The Greek “mesites”, or mediator, is derived from “mesos”, in the middle. Hence “mesites” means one who finds himself between two bodies or parties.

In classical Greek “mesites” was a legal term with the meaning of the neutral place between two parties in conflict, occupied by the arbitrator who seeks to judge and settle. This may be compared with 1Co 6:5: ‘Can it be that there is no man among you wise enough to decide between one and another of his brothers?’ In legal terminology “mesites” had a wide range of meanings: he could be the conciliator or arbitrator in cases that had not yet come before a court of law, so as to prevent this happening; he could be the administrator or trustee for something in dispute; he was also the witness to legal business that had been settled with the responsibility of guaranteeing that the decision would be carried out. He could be a pawnbroker and sometimes a guarantor, who guarantees the liabilities of another with his own property; he could even be a negotiator, appointed by one side to establish a link with the other side and so negotiate appropriate terms (eg, in a peace treaty) (NIDNTT).

There is no single term for a mediator in OT. It was not really a question of arbitrating between the two parties, but of listening to accusation and defense and restoring the infringed law by dealing with the guilty party — unless of course the accusation was rejected. Thus the relationship between the parties was restored. In Israel there was no civil code which would function by upholding a golden mean between conflicting interests. There was only divine law, which bound together the members of the people as fellow-men. Hence there could hardly be any real difference between an arbitrator and an official judge in Israel. Where the term appears in relation to the Jews, it means something quite different from the concept in the Gr world. The priest and prophet were mediators between God and his people, though never in the role of a neutral third party. Two mediators stand out in Israel’s history. One comes at the beginning and the other is prophetic. Moses mediated salvation at the Red Sea (Exo 14:15-18). He was the mediator of the covenant at Sinai (Exo 24:4-8) and as such of the law and of revelation (Exo 33:7-11). These thoughts occur again in the prophetic picture of the awaited Servant of Yahweh (Son of God) in Isaiah. He is the bearer of God’s revelation (Isa 42:1-4). God makes him the bearer of salvation to the nations (Isa 49:1-6). He bears the sin of men and blots out that sin [or perhaps more precisely, provides a basis by which those sins may be forgiven] by his suffering (Isa 52:13–53:12).

The verb form of “mediator” occurs only once in the NT: “Because God wanted to make the unchanging nature of his purpose very clear to the heirs of what was promised, he confirmed it with an oath” (Heb 6:17); here it has God as its subject. The noun occurs only 6 times. (a) As applied to Christ, “mesites” is qualified by “diathekes”, signifying a covenant (Heb 8:6; 9:15; 12:24), or by “between God and men” (1Ti 2:5). (b) It also refers to the one who once mediated the Law of Moses — Moses himself (Gal 3:19,20).

In the letter to the Hebrews, “mesites” has a somewhat different meaning. Here we are concerned with the surety for our attaining the promised kingdom. The promise which underlies this surety is expressed in the new covenant (diatheke). In Heb this always denotes the right instituted by God through Christ for liberation from death and sin. “Mesites”, like “diatheke”, has a legal function, and describes the one who procures and guarantees that right. On the one hand, this right is secured by the promise given (Heb 8:6) and, on the other hand, it is the presupposition of the fulfillment of the promise (Heb 9:15), which in any case was guaranteed by God with an oath (Heb 6:17). Strictly speaking, in Heb, then, “mesites” does not mean “mediator” or “go-between”, but rather the one who “guarantees” the promises of God. This is closely akin to the concept of the covenant-victim — the one whose sacrificial death provides a seal or guarantee of God’s covenant (Mat 26:27,28; Heb 9:15-17; 13:20).

Since the Heb passages present the “mesites” as more of a “guarantor” than a “go-between”, there remains only one passage in the NT where Jesus Christ is explicitly called a mediator between God and man (1Ti 2:5). The fuller context of this passage is as follows: “God our Savior, who wants all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth. For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself as a ransom for all men — the testimony given in its proper time” (1Ti 2:3-6). So, even in this passage, the concept of ‘go-between’ (as in prayer) seems subordinate to the concept of salvation (the “ransom”) developed and implemented through Christ the means or ‘medium’ of God. For it is a plain teaching of the NT that salvation is only through the means of Jesus Christ: Gal 3:12-19; 2Co 5:14-19; Act 4:12; Joh 3:36; 14:6; 1Co 3:11; 1Jo 5:11,12; etc.

In summary, it may be said that the “mediation” of Christ for men is much more than as a ‘go-between’, and much more than as a ‘conduit’ for prayers. Rather, Christ is the “total package” — the absolute and perfect representative of God, in whom is developed and revealed the fullness of God’s eternal plan to be glorified in the salvation of men and women. In that sense, Christ is THE “mediator” between God and man in his life and death and resurrection and coming again — as well as (but certainly not restricted to) his current role whilst sitting at the right hand of the Father.

Only two “rites” are absolutely commanded to the believer: baptism, and the Breaking of Bread. By the first we join God’s family, and by the second we regularly reaffirm our membership in this family.

It is surprising that there are any with full opportunity to attend regularly who are content to be at the Breaking of Bread just now and then. For this most important service is essentially a thanksgiving. A casual attitude toward it, with irregular attendance, in effect declares, “I am thankful to God for the Lord Jesus Christ and what he has done for me, but not much! And there are other things which I regard as being more important.”

Put down in black and white, this looks horrible. But is there really anything unfair about such a diagnosis?

Would there be such a careless attitude to the Table of the Lord if it were properly appreciated what this meeting can mean? Consider the familiar words, “My blood of the new covenant… shed… for the remission of sins” (Mat 26:28).

Here is the identical phrase which is used about our baptism into Christ. These two holy rites are designed to supplement one another. Baptism washes away every sin committed up to that moment. But — such is human frailty and human thinking — spotless robes of righteousness invariably begin to become drab and soiled. However, the disciple who lives by faith in Christ knows that with the Memorial Service comes remission (forgiveness) of sins. There the robe of righteousness resumes its original brightness.

Yet faced with such startling but delightful truths as these, there are some who are indifferent to this most important thing in life, and do not mind openly asserting, by their lack of enthusiasm, that this is how they feel!

Away from home

From time to time, believers find themselves away from their homes, and their home ecclesias, on a Sunday. Such times are fine opportunities to get to know other Christadelphians, by attending memorial meetings of other ecclesias. A little foresight and planning before weekend trips or vacations can be spiritually rewarding, in experiencing at first hand the true worldwide family fellowship of our brotherhood. A week or two spent on business in a strange city far from home, rather than being a desolate and lonely time, can be a wonderful time of sharing with people who are truly “family” — family in a more meaningful sense, quite often, than one’s own natural family. As Jesus said,

“Who is my mother, and who are my brothers? Pointing to his disciples, he said, Here are my mother and my brothers. For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister and mother” (Mat 12:48-50).

In isolation

There will be times, of course, when it will be clearly impossible — or extremely difficult — to attend a Sunday meeting of Christadelphians. What should be done then? The partaking of the bread and wine, accompanied by suitable Bible readings and prayers, can be a tremendously fresh and rewarding experience — even for an individual or a couple temporarily isolated from all other spiritual companionship.

Our Sunday service is properly a memorial. It is not a sacrifice, as the “Catholic” church insists; neither is it a “sacrament”, that is, an act which mechanically appropriates grace to the doer. It is simply a memorial, a means of remembrance:

“This do, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me” (1Co 11:25).

If we are to live up to the New Testament pattern, we must be a family gathered around a table, partaking of a meal and in so doing remembering an absent member. It is an uncomplicated act, an act of loving companionship, of warmth and familiarity, not of pomp and ceremony.

We do not break bread and drink wine in order to assert any superiority over outsiders. We do not break bread and drink wine as a substitute for the rigorous discipline of service to God in its many features, to which the Truth calls us. Neither do we break bread and drink wine to encourage personal feelings of self-righteousness or complacency. (Especially on this last we must beware, because frequent repetition, instead of fostering memory, can in fact encourage forgetfulness of the true principles.)

But, purely and simply, we partake of these emblems in order to remember: first, God’s love; second, Christ’s sacrifice; and third, our duty.

There are two absolutely essential aspects of worship: baptism and the memorial supper. Baptism is the process by which the believer is “born” into his new “family”. And the Breaking of Bread is the perpetuation of that “family life” begun at baptism, by the repeated affirmation of the believer’s membership in the marvelous “family of God”!

Why are there two different emblems? The obvious answer is that the bread represents Christ’s body and the wine his blood. But that answer seems somewhat inadequate since either one alone might convey, almost as well as both together, the sense of sacrificial death. Is there some further distinction?

Perhaps it is this: the bread represents the strength of our Lord’s life — a life totally dedicated to the will of the Father. The wine more aptly represents his death — the blood willingly poured out as a climax to his life’s work.

The bread was broken and passed to each disciple. Each disciple drank a portion from the cup. But we must not suppose that this apportioning out of the emblems implies, in any sense, that Christ can be divided among us, or that we in any sense partake of only a portion of the blessings involved. All the blessing belongs to every individual among us. The bread must be broken in order that many can share it — there just is no other way to accomplish the practical object of providing for each brother and sister to eat of it. But the body, which the bread represents — Christ’s spiritual, multitudinous body — cannot be broken; it is one! “For we being many are one bread, and one body” (1Co 10:17). And the body is “knit together” in love with the Head, which is Christ himself (Col 2:2,19).

The component parts

It may be profitable to consider, item by item, the component parts of the Memorial Meeting, as to the significance of each:

1. First of all, in keeping with Hab 2:20, we enter the meeting room and take our seats, as much as possible in a spirit of quietness and meditation. Now is the time for serious thought and preparation and self-examination. Despite the ordinariness of the surroundings, if that is the case, we are nevertheless coming into the very presence of God! As for being late, when it is avoidable: This is not just wrong because it has the potential of disturbing our brothers and sisters, but also (and especially) because it is an appointment with God. Is this important? Consider the parable of the virgins in Mat 25: the foolish virgins, not being prepared ahead of time, came late to the marriage feast, to find the door shut against them!

2. General appearance and dress: In this, as in many areas of our life in the Truth, no hard-and-fast rules can (or should) be imposed. But surely we can be governed by intelligence and common sense. How would we dress for a “special occasion” such as meeting some important human dignitary? And how would we behave at such a meeting? Let us answer such questions for ourselves, and then realize, with wonder and awe, that we are going on Sunday morning to “meet” the Lord of the Universe and His Son!

3. The presiding brother: Presiding is perhaps the most important duty of all, more important to the memorial meeting than even exhorting. The presiding brother’s is the first voice to be heard; it is his duty to set and maintain the tone of the meeting; and by his presence, attitude, and words to give unity and continuity to the whole service. His duty is also to introduce the central feature of the whole worship service, the partaking of the emblems. This should require preparation (and prayer!) at home, even before coming to the meeting. Our minds are drawn to that first Memorial Meeting, in the upper room in Jerusalem, where Jesus was the first presiding brother, conveying an all-pervasive calm and confidence to his brethren, by which he demonstrated to them God’s presence and God’s love.

4. Music and singing: This can become something of an ordeal in small meetings, when those who play and those who sing may be all too aware of their inadequacies. So it must be remembered that our hymns are not important as a display of technical skill, but only for the spiritual quality of the worship itself. It is entirely possible to sing (and play) in the spirit which Jesus condemned: “These people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me” (Mat 15:8).

In short, the words and their message must always be the motivating principle in our hymns.

5. Reading of Scripture: The crucial point to recognize here, as in every Bible reading, is that God is speaking to us:

“This is what the Lord says: ‘Heaven is my throne, and the earth is my footstool. Where is the house you will build for me? Where will my resting place be? Has not my hand made all these things, and so they came into being?’ declares the Lord. ‘This is the one I esteem: he who is humble and contrite in spirit, and trembles at my word'” (Isa 66:1,2).

Just as with prayers, there should be no unnecessary movements, no interruptions, and no noise. Whether we speak to God (in prayers and hymns) or God speaks to us (in Bible readings), we are dealing with divine communications!

6. Collection: Although we were not redeemed by corruptible things such as silver and gold, we cannot escape from their use in the service of God. Indeed, there is something satisfying in the thought that the world’s monies can be put to other-worldly uses. It is our privilege to consecrate what we have of this world’s goods to the service of the Giver of all things.

In our day there remains the need for money and materials for the service of our God. There is the rent or purchase of a meeting room or hall; there are the poor, the elderly, the children and young people to whom we have special responsibility; the word must be preached, the meetings advertised; there are the funds collected centrally for special causes and special occasions.

How do we give? How much do we give? We should give willingly and without grudging as though giving were, as indeed it is, a service to Christ personally. How much? That depends upon the giver. There is a twin gauge: our ability to give (our means and income) and our spirit (our liberality or otherwise).

Some churches use tithes by which to bring in the money they need: others employ businessmen with a flair for touching people’s hearts and pockets and find their annual income increased by many thousands of dollars. We do none of these things and, perhaps, rightly so. But our own system of giving should not be an excuse for minimum contributions. The left hand may not know what the right hand is doing, but the Lord knows nevertheless.

7. Prayers: Public prayers should be relevant (ie, related to the object at hand, whether an opening prayer, prayer on behalf of others, thanks for bread or wine, etc.) and not repetitious. Prayers should be fresh and spontaneous, if possible; in common, everyday language — not stilted, artificial “Sunday only” speech. When all else fails, the pattern of Jesus in what is commonly called “the Lord’s prayer” will surely set us on the right road again.

8. The exhortation: The exhortation is not primarily a Bible study talk — so it should not be particularly technical or detailed. Neither is it the best place to teach, or re-teach, the first principles of our faith. Instead, it is primarily an introduction to the emblems of bread and wine, and therefore an aid to remembrance and self-examination. An exhortation should emphasize God’s holiness and purity and love; and the awesome responsibility of our calling to serve Him. It should not discourage, but rather encourage and comfort (which is the primary meaning of the Greek word translated “exhort”). It should, above all else, show us Christ. Wherever our thoughts and words take us as we contemplate God’s message, there we will find Christ: the central character in the Bible. If the exhortation has done its work, we will leave the Memorial Meeting feeling and acting as though we have been changed for the better:

“When they saw the courage of Peter and John and realized that they were unschooled, ordinary men, they were astonished and they took note that these men had been with Jesus” (Act 4:13).

9. The memorials themselves have been sufficiently discussed above, as to their importance and significance. Let it be merely added that in “showing the death of Christ”, our service on Sunday morning is in a sense a funeral. In attending a “funeral” we are showing respect for the dead (in this case, one who was dead, but is now alive, gloriously and eternally alive!), and for the occasion. And we are recognizing, for ourselves as well, the solemnity of both life and death, and how, in our daily lives, we can come in contact with eternal things. “Ask not for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee.” Surely, if we grasp this fact, we need not worry that we will forget to examine ourselves.

10. Conclusion: After a final hymn and prayer, a brief musical interlude closes the meeting. This is not a convenient background to cover the noise of shuffling feet and whispers about lunch plans. Rather, it is a final quiet moment to gather together the threads of thoughts from the worship, and to prepare to face the rest of the day and the week to follow — being sure that Christ is going with us as we leave the place of meeting.

Remember, our service can be beautiful and holy even without the external trappings of an expensive building and a large congregation. Christ on a mountain side, or in a secluded room, with no more than a dozen friends, could lead the holiest of all services. And so it may still be:

“For where two or three come together in my name, there am I with them” (Mat 18:20).