Alexander the Great Confirms the Accuracy of Bible Prophecy Daniel 8

2014 A Review The year reviewed in the light of Bible Prophecy

A Review of Aronofsky’s Noah (2014)

A Review of Aronofsky’s Noah (2014) by Dave Burke

--[This review contains spoilers]--

Background Information

Darren Aronofsky (the Jewish director of Noah) has described his movie as ‘the least biblical biblical movie ever made.’ While somewhat exaggerated, this deliberately provocative statement confirmed what everyone should already have known: that the script of Noah would not be faithful to Scripture.

Any further doubt was removed by the trailers, which show God communicating with Noah through troubling dreams, Methuselah wielding a flaming sword, and a raging battle in front of the ark—to name just a few of the many unbiblical elements.

No-one entering the theatre should be under any illusion that Noah offered a strictly biblical narrative. Despite this, many Christians have complained that Noah wasn’t as accurate as they’d expected it to be. Don’t be one of those Christians. Inform yourself before watching the film, and you won’t be disappointed.

Aronofsky has told interviewers that the story of Noah is a personal favourite, and its themes have fascinated him since childhood. Although a weak atheist/borderline agnostic today, he was raised in a religious Jewish household, remains a cultural Jew, and retains respect for Jewish theological traditions.

Aronofsky’s research for Noah included extensive reading from ancient Jewish commentaries, and consultation with rabbis from several different Jewish organisations. His source material includes the Bible, Jewish rabbinic tradition, early Christian theological speculation, and the Kabbalah.

While it may seem strange to us, some rabbis have said that Aronofsky’s version of Noah’s story is easily accommodated among the plurality of views which comprise the Midrash tradition (an ancient homiletical commentary). In other words it is ‘kosher’ from a rabbinic perspective. Thus Aronofsky’s interpretation operates within the context of Midrash, and must be assessed on that basis.

Anyone going into the movie without awareness of these facts is likely to be confused and disappointed.

To ensure that my review is as objective and well informed as possible I have spent the past few days researching and reading the extra biblical Jewish texts upon which Aronofsky’s interpretation is based, including Midrash and the Zohar. It has been a helpful and enlightening process.

While this review does contain spoilers it neither comprises nor includes a detailed plot summary.

Cultural & Geographical Setting

Noah lived in the Mesopotamian Basin and was most likely Sumerian (the Hebrews did not exist yet). Unfortunately all of the actors in Aronofsky’s movie appear as white Europeans, which is obviously unbiblical and ahistorical. On the plus side, they all speak with British accents.

Instead of the hot, dry climate we would expect for the setting of Noah’s story, Aronofsky’s Noah lives in a cold, damp region where the hills are covered with lush green grass and several layers of robust clothing are essential (including stout leather boots).

We can read this discrepancy in two different ways: either it reflects the fact that Aronofsky felt no obligation to follow Scriptural details and relocated the story to suit himself, or it is intended to imply that the climate of Mesopotamia was very different before the flood, when God made drastic changes to the weather system (as Scripture implies).

Whatever the case, it refutes the claim made by some reviewers that Aronofsky’s movie carries an explicit message about global warming. There is not a single hint of this throughout the entire film, and no suggestion that the planet is overheating in Noah’s time. Frankly it is difficult to see how such a message could be delivered through an interpretation that situates Noah’s story within the rugged terrain of a chilling Nordic landscape.

Clothes in Noah are realistically portrayed in dull earth tones with an occasional hint of blue suggesting an era in which dyes were largely unknown. They are also quite sophisticated (e.g. trousers, primitive shirts, basic ‘jackets’) and distinctly Western rather than Mesopotamian.

However, since we don’t know how advanced civilisation had become before the flood ‘reset’ everything, I am willing to let this slide. The main point is that Noah’s clothes are appropriate to his surroundings, and that’s a mark of consistency.

God

Some reviewers have falsely claimed that God is never mentioned in Noah. The opposite is true: God is referred to at least twenty times as ‘the Creator’, and twice as ‘God.’

This is consistent with the Jewish aversion to using God’s name and remains faithful to the biblical record, which tells us that God’s name was not revealed until He spoke with Moses. ‘Creator’ is an Old Testament title for God, and Jesus refers to Him as ‘the Creator’ in Matthew 19:4.

In Aronofsky’s film God never speaks to Noah verbally, instead communicating by dreams which Noah struggles to comprehend. This is the opposite of the biblical account, in which God speaks verbally but we have no words from Noah.

Creation

Creation is depicted as occurring ex nihilo within 6 literal days; this is explicitly stated by Noah, who correctly describes the work of each day in turn, as recorded in Scripture (which he quotes).

Contrary to some reviews there is no ‘evolution sequence.’ Instead we see a rapid montage of different animals as the camera pans from sea to land. This sequence does not follow the order of evolution; instead it follows the order of creation in Genesis 1.

The movie does not depict any animal evolving from any other (Noah specifically informs his sons that all animals were created ‘according to their kinds’) and there is no suggestion that humans evolved from apes or ape-like beings.

Adam & Eve

Adam and Eve are depicted as humans covered in a bright golden glow. This idea is taken from the Genesis Rabba (a Midrash composed between AD 400-600) which teaches that the first couple were ‘clothed with light’ until the Fall, after which they were ‘clothed with skins.’

When Noah recounts Adam and Eve’s story to his children he warns them that ‘Temptation led to sin.’ This leads to a silhouetted depiction of Cain slaying Abel, which becomes a rapid montage of human violence throughout history.

Each image is superimposed over the last one, with Cain and Abel replaced by a swift succession of soldiers from many different cultures and eras, including our own. This same technique is later used to great effect in the creation sequence.

Noah

In Aronofsky’s movie Noah is a vegetarian (this is biblical; the sanction to eat meat was only given after the flood) but contrary to some reviews he is not a vegan. 

When Ham asks why the family doesn’t kill animals for food, Noah simply replies ‘We take only what we need, only what we can use.’ This explains Noah’s leather boots, which are clearly visible in several scenes. While he may not eat meat, he has no qualms about using animal skins for clothing.

Similarly, Abel’s animal sacrifice was acceptable to God even though meat-eating itself was not yet approved. In Noah, as in Scripture, faithful believers of the antediluvian era ate no meat and did not kill animals wantonly.

Noah maintains a sustainable semi-agrarian existence, but contrary to some reviews he is not a radical tree-hugging pacifist. Throughout the course of the movie he slaughters an unspecified number of Cainites with ruthless brutality (three in the first 10 minutes!) and cuts down an entire forest. Many conservative Christian viewers have actually complained that Aronofsky’s Noah is not peaceful enough.

In an early scene Noah finds a dying animal hunted by the Cainites for food. Minutes later he is confronted by angry Cainites and kills them all in self-defence. Rather than burying the dead animal he wraps it in cloth and cremates it on an altar of stones as a burnt offering to God while silently and reverently raising his eyes to heaven in prayer. The music track accompanying this scene is appropriately called ‘Sweet Savour.’

In Aronofsky’s movie Noah does not preach to the wicked and is not mocked by doubters. This is faithful to the OT account, which never says Noah preached to those around him and neither states or implies that he was mocked for building the ark.

In Scripture Noah is never described as speaking, consulting God, or praying. We don’t even have any record of him offering sacrifices until after the flood. By contrast, Aronofsky’s Noah seeks God’s guidance on several occasions and presents a burnt offering in the first 20 minutes of the film.

The most confronting part of the film occurs in the final act. Noah and his family have been afloat for an unspecified period, without any message from God. Their uncertain fate breeds doubt in Noah’s mind. Having reflected upon the violence and depravity of the Cainites’ last days he becomes convinced that humanity is irredeemable.

Noah despairs, believing God’s plan to renew creation cannot be achieved as long while sin is perpetuated. He shares these thoughts with his family, voicing his belief that Japheth will outlive them all and die alone as the last human on Earth. This, he says, is the only way the world can revert to its Edenic state. The animals are innocent and must be preserved but humans must not survive, lest their propensity to sin result in a fresh cycle of corruption and violence.

Soon afterwards Noah learns from Shem that Ila is pregnant. At the height of a furious argument he accuses them both of undermining God by choosing to procreate, in open defiance of the Creator’s will. Overcome by grief he tells Ila that if the child is a boy he will replace Japheth as the last man to die; if a girl she will be slain to ensure the end of humanity. This has a predictable effect on the family dynamic.

As the months drag on, Noah is racked with guilt and uncertainty. He goes to the roof of the ark and pleads with God, begging for an alternative to his own bloody solution. But there is no reply, so he steels himself for the hideous task and resolves to carry it through.

I saw this as a deliberate parallel with Abraham, who was also prepared to kill his own child in obedience to God. The crucial difference between these two men is that Abraham correctly understood God’s command but was spared from carrying it out, whereas Aronofsky’s Noah is wrong and must choose to stop himself.

It strikes me as odd that some Christians have condemned Aronofsky for portraying Noah as a man prepared to commit infanticide when Abraham was ready to kill Isaac. Surely the only valid criticism here is narrative inaccuracy, since the idea that a patriarch was willing to kill his own flesh and blood is entirely biblical.

Ila gives birth to twin girls and Noah pursues her to the upper deck. At the last moment he experiences an epiphany and spares the babies. Yet Noah still seems troubled as they start a new life on dry land. In his heart he is wondering: have I obeyed or betrayed the Creator?

The scenes which follow imply he seeks solace in wine. True to Scripture, Noah becomes drunk and is discovered naked by Ham. The episode is tastefully depicted with a long shot of Noah face down on the ground. 

Shem arrives shortly with Japheth, and together they drag a blanket over their father, walking carefully backwards while averting their eyes (another point of accuracy typically ignored by negative reviews). There is no explicit cursing of Ham, but it’s obvious he won’t be hanging around for long (and he doesn’t).

In the closing moments of the film Noah witnesses a rainbow in the sky and correctly recognises this as God’s covenant with man. The rainbow pulses outward from the sun in a perfect, ever-expanding circle as Noah blesses his family with the words of Genesis 1:28, ‘Be fruitful and multiply!’

Aronofsky’s depiction of Noah is a disturbing one for Christians, but Jewish viewers will recognise the darker portrait which emerges from Midrash. In rabbinic tradition the statement ‘Noah was blameless in his generations’ merely refers to the fact that he was more righteous than anyone else by the standards of his day, and does not imply he was above reproach. 

On the contrary, some ancient rabbis appear to have seen Noah as more of an antihero. According to them, Noah might not have been considered righteous in the days of Moses or Samuel.

The Zohar claims Noah challenged God’s judgement, only to receive a stinging rebuke:

How did God answer Noah when he came out of the ark? Noah saw the whole world destroyed. He began to cry for the world and said, ‘Master of the world, You are called Compassionate! You should have shown compassion for Your creatures!’ 

The Holy One answered him, ‘Foolish shepherd! Now you say this, but not when I spoke to you tenderly, saying “Make yourself an ark of gopher wood…” [Genesis 6:14]. Because I saw that you were righteous before me, I lingered with you and spoke to you at length so that you would ask for mercy for the world! 

But as soon as you heard that you would be safe in the ark, the evil of the world did not touch your heart. You built the ark and saved yourself. Now that the world has been destroyed you utter questions and pleas?’

Notice that in this story the warning of the flood was intended to test Noah’s concern for the rest of creation. God is angry that Noah failed to plea for humanity while there was still time, and openly accuses him of selfishness. The moment his safety was assured, Noah had no thought for anyone else.

Midrash traditionally contrasts Noah against Abraham, who pleaded for Sodom and Gomorrah on the grounds that a few innocent should not perish with them. It is implied that this act of mercy uniquely qualified Abraham rather than Noah as the father of Israel.

Other Jewish assessments of Noah are equally sobering:

Three men craved for things of earth, and none of them made a success of his occupation. Cain was a tiller of the ground; we know his sad history. Noah attempted to become a husbandman, and he became a drunkard. Uzziah became a leper [II Chronicles 26:10-20]. 

Even Noah, however, was left not because he deserved it, but because he found grace.

Noah began by being righteous in his generation, but fell back and became a man of earth [Genesis 9:20].

It is texts such as these which informed and inspired Aronofsky’s interpretation of Noah. If we wish to judge the movie objectively we must familiarise ourselves with the source material and learn what Aronofsky saw in the Jews’ own interpretations of this story. 

Noah’s Family

Scripture does not record the name of Noah’s wife or daughters-in-law. The Book of Jubilees says Noah’s wife’s name was ‘Emzârâ. Genesis Rabba says she was called Naamah. 

In Aronofsky’s film her name is Naameh.

The Book of Jubilees says Shem’s wife was called Sedeqetelebab, Ham’s wife was Ne’elatama’uk, and Japheth’s wife was ’Adataneses. In the movie Noah only has one daughter-in-law: Shem’s wife, Ila.

Noah’s sons receive little characterisation (Japheth least of all). Shem is portrayed as highly moral, while Ham is the brooding black sheep. It is established early in the film that he will be a problem. His resentment of Noah is motivated by a tragic incident in which he loses woman he loves. This strikes me as an unnecessary attempt to mitigate—or at least rationalise—his later betrayal.

Ila conceives before the flood commences, and starts to experience morning sickness just as the rain stops. This is a timeframe of ~40 days, consistent with the typical emergence of morning sickness at ~6 weeks.

Aronofsky’s Methuselah has been unfairly misrepresented by reviewers as everything from ‘a sort of witch doctor with mental health issues’ to ‘a crazed warlock.’ None of these ridiculous caricatures are even remotely close to the truth.

The film portrays Methuselah as a wise, ancient patriarch of great courage and virtue. In a disappointingly brief flashback he singlehandedly destroys an entire army of Cainites with a flaming sword. Methuselah is said to have lived with the earthbound Watchers and imbibed much of their wisdom. He also possesses a supernatural ability to heal.

Noah visits Methuselah seeking advice about his apocalyptic dreams, and Methuselah confirms that the dreams are prophetic. Contrary to some of the more bizarre negative reviews, Methuselah does not live on a diet of mind-altering berries and does not provide Noah with a hallucinogenic drug. Instead he provides a soporific which sends Noah to sleep, during which he experiences his troubling dream again, with some variations. This time he wakes with greater insight.

According to the dates and ages given in the Masoretic text and Samaritan Pentateuch, Methuselah died in the year of the flood; possibly just a few weeks before it arrived. According to rabbinic tradition he died 7 days before the flood.

Calculated by the dates and ages given in Septuagint Alexandrius, Methuselah died six years before the flood. Calculated by the dates and ages given in Septuagint Vaticanus, he died fourteen years after the flood(!) 

Aronofsky’s movie shows Methuselah choosing to die in the flood. This is an unnecessary departure from the biblical account for no other purpose than dramatic effect.

Tubal-Cain

Ray Winstone plays Tubal-Cain, hamming up his role with such enthusiasm that in some scenes it is more accurate to say Tubal-Cain is playing Ray Winstone. Aronofsky portrays Tubal-Cain as the leader of the Cainites. In the opening scene he is shown murdering Noah’s father Lamech.

Unlike the rest of the Cainites Tubal-Cain does not die in the flood. Instead he successfully reaches the ark, climbs up the scaffolding, chops a hole in the top storey and hides among the sleeping animals, where he negotiates an uneasy truce with Ham and waits for a chance to murder Noah.

This is a gross departure from Scripture but it does have a precedent in rabbinic literature. The aggadic-midrashic work Pirke de-Rabbi Eliezer contains the story of a famous stowaway who survived the flood:

As the floodwaters swelled, Og, king of Bashan, sat himself on one of the rungs of the ark’s ladders and swore to Noah and to his sons that he would be their slave forever. 

What did Noah do? He punched a hole in the ark, and through it he handed out food to Og every day. Og’s survival is hinted at in the verse “Only Og remained of the remnant of the Rephaim” [Deuteronomy 3:11].

Aronofsky has used this tale as the inspiration for his own subplot, in which Tubal-Cain replaces Og and brings violence rather than offering peace.

Perhaps the most interesting aspect of the rabbinic legend is Noah’s resolution of a moral dilemma. He is not at liberty to take Og on board the ark (Og is a sinner, and God has already established that only Noah and his family will be saved) yet he is loath to be merciless since God has shown mercy to him.

But if Og can be spared while remaining outside the ark, Noah can claim he has kept the letter of God’s command in good conscience (if not the spirit). This is typical of the moral conundrums posed by rabbinic literature and the clever solutions devised to resolve them.

The Watchers

In Aronofsky’s movie Noah is aided by a group of supernatural beings known as the Watchers. The depiction of these creatures is inspired partly by rabbinic tradition and partly by biblical elements. Scripture also mentions the Watchers, albeit not in the context of Noah’s story (see Daniel 4:13, 17, 23) but provides no details about their origin, purpose, or physical appearance. The most we can glean is that they are angelic guardians of some kind (the NET Bible calls them ‘Sentinels’); thus Aronofsky is free to portray them as he likes. In Noah they have six wings (inspired by the seraphim) which become arms when their bodies are encased in stone.

In the Book of Jubilees and the Books of Enoch some of the Watchers breed with mortal women, thereby producing the Nephilim. When Nephilim are killed, evil spirits emerge from their bodies. These become ‘demons’ (‘daimon’ in the New Testament). Aronofsky’s film makes no reference to this aspect of the Enochic/Jubilean tradition, and it is important to understand that the Watchers in Noah are not Nephilim.

In Noah the leader of the Watchers is called ‘Samyaza.’ This is taken from 1 Enoch. Aronofsky depicts the Watchers as ‘fallen angels’, cursed to remain on Earth as punishment for defying God’s will by teaching humanity advanced technologies after the Fall (metalworking, weaponry, etc.).

This is faithful to 1 Enoch, where the Watchers and the Nephilim also pass on forbidden knowledge (‘the instruments of death, the coat of mail, the shield, and the sword for slaughter… the use of ink and paper… every wicked stroke of spirits and of demons’) which humanity employs for evil purposes. The Books of Enoch and the Book of Jubilees also state that the Watchers were punished for their disobedience.

In Scripture the ark was built entirely by Noah. In 1 Enoch the ark was built entirely by the Watchers. Aronofsky combines the two accounts by depicting the Watchers as Noah’s assistants, using their great strength to hasten construction. Noah’s family also joins in the work.

In yet another scene borrowed from Midrash, Tubal-Cain attacks the ark with an army of thousands. The Watchers defend it with their lives, a self-sacrificial act which earns them divine absolution. As they fall in battle the Watchers are released from stone and return to heaven in spirit form.

Zohar

Noah’s land is rich in ‘zohar’, a combustible, highly unstable, brightly glowing ore. It can be ignited by fire or compression, with explosive results. ‘Zohar’ (more accurately ‘tzohar’) is a Hebrew word meaning ‘radiance’ or ‘illuminate’, and also the name of an extra biblical canon upon which the teachings of the Kabbalah are based. This is a very obvious reference to the movie’s source material.

The use of ‘zohar’ also invokes another Jewish tradition. In Midrash the tzohar was a glowing stone which contained light from the first day of creation. According to Jewish legend the tzohar was originally given to Adam and Eve, and later used by Noah to illuminate the ark.

The Cainites mine zohar on an industrial scale with no regard for the surrounding area, which is rapidly destroyed by pollution and strip mining. Noah also collects zohar but takes care not to damage his environment in the process.

Morality

In one scene Noah says: ‘For 10 generations since Adam, sin has walked within us. Brother against brother, nation against nation, man against creation. We murdered each other. We broke the world.’ This is biblical.

Aronofsky shows the primary sins of humanity to be murder, slavery, debauchery, destruction of God's creation, general disobedience to His commands, rape, and cannibalism. 

All of these activities are present in the movie (though the sexual violence is implied rather than depicted) and consistent with the biblical account of extreme human vice during Noah’s era. The Book of Jubilees provides a similar account, with particular reference to sins against creation.

The Flood

Many critics of the Bible claim the story of Noah’s flood was simply borrowed from other cultures. An article refuting this claim can be found here: http://bibleapologetics.wordpress.com/the-genesis-flood-24

In Aronofsky’s movie Noah correctly refers to ‘the waters above the earth’ which will be released during the flood; this is biblical (Genesis 1:6-7). The movie depicts huge torrents of water surging up from deep within the earth; this is biblical (Genesis 8:11).

The film incorrectly depicts Noah’s flood as global, with a long shot ‘from space’ showing heavy storm clouds all over the entire earth. By contrast, biblical evidence tells us that the flood was local (see the article here: http://bibleapologetics.wordpress.com/the-genesis-flood-14). Rabbinic tradition concurs.

The Ark

The ark is depicted as rough yet sturdy, and its exterior is at least partly real; Aronofsky spent six months building one third of the ark using the precise measurements given in Scripture. Digital imagery was used to complete the rest. It’s one of the most biblically faithful aspects of the entire movie.

Many critics of the Bible assert that a seaworthy vessel of such magnitude could not have been built with the technology available to Noah. An article refuting this claim can be found here: http://bibleapologetics.wordpress.com/the-genesis-flood-34

Locating Land & Leaving the Ark

In Aronofsky’s interpretation the raven is sent out by Japheth instead of Noah, while the dove is not sent out at all. Nevertheless I was pleased that this was correctly shown as an act of initiative by Noah’s family, as we find in Scripture.

The Bible tells us that God called Noah out of the ark when it was safe to leave. In the movie Noah and his family simply leave the ark when it runs aground on dry land.

Themes

Sin

The movie shows that Adam and Eve brought sin into the world by succumbing to the temptation of the forbidden fruit when prompted by the serpent; this is biblical (Genesis 3:1-6).

Aronofsky has been quoted as saying that the movie is about ‘family and survival’, and ‘how we all have original sin in us and what we're going to do with this second chance that we've been given.’ This is a central theme and it comes through very strongly.

Imago Dei

There are many references to man being made in the image of God (which even Tubal-Cain admits). This is biblical (Genesis 1:26-27). There are regular references to the sin and curses of Adam & Cain; this too is biblical (Genesis 3:17-19; 4:8-12).

Cities

Cities are described as creations of the Cainites (this is biblical; see Genesis 4:17) in which evil is concentrated and indulged. As the movie progresses these cities collapse under the self-destructive influences of immorality and unsustainability.

God’s sovereignty

Throughout the film we are constantly reminded that God is in control. The Watchers testify to the futility of resisting His will and the necessity of divine forgiveness. Noah recognises the unstoppable purpose of God in the message of his dreams. Methuselah affirms the certainty of judgement. 

By contrast, Tubal-Cain—a self-appointed king—acknowledges the inevitability of the flood but remains defiant even as the rain starts to fall. In a tense standoff with Ham he snarls, ‘You don't know your king!’ Ham brilliantly replies, ‘My father says there can be no king. The Creator is God!’

Tubal-Cain’s eventual death has a fatalistic air which implies that however long it might be delayed, God’s judgement is inescapable.

God’s silence

The absence of verbal communication from God presents Noah with the challenge of interpreting dreams that nobody understands any better than he does. The dreams cease when he starts building the ark, and there is no sign from heaven until he reaches dry land.

Tubal-Cain exploits this by challenging Noah’s claim to divine guidance, saying God has not spoken for generations and is unlikely to start now. Yet it seems this taunt masks a deep rooted insecurity, for Tubal-Cain cries to God just before the flood, demanding ‘Why won’t you speak to me?!’ Is he desperately hoping to supplant Noah at the eleventh hour?

God’s lengthy silence between the building of the ark and the film’s final scene contributes to Noah’s spiritual breakdown in the third act, where he begs God for an answer that will relieve the moral burden thrust upon him by his own misinterpretation of the Creator’s intentions. Here we might pause to reflect upon similar moments in our own lives.

Justice & mercy

At times I felt Aronofsky’s Noah resembled Jonah: a flawed man with a misguided passion for justice, grappling with the demands of an apocalyptic mission. He is merciless with the Cainites but spares Ila’s daughters even though part of him believes they must die.

Aronofsky explains his motivation for this theme as follows:

We started to realize these big ideas about justice and mercy in the film. It started with Noah being called righteous in his generation, and we tried to figure out what that meant. 

What we’ve discovered is that people who are a lot smarter than us and who study theology talk about righteousness as having a balance of justice and mercy. As a parent, you understand that if you’re too just, you can destroy your child with strictness, and if you’re too merciful you can destroy them with leniency. Finding that balance makes you a great parent.

For us, since Noah is called righteous, we asked, “OK, what is his balance of justice and mercy?” So at the beginning of the film, he clearly wants justice, very much like God. By the end, when the rainbow happens, he has learned mercy, forgiveness and grace.

Ila encapsulates these sentiments when she tells Noah ‘He [God] chose you because you saw the wickedness of man and knew you wouldn't look away. But there is goodness too.’ In reference to the sparing of her daughters, Ila says to Noah ‘You chose mercy. You chose love.’

Ila’s words are particularly poignant in the light of the earlier exchange between Noah and Ham:

Ham: ‘I thought you were good. I thought that's why He [God] chose you.’

Noah: ‘He chose me because he knew I would finish the job, nothing more.’

This brooding, pragmatic Noah weathers a perfect storm of spiritual challenges and emerges a better man for the experience.

Jewish Perspectives

Jewish reviews will greatly inform your understanding of Noah, even if you do not see it yourself. Here is an excerpt from one Jewish viewer’s response to the film:

One of Aronofksy's stated central interests in the film was to explore the biblical notion of righteousness. He determined, after a lot of study, that righteousness in the Bible refers to a perfect balance of justice and mercy, and that is what he primarily explored in the character of Noah. 

…For me, Noah was truly great biblical art. I cried through at least a solid third of the film, moved by everything from the aesthetic beauty onscreen to the human tragedy of the deluge. So many moments of this film felt uncomfortably recognisable. 

I know what it's like to follow a path through the murk of my own imperfectly heard communication with G-d, and I know what it's like to overshoot the messages I've actually heard. I know what it's like to be bound in a state like the Watchers are in. What greater metaphor is there for being caught in one's own sinful decisions than being bound up in twisted rock when you were created to fly free?

I am growing in an increasingly desperate need to care for a hurting earth, particularly endangered species, and often feel powerless to stop the exploitative machine around me, but I must learn to do something concrete about it. And some corner within me, no matter how infinitesimal, remembers what it was like to be in the Garden, wrapped in a garment of light.

And that remembrance is, at least in great part, what brings me forward into G-d's redemption as a Prodigal journeying back to the love that bore me in the first place. This is especially poignant to me as Passover approaches, because the blessing of G-d is irrevocable—in every human being, in every dog and fish and elephant, in every blade of grass.

I encourage you to read the full text, which contains many more insights.

Jewish studies PhD candidate Krista Dalton has written a good article on Noah as Midrash. Dr Eric A. Goldman—adjunct associate professor of film studies at Yeshiva University, New York City—has written about his experience at a special screening of Aronofsky’s film.

Goldman’s article includes references to the movie’s use of rabbinic literature. He observes that Jewish audiences are better prepared for Noah than Christians and Muslims because they have been raised in a theological culture which sanctions and encourages the reinterpretation of biblical stories.

Other Perspectives

I have read almost four dozen reviews of Noah from commentators, bloggers, professional reviewers, and regular members of the public. Some praise the movie, some denounce it as a tool of Satan, and others are quite ambivalent. Opinion remains divided over the question of whether it functions better as pure entertainment or a biblically inspired story. 

The following articles may be of interest:

Justin Chang: http://variety.com/2014/film/news/noah-is-the-biblical-epic-that-christians-deserve-1201150333

Brett McCracken: http://convergemagazine.com/noah-film-12561

Steven D. Greydanus: http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/noah-controversy

Annette Yoshiko Reed:  http://www.religiondispatches.org/archive/atheologies/7741/who_gets_to_decide_if_noah_is_biblical

Phil Cooke: http://philcooke.com/christians-should-see-noah

Peter T. Chattaway: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/filmchat/2014/03/the-jewish-roots-of-and-responses-to-noah.html

Peter T. Chattaway: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/filmchat/2014/04/no-noah-is-not-gnostic-say-that-ten-times-fast.html

Peter T. Chattaway: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/filmchat/2014/02/the-righteousness-of-noah-what-did-the-rabbis-say.html

George Fike: http://pastor-george.com/2014/03/31/swimming-against

iPreacher: http://316apps.com/ipreachersblog/2014/03/31/noah

Nearly all of them are written by Christians. Chattaway’s analysis is particularly focused on the Jewishness of Aronofsky’s interpretation, and engages well with its rabbinic source material. He also defends the film against false accusations of Gnosticism and addresses its uncomfortable portrait of Noah’s character.

Concluding Thoughts

Aronofsky’s Noah is not a faithful reproduction of the Old Testament story. I wish the movie had been far more biblically accurate than it is. Some of the changes were pointless and unjustifiable, even allowing for artistic licence.

For example, retaining all eight members of Noah’s family would have expanded the central cast and provided room for deeper characterisation. Reducing Noah’s daughters-in-law from three to one simply made it easier for Aronofsky to fabricate a moral dilemma which exists solely to add drama—as if the story of Noah needed any more!—and drive the plot forward on his terms.

Although utterly disposable, the stowaway subplot was forgivable considering its rabbinic precedent and Aronofsky’s desire to incorporate traditional Jewish interpretations. 

The exploration of Noah’s character was unnecessarily overwrought, and I felt the parallel to Abraham was merely latent where it should have been explicit. This might have gone a long way towards reassuring Christian audiences that the film was not a hatchet job on one of their favourite Bible stories.

However, the more I researched for this review the more I realised just how little Aronofsky had tinkered with Noah’s story. Almost every embellishment—whether addition or omission—was drawn directly from Jewish exegesis, some of it very ancient. Aronofsky contributed very few ideas of his own. Most of the work was already done by long dead rabbis.

This was not a case of Hollywood grabbing the Bible and haphazardly twisting it into a few random shapes. Aronofsky deliberately chose his own Jewish theological heritage as the basis for a dramatic re-envisioning of Genesis 6-9 which brings out speculative subplots and scholarly interpretations well known to Jewish audiences but far less familiar to Christians. 

Above all, Aronofsky is sympathetic to Noah and depicts him realistically. Some of us may feel Aronofsky’s Noah is a far cry from the one we learned about in Sunday School, but in my view he is no more a villain than Samson or King David.

While watching the movie I detected an underlying tension which I’ve found difficult to articulate. The best way I can put it is to say that Noah falls between two stools: a secular interpretation, and a supernatural epic visualised through the prism of Midrash.

On one hand we get an angsty Noah who believes God is speaking to him but doesn't fully understand what He’s saying (the secular perspective). On the other hand we get visions, miracles, the Watchers, and other elements drawn from ancient Jewish writings (the supernatural perspective).

I believe Aronofsky should have chosen one or the other. If a secular interpretation, the film should have had no supernatural elements. If a supernatural epic, the film should have stayed much closer to the biblical text and Jewish traditions.

Aronofsky's Noah is not faithful to Scripture but it is faithful to Judaism. I believe this approach is legitimate and laudable insofar as it provides an authentically Jewish interpretation of Noah’s story, deeply rooted in rabbinic exegesis.

It’s refreshing to see this powerful narrative brought to life without the influence of Christian anachronisms. Perhaps for the first time in history Hollywood has presented a biblically inspired Old Testament movie with a genuinely Jewish voice.

Christadelphian takes Hawaiian Baby Woodrose Seeds Trip

Atonement Fellowship Differences

atonement fellowship differences 

The Clean Flesh Position
1. The Bible devil is personal sins only, and is a moral term equivalent to the mind of the flesh. The same applies to “sin in the flesh,” which is a moral term only and is not a physical characteristic of our nature. Mortality and “proneness to sin” are physical, but they are not a part of the Bible devil. “Proneness to sin” is caused by transgression becoming a way of life by the sinner.
2. God required Jesus to be crucified only because of our personal sins. The crucifixion was not required because Christ had any relationship to physical sin; for himself crucifixion was simply an act of obedience.
3. The crucifixion was a ritual whereby sin as a principle (represented by human nature) was ritually condemned in Christ, but it did not actually exist there. Jesus was not “made sin” by being of human nature, sin’s flesh.
4. Baptism is only for the forgiveness of personal sins.

The UnAmended Position
The UnAmended hold that a man is legally condemned for being born with human nature and that this legal condemnation will hold a person in the grave forever once he dies. Therefore circumcision and baptism  are necessary to remove this legal condemnation and that this is why Jesus was baptized.The only basis revealed in the Bible upon which God can raise a person from the dead to judgment is that the person be “in the covenant” through circumcision or baptism. If the unbaptized are to be raised it will have to be upon a different basis.

The Partial Atonement Position
This theory is similar to that of the “clean flesh” position inasmuch as it teaches that sin is only transgression, and that Christ’s offering was only for those of his believers, because they are sinners in action. Consequently they teach that no sacrifice, atonement, or offering is required on account of the defiled nature we bear. The diabolos, being sin in the flesh, is thus destroyed by dying and not by sacrifice. Since they teach that sacrifice is only for transgression and not for any physical defect or need of redemption, atonement does not apply to the Lord Jesus Christ, but only to others. In this way, the theory requires that the Lord Jesus did not offer for himself for the purifying of his sin’s flesh. They explain that the offering of Christ was only an action of obedience in order that others could be saved, and that Christ was only benefited as a result of his action for others.

The Whole Truth
1. The Bible devil is a personification of the physical principle in human nature which lures and incites us to sin. Since this physical characteristic of our nature inevitably produces personal sins in every human except Christ, it is termed “sin in the flesh” or “the law of sin” in our members. God holds no man morally guilty for being born with the devil in his flesh.
2. Jesus needed to crucify his flesh in order to destroy the devil (the law of sin, called “the law of condemnation” [BASF #8] in his flesh) and redeem himself from sin nature. This is the righteous basis upon which God forgives our personal sins.
3. The crucifixion was the real condemnation of Sin by killing the devil (the root cause of personal sins) in the flesh of a sinless human — in Christ himself. This will ultimately accomplish the destruction of the devil in all of the redeemed. Jesus was “made sin” by being born of human nature so that he could condemn it to death in himself. In his crucifixion he identified with the transgressions of his people, being “made a curse for us,” and thus came under the full weight of the divine law against Sin.
4. Baptism provides for the forgiveness of past sins and is our commitment to put to death the old man of sin’s flesh; whilst providing a covenant relationship with the Eternal Spirit, with hope of partaking of divine nature.

Vine’s Expository Dictionary
— on the “Heart”
KARDIA (kadia), the heart (Eng. “cardiac” etc), the chief organ of physical life (Lev. 17:11), occupies the most important place in the human system. By an easy transition the word came to stand for man’s entire mental and moral activity, both the rational and the emotional elements. In other words, the heart is used figuratively for the hidden springs of the personal life. “The Bible describes human depravity as in the ‘heart,’ because sin is a principle which has its seat in the centre of man’s inward life, and then ‘defiles’ the whole circuit of his action, Mat. 15:19, 20. On the other hand, Scripture regards the heart as the sphere of divine influence, Rom. 2:15; Acts 15:9... the heart, as lying deep within, contains ‘the hidden man,’ 1Pet. 3:4, the real man. It represents the true character but conceals it” (J. Laidlaw, in Hastings’ Bible doc). • The word is also translated from the Greek PSUCHE (yuch), signifying “soul” or “life.”

the significance of blood
in sacrifice
FOR the life of the flesh is in the blood: and 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. For it is the life of all flesh; the blood of it is for the life thereof” (Lev. 17:11, 14).

Bro. Thomas, as a medical practitioner, was trained in, and was experienced in, the functions of the human body. With that background, he has written a number of expositions which clearly explain the significance, both in respect to Law rituals and in relation to the sacrifice of the Lord Jesus Christ. His explanations, therefore, ought to be carefully considered. A selection of his explanations, together with those of some brethren who followed him, are here presented for the assistance that they provide.
“In Lev. 17:11 he saith, ‘I have given the blood to you upon the altar for a covering upon your souls; for the blood itself shall cover the soul.’ The reason given for the blood being thus used is; ‘because the soul of the flesh is in the very blood.’ The soul, nephesh, or life, is in the blood. The blood contains or covers it, as it were, and as it is a question of life or death — life forfeited for sin, the wages of which is death — that is appointed to cover sin which covers life, namely, the blood in this sense, ‘the life, or soul, of all flesh is in the blood thereof’ because the vitality of all animalsis in the blood.
Now the blood of Jesus was more precious than the life-blood of any other man. If it had not been so, it would have been inadequate to the purchase of life for the world.
The blood of Jesus was the only blood of all the generations of Adam, that had not been generated by the lust of the flesh; and which had not energized a man to the commission of sin.
The purifying or sanctifying property of the Yahweh-Name being connected with bloodshedding, as prefigured in the law, necessitates the death of him who becomes the medium of its manifestation.” Eureka, vol. pp. 278-279.
Further, Bro. Thomas also wrote the following in Eureka vol. 3, p. 666:
“The mission of the Lord Jesus Christ was to ‘destroy that having the power of death which is the devil;’ of Sin’s Flesh; in other words, to ‘take away the Sin of the world;’ and to ‘destroy the works of the devil’ — of Sin — Heb. 2:14; Jn. 1:29; 1Jn. 3:8.
This mission has been completed in himself and he is now able to extend the effects of the mission to others, concerning whom Bro. Thomas wrote:
“In being made a sacrifice for sin by the pouring out of his blood upon the cross, he was set forth as a blood-sprinkled mercy seat to all believers of the gospel of the kingdom ...” (Elpis Israel, p. 133). Such are then “justified by his blood” (Rom. 5:9; Col. 1:14; Heb. 9:22; Mat. 26:28).
Bro. Roberts adds the following: “The taking away of sin is especially associated with the bloodshedding death or offering of Christ, because that is the one element of the process of sin-taking away which implies all the rest. The death of Christ implies all the other parts of the process by which sin was covered.
The prominence of the ‘blood of Christ’ is due to the symbolism of the law which converged and terminated in him. Blood-shedding was its constant feature in the slaying of animals from the foundation of the world. This blood-shedding had two significances, related one to the other, and both declarative of a fundamental principle in the relations between God and man, and illustrated in the death of Christ, who was slain for us. The first is that death is the penalty of sin. The blood is the life (Lev. 17:11-14) and the shedding of blood was, therefore, typical of death. But it was typical of more than death; it was typical of a violent manner of death, for in natural death the blood is not shed. Blood-shedding includes both ideas. But why was it necessary that both should be thus prominent in the law? Because death had a double hold upon those for whom Christ was to die. They are hereditarily mortal because they inherit their being from one who was condemned to death because of sin: and their own numerous offences render them liable to the violent death decreed by the law. Christ came under both curses, and discharged them both by the shedding of his blood.”
(Refer “The Christadelphian,” 1873, p. 553).
It is blood that energizes a man to the commission of sin. Hence it is the “life” in the blood that provides the energy, vitality or impetus that enables the members of the body to make movements that end in acts of transgression. Paul, in Romans 7:5 referred to this movement as “motions of sin in my members,” motions or movements that lead to, or are themselves an act of transgression.
In Eureka, vol. 2, pp. 222-224, Bro.. Thomas provides an exposition relating to “The Altar” and quotes Paul in Hebrews 13:10 that “we have an altar” which, in being cleansed by the blood of Jesus is made identical with him. In explaining (p.222) the operation of sacrifices upon the Mosaic altar, he wrote: “The burnt bodies consumed into smoke were whole burnt offerings: and typified, or represented the utter destruction of Sin’s Flesh, which sin had been condemned in the flesh of the victim, by the abstraction therefrom, or The pouring out of the soul of the flesh in the slaughter of the victim. “The soul of the flesh is in the blood.” The blood covers upon the soul, or life, therefore, in pouring out the blood, the soul or life of the animal was poured out unto death; and the blood being poured out at the base of the altar, the soul was there and the altar was considered as covering it; hence the phrase, “underneath the altar the souls of the slain.”
In extending this explanation to the Lord Jesus (p. 224) Bro. Thomas further wrote: “The flesh made by the Spirit out of Mary’s substance, and rightly claimed therefore in Psa. 16:8; Acts 2:31, as His flesh, is the Spirit’s anointed altar, cleansed by the blood of that flesh when poured out unto death on the tree.” This flesh was the victim offered — the sacrifice, suspended on the tree by the voluntary offering of the Spirit-Word (Jn. 10:18). “Sin was condemned in the flesh” when the soul-blood thereof was p\oured out unto death. The Spirit-Word made his soul thus an offering for sin (Isa. 53:10); and by it sanctified the Altar-body on the tree. It was now a Thusiasterion — an altar most holy; and all who touch it are holy; and without touching it none are holy.”
In a brief, concise but lucid statement in ”Catechesis,” Bro. Thomas penned Item 51 thus: “To be “justified by spirit” is the second item of The “Great Mystery of Godliness.” The flesh in or through which the Deity was manifested was, for the brief space of thirty-three years, inferior to the angelic nature, which is spirit. It has been ‘purified’ by the sprinkling of its own blood on the cross; it came forth from the tomb an earthy body, which, in order to become spirit, and so, “equal to the angels” had to be “justified,” rectified, “made perfect” or quickened “by spirit.”
The apostle Paul wrote to the Hebrews about the significance of sacrificial blood-shedding on the part of the Lord Jesus, in ch. 9 of his epistle. In v. 7 he referred to the High Priest having entered into the “second (tabernacle) once every year, not without blood, which he offered for himself and the errors of the people.” Then, in v. 11 he applied these activities to the Lord and in v. 12 he described the result accruing to the Lord for so doing. “By his own blood he entered in once into the holy place having obtained eternal redemption” and he added, in ch. 13:20, that it was by the “blood of the everlasting covenant” that Yahweh brought the Lord from the dead, a prior necessity to his subsequent entry into the “Holy Place.”
To the foregoing explanations are now added these made by Bro. Roberts in “The Law of Moses,” ch. 18, “The consecration of Aaron” and the sub-section entitled, “The Sacrificial Blood” ... pp. 170-171, where he treated with the significance of the sacrificial blood in connection with the work of the Lord. “Now all these things were declared to be “patterned of things in the heavens,” which is admitted on all hands, converge upon and have their substance in Christ. There must, therefore, be a sense in which Christ (the antitypical Aaron, the antitypical altar, the antitypical mercy seat, the antitypical everything), must not only have been sanctified by the action of the antitypical oil of the Holy Spirit, but purged by the antitypical blood of his own sacrifice.”
He must therefore have been the subject of a personal cleansing in the process by which he opened the way of sanctification for his people. If the typical holy things contracted defilement from connection with a sinful congregation, were not the antitypical (Christ) holy things in a similar state, through derivation on his mother’s side from a sinful race? If not, how came they to need purging with his own “better sacrifice?” (Heb. 9:23).
“Under apostolic guidance, we see Christ both in the bullock, in the furniture, in the veil, in the high priest, and, in brief, in all these Mosaic “patterns,” which he says were “ a shadow of things to come” (Heb. 8:5; 9:23; 10:1; 3-5). All were both atoning and atoned for (Lev. 16:33). He was “purified with” ... his own sacrifice (Heb. 9:23, 12).
Bro. Roberts also made similar references in “The Blood of Christ,” p. 10 under the sub-heading of “The Shadow Institution.’ He wrote:
“Look then, at Lev. 17:11: “For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls (lives); for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul (life).” And, v. 14, “For it (the blood) is the life of all flesh ... for the life of all flesh is the blood thereof.”
In addition to Bro. Thomas, and Bro. Roberts, Bro. Henry Sulley also understood the physical properties and functions of the human body. He wrote, in his Book “the Temple of Ezekiel’s Prophecy,” a chapter headed “The Parable of the Sin-bearer,” commencing at p. 232.
“Since impulse to sin arises from the flesh (Jas. 1:14) in response to the wiles of the tempter, the motive power of which is provided by the life -blood coursing through the arteries of the body, the only way to abolish such impulses is by death, as saith the apostle, “he that is dead is free from sin.” In this way, the source from which sin comes, its fountainhead is destroyed. This occurred in the crucifixion of Jesus, who not only destroyed the adversary in himself by dying (Heb. 2:14; Eph. 2:15-16), but will also destroy the power of sin in others (1Jn. 3:8). Refer p. 234.
“Until crucifixion, when the life-blood exuded from his wounds, there could be no release from those impulses which are aroused by temptation and which were intensely offensive to him, even causing him to resent the well-meant solicitude of Peter and say, “Get thee behind me Satan (adversary); thou art an offence unto me; for thou savourest not the things that be of God but those that be of men” (Mat. 16:23). So long as the life-blood was coursing through his veins he must always be amenable to and in conflict with temptation to sin, for only ‘he that is dead is free from sin’ (Rom. 6:7). refer p. 245.
Attention is also directed to the article entitled “The power of the Altar” by Bro. H. P. Mansfield and reproduced in the Logos publication “The Atonement,” pp. 185-186. There the writer quoted Exo. 29:36-37, and showed that the Mosaic altar required to be cleansed, although it had not transgressed. He wrote: “The blood is the cleansing agent, as it made the altar ‘holy: and not unclean.’ As the altar had to be cleansed, atoned for, anointed and sanctified, and as it typed the Lord Jesus, it is obvious that he was involved in his own sacrifice. he had to be cleansed from flesh-nature and clothed upon with Spirit-nature. And this was effected through his offering.”
In a similar article entitled “The Christ Altar,” appearing in pp. 187-190, he wrote the following: “Now look a little more closely at the manner in which the altar of Exo. 29:36 had to be cleansed. It was not by washing ... but by the shedding of blood, and that of a sin offering. The altar was thus cleansed through the shedding of blood. Whose blood was shed to cleanse the Jesus-altar? None other than his own.”
Blood is the motivating force which gives power or ability to the members of the body to respond to impulses and to thus put into action a transgression. These are the “motions of sin in (our) members” (Rom. 7:5) or “the law of sin in my members” (Rom. 7:23, 25). In that sense the blood is the life

Logos Christadelphian BASF

BASF

May I introduce myself?

I am the Birmingham Amended Statement of Faith, well known to most of the Brotherhood. I was formed by brethren John Thomas, Robert Roberts, and many other faithful defenders of the Truth, as a basis of belief and a doctrinal standard on which to extend fellowship.

Formed almost 130 years ago,I have not changed from the First Principles of the Truth then clearly set out. I have brought unity to the ecclesias that have used me. I have kept false teachers away from the Household.

The only addition made to the original statement was the amendment around the turn of the century when the non-responsibility doctrine was introduced into the ecclesial world. How much trouble was caused, and is still being caused in some places, by this doctrine! How many divisions, heartaches, and misunderstandings arose from this one error! Of course, other items were added, such as paragraphs 32-35, at dates subsequent to 1883.
But there have arisen other problems in the brotherhood, when the clarity of my statements are misunderstood. Of course, there can be no divisions where there is doctrinal agreement; and history has shown that this Statement of Faith is scriptural,workable, and sensible. I have withstood false doctrines of every description, including Partial Inspiration, Clean Flesh, No Priesthood of Christ, Immortal Emergence, and many others.
I have been the basis of reunion from earlier times until now, and in more recent times I was endorsed in the Australian Unity Agreement in Australia. My endorsement is set out in pages 13-15 of the Unity Booklet.
Down through the history of the Truth, I have served faithfully and well to bring peace to those who use me properly. There is no true fellowship where doctrinal agreement is not found. Wrong doctrine in our midst will bring us condemnation at the judgment seat of Christ.
I earnestly ask you to read my appeal. The brotherhood’s future will be safe and secure if there can be agreement on my statements of Truth.
Remember, it takes courage to be a good Christadelphian.
Paul compares the Ecclesia of Christ to the natural body. He said, “For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body, so also is Christ”. A healthy body must be evenly proportioned and balanced. Sores and afflictions must be treated, and if possible, cured. If not, they must be removed. This is exactly what the Lord said in Matthew 5:30. When we stand before Christ, the white robe that he has given us must be spotless, and it will only be spotless if all uphold his truths, as is set out in the Holy Scriptures, of which I am an epitome.
Previous controversies have left many scars in our history. All must be sure that they are not of those who are, causing disunity and division in the Body, or supporting those who are, by a change of teaching. If all stay with me, the BASF, there can be no trouble; no division.
All New Testament writers and speakers, including Christ, warn us over and over of the dangers of losing the Truth. Christ rightly asked, “When the Son of man cometh, shall he find the faith on the earth?” The answer will be a negative one, if present trends towards doctrinal looseness and a change of teaching continue.
                           
OUR STATEMENT OF FAITH.

I appeal to all faithful brethren and sisters to remember the heritage provided in my pages. Paul reminded his young disciple: “O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called” (1Timothy 6:20).
As our Statement of Faith, I outline what Christadelphians believe to be the essential gospel of salvation, that which must be believed for salvation, as we read in the Scriptures:
“God hath chosen you to salvation through… belief of the truth” (2Thes. 2:13). “If any preach any other Gospel, let him be accursed” (Gal.1:8). “The Gospel… By which ye are saved,if ye keep in memory” (1Cor. 15:1-2).
The Bible is a large book. Many, many divergent views claim its support. Yet it emphasizes over and over that truth is vitally important, and that ignorance and error alienate from God. It is necessary, therefore, as John said: “Try the spirits… because many false prophets are gone out” (1John 4:1).
It is necessary for sound, harmonious and profitable fellowship and mutual labour in the Truth to be agreed in what is the Bible’s basic message of salvation. That glorious message of hope, briefly outlined in my Statement of Faith, is beautiful and inspiring. It is good, and it is important, for all to keep ourselves constantly refreshed in it.
I, the BASF, believe that any who truly understand the Gospel, who desire it in its simplicity, and who do not have or desire their own pet crotchets, will wholeheartedly and joyfully concur with my clauses expressing divine Truth, and will recognize its value and necessity and importance. I further believe any who do so, are largely protected from errors and crotchets, and from the constant, dangerous, and restless human quest for “some new thing” to tickle the ears. I have thirty clauses with an introduction that is fundamental. Please make sure you carefully read my message; it is your life! Further, your acceptance of being a brother or sister in the Central fellowship is established upon the basis of your own understanding of its clauses, and of its teaching.
My clauses are set out as follows. I have not included all the Scripture quotations listed in my statement, and ask you to carefully examine them as they provide the vital Bible teachings of each of my clauses.
                                                     
THE FOUNDATION.

I introduce the important basis of our belief in these words:
That the book currently known as the Bible, consisting of the Scriptures of Moses, the Prophets, and the Apostles, is the only source of knowledge concerning God and His purposes, at present extant or available in the earth, and that the same were wholly given by inspiration of God in the writers, and are consequently without error in all parts of them, except such as may be due to errors of transcription or translation.
Notice two vital points.
1. • We have no source of knowledge of God and His purpose other than the Bible. It is here that we must constantly search and study for the instruction of life eternal.
2. • As originally given, by direct inspiration of God, the Bible is wholly and verbally — word for word — letter for letter — infallible and unerring.
This was the view of Christ and his apostles, who quoted it as absolutely final, with implicit trust and faith, basing whole arguments on a single word or even a single letter. Regardless of any specious arguments trying to break down this fact — and there have always been such — we must in simplicity stick right to it to avoid shipwreck of our faith. Jesus said conclusively, “The Scriptures cannot be broken” (John 10:35). He was reasoning from the use of one single word in the Psalms.

I begin my Statement in this way, and ask you to check the Scriptures quoted against each clause. Herein I am listing a few of these quotations for your particular consideration, and some comments of explanation:

CLAUSE 1:That the only true God is He Who was revealed to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, by angelic visitation and vision, and to Moses at the flaming bush (unconsumed) and at Sinai, and Who manifested Himself in the Lord Jesus Christ, as the supreme self-existent Deity, the one Father, dwelling in unapproachable light, yet everywhere present by His Spirit, which is a unity with His person in heaven. He hath out of His Own underived energy, created heaven and earth, and all that in them is.
“I am Yahweh, and there is none else” (Isa.45:5). “There is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus” (1Tim.2:5).
Note: Jesus Christ is a man,and is someone other than the one God. Thus, “one God — And…”

CLAUSE 2: That Jesus of Nazareth was the Son of God,begotten of the virgin Mary by the Holy Spirit, without the intervention of man, and afterwards anointed with the same Spirit, without measure, at his baptism.
“A virgin shall be with child” (Mat. 1:23). “The Holy Spirit shall come upon thee… therefore that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God” (Lk. 1:35).

CLAUSE 3: That the appearance of Jesus of Nazareth on the earth was necessitated by the position and state into which the human race had been brought by the circumstances connected with the first man.
“By man came death; by man came also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, so in Christ shall all be made alive” (1Cor.15:21-22).

CLAUSE 4: That the first man was Adam, whom God created out of the dust of the ground as a living soul, or natural body of life, “very good” in kind and condition, and placed him under a law through which the continuance of life was contingent on obedience.
Adam was the first man, not an evolved creature from animals or sub-men, but created directly by God out of the dust of the ground. The Scriptures are clear on that. Any degree of evolutionary speculation that Adam was not the first man is not sound scriptural Christadelphian teaching. It is the first fatal step to shipwreck of faith.
“Yahweh Elohim formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and man became a living soul” (Gen.2:7; Heb. nephesh which means merely ‘creature’).
Thus Adam was not an immortal soul (of which the Scriptures know nothing), but a natural, living creature. This same word nephesh, here translated “soul,” is used four times of the animal creation of Gen. 1. Note also that, when first made, Adam was “very good” — a striking contrast to man’s present condition, as we shall see.

CLAUSE 5: That Adam broke this law, and was adjudged unworthy of immortality, and sentenced to return to the ground from whence he was taken — a sentence which defiled and became a physical law of his being, and was transmitted to all his posterity.
My statement that “a sentence which defiled and became a physical law of his being, and was transmitted to all his posterity,” is a vital truth that many have stumbled at, even those claiming the name Christadelphian. This truth is the key to the meaning of the sacrifice of Christ, and was clearly seen by those who composed me, as the foundation truth of the Christadelphian community.
There was no sin in the world or in man before Adam and Eve transgressed. But in Romans 7 Paul describes a very different condition, to which we can all agree by bitter and sorrowful experience — “Sin dwelleth in me” (v. 17); “[in my flesh] dwelleth no good thing” (v. 18); “Sin that dwelleth in me” (v. 18); “The law of sin which is in my members, warring against the law of my mind” (v. 23). David said of the same universal physical condition of the condemned and defiled race: “I was shapen in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me” (Psa. 51:5). And Paul said in Galatians 5:17, “The flesh lusteth against the Spirit… these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would.” Job also referred to his own condition: “Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean? not one” (Job 14:4).

Bro. John Thomas, in The Christadelphian, 1873, page 501, commented: “His character was spotless; but as being the seed of the woman of whom no clean flesh can be born, the seed of Abraham which is not immaculate, be it virgin or Nazarite, his nature was flesh and blood which Paul styles ‘sinful flesh’ or flesh full of sin, a physical quality or principle which makes the flesh mortal; and called ‘sin’ because this property of flesh became its law, as the consequence of transgression.”
Clause 5 describes the physical or corporeal consequences of Adam’s sin. His body and the bodies of all his posterity became subject to the law of sin and death. Therefore the sentence made them possessors of a nature which was subject to death and in which the sin principle reigned. Neither death or the sin principle was part of the nature of Adam and Eve before transgression and sentence.
The word “defile” in this clause of the BASF means to destroy the purity or cleanness of something, thus to corrupt. The defilement indicated in Clause 5 is a physical defilement, as a moral defilement is not capable of being transmitted to one’s posterity. The phrase, “all his posterity” requires that the defilement transmitted to Christ was a physical condition, for he had no moral defilement.

CLAUSE 6: That God, in His kindness, conceived a plan of restoration which, without setting aside His just and necessary law of sin and death, should ultimately rescue the race from destruction, and people the earth with sinless immortals.
God’s “just and necessary law of sin and death” here referred to is that sin must end in death. Sin has no place in God’s universal presence. It cannot be allowed to continue. God does not set aside that vital law of holiness and purity. In His love and wisdom He provided a man who conformed perfectly to it, and He invites us to die completely to ourselves and to enter completely into that man, Christ Jesus, and be saved.
“The wages of sin is death.” (Rom. 6:23). “He put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.” (Heb.9:26).
Bro.Robert Roberts, in The Blood of Christ (The Atonement, pages 161,164) wrote: “At the very crisis of transgression and condemnation, He provided a shadow institution, by which, notwithstanding his alienated and condemned position, man might approach God acceptably, in the hope of rectification of his position in a far-off day… There was a third way — a middle way, and that is the way which has been adopted — namely, to enforce the law against sin, and at the same time leave the door open for mercy to repentant and obedient sinners. How such a method could be made consistent with itself has been exhibited to us in the birth, death and resurrection of Christ.”
The defilement of the physical body as set out in Clause 5 is here paralleled in the statement, “His just and necessary law of sin and death” which is the “physical law of his being.” God has provided the means whereby the Edenic sentence can be reversed through the work He has accomplished in and through His Son. “God was in Christ reconciling the world unto Himself.”

CLAUSE 7: That He inaugurated this plan by making promise to Adam, Abraham and David, and afterwards elaborated it in greater detail through the prophets.
To Adam: “The woman’s seed shall bruise the serpent’s head” (Gen.3:15). To Abraham: “In thy seed shall all nations be blessed” (Gen.22:18). To David: “Thy seed will I establish for ever… I will make him My firstborn… My mercy will I keep for him for evermore” (Ps.89). The prophets: “I will redeem them from death. O grave, I will be thy destruction” (Hos.13:14).
This clause indicates that God will assuredly bring to pass His predetermined purpose of filling the earth with His glory, when He is manifested in a multitude of immortalised beings.

CLAUSE 8: That these promises had reference to Jesus Christ, who was to be raised up in the condemned line of Abraham and David, and who, though wearing their condemned nature, was to obtain a title to resurrection by perfect obedience, and, by dying, abrogate the law of condemnation for himself and all who should believe and obey him.
One of the condemned race had to escape from death in a perfectly righteous way, without any violation or ignoring or setting aside of the righteous law of sin and death. This required that his death be not merely the expiring of life, but the “death of the cross” (Phil. 2:8), which was a sacrificial offering called by the apostle Paul “the blood of the everlasting covenant” (Heb. 13:20). Having given this unique sacrifice Jesus “abrogated” (which means to render powerless; ineffective; to remove its strength) the “law of condemnation,” “for Himself, and for all those who should believe and obey him,” as this clause requires. Christ was the first beneficiary of his offering.
Christ died in harmony with the law of God because he partook by birth of the condemnation of death that had come upon the race through Adam.
Christ rose in harmony with the law of God because, being perfect in character, it was not righteous that death should hold and possess him. Once the body of sin had died, death had no claim on him. To leave him dead would have been unrighteous. To raise him to life manifested God’s justice and righteousness.
He partook of flesh and blood that, “through death, he might destroy him that had the power of death” (Heb. 2:14; the devil, diabolos, sin in the flesh). “Made of a woman, made under the Law, …to redeem them that were under the Law.” (Gal. 4:4-5).
He had to be “made under the Law” of Moses to be able to redeem those under the Law. Note the significance of this as applied to the law of condemnation on the race through Adam.
“God, sending His Son in the likeness of sinful flesh… condemned sin in the flesh” (Rom. 8:3). “Being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him” (Heb. 5:9).

CLAUSE 9: That it was this mission that necessitated the miraculous begettal of Christ of a human mother, enabling him to bear our condemnation, and, at the same time, to be a sinless bearer thereof, and, therefore, one who could rise after suffering the death required by the righteousness of God.
Two things were necessary:
1. • He had to be of the human race, descended from Adam, bearing the same defiled, condemned nature as we; having the same “law of sin” in his members as Paul described.
2. • He had to be perfectly obedient, never once allowing the law of sin to control him in any thought, word or action.
An ordinary man, born of the will of the flesh, could never accomplish this, so God created a specially prepared and strengthened man, but still a real man descended from Adam, of the same sin-and-death stricken race. So the salvation wrought was by the will and power of God, through man, in harmony with the law of holiness.
“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” (Rom. 8:3). “He was made sin for us who knew no sin” (2Cor. 5:21). “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” (Heb. 2:14).
Bro. Roberts, in Nazareth Revisited, page 428, explained: “The divine origin of Christ, as expounded in the writings of the prophets and the apostles, supplies an explanation of every phase in which the gospel narratives exhibit the Lord Jesus Christ, and every utterance that came out of his mouth. They give the key that is beyond the reach alike of those who consider him to have been a mere man, and those whose theology compels them to describe him as eternal God. They account to us for what appear otherwise to be contradictions. They explain to us why in a man, the deportment of God is visible; why in sinful flesh, a sinless character was evolved; why in the impotent seed of Abraham, the power of Abraham’s God should be shown; why a man born as a babe in Bethlehem should speak of coming down from heaven; why a man not yet forty years of age should speak as if he had been contemporary with Abraham; why a man should at once be David’s son and David’s Lord; why a man of own own flesh and blood should assume the authority that belongs to God only, saying, ‘Ye call me Master and Lord: and ye say well, for so I am’; why of a man it should be said that the world was made by him, that he dwelt in the bosom of the Father, and that he was the image of the invisible God, by whom and for whom all things had been created.”
Clause 9 points out that only through divine begettal could a sinless descendant of Adam be produced, as it is impossible for any born of two human parents to render perfect obedience. Only a sinless one could rise from the dead in the manner that Christ rose. The “death required by the righteousness of God” was a sacrificial one.

CLAUSE 10: That being so begotten of God, and inhabited and used by God through the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, Jesus was Emmanuel, God with us, God manifest in the flesh — yet was, during his natural life, of like nature with mortal man, being made of a woman, of the house and lineage of David, and therefore a sufferer, in the days of his flesh, from all the effects that came by Adam’s transgression, including the death that passed upon all men, which he shared by partaking of their physical nature.
God dwelt in Christ; manifested Himself through Christ — and Christ completely and joyfully submitted to God’s use, never for a moment asserting his own will against God who was working in him for the salvation of the race. Paul wrote in Phil.2:13, “It is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of His good pleasure.” Christ was this — in absolute completion and perfection —
“God was manifest in the flesh” (1Tim. 3:16). “God was in Christ,reconciling the world unto Himself” (2Cor.5:19). “I speak not of myself: the Father that dwelleth in me, He doeth the works” (John 14:10).
Bro. Thomas commented in Eureka, vol.1, pages 202-203 on this matter: “For, if Jesus Anointed did not partake of our nature, but obtained somehow or other, a pure physical organization, or was only ‘a similitude’ such as Daniel beheld by Ulai, then Paul’s testimony is untrue; for he has testified that, ‘forasmuch as the children (of the Deity) are partakers of flesh and blood, Jesus also himself likewise took part of the same,’ and ‘in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren;’ and ‘God sent His own Son in the likeness of Sin’s flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh’ — Heb. 2:14; Rom. 8:3; but if the principle of corruption had not pervaded the flesh of Jesus, or if he were not flesh, he could not have been tried in all points as we; nor could sin have been condemned there; nor could he have ‘borne our sins in his own body, on the tree’.”
Bro. Roberts, in The Christadelphian, 1874, pages 236-7, stated: “If you admit his [Jesus’] body was the same as ours, you are bound to admit that it was dead, because ours is (Rom. 8:10); that it was vile, because ours is (Phil. 3:21); that it was mortal, because ours is (1Cor. 15:53); that it was unclean, because all born of women are (Job. 14:4; Psa. 51:5); that it had the sentence of death in itself, because Paul’s had (2Cor. 1:9); the reason of all which was, that it was produced exactly as ours is, in being made and born of a sinful woman…”
Jesus was Deity manifest in flesh, but was identical in nature to his brethren. He inherited in his body all the physical consequences of Adam’s sin. This is defined in Clause 5 as “a sentence which defiled and became a physical law of his being, and was transmitted to all his posterity.”

CLAUSE 11: That the message he delivered from God to his kinsmen the Jews, was a call to repentance from every evil work, the assertion of his divine sonship and Jewish kingship; and the proclamation of the glad tidings that God would restore their kingdom through him, and accomplish all things written in the prophets.
The kingdom is restored: Mat. 19:28 — “In the regeneration, ye also [disciples] shall sit upon twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel,” and thereby accomplish all things in the prophets: Lk. 24:44 — “All things… written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and psalms, concerning me, must be fulfilled.”

CLAUSE 12: That for delivering this message, he was put to death by the Jews and Romans, who were, however, but instruments in the hands of God, for the doing of that which He had determined before to be done — viz., the condemnation of sin in the flesh, through the offering of the body of Jesus once for all, as a propitiation to declare the righteousness of God, as a basis for the remission of sins. All who approach God through His crucified, but risen, representative of Adam’s disobedient race, are forgiven. Therefore, by a figure, his blood cleanseth from sin.
A “propitiation” signifies a mercy seat, a place of mercy, a provision that God’s love has made so that He can righteously extend mercy. Sin had to be openly condemned. The voluntary sacrifice of the life of a perfect man who bore the sin-defiled, condemned nature, must be made to condemn and repudiate sin before all the world, and to show its deadliness in God’s sight. God’s holiness and divine requirements, and His sentence of death on sin, must be manifested, upheld, vindicated, and acknowledged as righteous and just and necessary.
Christ recognized and acknowledged the deadly sin-principle in his flesh, and in all his life he kept it perfectly and completely under control. He vanquished it in himself, and he nailed it to the cross in repudiation and destruction.
“By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all” (Heb. 10:10). “Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare His righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God” (Rom. 3:25). “How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?” (Heb. 9:14). “Who needeth not daily as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the people’s, for this he did once, when he offered up himself” (Heb. 7:27). “For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world; but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment; so Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.” (Heb. 9:26-28).
Bro. Thomas, Elpis Israel, pages 130-131 commented: “Sin could not have been condemned in the body of Jesus, if it had not existed there. His body was as unclean as the bodies of those he died for; for he was born of a woman and ‘not one’ can bring a clean body out of a defiled body; for ‘that,’ says Jesus himself, ‘which is born of the flesh is flesh’ (Jn. 3:6)… Sinful flesh being the hereditary nature of the Lord Jesus, he was a fit and proper sacrifice for sin; especially as he was himself ‘innocent of the great transgression,’ having been obedient in all things.” On page 101 Bro. Thomas observed: “But here the serpent-power of sin ended. It had stung him to death by the strength of the law, which cursed every one that was hanged upon a tree; Jesus being cursed upon this ground, God ‘condemned sin in the flesh’ through him (Gal. 3:13; Rom. 8:3). Thus was sin, the Prince of the World, condemned, and the world with him according to the existing course of it. But, Jesus rose again, leading captivity captive; and so giving the world an earnest, that the time would come when death should be abolished, and sin, the power of death, destroyed. Sinful flesh was laid upon him, ‘that through death, he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil’ or sin in the flesh (Heb. 2:14); for, ‘for this purpose was the Son of God manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil’ (1Jn. 3:8).” See also, Bro. Roberts, in The Law of Moses, pp. 175-176.

CLAUSE 13: That on the third day, God raised him from the dead, and exalted him to the heavens as priestly mediator between God and man, in the process of gathering from among them a people who should be saved by the belief and obedience of the Truth.
This clause draws attention to the present work of the Master: for only through him, because of his atoning work, can we approach the high and holy Deity. Thereby is being developed a people for His name (Acts 15:14).

CLAUSE 14: That he is a priest over his over his own house only, and does not intercede for the world, or for professors who are abandoned to disobedience. That he makes intercession for his erring brethren, if they confess and forsake their sins.
Christ is priest and mediator for his own people only. He does not pray for or intercede for the people of the world, nor for wilfully disobedient “believers.” He makes intercession for us to God if sin is confessed and forsaken.
“I pray not for the world, but for them whom Thou hast given me” (John 17:9). “We have an advocate with the Father… If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us.” (1John 2:1; 1:9).

CLAUSE 15: That he sent forth his apostles to proclaim salvation through him, as the only name given under heaven whereby men may be saved.
Christ is the only way of access to God and eternal life. This is fundamental. There are no hazy ‘ifs’ and ‘buts’ or ‘maybes’ that any could be saved outside of faithful submission to Christ.
“He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life” (1John 5:12). “No man cometh unto the Father, but by me” (John 14:6).

CLAUSE 16: That the way to obtain this salvation is to believe the Gospel they preached, and to take on the name and service of Christ, by being thereupon immersed in water, and continuing patiently in the observance of all things he has commanded, none being recognized as his friends except those who do what he has commanded.
Belief of the Gospel of the Kingdom and baptism into Christ is the only way to get into him, and be part of him, and get life through him. We must get into Christ — within him. Outside of him, the one perfect and divinely acceptable Man, we shall inevitably be destroyed by God’s righteous and necessary law of sin and death. Inside of him — covered by him — we are safe. None are his friends — none are truly in him — who do not devote their whole life to knowing and obeying him. “Ye are my friends, if ye do whatsoever I command you” (John 15:14).

CLAUSE 17: That the Gospel consists of “the things concerning the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ.”
“When they believed Philip preaching (literally, gospelizing, preaching the Gospel of) the things concerning the Kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized” (Acts 8:12).

CLAUSE 18: That the things of the Kingdom of God are the facts testified concerning the Kingdom of God in the writings of the Prophets and Apostles, and definable as in the next 12 paragraphs (beginning with No. 19).

CLAUSE 19: That God will set up a kingdom in the earth, which will overthrow all others, and change them into “the kingdom of our Lord and His Christ.
“The God of heaven shall set up a kingdom that shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms [the present governments of the world] and it shall stand for ever” (Dan. 2:44). “The meek shall inherit the earth” (Mat. 5:5). “Thou hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth” (Rev. 5:10).

CLAUSE 20: That for this purpose God will send Jesus Christ personally to the earth at the close of the Times of the Gentiles.
God shall send Jesus Christ at the time of the restitution of all things (Acts 3:20-21). “The Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven… in flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God” (2Thes. 1:7). “This same Jesus… shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven” (Acts 1:11).

CLAUSE 21: That the kingdom which he will establish will be the kingdom of Israel restored, in the territory it formerly occupied, namely, the land bequeathed for an everlasting possession to Abraham and his seed (the Christ) by covenant.
“Yahweh shall reign over them in Mount Zion… the kingdom shall come to the daughter of Jerusalem” (Mic.4:7-8). “I will raise up the tabernacle of David that is fallen” (Amos 9:11). “I will take the children of Israel from among the nations, and they shall dwell… forever in the land where your fathers dwelt” (Eze. 37:21-25). “Abraham… sojourned in a land he should afterwards receive as an inheritance” (Heb. 11:8-9). “They shall build the old wastes, raise up the former desolations” (Isa. 61:4).

CLAUSE 22: That this restoration of the Kingdom again to Israel will involve the ingathering of God’s chosen but scattered nation, the Jews; their reinstatement in the land of their fathers, when it shall have been reclaimed from “the desolation of many generations”; the building again of Jerusalem to become “the throne of the Lord” and the metropolis of the whole world.
“The law shall go forth of Zion.” (Mic. 4:2). “He that scattered Israel will gather him…” (Jer. 31:10). “It shall not be plucked up nor thrown down any more forever” (Verse 40). “Jerusa­lem shall be the throne of Yahweh; and all the nations shall be gathered unto it” (Jer. 3:17). “He shall assemble the outcasts of Israel… the earth shall be full of the knowledge of Yahweh” (Isa. 11:12, 9).

CLAUSE 23: That the governing body of the Kingdom so established will be the brethren of Christ, of all generations, developed by resurrection and change, and constituting, with Christ as their head, the collective “seed of Abraham,” in whom all nations will be blessed, and comprising “Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and all the prophets” and all in their age of like faithfulness.
It is the brethren of Christ who shall govern the world.
“To him that overcometh will I give power over the nations, and he shall rule them with a rod of iron” (Rev. 2:26-27). “Come, ye blessed of my father, inherit the kingdom” (Mat. 25:34). “The Kingdom under the whole heaven shall be given to the people of the saints of the Most High.” (Dan. 7:27). “At that time (the ‘time of the end’) …many that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake… to everlasting life” (Dan.12:1-2). “The Lord himself shall descend from heaven, and the dead in Christ shall rise” (1Thes. 4:16). “Everyone that believeth… I will raise him up at the last day.” (John 6:39). “He shall rise again in the resurrection at the last day” (John 11:24).

CLAUSE 24: That at the appearing of Christ prior to the establish­ment of the Kingdom, the responsible (namely, those who know the revealed will of God, and have been called upon to submit to it), dead and living — obedient and disobedient — will be summoned before his Judgment Seat “to be judged according to their works”; and “receive in body according to what they have done, whether it be good or bad.”
This is the clause that was amended by the brethren in Birmingham as a result of agitation on the resurrectional responsibility question. It was made very clear that responsibility is based upon understanding, and therefore the bracketted clause clarified the matter. This is in accordance with the Scripture. “We must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ” (2Cor. 5:10). “He that rejecteth me… the Word… shall judge him in the last day” (John 12:48). “This is the condemna­tion, that light is come into the world” (John 3:19). “As Paul reasoned… judgment to come, Felix trembled” (Acts 24:25). “Those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me” (Luke 19:27). “To him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin” (James 4:17). Soon will come the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God Who will render to every man according to his deeds….to them that do not obey the truth…wrath upon every man that doeth evil…Jew first, and also Gentile…as many as have sinned under the law shall be judged….in the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus (Rom. 2:5-16). “God… recompense tribulation to them that trouble you… when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven… taking vengeance on them that obey not the gospel… who shall be punished with everlasting destruction” (2Thes. 1-9). This “ignorance God winked at, but now commandeth all men everywhere to repent. Because He hath appointed a day in which He will judge [Gr. krino: never means rule] the world… by [Christ]” (Acts 17:30-31). “Whosoever speaketh against the Holy Spirit, it shall not be forgiven… Every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment” (Mat. 12:32-36).

CLAUSE 25: That the unfaithful will be consigned to shame and “the second death,” and the faithful invested with immortality, and exalted to reign with Jesus as joint heirs of the Kingdom, co-possessors of the earth, and joint administrators of God’s authority among men in everything.
“Many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall arise: some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt” (Dan.12:2). “He that overcometh shall inherit all things, but the unbelieving… shall have their part in the second death” (Rev. 21:7-8). “The meek shall inherit the earth… the wicked shall not be” (Psa. 37:9-11). Abraham was promised that he should inherit the world (Rom. 4:13). “If ye be Christ’s, then are ye Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.” (Gal. 3:29). “I appoint unto you a kingdom, as my Father hath appointed unto me” (Lk. 22:29).

CLAUSE 26: That the Kingdom of God, thus constituted, will continue a thousand years, during which sin and death will continue among earth’s subject inhabitants, though in a much milder degree than now.
“They lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years” (Rev. 20:4). “The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdom of our Lord, and of His Christ, and he shall reign for ever and ever” (Rev. 11:15). “The child shall die an hundred years old” (Isa. 65:20).

CLAUSE 27: That a law will be established which shall go forth to the nations for their “instruction in righteousness,” resulting in the abolition of war to the ends of the earth, and the “filling of the earth with the knowledge of the glory of Yahweh, as the waters cover the sea.”
“The law shall go forth of Zion… nation shall not lift up a sword against nation… they shall sit every man under his vine and under his fig tree, and none shall make them afraid” (Mic. 4:2-4).
“With righteousness shall he judge the poor, and reprove with equity for the meek of the earth: and he shall smite the earth with the rod of his mouth… the earth shall be full of the knowledge of Yahweh, as the waters cover the sea” (Isa. 11:4-9).
Here is a striking and beautiful picture of universal peace and justice and safety and prosperity on earth, linked with righteousness and the knowledge of God.

CLAUSE 28: That the mission of the Kingdom will be to subdue all enemies, and finally death itself, by opening up the way of life to the nations, which they will enter by faith during the thousand years, and (in reality) at their close.
“He [Jesus] must reign till he hath put all enemies under his feet. The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death” (1Cor. 15:25-26).
“Everyone that is left of the nations [after the worldwide judgments at Christ’s return]… even shall go up from year to year to worship the king, Yahweh Sabaoth, and to keep the feast of tabernacles” (Zech. 14:16).
This shall be enforced with penalties for disobedience.
“In that day there shall be one Yahweh, and His Name one” (Zech. 14:9).
His rule will be openly manifested and enforced, and all will be compelled to submit and obey. No rival rulers or religions will be permitted to exist, as in today’s terrible Babel and strife.
Due to man’s sin, the earth and its produce — animal and vegetable — were cursed. Nature was set at war. But in the millennial rule of Christ, the curse will be lifted and all nature be in peace and harmony.

CLAUSE 29: That at the close of the thousand years, there will be a general resurrection and judgment, resulting in the final extinction of the wicked, and the immortalisation of those who shall have established their title (under the grace of God) to eternal life during the thousand years.
Christ’s 1000 year reign on earth is a transition period leading to the final abolition of sin, mortality and death.
“And when the 1000 years are expired, satan shall be loosed out of his prison, and shall go out to deceive the nations” (Rev. 20:7-8).
Sin-human nature, the diabolos — bound and restrained during the 1000 years, will be briefly allowed free reign to test faith, and to bring issues to a head for the final resurrection and judgment.
As a result of the last judgment, death and the grave are abolished. There is, henceforth, no dying, no burying; all the wicked will have been destroyed; all the righteous will have been given everlasting life.

CLAUSE 30: That the government will then be delivered up by Jesus to the Father, who will manifest Himself as the “All-in-All”; sin and death having been taken out of the way, and the race completely restored to the friendship of the Deity.
Herein is depicted the final completion of God’s gracious purpose with mankind.
“And when all things shall be subdued unto him [Christ], then shall the Son also himself be subject unto Him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all” (1Cor. 15:28). “The tabernacle of God is with men, and He will dwell with them… and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow nor crying,for the former things are passed away” (Rev. 21:3-7).

Beyond this lie the endless ages of divine strength and joy for the people of God — equal unto the angels, neither can they die any more — “partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust.”

Let us, in this brief moment of the passing present, have the simple, basic commonsense and wisdom to cast away every thing else, and devote all our efforts and attention to the very limit of our ability to laying hold on the glories of eternity. What unbelievable folly to do anything short of this!



Errors

Doctrines to be Rejected
(With Explanations Expressed Positively — in italics)

  1.  We reject that the Bible is only partly the work of inspiration — or if wholly so, contains errors which inspiration has allowed. [The Bible, in its original text, is altogether the work of inspiration, and that God has been the true author of every part of His Word, thereby constituting it infallible — 2Tim. 3:16; 2Pet. 1:19-21.]


  2. We reject that God is three persons. [The doctrine of the trinity being false, it remains that God is a Being of Spirit; the Lord Jesus Christ is His Son, born of the virgin Mary; the Holy Spirit is His power — 1Tim. 2:5; Jn. 1:14; Lk. 24:49.]

  3. We reject that the Son of God was co-eternal with the Father. [Jesus was begotten of the virgin Mary; he was only “known” beforehand in the mind and purpose of Yahweh from the beginning — Gal. 4:4; Jn. 1:1].

  4. We reject that Christ was born with a “free life”. [A “free life” signifies that Christ’s nature was not under Adamic condemnation as is that of all other members of the human race, and that therefore his sacrifice was a substitute for the “lives” of others. However, he needed to obtain redemption himself in order to redeem his “brethren” — Gal 4:4; 1Tim. 2:6; Heb. 9:12.]


  5.  We reject that Christ’s nature was immaculate, or that he was of a different nature from other men. [Through his birth he inherited a nature sin-affected, and destined to death, being mortal, as all others — Heb. 2:14.]


  6. We reject that the Holy Spirit is a person distinct from the Father. [The Holy Spirit is the exclusive power which emanates only from God to perform His determination — Lk. 24:49.]


 7. We reject that man has an immortal soul. [The soul of man defines his being, his life, his existence; and is related to his attitude and emotions. He is wholly mortal, and has no immortal essence hereditarily.]


  8. We reject that man consciously exists in death. [At death, man ceases to exist in every respect. He has no consciousness in death — Ecc. 3:19; Psa. 49:17-20.]


  9. We reject that the wicked will suffer eternal torture in hell. [The wicked are destined to eternal oblivion in the grave, excepting only those of their number who are answerable to God and will be raised to condemnation, to return eternally to the grave. — 2Thes. 1:8-9.]


10. We reject that the righteous will ascend to the kingdoms beyond the skies when they die. [None ascend to heaven; the Lord Jesus being the only exception, and in this case for the purpose of his continuing mediatorial work. The righteous await the return of Christ for the bestowal of immortality — Jn . 3:13.]


11.  We reject that the devil is a supernatural personal being. [The devil is variously manifested as that which falsely “accuses.” It is the manifestation of the ungodly characteristics of sin’s flesh, and will cease to exist when sin is ultimately destroyed — 1Pet. 5:8; Rev. 20:10.]


12.  We reject that the Kingdom of God is “the church.” [The Kingdom of God is a divine political empire to be established on earth at the return of Jesus Christ. — Isa. 2:2-5]


13. We reject that the gospel is the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ merely. [The gospel includes the covenants of promise granted to Abraham and David and involves the establishment of God’s kingdom on earth — Gal. 3:8.]


14. We reject that Christ will not come until the close of the thousand years. [Jesus Christ returns to establish the millennium, and will reign as king during that period — 1Cor. 15:24-29; Rev. 20:6.]


15. We reject that the tribunal of Christ, when he comes, is not for the judgment of saints, but merely to divide among them different degrees of reward. [The Judgment seat of Christ is for the purpose of revealing the motives, actions and characteristics of all the responsible, and to prepare the righteous for the granting of immortality — Rom. 14:10; 2Cor. 5:10.]


16.  We reject that the resurrection is confined to the faithful. [The resurrection will involve all who have known the Will of God, including those who have rejected that Will and those who have failed to uphold it in a faithful life — Jn. 12:48; 9:39-41; 15:22; Acts 15:24.]


17.  We reject that the dead rise in an immortal state. [The dead come from the grave in the same state as they entered it; they will remain mortal as they appear before the judgment seat.]


18.  We reject that the subject-nations of the thousand years are immortal. [The nations will consist of mortal men and women, subject to the laws of Jesus Christ — Isa. 65:20.]


19.  We reject that the law of Moses is binding on believers of the gospel. [The Law being fulfilled in Jesus Christ, its demands are not binding upon Christ’s disciples, as they are now subject to his commandments — Heb. 8:13.]


20.  We reject that the observance of Sunday is a matter of duty. [Although the “first day” is commonly used for remembrance of the Christ-covenant, there is no obligation to limit such observance to a Sunday. It is a matter of “as oft as we do so,” whatever the day — 1Cor. 11:25.]


21. We reject that baby sprinkling is a doctrine of Scripture. [Baptism is only valid upon a confession of understanding the complete Will and purpose of God. It is the outward manifestation of an inner conviction — Mark 16:16; Acts 8:12.]


22. We reject that “heathens,” idiots, pagans, and very young children will be saved. [Salvation is based upon a reasonable and logical understanding of the Truth; those who are foreign to the gospel, who lack the capacity to perceive its responsibilities; or who are unable to comprehend, are outside the sphere of salvation — Acts 8:12.]


23. We reject that man can be saved by morality or sincerity, without the gospel. [Morality and sincerity must be accompanied by an acknowledgement of the gospel for salvation — Acts 10:1-6.]


24. We reject that the gospel alone will save, without the obedience of Christ’s commandments. [Obedience to the commandments is a responsibility required of all believers; salvation will be determined upon the application of faith and obedience. Rev. 22:14; Mat. 7:26; 2Pet. 2:21; Mat. 28:20; Gal. 6:2]


25.  We reject that a man cannot believe without possessing the Spirit of God. [In this case, the “Spirit of God” identifies a direct, miraculous influence from God in a person’s life. Belief comes from understanding the Word of Truth.]


26. We reject that men are pre-destined to salvation unconditionally.  [Salvation is based upon a personal decision by a believer to uphold God’s Truth, and is dependent upon the grace of God — Eph. 2:8.]


27. We reject that there is no sin in the flesh. [The flesh is hereditarily related to sin, caused by the transgression of Adam, the effects of which have passed upon all men, including the Lord Jesus Christ — 2Cor. 5:21.]


28.  We reject that Joseph was the actual father of Jesus. [Joseph was his guardian; Yahweh, through His Spirit acting on the virgin Mary, was his Father — Lk. 1:35.]


29.  We reject that the earth will be destroyed. [The earth has been created for Yahweh’s glory, and will never be destroyed — Psa. 37:11; Num. 14:21.]


30.  We reject that baptism is not necessary to salvation. [Baptism establishes a covenant-relationship, and is an act of obedience required for salvation — Acts 2:38.]


31. We reject that a knowledge of the Truth is not necessary to make baptism valid. [Baptism is only valid upon a knowledge of God’s revealed will and purpose, and an open declaration and confession thereof — Acts 8:12.]


32. We reject that some meats are to be refused on the score of uncleanness. [No foods are forbidden on the grounds of divine law or ceremonial defilement; such decisions are a matter of personal conscience — 1Cor. 6:11; Col. 2:16; Mk. 7:15.]


33.  We reject that the English are the ten tribes of Israel, whose prosperity is a fulfilment of the promises made concerning Ephraim. [The ten tribes comprise the Jewish people in dispersion, descendants of Shem. The English people are descendants of Japheth, and do not form part of natural Israel — 1Pet. 1:1; Jas 1:1.]


34. We reject that marriage with an unbeliever is lawful. [Marriage with the unbeliever, or with a divorced person whose spouse is living, is forbidden by the law of Christ — 1Cor. 7:39; Mk. 10:8-12.]


35.  We reject that we are at liberty to serve in the armed forces, in the police force, take part in jury duty or politics, or recover debts by legal coercion. [These constitute elements of society and its law-enforcement requirements, of which the believer will have no part. — Jn . 17:16]


36. We reject that Holy Spirit Gifts are available today. [These special and miraculous personal gifts were limited to the apostolic era, and are not manifested today — 1Cor. 13:8-10.]


37. We reject that the sacrifice of the Lord Jesus Christ was not required for the cleansing of his sin nature. [The Lord's sacrifice was necessary for his own redemption. His sacrifice was a public demonstration that his flesh was rightly related to death and a declaration of the righteousness of God that required the offering of his life in devotion to Him. By his sacrifice the ungodly propensities (diabolos) of his nature was destroyed (Heb. 2:14; 9:12; 7:27), thus providing for the granting of immortality.



38. We reject that the Bible account of creation is figurative, or parabolic, of a type of organic evolution in which all living things evolved from simpler varieties. [The record of Genesis 1-3 describes the literal work of God in creating this world and its creatures out of the previous void and chaos. Each day was a period of 24 hours duration, and does not permit an evolutionary process].