I — The Destruction of Sin
When Adam and Eve had sinned, their consciences became defiled; their eyes were opened to know evil as well as good, and for the first time “they knew that they were naked”. Accordingly, “they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons”, for the purpose of covering their nakedness — (Gen. 3: 7). But this mode of hiding their sinful nature was not acceptable to the Almighty; therefore He substituted other garments in the place of fig leaves: “The Lord God made coats of skins, and clothed them” — (Gen. 3: 21), an act necessitating the slaying of animals, or shedding of blood; from which incident may be learned this important, but much neglected, lesson that it is utterly useless for a man to patch together garments of his own device for the purpose of covering or removing his guilt. No system of religion can give a “garment of salvation”, but that which has been instituted by the Divine Being Himself.
It is recorded of the two sons of Adam and Eve, that they brought offerings unto the Lord; the one bringing “fruit of the ground”, and the other “firstlings of his flock”. The latter was accepted, but the former was not: “Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain” — (Heb. 11: 4). The explanation of this is partly to be found in the fact that Abel’s offering, being a lamb, contained blood, which, on the life of the animal being taken away, would be poured out; whereas Cain’s offering had no blood in it. Abel recognised the principle that “Without shedding of blood is no remission” of sin (Heb. 9: 22), but Cain did not.
Man’s Corruptible Nature
It is true there is no record of Abel or his parents having been instructed to present an offering containing blood; but from the fact that Abel did so, and that his offering was accepted, it may be inferred that such was the case. Moreover there must have been some special reason for ordinary sacrifices of this kind: they must have been appropriate for the purpose they were intended to serve. Man, although mentally and morally much superior to the animal creation, is physically on a par with it, by reason of possessing a corruptible nature. Both have been made from the dust of the ground: “All are of the dust, and all turn to dust again” — (Eccles. 3: 20); both possess the “breath of life”: — “They have all one breath” — (Eccles. 3: 19); both are living souls (Gen. 1: 30; 2: 7); both derive their life from the same source: — “The life of the flesh is in the blood; it is the life of all flesh” (Lev. 17: 11 and 14); and both are subject to the same death: — “That which befalleth the sons of men befalleth beasts . . . as the one dieth so dieth the other” — (Eccles. 3: 19).
The Meaning of Sacrifices
In view of these truths, it cannot but be admitted that the act of taking a life of an animal was well calculated to remind man of his own position: of the fact that he had sinned against his Maker; that in consequence of that sin he had been condemned to death; and that when subjected to this penalty he would become as unconscious and devoid of life as the animals he slew as sacrifices. It further taught him that he could only be delivered from this destiny by a more perfect sacrifice in the future, combined with his own obedience to God’s commandments. On the supposition that the punishment which Adam brought upon himself and his descendants was eternal torment, sacrifices lose all their significance; for the animal sacrificed was not put through any process of suffering, but was simply deprived of life — an appropriate symbol of the death which man had incurred by sin.
Under the Mosaic law, sacrifices were offered up with more elaborate ceremonials and surroundings than at any previous period; but none of these things increased their efficacy. They could only cover or hide, for the time being, the sins of those on whose behalf they were offered: “Those sacrifices” could never make the comers thereunto perfect — (Heb. 10: 1), “for it is not possible that the blood of bulls and goats should take away sin” — (Heb. 10: 4). It was necessary, however, that they should be offered up as types of that greater sacrifice, without which they would have no efficacy whatever. Animals are under no moral law; they have committed no transgression, they merely obey their natural instinct. Their offering up, therefore, could not satisfy the eternal principles of justice on which the Almighty completely blots out transgression, removes its consequent penalty of death, and bestows immortality.
To do this, it is necessary that a member of the race which had sinned should manifest that perfect obedience which Adam failed to render, and then have his blood or life poured out, that he might undergo the penalty of death brought into this world by sin, and triumph over death by being raised from the grave on account of his righteousness and thereby become the author of immortality to other members of the same race. These requirements are found in no other individual than Jesus Christ. Hence the apostolic statement that “He appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself” — (Heb. 9: 26).
An Early Promise
The intention of God to remove sin from this world was made known at a very early stage in the disobedient career of Adam and Eve. Before they were turned out of the garden, the Lord God addressed to the serpent the following words: — “I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shall bruise his heel” — (Gen. 3: 15). To modern eyes this may seem a very indefinite promise of a Divine plan for removing sin and its consequent penalty of death. Nevertheless it contains the germ of the scheme of salvation more fully elaborated in subsequent revelation. Whether it was or was not accompanied by further details omitted from the inspired narrative, we may rest assured that it contained sufficient to convey to the minds of Adam and Eve the prospect of a future deliverance from the effects of their transgression.
Having succumbed to temptation at the instigation of the serpent, they had, for the time being, come under its power. The promise that the seed of the woman should bruise the serpent’s head, the most vital part of all organic creatures, would lead them to look forward to a time when one of their descendants, notwithstanding the infliction of a temporary wound in the heel at the hands of the seed of the serpent, would relieve them from its influence and the attendant evils. Interpreted in the light of subsequent events and predictions, it teaches that the Saviour of mankind would suffer death on account of sin, at the hands of wicked men; but that he would be subjected to it only for a short time, then overcome it, and afterwards remove all traces of sin from the earth.
The Destroyer of Sin
The mission of Jesus Christ, as the seed of the woman, and the destroyer of sin, is thus stated by the apostle Paul: — “Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same, that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil; and deliver them who, through fear of death, were all their lifetime subject to bondage” — (Heb. 2: 14-15); to which another apostle adds, “The Son of God was manifested that he might destroy the works of the devil” — (I John 3: 8). Two more important verses than these it would be impossible to find in the New Testament; but, to be understood, they must be analysed, and examined in the light of parallel passages. They teach the following truths: — That as the children of God were made of flesh and blood, and through being under the power of the devil were subject to the fear of death, it was necessary for Jesus to be made of the same nature for the purpose of suffering death; that by means of his death he would destroy that which causes death; that death is under the power of “the devil”; and that, therefore, by passing through death, Jesus would destroy “the devil”, together with all “the works of the devil”.
It has already been seen, from the narrative of Luke, that Jesus, instead of having, like other members of the Adamic race, two human progenitors, had God for his father, and a woman for his mother. By means of the Holy Spirit, the Eternal Father caused Mary to conceive and give birth to a Son. But, though Son of God, he possessed the nature of his mother: — “Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean? Not one” — (Job. 14: 4). Although begotten by the Spirit, he was nevertheless “made of a woman” — (Gal. 4: 4). The reason for supernatural power being employed in his begettal is to be found (1) in the necessity for showing unmistakably that the way of salvation is of Divine origin, and that without God’s intervention man was utterly impotent to attain to an endless life; and (2) in the requirement that the Saviour of men should exhibit in his own conduct, as far as his position would admit, the character of Jehovah.
The One Exception
From the time of the Fall, no one had ever manifested perfect obedience: “All have sinned, and come short of the glory of God” — (Rom. 3 : 23). If man had been left to himself, it would have been impossible for him to escape the endless consequences of the death penalty. Therefore God interposed in the above way, and produced one who manifested that perfect obedience which all others had failed to perform. From his youth Jesus walked in the affectionate fear of his heavenly Father, as illustrated by the recorded saying at twelve years of age: “Wist ye not that I must be about my Father’s business?” — (Luke 2: 49). And as he grew in years he “increased in wisdom and stature, and in favour with God and man” — (Luke 2: 52). His mind was evidently susceptible, even in early life, and to an exceptional degree, to spiritual truths. To use the language of the prophet Isaiah, he was “of quick understanding in the fear of the Lord” — (Isaiah 11: 3).
In a very concise summary of the mission of Jesus Christ, the writer of the epistle to the Romans says, “God sent his own son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh” — (Rom. 8: 3). God did not send His Son from heaven to earth possessed of an incorruptible spirit-nature, clothed in a body of clay, modelled in the image of sinful men. But He formed him of the flesh of a sinful race, and thus he was “in the likeness of sinful flesh”; not a different kind of flesh from that of mankind generally, but precisely “the same” — (Heb. 2: 14); “That which is born of the flesh is flesh” — (John 3: 6).
Jesus Not Immaculate
Had he been of a nature superior to that of man’s, such as the angelic, he could not have fulfilled what was requisite in a perfect atoning sacrifice; he could not have been “in all points tempted like as we are” — (Heb. 4: 15); he could not have “tasted death for every man” — (Heb. 2: 9); he could not have become “perfect through sufferings” — (Heb. 2: 10); and God could not, through him, have “condemned sin in the flesh” — (Rom. 8: 3). Hence Paul says, “in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people” — (Heb. 2: 17). Accordingly, “Jesus was made a little lower than the angels” — (Heb. 2: 9), and subject to the same law of death as all other descendants of Adam. This is comprised in the statement that he was “like unto his brethren in all things”. To meet the requirements of Eternal wisdom, it was necessary that the same nature which had transgressed should suffer the penalty of death in the person of one who was sinless.
The importance of this truth is made evident by the apostle John’s injunction in his first epistle: — “Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh, is of God; and every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh, is not of God; and this is that spirit of antichrist whereof ye have heard that it should come” — (I John 4: 2-3). The Romish church makes void this truth, by affirming that the flesh of Jesus was immaculate and different from that of all other men; thereby identifying itself as the “antichrist”. Nearly all Protestant churches follow in the same strain, though in a more modified degree; thus proving that they are the daughters of the Romish “Mother of Harlots”; while a third class teach that Jesus Christ was born under precisely the same conditions as Adam before the Fall — free from all effects of Edenic sin. Each of these dogmas nullifies the New Testament truth that Jesus Christ was “made like unto his brethren in all things”, and came in “the same” flesh.
Resurrection the Gate of Life
However necessary the death of Jesus was, his resurrection was equally essential to the destruction of sin; the one was the indispensable sequel to the other: — He “was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification” — (Rom. 4: 25). To anyone unacquainted with the difference between his character and that of other descendants of Adam, the question would naturally arise: Why was Jesus favoured with such an exceptional privilege as that of being raised from the dead almost immediately after his death? The answer to this is, that he was without sin (Heb. 4: 15; Acts 2: 24). The principle on which this Divine act was based is obvious. Death is only inflicted as the result of sin; Jesus committed no sin; he was “obedient unto death, even the death of the cross” — (Phil. 2: 8); but, being a member of a race which was under condemnation of death, it was necessary that he on whom was “laid the iniquity of us all” (Isaiah 53: 6) should suffer “the wages of sin”, which “is death”. Although he came under the Adamic condemnation of death he was personally free from transgression, and therefore death could not hold him for more than a short space of time. Hence he who had laid down his life for the benefit of others was permitted to take it up again (John 10: 17); the “good shepherd” who, it was said, “giveth his life for the sheep” — (John 10: 11) received that life back again; for “as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself” — (John 5: 26).
The life which he received after resurrection was much superior to that which he possessed before crucifixion: it was one which no longer subjected him to temptation, suffering or death. It could then be said of him, what it would have been impossible to declare in any previous part of his career, “Death hath no more dominion over him” — (Rom. 6: 9). Respecting no other member of Adam’s race who has died has such a statement been made. Jesus is “the firstborn from the dead” — (Col. 1: 18), and “the beginning of the (new) creation of God” — (Rev. 3: 14). Hence, it is “Jesus Christ who hath abolished death, and hath brought life and immortality to light through the gospel” — (II Tim. 1: 10). He “abolished death”, not universally, but in relation to himself, and “brought immortality to light” by illustrating it in his own person. At the resurrection and judgment these results will be realised by all who are then found worthy.
To say that man is naturally immortal, is to rob Christ of his glory in having obtained, through obedience, that precious gift; to make void his mission as the one who is ultimately to destroy “the last enemy”, death; and to render useless his functions as the “good shepherd” who has promised to give eternal life unto his sheep.
The Abolisher of Death
In analysing Heb. 2: 14, it was found that Paul declared death to be under the power of “the devil”. But in other portions of the Scriptures, death is described as being the result of sin, which is equivalent to saying that it is under the power of sin. Is death, then, under two powers — one the principle of sin, and the other a wicked being supposed to be superhuman and immortal, commonly styled “the devil”?
According to popular religion, such must be the case; and, if so, Jesus must have overcome that personal being, as well as the principle of sin, before he could have been released from death, and endowed with immortality. On this supposition, what an anomalous position was Jesus placed in as the abolisher of death! Before he could effect this, he must destroy that which exercises “power over death”, and that power, says Paul, is “the devil”. If, however, “the devil” be immortal, he cannot be destroyed. Moreover, if “the devil” be stronger in might than man, a god of evil almost as omnipotent as the Deity himself, according to the representations of many preachers, what propriety could there possibly be in Jesus being made of a weaker nature in order to destroy him?
If “the devil” be of angelic nature, as he must be if a fallen angel, according to popular superstition, it would seem more appropriate, and indeed necessary, that Jesus should have been made of that nature in order to “destroy” him; but, so far from this being the case, we find that he was “made a little lower than the angels”.
And lastly, in what way could Jesus “destroy” this supposed wicked angel “through death”? Would he not rather have required life to combat and overcome such an adversary? There is a suggestion, adopted by some who are easily deceived by “old wives’ fables”, that, between his death and resurrection, Jesus went down into “hell-fire”, and had a fight with “his sooty majesty”. But all who understand the Bible terms of “sin”, “death”, and “the devil”, spurn such a fanciful legend as a base caricature of the mission of Jesus Christ, as a remnant of the mythology of superstitious pagans.
The Bible “Devil”
By adopting the Bible meaning of the word “devil”, all the foregoing difficulties at once vanish. The sense in which it is used can easily be ascertained by comparing Paul’s statement of Christ’s mission in Heb. 2: 14, with other passages of like import. Thus, John the Baptist, on seeing Jesus coming to him, said, “Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world” — (John 1: 29); and Paul says that Jesus “appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself” — (Heb. 9: 26). Coupling these passages with others which show that death results only from sin, it necessarily follows that Jesus was manifested to take away the cause of death.
Figuratively speaking, that which causes death is said to have “power” over it; for “the sting of death is sin” — (I Cor. 15: 56): that is to say, sin is the fatal sting which produces death. Therefore, to say that Jesus partook of flesh and blood that he might destroy “the devil”, is precisely the same as to say that he appeared to “take away”, or “put away” sin. Thus a belief in the true doctrine of Christ’s death involves a knowledge of what “the devil” is. Ignorance in relation to the nature of “the devil” involves an imperfect conception of the mission of Jesus Christ, and of the way in which he accomplished it. No one believing “the devil” to be a personal being superior in nature and power to man, can see the absolute necessity of Jesus being of the same flesh and blood nature as that of fallen man.
The Devil to Be Destroyed
Jesus has not yet completely destroyed “the devil”, or “put away sin”. If he had, there would be no sinners in the world. But by means of resurrection, to which he became entitled through resisting all temptation to sin, the power of “the devil”, or sin, was destroyed as far as he himself was concerned. In consequence of that victory, he has been endowed with authority to relieve all the faithful from the same power: this he will do when he raises them from the dead and makes them immortal.
The next stage in the process will take place when he returns from heaven; but his mission as the destroyer of sin will not be fully consummated until the end of his reign over mortal men. “For he must reign till he hath put all enemies under his feet: the last enemy that shall be destroyed is death” — (I Cor. 15: 25-26). When death has been destroyed, sin will have been destroyed; for where there is no death, there can be no sin.
If an objection be raised that the term “devil” implies a person, an answer is furnished in the fact that various principles, such as wisdom, riches, etc., are personified in the Bible; and that among these is sin itself, which Paul alludes to figuratively as a master: “To whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey, whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness”; “ye were the servants of sin” — (Rom. 6: 16-17). It is quite as appropriate to apply the term “devil” to sin, as it is to speak of it as a master who is obeyed by “his servants”. In itself, “devil” is not the name of one particular being, and it is only by usage that it conveys such an idea.
People are taught from early childhood that it is the name of a superhuman evil being, and hence whenever they meet with it they think that a person is spoken of. Its simple meaning is that of slanderer or false accuser. Both these words are to be found respectively in I Tim. 3, 11; and Titus 2: 3; where, in the original, the word is precisely the same as that which in other passages is rendered “devil”. Anyone who slanders or opposes God or His Truth is, in scriptural language, a “devil”. It was on this account that Jesus called Judas a “devil” — (John 6: 70).
The word translated “devil ” is applied to sin because it is derived from a verb which means to cross or pass over. When Adam sinned, he crossed over the line which divided the path of obedience from the path of disobedience; he was tempted, and then “drawn away of his own lust and enticed”. His sin was his act of disobedience to God, and therefore it was sin which caused him to be transferred from a state of life to a state of death. By this means he became the “servant of sin”, that tyrannical master who brings death upon all who serve him, and whom the Second Adam will in due time destroy.
The Works of the Devil
The “works of the devil”, which John says that Jesus was manifested to destroy, are the works of sinful flesh which fill the whole world. Paul gives a list of them in Gal. 5: 19-21; and it requires but a glance at the vices he enumerates, to enable anyone to perceive that they comprise all the evil actions which render this earth such a world of woe; so that there is no need for the operation of an invisible evil spirit to increase man’s wickedness. “All that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life ... is of the world” — (I John 2: 16). And Jesus himself, speaking of the same thing, says, “Out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies” — (Matt. 15: 19). This is equivalent to James’s statement that “Every man is tempted when he is drawn away of his own lust” and that “when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin” — (Jas. 1: 14-15). To all who desire to overcome the world, it is important that they should know this truth, in order that they may be on their guard against that by which they may be led into temptation. They will then know that the greatest enemy which man has to fear is himself, the lusts of his own flesh, and not an invisible evil fiend.
Satan
The term “satan” simply means an adversary, and may be applied either to a good or a bad being. Instances of both kinds are to be found in the Scriptures. Thus, the angel which opposed Balaam was an “adversary” or satan to him — (Num. 22: 22). And Peter, when he opposed his Master, was denominated “satan” — (Matt. 16: 23). More frequently it is applied to wicked adversaries, and, as it is used synonymously with “devil”, it obviously often represents sin, the greatest adversary with which man has to contend. If these principles be applied to any of the passages in which either of the terms “devil” and “satan” occur, they will furnish a clue to their meaning. From the fact that these words are synonymous with sin, it must not be supposed that whenever they occur, the same manifestation of sin is referred to. They can be applied to sin in general, or to any exhibition of sin in human nature in one man or a multitude. Their precise signification in each particular case must, therefore, be ascertained from the context.
In view of the foregoing truths and facts, it would be well for the reader to ask, What aspect does the death of Jesus present, on the hypothesis that the punishment for sin is eternal torment? We have seen that the penalty with which Adam was threatened has since passed upon him and his descendants, and that in order to redeem any of them from its power, it was necessary that an obedient member of the race should, for a short time, suffer the same penalty. If, therefore, that penalty consisted of torment in hell-fire, Jesus must have “tasted” (Heb. 2: 9) the same torment between his crucifixion and resurrection. The advocates of the doctrine of unending suffering can only reject this conclusion by a display of inconsistency and unsound reasoning; for it is the inevitable result of their theory.
Beautiful Harmony
On the other hand, if the scriptural definition of death be accepted, all is beautiful harmony. Adam was threatened with death, a punishment defined by the Lord God to be a “return” to the dust of the ground. It is said of Jesus that he “was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death . . . that he . . . should taste death for every man” — (Heb. 2: 9). This was precisely what Jesus did: he suffered death. He was “three days and three nights in the heart of the earth” — (Matt 12: 40). True, he was not resolved into dust; but that was merely because his body was not allowed to stop in the ground long enough. While it was there, he was as utterly devoid of life or consciousness as all other dead persons; for there is a general statement made respecting them, which is equally applicable to Jesus, that “the dead know not anything”, and that “there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom in the grave” — (Eccles. 9: 5, 10). It is useless to suggest that Jesus might have had an immortal soul which escaped death: such a supposition cannot be entertained until it be proved that all men are immortal; for whatever be the nature of mankind generally, the nature of Jesus before his crucifixion must have been identical with it, or he could not have submitted to the same penalty as they were under.
Thus it will be seen that, on the scriptural principle of redemption, there is no necessity for the doctrine of “substitution”, which is, that Jesus suffered the punishment due to sin instead of man. Jesus simply “tasted death for every man”; he underwent, for a brief space of time, the death common to all men; and so obtained the privilege of opening the gates of the grave, to liberate others from its bondage. He died, not to ensure to others exemption from death, as implied by “substitution”, but to release from its power, whether actual or prospective, such as believe and obey God’s word. It was an event required, not for the appeasing of Jehovah’s wrath, but for the vindication of His law, which had not only placed all the race under condemnation of Death, but had ordained that the seed of the woman (Christ) should be bruised in the heel (die) before the seed of the serpent (sin) should be bruised in the head (destroyed).
An Echo of Paganism
No more erroneous and mischievous theory exists than that which represents the sacrificial death of Jesus as necessary to appease God’s wrath. It had its origin in Paganism, which, in every form, inculcates the necessity of its votaries doing something uncommon to appease the wrath of the false gods they worship. In a more modified form it is to be found in all those religious systems of “Christendom” which teach their members that they must perform some extraordinary act of worship, self-denial, or benevolence, to ingratiate themselves into the favour of the Deity. It is on this principle that so much noise is made at revival meetings; that men and women immure themselves in convents; and that persons amass fortunes to be given away to charitable objects after their death. Instead of conduct such as this, all that is necessary is a compliance with the conditions which God has made known through His prophets and apostles.
The Deity’s wrath against man was manifested when he passed sentence of death on Adam and his descendants. By the Fall, man became alienated from God. After that event, God’s efforts were directed towards bringing man back to Him. It was man who required to be “reconciled” not God. Hence Paul declares that “God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses upon them” — (II Cor. 5: 19). The sacrificial death which Jesus underwent was undoubtedly the result of God’s wrath against sin — the sinful conduct of others, not his own — but the moving cause which provided him as the “Lamb of God” was love: “God so loved the world, that he gave his only-begotten Son” (John 3: 16); God “loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins” — (I John 4: 10).
The Two Adams
The “first Adam” led man astray from his Maker, the second, or “last Adam” was raised up to bring him back again; “for as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous” — (Rom. 5: 19). These two Adams have each been constituted the federal head or representative of a large community: one on the basis of flesh; the other on the basis of spirit. In their relationship to these communities they exhibit a parallel; but in relation to each other, a contrast. Both were flesh and blood beings endowed with mental and moral capacities: one created by God, the other begotten by Him; the one commenced his existence unfettered by the trammels of sin and death, whereas the other was born when these enemies of man had been in operation for 4,000 years. They were subject to the same temptations, but one yielded, while the other overcame; the one disobeyed the only command given him, the other obeyed perfectly all the commandments of his Father; the one introduced sin, the other righteousness; the one brought death, the other life, so that “by man came death”, and “by man came also the resurrection of the dead” — (I Cor. 15: 21).
The Atoning Blood
One of the principles requiring recognition to enable anyone to participate in the salvation obtainable through Christ, is that on which his atoning sacrifice is based, viz.: that “without shedding of blood there is no remission” of sin. Jesus endorsed it when instituting the supper in commemoration thereof: “This is my blood . . . which is shed for many, for the remission of sins” — (Matt. 26: 28). The apostles also understood and taught it after receiving “the Spirit of truth”. Hence their references to Christ’s blood as a means of forgiveness — “In whom (Christ) we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins” — (Eph. 1:7); “Ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold . . . but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish, and without spot” — (I Peter 1: 18-19).
None but those who seek for remission of sins through the atoning blood of Jesus can reap the benefit of his mission; for all the redeemed are represented as ascribing glory “unto him that loved us and washed us from our sins in his own blood” — (Rev. 1: 5), and as singing a new song to the Lamb: “Thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood, out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation” — (Rev. 5: 9). But a mere mental acquiescence in this truth is not sufficient. “Faith without works is dead.”
Baptism — Its Necessity and Meaning
God has appointed a way by which a believer in this truth may give effect to his convictions, and personally realise the benefits accruing therefrom. He must put on the garment of righteousness provided in the person of Jesus Christ, in the same manner as did he who, on requesting John to baptise him, said, “Thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness” — (Matt. 3: 15). This is effected by a believer undergoing a symbolic death and burial; by becoming dead to the world, and being buried in water, that his sins may be washed away, and he may rise to newness of life. Hence the following statements of Paul: “Know ye not that so many of us as were baptised into Jesus Christ were baptised into his death? Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death; that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection: knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin” — (Rom. 6: 3-6).
The ordinance of baptism being a symbol of Jesus Christ’s death, burial, and resurrection, it is obvious that none can comprehend its full significance unless they understand the meaning of those all-important events. To do this, a person must know of what nature Jesus was made, the cause which rendered his death necessary, and the results which flow from his crucifixion and resurrection. This necessitates a belief that immortality can only be obtained through Christ, and that in the case of those who have died, resurrection is absolutely necessary to the enjoyment of a future life. The doctrine of man’s natural immortality destroys these truths. Therefore a person must discard this dogma before he can fully appreciate the ordinance of baptism, and become a fit subject for its administration; for it is designed to enable believers to show in a practical manner that their only hope of a future life is based upon the life and resurrection of Jesus Christ.
The absolute necessity of submitting to it is shown by the apostle making it a conditional preliminary to being planted in the likeness of Christ’s resurrection: — “if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection”. The logic of this proposition teaches that if we have not been planted in the likeness of Christ’s death, by a burial with him in baptism, we shall not be planted in the likeness of his resurrection; and, if not planted in the likeness of his resurrection, there can be no immortality for us, because it is written, “If the dead rise not . . . then they which are fallen asleep in Christ are perished” — (I Cor. 15: 16-18).
Having thus, by word and deed, acknowledged Christ’s shed blood to be the only means of blotting out transgressions and obtaining release from death, that truth must be recognised by a weekly commemoration of the great event which happened on Calvary. This can only be done by assembling with others of the “one faith”, and none else, to partake of the emblems ordained for that purpose. “This do”, said Jesus, “in remembrance of me . . . for as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do show the Lord’s death till he come” — (I Cor. 11, 24-26).