The Great Doctrines of the Bible by Cleland Boyd McAfee
Author: Unknown
Date: 0101-01-01T00:00:00+00:00

The Project Gutenberg EBook of The Great Doctrines of the Bible by Rev. William Evans

Copyright laws are changing all over the world. Be sure to check the copyright laws for your country before downloading or redistributing this or any other Project Gutenberg eBook.

This header should be the first thing seen when viewing this Project Gutenberg file. Please do not remove it. Do not change or edit the header without written permission.

Please read the “legal small print,” and other information about the eBook and Project Gutenberg at the bottom of this file. Included is important information about your specific rights and restrictions in how the file may be used. You can also find out about how to make a donation to Project Gutenberg, and how to get involved.

**Welcome To The World of Free Plain Vanilla Electronic Texts**

**eBooks Readable By Both Humans and By Computers, Since 1971**

*****These eBooks Were Prepared By Thousands of Volunteers!*****

Title: The Great Doctrines of the Bible

Author: Rev. William Evans

Release Date: July, 2004 [EBook #6038] [Yes, we are more than one year ahead of schedule] [This file was first posted on October 23, 2002]

Edition: 10

Language: English

Character set encoding: ASCII

*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK, THE GREAT DOCTRINES OF THE BIBLE ***

This eBook was produced by Charles Aldarondo, Charles Franks and The Online Distributed Proofreading team.

THE GREAT DOCTRINES OF THE BIBLE

By REV. WILLIAM EVANS, Ph.D., D.D.

DEDICATED TO MY WIFE

CONTENTS

THE DOCTRINE OF GOD

THE DOCTRINE OF JESUS CHRIST

THE DOCTRINE OF THE HOLY SPIRIT

THE DOCTRINE OF MAN

THE DOCTRINES OF SALVATION

Repentance—Faith—Regeneration—Justification—Adoption— Sanctification—Prayer

THE DOCTRINE OF THE CHURCH

THE DOCTRINE OF THE SCRIPTURES

THE DOCTRINE OF ANGELS

THE DOCTRINE OF SATAN

THE DOCTRINE OF THE LAST THINGS

The Second Coming of Christ—The Resurrection—The Judgment—The Destiny of the Wicked—The Reward of the Righteous

FOREWORD.

The demand for this book has come from the students in the class room who have listened to these lectures on the Great Doctrines of the Bible, and have desired and requested that they be put into permanent form for the purpose of further study and reference. This volume is prepared, therefore, primarily, but not exclusively, for the student, and with his needs in mind.

The doctrines herein treated are dealt with from the standpoint of Biblical rather than Dogmatic theology. This is evident from the plan which is followed in the work, namely, to gather together all the Scripture passages dealing with the subject under consideration, and from them choose a required number that may be called representative; then seek to understand the meaning of these references by the study of the text itself as well as its context and parallel passages; and finally, from the selected proof-texts, formulate the doctrinal teaching, and place such results under appropriate headings.

The doctrines of God, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit are more fully dealt with than the doctrines which follow. This is especially true of the doctrine of God. The reason for this is to set forth the method pursued in these studies, and to give a pattern for the study of the doctrines to follow.

It is intended that the doctrines of this book should be studied side by side with the open Bible. It is for this reason that many of the Scripture references are indicated by chapter and verse only. There must be constant reference to the Scriptures themselves.

This volume is in such form as to be of great service in the instruction given in Bible classes. There is probably no greater need in the Christian church today than that its membership should be made acquainted with the fundamental facts and doctrines of the Christian faith. The Christian layman, therefore, who desires a deeper knowledge of the doctrines of the Christian faith may find all the help he needs in this book. It is hoped that while it is prepared for the student, it is nevertheless not too deep for the average layman.

The special indebtedness of the writer is hereby expressed to the following works: “What the Bible Teaches,” by R. A. Torrey, D. D. To this work the writer owes much with regard to the method and plan of this book. “Systematic Theology,” by A. H. Strong, D. D., has provided some rich expositions of the sacred text. “Christian Doctrine,” by Dr. F. L. Patton, has been found very helpful, especially in connection with the subject of the “Proofs for the Existence of God.” Further recognition of indebtedness is also due to the following: “The Problem of the Old Testament,” and “The Christian View of God and the World,” by Dr. James Orr; “Studies in Christian Doctrine,” by George Knapp; “Jesus and the Gospel,” and “The Death of Christ,” by Prof. James Denny; “The Person and Work of Jesus,” by Nathan E. Wood, D. D.

There are doubtless others to whom credit is due of whom the author is not at this time conscious, for, after all, we are “part of all that we have seen, and met, and read.” To those unknown authors, therefore, our indebtedness is hereby acknowledged.

Chicago. WILLIAM EVANS.

THE DOCTRINE OF GOD

I. THE EXISTENCE OF GOD: (Vs. Atheism).

1. ASSUMED BY THE SCRIPTURES. 2. PROOFS OF THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. a) Universal belief in the Existence of God. b) Cosmological:—Argument from Cause. c) Teleological:—Argument from Design. d) Ontological:—Argument from Being. e) Anthropological:—Moral Argument. f) Argument from Congruity. g) Argument from Scripture.

II. THE NATURE OF GOD: (Vs. Agnosticism)

1. THE SPIRITUALITY OF GOD: (Vs. Materialism). 2. THE PERSONALITY OF GOD: (Vs. Pantheism). 3. THE UNITY OF GOD: (Vs. Polytheism). 4. THE TRINITY: (Vs. Unitarianism).

III. THE ATTRIBUTES OF GOD.

1. THE NATURAL ATTRIBUTES: a) Omniscience. b) Omnipotence. c) Omnipresence. d) Eternity.

2. THE MORAL ATTRIBUTES: a) Holiness. b) Righteousness. c) Faithfulness. d) Mercy and Loving-kindness. e) Love.

I. HIS EXISTENCE.

1. TAKEN FOR GRANTED BY THE SCRIPTURE WRITERS:

It does not seem to have occurred to any of the writers of either the Old or the New Testaments to attempt to prove or to argue for the existence of God. Everywhere and at all times it is a fact taken for granted. “A God capable of proof would be no God at all” (Jacobi). He is the self-existent One (Exod. 3:14) and the Source of all life (John 5:26).

The sublime opening of the Scriptures announces the fact of God and His existence: “In the beginning God” (Gen. 1:1). Nor is the rise or dawn of the idea of God in the mind of man depicted. Psa. 14:1: “The fool hath said in his heart. There is no God,” indicates not a disbelief in the existence, but rather in the active interest of God in the affairs of men—He seemed to hide Himself from the affairs of men (See Job 22:12-14).

The Scriptures further recognize that men not only know of the existence of God, but have also a certain circle of ideas as to who and what He is (Rom. 1:18-19).

No one but a “fool” will deny the fact of God. “What! no God? A watch, and no key for it? A watch with a main-spring broken, and no jeweler to fix it? A watch, and no repair shop? A time-card and a train, and nobody to run it? A star lit, and nobody to pour oil in to keep the wick burning? A garden, and no gardener? Flowers, and no florist? Conditions, and no conditioner?” He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh at such absurd atheism.

2. THE ARGUMENTS FOR THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.

[Footnote: A fuller and complete presentation of these arguments for the Existence of God may be found in the works of Dr. Augustus H. Strong and Dr. Francis L. Patten, to whom the author is here indebted.]

These arguments may not prove conclusively that God is, but they do show that in order to the existence of any knowledge, thought, reason, conscience in man, we must assume that God is (Strong). It is said of the beautiful, “It may be shown, but not proved.” So we say of the existence of God. These arguments are probable, not demonstrative. For this reason they supplement each other, and constitute a series of evidences which is cumulative in its nature. Though taken singly, none of them can be considered absolutely decisive, they together furnish a corroboration of our primitive conviction of God’s existence, which is of great practical value, and is in itself sufficient to bind the moral actions of men. A bundle of rods may not be broken even though each one separately may; the strength of the bundle is the strength of the whole. If in practical affairs we were to hesitate to act until we have absolute and demonstrable certainty, we should never begin to move at all.

Instead of doubting everything that can be doubted, let us rather doubt nothing until we are compelled to doubt.

Dr. Orr, of Glasgow, says: What we mean by the proof of God’s existence is simply that there are necessary acts of thought by which we rise from the finite to the infinite, from the caused to the uncaused, from the contingent to the necessary, from the reason involved in the structure of the universe to a universal and eternal reason, which is the ground of all, from morality in conscience to a moral Lawgiver and Judge. In this connection the theoretical proofs constitute an inseparable unity—‘constitute together,’ as Dr. Stirling declares, “but the undulations of a single wave, which wave is but a natural rise and ascent to God, on the part of man’s own thought, with man’s own experience and consciousness as the object before him.”

Religion was not produced by proofs of God’s existence, and will not be destroyed by its insufficiency to some minds. Religion existed before argument; in fact, it is the preciousness of religion that leads to the seeking for all possible confirmations of the reality of God.

a) Universality of Belief in the Existence of God.

(1) The fact stated and proven:

Man everywhere believes in the existence of a supreme Being or Beings to whom he is morally responsible and to whom propitiation needs to be made.

Such belief may be crudely, even grotesquely stated and manifested, but the reality of the fact is no more invalidated by such crudeness than the existence of a father is invalidated by the crude attempts of a child to draw a picture of its father.

It has been claimed by some that there are or were tribes in inland Africa that possessed no idea or conception of God. Moffat, Livingstone’s father-in-law, made such a claim, but Livingstone, after a thorough study of the customs and languages of such tribes, conclusively showed that Moffat was wrong.

Nor should the existence of such few tribes, even if granted, violate the fact we are here considering, any more than the existence of some few men who are blind, lame, deaf, and dumb would make untrue the statement and fact that man is a seeing, hearing, speaking, and walking creature. The fact that some nations do not have the multiplication table does no violence to arithmetic.

Concerning so-called atheists in Christian lands: it may be questioned if there are really any such beings. Hume, known as a famous sceptic, is reported to have said to Ferguson, as together they looked up into the starry sky: “Adam, there is a God.” Voltaire, the atheist, prayed to God in a thunderstorm. Ingersoll, when charged with being an atheist, indignantly refuted the charge, saying: “I am not an atheist; I do not say that there is no God; I am an agnostic; I do not know that there is a God.” “I thank God that I am an atheist,” were the opening words of an argument to disprove the existence of God. A new convert to atheism was once heard to say to a coterie of unbelievers: “I have gotten rid of the idea of a supreme Being, and I thank God for it.”

(2) Whence comes this universal belief in the existence of God?

aa) Not from outside sources, such as reason, tradition, or even the Scriptures.

Not from reason or argument, for many who believe in God have not given any time to reasoning and arguing the question; some, indeed, intellectually, could not. Others who have great powers of intellect, and who have reasoned and argued on the subject are professed disbelievers in God. Belief in God is not the result of logical arguments, else the Bible would have given us proofs.

Nor did this universal belief come from tradition, for “Tradition,” says Dr. Patton, “can perpetuate only what has been originated.”

Nor can it be said that this belief came from the Scriptures even, for, as has been well said, unless a man had a knowledge of the God from whom the Scriptures came, the Revelation itself could have no authority for him. The very idea of Scripture as a Revelation, presupposes belief in a God who can make it.—_Newman Smith_. Revelation must assume the existence of God.

bb) This universal belief comes from within man.

All the evidence points to the conclusive fact that this universal faith in the existence of God is innate in man, and comes from rational intuition.

(3) The weight and force of this argument.

The fact that all men everywhere believe in the existence of a supreme Being or beings to whom they are morally responsible, is a strong argument in favor of its truth. So universal an effect must have a cause as universal, otherwise we have an effect without any assignable cause. Certain is it that this argument makes the burden of proof to rest upon those who deny the existence of God.

b) The Argument from Cause: Cosmological.

When we see a thing we naturally ask for the cause of that thing. We see this world in which we live, and ask how it came to be. Is it self-originating, or is the cause of its being outside of itself? Is its cause finite or infinite?

That it could not come into being of itself seems obvious; no more than nails, brick, mortar, wood, paints, colors, form into a house or building of themselves; no more than the type composing a book came into order of itself. When Liebig was asked if he believed that the grass and flowers which he saw around him grew by mere chemical forces, he replied: “No; no more than I could believe that the books on botany describing them could grow by mere chemical forces.” No theory of an “eternal series” can account for this created universe. No matter how long a chain you may have, you must have a staple somewhere from which it depends. An endless perpendicular chain is an impossibility. “Every house is builded by some man,” says the Bible; so this world in which we live was built by a designing mind of infinite power and wisdom.

So is it when we consider man. Man exists; but he owes his existence to some cause. Is this cause within or without himself, finite or infinite? Trace our origin back, if you will, to our first parent, Adam; then you must ask, How did he come into being? The doctrine of the eternity of man cannot be supported. Fossil remains extend back but 6,000 years. Man is an effect; he has not always existed. Geology proves this. That the first Cause must have been an intelligent Being is proven by the fact that we are intelligent beings ourselves.

c) The Argument from Design: Teleological.

A watch proves not only a maker, an artificer, but also a designer; a watch is made for a purpose. This is evident in its structure. A thoughtful, designing mind was back of the watch. So is it with the world in which we live. These “ends” in nature are not to he attributed to “natural results,” or “natural selection,” results which are produced without intelligence, nor are they “the survival of the fittest,” instances in which “accident and fortuity have done the work of mind.” No, they are the results of a superintending and originating intelligence and will.

d) The Argument from Being: Ontological.

Man has an idea of an infinite and perfect Being. From whence this idea? From finite and imperfect beings like ourselves? Certainly not. Therefore this idea argues for the existence of an infinite and perfect Being: such a Being must exist, as a person, and not a mere thought.

e) The Moral Argument; Anthropological.

Man has an intellectual and a moral nature, hence his Creator must be an intellectual and moral Being, a Judge, and Lawgiver. Man has an emotional nature; only a Being of goodness, power, love, wisdom and holiness could satisfy such a nature, and these things denote the existence of a personal God.

Conscience in man says: “Thou shalt,” and “Thou shalt not,” “I ought,” and “I ought not.” These mandates are not self-imposed. They imply the existence of a Moral Governor to whom we are responsible. Conscience,—there it is in the breast of man, an ideal Moses thundering from an invisible Sinai the Law of a holy Judge. Said Cardinal Newman: “Were it not for the voice speaking so clearly in my conscience and my heart, I should be an atheist, or a pantheist, when I looked into the world.” Some things are wrong, others right: love is right, hatred is wrong. Nor is a thing right because it pleases, or wrong because it displeases. Where did we get this standard of right and wrong? Morality is obligatory, not optional. Who made is obligatory? Who has a right to command my life? We must believe that there is a God, or believe that the very root of our nature is a lie.

f) The Argument from Congruity.

If we have a key which fits all the wards of the lock, we know that it is the right key. If we have a theory which fits all the facts in the case, we know then that we have the right theory. “Belief in a self-existent, personal God is in harmony with all the facts of our mental and moral nature, as well as with all the phenomena of the natural world. If God exists, a universal belief in his existence is natural enough; the irresistible impulse to ask for a first cause is accounted for; or religious nature has an object; the uniformity of natural law finds an adequate explanation, and human history is vindlcated from the charge of being a vast imposture. Atheism leaves all these matters without an explanation, and makes, not history alone, but our moral and intellectual nature itself, an imposture and a lie.”—_Patton_.

g) The Argument from Scripture.

A great deal of our knowledge rests upon the testimony of others. Now the Bible is competent testimony. If the testimony of travelers is enough to satisfy us as to the habits, customs, and manners of the peoples of the countries they visit, and which we have never seen, why is not the Bible, if it is authentic history, be enough to satisfy us with its evidence as to the existence of God?

Some facts need more evidence than others, we know. This is true of the fact of the existence of God. But the Bible history is sufficient to satisfy every reasonable demand. The history of the Jews, prophecy, is not explainable minus God. If we cannot believe in the existence of God on the testimony of the Bible we might as well burn our books of history. A man cannot deny the truth of the testimony of the Bible unless he says plainly: “No amount of testimony will convince me of the supernatural.”

Scripture does not attempt to prove the existence of God; it asserts, assumes, and declares that the knowledge of God is universal, Rom. 1:19-21, 28, 33; 2:15. It asserts that God has wrought this great truth in the very warp and woof of every man’s being, so that nowhere is He without this witness. The preacher may, therefore, safely follow the example of the Scripture in assuming that there is a God. Indeed he must unhesitatingly and explicitly assert it as the Scripture does, believing that “His eternal power and divinity” are things that are clearly seen and perceived through the evidences of His handiwork which abound on every hand.

II. THE NATURE OF GOD: (Vs. Agnosticism).

1. THE SPIRITUALITY OF GOD: (Vs. Materialism). “GOD IS SPIRIT.”

a) Statement of the Fact, John 4:24: “God is Spirit.”

Meaning: The Samaritan woman’s question, “Where is God to be found?” etc. On Mt. Zion or Gerizim? Christ’s answer: God is not to be confined to any one place (cf. Acts 7:48; 17:25, 1 Kings 8:27). God must be worshipped in spirit as distinguished from place, form, or other sensual limitations (4:21); and in truth as distinguished from false conceptions resulting from imperfect knowledge (4:22).

b) Light on “God is Spirit,” from other Scriptures.

Luke 24:39: “A spirit hath not flesh and bones,” i. e., has not body, or parts like human beings; incorporeal; not subject to human limitations.

Col. 1:15: “The image of the invisible God.”

1 Tim. 1:17 (R. V.): “Now unto the King incorruptible, invisible.”

These passages teach that God has nothing of a material or bodily nature. Sight sees only objects of the material world, but God is not of the nature of the material world, hence He cannot be seen with the material eye—at least not now.

c) Light Derived from Cautions Against Representing God by Graven Images:

Deut. 4:15-23; Isa. 40:25; Exod. 20:4. Study these passages carefully and note that the reason why images were forbidden was because no one had ever seen God, and consequently could not picture how He looked, and, further, there was nothing on the earth that could resemble Him.

d) Definition of “God is Spirit” in the Light of All This:

God is invisible, incorporeal, without parts, without body, without passions, and therefore free from all limitations; He is apprehended not by the senses, but by the soul; hence God is above sensuous perceptions. 1 Cor. 2:6-16 intimates that without the teaching of God’s Spirit we cannot know God. He is not a material Being. “LaPlace swept the heavens with his telescope, but could not find anywhere a God. He might just as well have swept a kitchen with his broom.” Since God is not a material Being, He cannot be apprehended by physical means.

e) Questions and Problems with Reference to the Statement that “God is Spirit.”

(1) ‘What is meant by statement that man was made “in the image of God”?

Col 3:10; Eph. 4:24 declare that this “image” consists in “righteousness, knowledge, and holiness of truth.” By that is meant that the image of God in man consisted in intellectual and moral likeness rather than physical resemblance. Some think that 1 Thess. 5:23 indicates that the “trinity of man”—body, soul, and spirit—constitutes that image and likeness.

(2) What is meant by the anthropomorphic expressions used of God?

For example: God is said to have hands, feet, arms, eyes, ears He sees, feels, hears, walks, etc. Such expressions are to be understood only in the sense of being human expressions used in order to bring the infinite within the comprehension of the finite. How otherwise could we understand God saving by means of human expressions, in figures that we all can understand!

(3) How are such passages as Exod. 24:10 and 33:18-23 in which it is distinctly stated that men saw the God of Israel, to be reconciled with such passages as John 1:18; “No man hath seen God at any time,” and Exod. 33:20: “There shall no man see me and live”?

Answer:

aa) Spirit can be manifested in visible form:

John 1:32: “I saw tho Spirit descending from heaven like a dove (or in the form of a dove).” So throughout the ages the invisible God has manifested Himself in visible form. (See Judges 6:34: The Spirit of the Lord clothed Himself with Gideon.)

bb) On this truth is based the doctrine of “The Angel of the Lord”

in the Old Testament: Gen 16:7, 10, 13. Note here how the Angel of the Lord is identified with Jehovah Himself, cf. vv. 10, 13. Also Gen. 22:12—“The angel of the Lord…. not withheld from me.” In 18:1-16, one of the three angels clearly and definitely identifies himself with Jehovah. Compare chapter 19, where it is seen that only two of the angels have come to Sodom; the other has remained behind. “Who was this one, this remaining angel? Gen.18:17, 20 answers the question; v. 22 reads: “And Abraham stood yet before the Lord. In Exod. 13:21 it is Jehovah, while in 14:19 it is the Angel that went before Israel. Thus was the way prepared for the incarnation, for the Angel of the Lord in the Old Testament is undoubtedly the second person of the Trinity. This seems evident from Judges 13:18 compared with Isa. 9:6, in both of which passages, clearly referring to Christ, the name “Wonderful” occurs. Also the omission of the definite article “the” from before the expression “the Angel of the Lord,” and the substitution of “an” points to the same truth. This change is made in the Revised Version.

cc) What was it then that the elders of Israel saw when it is said they saw the “God of Israel”?

Certainly it was not God in His real essence, God as He is in Himself, for no man can have that vision and live. John 1:18 is clear on that point: “No man hath seen God at any time.” The emphasis in this verse is on the word “God,” and may read, “GOD no one has seen at any time.” In 5:37 Jesus says: “Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape.” From This it seems clear that the “seeing” here, the which has been the privilege of no man, refers to the essence rather than to the person of God, if such a distinction can really be made. This is apparent also from the omission of the definite article before God, as well as from the position of God in the sentence. None but the Son has really seen God as God, as He really is. What, then, did these men see?

Evidently an appearance of God in some form to their outward senses; perhaps the form of a man, seeing mention is made of his “feet.” The vision may have been too bright for human eyes to gaze upon fully, but it was a vision of God. Yet it was only a manifestation of God, for, although Moses was conversing with God, he yet said: “If I have found grace in thy sight, show me thy face.” Moses had been granted exceeding great and precious privileges in that he had been admitted into close communion with God, more so than any other member of the human race. But still unsatisfied he longed for more; so in v. 18 he asks to see the unveiled glory of God, that very thing which no man in the flesh can ever see and live; but, no, this cannot be. By referring to Exod. 33:18-23 we find God’s answer: “Thou canst not see my face…. thou shalt see my back parts, but my face shall not be seen.” (Num. 12:8 throws light upon the subject, if compared with Exod. 33:11.)

“The secret remained unseen; the longing unsatisfied; and the nearest approach to the beatific vision reached by him with whom God spake face to face, as friend with friend, was to be hidden in the cleft of the rock, to be made aware of an awful shadow, and to hear the voice of the unseen.”

2. THE PERSONALITY OF GOD: (Vs. Pantheism).

Pantheism maintains that this universe in its ever changing conditions is but the manifestation of the one ever changing universal substance which is God; thus all, everything is God, and God is everything; God is all, all is God. Thus God is identified with nature and not held to be independent of and separate from it. God is, therefore, a necessary but an unconscious force working in the world.

The Bearing of the Personality of God on the Idea of Religion.

True religion may be defined as the communion between two persons: God and man. religion is a personal relationship between God in heaven, and man on the earth. If God were not a person there could be no communion; if both God and man were one there could be no communion, and, consequently, no religion. An independent personal relationship on both sides is absolutely necessary to communion. Man can have no communion with an influence, a force, an impersonal something; nor can an influence have any moving or affection towards man. It is absolutely necessary to the true definition of religion that both God and man be persons. God is person, not force or influence.

a) Definition of Personality.

Personality exists where there is intelligence, mind, will, reason, individuality, self-consciousness, and self-determination. There must be not mere consciousness—for the beast has that—but self-consciousness. Nor is personality determination—for the beast has this, too, even though this determination be the result of influences from without—but self-determination, the power by which man from an act of his own free will determines his acts from within.

Neither corporeity nor substance, as we understand these words, are necessarily, if at all, involved in personality. There may be true personality without either or both of these.

b) Scripture Teaching on the Personality of God.

(In this connection it will Be well to refer to the Ontological Argument for the Existence of God, for which see p. 17.)

(1) Exod 3:14;—“I AM THAT I AM.”

This name is wonderfully significant. Its central idea is that of existence and personality. The words signify “I AM, I WAS, I SHALL BE,” so suggestively corresponding with the New Testament statement concerning God: “Who wast, and art, and art to come.”

All the names given to God in the Scripture denote personality. Here are some of them:

Jehovah—Jireh: The Lord will provide (Gen. 22:13, 14).

Jehovah-Rapha: The Lord that healeth (Exod. 15:26).

Jehovah-Nissi: The Lord our Banner (Exod. 17:8-15).

Jehovah-Shalom: The Lord our Peace (Judges 6:24).

Jehovah-Ra-ah: The Lord my Shepherd (Psa. 23:1).

Jehovah-Tsidkenu: The Lord our Righteousness (Jer. 23:6).

Jehovah-Shammah: The Lord is present (Ezek. 48:35).

Moreover, the personal pronouns ascribed to God prove personality: John 17:3, et al. “To know thee”—we cannot know an influence in the sense in which the word know is here used. Statement: All through the Scriptures names and personal pronouns are ascribed to God which undeniably prove that God is a Person.

(2) A sharp distinction is drawn in the Scriptures between the gods of heathen and the Lord God of Israel (See Jer. 10:10-16).

Note the context: vv. 3-9: Idols are things, not persons; they cannot walk, speak, do good or evil. God is wiser than the men who made these idols; if the idol-makers are persons, much more is God.

See the sharp contrast drawn between dead idols and the living, personal, true and only God: Acts 14:15; 1 Thess. 1:9; Psa. 94:9,

10.

Statement: God is to be clearly distinguished from things which have no life; he is a living Person.

(3) Attributes of personality are ascribed to God in the Scriptures.

God repents (Gen. 6:6}; grieves {Gen 6:6}; is angry {1 Kings 11:9); is jealous (Deut. 6:15); loves (Rev. 3:19); hates (Prov. 6:16).

Statement: God possesses the attributes of personality, and therefore is a Person.

(4) The relation which God bears to the Universe and to Men, as set forth in the Scriptures, can be explained only on the basis that God is a Person.

Deism maintains that God, while the Creator of the world, yet sustains no further relations to it. He made it just as the clock-maker makes a self-winding clock: makes it and then leaves it to run itself without any interference on His part. Such teaching as this finds no sanction in the Bible. What are God’s relations to the universe and to men?

aa) He is the Creator of the Universe and Man.

Gen. 1:1, 26; John. 1:1-3. These verses contain vital truths. The universe did not exist from eternity, nor was it made from existing matter. It did not proceed as an emanation from the infinite, but was summoned into being by the decree of God. Science, by disclosing to us the marvellous power and accuracy of natural law, compels us to believe in a superintending intelligence who is infinite. Tyndall said: “I have noticed that it is not during the hours of my clearness and vigor that the doctrine of material atheism commends itself to my mind.”

(In this connection the Arguments from Cause and Design, pp. 16 and 17, may be properly considered.)

Statement: The Creation of the Universe and Man proves the Personality of the Creator—God.

bb) God sustains certain relations to the Universe and Man which He has made.

Heb 1:3—“Uphold all things.” Col. 1:15-17—“By him all things hold together.” Psa. 104:27-30—All creatures wait upon Him for “their meat in due season.” Psa. 75:6, 7—“Promotion” among men, the putting down of one man and the setting up of another, is from the hand of God.

What do we learn from these scriptures regarding the relation of God to this universe, to man, and to all God’s creatures?

First. That all things are held together by Him; if not, this old world would go to pieces quickly. The uniformity and accuracy of natural law compels us to believe in a personal God who intelligently guides and governs the universe. Disbelief in this fact would mean utter confusion. Not blind chance, but a personal God is at the helm.

Second. That the physical supplies for all God’s creatures are in His hand: He feeds them all. What God gives we gather. If He withholds provision we die.

Third. That God has His hand in history, guiding and shaping the affairs of nations. Victor Hugo said: “Waterloo was God.”

Fourth. Consider with what detail God’s care is described: The sparrows, the lilies, the hairs of the head, the tears of His children, etc. See how these facts are clearly portrayed in the following scriptures: Matt. 6:28-30; 10:29, 30; Gen. 39:21, with 50:20; Dan. 1:9; Job 1:12.

Statement: The personality of God is shown by His active, interest and participation all things, even the smallest things, in the universe, the experience of man, and in the life of all His creatures.

THE UNITY OF GOD: (Vs. Polytheism).

There are three monotheistic religions in the world: Judaism, Christianity, and Mahommedanism. The second is a development of the first; the third is an outgrowth of both.

The doctrine of the Unity of God is held in contradistinction to Polytheism, which is belief in a multiplicity of gods; Tri-theism, which teaches that there are three Gods—that is, that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost are, specifically, three distinct Gods; and to Dualism, which teaches that there are two independent divine beings or eternal principles, the one good, and the other evil, as set forth especially in Gnostic systems, such as Parseeism.

a) The Scriptures Assert the Unity of God.

Deut. 6:4—“Hear, O Israel; the Lord our God is one Lord”; or, “The Lord our God, the Lord is one.” Isa. 44:6-8—“First…. last…. beside me there is no God.” Isa. 45:5—“There is none else, there is no God beside me.” 1 Tim. 2:5 “There is one God.” 1 Cor. 8:4—“There is none other God but one.”

That God is one, that there is no other, that He has no equal is the forceful testimony of above fifty passages in the Scriptures. The fundamental duty of life, namely, the devotion of the entire being to the Lord, is based upon the Unity of God: “The Lord….is one …. therefore thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart,” etc.

No other truth of the Scripture, particularly of the Old Testament, receives more prominence than that of the Unity of God. This truth is clearly pronounced also in the material universe; it is the introduction and conclusion of all scientific researches. Any other representation contradicts both creation and revelation. Its denial is a proper object for the ridicule of every thinking man, and of the disbelief of every orthodox Christian. Let this, then, be our first and necessary conclusion—that Deity, whether creating, inspiring, or otherwise manifesting itself, is one God; one, and no more.—_Cerdo._

A multiplication of Gods is a contradiction; there can be but one God. There can be but one absolutely perfect, supreme, and almighty Being. Such a Being cannot be multiplied, nor pluralized. There can be but one ultimate, but one all-inclusive, but one God.

Monotheism, then, not Tri-theism, is the doctrine set forth in the Scriptures. “If the thought that wishes to be orthodox had less tendency to become tri-theistic, the thought that claims to be free would be less Unitarian.”—_Moberly._
b) The Nature of the Divine Unity.

The doctrine of the Unity of God does not exclude the idea of a plurality of persons in the Godhead. Not that there are three persons in each person of the Godhead, if we use in both cases the term person in one and the same sense. We believe, therefore, that there are three persons in the Godhead, but one God. Anti-trinitarians represent the evangelical church as believing in three Gods, but this is not true; it believes in one God, but three persons in the Godhead.

(1) The Scriptural use of the word “One.”

Gen. 2:24—“And they two (husband and wife) shall be one flesh.” Gen. 11:6—“The people is one.” I Cor. 3:6-8—“He that planteth and he that watereth are one.” 12:13—“All baptized into one body.” John 17:22, 23—“That they may be one, even as we are one … that they may be made perfect in one.”

The word “one” in these scriptures is used in a collective sense; the unity here spoken of is a compound one, like unto that used in such expressions as “a cluster of grapes,” or “all the people rose as one man.” The unity of the Godhead is not simple but compound. The Hebrew word for “one” (yacheed) in the absolute sense, and which is used in such expressions as “the only one,” is never used to express the unity of the Godhead. On the contrary, the Hebrew word “echad,” meaning “one” in the sense of a compound unity, as seen in the above quoted scriptures, is the one used always to describe the divine unity.

(2) The Divine Name “God” is a plural word; plural pronouns are used of God.

The Hebrew word for God (Elohim) is used most frequently in the plural form. God often uses plural pronouns in speaking of Himself, e. g., Gen. 1:26—“Let us make man.” Isa. 6:8-“Who will go for us?” Gen. 3:22—Behold, man is become as “one of us.”

Some would say that the “us” in Gen. 1:26—“Let us make man,” refers to God’s consultation with the angels with whom He takes counsel before He does anything of importance; but Isa. 40:14—“But of whom took he counsel,” shows that such is not the case; and Gen. 1:27 contradicts this idea, for it repeats the statement “in the image of God,” not in the image of angels; also that “GOD created man in HIS OWN image, in the image of God (not angels) created he him.” The “us” of Gen. 1:26, therefore, is properly understood of plural majesty, as indicating the dignity and majesty of the speaker. The proper translation of this verse should be not “let us make,” but “we will make,” indicating the language of resolve rather than that of consultation.

4. THE DOCTRINE OF THE TRINITY: (Vs. Unitarianism).

The doctrine of the Trinity is, in its last analysis, a deep mystery that cannot be fathomed by the finite mind. That it is taught in the Scripture, however, there can be no reasonable doubt. It is a doctrine to be believed even though it cannot be thoroughly understood.

a) The Doctrine of the Trinity in the Old Testament.

This doctrine is not so much declared as intimated in the Old Testament. The burden of the Old Testament message seems to be the unity of God. Yet the doctrine of the Trinity is clearly intimated in a four-fold way:

First: In the plural names of the Deity; e. g., Elohim.

Second: Personal pronouns used of the Deity. Gen. 1:26; 11:7; Isa.6:8.

Third: The Theophanies, especially the “Angel of the Lord.” Gen.16 and 18.

Fourth: The work of the Holy Spirit. Gen. 1:2; Judges 6:34.

b) The Doctrine of the Trinity in the New Testament.

The doctrine of the Trinity is clearly taught in the New Testament; it is not merely intimated, as in the Old Testament, but explicitly declared. This is evident from the following:

First: The baptism of Christ: Matt 3:16, 17. Here the Father speaks from heaven; the Son is being baptized in the Jordan; and the Spirit descends in the form of a dove.

Second: In the Baptismal Formula: Matt. 28:19—“Baptizing them in the name (sing.) of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.” Third: The Apostolic Benediction: 2 Cor. 13:14—“The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ….love of God…..communion of the Holy Ghost.”

Fourth: Christ Himself teaches it in John 14:16—”I will pray the Father… He will give you another Comforter.”

Fifth: The New Testaffignt sets forth:

A Father who is God, Rom. 1:7. A son who is God, Heb. 1:8. A Holy Spirit who is God, Acts 5:3, 4.

The whole is summed up in the words of Boardman: The Father is all the fulness of the Godhead invisible, John 1:18; the Son is all the fulness of Godhead manifested, John 1:4-18; the Spirit is all the fulness of the Godhead acting immediately upon the creature, 1 Cor. 2:9, 10.

III. THE ATTRIBUTES OF GOD:

It is difficult to clearly distinguish between the attributes and the nature of God. It is maintained by some that such a division ought not to be made; that these qualities of God which we call attributes are in reality part of His nature and essence. Whether this be exactly so or not, our purpose in speaking of the attributes of God is for convenience in the study of the doctrine of God.

It has been customary to divide the attributes of God into two classes: the Natural, and the Moral. The Natural attributes are Omniscience, Omnipotence, Omnipresence, Eternity; the Moral attributes: Holiness, Righteousness, Faithfulness, Mercy and Loving-kindness, and Love.

1. THE NATURAL ATTRIBUTES:

a) The Omniscience of God.

God Is a Spirit, and as such has knowledge. He is a perfect Spirit, and as such has perfect knowledge. By Omniscience is meant that God knows all things and is absolutely perfect in knowledge.

(1) Scriptures setting forth the fact of God’s Omniscience.

In general: Job 11:7, 8—“Canst thou by searching find out God? Canst thou find out the Almighty unto perfection?” Job’s friends professed to have discovered the reason for his affliction, for, forsooth, had they not found out the secrets of the divine wisdom unto perfection. No, such is beyond their human, finite ken. Isa. 40:28—“There is no searching of his understanding.” Jacob’s captive condition might lead him to lose trust and faith in God. But Jacob has not seen all God’s plans—no man has. Job, 37:16—“The wondrous works of him which is perfect in knowledge.” Could Job explain the wonders of the natural phenomena around him? Much less the purposes and judgments of God. Psa. 147:5—“His understanding is infinite.” Of His understanding there is no number, no computation. Israel is not lost sight of. He who can number and name and call the stars is able also to call each of them by name even out of their captivity. His knowledge is not to be measured by ours. 1 John 3:20—“God knoweth all things.” Our hearts may pass over certain things, and fail to see some things that should be confessed. God, however, sees all things. Rom. 11:33—“How unsearchable are his judgments and his ways past finding out.” The mysterious purposes and decrees of God touching man and his salvation are beyond all human comprehension.

In detail, and by way of illustration:

aa) His knowledge is absolutely comprehensive:

Prov. 15:3—“The eyes of the Lord are in every place, keeping watch upon the evil and the good.” How could He reward and punish otherwise? Not one single thing occurring in any place escapes His knowledge. 5:21—“For the ways of man are before the eyes of the Lord, and he pondereth all his goings.” We may have habits hidden from our fellow creatures, but not from God.

bb) God has a perfect knowledge of all that is in nature:

Psa. 147:4—“He telleth the number of the stars; he calleth them all by their names.” Man cannot (Gen. 15:5). How, then, can Israel say, “My way is hid from the Lord?” Cf. Isa. 40:26, 27. Matt. 10:29—“One … sparrow shall not fall to the ground without your Father.” Much less would one of His children who perchance might be killed for His name’s sake, fall without His knowledge.

cc) God has a perfect knowledge of all that transpires in human experience:

Prov. 5:21—“For the ways of man are before the eyes of the Lord, and he pondereth all his goings.” All a man’s doings are weighed by God. How this should affect his conduct! Psa. 139:2, 3—“Thou knowest my downsitting and mine uprising, thou understandest my thought afar off. Thou compassest my path and my lying down, and art acquainted with all my ways.” Before our thoughts are fully developed, our unspoken sentences, the rising feeling in our hearts, our activity, our resting, all that we do from day to day is known and sifted by God. v. 4—“There is not a word in my tongue, but lo, O Lord, thou knowest it altogether.” Not only thoughts and purposes, but words spoken, idle, good, or bad. Exod. 3:7—“I have seen the affliction….heard the cry: know the sorrows of my people which are in Egypt.” The tears and grief which they dared not show to their taskmasters, God saw and noted. Did God know of their trouble in Egypt? It seemed to them as though He did not. But He did. Matt. 10:29, 30—“But the very hairs of your head are all numbered.” What minute knowledge is this! Exod 3:19—“And I am sure that the king of Egypt will not let you go, no, not by a mighty hand.” Here is intimate knowledge as to what a single individual will do. Isa. 48:18—“O that thou hadst harkened to my commandments! then had thy peace have been as a river,” etc. God knows what our lives would have been if only we had acted and decided differently.

dd) God has a perfect knowledge of all that transpires in human history.

With what precision are national changes and destinies foretold and depicted in Dan. 2 and 8! Acts 15:18—“Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world (ages).” In the context surrounding this verse are clearly set forth the religious changes that were to characterize the generations to come, the which have been so far literally, though not fully, fulfilled.

ee) God knows—from, all eternity to all eternity what will take place.

The ominiscience of God is abduced as the proof that He alone is God, especially as contrasted with the gods (idols) of the heathen: Isa. 48:5-8—“I have even from the beinning declared it unto thee; before it came to pass I showed it thee…..I have showed thee new things from this time, even hidden things,” etc. 46:9, 10—“I am God….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.” Here God is announcing to His prophets things that are to occur in the future which it is impossible for the human understanding to know or reach. There is no past, present, future with God. Everything is one great living present. We are like a man standing by a river in a low place, and who, consequently, can see that part of the river only that passes by him; but he who is aloof in the air may see the whole course of the river, how it rises, and how it runs. Thus is it with God.

(2) Certain problems in connection with the doctrine of the Omniscienc of God.

How the divine intelligence can comprehend so vast and multitudinous and exhaustless a number of things must forever surpass our comprehension. “O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out!” (Rom. 11:33). “There is no searching of his understanding; it is beyond human computation.” We must expect, therefore, to stand amazed in the presence of such matchless wisdom, and find problems in connection therewith which must for the time, at least, remain unsolved.

Again, we must not confound the foreknowledge of God with His foreordination. The two things are, in a sense, distinct. The fact that God foreknows a thing makes that thing certain but not necessary. His foreordination is based upon His foreknowledge. Pharaoh was responsible for the hardening of his heart even though that hardening process was foreknown and foretold by God. The actions of men are considered certain but not necessary by reason of the divine foreknowledge.

b) The Omnipotence of God.

The Omnipotence of God is that attribute by which He can bring to pass everything which He wills. God’s power admits of no bounds or limitations. God’s declaration of His intention is the pledge of the thing intended being carried out. “Hath he said, and shall he not do it?”

(1) Scriptural declarations of the fact; In general:

Job 42:2.(R. V.)—“I know that thou canst do everything (all things), and that no purpose of thine can be restrained.” The mighty review of all God’s works as it passes before Job (context) brings forth this confession: “There is no resisting thy might, and there is no purpose thou canst not carry out.” Gen. 18:14—“Is anything too hard for the Lord?” What had ceased to be possible by natural means comes to pass by supernatural means.

(2) Scriptural declaration of the fact; In detail:

aa) In the world of nature:

Gen. 1:1-3—“God created the heaven and the earth. And God said, Let there be light, and there was light.” Thus “he spake and it was done. He commanded and it stood fast.” He does not need even to give His hand to the work; His word is sufficient. Psa. 107:25-29—“He raiseth the stormy wind … he maketh the storm calm.” “Even the winds and the sea obey him.” God’s slightest word, once uttered, is a standing law to which all nature must absolutely conform. Nahum 1:5, 6—“The mountains quake at him … the hills melt … the earth is burned at his presence … the rocks are thrown down by him.” If such is His power how shall Assyria withstand it? This is God’s comforting message to Israel. Everything in the sky, in sea, on earth is absolutely subject to His control.

bb) In the experience of mankind:

How wonderfully this is illustrated in the experience of Nebuchadnezzar, Dan. 4; and in the conversion of Saul, Acts 9; as well as in the case of Pharaoh, Exod. 4:11. James 4:12-15—” … For that ye ought to say, If the Lord will, we shall live and do this or that.” All human actions, whether present or future, are dependent upon the will and power of God. These things are in God’s, not in man’s, power. See also the parable of the Rich Fool, Luke 12:16-21.

cc) The heavenly inhabitants are subject to His will and word:

Dan. 4:35 (R. V.)—“He doeth according to his will in the army of heaven.” Heb. 1:14—“Are they (angels) not all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation?” It has been said that angels are beings created by the power of God for some specific act of service, and that after that act of service is rendered they pass out of existence.

dd) Even Satan is under the control of God

Satan has no power over any of God’s children saving as God permits him to have. This fact is clearly established in the case of Job (1:12 and 2:6). and Peter (Luke 22:31,32), in which we are told that Satan had petitioned God that he might sift the self-righteous patriarch and the impulsive apostle. Finally Satan is to be forever bound with a great chain (Rev. 20:2). God can set a bar to the malignity of Satan just as he can set a bar to the waves of the sea.

c) The Omnipresence of God.

By the Omnipresence of God is meant that God is everywhere present. This attribute is closely connected with the omniscience and omnipotence of God, for if God is everywhere present He is everywhere active and possesses full knowledge of all that transpires in every place.

This does not mean that God is everywhere present in a bodily sense, nor even in the same sense; for there is a sense in which He may be in heaven, His dwelling place, in which He cannot be said to be elsewhere. We must guard against the pantheistic idea which claims that God is everything, while maintaining the Scriptural doctrine that He is everywhere present in all things. Pantheism emphasizes the omnipresent activity of God, but denies His personality. Those holding the doctrine of pantheism make loud claims to philosophic ability and high intellectual training, but is it not remarkable that it is in connection with this very phase of the doctrine of God that the Apostle Paul says “they became fools”? (Rom. 1.) God is everywhere and in every place; His center is everywhere; His circumference nowhere. But this presence is a spiritual and not a material presence; yet it is a real presence.

(1) Scriptural statement of the fact.

Jer. 23:23, 24-“Am I a God at hand, saith the Lord, and not a God afar off? Can any hide himself in secret places that I shall not see him? saith the Lord. Do not I fill heaven and earth? saith the Lord.” Did the false prophets think that they could hide their secret crimes from God? Or that He could not pursue them into foreign countries? Or that He knew what was transpiring in heaven only and not upon the earth, and even in its most distant corners? It was false for them to thus delude themselves—their sins would be detected and punished (Psa. 10:1-14).

Psa. 139:7-12—“Whither shall I go from thy Spirit, or whither shall I flee from thy presence,” etc. How wondrously the attributes of God are grouped in this psalm. In vv. 1-6 the psalmist speaks of the omniscience of God: God knows him through and through. In vv. 13-19 it is the omnipotence of God which overwhelms the psalmist. The omnipresence of God is set forth in vv. 7-12. The psalmist realizes that he is never out of the sight of God any more than he is outside of the range of His knowledge and power. God is in heaven; “Hell is naked before Him”; souls in the intermediate state are fully known to Him (cf. Job 26:2; Jonah 2:2); the darkness is as the light to Him. Job 22:12-14—“Is not God in the height of heaven? … . Can he judge through the dark cloud? Thick clouds are a covering to him that he seeth not,” etc. All agreed that God displayed His presence in the heaven, but Job had inferred from this that God could not know and did not take notice of such actions of men as were hidden behind the intervening clouds. Not that Job was atheistic; no, but probably denied to God the attribute of omnipresence and omniscience. Acts 17:24-28—“For in him we live, and move, and have our being.” Without His upholding hand we must perish; God is our nearest environment. From these and many other scriptures we are clearly taught that God is everywhere present and acting; there is no place where God is not.

This does not mean that God is everywhere present in the same sense. For we are told that He is in heaven, His dwelling-place (1 Kings 8:30); that Christ is at His right hand in heaven (Eph. 1:20); that God’s throne is in heaven (Rev. 21:2; Isa. 66:1).

We may summarize the doctrine of the Trinity thus: God the Father is specially manifested in heaven; God the Son has been specially manifested on the earth; God the Spirit is manifested everywhere.

Just as the soul is present in every part of the body so God is present in every part of the world.

(2) Some practical inferences from this doctrine.

First, of Comfort: The nearness of God to the believer. “Speak to Him then for He listens. And spirit with spirit can meet; Closer is He than breathing, And nearer than hands or feet.”

“God is never so far off, As even to be near; He is within. Our spirit is the home He holds most dear. To think of Him as by our side is almost as untrue, As to remove His shrine beyond those skies of starry blue.”—_Faber._ The omnipresence is not only a detective truth—it is protective also. After dwelling on this great and awful attribute in Psalm 139, the psalmist, in vv. 17, 18, exclaims: “How precious are thy thoughts to me….. When I awake I am still with thee.” By this is meant that God stands by our side to help, and as One who loves and understands us (Matt.

28:20).

Second, of Warning: “As in the Roman empire the whole world was one great prison to a malefactor, and in his flight to the most distant lands the emperor could track him, so under the government of God no sinner can escape the eye of the judge.” Thus the omnipresence of God is detective as well as protective. “Thou God seest me,” should serve as warning to keep us from sin.

d) The Eternity and Immutability of God.

The word eternal is used in two senses in the Bible: figuratively, as denoting existence which may have a beginning, but will have no end, e. g., angels, the human soul; literally, denoting an existence which has neither beginning nor ending, like that of God. Time has past, present, future; eternity has not. Eternity is infinite duration without any beginning, end, or limit—an ever abiding present. We can conceive of it only as duration indefinitely extended from the present moment in two directions—as to the past and as to the future. “One of the deaf and dumb pupils in the institution of Paris, being desired to express his idea of the eternity of the Deity, replied: ‘It is duration, without beginning or end; existence, without bounds or dimension; present, without past or future. His eternity is youth, without infancy or old age; life, without birth or death; today, without yesterday or tomorrow.’”

By the Immutability of God is meant that God’s nature is absolute|y unchangeable. It is not possible that He should possess one attribute at one time that He does not possess at another. Nor can there be any change in the Deity for better or for worse. God remains forever the same. He is without beginning and without end; the self-existent “I am”; He remains forever the same, and unchangeable.

(1) Scriptural statement of the fact: The Eternity of God

Hab. 1:12—“Art thou not from everlasting, O Lord my God, mine Holy One?” Chaldea had threatened to annihilate Israel. The prophet cannot believe it possible, for has not God eternal purposes for Israel? Is He not holy? How, then, can evil triumph? Psa. 90:2—“Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever thou hadst formed the earth and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting, thou art God.” Short and transitory is the life of man; with God it is otherwise. The perishable nature of man is here compared with the imperishable nature of God. Psa. 102:24-27—“I said, O my God, take me not away in the midst of my days: thy years are throughout all generations. Of old thou hast laid the foundations of the earth: and the heavens are the work of thy hands. They shall perish, but thou shalt endure; yea, all of them shall wax old like a garment; as a vesture shalt thou change them, and they shall be changed. But thou art the same, and thy years shall have no end.” With the perishable nature of the whole material creation the psalmist contrasts the imperishable nature of God. Exod. 3:14—“And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM.” The past, present and future lies in these words for the name of Jehovah. Rev. 1:8—“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.”

(2) Scriptural statement of the Immutability of God:

Mal 3:6—“1 am the Lord, I change not.” Man’s hope lies in that fact, as the context here shows Man had changed in his life and purpose toward God, and if God, like man, had changed, man would have been destroyed. James 1:17—“The Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning.” There is no change—in the sense of the degree or intensity of light such as is manifested in the heavenly bodies. Such lights are constantly varying and changing; not so with God. There is no inherent, indwelling, possible change in God. 1 Sam. 15:29.—“And also the Strength of Israel will not lie nor repent: for he is not a man, that he should repent.” From these scriptures we assert that God, in His nature and character, is absolutely without change.

Does God Repent?

What, then, shall we say with regard to such scriptures as Jonah 3:10 and Gen. 6:6—“And God repented of the evil, that he said he would do unto them.” “And it repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.” In reply we may say that God does not change, but threatens that men may change. “The repentent attitude in God does not involve any real change in the character and purposes of God. He ever hates the sin and ever pities and loves the sinner; that is so both before and after the sinner’s repentance. Divine repentance is therefore the same principle acting differently in altered circumstances. If the prospect of punishment answers the same purpose as that intended by the punishment itself, then there is no inconsistency in its remission, for punishment is not an end, it is only a means to goodness, to the reign of the law of righteousness.” When God appears to be displeased with anything, or orders it differently from what we expected, we say, after the manner of men, that He repents. God’s attitude towards the Ninevites had not changed, but they had changed; and because they had changed from sin unto righteousness, God’s attitude towards them and His intended dealings with them as sinners must of necessity change, while, of course, God’s character had in no wise changed with respect to these people, although His dealings with them had. So that we may say that God’s character never changes, but His dealings with men change as they change from ungodliness to godliness and from disobedience unto obedience. “God’s immutability is not that of the stone, that has no internal experience, but rather that of the column of mercury that rises and falls with every change in the temperature of the surrounding atmosphere. When a man bicycling against the wind turns about and goes with the wind instead of going against it, the wind seems to change, although it is blowing just as it was before.” —_Strong_.

2. THE MORAL ATTRIBUTES.

a) The Holiness of God.

If there is any difference in importance in the attributes of God, that of His Holiness seems to occupy the first place. It is, to say the least, the one attribute which God would have His people remember Him by more than any other. In the visions of Himself which God granted men in the Scriptures the thing that stood out most prominent was the divine holiness. This is clearly seen by referring to the visions of Moses, Job, and Isaiah. Some thirty times does the Prophet Isaiah speak of Jehovah as “the Holy One,” thus indicating what feature of those beatific visions had most impressed him.

The holiness of God is the message of the entire Old Testament. To the prophets God was the absolutely Holy One; the One with eyes too pure to behold evil; the One swift to punish iniquity. In taking a photograph, the part of the body which we desire most to see is not the hands or feet, but the face. So is it with our vision of God. He desires us to see not His hand and finger, denoting His power and skill, nor even His throne as indicating His majesty. It is His holiness by which He desires to be remembered as that is the attribute which most glorifies Him. Let us bear this fact in mind as we study this attribute of the divine nature. It is just this vision of God that we need today when the tendency to deny the reality or the awfulness of sin is so prevalent. Our view of the necessity of the atonement will depend very largely upon our view of the holiness of God. Light views of God and His holiness will produce light views of sin and the atonement.

(1) Scriptural statements setting forth the fact of God’s Holiness.

Isa. 57:15—“Thus saith the high and lofty One that inhabiteth eternity, whose name is Holy; I dwell in the high and holy place.” Psa. 99:9—“Exalt the Lord our God, and worship at his holy hill: for the Lord our God is holy.” Hab. 1:13—“Thou art of purer eyes than to behold evil, and canst not look on iniquity.” 1 Pet. 1:15, 16 —“But as he which hath called you is holy, so be ye holy in all manner of conversation. Because it is written, Be ye holy: for I am holy.” God’s personal name is holy. John 17:11—“Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me.” Christ here contemplates the Father as the Holy One, as the source and agent of that which He desires for His disciples, namely, holiness of heart and life, being kept from the evil of this world.

Is it not remarkable that this attribute of holiness is ascribed to each of the three persons of the Trinity: God the Father, is the Holy One of Israel (Isa. 41:14); God the Son is the Holy One (Acts 3:14); God the Spirit is called the Holy Spirit (Eph. 4:30).

(2) The Scriptural meaning of Holiness as applied to God.

Job 34:10—“Be it far from God, that he should do wickedness; and from the Almighty that he should commit iniquity.” An evil God, one that could commit evil would be a contradiction in terms, an impossible, inconceivable idea. Job seemed to doubt that the principle on which the universe was conducted was one of absolute equity. He must know that God is free from all evil-doing. However hidden the meaning of His dealings, He is always just. God never did, never will do wrong to any of His creatures; He will never punish wrongly. Men may, yea, often do; God never does. Lev. 11:43-45—“Ye shall not make yourselves abominable with any creeping thing that creepeth, neither shall ye make yourselves unclean with them, that ye should be defiled thereby. For I am the Lord your God; ye shall therefore sanctify yourselves, and ye shall be holy; for I am holy: neither shall ye defile yourselves with any manner of creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth…. Ye shall therefore be holy, for I am holy.” This means that God is absolutely clean and pure and free from all defilement.

The construction of the Tabernacle, with its holy and most holy place into which the high priest alone entered once a year; the Ten Commandments, with their moral categories; the laws of clean and unclean animals and things—all these speak to us in unmistakable terms as to what is meant by holiness as applied to God.

Two things, by way of definition, may be inferred from these Scriptures: first, negatively, that God is entirely apart from all that is evil and from all that defiles both in Himself and in relation to all His creatures; second and positively, by the holiness of God is meant the consummate holiness, perfection, purity, and absolute sanctity of His nature. There is absolutely nothing unholy in Him. So the Apostle John declares: “God is light, and in him is no darkness at all.”

(3) The manifestation of God’s Holiness.

Prov. 15:9, 26—“The way of the wicked is an abomination unto the Lord. The thoughts of the wicked are an abomination unto the Lord.” God hates sin, and is its uncompromising foe. Sin is a vile and detestable thing to God. Isa. 59:1, 2—“Behold, the Lord’s hand is not shortened, that it cannot save; neither his ear heavy, that it cannot hear. But your iniquities have separated between you and your God, and your sins have hid his face from you, that he will not hear.” Israel’s sin had raised a partition wall. The infinite distance between the sinner and God is because of sin. The sinner and God are at opposite poles of the moral universe. This in answer to Israel’s charge of God’s inability. From these two scriptures it is clear that God’s holiness manifests itself in the hatred of sin and the separation of the sinner from himself.

Herein lies the need of the atonement, whereby this awful distance is bridged over. This is the lesson taught by the construction of the Tabernacle as to the division into the holy place and the most holy place.

Prov. 15:9—“But he loveth him that followeth after righteousness.” John 3:16—“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son,” etc. Here God’s holiness is seen in that He loves righteousness in the life of His children to such a degree that He gave His only begotten Son to secure it. The Cross shows how much God loves holiness. The Cross stands for God’s holiness before even His love. For Christ died not merely for our sins, but in order that He might provide us with that righteousness of life which God loves. “He died that we might be forgiven; he died to make us good.” Do we love holiness to the extent of sacrificing for it?

For other manifestations see under Righteousness and Justice of God.

(4) Practical deductions from the doctrine of God’s Holiness.

First, we should approach God with “reverence and godly fear” (Heb. 12:28). In the story of Moses’ approach to the burning bush, the smiting of the men at Bethshemesh, the boundary set about Mt. Sinai, we are taught to feel our own unworthiness. There is too much hilarity in our approach unto God. Eccl. 5:1-3 inculcates great care in our address to God.

Second, we shall have right views of sin when we get right views of God’s holiness. Isaiah, the holiest man in all Israel, was cast down at the sight of his own sin after he had seen the vision of God’s holiness. The same thing is true of Job (40:3-4; 42:4-5). We confess sin in such easy and familiar terms that it has almost lost its terror for us.

Third, that approach to a holy God must be through the merits of Christ, and on the ground of a righteousness which is Christ’s and which naturally we do not possess. Herein lies the need of the atonement.

b) The Righteousness and Justice of God.

In a certain sense these attributes are but the manifestation of God’s holiness. It is holiness as manifested in dealing with the sons of men. Holiness has to do more particularly with the character of God in itself, while in Righteousness and Justice that character is expressed in the dealings of God with men. Three things may be said in the consideration of the Righteousness and Justice of God: first, there is the imposing of righteousness laws and demands, which may he called legislative holiness, and may he known as the Righteousness of God; second, there is the executing of the penalties attached to those laws, which may be called judicial holiness; third, there is the sense in which the attributes of the Righteousness and Justice of God may be regarded as the actual carrying out of the holy nature of God in the government of the world. So that in the Righteousness of God we have His love of holiness, and in the Justice of God, His hatred of sin.

Again Righteousness, as here used, has reference to the very nature of God as He is in Himself—that attribute which leads God always to do right. Justice, as an attribute of God, is devoid of all passion or caprice; it is vindicative not vindictive. And so the Righteousness and Justice of the God of Israel was made to stand out prominently as contrasted with the caprice of the heathen gods.

(1) Scriptural statement of the fact.

Psalm 116:5—“Gracious is the Lord, and righteous; yea, our God is merciful.” The context here shows that it is because of this fact that God listens to men, and because having promised to hear He is bound to keep His promises. Ezra 9:15—“0 Lord God of Israel, thou art righteous.” Here the Righteousness of Jehovah is acknowledged in the punishment of Israel’s sins. Thou art just, and thou hast brought us into the state in which we are today. Psa. 145:17—“The Lord is righteous in all his ways, and holy in all his works.” This is evident in the rewards He gives to the upright, in lifting up the lowly, and in abundantly blessing the good, pure, and true. Jer. 12:1—“Righteous art thou, O Lord, when I plead with thee.” That is to say, “If I were to bring a charge against Thee I should not be able to convict Thee of injustice, even though I be painfully exercised over the mysteries of Thy providence.”

These scriptures clearly set forth not only the fact that God is righteous and just, but also define these attributes. Here we are told that God, in His government of the world, does always that which is suitable, straight, and right.

(2) How the Righteousness and Justice of God is revealed.

In two ways: first, in punishing the wicked: retributive justice, second, in rewarding the righteous: remunerative justice.

aa) In the punishment of the wicked.

Psa. 11:4-7—“The Lord is in his holy temple, the Lord’s throne is in heaven: his eyes behold, his eyelids try, the children of men. The Lord trieth the righteous; but the wicked and him that loveth violence his soul hateth. Upon the wicked he shall rain snares, fire and brimstone and an horrible tempest. This shall be the portion of their cup.” This is David’s reply to his timid advisers. Saul may reign upon the earth and do wickedly, but God reigns from heaven and will do right. He sees who does right and who does wrong. And there is that in His nature which recoils from the evil that He sees, and will lead Him ultimately to punish it. There is such a thing as the wrath of God. It is here described. Whatever awful thing the description in this verse may mean for the wicked, God grant that we may never know. In Exod. 9:23-27 we have the account of the plague of hail, following which are these words: “And Pharaoh sent…for Moses and Aaron, and said unto them, I have sinned this time: the Lord is righteous, and I and my people are wicked.” Pharaoh here acknowledges the perfect justice of God in punishing him for his sin and rebellion. He knew that he had deserved it all, even though cavillers today say there was injustice with God in His treatment of Pharaoh. Pharaoh himself certainly did not think so. Dan. 9:12-14 and Rev. 16:5, 6 bring out the same thought. How careful sinners ought to be not to fall into the hands of the righteous Judge! No sinner at last will be able to say, “I did not deserve this punishment.”

bb) In forgiving the sins of the penitent.

1 John 1:9 (R. V.)—“If we confess our sins, he is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.” Ordinarily, the forgiveness of sin is associated with the mercy, love, and compassion of God, and not with His righteousness and justice. This verse assures us that if we confess our sins, the righteousness and justice of God is our guarantee for forgiveness—God cannot but forgive and cleanse us from all sin.

cc) In keeping His word and promise to His children.

Neh. 9:7, 8—“Thou art the Lord the God, who didst choose Abram…and madest a covenant with him to give the land of the Canaanites…to his seed, and hast performed thy words; for thou art righteous.” We need to recall the tremendous obstacles which stood in the way of the fulfillment of this promise, and yet we should remember the eleventh chapter of Hebrews. When God gives His word, and makes a promise, naught in heaven, on earth, or in hell can make that promise void. His righteousness is the guarantee of its fulfillment.

dd) In showing Himself to be the vindicator of His people from all their enemies.

Psa. 129:1-4—“Many a time have they afflicted me…yet they have not prevailed against me. The Lord is righteous: he hath cut asunder the cords of the wicked.” Sooner or later, God’s people will triumph gloriously as David triumphed over Saul. Even in this life God will give us rest from our enemies; and there shall assuredly come a day when we shall be “where the wicked cease from troubling, and the weary are at rest.”

ee) In the rewarding of the righteous.

Heb. 6:10—“For God is not unrighteous to forget your work and labor of love, which ye have showed towards his name, in that ye have ministered unto the saints, and do minister.” Those who had shown their faith by their works would not now be allowed to lose that faith. The very idea of divine justice implies that the use of this grace, thus evidenced, will be rewarded, not only by continuance in grace, but their final perseverance and reward. 2 Tim. 4:8—“Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, will give me at that day: and not to me only, but unto all them that love hiss appearing.” The righteous Judge will not allow the faithful believer to go unrewarded. He is not like the unrighteous judges of Rome and the Athenian games. Here we are not always rewarded, but some time we shall receive full reward for all the good that we have done. The righteousness of God is the guarantee of all this.

c) The Mercy and Loving-kindness of God.

By these attributes is meant, in general, the kindness, goodness, and compassion of God, the love of God in its relation to both the obedient and the disobedient sons of men. The dew drops on the thistle as well as on the rose.

More specifically: Mercy is usually exercised in connection with guilt; it is that attribute of God which leads Him to seek the welfare, both temporal and spiritual, of sinners, even though at the cost of great sacrifice on His part. “But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us…God commendeth his love towards us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.” (Eph. 2:4; Rom. 5:8.)

Loving-kindness is that attribute of God which leads Him to bestow upon His obedient children His constant and choice blessing. “He that spared not his own Son, but freely delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him freely give us all things?” (Rom.

8:32.)

(I) Scriptural statement of the fact.

Psa. 103:8—“The Lord is merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and plenteous in mercy.” For, instead of inflicting pain, poverty, death—which are the wages of sin—God has spared our lives, given us health, increased our blessings and comforts, and given us the life of the ages. Deut. 4:31—”(For the Lord thy God is a merciful God); he will not forsake thee, neither destroy thee, nor forget the covenant of thy fathers.” God is ready to accept the penitence of Israel, even now, if only it be sincere. Israel will return and find God only because He is merciful and does not let go of her. It is His mercy that forbids his permanently forsaking His people. Psa. 86:15—“But thou, O Lord, art a God full of compassion, and gracious, longsuffering, and plenteous in mercy and truth.” It was because God had so declared Himself to be of this nature that David felt justified in feeling that God would not utterly forsake him in his time of great stress and need. The most striking illustration of the Mercy and Loving-kindness of God is set forth in the parable of the Prodigal Son (Luke 15:11-32). Here we have not only the welcome awaiting the wanderer, but also the longing for his return on the part of the anxious and loving father.

(1) How the Mercy and Loving-kindness of God are manifested.

In general: We must not forget that God is absolutely sovereign in the bestowal of His blessings—“Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy” (Rom. 9:18). We should also remember that God wills to have mercy on all His creatures—“For thou, Lord, art good, and ready to forgive, and plenteous in mercy to all them that call upon thee” (Psa. 86:5).

aa) Mercy—towards sinners in particular.

Luke 6:36—“Be ye therefore merciful, as your Father also is merciful.” Matt. 5:45—“That ye may be the children, of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sendeth rain on the just and the unjust.” Here even the impenitent and hard-hearted are the recipients of God’s mercy; all sinners, even the impenitent are included in the sweep of His mercy.

Isa. 55:7—“Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts, and let him return unto the Lord: and he will have mercy upon him; and to our God, for he will abundantly pardon.” God’s mercy is a holy mercy; it will by no means protect sin, but anxiously awaits to pardon it. God’s mercy is a city of refuge for the penitent, but by no means a sanctuary for the presumptuous. See Prov. 28:13, and Psa. 51:1. God’s mercy is here seen in pardoning the sin of those who do truly repent. We speak about “trusting in the mercy of the Lord.” Let us forsake sin and then trust in the mercy of the Lord and we shall find pardon.

2 Pet. 3:9—“The Lord…is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.” Neh. 9:31—“Nevertheless for thy great mercies’ sake thou didst not utterly consume them; for thou art a gracious and merciful God.” Here is mercy manifested in forbearance with sinners. If God should have dealt with them in justice they would have been cut off long before. Think of the evil, the impurity, the sin that God must see. How it must disgust Him. Then remember that He could crush it all in a moment. Yet He does not. He pleads; He sacrifices to show His love for sinners. Surely it is because of the Lord’s mercies that we are not consumed, and because His compassions fail not. Yet, beware lest we abuse this goodness, for our God is also a consuming fire. “Behold, the goodness and the severity of God.” The Mercy of God is here shown in His loving forbearance with sinners.

bb) Loving-kindness towards the saints, in particular.

Psa. 32:10—“But he that trusteth in the Lord, mercy shall compass him about.” The very act of trust on the part of the believer moves the heart of God to protect him just as in the case of a parent and his child. The moment I throw myself on God I am enveloped in His mercy—mercy is my environment, like a fiery wall it surrounds me, without a break through which an evil can creep. Besistance surrounds us with “sorrow”; but trust surrounds us with “mercy.” In the center of that circle of mercy sits and rests the trusting soul.

Phil. 2:27—“For indeed he was sick nigh unto death; but God had mercy on him; and not on him only, but on me also, lest I should have sorrow upon sorrow.” Here God’s loving-kindness is seen in healing up His sick children. Yet remember that “He hath mercy on whom He will have mercy.” Not every sick child of God is raised. Psa. 6:4—“Have mercy upon me, O Lord, for I am weak: O Lord, heal me…Deliver my soul for thy mercies’ sake (v. 4).” The psalmist asks God to illustrate His mercy in restoring to him his spiritual health. From these scriptures we see that the mercy of God is revealed in healing His children of bodily and spiritual sickness.

Psa. 21:7—“For the king trusteth in the Lord, and through the mercy of the most High he shall not be moved.” David feels that, because he trusts in the mercy of the Lord, his throne, whatever may dash against it, is perfectly secure. Is not this true also of the believer’s eternal security? More to the mercy of God than to the perseverance of the saints is to be attributed the eternal security of the believer. “He will hold me fast.”

d) The Love of God.

Christianity is really the only religion that sets forth the Supreme Being as Love. The gods of the heathen are angry, hateful beings, and are in constant need of appeasing.

(1) Scriptural statements of the fact.

1 John 4:8-16—“God is love.” “God is light”; “God is Spirit”; “God is love.” Spirit and Light are expressions of God’s essential nature. Love is the expression of his personality corresponding to His nature. It is the nature of God to love. He dwells always in the atmosphere of love. Just how to define or describe the love of God may be difficult if not impossible. It appears from certain scriptures (1 John 3:16; John 3:16) that the love of God is of such a nature that it betokens a constant interest in the physical and spiritual welfare of His creatures as to lead Him to make sacrifices beyond human conception to reveal that love.

(2) The objects of God’s Love.

aa) Jesus Christ, God’s only-begotten Son, is the special object of His Love.

Matt. 3:17—“This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.” Also Matt. 17:5; Luke 20:13. Jesus Christ shares the love of the Father in a unique sense, just as He is His Son in a unique sense. He is especially “My chosen.” “The One in whom my soul delighteth,” “My beloved Son,”—literally: the Son of mine, the beloved. And we can readily understand how that He who did the will of God perfectly should thus become the special object of the Father’s love. Of course, if the love of God is eternal, as is the nature of God, which must be the case, then, that love must have had an eternal object to love. So Christ, in addressing the Father, says: “Thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world.”

bb) Believers in His Son, Jesus Christ, are special objects of God’s Love.

John 16:27—“For the Father himself loveth you, because ye have loved me, and have believed that I came out from God.” 14:21-23—“He that loveth me shall be loved of my Father. …If a man love me…my Father will love him.” 17:23—“And hast loved them, as thou hast loved me.” Do we really believe these words? We are not on the outskirts of God’s love, but in its very midst. There stands Christ right in the very midst of that circle of the Father’s love; then He draws us to that spot, and, as it were, disappears, leaving us standing there bathed in the same loving-kindness of the Father in which He Himself had basked.

cc) God loves the world of sinners and ungodly men.

John 3:16—“For God so loved the world” was a startling truth to Nicodemus in his narrow exclusivism. God loved not the Jew only, but also the Gentile; not a part of the world of men, but every man in it, irrespective of his moral character. For “God commendeth his love towards us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us” (Rom. 5:8). This is wonderful when we begin to realize what a world in sin is. The love of God is broader than the measure of man’s mind. God desires the salvation of all men (1 Tim. 2:4).

(3) How the Love of God reveals Itself.

aa) In making infinite sacrifice for the salvation of men.

1 John 4:9, 10—“In this was manifested the love of God towards us, because that God sent his only-begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him. Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that God loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins.” Love is more than compassion; it hides not itself as compassion may do, but displays itself actively in behalf of its object. The Cross of Calvary is the highest expression of the love of God for sinful man. He gave not only a Son, but His only Son, His well-beloved.

bb) In bestowing full and complete pardon on the penitent.

Isa. 38:17—“Thou hast in love to my soul delivered it from the pit of corruption: for thou hast cast all my sins behind thy back.” Literally, “Thou hast loved my soul back from the pit of destruction.” God had taken the bitterness out of his life and given him the gracious forgiveness of his sins, by putting them far away from Him. Eph. 2:4, 5—“But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us, even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ,” etc. Verses 1-3 of this chapter show the race rushing headlong to inevitable ruin. “But” reverses the picture; when all help for man fails, then God steps in, and by His mercy, which springs from “His great love,” redeems fallen man, and gives him not only pardon, but a position in His heavenly kingdom by the side of Jesus Christ. All this was “for,” or, perhaps better, “in order to satisfy His great love.” Love led Him to do it.

cc) In remembering His children in all the varying circumstances of life.

Isa. 63:9—“In all their affliction he was afflicted, and the angel of his presence saved them: in his love and in his pity he redeemed them; and he bare them, and carried them all the days of old.” Here is retrospection on the part of the prophet. He thinks of all the oppressions of Israel, and recalls how God’s interests have been bound up with theirs. He was not their adversary; He was their sympathetic, loving friend. He suffered with them. Isa. 49:15, 16—“Can a woman forget her sucking child? Yea, they may forget, yet will I not forget thee. Behold, I have graven thee on the palms of my hands; thy walls are continually before me.” It was the custom those days to trace upon the palms of the hands the outlines of any object of affection; hence a man engraved the name of his god. So God could not act without being reminded of Israel. God is always mindful of His own. Saul of Tarsus learned this truth on the way to Damascus.

THE DOCTRINE OF JESUS CHRIST.

A. THE PERSON OF CHRIST.

I. THE HUMANITY OF JESUS CHRIST. 1. HE HAD A HUMAN PARENTAGE. 2. HE GREW AS OTHER HUMAN BEINGS DO. 3. HE HAD THE APPEARANCE OF A MAN. 4. HE WAS POSSESSED OF A BODY, SOUL, AND SPIRIT. 5. HE WAS SUBJECT TO THE SINLESS INFIRMITIES OF HUMANITY. 6. HUMAN NAMES ARE GIVEN TO HIM.

II. THE DEITY OF JESUS CHRIST.

1. DIVINE NAMES ARE GIVEN TO HIM. 2. DIVINE WORSHIP IS ASCRIBED TO HIM. 3. DIVINE QUALITIES AND PROPERTIES ARE POSSESSED BY HIM. 4. DIVINE OFFICES ARE ASCRIBED TO HIM. 5. DIVINE ATTRIBUTES ARE POSSESSED BY HIM. 6. CHRIST’S NAME IS COUPLED WITH THAT OF THE FATHER. 7. THE SELF-CONSCIOUSNESS OF JESUS CHRISTAS MANIFESTED: a) In His Visit to the Temple. b) In His Baptism. c) In His Temptation. d) In the Calling of the Twelve and the Seventy. e) In the Sermon on the Mount.

B. THE WORK OF CHRIST.

1. HIS DEATH. 2. HIS RESURRECTION. 3. HIS ASCENSION AND EXALTATION.

THE DOCTRINE OF JESUS CHRIST.

A. THE PERSON OF CHRIST.

The close kinship of Christ with Christianity is one of the distinctive features of the Christian religion. If you take away the name of Buddha from Buddhism and remove the personal revealer entirely from his system; if you take away the personality of Mahomet from Mahommedanism, or the personality of Zoroaster from the religion of the Parsees, the entire doctrine of these religions would still be left intact. Their practical value, such as it is, would not be imperilled or lessened. But take away from Christianity the name and person of Jesus Christ and what have you left? Nothing! The whole substance and strength of the Christian faith centres in Jesus Christ. Without Him there is absolutely nothing.—_Sinclair Patterson._

From beginning to end, in all its various phases and aspects and elements, the Christian faith and life is determined by the person and the work of Jesus Christ. It owes its life and character at every point to Him. Its convictions are convictions about Him. Its hopes are hopes which He has inspired and which it is for Him to fulfill. Its ideals are born of His teaching and His life. Its strength is the strength of His spirit.—_James Denney._

I. THE HUMANITY OF JESUS CHRIST.

1. THE SCRIPTURES DISTINCTLY TEACH THAT HE HAD A HUMAN PARENTAGE: THAT HE WAS BORN OF A WOMAN—THE VIRGIN MARY.

Matt. 1:18—“Mary … was found with child of the Holy Ghost.” 2-11—“The young child with Mary his mother.” 12:47 —“Behold, thy mother and thy brethren.” 13:55—“Is not his mother called Mary?” John 1:14—“The Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us.” 2:1—“The mother of Jesus was there.” Acts 13:23—“Of this man’s seed hath God … raised … ..Jesus.” Rom.1:3—“Of the seed of David according to the flesh.” Gal. 4:4—“Made of a woman.”

In thus being born of a woman Jesus Christ submitted to the conditions of a human life and a human body; became humanity’s son by a human birth. Of the “seed of the woman,” of the “seed of Abraham,” and of line and lineage of David, Jesus Christ is undeniably human.

We must not lose sight of the fact that there was something supernatural surrounding the birth of the Christ. Matt. 1:18—“On this wise,” and Luke 1:35—“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.” “On this wise” indicates that this birth was different from those recorded before it. Luke 1:35 is explicit about the matter. To assail the virgin birth is to assail the Virgin’s life. He was of “the seed of the woman,” not of the man. (See Luke 1:34—“How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?”) No laws of heredity are sufficient to account for His generation. By a creative act God broke through the chain of human generation and brought into the world a supernatural being.

The narrative of the virgin birth need not stagger us. The abundance of historical evidence in its favor should lead to its acceptance. All the manuscripts in all the ancient versions contain the record of it. All the traditions of the early church recognize it. Mention of it is made in the earliest of all the creeds: the Apostles’ Creed. If the doctrine of the virgin birth is rejected it must be on purely subjective grounds. If one denies the possibility of the supernatural in the experience of human life, it is, of course, easy for him to deny this doctrine. To one who believes that Jesus was human only it would seem comparatively easy to deny the supernatural birth on purely subjective grounds. The preconceptions of thinkers to a great degree determine their views. It would seem that such a wonderful life as that lived by Christ, having as it did such a wonderful finish in the resurrection and ascension, might, indeed should, have a wonderful and extraordinary entrance into the world. The fact that the virgin birth is attested by the Scriptures, by tradition, by creeds, and that it is in perfect harmony with all the other facts of that wonderful life should be sufficient attestation of its truth. [Footnote: “The Virgin Birth,” by James Orr, D.D., deals fully and most ably with this subject.]

It has been thought strange that if, as is claimed, the virgin birth is so essential to the right understanding of the Christian religion, that Mark, John, and Paul should say nothing about it. But does such silence really exist? John says “the Word became flesh”; while Paul speaks of “God manifest in the flesh.” Says L. F. Anderson: “This argument from silence is sufficiently met by the considerations that Mark passes over thirty years of our Lord’s life in silence; that John presupposes the narratives of Matthew and Luke; that Paul does not deal with the story of Jesus’ life. The facts were known at first only to Mary and Joseph; their very nature involved reticence until Jesus was demonstrated to be the Son of God with power by the resurrection from the dead; meantime the natural development of Jesus and His refusal to set up an earthly kingdom have made the miraculous events of thirty years ago seem to Mary like a wonderful dream; so only gradually the marvelous tale of the mother of the Lord found its way into the Gospel tradition and the creeds of the church, and into the innermost hearts of the Christians of all countries.”

2. HE GREW IN WISDOM AND STATURE AS OTHER HUMAN BEINGS DO. HE WAS SUBJECT TO THE ORDINARY LAWS OF HUMAN DEVELOPMENT IN BODY AND SOUL.

Luke 2:40, 52, 46—“And the child grew, and waxed strong in spirit, filled with wisdom: and the grace of God was upon him. And Jesus increased in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and man. And….they found him in the temple, sitting in the midst of the doctors, both hearing them, and asking them questions.”

Just to what extent His sinless nature influenced His growth we may not be able to say. It seems clear, however, from the Scriptures, that we are to attribute Jesus’ growth and advancement to the training He received in a godly home; to the instruction given at the synagogue and the temple; from His own personal study of the Scriptures, and from His fellowship and communion with His Father. Both the human and divine element entered into His training and development, which were as real in the experience of Jesus as in that of any other human being. We are told that “Jesus grew, and increased in wisdom and stature.” He “increased,” i.e., He kept advancing; He “grew,” and the reflective form of the verb would seem to indicate that His growth was due to His own efforts. From all this it seems clear that Jesus received His training along the lines of ordinary human progress—instruction, study, thought.

Nor should the fact that Christ possessed divine attributes, such as omniscience and omnipotence, militate against a perfectly human development. Could He not have possessed them and yet not have used them? Self-emptying is not self-extinction. Is it incredible to think that, although possessing these divine attributes, He should have held them in subjection in order that the Holy Spirit might have His part to play in that truly human, and yet divine, life?

3. HE HAD THE APPEARANCE OF A MAN.

John 4:9—“How is it that thou, being a Jew.” Luke 24:13—The two disciples on the way to Emmaus took Him to be an ordinary man. John 20:15—“She, supposing him to be the gardener.” 21:4, 5—“Jesus stood on the shore; but the disciples knew not that it was Jesus.”

The woman of Samaria evidently recognized Jesus as a Jaw by His features or speech. To her He was just an ordinary Jew, at least to begin with. There is no Biblical warrant for surrounding the head of Christ with a halo, as the artists do. His pure life no doubt gave Him a distinguished look, just as good character similarly distinguishes men today. Of course we know nothing definite as to the appearance of Jesus, for no picture or photograph of Him do we possess. The apostles draw attention only to the tone of His voice (Mark 7:34; 15:34). After the resurrection and ascension Jesus seems still to have retained the form of a man (Acts 7:56; 1 Tim.

2:5).

4. HE WAS POSSESSED OF A HUMAN PHYSICAL NATURE: BODY, SOUL AND SPIRIT.

John 1:14—“And the Word was made flesh.” Heb. 2:14—“For asmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same.” Matt. 26:12—“She hath poured this ointment on my body.” v. 38—“My soul is exceeding sorrowful.” Luke 23:46—“Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit.” 24:39—“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.”

By his incarnation Christ came into possession of a real human nature; He came not only unto His own, but came unto them in the likeness of their own flesh. Of course we must distinguish between a human nature and a carnal nature. A carnal nature is really not an integral part of man as God made him in the beginning. Christ’s human nature was truly human, yet sinless: “Yet without sin” (Heb.

4:15).

5. HE WAS SUBJECT TO THE SINLESS INFIRMITIES OF HUMAN NATURE.

Matt. 4:2—“He was afterward an hungred.” John 19:28—“Jesus….saith, I thirst.” 4:6—“Jesus….being wearied with his journey.” Matt. 8:24—“But he was asleep.” John 19:30—“He bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.” He mourns over Jerusalem (Matt. 23:37); weeps over His dead friend Lazarus, (John 11:35); craves for human sympathy in the garden (Matt. 26:36,40); tempted in all points like as we are (Heb. 4:15). There is not a note in the great organ of our humanity which, when touched, does not find a sympathetic vibration in the mighty range and scope of our Lord’s being, saving, of course, the jarring discord of sin. But sin is not a necessary and integral part of unfallen human nature. We speak of natural depravity, but, in reality, depravity is unnatural. God made Adam upright and perfect; sin is an accident; it is not necessary to a true human being.

6. HUMAN NAMES ARE GIVEN TO HIM BY HIMSELF AND OTHERS.

Luke 19:10—“Son of Man.” Matt. 1:21—“Thou shalt call his name Jesus.” Acts 2:22—“Jesus of Nazareth.” 1 Tim. 2:5—“The man Christ Jesus.”

No less than eighty times in the Gospels does Jesus call himself the Son of Man. Even when acquiescing in the title Son of God as addressed to Himself He sometimes immediately after substitutes the title Son of Man (John 1:49-51; Matt 26:63,64).

While we recognize the fact that there is something official in the title Son of Man, something connected with His relation to the Kingdom of God, it is nevertheless true that in using this title He assuredly identifies Himself with the sons of men. While He is rightly called THE Son of Man, because, by His sinless nature and life He is unique among the sons of men, He is nevertheless A Son of Man in that He is bone of our bone and flesh of our flesh.

II. THE DEITY OF JESUS CHEIST.

1. DIVINE NAMES ARE GIVEN TO HIM.

a) He is Called God.

John 1:1—“The Word was God.” Heb. 1:8—“But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever.” John 1:18—“The only begotten Son (or better “only begotten God”).” Absolute deity is here ascribed to Christ. 20:28-“My Lord and my God.” Not an expression of amazement, but a confession of faith. This confession accepted by Christ, hence equivalent to the acceptance of deity, and an assertion of it on Christ’s part. Rom. 9:5—“God blessed forever.” Tit. 2:13—“The great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ.” 1 John,5:20—“His Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God.” In all these passages Christ is called God.

It may be argued that while Christ is here called God, yet that does not argue for nor prove His deity, for human judges are also called “gods” in John 10:35—“If he called them gods unto whom the word of God came.” True, but it is then used in a secondary and relative sense, and not in the absolute sense as when used of the Son.

b) He is Called the Son of God.

The references containing this title are numerous. Among others see Matt. 16:16, 17; 8:29; 14:33; Mark 1:1; 14:61; Luke 1:35; 4:41. While it may be true that in the synoptic Gospels Jesus may not be said to have claimed this title for Himself, yet He unhesitatingly accepted it when used of Him and addressed to Him by others. Further, it seems clear from the charges made against Him that He did claim such an honor for Himself. Matt. 27:40, 43—“For he said, I am the Son of God.” Mark 14:61, 62 —“Art thou the Christ, the Son of the Blessed” (Luke 22:70—“Art thou then the Son of God? And Jesus said, I am.” In John’s Gospel, however, Jesus plainly calls Himself “the Son of God” (5:25; 10:36 11:4). Indeed, John’s Gospel begins with Christ as God: “The Word was God,” and ends with the same thought: “My Lord and my God” (20:28). (Chapter 21 is an epilogue.)

Dr. James Orr says, in speaking of the title Son of God as ascribed to Christ: “This title is one to which there can be no finite comparison or analogy. The oneness with God which it designates is not such reflex influence of the divine thought and character such as man and angels may attain, but identity of essence constituting him not Godlike alone, but God. Others may be children of God in a moral sense; but by this right of elemental nature, none but He; He is herein, the only Son; so little separate, so close to the inner divine life which He expresses, that He is in the bosom of the Father. This language denotes two natures homogeneous, entirely one, and both so essential to the Godhead that neither can be omitted from any truth you speak of it.”

If when He called Himself “the Son of God” He did not mean more than that He was a son of God, why then did the high priest accuse Him of blasphemy when He claimed this title (Matt. 26: 61-63)? Does not Mark 12:6—“Having yet therefore one son, his well-beloved, he sent him also last unto them, saying, They will reverence my son,” indicate a special sonship? The sonship of Christ is human and historical, it is true; but it is more: it is transcendent, unique, solitary. That something unique and solitary lay in this title seems clear from John 5:18—“The Jews sought the more to kill Him….because he….said….also that God was His Father, making Himself equal with God.”

The use of the word “only begotten” also indicates the uniqueness of this sonship. For use of the word see Luke 7:12—“The only son of his mother.” 9:38—“For he is mine only child.” This word is used of Christ by John in 1:14, 18; 3:16, 18; 1 John 4:9, and distinguishes between Christ as the only Son, and the “many….children of God” (John 1:12, 13). In one sense Christ has no brethren: He stands absolutely alone. This contrast is clearly emphasized in John 1:14, 18—“only begotten Son,” and 1:12 (R. V.)—“many….children.” He is the Son from eternity: they “become” sons in time. He is one; they are many. He is Son by nature; they are sons by adoption and grace. He is Son of the same essence with the Father; they are of different substance from the Father.

c) He is Called The Lord.

Acte 4:33; 16:31; Luke 2:11; Acts 9:17; Matt. 22:43-45. It is true that this term is used of men, e.g., Acts 16:30—“Sirs (Lords), what must I do to be saved?” John 12:21—“Sir (Lord), we would see Jesus.” It is not used, however, in this unique sense, as the connection will clearly show. In our Lord’s day, the title “Lord” as used of Christ was applicable only to the Deity, to God. “The Ptolemies and the Roman Emperors would allow the name to be applied to them only when they permitted themselves to be deified. The archaeological discoveries at Oxyrhyncus put this fact beyond a doubt. So when the New Testament writers speak of Jesus as Lord, there can be no question as to what they mean.” —_Wood._
d) Other Divine Names are Ascribed to Him:

“The first and the last” (Rev. 1:17). This title used of Jehovah in Isa. 41:4; 44:6; 48:12. “The Alpha and Omega” (Rev. 22:13, 16); cf. 1:8 where it is used of God.

2. DIVINE WORSHIP IS ASCRIBED TO JESUS CHRIST.

The Scriptures recognize worship as being due to God, to Deity alone: Matt. 4:10—“Worship the Lord thy God, and him only.” Rev. 22:8, 9—“I fell down to worship before the feet of the angel…Then saith he unto me, See thou do it not:…. worship God.” John was not allowed even to worship God at the feet of the angel. Acts 14:14, 15; 10:25, 26—Cornelius fell down at the feet of Peter, and worshipped him. “But Peter took him up, saying, Stand up; I myself also am a man.” See what an awful fate was meted out to Herod because he dared to accept worship that belonged to God only (Acts 12:20-25). Yet Jesus Christ unhesitatingly accepted such worsnip, indeed, called for it (John 4:10). See John 20:28; Matt. 14:33; Luke 24:52; 5:8.

The homage given to Christ in these scriptures would be nothing short of sacrilegious idolatry if Christ were not God. There seemed to be not the slightest reluctance on the part of Christ in the acceptance of such worship. Therefore either Christ was God or He was an imposter. But His whole life refutes the idea of imposture. It was He who said, “Worship God only”; and He had no right to take the place of God if He were not God.

God himself commands all men to render worship to the Son, even as they do to Him. John 5:23, 24—“That all men should honor the Son, even as they honor the Father.” Even the angels are commanded to render worship to the Son. Heb. 1:6—“And let all the angels of God worship him.” Phil. 2:10—“That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow.”

It was the practice of the apostles and the early church to render worship to Christ: 2 Cor. 12:8-10—“I besought the Lord.” Acts 7:59—“And they stoned Stephen, calling upon God, and saying, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.” 1 Cor. 1:2—“Them that…call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord.”

The Christians of all ages have not been satisfied with admiring Christ, they have adored and worshipped Him. They have approached His person in the attitude of self-sacrifice and worship as in the presence of and to a God.

Robert Browning quoted, in a letter to a lady in her last illness, the words of Charles Lamb, when in a gay fancy with some friends as to how he and they would feel if the greatest of the dead were to appear suddenly in flesh and blood once more—on the first suggestion, and “if Christ entered this room?” changed his tone at once, and stuttered out as his manner was when moved: “You see —if Shakespeare entered, we should all rise; if Christ appeared, we must kneel.”

3. HE POSSESSES THE QUALITIES AND PROPERTIES OF DEITY.

a) Pre-Existence.

John 1:1—“In the beginning”; cf. Gen 1:1 John 8:58—“Before Abraham was, I am.” That is to say: “Abraham’s existence presupposes mine, not mine his. He was dependent upon me, not I upon him for existence. Abraham came into being at a certain point of time, but I am.” Here is simple being without beginning or end. See also John 17:5; Phil. 2:6; Col. 1:16, 17.

b) Self-Existence and Life-Giving Power:

John 5:21, 26—“For as the Father raiseth up the dead and quickeneth them, even so the Son quickeneth whom he will.” “For as the Father hath life in himself, so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself.” 1:4—“In him was life.” See also 14:6; Heb. 7:16; John 17:3-5; 10:17, 18. These scriptures teach that all life—physical, moral, spiritual, eternal—has its source in Christ.

c) Immutability:

Heb. 13:8—“Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and today, and for ever.” See also 1:12. All nature, which like a garment He throws around Him is subject to change and decay; Jesus Christ is the same always, He never changes. Human teachers, such as are spoken of in the context, may change, but He, the Christ, never.

d) All the Fulness of the Godhead Dwelt in Him:

Col. 2:9—Not merely the divine perfections and attributes of Deity, but (theotes) the very essence and nature of the Godhead. He was not merely Godlike; He was God.

4. DIVINE OFFICES ABE ASCRIBED TO HIM.

a) He is the Creator:

John 1:3—“All things were made by Him.” In the creation He was the acting power and personal instrument. Creation is the revelation of His mind and might. Heb. 1:10 shows the dignity of the Creator as contrasted with the creature. Col. 1:16 contradicts the Gnostic theory of emanations, and shows Christ to be the creator of all created things and beings. Rev. 3:14—“The beginning of the creation of God,” means “beginning” in the active sense, the origin, that by which a thing begins to be. Col. 1:15—“first-born,” not made; compare with Col. 1:17, where the “for” of v. 16 shows Him to be not included in the “created things,” but the origin of and superior to them all. He is the Creator of the universe (v. 16), just as He is the Head of the church (v. 18).

b) He is the Upholder of All Things:

Col. 1:17; Heb. 1:3. The universe is neither self-sustaining nor is it forsaken by God (Deism). Christ’s power causes all things to hold together. The pulses of universal life are regulated and controlled by the throbbings of the mighty heart of Christ.

c) He Has the Right to Forgive Sins.

Mark 2:5-10. Luke 7:48—“And he said unto her, Thy sins are forgiven.” Certain it is that the Pharisees recognized that Christ was here assuming a divine prerogative. No mere man had any right to forgive sins. God alone could do that. Hence the Pharisees’ charge of blasphemy. This is no declaration of forgiveness, based upon the knowledge of the man’s penitence. Christ does not merely declare sins forgiven. He actually forgives them. Further, Jesus, in the parable of the Two Debtors (Luke 7), declares that sins were committed against Himself (cf. Psa. 51:4—“Against thee, thee only, have I sinned”).

d) The Raising of the Bodies of Men is Ascribed to Him:

John 6:39, 40, 54; 11:25. Five times it is here declared by Jesus that it is His prerogative to raise the dead. It is true that others raised the dead, but under what different conditions? They worked by a delegated power (Acts 9:34); but Christ, by His own power (John 10:17, 18). Note the agony of Elisha and others, as compared with the calmness of Christ. None of these claimed to raise the dead by his own power, nor to have any such power in the general resurrection of all men. Christ did make such claims.

e) He is to be the Judge of All Men;

John 5:22—“For the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son.” 2 Tim. 4:1; Acts 17:31; Matt. 25:31-46. The Man of the Cross is to be the Man of the throne. The issues of the judgment are all in His hand.

5. DIVINE ATTRIBUTES ARE POSSESSED BY HIM.

a) Omnipotence.

Matt 28:18—“All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.” Rev. 1:8; John 17:2; Eph. I:20-22. Here is power over three realms: First, all power on earth: over disease (Luke 4:38-41); death (John 11); nature, water into wine (John 2); tempest (Matt. 8). Second, all power in hell: over demons (Luke 4:35, 36, 41); evil angels (Eph. 6). Third, all power in heaven: (Eph. 1:20-22). Finally, power over all things: (Heb. 2:8; 1:3; Matt. 28:18).

b) Omniscience.

John 16:30—“Now are we sure that thou knowest all things.” 2:24; Matt. 24; 25; Col. 2:3. Illustrations: John 4:16-19; Mark 2:8; John 1:48. “Our Lord always leaves the impression that He knew all things in detail, both past and future, and that this knowledge comes from His original perception of the events. He does not learn them by acquisition. He simply knows them by immediate perception. Such utterances as Matt. 24 and Luke 21 carry in them a subtle difference from the utterances of the prophets. The latter spoke as men who were quite remote in point of time from their declaration of unfolding events. Jesus spoke as one who is present in the midst of the events which He depicts. He does not refer to events in the past as if He were quoting from the historic narrative in the Old Testament. The only instance which casts doubt upon this view is Mark 13:32. The parallel passage in Matthew omits, in many ancient versions, the words; “Neither the Son.” The saying in Mark is capable of an interpretation which does not contradict this view of His omniscience. This is an omniscience nevertheless, which in its manifestation to men is under something of human limitation.”—_Wood._

This limitation of knowledge is no argument against the infallibility of those things which Jesus did teach: for example, the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch. That argument, says Liddon, involves a confusion between limitation of knowledge and liability to error; whereas, plainly enough, a limitation of knowledge is one thing, and fallibility is another. St. Paul says, “We know in part,” and “We see through a glass darkly.” Yet Paul is so certain of the truth of that which he teaches, as to exclaim, “But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.” Paul clearly believed in his own infallibility as a teacher of religious truth, and the church of Christ has ever since regarded his epistles as part of an infallible literature. But it is equally clear that Paul believed his knowledge of truth to be limited. Infallibility does not imply omniscience, any more than limited knowledge implies error. If a human teacher were to decline to speak upon a given subject, by saying that he did not know enough about it, this would not be a reason for disbelieving him when he proceeded to speak confidently upon a totally different subject, thereby at least implying that he did not know enough to warrant his speaking. On the contrary, his silence in the one case would be a reason for trusting his statements in the other. The argument which is under consideration in the text would have been really sound, if our Saviour had fixed the date of the day of judgment and the event had shown him to be mistaken. Why stumble over the limitation of this attribute and not over the others? Did He not hunger and thirst, for example? As God He is omnipresent, yet as man He is present only in one place. As God He is omnipotent; yet, on one occasion at least, He could do no mighty works because of the unbelief of men.

c) Omnipresence.

Matt. 18:20—“For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.” He is with every missionary (Matt. 28:20). He is prayed to by Christians in every place (1 Cor. 1:2). Prayer would be a mockery if we were not assured that Christ is everywhere present to hear. He fills all things, every place (Eph. 1:23). But such an all pervading presence is true only of Deity.

6. HIS NAME IS COUPLED WITH THAT OF GOD THE FATHER.

The manner in which the name of Jesus Christ is coupled with that of God the Father clearly implies equality of the Son with the Father. Compare the following:

a) The Apostolic Benediction.

2 Cor. 13:14. Here the Son equally with the Father is the bestower of grace.

b) The Baptismal Formula.

Matt. 28:19; Acts 2:38. “In the name,” not the names (plural). How would it sound to say, “In the name of the Father” and of Moses? Would it not seem sacrilegious? Can we imagine the effect of such words on the apostles?

c) Other Passages.

John 14:23—“We will come: the Father and I.” 17:3—“And this is life eternal that they might know thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ.” The content of saving faith includes belief in Jesus Christ equally with the Father. 10:30—“I and my Father are one.” “One” is neuter, not masculine, meaning that Jesus and the Father constitute one power by which the salvation of man is secured. 2 Thess. 2:16, 17—“Now our Lord Jesus Christ himself, and God, even our Father…comfort your hearts.” These two names, with a verb in the singular, intimate the oneness of the Father with the Son.

7. THE SELF-CONSCIOUSNESS OF JESUS REGARDING HIS OWN PERSON AND WORK.

It will be interesting to search the Gospel records to ascertain what was in the mind of Jesus concerning Himself—His relation to the Father in particular. What bearing has the testimony of Jesus upon the question of His deity? Is the present Christian consciousness borne out by the Gospel narratives? Is Jesus Christ a man of a much higher type of faith than ours, yet one with whom we believe in God? Or is He, equally with God, the object of our faith? Do we believe with Him, or on Him? Is there any indication in the words ascribed to Jesus, as recorded in the Gospels, of a consciousness on His part of His unique relation to God the Father? Is it Jesus Himself who is responsible for the Christian’s consciousness concerning His deity, or is the Church reading into the Gospel accounts something that is not really there? Let us see.

a) As Set Forth in the Narrative of His Visit to the Temple.

Luke 2:41-52. This is a single flower out of the wonderfully enclosed garden of the first thirty years of our Lord’s life. The emphatic words, for our purpose, are “thy father,” and “my Father.” These are the first recorded words of Jesus. Is there not here an indication of the consciousness on the part of Jesus of a unique relationship with His heavenly Father? Mary, not Joseph, asked the question, so contrary to Jewish custom. She said: “Thy father”; Jesus replied in substance: “Did you say my father has been seeking me?” It is remarkable to note that Christ omits the word “father” when referring to His parents, cf. Matt. 12:48; Mark 3:33, 34. “My Father!” No other human lips had ever uttered these words. Men said, and He taught them to say, “Our Father.” It is not too much to say that in this incident Christ sees, rising before Him, the great truth that God, and not Joseph, is His Father, and that it is in His true Father’s house that He now stands.

b) As Revealed at His Baptism:

Matt. 3:13-17; Mark 1:9-ll; Luke 3:21. Here are some things to remember in connection with Christ’s baptism: First, Jesus was well acquainted with the relation of John and his ministry to the Old Testament prophecy, as well as of John’s own announcement that he was the Messiah’s forerunner, and that he (John) was not worthy to untie the latchet of Christ’s shoes. Second, to come then to John, and to submit to baptism at his hands, would indicate that Jesus conceded the truth of all that John had said. This is emphasized when we remember Jesus’ eulogy of John (Matt. 11). Thirdly, There is the descent of the Spirit, and the heavenly voice; what meaning did these things have to Jesus? If Christ’s sermon in the synagogue at Nazareth is of any help here, we must believe that at His baptism, so much more than at the age of twelve, He was conscious that in thus being anointed He was associating Himself in some peculiar way with the prophecy of Isaiah, chapters 42 and 61: “Behold my Servant… I have put my Spirit upon Him.” All, therefore, that must have been wrapped up in the thought of the “Servant of the Lord” in the Old Testament would assuredly be quickened in his consciousness that day when the Spirit descended upon Him. See also Luke 4:16-17; Acts 10: 38; Matt. 12:28.

But what did the heavenly voice signify to Christ? “This is my beloved Son” takes us back to the second Psalm where this person is addressed as the ideal King of Israel. The last clause—“in whom I am well pleased”—refers to Isaiah 42, and portrays the servant who is anointed and empowered by the endowment of God’s Spirit. We must admit that the mind of Jesus was steeped in the prophecies of the Old Testament, and that He knew to whom these passages referred. The ordinary Jew knew that much. Is it too much to say that on that baptismal day Jesus was keenly conscious that these Old Testament predictions were fulfilled in Him? We think not.

c) As Set Forth in the Record of the Temptation.

Matt. 4:1-11; Mark 1:12, 13; Luke 4:1-13. That Jesus entered into the temptation in the wilderness with the consciousness of the revelation He received, and of which He was conscious at the baptism, seems clear from the narratives. Certain it is that Satan based his temptations upon Christ’s consciousness of His unique relation to God as His Son. Throughout the whole of the temptation Satan regards Christ as being in a unique sense the Son of God, the ideal King, through whom the kingdom of God is to be established upon the earth. Indeed, so clearly is the kingship of Jesus recognized in the temptation narrative that the whole question agitated there is as to how that kingdom may be established in the world. It must be admitted that a careful reading of the narratives forces us to the conclusion that throughout all the temptation Christ was conscious of His position with reference to the founding of God’s kingdom in the world.

d) As Set Forth in the Calling of the Twelve and the Seventy.

The record of this event is found in Matt. 10; Mark 3:13-19; 6:7-13; Luke 9:1-6; 10:1-14. This important event in the life of our Lord had an important bearing upon His self-consciousness as to His person and work. Let us note some of the details:

First, as to the number, twelve. Is there no suggestion here with reference to the New Jerusalem when the Messiah shall sit upon the throne surrounded by the twelve apostles seated on their thrones? Is not Jesus here conscious of Himself as being the centre of the scene thus described in the Apocalypse?

Second, He gave them power. Is not Jesus here repeating what had been done for Him at His baptism: conveying super-human power? Who can give this power that is strong enough to make even demons obey? No one less than God surely.

Third, note that the message which He committed to the twelve concerned matters of life and death. Not to receive that message would be equivalent to the rejection of the Father.

Fourth, all this is to be done in His name, and for His name’s sake. Fidelity to Jesus is that on which the final destiny of men depends. Everything rises or falls in its relation to Him. Could such words be uttered and there be no consciousness on the part of the speaker of a unique relationship to the Father and the things of eternity? Know you of anything bolder than this?

Fifth, He calls upon men to sacrifice their tenderest affections for Him. He is to be chosen before even father and mother (Matt.

10:34-39).

e) As Revealed in the Sermon on the Mount.

Matt. 5-7; Luke 6:20-49. Two references will be sufficient here. Who is this that dares to set Himself up as superior to Moses and the law of Moses, by saying, “But I say unto you”? Then, again, listen to Christ as He proclaims Himself to be the judge of all men at the last day (Matt. 7:21). Could Jesus say all this without having any consciousness of His unique relationship to all these things? Assuredly not.

B. THE WORK OF JESUS CHRIST.

The Death of Jesus Christ.

I. ITS IMPORTANCE.

1. IT HAS A SUPREME PLACE IN THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION.

Christianity is a religion of atonement distinctively. The elimination of the doctrine of the death of Christ from the religion that bears His name would mean the surrender of its uniqueness and claim to be the only true religion, the supreme and final revelation from God to the sons of men. It is its redemption feature that distinguishes Christianity from any and all other religions. If you surrender this distinctive Christian doctrine from its creed, then this supreme religion is brought down to the level of many other prevailing religious systems. Christianity is not merely a system of ethics; it is the history of redemption through Jesus Christ, the personal Redeemer.

2. ITS VITAL RELATION TO JESUS CHRIST.

The atonement is so closely related to Jesus Christ, so allied to His work, as set forth in the Scriptures, that it is absolutely inseparable from it. Christ was not primarily a religious teacher, a philanthropist, an ethical example; He was all these, yea, and much more—He was first and foremost the world’s Saviour and Redeemer. Other great men have been valued for their lives; He, above all, for His death, around which God and man are reconciled. The Cross is the magnet which sends the electric current through the telegraph between earth and heaven, and makes both Testaments thrill, through the ages of the past and future, with living, harmonious, and saving truth. Other men have said: “If I could only live, I would establish and perpetuate an empire.” The Christ of Galilee said: “My death shall do it.” Let us understand that the power of Christianity lies, not in hazy indefiniteness, not in shadowy forms, not so much even in definite truths and doctrines, but in the truth, and in the doctrine of Christ crucified and risen from the dead. Unless Christianity be more tnan ethical, it is not, nor can it really be ethical at all. It is redemptive, dynamic through that redemption, and ethical withal.

3. ITS RELATION TO THE INCARNATION.

It is not putting the matter too strongly when we say that the incarnation was for the purpose of the atonement. At least this seems to be the testimony of the Scriptures. Jesus Christ partook of flesh and blood in order that He might die (Heb. 2:14). “He was manifested to take away our sins” (1 John 3:5). Christ came into this world to give His life a ransom for many (Matt. 20:28). The very purpose of the entire coming of Christ into the word, in all its varying aspects, was that, by assuming a nature like unto our own, He might offer up His life as a sacrifice for the sins of men. The faith of the atonement presupposes the faith of the incarnation. So close have been the relation of these two fundamental doctrines that their relation is one of the great questions which have divided men in their opinions in the matter: which is primary and which secondary; which is to be regarded as the most necessary to man’s salvation, as the primary and the highest fact in the history of God’s dealings with man. The atonement naturally arises out of the incarnation so that the Son of God could not appear in our nature without undertaking such a work as the word atonement denotes. The incarnation is a pledge and anticipation of the work of atonement. The incarnation is most certainly the declaration of a purpose on the part of God to save the world. But how was the world to be saved if not through the atonement?

4. ITS PROMINENCE IN THE SCRIPTURES.

It was the claim of Jesus, in His conversation with the two disciples on the way to Emmaus, that Moses, and all the prophets, indeed, all the Scriptures, dealt with the subject of His death (Luke 24:27, 44). That the death of Christ was the one great subject into which the Old Testament prophets searched deeply is clear from 1 Pet. 1:11, 12. The atonement is the scarlet cord running through every page in the entire Bible. Cut the Bible anywhere, and it bleeds; it is red with redemption truth. It is said that one out of every forty-four verses in the New Testament deals with this theme, and that the death of Christ is mentioned in all one hundred and seventy-five times. When you add to these figures the typical and symbolical teaching of the Old Testament some idea is gained as to the important place which this doctrine occupies in the sacred Scriptures.

5. THE FUNDAMENTAL THEME OF THE GOSPEL.

Paul says: “I delivered unto you first of all (i.e., first in order; the first plank in the Gospel platform; the truth of primary importance) … that Christ died for our sins” (1 Cor. 15:1-3). There can be no Gospel story, message or preaching without the story of the death of Christ as the Redeemer of men.

6. THE ONE GRAND THEME IN HEAVEN.

Moses and Elias, the heavenly visitors to this earth, conversed about it (Luke 9:30, 31), even though Peter was ashamed of the same truth (Matt. 16:21-25). The theme of the song of the redeemed in heaven is that of Christ’s death (Rev. 5:8-12).

II. THE SCRIPTURAL DEFINITION OF THE DEATH OF CHRIST.

The Scriptures set forth the death of Jesus Christ in a four-fold way:

1. AS A RANSOM. Matt. 20:28; 1 Pet. l;18; 1 Tim. 2:6; Gal. 3:13.

The meaning of a ransom is clearly set forth in Lev. 25:47-49: To deliver a thing or person by paying a price; to buy back a person or thing by paying the price for which it is held in captivity. So sin is like a slave market in which sinners are “sold under sin” (Rom. 7:14); souls are under sentence of death (Ezek. 18:4). Christ, by His death, buys sinners out of the market, thereby indicating complete deliverance from the service of sin. He looses the bonds, sets the prisoners free, by paying a price—that price being His own precious blood.

To whom this ransom is paid is a debatable question: whether to Satan for his captives, or to eternal and necessary holiness, to the divine law, to the claims of God who is by His nature the holy Lawgiver. The latter, referring to God and His holiness, is probably preferable.

Christ redeemed us from the curse of a broken law by Himself being made a curse for us. His death was the ransom price paid for our deliverance.

2. A PROPITIATION. Rom. 3:25; 1 John 2:2; Heb. 2:17 (R. V.).

Christ is the propitiation for our sins; He is set forth by God to be a propitiation through His blood.

Propitiation means mercy-seat, or covering. The mercy-seat covering the ark of the covenant was called propitiation (Exod. 25:22; Heb. 9:5.) It is that by which God covers, overlooks, and pardons the penitent and believing sinner because of Christ’s death. Propitiation furnishes a ground on the basis of which God could set forth His righteousness, and yet pardon sinful men, Rom. 3:25, 26; Heb. 9:15. Christ Himself is the propitiatory sacrifice, 1 John 2:2. The death of Jesus Christ is set forth as the ground on which a righteous God can pardon a guilty and sinful race without in any way compromising His righteousness.

3. AS A RECONCILIATION. Rom. 5:10; 2 Cor. 5:18, 19; Eph. 2:16; Col.

1:20.

We are reconciled to God by the death of His Son, by His Cross, and by the blood of His Cross—that is the message of these scriptures.

Reconciliation has two sides; active and passive. In the active sense we may look upon Christ’s death as removing the enmity existing between God and man, and which had hitherto been a barrier to fellowship (see the above quoted texts). This state of existing enmity is set forth in such scriptures as Rom. 8:7—“Because the carnal mind is enmity against God.” Also Eph. 2:15; Jas. 4:4. In the passive sense of the word it may indicate the change of attitude on the part of man toward God, this change being wrought in the heart of man by a vision of the Cross of Christ; a change from enmity to friendship thus taking place, cf. 2 Cor. 5:20. It is probably better to state the case thus: God is propitiated, and the sinner is reconciled (2 Cor. 5:18-20).

4. AS A SUBSTITUTION. Isa. 53:6; 1 Pet. 2:24, 3:18; 2 Cor. 5:21.

The story of the passover lamb (Exod. 12), with 1 Cor. 5:7, illustrates the meaning of substitution as here used: one life given in the stead of another. “The Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.” God made Christ, who knew no sin, to be sin for us. Christ Himself bore our sins in His own body on the tree—this is substitution. Christ died in our place, bore our sins, paid the penalty due our sins; and all this, not by force, but willingly (John 10:17, 18). The idea of substitution is well illustrated by the nature of the preposition used in connection with this phase of Christ’s death: In Matt. 80-28 Christ is said to give His life a ransom for all (also 1 Tim. 2:6). That this preposition means instead of is clear from its use in Matt. 2:22—“Archelaus did reign in the room (or in the stead) of his father, Herod.” Also in Luke 11:11—“Will he for a fish give him a serpent?” (See Heb. 12:2, 16.) Substitution, then, as used here means this: That something happened to Christ, and because it happened to Christ, it need not happen to us. Christ died for our sins; we need not die for them if we accept His sacrifice. For further illustrations, see Gen. 22:13; God providing a ram instead of Isaac; also Barabbas freed and Christ bearing his cross and taking his place.

Upon a life I did not live; Upon a death I did not die; Upon another’s death, another’s life, I risk my soul eternally.

III. UNSCRIPTURAL VIEWS OF CHRIST’S DEATH.

There are certain so called modern views of the atonement which it may be well to examine briefly, if only to show how unscriptural they are. That the modern mind fails to see in the doctrine of the atonement what the orthodox faith has held for centuries to be the truth of God regarding this fundamental Christian doctrine, there is certainly no doubt. To some minds today the death of Jesus Christ was but the death of a martyr, counted in the same category as the death of John Huss or Savonarola. Or perchance Christ’s death was an exhibition to a sinful world of God’s wondrous love. Or it may be that Christ, in His suffering of death, remains forever the sublime example of adherence to principles of righteousness and truth, even to the point of death. Or, again, Calvary may be an episode in God’s government of the world. God, being holy, deemed it necessary to show to the world His hatred of sin, and so His wrath fell on Christ. The modern mind does not consider Christ’s death as in any sense vicarious, or substitutionary. Indeed, it fails to see the justice as well as the need or possibility of one man, and He so innocent, suffering for the sins of the whole race—past, present and future. Every man must bear the penalty of his own sin, so we are told; from that there is no escape, unless, and it is fervently hoped and confidently expected, that God, whose wondrous love surpasses all human conception, should, as He doubtless will, overlook the eternal consequences of man’s sin because of the great love wherewith He loves the race. The love of God is the hope of the race’s redemption.

What shall the Christian church say to these things, and what shall be her reply? To the Word of God must the church resort for her weapons in this warfare. If the so called modern mind and its doctrinal views agree with the Scriptures, then the Christian church may allow herself to be influenced by the spirit of the age. But if the modern mind and the Scriptures do not agree in their results, then the church of Christ must part company with the modern mind. Here are some of the modern theories of the atonement:

1. THE ACCIDENT THEORY.

Briefly stated, this is the theory: The Cross was something unforeseen in the life of Christ. Calvary was not in the plan of God for His Son. Christ’s death was an accident, as unforeseen and unexpected as the death of any other martyr was unforeseen and unexpected.

To this we reply: Jesus was conscious all the time of His forthcoming death. He foretold it again and again. He was always conscious of the plots against His life. This truth is corroborated by the following scriptures: Matt. 16-21; Mark 9:30-32; Matt. 20:17-19; Luke 18:31-34; Matt, 20:28; 26:2, 6, 24, 39-42; Luke 22:19, 20. Further, in John 10:17, 18 we have words which distinctly contradict this false theory: “Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again. No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father.”

In addition to this we may make mention of the many, many references and prophecies of the Old Testament to the fact of Christ’s death. Then there is Christ’s own testimony to the fact of His death being predicted and foretold by the prophets (Luke 24:26, 27, 44). See also Isa. 53; Psa. 22; 69.

2. THE MARTYR THEORY.

It is as follows: Christ’s death was similar in kind to that of John Huss, or Polycarp, or any other noble man who has given up his life as a sacrifice for a principle and for truth.

To this we reply: Then Christ should have so declared Himself. Paul should have said so. That word was used for other Christian deaths, why not for Christ’s? Then there is no mystery about the atonement, and the wonder is that Paul should have said anything about the mystery. Further, if Christ died as a martyr He might, at least, have had the same comforting presence of God afforded other martyrs in the hour of their death. Why should He be God-forsaken in that crucial hour? Is it right that God should make the holiest man in all the ages the greatest sufferer, if that man were but a martyr? When you recall the shrinking of Gethsemane, could you really—and we say it reverently—call Jesus as brave a man facing death as many another martyr has been? Why should Christ’s soul be filled with anguish (Luke 22:39-46), while Paul the Apostle was exultant with joy (Phil. 1:23)? Stephen died a martyr’s death, but Paul never preached forgiveness through the death of Stephen. Such a view of Christ’s death may beget martyrs, but it can never save sinners.

3. THE MORAL EXAMPLE THEORY.

Christ’s death has an influence upon mankind for moral improvement. The example of His suffering ought to soften human hearts, and help a man to reform, repent, and better his condition. So God grants pardon and forgiveness on simple repentance and reformation. In the same way a drunkard might call a man his saviour by whose influence he was induced to become sober and industrious. But did the sight of His suffering move the Jews to repentance? Does it move men today? Such a view of Christ’s death does not deal with the question with which it is always connected, viz., the question of sin.

4. THE GOVERNMENTAL THEORY.

This means that the benevolence of God requires that He should make an example of suffering in Christ in order to exhibit to man that sin is displeasing in His sight. God’s government of the world necessitates that He show His wrath against sin.

True, but we reply: Why do we need an incarnation for the manifestation of that purpose? Why not make a guilty, and not an absolutely innocent and guileless man such an example of God’s displeasure upon sin? Were there not men enough in existence? Why create a new being for such a purpose?

5. THE LOVE OF GOD THEOEY.

He died to show men how much God loved them. Men ever after would know the feeling of the heart of God toward them.

True, the death of Christ did show the great love of God for fallen man. But men did not need such a sacrifice to know that God loved them. They knew that before Christ came. The Old Testament is full of the love of God. Read Psalm 103. The Scriptures which speak of God’s love as being manifested in the gift of His Son, tell us also of another reason why He gave His Son: “That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life” (John 3:16); “Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins” (1 John 4:10).

We believe that Christ’s Cross reveals the love of God, and that throughout all these ages men have been bowed in penitence as they have caught a vision of the One who hung thereon. But if you were to question the multitudes that have believed in God because of the Cross, you would find that what moved them to repentance was not merely, if at all, certainly not primarily, that the Cross revealed the love of God in a supreme way, but the fact that there at that Cross God had dealt with the great and awful fact of sin, that the Cross had forever removed it.

“I examine all these views, beautiful as some of them are, appealing to the pride of man, but which leave out all thought of vicarious atonement, and say, ‘But what shall be done with my sin? Who shall put it away? Where is its sacrifice? If without shedding of blood there is no remission of sin, where is the shed blood?’ These views are neat, measurable, occasionally pathetic, and frequently beautiful, but they do not include the agony of the whole occasion and situation. They are aspect theories, partial conceptions. They do not take in the whole temple from its foundation to its roof. No man must set up his judgment against that of another man in a dogmatic way, but he may, yea, he must, allow his heart to speak through his judgment; and in view of this liberty, I venture to say that all these theories of the atonement are as nothing, most certainly shallow and incomplete to me … . As I speak now, at this very moment, I feel that the Christ on the Cross is doing something for me, that His death is my life, His atonement my pardon, His crucifixion the satisfaction for my sin, that from Calvary, that place of a skull, my flowers of peace and joy blossom forth, and that in the Cross of Christ I glory.”—_Joseph Parker._

IV. THE NECESSITY OF CHRIST’S DEATH.

The necessity of the atonement lay in a twofold fact: The holiness of God, and the sinfulness of man. The doctrine of the atonement is a related subject, and it cannot be properly understood unless it is viewed as such. It is related to certain conditions existing between God and man—a condition and relation which has been affected by sin. It is necessary, therefore, to know this relation and how it has been affected by sin. This relation between God and man is a personal one. No other construction can legitimately be put upon the passages setting forth this relationship. “Thou has searched me, and known me.” “I am continually with Thee.” It is, moreover, an ethical relationship, and that which is ethical is at the same time personal and universal, that is to say, that God’s dealings with mankind are expressed in a moral constitution of universal and eternal validity. These relationships are disordered by sin. No matter how sin came to be here we are morally conscious, by the testimony of a bad conscience, that we are guilty, and that our sin is not merely a matter of personal guilt but a violation of a universal moral law.

1. THE HOLINESS OF GOD.

We should carefully note the emphasis laid upon the doctrine of God’s holiness in the Old Testament (see under Attributes of God, p. 37). The Levitical law, the laws of clean and unclean, the tabernacle and the temple with its outer court, its holy and most holy place, the priestly order and the high priest, the bounds set around Mt. Sinai, things and persons that might not be touched without causing defilement, sacred times and seasons, these, and much more, speak in unmistakable terms of the holiness of God. We are thus taught that if sinful man is to approach unto God, it must be through the blood of atonement. The holiness of God demands that before the sinner can approach unto and have communion with Him, some means of propitiation must be provided. This means of approach is set forth in the shed blood.

2. THE SIN OF MAN.

Light and erroneous views of the atonement come from light and erroneous views of sin. If sin is regarded as merely an offence against man, a weakness of human nature, a mere disease, rather than as rebellion, transgression, and enmity against God, and therefore something condemning and punishable, we shall not, of course, see any necessity for the atonement. We must see sin as the Bible depicts it, as something which brings wrath, condemnation, and eternal ruin in its train. We must see it as guilt that needs expiation. We must see sin as God sees it before we can denounce it as God denounces it. We confess sin today in such light and easy terms that it has almost lost its terror.

In view of these two thoughts, the holiness of God and the sinfulness of man, the question naturally arises: How is the mercy of God to be manifested so that His holiness will not be compromised by His assuming a merciful attitude towards sinful men in the granting of forgiveness, pardon, justification? The answer is: The only way in which this can be done is by means of the atonement.

3. THE FULFILLMENT OF THE SCRIPTURES.

We may add this third thought to the two already mentioned. There is a sense in which the atonement was necessary in order to the fulfillment of the predictions of the Old Testament—predictions inseparable from the person and work of the Messiah. If Jesus Christ were the true Messiah, then these predictions regarding His sufferings and death must be fulfilled in Him (Luke 24:25-27, 44; Isa. 53; Psa. 22; 69).

V. THE EXTENT OF CHRIST’S DEATH.

Was the death of Jesus Christ for all mankind—for every human being in the world, or for man actually and ultimately regenerate only—the chosen Church? Was it for all mankind, irrespective of their relation to Jesus Christ, or must we limit the actual benefits of the atonement to those who are spiritually united to Christ by faith? That the death of Christ is intended to benefit all mankind seems clear from the following scriptures: Isa. 53:6; 1 Tim. 2:6; 1 John 2:2, cf. 2 Cor. 5:19; Rom. 14:15; 1 Cor. 8:11. The scriptures, which to some seem to limit the effects of the atonement, are John 10:15, cf. vv 26, 29; Eph. 5:25-27.

Certain it is that the doctrine of the atonement is presented in the Scriptures as competent to procure and secure salvation for all. Indeed, not only competent but efficacious to do this very thing. It might seem that there is an apparent contradiction in the above-named scriptures. The atonement, in its actual issue, should realize and actualize the eternal purpose of God, the which is set forth as a desire that all men should be saved and come to a saving knowledge of the truth as it is in Jesus Christ. This is testified to be the general and universal invitation of the Scriptures to partake of the blessings of Christ’s death. Thus the offer of the Gospel to all is not a pretence but a reality on the part of God. The divine willingness that all men should share the benefits of the atonement is all-inclusive, and really means what is offered. Yet on the other hand, we can not overlook the fact that, from another point of view the effects of the atonement—shall we say the purpose of the atonement?—seems to be limited to the sphere of the the true Church, so that only those who are really united to Christ by faith actually share in the merits of the atonement. Let us put it this way: “The atonement is sufficient for all; it is efficient for those who believe in Christ.” The atonement itself, so far as it lays the basis for the redemptive dealing of God with all men, is unlimited; the application of the atonement is limited to those who actually believe in Christ. He is the Saviour of all men potentially (1 Tim. 1:15); of believers alone effectually (1 Tim. 4:10). The atonement is limited only by men’s unbelief.

1. FOR THE WHOLE WORLD.

The Scriptures set forth this fact in the following statements: “And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world” (1 John 2:2). Christ’s death was the ground on which God, who is absolutely holy, could deal with the whole race of men in mercy, and pardon their sins.

John 1:29—“Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.” Not the sin of a few individuals, or of an elect race, like Israel, but the sin of the whole world. This was a striking truth to reveal to a Jew.

1 Tim. 2:6—“Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.” It is for this reason, as the context of this passage shows, that we may pray for all men. If all men were not capable of being saved, how then could we pray to that end?

2. FOR EACH INDIVIDUAL MAN.

This is but a detailed statement of the fact that He died for the whole world. Not a single individual man, woman, or child is excluded from the blessings offered in the atonement.

Heb. 2:9—“But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honor; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.” Leo the Great (461) affirmed that “So precious is the shedding of Christ’s blood for the unjust, that if the whole universe of captives would believe in the Redeemer, no chain of the devil could hold them.” General Booth once said: “Friends, Jesus shed His precious blood to pay the price of salvation, and bought from God enough salvation to go around.”

3. FOR THE SINFUL, UNJUST, AND UNGODLY.

Sinners of all sorts, degrees, and conditions may have a share in the redemptive work of Christ. Greece invited only the cultured, Rome sought only the strong, Judea bid for the religious only. Jesus Christ bids all those that are weary and heavy-hearted and over-burdened to come to Him (Matt. 11:28).

Rom. 5:6-10—“Christ died for the ungodly…While we were yet sinners, Christ died for us…When we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of His Son.” 1 Pet. 3:18—“For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust.” Christ died for sinners—those in open opposition to God; for the unjust—those who openly violate God’s laws; for the ungodly—those who violently and brazenly refuse to pay their dues of prayer, worship, and service to God; for enemies —those who are constantly fighting God and His cause. For all of these Christ died.

1 Tim. 1:15—“Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.” Paul was a blasphemer, a persecutor, injurious (v. 13), a murderer (Acts 22 and 26), yet God saved him; he was included in the atonement. Note also that it is in this very connection that the apostle declares that the reason God saved him was in order that his salvation might be a pattern, or an encouragement to other great sinners, that God could and would save them, if they desired Him to do so.

4. FOR THE CHURCH.

There is a peculiar sense in which it may be said that Christ’s death is for the Church, His body, the company of those who believe in Him. There is a sense in which it is perfectly true that Christ’s death avails only for those who believe in Him; so in that sense it can be said that He died for the Church more particularly. He is “the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe” (1 Tim. 4:10). Herein lies the truth that is contained in the theory of a limited atonement.

Eph. 5:25-27—“Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it.” Not for any one particular denomination; not for any one organization within any four walls; but for all those whom He calls to Himself and who follow Him here.

Gal. 2:20—“The Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.” Here the individual member of the Church, the body of Christ, is specifically mentioned as being included in the efficacy of the atonement. When Luther first realized this particular phase of the atonement, he was found sobbing beneath a crucifix, and moaning: “Mein Gott, Mein Gott, Fur Mich! Fur Mich!”

1 Cor. 8:11—“And through thy knowledge shall the weak brother perish, for whom Christ died?” Also Rom. 14:15. Note the connection in which this truth is taught. If Christ was willing to die for the weak brother—whom we, perchance, sneer at for his conscientious scruples—we ought to be willing to deny ourselves of some habit for his sake.

How all-inclusive, all-comprehensive, far-reaching is the death of Christ in its effects! Not a few, but many shall be saved. He gave his life a ransom for many. God’s purposes in the atonement shall not be frustrated. Christ shall see of the travail of His soul, and shall be satisfied. Many shall come from the north, the south, the east and the west and sit down in the kingdom. In that great day it will be seen (Rev. 7:9-15).

VI. THE EFFECTS OF CHRIST’S DEATH.

1. IN RELATION TO THE PHYSICAL OR MATERIAL UNIVERSE.

Just as the material universe was in some mysterious manner affected by the fall of man (Rom. 8:19-23, R. V.), so also is it affected by the death of Jesus Christ, which is intended to neutralize the effect of sin upon the creation. There is a cosmical effect in the atonement. The Christ of Paid is larger than the second Adam—the Head of a new humanity; He is also the center of a universe which revolves around Him, and is in some mysterious way reconciled by His death. Just how this takes place we may not be able definitely to explain.

Col. 1:20—“And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven.” Some day there shall be a new heaven and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness (2 Pet. 3:13). See also Heb. 9:23, 24; Isa. 11 and 35.

2. IN RELATION TO THE WORLD OF MEN.

a) The Enmity Existing Between God and Man is Removed:

Rom. 5:10; Col. 1:20-22. For explanation, see under Scriptural Definition of the Atonement ((II.3, p. 72). The ground of enmity between God and man—whether in the active or passive sense of reconciliation—is removed by Christ’s death. The world of mankind is, through the atonement, reconciled to God.

b) A Propitiation for the World’s Sin Has Been Provided:

1 John 2:2; 4:10. See under Propitiation (II. 2, p. 71). The propitiation reaches as far as does the sin.

c) Satan’s Power Over the Race Has Been Neutralized:

John 12:31, 32—“Now is the judgment of this world: now shall the prince of this world be cast out. And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me.” Also John 16:9, 10; Col. 2:10. The lifting up of Christ on the Cross meant the casting down of Satan. Satan no longer holds undisputed sway over the sons of men. The power of darkness has been broken. Man need no longer be the slave of sin and Satan.

d) The Question of the World’s Sin is Settled:

It need no longer stand as a barrier between God and man. Strictly speaking, it is not now so much of a sin question as it is a Son question; not, What shall be done with my sin? but, What shall I do with Jesus, which is called Christ? The sins of the Old Testament saints, which during all the centuries had been held, as it were, in abeyance, were put away at the Cross (Rom. 3:25, 26). Sins present and future were also dealt with at the Cross. By the sacrifice of Himself, Christ forever put away sin (Heb. 9:26).

e) The Claims of a Broken Law Have Been Met, and the Curse Resting upon Man Because of a Broken Law Removed.

Col. 2:14—“Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross.” Thus every claim of the holy law of God, which sinful man had violated, had been met.

Gal. 3:13—“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.” (See v. 10 for the description of the curse.) The wages of sin, and the curse of sin, is death. Christ by His death on the Cross, paid that debt, and removed that curse.

f) Justification, Adoption, Sanctification, Access to God, an Inheritance, and the Removal of All Fear of Death—All This is Included in the Effect of the Death of Christ in the Behalf of the Believer.

Rom. 5:9; Gal. 4:3-5; Heb. 10:10; 10:19, 20; 9:15; 2:14, 15. How comforting, how strengthening, how inspiring are these wonderful aspects of the effects of the death of our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ!

3. THE EFFECT OF CHRIST’S DEATH ON SATAN.

See under c) above. The devil must submit to the victory of Christ. The dominion of Satan, so far as the believer in Christ is concerned, is now at an end: his dominion over the disobedient sons of men, too, will soon be at an end. Christ’s death was the pronouncement of Satan’s doom; it was the loss of his power over men. The power of the devil, while not yet absolutely destroyed, has been neutralized (Heb. 2:14). The evil principalities and powers, and Satan himself, did their worst at the Cross, but there they received their deathblow (Col. 2:14, 15).

THE RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST.

I. ITS IMPORTANT PLACE IN THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION.

1. IT HOLDS A UNIQUE PLACE IN CHRISTIANITY.

Christianity is the only religion that bases its claim to acceptance upon the resurrection of its founder. For any other religion to base its claim on such a doctrine would be to court failure. Test all other religions by this claim and see.

2. IT IS FUNDAMENTAL TO CHRISTIANITY.

In that wonderful chapter on the resurrection (1 Cor. 15) Paul makes Christianity answer with its life for the literal truth of the resurrection of Jesus Christ. That the body of the founder of the Christian religion did not lie in the grave after the third day is fundamental to the existence of the religion of Christ: “And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain” (v. 14). “If Christ be not raised … ye are yet in your sins” (v. 17). “Then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are perished” (v.18). Remove the resurrection from Paul’s Gospel, and his message is gone. The resurrection of Jesus Christ is not an appendage to Paul’s Gospel; it is a constitutive part of it.

The importance of this doctrine is very evident from the prominent part it played in the preaching of the Apostles: Peter—Acts 2:24, 32; 3:15; 4:10; 5:30; 10:40; 1 Peter 1:21, 23. Paul—Acts 13:30, 34; 17:31; 1 Cor. 15; Phil. 3:21. It was belief in such preaching that led to the establishment of the Christian church. Belief in the resurrection of Christ was the faith of the early church (Acts 4:33). The testimony to this great fact of Christian faith was borne in the midst of the fiercest opposition. Nor was it controverted, although the grave was well known and could have been pointed out. It was in this fact that Christianity acquired a firm basis for its historical development. There was not only an “Easter Message,” there was also an “Easter Faith.”

Our Lord’s honor was, in a sense, staked upon the fact of His resurrection. So important did He regard it that He remained forty days upon the earth after His resurrection, giving many infallible proofs of the great fact. He appealed to it again and again as evidence of the truth of His claims: Matt. 12:39, 40; John 2:20-22.

Both the friends and the enemies of Christianity admit that the resurrection of Jesus Christ is vital to the religion that bears His name. The Christian confidently appeals to it as an incontrovertible fact; the sceptic denies it altogether as a historical reality. “If the resurrection really took place,” says an assailant of it, “then Christianity must be admitted to be what it claims to be—a direct revelation from God.” “If Christ be not risen,” says the Apostle Paul, “then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain.” The one tries all he can to do away with the proofs submitted for the accepted fact; the other plainly says that if the resurrection cannot be believed, then Christianity is nothing but a sham. If the resurrection of Christ can be successfully denied, if it can be proven to be absolutely untrue, then the whole fabric of the Gospel falls to pieces, the whole structure of the Christian religion is shaken at its foundation, and the very arch of Christianity crumbles into dust. Then it has wrought only imaginary changes, deluded its most faithful adherents, deceived and disappointed the hopes of its most devoted disciples, and the finest moral achievements that adorn the pages of the history of the Christian church have been based upon a falsehood.

Nor must we ignore the prominent place the resurrection of Jesus Christ occupies in the Scriptures. More than one hundred times is it spoken of in the New Testament alone.

II. THE NATURE OF THE RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST.

1. JESUS CHRIST ACTUALLY DIED.

Some who disbelieve in the resurrection of Christ assert that Jesus merely swooned, and that pitying hands took Him down from the cross, thinking that He had died. The cool air of the tomb in which He was placed revived Him, so that He came forth from the tomb as though He had really risen from the dead. The disciples believed that He had really died and risen again.

This theory is false for the following reasons:

Jesus Christ appeared to the disciples after the third day, not as a weak, suffering, half-dead man, but as a conquering, triumphant victor over death and the grave. He never could have made the impression upon the disciples that He did, if He had presented the picture of a sick, half-dead man.

From John 19:33-37 we learn that when the soldiers pierced the side of Christ, there came forth blood and water. Physiologists and physicists agree that such a condition of the vital organs, including the heart itself, precludes the idea of a mere swoon, and proves conclusively that death had taken place.

Joseph of Arimathaea asked permission to bury the body of Jesus because he knew that Jesus had been pronounced dead (Matt. 27:57,

58).

When the news was brought to Pilate that Christ had died, it is said that “Pilate marvelled if he were already dead: and calling unto him the centurion, he asked him whether he had been any while dead. And when he knew it of the centurion, he gave the body to Joseph” (Mark 15:44, 45).

The women brought spices to anoint a dead body, not a half-dead Christ (Mark 16:1).

The soldiers pronounced Him dead: “But when they came to Jesus, and saw that he was dead already, they brake not his legs” (John 19:33).

Jesus Christ Himself, He who is the Truth, testifies to the fact that He had really died: Rev. 1:18—“I am he that liveth, and was dead.”

2. THE FACT THAT CHRIST’S BODY WAS ACTUALLY RAISED FROM THE DEAD.

The resurrection of Christ is not a spiritual resurrection, nor were his appearances to the disciples spiritual manifestations. He appeared to His disciples in a bodily form. The body that was laid in Joseph’s tomb came forth on that first Easter morn twenty centuries ago.

Some maintain that it is not vital to belief in the resurrection of Christ that we insist on a literal resurrection of the body of Jesus; all that we need to insist on is that Christ was ever afterwards known to be the victor over death, and that He had the power of an endless life. So it comes to pass that we have what is called an “Easter Message,” as contrasted with an “Easter Faith” which believes in the literal resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead. “Faith has by no means to do with the knowledge of the form in which Jesus lives, but only with the conviction that He is the living Lord.”—_Harnack_ in What is Christianity? According to this theory, belief in Christ’s resurrection means nothing more than belief in the survival of the soul of Jesus—that somehow or other Jesus was alive, and lived with God, while His body yet saw corruption in the grave.

We reply: This cannot be, for all the facts in the Gospel narratives contradict such a theory. Let us examine these narratives.

a) We are Confronted by the Fact of an Empty Tomb.

Matt. 28:6; Mark 16:6; Luke 24:3, 12; John 20:1, 2. The fact that the tomb was empty is testified to by competent witnesses —both friends and enemies: by the women, the disciples, the angels, and the Roman guards. How shall we account for the absence of the body of Jesus from the tomb? That it had not been stolen by outside parties is evident from the testimony of the soldiers who were bribed to tell that story (Matt. 28:11-15). Such a guard never would have allowed such a thing to take place. Their lives would have been thereby jeopardized. And if they were asleep (v. 13), how could they know what took place? Their testimony under such circumstances would be useless.

The condition in which the linen cloths were found lying by those who entered the tomb precludes the possibility of the body being stolen. Had such been the case the cloths would have been taken with the body, and not left in perfect order, thereby showing that the body had gone out of them. Burglars do not leave things in such perfect order. There is no order in haste.

Then again, we have the testimony of angels to the fact that Jesus had really risen as foretold (Matt. 28:6; Mark 16:6). The testimony of angels is surely trustworthy (Heb. 2:2).

b) There are Other Resurrections Mentioned in the Gospel Records which were Undoubtedly Bodily Resurrections.

Matt. 9:18-26; Luke 7:11-18; John 11:1-44. These incidents throw light upon the resurrection of Jesus. Why did the officers say that they were afraid “that his disciples should come by night and steal him away” if they did not refer to the body of Jesus? They surely could not steal His soul.

c) Those Who Saw Him After the Resurrection Recognized Him as Having the Same Body as He Had Before, Even to the Wound Prints.

John 20:27; Luke 24:37-39. It is true that there were occasions on which He was not recognizable by the disciples, but such occasions were the result of the eyes of the disciples being holden in order that they might not know him. There was divine intervention on these occasions. Does Christ still retain the prints of the nails? Is He still the Lamb as though it had been slain? (Rev. 5 and 6).

d) There Can Be No Doubt of the Fact that the Apostle Paul Believed in the Bodily Resurrection of Christ.

The Corinthians, to whom the apostle wrote that wonderful treatise on the resurrection (1 Cor. 15), were not spending their time denying a spiritual resurrection; nor was the apostle spending his time trying to produce convincing arguments for a spiritual resurrection. (See also Rom. 8:11.)

e) It is Clear also from Christ’s Own Testimony Before and After the Resurrection.

Matt. 17:23; Luke 24:39; Rev. 1:18. No other construction can legitimately be put upon these words than that Christ here refers to the resurrection of His body.

f) The Apostolic Testimony Corroborates this Fact.

Acts 2:24-32; 1 Pet. 1:3, 21; 3:21. Peter was at the tomb; he it was who stepped inside and saw the linen cloths lying. His testimony ought to be beyond question as to the fact at issue.

g) The Record of the Appearances of Christ Prove a Literal, Physical Resurrection.

Matt. 28:9, 10; John 20:14-18, cf. Mark 16:9; Luke 24:13-32; John 21, etc. All these appearances bear witness to the fact that it was not an incorporeal spirit or phantom, but a real, bodily Christ that they saw. He could be seen, touched, handled; He was recognizable; He ate and drank in their presence.

h) Lastly, Many Passages in the Scriptures Would Be Unintelligible Except on the Ground of a Bodily Resurrection of Jesus Christ from the Grave.

Rom. 8:11, 23; Eph. 1:19, 20; Phil. 3:20, 21; 1 Thess. 4:13-17.

3. THE NATURE OF THE RESURRECTION BODY OF CHRIST.

a) It was a Real Body; not a Ghost, nor a Phantom.

That the resurrection body of Jesus was not a phantom, but a body composed of “flesh and bones” is evident from Luke 24:36-43. It could be “touched” (John 20:20), and bore the marks of His passion (John 20:24-29). The likeness to His earthly body was not wholly parted with. [NOTE: Does this throw any light on the matter of recognition in heaven? Has Jesus Christ still this body in the glory? Shall we know Him by the prints?]

b) Yet the Body of Jesus was more than a mere Natural Body.

It bore marks and possessed attributes which proclaimed a relation to the celestial or supra-terrestrial sphere. For example: It could pass through barred doors (John 20:19), thus transcending physical limitations. It was not recognizable at times (Luke 24: 13-16; John 20:14, 15; 21:4, 12; Mark 16:12). This fact may be accounted for in two ways: First, supernaturally—their eyes were holden; Second, that in that risen life the spiritual controls the material rather than as here, the material the spiritual; so that the spirit could change the outward form of the body at will and at any given time. [Yet, note how Jesus had power to make Himself known by little acts, such as the breaking of the bread, and the tone of His voice. Do we carry these little characteristics into the other life? Shall we know our loved ones by these things?] Then again, Jesus was able to vanish out of sight of His friends (Luke 24:31; John 20:19, 26; Luke 24:51; Acts 1:9). And so He could be in different places at very short intervals of time.

Can we explain these facts? No, not fully. Yet we must not be so material as to totally disbelieve them. “Daily, indeed, are men being forced to recognize that the world holds more mysteries than they formerly imagined it to do. Probably physicists are not so sure of the impenetrability of matter, or even of the conservation of energy, as they once were; and newer speculations on the etheric basis of matter, and on the relation of the seen to the unseen universe (or universes) with forces and laws largely unknown, open up vistas of possibility which may hold in them the key to phenomena even as extraordinary as those in question.”—_James Orr_.

c) Christ’s Resurrection Body was Immortal.

Not only is it true that Christ’s body has not seen death since His resurrection, but it cannot die again. Rom. 6:9, 10; Rev. 1:18, cf. Luke 20:36. [The lesson for us from this: Christ is the firstfruits (1 Cor. 15:20).]

III. THE CREDIBILITY OF THE RESURRECTION OF CHRIST.

Credibility refers to the acceptance of a fact in a manner that deserves belief; it is belief based upon good authority, reliable facts, and competent witnesses. Credulity is belief in a thing without respect to the strength or weakness, reliability or unreliability of the authority, facts, or witnesses; it is a believing too readily, and with no reason for the faith or hope. The resurrection of Christ is a fact proven by competent evidence, and deserving of intelligent acceptance and belief. It is a doctrine buttressed by “many infallible proofs.”

The lines of proof for the credibility of Christ’s resurrection which may be followed in harmony with our purpose are as follows:

1. THE ARGUMENT FROM CAUSE AND EFFECT.

Certain things, conditions, institutions exist in our midst today; they are effects of causes, or a cause; what is that cause? Among these we may mention—
a) The Empty Tomb.

That was an effect; what was its cause? How did that grave become empty? (See under II. a), p. 87). The fact of an empty tomb must be accounted for. How do we account for it? Renan, the French sceptic, wittingly said, and yet how truly: “You Christians live on the fragrance of an empty tomb.”

b) The Lord’s Day.

The Lord’s Day is not the original Sabbath. Who dared change it? For what reason, and on what ground was it changed? Ponder the tenacity with which the Jews held on to their Sabbath given in Eden, and buttressed amid the thunders of Sinai. Recall how Jews would sooner die than fight on the Sabbath day (cf. Titus’ invasion of Jerusalem on the Sabbath). The Jews never celebrated the birthdays of great men; they celebrated events, like the Passover. Yet, in the New Testament times we find Jews changing their time-honored seventh day to the first day of the week, and, contrary to all precedent, calling that day after a man—the Lord’s Day. Here is an effect, a tremendous effect; what was its cause? We cannot have an effect without a cause. The resurrection of our Lord was the cause for this great change in the day of worship.

c) The Christian Church.

We know what a grand and noble institution the Christian church is. What would this world be without it? Its hymns, worship, philanthropy, ministrations of mercy are all known to us. Where did this institution come from? It is an effect, a glorious effect; what is its cause? When the risen Christ appeared unto the discouraged disciples and revived their faith and hope, they went forth, under the all-conquering faith in a risen and ascended Lord, and preached the story of His life, death, resurrection, ascension, and coming again. Men believed these teachings; gathered themselves together to study the Scriptures, to pray, to worship Christ, and to extend His kingdom among men. This is how the church came into existence. Its cause was the resurrection of Christ.

d) The New Testament.

If Jesus Christ had remained buried in the grave, the story of His life and death would have remained buried with Him. The New Testament is an effect of Christ’s resurrection. It was the resurrection that put heart into the disciples to go forth and tell its story. Sceptics would have us believe that the resurrection of Christ was an afterthought of the disciples to give the story of Christ’s life a thrilling climax, a decorative incident which satisfies the dramatic feeling in man, a brilliant picture at the end of an heroic life. We reply: There would have been no beautiful story to put a climax to if there had been no resurrection of the Christ of the story. The resurrection does not grow out of the beautiful story of His life, but the beautiful story of Christ’s life grew out of the fact of the resurrection. The New Testament is the book of the resurrection.

2. THE ARGUMENT FROM TESTIMONY.

a) As to the Number of the Witnesses.

The resurrection of Christ as a historical fact is verified by a sufficient number of witnesses: over five hundred (1 Cor. 15:3-9). In our courts, one witness is enough to establish murder; two, high treason; three, the execution of a will; seven, an oral will. Seven is the greatest number required under our law. Christ’s resurrection had five hundred and fourteen. Is not this a sufficient number?

b) As to the Character of the Witnesses.

The value of the testimony of a witness depends much upon his character; if that is impeached, then the testimony is discounted. Scrutinize carefully the character of the men who bore witness to the fact of Christ’s resurrection. Impeach them if you can. They are unassailable on ethical grounds. “No honorable opponent of the Gospel has ever denied this fact. Their moral greatness awakened an Augustine, a Francis of Assisi, and a Luther. They have been the unrivalled pattern of all mature and moral manhood for nearly two thousand years.” In law much is made of the question of motive. What motive could the apostles have had in perpetrating the story of Christ’s resurrection upon people? Every one of them (except one) died a martyr’s death for his loyalty to the story of Christ’s resurrection. What had they to gain by fraud? Would they have sacrificed their lives for what they themselves believed to be an imposture?

Nor are we to slight the testimony to Christ’s resurrection that comes to us from sources other than that of the inspired writers of the New Testament. Ignatius, a Christian, and a contemporary of Christ, a martyr for his faith in Christ, in his Letter to the Philadelphians, says: “Christ truly suffered, as He also truly raised up Himself. I know that after the resurrection He was in the flesh, and I believe Him to be so still. And when He came to those who were with Peter, He said to them, ‘Take, handle me, and see that I am not an incorporeal phantom!’” Tertullian, in his Apolegeticus, says: “The fame of our Lord’s remarkable resurrection and ascension being now spread abroad, Pontius Pilate, according to an ancient custom of communicating novel occurrences to the emperor, that nothing might escape him, transmitted to Tiberius, Emperor of Rome, an account of the resurrection of our Lord from the dead…Tiberius referred the whole matter to the Senate, who, being unacquainted with the facts, rejected it.” The integrity of this passage is unquestioned by even the most sceptical critics.

Alleged Discrepancies.

[Footnote: The following extract from Dr. Orr’s book, The Resurrection of Jesus, will throw some light on the matter of differences in testimony, while maintaining the credibility of the fact itself. “An instructive example is furnished in a recent issue of the Bibliotheca Sacra. A class in history was studying the French Revolution, and the pupils were asked to look the matter up, and report next day by what vote Louis XVI was condemned. Nearly half the class reported that the vote was unanimous. A considerable number protested that he was condemned by a majority of one. A few gave the majority as 145 in a vote of 721. How utterly irreconcilable these reports seemed! Yet for each the authority of reputable historians could be given. In fact, all were true, and the full truth was a combination of all three. On the first vote as to the king’s guilt there was no contrary voice. Some tell only of this. The vote on the penalty was given individually, with reasons, and a majority of 145 declared for the death penalty, at once or after peace was made with Austria, or after confirmation by the people. The votes for immediate death were only 361 as against 360. History abounds with similar illustrations. As an example of another kind, reference may be made to Rev. R. J. Campbell’s volume of Sermons Addressed to Individuals, where, on pp. 145-6 and pp. 181-2, the same story of a Brighton man is told with affecting dramatic details. The story is no doubt true in substance; but for ‘discrepancies’—let the reader compare them, and never speak more (or Mr. Campbell either) of the Gospels!”]

The seeming differences in the testimony of the witnesses to the resurrection may be largely, if not altogether reconciled by a correct knowledge of the manner and order of the appearances of Christ after His resurrection.

The following order of appearances may help in the understanding of the testimony to the resurrection:

1. The women at the grave see the vision of angels.

2. The women separate at the grave to make known the news —Mary Magdalene going to tell Peter and John, who doubtless lived close by (for it seems that they reached the grave in a single run). The other women go to tell the other disciples who, probably, were at Bethany.

3. Peter and John, hearing the news, run to the grave, leaving Mary. They then return home.

4. Mary follows; lingers at the grave; gets vision of the Master, and command to go tell the disciples.

5. The other women see Christ on the way.

6. Christ appears to the two on the way to Emmaus.

7. To Simon Peter.

8. To the ten apostles, and other friends.

9. To the apostles at Tiberias.

10. To the apostles and multitude on the mount.

11. To the disciples and friends at the ascension.

12. To James (1 Cor. 15:7).

13. To Paul (1 Cor. 15:8).

IV. THE RESULTS OF THE RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST.

1. AS TO JESUS CHRIST HIMSELF.

Rom. 1:4—“And declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead.” To “declare” means to mark off, to define, to set apart (Acts 10:42; Heb. 4:7). NOTE: Christ was not made the Son of God by the resurrection, but declared such. Had Christ remained in the grave as other men had done, there would then have been no reasonable ground to impose faith in Him. The empty tomb testifies to the deity of Christ.

Matt. 18:38-42; John 2:13-22. In these scriptures Jesus Christ bases His authority for His teaching and the truth of all His claims on His resurrection from the dead. (Cf. under I. 2, in this chapter, p. 84.) See also Matt. 28:6—“Risen, as he said.”

2. AS TO THE BELIEVER IN JESUS CHRIST.

a) Assures Him of His Acceptance with God.

Rom. 4:25—“Who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification.” So long as Christ lay in the grave there was no assurance that His redemptive work had been acceptable to God. The fact that God raised Jesus from the dead was evidence that the Father was satisfied with the sacrifice Christ had made for the sins of men. “Of righteousness, because I go unto my Father” (John 16:10). Believing sinners may now rest satisfied that in Him they are justified. This thought is illustrated by the picture of the Jews waiting outside the temple for the coming out of the high priest (Luke 1:21), thereby indicating that their sacrifice had been accepted.

b) Assures of Him an Interceding High Priest in the Heavens.

Rom. 8:34—“Who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died, yea rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us.” Also Heb. 7:25. Salvation was not completed at the Cross; there is still need of daily forgiveness, and so of the continual presenting of the shed blood before the mercy-seat. The accusations of Satan still need to be answered (Zec. 3:1-5; Job 1 and 2; Heb. 7:25). We need a Moses, not only to deliver us from bondage, but also to plead for us and intercede for us because of our sins committed in the wilderness journey. Herein is our assurance of forgiveness of sins committed after conversion—that our great High Priest is always heard (John 11:42), and that He prays constantly for us that our faith fail not (Luke 22:32). Our temporary falls shall not condemn us, for our Priest intercedes for us.

c) Assures Him of All Needed Power for Life and Service.

Eph. 1:19-22—“The exceeding greatness of his power … which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places, far above all principality, and power, and might, … and gave him to be the head over all things to the church.” Also Phil. 3:10. There are two standards in the Bible by which God’s power is gauged: In the Old Testament, when God would have His people know the extent of His power, it is according to the power by which He brought Israel out of Egypt (Micah 7:15); in the New Testament, the unit of measurement of God’s power is “According to the working of his mighty power, which he wrought in Christ … when he raised him from the dead.” The connection of Phil. 3:10 gives the believer the promise and assurance not only of present power and victory, but also of future glorification. If we desire to know what God is able to do for and through us we are invited to look at the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

d) The Assurance of His Own Resurrection and Immortality.

1 Thess. 4:14—“For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him.”

2 Cor. 4:14—“Knowing that he which raised up the Lord Jesus shall raise up us also by Jesus, and shall present us with you.” John 14:19—“Because I live, ye shall live also.”

3. AS TO THE WORLD.

a) The Certainty of a Resurrection.

1 Cor. 15:22—“As in Adam all die; even so in Christ shall all be made alive.” Paul is here discussing a bodily, and not a spiritual, resurrection (see under II. 2 d), p. 88). As in Adam all men die physically, so in Christ all men are raised physically. The resurrection of Jesus Christ guarantees the resurrection of all men (see under Resurrection, p. 245).

b) The Certainty of a Judgment Day.

Acts 17:31—“Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead.” The resurrection of Christ is God’s unfailing testimony to the fact of a coming day of judgment for the world. The one is as sure as the other.

The Ascension and Exaltation of Jesus Christ.

I. THE MEANING OF THESE TERMS.

When we speak of the Ascension of Christ we refer to that event in the life of our risen Lord in which He departed visibly from His disciples into heaven. This event is recorded in Acts 1:9-11—“This same Jesus which is taken up from you into heaven,” etc.

By the Exaltation of Jesus Christ we mean that act of God by which the risen and ascended Christ is given the place of power at the right hand of God. Phil. 2:9—“Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him and given him a name which is above every name.” Eph. 1:20, 21—“Which he (God) wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places, far above all principality and power.” See also Heb. 1:3.

II. THE SCRIPTURAL DATA FOR THE DOCTRINE.

Foregleams of this truth were granted to the prophets of the Old Testament times, Psa. 110:1; 68:18. They saw Christ in prophetic vision not only as the meek and lowly One, but as the ascended and glorified Lord.

Our Lord Himself, on many occasions, foretold His ascension and exaltation. These events were constantly before His mind’s eye: Luke 9:51; John 6:62; 20:17.

The New Testament writers record the event: Mark 16:19; Luke 24:51; John 3:13; Acts 1:9-11; Eph. 4:8-10; Heb. 10:12.

Stephen, in his dying moments, was granted a vision of the exalted Christ. He saw the “Son of Man standing on the right hand of God” (Acts 7:55, 36).

The apostles taught and preached these great truths: Peter, Acts 2:33, 34; 5:31; 1 Peter 3:22. Paul: Eph. 4:8-10; Heb. 4:14; 1 Tim.

3:16.

III. THE NECESSITY OF THE ASCENSION AND EXALTATION OF JESUS CHRIST.

The nature of the resurrection body of our Lord necessitated His ascension and exaltation. Such a body could not be subject to ordinary laws; it could not permanently abide here.

Christ’s unique personality also required such an exit from the world. Should not the exit of Christ from this world be as unique as His entrance into it? Then, again, consider the sinlessness of His life. If a miraculous exit was granted to men like Elijah and Enoch, who were sinful men, why should we marvel if such was granted to Christ? Indeed it seems perfectly natural, and quite in keeping with His whole life that just such an event as the ascension and exaltation should form a fitting finish to such a wonderful career.

The ascension and exaltation were necessary to complete the redemptive work of Christ. His work was not finished when He arose from the dead. He had not yet presented the blood of the atonement in the presence of the Father; nor had He yet been given His place at the right hand of the Father as the bestower of all spiritual gifts, and especially the gift of the Holy Spirit.

The apostles were thus able to furnish to an unbelieving and inquisitive world a satisfactory account of the disappearance of the body of Christ which had been placed in the tomb, and which they claimed to have seen after the resurrection. “Where is your Christ?” the scoffing world might ask. “We saw Him ascend up into the heaven, and He is now at the Father’s right hand,” the apostles could reply.

It was further necessary in order that Christ might become an ideal object of worship for the whole human race. We should not forget that Christ’s earthly ministry was a purely local one: He could be but in one place at a time. Those who worshipped at His feet in Jerusalem could not, at the same time, worship Him in any other place. This was the lesson, doubtless, that the Master desired to teach Mary when she would fain hold on to Him, and when He said, “Touch me not.” Mary must worship now by faith, not by sight.

IV. THE NATURE OF THE ASCENSION AND EXALTATION OF JESUS CHRIST.

1. IT WAS A BODILY AND VISIBLE ASCENSION.

Acts 1:9-11; Luke 24:51. It was the same Christ they had known in life, only glorified, who had tarried with them now for the space of forty days, who had delivered unto them certain commandments, and whose hands were even then outstretched in blessing that they saw slowly vanishing from their view up into the heavens. It was a body of flesh and bones, not flesh and blood. So will be our translation (1 Cor. 15:51, 52).

2. HE PASSED UP THROUGH THE HEAVENS.

Heb. 4:14 (R. V.); Eph. 4:10; Heb. 7:26. Whatever and how many created heavens there may be between the earth and the dwelling place of God, we may not know, but we are here told that Christ passed through them all, and up to the highest heaven, indeed was made higher than the heavens. This means that He overcame all those evil principalities and powers that inhabit these heavenlies (Eph. 6) and who doubtless tried their best to keep Him from passing through the heavens to present His finished work before the Father. Just as the high priest passed through the vail into the holy place, so Christ passed through the heavens into the presence of God.

3. HE TOOK HIS PLACE AT THE RIGHT HAND OF THE FATHER.

He was exalted to the right hand of God. Eph. 1:20—“Set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places, far above all principality and power.” Col. 3:1—“Christ sitteth on the right hand of God.” This place was not taken by Christ without conflict with these evil principalities and powers. But “He made a show of them openly, triumphing over them in it” (Col. 2:15). See also Acts 5:31.

What is meant by “the right hand of God”? Is it a definite place, or is it simply a figure of speech denoting a place of authority and power? Why can not both things be included? God has His dwelling place in heaven, and it is not incredible to believe that from the throne there Christ exercises His divine prerogatives. Stephen saw Christ standing at the right hand of God in heaven.

The “right hand of God” assuredly indicates the place of the accuser whom Christ casts out (Zec. 3:1; Rev. 12:10); the place of intercession which Christ now occupies (Rom. 8:34); the place of acceptance where the Intercessor now sits (Psa. 110:1); the place of highest power and richest blessing (Gen. 48:13-19); the place of power (Psa. 110:5). All these powers and prerogatives are Christ’s by reason of His finished work of redemption.

V. THE PURPOSE OF THE ASCENSION AND EXALTATION OF JESUS CHRIST.

1. HE HAS ENTERED HEAVEN AS A FORERUNNER.

Heb. 6:20—“Whither the forerunner is for us entered, even Jesus.” The forerunner is one who enters into a place where the rest are to follow; one who is sent before to make observations; a scout, a spy. The Levitical high priest was not a forerunner; no one could follow him. But where Christ goes His people may go also.

2. HE HAS GONE TO PREPARE A PLACE FOR HIS PEOPLE.

Heb. 9:21-24; John 14:2. He is there making all necessary preparations for the coming of His bride, the Church. In some way it seems that the heavenly sanctuary had been defiled by sin. It was necessary, therefore, that Christ purge it with His blood. What a home that will be if He prepares it!

3. HE IS NOW APPEARING BEFORE GOD IN OUR BEHALF.

Heb. 9:24—“To appear in the presence of God for us.” He is there to act as High Priest in our behalf; to present the blood of atonement. “Before the throne my Surety stands.” And yet not so much before the throne as on the throne. He is the Kingly Priest. With authority He asks, and His petitions are granted.

4. HE HAS TAKEN HIS PLACE AT THE FATHER’S RIGHT HAND THAT HE MAY FILL ALL THINGS, AWAITING THE DAY WHEN HE SHALL HAVE UNIVERSAL DOMINION.

Eph. 4:10. He fills all things with His presence, with His work, with Himself. He is not a local Christ any longer (cf. Jer. 23:24).

Heb. 10:12, 13; Acts 3:20, 21—“He shall send Jesus Christ … . whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things.” Having won His victory, Christ is now waiting for all the spoils to be gathered. He is expecting, not doubting, but assuredly waiting; already His feet are upon the neck of the enemy. The Apocalypse pictures Christ entering upon the actual possession of His kingdom.

VI. THE RESULTS OF THE ASCENSION AND EXALTATION OF JESUS CHRIST.

1. IT ASSURES US OF A FREE AND CONFIDENT ACCESS INTO THE PRESENCE OF GOD.

Heb. 4:14-16 (R. V.)—“Having then a great high priest, who hath passed through the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our confession… . . Let us therefore draw near with boldness unto the throne of grace.” Our great High Priest is before the throne to present petitions, secure pardons for His people, and to communicate blessings in answer to their faith and prayers. We may have a free and fearless confidence in our approach to God.

2. AN ASSURED HOPE OF IMMORTALITY.

2 Cor. 5:1-8 describes the longing of the Christian to be clothed with a body after he has been called upon to lay aside this earthly tabernacle. He has no desire for a bodiless existence. The ascension and exaltation of Christ assures the believer that as Christ, so he also will take his place in heaven with a body like unto Christ’s own glorious body.

3. IT GIVES THE BELIEVER CONFIDENCE IN GOD’S PROVIDENCE TO BELIEVE THAT ALL THINGS ARE WORKING TOGETHER FOR HIS GOOD

Seeing that Christ, the believer’s Head, is exalted far above all things in heaven and earth, it is possible for the believer to be master of circumstances, and superior to all his environment (Eph. 1:22; cf. Col. 1:15-18).

4. CHRIST HAS BEEN MADE HEAD OVER ALL THINGS FOR THE CHURCH.

That is to say, that everything is subject to Christ, and that for the Church’s sake. Eph. 1:22 (R. V.)—“And he put all things in subjection under his feet, and gave him to be head over all things to the church.” Christ is the fullness of the Father for the Church (Col. 1:19; 2:9, 10). Christ bestows the Holy Spirit upon the Church (Acts 2:33-36; John 7:37-39). He receives for, and bestows upon the Church spiritual gifts (Eph. 4:8-12).

THE DOCTRINE OF THE HOLY SPIRIT

I. THE PERSONALITY OF THE HOLY SPIRIT.

1. PERSONAL NAMES GIVEN TO THE SPIRIT. 2. PERSONAL PRONOUNS USED OF THE SPIRIT. 3. THE SPIRIT ASSOCIATED WITH THE FATHER AND THE SON. 4. THE SPIRIT POSSESSES PERSONAL CHARACTERISTICS. 5. PERSONAL ACTS ARE ASCRIBED TO THE HOLY SPIRIT. 6. THE SPIRIT IS SUBJECT TO PERSONAL TREATMENT.

II. THE DEITY OF THE HOLY SPIRIT.

1. DIVINE NAMES ARE GIVEN TO THE SPIRIT. 2. DIVINE ATTRIBUTES. 3. DIVINE WORKS. 4. NAME OF THE SPIRIT ASSOCIATED WITH NAMES OF THE DEITY. 5. COMPARISON OF OLD TESTAMENT PASSAGES WITH SOME IN THE NEW TESTAMENT.

III. THE NAMES OF THE HOLY SPIRIT.

1. THE HOLY SPIRIT. 2. THE SPIRIT OF GRACE. 3. THE SPIRIT OF BURNING. 4. THE SPIRIT OF TRUTH. 5. THE SPIRIT OF LIFE. 6. THE SPIRIT OF WISDOM AND KNOWLEDGE. 7. THE SPIRIT OF PROMISE. 8. THE SPIRIT OF GLORY. 9. THE SPIRIT OF GOD AND OF CHRIST. IV. THE WORK OF THE HOLY SPIRIT.

1. IN RELATION TO THE WORLD. a) The Universe. b) The World of Mankind. 2. IN RELATION TO THE BELIEVER. 3. IN RELATION TO THE SCRIPTURES. 4. IN RELATION TO JESUS CHRIST.

V. OFFENCES AGAINST THE HOLY SPIRIT.

1. BY THE SINNER. a) Resisting. b) Insulting. c) Blaspheming. 2. BY THE BELIEVER. a) Grieving. b) Lying to. c) Quenching.

THE DOCTRINE OF THE HOLY SPIRIT.

We are living in the Age of the Spirit. The Old Testament period may be called the Age of the Father; the period covered by the Gospels, the Age of the Son; from Pentecost until the second advent of Christ, the Age of the Spirit.

All matters pertaining to the doctrine of the Holy Spirit should, therefore, be of special interest to us who live in this age of special privilege. Yet how ignorant is the average Christian concerning matters pertaining to the Spirit. The Christian church today needs to heed Paul’s exhortation: “Now concerning spiritual gifts (or, perhaps better, “matters pertaining to the Spirit”), I would not have you ignorant.” May it not be that the reason why the sin against the Holy Spirit is so grievous is because it is a sin committed in the light and with the knowledge of the clearest and fullest revelation of the Godhead. We cannot, therefore, afford to remain in ignorance of this all-important doctrine.

I. THE PERSONALITY OF THE HOLY SPIRIT.

It seems strange that it should be necessary to discuss this phase of the subject at all. Indeed, in the light of the last discourse of the Master (John 14-16), it seems superfluous, if not really insulting. During all the ages of the Christian era, however, it has been necessary to emphasize this phase of the doctrine of the Spirit (cf. Arianism, Socinianism, Unitarianism).

1. WHY IS THE PERSONALITY OF THE HOLY SPIRIT QUESTIONED?

a) Because, as Contrasted with the Other Persons of the Godhead, the Spirit Seems Impersonal.

The visible creation makes the personality of God the Father somewhat easy to conceive; the incarnation makes it almost, if not altogether, impossible to disbelieve in the personality of Jesus Christ; but the acts and workings of the Holy Spirit are so secret and mystical, so much is said of His influence, graces, power and gifts, that we are prone to think of Him as an influence, a power, a manifestation or influence of the Divine nature, an agent rather than a Person.

b) Because of the Names Given to the Holy Spirit.

He is called breath, wind, power. The symbols used in speaking of the Spirit are oil, fire, water, etc. See John 3:5-8; Acts 2:1-4; John 20:22; 1 John 2:20. It is not strange that in view of all this some students of the Scriptures may have been led to believe, erroneously of course, that the Holy Spirit is an impersonal influence emanating from God the Father.

c) Because the Holy Spirit is not usually Associated with the Father and the Son in the Greetings and Salutation of the New Testament.

For illustration, see 1 Thess. 3:11—“Now God himself and our Father, and our Lord Jesus Christ, direct our way unto you.” Yet we must remember, in this connection, that the Apostolic Benediction in 2 Cor. 13:14 does associate the three persons of the Trinity, thereby asserting their personality equally.

d) Because the Word or Name “Spirit” is Neuter.

It is true that the same Greek word is translated wind and Spirit; also that the Authorized Version uses the neuter pronoun “itself,” when speaking of the Holy Spirit (Rom. 8:16, 26). As we shall see later, the Revised Version substitutes “himself” for “itself.”

The importance of the personality of the Spirit, and of our being assured of this fact is forcibly set forth by Dr. R. A. Torrey: “If the Holy Spirit is a Divine Person and we know it not, we are robbing a Divine Being of the love and adoration which are His due. It is of the highest practical importance whether the Holy Spirit is a power that we, in our ignorance and weakness, are somehow to get hold of and use, or whether the Holy Spirit is a personal Being … . who is to get hold of us and use us. It is of the highest experimental importance… . . Many can testify to the blessing that came into their lives when they came to know the Holy Spirit, not merely as a gracious influence … . but as an ever-present, loving friend and helper.”

2. METHOD OF PROOF.

It is difficult to define personality when used of the Divine Being. God cannot be measured by human standards. God was not made in the image of man, but man in the image of God. God is not a deified man; man is rather a limited God (“a little …. less than God.” Heb. 2:7, R. V.). Only God has a perfect personality. When, however, one possesses the attributes, properties and qualities of personality, then personality may be unquestionably predicated of such a being. Does the Holy Spirit possess such properties? Let us see.

a) Names that Imply Personality are Given to the Spirit.

The Comforter: John 14:16; 16:7. “Comforter” means one who is called to your side—as a client calls a lawyer. That this name cannot be used of any abstract, impersonal influence is clear from the fact that in 1 John 2:1 the same word is used of Christ. (See Rom. 8:26). Again in John 14:16 the Holy Spirit, as the Paraclete, is to take the place of a person—Christ Himself, and to personally guide the disciples just as Jesus had been doing. No one but a person can take the place of a person; certainly no mere influence could take the place of Jesus Christ, the greatest personality that ever lived. Again, Christ, in speaking of the Spirit as the Comforter, uses the masculine definite article, and thus, by His choice of gender, teaches the personality of the Holy Spirit. There can be no parity between a person and an influence.

b) Personal Pronouns are Used of the Holy Spirit.

John 16:7, 8, 13-15: Twelve times in these verses the Greek masculine pronoun ekeinos (that one, He) is used of the Spirit. This same word is used of Christ in 1 John 2:6; 3:3, 5, 7, 16. This is especially remarkable because the Greek word for spirit (_pneuma_) is neuter, and so should have a neuter pronoun; yet, contrary to ordinary usage, a masculine pronoun is here used. This is not a pictorial personification, but a plain, definite, clear-cut statement asserting the personality of the Holy Spirit. Note also that where, in the Authorized Version, the neuter pronoun is used, the same is corrected in the Revised Version: not “itself,” but “Himself” (Rom. 8:16,26).

c) The Holy Spirit is Identified with the Father and the Son—and, indeed, with Christians—in Such a Way as to Indicate Personality.

The Baptismal Formula. Matt. 28:19. Suppose we should read, “Baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the wind or breath.” Would that sound right? If the first two names are personal, is not the third? Note also: “In the name” (singular), not names (plural), implying that all three are Persons equally,

The Apostolic Benediction. 2 Cor. 13:14. The same argument may be used as that in connection with the Baptismal Formula, just cited.

Identification with Christians. Acts 15:28. “For it seemeth good to the Holy Ghost, and to us.” Shall we say, “It seemeth good to the wind and to us”? It would be absurd. 10:38—“How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power.” Shall we read, “Anointed .. with power and power?” Rom. 15:13—“That ye may abound in hope, through the power of the Holy Ghost.” Shall we read, “That ye may abound in hope, through the power of the power“? See also Luke 4:14. Would not these passages rebel against such tautological and meaningless usage? Most assuredly.

d) Personal Characteristics are Ascribed to the Holy Spirit.

The Holy Spirit is represented as searching the deepest and profoundest truths of God, and possessing knowledge of His counsels sufficiently to understand His purposes (1 Cor. 2:10, 11). Could a mere influence do this? See also Isa. 11:3; I Pet. 1:11.

Spiritual gifts are distributed to believers according to the will of the Spirit (1 Cor. 12). Here is wisdom, prudence and discretion, all of which are distinguishing marks of personality. The Spirit not only bestows spiritual gifts, but bestows them discreetly, according as He thinks best. See John 3:8 also.

The Spirit is said to have a mind, and that implies thought, purpose, determination: Rom. 8:27, cf. v. 7. Mind is an attribute of personality.

e) Personal Acts are Ascribed to the Holy Spirit.

The Spirit speaks: Rev. 2:7 (cf. Matt. 17:5—“Hear ye him.”) It is the Spirit who speaks through the apostles (10:20). Speech is an attribute of personality.

The Spirit maketh intercession: Rom. 8:26 (R. V.), cf. Heb. 7:25; I John 2:1, 2, where Christ is said to “make intercession.”

Acts 13:2; 16:6, 7; 20:28. In these passages the Holy Spirit is seen calling missionaries, overseeing the church, and commanding the life and practice of the apostles and the whole church. Such acts indicate personality.

f) The Holy Spirit is Susceptible to Personal Treatment.

He may be grieved (Eph. 4:30); insulted (Heb. 10.29); lied to (Acts 5:3); blasphemed and sinned against (Matt. 12:31, 32). Indeed, the sin against the Holy Spirit is a much more grievous matter than the sin against the Son of Man. Can such be said of an influence? Can it be said even of any of the sons of men?

II. THE DEITY OF THE HOLY SPIRIT.

By the Deity of the Holy Spirit is meant that the Holy Spirit is God. This fact is clearly set forth in the Scriptures, in a five-fold way:

1. DIVINE NAMES ARE GIVEN TO THE HOLY SPIRIT.

In Acts 5:4, the Spirit is called God. And this in opposition to man, to whom, alone, Ananias thought he was talking. Can any statement allege deity more clearly? In 2 Cor. 3:18—“We …. are transformed into the same image from glory to glory, even as from the Lord the Spirit” (R. V.). Here the Spirit is called the Lord. For the meaning of “Lord” see under the Deity of Christ, p. 60.

2. THE HOLY SPIRIT POSSESSES DIVINE ATTRIBUTES.

He is eternal in his nature (Heb. 9:14, R. V.); omnipresent (Psa. 139:7-10); omnipotent (Luke 1:35); omniscient (1 Cor. 2:10, 11). For the meaning of these attributes, see under the Doctrine of God and Jesus Christ, pp. 28 and 63.

3. DIVINE WORKS ARE ASCRIBED TO THE HOLY SPIRIT.

Creation (Gen. 1:2; Psa. 104:30, R. V.); Job 33:4—“The Spirit of God hath made me, and the breath of the Almighty hath given me life.” Regeneration (John 3:5-8); Resurrection (Rom.

8:11).

4. THE NAME OF THE HOLY SPIRIT IS ASSOCIATED WITH THAT OF THE FATHER, AND OF THE SON.

See under Personality of the Spirit, p. 107. The same arguments which there prove the Personality of the Spirit may be used here to prove the Deity of the Spirit. It would be just as absurd to say, “Baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of Moses“—thus putting Moses on an equality with the Father and the Son—as it would be to say, “Baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the wind“—thus making the wind as personal as the Father and the Son. The Spirit is on an equality with the Father and the Son in the distribution of spiritual gifts (1 Cor. 12:4-6).

5. PASSAGES WHICH IN THE OLD TESTAMENT REFER TO GOD ARE IN THE NEW TESTAMENT MADE TO REFER TO THE HOLY SPIRIT.

Compare Isa. 6:8-10 with Acts 28:25-27; and Exod. 16:7 with Heb.

3:7-9.

III. THE NAMES OF THE HOLY SPIRIT.

Just as the Father and the Son have certain names ascribed to them, setting forth their nature and work, so also does the Holy Spirit have names which indicate His character and work.

1. THE HOLY SPIRIT.

Luke 11:13—“How much more shall your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask Him?” Rom. 1:4—“The Spirit of holiness.” In these passages it is the moral character of the Spirit that is set forth. Note the contrast: “Ye, being evil,” and “the Holy Spirit.” The Spirit is holy in Himself and produces holiness in others.

2. THE SPIRIT OF GRACE.

Heb. 10:29—“And hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace.” As the executive of the Godhead, the Spirit confers grace. To resist the Spirit, therefore, is to shut off all hope of salvation. To resist His appeal is to insult the Godhead. That is why the punishment mentioned here is so awful.

3. THE SPIRIT OF BURNING.

Matt. 3:11, 12—“He shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire.” Isa. 4:4—“When the Lord shall have washed away the filth of the daughters of Zion…. by the spirit of judgment and the spirit of burning.” This cleansing is done by the blast of the Spirit’s burning. Here is the searching, illuminating, refining, dross-consuming character of the Spirit. He burns up the dross in our lives when He enters and takes possession.

4. THE SPIRIT OF TRUTH.

John 14:17; 15:26; 16:13; I John 5:6. As God is Love, so the Spirit is Truth. He possesses, reveals, confers, leads into, testifies to, and defends the truth. Thus He is opposed to the “spirit of error” (1 John 4:6).

5. THE SPIRIT OF LIFE.

Rom. 8:2—“For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.” That which had been the actuating principle of life, namely, the flesh, is now deposed, and its controlling place taken by the Spirit. The Spirit is thus the dynamic of the believer’s experience that leads him into a life of liberty and power.

6. THE SPIRIT OF WISDOM AND KNOWLEDGE.

That the references in Isa. 11:2; 61:1, 2 are to be understood as referring to the Spirit that abode upon the Messiah, is clear from Luke 4:18 where “Spirit” is capitalized. Christ’s wisdom and knowledge resulted, in one aspect of the case, from His being filled with the Spirit. “Wisdom and understanding” refer to intellectual and moral apprehension; “Counsel and might,” the power to scheme, originate, and carry out; “Knowledge and the fear of the Lord,” acquaintance with the true will of God, and the determination to carry it out at all costs. These graces are the result of the Spirit’s operations on the heart.

7. THE SPIRIT OF PROMISE.

Eph. 1:13—“Ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise.” The Spirit is the fulfillment of Christ’s promise to send the Comforter, and so He is the promised Spirit. The Spirit also confirms and seals the believer, and thus assures him that all the promises made to him shall be completely fulfilled.

8. THE SPIRIT OF GLORY.

1 Pet. 4:14—“The spirit of glory and of God resteth upon you.” What is glory? Glory as used in the Scripture means character. The Holy Spirit is the One who produces godlike character in the believer (cf. 2 Cor. 3:18).

9. THE SPIRIT OF GOD, AND OF CHRIST.

1 Cor. 3:16—“The Spirit of God dwelleth in you.” Rom. 8:9—“Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.” The fact that the Spirit is sent from the Father and the Son, that He represents them, and is their executive, seems to be the thought conveyed here.

10. THE COMFORTER (p. 109).

IV. THE WORK OF THE HOLY SPIRIT.

The Work of the Spirit may be summed up under the following headings: His work in the universe; in humanity as a whole; in the believer; with reference to the Scriptures; and, finally, with reference to Jesus Christ.

1. IN RELATION TO THE WORLD.

a) With Regard to the Universe.

There is a sense in which the creation of the universe may be ascribed to God’s Spirit. Indeed Psa. 33:6—“By the word of the Lord were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the breath (Spirit) of his mouth,” attributes the work of creation to the Trinity, the Lord, the Word of the Lord, and the Spirit of the Lord. The creation of man is attributed to the Spirit. Job 33:4—“The Spirit of God hath made me, and the breath of the Almighty hath given me life.” It would be proper, doubtless, to say that the Father created all things through the agency of the Word and the Spirit. In the Genesis account of creation (1:3) the Spirit is seen actively engaged in the work of creation.

Not only is it true that the Spirit’s agency is seen in the act of creation, but His power is seen also in the preservation of nature. Isa. 40:7—“The grass withereth, the flower fadeth, because the spirit of the Lord bloweth upon it.” A staggering declaration.

THE DOCTRINE OF THE HOLY SPIRIT

The Spirit comes in the fierce east wind with its keen, biting blast of death. He comes also in the summer zephyr, which brings life and beauty.

b) With Regard to Humanity as a Whole.

John 16:8-11—“And when He is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment; of sin, because they believe not on me; of righteousness, because I go unto my Father and ye see me no more; of judgment, because the prince of this world is judged.” Here are three great facts of which the Spirit bears witness to the world: the sin of unbelief in Christ; the fact that Christ was righteous and absolutely true in all that He claimed to be; the fact that the power of Satan has been broken. Of sin: the sin in which all other sins are embraced; of righteousness: the righteousness in which all other righteousness is manifested and fulfilled; of judgment: the judgment in which all other judgments are decided and grounded. Of sin, belonging to man; of righteousness, belonging to Christ; of judgment, belonging to Satan.

John 15:26—“The Spirit of truth … shall testify of me.” Acts 5:32—“And we are his witnesses of these things; and so is also the Holy Ghost.” It is the work of the Holy Spirit to constantly bear witness of Christ and His finished work to the world of sinful and sinning men. This He does largely, although hardly exclusively, through the testimony of believers to the saving power and work of Christ: “Ye also shall bear witness” (John 15:27).

2. THE WORK OF THE SPIRIT IN RELATION TO THE BELIEVER.

a) He Regenerates the Believer.

John 3:3-5—“Born of … the Spirit.” Tit. 3:5—“The… renewing of the Holy Ghost.” Sonship, and membership in the kingdom of God, come only through the regenerating of the Holy Spirit. “It is the Spirit that quickeneth.” Just as Jesus was begotten of the Holy Ghost, so must every child of God who is to be an heir to the kingdom.

b) The Spirit Indwells the Believer.

1 Cor. 6:19—“Your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you.” Also 3:16; Rom. 8:9. Every believer, no matter how weak and imperfect he may be, or how immature his Christian experience, still has the indwelling of the Spirit. Acts 19:2 does not contradict this statement. Evidently some miraculous outpouring of the Spirit is intended there, the which followed the prayer and laying on of the hands of the apostles. “Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.” “No man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost” (Rom. 8:9; 1 Cor. 12:3).

c) The Spirit Seals the Believer with Assurance of Salvation.

Eph. 1:13, 14—“In whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that Holy Spirit of promise; which is the earnest of our inheritance.” Also 4:30—“Sealed unto the day of redemption.” This sealing stands for two things: ownership and likeness (2 Tim. 2:19-21). The Holy Spirit is “the Spirit of adoption” which God puts into our hearts, by which we know that we are His children. The Spirit bears witness to this great truth (Gal. 4:6; Rom. 8:14, 16). This sealing has to do with the heart and the conscience—satisfying both as to the settlement of the sin and sonship question.

d) The Holy Spirit Infills the Believer.

Acts 2:4—“And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost.” Eph. 5:18—“Be filled with the Spirit.” The filling differs somewhat from the indwelling. We may speak of the baptism of the Spirit as that initial act of the Spirit by which, at the moment of our regeneration, we are baptized by the Spirit into the body of Christ; the Spirit then comes and takes up His dwelling within the believer. The filling with the Spirit, however, is not confined to one experience, or to any one point of time exclusively; it may be repeated times without number. There is one baptism, but many infillings with the Spirit. The experience of the apostles in the Acts bears witness to the fact that they were repeatedly filled with the Spirit. Whenever a new emergency arose they sought a fresh infilling with the Spirit (cf. Acts 2:4 with 4:31 showing that the apostles who were filled on the day of Pentecost were again filled a few days after).

There is a difference between possessing the Spirit, and being filled with the Spirit. All Christians have the first; not all have the second, although all may have. Eph. 4:30 speaks of believers as being “sealed,” whereas 5:18 commands those same believers to “be filled (to be being filled again and again) with the Spirit.”

Both the baptism and the infilling may take place at once. There need be no long wilderness experience in the life of the believer. It is the will of God that we should be filled (or, if you prefer the expression, “be baptized”) with the Spirit at the moment of conversion, and remain filled all the time. Whenever we are called upon for any special service, or for any new emergency, we should seek a fresh infilling of the Spirit, either for life or service, as the case may be.

The Holy Spirit seeks—so we learn from the story of the Acts—for men who are not merely possessed by but also filled with the Spirit, for service (6:3, 5; 9:17; 11:24). Possession touches assurance; infilling, service.

e) The Holy Spirit Empowers the Believer for Life and Service.

Rom. 8:2—“For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death” (also vv. 9-11). There are two natures in the believer: the flesh and the Spirit (Gal. 5:17). But while the believer is still in the flesh, he does not live after the flesh (Rom. 8:12, 13). The Holy Spirit enables the believer to get constant and continual victory over sin. A single act of sin a believer may commit; to live in a state of sin is impossible for him, for the Spirit which is within him gives him victory, so that sin does not reign over him. If sinless perfection is not a Scriptural doctrine, sinful imperfection is certainly less Scriptural. The eighth chapter of Romans exhibits a victorious life for the believer; a life so different from that depicted in the seventh chapter. And the difference lies in the fact that the Holy Spirit is hardly, if at all, mentioned in the seventh chapter, while in the eighth He is mentioned over twelve times. The Spirit in the heart is the secret of victory over sin.

Then note how the Holy Spirit produces the blessed fruit of the Christian life (Gal. 5:22, 23). What a beautiful cluster of graces! How different from the awful catalogue of the works of the flesh (vv. 19-21). Look at this cluster of fruit. There are three groups: the first, in relation to God—love, joy, peace; the second, in relation to our fellowman—longsuffering, gentleness, goodness; the third, for our individual Christian life—faith, meekness, self-control.

f) The Holy Spirit is the Guide of the Believer’s Life.

He guides him as to the details of his daily life, Rom. 8:14; Gal. 5:16, 25-“Walk in the Spirit.” There is no detail of the believer’s life that may not be under the control and direction of the Spirit. “The steps (and, as one has well said,‘the stops’) of a good man are ordered by the Lord.”

The Holy Spirit guides the believer as to the field in which he should labor. How definitely this truth is taught in the Acts 8:27-29; 16:6, 7; 13:2-4. What a prominent part the Spirit played in selecting the fields of labor for the apostles! Every step in the missionary activity of the early church seemed to be under the direct guidance of the Spirit.

g) The Holy Spirit Anoints the Believer.

This anointing stands for three things:

First, for knowledge and teaching. 1 John 2:27—“But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you; but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth … ye shall abide in him.” Also 2:20. It is not enough to learn the truth from human teachers, we must listen to the teaching of the Spirit. 1 Cor. 2:9-14 teaches us that there are some great truths that are spiritually discerned; they cannot be understood saving by the Spirit-filled man, for they are “spiritually discerned.” See also John 14:26; 16:13.

Second, for service. How dependent Christ was upon the Holy Spirit for power in which to perform the duties of life is clear from such passages as Luke 4:18—“The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach,” etc. Also Acts 10:38—“How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power: who went about doing good.” Ezekiel teaches a lesson by his vivid picture of the activity of God portrayed in the wheels within wheels. The moving power within those wheels was the Spirit of God. So in all our activity for God we must have the Spirit of power.

Third, for consecration. Three classes of persons in the Old Testament were anointed: the prophet, the priest, and the king. The result of anointing was consecration—“Thy vows are upon me, O God”; knowledge of God and His will—“Ye know all things”; influence—fragrance from the ointment. Just as the incense at Mecca clings to the pilgrim when he passes through the streets, so it is with him who has the anointing of the Spirit. All his garments smell of myrrh, and aloes, and cassia. He has about him the sweet odor and scent of the Rose of Sharon and the Lily of the Valley.

3. THE RELATION OF THE HOLY SPIRIT TO THE SCRIPTURES.

a) He is the Author of the Scriptures.

Holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Spirit. 2 Pet. 1:20, 21. The Scriptures came by the inbreathing of God, 2 Tim. 3:16. “Hear what the Spirit saith to the churches,” Eev. 2 and 3. It was the Spirit who was to guide the apostles into all the truth, and show them things to come (John 16:13).

b) The Spirit is also the Interpreter of the Scriptures.

1 Cor. 2:9-14. He is “the Spirit of wisdom and revelation,” Eph. 1:17. “He shall receive of mine and show it unto you,” John 16:14, 15. (See under the Inspiration of the Bible, p. 194.)

4. THE RELATION OF THE HOLY SPIRIT TO JESUS CHRIST.

How dependent Jesus Christ was, in His state of humiliation, on the Holy Spirit! If He needed to depend solely upon the Spirit can we afford to do less?

a) He was Conceived by the Holy Spirit, born of the Spirit, Luke

1:35.

b) He was led by the Spirit, Matt. 4:1.

c) He was Anointed by the Spirit for Service, Acts 10:38.

d) He was Crucified in the Power of the Spirit, Heb. 9:14.

e) He was Raised by the Power of the Spirit, Rom. 1:4; 8:11.

f) He gave Commandment to His Disciples and Church Through the Spirit, Acts 1:2.

g) He is the Bestower of the Holy Spirit, Acts 2:33.

V. OFFENCES AGAINST THE HOLY SPIRIT.

Scarcely any phase of the doctrine of the Spirit is more solemn than this. It behooves us all, believer and unbeliever alike, to be careful as to how we treat the Holy Spirit. Sinning against the Spirit is fraught with terrific consequences.

For convenience sake we are classifying the offences against the Spirit under two general divisions, namely, those committed by the unbeliever, and those committed by the believer. Not that there is absolutely no overlapping in either case. For, doubtless, in the very nature of the case there must be. This thought will be kept in mind in the study of the offences against the Spirit.

1. OFFENCES COMMITTED BY THE UNBELIEVER.

a) Resisting the Holy Ghost.

Acts 7:51-“Ye do always resist the Holy Ghost.” Here the picture is that of the Holy Spirit attacking the citadel of the soul of man, who violently resists the gracious attempts of the Spirit to win him. In spite of the plainest arguments, and the most incontestable facts this man wilfully rejects the evidence and refuses to accept the Christ so convincingly presented. Thus is the Holy Ghost resisted. (See Acts 6:10.) That this is a true picture of resistance to the Holy Spirit is clearly seen from Stephen’s recital of the facts in Acts 7:51-57.

b) Insulting, or Doing Despite unto the Holy Spirit.

Heb. 10:29 (cf. Luke 18:32). It is the work of the Spirit to present the atoning work of Christ to the sinner as the ground of his pardon. When the sinner refuses to believe or accept the testimony of the Spirit, he thereby insults the Spirit by esteeming the whole work of Christ as a deception and a lie, or accounts the death of Christ as the death of an ordinary or common man, and not as God’s provision for the sinner.

c) Blaspheming the Holy Spirit.

Matt. 12:31,32. This seems to be the most grievous sin of all, for the Master asserts that there is no forgiveness for this sin. Sins against the Son of Man may be forgiven because it was easily possible, by reason of His humble birth, lowly parentage, etc., to question the claims He put forth to deity. But when, after Pentecost, the Holy Spirit came, and presented to every man’s conscience evidence sufficient to prove the truth of these claims, the man who then refused to yield to Christ’s claims was guilty of resisting, insulting, and that amounts to blaspheming the testimony of the whole Godhead, of which the Spirit is the executive.

2. OFFENCES COMMITTED BY THE BELIEVER.

a) Grieving the Spirit.

Eph. 4:30, 31; Isa. 63:10 (R. V.). To grieve means to make sad or sorrowful. It is the word used to describe the experience of Christ in Gethsemane; and so the sorrow of Gethsemane may be endured by the Holy Spirit. The Spirit is the most sensitive person of the Godhead. He is called the “Mother—heart” of God. The context of this passage (v.31) tells us how the Spirit may be grieved: by “foolish talking and jesting.” Whenever the believer allows any of the things mentioned in this verse (and those stated also in Gal. 5:17-19) to find place in his heart and expression in his words and life; when these things abide in his heart and actively manifest themselves, then the Spirit is sad and grieved. Indeed to refuse any part of our moral nature to the full sway of the Spirit is to grieve Him. If we continue to grieve the Spirit, then the grief turns into vexation (Isa. 63:10).

b) Lying to the Holy Spirit.

Acts 5:3, 4. The sin of lying to the Spirit is very prominent when consecration is most popular. We stand up and say, “I surrender all” when in our hearts we know that we have not surrendered all. Yet, like Ananias, we like to have others believe that we have consecrated our all. We do not wish to be one whit behind others in our profession. Bead carefully in this connection the story of Achan (Joshua 7), and that of Gehazi (2 Kings 5:20-27).

c) Quenching the Spirit.

1 Thess. 5:19-“Quench not the Spirit.” The thought of quenching the Spirit seems to be used in connection with fire: “Smoking flax shall he not quench” (Matt. 12:20); “Quench the fiery darts” (Eph. 6:16). It is therefore related more to the thought of service than to that of life. The context of 1 Thess. 5:19 shows this. The manifestation of the Spirit in prophesying was not to be quenched. The Holy Spirit is seen as coming down upon this gathered assembly for praise, prayer, and testimony. This manifestation of the Spirit must not be quenched. Thus we may quench the Spirit not only in our hearts, but also in the hearts of others. How? By disloyalty to the voice and call of the Spirit; by disobedience to His voice whether it be to testify, praise, to do any bit of service for God, or to refuse to go where He sends us to labor—the foreign field, for example. Let us be careful also lest in criticizing the manifestation of the Spirit in the testimony of some believer, or the sermon of some preacher, we be found guilty of quenching the Spirit. Let us see to it that the gift of the Holy Ghost for service be not lost by any unfaithfulness, or by the cultivation of a critical spirit on our part, so that the fire in our hearts dies out and nothing but ashes remain—ashes, a sign that fire was once there, but has been extinguished.

From what has been said the following may be summarily stated:

Resisting has to do with the regenerating work of the Spirit;

Grieving has to do with the indwelling Holy Spirit;

Quenching has to do with the enduement of the Spirit for service.

THE DOCTRINE OF MAN

I. THE CREATION AND ORIGINAL CONDITION OF MAN.

1. IMAGE AND LIKENESS OF GOD. 2. PHYSICAL—MENTAL—MORAL—SPIRITUAL.

II. THE FALL OF MAN.

1. THE SCRIPTURAL ACCOUNT. 2. VARIOUS INTERPRETATIONS. 3. THE NATURE OF THE FALL. 4. THE RESULTS OF THE FALL.

a) On Adam, and Eve. b) On the Race. (1) Various Theories. (2) Scriptural Declarations.

THE DOCTRINE OF MAN.

I. THE CREATION AND ORIGINAL CONDITION OF MAN.

1. MAN MADE IN THE IMAGE AND LIKENESS OF GOD.

Gen. 1:26—“And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness.” 9:6—“For in the image of God made he man.” What is meant by the terms image and likeness? Image means the shadow or outline of a figure, while likeness denotes the resemblance of that shadow to the figure. The two words, however, are practically synonymous. That man was made in the image and likeness of God is fundamental in all God’s dealings with man (1 Cor. 11:7; Eph. 4:21-24; Col. 3:10; James 3:9). We may express the language as follows: Let us make man in our image to be our likeness.

a) The Image of God Does Not Denote Physical Likeness.

God is Spirit; He does not have parts and passions as a man. (See under Doctrine of God; The Spirituality of God, pp. 19, 20). Consequently Mormon and Swedenborgian views of God as a great human are wrong. Deut. 4:15 contradicts such a physical view of God (see p. 19, b, c). Some would infer from Psa. 17:15—“I shall be satisfied, when I awake, with thy likeness,” that in some remote way, a physical likeness is suggested. The R. V., however, changes somewhat the sense of this verse, and reads: “I shall be satisfied, when I awake, with beholding thy form.” See also Num. 12:8, R. V. It is fair to believe, however, that erectness of posture, intelligence of countenance, and a quick, glancing eye characterized the first man. We should also remember that the manifestations in the Old Testament, and the incarnation must throw some light upon this subject (see p. 20).

b) Nor Are the Expressions “Image” and “Likeness” Exhausted When We Say That They Consisted in Man’s Dominion Over Nature, and the Creation of God in General.

Indeed the supremacy conferred upon man presupposed those spiritual endowments, and was justified by his fitness, through them, to exercise it.

c) Positively, We Learn from Certain Scriptures in What This Image and Likeness Consisted.

Eph. 4:23, 24—“And be renewed in the spirit of your mind; and that ye put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness (B. V., holiness of truth).” Col. 3:10—“And have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him.” It is clear from these passages that the image of God consists in knowledge, righteousness, and holiness; moral, not physical likeness.

d) The Original Man Was Endowed with Intellectual Faculties.

He had sufficient intelligence to give names to the animals as they were presented before him (Gen. 2:19, 20). Adam had not only the power of speech, but the power of reasoning and thought in connection with speech. He could attach words to ideas. This is not the picture, as evolution would have us believe, of an infantile savage slowly groping his way towards articulate speech by imitation of the sounds of animals.

e) The Original Man Possessed Moral and Spiritual Faculties.

Consider the moral test in Genesis 3. Adam had power to resist or to yield to moral evil. Sin was a volitional thing. Christ, the second Adam, endured a similar test (Matt. 4).

From all this it is evident that man’s original state was not one of savagery. Indeed there is abundant evidence to show that man has been degraded from a very much higher stage. Both the Bible and science agree in making man the crowning work of God, and that there will be no higher order of beings here on the earth than man. We must not forget that while man, from one side of his nature, is linked to the animal creation, he is yet supra-natural—a being of a higher order and more splendid nature; he is in the image and likeness of God. Man has developed not from the ape, but away from it. He never was anything but potential man. “No single instance has yet been adduced of the transformation of one animal species into another, either by natural or artificial selection; much less has it been demonstrated that the body of the brute has ever been developed into that of the man. The links that should bind man to the monkey have not been found. Not a single one can be shown. None have been found that stood nearer the monkey than the man of today.”—_Agassiz_.

II. THE FALL OF MAN.

The doctrine of the Fall of Man is not peculiar to Christianity; all religions contain an account of it, and recognize the great and awful fact. Had there been no such account as that found in Genesis 3, there would still have remained the problem of the fall and sin.

Yet, the doctrine of the fall has a relation to Christianity that it does not have to other religions, or religious systems. The moral character of God as seen in the Christian religion far surpasses the delineation of the Supreme Being set forth in any other religion, and thus heightens and intensifies its idea of sin. It is when men consider the very high character of God as set forth in Christianity, and then look at the doctrine of sin, that they find it hard to reconcile the fact that God, being the moral Being He is, should ever allow sin to come into the world. To some minds these two things seem incompatible.

1. THE SCRIPTURAL ACCOUNT OF THE FALL OF MAN.

The third chapter of Genesis gives the fullest account of this awful tragedy in the experience of mankind. Other scriptures: Rom. 5:12-19; I Tim. 2:14; Gen. 6:5; 8:31; Psa. 14; Rom. 3:10-23.

The purpose of the Genesis narrative is not to give an account of the manner in which sin came into the world, but how it found its advent into the human race. Sin was already in the world, as the existence of Satan and the chaotic condition of things in the beginning, strikingly testify.

The reasonableness of the narrative of the fall is seen in view of the condition of man after he had sinned with his condition when he left the hand of the Creator. Compare Gen. 1:26 with 6:5, and Psa. 14. If the fall of man were not narrated in Genesis we should have to postulate some such event to account for the present condition in which we find man. In no part of the Scripture, save in the creation account as found in the first two chapters of Genesis, does man appear perfect and upright. His attitude is that of rebellion against God, of deepening and awful corruption.

2. VARIOUS INTERPRETATIONS OF THE NARRATIVE OF THE FALL OF MAN.

Some look upon the whole narrative as being an allegory. Adam is the rational part of man; Eve, the sensual; the serpent, external excitements to evil. But the simplicity and artlessness of the narrative militates against this view.

Others, again, designate the narrative as being a myth. It is regarded as a truth invested in poetic form; something made up from the folklore of the times. But why should these few verses be snatched out of the chapter in which they are found and be called mythical, while the remaining verses are indisputably literal?

Then there is the literal interpretation, which takes the account as it reads, in its perfectly natural sense, just as in the case of the other parts of the same chapter. There is no intimation in the account itself that it is not to be regarded as literal history. It certainly is part of a historical book. The geographical locations in connection with the story are historic. The curse upon the man, upon the woman, and upon the ground are certainly literal. It is a fact that death is in the world as the wages of sin. Unquestionably Christ, and the other Scripture writers regard the event as historical and literal: of. Matt. 19:4; Mark 10:6; 2 Cor. 11:3; I Tim. 2:13-15; I Cor. 15:56.

3. THE NATURE OF THE FALL.

It must be kept in mind that Adam and Eve were free moral agents. That while they were sinless beings, it was yet possible for them to sin, just as it was possible for them not to sin. A careful reading of the narrative leads to the following remarks:

The sin of our first parents was purely volitional; it was an act of their own determination. Their sin was, like all other sin, a voluntary act of the will.

It came from an outside source, that is to say, it was instigated from without. There was no sin in the nature of the first human pair. Consequently there must have been an ungodly principle already in the world. Probably the fall of Satan and the evil angels had taken place already.

The essence of the first sin lay in the denial of the divine will; an elevation of the will of man over the will of God.

It was a deliberate transgressing of a divinely marked boundary; an overstepping of the divine limits.

In its last analysis, the first sin was, what each and every sin committed since has been, a positive disbelief in the word of the living God. A belief of Satan rather than a belief in God.

It is helpful to note that the same lines of temptation that were presented to our first parents, were presented to Christ in the wilderness (Matt. 4:1-11), and to men ever since then (1 John 2:15-17). Satan’s program is short and shallow after all.

4. THE RESULTS OF THE FALL.

a) On Our First Parents—Adam and Eve.

The results of sin in the experience of our first parents were as follows:

The ground was cursed, so that henceforth it would not yield good alone (Gen. 3:17).

Sorrow and pain to the woman in child-bearing, and subjection of woman to the man (Gen. 3:16).

Exhausting physical labor in order to subsist (Gen. 3:19).

Physical and spiritual death (Gen. 3:19; 3:3; 5:5; Rom. 5:12).

Of course, with all this came also a fear of God, a shame because of sin, a hiding from God’s presence, and finally, an expulsion from the garden (Gen. 3:8-11, 32-24).

b) On the Race—Various Theories.

There are three general views held with regard to the effect of Adam’s sin upon the race. Before looking at the strictly Scriptural view in detail, let us briefly state these three theories:

That Adam’s sin affected himself only; that every human being born into the world is as free from sin as Adam was. The only effect the first sin had upon the race was that of a bad example. According to this theory man is well morally and spiritually. This view of the case is false because the Scriptures recognize all men as guilty and as possessing a sinful nature; because man, as soon as he attains the age of responsibility commits sinful acts, and there is no exception to this rule; because righteousness is impossible without the help of God, otherwise redemption would be by works of righteousness which we have done, and this the Scripture contradicts. According to this view man is perfectly well. (The Pelagian theory.)

That while Adam’s sin, as guilt, is not imputed to man, he is yet destitute of original righteousness, and, without divine help, is utterly unable to attain it. God, however, bestows upon each individual, at the dawn of consciousness, a special gift of His Spirit, which is sufficient to enable man to be righteous, if he will allow his will to co-operate with God’s Spirit. According to this view man is only half sick, or half well. This view also is false because the Scriptures clearly state that man is utterly unable to do a single thing to save himself. (The Semi-Pelagian theory.)

That because of the unity of the race in Adam, and the organic unity of mankind, Adam’s sin is therefore imputed to his posterity. The nature which man now possesses is like to the corrupted nature of Adam. Man is totally unable to do anything to save himself. According to this theory man is not only not well, nor half well, but totally dead. ( The Augustinian theory.)

SCRIPTURAL TEACHING.

(1) All men, without respect of condition or class, are sinners before God.

Rom. 3:9, 10, 22, 23; Psa. 14; Isa. 53:6. There may be a difference in the degree, but not in the fact of sin. All men, Jew and Gentile, have missed the mark, and failed to attain to God’s standard. There is none righteous, no, not one.

(2) This universal sinful condition is vitally connected with the sin of Adam.

Rom. 5:12—“Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned.” “For the judgment was by one to condemnation” (5:16). “For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners” (5:19). All men were in Adam when he sinned; fallen he, fallen they. Herein lies the truth of the organic unity of the race. “In Adam all die.” Two questions are raised here: How can man be held responsible for a depraved nature?—this touches the matter of original sin; and How can God justly impute Adam’s sin to us?—this deals with the question of the imputation of sin.

(3) The whole world rests under condemnation, wrath, and curse.

Rom. 3:19—“That every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.” Gal. 3:10; Eph. 2:3. The law of God demands a perfect obedience; but no son of man can yield such obedience; hence the curse of a broken law rests upon those breaking it. The wrath of God abides on all not vitally united by faith to Jesus Christ (John 3:36).

(4) Unregenerate men are regarded as children of the devil, and not sous of God.

1 John 3:8-10; John 8:44—“Ye are of your father the devil.” 1 John 5:19—“And we know that we are of God, and the whole world lieth in wickedness (in the wicked one, R. V.).”

(5) The whole race of men are in helpless captivity to sin and Satan.

Rom. 7, chapter entire; John 8:31-36; Eph. 2:3.

(6) The entire nature of man, mentally, morally, spiritually, physically, is sadly affected by sin.

The understanding is darkened (Eph. 4:18; 1 Cor. 2:14); the heart is deceitful and wicked (Jer. 17:9, 10); the mind and conscience are defiled (Gen. 6:5; Titus 1:15); the flesh and spirit are defiled (2 Cor. 7:5); the will is enfeebled (Rom. 7:18); and we are utterly destitute of any Godlike qualities which meet the requirements of God’s holiness (Rom. 7:18).

What does all this mean? A. H. Strong, in his Systematic Theology, explains the matter somewhat as follows: It does not mean the entire absence of conscience (John 8:9); nor of all moral qualities (Mark 10:21); nor that men are prone to every kind of sin (for some sins exclude others). It does mean, however, that man is totally destitute of love to God which is the all absorbing commandment of the law (John 5:42); that the natural man has an aversion to God (Rom. 8:7); that all that is stated under (6) above is true of man; that man is in possession of a nature that is constantly on the downgrade, and from the dominion of which he is totally unable to free himself (Rom. 7:18, 23).

[Illustration with caption: Handwritten notations of Rev. William Evans, Ph.D. D.D.]

THE DOCTRINES OF SALVATION A. REPENTANCE. B. FAITH. C. REGENERATION. D. JUSTIFICATION. E. ADOPTION. F. SANCTIFICATION. G. PRAYER.

THE DOCTRINES OF SALVATION.

A. REPENTANCE. I. THE IMPORTANCE OF THE DOCTRINE. II. THE NATURE OF REPENTANCE. 1. AS TOUCHING THE INTELLECT. 2. AFFECTING THE EMOTIONS. 3. WILL. a) Confess Sin. b) Forsake Sin. c) Turn to God. III. HOW REPENTANCE IS PRODUCED. 1. DIVINE SIDE. 2. HUMAN SIDE. 3. QUESTION OF MEANS. IV. RESULTS OF REPENTANCE. 1. GODWARD. 2. MANWARD.

A. REPENTANCE.

I. THE IMPORTANCE OF THE DOCTRINE.

The prominence given to the doctrine of Repentance in the Scriptures can hardly be overestimated. John the Baptist began his public ministry, as did Jesus also, with the call to repentance upon his lips (Matt. 3:1, 2; 4:17).

When Jesus sent forth the twelve and the seventy messengers to proclaim the good news of the kingdom of heaven, He commanded them to preach repentance (Luke 24:47; Mark 6:12).

Foremost in the preaching of the apostles was the doctrine of repentance; Peter, (Acts 2:38); Paul, (Acts 20:21).

The burden of the heart of God, and His one command to all men everywhere, is that they should repent (2 Pet. 3:9; Acts 17:30).

Indeed, failure on the part of man to heed God’s call to repentance means that he shall utterly perish (Luke 13:3).

Does the doctrine of repentance find such a prominent place in the preaching and teaching of today? Has the need for repentance diminished? Has God lessened or changed the terms of admission into His kingdom?

II. THE NATURE OF REPENTANCE.

There is a three-fold idea involved in true repentance:

1. AS TOUCHING THE INTELLECT.

Matt. 21:29—“He answered and said: I will not; but afterward he repented, and went”. The word here used for “repent” means to change one’s mind, thought, purpose, views regarding a matter; it is to have another mind about a thing. So we may speak of it as a revolution touching our attitude and views towards sin and righteousness. This change is well illustrated in the action of the Prodigal Son, and of the Publican in the well-known story of the Pharisee and the Publican (Luke 15 and 18). Thus, when Peter, on the day of Pentecost, called upon the Jews to repent (Acts 2:14-40), he virtually called upon them to change their minds and their views regarding Christ. They had considered Christ to be a mere man, a blasphemer, an impostor. The events of the few preceding days had proven to them that He was none other than the righteous Son of God, their Saviour and the Saviour of the world. The result of their repentance or change of mind would be that they would receive Jesus Christ as their long promised Messiah.

2. AS TOUCHING THE EMOTIONS.

2 Cor. 7:9—“Now I rejoice, not that ye were made sorry, but that ye sorrowed to repentance; for ye were made sorry after a godly manner, that ye might receive damage by us in nothing.” The context (vv. 7-11) shows what a large part the feelings played in true Gospel repentance. See also Luke 10:13; cf. Gen. 6:6. The Greek word for repentance in this connection means “to be a care to one afterwards,” to cause one great concern. The Hebrew equivalent is even stronger, and means to pant, to sigh, to moan. So the publican “beat upon his breast,” indicating sorrow of heart. Just how much emotion is necessary to true repentance no one can definitely say. But that a certain amount of heart movement, even though it be not accompanied with a flood of tears, or even a single tear, accompanies all true repentance is evident from the use of this word. See also Psa.

38:18.

3. AS TOUCHING THE WILL AND DISPOSITION.

One of the Hebrew words for repent means “to turn.” The prodigal said, “I will arise…. and he arose” (Luke 15:18, 20). He not only thought upon his ways, and felt sorry because of them, but he turned his steps in the direction of home. So that in a very real sense repentance is a crisis with a changed experience in view. Repentance is not only a heart broken for sin, but from sin also. We must forsake what we would have God remit. In the writings of Paul repentance is more of an experience than a single act. The part of the will and disposition in repentance is shown:

a) In the Confession of Sin to God.

Psa. 38:18—“For I will declare mine iniquity: I will be sorry for my sin.” The publican beat upon his breast, and said, “God be merciful to me a sinner” (Luke 18:13). The prodigal said, “I have sinned against heaven” (Luke 15:21).

There must be confession to man also in so far as man has been wronged in and by our sin (Matt. 5:23, 24; James 5:16).

b) In the Forsaking of Sin.

Isa. 55:7—“Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts; and let him return unto the Lord.” Prov. 28:13; Matt. 3:8, 10.

c) In Turning Unto God.

It is not enough to turn away from sin; we must turn unto God; 1 Thess. 1:9; Acts 26:18.

III. HOW REPENTANCE IS PRODUCED.

1. IT IS A DIVINE GIFT.

Acts 11:18—“Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life.” 2 Tim. 2:25—“If God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth.” Acts 5:30, 31. Repentance is not something which one can originate within himself, or can pump up within himself as one would pump water out of a well. It is a divine gift. How then is man responsible for not having it? We are called upon to repent in order that we may feel our own inability to do so, and consequently be thrown upon God and petition Him to perform this work of grace in our hearts.

2. YET THIS DIVINE GIFT IS BROUGHT ABOUT THROUGH THE USE OF MEANS.

Acts 2:37, 38, 41. The very Gospel which calls for repentance produces it. How well this is illustrated in the experience of the people of Nineveh (Jonah 3:5-10)! When they heard the preaching of the word of God by Jonah they believed the message and turned unto God. Not any message, but the Gospel is the instrument that God uses to bring about this desired end. Furthermore, this message must be preached in the power of the Holy Spirit (1 Thess. 1:5-10).

Rom. 2:4—“Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance?” Also 2 Pet. 3:9. Prosperity too often leads away from God, but it is the divine intention that it should lead to God. Revivals come mostly in times of panic.

Rev. 3:19; Heb. 12:6, 10, 11. The chastisements of God are sometimes for the purpose of bringing His wandering children back to repentance.

2 Tim. 2:24, 25. God oftentimes uses the loving, Christian reproof of a brother to be the means of bringing us back to God.

IV. THE RESULTS OF REPENTANCE.

1. ALL HEAVEN IS MADE GLAD.

Luke 15:7, 10. Joy in heaven, and in the presence of the angels of God. Makes glad the heart of God, and sets the bells of heaven ringing. Who are those “in the presence of the angels of God”? Do the departed loved ones know anything about it?

2. IT BRINGS PARDON AND FORGIVENESS OF SIN.

Isa. 55:7; Acts 3:19. Outside of repentance the prophets and apostles know of no way of securing pardon. No sacrifices, nor religious ceremonies can secure it. Not that repentance merits forgiveness, but it is a condition of it. Repentance qualifies a man for a pardon, but it does not entitle him to it.

3. THE HOLY SPIRIT IS POURED OUT UPON THE PENITENT.

Acts 2:38—“Repent… and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.” Impenitence keeps back the full incoming of the Spirit into the heart.

B. FAITH.

I. THE IMPORTANCE OF THE DOCTRINE.

II. THE DEFINITION OF FAITH.

1. IN GENERAL:

a) Knowledge.

b) Assent.

c) Appropriation.

2. IN PARTICULAR:

a) Towards God.

b) Towards Christ.

c) In Prayer.

d) In the Word of God.

3. RELATION OF FAITH TO WORKS.

III. THE SOURCE OF FAITH.

1. THE DIVINE SIDE.

2. THE HUMAN SIDE.

3. MEANS USED.

IV. SOME RESULTS OF FAITH.

1. SAVED.

2. JOY AND PEACE.

3. DO GREAT WORKS.

B. FAITH.

I. THE IMPORTANCE OF THE DOCTRINE.

Faith is fundamental in Christian creed and conduct. It was the one thing which above all others Christ recognized as the paramount virtue. The Syrophoenician woman (Matt. 15) had perseverance; the centurion (Matt. 8), humility; the blind man (Mark 10), earnestness. But what Christ saw and rewarded in each of these cases was faith. Faith is the foundation of Peter’s spiritual temple (2 Pet. 1:5-7); and first in Paul’s trinity of graces (1 Cor. 13:13). In faith all the other graces find their source.

II. THE DEFINITION OF FAITH.

Faith is used in the Scriptures in a general and in a particular sense.

1. ITS GENERAL MEANING:

a) Knowledge.

Psa. 9:10—“And they that know thy name will put their trust in thee.” Rom. 10:17—“So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.” Faith is not believing a thing without evidence; on the contrary faith rests upon the best of evidence, namely, the Word of God. An act of faith denotes a manifestation of the intelligence: “How shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard?” Faith is no blind act of the soul; it is not a leap in the dark. Such a thing as believing with the heart without the head is out of the question. A man may believe with his head without believing with his heart; but he cannot believe with his heart without believing with his head too. The heart, in the Scriptures, means the whole man—intellect, sensibilities, and will. “As a man thinketh in his heart.” “Why reason ye these things in your hearts?”

b) Assent.

Mark 12:32—“And the scribe said unto him, Well, Master, thou hast said the truth.” So was it with the faith which Christ demanded in His miracles: “Believe ye that I am able to do this?” “Yea, Lord.” There must not only be the knowledge that Jesus is able to save, and that He is the Saviour of the world; there must be also an assent of the heart to all these claims. Those who, receiving Christ to be all that He claimed to be, believed in Him, became thereby sons of God (John 1:12).

c) Appropriation.

John 1:12; 2:24. There must be an appropriation of the things which we know and assent to concerning the Christ and His work. Intelligent perception is not faith. A man may know Christ as divine, and yet aside from that reject him as Saviour. Knowledge affirms the reality of these things but neither accepts nor rejects them. Nor is assent faith. There is an assent of the mind which does not convey a surrender of the heart and affections.

Faith is the consent of the will to the assent of the understanding. Faith always has in it the idea of action—movement towards its object. It is the soul leaping forth to embrace and appropriate the Christ in whom it believes. It first says: “My Lord and my God,” and then falls down and worships.

A distinction between believing about Christ and on Christ is made in John 8:30, 31, R. V.—“Many believed on him…. Jesus therefore said to those Jews that had believed him.”

S. THE MEANING OF FAITH IN PARTICULAR:

a) When Used in Connection with the Name of God.

Heb. 11:6—“But without faith it is impossible to please him; for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.” Also Acts 27:22-25; Rom. 4:19-21 with Gen. 15:4-6. There can be no dealings with the invisible God unless there is absolute faith in His existence. We must believe in His reality, even though He is unseen. But we must believe even more than the fact of His existence; namely, that He is a rewarder, that He will assuredly honor with definite blessing those who approach unto Him in prayer. Importunity will, of course, be needed (Luke 11:5-10).

There must be confidence in the Word of God also. Faith believes all that God says as being absolutely true, even though circumstances seem to be against its fulfillment.

b) When Used in Connection with the Person and Work of Christ.

Recall the three elements in faith, and apply them here.

First, there must be a knowledge of the claims of Christ as to His person and mission in the world: As to His person—that He is deity, John 9:35-38; 10:30; Phil. 2:6-ll. As to His work—Matt. 20:28; 26:26-28; Luke 24:27, 44.

Second, there must be an assent to all these claims, John 16:30; 20:28; Matt. 16:16; John 6:68, 69.

Third, there must be a personal appropriation of Christ as being all that He claims to be, John 1:12, 8:21, 24; 5:24. There must be surrender to a person, and not mere faith in a creed. Faith in a doctrine must lead to faith in a person, and that person Jesus Christ, if salvation is to be the result of such belief. So Martha was led to substitute faith in a doctrine for faith in a person (John 11:25).

It is such faith—consisting of knowledge, assent, and appropriation —that saves. This is believing with the heart (Rom. 10:9,10).

c) When Used in Connection with Prayer.

Three passages may be used to set forth this relationship: 1 John 5:14, 15; James 1:5-7, Mark 11:24. There must be no hesitation which balances between belief and unbelief, and inclines toward the latter—tossed one moment upon the shore of faith and hope, the next tossed back again into the abyss of unbelief. To “doubt” means to reason whether or no the thing concerning which you are making request can be done (Acts 10:20; Rom. 4:20). Such a man only conjectures; he does not really believe. Real faith thanks God for the thing asked for, if that thing is in accord with the will of God, even before it receives it (Mark 11:24). Note the slight: “that man.”

We must recognize the fact that knowledge, assent, and appropriation exist here also. We must understand the promises on which we base our prayer; we must believe that they are worth their full face value; and then step out upon them, thereby giving substance to that which, at the moment may be unseen, and, perchance, nonexistent, so far as our knowledge and vision are concerned, but which to faith is a splendid reality.

d) When Used in Connection with the Word and Promise of God.

First, we should know whether the particular promise in question is intended for us in particular. There is a difference in a promise being written for us and to us. There are dispensational aspects to many of the promises in the Bible, therefore we must rightly divide, apportion, and appropriate the Word of God (cf. I Cor. 10:32).

Second, when once we are persuaded that a promise is for us, we must believe that God means all He says in that promise; we must assent to all its truth; we must not diminish nor discount it. God will not, cannot lie (Titus 1:2).

Third, we must appropriate and act upon the promises. Herein lies the difference between belief and faith. Belief is mental; faith adds the volitional; we may have belief without the will, but not faith. Belief is a realm of thought; faith is a sphere of action. Belief lives in the study; faith comes out into the market-places and the streets. Faith substantiates belief—gives substance, life, reality, and activity to it (Heb. 11:1). Faith puts belief into active service, and connects possibilities with actualities. Faith is acting upon what you believe; it is appropriation. Faith counts every promise valid, and gilt-edged (Heb. 11:11); no trial can shake it (11:35); it is so absolute that it survives the loss of its own pledge even (11:17). For illustration, see I Kings 18:41-43.

3. THE RELATION OF FAITH TO WORKS.

There is no merit in faith alone. It is not mere faith that saves, but faith in Christ. Faith in any other saviour but Christ will not save. Faith in any other gospel than that of the New Testament will not save (Gal. 1:8, 9).

There is no contradiction between Paul and James touching the matter of faith and works (cf. James 2:14-26; Rom. 4:1-12). Paul is looking at the matter from the Godward side, and asserts that we are justified, in the sight of God, meritoriously, without absolutely any works on our part. James considers the matter from the manward side, and asserts that we are justified, in the sight of man, evidentially, by works, and not by faith alone (2:24). In James it is not the ground of justification, as in Paul, but the demonstration. See under Justification, II. 4, p. 159.

III. THE SOURCE OF FAITH.

There are two sides to this phase of the subject—a divine and a human side.

1. IT IS THE WORK OF THE TRIUNE GOD. God the Father: Rom. 12:3; I Cor. 12. This is true of faith both in its beginning (Phil. 1:29) and its development (1 Cor. 12). Faith, then, is a gift of His grace.

God the Son: Heb. 12:2—“Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith.” (Illustration, Matt. 14:30, 31—Peter taking his eyes off Christ.) I Cor. 12; Luke 17:5.

God the Spirit: Gal. 5:22; I Cor. 12:9. The Holy Spirit is the executive of the Godhead.

Why then, if faith is the work of the Godhead, are we responsible for not having it? God wills to work faith in all His creatures, and will do so if they do not resist His Holy Spirit. We are responsible, therefore, not so much for the lack of faith, but for resisting the Spirit who will create faith in our hearts if we will permit Him to do so.

2. THERE IS ALSO A HUMAN SIDE TO FAITH.

Rom. 10:17—“So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.” (cf. the context, vv. 9-21.) Acts 4:4—“Howbeit many of them which heard the word believed.” In this instance the spoken word, the Gospel, is referred to; in other cases the written Word, the Scriptures, are referred to as being instrumental in producing faith. See also Gal. 3:2-5. It was a looking unto the promises of God that brought such faith into the heart of Abraham (Rom. 4:19).

Prayer also is an instrument in the development of faith. Luke is called the human Gospel because it makes so much of prayer, especially in connection with faith: 22:32—“But I have prayed for thee that thy faith fail not.” 17:5—“And the apostles said unto the Lord, Increase our faith.” See also Mark 9:24; Matt. 17:19-21.

Our faith grows by the use of the faith we already have. Luke 17:5, 6; Matt. 25:39.

IV. SOME RESULTS OF FAITH.

1. WE ARE SAVED BY FAITH.

We, of course, recall that the saving power of faith resides not in itself, but in the Almighty Saviour on whom it rests; so that, properly speaking, it is not so much faith, as it is faith in Christ that saves.

The whole of our salvation—past, present, and future, is dependent upon faith. Our acceptance of Christ (John 1:12); our justification (Rom. 5:1); our adoption (Gal. 3:26); our sanctification (Acts 26:18); our keeping (1 Pet. 1:5), indeed our whole salvation from start to finish is dependent upon faith.

2. REST, PEACE, ASSURANCE, JOY.

Isa. 26:3; Phil. 4:6; Rom. 5:1; Heb. 4:1-3; John 14:1; 1 Pet. 1:8. Fact, faith, feeling—this is God’s order. Satan would reverse this order and put feeling before faith, and thus confuse the child of God. We should march in accord with God’s order: Fact leads, Faith with its eye on Fact, following, and Feeling with the eye on Faith bringing up the rear. All goes well as long as this order is observed. But the moment Faith turns his back on Fact, and looks at Feeling, the procession wabbles. Steam is of main importance, not for sounding the whistle, but for moving the wheels; and if there is a lack of steam we shall not remedy it by attempting by our own effort to move the piston or blow the whistle, but by more water in the boiler, and more fire under it. Feed Faith with Facts, not with Feeling.—_A. T. Pierson_.

3. DO EXPLOITS THROUGH FAITH.

Heb. 11:32-34; Matt. 21:21; John 14:12. Note the wonderful things done by the men of faith as recorded in the eleventh chapter of Hebrews. Read vv. 32-40. Jesus attributes a kind of omnipotence to faith. The disciple, by faith, will be able to do greater things than his Master. Here is a mighty Niagara of power for the believer. The great question for the Christian to answer is not “What can I do?” but “How much can I believe?” for “all things are possible to him that believeth.”

C. REGENERATION, OR THE NEW BIRTH.

I. ITS NATURE. 1. NOT BAPTISM. 2. NOT REFORMATION. 3. A SPIRITUAL QUICKENING. 4. AN IMPARTATION OF A DIVINE NATURE. 5. A NEW AND DIVINE IMPULSE.

II. ITS NECESSITY. 1. UNIVERSAL. 2. THE SINFUL CONDITION OF MAN DEMANDS IT. 3. THE HOLINESS OF GOD DEMANDS IT.

III. THE MEANS. 1. THE DIVINE SIDE. 2. THE HUMAN SIDE. 3. THE MEANS USED.

C. REGENERATION, OR THE NEW BIRTH.

It is of the utmost importance that we have a clear understanding of this vital doctrine. By Regeneration we are admitted into the kingdom of God. There is no other way of becoming a Christian but by being born from above. This doctrine, then, is the door of entrance into Christian discipleship. He who does not enter here, does not enter at all.

I. THE NATURE OF REGENERATION.

Too often do we find other things substituted by man for God’s appointed means of entrance into the kingdom of heaven. It will be well for us then to look, first of all, at some of these substitutes.

1. REGENERATION IS NOT BAPTISM.

It is claimed that John 3:5—“Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit,” and Titus 3:5—“The washing of regeneration,” teach that regeneration may occur in connection with baptism. These passages, however, are to be understood in a figurative sense, as meaning the cleansing power of the Word of God. See also Eph. 5:26—“With the washing of water by (or in) the word”; John 15:3—“Clean through the word.” That the Word of God is an agent in regeneration is clear from James 1:18, and 1 Pet. 1:23.

If baptism and regeneration were identical, why should the Apostle Paul seem to make so little of that rite (1 Cor. 4:15, and compare with it 1 Cor. 1:14)? In the first passage Paul asserts that he had begotten them through the Gospel; and in 1:14 he declares that he baptized none of them save Crispus and Gaius. Could he thus speak of baptism if it had been the means through which they had been begotten again? Simon Magus was baptized (Acts 8), but was he saved? Cornelius (Acts 11) was saved even before he was baptized.

2. REFORMATION IS NOT REGENERATION.

Regeneration is not a natural forward step in man’s development; it is a supernatural act of God; it is a spiritual crisis. It is not evolution, but involution—the communication of a new life. It is a revolution—a change of direction resulting from that life. Herein lies the danger in psychology, and in the statistics regarding the number of conversions during the period of adolescence. The danger lies in the tendency to make regeneration a natural phenomenon, an advanced step in the development of a human life, instead of regarding it as a crisis. Such a psychological view of regeneration denies man’s sin, his need of Christ, the necessity of an atonement, and the regenerating work of the Holy Spirit.

3. REGENERATION IS A SPIRITUAL QUICKENING, A NEW BIRTH.

Regeneration is the impartation of a new and divine life; a new creation; the production of a new thing. It is Gen. 1:26 over again. It is not the old nature altered, reformed, or re-invigorated, but a new birth from above. This is the teaching of such passages as John 3:3-7; 5:21; Eph. 2:1, 10; 2 Cor. 5:17.

By nature man is dead in sin (Eph. 2:1); the new birth imparts to him new life—the life of God, so that henceforth he is as those that are alive from the dead; he has passed out of death into life (John 5:24).

4. IT IS THE IMPARTATION OF A NEW NATURE—GOD’S NATURE.

In regeneration we are made partakers of the divine nature (2 Pet. 1:4). We have put on the new man, which after God is created in holiness and righteousness (Eph. 4:11; Col. 3:10). Christ now lives in the believer (Gal. 2:20). God’s seed now abides in him (1 John 3:9). So that henceforth the believer is possessed of two natures (Gal. 5:17).

5. A NEW AND DIVINE IMPULSE IS GIVEN TO THE BELIEVER.

Thus regeneration is a crisis with a view to a process. A new governing power comes into the regenerate man’s life by which he is enabled to become holy in experience: “Old things are passed away; behold all things are become new” (2 Cor. 5:17). See also Acts 16:14, and Ezek. 36:25-27, 1 John 3:6-9.

II. THE IMPERATIVE NECESSITY OF THE NEW BIRTH.

1. THE NECESSITY IS UNIVERSAL.

The need is as far reaching as sin and the human race: “Except a man (lit. anybody) be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God” (John 3:3, cf. v. 5). No age, sex, position, condition exempts anyone from this necessity. Not to be born again is to be lost. There is no substitute for the new birth: “Neither circumcision availeth anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature” (Gal. 6:15). The absolute necessity is clearly stated by our Lord: whatever is born of the flesh, must be born again of the Spirit (John 3:3-7).

2. THE SINFUL CONDITION OF MAN DEMANDS IT.

John 3:6—“That which is born of the flesh is flesh”—and it can never, by any human process, become anything else. “Can the Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard his spots? then may ye also do good that are accustomed to do evil” (Jer. 13:23). “They that are in the flesh cannot please God” (Rom. 8:8); in our “flesh dwelleth no good thing” (Rom. 7:18). The mind is darkened so that we cannot apprehend spiritual truth; we need a renewing of the mind (Rom. 12:2). The heart is deceitful, and does not welcome God; we need to be pure in heart to see God. There is no thought of God before the eyes of the natural man; we need a change in nature that we may be counted among those “who thought upon His name.” No education or culture can bring about such a needed change. God alone can do it.

3. THE HOLINESS OF GOD DEMANDS IT.

If without holiness no man shall see the Lord (Heb. 12:14); and if holiness is not to be attained by any natural development or self-effort, then the regeneration of our nature is absolutely necessary. This change, which enables us to be holy, takes place when we are born again.

Man is conscious that he does not have this holiness by nature; he is conscious, too, that he must have it in order to appear before God (Ezra 9:15). The Scriptures corroborate this consciousness in man, and, still further, state the necessity of such a righteousness with which to appear before God. In the new birth alone is the beginning of such a life to be found. To live the life of God we must have the nature of God.

III. THE MEANS OF REGENERATION.

1. REGENERATION IS A DIVINE WORK.

We are “born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God” (John 1:13). It was of His own will he begat us (Jas. 1:18): Our regeneration is a creative act on the part of God, not a reforming process on the part of man. It is not brought about by natural descent, for all we get from that is “flesh.” It is not by natural choice, for the human will is impotent. Nor is it by self-effort, or any human generative principle. Nor is it by the blood of any ceremonial sacrifices. It is not by pedigree or natural generation. It is altogether and absolutely the work of God. Practically speaking, we have no more to do with our second birth, than we had to do with our first birth.

The Holy Spirit is the Divine Agent in our regeneration. For this reason it is called the “renewing of the Holy Ghost” (Tit. 3:5). We are “born of the Spirit” (John 3:5).

2. AND YET THERE IS A HUMAN SIDE TO THE WORK.

John 1:12 and 13 bring together these two thoughts—the divine and the human in regeneration: Those who received Him (i. e., Christ)….were born of God. The two great problems connected with regeneration are the efficiency of God and the activity of man.

a) Man Is Regenerated by Means of the Acceptance of the Message of the Gospel.

God begat us by “the word of truth” (James 1:18). We are “born again,” says Peter (1 Ep. 1:23), “of incorruptible seed, by the word of God.” We are “begotten through the gospel” (1 Cor. 4:15). These scriptures teach us that regeneration takes place in the heart of man when he reads or hears the Word of God, or the Gospel message, or both, and, because of the Spirit working in the Word as well as in the heart of man, the man opens his heart and receives that message as the Word of life to his soul. The truth is illuminated, as is also the mind, by the Spirit; the man yields to the truth, and is born again. Of course, even here, we must remember that it is the Lord who must open our hearts just as He opened the heart of Lydia (Acts 16:14). But the Word must be believed and received by man. 1 Pet. 1:25.

b) Man Is Regenerated by the Personal Acceptance of Jesus Christ.

This is the clear teaching of John 1:12, 13 and Gal. 3:26. We become “children of God by faith in Jesus Christ.” When a man, believing in the claims of Jesus Christ receives Him to be all that He claimed to be—that man is born again.

Man therefore is not wholly passive at the time of his regeneration. He is passive only as to the change of his ruling disposition. With regard to the exercise of this disposition he is active. A dead man cannot assist in his own resurrection, it is true; but he may, and can, like Lazarus, obey Christ’s command, and “Come forth!”

Psa. 90:16, 17 illustrates both the divine and human part: “Let thy work appear unto thy servants,” and then “the work of our hands establish thou it.” God’s work appears first, then man’s. So Phil. 2:12,13.

D. JUSTIFICATION.

I. ITS MEANING.

1. RELATIVELY. 2. SCRIPTURALLY. 3. PARDON—RIGHTEOUSNESS.

II. ITS METHOD.

1. NOT BY LAW. 2. BY GOD’S FREE GRACE. 3. THE BLOOD OF CHRIST. 4. FAITH.

D. JUSTIFICATION.

I. THE MEANING OF JUSTIFICATION.

1. RELATIVELY.

It is a change in a man’s relation or standing before God. It has to do with relations that have been disturbed by sin, and these relations are personal. It is a change from guilt and condemnation to acquittal and acceptance. Regeneration has to do with the change of the believer’s nature; Justification, with the change of his standing before God. Regeneration is subjective; Justification is objective. The former has to do with man’s state; the latter, with his standing.

2. ACCORDING TO THE LANGUAGE AND USAGE OF THE SCRIPTURES.

According to Deut. 25:1 it means to declare, or to cause to appear innocent or righteous; Rom. 4:2-8: to reckon righteous; Psa. 32:2: not to impute iniquity. One thing at least is clear from these verses, and that is, that to justify does not mean to make one righteous. Neither the Hebrew nor Greek words will bear such meaning. To justify means to set forth as righteous; to declare righteous in a legal sense; to put a person in a right relation. It does not deal, at least not directly, with character or conduct; it is a question of relationship. Of course both character and conduct will be conditioned and controlled by this relationship. No real righteousness on the part of the person justified is to be asserted, but that person is declared to be righteous and is treated as such. Strictly speaking then, Justification is the judicial act of God whereby those who put faith in Christ are declared righteous in His eyes, and free from guilt and punishment.

3. JUSTIFICATION CONSISTS OF TWO ELEMENTS.

a) The Forgiveness of Sin, and the Removal of Its Guilt and Punishment.

It is difficult for us to understand God’s feeling towards sin. To us forgiveness seems easy, largely because we are indifferent towards sin. But to a holy God it is different. Even men sometimes find it hard to forgive when wronged. Nevertheless God gladly forgives.

Micah 7:18,19—“Who is a God like unto thee, that pardoneth iniquity, and passeth by the transgression of the remnant of his heritage? he retaineth not his anger forever, because he delighteth in mercy … . he will subdue our iniquities; and thou wilt cast all their sins into the depths of the sea.” See also Psa. 130:4. What a wondrous forgiveness!

Forgiveness may be considered as the cessation of the moral anger and resentment of God against sin; or as a release from the guilt of sin which oppresses the conscience; or, again, as a remission of the punishment of sin, which is eternal death.

In Justification, then, all our sins are forgiven, and the guilt and punishment thereof removed (Acts 13:38, 39; Rom. 8:1). God sees the believer as without sin and guilt in Christ (Num. 23:21; Rom.

8:33, 34).

b) The Imputation of Christ’s Righteousness, and Restoration to God’s Favor.

The forgiven sinner is not like the discharged prisoner who has served out his term and is discharged from further punishment, but with no rights of citizenship. No, justification means much more than acquittal. The repentant sinner receives back in his pardon, the full rights of citizenship. The Society of Friends called themselves Friends, not because they were friends one to another but because, being justified, they counted themselves friends of God as was Abraham (2 Chron. 20:7, James 2:23). There is also the imputation of the righteousness of Jesus Christ to the sinner. His righteousness is “unto all and upon all them that believe” (Rom. 3:22). See Rom. 5:17-21; 1 Cor. 1:30. For illustration, see Philemon

18.

II. THE METHOD OF JUSTIFICATION.

1. NEGATIVELY: NOT BY WORKS OF THE LAW.

Rom. 3:20—“Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight; for by the law is the knowledge of sin.” “Therefore” implies that a judicial trial has taken place and a judgment pronounced. At the bar of God no man can be counted righteous in His sight because of his obedience to law. The burden of the Epistle to the Romans is to set forth this great truth. As a means of establishing right relations with God the law is totally insufficient. There is no salvation by character. What men need is salvation from character.

The reason why the law cannot justify is here stated: “For by the law is the knowledge of sin.” The law can open the sinner’s eyes to his sin, but it cannot remove it. Indeed, it was never intended to remove it, but to intensify it. The law simply defines sin, and makes it sinful, yea, exceedingly sinful, but it does not emancipate from it. Gal. 3:10 gives us a further reason why justification cannot take place by obedience to the law. The law demands perfect and continual obedience: “Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them.” No man can render a perfect and perpetual obedience, therefore justification by obedience to the law is impossible. The only thing the law can do is to stop the mouth of every man, and declare him guilty before God (Rom. 3:19, 20).

Gal. 2:16, and 3:10, Rom. 3:28, are very explicit in their denial of justification by law. It is a question of Moses or Christ, works or faith, law or promise, doing or believing, wages or a free gift.

2. POSITIVELY: BY GOD’S PEEE GRACE—THE ORIGIN OR SOURCE OF JUSTIFICATION.

Rom. 3:24—“Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus.” “Freely” denotes that it is granted without anything done on our part to merit or deserve it. From the contents of the epistle up to this point it must be clearly evident that if men, sinful and sinning, are to be justified at all, it must be “by his free grace.”

3. BY THE BLOOD OF JESUS CHRIST—THE GROUND OF JUSTIFICATION.

Rom. 3:24—“Being justified … . through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus.” 5:9—“Much more then, being now justified by his blood.” 2 Cor. 5:21 (R. V.)—“Him who knew no sin he made to be sin on our behalf; that we might become the righteousness of God in him.” The bloodshedding of Christ is here connected with justification. It is impossible to get rid of this double idea from this passage. The sacrifices of the Old Testament were more than a meaningless butchery—“Without shedding of blood is no remission” of sin (Heb. 9:22). The great sacrifice of the New Testament, the death of Jesus Christ, was something more than the death of a martyr—men are “justified by his blood” (Rom. 5:9).

4. BY BELIEVING IN JESUS CHRIST—THE CONDITION OF JUSTIFICATION.

Gal. 2:16—“Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ,” or as the Revised Version margin has it: “But only through faith in Jesus Christ.” Rom. 3:26—“To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness; that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.” “Him that believeth in Jesus” is contrasted with “as many as are of the works of the law” (Gal. 3:10). When Paul in Romans 4:5 says: “Now to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly,” he gives the deathblow to Jewish righteousness. “His faith is counted for righteousness;” that pictures the man who, despairing of all dependence upon his works, casts himself unreservedly upon the mercy of God, as set forth in Jesus Christ, for his justification. Thus it come to pass that “all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses” (Acts 13:39). The best of men need to be saved by faith in Jesus Christ, and the worst need only that. As there is no difference in the need, neither is there in the method of its application. On this common ground all saved sinners meet, and will stand forever. The first step, then, in justification is to despair of works; the second, to believe on him that justifieth the ungodly.

We are not to slight good works, for they have their place, but they follow, not precede justification. The workingman is not the justified man, but the justified man is the workingman. Works are not meritorious, but they meet with their reward in the life of the justified. The tree shows its life by its fruits, but it was alive before the fruit or even the leaves appeared. (See under Faith, II. 3, p. 148, for further suggestions regarding the relation between faith and works.)

Summing up we may say that men are justified judicially by God. (Rom. 8:33); meritoriously by Christ, (Isa. 53:11); mediately by faith, (Rom. 5:1); evidentially by works, (James 2:14, 18-24).

THE DOCTRINES OF SALVATION

E. ADOPTION.

I. THE MEANING OF ADOPTION.

1. ETYMOLOGICALLY. 2. SCRIPTURALLY.

II. THE TIME OF ADOPTION.

1. ETERNAL. 2. WHEN ONE BELIEVES. 3. COMPLETE AT RESURRECTION.

III. THE BLESSINGS OF ADOPTION.

1. FILIAL. 2. EXPERIMENTAL.

IV. SOME EVIDENCES OF SONSHIP. 1. GUIDANCE. 2. CONFIDENCE. 3. ACCESS. 4. LOVE FOR THE BRETHREN. 5. OBEDIENCE.

E. ADOPTION.

Regeneration begins the new life in the soul; justification deals with the new attitude of God towards that soul, or perhaps better, of that soul towards God; adoption admits man into the family of God with filial joy. Regeneration has to do with our change in nature; justification, with our change in standing; sanctification, with our change in character; adoption, with our change in position. In regeneration the believer becomes a child of God (John 1:12,13); in adoption, the believer, already a child, receives a place as an adult son; thus the child becomes a son, the minor becomes an adult (Gal. 4:1-7).

I. THE MEANING OF ADOPTION.

Adoption means the placing of a son. It is a legal metaphor as regeneration is a physical one. It is a Roman word, for adoption was hardly, if at all, known among the Jews. It means the taking by one man of the son of another to be his son, so that that son has the same position and all the advantages of a son by birth. The word is Pauline, not Johannine. The word is never once used of Christ. It is used of the believer when the question of rights, privileges, and heirship are involved. It is peculiarly a Pauline word (Gal. 4:5; Rom. 8:15, 23; 9:4; Eph. 1:5). John uses the word “children,” not “sons,” because he is always speaking of sonship from the standpoint of nature, growth, and likeness (cf. 1 John 3:1, R. V.).

Exodus 2:10 and Heb. 11:24, furnish two splendid illustrations of the Scriptural sense and use of adoption.

II. THE TIME WHEN ADOPTION TAKES PLACE.

1. IN A CERTAIN SENSE IT IS ETERNAL IN ITS NATURE.

Eph. 1:4, 5—Before the foundation of the world we were predestinated unto the adoption of children. We need to distinguish between the foreordaining to adoption, and the actual act of adoption which took place when we believed in Christ. Just as the incarnation was foreordained, and yet took place in time; and just as the Lamb was slain from before the foundation of the word, and yet actually only on Calvary. Why then mention this eternal aspect of adoption? To exclude works and to show that our salvation had its origin solely in the grace of God (Rom. 9:11; 11:5, 6). Just as if we should adopt a child it would be a wholly gracious act on our part.

2. IT TAKES PLACE THE MOMENT ONE BELIEVES IN JESUS CHRIST.

1 John 3:2—“Beloved, now are we the sons of God.” Gal. 3:26—“For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.” See also John 1:12. Sonship is now the present possession of the believer. Strange as it may be, inconceivable as it may seem, it is nevertheless true. The world may not think so (v. 1), but God says so, and the Christian believing it, exclaims, “I’m the child of a King.” Formerly we were slaves; now we are sons.

3. OUR SONSHIP WILL BE COMPLETED AT THE RESURRECTION AND COMING AGAIN OF OUR LORD JESUS CHRIST.

Rom. 8:23—“Waiting for the adoption, to-wit, the redemption, of the body.” Here in this world we are incognito; we are not recognized as sons of God. But some day we shall throw off this disguise (2 Cor. 5:10). It doth not appear, it hath not yet appeared what we shall be; the revelation of the sons of God is reserved for a future day. See also I John 3:1-3.

III. THE BLESSINGS OF ADOPTION.

The blessings of adoption are too numerous to mention save in the briefest way. Some of them are as follows:

Objects of God’s peculiar love (John 17:23), and His fatherly care (Luke 12:27-33).

We have the family name (1 John 3:1; Eph. 3:14, 15), the family likeness (Rom. 8:29); family love (John 13:35; 1 John 3:14); a filial spirit (Rom. 8:15; Gal. 4:6); a family service (John 14:23,

24; 15:8).

We receive fatherly chastisement (Heb. 12:5-11); fatherly comfort (Isa. 66:13; 2 Cor. 1:4), and an inheritance (1 Pet. 1:3-5; Rom.

8:17).

IV. SOME EVIDENCES OF SONSHIP.

Those who are adopted into God’s family are: Led by the Spirit (Rom. 8:4; Gal. 5:18). Have a childlike confidence in God (Gal. 4:5, 6). Have liberty of access (Eph. 3:12). Have love for the brethren (1 John 2:9-11; 5:1). Are obedient (1 John 5:1-3).

F. SANCTIFICATION.

I. ITS MEANING.

1. NEGATIVELY—SEPARATION FROM EVIL. 2. POSITIVELY—DEDICATION UNTO GOD. 3. USED OF THE DIVINE NATURE.

II. WHEN IT TAKES PLACE.

1. INSTANT. 2. PROGRESSIVE. 3. COMPLETE.

III. THE MEANS.

1. DIVINE. 2. HUMAN. 3. MEANS USED.

F. SANCTIFICATION.

If Regeneration has to do with our nature, Justification with our standing, and Adoption with our position, then Sanctification has to do with our character and conduct. In Justification we are declared righteous in order that, in Sanctification, we may become righteous. Justification is what God does for us, while Sanctification is what God does in us. Justification puts us into a right relationship with God, while Sanctification exhibits the fruit of that relationship—a life separated from a sinful world and dedicated unto God.

I. THE MEANING OF SANCTIFICATION.

Two thoughts are prominent in this definition: separation from evil, and dedication unto God and His service.

1. SEPARATION FROM EVIL.

2 Chron. 29:5, 15-18—“Sanctify now yourselves, and sanctify the house of the Lord God … . and carry forth the filthiness out of the holy places… . And the priests went into the inner part of the house of the Lord, to cleanse it, and brought out all the uncleanness… .Then they went in to Hezekiah the king, and said, We have cleansed all the house of the Lord.” 1 Thess. 4:3—“For this is the will of God, even your sanctification, that ye should abstain from fornication.” See also Heb. 9:3; Exod. 19:20-22; Lev.

11:44.

It is evident from these scriptures that sanctification has to do with the turning away from all that is sinful and that is defiling to both soul and body.

2. SEPARATION OR DEDICATION UNTO GOD.

In this sense whatever is set apart from a profane to a sacred use, whatever is devoted exclusively to the service of God, is sanctified. So it follows that a man may “sanctify his house to be holy unto the Lord,” or he may “sanctify unto the Lord some part of a field of his possession” (Lev. 27:14, 16). So also the first-born of all the children were sanctified unto the Lord (Num. 8:17). Even the Son of God Himself, in so far as He was set apart by the Father and sent into the world to do God’s will, was sanctified (John 10:36). Whenever a thing or person is separated from the common relations of life in order to be devoted to the sacred, such is said to be sanctified.

3. IT IS USED OF GOD.

Whenever the sacred writers desire to show that the Lord is absolutely removed from all that is sinful and unholy, and that He is absolutely holy in Himself they speak of Him as being sanctified: “When I shall be sanctified in you before their eyes” (Ezek. 36:23).

II. THE TIME OF SANCTIFICATION.

Sanctification may be viewed as past, present, and future; or instantaneous, progressive, and complete.

1. INSTANTANEOUS SANCTIFICATION.

1 Cor. 6:11—“And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.” Heb. 10:10, 14—“By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all… . For by one offering he hath perfected forever them that are sanctified.” By the death of Jesus Christ the sanctification of the believer takes place at once. The very moment a man believes in Christ he is sanctified, that is, in this first sense: he is separated from sin and separated unto God. For this reason all through the New Testament believers are called saints (1 Cor. 1:2, R. V.; Rom. 1:7, R. V.). If a man is not a saint he is not a Christian; if he is a Christian he is a saint. In some quarters people are canonized after they are dead; the New Testament canonizes believers while they are alive. Note how that in 1 Cor. 6:11 “sanctified” is put before “justified.” The believer grows in sanctification rather than into sanctification out of something else. By a simple act of faith in Christ the believer is at once put into a state of sanctification. Every Christian is a sanctified man. The same act that ushers him into the state of justification admits him at once into the state of sanctification, in which he is to grow until he reaches the fulness of the measure of the stature of Christ.

2. PROGRESSIVE SANCTIFICATION.

Justification differs from Sanctification thus: the former is an instantaneous act with no progression; while the latter is a crisis with a view to a process—an act, which is instantaneous and which at the same time carries with it the idea of growth unto completion.

2 Pet. 3:18—“But grow in (the) grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.” 2 Cor. 3:18—We “are transformed into the same image from glory to glory, even as from the Lord the Spirit.” The tense is interesting here: We are being transformed from one degree of character, or glory, to another. It is because sanctification is progressive, a growth, that we are exhorted to “increase and abound” (1 Thess. 3:12), and to “abound more and more” (4:1, 10) in the graces of the Christian life. The fact that there is always danger of contracting defilement by contact with a sinful world, and that there is, in the life of the true Christian, an ever increasing sense of duty and an ever-deepening consciousness of sin, necessitates a continual growth and development in the graces and virtues of the believer’s life. There is such a thing as “perfecting holiness” (2 Cor. 7:1). God’s gift to the church of pastors and teachers is for the purpose of the perfecting of the saints in the likeness of Christ until, at last, they attain unto the fulness of the divine standard, even Jesus Christ (Eph. 4:11-15). Holiness is not a mushroom growth; it is not the thing of an hour; it grows as the coral reef grows: little by little, degree by degree. See also Phil. 3:10-15.

3. COMPLETE AND FINAL SANCTIFICATION.

1 Thess. 5:23, R. V.—“And the God of peace himself sanctify you wholly; and may your spirit and soul and body be preserved entire, without blame at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.” “Wholly” means complete in every part, perfect in every respect, whether it refers to the Church as a whole, or to the individual believer. Some day the believer is to be complete in all departments of Christian character—no Christian grace missing. Complete in the “spirit” which links him with heaven; in the “body” which links him with earth; in the “soul” as being that on which heaven and earth play. Maturity in each separate element of Christian character: body, soul, and spirit.

This blessing of entire and complete sanctification is to take place when Christ comes: 1 Thess. 3:13—“To the end that he may establish your hearts unblameable in holiness before God, even our Father, at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ with all his saints.” It is when we shall see Him that we shall be like Him (1 John 3:2). How explicitly Paul puts the matter in Phil. 3:12-14, R. V. —“Not that I have already obtained, or am already made perfect: but I press on, if so be that I may lay hold of that for which also I was laid hold on by Christ Jesus. Brethren, I count not myself yet to have laid hold: but one thing I do, forgetting the things which are behind, and stretching forward to the things which are before, I press on toward the goal unto the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus.”

III. THE MEANS OF SANCTIFICATION.

How are men sanctified? What means are used, and what agencies employed to make men holy and conform them into the likeness of Christ? The agencies and means are both divine and human: both God and man contributing and co-operating towards this desired end.

1. FROM THE DIVINE SIDE: IT IS THE WORK OF THE TRIUNE GOD.

a) God the Father.

1 Thess. 5:23, 24, R. V.—“And the God of peace himself sanctify you wholly… . Faithful is he that calleth you, who will also do it.” God’s work is here contrasted with human efforts to achieve the preceding injunctions. Just as in Hebrews 12:2, and Philippians 1:6, the Beginner of faith is also the Finisher; so is it here; consequently the end and aim of every exhortation is but to strengthen faith in God who is able to accomplish these things for us. Of course there is a sense in which the believer is responsible for his progress in the Christian life (Phil. 3:12, 13), yet it is nevertheless true that, after all, it is the divine grace which works all in him (Phil. 2:12, 13). We cannot purify ourselves, but we can yield to God and then the purity will come. The “God of peace,” He who reconciles us—is the One who sanctifies us. It is as if the apostle said: “God, by His mighty power will do for you what I, by my admonitions, and you by your own efforts, cannot do.” See also John 17:17—“Sanctify them through thy truth.” Christ addresses God as the One who is to sanctify the disciples.

b) Jesus Christ the Son.

Heb. 10:10, R. V.—“By which will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.” The death of Jesus Christ separates the believer from sin and the world, and sets him apart as redeemed and dedicated to the service of God. This same truth, namely, the sanctification of the church as based on the sacrificial death of Christ, is set forth in Eph. 5:25, 27—“Christ loved the church, and gave himself up for it; that he might sanctify it.” Christ is “made unto us … sanctification” (1 Cor. 1:30). See also Heb. 13:12, R. V.

c) The Holy Spirit Sanctifies.

1 Pet. 1:2—“Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit.” 2 Thess. 2:13—”… . Because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth.” The Holy Spirit seals, attests, and confirms the work of grace in the soul by producing the fruits of righteousness therein. It is the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus who gives us freedom from the law of sin and death (Rom. 8:2). He is called the Holy Spirit, not only because He is absolutely holy Himself, but also because he produces that quality of soul-character in the believer. The Spirit is the executive of the Godhead for this very purpose. It is the Spirit’s work to war against the lusts of the flesh and enable us to bring forth fruit unto holiness (Gal. 5:17-22). How wonderfully this truth is set forth in the contrast between the seventh and eighth chapters of Romans. Note the unsuccessful struggle of the former, and the victory of the latter. Note also that there is no mention of the Holy Spirit in the seventh, while He is mentioned about sixteen times in the eighth chapter. Herein lies the secret of failure and victory, sin and holiness.

2. FROM THE HUMAN SIDE.

a) Faith in the Redemptive Work of Jesus Christ.

1 Cor. 1:30, R. V.—“But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who was made unto us wisdom from God, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption.” Christ is indeed all these things to us, but, in reality, He becomes such only as we appropriate Him for ourselves. Only as the believer, daily, yea, even momentarily, takes by faith the holiness of Jesus, His faith, His patience, His love, His grace, to be his own for the need of that very moment, can Christ, who by His death was made unto him sanctification in the instantaneous sense, become unto him sanctification in the progressive sense—producing in the believer His own life moment by moment. Herein lies the secret of a holy life—the momentarily appropriation of Jesus Christ in all the riches of His grace for every need as it arises. The degree of our sanctification is the proportion of our appropriation of Christ. See also Acts 26:18.

b) The Study of the Scriptures and Obedience Thereto.

John 17:17—“Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.” Eph. 5:26—“That he might sanctify and cleanse it (i.e., the Church) with the washing of water by the word.” John 15:3—“Now ye are clean through the word which I have spoken unto you.” Our sanctification is limited by our limitation in the knowledge of and our lack of obedience to the Word of God. How does the Word of God sanctify? By revealing sin; by awakening conscience; by revealing the character of Christ; by showing the example of Christ; by offering the influences and powers of the Holy Spirit, and by setting forth spiritual motives and ideals. There is no power like that of the Word of God for detaching a man from the world, the flesh and the devil.

c) Various Other Agencies.

Heb. 12:14, R. V.—“Follow after … the sanctification without which no man shall see the Lord.” To “follow after” means to pursue, to persecute, as Saul of Tarsus pursued and followed the early Christians. One cannot become a saint in his sleep. Holiness must be the object of his pursuit. The lazy man will not be the holy man.

Heb. 12:10, 11: God chastens us “for our profit, that we might be partakers of his holiness.” Chastisement ofttimes is intended to “produce the peaceable fruit of righteousness.”

Rom. 6:19-32; 2 Cor. 6:17, 7:1. Sanctification is brought about in the life of the believer by his separating himself deliberately from all that is unclean and unholy, and by presenting, continually and constantly, the members of his body as holy instruments unto God for the accomplishment of His holy purposes. Thus by these single acts of surrender unto holiness, sanctification soon becomes the habit of the life.

G. PRAYER.

I. ITS IMPORTANCE.

II. ITS NATURE.

1. AS SEEN IN ITS HISTORIC DEVELOPMENT. 2. SCRIPTURAL TERMS.

III. ITS POSSIBILITY.

1. THE REVELATION OF GOD. 2. THE WORK OF THE SON. 3. THE ASSISTANCE OF THE SPIRIT. 4. THE PROMISES. 5. CHRISTIAN TESTIMONY.

IV. ITS OBJECTS.

1. GOD THE FATHER. 2. CHRIST THE SON. 3. THE HOLY SPIRIT.

V. ITS METHOD.

1. POSTURE. 2. TIME AND PLACE.

VI. HINDEANCES AND HELPS.

1. HINDRANCES. 2. HELPS—ESSENTIALS.

G. PRAYER.

I. THE IMPORTANCE OF PRAYER.

Even a cursory perusal of the Scriptures will reveal the large and important place which the doctrine of Prayer finds therein. The Christian life cannot be sustained without it; it is the Christian’s vital breath. Its importance is seen when we recall:

That the neglect of prayer is grievous to the Lord (Isa. 43:21, 22; 64:6, 7, R. V.). That many evils in life are to be attributed to the lack of prayer (Zeph. 1:4-6; Dan. 9:13, 14, cf. Hosea 7:13,

14; 8:13, 14).

That it is a sin to neglect prayer (1 Sam. 12:23).

That to continue in prayer is a positive command (Col. 4:2, R. V.; 1 Thess. 5:17; we are commanded to take leisure or a vacation for prayer: 1 Cor. 7:5).

That it is God’s appointed method of obtaining what He has to bestow (Dan. 9:3; Matt. 7:7-11; 9:24-29; Luke 11:13).

That the lack of the necessary blessings in life comes from failure to pray (James 4:2).

That the apostles regarded prayer as the most important employment that could engage their time or attention (Acts 6:4; Rom. 1:9; Col. 1:9).

II. THE NATURE OF PRAYER.

It is interesting to trace the development of prayer in the Scriptures.

In the life of the patriarch Abraham prayer seems to have taken the form of a dialogue—God and man drawing near and talking to each other (Gen. 18; 19); developing into intercession (Gen. 17:18; 18:23, 32), and then into personal prayer (Gen. 15:2; 24:12); Jacob, (Gen. 28:20; 32:9-12, 24; Hosea 12:4). The patriarchal blessings are called prayers (Gen 49:1; Deut. 33:11).

During the period of the Law. Not very much prominence is given to formal prayer during this period. Deut. 26:1-15 seems to be the only one definitely recorded. Prayer had not yet found a stated place in the ritual of the law. It seems to have been more of a personal than a formal matter, and so while the Law may not afford much material, yet the life of the lawgiver, Moses, abounds with prayer (Exod. 5:22; 32:11; Num. 11:11-15).

Under Joshua (7:6-9; 10:14), and the judges (c. 6) we are told that the children of Israel “cried unto the Lord.”

Under Samuel prayer seems to have assumed the nature of intercession (1 Sam. 7:5, 12; 8:16-18); personal (1 Sam. 15:11, 35; 16:1). In Jeremiah (15:1) Moses and Samuel are represented as offering intercessory prayer for Israel.

David seems to regard himself as a prophet and priest, and prays without an intercessor (2 Sam. 7:18-29).

The prophets seem to have been intercessors, e.g., Elijah (1 Kings 18). Yet personal prayers are found among the prophets (Jer. 20—both personal and intercessory; 33:3; 42:4; Amos 7).

In the Psalms prayer takes the form of a pouring out of the heart (42:4; 62:8; 100:2, title). The psalmist does not seem to go before God with fixed and orderly petitions so much as simply to pour out his feelings and desires, whether sweet or bitter, troubled or peaceful. Consequently the prayers of the psalmist consist of varying moods: complaint, supplication, confession, despondency, praise.

True prayer consists of such elements as adoration, praise, petition, pleading, thanksgiving, intercession, communion, waiting. The closet into which the believer enters to pray is not only an oratory —a place of prayer, it is an observatory—a place of vision. Prayer is not “A venture and a voice of mine; but a vision and a voice divine.” Isa. 63:7; 64:12, illustrates all essential forms of address in prayer.

III. THE POSSIBILITY OF PRAYER.

This possibility consists in five things:

1. THE REVELATION OF GOD WHICH CHRIST HAS BROUGHT TO US.

John 1:18—“No man hath seen God at any time; the only-begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.” Matt. 11:27—”… . Neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him.”

Christ reveals God as a personal God, as a Being who sees, feels, knows, understands, and acts. Belief in the personality of God is absolutely necessary to true prayer (Heb. 11:6).

Christ reveals God as a sovereign God (Matt. 19:26)—“With God all things are possible.” God is sovereign over all laws; He can make them subservient to His will, and use them in answering the prayers of His children. He is not bound by any so-called unchangeable laws.

Christ revealed God as a Father (Luke 11:13). In every instance in the life of Christ whenever He addresses God in prayer it is always as Father. The fact of the fatherhood of God makes prayer possible. It would be unnatural for a father not to commune with his child.

2. THE SACRIFICIAL WORK OF JESUS CHRIST.

Heb. 10:19-22, R. V.—“Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holy place by the blood of Jesus, by the way which he dedicated for us, a new and living way, through the veil, that is to say, his flesh; and having a great priest over the house of God; let us draw near with a true heart in fulness of faith.” It is because of the death of Christ, which removed the barrier that stood between God and us so that He could not consistently hear and answer our prayers, that He can now hear and answer the petitions of His children.

3. THE INSPIRATION OF THE HOLY GHOST.

Rom. 8:26—“Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit himself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered.” See also Jude 20. The thought is this: Even though we are assured that there is a personal God to hear us, and although we have the confidence that the barrier of sin which stood between us and God has been removed, so that we now desire to pray, we often are hindered because we either do not know what to say or what to ask for. We may ask too ardently for wrong things, or too languidly for the things we most need. And so we are afraid to pray. The assurance that this verse gives us is that the Holy Spirit will pray within us, and will indict the petition, helping us in our prayer life.

4. THE MANY PROMISES OF THE BIBLE.

We are told that there are over 33,000 of them. Each promise is “yea and amen in Jesus Christ”; He is the guarantee and the guarantor of them all. They are not given to mock but to encourage us: “Hath he said and shall he not do it? Hath he spoken and shall he not make it good?” See John 14:13; 15:7; 1 John 5:14, 15; Luke 11:9, etc.

5. THE UNIVERSAL CHRISTIAN TESTIMONY.

Christians, by the millions, the world over, can and do testify to the fact that God both hears and answers prayer. The credibility, character, and intelligence of the vast number of witnesses make their testimony indisputable and incontrovertible.

IV. THE OBJECTS OF PRAYER—TO WHOM TO PRAY.

1. TO GOD.

Neh 4:9; Acts 12:5—“Prayer was made without ceasing of the church unto God for him”: God is holy—hence there must be no impurity in the life of the one praying; righteous, hence no crookedness; truthful, hence no lying or hypocrisy; powerful, hence we may have confidence; transcendent, hence reverence in our approach.

2. TO CHRIST.

Acts 7:59—“Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.” 2 Cor. 12:8, 9; 2 Tim.

2:22.

3. THE HOLY SPIRIT.

Rom. 8:15, 16 sets forth the relation of the Holy Spirit and prayer, as do also Zech. 12:10; Eph. 6:18; Jude 20. The Holy Spirit is God (Acts 5:3, 4; Matt. 28:19; 2 Cor. 13:14), hence is to be worshipped (Matt. 4:10; Rev. 22:9).

The normal mode of prayer is prayer in the Spirit, on the ground of the merits of the Son, to the Father: In the Spirit, through the Son, to the Father.

V. THE METHOD OR MANNER OF PRAYER.

1. WITH REGARD TO THE POSTURE OF THE BODY.

The soul may be in prayer no matter what is the attitude of the body. The Scriptures sanction no special bodily posture. Christ stood and prayed (John 17:1), knelt (Luke 22:41), He also fell on his face on the ground (Matt. 26:39); Solomon knelt (1 Kings 8:54); Elijah prayed with his elbows on his knees and his face buried in his hands; David prayed lying on his bed (Psa. 63:6); Peter prayed on the water (Matt. 14:30); the dying thief, on the cross (Luke

23:42).

2. TIME AND PLACE.

Time: Stated times (Dan. 6:10; Psa. 55:16, 17; Acts 3:1; 2:46; 10:9, 30). Special occasions: Choosing the twelve (Luke 6:12, 13). Before the cross (Luke 22:39-46). After great successes (John 6:15, cf. Mark 6:46-48). Early in the morning (Mark 1:35). All night (Luke 6:12). Times of special trouble (Psa. 81:7, cf. Exod. 2:23; 3:7; 14:10, 24). At meals (Matt. 14:19; Acts 27:35; 1 Tim. 4:4, 5).

Place of Prayer: Inner chamber (Matt. 6:6); amid nature (Matt. 14:23; Mark 1:35). In the church (John 17:1; Psa. 95:6). Before the unsaved (Acts 16:25; 27:35). In all places (1 Tim. 2:8, R. V.).

VI. HINDRANCES AND HELPS TO PRAYER.

1. HINDRANCES.

Indulged known sin (Psa. 66:18; Isa. 59:1, 2). Wilful disobedience to known commandments (Prov. 28:9). Selfishness (James 4:3). Unforgiving spirit (Matt. 5:22, 23; 6:12). Lack of faith (Heb. 11:6; James 1:6). Idols in the heart (Ezek. 8:5-18; 14:1-3).

2. HELPS—ESSENTIALS TO PREVAILING PRAYER.

Sincerity (Psa. 145:18; Matt. 6:5). Simplicity (Matt. 6:7, cf. 26:44). Earnestness (James 5:17; Acts 12:5; Luke 22:44). Persistence (Luke 18:1-8; Col. 4:2; Rom. 12:12, R. V.). Faith (Matt. 21:22; James 1:6). Unison with others (Matt. 18:19, 20). Definiteness (Psa. 27:4; Matt. 18:19). Effort (Exod. 14:15). In the name of Jesus (John 16:23; 14:13, 14). With fasting (Acts 13:2, 3; 14:23).

THE DOCTRINE OF THE CHURCH I. DEFINITION; DISTINCTIONS.

1. OLD TESTAMENT. 2. NEW TESTAMENT. 3. THE CHURCH; CHRISTENDOM; KINGDOM.

II. THE FOUNDING OF THE CHURCH.

1. IN PROPHECY AND PROMISE. 2. HISTORICALLY FOUNDED.

III. MEMBERSHIP IN THE CHURCH.

Conditions of Entrance; Characteristics.

1. REPENTANCE AND BAPTISM. 2. FAITH IN THE DEITY OF JESUS CHRIST. 3. REGENERATION. 4. PUBLIC CONFESSION OF CHRIST—BAPTISM. 5. ADHERENCE TO THE APOSTLES’ DOCTRINE. 6. CHARACTERISTICS.

IV. FIGURES UNDER WHICH THE CHURCH IS PRESENTED.

1. THE BODY OF CHRIST. 2. THE TEMPLE OF GOD. 3. THE BRIDE OF CHRIST.

V. THE ORDINANCES OF THE CHURCH.

1. BAPTISM. 2. THE LORD’S SUPPER.

VI. THE VOCATION OF THE CHURCH.

1. TO WORSHIP GOD. 2. TO EVANGELIZE THE WORLD. 3. PERFECT EACH MEMBER. 4. TO WITNESS. 5. FUTURE GLORY.

THE DOCTRINE OF THE CHURCH.

There is great danger of losing sight of the Church in the endeavor to emphasize the idea of the Kingdom of Heaven or Christendom. We are prone to think it a small thing to speak of the Church; the Kingdom and Christendom seem so large in comparison. We are tempted to distinguish and contrast Churchism, as it is sometimes called, and Christianity, to the disparagement of the former. It is well to remember that Jesus Christ positively identifies Himself with the Church (Acts 9) and not with Christendom; He gave up His life that He might found the Church (Eph. 5:25). The Apostle Paul sacrificed himself in his endeavors to build up the Church, not Christendom. He speaks of his greatest sin as consisting in persecuting the Church of God (1 Cor. 15:9). The supreme business of God in this age is the gathering of the Church. Some day it will be complete (Eph. 4:12), and then the age will have served its purpose.

I. DEFINITIONS; DISTINCTIONS.

1. OLD TESTAMENT USE OF THE WORD.

Lev. 4:13—“And if the whole congregation of Israel sin through ignorance, and the thing be hid from the eyes of the assembly … .” The Hebrew word for assembly means to call or assemble, and is used not only for the act of calling itself, but also for the assembly of the called ones. In this sense Israel is called a “church,” an assembly, because called out from among the other nations to be a holy people (Acts 7:38, “the church in the wilderness”). There is always a religious aspect associated with this particular call.

2. THE NEW TESTAMENT USE OF THE WORD.

It is from the New Testament primarily, if not really exclusively, that the real meaning and idea of the Church is derived. The Christian Church is a New Testament institution, beginning with Pentecost, and ending, probably, with the rapture. Two words are of special importance in this connection:

a) Ecclesia, from Two Greek Words Meaning “To Call Out From.”

This word is used in all about 111 times in the New Testament. It is used in a secular sense in Acts 19:39—“It shall be determined in a lawful assembly”; of Israel in the wilderness (Acts 7:38), and of the assembly of believers in Christ (Matt. 16:18; 18:17; 1 Cor. 1:2; Eph. 5:25-27). In keeping with this idea the saints are said to be the “called-out” ones (Rom. 8:30; 1 Cor. 1:2; cf. 2 Cor.

6:17).

b) “Kuriakon”—That Which Belongs to the Lord.

So we have “the supper of the Lord” (1 Cor. 11:20); the “day of the Lord” (Rev. 1:10). See also Luke 22:25 and Rom. 14:8, 9, as illustrating that over which the Lord has dominion and authority.

To sum up then: The Church is composed of the body of believers who have been called out from the world, and who are under the dominion and authority of Jesus Christ.

c) The Growth of the Church Idea in the New Testament.

At first there was but one Church at Jerusalem. The meetings may have been held in different houses, yet there was but one Church with one roster: so we read of the total membership consisting at one time of 120 (Acts 1:15), again of 3,000 (2:41), and still again of 5,000 (4:4), to which there were daily additions (2:47). The apostles were at the head of the Church (2:41-47). See Acts, cc. 1 and 2, for a fuller account of the first Church.

The second stage in the growth of the Church was its spread throughout Judea and Samaria, as recorded in Acts 8.

Antioch, in Syria, then became the head of the Gentile Church (Acts 13:1), as Jerusalem was the head of the Jewish Church (Acts 15); Paul representing the Church at Antioch, and Peter and James at Jerusalem. The assembly at Antioch was called “the church” just as truly as was the assembly at Jerusalem (11:22; 13:1).

Because of the missionary activities of the apostles, especially Paul, churches sprang up in different cities, especially in Asia Minor, e.g., Corinth, Galatia, Ephesus, and Philippi.

In view of all this the term “church” came to be used of the Church universal, that is, the complete body of Christ as existing in every place (1 Cor. 15:9; Gal. 1:2, 13; Matt. 16:18); of local churches in any one place (Col. 4:16; Phil. 4:15; 1 Cor. 1:2, etc.); of single meetings, even where two or three met together (Matt. 18:19; Col. 4:15; Phil. 1:2; Rom. 16:5).

It is evident, then, from what has here been said, that by the term “church” is included all that is meant from the Church Universal to the meeting of the church in the house. Wherever God’s people meet in the name of Christ to worship, there you have the Church.

3. DISTINCTIONS:

a) The Church and the Kingdom.

The Church (which is the mystery) and the Kingdom in mystery are now contemporary. The Kingdom will be fully manifested at the coming of Christ. The Church is within the Kingdom; probably the regenerate are “the children of the kingdom.” The Kingdom is comprised of both good and bad (Matt. 13); the Church, of real saints only. The Jews rejected the Kingdom under Christ and the apostles. That Kingdom, now rejected, will be set up again when the Messiah comes. This conception will help us to understand the parables of Matthew 13, as well as the Sermon on the Mount. The tares are sown not in the Church, but in the field, which is the world. The Church may be looked upon as part of the Kingdom of God, just as Illinois is part of the United States. The Kingdom is present, in a sense, just as the King is present in the hearts of his own people. There is a difference between the Church and Christendom, just as there is a difference between possessing and professing Christians. Baptized Christendom is one thing, and the Church of Christ is another.

b) The Church Visible and Invisible: Actual and Ideal.

The Church Visible is composed of all those whose names are enrolled upon its roster; Invisible, of those whose names are written in the Lamb’s book of life; Actual, people imperfect, yet aiming after perfection, alive here on the earth; Ideal, departed saints who are now triumphant in heaven (Heb. 12:23). There is a Church in heaven just as there is one upon the earth; indeed, it is but a part of the one Church; called the Church militant while upon the earth, and the Church triumphant in heaven.

c) The Church Local and Universal.

By the first is meant the Church in any particular place, such as “the church at Corinth”; by the latter, the Church as found in every place (1 Cor. 1:2).

II. THE FOUNDING OF THE CHURCH.

1. FORETOLD BY CHRIST.

Matt. 16:16-18—”… . On this rock I will build my church.” Here is the Church in prophecy and promise; the first mention of the Church in the New Testament. Note the distinction here recognized between the “Kingdom” and the “Church.”

The Church is to be founded on Peter’s confession of Jesus Christ as the Son of the living God. No supremacy is here given to Peter, as a comparison of these verses with John 20:19-23, and Matt. 18:18—in which the same privilege of the binding and loosing is given to the whole Church and to all the apostles—will show.

In Matthew 18:15-20 our Lord recognizes the fact of the Church, and also that it has the divine seal and sanction in the exercising of the power of the keys.

2. HISTORICALLY FOUNDED BY THE APOSTLES.

Acts 1-2:47. The promise and prophecy of Matt. 16:16-18 is here fulfilled. Here is the account of the first Christian Church in its glorious beginning, and as it actually existed in Jerusalem. When a man became regenerate by believing in Jesus Christ he was thereby constituted a member of the Church. There was no question as to whether he ought to join himself to the Church or not; that was a fact taken for granted. So we read that the Lord was adding to the Church daily such as were being saved. The Church was already a concrete institution to which every believer in Christ united himself.

“The Apostles’ doctrine” formed the standard of faith—a fulfillment of Christ’s prophecy and promise in Matthew 16:16-18: “On this rock I will build my church,” etc.

The Church had stated places of meeting: the upper room (Acts 1:13), the temple (5:12), the homes of members (2:46, 12:12), and the synagogue; stated times of meeting: daily (2:46), each Lord’s Day (20:7), the regular hours of prayer (3:1; 10:9); a regular church roll: 120 (1:15), 3,000 (2:41), 5,000 (4:4); daily additions (2:47).

That there were definitely, regularly organized churches is clear from the fact that the Apostle Paul addressed many of his epistles to churches in different localities. The letters to the Corinthians (e.g., 1 Ep. 12-14) show that the churches had already recognized certain forms of service and liturgy; those to Timothy and Titus presume a regularly organized congregation of believers. That there is a Church in the world is clear from 1 Cor. 5:9-13. The Christian Church is as much an entity as the Gentile, or the Jew (1 Cor. 10:32). The existence of church officers proves the existence of the Church in an organized form: bishops and deacons (Phil. 1:1), elders (Acts 20:17), the presbytery (1 Tim. 4:14). Church letters were granted to members (Acts 18:27).

III. MEMBERSHIP IN THE CHURCH—ITS CONDITIONS AND CHARACTERISTICS.

1. REPENTANCE AND BAPTISM REQUIRED OF ALL ITS MEMBERS.

Acts 2:38-41—“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. Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.”

2. FAITH IN THE LORD JESUS CHRIST AS THE DIVINE REDEEMER.

Matt. 16:16-18; Acts 2:38, 39. Peter’s entire sermon in Acts 2 illustrates this fact.

3. SAVED-REGENERATED.

Acts 2:47—”… . And the Lord added to the church such as should be saved.” Cf. John 3:3, 5. It was essential that the members of the early Church should be “added unto the Lord” before they were added to the Church (5:14; 11:24).

4. BAPTISM IN THE NAME OF THE TRIUNE GOD AS AN OPEN CONFESSION OF CHRIST.

Matt. 28:19—“Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.” Acts 2:38-41; 10:47, 48; 22:16: cf. Rom. 10:9, 10.

5. ADHERENCE TO THE APOSTOLIC DOCTRINE.

Acts 2:42—“And they continued steadfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship.” Cf. “On this rock I will build my church” (Matt. 16:16-18); also Eph. 2:20.

6. CHARACTERISTICS OF MEMBERSHIP IN THE EARLY CHURCH.

The members were known as believers (Acts 4:32); brethren (11:29; 12:17; Rom. 1:13—the absolute equality of all believers, cf. Matt. 23:8-10); Christians (Acts 11:26; 26:28); saints (9:13; 1 Cor. 1:2; Rev. 13:7); elect (Mark 13:27; Rom. 8:33; Eph. 1:4).

IV. FIGURES UNDER WHICH THE CHURCH IS SET FORTH IN THE SCRIPTURES.

1. THE BODY, OF WHICH CHRIST IS THE HEAD.

Two ideas are contained in this symbol:

a) The Relation of the Church to Christ, Who Is Its Head.

Eph. 1:22, 23; Col. 1:18; 2:19. The Church is an organism, not an organization. There is a vital relation between Christ and the Church, both partaking of the same life, just as there is between the physical head and the body. We cannot join the Church as we would a lodge or any mere human organization. We must be partakers by faith of Christ’s life before we can become members of Christ’s Church, in the true sense. As the Head of the Church Christ is its Guardian and Director (Eph. 5:23, 24); the Source of its life, filling it with His fulness (Eph. 1:23); the Centre of its Unity and the Cause of its growth (Eph. 4:15; Col. 2:19).

b) The Relation of the Members One to Another.

1 Cor. 12:12-27; Rom. 12:4, 5; Eph. 4:1-4, 15,16.

2. A TEMPLE, A BUILDING, A HABITATION, A DWELLING-PLACE FOR GOD’S SPIRIT.

Eph. 2:20, 21; 1 Cor. 3:9-17; 1 Tim. 3:15; 1 Pet. 2:4-8; Rev. 21:3; 1 Cor. 6:19. Of this building Christ is the cornerstone, and the prophets and apostles the foundation. In 1 Cor. 3 Christ is the chief cornerstone and the apostles the builders; the whole building is held in place by Christ.

3. THE BRIDE OF CHRIST.

2 Cor. 11:2; Eph. 5:25-27; Rev. 19:7; 22:17. Christ is the Bridegroom (John 3:29). This is a great mystery (Eph. 5:32). The Bride becomes the wife of the Lamb (Rev. 21:2).

V. THE ORDINANCES OF THE CHURCH.

1. BAPTISM.

Matt. 28:19, 20; Mark 16:16; Acts 2:38, 41; 8:36-40; 10:47, 48.

2. THE LORD’S SUPPER.

Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7—“And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow; and continued his speech until midnight.” 1 Cor. 11:20-34.

VI. THE VOCATION OF THE CHURCH.

1. TO WORSHIP GOD AND TO GLORIFY HIM ON THE EARTH:

Eph. 1:4-6—“According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love: Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will. To the praise of the glory of his grace wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved.”

2. TO EVANGELIZE THE WORLD WITH THE GOSPEL:

Matt. 28:19, 20—“Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.” Acts 2; 5:42; 6:5-8; Eph. 3:8; Acts 15:7.

3. TO DEVELOP EACH INDIVIDUAL CHRISTIAN UNTIL HE ATTAINS UNTO THE FULNESS OF THE STATURE OF CHRIST:

Eph. 4:11-15. Hence the gift of pastors, teachers, etc. Herein lies the value of church attendance—it promotes growth; failure to attend leads to apostasy (Heb. 10:25-28), cf. 1 Thess. 5:11; 1 Cor. 12.

4. A CONSTANT WITNESS FOR CHRIST AND HIS WORD:

Acts 1:8—“But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.” 8:1, 4.

5. THE FUTURE GLORY OF THE CHURCH:

Eph. 3:10, 21; Eev. 7:9-17.

THE DOCTRINE OF THE SCRIPTURES.

I. NAMES AND TITLES.

1. THE BIBLE. 2. THE TESTAMENTS. 3. THE SCRIPTURES. 4. THE WORD OF GOD.

II. INSPIRATION.

1. DEFINITION. 2. DISTINCTIONS. a) Revelation. b) Illumination. c) Reporting. 3. VIEWS: a) Natural Inspiration. b) Christian Illumination. c) Dynamic Theory. d) Concept Theory. e) Verbal Inspiration. f) Partial Inspiration. g) Plenary Inspiration. 4. THE CLAIMS OF THE SCRIPTURES THEMSELVES: a) The Old Testament. b) The New Testament. 5. THE CHARACTER (OR DEGREES) OF INSPIRATION. a) Actual Words of God Himself. b) Actual Words Communicated by God to Men. e) Individual Freedom in Choice of Words—To What Extent?

THE DOCTRINE OF THE SCRIPTURES.

I. THE BIBLE—ITS NAMES AND TITLES.

1. “THE BIBLE.”

Our English word Bible comes from the Greek words biblos (Matt. 1:1) and biblion (diminutive form) (Luke 4:17), which mean “book.” Ancient books were written upon the biblus or papyrus reed, and from this custom came the Greek name biblos, which finally came to be applied to the sacred books. See Mark 12:26; Luke 3:4; 20:42; Acts 1:20; 7:42.

The Bible is not merely a book, however. It is THE BOOK—the Book that from the importance of its subjects, the wideness of its range, the majesty of its Author, stands as high above all other books as the heaven is high above the earth.

2. “THE OLD AND NEW TESTAMENTS.”

See Luke 22:20; 1 Cor. 11:25; 2 Cor. 3:6, 14; Heb. 9:15; 12:24.

The word Testament means Covenant, and is the term by which God was pleased to designate the relation that existed between Himself and His people. The term Covenant was first of all applied to the relation itself, and afterward to the books which contained the record of that relation.

By the end of the second century we find the “Old Covenant” and the “New Covenant” as the established names of the Jewish and Christian Scriptures; and Origen, in the beginning of the third century, mentioned “the divine Scriptures, the so-called Old and New Covenants.”

The Old Testament deals with the record of the calling and history of the Jewish nation, and as such it is the Old Covenant. The New Testament deals with the history and application of the redemption wrought by the Lord Jesus Christ, and as such it is the New Covenant.

3. “THE SCRIPTURE,” AND “THE SCRIPTURES.”

The Bible is also called “The Scripture” (Mark 12:10; 15:28; Luke 4:21; John 2:22; 7:38; 10:35; Rom. 4:3; Gal. 4:30; 2 Pet. 1:20), and “The Scriptures” (Matt. 22:29; Mark 12:24; Luke 24:27; John 5:39; Acts 17:11; Rom. 1:2; 2 Tim. 3:15; 2 Pet. 3:16). These terms mean that the Scriptures are “Holy Writings.” By the early Christians the most common designation for the whole Bible was “The Scriptures.”

4. “THE WORD OF GOD.”

Of all the names given to the Bible, “The Word of God” (Mark 7:13; Rom. 10:17; 2 Cor. 2:17; Heb. 4:12; 1 Thess. 2:13) is doubtless the most significant, impressive, and complete. It is sufficient to justify the faith of the weakest Christian. It gathers up all that the most earnest search can unfold. It teaches us to regard the Bible as the utterance of divine wisdom and love—as God speaking to man.

II. THE INSPIRATION OF THE BIBLE.

1. WHAT IS MEANT BY THE TERM “INSPIRATION.”

This question is best answered by Scripture itself. It defines its own terms. Let us turn, then, “to the Law and to the Testimony.”

In 2 Tim. 3:16—“All Scripture is given by inspiration of God.”

The word “inspired” means literally “God-breathed.” It is composed of two Greek words—_theos=God;_ and pnein=to breathe. The term “given by inspiration” signifies, then, that the writings of the Old Testament, of which Paul is here speaking, are the result of a certain influence exerted by God upon their authors.

The meaning of the word “breathed,” as here used, is brought out very forcibly by the comparison of two other words translated in the same way. The one is the Greek word psuchein=to breathe gently, while in 2 Tim. 3:16 the term denotes a forcible respiration. The other is the Hebrew word ah-ayrh=to breathe unconsciously, while 2 Tim. 3:16 denotes a conscious breathing.

Inspiration, then, as defined by Paul in this passage, is the strong, conscious inbreathing of God into men, qualifying them to give utterance to truth. It is God speaking through men, and the Old Testament is therefore just as much the Word of God as though God spake every single word of it with His own lips. The Scriptures are the result of divine inbreathing, just as human speech is uttered by the breathing through a man’s mouth.

2 Pet. 1:21—“For not by the will of man was prophecy brought at any time, but being borne by the Holy Spirit, the holy men of God spoke.” (This is a literal rendering, and brings out the sense more clearly.)

The participle “moved” may be translated “when moved,” so this passage teaches that holy men of God wrote the Scripture when moved to do so by the Holy Spirit.

Further, the participle is passive, and denotes “to be moved upon.” This distinctly teaches that the Scripture was not written by mere men, or at their suggestion, but by men moved upon, prompted, yea indeed, driven by the promptings of the Holy Spirit.

This declaration of Peter may be said to intimate that the Holy Ghost was especially and miraculously present with and in the writers of the Scriptures, revealing to them truths which they did not know before, and guiding them alike in their record of these truths, and of the transactions of which they were eye and ear witnesses, so that they were enabled to present them with substantial accuracy to the minds of others.

The statements of the Scriptures regarding Inspiration may be summed up as follows: Holy men of God, qualified by the infusion of the breath of God, wrote in obedience to the divine command, and were kept from all error, whether they revealed truths previously unknown or recorded truths already familiar. In this sense, “all Scripture is given by inspiration of God,” the Bible is indeed and in truth the very Word of God, and the books of the Bible are of divine origin and authority.

2. THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN INSPIRATION, REVELATION, ILLUMINATION, AND VERBATIM REPORTING.

a) The Distinction Between Inspiration and Revelation.

It is of the greatest importance, in considering the theme of Inspiration, to distinguish it clearly from Revelation.

The most cursory perusal of the Scriptures reveals the fact that they consist of two different kinds of records: first, records of truth directly revealed and imparted to the mind of the writer by God, and which he could have learned in no other manner (such, for example, as the story of Creation); and second, records of events that occurred within the writer’s own observation, and of sayings that fell upon his own ears (such as Moses’ account of the Exodus, Paul’s account of his interview with Peter at Antioch). In the one case, the writer records things that had not been revealed to man before; in the other case, he records facts which were as well known to others as to himself.

Now, Revelation is that act of God by which He directly communicates truth not known before to the human mind. Revelation discovers new truth, while Inspiration superintends the communicating of that truth.

All that is in the Bible has not been “directly revealed” to man. It contains history, and the language of men, even of wicked men. But there is absolutely no part of the Bible record that is not inspired. The history recorded in the Bible is true. The sacred writers were so directed and influenced by the Spirit that they were preserved, in writing, from every error of fact and doctrine. The history remains history. Things not sanctioned by God, recorded in the Bible, are to be shunned (2 Tim. 3:16). Nevertheless, all these things were written under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. This is Inspiration.

This distinction should be definitely and clearly understood, for many of the most plausible arguments against the full inspiration of the Scriptures have arisen from the fact that this has been either unrecognized or ignored.

Though all Scripture is inspired, it does not stamp with divine authority every sentiment which it reports as uttered by the men of whom it speaks, nor does it mark with divine approval every action which it relates as performed by those with whose biographies it deals. In the book of Job, for example, Inspiration gives with equal accuracy the language of Jehovah, the words of Satan, and the speeches of Job and his three friends; but it does not therefore place them all on the same level of authority. Each speaker is responsible for his own utterances. Neither Satan, Job, nor his three friends spoke by inspiration of God. They gave utterance to their own opinions; and all that Inspiration vouches for is that no one of them is misrepresented, but that each one spoke the sentiments that are attributed to him in Scripture. So, again, the fact that David’s cruelty to the Ammonites is recorded in the book of Kings does not imply that God approved it any more than He approved the king’s double crime of murder and adultery, which “displeased Him.” The inspiration of the Book vouches only for the accuracy of the record.

b) The Distinction Between Inspiration and Illumination.

Spiritual Illumination refers to the influence of the Holy Ghost, common to all Christians. No statement of a truth about God or spiritual things can be understood by a man unless the Holy Spirit takes it and reveals it to him. It is only the spiritual man who can understand spiritual things. “The natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit” (1 Cor. 2:14). No learning of the schools can lead him to know God. Flesh and blood cannot reveal God to men (Matt. 16:17).

There is a vast difference between “a divine revelation of the mind of God” and “a divine action on the mind of man.” The former is Revelation; the latter is Spiritual Illumination.

Those who hold to the illumination theory to account for the origin of the Bible revelation claim that there is in every man an intuitive faculty that grasps the supernatural, that lays hold of God and spiritual things; and that whatever insight into the nature and being of God is given man, is produced by the divine Spirit playing upon this spiritual faculty in man, illuminating and irradiating it, so that it sees the perfection of God and is enabled to penetrate into His will.

According to this view, the Bible is the result of the meditations of godly men whose minds were acted upon by God. Any revelation of divinity of which man is the recipient, comes in this manner. Subjective illumination God has carried on since the world began, and is still carrying on by a great variety of methods. The Scriptures are not in any way the oracles of God, nor do they come to us as direct, logical utterances of the divine mind. The patriarchs, prophets and apostles of old so deeply meditated on God and the things of God that their spiritual faculties were enlarged and illuminated to such a degree that they conceived of these visions of God, His nature, His will, etc., as recorded in the Scriptures.

Now, it is true, doubtless, that a man may be granted a very deep insight into the nature and being of God by spiritual meditation. That a fire does burn in the Bible, we do not deny. Throughout all ages of the Jewish and Christian churches men have lit their spiritual torches at this fire, and in their light they have seen Him who is invisible. This fire still burns, and to-day the devout student may catch its flame if, with uncovered head, with shoeless feet, and with humble spirit, he stands before the bush that ever burns and yet is never consumed. But this working of the truth of God on the mind of man is not God’s revelation of His mind to man which the Bible professes to be. The Bible must of necessity be not merely a repository or receptacle of spiritual influences fitted to act upon the mind; it must be—it is—God making Himself known to men. It is God speaking to man through men.

In contradistinction to the illumination theory we have instances in the Bible in which God made revelations of Himself, His truth, and His will to men who were by no means at the time meditating upon God. See e.g.:

John 11:49-52—“And one of them, named Caiaphas, being the high priest that same year, said unto them, Ye know nothing at all, nor consider that it is expedient for us, that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation perish not. And this spake he not of himself: but being high priest that year, 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.” See also Num. 22:34, 35.

c) The Distinction Between Inspiration and Verbatim Reporting.

Inspiration is not necessarily Verbatim Reporting.

It is not absolutely necessary to make such a claim to prove the inspiration of the Scriptures. Verbatim Reporting is, in a sense, a mere mechanical operation. It would have robbed the writers of their individuality, and made them mere machines. But no; the Holy Spirit used the memories, the intuitions, the judgments, and indeed the idiosyncrasies of the writers, so that while each recorded that part of the event or discourse which (as we may express it) adhered to himself, he was enabled to give it with substantial accuracy.

3. VARIOUS THEORIES OF INSPIRATION.

It will be in order here to note briefly various theories of inspiration; for it must be known that all students do not agree as to the degree of inspiration that characterized the writers of the Scripture. When a man says, “I believe in the inspiration of the Bible,” it will be quite in place in these days to ask him what he means by inspiration. Following are some of the views of inspiration held at the present day.

a) Natural Inspiration.

This theory identifies inspiration with genius of a high order. It denies that there is anything supernatural, mysterious, or peculiar in the mode of the Spirit’s operation in and upon the Scripture writers. It claims that they were no more inspired than were Milton, Shakespeare, Mahomet, or Confucius.

Such a theory we absolutely reject. For if such be the character of the inspiration possessed by the Scripture writers, there is nothing to assure us that they were not liable to make the same errors, to teach the same false views of life, to give expression to the same uncertainties concerning the past, the present, and the future as did these shining lights of mere human genius.

When David said, “The Spirit of the Lord spake by me, and His word was in my tongue,” he meant something more than the prayer which forms the gem of Paradise Lost. When Isaiah and his brethren said, “Thus saith the Lord,” they claimed something higher than that they were speaking under the stirrings of poetic rapture. When Paul said to the Corinthians, “Which things also we speak, not in the words which man’s wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth (1 Cor. 2:13),” he used the language to which you will find no parallel in the literature of mere human genius. And no man of candor or intelligence can pass from the writings even of the unapproachable Shakespeare into the perusal of the Bible without feeling that the difference between the two is not one simply of degree, but of kind; he has not merely ascended to a loftier outlook in the same human dwelling, but he has gone into a new region altogether. There is a certain “unknown quality” in this Book which clearly distinguishes it from all others; and if we may take its own explanation of the matter, that unknown quality is its divine inspiration.

b) Universal Christian Inspiration, or Illumination.

According to this theory, the inspiration of the Bible writers was the same as has characterized Christians of every age; the ordinary Christian of to-day is inspired as much as was the Apostle Paul.

If this be the true view, there seems to be no plausible reason why a new Bible should not be possible to-day. And yet no individual, however extreme his claims to inspiration may be, has even ventured such a task.

c) Mechanical, or Dynamic Inspiration. (See Verbatim Eeporting, page 198.)

This theory ignores the human instrumentality in the writing of the Scriptures altogether, and claims that the writers were passive instruments mere machines, just as insensible to what they were accomplishing as is the string of the harp or lyre to the play of the musician.

How, then, do we account for the differences in style of the various writers, the preservation of their individualities, their idiosyncrasies?

It seems evident that Scripture cannot be made to harmonize with the application of this theory.

d) Concept, or Thought Inspiration.

This theory claims that only the concepts, or thoughts, of men were given by inspiration. It will be examined more fully later. Concept Inspiration is opposed by
e) Verbal Inspiration.

Here it is claimed that the very words of Scripture were given by the Holy Spirit; that the writers were not left absolutely to themselves in the choice of words they should use. (See page 204.)

f) Partial Inspiration.

The favorite way of expressing this theory is, “The Bible contains the Word of God.”

This statement implies that it contains much that is not the Word of God, that is, that is not inspired. A serious question at once arises: Who is to decide what is and what is not inspired? Who is to be the judge of so vital a question? What part is inspired, and what part is not? Who can tell?

Such a theory leaves man in awful and fatal uncertainty.

g) Plenary, or Full, Inspiration.

This is the opposite of Partial Inspiration. It holds all Scripture to be equally inspired, as stated on page 200. It bases its claim on 2 Tim. 3:16.

The Revised Version translation of 2 Tim. 3:16 is erroneous. The reader might infer from it that there is some Scripture that is not inspired.

If Paul had said, “All Scripture that is divinely inspired is also profitable, etc.,” he would virtually have said, “There is some Scripture, some part of the Bible, that is not profitable, etc., and therefore is not inspired.” This is what the spirit of rationalism wants, namely, to make human reason the test and judge and measure of what is inspired and what is not. One man says such and such a verse is not profitable to him, another says such and such a verse is not profitable to him; a third says such and such is not profitable to him. The result is that no Bible is left.

Is it possible that anyone need be told the flat and sapless tautology that all divinely-inspired Scripture is also profitable? Paul dealt in no such meaningless phrases. The word translated also does not mean also here. It means and. Its position in the sentence shows this.

Again, the Revised rendering is shown to be openly false because the revisers refused to render the same Greek construction elsewhere in the same way, which convicts them of error.

In Hebrew 4:13 we read: “All things are naked and laid open before the eyes of Him with whom we have to do.” The form and construction of this verse is identical with that of 2 Tim. 3:16. Were we, however, to translate this passage as the revisers translated the passage in Timothy, it would read: “All naked things are also open to the eyes of Him with whom we have to do.” All naked things are also open things! All uncovered things are also exposed things! There is no also in the case.

Again, 1 Tim. 4:4: “Every creature of God is good and nothing is to be rejected.” According to the principles the revisers adopted in rendering 2 Tim. 3:16, this passage would read: “Every good creature of God is also nothing to be rejected.”

The Greek language has no such meaningless syntax. The place of the verb is,—which must be supplied,—is directly before the word “inspired,” and not after it.

The great rationalistic scholar, DeWette, confessed candidly that the rendering the revisers here adopted cannot be defended. In his German version of the text, he gave the sense thus: “Every sacred writing, i.e., of the canonical Scriptures, is inspired of God and is useful for doctrine, etc.” Bishops Moberly and Wordsworth, Archbishop Trench, and others of the Revision committee, disclaimed any responsibility for the rendering. Dean Burgon pronounced it “the most astonishing as well as calamitous literary blunder of the age.” It was condemned by Dr. Tregelles, the only man ever pensioned by the British government for scholarship.

In accordance with this weight of testimony, therefore, we hold to the rendering of the Authorized Version, and claim that all Scripture is equally and fully inspired of God.

4. THE CLAIMS OF THE SCRIPTURES TO INSPIRATION.

That the writers of the Scriptures claimed to write under the direct influence of the Spirit of God there can be no doubt. The quality or degree of their insspiration may be called into question, but surely not the fact of it. Let us examine the testimony of the writers themselves.

a) The Claims of Old Testament Writers to Inspiration. (We use the word Inspiration here as including Revelation.)

Compare and examine the following passages:

Exod. 4:10-15—“And Moses said unto the Lord, O my Lord, I am not eloquent, neither heretofore, nor since thou hast spoken unto thy servant; but I am slow of speech, and of a slow tongue. And the Lord said unto him, Who hath made man’s mouth? or who maketh the dumb, or deaf, or the seeing, or the blind? have not I the Lord? Now therefore go, and I will be with thy mouth, and teach thee what thou shalt say. And he said, O my Lord, send, I pray thee, by the hand of him whom thou wilt send. And the anger of the Lord was kindled against Moses, and he said, Is not Aaron the Levite thy brother? I know that he can speak well. And also, behold, he cometh forth to meet thee; and when he seeth thee, he will be glad in his heart. And thou shalt speak unto him, and put words in his mouth, and I will be with thy mouth, and with his mouth, and will teach you what ye shall do.”

Deut. 4:2—“Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you.”

Jer. 1:7-9—“But the Lord said unto me, Say not, I am a child: for thou shalt go to all that I shall send thee, and whatsoever I command thee thou shalt speak. Be not afraid of their faces; for I am with thee to deliver thee, saith the Lord. Then the Lord put forth his hand, and touched my mouth. And the Lord said unto me, Behold, I have put my words in thy mouth.” Also Ezek. 3:4; Micah

3:8.

These are but a few of the many passages in which the inspiration of the writers is affirmed and claimed.

Note further that the words “God said” occur ten times in the first chapter of Genesis. It is claimed that such expressions as “The Lord said,” “The Lord spake,” “The word of the Lord came,” are found 3,808 times in the Old Testament. These writers, claiming to be the revealers of the will of God, almost always commenced their messages with the words, “Thus saith the Lord.” That they were not deceived in their claims is evident from the minuteness and detail as to names, times and places which characterized their messages, and from the literal fulfillment of these oracles of God.

b) The Claims of the New Testament Writers to Inspiration.

It is worthy of note here to observe that inspiration is claimed by New Testament writers for Old Testament writers as well as for themselves. Read and compare the following passages:

2 Pet. 1:20, 21—“Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the Scripture is of any private interpretation. 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.”

1 Pet. 1:10, 11—“Of which salvation the prophets have inquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you: searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow.”

Acts 1:16—“Men and brethren, this scripture must needs have been fulfilled, which the Holy Ghost by the mouth of David spake before concerning Judas, which was guide to them that took Jesus.” Acts 28:25—“And when they agreed not among themselves, they departed, after that Paul had spoken one word, Well spake the Holy Ghost by Esaias the prophet unto our fathers.”

1 Cor. 2:13—“Which things also we speak, not in the words which man’s wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.”

1 Cor. 14:37—“If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.”

1 Thess. 2:13—“For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but, as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe.”

2 Peter 3:1, 2—“This second epistle, beloved, I now write unto you; in both which I stir up your pure minds by way of remembrance: that ye may be mindful of the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the commandment of us the apostles of the Lord and Saviour.”

Matt. 10:20—“For it is not ye that speak, but the Spirit of your Father which speaketh in you.”

Mark 13:11—“But when they shall lead you, and deliver you up, take no thought beforehand what ye shall speak, neither do ye premeditate; but whatsoever shall be given you in that hour, that speak ye, for it is not ye that speak, but the Holy Ghost.”

See also Luke 12:12; 21:14, 15; Acts 2:4.

It is evident from these and many other passages of Scripture that the writers of both the Old and New Testaments were conscious of having received revelations from God, and considered themselves inspired of God to write the Scriptures. They felt while writing that they were giving expression to the infallible truth of God, and were conscious that the Holy Spirit was moving them to the work.

5. WHAT IS THE NATUEE OF THE INSPIRATION THAT CHARACTERIZED THE WRITERS OF THE SCRIPTURES, AND IN WHAT DEGREE WERE THEY UNDER ITS INFLUENCE?

Much has been said and written in answer to this question. Were the thoughts or concepts alone inspired, or were the words also inspired? Were the words dictated by the Holy Spirit, or were the writers left to choose their own words? These are the knotty questions current today regarding the Inspiration of the Bible. We may say with certainty that
a) At least Some of the Words of Scripture are the Identical Words Written or Spoken by God Himself.

Note Exodus 38:16—“The writing was the writing of God”; Exodus 31:18—“Written with the finger of God.” Compare also Deuteronomy 10:2, 4; 9:10; Exodus 24:12. See also 1 Chronicles 28:19 (R. V.)—“All this, said David, have I been made to understand in writing from the hand of Jehovah”; Daniel 5:5—There “came forth the finger of a man’s hand and wrote.”

In the New Testament God is heard speaking both at the baptism and the transfiguration of Jesus, saying, “This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him.”

It is clearly evident from these passages that some part of the inspired record claims to be a record of the exact words of God.

b) It is Also very Definitely Stated in Scripture that God Put into the Mouths of Certain Men the Very Words They Should Speak, and Told Them What They Should Write.

Exod. 4:10-15—“And Moses said unto the Lord, O my Lord, I am not eloquent, neither heretofore, nor since thou hast spoken unto thy servant: but I am slow of speech, and of a slow tongue. And the Lord said unto him, Who hath made man’s mouth? or who maketh the dumb, or deaf, or the seeing, or the blind? have not I the Lord? Now therefore go, and I will be with thy mouth, and teach thee what thou shalt say. And he said, O my Lord, send, I pray thee, by the hand of him whom thou wilt send. And the anger of the Lord was kindled against Moses, and he said, Is not Aaron the Levite thy brother? I know that he can speak well. And also, behold, he cometh forth to meet thee: and when he seeth thee, he will be glad in his heart. And thou shalt speak unto him, and put words in his mouth: and I will be with thy mouth, and with his mouth, and will teach you what ye shall do.”

Exod. 34:27—“And the Lord said unto Moses, Write thou these words: for after the tenor of these words I have made a covenant with thee and with Israel.” Num. 17:2, 3—“Speak unto the children of Israel, and take of every one of them a rod according to the house of their fathers, of all their princes according to the house of their fathers, twelve rods: write thou every man’s name upon his rod. And thou shalt write Aaron’s name upon the rod of Levi: for one rod shall be for the head of the house of their fathers.”

Isa. 8:1, 11, 12—“Moreover the Lord said unto me, Take thee a great roll, and write in it with a man’s pen concerning Maher-shalal-hash-baz. For the Lord spake thus to me with a strong hand, and instructed me that I should not walk in the way of this people, saying, Say ye not, A confederacy, to all them to whom this people shall say, A confederacy; neither fear ye their fear, nor be afraid.”

Jer. 1:7—“But the Lord said unto me, Say not, I am a child: for thou shalt go to all that I shall send thee, and whatsoever I command thee thou shalt speak.”

Jer. 7:27—“Therefore thou shalt speak all these words unto them; but they will not hearken to thee; thou shalt also call unto them; but they will not answer thee.”

Jer. 13:12—“Therefore thou shall speak unto them this word: This saith the Lord God of Israel, Every bottle shall be filled with wine: and they shall say unto thee, Do we not certainly know that every bottle shall be filled with wine?”

Jer. 30:1, 3—“The word that came to Jeremiah from the Lord, saying. Thus speaketh the Lord God of Israel, saying, Write thee all the words that I have spoken unto thee in a book.”

Jer. 36: 1, 2, 4, 11, 27-32—“And it came to pass in the fourth year of Jehoiakim the son of Josiah king of Judah, that this word came unto Jeremiah from the Lord, saying, Take thee a roll of a book, and write therein all the words that I have spoken unto thee against Israel, and against Judah, and against all the nations, from the day I spake unto thee, from the days of Josiah, even unto this day. Then Jeremiah called Baruch the son of Neriah; and Baruch wrote from the mouth of Jeremiah all the words of the Lord, which he had spoken unto him, upon a roll of a book. When Michaiah the son of Gemariah, the son of Shaphan, had heard out of the book all the words of the Lord… . Then the word of the Lord came to Jeremiah, after that the king had burned the roll, and the words which Baruch wrote at the mouth of Jeremiah, saying, Take thee again another roll, and write in it all the former words that were in the first roll, which Jehoiakim the king of Judah hath burned. And thou shalt say to Jehoiakim king of Judah, Thou saith the Lord; Thou hast burned this roll, saying, Why hast thou written therein, saying, The king of Babylon shall certainly come and destroy this land, and shall cause to cease from thence man and beast? Therefore thus saith the Lord of Jehoiakim king of Judah; He shall have none to sit upon the throne of David: and his dead body shall be cast out in the day to the heat, and in the night to the frost. And I will punish him and his seed and his servants for their iniquity; and I will bring upon them, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and upon the men of Judah, all the evil that I have pronounced against them; but they hearkened not. Then took Jeremiah another roll, and give it to Baruch the scribe, the son of Neriah, who wrote therein from the mouth of Jeremiah all the words of the book which Jehoiakim king of Judah had burned in the fire; and there were added besides unto them many like words.” Also Ezek. 2:7; 3:10, 11; 24:2; 37:16; Hab. 2:2; Zech. 7:8-12.

1 Cor. 14:37—“If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.”

Rev. 2:1, 8, 12, 18—“Unto the angel of the church of Ephesus write; These things saith he that holdeth the seven stars in his right hand, who walketh in the midst of the seven golden candle-sticks … . And unto the angel of the church in Smyrna write; These things saith the first and the last, which was dead, and is alive … . And to the angel of the church in Pergamos write; These things saith he which hath the sharp sword with two edges … . And unto the angel of the church in Thyatira write; These things saith the Son of God, who hath his eyes like unto a flame of fire, and his feet are like fine brass.” Also 3:1; 7:14.

Rev. 10:4—“And when the seven thunders had uttered their voices, I was about to write: and I heard a voice from heaven saying unto me, Seal up those things which the seven thunders uttered, and write them not.”

To sum up these two arguments, then, let us say, regarding the nature of the inspiration of the sacred writings, that part of them claim to be the very words and writings of God Himself, spoken by His own mouth, or written by His own hand: that another part claim to be the record of words spoken to certain men who wrote them down just as they were spoken. And yet if this is all that is involved in inspiration, shall we not be robbed of a very beautiful and helpful fact, namely, that the Holy Spirit saw fit to preserve the characteristics of the writers? Do not the works of James, the faith of Paul, and the love of John appeal to us in their own peculiar way? This leads to the statement that
c) In a Certain Sense, and in Respect to Some Parts of the Scripture, the Authors Were (Humanly Speaking) Left to Choose Their Own Words in Relating Divine Truth.

This was by no means true of all the sacred writings. There are instances recorded of men who spoke without knowing what they were saying; and of men and animals speaking without knowledge of the substance of their message:

John 11:49-52—“And one of them, named Caiaphas, being the high priest that same year, said unto them, Ye know nothing at all, nor consider that it is expedient for us, that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation perish not. And this spake he not of himself; but being high priest that year, 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.”

Num. 22:28-30—“And the Lord opened the mouth of the ass, and she said unto Balaam, What have I done unto thee, that thou hast smitten me these three times? And Balaam said unto the ass, Because thou has mocked me: I would there were a sword in mine hand, for now would I kill thee. And the ass said unto Balaam, Am not I thine ass, upon which thou hast ridden ever since I was thine unto this day? was I ever wont to do so unto thee? And he said, Nay.”

Dan. 12:8, 9—“And I heard, but I understood not: then said I, 0 my Lord, what shall be the end of these things? And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end.”

And yet the gift of inspiration admitted of personal, diligent, and faithful research into the facts recorded—Luke 1:1-4.

This fact allowed the expression of the same thought in different words, such differences (by no means discrepancies) between the accounts of inspired men as would be likely to arise from the different standpoint of each. Examples: Matt. 26:26, 27—“And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body. And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it.”

Luke 22:19, 20—“And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, this is my body which is given for you; this do in remembrance of me. Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you.”

1 Cor. 11:24, 25—“And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat; this is my body, which is broken for you; this do in remembrance of me. After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood; this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.”

Matt. 3:17—“And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.”

Mark 1:11—“And there came a voice from heaven, saying, Thou art my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.”

Luke 3:22—“And the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon him, and a voice came from heaven, which said, Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased.”

The Spirit employed the attention, the investigation, the memory, the fancy, the logic, in a word, all the faculties of the writer, and wrought through them. He guided the writer to choose what narrative and materials, speeches of others, imperial decrees, genealogies, official letters, state papers or historical matters he might find necessary for the recording of the divine message of salvation. He wrought in, with, and through their spirits, so as to preserve their individuality to others. He used the men themselves, and spoke through their individualities. “The gold was His; the mould was theirs.”

DID INSPIRATION AFFECT THE WORDS USED?

If the question be asked whether or not inspiration affected the words, it must be answered in the affirmative. It is hardly possible that inspiration could insure the correct transmission of thought without in some way affecting the words. Yet it affected the words not directly and immediately by dictating them in the ears of the writers, but mediately, through working on their minds and producing there such vivid and clear ideas of thoughts and facts that the writers could find words fitted to their purpose.

We must conclude, therefore, that while from the divine side the Holy Spirit gave through men clearly and faithfully that which He wished to communicate, from the human side that communication came forth in language such as men themselves would naturally have chosen.

This may seem to some to be an impossibility, and they would allege that if the words were affected by inspiration at all, there must have been dictation. But the must is a non sequitur. It is admitted that God works His purposes in the world through the ordinary actions of men, while yet no violence is done to their freedom. It is admitted, also, that God, through the gracious operations of His Holy Spirit, works in the hearts of His people so as to develop in each of them the new man, while yet the individuality of each is preserved; and the type of piety is just as distinct in each Christian as the style is in each of the sacred writers. These cases are so nearly parallel as to suggest that all denials of the possibility of inspiration without the destruction of the individual characteristics are as unphilosophical as they are unwarranted.

We may therefore safely say that in a very real sense the words as well as the thoughts have been given, whether mediately or immediately, under the influence of the divine Spirit. We claim that the Bible is in deed and in truth the very Word of God; that it is the Word of God in the language of men; truly divine, and at the same time truly human; that it is the revelation of God to His creatures; that infallible guidance was given to those who wrote it, so as to preserve them from error in the statement of facts; that what the writers of the Scriptures say or write under this guidance is as truly said and written by God as if their instrumentality were not used at all; that the ideas expressed therein are the very ideas the Holy Ghost intended to convey; that God is in the fullest sense responsible for every word. This is what the Bible claims for itself.

THE DOCTRINE OF ANGELS.

I. THEIR EXISTENCE.

1. THE TEACHING OF JESUS. 2. THE TEACHING OF THE APOSTLES.

II. THEIR NATURE.

1. CREATED BEINGS. 2. SPIRITUAL BEINGS. 3. GREAT POWER AND MIGHT. 4. VARIOUS GRADES. 5. THE NUMBER OF ANGELS.

III. THE FALL OF ANGELS.

1. TIME AND CAUSE. 2. THE WORK OF FALLEN ANGELS. 3. THE JUDGMENT OF FALLEN ANGELS.

IV. THE WORK OF ANGELS.

1. THEIR HEAVENLY MINISTRY. 2. THEIR EARTHLY MINISTRY. a) In Relation to the Believer. b) In Relation to Christ’s Second Coming.

THE DOCTRINE OF ANGELS.

We are not to think that man is the highest form of created being. As the distance between man and the lower forms of life is filled with beings of various grades, so it is possible that between man and God there exist creatures of higher than human intelligence and power. Indeed, the existence of lesser deities in all heathen mythologies presumes the existence of a higher order of beings between God and man, superior to man and inferior to God. This possibility is turned into certainty by the express and explicit teaching of the Scriptures. It would be sad indeed if we should allow ourselves to be such victims of sense perception and so materialistic that we should refuse to believe in an order of spiritual beings simply because they were beyond our sight and touch. We should not thus shut ourselves out of a larger life. A so-called liberal faith may express unbelief in such beings. Does not such a faith (?) label itself narrow rather than liberal by such a refusal of faith? Does not a liberal faith mean a faith that believes much, not little—as much, not as little, as possible?

I. THEIR EXISTENCE.

1. THE TEACHING OF JESUS.

Matt. 18:10—“For I say unto you, That in heaven their angels do always behold the face of my Father which is in heaven.” Mark 13:32—“But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven.” 8:38; Matt. 13:41; 26:53.

These are a sufficient number of passages, though they are by no means all, to prove that Jesus believed in the existence of angels. Jesus is not here speaking in any accommodative sense. Nor is He simply expressing a superstitious belief existing among the Jews at that time. This was not the habit of Jesus. He did not fail to correct popular opinion and tradition when it was wrong, e.g., His rebuke of the false ceremonialism of the Pharisees, and the unbelief of the Sadducees in the resurrection. See also the Sermon on the Mount (Matt. 5:20-37).

2. THE TEACHING OF PAUL, AND OTHER APOSTLES.

2 Thess. 1:7—“And to you who are troubled, rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with His mighty angels,” Col. 2:18—“Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels.” Is not one of the principal reasons for the writing of the Epistle to the Colossians to correct the gnostic theory of the worshipping of angels? See also Eph. 1:21, Col. 1:16. John believed in an angelic order of beings: John 1:51; Rev. 12:7; 22:9. Peter: 1 Pet. 3:22; 2 Pet. 2:11. See also Jude 9; Luke 22:43; Mark 8:38; Heb. 12:22. These and numerous other references in the Scriptures compel the candid student of the Word to believe in the existence of angels.

II. THE NATUEE OF ANGELS.

1. THEY ABE CREATED BEINGS.

Col. 1:16—“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.” Angels are not the spirits of the departed, nor are they glorified human beings (Heb. 12:22, 23). Neh. 9:6—“Thou, even thou, art Lord alone; thou hast made heaven, the heaven of heavens, with all their host.”

2. THEY ARE SPIRITUAL BEINGS.

Heb. 1:14—“Are they not all ministering spirits?” Psa. 104:4—“Who maketh his angels spirits; his ministers a flaming fire.” It is thought by some that God creates angels for a certain purpose, and when that purpose is accomplished they pass out of existence. But that there are many, many angels in existence all the time is clear from the teaching of the Scriptures.

Although the angels are “spirits,” they nevertheless ofttimes have appeared to men in visible, and even human form (Gen. 19; Judges 2:1; 6:11-22; Matt. 1:20; Luke 1:26; John 20:12). There seems to be no sex among the angels, although wherever the word “angel” is used in the Scriptures it is always in the masculine form.

3. THEY ARE BEINGS OF GREAT MIGHT AND POWER.

2 Pet, 2:11—“Whereas angels, which are greater in power and might (than man).” Psa. 103:20—“Angels that excel in strength.” One angel was able to destroy Sodom and Gomorrah, and other guilty cities; one angel smote the first-born, and rolled away the great stone from the mouth of the tomb. One angel had power to lay hold of that old dragon, the devil (Rev. 20:2, 10); one angel smote a hundred and fourscore and five thousand Assyrians (Isa. 37:36). Their power is delegated; they are the angels of His might (2 Thess. 1:7), the ministers through whom God’s might is manifested. They are mighty, but not almighty.

4. THERE ARE VARIOUS RANKS AND ORDERS OF ANGELS.

We read of Michael, the archangel (Jude 9; 1 Thess. 4:16); angels, authorities, and powers—which are supposedly ranks and orders of angels (1 Pet. 3:22; Col. 1:16). In the Apocryphal books we find a hierarchy with seven archangels, including Michael, Gabriel, Raphael, Uriel. The fact that but one archangel is mentioned in the Scriptures proves that its doctrine of angels was not derived, as some supposed, from Babylonian and Persian sources, for there we find seven archangels instead of one.

5. THE NUMBER OF ANGELS.

Heb. 12:22, R. V.—“Innumerable hosts of angels.” Cf. 2 Kings 6:17; Matt. 26:53; Job 25:3.

III. THE FALL OF ANGELS.

Originally all angels were created good. The Scriptures speak of a fall of angels—“the angels that sinned.”

2 Pet. 2:4—“For if 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.” Jude 6—“And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day.”

1. THE TIME OF THE FALL OF ANGELS.

Some maintain that it took place before the creation recorded in Genesis 1:2—between verses one and two; that it was this fall which made the original creation (Gen. 1:1) “waste and void.” This view can neither be proven nor refuted, nevertheless the great and awful fact of a fall of angels remains. (See under Doctrine of Satan, p. 225, for fall of angels in connection with the fall of Satan.)

2. THE CAUSE OF THE FALL OF ANGELS.

Peter does not specify the sin. Jude says they “kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation.” This, taken in connection with Deut. 32:8, which seems to indicate that certain territories or boundaries were appointed unto the angels, and Gen. 6:1-4, which speaks of the “sons of God” (which some suppose to refer to angels, which, however, is questionable), might seem to imply that the sin of the angels consisted in leaving their own abode and coming down to cohabit with the “daughters of men.” Thus their sin would be that of lust. To some expositors the context in Jude would seem to warrant such a conclusion, inasmuch as reference is made to the sins of Sodom and Gomorrah. But this can hardly be true, for a close study of the text in Genesis 6 shows that by “the sons of God” are meant the Sethites. This would seem to be the true interpretation; if so, then the sin recorded in Genesis 6 would be (1) natural and not monstrous; (2) Scriptural, and not mythical (cf. Num. 25; Judges 3:6; Rev. 2:14, 20-22 contains sins of a similar description); (3) accords with the designations subsequently given to the followers of God (Luke 3:38; Rom. 8:14; Gal. 3:26); (4) has a historical basis in the fact that Seth was regarded by his mother as a (the) son of from God, (5) in the circumstance that already the Sethites had begun to call themselves by the name of Jehovah (Gen. 4:26); (6), finally, it is sufficient as a hypothesis, and is therefore entitled to the preference (after Lange).

There are still others who say that the sin of the angels was pride and disobedience. It seems quite certain that these were the sins that caused Satan’s downfall (Ezek. 28). If this be the true view then we are to understand the words, “estate” or “principality” as indicating that instead of being satisfied with the dignity once for all assigned to them under the Son of God, they aspired higher.

3. THE WORK OF FALLEN ANGELS.

They oppose God’s purposes (Dan. 10:10-14); afflict God’s people (Luke 13:16; Matt. 17:15, 16); execute Satan’s purposes (Matt. 25:41; 12:26, 27); hinder the spiritual life of God’s people (Eph. 6:12); try to deceive God’s people (1 Sam. 28:7-20).

4. THE JUDGMENT OF THE FALLEN ANGELS.

Jude 6; 2 Pet. 2:4; Matt. 25:41, show that there is no hope of their redemption. Their final doom will be in the eternal fire. According to 1 Cor. 6:3 it would seem as though the saints were to have some part in the judgment of fallen angels.

IV. THE WORK OF ANGELS.

1. THEIR HEAVENLY MINISTRY.

Isa. 6; Rev. 5:11, 12; 8:3, 4—priestly service and worship.

2. THEIR EARTHLY MINISTRY.

To the angels has been committed the administration of the affairs material to sense, e.g., showing Hagar a fountain; appearing before Joshua with a drawn sword; releasing the chains from Peter, and opening the prison doors; feeding, strengthening, and defending the children of God. To the Holy Spirit more particularly has been committed the task of imparting the truth concerning spiritual matters.

In general: Angels have a relation to the earth somewhat as follows: They are related to winds, fires, storms, pestilence (Psa. 103:20; 104:4; 1 Chron. 21:15, 16, 27). The nation of Israel has a special relationship to angels in the sense of angelic guardianship (Dan. 12:1; Ezek. 9:1; Dan. 11:1).

In particular: Angels have a special ministry with reference to the church of Jesus Christ—the body of believers. They are the saints’ “ministering servants” (Heb. 1:14)—they do service for God’s people. Illustrations: To Abraham (Gen. 19); to Gideon (Judg. 6); to Mary (Luke 1); to the shepherds (Luke 2); to Peter (Acts 12); to Paul (Acts 27).

a) They Guide the Believer.

They guide the worker to the sinner (Acts 8:26), and the sinner to the worker (Acts 10:3). Note: The angel guides, but the Spirit instructs (8:29). Are angels interested in conversions? (Luke 15:10). How they watch our dealing with the unsaved!

b) They Cheer and Strengthen God’s People.

1 Kings 19:5-8; Matt. 4:11; Luke 22:43; cf. Acts 27:4-35; 5:19.

c) They Defend, Protect, and Deliver God’s Servants.

Dan. 6:22; Acts 5:19; 2 Kings 6:18; Gen. 19:11; Acts 12:8-ll; 27:23,

24.

d) They Are Eyewitnesses of the Church and the Believer.

1 Tim. 5:21—in matters of preaching, the service of the church, and soul-saving, the angels look on—a solemn and appalling thought. 1 Cor. 4:9—the good angels are spectators while the church engages in fierce battle with the hosts of sin. This is an incentive to endurance. 1 Cor. 11:10—“Because of the angels.” Is there intimated here a lack of modesty on the part of the women so shocking to the angels, who veil their faces in the presence of God when they worship.

e) They Guard the Elect Dead.

Luke 16:22; Matt. 24:31. Just as they guarded Christ’s tomb, and as Michael guarded Moses’ tomb (Jude 9).

f) They Accompany Christ at His Second Coming.

Separating the righteous from the wicked (Matt. 25:31, 32; 2 Thess. 1:7, 8). Executing God’s wrath upon the wicked (Matt. 13:39-42, R. V. How this is done, no human pen can describe. The most fearful imagery of the Bible is connected with the judgment work of angels (cf. Revelation; fire, hail, blood, plague of locusts, poison of scorpions, etc.)—whether actual or symbolic, it is awful.

THE DOCTRINE OF SATAN.

I. HIS EXISTENCE AND PERSONALITY.

1. EXISTENCE. 2. PERSONALITY.

II. HIS PLACE AND POWER.

1. A MIGHTY ANGEL. 2. PRINCE OF POWER OF THE AIR. 3. GOD OF THIS WORLD. 4. HEAD OF KINGDOM OF DARKNESS. 5. SOVEREIGN OVER DEATH.

III. HIS CHARACTER.

1. ADVERSARY. 2. DIABOLOS. 3. WICKED ONE. 4. TEMPTER.

IV. OUR ATTITUDE TOWARDS SATAN.

1. LIMITED POWER OF SATAN. 2. RESIST HIM.

V. HIS DESTINY.

1. A CONQUERED ENEMY. 2. UNDER ETERNAL CURSE.

VI. DEMONS.

THE DOCTRINE OF SATAN.

Throughout the Scriptures Satan is set forth as the greatest enemy of God and man. Too long has Satan been a subject of ridicule instead of fear. Seeing the Scriptures teach the existence of a personality of evil, man should seek to know all he can about such a being. Much of the ridicule attached to the doctrine of Satan comes from the fact that men have read their fancies and theories into the Scriptures; they have read Milton’s Paradise Lost but have neglected the Book of Job; they have considered the experiences of Luther instead of the Epistles of Peter and Jude. To avoid skepticism on the one hand, and ridicule on the other we must resort to the Scriptures to formulate our views of this doctrine.

I. THE EXISTENCE AND PERSONALITY OF SATAN.

1. HIS EXISTENCE.

To science the existence of Satan is an open question; it neither can deny nor affirm it. Satan’s existence and personality can be denied therefore only on purely a priori grounds. The Bible, however, is very clear and positive in its teaching regarding the existence of a personality of evil called the devil. It is popular in some circles today to spell devil with the “d” left off, thus denying his real existence.

Matt. 13:19, 39—“Then cometh the wicked one … . The enemy that sowed them is the devil.” John 13:2—“The devil having now put it into the heart of Judas Iscariot, Simon’s son, to betray him.” See also Acts 5:3; 2 Cor. 11:3, 14; 2 Pet. 2:4; Jude 6.

How Satan came to be is not quite as clear a fact as that he exists. In all probability he was once a good angel. It is claimed by scholarly and reliable interpreters that his fall is portrayed in Ezekiel 28:12-19; cf. Isa 14:12-14. That he was once in the truth but fell from it is evident from John 8:44. His fall (Luke 10:18) was probably in connection with the fall of angels as set forth in such passages as 2 Pet. 2:4; Jude 6. Pride (?) was one of the causes (1 Tim. 3:6; Ezek. 28:15, 17). This fact may account for the expression “Satan and his angels” (Matt. 25:41). Paul doubtless refers to the fact that Satan was once an angel of light (2 Cor. 11:14). Whenever Satan is represented under the form of a serpent, we are to understand such expressions as describing him after his fall. There is certainly no ground for presenting the evil one as having horns, tail, and hoofs. This is only to bring into ridicule what is an exceedingly serious fact. A careful consideration of all the scriptures here given will assure the student that Satan is not a figment of the imagination, but a real being.

2. HIS PERSONALITY.

John 8:44—“Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own; for he is a liar, and the father of it.” 1 John 3:8—“He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning.” Satan is here set forth as a murderer, a liar, a sinner—all elements of personality. He had the “power over death” (Heb. 2:14), and is the “prince of this world” (John 14:30).

The narrative of Satan in Job. (cc. 1, 2) strongly emphasizes his personality. He is as much a person as the “sons of God,” Job, and even God himself. Zech. 3:1, 2; 1 Chron. 21:1; Psa. 109:6 also emphasize the fact of Satan’s personality. Throughout all these Scriptures the masculine personal pronoun is used of Satan, and attributes and qualities of personality are ascribed to him. Unless we veto the testimony of the Scriptures we must admit that Satan is a real person. How can any one read the story of the temptation of Christ (Matt. 4:1-11) and fail to realize both parties in the wilderness conflict were persons—Christ, a person; Satan, a person?

Such offices as those ascribed to Satan in the Scriptures require an officer; such a work manifests a worker; such power implies an agent; such thought proves a thinker; such designs are from a personality.

Our temptations may be said to come from three sources: the world, the flesh, and the devil. But there are temptations which we feel sure come from neither the world nor the flesh, e.g., those which come to us in our moments of deepest devotion and quiet; we can account for them only by attributing them to the devil himself. “That old serpent, the devil, has spoken with fatal eloquence to every one of us no doubt; and I do not need a dissertation from the naturalist on the construction of a serpent’s mouth to prove it. Object to the figure if you will, but the grim, damning fact remains.” —_Joseph Parker._

There can scarcely be any doubt as to the fact that Christ taught the existence of a personality of evil. There can be but three explanations as to the meaning of His teaching; first, that He accommodated His language to a gross superstition, knowing it to be such—if this be true then what becomes of His sincerity; second, that He shared the superstition not knowing it to be such—then what becomes of His omniscience, of His reliability as a Teacher from God? third, that the doctrine is not a superstition, but actual truth—this position completely vindicates Christ as to His sincerity, omniscience and infallibility as the Teacher sent from God.

II. THE PLACE AND POWER OF SATAN.

1. A MIGHTY ANGEL.

He was such, and probably is yet. Jude 8, 9—They “speak evil of dignities. Yet Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil, he disputed about the body of Moses, durst not bring against him a railing accusation, but said, The Lord rebuke thee.” Daniel 10 shows that Satan has power to oppose one of the chief angels (vv. 12, 13 in particular). In Luke 11:21 Christ calls Satan “a strong man armed.” He is “the prince of this world” (John 14:30).

2. PRINCE OF THE POWER OF THE AIR.

Eph. 2:2—“The prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience.” Cf. 6:11, 12. He is also prince of the demons or fallen angels, Matt. 12:24; 9:34; Luke 11:14-18. There is doubtless an allusion here to the fact that the world of evil spirits is organized, and that Satan is at its head. 3. THE GOD OF THIS WORLD.

2 Cor. 4:4—“In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not.” He is “the prince of this world” (John 12:31; 14:30; 16:11; cf. Eph. 2:1, 2; 1 John 5:19). Satan is not only the object of the world’s worship, but also the moving spirit of its godless activities.

4. HE HEADS A KINGDOM WHICH IS HOSTILE TO THE KINGDOM OF GOD AND OF CHRIST.

Acts 26:18—“To open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God.” Col. 1:13—“Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son.” The kingdom of light is headed by a person—Jesus Christ; the kingdom of darkness, by a person—Satan. The one is a person equally with the other.

5. HAS SOVEREIGNTY OVER THE REALM OF DEATH.

Heb. 2:14—“That … . he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil.” It would seem as if the souls of the unregenerate dead are (or were) to some extent under Satan’s dominion.

III. THE CHARACTER OF SATAN.

“We may judge of the nature and character of the evil one by the names and titles ascribed to him.”

1. THE ADVERSARY, OR SATAN.

Zech. 3:1—“And he showed me Joshua the high priest standing before the angel of the Lord, and Satan standing at his right hand to resist him.” (See vv. 1-5.) 1 Pet. 5:8—“Your adversary the devil.” Luke 10:18. See for use of the word: Num. 22:22. By adversary is meant one who takes a stand against another. Satan is the adversary of both God and man.

2. THE DEVIL, DIABOLOS.

Matt. 13:39—“The enemy … . is the devil.” John 8:44—“Ye are of your father the devil.” This name is ascribed to Satan 33 times at least in the New Testament, and indicates an accuser or slanderer (Rev. 12:9). He slanders God to man (Gen. 3:1-7), and man to God (Job 1:9; 2-4).

3. THE WICKED ONE.

Matt. 13:19—“Then cometh the wicked one.” Matt. 6:13 (R. V.); 1 John 5:19 (R. V.). This title suggests that Satan is not only wicked himself, but is also the source of all wickedness in the world.

4. THE TEMPTER.

Matt. 4:3—“And when the tempter came to him.” See Gen. 3:1-6. None escape his temptations. He is continually soliciting men to sin.

In this connection we may speak of the cunning and malignity of Satan (Gen. 3:1). Satan transforms himself into an angel of light (2 Cor. 11:14). This phase of his work is well illustrated in the temptation of Christ (Matt. 4:1-11), and the temptation of Eve (Gen. 3). He fain would help Christ’s faith, stimulate His confidence in the divine power, and furnish an incentive to worship. The Scriptures speak of the “wiles” or subtle methods of the devil (Eph. 6:11, 12). The “old serpent” is more dangerous than the “roaring lion.”

Satan’s subtlety is seen in tempting men in their weak moments (Matt. 4:1-11; Luke 22:40-46); after great successes (John 6:15, cf. vv. 1-14); by suggesting the use of right things in a wrong way (Matt. 4:1-11); in deluding his followers by signs and wonders (2 Thess. 2:9, 10).

IV. OUR ATTITUDE TOWARDS SATAN.

1. SO FAR AS THE BELIEVER IS CONCERNED HIS POWER IS LIMITED.

Job 1:9-12; 2:4-6. Satan had to ask leave of God to try Job. John 12:31; 16:11. Satan hath been already judged, i.e., his power and dominion over believers was broken at the cross, by reason of Christ’s victory there. He had to ask permission to enter even swine (Matt. 8:30-32). Satan is mighty, but not almighty.

2. HE IS TO BE RESISTED.

1 Pet. 5:8, 9—“Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about seeking whom he may devour; whom resist steadfast in the faith.” James 4:7—“Resist the devil, and he will flee from you.” This resistance is best accomplished by submitting to God (Rom. 6:17-33; James 4:7), and by putting on the whole armor of God (Eph. 6:10-20).

V. THE DESTINY OF SATAN.

1. HE IS A CONQUERED ENEMY.

That is, so far as the believer is concerned; John 12:31; 16:9,10; 1 John 3:8; Col. 2:15.

2. HE IS UNDER A PERPETUAL CURSE.

Gen. 3:14, cf. Isa. 65:25. There is no removal of the curse from Satan.

3. HE IS FINALLY TO BE CAST ALIVE INTO THE LAKE OF FIRE, THERE TO BE TORMENTED FOR EVER AND EVER.

Matt. 25:41; Rev. 20:10—“And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.”

VI. DEMONS.

(See under “Fallen Angels,” p. 217.)

THE DOCTRINE OF THE LAST THINGS.

A. THE SECOND COMING OF CHRIST. B. THE RESURRECTION. C. THE JUDGMENT. D. THE DESTINY OF THE WICKED. E. THE REWARD OF THE RIGHTEOUS.

THE DOCTRINE OF THE LAST THINGS.

Under this caption are treated such doctrines as the Second Coming of Christ, the Resurrection of both the righteous and wicked, the Judgments, Final Awards, and Eternal Destiny.

A. THE SECOND COMING OF CHEIST.

I. ITS IMPORTANCE. 1. PROMINENCE IN THE SCRIPTURES. 2. THE CHRISTIAN HOPE. 3. THE CHRISTIAN INCENTIVE. 4. THE CHRISTIAN COMFORT.

II. ITS NATURE.

1. PERSONAL AND VISIBLE COMING TO THE EARTH. 2. DIFFERENT VIEWS. 3. DISTINCTIONS.

III. ITS PURPOSE. WITH REFERENCE TO— 1. THE CHURCH. 2. THE UNREGENERATE. 3. THE JEWS. 4. THE ENEMIES OF GOD. 5. THE MILLENNIUM.

IV. ITS DATE. 1. DAY AND HOUR UNKNOWN. 2. RECOGNIZING THE “SIGNS.” 3. IMMINENT.

A. THE SECOND COMING OF CHRIST.

I. ITS IMPORTANCE.

1. ITS PROMINENCE IN THE SCRIPTURES.

It is claimed that one out of every thirty verses in the Bible mentions this doctrine; to every one mention of the first coming the second coming is mentioned eight times; 318 references to it are made in 216 chapters; whole books (1 and 2 Thess., e.g.) and chapters (Matt. 24; Mark 13; Luke 31, e.g.) are devoted to it.

It is the theme of the Old Testament prophets. Of course, they sometimes merge the two comings so that it is not at first sight apparent, yet the doctrine is there. (1 Pet. 1:11).

Jesus Christ bore constant testimony to His coming again (John 14:3; Matt. 24 and 25; Mark 13; Luke 21; John 21:22).

The angels, who bore such faithful testimony to Christ’s first advent, bear testimony to His second coming (Acts 1:11; cf. Heb. 2:2, for the faithfulness of their testimony).

The apostles faithfully proclaimed this truth (Acts 3:19, 20; 1 Thess. 4:16, 17; Heb. 9:28; 1 John 2:28; Jude 14, 15).

2. THE CHURCH OF CHRIST IS BIDDEN TO LOOK FORWARD TO CHRIST’S SECOND COMING AS ITS GREAT HOPE.

Titus 2:13—“Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ.” 2 Pet. 3:12. The one great event, that which supersedes all others, towards which the Church is to look, and for which she is to ardently long, is the second coming of Christ.

G3. IT IS SET FORTH AS THE DOCTRINE WHICH WILL PROVE TO BE THE GREATEST INCENTIVE TO CONSISTENT LIVING.

Matt. 24:44-46; Luke 21:34-36—“And take heed to yourselves, lest at any time your hearts be overcharged with surfeiting, and drunkenness, and cares of this life, and so that day come upon you unawares… . Watch ye therefore, and pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of man.” 1 John 2:28; 3:3. The test which the church should apply to all questions of practice: Would I like to have Christ find me doing this when He comes?

4. IT IS A DOCTRINE OF THE GREATEST COMFORT TO THE BELIEVER.

1 Thess. 4:14-18. After stating that our loved ones who had fallen asleep in Christ should again meet with us at the coming of our Lord, the apostle says, “Wherefore comfort one another with these words.”

Why then should such a comforting and helpful doctrine as this be spoken against? Many reasons may be suggested: the unreadiness of the church; preconceived views (2 Pet. 3:4); extravagant predictions as to time; lack of knowledge of the Scriptures. May not the guilt on our part for rejecting the second coming of Christ be as great if not greater than that of the Jews for rejecting His first coming?

II. WHAT IS MEANT BY THE SECOND COMING OF CHRIST.

1. A PERSONAL AND VISIBLE COMING.

Acts 1:11—“Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? This same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.” 1 Thess. 4:16, 17—“For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven.” Rev. 1:7. From these scriptures we learn that by the second coming of Christ is meant the bodily, personal, and visible coming of our Lord Jesus Christ to this earth with His saints to reign.

2. ERRONEOUS VIEWS CONCERNING THE SECOND COMING OF CHRIST.

a) That the Second Coming Means Christ’s Coming at Death.

This cannot be the meaning, because—

Death is not attended by the events narrated in 1 Thessalonians 4:16, 17. Indeed the second coming is here set forth as the opposite of death for “the dead in Christ shall rise” from the dead when Christ comes again. According to John 14:3, Christ comes for us, and not we go to Him: “I will come again, and receive you unto myself.”

John 21:21-23—“Peter seeing him (John) saith to Jesus, Lord, and what shall this man do? Jesus saith unto him, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee? Follow thou me. Then went this saying abroad among the brethren, that that disciple should not die; yet Jesus said not unto him, He shall not die; but, if I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee?”

1 Corinthians 15:50-57 declares that at the second coming of Christ we overcome, not succumb to, death. See John 8:51; Matt. 16:28.

The foolishness of such interpretation is seen if we substitute the word “death” for the second coming of Christ in such places where this coming is mentioned, e.g., Phil. 3:20; Matt. 16:28—“Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.”

b) That the Second Coming Means the Coming of the Holy Spirit.

There is no doubt but that the coming of the Holy Spirit is a coming (John 14:21-23), but it is by no means the second coming, and for the following reasons:

Many of the testimonies and promises of the second coming were given after Pentecost, e.g., Phil. 3:21; 2 Tim. 4:8; 1 Thess. 4:16, 17; 1 Cor. 15:51, 52.

Christ does not receive us unto Himself, but comes to us, at Pentecost. In the second coming He takes us, not comes to us.

The events of 1 Thessalonians 4:16, 17 did not occur on the day of Pentecost, nor do they occur when the believer receives the Holy Spirit.

c) That the Second Coming refers to the Destruction of Jerusalem.

Reply: The events of 1 Thessalonians 4:16, 17 did not take place then.

John 21:21-23, and Rev. 22:20 were written after the destruction of Jerusalem.

From all that has been said then, it seems clear that the second coming of Christ is an event still in the future.

3. THE NEED OF RECOGNIZING THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN CHRIST’S COMING FOR HIS SAINTS AND WITH HIS SAINTS.

There is a distinction between the presence and the appearing of Christ: the former referring to His coming for, and the latter with His saints. We should remember, further, that the second coming covers a period of time, and is not the event of a single moment. Even the first coming covered over thirty years, and included the events of Christ’s birth, circumcision, baptism, ministry, crucifixion, resurrection, etc. The second coming will also include a number of events such as the rapture, the great tribulation, the millenium, the resurrection, the judgments, etc.

III. THE PURPOSE OF THE SECOND COMING.

1. SO FAR AS IT CONCERNS THE CHURCH.

1 Thess. 4:13-17; 1 Cor. 15:50-52; Phil. 3:20, 21, R. V.; 1 John 3:2. When Christ comes again He will first raise the righteous dead, and change the righteous living; simultaneously they shall be caught up to meet the Lord in the air to be with Him for ever.

Eph. 5:23, 32; 2 Cor. 11:2; Rev. 19:6-9; Matt. 25:1-10. The Church, the Bride of Christ, will then be married to her Lord.

Matt. 25:19; 2 Tim. 4:8; 1 Pet. 5:4; 1 Cor. 3:12-15; 2 Cor. 5:10. Believers will be rewarded for their faithfulness in service at His coming. (See under The Final Beward of the Righteous, page 266.)

2. SO FAR AS IT CONCERNS THE UNCONVERTED NATIONS AND INDIVIDUALS.

Matt. 24:30; Rev. 1:7; Matt. 25:31, 32; Rev. 20:11, 12; Isa. 26:21; 2 Thess. 1:7-9. A distinction must be recognized between the judgment of the Living Nations, and that of the Great White Throne. These are not the same, for no resurrection accompanies the judgment of the Living Nations, as in the case of the throne judgment. Further, one thousand years elapse between these two judgments (Rev. 20:7-11). Again, one is at the beginning of the Millennium, and the other at its close.

3. WITH REFERENCE TO THE JEWS.

The Jews will be restored to their own land (Isa. 11:11; 60) in an unconverted state; will rebuild the temple, and restore worship (Ezek. 40-48); will make a covenant with Antichrist for one week (seven years), in the midst of which they will break the covenant (Dan. 9:27; 2 Thess. 2); they will then pass through the great tribulation (Matt. 24:21, 22, 29; Rev. 3:10; 7:14); are converted (as a nation) at the coming of Christ (Zech. 12:10; Rev. 1:7); become great missionaries (Zech. 8:13-23); never more to be removed from the land (Amos 9:15; Ezek. 34:28).

4. WITH REGARD TO ANTICHRIST, AND THE ENEMIES OF GOD’S PEOPLE.

2 Thess. 1:7-9; Rev. 19:20; 20:10. These shall be destroyed by the brightness of His coming; will be cast finally into the bottomless pit.

5. TO SET UP THE MILLENNIAL REIGN ON THE EARTH.

The Millennium means the thousand years reign of Christ upon the earth (Rev. 20:1-4). Some think that it is the continuation of the Kingdom Age broken off by the unbelief of the Jews at the time of the Apostles.

The Millennium begins with the coming of Christ with His saints; with the revelation of Christ after the great tribulation (Matt. 24:29, 30); at the close of the seventieth week of Daniel. For illustration, see Rev. 19:11-14; Dan. 7:21, 22; Zech. 14:3-9.

Then comes the destruction of Antichrist, the binding of Satan, and the destruction of the enemies of God’s people (Rev. 19:20;

20:1-3, 10).

The Judgment of the Living Nations (Matt. 25).

The conversion and missionary activity of the Jews (Zech. 8:13-23; cf. Acts 15:14-17). Then, we may have a converted world, but not now, nor in this age; Israel, not the Church, then concerned.

The nature of the Millennium:

It is a Theocracy: Jesus Christ Himself is the King (Jer. 23:5; Luke 1:30-33). The Apostles will, doubtless, reign with Christ over the Jews (Isa. 66; Matt. 19:28); the Church, over the Gentile nations (Luke 19:11-19; Heb. 2:6, 7).

The capitol city will be Jerusalem (Isa. 2:1-4). Pilgrimages will be made to the Holy City (Zech. 14:16). The reign of Christ will be one of righteousness and equity (Isa. 11:4; Psa. 98:9).

A renovated earth (Rom. 8:19-31; Isa. 65:17; c. 35).

The events closing the Millennium are apostasy and rebellion (Rev. 20:7-9); the destruction of Satan (Rev. 20:10); the Great White Throne judgment (Rev. 20:11-15); a new heaven and a new earth (Rev. 21 and 22).

IV. THE TIME OF CHRIST’S SECOND COMING.

We need to carefully distinguish between Christ’s coming for His saints—sometime called the “rapture” or “parousia”; and His coming with His saints—the “revelation” or “epiphany.”

In considering the matter of the “signs” of Christ’s coming we need to pay particular attention to and distinguish between those signs which have been characteristic of and peculiar to many generations, and have, consequently, been repeated; and those which are to characterize specifically the near approach of the coming of Christ. Christians are not altogether in the dark concerning these facts: Luke 21:29-33—“So likewise ye, when ye see these things come to pass, know ye that the kingdom of God is nigh at hand” (v. 36). Also 1 Thess. 5:1-8—“But ye, brethren, are not in darkness, that that day should overtake you as a thief” (v. 4).

1. NO ONE KNOWS THE DAY NOR THE HOUR.

Matt. 24:36-42—“But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only” (v. 36). Mark 13:32, cf. Acts 1:7.

The Scriptures tell us enough regarding the time of Christ’s coming to satisfy our faith, but not our curiosity. These statements of the Master should be sufficient to silence that fanaticism which is so anxious to tell us the exact year, month, and even the day when Christ will come. This day is hidden in the counsels of God. Jesus Himself, by a voluntary unwillingness to know, while in His state of humiliation, showed no curiosity to peer into the chronology of this event. We should not nor ought we to want to know more than Christ did on this point. Can it be that “that day” was not yet fixed in the counsels of the Father, and that its date depended, somewhat at least, upon the faithfulness of the Church in the evangelization of the world? We know not certainly. The Revelation which Jesus gave to John would seem to teach that “that day,” which was at one time hidden from Christ, is now, in His state of exaltation, known to Him.

2. YET, WE MUST NOT FOEGET THAT WHILE WE MAY NOT KNOW THE EXACT DAY OR HOUR OF CHRIST’S COMING, WE MAY KNOW WHEN IT IS NEAR AT HAND. (Matt. 24:36-42; 1 Thess. 5:1-5.)

There are certain “signs” which indicate its nearness:

General apostasy and departure from the faith (1 Tim. 4:1; 2 Tim. 3:1-5; Luke 18:8).

A time of great heaping up of wealth (James 5:1-9).

A time of great missionary activity (Matt. 24:14). Consider the missionary activity of the last century. Is it not marvellous? Is it a “sign” of His coming?

The modern history of the Jews throws much light on the question of the nearness of Christ’s coming. The following facts are interesting in this connection: The large number of Jews returning to Palestine; the waning of the power of the Turkish government, which has held Palestine with an iron hand and has excluded the Jew; the plans already before the nations to give the Holy Land to the Jews by consent of the powers; the early and latter rain in Palestine; railroads, electric lights, etc., now in the land long desolate—the fig-tree is budding, and the hour of the coming is at hand.

It should not be forgotten in this connection that many of the signs mentioned refer primarily to the coming of Christ with His saints. But if that stage of the coming be near then surely the first stage of it must be. Other signs have reference to the first stage in the one great event of His coming, which is known as the “rapture” or Christ’s coming for His saints.

3. IT SEEMS CLEAR FROM THE TEACHING OF THE SCRIPTURES THAT THERE IS NOTHING TO PREVENT THE COMING OF CHRIST FOR HIS SAINTS AT ANY MOMENT.

By this is meant that there is nothing, so far as we can sea from the teaching of the Scriptures and the signs of the times, to hinder the introduction of the Day of the Lord, or the Second Coming of Christ looked upon as a great whole—a series of events, by Christ’s coming to take His own people unto Himself. In other words, there is nothing to hinder the “rapture” or “parousia”—the “epiphany,” “manifestation,” or “revelation” is something for a later day.

Some objections are offered to this view, the which it will be well to examine and answer even though briefly.

First, That the Gospel has not been preached into all the world (Matt. 24:14), therefore the coming of Christ is not imminent.

Reply: We must understand the emphatic words of the text: By “end” is meant the end of the age; but the rapture, or Christ’s coming for His saints, of which we are here speaking as being imminent, is not the end of the age. By “world” is meant the inhabited earth; by “Gospel,” good news; by “witness,” not conversion but testimony. Even if these events are to precede the “rapture,” have they not all been fulfilled? See Acts 2:5; 8:4; Rom. 10:18; Col. 1:6, 23, for the answer, which is certainly in the affirmative. We must give the same meaning to the word “world” in Romans and Colossians that we do to Matt. 24:14. Further, is the Church the only witness? See Rev. 14:6. If the rapture is not the end of the age, and if an angel can proclaim the Gospel, why cannot part of the work of witnessing be carried on after the rapture?

Second, Peter, James, and John were told that they should not taste of death until they had seen the coming of Christ’s kingdom (Matt. 16:28; Mark 9:1; Luke 9:27).

Reply: True, but was not this fulfilled when they saw Christ on the Transfiguration Mount? Peter, who was there, in his second epistle (1:16-18) distinctly says it was thus fulfilled.

Third, The disciples were told that they shall not have gone over all the cities of Israel until the Son of Man be come (Matt. 10:23).

Reply: Mark 6:30, Luke 9:10 shows that they did not finish all the cities, nor is there evidence anywhere that they ever did, for Israel rejected the message of the kingdom. May it not be that under the restoration of the Jews and the preaching of the “two witnesses” (Rev. 11) this shall be accomplished?

Fourth, Christ said “This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.” See Matt. 24:34; Luke 21:32; Mark 13:30. Reply: What is meant by a “generation”? Some would say “forty years,” consequently the Master referred to the destruction of Jerusalem, which event was the second coming of Christ. But this is not necessarily the case. The word “generation” may refer to the Jewish race; cf. the use of the same Greek word in Matt. 11:16; 16:4; Mark 8:38; Luke 7:31; 16:8; 17:25; Phil. 2:15; Psa. 22:30; 24:6. And in this connection consider carefully the wonderful preservation of the Jewish race. Other nations have passed away, having lost their identity; the Jew remains—that generation (race) has not yet passed away, nor will it “till all these things be fulfilled.” [FOOTNOTE: Jesus is Coming, by W.E.B., is heartily recommended as an exceedingly helpful book on this subject. The author is indebted thereto.]

B. THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD.

Under this caption is included the resurrection of both the righteous and the wicked, although, as will be seen later, they do not occur at the same time.

I. THIS DOCTRINE CLEARLY TAUGHT IN THE SCRIPTURES.

1. IN THE OLD TESTAMENT. 2. IN THE NEW TESTAMENT.

II. THE NATURE OF THE RESURRECTION.

1. LITERAL RESURRECTION OF THE BODIES OF ALL MEN. 2. RESURRECTION OF THE BODY NECESSARY TO COMPLETE SALVATION. 3. THE NATURE OF THE RESURRECTION BODY. a) In General. b) The Body of the Believer. c) The Body of the Unbeliever.

III. THE TIME OF THE RESURRECTION.

1. OF THE RIGHTEOUS. 2. OF THE WICKED.

I. THE DOCTRINE OF A RESURRECTION CLEARLY TAUGHT IN THE SCRIPTURES.

1. IN THE OLD TESTAMENT.

It is set forth in various ways:

In Word: Job 19:25-27—“For I know that my redeemer liveth, and that he shall stand at the latter day upon the earth: and though after my skin worms destroy this body, yet in my flesh shall I see God: whom I shall see for myself, and mine eyes shall behold, and not another; though my reins be consumed within me.” Also Psa. 16:9; 17:15; Dan. 12:1-3.

In Figure: Gen. 22:5 with Heb. 11:19—“Accounting that God was able to raise him up, even from the dead; from whence also he received him in a figure.”

In Prophecy: Isa. 26:19—“Thy dead men shall live, together with my dead body shall they arise. Awake and sing, ye that dwell in the dust.” The words “men” and “together with” may be omitted—“Thy dead (ones) shall live.” These words are Jehovah’s answer to Israel’s wail as recorded in vv. 17, 18. Even if they refer to resurrection of Israel as a nation, they yet teach a bodily resurrection. See also Hosea 13:14.

In Reality: 1 Kings 17 (Elijah); 2 Kings 4:32-35 (Elisha and the Shunamite’s son); 13:21 (Resurrection through contact with the dead bones of Elisha).

The Old Testament therefore distinctly teaches the resurrection of the body. Mark 9:10, which might seem to indicate that the apostles did not know of a bodily resurrection, is accounted for by their unwillingness to believe in a crucified Christ.

2. IN THE NEW TESTAMENT.

In Word: Note the teaching of Jesus in John 5:28, 29; c. 6 entire, note especially vv. 39, 40, 44, 54; Luke 14:13, 14; 20:35, 36. The teaching of the apostles: Paul, Acts, 24:15; 1 Cor. 15; 1 Thess. 4:14-16; Phil. 3:11; John, Rev. 20:4-6; 13.

In Reality: The resurrection of saints (Matt. 27:52, 53); of Lazarus (John 11); of Jesus Christ (Matt. 28). Our Lord’s resurrection assured them of what till then had been a hope imperfectly supported by Scriptural warrant, and contested by the Sadducees. It enlarged that hope (1 Pet. 1:3), and brought the doctrine of the resurrection to the front (1 Cor. 15).

II. THE NATURE OF THE RESURRECTION.

1. A LITERAL RESURRECTION OF THE BODIES OF ALL MEN—A UNIVERSAL RESURRECTION.

John 5:28—“Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, and shall come forth.” 1 Cor. 15:22—“For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.” The apostle is speaking of physical death in Adam, and physical resurrection in Christ.

Revelation 20:12, and 2 Corinthians 5:10 both show the necessity of the raising of the body in order that judgment may take place according to things done in the body. See also Job’s hope (19:25-27); David’s hope (Psa. 16:9).

An objection is sometimes made to the effect that we literalize these scriptures which are intended to be metaphorical and spiritual. To this we reply: While the exact phrase, “resurrection of the body,” does not occur in the Bible, yet these scriptures clearly teach a physical rather than a spiritual resurrection. Indeed John 5:25-29 draws a sharp contrast between a spiritual (v. 25) and a literal (v. 28) resurrection. See also Phil. 3:21; 1 Thess. 4:13-17. 2 Tim. 2:18—“Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is passed already,” indicates that the early church believed in a literal resurrection. Surely there is no reference here to a spiritual resurrection such as we read of in Ephesians 5:14. Acts 24:15 speaks of a resurrection of the just and the unjust—this cannot refer to a spiritual resurrection surely. If the resurrection were spiritual then in the future state every man would have two spirits—the spirit he has here, and the spirit he would receive at the resurrection. The term “spiritual body” describes, not so much the body itself, as its nature. The “spiritual body” is body, not spirit, hence should not be considered as defining body. By the term “spiritual body” is meant the body spiritualized. So there is a natural body—a body adapted and designed for the use of the soul; and there is a spiritual body—a body adapted for the use of the spirit in the resurrection day.

2. THE REDEMPTION OF THE BODY IS INCLUDED IN OUR COMPLETE REDEMPTION.

Rom. 8:11-23—“And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the first fruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body” (v. 23). See also 1 Cor. 6:13-20. In John 6:39 and Job 19:25-27 we are taught that the dust into which our bodies have decayed will be quickened, which indicates a physical resurrection.

This conception of the value of the body is doubtless what leads to the Christian’s care for his dead loved ones and their graves. The believer’s present body, which is called “the body of his humiliation” (Phil. 3:21) is not yet fitted for entrance into the kingdom (1 Cor. 15:50). Paul’s hope is not for a deliverence from the body, but the redemption of it (2 Cor. 5:4).

3. THE NATURE OF THE RESURRECTION BODY.

a) In General.

Because the Scripture teaches a literal resurrection of the body it is not necessary to insist on the literal resurrection of the identical body—hair, tooth, and nail—that was laid under the ground. The idea that at the resurrection we are to see hands flying across the sea to join the body, etc., finds no corroboration in the Scriptures. Such an idea is not necessary in order to be true to the Bible teaching. Mere human analogy ought to teach us this (1 Cor. 15:36, 37)—“thou sowest not that body which shall be.” The identity is preserved—that is all that we need to insist upon. What that identity tie is we may not yet know. After all it is not so much a question of material identity as of glorified individuality. The growth of the seed shows that there may be personal identity under a complete change of physical conditions.

Four things may be said about the resurrection body: first, it is not necessarily identical with that which descended into the grave; second, it will have some organic connection with that which descended into the grave; third, it will be a body which God, in His sovereignty, will bestow; fourth, it will be a body which will be a vast improvement over the old one.

b) The Body of the Believer.

Phil. 3:21 (R. V.)—“Who shall fashion anew the body of our humiliation, that it may be conformed to the body of his glory, according to the working whereby he is able even to subject all things unto himself.” See also 1 John 3:2; 1 Cor. 15:49.

What was the nature and likeness of Christ’s resurrection body which our resurrection body is to resemble? It was a real body (Luke 24:39); recognizable (Luke 24:31; John 20:16); powerful (John

20:19).

Summing up these passages, we may say that the resurrection body of the believer will be like the glorified body of Christ.

Characteristics of the believer’s resurrection body as set forth in 1 Cor. 15: It is not flesh and blood (vv. 50, 51; cf. Heb. 2:14; 2 Cor. 5:1-6; Luke 24:39)—“flesh and bones,” so not pure spirit; a real body.

It is incorruptible (v. 43)—no decay, sickness, pain.

It is glorious (v. 43), cf. the Transfiguration (Matt. 17); Rev. 1:13-17. It has been said that Adam and Eve, in their unfallen state, possessed a glorious body. The face of Stephen was glorious in his death (Acts 6:15). 2 Cor. 3:18.

It is powerful (v. 43)—not tired, or weak; no lassitude; cf. now “spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak”; not so then.

It is a spiritual body (v. 44). Here the soul is the life of the body; there the spirit will be the life of the body.

It is heavenly (v. 47-49).

c) The Resurrection Body of the Unbeliever.

The Scriptures are strangely silent on this subject. It is worthy of note that in the genealogies of Genesis 5 no age is attached to the names of those who were not in the chosen line. Is there a purpose here to ignore the wicked? In the story of the Rich Man and Lazarus no name is given to the godless rich man; why?

III. THE TIME OF THE RESURRECTION.

1. THE RESURRECTION OF THE RIGHTEOUS.

John 6:39, 40, 44—“The last day.” This does not mean a day of twenty-four hours, but a period of time. It will be safe, usually, to limit the word “day” to a period of twenty-four hours only where numeral, ordinal, or cardinal occurs in connection therewith, like “fourth day,” etc. When the “day of grace,” “day of judgment,” “this thy day,” etc., are mentioned, they refer to periods of time either long or short, as the case may be.

1 Cor. 15:23—“But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterwards they that are Christ’s at his coming.” 1 Thess. 4:14-17. In both these passages the resurrection of the believer is connected with the coming of Christ. This event ushers in the last day; it is treated as a separate and distinct thing.

2. THE RESURRECTION OF THE WICKED.

As there is a difference in the issue (John 5:28, 29; Dan. 12:2, cf. literal Hebrew rendering below) so there is as to time between the resurrection of the righteous and that of the wicked. Phil. 3:11—“If by any means I might attain unto the resurrection of (lit. out of) the dead.” It was no incentive to Paul simply to be assured that he would be raised from the dead; for he knew that all men would be thus raised. What Paul was striving for was to be counted worthy of that first resurrection—of the righteous from among the wicked. The resurrection “out from among” the dead is the resurrection unto life and glory; the resurrection “of” the dead is to shame and contempt everlasting.

1 Cor. 15:21-24. Note the expressions used, and their meaning: “Then,” meaning the next in order, the Greek denoting sequence, not simultaneousness—each in his own cohort, battalion, brigade (cf. Mark 4:28—“First the blade, then the ear, after that the full corn in the ear”). Nineteen hundred years have already elapsed between “Christ the firstfruits” and “they that are Christ’s.” How many years will elapse between the resurrection of “they that are Christ’s” and that of the wicked (“the end”) we may not be able to definitely state, but certainly long enough for Christ to have “put all enemies under his feet” (v. 25). Three groups or ranks are here mentioned: “Christ,” “they that are Christ’s,” “the end” (the resurrection of the wicked). (Cf. vv. 5, 6, 7—“Seen of Cephas, then of the twelve: after that … after that … then … and last of all he was seen of me also.”) First Christ, afterwards (later than) “they that are Christ’s” then (positively meaning afterwards, a new era which takes place after an interval) “cometh the end.”

Dan. 12:2—“And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some (lit. those who awake at this time) to everlasting life, and some (lit. those who do not awake at this time) to shame and everlasting contempt.” Some of the most eminent Hebrew scholars translate this passage as follows: “And (at that time) many (of thy people) shall awake (or be separated) out from among the sleepers in the earth dust. These (who awake) shall be unto life eternal, but those (who do not awake at that time) shall be unto contempt and shame everlasting.” It seems clear from this passage that all do not awake at one (this) time, but only as many as are written in the book (12:1).

Eevelation 20:4-6 shows that at least a thousand years—whatever period of time may be thereby designated—elapses between the resurrection of the righteous and the wicked.

John 5:28, 29; Dan. 12:2; Rev. 20:12 all show that the resurrection of the wicked is always connected with the judgment, and that takes place at the close and not at the beginning of the Day of the Lord.

Whatever difficulties may present themselves in connection with the resurrection, whatever obstacles of a miraculous or supernatural nature may present themselves in connection therewith are to be met by remembering the truth enunciated by Christ in connection with this very subject: Matt. 22:29—“Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God.” (Cf. v. 23.—“The same day came to him the Sadducees, which say that there is no resurrection,” etc., and the following verses for the setting of v. 39.)

C. THE JUDGMENT.

I. THE FACT OF THE JUDGMENT.

1. AS TAUGHT IN THE OLD TESTAMENT. 2. AS TAUGHT IN THE NEW TESTAMENT. 3. THE TESTIMONY OF CONSCIENCE. 4. THE TESTIMONY OF CHRIST’S RESURRECTION.

II. THE JUDGE—CHRIST.

III. THE NATURE OF THE JUDGMENT.

1. JUDGMENT AT THE CROSS. 2. THE DAILY JUDGMENT. 3. FUTURE JUDGMENT. a) Of the Saints. b) Of the Living Nations. c) Of the Great White Throne. d) Of the Fallen Angels. e) Of Israel.

C. THE JUDGMENT.

I. THE FACT OF THE JUDGMENT.

1. DISTINCTLY TAUGHT IN THE OLD TESTAMENT.

Psa. 96:13—“For he cometh, for he cometh to judge the earth: he shall judge the world with righteousness, and the people with his truth.” While this passage refers more particularly to the rewarding of the righteous, yet the idea of judgment is here. Both reward and punishment are involved in the idea of judgment.

2. THE NEW TESTAMENT.

Acts 17:31—“Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead.” Heb. 9:27. Just as it is “appointed unto men once to die” so it is appointed unto men to appear before the judgment. There is no more escape from the one than from the other. It is part of the burden of both the Old and New Testament message that a day of judgment is appointed for the world. God’s kingdom shall extend universally; but a judgment in which the wicked are judged and the righteous rewarded is necessary and in order that the kingdom of everlasting righteousness may be established upon the earth.

3. THE CONSCIENCE OF ALL MANKIND CORROBORATES THE TEACHING OF THE SCRIPTURES WITH REGARD TO THE CERTAINTY OF A COMING JUDGMENT.

This is true of both the individual and universal conscience. The discoveries of tablets as well as the history of all peoples establish this fact. This is enforced by Eccl. 11:9; 12:14—a book which is in a very real sense a book of worldly philosophy, narrating, as it does, the experiences and observations of a man who judged all things from the viewpoint of “under the sun,” i.e., without special reference to any revelation from above.

4. THE RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST IS A SURE AND CERTAIN PROOF WHICH GOD HAS GIVEN TO MEN OF A COMING JUDGMENT.

Acts 17:31 (quoted above). Here is “assurance” in the sense of proof or ground of evidence. The context is suggestive: God had long borne with the sins of men, and in a sense, overlooked them. Therefore men have thought that God would continue to do so. But no, this shall not be; there is a day of judgment coming, the evidence of which lies in the fact of the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

II. THE JUDGE—CHRIST.

John 5:22, 23, 27; 2 Tim. 4:1; 2 Cor. 5:10; Acts 10:42; 17:31. The Man of the Cross is the Man of the Throne. Note the expression “Because he is the Son of Man.” That indicates His fitness to judge: He can sympathize. But He is equal with the Father. This too indicates His competency to judge, for it implies omniscience. The texts which speak of God as judging the world are to be understood as referring to God the Son. No appeal can be made from the Son to the Father.

III. THE NATURE OF THE JUDGMENT.

The erroneous idea that there is to be one great general judgment which is to take place at the end of the world, when all mankind shall stand before the great white throne, is to be guarded against. The judgments of the Bible differ as to time, place, subjects, and results.

1. THERE IS A JUDGMENT THAT IS ALREADY PAST—THE JUDGMENT AT THE CROSS.

John 5:24; 12:31; 2 Cor. 5:21; Gal. 3:13; 1 Pet. 3:24. At this judgment bar Satan was judged and his power over the believer broken. Here also the sins of the believer were judged and put away.

2. THERE IS A PRESENT JUDGMENT WHICH IS TAKING PLACE DAILY IN THE LIFE OF THE BELIEVER.

1 Cor. 11:31, 32; 5:5; 1 Tim. 1:20; cf., for illustration, 2 Sam. 7:14, 15; 12:13,14. This continual judgment must be going on in the life of the believer or there will be judgment from God because of the consequent failure to grow in grace. There must be constant and continual judging of sin as it comes up in the believer’s life (1 John 1:5-7).

3. THERE IS A FUTURE JUDGMENT.

a) Of the Saints.

1 Cor. 3:8-16; 2 Cor. 5:10; 1 Cor. 4:5. This is to be a judgment with reference to the works, not the salvation, of the believer. It is called “the judgment seat of Christ.” That the saints are here referred to is clear from 2 Cor. 5:1, 5, 7, 9; also 1 Cor. 4:5 which says that those who are judged “shall have praise of God.” This is not true of the wicked. This is a judgment, not for destiny, but for adjustment, for reward or loss according to our works, for position in the kingdom; every man according as his work shall be.

b) Of the Living Nations.

Matt. 25:31-46. This judgment will take place at the coming of Christ with His saints. Note three things in this chaper: first, the marriage supper of the Lamb (w. 1-13); second, the judgment of the saints (vv. 14-30); third, the judgment of the living nations (vv. 31-46). This is not a general judgment of good and bad, for there are three classes here. “My brethren” can hardly refer to the saints, for then it would be “inasmuch as ye have done it unto yourselves, ye have done it unto me.” Nor is the Church in this judgment, for she is already translated and rewarded as we have seen. The Church no more belongs to the nations than does Israel. The nations are those who deal with Israel through the great tribulation. The “brethren” are probably the Jewish remnant who have turned to Christ during the great tribulation and whom the Antichrist has severely persecuted as also have many of the wicked nations, like Russia today. This is a judgment of nations that are living; there is no mention of the dead.

c) Of the Great White Throne.

Rev. 20:11-15. It is called the final judgment and takes place at the close of the millennium, after the judgment of the living nations (Matt. 25). It is a judgment of “the dead”; no mention is made of the living in connection therewith.

Note the difference between the judgments of the Living Nation and of the Great White Throne: the former at the beginning, the latter at the close of the millennium; one deals with the living, the other with the dead; one deals with conduct towards “the brethren,” the other with general sins recorded in the books.

d) Of Israel.

Ezek. 20:33-44; Psa. 50:16-22. Takes place probably at the end of the great tribulation.

e) Of the Fallen Angels.

Jude 6; 2 Pet. 2:4. Believers are associated with Christ in this judgment (1 Cor. 6:3).

D. THE FINAL DESTINY OF THE WICKED.

I. PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS.

1. DIFFERENCE BETWEEN FUTURE OF THE RIGHTEOUS AND WICKED. 2. DIFFICULTY OF FIGURATIVE LANGUAGE. 3. DISPARITY IN NUMBER OF THE SAVED AND LOST. 4. PROPHECY VS. HISTORY.

II. THE WICKED DIE IN THEIR SINS.

III. THE WICKED ARE NOT ANNIHILATED.

IV. THE WICKED ARE RAISED FROM THE DEAD FOR JUDGMENT.

V. THE PUNISHMENT DESCRIBED.

1. DEATH. 2. ETERNAL. 3. PUNISHMENT. 4. FIRE. 5. DARKNESS.

D. THE FINAL DESTINY OF THE WICKED.

“Every view of the world has its eschatology. It cannot help raising the question of the whither, as well as of the what and the whence? ‘0, my Lord,’ said Daniel to the angel, ‘what shall be the end of these things?’ (12:8). What is the end, the final destiny of the individual? Does he perish at death, or does he enter into another state of being; and under what conditions of happiness or woe does he exist there? What is the end, the final aim of the great whole, that far-off divine event towards which the whole creation moves? It is vain to tell man not to ask these questions. He will ask them, and must ask them. He will pore over every scrap of fact, or trace of law, which seems to give an indication of an answer. He will try from the experience of the past, and the knowledge of the present, to deduce what the future shall be. He will peer as far as he can into the unseen; and, where knowledge fails, will weave from his hopes and trusts pictures and conjectures.

“The Christian view of the world also has its eschatology. The Christian view, however, is positive, where that of science is negative; ethical, where it is material; human, where it is cosmogonic; ending in personal immortality, where this ends in extinction and death. The eschatology of Christianity springs from its character as a teleological religion—it seeks to grasp the unity of the world through the conception of an end or aim.”—_James Orr._

This is probably the hardest of all the doctrines of Christianity to be received. If we ask the reason why, we receive various answers. Some would tell us that this doctrine is unwelcome to many because they feel themselves guilty, and their conscience tells them that unless they repent and turn to God this awful doom awaits them. Others believe that it is because the thought of future punishment strikes terror to people’s hearts, and therefore this doctrine is repulsive to them. To others again, the thought of future anguish seems utterly incompatable with the fatherly love of God. Yet it is acknowledged to be a remarkable fact that both Jesus and John, who more than any one else in the New Testament represent the element of love in their lives and teaching, speak most of the future anguish of the wicked.

That future punishment of the wicked holds a prominent place in the teachings of the Scriptures there can be no reasonable doubt. What is between the covers of the Bible is the preacher’s message. Yet great care must be exercised in the teaching or proclamation of this doctrine. After all it is not the saying of hard things that pierces the conscience of people; it is the voice of divine love heard amid the thunder.

Yet there must be no consciousness of cowardice in proclaiming the doctrine of future retribution, however awful its delineation may be. Fear is a legitimate motive to which we may appeal, and while it may be classed among the lower motives, it is nevertheless true that it is the only motive that will effectively move some people to action.

SOME RECOGNIZED FACTS.

There are certain preliminary facts which should be recognized in the discussion of this subject:

1. That it shall be well with the righteous, and woe to the wicked (Isa. 3:10, 11). That there is to be retribution for sin and a reward for the righteous must be held to be beyond question, and must be recognized as an unchangeable law. One cannot very well meddle with that truth without serious danger. So long as a man persistently, willingly and knowingly continues in his sin he must suffer for it. That suffering the Bible calls eternal death.

2. We must recognize that much of the language of the Scripture dealing with this condition is couched in figurative terms. But the condition is none the less real because of that, for, generally speaking, the reality is more severe than the figure in which it is set forth. Yet we need caution here, and must distinguish between the things that are stated in clear unmistakable language and those that are set forth in words symbolic and figurative.

3. The disparity in the number of saved and lost. There is a danger lest we should be unmindful of the problems connected with this doctrine, such as that seeming fewness of the saved; the condition of the heathen who have not had a chance to hear the Gospel; and the difference in privilege and opportunity among those who live in so-called Christian lands.

4. Prophecy vs. History. We must recognize that it is more difficult to deal with facts which lie in the future than with those lying in the past. Prophecy is always more difficult to deal with than history. The past we may sketch in details, the future but in broad outlines.

“Our treatment of themes that deal with the future must, in the very nature of the case be very different than it would be were we dealing with the things of the past. History and prophecy must be handled differently. In dealing with the history of God’s past revelations—with the ages before the Advent, with the earthly life and revelation of Jesus Christ, with the subsequent course of God’s providence in the Church—we are dealing with that which has already been. It stands in concrete reality before us, and we can reason from it as a thing known in its totality and its details. But when the subject of revelation is that which is yet to be, especially that which is yet to be under forms and conditions of which we have no direct experience, the case is widely altered. Here it is at most outlines that we can look for; and even these outlines will be largely clothed in figure and symbol; the spiritual kernel will seek material investiture to body itself forth; the conditions of the future will require to be presented largely in forms borrowed from known relations. The outstanding thoughts will be sufficiently apparent, but the thoughts in which these thoughts are cast will partake of metaphor and image.”—_James Orr._

II. THE WICKED ARE SAID TO “DIE IN THEIR SINS.”

John 8:21, 24—“Then said Jesus again unto them, I go my way, and ye shall seek me, and shall die in your sins: whither I go, ye cannot come. I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.” Rom. 6:23—“For the wages of sin is death.” See Rev. 20:14,

15; 21:8.

The “death” spoken of here does not mean cessation of existence any more than eternal life means the beginning of existence. Eternal life does not mean merely to live for ever, but to live in a state of blessedness for ever. Eternal life deals not so much with quantity as with quality of existence. Just so with eternal death. It is a quality of existence, not cessation of being. Even in this life death can co-exist with life: “But she that liveth in pleasure is dead while she liveth” (1 Tim. 5:6); Eph. 2:1. What men call life God calls death. There are two things which the believer gets: at his regeneration, eternal life; at his resurrection, immortality; but in both instances he already has life and existence. So it is in the case of the wicked: the second death does not mean cessation of existence, for he is dead already, now in this life (1 Tim. 5:6; Eph. 2:1; John 5:24, 25). Rev. 21:8 describes what “death,” as here used, means: “But the fearful, and the unbelieving… shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.”

III. THE WICKED ARE NOT ANNIHILATED.

The texts most strongly urged as teaching the annihilation theory, if rightly interpreted, will be seen to refer to removal from off the earth, and not to future retribution. Here are the principal passages:

Psa. 37:20—“But the wicked shall perish, and the enemies of the Lord shall be as the fat of lambs: they shall consume; into smoke shall they consume away.” This psalm is written for the encouragement of Israel and against her enemies and their power on the earth. This earthly power shall be utterly broken, and be of no more account than the smoke of a burnt sacrifice. The great truth taught here is that the earth is the inheritance of the saints, and that the wicked shall have no part in it.

Obadiah 16—” … And they shall be as though they had not been.” These words are taken from the vision regarding Edom, and refer to the destruction of the Edomites and their land, and not to the future of the wicked in the next life.

In speaking of the “everlasting punishment” with which the wicked will be visited, as recorded in 2 Thess. 1:9, the annihilationist would say that reference is made to the “results or consequences” of that punishment and not to the punishment itself. But the Scriptures state that it is the “punishment” itself, and not the consequences, that is everlasting.

No such interpretation as that put upon these passages by those holding the annihilation theory can be maintained by sound exegesis. What need is there of a resurrection if the wicked are to be annihilated at death, or why should they be raised from the dead if only to be at once extinguished for ever? Again, there is no such thing as “unconscious” punishment. You cannot punish anything that is unconscious. Can you punish a stone or a house? Punishment can take place only where there is consciousness on the part of the one suffering.

IV. THE WICKED ARE TO BE PUNISHED.

Rom. 2:8, 9—“But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile.” “Wrath” indicates the settled mind of God towards the persistently wicked (John 3:36); “indignation,” the outbreak of that wrath at the day of judgment; “tribulation,” severe affliction (Matt. 13:21; 24:9; Rev. 7:14); “anguish,” torturing confinement in a strait place without relief, as in a dungeon, or in stocks. God grant that we may never know what these terms fully mean.

Matt. 25:41, 46—“Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels. And these shall go away into everlasting punishment.” 2 Thess. 1:7-9—“When the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, in flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power.” See also Mark 9:43-50 which speaks of the wicked being cast into “hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched: where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.”

There are certain important words in these scriptures which demand our attention, and which we need to understand in order to get right views of the doctrine we are now considering. They are as follows:

1. “ETERNAL.”

We read of “eternal” or “everlasting” punishment, “everlasting” fire. It is objected that the word “eternal” or “everlasting” does not mean “forever.” This may be true. But we are all willing to admit that when this word qualifies the condition of the righteous it means for ever, without end, e.g., the righteous shall go “into life eternal.” The same word, however, qualifies the punishment of the wicked, e.g., “these shall go away into everlasting punishment.” Fairness demands that we make the joy of the righteous and the punishment of the wicked—both qualified as they are by the same Greek word—of the same duration. If there is an end to the reward of the righteous, there is also to the penalty of the wicked. The one lasts as long as the other. If “destruction” means annihilation, then there is no need of the word “eternal” to qualify it. Further the Scriptures present the punishment of the wicked not only as “eternal” (or age-long) but as enduring “for ever and ever,” or “unto the ages of the ages” (Rev. 19:3; 20:10; 14:11, R. V.). Here is a picture of ages tumbling upon ages in eternal succession.

2. “PUNISHMENT.”

The meaning of this word will be found under the previous division (III) dealing with the subject of Annihilation.

3. “FIRE.”

This is one of the most constant images under which the torment and misery of the wicked is represented. Fire is a symbol of the divine judgment of wrath (Matt. 5:22). In Matthew 3:10 the godless are represented as a tree hewn down and cast into the fire; in 3:12 the chaff (godless) is burned with unquenchable fire; in 13:42 the wicked are said to be cast into a furnace of fire.

Is the “fire” spoken of here literal fire? It is an accepted law of language that a figure of speech is less intense than the reality. If “fire” is merely a figurative expression, it must stand for some great reality, and if the reality is more intense than the figure, what an awful thing the punishment symbolized by fire must be.

It is contended that fire must necessarily consume; that nothing could continue to exist in fire. Is it not remarkable that the Baptist uses the word “unquenchable”’ (Greek, “asbestos”) when speaking of this fire? Is any light thrown on the question by the incident of the three Hebrew children in the fiery furnace? Did they consume, or did they withstand the fire? (Dan. 3:27). In the parable of the Tares (Matt. 13:36-43) our Lord speaks of the tares being burned up. When Christ retired to the house after delivering the parable, his disciples asked Him to explain to them what He meant by the figures of speech He used in the parable. This request He granted. He explained the figurative language of the parable; every figurative word in it except that of “fire.” He said: “The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one; the enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels. As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire, so shall it be at the end of this world… . And they shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.” Why did not the Master explain what he meant by the figurative word “fire”? He explained all the other figurative words, why not this one? Did He forget? Or did He intend that His disciples should have the impression that He was speaking of literal fire? Here was His opportunity to explain His use of words, for the disciples were asking for just that very thing. Was there any significance in the fact that Jesus did not explain the word “fire”? Whether we believe in literal fire or not, we certainly ought to ask for a reason for the Master’s failure to literalize the figurative word “fire.”

4. “DARKNESS.”

This word is used to describe the condition of the lost: “Cast into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.” Seven times these terms are found together: Matt. 8:12; 13:42, 50; 22:13; 24:51; 25:30; Luke 13:28. The picture is that of a banquet which was usually held at night. The wicked are thrust out from the light, joy, and festivity into the darkness and gloom without, as into the remote gloom and anguish of a dungeon in which are found agony, wrath, and despair. Is this a description of hell —absence of spiritual light; separation from the company of the saved; lamentation; impotent rage?

E. THE FINAL REWARD OF THE RIGHTEOUS.

I. THE BELIEVER NEVER DIES.

II. THE BELIEVER GOES TO BE WITH CHRIST.

III. THE BODY OF THE BELIEVER IS RAISED FROM THE DEAD.

IV. THE BELIEVER IS REWARDED.

V. THE NATURE OF THE BELIEVER’S REWARD.

1. THE “CROWNS” OF SCRIPTURE. 2. THE SEVEN “OVERCOMES” (REV. 2 AND 3).

VI. THE NEW CONDITION AND ABODE OF LIFE FOR THE SAINTS.

1. NEW SPHERE OF LIFE. 2. A NEW HOME. 3. NEW CONDITIONS.

E. THE FINAL REWARD OF THE RIGHTEOUS.

If, says the Apostle Paul, in this present life we have a hope resting on Christ, and nothing more, we are more to be pitied than all the rest of the world (1 Cor. 15:19). The idea is that if this hope in Christ which the believer has is a delusive hope, with no prospect of fulfillment in the future, the Christian is indeed in a sad state. He has chosen a life of self-denial; he will not indulge in the pleasures of the world, and if there are no pleasures in the darkness into which he is about to enter, then he has miscalculated, he has chosen a life that shall end in self-obliteration. If he has no home to go to, no God to welcome him, no King to say, “Well done, exchange mortality for life,” then he is indeed in a pitiable plight. But such is not the case. The hope of the Christian enters beyond the vail, into the very presence of God Himself, and endures throughout all the eternities.

I. THE CHRISTIAN NEVER DIES.

1 John 8:51—“Verily, verily, I say unto you, If a man keep my saying, he shall never see death.” 11:25, 26—“Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live: and whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this?”

What Jesus means here is not that the believer shall not pass through the experience that we call death, but that in reality it is not death, at least, not in the sense in which it is death to the unbeliever. Jesus has taken the sting out of death. How sharply the contrast between death and the experience through which the believer passes is presented in 1 Thess. 4:13, 14—“But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope. For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him.” Jesus “died”—He tasted the awfulness of death; the believer in Him “falls asleep.” Cf. John 11:11—“Our friend Lazarus sleepeth.” We have no ground in these words for the modern doctrine of soul-sleeping. Christ did not mean to say that the soul is unconscious between the time of death and the resurrection. For, when the disciples did not understand His figurative language, He told them plainly, “Lazarus is dead” (11:11-15). What Jesus meant was that death is something like that which takes place when we go to sleep. What takes place when we go to sleep? Surely the current of life does not cease, but flows on, and when we awake we feel better and stronger than before. There is a shutting out of all the scenes of the world and time. Just so it is in the case of the believer’s death. Three ideas are contained in the word “sleep”: continued existence,—for the mind is active even though the body is still; repose—we lose our hold on and forget the things of the world; wakening—we always think of sleep as followed by awakening.

The word “see” in John 8:51 means that the believer shall not gaze at death protractedly, steadily, exhaustively. Death is not the objective of his gaze. The believer’s outlook is that of life not death. The death of the body is to be reckoned no more as death than the life of the body is life (1 Tim. 5:6). The believer’s back is turned upon death; he faces and gazes upon life. The temporary separation of the soul and body does not even interrupt, much less impair, the eternal life given by Jesus.

II. THE BELIEVER GOES TO BE WITH CHRIST.

2 Cor. 5:6, R. V.—“Being therefore always of good courage, and knowing that, whilst we are at home in the body, we are absent from the Lord.” Phil. 1:23, R. V.—“But I am in a strait betwixt the two, having the desire to depart and be with Christ; for it is very far better.”

The experience (death-sleep) through which the believer passes ushers him at once into the presence of Christ. It takes him instantly to be “at home” with the Lord. Surely there can be no hint of unconsciousness or the sleeping of the soul in these words. It would seem from Paul’s words in 2 Corinthians 5:1-5 that some kind of spiritual body is given to the believer during the period of his waiting for the resurrection body. What Paul longs for is not to be in a bodiless state, but to put on another body which shall not be subject to death. “At home with the Lord”—that is what “death” (?) means to the believer.

III. THE BODY OF THE BELIEVER IS RAISED FROM THE DEAD.

See under the Doctrine of the Resurrection for the full discussion of the believer’s resurrection body, its characteristics, etc.

IV. THE BELIEVER SHALL RECEIVE HIS FINAL REWARD IN THE FUTURE.

1 Matt. 25:20-23—“And so he that had received five talents came and brought other five talents, saying, Lord, thou deliveredst unto me five talents: behold, I have gained beside them five talents more. His lord said unto him, Well done, thou good and faithful servant: thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord. He also that had received two talents came and said, Lord, thou deliveredst unto me two talents: behold, I have gained two other talents beside them. His lord said unto him, Well done, good and faithful servant: thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord.”

Luke 19:12-19.—“He said therefore, A certain nobleman went into a far country to receive for himself a kingdom, and to return. And he called his ten servants, and delivered them ten pounds, and said unto them, Occupy till I come. But his citizens hated him, and sent a message after him, saying, We will not have this man to reign over us. And it came to pass, that when he was returned, having received the kingdom, then he commanded these servants to be called unto him, to whom he had given the money, that he might know how much every man had gained by trading. Then came the first, saying, Lord, thy pound hath gained ten pounds. And he said unto him, Well, thou good servant: because thou hast been faithful in a very little, have thou authority over ten cities. And the second came saying, Lord, thy pound hath gained five pounds. And he said likewise to him, Be thou also over five cities.”

Matthew 24 exhorts us to watch and wait for Christ’s coming; chapter 25 shows us how we may obey this exhortation. Chapter 25 illustrates to us, in the parable of the Virgins (vv. 1-13) the necessity of caring for the inward spiritual life; while the parable of the Talents (vv. 14-30), emphasizes the necessity of activity for Christ while awaiting His return.

While both parables deal with the matter of the rewarding of the saints, they nevertheless present the subject from different viewpoints. The parable of the Pounds was delivered before the entry into Jerusalem; that of the Talents, three days after; the Pounds, to the multitudes; the Talents, to the disciples. The Pounds was given because the people thought that the kingdom would immediately appear, hence the idea of a long journey. In the Pounds there is opposition to Christ; in the Talents, none. In the Talents unequal sums are multiplied in the same proportion; in the Pounds, equal sums in differed proportions. The parable of the Pounds was uttered to repress impatience; that of the Talents, to stimulate activity until Christ should return.

The talents are distributed not capriciously but according to each man’s ability to handle them. He who had five talents was able to use five, and was therefore held responsible for the use of this number; so with the two, and the one. The question is not so much “How many talents have I received,” but “To what use am I putting them?” The rewards for faithfulness are the same in each case—“Be thou ruler over many cities.” In the parable of the Pounds it is different. All start out with the same number of pounds. As men differ in their use of them, in their fidelity, zeal and labor, so they differ in spiritual gains and rewards (ten cities, five cities). The reward of the believer will be in proportion to the faithfulness of his service for God with the use of the talents with which God has endowed him. The rewards therefore will differ according to the faithfulness or unfaithfulness of our service and life.

Faith in Jesus Christ saves the believer, but his position in the future life together with the measure of his reward will depend upon his faithfulness in the use of the gifts with which he has been endowed by God. Thus it comes to pass that a man may be saved “yet so as by fire,” i.e., saved because of his faith in Christ, but minus his reward. See 1 Cor. 3:10-15—“In discharge of the task which God graciously entrusted to me, I—like a competent master-builder—have laid a foundation, and others are building upon it. But let every one be careful how and what he builds. For no one can lay any other foundation in addition to that which is already laid, namely, Jesus Christ. And whether the building which anyone is erecting on that foundation be of gold or silver or costly stones, of timber or hay or straw—the true character of each individual’s work will become manifest. For the day of Christ will disclose it, because that day is soon to come upon us clothed in fire, and as for the quality of every one’s work—the fire is the thing which will test it. If any one’s work—the building which he has erected—stands the test, he will be rewarded. If any one’s work is burned up, he will suffer the loss of it; yet he will himself be rescued, but only, as it were, by passing through the fire.” (Translation from Weymouth’s New Testament.) While this passage has its primary reference, probably, to Christian teachers and preachers, and touches the matter of doctrines that are taught, it nevertheless has a fitting and true application to the life and work of every believer.

V. THE NATURE OF THE BELIEVER’S REWARD.

1. HE SHALL RECEIVE A CROWN.

The Scriptures speak of a number of crowns: The Crown of Life (James 1:12; Rev. 2:10, compare context which speaks of death); of Glory (1 Pet. 5:4; cf. John 17:22; Heb. 2:9); of Righteousness (2 Tim. 4:8), the full realization of the imputed and inwrought righteousness of Christ; of Rejoicing (1 Thess. 2:19), at the sight of converts that have been won by one’s ministry for Christ; of Gold (Rev. 4:4); Incorruptible (1 Cor. 9:25), as compared with the perishable crowns of the Greek games; Thy crown (Rev. 3:11), that which is laid up for you, and which should not be lost by unfaithfulness; the summing up of all the previous expressions—all are characteristic of “thy” crown.

2. THE SEVEN “OVERCOMES” IN REVELATION (cc. 2, 3.).

a) 2:7—“Eat of the Tree of Life, Which is in the Midst of the Paradise of God.”

The tree of life, which has been practically unmentioned since Genesis 3, where it was lost through sin, is here restored in accordance with the restitution of all things in Christ. This figure expresses participation in life eternal—the believer shall die no more.

b) 2:11—“Shall Not be Hurt of the Second Death.”

He who is born but once—“of the flesh”—dies twice: physically, and eternally. He (the believer) who is born twice—“of the flesh” and “of the spirit”—dies but once; that is, he passes through only that physical dissolution of soul and body which is called death. The “second death” means, to say the least, utter exclusion from the presence of God. To say that the believer shall not be hurt of the second death is equivalent to saying that he shall eternally behold the face of the Father which is in heaven.

c) 2:17—He shall Receive a “Stone with a New Name Written” Thereon; To the Believer also will be Given to Eat of the “Hidden Manna.”

This figure may mean that to the believer is given the white stone of acquittal. In courts of justice in those days a black stone was given to the condemned. Reference may here be made to the white stone (diamond?) which was not among the stones in the high priest’s ephod, and thought by some to be the Urim and Thummim. The partaking of the hidden manna may refer to the fact that they who had resisted the eating of meat offered in sacrifice to idols would, as a reward, be allowed to feast on the bread of God, the divine food. The new name mentioned may stand for a new nature and character which the believer will possess in that new country.

d) 2:26, 27—Authority Over the Nations.

There is doubtless a reference here to the reign of the saints with the Lord Jesus Christ on the millenial earth. Those that have suffered with Him shall also reign with Him.

e) 3:4, 5—He Shall Be “Arrayed in White Garments,” and His Name Shall in No Wise be Blotted Out of the Book of Life.

“White garments” undoubtedly refers to the righteousness of the saints. In the Old Testament days to be blotted out of the book of life meant to forfeit the privileges of the Theocracy—to be shut out forever from God’s favor. Here the certainty of the believer’s eternal security is assured. Christ will rejoice over him and gladly confess that He knows him as one who belonged to Him and served and confessed Him on the earth.

f) 3:12—The Believer Will Be a Pillar in the Temple of God; He Shall Go Out No More; God Will Write Upon Him His Own New Name.

Philadelphia, the place in which was situated the church to whom these words were written, was subject to earthquakes, and quite frequently the massive pillars of the temple were shattered. It shall not be so with the believer—he shall never be moved. He will go in and out no more—no possibility of falling then. He will have the name of God written upon him—no danger of anyone else making claim to him. Then the believer’s period of probation will have passed away; he shall have a permanent and eternal place in the kingdom of the Father.

g) 3:21, R. V.—“I Will Give to Him to Sit Down With Me in My Throne.”

Not “on” or “upon” but “in” my throne. Christ will exalt us with Himself. James and John wanted to sit by Christ’s side in the coming kingdom. Here is something infinitely better—to sit with Him in His throne.

VI. THE BELIEVER WILL ENTER INTO A NEW CONDITION AND ABODE OF LIFE.

1. A NEW SPHERE OF LIFE FOR THE SAINTS.

New Heavens and a new Earth: Paradise regained; new spiritual environment; new physical conditions. Not surrounded by the temptations and defects of this mortal life. “No more sea”—to the Jew a symbol of unmixed peril, trouble, and restlessness.

2. A NEW HOME FOR THE SAINTS.

Rev. 21-22:5—A picture of the Holy City, the New Jerusalem, which is to be the final and eternal abode of the people of God.

Within the New Heavens and on the New Earth is the Holy City. Note some characteristics of the Holy City: Its Name: New Jerusalem—what music to the ear of the Jew, who for so long had been without a city of his own! Its Walls (21:17): high, secure, safe against all assaults. Its Gates (21:15, 21): guarded by angels; names on gates; only saints enter. Its Foundations (v.14): the Apostles of the Lamb; lustrous (18). Its Citizens: of the nations that are saved (citizens’ characteristics 21:6, 7; 22:14, R. V.; contrast with 21:8, 27). Its Magnitude: 4800 stadia (the earthly Jerusalem being but 33 stadia). Its Glory (11-23): what costliness!

3. NEW CONDITIONS OF LIFE FOR THE REDEEMED.

God’s home is there (21:3); thus the believer has uninterrupted communion with God. Some things that used to be have all passed away: death, mourning, curse, tears, sorrow, night—all have gone. New created things appear: the river of life, the tree of life, new service, new relationships, new light (22:4).

“AND AFTER THESE THINGS I HEARD A GREAT VOICE OF MUCH PEOPLE IN HEAVEN, SAYING, ALLELUIA; SALVATION, AND GLORY, AND HONOUR, AND POWER, UNTO THE LORD OUR GOD:

“AND THE FOUR AND TWENTY ELDERS AND THE FOUR BEASTS FELL DOWN AND WORSHIPPED GOD THAT SAT ON THE THRONE, SAYING, AMEN; ALLELUIA.

“AND A VOICE CAME OUT OF THE THRONE, SAYING, PRAISE OUR GOD, ALL YE HIS SERVANTS, AND YE THAT FEAR HIM, BOTH SMALL AND GREAT.

“AND I HEARD AS IT WERE THE VOICE OF A GREAT MULTITUDE, AND AS THE VOICE OF MANY WATERS, AND AS THE VOICE OF MIGHTY THUNDERINGS, SAYING, ALLELUIA: FOR THE LORD GOD OMNIPOTENT REIGNETH.

“LET US BE GLAD AND REJOICE, AND GIVE HONOUR TO HIM: FOR THE MARRIAGE OF THE LAMB IS COME, AND HIS WIFE HATH MADE HERSELF READY.

“AND TO HER WAS GRANTED THAT SHE SHOULD BE ARRAYED IN FINE LINEN, CLEAN AND WHITE: FOR THE FINE LINEN IS THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF SAINTS.”

*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK, THE GREAT DOCTRINES OF THE BIBLE ***

This file should be named gdotb10.txt or gdotb10.zip Corrected EDITIONS of our eBooks get a new NUMBER, gdotb11.txt VERSIONS based on separate sources get new LETTER, gdotb10a.txt

Project Gutenberg eBooks are often created from several printed editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the US unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we usually do not keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.

We are now trying to release all our eBooks one year in advance of the official release dates, leaving time for better editing. Please be encouraged to tell us about any error or corrections, even years after the official publication date.

Please note neither this listing nor its contents are final til midnight of the last day of the month of any such announcement. The official release date of all Project Gutenberg eBooks is at Midnight, Central Time, of the last day of the stated month. A preliminary version may often be posted for suggestion, comment and editing by those who wish to do so.

Most people start at our Web sites at: http://gutenberg.net or http://promo.net/pg

These Web sites include award-winning information about Project Gutenberg, including how to donate, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to subscribe to our email newsletter (free!).

Those of you who want to download any eBook before announcement can get to them as follows, and just download by date. This is also a good way to get them instantly upon announcement, as the indexes our cataloguers produce obviously take a while after an announcement goes out in the Project Gutenberg Newsletter.

http://www.ibiblio.org/gutenberg/etext04 or ftp://ftp.ibiblio.org/pub/docs/books/gutenberg/etext04

Or /etext03, 02, 01, 00, 99, 98, 97, 96, 95, 94, 93, 92, 92, 91 or 90

Just search by the first five letters of the filename you want, as it appears in our Newsletters.

Information about Project Gutenberg (one page)

We produce about two million dollars for each hour we work. The time it takes us, a rather conservative estimate, is fifty hours to get any eBook selected, entered, proofread, edited, copyright searched and analyzed, the copyright letters written, etc. Our projected audience is one hundred million readers. If the value per text is nominally estimated at one dollar then we produce $2 million dollars per hour in 2002 as we release over 100 new text files per month: 1240 more eBooks in 2001 for a total of 4000+ We are already on our way to trying for 2000 more eBooks in 2002 If they reach just 1-2% of the world’s population then the total will reach over half a trillion eBooks given away by year’s end.

The Goal of Project Gutenberg is to Give Away 1 Trillion eBooks! This is ten thousand titles each to one hundred million readers, which is only about 4% of the present number of computer users.

Here is the briefest record of our progress (* means estimated):

eBooks Year Month

1 1971 July 10 1991 January 100 1994 January 1000 1997 August 1500 1998 October 2000 1999 December 2500 2000 December 3000 2001 November 4000 2001 October/November 6000 2002 December* 9000 2003 November* 10000 2004 January*

The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation has been created to secure a future for Project Gutenberg into the next millennium.

We need your donations more than ever!

As of February, 2002, contributions are being solicited from people and organizations in: Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming.

We have filed in all 50 states now, but these are the only ones that have responded.

As the requirements for other states are met, additions to this list will be made and fund raising will begin in the additional states. Please feel free to ask to check the status of your state.

In answer to various questions we have received on this:

We are constantly working on finishing the paperwork to legally request donations in all 50 states. If your state is not listed and you would like to know if we have added it since the list you have, just ask.

While we cannot solicit donations from people in states where we are not yet registered, we know of no prohibition against accepting donations from donors in these states who approach us with an offer to donate.

International donations are accepted, but we don’t know ANYTHING about how to make them tax-deductible, or even if they CAN be made deductible, and don’t have the staff to handle it even if there are ways.

Donations by check or money order may be sent to:

Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation PMB 113 1739 University Ave. Oxford, MS 38655-4109

Contact us if you want to arrange for a wire transfer or payment method other than by check or money order.

The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation has been approved by the US Internal Revenue Service as a 501(c)(3) organization with EIN [Employee Identification Number] 64-622154. Donations are tax-deductible to the maximum extent permitted by law. As fund-raising requirements for other states are met, additions to this list will be made and fund-raising will begin in the additional states.

We need your donations more than ever!

You can get up to date donation information online at:

http://www.gutenberg.net/donation.html

***

If you can’t reach Project Gutenberg, you can always email directly to:

Michael S. Hart <hart@pobox.com>

Prof. Hart will answer or forward your message.

We would prefer to send you information by email.

**The Legal Small Print**

(Three Pages)

***START**THE SMALL PRINT!**FOR PUBLIC DOMAIN EBOOKS**START*** Why is this “Small Print!” statement here? You know: lawyers. They tell us you might sue us if there is something wrong with your copy of this eBook, even if you got it for free from someone other than us, and even if what’s wrong is not our fault. So, among other things, this “Small Print!” statement disclaims most of our liability to you. It also tells you how you may distribute copies of this eBook if you want to.

BEFORE! YOU USE OR READ THIS EBOOK By using or reading any part of this PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm eBook, you indicate that you understand, agree to and accept this “Small Print!” statement. If you do not, you can receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for this eBook by sending a request within 30 days of receiving it to the person you got it from. If you received this eBook on a physical medium (such as a disk), you must return it with your request.

ABOUT PROJECT GUTENBERG-TM EBOOKS This PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm eBook, like most PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm eBooks, is a “public domain” work distributed by Professor Michael S. Hart through the Project Gutenberg Association (the “Project”). Among other things, this means that no one owns a United States copyright on or for this work, so the Project (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, set forth below, apply if you wish to copy and distribute this eBook under the “PROJECT GUTENBERG” trademark.

Please do not use the “PROJECT GUTENBERG” trademark to market any commercial products without permission.

To create these eBooks, the Project expends considerable efforts to identify, transcribe and proofread public domain works. Despite these efforts, the Project’s eBooks and any medium they may be on may contain “Defects”. Among other things, Defects may take the form of incomplete, inaccurate or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other eBook medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by your equipment.

LIMITED WARRANTY; DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES But for the “Right of Replacement or Refund” described below, [1] Michael Hart and the Foundation (and any other party you may receive this eBook from as a PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm eBook) disclaims all liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal fees, and [2] YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE OR UNDER STRICT LIABILITY, OR FOR BREACH OF WARRANTY OR CONTRACT, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES, EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES.

If you discover a Defect in this eBook within 90 days of receiving it, you can receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending an explanatory note within that time to the person you received it from. If you received it on a physical medium, you must return it with your note, and such person may choose to alternatively give you a replacement copy. If you received it electronically, such person may choose to alternatively give you a second opportunity to receive it electronically.

THIS EBOOK IS OTHERWISE PROVIDED TO YOU “AS-IS”. NO OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, ARE MADE TO YOU AS TO THE EBOOK OR ANY MEDIUM IT MAY BE ON, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.

Some states do not allow disclaimers of implied warranties or the exclusion or limitation of consequential damages, so the above disclaimers and exclusions may not apply to you, and you may have other legal rights.

INDEMNITY You will indemnify and hold Michael Hart, the Foundation, and its trustees and agents, and any volunteers associated with the production and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm texts harmless, from all liability, cost and expense, including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following that you do or cause: [1] distribution of this eBook, [2] alteration, modification, or addition to the eBook, or [3] any Defect.

DISTRIBUTION UNDER “PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm” You may distribute copies of this eBook electronically, or by disk, book or any other medium if you either delete this “Small Print!” and all other references to Project Gutenberg, or:

[1] Only give exact copies of it. Among other things, this requires that you do not remove, alter or modify the eBook or this “small print!” statement. You may however, if you wish, distribute this eBook in machine readable binary, compressed, mark-up, or proprietary form, including any form resulting from conversion by word processing or hypertext software, but only so long as EITHER:

[*] The eBook, when displayed, is clearly readable, and does not contain characters other than those intended by the author of the work, although tilde (~), asterisk (*) and underline (_) characters may be used to convey punctuation intended by the author, and additional characters may be used to indicate hypertext links; OR

[*] The eBook may be readily converted by the reader at no expense into plain ASCII, EBCDIC or equivalent form by the program that displays the eBook (as is the case, for instance, with most word processors); OR

[*] You provide, or agree to also provide on request at no additional cost, fee or expense, a copy of the eBook in its original plain ASCII form (or in EBCDIC or other equivalent proprietary form).

[2] Honor the eBook refund and replacement provisions of this “Small Print!” statement.

[3] Pay a trademark license fee to the Foundation of 20% of the gross profits you derive calculated using the method you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. If you don’t derive profits, no royalty is due. Royalties are payable to “Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation” the 60 days following each date you prepare (or were legally required to prepare) your annual (or equivalent periodic) tax return. Please contact us beforehand to let us know your plans and to work out the details.

WHAT IF YOU WANT TO SEND MONEY EVEN IF YOU DON’T HAVE TO? Project Gutenberg is dedicated to increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be freely distributed in machine readable form.

The Project gratefully accepts contributions of money, time, public domain materials, or royalty free copyright licenses. Money should be paid to the: “Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.”

If you are interested in contributing scanning equipment or software or other items, please contact Michael Hart at: hart@pobox.com

[Portions of this eBook’s header and trailer may be reprinted only when distributed free of all fees. Copyright (C) 2001, 2002 by Michael S. Hart. Project Gutenberg is a TradeMark and may not be used in any sales of Project Gutenberg eBooks or other materials be they hardware or software or any other related product without express permission.]

END THE SMALL PRINT! FOR PUBLIC DOMAIN EBOOKSVer.02/11/02*END*