Leaves From The
Book
A FRAGMENT AS TO DISCIPLINE.
IN the matter of evil and of our dealing with it there are
two things to be considered: the sin itself on the one hand of course, but on
the other hand the state of the person who has committed it. It is so commonly
the case that the evil itself becomes practically the whole matter, or at least
it seems supposed that if the one is dealt with and set right, the other may
well be left to take care of itself. Than this scarcely anything can be a
greater hindrance (to speak of nothing else) to the real putting away of the
evil which we seek to remedy.
So faithful is God that He will not suffer us
to be tempted above that we are able, but will with the temptation make a way
of escape that we may be able to bear it. A sin then, when we fall into it, is
a sign of the state of soul, very likely unsuspected, but none the less a real
sign of a condition,- the fruit in fact of our not being with God. In dealing
with this, if the sin itself be practically the only thing before one - an act
and not a state - we shall become incapable of effective dealing with it;
except that effective dealing be considered the putting away of evil and the
evil doer together.
But the Lord hates putting away. It is the last and the
sad resource when all else fails, and when the person who has sinned has simply
to be left to God as confessedly beyond our reach altogether. Now there are, of
course, sins of such a character as makes it manifest from the first that
nothing else can be done. I am not now speaking of these. In other and ordinary
cases we shall only do mischief by identifying in this way the offence and the
offender,- by forgetting that there is a soul to be restored as well as a sin
to be put away.
In this case, grace and truth have both to act; but grace
foremost. Grace alone restores, alone gives dominion over sin. The water and
the towel have to he in the hands of one who can stoop low enough to use them
aright. Meekness and lowliness alone can meet the case in hand. But more: if
our action here is to be an imitation of Christ's own, we must first of all
realize what Christ's is; and I fear a mistake here in many minds. A thing,
true in itself, is often put into a false place.- that "if we confess our sins
He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins," and therefore it has been
conceived as if our part must first be the judgment of the evil before we could
count upon Him to be with us for blessing. But away from Him self-judgment in
its true meaning becomes impossible, and we find practically that this is no
remedy for us. We are as unable to meet conditions imposed on us here as
anywhere else. How indeed can we set ourselves right for Him to wash us? What
would be the meaning of His washing, if our feet could not be put into His
hands defiled, not clean?
A first welcome to Christ then, is to be
maintained in order to cleansing by Him, a restoration to His presence in order
to cleansing. And for that the open arms of love ever waiting,- the Lord
Himself only rebuking our absence from Him whatever our condition. Now if this
be Christ's way, our own must follow it. The first thing is not to get a matter
right, but to get a soul right so that he may be able to see and to judge with
God. For this he must be with Him. Force upon him your judgment of his sin
before this, you are not at his feet, you cannot wash. Your well-meaning work
may drive him hut further away from you and from God. He is away, and must be
brought near. Then wash, and He will not resist you.
THE GOSPELS AND THE OFFERINGS.
THE key to the characteristic
features of the Gospels is the position of the Lord Jesus. There are four
principal positions answering to the four Gospels, one to each. Thus in Matthew
as "Son of David, Son of Abraham," He is seen in relation to the dispensations.
We have His position with regard to David's throne and Abraham's true seed,-
the heirs of promise.
In Mark, on the other hand, we find Him "in the form
of a servant," come not to be ministered unto but to minister; and to do that,
humbling Himself to the full depth of man's need, giving His life a ransom for
many.
Then in Luke, "in fashion as a man," we find Him among men, meeting
them in grace upon an equal footing with themselves, as Himself the Son of
man.
While in John, as pre-eminently Son of God, we behold His glory, "a
glory as of the only begotten of the Father"
in the Father's bosom and
declaring Him - the life-giving Word of God, bringing those He quickens, in the
full privilege of sons, into divine fellowship with the Father and with the
Son.
Al! this we are more or less familiar with. It is less distinctly
seen,- not less distinct,- that the aspect or the work of Christ varies as
much, and in perfect accordance with each view of His Person. Such a thought is
clearly enough suggested by the Levitical sacrifices. Out of the five offerings
of Lev. i. 6, while one (the meat-offering) undoubtedly presents to us the
character of the life of the Lord, the four others, clearly recognized in their
distinctive application by the out-poured blood, present us with the varied
perfectness of His atoning work. Here, therefore, we have at once a fourfold
view. And it is sweet and wonderful to find, as soon as we begin to look at
details, that these pages of the Old and New Testaments correspond exactly to
each other as type and anti-type,- the offerings of Leviticus being but the
picture of that which in the gospel narratives is a living reality.
The
four offerings I allude to are the burnt-offering and the peace-offering, both
offerings of sweet savour, and the sin - and trespass-offerings which were not.
The former representing God's delight in the perfection of the sacrifice and in
the result of it, where man partakes of the joy; while the latter bringing
before us more distinctly the thought of the sin, in which God can have no
delight, which required atonement, and the judgment of it which is His strange,
though needed work.
Or, more particularly, In the burnt-offering we see the
perfectness of the sacrifice of Christ, His voluntary surrender of Himself to
do the will of God, and God's perfect delight in, and acceptance of the
sacrifice.
In the peace-offering, while God still has His joy in it, man is
permitted to be a sharer of that joy, feeding in peace with God upon the
offering.
In the sin-offering, however, the thought is totally different.
In the victim burnt without the camp we behold the due of sin, putting afar
from God and under judgment, while yet it is the blood of the sin-offering
which sanctifies the holy places, and is put upon the mercy seat; so it is
Christ made sin for us that is the foundation of everything, by which we are
not simply forgiven, but even "made the righteousness of God in Him;" and by
which, as our representative, He has "entered in once into the holy place
having obtained eternal redemption."
Lastly, in the trespass-offering, not
only is atonement made for particular sins, but recompense also for
wrong-doing. "He shall make amends for the wrong that he hath done" is one of
the most distinctive features. In it we see, therefore, Christ as making up,
and more than making up, -"he shall add the fifth part to it," - for all the
injury that sin has caused to God and man.
How beautifully all this is told
out in the Gospels we shall see upon a very brief examination: the mind of the
One Spirit brightly showing itself in the divine unity of Holy Scripture, from
the first of inspired writers to the last.
The order in which we find the
Gospels in our Bibles is most probably that in which they were written. Matthew
is the evident link with the Old Testament, which it cites continually, and
with which its subject and character correspond; while John is as evidently
that which opens out the deepest and fullest glories of the Lord's person, as
well as the highest character of His work. Mark, again, comes nearest to
Matthew, plainly; while Luke, with all his differences, opens the way to
John.
If our view of the application of, the Scripture language of numerals
be at all correct, we should expect Matthew to speak of divine sovereignty;
Mark, of divine interference in grace for us; Luke, of our being brought to
God. We shall not find these expectations disappoint us.
Matthew begins
with the Lord's legal genealogy, which proves Him to be Son of David, heir to
the throne in Israel. But He is also announced as Son of Abraham, through whom
the blessing of all nations is to come, and here the introduction of four
women's names, significantly all Gentiles, prove His title spiritually. But the
throne of Israel is Jehovah's throne; the coming kingdom, heaven's kingdom: the
blessing for Jew or Gentile requires salvation to be wrought for both; and so
immediately we are assured that He who is come is Immanuel - "God with us," and
Jesus, because He should save His people from their sins.
In this threefold
character, then, Matthew presents Him, the last not developed as in John, but
underlying the others. His first title is what is first insisted on. He is come
to His own. When they do not receive Him, the kingdom passes in the meantime to
the Gentiles, His Son-of-Abraham title is made good; always, however, with a
prophecy of blessing and fulfillment of promise to Israel in the time to come.
The first two chapters in this way give us the character of the book. Israel's
King is hailed by Gentiles while rejected by His own. Jerusalem is alarmed, the
Magi worship, the Lord takes in Egypt the place of rejection, yet there begins
again for God the nation's history, the secret of that remarkable quotation of
Hosea, "Out of Egypt have I called My Son." It is on this representation by
Another all their blessing depends.
The King and kingdom are thus the
characteristic thoughts in Matthew, its link, plainly, with the Old Testament.
Two and thirty times its distinctive-phrase is found-" the kingdom of heaven."
God is on the throne; and though made known as Father nearness of intimacy
there is not with Him. The work of salvation is intimated, but as to be
accomplished. There is no present joy of it as yet. Discipleship, and its
responsibility in walk and life, are emphasized; but the outflow of the heart
of God does not awaken man's heart in response, as yet it will. Over all these
is a certain restraint and reserve. Forgiveness of sins is governmental, and
may be revoked (xviii. 34). The shadow of law has not yet given place.
Only
when we reach the cross we find the intimation of a blessing which the other
gospels go on to develop. The aspect of the cross in Matthew we shall consider
later. Mark's gospel, which seems in some respects almost an abridgment of
Matthew, is nevertheless, in the view of His person, in entire contrast. He is
at the very outset declared to be the "Son of God," but this to give its
character to the lowly service in which throughout He is found. The "kingdom of
God" we have still, but now never "of Christ" or "of the Son of Man." Save as
accusation on the cross, He is never even "King of the Jews." His title of
"Lord" is very seldom taken. But He is the Son of God in service, with divine
power and riches in His hand, serving in love, which requires nothing but power
to entitle it to serve. There need be, and is, therefore, no genealogy. The
earnestness of His service is marked by the frequency of the word
"immediately." Half of all the occurrences throughout the New Testament of the
Greek word which this translates are found in this gospel. The singleness of
His service is seen in His knowing nothing of His Master's business save that
which is given Him to communicate (xiii. 32). The tenderness of it is found in
all the smaller features of His ministry: how "He was moved with compassion;"
how He was "grieved with the hardness of their hearts;" how He touched one,
lifted up another; how "He marvelled because of their unbelief." Here too, as
in Luke, the ascension is given as the fitting close to His path of
humiliation,-"the right hand of God;" even then His service being unceasing as
His love, so that we read, "And they went forth and preached everywhere, the
Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following."
But
in Mark, as in Matthew, there is not yet the nearness to God we shall find in
the next gospel. The Father is mentioned as such but five times, and "your
Father," only in one place (xi. 25, 26). Not the children's but the servant's
place is here, although it is recognized that the servants are children.
Governmental responsibilities and rewards are before us as in Matthew, but
there, of disciples, each for himself subject; here, of labourers for the
accomplishment of divine purposes: ministers, after the pattern of Him who, as
"Son of Man, came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give His
life a ramson for many."
The shadow that lies upon both these gospels is
revealed, as soon as we look at the cross, where in each the Lord's cry is
found, "My God, My God, why hast Thou forsaken Me?" The fourfold view of the
cross which the Gospels present, it is now long since that I have endeavoured
to show to be that of the early chapters of Leviticus. There as we have seen,
(omitting the meat-offering, which is not sacrificial,) we have just four
sacrificial offerings. Two of these, the burnt and peace-offerings, are "for
sweet savour:" the peace-offering, that which speaks of peace and communion
with God; the burnt-offering, of the perfection of the work itself to God. Luke
and John, I have no doubt at all, give us respectively the peace and the
burnt-offerings: of this, by and by. But in the two others,- the sin and
trespass-offerings,- the judgment of sin is the side dwelt upon, the necessary
result of divine holiness, but not that which is sweet savour to Him. In the
trespass-offering, sin as injury rather,- whether as regards God or man; in the
sin-offering, sin as sin. The one has to be repaired; the other, expiated.
Which, then, does Matthew present? and which, Mark? I have been accustomed to
take Matthew as the sin - Mark as the trespass-offering; I am now convinced
that this is wrong, however, and that it should be reversed. Matthew, I am now
clear, represents the trespass - and Mark the sin-offering.
The difficulty
lies mainly in this, that in the type the sin-offering alone is that which
shows us the full judgment of sin in the outside place in which the victim is
burnt upon the ground. But both gospels show our blessed Lord in this outside
place: the cry of forsaken sorrow is as much in one as in the other. There is
perhaps no such thing in Scripture as a mere repetition of the same thought;
and this, while a perfection of the Word itself, is a difficulty in the
interpretation of it. What has pressed upon me of late is this, that the
trespass-offering (as I have elsewhere said,) is a question of divine
government; the sin-offering, of the divine nature. Now Matthew we know to be
the gospel which speaks of government. We see too in this why the
trespass-offering can put on the aspect of the sin-offering; because the claim
of divine government requires the display of the holiness of the divine
nature.
In Matthew we find the double answer of God to the work of Christ.
Having gone for us into the outside darkness, it is dispelled; the veil of the
temple is rent in twain from the top to the bottom. The glory of God can shine
out: the way in to God is opened for man. But the Lord gives up His spirit
also: the double portion of man is death and judgment. Judgment He takes first,
and, having exhausted this, dies: the answer to this is seen in the
resurrection of many of those who slept, who after His own resurrection go into
the holy city and appear unto many. Now death is the stamp of divine government
upon the fallen creature, as the cup of wrath is the necessary outflow of His
holiness against sin. Matthew and Mark both give the rending of the veil, but
Matthew alone the resurrection of the saints. This shows again that Matthew
gives the governmental view of the cross, the trespass-offering.
There is
another indication in the fact that in Mark the grace which is the result of
the cross is not only fuller- "the gospel to every creature," preached with the
signs of the enemy's work overcome, and the effects of man's judgment at Babel
overruled,- but also it is grace unmixed. Compared in this way Psalm xxii. with
Psalm lxix. So in Mark there is no prophetic Aceldama, no "His blood be upon us
and on our children," no judgment even of the traitor. "Who is to be judged,"
as another has well asked, "for God's laying our sin on His beloved Son?" In
the governmental gospel these things have their right and necessary place, and
their omission would be as much a defect in Matthew as it is a perfection in
Mark.
Again, even the threefold witness to the Lord, in the traitor who
betrayed Him, the judge who gave Him up, and of Heaven in the dream of Pilate's
wife, seems to me now more in accord with the governmental trespass - than with
the sin-offering. Mark entirely omits them, and, by what it omits as well as
what it brings forward, thus concentrates our attention on the one point of
that forsaking of God which is the essential feature of the sin-offering.
In
Luke we find the manhood of the Lord emphasized, as His deity is in John. Thus
His genealogy is traced from Adam, not merely from Abraham. Not only His birth
is dwelt on, but His childhood also; and how He grows in wisdom and in stature.
His prayers are noticed where in the other gospels they are omitted, as at His
baptism and at His transfiguration. So, His being "full of the Holy Ghost."
Seldom is He the Son of David here; and Mary has the prominence in the early
history which in Matthew belongs to Joseph.
Taking thus a place among men
as Man, it is no wonder that angels tell, not simply of God's "good will
toward," but rather of His "good pleasure in men," for so it should be read.
And accordingly the peace-offering aspect of the work of Christ is what Luke's
gospel gives.
We might apply to it, in comparison with the two former
Gospels, those words of the Canticles, "The winter is past, the rain is over
and gone; the flowers appear in the earth; the time of the singing of birds is
come." Even so does Luke open with a burst of melody. Like Israel's chorus on
the banks of the Red Sea, when the returning flood had swept away the last
trace of those that had so lately threatened them, every heart is full of joy,
and every mouth opened to sing of a great deliverance. Not only so, but heaven
itself opens, to tell of, and to share its joy, and the burden of its song is
like carols of that never-ending morning which it anticipates:- "Behold, I
bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people.
"For
unto you is born this day, in the city of David, a Saviour, which is Christ the
Lord."
"And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heaveniy
host, praising God, and saying,
Glory to God in the highest,
And on
earth peace, good pleasure in men."
This at once stamps the gospel before
us with a peculiar character. In neither Matthew nor Mark do we read such
language as this. In them we look at the awful due of sin, seeing it, it is
true, where we see it in Divine grace put away forever, and learn His love who
gave Himself for us there. But in Luke we see heaven opened, and walk in the
light of it. God and man are at one again.
There is an open house, and a
glad reception, for the chief of sinners. What brings glory to God in the
highest, gives peace to man.
And this is just the meaning of the
peace-offering, where man feeds with God upon the same sacrifice, and is at
rest in His presence. This is the one theme of this precious gospel, not the
working out, but the bestowing of salvation. And this it is sets loose man's
tongue in praise: Mary, Elizabeth, Zacharias, Simeon, are all full of what we -
hear of in the angel's message,- a Saviour and salvation.
Let us enter a
little into the proof of this.
Not to speak more about what is so plain in
the first chapters, if we look on to the opening of the Lord's ministry, in
Nazareth, in the fourth, how strikingly is the character of the gospel
presented in those words - only to be found in Luke - "The Spirit of the Lord
is upon me, because He hath anointed me to preach the Gospel to the poor; He
hath sent me to heal the broken-hearted, to preach deliverance to the captives,
and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised,
to preach the acceptable year of the Lord." This is the place the Lord takes
throughout the book. He is ever doing this. Everywhere we see "God in Christ,
reconciling men unto Himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them." And we
see, too, men brought to God, and blessing Him, with adoring thankfulness, for
"trespasses not imputed."
So the woman, at the close of the seventh
chapter, who, taught of grace, is not afraid to seek Him out even in a
-Pharisee's house, loving much because much is forgiven her, though having the
instinct of it, if I may so say, rather than the assurance; getting that now
from the lips of Him who never disappoints the largest expectations faith can
form of Him -" Thy sins be forgiven." "And He saith unto the woman, Thy faith
hath saved thee; go in peace."
Again, in the parable of the tenth chapter,
how sweet to recognize, in the person of the "good Samaritan," Him, who (not
caring how men impute it to Him as a disgrace) ministers "righteousness of God
without law;" applying in the power of the Divine Spirit, the knowledge of His
own precious blood-shedding to the healing of those wounds from which the
life-blood flows. Or again in the fifteenth chapter, how "all the mind of
heaven is one," in the bringing back of the lost sheep, the recovery of the
lost piece of money, and the welcome back of a returned prodigal: all this to
justify those "publicans and sinners" who drew near to hear Him, and to assure
them of the joy that is in the presence of the angels of God over one sinner
that repenteth.
And we might add more, as in the Pharisee and publican of
the eighteenth chapter, and the history of Zaccheus in the nineteenth; but it
will suffice to quote one other instance. The cross, as we might expect,
preeminently has this peace-offering character. There is no "My God, my God,
why hast Thou forsaken me?" Instead of that the Lord says twice, "Father."
Though the shadow may be upon the cross, He is in the light with God. And
instead of self-occupation, such as was necessarily the case in draining the
cup of wrath and judgment, He is able to intercede for others. " Father,
forgive them," is His prayer for His murderers. And yet more wonderful even, a
little after, heaven is opened to a poor sinner at His side, and a dying thief,
who perhaps but a while ago had joined in deriding Him, is caught up to
Paradise.
How significant is all this! What depth of meaning does it give
to the angels' chorus in the opening chapters! while being, as it surely is,
"Glory to God in the highest," how sweetly does it speak, "On earth peace, good
pleasure in men."
A few statements, which it will be easy to verify with
the aid of a concordance, may perhaps not be useless for the confirmation of
this.
The word "peace" occurs but four times in Matthew. "If the house be
worthy, let your peace come upon it; but if it be not worthy, let your peace
return to you again." And in the same chapter, "Think not that I am come to
send peace on earth; I came not to send peace, but a sword." Once the word
"peacemakers" occurs: "Blessed are the peacemakers."
In Mark the same word,
"peace," is found but once. In chapter v. the Lord says to the woman diseased
with an issue of blood, "Go in peace, and be whole of thy plague."
The
character of these passages will be seen at once.
Now compare them with the
following in the present gospel:
"To guide our feet into the way of
peace."
"And on earth peace, good pleasure in men."
"Now lettest thou
thy servant depart in peace, according to thy word; for mine eyes have seen thy
salvation."
"Thy faith hath saved thee; go in peace."
"Blessed be the
King that cometh in the name of the Lord: peace in heaven, and glory in the
highest."
"And as they thus spake, Jesus himself stood in the midst of
them, and said, Peace be unto you."
This needs no comment.
The verb "to
save" is found in Matthew and Mark, but neither "Saviour" nor "salvation." For
the Lord is in those gospels more looked at as One who is working out
salvation, than as having wrought it out or bestowing it. In Luke, however, we
have- "My spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour." "Unto you is born this day a
Saviour." "He hath raised up a horn of salvation for us."
"To give
knowledge of salvation to His people by the remission of their sins."
"For
mine eyes have seen Thy salvation."
"And all flesh shall see the salvation
of God."
This day is salvation come to this house."
In all these
instances salvation is looked at as a thing wrought out, making glad man's
heart; God, a Saviour, bestowing it.
So the word "grace" is found several
times here, but not at all in the two former gospels. "All bare Him witness,
and wondered at the words of grace that proceeded out of His mouth."
"Remission" is found once in Matthew, as what would be the result of the
sacrifice of Christ; in Mark once, as connected with John's baptism, what it
led to in God's grace; and once in the negative, "He that shall blaspheme
against the Holy Ghost hath never remission."
"Remit" is used but once in
Matthew of present forgiveness, as ix. 2, to the paralytic -" Son, thy sins be
forgiven thee;" and here it seems to be brought in mainly to display the
character and dignity of Him who was among His people. In Mark it is precisely
the same thing. But in Luke both these words are of comparatively common
occurrence, in the sense of present remission.
"To give knowledge of
salvation to His people by the remission of their sins."
"To preach
deliverance (the same word) to the captives."
"To set at liberty (the same
word) them that are bruised."
Both these things the Lord was there to do:
"This day is this Scripture fulfilled in your ears."
"And that repentance
and remission of sins should be preached among all nations."
To the
paralytic, as in the former gospels-" Thy sins be forgiven thee."
To the
woman that as a sinner, the same thing.
On the cross: "Father, forgive
them."
And to this I add, what comes out very strikingly in the institution
of the Lord's supper, and may have been noticed in examples already given, that
in Luke the subjects of blessing are distinctly named, as it were, and the
blessing given to them; in Matthew and Mark, more attached to a certain
character.
Thus in Matthew we read: "This is my blood of the New Testament,
which is shed for many."
But in Luke -"This cup is the New Testament in my
blood, which is shed for you."
How the joy of salvation is here brought
home to the hearts of those He is addressing. Again, compare the Sermon on the
Mount with what answers to it in the present gospel. - "He opened His mouth,
and taught them, saying, 'Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the
kingdom of heaven." But in Luke -"And He lifted up His eyes upon His disciples,
and said, Blessed be ye poor; for yours is the kingdom of God."
And just
answering to these loving assurances on the part of a Saviour God to the
objects of His love and care, so do we find, as I have before noticed, the
heart of the redeemed sinner going forth in love and adoration towards Him -
who has so blessed him. - In Matthew and Mark you find love to God or man only
as a command, or as in the statement, "The love of many shall wax cold." In
Mark, further, you do find, what is so blessedly in keeping with the whole
gospel, the love of Jesus towards an object (though the fairest thing in mere
nature) utterly unlovely: "Then Jesus, beholding him, loved him." But in Luke
we have the Lord's own testimony as to what had been awakened by grace in the
heart of a poor sinner- it cannot be wondered - at. if I quote the whole
passage :-
"And He turned to the woman, and said unto Simon, Seest thou
this woman? I entered into thine house, thou gavest Me no water for nmy feet;
but she hath washed my feet with tears, and wiped them with the hairs of her
head. Thou gavest Me no kiss; but this woman, since the time I came in, hath
not ceased to kiss my feet. My head with oil thou didst not anoint; but this
woman hath anointed my feet with ointment. Wherefore I say unto thee, her sins,
which are many, are forgiven, for she loved much; but to whom little is
forgiven, the same loveth little." - And as we find here the heart attracted to
and delighting in the One who has redeemed it from death, so do we find the
mouth opened in blessing and adoration. Let us look again at some passages
which illustrate this.
The word "praise" (ainos) is found in Matthew once,
in the quotation from the eighth Psalm: "Out of the mouth of babes aud
sucklings Thou hast perfected praise." The verb "to praise" (aineo) is not
found at all. In Mark we have neither. In Luke we have-" A multitude of the
heavenly host praising God."
"And the shepherds returned, glorifying and
praising God."
"And all the people, when they saw it, gave praise unto
God."
"And the whole multitude of the disciples began to rejoice and praise
God with a loud voice."
"And they worshipped Him, and returned to Jerusalem
with great joy, and were continually in the temple, praising and blessing
God."
The word "glorify" is used four times by Matthew; twice only as a
thing actually done: "they glorified God." Mark uses the word once. In Luke we
have it nine times, - all of men actually glorifying God.
So the word
"bless" is used in Matthew, once as a command: "bless those that curse you ;"
twice, "blessed is He that cometh in the name of the Lord;" twice where the
Lord breaks bread and blesses,- once where the sheep are placed on the right
hand of the King: "come ye blessed of my Father."
In Mark it is used five
times, in a precisely similar way. In Luke it is used thirteen times. And,
omitting occurrences similar to those just given, we find "And he spake and
praised (blessed) God." "Then took he him up in his arms, and blessed God."
"And He lifted up his hands and blessed them. And it came to pass, while He
blessed them He was parted from them, and was carried up into heaven "- the
last look we have upon the Saviour here, and revealing His attitude until He
comes again.
Finally, as Elizabeth, Mary, and the rest, began the Gospel
with songs of gladness, so do the disciples close it. "And they worshipped Him,
and returned to Jerusalem with great joy, and were continually in the temple,
praising and blessing God." In connection with Luke, I have only one point more
to notice, and that has been glanced at. The fifteenth chapter opens the heart
of God to us in a way which the former Gospels have nothing of. Yet, if we see
here the prodigal brought home, and the grace of God revealed in doing it, and
the son's place into which grace receives him, we do not go on to see what
follows this. We do not actually enter the house, nor become familiar with the
after-life, in the Father's presence. This is reserved for yet another
revelation. Where Luke ends, John begins. No one of the Gospels has its
characteristic features more marked and decided than that of John. This will
readily be admitted. Coming, in providentially perfect order, after the rest,
it is based (so to speak) upon them. We have no repetition in it of what they
have said, but taking what they have proved for granted, our apostle proceeds
to the development of other and higher truths, for which they had prepared the
way.
The former Gospels have all shewn us, in connection with other things,
man fully tried and tested by the presence of One who stood among them in the
fulness of love and grace and of unspotted holiness. Christ in fulfilment of
long desired promises, had come unto His own cherished and peculiar people.
Jesus was in the world as the friend and servant of man's need, the perfect
witness of Him whose compassions go forth into a scene of guilt and ruin and
seek out the outcast and the sinner, with assurances of mercy and goodwill. But
what was the result? Alas, in whatever way the Lord is presented to us in these
inspired narratives, they bear a common testimony to His rejection. However in
other respects they differ, they all agree in bearing witness to the cross. "He
was in the world and the world was made by Him, and the world knew Him not. He
came unto His own and His own received Him not." With the statement of this
broad fact our Gospel begins.
We have therefore, no fresh trial of man
here;- he had been abundantly proved already. Here, in the light come into the
world, he is manifested indeed for what he is. The whole truth about him comes
out. "That which is born of the flesh is flesh," is the judgment of God upon
all that naturally comes of him. If any receive Christ, it only shows that
Divine power has been at work there. They have been "born, not of blood, nor of
the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God."
Now we have
nothing of regeneration in the other Gospels. Here we begin with it. On the
other hand, here we find no repetition of the warnings already given; none of
the gracious invitations so uniformly rejected. Even the Baptist utters not
here his usual message. We have no "Repent; for the kingdom of heaven is at
hand;" - no "bring forth fruits worthy of repentance"- no coming "in the way of
righteousness" or requirement at all. All that is over. Righteousness dealing
with men simply on the ground of natural responsibility could only be in
judgment. Yet it is not judgment we get here, though evil indeed be judged, and
man be set aside. No; it is rather God's own pure and precious grace :-God as
the Quickener of the dead, that they may walk in the "light of life" with Him,
maintained there by the precious blood upon the mercy-seat.
John has this
ever before him: the rent veil opening a way into the holiest,- the light
streaming out from thence, - Jesus, the light, not of Israel merely, but of the
world, - and the blood covering the sin the light reveals. This is what indeed
the first chapter gives: the "glory as of the Only-begotten of the Father, full
of grace and truth;" the glory revealing (bringing out the truth); grace
securing, so that, whatever is brought out, we can abide in His presence,- and
then furthermore, the manifestation to us, as there, of the Father; as it is
said, "the Only-begotten Son which is in the bosom of the Father, He has
declared Him."
Thus in the Gospel of John, that which breaks out in other
Gospels in gleams transitory, however glorious, here shines through the whole.
As we might fitly call Luke's, the Gospel of peace, so we might as fitly call
this, "the Gospel of the Glory." Yet, for that very reason, those occasional
gleams are not in John. We have no Transfiguration-scene. The glory is not afar
off on mountain-tops. It dwells with us. We are familiar with it In Christ we
have ever the Word made flesh - the Only-begotten in the Father's bosom,- the
"Son of man; who is in heaven, "-yea, more, he that has seen Him, has seen the
Father. Even upon the cross, where least we expect to find it - the Divine
glory does shine forth. There is no horror of a great darkness, hanging for
three hours about it here. There is no cry of desertion. There is no agony. If
Jesus says, "I thirst," it is "that the Scriptures might be fulfilled" And in
perfect keeping with this, He is all through the doer of the Father's will, and
the object of the Father's delight; just as in the burnt-offering, everything
is for the eye and heart of God, and all goes up to Him a savour of a sweet
smell. So here Jesus offers Himself in the calm and perfect consciousness of
acceptance; "when He had received the vinegar, He said, It is finished, and He
bowed His head, and rendered up His spirit."
How sweet this witness not
merely to "the strength of our salvation," but to the perfectness of our
acceptance in the Beloved. And how suited also to that particular aspect of
truth which we have here, viz.: communion in the light with God in the power of
a new life given of Him. It is in One in whom the fire could only bring out the
sweet savour of perfect devotedness, that we stand before God;-One in whom the
Father can only find unchanging delight. This preciousness it is that attaching
to us gives character to our communion and sustains it abidingly. Accepted in
the Beloved we dwell in the Father's presence, and our fellowship is with the
Father and the Son.
There is another witness to the perfectness of this
work that is exceedingly precious. Out of the side of a dead Saviour the
soldier's spear brings blood and water. It is God's answer of love to man's
senseless enmity, Divine provision for his need. It is the proof that all is
indeed finished. The spirit, water, and blood bear witness to the same
unspeakably blessed truth: God has given unto us eternal life and this ljfe is
in His Son. Yet one more character of the burnt-offering, found also in our
present Gospel, remains to be noticed:- the perfect voluntariness of Christ's
sacrifice.* We find this everywhere. So in the tenth chapter: "Therefore doth
my Father love me, because I lay down my life that I might take it again. No
one taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down
and I have power to take it again."
So again in the garden we see the
perfect expression of the same free will, where He gives Himself up to those
who had just fallen to the ground before Him. "The cup which my Father hath
given Me," is His answer to the hasty zeal of a disciple, "shall I not drink
it?" I do not know that I have much more to suggest here.
It will be plain,
I think, that we are touching harmonies of sweet and holy significance. May
they be full of power for our souls.
I scarcely need to repeat what is so
manifest, that here in John only, we get the full revelation of the Father. The
other Gospels are too much occupied with man and his trial, for this. But in
John, at length, the full end of this is come. Jew and Gentile, seen in the
light of God's own presence, are without distinction there. Both are alike dead
in sins. Both need alike renewal. Therefore, for John, Judaism and Gentilism
are one. Light is come into the world. The Sabbaths of the old creation, the
law and all carnal ordinances are gone with Judaism. Man is out of the scene,
and God can tell out therefore the secrets of His own heart.
* The
voluntary character of the burnt-offering is not to be argued from Leviticus i.
3. The words there should be rather, "He shall offer it for his acceptance."
But in point of fact all the sweet savour offerings partook of this character.
From the nature of the case, where sin is seen as requiring sacrifice, you
cannot speak of freewill in offering it. I need not say, Christ was willing
surely, He is burnt-offering and sin-offering both-" who through the eternal
Spirit offered Himself without spot to God."
-Then it is "grace upon
grace" only. Life for the dead, light for those in darkness, purification that
we may walk in the light with God, are all found in Him. We are without a veil
* in His presence, and it is perfect blessing.
Thus God manifests Himself
commending His love to us for God is love. And as it is the Son, the
only-begotten Son who has declared Him, we are put also in the place of sons,
that we may understand and enjoy this manifestation.
This is the Gospel of
John, very meet to be his whom Jesus loved, and who speaks ever as it were from
the breast of Him who is in the bosom of the Father: words of grace and love
such as must needs bow our heads down to the dust, while we drink them in.
One more remark may suitably close this brief recital of differences which are
manifest perfections of these inspired books. In Mark and Luke, the two gospels
which give most distinctly the Lord's humiliation, .His death is spoken of in
terms like that of any other man: "He expired." In Matthew, where He is King,
and heaven's own King, it is "He dismissed - His spirit." Here, even in death,
He is Lord of Himself, and none can take His life from Him. In John, again, He
is the Son, and in relation to the Father; and here the suited phrase is "He
delivered up His spirit "- handed it over to Another, as the word means.
I
do not know of any version of the English Bible which gives these differences
wholly right. But they are there, and each in perfect accord, as is plain, with
the view given of our glorious Saviour in the different books. Deeper than our
utmost realization of it is the perfection of God's blessed word.
The Only Begotten and the First Born
Home | Links | Literature