FIRSTFRUITS AND HARVEST
A Study in Resurrection and Rapture
By
G. H. LANG
Made and Printed in
John Roberts Press Ltd
Foropress House, Clerkenwell Green,
EDITOR’S FOREWORD
Who
was G. H. LANG? There is no doubt in
my mind the reader of this book will want to know, and it seems right for me to
endeavour to answer the qureston by providing two
writings by those who obviously knew him well.
Firstfruits and Harvest is, in my opinion,
one of Mr. Lang’s best works. In it he
methodically sets out to interpret and expound some of the more difficult
portions of the word of God: particularly, the conditional promises,
which appear to be almost completely neglected and ‘glossed over’ my a vast majority of regenerate believers today. Its a bold act indeed, when the people of God wilfully set
out to change a conditional promise of His into an unconditional one!
It
may be of interest to the reader to know that it was the writings of this
book which gave me a desire to search the Scriptures with an open mind, to
see if the doctrines taught here are both Scriptural and true.
Being
familiar (at one time) with writings by those who believe the whole
Mr.
Lang’s exposition on the intermediate state and place of the dead, what takes
place at death, the souls under the altar, the judgment seat of Christ, the
pre-tribulation rapture of the living, and the First Resurrection of the dead,
are all important subjects (neglected in our churches today) which the author
has dealt with here in great detail: I am in complete agreement with him on
these very important issues also.
Beliefs,
by some regenerate believers, who maintain that the whole
I
do not accept the author’s
interpretation of ‘the Church’ as being a select
company which will be taken out from those who are eternally saved. ‘The Church of
the Firstborn,’ are (in my opinion)
what Mr. Lang calls ‘the Church’.
Great
emphasis is now being placed by some on ‘the Judgment Seat of Christ,’ as proof
that all
believers (who are alive on earth at a particular time) will be rapt
to heaven before the Great Tribulation begins! They believe in one judgment of God only -
(after rapture and resurrection); and
disregard, disbelieve, or gloss over any prior judgment by God on their own righteousness
as to whether or not it has exceeded that of the
Pharisees, (Matt. 5: 20), before that
time. Mr. Lang deals extensively with
this unscriptural and misguided notion in great detail through pages 67-82.
It
is not surprising to read that F. F.
Bruce wrote: “Mr. Lang . . . has a meaning
and message
he has patiently sought out for himself and committed to writing for others,”
(Foreword, to The Revelation Of Jesus Christ.).
G.
H. Lang was also a gifted Poet and wrote “a collection
of Poems to exalt Christ and to strengthen godliness.” The following is an example which has been chosen
at random:-
“The
sweet commingling tints of morn
Lay
soft on
But
sea and shore and hills stood clear
As
noontide’s blazing hour drew near.
Too
swiftly fell the eastern night
And
shut the lovely scene from sight,
Till
stars in myriads shed their ray
And softly paled the gloom of grey.
The
moon her full white glory threw,
The
shadowy hills all ghostly grew,
Her
borrowed radiance saying plain,
“The sun still shines, to rise again:
By faith endure, by hope be
strong,
Another day will dawn ere
long.”
On
the inside cover of one of his books which I had on loan, I found a few words
which he had written. They are as follows:-
“He will give the strength to
endure any opposition that may come.
It is forbearance when opposed that commends the truth professed.”
I
consider it a great honour to present these writings on disc, and highly commend
them to ‘the Christian public’ for their careful
and prayerful study.
Yours
in His service,
W.H.Tindle.
Access to other writings by this same author
can be obtained at the following website address:-
http://website.lineone.net/~whtindle
-------
GEORGE HENRY LANG - A
TRIBUTE
By
DOUGLAS W. BREALEY
Having
known Mr. Lang for nearly sixty years I am glad to be given the opportunity of
paying a tribute to his memory; in doing so I desire only to ‘magnify the grace of God’ in him.
First, I would say, that over the years I have been growing
conscious of his deep spirituality; he was one of those rare souls who really
lived in heaven; he found himself truly to be a ‘stranger and pilgrim on the earth’. His ‘city home’ was
in heaven from which he saw himself to be sent to this world as an ambassador for Christ.
He was completely devoid of any earthly nationalism - it mattered little to him
where he was down here, except that he should be in the place of Christ's
choosing for the moment; so from time to time he was found in many countries on
the service of his Lord, now enduring the scorching heat of Arabian deserts,
now the freezing cold of Russian steppes; he was equally content to be posted
by his Sovereign in some primitive village of ‘the pensive East’, or in some
great city of the West with all its modern amenities. Thus he roamed the world,
Christ's ‘ambassador at large’, beseeching sinners to be reconciled to God.
He
was essentially a man of faith, never looking to man for the means of his
subsistence, but only to his heavenly Father, and faith grew with its exercise.
In this school, like his great predecessor, he learned in whatsoever state he
was therewith to be content; he learned the secret of how to run low and how to
run over. And he was such a man of faith because he was such a man of prayer;
his prayers were always unusual and as inspiring as they were unique; he spoke
with an intimacy to his heavenly Father as one who knew God, but whose intimacy
was the very soul of reverence.
I
think I may truthfully say that he was the most apostolic man I have ever met;
perhaps for that very reason he was a very controversial figure; a
correspondent suggested to me that he was the most controversial figure in
brethren circles since J. N. Darby; yet it would be true to say that he himself
was not a controversialist. A very close
student of the Word, and an independent thinker, he was not prepared to take
traditional interpretations unless he was personally convinced that they were
right. Though completely convinced of the eternal security of the believer,
many of his views on prophecy led him into avenues of thought and teaching
where a great number of us felt unable to follow. Unfortunately this closed
doors to his otherwise extremely valuable ministry. Perhaps one of the greatest
teachers of his time, multitudes could testify to the great help they have
received from him, either from his public utterances or from his numerous
writings.
It
was only to be in his presence to realise that one was in the presence of a
true saint of God whose holy life gave
weight and authority to all he taught.
From
our midst has gone ‘a prince and a great man’;
he has been an ensample to the flock. If we cannot follow all he taught, we may
well follow his faith, and like him, come [search] the Scriptures with an open
mind and teachable heart, ever keeping before us that day, quickly coming, when differences of judgement will have
disappeared for ever and when ‘we shall know even as we
are known’.
F. F. Bruce,
.
. . Having reached this position, he made it the
centre around which his interpretation was organised. While he fully accepted
the doctrine of the believer's eternal security, he held that there were great
and precious privileges which might be forfeited by unfaithfulness, and this
served in his eyes as an added incentive to personal holiness - a leading theme
in his ministry . . . .
Referring
to Mr. Lang's literary work, F. F. Bruce
continues: “By all these writings, his spoken ministry
and private correspondence and conversation, he has proved to be for many of us
‘an interpreter, one among a thousand’. But we think of him even more as a
humble and warm-hearted man of God, whose personal holiness and ‘cheerful
godliness’ were an inspiration to us.” Harold St. John, who had a great affection for him, said to me once with a
twinkle in his eye, ‘I agree with him
completely so far as the past is concerned’; but added with sober
emphasis: ‘He is a man whose prayer-life I envy!’ Such an appraisal from
a man of Mr. St. John's spiritual calibre speaks volumes. And if anyone wishes
to learn the secret of Mr. Lang's spiritual power and personal influence, he
may find it in three pamphlets from his pen - Praying is Working, Prayer
Focussed and Fighting, and Divine
Guidance.
G.H. Lang - A modern Caleb
‘He hath
followed me fully’ Numbers 14 v.24.
Two
courageous men were born in 1874; Churchill and G.H. Lang. November 20th will
mark the Centenary of that lucid and powerful Bible teacher - G.H. Lang. He was
never called before kings or judges, but he was that rarity - a man who taught what he really believed,
and lived by what he taught regardless of consequences. This simple courage
was to him but simple common sense. God was his father, and father’s wisdom is
always good. I commend the idea to us all. It saves a lot of heartaches if you
refuse to look at the hazards, and look simply to God.
His
childhood was spent in a Christian home at
By
1899 he was an insurance assessor’s clerk with very good prospects but one day
he was given an assignment which touched his conscience. He set out to ask a
friend’s advice, when a voice said ‘I will instruct
thee.’ (Psa. 32. 8). He returned home and waited some
days; on 27th. May the Voice said ‘Whatsoever ye do, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus,
giving thanks to God the Father through Him.’ (Col.
3. 7). He saw at once he could not do the business called for. On 1st
June he wrote his resignation, without having any other job to go to. I
remember him telling me. ‘The ink wasn’t dry on that
letter, when a deep peace filled my soul.’ He promised the Lord to take
whatever job he was led to; ‘until then’ he
told me ‘I said I would devote all my time to his
service.’ His eyes twinkled as he continued ‘I
am still waiting for that job.’ So for 54 years he served God in many
lands:
Almost
his last journey was to the wedding of our friend George Patterson in 1953. In 1954, at 80 years of age, he told me
that the Lord had said to him that his journeys were ended, but he began to
publish a new magazine, ‘The Disciple’ given free to all who would read it
prayerfully, each edition published only when the Lord had sent the money for
it. I have a full set, 22 numbers, more than 950 pages; close on half a million
words, more than half as long as the Bible, mostly from the pen of an ailing
man in his 80’s.
George
Lang wrote 14 major books, and innumerable booklets, 3 of which were published
by the Enfield Christian Bookshop! I recall him saying ‘No man should write a book until he is 40. He needs to prove his theories
in practice before publishing.’ All but 9 of his many writings were
published after he was 50.
His
views on prophecy and the hereafter did not win universal acceptance: his views
on the Church, the most lucid and scriptural expositions I have ever come
across, are unacceptable to denominational Christians and most clergy. He
trusted his reputation to God, and when doors were closed he found others
opened by the Lord! He very strictly maintained silence before men on the
subject of financial needs. He truly lived by faith.
Probably his most
influential books were his biography of
Lang’s
quiet, gracious, determined spirituality stemmed from a love for Christ which
valued more than anything else the great gift which the risen Saviour had given
him, the personal anointing of the Holy Spirit, which he said took place in the
30th year of his life.
The
titles of some of his best pamphlets are evidence of this great preoccupation;
‘The Rights of the Holy Spirit in the
House of God.’ (1938) * ‘God at work on his own lines.’ (1952) ‘The personal indwelling of the Holy Spirit.’ (1954) ‘Praying is working.’ (1918). The same
theme runs through his biographies ‘A.N.
Groves’, ‘Aroolappen’,
‘E.H.Broadbent’
and his autobiography ‘Pages from an
ordered life.’
[* Can be obtained on disc by personal
request. Not for general use. – Ed.]
F.F. Bruce concludes his Epilogue to the
posthumous edition of Lang’s Biography thus:- ‘He
takes his secure place in the ranks of those whom we are bidden to bear in
mind: ‘Remember your guides, who spoke to you
the Word of God, consider the outcome of their life, and imitate their faith.’ (Heb. 13: 7).
I
have been lucky to have known several people utterly devoted to Christ. G.H.
Lang was one of them. I thank God for his memory.
M. Collier.
By kind
permission.
-------
BOOK CONTENTS
Introduction . .
. . .
. . .
. . . . Page 7
I. The
Hope
. .
. . .
. . . . .
. . . 9
1. The Change of Body.
2. With the Lord.
3. On
Going to Heaven . .
. . . . .
. . .
. . . 9
4. The
Principle of Selection . .
. . .
. . 10
II. Who are those “of Christ Jesus”?
1 Thess. 4; 1 Cor.
15 .
. . .
. . .
. . . 19
III. The Period
of the Parousia .
. . .
. . . 31
IV. The Pre-Tribulation Rapture . .
. . .
. . . 36
V. Man's Constitution and Future.
Hades and
His
Creation . .
. . .
. . .
. . 47
Death . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
49
What takes Place at Death? .
. . .
. 51
Where is Hades? . .
. . .
. . . 52
Do Saints go to Heaven at
Death? .
. . 53
The Souls under the Altar
. . .
. . . . 58
VI. The Judgment
Seat of Christ . .
. . .
67
The
Time thereof . .
. . .
. . . 75
VII. Appendix
on “Of Christ”
. .
. . . 83
-------
FIRSTFRUITS AND
HARVEST
A Study in
Resurrection and Rapture
BY
G. H. LANG
Second Edition
Of
The Author
“Wretford,”
1946
FIRSTFRUITS AND
HARVEST
A Study in
Resurrection
and Rapture
INTRODUCTION.
“We must not adhere to those systems of doctrine that never
can bear an infringement of a view that is held popularly. For instance,
perhaps we have all been brought up in the notion that all the children of God,
in all ages, compose the
[* We
must learn to distinguish between the “Church” and “the
Church of the Firstborn”. All
regenerate believers are incorporated (through faith in Christ) into ‘the
Church,’ – it composes of all the saved of all ages, Old Testament
saints as well as New, (Acts
7: 38): but not all (regenerate believers), thought initially given
opportunity during this life to ‘attain’ (or ‘gain by effort’)
firstborn status (Gen. 25: 32), will make it into ‘the Church
of the Firstborn.’ (Heb. 12: 23; Gen. 25: 32, 34). The latter are selected out from the former,
and ‘accounted worthy’ (by the Lord) to receive
firstborn status and blessings. That is, they will obtain a double
inheritance: (1) they inherit ‘eternal life’ through faith – “the free
gift of God,” (Romans 6: 23, R.V.);
and (2) ‘a just recompense of reward’ for their faithfulness
and fidelity - an inheritance in Christ’s
The world system
that occupies the earth is aged and decrepit. Like some vast, worn‑out
machine it creaks and groans as at the breaking‑point. The age is as
weary as wicked, and the only solid comfort is that its consummation seems to
be nearing. The death‑throes of this vast body corporate will be
desperate and painful; yet they will be also the birth‑throes of a better
age.
The chief need of
the world is competent government. Even the best disposed and ablest rulers
prove signally unequal to relieving the woes of the nations, but for this
urgent need the mercy of God has made full provision. He has in readiness a
perfect Sovereign for heaven and earth, His own Son, Jesus Christ the Lord, and
His coming to earth to assume the government is a chief theme of the Word of
God. (Psm. 96: 9‑14; 97: 1: etc.)*
[* Quotations are usually
from the Revised Version.]
In this
expectation the apostles of Christ as devout Jews were trained; but their Lord
when about to leave them intimated that there were circumstances connected
with that expectation which yet awaited disclosure, and that the Spirit [page 8 - Christ’s
Germinal Teachings] of God, Who had visited and inspired the prophets,
should come to them also, to abide with them, and to guide them into all the
truth, and to disclose unto them those things to come (John
16: 13).
One of these yet
undisclosed particulars Christ had just hinted in the words of John 14: 2, 3: “In my
Father's house are many abiding places; if it were not so I would have told
you; for I go to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for
you, I come again, and will receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye
may be also.”
This intimation
was probably as yet obscure to the apostles, It suggested: 1. That for them the
Lord had in mind an abode away from the earth in the heavenly regions; 2. That
that place was not yet ready, but that He was about to go thither and prepare
it for their use; 3. That He would come again from heaven; 4. That at His
coming He would take them away from the earth to that prepared region; 5. That
this was in order that they might be in His company in His heavenly abode.
Here then is the
introduction of the subject of the removal of some of mankind from the earth to
dwell in the heavens. In his Progress of
Doctrine in the New Testament (24), Bernard
has well said, and shown, “that there is no part of
the later and larger doctrine [of the New Testament] which has not its germs
and principles in the words which Christ spake with
His own lips in the days of His flesh. It is provided that all which is to be
spoken after shall find support and proof from His own
pregnant and forecasting sayings.” This is a fact, and it is of the
first importance for a right interpreting of the New Testament. The four
Gospels open the truths expanded in the epistles; the latter must be construed
with the former and cannot be rightly explained in separation from them. The
doctrine of the rapture is an instance. It is rooted in this germinal saying of
our Lord, even as that of the first resurrection is rooted in His words in Luke 20: 34‑36: “The
sons of this age marry and are given
in marriage: but they that are accounted worthy to attain to that age [the age to follow this age, the age of the kingdom], and the resurrection which is out from among the dead,
neither marry nor are given in marriage: for neither can they die any more
[as those individuals raised [page 9 – “Going To Heaven] from the dead
before that resurrection had done and could yet do]: for
they are equal to angels; and are sons of God, being sons of the resurrection”
The doctrine of
the Rapture is thus rooted in this germinal saying of our Lord in John 14: 2, 3. The idea itself was not wholly new.
Enoch and Elijah while living had been removed bodily from the earth to the
heavenly world; but that a similar honour was open to themselves
was probably a new idea to the apostles; nor did Christ here make clear whether
the subjects of this favour would be found living at the moment or be raised
from the dead. These and other particulars were afterwards revealed by the Spirit,
and our present purpose is to set forth briefly some main elements of the New
Testament teaching upon this theme.
I. THE H0PE.
1. The Necessary Change of Body. Man by
constitution is made of and for the earth. He is physically incapable of living
in the presence of God (1 Cor.
15: 50; 1 Tim. 6: 16), so that a change of body is indispensable (1 Cor. 15: 50 ‑ 58; Phil.
3: 20, 21; 2 Cor. 4: 16 ‑ 5: 10). It is not at death but at the coming of the
Lord that this change will be effected and we shall be made like Him (Col. 3: 4; 1 John 3: 1‑3).
2. With the
Lord. The purpose and effect
of this removal and change is that the Lord may have us with Himself, like
Himself, to share His glory and authority and to assist in ruling His kingdom (John 14: 3, 17, 24; 1 Thess. 4.
17; Rev. 3: 4, 5, 21; 14. 4; 17: 14; 20: 4).
3. This is Unique in the Ways of God. The expression “going to heaven” has become a commonplace, used as
the equivalent of a sinner being delivered from hell, but it implies vastly
more. A king may pardon a rebel liable to death without taking him to live in
the royal palace and appointing him to high office and, honour. So sinners
might have been saved from eternal death and been given eternal life without
their ever being removed to the heavens as their abode. This certainly will be
the lot of multitudes of the saved and might have been of all. There will be a
new earth with saved nations, and God coming down to them, not their being taken
up to His region (Rev. 21: 1 ‑ 31, 24).
That some [page 10 – ENOCH] of the saved are to be honoured as above indicated seems to be
exceptional in the ways of God and is the final secret of His eternal counsels.*
Since God cannot make any superior to His Son, He can do nothing greater than
to cause some to share His Son's glory and authority. This is the highest
possible to the creature to all eternity.
[* Col. 2: 3: omit “even
Christ,” and read “in which,” that is, “the mystery of God in
which are all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge hidden.” See
Alford, and Darby, New Translation.]
4. The Principle of Selection. In view of our
sinful state and wicked works it is evident that this “holy
calling” to share His own kingdom and glory is given to us by God “not according to our works, but according to His own purpose
and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before times eternal” (2 Tim. 1: 9). But since not all the saved of
mankind will enjoy this highest destiny there must be some principle of
selection, for God always acts on moral grounds, not arbitrarily or by caprice.
(a) Enoch was
translated alive to heaven before that first age developed its worst degree of
corruption and long before the judgment of heaven was poured out. Concerning
him the Spirit emphasizes that he looked forward to the coining of the Lord and
forewarned the wicked of the judgment then to fall (Jude
14: 15), as also that he “walked with God” (Gen. 5:
24) in such wise that “before his translation he hath had witness borne to him that he had been well‑pleasing unto God” (Heb. 11:
5). Nothing therefore can be clearer than that the unique privilege of
translation must be preceded by such a life of faith in God as produces a clear
witness, and a holy walk which God already endorses as well‑pleasing to
Himself, and which He will crown by a removal to His own sphere of the
universe. Unless this were the lesson for us of this christian age why are these pointed comments upon
Enoch made in the New Testament?
(b) Concerning
certain Old Testament saints we are told that they desired that heavenly country, looked for that heavenly city, and therefore
in practical daily life walked in separation from the world, confessing that
they were strangers and pilgrims in the earth. This manner of life amongst the
godless and violent was attended by manifold [page 11 - MAKING ELECTION SURE] inconveniences
and perils (Gen. 13: 7 ‑ 9; 14: 22, 23; 21:
25; 23: 4, 16; 26: 15 ‑ 21). The divine comment on these men of
faith and this way of living is, “Wherefore God is not ashamed of them, to be called their God: for [that is, it is evident He is not ashamed of them, because] He hath prepared for them a city” (Heb. 11: 8‑16), which He would not do for
any of whom He might be ashamed. This “wherefore”
is most significant. It shows that it was this same manner of life, their
response and devotion to the call of God's grace, that made sure to them their
calling, by God's choice, to the heavenly world. They had not been ashamed to
serve the true and living God among men who did not wish to retain Him in their
knowledge (Rom. 1: 20); He is not ashamed of
them who thus confessed Him. They embraced the offer that grace made them of a
place in the heavens, and in consequence they walked a sanctified life in
separation from the godless; and therefore He Who was their sanctifier was not ashamed of them, and shall
bring them to glory (Heb. 2: 10 ‑ 11),
by the first resurrection.
To us also this
applies: to us those of old are set forth as a weighty example (Heb. 11); to us the Scripture, speaking
specifically of our obtaining a rich entrance (i.e., by the first resurrection,
instead of by the second resurrection after the millennial age) into the
eternal kingdom and glory to which we are called, cries: “Give diligence to make your calling and election sure”
(2 Pet. 1: 10, 11; 1 Pet. 5: 10). For it was
to such as had just confessed Him to be the Christ of God that Jesus solemnly
said, “Whosoever shall be ashamed of Me and of My
words, of Him shall the Son of Man be ashamed, when He cometh in His own glory,
and the glory of the Father, and of the holy angels” (Lk. 9: 20 – 26; comp. Mk. 8: 38: Mat. 10: 32, 33: Lk. 12: 8, 9; 2 Ti. 2: 10 ‑ 13).
(c) Thus
translation, both of the living, as of the dead by the first resurrection, is
consequent upon a life of faith which seizes upon the offer of the heavenly
calling and shapes its course and conduct accordingly. So the Lord, dealing
with the first and select resurrection, spoke of those that are accounted
worthy to attain to that age and the resurrection from among the dead (Lk. 20:34 ‑ 36). “That age” (singular) is not a Bible term for eternity,
which is not one age but [page 12
- THE
OUT‑RESURRECTION] many. “the ages of the ages”
(thirteen times in the Revelation). “That age”
is set by Christ in direct contrast to “this age,”
and so means the age of the kingdom to follow this age. A general resurrection
the Jews expected (Jo. 11: 34: Acts 24: 15), but here Christ speaks of “the resurrection which is out from among the dead” (tees anastaseos
tees ek nekron). This
is the first clear intimation of such a limited, select resurrection (this
doctrine also, as has been pointed out, being rooted in a germinal saying of
Christ), and its terms are the key to and must control all subsequent instruction
upon the subject. And it is made very clear that this resurrection is a privilege to which one must “attain”
and be “accounted worthy” thereof. The notion that a share in the first
resurrection is a certainty, irrespective of attainment and worthiness, can
only be held in direct disregard of this primary declaration by the One who
will effect the resurrection and determine who shall participate therein, the
Son of God.
It was through
Paul that the Holy Spirit saw fit to give in permanent written form fuller
particulars as to this theme (1 Cor.
15; 1 Thess. 4), and it is Paul who elsewhere
repeats the words of our Lord Jesus just considered, declaring that, whereas
justifying righteousness is verily received through faith in Christ, not by our own works, yet, in marked
contrast, “the resurrection which is from among the dead (teen exanastasin teen ek
nekron) is
a privilege at which one must arrive (katanteeso) by a
given course of life, even the experimental knowledge of Christ, of the power
of His resurrection, and of the fellowship of His sufferings, thereby becoming
conformed unto His death (Phil. 3: 7 ‑ 21).
Surely the present participle (summorphizomenos becoming
conformed) is significant, and decisive in favour of the view that it is a process,
a course of life that is contemplated.
It has been
suggested that Paul here speaks of a present moral resurrection as he does in Romans 6. But in that chapter it is simply a
reckoning of faith that is proposed, not a course of personal sufferings. The
subject discussed is whether the believer is to continue in slavery to sin (douleuein), as in his unregenerate days, or is the
mastery (kurieuo)
of sin to be immediately and wholly broken? It should be remembered that when
writing to the Philippians [page 13 - IF BY ANY MEANS] Paul was near the
close of his life and service. Could a life so holy
and powerful as his be lived without first knowing experimentally the truth taught in Romans
6? Did the Holy Spirit at any time
use the apostles to urge others to seek experiences which the writer had
not first known, and to which therefore he could be a witness? And again, if by
the close of that long and wonderful
career Paul was still only longing and striving to attain to death to the “old man” and victory over sin, when did he ever attain
thereto? Such reflections upon the apostle are unworthy, and, as has been indicated,
the experience set forth in Romans 6 is not
to be reached, or to be sought, by suffering, by attaining, by laying hold, by
pressing on, or any other such effort as is urged upon the Philippians, but by
the simple acceptance by faith of what God says He did for us in Christ in
relation to the “old man.”
Thus this
suggested exposition is neither sound experimental theology nor fair exegesis.
Paul indicates as plainly as language can do that the first resurrection may be
missed. His words are: “If by any means I may arrive
at the resurrection which is out from among the dead.” “If by any means”
(ei pos) “I may”
– “if” with the subjunctive of the verb ‑
cannot but declare a condition; and so on this particle in this place Alford says, “It
is used when an end is proposed, but failure is presumed to be possible”:
and so Lightfoot: “The apostle states not a positive assurance, but a modest
hope”: and Grimm‑Thayer
(Lexicon) give its meaning as, “If in any way, if by
any means, if possible,” and Ellicott
to the same effect says, “the idea of an attempt is conveyed,
which may or may not be successful.” Both Alford and Lightfoot regard the passage as dealing
with the resurrection of the godly from death, and Ellicott's note is worth giving in full. “‘The
resurrection from the dead’; i.e., as the
context suggests, the first resurrection (Rev.
20: 5), when, at the Lord's coming the dead in
Him shall rise first (1 Thess.
4. 16), and the quick be caught up to meet Him in
the clouds (1 Thess.
4: 17); comp. Luke
20: 35. The first resurrection will include
only true believers, and will apparently precede the second, that of non‑believers,
and disbelievers, in point of time. Any reference here to a merely ethical
resurrection (Cocceius) is wholly out of the [page 14 - HOPING
TO ATTAIN] question.” With the addition
that the second resurrection will include believers not accounted worthy of the
first, this note is excellent.
The sense and
force of the phrase “if by any means I may arrive”
are surely fixed beyond controversy by the use of the same words in Acts 27: 12: “the more
part advised to put to sea from thence, if by any means they could reach [arrive at] Phoenix, and winter there”
(ei pos dunainto katanteesantes), which goal they did not reach.
Further, speaking
upon the very subject of the resurrection and the kingdom promised afore by
God, Paul used the same verb, again
preceded by conditional terms, saying (Acts 26: 6 ‑
8), “unto which promise our twelve tribes,
earnestly serving God night and day, hope to
attain.”
Here the force of elpizei katanteesai “unto which they
hope to attain” is the same as his words in Philipplans ei pos kantanteeso, “if by any means I may attain.” This hope of the Israelite of sharing in Messiah's kingdom is plainly
conditional (Dan. 12: 2, 3). It is
assured to such an Israelite indeed as Daniel (12:
13), and to such a faithful servant of God in a period of great difficulty
as Zerubbabel (Hag. 2: 23).
It was also offered to Joshua the high priest, but upon conditions of obedience
and conduct. Joshua had been relieved of his filthy garments and arrayed in
noble attire (Zech. 3: 1‑5), but
immediately his symbolic justification before Jehovah had been thus completed,
and his standing in the presence of God assured, the divine message to him is
couched in conditional language: “And the Angel of
Jehovah protested unto Joshua, saying, Thus saith
Jehovah of hosts, If thou wilt walk in My ways, and if thou wilt keep My
charge, then thou also shalt judge My house, and shalt
also keep My courts, and I will give thee places to walk among these that stand
by” (ver. 6, 7).
It is at this
point that the “ifs” of the Word of God come in, and are so solemn and significant.
Whenever the matter is that of the pardon of sin, the justifying of the guilty,
the gift of eternal life, Scripture ever speaks positively and unconditionally.
The sinner is “justified freely by God's grace,”
and “the free gift of God is eternal life” (Rom. 3: 24; 6: 23), in which places the word “free” means free of conditions, not only of payment.
Eternal life therefore [page 15 - CONDITIONAL PROMISES] is what is called
in law an absolute gift, in contrast to a conditional gift. The latter may be
forfeited if the condition be not fulfilled; the former is irrevocable. But as
soon as the sinner has by faith entered into this standing before God, then the
Word begins at once to speak to him with “Ifs.” From this point and forward
every privilege is conditional.
It is truly “in all wisdom and prudence” that God has made known to
us the mystery of His will (Eph. 1: 8, 9).
The indispensable minimum, justification, without which no further blessing is
possible, and which the sinner is utterly unable to acquire, having no nature
that can produce ought acceptable to God, this God grants freely through the
atoning work of the Lord Jesus. But now
that a new nature has been implanted by grace, capable through the Spirit of
pleasing God, all attainment is made conditional upon the exertion that this
new nature is able to make, and must make. The whole promised land,
together with the title to share it and the power to conquer it, are gifts of
covenant grace, but no one shall get an
inch more than he sets his own foot upon, by the use of the power freely
granted to faith that obeys. And some who had equal title with the rest shall
not reach the inheritance at all, though neither shall they ever get back to
[* See
my “Firstborn
Sons.”]
The comments of Mr. David Baron upon the incident of
Joshua are impressive. (The
Visions and Prophecies of Zechariah, 103‑105.) I extract the following. “The word ‘protested’ means solemnly to protest, and is intended to express the solemnity and
importance of the charge about to be made. The expressions, ‘Walk in My ways’ and ‘Keep My charge’ are
frequently used in the Pentateuch for ‘holding on in the way of life, well‑pleasing
to God, and for keeping the charge given by God.’ The first part of the charge
refers particularly to Joshua's personal attitude towards the Lord ‑ to
fidelity in his personal relations to God; and the second to the faithful
performance of his official duties as
high priest. And the reward of his thus studying (in his personal and official
capacity) to present [page 16 - BARON ON
JOSHUA THE HIGH PRIEST] himself approved unto God
will be (a) ‘Then thou shalt
also judge My house . . .’ (b) ‘And shalt also keep My courts . . . ’ (c) But the climax of
promise in this verse is reached in the last clause, ‘And I
will give thee places to walk among these that stand by. . .’ ‘These that stand by’ ‑ as
we see by comparing the expression with verse
4 - are the angels, who were in attendance on
the Angel of Jehovah, and who ‘stood before
Him' ready to carry out His behests. The Jewish Targum
... is, I believe, nearer the truth [than many christian commentators] when it paraphrases the
words, ‘In the resurrection of the dead I will revive thee, and give thee feet
walking among these seraphim.’ Thus applied to the future the sense of the
whole verse would be this: 'If thou wilt walk in My ways and keep My charge,
thou shalt not only have the honour of judging My house
and keeping My courts, but when thy work on earth is done thou shalt be transplanted to higher service in heaven, and
“have places to walk” among these pure, angelic beings who stand by Me,
hearkening unto the voice of My word' (Ps.
103: 20, 21). Note the ‘ifs’ in this verse, my
dear reader, and lay to heart the fact that, while pardon and justification are
the free gifts of God to all that are of faith, having their source wholly in
His infinite and sovereign grace, and quite apart from work or merit on the
part of man, the honour and privilege of acceptable service and future reward
are conditional upon our obedience and faithfulness: therefore seek by His
grace and in the power of His Spirit to ‘walk in
His ways and to keep His charge,’ and in all things, even if thine
be the lot of a ‘porter’ or ‘doorkeeper’ in the House of God, to present
thyself approved unto Him, in remembrance of the day when ‘we must all be made manifest before the judgment‑seat
of Christ, that each one may receive the things done in the body, according to
what he hath done, whether it be good or bad’ (2 Cor. 5: 10).”
By virtue of their
relationship to Abraham all Israelites are natural sons of the kingdom which is
the goal of their national hopes according to the purpose and promise of the
God of Abraham; but the King has told them plainly, first, that Abraham, Isaac
and Jacob, together with all the prophets ‑ that is, all the men of faith
and devotion ‑ shall be in that [page 17 - ISRAEL AND THE KINGDOM] kingdom, but secondly, that it is very possible that some of the sons
of the kingdom may forfeit their entrance thereinto (Matt. 8: 10‑12: Luke 13 28‑29); for
there are those who may have been first in privilege and opportunity who shall be
last in final attainment.
If, therefore, an
Israelite attains to that kingdom it will be on the basis of a covenant made by
God with his federal head, Abraham; the source of which covenant is the grace
of God in Christ, the working principle
of which on man's side is faith proving itself by obedience. Wherein now
does this differ in basic principle from that new and better covenant which
introduces to better, that is, to heavenly privileges, to sharing the heavenly
sphere of that same kingdom, not only its earthward side? This new and higher
order of things is also derived from a covenant made with our federal Head, its source is in that same grace of God, its working
principle on our side is a faith that proves its quality in obedience.
Moreover, since
the man of true faith in that earlier age could aspire to this same heavenly
city and country as ourselves there manifestly was no difference in his
position and ours in this matter, though it may be he had only a more distant
view and not so full a revelation of the purpose of God in all this project. So
that if they of old could miss their
share, on what principle of righteousness shall we be
exempted from their need of diligence and obedience? Such exemption not
only would contain an invidious and inexplicable distinction, but it would prove
highly dangerous to our moral fibre and our zeal for godliness. And has not
this been seen? We heard it boldly stated from a platform, that the sharing in
the bridal glories of the wife of the Lamb is guaranteed absolutely no matter
what our practical life may or may not have been. But obviously if the very
highest of all honours cannot possibly be forfeited plainly nothing is forfeitable, and the whole notion of
reward for effort, so heavily emphasized in Holy Scripture, is swept away. For
ourselves we repudiate this common teaching as grossly immoral in its tendency,
the sheerest antinomianism, and flatly repugnant to the Word.
The Lord told His
disciples that status in the kingdom of the heavens was to be determined by the
measure of obedience and of having encouraged others to obedience, and [page 18 - STRETCHING
FORWARD] He as clearly
added that entrance itself into that kingdom was conditional upon a certain
degree of practical righteousness (Matt. 5: 19,
20). He further plainly warned the apostles themselves that except they
turned from their high-mindedness, and became as humble as a little child,
they should on no account enter into the kingdom (Matt.
18: 3). And this same possibility of missing our
inheritance by practical misconduct became a stock element in the apostolic
teaching of their converts, and most especially and notably of Paul (1 Cor. 6: 7‑10; Gal. 5:
19 ‑ 21; Eph. 5: 5).
It followed that
godly Israelites, bent on securing a share with Abraham in the kingdom of
Messiah, served God, as Paul says, with the utmost earnestness and ceaselessly:
“earnestly (en
ekteneia) serving God
night and day” (Acts 26: 7). It is an intensive form of this very word
which Paul employs in the Philippian passage (epekteinomenos) to describe his own strenuous
endeavours in godly service and suffering to reach that same goal, the out‑resurrection.
The word pictures the racer leaning far forward, stretched out toward the goal,
straining every fibre to win the coveted prize. It is the sharpest possible
rebuke to the complaisant idea that so great a reward is guaranteed to all
believers irrespective of piety, zeal, devotion, and life‑long
perseverance.
Nor is there
warrant for the assertion that to Paul only or even first were these themes
made known. He indeed learned them direct from the Lord, but so did other “holy apostles and prophets,” according to his own
statement (Eph.3: 5). These mighty truths
were as much the need of and as much the property of those many saints whom
Paul never taught as of that portion of the
When first writing
to the Thessalonians he could say that they already “knew perfectly”
about the day of the Lord, and when writing again he added that he had told
them about these things when with them (1 Ep. 5: 2; 2 Ep. 2: 5).
This is further shown by the way he speaks without explanation of those who “will be left unto the presence of the Lord,” to His parousia. How could he have
enlarged when with them upon these topics and yet not even himself have known
about the vital matter of the first resurrection? Yet this is necessarily
involved in the assertion that this truth was not made known before the first
letter to the Thessalonians.
II. WHO ARE THOSE “OF CHRIST JESUS”?
But it is urged
that two important scriptures upon the topic of resurrection seem to
contemplate all believers as sharing in the first resurrection. These are 1 Thess. 4 and 1 Cor. 15.
The former passage
speaks of those who “have fallen asleep through Jesus”
(1 Thess. 4: 14,
R.V. marg.). Is this of necessity the fact concerning
the end of all believers? Is there not such a thing as death through
Satan, acting as the
executioner of the sentence of the court of heaven against a believer's sins?. (1 Cor. 5: 5; 11: 30; Acts 5: 10: comp. 1 Tim. 1: 19, 20: 1 Jo. 5: 16, 17: Jas. 5: 19‑20).
Man through sin is
by nature in the power of Satan as the one who, by his angel servants, ends
human life when the [page 20 - DEATH IS GAIN] Most High
requires.*
But the sinner who in faith submits to Christ is transferred from Satan's
authority and is put under that of the Son of God (Col.
1: 13), and thenceforth the
Evil One cannot touch him (1 Jo. 5: 18). In
life his Lord protects him and in death puts him to sleep. But on account of
gross sin, of living again as if a servant of Satan, he may be “delivered unto Satan,” as regards his present
experience (Matt. 5: 23, 26; 6: 13; 18: 34, 35)
and his bodily life, in which case Satan may be permitted to cut short his
life, as the above cited passages show.
[* Heb. 2: 14; Acts 12: 23; Luke 12: 20, marg. “they,” i.e., angels: contrast Job 2. 6.]
It is not such A death that is “gain” within
the meaning of Phil. 1: 21. When Paul wrote
of death as “gain” he made no general statement
concerning all believers. He said, “For to me
to live is Christ and to die is gain.” At that time he was a prisoner,
and it was not certain that he would not shortly die for the faith. That was
the death immediately in question, and similarly such an one as the faithful
Stephen, dying as a witness for Christ, could say, “Lord
Jesus, receive my spirit.” The Lord accepted the trust, and the simple
record of that dreadful moment is, “he slept.”
Doubtless not martyrs alone but each who can truly say, “for to me to live is
Christ” may add truly, “to die is gain.”
Those who thus fall asleep will, as we expect, share in the first resurrection;
others have no guarantee that they will do so.
But it is further
urged that in 1 Cor. 15:
51, the Scripture declares that though “we shall
not all sleep,” but some be alive at the descent of the Lord, yet “we shall all be changed,” and surely,
says the objector with emphasis, all means all. Truly; but in verse 22, “For as in Adam all die, so also in the Christ shall all be made alive,” “all” means all of mankind, for every child of Adam
will at some time be raised by Christ (Jo. 5: 28,
29). But not
all at the first resurrection (Rev. 20: 5).
Therefore in this very chapter “all” means different things, and in verse 51 requires limiting, since it refers to a
smaller company than in verse 22.
The last and
immediate context is in verses 48, 49, which
speak of those who are to “bear the image of the
heavenly,” that is, are to share with the Lord in His heavenly form, [page 21 - MAGE
OF THE HEAVENLY] glory, and
sovereignty. Now the more difficult, and therefore the more probable reading
here is as in the R.V. margin: “As we have borne the
image of the earthy, let us also bear the image of the heavenly.” It is evident that
one copying a document is not likely to insert by mistake a more difficult word
or idea than is in the manuscript before him; so that, as a general rule, the
more difficult reading is likely to have been the original reading. Moreover,
in this case “let us also bear” is so well
attested by the manuscripts as to have been adopted as the true reading by Lachmann, Tischendorf, Tregelles, Alford, and Westcott and Hort, and is given as the text in the latest editions of the
Greek Testament, those of Nestle and
Von Soden.
Ellicott prefers the common reading,
but on subjective and internal grounds only, and his remark on the external
authority is emphatic: “It is impossible to deny that
the subjunctive, phoresomen is supported by very greatly
preponderating authority.” Alford
(on Romans 9: 5) well says, “that no conjecture [i.e., as to the true Greek text] arising from doctrinal difficulty is ever to be admitted in
the face of the consensus of MSS. and versions.”
By this
exhortation the apostle places upon Christians some responsibility to see that
they secure that image of the heavenly which is indispensable to inheriting “the kingdom of
God” (ver. 50). In this Paul is supported by Peter, who
also writes of that “inheritance which is reserved in
heaven” (1 Pet. 1: 4), which he
describes by the later statement that “the God of all
grace called you unto His eternal glory in Christ” (5: 10). But Peter goes on to urge the called to “give the more diligence to
make your calling and election sure” (2
Pet. 1: 10), thus showing that this calling to share the glory of God
has to be made sure. He is not at all discussing justification by faith or
suggesting that it must be made sure
by works done after conversion. Justification and eternal life are not in the least his subject. He writes expressly to
those “who have
[already] obtained like precious faith with us in the
righteousness of our God and Saviour Jesus Christ” (2 Pet. 1: 1). The calling of grace is to share in
God's own eternal glory, or, as Paul expresses it, to share God's “own kingdom and glory,” and he tells [page 22 - FIRSTFRUITS
RESURRECTION] us that he exhorted, encouraged, yea, and testified, to the
end that his children in faith should “walk worthily of
God” Who had called them to such supreme dignity (1 Thess. 2: 11 ‑ 12).
Since therefore
this most honourable calling must be “made sure”
by “walking worthily,” in order that we may be “counted worthy of the kingdom of God, for which ye also suffer” (2 Thess. 1: 5), the
reading “let us also bear the image of the heavenly”
becomes consistent and important. Thus 1 Cor. 15: 51, 52 is addressed to those who are
assumed (whether it be so or not) to have responded to that exhortation, and it
will mean that “we [who shall be accounted
worthy to bear that heavenly image] shall not all sleep,
but we shall all be changed.” Of that company it is strictly true that all means all.
Further, the
primary antecedent to verse 52 is in verse 23: “But each [shall be made alive] in his own order: Christ
the first‑fruits; then they that are Christ's in His Parousia:
then the end . . .” Does not the
whole sentence, in the light of other passages, carry the force: But each shall
be made alive, not all at the same hour, but each in his own class or company (tagma); first‑fruit, Messiah; then, next,
those of the Messiah, i.e., in His character as first‑fruit, at His Parousia; then, later, the end of all dispensations, involving
the resurrection of all, saved and unsaved, not before raised? Here is additional
reason for R. C. Chapman's view (to
be considered later) that the first resurrection is one of “first‑fruits,” and not
of all who will be finally raised in the “harvest”
of eternal life.
The translation “they that are Christ's” is not an exact rendering. The
Greek reads: “then those of the Christ (hoi tou Christou) in His Parousia,” and it is not a question of what these
words may mean to an English reader to‑day with his mind obsessed by a
certain theory, but what did they convey to a Greek ear of the day when they
were written. (See Appendix.)
In the ideal and
possibility all who are “in Christ” are “of Christ,” but that it is possible to be a believer
on Him unto salvation from hell and not to be of that privileged personal
circle which He will acknowledge before God, angels, and men as His companions,
is plainly taught in the [page 23 - THE KING'S COMPANIONS] Word. “If I wash thee not, thou [Peter, my believing, devoted
follower until now] hast no part with Me” – not “in Me,” that would have forfeited all, including salvation; but “with Me,”
which means that unwashed thou canst not continue in My company, My circle (John 13: 8). Again, “Thou
hast a few names in
[* Rev. 3: 4, 5:
comp. Luke 12: 9, with the use the apostle
and the early church made of that saying, as in 2
Tim. 2: 11‑13.]
The
fact that such as show special trust in and fidelity to God are granted
intimacy with Him beyond others is very natural and it runs throughout
Scripture. Instances are: Abraham, peculiarly the friend of God, from whom
Jehovah would hide none of His purposes (Gen. 18:
17‑19): Moses,
privileged beyond others of the people of God with mouth to mouth converse with
Him, because he was faithful (Num. 12: 7, 8): the prophets, without
informing whom Jehovah would not act (Amos 3: 7): of which Elisha
is a notable instance, as witness the tone of surprise in his words, “Jehovah hath hid it from me and hath
not told me!” (2 Kin. 4: 27). So God, reproving false prophets,
says: “Who [of them] hath
stood in the council of Jehovah?” and, “If they
had stood in My council” (Jer. 23: 18, 22) – not [page 24 - MY
FRIENDS IF] counsel, as A.V., but in “My secret
council,” as the Hebrew means, whither faithful prophets were transported
in spirit (1 Kin. 22: 19).
Thus also in the
New Testament we learn of very many hundreds who believed on Jesus when He was
here (1 Cor. 15: 6,
e.g.), but of these, some few enjoyed His special love, as the Bethany family (John 11: 5); a small band were honoured to share
peculiarly His toil, ministry, reproach, and company, and will therefore be specially honoured in His kingdom (Lk. 22: 28‑30: Rev. 22: 14): of which few
again a smaller circle were more especially favoured with His confidence (Lk. 9: 28: Matt. 26: 37), and one was loved above
them all (Jo. 13: 23; 19: 26, 21: 7, 20).
But as there is no
respect of persons, no favouritism, with the Lord, as we are repeatedly and
emphatically assured (Col. 3: 25: 1 Pet. 1: 17:
etc.), there must have been reason for this distinguishing of some. In John 15: 14, 15, Christ lays down its condition in
the words: “No longer do I call you slaves
[though it is to be well noted from the openings of the epistles that that is
exactly what they continued evermore to call themselves]; for the slave knoweth not what his
lord doeth: but I have called you friends; for all things that I heard from My
Father I have made known unto you.” Thus as with Abraham His friend, so
with these, He had hid nothing from them, had had no secrets, but had made
known unto them all that He had heard. But the terms of this incomparable
friendship were, and are, “Ye are My friends if ye do the things which I command you,”
a condition nowhere attached to the forgiveness of sins or to the obtaining of
eternal life, but of the simple nature of things in friendship between the Creator and the creature,
the King and the subject. To this privileged circle all indeed may attain, but it is reached by such only as pay the
(in reality) purely nominal but quite unavoidable price of full obedience to
their Saviour as their Lord.
Thus also in Hebrews 3: 12‑14, we learn that “we have become companions*
of the Messiah (metochoi tou Christou), [page 25 - GOD'S
HOUSE IF] if it be so that (eanper) we hold fast the beginning of our confidence
firm unto the end.” And in verse six
preceding we are told that we are the household over which the Son of God is
ruler “if we
hold fast our boldness and the glorying of our hope firm unto the end.”
Israel, though redeemed by blood and delivered, did not become the “house” of God until one whole year after redemption (Ex. 40: 1); and, though the people of God by
covenant and redemption, they only narrowly escaped the penalty of never having
God dwelling among them and so of not being to Him as a house (Ex. 33: 1 ‑ 3). To be a pardoned rebel,
restored to being a loyal subject of the sovereign, is one thing, and is great
indeed, but to be a member of the royal house, a chosen intimate of the
sovereign, is much greater. His pardon Of the rebel,
sealed and delivered, God never recalls; but the privilege of belonging to His Son's personal
circle is contingent and may be forfeited.
[* Darby,
New Translation, note: “I use the word ‘companions’
as being the same one as in c.1:9 metochoi, to
which, I doubt not, it alludes; that is, to the passage quoted, Ps. 45. ‘Partakers of
Christ’ has indeed quite a different sense.”]
The type of
tabernacle and temple when taken in its entirety shows that the “house” of God may
be forsaken by Him and be temporarily destroyed (Jer. 7: 12; Ps.
78: 60, 61; Jer. 12: 7; Ps. 74: 7; Matt. 23: 38); and the New Testament solemnly
declares the same as to the believer: " “Know ye
not that ye are a sanctuary of God, and the Spirit of God dwelleth
in you. If any man destroyeth the sanctuary of God
[mars it ‑ see Jer. 17: 7, 9,
where the LXX use this word ‑ so rendering the house unfit as a dwelling
for the Holy One], him shall God destroy (see 1 Cor. 5: 5: etc.), for the sanctuary of God is holy, which sanctuary ye are”
(1 Cor. 3: 16, 17). The believer who so lacks the spirit of Christ, and so walks according
to flesh, as to incur that judgment, will indeed, by the changeless grace of
God and through the eternal virtue of redemption by the precious blood of
Christ, be himself, as to his person, saved, yet only “so
as through fire” (ver. 15); but such will not be sharers of the privileges
pictured as being the “house” of God or “companions of the Messiah,” the King. But inasmuch
as all who rise in the first resurrection will share those very privileges (Rev. 20: 4‑6), it results that such as are
adjudged by the Lord unworthy thereof will not have part in that resurrection,
even as the many scriptures reviewed declare.
Thus the
expressions “fallen asleep through Jesus” and [page 26 - GRACE
AND FAITH] “those of Him in His Parousia” (those who are
to be companions with Him during the period of His “presence”
as King of this earth), both allow for the solemn possibility of some who might
have been “accounted worthy to attain unto that age [of the Presence] and the resurrection which is from among the dead” (Lk. 20: 35) failing to attain thereto.
Passages which
deal with a matter from the point of view of God's plan and willingness use
general, wide terms to cover and to disclose His whole provision. But these
must be ever considered in connection with any other statements upon the same
subject which reveal what God foresees of the human element which, by His own
creation of responsible creatures, He permits to interact with His working. Out
of these elements, through self‑will in the believer, arises the
possibility of individuals not reaching unto the whole of what the grace of God
had offered in Christ.
The isolation of
the former class of passages produced Calvinism, of the latter Arminianism. Truth
is found by construing all Scripture together. The principle of the divine
provision is grace: the principle
of our attaining is faith; and “according to your faith be it unto you” is the
inflexible condition. Now faith is not merely an apprehending of ideas by the
intellect, nor only the assent of the reason, though it includes of necessity
both of these elements: faith is a
principle of action which produces obedience to God and works out in love to
men. Incipient faith obeys God upon
the primary point of trusting to Christ for salvation from wrath, and it
secures that primary benefit for which it trusts. Developing faith obeys God
upon various successive points of His holy will; this issues
in sanctity of character and purity of conduct; and according to this advance
of faith in practical godliness will be the weight of glory which each will be
capable of bearing. Any particular possibility for which one's measure of
faith does not qualify will not be obtained. “The path
of sorrow is not indeed the meriting, but the capacitating preparation for
glory” (Moule on Rom. 8:
18).
It is
unquestionable that this unchanging, because unavoidable, rule operates undeviatingly as to benefits available in this life: the
Scripture shows plainly that it operates as to benefits available beyond this
life. Of these one is the [page 27 - ACCORDING TO FAITH] sharing in the
first resurrection and so inheriting the
“Such faith in
us, 0 God, implant,
And to our prayers Thy
favour grant,
Through Jesus Christ, Thine only Son,
Who is our fount of health alone.”
When it is said
that the acceptance of the believer in Christ involves the imputation to him of
all the acceptability of Christ, and that he is thereby qualified to share the
eternal glory of Christ in the presence of the Father, and that consequently
his own life and works can have no place in the matter, we point out that,
inasmuch as the merit of Christ is imputed judicially to every believer
equally, therefore every believer should of necessity share equally in all and
every privilege, and no distinction in reward would be possible, one star could
not then differ from another star in glory. But the opposite of this is taught
in the Word. The imputation of righteousness in Christ gives to every believer equality of standing and of opportunity,
but it does not, and cannot, do away with the necessity for faith, or alter the
rule that attainment is according to faith.
It being therefore
the case that the first resurrection, while open indeed to all, is a prize
which must be attained, and which, like every prize, may be forfeited, it is at
once made clear why in Rev. 20: 4‑6,
where the two resurrections are set, one at the opening of the Millennial
kingdom and the [page 28 - THE BOOK OF LIFE] other at its
close, it is said that “blessed and holy” is he
that hath part in the former, including pre‑eminently those who in
varying degree had suffered for and with Jesus and for the word of God. And
that some believers not accounted worthy of that resurrection, will rise in the
second resurrection unto eternal life, though they will have missed reigning
with Christ in His Kingdom, fitly explains why at the final judgment the book
of life will be opened and searched (Rev. 20: 11‑15).
Were it known as a fact that no possessors of eternal life would or could be
there this examining of the book of life would not be required, nor should we
expect the statement that “if any was not found written in the book”
he was cast into the lake of fire; for in that event the natural expression
would be “as their names were not found, etc.”
A correct
understanding of future events is of high value in the life of the Christian,
but it is not fundamental to the gospel, neither does any rearranging of the
order or particulars of those events imperil the faith. Men of undoubted
orthodoxy and greatly used of God have taken very divergent views on these
topics, which teaches that great names cannot prove any one view to be the true
meaning of Scripture. On the other hand, this divergence should assure
toleration and earnest research, so that more light may be
gained and ever closer agreement be reached.
It is worthy of
mention that Hudson Taylor and R. C. Chapman held the view here
advocated. In the Appendix to his small work on The Song of Songs, entitled
Union and Communion (ed. 5, p. 83), Hudson
Taylor wrote of such as “if saved, are only half‑saved:* who are for the present
more concerned about the things of this world than the things of God. To
advance their own interests, to secure their own comfort, concerns them more
than to be in all things pleasing to the Lord. They may [page 29 - HUDDSON
TAY4OR AND CHAPMAN] form part of that great
company spoken of in Rev. 7: 9 ‑ 17, who come out of the great tribulation, but they will hot
form part of the 144,000, ‘the first‑fruits
unto God and to the Lamb’ (Rev. 14: 1‑5). They have forgotten the warning of our Lord in Luke 21: 34 ‑ 36;
and hence they are not ‘accounted worthy to
escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of
Man.’ They have not, with Paul, counted 'all things but loss for the excellency
of the knowledge of Christ Jesus the Lord,' and
hence they do not ‘attain unto’ that resurrection from among the
dead, which Paul felt he might miss, but aimed to attain unto.
We wish
to place on record our solemn conviction that not all who are Christians, or
think themselves to be such, will attain to that resurrection of which
Robert Chapman about the year 1896 issued a series of Suggestive
Questions. Number 10 includes the following: “Are
not the redeemed in Rev. 4 and 5 the same with those in ch. 20: 4, 'Thrones and they sat upon
them'? (verse 5) 'This is the first
resurrection.' Is it not a resurrection of
first‑fruits?” . . . Now in
the essential nature of the case first‑fruits are but a portion of the
whole harvest, and so the Question proceeds: 'And the
rest of the dead (in the same verse) do they not include all the family of God?
not the wicked dead only. Hence, in verse 12, 'Another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead
were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to
their works' (verse
15). 'And
whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into.the lake
of fire’.”
Further as to this
last passage, the exact rendering in the Revised
Version, “if any was not found written in the book of life he was cast into the lake of
fire,” by its negative form strongly supports this view. If it should be
said of the crowd at a platform barrier that, If any
was found not to have a ticket he was refused admittance, no one would
suggest the meaning that not one of all who were there had a ticket or was allowed to pass. [page
30 - DOCTRINE
AND HOLINESS]
The late Mr. E. S. Pearce was intimately acquainted
with Mr. Chapman's views for he lived with him many years. He wrote to me as
follows: “It was Mr. Chapman's desire that, by so
walking with God and by obedience to His Word in all things, he might not shut himself out from the
honour of reigning with Christ. He saw no authority from the Scripture for
saying that all the children of God would. Rev.
20: 4, 'And they
sat upon them,' Mr. Chapman considered were
distinguished persons, not all the saints."
Now from verses 4 and 6
of Rev. 20, “they
lived and reigned” and “Blessed and holy is he
that hath part in the first resurrection ... they
shall reign,” it is clear that all who rise in the first resurrection do
reign, from which it certainly follows that such as are not accounted worthy to
reign do not rise at that time. Who shall say to what large degree this
searching, conscience‑quickening belief contributed to the blamelessness
of Mr. Chapman's beautiful life? The doctrine of the coming of our Lord is in
the Scripture so set forth as to promote holiness of life (1 John 3: 3; 2 Pet. 3: 11 ‑ 14; 1 Pet. 1: 13).
That line of exposition will be found most accordant with Scripture which makes
the most imperative demand for holiness.
To gain that prize I towards
that goal will struggle
Which
God has set before;
To
gain that prize 'gainst sin and death I'll battle
And
with the world make war;
And if
it brings me here but shame and troubles
And
scorn, if pain life fills,
Yet
seek I nothing of earth's empty baubles;
My God
alone my longing stills.
To
gain that prize, to reach that crown I'm pressing
Which
Christ doth ready hold;
I mean
His great reward to be possessing,
His booty for the bold.
I will
not rest, no weariness shall stay me,
To
hasten home is best,
Where
I some day in peace and joy shall lay me
Upon
my Saviour's heart and rest.
(From the German). [page 31 – THE FIRST RESURRECTION]
III. THE PERIOD OF THE PAROUSIA.
The first
resurrection, accompanied by the removal of the living, will take place at a
certain moment when the Lord Himself shall descend from His present place at the
right hand of the throne of God, in
the upper heavens, to the neighbourhood of the earth (1
Thess. 4: 15 ‑ 17). He is now absent
from the earth: then He will be present again. This will be the commencement of
His Parousia (presence). The Word of God shows that
this descent will take place at the end of that Great Tribulation which is to
be inflicted upon the saints by the Beast at the very close of this age. It has
been suggested that the phrase sat down on the right hand of the Majesty in the
heights (Heb. 1: 3) does not imply place,
but merely dignity. Yet this will not be said of 1
Kin. 2: 19: “The king sat down on his throne,
and caused a throne to be set for the king's mother, and she sat on his right
hand.” There is a spot in the heaven of heavens where the Father is throned in light unapproachable by man in the flesh. There
the Son sits at the right hand of God, and thence He will descend at the hour
which the Father has set within his own authority.
1. Christ stated that a time would come when His enemies
should “see the Son of man sitting at the right hand of
power, and coming on the clouds of heaven” (Matt.
26: 64): from which it would appear that down to an hour when He is to
be seen by the godless at the right hand of power He remains there, which place
therefore He did not leave for the air several years before that time. Christ
had said before that the hour when the world should thus see Him would follow the
Great Tribulation (Matt. 24: 29, 30).
2. Now under seal 6 (Rev. 6)
the godless are shown fleeing in terror from the face of God and from the wrath
of the Lamb and are hiding in the rocks. This accords with paragraph
one above and with Isa. 2: 10, 19, 21. The latter passage fixes
the hour as that when “Jehovah ariseth
to shake terribly the earth,” again showing at what point the Lord leaves
the throne on high. Seal 6 repeats the many signs in heaven and earth which
Christ said should follow the Tribulation (Matt.
24: 29, 30), which confirms that the [page 32 - THE BLESSED HOPE] “arising” of the Lord and
the appearing of His glory to men follow that Tribulation.
3. According to Paul himself the “blessed hope” of the church is the “appearing of the glory of our great God and Saviour
Jesus Christ” (Tit. 2: 13), not any
secret, invisible event. The words in italics are a repetition of words used by
Christ on the same topic (Matt. 24: 29, 30).
So that at the close of His then presence with His disciples the Lord pointed
them onward to His appearing in glory, and they adopted that appearing as their
hope. But the Lord stated that this His appearing would be after the signs that
should immediately follow the Great Tribulation.
The suggestion
that the “blessed hope” is a first event and the
appearing a second is denied by the grammar of the passage in Greek. “Hope and appearing belong together” (Alford. See also
4. The Lord stated next (Matt.
24: 31) that at that moment of His appearing He would gather together
His elect. That the elect are Christians, not Jews, is certain. (a) No
gathering of Jews to
5. Christ further stated that the gathering of the elect
should be accompanied by “a great sound of a trumpet”
(Matt. 24: 31). This is repeated in 1 Thess. 4: 16, and 1 Cor. 15: 52 describes
this as the “last trump.” The last trump of Scripture
is recorded in Rev. 11: 15‑18. Under
it four events are grouped: (1) The anger of the nations and God's wrath upon
them; (2) The time of the dead to be judged ‑ the
godly dead, for it is before the millennium: comp. Dan.
7: 22; (3) The rewarding of the prophets, saints, and those who fear
God; (4) The destruction of the destroyers of the earth.
Thus the raising
and rewarding of the godly take place at the same epoch as the destruction of
the wicked, and all is after the Tribulation, for it is the time of the
destruction of the Beast, and is after he has persecuted, and has killed the
Two Witnesses in Jerusalem (Rev. 11: 1 ‑ 13).
6. This is confirmed by the declaration of the strong
angel whose message follows trumpet 6 (Rev. 10: 5 ‑
7). He announces that the mystery of God shall be completed during the
period of the seventh trumpet. Paul taught concerning: (1) the mystery
(secret); (2) that it was according to the gospel (good tidings); (3) that it was made
known according to the commandment of the eternal God; (4) and that this was done through the
writings of the prophets (Rom. 16: 25 ‑ 27). The angel repeats these
four particulars concerning (1) the mystery; (2) that it was according to the good tidings (the same word as gospel); (3) that it
was declared
by God; (4) through His
servants the prophets. The two
passages read thus:
Rom.
16: 25‑27: “Now unto Him that is able to
establish you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of
the mystery which hath been [page 34 - SCRIPTURE
TESTIMONY ONE] kept in silence
through times eternal, but now is manifested, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the eternal God,
is made known unto all the nations unto obedience of faith. . . .”
Rev.
10: 7: “. . . in the days of the voice of the seventh
angel, when he is about to sound, then is finished the mystery of God, according to the good
tidings which He
declared to His servants the
prophets."
The attempt to
make out that these are not the same mystery, and that there are two divine
purposes of which all four particulars are equally and separately true, will
surely only be made in the interests of some special theory of interpretation.
The mystery that
was such a vital element in apostolic teaching is shown by Eph. 3: 1 ‑ 13 to be the gathering of the
church from Jews and Gentiles, and therefore was it to be made known unto all the
nations. This work will be completed by the resurrection and rapture, which will
be under trumpet 7, which will be after the Tribulation, as shown above under
(5).
7. Other Scriptures also reveal this same grouping of
events. In 2 Thess. 1: 6 ‑
8, it is said that the delivering of the saints from trouble at the
hands of the godless will be at the time of the destruction of the latter by
the Lord at His revelation in flaming fire with His angels. Thus the
1 Thess. 4: 13 ‑ 18 and 5: 1 ‑
11, belong together, though often arbitrarily dissevered, and they
similarly associate these events for the godly and the godless respectively.
The “times and the seasons” of verse 1 necessarily means the times and the
seasons in which will come the events just mentioned. No other events have been
mentioned, so that there is no other antecedent to the expression, which thus
connects the paragraphs.
Thus the earliest
revelations by Christ, the middle period teachings of Paul and others (see 2 Pet. 3: 15, that Peter and Paul taught alike),
and the latest through John (Rev. 10: 11),
agree.
8. This harmony is seen further in the passages which
picture the Lord as coming as a thief. [page 35 - COMING
AS A THIEF]
Christ used the
figure to warn His own servants of His own household (Matt.
24: 42, 44: Lk. 12: 39). Peter,
who heard that warning, repeats it to those who had “obtained
like precious faith” with himself “in the
righteousness of our God and Saviour Jesus Christ” (2 Pet. 3: 10, 11; 1: 1). Paul reminds the
Thessalonians that they, by his particular instruction, knew of that thief‑like
coming, and so they need not be caught unawares by its unannounced arrival, only
they must be very careful to keep awake, continuing watchful and sober (1 Thess. 5: 21).
The Lord from heaven repeats these warnings to the church at
Thus it appears
that the “house,” and the Lord's servants in it,
continue on earth in His absence down to the close of
the Tribulation era when the Beast is preparing for the final battle.
9. That the first resurrection takes place after the
Tribulation is clear from the fact that those martyred by the Beast share
therein (Rev. 20: 4). The supposition that
this resurrection will be completed in stages, of which this will be the last,
is not needed and seems without Scripture authority.
10. In Rev. 14
there is a series of six visions. In the first a company of saints are seen on
the Mount Zion with the Lamb, in the region of the throne of God, for the
elders and the living creatures are present, before the throne.* These saints have been “purchased
out of the earth” (showing that they are not then on earth), and they
learn [page
36 - THE
HARVEST] the song of heaven. In the second vision the hour of judgment
strikes; that is, the end days begin. In the third we learn that the Harlot,
[* In Revelation “before the throne” always means a heavenly locality,
not on earth. It is the place of the presence of God, of the elders, living
creatures, angels, the glassy sea, the heavenly throne and altar. See 4: 5, 6, 10; 7: 9; 8: 3; 14: 3; 20: 12; all its
occurrences.]
Here again the
presence on the clouds, with the gathering up of the godly, is put between the
Tribulation and the destruction of the lawless. With unique emphasis Christ had
taught that the “wheat” must remain in the field
with the “tares” “until
the harvest” and that the harvest is the “consummation
of the age” (Matt. 13: 30 ‑ 39), not any point of time prior to the End
Days. In Rev. 14 this harvest is shown
appropriately as the last great event but one in this age.
The whole New
Testament agrees in putting at this point the appearing in glory of the Son of
man, which was seen from afar by Old Testament prophets; nor does the Scripture
know of any earlier descent of the Lord from the throne to the air. And so Paul
in one sentence (2 Thess.
2: 1 ‑ 5) grouped
together (a) the Parousia, (b) our gathering together
unto the Lord, and (c) the Day of the Lord, and most expressly announced and
warned that these all must be preceded by the apostasy and the revelation of
the Man of Sin. George Muller said:
“having been a careful diligent student of the Bible
for nearly fifty years, my mind has long been settled upon this point, and I
have not the shadow of a doubt about it. The Scripture declares plainly that
the Lord Jesus will not come until the apostasy shall have taken place, and the
man of sin, the ‘son of perdition’ (or personal Antichrist) shall have been revealed, as
seen in 2
Thess. 2.”
IV. THE PRE‑TRIBULATION RAPTURE.
There are two principal views upon the
matters here [page 37 - ESCAPE POSSIBLE] considered: one,
that the Parousia will commence prior to the Times of
the End, and that at its inception all believers of the heavenly calling, dead
and living, will be taken to the presence of the Lord in the air; the other,
that the Parousia will occur at the close of the
Great Tribulation, until when no believers will be raised or changed. The one
view says that no believers will go into the End Times, the other that none
then living will escape them. The one involves that the utmost measure of
unfaithfulness or carnality in a believer puts him in no peril of forfeiting
the supreme honour of rapture or of having to endure the dread End Days: the
other view involves that no degree of faithfulness or of holiness will enable a
saint to escape those Days. As regards this matter, godliness and
unfaithfulness seem immaterial on either view; which raises a doubt of both
views.
Our study thus far
has shown that the former view is unfounded: we have now to see that the latter
is partly right and partly wrong. It is right in asserting that the Parousia will commence at the close of the Great
Tribulation, but wrong in declaring that no saints living as the End Times near
will escape that awful period.
1. For our Lord Jesus Christ has declared distinctly that escape is possible. In Luke 21 is a record of instruction given by Him to
four apostles on the
Then He mentions
the disturbances in nature and the fears of mankind that are grouped under seal
6 in Rev. 6: 12 ‑ 17, and adds explicitly
that “then shall they
see the Son of Man coming in a cloud with power and great glory,” and
that when these things begin His disciples may know that their redemption draweth nigh (ver. 27, 28).
In concluding this
outline of the period of the Beast the Lord then uttered this exhortation and
promise: “But take heed to yourselves, lest haply your
hearts be overcharged with surfeiting, and drunkenness, and cares of this life,
and that day come on you suddenly as a snare: for so shall it come upon all
them that dwell on the face of all the earth. But watch ye
at every season, making supplication, that
ye may prevail to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to
stand before the Son of Man.”
This declares
distinctly: (1) That escape is possible from all those
things of which Christ had been speaking, that is, from the whole End‑times.
(2) That that day of testing will be universal, and inevadable
by any then on the earth, which involves the removal from the earth of any who
are to escape it. (3) That those who are to escape will be taken to where He,
the Son of Man, will then be, that is, at the throne of the Father in the
heavens. They will stand before Him there. (4) That there is a fearful peril of
disciples becoming worldly of heart and so being enmeshed in that last period.
(5) That hence it is needful to watch, and to pray ceaselessly, that so we may
prevail over all obstacles and dangers and thus escape that era.
This most
important and unequivocal statement by our Lord sets aside the opinion that all
Christians will escape irrespective of their moral state, and also negatives
the notion that no escape is possible. There is a door of escape; but as with
all doors, only those who are awake will see it, and only those who are in earnest
will reach it ere the storm bursts. In every place in the New Testament the
word “escape” has its natural force ‑ ekpheugo, to flee
out of a place or trouble and be quite clear thereof.*
It never means [page 39 - THE ESCAPE
COMPLETE] to endure the trial successfully. In this very discourse of
the Lord it is in contrast with the statement, “He that
endureth (hupomeno) to the end [of these things] the same shall be saved” (Matt.
24: 13). One escapes, another
endures.
[* It comes only at Luke
21: 36; Acts 16: 27; 19: 16; Rom. 2: 3;2 Cor. 11: 33: 1 Thess. 5: 3: Heb.
2: 3; 12: 25. In comparison with
The attempt to
evade the application of this passage to Christians on the plea that it refers
to “Jewish” disciples of Christ, is baseless:
(a) No “Jewish” disciples of Christ are known
to the Scriptures (Gal. 3: 28: Eph. 2: 14 ‑ 18).
(b) The God‑fearing remnant of
2. In harmony with
this utterance of our Lord is His further statement to the church at
Philadelphia (Rev. 3: 10): “Because thou didst keep the
word of My patience, I also will keep thee from (ek) the hour of
trial, that hour which is to come upon the whole inhabited earth, to try them
that dwell upon the earth.” Here also are declared: (a) The universality
of that hour of trial, so that any escape from it must involve removal; (b) the
promise of being kept from it, (c) the intimation that such preservation is the
consequence of a certain moral condition: “Because thou didst keep
... I also will keep.” As this is addressed to a
church no question of a “Jewish” application
can arise. Nor do known facts or the Scriptures allow of the supposition that
every Christian keeps the word of Christ's patience (Matt.
24: 12; Rev. 2: 5: Gal. 6: 12: Col. 4: 14 with 2 Tim. 4: 10 concerning
Demas); so that this promise cannot be stretched to mean all believers.
In The Bible
Treasury, 1865, p. 380, there
is an instructive note by J. N. Darby (see
also Coll. Writings, vol. 13, Critical
[page 40
- THE
WOMAN IN HEAVEN]
1, 581) on the
difference between apo and ek. The former regards
hostile persons and being
delivered from them; the latter refers to a state and being kept from getting into it. On Rev.
3: 10 he wrote: “So in Rev. 3 the faithful are
kept from getting into this state, preserved from getting into it. or, as we say, kept out of it. For the words here answer
fully to the English ‘out of’ or ‘from’.” That the thought is not being kept from being
injured in soul by the trials is implied in the expression “Keep thee out of that hour”;
it is from the
period of time itself that the faithful are to be kept, not merely from its
spiritual perils.
3. Of this escape and preservation there are two
pictures as there are two promises.
In Rev. 12 is a vision of (a) a woman; (b) a man‑child
whom she bears; (c) the rest of her family. Light on this complex figure may be
gained from Hosea 4 and Isa. 49: 17 ‑ 21; 50: 1.
As to this “woman” the dominant fact is that at one and the same
time she is seen in heaven arrayed with heavenly glory and on earth in sorrow
and pain. This simultaneous and contradictory experience is true of the
As to the Man‑child,
his birth and rapture, as with the whole of this book from c. 4: 1, pointed to events which the angel
distinctly said were future to the time of the visions. There is no exception
to this, and therefore there is no possible reference to the resurrection and
ascension of Christ. Nor, in the fact, did our Lord at His birth escape from
Satan by rapture to the throne of God: on the contrary, the Dragon slew Him in
manhood and only thereafter did He ascend to heaven. Nor at the ascension of
Christ was Satan cast [page 41 - THE MAN CHILD] out of heaven.
Thirty years later, when Paul wrote to the Ephesians, he and his servants were
still there (Eph. 6:
12), and another thirty years later again, when John saw the visions,
his ejection was still future (Rev. 12).
The identity of
this Man‑child is indicated by the statement that he “is to rule all the nations with a rod of iron,” for
this is a repetition of the promise (Rev. 2: 26, 27),
“And he that overcometh, and
he that keepeth My works unto the end [comp.
the keeping the word of My patience, as above], to him
will I give authority over the nations, and he shall rule them with a rod of
iron.” This promise is given only
to Christ and the overcomers of the churches. As
it cannot here (Rev. 12) apply to Him it can
only apply to them.
This removal of
the Man‑child cannot be the event foretold in 1
Thess. 4: 15 ‑ 17, for those there in
view will be taken up only as far as to the air around this earth when the Lord
descends thereto from heaven, but this removal takes the Man‑child to the
throne of God, which is where Christ now is, in the upper heavens. This fulfils
the promise that such as prevail to escape shall “stand
before the Son of Man.”
As we have seen,
the Lord does not descend from heaven till the close of the Great Tribulation,
not before Satan is cast down. Moreover, this one child can be only a part of
the whole family, not the completed church in view in 1
Thess. 4 *
and 1 Cor. 15.
The “woman” out of whom he is born remains on earth, and after his ascent the “rest
of her seed” are persecuted by the Beast; but his removal is before the
Beast is even on the scene or Satan is cast out of heaven. Thus those who will
form this company escape all things [page 42 - FIRSTI7RUITS, HARVEST, VINTAGE] that will occur in
the End‑times, as Christ promised; and the identification with the overcomers declares that they had lived that watchful,
prayerful, victorious life, upon which, as the Lord said, that escape will
depend.
[* In 1 Thess. 4: 15, 17 the word perileipo, “that are
left,” deserves notice. It is not found elsewhere in the New Testament,
but the force may be seen in the LXX of Amos. 5: 15, and of the verb (in some
editions) at 2 Chron. 34: 21; Hag. 2: 3. In each case it means, to be left after others are gone.
So the lexicons also, and they are confirmed by The Vocabulary of the Greek Testament. In this place it seems redundant save
on our view that the rapture there in question is at the close of the
Tribulation and that some saints will not have been left on earth until that
event, but will have been removed alive earlier; for to have marked the
contrast with those that had died it would have been enough to have said “we that are alive,” without twice repeating this
unusual word.]
Consequent upon
this removal of the watchful, Satan is cast out of heaven, and presently brings
up the Beast, who persecutes the rest of the woman's family (12: 17, 18; 13: 7 ‑ 10). So that one section
of the family escapes the End‑times by being rapt to heaven, and the
rest, the more numerous portion, as the term
indicates, go into the Great Tribulation. These latter are such as “keep the commandments of God and hold the testimony of Jesus”
(ver. 17). In Rev. 14: 12, such are termed “the saints,” which in New Testament times, was the term regularly used by Christians
of one another; and among their number John had already included himself (1: 2, 9). It
covers therefore the
4. The second picture of this pre‑Tribulation
rapture is given in Rev. 14. In this chapter
there are six scenes: ‑
1. “First‑fruits” with the Lamb on the
2. The hour of
judgment commences (6, 7).
3. “
4.
The Beast period is present and persecution is in progress (9 - 13).
5.
The Son of Man on a white cloud reaps His “harvest”
(14 ‑ 16).
6.
The “vintage” of the earth is gathered, and is
trodden in the winepress on earth (17 ‑ 20).
The agricultural
figure wrought into this chapter by the Holy Spirit is the key to its teaching.
In the early summer the Jew was to gather a sheaf of corn as soon as enough was
ripe, and this was to be presented to God in the temple at
The last scene is the destruction of the Beast by the
Lord at His descent to
The First‑fruits
cannot be
a picture of the whole of the redeemed as they will finally appear at the
end of the drama of those days, for first‑fruits cannot be more than a portion of the whole harvest, neither can first‑fruits describe the final ingathering. It were
a contradiction to speak thus. Firstfruits must be
gathered first, before the reaping of the remainder. The number 144,000 need
not be taken literally. In the Apocalypse numbers are sometimes literal, but
sometimes figurative.
As has been noted
above, these had been purchased out of the earth, which shows that they were
not then on earth, and they learn the song of the heavenly choir. Nor can this
The 144,000 of ch. 7 are a different company. They are the godly
Remnant of Israel seen on earth after the Appearing and the gathering of the
elect to the clouds, and are sealed (comp. Ezek. 9)
so as to be untouched by the wrath of the Lamb now to be poured upon the
godless (Zeph, 2: 3; Isa. 26: 20, 21).
The identity of these
First‑fruits is revealed by a similar means to that which reveals the
identity of the Man‑child. These persons are shown as connected with the
Father, the Lamb, and the Mount Zion, which also refers back to the promises to
the overcomers, and shows that the First‑fruits
will be a portion of the company of the victors, who, it is [page 44 - TWO RAPTURES] promised, will be
marked as connected with the Father, the Son, and the New Jerusalem (Rev. 3: 12). These three marks of identification
come together in these two passages only. Now the moral features attributed to
these First‑fruits show that they had lived just that pure, faithful Christian
life which necessarily results from watchfulness, prayerfulness, and patient
obedience to the words of Christ, as inculcated in the corresponding passages
quoted.
As the Man‑child
and the rest of the woman's seed were but one family, only removed in two
portions, one before the Beast and the other after his persecutions, so first‑fruits
and harvest were grown from one sowing in one field, only they were reaped in
two portions, one before the hour of judgment and the other after the Beast had
persecuted. We have remarked above that these latter are termed “saints,”
and that this was the regular title that
Christians gave to one another; that it is amplified by the double
description “they that keep the commandments of God and
the faith of Jesus,” and that in this description John had before twice
included himself; so that the terms mean that company in which John had membership,
the church of God. Moreover, as the
Jewish remnant will not have owned Jesus during the period in view the terms can apply only to Christians.
Finally, as
between the gathering of the sheaf of first‑fruits and the ingathering of
the harvest there came the intensest summer heat, so
between the removal of the First‑fruits and the reaping of the Harvest
there is placed (ver. 9 ‑ 13) the Great Tribulation, that final
persecution which while, like all persecution, it will wither the unrooted stalk (Matt. 13: 21),
ripens the matured grain. It is
ripeness, not the calendar or the clock, that determines the time of reaping (Mk. 4: 29). The Heavenly Husbandman reaps no
unripe grain: hence, “the hour to reap is come”
when the harvest is “dried up” (Rev. 14: 15), for the dryness of the kernel in the
husk is its fitness for the gamer and for use. Thus the Great Tribulation will be a true mercy to the Lord's people
by fully developing and sanctifying them for their heavenly destiny and glory.
It thus appears that the foretold order of
events will be: ‑
1. The removal of
such as prevail to escape the Times of the End. These will be taken up to God
and to His [page 45 - THE FORETOLD ORDER] throne on the
2. The Beast arises and persecutes.
3. The Lord
descends to the clouds and gathers together His elect (Matt.
24: 29 – 31; 1 Cor. 15: 51, 52; 1 Thess.
4: 15‑17; Tit. 2: 13; Rev. 14: 14 ‑ 16). At this time there
will be the first resurrection. Each who shall be accounted worthy of the
coming age will “arise into his lot at the end of the days,” not sooner,
certainly not before the End days have commenced (Dan.
12: 13). Nor may we assume of the Firstfruits
that they will have priority in the Kingdom over equally faithful saints of
earlier times.
4. After an
interval the Lord descends to the
It is therefore
our wisdom to give earnest, unremitting attention to our Lord's most solemn
exhortation “take heed to yourselves, lest haply your
hearts be overcharged with surfeiting and drunkenness [that is, fleshly
indulgence], and cares of this life [that is,
its burdens through either poverty or riches], and that
day come on you suddenly as a snare: for so shall it come on all them that
dwell on the face of all the earth. But watch ye at every season, making
supplication, that ye may prevail to escape all these things that shall come to
pass, and to stand before the Son of Man (Lk. 21: 34 ‑
36).
Oh, dare and sufler all things!
Yet but a stretch of road,
Then
wondrous words of welcome,
And then ‑ the FACE OF
GOD!
Many of the
perplexities felt as to these themes are caused by misconceptions upon three
subjects ‑ the constitution of man, the place and state of the dead, the
judgment of the Lord upon His people. Some discussion of these matters follows.
[page 46]
S0UL OR SPIRIT, WHICH IS THE
MAN?
V. AN ENQUIRY AS TO MAN'S CONSTITUTION
AND FUTURE,
WITH REMARKS ON HADES AND
As treasures heavy
and valuable may hang upon a small hook, so consequences weighty and far‑reaching
may follow the settlement of what may seem a small point.
Because at death the spirit of man returns to God who
gave it (Eccl. 12: 7), it is generally
thought that man goes then to God in heaven. If the passage meant this it would teach that the ungodly, as well as
the godly, go to heaven at death, for it refers to man as man. This alone
shows that this is not the sense of the passage. But further, the meaning given assumes that the man, the
conscious entity, the person, the ego, is his spirit. But if this is not so,
then the opinion stated, has no support in Scripture.
Again, many annihilationists deem that the man, the person, consists of
two parts only, the body and the spirit, and that when these are parted at
death the person, the conscious, ego, ceases to exist until the two parts are
reunited m resurrection. But if the conscious personality has ceased to exist,
it is extremely difficult to conceive that it is the identical conscious person
that comes into existence again. Would it not rather be a new personality that
comes into being at resurrection? How can continuity of personality persist
during non‑existence, and how, then, shall this new man be held morally
responsible for the deeds of that former person, and be righteously liable to
judgment therefor?
Moreover, this would involve (what indeed we have
heard asserted) a disintegration of the person of the Man, Christ Jesus, between
His death and resurrection. According to the theory, during that period His
humanity was non‑existent. So that whilst the Son of
God existed, Christ did not until resurrection. This is fatal heresy,
and alone forbids the doctrine in question.
The alternative
must be for the annihilationist to adopt the first mentioned view,
that personality attaches to the spirit, as others of that school do.
But if it be, that the soul is the [page 47 – MAN FORMED] person, and that after death the soul has its
own separate existence, then the whole assertion
fails.
Inasmuch therefore as most serious issues
are involved, this inquiry is of great practical importance. Indeed. it may be said that many most interesting and profitable
themes can only be understood aright
by a right understanding of our question ‑ Soul or Spirit, Which is the
Man?
It must here be
remarked that this theme, like all such profounder topics of the Word of God, cannot be studied in the English Authorised Version. It is not possible, on account of the
deliberate irregularity in translation used by the Translators so as to secure
pleasing English. We quote here generally the English Revised Version, and sometimes the New Translation of J. N. Darby (Morrish,
1. THE CREATION OF MAN.
The
creation of man is described in Gen. 2: 7: “And Jehovah Elohim formed man, dust
of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man
became a living soul.”
Here
are three stages. 1. A material form fashioned but of material particles, dust.
This is the body. 2. A somewhat inbreathed by God, named in Eccl. 12: 7, “spirit.” That the “breath”
of Gen. 2: 7, and the “spirit” of Eccl. 12: 7
are one is confirmed by the combination of the two terms in Gen. 7: 22: “All in whose
nostrils was the breath of the spirit
of life.” 3. The result, that man became what is here called “soul,” a living soul.
1. As to the body, it is to be observed that
it was not itself the man. It lay there, fashioned and prepared, but the man was not yet there. The body was an
inanimate form, which preceded the existence of the man. This as against the Sadducean materialist and his assertion that the body is
the man, and that when it dies his existence ends.
2. The same is true of the breath or spirit,
which God inbreathed. It also was in existence prior to the man, for God
breathed it into the body. It was not God; it is not divine: it is not said
that God breathed of Himself, or [page 48 - MAN A TRINITY] breathed His
Spirit into the body, but a somewhat not to be defined by us as to its
substance or nature, but which God terms “spirit.”
In Zech. 12: 1 it is declared to be a
created thing, a thing “formed,” as an article
made by a potter. It is the same word as “potter”
in Zech. 11: 13, and is found first at Gen. 2: 8, God “formed man.”
This as against the pantheist, and the doctrine akin to pantheism, that there
is a measure of divinity in all men by creation. The immanence of God in all
creation is truth, the identity of all things, or of
any created thing, with God is error, deadly error.
Thus the spirit
was not the man, for he only came into existence by reason of the inbreathing of the
spirit into the body, which conjunction of two separate, previously existing
things, resulted in the creation of a third: “man
became a living soul.”
3. It remains only that the man is what he is here described
to be, “a living soul.” The man is the soul, not the spirit, even as he is not the body.
This as against the annihilationist theory above mentioned.
It is fairly
certain that every false philosophy that has beclouded the thoughts of man had
been instilled into men's minds by spirits of darkness in
This threefold
composition of man is implied everywhere in the Word of God, and sometimes is
distinctly stated. Thus in 1 Thess.
5: 3: “And the God of peace himself sanctify you
wholly; and may your spirit and soul and body be preserved entire, without
blame in the parousia of our
Lord Jesus Christ.” The body is distinguished from the spirit in James 2: 26: “The body apart
from (the) spirit is dead”; and the soul
from the spirit in Heb. 4: 12, “The word of God . . . piercing to the
dividing of soul and spirit.”
The man has a body
with which he operates upon the material world; but the body is not the man. He
has also [page 49 - DEATH] a spirit with
which he has dealings with the spiritual realm; but the spirit is not the man. The man himself, the conscious ego, is the
soul. Personality in man inheres in the
soul, which will become yet more apparent as we proceed, but may be seen in
such passages as Ex. 1: 5: “all the souls were seventy souls”; Lev. 4: 2: “if a soul shall
sin” 5: 2: “if
a soul
touch”; Lev. 5: 4: “if a soul swear” 7: 18: “the soul
that eateth”, etc., etc. The evident sense is:
“If a person” do this or that.
See also LXX Ezk. 16: 5.
2. THE MEANING OF THE WORD DEATH.
Now “the body without spirit is dead” (Jas. 2: 26), and the soul, the man, cannot use or
inhabit a dead body. The spirit imparts to the body vitality, animation, and
makes it usable by man. Thus so long as the two are united man is a living
soul, but when God recalls the spirit
which He gave, the body ceases to have life, the soul vacates it, and
thenceforth, until resurrection, the man is dead.
But it is
carefully and always to be remembered that in Scripture the term “life” does not mean simply existence, but much more
and much rather it means a certain mode or quality of existence, and equally so
the term “death,” therefore, does not mean, non‑existence,
but an opposite state or mode of existence. Many things exist which do not
exhibit the property called “life.” All annihilationist reasoning which we have read assumes this
false sense of the words “life” and “death” and cannot proceed without it.
Yet in some real
sense Adam died the day he disobeyed God, according to the sentence, “in the day that thou eatest of it
thou shalt certainly die” (Gen. 2: 17), but he did not cease to exist that
day. So, by a powerful antithesis, it is said, “she
that giveth herself to pleasure is dead while she liveth,”
which cannot be read, ceases to exist while she exists (1 Tim. 5: 6). In much the same way we speak of a living death.
Equally arresting
is our Lord's argument against the annihilationists
of His day (Lk. 20: 37, 38).
He first admits
that Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are dead, saying, “But
that the dead are raised,”
and at once adds that “God is not the God of the dead,
but of the living, for [page 50 - DEATH,
ITS DURATION] all live unto Him.” So dead in one sense, they are yet
alive in another, showing that both terms describe only relative conditions of
existence. Similarly the Lord makes the father of the prodigal say: “This my son was dead, and is alive again” (Lk. 15: 24), though in another sense he had been as
much alive in the far country as after his return. Further, it is clear that
the first death does not cause the annihilation of the sinner or there could be
no second death for him.
Thus the word death
does not of itself mean ceasing to be, and such as say that the second death
means annihilation are bound to show that the Scripture adds to the word this
sense which does not belong to it. The second death is the “lake of fire” (Rev. 20: 14).
The beast and the false prophet are cast thereinto
before the thousand years reign of Christ (Rev. 19:
20); they are still there at the close of that period when Satan is cast
there (Rev. 20: 10); so that a thousand
years in the second death has not destroyed their existence, and the sentence
upon all three is that “they shall be tormented day and
night for the ages of the ages.” It would be impossible to torment that
which had ceased to be.
It is consistent
with the holiness and the love of God - for it is fact – that angels that
abused His favour shall be confined in that place of misery, Tartarus, for already thousands of years (2 Pet. 2: 4); that Dives (Lk. 16),
who abused His goodness on earth, shall be tormented in a flame in Hades for a period unknown to us, for it is not yet
ended; that the Beast and the false prophet, who blasphemed His holy name,
shall be in the lake of fire for more than a thousand years at least. As this
is consistent with the love and justice of God why should it not be so for
10,000 years, for 100,000, for a billion years, or for ever, and especially in
the case of those who rejected His amazing love in Christ, trampled under foot
the Son of God, and definitely resisted the Spirit of truth? We are not
competent to form our own opinion as to what God may or may not, do
consistently with His character and because of it. We can only bow to what He
has revealed, assured that He will ever act consistently with what He is, for
He is not able to do otherwise. We can best estimate what sentence a judge may
pass by considering what sentences he has before passed, as well as what
statements he may have made as to future sentences. [page
51 - DEATH, ITS NATURE]
3. WHAT
The passage before
cited tells us that “the dust returns to the earth as
it was, and the spirit returns unto God who gave it” (Eccl. 12: 7). But what becomes of the soul?
An actual case is
better than much speculation, an ounce of fact being worth a ton of theory. Of
the Man Christ Jesus we ate told distinctly what took place at His death.
1. His dead body was laid in the tomb.
2. His last words on the cross were, “Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit” (Lk. 23. 46), the human spirit thus returning unto God who
gave it. That the human spirit is not the divine Spirit is seen clearly in the
case of our Lord, for His entire holy humanity was a created thing conceived by
an operation of the Holy Spirit in Mary (Lk. 1: 35);
years later it was anointed with power by the Spirit of God coming upon it; and
at last on the cross, He surrendered His human spirit to the Father: an act
impossible in relation to the Spirit of God with Whom He as God was in indissoluble
union. The distinction - necessary and unavoidable ‑ between the human
and the divine is thus ever maintained. It was the human spirit which vitalized
His body that Jesus gave up that He might die.
3. But the Spirit of prophecy in David (Ps. 16: 10) had put into Messiah's mouth these
other words: “Thou wilt not leave my soul to Sheol,” which
words were later, on the day of Pentecost, applied by Peter to Christ. “Thou wilt not leave
my soul unto Hades” (Acts 2: 27).
The error of Apollinaris (cent. 4), that the
person of Christ consisted of a human body and soul only, with the divine
Spirit (or Logos) taking the place in Him of a human spirit, must be
steadfastly resisted. His humanity, as ours, consisted of body, soul, and
spirit.
Sheol and Hades are equivalent words in Hebrew and Greek
respectively. Of this region there is abundant information in Scripture. It is
very far from the fact, as spiritualists assert, that
no certain information as to the state after death is available save what they
think they receive from spirits through mediums. But most unfortunately the
reader of the Authorized Version is
completely stopped from this study by the variety of the terms employed. Sheol and Hades are [page 52 - SPIRIT NOT THE PERSON] rendered “grave,” “pit,” and “hell.” The last
in its older English meaning was not inaccurate, but it has come now to mean
only the final place of the lost, the lake of fire, which never is the sense of
Sheol or Hades. However, any diligent reader can pursue the
subject in the Revised Version, for
these original terms are given in either text or margin where ever they occur.
This is one example, and an important one, of the superiority of the R.V. over the A.V.
4. WHERE IS HADES?
So the soul of our
Lord was in Hades between His death and His resurrection on the third day. And Eph. 4: 9, 10 shows beyond question (1) that the
“soul” was the Lord Himself, the personality, and (2) where Hades is situate. It says: “Having
ascended up on high he has led captivity captive, and has given gifts unto men.
Now this, having ascended, what is it but that He also descended into the lower
parts of the earth? He that descended is the same who has also ascended far
above all heavens, that he might fill all things.”
1. The Person that ascended is the same Person that had
descended, and from His own express
words to Mary directly after His resurrection it is certain that He himself did
not go to the Father at the hour of death, for He said to her: “I have (perf. ind., anabebeeko) not yet ascended to my Father; but go to my brethren and say
unto them, I ascend to my Father” (Jo. 20:
17). As His ascent to the Father had yet to take place it is clear that
His human spirit, which He had commended to His Father as He died, was not Himself. Nor would the words admit the thought;
for a man cannot send his personality, his self, away from himself, but we read
of Jesus that “he gave up the spirit,” or, breathed
out the spirit, expired, as
we say, the exact reversal of the act of creation when God breathes in the spirit.
The spirit
therefore was not Himself, but a part of His composite humanity that He could
dismiss by an act of the will. Man does not possess the power to do this; he
must use violence to terminate his life: but Christ had received this power specially
from His Father, according to His
statement [page 53 - HADES, ITS LOCATION] that the Father
had given Him authority to lay down His life by His own act (Jo. 10: 17, 18).
2. The realm to which
Christ descended, elsewhere, as we have seen, named Hades, is in this place in
Ephesians stated plainly to be in “the lower parts of
the earth.” Scripture always
locates it there and nowhere else. So Jacob of old said: “I will go down to Sheol to my son” (Gen. 37: 35); and so the great prophet Samuel, when
permitted by God to come from the world of the dead to announce the doom of
Saul (an exceptional permission and event) said: “Why
hast thou disquieted me to bring me up?” (1 Sam. 28: 15). And
so Christ said of
Readers of the
great classics will not need to be reminded that it was the common belief of
the ancient world that the place of the dead was within the earth. We are not
aware that any other opinion was then in men's minds. Their details of that
place and its conditions are not to be accepted without Scripture confirmation,
even as those of mediaeval writers like Dante
are not to be; but the general facts of the location of the world of the dead
within the earth, and of its having two divided regions, one of pain and one of
bliss, are plainly adopted in Holy Scripture (as in Lk. 16),
and so are confirmed as facts. And it could be shown that some details also are
thus confirmed; as that the poets made visitors to and from that realm go and
come through some cave or opening in the earth, and the Revelation similarly represents demon hordes as coming from the
abyss through a shaft or opening therefrom (Rev. 9: 1 ‑11). We take the idea in each case to represent the conception that the realm of the dead is within the earth.
5.
BUT DO NOT SAINTS AT DEATH “GO TO HEAVEN”?
The death of
Stephen presents the exact features seen at the death of his Lord. We are told
that “he called upon the Lord, saying, Lord Jesus,
receive my spirit ... and ... he fell asleep” (Acts 7:
59, 60). His body did not fall
asleep: it was battered to death by brutal ill‑usage, and devout men [page 54 - ON "GOING TO
HEAVEN"] buried it. It does not say that his spirit
fell asleep, but that he surrendered it to his Lord. We shall see later that
neither does the soul “sleep” in relation to
that other realm to which it goes at death; so that the expression “fell asleep” can only mean as to its relation to this
earth‑life which it leaves at death.
But did not
Stephen “go to heaven” when he died? Do not all
who die in Christ do so? It has been the
almost universal belief of Protestants, but there is no Scripture for it.
If Solomon's words, “the spirit returns to God who gave
it,” mean this, then the saints before the time of Christ must have gone
there, and, as before remarked, not saints only, but the ungodly also, for the
statement applies to all men.
It has been often
asserted that when the Lord rose he released from Hades the godly dead and
removed them to
It should be
asked, Where were these multitudes of souls during the forty days before Christ
himself ascended? Raised at His resurrection, as the theory asserts, what was
their location during that period?
But it is known
definitely that one of the most renowned of Old Testament men of God did not ascend to heaven with the Lord, for at
Pentecost, which was after the ascension, Peter distinctly stated that “David has not ascended into the heavens” (Darby, Acts
2: 34). Why was David left behind? There is no reason to think he was:
the other godly dead also stayed there, as far as Scripture is concerned.
Alford translates:
“David himself [i.e., in contrast to Christ] is not ascended”:
In his great work
on The
Creed (Art. 5, He
descended into Hell) Bishop Pearson shows how little basis
the opinion in question has. He says: “The next
consideration, is whether by virtue of His descent, the souls of those who
before believed in Him, the Patriarchs, Prophets, and all the people of God,
were delivered from that place and state, in which they were before; and
whether Christ descended into Hell to
that end, that He might translate them into a place and state, far more
glorious and happy. This has been, in the later ages of the Church, the vulgar
opinion of most men ...
“But even this opinion, as general as it hath been, hath neither
the consent of Antiquity, nor such certainty as it pretendeth.
Indeed, very few (if any) for above five hundred years after Christ, did so
believe that Christ delivered the saints out of Hell, as to leave all the
damned there. Many of the Ancients believed not, that they were removed at all,
and few acknowledged that they were removed alone.”
But it is asked, What became of those who came forth from their graves after
Christ had risen and who appeared unto many? (Matt. 27: 52, 53). Did they not “go to heaven” with the Lord? Let those say what
became of these to whom God may have given private information upon the point;
but it cannot be learned from Scripture
that they went to heaven. And in return it may be asked, What
became of Lazarus and the other persons who were resuscitated, as mentioned in
Scripture? Did they go to heaven without dying again or, are they still on
earth? or, did they not in due time go back to the death state, from which
they had been temporarily recalled to exhibit the power of God?
That Christ “led captivity captive” carries
no suggestion that He took the godly dead to heaven. The figure itself
forbids the idea. It is taken from the ancient practice that a victorious commander
dragged many, and the most noble, of his captives to his capital city and
exhibited them for his glory at his triumphal entry. The expression could in no
wise apply to the possible recovery of some of his own subjects from captivity
by his enemy and their return home with him in liberty. The sense may be seen
plainly in the place in [page 56 –
6. WHEN AND WHERE IS
Paul says that he
was “caught away
into the paradise” (2 Cor.
12: 4), which, in view of the meaning of the word, does not mean the
heaven of heavens where God has His own especial dwelling. The word “caught up” is not exact, for the
Greek word harpazo
does not in itself indicate the direction. Nor is it certain that by “the paradise” he means the “third
heaven” to which he had been taken according to the verse preceding,
because he had said (ver. 1) that he was about to speak of “visions,” not of only one vision, whereas he did not
mention more than one, unless the two are separate events.
But if
the article “the paradise” points to one such
region that is pre‑eminently
But the article “the paradise” does not require the sense of a region in
the heavens, because Christ used it when he said to the thief, “To‑day shalt thou be with me
in the paradise” (Lk. 23: 43), and it is beyond question, as we have
seen, that Christ did not go to the
heavenly regions that day, but to Hades, in “the lower
parts of the earth.” Therefore the blissful region of Hades, “Abraham's bosom” (Lk. 16: 22)
was paradise; and ought not we, the followers of the Lord, to feel that a
region which was suitable to Him in the death state must be fully suitable for
us?
As far as the meaning
of the word goes there may be many paradises, even as Solomon says, “I made me paradises”; and so it may be that “the Paradise of God,”
where grows the tree of life of which saints that have conquered in the battles
of life shall be privileged to eat, is heavenly in location (Rev. 2: 7; 22: 14); but in any case that is
future, not present, as to our enjoyment of it, and does not touch the place
and state of the dead.
The Lord Jesus in
His universal presence is not only in heaven; He is also in the midst of two or
three living saints gathered to His name on earth. He is in Hades also: “He descended . . . He
ascended, that He might fill all things” might occupy the universe (ta panta), might
pervade it all with His presence, as the odour of the ointment did the house (John 12: 3), where the same verb is used as in Eph. 4: 10 (pleeroo). Thus, without vacating His place at the right hand of God, He
could present Himself personally and repeatedly to His imprisoned and hard‑pressed
servant on earth (Acts 23: 11; 2 Tim. 4: 16, 17),
and can also communicate with the dead, as we shall see shortly.
And the soul,
freed from the trammels of this enfeebled, deranged body of our humiliation,
can in consequence appreciate that presence more keenly and enjoy it more
blessedly, and so Paul could rightly say that to depart and to be with Christ
would be very far better than to be chained day and night to a rough pagan
soldier, as was at that time his distressing lot (Phil.
1: 23). It is however to be noted that the apostle does not here make
any general statement that “to [page 58 - SOULS
UNDER THE ALTAR] die is gain”; strictly his
assertion is made of himself only. He had just stated his “earnest expectation and hope” that Christ should
continue to be “magnified in his body, whether by life
or by death.” Not every believer lives with this as his fixed and
paramount intention. Not every Christian has so dedicated his body to Christ as
to be as willing for death as for life. Then Paul adds: “For to me to live is Christ, and to die is gain”
(Phil. 1: 20, 21). Doubtless this is true of
each who lives to magnify Christ; but it
is not said of believers who may not so live, as those, for example, who are
cut off prematurely in their sins, as were Ananias
and Sapphira and the evil living Christians in the
Corinthian church (Acts 5: 1; Cor.
11: 30).
7. THE SOULS UNDER THE ALTAR.
It is a serious
loss to many believers that they regard the book of the Revelation as beyond comprehension, and are afraid to accept
its symbols and visions as a revelation. Hence, when appeal is made to it they decline to accept its
testimony. But symbols, pictures, figures of speech, being used by the Spirit
of truth with divine care, teach with accuracy, and
indeed with superior vividness, those who have eyes to see and ears to hear.
Hieroglyphs have plain meaning to those who can read them, and this had been
just as much the fact during the period when men could not read them, or in the
later period when scholars differed as to their meaning. Patient research brought
explanation and reconciliation.
One of the most
illuminating portions of Scripture upon our present interesting and necessary
themes is in Revelation 6: 9 ‑ 11.
John says: “And when the Lamb opened the fifth seal, I
saw underneath the altar the souls of them that had been slain for
the word of God, and for the testimony which they held: and they cried with a great voice, saying,
How long, O sovereign ruler, the holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge
our blood on them that dwell on the earth? And there was given to them, to each one, a white robe; and it
was said unto them that they should rest yet for a little time,
until their fellow‑bondmen also
and their brethren, who should be killed even as they were, should have
fulfilled their course.” [page 59 - CONSCIOUSNESS
IN HADES]
At the time here in
view the resurrection of the godly has not yet come, for the roll of the
martyrs is not complete. These brethren therefore are still without their
resurrection bodies. But to John, rapt in spirit into that super‑sensuous
world (c. 1: 10: “I
became in spirit,” that is, in an ecstatic state), those “souls” were visible. Therefore death does not end the
existence of the soul. Moreover, they are conscious: they remember what befell
them on earth at the hands of the godless; they know what the future will bring
of vengeance; they ponder the situation, and they wonder at the seeming delay
of their vindication by God; they appeal to their Lord; they are given answer,
counsel, and encouragement; they receive the sign of their Master's approval,
the white robe, at once His recompense for that they did not defile their
garments in this foul world, and His assurance that they shall be His personal
and constant associates in His kingdom (Rev. 3: 4,
5). This last item ‑ the giving of the white robes - shows
further that not all saints await a session of the judgment seat of Christ when
at last He shall come from heaven; for His decision and approval are here made
known to these in advance of His coming and of their resurrection.
The
vision contains also something more, and which is completely unseen by most
readers.
When
Samuel came from Hades to speak to Saul (1 Sam. 28:
12 ‑ 14) he was seen by the medium. She saw him “coming up out
of the earth,” a further plain Intimation that Sheol
is within the earth. She described him, saying it was “an
old man” who had appeared, and he was “covered
with a robe.” The description was so accurate that Saul, who had long
known Samuel on earth, recognized him by it and was satisfied that the real
Samuel was present, though he had not himself seen the appearance; for it says
that “he perceived (Heb., knew),” not that he saw that it was Samuel. Equally does
his question to the witch “What seest
thou?”
tell that he had not himself seen the form.
This
makes evident (a) that the disembodied soul has form and garments, such as can
be seen by one endowed with vision therefor, as were
the medium then and John later; and (b) that the psychical form and clothing of
that state correspond recognizably to the outer material form and clothing of
the former earth life. This has bearing upon the –[page 60 - PSYCHICAL
FORM AND CLOTHING] question of recognition after death, and upon other
interesting points not now to be examined.
The reality of this
psychical form is often assumed or asserted in Scripture. Dives in Hades (Lk. 16) has a body that can feel anguish from a “flame.” There is “water”
that could cool his “tongue.” Lazarus has a “finger.” Both Dives and Abraham have eyes and ears and
voices; they see and hear and speak. The
reality of bliss in that state must be surrendered if the reality of torment
there be denied. That those realities are subtle as compared with their
grosser counterparts of this world, does not make them
or the experiences less real, but rather the more acute.
Thus also it is as
to the souls “under the altar.” John sees them,
and sees that to each of them is given a “robe” that
is both suitable and significant.
It was for a
similar, yet even higher, experience that Paul longed; for, while the
disembodied state would indeed be far better than his painful lot as a
prisoner, yet in itself it is not the best. And so on another
occasion, when he was in freedom and rejoicing in his wondrous and privileged
service, he spoke differently (2 Cor. 5: 1 ‑ 10). First he spoke of the
present: “We that are in this tent‑dwelling
[the body] do groan, being burdened”: then he
mentioned the intermediate state after death: “not for
that we would be unclothed” (without adequate covering), for this is not
to be desired, it is as unpleasant and unseemly for the soul as for the body*;
and then he spoke of the future: “we long to be clothed
upon with our habitation which is from heaven; if so be that being clothed we
shall not be found naked,” that is, at the coming of the Lord.
[* Compare the evident longing of the evil spirit
to return into the body he had left. Without a material body he wandered
restless, like a thirsty man seeking water in a desert (Matt. 12: 43‑45). Demons also begged to enter the bodies
of even swine, when driven from the body of a man. This misery of disembodied
beings is recognized by the heathen, who often, by reason of dread and unholy
contact with the demon world, have more sense of these matters than the
materialized modern westerner. Thus a
Chinese driver explained the whirling dust spouts of the
This
“if so be” implies the possibility of not having
part in the first resurrection, for (1 Cor. 15: 54) that is the hour when “what is mortal shall be swallowed up of life,” by the soul
being clothed upon with its “building from God, a house
not made with hands, eternal, in the heavens,” a “house” in contrast to this present body, the frail
transitory tent.
This is the
meaning of his earlier prayer above noticed, that “the
spirit and soul and body be preserved entire, unblemished,” and so unblamable
(amemptbs includes
both) when the Lord shall come (1 Thess. 5: 22). No “naked,”
that is, unembodied, soul can be presented before the
presence of God's glory, because for that it must be without blemish (amomos), not to be blamed (Jude 24; Eph. 1: 4). Were a man, however perfect
his form, and even were he of the royal family, to present himself
naked on a court day before the king upon his throne he would be severely
blamed. Not only comeliness of person, but clothing, and suitable clothing, is
indispensable. Indeed, the officers of the court would prevent anything so
utterly unseemly. Shall the King of kings receive less respect? He that hath ears to hear let him hear
this, and lay to heart that not death, but resurrection or rapture fits for
translation to the realms above and the court of the God of glory. It was thus
with Christ himself.
For entrance into
the holy places the priest had not only to be one of the redeemed people of
God; he had also to be unblemished as to his person (Lev.
21), and he had further to be clothed in garments of glory and beauty (Ex. 28). Both were indispensable for access to the
presence of God. Moreover, before the perfect form could be clothed in such
garments it had to be washed with water (Lev. 8: 6;
16: 4), which is the work our Moses, Christ, wishes to effect in us in
this earthly life by His word (Eph. 5: 25 ‑ 27)
and by discipline (Heb. 12: 10), in
preparation for that coming day of our being clothed for access to and service
in the true sanctuary above.
If it be asked
whether the righteousness imputed to the believer upon first faith in Christ
does not include all this that is evidently necessary, the answer is a distinct
negative. One consideration settles this. That imputed righteousness is the “righteousness of God,” and this is of necessity
indefectible, untarnishable. But, according to the
regulations, [page 62 - GARMENTS MAY BE LOST] the priest may possibly be defective in
form or defiled in person and clothing: were it not so, what need of the regulations
and purifying ceremonies?
For the
forgiveness of sins, and for life as a forgiven man in the camp, neither perfection of form, nor
washing at the gate of the tabernacle, nor special clothing, were demanded; but
for access to God and for priestly service all these were as indispensable as
the atoning blood. Imputed righteousness settles completely and for ever the
judicial standing of the believer as justified before the law of God; but practical righteousness must be added
in order to secure many of the mighty privileges which become possible to the
justified. Let him that hath ears
hear this also, for loss and, shame must be his at last who has been content to
remain deformed and imperfect in moral state, or is found to have neglected the
washing, and so to be unfit to wear the noble clothing required for access to
the throne of glory. Such neglect of present grace not only causes the loss
of heart access to God, as the careless believer surely knows, but will assure the forfeiture of much that
grace would have granted in the future.
Here lies the weight
of the warning which our Lord announces from heaven as to be specially
applicable when His coming draws near: “Behold, I come as a thief. [This, message is set in
the midst of the gathering of the hosts of Antichrist for the battle of Har Magedon, and so indicates the
period when the coming will be]. Blessed is he that watcheth, and keepeth his
garments, lest he walk naked and they see his shame”
(Rev. 16: 15). Therefore “garments” may be lost. If the reference is to the
imputed righteousness, then justification may be forfeited, and the once saved
be afterwards lost. But let those who
rightly reject this, inquire honestly what it does properly mean as to the
eternally justified. And let them face what is involved in the loss of one's
garments.
In the temple of
old the guards were placed at nightfall at their posts. The captain of the
temple, at any hour he chose, went round with a posse of men unannounced, and
if a guard was caught asleep at his post, he was stripped of his clothes, which
were burned, and he was left to go forth in his shame. The shame of his
nakedness was the outward counterpart of the deeper shame that he had slept
when on duty. Not in that dishonoured state dare he enter the house of God [page 63 - MAN
NOT A SPIRIT] and sing or serve. And it would be long ere the disgrace of
that night would fade from memory, his own or others.
My soul, keep awake through this short night of duty while thy Lord is away!
Thou knowest not in which watch of the night He will
come, and it were dreadful to be left unclothed with that house which is from
heaven should He come suddenly and find thee sleeping!
To return to seal 5. These, then, are “souls”
not “spirits.” Man has spirit as part of his
composite being, but he is not a spirit, as angels are. In the 397 places where the word “spirit” comes in the New Testament man is never called
a spirit, because he himself is not one, but is a soul. Hence, by the way, the “in‑prison spirits” of 1
Pet. 3: 19 are not human
beings, but those fallen angels whom Peter again mentions (2 Pet. 2: 4: comp. Gen.
6: 1 ‑ 4 and Jude 6). This is put beyond question by the
fact that these are in the underworld, in prison, in Tartarus
‑ a region well known to the ancient world, and by this name that Peter
uses, as the deepest and most dreadful part of Hades, a prison of fallen
angels; whereas the spirit of man does not go to the underworld, but to
“God who gave it.”
It is therefore
the soul which is the person; and ‑ against the annihilationist ‑ the
soul has not ceased to exist, or lost its sense of personality, because of
being without spirit or body. Yet neither can man in this incomplete condition
stand in the all‑holy presence of God in heaven. For entrance into the
holy of holies the high priest himself must be arrayed in garments specially
pure and glorious. It was only in His
resurrection body of glory that the Man Christ Jesus entered into the holy
place on high, and so only can the under‑priests, His followers, do so.
To stand there the being must be complete in structure and perfect morally,
which is the point of Paul's prayer for fellow‑saints: “The God of peace himself sanctify you wholly; and may your spirit and soul and body
be preserved entire, blameless in the parousia
[the presence, at His coming] of our Lord Jesus Christ”
(1 Thess. 5: 23).
This shows that the phrase “the spirits of just men
made perfect” points to the
resurrection. It has just before been said of them, that “apart from us they
[i.e.,
Old Testament saints are included, (see verses 4 – 39) in this
chapter. – Ed.] could not be made perfect” (Heb.
12: 23; 11. 40). All [page 64 - UNDER THE
ALTAR] the other glories to which in this passage we are said, to have come are
future, to be realized actually at the coming of the Lord. See my “Firstborn Sons,” 84 ff.
The use of spirit in this place (Heb.
12: 23) may seem at variance with
the statement that man is not called a “spirit!”
It is a rare instance, perhaps in the New Testament the only instance, of Cremer's fourth
sense in which the term is used. It “comes to denote
an essence without any corporeal garb for its inner reality”; that is,
in Heb. 12: 23, which he cites, the man, the
soul, without its body, is described as spirit, meaning a spiritual substance destitute of a material covering. This
does not cancel the regular distinction in Scripture between soul and spirit, but indicates only the immateriality of
the soul, the ego, in itself. The student should by all means study Cremer's treatment of pneuma and psuche (Lexicon
of N.T. Greek), and note his conclusion
that “psuche [soul] is the subject or ego of life."
Now these souls
that John saw are “under the altar.” Not one of
the first six seals, of which this is the fifth, pictures events in the
presence of God in heaven; all deal with affairs of earth, or as seen from the
earth. This altar, then, is not in heaven. There is an altar in heaven pictured
in the book, but it is specified as being the “golden
altar,” that is, the one for incense (comp. Ex.
30: 3), and as being “before the throne”
or “before God” (Rev.
8. 3; 9. 13). In this book “before the throne”
always means the upper heavens. But this other altar is one of sacrifice,
though not of atoning sacrifice. We Christians have an altar of atoning sacrifice
(Heb. 13: 10): it is the cross of Jesus, the Lamb of God. But that is not in view
here.
The picture is really quite simple. The
brazen altar of sacrifice in the tabernacle was square and hollow, with a grating
upon which rested the wood and the victims. When the fire had done its work the
remains of the sacrifice fell through the grating to beneath the altar, whence
they could be removed on occasion. Now
the place, the “altar,” where these martyrs of
Christ sacrificed person and life in His cause is obviously this earth, and
thus this vision simply declares what we have seen from other scriptures, that
the place of the dead is under the earth: “He
descended into the lower [page 65 - IMMORTAL SOUL] parts of
the earth”; whence those still there will be removed at resurrection.
Since these pages
were written I have learned that this was the explanation of the earliest known
Latin commentator on the Apocalypse, Victorihus of Pettau (died 303). Mr.
F. F. Bruce summarized this in The Evangelical Quarterly (Oct., 1938) as follows: “The altar (6:9) is the earth: the brazen altar of burnt‑offering and
the golden altar of incense in the Tabernacle correspond to earth and heaven
respectively. The souls under the altar, therefore,
are in Hades, in
that department of it which is ‘remote from pains and fires, the rest of the
saints’. ”
This confirms Bishop Pearson cited above as to the
view held in the earliest Christian centuries.
A great deal more
concerning Hades can be learned from Scripture, but it would require separate
treatment. Here we deal with the matter only as connected with the subject in
hand.
It is true, as
above indicated on Heb. 12: 23,that the words soul and spirit take, by much usage, shades
of meaning derived from their primary sense. The student will discover these,
and will not be confused thereby if only the primary, dominant sense of each
has been first grasped firmly. And keeping that sense before him, we believe he
will find it to illuminate many obscure scriptures and subjects to see that the
soul is the person ‑ a living soul while on earth ‑ a dead soul
while in the underworld ‑ and to be made alive in immortality at the
resurrection, with a body of glory incorruptible, indestructible.
The term “immortal soul” is incorrect and misleading when used
of our present state or of the dead. To be immortal is to be incapable of
dying. Man is not this as yet. Neither the innocent humanity of Adam, nor even
the sinless humanity of Jesus was immortal, for both were capable of dying, and
did in fact die. But the saved of men will become immortal in resurrection, as the man Christ Jesus did. The soul, the man,
has now endless existence but
not immortality, in the proper sense of the word, until resurrection; and then
only the saved will be incapable of dying; the lost will exist for ever,
but in a state termed “dead,” the “second death.” [page 66 - INDISSOLUBLE
LIFE]
We rightly
describe death as a “dissolution,”
for the partnership between man's spirit and soul and body is dissolved. Of
our Lord in resurrection we read the glorious fact that “He liveth in the power of indissoluble life” and “death no more hath dominion over Him” (Heb. 7: 16: Rom. 6: 9, 10). This life His people
will share for ever and ever. But for
them, as for Him, it can be reached only by resurrection or rapture, never by
death. It will be no small profit
from this discussion if it be seen that the opinion that the believer goes at
death to glory diminishes the sense of need of resurrection or rapture, and
consequently of the return of Christ when these will take place; and also if it thus cause some hearts to
feel that these events are utterly indispensable, the proper, the blessed hope
of the believer. As Peter exhorts, let us “set our
hope perfectly [that is, undividedly] on the favour that is being brought unto us at the revelation
of Jesus Christ” (1 Pet. 1: 13). [page
67]
THE JUDGMENT SEAT OF CHRIST.
1. God has an inescapable duty to be the “Judge of all the earth” (Gen.
18: 25). Those who submit to Him are subject to this judgment equally
with the insubordinate: “The Lord shall judge His people”
(Deut. 32: 36; Ps. 135: 14; Heb. 10: 30). The children of the sovereign are amenable
to the laws and the courts and liable to penalty for misconduct.
2. This judgment is ever in process. There is a
perpetual overruling of human affairs by higher authorities. Prominent
instances are Job (ch. 1
and 2), Ahah (1 Kin. 22), Nebuchadnezzar (Dan. 4). The first case shows the judicial proceedings
effecting perfecting, the second death, the third
reformation.
Job was a godly man
under discipline for his good: an upright man was made a holy man. Thus still
does God chasten His sons that they may become partakers of His holiness (Heb. 12: 10, 11).
Sinning Christians
were disciplined even unto premature death, and it is explained that this
operates to save them from liability to condemnation at the time when God will
deal with the world at large (1 Cor.
11: 32).
3. But this continuous judicial administration has its
crisis sessions, its special occasions. Instances are: the Flood; the destruction of
Hereafter there
will come the destruction of Gentile world dominion
and the punishment of Antichrist. Then the judgment at
But it is most
necessary to keep in mind that all such separate and specific sessions are but
part of the ceaselessly operating judicial administration of heaven and earth. [page
68 -THE
SUPREME JUDGE]
4. It is important to remember that the Son of man is
the chief Judge of the universe. It was He who acted at the Flood: “Jehovah sat as king at the Flood” (Ps. 29: 10). It was He who, in holy care that only
justice should be done, came down to enquire personally whether Sodom and
Gomorrah ought to be destroyed (Gen. 18: 20, 21),
and Who again came down to deliver Israel from Egypt (Ex.
3: 7, 8). It was His glory as judge that was seen by Isaiah (ch. 6; John 12. 41),
and later by Ezekiel (ch. 1).
He is the Man
appointed to judge the world in righteousness on behalf of God the Father (Acts 17: 31); for the Father has entrusted all
judgment unto the Son, in order that He may receive equal honour with the
Father (John 5: 19 ‑ 29).
5. Yet it is particularly needful to note that the last
cited passage is in reference to the future sessions of the divine judgment,
for the judging in question is there set in direct connection with the raising
of men from the dead (John 5: 21, 22, 27 ‑ 29).
For when the Son of God became man He ceased for the present
to supervise those judgments of heaven. This was among the dignities of
which He emptied, that is, divested Himself, for His immediate and blessed
purpose in becoming man was their salvation from judgment (John 5: 24). Therefore He said: “God sent not the Son into the world to judge the world, but
that the world should be saved through Him” (John
3: 17); nor has He yet resumed the office of supreme Judge, though
appointed thereto as man. In relation to the world He is still the Dispenser of
the grace of God, not yet the Executor of His holy wrath, as He will one day
become.
This is clear from three chief
considerations:
(1) That the
Father has called Him to sit at His own right hand until the time when His
enemies are to be put under His feet (Ps. 110: 1;
Heb. 1: 13; 10: 13). That is, He is not yet sitting upon His own throne
and asserting His own right and authority, as He will do in a later day (Rev. 2: 26, 27; 3: 21: Matt. 25: 31); but He is
waiting expectantly that coming day.
(2) And therefore
is it twice pictured that, as Son of man, the Lamb, He is hereafter to be
brought before the Father to be invested officially with that authority to
judge and to make [page 69 - CHRISTIANS JUDGED NOW] war the title to
which is His already but the exercise of which is in abeyance (Dan. 7: 13, 14; Rev. ch. 4
and 5). In both of these scenes it is God
the Father who is shown acting from the throne of judgment until the Son has
been thus formally installed as Judge.
(3) And therefore
is He now the Advocate of His people before the Father (1 John 2: 1). But the Advocate cannot be at the same time the
Judge.
6. Thus during this interval the especial concern and
sphere of the Son of man is the company He is calling out of the world, the
And this work calls for both grace and
judgment. He “can bear gently with the ignorant and the
erring, sympathizing with our infirmities” (Heb.
5: 2; 4: 15), but dealing with kind severity with the wilful of His
people. “Behold then the goodness and severity of God”
(Rom. 11: 22). Nor may we abuse His goodness
by making light of His severity; or if we do, it will be unto painful
disillusionment.
7. Judgment upon
His own people therefore God exercises now; this is the very period for it;
but the general judgment of the world is deferred: “The
time is come for judgment to begin at the house of God” (1 Pet. 4: 17).
And again: “If we discriminated [sat in strict
judgment upon] ourselves, we should not be judged, but
when [failing in this holy self-judgment] we
are judged, we are chastened by the Lord [here perhaps the Father, comp.
Heb. 12: 5, 9, where He who chastens is the
Father of spirits] that we may not be condemned with
the world" (1 Cor.
11: 30,31). And this chastening may extend to bodily weakness, positive sickness,
or even death. So it was in the cases of Ananias
and Sapphira (Acts 5: 1 ‑
11, and see Jas. 5: 19, 20: 1 John 5, 16, 17; Matt. 5: 21‑26; 18: 28‑35).
8. The Lord made many most serious statements as to His
dealings with “His own” servants at His return.
Some of these are: [page 70 - LORD AND SLAVE] (1) Luke 12: 22‑53. From dealing with the crowd He turns and speaks specifically to
His own disciples (ver. 22). Only
genuine disciples, regenerated persons, are able to fulfil His precepts here
given. To mere professors the task is impossible, and such cannot be in view.
They are to live without any anxiety as to the necessities of life, and in this
are to be in express contrast to the nations; they are His “little flock,” for whom the Father intends the
kingdom, and therefore they are to give away, not to hoard, and so to lay up
treasure in heaven (21‑34). It is impossible
to include the unregenerate in such a passage; nor would it be attempted save
to avoid the application to Christians of part of the succeeding and connected
instruction.
This instruction
is that disciples are like the personal household slaves of an absent master,
who upon his return will deal with each according to his conduct during the
master's absence. In particular, the steward set over the household will be
dealt with the more strictly that his office, opportunities, and example were
the higher. The goodness of the master is seen in exalting the faithful (though
from one point of view he had done no more than his duty and was an
unprofitable servant) to almost unlimited privilege and power: “He will set him over all that he hath” (ver. 44): his
severity is shown by “cutting in sunder”*
the servant who had abused his trust, and appointing his portion with the unfaithful
(35‑53)
[* Equals “severely scourge,”
because the scourge used cut deeply into the flesh ‑ see margin.]
(2) This is
elaborated and enforced in later statements. Luke
19. 11‑27. The picture is the same, namely, the
absent master and the faithful or unfaithful servants. The “pound” represents that deposit of truth entrusted to
the saints (Jude 3), for their use among men while Christ is away: “Trade ye till I come.” The
Nobleman himself held and used it while here, and left it with us when He went
to receive the kingdom. If we traffic with knowledge it increases in our hands
and we gain more; if we neglect to do so it remains truth, retaining its own
intrinsic value (“thou hast thy pound”), but we do not accumulate knowledge, nor
benefit others, nor bring to our Lord any return for His confidence in us. In
this parable it is not the personal life of the slave that is in [page 71 - THE
EVIL SERVANT] question; that may have been good: it is his use of the truth
in either spreading it among man, or
hiding his light under a bushel of silence, or, as the picture is here, burying
the pound in the earth.
The unfaithful
servant loses opportunity further to serve his lord, the pound is taken from
him. Sadder still, his lord has no confidence in him. But he is not an enemy of his lord, nor is treated as such. He
does not lose his life. The contrast is most distinct between him, however
unfaithful, and the foes and rebels: “But these mine enemies that would not that
I should reign over them, bring hither and slay them before me” (ver. 27).
(3) Matt. 24: 42 ‑ 25, 30. Only a few days later the Lord repeated this instruction, with
fuller detail. The head slave, set as steward of the house during the absence
of the master, will be set over all his lord's possessions if only he have
acted faithfully (45‑47). “But if that evil servant” abuses his
position, and becomes self‑indulgent and tyrannical, he will be “severely scourged,” and his portion be allotted with the
hypocrites, where he will weep and gnash his teeth over his folly and lot.
Only
a believer who does not consider his own heart will assert that a Christian
cannot act the hypocrite, be unfaithful, or arbitrary and unloving. But the
pronoun " that” – “But
if that evil servant, etc.,” leaves no
option but to regard him as a believer, for it has no antecedent to whom it can
refer except the faithful servant just before described, no other person having
been mentioned. “That
evil servant” what evil servant? and there is no answer but
that the faithful steward has become unfaithful*: And such cases are known. Nor will we, for our part, join to
consign all such to eternal ruin rather
than accept the alternative of the temporary, though severe, punishments intimated
by the Lord being possible to a believer. Those who take the latter course,
mainly influenced to support certain dispensational theories, have surely never
weighed the solemnity of thus easily consigning so many backsliders to endless
misery.
[*
Since, then, an
unbeliever is (a) not set by the Lord over His house, nor (b) could feed the souls of his fellows, nor
(c) could be so faithful as to become at last ruler of all the possessions of
the Lord, this man must be a true believer. But when such a one may lapse from
his fidelity he does not thereby become unregenerate; consequently the unfaithful
steward is still called one of the Lord's “own servants”;
and therefore a believer may incur the solemn penalties veiled, under the
figures used.
If it be thought
inconceivable that the Lord should describe, one of His blood‑bought and
beloved people as a “wicked servant” (Matt. 25: 26), it must be weighed that He had
before applied the term to a servant whose “debt” had
been fully remitted: “thou wicked servant, I forgave
thee all that debt” (Matt. 18: 32).
Thus one who, as an act of compassion by the Lord, has been fully forgiven all
his failure as a servant may prove a “wicked servant,”
his wickedness consisting in this, that though
forgiven he would not forgive. To deny that a child of God can be unforgiving
is to blind the eyes by denying sad and stem fact. The Lord left no room for
doubt that members of the divine family were in His mind by the application of
the parable He then and there made: “Even so shall my
heavenly Father do unto you
[Peter, whose question as to forgiving had drawn forth the parable, and the
other disciples, ver. 1, 21], if ye forgive
not, each one of you (hekastos), his brother from your hearts” (35). It is the Father and the brothers who
are in question, not here those outside the family circle.
Moreover, if this
parable be pressed to include a mere professing but unregenerate person some
inevitable implications must be accepted. It is by no means denied that there
are such persons, but if they are in view here these consequences follow: ‑
(a) An unregenerate person has had “all his debt forgiven.”
(b) In spite of this free forgiveness he remains
unregenerate.
(c) A forgiven
sinner can have the free pardon of his sins, revoked, in which case he will
thereafter stand in his former lost estate exposed to the eternal wrath of God.
He may be saved to‑day yet lose this to‑morrow.
(d) Though
delivered to the “tormentors” he may entertain
hope that he may yet himself “pay all that is due”
[page 73
- THE
TORMENTORS] (ver. 34); that is, the wrath of God against the unregenerate
can be somehow, some time satisfied by the sufferings and efforts of the
sinner himself. In these
cases therefore “Christ died for nought”; they
can at last secure their own deliverance.
In the fact,
however, being “delivered to the tormentors” has
no reference to the eternal judgment of the lost. In the lake of fire neither
lost angels nor lost men are stated to torment one another, but are all alike
in the same torment. It is a picture of present and temporal chastisement under
that continually proceeding judgment of God above indicated, and which applies
to His family as to others. Regarded thus the above confusing implications do
not arise, implications which no one divinely illuminated could accept. But it results that the wicked servant is a
real servant, not a hypocrite, and were it not for the severity of the
punishment no one would be likely to question this.
It is not difficult to see what the
punishment is.
(a) The
forgiveness of his great failures as a servant can be revoked, and he be made to feel the sin and bitterness of
not having walked by the same spirit as his Lord, nor rendered to Him the due
use and return of the benefits grace had bestowed.
(b) Paul says of
some who had once had faith and a good conscience (or they could not have
thrust these away), and who had started on the voyage of faith (or they could
not have made shipwreck), “whom I delivered to Satan”
(the present “tormentor,” as of Job); but not to
be afflicted by him in hell, but for their recovery, “that
they might be taught not to blaspheme,” which the torments of the damned
will not teach them, as far as we
see in the Word (1 Tim. 1: 19, 20. See also 1 Cor. 5: 3 ‑ 5).
(4) We remark upon
one other instance of these solemn testimonies by Christ, the parable of the
virgins (Matt. 25). It is to the same
effect.
(a) They are all virgins, the foolish equally with the wise,
which figure is inappropriate to indicate a worldling
in his sins, even though he be a professing Christian.
In the only other places where it is used figuratively and spiritually it
certainly means true Christians (2 Cor. 11: 2; Rev. 14: 4). [page
74 - THE
FOOLISH VIRGINS]
(b) They are all
equally the invited guests of the bridegroom, not strangers, let alone his
enemies.
(c) They all have
oil, or, the foolish could not say “our lamps are going
out.” Without some oil the lamps could not even have been lit, for a dry
wick will not kindle and certainly could not have burned during the time they
had slept.
(d) But the
foolish had no supply to replenish the dimly burning flax and revive their testimony.
They had formerly been “light in the Lord,” but
had been thoughtless as to grace to continue alight.
(e) They found means for this renewing for in
spite of the darkness they gained the bridegroom’s gate.
(f) They did not
lose their lives, as enemies, but they did lose the marriage feast, and were
left in the darkness outside the house. This is parallel to the “wicked
servant,” who also did not lose his life but did lose the entrance into the joy
of his master at his return, and was cast into “outer
darkness.”
Two observations
are vital to grasping the meaning of these judgments.
(1) A marriage
feast is obviously no picture of anything eternal. Plainly it is a temporary
matter. Grand, intensely happy, a highly coveted honour, especially when the
king's son, the heir apparent, is the bridegroom, it yet is but the prelude to a life, a reign, not anything long‑extended,
let alone permanent. Does not this
correspond to the joy of the millennial kingdom as the glorious prelude to the
eternal kingdom? For
the “marriage of the Lamb” comes at the
immediate inception of that millennial kingdom (Rev.
19: 6 ‑ 9). And are not the invited virgins those of
whom verse 9 says, “Blessed
are they that are bidden to the marriage supper of the Lamb,” rather
than the wife herself? A bride is not usually invited to her wedding feast: it
cannot (save, perhaps, among Moslems) be held without her. Does not this give the clue to what the virgins and the unfaithful
servant lose?
(2) “Outer darkness” is no picture of the lake of fire. It
is the realm just outside the palace where the feast is held, not the public
prison or execution ground. If the strict sense of Scripture pictures be kept, and imagination be not allowed [page 75 - A
CONTRAST] to fill in what the Divine Artist did not put in, much
confusion will be avoided.
It has been felt
that the words of the bridegroom to the virgins, “Verily
I say unto you, I know you not” preclude us from taking these to
represent His true people. But again the picture itself will give the real
sense. The bridegroom is here pictured as standing within the heavy and thick
outer door that secures every eastern house of quality, and the door is shut.
He does not open it, or he would see who they are, and that they are some of
his own invited guests, but standing the other side of the closed door he says,
in idiomatic English, I tell you sincerely, I don't know who you
are (Ameen
lego humin, ouk oida humas). Into such a picture it is not permissible
to read in divine omniscience; it must be taken simply as it is given.
Its force may be
gathered more readily by the distinction between what is here said and what the
Lord said in Matt. 7: 15 ‑ 23. There
He spoke of false prophets, bad trees, men who, like
the sons of Sceva in Acts
19: 13, used His holy name without warrant. Picturing Himself
as standing face to face with these He protests, I never at any time made your
acquaintance! Here the scene
is changed; there is no closed door between: the verb to know is different: and the word rendered “never” is most emphatic and gives force and finality
to the assertion (Oudepote
egnon humas). He did
not speak thus to the virgins.
9. It is not our present purpose to consider all such
testimony of the Word. Enough has been advanced to show how much and how solemn
is the teaching of Scripture as to judgment upon careless Christians. We wish
only to deal now with the time of the judgment seat of Christ as to His people.
The most general
opinion is that this judgment lies between the moment of the Lord's descent to
the air, when they, dead and living, are caught up to Him there, and that later
moment when He is to descend with them to the earth to set up His kingdom. That
is, the judging of His saints will take place during the Parousia.
Observations.
(1) No passage of
Scripture seems distinctly to place this [page 76 – SUPPOSITIONS] judgment in this
interval and in the air. It seems to be rather assumed that it must take place
then and there since the effects of it are to be seen in the different
positions and honours in the kingdom immediately to follow.
(2) As regards the
parabolic instruction Christ gave when here it is to be observed that it speaks
only of persons who will be found alive when the “nobleman,”
“the master of the house” returns. Strictly,
therefore, these parables tell nothing as to the time and circumstances of the
judgment of dead believers. It must be allowed that the principles of justice
will be the same for dead and living, but the details as to the judgment of the
former cannot be learned from these passages.
(3) Some presuppositions held are:
(a) That every
believer will share in the first resurrection and the millennial kingdom.
(b) The opposite, that not every believer
will do so.
(c) That the
judgment of the Lord will result in some of His people suffering loss of reward
because of unfaithfulness, but nothing more than loss. This involves that none
of the positive and painful inflictions denounced can affect true believers.
(d) The opposite,
that the regenerate may incur positive chastisement as a consequence of the
Lord's judgment at that time. Thus in “Touching the Coming
of the Lord” (84, 85. ed.
1), upon Col. 3: 25, “For he that doeth wrong shall receive
again the wrong that he hath done (margin): and there
is no respect of persons,” Hogg
and Vine apply this text to that judgment of Christ at His parousia, and say: “It may be
difficult for us to conceive how God will fulfil this word to those who are
already in bodies of glory, partakers of the joy of the redeemed in salvation
consummated in spirit, soul and body. Yet may we be assured that the operation
of this law is not to be suspended even in their case. He that 'knoweth how to deliver the godly
out of temptation, and to keep the unrighteous tinder punishment unto the day
of judgment ' (2
Pet. 2: 9), knows also how to direct and to use
the working of His law of sowing and reaping in the case of His children also.
The attempt to alleviate the text of some of its weight by suggesting that the
law operates only in this life, fails, for there is nothing in the text or [page 77 – IMPOSSIBILITIES]
context to lead the reader to think other than that while the sowing is
here the reaping is hereafter. It is clear that if it were not for this
supposed difficulty of referring the words to the Christian in the condition in
which, as we know from other Scriptures, he will appear at the Judgment seat
of Christ, the question whether that time and place were intended would not be
raised.”
(e) Some (Govett, Pember, and
others) who hold that the millennial kingdom may be forfeited by gross sin,
suppose that all believers rise in the
first resurrection, appear before the judgment‑scat of Christ, and being
adjudged by Him unworthy of the kingdom they return to the death state to await
the second resurrection and the great white throne judgment. Their names
being then as believers found in the book of life, they have eternal life in
the eternal kingdom, but they will have missed the honour of sharing in and
reigning in the millennial age.
These two last
ideas (d) and (e) seem alike utterly
impossible. It seems wholly inconceivable that a body heavenly, spiritual,
glorified, like indeed to the body of the Son of God himself, can be subjected
to chastisement for guilt incurred by misuse of the present sin‑marred
body. Not only the manner of the infliction but the fact of
it seems to us out of the question.
It seems equally
so that a body that is immortal and incorruptible can admit of its owner passing
again into the death state. The ideas and the terms are mutually contradictory
and exclusive. Of those who rise in that first resurrection the Lord said
plainly: “neither
can they die any more” (Lk. 20: 36).
What, then, is the solution of these difficulties?
10. We turn to
passages dealing directly with the subject.
(1) 2 Cor. 5: 10. “We make it our aim, whether at home or absent, to be well‑pleasing
unto Him. For we must all be made manifest before the judgment‑seat of
Christ; that each one may receive the things done through the body, according
to what he hath done, whether it be good or bad.” This chief statement leaves unmentioned the time and place of the
judgment.
(2) Heb. 9: 27. “It is laid up
for men once to die and after this judgment” (meta de touto krisis, no article). Thus [page 78 - JUDGMENT AFTER DEATH] judgment may take
place at any time after death. Luke 16
shows Dives suffering anguish immediately after death, for the scene is Hades, the realm of the dead
between death and resurrection, and his brothers are still alive on earth. But
again, Rev. 20: 11 ‑ 15, shows
another, the final judgment, after resurrection, after the millennial kingdom.
Both are “after death” [verse 12].
Neither of these passages suggests the parousia in the air as the time or place.
(3) The statements
of the Lord as to His, dealing with His own servants at His return, contemplate
that His enemies will be called before Him immediately after He will have dealt
with His own household: “But these mine enemies, who
would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me”
(Lk. 19: 27). “Hither,”
that is, to the same spot where He had just been dealing with His servants.
This, as to servants then alive on earth at least, excludes the parousia in the air, for His
enemies will not be gathered there.
(4) Luke 16: 19 ‑ 31. Dives and Lazarus are seen
directly after death in conditions the exact reverse of those just before known
on earth. The passing of the soul to that other world, and the bringing about
of so thorough a change of condition, is too striking, too solemn just to
happen. Some one must have
decided and ordered this reversal; that is, there must have been a judging of their cases and a judicial decision
as to what should be their lot in the intermediate state.
This judgment
therefore may take place at or
immediately after death, as Heb. 9: 27
above. And in the time of Christ thus
almost all men believed. See, for example, the judgment of Ani directly after death, before Osiris
the god of the underworld, in the Egyptian Book
of the Dead. Or, as to the Pharisees, to whom particularly Christ spoke of
Dives and Lazarus, see Josephus, Antiquities,
18: 3.
(5) 2 Tim. 4: 6, 7, 8. “I am
already being poured out as a drink offering, and the time of my departure is
come. I have fought the good fight, I have kept the faith; I have finished the
course, henceforth there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness, which
the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give to me at that day: and not only to
me, but also to all them that have loved His appearing.”
Paul was now
certain he had won his crown. When [page 79 - THE CROWN WON] writing to the Philippians
a few years before (3: 10 ‑ 14) he
spoke uncertainly: “not that I have already obtained,”
for then he had not yet finished the course; but now he writes with certainty.
How could this assurance have become his save by communication from the
Righteous Judge? But this implies that the Judge had both formed and
communicated His decision upon Paul's life and service, even though Paul had not yet actually died. In such a case, as it
would seem, any session of the judgment seat “in that
day” will be only for
bestowment of the crown already won and allotted, not for adjudication upon the
race or contest, the latter having before taken place as to such a person.
(6) The expression
“I have finished my course” is taken from the
athletic world which held so large a place in Greek life and interest and is so
often used by Paul as a picture of spiritual effort. In 1 Cor. 9: 24 ‑ 27, it is used as a plain warning that the
coveted prize may be lost. Phil. 3: 12 ‑ 14
employs it to urge to intense and unremitting effort to win that prize. The
Lord is the righteous Judge, sitting to adjudicate upon each contestant in the
race or contest.
Now of unavoidable
necessity the judge of the games automatically formed his decision as to each
racer or wrestler as each finished the course or the contest. The giving of the
prizes was indeed deferred to the close of the whole series of events: Paul's
crown would be actually given “in that day”; but
not till then did the judge defer his decision as to each item or contestant.
It could not be, for the most celebrated of the Greek games, the Olympic,
lasted five days.
The figure, taken
with the case of Paul, and in the light of Dives and Lazarus, suggests a decision of the Lord as to each
believer before or at the time of his death. That decision issues in determining the place and experience of the man
in the intermediate state, and may extend to assurance that he has won the
crown, the prize of the high calling.
(7) Rev. 6: 9, 11, The Fifth
Seal. As before shown, these martyrs “under the altar” are not yet raised from
the dead, for others have yet to be killed for Christ's sake, and only then
will they be all vindicated and avenged. But to each one of them separately a
white robe is given. Now ch. 3: 4, 5, shows that the white robe is the
visible sign, conferred by the Lord, of their worthiness to be His companions
in [page
80 - JUDGMENT
BEFORE RESURRECTION] His glory and kingdom. This again makes evident that
for these the Lord's judgment has been formed and announced. No later
adjudication upon such is needful or conceivable: only the giving of the crown
“in that day.”
11. From these facts and considerations it
seems fairly clear that the judgment of the Lord upon the dead of His people is
not deferred to one session but is reached and declared either (a) immediately before death (as Paul), when
there is no further risk of the racer failing, or (b) immediately after death (as Lazarus), or (c) at least in tile intermediate state of death (the souls under the
altar).
If this is so,
then it will follow that the decision of
the Lord as to whether a believer is worthy of the first resurrection and
reigning in the kingdom is reached prior to resurrection, in which case the
two insoluble problems above stated simply do not arise; that is, there is no
question of one raised in a deathless state returning to the death state, nor
of bodies of glory being subjected to chastisement. Believers adjudged not
worthy of the first resurrection will not rise, but will remain where they are
until the second resurrection.
We agree fully
that the judgment seat of Christ will issue in chastisement for unworthy living
by Christians, but this will not be inflicted after resurrection.
(8) Rev. 11: 18 repays exact study. The four and
twenty elders worship God because He has put forth His “power, His great power” (teen dunamin sou teen megaleen)
and has exercised His sovereignty. In consequence of this asserting of
power there are five results. (1) The nations are angry, (2) God's wrath
replies, (3) there arrives “the season for the dead to
be judged,” (4) for the faithful to be rewarded, and (5) for the
destruction of the destroyers of the earth.
Since prophets and
saints are to receive their reward at the resurrection of the just (Luke 14: 14), the first resurrection (Rev. 20: 1 ‑ 6), the season for the dead to
be judged and rewarded is here found directly before the destruction of the
Antichrist and his helpers in the wasting of the lands.
Concerning this
judging of the dead three features are to be noted.
1. It must be of godly dead, for it is before the
thousand years, whereas the judgment of the ungodly dead is thereafter (Rev. 20: 1, 11 ‑ 15). [page
81 - JUDGED
WHILE DEAD]
2. It is a judgment of persons who are dead at the time
they are judged. There is no ground for reading in that they have been raised
from the dead before the judgment takes place. They are styled “the dead.” No one
would think of styling living persons “the dead.”
The term employed (nekros)
is nowhere used of persons who are not actually dead, physically or
morally. Moreover, resurrection does not of itself assure life. That unique and
glorious change to be the portion of such as share the first resurrection (1 Cor. 15) is their
special privilege; it does not attach to all resurrection. Dead persons can be
raised dead. In John 5: 29 our Lord creates
a clear contrast: “They that have done good shall come
forth unto resurrection of life; and they that have done evil unto resurrection of judgment." The Lord did not say that they
shall come forth out of the tombs alive, but that they shall come forth unto resurrection of life or “unto resurrection of
judgment” (eis anastasin). There seems no scripture, indeed, that at the moment they come
forth they have even a body, other than that psychical counterpart before
noticed and which persists in the death state.Thus in
Rev. 20: 12 also it is as dead that they are judged: “I saw the dead standing before the throne . . .
and the dead were judged.” It should therefore be supposed that those
there present whose names are found in the book of life will thereupon be
restored to life, that is, will
be given an immortal body, even as the Lord said: “The
Father raiseth the dead (egeirei tous nekrous) and makes them live (zoopoiei), thus
also the Son makes to live whom He will” (zoopoiei, John 5: 21). Here two operations
are distinguished by the “and makes them live.”
3. The verb to be judged, “the
season of the dead to be judged,” is the infinitive passive aorist (kritheenai). Being
an aorist it has the force of a completed and final action. But this final
judgment, which disposes of the case, may be the conclusion of a process of
judgment. This is seen in another place where this aorist is twice used, Acts 25: 9, 10. Festus asked Paul whether he would
be willing to go up from Caesarea to
This short
discussion is no more than suggestive, directed to certain obscurities and
perplexities found in our main theme, designed to provoke enquiry so as further
to elucidate truth and dispel
darkness. May the Lord in grace use it to this end. [page
83]
VII. APPENDIX TO PAGE 22.
On the meaning of the genitive “of Christ” (tou Christou) in 1 Cor. 15: 23.
(This critical study is submitted with respect to
those able to examine it.)
The force of this
genitive may be studied in the following passages.
1. In Acts 16: 33 it
is said of the jailer at
2. In the first chapter of the epistle that is before us
(1 Cor. 1: 12) the
apostle reproves the believers on account of the contentions among them. “Now this I mean, that each one of you saith,
I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and
I of Cephas; and I of Christ (Christou).” It cannot be supposed that these believers were attributing their
redemption to Paul, Apollos, or Peter; so that the
meaning is, “I am of Paul's circle; I of Apollos'; I
of Peter's; I of Christ's circle.” It was sectionalism, schism,
denominationalism, sectarianism; although all alike were on the only foundation
(ch. 3: 10, 11).
Family
relationship alone did not make the jailer's relatives to be “of him” at
that particular hour. It was those who were actually in his house at that time,
which would include servants and slaves (if any). All believers were equally
children of God, but some were “of Paul,” others
“of Peter,” etc. Thus these two instances show
that it is not relationship, natural or spiritual, but open membership in a
known visible circle that is the idea in the term “of
him.”
3. Romans 14: 4 reads
“Who art thou that judgest
the servant of another? (oiketees, household dependent; Lk. 16: 13: Acts 10: 7: 1 Pet. 2: 18: all places). To his own lord he standeth or falleth.” Verses 7, 8
add: “For none of us liveth
to himself, and none dieth
to himself. For whether we live, we live unto the Lord; or whether we die, we
die unto the Lord: whether we live therefore, or die, we are the Lord's”
(we are of the Lord, tou
Kuriou esmen. The [page 84 - IDEAL
OR ACTUAL] German can express this, as the Greek, by case ending, “wir sind des Herrn,” Elberfeld version). “For to this end Christ died, and lived again, that He might
be Lord of [might rule over] both dead and
living” (Darby). Christ's
lordship, His proprietorship of and authority over all, is indisputable: in
the apostle's argument all are assumed to be owning it: “he that regardeth the day, regardeth it unto the Lord: and he that eateth,
eateth unto the Lord” (ver. 6),
but, as we shall see shortly, not all believers do in fact own that lordship,
or do not own it continuously and to the end of life. Thus ideally all are “of Him,” but actually some who might be, and ought to
be, are not.*
[* Herodotus narrates that Astyages,
king of the Medes, ordered a courtier, Harpagus, to
kill the infant Cyrus, the king's grandson. The courtier says: “But for safety's sake it is necessary for me that this child
should die; it is necessary however that one of those of Astyages
himself (ton tina Astyageos) should
be the slayer and not (one) of mine (ton heemon). This he
said and straightway sent a messenger to (one) of the herdsmen of Astyages (ton Astyageos) whom he knew. . .” and left the
matter to him (Hdt. I. 109, 110). Here two circles
are distinguished, that of the king and that of the courtier, and each, in
relation to its head, is described by the genitive. This
force of the genitive occasions in English the italicized words in 1 Cor. 1: 11, “them which are of the household of Chloe,”
where the original has simply ton Chloees (those of Chloe).]
4. This same meaning is to be seen in 2 Cor. 10: 7, “Ye look at the things that are before your face. [It
is something visible that is in question.] If anyone
has confidence in himself of Christ to be (Christou einai), this let him consider with himself, that as he is of
Christ (Christou) thus also are we”:
that is, I Paul am evidently and obviously of Christ's circle at least as much
as my critic is: in proof of which he adduces the known public features of the
measure and power of his ministry of the Word, which were the Lord's open
acknowledgment of His faithful servant.
5. The same thought of a circle of persons that may be
contrasted with other circles lies in the statement in Gal.
5: 24, “And those of Christ Jesus (hoi tou Christou leesou) crucified the flesh with the [its] passions and the [its] cravings.”
In fallen human nature there works a powerful principle of evil, described in christian terms as, “the old man which [page 85 - THE FLESH CRUCIFIED] gets
more and more corrupt according to the [its] deceitful
cravings” (Eph. 4: 22). Its cravings
deceive man into indulging them, because they promise satisfaction though they
produce corruption. Through partaking of the divine nature the believer in
Christ is afforded a way of escaping “from the corruption
that is in the world through lust [the cravings of the old man]” (2 Pet. 1: 4); but it abides a certainty, to the
Christian as well as to the unbeliever, “that the one
sowing to the flesh out of the flesh shall reap corruption” (Gal. 6: 8).
How this
corrupting principle in human nature originated perplexed philosophers and how
to master it baffled moralists. Various schools had different methods. The
circle of Epicurus proposed the sensually agreeable plan of stifling the flesh
by satiating it. That of the Stoics advocated a stem rigid suppression. Eastern
philosophy, as in Buddhism, recommended a sustained passive ignoring of all
desire.
The circle which
bore the name of Christ Jesus had a method peculiar to itself. It was neither satiating, suppressing, nor ignoring, but crucifying: “those of
Christ Jesus crucified the flesh.”
They taught that Christ died on account of the old man himself, as well as his
corrupt doings. They held that, judicially, before God, man's creator and
judge, the death of the Substitute was the death of the sinner, that therefore
the old man “was crucified with Christ” (Rom. 6: 6). The
messengers of this faith offered a promise from God that whoever would accept
from the heart this view, with its implications and practical consequences,
should receive power from His eternal Spirit to live in freedom from the old
tyranny of sin. The new method worked effectively where all other attempts had
failed. Moral crucifixion with Christ led on to moral resurrection with Him,
and the circle that bore His name became, as a circle, and by contrast, conspicuous
for holiness.
No doubt this
crucifixion was more distinctly apprehended and more fully exhibited by some
than by others; we know that in fact some in the circle were not children of
God at all ‑ they seemed to be "of Christ Jesus” in
the sense of publicly belonging to the circle that bore His name, though they
were not “in
Christ Jesus” by spiritual union: but the thought in the statement
before us is that a certain known [page 86 - INFANTS OR SONS] circle or school –
“those of Christ Jesus” ‑ was characterized by a certain attitude and
doctrine, which its members were presumed to have adopted, and were expected
and exhorted to maintain in practical conduct.
6. The important
argument in Gal. 3: 23‑29, contains the same conception. “But if ye are of Christ, then are ye Abraham's seed, etc.” (ei de humeis Christou, ver. 29). Those who fear God are viewed by Him
in two classes: first, such as in, spiritual growth are
yet infants, and therefore under control by rules – “thou
shalt . . . thou shalt not”; second, those who have become of age,
grown up sons, who are freed from such restrictions; are at liberty. The former
are under a tutor, the law (ver. 23‑25),
who orders their conduct, who restrains and punishes the outworking of
their carnal nature: the “sons” are “of Christ” (“but if ye are of
Christ”), Who enables them by the Spirit to
walk by the free, holy impulses of the new nature.
Translation from
the one status and association into the other is by faith and baptism: that is,
by an act of the heart known to God, but also by a public act seen by men; for
we become “in Christ Jesus by faith” (ver. 26), but
we “put on Christ” by baptism (ver. 27). Thus
here also to be “of Christ” means something more
than to have exercised faith in Him, even to have associated openly by
immersion with those who profess to have died out of the old circle and to have
risen again into a new circle, that of Christ Jesus.
7. In 2 Tim. 2: 19‑21, the apostle again speaks of things
plain and visible; such as a foundation stone, and the inscription carved upon
it; a house built on the foundation; the various utensils of the house, of
either valuable or common materials, gold and silver or wood and earth.
The picture is
very like Paul's earlier metaphor in 1 Cor. 3. where also is the foundation, the superstructure, the
precious or the perishable materials, either of which may be built by the
believer into the life‑work and character which each is erecting on the
one foundation. He exhorts the Corinthian Christians not to use the perishable:
in Timothy he exhorts to purge out of one's character the common elements, that
the gold and silver of the divine nature, created in us by the Spirit upon the
ground of redemption, may alone remain, and one be thus a vessel fit for the
immediate use of the [page 87 - FOUNDATION AND SUPERSTRUCTURE] divine Master, not
one relegated to the lower purposes of the great house.
The said
inscription on the foundation reads thus: “Knows the
Lord those being of Him (tous ontas autou), and, Let every one naming the name of the
Lord depart from unrighteousness.” That is, the Lord, on His
side, knows distinctly each one who in reality, according to the Lord's
standard, is of His circle. On our side the sign that warrants any person being
accorded by us a place in that circle is that he forsakes unrighteousness. He
who never yet has forsaken unrighteousness (wrong doing, adikia, as 1 Cor.
6: 8, 9) is not “of Him,” (that is, not
as the Lord judges), even though he may hold membership in a Christian church.
He who having forsaken wrong doing afterward returns thereto is to be put out
of the Christian circle (1 Cor.
5: 13), and thus ceases to be “of Him”
for the purposes of this expression.
This does not
affect the final salvation of every believer; for one is saved before he is added to the church, and therefore
final salvation does not depend upon membership in that privileged company who
will form “the church.” *
This cuts away the root of the Romish error that one
must belong to the church to be saved. But the wrong doers of the church circle
are plainly warned that they “shall not inherit God's
kingdom” (1 Cor.
6: 9: etc.). Such will not be “accounted worthy
of the
8. The expression
under review is in Romans 8: 9: “But ye are not in flesh but in spirit, if at least spirit of
God dwells in you. But if any one has not spirit of Christ, this one is not of
Him.”
The omission from verse 1 preceding of the
clause “who walk not according to flesh but according
to spirit” is of first importance, showing that the justification of a
believer in Christ is not dependent upon his walk as a Christian. At the very
moment that a repenting sinner rests his salvation upon the atoning work that
Christ accomplished upon the cross, and therefore before he has had opportunity
for doing any works, he acquires a new standing. By that faith in Christ he
obtains access to the standing of one who is in [page 88 - FLESH OR SPIRIT] the favour of God
(Rom. 5: 1, 2). He is then and there seen by
God, his judge, no longer as he is in himself, but as he now is “in Christ.” He is deemed to have met his doom and to
be free therefrom. The storm of wrath due to him on
account of his sins has burst upon him in the person of his Divine Substitute:
he has thus endured its full fury; that storm
has exhausted itself, and “there is therefore now no
condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus.”
But this eternally
justified believer may henceforth walk either by the impulses of his old fleshly
nature or by the leading of that new spirit nature which is created in us when
we believe on Christ. That a justified person may walk “according to flesh” is certain from many Scriptures and much sad
experience. “I, brethren,” says Paul, “was not able [formerly] to
speak to you as to spiritual but as fleshly . . . But neither yet now am I able, for yet fleshly ye are. For
whereas there is among you jealousy and strife, are ye not fleshly, and walk
according to men,” that is, not according to God? (1 Cor. 3: 1 ‑ 3.
See also Gal. 5: 13 ‑ 26,
for a sustained contrast between “flesh” and “spirit,” the old nature and the new, in the believer).
To the Romans the
apostle declared that if they lived according to flesh they would be unable to
please God and were liable to die (8: 7, 8,
and comp. 1 Cor. 10: 1 ‑
6). Upon this possibility of premature death we have before spoken. But,
he adds, “ye are not in flesh but in spirit, if at least (eiper) spirit of God dwells in
you.” This “if at least” * shows clearly the possibility of one who is for
ever free from condemnation not being indwelt by “spirit
of God.” It is God the Spirit Who creates and energises the new nature,
but it is not the Holy Spirit as a person that is here in view: the question is
whether the believer is ruled still by the mind of the old nature, which is “flesh,” or by the mind of the new nature, which is “spirit,” according to the exhortations “be renewed in the spirit of your mind”: “Have this mind [page 89 - OF CAESAR] in you
which was also in Christ Jesus” (Eph. 4: 23: Phil. 2: 5).
And, adds the Scripture (
[* “The Greek particle is more than merely ‘if’ (which often equals
'since' or 'as'), and suggests just such doubt and enquiry as would
amount to self‑examination. See 2 Cor. 13: 5.” Moule, Camb. Bible for Schools, in loco. So
Alford: “if so be that (‘provided that’; not ‘since’ . . . that this is the meaning here is evident by the exception
which immediately follows).”]
In
the light of the other places considered this will mean that one not ruled by
the same spirit which animated Christ is not of that company which He owns as
His circle, His household. “He is not His (belongs not
to Him, in the higher and blessed sense of being united to Him as a member of Him)” Alford, in loco; italics
mine.
In
his learned critical work Licht vom Osten (Light from the East ‑
ed. iv. 322) Professor Adolph Deissmann has remarked upon the parallel between this
genitive Christou, of
Christ, and doulos Christou
Christ's slave, and the expressions Kaisaros of Caesar, and Caesar's slave, belonging to Caesar, his own personal property; that is, his
personal retinue and slaves as distinct from the vast host of his subjects outside
of his immediate household. In illustration he cites several of the passages
here examined, including the one chiefly before us, 1
Cor. 15: 22, “they
that are of Christ in His Parousia.”
This usage is found in Phil. 4: 22: “All the saints
salute you, especially they that are of Caesar's household” (hoi ek tees Kaisaros oikias). Comp. also Matt. 22: 21 and parallels: “the things that are Caesar's” (of Caesar, ta Kaisaros)
contrasted with the other circle, “the things that are
God's” (ta tou Theou). Similarly,
Christ also has a vast number who do acknowledge Him as Saviour but have
not learned to be His slaves, and so are not “of Him” within the
force of this term.
Many of the topics
of this pamphlet are opened more fully, in
THE REVELATION OF
JESUS CHRIST
Some of the themes
of this pamphlet are enlarged in
FIRSTBORN SONS
Their Rights and
Risks
-------
FIRSTFRUITS AND HARVEST
A Study in Resurrection and Rapture
By
G. H. LANG
Made and Printed in
John Roberts Press Ltd
Foropress House, Clerkenwell Green,
EDITOR’S FOREWORD
Who was G. H. LANG?
There is no doubt in my mind the reader of this book will want to know, and it
seems right for me to endeavour to answer the question by providing two
writings by those who obviously knew him well.
Firstfruits and
Harvest is, in my opinion, one of Mr. Lang’s best works. In it he methodically sets out to interpret
and expound some of the more difficult portions of the word of God:
particularly, the conditional promises, which appear to be almost completely
neglected and ‘glossed over’ my a vast majority of
regenerate believers today. Its a bold act indeed, when the people of God
wilfully set out to change a conditional promise of His into an unconditional one!
It may be of interest to the reader to know that it was the
writings of this book which gave me a desire to search the Scriptures with
an open mind, to see if the doctrines taught here are both Scriptural and true.
Being familiar (at one time) with writings by those who believe
the whole
Mr. Lang’s exposition on the intermediate state and place of the
dead, what takes place at death, the souls under the altar, the judgment seat
of Christ, the pre-tribulation rapture of the living, and the First
Resurrection of the dead, are all important subjects (neglected in our churches
today) which the author has dealt with here in great detail: I am in complete
agreement with him on these very important issues also.
Beliefs, by some regenerate believers, who maintain that the whole
I do not accept the
author’s interpretation of ‘the Church’ as being a select company which will
be taken out from those who are eternally saved. ‘The Church of the Firstborn,’ are (in my opinion) what Mr. Lang calls ‘the Church’.
Great emphasis is now being placed by some on ‘the Judgment Seat
of Christ,’ as proof that all believers (who are alive on
earth at a particular time) will be rapt to heaven before the Great
Tribulation begins! They believe in one
judgment of God only - (after rapture
and resurrection); and disregard, disbelieve, or gloss over any prior judgment
by God on their own righteousness as to whether or not it has exceeded that of
the Pharisees, (Matt. 5: 20), before that time.
Mr. Lang deals extensively with this unscriptural and misguided notion
in great detail through pages 67-82.
It is not surprising to read that F. F. Bruce wrote: “Mr. Lang . . . has a meaning and message
he has patiently sought out for himself and committed to writing for others,”
(Foreword, to The Revelation Of Jesus Christ.).
G. H. Lang was also a gifted Poet and wrote “a collection of Poems
to
exalt Christ and to strengthen godliness.” The following is an example which has been
chosen at random:-
“The sweet commingling tints of morn
Lay soft on
But sea and shore and hills stood clear
As noontide’s blazing hour drew near.
Too swiftly fell the eastern night
And shut the lovely scene from sight,
Till stars in myriads shed their ray
And softly paled the gloom of grey.
The moon her full white glory threw,
The shadowy hills all ghostly grew,
Her borrowed radiance saying plain,
“The sun still shines, to
rise again:
By faith endure, by
hope be strong,
Another day
will dawn ere long.”
On the inside cover of one of his books which I had on loan, I
found a few words which he had written. They are as follows:-
“He will
give the strength to endure any opposition that may come. It is forbearance when opposed that commends
the truth professed.”
I consider it a great honour to present these writings on disc,
and highly commend them to ‘the Christian public’ for their careful and
prayerful study.
Yours in His service,
W.H.Tindle.
Access to other writings by this same author can be obtained at
the following website address:-
http://website.lineone.net/~whtindle
-------
GEORGE HENRY LANG - A
TRIBUTE
By
DOUGLAS W. BREALEY
Having known Mr. Lang for nearly sixty years I am glad to be given
the opportunity of paying a tribute to his memory; in doing so I desire only
to ‘magnify the grace of God’ in him.
First, I would say, that over the years I have been growing
conscious of his deep spirituality; he was one of those rare souls who really
lived in heaven; he found himself truly to be a ‘stranger and pilgrim on the
earth’. His ‘city home’ was in heaven from which he saw himself to be sent to
this world as an ambassador for Christ. He was completely devoid of any earthly
nationalism - it mattered little to him where he was down here, except that he
should be in the place of Christ's choosing for the moment; so from time to
time he was found in many countries on the service of his Lord, now enduring
the scorching heat of Arabian deserts, now the freezing cold of Russian
steppes; he was equally content to be posted by his Sovereign in some primitive
village of ‘the pensive East’, or in some great city of the West with all its
modern amenities. Thus he roamed the world, Christ's ‘ambassador at large’,
beseeching sinners to be reconciled to God.
He was essentially a man of faith, never looking to man for the
means of his subsistence, but only to his heavenly Father, and faith grew with
its exercise. In this school, like his great predecessor, he learned in
whatsoever state he was therewith to be content; he learned the secret of how
to run low and how to run over. And he was such a man of faith because he was
such a man of prayer; his prayers were always unusual and as inspiring as they
were unique; he spoke with an intimacy to his heavenly Father as one who knew
God, but whose intimacy was the very soul of reverence.
I think I may truthfully say that he was the most apostolic man I
have ever met; perhaps for that very reason he was a very controversial figure;
a correspondent suggested to me that he was the most controversial figure in
brethren circles since J. N. Darby; yet it would be true to say that he himself
was not a controversialist. A very close
student of the Word, and an independent thinker, he was not prepared to take
traditional interpretations unless he was personally convinced that they were
right. Though completely convinced of the eternal security of the believer,
many of his views on prophecy led him into avenues of thought and teaching
where a great number of us felt unable to follow. Unfortunately this closed
doors to his otherwise extremely valuable ministry. Perhaps one of the greatest
teachers of his time, multitudes could testify to the great help they have
received from him, either from his public utterances or from his numerous
writings.
It was only to be in his presence to realise that one was in the
presence of a true saint of God whose
holy life gave weight and authority to all he taught.
From our midst has gone ‘a prince and a great man’; he has been an
ensample to the flock. If we cannot follow all he taught, we may well follow
his faith, and like him, come [search] the Scriptures with an open mind and
teachable heart, ever keeping before us that day, quickly coming, when differences of judgement will have
disappeared for ever and when ‘we shall know even as we are known’.
F. F. Bruce,
. . . Having reached this position, he made it the centre around
which his interpretation was organised. While he fully accepted the doctrine of
the believer's eternal security, he held that there were great and precious
privileges which might be forfeited by unfaithfulness, and this served in his
eyes as an added incentive to personal holiness - a leading theme in his
ministry . . . .
Referring to Mr. Lang's literary work, F. F. Bruce continues: “By all these writings, his spoken ministry
and private correspondence and conversation, he has proved to be for many of us
‘an interpreter, one among a thousand’. But we think of him even more as a
humble and warm-hearted man of God, whose personal holiness and ‘cheerful
godliness’ were an inspiration to us.” Harold
St. John, who had a great affection for him, said to me once with a twinkle
in his eye, ‘I agree with him completely so far as the past is concerned’; but
added with sober emphasis: ‘He is a man whose prayer-life I envy!’ Such an appraisal from a man
of Mr. St. John's spiritual calibre speaks volumes. And if anyone wishes to
learn the secret of Mr. Lang's spiritual power and personal influence, he may
find it in three pamphlets from his pen - Praying
is Working, Prayer Focussed and
Fighting, and Divine Guidance.
G.H. Lang - A modern Caleb
‘He hath followed me
fully’ Numbers 14 v.24.
Two courageous men were born in 1874; Churchill and G.H. Lang.
November 20th will mark the Centenary of that lucid and powerful Bible teacher
- G.H. Lang. He was never called before kings or judges, but he was that rarity
- a man who taught what he really
believed, and lived by what he taught regardless of consequences. This
simple courage was to him but simple common sense. God was his father, and
father’s wisdom is always good. I commend the idea to us all. It saves a lot of
heartaches if you refuse to look at the hazards, and look simply to God.
His childhood was spent in a Christian home at
By 1899 he was an insurance assessor’s clerk with very good
prospects but one day he was given an assignment which touched his conscience.
He set out to ask a friend’s advice, when a voice said ‘I will instruct thee.’ (Psa. 32. 8). He returned home and
waited some days; on 27th. May the Voice said
‘Whatsoever ye do, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God
the Father through Him.’ (Col. 3. 7). He saw at once he could not do the
business called for. On 1st June he wrote his resignation, without having any
other job to go to. I remember him telling me. ‘The ink wasn’t dry on that
letter, when a deep peace filled my soul.’ He promised the Lord to take
whatever job he was led to; ‘until then’ he told me ‘I said I would devote all
my time to his service.’ His eyes twinkled as he continued ‘I am still waiting
for that job.’ So for 54 years he served God in many lands:
Almost his last journey was to the wedding of our friend George Patterson in 1953. In 1954, at
80 years of age, he told me that the Lord had said to him that his journeys
were ended, but he began to publish a new magazine, ‘The Disciple’ given free
to all who would read it prayerfully, each edition published only when the Lord
had sent the money for it. I have a full set, 22 numbers, more than 950 pages;
close on half a million words, more than half as long as the Bible, mostly from
the pen of an ailing man in his 80’s.
George Lang wrote 14 major books, and innumerable booklets, 3 of
which were published by the Enfield Christian Bookshop! I recall him saying ‘No
man should write a book until he is 40. He needs to prove his theories in
practice before publishing.’ All but 9 of his many writings were published
after he was 50.
His views on prophecy and the hereafter did not win universal
acceptance: his views on the Church, the most lucid and scriptural expositions
I have ever come across, are unacceptable to denominational Christians and most
clergy. He trusted his reputation to God, and when doors were closed he found
others opened by the Lord! He very strictly maintained silence before men on
the subject of financial needs. He truly lived by faith.
Probably
his most influential books were his biography
of
Lang’s quiet, gracious, determined spirituality stemmed from a
love for Christ which valued more than anything else the great gift which the
risen Saviour had given him, the personal anointing of the Holy Spirit, which
he said took place in the 30th year of his life.
The titles of some of his best pamphlets are evidence of this
great preoccupation; ‘The Rights of the
Holy Spirit in the House of God.’ (1938) * ‘God
at work on his own lines.’ (1952) ‘The personal indwelling of the Holy Spirit.’ (1954) ‘Praying is working.’ (1918). The same
theme runs through his biographies ‘A.N.
Groves’, ‘Aroolappen’,
‘E.H.Broadbent’
and his autobiography ‘Pages from an
ordered life.’
[* Can be obtained on disc by personal request. Not for general use. – Ed.]
F.F. Bruce concludes his
Epilogue to the posthumous edition of Lang’s Biography thus:- ‘He takes his
secure place in the ranks of those whom we are bidden to bear in mind:
‘Remember your guides, who spoke to you the Word of God, consider the outcome
of their life, and imitate their faith.’ (Heb. 13: 7).
I have been lucky to have known several people utterly devoted to
Christ. G.H. Lang was one of them. I thank God for his memory.
M. Collier.
By kind permission.
-------
BOOK CONTENTS
Introduction . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. Page 7
I. The
Hope . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . 9
1. The Change of Body.
2. With the Lord.
3. On Going to Heaven .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
9
4. The Principle of
Selection . .
. . .
. . 10
II. Who are those “of Christ Jesus”?
1 Thess. 4; 1 Cor.
15 . .
. . .
. . .
. . 19
III. The Period of the Parousia . .
. . . . . 31
IV.
The Pre-Tribulation Rapture . .
. . .
. . . 36
V.
Man's Constitution and Future.
Hades and
His
Creation
. . .
. . . . .
. . 47
Death . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
49
What takes Place at
Death? . .
. . .
51
Where is Hades? . .
. . .
. . . 52
Do Saints go to Heaven at
Death? . .
. 53
The Souls under the Altar . .
. . .
. . 58
VI. The Judgment Seat of Christ . .
. . .
67
The
Time thereof
. . .
. . . . .
75
VII. Appendix on “Of
Christ” . .
. . .
83
-------
FIRSTFRUITS AND
HARVEST
A Study in
Resurrection and Rapture
BY
G. H. LANG
Second
Edition
Of
The
Author
“Wretford,”
1946
FIRSTFRUITS
AND HARVEST
A
Study in Resurrection
and Rapture
INTRODUCTION.
“We
must not adhere to those systems of doctrine that never can bear an
infringement of a view that is held popularly. For instance, perhaps we have
all been brought up in the notion that all the children of God, in all ages,
compose the
[* We
must learn to distinguish between the “Church” and “the Church of the
Firstborn”. All regenerate believers
are incorporated (through faith in Christ) into ‘the Church,’ – it composes of all
the saved of all ages, Old Testament saints as well as New, (Acts 7: 38): but not all (regenerate
believers), thought initially given opportunity during this life to ‘attain’
(or ‘gain by effort’) firstborn status (Gen. 25: 32), will make it into ‘the
Church of the Firstborn.’ (Heb. 12: 23; Gen. 25: 32, 34). The latter are selected out from the former,
and ‘accounted worthy’ (by the Lord) to receive firstborn status and
blessings. That is, they will obtain a double
inheritance: (1) they inherit ‘eternal life’ through faith – “the free
gift of God,” (Romans 6: 23, R.V.); and (2) ‘a just recompense of reward’
for their faithfulness and fidelity - an inheritance in Christ’s
The
world system that occupies the earth is aged and decrepit. Like some vast, worn‑out
machine it creaks and groans as at the breaking‑point. The age is as
weary as wicked, and the only solid comfort is that its consummation seems to
be nearing. The death‑throes of this vast body corporate will be
desperate and painful; yet they will be also the birth‑throes of a better
age.
The
chief need of the world is competent government. Even the best disposed and
ablest rulers prove signally unequal to relieving the woes of the nations, but
for this urgent need the mercy of God has made full provision. He has in
readiness a perfect Sovereign for heaven and earth, His own Son, Jesus Christ
the Lord, and His coming to earth to assume the government is a chief theme of
the Word of God. (Psm. 96: 9‑14; 97: 1: etc.)*
[* Quotations are usually from the Revised Version.]
In
this expectation the apostles of Christ as devout Jews were trained; but their
Lord when about to leave them intimated that there were circumstances
connected with that expectation which yet awaited disclosure, and that the
Spirit [page
8 - Christ’s
Germinal Teachings] of God, Who had visited and inspired the
prophets, should come to them also, to abide with them, and to guide them into
all the truth, and to disclose unto them those things to come (John 16: 13).
One of
these yet undisclosed particulars Christ had just hinted in the words of John
14: 2, 3: “In my Father's house are many abiding places; if it were not so I
would have told you; for I go to prepare a place for you. And if I go and
prepare a place for you, I come again, and will receive you unto myself; that
where I am, there ye may be also.”
This
intimation was probably as yet obscure to the apostles, It suggested: 1. That
for them the Lord had in mind an abode away from the earth in the heavenly
regions; 2. That that place was not yet ready, but that He was about to go
thither and prepare it for their use; 3. That He would come again from heaven;
4. That at His coming He would take them away from the earth to that prepared
region; 5. That this was in order that they might be in His company in His
heavenly abode.
Here
then is the introduction of the subject of the removal of some of mankind from
the earth to dwell in the heavens. In his Progress
of Doctrine in the New Testament (24), Bernard
has well said, and shown, “that there is no part of the later and larger
doctrine [of the New Testament] which has not its germs and principles in the
words which Christ spake with His own lips in the
days of His flesh. It is provided that all which is to be spoken after shall
find support and proof from His own pregnant and forecasting
sayings.” This is a fact, and it is of the first importance for a right
interpreting of the New Testament. The four Gospels open the truths expanded in
the epistles; the latter must be construed with the former and cannot be
rightly explained in separation from them. The doctrine of the rapture is an
instance. It is rooted in this germinal saying of our Lord, even as that of the
first resurrection is rooted in His words in Luke 20: 34‑36: “The sons of
this age marry and are given in
marriage: but they that are accounted worthy to attain to that age [the age to follow this age, the age of the kingdom], and the
resurrection which is out from among the dead, neither marry nor are given in
marriage: for neither can they die any more [as those individuals raised [page 9 – “Going
To Heaven] from the dead before that resurrection had done
and could yet do]: for they are equal to angels; and are sons of God, being
sons of the resurrection”
The
doctrine of the Rapture is thus rooted in this germinal saying of our Lord in
John 14: 2, 3. The idea itself was not wholly new. Enoch and Elijah while
living had been removed bodily from the earth to the heavenly world; but that a
similar honour was open to themselves was probably a
new idea to the apostles; nor did Christ here make clear whether the subjects
of this favour would be found living at the moment or be raised from the dead.
These and other particulars were afterwards revealed by the Spirit, and our
present purpose is to set forth briefly some main elements of the New Testament
teaching upon this theme.
I. THE H0PE.
1. The Necessary Change
of Body. Man by constitution is made of and for the earth.
He is physically incapable of living in the presence of God (1 Cor. 15: 50; 1 Tim. 6: 16), so that a change of body is
indispensable (1 Cor. 15: 50 ‑ 58; Phil. 3: 20,
21; 2 Cor. 4: 16 ‑ 5: 10). It is not at death but at the coming of the Lord that this change will
be effected and we shall be made like Him (Col. 3: 4; 1 John 3: 1‑3).
2. With the
Lord. The purpose and effect
of this removal and change is that the Lord may have us with Himself, like
Himself, to share His glory and authority and to assist in ruling His kingdom
(John 14: 3, 17, 24; 1 Thess. 4. 17; Rev. 3: 4, 5,
21; 14. 4; 17: 14; 20: 4).
3. This is Unique in the Ways of God. The expression “going to heaven” has
become a commonplace, used as the equivalent of a sinner being delivered from
hell, but it implies vastly more. A king may pardon a rebel liable to death
without taking him to live in the royal palace and appointing him to high
office and, honour. So sinners might have been saved from eternal death and
been given eternal life without their ever being removed to the heavens as
their abode. This certainly will be the lot of multitudes of the saved and
might have been of all. There will be a new earth with saved nations, and God
coming down to them, not their being taken up to His region (Rev. 21: 1 ‑
31, 24). That some [page 10 – ENOCH] of the
saved are to be honoured as above indicated seems to be exceptional in the ways
of God and is the final secret of His eternal counsels.* Since God cannot make any superior to His Son, He can do nothing
greater than to cause some to share His Son's glory and authority. This is the
highest possible to the creature to all eternity.
[*
Col. 2: 3: omit “even Christ,” and read “in which,” that is, “the mystery of
God in which are all the treasures
of wisdom and knowledge hidden.” See Alford, and Darby, New Translation.]
4. The Principle of
Selection. In view of our sinful state and wicked works it is
evident that this “holy calling” to share His own kingdom and glory is given to
us by God “not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and
grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before times eternal” (2 Tim. 1: 9).
But since not all the saved of mankind will enjoy this highest destiny there
must be some principle of selection, for God always acts on moral grounds, not
arbitrarily or by caprice.
(a)
Enoch was translated alive to heaven before that first age developed its worst
degree of corruption and long before the judgment of heaven was poured out.
Concerning him the Spirit emphasizes that he looked forward to the coining of
the Lord and forewarned the wicked of the judgment then to fall (Jude 14: 15), as also that he “walked with God” (Gen.
5: 24) in such wise that “before
his translation he hath had witness borne to him that he had been well‑pleasing unto God” (Heb. 11: 5). Nothing therefore can be
clearer than that the unique privilege of translation must be preceded by such
a life of faith in God as produces a clear witness, and a holy walk which God
already endorses as well‑pleasing to Himself, and which He will crown by
a removal to His own sphere of the universe. Unless this were the lesson for us
of this christian age why
are these pointed comments upon Enoch made in the New Testament?
(b)
Concerning certain Old Testament saints we are told that they desired that heavenly country, looked for that heavenly city, and therefore
in practical daily life walked in separation from the world, confessing that
they were strangers and pilgrims in the earth. This manner of life amongst the
godless and violent was attended by manifold [page 11 - MAKING ELECTION SURE]
inconveniences and perils (Gen. 13: 7 ‑ 9; 14: 22, 23; 21: 25; 23: 4, 16;
26: 15 ‑ 21). The divine comment on these men of faith and this way of living is, “Wherefore God is
not ashamed of them, to be called their God: for
[that is, it is evident He is not ashamed of them, because] He hath prepared
for them a city” (Heb. 11: 8‑16), which He would not do for any of whom
He might be ashamed. This “wherefore” is most significant. It shows that it
was this same manner of life, their response and devotion to the call of God's
grace, that made sure to them their calling, by God's choice, to the heavenly
world. They had not been ashamed to serve the true and living God among men who
did not wish to retain Him in their knowledge (Rom. 1: 20); He is not ashamed
of them who thus confessed Him. They embraced the offer that grace made them of
a place in the heavens, and in consequence they walked a sanctified life in
separation from the godless; and therefore He Who was their sanctifier was not ashamed of them, and shall
bring them to glory (Heb. 2: 10 ‑ 11), by the first resurrection.
To us
also this applies: to us those of old are set forth as a weighty example (Heb.
11); to us the Scripture, speaking specifically of our obtaining a rich
entrance (i.e., by the first resurrection, instead of by the second resurrection
after the millennial age) into the eternal kingdom and glory to which we are
called, cries: “Give diligence to make your calling and election sure” (2 Pet.
1: 10, 11; 1 Pet. 5: 10). For it was to such as had just confessed Him to be
the Christ of God that Jesus solemnly said, “Whosoever shall be ashamed of Me
and of My words, of Him shall the Son of Man be ashamed, when He cometh in His
own glory, and the glory of the Father, and of the holy angels” (Lk. 9: 20 – 26; comp. Mk. 8: 38: Mat. 10: 32, 33: Lk. 12: 8, 9; 2 Ti. 2: 10 ‑ 13).
(c)
Thus translation, both of the living, as of the dead by the first resurrection,
is consequent upon a life of faith which seizes upon the offer of the heavenly
calling and shapes its course and conduct accordingly. So the Lord, dealing
with the first and select resurrection, spoke of those that are accounted
worthy to attain to that age and the resurrection from among the dead (Lk. 20:34 ‑ 36). “That age”
(singular) is not a Bible term for eternity, which is not one age but [page 12 - THE OUT‑RESURRECTION] many.
“the ages of the ages” (thirteen times in the
Revelation). “That age” is set by Christ in direct contrast to “this age,” and
so means the age of the kingdom to follow this age. A general resurrection the
Jews expected (Jo. 11: 34: Acts 24: 15), but
here Christ speaks of “the resurrection which is out from among the dead” (tees anastaseos
tees ek nekron). This
is the first clear intimation of such a limited, select resurrection (this
doctrine also, as has been pointed out, being rooted in a germinal saying of
Christ), and its terms are the key to and must control all subsequent instruction
upon the subject. And it is made very clear that this resurrection is a privilege to which one must “attain” and be “accounted worthy”
thereof. The notion that a share in the
first resurrection is a certainty, irrespective of attainment and worthiness,
can only be held in direct disregard of this primary declaration by the One who
will effect the resurrection and determine who shall participate therein, the
Son of God.
It was
through Paul that the Holy Spirit saw fit to give in permanent written form
fuller particulars as to this theme (1 Cor. 15; 1 Thess. 4), and it is Paul who elsewhere repeats the words
of our Lord Jesus just considered, declaring that, whereas justifying
righteousness is verily received through faith in Christ, not by our own works, yet, in marked contrast, “the resurrection which
is from among the dead (teen exanastasin teen ek nekron) is a
privilege at which one must arrive (katanteeso) by a
given course of life, even the experimental knowledge of Christ, of the power
of His resurrection, and of the fellowship of His sufferings, thereby becoming
conformed unto His death (Phil. 3: 7 ‑ 21). Surely the present participle
(summorphizomenos becoming conformed) is significant,
and decisive in favour of the view that it is a process, a course of life that
is contemplated.
It has
been suggested that Paul here speaks of a present moral resurrection as he does
in Romans 6. But in that chapter it is simply a reckoning of faith that is
proposed, not a course of personal sufferings. The subject discussed is whether
the believer is to continue in slavery to sin (douleuein), as in his unregenerate days, or is the mastery (kurieuo) of sin
to be immediately and wholly broken? It should be remembered that when writing
to the Philippians [page 13 - IF BY ANY MEANS] Paul
was near the close of his life and service. Could a life so
holy and powerful as his be lived without first knowing experimentally the truth taught in Romans 6? Did the Holy
Spirit at any time use the apostles
to urge others to seek experiences which the writer had not first known, and to
which therefore he could be a witness? And again, if by the close of that long and wonderful career
Paul was still only longing and striving to attain to death to the “old man”
and victory over sin, when did he ever attain thereto? Such reflections upon
the apostle are unworthy, and, as has been indicated, the experience set forth
in Romans 6 is not to be reached, or to be sought, by suffering, by attaining,
by laying hold, by pressing on, or any other such effort as is urged upon the
Philippians, but by the simple acceptance by faith of what God says He did for
us in Christ in relation to the “old man.”
Thus
this suggested exposition is neither sound experimental theology nor fair
exegesis. Paul indicates as plainly as language can do that the first
resurrection may be missed. His words are: “If by any means I may
arrive at the resurrection which is out from among the dead.” “If by any means” (ei pos) “I may” – “if” with the subjunctive of the verb ‑ cannot
but declare a condition; and so on this particle in this place Alford says, “It is used when an end is
proposed, but failure is presumed to be possible”: and so Lightfoot: “The apostle states not a positive assurance, but a
modest hope”: and Grimm‑Thayer
(Lexicon) give its meaning as, “If in any way, if by any means, if possible,”
and Ellicott to the same effect
says, “the idea of an attempt is conveyed, which may or may not be successful.”
Both Alford and Lightfoot
regard the passage as dealing with the resurrection of the godly from death,
and Ellicott's note is worth giving
in full. “‘The resurrection from the dead’; i.e., as the context suggests, the
first resurrection (Rev. 20: 5), when, at the Lord's coming the dead in Him
shall rise first (1 Thess. 4. 16), and the quick be
caught up to meet Him in the clouds (1 Thess. 4: 17);
comp. Luke 20: 35. The first resurrection will include only true believers, and
will apparently precede the second, that of non‑believers, and
disbelievers, in point of time. Any reference here to a merely ethical
resurrection (Cocceius) is wholly out of the [page 14 - HOPING
TO ATTAIN] question.” With the addition that the second
resurrection will include believers not accounted worthy of the first, this
note is excellent.
The
sense and force of the phrase “if by any means I may arrive” are surely fixed
beyond controversy by the use of the same words in Acts 27: 12: “the more part
advised to put to sea from thence, if by any means they could reach [arrive at] Phoenix, and winter there” (ei pos dunainto katanteesantes),
which goal they did not reach.
Further,
speaking upon the very subject of the resurrection and the kingdom promised
afore by God, Paul used the same
verb, again preceded by conditional terms, saying (Acts 26: 6 ‑ 8), “unto
which promise our twelve tribes, earnestly serving God night and day, hope to attain.” Here the force of elpizei katanteesai “unto which they hope to attain” is the same as his words in Philipplans ei pos kantanteeso, “if by any means I may attain.” This hope of the Israelite of sharing in
Messiah's kingdom is plainly conditional (Dan. 12: 2, 3). It is assured to
such an Israelite indeed as Daniel (12: 13), and to such a faithful servant of
God in a period of great difficulty as Zerubbabel
(Hag. 2: 23). It was also offered to Joshua the high priest, but upon
conditions of obedience and conduct. Joshua had been relieved of his filthy
garments and arrayed in noble attire (Zech. 3: 1‑5), but immediately his
symbolic justification before Jehovah had been thus completed, and his standing
in the presence of God assured, the divine message to him is couched in
conditional language: “And the Angel of Jehovah protested unto Joshua, saying,
Thus saith Jehovah of hosts, If thou wilt walk in My
ways, and if thou wilt keep My charge, then thou also shalt judge My house, and shalt also keep My courts, and I will give thee places to
walk among these that stand by” (ver. 6, 7).
It is
at this point that the “ifs” of the Word of God come in, and are so solemn and
significant. Whenever the matter is that of the pardon of sin, the justifying
of the guilty, the gift of eternal life, Scripture ever speaks positively and
unconditionally. The sinner is “justified freely by God's grace,” and “the free
gift of God is eternal life” (Rom. 3: 24; 6: 23), in which places the word
“free” means free of conditions, not only of payment. Eternal life therefore [page 15 - CONDITIONAL
PROMISES] is what is called in law an absolute gift, in
contrast to a conditional gift. The latter may be forfeited if the condition be
not fulfilled; the former is irrevocable. But as soon as the sinner has by
faith entered into this standing before God, then the Word begins at once to
speak to him with “Ifs.” From this point and forward every privilege is
conditional.
It is
truly “in all wisdom and prudence” that God has made known to us the mystery of
His will (Eph. 1: 8, 9). The indispensable minimum, justification, without
which no further blessing is possible, and which the sinner is utterly unable
to acquire, having no nature that can produce ought acceptable to God, this God
grants freely through the atoning work of the Lord Jesus. But now that a new nature has been implanted by grace, capable through
the Spirit of pleasing God, all attainment is made conditional upon the
exertion that this new nature is able to make, and must make. The whole
promised land, together with the title to share it and the power to conquer it,
are gifts of covenant grace, but no one
shall get an inch more than he sets his own foot upon, by the use of the power
freely granted to faith that obeys. And some who had equal title with the rest shall
not reach the inheritance at all, though neither shall they ever get back to
[* See my “Firstborn Sons.”]
The
comments of Mr. David Baron upon the
incident of Joshua are impressive. (The Visions and Prophecies of Zechariah, 103‑105.) I extract the following. “The word
‘protested’ means solemnly to protest,
and is intended to express the solemnity and importance of the charge about to
be made. The expressions, ‘Walk in My ways’ and ‘Keep My charge’ are frequently
used in the Pentateuch for ‘holding on in the way of life, well‑pleasing
to God, and for keeping the charge given by God.’ The first part of the charge
refers particularly to Joshua's personal attitude towards the Lord ‑ to
fidelity in his personal relations to God; and the second to the faithful
performance of his official duties as
high priest. And the reward of his thus studying (in his personal and official
capacity) to present [page 16 - BARON ON
JOSHUA THE HIGH PRIEST] himself approved unto God will be (a)
‘Then thou shalt also judge My house . . .’ (b) ‘And shalt
also keep My courts . . . ’ (c) But the climax of
promise in this verse is reached in the last clause, ‘And I will give thee places to walk
among these that stand by. . .’ ‘These
that stand by’ ‑ as we see by comparing the expression with verse 4 - are
the angels, who were in attendance on the Angel of Jehovah, and who ‘stood before Him' ready to carry out
His behests. The Jewish Targum ... is, I believe, nearer the truth [than many christian commentators] when it
paraphrases the words, ‘In the resurrection of the dead I will revive thee, and
give thee feet walking among these seraphim.’ Thus applied to the future the
sense of the whole verse would be this: 'If thou wilt walk in My ways and keep
My charge, thou shalt not only have the honour of
judging My house and keeping My courts, but when thy work on earth is done thou
shalt be transplanted to higher service in heaven, and
“have places to walk” among these pure, angelic beings who stand by Me,
hearkening unto the voice of My word' (Ps. 103: 20, 21). Note the ‘ifs’ in this
verse, my dear reader, and lay to heart the fact that, while pardon and
justification are the free gifts of God to all that are of faith, having their
source wholly in His infinite and sovereign grace, and quite apart from work or
merit on the part of man, the honour and privilege of acceptable service and
future reward are conditional upon our obedience and faithfulness: therefore
seek by His grace and in the power of His Spirit to ‘walk in His ways and to
keep His charge,’ and in all things, even if thine be the lot of a ‘porter’
or ‘doorkeeper’ in the House of God, to present thyself approved unto Him, in
remembrance of the day when ‘we must all be made manifest before the judgment‑seat
of Christ, that each one may receive the things done in the body, according to
what he hath done, whether it be good or bad’ (2 Cor.
5: 10).”
By
virtue of their relationship to Abraham all Israelites are natural sons of the
kingdom which is the goal of their national hopes according to the purpose and
promise of the God of Abraham; but the King has told them plainly, first, that
Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, together with all the prophets ‑ that is, all
the men of faith and devotion ‑ shall be in that [page 17 - ISRAEL
AND THE KINGDOM] kingdom,
but secondly, that it is very possible
that some of the sons of the kingdom may forfeit their entrance thereinto (Matt. 8: 10‑12: Luke 13 28‑29);
for there are those who may have been first in privilege and opportunity who
shall be last in final attainment.
If,
therefore, an Israelite attains to that kingdom it will be on the basis of a
covenant made by God with his federal head, Abraham; the source of which
covenant is the grace of God in Christ, the
working principle of which on man's side is faith proving itself by obedience.
Wherein now does this differ in basic principle from that new and better
covenant which introduces to better, that is, to heavenly privileges, to
sharing the heavenly sphere of that same kingdom, not only its earthward side?
This new and higher order of things is also derived from a covenant made with
our federal Head, its source is in that same grace of
God, its working principle on our side is a faith that proves its quality in
obedience.
Moreover,
since the man of true faith in that earlier age could aspire to this same
heavenly city and country as ourselves there manifestly was no difference in
his position and ours in this matter, though it may be he had only a more
distant view and not so full a revelation of the purpose of God in all this
project. So that if they of old could
miss their share, on what principle of righteousness shall we be exempted from their need of diligence and obedience? Such
exemption not only would contain an invidious and inexplicable distinction, but
it would prove highly dangerous to our moral fibre and our zeal for godliness.
And has not this been seen? We heard it boldly stated from a platform, that the
sharing in the bridal glories of the wife of the Lamb is guaranteed absolutely
no matter what our practical life may or may not have been. But obviously if
the very highest of all honours cannot possibly be forfeited plainly nothing is forfeitable, and the whole notion of
reward for effort, so heavily emphasized in Holy Scripture, is swept away. For
ourselves we repudiate this common teaching as grossly immoral in its tendency,
the sheerest antinomianism, and flatly repugnant to the Word.
The
Lord told His disciples that status in the kingdom of the heavens was to be
determined by the measure of obedience and of having encouraged others to
obedience, and [page 18 - STRETCHING FORWARD] He as
clearly added that entrance itself into that kingdom was conditional upon a
certain degree of practical righteousness (Matt. 5: 19, 20). He
further plainly warned the apostles themselves that except they turned from
their high-mindedness, and became as humble as a little child, they should on no
account enter into the kingdom (Matt. 18: 3). And this same possibility
of missing our inheritance by practical misconduct became a stock element in
the apostolic teaching of their converts, and most especially and notably of
Paul (1 Cor. 6: 7‑10; Gal. 5: 19 ‑ 21;
Eph. 5: 5).
It
followed that godly Israelites, bent on securing a share with Abraham in the
kingdom of Messiah, served God, as Paul says, with the utmost earnestness and
ceaselessly: “earnestly (en ekteneia) serving God night and day” (Acts 26: 7). It is an intensive form of this very word
which Paul employs in the Philippian passage (epekteinomenos) to describe his own strenuous
endeavours in godly service and suffering to reach that same goal, the out‑resurrection.
The word pictures the racer leaning far forward, stretched out toward the goal,
straining every fibre to win the coveted prize. It is the sharpest possible
rebuke to the complaisant idea that so great a reward is guaranteed to all
believers irrespective of piety, zeal, devotion, and life‑long
perseverance.
Nor is
there warrant for the assertion that to Paul only or even first were these
themes made known. He indeed learned them direct from the Lord, but so did
other “holy apostles and prophets,” according to his own statement (Eph.3: 5).
These mighty truths were as much the need of and as much the property of those
many saints whom Paul never taught as of that portion of the church of God to
whom he ministered. And that the other apostles did in fact know and teach the
truth of a select resurrection, prior to the general resurrection of all men,
and thus knew and taught prior even to Paul's conversion, is seen from the
statement in Acts 4: 2, that from the very earliest days they “proclaimed in
Jesus the resurrection which is out from
among the dead” (teen anastasin teen ek nekron). The clearness of
their understanding of this first, select resurrection, of which the Lord had
spoken while with them, is shown by the definiteness and vigour with which
they announced it., for katangello, [page 19 - OF CHRIST JESUS] in
the A.V. weakly rendered “preach,” means “to proclaim with authority, as
commissioned to spread the tidings throughout those who hear them” (Westcott,
on 1 John 1: 5). Therefore such a resurrection was not revealed for the first
time when Paul wrote to the Thessalonians; those who were apostles before him
made it their business to announce this truth to all to whom they proclaimed
the gospel, for, as Paul himself tells us, it was the “commandment of the
eternal God” that the secret counsel of which the first resurrection is part
should be “made known unto all the nations” (Rom. 16: 26), which demanded that
other heralds before and besides Paul should receive and proclaim the message.
When
first writing to the Thessalonians he could say that they already “knew perfectly” about the day of the
Lord, and when writing again he added that he had told them about these things
when with them (1 Ep. 5: 2; 2 Ep.
2: 5). This is further shown by the way he speaks without explanation of those who “will be left unto
the presence of the Lord,” to His parousia.
How could he have enlarged when with them upon these topics and yet not even
himself have known about the vital matter of the first resurrection? Yet this
is necessarily involved in the assertion that this truth was not made known
before the first letter to the Thessalonians.
II. WHO ARE THOSE “OF CHRIST JESUS”?
But it
is urged that two important scriptures upon the topic of resurrection seem to
contemplate all believers as sharing in the first resurrection. These are 1 Thess. 4 and 1 Cor. 15.
The
former passage speaks of those who “have fallen asleep through Jesus” (1 Thess. 4: 14, R.V. marg.). Is
this of necessity the fact concerning the end of all believers? Is there not
such a thing as death through Satan, acting as the executioner of the sentence of the court of heaven
against a believer's sins?. (1 Cor. 5: 5; 11: 30; Acts 5: 10: comp. 1 Tim. 1: 19, 20: 1
Jo. 5: 16, 17: Jas. 5: 19‑20).
Man
through sin is by nature in the power of Satan as the one who, by his angel
servants, ends human life when the [page 20 - DEATH IS GAIN] Most
High requires.* But the sinner who
in faith submits to Christ is transferred from Satan's authority and is put
under that of the Son of God (Col. 1: 13), and thenceforth the Evil One cannot touch him (1 Jo. 5: 18). In life his Lord
protects him and in death puts him to sleep. But on account of gross sin, of
living again as if a servant of Satan, he may be “delivered unto Satan,” as
regards his present experience (Matt. 5: 23, 26; 6: 13; 18: 34, 35) and his
bodily life, in which case Satan may be permitted to cut short his life, as the
above cited passages show.
[*
Heb. 2: 14; Acts 12: 23; Luke 12: 20, marg. “they,”
i.e., angels: contrast Job 2. 6.]
It is
not such A death that is “gain” within the meaning of
Phil. 1: 21. When Paul wrote of death as “gain” he made no general statement
concerning all believers. He said, “For to me to live is Christ and to die
is gain.” At that time he was a prisoner, and it was not certain that he would
not shortly die for the faith. That was the death immediately in question, and
similarly such an one as the faithful Stephen, dying as a witness for Christ,
could say, “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.” The Lord accepted the trust, and
the simple record of that dreadful moment is, “he slept.” Doubtless not martyrs
alone but each who can truly say, “for to me to live
is Christ” may add truly, “to die is gain.” Those who thus fall asleep will, as
we expect, share in the first resurrection; others have no guarantee that they
will do so.
But it
is further urged that in 1 Cor. 15: 51, the Scripture
declares that though “we shall not all sleep,” but some be alive at the descent
of the Lord, yet “we shall all be changed,” and surely, says
the objector with emphasis, all means all. Truly; but in verse
22, “For as in Adam all die, so also
in the Christ shall all be made
alive,” “all” means all of mankind, for every child of Adam will at some time
be raised by Christ (Jo. 5: 28, 29). But not all at the first resurrection (Rev. 20: 5). Therefore in this very chapter “all” means
different things, and in verse 51 requires limiting, since it refers to a
smaller company than in verse 22.
The
last and immediate context is in verses 48, 49, which speak of those who are to
“bear the image of the heavenly,” that is, are to share with the Lord in His
heavenly form, [page 21 - MAGE OF THE HEAVENLY] glory,
and sovereignty. Now the more difficult, and therefore the more probable
reading here is as in the R.V. margin: “As we have borne the image of the
earthy, let us also bear the
image of the heavenly.” It is evident that one copying a document is not likely
to insert by mistake a more difficult word or idea than is in the manuscript
before him; so that, as a general rule, the more difficult reading is likely to
have been the original reading. Moreover, in this case “let us also bear” is so
well attested by the manuscripts as to have been adopted as the true reading by
Lachmann, Tischendorf, Tregelles, Alford, and Westcott and Hort, and is given as the text in the latest editions of the
Greek Testament, those of Nestle and
Von Soden.
Ellicott prefers the common reading,
but on subjective and internal grounds only, and his remark on the external
authority is emphatic: “It is impossible to deny that the subjunctive, phoresomen is supported by very greatly
preponderating authority.” Alford
(on Romans 9: 5) well says, “that no conjecture [i.e., as to the true Greek
text] arising from doctrinal difficulty is ever to be admitted in the face of
the consensus of MSS. and versions.”
By
this exhortation the apostle places upon Christians some responsibility to see
that they secure that image of the heavenly which is indispensable to
inheriting “the kingdom of God” (ver. 50). In this
Paul is supported by Peter, who also writes of that “inheritance which is
reserved in heaven” (1 Pet. 1: 4), which he describes by the later statement
that “the God of all grace called you unto His eternal glory in Christ” (5: 10). But Peter goes on
to urge the called to “give the more diligence to make your calling and election sure” (2 Pet. 1: 10), thus
showing that this calling to share the glory of God has to be made sure. He is
not at all discussing justification by faith or suggesting that it must be made sure by works done after
conversion. Justification and eternal life are not in
the least his subject. He writes expressly to those “who have [already] obtained like precious faith with us in the
righteousness of our God and Saviour Jesus Christ” (2 Pet. 1: 1). The calling
of grace is to share in God's own eternal glory, or, as Paul expresses it, to
share God's “own kingdom and glory,” and he tells [page 22 - FIRSTFRUITS
RESURRECTION] us that he exhorted, encouraged, yea, and
testified, to the end that his children in faith should “walk worthily of God”
Who had called them to such supreme dignity (1 Thess.
2: 11 ‑ 12).
Since
therefore this most honourable calling must be “made sure” by “walking
worthily,” in order that we may be “counted
worthy of the kingdom of God, for which ye also suffer” (2 Thess. 1: 5), the reading “let us also bear the image of
the heavenly” becomes consistent and important. Thus 1 Cor.
15: 51, 52 is addressed to those who are assumed (whether it be so or not) to
have responded to that exhortation, and it will mean that “we [who shall be
accounted worthy to bear that heavenly image] shall not all sleep, but we shall
all be changed.” Of that company it is strictly true that all means all.
Further,
the primary antecedent to verse 52 is in verse 23: “But each [shall be made alive] in
his own order: Christ the first‑fruits; then they that are Christ's
in His Parousia: then the end . . .” Does not the whole sentence, in the light of
other passages, carry the force: But each shall be made alive, not all at the
same hour, but each in his own class or company (tagma); first‑fruit, Messiah; then, next, those of the Messiah,
i.e., in His character as first‑fruit, at His Parousia;
then, later, the end of all dispensations, involving the resurrection of all,
saved and unsaved, not before raised? Here is additional reason for R. C. Chapman's view (to be considered
later) that the first resurrection is
one of “first‑fruits,” and not of all who will be finally raised in the
“harvest” of eternal life.
The
translation “they that are Christ's” is not an exact rendering. The Greek
reads: “then those of the Christ (hoi tou Christou) in His Parousia,” and it is not a question of what these words may
mean to an English reader to‑day with his mind obsessed by a certain
theory, but what did they convey to a Greek ear of the day when they were
written. (See Appendix.)
In the
ideal and possibility all who are “in Christ” are “of Christ,” but that it is
possible to be a believer on Him unto salvation from hell and not to be of that
privileged personal circle which He will acknowledge before God, angels, and
men as His companions, is plainly taught in the [page 23 - THE KING'S COMPANIONS] Word.
“If I wash thee not, thou [Peter, my believing, devoted follower until now]
hast no part with Me” – not “in Me,” that would have forfeited all, including salvation; but “with Me,” which means that unwashed
thou canst not continue in My company, My circle (John 13: 8). Again, “Thou
hast a few names in
[* Rev. 3: 4, 5: comp. Luke 12: 9, with the use the apostle
and the early church made of that saying, as in 2 Tim. 2: 11‑13.]
The fact that such as show special trust in and fidelity to
God are granted intimacy with Him beyond others is very natural and it runs
throughout Scripture. Instances are: Abraham, peculiarly the friend of God,
from whom Jehovah would hide none of His purposes (Gen. 18: 17‑19): Moses, privileged beyond others of the
people of God with mouth to mouth converse with Him, because he was faithful
(Num. 12: 7, 8): the prophets,
without informing whom Jehovah would not act (Amos 3: 7): of which Elisha is a notable instance,
as witness the tone of surprise in his words, “Jehovah hath hid it from me and hath not told me!” (2 Kin. 4: 27). So God, reproving false prophets, says: “Who [of them] hath
stood in the council of Jehovah?” and, “If they had stood in My
council” (Jer. 23:
18, 22) – not [page 24 - MY FRIENDS IF]
counsel, as A.V., but in “My secret council,” as the Hebrew means, whither
faithful prophets were transported in spirit (1 Kin. 22: 19).
Thus
also in the New Testament we learn of very many hundreds who believed on Jesus when
He was here (1 Cor. 15: 6, e.g.), but of these, some
few enjoyed His special love, as the Bethany family (John 11: 5); a small band
were honoured to share peculiarly His toil, ministry, reproach, and
company, and will therefore
be specially honoured in His kingdom (Lk. 22: 28‑30:
Rev. 22: 14): of which few again a smaller circle were more especially favoured
with His confidence (Lk. 9: 28: Matt. 26: 37), and
one was loved above them all (Jo. 13: 23; 19: 26, 21: 7, 20).
But as
there is no respect of persons, no favouritism, with the Lord, as we are
repeatedly and emphatically assured (Col. 3: 25: 1 Pet. 1: 17: etc.), there
must have been reason for this distinguishing of some. In John 15: 14, 15,
Christ lays down its condition in the words: “No longer do I call you slaves
[though it is to be well noted from the openings of the epistles that that is
exactly what they continued evermore to call themselves]; for the slave knoweth not what his lord doeth: but I have called you
friends; for all things that I heard from My Father I have made known unto
you.” Thus as with Abraham His friend, so with these, He had hid nothing from
them, had had no secrets, but had made known unto them all that He had heard.
But the terms of this incomparable friendship were, and are, “Ye are My friends
if ye do the things which I command you,”
a condition nowhere attached to the forgiveness of sins or to the obtaining of
eternal life, but of the simple nature of things in friendship between the Creator and the creature,
the King and the subject. To this privileged circle all indeed may attain, but it is reached by such only as pay the
(in reality) purely nominal but quite unavoidable price of full obedience to
their Saviour as their Lord.
Thus
also in Hebrews 3: 12‑14, we learn that “we have become companions* of
the Messiah (metochoi tou Christou), [page 25 - GOD'S
HOUSE IF] if it be
so that (eanper)
we hold fast the beginning of our
confidence firm unto the end.” And in verse six preceding we are told that
we are the household over which the Son of God is ruler “if we hold fast our boldness and the glorying of our hope firm unto the
end.” Israel, though redeemed by blood and delivered, did not become the
“house” of God until one whole year after redemption (Ex. 40: 1); and, though
the people of God by covenant and redemption, they only narrowly escaped the
penalty of never having God dwelling among them and so of not being to Him as a
house (Ex. 33: 1 ‑ 3). To be a pardoned rebel, restored to being a loyal
subject of the sovereign, is one thing, and is great indeed, but to be a member
of the royal house, a chosen intimate of the sovereign, is much greater. His
pardon Of the rebel, sealed and delivered, God never recalls; but the privilege of belonging
to His Son's personal circle is contingent and may be forfeited.
[* Darby, New Translation, note: “I use the word ‘companions’ as being the
same one as in c.1:9 metochoi, to which, I doubt not, it alludes;
that is, to the passage quoted, Ps. 45. ‘Partakers of Christ’ has indeed quite a
different sense.”]
The
type of tabernacle and temple when taken in its entirety shows that the “house”
of God may be forsaken by Him and be
temporarily destroyed (Jer. 7: 12; Ps. 78: 60,
61; Jer. 12: 7; Ps. 74: 7; Matt. 23: 38); and the New Testament solemnly
declares the same as to the believer: " “Know ye not that ye are a
sanctuary of God, and the Spirit of God dwelleth in
you. If any man destroyeth the sanctuary of God [mars
it ‑ see Jer. 17: 7, 9, where the LXX use this word ‑ so rendering the house
unfit as a dwelling for the Holy One], him shall God destroy (see 1 Cor. 5: 5: etc.), for the sanctuary of God is holy, which
sanctuary ye are” (1 Cor. 3: 16, 17). The believer who so
lacks the spirit of Christ, and so walks according to flesh, as to incur that
judgment, will indeed, by the changeless grace of God and through the eternal
virtue of redemption by the precious blood of Christ, be himself, as to his
person, saved, yet only “so as through fire” (ver.
15); but such will not be sharers of the privileges pictured as being the
“house” of God or “companions of the Messiah,” the King. But inasmuch as
all who rise in the first resurrection will share those very privileges (Rev.
20: 4‑6), it results that such as are adjudged by the Lord unworthy thereof will
not have part in that resurrection, even as the many scriptures reviewed
declare.
Thus
the expressions “fallen asleep through Jesus” and [page 26 - GRACE
AND FAITH] “those of Him in His Parousia”
(those who are to be companions with Him during the period of His “presence”
as King of this earth), both allow for the solemn possibility of some who might
have been “accounted worthy to attain unto that
age [of the Presence] and the resurrection which is from among the dead” (Lk. 20: 35) failing to attain thereto.
Passages
which deal with a matter from the point of view of God's plan and willingness
use general, wide terms to cover and to disclose His whole provision. But these
must be ever considered in connection with any other statements upon the same subject
which reveal what God foresees of the human element which, by His own creation
of responsible creatures, He permits to interact with His working. Out of these
elements, through self‑will in the believer, arises the possibility of
individuals not reaching unto the whole of what the grace of God had offered in
Christ.
The
isolation of the former class of passages produced Calvinism, of the latter Arminianism. Truth
is found by construing all Scripture together. The principle of the divine
provision is grace: the principle
of our attaining is faith; and “according
to your faith be it unto you” is the inflexible condition. Now faith is not
merely an apprehending of ideas by the intellect, nor only the assent of the
reason, though it includes of necessity both of these elements: faith is a principle of action which
produces obedience to God and works out in love to men. Incipient faith obeys God upon the primary
point of trusting to Christ for salvation from wrath, and it secures that
primary benefit for which it trusts. Developing faith obeys God upon various
successive points of His holy will; this issues in
sanctity of character and purity of conduct; and according to this advance of
faith in practical godliness will be the weight of glory which each will be
capable of bearing. Any particular possibility for which one's measure of
faith does not qualify will not be obtained. “The path of sorrow is not indeed
the meriting, but the capacitating preparation for glory” (Moule on Rom. 8: 18).
It is
unquestionable that this unchanging, because unavoidable, rule operates undeviatingly as to benefits available in this life: the
Scripture shows plainly that it operates as to benefits available beyond this
life. Of these one is the [page 27 - ACCORDING TO FAITH]
sharing in the first resurrection and so inheriting the
“Such faith in us, 0 God,
implant,
And to our prayers Thy favour
grant,
Through Jesus Christ, Thine only Son,
Who is our fount of health alone.”
When
it is said that the acceptance of the believer in Christ involves the
imputation to him of all the acceptability of Christ, and that he is thereby
qualified to share the eternal glory of Christ in the presence of the Father,
and that consequently his own life and works can have no place in the matter,
we point out that, inasmuch as the merit of Christ is imputed judicially to
every believer equally, therefore every believer should of necessity share
equally in all and every privilege, and no distinction in reward would be
possible, one star could not then differ from another star in glory. But the
opposite of this is taught in the Word. The imputation of righteousness in
Christ gives to every believer equality of standing
and of opportunity, but it does not, and cannot, do away with the necessity for
faith, or alter the rule that attainment is according to faith.
It
being therefore the case that the first resurrection, while open indeed to all,
is a prize which must be attained, and which, like every prize, may be forfeited,
it is at once made clear why in Rev. 20: 4‑6, where the two resurrections
are set, one at the opening of the Millennial kingdom and the [page 28 - THE
BOOK OF LIFE] other at its close, it is said that “blessed and
holy” is he that hath part in the former, including pre‑eminently those
who in varying degree had suffered for and with Jesus and for the word of God.
And that some believers not accounted worthy of that resurrection, will rise in
the second resurrection unto eternal life, though they will have missed
reigning with Christ in His Kingdom, fitly explains why at the final judgment
the book of life will be opened and searched (Rev. 20: 11‑15). Were it
known as a fact that no possessors of eternal life would or could be there this
examining of the book of life would not be required, nor should we expect the
statement that “if any was not found written in the book” he
was cast into the lake of fire; for in that event the natural expression would
be “as their names were not found, etc.”
A
correct understanding of future events is of high value in the life of the
Christian, but it is not fundamental to the gospel, neither does any
rearranging of the order or particulars of those events imperil the faith. Men
of undoubted orthodoxy and greatly used of God have taken very divergent views
on these topics, which teaches that great names cannot prove any one view to be
the true meaning of Scripture. On the other hand, this divergence should assure
toleration and earnest research, so that more light may be
gained and ever closer agreement be reached.
It is
worthy of mention that Hudson Taylor
and R. C. Chapman held the view here
advocated. In the Appendix to his small work on The Song of Songs, entitled
Union and Communion (ed. 5, p. 83), Hudson
Taylor wrote of such as “if saved, are only half‑saved:* who are for the
present more concerned about the things of this world than the things of God.
To advance their own interests, to secure their own comfort, concerns them more
than to be in all things pleasing to the Lord. They may [page 29 - HUDDSON
TAY4OR AND CHAPMAN] form part of that great company spoken of
in Rev. 7: 9 ‑ 17, who come out of the great tribulation, but they will
hot form part of the 144,000, ‘the first‑fruits unto God and to the Lamb’ (Rev. 14: 1‑5). They have
forgotten the warning of our Lord in Luke 21: 34 ‑ 36; and hence they are
not ‘accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and
to stand before the Son of Man.’ They have not, with Paul, counted 'all things
but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of
Christ Jesus the Lord,' and hence they do not ‘attain unto’ that
resurrection from among the dead, which Paul felt he might miss, but aimed to
attain unto.
We
wish to place on record our solemn conviction that not all who are Christians,
or think themselves to be such, will attain to that resurrection of which
Robert Chapman about
the year 1896 issued a series of Suggestive Questions. Number 10
includes the following: “Are not the redeemed in Rev. 4 and 5 the same with
those in ch. 20: 4, 'Thrones and they sat upon them'?
(verse 5) 'This is the first resurrection.' Is it not
a resurrection of first‑fruits?” .
. . Now in the essential nature of the case first‑fruits are but a
portion of the whole harvest, and so the Question proceeds: 'And the rest of
the dead (in the same verse) do they not include all the family of God? not the wicked dead only. Hence, in verse 12, 'Another book
was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those
things which were written in the books, according to their works' (verse 15).
'And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into.the lake
of fire’.”
Further
as to this last passage, the exact rendering in the Revised Version, “if any was not found written in the book of life he was cast into the lake of
fire,” by its negative form strongly supports this view. If it should be said
of the crowd at a platform barrier that, If any was
found not to have a ticket he was refused admittance, no one would
suggest the meaning that not one of all who were there had a ticket or was allowed to pass. [page
30 - DOCTRINE
AND HOLINESS]
The
late Mr. E. S. Pearce was intimately
acquainted with Mr. Chapman's views for he lived with him many years. He wrote
to me as follows: “It was Mr. Chapman's desire that, by so walking with God and
by obedience to His Word in all things, he might not shut himself out from the honour of reigning with
Christ. He saw no authority from the Scripture for saying that all the children
of God would. Rev. 20: 4, 'And they sat upon them,' Mr. Chapman considered
were distinguished persons, not all the saints."
Now
from verses 4 and 6 of Rev. 20, “they lived and reigned” and “Blessed and holy
is he that hath part in the first resurrection ... they shall reign,” it is
clear that all who rise in the first resurrection do reign, from which it
certainly follows that such as are not accounted worthy to reign do not rise at
that time. Who shall say to what large degree this searching, conscience‑quickening
belief contributed to the blamelessness of Mr. Chapman's beautiful life? The
doctrine of the coming of our Lord is in the Scripture so set forth as to
promote holiness of life (1 John 3: 3; 2 Pet. 3: 11 ‑ 14; 1 Pet. 1: 13).
That line of exposition will be found most accordant with Scripture which makes
the most imperative demand for holiness.
To gain that prize I towards that goal will
struggle
Which
God has set before;
To
gain that prize 'gainst sin and death I'll battle
And
with the world make war;
And if
it brings me here but shame and troubles
And
scorn, if pain life fills,
Yet
seek I nothing of earth's empty baubles;
My God
alone my longing stills.
To
gain that prize, to reach that crown I'm pressing
Which
Christ doth ready hold;
I mean
His great reward to be possessing,
His booty for the bold.
I will
not rest, no weariness shall stay me,
To
hasten home is best,
Where
I some day in peace and joy shall lay me
Upon
my Saviour's heart and rest.
(From the German). [page
31 – THE
FIRST RESURRECTION]
III. THE PERIOD OF THE PAROUSIA.
The
first resurrection, accompanied by the removal of the living, will take place
at a certain moment when the Lord Himself shall descend from His present place
at the right hand of the throne of
God, in the upper heavens, to the neighbourhood of the earth (1 Thess. 4: 15 ‑ 17). He is now absent from the earth:
then He will be present again. This will be the commencement of His Parousia (presence). The Word of God shows that this
descent will take place at the end of that Great Tribulation which is to be
inflicted upon the saints by the Beast at the very close of this age. It has
been suggested that the phrase sat down on the right hand of the Majesty in the
heights (Heb. 1: 3) does not imply place, but merely dignity. Yet this
will not be said of 1 Kin. 2: 19: “The king sat down on his throne, and caused
a throne to be set for the king's mother, and she sat on his right hand.” There
is a spot in the heaven of heavens where the Father is throned
in light unapproachable by man in the flesh. There the Son sits at the right
hand of God, and thence He will descend at the hour which the Father has set
within his own authority.
1. Christ stated that a time
would come when His enemies should “see the Son of man sitting at the right
hand of power, and coming on the clouds of heaven” (Matt. 26: 64): from which
it would appear that down to an hour when He is to be seen by the godless at
the right hand of power He remains there, which place therefore He did not
leave for the air several years before that time. Christ had said before that
the hour when the world should thus see Him would follow the Great Tribulation
(Matt. 24: 29, 30).
2. Now under seal 6 (Rev. 6) the
godless are shown fleeing in terror from the face of God and from the wrath of
the Lamb and are hiding in the rocks. This accords with
paragraph one above and with Isa. 2: 10, 19, 21.
The latter passage fixes the hour as that when “Jehovah ariseth
to shake terribly the earth,” again showing at what point the Lord leaves the
throne on high. Seal 6 repeats the many signs in heaven and earth which Christ
said should follow the Tribulation (Matt. 24: 29, 30), which confirms that the [page 32 - THE BLESSED HOPE] “arising”
of the Lord and the appearing of His glory to men follow that Tribulation.
3. According to Paul himself the
“blessed hope” of the church is the
“appearing
of the glory of our great God and Saviour Jesus Christ” (Tit. 2: 13),
not any secret, invisible event. The words in italics are a repetition of words
used by Christ on the same topic (Matt. 24: 29, 30). So that at the close of
His then presence with His disciples the Lord pointed them onward to His
appearing in glory, and they adopted that appearing as their hope. But the Lord
stated that this His appearing would be after the signs that should immediately
follow the Great Tribulation.
The
suggestion that the “blessed hope” is a first event and the appearing a second
is denied by the grammar of the passage in Greek. “Hope and appearing belong
together” (Alford. See also
4. The Lord stated next (Matt.
24: 31) that at that moment of His appearing He would gather together His
elect. That the elect are Christians, not Jews, is certain. (a) No gathering of
Jews to
5. Christ further stated that
the gathering of the elect should be accompanied by “a great sound of a
trumpet” (Matt. 24: 31). This is repeated in 1 Thess.
4: 16, and 1 Cor. 15: 52 describes this as the “last
trump.” The last trump of Scripture is recorded in Rev. 11: 15‑18. Under
it four events are grouped: (1) The anger of the nations and God's wrath upon
them; (2) The time of the dead to be judged ‑
the godly dead, for it is before the millennium: comp. Dan. 7: 22; (3) The
rewarding of the prophets, saints, and those who fear God; (4) The destruction
of the destroyers of the earth.
Thus
the raising and rewarding of the godly take place at the same epoch as the
destruction of the wicked, and all is after the Tribulation, for it is the time
of the destruction of the Beast, and is after he has persecuted, and has killed
the Two Witnesses in Jerusalem (Rev. 11: 1 ‑ 13).
6. This is confirmed by the
declaration of the strong angel whose message follows trumpet 6 (Rev. 10: 5 ‑
7). He announces that the mystery of God shall be completed during the period
of the seventh trumpet. Paul taught concerning: (1) the mystery (secret); (2)
that it was according to the gospel (good
tidings); (3) that it was made known according to the commandment of the eternal God; (4) and that this was done through the
writings of the prophets (Rom.
16: 25 ‑ 27). The angel repeats these four particulars concerning (1) the
mystery; (2) that it was according to the good tidings (the same word as gospel); (3) that it
was declared
by God; (4) through His
servants the prophets. The two
passages read thus:
Rom.
16: 25‑27: “Now unto Him that is able to establish you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ,
according to the revelation of the mystery which hath been [page 34 - SCRIPTURE TESTIMONY ONE] kept
in silence through times eternal,
but now is manifested, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the eternal God,
is made known unto all the nations unto obedience of faith. . . .”
Rev. 10:
7: “. . . in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, when he is about to
sound, then is finished the mystery of God, according to the good tidings which He declared to His
servants the prophets."
The
attempt to make out that these are not the same mystery, and that there are two
divine purposes of which all four particulars are equally and separately true,
will surely only be made in the interests of some special theory of
interpretation.
The
mystery that was such a vital element in apostolic teaching is shown by Eph. 3:
1 ‑ 13 to be the gathering of the church from Jews and Gentiles, and
therefore was it to be made known unto all the nations. This work will be completed
by the resurrection and rapture, which will be under trumpet 7, which will be after
the Tribulation, as shown above under (5).
7. Other Scriptures also reveal
this same grouping of events. In 2 Thess. 1: 6 ‑
8, it is said that the delivering of the saints from trouble at the hands of
the godless will be at the time of the destruction of the latter by the Lord at
His revelation in flaming fire with His angels. Thus the
1 Thess. 4: 13 ‑ 18 and 5: 1 ‑ 11, belong
together, though often arbitrarily dissevered, and they similarly associate
these events for the godly and the godless respectively. The “times and the
seasons” of verse 1 necessarily means the times and the seasons in which will
come the events just mentioned. No other events have been mentioned, so that
there is no other antecedent to the expression, which thus connects the
paragraphs.
Thus
the earliest revelations by Christ, the middle period teachings of Paul and
others (see 2 Pet. 3: 15, that Peter and Paul taught alike), and the latest
through John (Rev. 10: 11), agree.
8. This harmony is seen further
in the passages which picture the Lord as coming as a thief. [page
35 - COMING
AS A THIEF]
Christ
used the figure to warn His own servants of His own household (Matt. 24: 42,
44: Lk. 12: 39). Peter, who heard
that warning, repeats it to those who had “obtained like precious faith” with
himself “in the righteousness of our God and Saviour Jesus Christ” (2 Pet. 3:
10, 11; 1: 1). Paul reminds the Thessalonians that they, by his
particular instruction, knew of that thief‑like coming, and so they need
not be caught unawares by its unannounced arrival, only they must be very
careful to keep awake, continuing watchful and sober (1
Thess. 5: 21). The Lord from heaven repeats these
warnings to the church at
Thus
it appears that the “house,” and the Lord's servants in it, continue
on earth in His absence down to the close of the Tribulation era when the Beast
is preparing for the final battle.
9. That the first resurrection
takes place after the Tribulation is clear from the fact that those martyred by
the Beast share therein (Rev. 20: 4). The supposition that this resurrection
will be completed in stages, of which this will be the last, is not needed and
seems without Scripture authority.
10. In Rev. 14 there is a series
of six visions. In the first a company of saints are seen on the Mount Zion
with the Lamb, in the region of the throne of God, for the elders and the
living creatures are present, before the throne.* These saints have been
“purchased out of the earth” (showing that they are not then on earth), and
they learn [page 36 - THE HARVEST] the song of heaven. In the second vision
the hour of judgment strikes; that is, the end days begin. In the third we
learn that the Harlot,
[* In Revelation “before
the throne” always means a heavenly locality, not on earth. It is
the place of the presence of God, of the elders, living creatures, angels, the
glassy sea, the heavenly throne and altar. See 4: 5, 6, 10; 7: 9; 8: 3; 14: 3;
20: 12; all its occurrences.]
Here
again the presence on the clouds, with the gathering up of the godly, is put
between the Tribulation and the destruction of the lawless. With unique
emphasis Christ had taught that the “wheat” must remain in the field with the
“tares” “until the harvest” and that the harvest is the “consummation of the
age” (Matt. 13: 30 ‑ 39), not
any point of time prior to the End Days. In Rev. 14 this harvest is shown
appropriately as the last great event but one in this age.
The
whole New Testament agrees in putting at this point the appearing in glory of
the Son of man, which was seen from afar by Old Testament prophets; nor does
the Scripture know of any earlier descent of the Lord from the throne to the
air. And so Paul in one sentence (2 Thess. 2: 1 ‑
5) grouped together (a) the Parousia, (b) our gathering together unto the Lord, and (c)
the Day of the Lord, and most expressly announced and warned that these all
must be preceded by the apostasy and the revelation of the Man of Sin. George Muller said: “having been a
careful diligent student of the Bible for nearly fifty years, my mind has long
been settled upon this point, and I have not the shadow of a doubt about it.
The Scripture declares plainly that the Lord Jesus will not come until the
apostasy shall have taken place, and the man of sin, the ‘son of perdition’ (or
personal Antichrist) shall have been revealed, as seen in 2 Thess. 2.”
IV. THE PRE‑TRIBULATION RAPTURE.
There are two principal views upon the
matters here [page 37 - ESCAPE POSSIBLE] considered:
one, that the Parousia will commence prior to the
Times of the End, and that at its inception all believers of the heavenly
calling, dead and living, will be taken to the presence of the Lord in the air;
the other, that the Parousia will occur at the close
of the Great Tribulation, until when no believers will be raised or changed.
The one view says that no believers will go into the End Times, the other that
none then living will escape them. The one involves that the utmost measure of
unfaithfulness or carnality in a believer puts him in no peril of forfeiting
the supreme honour of rapture or of having to endure the dread End Days: the
other view involves that no degree of faithfulness or of holiness will enable a
saint to escape those Days. As regards this matter, godliness and
unfaithfulness seem immaterial on either view; which raises a doubt of both
views.
Our
study thus far has shown that the former view is unfounded: we have now to see
that the latter is partly right and partly wrong. It is right in asserting that
the Parousia will commence at the close of the Great
Tribulation, but wrong in declaring that no saints living as the End Times near
will escape that awful period.
1. For our Lord Jesus Christ has
declared distinctly that escape is
possible. In Luke 21 is a record of instruction given by Him to four
apostles on the
Then
He mentions the disturbances in nature and the fears of mankind that are
grouped under seal 6 in Rev. 6: 12 ‑ 17, and adds explicitly that “then shall they see the Son of Man coming in
a cloud with power and great glory,” and that when these things begin His
disciples may know that their redemption draweth nigh
(ver. 27, 28).
In
concluding this outline of the period of the Beast the Lord then uttered this
exhortation and promise: “But take heed to yourselves, lest haply your hearts
be overcharged with surfeiting, and drunkenness, and cares of this life, and
that day come on you suddenly as a snare: for so shall it come upon all them
that dwell on the face of all the earth. But watch ye
at every season, making supplication, that
ye may prevail to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to
stand before the Son of Man.”
This
declares distinctly: (1) That escape is possible from
all those things of which Christ had been speaking, that is, from the whole End‑times.
(2) That that day of testing will be universal, and inevadable
by any then on the earth, which involves the removal from the earth of any who
are to escape it. (3) That those who are to escape will be taken to where He,
the Son of Man, will then be, that is, at the throne of the Father in the
heavens. They will stand before Him there. (4) That there is a fearful peril of
disciples becoming worldly of heart and so being enmeshed in that last period.
(5) That hence it is needful to watch, and to pray ceaselessly, that so we may
prevail over all obstacles and dangers and thus escape that era.
This
most important and unequivocal statement by our Lord sets aside the opinion
that all Christians will escape irrespective of their moral state, and also
negatives the notion that no escape is possible. There is a door of escape; but
as with all doors, only those who are awake will see it, and only those who are
in earnest will reach it ere the storm bursts. In every place in the New
Testament the word “escape” has its natural force ‑ ekpheugo, to flee out of a place
or trouble and be quite clear thereof.* It never means [page 39 - THE ESCAPE COMPLETE] to
endure the trial successfully. In this very discourse of the Lord it is in
contrast with the statement, “He that endureth (hupomeno) to the end [of these things] the same
shall be saved” (Matt. 24: 13). One
escapes, another endures.
[* It
comes only at Luke 21: 36; Acts 16: 27; 19: 16; Rom. 2: 3;2
Cor. 11: 33: 1 Thess. 5: 3:
Heb. 2: 3; 12: 25. In comparison with
The
attempt to evade the application of this passage to Christians on the plea that
it refers to “Jewish” disciples of Christ, is baseless: (a) No “Jewish”
disciples of Christ are known to the Scriptures (Gal. 3: 28: Eph. 2: 14 ‑
18). (b) The God‑fearing remnant of
2. In harmony with this utterance of our Lord is His
further statement to the church at Philadelphia (Rev. 3: 10): “Because thou
didst keep the word of My patience, I also will keep thee from (ek) the hour
of trial, that hour which is to come upon the whole inhabited earth, to try
them that dwell upon the earth.” Here also are declared: (a) The universality
of that hour of trial, so that any escape from it must involve removal; (b) the
promise of being kept from it, (c) the intimation that such preservation is the
consequence of a certain moral condition: “Because thou didst keep ... I also
will keep.” As this is addressed to a church no question of a “Jewish”
application can arise. Nor do known facts or the Scriptures allow of the
supposition that every Christian keeps the word of Christ's patience (Matt. 24:
12; Rev. 2: 5: Gal. 6: 12: Col. 4: 14 with
2 Tim. 4: 10 concerning Demas); so that this promise cannot be stretched to
mean all believers.
In The
Bible Treasury, 1865, p. 380,
there is an instructive note by J.
N. Darby (see also Coll. Writings, vol. 13,
Critical [page 40 - THE WOMAN IN HEAVEN]
1,
581) on the difference between apo and ek. The former regards hostile persons and being delivered from them; the
latter refers to a state and being kept
from getting into it. On Rev. 3: 10 he wrote: “So in Rev. 3 the faithful are
kept from getting into this state, preserved from getting into it. or, as we say, kept out of it. For the words here answer
fully to the English ‘out of’ or ‘from’.” That the thought is not being kept
from being injured in soul by the trials is implied in the expression “Keep
thee out of that hour”;
it is
from the period of time itself that the faithful are to be kept, not merely
from its spiritual perils.
3. Of this escape and
preservation there are two pictures as there are two promises.
In
Rev. 12 is a vision of (a) a woman; (b) a man‑child whom she bears; (c)
the rest of her family. Light on this complex figure may be gained from Hosea 4 and Isa. 49:
17 ‑ 21; 50: 1.
As to
this “woman” the dominant fact is that at one and the same time she is seen in
heaven arrayed with heavenly glory and on earth in sorrow and pain. This
simultaneous and contradictory experience is true of the
As to
the Man‑child, his birth and rapture, as with the whole of this book from
c. 4: 1, pointed to events which the angel distinctly said were future to the
time of the visions. There is no exception to this, and therefore there is no
possible reference to the resurrection and ascension of Christ. Nor, in the
fact, did our Lord at His birth escape from Satan by rapture to the throne of
God: on the contrary, the Dragon slew Him in manhood and only thereafter did He
ascend to heaven. Nor at the ascension of Christ was Satan cast [page 41 - THE
MAN CHILD] out of heaven. Thirty years later, when Paul wrote
to the Ephesians, he and his servants were still there (Eph. 6: 12), and
another thirty years later again, when John saw the visions, his ejection was
still future (Rev. 12).
The
identity of this Man‑child is indicated by the statement that he “is to
rule all the nations with a rod of iron,” for this is a repetition of the
promise (Rev. 2: 26, 27), “And he that overcometh,
and he that keepeth My works unto the end [comp. the
keeping the word of My patience, as above], to him will I give authority over
the nations, and he shall rule them with a rod of iron.” This promise is given only to Christ and the overcomers
of the churches. As it cannot here (Rev. 12) apply to Him it can only apply
to them.
This
removal of the Man‑child cannot be the event foretold in 1 Thess. 4: 15 ‑ 17, for those there in view will be
taken up only as far as to the air around this earth when the Lord descends
thereto from heaven, but this removal takes the Man‑child to the throne
of God, which is where Christ now is, in the upper heavens. This fulfils the
promise that such as prevail to escape shall “stand before the Son of Man.”
As we
have seen, the Lord does not descend from heaven till the close of the Great
Tribulation, not before Satan is cast down. Moreover, this one child can be
only a part of the whole family, not the completed church in view in 1 Thess. 4 * and 1 Cor. 15. The “woman” out of whom he is born remains on earth, and after his ascent the “rest of her seed” are
persecuted by the Beast; but his removal is before the Beast is even on the
scene or Satan is cast out of heaven. Thus those who will form this company
escape all things [page 42 - FIRSTI7RUITS, HARVEST, VINTAGE] that
will occur in the End‑times, as Christ promised; and the identification
with the overcomers declares that they had lived that
watchful, prayerful, victorious life, upon which, as the Lord said, that escape
will depend.
[* In
1 Thess. 4: 15, 17 the word perileipo, “that are left,” deserves notice. It is not found elsewhere in
the New Testament, but the force may be seen in the LXX of Amos. 5: 15, and of the verb (in some editions) at 2 Chron.
34: 21; Hag. 2: 3. In each case it
means, to be left after others are gone. So the lexicons also, and they are
confirmed by The Vocabulary of the Greek Testament. In this place it seems redundant save on our view that the
rapture there in question is at the close of the Tribulation and that some
saints will not have been left on earth until that event, but will have been
removed alive earlier; for to have marked the contrast with those that had died
it would have been enough to have said “we that are alive,” without twice repeating
this unusual word.]
Consequent
upon this removal of the watchful, Satan is cast out of heaven, and presently
brings up the Beast, who persecutes the rest of the woman's family (12: 17, 18;
13: 7 ‑ 10). So that one section of the family escapes the End‑times
by being rapt to heaven, and the rest, the more numerous portion,
as the term indicates, go into the Great Tribulation. These latter are such as
“keep the commandments of God and hold the testimony of Jesus” (ver. 17). In Rev. 14: 12, such are termed “the saints,” which in New Testament times, was the term regularly used by Christians
of one another; and among their number John had already included himself (1: 2, 9). It covers therefore the
4. The second picture of this
pre‑Tribulation rapture is given in Rev. 14. In this chapter there are
six scenes: ‑
1.
“First‑fruits” with the Lamb on the
2. The
hour of judgment commences (6, 7).
3. “
4. The Beast period is present and persecution is in progress
(9 - 13).
5. The Son of Man on a white cloud reaps His “harvest” (14 ‑
16).
6. The “vintage” of the earth is gathered, and is trodden in
the winepress on earth (17 ‑ 20).
The
agricultural figure wrought into this chapter by the Holy Spirit is the key to
its teaching. In the early summer the Jew was to gather a sheaf of corn as soon
as enough was ripe, and this was to be presented to God in the temple at
The last scene is the destruction of the
Beast by the Lord at His descent to
The
First‑fruits cannot be a picture of the whole of the redeemed
as they will finally appear at the end of the drama of those days, for first‑fruits
cannot be more than a portion of the whole harvest, neither can first‑fruits describe the final ingathering. It were
a contradiction to speak thus. Firstfruits must be
gathered first, before the reaping of the remainder. The number 144,000 need
not be taken literally. In the Apocalypse numbers are sometimes literal, but
sometimes figurative.
As has
been noted above, these had been purchased out of the earth, which shows that
they were not then on earth, and they learn the song of the heavenly choir. Nor
can this
The
144,000 of ch. 7 are a different company. They are
the godly Remnant of Israel seen on earth after the Appearing and the gathering
of the elect to the clouds, and are sealed (comp. Ezek. 9) so as to be
untouched by the wrath of the Lamb now to be poured upon the godless (Zeph, 2: 3; Isa. 26: 20, 21).
The
identity of these First‑fruits is revealed by a similar means to that
which reveals the identity of the Man‑child. These persons are shown as
connected with the Father, the Lamb, and the Mount Zion, which also refers back
to the promises to the overcomers, and shows that the
First‑fruits will be a portion of the company of the victors, who, it is [page 44 - TWO RAPTURES] promised,
will be marked as connected with the Father, the Son, and the New Jerusalem
(Rev. 3: 12). These three marks of identification come together in these two
passages only. Now the moral features attributed to these First‑fruits
show that they had lived just that pure, faithful Christian life which
necessarily results from watchfulness, prayerfulness, and patient obedience to
the words of Christ, as inculcated in the corresponding passages quoted.
As the
Man‑child and the rest of the woman's seed were but one family, only
removed in two portions, one before the Beast and the other after his
persecutions, so first‑fruits and harvest were grown from one sowing in
one field, only they were reaped in two portions, one before the hour of
judgment and the other after the Beast had persecuted. We have remarked above
that these latter are termed “saints,”
and that this was the regular title that
Christians gave to one another; that it is amplified by the double
description “they that keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus,”
and that in this description John had before twice included himself; so that
the terms mean that company in which John had membership, the church of God. Moreover, as the Jewish remnant will not have
owned Jesus during the period in view the
terms can apply only to Christians.
Finally,
as between the gathering of the sheaf of first‑fruits and the ingathering
of the harvest there came the intensest summer heat,
so between the removal of the First‑fruits and the reaping of the Harvest
there is placed (ver. 9 ‑ 13) the Great
Tribulation, that final persecution which while, like all persecution, it will
wither the unrooted stalk (Matt. 13: 21), ripens the
matured grain. It is ripeness, not the
calendar or the clock, that determines the time of reaping (Mk. 4: 29). The
Heavenly Husbandman reaps no unripe grain: hence, “the hour to reap is come”
when the harvest is “dried up” (Rev. 14: 15), for the dryness of the kernel in
the husk is its fitness for the gamer and for use. Thus the Great Tribulation will be a true mercy to the Lord's people
by fully developing and sanctifying them for their heavenly destiny and glory.
It thus appears that the
foretold order of events will be: ‑
1. The
removal of such as prevail to escape the Times of the End. These will be taken
up to God and to His [page 45 - THE FORETOLD ORDER] throne
on the
2. The Beast arises and
persecutes.
3. The
Lord descends to the clouds and gathers together His elect (Matt. 24: 29 – 31; 1
Cor. 15: 51, 52; 1 Thess.
4: 15‑17; Tit. 2: 13; Rev. 14: 14 ‑ 16). At this time there will be
the first resurrection. Each who shall be accounted worthy of the coming age
will “arise into his lot at the end of the days,” not sooner,
certainly not before the End days have commenced (Dan. 12: 13). Nor may we
assume of the Firstfruits that they will have
priority in the Kingdom over equally faithful saints of earlier times.
4.
After an interval the Lord descends to the
It is
therefore our wisdom to give earnest, unremitting attention to our Lord's most
solemn exhortation “take heed to yourselves, lest haply your hearts be
overcharged with surfeiting and drunkenness [that is, fleshly indulgence], and
cares of this life [that is, its burdens through either poverty or riches], and
that day come on you suddenly as a snare: for so shall it come on all them that
dwell on the face of all the earth. But watch ye at every season, making
supplication, that ye may prevail to escape all these things that shall come to
pass, and to stand before the Son of Man (Lk. 21: 34 ‑
36).
Oh, dare and sufler all things!
Yet but a stretch of road,
Then
wondrous words of welcome,
And then ‑ the FACE OF
GOD!
Many
of the perplexities felt as to these themes are caused by misconceptions upon
three subjects ‑ the constitution of man, the place and state of the
dead, the judgment of the Lord upon His people. Some discussion of these
matters follows. [page 46]
S0UL OR SPIRIT, WHICH IS THE
MAN?
V. AN ENQUIRY AS TO MAN'S CONSTITUTION AND
FUTURE,
WITH REMARKS ON HADES AND
As
treasures heavy and valuable may hang upon a small hook, so consequences
weighty and far‑reaching may follow the settlement of what may seem a
small point.
Because
at death the spirit of man returns
to God who gave it (Eccl. 12: 7), it is generally thought that man goes then to
God in heaven. If the passage meant this
it would teach that the ungodly, as well as the godly, go to heaven at death,
for it refers to man as man. This alone shows that this is not the sense of
the passage. But further, the meaning
given assumes that the man, the conscious entity, the person, the ego, is his
spirit. But if this is not so, then the opinion stated, has no support in
Scripture.
Again,
many annihilationists deem that the man, the person,
consists of two parts only, the body and the spirit, and that when these are
parted at death the person, the conscious, ego, ceases to exist until the two
parts are reunited m resurrection. But if the conscious personality has ceased
to exist, it is extremely difficult to conceive that it is the identical
conscious person that comes into existence again. Would it not rather be a new
personality that comes into being at resurrection? How can continuity of
personality persist during non‑existence, and how, then, shall this new
man be held morally responsible for the deeds of that former person, and be
righteously liable to judgment therefor?
Moreover,
this would involve (what indeed we have
heard asserted) a disintegration of the person of the Man, Christ Jesus,
between His death and resurrection. According to the theory, during that period
His humanity was non‑existent. So that whilst the Son
of God existed, Christ did not until resurrection. This is fatal heresy,
and alone forbids the doctrine in question.
The
alternative must be for the annihilationist to adopt the first mentioned view, that personality attaches to the spirit, as others of
that school do. But if it be, that the
soul is the [page 47 – MAN
FORMED] person, and
that after death the soul has its own separate existence, then
the whole assertion fails.
Inasmuch therefore as
most serious issues are involved, this inquiry is of great practical
importance. Indeed. it may be said that many most
interesting and profitable themes can only be understood aright by a right understanding of our question ‑
Soul or Spirit, Which is the Man?
It
must here be remarked that this theme, like all such profounder topics of the
Word of God, cannot be studied in
the English Authorised Version. It
is not possible, on account of the deliberate irregularity in translation used
by the Translators so as to secure pleasing English. We quote here generally
the English Revised Version, and
sometimes the New Translation of J. N.
Darby (Morrish,
1. THE CREATION OF MAN.
The creation of man is described in Gen. 2: 7: “And Jehovah Elohim formed man, dust of the ground, and breathed into
his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.”
Here are three stages. 1. A material form fashioned but of
material particles, dust. This is the body. 2. A somewhat inbreathed by God,
named in Eccl. 12: 7, “spirit.” That the
“breath” of Gen. 2: 7, and the “spirit” of Eccl. 12: 7
are one is confirmed by the combination of the two terms in Gen. 7: 22: “All in
whose nostrils was the breath of the spirit of life.” 3. The result, that man became what is here
called “soul,” a living soul.
1. As to
the body, it is to be observed that it was not itself the man. It lay there, fashioned and prepared, but the man was not yet there. The body was an
inanimate form, which preceded the existence of the man. This as against the Sadducean materialist and his assertion that the body is
the man, and that when it dies his existence ends.
2. The
same is true of the breath or spirit, which God inbreathed. It also was in
existence prior to the man, for God breathed it into the body. It was not God;
it is not divine: it is not said that God breathed of Himself, or [page 48 - MAN A
TRINITY] breathed His Spirit into the body, but a somewhat
not to be defined by us as to its substance or nature, but which God terms
“spirit.” In Zech. 12: 1 it is declared to be a created thing, a thing
“formed,” as an article made by a potter. It is the same word as “potter” in
Zech. 11: 13, and is found first at Gen. 2: 8, God “formed man.” This as
against the pantheist, and the doctrine akin to pantheism, that there is a
measure of divinity in all men by creation. The immanence of God in all
creation is truth, the identity of all things, or of
any created thing, with God is error, deadly error.
Thus
the spirit was not the man, for he only came into existence by reason of the inbreathing of the
spirit into the body, which conjunction of two separate, previously existing
things, resulted in the creation of a third: “man became a living soul.”
3. It remains only that the man
is what he is here described to be, “a living soul.” The man is the soul, not the spirit, even as he is not the body.
This as against the annihilationist theory above mentioned.
It is
fairly certain that every false philosophy that has beclouded the thoughts of
man had been instilled into men's minds by spirits of darkness in
This
threefold composition of man is implied everywhere in the Word of God, and
sometimes is distinctly stated. Thus in 1 Thess. 5:
3: “And the God of peace himself sanctify you wholly; and may your spirit and
soul and body be preserved entire, without blame in the parousia of our Lord Jesus Christ.” The body is
distinguished from the spirit in James 2: 26: “The body apart from (the) spirit
is dead”; and the soul from the spirit in Heb. 4: 12, “The word of God . . . piercing to the dividing of soul and spirit.”
The
man has a body with which he operates upon the material world; but the body is
not the man. He has also [page 49 - DEATH] a spirit with which he has dealings with the
spiritual realm; but the spirit is not the man. The man himself, the conscious ego, is the soul. Personality in
man inheres in the soul, which will
become yet more apparent as we proceed, but may be seen in such passages as Ex.
1: 5: “all the souls were seventy souls”; Lev. 4: 2: “if a soul shall
sin” 5: 2: “if a soul touch”; Lev. 5: 4: “if a soul swear” 7: 18: “the soul
that eateth”, etc., etc. The evident sense is: “If a person” do this or that. See also LXX Ezk. 16: 5.
2. THE MEANING OF THE WORD DEATH.
Now
“the body without spirit is dead” (Jas. 2: 26), and the soul, the man, cannot
use or inhabit a dead body. The spirit imparts to the body vitality, animation,
and makes it usable by man. Thus so long as the two are united man is a living
soul, but when God recalls the spirit
which He gave, the body ceases to have life, the soul vacates it, and
thenceforth, until resurrection, the man is dead.
But it
is carefully and always to be remembered that in Scripture the term “life” does
not mean simply existence, but much more and much rather it means a certain
mode or quality of existence, and equally so the term “death,” therefore, does
not mean, non‑existence, but an opposite state or mode of existence. Many
things exist which do not exhibit the property called “life.” All annihilationist reasoning which we have read assumes this
false sense of the words “life” and “death” and cannot proceed without it.
Yet in
some real sense Adam died the day he disobeyed God, according to the sentence,
“in the day that thou eatest of it thou shalt certainly die” (Gen. 2: 17), but he did not cease to
exist that day. So, by a powerful antithesis, it is said, “she that giveth herself to pleasure is dead while she liveth,” which cannot be read,
ceases to exist while she exists (1 Tim. 5: 6). In much the same way we speak
of a living death.
Equally
arresting is our Lord's argument against the annihilationists
of His day (Lk. 20: 37, 38).
He
first admits that Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are dead, saying, “But that the dead are raised,” and at once adds that “God
is not the God of the dead, but of the living, for [page 50 - DEATH, ITS DURATION] all
live unto Him.” So dead in one sense, they are yet alive in another, showing
that both terms describe only relative conditions of existence. Similarly the
Lord makes the father of the prodigal say: “This my
son was dead, and is alive again” (Lk. 15: 24),
though in another sense he had been as much alive in the far country as after
his return. Further, it is clear that the first death does not cause the
annihilation of the sinner or there could be no second death for him.
Thus
the word death does not of itself mean ceasing to be, and such as say that the
second death means annihilation are bound to show that the Scripture adds to
the word this sense which does not belong to it. The second death is the “lake
of fire” (Rev. 20: 14). The beast and the false prophet are cast thereinto before the thousand years reign of Christ (Rev.
19: 20); they are still there at the close of that period when Satan is cast
there (Rev. 20: 10); so that a thousand years in the second death has not
destroyed their existence, and the sentence upon all three is that “they shall
be tormented day and night for the ages of the ages.” It would be impossible to
torment that which had ceased to be.
It is
consistent with the holiness and the love of God - for it is fact – that
angels that abused His favour shall be confined in that place of misery, Tartarus, for already thousands of years (2 Pet. 2: 4);
that Dives (Lk. 16), who abused His goodness on
earth, shall be tormented in a flame
in Hades for a period unknown to us, for it is not yet ended; that the Beast
and the false prophet, who blasphemed His holy name, shall be in the lake of
fire for more than a thousand years at least. As this is consistent with the
love and justice of God why should it not be so for 10,000 years, for 100,000,
for a billion years, or for ever, and especially in the case of those who
rejected His amazing love in Christ, trampled under foot the Son of God, and
definitely resisted the Spirit of truth? We are not competent to form our own
opinion as to what God may or may not, do consistently with His character and
because of it. We can only bow to what He has revealed, assured that He will
ever act consistently with what He is, for He is not able to do otherwise. We
can best estimate what sentence a judge may pass by considering what sentences
he has before passed, as well as what statements he may have made as to future
sentences. [page 51 - DEATH,
ITS NATURE]
3. WHAT
The
passage before cited tells us that “the dust returns to the earth as it was,
and the spirit returns unto God who gave it” (Eccl. 12: 7). But what becomes of
the soul?
An
actual case is better than much speculation, an ounce of fact being worth a ton
of theory. Of the Man Christ Jesus we ate told distinctly what took place at
His death.
1. His dead body was laid in the tomb.
2. His last words on the cross
were, “Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit” (Lk.
23. 46), the human spirit thus returning unto God who gave it. That the human
spirit is not the divine Spirit is seen clearly in the case of our Lord, for
His entire holy humanity was a created thing conceived by an operation of the
Holy Spirit in Mary (Lk. 1: 35); years later it was
anointed with power by the Spirit of God coming upon it; and at last on the
cross, He surrendered His human spirit to the Father: an act impossible in
relation to the Spirit of God with Whom He as God was in indissoluble union.
The distinction - necessary and unavoidable ‑ between the human and the
divine is thus ever maintained. It was the human spirit which vitalized His
body that Jesus gave up that He might die.
3. But the Spirit of prophecy in
David (Ps. 16: 10) had put into Messiah's mouth these other words: “Thou wilt
not leave my soul to Sheol,” which words were later, on the day of Pentecost, applied by
Peter to Christ. “Thou wilt not leave my
soul unto Hades” (Acts 2: 27).
The error of Apollinaris (cent. 4),
that the person of Christ consisted of a human body and soul only, with the
divine Spirit (or Logos) taking the place in Him of a human spirit, must be
steadfastly resisted. His humanity, as ours, consisted of
body, soul, and spirit.
Sheol and Hades are equivalent words in Hebrew
and Greek respectively. Of this region there is abundant information in
Scripture. It is very far from the fact, as spiritualists assert,
that no certain information as to the state after death is available save what
they think they receive from spirits through mediums. But most unfortunately
the reader of the Authorized Version
is completely stopped from this study by the variety of the terms employed. Sheol and Hades are [page 52 - SPIRIT NOT THE PERSON] rendered
“grave,” “pit,” and “hell.” The last in
its older English meaning was not inaccurate, but it has come now to mean only
the final place of the lost, the lake of fire, which never is the sense of Sheol or Hades. However, any diligent reader can pursue
the subject in the Revised Version,
for these original terms are given in either text or margin where ever they
occur. This is one example, and an important one, of the superiority of the R.V. over the A.V.
4. WHERE IS HADES?
So the
soul of our Lord was in Hades between His death and His resurrection on the
third day. And Eph. 4: 9, 10 shows beyond question (1) that the “soul” was the
Lord Himself, the personality, and (2) where
Hades is situate. It says: “Having ascended up on high he has led captivity
captive, and has given gifts unto men. Now this, having ascended, what is it
but that He also descended into the lower parts of the earth? He that descended
is the same who has also ascended far above all heavens, that he might fill all
things.”
1. The Person that ascended is
the same Person that had descended, and from
His own express words to Mary directly after His resurrection it is certain
that He himself did not go to the Father at the hour of death, for He said
to her: “I have (perf. ind.,
anabebeeko) not yet ascended to my Father; but go
to my brethren and say unto them, I ascend to my Father” (Jo. 20: 17). As His
ascent to the Father had yet to take place it is clear that His human spirit,
which He had commended to His Father as He died, was not Himself. Nor would the words admit the thought;
for a man cannot send his personality, his self, away from himself, but we read
of Jesus that “he gave up the spirit,” or, breathed out the spirit, expired, as we say, the exact reversal of the act of
creation when God breathes in the
spirit.
The
spirit therefore was not Himself, but a part of His composite humanity that He
could dismiss by an act of the will. Man does not possess the power to do this;
he must use violence to terminate his life: but Christ had received this power
specially from His Father, according
to His statement [page 53 - HADES, ITS
LOCATION] that the Father had given Him authority to lay down
His life by His own act (Jo. 10: 17, 18).
2. The realm to which Christ descended, elsewhere, as
we have seen, named Hades, is in this place in Ephesians stated plainly to be
in “the lower parts of the earth.” Scripture
always locates it there and nowhere else. So Jacob of old said: “I will go down to Sheol to my son” (Gen. 37: 35); and so the great prophet Samuel, when
permitted by God to come from the world of the dead to announce the doom of
Saul (an exceptional permission and event) said: “Why hast thou disquieted me
to bring me up?” (1 Sam. 28: 15). And
so Christ said of
Readers
of the great classics will not need to be reminded that it was the common
belief of the ancient world that the place of the dead was within the earth. We
are not aware that any other opinion was then in men's minds. Their details of
that place and its conditions are not to be accepted without Scripture
confirmation, even as those of mediaeval writers like Dante are not to be; but the general facts of the location of the
world of the dead within the earth, and of its having two divided regions, one
of pain and one of bliss, are plainly adopted in Holy Scripture (as in Lk. 16), and so are confirmed as facts. And it could be
shown that some details also are thus confirmed; as that the poets made
visitors to and from that realm go and come through some cave or opening in the
earth, and the Revelation similarly represents demon hordes as coming from the
abyss through a shaft or opening therefrom (Rev. 9: 1
‑11). We take the idea in each
case to represent the conception that the
realm of the dead is within the earth.
5. BUT
DO NOT SAINTS AT DEATH “GO TO
HEAVEN”?
The
death of Stephen presents the exact features seen at the death of his Lord. We
are told that “he called upon the Lord, saying, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit
... and ... he fell asleep” (Acts 7: 59, 60).
His body did not fall asleep: it was battered to death by brutal ill‑usage,
and devout men [page 54 - ON "GOING TO
HEAVEN"] buried it. It does not say that his spirit fell
asleep, but that he surrendered it to his Lord. We shall see later that neither
does the soul “sleep” in relation to that other realm to which it goes at
death; so that the expression “fell asleep” can only mean as to its relation to
this earth‑life which it leaves at death.
But
did not Stephen “go to heaven” when he died? Do not all who die in Christ do
so? It has been the almost universal
belief of Protestants, but there is no Scripture for it. If Solomon's
words, “the spirit returns to God who gave it,” mean this, then the saints
before the time of Christ must have gone there, and, as before remarked, not
saints only, but the ungodly also, for the statement applies to all men.
It has
been often asserted that when the Lord rose he released from Hades the godly
dead and removed them to
It
should be asked, Where were these multitudes of souls during the forty days before Christ
himself ascended? Raised at His resurrection, as the theory asserts, what was
their location during that period?
But it
is known definitely that one of the most renowned of Old Testament men of God
did not ascend to heaven with the Lord, for at
Pentecost, which was after the ascension, Peter distinctly stated that “David
has not ascended into the heavens” (Darby,
Acts 2: 34). Why was David left behind? There is no reason to think he was: the
other godly dead also stayed there, as far as Scripture is concerned.
Alford translates: “David himself [i.e., in contrast to Christ] is not
ascended”:
In his
great work on The Creed (Art. 5, He
descended into Hell) Bishop Pearson shows how little basis
the opinion in question has. He says: “The next consideration, is whether by
virtue of His descent, the souls of those who before believed in Him, the
Patriarchs, Prophets, and all the people of God, were delivered from that place
and state, in which they were before; and whether Christ descended into Hell to that end, that He might translate
them into a place and state, far more glorious and happy. This has been, in the
later ages of the Church, the vulgar opinion of most men ...
“But
even this opinion, as general as it hath been, hath neither the consent of
Antiquity, nor such certainty as it pretendeth.
Indeed, very few (if any) for above five hundred years after Christ, did so
believe that Christ delivered the saints out of Hell, as to leave all the
damned there. Many of the Ancients believed not, that they were removed at all,
and few acknowledged that they were removed alone.”
But it
is asked, What became of those who came forth from
their graves after Christ had risen and who appeared unto many? (Matt. 27: 52, 53). Did they not “go to heaven” with the
Lord? Let those say what became of these to whom God may have given private
information upon the point; but it
cannot be learned from Scripture that they went to heaven. And in return it
may be asked, What became of Lazarus and the other
persons who were resuscitated, as mentioned in Scripture? Did they go to heaven
without dying again or, are they still on earth? or, did they not in due time go back to
the death state, from which they had been temporarily recalled to exhibit the
power of God?
That Christ “led captivity captive” carries no suggestion that
He took the godly dead to heaven. The figure itself forbids the
idea. It is taken from the ancient practice that a victorious commander dragged
many, and the most noble, of his captives to his capital city and exhibited
them for his glory at his triumphal entry. The expression could in no wise
apply to the possible recovery of some of his own subjects from captivity by
his enemy and their return home with him in liberty. The sense may be seen
plainly in the place in [page 56 –
6. WHEN AND WHERE IS
Paul
says that he was “caught away into
the paradise” (2 Cor. 12: 4), which, in view of the
meaning of the word, does not mean the heaven of heavens where God has His own
especial dwelling. The word “caught up” is not exact, for the Greek word
harpazo
does not in itself indicate the direction. Nor is it certain that by “the paradise”
he means the “third heaven” to which he had been taken according to the verse
preceding, because he had said (ver. 1) that he was
about to speak of “visions,” not of only one vision, whereas he did not mention
more than one, unless the two are separate events.
But if
the article “the paradise” points to one such region that is pre‑eminently
But
the article “the paradise” does not
require the sense of a region in the heavens, because Christ used it when he
said to the thief, “To‑day shalt thou be with
me in the paradise” (Lk. 23: 43), and it is beyond question, as we have seen,
that Christ did not go to the heavenly
regions that day, but to Hades, in “the lower parts of the earth.” Therefore
the blissful region of Hades, “Abraham's bosom” (Lk.
16: 22) was paradise; and ought not we, the followers of the Lord, to feel that
a region which was suitable to Him in the death state must be fully suitable
for us?
As far
as the meaning of the word goes there may be many paradises, even as Solomon
says, “I made me paradises”; and so it may be that “the Paradise of God,” where grows the tree
of life of which saints that have conquered in the battles of life shall be
privileged to eat, is heavenly in location (Rev. 2: 7; 22: 14); but in any case
that is future, not present, as to our enjoyment of it, and does not touch the
place and state of the dead.
The
Lord Jesus in His universal presence is not only in heaven; He is also in the
midst of two or three living saints gathered to His name on earth. He is in
Hades also: “He descended . . . He ascended, that He might fill all things”
might occupy the universe (ta panta),
might pervade it all with His presence, as the odour of the ointment did the
house (John 12: 3), where the same verb is used as in Eph. 4: 10 (pleeroo). Thus, without vacating His place at the
right hand of God, He could present Himself personally and repeatedly to His
imprisoned and hard‑pressed servant on earth (Acts 23: 11; 2 Tim. 4: 16,
17), and can also communicate with the dead, as we shall see shortly.
And
the soul, freed from the trammels of this enfeebled, deranged body of our
humiliation, can in consequence appreciate that presence more keenly and enjoy
it more blessedly, and so Paul could rightly say that to depart and to be with
Christ would be very far better than to be chained day and night to a rough
pagan soldier, as was at that time his distressing lot (Phil. 1: 23). It is
however to be noted that the apostle does not here make any general statement
that “to [page
58 - SOULS
UNDER THE ALTAR] die is gain”; strictly his assertion is made of
himself only. He had just stated his “earnest expectation and hope” that Christ
should continue to be “magnified in his body, whether by life or by death.” Not
every believer lives with this as his fixed and paramount intention. Not every
Christian has so dedicated his body to Christ as to be as willing for death as
for life. Then Paul adds: “For to me to live is Christ, and to die is gain”
(Phil. 1: 20, 21). Doubtless this is true of each who lives to magnify Christ; but it is not said of believers who may not
so live, as those, for example, who are cut off prematurely in their sins, as
were Ananias and Sapphira
and the evil living Christians in the Corinthian church (Acts 5: 1; Cor. 11: 30).
7. THE SOULS UNDER THE ALTAR.
It is
a serious loss to many believers that they regard the book of the Revelation as
beyond comprehension, and are afraid to accept its symbols and visions as a revelation. Hence, when appeal is made to it they
decline to accept its testimony. But symbols, pictures, figures of speech,
being used by the Spirit of truth with divine care, teach with accuracy, and indeed with superior vividness, those who have
eyes to see and ears to hear. Hieroglyphs have plain meaning to those who can
read them, and this had been just as much the fact during the period when men
could not read them, or in the later period when scholars differed as to their
meaning. Patient research brought explanation and reconciliation.
One of
the most illuminating portions of Scripture upon our present interesting and
necessary themes is in Revelation 6: 9 ‑ 11. John says: “And when the
Lamb opened the fifth seal, I saw underneath
the altar the souls of them that
had been slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held: and they cried with a great voice, saying,
How long, O sovereign ruler, the holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge
our blood on them that dwell on the earth? And there was given to them, to each one, a white robe; and it
was said unto them that they should rest yet for a little time,
until their fellow‑bondmen also
and their brethren, who should be killed even as they were, should have
fulfilled their course.” [page 59 - CONSCIOUSNESS
IN HADES]
At the
time here in view the resurrection of the godly has not yet come, for the roll
of the martyrs is not complete. These brethren therefore are still without
their resurrection bodies. But to John, rapt in spirit into that super‑sensuous
world (c. 1: 10: “I became in spirit,” that is, in an ecstatic state), those
“souls” were visible. Therefore death does not end the existence of the soul.
Moreover, they are conscious: they remember what befell them on earth at the
hands of the godless; they know what the future will bring of vengeance; they
ponder the situation, and they wonder at the seeming delay of their vindication
by God; they appeal to their Lord; they are given answer, counsel, and
encouragement; they receive the sign of their Master's approval, the white
robe, at once His recompense for that they did not defile their garments in
this foul world, and His assurance that they shall be His personal and constant
associates in His kingdom (Rev. 3: 4, 5). This
last item ‑ the giving of the
white robes - shows further that not all saints await a session of the
judgment seat of Christ when at last He shall come from heaven; for His
decision and approval are here made known to these in advance of His coming
and of their resurrection.
The vision contains also something more, and which is
completely unseen by most readers.
When Samuel came from Hades to speak to Saul (1 Sam. 28: 12 ‑
14) he was seen by the medium.
She saw him “coming up out of the earth,” a further plain Intimation that Sheol is within the earth. She described him, saying it was
“an old man” who had appeared, and he was “covered with a robe.” The
description was so accurate that Saul, who had long known Samuel on earth,
recognized him by it and was satisfied that the real Samuel was present, though
he had not himself seen the appearance; for it says that “he perceived (Heb.,
knew),” not that he saw that it was Samuel. Equally does his question to the
witch “What seest thou?” tell that he had
not himself seen the form.
This makes evident (a) that the disembodied soul has form and
garments, such as can be seen by one endowed with vision therefor,
as were the medium then and John later; and (b) that the psychical form and
clothing of that state correspond recognizably to the outer material form and
clothing of the former earth life. This has bearing upon the –[page 60 - PSYCHICAL
FORM AND CLOTHING] question of recognition after death, and
upon other interesting points not now to be examined.
The
reality of this psychical form is often assumed or asserted in Scripture. Dives
in Hades (Lk. 16) has a body that can feel anguish from
a “flame.” There is “water” that could cool his “tongue.” Lazarus has a
“finger.” Both Dives and Abraham have eyes and ears and voices; they see and
hear and speak. The reality of bliss in
that state must be surrendered if the reality of torment there be denied.
That those realities are subtle as compared with their grosser counterparts of
this world, does not make them or the experiences
less real, but rather the more acute.
Thus
also it is as to the souls “under the altar.” John sees them, and sees that to
each of them is given a “robe” that is both suitable and significant.
It was
for a similar, yet even higher, experience that Paul longed; for, while the
disembodied state would indeed be far better than his painful lot as a
prisoner, yet in itself it is not the best. And so on another
occasion, when he was in freedom and rejoicing in his wondrous and privileged
service, he spoke differently (2 Cor. 5: 1 ‑
10). First he spoke of the present: “We that are in this tent‑dwelling
[the body] do groan, being burdened”: then he mentioned the intermediate state
after death: “not for that we would be unclothed” (without adequate covering),
for this is not to be desired, it is as unpleasant and unseemly for the soul as
for the body*; and then he spoke of
the future: “we long to be clothed upon with our habitation which is from
heaven; if so be that being clothed we shall not be found naked,” that is, at
the coming of the Lord.
[* Compare the evident longing of the evil spirit to return
into the body he had left. Without a material body he wandered restless, like a
thirsty man seeking water in a desert (Matt. 12: 43‑45). Demons also
begged to enter the bodies of even swine, when driven from the body of a man.
This misery of disembodied beings is recognized by the heathen, who often, by
reason of dread and unholy contact with the demon world, have more sense of
these matters than the materialized modern westerner. Thus a Chinese driver explained the whirling dust spouts of the
This “if so be” implies the possibility of not having part in
the first resurrection, for (1 Cor. 15: 54) that is
the hour when “what is mortal shall be swallowed up of life,” by the soul being
clothed upon with its “building from God, a house not made with hands, eternal,
in the heavens,” a “house” in contrast to this present body, the frail
transitory tent.
This
is the meaning of his earlier prayer above noticed, that “the spirit and soul
and body be preserved entire, unblemished,” and so unblamable (amemptbs includes
both) when the Lord shall come (1 Thess. 5: 22). No
“naked,” that is, unembodied, soul can be presented
before the presence of God's glory, because for that it must be without blemish
(amomos), not to be blamed (Jude 24; Eph. 1: 4).
Were a man, however perfect his form, and even were he of the royal family, to
present himself naked on a court day before the king
upon his throne he would be severely blamed. Not only comeliness of person, but
clothing, and suitable clothing, is indispensable. Indeed, the officers of the
court would prevent anything so utterly unseemly. Shall the King of kings
receive less respect? He that hath ears
to hear let him hear this, and lay to heart that not death, but resurrection or
rapture fits for translation to the realms above and the court of the God of
glory. It was thus with Christ himself.
For
entrance into the holy places the priest had not only to be one of the redeemed
people of God; he had also to be unblemished as to his person (Lev. 21), and he
had further to be clothed in garments of glory and beauty (Ex. 28). Both were
indispensable for access to the presence of God. Moreover, before the perfect
form could be clothed in such garments it had to be washed with water (Lev. 8:
6; 16: 4), which is the work our Moses, Christ, wishes to effect in us in this
earthly life by His word (Eph. 5: 25 ‑ 27) and by discipline (Heb. 12:
10), in preparation for that coming day of our being clothed for access to and
service in the true sanctuary above.
If it
be asked whether the righteousness imputed to the believer upon first faith in
Christ does not include all this that is evidently necessary, the answer is a
distinct negative. One consideration settles this. That imputed righteousness
is the “righteousness of God,” and this is of necessity indefectible, untarnishable. But, according to the regulations, [page 62 - GARMENTS
MAY BE LOST] the priest may possibly be defective in form or
defiled in person and clothing: were it not so, what need of the regulations
and purifying ceremonies?
For
the forgiveness of sins, and for life as a forgiven man in the camp, neither perfection of form, nor
washing at the gate of the tabernacle, nor special clothing, were demanded; but
for access to God and for priestly service all these were as indispensable as
the atoning blood. Imputed righteousness settles completely and for ever the
judicial standing of the believer as justified before the law of God; but practical righteousness must be added
in order to secure many of the mighty privileges which become possible to the
justified. Let him that hath ears
hear this also, for loss and, shame must be his at last who has been content to
remain deformed and imperfect in moral state, or is found to have neglected the
washing, and so to be unfit to wear the noble clothing required for access to
the throne of glory. Such neglect of present grace not only causes the loss
of heart access to God, as the careless believer surely knows, but will assure the forfeiture of much that
grace would have granted in the future.
Here
lies the weight of the warning which our Lord announces from heaven as to be specially applicable when His coming draws near: “Behold, I come as a thief. [This, message is
set in the midst of the gathering of the hosts of Antichrist for the battle of Har Magedon, and so indicates the
period when the coming will be]. Blessed is he that watcheth,
and keepeth his garments, lest he walk
naked and they see his shame” (Rev. 16: 15). Therefore “garments” may be lost.
If the reference is to the imputed righteousness, then justification may be
forfeited, and the once saved be afterwards lost. But let those who rightly reject this, inquire honestly what it does
properly mean as to the eternally justified. And let them face what is involved
in the loss of one's garments.
In the
temple of old the guards were placed at nightfall at their posts. The captain
of the temple, at any hour he chose, went round with a posse of men
unannounced, and if a guard was caught asleep at his post, he was stripped of
his clothes, which were burned, and he was left to go forth in his shame. The shame
of his nakedness was the outward counterpart of the deeper shame that he had
slept when on duty. Not in that dishonoured state dare he enter the house of
God [page
63 - MAN
NOT A SPIRIT] and sing or serve. And it would be long ere the
disgrace of that night would fade from memory, his own
or others. My soul, keep awake through this short night of duty while thy Lord
is away! Thou knowest not in which watch of the night
He will come, and it were dreadful to be left unclothed with that house which
is from heaven should He come suddenly and find thee sleeping!
To return to seal 5. These, then, are “souls” not
“spirits.” Man has spirit as part of his composite being, but he is not a
spirit, as angels are. In the 397 places
where the word “spirit” comes in the New Testament man is never called a
spirit, because he himself is not one,
but is a soul. Hence, by the way, the “in‑prison spirits” of 1 Pet. 3: 19 are not human beings, but those fallen
angels whom Peter again mentions (2 Pet. 2: 4: comp. Gen. 6: 1 ‑ 4 and
Jude 6). This is put beyond question
by the fact that these are in the underworld, in prison, in Tartarus
‑ a region well known to the ancient world, and by this name that Peter
uses, as the deepest and most dreadful part of Hades, a prison of fallen
angels; whereas the spirit of man does not go to the underworld, but to
“God who gave it.”
It is
therefore the soul which is the person; and ‑ against the annihilationist
‑ the soul has not ceased to exist, or lost its sense of personality,
because of being without spirit or body. Yet neither can man in this incomplete
condition stand in the all‑holy presence of God in heaven. For entrance
into the holy of holies the high priest himself must be arrayed in garments
specially pure and glorious. It was only
in His resurrection body of glory that the Man Christ Jesus entered into
the holy place on high, and so only can the under‑priests, His followers,
do so. To stand there the being must be complete in structure and perfect
morally, which is the point of Paul's prayer for fellow‑saints: “The God
of peace himself sanctify you wholly; and
may your spirit and soul and body be preserved entire, blameless in the parousia [the presence, at His coming] of our Lord Jesus
Christ” (1 Thess. 5: 23). This shows that the phrase
“the spirits of just men made perfect” points
to the resurrection. It has just before been said of them, that “apart
from us they [i.e., Old Testament saints are included, (see verses 4 – 39) in
this chapter. – Ed.] could
not be made perfect” (Heb. 12: 23; 11. 40). All [page 64 - UNDER THE ALTAR] the other glories to which in this passage
we are said, to have come are future, to be realized actually at the coming of
the Lord. See my “Firstborn Sons,” 84
ff.
The
use of spirit in this place
(Heb. 12: 23) may seem at variance with
the statement that man is not called a “spirit!” It is a rare instance, perhaps
in the New Testament the only instance, of Cremer's fourth sense in which
the term is used. It “comes to denote an essence without any corporeal garb for
its inner reality”; that is, in Heb. 12: 23, which he cites, the man, the soul,
without its body, is described as spirit, meaning a spiritual substance destitute of a material covering.
This does not cancel the regular distinction in Scripture between soul and spirit, but indicates only the immateriality
of the soul, the ego, in itself. The student should by all means study Cremer's treatment of pneuma and psuche (Lexicon
of N.T. Greek), and note his
conclusion that “psuche [soul] is the subject or ego of life."
Now
these souls that John saw are “under the altar.” Not one of the first six
seals, of which this is the fifth, pictures events in the presence of God in
heaven; all deal with affairs of earth, or as seen from the earth. This altar,
then, is not in heaven. There is an altar in heaven pictured in the book, but
it is specified as being the “golden altar,” that is, the one for incense
(comp. Ex. 30: 3), and as being “before the throne” or “before God” (Rev. 8. 3;
9. 13). In this book “before the throne” always means the upper heavens. But
this other altar is one of sacrifice, though not of atoning sacrifice. We
Christians have an altar of atoning sacrifice (Heb. 13: 10): it is the cross of Jesus, the Lamb of
God. But that is not in view here.
The picture is really quite simple. The
brazen altar of sacrifice in the tabernacle was square and hollow, with a
grating upon which rested the wood and the victims. When the fire had done its
work the remains of the sacrifice fell through the grating to beneath the
altar, whence they could be removed on occasion. Now the place, the “altar,” where these martyrs of Christ sacrificed
person and life in His cause is obviously this earth, and thus this vision
simply declares what we have seen from other scriptures, that the place of the
dead is under the earth: “He descended into the lower [page 65 - IMMORTAL
SOUL] parts of the earth”; whence those still
there will be removed at resurrection.
Since
these pages were written I have learned that this was the explanation of the
earliest known Latin commentator on the Apocalypse, Victorihus of Pettau (died 303). Mr. F. F. Bruce summarized this in The
Evangelical Quarterly (Oct.,
1938) as follows: “The altar (6:9) is the earth: the brazen altar of burnt‑offering
and the golden altar of incense in the Tabernacle correspond to earth and
heaven respectively. The souls under the altar, therefore, are in Hades, in that
department of it which is ‘remote from pains and fires, the rest of the
saints’. ”
This
confirms Bishop Pearson cited above
as to the view held in the earliest Christian centuries.
A
great deal more concerning Hades can be learned from Scripture, but it would
require separate treatment. Here we deal with the matter only as connected with
the subject in hand.
It is
true, as above indicated on Heb. 12: 23,that the words
soul and spirit take, by much usage, shades of meaning derived from their
primary sense. The student will discover these, and will not be confused
thereby if only the primary, dominant sense of each has been first grasped
firmly. And keeping that sense before him, we believe he will find it to
illuminate many obscure scriptures and subjects to see that the soul is the
person ‑ a living soul while on earth ‑ a dead soul while in the
underworld ‑ and to be made alive in immortality at the resurrection,
with a body of glory incorruptible, indestructible.
The
term “immortal soul” is incorrect and misleading when used of our present state
or of the dead. To be immortal is to be incapable of dying. Man is not this as
yet. Neither the innocent humanity of Adam, nor even the sinless humanity of
Jesus was immortal, for both were capable of dying, and did in fact die. But
the saved of men will become immortal in
resurrection, as the man Christ Jesus did. The soul, the man, has now endless
existence but not
immortality, in the proper sense of the word, until resurrection; and then
only the saved will be incapable of dying; the lost will exist for ever,
but in a state termed “dead,” the “second death.” [page
66 - INDISSOLUBLE
LIFE]
We
rightly describe death as a “dissolution,” for the
partnership between man's spirit and soul and body is dissolved. Of our Lord
in resurrection we read the glorious fact that “He liveth
in the power of indissoluble life”
and “death no more hath dominion over Him” (Heb. 7: 16: Rom. 6: 9, 10). This
life His people will share for ever and ever. But for them, as for Him, it can be reached only by resurrection or
rapture, never by death. It will be
no small profit from this discussion if it be seen that the opinion that the
believer goes at death to glory diminishes the sense of need of resurrection or
rapture, and consequently of the return of Christ when these will take place;
and also if it thus cause some hearts to
feel that these events are utterly indispensable, the proper, the blessed hope
of the believer. As Peter exhorts, let us “set our hope perfectly [that is,
undividedly] on the favour that is being brought unto
us at the revelation of Jesus Christ” (1 Pet. 1: 13). [page
67]
THE JUDGMENT SEAT OF CHRIST.
1. God has an inescapable duty
to be the “Judge of all the earth” (Gen. 18: 25). Those who submit to Him are
subject to this judgment equally with the insubordinate: “The Lord shall judge His
people” (Deut. 32: 36; Ps. 135: 14; Heb. 10: 30). The children of the sovereign are amenable to the laws and the courts
and liable to penalty for misconduct.
2. This judgment is ever in
process. There is a perpetual overruling of human affairs by higher
authorities. Prominent instances are Job (ch. 1 and
2), Ahah (1 Kin. 22), Nebuchadnezzar (Dan. 4). The
first case shows the judicial proceedings effecting perfecting, the second
death, the third reformation.
Job
was a godly man under discipline for his good: an upright man was made a holy
man. Thus still does God chasten His sons that they may become partakers of His
holiness (Heb. 12: 10, 11).
Sinning
Christians were disciplined even unto premature death, and it is explained that
this operates to save them from liability to condemnation at the time when God
will deal with the world at large (1 Cor. 11: 32).
3. But this continuous judicial
administration has its crisis sessions, its special occasions. Instances are:
the Flood; the destruction of
Hereafter
there will come the destruction of Gentile world
dominion and the punishment of Antichrist. Then the judgment
at
But it
is most necessary to keep in mind that all such separate and specific sessions
are but part of the ceaselessly operating judicial administration of heaven and
earth. [page 68 -THE SUPREME JUDGE]
4. It is important to remember
that the Son of man is the chief Judge of the universe. It was He who acted at
the Flood: “Jehovah sat as king at the Flood” (Ps. 29: 10). It was He who, in
holy care that only justice should be done, came down to enquire personally
whether Sodom and Gomorrah ought to be destroyed (Gen. 18: 20, 21), and Who
again came down to deliver Israel from Egypt (Ex. 3: 7, 8). It was His glory as
judge that was seen by Isaiah (ch. 6; John 12. 41),
and later by Ezekiel (ch. 1).
He is
the Man appointed to judge the world in righteousness on behalf of God the
Father (Acts 17: 31); for the Father has entrusted all judgment unto the Son,
in order that He may receive equal honour with the Father (John 5: 19 ‑
29).
5. Yet it is particularly
needful to note that the last cited passage is in reference to the future
sessions of the divine judgment, for the judging in question is there set in
direct connection with the raising of men from the dead (John 5: 21, 22, 27 ‑
29). For when the Son of God became man He ceased for the
present to supervise those judgments of heaven. This was among the
dignities of which He emptied, that is, divested Himself, for His immediate and
blessed purpose in becoming man was their salvation from judgment (John 5: 24).
Therefore He said: “God sent not the Son into the world to judge the world, but
that the world should be saved through Him” (John 3: 17); nor has He yet
resumed the office of supreme Judge, though appointed thereto as man. In
relation to the world He is still the Dispenser of the grace of God, not yet
the Executor of His holy wrath, as He will one day become.
This is clear from three chief
considerations:
(1)
That the Father has called Him to sit at His own right hand until the time when
His enemies are to be put under His feet (Ps. 110: 1; Heb. 1: 13; 10: 13). That
is, He is not yet sitting upon His own throne and asserting His own right and
authority, as He will do in a later day (Rev. 2: 26, 27; 3: 21: Matt. 25: 31);
but He is waiting expectantly that coming day.
(2)
And therefore is it twice pictured that, as Son of man, the Lamb, He is
hereafter to be brought before the Father to be invested officially with that
authority to judge and to make [page 69 - CHRISTIANS JUDGED NOW] war
the title to which is His already but the exercise of which is in abeyance
(Dan. 7: 13, 14; Rev. ch. 4 and 5). In both of these
scenes it is God the Father who is shown acting from the throne of judgment
until the Son has been thus formally installed as Judge.
(3)
And therefore is He now the Advocate of His people before the Father (1 John 2:
1). But the Advocate cannot be at the same time the Judge.
6. Thus during this interval the
especial concern and sphere of the Son of man is the company He is calling out
of the world, the
And this work calls for both grace and
judgment. He “can bear gently with the ignorant and the erring, sympathizing
with our infirmities” (Heb. 5: 2; 4: 15), but dealing with kind severity with
the wilful of His people. “Behold then the goodness and severity of God” (Rom.
11: 22). Nor may we abuse His goodness by making light of His severity; or if
we do, it will be unto painful disillusionment.
7. Judgment upon His own people therefore God exercises now; this is
the very period for it; but the general judgment of the world is deferred: “The
time is come for judgment to begin at the house of God” (1 Pet. 4: 17). And again: “If we
discriminated [sat in strict judgment upon] ourselves, we should not be judged,
but when [failing in this holy self-judgment] we are judged, we are chastened
by the Lord [here perhaps the Father, comp. Heb. 12: 5, 9, where He who
chastens is the Father of spirits] that we may not be condemned with the
world" (1 Cor. 11: 30,31).
And this chastening may extend to
bodily weakness, positive sickness, or even death. So it was in the cases
of Ananias and Sapphira
(Acts 5: 1 ‑ 11, and see Jas. 5: 19,
20: 1 John 5, 16, 17; Matt. 5: 21‑26; 18: 28‑35).
8. The Lord made many most
serious statements as to His dealings with “His own” servants at His return.
Some of these are: [page 70 - LORD AND SLAVE] (1)
Luke 12: 22‑53. From dealing
with the crowd He turns and speaks specifically to His own disciples (ver. 22). Only
genuine disciples, regenerated persons, are able to fulfil His precepts here
given. To mere professors the task is impossible, and such cannot be in view.
They are to live without any anxiety as to the necessities of life, and in this
are to be in express contrast to the nations; they are His “little flock,” for
whom the Father intends the kingdom, and therefore they are to give away, not
to hoard, and so to lay up treasure in heaven (21‑34). It is impossible
to include the unregenerate in such a passage; nor would it be attempted save
to avoid the application to Christians of part of the succeeding and connected
instruction.
This instruction
is that disciples are like the personal household slaves of an absent master,
who upon his return will deal with each according to his conduct during the
master's absence. In particular, the steward set over the household will be
dealt with the more strictly that his office, opportunities, and example were
the higher. The goodness of the master is seen in exalting the faithful (though
from one point of view he had done no more than his duty and was an
unprofitable servant) to almost unlimited privilege and power: “He will set him
over all that he hath” (ver. 44): his severity is shown by “cutting in sunder”* the servant who had abused his trust, and appointing his portion
with the unfaithful (35‑53)
[*
Equals “severely scourge,” because the scourge used cut deeply into the flesh ‑
see margin.]
(2)
This is elaborated and enforced in later statements. Luke 19. 11‑27. The
picture is the same, namely, the absent master and the faithful or unfaithful
servants. The “pound” represents that deposit of truth entrusted to the saints
(Jude 3), for their use among men
while Christ is away: “Trade ye till I come.” The
Nobleman himself held and used it while here, and left it with us when He went
to receive the kingdom. If we traffic with knowledge it increases in our hands
and we gain more; if we neglect to do so it remains truth, retaining its own
intrinsic value (“thou hast thy
pound”), but we do not accumulate knowledge, nor benefit others, nor bring to
our Lord any return for His confidence in us. In this parable it is not the
personal life of the slave that is in [page 71 - THE EVIL SERVANT] question;
that may have been good: it is his use of the truth in either spreading it among man, or hiding his light under a bushel
of silence, or, as the picture is here, burying the pound in the earth.
The
unfaithful servant loses opportunity further to serve his lord, the pound is
taken from him. Sadder still, his lord has no confidence in him. But he is not
an enemy of his lord, nor is treated as such. He
does not lose his life. The contrast is most distinct between him, however
unfaithful, and the foes and rebels: “But
these mine enemies that would not that I should reign over them, bring
hither and slay them before me” (ver. 27).
(3)
Matt. 24: 42 ‑ 25, 30. Only a
few days later the Lord repeated this instruction, with fuller detail. The head
slave, set as steward of the house during the absence of the master, will be
set over all his lord's possessions if only he have acted faithfully (45‑47). “But if that evil servant” abuses his position, and becomes self‑indulgent
and tyrannical, he will be “severely scourged,” and his portion be allotted
with the hypocrites, where he will weep and gnash his teeth over his folly and
lot.
Only a believer who does not consider his own heart will
assert that a Christian cannot act the hypocrite, be unfaithful, or arbitrary
and unloving. But the pronoun " that” – “But if that evil servant, etc.,” leaves no option but to regard him as a
believer, for it has no antecedent to whom it can refer except the faithful
servant just before described, no other person having been mentioned. “That
evil servant” what evil servant? and there is no answer but that the faithful steward has
become unfaithful*: And
such cases are known. Nor
will we, for our part, join to consign all such to eternal ruin rather than accept the alternative
of the temporary, though severe, punishments intimated by the Lord being
possible to a believer. Those who take the latter course, mainly influenced to
support certain dispensational theories, have surely never weighed the
solemnity of thus easily consigning so many backsliders to endless misery.
[*
Since,
then, an unbeliever is (a) not set by the Lord over His house, nor (b) could feed the souls of his fellows, nor
(c) could be so faithful as to become at last ruler of all the possessions of
the Lord, this man must be a true believer. But when such a one may lapse from
his fidelity he does not thereby become unregenerate; consequently the unfaithful
steward is still called one of the Lord's “own servants”; and therefore a
believer may incur the solemn penalties veiled, under the figures used.
If it
be thought inconceivable that the Lord should describe, one of His blood‑bought
and beloved people as a “wicked servant” (Matt. 25: 26), it must be weighed
that He had before applied the term to a servant whose “debt” had been fully remitted: “thou
wicked servant, I forgave thee all that debt” (Matt. 18: 32). Thus one who, as
an act of compassion by the Lord, has been fully forgiven all his failure as a
servant may prove a “wicked servant,” his wickedness consisting in this, that though forgiven he would not forgive. To deny
that a child of God can be unforgiving is to blind the eyes by denying sad and
stem fact. The Lord left no room for doubt that members of the divine family
were in His mind by the application of the parable He then and there made:
“Even so shall my heavenly Father do unto you [Peter, whose question as to forgiving had drawn forth
the parable, and the other disciples, ver. 1, 21], if
ye forgive not, each one of you (hekastos), his brother from your hearts” (35). It is the Father and the brothers who
are in question, not here those outside the family circle.
Moreover,
if this parable be pressed to include a mere professing but unregenerate
person some inevitable implications must be accepted. It is by no means denied
that there are such persons, but if they are in view here these consequences
follow: ‑
(a) An unregenerate person has
had “all his debt forgiven.”
(b) In spite of this free
forgiveness he remains unregenerate.
(c) A
forgiven sinner can have the free pardon of his sins, revoked, in which case he
will thereafter stand in his former lost estate exposed to the eternal wrath of
God. He may be saved to‑day yet lose this to‑morrow.
(d)
Though delivered to the “tormentors” he may entertain hope that he may yet
himself “pay all that is due” [page 73 - THE TORMENTORS] (ver. 34); that is, the wrath of God against the
unregenerate can be somehow, some time satisfied by the sufferings and efforts
of the
sinner himself. In these
cases therefore “Christ died for nought”; they can at last secure their own
deliverance.
In the
fact, however, being “delivered to the tormentors” has no reference to the
eternal judgment of the lost. In the lake of fire neither lost angels nor lost
men are stated to torment one another, but are all alike in the same torment.
It is a picture of present and temporal chastisement under that continually
proceeding judgment of God above indicated, and which applies to His family as
to others. Regarded thus the above confusing implications do not arise,
implications which no one divinely illuminated could accept. But it results that the wicked servant is a
real servant, not a hypocrite, and were it not for the severity of the
punishment no one would be likely to question this.
It is not difficult to see
what the punishment is.
(a)
The forgiveness of his great failures as a servant can be revoked, and he be made to feel the sin and bitterness of
not having walked by the same spirit as his Lord, nor rendered to Him the due
use and return of the benefits grace had bestowed.
(b)
Paul says of some who had once had faith and a good conscience (or they could
not have thrust these away), and who had started on the voyage of faith (or
they could not have made shipwreck), “whom I delivered to Satan” (the present
“tormentor,” as of Job); but not to be afflicted by him in hell, but for their
recovery, “that they might be taught not to blaspheme,” which the torments of
the damned will not teach them, as far as we see in the Word (1 Tim. 1: 19, 20. See also 1 Cor. 5: 3 ‑ 5).
(4) We
remark upon one other instance of these solemn testimonies by Christ, the
parable of the virgins (Matt. 25). It is to the same effect.
(a) They are all virgins, the foolish equally with the wise,
which figure is inappropriate to indicate a worldling
in his sins, even though he be a professing Christian.
In the only other places where it is used figuratively and spiritually it
certainly means true Christians (2 Cor. 11: 2; Rev.
14: 4). [page 74 - THE FOOLISH VIRGINS]
(b)
They are all equally the invited guests of the bridegroom, not strangers, let
alone his enemies.
(c)
They all have oil, or, the foolish could not say “our lamps are going out.”
Without some oil the lamps could not even have been lit, for a dry wick will
not kindle and certainly could not have burned during the time they had slept.
(d)
But the foolish had no supply to replenish the dimly burning flax and revive
their testimony. They had formerly been “light in the Lord,” but had been thoughtless
as to grace to continue alight.
(e) They found means for this renewing for in
spite of the darkness they gained the bridegroom’s gate.
(f)
They did not lose their lives, as enemies, but they did lose the marriage
feast, and were left in the darkness outside the house. This is parallel to the
“wicked servant,” who also did not lose his life but did lose the entrance into
the joy of his master at his return, and was cast into “outer darkness.”
Two
observations are vital to grasping the meaning of these judgments.
(1) A
marriage feast is obviously no picture of anything eternal. Plainly it is a
temporary matter. Grand, intensely happy, a highly coveted honour, especially
when the king's son, the heir apparent, is the bridegroom, it yet is but the prelude to a life, a reign, not anything long‑extended,
let alone permanent. Does not this
correspond to the joy of the millennial kingdom as the glorious prelude to the
eternal kingdom? For
the “marriage of the Lamb” comes at the immediate inception of that millennial
kingdom (Rev. 19: 6 ‑ 9). And are not the invited virgins
those of whom verse 9 says, “Blessed are they that are bidden to the marriage
supper of the Lamb,” rather than the wife herself? A bride is not usually
invited to her wedding feast: it cannot (save, perhaps, among Moslems) be held
without her. Does not this give the clue
to what the virgins and the unfaithful servant lose?
(2)
“Outer darkness” is no picture of the lake of fire. It is the realm just
outside the palace where the feast is held, not the public prison or execution
ground. If the strict sense of Scripture pictures be
kept, and imagination be not allowed [page 75 - A CONTRAST] to
fill in what the Divine Artist did not put in, much confusion will be avoided.
It has
been felt that the words of the bridegroom to the virgins, “Verily I say unto
you, I know you not” preclude us from taking these to represent His true
people. But again the picture itself will give the real sense. The bridegroom
is here pictured as standing within the heavy and thick outer door that secures
every eastern house of quality, and the door is shut. He does not open it, or
he would see who they are, and that they are some of his own invited guests,
but standing the other side of the closed door he says, in idiomatic English, I
tell you sincerely, I don't know who you are (Ameen lego humin, ouk oida
humas). Into
such a picture it is not permissible to read in divine omniscience; it must be
taken simply as it is given.
Its
force may be gathered more readily by the distinction between what is here said
and what the Lord said in Matt. 7: 15 ‑ 23. There He spoke of false
prophets, bad trees, men who, like the sons of Sceva in Acts 19: 13, used His holy name without warrant.
Picturing Himself as standing face to face with these
He protests, I never at any time made your acquaintance! Here the scene is changed; there is no closed door between: the
verb to
know is different: and the
word rendered “never” is most emphatic and gives force and finality to the
assertion (Oudepote
egnon humas). He did
not speak thus to the virgins.
9. It is not our present purpose
to consider all such testimony of the Word. Enough has been advanced to show
how much and how solemn is the teaching of Scripture as to judgment upon
careless Christians. We wish only to deal now with the time of the judgment seat of Christ as to His people.
The
most general opinion is that this judgment lies between the moment of the
Lord's descent to the air, when they, dead and living, are caught up to Him there,
and that later moment when He is to descend with them to the earth to set up
His kingdom. That is, the judging of His saints will take place during the Parousia.
Observations.
(1) No
passage of Scripture seems distinctly to place this [page 76 – SUPPOSITIONS]
judgment in this interval and in the air. It seems to be
rather assumed that it must take place then and there since the effects of it
are to be seen in the different positions and honours in the kingdom
immediately to follow.
(2) As
regards the parabolic instruction Christ gave when here it is to be observed
that it speaks only of persons who will be found alive when the “nobleman,”
“the master of the house” returns. Strictly, therefore, these parables tell
nothing as to the time and circumstances of the judgment of dead believers. It
must be allowed that the principles of justice will be the same for dead and
living, but the details as to the judgment of the former cannot be learned from
these passages.
(3) Some presuppositions held
are:
(a) That
every believer will share in the first resurrection and the millennial kingdom.
(b) The opposite, that not
every believer will do so.
(c)
That the judgment of the Lord will result in some of His people suffering loss
of reward because of unfaithfulness, but nothing more than loss. This involves
that none of the positive and painful inflictions denounced can affect true
believers.
(d)
The opposite, that the regenerate may incur positive chastisement as a
consequence of the Lord's judgment at that time. Thus in “Touching the Coming of the Lord” (84, 85. ed. 1), upon Col. 3: 25, “For he that doeth wrong shall receive
again the wrong that he hath done (margin): and there is no respect of
persons,” Hogg and Vine apply this
text to that judgment of Christ at His parousia, and
say: “It may be difficult for us to conceive how God will fulfil this word to
those who are already in bodies of glory, partakers of the joy of the redeemed
in salvation consummated in spirit, soul and body. Yet may we be assured that the
operation of this law is not to be suspended even in their case. He that 'knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptation, and to
keep the unrighteous tinder punishment unto the day of judgment ' (2 Pet. 2:
9), knows also how to direct and to use the working of His law of sowing and
reaping in the case of His children also. The attempt to alleviate the text of
some of its weight by suggesting that the law operates only in this life,
fails, for there is nothing in the text or [page 77 – IMPOSSIBILITIES] context
to lead the reader to think other than that while the sowing is here the
reaping is hereafter. It is clear that if it were not for this supposed
difficulty of referring the words to the Christian in the condition in which,
as we know from other Scriptures, he will appear at the Judgment seat of
Christ, the question whether that time and place were intended would not be
raised.”
(e)
Some (Govett, Pember, and
others) who hold that the millennial kingdom may be forfeited by gross sin,
suppose that all believers rise in the
first resurrection, appear before the judgment‑scat of Christ, and being
adjudged by Him unworthy of the kingdom they return to the death state to await
the second resurrection and the great white throne judgment. Their names
being then as believers found in the book of life, they have eternal life in
the eternal kingdom, but they will have missed the honour of sharing in and
reigning in the millennial age.
These
two last ideas (d) and (e) seem alike
utterly impossible. It seems wholly inconceivable that a body heavenly,
spiritual, glorified, like indeed to the body of the Son of God himself, can be
subjected to chastisement for guilt incurred by misuse of the present sin‑marred
body. Not only the manner of the infliction but the fact of
it seems to us out of the question.
It
seems equally so that a body that is immortal and incorruptible can admit of
its owner passing again into the death state. The ideas and the terms are
mutually contradictory and exclusive. Of those who rise in that first
resurrection the Lord said plainly: “neither
can they die any more” (Lk. 20: 36).
What, then, is the solution of
these difficulties?
10. We turn to passages dealing directly with the
subject.
(1) 2 Cor. 5: 10. “We make it our
aim, whether at home or absent, to be well‑pleasing unto Him. For we must
all be made manifest before the judgment‑seat of Christ; that each one
may receive the things done through the body, according to what he hath done,
whether it be good or bad.” This chief
statement leaves unmentioned the time and place of the judgment.
(2) Heb. 9: 27. “It is laid up for men once to die and after
this judgment” (meta
de touto krisis, no
article). Thus [page 78 - JUDGMENT AFTER DEATH]
judgment may take place at any
time after death. Luke 16 shows Dives suffering anguish
immediately after death, for the scene
is Hades, the realm of the dead between death and resurrection, and his
brothers are still alive on earth. But again, Rev. 20: 11 ‑ 15, shows
another, the final judgment, after resurrection, after the millennial kingdom.
Both are “after death” [verse 12].
Neither of these passages suggests the parousia in the air as the time or place.
(3)
The statements of the Lord as to His, dealing with His own servants at His
return, contemplate that His enemies will be called before Him immediately
after He will have dealt with His own household: “But these mine enemies, who
would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me”
(Lk. 19: 27). “Hither,” that is, to the same spot
where He had just been dealing with His servants. This, as to servants then
alive on earth at least, excludes the parousia
in the air, for His enemies will not be gathered there.
(4)
Luke 16: 19 ‑ 31. Dives and Lazarus are seen directly after death in
conditions the exact reverse of those just before known on earth. The passing
of the soul to that other world, and the bringing about of so thorough a change
of condition, is too striking, too solemn just to happen. Some one must have decided and ordered
this reversal; that is, there must have
been a judging of their cases and a judicial decision as to what should be
their lot in the intermediate state.
This
judgment therefore may take place at or
immediately after death, as Heb. 9: 27 above. And in the time of Christ thus almost all men believed. See, for
example, the judgment of Ani directly after death,
before Osiris the god of the underworld, in the
Egyptian Book of the Dead. Or, as to
the Pharisees, to whom particularly Christ spoke of Dives and Lazarus, see
Josephus, Antiquities, 18: 3.
(5) 2 Tim. 4: 6, 7, 8. “I am already being poured out as a drink
offering, and the time of my departure is come. I have fought the good fight, I
have kept the faith; I have finished the course, henceforth there is laid up
for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall
give to me at that day: and not only to me, but also to all them that have
loved His appearing.”
Paul
was now certain he had won his crown. When [page 79 - THE CROWN WON] writing
to the Philippians a few years before (3: 10 ‑ 14) he spoke uncertainly:
“not that I have already obtained,” for then he had not yet finished the
course; but now he writes with certainty. How could this assurance have become
his save by communication from the Righteous Judge? But this implies that the
Judge had both formed and communicated His decision upon Paul's life and
service, even though Paul had not yet
actually died. In such a case, as it would seem, any session of the
judgment seat “in that day” will be
only for bestowment of the crown already won and allotted, not for adjudication
upon the race or contest, the latter having before taken place as to such a
person.
(6)
The expression “I have finished my course” is taken from the athletic world
which held so large a place in Greek life and interest and is so often used by
Paul as a picture of spiritual effort. In 1 Cor. 9:
24 ‑ 27, it is used as a plain
warning that the coveted prize may be lost. Phil. 3: 12 ‑ 14 employs
it to urge to intense and unremitting effort to win that prize. The Lord is the
righteous Judge, sitting to adjudicate upon each contestant in the race or
contest.
Now of
unavoidable necessity the judge of the games automatically formed his decision
as to each racer or wrestler as each finished the course or the contest. The
giving of the prizes was indeed deferred to the close of the whole series of
events: Paul's crown would be actually given “in that day”; but not till then
did the judge defer his decision as to each item or contestant. It could not
be, for the most celebrated of the Greek games, the Olympic, lasted five days.
The
figure, taken with the case of Paul, and in the light of Dives and Lazarus, suggests a decision of the Lord as to each
believer before or at the time of his death. That decision issues in determining the place and experience of the man
in the intermediate state, and may extend to assurance that he has won the
crown, the prize of the high calling.
(7)
Rev. 6: 9, 11, The Fifth Seal. As before shown, these
martyrs “under the altar” are not yet raised from the dead, for others have yet
to be killed for Christ's sake, and only then will they be all vindicated and
avenged. But to each one of them separately a white robe is given. Now ch. 3: 4, 5, shows that the white robe is the visible sign,
conferred by the Lord, of their worthiness to be His companions in [page 80 - JUDGMENT
BEFORE RESURRECTION] His glory and kingdom. This again makes
evident that for these the Lord's judgment has been formed and announced. No
later adjudication upon such is needful or conceivable: only the giving of the
crown “in that day.”
11. From these facts and
considerations it seems fairly clear that the judgment of the Lord upon the
dead of His people is not deferred to one session but is reached and declared
either (a) immediately before death (as
Paul), when there is no further risk of the racer failing, or (b) immediately after death (as Lazarus),
or (c) at least in tile intermediate
state of death (the souls under the altar).
If
this is so, then it will follow that the
decision of the Lord as to whether a believer is worthy of the first resurrection
and reigning in the kingdom is reached prior to resurrection, in which case
the two insoluble problems above stated simply do not arise; that is, there is
no question of one raised in a deathless state returning to the death state,
nor of bodies of glory being subjected to chastisement. Believers adjudged not
worthy of the first resurrection will not rise, but will remain where they are
until the second resurrection.
We
agree fully that the judgment seat of Christ will issue in chastisement for
unworthy living by Christians, but this will not be inflicted after
resurrection.
(8)
Rev. 11: 18 repays exact study. The four and twenty elders worship God because
He has put forth His “power, His great power” (teen dunamin sou teen megaleen)
and has exercised His sovereignty. In consequence of this asserting of
power there are five results. (1) The nations are angry, (2) God's wrath
replies, (3) there arrives “the season for the dead to be judged,” (4) for the
faithful to be rewarded, and (5) for the destruction of the destroyers of the
earth.
Since
prophets and saints are to receive their reward at the resurrection of the just
(Luke 14: 14), the first resurrection (Rev. 20: 1 ‑ 6), the season for
the dead to be judged and rewarded is here found directly before the
destruction of the Antichrist and his helpers in the wasting of the lands.
Concerning
this judging of the dead three features are to be
noted.
1. It must be of godly dead, for
it is before the thousand years, whereas the judgment of the ungodly dead is
thereafter (Rev. 20: 1, 11 ‑ 15). [page 81 - JUDGED
WHILE DEAD]
2. It is a judgment of persons
who are dead at the time they are judged. There is no ground for reading in
that they have been raised from the dead before the judgment takes place. They are styled “the dead.” No one
would think of styling living persons “the dead.” The term employed (nekros) is
nowhere used of persons who are not actually dead, physically or morally.
Moreover, resurrection does not of itself assure life. That unique and glorious
change to be the portion of such as share the first resurrection (1 Cor. 15) is their special privilege; it does not attach to
all resurrection. Dead persons can be raised dead. In John 5: 29 our Lord
creates a clear contrast: “They that have done good
shall come forth unto resurrection of life; and they that have done evil unto resurrection of judgment." The Lord did not say that they
shall come forth out of the tombs alive, but that they shall come forth unto resurrection of life or “unto resurrection of judgment” (eis anastasin). There seems no scripture, indeed,
that at the moment they come forth they have even a body, other than that
psychical counterpart before noticed and which persists in the death state.Thus in Rev. 20: 12 also it is as dead that they are judged: “I saw the dead standing before the throne . . . and the dead were judged.” It should therefore be supposed that those there
present whose names are found in the book of life will thereupon be restored to
life, that is, will be given an immortal
body, even as the Lord said: “The Father raiseth the
dead (egeirei tous nekrous) and makes them live (zoopoiei), thus also the Son makes to
live whom He will” (zoopoiei, John 5: 21). Here two operations are
distinguished by the “and makes them live.”
3. The verb to be judged, “the season of the dead to be judged,” is the infinitive passive aorist
(kritheenai). Being
an aorist it has the force of a completed and final action. But this final
judgment, which disposes of the case, may be the conclusion of a process of
judgment. This is seen in another place where this aorist is twice used, Acts
25: 9, 10. Festus asked Paul whether he would be willing to go up from Caesarea
to
This
short discussion is no more than suggestive, directed to certain obscurities
and perplexities found in our main theme, designed to provoke enquiry so as
further to elucidate truth and
dispel darkness. May the Lord in grace use it to this end.
[page 83]
VII. APPENDIX TO PAGE 22.
On the meaning of the genitive “of Christ”
(tou Christou) in 1 Cor. 15: 23.
(This critical study is submitted with
respect to those able to examine it.)
The
force of this genitive may be studied in the following passages.
1. In Acts 16: 33 it is said of
the jailer at
2. In the first chapter of the
epistle that is before us (1 Cor. 1: 12) the apostle
reproves the believers on account of the contentions among them. “Now this I
mean, that each one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ (Christou).” It cannot be supposed that these believers were attributing their
redemption to Paul, Apollos, or Peter; so that the
meaning is, “I am of Paul's circle; I of Apollos'; I
of Peter's; I of Christ's circle.” It was sectionalism, schism,
denominationalism, sectarianism; although all alike were on the only foundation
(ch. 3: 10, 11).
Family
relationship alone did not make the jailer's relatives to be “of him” at that particular hour. It was those
who were actually in his house at that time, which would include servants and
slaves (if any). All believers were equally children of God, but some were “of
Paul,” others “of Peter,” etc. Thus these two instances show that it is not
relationship, natural or spiritual, but open membership in a known visible
circle that is the idea in the term “of him.”
3. Romans 14: 4 reads “Who art thou
that judgest the servant of another? (oiketees, household dependent; Lk. 16: 13: Acts 10: 7: 1 Pet. 2: 18: all places). To his
own lord he standeth or falleth.”
Verses 7, 8 add: “For none of us liveth to himself, and none dieth to
himself. For whether we live, we live unto the Lord; or whether we die, we die
unto the Lord: whether we live therefore, or die, we are the Lord's” (we are of
the Lord, tou Kuriou esmen. The [page 84 - IDEAL
OR ACTUAL] German can express this, as the Greek, by case
ending, “wir sind des Herrn,” Elberfeld version).
“For to this end Christ died, and lived again, that He might be Lord of [might
rule over] both dead and living” (Darby).
Christ's lordship, His proprietorship of and authority over all, is indisputable:
in the apostle's argument all are assumed to be owning it: “he that regardeth the day, regardeth it
unto the Lord: and he that eateth, eateth unto the Lord” (ver. 6),
but, as we shall see shortly, not all believers do in fact own that lordship,
or do not own it continuously and to the end of life. Thus ideally all are “of
Him,” but actually some who might be, and ought to be, are not.*
[*
Herodotus narrates that Astyages, king of the Medes,
ordered a courtier, Harpagus, to kill the infant
Cyrus, the king's grandson. The courtier says: “But for safety's sake it is
necessary for me that this child should die; it is necessary however that one
of those of Astyages himself (ton tina
Astyageos) should be the slayer and not (one) of
mine (ton heemon).
This he said and straightway sent
a messenger to (one) of the herdsmen of Astyages (ton Astyageos) whom he knew. . .” and left the matter to
him (Hdt. I. 109, 110). Here two circles are
distinguished, that of the king and that of the courtier, and each, in relation
to its head, is described by the genitive. This force of the
genitive occasions in English the italicized words in 1 Cor.
1: 11, “them which are of the household of Chloe,” where the original has
simply ton Chloees
(those of Chloe).]
4. This same meaning is to be
seen in 2 Cor. 10: 7, “Ye look at the things that are
before your face. [It is something visible that is in question.] If anyone has
confidence in himself of Christ to be (Christou
einai), this let him consider with himself, that
as he is of Christ (Christou) thus also are we”: that is, I Paul am
evidently and obviously of Christ's circle at least as much as my critic is: in
proof of which he adduces the known public features of the measure and power of
his ministry of the Word, which were the Lord's open acknowledgment of His
faithful servant.
5. The same thought of a circle
of persons that may be contrasted with other circles lies in the statement in
Gal. 5: 24, “And those of Christ Jesus (hoi tou Christou leesou)
crucified the flesh with the [its] passions and the [its] cravings.” In
fallen human nature there works a powerful principle of evil, described in christian terms as, “the old man
which [page
85 - THE
FLESH CRUCIFIED] gets more and more corrupt
according to the [its] deceitful cravings” (Eph. 4: 22). Its cravings deceive
man into indulging them, because they promise satisfaction though they produce
corruption. Through partaking of the divine nature the believer in Christ is
afforded a way of escaping “from the corruption that is in the world through lust
[the cravings of the old man]” (2 Pet. 1: 4); but it abides a certainty, to the
Christian as well as to the unbeliever, “that the one sowing to the flesh out
of the flesh shall reap corruption” (Gal. 6: 8).
How
this corrupting principle in human nature originated perplexed philosophers and
how to master it baffled moralists. Various schools had different methods. The
circle of Epicurus proposed the sensually agreeable plan of stifling the flesh
by satiating it. That of the Stoics advocated a stem rigid suppression. Eastern
philosophy, as in Buddhism, recommended a sustained passive ignoring of all
desire.
The
circle which bore the name of Christ Jesus had a method peculiar to itself. It was neither satiating, suppressing, nor ignoring, but crucifying: “those of Christ Jesus crucified the flesh.” They taught that
Christ died on account of the old man himself, as well as his corrupt doings.
They held that, judicially, before God, man's creator and judge, the death of
the Substitute was the death of the sinner, that therefore the old man “was
crucified with Christ” (Rom. 6: 6). The
messengers of this faith offered a promise from God that whoever would accept
from the heart this view, with its implications and practical consequences,
should receive power from His eternal Spirit to live in freedom from the old
tyranny of sin. The new method worked effectively where all other attempts had
failed. Moral crucifixion with Christ led on to moral resurrection with Him,
and the circle that bore His name became, as a circle, and by contrast, conspicuous
for holiness.
No
doubt this crucifixion was more distinctly apprehended and more fully exhibited
by some than by others; we know that in fact some in the circle were not
children of God at all ‑ they seemed to be "of Christ Jesus”
in the sense of publicly belonging to the circle that bore His name, though
they were not “in Christ Jesus” by spiritual union: but the thought in the
statement before us is that a certain known [page 86 - INFANTS OR SONS] circle
or school – “those of Christ Jesus” ‑ was
characterized by a certain attitude and doctrine, which its members
were presumed to have adopted, and were expected and exhorted to maintain in
practical conduct.
6. The important argument in Gal. 3: 23‑29, contains the same conception. “But if
ye are of Christ, then are
ye Abraham's seed, etc.” (ei de humeis Christou,
ver. 29). Those who fear God are viewed by Him
in two classes: first, such as in, spiritual growth are
yet infants, and therefore under control by rules – “thou shalt
. . . thou shalt not”; second, those who have become
of age, grown up sons, who are freed from such restrictions; are at liberty.
The former are under a tutor, the law (ver. 23‑25), who orders their conduct, who
restrains and punishes the outworking of their carnal nature: the “sons” are
“of Christ” (“but if ye are of Christ”), Who enables
them by the Spirit to walk by the free, holy impulses of the new nature.
Translation
from the one status and association into the other is by faith and baptism:
that is, by an act of the heart known to God, but also by a public act seen by
men; for we become “in Christ Jesus by faith” (ver.
26), but we “put on Christ” by
baptism (ver. 27).
Thus here also to be “of Christ” means something more than to have exercised
faith in Him, even to have associated openly by immersion with those who
profess to have died out of the old circle and to have risen again into a new
circle, that of Christ Jesus.
7. In 2 Tim. 2: 19‑21, the apostle again speaks of things
plain and visible; such as a foundation stone, and the inscription carved upon
it; a house built on the foundation; the various utensils of the house, of
either valuable or common materials, gold and silver or wood and earth.
The
picture is very like Paul's earlier metaphor in 1 Cor.
3. where
also is the foundation, the superstructure, the precious or the perishable
materials, either of which may be built by the believer into the life‑work
and character which each is erecting on the one foundation. He exhorts the Corinthian
Christians not to use the perishable: in Timothy he exhorts to purge out of
one's character the common elements, that the gold and silver of the divine
nature, created in us by the Spirit upon the ground of redemption, may alone
remain, and one be thus a vessel fit for the immediate use of the [page 87 - FOUNDATION
AND SUPERSTRUCTURE] divine Master, not one relegated to the
lower purposes of the great house.
The
said inscription on the foundation reads thus: “Knows the Lord those being of
Him (tous ontas autou), and, Let every one naming the name of the Lord depart from unrighteousness.” That is, the
Lord, on His side, knows distinctly each one who in reality, according to the
Lord's standard, is of His circle. On our side the sign that warrants any
person being accorded by us a place in that circle is that he forsakes
unrighteousness. He who never yet has forsaken unrighteousness (wrong doing, adikia, as 1 Cor. 6:
8, 9) is not “of Him,” (that is, not as the Lord judges), even though he may
hold membership in a Christian church. He who having forsaken wrong doing
afterward returns thereto is to be put out of the Christian circle (1 Cor. 5: 13), and thus ceases to be “of Him” for the
purposes of this expression.
This
does not affect the final salvation of every believer; for one is saved before he is added to the church, and therefore
final salvation does not depend upon membership in that privileged company who
will form “the church.” * This cuts away the root of the Romish
error that one must belong to the church to be saved. But the wrong doers of
the church circle are plainly warned that they “shall not inherit God's
kingdom” (1 Cor. 6: 9: etc.). Such will not be
“accounted worthy of the
8. The expression under review is in Romans 8: 9:
“But ye are not in flesh but in spirit, if at least spirit of God dwells in
you. But if any one has not spirit of Christ, this one is not of Him.”
The
omission from verse 1 preceding of the clause “who
walk not according to flesh but according to spirit” is of first importance,
showing that the justification of a believer in Christ is not dependent upon
his walk as a Christian. At the very moment that a repenting sinner rests his
salvation upon the atoning work that Christ accomplished upon the cross, and
therefore before he has had opportunity for doing any works, he acquires a new
standing. By that faith in Christ he obtains access to the standing of one who
is in [page
88 - FLESH
OR SPIRIT] the favour of God (Rom. 5: 1, 2). He is then and
there seen by God, his judge, no longer as he is in himself, but as he now is
“in Christ.” He is deemed to have met his doom and to be free therefrom. The storm of wrath due to him on account of his
sins has burst upon him in the person of his Divine Substitute: he has thus
endured its full fury; that storm
has exhausted itself, and “there is therefore now no condemnation to them that
are in Christ Jesus.”
But
this eternally justified believer may henceforth walk either by the impulses of
his old fleshly nature or by the leading of that new spirit nature which is
created in us when we believe on Christ. That a justified person may walk
“according to flesh” is certain from many Scriptures and much sad experience.
“I, brethren,” says Paul, “was not able [formerly] to speak to you as to
spiritual but as fleshly . . . But neither yet now am I able, for yet fleshly
ye are. For whereas there is among you jealousy and strife, are ye not fleshly,
and walk according to men,” that is, not according to God? (1
Cor. 3: 1 ‑ 3. See
also Gal. 5: 13 ‑ 26, for a sustained contrast between “flesh” and
“spirit,” the old nature and the new, in the believer).
To the
Romans the apostle declared that if they lived according to flesh they would be
unable to please God and were liable to die (8: 7, 8, and comp. 1 Cor. 10: 1 ‑ 6). Upon this possibility of premature
death we have before spoken. But, he adds, “ye are not
in flesh but in spirit, if at least (eiper) spirit of
God dwells in you.” This “if at least” * shows clearly the possibility of one
who is for ever free from condemnation not being indwelt by “spirit of God.” It
is God the Spirit Who creates and energises the new nature, but it is not the
Holy Spirit as a person that is here in view: the question is whether the
believer is ruled still by the mind of the old nature, which is “flesh,” or by
the mind of the new nature, which is “spirit,” according to the exhortations
“be renewed in the spirit of your mind”: “Have this mind [page 89 - OF
CAESAR] in you which was also in Christ Jesus” (Eph. 4:
23: Phil. 2: 5). And, adds the Scripture (
[*
“The Greek particle is more than merely ‘if’ (which often equals 'since' or
'as'), and suggests just such doubt and enquiry as would
amount to self‑examination. See 2 Cor. 13: 5.” Moule, Camb. Bible for Schools, in loco. So
Alford: “if so be that
(‘provided that’; not ‘since’ . . . that this is the meaning here is evident by
the exception which immediately follows).”]
In the light of the other places considered this will mean
that one not ruled by the same spirit which animated Christ is not of that
company which He owns as His circle, His household. “He is not His (belongs not
to Him, in the higher and blessed sense of being united to Him as a member of Him)” Alford, in loco; italics
mine.
In his learned critical work Licht vom Osten (Light
from the East ‑ ed. iv. 322) Professor
Adolph Deissmann has remarked upon the parallel
between this genitive Christou, of
Christ, and doulos Christou
Christ's slave, and the expressions Kaisaros of Caesar, and Caesar's slave, belonging to Caesar, his own personal property; that is, his
personal retinue and slaves as distinct from the vast host of his subjects outside
of his immediate household. In illustration he cites several of the passages
here examined, including the one chiefly before us, 1 Cor.
15: 22, “they that are of Christ in His Parousia.”
This usage is found in Phil. 4: 22: “All the saints salute you, especially they
that are of Caesar's household” (hoi ek tees Kaisaros oikias). Comp. also Matt. 22: 21 and parallels: “the
things that are Caesar's” (of Caesar, ta Kaisaros)
contrasted with the other circle, “the things that are God's” (ta tou Theou). Similarly,
Christ also has a vast number who do acknowledge Him as Saviour but have
not learned to be His slaves, and so are not “of Him” within the force of this term.
Many
of the topics of this pamphlet are opened more fully, in
THE REVELATION OF
JESUS CHRIST
Some
of the themes of this pamphlet are enlarged in
FIRSTBORN SONS
Their
Rights and Risks
-------