Menu•SiteMap |
Studies
Vital Truths: Eternal Life
and the Person of Christ
– G. A. Rainbow
If the enemy of our souls cannot detach us from Christ – and he has no power to do this – he will gladly engage us in spiritually-deadening human
reasoning on the most holy and vital matters, especially as they relate to Divine Persons.
Those thus occupied become puffed up with so-called knowledge or become depressed and avoid such matters altogether. In either case
- the spiritual edification and blessing, so much needed, is lost,
- relations between brethren are often adversely affected
- and – most serious of all – Divine Persons are robbed of the worship and honour due to them.
The holy matters covered on this page have been the objects of the enemy's continued attacks.
- Let us follow them up worshipfully in the Scriptures – in dependence on the Holy Spirit – and become built up and strengthened in the true knowledge of God.
G.A.R.
Page Top
Dear Gordon,
Remember what I was telling you over the phone yesterday regarding what Mr. Raven teaches, i.e., the Ravens believe that eternal life is something to be entered into and possessed later on in life. Basically, Mr. Raven
believes that eternal life was made a state or condition and not a new
life imparted.
Personally I believe that we possess eternal life right away, once we accept Christ into our life; but this is not so with the Ravens, i.e., they believe it comes in stages – rebirth, redemption, sealing of the Spirit do not come together at one time. Furthermore he believes that rebirth is the beginning of salvation and not the result of salvation.
Further they do not believe in the manhood of Christ, i.e., Christ was only man by condition, and was never man and God. Mr. Raven believes that Jesus was not personally man but man by condition. I believe that Christ was both perfect man and perfect God.
K—
Page Top
Dear K—,
I encouraged you to continue your contacts with the B—s, believing that they would be a help to you in your Christian growth, even though they might not share our beliefs on all matters. In my last letter I wrote:
- "Now I do not want to occupy you with the differences but something has to be said. Nor do I wish you to be at a disadvantage, through lack of information and background, if you were to discuss these matters with the B—s.
- "In fact, I believe that it would be in your best spiritual interest if you did not discuss such matters with them at this time. You could be put in a position of defending matters you do not fully understand; or, on the other hand, you could be influenced to accept things which you might not accept if you had all the facts. Surely, young believers should not be put in such a dilemma".
It now appears that these matters have been discussed in depth – whether brought up by you or the B—s. The portion of the recent letter L— showed to me suggests that you are being strongly influenced by information which you could only receive from others.
The allegations you report are a mishmash of misinformation: a confused mixture of fact and fiction, doctrinal error as to several matters and false charges against Mr. Raven and those who hold similar views. I am disturbed that:
- you should be propelled, in a partisan manner, into matters which have divided saints for years, and influenced against precious truth and ourselves by those whom we believed would care for you;
- you should apparently accept all that has been put before you without detailed inquiry from us as to what we really do hold and the Scriptural basis for it;
- L— and you are being put through considerable anguish and are apparently committed to opposite viewpoints.
I could send more information, but L— said that what I sent on eternal life had confused you. I do not understand this. What is most needed right now is prayerful and unbiased inquiry into the Scriptures.
For your own spiritual welfare, I believe you would be well advised to avoid merely accepting what you are told.
I went through a similar exercise as a young believer and found out that what I had read against Mr. Raven, and others, was either based on ignorance or was downright untruthful. I was even told by one, who held similar views as to those you are hearing, that as to brethren such as ourselves, "We don't even know if they are Christians!".
Now K—, I think you know us well enough, and would give us credit with seeking to honour the Lord Jesus in every way. L— and C— are both growing spiritually and finding their life in the things of God among us. Surely this could not be so if we held such errors as others charge us with.
As Nicodemus said to those who were eager to condemn the Lord, "Does our law judge a man before it have first heard from himself, and know what he does?", John 7: 51.
You are in our prayers daily for the blessing of God upon you.
Affectionately in the Lord Jesus, Gordon.
Page Top
Dear K—,
You say, "I just cannot fully understand why so many conditions should be set for the breaking of bread".
Actually it was the brethren with whom the B—s are in fellowship who took the step of setting conditions that refused and excluded Mr. Raven and those who accepted his teachings. The published letters of Mr. Raven show that he did all he could to keep the unity of the Spirit.
But I must stop for now, and will write as soon as possible on the "three main issues" which you mention.
Affectionately in the Lord Jesus, Gordon.
Page Top
Dear Gordon,
There are basically three main issues which I have difficulty in understanding, i.e.,
- Eternal Life
- The Manhood of Christ
- The Sonship of Christ
I am a little confused over the above mentioned issues and hope that you will be able to provide me with some answers.
With love in the Lord Jesus, K—
Page Top
Dear K—,
Some booklets which may be of help are enclosed:
- The Incarnation of the Son, by J. Boyd
- New Birth and Eternal Life, by J. Boyd
— See Memorabilia: James Boyd.
- Remarks on a pamphlet by A. J. Pollock entitled "The Eternal Son", by C. A. Coates.
A few statements in No. 1 and No. 2 could be more clearly expressed, but they should cause no difficulty. I read No's. 2 and 3 as a young man and received much help from them, especially from No. 3 written by C. A. Coates.
A review of the letters and ministry by JBS, FER, and JT, sent earlier, would also be valuable at this time.
I trust the comments which follow will be of assistance in your exercises.
Affectionately in the Lord, Gordon.
Page Top
Frederick Edward Raven (1837-1903)
Page Top
| ETERNAL LIFE |
|---|
Questions:
- Does the believer possess eternal life immediately upon accepting Christ as Saviour into his life?
- What about rebirth, redemption and the sealing of the Holy Spirit?
|
New birth precedes faith in Christ and is
- the initial sovereign work of the Spirit necessary to see and to enter the kingdom – to come under God's rule.
- It relates primarily to the Jews who rest in their ancestry according to flesh but applies to all God's people in every dispensation. John 3: 3-11; 8: 31-45.
- Being born anew does not of itself involve the reception of the Spirit. John 7: 37-39; Acts 8: 14-17; 19: 1-7.
- In this dispensation the full thought is being begotten of God. John 1: 12-13; 1 John 3: 9; 4: 7; 5: 1, 4, 18.
Eternal life is a heavenly thing, being born anew is an earthly thing. John 3: 12.
- Eternal life is linked with faith in Christ crucified and with faith in His Name. John 3: 14-16; 20: 30-31; 1 John 5: 13. Faith is God's gift. Ephesians 2: 8.
- "Possess" is unscriptural, implying that we have eternal life in ourselves, thus challenging the One "who only has immortality", 1 Timothy 6: 16.
- "God has given to us eternal life; and this life" is not said to be in us but "is in His Son", 1 John 5: 11-12.
- Eternal life – the life Jesus lived here in relation to the Father – was manifested to His disciples. 1 John 1: 2.
- It is not mere everlasting existence. For us it involves heavenly relationships with Christ and His own outside the natural order in another sphere.
- "For in that He has died, He has died to sin once for all; but in that He lives, He lives to God", Romans 6: 10.
- "We know that we have passed from death to life, because we love the brethren", 1 John 3: 14.
- Paul exhorts: "Lay hold of eternal life", 1 Tim. 6: 12.
- He also says it is the result of righteousness and practical holiness in contrast to the wages of sin, which is death. Romans 6: 19-23.
- Eternal life is also the blessing of the world to come. Psalm 133: 3; Matthew 25: 46.
Redemption is God's operation – through the death of Christ – to recover us righteously.
- We come into the value of redemption through faith in the blood of Christ. It is the basis for justification and forgiveness. Romans 3: 21-26; Ephesians 1: 7.
- The sealing of the Spirit follows faith in Christ. Ephesians 1: 13-14.
- Just as the blood was applied before the oil in the leper's cleansing in Leviticus 14, so we must first come under the value of the blood of Christ before we are suitable to receive the Holy Spirit.
- The Spirit indwelling the believer is "life", Romans 8: 9-11. "The water which I shall give him shall become in him a fountain of water springing up into eternal life", John 4: 14.
Page Top
| THE MANHOOD OF CHRIST |
|---|
Questions:
- Isn't Christ both perfect man and perfect God?
- If not, what is the significance of the crucifixion?
|
The high-sounding phrase "perfect man and perfect God" was
formulated by Gregory of Nazanius, so-called Archbishop of
Constantinople, in 380 AD –
- the same person who coined the blasphemous statement that "holy Mary is the mother of God".
- Both statements are without any Scriptural foundation.
- Let us "speak, not in words taught by human wisdom, but in those taught by the Spirit, communicating spiritual things by spiritual means", 1 Corinthians 2: 13.
If by "perfect" you mean sinless, that is clear. 2 Corinthians 5: 21; 1 Peter 2: 22; 1 John 3: 5.
- The creeds, however, allege the union of God and man in one Person.
- But Scripture states that a Divine Person came into Manhood. John 1: 14; Hebrews 10: 5.
- There could be no change to His Person. Deity was not added to a human
personality.
- Truly, in Person – His essential and eternal Being – He is God;
- in condition – "The Word became flesh" thus "taking His place
in the likeness of men" – He is Man. John 1: 14; Phil. 2: 5-11.
- Christ was the woman's seed, "come of a woman" but, nevertheless, "the holy thing". Genesis 3: 15; Galatians 4: 4-5; Luke 1: 35.
- He was, and is, a real Man and died as Man upon the cross, but He was
no mere man, no ordinary man, no man of fallen Adam's order.
Now, as risen, He is the head of a new order of man in
resurrection life. Romans 5: 12-21; 1 Corinthians 15: 45-50.
- It is only such a Man whose death on the cross could satisfy a righteous and holy God. Philippians 2: 5-11.
- Only such a Man could become the Firstborn of a heavenly order of man for God's pleasure. Colossians 1: 17-20; Hebrews 2: 9-12.
Throughout the centuries human reason has attempted to define the Incarnation in terms of the first man, and error has resulted.
"The second man" is "out of heaven", 1 Corinthians 15: 47.
- He is a Man of an entirely different order than the first earthly man, Adam.
- If He were not, He could not have been an acceptable sacrifice for
our sin and sins, and therefore He could not be our Saviour.
- "Confessedly the mystery of piety is great, God has been manifested in the flesh", 1 Timothy 3: 16.
- "Every spirit which confesses Jesus Christ come in flesh is of God", 1 John 4: 1-3.
- But "many deceivers have gone out into the world, they who do not confess Jesus Christ coming in flesh", 2 John 7.
- This is the Scriptural statement and test. We are to abide in "the doctrine of the Christ". 2 John 7-11.
Page Top
| THE SONSHIP OF CHRIST |
|---|
Question:
- Should we believe in the eternal Sonship of Christ?
|
The expression "eternal Sonship" is neither a Scriptural statement nor a Scriptural concept.
- Many believers, however, use it in a sincere, if misguided, desire to honour Him. They believe that somehow it protects the thought of His Deity but in fact it undermines it.
- It is unnecessary and unhelpful to resort to unscriptural terms to defend His Deity, a matter which is asserted unequivocally by the Spirit of God in many Scriptures. John 1; Colossians 1; Hebrews 1, etc.
The assumption of "eternal Sonship" stems from the Nicene creed, 325 AD, which erroneously describes the Lord as "begotten of the Father before all the ages".
- This statement developed into the assertion that He was "eternally begotten" – which no one can explain.
- The human mind has fallen into most serious error by attempting to define essential Divine relationships.
God has been pleased, as a result of the Incarnation – one Divine Person coming into Manhood, Philippians 2: 5-11 –
- to be known as Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Psalm 2: 7; Matthew 28: 19; John 1: 14, 18.
- Natural human reasoning has boldly attempted to carry back those relationships into preincarnate conditions.
- It is certain that our Lord Jesus is the Son in Manhood, and that He will remain Man and Son for eternity. 1 Corinthians 15: 24-28.
- There is, however, absolutely no Scriptural basis for saying that He was the Son before the incarnation.
John always presents the Son as subject to the Father, sent by and doing the will of the Father.
- In this connection our Lord says, "My Father is greater than I", John 14: 28.
- This is proper to sonship, but the notion of "eternal Sonship" necessitates imputing these subordinate features to our Lord when in the condition or form of God – prior to the Incarnation.
- This is a serious assault – perhaps unwitting – on our Lord's full and essential Deity and ranks Him as inferior to the Father in His essential Being. This cannot be accepted!
Some fear that they will be robbed of their appreciation of Christ if "eternal Sonship" is not held.
- Instead, perhaps innocently and certainly unintelligently, they are thinking and speaking of the Lord Jesus in a derogatory manner.
- It is He that is being robbed by them of the glory and honour due to Him from His people.
This should weigh far more heavily with the proponents of "eternal Sonship" than a merely sentimental attachment to a purely humanistic concept of the Deity.
G.A.R.
Page Top