« PreviousContinue »
(6) could have been conferred on him and he have been made Lord over all (7); nor could all power in heaven and on earth have been transferred to him (8); if he were not (9) in so close a union with the Creator and Lord of all things, that he could, in exercising the government of the world, avail himself of the infinite perfections of the Logos, as his own.
I. “It is the Spirit, or that invisible Being, which had previously been with God in heaven, which maketh alive and giveth salvation. John 6: 63, the flesh (the human nature without this Spirit) could profit nothing (toward giving life to the world). In him dwell the entire divine perfections visibly.” II.
Christ the promised Messiah.—The exaltation of Jesus placed the entire signification of the name “Son of God,” in a clear light. By his exaltation, Jesus was designated as the Son and Ruler over all vios Jeov ev duvapei Rom. 1 : 4; he became like his Father in dominion and honour, and in this respect also was shown to be the most perfect image of his Father. Both in Acts 13: 32 and in Heb. 1: 4 &c. the words of the Psalmist (2: 7), vios uov El ov, Ejw onu epov yeyevunxa 0, “Now I have made thee mine image in reference to the actual dominion over all things,” “now thou hast become my Son, xangovouos navtov," are referred to the exaltation of Christ. And in as far as the title “ Son of God” embraces the idea of the exaltation over all things, even over the angels, so far Christ became Son of God only after he had accomplished the work of atonement. In the term
“ Christ” [the Anointed Wa], the idea of likeness to God in point of dominion is also included. This is evident even from the pas
1 Commentary on
sage Psalm 2: 2, to which we are to trace the origin of the word Christ ; in connexion with v. 6, 7, “I have anointed thee my King--thou art my Son; to day have I made thee such.” At that time when Jesus became “ Lord over all” the full import of this name was displayed (Acts 2: 36). Precisely then when he was seated at the right hand of God, did it become most clearly evident that he was the Christ, the Son of God, see Matth. 26: 63, which verse shows the fallacy of the statement made in Schmidt's Bibliothek, “that those passages of Matthew which he has in common with Mark and Luke, contain no evidence of the higher power and dignity of the Messiah.” (See Luke 22: 69. Mark 14: 62.) But Christ is not only Lord, but specifically the Christ, the Messiah, i. e. that very Lord Acts 2:36. Luke 2 : 11, whom God had in general terms predicted by Moses as the future king. In John 5: 46, Jesus himself says—“Moses wrote of me;" and Luke says, ch. 24: 27, 44, “and beginning at Moses, he expounded unto them the things concerning himself,” and “he said unto them, all things must be fulfilled which are written in the law of Moses concerning me." And Paul (Acts 26:22) addresses Agrippa thus: “Having therefore obtained help of God, I continue -saying none other things than those which the prophets and Moses did say should come. Rom. 3: 21. If the prophecy in Gen. 3: 15, refers, in general, to a posterity pop of the woman, which should achieve a victory over the serpent or Satan ; and if the predictions in 22:18. 26: 4. 28: 14, refer, in general, to a posterity of Abraham, of Isaac, and of Jacob, through which all nations should be blessed: still the reference is to that particular individual who was subsequently announced as Christ. From the time of David, the Lord had predicted his coming by the prophets. Acts 2: 30. 13: 23, 22. Luke 1: 32. Heb. 1: 5. Psalm 2: 7. 2 Sam. 7: 14. And he was really looked for as the person who “ was promised” by the prophets. John 7:42. . 1: 46, we have found Jesus of whom Moses and the prophets did write Luke 2: 38, and spake to all them that looked for redemption in Israel. Matth. 11: 3, 5, art thou he that should come, or shall we expect another ? Josephus tells us that the Jews had derived their expectation of a Messiah, from their sacred books; and Tacitus says : an opinion was entertained by most persons, that according to the writings of the priests, at this very time, the East would prevail, and that chieftains from Judea would acquire the government of affairs. Jesus himself gives similar testimony. All things (says he) must be fulfilled which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms concerning me.-How then shall the scriptures be fulfilled, that thus it must be? Luke 24: 27, 44-47, 18: 31. 22: 37. Matth. 26: 54. Mark 9: 12. And 6 after his resurrection Jesus himself explained to them the prophecies concerning him in the Old Testament. Luke 24 : 45, 44. It is, therefore, on the authority of Jesus, that the apostles made such earnest and solemn declarations on this subject. God had before announced by the mouth of all his prophets that Christ should suffer—The spirit of Christ which was in them, testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ and the glory that should follow-we announce unto you glad tidings, the promise which was made unto the fathers. Acts 3: 18. 1 Pet. 1:11. Acts 13: 23, 32. In Matth. 26: 63, Jesus solemnly declares before the sanhedrim, that he is the Christ, the promised Messiah ; and in v. 16, 17, he declares that Peter's conviction of his Messiahship was not a mere human opinion, but derived by instruction from God. In Luke 24: 25, he declared it foolishness to doubt, that, according to the prophets, the Christ must enter on his glory; and in John 17: 3, the reception of Jesus, whom God sent as the Messiah, is declared to be eternal life. And in v. 20, 31, John declares that his chief design is to persuade his readers that Jesus is the Christ. See 1 John 2: 22. 1 Cor. 15: 1–4. Hence it is impossible, without offering violence to the authority of Jesus himself, to deny that the Old Testament contains prophecies and various prefigurations of him. Köppen remarks, “ Jesus and his apostles very frequently declare that he is the promised Messiah; but this necessarily includes the declaration that the Old Testament speaks of Jesus as the Messiah."2 And Herder in his Letters on the Study of Theolo
1 Vol. 1. p. 63. In the Christology of Matthew. 2 Comment, de protevangelio.
1 In the Comment on Heb. 10: 7, the words eV Kepahidi Bißhlov yeypantal, it is written in the volume of the book, are explained thus: "In the Mosaic writings, in as far as they treat of sacrifices, which were appointed as types of a future propitiatory sacrifice (Rom. 3: 21).” On the passage John 19: 36, see supra, Ø 13. Ill. 8.
2 Pluribus persuasio inerat, antiquis sacerdotum literis contineri, eo ipso tempore, fore, ut valesceret Oriens, profectique Judaea rerum potirentur. Histor. lib. v. ó 13. See Diss. de notione regni coelestis, $ 1.
says, “ the apostles and evangelists were certainly in earnest when they quoted the passages from the Old Testament and applied them to Christ; they found him predicted every where in the Old Testament, and declared unhesitatingly that of him bear all the prophets witness.' Jesus himself on several occasions refers all Scripture (the Old Test.] to himself, and thus regards the Old Test. in general as a witness for his cause. I cannot see how it is reasonably possible to pervert these passages, or to blunt their edge; or especially, how any one can charge Jesus or his friends with a designed, ingenious accom
1$ 13. Ill. 7–12. comp. Michaelis Dogmatik, Ø 122–128. Kleuker de nexu qualis constat inter utrumque divinae constitutionis foedus prophetico, p. 80.
2 Bible a work of divme wisdom, Pt. 1, p. 235. 3 B. 18, 21, p. 303, 349–352.
modation of these passages, the very idea of which is repelled by their unlearned simplicity. On the contrary, every difficulty is removed when, agreeably to his open declarations, we receive him as the sum total, as the ultimate spiritual end of the whole Old Testament, and regard his kingdom as the promise given to the fathers, and developed by the prophets more or less remote, with more or less light and clearness."
Hence we see the error of those who will admit of no real prophecies concerning Christ, in the Old Testament; and who either have recourse to the opinion that Jesus and his apostles accommodated themselves to the erroneous ideas of their hearers when they spake of prophecies relative to the Messiah, or that they merely intended to apply these passages of the Old Testament to the history and person of Jesus, and thereby meant nothing more than that these texts suited the particular events and the person of Jesus. This last hypothesis Eckermann has attempted to apply throughout the whole of the New Testament.
III. In reference to his divine nature it is impossible that Christ could have been raised to a higher dignity, or be made Lord of the universe, and be seated at the right hand of God (Ephes. 1: 20). The power over all things, could not then be first given him; in short, he could not then first be made Lord by the will and power of God. Acts 2: 36. Heb. 1: 4. On the contrary, we honour (Phil. 2: 11) and acknowledge the supreme dominion of God, when we really acknowledge as Lord the man whom the free purpose of God raised to that state.”
IV. Exaltation of Jesus.-Acts 2: 23. Phil. 2 : 9, God
1 Theol. Beitraege, Vol. I. No. 3. On the works relative to the prophecies of the Messiah, see Meyer's Hermeneutica of the Old Test. Pt. II, p. 468-502.
2 Commentary on the Hebrews, p. 9. Dissert. de notione regni coelestis, Note 71. On the Design of the Gospel of John, p. 458, 507.