The common thought in respect to our Lord’s manifestation in the flesh is usually expressed in the word incarnation. This usual thought we believe to be wholly incorrect, unscriptural. The Incarnation theory is that our Lord’s human body, which was born of Mary, was merely a clothing, a covering for the spiritual body. The thought therefore attached to our Lord’s earthly life, according to this theory, is that our Lord during his earthly life was still a spirit being, exactly as before, except that he used the flesh that was born of Mary, and that was known as the man Christ Jesus, as his veil or medium of communication with mankind, after the manner in which angels had appeared in human form in previous times-to Abraham, to Manoah, to Lot, and others. (Genesis 18:1, 2; 19:1; Judges 13:9-11, 16.) Because of this incorrect premise, many confused and unscriptural ideas have been evolved respecting the various incidents of our Lord’s life and death: for instance, this theory assumes that our Lord’s weariness was not real, but feigned; because he, as a spirit being, could know no weariness. The logic of this theory would imply also that our Lord’s prayers were feigned, because, says this
theory, he was God himself, and to pray would have been to pray to himself; hence it is argued that his prayers were merely pro forma, to make an impression upon the disciples and those who were about. The same theory is bound to suppose that our Lord’s death was merely an appearance of death, for they argue that Jesus was God the Father, who being from everlasting to everlasting, cannot die: hence that the apparent agony and cry, ‘My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?’ and the dying, were merely pro formal to make the impression upon the minds of those who heard and saw. The logical argument of this theory, therefore, is that there was no real death for man’s sins, but merely an appearance of one, a spectacular effect, a dramatic show, a cinematographic representation, a deception produced for a good purpose; -to favorably influence the sympathies and sensibilities of mankind. "All of this is wrong, and violently in opposition to the truth on the subject, as presented in the Word of God. The Scriptural declaration is not that our Lord assumed a body of flesh as a covering for a spiritual body, as did the angels previously; but that he actually laid aside, or, as the Greek
renders it, ‘divested himself of,’ his pre-human conditions, and actually took our nature, or, as our text above declares, ‘the Logos was made flesh.’ There was no fraud, no sham, about it: it was not that he merely appeared to humble himself, while really retaining his glory and power: it was not that he seemed to become poor for our sakes, yet actually remained rich in the possession of the higher spiritual nature all the time: it was not that he merely put on the clothing, the livery, of a servant. No, but he actually became a man-’the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself a ransom for all.? -1Ti 2:5.
We shall see subsequently, when we come to consider particularly the ransom feature of his work, that it was absolutely necessary that he should be a man-neither more nor less than a perfect man-because it was a man that sinned, man who was to be redeemed, and the divine law required that a man’s life should pay the redemption price for a man’s life. ‘As by a man came death, by a man also came the resurrection of the dead.’ (1 Corinthians 15:21.)
But let no one misunderstand us by this to mean that our Redeemer became a man such as we are, full of inherited imperfections and
blemishes. Quiet to the contrary of this: the same word of God declares that he was ‘holy, harmless, separate from sinners.’ -Heb 7:26, 28; Luke 1:35.
His separateness from sinners is one of the difficult points with many. How could he be a man, and yet be free from the hereditary taint which affects the entire human family? We hope to see exactly how this could be, and how it was accomplished under the divine plan; but we require first to have thoroughly impressed upon our minds the fact that an imperfect man, a blemished man, one who through heredity had partaken of Adamic stock, and whose life was thus part with our life, could not be our Redeemer. There were plenty of sinful men in the world without God sending his Son to be another. There were plenty of these imperfect men who were willing to lay down their lives for the accomplishment of the Father’s will. This is fully attested by the record of Hebrews 11, in which it is clearly shown that many ‘counted not their lives dear unto them,’ in their faithfulness to the Lord. But what was needed was not merely a sacrifice, which would thus pay the sinner’s penalty. And since ‘all have sinned and come short of the glory of God,’ and since ‘there is
none righteous, no, not one,’ therefore, as the Scriptures again declare, ‘None could give to God a ransom for his brother.’ (Romans 3:10, 23; Psalms 49:7.) It was because the Lord beheld and saw that there was no man competent to redeem the world that he laid help upon one who is mighty to save-able to save to the uttermost all who come unto the Father by him. -Ps 89:19; Isaiah 63:1; 59:16; Hebrews 7:25.
Next we want, if possible, to see clearly how our Lord Jesus laid hold upon our race, and became a member of it, through his mother Mary, without sharing in any degree its depravity, without inheriting its blight of sin, without its curse of death laying hold upon him: for if in any manner or degree he partook of the life of Adam, he would have been a partaker also of the death sentence upon Adam’s life, and thus he would have come under the sentence of death; and if rendered thus imperfect, and under the sentence of death, he had no life-rights to give as man’s ransom price, by which to purchase father Adarn and his race from under the sentence of death imposed by divine Justice. We propose to examine this question in our next chapter. We hope to there prove that our Lord did not, in any manner or degree, become contaminated with sin or imperfection through his mother."
theory, he was God himself, and to pray would have been to pray to himself; hence it is argued that his prayers were merely pro forma, to make an impression upon the disciples and those who were about. The same theory is bound to suppose that our Lord’s death was merely an appearance of death, for they argue that Jesus was God the Father, who being from everlasting to everlasting, cannot die: hence that the apparent agony and cry, ‘My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?’ and the dying, were merely pro formal to make the impression upon the minds of those who heard and saw. The logical argument of this theory, therefore, is that there was no real death for man’s sins, but merely an appearance of one, a spectacular effect, a dramatic show, a cinematographic representation, a deception produced for a good purpose; -to favorably influence the sympathies and sensibilities of mankind. "All of this is wrong, and violently in opposition to the truth on the subject, as presented in the Word of God. The Scriptural declaration is not that our Lord assumed a body of flesh as a covering for a spiritual body, as did the angels previously; but that he actually laid aside, or, as the Greek
renders it, ‘divested himself of,’ his pre-human conditions, and actually took our nature, or, as our text above declares, ‘the Logos was made flesh.’ There was no fraud, no sham, about it: it was not that he merely appeared to humble himself, while really retaining his glory and power: it was not that he seemed to become poor for our sakes, yet actually remained rich in the possession of the higher spiritual nature all the time: it was not that he merely put on the clothing, the livery, of a servant. No, but he actually became a man-’the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself a ransom for all.? -1Ti 2:5.
We shall see subsequently, when we come to consider particularly the ransom feature of his work, that it was absolutely necessary that he should be a man-neither more nor less than a perfect man-because it was a man that sinned, man who was to be redeemed, and the divine law required that a man’s life should pay the redemption price for a man’s life. ‘As by a man came death, by a man also came the resurrection of the dead.’ (1 Corinthians 15:21.)
But let no one misunderstand us by this to mean that our Redeemer became a man such as we are, full of inherited imperfections and
blemishes. Quiet to the contrary of this: the same word of God declares that he was ‘holy, harmless, separate from sinners.’ -Heb 7:26, 28; Luke 1:35.
His separateness from sinners is one of the difficult points with many. How could he be a man, and yet be free from the hereditary taint which affects the entire human family? We hope to see exactly how this could be, and how it was accomplished under the divine plan; but we require first to have thoroughly impressed upon our minds the fact that an imperfect man, a blemished man, one who through heredity had partaken of Adamic stock, and whose life was thus part with our life, could not be our Redeemer. There were plenty of sinful men in the world without God sending his Son to be another. There were plenty of these imperfect men who were willing to lay down their lives for the accomplishment of the Father’s will. This is fully attested by the record of Hebrews 11, in which it is clearly shown that many ‘counted not their lives dear unto them,’ in their faithfulness to the Lord. But what was needed was not merely a sacrifice, which would thus pay the sinner’s penalty. And since ‘all have sinned and come short of the glory of God,’ and since ‘there is
none righteous, no, not one,’ therefore, as the Scriptures again declare, ‘None could give to God a ransom for his brother.’ (Romans 3:10, 23; Psalms 49:7.) It was because the Lord beheld and saw that there was no man competent to redeem the world that he laid help upon one who is mighty to save-able to save to the uttermost all who come unto the Father by him. -Ps 89:19; Isaiah 63:1; 59:16; Hebrews 7:25.
Next we want, if possible, to see clearly how our Lord Jesus laid hold upon our race, and became a member of it, through his mother Mary, without sharing in any degree its depravity, without inheriting its blight of sin, without its curse of death laying hold upon him: for if in any manner or degree he partook of the life of Adam, he would have been a partaker also of the death sentence upon Adam’s life, and thus he would have come under the sentence of death; and if rendered thus imperfect, and under the sentence of death, he had no life-rights to give as man’s ransom price, by which to purchase father Adarn and his race from under the sentence of death imposed by divine Justice. We propose to examine this question in our next chapter. We hope to there prove that our Lord did not, in any manner or degree, become contaminated with sin or imperfection through his mother."
