the cross. He said `My God' on the resurrection morning, and the apostle speaks
of the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, when he speaks of His ascended glory.
There is therefore a definite reason for the introduction of this title.
God is God, whether man believes or does not believe. `Even from everlasting to
everlasting, Thou art God' (Psa. 90:2). Yet on occasion He says `I will not be
your God' (Hos. 1:9). It is evident therefore that when we read `The God OF',
as we do in Ephesians 1:17, there is something more intended than that God is,
and that Christ was in the form of a servant. Throughout the Scriptures we read
`I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, the God of Jacob', by which we
understand that Abraham, Isaac and Jacob were in covenant relationship with God.
He is called the God of Israel and the God of our fathers, but where does He
ever say `I am the God of Moses'? `I am the God of Isaiah'? When we come to
the epistles of the Mystery, the covenant with Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, is
temporarily suspended, inheritance of the land postponed, the high honour of
being a kingdom of priests, for the time being, forfeited. The members of the
One Body, being Gentiles, had no `fathers', no `covenants', no `promises', only
one promise, and that made before the world began. Consequently, when we read
that Paul prayed to `the God of our Lord Jesus Christ', we lose its significance
if we begin to argue about His Deity; to us, He is more than Abraham, Isaac and
Jacob were to Israel, and when we give the title to the Father, `the God of our
Lord Jesus Christ', we are claiming the same intimate relationship on higher
ground and with richer blessing, than Israel claimed on their lower ground and
with lesser blessings, when they called on the God of their Fathers. It is
especially used when the Son of God is peculiarly associating Himself with His
people.
The strong doctrinal element of the first prayer is associated with the
title `God'; the mellow experimental nature of the second prayer is associated
with the title `Father'. In the former, we have high exaltation, all things
under His feet and universal sovereignty; in the latter we have family and home.
In the former it is `power' that is exceeding; in the latter it is `love'. In
the former it is revealed that this church will be `the fulness of Him that
filleth all in all', a statement of fact, wonderful beyond our wildest dreams.
In the latter we are urged so to comport ourselves that we `might be filled up
to (eis) all the fulness of God'. It is `the God of our Lord Jesus Christ' in
the first prayer; it is `the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ' in the second. In
the first prayer we look up. In the second He comes down. The fact that both
`God' and `Father' are employed in these prayers, shows that the Lord Jesus is
still viewed in His mediatorial capacity. There in the highest glory He sits,
`the Man Christ Jesus', and as `the Son' He reigns until the goal is reached (1
Cor. 15:28). As `the Man' He sits on high as the Head of the Church His Body,
as in Him, the Man, all fulness dwells; as the Man He will be manifested with
His church in glory; as the Man all principality and power are beneath His feet,
a glory faintly foreshadowed in Adam as revealed in the eighth Psalm. We may
not fathom all the reasons why, after choosing the church in Christ, before the
foundation of the world, it was necessary that every member of this company
should first come into existence `in adam' but some glimmerings of the mighty
purpose are here to be seen.
Following the title `The God of our Lord Jesus Christ', is another of like
import, `The Father of glory'. We must resist all efforts to turn this into a
figure of speech that would make it mean `the glorious Father'. There is more
here than appears at first. A parallel is found in 2 Corinthians 1:3 where we
read `Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of
mercies, and the God of all comfort'. When we read Ephesians 1:17 for the first
time, `the God of our Lord Jesus Christ', it appears to put the Lord in a
130