6 And Jesus said, Let her alone; why trouble ye her? she hath wrought a good work on me.

Spikenard

There is ample field for every liberal soul who may conceive liberal things in the service of God. By liberal things he shall stand. There are not many to whom liberality occurs in this direction. But the celestial phenomenon is not absolutely unknown. Surprising instances are permitted to break the monotony of carnal stagnation, which even Paul lamented when he said,

"All seek their own, and not the things which are Jesus Christ's".

The rule has not been cancelled which he formulated thus:

"He that soweth bountifully shall reap also bountifully, and he that soweth sparingly shall reap also sparingly."

A man seems a fool who spends on God. Final developments will show a light on this subject that all men will be able to see.

Law of Moses Ch 25

12 And the first day of unleavened bread, when they killed the passover, his disciples said unto him, Where wilt thou that we go and prepare that thou mayest eat the passover?

The law did not require the passover to be killed on the evening of the 14th day of Nisan; but "between the evenings" of that day. The lamb was to be put up on the 10th day, and to be kept up

"until the fourteenth day of the same month: and the whole assembly of the congregation of Israel shall kill it bain hāărbāim), between the evenings."—Exod. 12:6.

The feast was also to be kept between the evenings.

"Let the children of Israel keep the passover at his appointed season. On the 14th day of this month between the evenings ye shall keep it in his appointed season, &c."—Numb. 9:2, 3.

These evenings would be what we term Thursday and Friday evenings, between which was the fourteenth day of the month.

We have no doubt but Jesus did really eat the passover with his disciples. This appears from his sending Peter and John, saying,

"Go, and prepare us the passover, that we may eat."

Afterwards, being seated at the table, he said,

"I have heartily desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer: for I say unto you, I will not any more (that is, after this eating) eat thereof, until it be fulfilled in the kingdom of God."

According to Mark, the disciples said,

"Where wilt thou that we go and prepare that thou mayest eat the passover?"

In reply he said, go to a certain place and say,

"The master saith, where is the guest chamber, where I shall eat the passover with my disciples?" Having made ready, "In the evening he cometh with the twelve, and as they sat and did eat, Jesus said," &c.

But, Jesus and "the whole assembly of the congregation of Israel," doubtless, did not eat it at the same hour. Mark says, the passover was killed on the first day of unleavened bread; and this day began at even. Jesus and his companions ate the passover at the first evening; the Jews at the second, the intermediate day being their "preparation." Jesus was apprehended after eating at the first evening.

During that night he was arrested, and taken before the High Priest, and upon false testimony judged worthy of death. On what we call Friday morning, they held a council, which sent him bound to Pilate. Having confessed to him that he was the King of the Jews, he was therefore condemned to be executed for treason against Tiberius Cæsar.

Sentence being passed, they crucified him at 9 A. M.—"the third hour." At 12 M., "the sixth hour, " darkness overspread the land, and continued for three hours, or "till the ninth hour," or 3 P. M.; when the veil of the temple was rent, and the body of Jesus broken. And now when the second even was come,

"because it was the preparation, that is the day before the sabbath,"

the body was taken down, for it was not lawful for it to remain there all night; as it is written,

"If a man be put to death, and thou hang him on a tree, his body shall not remain all night upon the tree, but thou shalt in any wise bury him that day (for he that is hanged is the curse of God); that thy land be not defiled, which the Lord thy God giveth thee for an inheritance."—Deut. 21:21.

"And the evening and the morning were the first day."

Thus the Bible reckons.

From Thursday evening to Friday evening was the first day; from Friday evening to Saturday evening was the second day; and from Saturday evening to Sunday evening was the third entire day. The Jews reckoned this as three days.

Jesus rose very early in the morning of the Day 3. as typified in Jonah. If the law had confined the eating of the passover to the second evening of the 14th, Jesus would not have eaten; but as it was to be eaten between two evenings, Jesus could both eat the passover, and be slain as such.

Editor.

Herald of the Kingdom and Age to Come, Jan 1856

16 And his disciples went forth, and came into the city, and found as he had said unto them: and they made ready the passover.

Christ our passover

WHEN Jesus instituted the memorial supper which we have met this morning to observe, he was surrounded by his disciples in an upper room in Jerusalem, where he had met them by appointment to keep the feast of the passover.

That feast was part of the Mosaic appointments. The meeting was on the basis of the law of Moses; for Jesus and the disciples were all Jews, born and bred under that law, which had been in force 1,400 years.

It was the last time they met together on that foundation, but not the last time they will eat the passover together, for he said:

"With desire I have desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer: for I say unto you, I will not any more eat thereof, until it be fulfilled in the kingdom of God."

The feast had been observed on countless previous occasions, and with an ostentation not to be found in that upper room among those quiet thirteen men; but never had there been such a momentous celebration of it.

The whole law, of which the passover was a part, was converging for its finish in the one sorrowful man who was the centre of that group.

"Christ our passover, sacrificed for us,"

was about to absorb in himself the significance of all that Israel had observed for ages in obedience to the law of Moses, and therefore of the passover which he was now about to eat for the last time as a mortal son of Abraham.

Seasons 1.91.

21 The Son of man indeed goeth, as it is written of him: but woe to that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed! good were it for that man if he had never been born.

The memorial supper

In giving thanks in the assembly for the bread and the wine, let such thanks—giving centre in and encircle the Slain Lamb as the covenant sacrifice, to the exclusion of all those more general things which may be more appropriately named in the preceding and following petition.

Bro FR Shuttleworth

The Christadelphian, Mar 1875

22 And as they did eat, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and brake it, and gave to them, and said, Take, eat: this is my body.

We do not find, as we might expect, that this habit of meeting every Sunday morning to break bread in remembrance of Christ, loses its interest from repetition. On the contrary, the meetings grow more powerful to help us in the direction in which they are intended to draw and develop the mind.

This is due to the nature of the matters to which they stand related. Any other subject than the subject of Christ, would become threadbare and insipid from continual treatment. The subject of Christ becomes larger, deeper to the view, and stronger in its power to interest and control the mind; that is, where the mind is unreservedly surrendered.

... Christ and his friends were a very small and despised company, even in the days of Jewish sacerdotal splendour, not to speak of Rome's imperial grandeur, and the world is not more divine now than it was then.

If we find ourselves with very few, and those the poor, the illiterate and the despised, let us remember that this was the situation of the friends of God ages before we were born.

Seasons 1.67.

Do this in remembrance of me

Designed for a purpose, it serves its purpose admirably. It brings him before us in the hour of his, humiliation, and introduces to notice the day of his glory. It connects the two in one act. It reminds us of what he accomplished in the days of his weakness as the foundation of the day of his glory.

A guileless partaker of our common mortality in Adam, we see him herein offered in harmony with the working of an immutable Creator, that in raising him, the Father might provide us one in whom His law has been vindicated, that through him His grace might advance without the compromise of His justice. Perceiving this, we can unite in the adoration of the Designer of this arrangement of love.

We ascribe glory to Him that sitteth on the throne, and unto the Lamb. This table of the Lord gives us a standing ground for the scriptural contemplation of the sufferings of Christ and the glory that shall follow.

They help us to realize our entire dependence on him for all our hope of goodness in the ages to come; they help us to feel our position as his servants, his disciples, his brethren; they stir up, from first day to first day, our anxiety to be diligent to make our calling and election sure, by the doing of those things which he has commanded, obedience to which will alone command his favour in that day.

To forsake the assembly of ourselves altogether, after the manner of some, is a species of wilful sinning which will cut us off from beneficial relation to that one sacrifice of sins, which was made by and in the Root and Offspring of David.

It is a disobedience of one of the leading commandments, left by the Lord for the observance of his disciples, during his absence. The assembly of the saints at the table of the Lord, is one of the sweet resting-places provided by the Lord of the highway, for his weary pilgrims in their journey through this evil world.

Seasons 1.48.

Concerning the breaking of bread, Christ said "Do this in remembrance of me." This command was not limited to his twelve apostles, for we find Paul "delivering" it to the Gentile believers at Corinth.—(1 Cor. 11:23.)

It was one of the ordinances he delivered unto them, which he praised them for keeping.—(5:2.) Paul was the apostle to the Gentiles: therefore to us. We have no access to the things of Christ except through his ministry—consequently, the breaking of bread is one of the things "absolutely required" of an obedient believer.

But God never requires the impossible. If you live "twenty-five or thirty miles from an ecclesia" and are "prevented from travelling through infirmity or want of means," you will not be expected to break bread with a company of believers.

You can call Christ to remembrance in solitude, which, though not so refreshing as to do it in company with others, will be better than living in entire neglect of a good commandment.

The Christadelphian, June 1874

25 Verily I say unto you, I will drink no more of the fruit of the vine, until that day that I drink it new in the kingdom of God.

My table in my kingdom

àThe literal eating and drinking by itself would be a poor affair to make the subject of promise; but as taking with it the sharing of his friendship, the participation of his glory, the enjoyment of his love and fellowship, the inheritance of his throne, and his glorious immortal nature, it becomes a very great and precious promise indeed without abating a jot of its literalness....

Some ... may reason that if Christ is glorious and real and immortal, the act of eating seems the more incongruous because it has to do with the sustaining of life, and is associated with the phenomenon of corruption.

They may ask, what need for an immortal to eat? What place in an incorruptible body for a process involving chemical decomposition? There is an answer. First, we must not govern possibility by our experience. The works of God are without measure, and without limit in their diversity. It does not follow that because we depend upon eating for living that therefore the act of eating has no higher function in higher organizations.

It does not follow that because eating is associated with corruption in our experience, that therefore corruption is a corollary of eating in whatever nature of body that act takes place. Even our present observations of nature would forbid narrow conclusions on the subject. We see even now that the power of chemically absorbing the elements of food is in proportion to the electrical and functional vigour of the constitution.

An enfeebled organization will scarcely take half the nutriment out of food, while a powerful organization will absorb it pretty completely, and reject but a small residuum.

Is it impossible to conceive of an absolutely complete absorption? It is evident that there is an ascending scale of power in this respect in even the animal organization of present experience; and by analogy, it is a matter of irresistible conclusion that in the spiritual body which is powerful (1 Cor. 15:43), this power exists in perfection, and can assimilate food to the last grain of substance without a remnant for corruption.

We must remember that all substance is spirit at the root; for out of God all things have come, and in Him they subsist. What we call matter is His energy made concrete in limited forms and conditions according to His wisdom.

Consequently, a spiritual body will presumably possess the functional capacity of reducing all substance to its first element, spirit, and assimilating food to its own spirit nature, possessed by the eater. This excludes the very idea of corruption, and at the same time, it preserves to us the act of eating without the association of corruption which belongs to present experience.

Eating in the spiritual nature will therefore be not merely a possibility, but probably a source of delight of which dull animal organisms know little: for the act of converting food, not into blood but into spirit itself will probably yield a sensation of pleasure as far surpassing the gratification of the animal palate as the spiritual body exceeds the animal body in life, glory and power.

Such a view of the case enables us to realise the act of eating and drinking in the spirit state as the occasion of much spiritual joy and friendship among those who partake together. Even now the act of eating together is the highest act of fellowship, and the occasion of the most refined enjoyment of which the human mind is capable, all other things being equal.

How much more must this be the case when weakness is eliminated, and when therefore there will be an absence of the many drawbacks to social enjoyment arising in the present state from feebleness in every function.

Seasons 1.93.

27 And Jesus saith unto them, All ye shall be offended because of me this night: for it is written, I will smite the shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered.

'For it is written'

Awake, O sword, against my shepherd, and against the man that is my fellow, saith the Lord of hosts: smite the shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered: and I will turn mine hand upon the little ones. Zech 13: 7

Offended

"Stumbled." is the idea -- confounded -- perplexed. Their minds were fixed on him in his kingly capacity. Something was about to happen for which they were totally unprepared, though he had sought to prepare them.

Nazareth Revisited Ch 53

Sore amazed and very heavy

From this terrible ordeal Jesus shrank with fearful apprehension. He wished not to suffer it, he desired to avoid it. It was his will to escape it, "if it were possible," that is, if the Father's objects in the case could admit of its omission. It was in his power to evade the terrible death before him if he had chosen to prefer his own feelings to the divine command.

Here was where the conflict lay. It was the great historic conflict - the will of God versus the wish of man - brought to a focus. ...But what was the nature of the victory? It was the deliberate preference of the Father's will to his own:

"not what I will, but what Thou wilt."

He was enabled to exercise this preference by reason of what he was, as the Son of God. Still, it was by what we may call the operation of reason in the discernment of truth. Paul informs us that-

"For the joy set before him he endured the cross."

This shows us the power of mental view in sustaining him, and leading him to "overcome," which is the term he himself employed in afterwards describing the achievement.

Seasons 2.87

38 Watch ye and pray, lest ye enter into temptation. The spirit truly is ready, but the flesh is weak.

The flesh is weak

If there had been nothing in the constitution of the original nature of man impressible by the suggestions of the Serpent, there could have been no transgression. Had Eve's nature been isangelic instead of animal, there would have been no internal response to the external enticement. That internal something was not essentially evil; because, though possessing it, Adam and Eve was pronounced "very good."

It is not evil to admire the beautiful, and to wish to possess it; to desire to gratify the taste, and to aspire to the wisdom of "the gods," or Elohim: but all this becomes evil when its attainment is sought by crossing the limit forbidden of God.

The seeking to attain by crossing the line, Paul teaches was the result, not of innate wickedness, but of deception. The Serpent beguiled Eve. Had she been certain of the consequences she would not have transgressed. She had no experience of evil. It might be a very agreeable thing for any thing she knew; and highly promotive of happiness.

God had warned her of danger in the pursuit of knowledge through disobedience; but then, if they were to go back to the dust, that is, to die, what was the meaning of that Tree of Lives? Did not God mean something else? If they crossed the line in relation to the Tree of Knowledge, could they not eat also of that other tree, and live forever?

There seemed to her mind to be an uncertainty about returning to the dust, when she lost sight of the law. This was "the weakness of the flesh." There was no uncertainty of consequences so long as she thought God meant what he said; but being deceived on this point, and so made doubtful of it, she ventured to experiment. But, however doubtful of what might be, if she had adhered strictly to what God had said, she would still have continued "very good."

"Weakness," mental and physical, is an original element of animal nature; as "power" is of the angelic. Adam's nature was "very good" as an animal nature; but still it was weak, and therefore deceivable and terminable.

This weakness is founded in the unfitness of air, electricity, blood, and food, to maintain organized dust, or flesh, in life and power forever. The life-principles being weak, the flesh is weak in all its operations, mental and physical.

Herald of the Kingdom and Age to Come, Sept 1852

47 And one of them [Peter - Jn 18: 26] that stood by drew a sword, and smote a servant of the high priest, and cut off his ear.

Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword. Thinkest thou that I cannot now pray to my Father, and he shall presently give me more than twelve legions of angels? Matt 26: 52,53

Obedience Imperative in All Circumstances

"Would killing a man in self-defence be unlawful in every circumstance? If attacked by an assassin, from whom you could only escape by killing him, would you hesitate to kill him? or, if you saw another in danger from the same cause, would you consider it wrong to take the life of the would-be murderer? I ask this, because Colorado, where we are, is, comparatively, a new place, and the Indians are very troublesome. Not a week passes but we hear of scalped and mutilated bodies left on the plain; and it might come to our turn."—(E.C.)

Answer. The duty of non-resistance is, doubtless, specially trying in the circumstances depicted in the foregoing; but duty is not altered by an increase in the difficulty of doing it. Either it is duty to be passive in the cases alluded to in the question, or it is not our duty to be passive in any case. It is duty in all cases, or none, for the law of our probation, contained in the New Testament, makes no allowance for exception. What can be done in such trying circumstances but to

"commit our souls to Him in well-doing, as unto a faithful Creator."—(1 Pet. 4:19.)

God has not forsaken the earth, and will not suffer us to be tempted beyond an impracticable point. Our part is to obey Him, regardless of consequences.

Abraham faltered not in the killing of his own son, which was the greatest violence a parent could be called on to do to natural feeling. If Abraham had sheltered himself behind the impossibility of the thing, and excused himself on the ground that it was contrary to nature, and incompatible with God's own principles of action, would be have been accepted?

By no means. And how can we claim to be His children if we be not prepared to act as he did? Jesus makes this the test. He said to the Pharisees,

"If ye were Abraham's children, ye would do the works of your father."—(John 8:39.)

Job was accepted, whose motto was:

"Though He slay me, yet will I trust Him."

This must be our motto in relation to His commandments. They may seem hard sometimes but let us endure. The time is short; a glorious change is at the door, when, if we are now obedient, we shall no longer be commanded to be submissive to evil, but have the sword of judgment put into our hands for irresistible execution upon all the world—wild Indians and polished Europeans alike included.

The Christadelphian, Feb 1873

68 But he denied, saying, I know not, neither understand I what thou sayest. And he went out into the porch; and the cock crew.

Peter was forgiven because Christ prayed for him because his denial was a sin of weakness and not of will. His affection and his will were all towards the lord. He was sincere when he said, "Lord, I will follow thee to prison and to death," as was shown by the fact that he did so follow Christ to prison and to death afterwards.

But when, after a night without sleep (except the few minutes snatched in the garden of Gethsemane), in the darkness and in the cold, he saw Christ, whom he thought invincible, given up to the will of his enemies, it was not wonderful that in the presence of a challenge which meant possible arrest and death, he denied that he knew the Lord. It was only for a moment. At the third challenge,

"he went out and wept bitterly."

He disowned his act, and took the attitude to receive forgiveness. It was very different with the case of Judas. He deliberately planned his Lord's betrayal for the sake of making money. When his plan succeeded, and he saw the Lord in the hands of his adversaries, he likewise experienced a revulsion of feeling; but it was the revulsion of despair. He went and hanged himself. He knew the justice of the words of Christ:

"It were good for that man if he had not been born."

The two cases may stand for an illustration of the two classes of sin-the one that may be forgiven, and the other that cannot. The important question to consider in our self-examination is: How stand we with regard to the department of will and purpose?

Seasons 1.96.

72 And the second time the cock crew. And Peter called to mind the word that Jesus said unto him, Before the cock crow twice, thou shalt deny me thrice. And when he thought thereon, he wept.

It may seem strange that Peter the impulsive, the weak, and (by the Lord's denial) the dishonoured, should have been afterwards chosen as the Spirit's mouthpiece on the Day of Pentecost, and employed in the specially honourable office of holder and user of the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, in opening the doors thereof officially and finally for Jew and Gentile, first for the Jews on the Day of Pentecost, and afterwards for the Gentiles at the house of Cornelius.

...Peter, the humbled... He would always remember the shame of having publicly denied the Lord. He would always feel like Paul, after him, that he was not worthy to be called an apostle. He was therefore qualified to fill the highest station in the ministration of the Spirit without being lifted up, for which his undoubted affectionate loyalty fitted him on another side of his character.

Nazareth Revisited Ch 52