Our purpose in publishing this debate
The founder of the Megiddo Church was originally affiliated with the Christadelphians. He separated over the issue that is the subject of this debate. In permitting Megiddo to set forth their view, we hope, by contrasting their belief with the Bible, to reinforce our own understanding of the atonement. In addition, the Megiddo Message distributes 15,000 copies most of which go to libraries and medical offices in America. They will be publishing this same debate which will give Christadelphians an exposure to people who may not be familiar with us.
Megiddo Church vs. Christadelphian teaching
Two principle areas of difference provide the framework for this debate. Megiddo Church believes:
- To be saved, we must become perfect now.
Following are some quotes from their booklet entitled, The Atonement:
“The Bible marks out an unequivocal demand for moral perfection — not one long, perfect life without a slip, but moral perfection through growth.”
“God will not remove the tendency to any sin a man has not conquered during his day of probation.”
“Likewise in our efforts toward the goal of life eternal…after, through ceaseless effort at self-mastery, we have succeeded in purifying ourselves even as Christ is pure; after we have banished all sin from our lives, and become one with God mentally and morally; after we, in every detail of life have ceased to do evil and learned to do well; after we have attained that beauty of character which in the sight of God is priceless…after we have replaced every evil thought with a good thought, bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ; after we have so trained ourselves that all that we do and say is to the honor and glory of God — even then, immortality is a gift, a gift which only God can bestow.”
When the Megiddo Church says we must be perfect, they mean “must be” and they mean “perfect.”
- Christ is the example not the redeemer
The Megiddo Church does not believe in the sacrificial death of Christ. Here are some quotes from the same booklet:
“John tells us plainly what is our propitiation, or the means by which our guilt may be annulled: it is for us to walk even as He walked. There is no suggestion here of an atoning sacrifice to cover all sin.”
“He is concerned with our sins; He is not a sacrificial offering for them.”
“Only as we make our own garments clean and white by overcoming evil with good can we be assured of eternal salvation. There is no single all-inclusive sacrifice to cover our sins.”
Christadelphian teaching
Christadelphian teaching differs significantly from the foregoing. We agree a person must sincerely try to obey God now. We do not believe, however, that perfection of character is mandatory for a person to be saved. Furthermore, we believe God’s gracious forgiveness is only granted to those associated with the literal, sacrificial death of Christ. This association is by faith in Jesus as the sacrifice for sins, by baptism into him and by living a life patterned after his obedience.
Proposition
The Bible conditions our salvation and eternal rewards upon our individual obedience and virtue, and not upon any merits deriving from the literal death or blood of Jesus Christ.
Opening Statements
Megiddo Church statement in support of the above proposition.
General support
We take the positive side of this discussion because we want to believe only what is clearly taught in the Bible. Of what benefit is any belief in salvation, if God is not its author? For we cannot give ourselves eternal life; we cannot save ourselves from pain, sickness and death. Only God can bestow salvation.
Our whole premise, then, must be, what does the Bible teach?
While the subject of the inspiration and authority of the Bible lies outside the scope of this discussion, for purposes of this discussion we must establish that the Bible is the work of an all-wise God, and as such presents one plan of salvation. Whether the writer be David, or Isaiah, or Peter, or Paul, all taught one gospel, all “spake as they were moved by the Holy Spirit” (II Pet. 1:21).
On the negative side of this discussion are a number of texts which, upon surface reading, seem to indicate that Christ’s literal death and blood are the means of our salvation. But what about the other side of the question, where many more texts state just as clearly that God demands righteousness, holiness, purity as a precondition for salvation? Either we must conclude that the Bible is contradictory, or that it presents more than one plan of salvation—or that the problem lies in our understanding of the passages on one side or the other.
All of us recognize God as the Creator of life. Accordingly, He has set laws in motion by which the human race is perpetuated and sustained. To each is given a limited span, which each is free to use as he pleases. At the same time God has through His written Word (the Bible) revealed His larger plan, offering a superior life–an eternal life, salvation. To whom does He offer this? What are the conditions God has placed upon the salvation He offers? Is it for all who are “reckoned righteous” because of the shed blood of Christ? Or does it depend on Our individual obedience and virtue?
Jesus’ teaching about salvation
What did Jesus teach? What did He say in the Sermon on the Mount? Is the state of eternal blessedness for the one who trusts in His blood or His righteousness to save them? Read the entire sermon (Matthew, chapters 5 to 7), and you will find not a single statement about the need for Christ’s literal death or blood. Each blessing is linked directly to obedience and virtue. The blessings include comfort. .,the earth for an inheritance … complete satisfaction of every want.. .heavenly mercy …seeing the face of the eternal Creator Himself…a place in the kingdom of heaven. And what are the preconditions for all these? “Blessed are the poor in spirit…Blessed are they that mourn…Blessed are the meek …Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness—Blessed are the merciful…Blessed are the pure in heart” and so on, According to Jesus, there must be virtue and obedience before there can be blessing.
And the obedience Jesus taught is not a mere outward formality. It is a heart obedience. Referring to the law of Moses Jesus said, “Ye have heard that it was said…But I say….” Where the old law demanded mere outward conformity, Jesus’ law demanded inner purity. For example, the old law forbade adultery, but Jesus said “that whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart” (Matt. 5:27-28).
Through the remainder of chapter 5 Jesus spells out more commands, then at the end of the chapter He makes this summary statement: “Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect” (Matt. 5:48). He is saying, in other words, This is the sum total of all that I have been saying: “Be ye therefore perfect…” In other words, if you do all that I have been saying, you will be morally perfect.
Shall we say that He was not capable of stating what He intended, or that His words do not mean what they say? Or was He requiring something we cannot do?
If this were the only such statement in Scripture, we might wonder if we are understanding it correctly.
But when we read elsewhere that we must become pure even as Christ is pure (I John 3:3); that we must come to the measure of the stature of Christ (Eph. 4:13); that we must be holy in our manner of living as God is holy (I Pet. 1:15,16), why not accept Jesus’ command that we must become perfect as our Father in heaven is perfect? Unless we reject the plain teaching of Scripture that God will judge and reward each according to his works, whether good or bad (Eccl. 12:13-14; II Cor. 5:10; Rev. 22:12; Rom. 2:6; Jer. 17:10), that we reap exactly as we have sown (Gal. 6:7,8), we have no alternative but to believe that the basis of our salvation is indeed our own life of obedience and virtue before God. If we sow “to the flesh,” live to please our natural instincts, we shall reap “corruption.” If we sow “to the Spirit” we shall reap “life everlasting.”
The remainder of Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount spells out more commands to virtue and obedience. Comparing believers to fruit trees He says, “Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit” is saved by the righteousness of Christ? No, it must be “hewn down, and cast into the fire.” And if there has been any question about the need for obedience as a precondition of salvation, Jesus says clearly, “Not everyone that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven” (Matt. 7:21).
Jesus follows this with a mini-parable about two builders. One builds on the rock, the other on the sand; one’s structure stands, the other’s falls. What is the difference between the two? Only this: that one hears Jesus’ sayings and obeys them, the other hears and does not obey (Matt. 7:24-27).
Notice again that there is no suggestion of any efficacy to be derived from Christ’s literal death.
The Old Testament teaching on salvation
Centuries earlier the Psalmist was teaching the same standard of obedience as a requirement for salvation. “Blessed are the undefiled in the way, who walk in the law of the Lord….They also do no iniquity: they walk in his ways” (Ps. 119:1-3), They “do no iniquity”–here is the source of their righteousness, not in Christ’s attainment but in their own strict adherence to the law of God, to the extent that they “do no iniquity.”
Moses foretold the coming of Christ, that He would be a prophet, and that all would have to hearken to Him, and that “whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name,
I will require it of him” (Deut. 18:18,19). What did Christ preach as He traveled from village to village? Did He teach that He was going to die and shed His blood for the salvation of mankind, that this was the purpose of His life? No, “He went throughout every city and village, preaching and showing the glad tidings of the kingdom of God” (Luke 8:1). In fact, so little did He have to say about His approaching death that the disciples, when it actually happened, could hardly comprehend it, even though He had told them.
Repentance, then forgiveness
What did Jesus, as He was parting from His disciples, commission them to teach? He told them clearly: “That repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem” (Luke 24:47). If His death had been the key to their salvation, would this not have been a likely time to have said so? But no, even after He had died and been resurrected, it was still necessary for them to repent so that their sins could be forgiven.
If our ultimate acceptance before God depends upon the righteousness of Christ imputed to us through His death and not upon our own obedience or virtue, why does the Bible define so precisely the type of life God requires? When we see a sign posted along the highway announcing the speed limit or giving us directions to stop or to go, we conclude that the sign was set up to be obeyed. Similarly, when we read in the Bible, “Be ye holy in all manner of conversation” or “Let patience have her perfect work” or “Cease from anger, and forsake wrath” or “Let no corrupt communication proceed out of your mouth,” is it not wise to conclude that these commands are to be obeyed? Why are there literally hundreds of admonitions to holiness, virtue and obedience if we are saved by the righteousness of Christ?
Not only does the Bible spell out the virtues God requires, but it also establishes clearly the link between our obedience and our salvation. The law of God is as straightforward as “Obey and live, disobey and die” (cf. Deut. 4:1;8:1; 12,:1;30:6,16).
What can the fact that Christ shed His blood on Calvary do to make anyone morally pure and upright? Suppose a driver has been consistently violating the rules of the highway. What must he do to become a law-abiding driver? He must stop violating the rules.
Suppose a man is making his living by robbing banks. Now suppose this man accepts Christ and His righteousness, yet goes right on robbing banks. Is he immediately counted righteous, pure id holy because of Christ’s death for him even though he continues his same sinful habits? To be cleansed and forgiven, must he not change his manner of life? He must stop robbing banks and earn his living honorably. The blood of Christ can do nothing to change his record; he himself must reform.
The basis of salvation God prescribes is the same. It is a simple, practical summons to personal reformation: stop doing wrong and do right. “Cease to do evil, learn to do well” (Isa. 1:16-17). The wicked” must “turn from his transgressions…and do that which is lawful and right.” Then, once we turn from our sin and do right, no guilt from our former sins remains, “None of his sins that he hath committed shall be mentioned unto him: he hath done that which is lawful and right; he shall surely live” (Ezek. 33:14-16). Where is any need for the sacrifice of Christ?
Isaiah stated the same fact: “Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts: and let him return unto the Lord, and he will have mercy upon him; and to our God, for he will abundantly pardon” (Isa. 55:6-7). When God has abundantly pardoned, what more can we need?
We are forgiven our sins as we forsake them. “He that covereth his sins shall not prosper: but whoso confesseth and forsaketh them shall have mercy” (Prov. 28:13). We “purify” our souls by “obeying the truth” (I Pet. 1:22). If our weakness has been to steal, Paul has the simple formula: “Let him that stole steal no more” (Eph. 4:28). If we have been telling lies, we must stop lying and tell only what is true (Col. 3:9). If we have been using profanity, we must stop it (Eph. 5:1-5). If we have been getting angry, we must be patient and kind (Eph. 4:31-32).
When we stop disobeying any law of God, we become clean on that point–not because Christ shed His blood for us but because we stopped committing the sin, just as the bank robber must stop robbing banks and take an honorable job to earn his living. As long as he continues to rob banks, the blood of a thousand Christs could do nothing to make his record clean. He must actually stop committing the sin before He can be forgiven.
Just as we can become clean on one point, so we can become clean on another, and another, until our whole life and character reaches the standard God requires and we are “holy and acceptable unto God” (Rom. 12:1).
Salvation conditional
The Bible does not offer salvation on a free-for-all basis, nor does God impart or impute the righteousness He requires. Each aspirant must purify his own heart and character (I John 3:3) by his own initiative, with the help of God, before God will bestow salvation. We must not overlook the help of God, because God provides the knowledge of what we must do, along with the mental and physical powers we need. But it is our responsibility to use all these to develop the character He requires. We cannot expect Him to change our character. This is our part of the agreement.
Every promise of God has two sides, a human side and a divine side. God says, You do this (indicating obedience and virtue on the human side)…and I will do this (indicating God’s bestowment of eternal blessings). God says, “IF” you do thus and thus, “THEN” I will do thus and thus (2 Chron 7:14).
Jesus promised to save those who would endure unto the end (Matt. 24:13). The Psalmist promised God’s deliverance to those who pay their vows to God (Ps 50:14-15). Isaiah said that God will recognize “him that is poor and of a contrite spirit., and trembleth at [His] word” (Isa. 66:2). He promises salvation “to him that ordereth his conversation [conduct] aright” (Ps. 50:23). He will “render to every man according to his deeds: To them who by patient continuance in well-doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life” (Rom. 2:6-7). The promise is based on the expressly stated condition that the believer patiently continue in well doing, not that he accept any righteousness imputed to him by Christ.
Jesus’ last message emphasizes the same point: “Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have light to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city” (Rev. 2:14).
If Jesus’ literal death and blood was the key to salvation and forgiveness, why did Jesus in His parable commend the obedient servant for what he had done: “Well done, thou good and faithful servant: thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things” (Matt. 25:21). If the servant had not been good and faithful, could Jesus have said this?
Paul himself says clearly that there is an “if” condition in the matter of salvation. Writing to the Corinthians he spoke of the gospel he had preached to them, “By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain” (I Cor. 15:1-2). They had heard the gospel, and they might or might not be saved–there was still an “if” in the picture.
Hebrews is likewise specific, that salvation depends on our individual obedience. “Follow peace with all men, and holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord” (Heb. 12:14).
James is equally direct, that only the “doers of the word” will merit eternal rewards. “Be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves….Whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed” (James 1:22-25). Notice that one must continue in the law, and be a “doer of the work,” and then “this man shall be blessed in his deed.”
James says again, “Blessed is the man that endureth temptation: for when he is tried, he shall receive the crown of life, which the Lord hath promised to them that love him” (James 1:12). “The crown of life” is to the one who endures under trial.
The apostle John concurs, making this plain statement: that the world passes away, and the lust thereof, and only “he that doeth the will of God abideth forever” (1 John 2:17).
Three steps to salvation
Briefly, the Bible outlines three steps to salvation. These three steps are summarized in Rev. 1:3: “Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand.”
The firs: step in the process of salvation is learning what God requires of us. knowledge comes first. This is the normal pattern of life. The newborn child must spend years in learning before he is able to live as a responsible adult. And if he wishes to pursue a profession, he must acquire even more knowledge. This knowledge is not automatically transplanted into into his mind. He must apply himself and learn.
The same is true for the aspirant to eternal salvation. He must first learn what God requires. And the source of that knowledge is the Book God has provided for our instruction, the Bible.
The second step to salvation is to apply the knowledge one has acquired, to live according to the law of God, to develop in one’s life the standard of virtue God requires.
The third step is the physical change from mortality to immortality. We are now mortal, subject to death. We must depend upon God for this third step, because we cannot save ourselves. Only God’s power can “change our vile [mortal] body and fashion it like unto his glorious body” (Phil. 3:21). Only He can make us like unto the angels, so that we will not die (Luke 20:35-36).
We are responsible for taking the first two steps during this present life, given the tools and the help which God provides. Then Christ when He returns will accomplish for each worthy one the third step, the physical change to immortality. “When the chief Shepherd shall appear, ye shall receive a crown of glory” (1 Pet. 5:4). This reward will be brought “at the revelation of Jesus Christ” (1 Pet. 1:13). Jesus Himself said that He was coming to bring His reward with Him (Rev. 22:12).
Summary
The Bible is contradictory if it teaches that salvation is the reward for an upright and holy life and also teaches that our salvation depends upon the death and shed blood of Christ. However, upon careful study we find that the problem is not with the Bible but with the false and misleading doctrines which have for centuries been taught in its name. God has one plan and one basis for salvation. And when we take the statements about Jesus’ death and blood as a symbolic representation of the complete sacrifice we ourselves must make (Rom. 12;1)— and which Jesus Himself made—we have harmony.
We, too, would prefer to trust in Christ’s sacrifice to atone for our sins, if only we could be sure it was God’s way. But how tragic to go to judgment depending upon the righteousness of Jesus, only to learn—when too late—that we are to be judged and rewarded according to what we ourselves have done!
Christadelphian statement in opposition to the above proposition.
General objections
If our own righteousness and human endeavor will save us, then why is there the need for salvation through Jesus? Why was Jesus the Son of God, and not just an ordinary man who lived without sinning? The flesh (body) and blood of Jesus are associated in John 6:53; Heb. 10:19,20; 1 Cor. 10:16; 11:27. To say that the blood of Jesus is not a precondition for our salvation is to say that his body was also unnecessary: i.e. Jesus was not essential; we can do it all ourselves, we don’t need him. By saying this, we are not suggesting that Christ’s example is unimportant; this debate is about the significance of his death.
“There is none righteous, not one” (Rom. 3:10). “It is not in man that walketh to (spiritually) direct his steps” (Jer. 10:23). “All have sinned, and come short of the glory of God” (Rom. 3:23). Paul had a sinful tendency within him which stopped him being totally obedient to God; when he would do good, this “evil” was present with him (Rom. 7:15-25).
The Megiddo Church correctly understands that the “devil” refers to this principle of evil within us. But their understanding remains at an abstract, academic level. In practice, this principle means that it is impossible by ow own endeavor and virtue to completely conquer the flesh.
It should be evident from these passages, as well as from our own experience, that we cannot achieve salvation
by ourselves. We cry with Paul: “O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death? I thank God through Jesus Christ” (Rom. 7:25). Although we cannot save ourselves, God will not do it all for us. We must come to the correct balance between these two extremes.
The need for imputation of righteousness
“God imputeth righteousness…the righteousness of God” (Rom. 4:6; 2 Cor. 5:21). We can only be reckoned righteous by being in Christ, not having our own righteousness, but that which is imputed to us by God’s system of justification (Phil. 3:9). Trying to establish our own righteousness is effectively rebelling against God’s righteousness (Rom. 10:3 cp. Job 35:2; Ezk. 33:13; Deut. 9:4,5). Our righteousness in God’s sight is by reason of our association with Christ, “the Lord our righteousness” (Jer. 23:6; 1 Cor. 1:30).
Imputation means that God looks on us as if we are perfect, even though we are not of ourselves. Why is there such Biblical emphasis upon this idea of justification and imputed righteousness, if our salvation depends upon our own virtue/righteousness? (See Romans. 2-4; 3:21; 4:3-6; Heb. 11:7; Deut. 24:13; Psa. 24:5). It is because of the imputation of righteousness that Jesus could say, “Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father…is perfect” (Matt. 5:48). We are surely being presumptuous to think that we can live on God’s level of moral perfection even for a day, given the weakness of our own natures.
The believer will be presented “faultless” before the judgment seat (Jude 24), “without blame before him” because “he hath made us accepted (by being) in the beloved” (Eph. 1:4,6). Christ cleanses us, that he might present us to himself (he does it, not us) “a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing” (Eph. 5:26,27), as Jesus was “without spot” (Heb. 9:14). All these statements become meaningful within the context of righteousness being imputed.
The place of forgiveness
Megiddo members must admit that they are not faultless. Yet they say that only the faultless will be accepted. No matter how hard we try from now on to be faultless, we still need forgiveness. Megiddo must have a strange concept of forgiveness, if salvation is by human effort, with no reference to the sacrifice of Jesus. Surely Megiddo members try hard not to sin. But when they do, they must have a terrible conscience, because they know no way to put themselves straight with God afterwards (cp. Heb. 9:14). Am I correct?
We need something more than our own “obedience and virtue:” forgiveness and the imputation of righteousness is made possible by the death of Christ.
The need for Christ’s death
The wages of sin is death (Rom. 6:23). Because of this, God has ordained a life must be poured out (i.e. death) as a basis for the forgiveness of sins. Seeing that “the life is in the blood,” it follows that blood must be poured out for sins to be forgiven. Just “trying harder next time” isn’t the means for forgiveness. “Without shedding of blood is no remission” (Heb. 9:22; 10:11,12).
The consistent teaching of scripture is that we cannot atone for our own sins. The pouring out of our blood (or life) to the death would not get us forgiveness. Because we have sinned, and therefore deserve to die, it would be our receiving the wages due our sins, i.e. death. This is where the unique place of Jesus is so vital. He was of our nature, of our “flesh and blood,” a suitable representative or us (Heb. 2:14-18). That blood was shed, a perfect life was poured out, with which we can be associated, and then share in the immortality which followed.
These ideas of shedding or pouring out of blood are concepts based on priestly acts, of killing the sacrifice. With regard to Christ, they speak of his literal death, “thou wast slain and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood” (Rev. 5:9). The shedding of his blood (his death) is the basis of remission of sins. One of the values of his death is in providing a suitable basis for our forgiveness. Without this basis no forgiveness is possible, “if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin. If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves…” (1 John 1:8).
The need for Christ’s blood
In contrast with Megiddo’s rejection of the importance of Christ’s blood, scripture emphasizes that our reconciliation with God is on account of Christ’s blood: “The Father…having made peace through the blood of (Christ’s) cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself” (Col. 1:19,20). We were “redeemed…with the precious blood of Christ’ (1 Pet. 1:19; Rev. 5:9). Those “in” Jesus “have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins” (Col. 1:14; Eph. 1:7). Our redemption is paralleled here with our forgiveness. In Christ, and only in him, our sins are not held against us; we will not receive eternal death as the wages of sin; in God’s grace, we can be given immortal nature, salvation from our sin-stricken condition.
“Christ died for us…being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him” (Rom. 5:8,9). Thus Jesus “washed us from our sins in his own blood (Rev. 1:5; notice how Jesus does this to us, rather than we achieving it for ourselves). “The blood of Christ (can) purge your conscience” (Heb. 9:14). In this way, Christ “purchased (us) with his own blood” (Acts 20:28).
“His own blood” highlights the very personal relationship which we have to Jesus, once his blood covers us. We cannot have this if we seek reconciliation by our own virtue. We are “justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood” (Rom. 3:24,25). If the blood of Jesus is irrelevant to our salvation, how are we justified through faith in his blood? Surely these passages invite us to focus our mind upon the blood (i.e. literal death) of Jesus?
If the blood of Jesus is not one of the preconditions for salvation, then it must mean that the life and death of Jesus are not necessary for it either. If we were to analyze the literal blood of Christ with no regard for the saving work which he did for us, then it would not be meaningful. It is not some kind of talisman in itself, as Catholicism teaches. But we cannot analyze Christ’s sacrifice by supposing that, for the sake of argument, he did not die for us. The fact is that he was born and he died, “for us.” This was his very reason of being. We cannot analyze his work apart from the purpose for which it was done: i.e. our salvation. It is as a result of such separation of Christ from his work that the conclusion has been reached that the literal blood of Christ is insignificant.
The teaching of the Mosaic Law
Under the Mosaic Law, the Israelite found atonement with God by placing his hand on the head of an animal, which then represented him. This animal was killed, and the blood poured out. This was because “the blood…I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul” (Lev. 17:11). But we must compare this with Heb. 10:1-10: “it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins,” and therefore the sacrifice of the body of Jesus was needed.
But according to Leviticus 17:11, the animal blood did make atonement for sin. It was not the literal blood which did so on its own; that blood made atonement because it pointed forward to “the blood” of Jesus. With this blood as well as that of Jesus, it is not the blood as literal blood that is efficacious, but its relation to something of which the blood-shedding is expressive.
Megiddo must have difficulty accepting that the blood of the animal sacrifices points forward to that of Jesus. If his blood is irrelevant, then why did the Mosaic system of reconciliation with God achieve this through blood, which pointed forward to that of Jesus? We must remember that the body and blood of Jesus was the actual fulfillment of the Mosaic types. Those types did not just point forward to Jesus as our example. The New Testament says that Jesus was typified by the altar, the high priest, the mercy seat and the blood on it; all the elements of the Mosaic Law pointed forward to him (Heb. 9).
Furthermore, Jesus was the equivalent of the Passover lamb. “Christ our Passover is sacrificed for us…(Jesus) the lamb of God that taketh (“beareth”) away the sin of the world…sprinkling of the blood of Jesus…the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot” (1 Cor. 5:7; John 1:29; 1 Peter 1:2,19). These are all obvious allusions to the Passover lamb as that lamb had to be without spot having its blood sprinkled around the lintels of the door. Did the blood of the Passover lamb point forward to that of Jesus or not? If the answer is “No,” then why do Megiddo still keep a “Passover” feast on 14th of Nisan? But isn’t “Yes,” then as the lamb’s blood brought salvation for Israel, so must the blood of Jesus bring salvation for the new Israel (1 Cor. 10:1,2).
Our Association With Christ’s Death and Blood
By baptism
By associating ourselves with his death, God looks on us as if we are sinless. Jesus died for us (1 Cor. 15:1,2 so that we too might share his death and therefore his resurrection. The divine appointed means for making this association is immersion (water baptism) (Rom. 6:3-6; Phil. 3:21; 2 Cor. 4:10). Because Megiddo fails to understand the need to associate ourselves personally with Christ’s death and resurrection in this way, they have rejected the doctrine of water baptism.
Many verses in the Bible speak baptism as a one-time act. Why is this so, if baptism is only symbolic of some inner spiritual process? How can we be baptized into the death and body of Jesus by this? (Rom. 6:3-5; 1 Cor. 12:13). Water baptism beautifully symbolize dying with Jesus, and then rising tone life with him.
By the breaking of bread
Because forgiveness and the hope of salvation is only available through Christ’s own death, we need to associate ourselves with him. “Except ye eat the flesh of the son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you” (John 6:53); we must intensely associate ourselves with the sacrifice of Jesus. Without regularly breaking bread, are we really associating ourselves with Christ’s saving work? The early church broke bread very often (Acts. 20:7; 2:42,46). Megiddo’s failure to frequently do this is explicable by their lack of appreciation of the value of Christ’s sacrifice. One mistake has led to another.
Jesus: our sin–bearer
Jesus “his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree” (1 Pet. 2:24). How can Jesus be a sin bearer if salvation is just conditioned on our own virtue? How do Megiddo understand Christ being our sin bearer (Isa. 53)? “We are sanctified by the offering of the body of Jesus” (Heb. 10:10); we are “reconciled in the body of his flesh through death” (Col. 1:21,22).
Also note that Jesus has brought about our salvation “because he hath poured out his soul unto death” (Isa. 53:12). Our salvation is obtainable because of the fact that Jesus offered himself– his life, his blood, his body, his very soul. The parallel between Christ’s body and blood and himself is because the giving of Christ’s life involved the giving of his complete self; including his literal blood. Separating the body and blood from the whole self of Christ is not a valid biblical distinction. Accordingly, if the blood and body of Jesus are not necessary conditions for our salvation, then neither was Jesus.
If Jesus was only our example, then he was useful but not essential. Megiddo must assume that the Bible records of many other men, e.g. Joseph and other types of Christ, could be our ideal example. Yet the Bible stresses that salvation is through the literal death, not just the example of Christ.
Jesus redeemed by his sacrifice
As one of the human race, Jesus sacrifice was partly for his own benefit; he was redeemed by his own blood, thus he totally represents us, who are also redeemed by his blood (Heb. 5:3; 7:27; 9:7,12; 13:20). Because Jesus was of our nature, he destroyed “the devil…(and) abolished death, and hath brought life and immortality to light through the gospel” (Heb. 2:14; 2 Tim. 1:10). Megiddo teaches that Jesus benefited from his own sacrifice; if he benefited by his own blood, and he was of our nature (which Megiddo also believe) then surely we too must benefit from his blood?
Baptism into the body of Christ
By being truly baptized into the death and resurrection of Jesus, we are counted by God as being part of Jesus, and therefore our bodies will also be glorified an Christ’s return. The reconciliation made available through the offering of Christ’s body is only available to those who continue faithful in him (Eph. 1:7; Col 1:14). By baptism into Jesus, we are baptized into the body of Jesus, we become part of his body (Eph. 1:23; 4:16 Col. 1:18; 1 Cor. 12:13,27). At Christ’s return, he will “change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body” (Phil. 3:21). “The life also of Jesus (i.e. the eternal life given through his resurrection) (will) be made manifest in our mortal flesh” (2 Cor 4:10).
Jesus was perfect by character; yet in order to represent us who have to die, he “died for us.” Because he had done no sin, he was raised again to immortal life By being baptized into Jesus, he represents us, and therefore if we faithfully remain “in him,” we will also share in his immortalization. Thus our salvation is on account of Christ’s death.
Megiddo teaches that a person must develop perfection to be saved. Until they reach that point, they are without hope. The scripture position is that we are considered part of the eternal grace of God now, unless we fall away from it: “Even when we were dead in sins, (God) hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;) and hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus” (Eph. 2:5-6). Although this salvation will not be physically manifested until the return of Christ, we are spoken of as having received it in prospect. Having received this great gift, our works should be motivated by gratitude for God’s “unspeakable gift,” rather than provoked by a feeling that our obedience will bring our salvation. In prospect, we have been saved.
The place of good works
Our ultimate acceptance will be on account of our living faith in God’s grace, not our works: “For by grace are ye saved through faith…not of works, lest any man should boast…And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise works is no more work” (Eph. 2:8,9; Rom. 11:6). If we really believe that we are acceptable to God, then we will show our faith by “works” of obedience (James 2:14-26).
“Works” do not just refer to the actions prescribed by the Mosaic Law, as Megiddo have claimed. James 2:14-26 says “works” include giving food and clothing to needy Christians. Romans 4:2-5 speaks of “works” being
done before the Mosaic Law was given The argument of Romans 2-7 which negates relying on the works of the Mosaic Law for salvation, also negates relying on obedience as a means of justifying ourselves before God. The real work of God is to believe in the work of Christ (John 6:69).
Christ’s cleansing our consciencev by his sacrifice means that therefore with works we “serve the living God” (Heb 9:14; Tit. 2:14). We can never have this kind of clear conscience if our relationship with God depends solely upon our own obedience.
Summary
While the Lord Jesus set an example of perfect obedience, his literal death the shedding of his blood, is critical to our salvation. We all need forgiveness of sins which God only grants upon our association with the death of Christ. The necessity of death as the basis of the forgiveness of sins is set forth in the Mosaic Law, the vocabulary of which is applied to Jesus Christ. By associating with Christ through baptism, God imputes righteousness to us; He counts our faith for righteousness. Our good work must spring out of our rejection of sin which is implicit in our association with the death and resurrection of Christ.
The Origin of the Organic World – Part One