Concerning His Son Jesus Christ our Lord.
Christ, God’s Son
I. In what sense.
1. Not--
(1) As angels (Job 38:7).
(2) As Israel (Exodus 5:22; Hosea 11:1).
(3) As Adam and men in general (Luke 3:38; Acts 17:29).
(4) As kings and rulers (Psalms 82:6).
(5) As the godly and regenerate (Genesis 6:2; John 1:12; 1 John 3:1).
2. But in an entirely peculiar sense (John 5:17-18).
(1) God’s own Son (Romans 8:32).
(2) Only begotten Son (John 3:16).
(3) Equal with God (Philippians 2:6; John 5:18).
(4) One with the Father (John 5:30).
(5) The brightness of His glory, and express image of His person (Hebrews 1:3).
(6) With God from eternity (John 1:1-2; Proverbs 8:22-23).
(7) God Himself (John 1:1; Romans 9:3).
II. By whom declared.
1. By prophecy (Psalms 2:7).
2. By the Father (Matthew 3:17; Matthew 17:5).
3. By Himself (Matthew 26:63-64; John 9:35; John 9:39; John 10:30-36).
4. By the apostles (Acts 3:13, Acts 9:20; 1 Corinthians 1:9, 1 Corinthians 15:28; 2 Corinthians 1:19; Galatians 4:4; 1 Thessalonians 1:10; Hebrews 1:2; Hebrews 5:8 : 1 John 4:9). (T. Robinson, D. D.)
Christ as Lord
He was promised as such (Psalms 2:6,9;, Psalms 110:1,2; Isaiah 9:6-7; Micah 5:1-2), and assumed as by right the title (John 13:13; John 20:28). He was made so by the Father (Acts 2:36; Philippians 2:11; Ephesians 1:22), and the universal confession of the fact will constitute His mediatorial reward (Philippians 2:11). Now He is confessed as such by men only through the Holy Ghost (1 Corinthians 12:3). As Lord, Christ.
I. Is the Sovereign of the universe; men, angels, and devils, are subject to Him (Ephesians 1:21).
II. Is Head of His Church and King of saints (Ephesians 1:22, Ephesians 4:15; Revelation 15:3). All other headship is usurpation.
III. Abolishes the Old Testament economy (Matthew 11:6; John 4:21, John 4:23; Hebrews 12:26-27; Revelation 21:5).
IV. Sends down the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:33-36).
V. Gathers men into His kingdom (John 10:2-4, John 10:14-16; Isaiah 55:4-5).
VI. Commissions His apostles to preach with that object (Matthew 28:18-19). VII. Appoints what is to be done in His Church (1 Corinthians 9:14, 1 Corinthians 11:23; Matthew 28:19-20). (T. Robinson, D. D.)
Which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh.
Christ the seed of David
Christ’s descent from David gave Him a claim upon the Jews as a descendant of their ancient kings; and as a scion of the stock to which the future royalty was promised (Jeremiah 23:5; Psalms 132:11). (Prof. J. A. Beet.)
Christ the seed of David
Messiah to be descended from David (Psalms 132:11; Matthew 22:42). He was David’s seed by Mary (Luke 3:23), also by Joseph, His adoptive Father (Matthew 1:18). The promised Saviour.
1. The seed of the woman and therefore a man (Genesis 3:15).
2. The seed of Abraham and therefore a Jew (Genesis 22:18; Romans 15:8).
3. The seed of David and therefore a king (Psalms 89:29; Luke 23:3; John 1:49). (T. Robinson, D. D.)
The Incarnation of God (a sermon for Christmas Day)
I. Such an event as that can have nothing like it, or parallel to it, while this world lasts. It is the turning point in the history of the world. The gospel of Christ has made the Incarnation of the Eternal Son what St. Paul made it--the centre of all teaching, worship, obedience, and morality, the fulfilment of all that was old, the starting point of all that was new--the gospel of Christ refuses to compromise with any view of religion which puts this tremendous truth in any less than its sovereign place. God has been with us, and seen our life, what we are, what we do, all our sin and all our need--seen it with the eyes of a man, with a heart as human in its sympathy and brotherhood as it was Divinely perfect in its love and righteousness. God has unveiled Himself to us here, to be as man the restorer of mankind. Is it possible that such a thing could be, and not that all things else be changed by it?
II. The Incarnation was the turning point in the history of the world; and, as a matter of fact, we have before our eyes the consequences which have followed from it. For each man, as for the world, the Son of God was made man to enable each man to reach the perfection for which he was made. His Incarnation has been made known to us, not only for the public creed of the Church, but for the personal hope and stay of each of our souls. And to know what it means, to realise what it is to us, is the turning point of each man’s belief. To think that He who loved with such self-sacrifice is He of whom all may be said that the mind of man can conceive of the everlasting God--this is a revelation to a man’s spirit which, whether it comes gradually or suddenly, is one of those things which lift him up out of the common places of routine religion, one of those things which bring him face to face with the real questions of his being--with those fateful alternatives, the choice of which decides the course of life and its issues. We may overload and cloud it with subordinate doctrines, with the theories and traditions of men, with a disproportionate mass of guesses on what is not given us to know--of subtleties and reasonings in the sphere of human philosophy. We may recoil from it as something which oppresses our imagination and confounds our reason; but we may be sure that on the place which we really give it in our mind and heart depends the whole character of our Christianity, depends what the gospel of Christ means to us.
III. We see in the Incarnation how God fulfils the promises He makes, and the hopes which He raises, in ways utterly unforeseen and utterly inconceivable beforehand, utterly beyond the power of man to anticipate; and, further, we see exemplified in it that widely prevailing law of His government, that in this stage of His dispensations with which we are acquainted--which we call “this world” and “this life”--that which is the greatest must stoop to begin from what is humblest, the greatest glories must pass through their hour of obscurity, the greatest strength must rise out of the poorest weakness, the greatest triumphs must have faced their outset of defeat and rebuke, the greatest goodness start unrecognised and misunderstood. Is it not something almost too great for the mind to endure--the contrast between what the eye of man really saw and what really was; between what was to be, and its present visible beginning? When wonder, adoration, and thanksgiving, if it were possible, without bounds, have had their due, there remain the practical impressions to be laid up for the serious work of life. You are the heirs--you cannot doubt it in presence of that manger cradle--of a hope which passes measuring here. You are the object of a Divine solicitude, interested in an economy of grace and recovery, of which human language is absolutely incapable to reveal the fulness. But, in the meanwhile, you are men and women, with your appointed parts to play on this earthly scene--with time to waste or to elevate, with the risks of unfaithfulness, with the sure rewards of self-discipline, with a character to fashion after the mind of Christ, with an allotted and fast shortening term to finish your work. What can you learn for your own guidance from the mystery of His Incarnation? Is it not, surely, that we must begin our eternal work, as He was pleased to begin His, according to that law which He has laid down for the kingdom of God, by which those who are to reach the highest must have known and welcomed the humblest and the lowest. “Except ye become as little children,” is His characteristic word, “ye cannot enter into the kingdom of heaven.” Let us think of ourselves as children in the presence of that supreme mystery with which all our destiny is bound up--children before the incalculable humiliation of the Son of God, before the infinity of His greatness and His love; children on the brink and threshold of that vast, unchanging life, to which this one is but a play time and a trial ground, knowing nothing except in part, yet with the fortunes of an eternal existence in our hands. (Dean Church.)
The necessity of Christ’s Incarnation
Whenever the Saviour’s character can be understood there is a felt adaptation. We do not know Him as a Jew any more; we know Him as the Son of Man, as the Saviour, as the Great Representative of the human race; we know Him as having something in common with everything that is human; we know Him as being more nearly related to human beings than any human being is to another, feeling every throb--shall I say?--every emotion, and every anxiety of every human creature with an interest, a depth, and a nearness of sympathy that no mother ever felt for her child. This is wonderful! It is an amazing provision for human want. All humanity cries out for an Incarnation. Did you ever think that the very idols which the poor heathen hath prepared throughout the whole world, wherever the gospel has not gone, are the product of the groaning there is in the human heart after God incarnate? They are groping in the dark, and yet they are reaching out after the light of heaven. It is the want of humanity reaching after something that is more tangible, more accessible, and more within the grasp and conception of human character than an invisible, intangible, inappreciable, all-pervading and infinite Spirit. It is strange that men shut themselves off in a vacuum when this wonderful provision is brought to them--God manifested in the flesh. (C. Kingsley.)
And declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the Spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead.--
Christ evinced by the resurrection to be the Son of God
His resurrection then did not constitute Him the Son of God, it only evinced that He was truly so. Jesus Christ had declared Himself to be the Son of God, and on this account the Jews charged Him with blasphemy, and asserted that He was a deceiver. By His resurrection, the clear manifestation of the character He had assumed, gloriously and forever terminated the controversy which had been maintained during the whole of His ministry on earth. In raising Him from the dead God decided the contest. He declared Him to be His Son, and showed that He had accepted His death in satisfaction for the sins of His people, and consequently that He had suffered not for Himself, but for them, which none could have done but the Son of God. On this great fact of the resurrection of Jesus Christ Paul rests the truth of the Christian religion, without which the testimony of the apostles would be false, and the faith of God’s people vain. (R. Haldane.)
Christ’s resurrection a proof of His Divinity
I shall--
I. Explain the words.
1. “Declared” may signify decreed or determined. But with what propriety could Christ be said to be decreed to be that which He was from eternity. That which is the proper object of decree or destination is something future; but that which was eternal cannot be imagined in any period of time to be future. Those who deny the eternal godhead of Christ, and date His Sonship principally from His resurrection, are great friends to this exposition. But the word also means to declare, show forth, or manifest, and this signification carries a most fit and emphatic opposition to “He was made of the seed of David,” which word imports the human constitution that did not exist before; but here, since He had from eternity been the Son of God, it is not said of Him that He was made, but only declared or manifested to be so.
2. “With power”; which, though some understand of the power of Christ, as it exerted itself in His miracles; yet here it signifies rather the glorious power of His Divine nature, by which He overcame death, and properly opposed to the weakness of His human nature, by which He suffered it (2 Corinthians 13:4).
3. “According to the Spirit of holiness.” Christ’s Divine nature--in opposition to His human nature (John 4:24; 1 Timothy 3:16). This qualification of holiness is annexed because Paul considers not the Divine nature of Christ, absolutely in itself, but according to the relation it had to His other nature. For it was His Divinity which consecrated and hypostatically deified His humanity.
4. “By the resurrection from the dead” cannot, as some suppose, mean the general resurrection, because that was future, and the apostle’s design here is to demonstrate the Divinity of Christ by something already done and known. It must be understood therefore of His personal resurrection.
II. Show that Christ’s resurrection is the greatest argument to prove Him the Son of God.
1. The foundation and sum of the gospel lies within the compass of this proposition, that Jesus of Nazareth is the Son of God. For that which properly discriminates the Christian religion from the natural, or Judaical, is the holding of Christ’s Deity. Of course Christ is capable of being called the Son of God in several respects.
(1) According to His human nature, He had no natural father, but was produced in the womb of His mother by the immediate power of God.
(2) For His resemblance to God; it being proper to call Him the Son of God, who does the works of God (John 8:44).
(3) From His having the government of all things put into His hands upon His ascension. Yet here we are to consider the principal cause of His being called so; which is from the eternal generation that He was the Son of God in such a way as proves Him to be God Himself.
2. Now this super eminent Sonship ought in reason to be evinced by some great and conclusive argument; and such a one is supplied by His resurrection.
(1) But you will naturally reply, How can His resurrection, which supposes Him to have been dead, prove Him to have existed from all eternity, and so could not die? The answer is that we must consider it with relation to His doctrine, affirming Himself to be the Son of God, and as the seal set to the truth of that doctrine.
(2) It is much disputed, whether Christ’s resurrection is to be referred to His own power, or only to the power of the Father. But it is not material, for both equally prove the same thing. If Christ raised Himself, He must have done it by virtue of a power inherent in another nature, which was Divine; if the Father raised Him, it still proves Him to have been God; for the Father would not have exerted an infinite power to have confirmed a lie.
3. The resurrection is the principal proof of His Divinity, The ordinary arguments are--
(1) From the nature of the things which He taught.
(2) The fulfilling of prophecies in His person.
(3) The wonderful works that He did, which were the syllogisms of heaven, and the argumentations of omnipotence.
(4) Yet over these Christ’s resurrection had a vast preeminence.
(a) All His miracles, supposing that His resurrection had not followed, would not have had sufficient efficacy, but His resurrection alone had been a full and undeniable proof. The former part of the assertion is clear from 1 Corinthians 15:14, 1 Corinthians 15:17. Now before Christ’s death all His miracles were actually done, and yet the apostle states that if He had not risen the whole proof of the gospel had been buried with Him in the same grave. And for the other part of the assertion, that appears upon two accounts; first, that the thing considered absolutely in itself, according to the greatness of it, did transcend all the rest of His works put together. Secondly, that it had a more intimate connection with His doctrine than any of the rest; and that not only as a sign proving it, but as enabling Him to give being to the things which He promised, viz., to send the gifts of the Holy Ghost upon His disciples to fit them to promulgate the gospel, and to raise up those that believed in Him at the last day, which are two of the principal pillars of His doctrine. But for Him to have done this not rising from the dead, but continuing under a state of death, had been utterly impossible.
(b) His miracles did not convince men so potently, but that while some believed, more disbelieved, and assigned them to some other cause, short of Divine power, either devilish or magical (Matthew 12:24). But now, when they came to His resurrection, they never attempted to assign any cause besides the power of God, so as to depress the miraculousness of it; but denied the fact, and set themselves to prove that there was no such thing; allowing, tacitly, that, if real, His Godhead could not be denied. Their scepticism in regard to the other miracles arose from--first, the difficulty of discerning when an action is really a miracle; i.e., above the force of nature, and therefore to be ascribed to a supernatural power. For who can assign the limits beyond which nature cannot pass? Then, secondly, supposing that an action is fully known to be a miracle, it is as difficult to know whether it proves the truth of the doctrine of that person that does it, or not. For it is by no means certain but that God may suffer miracles to be done by an impostor, for the trial of men, to see whether or no they will be drawn off from a received, established truth (Deuteronomy 13:1-5). But now neither of these exceptions take place against the resurrection. For first, though we cannot assign the determinate point where the power of nature ends, yet there are some actions that so vastly transcend it, that there can be no suspicion that they proceed from any power but a Divine. I cannot tell, e.g., how far a man may walk in a day, but I know that it is impossible for him to walk a thousand miles. Now reason tells us that the raising of a dead man to life in reference to the force of natural causes, that is not in their power to do it. And secondly, should God suffer a miracle to be done by an impostor, there is no necessity hence to gather that God did it to confirm His words; for God may do a miracle when and where He pleases. But since Christ had so often laid the stress of the whole truth of His gospel upon His resurrection, and declared to those who sought for a sign that it was the only sign that should be given to that generation, God could not have raised Him but in confirmation of what He had said and promised, and so have joined with Him in the imposture. In a word, if this does not satisfy, I affirm that its not in the power of man to invent, or of God to do any greater thing to persuade the world of the truth of a doctrine and he who believes not upon Christ’s resurrection from the dead would scarce believe, though he rose from the dead himself. (R. South, D. D.)
The resurrection of Christ: its evidence, and its bearing of the truth of Christianity
I. It was predicted beforehand. In the Old Testament (Psalms 16:9-10; Isaiah 26:19), and by Himself (Matthew 17:9; Matthew 17:23). This was not understood by His disciples (Mark 9:10; Luke 18:33-34), and they were slow to believe the tact when it took place (Mark 16:11-14; Luke 24:21; Luke 24:25).
II. It occurred under circumstances which rendered imposture impossible.
1. Christ’s death was real.
2. The story of the Jews in regard to the resurrection is absurd.
III. The idea of falsehood is contradicted by the whole life and conduct of the apostles.
IV. The existence of Christianity the proof of Christ’s resurrection. The institution of the Christian Sabbath is due to it, and all its other institutions and distinctive doctrines stand or fall with it. The resurrection is true, or Christianity is built on a lie, to believe which requires greater credulity than the resurrection itself. (T. Robinson, D. D.)
The secret of the success of Christianity
The theophilanthropist Larevellere Lepeaux had laboured to bring into vogue a sort of improved Christianity, which should be both a benevolent and rational religion. He went to Talleyrand, and, with expressions of mortification, he admitted that he had failed, for the sceptical age would have nothing to do with religion. “What, my friend, shall I do?” he mournfully asked. The wily ex-bishop and diplomat hardly knew, he said, what to advise in a matter so difficult as the improvement of Christianity. “Still,” said he, after a moment’s pause, and with a smile, “there is one plan you might try.” His friend was all attention, but there was a somewhat prolonged pause before Talleyrand answered. “I recommend to you,” he said, “to be crucified for mankind, and to rise again on the third day!” It was a lightning flash, and the reformer stood, at least for the moment, awed and reverent before the stupendous fact suggested by the great diplomat. (W. Baxendale.)
Christ’s Holy Spirit
The word “spirit” is in contrast with “flesh,” and “according to” (Gr.) limits the assertion “who was marked out as Son of God” to the spirit which animated the body born of David’s seed. Looking at the material of His body, we call Him David’s Son; looking at the Spirit which moved, spoke, and acted, in that human body, we call Him Son of God. In every man there is a mysterious linking together of two worlds, of that which is akin to the clay, and that which is akin to God; of flesh and Spirit. In Christ on earth we have this in a still higher degree. The flesh of Christ was ordinary flesh; and therefore needs no further description. But the Spirit which animated that flesh is altogether different from all other human spirits. Spirit of holiness is chosen, perhaps, to distinguish the personal Spirit of Christ from the Holy Ghost, and to show that it was a personal embodiment of holiness (Psalms 51:11; Isaiah 63:10), i.e., absolute devotion to God is a great feature of the nature of Christ, that of Him every thought, purpose, word, act, points directly towards God. This agrees with the words of Jesus about Himself (John 4:34; John 5:19; John 5:30; John 6:38). With Him holiness was not accidental or acquired; but was an essential element of His nature, arising directly from His relation to God (Romans 5:19). When we look at Christ’s body, we find Him like ourselves; and we call Him David’s Son; but when we look at the Spirit which moved those lips and hands and feet, which breathed in that human breast, and when we see that Spirit turning always and essentially to God, we declare Him to be the Son of God. (Prof. J. A. Beet.)