In Adam. (6) - by Charles H. Welch

No.6. The Primal Promise and the Incarnation. 

Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God. Yet God purposely placed every elect soul “in Adam”, who was flesh and blood, a process that demanded that the elect should be ultimately transferred to Christ. Gen. xv. points to the same process, and the “pattern” of the ages, can be set out in the form of a letter V, a descent before the ascent and the goal. 

The elect members of the Church of the One Body, are destined to enjoy “spiritual blessings in heavenly places” and to this, flesh and blood even when unfallen is by its very nature alien. 

What do we know of spiritual beings? Very little. Angels and other ranks of the spiritual world break into the record of the Scriptures, they exhibit extraordinary powers, are apparently above the influence and reach of many of the “laws of nature”, but very little positive teaching is discoverable in the Divine record. The earliest institution, appointed by the Divine will is that of marriage, and this is one thing that is foreign to the experience of angels. 

“This children of this world marry, and are given in marriage: but they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world . . . . . neither marry nor are given in marriage, neither can they die any more: for they are equal to the angels” (Luke xx. 34-36). 

At the resurrection, the believer will receive a “spiritual body” (I Cor. xv. 44) and in this too he will be equal to the angels. Here then is an outstanding divergence. Man from the beginning was created with marriage as a normal experience. Angels as created are excluded from such an experience only by “keeping not their first estate” and by leaving “their own habitation” could any semblance of marriage be attained. The union of man and wife makes them “one flesh”, and their children are called their “seed”. 

If it be true that marriage is unknown among spiritual beings, it follows that angels and principalities are all separately created beings. No angel is either the descendant ofor parent of any other spiritual being. There can be no such unity among angels as is found among mankind. Home, family, parent, child, members of one body, all of one blood, these features which are essential characteristics of the human race, are all absent from the spirit world. We can and do use the word “race” of humanity, for it means “A class of individuals sprung from a common stock; the descendants collectively of a common ancestor”. We cannot legitimately use the word “race” of angels, it has no meaning or place in the spirit world. It seems, therefore, to be an inevitable conclusion, that in the wisdom of God, it was imperative that those who were elected to be blessed with all spiritual blessings, should commence their term of conscious being “in Adam”, even though they had been chosen “in Christ”, and would have to be translated. 

Before we proceed further, there is a question that demands an answer, “Is the title ‘Christ’ restricted to the Saviour to the period that follows His incarnation? can the title be used of Him, in His pre-incarnated glory, the glory that He had before the world was?” There are a number of expositors who unhesitatingly affirm, that the title “Christ” belongs only to the Saviour as the Man, Jesus, the Christ. It is well known that the word “Christ”, the Greek Christos is the translation of the Hebrew Mashach, which is transliterated into English as the Messiah and means the anointed. This “anointing” was done with oil (Psa. lxxxix. 20) and it is this fact that gives the word Mashach its significance. There is another word that is translated anointed and that is the Hebrew suk, which in every one of its nine occurrences is rendered “anoint” in the A.V. A word derived from the same root is nasak, which occurs in Psa. ii. 6, “Yet have I set My King”, where the margin reads Heb. “anointed”. While this reveals the necessity to include nasak and mashach, it does not answer our question. There is, however, a passage which does: 

“The Lord possessed me in the beginning of His way; before His works of old. I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, or ever the earth was . . . . . when He prepared the heavens I was there . . . . . then I was with Him, as One brought up with Him . . . . . rejoicing in the habitable part of His earth, and My delights were with the sons of men” (Prov. viii. 22-31). 

Young’s literal translation reads “From the age I was anointed”. Here we are taken back “before the foundation of the world”, and there we find One Who is called the “Anointed”. When the church was chosen in Christ before the foundation of the world, “Christ” was there, “I was there” (Prov. viii. 27). This rids the mind of the necessity to await the incarnation of the Saviour for He Who was acclaimed “The Christ” here on earth, was “The Anointed” from the beginning. Yet, even though this illuminates one aspect of the mighty truth we are considering, it only makes the problem deeper. Why, seeing that Christ was “there” did the Lord wait geological ages for the advent of Adam? and why, seeing Christ was already “there” must He too in the fullness of time “come in the flesh”? We might at first be inclined to think that He only came in the flesh because man had sinned—but we have already seen that unfallen Adam was the figure of Him that was to come, and that the fact of sin and the need of redemption but adds to the problem without solving it. In Phil. ii. there is observable a twofold descent: the one reaching its goal when Christ became man, the other when He still further descended to “the death of the cross”. 

“Who being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: but made Himself of no reputation, and took upon Him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men.” 

This is the first stage. 

“And being found in fashion as a man, He humbled Himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross” (Phil. ii. 6-8). 

This is the second stage. 

Christ in the first stage came to reveal the Father, in the second stage He came to redeem the church. But more, the goal before God is a Unity, expressed with such overwhelming fullness in the language of John xvii. 23. 

On one occasion Paul wrote: “Now concerning virgins I have no commandment of the Lord: yet I give my judgment, as one that hath obtained mercy of the Lord to be faithful”, and when the Apostle’s judgment was given he concluded by saying: 

“She is happier if she so abide after my judgment: and I think also I have the spirit of God” (I Cor. vii. 25-40). 

We have no Apostolic gift, but we too have obtained mercy to be faithful, and venture to express the opinion that follows, fully recognizing that for this we have no “commandment”. With this understanding the reader is invited to ponder what is “my judgment” of a most wonderful subject, reserving the right to reject it or to modify it as light is given. Let us turn to the opening chapters of Genesis. The last verse of Gen. ii. says of Adam and his wife, that they were both naked but “not ashamed”. No one so created by God and innocent of sin would have any sense of shame, this could only come as an accompaniment of guilt, and is written to prepare us for what follows in Gen. iii. The word “naked” is the translation of the Hebrew word arom, and the word “subtil” which immediately follows in Gen. iii. 1 is the Hebrew arum. The first meaning that Gesenius gives to arum is “to be naked”, the second meaning “to be crafty”. The reader should know that the only way of distinguishing the vowel “o” from the vowel “u” in the Hebrew is the position of a dot like a full-stop. If it be half-way up the sign for vav, the vowel is pronounced “u”, if it stands at the top of the vav it is pronounced “o”. Mark, it is a matter of pronunciation, not meaning that is here intended. Shorn of the vowel points, that were added later, the words “naked” of Gen. ii. 25 and “subtil” of iii. 1 are identical. It is not possible to know this, or to read the original Hebrew without immediately making a mental connexion between the two verses. Now whatever the actual transgression of Adam and his wife may have been, and however we interpret the “tree of knowledge of good and evil”, one thing stands out prominent in the record, the immediate consequence was a sense of shame, not so much a sense of guilt, but a sense of shame connected with their nakedness. 

“And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked: and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons.” 

When challenged by the Lord, Adam’s immediate reply was: “I was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself” (Gen. iii. 7 and 10). When the doom was pronounced upon the man and his wife, a most unexpected turn is taken. Instead of receiving the death sentence, as Gen. ii. 17 would lead us to expect, child birth is referred to. First in the form of a prophetic promise: 

“I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed: it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.” 

Secondly, in the form of a chastisement and continual reminder: 

“Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.” 

The sexes were never “equal” even at creation, as I Cor. xi. 3-9 and I Tim. ii. 13 will make clear. Now since the advent of sin and death, a further subordination of woman is instituted, echoed by the sweat and the toil that Adam now faced, as compared with the labour of love which occupied his unfallen energies in the Garden. The words: “Thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee” (Gen. iii. 16) are repeated, with the necessary alterations of gender, in Gen. iv. 7: 

“If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted (margin have the excellency) and if not sin (or the sin offering) lieth at the door. And unto thee (margin subject unto thee iii. 16) shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.” 

Cain, as the firstborn, had pre-eminence (see Col. i. 18), a position which he forfeited by sin. When Cain was born, Eve in naming him gives utterance to a strange expression: 

“I have gotten a man from the Lord” (Gen. iv. 1). 

“Gotten” is the translation of the Hebrew qanah, from which root the name “Cain” is derived. Some, with Luther, render this passage: “I have gotten a man, the Jehovah”, referring to the promised seed of the woman. Subsequent events show that Eve was mistaken. Cain was not the promised seed, he was, rather “of that wicked one” the false seed (I John iii. 12). Nevertheless, Eve must have had good grounds for such an expectancy, even though the advent of the promised Seed did not take place until nearly 4000 years had passed. 

With these facts before us, we suggest (speaking always after the manner of men, for God knew what He would do from the beginning) that the primal purpose was that the Incarnation should take place by virgin birth in the Garden of Eden itself, that Christ should be “made flesh” and tabernacle among men from the beginning. The intrusion of the Serpent, the temptation and fall of the first pair, opened a door for sowing of the false seed (Cain) and the murder of Abel foretold the agonizing conflict that ensure culminating in the shedding of the blood of Him, Whose blood speaketh better things than that of Abel. The virgin birth of the Son of God was postponed until nearly four thousand years had passed, but in the fullness of time, He was born of a woman, entering not into the full glory of the Incarnate Son, because the added complication of sin and death, necessitated a sacrifice and an offering to deliver the heirs of promise from their bondage. That being graciously accomplished, resurrection and change, provide the appointed way in which both the innate frailty of sinless “flesh and blood” and the inherited corruption consequent upon the fall, should be exchanged for immortality, incorruption, and likeness to His body of glory. 

This is “my judgment” and I believe I can in good conscience say: “I think I also I have the mind of the Lord”, even if I cannot say with Paul: “I think also that I have the spirit of God.” 

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

(From The Berean Expositor, vol. 37, 117).

http://charleswelch.net/BE%20Vol%2037%20Final.pdf

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

The Goal of God. (I Cor. xv. 28).- (7)

by Charles H. Welch

No.7. The Creation of Gen. i. 1 a“Firstfruits”. 

We have considered very briefly “the end”, the goal of the ages, the consummation of 
redemption, the day when God shall be all in all. An “end” presupposes a “beginning”, and moreover, if we rightly apprehend what is aimed at in the “end”, we shall better appreciate what is implied by “the beginning”. Let us therefore turn back to the opening sentence of the Bible and reconsider what is intended by the revelation that “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth” (Gen. i. 1). “Beginning”, is the Hebrew reshith, derived from rosh “head”, which is the translation of this word in 349 occurrences. In Gen. ii. 10 we have the four ‘heads’ or beginnings of the rivers that encompassed Eden, and the word occurs next in the great promise of Gen. iii. 15 “It shall bruise thy head”. Reshith, the form of the word that is used in Gen. i. 1, occurs but three times in Genesis: “In the beginning” (i. 1), “the beginning of the kingdom” (x. 10), “the beginning of my strength” (xlix. 3), where it will be seen that Babel, a place or system, and Reuben, a person, not a date in the calendar, is in view. So in Leviticus to Deuteronomy we have the word translated “firstfruits” (Lev. ii. 12; xxiii. 10; Numb. xviii. 12; Deut. xviii. 4; xxvi. 10). Altogether the term “firstfruits” is stated in eleven passages, and implied in at least seven others. Several passages bring the two words ‘beginning’ and ‘end’ together. 

“Amalek was the first of the nations; but his latter end shall be that he perish for ever” (Numb. xxiv. 20). 

“From the beginning of the year even unto the end of the year” (Deut. xi. 12). 

“Though thy beginning was small, yet thy latter end should greatly increase”   (Job viii. 7). 

“So the Lord blessed the latter end of Job more than his beginning” (Job xlii. 12). 

“Better is the end of a thing than the beginning thereof” (Eccles. vii. 8). 

“Declaring the end from the beginning” (Isa. xlvi. 10). 

Common usage inclines the mind to think of time, when the phrase “in the beginning” is read, but if we press the point and ask “in the beginning of what?” how can we expect an answer? If God necessarily existed before the first act of creation, time cannot strictly be said to begin at all. When we consult a dictionary we find that the time element is of the first prominence. The English word is ultimately derived from the Greek ginomai and geno to become, to be brought forth, and the following are the headings of Lloyd’s Encyclopedic Dictionary: 

A. Transitive. 

(1) To commence action; to pass from action to action. 

(2) To trace the first ground, element, or existence of anything. 

B. Intransitive. 

(1) To come into being, or commence or enter on any particular state of existence. 

(2) To commence any action or cause of action; to take the first step from non-action to action. 

Begin and Begin with . . . . . To select any particular person or thing as the first of a series. 

It will be observed that in the above quotation, time as such does not enter into the definition; what is uppermost is the commencement of an action or of a series. When we add to this the Scriptural concept of a ‘firstfruits’, a prematurely ripened pledge of a full harvest to come, Gen. i. 1 takes on a richer meaning. 

The reference to wisdom in Prov. viii. 22-27 must not be omitted here. 

“The Lord possessed me in the beginning of His way, before His works of old. I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, or ever the earth was . . . . . when He prepared the heavens, I was there.” 

Wisdom is here personified, and is practically the same as the Logos of John i. 1-3. This leads to the last and most important revelation of the meaning of the word “beginning” when applied to creation. In the book of Revelation the word arche ‘beginning’ is found four times, and never used in any other way than a title of the Saviour Himself. 

 “I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty” (Rev. i. 8). 
 “These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God” (Rev. iii. 14). 

 “And He said unto me, It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end” (Rev. xxi. 6). 

 “I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last” (Rev. xxii. 13). 

When the sacred volume opens, the words ‘in the beginning’ are left unexplained, but when it closes, we discover that they imply not only a time, a commencement, but a Person, a Firstfruits and a Pledge, indeed the Alpha and the Omega, the Yea and the Amen (II Cor. i. 20). There is no article “the” in the Hebrew phrase “In the beginning”, the word being bereshith ‘In beginning’ or ‘to begin with’ or ‘as a commencement’ implying a goal that was in mind, a firstfruits, something future which was pledged in the opening act. Three great passages in the N.T. ascribe creation to the Saviour, namely John i., Heb. i., and Col. i., but as these passages are of fundamental importance we will reserve their study for a future article. 

It may be a useful appendix to the present examination to give the translations of arche found in the N.T. other than the word ‘beginning’: 

(1) Magistrates (Luke xii. 11). Power (of authority) (Luke xx. 20). 

(2) Corner (Acts x. 11; xi. 5). 

(3) First (Acts xxvi. 4). At the first (Heb. ii. 3). First adj. (Heb. vi. 1). First estate (Jude 6). 

(4) Principality (Rom. viii. 38; Eph. i. 21; iii. 10; vi. 12; Col. i. 16; ii. 10, 15; Titus iii. 1). 

(5) Rule (I Cor. xv. 24). 

Some of these references must appear again when the N.T. references to creation are before us. Meanwhile we have attained to one all covering and wondrous idea, namely that creation was a first step towards a goal, the creation of heaven and earth being ‘a kind of firstfruits’ pledging the harvest, and ultimately seen to be vested in the Person of Him Who takes to Himself the title The Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the Ending, the Amen, the Beginning of the creation of God. 

We now consider three great passages of the N.T. which ascribe creation to Christ. 

“In the beginning was the Word” (John i. 1-3).

There are four occurrences of the phrase en arche “in the beginning” in the N.T. namely John i. 1, 2, Acts xi. 15 and Phil. iv. 15, and it will be seen that after each occurrence we must add an explanatory term commencing with ‘when’. 

Relating John i. 1 with xvii. 5 and 24, we can read the opening words: 

“In the beginning / before the world was            \ 

                         \ and before it was overthrown / was the Word.”

If there is one fundamental truth which underlies all other revelations concerning the Godhead, it is that GOD is the Creator, and consequently when we read John i., we gather that, before the first act of creation was undertaken by the Almighty, a movement took place which is beyond our ability to describe or understand, but which can be spoken of as a descent of the unconditioned and absolute God, “Who is invisible”, into the realm of the conditioned and manifest. Hence, in the N.T. where creation is ascribed to Christ, He bears the titles “The Word”, “The Image”, and “The express Image of His Person”. Essentially “God is spirit” (John iv. 24) and God is “one” (Deut. vi. 4). 

  Economically, God is revealed as “Father” (Gal. i. 1), “Son” (Heb. i. 8) and 

“Holy Ghost” (Acts v. 3, 5), as well as Elohim, Jehovah and other titles. 

  Manifestly, before incarnation as “The Word” (John i. 1), “The Image” (Col. i. 15) and “The express Image of His substance” (Heb. i. 3). 

  Manifestly, at the incarnation “God was manifest in the flesh” (I Tim. iii.16), “The Word was made flesh” (John i. 14). 

Creation is the work of God Manifest; redemption the work of God manifest in the flesh. Creation is ascribed to Him as “The Word” as follows:

“All things were made (ginomai had a beginning, came into being) by Him; and without Him was not anything made that was made” (John i. 3). 

Creation is ascribed to Him as “The Image of the Invisible God” as follows: 

“For by Him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers; all things were created by Him, and for Him. And He is before all things, and by him all things consists” (Col. i. 16, 17). 

Creation is ascribed to Him as “The express Image of His person” as follows: 

“And Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundations of the earth; and the havens are the works of Thine hands” (Heb. i. 10). 

It will be observed that in John’s Gospel, the word ‘create’ is not used, but the word ginomai ‘to become’. This seems to have been chosen to emphasize two great facts: 

  All things came into being through Him, that is the primeval creation (John i. 1-3). 

  Grace and truth, i.e. the new creation came into being (ginomai) through Him (John i. 17). 

This is the first great comparison. The second is found in John viii. 58 and the recurring claims introduced by the words “I am”. 

 “Before Abraham came into being (ginomai), I AM.” 

 “I AM the bread of life . . . . . the light of the world . . . . . the good Shepherd . . . . . the resurrection and the life.” 

The word ‘create’ is not used in Heb. i. There we read: 

“And Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth; and the heavens are the works of Thine hands” (Heb. i. 10), 

and the strange fact is that, even though the earth and the heavens were thus brought into being, “They shall perish . . . . . and wax old as doth a garment”. This is revealed in order that the Hebrews should be prepared to find that some things which had been given as ‘foundations’, were now to be ‘left’ (Heb. vi. 1); that like the present heavens, the old covenant “waxeth old (and) is ready to vanish away” (Heb. viii. 13) in favour of the New Covenant, and that, just as the work of His ‘fingers’, so the Tabernacle ‘made with hands’ (Heb. ix. 11, 24) was also to be done away. The word ‘create’ is used in Col. i. 16 and iii. 10 of both the old and the new creations, and this relationship is further enforced by the repetition of the title “The Firstborn” in Col. i. 15 in connection with the primeval creation, and in Col. i. 18 of the church of the Mystery.

It is evident that these three books, John, Hebrews and Colossians, use their terms with precision, and the fact that inspiration has so pointed the way, makes it an established fact and no longer a pleasant theory that “In the beginning” really does mean in Gen. i. 1 that the primeval creation was ‘a kind of firstfruits’, pledging the attainment of the goal of the ages. 

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

(From The Berean Exxpositor, vol. 44, page 68).

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