This is the first of the "Time to Heal" articles and it refers to a number of articles bro John Carter wrote to re-affirm the position of The Christadelphian and the Central ecclesias on the nature of man and the sacrifice of Christ. This led to the reunion in the 1940's of the Berean ecclesias with Central on the basis of the "Time to Heal" articles. See links to these articles in the first paragraph below and the "Time to Heal" article of 1940.

The Christadelphian May 1939, John Carter

“The Christadelphian on the Nature of Man and the Sacrifice of Jesus Christ”

During the last eighteen months we have drawn attention to what we believe to be the true teaching of the Bible on these subjects (The Christadelphian, 1937, p. 552 (The Nature of Man and the Sacrifice of Jesus Christ); 1938, pp. 127 (Sin, Sins and Sin-Offering), 173 (The Reign of Death). These doctrines have been maintained since the revival of the Truth nearly 100 years ago, and are set forth in the Birmingham Amended Statement of Faith, which is in use in the majority of ecclesias, in the following clauses:—

IV.  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 continuance of life was contingent on obedience.

V.   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.

VI.  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.

VII. That He inaugurated this plan by making promises to Adam, Abraham and David, and afterwards elaborated it in greater detail through the prophets.

VIII.  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.

IX.  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.

X.   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 men, 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.

On the other hand, the doctrine known amongst us as “Renunciationism,” and associated with the name of Edward Turney, is defined thus:

“That the body of Jesus did not inherit the curse of Adam, though derived from him through Mary; and was therefore not mortal; that his natural life was “free”; that in this “free” natural life, he “earned eternal life” and might, if he had so chosen, have avoided death, or even refused to die upon the cross, and entered into eternal life alone; his death, being the act of his own free will and not in any sense necessary for his own salvation; that his sacrifice consisted in the offering up of an unforfeited life, in payment of the penalty incurred by Adam and his posterity, which was eternal death; that his unforfeited life was slain in the room and stead of the forfeited lives of all believers of the races of Adam.”

This contention, with modifications, has reappeared more than once since it was first proclaimed in the early 1870s. Brother Roberts met a form of it in the teaching of one Cornish, in answer to whom he drew up a series of propositions which were reproduced in The Christadelphian, December, 1937. It has been revived in certain of its aspects in recent teaching in America, and it appears desirable that the attitude of this Magazine towards this teaching should be once again emphasised.

We believe that because of disobedience Adam was sentenced to return to the ground, and that this sentence brought him at last to death. “By one man sin entered into the world and death by sin” (Rom. 5:12). “By man came death” (1 Cor. 15:21). Death “came by decree extraneously to the nature bestowed upon him in Eden,” to use the words of brother Roberts; or, in other words of brother Roberts, “Death did not come into the world with Adam, but by him after he came.”

We believe it is contrary to the meaning of Scripture to say (1) that the words “Dust thou art, to dust thou shalt return” described the condition of man when first created, and are therefore not a sentence of death subsequently passed by God upon Adam as a result of transgression; and (2) that the “death which has come by sin” is not the death common to all men, but the second death. The true teaching of the Bible, we assert, is that we are dying creatures, inheriting a nature which is “evil” (Matt. 7:11), in which “evil is present,” which evil is further described as “a law in our members,” “the law of sin in our members” (Rom. 7). Such phrases could not be used of Adam before he sinned.

The Scriptures define sin, in the primary sense, as transgression of God’s law (1 John 3:4) or, as in the R.V. with a closer reproduction of the original, “sin is lawlessness.” In a few passages of Scripture the word “sin” is used in a secondary sense, by metonymy, of human nature. As Paul could speak of “sin that dwelleth in me” so he could describe the nature in which dwells “the law of sin” as “sin,” inasmuch as it inevitably produces sin in all, with the exception of the Lord Jesus who always obeyed God. Thus Paul says, “God made Jesus to be sin for us, who knew no sin” (2 Cor., 5:21); again, “He shall appear the second time apart from sin” (Heb. 9:28 R.V.).

Jesus possessed our nature, which is a condemned nature. Because of this he shared in the benefits of his own sacrifice, as Paul declares:—

Heb. 7:27: “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. 9:12: “Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption.”

Heb. 9:23: “It was therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these; but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these.”

Heb. 13:20:“Now the God of peace, that brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus, that great shepherd of the sheep, through the blood of the everlasting covenant.”

Therefore, it is testified that “he obtained eternal redemption” and that “he was saved out of death” (Heb. 9:12; 5:7–9).

We believe that we cannot consider Jesus alone in this matter, but must always remember that he was “the arm of the Lord,” raised up for the work of reconciliation of mankind who are perishing. God set forth Jesus to declare His righteousness as a condition for the forgiveness of sins in the exercise of His mercy. To effect those objects it was necessary that Jesus should be of our nature, yet sinless. If he had not been of our nature which is under condemnation he could not have righteously died: had he not been sinless he could not have been raised from death to everlasting life. The wisdom of God is shown in the raising up of a Son who, though tempted and tried like all of his brethren, was yet without sin; who, therefore, by the shedding of his blood confirmed the new covenant for the remission of sins and obtained eternal redemption for himself and for us.

The denial that Jesus had our nature strikes at the root of the Principle stated by Paul, that the righteousness of God was declared in his death; and because of this the apostles were insistent that believers should test all doctrines presented to them for acceptance, and that teachers of error and their doctrine should both be rejected. John says (1 John 4:2):—

“Hereby know ye the Spirit of God. Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God.”

Again (2 John 7–11):—

“For many deceivers are entered into the world who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist. Look to yourselves that we lose not those things which we have wrought, but that we receive a full reward. Whosoever transgresseth and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son. If there come any unto you and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed: for the that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.”

When John says “in the flesh” he means the same flesh as ourselves. These false teachers attributed some other nature to Jesus, different from our own. Because of this apostolic injunction, we believe it is necessary to maintain the truth on this subject by declining to have fellowship with any who uphold the contrary.

The statement of the principle underlying the sacrifice of Christ in “The Statement of Faith” is elaborated in the pamphlet The Blood of Christ, which, in our judgment, sets out the truth on this subject .