The first chapter of John is considered one of the primary proof texts of the commonly-accepted doctrine of the Preexistence of Christ — i.e., that Christ had a personal, individual, and sentient existence before his conception and birth; indeed, that he was coexistent with the Father as a second person of the “trinity”.

Christadelphians often seek to refute this teaching, in John 1 at least, by asserting that the “Word” was not Christ literally, but the “Idea” or “Logos” of Christ, existing in the mind of the Father long before his conception and birth of the Son, and that this Idea found expression in Jesus when he was born (v 14?), as the embodiment of the Purpose of Almighty God.

This general idea — that the “Word” of God from the beginning (the Law and the prophets of the OT) described and pointed toward the Messiah who was yet to come — is certainly correct, but… is that what this passage is about?

The usual Christadelphian approach to John 1 is to assume that (1) “beginning” refers to Genesis 1, or earlier, and that (2) “Word” therefore cannot refer literally to Christ, at least at that “beginning”.

The following is a slightly different approach, which (1) has no problem with the “Word” being a title of Christ, but (2) interprets “beginning” in an entirely different way:

---

Joh 1:1: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God” (NIV).

The word for “beginning” is the Greek “archee”; signifying “first in order”, from the root “arch, archon” = a ruler. “The beginning” is a characteristic phrase of John, referring to the beginning of the NEW CREATION in Christ: consider carefully Joh 15:27; 16:4; 8:25; 6:64; 1Jo 1:1; 2:7,13,14,24; 2Jo 1:6. [Notice in some of these passages that the KJV translation shows certain words italicized, and that omitting these words actually enhances the sense of the passages.]

The “beginning” of the Gospel of John is obviously patterned after the “beginning” of Genesis — hence there is much similarity of language, and connection of ideas. But it is the beginning of a new, or spiritual “creation” in Christ. As there was a Sun, created and ordained in the heavens by God, in the Genesis-beginning when He decreed, “Let there be light”, so likewise… “In the (new, spiritual) beginning” God testified of Christ: “Let there be light” (cp Gen 1:3 with 2Co 4:6; Mat 4:17; Mar 1:1; Luk 1:1,2; Act 10:37), and this time a new spiritual Light came into the world. And so God made and ordained His Son Jesus Christ the “beginning” and the first cause of His new spiritual creation (Rev 3:14).

It is instructive and significant that each gospel begins with a “beginning”: cp Mat 1:1 (genesis); Mar 1:1 (archee); Luk 1:3 (anothen); and that the four gospel accounts are placed at the head of the New Testament. Here, in the coming of His Son, God has begun the work of His new, spiritual, “creation” — the corner piece, the foundation stone of which is His Son.

As a separate point, it may be noted how often the Greek “ktisis” (creation) — when used in the NT — signifies, not the material, physical creation of Genesis, but the new, spiritual creation, in Christ, of regenerated and forgiven men and women who bear his name.

Jesus was the “Word of God”

Jesus was a man (Act 2:22; 1Ti 2:5; Rom 8:3; Heb 2:14) who spoke God’s words (Joh 8:28; 7:16). Thus, one of his names is “the word of God” (1Jo 1:1; Rev 19:13; 1:2 — there are only three other instances of John’s use of the phrase “word of God”, all referring to Christ personally). In Greek philosophy, “logos” means an impersonal, abstract wisdom; but in Hebrew thought, “logos” refers to God Himself. Yahweh is the source of all wisdom! Here in John 1 “logos” occurs with the definite article (“ho”) which serves to strengthen its meaning. Hence, ‘THE Word’ can also be seen to be THE “Divine Expression”. Christ was exactly this. It was in Christ that God fully revealed Himself to mankind. It was through Christ’s life and mission that God expressed and illustrated His new covenant, showing us the better way — which is the power of salvation for those who believe.

Jesus as the “Word” was “with” God. The Greek “pros” signifies facing toward or moving toward.

“The Word was God”

As John used the definite article (“ho”) to strengthen the meaning of “logos”, so here there is no definite article: i.e., “THE word” was not THE God personally, but rather “of God”, or “godly”, or A (manifestation of) God. (In v 14 John writes, “We beheld his glory”, i.e., the glory of the One who came from God, and was thus “divine”.) This phrase is translated, “The word was DIVINE” (Moffatt). John is affirming Christ’s divinity, not his deity. Christ was the Son of God, the ‘Divine Expression’ from heaven which dwelt among us, “the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being” (Heb 1:3).

---

Joh 1:2: “He was with God in the beginning.”

This verse may be understood most literally if we define and circumscribe “beginning” to mean to the beginning of the “New Creation” in Christ. Truly Christ was with the Father in all the work of the New, spiritual, Creation in Himself; he was the prototype and the catalyst; such a Creation could not be without him!

---

Joh 1:3: “Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.”

There is plainly an intended, and extended, parallel between the material creation of Gen 1 and the spiritual creation of new men and women in Christ: Col 1:15-18; 3:10; 2Co 5:17; 4:6; 1Pe 1:23; 1Co 8:6. “All things” refer to men and women (Joh 5:17,20,21; 3:35; 13:3; 16:14,15; 17:10; Col 1:16; Eph 3:9). Cp 1Co 8:6: “To us there is but one God the Father, of whom are ALL THINGS (even we unto him), and one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are ALL THINGS (even we through him).”

“Without him nothing was made”

There should be a period (full stop) here. “Without me you can do nothing” (Joh 15:5). Then there is required a slight rearrangement, repunctuation, and retranslation of the text, which puts together the last portion of our v 3 with the first bit of v 4, and yields:

“That which has been made (v 3b) was life in him (v 4a).”

Should this relative clause [‘that (or what) has been made’] go with v 3 or with v 4? The earliest NT manuscripts had no punctuation. Many of the later manuscripts — which do have punctuation marks — place the equivalent of a period before this phrase, thus putting it with v 4.

It has even been suggested that the editors of some later manuscripts introduced their own unusual punctuation to place this phrase (wrongly) at the end of v 3 (as it appears in most modern translations); and that this was done in a specific attempt to bolster the erroneous doctrine of the “Trinity” during the so-called “Arian controversy” of the 4th century — in other words, to suggest that Jesus Christ himself was the Creator (or was with the Creator) in Genesis.

So the whole of these verses should probably read:

“Through him (ie, Christ himself) all things were made. Without him (Christ) nothing was made. What has been made was ‘life in him’, and that life was the light of men.”

Read this way, it may be seen that John’s focus is unequivocally on the spiritual creation (‘life in HIM) and not the earlier, physical, creation of Genesis.

---

Joh 1:4: “In him was life, and that life was the light of men.”

“What was made was life in him” (RV footnote).

“That life was the light of men” proves that this is spiritual life, which is produced by the light of God’s word — not natural life! And thereby are set the parameters of “beginning” and “creation” in this passage: the “beginning” of God’s revelation of His Son to the world, and the new, spiritual “creation” of believers in him.

---

Joh 1:5: “The light shines in the darkness, but the darkness has not understood {or overcome] it.”

Briefly this states a parable of the Gospel: the epic battle between light and darkness: Jesus = the light, and the Pharisees, etc = the darkness. Cp 2Co 4:3,6.

“Understood” is the Greek “katalambano”, which may be “comprehended” (Act 4:13; 10:34) or “overcome” (RV mg). God’s word will not return to Him void (Isa 55:7; 1Th 5:4). Both meanings are relevant: the enemies of Christ did not “understand” him, nor could they “overcome” or defeat him!

---

Joh 1:9: “The true light that gives light to every man was coming into the world.”

Notice: it is the Light [not every man] which was coming into the world (in contrast to the KJV translation): cp Joh 12:46; 16:28.

---

Joh 1:10: “He was in the world, and though the world was made through him, the world did not recognize him.”

This verse is difficult too, until we recognize that Christ “made” the world in this sense: that his sacrifice was efficacious backward into the past, even for earlier believers in Old Testament times (Rom 3:25; Heb 9:15). Cp vv 3/4: “What was made was life in him”… even for Adam and Abraham. (In this sense, the new or spiritual “creation” did have a sort of beginning — at least prophetically and typically — in the history of God’s covenant peoples in the Old Testament.)

Or, “the world was enlightened through him” (Diag), which is essentially the same thing: spiritual “enlightenment” leads, in faith, to a new and spiritual creation!

---

Joh 1:11: “He came to that which was his own, but his own did not receive him.”

“He came to his own (‘idia’: neuter plural): i.e., his own land or country; but his own (‘idioi’: masculine plural): i.e., his own people… did not receive him” (John Thomas, Eureka 1:29).

---

Joh 1:12: “Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God…”

Vv 12,13 — looking back to vv 1-4 — describe more literally the “creative process” at the “beginning”. These vv (12,13) demonstrate quite clearly that what is being discussed here is a spiritual “creation”! Those who believe in Christ’s Name are re-created as “children of God”.

---

Joh 1:14: “The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the Only Begotten, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.”

“The Word became flesh” is here a straightforward reference to Christ’s nature, not merely his birth (cp 1Jo 4:2). God manifested Himself in the flesh of humanity (1Ti 3:16), not in stone (Exo 34:6). Jesus was of David’s seed (Rom 1:3); under a curse (Gal 3:13); being born of a woman, under the law (Gal 4:4); and made “sin” (2Co 5:21). He was of sinful flesh (Rom 8:3); in the likeness of men, of no reputation (Phi 2:7); and like his brethren (Heb 2:17).

The conception of Jesus in the virgin womb is likened to the original “Creation” of Genesis; in fact, it is the beginning of the new, spiritual “creation”: cp Gen 1:2 (the Spirit of God hovering over the waters) like a mother bird brooding over her young: Deu 32:11; Exo 19:4). The words portray the energy-giving presence of God — wrapping, protecting, and caressing the chaos of the unfinished earth as He prepared to complete His creation. And THIS SAME ENERGY IN CREATIVE PROCESS is described in Luk 1:35 (“the Holy Spirit will… overshadow you…”): The language of Gabriel calls to mind that of Genesis (cp Gen 1:2, LXX); the Spirit of God “overshadowing”, or “moving upon” the face of the waters to bring forth life, as a mother hen brooding over her eggs and then her chicks. This is a direct parallel to the natural creation; this is the beginning of the spiritual, or new, creation. It is a picture of vast creative power, yet nonetheless tenderness and love.

“Made his dwelling” is “tabernacled” (RV mg): Exo 25:8,9. Jesus Christ is Immanuel, a sanctuary (Isa 8:14; Exo 33:9; 40:35). The child, and the man, Jesus was set up on earth as the perfect tabernacle or temple, in which the glory of the Father dwelt: Joh 2:19-21; Mat 12:6.

---

Joh 1:15: “John testifies concerning him. He cries out, saying, ‘This was he of whom I said, “He who comes after me has surpassed me because he was before me.” ‘ ”

He has “surpassed” me, John said; he stands in front of me, because he was “before me”: “Protos” means: first, in sense of rank. It signifies “first” or “chief”: Mar 6:21; Act 13:50; 17:4; 28:7,17. There are numerous cases of younger men surpassing their older brothers: Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, David, etc. Jesus is but one more, and the greatest, of younger men who surpass their elders.

---

Joh 1:17: “For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ.”

It may be said that the giving of the Law, by which Israel was constituted the people and nation of God, was a continuance of God’s original creation — or even the first, rudimentary, steps of His spiritual creation: men and women were being reconstituted or reborn as His own special family. So it is reasonable that the first, elementary, part of the Spiritual Creation would be seen by John as yet another pattern pointing forward to the fullness of the Spiritual Creation as it would be realized in the Son of God. What Yahweh began in Moses He finished — or rather, will finish — in Christ.

---

Joh 1:18: “No one has ever seen God, but the only begotten Son, who is at the Father’s side, has made him known.”

The only begotten Son is ‘in the bosom of the Father’, an idiom for closeness or nearness: cp Joh 13:23. (Is this phrase a commentary of John, after the facts of the history, referring to Christ who was then in heaven?)

The Son has declared, or interpreted, the Father. In this final verse of the prologue is the climactic and ultimate statement of the career of the Logos, “the Word of God made flesh”, Jesus of Nazareth. His whole life, all his teachings, and at last and especially his death and resurrection and ascension to heaven, all “expound” or “interpret” his heavenly Father.

---

Thus it is possible to read all of John’s Prologue as a statement about Christ, the Logos or “Word” of God in human form and expression, and the work of a new, spiritual Creation which God is carrying on through him. Indeed, this is a “Creation” which is far from finished — but one at which the Father, and the Son, continue to work to this very day. It will not be finished until every last redeemed one has been gathered in the great multitude standing before the throne of God. Indeed, so far as we know, it may not be finished even then!

Its decisions are immutable (Isa 8:20). Its doctrines are holy (Psa 19:80). Its precepts are binding (Deu 6:6). Its histories are true (Isa 55:11). It has light to direct you (Psa 119:105). It has food to nourish you (1Pe 2:2). It has comfort to cheer you (Psa 119:50). It is the traveler’s map (Isa 30:21). It is the pilgrim’s staff (Isa 41:10). It is the soldier’s sword (Eph 6:17). It is the pilot’s compass (John 16:13). It is the river of pleasure (Jer 15:16). It is a mine of wealth (Psa 14:10). Read it to be wise (Isa 55:4). Believe it to be safe (John 5:24). Practice it to be holy (2Co 7:1). Let it fill the memory (2Ti 3:4). Let it guide the feet (Psa 73:24). Let it rule the heart (Rom 10:10).

We have ample instruction that we must be diligent and redeem the time, but in many situations waiting on the Lord is the best solution. God is in complete control: we are merely servants. We have many specific duties and responsibilities, but even in the discharge of these, waiting on the Lord plays no small part.

“Who shall roll away the stone?” Who will help…? … or, Who can do… this or that, or whatever may seem to be required? These questions often occasion needless concern to Christ’s disciples. Much of such worry arises from our failure to recognize our own actual insignificance in the overall purpose of God. If we have any place in that purpose at all, it is merely as instruments in the hands of God. As far as we are concerned, the meaning of every circumstance lies principally in our own reaction to it. God is testing us, not coming to us for help. He who holds the earth in the hollow of His hands has no problems or worries, but simply an unalterable and irresistible purpose. We can safely leave all the planning and engineering to Him. Our simple task is confined to reacting to each new circumstance as it comes, in the way most in harmony with His revealed will.

“Wait on the Lord; be of good courage” (Psa 27:14). Waiting provides one of the greatest calls upon courage, and one of the severest tests of it. But circumstances that require courage, like circumstances that require wisdom, are simply arranged by God to give us practical training and experience in seeking these things from Him. They are to impress us with our natural ignorance and impotence, no matter what the external situation that confronts us.

Cowper wrote, “Wisdom and knowledge far from being one, have ofttimes no connection.”

The poet was trying to express the truth that wisdom is superior to knowledge, but in his statement of the difference he went too far. There is bound to be a connection, for although it is possible for men to have knowledge without wisdom, no one can be wise without possessing knowledge. Wisdom makes use of knowledge as mind makes use of matter. It is superior because it is comprehensive. A new-born babe begins life without knowing anything of the world he has entered and without any of the qualities that may come with experience. He cannot possibly be wise until he has knowledge — knowledge of the difference between good and evil, knowledge of the God who has called him into being, and knowledge of the way of life. Wisdom is revealed in the proper use of that which is known. The One who is perfect in wisdom has also the perfection of knowledge.

Wisdom is always good, but there is such a thing as the knowledge of evil. It can never be an advantage to lack wisdom in anything, but there are matters in which it is a blessing not to know.

The apostle Paul wrote, “knowledge puffeth up” (1Co 8:1). He was not condemning knowledge, but simply stating a truth. Knowledge of the right kind is excellent, but even it may tend to inflate the individual who possesses it. Men may be puffed up even by their knowledge of the Scriptures, especially if their reading has been ill-balanced. Much charity is needed to guard against this evil and to make knowledge lead to edification.

There are people who will say that it is only the dangerous “little knowledge” that puffs men up, while those who have studied deeply are truly humble and never boast. This thought has been stated often, but it is not true. Indeed it would be difficult to define the words of such a saying. All the knowledge of mankind is only little. The most ignorant and the most cultured are only separated by a few degrees. It is quite true that intelligent people perceive the ugliness and folly of blatant boasting and so if they boast they do it more skilfully. Or it is possible for a man to feel himself so superior to the common run of humanity that he finds no pleasure in the admiration of the multitude. His detachment is a form of pride, and he may fall into the worst of errors by being puffed up against God.

For all ordinary people it is most natural to find a certain pleasure in the possession of knowledge that is denied to others. The child’s open triumph with the delighted affirmation “I know, I know!” is only the natural expression of a pride which we conceal in later life. Men and women do not feel such keen pleasure in little triumphs, and they may be so self-deceived as to imagine that they are completely above such childish weakness. Often, however, circumstances conspire to reveal the inflation that is there even in those who would claim to be quite free from it. Even in dealing with the oldest and most dignified of men, a diplomatist remembers this human vanity.

An active business man once told us that in early days he made this discovery by accident. He was trying to sell certain articles to engineers, and was finding it very hard work. One day, aside from his business he thought of a very interesting engineering problem which baffled all friends to whom he put it. One of these friends suggested that there was probably one man in the country who could solve the problem, the head of a very large firm, why not write to him? The young man hesitated to be so bold, but at last he wrote, stating his problem. He was invited to make a call. The big man received the youth quite graciously in his office and explained the interesting difficulty. Then having given full satisfaction by his superior knowledge and ability, he began to question the youth as to what he was doing in life, and ended by giving him a good order. There is a sequel to this story which illustrates a worldly wisdom, hardly falling within our subject. The young salesman having found by accident that exalted men were children at heart, changed his method of approach and played on this human weakness. He took advantage of this nattering thought of superior knowledge, the truth noted by the apostle that “knowledge puffeth up.”

In some measure all men are subject to this weakness, but if they are instructed in the knowledge and wisdom that has been divinely revealed, they are aware of human vanity and so are on their guard. Knowledge and ignorance are only relative terms. It is said that in rural England a century ago, a man who could read and write was accounted a scholar, although in other circles the same man would have appeared as an ignoramus. In the same way the man with the greatest reputation for learning in all the world might seem deplorably ignorant to the angels. It is possible even that some of those with the greatest reputation would appear more foolish than their less capable fellows, just as we have noticed when we have chanced to overhear the conversation of children, the cleverest boy talks the worst nonsense, for there is no one to check him, or call in question his assertions.

Wisdom is needed to guide our steps, or knowledge will only bring increase of sorrow and a greater capacity for folly. Wisdom begins with the fear of the Lord and it ends with obedience to all His commandments. It can make use of knowledge on this mortal, material plane, while recognizing that there are other planes unknowable to us now. “Wisdom is the principal thing; therefore get wisdom, and with all thy getting get understanding” (Pro 4:7).

In the first chapter of the book of Proverbs we are told that “wisdom crieth aloud in the streets, she uttereth her voice in the broad places, she crieth in the chief place of concourse, at the entering in of the gates” (1:20,21, RV).

Considered as a “dark saying of the wise”, this is provocative of thought. We very rarely have a literal shouting of words of wisdom in the streets of a city, or in the broad places of human activity, but when we remember that the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom, we can see a definite meaning in the saying. In ancient Israel and in the modern world the idea of God is before men all the while even though human thoughts fail to turn to Him. In our time we can hardly live for a single day without Christ being brought before our minds, and through Christ, the Father who was manifest in him. Even the daily newspaper utters the call of wisdom in spite of its low aim and its native foolishness. The date it gives is from the birth of Christ, the record of human vanity confirms the teaching of Christ, while often, especially in these latter days, there is an item of news which shouts of the purpose of God to those who can understand.

Even apart from these matters the call of wisdom can surely be heard in the ordered wonders of the universe in which we live. Man’s cheerful acceptance of the earth as his home proclaims that in his heart he recognizes that there is a Creator. Would he feel comfortable on a ship with no captain? A hundred thousand tons of metal and wood driving through unknown seas at thirty miles an hour and no one in control? How then should he feel when he realizes that he is all through life on a vessel weighing millions of tons and going through space at sixty thousand miles an hour? Of course men believe that someone is in control. The stability of the earth and its long continuance, the facts of human consciousness and human ideals, the wonders of chemistry and the wonders of life all combine to prove that there is a mind far above that of man. Human intelligence is just sufficient to contemplate these things and to make some response. Wisdom is thus calling to the sons of men in the streets, in the broad places and at the entering in of the gate.

The Proverbs, however, do not suggest that it is easy for men to secure wisdom even though the first call is so loud and insistent. We have to incline our hearts to understanding, to cry after discernment and to seek for wisdom as for hid treasure; then may a man understand the fear of the Lord and find the knowledge of God. Then wisdom may be a tree of life to us (Pro 2:1-5).

There is much food for thought in this contrast between the first loud call of wisdom to the sons of men, and the diligent search which is necessary before we can find the real treasures that wisdom can yield. The study of nature will not carry men far. “The mysterious universe” offers new complexities as men advance in knowledge. The investigations of men are like the attempt to reach a goal which is moving from them faster than they can run.

God can only be known as far as He has chosen to reveal Himself. He has revealed that He is “a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him”. Just as there are treasures and stores of wealth in the material world to reward the diligent labours of men, so there are spiritual treasures for those who search diligently in the Scriptures that have been handed down to us. In the only way possible or desirable in this mortal condition we shall find God if we search for Him with all the heart.

In the book of Proverbs there are many contrasts drawn between wisdom and foolishness, most of them easy to understand. From the many passages we choose one because it contains hidden depths and may arouse helpful thoughts.

“Every wise woman buildeth her house, but the foolish plucketh it down with her hands” (Pro 14:1).

Perhaps this has a meaning even on the most material plane. Some women take steps to improve their houses as time goes on, while others let everything go to ruin. We have even heard of people breaking up some of the woodwork of their houses and burning it through foolish indolence or still more foolish anger. On a slightly less material plane we have noticed the extraordinary difference between the woman who builds a home of confidence, unselfishness and love and the one who pulls a home to pieces by suspicion, jealousy and a generally negative attitude. On a higher plane still, the saying is true of the corporate woman formed through the ages. Those who desire to be constituent members of the bride to be, must be wise. They must build the house and not pull it down.

(PrPr)

Charles Curwen Walker was born on February 18, 1856, in Norfolk, England, the son of a landed proprietor, having family associations with Cumberland and Shropshire. As a boy of 13 he accompanied his father by sailing ship to Australia, where as a young man he worked as a surveyor in the gold fields.

He visited England in 1880-81 in connection with the sale of some property, and met two young lady relatives, the Misses Ellen and Edith Sutcliffe. They were at the time enquiring into the Christadelphian belief and were shortly afterwards baptized at Keighley. CC Walker was present when they were received into fellowship. Edith Sutcliffe later became his wife.

On the return voyage to Australia he read “Christendom Astray”, and characteristically checked every passage of the Bible quoted. Such a thorough examination of the subjects dealt with, leading to a careful reading of the Scriptures, could have but one result. While on the voyage he wrote a declaration, which is a revelation of the sincerity of the man. The paper was found after his death; in it he said:

“I hereby solemnly and sincerely declare that if it shall please God to bring me to Melbourne and to allow me to be baptized into the name of Jesus Christ, I will thereafter devote myself entirely and exclusively to His service. Amen.”

The” vow was kept, first by his baptism on September 10th, 1881, and then by the continued service to the Truth he had espoused until his death.

In 1887 he returned to England, accompanied by his wife Edith; and having a private income he intended to give his life to the service of the Truth in whatever capacity he could. He contributed articles to The Christadelphian, undertaking a monthly feature, “The Jews and Their Affairs”; and his association with Robert Roberts, the Editor, became increasingly close. In 1889 there occurred a serious business reversal, which left CCW unable to pursue wider interests, but riveted him firmly in the service of the Christadelphians of Birmingham.

In 1898, on the death of Robert Roberts, CC Walker became Editor of The Christadelphian Magazine and publisher of the works of John Thomas and Robert Roberts, and this continued until he introduced changes in 1937, when the transfer of the enterprise to a committee of brethren, which he had proposed in 1934, took effect.

After being Editor for 39 years, he resigned from the duty in August, 1937. He however remained closely associated with the work until his death some three years later, on April 3rd, 1940.

C. C. Walker was a man of many gifts- — widely travelled, of considerable linguistic attainments, and of wide knowledge. But his greatest gift was his power to use all other gifts as a steward of the grace of God. A noble man, innately courteous, naturally dignified, he was nevertheless a humble disciple of the Lord. As successor to two remarkable men (John Thomas and Robert Roberts), he maintained with voice and pen the Truths of the gospel as believed by Christadelphians. He was a man of strong conviction and strong faith.

His published works include:

Ministry of the Prophets: Isaiah Jeremiah Theophany The Word of God.

Paul was addressing a situation specific to Ephesus. We have no idea if it was unique to them or not, although there seems to be certain similarities with problems in Corinth:

1. The primary reason for writing is revealed in 1Ti 1:3; 3:15. This reflects Paul’s prior warning in Acts 20:17-35 (esp v 30). The whole of the letter is dominated by Paul’s concern over people who were teaching false doctrine.

2. This false teaching was being presented as gnosis (1Ti 6:20) and had an exclusivist and esoteric appeal. It included an asceticism (1Ti 4:3; 5:23).

3. The consequences of this false teaching were quarreling and strife and controversy (1Ti 6:3-5).

4. The false teachers had found a receptive audience in some of the “house churches” and especially in certain women who were going from house-church to house-church spreading this false teaching (1Ti 5:13; cp 2Ti 3:6-7 and 1Co 16:19). Apparently the young widows were a fruitful field for these false teachers.

5. Timothy’s task, given him by Paul, was to (a) correct the false teaching; (b) deal with the related behavioral issues; (c) teach sound / healthy doctrine as the antidote; (d) reform the organization of the Ephesian church by replacing the false teachers with new elders.

The thrust of the letter, therefore, is corrective. Paul does not need to spell out the truth because he is writing to a lifelong companion who does not need such instruction. However, he does authorize him to take corrective measures.

Consequently, the reforms which Paul instructed Timothy to implement were specifically related to this problem, including:

• Stop those women who were instrumental in spreading the false teaching. In particular, they are instructed to learn in quietness (1Ti 2:11,12) rather than saying things about which they know nothing (1Ti 5:13). Paul wants them to become occupied with other things, including marrying and raising a family (1Ti 2:15; 5:14) — this is in contrast to the false teachers who were forbidding marriage (1Ti 4:3).

• These women are to learn “with a quiet demeanour” (the Greek does NOT mean “in silence”). The prohibition on women teaching was not universal because in Corinth they prophesy (1Co 11:5) and teach (1Co 14:26) and Paul elsewhere refers to women who co-laboured with him in preaching the gospel and in the work of an apostle (Rom 16:3-5,7; Phil 4:2,3).

Paul appeals to Scripture (1Ti 2:13-14) first by noting that Adam was formed first, then Eve. He does not elaborate on this, although he makes a similar observation in 1Co 11:8-9 without any suggestion of subordination. The Gen narrative implies no superiority based on the order of creation, except that the creation of man and woman was the climax of creation. Here in Genesis it is the LAST created (ie, man/woman) which are at the pinnacle (insofar as they are in God’s image). There is no suggestion that Eve was in any way inferior because she was created after Adam.

Paul’s second observation from Gen was that Eve was deceived by the serpent. Elsewhere (Rom 5:12,19) he says that it was through the man Adam that sin came into the world. Paul is no more suggesting that all women are easily deceived than he is that all men are led into sin by women. The point of his argument here is not to establish a universal “principle”, but to use an illustration relevant to the situation in Ephesus. In fact, in light of later Gnostic writings, it is almost certain that part of this false teaching which Paul is addressing was the heresy that Eve was created first (hence the reference to the creation order in Gen), and that she was the originator of all wisdom (hence the reminder that Eve was deceived and a sinner).

Paul’s instruction to the Ephesian women, via Timothy, was that they should marry, have children, and devote themselves to good deeds. This is what he means by being “saved through childbearing”.

“Withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us… And if any man obey not our word by this epistle, note that man, and have no company with him, that he may be ashamed” (2Th 3:6,14).

The argument for a “pure fellowship” achieved through broad excommunication goes as follows: “It is part of Paul’s word by this letter that we ‘withdraw’ from any brother who ‘walks disorderly’. If this withdrawal is not enforced, then it is necessary to ‘have no company’ not only with the original sinner, but also with all who disregard Paul’s instruction.”

This rather casually-constructed logic runs afoul of several considerations:

• 2Th 3:6 describes not false teachers, but those whose way of life is contrary to the apostolic norm. The “disorderly” meant the idlers, or loafers, who rapidly turned into “busybodies” (2Th 3:7,10,11). The word translated “disorderly” (“idle” in NIV) here is also translated “unruly” in 1Th 5:14. It is actually a military term for those “out of step” when marching, and thus “insubordinate”. This lack of discipline in the case of the Thessalonian ecclesia was manifested in a refusal to work (vv 8,10,12), perhaps because of a misguided belief that Christ’s imminent return rendered labor unnecessary.

• It must not be supposed, because Christadelphians conventionally use the milder “withdraw” instead of the more appropriate “disfellowship” or “excommunicate”, that the severing of fellowship ties is the meaning of “withdraw” wherever it occurs. As a matter of fact, the word stello (withdraw) signifies “to avoid”, the idea being that the ways of the unruly are to be shunned. The brethren themselves, however, are exhorted by Paul to work (2Th 3:12); they have not been cast out of the meeting! He speaks to them directly in terms which would seem highly inappropriate to evildoers no longer worthy of fellowship at all. V 15 uses the word “admonish”, a quite mild term. The parallel passage (1Th 5:14) says that such disorderly brethren are to be “warned”, again a degree of discipline much less severe than excommunication.

• 2Th 3:14: “Have no company with” merely means: ‘Do not join such brethren in their idle ways. By your aloofness you can express dissatisfaction. And perhaps the busybodies will become ashamed (v 15) and begin to reform themselves.’

We see, therefore, that 2Th 3 does deal with matters of ecclesial order, but only as pertaining to local matters of personal conduct. The terms of separation do not necessarily imply disfellowship. Even if disfellowship were the final outcome of an unrepentant attitude, the basis of that disfellowship would be improper conduct and not false doctrine. Finally, there is no suggestion that ecclesias failing to act as severely as Paul commands should themselves be disfellowshiped en masse by all other ecclesias. Yet all use of this passage to justify “block disfellowship” or “guilt by association” assumes that it clearly says this.

“Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know: Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain” (Acts 2:22,23).

It is surely true that Jesus was “murdered” by wicked men (Acts 2:23 says exactly that). But it is also true that he was “delivered” or “turned over” to their hands by God, and that this was no whim, no passing fancy: it was, rather, the “determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God” — or, as the NIV, “His set purpose and foreknowledge” — that led to this death. All the sacrifices of the Law of Moses, and many of the events of the Old Testament, were enacted parables, and prophecies, of the One who — when he came — would be the perfect sacrifice for sins. It was in God’s purpose from the very beginning that His only-begotten Son, whom He loved more than anything, must die in a certain way.

All of Jesus’ life was a “sacrifice”, an ongoing “crucifixion” of the flesh with its lusts, a putting to death of the “old man” (which was in him, as it is in us), and a doing of his Father’s will rather than his own.

But it was not enough until he sealed the covenant in his own blood, by dying the death of the cross, freely and willingly laying down his life — the last act of a perfectly obedient life.

Was his death a crime? Yes, from the perspective of those who arrested him, and led him to trial, and condemned him, and drove the nails into his hands and feet.

But, from another perspective, it was God — who so loved the world — “giving” His only-begotten Son as the perfect example of how to live, and the perfect sacrifice, once and for all men and for all time.

And, may I suggest, here’s an aspect that we don’t perhaps think of as much as we might: there was, in the Father’s will, a merciful aspect in the crucifixion of Jesus:

Here was a man carrying the enormous burden of absolute sinlessness; never, in his 33 or so years, had he succumbed to the temptations and weaknesses of the flesh, which he possessed along with the rest of us. He had lived a life of absolute dedication to the Father’s will, but it was not easy, and it would never become easy, so long as he lived in a frail body of flesh and blood. So the man who had reached the age of 33, without sinning, was — in his death, brutal and painful though it was — being in fact liberated from the last “burden” he carried, the last hindrance to serving God. He was, in the words of Scripture, passing through the “veil”, the last “barrier” that separated him from the Eternal God. Seen from that perspective, his death on the cross was not a punishment — it was a “liberation”! It was “graduation day”! It was, praise God, the most merciful end that could be contrived (given God’s requirements) to a perfect life. The One who had struggled mightily, and resisted every impulse to sin (even though he was greatly helped by his Father), would not have to carry that same heavy burden for another 50 or 60 years, until he expired of old age — God was saying to His Son, “Enough. You may now take your rest.”

God “killing” His Son? No! More like God saying to His Son: “It is enough. I am well-pleased. You can do no more. Come, sit down beside Me!”

Jesus was praying during his last evening with his loved ones. He very much needed his Father’s support and that of his disciples. His Father was awake and listening, but his friends fell asleep for “their eyes were heavy” — as undoubtedly were their minds. It had been a long, hard day and all were weary.

To “watch” is defined as “the act or fact of keeping awake, especially of keeping awake and alert, in order to look after, protect or guard”. There are other meanings also, but none that are relative to these verses.

We all spend a lot of time “watching”. We might be clock watchers at school or work; we might be watching children at play; we might be watching TV; we might be watching traffic. The examples could go on and on. We spend a lot of our time watching (and waiting).

One hour… a mere 60 minutes of 60 seconds each… not much of our “threescore years and ten”. But what a long time that hour can be if you’re watching the time and patients ahead of you at the doctor’s office; or it could seem a LONG time if your loved one’s flight was delayed and you are left watching (and waiting).

And yet how short one hour can seem if you’re cramming for a test… or saying goodbye to a loved one.

We know that our Father in heaven has spent countless days and years, watching. He watched “in the beginning” as creation proceeded… for He saw everything that He had made… and it was very good. He watched probably with sadness as Adam and Eve disobeyed and then tried to cover their sin; He watched as wickedness grew upon the earth and Noah and his family were the only ones righteous enough to be saved; He watched as the floodgates of heaven and earth opened up. Yes, He watched throughout countless times… and He watches over us and His land even now.

And there are many examples in Scripture of those who have watched:

Abraham watched as the smoke of the Sodom/Gomorrah area went up as the smoke of a furnace.

Joseph watched his brothers… and his brothers watched him; later Joseph watched over the house of Potiphar and then over the prison house and then over the entire land of Egypt (and the world).

Moses and Israel watched as the Egyptians were destroyed in the Red Sea.

Eli sat watching… his heart trembling for the ark of God.

Saul watched for David… and David watched for Saul.

King Belshazzar watched as the finger of a human hand appeared and wrote on the plaster of the wall… and his knees knocked together in fear.

The examples continue on down to the Pharisees and Sadducees, who watched John the Baptist and then Jesus. They watched him constantly even as he hung on a cross.

But in Mat 26:36-45 Jesus asked his disciples, his friends, to watch with him as he struggled with his humanity there in sad Gethsemane. But they couldn’t and didn’t… not even for just an hour.

And what of us, brothers and sisters? How well do we watch? for an hour? how often do our minds wander during this meeting… during this exhortation… as the emblems are passed?

Can we… do we… give an hour a day for readings? prayer? contemplation of our hope? Or are our thoughts and prayers only fleeting? How many times have we fallen asleep as we said our prayers? An hour isn’t much… indeed, as Duncan Heaster says, “The 6,000 years of humanity is an absolute pin prick in the spectrum of eternity. And our 70 years is even less significant.”

One day soon our 70 years… our brief hour… will be complete, and the kingdom we have prayed for since childhood will be a reality.

“No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father. Be on guard! Be alert! You do not know when that time will come. It’s like a man going away: He leaves his house and puts his servants in charge, each with his assigned task, and tells the one at the door to keep watch. Therefore keep watch because you do not know when the owner of the house will come back — whether in the evening, or at midnight, or when the rooster crows, or at dawn. If he comes suddenly, do not let him find you sleeping. What I say to you, I say to everyone: Watch” (Mar 13:32-37).

(BBk)