SIR ROBERT ANDERSON
Secret Service
Theologian
THE
WAY
CHAPTER X
WHO IS A CHRISTIAN?
WHAT does it mean to be "a Christian"? In Christendom we
are all Christians, for the Christian religion prevails. But as every one who
has even an elementary knowledge of history is aware, "the Christian religion"
has been a bitter opponent, and relentless persecutor, of Christianity. We
distinguish, therefore, between a real Christian and a person who merely
professes the Christian religion. Scripture declares that "he is not a Jew that
is one outwardly." And if this principle obtained in the case of a religion in
which such importance attached to externals, how much more applicable it must
be to Christianity.
But there are other distinctions which, though not so
obvious, are of great practical moment. WThen we say that a man is not a
gentleman, we usually mean, not to impugn his social status, but to aver that
his character and conduct are unworthy of it. And when we assert that a
barrister is no lawyer, or that a military officer is no soldier, we do not
question that the one was duly "called," or that the other holds his
Majestys commission. What we mean is that the barrister is unversed in
law, and the officer is ignorant of the art of war. And in a precisely similar
sense, if a man is devoid of Christian truth, or if his conduct is
un-Christian, we may challenge his right to be called a Christian, without
claiming in the least to decide whether he has life in Christ, or is a mere
professor.
In the Epistle to the Colossians the Apostle Paul puts the
Christian position in a single sentence : " As ye have received Christ Jesus
the Lord " - or to give the words more accurately, "As ye received the Christ,
Jesus the Lord, so walk ye in Him." With the Jew the divinity of the
Christ could never be in doubt. In his case, therefore, the burden of the
Gospel testimony was " that Jesus was the Christ." But the Gentile, to whom
Jesus Christ " was a mere name which meant no more than Pontius Pilate, nor
half so much as Julius Caesar, it was necessary to unfold the meaning of the
Christ, and to enforce the truth that He was Lord. Hence the Apostles
words to the Corinthians : " We preach Christ .Jesus as Lord."To the Jew the
emphasis was on the Christ " ; to the Gentile on "the Lord."
An attempt to
limit the use of the word "Christian" would be mere pedantry. But yet in its
highest sense the title belongs only to those who are of "The Way," or in other
words, to those who combine Christian doctrine with Christian life or who, in
the language of the Apostle have received the Christ, Jesus the Lord, and are
walking in Him. There is much to be learned from Greek tenses. The word is, "As
ye received the Christ," pointing back to a definite event or crisis in the
life. And the Apostle adds, "so walk in Him": a present tense this, implying
not an act, but a course of living. Walk about" is the literal rendering,
signifying the whole tenor of the life. But how can we walk about in a person?
Though the phrase is quite un-English, its significance in Greek is clear and
simple. It means that the whole life is to be characterised by all that is
implied in receiving the Lord Jesus Christ. As some one has sung
"From
various cares my soul retires;
Though deep and boundless its desires,
Ive now to please but ONE."
Heaping metaphors together, the
Apostle proceeds, "Rooted and being continually builded up in Him." "Rooted" is
in the perfect tense, signifying a past event, continuous in its effect. A
babys idea of gardening is to plant a thing one week, and to pull it up
the next, to see if it is growing. And the Christian experience of some people
is very like a babys gardening. But those who have really received the
Lord Jesus Christ are rooted in Him once for all.
And what is needed now
is to be continually builded up in Him, and continually established in the
faith. "Even as ye were taught," the Apostle adds, again reverting to the
aorist tense, and thus pointing back to the time when they received the Lord
Jesus Christ. For in receiving Him they received the truth. And so he goes on
to warn them lest any man should make spoil of them "through his philosophy and
empty deceit." For a heretic is always a cheat. He defrauds his dupes into
bartering the gold of Divine truth for the tinsel that is his stock-in-trade.
And then follow the words, "For in Him dwelleth all the fulness of the godhead
bodily; and in Him ye are made full."
One sentence has been omitted:
"Abounding in thanksgiving." If the walls of the city of God are salvation, her
gates are praise; and to abound in thanksgiving is to have "an abundant
entrance" there. Such, then, is the meaning of being A CHRISTIAN.
But
while in apostolic times the converts "received Christ Jesus the Lord,"
nowadays people "take Jesus." In this respect Ritualism, Rationalism, and
Revivalism are at one - the three Rs by which Christianity is travestied.
Ritual is often useful: too rational we cannot be in the religious sphere; and
every true Christian delights in Revival.
But the "ists" and "isms" are
only evil. Unlike the Ritualist, the old High Churchman was noted for devotion
to the Lord and reverence for His name. And his errors were mainly due to a
"Council of Trent" conception of the Church. With most Evangelicals that
figment is but a vague theory; while with him it was not only Divine truth, but
truth of principal importance. But errors and excesses springing from a false
conception of the Church are not quite on the same level as the trivialities
and superstitions of mere religion. If the Kingdom of God is not in meat and
drink, it is certainly not in incense and millinery. If "taking Jesus"
constituted a Christian, the present-day Rationalist would have an indisputable
claim to the title. For Rationalism is no longer a cloak for loose living. The
teaching of "Jesus," as recorded in the Gospels, is its code of ethics, and the
life there portrayed is its practical ideal.
Dr. Harnacks "What is
Christianity?" is an exquisite presentation of the system. Of course a fallacy
pervades it. For if the Gospels are relegated to the category of merely human
writings, "Jesus" is as obviously the creation of the Evangelists as, according
to the same school, Moses is the creation of the priests of the later days of
the monarchy. Here is an inexorable dilemma. If the Fourth Gospel is authentic,
Rationalism collapses like a house of cards. And if not authentic, then the
fact confronts us that this writers "discourses" (as Dr. Harnack calls
them) have throughout the whole Christian era exercised a wider and profounder
influence upon the hearts and minds of men than the sayings of "Jesus" Himself.
But let that pass. Dr. Harnacks treatise is written to remind us "that a
man of the name of Jesus Christ" once lived and taught upon earth. A man of the
name of Judas Iscariot betrayed him, and a man of the name of Pontius Pilate
gave him up to be crucified. And that was the end of him. And yet in a sense he
lives; for the resurrection is a beautiful "idea," and all such ideas contain
elements of truth. Not only so, for (under the influence of Spiritualism, no
doubt) the coarse infidelity of the past has given place to Rationalism, and
Rationalism is not quite irrational, nor altogether devoid of sentiment; and
therefore the very miracles may now receive "a more intelligent and benevolent
judgment" than of old. Nor is this all; even the doctrine of the Atonement may
be accepted, for it "belongs to a class of ideas" that "respond to a religious
need."
This is the sort of thing that now passes for Christianity in some
of our most popular pulpits. Its exponents pose as persons of superior
intelligence and of mental independence. As a matter of fact, their "religion"
is borrowed from Germany, and the only element of "independence" they display
is their amazing folly in still clinging to belief in the Deity of Christ.
Which only proves that a Divine truth revealed to faith may be degraded to the
level of a religious superstition. These teachers give proof that "taking
Jesus" is not a synonym for "receiving Christ." "But," some one will demand,
"do not these men live beautiful and useful lives, and is not such a life
better than the possession of an orthodox creed?" The question is legitimate
and interesting, but it is quite irrelevant here. For unless the words are to
be dismissed as meaningless, "receiving the Christ" implies the acknowledgment
of Him as the One "of whom Moses in the law, ajid the prophets, did write." As
He said to His disciples after His resurrection, "These are My words which I
spake unto you while I was yet with you, how that all things must needs be
fulfilled, which are written in the law of Moses, and the prophets, and the
Psalms, concerning Me." "The Law, the Prophets, and the Writings" is the
title-page of the Jewish Bible. And as the Psalter comes first in the third
division of the Canon, "the Psalms" stands colloquially for the whole. It is as
though He said, "Which are written in all the Scriptures." This indeed is
precisely the expression used in a preceding verse:
"He interpreted to them
in all the Scriptures the things concerning Himself." To receive "the Christ"
meant therefore receiving Him "in the full and glorious sense in which that
term was prophetically known."
If men to whom the names of David and
Abraham in the opening sentence of the New Testament represent merely a brigand
chief and a lunar myth - men who have got rid of "Moses," and who explain away
all the Messianic prophecies and Psalms, are to be called Christians because
they accord Him the highest human homage, accept His teaching in so far as it
commends itself to them, and lead pure and devout lives, then infidels of the
type of Renan and John Stuart Mill are Christians. And indeed, having regard to
the present standard of faith and clerical morality, there is no reason why
such men should not become Ministers of Christian Churches and Professors of
Christian Universities.
The Satan myth of the Christian religion is the
obscene monster of the cult of ancient Babylon. But the Satan of Scripture is
that marvellous spiritual being who "fashions himself into an angel of light,"
and whose ministers "fashion themselves as ministers of righteousness" (2 Cor.
xi. 14, 15, Revised Version). Ignorance of this deludes people into assuming
that a man of "spiritual" power, who is "a minister of righteousness," must be
a minister of Christ. The time may be near when "Christian" pulpits will be
occupied by demon-possessed men. For another popular error is that of supposing
that evil spirits must be unclean spirits.
"Revivalism" may be
described as the parodying by natural methods, and in the natural sphere, the
results which, in a true revival, the Spirit of God produces in the hearts and
lives of men. To attain this end it hucksters Divine realities, bringing
everything down to a human level.
The subject is embarrassing. For I fear
lest my words should be misread as though they were aimed at men who abundantly
approve themselves as true ministers of Christ. Some such, unfortunately, incur
the unmerited reproach of belonging to a camp which is abhorrent to them. They
err grievously, for example, in copying the Rationalists and Revivalists in the
manner in which they speak of the Lord Jesus Christ. In this respect the
habitual language of their lips belies the reverence of their hearts. For not
only do they name Him in a way that seems to savour of undue freedom, but they
foster this habit in others who, unlike themselves, are devoid of the
worshipping spirit of the true disciple. It is not strange that Rationalists
should habitually call Him "Jesus" or "Jesus Christ," but that those who
believe in His Deity should do so gives proof how thoroughly the leaven of the
apostasy has spread. Examples of, and precedents for, this evil practice
abound. Having regard to the spirit of our newest "Bible Dictionaries" and
"Encyclopaedias," and many other theological works, we are not surprised to
find that it is of the dead Buddha, and not of the living Lord, that the
writers speak. And in their references to our Divine Lord, even the authors of
books of a wholly different class generally convey the impression of being
under the influence of a great personality, rather than of being conscious of a
Divine presence. They turn our thoughts back to the ministry and the Passion,
but not up to "the Living One," who was dead and is alive for ever more.
In the case of most religious books, indeed, Marys lament might be
written across the page, "They have taken away my Lord." And too often it
happens that true ministers of the Gospel so speak of Him as to leave this
sense of injury and sadness in the hearts of many of their hearers.
"Ye
call Me Master, and Lord, and ye say well," ought
surely to be enough for His people. And the significance of the words is
indicated by the fact that the Gospels do not record a single instance in which
a disciple ever spoke of Him in any other way. Yes, there is a solitary
exception. The Emmaus disciples "had trusted that it had been He which should
have redeemed Israel." But from that bright dream they had suffered a rude
awakening. For the chief priests and their rulers had crucified Him, and He was
no longer their Lord and Master, but only "Jesus of Nazareth."
As "Jesus
of Nazareth" He was known to the world; and if one of the Jews had been sent to
fetch the beast to carry him in His entry into Jerusalem, or to bespeak the
guest chamber for the paschal supper, he would have said that "Jesus" required
it. But His disciples declared themselves in the very mention of His Name. With
them it was, "The Master saith;" " The Lord hath need of it."
Let me not
be misunderstood. In the narrative of the Gospels He is spoken of by His
personal name, because God is the narrator. But when the narrative introduces
words spoken by the disciples as men, whether addressed to Him, or to others
about Him, a title of reverence is used.
The use of the Lords name
in the later Scriptures is a study of very great interest and of principal
importance. But it is too large a subject for discussion here. Suffice it to
urge that the Lords express words, and the example set us by His
disciples under His teaching, should be our guide in this respect. For even the
most elevated and solemn of mere human utterances are separated by an
immeasurable distance from the inspired Scriptures.
(See the author's
"The Honour of His Name")
(In our Christian literature the only
guide known in using the names and titles of the Lord Jesus is euphony, and the
writers reverence (or irreverence) of spirit, whereas in their use in
Scripture there is an unexplored mine of deep and important teaching.
Unexplored, I say, for theology ignores the subject altogether. For example,
there is definite significance in the fact that the title of Lord is used only
three times of Christ in the Epistle to the Hebrews, and not even once in the
Epistle of John. But Christians notice this only, if at all, as a plea for
their omitting the title in naming Him.
My reference to this subject in
these pages is only by way of appeal to those who err thoughtlessly and by a
habit acquired by reading theological and "Christian" literature. I am not
confounding them with the Rationalists, to whom He is "a man of the name of
Jesus Christ," nor yet with that class of men who thus offend through native
vulgarity and slovenliness of mind; who call Him "Jesus" because it costs less
time and breath than "the Lord Jesus," or because they have never learned to
render honour to whom honour is due.)
CHAPTER ELEVEN
THE CHRISTIAN HOPE
NATURAL life gravitates to the grave: death is its legitimate
catastrophe. And yet death is none the less an outrage. "Death thy friend" is
mere poetic sentiment. It is not a friend but an enemy. "The last enemy,"
Scripture calls it; and this the human heart, so seldom in accord with
Scripture, emphatically endorses.
One of the greatest of philosophers has
said that it is as natural to die as to be born. Yes, as natural for the fallen
creature who lies under the Eden sentence upon sin. But mans natural
instincts rebel against the Divine decree that has made the grave the goal of
life. And the higher and truer instincts of our spiritual being respond to the
promise which raises us above the sentence. The life which is from heaven turns
upward to the God who gave it. The Christian has been "begotten to a living
hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead." And the
fulfilment of that hope awaits the coming of the Lord. But here "the Christian
religion" parts company with Christianity. For while Christendom believes that
He has come, it refuses to believe that He is coming. Or if a "Second Advent"
be acknowledged at all, it is dismissed as a mere dogma, too vague and too
remote to have any influence upon heart or life. The doctrine of His first
coming is connected with public facts of history, but that of His return rests
upon the bare word of God. Therefore it is that the one is accepted while the
other is refused.
Therefore it is also that the hope affords a test
whether belief in His first coming is genuine faith in God. For human
superstition may fasten on Divine truth, and bring it down to its own level;
and the basis of "the Christian religion" (as contrasted with vital
Christianity) is Divine truth which has been thus appropriated.
Scepticism
about the promise of the Lords return is utterly unintelligent. Indeed,
the absence of such a promise would go far to discredit belief in His
resurrection and ascension. If it be true that He who died on Calvary was
raised from the dead, and sojourned with His disciples on earth for forty days
before He ascended to Heaven, the wonder is, not that He is coming back again,
but that His coming is so long delayed.
The promise of His first coming
was so utterly incredible that it may well have staggered faith. But now that
He has been upon earth and gone back to heaven, His coming again seems but a
natural sequence to His ascension. So much so indeed, that if we were left to
reason out the matter, we should expect Him to come, not once, but again and
again. And this is precisely what Scripture tells us to look for. Common sense
vetoes the suggestion that His coming as Avenger and Judge is the event
described as "that blessed hope." "We are looking for the Saviour." Then again,
an intelligent child can understand that the angels words to the
bewildered disciples on the Mount of the Ascension do not relate to the same
coming as the Apostles words to the sorrowing Thessalonians.
It is
admitted that the early Christians expected the Lord to come during their own
lifetime, and that belief was clearly based on Apostolic teaching. And this
being so, it is certain there can be nothing to bar His coming in these days of
ours. It is idle to plead that certain events foretold in prophecy may
intervene. To maintain that they must intervene is to betray ignorance of the
elementary principles of prophetic interpretation. For "the times and seasons"
belong to the chronology of prophecy, and have to do with earth and the
fortunes of the earthly people.
(Footnote - The prophetic period
relates to Israels national existence as Gods people, and is
therefore interrupted during this dispensation of the Church, when Israel is
"Lo-ammi" (Hos. i. 9). The prophetic period of Dan. ix. 24 - 27 is seventy
weeks (of years), dating from the "going forth of the commandment to rebuild
Jerusalem," which afterwards occurred in Nehemiahs time, i.e. B.C. 445.
This period is divided into three parts of 7, 62, and 1 = 70. The first reached
to the time when the prophetic voice became silent in Judah, i.e. the date of
the Book of Malachi. The next period of sixty-two weeks, or 434 years, closed
with "the cutting off of Messiah" (verse 26). And the seventieth week, which is
all that remains of the prophetic period, will not begin to run its course
until Israels national position is restored, which event will be held to
date from the signing of a covenant or treaty between them and the Prince of
verse 27, who, we know from other Scriptures, is the last great Emperor of
Christendom. The course of unfulfilled prophecy is tided back till Israel is
restored; and not one line of Scripture intervenes to bar the realisation of
the Churchs hope. The scheme of prophecy, with special reference to the
seventy weeks, is dealt with in the authors books, "The Coming Prince,"
and "Daniel in the Critics Den.")
But the error which the Second
Epistle to the Thessalonians was designed to correct, is now the creed of
Christendom; the coming of the Lord as Saviour is confounded with "the day of
the Lord" - the day of wrath - when He will be manifested as Avenger and Judge.
The words of 1 Thessalonians v. 9 are definite and striking: "God hath not
appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ." For
"salvation" read deliverance, and the meaning stands out still more plainly, it
is ours to look forward, not to the day of wrath, but to obtaining deliverance
from that awful day by the fulfilment of the promise of the preceding chapter.
To appreciate the full significance of that promise we must take note of
the circumstances in which the Epistle was written. While the Apostle was still
at Athens he received such grave tidings from Thessalonica that he deemed it
necessary to send Timotheus back there at once. And what led to the writing of
the Epistle was the report which Timothy brought him after he had moved to
Corinth. What can have been the trouble which produced effects so momentous?
His stay in Athens was admittedly brief. That, in such a small community
as the Thessalonian Church, any deaths should have occurred during the interval
was somewhat remarkable. And that a few deaths in the ordinary course of nature
would have so shattered their faith as to imperil the results of the
Apostles labours among them, is quite incredible. How then can the
mystery be explained?
We learn from the Epistle that a storm of
persecution had passed over them. And the deaths they mourned were evidently
connected with it. The inference therefore is obvious that some of their number
had been martyred. They had been told that the Lord had "all power in heaven
and upon earth," and would never forsake His people. But He had left them a
prey to their enemies. Either the doctrine was false, or else their lost ones
had fallen under Divine displeasure, and were thus doubly lost to them. So the
Apostle begins by reminding them of the warnings he had given them - warnings
which, doubtless, had been as unheeded as warnings always are in bright days of
gladness and hope. And then he goes on to give them a special message of
comfort. Let us here appeal to some pagan pundit who will translate the Greek
for us without any doctrinal bias. He will tell us that the Apostle deplored
the ignorance which led the Thessalonians to grieve with a hopeless grief over
"the sleeping ones." "For," he proceeds, "if we believe that Jesus died and
rose again, even so them also which were put to sleep through Jesus will God
bring with Him." Which means that it was by His agency they were put to sleep,
or, in other words, that He was the cause of their being put to death. For so
our pundit will explain this plain and simple phrase. A new light will now
illumine the whole passage. For this was precisely what must have perplexed and
distressed the Thessalonian Church. It was faithfulness to the Lord that had
brought all the trouble upon them. They had been true to Him, but He had failed
them. The mystery of a silent heaven which weighs so heavily even upon us, to
whom the whole story of the Churchs sorrows is an open page, may well
have staggered faith in those early days. And mark the infinite grace and
exquisite tenderness with which the Lord deals with the troubles and trials,
and even with the doubts and murmurs, of His people. It is as though He said to
them, "I admit all you say; I accept the responsibility for their having been
put to death. But was not I Myself put to death? And so surely as I was raised
from the dead, they, too, shall be raised. God will bring them back to you with
Me when I return. There will be no interval of separation; nor will you, the
living who remain till I come, have any advantage over them."
Could this
have been written if His return had been fixed as a far distant event in the
Divine chronology? Could it have been written if a Divine decree had interposed
the Great Tribulation of Old and New Testament prophecy before His coming? The
accepted theory that the Apostle blundered is a disgrace to theology. Such a
blunder would discredit the whole Apostolic writings. But what we have here is
not merely the belief of an inspired Apostle, though such a belief ought not to
be lightly dismissed. "We are saying this to you in the word of the Lord," he
declares. And this "schoolboy translation" may suggest what the Greek original
explicitly conveys; that he was communicating a definite message which the Lord
had entrusted to him for His sorrowing people.
And the words were clearly
meant to awake in them the hope of His near return. How, then, can the lapse of
centuries be accounted for? The forty years sojourn of Israel in the
wilderness may suggest the answer. Theirs was a true hope who fled from Egypt,
with their faces toward the promised land which lay but a few days march
across the desert; and yet two men alone of all that host ever planted foot
upon the soil of Palestine. And why? Because they let slip the hope, and in
heart turned back to Egypt. And can any one read the later Epistles, and the
Revelation, and fail to mark how closely the Christian Church followed in the
footsteps of the Jewish people? Can we wonder, then, that "the same example of
unbelief" should reap the same results? Apostasy on earth, and long-suffering
in heaven, afford the true solution of the mystery of long centuries of desert
wandering and trial for a Church which, in its pristine purity and life, was
called to wait for, and expect with joyful confidence, its absent Lords
return.
The Thessalonians "turned to God from idols to serve the living
and true God, and to wait for His Son from heaven." And so absolutely is this
attitude of soul the proof and test of faithfulness, that the crown of
faithfulness is declared to be for "them that love His appearing." "The grace
of God has appeared, teaching us that we should live looking for that blessed
hope;" and if Christians are not looking for it, it is because grace has not
had its due influence upon their hearts. It is a hope to strengthen amid
trials, to cheer in sorrow, to solemnise in days of prosperity and ease, and to
keep us through the even tenor of an uneventful life. "Rejoice, inasmuch as ye
are partakers of Christs sufferings," was Peters word to the saints
in view of a "fiery trial" coming, "that, when His glory shall be revealed, ye
may be glad also with exceeding joy."
"Therefore comfort one another with
these words," expressed the purpose with which Paul unfolded the doctrine to
the Thessalonians, And it needs no flight of fancy to picture the "beloved
disciple "taking leave of some happy home circle where peace and contentment
reigned, with the words, "And now, little children, abide in Him; that, when He
shall appear, we may have confidence, and not be ashamed before Him at His
coming." But the hope has another aspect; and it is one which claims prominence
here, not only as being the most practical, but also the least noticed,
application of the truth of His appearing. With most of us heaven is such a
fools paradise that it has no influence upon our life on earth. Hearts
may be filled with longings for the rest and glory it will bring; but there is
nothing in it for the conscience. For death is to wipe out for ever all
memories of earth, and the white robes and harps of gold and ever-swelling hymn
are to banish every thought of our sojourn here, just as a midnight dream is
lost when the sleeper awakes to the sunlight of a new day. What a fools
paradise, to be sure! For he to whom yesterday is a blank is but a fool, and in
entering such a heaven we should pass from a higher to a lower elevation,
intellectually and morally. Strange thoughts they have of heaven who think that
Martha and Mary could forget the scene around their brothers grave, or
the Magdalene the sins by which she proved and gauged the depths of grace; that
Paul will ever cease to testify that once he was a blasphemer, or Peter to
recall his denial of his Lord. As though the saints of God who here have
learned to love and trust Him by the remembrance of the many sins forgiven, and
of the waywardness and wanderings through which His grace has kept them, shall,
the moment their eyes behold Him, be swept into a stream that is to swamp their
individuality for ever, and, in destroying their memories of earth, to destroy
the special emphasis with which on earth they praised Him. McCheynes
well- known hymn suggests a truer, healthier thought : -
"When this passing world is done,
When has sunk
yon glaring sun,
When I stand with Christ in glory,
Looking oer
lifes finished story,
Then, Lord, shall I fully know - Not till then
- how much I owe."
As the traveller ascends some mountain side, each turning
in the path shuts out from view the way behind him; but when the summit has
been reached he sees his track mapped out from first to last, and can in
thought retrace his journey even to the far-off village he set out from. And
such shall be the change from earth to heaven. In the ceaseless vicissitudes
and toils of life the narrow present too often fills our thoughts, and the past
slips from us as each "to-day" falls back among the forgotten "yesterdays"; but
when the great to-morrow comes we shall remember all the way which the Lord our
God has led us, and at every reminiscence of it we shall bless the Lord
our God.
Chapter 12
Literature | Photos | Links | Home