Conference back40::soapbox

	
                    THE TWO CROSSES

Hebrews 10:1 attributes the incapacity of animal sacrifice to
unexplained symbolism: "For the law having a shadow of good
things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never
with those sacrifices . . . make the comers thereunto perfect." 
Only the "very image" (that is, the reality) can perfect; the
mere symbol of that reality cannot.  If, then, the cross has
perpetuated the weakness of animal sacrifice, it is because the
cross has hitherto revealed more of symbol than of reality.

This can be demonstrated by a universal distinction between all
spiritual symbols (particularly those pertaining to the
sanctuary and its rituals) and their realities.  Whatever its
particular form the symbol is always a physical substance,
structure, or process.  The reality, on the other hand, is
always nonphysical, pertaining not to matter but to mind.  We
err, therefore, when we suppose that we have moved from type to
antitype, from symbol to reality, simply by the discovery that
earthly rituals signify heavenly rituals.  For even in heaven
ritual comes accross as a physical process using physical
substances, within a physical structure.  Symbols do not become
realities merely by transport to heaven or to imagination.  Nor
are heavenly symbols inherently more efficacious than an earthly
ones, for sin and righteoussness are of mind, not of matter, and
minds are changed not by matter but by mind, not by flesh but by
Spirit.

For the same reason the blood of Christ, of itself, is no more
efficacious than the blood of a lamb (this is confirmed in John
6:63 in the context of a discussion of Christ's flesh and blood,
which, He says, "profit nothing") because both are physical
(fleshly) substances; both are therefore equally symbolic of
realities beyond.  Physically Christ's death occured on the same
plane of reality as did the deaths of bulls and goats.  The
level of symbolism of that death was thus equal to that of the
animal sacrifices.  To see no further than that symbolism is
therefore to be nearly as distant from the "very image" and
nearly as much under the shadow of type as were the Jews prior
to the cross.

Even His death, to the extent that it was a physical process,
was, like the death of a lamb, a symbol of something beyond. 
Consider, for example, the sign of Jonah the prophet.: "For as
Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly, so
shall the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart
of the earth" (Matt. 12:40).  The heart of the earth refers to
His entombment and thus to His physical death.  But this is not
the only meaning of the three-day sign of Jonah.  For Jonah the
three days were a period of living death during which he
struggled for reconciliation with God.

Continuing...

	
Seen in the light of Jonah's experience, "heart of the earth" in
Matthew 12:40 refers to two things, hell (the Hebrew Sheol) and
the deep sea.  Both metaphors appear in Jonah 2:2,3 and
elsewhere in the Old Testament to designate living torment and
despair.  Especially is this true of Psalm 69, which, according
to verse 21, is a prophecy of the sufferings of Christ, His
living sufferings.  As with Jonah these sufferings are described
in terms of deep waters (Ps. 69:1,2,14).  All told, the sign of
Jonah pertains decidedly to living torment and living death, a
death symbolized by His later physical death, but experienced
during a living torment that began in Gethsemane.

This torment ended moments before He died.  Before He died 
light dispelled the gloom that had enveloped the cross; before 
He died His face shown with a glory like that of the sun; 
before He died the sense of His Father's disfavor was withdrawn; 
before He died He could truthfully announce, "It is finished."
That death that followed was accordingly the rest of the
Sabbath, a rest that always commemorates a finished work.  His
physical death was therefore as much a symbol of rest and
triumph as of torment and despair.  Only as a symbol distinct
from its reality could His death point simultaneously in such
opposite directions.
        
From beginning to end the entire ordeal of the cross was wrapped
in symbolism: the darkness, the brilliant light, the earthquake,
lightning, rending of the curtain, confinement in the tomb,
blood and water, death itself--all were fitting symbols, but
only symbols.  The reality lay elsewhere.  Even though the full
reality did then occur, it was not then fully revealed.  What
has come down to us from Calvary is more symbol than reality,
more type than antitype, more shadow than very image.  The old
covenant, in a significant sense, has yet to cease, for its
sacrifice still has much in common with the blood of bulls and
goats.

Thus we continue to speak of the benefits of the cross as if it
were a glorified physical rite.  Borrowing the language (but not
the meaning) of Scripture we say that His blood washes away our
sins and that His physical death expiates our transgression.  We
verbally acknowledge the existence of greater reality than
physical manifestation, but still our language, and therefore
our concept, pertains more to matter than to mind, and therefore
more to symbol than to reality.

Continuing...

	
It therefore comes as a shock to us to learn that the real
efficacy of the cross comes not at all from the physical demise
following the announcement "It is finished" (for by then the
sacrifice was already complete), but rather from the mental
warfare preceding that announcement.  Though we may profess to
accord due significance to His living struggle, our whole
concept of the efficacy of the cross is nonetheless controlled
by the idea of physical death, that is, by the symbol rather
than the reality.

Those whose view is thus controlled always view the entire
ordeal, living torment as well as physical death, in terms of
what physical death is, namely, a passive surrender to
life-crushing force.  From this premise the conclusion,
prevalent in Christendom, logically follows: His cross spares us
from punishment simply because Christ suffered an infinitely
painful ordeal ending in the passive surrender of death.

On the other hand, when one's view of the atonement is
controlled by the reality rather than the shadow, by what
occured prior to the announcement of completion rather than
thereafter, one comes to a very different conclusion.  One sees
in His living torment and struggle not passive surrender but
rather active combat against torment and tormentor, and not only
combat against tormentor, but also victory over tormentor to the
point where it tormented Him no more--this prior to the words,
"It is finished."  One sees in this conflict a final battle
against sin itself, a battle that Christ had to win if His
sacrifice was to be of any value to us.  And one sees why He had
to win, namely, to prove,  promise, and predict that mankind can
and will fight the same battle and gain the same victory through
the same faith.  One recognizes that only on the basis of such a
proof, promise, and prediction, could the cross have been of any
atoning benefit from that age to this.  Then it becomes apparent
that His physical death was simply a symbol of an earlier
torment, and His resurrection, a symbol of an earlier victory.

Continuing...

	
Here, then, stand contrasted two crosses, both originating at
Calvary, but one pertaining to the old covenant, and the other
to the new, one the result of physical process, the other, the
result of mental process, one the revelation of symbol, the
other the revelation of reality.  For nearly two thousand years
the cross of the old covenant has been held before us.  But now
that cross is to yield to another.  "He taketh away the first
that He may establish the second" (Heb. 10:9).  The day of the
new covenant is at hand.

The dawn of the new begins when a hitherto concealed promise
speaks from Calvary, the promise that God will have a perfect
people, the promise that God will finish the transgression, make
an end of sins, and bring in everlasting righteoussness.  This
promise, proven and predicted by Calvary, is the new covenant as
recorded in hebrews.  The cross ratifies this covenant because
it proves possible what this covenant predicts.

Through the perfection yet to be wrought by this covenant the
unending sacrifice and oblation will cease, sins once remembered
will be remembered no more, the sanctuary will be cleansed, the
sins commited under the first covenant will be redeemed.  Thus
it is written:



	This is the covenant that I will make with them after those
days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws into their hearts, and
in their minds will I write them; and their sins and iniquities
will I remember no more.  Now where a remission of these is,
there is no more offering for sin" (Heb. 10:16-18).



Not only our salvation, but also that of all past generations,
depends upon fulfillment of that prediction.  Abraham, Moses,
David, Samuel, and many like them, Hebrews declares, "received
not the promise, God having provided some better thing for us,
that they without us should not be made perfect" (Heb. 11:39,40).

  Assize Journal, Volume 1 Issue 1, Randall Neall


                                           God Bless,

                                           Tony

    You've posted these notes in the wrong conference.  This is SOAPBOX,
    not PULPIT.

    	WHO GIVES A RODENT'S DERRIER!
    
    	PLEASE GO AWAY AT HIGH SPEED!
    
    -b

      Geeeez, I thought it woul dbe ok given the time of the year.
    
      I don't note real often here, but I would hope that those 
      who are halfway familiar with my style know that I don't 
      bang people over the head with any Bibles.
    
      I'm sorry if I offended.  I really thought the time of the year
      was a suitable allowance for it.
    
    						Tony

    
     This after all SOAPBOX....
    
     The NEXT/UNSEEN works quite well Brian...
    
    YMMV
    

    
    This is soapbox, Tony.  You can enter any topic you like.  But don't be
    surprised by the responses you get.
    
    jeff

    Not to worry, Tony.  The noise-to-signal ratio is always very high in
    the box.  :-)

    Well, Tony, sorry you're the one to have "set me off"...

    Unfortunately, next unseen is not a viable option anymore.
    The box has become overwhelm with religious doctrine and
    I've personally had my fill of it... but that's not your
    problem, per se. However, chasing people away because
    their totally sick of this stuff is probably the opposite
    of what you had in mind, but well, congratulations on at
    least succeeding at doing something...

    -b

    
    SET FLAMES OFF please....
    
    Now I DO know that it is Passover and Easter.... but must
    SOAP be 'inundated' as a religious platform (any, I am not
    bias against any)???
    
    Quite enough already, say I.
    
    

    RE .11 What he said.
    
    Don't we already have a crucifixation notes around here somewhere?  

    ZZ    Unfortunately, next unseen is not a viable option anymore.
    ZZ    The box has become overwhelm with religious doctrine and
    ZZ    I've personally had my fill of it... but that's not your
    
    Oh dry up! (As Archie says to Edith!)

  My beliefs as a Christian are strong.  I know what my life was like without
 Christ and what it is like with him.  I also recognize that there are many
 who will not believe like I, and while I wish (and pray) that folks in here
 come to know what it truly means to know Christ, I realize that may not
 not happen.  I've decided that I'll do my best to stay out of debates
 about the Bible, etc.  However, when someone determines to start bashing
 Christians and assigns derogatory labels to those of us who claim Christ, I
 will speak up, and I hope that those who don't share my convictions won't
 consider that "prosylitizing".


 As I've stated before I don't believe anyone came to know Jesus Christ
 through debate.



 Jim

    proselytizing

 yeah, that too

    
    The next unseen works fine for me when I come across something I do not
    want to view.  I don't see what the beef is, at tleast the content in
    the first notes had some substance that some people might glean something
    from.
    
    
    Mike 

    Look, folks, please try and understand something.

    When I lashed out at you, I offended your religious sensibilities
    didn't I? And, yes, I meant to.

    Because, every time I read Soapbox, you offend mine.

    Every day you go on and on and on about the truth of it all,
    and how everyone else has it all wrong, and how you know all
    the answers because it's all there in the bible...

    To not be able to see how that attitude can be _offensive_
    to other people speaks volumes. It's cluelessness taken
    to the extreme of absurdity. Read soapbox, get slapped in
    the face once again. I may not be a Rhodes scholar, but
    I can see a pattern here.

    It's simply impossible for me to reconcile my own developing
    relationship with Jesus Christ with people who are intentionally
    offensive.

    If some of you had getting people to question the love and
    authority of Christ in mind, you WON! I thought I knew Christ,
    but now I'm totally confused. When I look around in here,
    I get to thinking that maybe Christ isn't the answer after
    all...

    -b

    
    Brian,
    
    Don't go to a whorehouse looking for a virgin.
    
    jeff

    -b,
    
    Nope, I don't let what goes on in soapbox offend me.
    
    
    
    Mike

    
    Well Jeff, around here it seems I'm more a virgin looking for
    someone to love and honor, who stumbled into a whorehouse...
    

    
    Brian.  Take my advice.  Slip out the side quickly and go down the
    street to that church that worships Jesus Christ and obeys His Word. 
    There you may find comfort and wisdom, and ultimately, the desire of
    your heart.
    
    jeff

    Actually I am quite comfortable with the Christian noting...
    
    because I'm so damn used to it here in Colorado Springs, which has
    become the thumping capital of the world!!!!
    
    ...Tom

    
    I think I'll take the whorehouse. :-)

      re: .19
    
      Would you please cite me one single time where I may have
      offended you in the way the you describe in .19?
    
      I try to be very careful when I write and if I have offended
      you, I am sorry.
    
      "If any man thinks he knows anything, he knows nothing yet
       as he ought to know."
    
      This scripture means a lot to me.  I hardly know ANYTHING.
      I do sometimes share, but I also oftentimes glean from what
      others have shared.
    
      I really do try not to have the spirit you mentioned in .19.
    
    						Tony

    My, we are a lively bunch today.  
    
    
    -steve

	Well, it IS Good Friday and all.....

    
    Tony,
    
    You were the "straw that broke the camel's back" so to speak.
    
    I'm better now. Really.
    
    -b