation would be against all logic. The Psalmist said, “Thou knowest my downsitting and mine uprising, thou understandest my thought afar off” (Psalms 139:2). This means before a thought becomes my own it is eternally comprehended by God. The incarnation would give a complete account of both Sonship and Fatherhood (John 1:18; Matthew 11:27; Luke 10:22). God alone can declare God. The Greek word for “declare” of John 1:18 is exegesato. It comes from two words - ek, out of, and hegeomai, to take the lead; to think, consider, esteem, regard; to be chief, to preside, govern. Hence, the full account of Fatherhood and Sonship is necessary for the elect’s salvation. Therefore, Fatherhood had to be there in order to be brought out. Fatherhood cannot exist apart from Sonship. Hence, the “Son” was given (Isaiah 9:6). The Son is equal with the Father (John 5:17-47; John 10:30). He is the image of God (Hebrews 1:3). The word “image” involves two things-representation and manifestation. The Son of God, therefore, is not simply the revealer of God, but He Himself is God revealed. In order to reveal the Father, the Son condescended to take the place of subjection to the Father. The place of subjection as the God-Man was to reveal the Father and redeem the elect. Two Persons are revealed in Psalms 2:7 -the Father and the Son. The Son’s begetting by the Father’s testimony is a declaration of an eternal fact in the Divine nature. Lancelot Andrewes shows there is a resemblance between begetting and speaking. Both result in bringing forth. When one speaks, he does it either within himself or without to others. What one speaks comes from what he thought. The thought is a form of generation known only to oneself until the thought is declared. When the thought is expressed, it takes on a form of expression called the second begetting. Let it be fully understood that the day of Christ’s begetting is for the elect. He was eternally begotten in the purpose of the Father to be begotten of the virgin Mary in time. Both result in bringing forth. The purpose (decree) was brought forth: “...when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman...” (Galatians 4:4). Therefore, the Word which was eternally with God and known only to God was revealed by the Spirit to the seer in prophecy. This is what is taught in Psalms 2:7. But there is more to come. The prophecy of the eternally begotten Son became a reality when the Word was made flesh and dwelt among men (John 1:1; John 1:14). Hence, the eternally begotten was begotten in time. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 52: 03.03. CHRIST'S TWO ADVENTS ======================================================================== Chapter 3 - CHRIST’S TWO ADVENTS The prophecy of Isaiah 9:6-7 came at a time when King Ahaz and the people of Judah had forsaken God. Ahaz had refused the sign of deliverance and was seeking alliance with Assyria to fight off his enemies. The people were turning to mediums and spiritists instead of God for guidance. Isaiah shows in the last verse of chapter eight that many prefer any source of assumed intelligence, even though it is diabolical. In this setting, the prophet said, “To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them” (Isaiah 8:20). The fact that man possesses a spirit causes him to seek support for that spirit in the day of mental strain and distress. Therefore, the unsaved person is an open target for “familiar spirits” (Isaiah 8:19). Satan does not allow the vacuum to go without filling it in his own way and for his own purpose. Familiar spirits will tell their clients just what they want to hear. They have no regard for the law of God, because it is their enemy. However, there is one thing for sure, the word which they despise will judge them in the last day. Christ said, “He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day” (John 12:48). In the midst of the darkness, Isaiah saw the sunrise behind the clouds. There was a brighter day, a day without clouds. It is interesting to observe that the clearest promises of the Messiah have been given in the darkest hours of history. In the dark hour of Adam’s fallen state, God gave the promise of sin’s remedy in the seed of the woman (Genesis 3:15). In the dark hour of Israel’s bondage in Egypt, Israel saw the promised Messiah in the paschal lamb (Exodus 12:3-10). When the foundation of society in Israel was crumbling with iniquity, God gave the promise of a sure foundation for believers (Isaiah 28:16). When false teachers were overthrowing the faith of some in Paul’s day, the Holy Spirit gave a message through the apostle to Timothy: “Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his. And, Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity” (2 Timothy 2:19). As we see the dark clouds gathering in these days of great wickedness and apostasy, our Lord is saying to us through Luke: “And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh” (Luke 21:28). This redemption is not that of the soul but of the body (Romans 8:23; Romans 13:11). Prophecy is to the Christian what a light is in a dark room. Peter said, “We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts” (2 Peter 1:19). Both the dawning of the day and the rising of the morning star refer to the parousia. The dawning of the day speaks of the anticipation in believers’ hearts caused by the signs of the approaching day of our Lord. Such anticipation produces a great transformation in the hearts of God’s people (1 John 3:2-3). Hence, the unfulfilled prophecy of Scripture is a light that God has provided for the church in her hour of suffering and darkness. Prophecy not only proves the faithfulness of God in the past by prophecies that have been fulfilled, but the unfulfilled prophecies give direction and comfort to His people in the present. Hope is strengthened and sustained by what God has promised for the future. David was living in dark times when God’s message came to him: “The Spirit of the LORD spake by me, and his word was in my tongue. The God of Israel said, the Rock of Israel spake to me, He that ruleth over men must be just, ruling in the fear of God. And he shall be as the light of the morning, when the sun riseth, even a morning without clouds; as the tender grass springing out of the earth by clear shining after rain. Although my house be not so with God; yet he hath made with me an everlasting covenant, ordered in all things, and sure: for this is all my salvation, and all my desire, although he make it not to grow” (2 Samuel 23:2-5). Although David’s house (his family) was not right with God, he knew that God’s covenant was unconditional and everlasting. “A morning without clouds” is a prophecy of the coming kingdom. The darkness before dawn appropriately describes the period preceding the kingdom: “...Weeping may endure for a night, but joy cometh in the morning” (Psalms 30:5). “The night is far spent, the day is at hand...” (Romans 13:12). Isaiah’s prophecy is in the present tense. “For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given....” Future things are often expressed in the Hebrew as past, present, or both. To God there is neither past nor future. He is the “I Am.” God “...calleth those things which be not as though they were” (Romans 4:17). The prophecy in Isaiah 9:6-7 should be viewed as though the Messiah was just born to national Israel, and that nation was also born again to welcome Him (Isaiah 66:7). “Unto us” refers to the only nation ever elected as a nation. The kingdom is the subject of Old Testament prophecy. Isaiah 9:6-7 has had only a partial fulfillment. A Child has been born, a Son has been given, but the government is not upon Christ’s shoulders. The government is not soteriological but eschatological. During Christ’s personal ministry on earth, He paid tribute to Caesar (Matthew 17:24-27). Caesar was not forced by the righteous rule of Christ over men to pay homage. The Lord Jesus did not rule in “peace” at His first advent (Matthew 10:34). He did not sit on His throne - the throne of David (Luke 1:32; Revelation 3:21). A world-wide, righteous government and universal peace are inseparable. The prophecy of Jeremiah 23:5-8 prophesies a reigning King. The terms of this prophecy were not fulfilled at Christ’s first advent. The Jews rejected Him at His first advent. They said, “We have no king but Caesar” (John 19:15). This prophecy, therefore, has been partially fulfilled. Like other Old Testament prophecies, the coming of the Son of God into the world is announced without distinguishing the first from the second advent. Included in the entire message of Isaiah to King Ahaz are both the first and second advents of Jesus Christ. Isaiah declared that Jehovah had spoken to him. The prophecy is better understood if the word for “confederacy” of Isaiah 8:12 is translated “conspiracy.” Isaiah and his associates were accused of a conspiracy against Ahaz and Judah, because the prophet had condemned the alliance of Ahaz with Assyria. This kind of slander is always expected when God’s true servants oppose professed followers of God who appeal to the heathen for help. When Amos prophesied that Jeroboam would die by the sword and the people would be led into captivity, Amaziah, the priest of Bethel, sent word to Jeroboam, saying, “Amos hath conspired against thee in the midst of the house of Israel...” (Amos 7:10-11). When Paul’s message of truth cut the hearts of the religionists, more than forty conspired that they would eat nothing until they had killed the apostle (Acts 23:12-14). However, Paul was protected from the conspiracy. Condemnation of fleshly activities in professing Christendom will result in conspiracies against God’s men today. Religious flesh is the same in every age. Furthermore, when God’s ministers warn people of the impending judgment of God on an ungodly society before the second advent, religious scoffers say, “...Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation” (2 Peter 3:4). Both the first and second advents of Jesus Christ are predicted in Isaiah 9:6-7, without any distinction between the two. This is not unusual from the perspective of Old Testament prophets. Both advents are absolutely necessary for completed redemption with respect to redemption’s application. The Old Testament prophets saw salvation of men in its completion-soul and body. Redemption’s application to the soul takes place when one is regenerated by the Spirit (John 3:8), but its application to the body will not take place until Christ’s second advent (Romans 8:23). Christ’s first advent was in humiliation to purchase redemption for the elect; His second advent will be in power to finalize its application to the elect and to establish the kingdom for them. Each has its appropriate place in God’s eternal purpose. The glory of the second is the reward subsequent to the suffering and application of the first. The first advent of Christ is given in the first part of Isaiah 9:6 - “For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given....” The incarnation was an absolute necessity. Man can suffer, but he cannot satisfy God by his suffering. God absolutely considered can satisfy, but He cannot suffer. Jesus Christ is both a child born and a Son given. As the “child born,” we have the human nature in which the Son of God could suffer; and as the “Son given,” we have the Divine nature of the Person who alone could satisfy God. Hence, the God-Man is able to suffer the penalty of sin for man and make satisfaction unto God at the same time. As the Mediator between God and man, Jesus Christ-the God-Man-reconciles God to the elect and the elect sinners to God. Jesus Christ restores God’s favor manward in propitiation. He removes our enmity Godward in reconciliation. Reconciliation is objective before it is subjective: “For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life” (Romans 5:10). Christ’s death on the cross removed the alienation objectively before it is removed subjectively by regeneration. The “child born” and the “Son given” are two statements that predict the hypostatic union-two natures in one Person. Three great areas of study are opened to us in this prophecy of Christ’s first advent: (1) “Child” and “Son” speak of Christ’s two natures. “Child” is a term used among men. No one would ever speak of God absolutely considered as a “child.” There are references to Jesus Christ as a “babe” (brephos - Luke 2:12), a “child” (paidion - Luke 2:27), a “boy” (pais - Luke 2:43), and a “man” (anthropos - John 19:5; andra - Acts 2:22); but these apply to Him as the One in whom both the Divine and human natures are united. Hence, the “child” is from the earth, but the “Son” is from heaven. (2) “Child” and “Son” tell us what had a beginning and Who is without beginning. That which was born of the virgin had a beginning, but the Son who assumed that which was born has no beginning. The virgin brought forth the child that was born, but the Father gave the Son who was without human birth. (3) At the birth of Jesus Christ, there was a “manger” for the child, but there was a “star” for the Son (Matthew 2:2). The shepherds came to view the child, but a choir of angels celebrated the Son (Luke 2:7-14). When Jesus Christ said, “I thirst,” He was emphasizing His human nature (John 19:28). God does not thirst. When He said, “I and my Father are one,” Christ was stressing His Divine nature (John 10:30). Moreover, when He said, “Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest,” the Lord Jesus was manifesting Himself as the God-Man (Matthew 11:28). The Lord Jesus Christ is equal with the Father but different because He possesses a human nature. He is the incarnate Son. Christ is equal with His brethren but different because He possesses a Divine nature (Hebrews 2:11-18). “Child” and “Son” do not constitute two persons. There is one Person with two natures. Both “child” and “Son” have but one name - “...His name shall be called...,” and upon the shoulders of this Person shall rest the righteous government. Unto whom is the unique Person of Jesus Christ given? The text says “unto us.” The promise, therefore, was made to Israel through the prophet; but the promise includes the unconditional Abrahamic covenant. By the death of the “seed” (Galatians 3:16), provision was made for the blessings promised in the Abrahamic covenant to come on both Jews and Gentiles (Galatians 3:13-14; Hebrews 2:16). “Unto us” includes all the elect given to Jesus Christ (John 17:2; John 17:6; John 17:9; John 17:11-12; John 17:24). The Son is given to the elect because the elect were given to the Son before the foundation of the world. His name is half Hebrew-Jesus-and half Greek-Christ. Of all the gifts that have come down from the Father of lights, the gift of His Son is the greatest (James 1:17). “Thanks be unto God for his unspeakable gift” (2 Corinthians 9:15). Precious gifts always come wrapped in something less precious, and the gift of God’s Son is not different. The Son of God was wrapped in human nature. His human nature, however, was not something unclean or peccable. The human nature, although infinitely below the dignity of the Divine nature, was holy (Luke 1:35). The second advent of Jesus Christ receives greater emphasis in Isaiah 9:6-7 than the first advent. The first advent is stressed in Isaiah 7:14. Connecting the government of this prophecy with the church will not withstand the test of Scripture. The church cannot be equated with the kingdom of Old Testament prophecy. At the center of Jewish tradition was the belief in a Divine kingdom. The prophet pointed to a King of whose government and peace there shall be no end. To equate the missionary work of the church with the increase of Christ’s government and peace of which there will be no end is exegetical fraud. All missionary work will come to an end when the church has completed her mission on the earth. Some have gone so far as to say the increase of Christ’s government is by the distribution of Bibles and tracts, by building hospitals and schools, and by preaching the gospel under the influence of the Holy Spirit. Conversely, the kingdom will be established by the coming King after the church has been completed and her mission fulfilled. Christ’s kingdom will be different from His control of the church as her Head and His providential rule over the universe. If Christ were reigning in the kingdom now, all the peoples of the world would recognize His reign. His reign in the kingdom will be visible. Neither His Headship in the church nor His sovereign rule in providence is visible. People in the world at large know nothing about Christ’s present rule. There is a great difference between the rule of the Lord Jesus Christ in the kingdom and his rule in the church. He will rule immediately in the kingdom; whereas, He rules mediately in the church. Isaiah’s prophecy states: “...the government shall be upon his [Son’s] shoulder [shoulders NASB].” Many expositors write and talk about the supreme, executive power given to Jesus Christ (John 5:22-23), such as forgiveness of sin and punishment of the ungodly. They make a threefold division of the kingdom: (1) the kingdom of grace, (2) the kingdom of providence, and (3) the kingdom of glory. By kingdom of grace, they mean the government of the church is laid upon the shoulders of Christ with a threefold solemnity: (1) an unalterable decree (Psalms 2:6-8), (2) a covenant transaction between the Father and the Son (John 17:1-26), and (3) an oath, ratifying the determination of a council of peace (Psalms 89:3-4; Psalms 89:35). Those who hold this view compare the kingdom and the church. They state that as the kingdom has laws to govern, officers under the king, armies to train, enemies to fight, and fortification to protect, so has the church of Jesus Christ. Therefore, to them the church or kingdom during the Old Testament dispensation was confined to the posterity of Abraham, with the exception of a few proselytes; but now, since the first advent of Christ, the church or kingdom has been extended also to the Gentile nations. But is this the meaning of the government upon Christ’s shoulders in this text? The prophet enlarged upon the meaning of the government of Christ in Isaiah 9:7 - “Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this.” A correct exegesis of this verse should dispel all confusion on the entire passage under consideration. That which will be given is not the last word on this passage; but it shall be an honest effort, in the light of all Scripture, to arrive at the truth apart from any denominational bias. The exalted and reigning King shall have a name above every name. Following the condescension and humiliation of the eternal Son, Paul said: “...God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name: That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father” (Php 2:9-11). “To bend or bow” and “to profess openly” are aspects of the acknowledgement of God’s greatness based on Isaiah 45:23 - “...That unto me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear.” There will be a universal acclamation in which angels (“of things in heaven”), men (“and things in earth”), and devils (“and things under the earth”) shall confess the Lordship of Jesus Christ. By the subjects of the righteous government of the King, His name shall be called: (1) Wonderful: He is wonderful in His eternal generation, birth, life, death, resurrection, ascension, exaltation, and coming kingdom. He is no ninety day wonder, but an eternal Wonder-the Wonder of all wonders. Our Savior and King is beyond our comprehension. Therefore, the first syllable of His name reveals that whatever we may know of the Son’s excellencies, there is still more that is unknown. He is not a miracle-worker, but He Himself is a miracle. As God-Man in one Person, He is a miraculous Personage. (2) Counsellor: This syllable of His name refers to Christ’s singular capacity for management. Every man, regardless of his position, needs counsellors; but the God-Man is the Wisdom of the Father (Proverbs 8:1-36). In Him are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge (Colossians 2:3). The Lord Jesus never went to college, belonged to any of the sects of His day, or counselled any by human methods. Christ is called Counsellor because He is the Counsellor with God. Before the world was, there was a solemn conclave between Father, Son, and Spirit of their working out the eternal purpose. Christ has preeminence as Counsellor. (3) Mighty God: In the hypostatic union, the Divine nature is not humanized and the human nature is not deified. The two natures are so united in the one Person that what is peculiar to one nature is often ascribed to the other (John 3:13; Acts 20:28). As the God-Man, Jesus Christ is the Mighty God who has power over all flesh (John 17:2), is able to save to the uttermost (Hebrews 7:25), holds all things together (Colossians 1:17), and shall destroy the wicked one with the brightness of His coming (2 Thessalonians 2:8). (4) Everlasting Father (Father of eternity): Christ is not called Father in respect to the eternal three. He is the Son in that point of view. How complex is the Person of Jesus Christ! The prophet called Him “child,” “Son,” “Counsellor,” and now “Eternal Father” (Father of eternity). A look at Jesus Christ will save the soul (Isaiah 45:22), but diligent study and patient meditation alone by the child of God can fill the mind with the knowledge of Him who passes knowledge. In what sense is Jesus Christ Father? Is the Son His own Father? The Hebrews had a tradition of calling a person the father of something for which he was responsible for its existence. For example, Jubal is called the father of such as handled the harp and organ; and Jabal was the father of such as dwelt in tents and raised cattle (Genesis 4:20-21). These two men were the inventors of their occupations. Furthermore, according to Jewish custom, the elder brother was the father of the family in the absence of his father. The firstborn took precedence over all and took upon him his father’s position. In this light, since the Lord Jesus will be the only visible Person of the Godhead in the kingdom, He will exercise the Father’s office to His own. (5) Prince of peace: The Lord Jesus gives individual peace to the elect as they are justified by faith (Romans 5:1). This peace was made by the blood of His cross (Colossians 1:20). When peace has been disturbed, Christ restores it (Isaiah 57:18-19). This peace which we have in a world of disturbance will be perfected in the kingdom. There will be no end to the increase of Christ’s government and peace. The government shall never have an interregnum. There will never be another king to reign when the Lord Jesus sits on David’s throne. There will never be an end to the government and peace of His kingdom: “He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David: And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end” (Luke 1:32-33). The subject of the kingdom clearly illuminates the past and present. It dispels the darkness of the immediate future for Christians. An explanation of neither the past nor the present can be given unless we consider the ultimate result displayed in the coming kingdom. Salvation is perfected in the kingdom, not in the church. Reigning is in the kingdom, but suffering is in the church. The prophet closed his prophecy by saying, “The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this” (Isaiah 9:7). No person can handle the Scripture properly without the correct concept of the kingdom. The establishment of the kingdom will not take place until the Son of Man openly exercises His power and visibly brings all things into subjection to His righteous reign on the earth. He alone will perform this when He comes as King of kings and Lord of lords. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 53: 03.04. CHRIST'S TWO FORMS (PART I) ======================================================================== Chapter 4 - CHRIST’S TWO FORMS (Part I) The nature of the Son of God was not changed, and He did not surrender His attributes in the incarnation. Jesus Christ did not cease to be God, but He veiled His Deity in human flesh. The Son of God did not take upon Himself all that we are, but He did share flesh and blood that through death He might save His people. He who created all things and upholds all things condescended to become the “seed of Abraham,” “the seed of David,” and “the seed of the woman.” The eternal Son of God shared our nature but not our sin. He could not have atoned for our sins if He had shared our guilt. He could not have cleansed our hearts if He had Himself been unclean. Priests of the Levitical system first offered sacrifices for their own sins and then for the sins of the people whom they represented, but the Son of God was the spotless Lamb who offered Himself. He who is all purity came to an impure people to make them pure. He who is absolute holiness came in a holy body that we might be partakers of His holiness. He made of one blood all nations of men so that in the sin of one all sinned. He then came in flesh and blood that we might be washed from our sins in His blood. He who was in the form of God took upon Himself the form of a servant to cleanse us by His blood. Christ took on Him the seed of Abraham (Hebrews 2:16). The Greek verb is the present middle form of epilambano, which means to lay hold of, seize, to assume a portion of, to assume the nature of, or to attach oneself to. This is not the language that describes the ordinary birth of a person. No human being could say, with respect to his birth, that he was pleased to take on him such a body. Most people I know would have taken on them different bodies than they have. It seems that everyone is dissatisfied to some extent with his body. Our text describes voluntary action. It was an act contemplated beforehand. The middle of the verb epilambano means that He Himself assumed the seed, sperma (seed, offspring, children, posterity, nature), of Abraham. Preexistence, power, and condescension are implied in Hebrews 2:16 - “...He took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham.” The Lord Jesus is greater than either angels or men. He who voluntarily took on Him the seed of Abraham was not less God because He said, “Before Abraham was, I am” (John 8:58). The Lord Jesus was determined to save those the Father gave Him. Our Savior’s birth in the flesh was the assurance of our birth in the Spirit. His birth in time is the pledge of our new birth. He is the Son of God by nature, and we are sons of God by grace. The prospect of death causes fear which results in mental bondage. Christ delivers His people from bondage: “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 had the power of death, that is, the devil; And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage” (Hebrews 2:14-15). Because of Christ’s death in the place of our death, Satan no longer has power over the elect to keep them in bondage to fear. As soon as the sovereign Spirit regenerates sinners, they are delivered experientially from the fear of death which has subjected them to slavery. The fear of death is twofold: (1) There is an instinctive fear that is shared by all, even the strongest Christians. The psychological nature of man is such that the first conscious reality of impending death causes fear. This fear is normal. The stark reality of dying hides from even the believer the blessedness of dying with the Lord, until he collects his thoughts (Revelation 14:13). After he gains his composure, the grace of God made available through his knowledge of Scripture will give calmness in the hour of dissolution. Hence, he can say, “...though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil: for thou art with me; thy rod and thy staff they comfort me” (Psalms 23:4). The believer not only passes through death, but to him it is only a shadow. The shadow is a shade cast by an object, and the object is the death of Christ. Therefore, the sting of death has been removed by the death of Christ, leaving death but a shadow because it is stingless. The sting of death is sin, but the sin question has been settled for the Christian. The glorious light of the resurrection is behind the shadow (1 Corinthians 15:51-57). It is wonderful to know that death belongs to the Christian rather than the believer belonging to death. This is what Paul meant when he said, “Therefore let no man glory in men. For all things are yours; Whether Paul, or Apollos, or Cephas, or the world, or life, or death, or things present, or things to come; all are yours; And ye are Christ’s; and Christ is God’s” (1 Corinthians 3:21-23). (2) The sting of death has not been removed for the unbeliever. He will not walk through death’s shadow, but he will walk into the second death which is eternal. He dreads death’s mystery. Hebrews 2:14-16 cannot give comfort to the nonchristian, because he is not included among the “sons” (Hebrews 2:10), “brethren” (Hebrews 2:11), “children” (Hebrews 2:14), and “his brethren” (Hebrews 2:17). There is a threefold division of Hebrews 2:14 that suggests a great truth - “the children,” “he also,” and “the devil.” There should be no fear to the Christian because the Lord Jesus comes between him and the devil. This is the secret of the believer’s safety, but the unbeliever does not have Christ to stand between him and the devil. Hence, there is no hope to the person who dies in his sin. The condescension of the Son of God is seen in His high priestly prayer: “And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them...” (John 17:22). Christ’s essential glory is something that can be neither received nor given. As the second Person of the Godhead, Christ possesses the glory which is essentially His from eternity. He never relinquished this glory of the Son of God. As the incarnate Son, there was a personal glory given which was ever peculiar to the God-Man and therefore incommunicable (John 1:14). However, there was a glory given to our Savior for the special object and purpose that He should give it to His believing people, until out of His fulness we receive grace upon grace. Christ’s reception of anything from the Father presupposes condescension. He who received this glory was none the richer, but it was for our enrichment. In fact, Christ receiving glory refers to His poverty; but His poverty was in order that we might be made rich: “For ye know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that, though he was rich, yet for your sakes he became poor, that ye through his poverty might be rich” (2 Corinthians 8:9). Our enrichment is not separate from Jesus Christ. The glory Christ received, which was for the benefit of His people, was the glory of His threefold office of Prophet, Priest, and King. As the Prophet, He is our Divine Messenger. He is the Teacher who has come from God to reveal the Father and to unfold the truth for the everlasting good of His people. He is our Divine Priest who has satisfied God by His atonement and has reconciled us to Himself. He is our King for whom we look to complete our salvation and establish His kingdom. This threefold office is the glory which has been communicated to us. It is not some perishable wealth or worldly honor. As the recipients of this glory, we are the messengers of God reflecting the light of Him who is the Light of the world. We are the sons of God by the redemptive work of Christ. Finally, we are motivated by the hope of Christ’s second coming and the new heavens and the new earth. Men seek glory for themselves in material wealth, worldly honor, and political power; but all such glory has no lasting portion for the soul. The glory which Christ gives will not only be remembered, but it will shine forth as the manifestation of the sons of God. Christ was rich, but He became poor: “For ye know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that, though he was rich, yet for your sakes he became poor, that ye through his poverty might be rich” (2 Corinthians 8:9). Persons who have been born and nurtured in the lap of poverty feel less woes of their condition. However, there are others whose poverty we pity. They were once rich but now they know the meaning of poverty. We pity them because they have known something better. Since Christ neither was born rich nor acquired earthly wealth, His riches must be attributed to His preincarnate state. He was rich in the possession of the inexpressible glory which He had with the Father before the foundation of the world (John 17:5; John 17:24; Hebrews 2:14-16). Christ was rich not only in glory but in virtue. His inherent righteousness could not be laid aside, yet His relative position to the law was altered. He was regarded by the law as a debtor, and His life was forfeited for your moral poverty. Although Christ could not become poor in the sense of being a sinner, He did become poor in the sense of being treated as one: “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” (Galatians 3:13). “For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him” (2 Corinthians 5:21). There is no degree of wealth to compare with the riches of Christ Jesus before His incarnation. Furthermore, there is no degree of poverty to compare with the poverty of Christ in His incarnation. Since He was so steeped in poverty, what must He be in riches? Since He made us rich in His poverty, what will He do for us now that He is glorified? Since the dying Savior wrought salvation from sin for us, should not the living and interceding Savior abundantly secure it? “For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life” (Romans 5:10). Christ’s poverty was for our sake. The true test of any action lies in its nature. Many deeds seem to be noble when in reality they are ignoble. They have been performed with an inglorious motive. Conversely, other actions appear to be inglorious, but they are full of the glory of a noble purpose. The less of self in any deed, the more noble it is. This brings us to Paul’s purpose in the message of Php 2:1-11. Both doctrine and duty are closely united. The “therefore” of verse 1 connects the passage with the manner of life worthy of the gospel in Php 1:27-30. Positively, there are qualities to be cultivated (Php 2:1-2); and negatively, there are things to be avoided (Php 2:3-4). Php 1:5 has been considered transitional, linking the duty of Php 1:1-4 with the great doctrinal section of Php 1:6-11. The mind which was in Christ Jesus should be in the Philippian saints. They were followers of Christ. The inculcation of personal virtue based on moral example is not implied in the words “in you” (Php 2:5). Contrarily, they signify that the same mind as Christ’s should be exercised in church fellowship at Philippi. Humility is the only attitude for those in Christ, because He is the one supreme example to His people (1 Peter 2:21). Christ’s humiliation consists in three stages: (1) The nature of Christ’s humiliation was self-renunciation (Php 2:6-7 a). The apostle had just appealed to the saints to “Look not every man on his own things...” (Php 2:4). (2) The manner of Christ’s humiliation was the incarnation (Php 2:7 b). Paul would remind the saints of his statement, “Look...every man also on the things of others” (Php 2:4). (3) The extent of Christ’s humiliation was His death (Php 2:8). The apostle would call the believer’s attention to his statement in Php 2:3, “...let each esteem other better than themselves (let each of you regard one another as more important than himself-NASB).” As Jesus Christ who was rich became poor and suffered for “our sake,” let us not forget that Paul said, “For unto you it is given in the behalf of Christ, not only to believe on him, but also to suffer for his sake” (Php 1:29). “For His sake” includes “...for righteousness’ sake...” (Matthew 5:10), “...for the gospel’s sake...” (1 Corinthians 9:23), “...for his body’s sake, which is the church...” (Colossians 1:24), “For the elect’s sakes...” (2 Timothy 2:10), and “...for the kingdom of God’s sake” (Luke 18:29). The norm for Christology is given by the Holy Spirit through Paul in Php 2:5-11. Paul named the Person who was in the form of God and took upon Himself the form of a servant. His name is Jesus Christ (Php 2:5). This passage proves not only Christ’s condescension but His preexistence. Hence, the same statements that prove His human nature also prove His Divine nature. The Divine Person did not become a mere man. He did not lay aside His Deity but assumed a human nature. This is called the hypostatic union-two natures united in one Person. The Divine nature never has a human attribute, and the human nature never has a Divine attribute. However, the God-Man may be spoken of as having both Divine and human attributes. Christ’s preexistent nature is strikingly described in Php 2:6 - “Who, being in the form of God....” The Greek text reads hos en morphe theou huparchon. The word huparchon is a present active participle of huparcho which means to exist, to subsist. The present tense, active voice makes it read: “Who is existing in the form of God.” Furthermore, the word morphe speaks of who Christ is essentially. This word is used three times in the New Testament (Mark 16:12; Php 2:6-7). The word in its original meaning carried the idea of reality that does not change regardless of how it might be manifested. Now, we see the importance of the word. He who was in the form of God does not cease to be God, even though He chose to manifest Himself in the form of a servant. The mystery of God was manifest in the flesh (1 Timothy 3:16). The mode of manifestation is not identical with the essence itself. He who was with God was God (John 1:1). Paul used an expression which indicates the relation of the second Person to the first Person of the Godhead. There is an eternal subordination without inferiority of nature. There cannot be a Father without a Son. The eternal Being must have an image. Christ Jesus is both the form of God and the express image of God (Php 2:6; Colossians 1:15; Hebrews 1:3). We must not think of Christ Jesus apart from both His Divine and human natures. Since the incarnation, He is the God-Man forever. The reality of Christ’s human nature is set forth by three expressions in Php 2:7-8 - (1) “Form of a servant” is used to describe Christ’s human nature. The same word is used to describe both His human and Divine natures. Therefore, morphe proves the reality of the human nature, as it does the Divine. Christ took the human nature that He might serve and die in it. (2) “Likeness of men” indicates that Christ Jesus is different from all other men. He who was eternally begotten was begotten in time by the Holy Spirit. Paul’s definition leaves room for all that range of difference between Christ and us. (3) “Found in fashion as a man” completes the description of the incarnation. It has been suggested that “form” describes who He was, and “fashion” describes what He looked like. The word “fashion” comes from schema - fashion, form; fashion, external show (1 Corinthians 7:31); guise, appearance (Php 2:8). Some give morphe as a synonym for schema. In certain cases, they may be used interchangeably; but here, Paul gave a contrast between what Jesus Christ was in Himself and what He appeared to be before men. Christ Jesus existing in “the form of God” and taking “the form of a servant” in time are two different things. Thinking of God absolutely devours one’s thoughts, but thinking of God manifested in the flesh is a comforting reflection. The form of God denotes the dignity of His being, and the form of a servant indicates His humiliation. The dignity of the preincarnate Christ refers to what He is essentially. He is essentially one with the Father (John 10:30). Therefore, morphe is properly the nature or essence, not in the abstract but as actually subsisting in the individual and retained as long as the individual Himself exists. Since Jesus Christ is eternal, the word includes His whole nature and essence. Christ did not change one form of being for another in the incarnation. He changed His appearance by assuming another nature-the form of a servant. He did not cease being God, because He is immutable (Malachi 3:6; Hebrews 13:8; James 1:17). But the Lord Jesus did assume the form of a servant, thus becoming what He was not before, the God-Man. He veiled Himself in flesh for the elect’s sake. Moreover, He condescended to notice our misery and agree to be our Savior; but much more did He condescend to associate with that misery by becoming our Kinsman-Redeemer by taking the form of a servant. In the form of God, He commanded. In the form of a servant, He subjected Himself to His own commands. In the form of God, Christ was the lawmaker. In the form of a servant, He subjected Himself to the law He had made (Galatians 4:4). He was born, lived, and died under His own holy law. Furthermore, He satisfied every requirement of that Divine law. The real difference between the “form of God” and the “form of a servant” is revealed in the tenses of the participles (verbal adjectives) used. The participle huparchon is the present active of the verb huparcho and means “who is existing in the form of God.” In the three expressions to describe Christ’s human nature, there are the participles: (1) labon, the second aorist active of lambano which means “taking the form of a servant”; (2) genomenos, the second aorist middle of ginomai which means “being made in the likeness of men”; and (3) heuretheis, first aorist passive of heurisko which means “recognized in fashion as a man.” Hence, He who ever exists in the form of God did not cease being God when He assumed the form of a servant. The union of the “form of God” with the “form of a servant” has made Jesus Christ the complex Person. John tells us that the Word who was with God and was God became flesh (John 1:14). The same verb is used in John 1:3 - “All things were made [became] by him....” The Word became that which first became by Him. The Word did not cease to be what He eternally was by becoming flesh. He only entered into a new mode of being, but He did not become a new being. (See Luke 1:35; Romans 1:3-4; Romans 9:5; 1 Timothy 2:5). The Godhead did not become flesh, but the second Person of the Godhead did. The names of the Persons of the Godhead remained unchanged in the incarnation. Hence, it was fitting that the Father commissioned the Son to become flesh instead of the Son commissioning the Father. It has been suggested that it was proper for the middle Person of the Divine Triunity to become the Mediator between God and man, since man occupies the middle position between angels and beasts in the scale of creatures. The eternal Word made flesh must be distinguished from transubstantiation. In the incarnation, the phrase “And the word was made [became] flesh” does not mean that the Word that was God ceased to be God. That would be transubstantiation. Transubstantiation is the change of an entire substance in which one substance is entirely destroyed and an entirely new one takes its place, without any change of appearance. This is one of the chief doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church. Their catechism states: “The priests of the Church continue to exercise this power to change bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ by repeating the words of Christ: ‘This is my body...this is my blood,’ at the moment of consecration (the time when the sacred change takes place) in the mass.... The change of the entire substance of the bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ is Transubstantiation” (The New Baltimore Catechism #2). Roman Catholics make a god out of the mass and then become cannibals and devour him. There are some who believe that Christ who existed in the form of God emptied Himself and became something less than He was originally. Liberal theologians press the sense of “emptied” until nothing of the form of God remains. They insist that the Son of God emptied out of Himself the attributes of Deity. This would be transmutation, the change from one nature to another. This is the opposite of the Roman Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation, the change of the bread and wine into the body and blood of Jesus Christ. Transmutation is heresy regardless of which way it goes -from God to man or from bread and wine to the body and blood of Jesus Christ. The eternal Word made flesh must be distinguished from consubstantiation. Some believe there was a mixture of the Divine and human natures in the incarnation. In the fifth century A. D., Eutyches taught there was a mixture of the two natures in the incarnation, thus making a third person which is different from both. Eutychianism is mentioned to show that the Lutheran church has partially revived the heresy of Eutyches. The Christology of Luther was clear on some points but indefinite on others. His favorite illustration on the union of the two natures was derived from heated iron. Two substances are united. The one interpenetrates the other. The iron receives the attributes of the heat, making it glow. Where the iron is, there the heat is; but the iron remains iron and the heat remains heat. This ingenious illustration, however, does not explain how Divine attributes are transferred to the human nature, and human attributes are transferred to the Divine nature. Divine attributes are not attributed to the human nature, and human attributes are not attributed to the Divine nature. They are ever distinct but performed by the God-Man. Therefore, the properties of the Divine essence never became the properties of the human. The Divine never becomes human, and the finite never becomes infinite. Lutheran Christology is reflected in their doctrine of the Lord’s Supper. In their doctrine of consubstantiation, they believe the substance of the body and blood of Christ coexist in and with the bread and wine of the Eucharist. Luther affirmed that not only the accidents (the outward appearance of the elements) but the reality of bread and wine remained in the sacrament of the altar. He further stated that the bread and wine are really bread and wine and the true flesh and blood of Christ are in them in the same fashion and the same degree as the Roman Catholics hold them to be beneath their accidents. Failure to see the difference between Person and nature has led to mixing the natures in Christ. Nature denotes the sum total of all the essential qualities of a thing-that which makes it what it is. Person denotes a complete substance endowed with reason. It is nature with something added, namely, independent subsistence. Christ assumed a nature that was not personalized, one that did not exist by itself. However, it is incorrect to speak of Christ’s human nature as impersonal. It is in-personal, because it has personal existence in the Person of Christ. The Word made flesh means Christ Jesus came to possess characteristics in addition to His Divine attributes. Assuming a human nature gave the Son of God a human form of consciousness as well as the Divine cognizance. Christ had only one form of consciousness in His preexistent state; but now, in His human awareness, He was “a man of sorrows,” “acquainted with grief,” “smitten of God, and afflicted,” “wounded,” “bruised,” “cut off out of the land of the living” (Isaiah 53:1-12), and “wearied with his journey” (John 4:6). He “wept” (John 11:35), “hungered” (Matthew 4:2), and “slept” (Matthew 8:24). The Son of God could not have any of these human experiences before the incarnation. But He was “touched with the feeling of our infirmities” (Hebrews 4:15), and as our High Priest He sympathizes with us in His incarnate state. He became subject to all the trials of human nature, except one. He had no experimental knowledge with sin. When the eternal Son assumed “the form of a servant,” He did not cease being the “form of God.” The Lord Jesus was capable of a twofold mode of existence, consciousness, and agency as the incarnate Word. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 54: 03.05. CHRIST'S TWO FORMS (PART II) ======================================================================== Chapter 5 - CHRIST’S TWO FORMS (Part II) The “form of God” refers to who Jesus Christ is essentially, and the “form of a servant” points to His assumption of the human nature in the incarnation. Assumption of the human nature may be illustrated by man’s contact with the sun. Should the sun descend to earth absolutely, none could bear its light and heat. Men’s eyes would not be enlightened but blinded by its glory. Furthermore, they would be consumed by the greatness of its heat. God is not only the Light of the world, but He is a consuming fire (1 John 1:5; John 8:12; Hebrews 12:29). If Jesus Christ had not veiled Himself with human nature, man would have been both blinded and consumed by God’s essential glory. However, since He veiled Himself with human nature, man can withstand and benefit from the rays proceeding from the Son of Man’s official and moral glory. What condescension to associate with the misery of the elect by becoming their Kinsman-Redeemer in the form of a servant! We are not living in a time of orthodoxy but heterodoxy. There are more persons propagating unorthodox than orthodox views about the Person of Christ. The church has never been without conflict concerning the most important principle of the Christian faith, namely, the Person of Jesus Christ. It seems that, in the last of the last days, believers are bombarded not only with a revival of old heresies but also some new ones. Some of the heresies concerning the Person of Jesus Christ in the first five centuries have been exposed. (1) The Ebionites (A.D. 107?) denied the reality of Christ’s Divine nature. They believed Jesus Christ was nothing more than a man, and their history can be traced back before the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A. D. The Ebionites could not be classified as Judaic Christians but simply Judaizers within the Christian church. (2) Docetism (A. D. 70-170) denied the reality of Christ’s human body. This was a pagan philosophy introduced into the church. Docetism comes from the Greek word dokeo which means “to appear, to seem.” (3) Monarchianism (second and third centuries A. D.) denied the Trinity. It was a form of Unitarianism which emphasized the unity of God by maintaining that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are three manifestations or aspects of God. There were two schools of Monarchianism. First, the Dynamic school was represented by Theodetus who denied the incarnation of the Logos and said that Jesus Christ was a mere man. Divine power and wisdom were bestowed upon Christ at His baptism and operated in Him as in no other man. Second, the Modalistic school was represented by Sabellius who accepted the divinity of Christ but denied His independent and preexistent personality. The life of Christ was only a theophany to this school. To this school God was one, and the names Father, Son, and Holy Spirit signified no more than different manifestations of the Divine essence. Both schools were condemned by the Synod of Antioch in A. D. 268. (4) Arianism was a reaction from Sabellianism in the fourth century. Arius denied the Deity of Christ. He taught that Jesus Christ was not consubstantial with the Father. This heresy was condemned in 325 A. D. at Nicea. (5) In the same century, at Constantinople in 381 A. D., the heresy of Appollinaris was condemned. Appollinarianism denied the completeness of Christ’s human nature. He taught that Christ had no human spirit; He had only a human body and soul. Hence, he taught the Divine Logos assumed not a complete human nature, but was only an irrational human animal. (6) In the fifth century, Nestorius denied the real union between the Divine and human natures in Christ. He separated the two natures into two persons. He was removed from the Patriarchate of Constantinople in 431 A. D. (7) Eutychianism was condemned at Chalcedon in 451 A. D. Eutyches denied the distinction and coexistence of Christ’s two natures. He mingled both into one which constituted a third nature different from the original natures. The fourth and fifth centuries revealed the Christological conflict that has not subsided. To summarize the heresies of that period, it may be said Arianism denied the true Godhead of Christ, Apollinarianism denied the true humanity of Christ, Nestorianism denied the unity of the two natures of Christ, and Eutychianism denied the distinction of the two natures of Christ. The heresies of our time are just as blatant, but it must be acknowledged that they are more subtly stated. During the first five centuries of the Christian church, Christology was a subject of great conflict; but out of that period of controversy came the Council of Chalcedon in 451 A. D. The four Chalcedonian adverbs point out how essential it is to the Person of Christ that one must believe that He possesses both Divine and human natures “without mixture,” “without change,” “without division,” and “without separation.” This formula has dominated the orthodox exegetes to the present day. Hence, Chalcedon has been called the terminal point of Christology. For Christians, however, there is but one terminal point in the study of Christology, and it is given in the words of Christ Himself: “...no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him” (Matthew 11:27). God manifest in the flesh is both a mystery and a manifestation (1 Timothy 3:16). We must not become so occupied with its mystery that we overlook its manifestation. On the other hand, we must not become so enamored with the manifestation that we fail to understand that it remains a mystery. The Person of Christ is a mystery to the elect. Although they know Him to some degree, they do not know Christ as the Father knows Him. Christ said, “...no man knoweth the Son, but the Father....” Reaction to the Chalcedonian Christology has been varied. At the end of the eighth century, some Spanish theologians contended there were two modes of sonship in Christ, one natural and the other adoptive. As the Son of Mary, Christ was the adopted son of God; as the second Person in the Trinity, He was the only begotten of the Father. Hence, they believed that Christ as the adopted Son was subordinate, and as the only begotten He was equal with the Father. Adoptionism was a reaction to various monophysite tendencies. A monophysite was one who maintained that Christ has one nature, partly divine and partly human. Scripture does not represent Jesus Christ being adopted as the Son of God as a reward for His faithfully performing a task. The Divine quality of Christ’s work is seen in the fact that He who is David’s Son is also David’s Lord (Matthew 22:41-46; Luke 20:41-44). Adoptionism was condemned at Regensburg in 792 A. D., Frankfort in 794 A. D., and Aachen in 799 A. D. History was quiet in her Christological conflict until the sixteenth century. There were two interesting developments in this century. First, there was Martin Luther and his new development of Christology. In his teaching on the two natures, he believed they interpenetrated one another in such a way that the attributes of the Divine nature were communicated to the human. During His earthly ministry, Christ veiled the Divine perfections of His human nature, but they are now manifested in His exaltation. This was a natural corollary that the physical body was considered omnipresent, and the real presence of Christ’s body and blood are in the elements of the Lord’s Supper. Secondly, during this same period, Socinus, an Italian Protestant Reformer (1539-1604), denied the Trinity. He taught that Christ was only a man with no existence before His birth. He taught that Christ was miraculously conceived by the virgin Mary, and He was peccable but sinless. He was baptized by the Spirit and caught up into heaven to be taught of God before He began His public ministry. At His exaltation, Christ was given power and is now worshipped as God. Socinians flourished in Poland until 1658. Socinianism led to the modern Unitarianism. During the Reformation, great emphasis was placed on the Person and Work of Christ. Some have criticized the reformers for lack of emphasis concerning Christ’s humanity, but such criticism is without foundation. Many strong confessions on the Divine and human natures united in the Person of Christ were made during this period. The spirit of Chalcedon is reflected in the Christological confessions. The Westminster Confession is a good example. It states: “The Son of God, the second person in the Trinity, being very and eternal God, of one substance, and equal with the Father, did, when the fulness of time was come, take upon Him man’s nature, and all the essential properties and common infirmities thereof, yet without sin: being conceived by the power of the Holy Ghost, in the womb of the Virgin Mary, of her substance. So that two whole, perfect, and distinct natures, the Godhead and the manhood, were inseparably joined together in one person, without conversion, composition, or confusion. Which person is very God and very man, yet one Christ, the only mediator between God and man.” The eighteenth century was marked by Rationalism. Emmanuel Kant was a rationalistic philosopher. He believed God was inscrutable, and the historical Christ was an ideal set before the mind as the perfect man. Therefore, when the mind had formed the ideal He represented, then He ceased to be the object of veneration. To Kant, Christ was the inward idea of a perfect man. Hence, Christ’s mission was to awaken the dormant God-consciousness in men; and redemption meant the awakening of the God-consciousness, thus elevating them to the level of Christ, the ideal man. In the nineteenth century, there was the emergence of what is called the Kenosis-Christology. Thomasius said, “Kenosis is the exchange of one form of existence for another.” He appealed to Php 2:7 for his Biblical support, and the Kenosis became the point of departure for a new Christological formula. Those who were dissatisfied with dualism went for the view of Thomasius. For the Word to become flesh meant to them that the Godhead was transmuted into humanity. They believed the Kenosis refuted the dualism of the Chalcedon formula. A transition from the form of God to the form of a servant by self-emptying replaced the union of the two natures. The Kenosis theory continues to be taught in the present century, but there are some modified versions. The twentieth century is marked by the rise of Neo-orthodoxy. It is religious liberalism whose defenders accept nothing as truth but what is acceptable to human reason. This is the age of existentialism. Existentialism is a humanistic philosophy that makes human experience the norm for judging reality. This philosophy denies that Scripture provides the norm for belief or action. To the existentialist, theology must rely on existentialism rather than on Biblical supernaturalism. Man, therefore, is severed from any objective, supernatural support. Theology is turned into anthropology. To the existentialist, God is known in the Word, but he has only a subjective standard for the Word. He talks about demythologization. All mythological attributes must be removed in order to accurately appraise the Word. Thus, he looks through naturalistic eyes as though they would give him Biblical truths. This, however, is in direct contradiction to Scripture: “But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned” (1 Corinthians 2:14). There is no inner light or revelation given above that which is written. Subjective revelation is without a standard: “To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them” (Isaiah 8:20). In closing this lesson, a limited list of heresies concerning the Person of Christ are given to show what the Christian has to battle in these last of the last days: FIRST-Roman Catholics advocate the Deity of Christ, but they deny His humanity by their doctrine of Mariolatry and the saints. If Christ assumed a human nature, why do they appeal to Mary and to the saints for understanding our infirmities? (See Hebrews 4:15). Furthermore, the Mass completely undermines the work of Calvary (Hebrews 10:10-14). SECOND-Unitarians deny the Deity of Christ. They believe in the divinity of mankind. They say their differences with the Orthodox Church is not that it made Jesus God but that it stopped there. THIRD-Christian Scientists teach that “Jesus is the human, and Christ is the divine idea; hence the duality of Jesus Christ....Jesus was the offspring of Mary’s conscious communion with God” (Mary Baker Eddy). FOURTH-Jehovah’s Witnesses teach that Christ existed as a spirit being before He was made flesh, and was properly known as “a god” -a mighty one. As chief of the angels and next to the Father, He was known as the Archangel-the highest messenger. They teach that Jesus was not a combination of two natures, human and spiritual; that the blending of the two natures produces neither the one nor the other but an imperfect, hybrid thing, which is obnoxious to the divine arrangement. FIFTH-Mormons believe the Persons of the Trinity are not three Persons in one Being but three separate beings. They believe in a plurality of gods. Furthermore, they believe God was a man and He became god; so men may become gods. They also believe Christ was a polygamist whose wives were Mary, Martha, Mary Magdalene, and the sisters of Lazarus; and the feast in Canaan was the occasion of one of His marriages. SIXTH-The World Wide Church of God (Herbert W. Armstrong) teaches that Jesus was, in the human flesh, a descendant of David; but in His resurrection He was born again. Armstrong says that Jesus alone of all humans has, so far, been saved. He does not say He was saved from sin, but he does say Jesus was the first to achieve it-to be perfected, finished as a perfect character. Armstrong asserts that no Scripture says that Jesus Christ could not sin. SEVENTH-The Kenosis-Christology (Christ emptying Himself) has four different views: (1) The absolute dualistic concept teaches a twofold division of attributes. Christ’s eminent attributes are related to Deity, and His relative attributes are related to humanity. The former are essential to the Godhead and the latter to the physical. (2) The absolute metamorphic theory believes Christ emptied Himself of all Divine attributes. His eternal consciousness ceased and was gradually regained until He attained again the completeness of Divine life. (3) The semimetamorphic concept contends the eternal Son in becoming a man underwent not a loss but a disguise of His Deity. He exchanged the eternal manner of being for the temporal manner of being. (4) The real and relative view teaches the Divine Logos retained His Deity, but He did so within the restricted confines of His human consciousness. The properties of the Divine nature were not present in their infinitude but were changed into properties of human nature. EIGHTH-The doctrine of peccability has been embraced by many in a large number of religious denominations. This man-made doctrine states that the historical Christ had the capacity to sin. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 55: 03.06. CHRIST IN THE FORM OF GOD ======================================================================== Chapter 6 - CHRIST IN THE FORM OF GOD As we begin an in-depth study of the great Christological passage of Php 2:5-11, let us not forget that Jesus Christ is known absolutely only by the Father. Christ said: “...no man knoweth the Son, but the Father...” (Matthew 11:27). There is an eternal Father and Son relationship, and it is revealed as never before in the incarnation. Unlike ordinary father and son relationships, this unique Father and Son relationship was absolutely perfect. This perfect relationship is the foundation of Christology. He who ever exists in the bosom of the Father did not change one form of being for another in the incarnation. Even in the incarnate state of the Son, the fulness of God dwelt bodily in Him (Colossians 2:9). The word “fulness” cannot be reduced to something less than being filled. Paul used the word pleroma which means fulness, completeness. The eternal Son who assumed human nature is filled with the essence of God, even though at the time of Paul’s writing He was in His glorified humanity. Who can know the infinite Son but the infinite Father? Not even glorified saints shall know the Son as He is. As a vessel cast into the ocean can receive only according to its capacity, the effort of the finite saint to understand Christ is like a thimble trying to hold all the waters of the oceans. Paul’s statement “Who being in the form of God” is foundational for a true perspective of Christology. The apostle used a verb which does not convey the idea of who Jesus Christ was before the incarnation, but who He is essentially. We have the present active participle of the verb huparcho, and it means “Who is existing in the form of God.” This destroys any idea of Christ being anything less than God in the incarnation. It was the Father’s good pleasure that all the fulness of Deity, theotes, should dwell bodily in Jesus Christ (Colossians 1:19; Colossians 2:9). The Son of God is declared to be God “manifest in the flesh” (1 Timothy 3:16). God “...is now made manifest by the appearing of our Savior Jesus Christ, who hath abolished death, and hath brought life and immortality to light through the gospel” (2 Timothy 1:10). “...We know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life” (1 John 5:20). When Paul penned the words of Php 2:6, the incarnation, life, death, resurrection, and ascension were historical facts. However, the one about whom he wrote was the ever living God. B. B. Warfield has suggested the phrase “Who being in the form of God” is not describing a past mode of existence of our Lord, but what in His intrinsic nature He is. This is correct according to the tense of the verb used. Others say the phrase “Who being in the form of God” presents two aspects of Christ’s preexistence: (1) its fact, and (2) its form. Although His preexistence is true, that is not the subject of this passage. When the intrinsic nature of God is apprehended, there is no problem with either preexistence or condescension. It is not a contrast between what God was and what He now is, but Who He is. Jesus Christ is the “I AM.” God’s proper name is “I AM.” The tense of this description manifests that God’s essence knows no past or future. God, therefore, is distinguished from all creatures. No created being can say in truth, “I am.” God said to Moses, “I AM WHO I AM” (Exodus 3:14 NASB). This name signifies unchanging essence and eternality. It denotes personality - “I”; self-existence - “I AM”; and mystery - “I AM WHO I AM.” This name includes all past, present, and future existence and constancy. Therefore, God could not speak of Himself as “I was.” That would indicate that He is not now what He once was. Furthermore, God could not speak of Himself as “I will be.” That would intimate that He is not now what He shall be. Hence, the eternality of God is sometimes fragmentarily expressed for the benefit of man’s finite capacity: “I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty” (Revelation 1:8). It cannot be said of any created being that he always was and shall always be what he is. The eternal “I AM,” however, is who He was and shall ever be who He is. The distinction between the Creator and created beings is that God is and created beings become. Created creatures are continually becoming something different, but God never changes (2 Corinthians 4:16; 2 Corinthians 4:18) or becomes anything different from what He eternally is (Malachi 3:6; James 1:17; Psalms 102:27). “I AM WHO I AM” proves the unity of God to the exclusion of many gods, the unchangeableness of God who lives in the eternal present, and the self-sufficiency of God who is His own equivalent. This is the eternal name that is equivalent with Jehovah. Jesus Christ is the great “I AM.” In the gospel of John, Christ said of Himself: “I am the bread of life” (John 6:35; John 6:41; John 6:48; John 6:51); “I am the light of the world” (John 8:12); “Before Abraham was, I am” (John 8:58); “I am the door” (John 10:7, John 10:9); “I am the good shepherd” (John 10:11); “I am the resurrection, and the life” (John 11:25); “I am the way” (John 14:6); and “I am the true vine” (John 15:1). The interesting thing about all of these is the use of the two Greek words ego and eimi. In each instance, the text reads ego eimi which means “I myself am.” Ego is the personal pronoun “I,” and eimi is the verb “I am.” When ego precedes eimi, it is used for emphasis - “I myself am.” The distinction between Christ and His creatures is remarkably illustrated in John 8:58 - “Before Abraham was, I am.” The verb applied to Abraham should be contrasted with the one Christ applied to Himself. The verb applied to Abraham is genesthai. Here we have a second aorist middle infinitive of ginomai which means to come into existence or to be born. But when Christ spoke of Himself, He used the verb eimi which speaks of an existence without origin. There is no implied beginning in the verb eimi. Our Lord spoke of His eternal existence when He said, “I AM.” It has been said that age is a relative term. It implies beginning, but God is eternal. It implies change, but God is unchangeable. It implies the measure of created existence, but God is eternal. This proves that all thoughts of God which apply time and succession to His existence are erroneous. The word “form” (morphe) is used three times in the New Testament (Mark 16:12; Php 2:6-7). In Mark 16:12, we are told that Christ appeared “in another form” - en hetera morphe. The different form does not mean the intrinsic nature of Christ is different in His glorified body from what it was while He was in the “form of a servant” in His unglorified body. There were changes, however, in the presentment of Christ to His people between His resurrection and ascension. For example, when Christ appeared to Mary Magdalene in the garden, she supposed Him to be the gardener (John 20:15). Again, when He appeared to the two men on the road to Emmaus, He appeared as a scribe who expounded the Scriptures (Luke 24:27). Another example is that Christ stood in the midst of the disciples after the two men had returned to Jerusalem saying, “The Lord is risen indeed”; yet, when He said, “Peace be unto you,” they were terrified and supposed they had seen a spirit (Luke 24:34; Luke 24:36-37). Whether it be the “pre” or “post” resurrection period, the intrinsic nature of Christ was unchanged, because He is the same yesterday, today, and forever (Hebrews 13:8). However, there were changes in presenting Himself to His own. This is not only true of Christ during His public ministry on earth, but it is also true of the revelation and works of God in the Old Testament: “GOD, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son...” (Hebrews 1:1-2). Biblical references to God repenting do not mean that God changes His will which is immutable and eternal, but they refer to a change in His work. It seems probable that the appearance of Christ changed from time to time during the forty days after His resurrection to meet the several cases of the disciples, but there was no change in God Himself. The word “form” in Php 2:6 has had varied interpretations by theologians and writers. The general consensus of these interpretations of the phrase “form of God” conveys the idea that Jesus Christ is God. The following is a summary of some of those views of “form”: 1. It denotes majesty. 2. It is identified with the essence of a person, not shape. 3. It refers to those qualities which constitute God. 4. It refers to the essential attributes in the form. 5. “Form,” morphe, and the term doxa have a connection, attesting to Paul’s seeing in the preexisting and glorified Christ the form and glory of God. 6. It does not mean mere outward appearance. 7. It refers to the inner, essential, and abiding nature of a person or thing. There are three words in Scripture to denote the interrelation of the Father and the Son: (1) image (eikon), “the image of the invisible God” (Colossians 1:15); (2) express image (charakter), “Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person” (Hebrews 1:3); and (3) form (morphe), “Who, being in the form of God” (Php 2:6). 1. Jesus Christ is the image of the invisible God (Colossians 1:15). The Greek word eikon means image, figure, likeness; the image of one; one in whom the likeness of one is seen. Since this word is used to speak of Christ, man, and things, the question is often asked, how can image be used when speaking of Christ who is equal with the father? Is not an image inferior to that of which it is a figure? Image is not the thing of which it is the figure. Adam was created in God’s image and after His likeness, but he was not God of whom he was the image and likeness (Genesis 1:26-27; 1 Corinthians 11:7). Men make images of God, but such images deface the glory of the incorruptible God (Romans 1:23). The phrase “the image of God” does not always carry out the idea of perfection. The context must determine its use. Christ, however, is the only perfect representation of God. He is God manifest in the flesh (1 Timothy 3:16). Adam being the image of God and Christ being the image of God are not the same. Adam was a type of Christ as the incarnate Son (Romans 5:14). Christ is the express image of His Father (Hebrews 1:3). The things in Adam which constituted the image and likeness of God were of a created substance. Conversely, the things in Jesus Christ were of the same Divine and eternal substance with the Father. The God-like nature is not perfectly represented in man because man is finite. On the other hand, God’s nature is perfectly represented in Jesus Christ because the Son of God is infinite. An image is something looked upon, thus something else is seen. The word eikon means one in whom the likeness of one is seen. The Person and Work of Christ manifested the perfection and glory of the Father. Christ said, “...he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?” (John 14:9). Christ meant that in His Person, as well as His doctrine and works, God is manifested as far as He can be to man. Wisdom, power, holiness, compassion, love, meekness, patience, longsuffering, justice, etc., are all revealed in Jesus Christ. Christ, therefore, is the image of the invisible God. No man has seen God at any time, yet to see God is a vital necessity for man’s salvation (John 1:18). Christ is seen only by faith: “But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost: In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them” (2 Corinthians 4:3-4). Jesus Christ, the second Person in the Godhead, is as invisible as the Father; but Christ clothed with human nature is the perfect representation of the excellency of the Father. Therefore, the invisible God has been manifested through the God-Man to the elect. It is by the agency of the Holy Spirit in regeneration that faith removes the veil and floods the soul with the “...light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ” (2 Corinthians 4:6). 2. Jesus Christ is the “express image” (charakter) of God (Hebrews 1:3). The Greek word charakter means an exact likeness or full expression of God. It comes from charagma, an engraving tool, and then something engraved-a character, as a letter, mark, or sign. Our word “character” comes from charakter. This word is used only in this text, but charagma is used eight times and is translated “graven” (Acts 17:29) and “mark” (Revelation 13:16-17; Revelation 14:9; Revelation 14:11; Revelation 15:2; Revelation 16:2; Revelation 19:20; Revelation 20:4). The essential being of God has come into full expression in the incarnate Son who bears the exact likeness of the Divine essence. The Father and the Son are coexistent and coeternal. Jesus Christ not only delivered God’s message, but He is God’s message. He is not only the exact likeness of God’s essence hupostasis (which means a substructure; subsistence, essence), but He is of the same essence. He came not only to provide a remedy for sinners, but He is the remedy. Therefore, if the sinner is to know God, it must be through Christ who knows the Father. Christ said, “...neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him” (Matthew 11:27). Christ as the “express image” (exact representation) of God does not stand alone in Hebrews 1:1-3. He is the “Son” who has revealed the Father, and He is also the “brightness” of God’s glory. The Son is contrasted with the prophets of the Old Testament. The prophetic revelations of the prophets were fragmentary and progressive, but the Son is the complete and final revelation of the Father. The prophets were “holy men,” but they were men (2 Peter 1:21); whereas, the Son of God is the God-Man. The incomplete revelations from the prophets caused the people to desire more revelations; but when the completed revelation of the Son comes into the hearts of the elect, there is no desire for new revelations. Believers know that in Christ are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge (Colossians 2:3). Their desire is to know more about the completed revelation. The Bible is more than a book written by men. It is the mind of God. Christ is the “brightness” (apaugasma) -an effulgence of God’s glory. The Greek work apaugasmas is a compound word- apo, from; and auge, brightness. The verb augazo means to be bright, to shine forth (2 Corinthians 4:4). The word for “brightness” is used only here. It is used in the sense of radiance rather than reflection. The brightness issuing from the sun is of the same nature as the sun. It comes naturally and voluntarily. This brightness comes from the sun and not the sun from the brightness. Each is distinct from the other, but each is inseparable from the other. Finally, the light which the sun gives to the world is by this brightness. Hence, the metaphor of the sun and its brightness sets forth the co-eternalness, distinction of Persons, and the incomprehensible glory of the Father shining forth in the Son who is equal with the Father. The following is a summary of some truths by Lancelot Andrewes on Hebrews 1:1-3 in 1612: This passage of Scripture includes Christ’s consubstantiality as the Son, coeternality as the effulgence, and coequality as the character (the true stamp of His substance). As the Son, Christ is contrasted with the prophets. As the effulgence, He is contrasted with the many parts (sparks) of Old Testament prophecy. As the character (essence), He is contrasted with the vanishing shadows of the law (old economy). 3. Jesus Christ exists in the form of God (Php 2:6). Paul began his subject of Christology by showing who Jesus Christ is in His incarnate state. He is the one who ever exists in the form of God. The great concern of the apostle was to show who Jesus Christ essentially is. When this is understood, one will not be thinking about what He was before the incarnation and what He became during the incarnation. With many religionists, Christ became something less in the incarnation than He was before. The eternal Son of God has the Divine nature in which there can never be a change. Therefore, one is never correct to speak of the eternal God as to who He was and who He now is. That kind of terminology implies a change. Past and future, with respect to God, are terms that the defects of our finite capacity force us to use. The essence of God is eternally the same. God not only remains but is constant. “But thou art the same...” (Psalms 102:27). Both the nature and perfections of God are immutable as well as eternal. That which remains the same is not changed, and what is changed cannot remain the same. Jesus Christ is eternally existing “in the form of God” which cannot change but ever remains the same. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 56: 03.07. EQUAL WITH GOD ======================================================================== Chapter 7 - EQUAL WITH GOD The phrase “Who...thought it not robbery to be equal with God” (Php 2:6) has been interpreted many different ways. Before getting into what we believe the passage teaches in the light of the context, it will stimulate our thinking to mention some interpretations of this statement: (1) Christ had no need to grasp at Divine equality because He had already possessed it as the eternal Son of God. (2) Christ did not consider equality with God a thing to be tenaciously retained. (3) Christ did not consider the honor of being equal with God as something to be retained at the expense of robbing the universe of the glory of redemption. (4) Although Jesus Christ was God, He cared less for His equality with God and His own things than He did for His own people. (5) Christ did not hold fast and bring down to earth the visible demonstrations of His Deity. (6) Christ did not falsely seize upon a title not rightly His. He did not regard His claims to equality with the Father as something stolen. (7) Christ did not count His existence in a manner equal to God something to cling to. (8) Christ did not hold fast and bring down to earth the visible demonstration of His Deity. (9) Had Christ come into the world emphasizing His equality with God, the world would have been amazed but not saved. He did not grasp at this. (10) Christ did not consider His God-equal existence a warrant for grasping (active) to Himself the glory afterward required. Christ’s equality with God is a subject of great importance. Like Christ existing in the form of God, equality with God is foundational. Some say “equality with God” declares Christ’s Being and “form of God” expresses the manifestation of that Being. Others say “form of God” has reference to nature and “equal with God” denotes relation. There is one thing for sure, the two words “form” and “equal” complement each other. You cannot have one without the other. One of the great passages on Christ’s equality with the Father is John 5:19-47. The Lord Jesus was so perfectly one with the Father that He could do nothing contrary to Him. As they are one in nature, they are also undivided in their working. As all is of the Father, all is by the Son. Christ had performed an act of mercy on the Sabbath. The man who had been healed was told to take up his bed and walk. Because of this act of mercy on the Sabbath, the Jews persecuted Jesus Christ and sought to slay Him. God’s providence does not stop on the Sabbath. Furthermore, He is above all law which He ascribed for His creatures. He is His own law. Christ’s equality with the Father was declared when Christ said, “My Father worketh hitherto, and I work” (John 5:17). The clear declaration of truth does not satisfy wicked men; therefore, the Jews sought the more to kill Christ. They said, “...he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God” (John 5:18). The Jews thought this was sufficient evidence for capital punishment. Christ gave examples of His equality with the Father (John 5:19-29). He is equal with the Father in works, quickening, judgment, honor, giving eternal life, authority, and resurrection of the dead. He is so perfectly one with the Father that He can do nothing contrary to Him. As it is impossible for the Son to do anything of Himself, it is impossible for the Father to do anything without the Son. Christ receives the same honor as the Father. There is an honor due to God only, and not to be given to any other. If the incarnate Christ is nothing more than man, how could He receive the same honor? Christ’s condescension took nothing from the “form of God.” No one can honor the Father who dishonors the Son. The equality of Christ with the Father is supported by witnesses (John 5:30-47). The first witness was Christ Himself. It is commonly stated that a man makes a poor witness in his own case. But it must be understood that Jesus Christ is no ordinary man; He is the God-Man. The reason a man is a poor witness in his own case is very simple. He is prejudiced, filled with self-love, and is subject to error. Christ is, however, “the Amen, the faithful and true witness” (Revelation 3:14). Christ’s statement “If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true” of John 5:31 does not contradict “...Though I bear record of myself, yet my record is true...” of John 8:14. In John 5:1-47, the Savior meant His witness was in itself insufficient as a matter of legal evidence. A testimony must be validated by two or three witnesses (Matthew 18:16). Therefore, Christ gave a fivefold witness. In John 8:1-59, the Jews were judging after the flesh. Their judgment was according to their corrupt hearts which could not understand the things of God (1 Corinthians 2:14). The other witnesses Christ mentioned were John the Baptist (John 8:32-35), His own works (John 8:36), the Father (John 8:37-38), and the Scriptures (John 8:39-47). According to Jewish law, the additional witnesses validated Christ’s testimony. There are two major views of Php 2:6 b - “Who...thought it not robbery to be equal with God” (hos...ouch harpagmon hegesato to einai isa theo). They are (1) equality was not something to retain in possession, and (2) equality was not something to be seized in the future. With regard to the first view, the essential equality with God is not something that could be surrendered. The incarnation did not rob the Godhead of any virtue or honor. Christ remains equal with the Father in His position as Mediator, the God-Man. Concerning the second view, Christ considered not His future honor to be given Him by the Father something to be seized. The future equality would be connected with Christ’s exaltation as He appears to men on an equality with God. Christ “thought it not robbery to be equal with God.” The Greek word for “thought” is the aorist tense of the verb hegeomai, which means to think, count, consider, esteem, or regard. Paul used the word in Php 2:3 - “...let each esteem other better than themselves”; Php 3:7 - “But what things were gain to me, those I counted loss for Christ”; and Php 3:8 - “Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord....” The context of this passage indicates a choice was made by the preincarnate Son and that choice was carried out by the immutable Christ in His state of humiliation. The word “robbery” comes from the Greek word harpagmon, accusative singular of harpagmos, which means something to grasp after; something to hold to; a thing seized or to be seized. This word is used only in Php 2:6, but the verb harpazo is used several times in the New Testament (Matthew 11:12; Matthew 13:19; John 6:15; John 10:12; John 10:28-29; Acts 8:39; Acts 23:10; 2 Corinthians 12:2; 2 Corinthians 12:4; 1 Thessalonians 4:17; Jude 1:23; Revelation 12:5). The verb harpazo means to take by force, to claim for oneself, or to snatch out or away. In every case where the verb is used, there is no indication of something being “retained in possession,” but rather something seized or claimed for oneself. The context of Php 2:1-30 does not justify the idea of Jesus Christ possessing a position of equality which He had and gave up in the incarnation. It does, however, justify the idea of a choice made by the eternal Son in His preincarnate state that He would not grasp after equality with God, because the future equality was to be God’s gift following the incarnation, death, and exaltation (Php 2:9-11). The future equality would include the names “Jesus” and “Lord.” In these two names, both Saviorhood and Lordship are revealed. “Jesus” was His God-given name: “...thou shalt call His name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins” (Matthew 1:21). To this “name” every knee must bow either in grace or in judgment. Every tongue must confess His “Lordship” either in grace or in judgment (Php 2:11). The equality of Saviorhood and Lordship is recognized by men in grace now, but it will not be recognized by Christ’s enemies until the judgment. The future equality promised Christ by the Father has to do with His offices, not with His essential personality. In Christ’s essential personality, He is existing in the form of God which includes equality with God. Consummation of Lordship will be the kingdom. Sovereignty is vested in Christ as the eternal Son of God, but the coming kingdom belongs to Him as the Son of David (Luke 1:31-33). A comparison of Adam and Christ has been suggested by some to clarify the idea which appears to be the correct interpretation in the light of the context. Adam asserted himself to be equal with God by an act of seizure (robbery). He was a son of God by creation (Luke 3:38). Satan told Eve if she would eat the forbidden fruit, she would “be as gods” (Genesis 3:5). Adam, as the head of the woman, deliberately ate of the forbidden fruit in an attempt “to be as god.” He sought to be lord independently of God his Creator, but he failed in his pursuit. Conversely, the Son of God by eternal generation, chose not to seize equality with God independently of His Father. The future honor of equality was not something to be grasped, but it was a gift to follow His humiliation. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 57: 03.08. CHRIST EMPTIED HIMSELF (PART I) ======================================================================== Chapter 8 - CHRIST EMPTIED HIMSELF (Part I) The entrance of the eternal Son of God into the world in the form of a servant cannot be compared with man’s entrance. Man’s entrance is not as difficult to describe. Man has a beginning and an entrance. In the case of Adam, man came into existence by an act of creation; but in the case of each man since Adam, he has come into existence by procreation and creation. His body came by procreation and his soul by creation. Christ’s entrance into the stream of mankind is more difficult to explain. With the Son of God, there was no coming into existence. He is eternal. Therefore, His entrance took the choicest of words to reveal the incarnation of Him who is without beginning: “But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men” (Php 2:7). Paul’s words “But made himself of no reputation” shall occupy our attention in this lesson. This phrase comes from three Greek words, alla heauton ekenosen, which mean “But emptied himself.” Alla means “but” and is a stronger word than de. Heauton is the accusative singular masculine of heautou, a reflexive pronoun meaning “himself.” Ekenosen, is the aorist form of kenoo, which means to empty, to deprive of power, or make of no effect. The Kenotic theory of the incarnation is based on the Greek word ekenosen, emptied. This word has been the occasion for various interpretations, many of which are heretical. The following list is a summary of some of the interpretations of the phrase “But made himself of no reputation”: 1. It means to give up one’s rights or privileges. 2. Christ laid aside equality with the form of God. 3. This is the emptying of Deity in order to take up humanity. 4. The Divine form was shed to avoid having mankind give Him His rightful honor. Instead He took on the form of a servant. 5. Christ gave up His proper and peculiar position. However, His Divine nature was not given up. He exchanged the form of God for the form of a servant. The change He experienced did not rob Him of the consciousness of Deity. Although He retained equality with God, He did not assert this equality. 6. Christ did not give up His Divine nature. The thing most probably relinquished was the surroundings of glory. 7. He removed His supreme authority. 8. Christ concealed His Divinity for a time. Only in His humanity was there emptying. Christ’s humbling Himself was a covering for his Divine majesty. 9. Christ took a servant’s form and limited His glory. He laid His glory aside in order to be born in the likeness of men. 10. This emptying can never be understood fully outside eternity. He emptied Himself not of Deity but the glory of Deity in order to accomplish redemption for mankind. 11. His form of being was traded for another form. 12. He voluntarily relinquished His rights. 13. Outward manifestations of His Deity were given up. 14. The emptying was related to His being God, and the humbling was related to His being man. 15. He laid aside His glory and became a sinner by imputation and by reputation. This listing will give one some idea of the controversy that has originated over one Greek word, ekenosen. In thinking of the Kenosis, one must never permit himself to think of Jesus Christ as anyone other than God who changes not. He is the same yesterday, today, and forever (Hebrews 13:8). Christ is God manifest in the flesh (1 Timothy 3:16). The immutability of God disproves any idea of Jesus Christ becoming something different from what He eternally is with the Father. It would not only be subversive to the immutability of Jesus Christ, but it would destroy the Divine Trinity, humanize the eternal Son, and make Jesus Christ neither God nor man. The only way to arrive at the truth of the statement “But emptied Himself” is to study the Greek verb kenoo and see how it is used in the New Testament. It was by this method that we were able to have a better understanding of harpagmon in verse 6. The Greek verb kenoo is used five times: (1) “For if they which are of the law be heirs, faith is made void [perfect passive form of kenoo], and the promise made of none effect” (Romans 4:14). If legalists are heirs of God’s promise, faith is emptied of all meaning or rendered useless. (2) “For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect [the aorist passive subjunctive form of kenoo]” (1 Corinthians 1:17). Paul did not fall into the trap of magnifying a church ordinance at the expense of the message of the cross. Had he done this, the cross would have been emptied of its meaning or rendered powerless and inoperative. (3) “But I have used none of these things: neither have I written these things, that it should be so done unto me: for it were better for me to die, than that any man should make my glorying void” [aorist active subjunctive form of keno] (1 Corinthians 9:15). Paul did not want to be deprived of his ground for boasting. His self-denial gave him confidence in the presence of his enemies. (4) “Yet have I sent the brethren, lest our boasting of you should be in vain [aorist passive subjunctive form of kenoo] in this behalf; that, as I said, ye may be ready” (2 Corinthians 9:3). The apostle did not want anything to hinder the collection of the money they had promised to give. He did not want his boasting of them to be empty. (5) This brings us to the final place where kenoo is used, and that is Php 2:7. The adjective kenos is used eighteen times and is translated by two words - “vain” and “empty.” Christ “emptied Himself” must be understood in one of two ways: (1) If it is connected with Christ’s Divine nature (essential equality or form of God), of what did He empty Himself? (2) If it is connected with Christ’s human nature, of what did He empty Himself? The verb for “emptied” has been explained in the sense of removing something from a container until it is empty. Was the eternal Son of God emptied of Deity until He was empty? Did Jesus Christ exchange the Divine form of existence for a human form of existence? There is no Biblical evidence of Jesus Christ renouncing His Divine nature. It is blasphemy to even suggest such a thing. There are those who think they have toned down such strong language by suggesting the Son of God divested Himself of all Divine functions, attributes, and consciousness, and restricted Himself to the limitations of man. They mean by this that the Son passed from one mode of being to another. The fact is, if Jesus Christ did not act in both natures during His condescension, how could He have been the Mediator? Furthermore, if the Son of God either emptied Himself of Deity or divested Himself of His attributes, what happened to providence during this time? The further we go with this view the worse it gets. However, I must not stop until I mention that the heretical doctrine of peccability (the teaching that Christ could sin) is one of the fruits of this heresy. There is a modified form of the Kenotic theory that does not deny Christ’s Deity, but it falls short of giving any sensible interpretation of the passage in the light of its context. Those who hold this modified view say there is no reference to abandoning Deity or attributes, but Christ merely took something, namely, “the form of a servant.” During His humiliation, the Son of God laid aside certain rights as the eternal One; but Deity or attributes, He could never lay aside. He did not insist upon being served but became a servant. Christ emptied Himself of all the outward glory of the form of God and revealed Himself to the world in the form of a slave. He surrendered the independent exercise of His Divine attributes. This theory may be summarized by the use of four statements: (1) “Form of God” refers to Christ’s preexistence. (2) “Equal with God” denotes Christ’s Person. (3) “Thought it not robbery to be equal with God” refers to the posture of His mind. (4) “Emptied Himself” points to the fact of His assuming “the form of a servant.” Since, equality with God" was not something to retain, this modified view will not fit the context. Christ “emptied Himself” is used in association with His human nature. It is something connected with Christ’s humiliation. Paul does not specifically state of what the self-emptying consists, but a study of the immediate context in the light of the overall context of Scripture will give us the answer. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 58: 03.09. CHRIST EMPTIED HIMSELF (PART II) ======================================================================== Chapter 9 - CHRIST EMPTIED HIMSELF (Part II) I categorically deny that Jesus Christ divested Himself of Deity either absolutely or relatively in the incarnation. Such language as “Christ emptied Himself of His Deity to take upon Himself His humanity” is blasphemous. It is reprehensible for anyone to suggest that He surrendered His attributes. Jesus Christ did not cease to be God in the incarnation, but He veiled His Deity in the form of a servant. The Son of God did not take upon Himself all that we are, but He did take upon Himself the nature of man minus its depravity. Here is a combination heretofore supposed to be contradictory and impossible. God is infinite; space cannot contain Him. Man is finite, fenced in by definite bounds. How can the unlimited and limited unite? This is the mystery of the incarnation. There is a difference between mystery and mist. One stands in awe before the impenetrable mystery of the incarnation, but he may by grace penetrate the mist. False conceptions, or half-truths, make a mystery needlessly greater. Furthermore, whether one sees the human or Divine-human will depend on the direction from which the subject is approached and the point of view he occupies. For example, if a person with only one nature approaches the subject of the incarnation, he looks at it strictly from the human point of view. Spiritual things are foolish to him: “But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned” (1 Corinthians 2:14). The person with one nature has only natural understanding of spiritual things. Therefore, he does not have grace to penetrate the mist, and stand in holy awe before the God-Man. Conversely, the person with two natures has a spiritual mind. Hence, he knows spiritual things are (1) revealed by the Spirit (1 Corinthians 2:10), (2) known by the Spirit (1 Corinthians 2:12), (3) communicated by the Spirit (1 Corinthians 2:13), and (4) discerned by the Spirit (1 Corinthians 2:14 b). Having grace, the believer views the incarnation from God’s point of view and not man’s. He penetrates the mist, and stands in awe before his Mediator, the God-Man. The condescension of the Godhead is one of the amazing truths of the Bible. Condescension means to stoop or descend from a higher, or superior, position. God is described in Scripture as “sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up” (Isaiah 6:1). (See Psalms 113:4-8). This is a revelation of majesty, power, and wisdom. They are all unequaled. Everything is under the control of the Sovereign. The Father greatly condescended to purpose to save some from among depraved mankind (Ephesians 1:4-6). The eternal Son condescended to take upon Himself the form of a servant in the incarnation that He might purchase those the Father condescended to elect to salvation in the Son. This is the message of Php 2:6-8. As the Father was no less the sovereign God when He condescended to purpose to save sinners, the Son was no less God when He condescended to be born of the virgin, live, and die for those the Father elected. Paul associated the blood of Christ’s human nature with a Divine title when he charged the Ephesian elders: “Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood” (Acts 20:28). This proves that Jesus Christ was God even when He was nailed to the cross. Finally, the Holy Spirit condescends to regenerate each person the Father elected and the Son redeemed. Condescension’s greatest wonder is that the Holy Spirit dwells in the regenerate sinner. The Holy Spirit who resides in the believer is no less God than the Father who elected and the Son who redeemed. How humbling it is to the believer when he realizes that the Father condescended to choose him, the Son condescended to redeem him, and the Holy Spirit condescended to regenerate and reside in him. The Christian alone recognizes and calls the Son of God “Emmanuel” - God with us (Matthew 1:23). The Person of Jesus Christ is not understood as the sciences of the world. To understand the sciences of the world, men must give themselves to laborious research and much learning. Human sciences are attained by study, but the knowledge of the Person of Christ comes to the elect by revelation. Many had observed Christ as He walked among them, but they did not know Him. When Peter said, “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God,” Christ replied, “...flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven” (Matthew 16:16-17). By this revelation, Peter penetrated through mere observation and apprehended the Lord Jesus whom he could not comprehend. God’s gift of faith enables the elect to penetrate the mist of the Divine mystery of the incarnation and stand in awe before the impenetrable mystery of the infinite Savior. He who contents himself with the human nature of Christ and does not grasp the meaning of Emmanuel-God with us-does not have saving faith. The death of Jesus Christ is more than the death of a mere man. It was God’s satisfaction for sin. In regard to Christ’s resurrection, one must see more than the resurrection of Lazarus or some other man. His resurrection was for the justification of the elect. “Knowing the unknowable” is the language of the Christian: “And to know the love of Christ, which passeth knowledge...” (Ephesians 3:19). The apostle used a word between the verb and its object which on the surface seems to contradict the verb. The verbal noun gnonai, second aorist active infinitive of ginosko, which means to know, is used. Agape, the strongest word for love in the Greek, is the object of the knowledge. Between the verbal noun and its object, the word huperballousan is used. It is the present participle (verbal adjective) of huperballo, which means to surpass, excell, or transcend. This compound verb is used five times and is translated “excelleth” (2 Corinthians 3:10), “exceeding” (2 Corinthians 9:14; Ephesians 1:19; Ephesians 2:7), and “which passeth” (Ephesians 3:19). The choice of words by the Holy Spirit proves that the love of Christ transcends the knowledge of the Christian. It is superior not only to human understanding, but it surpasses spiritual understanding. However, it does mean the Christian knows by grace what he could not know by natural understanding; he knows by faith what he could not know by reason. Hence, the knowledge of the saint is experiential and not merely academic. Experiential knowledge is not static. Paul began his explanation of this knowledge by using an active infinitive to show that one’s knowledge is not static. Too many church members have an erroneous view of Divine wisdom. They think that when they “make a decision” or have a “change in mental attitude” they have arrived. After years of “church membership,” there is no change in their knowledge of Christ. However, the knowledge of the Lord of Glory given by the Holy Spirit is not static. It is a knowledge that increases (Matthew 11:25-27; 1 John 2:20; 1 John 2:27; 1 Corinthians 1:21; 1 Corinthians 1:30; Ephesians 1:15-23; Ephesians 2:6-7; 1 Peter 2:2; 2 Peter 3:18). Between knowledge and the object of that knowledge, Paul used a present participle to describe the object of knowledge that transcends knowledge. Although Divine knowledge is not static but progressive, it can never comprehend the infinite. This does not discourage the believer. As natural life is one of growth and development, the same is true in the spiritual life, with one important exception. In natural life, years of aging and deteriorating come after years of growth and development. Conversely, no deterioration is experienced in the spiritual life. There is a continual renewing day by day while in a deteriorating body, and there will be an increasing growth in the knowledge of God (2 Corinthians 4:16-18; Ephesians 2:6-7). It is noticeable that when Jesus Christ affirms that “...neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son...,” He at once adds, “...and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him” (Matthew 11:27). Why did He not continue His affirmation with “and he to whomsoever the Father will reveal him” instead of “he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him”? The statement is absent because there are mysteries in the union of the two perfect natures, Divine and human, in the one Person of Christ which the Father nowhere in Scripture promises to fully reveal. The infinite is too deep for the finite mind of man. It is impossible to fully comprehend the complex Person of the God-Man. The complex Person of Jesus Christ can be known by grace, but He cannot be fully known. God the Father hides things from the wise and prudent (Matthew 11:25). The wise and prudent are not those who are truly wise and truly prudent, but those who are wise and prudent in their own eyes (Isaiah 5:21). Such persons are blind, proud, covetous, and prejudiced. Their problem is something that no preacher can cure. If the sovereign God does not give sight and change their proud hearts, they will never know Jesus Christ. Wise men of the world by their wisdom know not God (1 Corinthians 1:21). Knowledge that springs solely from the mind of man is not adequate. A mere speculative knowledge of God does not embrace the complex Person of Jesus Christ. The man possessed with a religious demon cried, “...I know thee who thou art, the Holy one of God” (Mark 1:24). That knowledge was unattended by any sanctifying influence of the Holy Spirit. He knew who Jesus Christ was, but he wanted to be left alone. He knew Christ was holy but hated His holiness. There are two distinct types of knowledge: (1) natural knowledge apart from grace (Romans 1:21-24) and (2) spiritual knowledge which is the fruit of grace (Colossians 1:6). Most religionists talk about their blessings rather than their Blesser. A regard for those things which benefit oneself personally to the neglect of the Person of Christ is concern for the benefits rather than the Lord of glory. A manifestation of the knowledge of Jesus Christ is the greatest evidence of salvation. This knowledge consists in the glory of His Divine nature and the immeasurable fulness of His human nature. Scripture enables one to know if his knowledge of Jesus Christ is the revelation of God or the revelation of a false spirit. A person without the correct concept of the Person of Christ has never had the Holy Spirit to shine in his heart, giving him the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ (2 Corinthians 4:6). The Holy Spirit within the regenerated person leads him outside of himself to the Person of Christ as the object of faith. No mistake can be made because it is the revelation of God, not the mere influence of man as the instrument of Satan. Where the Spirit of regeneration has been made to shine, the recipient knows that Jesus Christ is God manifest in the flesh (1 Timothy 3:16). For centuries, the self-emptying of the Son of God has been explained in terms of many patterns. Such questions as (1) How can God empty Himself and remain unchanged? and (2) How can a life be really human if that life is in some sense Divine? have never been satisfactorily answered for all professing believers. The fact is, these questions will never be answered to the satisfaction of all religionists. An answer that will satisfy all is as impossible as trying to get a translation of the Bible that all can understand. People do not need a change in translations of the Bible but a change of heart. Without a change of heart by the grace of the sovereign God, no one can handle such a mystery as the incarnation. Any fool can ask questions, but it takes grace to apprehend what one cannot comprehend. In our study of the Kenosis theory, let us consider, (1) what it is not, and (2) what it is in the light of its text and context. The Kenosis does not mean the eternal Son of God emptied Himself of Deity to take upon Himself humanity. How could He who is existing in the essence of God empty Himself of His existence and remain a Person who could take upon Himself humanity? The preincarnate Son of God possessed only one nature; therefore, if He emptied Himself of Deity, the second Person of the Godhead became extinct. Such an idea is unthinkable to the Christian. Scripture points out that the Lord Jesus Christ is our Savior; and in the same context, He is called “God our Savior” (Titus 1:3-4; Titus 2:13-14). In becoming the God-Man, God did not cease to be God. Had the Son of God ceased to be God in the incarnation, He could not have been the Mediator between God and men (1 Timothy 2:5). Without a Mediator, man is without hope. In John 1:1, the Son of God is called the “Word.” John used this term four times when speaking of the Son of God (John 1:1; John 1:14; 1 John 1:1; Revelation 19:13). Three great facts about Jesus Christ are given in John 1:1 - (1) Christ’s existence is eternal - “In the beginning was the Word.” The word “was” proves that the Word did not begin at the beginning of creation. The Divine Word Logos not only was in the beginning but He was the center of all things in the beginning (John 1:3). (2) Christ’s Person is distinct - “...the Word was with God.” “With God” signifies distinction in the Godhead. For example, He that is with me is not me. The preposition “with” (pros) implies not merely existence alongside of, but personal intercourse. The root meaning is near or facing. (3) Christ’s nature is Divine - “the Word was God.” The presence of the article ho before Logos points to no particular Person. Christ is not merely a concept of Deity - one among many. He is the unique concept of Deity. He is Deity manifested: “Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen” (Romans 9:5). Christ is called the “Word of life” (1 John 1:1). As the Word, Christ is the revealer of what we need; as the Life, He is the communication of what we need (Luke 19:10). As the Word, Christ is God uttering Himself; as the Life, He is God giving Himself (John 10:11). As the Word, Christ is God without us; as the Life, He is God within us (Colossians 1:27). The eternal Word was made flesh (sarx egeneto - became flesh). The three clauses of John 1:1 are the foundational causes for the three great truths connected with the incarnation of John 1:14 - (1) He who was in the beginning with God was made flesh in time. (2) He who was with God tabernacled among men. (3) He who was God became veiled in human nature. Our attention shall be occupied in this study by the words “made flesh” - sarx egeneto. The verb egeneto, second aorist indicative of ginomai, means “became.” Observe the contrast between “was” in verse 1 and egeneto, “became,” in verse 14. In the first, we have the continuous existence of Christ in “was” and in the second the incarnation of Christ in time in egeneto. Jesus Christ is not God made imperfect by the incarnation, but God manifested in the flesh. The word sarx (flesh) does not denote person but nature. The great truths of the incarnation are (1) God manifest in the flesh of men (1 Timothy 3:16), (2) God manifest in the flesh to dwell with men (John 1:14), (3) God manifest in the flesh that He might be full of grace and truth for men (John 1:14), (4) God manifest in the flesh that He might die in the flesh (1 Peter 3:18), (5) God manifest in the flesh that through His flesh He might enter into the holy of holies (Hebrews 10:19-20), (6) God manifest in the flesh in order for the flesh of men to rest in hope (Psalms 16:9), and (7) God manifest in the flesh that all flesh shall see the salvation of God (Luke 3:6). There is a Hebrew word for flesh, basar, which means “show forth” or “to bring tidings.” It is used in Isaiah 61:1 - “THE Spirit of the Lord GOD is upon me; because the LORD hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound.” The Greek word euaggelion is used to represent the Hebrew word basar. The first reference to basar portrays Christ on the cross. “And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh [basar] instead thereof” (Genesis 2:21). The flesh of Adam was closed after his side was opened, but the wound inflicted in Christ’s side of John 19:34 was not closed in the resurrected Lord: “Then saith he to Thomas, 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” (John 20:27). God made woman and presented her to Adam. She was Adam’s completion. Since the bride of Christ is incomplete, the side of Jesus Christ is not closed. The word basar also means to show forth. Therefore, the person who has been given the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ of 2 Corinthians 4:6 speaks the gospel and shines it forth in his life. The “Word became flesh” may be illustrated in the following manner. Suppose you picked up a Greek New Testament but you did not even know the Greek characters. You would see words in the Greek text but could not understand what they mean. You must have a person who knows Greek and English to teach you. The same is true with the “Word made flesh.” Jesus Christ is God’s thought made flesh. Those who saw Him and all who read about Him cannot know Him unless someone who knows Christ and knows us teaches us. The Holy Spirit is our teacher (1 John 2:20; 1 John 2:27). Without Him we can never know God’s thoughts about us, but with Him we confess that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh for us. (See 1 John 4:2.) Through the written word we embrace the Incarnate Word in a conversion experience. After seeing by faith that, Jesus Christ is God manifest in the flesh, the believer goes from the historical reality of Christ’s human nature to His eternal existence. Hence, in the light of John 1:1; John 14:1-31, he concludes John is presenting three basic things: (1) The Son of God who appeared in time existed before time. (2) He who dwelt among men was with God. (3) He who became flesh was the self-existing God by nature. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 59: 03.10. CHRIST EMPTIED HIMSELF (PART III) ======================================================================== Chapter 10 - CHRIST EMPTIED HIMSELF (Part III) Jesus Christ did not surrender His attributes in the incarnation. To make the incarnation in its actual historical form possible, some advocate the eternal Son reduced Himself to the rank and measures of humanity. To accomplish this, they say the personal Subject in the Logos remained the same when He passed from the Divine to the human state but completely surrendered all the Divine attributes. But the Son could not surrender His attributes without surrendering His Deity. The Bible warns us about persons who distort the Scripture: “...they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction” (2 Peter 3:16). The word for “wrest” is strebloo, which means to distort or pervert. Peter described perverters of truth as “unlearned and unstable.” Such persons draw statements from Scripture and distort them to justify their sins. They say David committed adultery, Jacob was deceitful, and Peter lied. Thus they attempt to suppress the truth by their unrighteousness (Romans 1:18). Those who advocate Jesus Christ surrendered His attributes in the incarnation quote the following Scriptures: (1) “I can of mine own self do nothing...” (John 5:30). (2) “And I am glad for your sakes that I was not there...” (John 11:15). (3) “But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son...” (Mark 13:32). They conclude these verses refute the view of Christ maintaining the attributes of omnipotence, omnipresence, and omniscience during the days of His flesh. I might add, since Jesus Christ is “a man approved of God” of Acts 2:22, why do they not go further and say Christ is not God and deny the great mystery of godliness (1 Timothy 3:16)? When Christ said, “I can of mine own self do nothing” (John 5:30), He was speaking as the incarnate Son who had come to earth to do the will of His Father. He is inseparable from the Father’s essence, will, power, and operation; therefore, He could act only subordinate to the will of God. This was not a denial of omnipotence, but it was a declaration that He would never exercise His power independently of the Father. Christ did not deny His omnipresence when He said to Mary and Martha after Lazarus’ death, “I am glad for your sakes that I was not there, to the intent ye may believe...” (John 11:15). Christ was there in His Divine nature but not in His human nature. The principle of John 3:13 applies in this case. Untried faith is weak. Faith never prospers so much as when all things are against it. Tried faith makes experience real, exposes weakness, keeps us from making idols of our mercies, and drives us to God. Our Lord often takes away our earthly props that we might lean more firmly on Him. The Son of God bears witness to His natures in Mark 13:32 - “But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father.” Ignorance is attributed to His human nature. He was so unlimited in His Divine nature that He knew the Father perfectly (Matthew 11:27); therefore, ignorance does not belong to His Divine nature. God absolutely considered has no blood; yet Jesus Christ who is God had blood as the incarnate Son, because He had assumed a human nature. The Divine Logos, though present in the infant Christ, could not properly manifest knowledge in the infant as He could through the child or the man. This is the only recorded statement by the Lord Jesus before His public ministry: “How is it that ye sought me? wist ye not that I must be about my Father’s business?” (Luke 2:49). “And the child grew, and waxed strong in spirit, filled with wisdom: and the grace of God was upon him” (Luke 2:40). But the Divine Logos did not grow. “...Jesus increased in wisdom and stature [age]...” (Luke 2:52), but the Divine Son did not increase. The eternal Son was always filled with wisdom, but it developed in His experience as He grew in age. The manifestations of human and Divine consciousness stand side by side in the records of our Lord’s self-expression. He spoke alternately out of a Divine and a human consciousness. In Christ’s condescension, He resolved not to use-as man-the knowledge which His omniscience-as God-would afford. The wisdom He used was the illumination of the Spirit given without measure. Divine attributes could not be surrendered, but we must not confound nonexistence with nonexertion. We declared the human nature was not the residential subject of omniscience. The Son of God did not surrender His omnipotence in the incarnation. Jesus Christ is “...a man approved of God among you by miracles...” (Acts 2:22). The word for “miracles” is dunamis, which means power, miraculous power, or omnipotence. When one thinks about miracles, it is not the “how” but the “Who” that should capture his attention. Paul’s defense before King Agrippa included the question, “Why should it be thought a thing incredible with you, that God should raise the dead?” (Acts 26:8). One cannot use the words “incredible” and “God” in the same sentence and remain logical. But, who can expect a depraved mind to be logical? The Greek word for “incredible” is apiston, the accusative singular of apistos, which means unbelieving or without confidence. Consider the miracles the incarnate Christ performed. He changed water into wine, healed the sick, restored sight to the blind, stilled the storm, and raised the dead. He had power to lay down His own life, and He had power to take it again (John 10:17-18). The word for “power” is exousia, which means authority, right, or liberty; supernatural power, government. Therefore, the incarnate Son was not only omnipotent, but He had the authority, or right, to be omnipotent. He is God manifest in the flesh (1 Timothy 3:16). Jesus Christ did not surrender His omnipresence when He took upon Himself the form of a servant. When one understands who Jesus Christ is, he will have no problem with His attributes. The omnipresence of Christ is taught in John 3:13 - “And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which [who] is in heaven.” The Lord from heaven came to earth to do the will of the Father. He obeyed the law, wrought miracles, and suffered death for His people. Christ did not bring with Him His human nature. He, being the omnipresent God, assumed a human nature into union with His Divine Person. Thus the Son of Man was in heaven by virtue of His Divine Person, while at the same time He was on earth in His human nature. His human nature was not in heaven, because it was not in its glorified state. The Son of God took upon Himself the form of a servant into a personal union never to be laid aside. Hence, it became proper for the human nature to carry a Divine title. There are three good examples of Divine attributes in evidence with human titles and human attributes in evidence with Divine titles: (1) In John 3:13, a human title is in evidence with a Divine attribute. Christ, in speaking to Nicodemus, spoke of Himself as the Son of Man who is in heaven. (2) In Acts 20:28, a Divine title is given to a human attribute. Paul called the blood of Christ’s human nature the “blood of God.” (3) In 1 Corinthians 2:8, a Divine title is given to a human attribute - “...they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.” The eternal Son did not cease to be God by His incarnation. He continued to be the omnipresent God filling heaven and earth. The Lord Jesus Christ did not surrender His omniscience in the incarnation. Strike out the thought of omniscience and you extinguish Deity by a single stroke. Paul desired that the Colossian saints have full assurance of understanding which would result in a true knowledge of the mystery of God, namely Christ: “In whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge” (Colossians 2:3). There is no greater passage to illustrate the omniscience of the incarnate Christ than John 1:43-51. Why did Nathanael worship Christ the moment they first met? Were not the Jews taught to worship none but God and to bow to Him only? When Jesus Christ said to Nathanael, “Before that Philip called thee, when thou wast under the fig tree, I saw thee” (John 1:48), Nathanael recognized the omniscience of the One who spoke. There was nothing unusual about Nathanael being under a fig tree. The remarkable thing was they were separated by a space of several miles. Therefore, when this Jew, who knew the attributes of God, met a Person whose presence was not only separated by distance but who knew where he was, he concluded that this is the omnipresent and omniscient God. Hence, he confessed, “...thou art the Son of God...” (John 1:49). According to John 1:51, he must have been reading about Jacob at Bethel. Jacob dreamed of a ladder that was set up on the earth, the top of which reached heaven. The angels of God were seen ascending and descending on it (Genesis 28:12). The “Word became flesh” is the meeting place of heaven and earth, and every person spiritually enlightened says, “God is with me.” “Thou God seest me” of Genesis 16:13 should constantly ring in our ears. The infinite mind of God is able to grasp billions of objects at once, and yet focus His attention as much upon one object as if there were no others. One must clearly understand this truth in the hypostatic union-the Divine nature never has a human attribute and the human nature never has a Divine attribute. Christ’s Deity was never mixed with His human nature. Hence, we are not to assume that Christ’s human nature is omnipotent because His Divine nature is all powerful, that His human nature is omnipresent because by His Divine nature He is everywhere present, or that His human nature is omniscient because His Divine nature has infinite understanding. As man possesses soul and body, Jesus Christ possesses the Divine and human natures. As man’s soul is invisible and his body is visible, the Divine nature of Christ is invisible and the human nature is visible. As the two substances of man retain their individual qualities, the two natures of Christ retain their distinctive attributes. The Divine continues omnipotent, omnipresent, and omniscient; and the human nature is limited in strength, presence, and knowledge. Furthermore, when we speak of man as immortal and mortal, we assign each of these attributes to that part of man to which it corresponds. Hence, the soul of man is not subject to death, but the body is subject to physical death. Likewise, the Divine nature cannot die, but the assumed human nature of Christ did die and was raised again the third day. We must understand that Christ’s Divine Nature is the base of Christ’s Person. Before the incarnation there was no God-Man, but there was the second Person of the Godhead-the eternal Son of God. The personality of the Son, therefore, was not dependent on the incarnation. Moreover, the death of Christ on the cross did not separate the union between the two natures, although they were temporarily dissolved for three days and three nights. The undissolved union kept the body of Christ from seeing corruption. The God-Man existed between His death and resurrection, notwithstanding the separation between His human soul and body. There are those who believe the verb “emptied” refers to Christ’s being on an equality with God rather than His existing in the form of God. Those who hold this view do not deny Christ’s Deity. They believe when the Son of God assumed the form of a servant He did not lay aside His form of God. The passage is interpreted to mean that Christ who preexisted in the form of God did not regard equality with God as a prize to be retained, but He emptied Himself, taking the form of a servant. The emptying involved a state of subjection in which Christ rendered obedience during His humiliation. This view is widely acclaimed among Christians. Not that I desire to be different, but it seems to me that the Greek construction and internal evidence is against this view. I shall list my objections and give the reasons for so doing. (1) There is nothing in the word harpazo or its derivatives to justify the idea of retaining something. Hence, the idea of retaining equality at the expense of robbing mankind of redemption is not the idea expressed in Php 2:6 b. (2) Equality with God is not something that could be relinquished by the Son. During the days of Christ’s flesh, equality with the Father was maintained by the Son (John 5:17-47). Equality with God and the form of God are inseparable. There is another theory of the Kenosis that is popular. Some advocate the verb “empty” is a dramatic way of expressing the change in the outward appearance of Christ which took place in the incarnation. They do not believe Christ emptied Himself of Deity, but only its outward manifestation and use for His own benefit. The illustration used is a king who temporarily wears the garments of a peasant while remaining king. Hence, they say the Son of God did not hold the outer manifestation of His Deity as a treasure to be grasped and retained. This view does not properly interpret ekenosen - emptied. To say Christ’s essential glory was concealed during the incarnation is not the same as “He emptied Himself.” The words “concealed” and “emptied” cannot be equated. Another interpretation of “He emptied Himself” is that Jesus Christ surrendered independent exercise of His attributes in the incarnation. Here are some arguments for this theory: (1) Christ did not empty out of Himself the form of God. (2) The verb ekenosen denotes a crisis act by Christ. (3) The verb “emptied” is guarded by two clauses - “taking the form of a servant” and “made in the likeness of men.” (4) Christ alone could give up the independent exercise of His attributes. (5) The testimony of the whole passage precludes that in emptying Himself Christ only acted as though He did not possess the Divine attributes. The main point of this theory is Christ’s surrender of independent exercise of His attributes in the incarnation; but this view, like all the aforementioned theories, falls short of interpreting the verb ekenosen. One of the more recent theories of the Kenosis is called self-limitation. This view begins with creation. Those who embrace it say creation means the existence of something that is not God, and God’s relation to creation implies limitation. Hence, limitation upon God, brought about by creation, is a free limitation and is therefore a Kenosis. God has fully accepted this limitation in the fulfillment of His will for fellowship with another. They believe the freedom of God means God is free to transform His mode of existence from the infinite to the finite. This freedom means God and man do not stand in radical opposition to each other; therefore, the Creator is free to share fully the life of His creature. They contend such a life is not foreign to God because there is a humanity about God. His being has its manward side. They believe the New Testament shows that Christ was already a man sharing the realm of God in His preexistent state. He was a man dwelling “in the form of God” who came to share the “form of a servant.” The Kenosis is God expressing His Lordship over creation by entering it. Christ as a man is different from other men (1) by virtue of being God’s unique agent for redemption of mankind and (2) by His divinity lying in His power to save. Several things in the self-limitation view need to be exposed: (1) “There is a humanity about God.” This is like saying there is a finiteness about the infinite. (2) “Christ was a man in His preexistent state.” No distinction is made between Christ’s manhood in purpose and in actuality. Manhood could not be an actuality before the incarnation. It was only in purpose. (3) “The Kenosis is God expressing His Lordship over creation and entering it.” The Kenosis is not what the eternal Son left. He did not empty Himself of Deity or equality with God. Kenosis refers to the life of the incarnate Son of Man that was spent and expended. (4) “Christ is different from other men by virtue of being God’s unique agent in His power to save.” Jesus Christ is different from men because He is the God-Man, Son of both. The union of the Divine and human natures makes Christ unique. When we speak of the God-Man, we are talking about one of the greatest mysteries of the Christian faith. In the God-Man, there is the union of the greatest possible opposites-Godhead and manhood. The fulness of the Godhead dwells bodily in the Son of Man. When we know who Jesus Christ is, there is no problem with His power to save. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 60: 03.11. CHRIST EMPTIED HIMSELF (PART IV) ======================================================================== Chapter 11 - CHRIST EMPTIED HIMSELF (Part IV) A summary of the negative approach to the Kenosis is in order before we consider what it is in the light of the text and context. It cannot be (1) an emptying of Deity, (2) an emptying of equality with God, (3) an emptying of Divine attributes, (4) equated with Christ surrendering independent exercise of attributes, (5) equated with concealing essential glory, or (6) equated with self-limiting. After considering what the Kenosis is not, let us seek to learn what it is in the light of Scripture. We have considered the testimony of many witnesses; and by the process of elimination for lack of Biblical support, the truth should not be too difficult to see. This does not mean the Kenosis will be clearly seen; but like knowing Christ’s love, there can be some degree of sight. There are degrees of sight just as there are degrees of knowledge. In John 20:5, the disciple who outran Peter to the sepulchre “saw the linen clothes lying.” The Greek word for “saw” is the present tense of blepo, which means to have faculty of sight, or to exercise sight. This means the disciple got a glance of the linen clothes as he stooped down and looked into the sepulchre. In John 20:6, Peter, following the more speedy disciple, went into the sepulchre and “seeth the linen clothes lie.” The word for “seeth” is the present tense of theoreo, which means to be a spectator, to gaze on, contemplate; to behold, review with interest and attention (Matthew 27:55; Matthew 28:1). Peter saw more than John, because he entered the sepulchre and viewed the clothes with great interest. He was not satisfied with a mere glance from the outside. May our interest in the great Christological passage of Php 2:1-30 be viewed with as much interest and attention as Peter had in the proof of Christ’s resurrection out from among the dead. Finally, in John 20:8, John - “that other disciple” - who reached the sepulchre before Peter, went in also, “and he saw, and believed.” The Greek word for “saw” is the aorist tense of horao, which means to see, behold; to attain a true knowledge. John saw exactly what Peter had seen. Having gained true knowledge from the factual evidence before him, John believed the Lord Jesus had risen from the dead. I trust our investigation of the Biblical evidence of the incarnation will result in a true knowledge of the complex Person of Jesus Christ. Let us not be satisfied with a mere glance at the evidence, but enter into an intense investigation of all the Biblical evidence and say, “I believe Jesus Christ is God with us.” Suggestion has been made that “but emptied himself” derives its meaning from what precedes and follows. Therefore, we are told two things about the self-emptying of the eternal Son: (1) He took upon Him the form of a servant, being made in the likeness of men. (2) He became obedient. He, before whom all powers obeyed, learned in a new experience the grace of obedience (Hebrews 5:8). Therefore, the general belief is that the self-emptying of the Son of God includes everything that took place during the humiliation of Jesus Christ. The human nature He assumed was real but minus depravity. It had all the characteristics of fallen nature, except sin. “Christ emptied Himself” cannot be connected with His Divine essence or equality with God. This should be understood at this point in our studies. It is associated, however, with Christ’s human nature, and it refers to something our Lord did during His humiliation. The aorist tense of kenoo means to empty, to deprive of power, or to make of no effect. It is used five times (Romans 4:14; 1 Corinthians 1:17; 1 Corinthians 9:15; 2 Corinthians 9:3; Php 2:7). Paul’s use of spendomai in Php 2:17 and 2 Timothy 4:6 throws light on the subject of the Kenosis. Paul said, “...if I be offered upon the sacrifice and service of your faith, I joy, and rejoice with you all” (Php 2:17). Again he said, “For I am now ready to be offered, and the time of my departure is at hand” (2 Timothy 4:6). These are the only two places where the verb spendomai is used. It means to pour out a libation or drink offering; to make libation of oneself by expending energy and life in the service of the gospel (Php 2:17); to be in the act of being sacrificed in the cause of the gospel (2 Timothy 4:6). In Php 2:17, the possibility of Paul’s execution for the sake of the gospel was weighing on his mind. This act of sacrifice is the main feature of Paul’s statement. He not only lived a life that was expended-used up or emptied-for the cause of Christ, but he contemplated the time of condemnation to death. That time had come when he said, “For I am now ready to be offered, and the time of my departure is at hand” (2 Timothy 4:6). Here, we have the present passive indicative of spendo, which means “I am already being poured out.” Paul was in the condition of the victim on whose head the wine had been poured. The only thing that remained was the stroke of death. Paul’s life had been a “living sacrifice” (Romans 12:1); but in death, his martyrdom would be a drink offering which would be the final seal upon his expended life. Paul told the Corinthians, “...I will very gladly spend and be spent for you...” (2 Corinthians 12:15). The Greek word for “spend” is future active indicative of dapanao, which means to expend or to be at expense (Mark 5:26; Acts 21:24; 2 Corinthians 12:15); to spend, waste, consume by extravagance (Luke 15:14; James 4:3). The word for “spent” is future passive indicative of ekdapanao - to exhaust, consume, to spend out or to spend utterly. The prepositional prefix gives the compound verb the meaning “to spend wholly.” To the Corinthians, Paul, who possessed the Spirit of Christ, was saying, “I will most gladly spend and be expended (to spend wholly) for your souls.” The apostle manifested the spirit of Him about whom it is said “...for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame...” (Hebrews 12:2) until he too was completely expended for the cause of Him whose life was spent and expended for him (2 Timothy 4:6). The previous statements should make it easy for us to see the meaning of “But emptied himself.” Christ, during the days of His humiliation, did not consider His future honor of equality with God before men something to be seized. He was willing to spend and to be expended in the ultimate sense for the elect. In His holy life, Christ said, “...the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many” (Matthew 20:28). This verse relates the character, life, and death of Jesus Christ. (1) He is called the Son of Man who came. Since man was the offender, the Son must assume the nature of man to suffer the penalty for man. In this union, dignity is united with humility. This made Jesus Christ the unique Person. “The Son of Man came.” His “coming” is as unique as the Person who came. He came voluntarily on a unique mission, a mission of mercy. He said, “I came forth from the Father, and am come into the world: again, I leave the world, and go to the Father” (John 16:28). (2) The life of Jesus Christ on earth was as unique as His Person. He said, “The Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister.” This should fill us with amazement when we consider who came and the place from which He descended. The Son of God did not exchange Deity for humanity, but He did exchange one state of living for another. His earthly mission necessitated a life of service rather than a life of being served. Hence, His life was one spent ministering to others. (3) The death of the Son of Man was as unique as His Person and life. He came “to give his life a ransom for many.” The word “for” has a vicarious meaning. It means He gave His life instead of many. Our Lord Jesus Christ expended Himself in His death on the cross. There was nothing else to give. He gave all. Not only did His body die upon the cross, but He poured out His soul unto death (John 19:30-34; Isaiah 53:12). The Son of Man is the ultimate as to His Person, life, and death. Hence, we have the meaning of “But emptied Himself” in a life spent in humiliation that was expended (emptied) in death. Death does not mean cessation but separation of being. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 61: 03.12. THE FORM OF A SERVANT (PART I) ======================================================================== Chapter 12 - THE FORM OF A SERVANT (Part I) The Son of God took the form of a servant in the incarnation. Three expressions are used to set forth the reality of Christ’s human nature: (1) “the form of a servant,” (2) “the likeness of men,” and (3) “found in fashion as a man.” There is not a trace of Docetism in this or any other New Testament passage. The Docetist refers to Christ’s body as a phantom. He places emphasis on the human appearance of the Son of Man. Over against the human appearance, one may speak about the human nature in such a way as to make it hard to believe in a true human nature. Docetism alienates mankind from the Mediator between God and men. This is heresy that must be condemned. Christ did not take upon Himself the nature of angels but the “seed of Abraham” (Hebrews 2:16). Marvelous grace is displayed in the comparison the writer of Hebrews makes between angels and men. The comparison shows how inferior our nature is to that of angels. Men at their highest are compared to angels. Stephen’s highest moment of spirituality is described by the analogy of an angel in Acts 6:15 - “And all that sat in the council, looking stedfastly on him, saw his face as it had been the face of an angel.” David’s wisdom is said to be as “an angel of God” (2 Samuel 14:20). Paul’s eloquence could not surpass angels. He said, “THOUGH I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal” (1 Corinthians 13:1). Angels are spirits (Hebrews 1:14), but men are dust and ashes (Genesis 18:27). Angels are immortal spirits (Luke 20:36), but men are as grass (1 Peter 1:24). Angels are heavenly spirits (Matthew 24:36), but men have their abode on earth (1 Corinthians 15:47). Oh, what grace for the Son of God to pass by the angels and assume the nature of man! This is beyond the reach of human reason. Thus, “...It is the LORD: let him do what seemeth him good” (1 Samuel 3:18). There were some angels which kept not their first estate, but left their habitation (Jude 1:6). When some of the angels fell, the Son of God sat still. He did not assume the nature of angels but left them in their fallen condition. There is no promise or hope for fallen angels. On the other hand, when Adam fell and fled from the presence of the Lord, God sought fallen Adam. God not only followed after man in his flight, but He followed with such earnestness as to be worthy of our consideration. When the angels sinned, God did not spare them. Peter said, “...God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment” (2 Peter 2:4). But when man fell, God spared the elect by not sparing His Son: “He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things?” (Romans 8:32). The Greek words ouch epheisato are used in both 2 Peter 2:4 and Romans 8:32. The word epheisato is the aorist tense of pheidomai, which means to spare, be tender (Romans 8:32); or to spare in respect of hard dealings (Acts 20:29; Romans 11:21; 1 Corinthians 7:28; 2 Corinthians 1:23; 2 Corinthians 13:2, 2 Peter 2:4-5). The word ouch means “not.” Thus, God spared not the nonelect angels, but He spared elect men by not sparing His Son. The incarnation was for the purpose of Christ apprehending the elect. Paul’s use of the word “apprehended” of Php 3:12 supposes a flight by the elect and a pursuit of the elect by Christ. The apostle said, “Not as though I had already attained, either were already perfect: but I follow after, if that I may apprehend that for which also I am apprehended of Christ Jesus.” The word “apprehended” comes from the aorist passive form of the Greek word katalambano, which means to lay hold of so as to make one’s own, to obtain, to attain, to overtake, or find. When Christ has overtaken us in grace, He lays hold on us with both hands as something He is glad to have; and having us in His hands, He will never let us go (John 10:27-29). Christ took the form of a servant in the incarnation (Php 2:7). The word for “form” is the same as the one used to describe Christ’s Divine essence (Php 2:6). Therefore, the human nature of Christ is as real as His Divine. The assumption of human nature, however, does not indicate a change in the personality of the second Person in the Godhead. Christ is called God’s servant (Isaiah 42:1). The eternal Son entered into the contract of service with the Father, and He was employed in the Father’s business (John 9:4). The reality of Christ’s humanity is carefully explained within the context of this Christological passage. First of all, distinction between the “form of God” and the “form of a servant” is shown by huparchon and genomenos. The first proves the eternal existence of the form of God, and the second reveals the definite historical event of the form of a servant prepared for the Son of God in time. The Son of God became something He was not in the incarnation, but He did not cease to be what He is essentially. Secondly, Scripture makes it clear that Christ’s body was similar but not identical to ours. That is why Paul said, “...and was made in the likeness of men.” The crucial word for the proper understanding of Christ’s human nature is the word homoiomati, the dative singular of homoioma, which means likeness, resemblance, or similitude. This same word is used in Romans 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 word homoiomati means “similar to” but not “identical with.” Thus, Jesus Christ did not come in sinful flesh, but only in the likeness of sinful flesh. He became the God-Man without entering the stream of human sin. Another example of this is associated with Christ’s testing. Christ was “...in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin” (Hebrews 4:15). The word homoioteta, accusative singular of homoiotes, which means likeness or similitude is used in Hebrews 4:15 and Hebrews 7:15. This means Christ was tested in a similar but not identical manner as we are. If He had been tested in the identical manner that we are, He would not have been the impeccable Savior. The body Jesus Christ assumed was one that was especially prepared for Him. “Wherefore when he [the Lord Jesus] cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me” (Hebrews 10:5). The word “prepared” comes from the aorist middle form of the Greek word katartizo, which means to prepare or provide. It speaks of a special kind of preparation, to render fit or complete. It is translated “to make perfect” (Hebrews 13:21), “to perfect” (1 Thessalonians 3:10), “to be perfectly joined together” (1 Corinthians 1:10), and “to frame” (Hebrews 11:3). Christ’s body, therefore, was so perfected by the Spirit in the womb of the virgin that no depravity touched that “holy thing” (Luke 1:35). The bodies of animals offered as sacrifices under the Levitical system were nothing more than “stays of execution” until the once-offered body of Christ put away sins forever (Hebrews 10:10-14). Christ’s “form of a servant” was not only in “the likeness of men,” but it was “found in fashion as a man” (Php 2:8). The word for “fashion” is schemati, dative singular of schema, which means fashion, form; external show (1 Corinthians 7:31); or guise or appearance (Php 2:8). These are the only places where schema is used. The words “being found” are the translation of the Greek word heurepheis, first aorist passive participle of heurisko, which means to find, discover, examine, or observe. The aorist points back to the earthly ministry of Christ. Christ’s appearance, speech, and works proved He was God manifest in the flesh. Putting the three statements “form of a servant,” “likeness of men,” and “found in fashion as a man” together, we have the following facts: (1) “Form” refers to the reality of human nature. (2) “Likeness” gives the similarity of Christ’s human nature to the nature of all men. (3) “Fashion” denotes the outward appearance of Christ. Unlike the fashion of the world that is passing away, the assumption of human nature which bears the fashion of a man will never pass away. He is the God-Man forever. The word “servant” (doulos) means a slave, man of servile condition, or one who gives himself up wholly to another’s will. Under the Roman law, a Jewish slave was subjected to great humiliation. The following are some of the laws respecting a slave: (1) He had no right as a citizen. When injured, Christ had no redress. Hence, when He was subjected to unjust treatment, there was no arm of justice for His defense. He who shall judge the nations was judged by wicked men. He who is life expects the sentence of death. Christ’s silence was wonderful. He who could have made the world to tremble opened not His mouth before His evil interrogators. Why? He came not to be His own advocate but ours. His silence was full of suffering that was vicarious and expiatory. Verbal defense does not convince a prejudiced mind. Convincing a prejudicial mind requires an inner work of grace. (2) He could have no property. The Servant of servants had no place to lay His head and no money to pay His taxes. (3) A slave, in the eyes of the law, was a mere chattel who could be bought or sold. Judas sold Christ for thirty pieces of silver. (4) At death, a slave was tortured as no other. Consider the treatment Christ received from His enemies! Such treatment, however, is only from man’s side. What about Christ’s forsakenness by the Father? Sin drove angels out of heaven, drove Adam out of the garden, and caused the Father to hide His face from His Son when Christ paid the debt of sin for the elect. The Son was God’s “servant” carrying out the will of the Father to make satisfaction for sin. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 62: 03.13. THE FORM OF A SERVANT (PART II) ======================================================================== Chapter 13 - HE FORM OF A SERVANT (Part II) Jesus Christ is absolutely unique within the circumference of human nature. The expressions in Philippians which assert Christ’s incarnation also assert His Deity. One could not say that Jesus Christ as man regarded equality with God as something to be seized. A mere man has not been exalted and given a name above all others. Every knee shall not bow or every tongue confess that a mere man is Lord to the glory of God the Father. When Christianity expresses what she knows of Jesus Christ, she calls Him the God-Man. Christ’s inner nature and His external, historical reality in His appearance before men were not contradictory. What He appeared to be was not the corresponding reality of what He essentially is as the eternal Son of God. The contrast between what Christ appeared to be and what He essentially is became sharper and sharper until its climax in His death. Jesus Christ who is eternal life sank in death to become life for the elect of God. “I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep” (John 10:11). “...I lay down my life for the sheep” (John 10:15). Jesus Christ is the only Mediator between God and men (1 Timothy 2:5). The distance between God and man was brought about by man’s sin. As far as man was concerned, there was none in heaven or earth, in their original nature, to undertake the office of Mediator. “If one man sin against another, the judge shall judge him: but if a man sin against the LORD, who shall intreat for him...” (1 Samuel 2:25). Job said, “Neither is there any daysman betwixt us, that might lay his hand upon us both” (Job 9:33). The required mediator could not be God absolutely considered: “Now a mediator is not a mediator of one, but God is one” (Galatians 3:20). Hence, a Christ truly human, yet not absolutely Divine, would be a bridge from man’s side who could not reach God’s side. However, in the God-Man, God and man meet with blessing to man and glory to God through the one Mediator, the Lord Jesus Christ. In the course of human history, God has established three ways of communication with man. (1) In the garden of Eden, Adam was in a state of friendship with God. Before the fall, no mediator was needed, because mediation implies a difficulty which is not easy to reconcile. (2) Under the law, Moses stood between God and the people of Israel to communicate to them the word of God: “I stood between the LORD and you at that time, to shew you the word of the Lord: for ye were afraid by reason of the fire, and went not up into the mount...” (Deuteronomy 5:5). God gave a promise in the unconditional covenant of Abraham (Genesis 17:1-27). The promise spoke of nothing but blessing. The law was “added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator” (Galatians 3:19). Israel was unable to bear the things that were spoken. God came to Israel not as He did to Abraham. The promise to Abraham was made directly by God. He spoke to Abraham as friend to friend; but God spoke through Moses in awful majesty as an offended sovereign. (3) Jesus Christ is the true Mediator of reconciliation in a way of satisfaction for the offence committed. This proves that the holy God can deal with men only through His Son. Jesus Christ is the Mediator of reconciliation and then of intercession. The elect are first reconciled through the sufferings and death of Christ and then through His interceding life. “For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life” (Romans 5:10). There is no mediator of intercession before reconciliation. Hence, as Christ prayed not for the world (John 17:9), He died not for the world. Since He died for those God had given Him out of the world, He makes intercession for those and no others. The hypostatic union-the union of two natures in one Person-is a doctrine difficult to understand, dangerous to undertake, and more dangerous to mistake. It is beyond the reason of man to comprehend. To be mistaken about the Person of Christ is indeed tragic. The characteristic feature about the incarnation is the hypostatic union-two natures in one Person. Distinction must be made between a trinitarian, a human, and a theanthropic person. There are three Persons in the Godhead-Father, Son, and Holy Spirit; but there is only one essence. All three Persons have one Divine nature. Before the incarnation, Jesus Christ possessed only one nature. A human person possesses two natures-material and immaterial. The material nature is visible, but the immaterial is invisible. Man’s material body came into existence when God made man from the dust of the earth, and the immaterial soul came into existence when God breathed into that body the breath of life. A theanthropic Person has three natures. Jesus Christ alone is the theanthropic Person. He has the Divine essence, a human body, and a human soul. Expressions used to describe the theanthropic Person should be guarded. One is incorrect to speak of the incarnate Christ as either “God in man” or “God and man.” This is the correct description: Jesus Christ is the “God-Man.” The expression “God in man” belongs to persons who have been born of the Spirit. Christ indwells believers: “...Christ in you, the hope of glory” (Colossians 1:27). “But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his” (Romans 8:9). God indwells the elect by the Spirit of regeneration. The indwelling is a fact. As the temple was the place where God dwelt with Israel, the body of the believer is the temple of the Holy Spirit: “What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own? For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God’s” (1 Corinthians 6:19-20). Indwelling signifies not only presence but activity and restraint. The Holy Spirit is the source of life who brings form and order from what at first was shapeless and void. This presence is not to be regarded as a mere influence. He is a Person who regenerates, works in the believer to will and do God’s good pleasure, and subdues sin. The Holy Spirit is the seal and earnest of an unseen Savior. Scripture speaks of the omnipresence of the spirit. “Whither shall I go from thy spirit? or whither shall I flee from thy presence?” (Psalms 139:7). Omnipresence is an attribute, but the indwelling of which we speak is a Person. Paul’s statement, “To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself...” (2 Corinthians 5:19), does not contradict the statement, “God in man should be restricted to Christians.” The relationship between the Father and the Son is not the same as the relationship between Christ and His own. Relationship of the Father and the Son is one of essence, and the relationship of Christ and the believer is one of grace. John 14:20 makes distinctions in these relationships: “At that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you.” When Christ spoke these words, the disciples did not know these things as they would. Their views would be enlarged and their faith confirmed. The teaching of the word enables Christ’s own to know. The following are points of knowledge emphasized in John 14:20 - (1) “I am in my Father” refers to the mystery of the Trinity. Scriptures are required to know that Christ is in the Father and the Father is in Christ (John 14:20; 2 Corinthians 5:19). It has been said that the text states “Ye shall know,” not “ye shall know how.” The “why” and “how” of God’s grace are wrapped up in His secret counsel. (2) “Ye in me” is the fruit of the incarnation. (3) “I in you” is the relationship of grace. The statement “God and man” indicates two persons rather than two natures. Jesus Christ is one Person, the second Person in the Godhead. He did not obtain personality by uniting with the human nature. The personality of Christ existed before the incarnation. On the other hand, the human nature Christ assumed was impersonal in itself; but it was personalized in the Divine Person. The nature Christ assumed had no subsistence apart from His Divine Person. Paul makes a distinction between person and nature in Romans 9:21 - “Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour and another unto dishonour?” The potter’s power over the clay denotes the absolute sovereignty of God. A lump of clay consists in one nature, but the sovereign God fashions from one piece of the lump a vessel unto honor and from another piece a vessel unto dishonor. Both vessels come from the same lump. However, when the Creator fashions the lump into vessels, they become personalized in particular vessels. The nature of all men is the same, but their characteristics differ. Nature is invisible. It is visible only as it is reflected in one’s person. Human nature is not actually personal, that is, a distinct person. Thus, “that holy thing” (Luke 1:35) was not called a person. Christ assumed not a person in the incarnation but a nature. The expressions “Son of man,” “man approved of God,” and “Behold the man” denote more than man. They indicate the God-Man who appeared in the form of a servant. Christ did not exist eternally as the God-Man. The God-Man’s complex consciousness was revealed as He walked among the sons of men. He possessed a twofold consciousness with only one self-consciousness. If Christ had only one nature, He could not have mediated between God and man. Christ’s weariness, weeping, praying, thirsting, and crying of forsakenness were from His human form of consciousness. On the other hand, His announcement that He and the Father are one, He had the power to lay down His life, He had power to resurrect Himself, and He had authority to forgive sin must be ascribed to the Divine form of His consciousness. While the acts and qualities of either nature of the God-Man may be regarded as proceeding from one Person, the acts and qualities of one nature cannot be attributed to the other. That which characterizes Christ’s Divine nature can never be assigned to His human nature. To say Christ’s Divine nature suffered, died, and was raised would be erroneous. Each nature has certain qualities, and the qualities of one cannot be transferred to the other. A material nature can have only material qualities, and a spiritual nature can have only spiritual qualities. The truth of Christ’s complex consciousness may be illustrated, to some extent in an imperfect manner, with a fluctuation of consciousness in a human person. Man’s thirst, hunger, pain, and sorrow are attributed to his human nature. On the other hand, man’s love for the Lord Jesus and joy in the Lord are ascribed to his spiritual nature. Man with his material nature is perishing daily, but his inward man which is his spiritual nature is renewed daily (2 Corinthians 4:16-18). end of document ======================================================================== CHAPTER 63: 04.1.0. CHRISTS KINGDOM IS FUTURE - VOLUME I BY W.E.BEST ======================================================================== Christ’s Kingdom Is Future - Volume I The King’s Genealogy by W. E. Best WEBBMT P.O. Box 34904 Houston, Texas 77234-4904 USA Copyright © 1992 W. E. Best Scripture quotations in this book designated “NASB” are from the NEW AMERICAN STANDARD BIBLE, © 1960, 1962, 1963, 1968, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1975, and 1977 by the Lockman Foundation, and are used by permission. Those designated “translation” are by the author and taken from the Greek Text. All others are from the King James Bible. This book is distributed by the W. E. Best Book Missionary Trust P. O. Box 34904 Houston, Texas 77234-4904 USA CONTENTS Author’s Note Christ’s Kingdom Is Future - An Overview VOLUME I - THE KING’S GENEALOGY 1. Introduction Section I - The Unconditional Aspect Of God’s Covenants Of Promise Was Emphasized From Abraham To David 2. Patriarch’s Names Recorded In The King’s Genealogy Abraham Isaac Jacob Judah Pharez And Zarah 3. Women’s Names Recorded In The King’s Genealogy Tamar Rahab Ruth Bathsheba Section II - Spiritual Decline Was Emphasized From David To Babylonian Captivity 4. Preface To Section II 5. Theocracy - God’s Ordained Form Of Government 6. Kings Preceding The Division Of The Kingdom David Solomon Rehoboam 7. Four Good Kings In Judah Subsequent To The Division Of The KingdomAsaJehoshaphat Hezekiah Josiah 8. A Short Revival Under Zerubbabel The Temple Rebuilt Haggai’s Prophecy 9. Conclusion AUTHOR’S NOTE This is Volume I of an extensive series on the subject of Christ’s future Kingdom. Subsequent volumes will be released periodically. Volume I covers only the King’s genealogy. Future volumes will comprehensively cover all aspects of Christ’s future Kingdom as revealed in the Scriptures from Genesis 1:1 to Revelation 22:21. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 64: 04.1.000. OVERVIEW ======================================================================== CHRIST’S KINGDOM IS FUTURE—AN OVERVIEW There is no subject of Scripture about which there are so many conflicting views as the doctrine of eschatology. The word eschatology comes from the Greek adjective eschatos, which means last or final. Among the many views espoused, two major conflicting opinions, which may be called “confusion twice confounded,” are outstanding. Many who embrace the unconditional covenant with reference to soteriology (the science of salvation) reject the unconditional covenant as it relates to eschatology (the science of last things). On the other hand, others embrace the unconditional covenant as it pertains to eschatology, but they reject the unconditional covenant as it relates to soteriology. Therefore, the inconsistency of both those who believe in free grace and those who believe in free will is manifested. The foundational problem in the study of eschatology lies in the misunderstanding of God’s covenants. A definition of the Greek noun diatheke is important. It means a disposition, arrangement, compact, covenant, will, or testament. The word covenant is used as eternal and temporal; unconditional and conditional; and soteriological and eschatological. In order to properly handle the subject of covenants, one must be able to distinguish between covenant and covenant. God made legal, ceremonial, and national conditional covenants with Israel in time, but His covenant of grace is eternal. Therefore, the covenant of grace reached up to God’s chief attributes and down to man’s deepest needs. Nothing can alter the disposition of God who gave it because He foresaw changes, overrules all events, and provides for all circumstances. In studying the covenant of grace as it relates to Israel, the lessons typified by the tabernacle are important. For example, the ark is a symbol of God’s throne from which all blessings descend. The mercy seat was placed upon the ark, and it was the same size as the ark, signifying that God’s saving grace reaches no further than the eternal covenant. The eternal covenant has the God of peace as its Author, the great Shepherd of the sheep as its fulfillment, and the sheep for whom Christ died as its recipients (Hebrews 13:20-21). Jesus Christ, the great Shepherd of the sheep, fulfilled all the obligations of the eternal covenant. He is great in His person, power, work, and exaltation. Furthermore, Christ shall be great when He comes the second time to establish His kingdom (Titus 2:13; 2 Timothy 4:1). The Epistle to the Hebrews speaks of the substitutionary death of Jesus Christ, who paid the penalty of sin by His death, satisfied the righteous demands of the law, and gave assurance of peace to the elect of God on the basis of satisfied justice. Since Jesus Christ was raised by God, the eternal covenant proves that His redeeming work has been accepted by God the Father and the security of salvation for His people is assured (Matthew 1:21). The new covenant is connected with restoration promises. It is no longer revealed by shadows but by the Lord Jesus Christ who fulfilled all the obligations and promises of the eternal covenant. Its blessings are for all of God’s elect. Those who spiritualize the kingdom ridicule the idea of a restored Israel. They accuse futurists of pinning their whole hope for the future on a castaway (Israel), thus proving their forced and unscholarly method of Biblical interpretation. Contrary to this accusation, Christians who embrace the Biblical teaching of the Scriptures concerning Christ’s kingdom are fastening their hope on the promise of Christ, not on Israel: “Looking [prosdechomenoi, present middle participle of prosdechomai, which means to look for, to expect, or await] for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ” (Titus 2:13). Hope is the expectation of something good or excellent to its highest degree. The personal unmediated presence of Jesus Christ is the object of this hope, and the eternal kingdom is its conclusion. What can excel the personal unmediated presence of Jesus Christ, in whom dwells the fullness of the Godhead bodily, in the eternal kingdom? “Confusion twice confounded” becomes evident when one begins considering the works of men on the subject of eschatology. Many “theologians” believe God’s promise to save the elect is unconditional, but they reverse their position on a promised consummation of soteriology in what they call a conditional kingdom. Thus, they make the covenant of grace unilateral, but they inconsistently make the covenant concerning the Kingdom bilateral. The “I will” and “I shall” of God are stressed in the first, but the “if” and “unfaithfulness” of men are emphasized in the second. One must understand that the fulfillment of God’s purpose is not limited by conditions outside the Person having purposed: For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief nullify the faithfulness of God? God forbid [absolutely not].... —Romans 3:3-4 (translation) God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, shall he not make it good? —Numbers 23:19 The unfaithfulness of neither the Jews nor the believers in the body of Christ can nullify the faithfulness of God concerning the fulfillment of His eternal purpose in regard to the kingdom: ...I am God, and there is no one like Me, Declaring the end from the beginning, And from ancient times things which have not been done, Saying, My purpose will be established, And I will accomplish all My good pleasure. —Isaiah 46:9-10 (NASB) A literal promise spiritualized is exegetical dishonesty. Theologians are guilty of this when they spiritualize the promises of salvation’s completion in the coming kingdom to mean its completion in the assembly Christ is building. How can salvation be completed in the assembly, since the assembly Christ is building is only one of the preparatory stages for the future kingdom? Scripture records not only Israel’s historical past but also her future and the future of the nations of the world subsequent to the assembly which Christ is presently building (Romans 11:1-36; Revelation 7:1-17). How can the kingdom exist in the heart or be the church/kingdom since Christ has gone to receive it from the Father (Luke 19:12)? Jewish and nonjewish believers of the Old Testament constitute one order of God’s elect. Jewish and nonjewish Christians of the New Testament—the assembly which is Christ’s bride—form the second order of God’s elect. The 144,000 Jews and the innumerable multitude of nonjews of Revelation 7:1-17 make up the third order of God’s elect. Hence, believing Jews plus engrafted believing Gentiles of all three orders constitute the heirs of the kingdom. There is nothing symbolical about either the unconditional covenant of grace or its consummation in the kingdom. Affirming God’s free grace in salvation while denying God’s freedom to complete that salvation in the kingdom does not make sense. On the other hand, denying God’s free grace in salvation while affirming God’s freedom to establish His kingdom is heresy. Although the latter is more heretical than the former, by God’s grace, believers do not have to make a choice of either/or. While the latter is distasteful to the spiritual nature of the Christian, the former is antagonistic to his hope. Christ’s kingdom which He has gone to receive from the Father is not limited to a period of one thousand years (Luke 1:32-33). It is unfortunate that the word “millennium” has been substituted for the Biblical term “the kingdom of the heavens,” “the kingdom of God,” or “My [Christ’s] kingdom” (Matthew 3:2; Mark 1:15; John 18:36). The Greek adjective chilioi, which means a thousand, is used six times in Revelation 20:2-7. This cardinal adjective which expresses amount is distinguished from an ordinal adjective that expresses degree or position in a series, such as first, second, or third. The adjective chilioi is used only to express one thousand, but the noun chiliades signifies thousands (Revelation 7:4-8; Revelation 11:13; Revelation 14:1; Revelation 14:3; Revelation 21:16). Christ’s kingdom is one in which He shall reign not only a thousand years but also forever. (See Daniel 2:44; Daniel 7:13-14; Luke 1:32-33; Revelation 11:15.) A true concept of the kingdom involves the total message of the Bible. Hence, the subject of Christ’s kingdom casts light upon the covenants, types, shadows, and prophecies of the Old Testament. Moreover, the study of the kingdom in the teachings of Jesus Christ and the apostles in the New Testament makes the light that shone in the Old Testament brighter. There is no explanation for either the past light or the present brighter light without considering the ultimate light as it is displayed in the coming kingdom. Therefore, there is a sense in which the light of truth shines brighter and brighter until it reaches the endless light of the eternal kingdom. There is progression of light in time, but progression gives way to perfection in eternity. The predicted kingdom is never declared to be a kingdom either in heaven or from the world, but it is a kingdom from heaven and not from this place (the world). Therefore, the kingdom is “the kingdom of the heavens [he basileia ton ouranon, genitive of description]” (Matthew 3:2—translation); “the kingdom of God [he basileia tou theou, genitive of description]” (Mark 1:15); “the kingdom which is mine is not from this world [he basileia he eme ouk estin ek, ablative of source, tou kosmou toutou]” (John 18:36—translation). Therefore, the hope of the Christian is not for something that remains in heaven, but it is the fruit of grace which shall descend from heaven in blessed reality to him on earth. Furthermore, the hope that has its source in heaven will never disappoint its recipient. Thus, the hope of the kingdom has its foundation in the covenants of eternity and time. It is presently confirmed by Jesus Christ and the apostles, and faith looks to Jesus Christ’s second advent for its realization. As the first advent of Christ brings regenerating and saving grace to the elect, the second advent shall perfect the elect in the kingdom. The light of prophecy concerning the kingdom was not obscure in the Old Testament. The kingdom described by Daniel cannot be the rise and spread of a mere spiritual kingdom in the midst of earthly kingdoms. It will be a kingdom which shall break in pieces and consume all earthly kingdoms. Christ did not do this at His first advent: And in the days of those kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom which will never be destroyed, and that kingdom will not be left for another people; it will crush and put an end to all these kingdoms, but it will itself endure forever. —Daniel 2:44 (NASB) Fifty years subsequent to Daniel’s interpretation of Nebuchadnezzar’s vision, recorded in Daniel 2:1-49, the prophet himself had a vision that harmonized with his interpretation of Nebuchadnezzar’s vision (Daniel 7:13-14). The kingdom given to the Son of Man is the same kingdom symbolized by the stone that was cut out of the mountain without hands (Daniel 2:45). Christ did not attack the kingdoms of this world when He came to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself. On the contrary, the Lord Jesus was apprehended by the Jews and handed over, according to the fixed counsel and prearrangement of God, to be nailed to a cross and killed by the hands of lawless men (Acts 2:23). Thus, the image of Nebuchadnezzar smote the Son of Man, instead of the Son of Man smiting the image. Daniel described the kingdom as being given to the Son of Man by the Ancient of days: I kept looking in the night visions, And behold, with the clouds of heaven One like a Son of Man was coming, And He came up to the Ancient of Days And was presented before Him. And to Him was given dominion, Glory and a kingdom, That all the peoples, nations, and men of every language Might serve Him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion which will not pass away; And His kingdom is one Which will not be destroyed. —Daniel 7:13-14 (NASB) His description is explained by Jesus Christ in Luke 19:11-27. The Ancient of days cannot be both the Father and the Son. According to Luke 19:12, the Son has gone into a distant country “to receive for himself a kingdom, and to return.” The kingdom given to Christ by the Ancient of days (the eternal Father) must be distinguished from Christ’s sovereignty. The kingdom belongs to Christ as the Son of David (Matthew 1:1; Luke 1:30-33), but sovereignty is the Son of God’s eternal endowment. Christ’s kingdom is never promised to Him as the Son of God, but it is promised to Him as the Son of Man or Son of David. Hence, Christ’s sovereignty is not His promised reign. Christ’s all authority in heaven and on earth (Matthew 28:18) differs from His visible unmediated presence bringing all things into subjection to Himself on earth as the Son of David (Acts 1:11; Revelation 1:7; Matthew 1:1; Luke 1:32; Romans 1:3-4; Php 1:9-11; Revelation 5:10; Matthew 5:5; James 2:5). Furthermore, Christ can never share His sovereignty with His people, but He will share His reign in the kingdom with them (2 Timothy 2:12; Revelation 5:10; Revelation 20:6; Revelation 22:5). Who would be so foolish as to say we are presently reigning with Christ in His spiritual kingdom as we behold Him in His unmediated presence? The kingdom prophesied in the Old Testament is the same kingdom that was taught by Jesus Christ and the apostles in the New Testament. There is no clearer reference to Christ’s future kingdom than the record of the model prayer Christ taught His disciples to pray (Matthew 6:9-13; Luke 11:1-4): After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread. And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors. And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen. —Matthew 6:9-13 Christ never intended that believers should repeat the model prayer as a mere religious formality. The disciples had referred to John the Baptist’s teaching His disciples to pray, but they evidently thought something was lacking in that teaching. The Lord Jesus had already given a warning about how to pray (Matthew 6:1-8); but now in answer to the disciples’ request, He described the correct method of praying. Paul characterized the heart of the prayer: For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father. —Romans 8:15 Christians must not overlook the proper order in the model prayer: (1) God’s interests and (2) His people’s need. Christ gave the method, and the Holy Spirit gives the utterance of prayer (Romans 8:26-27). The desire to pray is the fruit of grace, but the manner of prayer is a matter of instruction. The model prayer, like the decalogue, was given twice (Matthew 6:1-34; Luke 11:1-54) and taught that responsibility to God precedes personal need. Obedience to God qualifies believers to pray for personal need. The greatest mistake made in prayer is the tendency to look first to one’s need. But God will not be used like a wrecker service for a wrecked or malfunctioned automobile. He has first place or no place at all in the life of an individual. Hence, a person is dependent on the sovereign God to supply his need. God the Father’s attributes of omniscience, omnipresence, and omnipotence must be recognized by the person praying. “Our Father [pater hemon, literally means ‘Father of us’]” proves relationship, but we must understand that there is more than one form of relationship to God: (1) The Father’s relationship to Jesus Christ, His eternal Son, is one of transcendent glory. This is the reason Christ, after His resurrection, said to Mary: ...Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God. —John 20:17 Unlike our bodies, the body of Christ, which God had prepared for the Son’s incarnation, was not subject to corruption. However, one phase of His mission must be completed before His earthly body took on “another form [hetera, adjective, locative feminine singular of heteros, which means a different form rather than one of the same form]” (Mark 16:12). This different form is explained: 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 24:39 The unfulfilled part of His mission is explained in Hebrews 9:11-12. (2) The Father’s relationship to all mankind is one of creation and providence. Paul declared before the Athenians that all human beings—elect and nonelect—are living, being moved, and having their existence in God. Furthermore, Paul quoted some of the poets among them who had said, “we are also his offspring” (Acts 17:28). Religionists can take little comfort from this verse because reprobates are included. (3) The Father’s relationship to the elect is one of grace. This grace was first given to the elect in Christ before the “times of ages” (before the world began) (2 Timothy 1:9). It was then given in time when we were made alive in Christ (Ephesians 2:4-10). Therefore, Christians are indebted to God the Father for not only the grace of election but also life and likeness. The person who approaches God in prayer has reverence for the Father’s name, interest in the future kingdom, and concern for the will of God. Hence, the order of Christ’s model prayer for His servants must not go unnoticed. The prayer’s proper reverence for God the Father is evidenced by interest in the kingdom of God’s Son. Assurance of a future kingdom not only comforts persecuted and suffering believers, but it also dispels the present darkness. There is no explanation for the present imperfection in the Christian life without considering its perfection in the coming kingdom. As important as instruction to the assemblies of Christ is to the present, salvation will not be complete until the subjects of the assembly which Christ is continuing to build are perfected in the kingdom. Considered as a whole, the main idea in the model prayer is the saints’ longing for Christ’s kingdom in which God’s will shall be done on earth. While the politicians’ work is worthless and their hope is hopeless, Christians work, hope, and pray with assurance of faith. Furthermore, while society’s aims are aimless and its anticipation is never realized, Christians set their affections on Christ and His kingdom with the assurance of their present foretaste becoming a reality. Christ’s instruction in the model prayer stressed something that lay ahead: “Let your kingdom come [elthato he basileia sou]...” (Matthew 6:10—translation). This petition emphasized eschatology. Luke’s account of the model prayer in Luke 18:1-8 follows Christ’s discourse on His second advent in Luke 17:22-37. Thus, our Lord encouraged praying without fainting during the long interval between His first and second advents. The time of suffering and persecution of God’s people occurs between Christ’s two advents (1 Corinthians 4:8; 2 Thessalonians 1:3-10; 2 Timothy 2:10; 2 Timothy 3:12). Luke portrayed perseverance in prayer by the parable of a friendless widow who obtained justice from a wicked magistrate by persistent solicitation. Christ applied the parable by showing that if importunity obtained so much from a wicked magistrate, how much more will persistence obtain for the elect from the righteous Judge. The elect alone persevere in prayer. The heavenly kingdom will have an earthly existence—let your kingdom “come” (elthato, aorist active imperative of erchomai, which means to come, to come from one place into another, or to appear). The kingdom is the Father’s to give, and it is the Son’s to receive. When Christ receives the kingdom from the Father, He will return (Luke 19:12). Will He return to the earth with the kingdom? “Let your will [thelema, will or desire] be done [genetheto, aorist passive imperative of ginomai, which means to be done or to take place] as in heaven [hos en ourano], also on earth [kai epi ges]” (Matthew 6:10—translation). God’s will done on earth as it is in heaven will never take place until the son of Man establishes His kingdom on the earth. In fulfillment of prophecy, in the kingdom “...the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the LORD, as the waters cover the sea” (Isaiah 11:9). (See Psalms 72:19; Habakkuk 2:14; Zechariah 14:9; Romans 11:26; 2 Peter 3:13; Revelation 21:1.) The will of God that shall be done on the earth as it is now being done in heaven brings up some important questions that must be addressed: (1) What is the difference between the “secret things” which belong to the Lord our God and the “things revealed” which belong to us? (2) How can Christ’s reign with His saints for one thousand years be considered to be forever, or how shall it have no end? (3) How can the glorified saints come back into time during the millennium? 1. God’s will is a great sphere with two hemispheres—revealed and unrevealed. Man cannot see the sphere of God’s will, but he is responsible to know the hemisphere of God’s revealed will. There are some things concerning God’s will (purpose) that are secret. His eternal purpose is not a matter of prayer. No believer can question the fact that God’s purpose on earth is being fulfilled, and the time is fast approaching when it will be completed. However, one cannot say that the revealed hemisphere of God’s will is being done on earth as it is in heaven. That will not take place until the kingdom is established. 2. There is much confusion concerning the duration of Christ’s kingdom. The first phase of the kingdom will be in time; therefore, we are told that it will continue for one thousand years. During this time period, Christ the King will be ruling with a rod of iron (Revelation 2:27; Revelation 12:5; Revelation 19:15). Why will a rod of iron be used if God’s will is being done on the earth during the kingdom? Since there will be unsaved people during this time period of the kingdom, the rod will be necessary for a righteous government. Scripture proves that unsaved people will be present during the one thousand years (Revelation 20:7-10). However, Revelation 21:1-27; Revelation 22:1-21 show that the power of opposition will have been completely subdued by the superior force of the King of kings. All the judgments will then be over, including the one at the close of the millennium. Therefore, the difference between the millennium and the eternal reign of Christ is His reigning with a rod of iron during the millennium and His reigning without a rod subsequent to the millennium. 3. The glorified saints will come back into time to reign with Christ in the same way Christ came back into time. The glorified Savior came back on several occasions between His taking “another form” and His ascension. “Let your kingdom come” is a petition for one distinctive future kingdom that shall be given by the Father to His Son for its establishment on the earth. The aorist active imperative Greek verb of request does not suggest that we pray for a gradual coming but for a sudden social and moral change due to the unmediated theocratic rule and reign of Jesus Christ. Furthermore, the imperative of entreaty, which carries the idea of urgency or request, can be linked with the petition of Revelation 22:20. “The one witnessing these things is saying, Yes indeed I am coming soon. Amen, Come Lord Jesus” (translation). Who can deny that this prayer is for a future kingdom? A theory is hard pressed for argument to change “Let your kingdom come” into a present kingdom in the heart, the spread of the gospel, Christ’s rule in His assembly, the kingdom of grace, success of the gospel, etc. One who is already in the kingdom cannot pray for its coming. Therefore, the request “let your kingdom come” points to the future, and it is an expectation as much as a petition. It is a desire uttered by the kingdom’s heirs that expresses faith and hope in a distinctive kingdom whose place of establishment will be the earth. The duration of the kingdom cannot be restricted to a millennium. Even the word “duration,” which means the length of time during which something continues, is out of place when speaking about the endlessness of Christ’s kingdom. The millennium refers to the time of Satan’s being bound, but there is no thought of Christ’s reign being terminated. Such an idea of cessation is contrary to the true conception of Christ. Luke’s statement with reference to Christ’s kingdom was that there shall not be an end (Luke 1:33). This teaches that His kingdom extends into eternity when time shall be no more. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 65: 04.1.1. INTRODUCTION ======================================================================== VOLUME I - THE KING’S GENEALOGY Chapter 1 - INTRODUCTION Matthew is the author of the genealogy of the King. Matthew’s Gospel is the transitional book between God’s dealings with the Jews in the Old Testament and His actions toward them at the time of and subsequent to the incarnation. This explains the reason for the order of David and then Abraham rather than the chronological order. Matthew was more concerned about Christology than he was about chronology, but chronology must be complete enough to satisfy the Jews. This pedigree contains Christ’s relationship to Israel as their Messiah and rightful King. Matthew gave the presentation, principles, powers, and parables of the King, but the Jews rejected the message of the King. Therefore, Jesus Christ left them and departed (Matthew 16:4). The Gospel of Matthew was written before 70 A.D., but Mark’s Gospel was written some time before Matthew’s. Nevertheless, the Gospel of Matthew precedes Mark’s because Matthew was stressing the Jewish concept. The Biblical order of proclaiming God’s message is to the Jew first and then to the Gentile. A detailed study of the pedigree recorded by Matthew will enable a Christian to have a workable knowledge of the entire Old Testament. Matthew stated the King’s lineage in the first verse: The book [biblos—book, scroll, or record] of the genealogy [geneseos, genitive of genesis, which means origin, descent, or lineage] of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham. —Matthew 1:1 (NASB) David and Abraham were the two with whom God made covenants which had unconditional and conditional aspects. (See 2 Samuel 7:9-16; Genesis 12:1-3; Genesis 13:14-17; Genesis 15:18-21; Genesis 17:1-8; Genesis 22:17-18.) The name “Jesus” is the human name of the King, but the context of Matthew 1:1-25 proves He is more than human: “...and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins” (Matthew 1:21). There is no other name by which we must be saved (Acts 4:12). Mark said of Him that God alone can forgive sins (Mark 2:7-10). The word “son” used in connection with David and Abraham is from the Greek word huios. The flexibility of the use of this word is disclosed in the Scriptures. Jesus Christ was not the son of David and the grandson of Abraham. Being the “son of David, the son of Abraham” signifies that Jesus Christ was identified with David and Abraham. For example, sons of thunder were identified with thunder (Mark 3:17); sons of disobedience are identified with disobedience (Ephesians 2:2); sons of God are identified with God (Romans 8:14). Matthew emphasized the son of David because he was writing to Jews, and Jesus Christ as the son of David would fulfill the unconditional aspect of the covenant that God made with David. Jesus Christ was not the son of David in the immediate sense, but He was the son of David in the ultimate sense. There were many generations between David and Jesus Christ. The lineage of Jesus Christ contains an important link in the understanding of the future kingdom. Since Matthew portrayed Jesus Christ as King, the King must have a lineage that was known to the Jews. Although David appeared before Abraham in our text, Abraham is the first in the historical chronology. Mark omitted a genealogy because he presented Christ as a Servant, and a servant does not need a record of his genealogy. Luke introduced the Lord Jesus as the perfect Man; therefore, he gave His lineage. John revealed the eternal son of God who was manifested in the flesh, and God can have no lineage. Since the Son of David shall be the fulfillment of Israel’s hopes and promises, the Holy Spirit began the genealogy with the Son of David. If the Savior was to descend from David for merely the purpose of redemption, why place so much emphasis on the royal line? Furthermore, if David’s throne is God’s throne in heaven, no satisfactory reason can be assigned to something that is merely symbolical. The throne of David is not typical, representative, or symbolical; it is actually and really covenanted to the Heir, Jesus Christ, the Son of David. Three things that were made sure to David were a house, throne, and kingdom (2 Samuel 7:13). In these are portrayed posterity, royal authority, and sphere of rule. The unconditionality of the covenant was dependent on the faithfulness of God, not on the faithfulness of Israel. Unfaithfulness by men never prevents the fulfillment of God’s purpose set forth in the unconditional aspect of God’s covenants in time. The unfaithfulness of the first generation of Jews (Numbers 32:13) did not keep the nation of Israel from entering Canaan (Joshua 14:1). Furthermore, the Jews’ rejection of Christ during His first advent did not nullify God’s promise that “all Israel shall be saved [sothesetai, future passive indicative of sodzo, which means to save or deliver]” (Romans 11:26). Hence, the salvation of Israel was future when Paul wrote the Roman letter by inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Furthermore, the passive voice signifies that Israel will be passive (have no part in her deliverance) when God delivers her, and the indicative mood is the mood of reality. Israel’s past and future are based on God’s election of Israel, not on Israel’s choice of God. Therefore, Israel’s election does not rest on her merits but on God’s choice and faithfulness (Deuteronomy 7:6-11; Romans 11:1-36). God made provision for any sin or failure in the unconditional aspect of the covenants made in time: When your days are complete and you lie down with your fathers, I will raise up your descendant after you, who will come forth from you, and I will establish his kingdom. He shall build a house for My name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever. I will be a father to him and he will be a son to Me; when he commits iniquity, I will correct him with the rod of men and the strokes of the sons of men, but My lovingkindness shall not depart from him, as I took it away from Saul, whom I removed from before you. And your house and your kingdom shall endure before Me forever; and your throne shall be established forever. —2 Samuel 7:12-16 (NASB) Verse 15 was inserted in the Davidic covenant to cover not only Solomon but also his erring descendants until the true and perfect King came from David’s seed. Paul spoke of the Son who came from the seed of David according to the flesh (Romans 1:3). David’s life was not all conquest and success. He had his weak moments, and he was not always kinglike in his heart. However, he felt his weakness, and that was his strength (Psalms 32:1-11; Psalms 51:1-19). David’s understanding of the promised kingdom was stated in his own language (Psalms 132:11; also study Psalms 89:34-35). The prophets Isaiah and Jeremiah had the same understanding of the kingdom. The LORD has sworn to David, A truth from which He will not turn back; Of the fruit of your body I will set upon your throne. —Psalms 132:11 (NASB) There will be no end to the increase of His government or of peace, On the throne of David and over his kingdom, To establish it and to uphold it with justice and righteousness From then on and forevermore. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will accomplish this. —Isaiah 9:7 (NASB) Behold, the days are coming, declares the LORD, When I shall raise up for David a righteous Branch; And He will reign as king and act wisely And do justice and righteousness in the land. In His days Judah will be saved, And Israel will dwell securely; And this is His name by which He will be called, The LORD our righteousness. —Jeremiah 23:5-6 (NASB) All the terms of these Old Testament prophecies were not fulfilled at Christ’s first advent. The Jews not only rejected Jesus Christ, but they also said, “We have no king but Caesar” (John 19:15). Although the kingdom of the seed of David is the subject of Old Testament prophecy, that prophecy was only partially fulfilled at Christ’s first coming. A child was born, and a Son was given. But the government was not upon Christ’s shoulder, and He did not rule in peace at His first coming (Matthew 10:34). Furthermore, when He finished the work the Father sent Him to perform, He did not sit on the throne of David; but he sat on His Father’s throne (Revelation 3:21). David’s name not only appears first in the genealogical record of Matthew, but it also concludes the first of three divisions of the generations from Abraham to Joseph in Matthew 1:1-17. The three divisions are as follows: (1) The generations from Abraham to David emphasize the promise in the unconditional aspect of the covenants. (2) The generations from David to the captivity in Babylon stress spiritual decline. (3) The generations from the Babylonian captivity to Joseph describe a period of darkness which concluded with four hundred years without a recorded witness. The division of promise concluded with David and began with Abraham because Jesus Christ is the seed of both David (the royal line) and Abraham (the line of promise). (See Romans 1:3-4; Galatians 3:16.) Jesus Christ is the seed of Abraham as the chosen Head of the elect of God. Thus, Paul showed that the promised salvation by grace is concentrated in one Person, namely, Jesus Christ. The prominent feature of the Abrahamic covenant is grace. It is unconditional because it looks forward to Jesus Christ in God’s fixed purpose. Thus, we see the reason for Matthew’s beginning with David and then going back to Abraham. The Jews during Christ’s first advent never questioned the descent of the Messiah from David, but they lacked the understanding of grace promised in the seed of Abraham. Therefore, Matthew mentioned David first to get their attention, and he then went back to Abraham to show that the election of grace is the foundation of hope for the promised kingdom for both Israel and the assembly Christ is building. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 66: 04.1.2. PATRIARCHS NAMES RECORDED IN KINGS GENEALOGY ======================================================================== SECTION I - THE UNCONDITIONAL ASPECT OF GOD’S COVENANTS OF PROMISE WAS EMPHASIZED FROM ABRAHAM TO DAVID Chapter 2 - PATRIARCH’S NAMES RECORDED IN THE KING’S GENEALOGY There are some marvelous examples of God’s grace and the working out of His eternal purpose in the first division of the generations from Abraham to David. The division of promise concluded with David, but it began with Abraham. Now we know why Matthew 1:1 gave prominence to these two patriarchs. Paul was speaking of the Abrahamic covenant when he said: Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ. —Galatians 3:16 Jesus Christ, therefore, is the seed of Abraham and of David. In a far higher sense than Isaac, Jesus Christ is the seed of Abraham as the chosen Head of the elect of God. Paul was showing that the promised salvation by grace is concentrated in one Person, namely, Jesus Christ. This comment by Paul has given rise to much discussion, but there is no real basis for such controversy. The prominent feature of the Abrahamic covenant is grace; therefore, it is unconditional. It clearly looks forward to Jesus Christ. In the Davidic covenant, the promised seed was Solomon in the immediate sense and Jesus Christ in the ultimate sense. The names of some of the persons included in the first division of the genealogy are recorded for several reasons: (1) The proud Jews who gloried in their ancestry should be cut to the very heart by learning that lineage is not a guarantee of salvation. (2) All Christians must be reminded that not one believer is without sin. (3) Christians should not only consider the condescension of Jesus Christ but also understand that the Lord Jesus was born of impure parentage without being contaminated. How wonderful that the eternal Son entered the human race through such a sinful channel without being contaminated with depravity. Abraham Abraham occupies a special place in Scripture due to his effectual call (the fruit of electing grace) and as the founder of a nation that would bless all nations. He was the beginning of the nation of Israel because he fathered Isaac, and Isaac fathered Jacob who became Israel: ...Your name shall no longer be Jacob, but Israel; for you have striven with God and with men and have prevailed. —Genesis 32:28 (NASB) Although Jacob received a new name at Peniel (the name means “turn thou, God”), it was at Bethel (the name means “house of God”) that God revealed His name. Thus, the covenant God made with Abraham was confirmed with both Isaac and Jacob: And God said to him, Your name is Jacob; you shall no longer be called Jacob, But Israel shall be your name. Thus He called him Israel. God also said to him, I am God Almighty; Be fruitful and multiply; A nation and a company of nations shall come forth from you, And kings shall come forth from you. And the land which I gave to Abraham and Isaac, I will give it to you, And I will give the land to your descendants after you. —Genesis 35:10-12 (NASB) The covenant God made with Abraham was rooted in the electing grace of God. Its three main features were the seed, the land, and the nations (Genesis 15:5; Genesis 15:7; Genesis 18:18). The seed is stated to be his son, Isaac, and his descendants are described by the figure of the stars. As to the land, Abraham asked, “O Lord God, how may I know that I shall possess it?” (Genesis 15:8 NASB). God condescended to a covenant sacrifice, and Abraham’s faith was tested as it would again be tested in the case of Isaac. When Abraham’s faith was tested, he was assured that God would sustain the covenant relationship. The patriarch’s question is answered in the record of the centurion who came beseeching the Lord for his servant who was ill (Matthew 8:5-13). The Lord Jesus marveled at the centurion’s admission of his unworthiness when He told him he would heal his servant. He told the multitude that had followed Him from the mountain (Matthew 8:1) that He had not found such faith in Israel. He said to them: ...I say unto you, That many shall come from the east and west, and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven. —Matthew 8:11 The mercy extended to the centurion had direct reference to the purpose of Jesus Christ according to Christ’s foreknowledge of His rejection by the Jews and His introduction of Himself to the Gentiles. The record of the healing of the centurion, a Gentile, proves that both elect Jews and Gentiles shall inherit the kingdom. How shall we sit down with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom if these patriarchs do not personally inherit it (Matthew 8:11)? Christ predicted His rejection by the Jews and the subsequent call of the Gentiles in Matthew 8:12-13. The believing Gentile, who had become a “Jew inwardly” (Romans 2:29) and had received a place in the kingdom, was contrasted with the unbelieving sons of the kingdom by natural descent who were not the children of God and were cut off from the covenanted kingdom (Romans 9:8). Isaac As the purpose of God the Father is seen in Abraham, in Isaac is seen a great type of Jesus Christ, who is the heir of His Father’s wealth. Abraham’s servant acknowledged that Isaac was the heir of all that Abraham had: Now Sarah my master’s wife bore a son to my master in her old age; and he has given him all that he has. —Genesis 24:36 (NASB) The writer of Hebrews declared that Jesus Christ is the heir of all things: GOD, after He spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways, in these last days has spoken to us in His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things.... —Hebrews 1:1-2 (NASB) Isaac, like Christ, came into his possession after passing through the figure of death (Hebrews 11:19). One of the most beautiful chapters in the Bible is Genesis 24:1-67. It is as though the books of Ruth and The Song of Solomon were rolled into one great love story of redemption and of the relationship between Jesus Christ and His own. The following are five great features of the chapter: 1. The Father’s purpose is typified in Abraham. As the Father’s purpose centered in His Son, Jesus Christ, Abraham’s purpose centered in his son, Isaac. As the thought of the bride of Christ originated with God the Father, the thought of the bride for Isaac originated with Abraham. 2. The Bridegroom of the bride of Jesus Christ is symbolized in Isaac. Isaac became the heir of all that Abraham possessed, and a bride was to be effectually called for him. 3. Eliezer, Abraham’s servant, is typical of God’s messengers operating under the leadership of the Holy Spirit. He was obedient, zealous to fulfill his commission, and discerning. He revealed the things of Isaac rather than the things of himself. He was a faithful guide in his preparation of the bride he had betrothed to one husband, Isaac. Thus, the servant who is in subjection to proper authority has the right message for the right person at the right time. There is a ministry of the gospel that is indiscriminate from the minister’s point of view, but there is also a ministry that discriminates from the Spirit’s point of view. The first is general, and the second is particular. Abraham desired (purposed) the bride; Isaac wanted her; and the servant by the leadership of the Spirit was committed to Abraham and Isaac. 4. Rebekah typifies the assembly Christ is continuing to build. As Rebekah was presented to Isaac, the assembly, upon her completion, will be presented to the Bridegroom. Isaac’s bride was thought of before she knew anything about it (Genesis 24:4; Genesis 24:14). The servant did not go and find someone unsuitable and make her suitable, but he found someone already prepared by grace who received his message. She was suitable to the servant, because in figure she was of Divine origin. The secret to all response to God’s gospel is grace. Although Rebekah’s mind and heart were on Isaac, there was room in her heart for the servant who had betrothed her to Isaac and was preparing her for the wedding. The servant knew her, and she knew the servant. (See 1 Thessalonians 5:12-13.) 5. The wedding of Isaac and Rebekah is a figure of the future blessing and hope of Christ’s assembly. As all the trials and hardships of Rebekah’s pilgrimage were forgotten with one glimpse of Isaac, all our wounds and scars will be forgotten when we see Jesus Christ. Jacob The son of Isaac and Rebekah was named Jacob, which means supplanter (Genesis 27:36). He represents the elect of God; therefore, his heart was set on the blessings. He had a great mixture of human infirmity, expedience, and unbelief; but he had true faith that caused his desire to be in the line of the birthright and blessing. God was pledged to Jacob from the beginning. We must not become so occupied with Jacob’s faults that we fail to observe his qualities that manifest Divine election and God’s confirmation of the Abrahamic covenant in him. Jacob’s name was changed to Israel. His sons and the meaning of their names are separated into the following divisions: (1) Representing what Israel was in Egypt were Reuben—you see, Simeon—hearing, and Levi—joined (Genesis 49:3-7). (2) Portraying the wilderness influence that led to departure from the blessing were Zebulun—dwelling, Issachar—reward, and Dan—judging (Genesis 49:13-18). (3) Symbolizing the power and effect of deliverance from indwelling sin subsequent to the passover were Gad—a company, Asher—happy, and Naphtali—wrestling (Genesis 49:19-21). (4) Typifying Jesus Christ in different ways were Judah—praised, Joseph—addition, and Benjamin—son of the right hand (Genesis 49:8; Genesis 49:22; Genesis 49:27). The order in which we have mentioned the names in this last division is very important. In Judah, the Lordship of Jesus Christ must be acknowledged; in Joseph, the answer to the believer’s living out of Christian character is found in Jesus Christ; and in Benjamin, the hope of the Christian’s present suffering is portrayed in Jesus Christ. Judah Judah learned the hard way that the infection of sin led to defection from truth, and defection from truth resulted in the infliction of punishment (Genesis 38:1-30). First, he took a wife from Canaan without his father’s consent. His wife Shuah gave him three sons: Er, Onan, and Shelah. Er was wicked in the sight of the Lord, and the Lord took his life. Since levirate marriages were customary, Judah told Onan to take his deceased brother’s wife, Tamar, and raise up offspring for his brother. (See Deuteronomy 25:5-10.) Knowing the offspring would not be his, Onan refused. His crime was not so much self-pollution as his refusal to raise up offspring for his brother. What he did was displeasing to the Lord; so the Lord took his life as He had taken the life of Er. Following the death of Onan, Judah told Tamar to remain a widow until Shelah became a man. After much time had lapsed, Judah’s wife died. Having lost two sons and his wife, Judah was on his way to Timnath (Timnah) when he saw a woman he thought was a harlot. Tamar had been told that Judah would be passing through on his way to Timnath. Furthermore, she knew that Shelah was a man now, and she had not been given to him to bear offspring for his deceased brother, Er. Therefore, she disguised herself as a whore and waited for Judah. Judah was wrong for lusting, and Tamar was wrong for disguising herself as a harlot. Judah promised Tamar a kid from his flock for her services, but she would not submit until she had received an earnest. She asked for his seal, cord, and staff which he gave to her, and she conceived by him. After some time, Judah sent the kid he had promised Tamar; but she was not to be found. Three months later word came to Judah that Tamar, his daughter-in-law, had played the harlot and was with child by harlotry. He wanted her brought forth and burned; but when he learned that she was bearing his child, he said, “She is more righteous than I, inasmuch as I did not give her to my son Shelah” (Genesis 38:26 NASB). Of all the children of Jacob, Judah was singled out to continue the Messianic line. God, in His sovereignty, passed by Reuben, the firstborn, and chose Judah, the fourth child. Judah’s sin with Tamar did not prevent the sovereign God from choosing him to manifest His purpose and grace: Judah, your brothers shall praise you; Your hand shall be on the neck of your enemies; Your father’s sons shall bow down to you. Judah is a lion’s whelp; From the prey, my son, you have gone up. He couches, he lies down as a lion, And as a lion, who dares rouse him up? The scepter shall not depart from Judah, Nor the ruler’s staff from between his feet, Until Shiloh [the bringer of peace and prosperity] comes, And to him shall be the obedience of the peoples. —Genesis 49:8-10 (NASB) Pharez And Zarah The twins brought forth by Tamar are both mentioned in Christ’s lineage (Genesis 38:27-30; Matthew 1:3). Pharez (also spelled Phares and Perez) precedes Zarah (also spelled Zerah and Zara), but Zarah was the eldest. In Jewish tradition, the eldest son is mentioned in the books of lineage, but this instance is unique because it carries a prophetical lesson in this first division of the genealogy of Jesus Christ. While Tamar was giving birth, Zarah put out a hand; and the midwife tied a scarlet thread on his hand saying, “This one came out first” (Genesis 38:28 NASB). As Zarah drew back his hand, his brother Pharez came out. The midwife said, “What a breach [a breaking in upon or an overthrow] you have made for yourself!” (Genesis 38:29 NASB). Hence, he was named Pharez (the name means “a breach”). In like manner, the Jews first put forth their hand, but they fell through unfaithfulness. However, subsequent to the gathering in of the Gentiles, the Jews shall rise again. This is prophesied by the fact that after Pharez was born, Zarah (the name means “an arising”) came forth, showing that Zarah shall rise again. The prophetical message of Judah’s twin sons by his daughter-in-law, Tamar, is reinforced in prophecies given by Isaiah in the Old Testament and Simeon in the New Testament: 1. In the year that King Uzziah died, Isaiah had a vision of God, of himself, and of a remnant from among the Jews that would constitute Jehovah’s tithe (Isaiah 6:9-13). Isaiah was commissioned as follows: Go, and tell this people: Keep on listening, but do not perceive; Keep on looking, but do not understand. Render the hearts of this people insensitive, Their ears dull, And their eyes dim, Lest they see with their eyes, Hear with their ears, Understand with their hearts, And repent and be healed. —Isaiah 6:9-10 (NASB) The prophet’s question that followed, “Lord, how long?” (Isaiah 61:11), was not a cry of despair. It was an expression of hope by one who knew that somewhere down the long passageway of time there would be a kingdom on earth. In Isaiah 6:13, the answer to his question is given: Yet there will be a tenth portion in it, And it will again be subject to burning, Like a terebinth or an oak Whose stump remains when it is felled. The holy seed is its stump. —Isaiah 6:13 (NASB) Therefore, as a living seed does not perish when buried in the ground, Israel shall never perish from among the nations of the world. (See Psalms 89:1-52; Romans 11:1-36; Revelation 7:1-17.) 2. Simeon, a just and devout man, was in Jerusalem for the consolation of Israel (Luke 2:25-35). The Holy Spirit revealed to Simeon that he would not see death until he had seen the Lord’s Christ. Simeon’s name signifies “one who hears”. He lived at the close of the four hundred years when there was no prophet of God. Nevertheless, he heard God by the Holy Spirit, and he went into the temple. His vocation was awaiting (expecting) the consolation of Israel. His character is described as being just toward men and devout toward God. His companionship was the Holy Spirit “upon (epi, the accusative of relationship) him” (Luke 2:25). The Holy Spirit’s being “upon him” is Old Testament terminology. This Old Testament believer went to the temple and greeted Jesus Christ in His incarnation. Simeon’s inward grace did not allow him to neglect the outward visible signs appointed by God. He was faithful in attendance in the temple. Month after month and year after year when no message was given by the prophets, this just and devout man went to the temple. There is no substitute for God’s people being in God’s appointed place at God’s appointed time. The temple was to Simeon what the sanctuary was to Asaph. Asaph’s questions concerning the deprivations of the people of God and the abundance of the wicked were answered when he went into the sanctuary of God (Psalms 73:1-17). As the temple was a sanctuary scene for Simeon, the assembly of Jesus Christ is the sanctuary for us. As Simeon went into the temple awaiting (expecting) Jesus Christ before His first advent, how much more should Christians, acting in the knowledge of His first advent, wait expectantly for Christ’s glorious second advent. There is only a short biography of Simeon recorded. Short biographies, like this one, denote true character. Devout men want the Lord and not themselves to be exalted. The context of Luke 2:25-35 proves that Simeon was an old man when he saw Jesus Christ the infant. Regardless of circumstances, a Christian’s last days should be his best. Simeon was not occupied with events but with the Person of Jesus Christ. Although Jesus Christ had not occupied David’s throne, Simeon’s affection for His incarnation made his last days his best. Simeon’s faithfulness was rewarded by his holding the infant Jesus Christ and by God’s using him to give us a prophecy: Lord [despota, vocative masculine of despotes, which means Lord or Master] now lettest thou thy servant depart [apolueis, present active indicative of apoluo, which means release or dismiss] in peace, according to thy word: For mine eyes have seen thy salvation, Which thou hast prepared before the face of all people; A light to [eis, accusative of purpose] lighten [apokaluphin, accusative singular of apokaluphis, which means a revelation] the Gentiles [ethnon, genitive plural of ethnos, which means nations, nonjews, or Gentiles], and the glory of thy people Israel.... Behold, this child [one] is set [keitai, present middle indicative of keimai, which means appointed or destined] for [eis, accusative of purpose] the fall and rising again [anastasin, accusative singular of anastasis, which means a raising or rising up] of many in Israel; and for [eis, accusative of purpose] a sign which shall be spoken against [antilegomenon, present passive participle of antilego, which means to object or oppose]. —Luke 2:29-32 Simeon’s prediction has two important purpose phrases introduced in each instance by the accusative case of the preposition eis. In the first instance, Jesus Christ would be a light for a revelation of the Gentiles (nonjews) (Luke 2:32). Since Israel is associated with the Shekinah in the Old Testament, no more fitting description can be given of her than Simeon’s reference to the “glory” of Israel (Luke 2:32). Christ spoke of having sheep other than those of the fold of Judaism (John 10:16). (See Acts 9:15; Acts 11:1-18; Acts 13:42-48; Acts 18:6; Acts 28:28.) In the second instance, the Lord Jesus would be the cause of both Israel’s fall and her rising, in that order (Luke 2:34). ======================================================================== CHAPTER 67: 04.1.3. WOMEN'S NAMES RECORDED IN THE KING'S GENEALOGY ======================================================================== Chapter 3 - WOMEN’S NAMES RECORDED IN THE KING’S GENEALOGY The list of women in the genealogy of our Lord is a wonderful display of not only God’s unmerited favor on sinners, but also a miracle that His human nature was not contaminated by depravity. The women’s names were included not for the purpose of genealogy but for the manifestation of God’s grace. Tamar Tamar (also spelled Thamar) was one of the women whose characters were far below average who were included in Christ’s pedigree, and yet the Lord of glory was not disgraced by them. Tamar’s name was the first listed in the division of the generations that stress God’s promise. After the death of her husbands, Er and Onan, Tamar disguised herself as a harlot and tricked her father-in-law into an incestuous relationship by which she brought forth twins. Since we have already discussed Tamar in connection with Judah and the twins, Pharez and Zarah, we will proceed to the second woman named in Christ’s pedigree. Rahab Rahab (also spelled Rachab), a prostitute saved by God’s grace, became the mother of Boaz, fathered by Salmon. It was Boaz who purchased Ruth and married her. The harlot Rahab became an unexpected ally of God’s chosen people (Joshua 2:1-24). Like Cornelius before Peter was sent to give him words whereby he could be saved, Rahab had already been quickened by God’s grace before the spies came from Jerusalem. Joshua’s sending two spies to secretly observe Jericho was not by chance. In God’s providence, the spies must go to Rahab’s home, as the Lord Jesus Christ must go through Samaria because one of His sheep was there (John 4:1-54). The former harlot needed the message of the spies to convert her and give her assurance of her salvation. By Rahab’s choice, she became a whore; but by God’s choice, she had been quickened by Divine grace (Psalms 65:4; Ephesians 1:4). Although saved by grace, Rahab carried the stigma of harlotry into the New Testament record (James 2:25). The sending of the spies by Joshua was not from his lack of trust in God, but it proves that faith does not preclude the use of proper means. God’s promises intensify affection, induce caution, and prompt obedience. The effect of God’s promises is to stimulate zeal. Hence, to expect the fulfillment of promises without working is to test God, and to work without expecting their fulfillment is to dishonor Him. The promise that Israel would possess Canaan caused Moses to send spies to view the land (Numbers 13:1-33), and Joshua followed the example of his predecessor. God promised success to His ancient people, but possession is impossible without dispossession. This is a lesson all Christians must learn, regardless of the age in which we live. Although the men Joshua sent forth were spies, they were also messengers in relation to Rahab. Saving faith cannot exist with deadly sins. Therefore, the gift of faith which Rahab possessed could no longer permit her to be employed in the trade of prostitution. The context gives evidence that at the time the Jewish spies came to her home, she was employed in the preparation of flax. She “hid them [the spies] with the stalks of flax” (Joshua 2:6). The outstanding characteristic of faith is that it is always inclined to salvation. Rahab had both hearing ears and seeing eyes. The confession of her faith is revealed in her statement to the men: I know that the LORD hath given you the land.... For we have heard how the LORD dried up the water of the Red sea...and what ye did unto the two kings of the Amorites, that were on the other side Jordan, Sihon and Og, whom ye utterly destroyed. And as soon as we had heard these things, our hearts did melt.... —Joshua 2:9-11 Since faith is always put to severe tests, Rahab’s faith was no exception. The crucial question is, how could she lie about the spies? A long list of those who lied could be added to her name. Why did Abraham, the father of the faithful, lie before Abimelech about his wife (Genesis 20:1-18)? Why did Peter lie before the damsel about being one of Christ’s disciples (John 18:15-18)? The question about Rahab’s lying has given rise to several false views. Some think the end justifies the means; therefore, anything goes if you get results. This view is employed by religionists in general today. Others say circumstances alter certain cases; therefore, in the case of Rahab, she was justified in what she did. It was better to lie and save the spies than to tell the truth and have them killed. Such reasoning leaves God out altogether. People who advocate this view would call Rahab’s falsehood a white lie, believing that a white lie is not criminal. The truth is that Rahab, like Abraham and Peter, sinned by lying. However, she was not as well-informed as either Abraham or Peter. James mentioned Abraham and Rahab together. They were different vessels, but the same treasure of grace was placed in each. Whether the vessel is reputable or disreputable, what God puts in the vessel is important and not the vessel itself. The grace of faith distinguishes a person with God. Grace sanctifies the vessel. (See James 2:1-26.) The only bounds known to grace is the one limited by the eternal covenant. Rahab’s falsehood, although it was for the purpose of saving life, did not vindicate her on that ground. As there were mixed actions in Rahab, in a moral sense, there are mixed actions in all Christians. For instance, one may take a conglomerate mineral and single out one ingredient for discussion, thus drawing attention away from the other ingredients. One aspect of a complex Christian life may be singled out for either admiration or condemnation; but continual actions, not occasional actions, determine the Christian’s character (1 John 2:29; 1 John 3:1-10). A person’s genius may be emphasized without approving his principles or his skill praised while disapproving of his policy. Hence, Scripture commends Rahab’s faith without approving of her falsehood. The New Testament speaks of Rahab’s faith and works without mentioning her sin: By faith the harlot Rahab perished not with them that believed not, when she had received the spies with peace. —Hebrews 11:31 Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works, when she had received the messengers, and had sent them out another way? —James 2:25 Saving faith always manifests itself by works. Rahab tied the scarlet cord in the window as she had been instructed by the spies. She said, “...According unto your words, so be it” (Joshua 2:21). Both God’s blessing and His curse are represented by cities. Jerusalem is called a place of blessing (Psalms 48:1-3), and Jericho is called a place of curse (Joshua 6:17). Rahab represents one who has been delivered from a place of curse—“shall be accursed” (Joshua 6:17), and she was destined to a place of dual peace—“peace of heart and peace of society.” Heart peace is a present enjoyment. Society peace will be enjoyed in the new Jerusalem (Revelation 21:1-27). Although she was destined for Jerusalem, she was left in Jericho for a time. As Christians, we have been delivered from this evil age; but we are left in it for a time of training, testimony, and work. Rahab’s life had sunk to a level lower than most others in Jericho, but by grace she had risen higher than all. Although Rahab was a harlot, the Lord told the religious Pharisees that the harlots would go into the kingdom before them (Matthew 21:31). She did not perish with those who did not believe. There is no more saving merit in faith than there is in works. One is not regenerated because he believes, but he believes because he has been quickened. Rahab’s faith caused her to live a lonely life in Jericho, but that is the testimony of all Christians in every age. The gift of faith cuts us off from the world, which is lying in the lap of the Devil (1 John 5:19). However, the believer knows that he will be rewarded for his faith and obedience. Rahab was rewarded in time by becoming the mother of Boaz (Matthew 1:5). Rahab’s faith can be summed up in the following ways: (1) Its nature was that it was God-given, and she did not continue as a harlot. (2) Its confession was that as soon as she heard the message of the spies her heart melted. (3) Its imperfection was that she lied about the spies. The Psalmist said, “If thou, Lord, shouldest mark iniquities, O Lord, who shall stand?” (Psalms 130:3). (4) Its reward was that her name is eternally inscribed on the imperishable scroll of Scripture not only in the hall of faith (Hebrews 11:1-40) but also in the genealogy of Christ. Ruth The book that bears Ruth’s name is a literary and spiritual classic. There is nothing in human literature more beautiful than Ruth’s address to her mother-in-law: Do not urge me to leave you or turn back from following you; for where you go, I will go, and where you lodge, I will lodge. Your people shall be my people, and your God, my God. Where you die, I will die, and there I will be buried. Thus may the LORD do to me, and worse, if anything but death parts you and me. —Ruth 1:16-17 (NASB). Ruth is the only book in the Bible which is wholly devoted to the history of a woman. Therefore, it is not surprising that Ruth’s name is found in the genealogy of our Lord. The chief purpose of the book is to trace the genealogy of David and David’s Lord. Ruth was a Gentile who married a Hebrew, Boaz, the son of Rahab. He was the kinsman redeemer who lifted Ruth from the ash heap of Moab to sit as a princess with himself. There are thirty references in this short book to the redeemer or kinsman. Boaz declared that in redeeming the property of Elimelech and his sons, Chilion and Mahlon, he had also purchased the widow of Mahlon—Ruth—to be his wife (Ruth 4:10). What the nearer kinsman was unable to do, Boaz performed. This describes what Jesus Christ has done for the elect: For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death. 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. —Romans 8:2-3 The book of Ruth (the name means “satisfied”) begins with a story of wanderers from God. Elimelech (the name means “my God is king”) took his wife Naomi (the name means “my pleasantness”) and his two sons Mahlon (the name means “sickness”) and Chilion (the name means “consumption or wasting away”) and went to Moab. Famine had made their home in the area of Bethlehem (the name means “house of bread”) uncomfortable. Elimelech did not patiently endure God’s will for his life; therefore, he departed from God’s land, God’s company of people, and the privilege of God’s revelation. God sent temporary trouble, and Elimelech fled from it. But how mournful are the consequences of wandering from God. The “house of bread” is better in a time of famine than the land of Moab in the time of plenty. Elimelech was a Hebrew whose inheritance was in the area of Bethlehem. Because of the sins of the Israelites, tolerating idolaters and public monuments of idolatry (Judges 1:1-36; Judges 2:1-23; Judges 3:1-31) and the Israelites themselves falling into idolatry (Judges 2:11-13; Judges 2:17), God sent a famine to chasten them (Leviticus 26:18-20). When God chastens by famine, the duty of His people is to submit with contentment. God’s people are to bear the rod of Him who appointed it. Elimelech, however, went to Moab because abundance was in that land. Moab was a doomed country. Before Ruth’s birth, Balaam issued a prophetical statement about Moab: I shall see him, but not now:I shall behold him, but not nigh: there shall come a Star our of Jacob, and a Sceptre shall rise out of Israel, and shall smite the corners of Moab, and destroy all the children of Sheth. —Numbers 24:17 Balaam’s prophecy reminds one of Caiaphas’ prophecy to his own condemnation, but he declared the truth of God (John 11:50-52). God often uses extraordinary means of awakening men to a sense of sin. Christ is not viewed in the prophecy of Balaam as coming out of heaven but out of Jacob. The Sceptre will rise out of Israel. This is the same Jacob and Israel seen in the other parables spoken by Balaam, but they are now seen as those out of whom Christ will come to reign. The Star is a symbol which is evidently in the night period. The Star coming out of Jacob and the Sceptre rising out of Israel portray that Christ, as He is presently known to His saints, is coming to introduce the day and to reign. Shall we, like Elimelech, go down to a condemned world to seek help? It may seem strange that Christians should suffer famine when worldlings wallow in plenty (Psalms 17:14; Psalms 73:4; Psalms 73:12), but one must not lose sight of God’s chastisement of Christians. Elimelech sought livelihood in enemy country but forfeited life itself. He sought bread apart from the house of bread but found a grave (Ruth 1:3). The sons of Elimelech married strange women. Mahlon married Ruth (Ruth 4:10), and Chilion married Orpah. After ten years in Moab, Mahlon and Chilion died. Naomi was left a widow with two daughters-in-law in enemy country. There was death for those so dear to her and solitude for herself. Her losses made her think more about Canaan, the land of promise. News also came to her about the Lord giving bread to the famine-stricken people. During her ten years absence, Naomi had a rest and reality of spiritual strength that never departed. Naomi began her journey back to the land of Judah. God’s providential dealings with Naomi brought recovery. A broken and contrite heart is the result of God’s judgment, which is absolutely necessary for all recoveries. Without a sense of departure, there will be no desire for recovery. This lack is the spirit of our age. Mercy is rich in affliction which brings us from worse to better, from Moab to Canaan, and from being afar off because of sin to being near the Lord again because of repentance. The two daughters-in-law said to Naomi, “Surely we will return with thee unto thy people” (Ruth 1:10). Orpah promised but did not purpose to go. Ruth promised and purposed to go. A person who merely promises may manifest religious zeal, but for want of a regenerated heart his promises come to nothing. Promises of the mouth often proceed from passion and not from principle. The bud of a mere promise will not ripen into precious fruit. It is like the seed that was cast on stony ground. It grew rapidly, but withered when the sun began to shine. This was Orpah’s experience. She kissed Naomi, but turned back to her people and to her gods. (See John 6:66-67.) Conversely, Ruth promised and also purposed by cleaving to Naomi. Ruth persevered because she made the following choices with a purposed heart (Ruth 1:16-17 NASB): (1) She chose Naomi’s path—"where you go I will go." (2) She chose Naomi’s habitation—"where you lodge I will lodge." (3) She chose Naomi’s people—"your people shall be my people." (4) She chose Naomi’s God—"your God shall be my God." (5) She chose Naomi’s death and place of burial—"where you die I will die, and there I will be buried." The strength of Ruth’s purpose was manifested when she said, “...If anything but death parts you and me” (Ruth 1:17 NASB). The bond of faith is so powerful that it makes believers desirous and resolute to live and die together. When Naomi heard Ruth’s confession, she was convinced of her sincerity. She had been tried and proved. Failure to try a person before trusting him is want of wisdom, but refusing to trust him after he has been tried is want of love. The backslidden Naomi returned to the place from which she had departed. She and Ruth arrived in Bethlehem at the time of barley harvest. Naomi’s good reputation among the Jews was manifested by the people being stirred by the couple’s presence in the city. The question was asked, “Is this Naomi?” (Ruth 1:19). Naomi expressed her regret by saying, “Call me not Naomi [pleasantness], call me Mara [bitter]” (Ruth 1:20). She knew from the promise of Scripture that she was guilty of distrusting the Lord: “Trust in the LORD, and do good; so shalt thou dwell in the land, and verily thou shalt be fed” (Psalms 37:3). The humbled Naomi came back empty. Many people are humbled but not humble; they are made low but not lowly. Naomi went out full not because of desire but from fear of want. Although in the strict sense Naomi did not come back empty, she must not assume the credit for Ruth’s accompanying her. God had overruled her disobedience; and because of her repentance, He gave her a traveling companion. Only a restored backslider can be a blessing to others. Upon returning, Naomi found a well-spread table and the precious blood of the paschal Lamb, because it was the time of barley harvest—the passover. This is what the backslider finds when he returns to God. The book of Ruth belongs to the time of the Judges. It stands in relation to a time of failure and departure. There had been repeated departures by God’s people and God’s gracious interventions to raise up deliverers. However, there is no account in the book of Judges of recovery to the normal enjoyment of the inheritance. The judges were all marked by defects. Not one of them was able to reinstate the people to the enjoyment of the inheritance according to God. This is where the book of Ruth stands out like an oasis in the desert. The inheritance was recovered. One appeared who was great enough to exercise the right of redemption, redeem the inheritance, and secure a seed to enjoy it. Naomi had a kinsman of her husband, a mighty man of wealth. His name was Boaz (the name means “in him is strength”), the son of Rahab, who was able to redeem what Naomi had lost through poverty. This redemption involved his marriage with Ruth. Therefore, Ruth would be wise to abide with the maidens of Boaz and seek no other field in which to glean. The law opposed Ruth because she was a Moabitess, a Gentile, which prevented her from entering into the congregation of the Lord (Deuteronomy 23:3). The law can only condemn. Boaz must purchase Ruth from a kinsman who had a prior claim but could not redeem her lest he mar his own inheritance. This left Boaz free to do what the kinsman nearer than himself could not do. Therefore, Boaz purchased the inheritance of Elimelech. Thus, he bought Ruth the Moabitess to be his wife to “raise up the name of the dead upon his inheritance” (Ruth 4:10). The nearer kinsman represents the law (legal principle). He could not redeem the inheritance for himself (Ruth 4:6); therefore, he plucked off his shoe in token of giving place to another, namely, Boaz. Since the law cannot redeem, it must give place to Him who is full of grace and truth (John 1:14-17). Christians have become dead to the law by the body of Christ in order that we might be married to another, even to Him who was raised from the dead (Romans 7:1-6). Estates fall into litigation in court when there is no heir whose title can be established. Without heirs the inheritance would go into the hands of the state. However, God’s purpose cannot be invalidated because “he is in one mind, and who can turn him? and what his soul desireth, even that he doeth” (Job 23:13). Hence, a seed who was capable of enjoying the inheritance was secured through Boaz and Ruth. A son was born (Ruth 4:13) who had the right of redemption (Ruth 4:14). They called his name Obed (the name means “serving”). Obed was the father of Jesse (the name means “my subsistence” or “God exists”), and Jesse was the father of David (the name means “beloved”). As to the flesh, Christ is the son of David (Matthew 1:1; Romans 1:3-4). We are tracing the genealogy of David and David’s Lord. Ruth is connected with the Messianic line. In Christ’s humanity, He is our nearest kinsman. In His Deity, He is able to supply our needs and defend us from all danger. As the promised Redeemer, the Lord Jesus has a special relation to Israel and a particular personal relation to every regenerated and converted person. He is the kinsman Redeemer of Israel. He is the seed of Abraham in whom all nations are blessed. Furthermore, He is the seed of David and is therefore the ultimate Son who shall sit on David’s throne. The following are qualifications the Redeemer must meet: (1) He must be willing to perform the work of redemption. (2) He must be absolutely free from sin. (3) He must possess the ability to redeem. (4) He must have the price of redemption. (5) He must be a near kinsman. In Christ’s humanity, the first and fifth qualifications are met. In His Deity, the second and third are fulfilled. In Jesus Christ as God-Man, the fourth is fulfilled. Bathsheba The list of women’s names concludes with Bathsheba. She is not specifically named in Christ’s genealogy; but her second son, Solomon, is referred to as being fathered by David “from the wife of Uriah [ek tes tou Ouriou]” (Matthew 1:6—translation). Bathsheba was an adulteress who exploited her beauty by bathing in a place where she could be seen. As she made her body available to David’s eyes, she made her heart available to the King’s desire. A woman who dresses immodestly to arouse the passions of a man is as sinful as the man who looks upon her until he commits heart adultery. Bathsheba’s exploitation of her body led to an adulterous relationship between David and herself. David, a man after God’s heart, committed adultery in his heart before he committed the act. The sin of adultery is the Devil’s nest egg which causes many sins to be laid one after another. Fashion designers today are bold to say their fashions for women are designed to attract the sensuous nature of men. There is no doubt that present day dress codes have contributed to the rising crime of rape and other crimes. Christian women must in good sense dress modestly. The Bible explicitly describes the modest apparel with which women should clothe themselves: In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest [aidous, genitive singular of aidos, which means a sense of shame or modesty] apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety [sophrosunes, genitive of sophrosune, which means soundness of mind, self-control, or sobriety]; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array; But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works. —1 Timothy 2:9-10 David’s sinning went from seeing the woman to sending for Bathsheba to climax his act of adultery. David was enticed by his own lust; and when his lust conceived, it brought forth sin (James 1:14-15). Although Bathsheba stood naked before David’s eyes, the real sin could not be attributed to providential circumstances. Bathsheba was only the occasion for David’s passion to be inflamed. Christians are presently subjected to things almost as bad as that which David saw three thousand years ago. Every Christian is thankful for restraining grace. Bathsheba was not free from fault in the adulterous act with David. She prostituted her beauty near the King’s court for the purpose of enticing him. The prostitution of herself was followed by her willingness to respond to the King’s first invitation. When any woman goes as far as Bathsheba did, she is a push-over for man’s first advance. Like David, Bathsheba was guilty of adultery in her heart before she committed the act. David’s sin went from adultery to an attempted cover-up of his sin. Under the Jewish law, adultery was a capital offense. Therefore, David contrived to conceal his sin by having Uriah, Bathsheba’s husband, brought home from the battlefield. The King thought that by Uriah’s lying with his wife, he might believe her conception was of his own fathering. In his conference with Uriah, David inquired about Joab, the people, and state of the war. David’s attempt to appear interested in the importance of a firsthand report from his trusted servant reveals how deceptive a Christian’s heart can be in devising a cover-up. David used his office of kingship to appeal to Uriah. The King instructed Uriah to go home and refresh himself. Surely he would take the opportunity of rejoicing with the wife of his youth (Proverbs 5:18). After Uriah’s departure from the King’s house, David sent a present to him. After all of this, David’s scheme failed. While trying to hide his sin, his deceitful heart overlooked the providence of God. Uriah did not go home, because his loyalty to the King led him to sleep at the King’s door with the servants. David was informed that Uriah did not go home, as he had instructed. The King was dissatisfied with Uriah’s reply to his inquiry as to why he did not go: ...The ark, and Israel, and Judah, abide in tents; and my lord Joab, and the servants of my lord, are encamped in the open fields; shall I then go into mine house, to eat and to drink, and to lie with my wife? as thou livest, and as thy soul liveth, I will not do this thing. —2 Samuel 11:11 Tenderhearted David became a monster. This shows what sin will do to a Christian when passion gets the upper hand. If David would take advantage of Uriah’s absence to commit adultery with his wife, Uriah’s expressed loyalty would not affect the King. Hence, the failure of his first plot only caused the King to invent a new one. David’s next step in trying to conceal his sin was to make Uriah drunk, hoping that by intoxication Uriah would break his vow of not lying with his wife. But this also failed: And when David had called him, he did eat and drink before him; and he made him drunk: and at even he went out to lie on his bed with the servants of his lord, but went not down to his house. —2 Samuel 11:13 However, David refused to give up; and he pursued a more deadly course. King David framed a letter to have Uriah killed and sent it to Joab by the hand of him who was to die. Thus, he involved another man in an unjust and atrocious act to cover his own crime. The letter instructed Joab that Uriah should be placed where he would be most exposed in battle that he might die by the hands of Israel’s enemy. The record states that Uriah died in battle, which proves that no sin stands alone. The little break in a dam widens until the whole dam gives way, and a little speck of rot slowly spoils fruit of its useful character. Scripture states that the little foxes spoil the vine (Song of Solomon 2:15). When Bathsheba heard that Uriah was dead, she mourned for her husband; but her mourning was short-lived because the next day she became David’s wife. The hasty marriage of widows and widowers manifests the hypocrisy of such sorrow. Those who consider hasty remarriage may not be guilty of the act of adultery or murder, but they evidence lust in the heart. They seek to cover their lust with the excuse of desiring companionship. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 68: 04.1.4. PREFACE TO SECTION II ======================================================================== SECTION II - SPIRITUAL DECLINE WAS EMPHASIZED FROM DAVID TO BABYLONIAN CAPTIVITY Chapter 4 - PREFACE TO SECTION II The second division of the generations of Jesus Christ is portrayed as the decline of Israel. God’s ordained form of government was a theocracy. Therefore, Israel’s decline began with her demand for a king and concluded with the Babylonian captivity. During the declining years of Israel’s history, David, Solomon, and Rehoboam reigned over Israel. The kingdom was divided into the northern (Israel) and the southern (Judah) kingdoms under Rehoboam. Subsequent to Rehoboam, there was not one good king in Israel (the northern kingdom). However, among the kings of Judah (the southern kingdom), there were eight good kings, four of whom are mentioned in the genealogy of Jesus Christ. The last three kings of Judah—Jehoiakim, Jehoiachin, and Zedekiah—did evil in the sight of the Lord (2 Kings 23:37; 2 Kings 24:9; 2 Kings 24:19). ======================================================================== CHAPTER 69: 04.1.5. THEOCRACY - GOD'S ORDAINED FORM OF GOVERNMENT ======================================================================== Chapter 5 - THEOCRACY—GOD’S ORDAINED FORM OF GOVERNMENT In the genealogy of the King, Matthew goes from Jesus Christ, “son of David,” to “David the king” (Matthew 1:1; Matthew 1:6). The royalty of David’s family was established according to God’s eternal purpose of electing grace. Therefore, the perpetuity of this royalty is dependent on the faithfulness of God. Although God stressed the responsibility of man in the conditional aspect of the covenants of time, the accomplishment of the covenants is according to God’s grace and power. Failure is written over man in every age of human history. As in the days of the Judges when every man did that which was right in his own eyes (Judges 21:25), in the days of the apostles all sought after their own interests and not those of Jesus Christ (Php 2:21). In view of man’s failure, it is wonderful that we can look to the faithfulness of God. Thus, we look from the changing world to the unchanging covenant of God. Informed Christians are able by God’s grace to leap from the tempest-tossed vessel of this world and stand on the terra firma of the unconditional aspect of God’s covenants in time, because we have our foundation in the eternal covenant of God’s purpose. Theocracy must be defined and explained in order to have a correct concept of the future kingdom of Jesus Christ. The term “theocracy” means a form of government in which God is recognized as the supreme Ruler. God did not reign over Israel as Elohim, the Creator, but as Jehovah, the covenant God. Jehovah descended to reign over Israel. Hence, they had a supernatural form of government. Theocracy is neither a republic nor a democracy, because both forms are exercised by men. In theocracy, God is Ruler in the highest sense, because the supreme power of sovereignty resides in Him. The theocracy during the time of Moses was not a government by priests as opposed to kings, but it was a government by God Himself as opposed to government by priests and kings. Theocracy exalted Israel above all other nations, thus causing the nations of the world to hate the people who claimed God as their supreme Ruler. God chose Israel not only to be a holy people to Himself but also with a view to the kingdom: “And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation...” (Exodus 19:6). This is the first reference to the kingdom as it is related to God. God in His sovereignty and election raised up the descendants of Abraham in their associated capacity (Romans 9:4; Deuteronomy 7:6-11). This associated capacity of the natural descendants of Abraham does not indicate that every individual in it had been elected to salvation in Jesus Christ, because there were some in the associated capacity of national Israel who were not, in reality, of Israel (Romans 9:6-8). The nation in its corporate capacity may reject the truth, but God had an election of grace within a national election. The unbelief and sinfulness of Israel in her corporate capacity shall cause God to remove His blessing, but His national election is never affected (Isaiah 62:12-13; Luke 2:34; Romans 11:1-36). The following ten things should be considered with reference to Israel and the future kingdom: 1. God as Jehovah, the covenant God—not God as Elohim, the Creator—chose the Jewish people with a view to the kingdom. 2. Their election embraced a nationality—the natural descendants of Abraham in their associated capacity. 3. This election was unconditional, according to God’s eternal purpose. Matthew addressed his Gospel primarily to the Jews. He spoke to them of a future kingdom: When the son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory.... —Matthew 25:31 Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed [eulogemenoi, perfect passive participle of eulogeo, which means having been blessed] of my Father, inherit [kleronomesate, aorist active imperative of kleronomeo, which means inherit at once] the kingdom prepared [hetoimasmenen, perfect passive participle of hetoimadzo, which means having been prepared] for you from [apo, ablative of time] the foundation of the world. —Matthew 25:34 These two verses must be considered together. When Jesus Christ comes in His glory to establish the kingdom, He will tell those who have been permanently blessed to enter at once into the kingdom that has been permanently prepared for them from the foundation of the universe. This applies to national Israel, but this same truth is for every child of God. National Israel has not come into possession of the kingdom, and neither have we because we will possess it through Israel. Two perfect passive Greek participles are found in Matthew 25:34. The perfect tense looks at not only the beginning but also the conclusion of the action. It represents a present condition or state as a result of a past completed action. The sheep had been eternally blessed, and the kingdom had been eternally prepared concurrently. The kingdom is permanently prepared because the sheep are permanently blessed. The sheep could not be permanently blessed apart from “the Lamb slain [esphagmenou, perfect passive participle of sphadzo, which means having been slain] from [apo, ablative of time] the foundation of the world” (Revelation 13:8). Without the Lamb having been permanently slain, the names of the sheep would never have been “written [gegraptai, perfect passive indicative of grapho, which means having been written] in the book of life from [apo, ablative of time] the foundation of the world...” (Revelation 17:8). 4. The unbelief and sinfulness of the nation of Israel may remove the favor of God from them, but this does not affect Israel’s election. 5. The same elect nation, chastened and scourged, scattered and dispersed, shall be recalled and exalted. 6. While the nation comprising the national descendants of Abraham are thus chosen, it does not follow that every individual in it is personally elected to salvation (Romans 9:1-33). 7. God has made provision for the elect Gentiles by grafting them with preceding believers (Romans 11:1-36). 8. Israel under theocracy was a type of a future kingdom. 9. The root stump that remains is a holy seed. 10. The kingdom is given to the natural descendants of Abraham in their corporate capacity. The book of Judges covers the period between Israel’s conquest of the land of Canaan and the death of Joshua to the judgeship of Samuel and the people’s choice of a visible king. This period was one of theocratic regime in which Jehovah Himself was Israel’s “invisible King.” However, there were many departures from God by Israel during this period which concluded with their desire to have a king like all the nations to judge them (1 Samuel 8:5). This took place during the judgeship of Samuel when his sons, Joel and Abiah, walked not in the ways of their father. The change from theocracy to what Israel would call monarchy, “a king to judge us like all the nations” (1 Samuel 8:5), was what people today call “the right of self-determination.” The following verses were Samuel’s words to Israel and Israel’s response: And ye shall cry out in that day because of your king which ye shall have chosen you; and the LORD will not hear you in that day. Nevertheless the people refused to obey the voice of Samuel; and they said, Nay; but we will have a king over us; That we also may be like all the nations; and that our king may judge us, and go out before us, and fight our battles. And Samuel heard all the words of the people, and he rehearsed them in the ears of the LORD. And the LORD said to Samuel, Hearken unto their voice, and make them a king.... —1 Samuel 8:18-22 Therefore, God gave Israel a king of their choosing in the same manner that He gave them flesh to eat (Numbers 11:20; Psalms 106:15). Israel wanted to be like the people from whom they had been delivered. This sounds like modern-day Christendom. The religious world is saying that a religion is not true without denominations, associations, conventions, conferences, forms, ceremonies, programs for such maladies as AIDS, addicts, the homeless, battered wives and children, and other social programs, professional choirs, musicians, hierarchies, and a peccable savior to sympathize with men when they are seduced by the world’s evils. Therefore, they must conclude that a religion which has only a sovereign God, an impeccable Savior, a regenerating Holy Spirit, a Bible, and a song book cannot be the true religion of our day of intellectualism, socialism, and humanism. The first thing man does when God sets up something of His own on the earth is to either counterfeit it or substitute something for it. Thus, man has another Jesus, a different spirit, and a different gospel (2 Corinthians 11:4). However, as God has Jesus Christ who is the Son of the living God, the Holy Spirit, and the gospel which was settled in heaven before the foundation of the world, He also has a remnant in the corrupted nation of Israel. Israel’s real reason for wanting a change in government was not the degeneracy of the sons of Samuel. Although Samuel was a godly man, his sons were a disappointment. His grief was the same as that experienced by Isaac, Aaron, Eli, David, and other Biblical individuals. Neither Eli’s softness nor Samuel’s firmness gave character to their sons; grace alone gives character. This strikes across the grain of the cliche, “A man’s character is reflected in his children.” When children without grace leave the enclosure of a godly home, they have no principle of restraint. Three things should be observed concerning Israel’s demand for a king like all the nations: (1) Israel’s reference to Samuel’s sons was the most evident thing the people could mention because his sons walked not in the ways of their father, Samuel. Therefore, they “turned aside after lucre, and took bribes, and perverted judgment” (1 Samuel 8:3). (2) Their inner motive was that the people might be like other nations. (3) The true reason was that Israel had now rejected the theocracy: And the LORD said unto Samuel, Hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee: for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them. —1 Samuel 8:7 Israel had rejected the Lord’s invisible reign, and the Israelites were making Samuel’s age and his sons an excuse for their rebellion. The people had forgotten their covenant relation with God, and they wanted to have a “say” in their government. Although God allowed Israel to choose their king, God safeguarded the principle of kingship in a monarchical government under King David (Deuteronomy 17:14-20). The king was directly responsible to God, and the people were no less responsible than their king. Israel’s king, therefore, was to be a monarchical king (an earthly king under God’s rule), not an autocratic king (an earthly king vested with absolute authority). Government was to be a kingly power in the hands of men who acted in obedience to the written law of God. Theocracy instituted by God is the introductory form of government which shall be perfected not in imperfect men, such as Solomon, the immediate son of David, but through the perfect One in the royal line, who is “the root and offspring of David, and the bright and morning star” (Revelation 22:16). This perfect King shall reign eternally over His perfected people. Since the time of Israel’s rejection of God’s theocratic rule, they have declared, “We will not have this man [the Jehovah of 1 Samuel 8:7] to reign over us” (Luke 19:14). The Jews have been scattered throughout the nations of the world. This scattering will continue until both “the times of the Gentiles” (various forms of Gentile government from Nebuchadnezzar to the establishment of Christ’s kingdom at His second advent) (Luke 21:24) and the “fulness of the Gentiles” (Christ’s visiting the Gentiles to take out of them a people for His name—Acts 15:13-17) may come in (Romans 11:25). The kingdom of Christ has not been manifested because God’s purpose was that the Son of Man would be honored and glorified in heaven before He shall be honored on earth. Therefore, according to Christ’s own teaching, His kingdom will be assumed from the heavenly rather than the earthly realm. Theocracy is not the same as sovereignty. It may be premised that Jesus Christ, in His oneness with the Father, is exercising His dominion over all things at the present time. Nevertheless, when Jehovah withdrew His kings in the Old Testament, He did not cease to be Israel’s sovereign. Furthermore, the kingdom belongs to Jesus Christ as the Son of David, and sovereignty is His as the Son of God. The kingdom is never promised to Jesus Christ as the Son of God but as the Son of Man or the Son of David. While sitting at the Father’s right hand, Christ has not laid aside His sovereignty. All power in heaven and in earth was given Him (Matthew 28:18), but something will be added to that when He comes to establish His kingdom as the Son of Man. At that time, He will manifest His power openly and will visibly bring all things into subjection to Himself on the earth. The theocratic form of government is never represented as a type. When Israel rejected this form of government, all the prophets with one voice proclaimed its restoration. No wonder depraved men, including depraved religionists, hate the theocratic form of government. Christ rules now through the “powers that be” (Romans 13:1-7), but the “powers that be” do not constitute a theocracy. The Greek text of Romans 13:1, Pasa psuche exousiais huperechousais hupotassestho, is translated “Let every soul be subordinate to governing authorities.” The participle huperechousais is a present active form of the verb huperecho, which means to have power over, be highly placed, those in high position, or governing authorities. The imperative, hupotassestho, is a present passive form of hupotasso, which means to be in subjection or subordinate. Peter spoke of submitting to “every ordinance [ktisei, dative feminine singular of ktisis, which means human authority] of man [anthropine, dative feminine singular of the adjective anthropinos, which means human or belongs to man]” (1 Peter 2:13). Human authority does not mean that it is any less God’s authority; but it is delegated authority, unless it is opposed to God’s revealed will. The word “human” denotes the means through which the authority operates. An example of this is the delegated authority of elders in local assemblies (1 Timothy 5:17; Hebrews 13:7; Hebrews 13:17; Hebrews 13:24). Obedience to human authority has its limits. Parental authority and civil authority are responsible to God, whether the ones occupying those positions are Christians or nonchristians. As an alien in this country is not free from subordination to our laws, one’s spiritual inability as an unregenerate person does not nullify his responsibility to God. Man is responsible for his own depravity by his solidarity with Adam in the fall, and he lacks spiritual ability to do the will of God. Nevertheless, he is accountable to God. God has two governments during the age of the assembly, the time between the first and second advents of Jesus Christ. There is a spiritual government for Christ’s assembly which He is building; and there is a civil government for the protection of society, which is made up of both elect and nonelect. Paul wrote Romans 13:1-7 to Christians in Rome to inform them concerning their relationship to the civil government where they resided. They were to be subordinate to the authorities of the civil government of Rome. The only exception to such subordination occurs when man’s authority contradicts God’s supreme authority. What did the “certain Jews” do when Nebuchadnezzar made an image of gold and commanded all the people to come to the dedication of the image (Daniel 3:1-25)? Although the King issued a mandate for all the subjects of Babylon to worship the image, the faithful Jews knew the mandate was directly opposed to God who said: I am the LORD thy God.... Thou shalt have no other gods before me. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image.... Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them.... —Exodus 20:2-5 The lesson in Paul’s instruction to the Roman Christians teaches Christians of all time that believers are to be subordinate to governing authorities because there is no authority except from God. However, Christians must not be subordinate to false gods established by governing authorities. To embrace a false god established by a governing authority would be to deny the true God who gave the ruler his authority. Hence, our answer to such authority must be the same as that given by the faithful Jews: ...our God whom we serve is able to deliver us from the burning fiery furnace, and he will deliver us out of thine hand, O king. But if not, be it known unto thee, O king, that we will not serve thy gods, nor worship the golden image which thou hast set up. —Daniel 3:17-18 Christians must be willing, like the “certain Jews,” to suffer the consequences of refusing to obey the demands of civil authorities when they set themselves above the supreme authority of God. Three principles are established with respect to the “certain Jews” that Christians must consider: (1) They did not defile themselves by partaking of that which Babylon provided (Daniel 1:1-21). The King gave them a tuition-free three-year course in a false religion, but they had a meat to eat that Babylon did not understand. Biblical principles remain unchanged regardless of where God’s people live (Daniel 1:4-8). (2) God gave the young men of Israel knowledge and skill in all learning and wisdom, thus enabling them to resist false teaching designed to lead them astray. The King knew that the religious nature of men, apart from grace, is easily carried away by anything that stirs their religious feeling. Therefore, as false religion is doing today, the King used Babylon’s music for persuasion. Who can deny that music plays a role in the spread of false religion? False religion inspired by false music works on false emotions to respond to a false peace that shall be offered by a false prophet. This indicates that things are speedily shaping up for the manifestation of the antichrist (Daniel 3:1-7). (3) The young men faithfully refused to acknowledge any god other than the true God, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (Daniel 3:13-18). Likewise, Christians in every age will be faithful to God and say with Peter and the apostles that we must be obeying God rather than men (Acts 5:29). Doing the will of God denotes character. Unawed by the presence of King Nebuchadnezzar and unseduced by the terrors of the burning fiery furnace, the faithful remnant refused to bow down and worship the image. In like manner, Christians who purpose in their hearts to please God act in the light of eternity. The miracle recorded in Daniel 3:1-30 is a type of the remnant of Jews preserved by God during the great tribulation of Revelation. Some who profess to be theologians are as confused about the great tribulation as the pastor who preached the funeral of one of his assembly members and referred to him as one who came out of great tribulation. Since the Greek does not have an indefinite article comparable to the English, the absence of the article from the Greek is the equivalent of the indefinite article “a” in the English. The presence of the article in the Greek identifies; the absence of the article qualifies (makes less strong or positive). Therefore, the presence of the Greek article in Revelation 7:14, “...These are the ones who come [coming] out of the great tribulation...” (NASB), distinguishes it from the ordinary tribulations experienced in life. A correct estimate of human government cannot be formed apart from the Biblical teaching of the future kingdom of Jesus Christ. While one political party will praise and magnify democracy as a Divine institution, another political party will condemn democracy and advocate socialism. There are others, however, who condemn all human government; but this must be denounced because any form of government is better than none. There are those who speak about “the rights of the people,” “all people being created equal,” “the sovereignty of the people,” “the supreme power resting in the body of citizens instituted to vote,” etc. The promoters of different political philosophies are trying to influence the world with their ideologies. Therefore, the political battles become so heated that they turn into political wars. All human authorities must realize that authority does not rest in the policeman’s badge, the judge’s robe, or the king’s crown. It goes back of these symbols to the sovereign God who says to all authorities what Jesus Christ told Pilate: “You could be having no authority against me except it was being given to you from above” (John 19:11—translation). The different forms of human government in society must be distinguished from the one established form of Divine government for Christ’s assemblies. Nothing is stated in Romans 13:1-14 or 1 Peter 2:1-25 concerning forms of government. The emphasis is on some established order for the protection of society, which includes both Christians and nonchristians. On the other hand, believers have a Divinely established order of government for Christ’s assemblies which cannot be altered regardless of the different forms of human government under which the assemblies exist. During the absence of Christ’s theocratic kingdom, the Divinely established government of Christ’s assemblies cannot make the state which is composed of regenerate and unregenerate people subordinate to their principles. However, the assemblies with their one established form of Divine government should be subordinate to different and changing human authorities, except when they oppose God’s established will, because Christianity is not controlled by human authority that is opposed to God’s revealed will. The voice of Christianity must not remain silent before civil and political corruption. As the voices of the prophets were heard in the Old Testament, the voices of the elders must be heard proclaiming the same principles and giving the same warnings in New Testament times. Consider the calling and work of such prophets of the Old Testament as Samuel (1 Samuel 3:1-21; 1 Samuel 7:3-15; 1 Samuel 8:6-18), Shemaiah (2 Chronicles 12:1-12), Micaiah (2 Chronicles 18:1-34), Elijah (1 Kings 16:1-34; 1 Kings 17:1-24; 1 Kings 18:1-46; 1 Kings 19:1-21; 1 Kings 20:1-43; 1 Kings 21:1-29; 1 Kings 22:1-53), the major and minor prophets, and concluding with John the Baptist. John, like Elijah before him, knew he was asking for trouble when he rebuked the one who sat on the throne: “...It is not lawful for thee to have her [his brother Philip’s wife]” (Matthew 14:4). John the Baptist was not the last messenger to die for the cause of Christ. (See Matthew 24:9; John 16:2; John 21:19; Acts 7:59-60; Acts 12:1-2; Revelation 2:13.) The messengers of God must never compromise the principles of eternal truth regardless of the consequences. The assembly of Christ should never be affiliated with any political party. However, this in no way excludes Christians from their responsibility to civil authority and their payment of taxes to the human authority under which they live. Since political and social structures of human authorities frown upon the perfected theocratic government under the Son of Man, the Son of David, Christians cannot endorse one form of humanism over another. Hence, a Christian is not justified in saying, “I have chosen the lesser of two or more evil parties.” All human authorities accuse Christians of being too occupied with the other world, but all informed believers know that no one can properly understand his duty to the present without regarding it in the light of eternity. Therefore, chaos and confusion in society and Christendom are the fruit of rhetoric among politicians and religionists concerning a better society apart from the Biblical concept of the theocratic kingdom. Hence, the result prior to Christ’s second advent will always be circumstances described by Jesus Christ: And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive you. For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many. And ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet. For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes, in divers places. All these are the beginning of sorrows. —Matthew 24:4-8 Paul did not manifest any resentment toward the government under which the providence of God placed him. Therefore, he had no conflict between his rendering to Caesar the things that belonged to him and surrendering to God the things that belonged to Him. Because Christians revere the authority of God, they make better citizens of Caesar’s domain than those who are strangers to God’s grace. Since all nature is submissive to God’s laws, Christians should submit to God’s providence by submitting our hearts that are prone to carnality to God’s holiness, arrogancy to His mercy, and rebellion to His sovereignty in providence. Some of the Roman believers to whom Paul wrote needed Paul’s counsel concerning submission: Whosoever therefore resisteth [antitassomenos, present middle participle of antitasso, which means oppose or resist] the power [exousia, which means authority, ruling power, or government], resisteth [anthesteken, perfect active indicative of anthistemi, which means resist, oppose, set against, or withstand—has opposed and is in a state of opposition] the ordinance [diatage, which means decree or ordinance] of God: and they that resist [anthestekotes, perfect active participle of anthistemi, which means having opposed and are in a state of opposition] shall receive to themselves damnation [krima, which means judgment or punishment]. —Romans 13:2 Although wicked Nero was on the throne at the time Paul wrote this letter, the believers in Rome were to be subordinate to God and to the ruling authority as Solomon in his wisdom instructed: “My son, fear thou the LORD and the king: and meddle [interfere] not with them that are given to change” (Proverbs 24:21). Note the order of “the LORD and the king.” Contrary to Jesus Christ and the apostles, who never sought to overthrow human government, many religionists are trying to cause the downfall of some form of human government. Christians are living on a higher plane than any earthly ruler; furthermore, this is not the time for Christians to reign. We look forward to the time when we shall judge the world (1 Corinthians 6:2). Our judging the world will occur when we shall rule and reign with Jesus Christ. Therefore, the role of Christians during the absence of Christ’s theocratic rule in His kingdom is submission to the rule of the sovereign God and to continually changing human government as long as it does not demand opposition to God’s revealed will. There are principles that bear on the right or wrong of revolution. Christians must not identify themselves with political associations to oppose or subvert the government of their country. Every age has its political and social tastes, but reverence for God is not one of the most popular virtues of any age, especially the one in which we live. Man without reverence sees no greatness in God’s universe which transcends himself. Knowing God through Jesus Christ is necessary for one to act reverently. The attitude of deep respect is compatible with love. Our age of existentialism has produced a generation in which there is very little reverence or respect for anyone or anything. Existentialism is a high-sounding title for humanism which makes human experience the norm for judging reality. Since man is doing that which is right in his own eyes, he judges everything by his own standard. There are three important things to understand about human government: (1) It is necessary in order to prevent anarchy. Any kind of government is better than no government. Lawlessness would abound in a nation without some form of human authority. (2) Human government, as far as its character is concerned, is not asserted to be acceptable to God. It may be described as a “beast” (Daniel 7:1-28; Revelation 13:1-18; Revelation 17:1-18). The four beasts of Daniel 7:1-28 are the world empires of history. Their moral character is described, and the fourth kingdom is so terrible that there is no beast to describe it. The order is reversed in Revelation 13:1-18 because Daniel was looking forward, but John was looking backward. The “MOTHER OF HARLOTS” riding the beast of Revelation 17:1-18 speaks of her dependence on and confidence in him to whom she is united. Since no nation is ever called a harlot, she represents the false assembly which claims relationship with God while being allied elsewhere. The false assembly will be used by the beast’s authority until she has served his purpose, and then she will be destroyed. (3) Human government, like everything ministered by men, is always imperfect. The authorities which exist are not viewed in Scripture as having intelligence of a spiritual order. Christians have no form of government, civil or ecclesiastical, to impose on a nation. They are to pray for those in authority in order that they might lead a peaceful and quiet life in godliness and respectability (1 Timothy 2:1-2). The Christian, like the Israelites wandering in the wilderness, desires to pass his life of pilgrimage on earth in peace (Numbers 21:22), serving God in the path of the just that shines brighter and brighter until the perfect day (Proverbs 4:18). That which shines brighter and brighter does not refer to a better path of life brought into being through political and ecclesiastical influences on human authorities. One must not discount the fact that political and religious propaganda will bring the deceived to say, “Peace and safety,” but then sudden destruction shall come upon them (1 Thessalonians 5:1-3). There is no authority except from God. The God-given authority of civil government is affirmed in Romans 13:1-7. But unlimited power over people under a particular form of human government is not awarded to men. The authority of human government and the obedience of the governed are limited. Since God is sovereign, no human government has the authority to violate God’s commandments and principles. When human authority approves and practices that which God condemns, Christians must obey God rather than men and be willing to suffer the consequences of having obeyed God (Acts 5:29). Biblical examples of obedience to God while disobeying civil government are given: (1) The King of Egypt requested that all the Hebrew male children be killed, but Moses’ parents disobeyed this command (Exodus 1:16; Exodus 1:22; Exodus 2:1-3). Their obedience to God is recorded in Hebrews 11:23. (2) Rahab, a converted prostitute, appears among the heroes of faith because of a courageous act of civil disobedience (Joshua 2:1-24; Joshua 6:1-27). By this act, she was justified by her work (James 2:25). (3) In disobedience to the rulers during the time of Ahab and Jezebel, Obadiah hid 100 prophets in caves to protect them from the authorities (1 Kings 18:13). (4) The three Hebrew children refused to obey King Nebuchadnezzar (Daniel 3:17-18), and their faith is spoken of in Hebrews 11:34. (5) Daniel refused to comply with a royal decree that he must not pray to his God three times a day with his face toward Jerusalem. His faith is recorded in Hebrews 11:33. Civil government is a human institution that formulates law without direct reference to Scripture for temporal welfare and prosperity, and it applies to all its subjects. Assembly authority is based on Scripture for the eternal good of believers whose subordination to God takes priority over civil government, and they must never compromise Divine authority. Civil government has definite limitation. It cannot intrude into assembly government and command Christians to disobey God. Assembly government cannot intrude into civil government and command unbelievers to live a Christian life which they are unable to do. Biblical principles cannot be imposed on unregenerate people. That does not indicate that unregenerate people are not responsible to God. God is the supreme authority. The assembly intensifies her influence by keeping separate from the state. The role of the assembly in the world is not to dabble in politics but to keep separated from politics and be in a position by a life of separation to condemn everything that is contrary to the purpose and command of Almighty God. Christians must obey authority that does not disobey God, the supreme authority. We must be honest in dealing with our fellow men, owe no man anything, and live clean lives without compromise. God rules in the governments of men by giving authority to whom He will (Proverbs 21:1; Daniel 4:17). Some rulers may consider themselves absolute and unaccountable to any, but they are overruled by God who is higher than the highest. The king’s heart being in the hand of the Lord does not mean that the Lord is in his heart. Whether regenerate or unregenerate, the king’s heart is in the hand of the sovereign God (1 Samuel 2:6-10; Acts 17:28). The quality of the ruler’s heart is not changed if he is unregenerate, but the path of its actions runs under God’s guidance and subservient to His pleasure for the fulfillment of His purpose. The Christian goes beyond the reasoning of the natural man to see God sending Joseph to preserve many people alive (Genesis 50:18-20), sending Shimei to curse David (2 Samuel 16:10), and delivering Jesus Christ to wicked men for crucifixion (Acts 2:23). Job expressed his belief in (1) the truth of God’s agency—"he taketh away," (2) the sovereignty of His dominion—"who can hinder him," and (3) the justice of His conduct—"who will say unto him, What doest thou?" (Job 9:12). The following are three important questions for consideration: (1) Does the New Testament set boundaries between civil and assembly jurisdictions? (2) Does the New Testament suggest the union of assembly and state, in other words, a theocracy of sort? (3) Does Christ expect the assembly to fulfill the commission by legislation? (Study Luke 12:13-15.) ======================================================================== CHAPTER 70: 04.1.6.1 KINGS PRECEDING DIVISION OF KINGDOM - DAVID ======================================================================== Chapter 6i - KINGS PRECEDING THE DIVISION OF THE KINGDOM David David, whom God selected to be king and sent Samuel to anoint, was the son of Jesse, the Bethlehemite. God said to Samuel: How long will you grieve over Saul, since I have rejected him from being king over Israel? Fill your horn with oil, and go; I will send you to Jesse the Bethlehemite, for I have selected a king for Myself among his sons. —1 Samuel 16:1 (NASB) Israel’s first king had been the people’s choice, and the people’s choice always fails. God had allowed Israel to choose their king to show the nation that their best choice could never meet their need. The genealogy of Saul suggests pride, self-will, excellence of nature, weakness, and deceitfulness (1 Samuel 9:1-2). During the period of the Judges, Israel’s rejection of God as their invisible King reached its climax in Samuel’s day when they asked for a king like all the nations (1 Samuel 8:5; 1 Samuel 8:19-20). The man of Israel’s choice soon became a failure, and God told Samuel that He had rejected Saul’s reign over the people. However, God sought a king after His own heart (1 Samuel 13:14; 1 Samuel 16:1). He chose David also his servant, and took him from the sheepfolds: From following the ewes great with young he brought him to feed Jacob his people, and Israel his inheritance. —Psalms 78:70-71 Saul’s success was also his failure (1 Samuel 15:11-23). How could Saul succeed and fail at the same time? He conquered Agag but disobeyed God by failing to destroy the Amalekites. Hence, the glory of his victory was lost in the darkness of his defeat. One may conquer some of earth’s greatest kings, but his life is a failure if he disobeys the King of all kings. Therefore, Saul’s sin of disobedience must be condemned rather than his victory praised. There are three lessons to be learned in Saul’s disobedience: (1) Saul took King Agag alive but did not destroy him. Someone might reason himself into saying that imprisonment for life is a worse punishment than death. But no one has the right to alter God’s command. (2) Saul shifted the responsibility to the people: “But the people took of the spoil...to sacrifice unto the LORD thy God in Gilgal” (1 Samuel 15:21). Saul made the people his means of escape, but he tried to make it light on them by saying they spared the sheep for sacrifice. Now that was being truly thoughtful of the people! (3) Saul offered a religious excuse for his sin of disobedience by suggesting that using the sheep for sacrifice would be better than slaying them in war. Although God said to slay them, Saul’s reasoning was that it does not matter how they are slain. Disobedience is not condoned by partial obedience. Samuel rebuked him for his disobedience: Hath the LORD as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the LORD? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice and to hearken than the fat of rams. For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft [divination], and stubbornness [insubordination] is as iniquity and idolatry. Because thou hast rejected the word of the LORD, he hath also rejected thee from being king. —1 Samuel 15:22-23 Saul’s confession did not come until the evidence of his sin was revealed. He was frightened into a religious feeling (1 Samuel 15:24). Furthermore, in his confession, he placed the blame on the people because he feared them: “...I have sinned: yet honour me now, I pray thee, before the elders of my people, and before Israel...” (1 Samuel 15:30). He was more concerned about standing well in the sight of the people than before the Lord. In contrast, Christians confess their sins because they desire to stand well in the sight of the Lord. David was chosen long before Samuel was sent for him (Psalms 78:70). Those chosen by God are immovable because they are connected to the foundation of God’s purpose. David was the eighth son of Jesse to pass in review before Samuel when he was sent to anoint God’s choice of a king. The unseen God is the all-seeing One who moved Samuel to recognize the son of Jesse who was to be the king of Israel. (See 1 Samuel 16:6-13.) God’s choices are different from man’s choices because God looks not upon man’s physical stature (2 Samuel 14:25), social rank (1 Corinthians 1:26-31), or material wealth (1 Samuel 16:11). David appeared before Samuel: And the Lord said, Arise, anoint him: for this is he. Then Samuel took the horn of oil, and anointed him in the midst of his brethren: and the Spirit of the LORD came upon David from that day forward.... —1 Samuel 16:12-13 The “sweet psalmist of Israel” (2 Samuel 23:1) denotes David’s character, the basis of which was that he was raised on high: He [God] raises the poor from the dust, He lifts the needy from the ash heap To make them sit with nobles, And inherit a seat of honor.... —1 Samuel 2:8 (NASB) Seventy-three of the 150 Psalms were written by David, and they were set to music for the tabernacle and temple worship. Therefore, they reveal the attitude of the soul in God’s presence while thoroughly considering past history, present experience, and prophetic hope. The Spirit of the Lord speaking through David involved the triune God—the Spirit of the Lord, the God of Israel, and the Rock of Israel (2 Samuel 23:2-3). The God of Israel is the Author of the eternal covenant, and the Rock of Israel shall fulfill the obligations of the covenant. Jesus Christ is represented as the Person by whom God created all things (1 Corinthians 8:6), and as the Divine Being who accompanied the Israelites in the wilderness as their deliverer. Paul’s statement in 1 Corinthians 10:4, “that Rock was Christ,” proves Christ’s preexistence. In the Old Testament, Christ appeared as “the angel of the LORD” (Exodus 3:2), “the angel of his presence” (Is. 63:9), and “the messenger [angel] of the covenant” (Malachi 3:1). Hence, it is easy to understand the relation that Paul made between the Rock of the Old Testament and the Christ of the New Testament. David’s hope was for a “morning without clouds” (2 Samuel 23:4), which is a messianic prophecy. The basis of his hope was “the everlasting covenant” which was ordered and sure. David’s statements “Although my house be not so with God” and “yet he hath made with me an everlasting covenant” of 2 Samuel 23:5 must be contrasted, because the faithfulness of God is presented in contrast to the failures of King David. In any honest biography of the best of men, one will find a “but” or an “although.” Hence, the only thing that gives permanent hope is God’s unconditional covenant and His faithfulness in fulfilling it. King David rejoiced in God’s covenant—2 Samuel 23:5—for the following reasons: (1) It was Divine in origin—“God...made with me an everlasting covenant.” (2) It was a personal covenant—“God...made with me....” (3) It was everlasting—“...an everlasting covenant.” (4) It was ordered—“ordered in all things.” (5) It was sure—“and secured” (NASB). (6) It was the satisfaction of his heart—“this is all my salvation.” (7) It was all his desire—“and all my desire.” The promises of God are yes and amen (2 Corinthians 1:20). The unfaithfulness of David’s house included his own personal failures. When Christians near the end of their lives in time, their hearts are set upon what they were in sin, what they are in Christ, and how miserably they have failed God as believers. Hence, they lament their failures and grieve over the way they have prostituted their blessings and privileges. However, like David, they do not spend all their last moments lamenting and grieving over their failures. As David became absorbed with God’s covenant that was ordered and secured, informed Christians become occupied with God’s eternal, unilateral covenant of grace that is the foundation of all the covenants of time. The prophetical kingdom is represented by the following poetic expression in 2 Samuel 23:3-4 (NASB): He who rules over men righteously, Who rules in the fear [reverence] of God, Is as the light of the morning when the sun rises, A morning without clouds, When the tender grass springs out of the earth, Through sunshine after rain. Paul said, “The night is far spent, the day is at hand...” (Romans 13:12). The night is the time and power of darkness (Luke 22:53); therefore, it is the time of warfare, trial, struggle, absence of the Bridegroom, man’s judgment, mixture of tares and wheat, tribulation, sorrow, and death. Conversely, the morning is the time of no clouds, complete deliverance, eternal glory, and the righteous rule of Christ in the eternal kingdom. The evening of the world is dark and depressing, but Christ Jesus shall be the light of the morning. The purity of the morning follows the purifying judgment of God. A willing people shall bow before the righteous rule of Christ in the day of His power and glory. Therefore, in the beauty of holiness from the womb of the morning, Christ shall have the dew of His youth; thus, everything under His quickening power shall flourish in His kingdom. (See Psalms 110:1-7.) Critics have seized on David’s sin with Bathsheba and his having Uriah killed to ridicule David as a great Bible hero. They ask what kind of God could find anything in David to praise. God Himself acknowledged this criticism against Himself and His people when He inspired Daniel to say these words: O my God, incline thine ear, and hear; open thine eyes, and behold our desolations, and the city which is called by thy name: for we do not present our supplications before thee for our righteousnesses, but for thy great mercies. O Lord, hear; O Lord, forgive; O Lord, hearken and do; defer not, for thine own sake, O my God: for thy city and thy people are called by thy name. —Daniel 9:18-19 A stain appeared to be on the name of God for four hundred years. God forgave sinners in Old Testament times because His Son was on the way to Calvary. He would soon justify Himself in the sight of all His critics. God will by no means clear the guilty (Romans 3:24-26). God’s commendation of David proves that David, like Rahab the harlot, did not wallow in sin; but his pleasure with Bathsheba displeased the Lord: ...David did that which was right in the eyes of the LORD, and turned not aside from any thing that he commanded him all the days of his life, save only in the matter of Uriah the Hittite. —1 Kings 15:5 And when the mourning [Bathsheba’s mourning over Uriah’s death] was past, David sent and fetched her to his house, and she became his wife, and bare him a son. But the thing that David had done displeased the LORD. —2 Samuel 11:27 As threatening as David’s hypocrisy and self-deceit were, he was honest within himself all the self-deceiving time. One might ask how David could go for a year without forgiveness of his sin. It would be inconceivable if we did not look at David through some of our own experiences and confess that the same detestable sin principle that was in David is in each of us. There was a lapse of time between David’s sin and his being rebuked. God did not awaken David to a sense of his wickedness by raising up enemies to lay waste his country, but He sent to him one of His faithful ministers. The King did not fly into a rage when Nathan faithfully performed his duty. David was so horrified when convicted by the parable that he said, “I have sinned against the LORD” (2 Samuel 12:13). After David’s confession, Nathan said: The LORD also hath put away thy sin; thou shalt not die. Howbeit, because by this deed thou hast given great occasion to the enemies of the LORD to blaspheme, the child also that is born unto thee shall surely die. —2 Samuel 12:13-14 A principle in the moral government of God that must not be overlooked is that we reap what we sow (Galatians 6:7). God said the following words to David through Nathan: Why have you despised the word of the LORD by doing evil in His sight? You have struck down Uriah the Hittite with the sword, have taken his wife to be your wife, and have killed him with the sword of the sons of Ammon. Now therefore, the sword shall never depart from your house, because you have despised Me and have taken the wife of Uriah the Hittite to be your wife. Thus says the LORD, Behold, I will raise up evil against you from your own household; I will even take your wives before your eyes, and give them to your companion, and he shall lie with your wives in broad daylight. Indeed you did it secretly, but I will do this thing before all Israel, and under the sun. —2 Samuel 12:9-12 (NASB) God’s promise that He would raise up evil against David and his own house was fulfilled in (1) the death of his first son by Bathsheba (2 Samuel 12:14; 2 Samuel 12:19), (2) Amnon raping his half-sister Tamar (2 Samuel 13:14), (3) Absalom having Amnon assassinated (2 Samuel 13:28-29), (4) Absalom being slain by Joab (2 Samuel 18:14), and (5) Adonijah falling by the sword at the command of Solomon (1 Kings 2:24-25). Another recorded sin in David’s life was his ordering a third census in Israel. Although God ordered two numberings of the children of Israel (Numbers 1:2; Numbers 26:2), David sinned by ordering the third census (2 Samuel 24:1-2; 2 Samuel 24:10; 1 Chronicles 21:1). The first census was in order to determine Israel’s military strength and to facilitate orderly progress. Since only Israelites were to fight Israel’s battles, the mixed multitude was eliminated because they could not prove their pedigree. The numbering was not a mere numbering of the Israelites, but it was to be a declaration of their pedigree by acknowledging the covenant, their redemption, and their identification with the tent of meeting. These three things stand or fall together in the case of national Israel, and they also contain a principle that applies to Christians in the dispensation of grace. The numbering in the second census had in view Israel’s entrance into Canaan and the division of the land (Numbers 26:52-54). Israel was to have an interest not only in position but also in her inheritance. This principle also applies to Christians today. Our use of grace and not grace itself is the difference between Christians. David’s command to have Israel and Judah numbered was not from God. He ordered Joab to number the people “that I may know the number of the people” (2 Samuel 24:2). Subsequent to the census, David said: ...I have sinned greatly in what I have done. But now, O LORD, please take away the iniquity of Thy servant, for I have acted very foolishly. —2 Samuel 24:10 (NASB). Scripture does not specifically state what the sin was that David committed; therefore, the answer must be found in the context and circumstances of David’s life: (1) David was not commanded to take a census. (2) Satan provoked (moved) David to number Israel (1 Chronicles 21:1). (3) The numbering of Israel was out of the pride of his heart—"that I may know the number of the people." David was given a choice of the method of punishment he would receive for his sin: (1) seven years of famine, (2) fleeing his pursuers for three months, or (3) three days of pestilence in his land (2 Samuel 24:11-13). After hearing the choices from the prophet of God, David returned to a proper sense of submission to the sovereign God. Recognizing his sin and foolishness, he was willing to fall into the hands of the merciful God, knowing that in governmental forgiveness he must be punished for his sin. At the close of David’s life, he was made to have a keen sense of his own personal sin, failure, and neglect of duty. The last words of King David present a difficulty to some, but what appears to be a problem between 1 Kings 2:1-11 and 2 Samuel 23:1-5 is not a problem when one sees that 2 Samuel 23:1-5 is David’s expression of faith and hope in his dying moments. Such is the testimony of every properly instructed dying believer. What David said in his last address extended beyond himself; therefore, his words should be considered as both a charge and a prophecy. Let us look first at David’s charge to his son, Solomon, and then at his dying testimony. The King was about to take his last step out of time into eternity. Hence, he acknowledged that the glory of his reign as king over Israel was nearing completion: “I go the way of all the earth” (1 Kings 2:2). Although his sun was sinking slowly in the west, he had an interest in the future of Israel; therefore, his last words to Solomon are the words of a patriot to a young soldier: I go the way of all the earth: be thou strong therefore, and shew thyself a man; And keep the charge of the LORD thy God, to walk in his ways, to keep his statutes, and his commandments, and his judgments, and his testimonies, as it is written in the law of Moses, that thou mayest prosper in all that thou doest, and whithersoever thou turnest thyself: That the LORD may continue his word which he spake concerning me, saying, If thy children take heed to their way, to walk before me in truth with all their heart and with all their soul, there shall not fail thee (said he) a man on the throne of Israel. —1 Kings 2:2-4 David’s admonition to Solomon to “shew thyself a man” reminds one of Paul’s admonition to Timothy, his child in the faith, to become strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus (2 Timothy 2:1). One of the difficulties of Solomon’s position was his youth. Therefore, David exhorted him to be a “man” with reference to his responsibilities as king over the people. Solomon was introduced to the throne; the book of the law was placed in his hands; and David gave him the charge of the Lord his God to walk in His ways. The charge consisted of keeping the following things: (1) God’s statutes—the positive statutes of the law, (2) His commandments—the moral precepts, (3) His judgments—the laws belonging to civil government, and (4) His testimonies—the laws directing the commemoration of certain events. This charge was also a reminder of God’s covenant to motivate Solomon’s faithfulness. Hence, the charge extended further than father to son; it was also from a king to his successor. King David’s words about Joab and Shimei of 1 Kings 2:5-9 have caused a lot of controversy among “scholars.” Some have said they would like to pass by the words of David to Solomon if they could. They have difficulty harmonizing this with David’s forgiveness of Joab and Shimei. Some who consider themselves more loving and forgiving than the man after God’s own heart would never stoop to utter such language. Thus, they are Pharisees who know neither their hearts nor the justice of God. Being too weak to carry out the law, David pronounced sentence on the criminals and charged his successor to carry out its penalty. This was not vengeance but justice. (See Numbers 35:31-33; Deuteronomy 19:13.) Distinction must be made between David as the man after God’s own heart (1 Samuel 13:14) and David as the king. Although David was used by God to give many of the Psalms, scoffers have questioned how he could be a man after God’s own heart in the face of his heinous sins. But David’s life as a whole must be considered. Furthermore, David’s repentance and his inner life as revealed in the Psalms should be taken into account. Inspired Scripture gives the answer to the reason for David’s being a man after God’s heart: And when he had removed him, he raised up unto them David to be their king; to whom also he gave testimony, and said, I have found David the son of Jesse, a man after mine own heart, which shall fulfil all my will. —Acts 13:22 Hence, one who fulfills all of God’s desires is a person after His heart. Man’s custom is to fix his eyes on either a virtuous act or a heinous sin without knowing if either is upright or vicious. This can be illustrated on one hand by Noah’s drunkenness and Moses’ murder of an Egyptian, and on the other hand, by Balaam’s truthfulness and Judas’ repentance. Therefore, a life, not an act, should be taken into account. David, as the man, used Joab as his accomplice in the murder of Uriah (2 Samuel 11:14-15); and he said concerning Shimei who cursed him: ...What have I to do with you, O sons of Zeruiah? If he curses, and if the LORD has told him, Curse David, then who shall say, Why have you done so? —2 Samuel 16:10 (NASB) David knew that duty was his, and the events of providence were God’s. Therefore, he looked beyond second causes to God who works all things after the counsel of His own will. Scripture is not clear as to exactly what Joab had done that caused David as king in his charge to Solomon to say, “So act according to your wisdom and do not let his gray hair go down to Sheol in peace” (1 Kings 2:6 NASB). The following things have been suggested: (1) It was Joab’s strong language concerning David’s excessive mourning over the death of Absalom (2 Samuel 19:1-8). (2) It was Joab’s treason in turning to Adonijah who feared Solomon (1 Kings 1:41-53). Whatever Joab had done, David was speaking as king in charging his successor, and punishment was justified from the standpoint of public duty, not from private vengeance. Furthermore, recognizing that the kingdom was in peril, David made reference to Shimei whom he met at Jordan and to whom he had sworn, “...I will not put thee to death with the sword” (1 Kings 2:8). (See 2 Samuel 19:16-23.) David’s last charge to Solomon is given: Now therefore, do not let him go unpunished, for you are a wise man; and you will know what you ought to do to him, and you will bring his gray hair down to Sheol with blood. —1 Kings 2:9 (NASB) According to 1 Kings 2:36-46, Shimei added iniquity to iniquity; thus proving David correct in what he did. Sin may appear to have been confessed by one saying, as Shimei did at Jordan, “I have sinned” (2 Samuel 19:20). Instead of a true confession, the so-called confessor was only waiting for an opportunity to strike again with greater force. Following the death of Shimei, the kingdom was established in the hands of Solomon. As a type of Christ, David as a man and as the king should be distinguished. Jesus Christ as the perfect Man, who was attested by God by miracles, wonders, and signs (Acts 2:22), must be distinguished from Jesus Christ as Mediator and King. Jesus Christ, the perfect Man, gave us an example by speaking to His Father on behalf of those who were putting Him to death: ...Father forgive [aphes, aorist active imperative of aphiemi, which means cancel, remit, pardon, forgive, or tolerate] them; for they know [oidasin, perfect active indicative of oida, which means know, understand, or perceive] not what they do [poiousin, present active indicative of poieo, which means do, cause, perform, or accomplish]. —Luke 23:34 Father, forgive them, for they have not known what they are doing. —(Translation) Although this was Christ’s first cry from the cross, it was not His intercession for the transgressors prophesied by Isaiah (Isaiah 53:12). FIRST—Christ’s praying in His perfect manhood was subject to the law; therefore, He forgave wrongs done to Him and prayed for His enemies, thus leaving us an example. He asked the Father to forgive those who crucified Him in ignorance; He was not asking forgiveness for all who participated in His death. Peter explained to the Jews the miracle of the lame man who received full health by telling them he had known that they acted on the basis of ignorance when they murdered the Author of life (Acts 3:14-17). Paul went beyond the Jews’ guilt of murdering Jesus Christ when he told the Corinthians he was proclaiming God’s wisdom in a mystery which had been hidden but was predestined before the ages to the glory of the elect. Furthermore, he said the rulers of this age have not understood; for had they understood, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory (1 Corinthians 2:6-8). Therefore, in view of Christ’s knowing what was in man (John 2:23-25), He could not have interceded for those who died in their sins. The ignorance of those who murdered Jesus Christ was not their ignorance that they murdered but their ignorance concerning the Author of life whom they murdered. Hence, the subsequent salvation of some of them signifies that the Son of God asked the Father to tolerate the ignorant concerning this heinous crime for the sake of the elect among them who would be saved. Although some who crucified Christ in ignorance were later saved, He did not say that they all might believe, because that would have been indefinite. SECOND—Christ’s praying in His office as Mediator is on behalf of the elect. There is nothing indefinite about that which is effectual, and nothing can be ineffectual about Christ’s intercessory work. Many believe Christ’s first saying from the cross was a general intercession for all men that they might believe. If that were true, Christ’s intercession would be unsuccessful because all men are not believers. If Christ prayed for the forgiveness of all men, one of two absurdities will follow: (1) Either the Father does not always hear Christ, which contradicts John 11:42, or (2) all men shall be forgiven, which is also contradictory to Scripture (Matthew 7:13-14; Matthew 13:38-43; 2 Thessalonians 1:5-10; etc.). In David’s dying moments, he expressed his faith and hope of the future in terms of poetic skill. Here is an example of how the Holy Spirit took the God-given ability of the “sweet psalmist of Israel” and gave him God’s message, which the Psalmist expressed. Some think “the light of the morning” of 2 Samuel 23:4 refers to the first advent of Christ as depicted by Matthew: The people who were sitting in darkness saw a great light, And to those who were sitting in the land and shadow of death, Upon them a light dawned. From that time Jesus began to preach and say, Repent, for the kingdom of heaven [the heavens] is at hand [has approached]. —Matthew 4:16-17 (NASB) Jesus Christ said nothing to mislead the Jews from the truth that He was their Messiah. Furthermore, He did not leave them wondering about His mission to the Gentiles. (See Isaiah 42:6-7; Isaiah 60:1, Isaiah 60:3; Luke 2:32; Romans 2:19; Romans 11:11-25). David’s statement, He “Is as the light of the morning when the sun rises, A morning without clouds, When the tender grass springs out of the earth, Through sunshine after rain” (2 Samuel 23:4), goes beyond the description of Christ’s first advent. The events that are associated with “a morning without clouds” are of such nature that they can be realized only after Christ’s second advent. A comparison of David’s charge in his last days to Solomon, his successor (1 Kings 2:1-11), with his last words (2 Samuel 23:1-5) presents no problem. His last words were his dying testimony of faith and hope. His testimony looked beyond himself; therefore, his words are to be viewed both historically and prophetically. Historically, David’s last words, 2 Samuel 23:1-5, emphasize the following things: (1) David was the “son of Jesse” by nature (2 Samuel 23:1). (2) By grace he became “the man who was raised up on high” (2 Samuel 23:1). (3) “The Spirit of the LORD” spoke by him (2 Samuel 23:2). (4) His view of the Godhead was “The Spirit of the LORD,” “The God of Israel,” and “the Rock of Israel” (2 Samuel 23:2-3). (5) His hope in the future was “a morning without clouds” (2 Samuel 23:4). (6) His confession in view of stepping out of time into eternity was “Although my house be not so with God” (2 Samuel 23:5). (7) The foundation of David’s hope was “He has made an everlasting covenant with me, Ordered in all things, and secured” (2 Samuel 23:5 NASB). Prophetically, David’s last words stress the following things: (1) “The Rock of Israel...who rules over men righteously,” (2) “Who rules in the fear [reverence] of God,” (3) “Is as the light of the morning when the sun rises,” (4) “A morning without clouds,” (5) “When the tender grass springs out of the earth,” (6) “Through sunshine after rain” (2 Samuel 23:3-4 NASB). ======================================================================== CHAPTER 71: 04.1.6.2. KINGS PRECEDING DIVISION OF KINGDOM - SOLOMON ======================================================================== Chapter 6ii - Solomon Solomon succeeded David on the throne. Solomon’s love for the Lord was reciprocal (1 John 4:10); Divine love begets love. “Solomon loved the LORD, walking in the statutes of David his father...” (1 Kings 3:3). How futile for man to think he can talk himself into loving God. The origin of Divine love is not found in a sense of duty but in love itself. Hence, when the sun of Divine love melts the icy-hard heart, the stream of affection begins to flow to God who is love. If all the rocks of ice could be broken with the hammer of either law or duty, not a drop of affection would flow toward God. The “thousand burnt offerings” that Solomon offered upon “that altar” (1 Kings 3:4) reveal that he knew something of God’s holiness, the horribleness of his own sin, and the greatness of the atonement. Hence, he knew that man must look above his path in order to walk in it. Solomon’s career may be divided into four stages: (1) His purpose as a young man was to seek the Lord, who appeared to him twice (1 Kings 3:5; 1 Kings 9:2; 1 Kings 11:9). (2) In his prosperity, he attained the highest glory of any man (1 Kings 10:1-13). (3) He had the privilege of building the temple, and he made a contribution to the Scriptures. (4) In his perversion, Solomon’s heart was turned from the Lord, and his reign ended in disaster. Solomon’s greatness was confirmed by Christ’s saying of Himself, “a greater than Solomon is here” (Matthew 12:42). In addition to the kingdom being established under his reign, Solomon possessed great wisdom and built the temple. He wrote Ecclesiastes, The Song of Solomon, and some of Proverbs. Scripture states the following about Solomon: And God gave Solomon wisdom and understanding exceeding much, and largeness of heart, even as the sand that is on the sea shore. —1 Kings 4:29 Wisdom is not the same as talent, ability, sense, or prudence. All of these combined cannot give one wisdom, which is more than a high order of genius. Wisdom is the exercise of reason into which the heart enters plus a structure of the understanding, which is the product of one’s spiritual nature. The writings of Solomon have some enlightening passages on wisdom that are incomparable with modern day intellectualism, which emphasizes the abstract conceived apart from the concrete. Solomon knew by experience that intellectualism alone could never give happiness. (See Ecclesiastes 1:1-18.) Proverbs, unlike Ecclesiastes, sets forth the sufficiency of Divine wisdom. Ecclesiastes proves the world’s wisdom can never give a person the true concept of God; furthermore, the wisdom of God can never be reduced to something that conforms to the wisdom of the world. (See 1 Corinthians 1:18-31.) Therefore, four things are absolutely essential to a saving knowledge of God through Jesus Christ: (1) Divine illumination in the understanding (Ephesians 1:18), (2) God-given faith in the heart (Ephesians 2:8; Jude 1:20), (3) Godly fear in the conscience (Jeremiah 32:40; Php 2:12), and (4) heavenly love in the affections (Romans 5:5). Without enlightenment we cannot see spiritual things; without God-given faith we cannot believe His promises; without fear we cannot reverence God; without love we cannot embrace Jesus Christ who is the way, the truth, and the life. The wisdom of Solomon surpassed the wisdom of the sons of the east and Egypt (1 Kings 4:30 NASB). His wisdom was not restricted to one or two sciences, like great minds today which specialize in one of many aspects of one particular science. His God-given wisdom included such natural sciences as literature, music, forestry, zoology, ornithology, and biology (1 Kings 4:32-33). In addition to these natural sciences, Solomon’s God-given wisdom included such Biblical sciences as theology, anthropology, Christology, soteriology, and eschatology. No one is to suppose that all the proverbs contained in the book that begins with “THE proverbs of Solomon the son of David, king of Israel” (Proverbs 1:1) constitute the exclusive work of the King himself. There should be no doubt that his “three thousand proverbs” (1 Kings 4:32) are included; but internal evidence shows that some are by Agur (Proverbs 30:1) and others are the words of “...king Lemuel, the prophecy that his mother taught him” (Proverbs 31:1). These last two references do not contradict Proverbs 1:1. Solomon was the collector and editor, by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, of the proverbs of others as well as being the author of his own. The book of Proverbs is to be regarded as a practical guide of life because it contains counsels from above for conduct below. These pointed precepts for practical living are considered one of the most ancient forms of instruction. Their ability to whet the spiritual appetite for knowledge can be best expressed by the proverb, “A word fitly spoken is like apples of gold in pictures of silver” (Proverbs 25:11). The word “fitly” in Hebrew signifies “wheels,” and it has been rendered, “a word spoken on his wheels,” meaning a word spoken in proper circumstances. (See Ezekiel 1:1-28). This does not mean that grace and courtesy are to be substituted for truth and honesty. Letting our “Yea, yea; Nay, nay” (Matthew 5:37) degenerate to an artificial politeness is not what the proverb teaches. The truth portrayed in this text is that things of rare worth and beauty are words fitly spoken. King Solomon knew from experience the meaning of the proverb, “THE king’s heart is like channels of water in the hand of the LORD; He turns it wherever He wishes” (Proverbs 21:1 NASB). Kings are not only ruled but also overruled by God who “is higher than the highest” (Ecclesiastes 5:8). God does not always change the quality of the heart of a king, but He does direct his course of life for the fulfillment of His eternal purpose. Solomon was one who had experienced a change in the quality of his heart as well as the control of the course of his life. No one can read the writings of Solomon and deny that he had more than a theoretical knowledge of God. By grace, Solomon rose above human reason because he could not ascribe the things mentioned in his life to human agency apart from God’s intervention. A consideration of the three books by Solomon will reveal the sufficiency of Divine wisdom in Proverbs, the insufficiency of human wisdom in Ecclesiastes, and the object and purity of Divine love in The Song of Solomon, which stands in contrast to the “vanity of vanities” in Ecclesiastes. Christians are attracted to Christ not merely for what He has done but because of who He is in His perfection. Jesus Christ, the Wisdom of God, is represented as the personification of Wisdom in Proverbs 8:1-36, and representation climaxes with the question concerning His name: Who has ascended into heaven and descended? Who has gathered the wind in His fists? Who has wrapped the waters in His garment? Who has established all the ends of the earth? What is His name or His son’s name? Surely you know! —Proverbs 30:4 (NASB) The true mark of wisdom is one’s knowledge of his own ignorance. Although Agur was an informed philosopher, he felt that he could not by searching come to the knowledge of the sovereign God of the universe. Therefore, he was letting his friends know that true wisdom is a revelation from God. The Wisdom of Proverbs is the Old Testament representation of the incarnate Word of the New Testament (Proverbs 30:1-33). Solomon is called the Preacher seven times in the book of Ecclesiastes (Ecclesiastes 1:1-2, Ecclesiastes 1:12; Ecclesiastes 7:27; Ecclesiastes 12:8-10). “Preacher” is a proper name by which Solomon is distinguished because of his lectures of wisdom given in the congregation of the people. His message in Ecclesiastes (the name means “convoker, to call together or summon”) describes “man under the sun” (used 28 times), not “in the Son of God.” The reasons for dissatisfaction in “men under the sun” is that God “has also set eternity in their heart” (Ecclesiastes 3:11 NASB), and they are depraved. “Behold, I have found only this, that God made men upright, but they have sought out many devices” (Ecclesiastes 7:29 NASB). Having viewed these basic principles in this book where the covenant title “Jehovah” is not used, let us observe the answer to man’s problem in The Song of Solomon. We learn from Ecclesiastes that science, wisdom of the world, pleasure, materialism, religion, wealth, and morality cannot satisfy us “under the sun”; our hearts are too large for our objects because the world—eternity—has been set in our hearts (Ecclesiastes 3:11). We learn from The Song of Solomon that the Object of our faith and love is infinite; therefore, the Son of Man, in whom the Godhead dwells bodily, is too large for the heart in which eternity resides. This is the reason that Jesus Christ alone satisfies. The Song of Solomon is greater than all the other songs he wrote (1 Kings 4:32). The theme of The Song of Solomon is a consciousness of Christ’s love which makes the heart desire to please Him. When Christ’s love is valued more than all earthly joys, its personal intimacy will be experienced. There is no sensual love in “THE song of songs, which is Solomon’s” (Song of Solomon 1:1). The natural man can neither understand nor give a true interpretation of this book. It stands in contrast with the “vanity of vanities” because it is the “holy of holies” of Solomon’s songs. This book is a revelation of the chaste and virtuous love which no grandeur can dazzle and no compliment can seduce. The Song presents three levels of love: (1) The young believer thinks chiefly of Jesus Christ as his and of Christ’s being in some way for his pleasure: “My beloved is mine, and I am his...” (Song of Solomon 2:16). (2) Christ’s ownership takes first place in the believer who has grown to some extent in grace and knowledge of Christ: “I am my beloved’s, and my beloved is mine...” (Song of Solomon 6:3). (3) The word “mine” is dropped in the assurance that belonging to Christ includes all: “I am my beloved’s, and his desire is toward me” (Song of Solomon 7:10). Thus the mature believer understands that Christ’s ownership swallows up every other thought. Every Christian can know by these three Scriptures the level of love on which he stands before God. Solomon purposed to build a house for the name of the Lord his God because the Lord had spoken to David: ...Your son, whom I will set on your throne in your place, he will build the house for My name. —1 Kings 5:5 (NASB) God was pleased to accept the sincere purpose of David’s heart. He accepted David’s will for the deed, as He accepted Abraham’s willingness to offer up Isaac. David’s motive was right or God would not have said, “...you did well that it was in your heart” (1 Kings 8:18 NASB). Observe that the temple was not built for the Lord but for the name of the Lord. Pagan temples are intended by their builders for the actual residence of their gods, but Solomon knew better: But will God indeed dwell on the earth? Behold, heaven and the highest heaven cannot contain Thee, how much less this house which I have built. —1 Kings 8:27 (NASB) A place where God manifests Himself to man is the basic idea of a temple. This is demonstrated by the Shekinah, the Person of Jesus Christ, and the holy character of Christians. (See 1 Kings 6:1-38; 1 Kings 7:1-51; 1 Kings 8:1-66; John 1:14; 1 Corinthians 6:19-20.) Solomon’s statement in 1 Kings 8:27 indicates that he recognized the omnipresence of God. The spiritual dimension is outside of human reason. There is existence beyond the physical as we know it. Since God is spiritual in nature, He is everywhere present and cannot be restricted by material nature. A material body may be dissolved, but the Godhead is incapable of dissolution. God’s spiritual nature cannot be divided; therefore, He is entire in every place: Am I a God who is near, declares the LORD, And not a God far off? Can a man hide himself in hiding places, So I do not see him? declares the LORD. Do I not fill the heavens and the earth? declares the LORD. —Jeremiah 23:23-24 (NASB) The absolute perfection of the Godhead cannot be restricted because limitation is imperfection. For example, the Being of the absolutely perfect God must with regard to time be eternal, with regard to space be omnipresent, with regard to power be omnipotent, and with regard to wisdom be omniscient. If the Godhead is not always existent, the Godhead never was existent; if the Divine Being is not everywhere at the same time, He has no being anywhere; if the Divine being could not manifest His power everywhere at once, He does not exist. Power without existence cannot be a reality. The Divine Being who wisely governs all actions must be eternally present with omnipresence and omnipotence because if the Divine Being can be absent at any time, He may be absent at all times. The period between the exodus and the beginning of the building of the temple has been a stumbling block to many. The problem is the 480 years mentioned in 1 Kings 6:1 and the 573 years recorded in the five periods in Israel’s national history (Judges 3:8-31; Judges 4:1-24; Judges 5:1-31; Judges 6:1-40; Judges 7:1-25; Judges 8:1-35; Judges 9:1-57; Judges 10:1-18; Judges 11:1-40; Judges 12:1-15; Judges 13:1). The five periods mentioned in Judges are punishments by God for the evil Israel had done: (1) God sold the sons of Israel into the hands of Chushan-rishathaim, king of Mesopotamia for eight years (Judges 3:8). (2) Israel served Eglon, the king of Moab, for 18 years (Judges 3:12-14). (3) They served Jabin, king of Canaan, for 20 years (Judges 4:2-3). (4) They served Midian for seven years (Judges 6:1). (5) They served the Philistines for 40 years (Judges 13:1). The solution to the problem is the uncounted 93 years that Israel lived out of God’s will. The sins of those years were remembered until they were confessed, but these were wasted years and not counted in God’s spiritual chronology (1 Kings 6:1). Those who wonder about Israel’s being sold into the hands of the Philistines and the Ammonites of Judges 10:7; Judges 10:9 must consider that this affected only the tribes “beyond Jordan” and did not suspend Israel’s national position. In the study of the temple, many want to stop with the assembly of Christ as the spiritual temple (Ephesians 2:22; 1 Peter 2:4-5). However, we must look at the temples in their historical sequence. (1) The first was the tabernacle erected by Moses. This was the traveling tent of meeting of God in the wilderness. (2) The temple built by Solomon followed the same floor plan of the tabernacle, but it was more magnificent. It was the center of worship for centuries, in spite of the apostate form of worship introduced by Jeroboam (1 Kings 12:1-33). When the temple was destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar, the service in Israel was discontinued for 70 years. (3) Following Israel’s return from captivity, the temple was rebuilt by Zerubbabel. This was the temple that Jesus Christ as a boy entered (Luke 2:46), and from which He later drove out the money changers and as a Prophet taught (John 2:14-17). The curtain in this same temple was rent (Matthew 27:51; Hebrews 9:8-9; Hebrews 10:19-20). This temple was destroyed by Titus in 70 A.D. (4) The temple of the body of Christ was the earthly tent in which the fullness of the Godhead is dwelling in Him bodily (John 1:14; John 2:19; Colossians 2:9). (5) The assembly that Christ continues building is the spiritual temple (Ephesians 2:22). (6) The temple shall be rebuilt (Ezekiel 40:1-49; Ezekiel 41:1-26; Ezekiel 42:1-20; Ezekiel 43:1-27; Ezekiel 44:1-31; Ezekiel 45:1-25; Ezekiel 46:1-24; Ezekiel 47:1-23; Ezekiel 48:1-35). (7) The heavenly Jerusalem is represented as a temple (Revelation 21:1-27; Revelation 22:1-21). The last two references to the temple are associated with Israel in the future (Ezekiel 40:1-49; Ezekiel 41:1-26; Ezekiel 42:1-20; Ezekiel 43:1-27; Ezekiel 44:1-31; Ezekiel 45:1-25; Ezekiel 46:1-24; Ezekiel 47:1-23; Ezekiel 48:1-35) and the future eternal kingdom (Revelation 21:1-27; Revelation 22:1-21). The kingdom will be material. Those who spiritualize the last two references to the temple and literalize the others are not consistent. Scripture teaches the following: The heavens are the heavens of the LORD; But the earth He has given to the sons of men. —Psalms 115:16 (NASB) Blessed are the gentle [meek or humble], for they shall inherit the earth. —Matthew 5:5 (NASB) But according to His promise we are looking for new heavens and a new earth, in which righteousness dwells. —2 Peter 3:13 (NASB) And thou hast made them to be a kingdom and priests to our God; and they will reign upon the earth. —Revelation 5:10 (NASB) AND I saw a new heaven and a new earth.... —Revelation 21:1 (NASB) Scripture nowhere states that our final abode with God will be “up in heaven.” Where is heaven? The common reply to that question is that heaven is up. But where is up? What is above our heads at noon is beneath our feet at midnight. Was Christ looking in the same direction during the day when He took the five loaves and two fish and looked “up” toward heaven as He was on the night of His betrayal when He lifted “up” His eyes to heaven (Luke 9:16; John 17:1)? If heaven were in a fixed locality, we would have to know behind what group of stars or on what planet it is located in order to know when to look toward heaven. It would have to be in a certain position before we could look up toward heaven. We must understand that the heaven of Holy Scripture is always up to Christians. Therefore, we do not regard heaven as a topographical term. Thomas was not told where heaven was located, but he was told the way to heaven: Thomas said to Him, Lord, we do not know where You are going, how do we know the way? Jesus said to him [Thomas], I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father, but through Me. —John 14:5-6 (NASB) Paul was transported to that blessed sphere, but he was not allowed to give information pertaining to its locality (2 Corinthians 12:1-4). The location of the third heaven has never been revealed. The term “heavens” suggests that the true direction of the elect is always upward. Moral and spiritual excellence are expressed in terms of altitude. We naturally use such expressions as “lofty purpose,” “high resolve,” or “elevated views.” Conversely, we naturally use such expressions as “base passions,” “degraded character,” and “stooping to do it.” Since the Greek noun ouranos is defined by Greek lexicons as the heights above, the upper regions, the vaulted expanse of the skies, the region above, the seat of an order of things eternal and consummatively perfect, where God dwells, etc., we can say the true life is a perpetual soaring. While we do not attempt to be wise above that which is written, we should attempt with great earnestness to be wise in that which has been written. Like God’s glory, heaven cannot be interpreted, but it can be experienced. However, one must realize that spiritual or heavenly blessings cannot be enjoyed in a worldly atmosphere. Although heaven is not a fixed location, we are not left without descriptive terms denoting what heaven really means. The Father is there (Matthew 6:9). Christ came from there (John 3:13). Christ ascended back there (John 6:62; Acts 1:9-11). The Holy Spirit came from there (John 16:1-33; Acts 2:1-47). Our citizenship is there (Php 3:20). Our treasure is there (Matthew 6:19-20). Our inheritance is there (1 Peter 1:4). Our reward is there (Matthew 5:12). We are expectantly waiting for Christ to come from there (1 Thessalonians 1:10; Titus 2:13). But the heaven as it is now is not the final dwelling place of the saints. The heaven of the future is always spoken of as “the new heaven and the new earth.” Therefore, they shall form one sphere of life, worship, and service. Since this is a Biblical fact, how can people teach that heaven is to be viewed as merely a spiritual state without a particular place? There is nothing in Scripture to justify our singing, “When I can read my title clear to mansions in the skies.” Christ has gone to prepare a place for His own (John 14:2), and we are not left in doubt as to what part of the universe that place will be where His own shall reside. (See Psalms 37:9; Psalms 37:11; Psalms 37:22; Psalms 37:29; Isaiah 65:1-25; Isaiah 66:1-24; 2 Peter 3:13; Revelation 21:1-27; Revelation 22:1-21.) As to the saints’ future in the eternal kingdom, we know that we shall never be infinite, but we shall always be in the presence of the infinite God and Savior. As new persons with new names singing a new song, we shall reside eternally in a new heaven and a new earth, which form a new sphere for our eternal habitation. (See Ephesians 2:15; Revelation 5:9; Revelation 21:1.) Please note that Scripture goes from the plural heavens, which shall be purified, to the singular new heaven subsequent to the purification (2 Peter 3:13; Revelation 21:1). Hence, the heaven and earth becoming one sphere of habitation represents God and man being brought together in the highest relationship between the Redeemer and the redeemed. At the dedication of the temple, all the men of Israel assembled themselves to King Solomon (1 Kings 8:1-66). The King, rather than the priest who took the secondary place, dedicated the temple. Although Solomon was not subject to the priest, he was subject to God. Both king and priest were to yield to the prophet, because the prophet revealed the will of the supreme Ruler to both. One of the great studies of the times of the kings is the role of the prophet. In addition to the kingship and priesthood, a prophetical office ran parallel with the kingship from the first to the last king. The Queen of Sheba, hearing about the fame (report or tidings) of Solomon’s wisdom, desired to have some heartfelt questions answered (1 Kings 10:1-13). Having seen in Christ’s pedigree God’s election and the quickening of those elected in such cases as Rahab and Ruth, we now see the same sovereign God working in the heart of the Queen of Sheba when she heard of Solomon’s fame. She had such an impelling desire to speak with him about all that was in her heart that she traveled a thousand miles to test him with difficult questions. Since no person can ask another’s questions, she could not be content with the report by another. What is distance when a person has questions concerning the wisdom of God? Therefore, the Queen was moved by the strongest and loftiest of motives to undertake her journey. This had to be true when one royal person (the Queen of Sheba) was desiring to stand before another royal person (the King of Israel whom God loved) and speak with him about all that was in her heart. As recorded in 1 Kings 10:1-29, the things to be considered concerning the Queen are what she saw, said, and did. The Queen saw (1) Solomon’s wisdom (1 Kings 10:4-5), (2) the house that he had built (1 Kings 10:4), (3) his servants (1 Kings 10:5), and (4) his ascent (1 Kings 10:5). Her reaction was demonstrated in her words: (1) “It was a true report that I heard in mine own land of thy acts [words] and of thy wisdom” (1 Kings 10:6). (2) “...Behold, the half was not told me: thy wisdom and prosperity exceedeth the fame which I heard” (1 Kings 10:7). (3) “Happy are thy men, happy are these thy servants, which stand continually before thee, and that hear thy wisdom” (1 Kings 10:8). The Queen gave the following things: (1) She gave the praise of her lips—“Blessed be the LORD thy God, which delighted in thee, to set thee on the throne of Israel...” (1 Kings 10:9). (2) She gave the gifts of her substance—“And she gave the king an hundred and twenty talents of gold, and of spices very great store, and precious stones: there came no more such abundance of spices as these which the queen of Sheba gave to king Solomon” (1 Kings 10:10). What lesson do we learn from the Queen of Sheba? All who are born of God desire to come to Jesus Christ who is greater than Solomon in all of the following ways: (1) In birth, Solomon came by natural generation. Jesus Christ came by supernatural generation. He was not only the source of David, but He was also David’s Lord (Revelation 22:16). (2) In character, Solomon worshipped God; but he fell into sin. Jesus Christ, the impeccable Savior, is worshipped because He knew no sin, and He did no sin. (3) In substance, Solomon was a type of Christ; but a type is only a shadow. Christ is the substance of all the shadows. (4) In his claims, Solomon was a wise man. Jesus Christ is the wisdom of God. The first lesson the Christian learns is that Christ is the Wisdom of God, a Wisdom hidden until God reveals Him to the elect. The apprehension of God’s Wisdom makes one not only independent of man’s wisdom but also infinitely superior to it. However, this makes a believer humble, not proud. Thus, the Christian is both bold and humble; and this is something the wisdom of the world can neither explain nor understand. (5) In works, those of Solomon were the marvel of the world; but they cannot compare with the works of Jesus Christ. (6) In wealth, Solomon possessed things of great material value, but what was that in comparison to Christ who is the Heir of all things? (7) In his kingdom, Solomon had a kingdom that included one nation, was circumscribed to one country, was divided at his death, and went into decay. Jesus Christ shall be King of kings and Lord of lords. The kingdom’s geographical bounds shall cover heaven and earth; it will never be divided; and it shall be eternal. (Study 1 Kings 10:1-29 and 2 Chronicles 9:1-31.) In reciprocation for her words, actions, and deeds, King Solomon gave “the queen of Sheba all her desire, whatsoever she asked, beside that which Solomon gave her of his royal bounty” (1 Kings 10:13). A person’s true character is indicated by his desires. Two of Solomon’s proverbs must be considered at this point of study: (1) “The desire of the righteous is only good...” (Proverbs 11:23). The righteous man is not one who is righteous in his own eyes (Proverbs 30:12; Luke 18:9-12), but he has been made righteous by God (2 Corinthians 5:21; Php 3:6-9). The desire of the person made righteous by God is good, because it comes from the heart motivated by grace. A person’s action can be counterfeited, but not his desire motivated by grace. Hence, the desire motivated by grace may be compared to one praying in the will of God. (2) As praying in the will of God assures an answer (1 John 5:14), “the desire of the righteous shall be granted” (Proverbs 10:24). Paul’s true character was demonstrated by his expressing no desire to have his circumstances changed (Php 4:11-13). When one makes circumstances an excuse for his lack of devotedness to Christ, he is motivated by the flesh rather than the Spirit of grace. The righteous person motivated by the Spirit of grace knows self must die. The Epistle to the Philippians starts at the level of Galatians 2:20. The “I’s” and “me’s” of Philippians are different from those of Romans 7:15-25. In Philippians, it was no longer what happened to Paul but the desire that in whatever happened to him, Christ would be magnified. (See Acts 20:24; 2 Corinthians 4:10-12.) May the Spirit teach us the meaning of our God fulfilling our every need according to His riches in glory in Christ Jesus (Php 4:19). This is that “royal bounty” which comes from Him who said, “A greater than Solomon is here” (Matthew 12:42). The glory of the Solomonic period was short-lived. The King was the cause of his own failure. While God conferred many blessings and privileges on Solomon, He never conferred the privilege to sin. Solomon’s sins may be classified in three categories: (1) Unholy alliances were a contributing factor to his downfall. He loved many strange women (1 Kings 11:1). He married not only Pharaoh’s daughter but also many other strange women of the Moabites, Ammonites, Edomites, Zidonians, and Hittites. These “foreign women” turned him aside (Nehemiah 13:26 NASB). (2) Solomon disobeyed the law of God by multiplying horses, taking many wives, amassing to himself silver and gold, serving other gods, and making offerings on high places (Deuteronomy 12:3; Deuteronomy 17:16-17). (3) Solomon gave his heart to worldliness. All of that which is under the sun cannot satisfy (Ecclesiastes); therefore, we should hold all that we have loosely in order that it may not turn away our hearts. Solomon’s adversaries were both foreign and domestic. His foreign enemies were Hadad, the Edomite (1 Kings 11:14-22), and Rezon, who reigned over Syria (1 Kings 11:23-25). His domestic enemy was Jeroboam, the son of Nebat, Solomon’s servant. Jeroboam, like most persons who are taken in and helped, became unthankful and disloyal. However, Solomon’s own disobedient life ensured trouble within and without the home. The record states that God stirred up Hadad and Rezon. Their restlessness was sent from God. This does not mean that God infused malice in them. The malice was theirs by depravity, but God often uses those with whom His people have had to deal harshly as His executors of discipline to punish His people for their defection. In his old age, Solomon added to his other transgressions by an insane passion for building palaces for himself and his heathen queens and temples for their gods. (1 Kings 11:1-8). Hence, the people were burdened with taxes (1 Kings 12:1-5). God became angry with Solomon because of his sin (1 Kings 11:9). Opportunities cannot be neglected with impunity. Neglected duties aggravate God’s anger against His people which is not only His aversion to sin but also His punishment for sin. He raised up Jeroboam from within Solomon’s house to punish him. God did not judge Solomon without previous warning (1 Kings 11:11). Chastisement is the fruit of God’s displeased love. A parent chastens his child through displeased love. Jeroboam would not wait for God to give him the kingdom, but he sought to get it. Man’s nature is so depraved that he will use Divine promises and the daily gifts of God for the accomplishment and pleasure of his own desires and thus degrade the gifts and promises of God. The sin of today becomes the suffering of tomorrow and tomorrow, because tomorrow never comes. Governmental forgiveness may continue throughout one’s life. The truth that the sword never passed from David’s house should be a warning to every child of God. The way of the transgressor is hard. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 72: 04.1.6.3. KINGS PRECEDING DIVISION KINGDOM -REHOBOAM ======================================================================== Chapter 6iii - Rehoboam As soon as Solomon died there was a division in the kingdom, which had been united for 80 years under David and his son. The King’s failures clearly led to Israel’s turning from the Lord and going into idolatry. The Prophet Ahijah told Jeroboam, Solomon’s servant, that God would rend the kingdom and give him ten tribes (1 Kings 11:28-33). Only Judah and Benjamin would be left to Solomon’s son, Rehoboam. When Solomon died, Rehoboam (spelled Roboam in Matthew 1:7) assumed that the throne was his by the right of succession. He thought he could pass to the throne unchallenged. Kingship to him meant being served rather than serving. He soon learned differently. The crisis, which resulted from the people being bled to death under the leadership of Solomon, was more than Rehoboam could handle. Rehoboam resorted to politics to solve the impending problem. Politics, however, is too often the game of ambition rather than a sphere of service. The old heathen idea of forcible dominion is still largely governing politics. It carries the idea that to be great is to receive much service without rendering any. Hence, the politician too often forgets that nothing in creation is self-serving and every element is intended to serve another. Rehoboam left the impression with the people that he would give due consideration to their request. Therefore, he consulted with the counselors of his father, but he did not heed their counsel. As far as he was concerned, he was king; and the people had no right but what he chose to give them. After consulting with the old men and refusing their counsel, Rehoboam turned to the young men. When respect for age and experience is refused, the foundation for a sound moral character is jeopardized. The advice of the young men reflected a spirit of arbitrariness; “...thus shalt thou say unto them, My little finger shall be thicker than my father’s loins” (1 Kings 12:10). This is the same as saying, “Solomon was only a child, but I am a man.” The people fulfilled Ahijah’s prophecy by refusing to hearken to Rehoboam (1 Kings 12:16; 1 Kings 12:19). Rehoboam was the first king following the death of his father, Solomon. He began his seventeen year reign contrary to the true spirit of a leader defined by Christ: “For even the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister...” (Mark 10:45). The strength of a leader is service for and sympathy with the people he rules. Pride led Rehoboam to think that his father was only a child, but he was a man. Hence, he increased the burdens his father had inflicted on the people. Jeroboam was present with the people when they all came at Rehoboam’s appointment (1 Kings 12:12). Jeroboam was a talented young man who quickly rose in Solomon’s service. He had great influence with the people; therefore, he saw what his chances were to eventually become king. When the people saw that Rehoboam hearkened not to their request, they called Jeroboam and made him king over Israel (1 Kings 12:20). This left only Judah and Benjamin to stand with Rehoboam. Seated firmly on the throne, Jeroboam faced the opportunity of his life. He failed because he chose the path of expediency rather than the path of righteousness. This is always the path of a depraved heart. The causes of his failures were seductive. They seemed to be justified by the soundest maxims of governmental policy. He reasoned that having the center of the national religion in a foreign city, especially the chief city of the country from which his subjects had come, would never work. The old ties might prove too strong, and religious principles might overcome political considerations. Hence, Jeroboam, with whom expedience took the place of principle, made the fatal mistake of setting up politics before righteousness. The King, Jeroboam, made use of man-made religion to serve his political ambitions. Israel sacrificed her religious principles for her love of ease. A servile priesthood (not of Levi) aided in the idolatry of the people. The King chose his priests where he pleased (1 Kings 12:25-33). Jeroboam manifested his man-made religion. He made two calves of gold and set one in Bethel and other in Dan, so the people would not return to Jerusalem for worship. He made a house (temple) and made priests of the basest of people. Jeroboam ordained a feast like the feast in Judah and offered on the altar he had devised in his own heart and set up in Bethel. There is a lesson for our day in Jeroboam’s religious actions. Religious leaders are chosen today outside the prescribed requirements of Scripture. Hence, man-made religion is manifested in the following ways: (1) The kind of ministers who serve are men-pleasers. (2) They preach doctrine that will tickle the ears of their followers. (3) The kind of service they render is with the incorrect motives of personal or denominational success. (4) The masters they serve are their own self-appointed or denominational programs. The division of the kingdom was the result of Solomon’s sin and Rehoboam’s folly. God was not the author of either Solomon’s sin or Rehoboam’s folly, but He directed both for the accomplishment of His purpose. This is understood in the same sense as the crucifixion of Christ (Acts 2:23). God orders all the disorders for the fulfillment of His own purpose. He often uses evil to punish evil (Isaiah 45:7). God’s overruling providence is demonstrated by a wheel within a wheel (Ezekiel 1:16). Ezekiel’s vision by the river Chebar was for the purpose of encouragement. Hence, the vision of the cherubim and the wheels was designed to correct his despondent mood and to assure him that God was keeping watch over His own in a dark hour of Israel’s history. Their lives had not passed out of God’s control. Above both the cherubim and the wheels, the prophet saw the glory of God. The decline took a sharp turn with the northern kingdom under Jeroboam and the southern kingdom under Rehoboam. “AND it came to pass, when Rehoboam had established the kingdom, and had strengthened himself, he forsook the law of the LORD, and all Israel with him” (2 Chronicles 12:1). Neither fenced cities nor worldly wisdom can protect a ruler who is disloyal to truth. Deterioration follows those who ignore the objective standard of God. Departure from God always brings defeat; therefore, God used Shishak, King of Egypt, to go up against Jerusalem and carry away the “shields of gold” which Solomon had made (2 Chronicles 12:9). Rehoboam’s replacement of the “shields of gold” with “shields of brass” demonstrated that he wanted to replace the appearance of principle with something of lesser value. People turning from right principles is bad, but the same people trying to repair the loss with something of lesser value is worse. Professing Christendom is doing the same thing today by “Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof...” (2 Timothy 3:5). Persons dedicated to God never bring Him brass for gold. On the other hand, persons going away from God can never bring gold to God. Not one of the nineteen kings who reigned in Israel (the northern kingdom) from the time of Jeroboam until Israel’s captivity in Assyria, during the reign of Hoshea, was a good king. There were some good prophets during this period of 241 years, but their messages fell on deaf ears. Judah had nineteen kings over a period of 393 years before their captivity in Babylon. Athaliah, the daughter of Ahab and Jezebel, who was Jehoram’s wife, usurped the throne for six years. The eight good kings among the nineteen kings of Judah were Asa, Jehoshaphat, Jehoash, Amaziah, Azariah, Jotham, Hezekiah, and Josiah. Even though there were some bright spots during the 393 years, there was a continual decline until the Babylonian captivity. The messages of the prophets went forth, but the times of revival were short-lived. Therefore, the general decline continued until there was nothing but judgment left. But they mocked the messengers of God, and despised his words, and misused his prophets, until the wrath of the LORD arose against his people, till there was no remedy [healing]. —2 Chronicles 36:16 The judgment of God in Babylon was terrible, but it was not final. God uses rulers for the benefit of His people. He raises up men not only from among but also outside of His people to lead and instruct. But the Lord also raises up men not belonging to His people to work on behalf of them. Through the influence of Esther and Mordecai, Ahasuerus preserved the Jews. Through the intervention of Joseph, God made Pharaoh the preserver of His people. The same thing is seen during the reign of Cyrus, Artaxerxes, and others during the time of the reformation. One thing for sure is that the Spirit of God is in the world preparing His people for the coming kingdom. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 73: 04.1.7.1. FOUR KINGS IN JUDAH - ASA ======================================================================== FOUR GOOD KINGS IN JUDAH SUBSEQUENT TO THE DIVISION OF THE KINGDOM Chapter 7i - Asa Although Asa was the third king after Solomon, he was the first good king of Judah subsequent to the division of the kingdom. Asa reigned in Judah during the last two years of the reign of Jeroboam in Israel (1 Kings 15:9-10). His reign lasted 41 years. His contemporaries who reigned during this period in the northern kingdom were Nadab, Baasha, Elah, Zimri, Omri, and Ahab. Asa’s father, Abijam, son of Rehoboam, reigned three years (I King 14:31-15:2). The name Abijam in I Kings is recorded as Abijah in 2 Chronicles 13:1-22 (spelled Abia in Matthew 1:7). Abijah is believed to be his real name, while the name Abijam is a form of the name. Due to the religious feelings of the Jews, they would not allow the word Jah, a construction of Jehovah, to be retained as an element in a bad king. An illustration of this feeling is also seen in the change of Beth-el (the name means “house of God”) to Beth-aven (the name means “house of vanity”). The change of the name from Abijah (the name means “my father is Jah”) to Abijam (the name means “father of the sea”) is understandable: And he walked in all the sins of his father, which he had done before him: and his heart was not perfect with the LORD his God, as the heart of David his father. —1 Kings 15:3 As wars had continued between Rehoboam and Jeroboam, war between Abijah and Jeroboam followed the death of Rehoboam (2 Chronicles 13:1-22). Although Judah was outnumbered two to one—eight hundred thousand to four hundred thousand—God used Abijah to punish Jeroboam. The religion of Jeroboam was idolatrous (1 Kings 12:25-33), and Abijah was also evil. But for the sake of the good people in Judah, God gave them victory over Jeroboam and his army. The world’s philosophy is “might is right,” but to God’s people “right is might.” Judah’s enemies are described as rebels against appointed authority, vain men, children of Belial, and those who strengthened themselves (2 Chronicles 13:6-9). Abijah had made a great speech (2 Chronicles 13:4-12), but while Jeroboam was listening, his men were preparing for an attack from the rear. Although Abijah was for peace, Jeroboam was for war. The record states that God smote Jeroboam and all Israel before Abijah and Judah. Thus, Abijah and his army slew five hundred thousand chosen men of Israel. Judah prevailed because they relied on the Lord God of their fathers (2 Chronicles 13:13-20). Asa’s mother (grandmother), Maachah, the daughter of Abishalom, was an idolater (2 Chronicles 15:16). In doing that which was right in the eyes of the Lord, Asa “...took away the sodomites out of the land, and removed all the idols that his fathers had made” (1 Kings 15:12). He also removed his mother (grandmother) from being queen because she had made an idol in a grove. He not only cut down her idol but also crushed and burned it at the brook Kidron (2 Chronicles 15:16). Relatives did not stand in Asa’s way when it came to serving God. This principle is the same as that taught by Jesus Christ. (See Matthew 10:32-38.) Tearing down is insufficient. True service must also set up something constructive in the place of that which has been destroyed.Hence, both negative and positive actions are necessary. One must not misapply the perfection of Asa: “...nevertheless the heart of Asa was perfect [blameless] all his days” (2 Chronicles 15:17). When the heart is right before God, the man is counted perfect (blameless). This is not talking about state or condition. It is referring to Asa’s standing or position before God. The state of one’s heart cannot always be determined by external symptoms; conversely, the state of the heart may be unsound even though its unsoundness is not manifested by outward actions. Asa’s life proves that a person may be wholly devoted to the Lord and yet have sin. (See 1 John 1:8-10.) It is a Biblical fact that God does not see sins as condemnatory where He sees grace. Asa’s sins were not seen because they were covered by the mercyseat, and this was manifested by his actions. What we see in Asa is opposite to what we see in Jehu: But Jehu took no heed [observed not] to walk in the law of the LORD God of Israel with all his heart: for he departed not from the sins of Jeroboam, which made Israel to sin. —2 Kings 10:31 Asa not only did what was right in the eyes of the Lord his God, but he also prepared for war before he entered into battle (2 Chronicles 14:6-8). He began as follows: [He] commanded Judah to seek the LORD God of their fathers and to observe the law and the commandment. He also removed the high places and the incense altars from all the cities of Judah. And the kingdom was undisturbed under him. —2 Chronicles 14:4-5 (NASB) Preparation for this begins with people being right with God. Since Asa ascended the throne in a crisis situation in the nation’s history, this first good King since the division of the kingdom must seek to rectify the transgression of both his father and grandfather, Abijah and Rehoboam. If Judah had followed their path, the southern kingdom would have gone the way of Israel. However, God in His faithfulness to the unconditional covenant made with David, raised up Asa to keep alive the promise: Judah, your brothers shall praise you; your hand shall be on the neck of your enemies; your father’s sons shall bow down to you. Judah is a lion’s whelp; From the prey, my son, you have gone up. He couches, he lies down as a lion, And as a lion, who dares rouse him up? The scepter shall not depart from Judah, Nor the ruler’s staff from between his feet, Until Shiloh comes, And to him shall be the obedience of the peoples. —Genesis 49:8-10 (NASB) Judah becomes a gathering place for God’s elect people. This is presently realized in the assembly meetings, but these are only a foretaste of the great gathering and obedience of the future, expressed by Paul: With a view to an administration suitable to the fulness of the times, that is, the summing up of all things in Christ, things in the heavens and things upon the earth. In Him. —Ephesians 1:10 (NASB) Since Christians are soldiers, we must be prepared for battle if we expect to win the war over our enemies. In the beginning of Ephesians, the believers are described as chosen, predestined, adopted, redeemed, forgiven, sealed, and seated in the heavenlies in Christ Jesus; but at the conclusion, the Ephesian believers were to stand (Ephesians 6:11-17). Christians have three great foes; they are to flee the world and the flesh but fight the enemies of truth. According to Ephesians, the Christian walk merges into a warfare. The Epistle begins with all spiritual blessings in the heavenlies in Christ and closes with all spiritual enemies in the same position. Positionally, Christians are victorious; but conditionally, we may be defeated. For conditional victory, we must fight in order to win; but it can never be negotiated. As soon as Asa prepared Judah for war, Zerah, the Ethiopian, came out against them with a million men and three hundred chariots (2 Chronicles 14:9). The odds were so great (580,000 against 1,000,000) that all Asa could do was to cry unto the Lord his God: LORD, there is no one besides Thee to help in the battle between the powerful and those who have no strength; so help us, O LORD our God, for we trust in Thee, and in Thy name have come against this multitude. O LORD, Thou art our God; let not man prevail against Thee. So the LORD routed the Ethiopians before Asa and before Judah, and the Ethiopians fled. —2 Chronicles 14:11-12 (NASB) The world says that “self-reliance” is the conquering virtue, but Scripture teaches that “self-distrust” is the condition of all spiritual victories. Courageous advance should follow self-distrust. Therefore, it is good when self-distrust leads to confidence, but it is better when self-distrust and confidence in God lead to spiritual courage. Asa was warned by the prophet Azariah (2 Chronicles 15:1-7). The prophet admonished Asa and his army concerning their duty after so great a victory: ...Listen to me, Asa, and all Judah and Benjamin: the LORD is with you when you are with Him. And if you seek Him, He will let you find Him; but if you forsake Him, He will forsake you. —2 Chronicles 15:2 (NASB) Following this warning, Azariah used Israel, the northern kingdom, as an illustration of a people forsaking God: And for many days Israel was without the true God and without a teaching priest and without law. But in their distress they turned to the LORD God of Israel, and they sought Him, and He let them find Him. And in those times there was no peace to him who went out or to him who came in, for many disturbances afflicted all the inhabitants of the lands. And nation was crushed by nation, and city by city, for God troubled them with every kind of distress. But you, be strong and do not lose courage, for there is reward for your work. —2 Chronicles 15:3-7 (NASB) The victorious Asa became the bribing and defeated Asa (2 Chronicles 16:1-14). Having done his best at the first, Asa could not say that the conclusion of his life was better than the beginning. Hence, men at their best are but men. The greatest faith of yesterday will not suffice today. One must be experiencing fellowship with God that results in his going from faith to faith, strength to strength, and glory to glory to be victorious. The good King Asa failed to take his problem to the Lord when Baasha, King of Israel, came against Judah, as he did when Zerah came to Mareshah. His actions showed that Asa was not completely divorced from confidence in the flesh even after the victory over the Ethiopians and his covenant to seek the Lord God. Resorting to fleshly schemes is always disastrous because the sad fruit of such schemes will soon manifest itself. Asa used bribery to get Ben-hadad, King of Syria, to break treaty with Baasha, King of Israel. A believer teaching an unbeliever to be untrue may be considered good politics, but it was a black mark against one who had entered into a covenant to seek the Lord God with all his heart and soul (2 Chronicles 15:12). According to 2 Timothy 3:3, truce breaking is a sin. It has been said that a political ambassador is a person who is sent abroad to lie for his country. Consider the tricks, plots, deceptions, and intrigues of political diplomacy! Was Asa foolish enough to think that all was fair in war? God sent His prophet Hanani (the name means “my grace—gracious”) to warn Asa: ...Because thou hast relied on the king of Syria, and not relied on the LORD thy God, therefore is the host of the king of Syria escaped out of thine hand. Were not the Ethiopians and the Lubims a huge host, with very many chariots and horsemen? yet, because thou didst rely on the LORD, he delivered them into thine hand. For the eyes of the LORD run to and fro throughout the whole earth, to shew himself strong in the behalf of them whose heart is perfect [completely His] toward him. Herein thou hast done foolishly: therefore from henceforth thou shalt have wars. —2 Chronicles 16:7-9 The prophet showed that God sees the whole of a thing, whereas we see but a little of anything. God’s government is practically denied when we walk contrary to the checks of providence, or when we lean on the arm of the flesh. The good King Asa did something that Rehoboam, the bad King who was his grandfather, did not do. Rehoboam did not put the prophet Shemaiah in prison, but Asa became so angry with Hanani for telling him the truth that he put him in prison. (See 2 Chronicles 16:6-10.) Asa was not only enraged at Hanani the prophet, but he also oppressed some of the people. When Asa failed to listen to the prophet, God sent another messenger to the King in the form of a mortal disease which lasted two years before he died. During those two years, Asa sought not the Lord but the physicians (2 Chronicles 16:12). The King fell into his former sin of creature confidence. He was not wrong to seek physicians, but he was wrong to seek them without first seeking the Lord. The saddest thing about Asa is that during this time he never sought the Lord with whom he made a covenant to seek Him with all his heart and soul. Therefore, the Lord took him after two years of suffering for his sin; and his acts—first and last—are written in the book of the Kings of Judah and Israel. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 74: 04.1.7.2. FOUR KINGS IN JUDAH - JEHOSHAPHAT ======================================================================== FOUR GOOD KINGS IN JUDAH SUBSEQUENT TO THE DIVISION OF THE KINGDOM Chapter 7ii - Jehoshaphat Jehoshaphat (the name means Jehovah is judge) (spelled Josaphat in Matthew 1:8), Asa’s son, was the second good King of Judah (1 Kings 15:24; 1 Kings 22:41-49; 2 Chronicles 17:1-19; 2 Chronicles 18:1-34; 2 Chronicles 19:1-11; 2 Chronicles 20:1-37; 2 Chronicles 21:1). He walked in both the good and bad ways of his father throughout his twenty-five years of reign. Jehoshaphat’s reign in Judah was during the time of Ahab and Ahaziah, Kings of Israel. His walking in “the first ways of his father David” revealed the character of this second good King. The first ways include the strengthening of himself against Israel, seeking the God of his fathers, and sending his princes and Levites to teach the people of the kingdom of Judah (2 Chronicles 17:1-9). The first ways of David cannot be commended without a warning subsequent to the eulogy. This reminds the student of Scripture of what Christ said to the assembly in Ephesus: Remember therefore from whence thou are fallen, and repent, and do the first works; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will remove thy candlestick out of his place, except thou repent. —Revelation 2:5 Retrogression in the Christian life is a deviation from the normal way. Apart from repentance, the just punishment by God will come upon the assembly by the removal of the lampstand, or punishment like the sickness that God sent upon Asa (2 Chronicles 16:11-14). The reason God records the shortcomings of His people, and His public servants in particular, is to warn all believers that men at their best must never be viewed as anything but men. The Lord Jesus Christ is the only perfect example for the people of God. The first ways of Jehoshaphat, plus the teaching of the people by the rulers and Levites, caused the fear of the Lord to come upon all the kingdoms around Judah. In the third year of Jehoshaphat’s reign, he sent his rulers Ben-hail (the name means “son of valor”), Obadiah (the name means “serving Jehovah”), Zechariah (the name means “remembered of Jehovah”), Nethaneel (the name means “given to God”), and Michaiah (the name means “who is as Jehovah”) to teach in all the cities of Judah. The king sent with them the Levites Shemaiah (the name means “heard of Jehovah”), Nethaniah (the name means “given of Jehovah”), Zebadiah (the name means “endowed of Jehovah”), Asahel (the name means “wrought of God”), Shemiramoth (the name means “name of heights”), Jehonathan (the name means “Jehovah is giver”), Adonijah (the name means “my Lord is Jehovah”), Tobijah (the name means “goodness of Jehovah”), and Tobadonijah (the name means “good is my Lord Jehovah”). With the Levites, the King sent the priests Elishama (the name means “my God is a hearer”) and Jehoram (the name means “Jehovah is exalted”). Thus the character of the men Jehoshaphat sent with the “book of the law” to teach the people throughout all the cities of Judah was revealed in the meanings of their names (2 Chronicles 17:7-9). The same principle was applied by Paul in his exhortation to Timothy to commit what he had heard from Paul through many witnesses to faithful men who shall also be capable to teach others (2 Timothy 2:2). The people of Judah became spiritually strengthened so that the fear of the Lord was upon the surrounding kingdoms to the extent that they did not make war with Jehoshaphat. The Philistines and Arabians brought gifts to Jehoshaphat, and he grew greater and greater; therefore, he built fortresses and store cities in Judah. However, his greatest strength was spiritual. The principle of spiritual fortification by means of Biblical doctrine is the lesson for God’s people in every age. Although Satan is already judged and condemned, his execution is stayed until the consummation of time. Satan is not only the ruler of demons (Matthew 9:34), but he is also the ruler of this world’s system (John 14:30). He has his secrets of human government, ministers of state, and mysteries of iniquity. Not feeling danger is the greatest danger to God’s people. The whole armor provided by God must be put on by every believer if he expects to win the hand to hand combat. This armor is not to be used as a cover for but as a defense against sin. When the whole armor is used against sin by the assembly, fear will come upon the assembly; and those outside will not be bold enough to unite with the assembly (Acts 5:1-13). The first verse of 2 Chronicles 18:1-34 is indeed sad: NOW Jehoshaphat had great riches and honor; and he allied himself by marriage with Ahab. (NASB) Riches and honor are more to be feared in the Christian life than poverty and contempt. Daily watching, studying, and praying are as necessary to the experienced as to the inexperienced believer. Alliance with evil prevents victory over evil. Jehoshaphat’s faithfulness to Ahab meant his unfaithfulness to God. The record states that after some years Jehoshaphat “went down to Ahab” (2 Chronicles 18:2), which proved to be a spiritual decline for the King of Judah. Ahab had manifested his lack of spirituality by saying to Elijah: Have you found me, O my enemy? And he answered, I have found you, because you have sold yourself to do evil in the sight of the LORD. —1 Kings 21:20 (NASB) Jehoshaphat not only joined himself with Ahab who had sold himself to do evil, but he also made peace with him (1 Kings 22:44). Subsequent to wicked Ahab’s request that Jehoshaphat go up to Ramoth-gilead, Jehoshaphat made a statement to him that should be contrasted with Ruth’s statement to Naomi: I [Jehoshaphat] am as you [Ahab] are, and my people as your people, and we will be with you in the battle. —2 Chronicles 18:3 (NASB) But Ruth said, Do not urge me to leave you [Naomi] or turn back from following you; for where you go, I will go, and where you lodge, I will lodge. Your people shall be my people, and your God, my God. —Ruth 1:16 (NASB) Jehoshaphat’s alliance was evil, but Ruth’s alliance was spiritual. In every age, God calls His people to a life of separation (2 Corinthians 6:14-18). (1) God said to Abraham: “Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred” (Genesis 12:1). (2) God told Israel to get out of Egypt (Exodus 11:8). (3) John the Baptist stood outside of organized Judaism (Matthew 3:1-17). (4) Christ led His sheep out of Judaism (John 10:1-42). (5) Peter told the converts at Pentecost to be saved from this perverse generation (Acts 2:40). (6) The writer of Hebrews admonished Christians to go forth to Christ outside the camp (religious Jerusalem) (Hebrews 13:13). (7) In the future, the call of God shall go forth to His people to come out of Babylon (Revelation 18:4). Recorded in 2 Corinthians 6:14-16 are the following five spheres of separation: 1. COMMERCIAL—In the commercial sphere, there can be no partnership between righteousness and lawlessness: “...for what partnership [metoche] have righteousness and lawlessness?” (2 Corinthians 6:14 NASB). Men of the world often unjustly get commercial riches, but no one can unjustly get spiritual riches because God cannot be bribed. Furthermore, unsaved people often choose the god of mammon, but the mammon of iniquity is not gain but loss. Conversely, the man of God has the righteous principle in making money, and he uses his money with an eye on the future judgment seat of Christ. Therefore, a partnership that involves a believer and a nonbeliever cannot be successful, because the partners operate on two different principles—righteousness and lawlessness. 2. POLITICAL—In the political sphere, there can be no close relationship between light and darkness: “what fellowship [koinonia, close relationship] has light with darkness?” (2 Kings 6:14 NASB). Scripture tells us that a worldly master praised the wrongdoing of a worldly steward “because he had acted shrewdly; for the sons of this age are more shrewd in relation to their own kind than the sons of light” (Luke 16:8 NASB). Christ gave the disciples a lesson on how money should be used. The sons of this age use money to make friends, but their friends are restricted to their own generation for personal gain. “...But those who love the rich are many” (Proverbs 14:20 NASB). “Wealth adds many friends...” (Proverbs 19:4 NASB). Friends gained by wealth last only as long as they are its recipients. Hence, their thoughts are on this age without any concern for eternity. The sons of this age are “now” people; they give no thought to “then.” Conversely, the sons of light have a deep concern for “then,” but they must realize that they have a responsibility “now.” Jesus Christ did not suggest to the disciples that they should be dishonest, but He taught them to wisely use what they had for the spiritual benefit of the elect. The sons of this age are wise for a little while, but they shall be fools forever. On the other hand, the sons of light are fools for a short time for Christ’s sake, but they shall be wise in Christ for eternity. 3. SOCIAL—In the social sphere, there can be no agreement between Christ and the Devil: “What harmony [sumphonesis, which means harmonious with or agree with] has Christ with Belial [the Devil]” (2 Corinthians 6:15 NASB)? Paul was not suggesting isolation but separation in the sense of being insulated against anything in society that is contrary to Biblical principles. Christ associated with sinners, but He did not become their ally because sin does not exist in Him (1 John 3:5). Furthermore, inward separation results in outward separation. One is wrong to become affiliated with benevolent, cultural, or political organized social groups for community benefits. Moreover, Christians must never compromise Biblical principles in order to have a place to “serve” in a religious institution. Full obedience to God is more important than a larger sphere of service to men. Uncompromising Christians know that compromise limits God’s message, whereas no compromise limits their fellowship. 4. MARITAL—In the marital sphere the believer can have no part with the unbeliever: “What has a believer in common [meris, which means part, share, or portion] with an unbeliever?” (2 Corinthians 6:15 NASB). As in nature before the fall, by grace, “marriage in the Lord” surpasses everything human. Such a marriage finds what is of Jesus Christ in one another in spite of failures. The one who best knows his or her partner in marriage and seeks out of real love to correct his or her failings, gains a place in the spouse’s heart that cannot benefit a flatterer. Peter spoke to husband and wife as sharing together the grace of life (1 Peter 3:7). Paul spoke of marriage as man and woman becoming “one flesh” (Ephesians 5:31). Since man and woman become “one flesh” in marriage, the body of each belongs to the other, regardless of the shape or condition of it, until death parts them. How can a believer married to an unbeliever present his or her body (one flesh) a living sacrifice, holy, and well-pleasing to God? (See Romans 12:1.) Although the grace of God is sufficient for the believer, the unbelieving mate in a marriage relationship is a hindrance to the believer’s worship and service because of the unequal yoke. 5. SPIRITUAL—In the spiritual sphere, there is no agreement between the temple of God and idols. “What agreement [sugkatathesis, which means agreement, approval, or in company with] has the temple of God with idols?” (2 Corinthians 6:16 NASB). Paul used the Jewish temple as an analogy of the Christians in Corinth. He said that we are the temple of the living God; and that God said He will lie in us, walk in us, live among us, and be our God, and we shall be His people (2 Corinthians 6:16). As the beauty, fragrance of the incense, or the order of the service of the temple, which were outward appearances, did not reveal God’s presence, the human understanding of some Biblical principles, or the assembling of ourselves together does not prove that God is living within us. The Shekinah demonstrated God’s presence, and the Spirit of Christ being in us proves we have passed from spiritual death to spiritual life. As Christ would not tolerate any worldly merchandise in the temple in Jerusalem, Christians will cleanse themselves from all defilement of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God (2 Corinthians 6:17-18; 2 Corinthians 7:1). The unholy alliances of Jehoshaphat included military, commercial, and family affiliations. The military alliance between Jehoshaphat and Ahab resulted in both taking refuge in human inventions rather than in Divine principles. Ahab disguised himself; and Jehoshaphat, dressed in his royal robes, was thought to be the King of Israel. Their inventions brought death to Ahab and trouble to Jehoshaphat (2 Chronicles 18:1-3; 1 Kings 22:1-40). Jehoshaphat committed the same sin that he had perpetrated with Ahab, Ahaziah’s father, subsequent to the death of Ahab, when he joined himself with Ahaziah. But this time the union was for commercial reasons (2 Chronicles 20:35-37). Jehoshaphat’s son, Jehoram (spelling is Joram in Matthew 1:8), married the daughter of Ahab and Jezebel. Her name was Athaliah, and her character proved the commonplace saying, “like mother, like daughter.” The marriage of Jehoram and Athaliah was the fruit of Jehoshaphat’s union with Ahab. Jehoshaphat’s alliance with Ahab was a compromise which led to serious consequences. Although Ramoth-gilead belonged to Israel, undertaking its recovery by going to war with Ahab was a sin for which Jehoshaphat must pay. His affinity with Ahab, who sold himself to do evil, affected his whole reign as king. Association with wicked people is always harmful to Christians. The company believers keep is important because bad associations corrupt good habits (1 Corinthians 15:33-34). Since the righteous cannot change the unrighteous, unholy alliances weaken the righteous. It has been said that disease, not good health, is contagious. Hence, the believer who compromises in his Christian life, thinking that some good will come from it, will learn that he loses on both ends. He sins by compromise, and the person with whom he has banded in his compromise loses respect for what he claims to believe. As soon as Jehoshaphat said to Ahab, “I am as you are, and my people as your people, and we will be with you in the battle” (2 Chronicles 18:3 NASB), he asked Ahab to “please inquire first for the word of the LORD” (2 Chronicles 18:4 NASB). Ahab called the first ecumenical council when he gathered the four hundred prophets (2 Chronicles 18:5). Although the prophets promised the King victory, Jehoshaphat was not satisfied without an answer from a prophet of the Lord. With all the opinions of false teachers today, no greater request can be made than the one by Jehoshaphat: “Is there not yet a prophet of the LORD here that we may inquire of him?” (2 Chronicles 18:6). The word “prophet” has a twofold meaning: (1) telling forth the word of truth, and (2) foretelling what will take place. Since the prophetic message has been completed, the man of God today can only tell forth what God through inspired men has already given. Ahab told Jehoshaphat that he knew one prophet of the Lord: There is yet one man, by whom we may inquire of the LORD: but I hate him; for he never prophesied good unto me, but always evil: the same is Micaiah [the name means “who is as Jehovah”].... —2 Chronicles 18:7 One who hates the man who tells him the truth must remember what happened to Ahab (2 Chronicles 18:13-28). Ahab’s statement about Micaiah’s prophecy against him was an indictment against himself. Did the King think that if he had not been told the truth, the word of God through the prophet would have been divested of its authority? Many today deceive themselves to think that if they are ignorant of Scripture, they may take the liberty to do what seems good to them. Furthermore, they assume that since God judges them according to the light they have, they would be better to remain ignorant and say, “We did not know that.” However, the truth is that people will be judged according to the opportunities created for them by Divine providence. Therefore, our duty is to find the true teachers who have been provided by God’s providence that we may learn as much about the truth of God as possible at all cost. Although the God-appointed minister is nothing in himself, the measure of his authority is determined by the measure of his knowledge of truth. Micaiah lived in God and spoke only what God spoke. Ministers must seek to emulate Micaiah’s independence of “the establishment”—the school of the prophets—but experience total dependence on God. The false prophets, like false ministers in the twentieth century, accommodated themselves to the spirit of the times. Furthermore, the sad commentary of our day is that rulers like Ahab and Jehoshaphat are inventing tricks to surprise the enemy rather than taking refuge in the sanctuary of Biblical principles. The messenger who was sent to summon Micaiah told him that the four hundred prophets with one voice predicted that God would give the King victory. Since the four hundred unanimously approved Ahab’s going up to Ramoth-gilead, the messenger requested that Micaiah also give his approval (2 Chronicles 18:5-12). A popular cry should be feared because “everybody” is a fearful tyrant. A fact of human nature is that it drifts with the tide because dead things and refuse drift with the stream. The grace of God and a knowledge of Biblical principles are necessary for one to go against the tide of human nature which is under the direction of the god of this age. Micaiah is a demonstration of one with grace and conviction to contradict the majority, but his speaking the truth of God was not without a personal price (2 Chronicles 18:23-27). The following examples confirm that this is a fact of Scripture: Ahab accused Elijah of being a troublemaker— “Art thou he that troubleth Israel?” (1 Kings 18:17). The man of God is an intruder upon the peace and order of society. Like Elijah, he traces evil to its proper source. Elijah said to Ahab: ...I have not troubled Israel; but thou, and thy father’s house, in that ye have forsaken the commandments of the LORD, and thou hast followed Baalim. —1 Kings 18:18 Paul was forsaken but not forsaken by God (2 Timothy 4:10; 2 Timothy 4:16-18). The apostle did not die in a blaze of glory and praise, but his complete self-sacrifice for Christ’s sake was evidenced. Micaiah valued the truth of God above all the sayings of men: “As the LORD lives, what my God says, that I will speak” (2 Chronicles 18:13 NASB). Micaiah’s faithful proclamation of truth caused Ahab to express his hatred for him: “I hate him, for he never prophesies good concerning me but always evil” (2 Chronicles 18:7 NASB). Although Ahab did not intend to commend Micaiah, no greater commendation can be paid the man of God than the enemies of truth saying, “We hate him.” The wicked become angry because the word of God destroys human theories, annihilates prejudice, and unveils sin. Thus, speaking the truth causes the haters of truth, like those of Jeremiah’s day, to say: Come and let us devise plans against Jeremiah. Surely the law is not going to be lost to the priest, nor counsel to the sage, nor the divine word to the prophet! Come on and let us strike at him with our tongue, and let us give no heed to any of his words. —Jeremiah 18:18 (NASB) Festus, an example of haters of truth, did not denounce Paul as a hypocrite but as a brainless fanatic (Acts 26:24). The charge of madness against the proclaimer of truth requires no thought but only a mouth of cursing and bitterness, running with its depraved brain out of gear. Furthermore, religionists today are resolving among themselves, like the enemies of Jeremiah, what should be done. When they stand for their depraved opinions, they are as much opposed to God’s true servants as the Jews were to Jeremiah. Look at their vain, glorious self-confidence! The Jews had their priests, wise men, and prophets. Their law, counsel, and word meant more to them than the law, counsel, and word of God through the prophet. Jeremiah’s enemies hoped to stir up the anger of King Jehoiakim against him because he did not belong to them. Micaiah, the prophet of the Lord, would not compromise for either the pleasure or displeasure of any person. Therefore, he told King Ahab that in going up to Ramoth-gilead the people would be delivered into his hand, but at the same time Israel would be scattered as sheep without a shepherd. Hearing this, the King reminded Jehoshaphat, “Did I not tell you that he would not prophesy good concerning me, but evil?” (2 Chronicles 18:17 NASB). Micaiah told Ahab that the Lord had put a deceiving spirit in the mouths of his prophets, because the Lord had proclaimed the King’s destruction (2 Chronicles 18:22; 2 Thessalonians 2:11). Hence, God declared through Micaiah what He decreed. The declaration of truth by God’s prophet caused Ahab to have Micaiah imprisoned with a diet of bread and water until he returned safely. But Ahab did not return safely; he died. Men of such heroism as that displayed by Micaiah often suffer for their principles. Micaiah told Ahab, “If you indeed return safely, the Lord has not spoken by me” (2 Chronicles 18:27 NASB). Ahab pretended to honor Jehoshaphat while intending to save himself and avoid Micaiah’s prophecy. The King of Israel said, “I will disguise myself, and will go to the battle; but put thou on thy robes...” (2 Chronicles 18:29). The King of Syria had commanded his men to fight with only the King of Israel. Therefore, when they saw Jehoshaphat dressed as a king, the warriors of Syria thought he was the King of Israel: It is the king of Israel. Therefore they compassed about him to fight: but Jehoshaphat cried out, and the LORD [Jehovah, the covenant Savior] helped him; and God [Elohim] moved them to depart from him. —2 Chronicles 18:31 While sparing the good King, Jehoshaphat, the God of heaven directed the arrow from the bow to its destined target. It went through the joint of Ahab’s armor and caused his death at sunset that day. Following Jehoshaphat’s safe return to Jerusalem, the prophet Jehu pronounced judgment upon him: Shouldest thou help the ungodly, and love them that hate the LORD? therefore is wrath upon thee from before the LORD. Nevertheless there are good things found in thee, in that thou hast taken away the groves out of the land, and hast prepared thine heart to seek God. —2 Chronicles 19:2-3 Jehu was the brave prophet who reproved Baasha, King of Israel (1 Kings 16:1-6). God then sent him to Jehoshaphat to reprove him with the strongest language possible for his unholy alliance: “Shouldest thou...love them that hate the LORD...?” (2 Chronicles 19:2 NASB). Ahab was an idolater who had introduced his own depraved religion into his kingdom (1 Kings 18:17-40). God’s altar and Baal’s altar, like free grace and free will, cannot stand side by side because there can be only one sovereign God. Moses challenged the necromancers of Egypt. Elijah challenged the false prophets of Baal. Jesus Christ challenged the Pharisees. The apostles challenged the false teachers. Christendom, like the religion of Baal, has many followers. Anyone who unites himself with a religion that denies the following truths is loving those who hate the Lord: (1) God’s absolute sovereignty, (2) the inerrancy of Scripture, (3) man’s depravity, (4) unconditional election, (5) particular redemption, (6) irresistible grace, (7) perseverance of the saints, (8) regeneration by the Spirit apart from man’s faith, (9) conversion by the gospel, (10) justification before God by the imputed righteousness of Christ, (11) justification by God’s gift of faith before one’s consciousness, (12) justification by works before men, (13) sanctification, (14) the impeccability of Jesus Christ, (15) the future kingdom of Christ for which the assembly is being prepared and Israel shall be prepared, and (16) eternal punishment for the nonelect. Since idolaters are haters of the Lord, they are to be hated. David declared that he hated his enemies: Surely thou wilt slay the wicked, O God: depart from me therefore, ye bloody men. For they speak against thee wickedly, and thine enemies take thy name in vain. Do not I hate them, O LORD, that hate thee? and am not I grieved with those that rise up against thee? I hate them with perfect hatred: I count them mine enemies. —Psalms 139:19-22 Jehoshaphat exemplified the true spirit in which one should receive Divine reproof (2 Chronicles 19:4-11). He not only went out among the people and brought them back to the Lord, the God of their fathers, but he also sent out judges for the purpose of judging for the Lord rather than for man. Moses had instructed Israel: You shall not show partiality in judgment; you shall hear the small and the great alike. You shall not fear man, for the judgment is God’s. And the case that is too hard for you, you shall bring to me, and I will hear it. —Deuteronomy 1:17 (NASB) Christ exhorted Christians: “Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment” (John 7:24). Christ used two present active imperatives: (1) The first was negative—"Be not judging by external standards." (2) The second was positive—"Be judging righteous judgment." The principle on which all issues are to be settled is subjection to God’s will. However, the flesh always wants to be vindicated; therefore, people motivated by the flesh go to persons who will take their side of an issue. On the other hand, the person motivated by the Spirit looks for adjustment to the will of God. A righteous judgment must be based on Biblical principles before two or three witnesses (Deuteronomy 17:6; Matthew 18:16; 1 Timothy 5:19). The repentant King told the judges to “let the fear of the LORD be upon you” (2 Chronicles 19:7). Furthermore, “he charged them, saying, Thus shall ye do in the fear of the LORD, faithfully, and with a perfect heart” (2 Chronicles 19:9). The word “perfect” means with a heart of pure intent. When the heart is fixed on a Biblical principle one will strive wholeheartedly to reach the goal. In 2 Chronicles 19:7, the Hebrew word for “fear” is pachad, and it refers to the object of fear: “let the fear of the LORD be upon you.” In 2 Chronicles 19:9, the Hebrew word translated “fear” is yiraw, which means reverence. Since God’s people are representatives, their representation must be worthy of God: “I THEREFORE, the prisoner of the Lord, beseech you that ye walk worthy of the vocation wherewith ye are called ” (Ephesians 4:1). As the result of Jehoshaphat’s affinity (marriage) with Ahab, God’s wrath (great displeasure) came on him. Having experienced God’s great displeasure, the King warned his judges that they must perform their work in awe of God because God will have no part in unrighteousness. Therefore, in reverence of God to whom they were accountable, they must warn the people that disobedience brings God’s great displeasure on them. Professing Christians seem to have no place in their vocabulary for God’s wrath (displeasure). Their common language is “God loves you” or “God love you.” The power of positive thinking supposedly gets people through any problem or condition, regardless of the reason for these situations. Many professing believers emphasize God’s love to the exclusion of His wrath. Knowing nothing about the ways the word fear is used in Scripture, they represent fear as pertaining to the realm of slavery. There are several Hebrew and Greek words translated fear in the Old and New Testaments. Hence, the English word fear translated from either the Hebrew or Greek can mean terror, horror, alarm, cowardice, fear, reverence, respect, worship, godly fear, etc. Scripture affirms that fear is an essential part of the Christian life: “But there is forgiveness with thee, that thou mayest be feared” (Psalms 130:4). God cannot be reverenced where there is no forgiveness. Paul’s list of horrible indictments against the unforgiven concludes with “There is no fear [phobos, reverence for God] of God before their eyes” (Romans 3:18). The person who has been convinced of sin fears God: “...And by the fear [Hebrew for reverence] of the LORD one keeps away from evil” (Proverbs 16:6 NASB). Fear is a permanent principle wrought in the heart by the Spirit of God in regeneration (Jeremiah 32:40), and it is a manifestation of Divine election. This principle is constantly stimulated by the name, word, and worship of God, all of which are fearful: If you are not careful to observe all the words of this law which are written in this book, to fear this honored and awesome name, the LORD your God, then the LORD will bring extraordinary plagues on you and your descendants, even severe and lasting plagues, and miserable and chronic sicknesses. —Deuteronomy 28:58-59 (NASB) The one who despises the word will be in debt to it, But the one who fears the commandment will be rewarded. —Proverbs 13:13 (NASB) But as for me, by Thine abundant lovingkindness I will enter Thy house, At Thy holy temple I will bow in reverence for Thee. —Psalms 5:7 (NASB) Very few today have a true Biblical concept of love and fear. Many quote Scripture without understanding its true meaning. For example, some quote 1 John 4:18 as a proof text that love casts out all fear: “There is no fear in love; but perfect love casts out fear, because fear involves punishment, and the one who fears is not perfected in love” (NASB). Since the unregenerate person neither fears nor loves God, he often mistakes the absence of fear for the presence of love. The Greek noun phobos (fear, terror, reverence for God, or respect for persons) is used twice, and the participial form of the verb phobeo (to fear, be afraid of, to reverence) is used once in this verse. How are we to understand this verse in the light of the immediate text and the overall context of Scripture? An isolated feature of God never gives a true picture of His character; therefore, all the attributes and characteristics of God are required to give a true perspective of the sovereign Lord. When the characteristics of God are separated, each feature may be presented as something that does not portray His true character. Hence, the Bible speaks of God as the God of love, hate, righteousness, holiness, judgment, wrath, omnipotence, omniscience, omnipresence, justice, severity, mercy, forgiveness, goodness, etc. Reverence for such a God is the alphabet of Christianity. As one cannot acquire knowledge without the alphabet, he cannot acquire spiritual knowledge without reverence for God, which is the fruit of regeneration. The one attribute of God which can be said to be the beauty of all His attributes and characteristics is holiness: Who is like unto thee, O LORD, among the gods? who is like thee, glorious in holiness, fearful in praises, doing wonders? —Exodus 15:11 God reigneth over the heathen: God sitteth upon the throne of his holiness. —Psalms 47:8 There is none holy as the LORD: for there is none beside thee: neither is there any rock like our God. —1 Samuel 2:2 Contrary to those only professing to be Christians, no Christian will emphasize one attribute of God at the expense of another. A person does not have to listen very long until he hears one who is only a professing believer say, “I have no use for religious dogma; it is enough for me to know that God loves me.” The oversimplification of “God is love” has resulted in a dislike for both doctrine in general and doctrine that is distasteful to oneself in particular. Any system of doctrine built on the oversimplification of “God is love” leads to affinity with modernism and socialism. Hence, the final outcome will be a denial of eternal punishment because if God is essentially love, one cannot believe in eternal punishment. When John said, “There is no fear in love...” (1 John 4:18 a), he was not saying the believer has no filial fear of God. The word filial pertains to a son or daughter having parental fear or respect. Scripture teaches that we are to live in fear during the time of our staying in a strange country (1 Peter 1:17; 1 Peter 2:17; Php 2:12; Hebrews 12:28; 2 Corinthians 7:1; 2 Corinthians 7:11). The fear the Christian has as he sojourns in an alien country is that of displeasing his heavenly Father by failing to either work out his salvation properly or cleanse himself from all defilement of the flesh and spirit. Filial fear gives positional confidence: “In the fear of the LORD is strong confidence: and his children shall have a place of refuge” (Proverbs 14:26). Reverential fear drives out slavish fear, and that gives confidence. Following John’s statement “There is no fear in love” in 1 John 4:18 a, the superordinating conjunction alla is used to introduce his next statement, “...but perfect [teleia, from teleios, which means perfect, full grown, or mature] love casteth [ballei, present active indicative of ballo, which means throw, throw down, or as it is used here, drive out fear] out fear....” This signifies that mature love exerts its influence on the elect. According to 1 John 4:17, “love has been permanently matured [perfect passive indicative of teleioo] with [meta, genitive of association] us in order that we may have confidence in the day of judgment” (1 John 4:17 a —translation). The recipient of love has filial fear, but he is not governed by this fear “because fear hath [echei, present active indicative of echo, which literally means is having] torment [kolasin, accusative feminine singular of kolasis, which means punishment]” (1 John 4:18 b). This is the only place in the New Testament where the noun kolasis is used. Thus, the statement that “fear is having punishment” (1 John 4:18 b —translation) is something presently taking place in the believer who has not reached maturity in his Christian life. Since there are no degrees of God’s love to the elect, the passage is discussing the growth and maturity of our love to God and His people. 1 John 4:18 concludes, “The one fearing has not been matured in [en, locative of sphere] the sphere of love” (translation); therefore, he lacks conditional confidence. Mature love lifts from the heart of the Christian the burden of fearing to meet his Judge at the judgment seat of Christ. Although reverential fear of God exists in every believer, regardless of his growth and maturity, he is governed by mature love when it comes to judgment. As the judgment of the Savior for the sins of the elect is behind Him, it is also behind the elect; and matured love is made conscious of this truth. Hence, as Christ the Savior “is [estin, present active indicative of eimi), so are [esmen, present active indicative of eimi] we in this world” (1 John 4:17b). We are in this world not as Jesus Christ was in it but as He is now in it in reference to judgment (Romans 8:1-3). The judgment seat of Christ has nothing to do with our position, but it does have something to do with our condition before our Judge. The love of God shed abroad in our hearts cannot exist as a subordinate (secondary) principle. True love admits no rival, allows no allurements of the world to alienate it from it’s object, and permits no comparison. Furthermore, God’s love, according to 1 John 4:18, has been permanently brought to completion with Christians in order that we may have confidence before the judgment seat (bema) of Christ (2 Corinthians 5:10). This love is constant because it has not been ignited by the things of time but by the eternal flame of God’s purpose in the salvation of the elect. John added that “We are loving him, because he first loved us” (1 John 4:19—translation). Therefore, our love for God is the reflex of His love “which has been poured out [ekkechutai, perfect passive indicative of ekcheo] in our hearts by the Holy Spirit” (Romans 5:5—translation). “The one fearing has not been brought to completion [teteleiotai, perfect passive indicative of teleioo] in the sphere of love” (1 John 4:18 b—translation). Love is like honey, but love brought to completion is like honey with all the comb and wax strained out. The condition of Christians will vary from believer to believer. Some have fear without matured love; thus, their lack of growth and development in Biblical doctrine causes them to lack the conditional confidence that comes with maturity. Others have grown to a greater degree in doctrinal teaching, but their condition contains fear and love when they contemplate the judgment. Love has not matured to the degree that they are not apprehensive about the judgment. Finally, there are Christians whose condition is without fear of the judgment because their love is mature. This is what John was talking about when he said the following: By this our love has been perfectly matured with us, in order that we may have confidence in the day of judgment. —1 John 4:17 (translation) And now children, you be abiding in him; in order that when He may be made visible, we may have confidence before Him in His presence. —1 John 2:28 (translation) This lack of conditional confidence is due to insufficient growth and development in the grace and knowledge of Jesus Christ. The Greek word for confidence is parresia, which means openness, boldness, fearless confidence, assurance, or freedom of speech. The noun is used 31 times in several different ways; but since our emphasis is fearless confidence or assurance, we shall restrict ourselves to this theme. No person can be fearlessly confident of his salvation by simply believing what is objectively contained in the Scriptures. There must be a subjective experience of objective truth. Hence, a subjective knowledge of “I believe,” apart from the Holy Spirit to mediate the objective and subjective elements to the consciousness of the believer, will not give assurance (Romans 8:14-16). Therefore, the character and not the strength of one’s conviction proves the validity of his fearless confidence. Peter’s subjective experience had become reconciled to the objective truth of God when he replied to Christ’s question, “Do you desire to be going away?” by saying: ...to whom shall we go? you have the words of eternal life, And we believed [pepisteukamen, perfect active indicative of pisteuo, which means have permanently believed] and have known [egnokamen, perfect active indicative of ginosko, which means have permanently known] that you are the holy one of God. —John 6:67-69 (translation) Most people think of reconciliation only as God being reconciled to a sinner. It is true that God is reconciled to the sinner, but the person dead in trespasses and sins must have his sins paid for before he can be reconciled to God. As freedom from condemnation in Romans 8:1 embraces more than freedom from the judgment of sin’s guilt, judgment of sin in the flesh by the believer embodies more than legal judgment of sin in the flesh. Persons engaged in the conflict between the spirit and the flesh must realize that the “power of sin” as well as the “penalty of sin” has been once-for-all judged, and the ruling power in the believer is the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus (Romans 8:1-3). In the natural world, matter does not form the life; but the life forms matter. In the spiritual world, the man does not form the Christian; but the Spirit of God forms the Christian. Flesh manifests itself in deeds of the flesh (Galatians 5:16-21; Colossians 3:9), confidence in the flesh (Php 3:4), fleshly religion (Galatians 1:14; Galatians 3:3; Php 3:4-7), fleshly worship (Galatians 3:3), fleshly service (1 Corinthians 11:22), and fleshly methods that are adopted by those who practice fleshly religion. Whereas the Spirit of God leads the Christian to manifest the fruit of the Spirit (Galatians 5:22-24). Doctrine, walk, and warfare are inseparable in the Christian life. The Epistle to the Ephesians begins with God’s election, predestination, foreordination, reconciliation, etc.; continues with the Christian walk; and concludes with warfare in the Christian life. If a person understands doctrine and this objective truth of God has been mediated by the Holy Spirit between the experience of these truths with the objective truths themselves, the experience of the person who says he believes these things will harmonize with the objective truths of God. This is the work of the Holy Spirit. Work of faith, labor of love, and endurance of hope distinguish God’s chosen ones (1 Thessalonians 1:3). The Spirit of God bears witness with the spirit of each Christian enabling us to know we are the sons of God (Romans 8:14-16). The only way we can know when we are led by the Spirit of God is by knowing the objective message of God. The objective message and the subjective knowledge become one in regeneration. Before his regeneration, Paul thought he knew and understood the law, but he did not. After his regeneration, he was made by the Spirit of God to see the spirituality of the law. The Holy Spirit mediated what Paul knew objectively and what he experienced subjectively on the road to Damascus. When one has been reconciled to Jesus Christ and then the Holy Spirit regenerates him, he knows that he and Christ are one. As the result of having been reconciled to Christ, the experience of the individual who has been regenerated will be reconciled to the objective truth of God; and the objective truth of God and his experience will be one. The regenerated person responds to truth. When there is no response, there is no mediating Spirit of regeneration in him. God-given faith is not contented with an obscure and ill-defined understanding of anything pertaining to one’s relationship to God. From faith, the Christian derives confidence through the objective message of God; and from confidence in God’s word, he approaches with confidence the throne of grace (Hebrews 4:16). Such confidence in approaching God stems from the believer’s assurance in what the Scripture says about the foundational truth of judgment for the believer’s nature of sin and his sins of nature in the death of Christ. Confidence is the result of knowing the following things: (1) The fire of God’s judgment is ignited by man’s sin. (2) Jesus Christ bore the judgment of God on behalf of the elect. (3) The word of God assures everyone born of the Spirit that there is now no condemnation to those in Christ. The Son of God died not only for what the elect have done and have not done but also for what we were in Adam. The wrath of God due to both our sinful nature and the sins of our sinful nature was borne by the holy One who had neither sin nor sins. Since the wrath of God expended itself in Christ Jesus on behalf of the elect, we are positionally complete in Christ. What confidence! What assurance! What boldness! Jehu’s warning stirred Jehoshaphat to make some compensation for the loss he had caused in Judah. Thus, his recovery from his declension was manifested. God not only reproved His backslidden King, but He also commended him for the good he had done. The reproved King received the rebuke and wasted no time in setting things in order. (1) He appointed judges in all the cities to judge not for the benefit of man but for the benefit of God (2 Chronicles 19:6). (2) Their judgments were to be in the fear of the Lord, because the Lord “will have no part in unrighteousness, or partiality, or the taking of a bribe” (2 Chronicles 19:7 NASB). (3) He charged them to operate “in the fear of the LORD, faithfully and wholeheartedly” (2 Chronicles 19:9 NASB). (4) He warned them “that they may not be guilty before the LORD, and wrath may not come on you and your brethren...” (2 Chronicles 19:10 NASB). (5) There were distinctions as well as order in the King’s appointments. First, spiritual matters were involved in the King’s appointment of Amariah (the name means “the saying of Jehovah”) over the people in all that pertained to the Lord (2 Chronicles 19:11 NASB). Second, civil matters were involved in his appointment of Zebadiah (the name means “endowed of Jehovah”) as ruler of the house of Judah. Third, the King appointed the Levites as officers to see that things were correctly carried out and good laws were executed. The ruler’s offering must be male (Leviticus 4:22-26) to show that a ruler or judge must be of masculine gender. The people’s offering, however, might be a female (Leviticus 4:27-35). This same principle is maintained in the New Testament. Our generation ignores God’s principle pertaining to the sexes, and we are paying for this rebellion. (6) The King exhorted them to “Deal courageously, and the LORD shall be with the good” (2 Chronicles 19:11). “Act resolutely, and the LORD be with the upright” (NASB). The Hebrew word translated “courageously” in the King James Bible and “resolutely” in the New American Standard Bible is chazaq, which means strong, firm, undaunted, or courageous. The Septuagint uses the Greek word ischuo, which means to be able, win over, or be strong, to translate the Hebrew word chazaq. The English word “resolute” means firmly resolved or determined. Few people in religious circles today consider the value and need of resolved or determined Christians. Hence, only a small number of believers are undaunted in their proclamation of the truth. These few are not forced by fear of man to abandon their purpose in declaring the whole counsel of God regardless of the consequences. Therefore, believers who will defend the truth thoroughly and boldly are rare. Many neglect such responsibility not because they lack sympathies, sentiments, and ideas but simply for lack of courage to take the first line trenches where the real warfare is being fought. This lack of courage is a manifestation of a want of confidence in what they really believe. Some persons may have boldness without spiritual confidence. Many assume that they are acting spiritually when they are really acting from prejudice or sentimental feelings. Their actions may be classified as bulldog determination or intestinal fortitude (guts). Such resolve may attract uninformed believers, but it is soon detected by persons who have experienced Biblical principles. Persons having tasted that the Lord is gracious cannot remain silent: We having the same spirit of faith, according as it has been written, I believed, therefore I spoke; we are also believing, for this reason we are speaking. —2 Corinthians 4:13 (translation) It can be said that “...the righteous are as bold as a lion” (Proverbs 28:1). This, however, is not bulldog boldness. No Christian has ever been more bold than Paul, but his boldness had another side which was revealed in his admonition to the Ephesian elders: “Therefore, watch, and remember, that by the space of three years I ceased not to warn every one night and day with tears” (Acts 20:31). Paul’s tears were not for public display or showmanship, but they were a manifestation of his tenderness that is inseparable from spiritual boldness. A minister was asked, “How could you be so calm while people were weeping as you preached?” He replied, “My weeping was done yesterday.” Solomon restricted the proverbial statement “bold as a lion” to the righteous. Hence, distinction must be made between physical and spiritual courage. Natural courage is nothing more than self-confidence, but spiritual courage is Christ-confidence. The first is presumptuous; the latter is trust in God who cannot fail. Self-confidence cannot withstand the trials and exposures of life. Christ-consciousness enables the righteous to bid farewell to doubt and insecurity, because they are in Jesus Christ who gives a hope that is sure and steadfast. Righteous courage is manifested throughout Scripture in such men as Joseph, Moses, Caleb, Joshua, David, Elijah, Daniel, the three young Hebrew men, Paul, etc. (See. Hebrews 11:1-40.) The degree of courage depends on the spiritual level the Christian is living. Furthermore, the spiritual level is determined by the indoctrination one has experienced. Who can deny that Peter disgraced himself by denying that he was one of Christ’s disciples (John 18:17; John 18:27)? Peter should have been humbled to have had both his sin and restoration predicted. (See Luke 22:31-34.) Peter was like a glass filled with muddy water. Under normal conditions, the mud settles to the bottom, and the water looks clear. However, under abnormal conditions, the water is stirred, and the condition becomes realistic. Peter’s self-confident statement, “Lord, I am ready to go with thee, both into prison, and to death” (Luke 22:33), was a manifestation of his flesh at its best before men. However, when he denied that he was Christ’s disciple, the muddy water of his flesh manifested his condition of life. Do not overlook the fact that Christ’s prayer, “I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not” (Luke 22:32), revealed Peter’s position. Our flesh will surely be exposed. Its untrustworthiness must be brought to light; and at the same time, the removal of the chaff causes faith to be more evident. Although Peter, through lack of courage, lied about being Christ’s disciple, the cowardly Simon became the courageous Peter on the day of Pentecost. Satan’s desire was to do Peter harm, but Christ’s desire by means of Satan’s sifting was Peter’s spiritual profit. The sifting of wheat does not destroy the kernel of life in the wheat. Even though there was some chaff in Peter, he was not all chaff. Although Jehoshaphat committed a heinous sin, Scripture records a “nevertheless [but]”: Nevertheless there are good things found in thee, in that thou hast taken away the groves out of the land, and hast prepared thine heart to seek God. —2 Chronicles 19:3 God distinguished a backslidden believer from an apostate. He preserves, reproves, and commends the Christian. Thus, in judgment, God remembers mercy. Jehoshaphat’s taking away the groves refers to his removing the idols worshipped in the groves. Even the good works done by God’s people are performed by grace. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 75: 04.1.7.3. FOUR KINGS IN JUDAH - HEZEKIAH ======================================================================== FOUR GOOD KINGS IN JUDAH SUBSEQUENT TO THE DIVISION OF THE KINGDOM Chapter 7iii - Hezekiah Hezekiah (the name means “strengthened of Jehovah”) was the third good king in Christ’s genealogy (2 Kings 18:1-37; 2 Kings 19:1-37; 2 Kings 20:1-21; 2 Chronicles 29:1-36; 2 Chronicles 30:1-27; 2 Chronicles 31:1-21; 2 Chronicles 32:1-33; Isaiah 36:1-22; Isaiah 37:1-38; Isaiah 38:1-22; Isaiah 39:1-8). There is more recorded history on Hezekiah (spelled Ezekias in Matthew 1:9) than on the other good kings in Judah subsequent to the division of the kingdom. The civil events of Hezekiah’s reign are emphasized over his religious life in II Kings; however, his religious life is stressed over his secular life in II Chronicles. Each book demonstrates that it is independent of but complimentary to the other. Difficulties are created by persons assuming that the books should be alike. Since both were written by one Author, God, they were written for the edification of His people. The life of Hezekiah challenges the supremacy of influence and circumstances. He was the good son of a wicked father, Ahaz, whose precept and example contributed nothing to his morality. Ahaz supported every form of heathenism he found in the land and introduced new varieties of sin from other lands. There was evil not only in the home but also in the southern kingdom. History proves that oftentimes the worst of fathers leave behind them the best of sons. This is only another proof of God’s absolute sovereignty. We are informed that God makes a distinction between persons (1 Corinthians 4:7). Ahaz could take no credit for the good character of his son, Hezekiah. Hezekiah did not honor the things his father had done; if he had, he would have dishonored God. The record states the following about Hezekiah: He trusted in the LORD God of Israel; so that after him was none like him among all the kings of Judah, nor any that were before him. For he clave to the LORD, and departed not from following him, but kept his commandments, which the LORD commanded Moses, And the LORD was with him, and he prospered whithersoever he went forth: and he rebelled against the king of Assyria, and served him not. He smote the Philistines, even unto Gaza, and the borders thereof, from the tower of the watchmen to the fenced city. —2 Kings 18:5-8 Hezekiah set out immediately to restore what Ahaz his father had destroyed. Hezekiah has been called a Jewish iconoclast (one who attacks cherished beliefs, traditional customs, and traditional institutions as being based on error or superstition—a destroyer of images). Therefore, he began by removing the high places, breaking the images, and cutting down the groves; and he broke in pieces the brazen serpent that Moses had made (2 Kings 18:4). The King saw that the brazen serpent was nothing but a piece of brass. Hence, he saw that what the people accounted as a god and worshipped by burning incense to it was only a lifeless, senseless piece of brass. The brazen serpent was not made for an object of worship, but for a means of a cure. Destruction of the brazen serpent was to the great displeasure of the people who worshipped it. Blind veneration for the past often becomes an obstacle in the path of spiritual progress. An intelligent regard for the past helps in the direction of progress, but clinging to customs becomes a hindrance. That which has been ordained by God for a blessing might be misused so as to become a curse. For example, ordinances may become curses if we worship them instead of Him whom they portray. Every symbol loses its significance and value if it is converted into an idol. The brazen serpent had not been mentioned for nearly 800 years until it became necessary for Hezekiah to destroy it. Although God commanded the serpent of brass to be made and used, there is no record of a Divine command for its preservation, as in the case of the golden pot that had manna, Aaron’s rod that budded, and the tables of the covenant. This demonstrates the importance of God’s people knowing the teaching of Scripture. A consideration of the record of the purpose for the brazen serpent is important at this point (Numbers 21:1-35). Making the distinction between “look and live” of Numbers 21:8-9 and “live and look” of Ezekiel 16:6-8 is absolutely imperative. The serpent was lifted up in the fortieth year of Israel’s wilderness journey. Chronologically, this event followed the “red heifer” offering of Numbers 19:1-22, God’s provision for the flesh during the wilderness journey. Those who lived by looking upon the serpent of brass lived in view of their entering Canaan, the promised possession. There is no looking in Ezekiel 16:6, because “living” there is by the voice of God which is regeneration. However, looking in Numbers 21:8-9 is conversion because Jesus Christ must be lifted up to effect a true conversion experience. Eternal life is outside the life of the flesh. The type in Numbers 21:1-35 teaches that sinful flesh has been condemned (Romans 8:3). Life involves the gift of the Holy Spirit (Romans 8:10). Therefore, by the Spirit the believer puts to death the deeds of the body (Romans 8:13) by looking at what the brazen serpent symbolizes. The cause for God’s ordering the making of the serpent of brass was twofold: (1) sin on man’s side and (2) grace on God’s side. The bite of the serpent was Divine conviction in the Israelites of what the flesh truly is in the source of its being. God is determined to bring His people to judge the root of the flesh. The serpent’s bite brought a conversion experience in the lives of the bitten Israelites who were healed. Christ did not use the analogy of the serpent of brass with Nicodemus (John 3:14-16) to teach how a person is regenerated (John 3:8). Conversion does not come in the same manner as regeneration. The sinner is passive in regeneration, but he is active in conversion. Regeneration is the motion of God toward the sinner, and conversion is the motion of the quickened sinner toward God. The brazen serpent was carried, not by God’s command, by the Israelites into the land of Canaan; and it became the object of idolatry which Hezekiah destroyed. Christians in any age must beware of uses and abuses of “church” history. Progress in the Christian life can be greatly hindered by romanticizing or absolutizing “church” history. Romanticizing the past means giving it a quality which it does not possess. Christians should be grateful to God for His servants of the past who made a contribution to the cause of Christ; but since Christians are imperfect, their achievements cannot be regarded as perfect. Absolutizing the past is to regard some period in the past as a norm for all time. As important as the reformation was, it should never be considered as the norm for all time. Although the puritans had a lot of truth, they should never take precedence over the Scriptures which are God’s absolute truth settled in heaven before the foundation of the world. A fallible “church” history must never take the place of the infallible Scriptures. Hezekiah was an outspoken King who called things by their correct names. He called the brazen serpent, Nehushtan, which means “a piece of brass.” While many were regarding the serpent of brass as some kind of god by burning incense to it, Hezekiah recognized it as an idol that must be destroyed. Many religionists assume that the ordinances of baptism and the Lord’s supper are a means of getting into Christ Jesus and Christ getting into them. May God grant us the courage to do as Hezekiah did and call things by their correct names. To make the ordinances the means of obtaining salvation is to make idols out of symbols ordained to portray salvation. Ordinances may become curses if we worship them instead of Him whom they reveal. Symbols lose their significance and value if they are converted into idols. Hezekiah demonstrated that he was a man of action by not only condemning but also destroying all the idols. Unlike the ordinances of the assembly of Christ, Hezekiah could destroy the idols, which included the brazen serpent, because there was no command from God for their preservation. The ordinances of the tabernacle, priesthood, and offerings have served their purpose. Christians, therefore, have moved from the symbols to embrace the substance. (See Hebrews 10:1-39.) Hezekiah’s surroundings were extremely unfavorable (2 Chronicles 29:1-36); therefore, the character of his work deserves special attention. His wicked father had not only corrupted the court but also closed the door to God’s house. Knowing that the cause of Judah’s trouble was ungodliness, Hezekiah immediately began to put things in order. (1) His work began on the first day of the first month of the first year of his reign (2 Chronicles 29:3; 2 Chronicles 29:17). (2) He opened the doors of the Lord’s house and repaired them (2 Chronicles 29:3). Reverence for God is at the foundation of all that is trustworthy in private character and enduring in public order. (3) The work was of a positive nature. It did not address itself chiefly to the destruction of the emblems of idolatry, but to the work of reconsecrating the temple (2 Chronicles 29:3-19). (4) Extreme measures were adopted in the work (2 Chronicles 31:1). Hezekiah went further in destroying the idols than either Asa or Jehoshaphat because he wanted no remaining germs of idolatry in Judah. (5) The work included putting things in order (2 Chronicles 29:4-5; 2 Chronicles 29:20; 2 Chronicles 29:28). He began with the priests; then the Levites, and then the rulers of the city. (6) The work called for sanctification (2 Chronicles 29:5; 2 Chronicles 29:15-16; 2 Chronicles 29:31), which went further than external legal rites to include repentance, faith, obedience, and fitting themselves for their respective services. (7) Hezekiah’s work had a good beginning. He was correct in life (2 Chronicles 29:2), prompt in action (2 Chronicles 29:3; 2 Chronicles 29:20), and holy in influence (2 Chronicles 29:5). (8) His work included the sad confession that the Lord had been forsaken (2 Chronicles 29:6); the Lord’s house had been abandoned (2 Chronicles 29:7); and God’s wrath had been incurred (2 Chronicles 29:8). (9) His work contained a wise appeal because he desired to make a covenant with the Lord (2 Chronicles 29:10), avert God’s wrath (2 Chronicles 29:10), and perform his duty (2 Chronicles 29:11). We must not conclude our consideration of Hezekiah without observing his sin before his death. After the Lord saved Hezekiah and the inhabitants of Jerusalem from the hand of Sennacherib, the king of Assyria, many brought gifts to Hezekiah. Thus, He was exalted in the sight of all nations. He became mortally ill and prayed to the Lord. The Lord gave him a sign, but Hezekiah failed to acknowledge the benefit he received because his heart was lifted up with pride. Therefore, the wrath of the Lord came on him, Judah, and Jerusalem (2 Chronicles 32:22-25). Hezekiah was very wealthy (2 Chronicles 32:27-30). If he had remained close to the Lord, he would have spoken to the ambassadors of Babylon of God’s unsearchable riches and not of his own worthless treasures of silver and gold (2 Chronicles 32:31). Notwithstanding Hezekiah humbled himself for the pride of his heart, both he and the inhabitants of Jerusalem, so that the wrath of the LORD came not upon them in the days of Hezekiah. And Hezekiah had exceeding much riches and honour.... —2 Chronicles 32:26-27 Genuine goodness desires neither record nor remembrance. God left Hezekiah to try him in order that the King might know all that was in his heart (2 Chronicles 32:31). This trial, like all trials in the lives of God’s people, was in order that the King might discover for himself and others what he really was in himself. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 76: 04.1.7.4. FOUR KINGS IN JUDAH - JOSIAH ======================================================================== FOUR GOOD KINGS IN JUDAH SUBSEQUENT TO THE DIVISION OF THE KINGDOM Chapter 7iv. - Josiah Josiah (spelled Josias in Matthew 1:10) was the last of the good kings of Judah to be named in the genealogy of Jesus Christ (Matthew 1:10-11). His name means “sustained by Jehovah.” This last good King was prophesied over 300 years before his birth (1 Kings 13:2). He was eight years of age when he began to reign. The high points in his life were his conversion at the age of 16, finding the book of the law which had been lost, and the reformation of Judah. In the eighth year of his reign, Josiah began to seek after the God of David (2 Chronicles 34:3). His desire to seek the Lord was equivalent to spiritual enlightenment. The Psalmist said, “O satisfy us early with thy mercy; that we may rejoice and be glad all our days” (Psalms 90:14). In seeking the Lord early, Josiah turned from the way of the world, the carnal desires of youth, the vanities of imaginations, false friends, and evil counselors. Satisfaction is the cry of humanity, but God’s mercy alone can give lasting gratification. Realization of Divine mercy is one link in the chain of blessings that began in God’s eternal purpose and extends through the ceaseless cycles of eternity. He has made everything appropriate in its time. He has also set eternity in their heart, yet so that man will not find out the work which God has done from the beginning even to the end. —Ecclesiastes 3:11 (NASB) After Josiah’s conversion and prior to the discovery of the book of the law, he began to purge Judah and Jerusalem from idolatry. Six years later the book of the law was found, and he learned from it how defective his purging had been. Therefore, he proceeded to a cleansing that would be in accordance with Scripture rather than one that met the approval of traditions or his uninformed conscience. Conscience is revealed in Scripture as needing the aid of objective truth to develop it. Therefore, in regeneration the objective truth is written in the new heart as a power to govern and transform. Hence, the light of Josiah’s convicted conscience led him to discover the revealed law of God. “So let us know, let us press on to know the LORD...” (Hosea 6:3 NASB). What appears to be a discrepancy between 2 Kings 23:1-37 and 2 Chronicles 34:1-33 disappears when one realizes that there was a partial restoration before the book of the law was found. The finding of the book of the law gave Josiah a new basis for his faith and courage. Knowledge of the law of God enlarges one’s concept of duty. The results of the law of God being lost were as follows: (1) Knowledge of truth was lost. There must be an objective standard of truth. Without it, everyone does what is right in his own eyes. (2) There was no true worship of God apart from His word: “God is spirit, and the ones worshipping must worship in spirit and truth” (John 4:24—translation). (3) The services of the temple ceased. (4) The sanctuary was polluted. (5) False religion came in like a flood. The land was filled with idols. (6) Crimes of violence and deeds of oppression abounded. Where there is no fear of God, there is hatred for men. (7) Immorality was rampant. The following are the results of finding the law of God: (1) False religion was destroyed. (See Galatians 1:6-9; Galatians 5:12.) (2) The people repented and turned to God. (3) Truth was learned. (4) The temple was beautified and opened for service. (5) A measure of mercy was experienced. (6) Truth was handed down to other ages. (7) Temple service was no longer in vain. The following are ways the importance of Divine truth is seen: (1) If we are in need of reviving, “Thy word has revived me” (Psalms 119:50 NASB). (2) If we are to grow, “desire the sincere milk of the word, that ye may grow thereby” (1 Peter 2:2). (3) If we are to be fed, “man doth not live by bread only, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of the LORD doth man live” (Deuteronomy 8:3). (4) If our souls are enlightened, “The entrance of thy words giveth light” (Psalms 119:130). (5) If our hearts are comforted, they must be comforted “through patience and comfort of the scriptures” (Romans 15:4). (6) If we are renewed, we are “renewed in knowledge” (Colossians 3:10). (7) If we are to be established, God must “stablish you in every good word and work ” (2 Thessalonians 2:17). (8) If we are to be conquerors, we overcome “by the word of their testimony” (Revelation 12:11). It was no mere coincidence that Hilkiah, the priest, found a “book of the law of the LORD” (2 Chronicles 34:14) because the priest was busy trying to set things in order (2 Kings 22:3-14). The law of God can be lost in the assembly place or home even though a copy of it may be located therein. Hence, the Bible is a lost book to those who neglect it, disbelieve it, or disobey God. As soon as a person has been quickened by the Spirit of God, he is made to realize the importance of the word of God in preserving his salvation. Paul referred the elders in Ephesus “to God, and to the word of his grace, which is able to build you up, and to give you an inheritance among all them which are sanctified” (Acts 20:32). Both the God of the word and the word of God are identified in this passage. Placing the written word on a level with the incarnate Word, the Divine Being, is improper because that would lessen the glory of the Divine Being. However, the written word, which is the sword of the Spirit (Ephesians 6:17), has the power to accomplish a great work, the conversion and progressive sanctification of the one who has been begotten of God. Josiah’s piety was demonstrated by his having a tender heart: Because thine heart was tender, and thou didst humble thyself before God, when thou heardest his words against this place, and against the inhabitants thereof, and humblest thyself before me, and didst rend thy clothes, and weep before me: I have even heard thee also, saith the LORD. Behold, I will gather thee to thy fathers, and thou shalt be gathered to thy grave in peace.... —2 Chronicles 34:27-28 Since all by nature have stony hearts, all the threatenings in the world will do no good. The heart must be wrought upon by the power of God in order to become tender. One with a tender heart desires to know the will of God. Hence, a tender heart implies one’s readiness for spiritual things, a disposition to obey revealed truth, and the desire to make the things of God his chief business. The great things in the life of Josiah have been observed, but sin was displayed in his life when he “hearkened not unto the words of Necho from the mouth of God” (2 Chronicles 35:22). The good King “disguised himself”; that is, he clothed himself falsely. Disguising oneself means undertaking something which contradicts one’s character by dress, speech, or manner of life. Our hearts are so deceptive that while priding ourselves on our subjection to the Scriptures we may, like Josiah, refuse a message from God by a heathen messenger. Necho, King of Egypt, slew Josiah at Megiddo. Egypt remained the dominant power until the fourth year of Jehoiakim, and in that year Nebuchadnezzar defeated Necho. Following Josiah’s death, all Judah and Jerusalem mourned his death. Although Josiah died at the age of 39, the length of his life did not determine his usefulness. Surely there is a warning for God’s people in general in the sins of the four good Kings mentioned in Christ’s genealogy. Asa’s sin was relying on the King of Syria and not on God. Jehoshaphat joined affinity with wicked Ahab. Hezekiah sought his own glory in preference to God’s honor. Josiah refused a message from God by a heathen King. The sins of these good Kings were not recorded for our emulation but for a warning. Spiritual decline continued in Judah, and the people were led into Babylonian captivity while Jehoiachin, grandson of Josiah, was reigning (2 Kings 24:8-16). God caused Judah to be carried away into captivity because of her sin: Thus saith the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel, unto all that are carried away captives, whom I have caused to be carried away from Jerusalem unto Babylon. —Jeremiah 29:4 The sin was great which induced a loving God to cause His chosen people to be driven away into Babylonian captivity for seventy years. (See Deuteronomy 31:17-18.) The Lord had required Israel to observe every seventh year as a season of Sabbatic rest. This injunction had been practically ignored for four hundred and ninety years. Seventy Sabbatic years had been desecrated; hence, seventy years of captivity in Babylon was Israel’s punishment. The purpose of the captivity was not only to punish but also to reform. God’s people reap what they sow. The captivity taught Judah what it meant to be without the sanctuary, to be deprived of the Scriptures, and to be governed civilly by pagans. Babylon represents the current system of religion to which many of God’s people have been subjected and to which many are rendering service. Any time Christians take part in a service not ordered by the Spirit of God, they are in spiritual captivity. It is impossible for religious Babylon, which lies in the lap of the Devil (1 John 5:19), and Christians to take common ground before God in worship and service. The heavenly character of God’s people cannot be known by an earthly system. The headship of Jesus Christ cannot be embraced by a totalitarian power of this world’s system. The saints of God cannot serve God in a system that recognizes nothing above the flesh. Although Israel as a nation was on a downward course, God purposed the return of a remnant. It had been prophesied, and God provided for it by His ways in government. (See Jeremiah 25:1-38; Jeremiah 29:1-32.) God’s people, the Israelites, were cast out but not cast off. The captivity was God’s judgment upon His people for their sins, but it was judgment tempered with mercy. God’s covenant people are not immunized against either sinning or being punished for their sins. Responsibility always accompanies privilege. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 77: 04.1.8. A SHORT REVIVAL UNDER ZERUBBABEL ======================================================================== Chapter 8 - A SHORT REVIVAL UNDER ZERUBBABEL The Temple Rebuilt Zerubbabel was God’s chosen servant to lead the remnant back to Jerusalem to rebuild the temple (Haggai 2:23; Ezra 5:1-2; Zechariah 4:1-10). The return of the remnant was in fulfillment of a prophecy given by Isaiah nearly two hundred years before (Isaiah 44:12-28). The Lord addressed Cyrus personally (Isaiah 45:1-25). When Babylon fell, the kingdom was replaced by the Persians. The name Cyrus was the Persian designation for the sun (Isaiah 45:6). The Lord reaffirmed to Cyrus that He was Jehovah and that He had equipped him for this particular job at this particular time, when Cyrus did not know Him (Isaiah 45:5). The Persian King represents an aspect of world power that God overrules and uses for the benefit of His people. Cyrus was chosen before he was born for the purpose of releasing the remnant after their seventy years of captivity so the remnant could return to rebuild the temple. (See Isaiah 41:2; Isaiah 44:28; Isaiah 45:1-5; Isaiah 48:14.) The rule of Cyrus over Babylon was no accident. “THE king’s heart is in the hand of the LORD, as the rivers of water: he turneth it whithersoever he will” (Proverbs 21:1). Hence, the liberties or captivities of God’s people are not accidental. They are the results of God’s choice. When the remnant returned under the leadership of Zerubbabel, God had no thought of setting up something new. The lesson, therefore, for God’s people in every age is that God would have His people to return to His original thoughts. God’s thoughts are not man’s thoughts, and His ways are not ours (Isaiah 55:8). The vessels of the tabernacle that were out of their Divinely appointed places were not a blessing to the people. They must be returned. Not only did the people have to return to their Divinely appointed places but all the services of the temple had to be restored to their Divinely appointed places. For the application of this principle, the believer should study Acts 2:37-47, 1 Corinthians 12:1-31, and Ephesians 4:1-16. The rebuilding of the temple was not without opposition. The work had no sooner begun when the adversaries of Judah and Benjamin said, “Let us build with you” (Ezra 4:2). When God opens a door, there are adversaries (1 Corinthians 16:9). The refusal of the adversaries by the remnant caused them to manifest their true colors. They were “the people of the land” (Ezra 4:4). Hence, counselors were hired by the people of the land against the Jews. Every effort was made to frustrate the purpose of the returned exiles. God’s people are responsible to let “the people of the land” know that they have nothing to do with the building of God’s house (Ezra 4:3). However, the efforts by Israel’s adversaries were not deterred. When our enemies cannot bend us to their wishes and aims by plausible pretenses, they alter their tactics to unscrupulous opposition in various forms. Letters were written against Jerusalem. The Jews were accused of building the rebellious and bad city (Ezra 4:12). This frightened the Jews, and they ceased from their work for fifteen years. The zeal of the people for the sanctuary of God grew cold during the long delay. They looked on the unfinished work and said, “The time is not come, the time that the LORD’s house should be built” (Haggai 1:2). Opposition in itself has never hindered the Lord’s work. Waning interest by God’s people is the hindrance. According to Haggai, the work ceased because it was no longer the people’s chief interest. When God’s chief interest becomes ours, things go well; but when this concern ceases, some form of self-consideration manifests itself. This very thing caused Paul to write as he did to the assembly at Philippi: “For all seek their own, not the things which are Jesus Christ’s” (Php 2:21). Haggai gave a vivid description of this self-centeredness in his prophecy. Haggai’s Prophecy According to Ezra 5:1, Haggai and Zechariah were among the first exiles to return to Jerusalem. Nothing about Haggai is known beyond the fact that he was a prophet working in conjunction with Zechariah. Haggai began to prophesy two months before Zechariah, and his prophesying continued three months and twenty-four days. Whereas, Zechariah’s prophesies continued three years. The name Haggai means “my feasts,” signifying anticipation of the return of the remnant from Babylonian captivity. Haggai uttered four short prophecies. Each message began with “...came the word of the LORD” (Haggai 1:1; Haggai 2:1; Haggai 2:10; Haggai 2:20). The subject of Haggai’s prophecy was the temple. He sought to show the remnant that their neglecting God’s house was neglect of God. If they had really thought of God, His house would have been their primary interest. This was the burden of the prophet’s first message of chapter one. This prophecy by Haggai produced the desired effect. The people rose up to resume their work of rebuilding the temple. Haggai exhorted them to be strong and build because the Lord was with them (Haggai 2:1-9). This second prophecy came one month after discouragement seems to have overtaken them. Two months later the prophet showed the returned remnant that sacrifices, however holy in themselves, cannot sanctify disobedience and self-will (Haggai 2:10-19). That which is holy cannot sanctify the profane, but that which is unclean defiles that which is holy—the main lesson of this message was to reveal this to them. Haggai showed that war will continue until the second advent of the great King of Israel (Haggai 2:20-23). The prophet had something to say to Zerubbabel on the same day that he gave his third message. The message addressed to Zerubbabel concerned the Messiah, of whom Zerubbabel was a type. The subject of Haggai’s first message was responsibility. Neglected responsibility incurs chastening. Therefore, Haggai’s mission was to urge the Jews to fulfill their incumbent work. The people acknowledged that the work was needful, but they said the time had not come to build the Lord’s house (Haggai 1:2). How did they know the time had not come? Were they judges of the time? Had they been given the freedom to return to Jerusalem to build their own houses before they built God’s house? Were they to provide for the flesh before they provided for the soul? Here is a classic example of how people can be orthodox but disobedient. Hence, correctness of opinion and incorrectness of conduct may coexist in the same people. Postponement is a denial by conduct of what the intellect affirms. The cause of God suffers more from its professed friends than from its avowed enemies. While the Jews were taking care of themselves and their own interests, the building of the temple was neglected. Sin is essentially selfish. Since the Jews did not have the courage to disallow God’s claim, they acknowledged it; but said, “The time is not come....” Haggai sought to shame the people by asking a probing question: “Is it time for you, O ye, to dwell in your cieled [paneled] houses, and this house lie waste [desolate]?” (Haggai 1:4). He asked them to consider their ways (Haggai 1:5; Haggai 1:7). Consideration is the operation of the mind in order to bring about reformation of life. It is equivalent to “judge yourselves” (1 Corinthians 11:31). Little can be learned in life without deep consideration. Consideration is not the same as meditation, which is the continued operation of the mind of those who have been revived by contemplation. The revived person meditates in God’s law day and night (Psalms 1:2). The Jews had outward difficulties of circumstance; but their chief hindrance was their personal interests, as Haggai 1:6 reveals. Money had been diverted from God’s work to personal use, which resulted in spiritual drought. In Haggai 1:6, the bad investment by God’s people was revealed by Haggai in a fivefold manner: 1. They had sown much but harvested little: “Ye have sown much, and bring in little.” Israel’s sowing was for themselves; therefore, nothing spiritual could be expected. There may be much activity but no fruit. When God’s house is neglected, no fruit can be expected because the assembly of Jesus Christ has been appointed for the propagation of God’s word. 2. They ate but were not satisfied: “Ye eat, but ye have not enough.” There is a kind of eating which gives no satisfaction. Too many of God’s people have developed spiritual malnutrition from being fed the wrong food by man-appointed preachers. Others have deliberately eaten the wrong food when better food was available. 3. They drank but were not filled with spiritual drink: “Ye drink, but ye are not filled with drink.” There is a drinking that adds nothing to the spiritual man. Artificial drinks can never take the place of the river of God. The Psalmist said, “As the hart panteth after the water brooks, so panteth my soul after thee, O God. My soul thirsteth for God, for the living God...” (Psalms 42:1-2). The spiritually thirsty person can find satisfaction by going directly to the sovereign Lord for the best wine (John 2:10). 4. They clothed themselves but were not sufficiently warm: “Ye clothe you, but there is none warm.” One may be clothed with things that give no warmth to the soul. Too many think that to admire and discuss heavenly garments is fine, but to be clothed with them is unnecessary. The fashion of the religious world is setting the fashion for Christ’s assembly. Hence, many believers improperly adorned before God appear in the eyes of the religious world to be properly adorned. 5. They earned wages but did not spend them wisely: “and he that earneth wages earneth wages to put it into a bag [purse] with holes.” The only purse without holes is the will of God. While toiling for their temporal gratification, the Jews did not realize that God would send a drought upon their land, crops, cattle, and the labor of their hands (Haggai 1:11). They knew how to make money but did not know how to take care of it. Half the battle of life is to make money, and the other half is to take care of it. The Jews had looked for much, but it came to little (Haggai 1:9). Their sin of preferring their own interests before God’s caused both their spiritual and physical droughts. Haggai recorded God’s message to the remnant of Israel before Christ’s first advent, and the letter to Laodicea (Revelation 3:1-22) records God’s message to the remnant of God’s people before Christ’s second advent. Haggai told Israel that the drought they experienced was because of their neglect. His remarks produced the desired effect. The people rose up and began the work of rebuilding the temple which had been interrupted for fifteen years by Israel’s surrounding enemies (Ezra 1:1-11; Ezra 2:1-70; Ezra 3:1-13; Ezra 4:1-24). There will always be outward opposition, but outward opposition is not as bad as inward disinterest. Living in our own things leads to spiritual poverty and dissatisfaction. Haggai prophesied in a transition period. The return of the captives to Jerusalem was the glimmering dawn in a very dark and stormy night. They had been in Babylonian captivity without a sanctuary, without hearing the word of God, and under the rule of pagans for seventy years. Although this was a time of darkness, the darkest hour spiritually and physically is just before dawn. As Israel’s darkest hour preceded the first advent of Jesus Christ, the Christian’s darkest hour precedes the second advent of Jesus Christ. Therefore, like Haggai, we are to hold forth the word of life whether people hear or forbear. No matter how dark the hour, the path of the Christian shines brighter and brighter until the perfect day (Proverbs 4:18). Haggai’s second message was one of encouragement (Haggai 2:1-9). He had sharply rebuked the remnant in the first message. Recovery from captivity was slow and painful. The remnant was weak and despised. They were opposed by the Samaritans and discredited at the Persian court. Self-justification is easy when one is eager to recede from duty that seems, from man’s point of view, impossible to accomplish. Looking at circumstances rather than to the God of circumstances will discourage God’s people any time. Success does not lie with God’s people but with their God. The glorious past is never disdained, but there is a future to inspire God’s people. Haggai asked: Who is left among you that saw this house in her first glory? and how do ye see it now? is it not in your eyes in comparison of it as nothing? —Haggai 2:3 There is a past that humbles the present. Israel had a glorious past in spite of her sins. She had been redeemed from Egyptian slavery. She had been delivered by power through the Red Sea. She had experienced provision for her in her wanderings in the wilderness. She enjoyed God-given victory in the land of Canaan. Nevertheless, God does not regard the past as the end of His manifestations. The past with Israel was a memory, and the future was a dream. The future that inspires the present is the consummation of all things in the kingdom. Because we have seen greatness, we shall see glory. Hence, the future will be more than a dream. As we await the kingdom, we should be strong because the Lord promised to be with us. He is with us in acceptance and in assistance. Reference is made in Haggai 2:4 to not only the covenanting God but also to the Holy Spirit who remains with us and was remaining with the Israelites. Jesus Christ promised the disciples that He would send the Comforter who would never leave nor forsake us but would be with us forever (John 14:16). The Trinity in unity is portrayed in Haggai 2:5. The angel of the Lord appeared to Moses in a flame of fire out of the midst of a burning bush to give God’s word to Moses concerning Israel’s deliverance from Egypt (Exodus 3:1-22). Christ is called the messenger (angel) of the Lord (Malachi 3:1). Hence, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit were with Israel and are with the children of God today. The believer should have no fear because he has God in Christ by the Holy Spirit: “For through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father” (Ephesians 2:18). Haggai’s prophecy of Haggai 2:6-9, like that of other Old Testament prophecies, told of the advent of the Messiah without distinguishing His first and second advents. The Lord spoke of a “little while” when He will shake the heavens (Haggai 2:6). A little while to God is a long time to us: “...one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day” (2 Peter 3:8). Sometimes God’s help seems long in coming because we are shortbreathed and shortsighted. The Jews found by experience that the spoiling of their goods caused them to exercise the patience which they needed, but waiting for the fulfillment of God’s promise required more than ordinary patience. It required God-given patience. The time of the great shaking is explained in the following verses in Hebrews: Whose voice then shook the earth: but now he hath promised, saying, Yet once more I shake not the earth only, but also heaven. And this word, Yet once more, signifieth the removing of those things that are shaken, as of things that are made, that those things which cannot be shaken may remain. Wherefore we receiving a kingdom which cannot be moved, let us have grace, whereby we may serve God acceptably with reverence and godly fear: For our God is a consuming fire. —Hebrews 12:26-29 This great shaking will not be the result of the preaching of the gospel of the Lord Jesus. It will be when Jesus Christ comes in Person as King of kings and Lord of lords. It goes beyond the gospel dispensation to the second advent of our Lord. The Lord “will shake all nations, and the desire of all nations shall come: and I will fill this house with glory, saith the LORD of hosts” (Haggai 2:7). The desire of all nations will be Christ. Christ is not presently the desire of all nations. The time that Christ will be the desire of all nations will occur when the kingdoms of this world shall become the kingdom of our Lord and His Christ (Revelation 11:15). Hence, Jesus Christ is not only the Deliverer but He will also bring the things desired by all nations—peace, health, abundance, and happiness. The moral glory of God in the temple at the first advent is here overleaped and His apparition in glory is predicted. He will then manifestly fill the house with glory. The Spirit pointed to the excellency of that glory above material glory (Haggai 2:8-9). Although the streets of Jerusalem will be gold (Revelation 21:1-27), spiritual glory that shall fill the house will far exceed that. The absence of precious metals from the first house made the people ashamed of that house. But they were assured that its last glory would be greater than its first, and that it would also be the dwelling place of the Prince of peace. The prophet’s third message showed that sacrifices, however holy in themselves, cannot sanctify disobedience and self-will (Haggai 2:10-19). The people who had neglected Jehovah had become profane. That which is holy cannot sanctify profane things. On the other hand, an unclean thing can defile that which is holy. The presence of evil destroys holiness merely by its presence, unless holiness is the nature of God. God’s holiness excludes all that is contrary to it. Mere ceremonial holiness can neither impart virtue to our actions in daily life nor render our efforts in the service of God acceptable. Haggai concluded with the thought that when the heart is right, chastisement will stop and blessing will begin. God had a message through Haggai for Zerubbabel in Haggai 2:20-23. God purposed to magnify Christ, of whom Zerubbabel was a type. In Haggai 2:23, five things of importance are included in the message: (1) The set time—“In that day”; (2) the person to be advanced—“my servant”; (3) the Author of the advancement—“I...will take thee”; (4) the ground and reason—“I have chosen thee”; (5) the ratification of the promise—“I...will make thee as a signet.” The promise was sealed with the seal of the living God. Observe the contrast between this seal and that of Jeremiah 22:24—“As I live, saith the LORD, though Coniah the Son of Jehoiakim king of Judah were the signet upon my right hand, yet would I pluck thee thence.” God rejected Jechonias (Coniah); but in Jesus Christ, the greater Son of David, and Zerubbabel, God’s signet shall be impressed upon all nations in His perfect will and way. In God’s providence, the remnant of the Jews had been given freedom to return to Jerusalem to rebuild the temple. However, the rebuilt temple did not have the glory of the first: (1) There was no king in Jerusalem. (2) The disobedience of Israel was felt in everything. The times of the Gentiles had already begun with Nebuchadnezzar and would not be completed until the perfection of the kingdom under the righteous rule of the Messiah, the Lord Jesus Christ. While sustaining the faith of the remnant by His mercy, God went much further in His prophecy. Since God would not manifest Himself as He had in times past because of Israel’s disobedience, the time would come for His intervention by His own power in the kingdom. As Israel is looking for the perfection of the kingdom, the assembly of Christ is looking for the completion of the bride who shall inherit the kingdom. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 78: 04.1.9. CONCLUSION ======================================================================== Chapter 9 - CONCLUSION Some attention should be given to the supposed discrepancies in the second section of Christ’s genealogy recorded in the first chapter of Matthew. There is little agreement among scholars concerning the generations, how they should be divided, and how to harmonize the discrepancies. Some have suggested that the genealogical records were destroyed in 70 A.D.; but if that were true, it would have no effect on the fact that the enemies of Jesus Christ never challenged that He was the rightful heir to David’s throne. Their nonquestioning of Jesus Christ’s descent from David during His earthly life is a great comfort to the people of God in a day when critics are trying to cut the Bible to pieces. The generations have been divided by men in the following ways: FIRST: The first division goes from Abraham to David (14 generations), the second from David (heading the second division) to the captivity (Josiah) (14 generations), and the third from the captivity represented by Jechoniah to Christ (14 generations). SECOND: The first division goes from Abraham to David (14 generations), the second from Solomon to Jechoniah (14 generations), and the third from Jechoniah to Jesus Christ (14 generations). Jechoniah’s childlessness, predicted in Jeremiah 22:30, meant no more than that none of his offspring would occupy David’s earthly throne. Furthermore, his change before and after the deportation justifies his being counted twice. (See 2 Kings 25:27-30; Jeremiah 52:31-34.) Being freed from prison, Jechoniah was treated kindly by Evil-merodach, King of Babylon; and he received a seat above the kings that were with him in Babylon. This may be illustrated with an analogy to Mr. Cleveland, an American President, who must be counted twice since he served as president for two nonconsecutive terms—1885-1889; 1893-1897. THIRD: There are not literally 42 generations from Abraham to Christ. The three fourteens are used to show the completion of the Divine purpose. At the death of Josiah, Jehoahaz reigned three months. He was followed by Jehoiakim, the father of Jechoniah. Jechoniah was never a king. The kings in order were Josiah, Jehoahaz, Jehoiakim—the puppet, Jehoiachin—son of Jehoiakim, and Zedekiah (Mattaniah)—son of Josiah. This division can be confirmed by explaining 2 Chronicles 36:1-2; 2 Kings 23:30-36; 2 Kings 24:1; 2 Kings 24:6; 2 Kings 24:15; 2 Kings 24:17; and Jeremiah 22:28-30. Since no one has come up with a valid argument on the divisions of the generations from Abraham to Christ, this writer rests his case by saying the infallible Spirit of God had His unexplained reason for stating it as He did in Matthew 1:17. It must be observed that there were omissions of the kings from this genealogy, and some say the answer to that is found in Exodus 20:4-5. The genealogy by Matthew speaks of deterioration. Corruption and hopelessness are clearly evident in it. It begins with Abraham; and as generation after generation passes, the shameful history of national Israel unfolds. However, such a history apart from God’s unconditional covenant of grace would be only unexplained desires and unfulfilled hopes. Therefore, we see the unfolding of the dawn of the day which Abraham rejoiced to see (John 8:56), and we hear Simeon say: ...mine eyes have seen thy salvation, Which thou hast prepared before the face of all people; A light to lighten the Gentiles, and the glory of thy people Israel. —Luke 2:30-32 Although God placed a curse on the descendants of Jechoniah, Jesus Christ escaped the curse by being virgin born and yet becoming the legal heir to David’s throne. The third division of the generations from Abraham to Joseph reveals the spiritual darkness that preceded the first advent of Jesus Christ. Nothing can be written about the time of spiritual darkness, because Scripture is silent about the 400 years when there was no prophet in Israel or Judah. In the study of the three divisions, we have seen regression from promises to decline; now we observe darkness. Light, diminishing light, and darkness constitute an order that is manifested throughout Scripture. The age of the New Testament assembly is not different from other ages. Apostasy was predicted before the death of the apostles. The greatest period of spiritual darkness the world has ever seen will precede the second advent of Jesus Christ. This concludes Volume I in which we have considered the King’s genealogy. Volume II will continue with the next aspect in our study of Christ’s future Kingdom. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 79: 04.2.0. CHRIST'S KINGDOM IS FUTURE - VOL II ======================================================================== Christ’s Kingdom Is Future Volume II Introduction Of The King by W. E. Best Copyright © 1992 W. E. Best Scripture quotations in this book designated “NASB” are from the NEW AMERICAN STANDARD BIBLE, © 1960, 1962, 1963, 1968, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1975, and 1977 by the Lockman Foundation, and are used by permission. Those designated “translation” are by the author and taken from the Greek Text. All others are from the King James Bible. This book is distributed by the W. E. Best Book Missionary Trust P. O. Box 34904 Houston, Texas 77234-4904 USA CONTENTS Author’s Note 1. Introduction 2. The King’s Birth 3. The King’s Mother 4. The King’s Incarnation 5. The King Of The Jews 6. The King’s Forerunners 7. Baptism Of The King 8. The Greatness Of John 9. John’s Message Of Repentance 10. The Baptismal Formula 11. Joel’s Prophecy Of Baptism In The Spirit And Fire 12. John’s Prophecy Of Baptism In The Spirit And Fire 13. Partial Fulfillment Of The Prophecies Of Joel And John 14. Complete Fulfillment Of The Prophecies Of Joel And John 15. The Kingdom Prophesied Fulfilled Prophecies Partially Fulfilled Prophecies Unfulfilled Prophecies The Kingdom Defined 17. The Kingdom Has Approached 18. The Kingdom Prepared From The Foundation Of The World AUTHOR’S NOTE This is Volume II of an extensive series on the subject of Christ’s future Kingdom. Volume I covered the King’s genealogy. Volume II covers the introduction of the King. Future volumes will be released periodically. The complete series will comprehensively cover all aspects of Christ’s future Kingdom as revealed in the Scriptures from Genesis 1:1 to Revelation 22:21. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 80: 04.2.01. INTRODUCTION ======================================================================== Chapter 1 - INTRODUCTION There is one true and living God, one true concept of man’s origin, one plan of deliverance from sin, one New Testament assembly which Jesus Christ is building, and one future kingdom of Jesus Christ. When the Holy Scriptures are handled correctly by a Christian whose mind is free from deception, he will readily admit that all conflicting views about theology, anthropology, soteriology, ecclesiology, and eschatology cannot be true. Hence, all the discussion about ecumenism is a sham, because it is a manifestation of deception. Apart from the grace of the sovereign God, an obedient life to the revealed will of God, and a clear understanding of the whole counsel of God (all the major Biblical principles), one not only will misrepresent many Biblical principles but also will try to conceal his own lack of knowledge and character. Persons who think they cannot be deceived are the most reprehensibly deluded, because the most studious believer knows that no Christian is beyond seduction to some degree. (See Romans 16:17-18; 1 Corinthians 3:18; Ephesians 5:6; 1 John 3:7.) Thus, the greater knowledge one has of the faith once delivered to the saints (Jude 1:3), the less deceit he will experience. Conversely, one who has little knowledge is incapable of withstanding the deluder’s craftiness, and he tries to defend his own fraudulence. No wonder Hosea said, “My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge” (Hosea 4:6). Persons who are denominationally oriented cannot honestly make an objective examination of any Biblical subject. When a Biblical subject is examined from the viewpoints of the Reformed Faith, Baptist Faith, Methodist Faith, etc., those making the perusal have already admitted that they are viewing the subject through denominationally colored glasses. Scripture speaks of “one faith” (Ephesians 4:5), and that one faith (system of truth) “has been once for all delivered [paradotheise, aorist passive participle of paradidomi, which means to deliver, entrust, hand down, pass on, or teach] to the saints” (Jude 1:3—translation). There is nothing superfluous in the sphere of God’s objective truth, because it is God’s gift once for all given to the saints, not to the unregenerate. Therefore, a Biblical subject must be studied not from the viewpoint of some “denominational faith” but by gathering all the Biblical data on the subject under investigation in order to view the subject in the light of the whole of Scripture rather than a few isolated passages. The following things illustrate that every so-called “denominational faith” is built on a few excessively emphasized isolated passages of Scripture: (1) Those who teach baptismal regeneration have their “pig trail” of Scriptures which they think support their particular institutions (Mark 16:16; John 3:5; Acts 2:38; Acts 22:16; Galatians 3:27; 1 Peter 3:20-21). They are so deceived by their misinterpretation of these verses that they are unable to see that God’s purpose in His eternal covenant of grace, redemption by the blood of Jesus Christ, and Divine quickening (regeneration) by the Holy Spirit must precede water in the Divine order. (2) Others, like those who believe in baptismal regeneration, isolate a few passages which they think teach that baptism in the Holy Spirit is for men today. This neopentecostalism is the result of John Wesley’s experiential theology, which was followed by Charles Finney’s experiential methodology. Although there are only seven references in the New Testament to baptism in the Holy Spirit (Matthew 3:11; Mark 1:8; Luke 3:16; John 1:33; Acts 1:5; Acts 11:16; 1 Corinthians 12:13), the unsuspecting are led by neopentecostal religiously-zealous people, without Biblical knowledge, to think the Bible is full of the subject of baptism in the Spirit. The seven references mentioned are divided into two sections. The first five point to Pentecost and the last two point backward to what happened at Pentecost. (3) Others take a few verses, like the “kingdom is at hand,” “the kingdom of God is come unto you,” “it is your Father’s good pleasure to give you the kingdom,” “the kingdom of God is within you,” and “translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son” (Matthew 3:2; Matthew 12:28; Luke 12:32; Luke 17:21; Colossians 1:13), and try to fit the whole subject of the kingdom into these few texts without explaining them within their own contexts. They deny a future kingdom and spiritualize these verses to mean either no future kingdom, a present realized kingdom, a kingdom in the heart, a present spiritual reign, gospel kingdom, etc. However, one cannot state too emphatically that a literal promise spiritualized is an interpretational hoax or breach of confidence. Following Paul’s reference to the defection of some from the truth (2 Timothy 1:13-18), he personally exhorted Timothy to be strong and to commit the things he had heard from Paul to the charge of faithful men, who shall be capable to teach others also (2 Timothy 2:2). Since every Scripture is God-breathed, men who are responsible to instruct God’s sheep can never permit revelation apart from the written word. To do so would be a denial that the Bible is perfect and complete. The man of God is qualified to teach others because he has been permanently equipped (perfect passive participle of exartidzo, which means to furnish perfectly or to be perfectly equipped) (2 Timothy 3:17). Having been permanently equipped, he must not do the following things: (1) He must not believe in God’s sovereignty and deny His unconditional covenant which is associated with His eternal purpose. (2) He must not hold to God-breathed Scripture and deny the authenticity of some of them. (3) He must not do wrong in order to have the opportunity of doing right. (4) He must not associate with those who reject the truth of God. (5) He must not be contemptible enough to profess one thing and believe and practice another. (6) He must not desire to embrace some passages but reject others that do not fit his organization. (7) He must not talk about loving the Lord and His word while giving little or no time to either. People want a one minute answer to a question on Biblical principles that involves hundreds or thousands of hours of examination. A complex question can never be resolved with a simple answer, because every Biblical subject is composed of many interconnected thoughts and parts. This may be illustrated with an interrogator and a physician. The interrogator may ask the physician what causes blood to flow throughout the arteries and veins in the human body. The physician would answer that the heart, a muscular organ, by rhythmic contractions and relaxations keeps the blood circulating throughout body. The answer may seem simple until the interrogator asks a second question, what causes the heart to contract and relax? Many physicians would give a scientific explanation of life; however, the life principle cannot be explained apart from God, the Giver of life. When God is brought into any discussion, the subject becomes so complex that it includes His eternal purpose. Hence, one can understand that most people have a meager (lacking fullness or richness) understanding of Divine principles. The richness and fullness of Divine principles can never be experientially known apart from a laborious study of God’s gold mine of eternal verities. The following is a brief list of important Biblical principles where understanding is lacking: FIRST—The difference between the revealed and concealed things of God’s will is known to few “professing believers.” “The secret things belong to the LORD our God, but the things revealed belong to us and to our sons forever, that we may observe all the words of this law” (Deuteronomy 29:29 NASB). These are not two variant wills. That would be dualism (the theory that there are two basic principles), which contradicts the Biblical fact that God has one eternal purpose. God’s will is like a giant globe of which man is capable of seeing only the hemisphere of what God has been pleased to reveal. Man has always quarreled with God over what He has not been pleased to reveal, even though nature itself proves that in the Divine administration secrecy and benevolence coexist. God has not been pleased to reveal the mystery of the new birth in the changed life of one He chose in Christ (Colossians 1:27). God has not chosen to divulge the mystery of His breaking off some of the natural branches in order that the Gentiles shall be grafted in among them (Romans 11:17-26). Our ignorance of many things does not mean we cannot be sure of some things. Beware of the idea that everything unknown to you should be considered the secret things of God when you are too lazy to search the things which have been revealed. SECOND—God’s sovereignty and man’s responsibility are immensely misunderstood. Some basic things are absolutely essential in order that one may have the Biblical understanding of God and man: (1) Man “was” in a state of uprightness as he came from the sovereign God (Ecclesiastes 7:29). Before the fall, man was straight with the will and law of God. God did not create him and then make him upright. He created him upright. Had Adam’s uprightness been essential to his being, he would have lost his being in the fall. (2) Man “is” in a state of depravity because of his sin in Adam. How could Adam, who stood in created uprightness, fall? Do not make the mistake of failing to distinguish between Adam’s state of created uprightness before the fall and his state of uncreated righteousness with which God clothed him subsequent to the fall. A frequently repeated question is, why did God make man capable of falling? Although God made the sun and moon incapable of falling, He did not create upright man incapable of falling because in passing from matter to life He passed from comparative to probable certainty. Since God cannot create God, He created human life with a will which man himself could exercise. In exercising his will to refuse God’s command not to eat the forbidden fruit, man lost his uprightness and thereby became incapable of choosing that which is good. (3) God’s elected ones among men “shall” actually be in a state of grace. All the elect are in grace electively by the Father and redemptively by the Son before they are actually in grace by the Spirit of regeneration. Thus, the “shall” is made sure by election and redemption. All the regenerated will repent, but we must not assume that since we cannot regenerate a person we are free from the responsibility to reach people indiscriminately with the gospel for the conversion of those the sovereign Spirit regenerates. THIRD—The proper distinction between the present assembly which Jesus Christ is building and the future kingdom is made by few professing Christians. By not making this distinction, many are deceived and are deceiving others, thus robbing them of spiritual blessings. The kingdom was not designed to be the means of reaching the elect of God, but it was intended to be the completion and perfection of God’s eternal purpose concerning the elect. In 2 Timothy 4:1—"I solemnly charge you in the presence of God, and Jesus Christ, who is going to judge the living and dead at His coming and His kingdom" (translation)—Paul mentioned four solemn events: (1) recognition of Christ as the present searcher of hearts, (2) judgment that is destined to come, (3) Christ’s personal coming or appearance, and (4) Christ’s future kingdom. “Then the king shall say to those on his right hand, come, you who have been blessed of my Father, come into possession of the kingdom which has been prepared for you from the foundation of the world” (Matthew 25:34—translation). We are commanded to eagerly make our calling and election sure (2 Peter 1:10). “For in this way the entrance shall be richly provided for you into the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ” (2 Peter 1:11—translation). The success of God’s eternal purpose depends on His, not man’s, faithfulness. Man’s unfaithfulness never prevents the fulfillment of what God decreed. Therefore, the unfaithfulness of the first generation Jews did not prohibit the nation of Israel from entering Canaan (Numbers 32:13; Joshua 12:1). Furthermore, the Jews’ rejection of Christ during His first advent did not nullify God’s promise that “all Israel shall be saved” (Romans 11:26). Israel’s past and future are based on God’s election; therefore, election does not rest on Israel’s faithfulness but on God’s faithfulness. The coming kingdom is for not only the Jews chosen in Christ but also the Gentiles who are likewise chosen in Christ. The chosen Gentiles, being wild by nature, are grafted into the olive tree; and they shall partake of the blessings of the kingdom with the chosen Jews. Nothing in history has satisfied the description of events accompanying Christ’s coming and kingdom, such as destroying Satan’s power, casting him into the bottomless pit, delivering creation from the bondage of corruption, restoring all things, every eye seeing Jesus Christ, and His knowledge covering the earth as the waters cover the sea. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 81: 04.2.02. THE KING'S BIRTH ======================================================================== Chapter 2 - THE KING’S BIRTH The day of Jesus Christ’s birth was the saddest day in history because God’s chosen people, upon whom He had poured His blessings, refused Him: “He came unto his own, and his own received him not” (John 1:11). The people who studied the prophets rejected the One the prophets predicted, “...Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel” (Isaiah 7:14). Since the Jews, by whom and to whom the Old Testament Scriptures were given (Romans 3:1-2), were so spiritually blind that they did not recognize the One of whom the Scriptures spoke, the attitude of mankind in general is not difficult to understand. “He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not” (John 1:10). No wonder the so-called Christmas season is a time of debauchery and sinning. David prophesied of the greater David: “I made sackcloth also my garment; and I became a proverb to them. They that sit in the gate speak against me; and I was the song of the drunkards” (Psalms 69:11-12). Quotations from the New Testament establish the relation of this Psalm to the Lord Jesus Christ (Matthew 27:34; John 2:17; John 15:25; Romans 15:3). People may have sight without insight. This is descriptive of many of the Jews to whom Isaiah must declare “...see ye indeed, but perceive not” (Isaiah 6:9). They exercised the power of observation but had no heart for what they saw. They had eyes, but not for spiritual vision. Everything was surface phenomenon because there was no internal ministry of the Spirit to fill them with holy awe. Surface sight is natural, but the ability “to comprehend with all saints what is the breadth, and length, and depth, and height; And to know the love of Christ, which passeth knowledge...” is supernatural (Ephesians 3:18-19). Hence, the two ways of looking at something are by sight and insight. One may look at the Bible and see nothing more than a book. He might consider it a waste of time and money for men to labor in translating the Hebrew and Greek to record some ancient history. That is sight without insight. Conversely, the person who looks at the Bible and sees it as the revelation of God’s mind to His people, the Book of redemption, wisdom, and hope, has both sight and insight. The eye salve of spiritual illumination is necessary for insight (Revelation 3:18). “Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God” (Matthew 5:8). “Open thou mine eyes, that I may behold wondrous things...” (Psalms 119:18). The virgin birth of Jesus Christ has been more bitterly assailed throughout the ages than any other Bible truth. God anticipated the attacks by the critics and made this great truth foolproof. The virgin birth was the sign God promised the nation of Israel. Some argue that since the Hebrew word translated “virgin” of Isaiah 7:14 means a young woman, it has nothing to do with chastity. This argument is a falsification of fact. The Hebrew word almah means a young woman of marriageable age who was under the care of her parents and was hidden from the public (Genesis 24:43; Song of Solomon 1:3; Isaiah 7:14). It is the feminine of elem, which means something kept out of sight—a lad. The Septuagint uses parthenos, which means virgin (a female without sex experience) to translate almah. Furthermore, the Holy Spirit directed Matthew (Matthew 1:23) to use the word parthenos to describe the fulfillment of Isaiah 7:14. The Greek noun parthenos is used 14 times in the New Testament and speaks not only of chaste females but also of chaste males (2 Corinthians 11:2; Revelation 14:4). What would be a sign in some young woman giving birth to a child? The birth of which Isaiah spoke was one that would startle the world and give evidence of the fulfillment of God’s promise that Jesus Christ would be the “seed of the woman.” Thus, the One who would come in human flesh would derive His human nature from a woman minus man (Genesis 3:15). The male plays the active, initiatory role in natural, human generation. Therefore, in order for the human nature of Jesus Christ to be the “seed of the woman,” the initiatory role was with the Spirit of God. In this manner, Mary was with child before she and Joseph came together (Matthew 1:18). Mary asked, “How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?” (Luke 1:34), “And the angel responding said to her, The Holy Spirit shall come upon you, and the power of the Highest shall fall upon you; for this reason also the Holy thing being begotten shall be called the Son of God” (Luke 1:35—translation). Human life has been brought into existence four ways: (1) by God in creation, as in the case of Adam; (2) by man minus woman, as in the case of Eve; (3) by man plus woman, as in the case of procreation; (4) by woman minus man, as in the case of the incarnation of Jesus Christ. The latter was the only possible choice for the first advent of Jesus Christ. Woman was elected by God to fulfill the essential, passive role as the one through whom God would act to accomplish His gracious salvation for sinners. The verb “begat” (egennesen) is used 38 times in Matthew 1:2-16, but there is a change in the inflected form in its use in Matthew 1:16 : “And Jacob begat [egennesen] Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born [egennethe] Jesus, who is called Christ.” The word egennesen is the aorist active indicative and egennethe is the aorist passive indicative of the root verb gennao. Going from the active to the passive voice proves the virginity of Mary at the time Jesus Christ was born. Further confirmation of Mary’s virginity is found in the words of the angel’s message to Joseph: “...Arise, and take the young child and his mother, and flee into Egypt...” (Matthew 2:13). Joseph was represented as the guardian but not the father of Jesus Christ. Some “supposed” that Joseph was the father of Jesus Christ: “And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph...” (Luke 3:23). “As was supposed” is the translation of hos enomidzeto. The verb enomidzeto is the imperfect passive indicative of nomidzo, which means to suppose or assume. The verb nomidzo is used 15 times in the New Testament and has the meaning of supposition rather than actuality (Matthew 5:17; Matthew 10:34; Matthew 20:10; Luke 2:44; Luke 3:23; Acts 7:25; Acts 8:20; Acts 14:19; Acts 16:13; Acts 16:27; Acts 17:29; Acts 21:29; 1 Corinthians 7:26; 1 Corinthians 7:36; 1 Timothy 6:5). The Lord Jesus has neither a father on earth nor a mother in heaven. Matthew spoke of Joseph as a husband (Matthew 1:19) and Mary as a wife (Matthew 1:20), but this can be accounted for under the Hebrew law of betrothal. The Hebrew law of betrothal constituted a binding legal contract between the persons concerned. Mary was espoused (mnesteutheises, aorist passive participle of mnesteuo, which means to ask in marriage or betroth) to Joseph (Matthew 1:18; Luke 1:27; Luke 2:5). Marriage in Israel was a covenant of two parts: (1) a betrothal period and (2) the established marriage state. The betrothal period was so binding that sexual unfaithfulness during that time was the only thing that could break the agreement (Deuteronomy 22:13-21). A divorce could be granted for sexual unfaithfulness during the betrothal period (Matthew 5:32; Matthew 19:9). Punishment by death of the guilty one rendered the living person either a widow or a widower. Mary’s joy was accompanied with both trial and submission. The trial came when Gabriel appeared to her and said, “...Fear not, Mary: for thou hast found favour with God. And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS” (Luke 1:30-31). Mary’s submission to God is stated in Luke 1:38: “...Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to thy word. And the angel departed from her.” The angel appeared to Mary privately, but Mary would have to explain becoming pregnant during her betrothal period. Although she had assurance from the Lord and acquiesced in His word, Mary knew she would be exposed to severe criticism. In the eyes of those who did not understand, her character would be ruined. The religious Jews would demand the death penalty. Her friends would mourn over her. Her husband (one to whom she was espoused—the first part of the two part Jewish marriage contract) could ask for a divorce on the ground of fornication. However, Mary did not try to conceal the fact of her pregnancy. She ran to the fountainhead of law and judgment to report her condition. She went to the wife of the officiating priest, Zacharias (Luke 1:39-56). Mary brought extraordinary blessings with her when she came to Elisabeth. One was on the way who would be called the Son of the Highest. Mary was representative of that humanity with which Jesus Christ would be identified. In Christ’s earthly life, He never identified Himself with the degradation of fallen mankind, but He identified Himself with that which was of God. All titles and designations which the Lord Jesus assumed indicate His identification with the elect as the subjects of Divine grace. One would blaspheme to say Christ was identified with fallen mankind, except in the atonement. Mary’s pregnancy was as much a trial to Joseph, her espoused husband, as it was to her. Joseph was a righteous man; therefore, he knew the principles of chastity regarding love and marriage. He would not expose Mary to public ridicule; but as a righteous man, he must defend the principle of marriage fidelity. He was in a difficult position. Knowing the law, Joseph could make one of three choices. He could appeal to Deuteronomy 24:1 and say, “I have found some uncleanness in her.” He could present her case in the light of either Deuteronomy 22:13-24 or Deuteronomy 22:25-29. In Deuteronomy 22:13-24, there are two different instances of fornication, but the penalty for both is death. The first applies to the whore and the second to the virgin who became unfaithful during the betrothal period. In Deuteronomy 22:25-29, the fornicators were put to death. The first applies to the sin which was committed outside the betrothal period and the second to the girl who was the victim of rape. Joseph chose to follow the course of having found some uncleanness in her and granting her a divorce (Deuteronomy 24:1). The words “put her away” in Matthew 1:19 are the translation of the Greek word apolusai, aorist active infinitive of apoluo, which means to loose, release, or divorce. However, while Joseph was thinking about divorcing Mary, the angel appeared to him and explained her pregnancy. What a glorious victory this was after such severe trial. The virgin Mary “found with child of the Holy Ghost [Spirit]” (Matthew 1:18) is beyond natural understanding but not beyond apprehension by faith. According to nature, virginity is gone before conception; but Mary’s pregnancy by the Holy Spirit was a sign above nature that was predicted by Isaiah. The God of nature is not bound to the rules of what we call nature; therefore, there is no reason that this truth should seem incredible. As light passes through glass without destroying the glass, the Holy Spirit passed through the virgin Mary without destroying her virginity. This was a supernatural act of the sovereign God, and the power of the Doer is the reason the thing is done. “...God said, Let there be light: and there was light” (Genesis 1:3). “God said” is the Word in action. “By the word of the LORD were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth....For he spake, and it was done...” (Psalms 33:6; Psalms 33:9). “For with God nothing shall be impossible” (Luke 1:37). In the sense that Jesus Christ “knew no sin” (2 Corinthians 5:21), Joseph did not know experientially the sexual function of a husband until after the birth of Jesus Christ. “And he was not knowing her [imperfect active indicative of ginosko] until she gave birth to a son: and he called his name JESUS” (Matthew 1:25—translation). The Greek verb means to know, perceive, or understand. It is used as a euphemism (indirect or mild expression) of sexual relations. The One born of the virgin Mary was named Jesus, the Savior of His people. To be Savior, He must be Emmanuel—God with us. Emmanuel indicates His vocation, which was to bring God to His people that they might be with Him forever. These names attributed to Jesus Christ indicate what He must be and do to save His people. Emmanuel is the name which portrays the hypostatic union of the Divine and human natures in one Person. The miracle of the virgin birth assures the elect of the new birth. Jesus Christ is the only accepted “once born” person. He is the unique Person who needed no second birth. Had He been peccable, as many religionists affirm, He would have needed the new birth. Jesus Christ’s conception and death were very much unlike those to whom and for whom He came into the world. The doctrine of the virgin birth places the initiative in the hands of the Godhead. It completely excludes human initiation thus protecting the human nature—the holy thing—from contamination with original sin. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 82: 04.2.03. THE KING'S MOTHER ======================================================================== Chapter 3 - THE KING’S MOTHER Mary was the offspring of a nation chosen by God for a special purpose. Among the blessings that have come from the nation of Israel, the advent of the eternal Son of God through the virgin’s womb was the highest (Romans 9:4-5). God’s purpose in Mary’s life was to give us Emmanuel—"with us is God" (Matthew 1:23—translation). The manifestation of Jesus Christ in the flesh is the supreme point in the purpose of God. The virgin Mary, like any other person that God elected to salvation, was a recipient and not a dispenser of grace. Mary acknowledged God as her Savior: “...My soul doth magnify the Lord, And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour” (Luke 1:46-47). Although the word “salvation” is used variantly in Scripture—physically as well as spiritually—the rejoicing by Mary was the fruit of spiritual deliverance. She was the recipient of God’s grace, manifested by her exalting the Lord and rejoicing in His salvation. Any person who rejoices in God his Savior is conscious that God has put away his sins. The jailor rejoiced as soon as he was saved (Acts 16:30-34). Mary’s joy was not superficial. It was not excited by the kindness shown by Elisabeth who said, “Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb. And whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?” (Luke 1:42-43). Mary’s joy was motivated by the Spirit of regeneration, which caused her to acquiesce in God her Savior and the trial that always accompanies salvation. David, from whom Mary descended, expressed his joy: “And my soul shall be joyful in the LORD: it shall rejoice in his salvation” (Psalms 35:9). The worship that God requires of us is that of a saved sinner, and He required nothing less of the virgin Mary. The statement by Mary, “...my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour,” of Luke 1:47 is used by the Roman Catholic Church as Mary’s deliverance from every class of spiritual and temporal evil to which mortal man is subjected in his life on earth. They say the word “saviour” is used in a different sense than salvation from the guilt and power of sin. Roman apologists teach that with the exception of Mary, all other human beings contract original sin and therefore need redemption. They say the virgin Mary, in view of her becoming the mother of Jesus Christ, was preserved from contracting original sin. Therefore, according to the apologist, Christ did not purge the soul of Mary from sin by His blood but preserved it clean. Such teaching is made in the face of Paul’s statement, “For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God” (Romans 3:23). A fact is expressed by a point action Greek verb, with the note of time not emphasized, in the statement “for all have sinned.” The second aorist active indicative of hamartano gathers up the whole of mankind into one statement of timelessness. The virgin having brought a “bloody sacrifice” at her purification reveals that she knew her need of cleansing as much as any other woman. “And when the days of her purification according to the law of Moses were accomplished, they brought him [Jesus] to Jerusalem to present him to the Lord...And to offer a sacrifice according to that which is said in the law of the Lord, A pair of turtledoves, or two young pigeons” (Luke 2:22; Luke 2:24). There is no doubt that Mary, in her hymn of praise of Luke 1:46-55, counted herself among those the Lord had brought into positional grace. The sacrifice that was brought to the temple was not for Jesus Christ. Those who believe Jesus Christ was peccable should say that it was, but that would be blasphemy. Jesus Christ cannot be connected with the “new creation” (the regenerated), but He is connected with the eternal generation—that which goes back to God. Although Mary was the mother of Jesus Christ, she must not be deified. Such honor is a totally reprehensible sin. This honor has never been given to a created being. Some state that the worship of the virgin Mary grew up in a world wearied by the violence and passion of masculine strength, injustice, and tyranny; in a world trodden by armies, corrupted by lust, and dominated by ambition. The worship of the virgin was a living protest against war and sensuality. Many believe Mary was the symbol of strength and glory consistent with tenderness and gentleness. While this may have given some reason for going from one social extreme to another, it was turning from one form of evil to another more deadly. To make a god out of a creature, whether man, birds, fourfooted beasts, creeping things, or the virgin Mary, is the worst kind of crime. (See Romans 1:19-25.) Mary was the mother of Jesus Christ; but no one can say that she is intrinsically the mother of God. God absolutely considered has no mother. Jesus Christ as the God-Man has no father. Sin is attached to every descendant of Adam, but it is not connected with the God-Man. Mary was poor, yet rich. God was pleased that in connection with Jesus Christ there should be the humblest and smallest sacrifice. (See Leviticus 1:14; Leviticus 12:8.) God brought in His saving grace in a form that was insignificant to the world. Nothing could be greater proof of this than a baby lying in a manger and Christ’s circumcision as a sign of the covenant that prefigured His death. A pair of turtledoves or two young pigeons offered in sacrifice to God reveal the humility of grace. Mary had been humbled by being “much graced.” Mary was selected by God from among all other women to be the mother of Jesus Christ. “And the angel who has come to her, said, Hail, the one having been favored, the Lord is with you” (Luke 1:28—translation). “Having been favored” is the translation of a perfect passive participle of the verb charitoo, which means to bestow favor on, favor highly, or bless. It is used only in Luke 1:28 and Ephesians 1:6, and it speaks of what God does for all the elect. In both instances, it means to be brought into a relationship with God by means of grace. To ask why God singled out Mary is like asking why He chose Israel out from all other nations, Naaman from all other lepers, the widow of Sarepta from all other widows, and Saul of Tarsus from other Pharisees. These were not selected because they were better than others but because God chose to choose them. The reason for God’s choice is wrapped up in the good pleasure of His will, which He is not obligated to reveal. The church of Rome has translated “highly favored” of Luke 1:28 as full of grace. However, Mary was highly favored but not full of grace. Mary is not a dispenser of grace, but she was the recipient of God’s favor. The perfect passive participle tells us that grace had been permanently bestowed on Mary. Therefore, her present state of favor was due to God’s eternal purpose. Since Mary was chosen by God, she was “endued with grace.” Like Mary who found favor with God (Luke 1:30), God will endear His own to Himself that they shall find favor with Him. God thinks highly of His people. We are His treasure (Exodus 19:5), portion (Deuteronomy 32:9), rest (Psalms 132:14), crown of glory (Isaiah 62:3), joy (Isaiah 65:19), inheritance (Ephesians 1:18), and habitation (Ephesians 2:22). Having chosen His people in Christ, God likewise highly favors us. There is no reason outside the “good pleasure of God’s will” why He has favored those who are His. Jesus Christ, the incarnate One, is the only One “full of grace and truth” (John 1:14). The Greek word for “full” (pleres) means full, filled, abounding in, wholly occupied with, completely under the influence of, complete, or perfect. It is used of Jesus Christ to state that He was “full of the Holy Ghost” (Luke 4:1). Christ was not given the Spirit by measure (John 3:34). The word used with reference to a Christian cannot have the same degree of meaning as when it applies to Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ is full of grace because He is the fountain—dispenser—of grace. The Christian is full of grace not in the sense of a fountain but as a vessel. When Christ dispenses grace, the fountain is not less full; but if the vessel could dispense grace, it would be less full each time grace is dispensed. We have received of Christ’s “fullness” (pleromatos, from pleroma, which is the ablative of source) (John 1:16). This speaks of the fullness of God in Christ (Colossians 2:9). Christ’s fullness was not for Himself but for us. He did not need grace and truth: “For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself” (John 5:26). This means that the Father, as head of the mediatorial economy, appointed the Son to hold and exercise independent power of conferring life. This is the characteristic property of Deity, which both Father and Son equally possess. Therefore, grace proceeds from the flowing fountain into the tabernacle of Christ’s flesh. From the tent of His flesh, it flows to the elect at God’s appointed time. The fullness of the Godhead dwelling bodily in Jesus Christ is the reason the recipients of grace have received of His fullness. Fullness dwelling bodily in Christ signifies those perfections and qualities which fill up the Godhead to absolute perfection. Hence, there is not a portion of God dwelling in Christ, but the fullness of the Godhead dwells bodily in Him. The adverb “bodily” means that which is real and substantial in contrast to types and shadows. Such fullness cannot dwell in peccable human nature, but it dwelt bodily in Christ’s impeccable human nature during His earthly ministry and presently dwells in His glorified bodily state. Grace is followed by grace from Christ’s fullness—"grace for grace" (John 1:16). One must have grace to feel the need of, ask for, and use grace when it is given. One grace is followed by another. Hence, the grace of justification is followed by the grace of sanctification, and the grace of sanctification is followed by the grace of glorification. The world gives a little that it may give no more. It gives to make one feel obligated, because the spirit of the world is selfish. Conversely, Christ gives that He may continue to give: “...he giveth more [meidzona, accusative singular of megas, which means great, much, or extraordinary] grace...” (James 4:6). Grace comes by degrees—grace on grace. There is grace at the beginning, but there is more to follow. One grace prepares for the next. The grace of eternal election prepared for the grace of redemption. God’s grace of redemption prepared for the grace of regeneration. His grace of regeneration prepares for the grace of Christian living. Grace expands the heart and gives one the capacity for receiving more grace. Therefore, one is not ready for the grace of glorification until he has been educated by the degrees of grace given in time. Anyone who affirms that Mary is a co-redemptrix blasphemes. Scripture proves that Jesus Christ gave “...his life a ransom for many” (Matthew 20:28); “...he offered up himself” (Hebrews 7:27); “...by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us” (Hebrews 9:12); “...he...put away sin by the sacrifice of himself” (Hebrews 9:26); “...this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God” (Hebrews 10:12). The Lord Jesus Christ alone satisfied the demands of the holy law of God. Furthermore, those who affirm that Mary is a mediatrix blaspheme: “For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus” (1 Timothy 2:5). To say that Mary is a mediatrix is to attribute such attributes as omnipresence and omniscience to her. How can millions gain an audience with Mary at the same time? In contrast, Christ has promised that He will hear all who come to Him. As every recipient of grace knows where the source of grace is, he also knows the One through whom he must go to reach that source. Christ showed by His statement to Mary in John 2:4 that her control of His actions ceased as soon as His public ministry began: “...Woman, what have I to do with thee....” In Mary’s song of praise, she said, “all generations shall call me blessed” (Luke 1:48). This, however, does not justify the venerable title, “The Blessed Virgin Mary.” The Greek verb for “call me blessed” (from makaridzo) means “to count as blessed.” Mary was blessed “among” not “above” women (Luke 1:28). She was called “blessed” because of the fruit of her womb. She was saved by faith in Jesus Christ who was that fruit and not because she was the mother of Him who was called Jesus. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 83: 04.2.04. THE KING'S INCARNATION ======================================================================== Chapter 4 - THE KING’S INCARNATION The incarnation and virgin birth stand or fall together. “Unto us a child is born” has reference to the virgin birth; “unto us a son is given” refers to the incarnation (Isaiah 9:6). God saves man by identifying with him, and that identification has come through the virgin birth. Incarnation is the teaching that the second Person in the Trinity assumed human form in the Person of Jesus Christ. Virgin birth is the dogma that the conception and birth of Jesus Christ did not impair the virginity of Mary. The importance of this subject revolves around the degree to which the eternal Son of God identified Himself with man in the incarnation. A false conception of the extent of God’s identification with man would render both salvation and its consummation in the kingdom invalid (without foundation). The distinctive characteristic of the incarnation is the hypostatic union of the Divine and human natures in one Person. “...Great is the mystery of godliness; God was manifest in the flesh...” (1 Timothy 3:16). John identified the incarnate Word with the eternal God of creation (John 1:1; Genesis 1:1). The creating speech of the first chapter of John is equivalent with an aspect of the one God who was both with God and was God (John 1:1). An imperfect Greek verb (en, from eimi), which means “to be” or “to exist” is used three times in this verse to signify that Jesus Christ was in the beginning with God, and He was God. He is called the Word (logos), but the Word is not the same as the One with whom He was existing. He who is with God was God. Jesus Christ as logos could not be seen; as flesh, He could not be heard; but the Word becoming flesh (John 1:14) could be seen and heard. The three parts of John 1:1 teach the following things concerning the incarnate Word: (1) When the Word was—in the beginning. Since He existed in the beginning, He was before the beginning. The designation “Word” means He is eternal. (2) Where the Word was—with God. This denotes His personality. He is a Person in the Godhead; therefore, He is deity. (3) Who the Word was—God. He is the ever present I AM. The mystery of the first verse became more understandable to the elect in verse 14. He who was in the beginning was made flesh in time. He who was with God tabernacled among men. He who was God became veiled in human nature. The Divine Son of God did not assume a human person but a human nature. The Divine Trinity was not modified by the incarnation. Only the second Person experienced a change from a one natured Person to a theanthropic Person having the Divine nature, a human nature, and a human body. Although the Person of Jesus Christ is theanthropic, His nature is not because that would make the infinite finite and the finite infinite. Therefore, the natures in Jesus Christ retained their own properties and attributes which prove the Divine nature was not humanized and the human nature was not deified. The eternal Son of God did not in His incarnation identify Himself with either man’s unfallen (Adam’s nature before the fall) or fallen (Adam’s nature subsequent to the fall) nature. His human nature was called “the holy thing being begotten” (Luke 1:35—translation) and described as “...God having sent his Son in the likeness of sin of flesh” (Romans 8:3—translation). Anyone who claims to accept the truth of the miraculous conception of Jesus Christ in the womb of the virgin Mary while at the same time insisting on the human doctrine of peccability (the teaching that Christ had the capability of sinning) advocates that the Holy Spirit produced an unholy thing. Jesus Christ was holy not merely in conduct, but He was absolutely holy as to His human nature. He asked the religious Pharisees, “Who from among you convicts me concerning sin?” (John 8:46—translation). Since a noun rather than a verb is used in the question, it is not who from among you convicts me of “sinning” (sins of nature) but who from among you convicts me of “the nature of sin”? Christians do not demand further documentary evidence of a truth so explicitly stated and so implicitly believed by all who possess God-given faith. Although the Assumer and what He assumed cannot be the same, the holiness of the Assumer demanded that what He assumed be holy. The Person of Jesus Christ must be distinguished from the person of man: (1) The Person of Christ was uncreated; the person of man was created. Therefore, Jesus Christ did not assume a sinful person any more than God made man deity. (2) Christ’s God-given name is “Jesus,” which means Savior; there are no saviors among men. Only a Divine Person could be called Savior; and yet, He is a Man having been attested by God: “Jesus Christ is the Nazarene, a man having been attested [perfect passive participle of apodeiknumi, which means attest, approve, or show forth] by [apo, ablative of agency] God” (Acts 2:22—translation). (3) Jesus Christ is God’s Man by incarnation; Adam was God’s man by creation. (4) Jesus Christ is God’s Man from heaven; Adam was God’s man from the earth. (5) Jesus Christ is the “only begotten”; therefore, He is the only one of His kind, the unique one. Adam was created, but he was not the only one of his kind. (6) The essential Divine nature in Jesus Christ cannot grow; the God-like nature in Christians grows. (7) Jesus Christ was not born a human person, but man is born a depraved human person. In the incarnation, He assumed a human nature, the weakness of which was not sinful. Hence, Luke was saying in Luke 1:35 that the Person coming through the womb of the virgin was, by the agency of the Holy Spirit, the eternal Son of God now living in a holy tabernacle which He had assumed. Mary experienced the overshadowing of the Holy Spirit to protect the holy nature Christ assumed from her depravity. Unlike man, Christ’s ego always pleased the Father. All the wonders of the world must take a back seat since the mystery of the incarnation (1 Timothy 3:16). The incomprehensible incarnation is not beyond the ability of one with God-given faith to embrace on the basis of the following Biblical facts: (1) Jesus Christ who made woman was made of a woman (Galatians 4:4). (2) Abraham’s birth preceded the birth of Jesus Christ; and yet, Christ existed before Abraham (John 8:56-58). (3) He who was the seed of David according to the flesh was David’s Lord (Matthew 22:43-44; Romans 1:3-4). (4) He who had a Father in eternity had a mother but no father in time. (5) He who had neither beginning of days nor end of life had a beginning of days and an end of life on earth. (6) He whom the heavens could not contain was contained in the womb of the virgin (Luke 1:35). (7) Jesus Christ was the fruit of the womb but not of the loins (Luke 1:42). The Mediator between God and man is the middle Person in the Godhead. Therefore, Jesus Christ mediates between the Father, the first Person in the Trinity, and men who are indwelt by the Holy Spirit of regeneration, the third Person in the Trinity. While there is only one God, there are in the one Divine essence three distinct Persons. Each Person in the Godhead fulfills a separate department in the economy of human redemption. The second trinitarian Person did not begin at the incarnation, but the theanthropic personality of Jesus Christ did begin when the Father sent Him in the likeness of men. Hence, the name Jesus, which means “Jehovah is Savior,” proves that only a Divine Person can save (Acts 4:12; Mark 2:7); and yet, He is a Man attested by God (Acts 2:22). The record proceeds from the God-given name of Jesus (Jehovah is Savior) of Matthew 1:21 to Emmanuel (with us is God) of Matthew 1:23—the name which the recipients of salvation call Him. Only the elect who have been saved experientially know the meaning of Emmanuel. The uniqueness of Christ’s Person is displayed in His becoming the God-Man. Jesus Christ is equal with the Father, but He is different from the Father because He possesses a human nature. The Son of God was made in the likeness of man, but He was different from man because He possessed a Divine nature. During Christ’s earthly ministry, He spoke as (1) God—"I and my Father are one" (John 10:30); (2) Man—"I thirst" (John 19:28)—God does not thirst; and (3) the God-Man—"Come unto me...I will give you rest" (Matthew 11:28). The prophecy concerning Jesus Christ who shall be called Immanuel is given by Isaiah (Isaiah 7:14). His prophecy of the incarnation came at a dark time in Israel’s history. The prophet’s unusual commission from the Lord was to preach to a people who would not hear him (Isaiah 6:9-10). Isaiah’s first experience of his commission was his call to speak to King Ahaz. Ahaz was the son of the good King Jotham. A king may pass on the crown, but he cannot pass on a holy disposition. From the beginning of his reign, Ahaz reversed the policy of his father and threw himself into the arms of the heathen. He did not plunge into idolatry from want of good advice. Good instruction had come to Ahaz from both his father and God’s prophet; but in spite of his instruction, Ahaz abused the house of God by cutting up its vessels and closing its door. He dishonored God’s altar by making himself altars in every corner of Jerusalem, and he turned his back on the God of Israel by sacrificing to the gods of Damascus. To Ahaz, the worship by the chosen Jews was dull and monotonous. The one true God of Israel did not satisfy his depraved mind. Depraved hearts seek false inspiration. Idolaters are zealous in their digging descents to hell. Ahaz was so wicked that he sinned against God’s providence: “...in the time of his distress did he trespass yet more against the LORD...” (2 Chronicles 28:22). Isaiah was told to meet Ahaz “at the end of the conduit of the upper pool in the highway of the fuller’s field” (Isaiah 7:3). The prophet was instructed to go to the “end” of the aqueduct, to the very place where it poured its waters into Jerusalem. The waters were brought down from the “upper pool.” The “pool” signifies blessing because water is a necessity (John 4:10-14). Water comes from the “upper pool” which symbolizes the source from which the purposed blessings of God are made available to the elect (1 Peter 1:18-20). Spiritual blessings are provided in the Person and Work of Jesus Christ, and they are applied by the Holy Spirit. The “end” is the place where the blessings reach the recipients. The blessings do not reach the recipients in either the incarnation or the life of Jesus Christ, which constitute the preparation of the satisfaction which was made at the cross. “The highway of the fuller’s field” was a path clearly defined (Isaiah 7:3). It was raised up, and it led upward. It was the highway that ascended—the path that shines more and more to the perfect day (Proverbs 4:18). Since the “conduit” was the way by which the water came down, the “highway” is the holy path which leads up to the source of all blessings: “The highway of the upright is to depart from evil...” (Proverbs 16:17). It is the way of holiness (Isaiah 35:8). “The fuller’s field” means the field of Him who washes the garments of the elect. “Garments” are the habits of believers who need cleansing (John 13:10). The life that has come down by the grace of the sovereign God leads upward by the path of practical holiness (2 Timothy 2:19). The spot on which the prophet stood with his son, Shear-jashub (the name means “the remnant shall return”), in his meeting with Ahaz symbolized the One who would be the only “conduit” of blessing from the most high God. Judah was immortal until the fulfillment of the “sign” God would give His people. God’s sign would serve as a token or guarantee of something either present or future. The present tenses in the Hebrew further validate the certainty of the remote future as well as the near future of the prophecy as though it were already accomplished. Since the Hebrew has no “tenses” in the sense of the English language, the two “states” are expressed by the perfect and imperfect verbs. The perfect verb expresses any kind of completed action, and the imperfect verb denotes any incomplete action whether past, present, or future. Therefore, the sign of Isaiah 7:14 extends further than the circumstances of the time of its near historical setting. Some think the “sign” of Isaiah 7:14 refers exclusively to some event in the time of the prophet, and others say it refers exclusively to Jesus Christ. However, the context proves that it is a prophecy with both near and remote fulfillments. Isaiah was granted a son subsequent to Shear-jashub. When he approached the “prophetess” (by association, a prophet’s wife), she conceived and gave birth to a son who was named Maher-shalal-hash-baz (the name means “haste in seizing the prey”), the near fulfillment of Isaiah 7:14. Now, the question is asked, how can the word “virgin” apply to Isaiah’s wife in Isaiah 8:3? First, let us seek to find the meaning of the word “virgin” of Isaiah 7:14. The Hebrew word is almah, which means a young woman of marriageable age who remains under the care of her parents hidden from the public (Genesis 24:43; Song of Solomon 1:3; Song of Solomon 6:8; Isaiah 7:14). We must not suppose that the prophetess of Isaiah 8:3 was a virgin at the time Maher-shalal-hash-baz was born, but she was a virgin at the time the prophecy was given in Isaiah 7:14. However, there is another problem that must be solved. How could the prophetess of Isaiah 8:3 have been a virgin since Maher-shalal-hash-baz was the second son of Isaiah. The record does not state that she was the mother of Shear-jashub. Therefore, we must assume that the mother of Shear-jashub was dead, and Isaiah had married a young woman who was a virgin at the time of their marriage. The close connection of the historical record of Isaiah 7:1-25; Isaiah 8:1-22; Isaiah 9:1-21 proves that the prophecy had reference to not only something in the prophet’s time but also to a higher fulfillment in Jesus Christ. The same Holy Spirit prophesied through Isaiah and Matthew. The great difference between the near and the remote fulfillments is that the mother of Maher-shalal-hash-baz was a virgin when she married Isaiah but not a virgin when her son was born; whereas Mary was virgin before and at the time Jesus Christ was born. Furthermore, deliverance from the threatened invasion during the time of Ahaz and universal deliverance in the remote future were predicted (Isaiah 8:5-10; Isaiah 9:1-7). It has been said that most prophecies take their start from historical facts. In view of the near and remote aspects of a prophecy, there is nothing in Scripture to refute the theory that the Immanuel of Isaiah 7:14 was also to be called Maher-shalal-hash-baz of Isaiah 8:3. Thus, he was a symbol or type of the incarnate Christ coming through the womb of the virgin Mary (Matthew 1:22-23) and also of God’s wrath which shall come before the establishment of the kingdom (1 Thessalonians 1:10). All we know about the sons of Isaiah is revealed in the meaning of their names. The prophet said, “Behold, I and the children whom the LORD hath given me are for signs and for wonders in Israel from the LORD of hosts, which dwelleth in mount Zion” (Isaiah 8:18). Therefore, the following prophetical lessons are taught in these names: (1) There was an ascending from Shear-jashub to Immanuel. (2) There was a descending from Immanuel to Maher-shalal-hash-baz. (3) There was another ascending from Maher-shalal-hash-baz to the Prince of Peace (Isaiah 9:6-7). Jesus Christ is the Immanuel of Isaiah’s prophecy. The name “Immanuel” is a compound word which denotes the same as theanthropos and has reference to the personal union of the human and the divine natures in Christ. Immanuel means “with us is God.” In this name, the elect have a promise of God’s presence. One might ask, was God not with the Old Testament prophets and patriarchs as well as with us? God was with them but not in the Incarnate Word. He was with them in types and shadows, but God was not with them in the hypostatic union. “God” is the most important part in the compound word “Immanuel.” Although it is the most important, it is the last part of the word. The two parties involved are God and us, the elect. In order for God and the elect to be brought together, God had to be made like the elect so the elect could be made like God. Therefore, the eternal Son took the form of a servant for the purpose of suffering and dying for His own (Php 2:5-8). Christ’s great love for us is expressed in the Ephesian letter: “And walk in love, as Christ also hath loved us, and hath given himself for us an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweetsmelling savour” (Ephesians 5:2). How humbling to learn that “with us is God.” God who is above and the elect who are from beneath are brought together through Jesus Christ and His redemptive work: “But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ” (Ephesians 2:13). There is no “with us” like that in the theanthropic Person. God was with Israel in His sacrifices on the altar of the tabernacle and temple, but God was with all the elect in His sacrifice on the altar of the cross. From that great “with us” all the others follow. The satisfaction of Christ’s death has made His “with us” a reality in His resurrection, ascension, exaltation, life, and death; and it will be a reality to the end of the age and forever (Colossians 3:1; Ephesians 2:6; 2 Timothy 4:18; Psalms 23:4; Matthew 28:20; Revelation 21:3). The name of our Savior is Jesus (the name means “Jehovah is Savior”), and the saved shall call Him Emmanuel (the name means “with us is God”). No greater honor can be received by poor and strengthless sinners than to be included in the name of Emmanuel. Inclusion of the elect in the name is one thing, but their being placed in the forepart of that name is humbling. Surely there is some reason why the order of the name is as it occurs. The names of the twelve tribes of Israel engraved on the stones of the ephod and borne on the shoulders by the high priest as a memorial should tell us something about God’s love for His own (Exodus 28:9-12). The onyx was a precious stone, and its meaning, “to shine with the luster of fire,” is significant. As Aaron presented the names of his people before the Lord, our High Priest presents us before the Father. As God looked down on Aaron and saw the names of His people indelibly engraved in the shining onyx stones, He looked on His only begotten Son and saw His people as part of the name, Emmanuel. As the names of Aaron’s people were borne in the forefront of his priestly garment, the elect are in the forefront of Christ’s name, Emmanuel. The elect are sheep who have gone astray (Isaiah 53:6). Jesus Christ came to seek and to save that which was lost (Luke 19:10). Those who have gone astray did not seek Christ, but the Savior sought the sheep (Romans 3:11; John 10:1-16). Separation from God began with man, but man’s reconciliation must begin with God. Apart from the quickening Spirit of God, the elect have no more concern for the Person signified by the sign than King Ahaz had for the sign of the Person of Christ (Isaiah 7:10-16). We often hear the question, what is in a name? Although names mean little to people in our generation, proper names in the Bible do have important spiritual connotations; but they have specific signification when they apply to God. The supernatural nature of the Person and Work of Jesus Christ is displayed in some of the many names given to Him in Scripture. There is majesty in the name “God,” independent being in “Jehovah,” Savior in “Jesus,” unction in “Christ,” power and authority in “Lord,” affinity (relationship) in “Emmanuel,” intercession in “Mediator,” help in “Advocate,” and royalty in “King.” ======================================================================== CHAPTER 84: 04.2.05. THE KING OF THE JEWS ======================================================================== Chapter 5 - THE KING OF THE JEWS Matthew portrayed Jesus Christ as King of the Jews. After interrogating Jesus Christ prior to His crucifixion, Pilate called Him “the King of the Jews” (John 18:39). When he brought Jesus Christ forth to the Jews for their decision to crucify Him, he said to the Jews, “Behold your King” (John 19:14). Furthermore, he wrote the title “JESUS OF NAZARETH THE KING OF THE JEWS” on the cross (John 19:19). In His answer to Pilate, Jesus Christ told him the kingdom which is His is spiritual, and it is not out of this world’s system (John 18:36). He did not say it will not be “in” the world, but it is not made up “from” this world’s system. In answer to Pilate’s question, “Art thou a king then?” Christ affirmed that He is King: “...Thou sayest that I am a king. To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth...” (John 18:37). The following things should be observed concerning Christ’s statement to Pilate in John 18:36— (1) He spoke of the kingdom as His. “My kingdom” denotes His covenanted kingdom. (2) His kingdom being not of this world means it is not of humanly devised order or arrangement. (3) If His kingdom were of this world, His servants would be fighting to prevent His crucifixion. Christ’s kingdom is of Divine origin, and its establishment is future. (4) His kingdom is not from this place, signifying that it is not related to this age but to the age to come. (5) As believers are not of this world but remain in the world, Christ’s kingdom is not out of this world’s system but it shall be in the renewed world system. (6) Jesus Christ was born King of the Jews, but we must distinguish the King de jure from the King de facto. (7) Distinction must be made between the kingdom on earth and God’s sovereign rule over the earth. The kingdom belongs to Christ as the Son of Man. Sovereignty is vested in Him as the Son of God. Conclusively, Jesus Christ was born King, and He recognized that He was born King. He confirmed it before He died, and Pilate inscribed that message on the cross. As soon as the birth of the Lord Jesus was announced, the wise men from the east came to Jerusalem asking, “Where is he that is born King of the Jews?” (Matthew 2:2). This is the first question in the New Testament, and the first question in the Old Testament is “Where art thou?” (Genesis 3:9). What made these men from the east wise? In the child, they recognized Christ the King. They worshipped Christ, not His mother. They came to give and not to get (Matthew 2:1-12). They knew something about Old Testament prophecy and believed it. Therefore, their wisdom came from the word of God and not from some dream or the figment of someone’s imagination. The wise men had seen “his star” in the east, and they came to worship Him (Matthew 2:2). The New Testament opens and closes with the star of Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ said of Himself that He is “the root [the Divine nature of Jesus Christ] and the offspring [the human nature of Jesus Christ] of David, and the bright and morning star” (Revelation 22:16). Hence, Christ’s star is connected with His first and second advents. This is not merely “a star” but “the star” of prophecy: “I shall see him, but not now: I shall behold him, but not nigh: there shall come a Star out of Jacob, and a Sceptre shall rise out of Israel...” (Numbers 24:17). The wise men evidenced their recognition of the deity of Jesus Christ, the King of the Jews, by bringing the gift of gold; His impeccable life, by bringing the gift of frankincense; and His going to the cross, by bringing the gift of myrrh. Thus, their spiritual wisdom led them to acknowledge that Jesus Christ came the first time to die, not to set up His kingdom. Suffering precedes glory. These men had been made wise by the grace of God. The Lord Jesus is from the royal line of David. Matthew used the title “King” fourteen times and “son of David” nine times to refer to Christ. He employed the term “kingdom” fifty-five times, thirty-two of which are “kingdom of the heavens.” He also recorded twelve parables to depict the kingdom of the heavens. The center and goal of all prophecy is the Lord Jesus Christ who was born King of the Jews. Union of the Divine and human natures in the King formed the foundation for a perfect kingdom. The reign of the Son of Man, in accordance with the Davidic covenant, and the union of His people with Himself in that rule alone will satisfy the cravings of a redeemed people. The kingdom will sweep away all the false hopes for a man-made utopia by fallible men. As the perfection of Christ’s human nature cannot be denied, the perfection of His work, which finds its completion in the kingdom, cannot be refuted. The past and present are only preparatory stages for the coming kingdom. This kingdom is the theme of the covenants and prophecy. It is the special honor given to Jesus Christ by the Father (Luke 19:12-15). The kingdom of the world shall become the kingdom of Jesus Christ (Revelation 11:15). Prophecy is not only a light to Christians in a dark world but also a witness to God when it is fulfilled: “We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place...” (2 Peter 1:19). “Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness” (2 Peter 3:17). Having been forewarned by prophecy, Christians are forearmed. Hence, knowing the truth beforehand, we are without excuse for failure to be on guard. A blessing is promised to believers who read, hear, and keep the words of prophecy (Revelation 1:3). As we do not understand everything about food before eating it, we do not have to understand everything about prophecy before we guard and proclaim it. Moreover, the fulfillment of prophecy will become, as it has in the past, a witness to God’s omniscience. The King of the Jews was born during the reign of King Herod. Herod became disturbed because he feared his own kingdom would be challenged. His response may be illustrated by the Thessalonians’ reaction to Paul’s preaching. The unbelievers caused an uproar in the city “...saying that there is another king, Jesus” (Acts 17:7 NASB). According to Paul’s Epistles to the assembly in Thessalonica, Christ’s second coming as King was prominent in His teaching. Believers look upon the establishment of the kingdom as the overthrow and destruction of the wicked ones and their wickedness. Believers delight not in their ruin but in the clearing of God’s name and glory (2 Thessalonians 1:3-12). Wicked rulers do not want their power challenged: “The kings of the earth set themselves, and their rulers take counsel together, against the LORD, and against his anointed, saying, Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us” (Psalms 2:2-3). These words were partially fulfilled by Herod when the eternal Son was born King. There was another King, Jesus Christ. Herod had no problem summoning help from the priests and scribes to learn where the young child was located. Jesus Christ is hated and despised by rulers with the sword, religionists with their human traditions, and the multitudes with their lawless violence. They all have one thing in common. They care not what stars occupy the religious heavens of the world, provided “His Star” is not among them. They will tolerate any kind of religious leader other than the holy, sovereign, and impeccable Christ of Christianity. All this will have its final consummation in the last days before the Prince of Peace establishes His kingdom. Matthew recorded four historic prophecies in the second chapter. Each had some particular burden: (1) Micah’s burden was authority. He denounced the false rulers of his time; but by prophecy, he saw the true Ruler (Matthew 2:6). (2) Hosea’s burden was the unfaithfulness of Israel (Matthew 2:15). (3) Jeremiah’s burden was the judgment of a sinful nation (Matthew 2:18). (4) The last one refers to no particular prophet, but it is a summary of several prophets (Matthew 2:23). Micah prophesied Divine wrath and Divine promise. He was contemporary with Isaiah and prophesied in the days of Jothan, Ahaz, and in the early years of Hezekiah, kings of Judah. The three divisions of his prophecy began with the call to “hear” (Micah 1:2; Micah 3:1; Micah 6:1). Micah’s name means “who is like God.” Being like God, the prophet denounced the sins of the rulers and gave a picture of Christ’s kingdom with Christ’s reign of universal peace. He is noted for his rapid transitions from threats to promises. He went from pronouncing the destruction of Jerusalem and captivity in Babylon to prophesying the reign of the Ruler in Israel (Micah 3:12; Micah 4:7; Micah 5:2). “All the chief priests and scribes” (Matthew 2:4) gathered together by Herod proclaimed Micah’s prophecy that Christ, the King of the Jews, should be born in Bethlehem of Judah: “But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting” (Micah 5:2). Bethlehem (the name means “house of bread”) was the birthplace of David, and it would be the birthplace of David’s Lord. Jesus Christ is David’s son as well as his Lord: “...I am the root and the offspring of David...” (Revelation 22:16). Although the Son of God came into the world centuries after the death of David, He was before David. In the days of the kingdom’s peril under King Saul, God gave Israel King David. He came from Bethlehem. Bethlehem has become a household name to all Christians. It is first mentioned in Genesis 35:19: “And Rachel died, and was buried in the way to Ephrath, which is Bethlehem.” It is believed the city was built by Ephratah, the father of Bethlehem, and called after both “Bethlehem Ephratah” in the prophecy by Micah. David is described as “the son of that Ephrathite of Bethlehem-judah” (1 Samuel 17:12). It was also the scene of Ruth’s romance with Boaz. Boaz purchased Ruth the Moabitess to be his wife: “And all the people that were in the gate, and the elders, said, We are witnesses. The LORD make the woman that is come into thine house like Rachel and like Leah, which two did build the house of Israel: and do thou worthily in Ephratah, and be famous in Bethlehem” (Ruth 4:11). The one who would come forth from Bethlehem is the same one “whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting” (Micah 5:2). This is a description of Christ’s eternal generation. Here we have the prophecy of the unprecedented King of the Jews of Matthew 2:2. Micah spoke of a twofold going forth: (1) “from Bethlehem” and (2) “from everlasting.” This twofold going forth also speaks of the two natures of the King of the Jews—as God from eternity and as the God-Man from Bethlehem. Hence, the Person who came from Bethlehem Ephratah is more than man; He is the theanthropic Person. The King came forth from little Bethlehem. His royalty is seen in the Divine nature and not in earthly circumstances. The shepherd life of David depicted Jesus Christ as Shepherd: “He [God] chose David also his servant, and took him from the sheepfolds: From following the ewes great with young he brought him to feed Jacob his people, and Israel his inheritance” (Psalms 78:70-71). The shepherd life of David was his needed preparation for kingship over Israel. He would rule them for their good, defend them from their enemies, and conduct the affairs of the kingdom in the spirit of a shepherd. Micah saw the new King coming out of little Bethlehem in the implied character of a shepherd: “And he shall stand and feed in the strength of the LORD, in the majesty of the name of the LORD his God; and they shall abide: for now shall he be great unto the ends of the earth” (Micah 5:4). The Lord Jesus is called the “good shepherd,” “the great shepherd,” and the “chief shepherd” (John 10:11; Hebrews 13:20; 1 Peter 5:4). He came to the sheepfold of Israel as “the good shepherd.” The prophet said, “He shall stand,” and “the good shepherd” stood against all the false shepherds who came into the sheepfold of Israel. The strength in which He stood as the “good shepherd” was His own intrinsic power. The “feeding” applies to all the duties of a shepherd, even to giving His life for His sheep. This is what Christ did “in the majesty of His God.” The Lord Jesus was majestic even in His humiliation. The prophet rejoiced to know that God passed by the pride of the city and brought forth the King from a place that was “little among the thousands of Judah.” The advent of Christ would not be according to human expectations. As the “chief shepherd,” He will consummate His work (Micah 5:5-15). Israel will yet be shepherded by her Messiah (Isaiah 11:1-16; Isaiah 35:1-10; Daniel 7:1-28; Daniel 9:1-27; Joel 2:1-32; Joel 3:1-21; Zechariah 9:1-17; Zechariah 14:1-21; Malachi 4:1-6). The burden of Hosea’s prophecy was Israel’s unfaithfulness. Hosea was contemporary with Amos, Isaiah, and Micah. His message was principally to Israel (the ten tribes of the northern kingdom). The subject matter of his message was spiritual adultery. The prophet learned the meaning of unfaithfulness through bitter experience. When he had suffered the worst agony that can come to the human heart—the infidelity of one’s mate—God said to him in effect, “Now, you know how I feel about Israel.” Hosea’s prophecy “WHEN Israel was a child, then I loved him, and called my son out of Egypt” (Hosea 11:1) was quoted by Matthew: “Out of Egypt have I called my son” (Matthew 2:15). The angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph and told him to go into Egypt with the young child and Mary. Joseph fled into Egypt with his family that Hosea 11:1 might be fulfilled. God loved Israel in Egypt and called Israel “his son” (Exodus 4:22). The Israelites were a highly favored people. God loved, redeemed, educated, guided, and fed them. Pharaoh treated the Israelites cruelly, but God heard their cry and came down to help them. Hosea looked forward as well as backward. He saw that his words had fuller meaning than could be fulfilled by the children of Israel. His prophecy carried a promise that had not been fulfilled. Like Abraham, he saw Christ’s day afar off and was glad. This may seem strange in the light of the context of the prophecy, but the Holy Spirit made no mistake when He inspired Matthew to quote this passage. The King of the Jews identified Himself with Israel. Israel and Christ are both loved, but Christ is loved by nature and Israel by grace. Both were called “my son,” and both were called out of Egypt. However, Israel was in Egypt because of sin; but Jesus Christ, who knew no sin and in whom is no sin, was there to be identified with the sinners He would deliver. He is the King of the Jews. Before His death, Christ was asked, “Art thou a king then?” He replied, “...To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world...” (John 18:37). Christ’s kingship is of such character that it can be neither invalidated by His arrest nor destroyed by His death. The King was untouchable by the wicked designs of men until the time He voluntarily laid down His life for the sheep (John 10:11; John 10:15; John 10:17-18). God chose Jeremiah, a tenderhearted man, to deliver a stern message of judgment. He was contemporary with Ezekiel and ministered to the Jews in Jerusalem while Ezekiel ministered among the captives in Babylon. Matthew quoted Jeremiah 31:15 at the conclusion of the section describing the slaying of the children in Bethlehem: “In Rama was there a voice heard, lamentation, and weeping, and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children, and would not be comforted, because they are not” (Matthew 2:18). The context of Jeremiah 31:15 gives a prophecy of the Israelites being driven from their land, but there was hope in their future restoration (Jeremiah 31:15-17). Jeremiah’s prophecy describes the massacre of the tribulation through which Israel shall pass before her final deliverance. Herod’s murder of all the male children from two years old and under is only a foretaste of that future tribulation. The foundation of Israel’s hope of the future is God’s unconditional covenant. The twofold application of prophecy is common in Scripture. The baptism in the Spirit at Pentecost was the pledge, or foretaste, of the future fulfillment in the kingdom (Joel 2:1-32, Acts 2:1-47). Therefore, Bethlehem’s mourning over the murdered children was as though Rachel were repeating her lamentation. Rachel, however, represents the remnant that shall be saved by the coming Messiah. Few attempts have been made to explain and little has been said about the slaughter of the children. Some have said it seems strange that, only a few days before, men had assembled around the newborn King, and now the whole province of Herod was strewn with the bodies of slaughtered male children from two years old and under. The question has been asked, why were innocent children slaughtered? The following answers have been suggested: The lot of the children was a blessed one because they were “safe”—not saved. The Father was plucking His innocent flowers. They died for Christ in order that He might die for them. Had they not died for Him, Christ would have been slain by Herod; and all of Adam’s descendants would have spent eternity in hell. There is no Scripture to justify the idea of children being either “innocent” or “safe.” The word “innocent” may be used relatively to speak of someone free from a specific crime or wrong, but it cannot be used in the sense of being without sin. Indiscriminate universal death of persons of all ages proves that all persons come into the world sinful—in a state of depravity (Psalms 51:5; Romans 5:12). What about children destroyed in the flood, Sodom and Gomorrah, the night of the passover, etc.? Furthermore, the idea of children being “safe” until they reach the age of accountability is ridiculous. What is the difference between “safe” and “saved” if all who die in infancy go to heaven? There is no Scripture which says they go to heaven, not even the one recording the death of David’s son by Bathsheba: “...I shall go to him, but he shall not return to me” (2 Samuel 12:23). “I shall go to him” means that David shall go to the “house appointed for all living” (Job 30:23), and “he shall not return to me” means he shall not return to me in the present, mortal state. If children are “safe”—saved—until they reach the age of accountability, they lose their safeness and must be regenerated. What is the difference between being safe and being regenerated? Did God give “safe” children grace in Christ before the world began? If so, did they lose it at the age of accountability? (See 2 Timothy 1:9.) The hypothetical statement, “If the children had not died, Christ would have died by the hands of Herod and all of Adam’s race would have spent eternity in hell,” contradicts the eternal purpose of God. This is not the first instance recorded in Scripture where children were slaughtered. (See Ezekiel 9:1-11.) In the last division of Matthew 2:1-23, Joseph was told to take the young child and His mother into the land of Israel because those who sought His life were dead. The statement “He shall be called a Nazarene” (Matthew 2:23) does not refer to any particular prophet; but it was the message of the prophets in general. “Nazarene” was a term of contempt: “...Can there any good thing come out of Nazareth...” (John 1:46; John 7:52). A person is not to be judged by the place from which he comes or by the work he has been doing. Jesus Christ came from Nazareth, and He was the son of a carpenter. The whole of Galilee was a despised region. The Galileans were accused of being rude, illiterate, and devoid of culture. Hence, the appellation “Nazarene” describes the lowliness of the majestic Person of Jesus Christ who was born King of the Jews. Not only is Jesus Christ the Lamb that was slain but He shall also be the King, the Lion of the tribe of Judah, on David’s throne. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 85: 04.2.06. THE KING'S FORERUNNERS ======================================================================== Chapter 6 - THE KING’S FORERUNNERS The two forerunners of the King are John the Baptist and Elijah. John the Baptist has already come and prepared the way for the King’s first advent. Elijah shall come and prepare the way for His second advent. Scripture clearly indicates that John the Baptist was not Elijah, although he came in the spirit and power of Elijah. There are similarities between Elijah and John, especially Elijah’s encounter with Ahab and Jezebel and John’s confrontation with Herod and Herodias. The necessity of understanding information conveyed in prophecy is emphasized by prophecy distinguishing the first forerunner from the second. Isaiah predicted the coming of the first forerunner: “The voice of him that crieth in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the LORD, make straight in the desert a highway for our God” (Isaiah 40:3). Malachi foretold the second forerunner: “Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD: And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse” (Malachi 4:5-6). The ministry of both Elijah and John is confined to Israel. John’s coming was during Israel’s wilderness condition, and Elijah’s coming will precede the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord. Since John did not restore all things, one must come who will. The idea of a postponed kingdom is refuted by the prediction of two forerunners. Could a postponed kingdom mean that if the Jews had received the so-called offered kingdom at Christ’s first advent, John would have fulfilled the prophecy of Malachi 4:5-6? God would have sent Elijah instead of John had He purposed to establish the kingdom at His first advent. Both forerunners were in God’s purpose. Furthermore, the omniscient and omnipotent God is not so unsure of the outcome of His purpose that He gave a contingency. John was chosen by God to be a voice shouting in the desert “And saying, you repent: for the kingdom of the heavens has approached” (Matthew 3:2—translation). Repentance is a prerequisite to entering or seeing the kingdom (John 3:3-7). Prior to the dreadful day of the Lord, John preached the baptism of repentance to qualify the elect for the kingdom which will be established. John and Christ were killed at Christ’s first advent. A martyred forerunner was an appropriate foreground for the King who would be crucified. On the other hand, Elijah’s mission to restore all things will precede the dreadful day of the Lord (Matthew 17:11). This is the reason his name is associated with the mount of transfiguration scene which is a foretaste of the coming kingdom (Matthew 17:1-13). The suggestion of a postponed kingdom casts reflection on the sovereign God who has infinite knowledge. Persons who think the destinies of men lie within themselves must be subjected to the overruling God who is higher than the highest. The sovereign God turns the heart of man wherever He wishes (Proverbs 21:1). Do men think God’s heart is in their hands to do with as they desire? Rising above human reason is a necessity for man, but it is impossible apart from grace which God alone can give. God who has infinite knowledge needs no backup plan. His understanding is infinite (Psalms 147:5). God sees future, present, and past all at once because He is “in one mind” (Job 23:13). Therefore, God’s purpose is fixed and settled. God foresaw no chance of its failure at either Christ’s first or second advent. The events at Christ’s second coming are as certain as those at His first coming. Nothing in God’s providence is by accident. Man alone needs a contingent plan, but he cannot be sure the backup will be successful. No matter how many backups a spacecraft may have, its destruction is sure when God wills it. A Scriptural view of the kingdom is impossible without a Biblical concept of prophecy. The importance of studying prophecy related to Christ’s first advent reveals the necessity of acquiring knowledge of prophecies associated with His second advent. Prophetical Scriptures are part of the word of God entrusted to us. The book of Revelation is basically prophetical. It pronounces blessing on those who read, hear, and keep the words of its prophecy (Revelation 1:3). The prophecy of Isaiah has two major divisions which correspond with the Old and New Testaments. The first thirty-nine of the sixty-six chapters agree with the thirty-nine Old Testament books; whereas the last twenty-seven are analogous to the twenty-seven New Testament books. The whole prophetical section is a record of the development of evil and the final overthrow of the wicked, who shall be excluded from the messianic kingdom. Both Isaiah’s last major division and the Gospel according to Matthew begin with the introduction of John the Baptist, the first forerunner of the King (Isaiah 40:3; Matthew 3:1-3). All four of the Gospel writers—Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John—quoted from Isaiah 40:3. Both Isaiah and Revelation conclude with the establishment of the kingdom and the reign of Jesus Christ. With the close of Malachi’s predictions, there was a silence for 400 years. No voice of a prophet was heard until John the Baptist came forth shouting in the desert. He stood in a unique place in human history. As the God-ordained clasp of two Testaments, John was content to be a “voice” declaring the object of all prophecy, the end of all sacrifices, and the hope of all the elect. Thus, the true Shepherd who stood at the door waiting to be admitted was introduced by John. He bowed low as Jesus of Nazareth passed through the door; and he shouted, “Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world” (John 1:29). John was the bright and shining light who must fade into insignificance in the light of Him who is the Light of the world (John 5:35; John 8:12). He who spent thirty years preparing for one year of service became a martyr soon after he introduced Jesus Christ. Some think they can prepare in one year for thirty years of service. They can, if they are nothing more than the servants of men. However, God’s servants cannot be too careful about the way they handle the Holy Scriptures. They are not like the schoolteacher who applied for a teaching position and stated in her interview that she had twenty years of experience. The principal asked her if she had twenty years of experience or one year of experience that had been repeated twenty times. Continuous study is necessary for growth. John the Baptist became a terror to Israel. His preaching was like a succession of lightning flashes. His proclamation of the kingdom passed into a denunciation of his hearers, warning them of wrath about to come (Matthew 3:3; Matthew 3:7). He called his congregation of Pharisees and Sadducees an offspring of snakes and demanded fruit from them to prove their repentance (Matthew 3:8). That congregation of hypocrites to whom John preached boasted of their religious heritage as the seed of Abraham. Therefore, John demanded that they prove their spiritual descendance from Abraham. Similarly, people today boast of certain religious ties. Since John was independent of the offspring of snakes, he boldly renounced them. Every man of God should be so independent of religious connections that he will speak the word of God uncompromisingly. At the same time, he should be cognizant that he must give account before God. Hierarchies of religious denominations often support religionists while seeking to hinder men of God from boldly proclaiming the word of God. John the Baptist stated his belief in the absolute sovereignty of God: “...God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham” (Matthew 3:9). John’s message was declared in order that those persons to whom God granted repentance might be qualified for entrance into the kingdom of the heavens. He warned his listeners that “already the ax is being laid at the root of the trees” (Matthew 3:10—translation). Every person who does not bring forth fruit as proof of his repentance shall be judged and cast into the fire, regardless of his ancestry. John’s imprisonment and death prove that instead of a present kingdom, suffering is the portion that God’s providence has assigned to every Christian. The forerunner was rejected and slain (Matthew 14:1-12). Likewise, the apostle Paul was stoned, and men supposing him to be dead dragged him out of the city. However, he was not dead. He continued proclaiming the gospel, confirming the souls of the disciples, exhorting them to continue in the faith, and reminding them that they must go through much tribulation to enter the kingdom of God (Acts 14:19-22). Their entrance into the kingdom was future. If the assembly of Christ and the kingdom were synonymous, Christians would be entering that which they have already entered. Christians are subjects of the assembly Christ is building and heirs of the kingdom. John’s confrontation with Herod resulted in his martyrdom. A martyred forerunner was an appropriate foreground for the crucified, not reigning, King. The state put John to death, and the religious leaders by their traditions perverted the word of God preached by John. The brevity of John’s ministry proved Israel’s unfitness for the kingdom. John the Baptist was appointed by God to preach in the desert of Judea to prepare for the beginning of Christ’s public ministry. He prepared the people for the Messiah and introduced Him to Israel. John’s commission was stated in the angel’s words to Zacharias prior to John’s conception: “And he shall go before him [Jesus Christ] in the spirit and power of Elias, to turn [epistrephai, aorist active infinitive of epistrepho, which means to turn back, to cause to return, or to bring back] the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just; to make ready [hetoimasai, aorist active infinitive of hetoimadzo, which means to prepare or make ready] a people prepared [kateskeuasmenon, perfect passive participle of kataskeuadzo, which means having been prepared] for the Lord” (Luke 1:17). John the Baptist was commissioned to prepare those already prepared by the Lord. He could prepare no one who had not been previously prepared by God. The preparation of one’s heart by God prior to his preparation by the gospel emphasizes the distinction between regeneration and conversion. Paul’s record of his regeneration and his testimony of his conversion experience (Acts 9:3-6; Acts 22:6-10; Acts 26:12-18) illustrates that John the Baptist’s preaching was not to regenerate anyone, and his baptizing those who repented and brought forth fruits of their repentance was not for the purpose of regenerating anyone. In Paul’s third account of his having been quickened by God and his conversion experience, he stated that God had sent him to the Gentiles: “To open their eyes, and to turn [epistrephai, aorist active infinitive of epistrepho, which means to turn back, to cause to return, or to bring back] them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me” (Acts 26:18). Paul, like John the Baptist, was sent to prepare a people God had already prepared for Himself. God’s man cannot help people to be ready who have not first been made ready by God. This is the same principle set forth in Jeremiah 31:18-19 concerning Ephraim: “...turn thou me, and I shall be turned; for thou art the LORD my God. Surely after that I was turned, I repented....” Isaiah prophesied, “The voice of him that crieth in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the LORD, make straight in the desert a highway for our God” (Isaiah 40:3). Matthew referred to the first forerunner of Jesus Christ as a “voice” without saying anything about the announcement of his birth by an angel, his priestly descent, or the thirty years of preparation for such a brief ministry (Matthew 3:3). When John the Baptist was asked who he was, “He said, I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness, Make straight the way of the Lord, as said the prophet Esaias” (John 1:23). The prophet of the Highest asserted that he was only a voice. The voice of the messenger was for a fleeting second, but the content of his message was eternal. The truth that has been voiced and not the voice of a highly trained orator should be remembered. The “voice” for God is a witness of Christ, not a witness of nature, reason, philosophy, science, politics, or religion. A mere voice is insufficient for religionists, but it is enough for the elect of God. The “voice” declared, “...Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world” (John 1:29). True humility is manifested in John’s statement, “I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness.” John the Baptist had nothing about his person to attract anyone. His raiment of camel’s hair, leather girdle, and diet of locusts and wild honey manifested the austerity of his life. He was a self-disciplined man who lived in solitude. He received in solitude the spiritual strength that would enable his candle to shine more brightly when he came forth to preach. Solitude has its place in the Christian life, but one must not remain in seclusion. It is a good school, but the world is the arena in which the good fight of faith must be fought. Privacy is best for communion with God, but society is where the message learned in seclusion with God is to be proclaimed. John the Baptist, like Elijah, was prepared for his ministry while alone with God. Elijah had a solitary grandeur that was all his own. He was called a Tishbite, but no one knows the location of Tishbe. The prophet’s earnestness in preaching was demonstrated in his message on Mount Carmel (1 Kings 18:1-46). The preparation for that preaching must not be overlooked. The Lord told Elijah to hide himself by the brook Cherith that was before Jordan (1 Kings 17:3). The person who takes a high place before men must take a low place before God. Time in secret must exceed time in public. After preparation in solitude with God, the Lord told the prophet to “Go, shew thyself unto Ahab...” (1 Kings 18:1). John the Baptist is spoken of as going before Jesus Christ “in the spirit and power of Elias” (Luke 1:17). Matthew gave no information about the previous history of John the Baptist. He assumed the Jews to whom he wrote understood from the prophecies of Isaiah 40:3 and Malachi 3:1 who he was. The early life of John was as obscure as the Christ of whom he was a forerunner. Elijah went forth to meet King Ahab. On his way, he came in contact with Obadiah, Ahab’s governor, who was a good man employed by the wicked king. Obadiah did not extend the Christian cordiality that might be expected. The governor’s greeting was one of cold formality. This should not be surprising because Obadiah’s mission was in keeping with the place from which he had come. Serving Ahab was doubtless not his correct ministry. Some today would consider it another form of ministry. His service to Ahab was not the result of solitude with God. Although Elijah was providentially forced to own Ahab as his king, he would not own him as his master. Subjection to “the powers that be” and cooperating with them differ (Romans 13:1-7). The missions of Elijah and Obadiah were different. Obadiah was sent by Ahab to find grass for the livestock, but Elijah was sent by God to call the nation of Israel back to God. The nation of Israel had been without a voice for God for four hundred years when John the Baptist came. Hence, the spiritual condition of Israel was so degenerated that the prophet of the Highest preached in the desert of Judea. The Pharisees and Sadducees continued with the old forms of Judaism, but there was no spiritual power in their forms. John the Baptist, like the one in whose spirit and power he had come, was sent forth to call some out of Israel back to God by “saying, Repent ye: for the kingdom of the heavens has approached” (Matthew 3:2—translation). Elijah challenged the prophets of Baal and of the groves who feasted at the table of Jezebel. The altars of Baal and Jehovah cannot stand side by side. False religion is always attractive to the natural man, whether it is the false religion of Elijah’s day or of the twentieth century. Many want to worship God and Baal simultaneously. However, things that are contradictory cannot be reconciled. Free grace can never be reconciled with free will. If man’s will is sovereign, God is not. Since God alone is sovereign, free will is heretical. When the Pharisees and Sadducees, the greatest enemies of Messiah, came to John’s baptism, he identified them with vipers, the most dangerous of serpents: “O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come” (Matthew 3:7). Both the message of John the Baptist during the transitional period and the message of the apostles after the transitional period refute the belief by religious liberals that the spirit of the New Testament differs from that of the Old Testament. The statements by the Psalmist are as true today as the day they were penned: “...thou hatest all workers of iniquity” (Psalms 5:5). “Oh let the wickedness of the wicked come to an end.... God is angry with the wicked every day” (Psalms 7:9; Psalms 7:11). The appearance of Elijah in the transfiguration scene does not invalidate his future coming as Christ’s forerunner (Matthew 17:1-13). Christ had reason for likening John the Baptist to Elijah. He called John “Elias” because he had come “in the spirit and power of Elias.” Three passages of Scripture that mention John the Baptist connected with Elijah should be considered in their chronological order: (1) Gabriel did not say that John the Baptist shall be Elijah himself but “...he shall go before him [the Lord] in the spirit and power of Elias...” (Luke 1:17). (2) During the time of John’s ministry, the Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask John who he was. When asked if he was Elijah, John replied, “I am not” (John 1:21). (3) After the death of John the Baptist, Jesus Christ gave the disciples a preview on the mount of transfiguration of the coming kingdom. The transfiguration scene was both a reality and a figure of Christ’s future advent. Elijah, who had been seen, disappeared. This brought the question, “...Why then say the scribes that Elias must first come” (Matthew 17:10)? The scribes held that Elijah would be a forerunner of the Messiah before “...the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD” (Malachi 4:5). The disciples, on the other hand, saw Elijah coming subsequent to Jesus Christ. Elijah’s departure from them caused the disciples to question the scribes. The answer to their question is found in the fact that the scribes taught correctly. Christ answered the disciples, “...Elias truly shall first come, and restore all things. But I say unto you, That Elias is come already, and they knew him not, but have done unto him whatsoever they listed. Likewise shall also the Son of man suffer of them. Then the disciples understood that he spake unto them of John the Baptist” (Matthew 17:11-13). John the Baptist was called Elijah by Jesus Christ because he had qualities like Elijah. The Lord had sent Gabriel to announce that he would come “...in the spirit and power of Elias.” Elijah had turned the hearts of some to the Lord and had preached repentance and judgment in difficult and dark days. Conditions were the same when John preached repentance and pointed out the Lamb of God, who was rejected by the nation of Israel. John’s message was not destined to “restore all things,” but Elijah was destined to be successful: “...Elias truly shall first come, and restore all things” (Matthew 17:11). The nation of Israel will not receive the message of repentance, which is prerequisite to the kingdom, until she is made willing in the day of God’s power (Psalms 110:3). That day will not come until the coming of Elijah, the forerunner of Christ’s second advent. John came in the spirit and power of Elijah but was rejected and killed. Christ was also rejected and killed. Elijah shall also be killed (Revelation 11:1-19). However, Christ will not be rejected by Israel when He comes the second time. The nation will repent and receive the Lord Jesus as her Messiah: “All the land shall be turned as a plain from Geba to Rimmon south of Jerusalem: and it shall be lifted up, and inhabited in her place, from Benjamin’s gate unto the place of the first gate, unto the corner gate, and from the tower of Hananeel unto the king’s winepresses. And men shall dwell in it, and there shall be no more utter destruction; but Jerusalem shall be safely inhabited” (Zechariah 14:10-11). John the Baptist was not Elijah. When asked if he was Elijah, John said, “I am not” (John 1:21). His reply does not contradict Matthew 11:11-14 or Matthew 17:1-13. The word “come” in Matthew 17:11—"...Elias truly shall first come..."—is erchetai, a futuristic present middle indicative of the Greek verb erchomai, which means to come. The verb is connected with the words “and shall restore all things [kai apokatastesei panta]” (translation). The verb apokatastesei is a future active indicative of apokathistemi, which means to restore a thing to its former place or state. Hence, the futuristic present verb indicates a future ministry of Elijah. Following the futuristic present verb for “come,” Christ used a predictive future verb for “restore.” Christ’s statement—"But I say unto you, That Elias is come already, and they knew him not, but have done unto him whatsoever they listed. Likewise shall also the Son of man suffer of them" (Matthew 17:12)—does not contradict what had been said. What about Elijah having already come? The verb “come” (elthen) is the aorist active indicative of erchomai, which is used culminatively. The culminative use of the aorist emphasizes the end of the action. The other aorist verbs “knew him not,” “done unto him,” and “whatsoever they listed” are used constatively. The constative action is viewed in its entirety. All the verbs point to the past when Christ spoke to the disciples who were unfamiliar with the double fulfillment of prophecy. In verse 13, they understood that Christ was speaking about John the Baptist who had fulfilled his role in prophecy. All things were not restored by John the Baptist, but they will be restored by one who shall come. Therefore, the prophecy of Malachi 4:5-6 has not been fulfilled, and this proves John the Baptist was not Elijah. At the time Christ spoke these words to His disciples, John the Baptist had already come and died a martyr’s death. Elijah is called “the prophet” (1 Kings 18:36), but John is designated “more than a prophet” (Matthew 11:9). Therefore, John is not Elijah. Christ talked about John the Baptist and Elijah in Matthew 17:11-13 when He referred to Elijah. One had already come, but the other was yet to come. If John the Baptist was Elijah, one is forced to believe in reincarnation (the soul coming back in another body). ======================================================================== CHAPTER 86: 04.2.07. BAPTISM OF THE KING ======================================================================== Chapter 7 - BAPTISM OF THE KING Jesus Christ came from Galilee to Jordan to be baptized by John the Baptist. But on His arrival, John tried to hinder Him, because he saw nothing in Jesus Christ to necessitate His receiving the baptism of repentance: “Then Jesus comes from Galilee to the Jordan to John, to be baptized by [hupo, ablative of agency] him. But he was trying to hinder Him, saying, I have need to be baptized by you, and you are coming to me?” (Matthew 3:13-14—translation). John was administering the baptism of repentance, demanding that the recipients first prove by their lives that they had repented of their sins. He realized that Jesus Christ, the Son of God, did not fit that category. He had no sin of which to repent. Therefore, John tried to prevent Christ’s being baptized with his baptism. There is no Biblical substantiation for the opinion that Christ was confessing the sins of Israel in the same sense that Moses and Daniel did (Exodus 32:1-35; Daniel 9:1-27). Others say He was setting an example for us. Some who believe Christ was setting an example for us actually link Jesus Christ with the baptism of repentance. That concept certainly will not stand the test of Scripture. It can be said that Jesus Christ was baptized for the following reasons: 1. He was baptized to manifest His dying to natural relationships, such as to parents and vocation. Jesus Christ was more than the Son of Mary. He is the eternal Son of God; therefore, He died to His relationship with Mary. He had been a carpenter, but He also died to that relationship. 2. Baptism, Christ’s first public act in the flesh at the beginning of His public ministry, announced His last act in His flesh and blood. 3. Christ’s baptism verified for John that Christ was the Son of God (John 1:32-34). John was progressively learning about Jesus Christ. 4. Christ’s baptism authenticated John’s message concerning the One coming. 5. His baptism distinguished John’s relationship and Jesus Christ’s relationship to sinners. John had been sent from God with the message of repentance, but Jesus Christ had been sent by God the Father to bring salvation (Luke 19:10). John and Jesus Christ are distinguished as witnesses. John was a light sent from God to bear witness concerning the Light in order that all may believe through Jesus Christ. John was not that Light (John 1:6-9). The Lord Jesus included John’s name as a witness in John 5:32-37 when He said His own works and the Father bear witness of Him. John was a burning and shining lamp. He was a flickering light in which the Pharisees were willing to rejoice for an hour (John 5:35). Since John was a flickering lamp, he was willing to decrease in order that Christ might increase (John 3:30). As a star loses its brightness in the light of the rising sun, the light John was giving would diminish in the rising of the light of Jesus Christ who is the Light of the world. Christ’s statement that the Pharisees were willing to rejoice in John’s light for an hour explains the light shining in the darkness and men unable to comprehend the Light. No one can suppress the Light sent from God. God’s light will accomplish the purpose for which He has sent it. In contrast to John, the flickering light, Jesus Christ, the Light of the world, “became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we observed His glory, the glory of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth” (John 1:14—translation). The missions of John and Christ are distinct. In answer to John’s trying to prevent His being baptized, Jesus Christ said to him, “permit it at the present time: For thus it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness. Then he permitted him. And having been immersed, Jesus went up immediately from the water: and, behold, the heavens were opened, and he saw the Spirit of God coming down as a dove, and coming upon Him. And behold a voice from the heavens, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I take delight” (Matthew 3:15-17—translation). John could not assist Jesus Christ in fulfilling all righteousness. Furthermore, John waited until sinners came to him and proved by their lifestyle that they had repented before he would baptize them. But Jesus Christ in His incarnation came down where sinners are. The adverb “thus” (houtos) can refer either to what precedes it, as in Matthew 5:19; Matthew 6:30, or to what follows it, as in Matthew 3:15, Matthew 6:9, and Acts 7:6. This adverb is used the following ways in Scripture: like, in this way, thus, so, like this, or in like manner. Therefore, its meaning must be considered in the light of its context. In Matthew 3:15, it points to something that would follow Christ’s baptism. The pronoun “us” (hemin) in Matthew 3:15 is plural. Does it apply to John, to future sinners—as taught by those who believe in baptismal regeneration, or to the Godhead—Father, Son, and Holy Spirit? Grammatically, it could refer to Jesus Christ and John, called the Baptizer. But theologically, it cannot refer to John. Man cannot assist God in the fulfillment of righteousness. Righteousness was fulfilled by One—Jesus Christ—not two—John and Christ. By the obedience of Jesus Christ, not the obedience of Christ and another, men are made righteous (Romans 5:16-21). The righteousness which Christ fulfilled was accomplished not at His baptism but at Calvary. His baptism was only a picture of that which He would accomplish at the close of His public ministry. Therefore, it was righteousness which could not be accomplished by Christ and John or by Christ and sinners in their act of obedience to baptism. But it was accomplished by the Persons in the Godhead—Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Jesus Christ, in whom dwelt the fullness of the Godhead bodily (Colossians 2:9), gave Himself for us (Galatians 1:4). He was crucified for us (Galatians 2:20). He offered one sacrifice forever (Hebrews 10:10-14). Jesus Christ offered Himself through the Holy Spirit (Hebrews 9:14). The Father laid on Jesus Christ all the sins of the elect (Is. 53:6). How could the Lord Jesus Christ, the impeccable Savior, submit to John’s baptism? It has been said that Christ saw His sheep struggling under judgment. Christ saw the ones the Father had given to Him in the covenant of redemption struggling in their depravity, and He must go in to rescue them. He must become identified with them, taking their place in judgment in order that they might be made the righteousness of God in Him. Hence, Christ’s baptism was a portrayal of that which would take place at Calvary. The One who knew no sin was made a sin offering for the elect, and this was symbolized in His baptism. Jesus Christ was born under the law which He Himself gave (Galatians 4:4). He had already submitted to circumcision (Luke 2:21) and had been to the temple at the age of twelve (Luke 2:46). Hence, in nothing was He distinguished from the other children of His people until He was publicly identified in His baptism. His relationship with the other children of His people was not one of personal sinfulness, but it involved humiliation under the law. Christ’s baptism in Jordan is a portrayal of His being released from the judgment which He would bear at Calvary for all the elect. God laid on Him the iniquities of all of those the Father gave to the Son. “For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him” (2 Corinthians 5:21). What is the meaning of this verse? (1) It cannot be sin in the abstract, or sin as such. Since He did not have any sins of His own, His being made sin must be in some figurative sense. (2) It cannot be that He was a sinner, because He knew no sin. (3) It cannot be that He was guilty, because that would have disqualified Him as the Savior. (4) It does mean He was a sin offering, or God treated Him as though He were a sinner, because our sins were judicially imputed to Him. Therefore, He in reality bore those sins in His own body on the tree (1 Peter 2:24). The word for sin, even in Hebrew, can mean sin or sin offering. Jesus Christ was a sin offering. He did not become a sinner, but He was judicially treated as a sinner. The sins were not His. They were legally ours, and He paid for them at Calvary. Where did Christ’s identification with sin take place? It occurred the same place where He fulfilled all righteousness. It did not come to pass at His baptism but at Calvary when He suffered on behalf of those the Father gave to Him. Peter confirmed that Jesus Christ fulfilled all righteousness at Calvary when he spoke to the Jews about their having killed the Prince of life. Peter called the Jews’ attention to the lame man who had been healed (Acts 3:12). He told them the power with which he had been healed was that of the holy and righteous One they had denied and killed (Acts 3:13-16). He added, “And now, brethren, I have known that you acted on the basis of ignorance, as also your rulers. But the things, which God announced beforehand by the mouth of all the prophets, that His Christ should suffer, He thus fulfilled” (Acts 3:17-18—translation). Thus, Peter proved that righteousness was fulfilled only figuratively at Christ’s baptism. It was actually fulfilled at Calvary. In His baptism, Jesus Christ identified Himself with the work He came to accomplish at His first advent. His first act in His public ministry foretold His last on account of His elect. Immediately after His baptism, the Spirit drove Christ into the wilderness to be tested by the Devil (Mark 1:12). Christ’s trial in the desert is recorded in Matthew 4:1-11, Mark 1:12-13, and Luke 4:1-13. Mark’s account is very concise, and Luke’s account is very similar to Matthew’s account. Three prepositions in Matthew 4:1 must be understood in order to properly translate and interpret this portion of Scripture. “Then Jesus was led up [anechthe, aorist passive indicative of anago, a compound word made up of the preposition ana and the verb ago, which means I go up] by [hupo, ablative of agency] the Spirit into [eis, accusative of extent] the desert to be tried [peirasthenai, aorist passive infinitive of peiradzo], by [hupo, ablative of agency] the Devil” (translation). The passive voice for “tried” would not be used unless Christ was led by the Spirit into the desert for reasons other than testing. Satan’s testing of Jesus Christ is related to the kingdom. The Lord Jesus was born King. He was preserved when Herod wanted to kill all the male children. He was baptized, and then He was driven into the wilderness to be tested to prove He is the One who was, is, and will always be the King of kings and Lord of lords. All three offices of Jesus Christ—Prophet, Priest, and King—are in Him simultaneously. But they are not exercised in sequence. He was the good Shepherd; He is the great Shepherd; and He shall be the chief Shepherd. Thus, there is order in His exercising the offices of Prophet, Priest, and King. In Matthew 4:3-4, Satan’s first test of Jesus Christ is recorded: “And having come, the one testing said to Him, since you are the Son of God, speak in order that these stones may become loaves. And He answered and said, it has been written, Man shall not live because of bread alone, but because of every word proceeding out of the mouth of God” (translation). This first test destroys tradition and proves we must be guided by Divine principles. Matthew 4:5-7 records the second test: “Then the Devil takes Him into the holy city, and made Him stand on the highest point of the temple, And says to Him, since you are the Son of God, cast yourself down: for it has been written, to His angels He shall give a charge concerning you and on their hands they shall bear you up lest you may strike your foot against a stone. Jesus said to him, again it has been written, you shall not put the Lord your God to an all-out-test” (translation). This second test proves the end never justifies the means. Matthew 4:8-11 records the third test: “Again, the Devil takes Him to a very exceedingly high mountain, and shows Him all the kingdoms of the world, and their glory; And said to Him, I will give all these things to you, having fallen down you may worship me. Then Jesus says to him, depart Satan: for it has been written, you shall worship the Lord your God, and you shall serve Him only. Then the Devil leaves Him, and behold, angels came and were ministering to Him” (translation). This third test demolishes sensationalism. Imagine the Devil, who knew who Christ was, telling Christ, the eternal Son of God, he would give Him authority and glory if Christ would worship before him! There was no weakness in Jesus Christ to respond to Satan’s proposal. The testing was not for Christ’s benefit but for the tester and the world. If Jesus Christ could have concurred with Satan’s suggestion that Christ worship before him, Satan would have been promoted. He and the Lord of glory would have exchanged places. Satan would have become the Lord of glory, and Jesus Christ would have become the god of this age. At his beginning, Satan was Lucifer, the archangel who represented Christ. He was a bright and shining one, but he aspired to exalt himself above God (Isaiah 14:1-32; Ezekiel 28:1-26). Thus, Lucifer fell and became Satan. The word “temptation” should not be used in reference to Jesus Christ. Most denominations today teach that Christ could be tempted, could have sinned, but did not sin. Some say that since Jesus Christ had taken our flesh on Himself, He could be tempted with the possibility of falling; otherwise, it could not be considered a real temptation. They say that Christ’s Deity insured His victory. They assert that sinlessness does not preclude temptation, or Adam could not have fallen. Their conclusion is that no one is so holy as to be free from temptation; moreover, it is the yielding of one’s will to Satan’s suggestion that constitutes sin. However, Scripture teaches that the word “temptation” can never apply to the absolutely holy Savior, because He is not only incapable of evil but also untemptable with evil (James 1:13-15). There are five steps to an overt act of sin: (1) The first step in an act of sin involves allurement. Allurement is attraction by the offer of something attractive or desirous. We may be allured to something morally good or bad. However, since there was no weakness within Jesus Christ, He could not be allured. (2) The second step in an act of sin is illumination. The one tempted or allured knows that having what he desires, or what has been offered to him, involves crossing a standing precept into forbidden territory. (3) The third step in an act of sin is rationalization. The person who has been allured desires something and is enlightened that he must cross a principle and step into forbidden territory to secure his desired object. Then, he begins rationalizing with his human reasoning because he will do his best to justify by rationalization what he wants to do. He will ignore Divine principle and follow his human reasoning. (4) The fourth step in an act of sin is to aspire after the offer by the tempter. (5) The fifth step in an act of sin is to surrender to an overt—open to view or knowledge, no longer concealed, or no longer secret—act of sin. Jesus Christ, the impeccable Savior, could not succumb to any of these steps in an act of sin, because He did not have a sinful nature to enable Him to yield to Satan’s propositions. One cannot deny that Satan offered something to Christ in the desert. Neither can one deny that the eternal Son was aware of every detail of Satan’s offer. He is the eternal Son of God. But it must be denied that Christ wanted anything that was offered. He could not want it because there was nothing in His holy nature to desire it. NOTE: The book CHRIST COULD NOT BE TEMPTED by W. E. Best presents a more comprehensive study of this subject. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 87: 04.2.08. THE GREATNESS OF JOHN ======================================================================== Chapter 8 - THE GREATNESS OF JOHN The universal question by the people in the entire hill country of Judea concerning John was, “What then will this child turn out to be?” (Luke 1:66 NASB). From the time it was learned that Elisabeth was pregnant, there is no doubt that the people who were close to Zacharias and Elisabeth were wondering what part their child would play in helping to bring about a change for the better in their uncultivated spiritual desert. Surely God must have something in store for them after so long a period of national spiritual drought. The answer to the people’s question was “the hand of the Lord was certainly with him” (Luke 1:66 NASB). There was something unusual about the child in the womb of Elisabeth. The record states that when Mary was told “...that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God” (Luke 1:35), she went to her cousin Elisabeth. Mary had been told that Elisabeth was with child in her old age, and she wanted to tell Elisabeth about her pregnancy. When they met, Elisabeth was occupied with Mary’s child rather than her own. Furthermore, Zacharias was filled with thoughts of Christ rather than John. What a lesson for Christian parents! “...When Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb...” (Luke 1:41). Some are foolish enough to say that the fetus leaped in her womb as a result of reflex motility caused by the cardiovascular system. Contrary to this scientific explanation, the Biblical record states that Elisabeth exclaimed, “For, consider, as soon as the outcry of the greeting came into my ears, the baby [brephos, which means baby or infant] leaped for extreme joy in my womb” (Luke 1:44—translation). Can the explanation be limited to the fact that Elisabeth was filled with the Spirit (Luke 1:41)? Can science interpret this Biblical fact? Can science explain the virgin birth? Although the baby who would be called John when he was born (Luke 1:13) leaped for joy in the womb of Elisabeth (Luke 1:41), the major attention was directed to the baby in the womb of Mary. Thus, before the births of either the forerunner or the Savior, the unborn forerunner must decrease in order that the unborn Savior might increase. This same principle was carried out in the life and ministry of John the Baptist. John was a man who would rather anger a king than fail to expose his sins. Herod Antipas the tetrarch was a person of lesser importance than the primary king. He had inherited only one-fourth of the inheritance of Herod the Great. John was continually saying to Herod that it was not lawful for him to have his brother’s wife (Matthew 14:4; Mark 6:14-29). Faithful rebukes that do not profit provoke one to anger. John was faithful to God and to Biblical principles. He preferred being without a head to having a conscience with offense before God. Since sinners are bold to sin, we must be bold to denounce sin. What one loves becomes an X-ray of his heart. The prophet’s voice was not silenced by his executioner. John troubled Herod more after his beheading. Herod heard John pleasurably before he beheaded him; but afterwards, it was through Herod’s conscience that he heard John. Conscience starts judgment in time that continues throughout eternity (Romans 2:14-16). The following are Herod’s steps to misery: (1) He was subjected to John’s preaching (Mark 6:20). He heard him, heard him often, and heard him with pleasure. (2) He took his brother’s wife. (3) He arrested and imprisoned John. (4) He had permanent knowledge of John’s righteous character. (5) He was grieved because of his oaths. (6) He acknowledged that he beheaded John (Mark 6:16). John the Baptist stood for the Lord against the hopeless apostasy of his day. The terms “man in Christ” and “man of God” are not synonymous. In the sense of 1 Timothy 6:11-12, a man must be in Christ in order to be a man of God: “But thou, O man of God, flee these things; and follow after righteousness, godliness, faith, love, patience, meekness. Fight the good fight of faith, lay hold on [epilabou, aorist middle imperative of epilambano, take hold of for yourself] eternal life, whereunto thou are also called [to which you were called]....” Taking hold of eternal life for oneself is not a reward following the struggle; but according to the aorist imperative Greek verb, it is something to be done at once. Hence, the man of God is seen standing for the Lord against the hopeless apostasy described in II Timothy. The eternal life which the man of God is to take hold of for himself is not only quantitative (endless) but also qualitative (the spiritual strength to fight). John the Baptizer had his shortcomings, but they did not distract from his message concerning the kingdom. The dark shadow cast over his soul because of his imprisonment was not unusual among God’s privileged servants. Scripture furnishes many examples of depression, disappointment, and other manifestations of the flesh. God never hides the failures of His servants, whether it is Abraham’s lying, Moses’ anger, Elijah’s discouragement, Jeremiah’s disappointment, or Peter’s cursing (invoking a curse on himself). John, like Elijah, was a man of like passions as all of us. He manifested his shortcomings by sending two of his disciples to Jesus Christ with the question, “Art thou he that should come, or do we look for another [heteros, one of a different kind]?” (Matthew 11:3). Some believe the question posed by John’s disciples arose not from doubt but to give the disciples an opportunity to hear from Christ’s own lips the evidence of John’s Divine mission. Impatience is what we really see in John’s question. John did not doubt Christ’s Messiahship, but he could not dismiss the thought of Christ as the avenger of sin and the Judge of all (Matthew 3:11-12). A noteworthy observation is that Jesus Christ did not refute John’s messianic hope, but He confirmed His messianic character by appealing to His miracles. This fortified John’s faith in Christ as the Messiah. A new beatitude was introduced to the report sent back to John in prison: “...blessed is he, whosoever shall not be offended [aorist passive subjunctive—the mood of possibility—of skandalidzo, which means to cause to stumble or to be shocked; to cause to falter or err] in me” (Matthew 11:6). (See John 16:1; Romans 14:21.) Blessings are forfeited by failure to acknowledge Christ’s authority. John was on the winning side despite the fact that he was destined to be beheaded. He should take refuge in the truth that God’s most noble servants are bitterly tested. The fires are heated seven times hotter for them (Daniel 3:19). Hence, they are often made to cry, “O Lord, hear; O Lord, forgive; O Lord, hearken and do; defer not, for thine own sake, O my God: for thy city and thy people are called by thy name” (Daniel 9:19). After John’s disciples departed, the Lord Jesus began His discourse on the greatness of John the Baptizer by asking the three following questions: (1) “What did you go out into the desert to see? A reed [kalomos, a reed or cane] shaken with the wind?” (Matthew 11:7—translation). Christ’s approval did not endorse a timid, vacillating, unstable man. John did not bend with the winds of either religion or politics. His commission from God was all he needed to give him stability of purpose. (2) “But what went ye out for to see? A man clothed in soft [malakos, soft to the touch or delicate] raiment?” (Matthew 11:8). Persons who wear soft garments are without stamina. They do not have the constitution to withstand opposition or to endure in times of hardship. That type of person could not stand against Herod and his unlawful wife. (3) “But what went ye out for to see? A prophet? yea I say unto you, and more than a prophet” (Matthew 11:9). John was more than a prophet. He was also the subject of prophecy. The Biblical answer to John’s greatness was stated by the Lord Himself: “Truly I am telling you, among them that are born of women there has not appeared a greater than John the Baptist; but the one of least importance in the kingdom of the heavens is greater than he” (Matthew 11:11—translation). The greatest man born of women became a martyr after thirty years of training and only one year of service. The Savior’s commendation of John for his greatness did not include amiability, friendliness, and agreeableness with all and everything regardless of principles in order to attract crowds. Jesus Christ said the most gracious things about His people in their absence. Unlike Christ, men often say their most gracious things about people in their hearing because they seek personal advantage: “...their mouth speaketh great swelling words, having men’s persons in admiration because of advantage [opheleia, means profit or advantage]” (Jude 1:16). Christ’s commendation of John the Baptist included one of the most controversial passages in the Bible—Matthew 11:11-15. Some assume that the “least” (mikros, one who is low or humble in dignity) in the kingdom (Matthew 11:11) means the most degraded sinner in whose heart the kingdom is established is greater than John the Baptist. They allege that John was the herald to usher in the messianic age and the advent of the kingdom. They think he could not enjoy the benefits of the kingdom because he was destined to die. Therefore, they conclude that John must be pronounced as one blessed less than those in their desperate need violently striving to be recipients of what Christ would bestow (Matthew 11:12; Luke 16:16). Many students of Scripture contend that John proclaimed a spiritual kingdom that is being taken by the forceful. They state that the Baptizer was less than the least in the kingdom. John was great, but there is a greatness that goes beyond what he could ever hope to experience. Their opinion is that the forerunner stood on the borders of the kingdom, but he was unable to enter. They say this mystified the disciples, but that Christ gave the answer in Matthew 18:1-3. They claim this does not mean that John the Baptizer was unsaved; but it does mean that he could not enjoy the kingdom that Christ established at His first advent. No one violently strives to enter the kingdom. People violently strive to enter that which pertains to either the flesh or the world. The Greek word for “violent” in Matthew 11:12 is biastai, nominative plural of biastes, which means one who uses violence or is forceful. Since this is the only place this noun is used, one cannot go elsewhere in Scripture for its explanation. According to the context, Christ was speaking to the multitudes (Matthew 11:7). How can persons who claim to believe in salvation by grace say forceful or violent unregenerate men take “the kingdom of salvation” by force? The Bible says, “...There is none that seeketh after God” (Romans 3:11). Furthermore, anyone who understands the Biblical teaching of regeneration knows that the sinner is passive in the new birth (John 3:8). Many who advocate that the kingdom is present declare that they believe in depravity, unconditional election, and irresistible grace; but they manifest their inconsistency by saying the spiritual kingdom requires earnest labor and the highest degree of exertion in order to enter. This teaching denies that life precedes any activity toward God. Hence, their exegesis of Matthew 11:12 would be amusing were it not damaging to interpretation. Therefore, such teaching must not go unnoticed, and it must be exposed. Is everyone pressing into the kingdom? Whether “every man” is interpreted to mean without distinction or without exception does not matter in this instance, because the unregenerate are not with utmost effort pressing to get into what is unscripturally called the kingdom of grace. In Matthew 11:12, the Greek verb biadzo is used the same way as the noun biastai—"...the kingdom of heaven suffereth violence...." Since the inflected form biadzetai can be either present middle indicative or present passive indicative, much discussion has ensued over the verb biadzo, which means to overpower by force, to be carried by storm, or to inflict violence on. Some teach that it is used in the middle voice; therefore, the kingdom is presently pressing forward. Since the kingdom has been preached, they assume that men rush to it. Thus, they conclude that believers “seize” (present active indicative of arpadzo, which means to seize or carry away by force) the kingdom and make it their own. This brings up a valid question, which they are obligated to answer. How can believers seize that which they claim already belongs to them in salvation? Thus, they contradict their teaching that the kingdom is salvation. They fail to understand that the Christian’s spiritual experience is from Egypt through the wilderness into Canaan and then the kingdom. The inflected form biadzetai in Matthew 11:12 must be the present passive indicative of biadzo. Since it is the passive voice, the verse means the kingdom was suffering from the violent efforts of national Israel, as violent (biastai, nominative plural of biastes, which means violent, strong, or forceful) ones seized (present active indicative of arpadzo, which means to seize or carry away by force) it. The latter verb is used by John to describe the Jews who wanted to take (present active infinitive of arpadzo) Christ and make Him King (John 6:15). He who was born King could not be made King by men (Matthew 2:2). The forceful religionists about whom Christ spoke wanted a kingdom on their terms. They rejected not only the rightful King but also the prerequisite to the kingdom—repentance. Christ gave a parable to correct the erroneous idea that a kingdom would be set up at His first advent (Luke 19:11-27). He foretold what the forceful Jews would say: “We do not want this man to reign over us” (Luke 19:14 NASB). Furthermore, the Pharisees and lawyers rejected the baptism of repentance: “...the Pharisees and lawyers rejected the counsel of God against themselves, being not baptized of him” (Luke 7:30). Many forceful religionists today want not only a preacher but a “church” on their terms. Thus, the same sins of religionists are repeated over and over. Those who believe the kingdom was established at Christ’s first advent allege that John the Baptist was the Elijah who was to come (Matthew 11:13-14). They say he was not literally Elijah, but his coming in the spirit and power of Elijah (Luke 1:17) fulfilled Malachi 4:5-6. Contrary to their declaration, “And if ye will receive” of Matthew 11:14 introduces a first class condition where assumption is factual. Thus, some were willing to accept John the Baptist as the fulfillment of Malachi 4:5-6, but Israel as a nation was destined to reject both John the Baptist and Jesus Christ—forerunner and King. Since John the Baptist, Christ’s first forerunner, was beheaded and Jesus Christ was crucified as the King of the Jews, Elijah is yet to come as the second forerunner of the coming King. Christ went on to show that Israel failed to qualify for the kingdom’s establishment at His first coming (Matthew 11:16-19). John was not ignorant of the kingdom he proclaimed. He was specially prepared and sent forth to preach the kingdom of prophecy. Many religionists assume the disciples had the wrong concept of the kingdom. However, the supposition that religionists today know more about the nature of the kingdom than Christ’s disciples is folly. Jesus Christ’s sending men forth to preach what they did not understand would be incredible, but that would be true if some of the modern ideas of the kingdom espoused by men were factual. Since the Scriptures are consistent, only prejudiced men judge the disciples under a misconceived theory of the kingdom of Christ. Hence, truth suffers more from its supposed friends than from its enemies. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 88: 04.2.09. JOHN'S MESSAGE OF REPENTANCE ======================================================================== Chapter 9 - JOHN’S MESSAGE OF REPENTANCE The first forerunner of Jesus Christ, named John the Baptist, was the last Old Testament prophet and the first New Testament prophet. He marks the transition from the old covenant to the new covenant. The law, the prophets, and 400 years without a voice from God preceded him. “Baptist” was not John’s surname. This noun is an apposition. The two nouns “John” and “Baptist” are used like “George Washington” and “President” of the United States. John was called Baptist because he was the baptizer. John, who was filled with the Holy Spirit before his birth, grew and developed in the wilderness (desert) of Judea, a spiritually uncultivated place. Israel’s sins had caused its lack of cultivation (Jeremiah 2:31-37; Jeremiah 25:8-9). This desert was in the Jordan valley, which connects with the Dead Sea; hence, the Jordan valley is associated with death. In her history, Israel had passed dry shod through the Jordan River. Years later, in the presence of John’s preaching, they must repent, bring forth fruits fitting of repentance, and be baptized in the Jordan River to signify their having died to sin. John’s twofold message was repentance and the kingdom of the heavens. There are incorrect views of repentance: (1) Remorse of conscience over sins is a wrong view of repentance. A person may regret the sins he has committed, but the repentance needs to be repented of (2 Corinthians 7:10). (2) A simple change of mind is an erroneous belief concerning repentance. It is more than a simple change of mind. A person may change his mind but will soon change it again. (3) Doing something which is designed to expiate sin is a false concept of repentance. The correct view of repentance is as follows: (1) It is a radical soul transformation. (2) This radical soul transformation is the gift of God (Acts 5:31; Acts 11:18; 2 Timothy 2:25). (3) This radical soul transformation, which is God’s gift, is the fruit of regeneration. Every person for whom Christ died will come to repentance (2 Peter 3:9). Two Greek verbs for repentance are used in the New Testament. The first is the compound word metamelomai, which means regret, be sorry, or change of mind (Matthew 21:30; Matthew 21:32; Matthew 27:3; 2 Corinthians 7:8; Hebrews 7:21). This word signifies a change of mind, but a change of mind can fall short of being a radical soul transformation as taught within the context of 2 Corinthians 7:1-16. The second, which is the stronger Greek word for repentance is metanoeo, which means repent, have a change of heart, turn from one’s sin, or change of way caused by an abhorrence of one’s sins. It is used 34 times in the New Testament. This repentance is exemplified in the Old Testament by Ezekiel’s reference to God’s taking away the stony heart and giving a heart of flesh (a new heart) (Ezekiel 36:26). The nature of repentance is described as turning away from evil (Acts 3:26) and turning to God (Acts 20:21; Acts 26:20). God gives time for the elect to repent (Romans 2:4). A Biblical example of the character of repentance is Paul’s statement to the Thessalonian Christians in 1 Thessalonians 1:9-10. Paul reversed the order to turning to God from evil. There are two kinds of repentance. There is the initial repentance which can also be called a conversion experience. This happens only once. After the initial repentance, there is a continual repentant spirit (Revelation 2:4-5). Repentance is an action that keeps on acting. As John the Baptist was the forerunner of Christ, repentance is the forerunner of faith. Although repentance and faith are inseparable in the Biblical order, repentance always precedes faith (Acts 20:21). As the person with God-given faith not only believes but continues believing, the one to whom God has granted repentance not only repents but continues repenting in preparation for each act of faith. The word faith (pistis) is used three basic ways in Scripture: (1) personal faith that God gives to each person He regenerates, (2) Jesus Christ Himself, and (3) the system of truth. Conclusively, repentance is the forerunner of saving faith (justifying faith before one’s consciousness, Christ being the object of this saving faith). It is the forerunner of every act of faith in the Christian life, and a repentant spirit prepares the individual for accepting and embracing the system of truth (Php 1:27; Jude 1:3). The following are signs of repentance: (1) True inward sorrow for sins is a sign of repentance (2 Corinthians 7:10). Every person who has had a true conversion experience can relate with this. (2) Hatred of one’s sins evidences repentance (Ezekiel 36:31). (3) The prompting of grace to turn from sins denotes repentance (Ezekiel 18:30). (4) Turning to God and asking for forgiveness is a sign of repentance (Hosea 5:15). (5) The change must be genuine, and it must be demonstrated in order to depict repentance (Matthew 3:7-8). (6) Initial repentance is manifested in obedience to baptism, which is an answer of a good conscience toward God (1 Peter 3:21). (7) The subsequent spirit of repentance to the initial repentance is expressed by the crucifixion of the flesh (Galatians 2:20). An apostate cannot repent. John’s message to the masses in general and his message to the Pharisees and Sadducees differed. His announcement in the desert of Judea to the masses in general was “you repent for the kingdom of the heavens has approached” (Matthew 3:2—translation). In contrast, when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees coming to his baptism, he said to them, “Offspring of snakes, who warned you to flee from the coming wrath?” (Matthew 3:7—translation). God’s strongest language is against religionists. The Pharisees were hypocrites. Like the liberals and modernists who misinterpret the Scriptures, these Pharisees misinterpreted the law of God. The Sadducees denied the resurrection and the angels; hence, they denied the supernatural (Acts 23:6). At the beginning of his ministry, John was popular, and the people came to him as his fame spread abroad. His popularity among the Jews who knew the Old Testament Scriptures is understandable. They knew Isaiah had prophesied a forerunner of the Lord, and they also realized their spiritual drouth in being without a prophet for 400 years. Of the three major views held by religionists pertaining to the subject of repentance, the first for consideration is baptismal regeneration. This view maintains that repentance and confession are worthless unless they are accompanied with baptism. Contrary to this teaching, baptism is not for the purpose of repentance. Those who hold this view say baptism is for the purpose of remission of sins: “Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost” (Acts 2:38). However, the preposition “for” comes from the Greek preposition eis, the accusative of cause, which means “because of” the remission of sins. The correct interpretation of Greek prepositions can be determined only by the context in which they are used. Paul spoke of Jews who had already been delivered by blood who “were all baptized unto [eis, accusative of reference] Moses in the cloud and in the sea” (1 Corinthians 10:2). Those Jews were baptized with reference to their relation to Moses. We are baptized with reference to our relation to Christ: “For as many of you as have been baptized into [eis, accusative of reference] Christ have put on Christ” (Galatians 3:27). It does not signify that we are baptized in order to be saved. John the Baptist demanded that those he baptized first produce fruits worthy of repentance (Matthew 3:8). They must prove by their works that they had repented before he would baptize them. The second of the major views held by religionists on the subject of repentance is that of covenant theology. Those who hold this view maintain that there is a class of Scriptures which makes baptism and salvation look identical (Acts 2:38; Acts 22:16; Mark 16:16), and there is another class that makes them look separate (Matthew 3:7-8; Luke 3:12-14; Acts 10:44-48; Acts 11:15). They affirm that the Scriptural teaching is that baptism is the outward part of repentance showing submission to Christ in the name of Christ (Acts 2:38) on the ground of authority (Matthew 18:5; Matthew 18:20). This assumption is that baptism for the remission of sins is the result of submission because Jesus Christ commanded it. The covenant theologians believe in infant baptism. To substantiate that belief, they say the Jews were baptized on dry ground, and fathers, mothers, and children passed through the Red Sea on dry ground. They believe the children being in covenant relationship with the parents are saved unless after they are grown they forsake, and then their names can be taken out of the book of life. The third view is that there is no repentance or baptism for the assembly of Christ today. This view is held by some dispensational premillennialists. Their opinion is that sign gifts, including water baptism, were associated with Israel; and when Israel was temporarily laid aside, these ended (1 Corinthians 1:22; 1 Corinthians 13:8; Ephesians 4:5). They contend that “church truth” was given only by Paul in the Pauline Epistles. Their observation is that the Bible teaches Christ’s body had its historical beginning at Acts 13:9-13. They give the following reasons for their conviction: (1) Saul was separated to the work to which God called him. (2) Saul, his Hebrew name, was changed to Paul, his Gentile name. (3) Prior to this time, Saul’s name was associated with Barnabas, but now Paul is associated with his company. Paul is now in command. (4) Prior to this time, Saul had preached only to Jews, and that is his confirmation; but now, the good news is given by Paul to the Gentiles. (5) Sergius Paulus was saved by faith alone. He did not repent nor was he water baptized, as required under the kingdom gospel. (6) Prior to this time the only means of salvation was through the nation of Israel; but now, a Gentile was saved in spite of the Jews. (7) This age is a part of that hidden mystery, mystery of the gospel, given to us by God through Paul, the apostle of this age. Apollos knew only the baptism of John until he sat under the teaching of two tentmakers and was instructed more perfectly in the way of the Lord. After 1900 years, believers still know only the baptism of John and are unwilling to submit to the tentmaker, Paul. Those who project the preceding arguments believe there were kingdom apostles, those called by Jesus Christ during His public ministry, and there were church apostles. They assume that the apostles commissioned to go to the lost sheep of the house of Israel in Matthew 10:1-42 were kingdom apostles, but apostles subsequent to them, including Paul, were church apostles. Does Acts 13:9-13 record the beginning of the assembly of Jesus Christ? Some Greek scholars, who are prejudiced in their interpretation, think the body of Christ had its historical beginning in this portion of Scripture at the time Saul was called Paul. However, there is nothing in this portion of Scripture to indicate that this is the beginning of the assembly of Jesus Christ. The beginning of Paul’s first missionary tour is recorded in Acts 13:1-52. As certain prophets and teachers in the assembly at Antioch ministered to the Lord and fasted, the Holy Spirit said, “Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them” (Acts 13:2). Thus, Saul was sent on his first missionary journey (Acts 13:1-52; Acts 14:1-28; Acts 15:1-39). The prophets are distinguished from the teachers by the enclitic particle (kai), used as a coordinating conjunction. The three prophets were Barnabas, Simeon, and Lucius. The two teachers were Manaen and Saul, whose name was called Paul. The following things should be observed in answer to the arguments given by those who claim that there is no repentance or baptism for the assembly of Jesus Christ today. FIRST—When did the apostles become members of the assembly? Did they become members at Pentecost? Did they become members when Jesus Christ called them to Himself? According to Ephesians 2:20, written by Paul by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, the apostles were the foundation of the assembly of Jesus Christ. Paul had just stated to the Ephesian saints that through Jesus Christ both saved Jews and saved Gentiles have access by one Spirit to the Father (Ephesians 2:18). They were fellow citizens with the saints and were members of the family of God, having been built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets (Ephesians 2:19-20). A foundation is a very important part of the house itself. Since the apostles called together by Christ constituted the foundation of the assembly, the assembly did not begin on the day of Pentecost. Neither did it begin in Acts 13:9-13 when Saul’s name was called Paul. The assembly (ekklesia) which Jesus Christ is building was begun with the apostles in Matthew 16:1-28. This is the universal aspect of the assembly. The universal aspect of the assembly is demonstrated in local assemblies where two or three are gathered together in Christ’s name agreeing (Matthew 18:1-35). Both universal and local aspects of the assembly (ekklesia) are given in Matthew’s Gospel, not in Acts or the Epistles. The apostles were the first to be set in the assembly (1 Corinthians 12:28). SECOND—Is there a distinction between “kingdom apostles” and “church apostles”? There is no distinction between them. Paul was not one of the twelve apostles. He was one born out of due season (1 Corinthians 15:8-9). There are only a few other apostles named in the Scriptures. THIRD—What is the significance of Saul’s name being called Paul? The statement “Then Saul (who also is called Paul)” does not indicate that this name was given him for the first time. As a Jew, his name was Saul, and as a Roman citizen, his name was Paul. He undoubtedly had both names. He was no longer called by his Hebrew name, which means “requested,” but he would now be called Paul, which means “little.” Paul was a Hebrew by birth; he was a Roman by citizenship; he was a Greek by culture. God chose this man to be His minister to the Gentiles. He would come in contact with the Jews. When he first began his ministry, he spoke many times to the Jews. However, his primary ministry was to the Gentiles; therefore, he was called by his Gentile name. The record of two names being given to an individual is not uncommon in Scripture—John Mark (Acts 12:12), Simeon Niger (Acts 13:1), Sergius Paulus (Acts 13:7), Barsabas Justus (Acts 1:23), etc. Sometimes a new name is equivalent to a new dignity. For instance, when Peter was called by the Lord, his name was Cephas, which means a stone; but it was changed to Peter to signify dignity. FOURTH—What is the meaning of “Paul’s gospel”? Was Paul’s gospel different from other names of the gospel? Many compound names are used in the Old Testament to describe Jehovah. The numerous compound names are necessary because no one name can describe the infinite God. There are also many names ascribed to Jesus Christ throughout the Scriptures. The same thing can be said concerning the gospel. The gospel, like God Himself, can never be adequately described by names. There are not different gospels. The one message of the unmerited favor of God is given the following designations: 1. “The gospel of God” signifies its source. The message was settled in heaven before the foundation of the world (Romans 1:1). 2. “The gospel of Christ” denotes its subject (2 Corinthians 10:14). 3. “The gospel of the grace of God” directs attention to its unmerited favor (Acts 20:24). 4. “The gospel of your salvation” specifies its purpose (Ephesians 1:13). 5. “The gospel of peace” evidences its inner protection and assurance in warfare (Ephesians 6:15). 6. “This gospel of the kingdom” points to its hope and prospect (Matthew 4:23; Acts 20:25). 7. “The everlasting gospel” directs attention to its unchangeableness (Revelation 14:6). 8. “My [Paul’s] gospel” identifies its human channel (Romans 2:16; Romans 16:25; 2 Timothy 2:8). It was Paul’s by inspiration and revelation plus commitment (Galatians 1:12; 2 Timothy 3:16). 9. “The gospel which was preached of me [Paul]” names the message he preached (Galatians 1:11; Galatians 2:2). 10. “Our gospel” shows its commitment to the recipients of grace, because it has been revealed to us by the Holy Spirit (2 Corinthians 4:3; 1 Thessalonians 1:5; 2 Thessalonians 2:14). Paul included himself with the assemblies when he called the message “our gospel.” We could not understand the gospel if it were not revealed to us by the Holy Spirit. The message has come to us in the sense that all truth is made known by God (Matthew 16:17; 2 Corinthians 4:3; 2 Corinthians 4:6; Ephesians 1:17-23; 1 John 2:20; 1 John 2:27). 11. “The mystery of the gospel” signifies that what was set forth in types and shadows in the Old Testament has been made plain since the advent of Jesus Christ (Ephesians 6:19). The gospel is the message of the unmerited favor of God, whether it is preached in the Old Testament, the New Testament, presently, or during the tribulation period when God will save the nation of Israel. The one message is that of the infinite indescribable God. It was good news in the Old Testament through types and shadows of Him who would come and what He would do when He came. The nature of the good news is the same in every age. The gospel was not one thing in one age and something else in a different age. That would be like saying election is one thing in one age and something else in another age. God has one purpose. It had been kept silent for long ages, from eternity to Christ’s first advent: “Now to the one who is able to strengthen you on the basis of my gospel, and the proclamation of Jesus Christ; on the basis of the revelation of the mystery that has been kept silent in times eternal, But now has been made plain, through prophetic writings, according to the mandate of the eternal God having been made to all nations for obedience to the faith” (Romans 16:25-26—translation). Since the advent of Jesus Christ, the God-Man Mediator, it has been made plain. That which was set forth in types and shadows in the Old Testament has been made plain in the New Testament. Although it has been made plain, there are many things about the gospel we do not comprehend any more than we can comprehend the Person of Jesus Christ and the hypostatic union, both of which are mysteries. Furthermore, salvation is a mystery. Although we are recipients of God’s work of grace, there are many things about it that are inexplicable. It has been made plain to a point, but we do not fully comprehend its aspects. It will take all eternity to understand the Godhead, the Person of Christ, the mystery of the gospel, and the mystery of Israel who shall be saved. But it has been made plain in the sense that we are no longer living under the shadows, because the substance has appeared. He gave Himself an offering for us, and we understand that. This is the good tidings we are commissioned to make known to the whole world (Matthew 28:19-20). The gospel, called by many names, was committed to Paul. He said he committed it to Timothy to commit to faithful men that they might commit it to the assemblies of Christ, which are universities of God for the edification of the elect that we might make known the wisdom of God to evil and good forces in the heavenlies. Paul discussed the awesome responsibility of the assembly in Ephesians 3:1-21. There are two major divisions in Ephesians 3:1-21; each begins with the expression “for this cause [reason]” (Ephesians 3:1; Ephesians 3:14). The first refers back to Paul’s statements in regard to the middle wall of partition between Jews and Gentiles having been broken down (Ephesians 2:11-22). Paul, who was a prisoner on behalf of the Gentiles, was writing for the spiritual benefit of the Ephesians (Ephesians 3:1). They had heard of the administration of the grace of God which had been given to Paul for them (Ephesians 3:2). The revelation that made known the mystery in Ephesians 3:3 and the explanation of the mystery is recorded in Galatians 1:10-16. Paul explained the mystery which in other generations was not made known to men. A Biblical mystery is not something incomprehensible, but it is a secret that God alone can make known to the elect. It is a secret that unless one has the grace of God he cannot understand (Ephesians 3:5). God revealed this mystery, which from the beginning of the ages has been hidden in God, by the Spirit to His apostles and prophets (Ephesians 3:9). The mystery is that the assembly is constituted of both saved Jews and saved Gentiles, since the middle wall of partition has been broken down (Ephesians 2:14). The former inexplicability of how the saved Gentiles could come along and receive the same blessings on the promises that the saved Jews were experiencing was now made known. The assembly age itself was not mysterious to the prophets of old. David saw three periods of time (Psalms 110:1-7). The present is the period of time when Jesus Christ is seated at the Father’s right hand making intercession for His own, saving to the uttermost, and preserving all who come to Him. The truth that the Gentiles would be fellow heirs and fellow body members in the same body—the assembly, and fellow partakers of the promise in Christ through the gospel was not formerly known (Ephesians 3:6). God made Paul a minister of God according to the gift of God having been given to him by the activity of God’s power. Men are not made ministers by schools but by God. Being made a minister by God to preach to the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ produced humility in Paul. He declared that he was the very least of all saints (Ephesians 3:8). Who can place a value on God’s riches? The purpose for bringing to light the administration of the mystery which from the beginning of the ages had been hidden in God was in order that the diversified wisdom of God shall be made known now through the assembly to the rulers and to the authorities in the heavenlies. Most assembly members do not realize the value of the assembly. Let us get a glimpse of the impact of the assembly making known the diversified wisdom of God to rulers and authorities in the heavenlies. We are told to “...be strong.... Put on the complete armor of God, for you to be able to stand against stratagems of the Devil, because our conflict is not against blood and flesh but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the world rulers of this darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenlies” (Ephesians 6:10-12—translation). This is our conflict against evil forces in the heavenlies. We make known the varied wisdom of God not only to evil but also to good powers in the heavenlies. There are good (elect) and bad (nonelect) angels. The angelic host of good angels are presently desiring (present active indicative of epithumeo) to look into (aorist active infinitive of parakupto, which means look into, stoop, or bend over) our salvation (1 Peter 1:12). We can see this typified in the cherubim who were bending over the mercy seat which covered the ark of the covenant in the holy of holies in the tabernacle. The cherubim were fashioned as though they were looking down into the ark of the covenant searching diligently. This salvation was not revealed to the angels but to us. God is making His diversified wisdom known to elect and nonelect angels through the assembly of Jesus Christ. The gospel has been committed to people who have been born of the Spirit of God and initiated by Him into the family of God. The assembly becomes an institute for the edification of God’s people in time, and the institute to teach evil and good forces what is truth. Good angels desire to find out more about our redemption, because there is no redemption for them. We have something and know something that the angels do not fully comprehend. The reason is obvious. Salvation must be experienced in order to comprehend it. The second division of Ephesians 3:1-21 begins with “for this cause [reason]” (Ephesians 3:14). This looks back to the recognition that the assembly to whom the gospel has been revealed is the university of God. This cognizance produces humility in God’s people. We are more concerned about that part of ourselves that is spiritual rather than the part that is flesh. We desire to be rooted, having been fully established, in order that we may be fully able to comprehend “with all saints what is the breadth, and length, and depth, and height; And to know the love of Christ, which passeth knowledge, that ye might be filled with all the fulness of God” (Ephesians 3:18-19). God is able to do far beyond all that we are asking or thinking, according to the power operating in us. Therefore, all glory in the assembly of Jesus Christ to all generations of the ages of ages belongs to Him (Ephesians 3:20-21). ======================================================================== CHAPTER 89: 04.2.10. THE BAPTISMAL FORMULA ======================================================================== Chapter 10 - THE BAPTISMAL FORMULA Is John’s baptism, which was the baptism of repentance, for the assembly of Jesus Christ today? What is the baptismal formula for the New Testament assembly today? If there were no repentance for this dispensation of grace, there would be no reference to repentance subsequent to the time the assembly began. Since there are recorded instances of repentance subsequent to the beginning of the assembly, the concept of no repentance for this dispensation of grace is destroyed. If there is no spirit of repentance, God did not give repentance; and those who claim there is no repentance for this age are in error. John’s baptism was the baptism of repentance, because it identified baptism with repentance. He said, “I am now baptizing you in [en, locative of sphere] water because of [eis, accusative of cause] your repentance...” (Matthew 3:11—translation). John had warned the Jews that a physical descent from Abraham and an outward conformity to the Jewish ceremonies would not suffice to justify them before God. God’s gift of repentance is more than a change of mind. It is also an act of the will. John’s baptism because of (eis) repentance was not in the name of the Godhead, as we are baptized in the name of the Father, the Son, and Holy Spirit. It was not in the name of the Lord Jesus, but it was through faith in their Messiah who was about to be manifested. It was not without some knowledge of the Holy Spirit, because John preached that the Messiah would baptize them in the Holy Spirit. Not until the Acts of the Apostles do we find the statement about being baptized in the name of Jesus Christ (Acts 2:38; Acts 8:16; Acts 10:48; Acts 19:5). Three Greek prepositions are used to express “in” the name. The preposition epi, the dative of reference, which means “on” is used in Acts 2:38. It means be baptized on the confession of which the name implies. The preposition eis, the accusative of reference, which means “with reference to” is used in Acts 8:16; Acts 19:5. It means baptized with reference to the authority of Jesus Christ, which denotes that the one being baptized is united with Jesus Christ. The preposition en, the locative of sphere, which means “the sphere” in which true baptism is accomplished is used in Acts 10:48. In the great commission, the name in which believers are to be baptized is the name of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit (Matthew 28:19). In Acts, believers were baptized in the name of Jesus Christ, the Lord Jesus, and the Lord. Nevertheless, it was baptism, because all the fullness of the Godhead dwells bodily in Jesus Christ (Colossians 2:9). All that is known about the Father and the Holy Spirit is known through Jesus Christ and His redemptive work. The disciples of Acts 19:5 were baptized because they had never been baptized in the manner prescribed by the Lord Jesus in the great commission. Was John’s baptism Christian baptism? Was Apollos’ baptism, which was only John’s baptism, Christian baptism? Was Apollos baptized with Christian baptism with a number of people in Corinth who believed? Apollos was a native of Alexandria (Acts 18:24). Alexandria was noted for its library. One-third of the population was Jewish. Apollos was a learned man, powerful in the Scriptures. This man had been instructed in the way of the Lord and was boiling with enthusiasm in the Spirit, speaking and teaching accurately concerning Jesus Christ. But he lacked information pertaining to the baptism of John. He began to speak boldly in the synagogue. Aquila and Priscilla, having heard him, took him and explained to him the way of God more accurately. When Apollos passed through Achaia, he assisted ones who had believed through grace. There is no operative faith except through grace. Faith does not operate and bring grace to an individual, but one believes through grace. Although Apollos needed further instruction in Acts 18:1-28, there is no record of his being rebaptized in Acts 19:1-41. Furthermore, the apostles had received only the baptism of John. There is no record of the Lord’s disciples being rebaptized at Pentecost, as some believe. The message at Pentecost was “repent” with reference to initial repentance, but the disciples had already experienced initial repentance. John’s baptism was sufficient for them. It was the only baptism the Lord Jesus had. He was baptized with John’s baptism, but for a different purpose. He was not baptized with reference to His repentance, because He had no sin of which to repent. But He was baptized because that was the beginning of His public ministry when He was made known (John 1:29-34). John’s baptism was from God and not from man: “The baptism of John, from where [pothen, an interrogative adverb] was it? from [ek, ablative of source] heaven, or from men? And they were reasoning [imperfect middle indicative of dialogidzomai] among themselves saying if we may say from heaven he will say to us, why then did you not believe him? But if we may say from men, we fear the crowd. For all regard John as a prophet” (Matthew 21:25-26—translation). They answered Christ by saying, “We have not known [perfect active indicative of oida, which means have known, perceived, or understood], and he said to them, neither am I telling you by what authority I am doing these things” (Matthew 21:27—translation). Christ would not repeat the truth He had already displayed by submitting to John’s baptism. He would not tell them explicitly what He had demonstrated implicitly by His submission to John’s baptism. If they had acknowledged John as a prophet, they would have not only accepted his message, but would have also submitted to his baptism. They did not accept him as a prophet; therefore, they did not accept his message. Because of that, they did not submit themselves to baptism. Therefore, they rejected the counsel of God. All the people having heard John were submitting themselves to baptism, having acknowledged God’s justice (Luke 7:29). “But the Pharisees and the lawyers set aside God’s plan as being for the purpose of themselves, not having been baptized by him” (Luke 7:30—translation). Those who submitted to baptism were acknowledging God’s justice. Those who set aside baptism were rejecting the truth of God; therefore, they were not acknowledging God’s justice. The baptismal formula for Christians cannot be baptism with reference to Moses (1 Corinthians 10:1-2). The Israelites were baptized with reference “to [eis, accusative of reference]” (1 Corinthians 10:2) their relation to Moses. Galatians 3:27 is a companion passage for us—"For all of you who were baptized with reference to [eis, accusative of reference] Christ put on [enedusasthe, aorist middle indicative of enduo] Christ for yourselves" (translation). We have nothing to do with our getting into Christ; but we do participate in the action of putting on Christ in our daily lives; and this is proved by the middle voice of enduo. The formula for baptism was given by the Head of the assembly, Jesus Christ Himself: “Go into the world preaching the gospel, baptizing them into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit” (Matthew 28:19—translation). There is no contradiction between baptism into the name of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit and baptism in the name of Jesus Christ as taught in Acts. We have access to the Father by the Son through the agency of the Holy Spirit. One who denies any one Person in the Godhead does not have access to the Father. The Father chose us, the Son redeemed us, and the Holy Spirit quickened us. All the fullness of the Godhead dwells bodily in Jesus Christ. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 90: 04.2.11. JOELS PROPHECY OF BAPTISM IN SPIRIT AND FIRE ======================================================================== Chapter 11 - JOEL’S PROPHECY OF BAPTISM IN THE SPIRIT AND FIRE Baptism in the Holy Spirit and fire was prophesied by both Joel and John the Baptist (Joel 2:28-30; Matthew 3:11; Luke 3:16). The Hebrew word for Spirit is found 388 times in the Old Testament. The Greek word for Spirit is used 378 times in the New Testament. The Holy Spirit was the Agent in the reconstruction of the chaotic state of creation. In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth (Genesis 1:1). The earth became without form and void, and darkness was on the deep. The Spirit moved on the chaotic state of creation (Genesis 1:2). The Holy Spirit had a part in the beginning of man (Genesis 2:7). He did not always strive with man through the ministry of the word (Genesis 6:3). Before Pentecost, the Holy Spirit came on judges, craftsmen, prophets, and civil leaders in the Old Testament for their empowerment for a particular mission (Numbers 24:2; Judges 3:10; Judges 6:34; etc.), and then He departed from them (1 Samuel 16:14). At Pentecost, the assembly was baptized in the Holy Spirit. Five of the seven references to baptism in the Spirit were prophetical (Matthew 3:11; Mark 1:8; Luke 3:16; John 1:33; Acts 1:5). The other two are historical (Acts 11:16; 1 Corinthians 12:13). Subsequent to Pentecost, the New Testament speaks of being born of the Spirit (John 3:5-8), having been baptized in the Spirit (1 Corinthians 12:13), having been sealed with the Spirit (Ephesians 1:13), being filled with the Spirit (Ephesians 5:18), and having been anointed with the Spirit (1 John 2:20; 1 John 2:27; 2 Corinthians 1:21). The word “fire” is used more than 375 times in the Bible, and about 76 of those are in the New Testament. The Hebrew word is esh. It is used in the context of either God’s revelation of Himself to man or man’s approach to God in worship. In order to properly interpret this word in Matthew 3:11 and Luke 3:16, some of its uses in the Old Testament should be considered. When Adam and Eve fell, the sword like fire protected the way into the garden so that in order to get back into the garden of Eden they must go through fire (Genesis 3:24). Fire symbolizes separation of life in the separation of Adam and Eve from the garden of Eden by the flaming sword. The climax of God’s covenant with Abraham was by a lamp of fire (Genesis 15:17). God appeared to Moses in a blazing flame of fire (Exodus 3:2; Exodus 3:4). The Lord descended on Mount Sinai in fire (Exodus 19:18). Ezekiel’s vision was dominated by fire (Ezekiel 1:26-27). The destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah by fire is a symbol of God’s judgment on those cities (Genesis 18:1-33; Genesis 19:1-38). Korah, with 250 followers, was consumed by fire (Numbers 16:32-35). God destroyed Nadab and Abihu with fire because they offered strange fire (Leviticus 10:1-2). Fire symbolizes cleansing (Isaiah 6:1-9; Malachi 3:2). Conclusively, in the Old Testament, fire symbolizes separation, judgment, destruction, and cleansing. To one person fire means death, and to another it means life. Fire refers to God’s revelation of Himself and man’s approach to God by means of a sacrifice. Where fire and blood are mentioned together one thinks of sacrifice which is blessing. This is demonstrated in the offerings of Leviticus 1:1-17; Leviticus 2:1-16; Leviticus 3:1-17; Leviticus 4:1-35; Leviticus 5:1-19. But where there is fire without blood there is a curse. The New Testament Greek word for fire is pur. It is used a few times in a literal sense (Matthew 17:15; Luke 22:55; Acts 28:5). It is used symbolically of the Spirit (Acts 2:3), of the judgment seat of Jesus Christ where our works will be tried so as by fire (1 Corinthians 3:13-15), of God as a consuming fire (Hebrews 12:29), and of the Lord Jesus as He judges the assemblies (Revelation 1:14). The word denotes judgment in many of the approximately 76 references. Since John was predicting blessing when he said Jesus Christ would baptize in the Holy Spirit and fire, how could judgment be a blessing? This will be considered later in our discussion. The prophecy of Joel, some of which was quoted by Peter at Pentecost, may be divided in the following manner: (1) Joel foretold the day of the Lord (Joel 1:1-20). (2) In view of the day of the Lord, Joel exhorted and consoled the people (Joel 2:1-32). (3) Although the bondage of God’s people may be long and grievous, it shall not be everlasting (Joel 3:1-21). The day of the Lord, which will be associated with fire, is described in Joel 1:1-10 and foreshadowed in Joel 1:15. National calamity came on Israel. The memory of God’s judgment should be transmitted to all posterity and written for the generations to come (Psalms 102:18). Israel should let their woes be warnings, their sufferings be standing sermons, and their corrections be instructions for future generations. Paul gave the same kind of instruction to the Corinthian saints when he drew from Old Testament analogies. A record should be kept of God’s great works, whether they were for blessings or punishments, as a list for the benefit of posterity, not with vain affection of wit but with holy gravity. The insects listed in Joel 1:4 were instruments of Divine judgment. Joel was calling Israel to repentance in order to avert a more serious judgment. The palmerworm derives its name in the Hebrew from shaving, because it shaves the fruit from the earth. The locust derives its name in Hebrew from multitude. It crops the tops of plants. The cankerworm derives its name in Hebrew from licking. It feeds on flowers and fruit. The caterpillar derives its name from wasting, because it utterly consumes fruit, branches, and all. Joel was calling the people to repentance in order to avert a more serious judgment by means of hostile armies, of which the insects he mentioned were only types. Each invasion was with more intense destruction. What one insect left, the next devoured until all was destroyed. This is more than history. It is prophecy, a type of another more terrible invasion which had its partial fulfillment in the day of Joel and will have its complete fulfillment in the day of the Lord. Instruction to the people in view of their judgmental circumstances was to lament like a virgin (Joel 1:8), be ashamed (Joel 1:11), and gird yourselves (Joel 1:13). Joel was calling them to repentance. The Lord’s ministers and the land mourned (Joel 1:9-10). The land lies under the curse of barrenness, even at its best. Creation is groaning because of the curse, waiting for the time the curse will be lifted (Romans 8:20-22). The offerings were no longer being made (Joel 1:13). The priests should sanctify a fast, call a solemn assembly, gather in the house of God, and cry to the Lord (Joel 1:14). The place where they were to assemble was “into the house of the LORD your God.” He was their God by virtue of the covenant. He is ours by virtue of the eternal covenant of grace. The object of this day was for repentance and confession of sins. There must be humiliation in order for a person to have proper reflection on the things of the Lord. Private mourning and humiliation are not enough under public calamities. A time should be appointed to come to the appointed place that the fast should be made known. There was no example of fasting before Moses. Neither the Savior nor the apostles instituted any particular fast. True fasting results when believers become so consumed with holy business that everything else is laid aside. There is a lesson in this for us today. The person with God-given faith embraces Christ; his praying embraces the sovereignty of God; and his fasting denies himself. Because of the desolated condition of the institutional assembly, which is lying in spiritual waste today inflicted by many spiritual foes, we have spiritual drought. As in the days of the prophecy of Amos (Amos 8:11), there is a famine for the word of God in all its purity. The call goes forth to repent, but people will not repent. This repentance must begin with the leaders. Because of famine for the word of God and the worship of God, the judgment of God came in Joel’s time. America cannot continue the way she is going without experiencing the judgment of God. The day of the Lord was interpreted in Joel 1:15. Joel prophesied that it would come as a destruction. The day of the Lord would be associated with fire (Joel 1:19-20). The Spirit took the opportunity afforded by an unparalleled scarcity of things in Joel’s time to awaken the people in respect to the day of the Lord. National calamity came on Israel, which foreshadows the great and terrible day in which God’s power shall be manifested in judgment. The blowing of the trumpet is linked with the day of the Lord (Joel 2:1). The priests’ duty was to blow the trumpet. There were two trumpets blown in Israel (Numbers 10:1-36). The trumpets come in with striking fitness after the instruction respecting the movement of the cloud. They were made of one piece of silver, but they served a dual purpose. One was blown to assemble the people, and the other was blown for an alarm to alert the Israelites for journeying. The trumpet must give a distinct message. This ancient custom of the Old Testament to give a distinct message is for us today. The man of God must give a certain message in order that the people of God may prepare themselves for battle: “For if the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle?” (1 Corinthians 14:8). Shall we permit men to advance into judgment without being warned? Should we remain quiet and not give a distinct sound? People must be exposed to truth whether or not they heed it. Sounding the alarm is not a warning concerning what has already taken place but the warning pertaining to that which was about to take place. This follows the description of the dread army which was to overrun the land. The day of the Lord is accompanied with darkness, gloominess, clouds, thick darkness, and fire (Joel 2:2-3). Joel was giving a prophecy of the end time when fire will devour before the people; a flame will burn behind them; and behind them there will be a desolate wilderness. Nothing shall escape them (Joel 2:3). “The earth shall quake before them; the heavens shall tremble: the sun and the moon shall be dark, and the stars shall withdraw their shining” (Joel 2:10). Darkness is the emblem of intense sorrow, but light is the emblem of joy. The image describes the universality of darkness. Darkness will grow darker. In this instance, instead of the mountain tops catching the gladdening rays of the early morning sun and the light spreading from one height to another until the whole earth is arrayed in light, all will become darkness. Apostasy will continue to escalate until the end time. The greatness of Israel’s sin brought judgment, and it will bring a terrible time of judgment which she has not seen, even in the years of her captivity. The day of the Lord is described as “great and very terrible; and who can abide it?” (Joel 2:11). In view of the coming day and God’s intervention, Israel should repent. An event too clear to miss is the appeal to the nation to repent before the judgment of God fell (Joel 2:12-17). There is a turning with the brain without turning with the heart. However, alteration is required of not only the mind but also the affections of the heart. Without a change in the affections of the heart, repentance is not genuine. Christians know that when the Lord appeals to us to repent, repentance is needed; and we escape chastisement only by running to God. Repentance is represented in Scripture as renewing from decay, refining from dross, recovering from a malady, cleansing from soil, rising from a fall, or turning. Some rend neither their hearts nor their garments. Others rend their garments and not their hearts, and some rend their hearts and garments. Inward sorrow and outward expression must both be manifested. Inward sorrow is manifested by what we consistently do. When the heart is made clean, the garment is also made white. A rent heart is followed by a rent veil and a rent heaven (Matthew 27:51; Isaiah 64:1). The nation was also called to fast. Fasting is self-denial. Feeding the flesh will increase corruption (Jeremiah 5:7-8). Abstinence subdues the flesh. This is what Paul had in mind when he said he buffeted his body to keep it in subjection (1 Corinthians 9:27). Fasting days and soul fattening days are not the same. The nation was called to weeping and mourning. Peter never looked as good as when he wept bitter tears in repentance. A Christian out of the will of God never looks better than when he is weeping bitter tears of repentance. King David illustrates this in Psalms 6:1-10; Psalms 51:1-19. Repentance includes fasting and mourning. What is a humbling day without a humble heart? Sorrow for sin must not be light and sudden but heavy and piercing. Israel must rend their hearts and not their garments (Joel 2:13). The appeal was heeded. The priests, the ministers of the Lord, led out in the turning. They wept between the porch and the altar. The porch denotes fellowship with God, and the altar proclaims accomplished redemption. Israel repented and manifested repentance. The Lord blessed her (Joel 2:18-19), emancipated her (Joel 2:20), prospered her (Joel 2:21-27), judged the Gentile nations (Joel 3:1-8), and promised kingdom blessings (Joel 3:17-21). God promised repentant Israel former and latter rain (Joel 2:23). Charismatics claim that the former rain refers to the original outpouring of the Spirit at Pentecost, and the latter rain denotes the charismatic revival of the last days. Contrary to their opinion, this verse and James 5:7-8 are linked: “Be patient therefore, brethren, unto the coming of the Lord. Behold, the husbandman waiteth for the precious fruit of the earth, and hath long patience for it, until he receive the early and latter rain. Be ye also patient; stablish your hearts: for the coming of the Lord draweth nigh.” Hence, the rain ties with the outpouring of the Spirit predicted by Joel, and the latter rain designates an event which will immediately precede Christ’s second coming. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 91: 04.2.12. JOHNS PROPHECY BAPTISM IN SPIRIT AND FIRE ======================================================================== Chapter 2 - JOHN’S PROPHECY OF BAPTISM IN THE SPIRIT AND FIRE The law and the prophets were “until” John the Baptist (Luke 16:16). His prediction of Christ’s baptizing in the Holy Spirit and fire, like the Old Testament prophecies, made no distinction between Christ’s first and second advents. The Holy Spirit led him to speak of the partial near fulfillment at Pentecost and the complete remote fulfillment at Christ’s second advent. John’s question to Christ from prison by his disciples, “Art thou he that should come, or do we look for another?” (Matthew 11:3), shows he did not understand the time lapse between Christ’s two advents. Furthermore, the disciples having come together were questioning the Lord saying, “Are you at this time restoring the kingdom to Israel?” (Acts 1:6—translation). The Lord replied, “It is not yours to know times or seasons which the Father placed in His own authority” (Acts 1:7—translation). The Lord’s reply does not contradict the future establishment of the kingdom. John and the disciples understood the nature of the kingdom, but they were ignorant concerning the time of its establishment. The time of the kingdom’s establishment remains a secret with the Father (Matthew 24:36). The Son Himself, because of His subordination to the Father, said He did not know the time (Mark 13:32). This does not indicate that He does not know all things. But He spoke in subordination to the Father. He was the perfect One and always did the will of His Father. Conclusively, the disciples knew nothing of a kingdom already set up. It was not set up at the first advent of Jesus Christ. Surely the apostles would have known if Christ had already established the kingdom. Subsequent to Pentecost, the apostles did not preach that the kingdom had been established. Jesus Christ did not correct the disciples pertaining to their view of the kingdom. Restoring the kingdom to Israel could mean nothing else than the kingdom prophesied in the Old Testament. In Matthew 3:11, John the Baptist addressed the Pharisees and Sadducees when he said, “I am baptizing you in water because of your repentance: but the One coming after me is stronger than I, of whom I am not worthy to be carrying His sandals; He shall baptize you in the Holy Spirit and fire” (translation). They were the ones going out to be baptized by him (Matthew 3:7). In Luke 3:7, Luke stated, “Then he was saying to the crowds going out to be baptized by [hupo, ablative of agency] him, offspring of vipers, who warned you to flee from [apo, ablative of separation] the coming wrath?” (translation). In both Matthew and Luke, the context of each passage proves John’s prediction of Christ’s baptizing in the Holy Spirit and fire was addressed primarily to the Israelites. He was warning them of coming judgment. The ax was already being laid at the root of the tree, and God was about to speak to them of judgment in his message (Matthew 3:10; Luke 3:9). God will manifest His wrath on all the unregenerate. John’s prophecy of Christ’s baptizing in the Spirit and fire was a blessing to the regenerate but a curse to the unregenerate. In like manner, our proclamation of truth is a savor of life to those the Holy Spirit regenerates, but it is a savor of death to the unregenerate (2 Corinthians 2:14-16). John’s prediction of Christ’s baptizing in the Holy Spirit and fire should be considered from each of the synoptic Gospels. Matthew included fire in his account: “I am baptizing you in water because of your repentance, but the One coming after me is stronger than I, of whom I am not worthy to be carrying His sandals: He shall baptize you in the Holy Spirit and fire” (Matthew 3:11—translation). Mark’s short account of John’s prophecy eliminated fire: “I baptized you in water: but He shall baptize you in the Holy Spirit” (Mark 1:8—translation). Luke included fire in his Gospel: “John answered, saying to all, I indeed baptize you in water; but someone stronger than I is coming, of whom I am not worthy to untie His sandals: He shall baptize you in the Holy Spirit and fire” (Luke 3:16—translation). John omitted fire: “And I had not known Him: but the One having sent me to baptize in water, that One said to me, on whomever you may see the Spirit coming down, and remaining on Him, this is the One baptizing in the Holy Spirit” (John 1:33—translation). Luke, who also wrote Acts, did not include the word fire in Acts 1:5—"John indeed baptized in water; but you shall be baptized in the Holy Spirit not many days after these" (translation). Luke’s account of this subject is more detailed than Matthew’s. It is recorded in Luke 3:7-18. Both Matthew and Luke make reference to the fan in Christ’s hand (Matthew 3:12; Luke 3:17). Four references are made to judgment by both writers: (1) The ax, which destroys, is a means of judgment. (2) The shovel is an element of judgment because as the winnowing shovel does its work, the chaff is blown away by the wind. (3) Fire, which indicates destruction, is a means of judgment. Matthew calls it unquenchable fire in Matthew 3:12. (4) Wrath is also a means of judgment. Both Matthew and Luke use the word fire three times (Matthew 3:10-12; Luke 3:9; Luke 3:16-17). It is clear that fire has reference to judgment. The first reference to fire is connected with judging the unfruitful trees; the second, with the blessing of judging by believers in the future; and the third, with final judgment at the great white throne. Baptism in the Spirit and fire cannot be regeneration—the new birth. Some believe that baptism in the Spirit is one thing and fire cleanses like the Holy Spirit. But that would be redundant. It would be equivalent to saying baptized in the Holy Spirit and baptized in the Holy Spirit. The baptism of those at Pentecost was an added blessing to already regenerated persons. The Lord Jesus had breathed on the apostles. He said to them, “Peace to you: as my Father has sent me, I also am sending you. And saying this, He breathed on them, saying, Receive at once the Holy Spirit” (John 20:21-22—translation). His breathing on them was a foretaste of Pentecost, which was a foretaste of the kingdom. Every child of God has the guarantee of what Christ promised to partially take place in the near future (Ephesians 1:13) and completely take place in the remote future (Acts 2:17). Baptism in the Holy Spirit was designated for the uniting of Jews and non-Jews into the assembly that Jesus Christ has already established and of which the apostles were the foundation. Hence, the infant assembly was empowered at Pentecost for the proclamation of the gospel. At the beginning of the history of the assembly, the early disciples had extraordinary as well as ordinary power. As a result, they had extraordinary and ordinary gifts. The extraordinary power and gifts continued until the completion of the word of God. Some argue that since Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever, this extraordinary power and gifts continue. Jesus Christ is eternally the same because He is God, and God does not change. However, He does change His methods. His present method is through ordinary officers with ordinary God-given gifts. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 92: 04.2.13. PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF PROPHECIES JOEL & JOHN ======================================================================== Chapter 13 - PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE PROPHECIES OF JOEL AND JOHN Baptism in the Holy Spirit and fire cannot find its fulfillment at Pentecost. Why did Luke include the word fire in his Gospel (Luke 3:16) and omit it in Acts 1:5? In his account in Luke, he was speaking of Pentecost as a partial fulfillment, pointing to the remote complete fulfillment. Whereas in Acts, he spoke only of Pentecost, at which time there was baptism in the Holy Spirit but no fire. Many use Acts 2:3—"And there appeared to them tongues being distributed as fire, and it sat on each of them" (translation)—as a proof text to substantiate their opinion that this is the fulfillment of the fire mentioned in Matthew 3:11 and Luke 3:16. However, the statement describing the phenomena at Pentecost, “like as of fire,” of Acts 2:3 is not the same as the word “fire” in the accounts of Matthew and Luke in their Gospels. This was similar to fire but not actually the fire in John’s prediction. The infant assembly was baptized in the Holy Spirit at Pentecost. This was predicted in Acts 1:5 where the word fire is omitted. The aorist passive indicative of the verb baptidzo used in 1 Corinthians 12:13 signifies that the baptism in the Spirit took place in the past at Pentecost. The indicative is the mood of reality; therefore, it actually took place at that time. The ones assembled with one accord in one place of Acts 2:1-4 were the 120 disciples of the Lord waiting in the upper room for the partial fulfillment of the promise by John which is recorded in Acts 1:5. (See Acts 1:12-15.) Since Christians were baptized, this baptism could not be regeneration. There is a difference between being born of the Spirit and being baptized in the sphere of the Spirit. We are born of the Spirit, and those born of the Spirit were all baptized in that infant assembly. Therefore, our baptism in the Spirit was in that baptism. The feast of Pentecost, which is called the feast of weeks in Deuteronomy 16:9-16 and 2 Chronicles 8:13, is described in Leviticus 23:16-22. This feast was observed by Israel fifty days after the feast of passover when the children of Israel brought a sheaf of the firstfruits (Leviticus 23:10). The sheaf foreshadowed Jesus Christ, the Lamb of God. The sheaf, like Christ, needed no preparation. He was absolutely holy. The feast of weeks harmonizes with what took place at Pentecost. The three parts to baptism in the Spirit at Pentecost were foreshadowed in the feast of weeks—Pentecost—to which there were three parts. “And when ye reap the harvest of your land, thou shalt not make clean riddance of the corners of thy field when thou reapest, neither shalt thou gather any gleaning of thy harvest: thou shalt leave them unto the poor, and to the stranger: I am the LORD your God” (Leviticus 23:22). In this verse, note the three parts of Pentecost foreshadowed: (1) “Ye” refers to the Jews who are associated with the “harvest.” (2) The “poor” designates the non-Jews who are connected with the “corners of thy field.” (3) The “stranger” calls attention to non-Jews who are related to the “gleaning of thy harvest.” This feast was partially fulfilled in the three parts of Pentecost when the Holy Spirit came on Jews—Acts 2:1-47, Samaritans—Acts 8:1-40, and Gentiles—Acts 10:1-48, but not on “all flesh [mankind]” (Joel 2:28). (1) Acts 2:1-47—The Jews assembled in the upper room in Jerusalem were baptized in the Holy Spirit to correspond with “ye” in Leviticus 23:22. (2) Acts 8:1-40—The Samaritans in Samaria were baptized in the Holy Spirit in answer to the “poor” in Leviticus 23:22. These were not full-blooded Jews. (3) Acts 10:1-48—The Gentiles in the end of the earth (Acts 1:8) were baptized in the Holy Spirit to correspond with the “strangers”—non-Jews—in Leviticus 23:22. These were the three parts of Pentecost when these three groups received a foretaste of that which shall be completely fulfilled in the future. Baptism in the Spirit at Pentecost empowered the infant assembly, which is made up of Jews and Gentiles between whom the middle wall of partition is broken down, for witnessing during the assembly age: “but you shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be My witnesses both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and even to the remotest part of the earth” (Acts 1:8 NASB). Jesus Christ is the cornerstone (Matthew 16:18), and the apostles became the foundation of the assembly (Ephesians 2:20). The age of the assembly, which began with Christ and His apostles, experienced a foretaste of what John predicted for Israel (Matthew 3:11; Luke 3:16). Jesus Christ, not the Holy Spirit, is the Agent in baptism in the Spirit. There are only seven references to baptism in the Spirit (Matthew 3:11; Mark 1:8; Luke 3:16; John 1:33; Acts 1:5; Acts 11:16; 1 Corinthians 12:13). The first five references are prophetical, and the last two are historical. Five look forward to the day of Pentecost, and two are historical of what took place at Pentecost. There is no such thing as any individual being baptized in, with, or by the Holy Spirit today. Let us consider the last historical reference: “For indeed in one Spirit we were all baptized [ebaptisthemen, aorist passive indicative of baptidzo] into one body, whether Jews or Gentiles, whether slaves or free; and we were all made to drink one Spirit” (1 Corinthians 12:13—translation). The indicative mood is the mood of reality, and the passive voice means the Lord Jesus was the Agent of this baptism. Is that not what John said? “...He [Jesus Christ] shall baptize you in the Holy Spirit and fire” (Matthew 3:11 b—translation). The Holy Spirit is the sphere into which Jesus Christ baptized the infant assembly. The passive voice signifies that the infant assembly did not participate in it. It is historical. It has been fulfilled. Born again people have been baptized by Jesus Christ into the sphere of the Holy Spirit. The baptism at Pentecost was collective. It included Christ’s body, that is, His assembly. There is not one reference to an individual being baptized in the Holy Spirit. The assembly as a whole was baptized in the sphere of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost. This was not the Holy Spirit being poured out on all flesh in the kingdom. That is future. The disciples knew nothing of a kingdom having been set up. Israel as a nation did not enter the events of Pentecost. They knew the nature of the kingdom but not the time of its establishment. Pentecost was a foretaste of what will yet be experienced by God’s people as a whole. The Holy Spirit led Luke to include fire in John’s prediction in Luke 3:16 and to omit it from Acts 1:5 when he predicted what would take place in a few days. He made no reference to fire in the latter reference, because what fire represents would not be fulfilled in a few days. The terrible “day of the Lord” would not take place at Pentecost. Pentecost would be only a partial fulfillment of Joel’s prophecy. The present work of the Holy Spirit in the life of the believer is recorded in Ephesians 5:18—"And be not drunk with wine, wherein is excess; but be filled with the Spirit." Being filled with the Spirit means being continually controlled by means of the Spirit. There is no baptism in the Spirit since Pentecost. The elect are born of the Spirit (John 3:8), sealed with the Spirit (Ephesians 1:13), possess the guarantee of our inheritance (Ephesians 1:1; Ephesians 1:14), and have the Spirit as our guide (Romans 8:14) and as our teacher (1 John 2:20; 1 John 2:27). As all the elect who constitute the assembly died with Christ at Calvary, we were all baptized by Christ into one body at Pentecost. As we were legally in Christ before regeneration, we were legally in the body before we were born of the Spirit. The reverse of the Holy Spirit being poured out on all flesh at Pentecost is demonstrated throughout Acts, and it has been demonstrated for nearly 2,000 years. When the Holy Spirit is poured out on all flesh, the glory of God shall cover the earth as the waters cover the sea. Men will beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks, and there will be no more war, confusion, or chaos. Hence, the very opposite of all flesh being immersed in the sphere of the Spirit is proved by what followed Pentecost. Christians are persecuted; there are wars; there are apostates; etc.; and many prophecies have not yet been fulfilled. The apostle Paul told believers that they possessed the earnest of the Spirit (2 Corinthians 1:22; 2 Corinthians 5:5; Ephesians 1:13). Believers are presently able to realize through the personal indwelling agency of the Holy Spirit as an earnest what this same Spirit will perform in the day of the Lord Jesus Christ. God’s final outpouring is not to be confined to the saints who have the earnest, because it extends to the Jewish remnant, to the Gentiles, and to all the earth of which Pentecost was a publicly manifested pledge. It is sad when men rashly antedate the Spirit, making baptism in the Spirit present when it is future. A person is incorrect to take a prophecy, apply it to his personal life, and claim its fulfillment in himself. One is incorrect to refer to this dispensation as the dispensation of the Spirit. It is the age of grace when the Holy Spirit is operating and calling out a people for Jesus Christ. Miracles to confirm the word have ceased. If truth were perpetuated today in the assemblies of Christ by miracles without any intermission, the baptism in the Spirit would have failed in its significance as a pledge of its future fulfillment. To falsely assign such signs proceeding from the Holy Spirit vilifies the mighty Agent through whom the covenant shall be fulfilled. The miracles at Pentecost were God-given signs of the kingdom as a pledge, and the baptism in the Spirit was an earnest of that which is yet to come. Israel’s rejection was crystallized in the first part of Acts. Therefore, signs and wonders have been withdrawn until the coming kingdom. Since Joel does not refer to the assembly of Christ, the outpouring of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost could not be the complete fulfillment of Joel’s prophecy. The kingdom and the gospel were first proclaimed to the Jews, but they rejected the spiritual requirements of the kingdom—repentance and faith—and even crucified the King in fulfillment of prophecy. This crucifixion was ordained by God for the purpose of redemption and to effect a worldwide proclamation of the gospel for the conversion of the elect. Peter did not identify the events. He identified the power, as the Lord had predicted in Acts 1:8. Baptism in the Spirit at Pentecost was designed for the bestowal of supernatural power. The infant assembly was baptized into the realm of the Spirit—the sphere of power—to accomplish the purpose for which Christ appointed the assembly. The Spirit who formerly dwelt with His people dwells in us since Pentecost. Another proof that the Holy Spirit did not come on all flesh at Pentecost is Joel’s term “afterward [after this]” of Joel 2:28. After what? After God’s statement that He has received Israel back: “And ye shall know that I am in the midst of Israel, and that I am the LORD your God, and none else: and my people shall never be ashamed” (Joel 2:27). The outpouring of the Spirit in those days will extend to all flesh. It cannot be restricted to Israel who shall be born in a day before the establishment of the kingdom, but it will include everyone in the kingdom. “All flesh” includes elect Jews and Gentiles—the body of Christ which is now being built (Matthew 16:18). We will all be in the kingdom, and the baptism in the Spirit will be universally experienced. Baptism in the Spirit at Pentecost was an additional blessing to what the recipients already possessed. When the Spirit is poured out universally, it will be another added blessing to God’s people. The experience at that time will be greater than the experience at Pentecost. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 93: 04.2.14. COMPLETE FULFILLMENT OF PROPHECIES JOEL & JOHN ======================================================================== Chapter 14 - COMPLETE FULFILLMENT OF THE PROPHECIES OF JOEL AND JOHN The kingdom is connected with baptism in the Spirit in complete fulfillment of the prophecy given by Joel and John the Baptist in Joel 2:28-30 and in Matthew 3:11. To avoid misunderstanding, it is proper to say that the Spirit works in regeneration and sanctification during this dispensation, but this is not His final work. On the promises of physical blessings, another outpouring of the Spirit will follow. Did Joel imply that physical prosperity must precede spiritual fullness? To Joel these are the tokens that God has returned to His people, Israel. The drought and famine were signs of God’s anger and judgment. But now there were physical proofs that God had taken Israel back, and this is ascribed to the unconditional covenant that God made with Israel. God has not turned His back on the covenant. It is unconditional. God has not forgotten His people (Romans 11:1). They shall eat in plenty, be satisfied, and praise the Lord their God who will deal wondrously with them; and God’s people shall know that God is in the midst of Israel and that He is the Lord their God (Joel 2:26-27). Joel climbed higher than he had ever climbed when he looked into the future and gave the prophecy recorded in Joel 2:28. “And it shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh; and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, your young men shall see visions.” In this verse, note the following: (1) Joel predicted the time of the Spirit’s outpouring—"afterward," after God has received Israel back (Joel 2:27). (2) He predicted the Author—God, “I will pour.” (3) He predicted the extent—"all flesh." (4) He predicted the effect—"prophesy," “dream dreams,” “see visions,” etc. This prophecy was not fulfilled during the ministry of Christ, at Calvary, or at Pentecost; but it shall be fulfilled when the kingdom is established. Hence, the baptism in the Spirit at Pentecost was only a pledge, or foretaste, of the future fulfillment which will take place at the time the Holy Spirit is poured out on “all flesh.” “All flesh” includes more than was realized at Pentecost or will ever be realized until its fulfillment in the kingdom. The blessings in the kingdom will be greater in degree than the blessings of Pentecost. Among the future blessings is the experience of fire. The fire that is included in the record of John’s prediction in Matthew 3:11 and Luke 3:16 will then be the blessing of God’s people. As the assembly of Jesus Christ does not presently use the keys of the kingdom, so does she not presently experience the blessing of fire. The baptism in the Holy Spirit and fire of Matthew 3:11 and Luke 3:16 cannot be divided into a blessing and a curse. It does not make sense to divide John’s promise into both a blessing and a curse. All of God’s people will inherit the kingdom together, experience the universal outpouring of the Holy Spirit, and take part in the blessing of judging with Jesus Christ. Fire is referred to three times in both Matthew 3:1-17 and Luke 3:1-38. Matthew 3:10, Matthew 3:12, Luke 3:9, and Luke 3:17 all refer to God’s judgment. But in Matthew 3:11 and Luke 3:16, John was promising a blessing to the people of God. This was a blessing for those who would be baptized in the sphere of the Spirit; and being thus baptized, the fire represents God’s judgment in which we shall participate. Jesus Christ will reign as King, and we will reign with Him as kings and priests, serving under Him. We will be like Christ; and we will be associated with Him as associate kings and priests, performing similar offices under our great King and Lord. All this is wrapped up in blessing, not a curse. Fire is used two ways in Scripture. It is used in the sense of purification, or cleansing, and it is also used in the sense of judgment. Fire denotes judging and executing judgment in reference after reference in both Old and New Testaments (Deuteronomy 4:24; 2 Thessalonians 1:8; Hebrews 12:29; etc.). Those in the kingdom will join with Jesus Christ in executing judgment. Paul reminded the Corinthians that the saints shall judge the world and angels (1 Corinthians 6:2-3). God promised the assembly of Jesus Christ that those who overcome and keep His works shall have power over the nations (Revelation 2:26). Joel’s prophecy will be completely fulfilled in the future baptism in the Holy Spirit and fire. Pentecost was not the kingdom. The assembly of Christ and not Israel was being dealt with at Pentecost. It is a sad fact that many religionists have transferred to themselves Scriptures that belong to a future age. Those in the kingdom will join with Christ in executing judgment on the unregenerate, which will be a blessing to the regenerate. This judgment will take place when the kingdom is in its time stage. The time stage will be the 1,000 years preceding the eternal state of the kingdom. All who have the earnest of the Spirit have some understanding of what the Lord Jesus Christ will do when His Spirit shall be poured out on all flesh. There will be people in their flesh and blood bodies in the first phase of the kingdom. People will die during this millennium. But in the eternal phase of the kingdom, everyone will be in his flesh and bone body; therefore, there will be no death. Flesh and blood shall not inherit the eternal phase of the kingdom. The first aspect of the kingdom shall be purged before the eternal aspect begins (Matthew 13:1-58). The physical phenomena of the sun being turned to darkness and the moon turned to blood will precede the great and terrible day of the Lord (Joel 2:31). But these did not accompany the baptism in the Holy Spirit at Pentecost. Peter knew that Pentecost was not the terrible day of the Lord but was only a partial fulfillment of the prediction by Joel and John. He explained the terrible day of the Lord in his second Epistle, not in Acts. “Looking for and hastening the coming of the day of God, on account of the heavens being set on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements burning are being melted, but according to His promise, we are looking for new heavens and a new earth, in which righteousness dwells” (2 Peter 3:12-13—translation). Baptism in the Holy Spirit and fire cannot be Israel as a nation entering into the events of Joel’s prophecy. Although Peter quoted from Joel’s prophecy and said, “But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel” (Acts 2:16), he did not identify the baptism in the Spirit at Pentecost as “all of that.” Pentecost was only a partial fulfillment of the events of Joel’s prophecy. Both Joel and John prophesied the conclusion in the absolute fulfillment. All the Old Testament prophets prophesied in that manner. The complete fulfillment of Joel’s prophecy will not take place until the reality of the day of the Lord. In that day, all sham and hypocrisy will be manifested. Only that which is of God will stand. Joel’s prophecy is timely in our apostate days, reminding us that the coming of the Lord is approaching. The day of the Lord signifies judgment. It is used in a local sense. It was experienced by the people of Joel’s time, and it will be experienced in a final sense. It was the Lord’s judgment on Israel, Judah, and Jerusalem at that time, but it will also be God’s judgment on Israel, Judah, and Jerusalem in a final sense. Joel combined both the historical and prophetical, both the near and the remote. This is a remarkable feature that we find again and again throughout Old Testament Scripture. The kingdom will not be established without a period of violence and war: “Multitudes, multitudes in the valley of decision: for the day of the LORD is near in the valley of decision” (Joel 3:14). How utterly vain are the expectations of collective humanity unified and deified in the person of the antichrist (Revelation 13:1-18). The Spirit predicts the formation of a mighty confederation under the auspices of this last head of depraved humanity (Revelation 17:12). The formation of this confederacy is still future. Whatever confederations have existed in the past were only partial fulfillments looking forward to the last great array in the kingdom of the earth against the Messiah (Revelation 19:1-21). The period of violence and war against antichrist is described in Revelation 19:1-21, 2 Thessalonians 2:1-17, Isaiah 63:1-19, and many other prophecies. This last great war will create the greatest devastation of any preceding it. God will execute justice on the ungodly. The wicked must fill up the measure of their sin, and this will have taken place before the Lord returns (Joel 3:1-16). Vengeance belongs to God: “...Vengeance is mine, I will repay, saith the Lord” (Romans 12:19b). “For we know him that hath said, Vengeance belongeth unto me, I will recompense, saith the Lord. And again, The Lord shall judge his people” (Hebrews 10:30). Christians long for the day of absolute justice under Jesus Christ. The time for absolute justice on earth will not be executed until the time the assembly has been perfected. Then we shall use the keys of authority given to the perfected assembly to participate in judgment. God’s vengeance will become ours in the Lord Jesus Christ, our King, the King of the Jews. The Hebrew word for vengeance is nagam, which means a rendering of justice, retribution, punishment, or satisfaction. The Hebrew root word with its derivations is used 70 times in the Old Testament. Although theologically important, it is greatly misunderstood. In modern thinking, vengeance and revenge, coming from either God or man, are ideas that appear to have no ethical validity. Those with this thinking have no concept of God’s holy character. Understood in the light of God’s whole counsel, vengeance is understood to be a necessary aspect of the history of redemption. There are a few cases in the Old Testament where vengeance is executed by man. Although the Hebrew word nagam is not used in Genesis 9:6, this verse teaches capital punishment: “Whoso sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man.” Other passages warn men not to take vengeance into their own hands. These are not contradictory. A classic use of the Hebrew word nagam is the Lord’s statement in Deuteronomy 32:35; Deuteronomy 32:41—"To me belongeth vengeance, and recompence....I whet my glittering sword, and mine hand take hold on judgment; I will render vengeance to mine enemies, and will reward them that hate me." God cannot be true to His holy character and justice if He does not punish in justice. The prophet Isaiah stressed the day of the Lord’s vengeance. We will rejoice when we see God’s absolute justice executed: “The righteous shall rejoice when he seeth the vengeance: he shall wash his feet in the blood of the wicked. So that a man shall say, Verily there is a reward for the righteous: verily he is a God that judgeth in the earth” (Psalms 58:10-11). Does this teach that Christians must hate their enemies? We, like David, hate those who hate the Lord: “Do not I hate them, O LORD, that hate thee? and am not I grieved with those that rise up against thee? I hate them with perfect hatred: I count them mine enemies” (Psalms 139:21-22). Christ was not rejecting the teaching of just punishment in His sermon on the mount in Matthew 5:1-48; Matthew 6:1-34; Matthew 7:1-29, but He was showing that just punishment awaits the time for it. Psalms 50:1-23 brings this into focus by showing that men curse the Lord while He remains silent. However, the time is coming when His silence will be broken. He will roar out of Zion (Joel 3:16). He will speak in vengeance and execute absolute justice. We await this day of reckoning, which will not occur until the assembly of Jesus Christ has been perfected. Since man’s examination of himself and others cannot be absolutely perfect because he cannot discern motives, Paul said, “Therefore judge nothing before the time, until the Lord comes, who both will bring to light the hidden things of the darkness, and will make known the counsels of the hearts: and then praise shall be to each one from God” (1 Corinthians 4:5—translation). A distinction is made between the exhortation not to judge in 1 Corinthians 4:5 and the exhortation to judge in 1 Corinthians 5:12-13 with the use of “before the time” in the first reference. A just judgment must be made now on the basis of one’s fruits, works, words, and lifestyle (Matthew 7:1-29). Christians must judge themselves and offending members in the local assembly (1 Corinthians 5:12; 1 Corinthians 11:31). The Greek word for judge in 1 Corinthians 4:5 is a present active imperative of krino, which means to judge, pronounce judgment, preside over with the power of giving judicial decision, or examine. Since it is an imperative, it is a command. This judgment, or examination, goes beyond fruit that is seen. It descends into the soul. Therefore, it is not viewed externally. The context of verse 5 proves the Lord alone can examine and render judgment on the things that are hidden. All the things in our lives that we have successfully hidden from others will on this day be brought to light, and we will stand fully revealed before the Lord. Since Paul was incompetent to judge either himself or his service, the Corinthians could neither examine nor make a just judgment of Paul’s motive and service. The time for judging in the sense of 1 Corinthians 4:5 will be subsequent to our being judged at the judgment seat of Jesus Christ, where we will be rewarded according to our individual performances in time (1 Corinthians 3:13-15; 2 Corinthians 5:10). There, the counsels (plural of boule, which means purpose, design, determination by implication, secret thoughts of the mind, or the mediation of the mind) of the hearts of others will have been brought to light. Every born again person will receive praise (epainos, which means approval, commendation, recognition, or reward) from God. This is the judgment of God’s people; it is not the general judgment at the great white throne. The perfected collective body of Jesus Christ shall be given the keys to the kingdom. This authority will be executed perfectly under the perfect King, Jesus Christ, the Son of Man, the Son of David. Being perfected and having the keys of Christ’s kingdom, we shall render absolute justice, and God’s vengeance will become ours because we will be concerned only about His vengeance. Righteous judgment by us is impossible before that time. But we shall at that time render absolute justice in our judgments when we execute our examination (1 Corinthians 6:2; Revelation 2:26-27). Jesus Christ promised His disciples the blessing of rendering absolute justice in their examination. Peter’s question, “Behold, we have forsaken all, and followed thee; what shall we have therefore?” (Matthew 19:27), was answered by Christ’s promise to the disciples that they would sit on twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel: “And Jesus said to them, truly I am saying to you, the ones having followed me in the regeneration [paliggenesia, which means rebirth, new birth, new age, or next world] when the Son of Man shall sit on the throne of His glory, you shall sit on twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel” (Matthew 19:28—translation). Some say the word for regeneration refers to the new birth. They are correct pertaining to its use in Titus 3:5. But in Matthew 19:28, the Lord was talking to already regenerated disciples; therefore, it refers to the new age—the messianic restoration. The time element is explicitly stated. It has to do with the future, when the Son of Man shall sit on the throne of His glory. At that time, the apostles will sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel. The names of the twelve apostles will be inscribed in the twelve foundations of the New Jerusalem (Revelation 21:14). Hence, the twelve apostles will have a part in that which is future. Furthermore, they had a part in the foundation of the assembly (Ephesians 2:19-20). Those who have forsaken all for the name of Jesus Christ “shall receive an hundredfold, and shall inherit eternal life in its fullness” (Matthew 19:29—translation). The regeneration—messianic restoration of all things—of Acts 3:19-21 is not one single act. It includes the glorification of the bodies of Christians who make up the ekklesia—the body of Christ. It also involves Israel’s future restoration when God will deal with them nationally. The judgments that will take place during the millennium before the eternal state of the kingdom are also included in this restoration. Those who will participate in this judging will include the Jewish branches that have been broken off, the assembly that has been grafted in, and the restored natural branches (Romans 11:1-36). With these truths in mind, any person who spiritualizes the kingdom in order to bring about the teaching of amillennialism concerning the Lord’s future is dishonest in dealing with the Scriptures. One cannot isolate one text and try to make all other texts fit it. He must consider all the passages relative to the subject. He is then in a position to arrive at a correct conclusion when all the various Scriptures pertaining to the subject harmonize. There is no doubt about the spirituality of the literal kingdom. Jesus Christ had a material body while He walked among men. He was also filled with the Spirit. There was none more spiritual than He who has the Spirit without measure. When the Holy Spirit is poured out on all flesh in the kingdom, the kingdom will be very much a spiritual kingdom. When the King—Jesus Christ—pours out His Spirit on all flesh and the Spirit exerts His mighty energy in every direction, extending even to the material creation, surely the kingdom will be preeminently spiritual. This kingdom will not be of this unspiritual world. The literal/spiritual kingdom will be on a renovated earth on which Jesus Christ will reign, and we shall rule and reign with Him. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 94: 04.2.15. THE KINGDOM PROPHESIED ======================================================================== Chapter 15 - THE KINGDOM PROPHESIED The thoughts of God about the future are called prophecy. God’s thoughts contain the purpose of His heart. His thoughts are as high above the thoughts of man as the heavens are above the earth (Isaiah 55:8-9). Man’s capability of thinking is one of the characteristics in which he has been made in the likeness of God. This characteristic distinguishes him from the lower creation. Let us be kind to the evolutionist and admit that he has more intelligence than the monkeys from whom he thinks he evolved. We must admit that he thinks; but contrary to his knowledge, that ability is the result of creation and not evolution. Christians are thankful that God’s thoughts have become our thoughts. Christians have the mind of Christ; hence, we cannot ignore Divine principles (1 Corinthians 2:16). Therefore, we enjoy His thoughts about creation, Christ’s incarnation, Christ’s substitutionary death, Christ’s resurrection, our regeneration, and the prophecy concerning Christ’s glorious second coming to establish His kingdom in the renewed creation subsequent to the fall. Without man’s ability to think, God could not communicate with His own. Prophecy is a study which leads the believer to return in his thinking to the beginning as well as the ending of things. Since God is the first and the last, His first thoughts are simultaneous with His last thoughts. Hence, it is no surprise when one reaches the last book of the Bible—the Revelation of Jesus Christ—that he finds himself once again contemplating the first book of the Bible—Genesis. In the study of Revelation, the first is seen from the last; moreover, as one progresses in the study of that book, he learns that the last was seen from the first. Revelation is Genesis enlarged and glorified. God sees future, present, and past all at once because He is in one mind: “But he is in one mind, and who can turn him? and what his soul desireth, even that he doeth” (Job 23:13). Since God is in one mind, He can have no new thoughts. Whatever God thinks He has ever thought because He does not think successively: “Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure” (Isaiah 46:10). His purpose was settled before the foundation of the world; therefore, whatever God predestined from the beginning shall be effected in the end. A perfect plan failing in its execution would be contrary to Deity. God’s omniscience and omnipotence are perfect. What God’s omniscience planned, His omnipotence executes. Prophecy is proof of God’s infinite knowledge: “Great is our Lord, and of great power: his understanding is infinite” (Psalms 147:5). God knows everything as present because there is no time with Him. This is the reason some of the prophecies concerning things to come are presented as present, and sometimes future things are described as having been fulfilled (Isaiah 9:6; Isaiah 53:4; Psalms 22:18). There was a time, from man’s perspective, when nothing other than God existed. We must not lose sight of the truth that God was before and is above what man calls time. Creation was once future, or else one must conclude that it is eternal. To say that creation is eternal is to deny the Creator. The denial of God as Creator is to deny the Bible, man’s existence, and salvation. God, who purposed to create, knew all things from the beginning; otherwise, there was a time when He was ignorant. Prophecy, therefore, is proof of His infinite knowledge. Prophecy is a classification. Since there was order in God’s work of creation, vividly described in Genesis, one would be foolish to deny order in the consummation of His work. Hence, numbering in the book of Revelation is not mere numbering; it is classification. The book of the Revelation of Jesus Christ is clearly stated to be prophetical. This refutes the historical premillennial and the amillennial view that it is historical. One must beware of giving the book any classification other than prophetical. Both the prologue and the epilogue of Revelation classify it as prophecy (Revelation 1:3; Revelation 22:7; Revelation 22:10; Revelation 22:18-19). Three times, in Revelation 1:1; Revelation 22:6-7; Revelation 22:16-17, John affirmed that this prophecy contains Divine predictions and not human imaginations. The Old Testament closed with the announcement of Christ’s first advent (Malachi 4:2), and the New Testament concludes with the prophecy of His second advent (Revelation 22:20). What would we do without classification in science? Classification is the assignment of things to groups within a system of categories distinguished by structure and origin. As there are many sciences in the natural world, there are sciences such as theology, anthropology, soteriology, ecclesiology, and eschatology in the study of the Bible. To correctly handle the word of truth, one must assign all Scripture that pertains to God to theology. Assigning anthropology to Scripture that belongs to God humanizes God, and that is heresy. Designating Scripture that relates to man to theology deifies man, and that too is heresy. These two examples should illustrate the importance of proper classification of Scripture. Since there have always been heretical movements that emphasize certain Biblical statements, one must never oppose an extreme view of a Biblical subject by going to the opposite view. A person must search for truth which is usually found between two extremes. Amillennialists attack all premillennialists by classifying them with cults that embrace premillennialism. According to their logic, premillennialists can classify amillennialists with Roman Catholics, because they are amillennial. The future kingdom is not a re-exalted Judaism with carnal ordinances. Prophecy must be viewed from a higher basis than mere prediction of the future. Above all, it must be considered a revelation of God’s eternal purpose. Even though prophecy is a declaration of something future, which is a message of hope, it must be contemplated from the foundational truth of God’s will and purpose. History, which is executed prophecy, flows from God’s purpose. Prophecy, therefore, must be embraced as God’s predetermined counsel which finds its culmination in the predestined King and His kingdom. The kingdom is the consummation of God’s purpose in redemption. It is self-evident that prophecy is intended to reveal the Divine purpose relating to redemption. An example of prophecy and the manner in which prophecy shall be ultimately fulfilled is recorded in Deuteronomy 32:1-52. Prophecy is an essential part of the system of revelation. It not only reveals but also systematizes truths. As heirs of God and joint heirs with Christ, Christians are invited by the prophets and apostles to study God’s purpose in order to have some comprehension of what we have in Christ (Romans 8:14-32; Ephesians 1:1-14; 2 Peter 1:19-21; 2 Peter 3:1-18). There are two kinds of evidence in the hearts and minds of God’s people. The first source of evidence comes from faith, which is God’s gift to His people; the second source is derived from historical evidence which includes the fulfillment of prophecy. Our Lord stressed the importance of prophetic study by showing that all Scripture speaks of Himself (Luke 24:25-27). Classification is necessary in the study of prophecy. There are fulfilled, partially fulfilled, and unfulfilled prophecies. Fulfilled Prophecies There are fulfilled prophecies. The prophets saw the future perspectively. They did not always understand their predictions, but that is only an unimpeachable evidence of the inspiration of the Bible (1 Peter 1:10-13). If prophecy can be understood only after its fulfillment, how can it be a lamp shining in a dark place for our guidance? Let us consider a few prophecies regarding Israel that have been fulfilled. Christ was prophesied to be born of a virgin (Isaiah 7:14). After Ahaz had forsaken Jehovah and set up the altar of a strange god in the temple, God renewed the hopes of Israel by giving a sign, the range of which would extend beyond the time of Ahaz. Christ was born of a virgin (Matthew 1:18-23). The present tense used in Old Testament prophecy often proves the certainty of a future event. That which was prophecy to Isaiah was proclaimed as history. The Old Testament saints, who could only expect blessing, spoke as though the fulfillment of prophecy were already enjoyed. Thus their faith, which elevated them to the realm of the spiritual, made them partakers of God’s excellencies (Hebrews 11:1-3). Israel’s rejection of Christ was foretold (Isaiah 53:1-3). Both Christ and Paul quoted from Isaiah’s prophecy (John 12:37-38; Romans 10:16). When the Lord Jesus said, “Therefore they could not believe, because that Esaias said again, He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart; that they should not see...” (John 12:39-40), He did not infuse any evil principle in them. But He left them to the unrestrained operations of their own depraved hearts. The decree of God deals not with innocent but depraved men; therefore, it is not unjust to either aggravate their depravity with the truth of the gospel or condemn them because of their sin of rejection. Isaiah said, “...we hid as it were our faces from him; he was despised, and we esteemed him not” (Isaiah 53:3). Christ said, “And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life” (John 5:40). There is no free will in this text. The will of the sinner is not free but depraved. Once a person commits himself to the heresy that the will of God is to be subordinated to his depraved will, he will remain a religious heretic unless God’s will turns him and makes his will subservient to God’s superior will. Some religionists have gone so far as to say that God’s making some but not others willing renders God meaner than the Devil. Such persons have no understanding of their complicity and solidarity in depravity. They are in danger of being treated as the apostate Jews during the first advent of Jesus Christ: “Behold, your house is left unto you desolate” (Matthew 23:38). The nation of Israel has been broken off in order that the Gentiles might be grafted into the root (Romans 11:11-29). The Acts of the Apostles closes with the record of God turning from the Jews to the Gentiles (Acts 28:25-31). The removal taught by Moses and the prophets was designed for punishment, but it was not to be perpetual. Israel’s restoration was not fulfilled in the remnant that returned from Babylon. Her return from Babylon was preparatory for Christ’s first advent; whereas the restoration recorded in Romans 11:25-26 is identified with Christ’s second advent. Partially Fulfilled Prophecies There are partially fulfilled prophecies. The prophets often predicted the advent of Christ without discriminating between the first and second advents. The reason is very simple; both advents are absolutely necessary for perfected redemption. The first is preparatory for the second. There could be no second without the first, and the first is the guarantee of the second. The first advent was in humiliation; the second shall be in glory. We must not forget that the prophets unite the two as essential to the complete salvation of man. Therefore, each advent has its appropriate sphere of action; the glory of the second is the perfection subsequent to the suffering of the first. Joel 2:1-32 and Joel 3:1-21 are partially fulfilled prophecy. The Holy Spirit was not poured out on all flesh at Pentecost (Joel 2:28; Acts 2:16). Men are erroneous to antedate this period and ascribe to themselves what belongs to a future age. The miraculous signs of Joel 2:30-31 were not fulfilled at Pentecost. Hence, Joel’s prophecy was only partially fulfilled at Pentecost. (This was discussed at length in an earlier chapter.) Malachi 3:1-6 is a partially fulfilled prophecy: “BEHOLD, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me: and the Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple, even the messenger of the covenant, whom ye delight in....” This refers to Christ’s first advent. “...Behold, he shall come, saith the LORD of hosts” refers to His second advent. The refining, punishing, and restoring to power and prosperity were not realized at the first advent. The restoration of Israel will not take place until the day of God’s power (Psalms 110:3). Unfulfilled Prophecies There are unfulfilled prophecies. The center and goal of all prophecy is Jesus Christ. Old Testament Scripture gives the preparation for the manifestation of the King. The Gospels and Acts unveil the birth, life, death, and resurrection of the King. Since His ascension, the Epistles demonstrate that the King is in hiding. The Revelation enthrones the King in His kingdom. Jesus Christ shall sit on the throne of His father David (Luke 1:32-33; Acts 2:30). There is only one throne of David, and it is in Jerusalem, not in heaven. Christ is not presently on David’s throne (Revelation 3:21). David was a prophet, and he knew God’s promise to him. God made a vow that He would make one of David’s descendants a king, and Jesus Christ is that true King (Luke 1:30-33). As Divine, Christ is the root of David; and as Man, He is the offspring of David (Revelation 22:16). Jesus Christ is David’s descendant and David’s Lord. The kingdom of Jesus Christ shall be established at Christ’s second advent (2 Timothy 4:1). The mountain of the Lord’s house shall be established in the top of the mountain (Isaiah 2:1-5). Isaiah’s prophecy looks beyond the present conditions of sin and suffering in the earth. The earth, not heaven, is in view. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 95: 04.2.16. THE KINGDOM DEFINED ======================================================================== Chapter 16 - THE KINGDOM DEFINED Many formal statements have been made concerning the kingdom, but there is only one true definition: The Kingdom of God will be when the Son of man openly exercises His power and visibly brings all things into subjection to His righteous reign on the earth. Biblical ignorance, denominational prejudice, and fanaticism have obscured the true meaning of the kingdom. Every professing Christian must confess that what God said is true, but what the expositor of Scripture says may or may not be true. The only way to determine the authenticity of the exegete is to compare what he says with the Divine record of truth. The purport of the kingdom can be determined only by a thorough investigation of all the Biblical data on the subject. Its definition should not be determined by a few isolated passages from the Bible. Christians have only one key to unlock the true interpretation of the kingdom. Since Christians possess the Divine unction (1 John 2:20; 1 John 2:27), they must correlate all the information from the first prophecy to the fulfillment of the prophecy in the establishment of the kingdom. The kingdom of Christ is one of the great themes of Biblical prophecy. It was the leading subject of the Old Testament prophets, John the Baptist, Jesus Christ, and the apostles. Should someone object to this fact, this is the answer: There can be no kingdom without the King. Furthermore, kingship is subsequent to saviorhood. A correct understanding of the kingdom is necessary to properly teach the Scriptures. The kingdom of God is the object of the covenants. Through the truth of the new covenant, operating in this age, the elect are being called to become heirs of the kingdom. Therefore, the assembly is a preparatory stage for the coming kingdom. The kingdom is a special honor given by the Father to Jesus Christ as the Son of Man. Much of Holy Scripture is given to the subject of the kingdom, because it is the perfection of all of Christ’s work and honor. There is little agreement among many expositors concerning the connotation of the kingdom. The Greek word for “kingdom” is basileia, which basically means a ruling. Some say the kingdom of God cannot be divorced from the present and personal activity of God. They state that if kingdom means a future realm over which a king rules, the spiritual kingdom would be excluded. Thus, they conclude that the kingdom cannot be something that has come and has not come. Those who embrace the present spiritual kingdom in the assembly fail to differentiate sovereignty from kingship. God has ever been the sovereign Lord and Ruler over all nations, but He was not the theocratic King of any nation until God called elected Israel. Furthermore, while God ruled Israel as her theocratic King, He did not cease exercising His sovereignty. Therefore, the kingdom which Christ ascended to receive—the future kingdom—belongs to Him as the Son of Man, the Son of David. While the ascended Son of Man is not presently reigning over the future kingdom as the Son of God, He is the sovereign Ruler over the universe. In His Divine capacity, He is reigning over all; but this reign is not the reign of promise as the Son of Man. The reign of promise will be an externally visible manifestation of the God-Man in the kingdom He has gone to receive. Serious defects exist in a system which requires many different interpretations of the kingdom, such as the kingdom being defined as (1) the spiritual reign in the assembly (Matthew 3:2), (2) praying for the advancement of the gospel (Matthew 6:10), (3) the effects of the gospel (Matthew 13:24), (4) the new dispensation (Matthew 13:44), (5) every man that is acquainted with the gospel (Matthew 13:51-53), (6) the assembly on earth (Matthew 16:19), (7) those who readily become Christians (Matthew 21:31), (8) reception as sons of God (Matthew 25:34), and (9) heaven where God’s reign shall be fully established (Matthew 26:29). The kingdom cannot be Scripturally interpreted to infer all these things. Chiliasm is the theological doctrine that Jesus Christ will set up a theocratic kingdom on earth for a thousand years. The word “chiliasm” comes from the Greek word chilioi, which means a thousand. It is used ten times in the New Testament (2 Peter 3:8; Revelation 11:3; Revelation 12:6; Revelation 14:20; Revelation 20:2-7). The word “millennium,” a Latin word which means the same thing, has taken its place. One is mistaken to think Christ’s reign will be consummated at the conclusion of the millennium. He is the King of the ages. Opponents to millennialism stress that outside of Revelation 20:1-15 there is no reference to a millennium. To the surprise of many premillennialists, these opponents are correct to say Christ’s reign cannot be limited to a period of one thousand years. Jesus Christ is called the King of the ages: “Now unto the King eternal [aionon, genitive masculine plural of aion, which means ages], immortal, invisible, the only wise God, be honour and glory for ever and ever. Amen” (1 Timothy 1:17). The Scriptures nowhere declare that Christ’s reign is restricted to a thousand years. On the contrary, the Bible speaks of His reign continuing forever: “He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David: And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end” (Luke 1:32-33). Most premillennialists make the mistake of placing emphasis on the millennium rather than the kingdom. While there are only six references to the millennium in Revelation 20:1-7, there are many references in the Scriptures to the King and His kingdom. The idea that Christ will establish a kingdom to last a short period of one thousand years should be denounced. Scripture often speaks of the coming kingdom of Jesus Christ, which is associated with His second advent. The millennium is the period which serves as the transition between the age of the assembly and the eternal state. Christians are waiting for not only the redemption of the body but also the renewal of the earth: “For I reckon that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us. For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God. For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope. Because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God. For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now. And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body. For we are saved by hope: but hope that is seen is not hope: for what a man seeth, why doth he yet hope for?” (Romans 8:18-24). Since the whole creation is now under the curse, the animate and inanimate world is subject to vanity. Amillennialists ask, Where does Scripture say there will be a millennium? The millennium is not mentioned, but reference is made to the lifting of the curse in Christ’s kingdom. There will be a change in the material world when Christ comes. The main idea is transition, not extinction. The verb “perished” of 2 Peter 3:6 refers to the people on earth who perished, not to the earth itself. Peter, speaking of the old world, said, “Through which the world at that time perished, being deluged by water” (translation). The Greek verb translated “shall be dissolved” of 2 Peter 3:12 describes deliverance rather than annihilation. Since this Greek verb luo is used for loose, release, or set free, earth’s present condition shall give place to a better condition. Groaning and travailing, which occur in the material world, will give place to glorying and triumphing in the kingdom. The kingdom will be filled with righteousness. Every blessing of the Christian is the fruit of Christ’s redemptive work. We often hear the question, Is Divine healing in the atonement? Some answer in the affirmative and others in the negative. The affirmative Biblical answer demands explanation. By the merit of Jesus Christ, every good and perfect gift comes from the Father (James 1:17). The resurrection of the body of the believer is included in the atonement, but it is not yet ours. The request for healing may or may not be presently granted. Restoration to health is subject to the will of God. Christians await the glorification of our bodies. We will be perfected spiritually and physically in the kingdom. The kingdom will involve the whole world. It will encompass eternity and not the millennium only. Abraham shall become heir of the world (Romans 4:13). The promise to Abraham, according to amillennialists, was not given on the natural but the supernatural plane. They say that whatever may be involved in the numerous seed is in the supernatural and never in the natural sphere. They ridicule what they call the segmentary and fragmentary interpretation of the Bible. The kingdom argument for the supernatural is commendable. This argument begins by showing that God promised Abraham the humanly impossible. Isaac was supernaturally conceived by Abraham’s dead loins and Sarah’s dead womb. The promises made to Abraham were made through Christ (Galatians 3:16-29). All the saved have been supernaturally born (John 1:12-13; John 3:8). These constitute Abraham’s spiritual seed. There is no argument with these Scriptural facts, but the theory of no future kingdom breaks down when it states that the promise to Abraham did not include the earth. The land promise, they say, was conditional; but every condition has been violated. Truth reveals whether amillennialists or millennialists are fragmentary and segmentary in Biblical interpretation. Amillennialists, who embrace the doctrine of free grace, teach that God’s covenant with reference to soteriology (salvation) is unconditional. On the other hand, they state that the covenant with reference to eschatology (last things) is conditional. This is dividing God’s eternal purpose into contradictory segments, thus reducing the purpose of God into incomplete parts. Millennialists who adopt the doctrine of free grace espouse the unconditional covenant of God with reference to soteriology and eschatology. Thus, they do not divide God’s purpose into incomplete segments. God’s purpose clearly shows that He intends to set up a visible kingdom on this earth (Genesis 1:26-28). Man’s power to govern, however, was lost by the fall. Immediately after the fall of man, God revealed His purpose to not only save His elect but also give us eternal rest in the kingdom. This purpose was gradually unfolded. God’s plan was revealed in the meaning of the names of the men from Adam to Noah: (1) Adam—man, (2) Seth—appointed, (3) Enos—mortal, (4) Cainan—fixed or objective mercy, (5) Mahalaleel—the praise of God, (6) Jared—shall descend, (7) Enoch—dedicated, under God’s discipline, (8) Methuselah—longsuffering, (9) Lamech—brought low or overthrown, and (10) Noah—rest (Genesis 5:1-32). When these names are connected as a chain of historical events, they reveal that man appointed to die stands before objective mercy, praises God, descends, and becomes dedicated. God is longsuffering for the elect’s sake, and when the lawless have been brought low, rest will be experienced in the kingdom. The Divine purpose becomes more detailed, specific, and certain in Abraham. God revealed more of the particulars of His purpose in salvation by distinguishing Abraham from others of the human race. He made a covenant with him concerning the seed and the land and confirmed it with an oath. Jesus Christ, the seed of Abraham (Galatians 3:16), is the appointed heir of all things (Hebrews 1:2). Christians, the spiritual seed of Abraham (Romans 4:13-25), are joint heirs with Christ (Romans 8:17). Amillennialists question the attractiveness of Christ’s reigning on David’s throne. They fail to distinguish Christ’s absolute sovereignty, which is His eternally as the Son of God, from His kingship, which is given to Him by promise as the Son of Man. They ignore the truth that those who inherit the eternal kingdom will not be in flesh and blood, but they will be in flesh and bones, like Jesus Christ (Luke 24:39). Furthermore, they represent the kingdom as a material kingdom on the earth which is under the curse. In contrast to their representation, the curse will be lifted. The new heavens will not be on a sin cursed earth but on a renewed earth (2 Peter 3:10-13). Biblical millennialists do not believe the reign of Jesus Christ will be limited to one city, but He shall reign over the renewed world—the new heaven and the new earth. Absolute authority is Christ’s eternally, and He will not relinquish that authority over all things to reign as King over a limited area. His absolute authority over all things as Son of God will be visibly recognized in His kingship as Son of Man. When one argues that the patriarchs waited for the kingdom, we offer no objection, if this does not mean that the kingdom will be either Christ’s assembly or a period of only a thousand years. The hope of both the Old Testament patriarchs and the New Testament saints is the coming kingdom: “And these all, having obtained a good report through faith, received not the promise: God having provided some better thing for us, that they without us should not be made perfect” (Hebrews 11:39-40). Christians have no doubt that Luke 19:11-27 refers to the actual coming again of Jesus Christ. This passage clearly shows that the visible kingdom will not appear until the return of the Lord Jesus Christ. Christ will receive the kingdom, not the assembly, from the Father. Hence, He will return with the kingdom for its establishment on the earth (2 Timothy 4:1; Revelation 11:15; Revelation 5:10). In Luke 19:11-27, three things should be observed: (1) The kingdom for which the Jews looked would not immediately appear (Luke 19:11)—the word “appear” describes a positive appearance. (2) The period between the ascension and second coming of Christ is one in which servants wait and have responsibilities (2 Thessalonians 3:10). (3) Having received the kingdom from the Father, Christ shall return in power and glory. He will not receive the kingdom from men on earth. The Old and New Testaments are occupied with three great facts: Christ is coming; He has come; and He will come again. This age is the time of Christ’s personal absence from the earth. Arminianism and amillennialism are both refuted in Luke 19:1-48. In the first ten verses, Jesus Christ presented Himself as “the Son of Man,” which signifies the Mediator who must stand between God and the elect (1 Timothy 2:5). In Luke 19:10, Christ’s purpose for coming into the world is expressed—"For the Son of man is come to seek and to save that which was lost." His purpose could not be frustrated. Modern minds have been conditioned by false teaching to think of the cross as a redemption which does less than it was purposed to accomplish. Contrarily, everything God purposed shall be accomplished. We are definitely told who seeks whom. Sinners do not seek God (Romans 3:11), but the Son of Man seeks and saves those for whom He died (John 10:11-16). The Arminian erroneously places man before God. In the case of Zacchaeus, the Guest became the Host when Christ said, “...today I must abide at thy house” (Luke 19:5). Later, Christ said to Zacchaeus, “This day is salvation come to this house, forsomuch as he also is a son of Abraham” (Luke 19:9). Hence, he had been freely elected to salvation. Although Zacchaeus was a Roman tax-collector, he became Abraham’s spiritual seed by regeneration. Therefore, Zacchaeus became an heir of the eschatological kingdom that Christ explained in the parable of the nobleman in the verses that followed (Luke 19:11-27). Jesus Christ has gone to receive for Himself a kingdom and to return. Amillennialists deny a future kingdom on earth. They teach that Jesus Christ received the kingdom in heaven and is presently reigning as King over the whole human race on earth. Concisely stated, Amillennialists believe the kingdom is heavenly rather than earthly, is spiritual rather than political, is present rather than future, and has been inaugurated in the first rather than awaiting the second advent; and the kingdom’s King is in heaven rather than coming to earth to reign. They also equate the kingdom with the assembly. Conversely, Jesus Christ has gone to receive the kingdom in fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy: “I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed” (Daniel 7:13-14). When He receives the kingdom, the Son of Man will return to earth, thus uniting heaven and earth. At that time, the will of God will be done on earth as it is in heaven. The kingdom was not established at Christ’s first advent. He has gone to receive it. There is an interesting parallel in the career of King David, the greater ancestor of Jesus Christ. When David was chosen and anointed king of Israel, he did not immediately occupy the throne (1 Samuel 16:1; 1 Samuel 16:13). He was a fugitive while Saul usurped the throne for a time (1 Samuel 15:28). However, during the time David was a fugitive, many loyally gathered themselves to him (1 Samuel 22:1-2). When Saul’s rule was ended by defeat and death, the kingdom of David, who was a type of Christ, was established over Israel. Jesus Christ is the fulfillment of the prophecy given to King David. Christ was chosen, anointed, and has been exalted to be the messianic King (Acts 2:36). He has gone to the right hand of the Father to receive the kingdom. In the course of His absence from the earth, Satan is the usurper because he is the god of this age (Ephesians 2:1-3). However, Christ’s elect are being gathered together in Him as heirs of the kingdom (Acts 15:13-17; James 2:5). Satan’s rule shall be ended by final defeat and death when Christ returns to establish His kingdom (Revelation 19:11-16). The kingdom will not be established in power and glory until Jesus Christ returns. Since the kingdom is heavenly, it must be received from the Father, not from men. “Thine is the kingdom” (Matthew 6:13) proves that the Father must give it. “Thy kingdom come” of Matthew 6:10 refers to one distinctive future kingdom. There are not two or more, one within the other, or one that precedes the other. Since believers are to pray for the coming of the kingdom, it does not presently exist. Christians are responsible to be employed until Christ returns. The rights of Jesus Christ were denied Him by men while He was on the earth, but He had gone to a place where all rights are granted Him. These rights must be maintained by Christians in testimony on the earth. The testimony of Christ is the doctrine of Christ (2 John 1:9-11). Believers should faithfully contend for the faith throughout the absence of Christ (Jude 1:3). The character of Christ’s testimony in the continuance of His absence is given in Luke 19:28-40. Although Christ is exalted above all heavens as to His place on high, He is the lowly One as to His testimony on the earth (Php 2:5-11). Therefore, the Lord selects lowly persons to bear the testimony of the lowly One (1 Corinthians 1:26-31). Working and watching are the two duties of Christ’s servants (Mark 13:32-37). Christ’s absence is represented as lasting a day and a night. The day and night describe the two duties He gives all Christians—working in the day and watching in the night. Matthew’s account of the parable of a man delivering the talents to his servants before traveling into a far country (Matthew 25:14-30) is similar to Luke’s record of a certain nobleman delivering a pound to each of ten servants before going into a far country (Luke 19:11-27). The important difference between them is the unequal distribution of the talents in Matthew and the equal distribution of the pounds (minas) in Luke. Matthew stressed the sovereignty of God who divides to every man severally as He pleases (1 Corinthians 4:7; 1 Corinthians 12:11). Whereas, Luke portrayed the responsibility of the recipients, each of whom received one pound. Matthew, like Luke, spoke of the prolonged absence of the distributor of the gifts. The absence of Jesus Christ is portrayed as a night season (Matthew 14:22-33). After the miracle of feeding the multitude with five loaves and two fish, Christ constrained His disciples to go to the “other side” (Matthew 14:22). The disciples in the ship symbolize Christ’s people in the world as they face the sea of mankind, the darkness of depravity, and the wind of false doctrine. The faith and obedience of the disciples were tested (Matthew 14:24; Matthew 14:28); nevertheless, Christ returned to bring His disciples to their desired haven (Matthew 14:25-33). The King shall return with His kingdom. When the nobleman “...returned, having received the kingdom, then he commanded these servants to be called unto him...” (Luke 19:15). Who can deny this refers to the coming of Christ? This parable distinguishes the servants from the citizens. The citizens rejected and crucified Christ. Israel rejected the Messiah. They sent a message after His return to the Father, saying, “...We will not have this man to reign over us” (Luke 19:14). Israel’s continual refusal of Christ is seen throughout the Acts of the Apostles (Acts 2:1-47, Acts 3:1-26, Acts 7:1-60, Acts 13:1-52, Acts 15:1-41, Acts 28:1-31). The servants were called to the returned nobleman—Christ. These ten servants could not be the apostles. There were twelve apostles at the beginning, and there were eleven after the apostasy and death of Judas. The ten servants suggest the idea of responsibility. The lethargic Thessalonian Christians who were misled to believe the resurrection had already taken place had ceased working. Therefore, Paul reminded them “that if any would not work, neither should he eat” (2 Thessalonians 3:10). Christians must awaken from apathy and assume the responsibility of redeeming the time, because the days are evil (Ephesians 5:14-16). Between Christ’s ascension and His coming again, we expectantly wait and look for His coming again. The pound given to each of the servants does not signify special grace. Special grace was wrought in their hearts and not merely delivered to them. It is never taken from one to whom it is given (Romans 11:29). (Study Romans 8:28-31.) The pound refers to the witness of God that makes every man inexcusable (Romans 1:19-28; Psalms 19:1-14). The returned King commanded all the servants to be called before Him in judgment. The first person who came was faithful to exercise his responsibility. He recognized that God is sovereign and had granted him the ability to be fruitful (Luke 19:16-17). (Study Acts 9:5-6; 1 Corinthians 15:10.) The second person was not as faithful as the first; therefore, the commendation given to the first person was omitted for this second person (Luke 19:18-19). Rewards are according to the degree of faithfulness. “And another came, saying, Lord, behold here is thy pound, which I have kept laid up in a napkin” (Luke 19:20). Lordship was acknowledged, but this is understood in the light of the confession of Christ’s lordship by the unsaved (Php 2:9-11; Matthew 7:21-23). He was an Arminian in his concept of theology. He said, “For I feared thee, because thou art an austere man...” (Luke 19:21). Austere means severe, hard, harsh, cruel, and uncompassionate. A recipient of grace would not bring such accusations against the God of unmerited favor, who said His yoke is easy and His burden is light. The returned King used the false servant’s own statement to condemn him. You will observe that the returned King will first deal with the faithful servants and finally with the wicked. No time element is mentioned here because the emphasis is placed on the difference between true and false servants. The Son of Man will openly exercise His power and visibly bring all things into subjection to His righteous reign on the earth in the eschatological kingdom. Adam’s dominion over the earth proves God’s purpose to reign through the Son of Man on earth (Genesis 1:26-28). The reign of Jesus Christ as the Son of Man points backward to Adam’s failure in the garden and forward to Jesus Christ, through whom the forfeited blessings are restored. Man was made a little lower than the angels, and he was the undisputed ruler of the lower world (Genesis 1:28; Psalms 8:4-9). In the capacity of ruler, Adam wore God’s image; he represented God on the earth. Adam’s dominion was universal as far as the lower creation was concerned. However, that dominion was lost in the fall. The dominion that was lost in Adam shall be restored in Jesus Christ, the second Adam. Psalms 8:1-9 is applied directly to Jesus Christ in Hebrews 2:6-7. Hence, Christ’s reign will be universal. As the land and the creatures on it were to participate in the sabbath rest, how much more shall their antitype (Romans 8:18-24)? Christ’s visible reign must not be enfeebled by making it to mean nothing more than His reign in the heart. The writer of Hebrews teaches us that Psalms 8:1-9 is not yet fulfilled in the preeminent Man, Jesus Christ, the Son of David: “...But now we see not yet all things put under him. But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man” (Hebrews 2:8-9). The extent of Adam’s fall will be regained by Jesus Christ, the second Adam. As the second Adam, Jesus Christ will overthrow the empire of Satan and regain the dominion Adam lost. Therefore, His redemption carries as far as the consequences of the fall have reached. Since the curse will be annulled, its extent must be ascertained. Man is literally depraved (Romans 5:12). The lower creation is literally under the curse. Hence, there was a literal Eden, serpent, fall, and curse. The sorrowful parturition of the woman, the toil and corruption of man, and the thorns and thistles of earth are literal. By His redemption, Jesus Christ conquered the consequences of the fall and regained what Adam lost. Therefore, man is literally renewed by the work of the triune God. Regeneration is from the Father, through the Son, and by the Holy Spirit. All the departments of the lower creation involved in the consequences of the first man’s shameful defeat must exhibit the fruits of the second Man’s magnificent victory. Romans 8:1-39 advocates the deliverance of the whole visible creation. This does not indicate progressing from the material to the spiritual and then regressing to the material. It signifies proceeding from the promise to its fulfillment. A kingdom of rule apart from the renewed creation would be inconsistent. A doxology by Paul in 1 Timothy 1:17 concluded his glorious testimony of saving grace: “Now unto the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only wise God, be honour and glory for ever and ever. Amen.” The Greek reads to de basilei ton aionon—"Now, to the King of the ages" (translation). He was filled with adoration for his Savior and King. The Greek word aionon is a genitive plural of aion, which means a period of time of significant character, an era, an age, or eternity. Since the word is plural, one would not say eternities but ages. It is another way of expressing the fact that Christ’s kingdom shall not have an end: “ouk estai telos [there shall be no end]” (Luke 1:33). This is the testimony of the Old and New Testament prophecies: “And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed” (Daniel 7:14). “And the seventh angel sounded; and there were great voices in heaven, saying, The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever” (Revelation 11:15). Christians in the early assemblies waited for Jesus Christ, the King of the ages (Romans 8:23; 1 Corinthians 1:7; Php 3:20; Hebrews 9:28). The double compound Greek verb apekdechomai, used in these verses, means to wait tirelessly, expectantly, and eagerly for Christ. Their hope was not in the betterment of society but in the coming of the King of the ages. Their hope was not soteriological. They were already saved. A visible church/kingdom was not the hope of these Christians. That would be a source of untold error and disaster in “church” history. They waited for Christ, the King of the ages, and His eschatological kingdom. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 96: 04.2.17. THE KINGDOM HAS APPROACHED ======================================================================== Chapter 17 - THE KINGDOM HAS APPROACHED There is little concurrence among scholars and Bible students concerning “the kingdom of the heavens has approached” (Matthew 3:2—translation). Hence, there is little agreement among them concerning eschatology (eschatos), which means the study of last things. One’s view of the kingdom of Matthew 3:2 determines what he believes concerning the manner and time of Christ’s second advent, the assembly of Christ and her mission in the world, and the purpose of the gospel. Therefore, the Biblical view of the kingdom is an absolute necessity for a Scriptural concept of other vital subjects. True eschatology is always concerned with the expectation of Jesus Christ, the One who has been revealed to the heart of man in regeneration and will appear the second time to consummate man’s salvation by the redemption of the body (Hebrews 9:28; Romans 8:18-23. Christ’s first advent was for the purpose of putting away sin by the sacrifice of Himself. His second advent will be to consummate His work. Hence, the two advents give the key to true eschatology. The Christian with the correct concept of last things is not disturbed by all the wild speculations of those who prostitute the subject for the basest purposes. The promises of God do not offer a framework of ideas to satisfy the curiosities of men. God’s promises are characterized by a message that penetrates to the root of man’s existence. Therefore, when God’s promises of the future find lodgment in the hearts of the elect, they compel us to have our eyes on the future, because the One who is coming has already entered our lives. There is much discussion over the following statement in the King James translation of the Bible: “the kingdom of heaven is at hand” (Matthew 3:2; Matthew 4:17; Matthew 10:7). The Greek verb in those verses is eggiken, perfect active indicative of eggidzo, which means to come near, approach, or draw nigh. When we observe the basic English meaning of these three verbs, we can better determine the definition of eggidzo. “Come” means to come toward or away from something, to pass from one point to one nearer. “Draw” means to pull, drag, draw, or move toward. “Approach” means to come or go near or nearer in either place or time. The occurrence of eggidzo in its perfect active indicative form in each reference where it is used proves that the kingdom has not arrived, but it has approached or come near. Since the word is used more than forty times in the New Testament, its meaning must be determined by the context. The perfect tense signifies that the kingdom of Old Testament prophecy has approached: “...Repent for the kingdom of the heavens has approached” (Matthew 3:2—translation). Out of the more than forty times the verb eggidzo is used, there are fourteen times when it is used as a perfect active indicative verb (Matthew 3:2; Matthew 4:17; Matthew 10:7; Matthew 26:45-46; Mark 1:15; Mark 14:42; Luke 10:9; Luke 10:11; Luke 21:8; Luke 21:20; Romans 13:12; James 5:8; 1 Peter 4:7). The following paragraphs consider these references: 1. The first two perfect active indicative forms of eggidzo refer to preaching by John the Baptist and Jesus Christ: “the kingdom of the heavens has approached [eggidzo]” (Matthew 3:2; Matthew 4:17—translation). The third is Christ’s commission to the twelve disciples to preach the same truth to the lost sheep of the house of Israel (Matthew 10:7). These first three references refer to the same thing. 2. Both Matthew and Mark use the perfect active indicative form of eggidzo in their record of Christ’s rebuke to His disciples who slept while He prayed in Gethsemane. “Then He comes to His disciples, and says to them, continue sleeping now and continue taking your rest: behold, the hour has approached [eggidzo], and the Son of Man is about to be betrayed [paradidotai, futuristic present passive indicative of paradidomi] into the hands of sinners. Be arising, let us be going: behold, the one betraying me has approached [eggidzo]” (Matthew 26:45-46—translation). (See Mark 14:42.) When Christ rebuked the disciples, His hour of death had not arrived, but it had approached. Furthermore, Judas had not yet arrived, but he approached. 3. After John the Baptist was imprisoned, Jesus Christ went to Galilee and preached “the gospel of the kingdom of God, And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand [eggidzo—has approached]: repent ye, and believe the gospel” (Mark 1:14-15). 4. In Christ’s instruction to the twelve disciples sent to the lost sheep of the house of Israel, He told them to say, “the kingdom of God is come [eggidzo—has approached] nigh unto you” (Luke 10:9; Luke 10:11). 5. In answer to the ones who questioned Him concerning His statement about the destruction of the temple, Christ warned them not to be deceived by antichrists who say “the time draweth near [eggidzo—has approached]” (Luke 21:8). He then described the time of its destruction: “And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh [eggidzo—has approached]” (Luke 21:20). Jerusalem had not at that time been destroyed, but the desolation had approached. 6. Paul sought to awaken the Roman Christians from their lethargy by reminding them that the perfection of their salvation, when their bodies would be glorified like the body of the Lord Jesus, was nearer than when they first believed. He told them, “The night is advanced, the day has approached [eggidzo]...” (Romans 13:12—translation). The day of which Paul spoke was the day of coming salvation—the glorification of the body: “So Christ also, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, shall appear a second time for salvation without reference to sin, to those who eagerly await Him” (Hebrews 9:28—translation). 7. In light of the truth that “the coming of the Lord has approached [eggidzo]” (James 5:8—translation), James exhorted Christians to be longsuffering and to establish our hearts. 8. Peter reminded us that “the termination of all things has approached [eggidzo]...” (1 Peter 4:7—translation). If all things had terminated, Peter would not have continued the verse with the exhortation, “be ye therefore sober, and watch unto prayer.” In conclusion, the kingdom has not arrived any more than any of the other events mentioned in these verses. The amillennialist humanly reasons that to the millennialist “near” becomes distant, “quickly” means ages hence, and “at hand” signifies afar off. In contrast to the amillennial human reasoning, nearness is not permanent, but it is a continual approaching or coming without pause. The Lord’s soon return is to be understood in the sense of Christian hope, called the blessed hope, the expectation which does not calculate the time and hour but looks at time in the same way our Lord views time: “...one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day” (2 Peter 3:8). The estimate of nearness given by God in measuring prophetic periods includes a purposed indefiniteness in order to produce watchfulness, piety, service, and diligent study of Scripture on our part until we depart to be with Him or He comes for us. What Christian can object to the prophecy expressed in the blessed hope? Two passages that have caused debate concerning the time of the Kingdom’s establishment are Matthew 12:28 and Luke 11:20. Since both synoptic writers were referring to the same thing, Matthew alone will be considered in this discussion. In answer to the Pharisees’ charge that Jesus Christ was casting out demons by the power of Beelzebub, Christ said, “But if [since—first class conditional particle] I am casting out demons by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God came [aorist active indicative of phthano, which means to precede, be close at hand, arrive, or come] to [epi, accusative of extent, which can be used with the genitive, dative, locative, instrumental, or accusative cases, meaning upon, over, or to] you” (Matthew 12:28—translation). Those who believe the kingdom was established at Christ’s first advent say “the kingdom of God has already come on you.” However, the kingdom had no more come on the unrepentant Pharisees than it was “within them” (Luke 17:21). Jewish national repentance is required before the kingdom will come on them (Psalms 110:1-7: Romans 11:1-36). The preposition epi used with the accusative plural pronoun humas in Matthew 12:28 carries the thought of a movement toward its object rather than having actually arrived (already come on them). Thus, the kingdom of Old Testament prophecy had moved near enough for the Jews to behold the Person of the King, but their unregenerate hearts prevented them from recognizing Him. Christ told them in a parable: “But his citizens hated him, and sent a message after him, saying, We will not have this man to reign over us” (Luke 19:14). The kingdom was within reach of only the repentant who became heirs of the kingdom (James 2:5). There is no reference to the kingdom approaching subsequent to Christ’s ascension. This does not indicate that the kingdom was offered to the Jews, because the kingdom of Old Testament prophecy was impossible before Calvary. Jesus Christ must die before He reigns; therefore, suffering precedes glory. The Jews rejected the Savior, not the kingdom. If the Jews were able to defeat God’s purpose at Christ’s incarnation, what hope do we have in His second coming? The intervening period between the advents of Jesus Christ is preparatory for the establishment of His kingdom. This includes the gathering and preparation of the elect. The Jews’ concept that their national choice by God assured them of entrance into the kingdom was incorrect. Entrance into the kingdom is not on the basis of natural but spiritual descent. Isaiah’s unusual commission emphasized the inability of these people to understand. God told Isaiah to “Go, and tell this people, Hear ye indeed, but understand not; and see ye indeed, but perceive not. Make the heart of this people fat, and make their ears heavy, and shut their eyes; lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and convert, and be healed” (Isaiah 6:9-10). Nevertheless, Isaiah must declare the information God gave. A teacher who withholds any information he has been assigned to teach would not fulfill his duty toward his unconcerned students. Furthermore, no prophet, apostle, or pastor/teacher has the right to keep back any of God’s counsel regardless of the attitude of his audience. God’s servant must keep one thing in mind throughout the course of his ministry—his faithfulness in proclaiming the whole counsel of God is pleasing to God whether the message is received or rejected. In 2 Corinthians 2:14, Paul testified that he was always being led in triumph (present active participle of thriambeuo, which means to lead or cause to triumph) in Christ as he proclaimed the truth of the gospel. The wording of Paul’s thanks is noteworthy: “Now thanks be unto God, which always causeth us to triumph in Christ, and maketh manifest the savour of his knowledge by us in every place.” He avoided any reference to himself as a victor because the victory was Christ’s who was leading him. What a lesson for “servants” who want to take credit for their “victories.” Following his thanks for Christ’s victory in which he shared, Paul stated the purpose for his thanks: “For we are unto God a sweet savour of Christ, in them that are saved, and in them that perish: To the one we are the savour of death unto death; and to the other the savour of life unto life. And who is sufficient for these things?” (2 Corinthians 2:15-16). True servants of God are a sweet savor to Jesus Christ in not only those who are being saved but also in those who are perishing. The truth of the gospel is a fragrant odor (osme) to those who are ordained to eternal life, but the same fragrant odor on the children of death causes them to stink more abominably. Hence, what is spiritual nourishment and joy to the elect is so unpalatable to the nonelect that it produces hatred in them. That which became light to Israel was darkness that could be felt by the Egyptians (Exodus 10:21-23). When God makes manifest the fragrant odor of Christ’s knowledge by His servants, it becomes light to the believing but darkness to the perishing. The weakness of both Isaiah and Paul was manifested, but God dealt with their discouragement. Isaiah said, “Woe is me! for I am undone; because I am a man of unclean lips...” (Isaiah 6:5). Paul said, “...when I came to Troas to preach Christ’s gospel, and a door was opened unto me of the Lord, I had no rest in my spirit, because I found not Titus my brother...” (2 Corinthians 2:12-13). God encouraged Isaiah by revealing to him that somewhere down the corridor of time some of the Jews would surely respond to the gospel of the kingdom: “But yet in it [the land] shall be a tenth, and it shall return, and shall be eaten: as a teil tree, and as an oak, whose substance is in them, when they cast their leaves: so the holy seed shall be the substance thereof” (Isaiah 6:13). A living seed buried in the ground does not perish; likewise, Israel shall never perish though she is buried among the nations of the world (Romans 11:1-36). Jehovah shall have His tithe. God encouraged Paul by letting him know that the success of the gospel was not his to achieve. The Lord’s turning from the Jews to the Gentiles to take out of them a people for Himself as His assembly was in the purpose of God. Some of the Old Testament saints had a clear view of the age of Christ’s assembly that would intervene between the two advents of Jesus Christ. David spoke of the time of Christ’s priesthood: “The LORD hath sworn, and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek” (Psalms 110:4). The King and His kingdom are set forth in Psalms 110:1-3. No verse is more misapplied than Psalms 110:1— "THE LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool." Christ applied this to Himself (Matthew 22:44). The eternal God said something to His eternal Son, whom David called his Lord. Therefore, the Psalm cannot be both by and about David. The promise is not that Christ’s enemies shall be converted but that they shall be made His footstool. At the time David’s Lord shall come back into the world, men will be united against Him; but the Messiah shall rule in the midst of His enemies. When He returns, His people (the Jews) will be willing in the day of God’s power. Reference to Christ’s priesthood after the order of Melchizedek is made in Psalms 110:4. Christ’s priesthood is administered at the Father’s right hand. Between the time Christ took His seat at the Father’s right hand (Psalms 110:1) and the time He “shall strike through kings in the day of His wrath” (Psalms 110:5), God is visiting the Gentiles to take out of them a people for His name (Acts 15:14; Romans 11:1-36). David then described His Lord’s warfare and victory (Psalms 110:5-7). The day of Christ’s wrath is not the day of grace. When the “fulness of the Gentiles” is completed, Jesus Christ shall return to build again the tabernacle of David (Romans 11:25; Acts 15:16-17). The kingdom that approached in the Person of the King at His first advent will be established by the Son of Man when He comes the second time. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 97: 04.2.18. THE KINGDOM PREPARED FROM FOUNDATION OF WORLD ======================================================================== Chapter 18 - THE KINGDOM PREPARED FROM THE FOUNDATION OF THE WORLD God’s predetermined intention will be successfully accomplished. The Sovereign of the universe does not undertake the accomplishment of a determined intention without His knowledge embracing all things relating to it. His understanding is infinite (Psalms 147:5). Hence, the whole creation was once future, or it was from eternity. Since creation had a beginning, it is not eternal. God’s eternal knowledge of all things proves He knew what would be created before His act of creation. Likewise, prophecy is proof of God’s infinite knowledge. If God does not know future things, He is ignorant. Prophecy is derived from God’s foreknowledge. Therefore, He “...calleth those things which be not as though they were” (Romans 4:17). God, in His perfect knowledge, saw the failure of human responsibility. Man has failed in every age: Adam in the garden failed in human responsibility. Noah with the sword of authority failed to govern himself. Israel broke the law that was given to her. The priesthood offered strange fire. Failure was written over kingship in Israel. Nebuchadnezzar’s power caused him to be lifted up with pride. Local assemblies have proved to be no exception. On the other hand, there is no failure with God (Isaiah 6:13; Ezekiel 16:60-63; 2 Timothy 2:19; Romans 8:28-30). Therefore, God shall accomplish His eternal purpose concerning all things, including the kingdom under the righteous reign of Jesus Christ on earth. God’s truth, describing what He intends to perform, should be the highest priority in the life of every Christian. As the wisdom of this world cannot be understood without studying its philosophers, the wisdom of God on any Biblical subject cannot be acquired without considering what the Lord has said (2 Timothy 2:7; 2 Timothy 2:15). Since the eschatological kingdom is one of the great subjects of the Bible, the truth concerning it is found only in Holy Scripture. Scripture does not describe it to mean one thing in one dispensation and something entirely different in a subsequent age. It is unchangeably the same in all Biblical prophecy until its fulfillment at Christ’s second advent. Some have likened the truth of the kingdom to a seed-germ that changes to a living plant and finally to the fully developed grain in its covering (Mark 4:26-29). Thus, they liken prophecy of the kingdom to the seed-germ, the assembly of Jesus Christ to the living plant, and kingdom of glory to the full corn in the ear. Every student of Scripture admits that there is progress in doctrinal revelation, but this progress by the Spirit through the apostles was only a clarification of Old Testament truths by means of their fulfillment. The progress of doctrine in the assembly and in the New Testament must be distinguished. When the last book of the New Testament was written, any further revelation of God’s mind and purpose ceased. That which has been “once delivered (aorist passive participle of paradidomi, which means to give over into the hands of another or to deliver something to one to keep)” (Jude 1:3) will have nothing added to it. Progress of doctrine in the assembly, however, has to do with man’s apprehension of the truth of God revealed in both the Old and New Testaments—the original truth of both Testaments. The following examples prove that original truth which portrays certain events that will transpire, prophecies that will be fulfilled, and promises that will be experienced cannot be a mere germ which will sprout into something entirely different: (1) The prophecies concerning the virgin birth of Christ, His impeccable life, vicarious death, resurrection out from among the dead, and coming the second time to establish His kingdom could not be a microbe that would germinate into another thing. (2) The promises concerning the new heart in regeneration and the hope of the glorified body could not be a micro-organism capable of evolving into a divergent substance. (3) All prophecies concerning the eschatological kingdom will not develop into the assembly, Christ’s reign in the heart, or His present reign from heaven. Biblical doctrine is given to God’s people for their spiritual growth, not that doctrine may be molded into things never intended by God. The future kingdom of Biblical prophecy is the consummation of God’s purpose. Christ said to those blessed by the Father, “...Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world” (Matthew 25:34). Those “blessed” (perfect passive participle of eulogeo, which means having been blessed) by the Father and the kingdom “prepared” (perfect passive participle of hetoimadzo, which means having been prepared) are both perfect passive participles. The perfect tense looks not only to the beginning but to the consummation of the action. Hence, the perfect tense is used consummatively, which means the completed action is emphasized. God never starts something He does not complete. The main verb is “inherit,” an aorist active imperative of kleronomeo, which means to obtain by inheritance or to receive possession of. All recipients of God’s grace are heirs of the future kingdom (James 2:5), but not until the Son of Man comes in His glory will the King command them to inherit the kingdom (Matthew 25:31-34). (1)The King, (2) the heirs, and (3) the kingdom—these great truths are revealed in Matthew 25:34. “Then the King shall say to those on his right hand, Come you who have been blessed of my Father, come into possession of the kingdom which has been prepared for you from the foundation of the world” (translation). The names of the elect written in the book of life, the slain Lamb—Revelation 13:8, and the kingdom—Matthew 25:34, are all “from the foundation of the world [apo kataboles kosmou]”. The same preposition (apo) is used in both verses. The Lamb “slain” (esphagmenou, perfect passive participle of sphadzo, which means having been slain) and the kingdom “prepared” (hetoimasmenen, perfect passive participle of hetoimadzo, which means having been prepared) took place before the foundation of the world. Furthermore, the names written in the Lamb’s book of life are included in Jesus Christ who was slain before the foundation of the world. The verb “written” of Luke 10:20—"...because your names are written in heaven"—is a perfect passive indicative of the Greek verb eggrapho, which means “it stands written.” The King was foreordained “before the foundation of the world [pro kataboles kosmou]” to be the Savior of the elect (1 Peter 1:20). Christ could become the King of His promised kingdom only through His blood. Apart from His vicarious atonement, He could never say, “Come, you who have been blessed of my Father, Come into possession of the kingdom which has been prepared for you from the foundation of the world” (Matthew 25:34—translation). The Father’s eternally chosen Servant (Isaiah 42:1), Jesus Christ, as Mediator assumed the position of the willing Servant. Therefore, the foreordained (perfect passive participle of proginosko, which means to determine beforehand or to foreordain) Savior by His election was the foreappointed King (1 Peter 1:20). His suffering must precede His glory (1 Peter 1:11). The time when Christ shall sit on the throne of His glory is predicted in Matthew 25:31-34. The Greek words for “foreordained” in reference to the Savior, “blessed” concerning the blessed by the Father, and “prepared” relating to the preparedness of the kingdom are all perfect passive participles. The perfect tense emphasizes the completed action of Christ’s Saviorhood, work of grace in the elect, and establishment of the kingdom. Christ’s Kingship, His preparation for it in His suffering and death, and its culmination when He shall sit on His throne must all be viewed as parts of the whole from God’s perspective. Those blessed by the Father’s election, their preparation by the application of Christ’s redemptive work in regeneration and subsequent progressive sanctification, and their ultimate perfection in glorification must also be viewed as parts of the whole. Moreover, the completion of the kingdom according to God’s eternal purpose, its preparation by Christ’s redemptive work, the salvation of the elect who shall inherit it, and its ultimate establishment must also be viewed as three parts of the whole. The heirs of the kingdom were chosen in Christ “before the foundation of the world” (Ephesians 1:4). The heirs of the kingdom are not presently in the kingdom, but they are destined to be in it. Heirs of the kingdom are the elect gathered out of all nations. In their aggregate form, they will constitute a holy nation. The context of Matthew 25:34 speaks of the judgment of the living nations immediately preceding the establishment of the kingdom. Therefore, the living “sheep” are the subjects of the living nations. However, entrance into the transitional period of the kingdom will not be restricted to sheep in their mortal bodies. Heirs of the kingdom will include both sheep living in mortal bodies of flesh and blood and glorified sheep (Isaiah 61:4-11; Isaiah 62:1-5; Isaiah 65:20-22; 2 Thessalonians 1:5-10; 2 Thessalonians 2:1; Revelation 19:1-11; Revelation 21:24). All of God’s sheep shall inherit the kingdom. The “sheep,” a term used by Jesus Christ in His judgment of the living nations, include sheep from the nation of Israel, the Gentile nations, and those from among both Jews and Gentiles who constitute the assembly: (1) Christ’s command to the twelve apostles in Matthew 10:5-6 proves God has some sheep from among the Jews: “Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” (2) Christ’s speaking to the Jews about sheep other than themselves proves God has sheep who are not of Israel: “And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd” (John 10:16). (3) Christ’s judgment of the living nations (Matthew 25:31-46) subsequent to His judgment of Israel and prior to establishing His kingdom proves God has sheep from among both Jews and Gentiles who constitute the assembly: “...he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats: And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left” (Matthew 25:32-33). The term “sheep” (probata, plural of probaton) is of great significance when it refers to God’s elect. It is used seventeen times in John 10:1-42. It refers to the elect from among Jews and “other sheep” who were not from among the Jews (John 10:16). Two Greek words in John 10:16 must be understood. Although they are different, both are translated by the word “fold.” (1) The first, aules, which means an enclosure by a wall or a sheepfold, is used for “other sheep” not of the Jewish fold. To the Jews, this fold held all the flock of God. As far as they were concerned all outside the confines of Judaism were nothing but dogs (Psalms 22:16; Psalms 22:20; Matthew 15:27; Php 3:2). (2) The second Greek word, poimne, which means a flock, was used to speak of all sheep constituting “one fold [flock].” This is incorrectly translated in some translations of the Bible. “One fold [flock]” signifies that Christ’s flock of sheep extends beyond the confines of the Jewish fold. The great commission given to the eleven disciples in Matthew 28:19 extends to all nations: “Go ye therefore, and teach all nations....” Caiaphas, the high priest, did not know the truth that he spoke: “...he prophesied that Jesus should die for that nation; And not for that nation only, but that also he should gather together in one the children of God that were scattered abroad” (John 11:51-52). God has His sheep (elect) that He will call out “of nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues” (Revelation 7:9). This stands in contrast to Christ’s commission in Matthew 10:1-7 to the twelve disciples to go only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. There are some goats inside of Judaism: “...For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel” (Romans 9:6). There are some sheep outside the fold of Judaism: “And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold...” (John 10:16). “Other sheep I have” of John 10:16 includes all nations and all ages. The Greek verb translated “I have” is a present active indicative of echo, which means “to have or to possess.” Even before Christ’s death for them and the Holy Spirit’s regeneration of them, Christ could say, “I have them.” They were His by covenant relationship. They had been given to Him by God the Father’s election (John 6:37; John 17:2; John 17:6; John 17:11-12; John 17:24; John 18:9). Thus, God’s sheep have been eternally Christ’s sheep. They were His at the time He spoke, and they will be His forever. There are saved sheep, and there are lost sheep. When Jesus Christ gave His life for the lost sheep (John 10:11; John 10:15; John 10:18), He absolutely and perfectly purchased salvation for them. The love that moved the Lord Jesus to die for the lost sheep in Israel was the same love that moved Him to say: “And I have other sheep, which are not from this sheepfold; it is necessary for me to bring them also, and they shall hear my voice; and they shall become one flock with one shepherd” (John 10:16—translation). In John 10:16, the Greek word translated “must” is dei, which means His bringing other sheep is binding, necessary, proper, or inevitable. Therefore, as Jesus Christ “must [dei]...be lifted up” (John 3:14), it is inevitable (dei) (John 10:16) that those for whom He died become saved sheep. The Greek word for “bring” is agagein, aorist active infinitive of ago, which means to bring or to lead. Hence, “it became him, for whom are all things, and by whom are all things, in bringing [agogonta, second aorist active participle of ago] many sons unto glory, to make the captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings” (Hebrews 2:10). The lost sheep from among the Jews being saved during the dispensation of grace become part of the body of Christ, the assembly: “Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace” (Romans 11:5). “What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded” (Romans 11:7). “...blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in” (Romans 11:25). However, God will once again deal with national Israel (Romans 11:26-27; Revelation 7:4-8). Furthermore, the lost sheep among the Gentiles who are being saved during the present assembly age become part of the constituted body of Christ. But some Gentiles will be saved after the completion of the assembly (Revelation 7:9; Matthew 25:31-33). Make no mistake, all the sheep, regardless of their race or nationality, will inherit the kingdom prepared for them from the foundation of the world. Some will enter the millennium in their natural bodies and others in their glorified bodies, but all shall enter the eternal kingdom in bodies of flesh and bones. The aforementioned things about Israel, the assembly, and the Gentiles are reprehensible to those who deny a future kingdom. However, the view of the present church/kingdom and no future kingdom should be even more reprehensible to those who believe the Scriptural teaching concerning the future kingdom. Matthew 25:31-34 proves, beyond successful contradiction, that the sheep’s inheritance of the kingdom will be associated with Christ’s coming as the Son of Man. There is not the slightest hint of Christ’s kingdom until He sits on the throne of His glory. The kingdom will not be given to the sheep as they are saved one by one but to them when they will be gathered together as a flock. The means by which the kingdom can be obtained and the kingdom itself are distinct. The following are preparatory prerequisites for entrance into the kingdom: (1) The new birth is a necessity. “...Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God” (John 3:3). “...Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God” (John 3:5). (2) Denial of self is a requirement. “...Whosoever will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me” (Mark 8:34). (3) Perseverance is a demand. “...No man, having put his hand to the plough, and looking back, is fit for the kingdom of God” (Luke 9:62). The new birth produces both the denial of self and perseverance. The kingdom was predetermined by God (Matthew 25:34). The kingdom, like the King and the heirs, was not an afterthought with God. It was His forethought. When God created the heavens and the earth, He had in mind the new heaven and the new earth (Genesis 1:1; Revelation 21:1).This concludes Volume II in which we have considered the introduction of the King. This series will continue in Volume III with the next aspect of our study of Christ’s future Kingdom. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 98: 04.3.0. CHRISTS KINGDOM IS FUTURE - VOL III BY W.E.BEST ======================================================================== Christ’s Kingdom Is Future - Volume III Formation Of The King’s Bride by W.E. Best Copyright © 1992 - W.E. Best Scripture quotations in this book designated "NASB" are from the NEW AMERICAN STANDARD BIBLE © 1960, 1962, 1963, 1968, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1975, and 1977 by the Lockman Foundation, and are used by permission. Those designated "translation" are by the Author and taken from the Greek Text. All others are from the King James Bible. This book is distributed by the: W.E. Best Book Missionary Trust WEBBMT P.O. Box 34904, Houston, Texas 77234-4904 USA CONTENTS Author’s Note 1. Introduction 2. Israel And The Assembly Distinguished 3. Kingdom And Assembly Distinguished 4. Foundation Of The Assembly Made Known 5. Birth Of The Assembly 6. Assembly Being Built On The Living Stone 7. A Stone In The Assembly Peter’s Alleged Roman Primacy Disproved Peter Sifted By Satan 8. Living Stones In The Assembly Living Stones Taught Servitude Living Stones Sanctified Positionally And Progressively Living Stones Suffering Prior To The Kingdom Living Stones Deny Self 9. Nature Of The Assembly 10. The Assembly Continuing To Be Built 11. Mystery Of The Assembly 12. Individual And Corporate Relationships 13. The Assembly A Living Epistle 14. Nonfailure In The Assembly But Failure In The Assemblies 15. Unity Of The Body 16. Christ’s Last Words To His Assmblies Warning Against Adding To Or Taking From The Word Of God Promised Fulfillment Of Hope 17. Authority Given To The King’s Completed Bride 18. Important Questions And Answers For Members Of Each Local Assembly AUTHOR’S NOTE This is Volume III of an extensive series on the subject of Christ’s future Kingdom. Volume I presents the King’s genealogy: Volume II the introduction of the King; and Volume III the formation of the King’s Bride. Future volumes will be released periodically. The complete series will comprehesively cover all aspects of Christ’s future Kingdom as revealed in the Scriptures from Genesis 1:1 to Revelation 22:21 ======================================================================== CHAPTER 99: 04.3.01. INTRODUCTION ======================================================================== Chapter 1 - INTRODUCTION The first advent of Jesus Christ ushered in the age of Christ’s assembly during the period of the times of the Gentiles. Distinction must be made between the times of the Gentiles and the fullness of the Gentiles. The times of the Gentiles began with Nebuchadnezzar, and they will be consummated when the Son of Man comes in power and glory to establish His kingdom on the earth (Luke 21:24). The fullness of the Gentiles speaks of Christ, by the agency of the Holy Spirit, taking out from among the Gentiles His assembly which He is presently building (Romans 11:25; Acts 15:13-17). Subsequent to the fullness of the Gentiles, the last form of Gentile rule on earth will be destroyed by Christ’s second advent (Revelation 19:11-21). Hence, the assembly which Christ is building is not an eschatological kingdom. Jesus Christ assumed human nature in order to bring Himself into reality with His covenant people, both elect Jews and elect non-Jews. The eternal covenant has the God of peace as its Author, the great Shepherd of the sheep as its fulfillment, and the sheep for whom Christ died as its recipients (Hebrews 13:20). The incarnate Savior must suffer before He enters into the glories of His kingship. Thus, He was qualified for His future reign as King of kings and Lord of lords by His sacrificial death on behalf of the elect and His taking on Himself human nature in its glorified form. Furthermore, His redeemed ones must not only be regenerated but also have glorified human natures like Christ’s in order to reign with Him in His future kingdom. This is the concise meaning of "so great salvation" (Hebrews 2:3) for both the assembly and Israel (1 Thessalonians 4:13-18; 1 Corinthians 1:10; Isaiah 25:9; Romans 11:26). The prophets described the sufferings of Christ, and they also spoke at length about the consummation of salvation in the coming kingdom. Although we must never detract from the sufferings of Christ (Romans 3:24-26), it is equally important that we do not limit the full scope of Scripture which includes the completion of salvation in the kingdom. The sufferings of Jesus Christ were the means of securing "so great salvation" (Hebrews 2:3-5). The "mystery of godliness" (1 Timothy 3:16) enables us to better understand the heavenly treasure being committed to an earthly vessel, the local aspect of Christ’s assembly. Christians embrace the truth that practical sanctification is wrought in us through the local assembly. The assembly is the pillar (support) and ground (basis) of the truth, and truth is the means of practical sanctification (1 Timothy 3:14-15; John 17:17; 1 Thessalonians 4:1-8; 1 Thessalonians 5:14-23). Truth has been entrusted to the assembly; therefore, faithful men should be appointed to handle the word of truth (2 Timothy 2:2). Men with ordinary gifts are given to local assemblies for the edification of believers (Ephesians 4:11-16), and these men should be recognized by the assemblies before their appointment (1 Timothy 3:1-7). This is why behavior is emphasized in 1 Timothy 3:15. The nature of Christ’s assembly which He is building is revealed in her invisible and visible aspects. The invisible aspect is the life principle; therefore, it is the great institution of unanimity--harmony and unity. Hence, one does not believe in Christ because he believes in the assembly, but he believes in Christ’s assembly because he believes in Jesus Christ. There is a sense in which the assembly Christ is building can say, "No one comes to the Father except through me." Why? It is the invisible principle of life. Conversely, the visible aspect of the assembly would be heretical to say, "No one comes to the Father except through me." Why? That would be institutional salvation. As the human nature of Jesus Christ is the visible manifestation of the invisible God, the local assembly is the visible manifestation of the invisible principle of life. Therefore, to say Jesus Christ was wholly spiritual in His first advent is to deny the incarnation; likewise, to say the assembly is wholly invisible is to repudiate her visibility. Furthermore, to deny the incarnation of Jesus Christ is to deny the new birth which is the principle of life coming by virtue of the sacrifice of Jesus Christ. Moreover, to say the assembly of Christ is only visible is the same principle as saying Jesus Christ is only human. Since Jesus Christ and His assembly are both invisible and visible, Christ and His kingdom are both invisible and visible. The visibility of the kingdom at Christ’s first advent was in the one born King, because it was in Him that "the kingdom of the heavens has approached [perfect active indicative of eggidzo]" (Matthew 3:2 --translation). However, the invisible kingdom of heaven, which is presently with the Father, shall be given to the Son to be visibly manifested on the earth at Christ’s second advent (Luke 19:11 ff). Furthermore, to say the kingdom is wholly spiritual and invisible is like saying Christ, His assembly, and His kingdom are wholly spiritual and invisible thus denying the visibility and materiality of Christ’s body, His assembly, and His kingdom. As God’s purpose in the incarnation was accomplished, His purpose in both His assembly and His kingdom shall be accomplished. There was only one place in Israel where God established His name (Deuteronomy 12:5; Deuteronomy 12:14; Deuteronomy 12:18; Deuteronomy 12:21; Deuteronomy 12:26), and there is only one place in the New Testament where Christ has established His name (Romans 16:16). In the Old Testament, the place was the tent of meeting; and in the New Testament, the place is the local assembly. God’s name is associated with His chosen and redeemed people. Depraved men have no desire to fellowship with God; hence, left to their own choice, they will follow the god of this world. Who is depraved man to dictate God’s chosen place for worship? The place God chose to establish His name (Deuteronomy 12:5) is contrasted with "all the places, wherein the nations...served their gods..." (Deuteronomy 12:2). Men have almost forgotten that God has an assembly, and He has given it an order and constitution which is universally the same. God’s people are under obligation to withdraw from everything that is contrary to God’s order and constitution (2 Timothy 2:19-22). Christians must return to first principles. In a time of apostasy, we find few with whom we can walk in truth. But the truth itself is universal, and every believer is obligated to embrace it. There is a terrible gap between word and deed or proclamation and action. The passion for statistics is greater than the passion Paul expressed for the elect: "Therefore I endure all things for the elect’s sakes, that they may also obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory" (2 Timothy 2:10). People who attend self-chosen places of worship want nothing to hinder their routine. Observe the way the Bible is used in self-chosen places. The most popular Book in the world is the Bible. It is popular to all self-serving religionists, but it becomes unpopular to the same people when they are subjected to the whole counsel of God. The following list shows the popularity and unpopularity of Scripture with religionists: POPULAR UNPOPULAR 1. God loves you (Ephesians 2:4) 1. God hates some (Romans 9:13) 2. Salvation is of God (Php 1:28) 2. Faith does not regenerate (John 3:8) 3. Judge not that you be not judged (Matthew 7:1) 3. Do you not judge the one inside the local assembly (1 Corinthians 5:12) 4. If you ask anything in my name, I shall do it (John 14:13) 4. If we ask anything according to God’s will. He is hearing us (1 John 5:14) 5. The blood of Jesus Christ cleanses us from all sin (1 John 1:7) 5. Let us cleanse ourselves from all defilement of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God (2 Corinthians 7:1) 6. The foundation of God has stood firm, having this seal (2 Timothy 2:19 a) 6. Let everyone naming the name of the Lord keep away from evil (2 Timothy 2:19 b) 7. Love your enemies (Matthew 5:44) 7. Hate God’s enemies with a mature hatred (Psalms 139:21-22) 8. Everyone has a right to his own belief (1 Corinthians 11:16). 8. Prove all things, and hold fast that which is good (1 Thessalonians 5:21) The list of approved and disapproved Scriptures among religionists could extend into the hundreds; but these examples should suffice to show the difference between one giving lip service to Scripture and the other saying with David, "O how love I thy law! it is my meditation all the day.... Through thy precepts I get understanding: therefore I hate every false way" (Psalms 119:97; Psalms 119:104). Love for God’s law is preceded by knowledge of God’s law (torah, teaching or God’s instruction for His people). How can we love that which we do not know? The very altitude of Holy Scripture reveals its Divine origin. Therefore, no one apart from the grace of God can scale the heights of God’s mountain of revealed truth. Human creeds reveal how much one knows; the word of God manifests how little one knows. Roman Catholicism has been justly criticized for her view concerning the Scriptures. Although admitting the Scriptures, Roman Catholics say they should be interpreted by the holy Mother, the church, who has held and holds the truth, and to whom belongs the responsibility of judging the true sense of the Scriptures. The rule of faith for the church of Rome consists of three parts: The Bible of the Romish church, tradition, and interpretation by the said church. Thus, she claims that such rule of faith banishes all doubts, resolves every dispute, and preserves unity. Granting that the criticism of Roman Catholicism is correct, a warning must be given concerning denominational creeds. Seeking to understand the suffering Savior and the assembly which He is building in the light of restricted creeds by men leads to subjectivism. The confessional life of the assembly must be tested by the unlimited sky of revelation rather than an artist’s portrayal of a limited sky on canvas. ======================================================================== Source: https://sermonindex.net/books/writings-of-w-e-best-volume-1/ ========================================================================