AUGUST 25TH, 1890

AUGUST 25TH, 1890

I do not accept the assertion of some that eternal life is an essential title of the Son of God. I am sure it cannot be maintained. I believe it to be a term indicating a condition, which, according to the counsel of God, was to characterise man, and which has now been made manifest by the appearing of Jesus Christ. That which was to characterise man was what had been in the Son eternally with the Father, and was in due time revealed in the second Man, the One out of ^[p. 23] heaven. But what characterised the second Man could not include all that was true of a divine Person, as self-existent, having life in Himself, omnipotence, omniscience, and many other attributes of a divine Person; and yet it does include what He was morally in righteousness, love, holiness, truth and nearness to the Father. Hence I said it was an integral part of His Person, but such as could be connected with manhood — could characterise the second Man and be communicated to men. I cannot see how there can be any difficulty in it. Christ is “the true God, and eternal life”. (1 John 5:20) We see the same thing in “that which is born of the Spirit is spirit”. (John 3:6) It partakes of the nature of the Spirit morally, but is apart from any question of divine attributes. The proper glory of the Son we shall see but could not share. I cannot imagine how anyone could think that the second Man covers all that is true of the Son; yet the second Man was out of heaven, as eternal life was with the Father. The only time that it is predicated of Christ that He is eternal life is 1 John 5:20, and then He is presented as the One who has come through “water and blood”, (1 John 5:6) is thus separated entirely by death from the first man, and is before God as the last Adam, the second Man in the virtue and power of redemption.

We are in Him and He is eternal life as the full expression and revelation of it, besides being the true God.

I trust that the above may meet your inquiry.

F E. Raven.