HORIZONED
BY RESURRECTION
Declared
to be
the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the
resurrection from the dead. ROMANS 1:4.
These words constitute the second part of a double
statement concerning one Person. That Person is indicated by a reference
preceding the statement and by an explanation following it. The reference you
will discover in the beginning of vs. 3: ”concerning His Son.” The explanation
is contained in the closing part of vs. 4: “even Jesus Christ our Lord.”
Between this reference and this explanation we find the twofold statement
concerning the Person thus referred to.
Born of the
seed of David according to the flesh. Declared to be the Son of God with power,
according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead. If for
purposes of illumination, I may take from each of the two parts of the words
necessary to discover the simple contrast, we have this result. Paul says
concerning this Person Whom he first designates “Son of God” and finally refers to as “Jesus Christ our Lord,” two things. First, according to the flesh
He was “born of the seed of David.”
Secondly, according to the spirit He was “declared
to be the Son of God with power . . . by the resurrection from the dead.”
The first part of the apostolic declaration is simple and needs neither
argument nor explanation, “of the seed of
David, according to the flesh.” The second part of the declaration was
sublime and it was impossible, if I may thus interpret the method of the
apostle, for him to write the second part without some qualification. “Of the seed of David according to the
flesh,” is a perfectly simple and natural declaration; but when he turns to
the other side, “according to the
spirit,” he has to qualify, “according
to the spirit of holiness”; or even more accurately as I think, “according to a holy spirit.” “According to
the flesh” He was of the seed of David, and Paul knew that no argument of
that fact was needed. But, “according to
the spirit,” the essential matter in that human life, there was a
difference. The spirit of this Person was holy. All the values of this
differentiation are discovered when we reach the 8th chapter of the epistle.
Therein the apostle is careful to distinguish between flesh and spirit in every
life. In flesh, and in spirit, are the two sides of every human life. They were
both present in the life of Jesus. His flesh was “born of the seed of David.” His spirit must be described. It
stands alone. There never was such another. It was a holy spirit, the spirit of
holiness. In flesh He was absolutely of our humanity. In spirit also, and yet
different. Numbered with transgressors, separated from sinners. In flesh, of
our humanity. In spirit essentially the same, but in character different, holy.
The evidence of His being of the seed of David was abundant and convincing. The
evidences of His being the Son of God were abundant but not convincing. The
evidence did not convince because those who observed were incapable of judging,
for they were spiritually blind. The men who looked at Jesus in the days of His
flesh were quite capable of judging material things, fleshly things; they could
trace genealogies, and discover racial traits; “according to the flesh, born of the seed of David.”
According to the spirit, they said He was a
gluttonous man and a wine-bibber, the friend of publicans and sinners. They did
not know Him. They could not be sure of Him. The evidence of Divine Sonship
were those of holiness. His thoughts, His words, His deeds, all of them were
the vehicles through which the essential and awful purity of God sounded and
shone upon the ways of men. “When we
shall see Him there is no beauty that we should desire Him.” (Isa 53:2). Not that He was devoid of
beauty, but that men were so blind they could not see it. The evidences of
fleshly relationship were abundant and convincing. The evidences of Divine
relationship were abundant, but not convincing, because men had lost their
spiritual vision and were incapable of judgment. If you object to that interpretation,
how do you find it in the world today? Is the man of the world of today capable
of judging of the beauty of holiness? Is not the sanctified life still the
sport of the worldly man? If you dare to season your daily speech with the salt
that tells that you have traffic with eternity, the worldly man sees nothing
beautiful in it. He shrugs his shoulders. That is the new method of
persecution, seeing that the rack has gone out of fashion. He smiles, and
perhaps holds you in contempt. Some of you hold the saints in contempt because
you are blind and cannot discover the beauty of holiness. How shall this Man be
proven the Son of God as well as Son of man, seeing that the holiness of His
spirit does not appeal to men? “Declared
to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the
resurrection from the dead.” It is that declaration of the text which we
are now to consider. In order to do so, confining ourselves entirely to this
half of the great statement concerning the Person, we must carefully understand
what this thing is that the apostle wrote. May I change the phrasing, not that
I can improve upon it, but that sometimes by a change of words we are
introduced to the meaning which we miss by very familiarity with the older formula.
So I read the text thus, “Who was distinguished,”
and that word must not be taken in the general sense in which we speak of a man
as being distinguished. “Who was marked
out as the Son of God with power through the means of the resurrection of dead
ones?” May I further change the text, this time not by translation in other
words, but by paraphrase: “The
resurrection of dead ones set Him with powerful effect upon the horizon as the
Son of God.” I do not suggest that that is translation, so those of you who
are reading from the Greek New Testament need not be anxious. I do not intend
it as interpretation. Those of you who are familiar with the passage in the
Greek will discover that I have dared to take a Greek word and Anglicize it.
What is this word “declared,”
“distinguished,” “marked out?” It is the word from which we have derived
our word horizon. What is the horizon? The boundary. What is a boundary? The
end? By no means. It is the beginning. If only I could transport you to the
sea, you would understand my text. Standing on the land’s last limit there
stretches the sea with its movement and its rhythm, its music and its laughter.
What beyond? The horizon, the boundary. Is that the end? That is the beginning.
Everything between me and the horizon I can comprehend. The mystery begins
where the horizon bounds my vision. It is limitation. The limitation is only
the limitation of my vision, not of the essential fact. According to flesh,
everyone can read the story, “born of the
seed of David.” According to the spirit, “horizoned as the Son of God by the resurrection of dead ones.”
Resurrection demonstrated the essential truth concerning Him. Apart from the
resurrection, He is “born of the seed of
David”; a great and gracious fact, and no one imagines I am undervaluing
it. My heart exults with the Apostle John who handled Him. I am glad that men
of my friends and family two thousand years ago did actually lay hands upon the
warm flesh of the Man of Nazareth. That, however, is not all. That is not the
final fact. If you make that the final fact, your Christianity will be a
diminishing quantity, losing all its essential virtue and all its power of
victory; until presently you will put Him by the side of Confucius, Buddha, and
the rest; a sorry spectacle over which angels might weep. There is something
else. He is the Son of God according to the spirit of holiness; and He is
demonstrated as such, horizoned as such, flaming out as the sun upon the
horizon, and rising to meridian glory, by way of the resurrection. That is the utmost
value of the resurrection. The resurrection is the unanswerable demonstration
of the profoundest fact concerning the Christ, that, namely, of His Divine
Sonship.
No comments:
Post a Comment