Milk, milk, milk, it's so incredibly easy to drink milk, in fact babies love the mother's milk they receive and are often loathed to be weaned from the breast. The weaning is a process most times, a gradual lessening of the time feeding resulting in less milk received. Filling that emptiness where the milk used to fill the belly to satiation, a mother introduces solid food. Again, it's a process, not instantaneous, in the ideal situation. Sometimes however due to circumstances a mother has to quit breast feeding and knowing their child is old enough, they choose to give them a cup for their liquid nourishment and solid food prepared in such a way to make it easy for the child to eat. This whole process of weaning whether sudden or gradual involves a change. Very RARELY does a child ever give up their venture into solid food and go back to milk as their sole source of nourishment.
Why is it then, that so many Christ followers believe they should just be allowed to remain on the milk of the word indefinitely? They're content to remain infants, spiritual infants, never truly growing spiritually as they are intended to grow. They want to be bottle fed because it's EASIER, it takes less time, it's less confusing, it's more comfortable and much less taxing. People FEAR confusion that can arise when they begin to eat spiritual meat. Rather than risk their spiritual life they now possess they choose to keep on drinking milk and ignoring the solid food. They don't realize they are actually killing their spiritual life when they choose to stop growing in Christ.
Why don't they realize? Shouldn't they realize? Can't they look at their spiritual size and tell whether or not they are growing? Would it make a real difference if they and a spiritual gauge attached to them that revealed their progress? The thing is, people know, if they REALLY want the truth as it is found in Christ, they can know whether or not they are growing in Christ.
When a person makes the choice to keep from studying deeply the Word of God, they must comprehend they are putting themselves on a spiritual diet, and NONE of us can afford to be put on a spiritual diet. We need to feast spiritually, every growing.
These current studies taken from Watchmen What of the Night- William Grotheer, are full of solid spiritual food. You might have to chew on a single concept for a long while before fully comprehending it. This food is for those who only choose to GROW in Christ and are willing to invest their TIME, their ENGERGY, their ALL in a deeper comprehension of their Savior!
Please, enjoy your milk, but do NOT expect to exist spiritually upon that milk thinking you do not need more than a superficial understanding of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.
By HIS LOVE!
*******
WWN 1998 Apr -- XXXI -- 4(98) -- Eternal Verities -- Part 4 -- THE INCARNATION -- Part 2 -- Editors Preface -- The first article concludes the summation of the second "Eternal Verity" - the Incarnation. We discuss the doctrine as found not only in the Pauline Epistles but also in the Epistles of John. In reviewing the first verses of John's first Epistle, new perceptions of Christ's eternal pre-existence broke into my mind. Using the same preposition as in the prologue of his Gospel - proV - John declares they showed to the believers "that Eternal Life which was with the Father." No inference is suggested that that "Eternal Life" was en (in) the Father and was "begotten" by Him, but rather had been ever "with" the Father. The capsheaf on the nature Christ assumed in accepting humanity is found in the heart of the Revelation of Jesus Christ. He was a male Child who could understand all of our infirmities.
In the Epistles is to be found a theology of the Incarnation, a theology sufficiently detailed so that it can be determined beyond question whether Christ took upon Himself the nature of Adam prior to the Fall, or the nature after the Fall, or a selected human nature which resembled both the post-Fall and pre-Fall Adamic nature.
Paul, writing to the Church at Corinth, stated that God in "reconciling the world unto Himself," made Christ "to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be the righteousness of God in Him." (II Cor. 5:19,21)
2Co 5:19 To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.
2Co 5:21 For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.
While the emphasis by Paul in this section of his letter is on reconciliation and its ministry, it cannot be overlooked that basic to this reconciliation is Jesus "made sin."
This could not be unless He incarnated in the fallen nature of man where sin held its dominion. To break the power of "the strong man," Christ had to "first bind the strong man," then He could "spoil his house." ( Matt. 12:29)
Mat 12:29 Or else how can one enter into a strong man's house, and spoil his goods, except he first bind the strong man? and then he will spoil his house.
We can but dimly comprehend the depths of the condescension to rescue man from the grasp of sin, except as we meditate on the "outer darkness" that enveloped the cross and hear the anguished cry that pierced the Heavens, "My God, my God, why hast Thou forsaken Me"? The result - "we [can] be made the righteousness of God in Him."
As he continued his epistle, Paul noted another aspect of the Incarnation. He wrote - "Ye know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that, though He was rich, yet for your sakes He became poor, that ye through His poverty might be rich." (II Cor. 8:9)
This was more than the mere fact that "the Son of man hath not where to lay His head." (Matt. 8:20)
As Alford in his Greek Testament comments - "It was not merely by His renunciation of human riches during His life on earth, but by His exinanition [act of evacuating] of His glory." (Vol. II, p.681)
The force of this aspect of the Incarnation, Paul will pursue in his letter to the Philippian Church. This we will now consider. He wrote:
Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: but made Himself of no reputation, and took on Him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: and being found in fashion as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. (Phil 2:5-8)
Within these verses, four words used by Paul need to be fully understood: "form" (morfh), "fashion" (schma), "no reputation" (kenow), and "likeness" ('omoiwma).
Moulton and Milligan in their work, The Vocabulary of' the Greek New Testament, observe that form "morfh" always signifies a form which truly and fully expresses the being which underlies it." (p.417)
Paul uses it twice to contrast what Jesus was and what He took upon Himself. He was "in the form of God." This is defined as being equal ('isa) with God. The word, 'isa means equal in either "quality or quantity" (Thayer).
In the case of Christ it was both. However, in the incarnation, He took upon Himself, "the form of a servant" (slave, douloV). If this statement were all that was given in the New Testament in regard to the nature that Christ assumed in the flesh, it would be sufficient to settle the question once and for all what Adamic nature He accepted. Not until Adam sinned did he have a slave form.
The second word - fashion "schma" - signifies the outward appearance. His external bearing was "in the likeness of men."
The third word, a verb, no reputation " kenow", in the KJV reads that Christ made Himself of no reputation." The RV translates the same word as "but emptied Himself." Literally translated the text reads - "But Himself, He emptied" (alla 'eauton ekenwsen) - the emphatic sentence structure.
Moulton and Milligan cited above, notes a use of the verb, kenow, in secular literature supporting the RV translation (p.340). Laying aside "the form of God," He took the slave form of man.
John in his Gospel records the prayer of Jesus, requesting of the Father that He be glorified "with the glory which He had with [Him] before the world was" (17:5). Yet John in his gospel declares that when the Logos became flesh He possessed a glory as the unique One of the Father, "full of grace and truth" (1:14). He emptied Himself of the manifest possession of Deity, yet retaining the essential elements of Divinity - grace and truth.
The fourth word, 'omoiwmati (in likeness), is connected with what He became, anqrwpon (of men) - literally "in the likeness of men becoming." The question is, Did Christ really become man, or did He merely give the appearance of being a man? The Bible plainly teaches the reality of the humanness of Jesus. He slept; He hungered; He thirsted; He wept - He was truly a man. The religious leaders who contended with Him had no problem with the fact that He was a man. They said to Him - "For a good work we stone thee not, but ... because that thou being a man, makest thyself God." (John 10:33) This force of the word used by Paul to convey that Jesus was really a man needs to be understood and retained in one's thinking, because elsewhere he uses this same word in defining the nature He assumed in humanity.
We consider this text next. In his letter to the Romans, Paul wrote - "God sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin condemned sin in the flesh." (Rom. 8:3)
Here is again the same word translated "likeness." Literally, en 'omoiwmati sarkoV 'amartiaV - "in the likeness of a flesh of sin. To understand the word, 'omoiwma, differently here than in Philippians 2:7, is wresting Scripture. God sent His Son in the reality of a flesh of sin.
Paul is not saying that He was sinful, but that He was like all others who were born into the human race having the tendencies and potential to sin.
To emphasize the force of this fact, Paul adds that He condemned sin "in the flesh." If not the reality, the condemnation was only an appearance - the victory a farce.
In his letter to the Galatians, Paul emphasizes that Christ "was born out of woman, born under law." (Gal. 4:4) He came as all other children come, came under the same law of heredity to which all are subject. Since the Fall, there has been no other flesh than the flesh of sin. But because of what Jesus did in that flesh of sin - condemned sin - there is hope that when He comes the second time, He will come "without sin unto salvation." (Heb. 9:28)
The discussion of Jesus as a man, and his relationship to those He came to save, in Hebrews 2:9-18, has been the basis upon which not only the leaders of the Holy Flesh Movement built their Christology, but is also the text used today by those who teach that Christ came born, born again. The assumption drawn from these verses is that while Jesus was "in all things made like unto His brethren" (ver. 17), these "brethren" were "sanctified" (ver. 11). Therefore Jesus did not come in the likeness of sinners, but in the likeness of men redeemed and sanctified. (It is not explained how these "sanctified ones" became sanctified, because if Jesus came only to that level, who made the provision for them to reach the level where they were? Is there an unknown "Saviour"?) This faulty teaching results from a failure to understand what the text actually states in verse 11 - "for both He that sanctifieth and they who are sanctified are all of one." The KJV omits a word from the final phrase - "all of one." The Greek text reads - ex 'enoV panteV - out of one, all. If the preposition, ek (ex before vowels) meaning "out of, were not in the text, then the assumption that all - the sanctified, and the One sanctifying were of one nature, might have merit. This cannot be with the use of the preposition, ek, denoting source or origin. The text indicates a common source - all out of one source. Two possible sources would do no violence to the text: 1) Out of the Father, or 2) Out of Adam. The evidence from the context would indicate the latter because it reads - "He took on Him the seed of Abraham" (ver. 16).
This was the interpretation given by A. T. Jones. In a series of talks at the 1895 General Conference session on "The Third Angel's Message, Jones commented on Heb. 2:11 stating: In His human nature, Christ came from the man from whom we all have come; so that the expression in this verse, "all of one," is the same as "all from one," - all coming forth from one. And the genealogy of Christ, as one of us, runs to Adam. Luke 3:38. (GC Bulletin, p.231)
A closer look at what is written to the Hebrews tells us something. "For as much as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, He also himself took part of the same;" - for a purpose - "that through death He might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil" (ver. 14). We might ask: Could Adam have died, once created, unless he sinned? We might inquire further; Could Christ if He had taken the nature of unfallen Adam have died, since He did not sin? He took the nature of those He came to save from "the power of death."
Turning now to the Epistles of John, and the book of Revelation which he was commissioned to write, the same position in regard to the Incarnation is reflected as has been noted in the Epistles of Paul. Using the same theme which marks the introduction to his Gospel, John begins his first Epistle declaring - That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word (logoV) of life. (For the life was manifested, and we have seen it, and bear witness, and shew unto you that eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifest unto us;) That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us: and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with His Son Jesus Christ (I John 1:1-3)
The Word of life which was with God was a reality - they saw, heard, and felt His substance. That "Eternal One" which was from the beginning with the Father was manifest - made flesh (John 1:14) - to them. This One which John had seen and heard declared he unto those to whom he was now writing. It was in that manifestation in flesh - real tangible flesh - that the believer was to have fellowship with the Son, Jesus Christ. He is the Son of God in our flesh, not in some emanating spirit form. "Unto us a son is given" in our flesh and blood. On this point a warning is sounded in his epistles: Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world. Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: and every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist (I John 4:1-3)
In his second Epistle, the warning is again sounded: For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist (II John 7)
While John's emphasis is clearly centered on the reality of God in the flesh, and not that Jesus Christ was only an appearance, it cannot be side-stepped that He came in the flesh, the same as those to whom He was manifest, who both saw, heard, and handled Him. They lived with Him; ate with Him, dwelt with Him. He was not different from them. John uses only one word to describe His reality as a man - the Word was made flesh, and the only flesh he knew was that which he himself possessed.
At the very heart of the Unveiling (apokalaluyiV) of Jesus Christ is the visionary manifestation of Jesus as "a Man-child" (Rev.12:5). The Greek text reads - kai eteken uion, arsen - literally, "and she brought forth a son, a male." The emphasis is that this Son was a male, not a eunuch. He was not bereft of the forces which surge through human beings; He understood the "feelings of our infirmities" (Heb. 4:15). In the next scene of the vision, as a warfare between Michael and the dragon, "the Man-child" conquered. "The dragon ... prevailed not." From heaven - to which the Man-child was taken - came "a loud voice" declaring, "Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of His Christ (Messiah); for the accuser of our brethren is cast down" (Rev.12:10).
Herein lies the hope of those who place their trust in Him - "the Man-child." He is "to rule all nations with a rod of iron" because He ruled the flesh He took with the same rod. It is declared of those who exercise their privilege to become "sons of God" (John 1:12), brothers of "the Man-child," that they, too, "overcame him [the dragon] by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony; and they loved not their lives unto death" (Rev.12:11).
In the heart of this Apocalypse to John is to be found in symbolism the victory over sin at its very fountainhead - the flesh. The Word (Logos) came to be flesh - "a Man-child." Accepting "a flesh of sin," He condemned sin in that flesh, that we might overcome "through the blood of the Lamb" to which we have contributed nothing, yet are enabled to testify to its saving power, willingly following the blood stained path to Calvary, loving not our lives even unto death. (To Be Continued) --
By the GRACE and MERCY of our GOD!
Why is it then, that so many Christ followers believe they should just be allowed to remain on the milk of the word indefinitely? They're content to remain infants, spiritual infants, never truly growing spiritually as they are intended to grow. They want to be bottle fed because it's EASIER, it takes less time, it's less confusing, it's more comfortable and much less taxing. People FEAR confusion that can arise when they begin to eat spiritual meat. Rather than risk their spiritual life they now possess they choose to keep on drinking milk and ignoring the solid food. They don't realize they are actually killing their spiritual life when they choose to stop growing in Christ.
Why don't they realize? Shouldn't they realize? Can't they look at their spiritual size and tell whether or not they are growing? Would it make a real difference if they and a spiritual gauge attached to them that revealed their progress? The thing is, people know, if they REALLY want the truth as it is found in Christ, they can know whether or not they are growing in Christ.
When a person makes the choice to keep from studying deeply the Word of God, they must comprehend they are putting themselves on a spiritual diet, and NONE of us can afford to be put on a spiritual diet. We need to feast spiritually, every growing.
These current studies taken from Watchmen What of the Night- William Grotheer, are full of solid spiritual food. You might have to chew on a single concept for a long while before fully comprehending it. This food is for those who only choose to GROW in Christ and are willing to invest their TIME, their ENGERGY, their ALL in a deeper comprehension of their Savior!
Please, enjoy your milk, but do NOT expect to exist spiritually upon that milk thinking you do not need more than a superficial understanding of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.
By HIS LOVE!
*******
WWN 1998 Apr -- XXXI -- 4(98) -- Eternal Verities -- Part 4 -- THE INCARNATION -- Part 2 -- Editors Preface -- The first article concludes the summation of the second "Eternal Verity" - the Incarnation. We discuss the doctrine as found not only in the Pauline Epistles but also in the Epistles of John. In reviewing the first verses of John's first Epistle, new perceptions of Christ's eternal pre-existence broke into my mind. Using the same preposition as in the prologue of his Gospel - proV - John declares they showed to the believers "that Eternal Life which was with the Father." No inference is suggested that that "Eternal Life" was en (in) the Father and was "begotten" by Him, but rather had been ever "with" the Father. The capsheaf on the nature Christ assumed in accepting humanity is found in the heart of the Revelation of Jesus Christ. He was a male Child who could understand all of our infirmities.
In the Epistles is to be found a theology of the Incarnation, a theology sufficiently detailed so that it can be determined beyond question whether Christ took upon Himself the nature of Adam prior to the Fall, or the nature after the Fall, or a selected human nature which resembled both the post-Fall and pre-Fall Adamic nature.
Paul, writing to the Church at Corinth, stated that God in "reconciling the world unto Himself," made Christ "to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be the righteousness of God in Him." (II Cor. 5:19,21)
2Co 5:19 To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.
2Co 5:21 For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.
While the emphasis by Paul in this section of his letter is on reconciliation and its ministry, it cannot be overlooked that basic to this reconciliation is Jesus "made sin."
This could not be unless He incarnated in the fallen nature of man where sin held its dominion. To break the power of "the strong man," Christ had to "first bind the strong man," then He could "spoil his house." ( Matt. 12:29)
Mat 12:29 Or else how can one enter into a strong man's house, and spoil his goods, except he first bind the strong man? and then he will spoil his house.
We can but dimly comprehend the depths of the condescension to rescue man from the grasp of sin, except as we meditate on the "outer darkness" that enveloped the cross and hear the anguished cry that pierced the Heavens, "My God, my God, why hast Thou forsaken Me"? The result - "we [can] be made the righteousness of God in Him."
As he continued his epistle, Paul noted another aspect of the Incarnation. He wrote - "Ye know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that, though He was rich, yet for your sakes He became poor, that ye through His poverty might be rich." (II Cor. 8:9)
This was more than the mere fact that "the Son of man hath not where to lay His head." (Matt. 8:20)
As Alford in his Greek Testament comments - "It was not merely by His renunciation of human riches during His life on earth, but by His exinanition [act of evacuating] of His glory." (Vol. II, p.681)
The force of this aspect of the Incarnation, Paul will pursue in his letter to the Philippian Church. This we will now consider. He wrote:
Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: but made Himself of no reputation, and took on Him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: and being found in fashion as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. (Phil 2:5-8)
Within these verses, four words used by Paul need to be fully understood: "form" (morfh), "fashion" (schma), "no reputation" (kenow), and "likeness" ('omoiwma).
Moulton and Milligan in their work, The Vocabulary of' the Greek New Testament, observe that form "morfh" always signifies a form which truly and fully expresses the being which underlies it." (p.417)
Paul uses it twice to contrast what Jesus was and what He took upon Himself. He was "in the form of God." This is defined as being equal ('isa) with God. The word, 'isa means equal in either "quality or quantity" (Thayer).
In the case of Christ it was both. However, in the incarnation, He took upon Himself, "the form of a servant" (slave, douloV). If this statement were all that was given in the New Testament in regard to the nature that Christ assumed in the flesh, it would be sufficient to settle the question once and for all what Adamic nature He accepted. Not until Adam sinned did he have a slave form.
The second word - fashion "schma" - signifies the outward appearance. His external bearing was "in the likeness of men."
The third word, a verb, no reputation " kenow", in the KJV reads that Christ made Himself of no reputation." The RV translates the same word as "but emptied Himself." Literally translated the text reads - "But Himself, He emptied" (alla 'eauton ekenwsen) - the emphatic sentence structure.
Moulton and Milligan cited above, notes a use of the verb, kenow, in secular literature supporting the RV translation (p.340). Laying aside "the form of God," He took the slave form of man.
John in his Gospel records the prayer of Jesus, requesting of the Father that He be glorified "with the glory which He had with [Him] before the world was" (17:5). Yet John in his gospel declares that when the Logos became flesh He possessed a glory as the unique One of the Father, "full of grace and truth" (1:14). He emptied Himself of the manifest possession of Deity, yet retaining the essential elements of Divinity - grace and truth.
The fourth word, 'omoiwmati (in likeness), is connected with what He became, anqrwpon (of men) - literally "in the likeness of men becoming." The question is, Did Christ really become man, or did He merely give the appearance of being a man? The Bible plainly teaches the reality of the humanness of Jesus. He slept; He hungered; He thirsted; He wept - He was truly a man. The religious leaders who contended with Him had no problem with the fact that He was a man. They said to Him - "For a good work we stone thee not, but ... because that thou being a man, makest thyself God." (John 10:33) This force of the word used by Paul to convey that Jesus was really a man needs to be understood and retained in one's thinking, because elsewhere he uses this same word in defining the nature He assumed in humanity.
We consider this text next. In his letter to the Romans, Paul wrote - "God sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin condemned sin in the flesh." (Rom. 8:3)
Here is again the same word translated "likeness." Literally, en 'omoiwmati sarkoV 'amartiaV - "in the likeness of a flesh of sin. To understand the word, 'omoiwma, differently here than in Philippians 2:7, is wresting Scripture. God sent His Son in the reality of a flesh of sin.
Paul is not saying that He was sinful, but that He was like all others who were born into the human race having the tendencies and potential to sin.
To emphasize the force of this fact, Paul adds that He condemned sin "in the flesh." If not the reality, the condemnation was only an appearance - the victory a farce.
In his letter to the Galatians, Paul emphasizes that Christ "was born out of woman, born under law." (Gal. 4:4) He came as all other children come, came under the same law of heredity to which all are subject. Since the Fall, there has been no other flesh than the flesh of sin. But because of what Jesus did in that flesh of sin - condemned sin - there is hope that when He comes the second time, He will come "without sin unto salvation." (Heb. 9:28)
The discussion of Jesus as a man, and his relationship to those He came to save, in Hebrews 2:9-18, has been the basis upon which not only the leaders of the Holy Flesh Movement built their Christology, but is also the text used today by those who teach that Christ came born, born again. The assumption drawn from these verses is that while Jesus was "in all things made like unto His brethren" (ver. 17), these "brethren" were "sanctified" (ver. 11). Therefore Jesus did not come in the likeness of sinners, but in the likeness of men redeemed and sanctified. (It is not explained how these "sanctified ones" became sanctified, because if Jesus came only to that level, who made the provision for them to reach the level where they were? Is there an unknown "Saviour"?) This faulty teaching results from a failure to understand what the text actually states in verse 11 - "for both He that sanctifieth and they who are sanctified are all of one." The KJV omits a word from the final phrase - "all of one." The Greek text reads - ex 'enoV panteV - out of one, all. If the preposition, ek (ex before vowels) meaning "out of, were not in the text, then the assumption that all - the sanctified, and the One sanctifying were of one nature, might have merit. This cannot be with the use of the preposition, ek, denoting source or origin. The text indicates a common source - all out of one source. Two possible sources would do no violence to the text: 1) Out of the Father, or 2) Out of Adam. The evidence from the context would indicate the latter because it reads - "He took on Him the seed of Abraham" (ver. 16).
This was the interpretation given by A. T. Jones. In a series of talks at the 1895 General Conference session on "The Third Angel's Message, Jones commented on Heb. 2:11 stating: In His human nature, Christ came from the man from whom we all have come; so that the expression in this verse, "all of one," is the same as "all from one," - all coming forth from one. And the genealogy of Christ, as one of us, runs to Adam. Luke 3:38. (GC Bulletin, p.231)
A closer look at what is written to the Hebrews tells us something. "For as much as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, He also himself took part of the same;" - for a purpose - "that through death He might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil" (ver. 14). We might ask: Could Adam have died, once created, unless he sinned? We might inquire further; Could Christ if He had taken the nature of unfallen Adam have died, since He did not sin? He took the nature of those He came to save from "the power of death."
Turning now to the Epistles of John, and the book of Revelation which he was commissioned to write, the same position in regard to the Incarnation is reflected as has been noted in the Epistles of Paul. Using the same theme which marks the introduction to his Gospel, John begins his first Epistle declaring - That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word (logoV) of life. (For the life was manifested, and we have seen it, and bear witness, and shew unto you that eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifest unto us;) That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us: and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with His Son Jesus Christ (I John 1:1-3)
The Word of life which was with God was a reality - they saw, heard, and felt His substance. That "Eternal One" which was from the beginning with the Father was manifest - made flesh (John 1:14) - to them. This One which John had seen and heard declared he unto those to whom he was now writing. It was in that manifestation in flesh - real tangible flesh - that the believer was to have fellowship with the Son, Jesus Christ. He is the Son of God in our flesh, not in some emanating spirit form. "Unto us a son is given" in our flesh and blood. On this point a warning is sounded in his epistles: Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world. Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: and every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist (I John 4:1-3)
In his second Epistle, the warning is again sounded: For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist (II John 7)
While John's emphasis is clearly centered on the reality of God in the flesh, and not that Jesus Christ was only an appearance, it cannot be side-stepped that He came in the flesh, the same as those to whom He was manifest, who both saw, heard, and handled Him. They lived with Him; ate with Him, dwelt with Him. He was not different from them. John uses only one word to describe His reality as a man - the Word was made flesh, and the only flesh he knew was that which he himself possessed.
At the very heart of the Unveiling (apokalaluyiV) of Jesus Christ is the visionary manifestation of Jesus as "a Man-child" (Rev.12:5). The Greek text reads - kai eteken uion, arsen - literally, "and she brought forth a son, a male." The emphasis is that this Son was a male, not a eunuch. He was not bereft of the forces which surge through human beings; He understood the "feelings of our infirmities" (Heb. 4:15). In the next scene of the vision, as a warfare between Michael and the dragon, "the Man-child" conquered. "The dragon ... prevailed not." From heaven - to which the Man-child was taken - came "a loud voice" declaring, "Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of His Christ (Messiah); for the accuser of our brethren is cast down" (Rev.12:10).
Herein lies the hope of those who place their trust in Him - "the Man-child." He is "to rule all nations with a rod of iron" because He ruled the flesh He took with the same rod. It is declared of those who exercise their privilege to become "sons of God" (John 1:12), brothers of "the Man-child," that they, too, "overcame him [the dragon] by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony; and they loved not their lives unto death" (Rev.12:11).
In the heart of this Apocalypse to John is to be found in symbolism the victory over sin at its very fountainhead - the flesh. The Word (Logos) came to be flesh - "a Man-child." Accepting "a flesh of sin," He condemned sin in that flesh, that we might overcome "through the blood of the Lamb" to which we have contributed nothing, yet are enabled to testify to its saving power, willingly following the blood stained path to Calvary, loving not our lives even unto death. (To Be Continued) --
By the GRACE and MERCY of our GOD!
No comments:
Post a Comment