"The church of God, which He hath purchased with His own blood"
He had afore prepared unto glory — even us, whom He hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?" (Rom. 9:14-24).
7. THE WORK OF CHRIST
"The church of God, which He hath purchased with His own blood"
(Acts 20:28).
I do not intend to enter fully upon the subject of Christ's work. This would require a much fuller discussion than I am able at present to bestow upon it. It would in fact require a volume of itself.
Christ is said in Scripture to have given Himself as a ransom and substitute for His church, and to have done so in a way such as He has not done for any other beings. This seems implied in the very first promise — the promise regarding the woman's seed. Here we have at the very outset the identifying work of Christ and His people — the setting them before us as entirely one with Him. His destiny and theirs are thus one from the beginning. We recognize here not only the Redeemer, but the chosen people, the people given Him of the Father, with whom He identifies Himself, and in whose behalf He is to die and to suffer — to bruise the serpent's head and to submit to the bruising of His own heel.
It is not merely Christ who is said to have died. His people are said to die with Him. The Apostle Paul very frequently dwells on this idea, representing the church as crucified with Christ, dying with Him, rising with Him, ascending up with Him and sitting with Him in
heavenly places. In Jehovah's eye His people were with Him all the time, from His coming into the world. He stood in their stead, and they were viewed as one with Him from His cradle to His cross, and from His cross to His throne. They were taken up to the cross with Him. They died there with Him. They went down to the grave with Him. They came again along with Him. They ascended with Him. Now, I confess I cannot understand these expressions unless I believe in a definite number for whom all this was especially done. I cannot see how it is possible for the atonement to be indefinite, so long as I read that in all its parts the church was associated with Christ. This renders definiteness an essential element in the idea of redemption.
But how can there be any truth in all this if Christ has no special object in view in dying, except merely to render salvation possible to all, but certain to none? In that case He could only die as a man for His fellowmen — not as a substitute, not as a representative, not as a surety, not as a shepherd at all. I put it to you, which of these is most in accordance with the Word of God?
It is the view which would present itself to the eye looking from the past eternity into the future, contemplating the glorious issue. And it is the view which we hereafter shall more fully realize when we get into that eternity and begin to look back upon the whole finished scheme. Viewed from either of these points, the far past or the far future, the thing seems striking and vivid. Standing as we do in the present in the very midst of the scenes, with the smoke of the world all around us, seeing but darkly through the glass, we may find it more difficult to realize this. But faith can rise out of these dark elements below. It can transport itself to either of these eternal eminences. And, looking at things as God looks on them, contemplating results as He does, faith will be able to realize God's
purpose regarding the church in all the different stages of its progress now, as if it had actually been represented in visible brightness, and the other parts which confuse us hidden from view. The moment the sculptor is hewing out his statue is not the best time to ascertain what he means. You must look at his designs, or you must wait until he has finished his work.
Here are some of the passages which represent Christ as doing a peculiar work on behalf of His church: "I am the good Shepherd, the good Shepherd giveth His life for the sheep" (John 10:11). "I am the good Shepherd and know My sheep and am known of Mine" (v. 14). "I lay down My life for the sheep" (v. 15). "Ye believe not, because ye are not of My sheep (v. 26). "Thou hast given Him power over all flesh, that He should give eternal life to as many as Thou hast given Him" (John 17:2). "I pray for them. I pray not for the world, but for them which Thou hast given Me" (v. 9). "Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself for it" (Eph. 5:25).
In these passages we hear Christ repeatedly speaking of those whom He calls sheep, and telling us He gave His life for them — for them in a peculiar sense, as He did for no other. It is as a shepherd that He died with a shepherd's love and a shepherd's care — for His sheep as such. Again, He prays for His own, for those whom the Father has given Him, not for the world. Can words be plainer? Here is certainly a distinction made, "I pray not for the world." Here at least is something peculiar to His church alone. And one such peculiarity is enough to answer the objections of adversaries. Is not the way in which He prayed an illustration of the way in which He died? Are not those for whom He prayed the same as those for whom He died?
But over against all this are set those many passages in which the word "all" occurs, as in "Christ died for all." Now the passages already quoted are more explicit and cannot be overthrown. They are too plain to be mistaken. Yet there are admittedly some difficulties with regard to some of the passages in which the word "all" occurs. But it is better to confess the difficulty and wait for further light than at once to proceed to do violence to the passage itself, or to make its difficulty a reason for doing violence to others.
With regard to the meaning of the word "all" in the Bible, especially in the New Testament, a few remarks will be necessary. It occurs there more than twelve hundred times. These twelve hundred texts may be subdivided:
Class One consists of a very large number of passages, several hundreds in which it is undeniable that the word cannot mean "all" literally. To give one or two specimens, we are told that "all the land of Judea... went out to him and were all baptized." This was certainly not literally the case, for every individual in the whole land did not come, for we are expressly told that "the Pharisees and lawyers were not baptized of him" (Luke 7:30). Again we read, "All men seek for Thee" (Mark 1:37). This was not literally so. Every individual in the human race, or even every individual in Judea, did not seek Him. Again, we have such passages as these, "He told me all things that ever I did" (John 4:29); "All things are lawful unto me"; "All our fathers were under the cloud"; "All they which were in Asia be turned away from me"; and, "Ye know all things."
Class Two consists of passages in which it is very doubtful whether all is literally universal. It may, or it may not be. There is nothing positively to determine it. "Every nation under heaven"; "All they which dwelt in Asia"; "The care of all the churches"; "All that dwell
upon the earth shall worship him" (Acts 2:5; 19:10; 2 Cor. 11:28; Rev. 13:8), etc. These are specimens of a large class of doubtful passages, which, of course, can prove nothing as to the literal meaning of "all."
Class Three consists of passages which are only determined by the context, not by the expressions themselves. The whole passage taken together fixes the meaning. But were it not for that, the literal meaning would have been doubtful. "All ye are brethren"; "All these things must come to pass"; "They all slumbered"; "When Jesus had finished all these sayings," etc. In all these passages and in many similar ones, it is not the word "all" itself that points out the strict universality, but it is some other word that occurs along with it, such as "all these things." In these cases, while in one sense the word has a universal sense, in another it has a limited one — limited by the words with which it is connected. It means all of a certain class, all of a certain number. So that we gather from these that when "all" is to be understood literally, we must learn from the context what the word means — whether it is all of one nation or all of another, whether it is all of one class or all of another. This answers at once the oft-repeated argument which consists merely in vociferating the word "all" as if the loudness or the frequency of the outcry were enough to demonstrate the meaning of the word. That meaning must be determined in each separate case by the other words, or parts of the passage.
Class Four consists of the passages in question, those supposed to imply a universal atonement. On these I cannot enter here. They are the fewest of all the four classes. Our opponents say they must be interpreted literally. Let us see how the proof stands.
Of the Scriptures in which the word "all" occurs, a large number are exceedingly doubtful. Another large number are only proved to mean
literally "all" by the context. The fewest in number of these four classes are those which are claimed by our opponents.
The result of this statement is simply this, that the mere occurrence of the word "all" does not determine the question at all. Nothing but a careful examination of the whole passage can settle it. Do not then be deceived by the loud repetitions of the words — all and every — when intended to take the place of more solid proof.
It is impossible to do more here than to notice one passage, being one of the strongest and one that affords an admirable illustration of the need for looking at the context to determine the meaning of the word. It is, "He tasted death for every man" (Heb. 2:9). It is literally "for each," since there is nothing about men in the original Greek. The question then arises, what does the apostle mean by "each"? The context must settle it. It either carries us back to the "heirs of salvation," or forward to the "many sons." For obviously it must refer to some of whom the apostle was speaking. Now, he was only speaking of the angels, and of the many sons, the heirs of salvation, and of no other. It cannot be the angels, therefore it must be the many sons, the heirs of salvation. They are the peculiar theme of the whole chapter, anyone following the apostle's reasoning would naturally understand this expression to refer to them. It is straining it to refer it to any others. If it does refer to others, it might as well refer to angels (much more naturally so than of the world); for he is speaking of them, not of the world at all. The fifteenth chapter of First Corinthians is an illustration of this. The apostle is treating of the resurrection of the saints, not of the wicked. It is only by keeping this in view that his statements there regarding the "all" can be fully understood. So the "each" here referred to must be the "each" of those he was speaking of. And the singular used here is very striking, not simply the individualizing the saints, but as doing so in