GREENWICH, MARCH 25TH, 1891

GREENWICH, MARCH 25TH, 1891

Mr. J. Edmondson.

My Dear Brother, — I was glad of your letter which was an encouragement to me. I think you have acted wisely at Rathmines in the position you have main-. tamed. At Westland Row they have gone beyond their proper function as an assembly and it will only involve them in difficulty. I had seen something of Mr. Hennessey’s thoughts previously in letters he had written. He blunders because he does not see that the thought of eternal life is taken up from the Old Testament — and that it means “the blessing” (Psalm 133) for man — though it must needs have had a peculiar place in Christ, who came here at the consummation of every thought of goodness for man — and we have it in having Him. Mr. H. insists that eternal life is actual vitality, and that it is by faith. If such were the case, where does new birth come in? He seems to me to ignore the necessity of new birth. Then he makes ‘eternal life’ to be the actual life of Christ when here after the flesh. It is Major Macarthur’s error. If it were true there could have been no real death. I call it shocking doctrine. I believe too that he would hold that it was the life of the Son before incarnation, which is profanity — for who knows anything of the divine life, save morally. His expression ‘God in flesh’ in his letter of February 2nd is in my judgment very wrong and unscriptural. I wish for his own sake he could be silenced.

^[p. 52] I have looked over your reply — and have run out a few words in pencil as I think they may lead to question. I understand you mean in general by ‘life’ the result of new birth. The letter seems to me alright, but I do not think you will convince Mr. H. in his present mood. The spirit abroad is that of fanaticism, I think what you say as to John 3:36 and John 6:53-56 is right. A man comes, so to say, to the death of Christ for life (though if he does so it is really divine drawing) and keeps in touch with that death all the time that he is here. As to the correspondence between Paul and John I should connect rather with quickening than with new creation (the latter though evidently coincident, compare Ephesians 2:5 and 10, seems more connected with walk) and save as to aspect (in our case quickened by the Son, in the other together with Christ) I see no difference between John 5 and Ephesians 2. I think the result of quickening is that we are of a new order, of a new nature according to Christ. I think that Paul connects the blessing of eternal life with the thought of full conformity to Christ in glory in the full place and condition of sons according to eternal counsel (Ephesians 1:4,5). John connects it with the relationship of children which we have in a world which knew not Christ and knows not us (John 1:10 - 12 and 1 John 3:1) and it supposes the divine nature. The thought of the divine nature in 2 Peter seems different and practical. I see nothing about eternal life as to those absent from the body. It stands in Scripture in connection with saints on earth in or under Christ, and in full conformity to Christ in glory.

I enclose you some thoughts in regard to ‘soul’ and ‘life’ which kindly return when done with. I have not a copy. Also some of the answers to Dr. Evan’s allegations.

With love in the Lord,
Your affectionate brother,
F. E. Raven.