First Adam, last Adam

As to the first Adam and the last Adam, consider the comparisons (and contrasts) between Gen 1-3 and Rev 20-22:

GENESIS 1-3 REVELATION 20-22
A river watering the Garden (Gen 2:10-14)… A river watering the Garden (Rev 22:1,2)
A companion made for the first Adam (Gen 2:18-25)… A companion made for the “last Adam” (Rev 21:9,10)
Paradise lost (Gen 3:23)… Paradise restored (Rev 21:25)
Tree of life lost (Gen 3:22)… Tree of life regained (Rev 22:1)
Leaves for a covering, but to no avail (Gen 3:7)… Leaves for healing (Rev 22:2)
Curse imposed (Gen 3:17)… Curse removed (Rev 22:3)
Sorrow and death (Gen 3:16-19)… “No more death or mourning or crying or pain” (Rev 21:4)
Man’s dominion (Gen 1:28) broken (Gen 3:19)… Man’s dominion restored (Rev 22:5)
Serpent triumphant (Gen 3:13)… Serpent bound (Rev 20:2,3), and then destroyed (v 10)
Adam and Eve separated from the presence of God (Gen 3:24)… God dwells with man again (Rev 21:22,23; 22:3,4)
Heaven and earth separated (Gen 1:6)… Heaven and earth brought together (Rev 21:1,2)

Flood, worldwide

A WORLDWIDE FLOOD?

“All the high hills that were under the whole heaven were covered” (Gen 7:19) and “every living substance was destroyed which was upon the face of the ground”. “Under the whole heaven” is found in Dan 7:27, where the kingdom of God covers the whole earth.

Possible objections:

  1. the ark, big though it was, would not seem to be large enough to hold that many animals and a years’ supply of food;

  2. how were these animals brought from remote, possibly bitterly cold parts of the earth to hot Mesopotamia?

  3. what kind of food could Noah store in the ark for a year to feed all of these diverse species?

(1) Depth of flood: Gen 7:19,20.

(2) Duration of flood: 2/10: Went into ark (Gen 7:4,10). 2/17: Rain began (Gen 7:11), lasted 40 days (Gen 7:12). Waters lasted 150 days (Gen 7:24; 8:3). 7/17: Ark rested on Ararat (Gen 8:4). 1/1: Ark’s covering removed (Gen 8:13). 2:27: Ark vacated (Gen 8:14-19). Thus time in ark was 1 year 17 days: 5 months afloat, 7 months on Ararat. A local flood could not possibly last for such a long time.

(3) Vast geological disturbances: Gen 7:11.

(4) Size of ark: Gen 6:15.

(5) Need for ark.

(6) Peter’s witness: 2Pe 3:3-7.

(7) Widely-distributed human race: (a) Purpose of flood: to punish the whole race of man: Gen 6:5-13. (b) Only Noah, etc, spared: Gen 6:17,18; 7:23,24; 8:1. (c) Jesus: “all men”: cp Gen with Luk 17:26-30. (d) Noachic covenant was with all men: Gen 9:1-17. (e) Longevity of antediluvians. (f) Widely-scattered human fossils. Assume 10 generations, 18 children per generation: Then 10th generation = 774,840,979 (2 x 9 to the 9th power), excluding all previous generations.

Foot-washing and a new commandment

“Now before the feast of the passover, when Jesus knew that his hour was come that he should depart out of the world unto the Father, having loved his own which were in the world, he loved them unto the end” (John 13:1).

The Son of man was about to embark upon a great journey — he was going to the Father. In fulfilling the Passover imagery of his last mortal days, he was about to accomplish his ‘exodus’ at Jerusalem (Luke 9:31) by departing out of the “Egyptian” world, slain as a sin-covering lamb. Associated with this “journey” was the thought of love, a divine love, an “agape”. Jesus loved his brethren right to the end of his life or, as some versions put it, “to the uttermost”. “He now showed them the full extent of his love” (NIV).

His was a love that never faltered. The washing of the disciples’ feet showed the same abiding love that would sustain him only hours later in his trial and crucifixion. The self-sacrifice, the disposition of the servant, the devotion to others in passionate concern… they were all as evident here in the ‘little’ task as they would soon be in the great work!

We read that it was “during supper” (v 2, RSV) that Jesus, to whom the Father had committed all power and authority, rose from the meal, laid aside his outer garments, took a towel, a pitcher of water, and a basin, and began to wash the disciples’ feet (vv 3-5).

The laying aside of his garments was a preview of his coming crucifixion, when the centurions would strip his garments from him (John 19:23,24). This earlier incident shows his willingness to deny self, to give up all that he possessed, even simple dignity, in a totality of loving service to others.

Our Lord’s actions here arose out of the sad, sordid contentions of the apostles as to which of them was the greatest (Luke 22:24). Perhaps the seating arrangements at this special meal had brought to the surface again their latent rivalries and jealousies. In absolute disregard of Jesus’ parable of the high and low seats (Luke 14:7-11), they jostled for position while their leader looked on in dismay.

The immediate rebuke of their pretensions was most effective because at first no word was spoken. Jesus rose up from the position already taken at the table and, making provision, began to wash the feet of each disciple in turn. Why had this not been attended to already? Can it be that Jesus arranged that no servant be present to provide this service, simply in order to give the twelve a chance to show what they had learned from him? If so, then their failure could not have been more complete.

How silly they appear to us in hindsight! The more they maneuvered and schemed to win his attention, the more they lowered themselves in his eyes. The more successful they were in achieving a superficial priority, the less they impressed the one who could read their hearts. And the simplest deed, that would have won from him the desired smile of appreciation, was the last thing on their minds. Yes, how foolish they seem. But a moment’s reflection will certainly reveal to all of us cases of similar shortsightedness in our won dealings with our brethren.

They all sought honor from Jesus. Yet none of the men seems to have realized how great an honor it would have been for them to have washed his feet. It took a woman to do that, and to wipe his feet with her hair (Luke 7:37-50).

So he went systematically from one to the next. And all argument and discord froze on their lips, except for Peter, whose pride (still fuelled by a false sense of superiority to the others) provoked him to speak: “Lord, does thou wash my feet?” (John 13:6).

In reply to Peter’s protest, Jesus persisted. “You will understand better by and by why I must do this.”

Still Peter continued to protest, drawing a further rebuke from the Lord: “If I wash thee not, thou hast no part with me” (v 8).

So now Peter swings drastically to the other extreme: “Lord, not my feet only, but also my hands and my head” (v 9).

No, Peter, still you fail to understand. You have been ‘washed’ already, in your baptism, and you need now only to wash your feet (v 10).

Christ’s point is based on the custom of waking home barefoot after visiting the public baths, so that on arrival one who had so bathed would, although bodily clean, have yet to wash his feet.

Now the disciples had been washed from their sins in baptism and had risen to newness of life. They wore robes of righteousness, having been cleansed from their past sins. But their ‘walk’ in the Truth made their ‘feet’ dirty; they did not need to be re-immersed on that account, but they did need to have their feet washed. This Christ could do for the, and so necessary it was that if they omitted his cleansing they could have no ‘part’ (no fellowship) with him. Here at once is an exhortation to humility, a rebuke to pride, and a total overthrow of that flimsy fortress ‘justification by works’! Christ’s lesson was not lost on John, who could write years later:

“If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the Truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness” (1Jo 1:8,9).

A Sacrament?

Finally Jesus was back at the table again:

“Know ye not what I have done to you? Ye call me Master and Lord: and ye say well; for so I am. If I then, your Lord and Master, have washed your feet; ye also ought to wash one another’s feet. For I have given you an example that ye should do as I have done to you” (John 13:12-15).

These words have been wrested in attempts to prove that the Washing of Feet is as much a commandment (even a “sacrament”) as the Breaking of Bread, and should therefore be practiced along with it. (The Roman Catholic as well as some Protestant churches make this same mistake).

This teaching is erroneous on at least three different counts:

  1. Concerning the Lord’s supper Jesus clearly commanded, “Do this”. (The verb in 1Co 11:25 is continuous in action: ‘Keep doing this!’) But concerning the washing of feet Jesus says, “I have given you an example (ie, a sample or a type), that you should do (not what, but) as I have done to you.”

  2. The witness of the early church is useful. As in Acts 2:42,46, the Breaking of Bread was the very center and focus of all worship from the earliest days. On the other hand, the ritual of footwashing makes no appearance for more than 300 years.

  3. Peter offers his inspired interpretation of this incident when he writes: “All of you be subject one to another, and be girded with humility” (1Pe 5:5) — as Jesus girded himself (John 13:4) for performing his service to the apostles. The practical display of humble and loving service had finally made its impression upon the headstrong Peter. Clearly, Peter is intent on the spirit of the incident rather than on the literal washing of feet.

Judas too

One special part of this scene rivets our attention: the picture of Jesus kneeling to wash the feet of Judas. Here is the best and the worst together; the perfect love of the Lord and the hateful bitterness of the betrayer at the same table. Shortly thereafter Philip would say to Jesus, “Lord, show us the Father” (John 14:8), only to receive the answer: “He that hath seen me hath seen the Father” (v 9). They had perhaps expected a vision of blinding glory, thunder and lightning, the sound of trumpets. Instead, they saw… a man kneeling in their midst with a basin of water and a towel.

All the Father’s love was manifested in him: His goodness, His patience, His forbearance, His kindness even to the sinner and the ungodly. We realize, then, how necessary it was for him to perform this service for all, even Judas. Had Jesus passed him by, or waited until he left, then all following generations of disciples would have said: “You see, it’s all right to restrict our acts of kindness just to our friends.” But the love revealed by Jesus leaves us no such excuse. He who died for those who were yet sinners calls us to follow his example, and to love those who are most unloving and unlovely! It is a difficult task, made no easier by the mean-spiritedness and fleshliness of so many around us. So we do well always to remember that our service to others, whatever form it takes, is no less than service to Christ.

No matter how willing the mind may be to receive this truth in theory, the routine of life reveals a hundred instances of the most abject failure. Unless we are always aware of it, our outlook can become seriously twisted by constant association with the world’s false principles. Labor unions agitate and threaten and strike, holding in contempt the idea that they should ever render any “service” in a joyful, liberal fashion. All around us workers squirm and fret under rules and restraints, and scheme to get the most pay for the least effort. “But ye shall not be so… he that is chief, (let him be) as he that doth serve” (Luke 22:26).

Such humility is not a thing to be striven for. The greater the agonizing effort to achieve it, the more it eludes him who strives. What is needed is a quiet transformation of spirit through the continuing influence of Christ’s example, along with a complete disregard for the possible impression our “good deeds” may make upon others.

This incident teaches us something else again. As Christ does, so ought we to do. If he can forgive trespasses, how much more ought we! “If ye know these things, happy are ye if ye do them” (John 13:17). We may feel as reluctant to forgive a brother’s sin, as we would to wash his feet, especially if he is one we are tempted to consider inferior. But Christ’s example, if it means anything, means that we must. How many ecclesial contentions would be ended, if one of the contending parties would humble himself sufficiently to be the first to do so!

A New Commandment?

“A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another. By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another” (John 13:34,35).

How was this a new commandment? It had in fact been the most prominent theme of all of Christ’s ministry. Both the greatest commandment, and the second which was like unto it, involved love. Love was, furthermore, the root and foundation of the law.

This commandment was ‘new’ only in the sense that it was now being given the perfect interpretation in the life of Jesus. For the first time in human history a man stood before his fellows as the absolutely flawless embodiment of the Divine ideal of “agape”:

“This is my commandment, that ye love one another, as I have loved you. Greater love hath no man that this, that a man lay down his life for his friends” (15:12,13).

Of all the challenges that face us in these last days, surely this is the greatest: to exemplify Christ’s love in all that we do and say, and thus through our practical knowledge of his sacrificial life to “show forth” his death until he come.

For glory and for beauty (Exo 28)

In Exo 28, Moses recounts for us the commissioning of Aaron and his sons as the highest order of Levitical priests. Special attention is given to the special clothes of these priests. Lengthy descriptions are carefully made by Moses. Certainly there would be no need to go into such detail unless the dress of Aaron and his sons had an exceptional significance.

Types of us

So often in God’s plans we get a glimpse of a dominant principle, which is this: the small and imperfect precedes and foreshadows the great and the perfect. This is true of first natural and then spiritual Israel. If it is true of nations, it is true of individuals. Therefore, the Jew of Moses’ time is a prophetic type of a believer today. And since Jesus has taught all of his followers how to approach God in prayer and has brought them all into contact with his sacrifice, then we are all, in effect, priests: “Ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should show forth the praises of Him who hath called you out of darkness into His marvelous light” (1Pe 2:9).

As the spiritual heirs of the Mosaic priests, we should study our predecessors and understand their responsibilities and privileges, for we also are spiritual “priests” (1Pe 2:9). If we take this attitude, then the study of the law that vanished away after Christ’s advent will become alive and exciting again.

The significance of clothing

Many passages in the Scriptures refer to clothing as a symbol:

“Let Thy priests be clothed with righteousness…” (Psa 132:9).

“I put on righteousness, and it clothed me: my judgment was as a robe and a diadem” (Job 29:14).

“Put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness” (Eph 4:24).

“Be clothed with humility” (1Pe 5:5).

“Put on the whole armor of God… Stand therefore, having your loins girt about with truth, and having on the breastplate of righteousness; And your feet shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace… And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the spirit, which is the word of God…” (Eph 6:11,13-15,17).

“And righteousness shall be the girdle of his (Christ’s) loins, and faithfulness the girdle of his reins” (Isa 11:5).

In Bible terms, our clothing is a fitting symbol of our way of life. As with natural clothing, our walk in the truth should be kept clean — in anticipation of our acceptance by Christ.

God told Moses to “make holy garments for Aaron thy brother for GLORY and for BEAUTY” (Exo 28:2). The clothes of Aaron would certainly be glorious and beautiful. But outward beauty and extravagance may be a characteristic of the most evil and sinful persons. Unless there is an inner beauty that God can see, then what is pleasing merely on the outside will fit Jesus’ descriptions of the pious hypocrites of his day: pure and white on the outside but inside full of death and corruption — “dead men’s bones” (Mat 23:25-28). The priests that condemned Christ wore basically the same outfit, and stood in the same relation to God, as Aaron did.

The ephod

The ephod (Exo 28:6) was a coat that reached about to the thigh. It was interwoven of many different colors: gold, blue, scarlet (or red), purple, upon white linen. Jacob loved his son Joseph very much and gave him a coat of many colors (probably to signify Joseph’s priestly office). Our Father in heaven gives us a “coat” also. When we enter into covenant relationship with Christ, we are symbolically given a cloak of righteousness. We are morally clean. But it is our duty to keep our robe pure and spotless and to add to its beauty by acceptable service to God. If we fail, we fall under the condemnation which Jesus pronounced upon those who came to the wedding without the proper garment (Mat 22:11-13).

Each of the colors of the ephod symbolizes some characteristic to be found in our coats. By studying Aaron’s clothes we learn to fashion our garments in the same way:

Gold

Gold represents a tried faith — “tried with fire” (1Pe 1:7). Gold is one of the most precious metals. It is very flexible and can be drawn into thin wire without breaking. It can withstand much pounding. Jesus said that only a little faith is very great. Gold is a fitting symbol of faith, “without (which) it is impossible to please [God]” (Heb 11:6).

The color blue

Under the ephod, the priest wore a long blue robe which was visible below the ephod. Blue also appeared in the ephod itself. The Jews have always worn blue upon ceremonial garments, feeling that it had a special significance. Yahweh commanded Israel to “make fringes in the borders of their garments throughout their generations, and that they put upon the fringe of the borders a ribband of blue… that ye may look upon it, and remember all the commandments of the Lord, and do them” (Num 15:37-40).

The fringe itself represented a law, because it encircled the wearer and restricted him within it. Its blue color reminded him of the sky above, and thus of the heavenly origin of the law. He could not go anywhere without seeing the heavens, God’s dwelling place, stretched out above. His clothes were all blue; his laws were all divine; and his only hope was to remember and meditate upon them always. Blue therefore represents the Divine, or heavenly, element in our garments. We are to manifest God’s love and mercy always. We must try to follow Christ’s footsteps. Christ so perfectly imitated God’s character that those who saw him, saw God (John 14:9). God told the Israelites that they were to be His witnesses to the Gentiles. The same holds true for us. Blue is a color which should increase in our garments.

The color red

As blue represents God, so red represents man. The word for man in Hebrew is practically the same as the word for blood and the word for red. Red is the color of flesh and the color of the blood that flows through it. Both flesh and blood are reminders of the imperfections of sinful dying nature. Red is included in our garment or body, as it was in Christ’s also:

“Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil; and deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage” (Heb 2:14,15).

So that Christ would undergo real trials, he had to be subjected to the temptations and lusts of the flesh. Only by suppressing the natural self could he remain sinless. We must have the weakness of mortality now — so that we may learn to rely only upon God and not upon our own strength. Man is as a flower of the field that fades away; we must learn that “to God alone be glory and honor…”

The color purple

Purple is the color of kings. Jesus was mockingly arrayed in a purple robe — along with a crown of thorns. However, few realized at the time the rightness of doing such a thing. Purple is a mixture of the blue of God and the red of man. It was only by showing a God-like character in the weak body of a man that Jesus triumphed over sin and opened a way for us to do the same. The only right to any form of kingship is through submission to God as the only true ruler. This is what Jesus did, and what we must do. The climax of the process is foreseen in Rev 5:10: “Thou hast made us unto our God kings and priests; and we shall reign on the earth.”

White linen

The white linen is the foundation fabric of the ephod. Its significance is simply explained in Rev 19:7,8: “And to her [the Bride] was granted that she should be arrayed in fine linen, clean and white: for the fine linen is the righteousness of saints.”

In the end, it will be the only color in the garments of immortality. It will be a whiteness and a purity, both moral and physical. The flesh will be totally forsaken and forgotten:

“Come now, and let us reason together, saith the Lord: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool” (Isa 1:18).

The girdle

The ephod had a girdle, or a belt (Exo 28:8). The girdle drew the other garments together and allowed freedom for moving about without stumbling. In the same way we must gird ourselves spiritually. We must put aside all things which hamper us and concentrate on the one goal — attaining to life everlasting. The girdle shows an active, working righteousness:

“Let your loins be girded about… and ye yourselves like unto men that wait for their lord, when he will return from the wedding; that when he cometh and knocketh, they may open unto him immediately” (Luke 12:35,36).

“Gird up the loins of your mind, be sober, and hope to the end for the grace that is to be brought unto you at the revelation of Jesus Christ” (1Pe 1:13).

Stones and names

On the shoulders of the ephod there were two onyx stones with the names of the TWELVE tribes engraved upon them. Also, on the priest’s breastplate there were another TWELVE stones arranged in four rows (suggesting the encampment of the twelve tribes around the tabernacle in the wilderness). Both sets of stones plainly symbolize the tribes of Israel. The fact that Aaron wore them shows a connection between himself and his countrymen.

All these precious stones were worn by Aaron when he went inside the temple to offer sacrifice (Exo 28:29,30).

As Aaron sacrificed on behalf of the Jews, so did Jesus offer himself so that we might be saved: “But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building; Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption [for himself as well as for us]” (Heb 9:11,12).

Bells and pomegranates

“Beneath upon the hem of it [the ephod] thou shalt make pomegranates of blue, and of purple, and of scarlet, round about the hem thereof: and bells of gold between them round about. A golden bell and a pomegranate, a golden bell and a pomegranate, upon the hem of the robe round about. And it shall be upon Aaron to minister; and his sound shall be heard when he goeth in unto the holy place before the Lord, and when he cometh out, that he die not” (Exo 28:33-35).

Pomegranates are a beautiful symbol of the righteous. Pomegranates are a fruit and Jesus has said, “By their fruits ye shall know them.”

What fruits reveal true saints to be what they are? The answer is… “love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, temperance” (Gal 5:22,23).

The pomegranate is full of many seeds. It symbolizes the multitudinous Christ — many saints joined together in Christ, their leader. Each seed, like each saint, is complete in itself; but together they form an even more perfect whole.

The fruit also points to the inheritance of the saints: the land of promise is called a “land of pomegranates” (Deu 8:8).

The bells were worn alongside the pomegranates. They made a pleasing sound and remind us that our words, as well as our works — or fruits — must be righteous. As the priest went about his work, the bells were constantly heard. In the same way, we are told always to “make a joyful noise unto the Lord”.

The crown

Finally, Aaron was to wear a crown, or miter. Upon this miter was a golden plate upon which was written “Holiness to Yahweh”. In everything, the priest, as well as the ordinary man, was to remember God’s laws;

“And these words, which I command thee this day, shall be in thine heart; and thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children, and shalt talk of them when thou sittest in thine house, and when thou walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up. And thou shalt bind them for a sign upon thine hand, and they shall be as frontlets between thine eyes. And thou shalt write them upon the posts of thy house, and on thy gates” (Deu 6:6-9).

For the present, there are many problems in our world. We may be ridiculed and feel discouraged because we sometimes fail to maintain our “holiness to Yahweh”. But if we constantly look to the end, we may be uplifted in thinking of that time when ungodliness will be turned from Jacob, and from all of the world: “And it shall come to pass, that every one that is left of all the nations which came against Jerusalem shall even go up from year to year to worship the King, the Lord of hosts, and to keep the feast of tabernacles… In that day shall there be upon the bells of the horses, HOLINESS UNTO THE LORD; and the pots in the Lord’s house shall be like the bowls before the altar. Yes, every pot in Jerusalem and in Judah shall be holiness unto the Lord of hosts” (Zec 14:16,20,21).

The partial and imperfect of both the Mosaic era and the present time will be submerged by the completeness of the declaration:

“But as truly as I live, all the earth shall be filled with the glory of the Lord” (Num 14:21).

May our “garments” be found acceptable at that time.

For this child I prayed

The characters in these early chapters of 1 Samuel are at once vividly and yet simply drawn. We feel as though we really know Elkanah and Hannah, Eli and Samuel — that their sorrows and joys are much like ours. As in the lovely book of Ruth, we observe that the greatest virtue can (and often does) flourish in a spiritual “wilderness”. We see in the righteous women of these times a quiet and subtle strength which often surpasses the strength of the men. The faith of Ruth or of Hannah moved mountains and altered the landscape of the Divine plan.

“Now there was a certain man… of the hill country of Ephraim, and his name was Elkanah” (1Sa 1:1). Elkanah was a Levite and a descendant of Korah (1Ch 6:33-38). His name means “God-acquired”, suggesting two possible interpretations:

  1. All his possessions were acquired from God, or
  2. he was acquired by God, and his possessions were a stewardship. In either case Elkanah’s name highlights the lesson of this story: it is about possessions and how they may be used in the service of God.

“And he had two wives… Hannah and Peninnah” (1Sa 1:2). How many sad memories of domestic unrest this verse evokes: Sarah and Hagar, Rachel and Leah, the households of David and Solomon. “Hannah” signifies grace or favor; “Penninah”, coral or pearl. The two women picture the extremes of inward and outward adorning (possessions again!); their characters and subsequent actions reflect their names.

A Domestic Triangle

This domestic triangle was accustomed to go up yearly to worship at Shiloh. There abode Eli (“alah”, to ascend) the priest with his sons Hophni (“handful”? — either of incense or of stolen offerings, it matters not) and Phinehas (“mouth of the serpent” — wise and subtle, yet also destructive).

“The Lord had shut up her (Hannah’s) womb” (v 5). So often we have witnessed the barren women in the Divine plan. Is God unmerciful to deny good things to His servants? Let us recognize that God often works through the adversity of His children, and there is no ultimate evil for those who conform to His will.

“And the adversary (‘she’ of v 7, no doubt Peninnah) provoked her sore” (1Sa 1:6). Peninnah had all things: children and social rank and satisfaction and probably wealth — yet she gave no glory to God. By comparison, Hannah had very little (a barren woman was a reproach and a pitiable creature), yet she recognized herself as acquired by God. Therefore her problems were His and she was not alone in her distress. “She prayed to the Lord, and wept sore” (v 10). There was no retaliation, but a turning of the other cheek, a casting of her burdens upon a greater Power. She knelt in the court, outside the veil of the holy place, sensing that her prayer of faith would pierce the heavy curtains and find its way to the golden mercy seat.

Her beautiful and delicate prayer (v 11) and her later song of triumph (1Sa 2:1-10) must have been the constant study of the young maid Mary a thousand years later; we hear Hannah’s spiritual daughter prophetically in every word that flows from this godly woman: “Behold Thy handmaid… look upon my affliction… remember me, and give me a manchild” (1:11). Even to this day the whole creation groans in affliction (Rom 8:22), waiting (though it knows not) for the manchild who sits at the right hand of his Father. How great will be the joy of the world when he returns: “Sing, O barren… cry aloud… for thou shalt forget the shame of thy youth… thy maker is thy husband, and thy Redeemer the Holy One of Israel… great shall be the peace of thy children” (Isa 54).

God-acquired or Self-made?

“If Thou wilt give me a manchild, then I will give him unto Thee” (1:11). That very thing that Hannah wanted most, she promised to give away. Do we feel the same about our possessions? Do we view ourselves as “God-acquired”, or as “self-made” men and women? Do we ask what we can do for our Father, or rather what He can do for us? Do our prayers often seem unanswered? If so, then James’ devastating rebuke may be for us: “Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts” (James 4:3).

“Hannah spake in her heart; her lips moved, but her voice was not heard; therefore Eli thought she was drunken” (1Sa 1:13). We may sadly infer from Eli’s thoughts that prayer was less frequent than sin at God’s House; Eli knew of his sons’ adulterous (and probably drunken) consorts (2:22), and no doubt thought this woman one of them. But Eli should have been slower in judging appearances. We gain an insight into the character of the righteous timid priest: he was severe when he should have been gentle (with Hannah), possibly hoping to compensate for his gentleness when he should have been severe (with his sons). He was a parent with love but no firmness, no discipline. We may imagine his love shriveling year by year, as his seed in the face of his feeble protests were transformed by their natural inclinations into the seed of the serpent.

Hannah, by a soft and wise answer, turned away the misdirected wrath of Eli. Such foresight and meekness prepared the way for Eli’s later reception of Samuel as a young child, and this in turn prepared the way for God to work through the young child at Shiloh.

But Hannah, although properly meek before the old man, was not indifferent to his shortcomings: “Count not thine handmaid for a daughter of Belial”, she said (1Sa 1:16). We detect a subtle rebuke: Why are you so anxious to criticize my “sin”, when the true offspring of Belial are your own sons? (1Sa 2:12).

Here again is the undercurrent of faith in this remarkable woman: Hannah knew of Eli’s sons and their deeds; they were a public reproach to Israel. She had prayed for a son, a gift from God, so that she might give him to God. At a previous time, when Israel cried for deliverance (Exo 2:23-25), a faithful woman had cast her son upon the waters (Exo 2:2,3; Heb 11:23), trusting in God to protect and use the goodly child for His purposes (Ecc 11:1). Now Hannah visualized her son-to-be as another Moses, a deliverer of his people from bondage and corruption:

“The Lord will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me (Moses)” (Deu 18:15). The first of such great prophets and successors of Moses was Samuel, as Peter later explained (Acts 3:22-24; Jer 15:1; Psa 99:6).

“All Her Living”

Like the widow with her two mites, Hannah gave away all that she had when she brought the weaned child to Shiloh. Here is the challenge of possessions: We must not hold back — whether it be time, money, effort, or children. A slave can own nothing! What, after all, can “riches” mean to a man or woman “acquired” by God? What “riches” are there for them but the riches of God’s grace and favor? Let us vow from this time forward we will hold nothing back; we will retreat from our responsibilities no further, we will hide behind silly excuses no more. “Render to God the things that are God’s”; all of life belongs to the Source of Life.

What we “lose” will be repaid many-fold: Hannah sacrificed one child and received five more (2:21), while not really losing the first. In Samuel she received “an hundredfold” (Mat 19:29). Of Hannah the words might have been written: “She that sows in tears shall reap in joy. She that goeth forth and weepeth, bearing precious seed, shall doubtless come again with rejoicing, bringing her sheaves with her” (Psa 126:5,6). Eli by his tolerance and weakness built his “house” unwisely; “And great was the fall of it” (Mat 7:27). His sons were “precious seed” cast thoughtlessly to the wind, and one day it was too late to redeem them. We naturally inquire, “Did Eli ‘love’ them too much to tell them ‘No’?” (2:29; 1Ki 1:6). Eli’s work was wood and stubble and it perished (2:34; 1Co 3:12-15), yet Eli himself may be saved “so as by fire”.

“The sin of the young men was very great… but Samuel ministered before the Lord” (1Sa 2:17,18). The elderly and broken-hearted Eli saw in the faith of Hannah and the young child a second chance for himself and the nation. Eli accepted a just rebuke from God (2:30-32) and gave over his declining years, not to frustration and sorrow, but to the education of the young prophet through whom God was now to speak (2:35). “He must increase; I must decrease” — it is a difficult role for any man to assume, especially a high priest. (The arrogant priests of Christ’s day would not accept God’s judgements and step down from their seats; consequently, not only did their house perish, but they themselves were lost.)

“Asked of God”

Finally we come to Samuel, the “Asked-one of God”; we marvel anew at the wondrous works of God. What a great purpose the sorrow of one barren woman played in His plan! To remedy a great evil in Israel, God chooses no grown man; His ways are not our ways; a thousand years is as a day in His sight, and He seldom hurries. Instead, the Almighty prepares through necessary affliction a special mother, and then causes a special and cherished son to be born. In God’s own good time, as the precious seed sprouts and ripens to harvest, deliverance comes. The thankful mother, lost among the thousands of Israel but at one with her God, nourishes at her breast the destiny of her people. With his mother’s milk and loving care, the child receives also her simple faith in God. It is for only a few short years, but it is enough. Together they wait for the time to visit Shiloh. May we say with Samuel, “Speak, Lord, for Thy servant heareth” (1Sa 3:9).

“Oh, give me Samuel’s ear, The open ear, O Lord, Alive and quick to hear Each whisper of Thy word; Like him to answer at Thy call, And to obey Thee first of all.”

Let us conclude by remembering Hannah once more, for she is surely the central character in this story. We can perhaps appreciate best the depth of love and self-sacrifice and knowledgeable faith in this extraordinary woman by recalling her statement to Elkanah:

“I will not go up (to Shiloh) until the child be weaned, and then I will bring him, that he may appear before the Lord, and there abide forever” (1Sa 1:22).

Can we not lovingly discipline our children so that we control wisely their passing whims (as Eli did not), and prayerfully direct their eternal destinies (as Hannah did)? Then will parents and children both abide in the house of God forever.

For whom Christ died (CMPA)

“FOR God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life” (John 3:16). “And truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ… and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin” (1Jo 1:3-7). (Scriptural quotations in the text are either AV or RV.)

Why then should it be that of all things that have divided brethren over the years, the most deep-seated and long-lived controversies have centred upon the nature of the act which revealed the love of God, the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ and the true meaning of fellowship? The answer is twofold. First, brethren have in all sincerity, and rightly, insisted that seriously inadequate ideas about the Atonement can be no proper basis for a fellowship built upon “our common salvation”. Although John speaks of walking in light or darkness as the test of fellowship which God applies, the darkness of the understanding does also alienate from the life of God. Secondly, however, understanding has often been clouded by the use of non-scriptural phrases, or even words of scripture abstracted from a context, to be bandied about in discussion. The truth is that slogans are a counterfeit coinage in the exchange of Scriptural ideas. So phrases like “clean flesh”, “free life”, “defiled Christ”, and even the hyphenated phrase “sin-in-the-flesh”, carrying their own emotional overtones, not to mention shades of meaning, for different people who use them, have degraded the discussion of a majestic theme into a wrangle and barred the way to a common understanding of Scriptural truth.

One thing is certain. If it pleased God in His love to give His Son to die for us, it was to inspire us to love in our turn: for the Father, and the Son, and one another. We shall not have begun to understand the mystery of the death of Christ, no matter how exact our knowledge of the facts, if what we know leaves us with any will to bite and devour one another. The most elementary first principles of the meaning of the death of our Lord will have passed us by if in any way our acquaintance with it allows us to breathe out threatenings and slaughter against one another, or unsubmissively to go about to establish our own righteousness. The sufferings of Christ teach us not only truth, but a frame of mind: for they that are Christ’s have crucified the flesh, with its affections and lusts. Paul is writing in the shadow of the cross when he writes: “Use not your freedom for an occasion to the flesh, but through love be servants one to another.” (John 3:16 ; Rom 5:8 ; 1Jo 4 :11; Phi 2:5; Gal 5:13-26; Rom 10:3; Acts 9:1.)

Another thing is no less certain. If God could foreshadow the offering of His Son in terms of many different sacrifices, and prefigure his work by means of an elaborate Tabernacle, and of priests in robes of intricate design, then we shall not be able to express the work he did in a set phrase or two of our own making, and suppose that we have comprehended it all. If the New Testament can speak of the death of Christ in relation to us as though it were the ransoming of slaves, or the crucifixion and burial of his friends as well as himself, or being washed clean by sprinkling of his blood, or the making and sealing of a covenant, and in other ways yet, any simple statements we might make on this subject, even when they are true and helpful, must inevitably leave much unsaid. It follows from this that any knowledge we have at any time on this subject should continue to grow as our experience, both of life and of the Word of God, becomes deeper and richer, and new needs call forth new understanding. (Much of Exo-Num, and the summaries in Heb 1-10; Mat 20:28; Rom 6:1-11; Col 2: 11-l5; Heb 9:11-14; 12:24; 9:20; Col 1:24.)

A third thing is as sure. The cross of Christ will not be so hard to receive that only the learned in the Law can profit from it. There is enough in its scope to occupy all our hearts and minds for all our life: there is meaning enough in a simple and faithful acceptance of its call to give us grace and peace from that point on, and teach us love and forbearance with one another. No words of ours, however true, will exhaust the riches of a subject so vast:

“O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and the knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past tracing out! For who hath known the mind of the Lord? or who hath been his counsellor?” (Rom 11:33-34).

Our Need and Helplessness

We must start at this point, for otherwise we shall have no conception of what redemption means. We shall have no real understanding of what it is from which we seek deliverance. Even worse, we might be looking for the wrong thing: forgiveness without strings and without real repentance, or even a sort of legal bargain which will grant us righteousness without real effort or response from us.

The Bible is very plain. Of the nature of Adam after he fell there is no doubt. In the day that he sinned he was condemned to death. From that moment he was as good as dead. “By one man sin entered into the world and death by sin.” All of us, save One, actually do sin and all, without any exception at all, are faced with the urge to do so, which is part and parcel of our fallen nature.

History shows it: the Fall of Adam was followed by the murder of Abel, and then by the multiplication of wickedness which arose from the indulgence of “every imagination of the thought of man’s heart”. (Gen 3; Rom 5:12; 3:23; Heb 4:15; Gen 4; 6:5.)

Precept shows it too: the last quotation was almost a statement of what man’s heart is like, and immediately following the Flood God pronounces that “the imagination of man’s heart is evil from his youth”, a very plain statement of where sin springs from, stating equally plainly that we are not only tempted to sin from without: the temptation is there, powerful and urgent within. As James puts it, “Every man is tempted when he is drawn away of his own lusts, and enticed.” The same root source of all our sinning is found in Jeremiah’s statement, “The heart of man is deceitful above all things, and it is desperately sick.” Paul makes the terrible statement that God gave hardened sinners over “in the lust of their own hearts” to all the evils to which they were abandoned. His picture of himself as of a man striving (so long as he was without Christ) helplessly against sin that dwelleth in him, unable to resist that which his enlightened conscience taught him to hate, is that of a man whose own desires war in his members against the will of God (like “your lusts that war in your members” of James). It leads him to the conclusion that good laws can never make a man good, because they are “weak through the flesh”. And to Paul the flesh is a term which denotes the natural man, whose natural works he lists as “fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, sorcery, enmities, strife, jealousies, wraths, factions, divisions, heresies, envyings, drunkenness, revellings, and such like” (that expressive etcetera at the end revealing that there is no limit to the things of which the natural man is capable, and to which he is by nature disposed). (Gen 8:21; Jam 1:14; Jer 17:9; Rom 1:24, and throughout Rom 1-3; 7:1-24; 8:3; Jam 4:1; Gal 5:19-21.)

We need only the Lord Jesus’ own confirmation of our position. And this he provides when he rejects the idea that defilement comes from outside, and tells us quite plainly whence come all our promptings to evil:

“That which proceedeth out of the man, that defileth the man. For from within, out of the heart of men, evil thoughts proceed, fornication, thefts, murders, adulteries, coveting, wickedness, deceit, lasciviousness, an evil eye, railing, pride, foolishness: all these evil things proceed from within, and defile the man” (Mark 7:1-23).

So there we have our human nature: through no fault of our own each one of us inherits desire contrary to the will of God. This is the “law of sin in our members”. When we indulge it we actually commit sin. Our nature can only be like that of Adam after the Fall; nor can it be said that terms like “clean” or “undefiled” are in accord with the Scripture teaching set out above. So long as this nature is with us we are unfit for the Kingdom of God. That is why a man needs to be born again, and why the Lord Jesus Christ died and rose again to make this possible. (John 3:3-5; Gal 5: 21; 1Co 6:10.)

Like Unto His Brethren

Of course, the Lord Jesus Christ was born Son of God, as well as Son of man. And a very important thing it is that God was his Father. Yet it is vital to establish that the Lord’s bodily nature was like our own, temptations and all. It is very readily done: he was made of a woman made under the Law; he was made in the likeness of men; because the children whom he came to redeem are of flesh and blood, he also himself in like manner partook of the same, he was made in all points like his brethren; he was sent in the likeness of sinful flesh. No distinction is ever made between the fleshly nature of the Lord and that of the rest of men: and therefore, having shown what this heritage implies in the way of temptation for us, we have already shown it for the Lord too. Those same desires which are strong in us, and which we fail to resist, were strong in him also. (Gal 4:4; Phi 2:7-8; Heb 2:14; 2:17; Rom 8:3.)

So, notwithstanding his divine sonship, he learned obedience by the things that he suffered. He was tempted in all points like ourselves. It was with strong crying and tears that he endured his trials. No matter by what means they came to him in the wilderness, his temptations, the desire for food, for popularity and for power, were keenly felt in his heart and had to be rejected. When meditating entirely within himself he could contemplate the possibility of seeking escape from his hour rather than glorifying the name of God. He knew the attractiveness of deliverance from his foes with the help of twelve legions of angels, and needed to put aside the thought. Being a man he needed the conscious and continuous discipline of emptying himself, taking on himself the form of a servant, becoming and remaining obedient, even unto the death of the cross. His temptations were so like our own that, as our High Priest, he draws constantly upon the recollection of his own trials as he resisted temptation, and so can be touched with the feeling of our infirmities, able to succour them that are tempted because he suffered under temptation himself. (Heb 5:8; 4:15; 2:18; Mat 4:1-11; John 12:27; Phi 2:5-8.)

Even though he did no sin, and all his words and deeds were pure from his youth up, he was not prepared to allow men to call him good, as with the inherent and unassailable goodness which belongs to God. When he used the word we translate “perfect” about himself, it was only of what he would become as a result of his death and resurrection. When the Letter to the Hebrews uses the same word three times about him, it is again what he had achieved by his death. God made him perfect by suffering; being made perfect he became the Author of eternal salvation; the word of God’s promise appoints the Son as priest, perfected for evermore. The Bible recognizes throughout the weakness of the Son of God in the days of his flesh, and places in his reliance upon the Word of God and upon the strength he sought from Him the credit for his victory: ”The Lord is at my right hand, therefore I shall not be moved.” (Mark 10:17-18; Luke 13:32; Heb 2:10; 5:9; 7:28; Psa 16:8.)

When Paul speaks of Jesus as coming “in the likeness of sinful flesh” (or flesh of sin), or “in the likeness of men”, he cannot be understood as meaning that Jesus’ make-up resembled these things, but was in reality different. In both cases he clearly means that, though our human nature left to itself had failed to overcome sin, when God sent His own Son born in the same human nature the victory was achieved. That the Lord’s fleshly nature was that of Adam after he fell, is seen in the fact that he offered up prayers “with strong crying and tears, unto him that was able to save him from death: and was heard in that he feared. Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered.” There is no need to rush to the Lord’s defence as though there were any discredit to him in having been born with a nature prone to sin. This was his lot, which he accepted and overcame. Far greater was the triumph of battling against sin in a body where a fallen nature was entrenched, than would have been the case had he commenced in innocence with a human nature unspoiled by heritage from Adam. And far greater was his brotherhood in affliction, and now in mediation, with his brethren, when we acknowledge that he conquered that very nature, with all its urge to turn away from God, which we know in our own consciences so well. There is real meaning in the words “to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself” when this is acknowledged; and in the fullest possible sense he destroyed the devil through death on the cross when, after the pattern of the serpent which Moses lifted up in the wilderness, he finally put away the power of sin from himself, and became the priest who can lead us in ultimate victory over the same power. (Rom 8:3; Phi 2:7; Heb 5:7-8; 9:26; John 3:14; Num 21:9.)

Yet though the Lord had our nature, to brandish when speaking of him the words “defiled”, “cursed”, or “condemned”, is both unseemly and beyond the warrant of Scripture. No defiled word or deed ever escaped him, and it were far better to concentrate on his behaviour (“who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth”), in spite of the limitations which he shared with us all. And though it is true that fleshly nature is unfitted for immortality or for eternal fellowship with God, it is foolish to speak as though the beloved Son was estranged from his Father by his nature. All the evidence of his life, his prayers, his Father’s commendation (at baptism, transfiguration and close to the time of the cross) is that he and his Father shared the closest communion, save for the briefest necessary moment on the cross itself. During his mortal life the Son was loved and cherished by his Father. No doubt it would have been otherwise had he turned aside to fulfil the lusts of the flesh, but this he never did. And as we trust through his work that we, now in this time, may be regarded as sons of the Father despite the weakness and proneness to sin which still exists in our members, we should rejoice in the Father’s help and companionship for the Son in his struggle against sin, rather than invent an estrangement which corresponds to nothing real in the Gospel record of the relationship between the Father and his beloved Son.

The only association of the idea of a curse with Christ is in connection with the curse of the Law where Christ is spoken of as having “become a curse for us”, a reference, neither to his nature nor to any failure to keep “all things which are written in the book of the law to do them”, but to the manner of the death by which he glorified God.

If the word “condemnation” is used at all in relation to our Lord, we must carefully guard against the misunderstandings which this term could introduce. Like us, our Lord Jesus was subject to infirmity and mortality, as his mission required. But no condemnation which would imply guilt or God’s displeasure can be affirmed of the beloved Son of the Father. Jesus was unique among men in that his constant submission to the will of God ensured unbroken fellowship with his Father. (1Pe 2:22; Mat 3:17; 11:27; 17:5; John 3:35; 11:41,42; 12:28; Gal 3: 10-14.)

This, of course, brings us to the point where we must consider the Father’s part in the work of His Son. Jesus was like us in his fleshly nature: and this he successfully overcame, so that at his death “the prince of this world” could come and find nothing in him. All this had been kept at bay while he lived, and all the weakness of flesh was now to be destroyed in his death. Yet, as no man had the right to make himself a priest, so has no man the right to make himself a saviour. Only God could appoint the man and the time. No man left to himself can achieve spotless righteousness. So, of necessity, when righteousness was achieved, it had to be by one given unfettered access to God, who chose of his own free will to accept it (“Not my will, but thine, be done”). Sonship of the Father conveyed an insight, an intimacy with his God, an unequalled knowledge of what was in man, fitting him eminently to be the Saviour — if only he would choose to be so. It conveyed peculiar temptations, too, such as other men do not know (for which of us would make himself a laughing stock by trying to turn stones into bread? or commit suicide by throwing himself unsupported from great heights? or think of snapping his fingers to make the world his kingdom? Yet all these things were possible to him, and with hard travail, and by constant trust in his Father, were rejected). Sonship of God did not make him sinless, but it did make sinlessness possible. And when all was done, it was plain to all concerned that the work was a work of God, without whom sinlessness could not have been achieved. In asking His righteous Son to die, the Father showed how the power of sin could be brought to an end. In granting him life when he had died, He showed that the victory was won indeed, and in appointing him a mediator for his brethren He made accessible to us, through him, all the blessings which he was sent to bring. (John 14:30; Heb 5:4-5; Luke 22:42; 4:1-13.)

A Merciful and Faithful High Priest

We have purposely kept words like sacrifice, atonement, and priest to a minimum. This is not because they are either unimportant or irrelevant, but because many of our difficulties arise from a failure to remember that the fundamental thing in the purpose of God was always intended to be the coming, life, death, resurrection, ascension, and return of the Lord Jesus Christ. All the types and shadows pointed to him, and were there because of that. He was what he was, and did what he did, because this was the purpose of God in him, and not because of what the types said. They did nothing to take away sin; it was impossible that they ever could. They helped men to remember that sin was real (“a remembrance made every year”) and they pointed to the time when it really would be conquered. So in the providence of God they were made available to do the best that pictures and symbols can do to point to the real thing.

And so we see the Lord Jesus Christ risen from the dead and seated at the right hand of God. He has overcome for himself the power of sin and has been granted endless life as the proper outcome. He has taught us the reality and the power of sin, and bids us surrender in baptism all our confidence in ourselves. This baptism joins us with the message of his cross, and teaches us that our old man must be crucified with him with its affections and lusts, and then buried with him. It joins us also with the hope of his new life, giving us an introduction into the presence of the Father through him, and telling us that, just as the Father forgives our past sins as a whole, when we surrender in baptism, so He is active through His Son in hearing our prayers for forgiveness, and for spiritual help now. And that Son is the more able to help from the knowledge of temptation and its power, which he faced and defeated in his life and finally in his death. Our acceptance of the cross is the acceptance of the righteousness of God — and also of His grace and love; it is the acceptance of the helplessness of our nature — and also of the way of help through Christ; it is the thankful receiving of forgiveness and reconciliation — and also the promise that sin may be forgiven yet, and the man of God progressively strengthened unto all good works.

It is, moreover, the joining together in one body by the cross of diverse people, of many races and different temperaments, called upon to make real in their life of fellowship the love of Christ, who, having loved his own which were in the world, loved them to the end. It is a topic not for strife but for endless contemplation in growing wonder. Its very humiliation, which the Lord endured first and which Paul commends to us (“Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus”), makes it imperative that our new calling be fulfilled in love and forbearance one of another. And if we should find it needful to debate and to instruct, then, on pain of our own rejection before God, it must be in a spirit which would never willingly, through any folly, or arrogance of ours, endanger the salvation of him, of anyone, for whom Christ died.

COMMITTEE OF THE CHRISTADELPHIAN

July, 1971

Forsaken

“My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” (Psa 22:1).

These words are quoted by Jesus as he hung on the cross (Mat 27:46; Mar 15:34; Luk 24:44). But was this literally true? Was Jesus actually abandoned by his Father? The answer must be: “NO!”:

  1. In quoting Psa 22, Jesus switched from the Hebrew azavtani (which means “forsaken me”) to the Aramaic sabachthani (which may mean “entangled me”: the same word occurs in Gen 22:13 for the “thicket” in which the sacrificial ram was found). So perhaps this should be read: ‘My God, my God, thou hast [an assertion, not a question!] ensnared and provided ME as the sacrificial victim!’

  2. If Jesus were abandoned by his Father, then the vivid and twice-repeated type of Gen 22 — which is suggested by the above — is quite misleading! “They went both of them together (the Father and the Son)” (Gen 22:6,8). The Father went with the Son to the cross (cp Rom 8:31,32, which is citing Gen 22:12).

  3. The idea that God abandoned His Son is so important, if true, that it ought to be supported by more than one solitary verse.

  4. Psa 22:24 is explicit that Jesus was NOT left without divine help.

  5. The emphasis of such passages as Psa 18:4-17 is so strong as to require not desertion, but actually its very opposite.

  6. Other Messianic psalms speak of alarm or doubt such as is natural to human weakness (Psa 94:17-19, RV mg; Psa 71:9-12; 73:13,17,21,22; 42:5; 116:11). As lesser mortals experience a sense of loneliness and helplessness, so also must have Jesus. But in neither their case nor his was it true.

  7. “I will never leave thee nor forsake thee” was spoken to the first “Jesus” (Joshua: Jos 1:5), and applied to those in Christ (Heb 13:5). Then, is it conceivable that the servant is greater than his Lord?

  8. Psa 22:1 may carry the meaning: ‘Why does my God LET IT APPEAR to these my enemies that I am utterly forsaken?’ This is the very idea in Isa 49:14,15.

  9. Jesus cites “My God, my God, why have… ” as simply a reference to the psalm itself, to call the attention of those nearby to the whole of the psalm that was being fulfilled before their eyes.

  10. Other possibilities? Ever since Gethsemane, there had been no angels to strengthen or sustain him.

  11. Or… Jesus felt the removal of the Holy Spirit.

Faith

Scripture is clear — we are saved from sin and death because of our faith, not through any deeds that we do. Eternal life is God’s gift, it cannot be earned.

“By grace [that is, an undeserved gift] are ye saved through faith” (Eph 2:8);

“Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law” (Rom 3:28).

What is faith?

Faith is synonymous in Scripture with belief; to have faith is to believe. It is therefore not a mysterious quality which people possess. The faith that saves is, however, not belief in just anything, but in what God has declared in the Scriptures — in particular, what He has said He will do.

Note how faith and belief are synonymous in the following passage: “But without faith it is impossible to please [God]: for he that cometh to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of them that diligently seek Him” (Heb 11:6).

What must we believe?

The things God wants us to believe are what He has revealed in the Bible, summarized as “the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ” (Acts 8:12). God not only purposes to set up His Kingdom on earth, He has made it possible for sinful humans to live for ever in it by the work of Jesus Christ. This is the essence of what we must believe.

How do we obtain faith?

Faith is not given to us by God, it is our response to God. We cannot, because of our weak natures, perfectly obey God, but we can at least believe what He has revealed to us in His Word.

We cannot believe what we do not know, however; hence “faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God” (Rom 10:17). It was necessary first for God to give His Word; then we must hearken to it and believe it.

Developing faith

Faith does not come in an instant, however; it develops. We can think of three stages in developing faith:

  1. The wonder and variety of the natural world should lead us to believe in the existence of a supreme Being Who created it.
  2. Fulfilled prophecy should convince us that the Bible is uniquely the Word of this supreme Being so that we read it and believe it.
  3. If we continue to read the Scriptures, we will recognize more and more their internal harmony and consistency, and the influence they have on us, and so grow in our faith. Also, our awareness of the hand of God at work in our lives and in the world will grow, and with this too our faith will grow.

Faith and works

Though we are saved by faith, not by works, true faith does not exist apart from works: “faith without works is dead” (Jam 2:20). This means no more than that if we really believe something to be true then we act on it.

Abraham believed that God had the power to bring the dead to life, so he was prepared to sacrifice Isaac when God asked him to; Rahab believed that God was with Israel, and was prepared to help the Israelite spies (Jam 2:21-26). Hebrews 11 is full of examples of people whose faith caused them to act; read carefully this chapter and note such words as ‘offered’, ‘prepared’, ‘went’, ‘blessed’, and so on. We cannot say we have faith yet take no action. Declaring our belief in Christ is insufficient; association with him in baptism is required. Declaring our belief in God’s Kingdom is insufficient; we must try to live as would-be citizens of it now.

Abraham and faith

Abraham is presented in Scripture as the great example of faith. “Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness”, was declared of Abraham when he believed God’s promises, and is quoted of him three times in the New Testament (Gen 15:6; Rom 4:3; Gal 3:6; Jam 2:23).

The life of Abraham shows that he constantly believed God’s promises, and based his life on them: leaving his home to go to Canaan in the belief that he would inherit it for ever; believing that God would give him and Sarah a son, even when it was humanly impossible; even being prepared to sacrifice that son at God’s command.

The life of Abraham also illustrates the development of faith. When God counted Abraham as righteous because of his faith he was about eighty (cf Gen 16:16). James says that when Abraham was prepared to offer up Isaac he was showing that his faith was perfect (mature, or complete), and Gen 15:6 was fulfilled (Jam 2:22,23). By this time he was well over 100. His faith had developed to maturity over the years.

Justification by faith

Justification means ‘counting as righteous’. God says that, though we are sinners, He will count us as being righteous if we truly have faith, just as he counted Abraham as righteous through his faith (Rom 4:3-5). Note the constant recurrence of ‘count’, ‘reckon’ and ‘impute’ in Rom 4 — all the same Greek word.

Trust and faithfulness

Though faith Biblically is synonymous with belief, ‘belief’ in normal English usage is perhaps too weak a term to convey fully the Biblical idea of faith. Perhaps we might like to think of faith as believing what God has said and trusting in Him to carry it out; or as not only initially believing in what God has said, but remaining basically faithful to that belief all our lives, in the face of difficulties, and despite times of doubt and sinfulness. Such ideas give a deeper meaning to this vital concept of faith.

Faith acting through works

The question of whether a person is saved by faith or by works has been the subject of great debate in Christendom down the ages. It formed the basis of the great split which occurred in the sixteenth century between the Roman Catholic and the Protestant Churches, for the clarion call of the leader of the Protestant movement, Martin Luther, was ‘salvation by faith alone’. In this he rejected the teaching of Roman Catholicism that salvation was to be obtained by doing works imposed by the church, and substituted for it salvation by an individual calling upon the name of the Lord Jesus Christ.

Scripture is quite clear on the matter: there is such a thing as salvation by faith and there is such a thing as salvation by works. They are not alternatives; both are necessary. However, there is an order of priority: salvation by faith comes first, and salvation by works comes second. The works or deeds that are required are those which flow from faith; they are the deeds which provide the evidence that faith truly exists in a person.

The above concept is both Scriptural and simple, but, like many such concepts, is not generally followed in Christendom. For many, salvation is a matter of a once-off profession of belief in Jesus Christ; whilst for many others the carrying out of acts of benevolence towards one’s fellows is all that is required. These concepts fall a long way short of the teaching of Scripture. Moreover, they are not the only ways in which wrong ideas are held about faith and works.

What is faith?

The word ‘faith’ in ordinary English usage has a slightly mystical aura about it. In ordinary speech the word ‘belief’ can be used in quite trivial contexts, but not ‘faith’. One believes that a bus will shortly turn up; one has faith that everything will ultimately be all right even though the present is dark.

This distinction does not, however, occur in Scripture, where ‘belief’ and ‘faith’ are interchangeable for the same Greek original. In fact it is usually ‘believe’ when it is a verb and ‘faith’ when it is a noun. There is nothing mystical about faith in the Bible; it simply means belief.

There is a common teaching of Christendom that faith is imparted by God directly into man’s heart through the Holy Spirit… Heb 11:6 says: “But without faith it is impossible to please [God]: for he that cometh to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of them that diligently seek Him”. Faith here is defined as believing in the existence of God, and believing what God has declared in His Word about what lies in store in His Kingdom. It must also involve believing in the work of Jesus Christ in overcoming sin and death, for this is the only way in which as sinners we are enabled to enjoy what God has promised for the future. The phrase “diligently seek” reminds us that there is more to faith than just acquiescing to something said; it goes much further than that, which is where works come in, as we shall see.

In Act 8:12 we read concerning the people of Samaria: “when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women”. These Samaritans showed the faith which saves; that is what faith is: believing the gospel. The faith that they had immediately led to ‘works’, however, for they were baptized; they did something which was commanded by God, because they believed God.

Abraham believed God

“And [Abram] believed in the LORD; and He counted it to him for righteousness” (Gen 15:6). This is a key passage. Abraham was showing the faith that saves, the faith which must be shown if a person is to be counted righteous by God and live for ever in His Kingdom, and so these words are quoted three times in the New Testament.

The previous chapter records that Abram (for his name had not yet been changed to Abraham) had routed the forces of the five kings who had captured Sodom and Gomorrah. He then turned down the offer of the king of Sodom to give him all the spoil recovered in Abram’s great victory. Abram must have wondered if bigger armies might come against him, and if he had done the right thing in turning down the spoils. God reassured him in the words, “Fear not, Abram: I am thy shield [against vengeful armies], and thy exceeding great reward [not the king of Sodom]”. The promises of the seed, both singular (v 4) and multitudinous (v 5), were then repeated to him. These things were what Abram believed, and this belief or faith which he showed enabled God to count him as righteous. The faith which he had was nothing mysterious, nor was it a mere intellectual assent to the truth of what he had been told; it was a wholehearted trust in God to do what He had said He would do, a trust in God which controlled his life.

In Rom 4 Paul is dealing with Jews who thought that they were righteous in God’s sight because of their efforts to keep the laws which He had given them. Many elements later incorporated into the Law of Moses were to be found in patriarchal society, and Abraham and the other patriarchs would have kept these. It was not this that caused God to count Abraham as righteous, however, as has been shown, and God’s statement in Gen 15:6 is the key element in Paul’s argument that salvation comes through faith, not works (v 3). In Rom 4 Paul is especially concerned with Abraham’s faith in the promise of a seed, as is shown by his quotation in v 18 of the words of Gen 15:5: “So shall thy seed be”. The chapter then sets out how he showed this faith in the promise: “And being not weak in faith, he considered not his own body now dead, when he was about an hundred years old, neither yet the deadness of Sara’s womb: he staggered not at the promise of God through unbelief; but was strong in faith, giving glory to God; and being fully persuaded that, what He had promised, He was able also to perform. And therefore it was imputed to him for righteousness” (vv. 19-22).

Abraham’s faith, by which he was counted righteous by God, and which stands for all time as an example of what faith is all about, consisted in “being fully persuaded that, what [God] had promised, He was able also to perform”, namely, that he and Sarah would have a son. Humanly it was not possible, but he knew God could do all things. The essence of our faith, if we would be counted as righteous before God, is that we should believe that what God has promised He will do through His Son Jesus Christ, namely, set up His Kingdom and give us an everlasting place in it, cleansed from our sins.

To illustrate the simplicity of this concept we refer to an extract from Elpis Israel. The writings of Brother Thomas, with good reason at times, are said to be hard to understand, but the concept of justification (being made righteous) by faith has surely never been put with greater clarity than in these words:

“There is no true religion without faith; nor any true faith without the belief of the truth. Now, although a scriptural faith is the scarcest thing among men. it is exceedingiy simple, and by no means difficult to acquire, when it is sought for aright. Paul gives the best definition of faith extant. He says, ‘Faith is a confident anticipation… of things hoped for, a full persuasion… of things not seen’ (Heb 11:1). This is the faith without which, he tells us afterwards, God is not, and cannot by any possibility be pleased. It is a faith which lays hold of the past and the future. The person who possesses it knows what is testified concerning Jesus by the apostles, and is fully persuaded of its truth; he also knows the exceeding great and precious promises which God has made concerning things to come, and he confidently anticipates the literal fulfilment of them. Laying hold of these things with a firm faith, he acquires a mode of thinking and a disposition which are estimable in the sight of God; and being like Abraham in these particulars, he is prepared, by induction into Christ, to become a son of the father of the faithful and of the friend of God.

“This faith comes by studying the scriptures; as it is written, ‘Faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God’ (Rom 10:17). This word contains the ‘testimony of God’. When this testimony is understood, and allowed to make its own impression in ‘a good and honest heart’, faith establishes itself there. There is no more mystery in this, than how one man comes to believe another guilty of a crime when he is made acquainted with all the testimony in the case. The ability to believe lies in a sound understanding, a candid disposition, and knowledge of the testimony of God. Where there is ignorance of this there can be no faith. It is as impossible for a man ignorant of God’s word to have faith, as it is for a man to believe another guilty of an alleged crime who knows nothing at all about the matter” (Elp 162,163).

Abraham’s works

It must never be forgotten that all Scripture must be interpreted in context, not just verses within chapters but chapters within books.

Rom 4 is part of an argument by Paul against Jews who thought that God was obliged to give them eternal life because they kept His law. Paul shows that sinful mankind can only earn death, and the only thing a person can do to obtain life eternal is believe what God says. The statement about Abraham’s faith in Gen 15:6 is crucial to his argument.

In James 2 the apostle is dealing with a different matter. There were those who apparently thought of faith as being some inner quality that one had quite apart from anything one actually did. This is not so, says Jam 2:17: “faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being by itself” (AV mg). If a person’s life does not show forth works then that person does not have the faith which saves; in reality he does not have faith at all.

Like Paul, James turns to Abraham to illustrate what he means. When God told Abraham to go to a certain place and offer up his son Isaac, he went, and would have offered him if God had not intervened. He knew God’s power and therefore believed that God would still be able to fulfil His promise that from Isaac would come a great multitude, because He could raise him from the dead. The comment is: “Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect? And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God” (vv 22,23). The NEB rendering, “faith was at work in his actions”, seems to give the idea best.

Initially it is by faith that a person is justified before God. He (or she) believes God’s Word, repents of sin, and by baptism is associated with Jesus Christ’s victory over sin. From then on there is justification by works, for if there is truly a belief in what God has said in His Word then that belief will result in a certain way of life, summed up in the word “works”.

Yet the newly baptized believer is but a ‘newborn babe’ (1Pe 2:2). Faith grows, and so do the works. When Abraham was prepared to offer up Isaac, “by works was faith made perfect”. The word translated “perfect” does not mean ‘flawless’ — it means ‘mature’. It was many years after the events of Gen 15 that Abraham obeyed the command to offer Isaac. During this time his faith in God grew, and as a result so did his obedience, until the time came when it could be said to be mature.

Again the position is put with great clarity in Elpis Israel:

“I would direct the reader’s attention to the fact, that Abraham was the subject of a twofold justification, as it were; first, of a justification by faith; and secondly, of a justification by works. PAUL SAYS, he was justified by faith; and James, that he was ‘justified by works’. They are both right. As a sinner he was justified from his past sins when his faith was counted to him for righteousness; and as a saint, he was justified by works when he offered up Isaac. Of his justification as a saint James writes, ‘Abraham our father was justified by works, when he offered Isaac his son upon the altar. Faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect. And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the friend of God. Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and NOT by faith alone’ (Jam 2:21-24).

“I have termed it a twofold justification by way of illustration; but it is, in fact, only one. The two stand related as cause and effect; faith being the motive principle it is a justification which begins with the remission of sins that are past, and is perfected in obedience unto death. The idea may be simplified thus. No exaltation without probation. If a man believe and obey the gospel his past sins are forgiven him in Christ; but, if after this he walk in the course of the world his faith is proved to be dead, and he forfeits his title to eternal life. But if, on the other hand, a man become an adopted son of Abraham, and ‘by a patient continuance in well-doing seek for glory, honour, and incorruptibility’ (Rom 2:7), he will find everlasting life in the Paradise of God” (Elp 260,261).

What we are reinforcing in this article is one of the foundation principles of the Christadelphian body, established very clearly from the very beginning of our community.

What are works?

There can easily be confusion about what works are. The phrase ‘good works’ is often used to indicate the sort of things which a ‘Christian’ does. These ‘good works’ are said to consist of acts of benevolence to others, both those done individually in the course of everyday life, and those done through charitable organisations set up to help others. Many people think that if they do acts of kindness towards others then they will be rewarded in the ‘next life’, whatever that may consist of.

To think like this is to believe in salvation by works, for it means that God is thought to be under obligation to a person to give a future reward in return for good deeds done now. Such a view completely overlooks all that we have already said in this article: that salvation is primarily by faith, not by works, and that faith means believing what God has said in His Word. Many people who expect a future reward for works done now have no idea what God has said in His Word, let alone believe it.

It is instructive to consider the ‘works’ which are used as examples in Jam 2. In the case of Abraham it was being prepared to kill his own son, a deed which in every civilised society is regarded as murder of the vilest sort. It is the fact that Abraham was acting in obedience to God’s command that transforms being prepared to commit a horrible crime into a great example of faith.

The other example given in James 2 is that of Rahab. What Rahab did was to hide her country’s enemies in a time of war — an act of treason which brings severe punishment, often death, in any country. What transformed her act of treason into an example of faith for all time is the fact that she did what she did because she believed in the God of Israel, and in God’s purpose with Israel, and chose to identify herself with this purpose.

Heb 11 is full of examples of faith. If the chapter is studied carefully it will be seen that all the examples given showed their faith by what they did; their belief in God resulted in certain actions in their lives. The predominant theme is that of association with God’s people. God’s promises. God’s coming Kingdom. To do such inevitably has consequences for a person’s way of life, and this comes out in the chapter:

“Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain”; “Noah… prepared an ark to the saving of his house”; “Abraham… went out, not knowing whither he went”; “Isaac blessed Jacob and Esau concerning things to come”; “Joseph… gave commandment concerning his bones”; “Moses… refused to be called the son of Pharaoh’s daughter”; “Rahab… received the spies with peace”.

Besides these examples there are hosts of others referred to at the end of the chapter whose faith was shown in the way they lived their lives.

It is particularly noticeable that the things that were done arose out of a belief that God would do what He said He would do. Abel surely offered a lamb (Gen 4:2,4) because he believed that God would one day send the promised seed who would die as a lamb for the sins of the world. Noah built the ark because he believed what God had said about the coming Flood. Abraham left his native land because he believed in God’s promises about the land of Canaan. Isaac blessed Jacob and Esau, believing that God would bring about these blessings. Joseph gave command concerning his bones because he believed that God would bring Israel to the Promised Land one day. Moses associated himself with Israel, not Egypt, because he believed in Israel’s great future under God’s good hand. Rahab likewise believed that the future lay with Israel, not her own people. The faith that pleases God is a belief that He will surely fulfil His promises of the Kingdom through the Lord Jesus Christ.

We do not, of course, deny that believers in Christ should do good deeds to their fellow men. Elsewhere in James we read: “Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this. To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world” (Jam 1:27). We read in Gal 6:10: “As we have therefore opportunity, let us do good unto all men, especially unto them who are of the household of faith”. However, it is obedience to God that makes works acceptable to God, not benevolence to man. Even though the commands of God do involve benevolence to man, such good deeds can be and are shown by those with no belief in God at all, let alone in the gospel of the Kingdom. It takes a belief in the gospel of the Kingdom to make works acceptable to God.

A distorted view

It is undoubtedly true that the Apostle Paul lays great stress on the fact that justification is by faith, not works. However, if what the Scriptures say about works being necessary to demonstrate a true faith is not taken into account, a distorted picture can emerge.

Faith, as we have seen, means believing what God has said in His Word. If all that God had given us was a list of do’s and don’ts then all we could do would be to hang it up somewhere, remind ourselves of them regularly, and try hard to obey them. However, what God has done is to teach us of His ways in a large volume containing an immense variety of material which is capable of occupying the finest minds for a lifetime without anywhere near exhausting its depths. We are told to treat this as our spiritual food: “Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God” (Mat 4:4); we are told that it “effectually worketh also in you that believe” (1Th 2:13).

The Apostle Paul says: “be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind” (Rom 12:2); he says the new man (or woman) in Christ “is renewed in knowledge after the image of Him that created him” (Col 3:10). The Word of God will change our thinking if we will let it, but only if we read it and believe implicitly that it is true, that is, have faith. If our thinking is changed to be more and more in accordance with God’s thoughts then what we do in our lives will be affected, and we will more and more do what is in accordance with the will of God, that is, perform works. So, while we do not deny that determination to do better is a Scriptural concept — what else does Peter mean when he says, “gird up the loins of your mind” (1Pe 1:13)? — there is certainly a lot more to living the Truth than that.

We do not forget that one who believes God’s Word and tries to act on it will nevertheless through the weakness of the flesh fall far short of full obedience to the Word of God. Forgiveness for such failures is of course available through Christ. Nor would we fail to mention that God is active in the lives of believers to help them in their efforts to obey His Word, although this is not done by direct action on the mind but by control of external circumstances.

In the early part of the article we laid much emphasis on a firm belief in God’s declared purpose being the faith which saves. How does this square with what we have said above about belief in God’s Word transforming our thinking to be in accordance with God’s? God’s ultimate purpose, to which He is working, is that a multitude of people will manifest His character perfectly and live for ever. This is what His work in Christ is all about; this is what His Kingdom is all about. Belief in God’s purpose in Christ, and belief in the gospel of the Kingdom, entails believing what God has to say about how His character should be shown in His people. Taking into the mind the gospel of Jesus Christ and the Kingdom means taking into the mind the moral teaching concerning the Kingdom, and showing it in a way of life. If we believe God’s promises and want to be part of them we have to show in our lives that they mean something to us now.

(TB)

Faith and works

FAITH

1. In the NT, the words faith and belief are all related.
2. Cannot please God without it — Heb 11:6.
3. Can be gained by teaching — Rom 10:14-17.
4. Faith is one of the essential elements of salvation (Mar 16:16; Rom 1:16).
5. Paul makes much of us being saved by our faith, and not by works of Law: eg Gal 2:16.
6. Faith in the OT — Hab 2:4 (quoted in Rom 1:17; Gal 3:11; Hab 10:38); Psa 26:1 (combination of faith and works); Psa 37:3 (faith AND works); Pro 3:5; Psa 18:2; Gen 15:6 (Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him for righteousness: cp Rom 4:1-5).
7. What the OT says NOT to have faith in — you own mind (Pro 28:26), your own righteousness (Eze 33:13), armies (Hos 10:13), idols (Isa 42:17; Hab 2:18), anything human (Jer 17:5).

 

WORKS

1. Good works are the fruit of the spirit, ie they are the result of being motivated and trained by the spirit: Tit 2:10-12; Gal 5:22-25.
2. By doing good works we are showing divine activity through us — Mat 5:16; Joh 14:12.
3. People with no faith demonstrate by their works (their way of life) their separation from God: Joh 3:19; Col 1:21; Eph 5:11 (“unfruitful works”); 2Pe 2:8.
4. Good works are therefore evidence of living in faith: Jam 2:14-26.
a. The type of faith “without works” that James is describing here is the same type of empty belief that pagans have.
b. James is not “anti-faith”: cp Jam 1:3; 2:1.
5. James is in harmony with Paul, who also repeatedly declares the necessity for works as well: Eph 2:8-10; 1Co 6:9-11; Gal 5:16-26; Rom 2:6-10.
6. The works Paul rejects are those which men claim earn God’s favour in the sense of saving themselves by their own power: cp Rom 4:1-5; Eph 2:8,9; Tit 3:4,5. Thus good works of the unbeliever cannot save them, since these people rely on the flesh and not on the spirit (Rom 8:7,8).
7. Why do good works? Because we are grateful for what has been done for us by God and Jesus: Joh 14:15,23; Gal 5:6.
8. Because we are imperfect, our attempts at good works may be flawed. Yet, if we do them with the right motivation, they will be accepted by the mediation of Jesus: Col 3:17.

 

[See Faith acting through works]