The Son of Man

J. N. Darby.

 

<42051E> 296

 

(Notes and Comments Vol. 2.)

 

The use of the term "Son of Man" is worthy of closer remark. Christ never calls Himself "the Christ" save to the woman of Samaria, outside Judaism; John 4. He confesses it before the chief priests, that He is the Christ the Son of the Blessed, but then His own testimony is "Moreover" (plen) "I say unto you, Henceforth" (not hereafter) "ye shall see the Son of Man sitting on the right hand of power" - so Stephen saw Him (but that was a vision for one "full of the Holy Ghost") and yet standing - and "coming in the clouds of heaven," i.e., they would from that out only see Him in that way. He calls Himself "Son of Man" continually - it is His name of predilection in the first three Gospels - in John more frequently "Son of God." In John it is used as to the place He has already taken, for He comes into the world, and the Jews are rejected, and His Person as divine while on earth and as to the Cross, see chapter 3; in chapter 4 for His Body given for the life of men and ascending up - Christ on earth; in chapter 5 judgment given to Him because He is such.

Men never call Him "Son of Man," save Stephen as seeing Him in heaven, which after what He said to the Jews is very significant, as is His not being yet set down. Save these cases, the term is used as suffering - as Lord of all - forgiving - in grace seeking and saving what was lost - or coming again in power and glory; as a general rule suffering and rejected, or coming again in glory.

In the Old Testament the name is only used in respect of future glory and power, in Daniel 7 and Psalm 8. The "made a little lower than the angels" of the latter is used in Hebrews as being in order to be able to suffer death.

The term is used in Revelation, one like unto the Son of man," as judging in the midst of the Churches, and as coming in the clouds of heaven. In one Psalm (80) He is viewed as the future Deliverer of Israel, who is to come.

The "suffering" point, as connected with the term, is very clear in John 12. It is emphatically stated there. In Luke 9 we have it distinctively in contrast with the Christ, and so that the whole blessing is on new ground, and repeated as the grand practical needed truth, verses 43, 44. The remark made above, which is already evident from John 1: 51, reading "henceforth," shows the different use of it in John. Hebrews 2 takes it up most distinctly in doctrine, and unfolds most fully its connection with the interest He takes in men (the seed of Abraham) as such; they are "all of one." Ephesians 1 connects it with the Church or the Church with Him; and 1 Corinthians 15, the bringing about the result by resurrection. And this explains the after-subjection of the Son, for He remains - infinite grace - Son of man; His personal glory and headship remaining, but His kingdom, rule and authority given up, as heretofore seen.

297 This explains the character of John's Gospel also, where the divine nature of Christ and His oneness with the Father is so clearly stated - having taken already the place of Son of man, He is always divine, but always recipient and dependent. It is not the Kingdom but the Person - a divine one - the Son one with the Father, but the Son of man who has taken the subject place, as we have often seen, all through. This is most important in itself, and for the understanding of John's Gospel, and most blessed. The whole of chapter 17 brings it out very strikingly, where He brings the disciples into His own place, and having brought the Son into Man, He brings men to be sons with Him - by Him, but with Him. This is very lovely. And this is His eternal place consequently, only then glorified of course, as He demands in chapter 17, "Glorify thou me."

His Person comes out strikingly in such passages as "The Son of Man who is in heaven." But although John distinctly uses it in the way and for the reason mentioned in connection with His Person - the Man down here, yet "The Son of man who is in heaven" - "That meat . . . which the Son of man shall give unto you: for him hath God the Father sealed" - yet the death and future glory are not lost sight of in connection with it, only it holds fast the Person as a present thing. We have it in chapter 6, and we have it when the Greeks come up, adding that the corn of wheat must fall into the ground and die or it abode alone. "The Son of man must be lifted up"; and this goes further than "The Son of man must suffer many things, and be rejected of this generation." In John it is directly connected with God - His nature and Christ's work - yet on the part of man towards God, the other side following under the title of "Son of God." But in John it has a most blessed and revealing character, which is indeed the gist of the whole Gospel, adding "The other Comforter."

298 The absolute unity of His Person, though in a taken nature, is seen in chapter 6: 62, as well as in chapter 3: 13.

It is evident "Son of man," though the predicted, miraculous descendant of Adam by the woman everywhere, is used in the three Gospels in contrast with the Christ (of Jewish promise) according to the promise of Psalm 8 and Daniel, showing He was to suffer, and not then take the place of Psalm 2, but suffer as Son of man in a more dispensational way; whereas in John it is His Person - He who could say "Father," could say it and did say it as Man - a present thing, as remarked before but not developed. See chapter 1: 49, and then verse 51 as following it.

In John the "Son of Man" is first seen in chapter 1 with the Angels of God serving Him as their special object. Then He is "Son of man who is in heaven," but came down from it. He "must be lifted up, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life." This "lifting up" is always in connection with the Son of man.

Then chapter 8, "When ye have lifted up the Son of man, ye shall know that I am he." So chapter 12, "How sayest thou: The Son of man must be lifted up, who is this Son of man?"

After chapter 3, chapter 6 next takes up the Son of man. There He is the one "sealed of the Father," but again "come down from heaven" - His flesh and blood to be eaten (to go up where He was before). If "lifted up" He was to draw all men. This "lifting up" was clearly His death, but His death as "lifted up," and this word seems to me of importance - His death as rejected and cast out of the earth, but thereby connected with heaven, and the Object of faith to the earth, i.e., to men on it as consciously lost then, but no longer of it. Hence connected with the Son of man, and contrasted by the people with Christ (Messiah) abiding as they thought ever, according to the law; as "Christ" and "Son of man" are contrasted in themselves in Luke 9.

"The Son of man must be lifted up" is associated with heavenly things, as with the serpent stricken to death in John 3. Israel even must be born again for earthly promises according to the prophets - for the setting up of the kingdom, of course the Gentile; but loving the world is connected with the Son of man being lifted up, "If I be lifted up, I will draw all men unto me." And it is on the rejection of the Jews, as such, for rejecting His word, that He says "when lifted up" they would "know it was he." When too late they would know whom they had rejected. So it was with the altar - it was not in the camp but in the court of the tabernacle, at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation (of meeting). only in chapter 8, He is the Word, I Am, whom they have rejected. It was one coming from the camp towards the Tabernacle (Heaven) who found the altar the first thing heavenward - so Christ on the Cross, lifted up, the Witness, dying, that we were dead in sin, but find it in grace in a sacrifice for sin. We go further - we enter into the holiest through the rent veil, but here was the meeting place, but it as having done consequently with the world (the first Adam) as Christ had there done with it - He was lifted up from the earth and all became heavenly but judgment, and that is so to us.

299 He is "lifted up" in chapter 3, in connection with dying men, like the brazen serpent, and as introducing to heavenly things; He is "lifted up" in chapter 8 in connection with the utter rejection of the Jews; He is "lifted up" in chapter 12, drawing all men unto Him - the wide sphere of application here below - all this by His death. These are the only cases of the use of the word regarding Christ.

Matthew 12 gives us the turning point very completely. The Pharisees and Sadducees who composed the Jews (and all religious men, ritualism, and self-righteousness, and infidel rationalists) are rejected - no sign given but a rejected Christ in the grave (Jonas), when it would be too late to be connected with the nation in flesh. In a word, death is brought in and the new resurrection state, but death to man and all hopes in man - the fig-tree is cursed. Then chapter 16, the Lord takes His own place in connection with man, not Judaism - "Whom do men say that I, the Son of man, am?" Peter then owns Him as "The Christ, the Son of the living God." As "the Christ" He is to be proclaimed no more, but still He was the accomplishment of promise - the Seed of David according to the flesh, and Son of God, of the living God (proved in resurrection). This confession of Peter is the whole Gospel, as to the Person, stated in the beginning of Romans 1 - practically in 2 Timothy 2: 8.

The Son of God, accomplishment of promise as the Christ, the Son of David, brings in life in divine power so as to be able to triumph over death. He goes down, as Man, into the full effect as to man's estate of sin, and Satan's power, breaks out in victory, and puts man into a new place beyond it all. The Son of man "made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death," is the Son of the living God in power. on this the Church is built by Christ - the living stones added to the Living Stone. Secondly, as a distinct matter, the keys of the Kingdom - not of the Church, there are none - are given to Peter; the human-built, responsible Church is Paul's work, 1 Corinthians 3, but that is not our subject here. Hence from this point He begins to tell them the fact of His rejection, and death, and resurrection - the wholly, absolutely new footing on which man was set; besides, afterwards, the Son of man should come in His glory - but this is chapter 17.

300 We learn that flesh may keep our state below the revelation we have really received, so as to be an adversary to Christ, for in minding earthly things we are adversaries to Christ, enemies of His Cross - for if we follow the Son of man, the Cross is the path He trod and we tread. Paul stood and started on this ground, "If one died for all, then were all dead," and he knew no man, not even Christ, after the flesh. It is not therefore a passing, as often noticed, from Judaism to the Church, but a passing from man in the flesh to a resurrection manhood through the Cross and death. The Christ-hood living connection with Israel, according to the flesh, being thus gone, and the Son of man taking up man's case, entering into and putting man into a wholly new condition in resurrection beyond death and Satan's power. That, as to the Son of man - but, on His being the Son of the Living God, the Church also is built, His then Christ-hood being then broken down, but this is in connection with the wider place of Son of man. The Church is not built upon His being "Son of man," but on the Son of man being the "Son of the Living God." The "Son of man" is individual and general - its public result and state is in chapter 17, Luke 9, etc.

Note though what is called "The eternal Sonship" be a vital truth, or we lose the Father sending the Son, and the Son creating, and we have no Father if we have no Son, so that it lies at the basis of all truth, yet in the historical presentation of Christianity the Son is always presented as down here in servant and manhood estate, as all through John, though in heaven and one with the Father. "This" - this Person - "is my beloved Son" - He who was as Man there, yet there. In Matthew 3 the whole Trinity is revealed, and we may say for the first time fully. Wonderful grace it is! Hence "No! not the Son," has no difficulty; Mark 13: 32.

Righteousness and Intercession

<42052E> 302

As to the righteousness of God and intercession, the righteousness stands thus: the Glory of God is fully revealed in the face of Jesus Christ - there is no veil now; We have to walk in light as He is in the light. In a word all the glory is revealed and all must be according to its requirements. We are in His presence or out of it. Hence, when we speak of sin, we say, "We have sinned and come short of the glory of God."

It is then according to the nature, fully revealed character of this glory, we have to stand before God. But Christ on the Cross has not only acted consistently with it, as His life even could not do (because He was not yet made sin) though perfectly consistent with it as life, but this glory was there made good. All that God was in glory was made good in a way that would have had no place if sin had not been there - it was in that it was brought out. "Hereby know we love, because he laid down his life for us."

So the divine Majesty was shown - "It became him for whom are all things and by whom are all things in bringing many sons to glory to make the Captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings" "though he were Son." Nothing could show the irrecusable requirements of His Majesty, as the sufferings of the Son when He took this place. So of His righteous nature, and judgment against sin; the Cross gives rise to the same thought. It is made good, as it could nowhere else be. So His truth. "The wages of sin is death." All that God is morally, and note, all there in respect of sin, so as if sin had not been there, they could not have been displayed and glorified, and the Son as Man made sin to this effect. Hence we read, "Now is the Son of Man glorified, and God is glorified in him." This very glory of God is made good - realised in that which brings us to Him. And now we behold with open, i.e., with unveiled face, the glory of the Lord - Man sitting at the right hand of God - God's righteousness displayed in it. And we, so to speak, it being done for us, and we being in Him, are the making good of the glory of God in righteousness. The sin was the only part we, as our part, had in it; but this, as we have seen, was needed to display it in all its own glory.

We stand in the Universe those in whom the glory and righteousness of God are displayed. So actually the glory given to Jesus will be given to us, and when He appears, we shall appear with Him in glory.

303 Now the intercession of Christ is founded on this being our place. We stand before the glory, in righteousness, in and through Him we are it. But our hearts have to be brought into association with this, in communion. For this Christ, who is that eternal life which was with the Father, is our life, and there is a nature, i.e., we are capable of enjoyment, for we have derivatively the nature, as we have before God the righteousness which is to be enjoyed in love. But we fail. "If any man sin" - now Jesus Christ the righteous is our Advocate according to the excellency of that which places us in that communion. And the soul is exercised by grace and love, in grief as to that which ought to have been joy. But the same affections are in play about the same object - first, as sense of loss and pain, but bringing to the sense of the blessedness of what we have got out of communion with, and attaching us to it intelligently as precious. What led us away was really not valuing it, estimating it, i.e., that into which we were brought we were lightly separated from, not feeling the loss or the value in possessing it, but when separated as to condition of soul, our springs of joy are dried up in the new nature. What has made us lose it is purged, and the same affections are brought into play in grief which ought to have been in joy of communion. When the soul is brought to this, i.e., purified from what made it light about it, and communion valued, it is restored with increased fixedness and capacity of communion.

But what grace is this which has brought us to God Himself! I here only note that the advocacy is exercised according to the perfection of divine communion into which we are brought. So even of priesthood, "Such a high priest became us, holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and made higher than the heavens."

The same truth is brought out as to our future condition and present realisation of it, in Jude: "Now unto him that is able to keep you from falling, and to present you faultless before the presence of his glory with exceeding joy." So in 1 Peter: "In whom, though now ye see him not, yet believing, ye rejoice with joy unspeakable and full of glory."

Again what is very immediately in connection with this - Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father. All He was involved this resurrection. It was His glory to do it, as Christ had glorified Him, or rather His glory did it - was made good and displayed in it.

304 Now we have to connect the heavenly character of Christ's priesthood with its care of our earthly state, of which it takes account. The way of this in Hebrews is evident - not as the Jewish priests compassed with infirmity while priests, but "tempted in all points like as we are" on earth, sin excepted, and perfect in heavenly glory when exercised on high where He is. But we are connected with both. Such a High Priest became us, holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, higher than the heavens, but withal one that can be touched with the feeling of our infirmities, as passing through this world of sin and trial. But this shows in a wonderful way our place - "For such a High Priest became us." We are called to association with what is undefiled and higher than the heavens, and yet experience a care which applies to infirmities, weakness and need.

But this, as association, calls up into heavenly things, and identifies us spiritually with them, but at the same time morally with every heart-exercise in which, while it brings us into dependence, the deepest and fullest sympathies are woven into our hearts in one who has been and who is divine in His love and human in His sorrows, and touched with the feeling of our infirmities, in a grace which knows them and was perfect in them.

It is a great thing to have the heart met where it is, and to be taken from where it is to brighter and better scenes where He is who perfectly knows both, but belongs to the highest though He has descended to the lowest for our sakes. And that makes it all sweetness in the sorrows, and yet our hope and life where all is bright in the holiness of God, and the love is found which has been the source of all the grace.

How infinite, how perfect on every side is the grace, not one element wanting up to God Himself, and Him we call our Father!

Note, there are three ways in which the priesthood of Christ is presented in the Epistle to the Hebrews. First, in His sympathy with those He is not ashamed to call His brethren as in chapters 2 and 4; then as that on which the whole religious system depends; thirdly as representing the people - not so much a priestly act but as the High Priest represented the people on the day of atonement, and this introduces the sacrifices.

305 There is however this difference between chapters 2 and 4 as to the priesthood; chapter 2 while showing Christ made higher than the heavens, insists on His being made like unto His brethren - truly a Man in flesh and blood so as to feel as a man for the saints in their trial. Chapter 4 on the other hand specially looks at Him as gone up on high, a High Priest who has gone up through the heavens, and speaks only of "was" as to His suffering being tempted. This was needed to give the place and exercise of His priesthood, the former (chapter 2) to show how He came down, and was Man to be qualified for it. In chapter 5 as in chapter 4 it is the exalted place in priesthood, only again He had, in the days of His flesh, passed through the trial so as to pass thence, fitted in compassion, into the place of its exercise.

The Government of God

<42053E> 306

The government of God, however imperfectly manifested outwardly, is yet exercised at any rate as to His children, and is in result with the world. It is exercised according to His judgment of what is right and what is wrong. He makes good His righteousness in government though all be not yet apparent; and so Job and Elihu reasoned, but not with adequate present witness, of which we can judge, and what modifies it apparently, with all patience and long-suffering it is not "speedily executed." Through this, when His saints err from Him, they must go; He maintains His true character. Hence they are difficultly saved. God must, after His patience, bring the trial which expresses what He is and proves what man is. And when it comes, it sweeps on to its results dragging on men with its stream. How are the righteous to get through this? This is the point, in Peter, of the difficulty - as Lot and Sodom, the just and the ungodly and the sinner in Peter.

But then while the government of God maintains its own principles and respects not persons, and meets His children in an erring path and overthrows them, it maintains His way and overthrows them if they cross it. But then with the saint He goes through this - much deeper into the soul. He does not merely correct the way, but lets His mind in as to the spirit that led to it. The will is broken - we find what we are - the soul, which had gone its own way, finds itself again with God, though sorrowfully, and God is known - the state of the soul is changed, it is not the free exercise of will, but the siftings and subduedness of a soul that has to say to God, and the happiness that accompanies it, though this last way be regained through trial. If there be any motive which has led astray, or any evil, and not merely levity and estrangement of heart from God, any false confidence in the soul, it is judged, of course.

But further. The walk becomes more thoroughly a following of Jesus under the effect of the Cross. This is ever true and simple, deeper and more experimental. We get a striking example of this in Peter. The original starting point of the disciples, as it must be, "Follow me," the one only right path in a world that was wrong, and that the perfection of Jesus. But there was confidence in self, and Peter must go through the dreadfully humbling process of his fall, yet Christ praying for him and watching over him. Self-confidence is broken down and will - he did not go where he would, but bound and led by another. Thus he could serve, as emptied of self-confidence, what was dearest to Jesus - His sheep and lambs, a care He now confides to him - and suffer with Him, just what he could not do before. And now Jesus says again "Follow me." In the measure in which self was judged, experimentally known and judged, he could. The full study of this is a most instructive lesson, and from Jesus' first care, praying for him, full of grace.

Peace

<42054E> 308

The connection and place of peace in Luke, and as to the last or application to us, in John also, is extremely interesting. As soon as Christ is born, the unjealous delight in the divine glory in man's blessing celebrates His birth. They pass over man's fault in putting the Saviour born into the manger, and, filled entirely with the divine thoughts in it, celebrate His praise. And what was this? "Glory to God in the highest, on earth peace, good pleasure in man." That was the result in its own nature of the birth of the Saviour. This presence of the Lord, the fruit of infinite grace, was in itself, if received, peace and blessing - carried it necessarily in what it was in itself - and will produce it finally.

But the Lord was rejected, and as some received Him, He had to say, "Think ye that I am come to send peace on earth; I tell you Nay, but rather a sword. Five shall be in one house, two against three, and three against two."

In the end of Luke, the Kingdom is celebrated, which will indeed bring in peace on the earth. There it is said: "Blessed be the King that cometh. Peace in heaven and glory in the highest." All that God had done on earth had been marred and spoilt by Satan, and as long as these wicked spirits were in heavenly places, thus it must be. But there is war in heaven, and the devil and his angels are cast out, and there is no more place for them. Then there is peace in heaven - Satan is bound. Now there can be peace on earth, and under the Lord's rule there will be peace. But between these two we stand. And in that same Gospel of Luke, the Lord comes after His resurrection and pronounces "Peace" on His disciples. But this was a peace of a far deeper and fuller character, not peace on earth, governmental peace, but peace made with God. He had made peace, perfect peace, so that the soul might enjoy cloudless communion with Him - all that is of the world or of this scene, as alive in it, being shut out. He had brought them, or had done what brought them into this peace by His death, and now He pronounced it. And if we turn to John, this will shine out with the brightest evidence. The Lord had warned His disciples that He did not come to bring peace, but a sword; so that the peace on earth was not there, but the fire already kindled. But He had ineffable peace of soul as not of the world - He was in, and His soul in the unclouded light of His Father's countenance. It was a link between man and God, infinite in blessing (in Him in every sense infinite, and in us objectively and as regards the power of the Holy Ghost, and as being in Him and so in cloudless light with God) no matter what the circumstances. Now Jesus through His death, and as being in Him and He in us, brings us into this blessing - "Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you: not as the world giveth give I unto you." This is unspeakably blessed.

309 The peace of the Christian is not the same as being justified - "Being justified, we have peace with God." This must be according to His nature; hence completely what He is, which makes it very blessed, and though in us connected with our being alienated and enemies by sin, yet in itself is only measured by what He was before sin existed - the outgoing of His own nature in itself before sin, and we in absolute harmony with its full display and proper nature. Sin has been the means of bringing us to know what holiness, righteousness, love are, but they are all in God - the last is His nature. Thus in seeing what Christ says, we learn what it is. "Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you." Now His peace was consonance in every way with the divine nature, and the consciousness of communion with it - that it rested on Him unclouded, but that was not by sin put away. It was in itself divine and, though now in a Man, eternal consonance. Now for us, of course, it had to be made - "He has made peace by the blood of the Cross," and this was so perfect, as to the whole nature and character of God, that He was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father - is glorified with God in virtue of that work in which He glorified God perfectly and in respect of what we are as sinners, but glorified God perfectly.

Hence we are brought into this - "Having been justified by faith, we have peace with God." It is in the midst of evil no doubt, conflict and warfare around, so that it has the character of peace. Still it is, and this makes it specially to be so, "Peace with God." Not as to the circumstances - that is the "Peace of God keeping our hearts" - a blessed thing, but not so deep and direct as this. This is with Himself - our secret with Him, His with us. I think it will turn to delight in His own glory in heaven, to which it ministers now. But here it has the character of peace with God.

Then we must remember that it is a state of mind in the unclouded consciousness of what God is (but necessarily according to His nature) to us according to the value of Christ's work, and in Him.

310 There is another order of peace from the conformity itself to this nature - a subjective peace, "The mind of the Spirit is life and peace."

______

I note the effects of the power of seeing the glorified Christ more distinctly. It absorbs the heart. "I have suffered the loss of all things, and r do count them but dung," it is not only that we have given them up, but their power is gone; the actual trials on the path become matter of joy - they are the fellowship of His sufferings, conformity to His death. It gives unity of action and perseverance. It gives a heavenly character to the path - the calling is above - confidence and joy in reference to God. It is God's calling and in the blessedest way in Christ Jesus. Christ Himself is the object, but this is united with our being glorified by divine favour resting on us as on Him. "Resurrection from among the dead" - for this too, divine righteousness in Christ Himself can alone be fit or suffice.

Walking Worthy

<42055E> 311

My attention has been drawn to the use of "Walking worthy." In Ephesians we see clearly its connection with the noticed force and character of the Epistle. This treats of the Christian and then of the Church's privileges, and the saint is to "walk worthy of his vocation" here, especially in Church place, and the worthiness to be of that.

In Colossians, where the glory of the Person of Christ is brought out as they were slipping away from the Head - I do not say His headship, but the glory of Him who is Head - they are to "walk worthy of the Lord." It is in this part that God and Father, the Lord and the Spirit are brought out.

In the Thessalonians, who, from being heathens, had been brought to know the one true God, the Father - "The Assembly of the Thessalonians which is in God the Father" having not intermediate and indeed demon powers, but being in direct, immediate relationship with the one true God, they are called to "walk worthy of God who has called us to his own kingdom and glory" - so they were "turned to God from idols, to serve the living and true God."

Philippians, in which we have the experimental condition of the Christian, and the Gospel is spoken of as in conflict in the world (Paul being in the bonds of it) they were to "walk worthy of the Gospel." So Paul was "set for the confirmation and defence of the Gospel" - he speaks of the "beginning of the Gospel" - Timothy had served with him "for the Gospel" - the women had "contended with him in the Gospel" - Paul was set "for the defence of the Gospel" - they had fellowship "in the furtherance of the Gospel." So it will be seen that when they are called to walk worthy of it, conflict is also spoken of, for which a right walk was needed, but they were not to be terrified by their adversaries. The true Gospel was as a cause, as a person in conflict in the world - they who stood by it as one they contended along with, were to walk worthy of it. They were "striving together with the faith of the Gospel," contending along with the faith of the Gospel in the world - not "for" the faith, but "with" it, as an associate with it in its conflicts.

There is thus in the three "walkings worthy," I think, a practical difference though essentially the same. In Thessalonians it is the essential measure and its nature - "Worthy of God?" imitators of God as dear children, "Who has called us to his own kingdom and glory." Then the manifestation of what this is in a divinely perfect ｅxpression of it in Christ, "Worthy of the Lord unto all pleasing." In Ephesians 4 we have more our own present place in it by the Holy Ghost - "the vocation wherewith we are called" - all our privileges and place being known to us through the Holy Ghost sent down when Christ was glorified - the place we are in in connection with Him glorified now.

Memory

<42056E> 313

Some make the act of knowledge the thing retained; if so, the idea is only a modification of the mind - a man holds it as part of the "I" (ego). What then is immediate perception, or activity continuing? The activity is not an idea. The activity of a faculty need not continue - no activity dependent on will need; nor involuntary either in man, because in man it is the effect of a body acting on the senses, and when it does not act, the effect, but for some other reason, would cease.

That knowledge is retained in a latent state, i.e., when the mind is not occupied with it, is certain. How or what it is, I do not know, nor does anyone else, I think; but that is the whole story. Association is a mere means out of reproduction, i.e., by will, but of the recurring of anything to the mind by a natural chain; only will can use it, i.e., I seek a person's name, etc. - I remember where, with whom, etc., I have seen him, in order to recover the name, but the suggestion is without will.

Imagination and memory are closely connected, i.e., the power of reproduction in the mind's consciousness of scenes, which in memory have been in their own combination present in imagination, the elements in some other. It may be a question, can we remember without association; but I think we can - though it plays so great a part it is difficult to separate it. What is more surprising is, calling up a scene, a passage by will. I say, "I will remember a line of Horace" - "the place I passed my childhood in"; I cannot account for my will being determined here. When I, reasoning on memory, would try to analyse some point, what does determine it? I suspect it is what is best retained fixed in the memory, unless it be determined by the kind of thing which judgment says is most to the point then - what is most familiar to the mind.

But I am not able to analyse memory yet, if ever I do. What the scientists* say is simply nothing. I doubt whether the knowledge which is stored up is rightly called "memory," though the materials of it. When we say "memory," I think we include recalling out of these stores, or the power of doing so, which is the same as saying it is there. It is in this point my analysis is short. Memory is various - I suppose depends on the force of impression. I say "I will make you remember it, i.e., I associate pain with it. "He will remember it but once," this shows it includes recalling it. "It is never out of his mind." I remember vividly people, circumstances, facts, never dates within years without special labour.

{*Sir W. Hamilton, for example.}

314 I suspect memory is much more material than we are aware; hence memoria technica. Like abstraction, our first perceptions are vivid, and of particular circumstances gradually generalised. So Memory. If it be Horace, it is a book, hard Latin, a school, a master, my learning it, gradually referred to what has most struck me in it - having itself formed an undeveloped faculty, a particular kind of taste, etc.

Consciousness

<42057E> 315

I would say a word on consciousness. It is used, I think, in two senses - consciousness, properly speaking, and reflection on "I," or the conscious person. They are so closely connected, it is no wonder; but the difference is important, for I apprehend it is just the difference between a beast and a man in this respect.

The living "I" is always a will in thought or for act, and consciously wills - wills, knowing it wills - so does even a beast. If it wants to get out of a room, it knows it wants it. Will is always conscious of itself, but it does not set about to reflect therefore on itself as I am doing now.*

{*I find Reid makes this distinction.}

This reflective self-consciousness is man's distinctive prerogative, as having a spirit. "I" has the power of using the upper faculty to reflect on the workings of "I." I reflect, but the capacity is in the spirit of man. "There is," says Elihu, "a spirit in man." But how was this before the fall? I mean as to "will." And here I have to remark that I think "will" is used in two ways - intention, the tendency of nature or "I," towards something, and the determination of "I" to go out towards that something, and where this question is raised in a moral ground.

All will is sin, because it is not obedience, i.e., is assumed independence of God, and much more. Now unfallen Adam had no such will as this. It was tested in the tree, and he ought to have said "I can have no will - I obey" - but he distrusted and willed. But in the place where God had set him, as dressing the garden and keeping it, nature was free in the sphere God had given it authority in; and so as to animals. Here God had given authority, and will was in its place while the whole man was subject to God. But he used a will in the sphere of testing obedience and was lost - Christ in the most perfect testing said "Not my will but thine be done." His tendency of nature and "I" to escape suffering was right - that suffering eminently so. He had, being a perfect Man, a will of nature and morally too, but no will which willed when God's will was there. This is commonly, in its grosser form, called "Self-will." It is the determination of "I" to have its own way.

316 Now the determination of Christ's "I" was to have God's will absolutely - that will from heaven down (Psalm 40) was His only motive for acting. He was the obedient Man. We have a will which strives (not merely suffers) and it is checked - right it should be - but that was not Christ's case. His whole moral being was obedience, "I come to do thy will" - "Not my will but thine be done." The desire and intention of nature not to suffer was there, rightly there, but His determination, His only and perfect one, was to do God's will, suffering bring what it might. Save the testing point, there was with Adam no determination of will called for or in posse.

Now consciousness is itself, and, where real, like sense certain of itself. Senses give the certainty of the thing they are conscious of to themselves - adequate for use of what is learned from them by experience, particularly sight.

Memory is according to its vividness and strength. Testimony is according to the testifier. Divine - it is doubly certain - it is necessarily true, and the conviction of its truth where there is belief divinely given.

The Headship of Christ

<42058E> 317

The question has been raised how far Christ gives up the glory and headship spoken of in Ephesians 1, drawn, as in 1 Corinthians 15 and Hebrews 2, from Psalm 8. He gives up the kingdom, that is certain, when He has subdued all principalities and power. His divine glory into which He has taken manhood is immutable, that is also clear. It is a question of His relative place, not His Person. We must, I think, distinguish between our relative place and conferred authority. This last Christ gives up. He is exalted now, but He has not yet taken to Him His great power and reigned, nor is He sitting on His throne yet, but on His Father's. He is become so much higher than the angels, having by inheritance a more excellent name than they - this is His place. Angels, principalities and powers being subject to Him - that is relative authority, though not yet the reign.

We have a place above angels, as united to Him, and as the fruit of redemption, and shall be made like unto Him. All this, I apprehend, continues - "Glory in the Church by Jesus Christ, world without end." It must be in Him.

I see in Ephesians two things - "Exalted him above every name," and "Put all things in subjection under his feet"; just as Adam was quite above the creatures, and besides had dominion over them, which was God's will, not a necessary consequence nor the same thing, only the second Adam has companions though He be anointed above them. This subjection of all things to His personal authority He will give up, not merely the kingdom looked at as a millennial reign, but the "all things" subjected to Him. He has not to put down angels and saints who delight in His glory, but those who oppose it and who are rebellious against God, and the fruit of creature-will and sin; but administrative authority is given up - not only Godhead of course, but, I suppose, personal exaltation remains. I do not mean merely personal preeminence as Son of God, for that too cannot be otherwise. It is not merely the "Son of Man is set," but "This is my beloved Son." But His relatively taken place remains.

Once made a little lower than the angels, He has now passed through the heavens, not merely angels, principalities and powers being made subject to Him, for that is given superiority as Messiah and Son of Man, but, as to the exercise of authority, He gives it up and is subject; but He does not cease, as to His place taken as Man, to be superior to the angels, even when there is no question of His throne, for that is conferred rule - is given up, as we know from Corinthians, and He takes as Man the place of subjection, the perfect personal place - for rule is not. That refers to what is below us, here even to what has to be subjected - "Head over all things," in this sense, is given up. But the raised Son never ceases to be the Centre of the whole company of heaven, and the saints with Him, "the firstborn among many brethren," "the only begotten." As God He of course possesses all things with the Father, but, as to His place as Man, He is not only the Head of all principalities and powers, but far above all principality and power, and by the necessity of His Person and title always will be - it is His place, when righteousness dwells, when it no longer reigns; He is always "Firstborn," when He no longer reigns in His conferred dominion. Though in another sense we shall reign for ever and ever.

318 This subject occurred to me again, and I looked over what I had written above. It is substantially right, and clearer than I had any thought of when I wrote it. one point seems to call perhaps for correction, for its substance came to me as a new idea. That is that "put all things under his feet" (Psalm 8) in Ephesians 1 is taken as the same as "gave him to be Head over all things to the Church." Now I suppose they must be considered as distinct. Putting all things under His feet includes at any rate an acquired dominion which He has not yet, and which He will give up. In 1 Corinthians 15 He is contemplating hostile, or at least unsubdued power - power which is not of and which does not own Him. Hence He reigns, when God puts them under Him, till all His enemies are made His footstool. But all things are not yet put under Him, as we see in Hebrews, and He is on His Father's throne, not His own. But He is personally exalted far above all principalities and powers. These - "And hath put all things under his feet," "And gave him to be Head over all things to the Church which is his body" - are two distinct things. Death is put under Him when the time comes, and it is the last enemy He destroys, but He is not over it as over that which was created by Him and for Him, and which the Fulness will reconcile by Him to itself. only in Colossians it was the Fulness - in Ephesians the Man is exalted to God's right hand, and given to be Head over all. But the putting "in subjection under His feet," and being "Head over all things to" are distinct things. It is clear that the exaltation above every name is a distinct thing, for that is so now, but I think the putting all things under His feet, and giving Him to be Head over all things are so too.

_______

319 Popish unity attaches Christ to unity, and hence may and does legalise with His name every corruption and evil; Christian unity attaches unity to Christ, and therefore gives it all the character of grace and truth that is in Him - gives it all His excellence.

END OF VOLUME 2