This series of editorials is occasioned by letters which touched on a long-standing area of discussion among Christadelphians: is sacrifice required for human nature?
Discussions on the issue have often produced more heat than light; sometimes so much heat that divisions have occurred. In fact, today’s divisions are often rationalized because the other fellowship has real or imagined errors on this point. Recognizing the background, we have commented carefully, hoping to produce a little light without being inflammatory.
To Review
In the first four editorials, we have covered a number of points, but the three most important are:
- God is not angry with us simply because we are human beings nor are we in any sense guilty of Adam’s sin. In light of this, brethren contribute to confusion by speaking of our condition inherited from Adam in terms normally associated with committed sins — i.e. phrases such as “forgiveness,” “remission,” “guilt,” “alienation,” “God’s wrath” should be confined to discussing personal transgressions.
- Under the Law of Moses, atonement was made for non-transgression situations (Lev. 12:7-8; 14:19; 15:15, 30; 16:16,18). Much confusion has been created by failure to acknowledge “atonement” does not always indicate personal moral responsibility.
- Motivation to right attitude and behavior is the reason behind the sacrificial system and the atonement through Christ. When we approach the atonement as if God were thereby satisfying a lot of legal requirements,
we bog down in convoluted ideas and incomprehensible jargon. When we see it as a means of instruction in divine principles, we find it a compelling force in our lives to godliness of mind and action.
The whole package
Under the law, there was a great variety of animal sacrifices. To recognize the significance of any given sacrifice, one had to consider not only the actual death of the victim but also many other attendant circumstances: the reason for the offering, who supplied it, the age, sex and condition of the animal, where it was slain, the disposal of the blood and body, etc.
In the case of the Lord Jesus, all of the principles taught in the Mosaic offerings are addressed in his one sacrifice. Clearly in his case, it is even more important to consider not just the fact he died, but the whole package of circumstances: who provided him, the manner of his life, who put him to death, the manner of his death, his resurrection, etc. All of these features are part of his “sacrifice.”
In earlier articles, we saw that some of the Mosaic offerings specifically emphasized that the flesh has great power to dominate our lives. They were sacrificial offerings occasioned by human nature. When we consider the sacrifice of Christ, we see two very important features that are “for human nature;” that is, they are necessitated by the extraordinary propensity to sin that is part of our nature. These two features are:
- The Savior is the Son of God.
- The blessings are based on promise and faith, not law and perfect compliance.
The sacrifice of Christ, when we view the whole package, is thus for human nature as well as for personally committed sins.
-
The Savior is the Son of God
In Romans 8, the apostle indicates two great reasons why God begot His own Son to be the Savior. By doing so, God forever convinces us of His love and His willingness to help us be saved: “He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things?” (Rom. 8:32). At some point, every believer has taken heart that, “God does love me; He has proven this in that He gave His only begotten Son on our behalf.” This aspect of the sacrifice of Christ thus has a compelling impact on our attitude.
But there is another reason God provided His Son to be the Savior: “For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh” (v.3). The law was utterly inept to save, not because it was a bad law; it was a holy, just and good law (7:12). People were the problem.
Ignorance was not the problem. Some were intimately familiar with law and did not commit sins of ignorance. Yet those very people found that the more they learned about God’s commands, the more their innate stubborn independence caused them to break them: “Sin, finding opportunity in the commandment, wrought in me all kinds of covetousness…when the commandment came, sin revived and I died” (7:8-9 RSV).
Sincerity was not the problem. “I do not do what I want, but I do the very thing I hate…For I do not do the good I want, but the evil I do not want is what I do” (vs. 15,19).
Our powerful propensity to sin is the problem: “If I do what I do not want…It is no longer I that do it, but sin that dwells within me. For I know that nothing good dwells within me, that is, in my flesh. I can will what is right, but I cannot do it” (vs. 16-18).
The law was weak because the flesh was so strong.
Going carefully
We need to tread carefully here for the Lord Jesus Christ was of our nature. He did not come in the likeness of angels but in the likeness of the very flesh that had produced sin in every other man, “in the likeness of sinful flesh.” He did not oppose and vanquish sin from a distance, “he condemned sin in the flesh.” He was not remote from human desires: he felt within himself the drive to satisfy hunger, to seize power and receive man’s adulation. He “was in all points tempted like as we are” (Heb. 4:15).
But he was different. Common experience and facts of genetics tell us that father and mother both leave a great imprint on their children. While we are nowhere given a list of the specifics in regard to the Lord, we can see certain results of his divine paternity. His scriptural aptitude was phenomenal; at age 12, his perception amazed the greatest Bible minds in Israel (Luke 2:42-47). His love for God’s law makes us envious (Psa. 119:97-104). His Father’s standards and plans evoked within him a singular love and devotion (Psa. 40:5-8).
Born to be different
He was different for a reason. He was to succeed where all others failed.
He had been begotten the Son of God because “all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God” (Rom. 3:23). Mankind had not fallen just a little short of full obedience. Of everyone it could be said that at some point in their lives, “Their throat is an open sepulcher, with their tongues they have used deceit; the poison of asps in under their lips” (Rom. 3:10-13). All had at times been utterly dominated by the disposition to sin that is part of human nature. Mankind had proved it could not condemn sin in the flesh.
Yet the Savior must change the results; human nature must be ruled, sin in the flesh must be condemned. To accomplish this end in the face of the proven power of human nature, God begot a Son. In this sense, He did it “for human nature.”
Benefit to Jesus
That the Savior should be the Son of God is a vital part of the total package of the atonement. Did Jesus benefit from this aspect of “the sacrifice of Christ?” Undoubtedly! We have already noted how his paternity would affect his aptitude, affection and disposition. There were other advantages in being the Son of God if Jesus would respond to them, and he did!
For instance, unless there is something wrong with the father, a son will intuitively use him as a role model. Jesus’ very make-up thus directed him to follow the example of God, and he responded: “I have set the LORD always before me” (Psa. 16:8).
Further, Jesus was made the Son of God because of the power of the flesh. Thus all day, every day, the very fabric of his being taught him he must not rely on his own strength to overcome the force which, to that point, had reigned an unconquered sovereign over all humans. Accordingly, he made no attempt to win the battle himself: “because He [God] is at my right hand, I shall not be moved” (v.8). In another Psalm he says: “It is God that girdeth me with strength, and maketh my way perfect” (Psa. 18:32).
Let us learn as well
This aspect of the atonement, Jesus as the Son of God, was “for human nature” and was obviously of great benefit to the Master. It provided essential elements needed to conquer sin in the flesh and it served as a great instructional force in his life. The point should not be lost to us.
We cannot conquer the flesh apart from God. In Romans 7, Paul expresses the frustration all have known, “I am carnal, sold under sin” (v.14). And his use of the word “sin” in verses 17 and 20 should strike down any self-confidence we may have. The context rules out the normal meaning of “sin” which is an act, word or thought disobedient to God; Paul clearly speaks here of the propensity to disobey that is part of our nature. In the technical terms of grammar, we are looking at the figure of speech of metonymy — using the name of the effect for the cause. But that hardly conveys the power of the point.
Our basic disposition will habitually lead us to sin. The tendency is so dominant that scripture uses the same word for transgression as it does for our basic disposition.
No wonder there is sacrificial offering for human nature. This does not mean we are held guilty for being human beings. But it does mean we should respond, as Jesus did, to the fact that God had to send His Son in order to conquer sin. We must realize that, left to ourselves, we will habitually walk in sin; consequently we desperately need God, His intervention, His help, His instruction, His grace.
The Origin of the Organic World – Part One