Vol 01 - Answers to Correspondents: Christ's Presence
Answers to Correspondents: Christ’s Presence
9. Q.-In the correspondence on the presence of the Holy Spirit, &c., in the April number of "Words of Faith," it is stated by X., page 102, that Christ’s presence among the disciples, after resurrection and before ascension, is the same that we have now, where the two or three are gathered to His name, and hence a corporeal, and not a spiritual, presence, and in the latter character differing from the presence of the Holy Ghost, which is, of course, spiritual. Is this correct? And does not Christ’s ascension, as the glorified Man to His Father’s right hand and throne, make it impossible for Him to be present corporeally elsewhere than in the glory; and therefore that His presence among His gathered saints now is a spiritual, and not a corporeal, presence?
Further, in page 104, I understand Z. to insist upon the free and independent action of the Holy Spirit in the assembly, quite apart from the state of the brother who may be the channel. Would it not, therefore, be wrong to deny that a brother, known to be in a bad state of soul, might nevertheless minister the word, or give out a hymn, in the power of the Spirit? C. E. H. W.
A.-Undoubtedly Christ is bodily, or corporeally, in heaven, and only present spiritually with His saints when gathered to His name. The ascension to heaven makes the difference as to the manner of His presence with His people now, as in contrast with what it was just after His resurrection. Still, He is personally present. This is plainly taught in Z.’s letter, page 107. The action of the Holy Ghost is free and sovereign. He acts by whom He chooses, and the state of the vessel has nothing to say to this; and therefore it is quite possible, though not usual, that he might use a brother "in a bad state of soul" to act in the assembly. The guard is, "Prove all things, hold fast that which is good." (See 1 Thessalonians 5:20-21.) 100: w.
10. Referring to your reply to "C. E. S." in the April No. (query 7) I think some fresh light is thrown on the use of the Lord’s official title "Christ," contrasted with His personal title "Jesus," by Philip (Acts 8:5; Acts 8:35), by noting the verbs employed. In the first case it was
"To herald Christ" would embrace all of Him, which He will do in grace and salvation, or in judgment. "To evangelize Jesus" would only embrace His Person and grace, as the One who was called that name by the angel (Matthew 1:1-25); because "he would save his people from their sins"-the One who was before the Ethiopian in a special way from reading Isaiah 53:1-12. This is, to my mind, the reason of the change of the name in the two passages. I think too that the use of the verbs generally, in the New Testament, shows us that when the thought of judgment is connected with the preaching of Christ,
We a little doubt whether the suggested use of
11. I do not like the paper in the "Words of Faith " for April by " X., Y., Z." I do not think it is the truth, and some of the expressions are far from reverent or worthy of the things of God. I write to you, beloved brother, because I know I am not alone in this judgment. You will be the best judge of the way to rectify this. E. F. As several others have written to us with reference to some of the expressions used in X.’s second letter we insert E. F.’s letter in order to say a few words on the subject for the sake of all our readers. Though the expressions in question are peculiar and graphic, and perhaps not the happiest that might have been used to convey the thought in the mind, we did not regard them as either "irreverent " or "profane;" while from the knowledge we have of the writer we are quite sure he meant nothing of the kind, and will be grieved to learn that they have had this appearance, or been a cause of stumbling to any. Still, we desire to hear what the Lord’s voice to us is in the matter, and to express regret for any want of godly discernment and care in inserting them in our pages. The importance of the subject, and the belief that many needed help on the question raised, led us to publish the correspondence. We firmly believe the true doctrine as to it has been fully and clearly given in "Z.’s" first letter, and we remark, too, that it does not appear to have struck him that the expressions in " X.’s" letter were really improper. As many inquiries have come to us as to who the several writers are, we feel free to say that "Y," is "C. W.," and "Z." (the writer of the fourth and sixth letters) is "J. N. D.," while "X." is not "F. W. G." C. W.
