Saints

If I apprehend right, those titles are used in Scripture with different meanings. Thus when spoken of, or beings of higher intellect than man, there is peculiar degree of holiness annexed to the word in those instances. Thus Moses, describing the descent of the Lord upon mount Sinai, saith, He came with ten thousands of saints." (Deut. 33. 2.)

But when the same word is made use of in application to men, whether the apostles and first servants in the church, or ordinary believers, I apprehend it means no more than sinners regenerated, and made saints in Christ Jesus. Thus Paul the apostle, addressing his first Epistle to the Corinthians, useth these remarkable words - - "Unto the church of God which is at Corinth, to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called robe saints." (1 Cor. i. 2.) I do not presume to point out the difference, - - I only state it as it is. Probablythere is no real difference in sanctity, because all holiness in every creature can be but a derived holiness. The high and Holy One who inhabiteth eternity, strictly and properly speaking, is the only Holy One. Every thing, therefore, of holiness is just so far so, and no more, as hath been received from him. And with respect to the holiness of men or angels it is possible, yea more than possible, even highly probable, that when a sinner is washed from all his sins in Christ’s blood, he is holier than an angel which neversinned; and eminently on this account - - the holiness of the sinner in his renewed nature is the holiness of God our Saviour, from a life received from Jesus and union with Jesus: whereas the holiness of the angel is but the holiness of the creature, a created holiness, and not derived from any life - union with Christ. If this be true, let the reader contemplate, if he can, the personal glory of the Lord Jesus Christ in this holiness of his nature, and his redeemed in him, Such honour have all his saints! And when he hath dulypondered this most blessed of all subjects, let him add this to it, namely, that it is an holiness that never can be lost, sullied, or lessened. "Such an High Priest (saith Paul) became us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and made higher than the heavens? (Heb. 7: 26.) As the holiness of Christ in his human nature, deriving every thing of sanctity as it must from the union with the GODHEAD, gives a completeness both of durableness and excellency to that sanctity, so must it ensure the same in all hismembers. The holy angels are said by JEHOVAH (Job. 4: 18.) to have no trust put in them, yea, "he chargeth them with folly, or weakness - - that is, with a possibility of falling. For though they are free from sin, yet not secure from the possibility of sinning. Angels have fallen, and therefore angels may fall. But believers united to Jesus are everlastingly secure in him. He saith himself, Because I live ye shall live also." (Joh 14:19.) What an unspeakable felicity this to the church of God in Christ Jesus called to be saints!

Holy, godly, or sanctified persons

Jesus Christ Being Glorified In His Saints

2Th_1:7-10.

The LORD Coming With His Saints

Deu_33:1-2; Zec_14:1-5; Jud_1:14.

The LORD Gathering His Saints

Psa_50:1-6.

The Saints Of GOD

Deu_33:1-3; 1Sa_2:6-9; Psa_37:28; Psa_97:10; Psa_145:9-10; Psa_148:7-14; Pro_2:6-8; Dan_7:15-28; Rom_8:26-28; 1Co_6:1-3; Col_1:24-28; Rev_11:15-18.

SAINTS.—The word ‘saints’ (οἱ ἅγιοι) occurs in the Gospels in Mat 27:52 only. Elsewhere in the NT it is never used of any but Christians (e.g. Act 9:13, Rom 12:13, Rev 11:18). In the LXX Septuagint (Dan 7:22; Dan 7:25; Dan 7:27; Dan 8:24) ἅγιοι is the equivalent of קְּרשׁים ‘the holy ones’ (i.e. angels). The root idea seems to be that of ‘separation,’ so that a ‘saint’ is one who is separated, consecrated, one who belongs to God. Its occurrence in Mat 27:52 opens up the entire question of the meaning of the section. The incident is peculiar to the First Gospel, and occurs in the course of the narrative of our Lord’s crucifixion and death. It is stated that at the moment of His death there was a supernatural earthquake which caused the tombs to be opened, and that immediately following His resurrection on the first day of the week many bodies (σώματα) of dead saints arose from their graves, and the persons (ἐξελθόντες, masc.) thus raised from the dead appeared in the city of Jerusalem to many. Several theories have been put forward to account for this remarkable statement.

1. It is said to be an interpolation. In reply, it is argued that the textual evidence of Manuscripts and Versions is exactly the same for this passage as for the rest of the First Gospel. It is also urged that the incident seems plainly referred to as early as Ignatius (Ep. ad Magn. 9).

2. It is said to be a legendary addition. It is thought that the graves were rent by an earthquake which actually occurred, and that then this statement was subsequently added as a spiritual explanation of the natural phenomenon. Bruce (EGT [Note: GT Expositor’s Greek Testanent.] , in loc.) says: ‘We seem here to be in the region of Christian legend.’ Meyer takes the same general view. Those who oppose this view argue that textual considerations give no indication of a later addition, and that the writer of the First Gospel evidently believed in the incident, and wished his readers to do the same.

3. It is accounted for as a wrong explanation of incidents which were in themselves true. Farrar (Life of Christ) suggests that these ghostly visitants were the product of the imagination of those who were impressed by the events then taking place. To this it is replied that there is no trace of it in the narrative which now is, and apparently has been from the first, an integral part of this Gospel.

4. It is explained by saying that we have in the incident a striking testimony to the supernatural character and far-reaching power of our Lord’s death; that not only did it affect nature (earthquake), the Jewish economy (the rent veil), and human life (centurion), but that its influence penetrated even to the unseen world. The narrative as it stands says that it was at the moment of His death that the tombs were opened, but that the actual rising of the saints did not take place until after the Lord’s resurrection. He was ‘the first-fruits of them that slept.’ The fact that the incident is found in one Gospel only is, it is urged, no necessary argument against its credibility. On this view, the question as to who were the saints would seem to be answered by the narrative itself. The tombs were near Jerusalem, and the fact of recognition implied in the appearance of the risen ones in the city suggests that the saints were some of those who, during their earthly life, had been led to faith in Jesus as the Messiah: godly people of the type of Anna, Simeon, Zacharias, and Elisabeth. Those who accept its genuineness fully recognize that the incident is mysterious, but they point out that the narrative as it stands is a calm, quiet statement, marked by reserve and by the absence of all legendary details. The upholders of the authenticity consider it full of spiritual meaning as to the supernatural character of our Lord’s death in relation to the holy dead, holding that it was a manifestation of His power over death and the grave (1) by the resurrection of some from Hades, (2) by the clothing of them with a resurrection body, and (3) by permission to appear to those who knew them. On this theory the narrative is to be accepted as it is, and the exegesis of the passage strictly adhered to without endeavouring to draw conclusions which go beyond the brief record.

Literature.—(1) in favour of historicity: Alford, Com. in loc.; Westcott, Introd. to Gospels^{4 [Note: designates the particular edition of the work referred]} , p. 329 f.; Thinker, vol. v. (2) in favour of legendary character: Bruce, Meyer, etc.

W. H. Griffith Thomas.

SAINTS.—See Holiness, II. 2, and Sanctification.

(Latin: sanctus, holy)

Name applied in the New Testament to the members of the Christian community generally, as in Colossians 1

To the saints and faithful brethren in Christ Jesus, who are at Colossa....

sānts: In the King James Version 3 words are thus rendered: (1) קדושׁ, ḳādhōsh (in Dan the same root occurs several times in its Aramaic form, קדּישׁ, ḳaddı̄sh); (2) חסיד, ḥāṣı̄dh, and (3) ἄγιοι, hágioi. Of these words (2) has in general the meaning of righteousness or goodness, while (1) and (3) have the meaning of consecration and divine claim and ownership. They are not primarily words of character, like ḥāṣı̄dh, but express a relation to God as being set apart for His own. Wherever ḳādhōsh refers to angels, the rendering “holy one” or “holy ones” has been substituted in the Revised Version (British and American) for the King James Version “saint” or “saints,” which is the case also in Psa 106:16 margin (compare Psa 34:9), and in 1Sa 2:9, as the translation of ḥāṣı̄dh.

While hagioi occurs more frequently in the New Testament than does ḳādhōsh in the Old Testament, yet both are applied with practical uniformity to the company of God’s people rather than to any individual. Perhaps the rendering “saints” cannot be improved, but it is necessary for the ordinary reader constantly to guard against the idea that New Testament saintship was in any way a result of personal character, and consequently that it implied approval of moral attainment already made. Such a rendering as “consecrate ones,” for example, would bring out more clearly the relation to God which is involved, but, besides the fact that it is not a happy translation, it might lead to other errors, for it is not easy to remember that consecration - the setting apart of the individual as one of the company whom God has in a peculiar way as His own - springs not from man, but from God Himself, and that consequently it is in no way something optional, and admits of no degrees of progress, but, on the contrary, is from the beginning absolute duty. It should also be noted that while, as has been said, to be a saint is not directly and primarily to be good but to be set apart by God as His own, yet the godly and holy character ought inevitably and immediately to result. When God consecrates and claims moral beings for Himself and His service, He demands that they should go on to be fit for and worthy of the relation in which He has placed them, and so we read of certain actions as performed “worthily of the saints” (Rom 16:2) and as such “as becometh saints” (Eph 5:3). The thought of the holy character of the “saints,” which is now so common as almost completely to obscure the real thought of the New Testament writers, already lay in their thinking very close to their conception of saintship as consecration by God to be His own.