Lecture XII · The Great Example

IN this singularly interesting and important paragraph, the apostle enforces the preceding counsels to the cultivation _ of self-denying love, by the argument strongest of all to the _ heart of every Christian, the example of the Lord Jesus. ‘

The first fact in the history of the Lord to which he refers is, _ that God condescended to become man: ‘who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God; but made Him- _ self of no reputation, and took upon Him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men,’

You will observe that the word ‘nature’ is not employed here, but ‘form.’ The probable reason appears, when we think of the apostle’s immediate object in referring to the _ Saviour, which, as we have seen, was to set Him forth as an example for us of kind and self-sacrificing consideration for others. Now we cannot change our nature, or assume an additional nature. We are, and must remain, simply human. In the Lord’s taking human nature into association with the K

divine, therefore, there is nothing even approximately imitable’ by us. But as regards the surrender for the good of others of wealth, ease, rank, repute, or life, there is a possibility, at an infinite distance, of Christians following their Lord. It is to these points, accordingly, in which there is an analogy between the case of Christ and that of His people, that Paul adverts. He presents the argument, you remember, very similarly, in calling on the Corinthians to be liberal givers for the relief of the poorer brethren. ‘See that ye abound in this grace,’ he says, ‘for ye know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though He was rich, yet for your sakes He became poor, that ye through His poverty might be rich.’ As, in that passage, he presents voluntary self-impoverishment for the sake of others as the aspect of our Lord’s work of love suitable for his exhortation, —so, in the verse before us, somewhat more generally, seeing that self-sacrificing love generally is the subject of appeal, the renunciation for our sakes of ineffable greatness and glory is made prominent—His leaving His original divine glory of manifestation and surroundings for the lowliness of humanity. The possession of the zatures of which the manifestations are respectively glory and lowliness, is of course implied.

You gather from what has been said, that ‘form’ here is to be taken in its widest sense, as the mode in which a nature ΟΠ reveals itself, or has its characteristics exhibited. When we are told, then, that, ‘being’—from eternity—‘in ¢he form of God, Christ ‘took upon Him Zhe form of a servant’ of God, the contrast is between the glory of the Supreme King and the lowliness of a subject.

The word which our translators have rendered by ‘ robbery’ is of doubtful interpretation. According to the usage of the Greek language, it may be taken in either of two senses, closely allied, yet giving the clause very different bearings. It may mean ‘the act of grasping,’ or it may mean ‘an object grasped, or to be grasped,’ for acquisition or retention. ‘This double signification may be illustrated by the use of our own

_ English word ‘capture,’ a word of very similar meaning. We speak of the ‘capture’ of a ship; and again, the crew of the conquering vessel will call the taken ship herself ‘ our capture.’ In the vast majority of cases in which words of this kind are employed, the context prevents the slightest risk of ambiguity ; but the present happens to be one in which a good consistent meaning, pertinent to the apostle’s purpose, is obtained on either view. Our translators, with many other interpreters, adopt the first sense, ‘the act of grasping ;’ and the statement thus yielded is, that ‘Christ, being in the enjoyment of the glory of God, therefore thought it no pillaging or robbery to be equal with God,—but, nevertheless, made Himself of no reputation.’ Here the clause is an amplification of the mention of our Lord’s original dignity, which heightens the force of the subsequent statement of condescension. According to the other use of the word, the statement made is, that, ‘ though in the form, or glory, of God, yet He did not reckon this equality with God as an object to be graspingly retained, —or, more generally, ‘did not count it as of supreme importance.’ The work of love seemed to him a greater thing than the manifestation of power and dignity. Here, you observe, the clause, which on the former view continued the statement of the Lord’s original dignity, now introduces the account of His condescension. On the whole, considering the connection in which the apostle makes the statement, and various little points in the mode of expression in the original, it seems to me that the latter sense is that which he intended: ‘ Being in the form of God, still He did not consider His being on a parity with God as a possession to be graspingly retained,— or, as of supreme value,—but made Himself of no reputation.’ On this view of the meaning, the phrase “ὦ be equal with God’ is virtually equivalent to the previous ‘ being in the form, or glory, of God.’ On the view adopted by our translators, there seems to be an advance from the idea of ‘form’ to ‘nature.’ On either interpretation of the clause, as you see, the doc-

trine of our Lord’s true and supreme divinity is most clearly taught, in the one case expressly, in the other by most distinct implication. That any mere creature should be spoken of as

‘in the form of God’—taking these words in any natural or adequate sense—is utterly inconceivable ; and to exhibit, as an evidence of sublime condescension, the not reckoning equality of glory with God the Father to be a possession of supreme value, would plainly be totally unmeaning, unless this equality of glory were a true and rightful possession. ‘

Being in the form of God,’ then, ‘He yet esteemed not His equality with God as a possession to be graspingly retained ; but,’ on the contrary, ‘ made Himself of no reputation” Our translators have here slightly paraphrased, the exact meaning of the original words being ‘emptied Himself,’—not of the nature of God (this is impossible ; essentially, everlastingly, He is God), but of the ‘form,’ the glory in mode of manifestation. The glory in which He had been revealed to angels in heaven, —the glory in which, at times, in His pre-incarnate state, He, under all the economies the Revealer of God, had shown Himself to man, as at Sinai, or to Isaiah, when he ‘ saw the Lord sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up, and His train filled the temple, —of this glory He ‘ emptied Himself.’

This He did by ‘ taking upon Himself the form of a servant. These last words standing in obvious and very striking antithesis to ‘the form of God,’ we are not to think of the word ‘servant’ here as intended to bring before us the humbleness even among men of the position He assumed in this world,— to which He Himself adverts in such statements as ‘ The Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister,’ and

‘I am among you as he that serveth.’ This thought of lowliness among men comes afterwards, as we shall see. At this point ‘servant of God’ is the idea, the contrast being simply between the glory which is the ‘ form,’ or manifestation, of the supreme King of the universe, and the lowliness which is the ‘form’ of a subject or servant of the Divine King.

How the Son of God took the form of a servant the apostle explains in the next clause,—‘ being made in the likeness of men. — £ Of men,’ you observe, not ‘of a man, for the thought of the race, to be whose representative He assumed our nature, is before the apostle’s mind. Again, the humanity of the Saviour was indeed a true humanity, not a mere shadow; but it was not mere humanity. To keep the absolute uniqueness of Christ’s Person before our minds, therefore, and thus the thought of His infinite condescending grace, Paul introduces the word ‘/ikeness.’

Thus, dear brethren, we have the mystery of mysteries set _ before us, ‘ without controversy great,‘ God manifest in the - flesh.” Our Redeemer is ‘God over all, blessed for ever,’ infinite, eternal, immutable,—the I AM, the essentially living One. Take away from our faith the doctrine of our Lord’s true divinity, and our hope of deliverance through Him is found baseless. There could then be no atonement for our sins; for there would be no true right or power of self-surrender for such a work, and no adequate value in the ransom paid. There could then be no trusting to the Saviour’s care, no expectation of His sympathy, no prayer to Him; for there would be no omniscience, omnipresence, omnipotence, and a true Saviour needs all these. But the truth stands fast that ‘The Word was God.’ Yet, ‘ being in the form of God,’ He ‘emptied Himself’ of this glory. It is true that in His life on earth He exhibited sublime wisdom, holiness, and power ; and that once even in His bodily appearance something of the glory of heaven was revealed, ‘ His face _ shining as the sun, and His raiment white as the light, —so that the witnesses could testify, ‘We beheld His glory, such glory __as beseemed the Only-begotten of the Father.’ Still in His common life it was possible—it was easy—not to see the Saviour’s heavenly beauty and majesty. No visible diadem of celestial _ glory glittered on His brow, to mark Him out as the King of kings. No jewelled breastplate, with Urim and Thummim,

indicated Him to be the world’s great High Priest. ‘For our sakes He became poor.’ And the obvious evidences of His humanity blinded most men to the significance of His wisdom and character and works. ‘They would not allow the thought to enter their minds, or at least to find permanent lodgment there, that this Man, whose life in many things was so similar to their own,—who hungered and thirsted,—who toiled and grew weary,—who went in and out among them so humanly,— could be essentially, or in any material respect, different from themselves. Most striking is the fact recorded in His history, that until His resurrection His own brothers, who for many years had lived their daily life by His side, did not believe on Him. He ‘emptied Himself’ of His glory.

But we must pass on now to consider the second fact regarding Himewhich the apostle mentions. This is that, as man, Fe went down into the depths of humiliation: ‘ And being found in fashion asa man, He humbled Himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross” We pass here, you 566, to the view of another evidence of our Lord’s condescending grace. The first was the incarnation: we come now to the humiliations, even as compared with other men, to which, having assumed our nature, the God-man yielded Himself for our redemption. ‘To the hearts of most Christians, probably of all, this second evidence is even more impressive than the former. In contemplating the incarnation,—the step from the “form of God’ into the conditions of a finite nature,—we cannot see clearly for the glory of the heavenly light. Infinity meets us in the foreground, and thus a haze drapes for us the whole picture of that act of immeasurable moral grandeur. In the life of the man Christ Jesus on the earth, infinity is in the background ; and just because He has ‘emptied Himself’ of His glory, we have more distinct and influential impressions made upon us.

The Lord comes before us now, then, ‘27 fashion as a man, By ‘fashion’ are intended outward guise, demeanour, and mode

of life. Still, you observe, as before in the word ‘likeness,’ the apostle would remind us of the uniqueness of the Saviour’s Person. Prominence given to the s/mi/arity to man, in places where we should expect simple mention of the real humanity, suggests, by contrast, the aspects of dissimilarity.

Throughout the whole passage the idea of visible manifestation is prominent, the apostle having it before his mind to point to the evidence of the Saviour’s self-sacrificing grace. Thus we have already had the ‘ form of God’ contrasted with ‘ the form of a servant.’ The same idea appears again here in the somewhat remarkable expression, ‘ being fownd in fashion as a man.’ We are led to think of seekers and beholders. When the angels, who from their creation had known Him and worshipped Him ‘in the form of God,’ sought Him at Bethlehem, in the wilderness, or in Gethsemane,—in what condition did they ‘ find’ Him whom they adored as their Creator, and Sustainer, and King? When we are roused by the Divine Spirit to seek the Light and Life of men, and are thus led to contemplate Jesus with profoundest interest,—what do we ‘find’ in looking at His earthly life? We find no outward grandeur or glory, no abundance of outward comfort. We find one who among His fellow-men was conspicuous as a Sufferer. ‘ He humbled Himself,—and this by ‘ becoming obedient, obedient even ‘ unto death, and that ‘the death of the cross,

The fact that the God-man became ‘obedient’ to God, proves of itself, even were there no other evidence, the reality of His humanity. Subjection, dependence, is conceivable only in a created nature. This expression brings the suitableness of the Lord’s conduct as an example clearly before us, too. What He did and bore on earth, He did and bore as a servant of God, —a member of the class to which all Christians profess to belong.

Consider, then, to what the spirit of obedience led our Forerunner. And, in doing this, bear in mind the truth which, as we have just seen, is implied in His being obedient—a truth

which, I fear, is often but very dimly before us,—that He was a real man,—that He felt pain as really as you and I do,—that the wants caused by poverty were as real privations and trials for Him as they would be to you and me,—that He yearned for the love and esteem of his fellow-men as you and I do, and this with a purity and unselfishness of interest in absolute perfection, of which there is often sadly little in our hearts. Having this nature, then, Christian brethren, ‘the Man, God’s Fellow,’ was a ‘Man of Sorrows.’ How manifold were the springs of distress which showed themselves in His experience! Poverty and hardship, hatred and contempt, bereavement by death, and yet sorer bereavement by desertion, of dear and trusted friends, —what source of human sadness was wanting to Jesus, except a consciousness of sin? In the pathetic language of prophetic Scripture, ‘He became a stranger unto His brethren, and an alien unto His mother’s children. Reproach broke His heart, and He was full of heaviness ; and He looked for some to take pity, but there was none, and for comforters, but He found none. He gave His back to the smiters, and His cheeks to them that plucked off the hair. He was despised and rejected of men, and we hid, as it were, our faces from Him.’

And, after thus suffering, He died. He who was ‘holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners,’ received the ‘ wages of sin.’ The Prince of life yielded up His life. And this by ‘7¢he death of the cross.’ Of all the modes of inflicting death which the ingenuity of cruelty has devised, crucifixion is one of the most painful—perhaps absolutely the most painful. From descriptions and pictures, all of us are, to some extent, acquainted with the nature of this punishment. The cross consisted of a strong upright post, not so high as is generally represented in pictures, —not more than from six to seven feet,—with a transverse beam near the top, and a small projecting piece about half-way up. To this cross, probably after it had been placed in the ground, the condemned person was secured ; being made to rest in a measure on the middle projection, with his hands fastened to

the transverse beam by large bolts or nails driven through them ; and, in the case of our Lord at least, though the general usage is somewhat uncertain, the feet also were similarly nailed. The partial resting of the body on the projection I have mentioned, somewhat lessened the torture which would have been occasioned by the suspending of the whole weight on the nails driven through the hands; but made it more lingering. From this account it will be plain that this mode of death was one of intense and protracted anguish. An interesting and impressive relic of the feelings of old times regarding the physical suffer-. ing caused by crucifixion is found in our own language ; for when, to express the utmost intensity of pain, we select the word ‘excruciating,’ as the very strongest our tongue supplies, we are, according to the etymological meaning of the word, likening the pain to that endured upon a cross. No vital organ being directly injured in this mode of punishment, death was commonly slow, awfully slow ; whilst the laceration of parts so exquisitely sensitive as the hands and feet, the pressure on the wounds, and the rapidly increasing fever of the whole system, caused unutterable agony. And this, men and brethren,— this your divine Saviour endured for you. Oh that every one of us were enabled to join, with all the energies of his being, in that richest, deepest tone of the loving praise of heaven,— ‘Worthy is the Lamb that was slain, to receive power, and riches, and wisdom, and strength, and honour, and glory, and blessing !’

Besides its painfulness, crucifixion was a punishment to which _ the idea of disgrace attached also in a particular degree. The Jews regarded a crucified person as accursed. It is true, indeed, that in their own penal code this cruel punishment had no place, nor any at all resembling it. Had Jesus suffered directly _ under a Jewish sentence, His death would have been by stoning. But, with them, after stoning, the corpses of the very worst of malefactors were suspended publicly on a tree or post ; and crucifixion was regarded as equivalent to an exposure

of this kind,—an exposure which was held to bea public declaration that the curse of God had come down on a rebel against His law. ‘Thus, my brethren, ‘Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us ; for it 15 written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree.’ Among the Romans also, by whom our Lord was crucified, this punishment was regarded as utterly ignominious and degrading. In their use it was all but exclusively limited to slaves,—a class by them, as generally by slave-holding nations, looked upon with the utmost contempt, as scarcely at all possessed of the rights, or entitled to the sympathies, of humanity. Thus, in being condemned to the cross, Jesus was held up as an outcast from society,—‘a worm and no man, a reproach of men and despised of the people.’ I can hardly help thinking that before Paul’s mind, as with adoring wonder he wrote his ‘ even the death of the cross,’ the contrast between his own position and the Saviour’s was prominent. By Roman law, under no circumstances could a Roman citizen be crucified. ‘Let the very name of the cross,’ says Cicero in one of his speeches, ‘ be far away, not only from the body of Roman citizens, but from their very thoughts, eyes, ears.’.}_ Now Paul was a Roman citizen. In the very town to which he was now writing, his citizenship had brought him the amplest apologies from the magistrates for having even beaten him with rods. And to the shameful punishment of the cross, which no man in the world would dare to inflict on him,—him whom his profoundly tender conscience called ‘the chief of sinners,’—to that the holy Son of God had — humbled Himself for his redemption. ‘Behold what manner of — love !’

The thought of the condescension in which the Saviour’s love revealed itself being before the apostle’s mind throughout the whole passage, he gives prominence to the spirit of obedience in © which He suffered: ‘He became obedient unto death, even the — death of the cross.’ In His voluntarily assumed position as ‘a

VERS” SS ee servant’ of God, He had a great work assigned Him ;—and * He was faithful to Him that appointed Him.’ ‘ His meat was to do the will of Him that sent Him.’ His whole life was one unbroken act of obedience, ‘ fulfilling,’ as the representative Man, ‘all righteousness.’ And since, of His appointed work, dying constituted an essential part—dying on the cross,—He shrank not even from this. He ‘had a baptism to be baptized with,’ and He ‘ was straitened till it was accomplished.’ The aspiration of His soul was ever, ‘Not My will, but Thine, be done ;’ and, whithersoever the path led which God had marked out for Him, ‘ He stedfastly set His face to go,’—even to the darkness of Gethsemane, to the pain and shame and dreary desolation of Calvary. Then, at last, came the cry of triumph, ‘ It is finished.’

This brings us to the third fact regarding the Saviour, of which the apostle makes mention—namely, that in reward of His obedience He was crowned with glory and honour : ‘Wherefore God also hath highly exalted Him, and given Him a name which is above every name; that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father’? The ancient oracle has been fulfilled, ‘ Behold, My Servant shall be exalted, and extolled, and be very high.’ ‘The God of peace hath brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus, that great Shepherd of the sheep,’ ‘and set Him at His own right hand in the heavenly places, far above all principality and power and might and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come, and hath put all things under His feet.’ The Father, who in the economy of redemption represents the majesty of the Godhead, has invested the Mediator with this glory and power, in attestation of perfect satisfaction with the work of atonement,—and for the carrying out to completion of the great purposes of His grace, through the mission of the Spirit, and the providential adminis-

tration of the affairs of the world with a view to the triumph of the gospel. In the connection, however, in which the apostle introduces his statement of the Lord’s exaltation here, as part of an enforcement of the precept of the 4th verse, he is evidently looking to Him specially as our Forerunner,—his immediate design being to exhibit this general principle of the divine government, that God marks and rewards all subjection of the heart to the spirit of self-sacrificing love and holy obedience. He who was ‘in the form of God, took upon Him the form of a servant: and being found in fashion as a man, He humbled Himself, and became obedient ; wherefore God also hath highly exalted Him.’ ‘We see Jesus for the suffering of death crowned with glory and honour.’

By ‘name, in this passage, is meant, according to a most natural and familiar usage, ‘title and dignity.’ We say of John Howard, that by philanthropy he has gained for himself an undying ‘name.’ ‘The word of God came to Nathan, saying, Go and tell David, My servant, Thus saith the Lord, I have been with thee, and have made thee a name like the name of the great men that are in the earth’ (1 Chron. xvi. 8). The — universal confession spoken of in the 11th verse, ‘that Jesus Christ is Lord,’ makes it not improbable that, in employing the word ‘name,’ the apostle had in his mind the title of ‘ Lord,’ as summing up the authority and glory to which the Saviour was raised. Similarly, you remember, Peter, in the great sermon at Pentecost, called upon ‘all the house of Israel’ to ‘know assuredly that God had made that same Jesus whom they had crucified, both Lord and Christ.’ This name ‘is above every name. Our Redeemer’s position and glory are infinitely higher than that of the very highest of mere created beings. ‘To which of the angels said God at any time, Sit on My right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool ?’

The purpose of God, in bestowing this power and glory, was - ‘ that at (more exactly, ‘‘in”) the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under

• the earth ; and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord” ‘The expression ‘in the name,* often used in Scripture in various connections, has some variety of signification. The general idea, however, is ‘in recognition or acknowledgment’ of him who is named,—the name being, so to speak, the element or atmosphere within which an act referred to is performed, or a command put forth as authoritative. When David says, ‘O God, Thou art my God; I will lift up my hands in Thy name,’—his meaning plainly is, ‘ Recognising in Thee the only God, the only Fountain of life and strength and joy, I will raise my hands to Thee in prayer.’ To the lame man at the gate of the temple Peter said, ‘In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, rise up and walk,’—that is, ‘ Acknowledging Him as the Source of the power which is about to be manifested, I give thee this command.’ Similarly, in the passage before us, ‘ Every knee’ is to ‘dow’ in profoundest homage, “ 271 recognition of the power and majesty of Jesus” The name ‘ Jesus’ has manifestly a special force here, through the contrast between its former association with lowliness and suffering—its former subjection to derision and scorn,—and the present glory of Him who bears it. ‘The stone which was set at nought of the builders, is become the head of the corner.’

By the rendering of our translators, ‘that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth, is set forth the subjection to Christ of the whole universe—all the creatures of God, rational and irrational, animate and inanimate. In some form, all of them shall acknowledge His sway. In the same way, the Psalmist calls upon every thing that God has made—‘ the angels, the sun and moon, stormy wind fulfilling His word, fruitful trees and all cedars, beasts and all cattle, creeping things and flying fowl, young men and maidens, old men and children’—to ‘praise the name of the Lord.’! The bold figure, too, of the inanimate creation ‘bowing the knee,’ has 1

Ps, cxlviii.

Old Testament analogies, in ‘ the floods’ and ‘the trees of the field’ ‘ clapping their hands.’! This wide view of the meaning of the apostle’s statement gives a perfectly clear and satisfactory sense. His reference, however, may be to moral beings merely,—‘ of ¢hose in heaven, and /¢hose on earth, and ‘those under the earth.’ The conscious acknowledgment of Christ which appears to be most naturally suggested by the second part of the statement, ‘that every tongue should confess,’ renders this view perhaps on the whole the more probable. In this case, if the language be other than a rhetorical expansion—not intended to be pressed in its details—of the general idea ‘moral beings everywhere,’—we must think, under the various classes respectively, of angels and the spirits of departed saints, of men still living on earth, and of Satan and his hosts, and the souls of lost men, whose appointed abode is ‘the abyss.’? Willingly or unwillingly—through joyful surrender to His grace, or through the experience of His wrath and the conviction of utter overthrow—all moral beings, in heaven, and earth, and hell, shall ‘ bow the knee’ to Christ, and ‘ confess Him to be Lord.’

In the 10th and 11th verses there is a distinct allusion to a passage in Isaiah,—‘ Thus saith the Lord that created the heavens ; God Himself that formed the earth,—I have sworn by Myself, that unto Me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear’ (Isa. xlv. 18, 23). The application of such words to Jesus, by an inspired servant of Him who says, ‘I am the Lord ; that is My name; and My glory will I not give to 1

See Luke viii. 31 ; Rev. ix. 11. For ‘the deep’ of the English Version, in the former of these passages, and ‘the bottomless pit’ of the latter, and of several other places in Revelation, the word in the original is the same,—that from which our English ‘abyss’ comes. ‘ The deep,’ in Luke, is far from a happy translation, as hiding the connection with the fuller teaching of Revelation on the subject, and probably suggesting to many readers an unreal connection with the subsequent fate of the swine, which perished in ‘ the deep’ of the lake.

another,’ is a most explicit testimony to the supreme divinity of our Lord.

But since, in the economy of redemption, the Son is subject to the Father, the grand end of the universal homage to Jesus is ‘the glory of God the Father. The Lord’s own prayer was, ‘Father, glorify Thy Son, that Thy Son also may glorify Thee.’ To no other end can the Absolutely Wise and Holy One work, than the manifestation of His own excellences, and their recognition by His moral creatures,—for in this is summed up all good. The creation, maintenance, and administration of the universe are ‘for His own glory.’ But unspeakably the fullest exhibition of His excellence is in the provision which He has made for saving sinful men, through the mediation of His Son. Here His wisdom and His holiness, His justice and His love, shine forth in unparalleled splendour. The subjection of all creatures, therefore, to the authority of the Mediator between God and men, and the triumphant testimony thus given to the complete success of the mediation,—this most signally redounds to the glory of Him who ‘so loved the world, that He gave His only-begotten Son’ to be its Redeemer.

Looking back now over the whole of this wonderful paraἢ graph, you see its sublime fitness to serve the purpose of illustration and argument which immediately led to its introduction by the apostle. In the first verses of the chapter he had appealed, with intense earnestness, to his dear spiritual children at Philippi, to ‘increase and abound in love, one toward another,’ shunning factiousness and self-seeking, and cultivating a sincere and tender regard for the interests of their brethren. This appeal is taken up again in the 5th verse, and sent home with transcendent power to the heart and conscience of every believer : ‘ Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus,—who, being in the form of God, made Himself of no reputation, and took upon Him the form of a servant, and became obedient to death, even the death of the cross, —all from love to you. ‘If, to save you, He thus

humbled Himself, is it not most reasonable that you, His brethren, blessing Him for His love, should yourselves show to each other the same spirit of true and self-sacrificing affection ?’

All conceivable intensities and activities of love are summed _ up in the record of the work of Christ, ‘who gave Himself for us.’ ‘ Hereby perceive we love,! because He laid down His life for us,—and we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren.’ These words of the Apostle John are evidently, in substance, equivalent to Paul’s here; for self-sacrifice is the central element referred to in ‘the mind which was in Christ Jesus’ Believers are not unfrequently invited by their Lord, in His providence, to place themselves in positions where they may be called on literally to ‘lay down their lives for the brethren.’ And, blessed be God, not a few Christians, all down the history of the church, have been ready to respond to the summons. John Howard, voluntarily making a voyage in a plague-ship, and taking up his abode in a plague-hospital, with the full expectation of death, but in the hope that, by carefully noting the peculiarities of the disease, and leaving papers on the subject, he might provide the physicians of Europe with materials which would perhaps enable them somewhat to stay the ravages of the awful destroyer,—is, in his grand self-forgetfulness, the type of a glorious band whom God has strengthened. Many a humble man and woman, who, simply through the impulse of Christian love, have, at imminent risk to their own lives, cared for their brethren, by nursing them in infectious diseases, or bringing them aid in other circumstances of peril,—many such, ‘never heard of half a mile from home,’ will be honoured by the Master ‘in that day’ with a smile of 1

Our translators render this passage (1 John iii. 16), ‘ Hereby perceive we the love of God.’ The last two words are a supplement, unnecessary _ and not very happy. The apostle’s thought seems to be, ‘In this we have the knowledge of love’—of the nature and working of this heavenly spirit.

specially tender love, as He says to them, ‘Inasmuch as ye did it unto one of the least of these My brethren, ye did it unto Me.’

Apart, however, from calls to self-devotion, even to death, in such ways as I have indicated,—calls which, of necessity, come but occasionally in most lives,—opportunities present themselves continually for some self-surrender in the cause of love, some sacrifice of time or ease or personal inclination. So far as his own conscience was concerned, it was to Paul a matter of indifference what he ate or drank; yet, as you remember, he says, ‘If meat make my brother to offend, I will eat no flesh while the world standeth, lest I make my brother to offend.’ Here, in regard to what might seem comparatively trifling, was real self-sacrifice for love’s sake,—the working of the same ‘mind which was also in Christ Jesus.’ Similarly, my brethren, let ours be the love which ‘seeketh not her own.’ If there be anything in your daily life or mine calculated to lead others astray,—if, by some sacrifice of personal ease or liking, we can alleviate any distress of others, remove any stumbling-block out of their way, or gain any true good for them,—let us not hesitate to follow the dictate of the royal law of love. Our natural selfishness will often struggle vigorously _ with the impulses of conscience ; yet, if our souls at all ‘ prosper _ and be in health,’ one thought will tell in the controversy with ever fuller power,—‘ If my Saviour died for me, surely I may, in some small measure, die daily in self-denial for my brethren.’