GREENWICH, JUNE 17TH, 1900
GREENWICH, JUNE 17TH, 1900
Mr. J. Edmondson.
My Dear Brother, — Many thanks for your letter, which I have been unable to answer till now, as it arrived while I was away from home. I had had a line from Hamilton giving me some information as to the state of things in Dublin. I am very sorry for all [p. 159] there. Things would not be half so difficult did not Colossians Gahan find some measure of sympathy in Mr. Trench. It seems to me monstrous that he should talk of erroneous doctrine when the only one that was putting out anything contrary to Scripture was himself. He maintained that eternal life was communicated, and I said that I could not see any such thing as the communication of life, but that a man lived, either naturally or spiritually, by the operation of God. A man was said to be born of the Spirit, quickened, or new created, all of which speak of man being the subject of the power of God. No one can possibly deny this, he may quibble at the expression ‘that it is an effect produced’, but it is certain that it is the man who is the subject of the operation. The Lord said, “Ye must be born again”. He has no warrant that I know of for the idea of communication of life. The expression ‘I give unto them eternal life’ will not carry it. To begin with, it is to His sheep who know His voice and follow Him that He gives eternal life. He does not give them eternal life that they may become His sheep. Then again the mere word ‘give’ does not carry the idea of communication of life as a vital principle. God may give us an inheritance. The Father has given us that we should be called children of God. Anything may be the subject of a gift. He may say what he likes, but life is the man himself. He lives, and his life cannot be separated from himself. And though he dies as regards men, the saint lives for God. I can understand speaking of the communication of the Spirit, but then the Spirit is not myself, though the Spirit is life in us in this present time when we have to mortify the deeds of the body. But Colossians Gahan does not mean the communication of the Spirit, but of eternal life, a thought he cannot substantiate from the scripture. A man hates his life in this world, and keeps it to life eternal. How can you bring in the thought of communication here. The error is not with [p. 160] me but with him. He may appeal to Mr. Darby but this will not satisfy all. The situation is a difficult one but we shall have to wait on the Lord to see what He brings out of it. It is difficult to me to understand a man remaining in fellowship when erroneous doctrines are admitted and accepted. In reply to your questions, I would say, that I understand that the Spirit is life in us at the present time when, instead of the body being a competent vehicle, the deeds of the body have to be mortified. He is life potentially. We are quickened as regards affections, but not yet as regards the body. As regards Luke 20: 38, I think the expressions “living” and “live” indicate the account that God takes of saints who have passed off this scene, they have died for men, but they live for Him, and this involves their being raised. In regard to the term ‘reconciliation’ it appears to me that when the preposition ‘apo’ is prefixed it must bring in the idea of ‘from’, the recognition of a previous state in contrast. The word is intensified in force. As to the difference between ‘soul’ and ‘spirit’ in the passage in Luke, I can say little. I imagine it is often in the Psalms and elsewhere a parallelism, and if so, though the word is varied, there is not much difference of signification. The spirit seems to go the deeper of the two. But I am not learned in such refinements. We are through mercy well, and I trust you are so, I am glad you are going to have a change. Give my love in the Lord to your mother and brother, and to your own circle, and believe me,
Your affectionate brother,
F. E. Raven.