I do not now mean in regard to the nature of the salvation, but in
regard to the relation between the human and the divine. Joshua was the
human agent through which the divine will effected deliverance, but, as
in all helpers and teachers, he was but the instrument. He could not
have said, 'I lead you, I give you victory.' His name taught him that he
was not to come in his own name. But '_he_ shall save'--not merely God
shall save through him. And '_his_ people'--not 'the people of _God_'
All this but points to the broad distinction between Christ and all
others, in that God, the Saviour, is manifest in Him as in none other.
We are not detracting from the glory of God when we say that Christ
saves us.
Christ's consciousness of being Himself Salvation is expressed in many
of His words. He makes claims and puts forward His own personality in a
fashion that would be blasphemy in any other man, and yet all the while
is true to His name, 'God is the Saviour.'
The paradox which lies in these earliest words, the great gulf between
the name and the interpretation on the angel's lips, is only solved when
we accept the teaching which tells us that in that Word made flesh and
dwelling among us, we behold 'God manifest in the flesh,' and 'in Christ
reconciling the world unto Himself.'
The name guards us, too, from that very common error of thinking of
Christ as if He were more our Saviour than God is. We are not without
need of this warning. Christ does not bend the divine will to love, is
not more tender than our Father God.