Biblical Research Studies Group-The Atonement (Kappurah)

(Continued-Chapter XII-The Atonement)

The Hebrews of the first century had the correct idea regarding Messiah's¹ being the son of God. As proof of this assertion one only has to turn to the oath administered by Caiaphas the high priest to Jesus when He was on trial. "And the high priest said unto him, I adjure thee [Jesus of Nazareth] by the living God, that you tell us whether you are the Messiah, the son of God" (Matt. 26:63, literal translation). This is an official attitude uttered by the high priest of the Jewish nation at the time. It reflects in the clearest manner their conception that the Messiah was to be the Son of God. To Caiaphas Jesus replied, "Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Henceforth ye shall see the son of man sitting at the right hand of power, and coming on the clouds of heaven" (Matt. 26:64). Martha, the sister of Lazarus, echoed this belief. "She saith unto him, Yea, Lord: I have believed that thou art the Christ [Messiah], the Son of God, even he that cometh into the world" (John 11:27). We see the same belief in Peter's reply to the Lord Jesus as to his opinion regarding Him. “And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God" (Matt. 16:16). These statements are sufficient to demonstrate the fact that the Jews of the first century believed the Messiah to be the son of God.

When John made the announcement that the time was fulfilled and the kingdom of heaven was at hand, the nation was stirred from center to circumference. The great masses of the people went out to hear John deliver his message and accepted baptism at his hands without question. In his instructions he urged them to look forward to the one who would follow him, and who was mightier than he. The unanimous reception accorded his preaching shows conclusively that the nation as a whole was expecting the appearance of the kingdom of God, which was to be ushered in, according to prophetic predictions, by the Messiah. Doubtless this expectation of His appearance at that time was based upon the prophecy of Daniel, chapter 9. Rabbi Abba Hillel Silver in Messianic Speculation in Israel has proved from rabbinical sources that the Jews of the first century were expecting Messiah to appear in the second quarter of that century.

From the facts just presented we see that the Hebrew people of the first century held the trinitarian position, which fact Matthew assumed as true and wrote accordingly; that they understood the person and nature of Messiah, that is, that He would be God in human form; and that they were expecting His advent at that time. The thing which they did not understand about Him was that he would suffer and die at his first coming. They were looking for a triumphant Messiah who would throw off the Roman yoke and establish Israel as the head of the nations. Why did they not expect him to suffer and die at that time as the prophets had foretold? The answer is to be found in the following facts: There are four types of messianic prophecy. The first presents Messiah's first coming only; the second deals with His second coming exclusively; the third blends a description of the two advents into a single picture as if all the items connected with both events were to transpire at the same time; and the fourth type gives the entire outline of Messiah's redemptive career, consisting of the two comings separated by the interval during which He, after being rejected by the nation, is seated at the right hand of the throne of God. The people as a whole refused to consider any of these four types except the second one. The reason for this attitude was that they were very eager for a Messiah who would come in glory and power and make them head of the nations. Unfortunately the people, engaging in much wishful thinking, became blinded to the facts as set forth by the prophets. Because of this attitude, the nation had not learned about His sufferings. Even disciples of Jesus were not expecting Him to suffer and to die not knowing that it was for this very purpose that He came into the world. After He had been with them three years teaching them the great fundamentals of the faith, He, only six months before His crucifixion, foretold his death at Jerusalem. Immediately Peter rebuked Him, saying that such a tragedy should never befall Him. From this time forward He instructed His disciples concerning His death. When He was crucified, the apostles gave up hope. When, however, He arose from the dead, they were begotten again "unto a living hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead" (I Peter 1:3). Israel's failure therefore to study all that the Word said in regard to Messiah's coming and redemptive work cause her to take only a partial view of things. This distorted conception of Him and His work caused her as a nation not to recognize but reject Him.

But to those who were familiar with the entire prophetic program as it is related to Messiah, Jesus and His work appeared the normal fulfillment of the messianic hope. They therefore, when the facts were brought before them, accepted Him and entered into the joy of salvation.

The Gospel of Matthew has indeed a marvelous message for the Jewish people today who know the Old Testament teaching concerning the Trinity and Messiah's true nature--that He is the God-man--and who know that, according to the prediction He was to appear in the first century of the Christian Era and suffer and die--to make atonement for sin. To those, however, who do not know these things, the gospel record of Matthew is more or less an enigma. It is therefore imperative for the Jew to know the correct teaching of the Old Testament on these points in order that he may understand the message of Matthew, which tells him specifically of the fulfillment of the Old Testament predictions in the person of Jesus of Nazareth.

b. Mark

According to the latest discoveries of New Testament scholars Mark was the first of our Four Records of the gospel. He wrote for the Roman people who liked men of action. Thus, Mark, led by the Holy Spirit, selected those materials from the deeds and teachings of Jesus which would present Him to his audience in the light which would appeal to their hearts.

If one will study carefully this record of the gospel, one will see that, though Mark is laying the emphasis upon what Jesus did and taught, he at the same time assumed His divine-human nature.

He said nothing about the virgin birth because the Romans were not particularly interested in that subject. To set forth the facts on this subject did not necessarily come within the scope of his purpose. It appears that it was his plan to present Jesus as a man of action, who dealt with the great masses of the common people. He therefore, after giving a brief statement of the ministry of John the Baptist, the herald of Jesus recounted His baptism and temptation. He then plunged into recording the Great Galilean Ministry. It was not therefore in Mark's plan to recount these matters. This short narrative of our Lord's life has an attraction for and gripping power upon the heart of the one who wishes to get the facts in the shortest space and time.

c. Luke

From all the facts it appears that Luke wrote especially for the Greeks, who loved beauty and grandeur. We could therefore say that he had as his ideal the presentation of Jesus as a perfect man. At the same time he recognized that Christ was more than human--that He was the divine-human Saviour of the world. In his prologue (1:1-4) he informed us why he undertook to write the life of Christ. Inasmuch as others had attempted to do so, he took it in hand to draw up an orderly narrative, starting from the first, so that Theophilus, the reader, might know, with certainty, the things wherein he had been instructed. In his statement Luke tells why he wrote, his plan of procedure, and his ultimate object in doing so. An examination of Mark shows that the writer observed the chronological order of events in the main. When one lays the Gospel of Luke beside that of Mark, one sees that Luke, in all his material which is parallel with Mark, is likewise chronological. But, since Luke informs us that it was his purpose to give a full and complete account, we see that he of necessity had to start with the birth narrative and the genealogy of Jesus, which he traces back to Adam. Thus chapters 1-3, in which these details are narrated, constitute an integral part of his record. To delete them, as some rationalists would have us do, would be to mutilate his document. He recounts the facts regarding the miraculous conception and virgin birth of Jesus, but does not tie it up with the Old Testament predictions as did Matthew. The reason for this is evidently that he did not have the Hebrews in mind. On the contrary he realized that he was writing to a people who were not conversant with the Old Testament. It would not therefore aid him in his purpose to preface his account of the virgin birth by quotations from the Hebrew Scriptures.

The miraculous elements found in the birth narratives of John the Baptist and Jesus are strengthened and confirmed by the data of the entire book. Since Jesus was begotten of the Holy Spirit and was born of the virgin, their portrait appearing throughout the body of the book is in perfect conformity with the data of chapters 1 and 2. Thus the cumulative evidence of Luke confirms indisputably the proposition that Jesus was God who entered the world by virgin birth.

Luke, the most beautiful book in the world, gives the fullest account of the gospel. In chapters 9:51-18:34 he presents a wealth of information that is not given by any of the other writers, and that supplements them greatly. His contribution to our knowledge of the events of the last week of our Lord's life is of inestimable value. No person can claim to be well-educated who is not familiar with this matchless account of our Lord's life.

d. John

A Close examination of the gospel according to John discloses the fact that he laid the emphasis upon Jesus as the God-man. It was necessary for him to supplement the material already appearing in the Synoptic Gospels by the matchless discourses and discussions which Jesus had with the Jerusalem authorities. Thus that which was lightly touched upon by the Synoptics is boldly asserted by John.

John assumed on the part of his readers a knowledge of Jesus in general as He went about Palestine engaged in His work among the masses. He therefore was led by the Spirit of God to record the matchless discourses especially, which Jesus delivered to the authorities at Jerusalem. These discussions of course naturally centered around the person of Christ and His claim to being the son of God. John therefore lays emphasis, not so much upon what Jesus did, as upon what He was. I therefore urge everyone to read this record most earnestly and prayerfully, asking the Lord to open his eyes that he might see the wonderful things set forth in the marvelous book.

In the writers of the Four Records of the gospel we have four independent witnesses, each of whom tells a consistent story. Each one presented Jesus from his particular point of view, using that material which would assist in reaching his objective. Naturally, in the testimony of independent, truthful witnesses, there are similarities and dissimilarities. They will agree in the main. At the same time there will be seeming differences, which however, when all the facts are known, will be seen to present a glorious harmony. All truth is in agreement. Whenever there is a seeming discrepancy, let us remember that it will disappear with a full knowledge of all the facts. The similarities therefore are due to the fact that all are speaking of the same person, Jesus, and the same events; the dissimilarities are in like manner due to the differences of the individuality and personal habits of each separate writer.

If the reader wishes to pursue this special phase of our investigation further and desires to see indisputable evidence that the Four Records of the life of Jesus are genuine, authentic documents, he should procure the volume, An Examination of the Testimony of the Evangelists, by Simon Greenleaf, late Dane Professor of Law in Harvard University and author of Treatise on the Law of Evidence. Greenleaf's book on evidences is recognized as the standard work on the subject. In the volume first mentioned above, our talented author brought all his legal and critical acumen to bear upon the subject and has shown, beyond a peradventure, that these records are genuine and that their testimony regarding Jesus and His life is unimpeachable. Should any of my readers have any doubts regarding these records, he owes it to himself to procure this volume by this eminent jurist and weigh the evidence for himself. To fail to do so is proof of insincerity, or of indifference, to the greatest subject in the world. May God enable each of us to seek the truth and to have courage to take our stand upon it when we find it.

4. The Sinless Character of Jesus of Nazareth

The Four Gospel records present Jesus as the peerless, spotless Son of God. They do so by the omission of any reference to mistakes or failures. According to John 8:46 Jesus challenged His enemies to point out a single sin of which He was guilty. They of course were unable to do so, the reason being that there were none to which they could call attention.

Though Jesus was human, was He like other men? My answer is, Positively not! The reason for my dogmatism rests upon several facts. The reader will recall that in discussing the expression, "the seed of the woman," I called attention to the fact that this term implied something unique about the Messiah. He would have a human mother but not a human father. This fact would make His fleshly nature entirely different from that of all who are born by natural generation, having both natural father and mother. Thus in the first Book of Moses we see that the foundation was laid by the Almighty himself for the doctrine that Messiah's nature would be entirely different from that of all other men. We have already seen that He was begotten by the Holy Spirit, according to unimpeachable historical records, and was born of the Virgin Mary. This fact was in fulfillment of the original prediction in Genesis 3:15--"And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed: he shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel." The one who believes these facts--both the original prophecy and the fulfillment--can understand in a measure what the Apostle Paul meant in Romans 8:3: "For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God, sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh." Messiah came "in the likeness of sinful flesh" in order that He might condemn sin in the flesh. His bodily appearance seemed to be the same as that of other men; nevertheless it was not. The likeness was simply in appearance only; His nature was entirely different. From this fact we see that Jesus of Nazareth was a unique character, differing from all other men.

Concerning our Lord the apostle again said, "Him who knew no sin he made to be sin on our behalf; that we might become the righteousness of God in him" (II Cor. 5:21). From this passage we learn that, though Christ had the human, fleshly nature, He did not know sin. This assertion means that Jesus did not have sin in the flesh. What is sin in the flesh? (Though this point was discussed in Chapters IX and X, it is necessary to glance at it in this connection.) Paul refers to it in Romans 7:17. Before making this statement, however, he in effect, said that, if he did that which he did not wish to do and at the same time failed to do that which he desired, it was no longer he who did it "but sin which dwelleth in" him. Sin might be called spiritual gravity which pulls all men downward. In Paul's saying that Christ knew no sin, he affirmed that He did not have sin in the flesh; nevertheless He became a sin offering in our behalf in order that we who accept Him might become the righteousness of God in Him.

In the Epistle to the Hebrews (I believe that Paul wrote this letter), Paul declared, "For such a high priest became us, holy, guileless, undefiled, separated from sinners, and made higher than the heavens; who needeth not daily, like those high priests, to offer up sacrifices, first for his own sins, and then for the sins of the people: for this he did once for all, when he offered up himself: (Heb. 7:26,27). In this passage the apostle asserted that Christ as a man was holy, guileless, undefiled, separated from sinners, and made higher than the heavens. The only construction that can be placed upon this passage is that our Lord was different from all other people. He entered the world differently, in that He was begotten of the Holy Spirit and born of the virgin. He did not have sin in the flesh; neither did He commit any sin.

The Apostle John in his first epistle (3:5) declared, "And ye know that he [Christ] was manifested to take away sins; and in him is no sin." These, and other passages which might be brought forth, prove conclusively that Jesus of Nazareth was unique in that, though He was a man, yet He was apart from all sin. He therefore stands on a plane infinitely higher than the one on which men live. Remember that John was inspired in his declaration that "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God … And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us (and we beheld his glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father), full of grace and truth … For of his fullness we all received, and grace for grace. For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son [God only begotten, according to the true text], who is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him" (John 1:1-18). Jesus was indeed the God-man, having a human nature free from sin and different from all men.

The psalmist in vision, seeing the Messiah, addressed Him:

Thou art fairer than the children of men;
Grace is poured into thy lips:
Therefore God hath blessed thee for ever (Ps. 45:2)

Here the psalmist sees Messiah in His perfect nature as the Man among men, and yet he cannot classify Him with the sons of men. He stands out from them although He is man. The facts which we have just discovered both in the prediction and in the fulfillment show why Messiah is this unique character. He was pure and holy in His very being--He never knew any sin. He was indeed the spotless Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the world.

5. Union of the Two Natures in Christ

We have already proved that Jesus of Nazareth was the God-man. The evidence is so very positive that there is no possibility of doubt for the one who receives the Bible as the inspired, inerrant Word of God. Many questions arise in the mind of the thoughtful reader regarding Him. Did He have an actual human body? Did a human spirit dwell therein? Was He a dual personality in that He had a human spirit and likewise the divine nature? Or did the divine Spirit take the place of the human? In order to clear up these puzzling questions, we must study the evidence.

a. Statements Regarding Christ's Human Nature

(1) His Body

That Christ had an actual human body is seen from John's telling us that the Word which was in the beginning with God and which was God became flesh and dwelt among us (John 1:1-14). Flesh, in this passage, refers to His actual body consisting of flesh and bones; for, we are told, this Word dwelt among us. These words can mean nothing other than that Christ had an actual, literal body. The same apostle informs us that he and his fellow-disciples had seen Christ with their own eyes, had heard Him with their own ears, and had handled Him (His body) with their own hands. Here is his testimony:

1 That which was from the beginning, that which we have heard, that which we have seen with our eyes, that which we beheld, and our hands handled, concerning the Word of life 2 (and the life was manifested, and we have seen and bear witness, and declare unto you the life, the eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us); 3 that which we have seen and heard declare we unto you also, that ye also may have fellowship with us: yea, and our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ: 4 and these things we write, that our joy may be made full (I John 1:1-4).

In the birth narrative, recorded in Matthew, chapter 1, and Luke, chapter 2, we are told that Jesus was born of the Virgin Mary who became impregnated by the over-shadowing power of the Holy Spirit. When these records are allowed to give their message, there can be but one conclusion: Jesus of Nazareth had an actual literal body.

When John wrote his epistles, the Gnostic heresies were disturbing the churches. One of these fanatical groups was known as the Docetic Gnostics, because they claimed that Christ only seemed to have a body, whereas, according to them, He did not. In order to combat this serious error, John made the following declaration: "Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: 3 and every spirit that confesseth not Jesus is not of God: and this is the spirit of the antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it cometh; and now it is in the world already" (I John 4:2,3). Note the clause, "every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: and every spirit that confesseth not Jesus is not of God …" The more literal, accurate translation of the Greek is, "every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God ..." The participle rendered, in the Revised Version, "is come" is in the perfect tense, indicating completed action. John therefore asserted that Jesus Christ, the Eternal Word, had come² in the flesh--had appeared in an actual, literal human body.

(2) His Spirit

That Jesus had a human spirit is quite evident from this statement: "And Jesus advanced in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and men" (Luke 2:52). According to this quotation, Jesus advanced in wisdom as well as growing in physical stature. His increase of wisdom and knowledge could only be in the realm of the human spirit. Additional proof is found in His statement to the three disciples: "My soul is exceeding sorrowful, even unto death: abide ye here, and watch with me" (Matt. 26:38). Notice the following record:

33 When Jesus therefore saw her weeping, and the Jews also weeping who came with her, he groaned in the spirit, and was troubled, 34 and said, Where have ye laid him? They say unto him, Lord, come and see. 35 Jesus wept. 36 The Jews therefore said, Behold how he loved him! (John 11:33-36).

From this passage we learn that Jesus groaned in His spirit and likewise wept. This language can refer to nothing other than a human spirit. We again get a glimpse of His human spirit in John 12:27: "Now is my soul troubled; and what shall I say? Father, save me from this hour. But for this cause came I unto this hour." From these statements we see that the Lord Jesus Christ had a human spirit as well as a physical body.

(3) The Man Christ Jesus

In John, chapter 8, we read of a controversy that the Jews had with our Lord. They became enraged against Him to the point that they were seeking to kill him. To them He declared, "40 But now ye seek to kill me, a man that hath told you the truth, which I heard from God: this did not Abraham" (vs. 40).

Jesus spoke of Himself as "a man" whom they were seeking to kill. If He were not a man in the proper sense of the word, he could not have used this language. What constitutes a man? Spirit and body. Jesus therefore spoke of Himself as a man. Since He did not qualify His statement, we must understand that He used this word with its regular meaning. On the day of Pentecost Peter preached to a vast multitude in Jerusalem, the account of which is found in Acts, chapter 2. Addressing his audience, he proclaimed,

22 Ye men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth a man approved of God unto you by mighty works and wonders and signs which God did by him in the midst of you, even as ye yourselves know; 23 him, being delivered up by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye by the hand of lawless men did crucify and slay; 24 whom God raised up, having loosed the pangs of death; because it was not possible that he should be holden of it (Acts 2:22-24).

The apostle spoke of Jesus as "a man approved of God." Paul in Romans 5:15 likewise designated him as "the one man, Jesus Christ." To Timothy he also declared, "For there is one God, one mediator, also between God and men, himself man, Christ Jesus ..." (I Tim. 2:5). From these utterances we see that the Apostles considered Jesus as a man--perfect in every particular.

The Scriptures present Jesus as a normal, human being, acting and reacting to people and situations as a man does. For instance, He became hungry (Matt. 4:2); and thirsty (John 19:28). After a long journey He was weary and sat at the well in Samaria (John 4:6). When he was in the boat, He fell asleep (Matt. 8:24). He looked upon a young man and loved him (Mark 10:21). Seeing vast multitudes of tired, weary people, He was moved with compassion toward them (Matt. 9:36). At Nazareth He looked upon His audience with righteous indignation and anger because He was grieved at the hardness of their hearts (Mark 3:5). Throughout his life He made supplications and prayers to God with tears and groanings (Heb. 5:7). As He approached the cross, His holy being naturally shrank from it and He prayed, "Now is my soul troubled; and what shall I say? Father, save me from this hour" (John 12:27). From these passages and many others which space forbids my quoting, we can see that our Lord was a man, perfect in every particular. About this proposition there can be absolutely no doubt.

b. Statements Regarding Christ's Divine Nature

We have already seen abundant evidence that Jesus of Nazareth was God in human form. In this connection therefore I shall refer only to John 1:1-18, which gives us what might be called the "biography of the Word." This Word was in the beginning--eternity prior to the creation of the universe--with God and was God. As we learn from the Old Testament, frequently He appeared to the patriarchs as "the angel of Jehovah." He was "God only begotten," who was the very embodiment of grace and truth. In this connection I shall ask the reader to study those classic passages which speak of His divine nature, such as Philippians 2:5-11; Colossians 1:14-17; and Hebrews, chapter 1. From these and many other passages, it is obvious that the man Christ Jesus was God in human form, the God-man.

Footnotes:

¹ Messiah in Hebrew means "anointed." But transliterated through the Greek into English it is Christ. "He findeth first his own brother Simon, and saith unto him, We have found the Messiah (which is, being interpreted, Christ)" [John 1:41]

² I John 4:2 must not be confounded with II John 7. The statement in the latter reference asserts, "For many deceivers are gone forth into the world, even they that confess not that Jesus Christ cometh in the flesh." The word "cometh" is the translation of the present participle, which is never used in referring to completed action in the past. It is timeless and must be interpreted in connection with the main verb. It usually indicates contemporaneous or prospective action. But the facts of each context must be consulted to determine its exact significance in a given case. In view of the meaning of this participle, it is quite evident that the apostle was speaking of the deceivers who deny that Jesus Christ will come back to the earth in that same body in which He went to heaven, as we read in Acts 1:10,11: "And while they were looking steadfastly into heaven as he went, behold two men stood by them in white apparel; 11 who also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye looking into heaven? this Jesus, who was received up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye beheld him going into heaven."

(Continued on the next page)