1 Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ.

...in private he [Bro Thomas] reminded us of Christ by a gravity of deportment that was mixed with urbanity, and a dignity that was sweetened by unfeigned humility, a quiet penetrating depth of intelligence, unweakened by the least approach to frivolity; a cordial interest that was free and natural in all things connected with the truth.

My days and my ways Ch 36

We follow Dr. Thomas

in the sense in which Paul asked the Corinthian believers to follow him (1 Cor. 11:1) not for what he was as a natural man, but for the treasure of heaven which the earthen vessel contained; Paul got the treasure by inspiration; Dr. Thomas by a life-long study of what inspiration wrote.

The result is the same, except as to authority, which Dr. Thomas was the last to claim. Dr. Thomas gave reasons for all he taught.

We have looked at those reasons, and considering them good, adopt his conclusions. Surely this is as legitimate as your rejection of some of them. Judge us not. The Lord is Judge, at which we rejoice. Take care that ye speak no evil of the things ye understand not.

The Christadelphian, Mar 1872

7 For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man.

The image and glory of God

à...we cannot know what the Father is. His substance defies analysis, in this respect we

cannot conceive of him in the least degree. Jesus most certainly did not represent the Father's substance, for he was Son of Man, " made of a woman." Now when Moses

asked for particular information respecting God, the Lord said, " No man can see my face and live," but his request was granted so far that the glory of the Lord passed before

him, proclaiming his name,

"Yahweh Elohim, merciful and gracious, long-suffering and abundant in goodness and truth, keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin" (Exod. xxxiv.

6-7). All this was exhibited in Jesus. He did not present to his fellow men an " image " like unto Judas, but like unto God. Just as a meretricious woman is the " image " of abandoned desire, so a virtuous woman is an " image " of chastity.

If we do not discerningly distinguish such figures of speech in the Scripture we get befogged, and are unable " to rightly divide " them. For instance, we read that man " is the image and glory of God " (1st Cor. xi. 7) evidently only in some special sense. When the Apostle said that Christ was " the " image of God " (2nd Cor. iv. 4) he must have referred

to the character of Jesus, because of the context in which the expression is embedded. His exhortation to holiness would otherwise be without point. Likewise in the following passages of Scripture :

Put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him. (Col. iii. 18.)

For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son. (Rom. viii. 29.)

We all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory. (2 Cor. iii. 18.)

Under the operation of the word of God, received without question, apprehended and faithfully observed, the mind is changed. Those in whom the light of heaven shines,

are changed as it were from one image to another, from glory to glory. Then they glorify their Father in heaven (Matt. v. 16).

As to the oneness existing between Jesus and his Father this must be a oneness of character, for in order that the disciples might not exhibit the impulses common

to humanity, but exhibit the character of God, Jesus prayed for His disciples thus :

Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are. I have given them thy word; and the world hath hated them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.

Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word ; That they all may be one ; as thou, Father, art in me, and / in thee, that they also may be one in us ; that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.

And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them ; that they may be one, even as we are one: I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one ; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me. (John

XVII., 11, 14, 20-23.)

Evidently from the above testimony in whatever way Jesus was " one " with his Father, that same oneness will obtain between the Father, Jesus, and his disciples who receive and obey his words. Obviously the statement that " I and the Father are one " does not imply

what Trinitarians usually suppose.

The Temple of Ezekiel's prophecy 5.6.7.

8 For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man.

She was not formed in the image of man, though she may have been in the image of some of the Elohim. "Man" is generic of both sexes. When, therefore, Elohim said "let us make man in our image;" and it is added, "male and female created he them;" it would seem that both the man and the woman were created in the image and likeness of Elohim. In this case, some of the Elohim are represented by Adam's form, and some by Eve's. I see no reason why it should not be so.

When mankind rises from the dead, they will doubtless rise as immortal men and women; and then, says Jesus, "they are equal to the angels;" on an equality with them in every respect. Adam only was in the image of Him that created him; but then, the Elohim that do the commandments of the invisible God, are the virile portion of their community: Eve was not in their image.

Their's was restricted to Adam; nevertheless, she was after the image and likeness of some of those comprehended in the pronoun "our." Be this as it may, though not in the image, she was in the likeness of Adam; and both "very good" according to the subangelic nature they possessed.

Elpis Israel 1.2.

9 Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.

"If his offering be a burnt sacrifice of the herd, let him offer a male without blemish" (Lev. 1:3).

The sex feature is prominent in all the appointments of the law. The numbering of Israel applied to males only (Num. 1). So with the law of the firstborn (Exod. 13:12), "every male shall be the Lord's"; So with the three annual feasts: "three times a year shall all your males appear before the Lord" (Exod. 23:17; Deut. 16:16). The seal of the covenant was imprinted in the flesh of the males only (Gen. 17:10).

On the other hand, the female, in cases of vow, was to be assessed at a smaller value than the male (Lev. 27:4-7), and in the case of the birth of a daughter, the mother was to be a longer time in purification (Lev. 12:7) A female animal could not be used for sacrifice except for peace offering (Lev. 3:1, 6) or for the sin of one of the common people (4:28, 32; 5:6).

As all these things have an allegorical significance, we naturally desire to penetrate the meaning. Where shall we find it? We are probably not far away from it when we read "Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection . . . for Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression" (1 Tim. 2:11-14).

...Here are historical facts and moral responsibilities at the beginning of human history that in-weave themselves with the whole work of God with the race. Of course, the modern school, with their "new woman" racing hither and thither and posing in attitudes and relations for which she is unfitted by nature, will rebel against these divine appointments, Mosaically recorded. They might as well fight against gravitation.

Woman was secondary in the purpose for which she was formed, and she was influential in deflecting man from the path of obedience which he probably would have observed if left to himself. If God has chosen to preserve the memorial of these facts in the constitution of things He has established among men, who can make demur?

Man has the first place all the way through, especially in the one great institution that brings man back to God in reconciliation. It was to be in a man and not in a woman that the righteousness of God was to be declared for the putting away of sin by forgiveness.

It was to be by the obedience of one man that justification was to be provided for believing and obedient sinners, and not by the obedience of one man and woman, although it was by the disobedience of one man and woman that death entered the world --not that the law was laid down to Eve: it was to Adam the command was addressed: "Thou shalt not eat": but Eve considered herself included (Gen. 3:2), and was, in fact, included as one flesh with Adam (2:23).

So in the case of the last Adam--the remover of sin: his bride, the Lamb's wife, shares the victory achieved by him when it has been decided at the judgment-seat who constitute such.

Law of Moses Ch 23.

12 For as the woman is of the man, even so is the man also by the woman; but all things of God.

In both cases, it is the male that is the subject of direct operation. Though there is neither male nor female in Christ Jesus, it is by a man and not by a woman that life has come, though she is instrumentally contributory: for as she was the beguiler of Adam, to the death and ruin of both of them, so she is made his rescuer, in being made use of in a virgin descendant of the House of David to bring the Saviour into the world.

Male and female are thus coordinate in the scheme without interfering with the headship appointed in the beginning. As Paul beautifully expresses it in his letter to the Corinthians:

...There is congruity in all the ways of God when the relations established by His law are observed. Man is the head, but only for nurture and protection and honour of the woman. Woman is man's equal fellow-heir of the salvation that is offered in Christ, but not to usurp the position that belongs to man both by natural constitution and divine appointment.

Man is for strength, judgment, and achievement. Woman is for grace, sympathy, and ministration. Between them, they form a beautiful unit--"heirs together of the grace of life"

Law of Moses Ch 23

14 Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?

... but in the case of the Nazarite, it was otherwise. It was both the token of consecration, and the condition of God's succouring presence with the wearer, as Samson found, when he revealed the secret of his strength to Delilah (Judges 16:17-21).

Law of Moses Ch 23

19 For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you.

All the evil that has been in the world subserves the purpose of God,‭ ‬as well as all the heresies that have existed.‭ ‬They have come for the purpose of punishing the wicked,‭ ‬chastising,‭ ‬and also developing the character of those who‭ "‬shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world,‭ ‬and the resurrection from the dead.‭" "‬We know‭ (‬says Paul‭) ‬that all things work together for good to them that love God,‭ ‬to them who are the called according to His purpose.‭"

Therefore be it far from us to regret the appearance of the agencies,‭ ‬that God has sent for the good of the future kings of the earth.‭ ‬The truth was correctly stated by a brother when he wrote the following:‭—"‬It is written of Israel in the wilderness,‭ "‬The Lord thy God walketh in the midst of thy camp,‭ ‬to deliver thee,‭ ‬and to give up thine enemies before thee‭" (‬Deut.‭ xxiii. ‬14‭)‬.

In like manner the personal Word of God‭ '‬walketh in the midst of the seven golden candlesticks,‭' '‬or ecclesias‭ (‬Rev.‭ ii. ‬1‭)‬,‭ ‬to search the reins and hearts.‭' ‬His‭ '‬eyes‭' ‬are‭ '‬like unto a flame of fire‭' (‬Rev.‭ ii. ‬18‭); ‬and‭ '‬all things are naked and opened‭' ‬before him.‭ ‬At irregular intervals he applies his‭ '‬two-edged sword‭' ‬to the whole of the One Body to‭ '‬divide asunder‭' ‬its‭ '‬joints and marrow.‭' ‬His object is two-field,‭ ‬viz.,‭ ‬to bring into greater prominence some item of the truth,‭ ‬and‭ '‬that they which are approved may be made manifest‭' (‬1‭ ‬Cor.‭ ‬xi. 19‭); ‬the sifting process likewise makes manifest the disapproved.‭"

‭Bro AD Strickler

‭The Christadelphian, July 1887

24 And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.

The bread and the wine stand for the body and blood of the Lord in their sacrificial relations.‭ ‬Consequently,‭ ‬they ought not to be served in a way inconsistent with their significance as such.‭

This is done when a number of biscuits,‭ ‬or broken pieces of bread,‭ ‬are used.‭ "‬One body‭" ‬requires one piece of bread divided in the act of distribution,‭ ‬as when the Lord

‭ "‬took bread,‭ ‬and when he had given thanks,‭ ‬he brake it and said,‭ ‬take,‭ ‬eat‭" (‬1‭ ‬Cor.‭ ‬11:24‭)‬.‭

We cannot do wrong in following his example.‭ ‬The brother distributing ought first to break.‭ ‬As to the nature or form of the bread,‭ ‬we have no instructions:‭ ‬and‭

‭"‬where there is no law there is no transgression.‭"

A piece of bread,‭ ‬whether baked whole or cut from its place after baking,‭ ‬combines the two ideas of unity and life sustenance,‭ ‬and comes sufficiently near the original memorial.

The Christadelphian, Oct 1886

We are here to remember Christ.

... It is a duty because it has been commanded; and it is profitable because it tends to strengthen the hold of Christ upon the mind; and it is pleasant because every agreeable and ennobling exercise of the mind is called into play by the ideas presented for contemplation.

We make a mistake if we excuse ourselves from attending on any ground, except absolute inability. Duty, advantage and pleasure will be sure to bring us-one or other of them-if we are even moderately in subjection to the Truth. The presence of an enemy or an obnoxious friend will not keep us away if we can realise that Christ requires our attendance. Christ did not say,

"Come when all things are agreeable; come when all think well of you; come when every one else at the Table is perfect."

He said, "Do this," and (by Paul) "Keep the ordinances as delivered unto you." He also said,

"He that hath my commandments and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me."

Now if we stay away because someone has played Judas, or we think they have, we are not keeping his commandment but breaking it, and making ourselves as much a transgressor as we think our neighbour is in some other particular. The way to do is to go and see our offending neighbour if there is anything seriously wrong, and bring about a restoration.

Try it; it will have a conciliatory effect for you to go and see him. If the thing is not serious enough to call for a visit of this kind, it is not serious enough to think of at all. It is your duty to "drop it" and go on as if all were sweet and right.

If your feelings have been hurt, it is an opportunity of seeing if you can overcome evil with good;

"not rendering railing for railing, but contrariwise, blessing."

It certainly is not a reason for staying away from the Table. Nothing can justify this but the open rejection of the Truth or of the commandments by the assembly, or the open espousal of error or unrighteousness in the person or persons of others.

Some may stay away because they think it unnecessary for them to come. They think they can get all the good they want by staying at home and reading. This also is a mistake, as must appear to anyone on reflection. It is first of all setting up their judgment against Christ. Do they think the Lord would have required our attendance at the Table if it had been unnecessary for us? As a matter of fact, experience shows the wisdom of his appointment in the matter.

We do not get the same benefit staying at home reading that we do in the assembling of ourselves together to call the Lord to remembrance. For this, there may be more reasons than one.

First of all, the going out, the seeing of others, the taking part in an outward act in connection with the name and memory of Christ, all has a power to feed the mind more richly and more powerfully than belongs to the mere act of reading at home. We are mentally constituted for variety of exercise, and we get more "good" by going out to a meeting for the breaking of bread than we can get in the passive monotony of home.

Seasons 2: 23

25 After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.

The whole landscape is coloured with Christ. We are here to look at it again. It is well to withdraw thus for such a purpose. We are weak and apt to forget. We are apt to have our eyes dimmed by the dust of the way. We are liable to be overcome with fatigue and to get into some bypath and sit down and make ourselves comfortable. Christ knew our danger; therefore, he left us this command, to assemble and "do this" in remembrance of him.

Bro Roberts - Christ past and future

The new covenant or agreement, which ensures coming blessedness to the fallen sons of Adam, is in the blood of Christ and nowhere else. There can be no blessedness without covenant, because, apart from the addition of special covenant on the part of God, who only has the power to bestow blessedness, we are shut up to what we have by nature, and that is, a poor mortal body that will wear out in due course, and disappear in death.

And there can be no covenant without sacrifice, for so has God willed, and we can no more get past His will in this matter than we can alter the constitution of heaven and earth. And there is no sacrifice but one with which we can approach God for covenant, and that is the one great sacrifice accomplished in Christ.

And there is no way of becoming associated with that sacrifice but by enlightenment in the promises on which the covenant is established, and faith in the blood in which it is offered, and legal contact with that blood in baptism, which is the divinely appointed mode of association with the death of Christ.

The root of the whole matter lies first in the greatness, and then in the goodness of God. God is a great and dreadful majesty, to whom the earth and all flesh belong, for He has made them out of His own energy. He is not only great, but He is holy, and jealous of His supremacy. He has been disobeyed on earth, and has in consequence given us over to death; and will nor be approached by us except in the manner He has appointed.

But He is good, and He will forgive and bestow everlasting life if we humble ourselves and come to Him in the way appointed. The way appointed is through the shed blood of a perfectly righteous wearer of our nature, in whom sin was condemned on our account.

He will forgive us if we come in this way: not because that blood-shedding pacifies Him, or gives Him anything, or pays any debt; for then it would be no forgiveness-but because His righteousness is declared, and His prerogative recognized, and our position acknowledged in the acceptance of the slain lamb of His appointing.

Seasons 1.91.

26 For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come.

Did Jesus Partake of the Memorial Supper?

Jesus "gave thanks" for the bread (1 Cor. 11:24) and the cup.—(Matt. 26:27.) Why should he give thanks if he were not to partake? When handing the cup to his disciples, he said, "I will drink no more of the fruit of the vine until the day that I drink it new in the kingdom of God."—(Mark 14:25.)

Why should he say "no more" if he had not drunk at all? Is not 1 Cor. 11:25, an express intimation that he did partake? "After the same manner also, the cup when he had supped, saying, This cup is the New Testament, &c." With what appropriateness can it be called "the Lord's Supper" (verse 20) if the Lord did not sup?

Why should he not partake of his own supper for which he gave thanks?

The bread represented his body, and the wine his blood. Is not the personal Messiah part of the one body represented by the "one bread?"—(1 Cor. 10:17.) Is he not the head? and is not the head the principal part of the body? Why should a doubt be raised? Because, presumably, Renunciationism perceives that if the Lord partook of the emblems of his own sacrifice, it is an intimation that he was himself comprehended in the operation and effects of that sacrifice, which is, in fact, the case.

But whatever doubt may be raised with regard to the breaking of bread, none can exist with regard to his eating the passover:

"Where is the guest chamber where I shall eat the passover with my disciples? . . . With desire I have desired to eat the passover with you before I suffer."—(Luke 22:11, 15.)

Now, let the significance of the passover be considered:

"Christ our passover is sacrificed for us."—(1 Cor. 5:7.)

Christ ate lamb's flesh, representing himself. What is the conclusion? That as an individual he was saved from death (Heb. 5:7) by the anti-typical passover which God, through him, provided. The conclusion based upon his participation in the breaking of bread, is of less weight than that which follows from his undisputed eating of the passover with his disciples.

The Christadelphian, Feb 1874

27 Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.

The Mosaic law was the μορφωσις, or "representation of the knowledge and the truth" (Rom. 2:20)—the σκια, or "shadow of the future good (or heavenly) things, not itself the image of the things," (Heb. 10:1; 8:5, )—the υποδειγματα, or "patterns of the things in the heavens," not "the heavenly things themselves" (Heb. 9:23): for the σωμα, or "corporate substance is of the Christ." Col. 2:17. That, namely, which is constituted of the good, the true, and the heavenly, pertaining to him in all his relations.

Unleavened breads were representative, shadowy, or typical things. They represented "purity and truth." This is apparent from the apostle's allusion to them in 1 Cor. 5:8. "Christ our Passover," says he, "is slain for us; therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, nor with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened (cakes) of purity and truth."

When therefore the law saith, "Thou shalt not offer the blood of my sacrifice with leaven" (Exod. 34:25), we have a typical enactment before us, which was fulfilled in the letter by offering the blood with dough baked before it was leavened. This observance was an element of the typical righteousness of the law, which was to be "fulfilled" by those "who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit." (Rom. 8:4.)

If a Christian drink of the Lord's cup, not discerning the Lord's body, or with malice and wickedness he eats and drinks condemnation to himself; and does not "fulfil the righteousness of the law;" but on the contrary,

"offers the blood of Yahweh's sacrifice with leaven,"

which is death. To eat bread and drink wine at the table of the Lord is to

"offer up spiritual sacrifice." This offering is "acceptable to God through Jesus Christ," 1 Pet. 2:5, when offered, not in the letter, but in the spirit of the law. The letter of the law is,

"Thou shalt not offer the blood of my bulls and goats, heifers and lambs, with fermented bread;"

but the spirit of the law,

"Thou shalt not eat my flesh and drink my blood with malice and wickedness; or thou shalt be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord." John 6:53–58; 1 Cor. 11:27.

We conclude, therefore, that the quality of the bread matters not, so that we eat it in purity and truth, discerning the Lord's body.

Herald of the Kingdom and Age to Come, Dec 1856

29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.

We break not this bread and drink not this wine discerningly unless we see in Christ crucified the vindication of the honour of God, in the condemnation of sin in the flesh of sin as the basis of our acceptable approach to God, and our forgiveness unto life eternal.

We come this morning with the Slain Lamb in our hands, so to speak; the priest, the risen Christ, takes it at our hands, and asks the Father for our acceptance, and the blessing comes forth in our forgiveness, and by and by, in the redemption of our body, which is the great consummation of our adoption.

Seasons 1.44.

30 For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep.

Weak and Sickly and Asleep

He undoubtedly refers to physical suffering.

That is, because of their unworthy use of the Lord's ordinances, they were suffering judgment. This was punishment beforehand, that the punishment of the second-death at the Lord's coming, might be averted; as is evident from the succeeding words

The believing communities, in the days of the apostles, were under the ministration of the Spirit, and, therefore, experienced the results of their actions in a more direct and signal manner than is permitted to us in these deserted days.

Nevertheless, we are under the same Lord, and may trust to receive a portion of that chastisement which will redeem us from the fate of bastards.

The Christadelphian, Oct 1898

If there were no moral evil in the world, there would be no physical evils. Sin and punishment are as cause and effect in the divine economy.

God does not willingly afflict, but is long suffering and kind. If men, however, will work sin, they must lay their account with "the wages of sin;" which is disease, famine, pestilence, the sword, misery and death. But, let the righteous rejoice, that the enemy will not always triumph in the earth. The Son of God was manifested to destroy him, and all his works; which, by the power and blessing of the Father, He will assuredly do.

Elpis Israel 1.3.

33 Wherefore, my brethren, when ye come together to eat, tarry one for another.

Punctuality...

is a form of faithfulness.‭ ‬It is the keeping of a covenant.‭ ‬Unpunctuality will generally be found associated with looseness in other matters.‭ ‬God is punctual in the execution of all His works,‭ ‬whether in the movement of the heavenly bodies or the fulfilment of His plans and promises‭; ‬and His children are commanded to be like Him.‭ ‬They can only be so on a small scale.‭ ‬All the more important it is that their punctuality should be seen in small matters.‭

Presence at the hour of meeting is one of them.‭ ‬Paul's words‭ ("‬tarry one for another‭"—‬1‭ ‬Cor.‭ xi. ‬33‭) ‬which have been quoted as a plea for waiting for late comers before commencing were never written with this meaning.‭ ‬The context is clear as to this.‭ ‬It was a question of the mode of attending to the breaking of bread when they had actually come together,‭—‬not of the time at which they should assemble.‭ ‬The question was whether they bring food and eat simultaneously,‭ ‬as at a feast,‭ ‬or whether,‭ ‬passing the bread,‭ ‬they should‭ "‬tarry one for another.‭"

‭TC 06/1887