See additional comments about George Cornish by Robert Roberts in “The Nature of Man and the Sacrifice of Jesus Christ” in The Christadelphian December 1937, John Carter

The Christadelphian September 1898, Robert Roberts

“The Nature of Man and the Sacrifice of Christ”

1. —That death entered the World of mankind by Adam’s disobedience. “By one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin” (Rom. 5:12). “In (by or through) Adam all die” (1 Cor. 15:22). “Through the offence of one many are dead” (Rom. 5:15).

2. —That death came by decree extraneously to the nature bestowed upon Adam in Eden, and was not inherent in him before sentence. “God made man in his own image . . a living soul (a body of life) . . very good” (Gen. 1:27; 2:7; 1:31). “Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife . . . unto dust shalt thou return” (Gen. 3:17, 19).

3. —Since that time, death has been a bodily law.—“The body is dead because of sin” (Rom. 8:10). “The law of sin in my members . . . the body of this death” (Rom. 7:23, 24). “This mortal . . . we that are in this tabernacle do groan, being burdened” (1 Cor. 15:53; 2 Cor. 5:4). “Having the sentence of death in ourselves, that we should not trust in ourselves, but in God who raiseth the dead” (2 Cor. 1:9).

4. —The human body is therefore a body of death requiring redemption.—“Waiting for the adoption, to wit the redemption of our body” (Rom. 8:23). “He shall change our vile body that it may be fashioned like unto His own glorious body”—(Phil. 3:21). “Who shall deliver me from the body of this death?” (Rom. 7:24). “This mortal (body) must put on immortality” (1 Cor. 15:53).

5. —That the flesh resulting from the condemnation of human nature of death because of sin, has no good in itself, but requires to be illuminated from the outside.—“In me (that is in my flesh) dwelleth no good thing” (Rom. 7:18). “Sin dwelleth in me” (Ib. 7:20). “The law of sin which is in my members” (Ib. 23). “Every good and perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of Lights” (James 1:17). “Out of the heart proceed evil thoughts” (Matt. 15:19). “He that soweth to the flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption” (Gal. 6:8). “Put off the old man which is corrupt, according to the deceitful lusts” (Eph. 4:22).

6. —That God’s method for the return of sinful man to favour required and appointed the putting to death of man’s condemned and evil nature in a representative man of spotless character, whom he should provide, to declare and uphold the righteousness of God, as the first condition of restoration, that he might be just while justifying the unjust, who should believingly approach through him in humility, confession, and reformation.—“God sent His Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin condemned sin in the flesh” (Rom. 8:3). “Forasmuch as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself took part of the same, that through death he might destroy that having the power of death, that is, the devil” (Heb. 2:14), “Who his own self bare our sins in his own body to the tree” (1 Pet. 2:24). “Our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed” (Rom. 6:6). “He was tempted in all points like as we are, yet without sin” (Heb. 4:15). “Be of good cheer, I have overcome the World” (Jno. 16:33). “Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past through the forbearance of God, to declare, I say, at this time his righteousness, that he might be just, and the justifier of him that believeth in Jesus” (Rom. 3:26).

7. —That the death of Christ was by God’s own appointment, and not by human accident, though brought about by human instrumentality. “He that spared not His own Son, but delivered him up for us all” (Rom. 8:32). “Him being delivered by the determinate council and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken and by wicked hands have crucified and slain” (Acts 2:23). “Herod and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles and the people of Israel were gathered together for to do whatsoever thy hand and thy counsel determined before to be done” (Acts 4:27). “No man taketh it—my life—from me, but I lay it down of myself; I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father” (Jno. 10:18).

8. —That the death of Christ was not a mere martyrdom, but an element in the process of reconciliation.—‘You that sometimes were alienated in your mind by wicked works, yet now hath he reconciled in the body of his flesh through death”—(Col. 1:21). “When we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of His Son” (Rom. 5:10). “He was wounded for our transgressions: He was bruised for our iniquity: the chastisement of our peace was upon him, and with his stripes we are healed” (Isaiah 53:5). “I lay down my life for my sheep” (Jno. 10:15). “Having therefore boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus, by a new and living way, which he hath consecrated for us through the veil, that is to say his flesh, let us draw near” (Heb. 10:20).

9. —That the shedding of his blood was essential for our salvation. “Being justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him” (Rom. 5:9). “In whom we have redemption through his blood, even for the forgiveness of sins” (Col. 1:14). “Without shedding of blood there is no remission” (Heb. 9:22). “This is the new covenant in my blood, shed for the remission of sins” (Matt. 26:28). “The Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the world” (Jno. 1:29). “Unto him that loved us and washed us from our sins in his own blood” (Rev. 1:5). “Have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lanb” (Rev. 7:14).

10. —That Christ was himself saved in the Redemption he wrought out for us. “In the days of his flesh, when he had offered up prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears unto Him that was able to save him from death, and was heard in that he feared. Though he were a son, yet learned obedience by the things which he suffered. And being made perfect, he became that author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him” (Heb. 5:7–9). “Joint heirs with Christ” (Rom. 8:17). “By his own blood he entered once unto the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption” (Heb. 9:12). “Now the God of peace that brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus Christ, that great shepherd of the sheep, through the blood of the everlasting covenant, make you perfect, &c.” (Heb. 13:20).

11. —That as the anti-typical High Priest, it was necessary that he should offer for himself as well as for those whom he represented—“And by reason hereof, he ought as for the people, so also for himself, to offer for sins. And no man taketh this honour unto himself, but he that is called of God, as was Aaron. So also Christ glorified not himself to be made a high priest, but he that said unto him, &c.” (Heb. 5:3). “Wherefore it is of necessity that this man have somewhat also to offer.” (Heb. 8:3). “Through the Eternal Spirit, he offered himself without spot unto God” (Heb. 9:14). “Who needeth not daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins and then for the people’s: for this he did once when he offered up himself” (Heb. 7:27). “It was therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens (that is, the symbols employed under the law), should be purified with these (Mosaic sacrifices), but the heavenly things themselves (that is, Christ who is the substance prefigured in the law), with better sacrifices than these” (that is, the sacrifice of Christ—Heb. 9:23).

I have seen the 102-page pamphlet put out by Mr. Cornish in connection with this subject, entitled, “The Editor of the Christadelphian Unmasked.” I know not how to characterise it as it ought. It is not for me to judge or condemn, but rather to have in view the precept which enjoins us to “Pray for” those who despitefully use and afflict us. At the same time, the necessity for a correct understanding sometimes calls for rejoinder where silence would seem preferable. My rejoinder shall be very brief.

The venom of Mr. Cornish’s production is self-manifest. Its venom is only equalled by its untruthfulness. That Mr. Cornish is a conscious liar, I cannot tell. I rather think a good deal must be put down to his infirmity of hearing, which prevents correct impressions; and (if reports are correct) to another infirmity which would go far to account for a virulence approaching insanity.

However this may be, I repudiate his report of the meeting between us as a tissue of misrepresentation and mendacity. Of course, there is a framework of fact in his account, as there is in all false versions, but as regards those details on which the character of an action or a speech depends, two-thirds of them are distortions, and some of them inventions. I disown questions put into my mouth. I disown answers I am represented as giving. I deny the calumnious version of my connection with the proposed refinement of sugar by electricity which Mr. Cornish has raked up from the extinct embers of past animosities. I do not admit that livelihood by pure literature is a just cause of reproach.

God has raised up this Shimei to curse me, and I must bear it. It comes at a time when I have many other sorrows. There is a Divine meaning to it all, without doubt, which will be manifest in due time. It may be said, if Shimei cursed, David sinned. Be it so: “What man is he that sinneth not?” But Shimei’s cursing was short-lived, and David forgiven was re-instated. We live in a time of trouble. We live in the developing crisis of the time of the end. Evil goes forth from nation to nation, and from so-called brother to brother. In such a time, the answer of a good conscience inspires resolute endurance. God guides the whirlwind, and will at last save His own out of all affliction. Wherein this man may mean well in his personal antagonisms to me, I pray God to forgive him. Wherein he fights against God, in adding to the afflictions of the Gospel, at a time when it fights an almost single-handed battle against the hosts of darkness, he is in God’s hands and may have to answer for it.—R. R 

The Christadelphian, July 1896, Robert Roberts

“Bro Roberts comments on the teachings of bro Cornish in an Open Letter”

At one or two points some had been turned aside by the sophistries of one George Cornish, who, while holding the truth otherwise, denies the sacrifice of Christ in maintaining that Christ died, not as God’s arrangement for the forgiveness of our sins, but “because he was killed.” This is the old Panton Nain Bristol theory of the death of Christ. It is reached in the case of the truth, through a plausible theory to the effect that we do not inherit death from Adam by any physical law, but merely by denial of access to the tree of life: that the sentence of death took no effect on Adam’s body, and therefore is not in ours: that in fact we are the “very good” and uncursed Adamic nature that God formed from the ground in the first case; that our nature is not an unclean and sinful nature; that there is no such thing as sin in the flesh, or sinful flesh, or “sin that dwelleth in us.” Having sought to establish such a very good case for human nature, it easily opens the door for a Christ of immaculate nature, notwithstanding its having to admit that he was made in all things like to his brethren, and partook of their identical nature. It is the old doctrine of Renunciationism in a new form. It is worse than Renunciationism. Renunciationism, while denying Christ as the bearer of sin for its abolition through death and resurrection, did at least admit that the race was under condemnation. But this “ism” denies the very first fact of the Gospel testimony, that “By one man, sin entered into the world, and death by sin, and so death hath passed upon all men” By denying this, it denies the death of Christ in its testified character as God’s appointed method of taking away the sin of the world. It declares that “Christ died because he was killed,” in destruction of the Gospel testimony that “he gave his life a ransom for many” (Mark 10:45); laid down his life for the sheep (John 10:15); put away sin by the sacrifice of himself (Heb. 9:26); offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, by which he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified (Heb. 10:12–14) through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all (verse 10). It reaches these disastrous results through the apparently harmless idea that the body of Adam was unaffected by the sentence of death, and that therefore Jesus was pure and holy and good in body as well as in character. Those who are young in the faith are easily carried away by a theory that appears to honour Christ. A maturer acquaintance with the Scriptures, and especially with the shadowings of the entire Mosaic economy, will show them that in this particular it honours him at the expense of his work as the sin-bearer. It pleases inexperience to hear that Christ’s nature was “undefiled” in the days of his flesh, but it is the pleasure of sentiment as opposed to truth. If the pleasure of sentiment is to guide us, we may as well go on to say that he was strong, in face of the testimony that he was weak (2 Cor. 13:4; John 4:6): glad, in the face of the testimony that he was a man of sorrow (Isa. 53:5:3): beautiful in the face of the testimony that he had no form or comeliness (Ib. 2.); immortal in the face of the testimony that he had to be saved from death (Heb. 5:7); and had to obtain eternal salvation (Heb. 9:12).

It is a case illustrative of Solomon’s saying that “there is a way that seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof is the way of death.” While apparently an innocuous and harmless and superior theory, it fatally corrupts and upsets and perverts the truth at its very threshold, for the very threshold of acceptability with God has been placed in sacrifice, both in the shadows of the law of the substance of the Gospel. When sacrifice is seen as the self-abasement and repudiation of the offerers, the condemnation of sin in the flesh, and the supreme exaltation of the Creator in holiness, righteousness and truth, the evil will be seen of a theory that takes away the one great offering through which man is invited to approach, in crucifixion with Christ and burial with him, for the forgiveness of sin and reconciliation with God, and the attainment of life eternal.

It may be that this mischief has been permitted to agitate the Colonies for the quickening of their spiritual apprehension. It always happens that when a truth is assailed, the controversy it provokes has the effect of causing the truth to be more clearly seen than it was before. The particular truth in this case is of so subtle and spiritual and high a character (as involving God’s etiquette in dealing with exiled man) that it is not seen at once nor easily seen at any time, and is therefore liable to be easily clouded by reasonings that commend themselves to human ways and thoughts. After agitation, it will be more solidily established than before. Mr. Cornish obtained a considerable ascendancy at first, not only by pertinacious sophistry, but by other arts not unknown in a “hypnotic” age. But the glamour has gone off in most places, and may possibly disappear from the one or two neighbourhoods where it still clings.