The Christadelphian Advocate, August 1895
A brother writes in The
Christadelphian that he has been pondering over the two phrases "in
Adam" and "in Christ," and that he finds an amount of haze has
recently been developed around them which he thinks he can dissipate by a few
simple reflections. Among these haze-dissipating reflections he gives the
following: "Though saints are 'in Christ' it is only in a preliminary
sense. Christ is glorious nature. No one can be in Christ as he is
in Adam till he is of Christ's nature. This is a self-evident truth.
The inference to be drawn from it would clearly be that the phrase 'in
Christ' cannot have the same import as the phrase in Adam until a future event
takes place.***At present our being in Christ is, and can be, only a state or
condition of relationship."
Now the question is, Where is the "haze?" It must be that it is
in the brother's imagining that some claim we are now in Christ in the sense of
being of His physical nature. When he says that we are in Christ in the
sense of state or relation, he is saying what those he pretends to be opposing
have been saying all the time. Where is the "haze?" To
tell us that we are not in Christ physically is as consistent as to tell us
that the moon is not made of green cheese. It is to deny what no sane man
ever affirmed. Where is the "haze?" It is nowhere else
but in the brother's imagination. He has persuaded himself, and is trying
to persuade his readers, that those he pretends to oppose teach that we are now
in Christ physically. This is purely haze of his own making; and if he
succeeds in "dissipating" it he will probably cease putting his
brethren in a false light. Those being opposed have said and repeated
that baptism puts us into Christ in the sense of relation and that we must wait
for the redemption of the body. It is "haze" that has prevented
this from being admitted and caused some to say that it is a mistake to claim
that baptism puts us into Christ. Now does this brother and those he is
united with in "dissipating haze" admit that baptism puts us into
Christ? He says: "Though saints are 'in Christ' it is only
preliminary." What does this mean? Does it mean that we are in
Christ or that we are not in Christ? Are Paul's words to be taken as
they are, or are they to be supplemented by the words "only
preliminary?" He does not say "For as many of you as have been
baptized into Christ only preliminary have put on Christ only
preliminary." The "only preliminary" is the
"haze" that needs "dissipating." The phrase "in
Christ" is a phrase denoting the relation we come into by baptism into the
One Name; and when we thus "put on the new man" we "put off the
old man;" and therefore the inference is not that the phrase "in
Christ" cannot have the same import as the phrase "in Adam;" but it is that it expresses relation in both cases;
"in Adam" expresses one relationship and "in Christ"
expresses another. When the latter is put on the former is put off.
Hence the attempt on the part of this brother to confine the phrase "in
Adam" to nature and exclude relation, and to apply the phrase "in
Christ" in a two-fold sense is a total failure, unless mere assumption
makes it a success. "In Adam" expresses relation to a sin
constitution, and "in Christ" expresses a relation to the
constitution of righteousness. If for convenience you wish to apply the
phrase in the two-fold sense we have no objection; but you shall not insinuate
that those you oppose believe that the phrase "in Christ" means now
to the baptized more than relation; at least you shall not without having your
insinuations and sophistry exposed.
When this writer says
"It is a serious blunder to interpret the phrase 'in Christ' otherwise
than one of relationship" he insinuates that those he is opposing have
made the "serious blunder." Let him or anyone else quote a
sentence to justify this insinuation if they can. They cannot. He
cannot. Then why put brethren in such a false light and try to make them
out simpletons?
"By baptism into
His name," says the writer, "we are brought into a relation of
reconciliation or favor." Just so; this is what those you are
opposing have said all the time. Now where is the issue? What have
you been opposing? No sooner than this admission is made, however, the
writer falls back into the pit he for the moment had escaped and says: "It
would be wrong to interpret it ('in Christ') as expressive of present
results." Here is haze that surely needs dissipating. We are
first told that to be baptized into Christ is to be brought into "a
relation of reconciliation or favor with God," and then we are told that
baptism into Christ brings "no present results." Why is it these men will not see that there are present results
of a character that calls for our deepest gratitude? To be in "a
relation of reconciliation or favor with God" instead of being in Adam
under condemnation is surely a present result of baptism. What mean these
contradictory statements that we do in Christ become reconciled and yet
"in Christ" expresses "no present results?" If it
means that there are no present physical results then there is the same
insinuation that some are stupid enough to say that there is a physical change;
and to contend against such a silly thing that no sane man ever dreamed of
claiming is beyond the dignity of a fair-minded man. The fact that those
the brother is opposing have been placed in the false light of claiming that
there are present physical results by baptism into Christ is proof that they
cannot find a point to attack them on in the position they really and
truthfully take. Their position is simple as the truth and it does not
require minds of supposed high grade to comprehend it. They simply say
that Adam's sin brought condemnation and alienation and mortality upon the
whole race; that as we are born in Adam we are related only to him in alienation
and under condemnation. This is our relation; and in addition to
this we are mortal as the result of the sin that brought the relation.
Then, on the other hand, they claim that when we "put off the old man and
put on the new man" by baptism we pass out from the relation to
condemnation and alienation and become related to Christ, in whom we are in a
state or relation of reconciliation and favor - not alienation and
condemnation. Then, when Christ comes, the mortality we inherit from Adam
will be swallowed up of life. Surely this is easily understood, and is in
perfect accord with Dr. Thomas' way of stating it in "The Revealed
Mystery," which we have given several times, but which it is claimed does
not mean what it says. It does mean just what it says and it is the
truth; and if it were not for "haze" it would be accepted without so
much "interpretation." Here it is again in the doctor's own
words: "In this life, then, there are two states in relation to God and
the children of Adam - the one a state of sin and the other a state of favor;
the former is occupied by 'constitutional sinners' of all ages, from the babe
to the old man, of every shade and variety; and by illuminated transgressors,
whose sin is not only constitutional but voluntary; and the latter state is
composed of persons who were not only constituted sinners and voluntary
transgressors, but who, by obedience to the laws of God and to Christ, are
constituted righteous. In regard to the righteous, they are delivered
from the fear of death, because, having obeyed the Truth, they have passed from
death to life; but this is not the case of constituted sinners and intelligent
transgressors. These are both under the sentence of death eternal."
If this is not enough
to dissipate the haze from before our brother's eyes, let him ponder over the
following from "Twelve Lectures," pages 95-96:
The Line Clearly Drawn.
"Abraham the
idolater was his own; his own to live like the insect of the moment, his own to
die and disappear in an irrevocable grave. Abraham, the called of God,
was no longer his own, but bought with the price of God's promises. He
entered upon a higher relation of being. He was exalted to a higher
destiny, and had imposed upon him Godward obligations
unknown to his former condition. Success or failure in the ordering of
his life was of greater moment than before. Faith and obedience would
constitute him the heir of the world and the subject of resurrection to
immortality; unbelief would make him obnoxious to a severer and farther-reaching
displeasure than than fell upon Adam. In this
respect the children of Abraham by faith - that is, those 'who walk in the
steps of the faith which Abraham had, being yet uncircumcised' (Rom.
"The law of faith,
established by the promises made to Abraham, constituted a center, around which
responsibilities of this description developed themselves. All who
acquired Abraham's faith came under Abraham's responsibilities."
Here the line between "in Adam" and "in Christ" is clearly
drawn, and the present results of passing from one to the other fully shown
without any haze to dissipate.
Thomas Williams