The High Standards of Heaven

IN reading the Bible, if we do so with care, we are confronted with new standards and values that raise questions and problems that only find a true solution in the recognition that these are the standards and values of Him with whom we have to do. For centuries men had been formulating values of their own and setting up standards by which they measured themselves and others but when God spoke and announced to men what He regarded as important it went in the face of all that the natural man valued. Under the vain delusion that a multitude of sacrifices would please God the worshipper was awakened out of his dreams by the announcement that “the sacrifices of God are a broken spirit.” To the formalist, satisfied with the outward performance of duties, the announcement must have appeared as the very negation of all that he considered of importance in the worship of God. The whole subject is one of the profoundest interest for though we can only touch on its fringe it will be found running throughout the revelation God gave to man. It is the truth underlying many of the announcements of God. Take for instance the virtues emphasised in the Sermon on the Mount—humility, etc., how strange must it all have sounded in the ears of those who were accustomed to regard pride as one of the essentials of manly bearing and who were as ignorant of being poor in spirit as the untutored savage who gloried in fancied virtues that were never recognised in the court of heaven. In

these announcements we are at once transported into a new realm where different standards operate and different values are recognised.

It is not our intention even if we possessed the ability to deal elaborately with this great subject but does it not strike us at once that in the matter of sacrifice which occupies such a prominent place in Scripture that we have a heavenly principle brought before us which even after it is revealed comes right into opposition with deeply ingrained prejudices in the heart of man? It was the recognition of the necessity of sacrifice by God at the beginning of the world that caused the first religious controversy and ended in the murder of a brother. In his carnal way Cain offered the best he had and probably argued that this offering was as good, if not better, than that of his brother Abel’s but God who was the sovereign Judge in this matter made it clear that Abel’s sacrifice as setting forth the solemn and profound truth—without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sin—was more acceptable in His sight. Cain’s standard in measuring sin was not God’s standard. His view of drawing near to God as one of Adam’s fallen race was different from God’s. The narrative in Genesis makes this abundantly plain and at the beginning of revelation we have the elements in the first controversy on religion which are a live issue to this day. God’s ways are not man’s ways. Sin was something more heinous than entered into the heart of Cain though he was soon to see in his own fratricidal act what it was capable of nerving his heart and arm to do. The same phenomena meets us in the great Sacrifice offered on Calvary. From two converging points we find strong, determined, even Satanic opposition to the great truth underlying all that was taking place on Calvary’s accursed tree. The Jew with a righteousness of his own which he regarded as sufficient to take him to heaven found the Saviour to be a stone of stumbling and rock of offence. Christ’s very presence as the Lamb of God who was taking away the sin of the world by a way for which no recognition had been made in the religion of the

Jew only made him stumble when he met Him on the way. But He was not only a stone of stumbling—He was a rock of offence. This Rock stood in the way which the self-righteous Jew complacently imagined was leading to heaven and completely barred his way. The supernatural religion of heaven and the natural religion of man stood confronting each other and between them there could be no compromise. Here again the standard measuring the necessities of the sinner explains the impassable gulf there is between the religion revealed from heaven through Jesus Christ and the natural religion of the human heart in its highest attainments of even such a man as Saul of Tarsus. But all that took place on the cross was not only a stumbling stone to the Pharisaic Jew it was foolishness to the learned and cultured Greek. He too had to face the problem of that cross where God was revealing the profound mystery of eternal wisdom in the taking away of sin. Intoxicated with the philosophy that had become to him as stable as the solid earth but which had no place for sacrifice because it had never faced the problem of sin he sat in judgment on the greatest manifestation of wisdom ever given to the children of men and unhesitatingly pronounced it foolishness. The Greek’s philosophy could not cure hearts that were broken; it brought no message of hope to hearts that were sinking beneath a load that was too heavy to bear. The evil that was gnawing at the heart of man was something of which the Greek philosophy took no cognizance and for which no remedy had been suggested by it. The standard by which the Greeks measured the mighty transactions of the Cross of Calvary was a very low one and hence the verdict was directly in opposition to the true verdict. The two outstanding characteristics of the religion that regarded the Cross as a stumbling block and as foolishness are found proudly asserting themselves in all ages whenever a formal religion and intellectual pride find themselves confronted with the Cross of Christ. Both, though differing widely, like Herod and Pilate, are agreed on one point and alike in the religion of the Pharisee and the philosophy of the Greek there is no place

for God’s great Sacrifice. The two main points touched on in the foregoing may now be dealt with more fully in detail.

1. Standard of Righteousness as set forth in the Cross. No doubt the Pharisee had a standard by which he measured himself and others. In some cases it was much higher than in others. Saul of Tarsus could say as touching the law he was blameless but all this arose from his failing to recognize how high was the standard of God’s holy law. The Pharisees, measuring themselves by their own standard, could not see nor understand the necessity of the tremendous sacrifice of Calvary’s Cross but this Cross was God’s announcement of the provision required to meet the claims of the high standard of heaven. The very righteousness which God required was provided by Him and was not the work of angel or man. This subject is one of abiding interest to the Church of Christ as it underlies the great and encouraging doctrine of justification by faith.

2. God’s standard of wisdom. That this standard is not only different in degree but in kind is made clear by man’s attitude of undisguised hostility to those mighty works and wonders of God in which His wisdom was revealed. Perhaps in no place in Scripture is the subject so clearly and summarily dealt with than it is in the opening chapters of Paul’s First Epistle to the Corinthians. It is true, of course, that the general principle meets us everywhere in Scripture. No people perhaps in the world’s history were so captivated by the wisdom of their great philosophers and teachers as the Greeks. The Corinthian believers lived in an atmosphere that was saturated with that philosophy. They breathed it as naturally as the very air. The result was that it was seriously affecting their whole outlook on the redemptive work of the Cross. On its practical side it was causing serious division in the Corinthian Church and the Apostle calls upon the Corinthian believers to consider the manner in which God had been dealing with them when He called them into the kingdom of His dear Son. Not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble were called. God made choice of the foolish things of

the world to confound the wise and He chose the weak things to confound the mighty. He made choice of the base things of the world and things that were despised and things which were not to bring to nought things that were. God’s ways of working were therefore not only different to what human wisdom would have suggested but were in direct antagonism to it. Behind these mighty transactions in the field of redemption there was a wisdom which was not only infinitely higher in degree but different in kind to the wisdom that ruled the intellectual world of the Greeks. Their wisdom came into direct antagonism with the wisdom of God. It has caused endless trouble to the cause of Christ. It masquerades under many forms, intellectual pride, undisguised scorn for the weak, exulting in its own strength to break down the citadels of the enemy with its own carnal weapons, and generally displaying a proud arrogance that is the very anti-thesis of the humility of the Gospel. It has high ideas of its own capacities and its capability to drive all before it. Its contempt for those who though gracious men and women are not endowed with its own high attainments is pitiable.

The subject dealt with in this article is one of special importance in view of the attitude assumed by men to God’s truth as revealed in His Word and made known in His providence. How different is God’s standard of greatness from man’s—of riches, etc. But we cannot dwell further on a subject which while making its appeal to us is too vast for treatment in a short article.

Sermon.

By the Rev. JOHN COLQUHOUN, D.D., Leith.

“The Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us.”—John i. 14.

SOME of the ancients inform us, that John wrote this gospel in Ephesus, at the request of the ministers of the several churches in Asia, in opposition to the heresy of Ebion and

Cerinthus, who maintained that Christ was only a mere man. In the beginning of this first chapter, the evangelist, inspired by the Spirit of truth, asserts in the strongest and most sublime manner, the eternal existence, the personal co-existence, and the divine essence of our Lord Jesus. He then demonstrates the truth of his assertion concerning the divinity and divine perfections of our Lord, by observing, that “all things were made by Him, and that without Him was not any thing made that was made;” and also, that He was the Proprietor and Fountain of life. “In Him was life, and the life was the light of men.” Having thus asserted and demonstrated the truth of Christ’s supreme Godhead, in opposition to such as in every age would deny it, and said some things in further confirmation of it, he proceeds, in the words of my text, to introduce the great and fundamental doctrine of His incarnation, in opposition to them who, he foresaw, would afterwards deny the truth of His humanity. “The Word,” says he, “was made flesh, and dwelt among us:” the Word, that is, the Eternal Word, the only-begotten Son of the Father, did in the fulness of time become man, or assume human nature, with all its sinless infirmities, into a personal union with Himself. Thus, in human nature, He for a time condescended to tabernacle among men upon earth.

In elucidating this delightful subject, it is proposed, in the first place, To discourse a little of Christ as the Eternal Word; secondly, To speak of His Incarnation, or having been made flesh; thirdly, To assign some reasons of this; and, lastly, To unfold the import of this assertion, He “dwelt among us.”

I. It is proposed, then, in dependence on the Spirit of truth, to discourse a little of the Lord Jesus as the Eternal Word.

1. He may be so denominated, because He is the only-begotten Son of the Father. The term intimates His ineffable generation; for, as words are as it were begotten in our thoughts, and are the express image of them, as they are only our thoughts expressed; so, the second Person of the glorious Trinity is very properly styled the Word, because He is the only begotten

of the Eternal Father—that eternal and personal Wisdom which the Lord possessed in the beginning of His way (Prov. viii. 22). There is nothing of which we are more certain than that we think, and nothing of which we are more ignorant, than how we think. None can declare the generation of thought, or tell how thoughts are conceived in the soul. Who, then, can declare His generation who is the eternal and only-begotten Son of the Father?

1. Christ may be called the Word, because He is the great Revealer of the secrets of Heaven—”No man hath seen God at any time; the only-begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, He hath declared Him” John i. 18. By Him, God expresses and declares His thoughts to the Church, as men express their thoughts by their words. He “hath in these last days spoken unto us by His Son” Heb. i. 2. By Him, God in the beginning spoke all things into existence—”By the word of the Lord were the heavens made.” By Him, God spake to the ancient patriarchs and prophets. By Him was the gospel preached in the days of His flesh: at the first it began to be spoken by the Lord. It is by Him that God speaketh to the hearts of sinners in the day of His power.

2. As it is by Him that God declares His thoughts or will to His people, so it is by Him that they express their thoughts and desires to God. The Man Christ Jesus “is the only Mediator between God and men.” It is by Him, therefore, that believers offer the sacrifice of praise and thanks to God continually. He spake for His people in the council of peace, and covenanted to pay the price of their redemption. He speaks for them in His intercession, and presents their prayers and performances acceptable to His eternal Father.

3. He is in the text, and also in the first verse of the chapter, called the Word, because, being the second Person in the Trinity, it was customary among the Jews to call Him by this name; and since the evangelist is here speaking of the constitution of His Person, what he says concerning Him would consequently be better understood by them than if he had called Him by

any other name. Messiah was better known by that name among the ancient Jews than by any other; for He was so denominated, not only in several passages of the Old Testament, but in multitudes of places in the Chaldee paraphrase. Besides, it has been observed, that this term was more acceptable, both to Jews and heathens, than the terms Christ or Son would be. Heathen writers made much use of this term to express the power of God; and nothing was more abhorred by the Jews than the phrase, Son of God. Since, therefore, our evangelist was treating of the constitution of Christ’s adorable Person, it was requisite that he should style Him the Word.

1. Once more: He may be so named, because He is the great and glorious Subject of divine revelation. The oracles of God are full of Him. Moses and all the prophets testified of Him: they testified of His sufferings, and of the glory that should follow. The evangelists and apostles build all their doctrines upon Him, as the foundation laid in Zion: “And other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.” He is the centre in which all the lines of divine revelation meet. The gospel cannot exist without Him. There we read, that “He was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood,” and that His name is called “The Word of God,” Rev. xix. 13. On these accounts, the only-begotten of the Father may be styled the Word.

II. The second thing proposed was—to speak of Christ’s Incarnation, or His having been made flesh.

1. The eternal Word, the only-begotten Son of the Father, “was made flesh;” that is, He, in the fulness of time, actually assumed human nature, with all its sinless infirmities, into a personal union with the divine nature in His adorable Person—”When the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth His Son, made of a woman, made under the law,” Gal. iv. 4. “Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, He also Himself likewise took part of the same,” Heb. ii. 14. The Word was made or became flesh. He became man, or began to be man, not by alteration, but by assumption;

not by changing the Godhead into man, but by taking the manhood unto God; so as to constitute a personal and indissolvable union between the divine and human nature. In consequence of this union, the human nature does not exist by itself, but subsists in the person of the eternal Son.

1. The evangelist does not say that the Word was made man, but that the Word was made flesh; intimating the astonishing love of Christ to His people, in humbling Himself so low for their redemption as to assume flesh, the meanest part of human nature. Besides, the term flesh expresses more fully the truth of Christ’s humanity, and shows, that though He did not assume the person of any man, yet He assumed the nature of every man. Moreover, the distinction of the two natures in the person of Christ was hereby rendered more clear, especially to the Jews, who used to set flesh and blood in opposition to the nature of God.

2. The expression intimates, that Christ existed before His incarnation—”The Word was made flesh,” which implies, that He was the Word before He assumed flesh. He was the Word from all eternity; He was with His eternal Father, as one brought up with Him; he was daily His delight, rejoicing always before Him; but He was made flesh only in time.

3. So great was the love of Christ to His people, and so much did He long to assume their nature, that He is represented in the Old Testament as often appearing in it before He actually assumed it. He sometimes appeared in human form to saints under the Old Testament. I shall cite only two passages in proof of this:—”It came to pass, when Joshua was by Jericho, that he lifted up his eyes and looked, and, behold, there stood a MAN over against him, with his sword drawn in his hand; and Joshua went unto him, and said unto him, Art thou for us, or for our adversaries? And he said, Nay, but as Captain of the host of the Lord am I now come,” Josh. v. 13, 14. “He answered and said, Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God,” Dan. iii. 25. The love of

Christ to His spiritual seed was so ardent, so immense, that He longed to resemble them as nearly as it was possible for Him, consistently with His infinite holiness, to do. Hence He was styled, long before His incarnation, “the Son of man,” Psal. lxxx. 17; Dan. vii. 13.

1. Each of the Persons in the adorable Trinity had a peculiar agency in the incarnation of Christ. The Father prepared a body or human nature for Him, Heb. x. 5; the Holy Spirit, by his overshadowing power, formed it out of the substance of the virgin, Luke i. 35; and the Son, or second Person, assumed the entire human nature to the Divine nature in His person, Heb. ii. 14.

2. The human nature of Christ has no personality of its own. In the moment it was formed by the Holy Spirit, it was assumed by the Son; so that, instead of existing for a moment by itself, or having a distinct personality of its own, it subsists in the person of the Son of God. This human nature is so far from being less perfect than that in a mere man, because it has not a distinct personality of its own, that it is much more perfect and excellent; for to subsist in a divine person is inconceivably more excellent than to subsist by itself. A human nature differs from a human person in this, that a human person subsists by itself, but a human nature can subsist in the person of another.

3. The divine and the human nature in the person of Christ, though united together, are still distinct—each nature possessing its own peculiar properties. The human nature, though united to the divine, is not dignified with divine perfections; nor is the divine nature made finite or dependent. The human nature is not, in consequence of this union, omnipotent, for Christ was crucified in weakness; nor is it omniscient, Mark xiii. 32; nor omnipresent, John xi. 15. And that these two natures are distinct in the person of Christ, is evident also from this, that the Scripture ascribes two wills to Him, a human and a divine, Luke xxii. 42. Though the two natures are distinct in the

Lord Jesus, yet He hath not two persons, but one; as the soul and body, though very distinct, form but one person. It was necessary that His divine and human natures should be entirely distinct; because otherwise His divine nature would have advanced His human nature above the capacity of obeying and suffering; and His human would have depressed His divine nature below the capacity of meriting and satisfying. Notwithstanding this personal union, the two natures are not confused nor changed into each other, which was the error of the Eutychians of old, who maintained that there was no distinction of natures in the person of Christ, but that the human was entirely absorbed in the divine nature. This union is such, that the properties of both natures are preserved entire; each nature retaining its own essential properties. One of the Christian fathers considers the burning bush as a type of this union. He makes the fire in the bush a type of the divine, and the bush itself a type of the human nature. As the bush was united to the fire, and yet was not hurt by it, but remained entire, was not converted into it, but retained its own properties; so the human nature is united to the divine, and yet, instead of being converted into it, remains entire. The two natures are so united in one person, as to continue two still.

1. There is a great difference between this union and the union among the divine Persons in the adorable Trinity. Whereas the hypostatical union of which I have been speaking, is a union of two natures in one person; the union in the Trinity is the union of three persons in one nature, in one numerical nature, or essence. It differs also from the mystical union that subsists between Christ and believers; for although Christ be said, in consequence of this mystical union, to be in believers and they in Him, yet they are not one person with Him; they are one mystical body with Him, but not one person. It likewise differs from the union that takes place between the soul and the body. Death dissolves the union between the soul and the body; but though the soul had been separated from the body of our Lord before it was laid in the grave, yet both

His soul and His body were then united to the divine nature in His person as firmly as ever.

1. In consequences of this personal union, there is a communication of the properties of each nature to the whole person; so that all the acts of Christ, both those which are performed immediately by his divine nature, and those which are done immediately by his human, are personal acts, or acts of Christ considered as a person. Accordingly, the Scripture ascribes that to His person which belongs properly to one of His natures. For instance, it was the human nature only that suffered and bled; and yet, in virtue of this union, the Church is said to have been purchased with the blood of God, Acts xx. 28. Though it was the human nature only that ascended to heaven, yet, in consequence of this personal union, we read, “that God hath gone up with a shout,” Psal. xlvi. 5. And though Christ Jesus is called the Son of man, only in respect of His human nature, and though, as to His human nature, He, during His humiliation, was only upon earth; yet, in consequence of this union, He could say, “No man hath ascended up to heaven, but He that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven,” John iii. 13.

2. Once more: The union between the divine and human natures, in the person of our glorious Immanuel, is the foundation of the mystical union between His Person and the persons of His redeemed: and since the former shall continue for ever, so shall the latter.

3. From what has been said, we may infer, how wonderful redeeming love is. God so loved the world as to send His only-begotten Son to assume our nature, after it had been debased by sin. He laid help for us upon One who is mighty; and said concerning us, “Deliver them from going down to the pit; I have found a ransom.” Consider who it was whom God the Father sent to redeem us. It was not an angel nor archangel; it was none of the flaming seraphim around His celestial throne. Had he spared one of His own retinue from attending Him, and given such a glorious servant as an angel for the redemption

of such a sinful and despicable creature as fallen man, it would have been a bright display of love. But how immense, how astonishing His loving kindness! He gave not an angel, but the Lord of angels; not a servant, but a Son, a dearly beloved, an only-begotten Son! And how marvellous is the love of the dear Redeemer Himself, in condescending to assume to Himself our nature, with all its sinless infirmities, that He might be capable of obeying and suffering for us! How amazing, that He who was in the form of God took upon Him the form of a servant; that He condescended to be “made of a woman, made under the law, to redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons!” Should not this love of Christ to us fill us with great admiration, and constrain us to love Him, and God in Him, with supreme affection?

1. Hence see how great a mystery is the incarnation of Christ. Two natures, infinitely distant from each other, are hereby united in one Person, in order that sinners, who were at an infinite moral distance from God, might be admitted to the closest communion with Him. How wonderful is it, that He whom the heaven of heavens cannot contain, should be contained in a virgin’s womb; that He who is the mighty Thunderer, whose voice divides the flames of fire, and makes the wilderness to quake, should become a poor weeping infant; that He who is adored by angels should be despised by men; and that He who is the Fountain of Life should be brought unto the dust of death!

2. We may also see how suitable a Mediator the Lord Jesus Christ is. He is both God and man in one Person. How suitable, that He who is the Son of God should become the Son of man! that He who is the middle Person in the Trinity should be the Mediator between God and men! How fit that He who is the Son of God by nature should make us the sons of God by grace! How agreeable that He should become a partaker of our nature, in order to make us partakers of a divine nature in union with Him!

3. From what has been said, it is evident that the redemption of the soul is precious. It is ransomed at no less a price than the infinitely precious blood and meritorious obedience of Him who is God as well as man. With what assured confidence may we trust in Him, and rely on His consummate righteousness for a title to plenteous redemption, to everlasting salvation!

4. Let lost sinners be persuaded, without delay, to believe the record of God concerning His incarnate Son, with application to themselves, and in virtue of His being clothed with our nature, to say in faith, “Unto us a Son is given,” Isa. ix. 6. And let all who attempt believing the gracious offer trust in Him for all His salvation to themselves; and in the confidence that He will save them, let them love Him, and love His commandments.