The Goal of God. (I Cor. xv. 28).- (1)

by Charles H. Welch

No.1. God is, and always has been, 

“all in all” in creation. 

A plan of action, presupposes a goal toward which everything contributes either by way of direct purpose, incidental assistance, or the overruling and directing of evil antagonism. That such a purpose is an integral part of the Scriptures is evident to all who have studied its teaching with any approach to understanding. To most of our readers, it is the goal of the ages, the purpose, which gives a life pulse to the most formal and ceremonial parts of Scripture, even as it crowns the most glorious of the triumphs of redeeming love. The goal of the ages is expressed in one statement made by the apostle Paul: 

“That God may be all in all” (I Cor. xv. 28). 

It would be only too easy at this point to allow ourselves to be turned aside from the main purpose of our inquiry, to the unfruitful debate which gathers around the Divine intention expressed in the second word “All”. To the question of the disciples: 

“Lord are there few that be saved?” (Luke xiii. 23). 

His answer was in effect, ‘see to it that you are’. 

In the series of articles entitled “The Reconciliation of all Things” which ran through Volume VI The Berean Expositor we have given the answer that we find in Scripture as to the number comprehended by the ‘all’ who are reconciled and redeemed. That is not our chief quest now. For our present purpose it makes no difference to our approach or our conclusion whether ‘all’ is limited to Adam’s seed, to believers, to the elect—or whether it is as universal as creation itself—our concern is rather with the intention behind the first word ‘all’ of I Cor. xv. 28. What does it mean when it says “That God may be ALL in all”? 

If we turn our thought to the witness of the heavens and observe the silent obedience of sun, moon and star, or if we consider the testimony of the creation around us, and observe the unbroken obedience—that is ever and always going on in the world of chemistry or biology, we can say that here, in this irrational unmoral creation, God is and always has been “All in all”. Never in the experience of human observation has the sun refused to rise and set, never has the ocean grown weary of its tidal regularity, never has the power of gravitation, or the law of chemical combination been transgressed. This fact is fully recognized in the Scriptures. 

“Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power; for Thou hast created all things, and for Thy pleasure they are and were created” (Rev. iv. 11). 

“And every creature which is in heaven, and on the earth and under the earth, and such as are in the sea, and all that are in them, heard I saying, Blessing, and honour, and glory, and power be unto Him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb for ever and ever” (Rev. v. 13). 

If the words ‘every creature’ are construed as inclusive of mankind, then the rest of the book of Revelation, with its revolt, blasphemy, wickedness and wrath is inexplicable, but if they refer to creation apart from men and angels, all is harmony. 

Throughout the Scriptures we find references to the perfect submission of all creation to the will and power of the Creator.

“Fire and hail; snow and vapors; stormy wind, fulfilling His word” (Psa. cxlviii. 8). 

“He sendeth forth His commandment upon earth; His word runneth very swiftly. He giveth snow like wool; He scattereth the hoarfrost like ashes. He casteth forth His ice like morsels: Who can stand before His cold? He sendeth out His word and melteth them: He causeth His wind to blow, and the waters flow” (Psa. cxlvii. 15-18). 

There is, however, no need to multiply these evidences. The reader will call to mind many a passage where sun and star, or the humbler creatures of earth are revealed as entirely subservient to the Divine Will. God has always been ‘all in all’ as Creator. Without this perfect alignment creation would vanish and the whole fabric turn to chaos. He upholds all things and by Him all thing consist. That, therefore, cannot be a future goal which has always been in existence from the beginning. When we look again at I Cor. xv. 28, we find that it is in a context that speaks of rule, authority, power, enmity, resurrection, immortality, sin, law, death and victory. These terms do not belong to science, they are out of place when dealing with creation as such, they are entirely related to man, his nature, his fall, his redemption and his final oneness with God. The goal of the ages expressed in the words “That God may be all in all” therefore looks to the one great exception in the earth—to man, the moral, reasonable creature, who can and did, by the very fact that he was moral and not mechanical, come under the category of ‘ought’ and in connection with whom even God uses the contingent “IF”. God Who is already ‘all’ in creation, will one day be ‘all’ within the moral realm; but whereas in the realm of irresponsible creation “He spake, and it was done”, the question never arose as to whether fire and hail, snow and vapours, or stormy wind, would or world not fulfil His Word; the creation, constitution and the probation of the first man, a responsible creature, as recorded in Gen. i.-iii. reveals an entirely different proposition. Here, the Lord does not ‘speak’ and find it done. In the material world, He had but to say “Light be”, and “Light was”, but in the moral and the spiritual world, no such instantaneous command or response was or is possible. In the very nature of the moral world, compulsory obedience, compelled love, coerced sanctity or commanded affection are impossible. Where probation has no place in the obedience of creation to the laws of its being, time and experience are essential factors in the work of grace in the moral sphere. It may have been necessary that the fitting of the earth for man should occupy six days, followed by one day’s rest, in order that it foreshadow the course of the ages, but the reader of the Scripture is made abundantly alive to the fact, that God was under no more physical necessity to occupy six days in the work, than He Who fainteth not nor is weary, was under any necessity to have the seventh day set apart for rest. With regard to man, however, and the purpose of his creation, time, probation, testing, experience, suffering, faith, hope, reward, punishment, all have their place, and it is therefore of the very nature of the subject that it should involve patient waiting, great giving, unbounded love, and grace beyond dreams, before the “all” which characterized God’s pre-eminence in nature should find its echo in the moral world.

When therefore the Apostle wrote “That God may be ALL in all” that ‘all’ must contain within its scope all that goes to make up the moral nature of man, and all that is reflected of the nature of God, both in the law of Sinai, in the gospel of grace, and in the person of Christ. We are now we trust, prepared to give this most important theme our closest attention, and we pray that light and truth may be our guide and goal as we seek to open up the Scriptures. 

----------------

(From The Berean Expositor, vol. 43, page 8).

----------------

Acknowledgment. (6) - by Charles H. Welch

#6. The “Recognition” that leads to “Full Adulthood”. “The knowledge of the Son of God”
(Eph. iv. 13). 

Epignosis, the word under consideration, occurs but twice in Ephesians, and epiginosko not at all. This of itself should make us hesitate to subscribe to the suggestion that epignosis means the “full knowledge” of the mystery as distinct from the more elementary knowledge of the Pentecostal dispensation. We have looked at Eph. i. 17, where is the first occurrence of epignosis in that Epistle. We must now look at Eph. iv. 13, the only other reference. 

We are all doubtless familiar with the fact that the epistle to the Ephesians is divided into two main parts, chapters i.-iii. containing doctrine, and chapters iv.-vi. containing corresponding practice. We observe, therefore, that the word we have translated “acknowledgment” occurs once in the doctrinal and once in the practical section of this epistle. 

“Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ; that we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro” (Eph. iv. 13, 14). 

This passage must not be visualized as one long chain of equal links, but rather as a succession of expansions, each containing a development of the doctrine enunciated. The goal is “the unity of the faith”. This goal is further expanded and explained as “the acknowledgment, or recognition, of the Son of God”. To follow the subdivisions clearly, it is necessary to correct the Authorized Version in the matter of the translation of the preposition eis which occurs in verses 12 to 16 seven times, as follows: 

“For the work of the ministry, for the edifying . . . . in the unity of the faith . . . . . unto a perfect man, unto the measure . . . . . may grow up into Him . . . . unto the edifying of itself in love.” 

While it is impossible and undesirable to reduce the translation of the Greek original to a lifeless and mechanical uniformity, it is wise, when examining a passage, to realize that where prepositions are repeated, it will seriously influence our understanding if such repetition is hidden by a variety of renderings, however charming they may sound.

Eis answers the question Whither? The idea of a goal or an end in view is always present. Consequently, where the goal is material or physical, “to”, “into” or “unto” is the usual rendering. Where the goal is intangible, “for” sometimes better expresses the idea of moving on to its attainment. Thus we have eis translated in Rom. xiv. 9, “to this end”. While “into” may sometimes be a legitimate translation, it can sometimes be an overstatement. In John xi. 38, “cometh to the grave” is true, “cometh unto the grave” would be true, but “cometh into the grave” would be false (cf. 41). The Lord came unto, but not into, Sychar (John iv. 5, 8, 28). Mary came unto, but not into, the sepulcher (John xx. 1, 11).

For the purposes of study and analysis, “unto” is the safe translation, and the occurrence of eis in Eph. iv. 13 subdivides the goal into three parts. 

Till we all come 

   UNTO (eis)  The unity of the faith. 

                      The knowledge of the Son of God. 

   UNTO (eis)  A perfect man. 

   UNTO (eis)  The measure of 

                      The stature of 

                      The fullness of   THE CHRIST. 

The goal of the ministry given by the ascended Lord, when He gave some apostles, some prophets, some evangelists and some pastors and teachers, was “the unity of the faith”. This unity of the faith embraces, and is partly explained by, “the knowledge of the Son of God” which, in its turn, is revealed under the figure of the “perfect man”, and this perfect man is none other than Christ in all His fullness of stature—truly an amazing Goal. 

In the epistles of Paul to the Romans, Galatians, Hebrews, both epistles to the Corinthians and the first to the Thessalonians, reference is made to Christ as the Son twenty-seven times, but in the epistles of the Mystery there are but two such references, the one already quoted from Eph. iv. and one in Col. i. 13, “The kingdom of His dear Son”. 

The doctrine of the sonship of Christ had been made known before the opening of the dispensation of the Mystery. The sonship of Christ, even as to its human side, forms a definite part of the witness for the present dispensation. This is implied in the exhortation given to Timothy: 

“Remember that Jesus Christ of the seed of David was raised from the dead according to my gospel” (II Tim. ii. 8). 

However great the difference between the position of the risen Christ as Head of the Church, and the position of the risen Christ as David’s heir, the Person remains unchanged, and consequently the doctrine of the sonship of Christ, so clearly taught in Romans and Hebrews, remains a fundamental of the faith of all times. 

We have already observed that the one reference to “the Son of God” occurs not in the doctrinal but in the practical section of Ephesians. In the fourth chapter we are not taught the doctrine of the Divine sonship, but we are told that we shall never attain to full growth and maturity apart from “the recognition of the Son of God”. What this recognition involves is discovered in the expansion of the theme that follows. Christ is “recognized” as “the perfect Man”, and the measure of our growth is “the measure of the stature (or age) of the fullness of the Christ”. Just as in Paul’s early epistles the sonship of Christ is stressed, so also in the same epistles the sonship of the believer is stressed; and just as there are only two references to the sonship of Christ in the epistles of the Mystery, so there is no reference to the sonship of the believer in the prison epistles, except the one passage which speaks of his “adoption”, huiothesia, “to place as a son” (Eph. i. 5). 

In the epistles of the Mystery the single reference to Christ as the Son of God is used to encourage growth, and the single reference to the adoption of the believer points not merely to sonship, but to the dignity of the firstborn son, the distinctive title of Christ in Col. i., “Firstborn of every creature” and “Firstborn from the dead” (Col. i. 15, 18), being the counterpart. In Eph. iv. the believer is referred to a “measure”. For the exercise of grace in ministry the believer’s attention is directed to “the measure of the gift of Christ” (Eph. iv. 7-12). For growth and attainment, he is directed to “the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ” (Eph. iv. 13, 14). For his individual share in the growth of the body, each member is reminded of the “measure of every part”, if the body is to increase and edify itself in love (Eph. iv. 15, 16). The “perfect” man is in direct contrast with the “children” who are tossed to and fro (Eph. iv. 13). The word “perfect”, teleios, is often placed in contrast with “babes” (Heb. v. 14, with Heb. v. 13; and I Cor. ii. 6 with iii. 1 & xiii. 11). 

“Be not children in understanding . . . . . in understanding be men” (I Cor. xiv. 20). 

Here the word translated “men” is teleios, “perfect” or, as it should be rendered in this passage, “of full age”. The word translated “stature” includes both height and age, the two evidences of adulthood that are immediate to the eye. 

“Add one cubit to his stature” (Matt. vi. 27). 

“He was little of stature” (Luke xix. 3). 

are proofs that the word helikia refers to height. 

“He is of age” (John ix. 21). 

“When she was past age” (Heb. xi. 11). 

are proofs that the word helikia refers to age. Like teleios, the word indicates adulthood, and it is this that the apostle has in mind in Eph. iv. 12. It is the “recognition” of the Son of God by the adult believer which is placed in contrast with the “wind of doctrine” that tossed to and fro the “babe”, and which shows that practical issues are before us. 

The secret of spiritual maturity, is NOT introspection, for the holiest saint will be horrified at the evidences of corruption which he will find within. The secret of spiritual maturity is the “recognition” of what Christ means to the believer as the Son of God, the perfect Man, and true growth is “up into Him in all things which is the Head”. Finally, it is “the fullness” which is the goal here, “the measure of the stature of the fullness of the Christ”.

To appreciate in any adequate degree what is intended by this word “fullness” would demand a life’s study of the Scriptures, and to enter really into its meaning demands resurrection glory as its atmosphere. 

--------------

(From The Berean Expositor, vol. 36, page 19).

---------------