King's Business - 1932-07


T h e K i n g ’ s B u s i n e s s

July 1932

meaning of this word “ virgin,” we know that this was said to King Ahaz to be to him a sign that what God had said was true. It would be no “ sign” to say, “ A married woman shall conceive and bear a son.” There would be nothing in the fact that a married woman should bear a child to mani­ fest to Ahaz that God was giving him a miraculous sign. But that a virgin should have a child immediately lifts the event into the realm of the miraculous, and it thus becomes the “ sign.” This is the real meaning of the passage. Something similar to this is found in Jeremiah 31 :22, “ The Lord hath created a new thing in the earth, a woman shall encompass a man.” There would be nothing “ new” about such an event unless there was something unique concerning the conception and birth of the man encom­ passed by the woman. As an argument against the virgin birth, we are told that Matthew and Luke alone record it, while Mark and John are silent concerning it. Hence, because Mark and John do not mention it, we are to disbelieve it. To make this argument more potent, diligent attempts have been made to discredit the genuineness of both Matthew and Luke, but all attempts have been without success. The weakness of such an argument is seen when we remember that neither Mark nor John speak of the childhood and early life of Jesus. Shall we conclude therefore that He had none ? Another argument advanced against the virgin birth is the fact that Paul does not definitely mention it. But would Paul need to mention it definitely after writing such a pas­ sage as: “When the fulness of time was come, God sent forth his Son, born of a woman” (Gal. 4:4, R. V .) ? Why clutter up the page by informing us that this Son was “ born of a woman” unless there was something unique in His birth ? Could any one come into this world without being born of a woman? A careful consideration of Philippians 2 :5 -ll will also reveal why it was unnecessary for Paul to mention definitely the virgin birth. Paul certainly believed it, whether he definitely mentioned it or not. u t t h e miracle on the biological plane falls into the background when we come to a consideration of the moral aspect of His birth. The angel Gabriel informed Mary, in reply to her question concerning how such a birth could be, that “ the Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God” (Lk. 1 :35). There had never been a holy person upon earth until this One was born. There had been

He was the solitary holy person among all the millions of the sons of Adam. He was absolutely sinless in His na­ ture, motives, purposes, desires, actions, and words. And for this, we have the witness of friend and foe alike. Heaven and earth and hell all unite in declaring this One to be holy. Pilate who condemned Him said, “ I find no fault in this man.” The centurion in charge of the cruci­ fixion said,' “ Surely this is a righteous man.” Judas who betrayed Him said, “ I have betrayed innocent blood.” The demons who met Him said, “ We know thee who thou qrt, the holy one of God.” The apostles declare the same truth. John says, “ In him was no sin.” Paul says, “ He knew no sin.” Peter says, “ He did no sin.” He Himself could say, “ I do always the things that please God” ; and to this day His challenge remains unanswered, “ Which of you convinceth me of sin ?” And finally, God the Father could say to Him, “ Thou art my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.” Thus the moral mystery is greater far than the biolog­ ical, and there can be but one possible explanation of it, Here is a life that has been actually lived upon the earth, a life that has been the subject of the most searching investi-> gation ever given any life, and we rise from the investiga­ tion with the overwhelming conviction that this Man was sinless; He was holy; He was impeccable. But while the moral mystery transcends the physical, there is another mystery here that surpasses the moral. It is found in the spiritual aspect of this birth. “ That holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called ttye Son of God.” This Son of God was the first Child God ever had. Adam was His creature, coming by creative act’; this One is His Son', coming by procreative act. We .do not for­ get that God the Son was the uncreated and eternal Sec­ ond Person of the Trinity. The God of the Scriptures is a triune Being, three persons in the one God, each person coeternal and uncreated. But this triune God becomes the Father of a Son, who is henceforth called “ The Son of God.” There is a wide difference between God the Son and the Son of God. The former never became, He always was; the latter had a beginning. We should carefully re­ member, however, that the former ever dwelt in the latter; He could not divest Himself of His essential deity. This Son of God had a birthday, the day of His resur­ rection from Joseph’s tomb. There had been restorations before, but never had there been a resurrection: He was the “ first-born” from among the dead (Rom. 8:29 ), and the “ firstfruits” of them that slept (1 Cor. 15:20). The “ first-born” speaks of others who shall be born, and the

good men, and Adam had been an in­ nocent man, but never before had earth looked upon one who was holy. Indeed, never since has another holy one appeared upon earth. This One was “ holy” in His birth, He then sanc­ tified Himself upon earth, He was al­ so sanctified by God the Father for His service, and He was sanctified upon the cross, thus becoming the sufficient sacrifice for sin and the ac­ ceptable Substitute for sinners. Well might the people, as they examined His miraculous life, and listened to His miraculous teaching, and beheld His miraculous works, cry out, “What manner of man is this?” (Mk. 4:41). The answer to their question is found in the fact that He was “ that holy thing” born of the Virgin Mary.

“ firstfruits” is the pledge that the har­ vest is all ready, and the guarantee that all the harvest is like unto the firstfruits. God’s purpose is that “whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate tcf be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the first-born among many brethren” (Rom. 8 :29 ). As deity, He could Have no brethren, but as the Son of God, the first-born from the dead, He is to have many brethren. The Son who is to have many brethren in the One of whom it is written, “ Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee” (Psa. 2 :7 ). Christians can never become partakers of Deity, or of God the Son, but they are to par­ take of the divine nature, like unto the Son of God (2 Pet. 1 :4). [Continued on page 310]

His Virgin Birth B y R ussell E. K auffman Born of the Virgin Mary, Conceived by the Holy Ghost; Never the son of. Joseph, He was but earthly host; Before they had come together Mary with child was found; Miracle Child of the ages — God’s revelation profound! Prophecy thus fulfilling, Jesus was virgin born. Denying the blessed doctrine, He of His power is shorn. Reason cannot explain it, Men cannot understand; Still let His own proclaim it; Firm on the Bible stand.

Made with FlippingBook - Online catalogs