Isaiah 4:2 KJV
In that day shall the branch of the LORD be beautiful and glorious, and the fruit of the earth shall be excellent and comely for them that are escaped of Israel.
That one of those descriptive titles of Christ is the Branch is well known. But I was impressed today with Scofield's four classifications of that name and of his tying that in with the four gospels...
"(1) "The Branch of [the LORD]" (Isa_4:2), that is, the "Immanuel" character of Christ (Isa_7:14) to be fully manifested to restored and converted Israel after His return in divine glory (Mat_25:31).
(2) the "Branch of David" (Isa_11:1); (Jer_23:5); (Jer_33:15) that is, the Messiah, "of the seed of David according to the flesh" (Rom_1:3) revealed in His earthly glory as King of kings, and Lord of lords;
(3) Jehovah's "Servant, the Branch" (Zec_3:8) Messiah's humiliation and obedience unto death according to; (Isa_52:13-15); (Isa_53:1-12); (Phi_2:5-8).
(4) The "man whose name is the Branch" (Zec_6:12); (Zec_6:13) that is His character as Son of man, the "last Adam," the "second Man" (1Co_15:45-47) reigning, as Priest-King, over the earth in the dominion given to and lost by the first Adam. …"
Now here was the interesting part to me:
• "...Matthew is the Gospel of the "Branch of David";
• Mark of "Jehovah's Servant, the Branch";
• Luke of "the man whose name is the Branch";
• John of "the Branch of Jehovah."
I can see where the tie between the title of the branch and the four gospels is, but I do question whether it is "hard truth." Sometimes our creativity, though creative, is merely the work of the imagination and not of the Spirit. Comparing Scripture with Scripture is a Biblical practice, but interjecting Biblical passages into another without Scriptural precedent to do so is a means of creating false doctrine.
In that day shall the branch of the LORD be beautiful and glorious, and the fruit of the earth shall be excellent and comely for them that are escaped of Israel.
That one of those descriptive titles of Christ is the Branch is well known. But I was impressed today with Scofield's four classifications of that name and of his tying that in with the four gospels...
"(1) "The Branch of [the LORD]" (Isa_4:2), that is, the "Immanuel" character of Christ (Isa_7:14) to be fully manifested to restored and converted Israel after His return in divine glory (Mat_25:31).
(2) the "Branch of David" (Isa_11:1); (Jer_23:5); (Jer_33:15) that is, the Messiah, "of the seed of David according to the flesh" (Rom_1:3) revealed in His earthly glory as King of kings, and Lord of lords;
(3) Jehovah's "Servant, the Branch" (Zec_3:8) Messiah's humiliation and obedience unto death according to; (Isa_52:13-15); (Isa_53:1-12); (Phi_2:5-8).
(4) The "man whose name is the Branch" (Zec_6:12); (Zec_6:13) that is His character as Son of man, the "last Adam," the "second Man" (1Co_15:45-47) reigning, as Priest-King, over the earth in the dominion given to and lost by the first Adam. …"
Now here was the interesting part to me:
• "...Matthew is the Gospel of the "Branch of David";
• Mark of "Jehovah's Servant, the Branch";
• Luke of "the man whose name is the Branch";
• John of "the Branch of Jehovah."
I can see where the tie between the title of the branch and the four gospels is, but I do question whether it is "hard truth." Sometimes our creativity, though creative, is merely the work of the imagination and not of the Spirit. Comparing Scripture with Scripture is a Biblical practice, but interjecting Biblical passages into another without Scriptural precedent to do so is a means of creating false doctrine.
No comments:
Post a Comment