THE DEFINITIVE ATONEMENT [742b]

Who had the power and authority to bear and forgive sin? I have written a lot about the atonement, with some approaches to this subject being clear cut, but others being a bit “iffy”. While I have been reluctant to use the term “representative” and “representation” because there are others who use this to formulate their individualistic atonement view, and which is a wrong view, I now  find it necessary to take this approach also, albeit with hopefully a very different outcome.

There is a crude term which goes something like “having a dog in the fight” but which rings a bell in the matter of the cross, where there was a fight, a conflict, by two opposing parties. Both of these parties are represented by the same person, Jesus, who represented man and mankind as “The son of man” and represented God as “The son of God”. He is this representation because he is the divine son of the divine God but in our human body form, and so becomes both “dogs in the fight” at the same time.

These opposing parties are in conflict with each other, and apart from the cross, also represent those forces which we find to be in ourselves*, our flesh or human nature. Jesus then becomes representative of this internal conflict, which is god versus flesh, or righteousness versus unrighteousness.

If you refuse to recognise Jesus as “divine”, IE his “divinity”, then you lose one half of the opposing forces, and one half of the representation of those forces. You lose the half which represents God, so you then lose the aspect that He is able to suffer through his Son, and therefore His forgiveness is not tied to his suffering, the suffering that love undergoes because it loves and because the nature of love is that it suffers the nature of unlove within itself, so as to restore that love nature.

The parable about the vineyard and those who rented it killing the son who was the King’s representative, shows the impact it would have had on the King and his subsequent action of retribution on the vineyard renters. If the divine son of God suffers, then God his father suffers also, and in anycase the son, Jesus, had been given his Father’s authority to act on behalf of his Father, just as by coming to this earth in human form, Jesus was authorised to represent humankind.

A representative is effectively the person whom they represent, if he represents us then whatever happens to him happens to us as well, as the vineyard story tells us. By killing the “heir”, they also thrust a sword or spear into the King or Father’s heart. And by killing Jesus on the cross, not only was this so, but we died also. When Jesus died and rose, he had all authority and power as our representative, to take us with him, to “prepare a place for us”.

Just as he entered into our “hell” through our separation from God, when he overcame his and our enemy, by representing US, he also gave His authority to US to have died [according to the law of sin and death] and to rise again with him, so that just as he is seated at the right hand of the Father, so too are we seated at HIS right hand. When “satan” “fell from heaven” (and there was war in heaven) [although it was the lightning that fell, not “satan”] He was deposed, lost HIS seat, and ‘WE filled that vacancy’.***

The ‘evil one’ [flesh] lost his/its power and authority as Jesus took it from him/it in that battle in his flesh which was to the death, so that His experience became ours as well, even as ours became his.

The cross was where this battle of power and authority took place within his flesh and his person, and where man met God once again, and is the place and symbol of the resolution of the estrangement from God, and of man’s inner conflict. It is the place and the enactment and declaration of our full and complete forgiveness and restoration and reconciliation to Him, in full, for now and forever. The only thing that can contradict this as/from being our situation is our unbelief.

If you do not see that the cross was your total and absolute forgiveness and which stands forever, then you will end up with some halfway house position of incomplete forgiveness, where you will always be wrestling  with your moral condition, never able to be sure that his love has absolutely and completely dealt with all your sin for all time.

Unitarians for one group**, deny the divinity of Christ, and thereby lose the aspect that God suffered through his son, and that this in itself, by virtue of his love and his authority, was the presentation of our forgiveness of sin and death. I guess they do this in order to disassociate themselves from the “Trinity”. For similar reasons they also divorce themselves from the action of the Holy Spirit in believer’s lives.

The “problem” of understanding the cross from an analytical aspect is that it was designed as a filter to allow only those whose hearts were ready to receive God, to be able to do so, and to exclude# those with a fleshly intellectual analytical approach from being able to “enter in” to that kingdom which it was declaring. Paul in Corinthians has a lot to say on this. “Not many wise” etc. [1 Corin. 1-26].

*[Romans 7]**[cChristadelphian]**[cJehovahs witnesses]  

Jehovahs Witnesses      http://www.teachingtheword.org/apps/articles/?articleid=59595&columnid=5440

Story of an ex Christadelphian    https://www.exchristovoiceofreason.com/2017/04/thoughts-about-my-journey-out-of.html

 EXTRA.  The pure position that God has put forward is that sin and death are no longer consequential, he has taken care of them and is now done with them, and he now only recognises life if and as it arises from our faith that recognises he has dealt with it all.

***The power of sin via law, was deposed by Jesus’ sacrifice, which forgiveness rendered law and ego fallen and null and void, and our identity can be resumed with cleansed hearts as sons of God. “One died for all, therefore, all died…” [no longer to be under laws of death, but to live by the Spirit of life.] [#The true fruit can only come from the true Spirit ].

Advertisements

THE DEFINITIVE ATONEMENT [742a]

Who had the power and authority to bear and forgive sin? I have written a lot about the atonement, with some approaches to this subject being clear cut, but others being a bit “iffy”. While I have been reluctant to use the term “representative” and “representation” because there are others who use this to formulate their individualistic atonement view, and which is a wrong view, I now  find it necessary to take this approach also, albeit with hopefully a very different outcome.

There is a crude term which goes something like “having a dog in the fight” but which rings a bell in the matter of the cross, where there was a fight, a conflict, by two opposing parties. Both of these parties are represented by the same person, Jesus, who represented man and mankind as “The son of man” and represented God as “The son of God”. He is this representation because he is the divine son of the divine God but in our human body form, and so becomes both “dogs in the fight” at the same time.

These opposing parties are in conflict with each other, and apart from the cross, also represent those forces which we find to be in ourselves*, our flesh or human nature. Jesus then becomes representative of this internal conflict, which is god versus flesh, or righteousness versus unrighteousness.

If you refuse to recognise Jesus as “divine”, IE his “divinity”, then you lose one half of the opposing forces, and one half of the representation of those forces. You lose the half which represents God, so you then lose the aspect that He is able to suffer through his Son, and therefore His forgiveness is not tied to his suffering, the suffering that love undergoes because it loves and because the nature of love is that it suffers the nature of unlove within itself, so as to restore that love nature.

The parable about the vineyard and those who rented it killing the son who was the King’s representative, shows the impact it would have had on the King and his subsequent action of retribution on the vineyard renters. If the divine son of God suffers, then God his father suffers also, and in anycase the son, Jesus, had been given his Father’s authority to act on behalf of his Father, just as by coming to this earth in human form, Jesus was authorised to represent humankind.

A representative is effectively the person whom they represent, if he represents us then whatever happens to him happens to us as well, as the vineyard story tells us. By killing the “heir”, they also thrust a sword or spear into the King or Father’s heart. And by killing Jesus on the cross, not only was this so, but we died also. When Jesus died and rose, he had all authority and power as our representative, to take us with him, to “prepare a place for us”.

Just as he entered into our “hell” through our separation from God, when he overcame his and our enemy, by representing US, he also gave His authority to US to have died [according to the law of sin and death] and to rise again with him, so that just as he is seated at the right hand of the Father, so too are we seated at HIS right hand. When “satan” “fell from heaven” (and there was war in heaven) [although it was the lightning that fell, not “satan”] He was deposed, lost HIS seat, and ‘WE filled that vacancy’.***

The ‘evil one’ [flesh] lost his/its power and authority as Jesus took it from him/it in that battle in his flesh which was to the death, so that His experience became ours as well, even as ours became his.

The cross was where this battle of power and authority took place within his flesh and his person, and where man met God once again, and is the place and symbol of the resolution of the estrangement from God, and of man’s inner conflict. It is the place and the enactment and declaration of our full and complete forgiveness and restoration and reconciliation to Him, in full, for now and forever. The only thing that can contradict this as/from being our situation is our unbelief.

If you do not see that the cross was your total and absolute forgiveness and which stands forever, then you will end up with some halfway house position of incomplete forgiveness, where you will always be wrestling  with your moral condition, never able to be sure that his love has absolutely and completely dealt with all your sin for all time.

Unitarians for one group**, deny the divinity of Christ, and thereby lose the aspect that God suffered through his son, and that this in itself, by virtue of his love and his authority, was the presentation of our forgiveness of sin and death. I guess they do this in order to disassociate themselves from the “Trinity”. For similar reasons they also divorce themselves from the action of the Holy Spirit in believer’s lives. [And so divorce themselves from the reality of God].

The “problem” of understanding the cross from an analytical aspect is that it was designed as a filter to allow only those whose hearts were ready to receive God, to be able to do so, and to exclude those with a fleshly intellectual analytical approach from being able to “enter in” to that kingdom which it was declaring. Paul in Corinthians has a lot to say on this. “Not many wise” etc. [1 Corin. 1-26].

*[Romans 7]**[cChristadelphian]**[cJehovahs witnesses]  

Jehovahs witnesses    http://www.teachingtheword.org/apps/articles/?articleid=59595&columnid=5440

Story of an ex Christadelphian    https://www.exchristovoiceofreason.com/2017/04/thoughts-about-my-journey-out-of.html

 EXTRA.  The pure position that God has put forward is that sin and death are no longer consequential, he has taken care of them and is now done with them, and he now only recognises life if and as it arises from our faith that recognises he has dealt with it all.

***The power of sin via law, was deposed by Jesus’ sacrifice, which forgiveness rendered law and ego fallen and null and void, and our identity can be resumed with cleansed hearts as sons of God. “One died for all, therefore, all died…” [no longer to be under laws of death, but to live by the Spirit of life.] [Only the true Spirit can reproduce the true fruit].

THE DEFINITIVE ATONEMENT [742]

Who had the power and authority to bear and forgive sin? I have written a lot about the atonement, with some approaches to this subject being clear cut, but others being a bit “iffy”. While I have been reluctant to use the term “representative” and “representation” because there are others who use this to formulate their individualistic atonement view, and which is a wrong view, I now  find it necessary to take this approach also, albeit with hopefully a very different outcome.

There is a crude term which goes something like “having a dog in the fight” but which rings a bell in the matter of the cross, where there was a fight, a conflict, by two opposing parties. Both of these parties are represented by the same person, Jesus, who represented man and mankind as “The son of man” and represented God as “The son of God”. He is this representation because he is the divine son of the divine God but in our human body form, and so becomes both “dogs in the fight” at the same time.

These opposing parties are in conflict with each other, and apart from the cross, also represent those forces which we find to be in ourselves*, our flesh or human nature. Jesus then becomes representative of this internal conflict, which is god versus flesh, or righteousness versus unrighteousness.

If you refuse to recognise Jesus as “divine”, IE his “divinity”, then you lose one half of the opposing forces, and one half of the representation of those forces. You lose the half which represents God, so you then lose the aspect that He is able to suffer through his Son, and therefore His forgiveness is not tied to his suffering, the suffering that love undergoes because it loves and because the nature of love is that it suffers the nature of unlove within itself, so as to restore that love nature.

The parable about the vineyard and those who rented it killing the son who was the King’s representative, shows the impact it would have had on the King and his subsequent action of retribution on the vineyard renters. If the divine son of God suffers, then God his father suffers also, and in anycase the son, Jesus, had been given his Father’s authority to act on behalf of his Father, just as by coming to this earth in human form, Jesus was authorised to represent humankind.

A representative is effectively the person whom they represent, if he represents us then whatever happens to him happens to us as well, as the vineyard story tells us. By killing the “heir”, they also thrust a sword or spear into the King or Father’s heart. And by killing Jesus on the cross, not only was this so, but we died also. When Jesus died and rose, he had all authority and power as our representative, to take us with him, to “prepare a place for us”.

Just as he entered into our “hell” through our separation from God, when he overcame his and our enemy, by representing US, he also gave His authority to US to have died [according to the law of sin and death] and to rise again with him, so that just as he is seated at the right hand of the Father, so too are we seated at HIS right hand. When “satan” “fell from heaven” (and there was war in heaven) [although it was the lightning that fell, not “satan”] He was deposed, lost HIS seat, and ‘WE filled that vacancy’.***

The ‘evil one’ [flesh] lost his/its power and authority as Jesus took it from him/it in that battle in his flesh which was to the death, so that His experience became ours as well, even as ours became his.

The cross was where this battle of power and authority took place within his flesh and his person, and where man met God once again, and is the place and symbol of the resolution of the estrangement from God, and of man’s inner conflict. It is the place and the enactment and declaration of our full and complete forgiveness and restoration and reconciliation to Him, in full, for now and forever. The only thing that can contradict this as/from being our situation is our unbelief.

If you do not see that the cross was your total and absolute forgiveness and which stands forever, then you will end up with some halfway house position of incomplete forgiveness, where you will always be wrestling  with your moral condition, never able to be sure that his love has absolutely and completely dealt with all your sin for all time.

Unitarians for one group**, deny the divinity of Christ, and thereby lose the aspect that God suffered through his son, and that this in itself, by virtue of his love and his authority, was the presentation of our forgiveness of sin and death. I guess they do this in order to disassociate themselves from the “Trinity”. For similar reasons they also divorce themselves from the action of the Holy Spirit in believer’s lives.

The “problem” of understanding the cross from an analytical aspect is that it was designed as a filter to allow only those whose hearts were ready to receive God, to be able to do so, and to exclude# those with a fleshly intellectual analytical approach from being able to “enter in” to that kingdom which it was declaring. Paul in Corinthians has a lot to say on this. “Not many wise” etc. [1 Corin. 1-26].

*[Romans 7]**[cChristadelphian]**[cJehovahs witnesses]  

Jehovahs Witnesses      http://www.teachingtheword.org/apps/articles/?articleid=59595&columnid=5440

Story of an ex Christadelphian    https://www.exchristovoiceofreason.com/2017/04/thoughts-about-my-journey-out-of.html

 EXTRA.  The pure position that God has put forward is that sin and death are no longer consequential, he has taken care of them and is now done with them, and he now only recognises life if and as it arises from our faith that recognises he has dealt with it all.

***The power of sin via law, was deposed by Jesus’ sacrifice, which forgiveness rendered law and ego fallen and null and void, and our identity can be resumed with cleansed hearts as sons of God. “One died for all, therefore, all died…” [no longer to be under laws of death, but to live by the Spirit of life.] [#The true fruit can only come from the true Spirit ].

CATHOLIC EXALTATION OF MARY [63b]

This is just a quick thought. Is the reason that the Catholic church gives Mary such a high position, even to claiming that she bodily rose into heaven , [the “assumption” of Mary?] ; to do with the perpetuation of the thinking that Christ was “perfect” at all times, and therefore he may have been afflicted with our sin, but never actually had any internal impurity [deficient of perfection, continually holy, perfect God in man].

On this basis that Mary was as good as perfect, they consolidate the position that Christ DID NOT share in our humanity, in the full meaning of the phrase, because he had perfection on both sides of his family, and that he only came in a fleshly body like ours, that was not a part of the temptation process, because the temptation is represented as being from an external source.

And there lies a problem. If we too, are tempted “by the devil”, externally, not INTERNALLY, then our “sin nature” has to be divorced from desire and temptation itself, unless we have to consider that man can have a desire, which then requires an external tempter to mate up to that desire, before temptation can be said to have taken place.

The word of course, says that “Every man is tempted when, from within, BY his OWN desire, he is led and enticed. [logically this means that what is doing the tempting, is his own desire].  Either his own desire, generated from within, from the “sin nature” is tempting him internally, or the external devil comes to him and latches onto his desire and proceeds to tempt him from an external position.

This then divorces the desire, from the “leading” process. It says that a desire can sit there of itself, needing an external source to come to him, albeit invisibly, and provide the next step towards the fulfillment of that desire, to carry it out so that “…and sin, when it has given birth, brings death” (or similar).

So it is saying that the whole “chain of events” in the temptation/sin process, is complete in itself, OTHER THAN the “bit in the middle” which apparently requires a supernatural tempter to be involved.

When Paul talks about his problem in Romans 7, although he does not specifically mention the word “temptation”, he talks about his inability to do good, because of his captivity to the function of the flesh, which in anyone’s parlance, has to be considered as the “sin nature”. He attributes all of his problems, which have to include temptation, to  “therefore it is not me, but sin that dwells in me.”, an internal, not external, process. There is no step in the middle that includes supernatural intervention.

In both the “definition” of temptation, (every man is tempted when FROM WITHIN, BY HIS OWN DESIRES, HE IS LED….in the slavery that leads to death)  and in his explanations of captivity to sin in Romans, this external tempter does not appear. In the very places you would expect him to say “we have to blame the devil”, it does not happen.

Therefore, I conclude that this temptation is that which arises from man’s sinful corrupt inner nature, which is what we call “flesh”, and that this flesh is primarily referring to “the body of flesh”, and it is this form of body that Christ participated in when he “joined the human race” via Mary.

It says that Christ had to be made perfect. That he was perfected through suffering, through obedience. And then that “having been made perfect…” So Christ WAS NOT PERFECT IN THE FLESH. He was deficient in the same manner we are, “yet without sin”, whereas we have plenty of sin as a result of having lived in this nature that we and he shared/share.

So in order for his perfection to take place, it meant change had to occur. This change was enacted within himself as he wrestled with this inner problem, deficiency, inadequacy, defect, fault, imperfection in the human species.

What was resurrected in Christ? Was it just his “perfect self”? Did this not include his body? Jehovah’s witnesses used to say that his body dissolved into gasses. But his resurrection was his whole self, body and all. In fact, it is the body that is the main point of all this.

Was just the part that he entered into the world with, even if it was perfect; the exact same thing that he left the world with?  If he partook of humanity, it says that “flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God.” Wasn’t that the point of it all, that he be a partaker of flesh and blood? Therefore he could not be resurrected without first undergoing change. By literally destroying in his flesh, the law of sin and death.

If he, in his lifetime, “learned obedience” through what he suffered, as Paul did, then why did he have to suffer horrifically in the garden and on the cross? Why all the “My God, My God, why have you abandoned me”? It could have been some dramatic symbolism, but more likely it was real anguish, it’s as if he was indeed being the object of “the wrath of God” on sin. But it does not make sense unless the wrath was real, and makes no sense unless the “wrath” was achieving something or destroying something.

If he only came as the perfect one so that he might die ” to make up for or pay for our sins, unjustly” because he took our place in death, then there was no need to torture him further because there was no way this could be done. And he had died, so what more was required. The basic premise is that the one death paid for the all of us. It makes more sense if he was being “tortured” by our sins because he was experiencing the reality of what that sin nature was, because he had, in himself, a sample of it.

So what’s the difference in the two states? The one is that the perfect one came and rejected temptation and survived trial, so that after spreading the gospel, having “learned obedience,” he could die as the one who, by taking our sin, took our death away. And because he was perfect he could be resurrected, although his body had not changed. The other is that he came to us perfect, but in our imperfect body. And by confronting sin nature within this imperfect body, he destroyed/changed it and perfected that body, so that it (he) was worthy of resurrection.

If he bore our sins literally, there is a problem as to how this could be done, the simplistic idea is really that he only had to die, and by dying, that in itself was him bearing our sin, because death is the penalty for sin. So he is the “sin-bearer” in that sense.

But to experience “the wrath of God”, as he appears to have done, as part of that sin bearing, is another thing altogether. In principle they are the same thing, in practice there is more to it. Since “Law brings wrath” ON SIN, it appears that sin (sin nature) is being dealt with. It appears as though the nature of love is to suffer and endure because of the sins of others. We are looking at an internal conflict, just as Paul observed, but in his case one that could not be resolved until he knew Christ.

In Christ’s case, it could not be resolved until sin was fully and completely dealt with, IN HIS BODY and that body then would be a cleansed one. That his suffering WAS HIS PURIFICATION, because it was the actual conflict between his righteousness and the unrighteousness of the sin nature, with the result that he destroyed/converted his own sin nature – “sin in the flesh” and restored it not only to “pre Adamic” state, but in overcoming the “fallen” (sinful) Adamic condition, had shown worthiness of eternal life. Which is why his body underwent immortalisation.

HARDNESS OF THE ARTERIES WILL KILL YOU, BUT HARDNESS OF THE HEART DOES IT SOONER. [741a]

There must be many verses concerning the hardness of the heart. “Today, when you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts…”

Hardening of the heart, or having a “hardened heart”, means that you have closed yourself off to a “normal” emotional response. In fact, the hardened  heart has become the norm in this world of emotional injury and moral bankruptcy.

And so it is where it says in relation to the cross, “…I will turn the hearts of the Fathers back to the sons…”

There is a level of emotional involvement which is to be expected between fathers and sons, in the old currency of lineage, of blood line inheritance, and just plain old family relationships. And on the subject of hardness or softness of heart there is the matter that, traditionally, boys who later became men, were discouraged from crying. There has been this comment that says “toughen up princess”,  as if to say that to live a normal life you are expected to cover up or dismantle your emotions. Of course in the bad old days where men and boys were pushed into wars where at any moment they might expect to see their innards being torn open, there can be some understanding of this attitude which reflected the expectation of being pressed into military service with hard discipline being applied.

And all of this is understandable within a society which wrongly accepts that hardness of heart is necessary to be able to cope with all the emotional hurts and disappointments of this life. But God is saying that softness of heart and sensitivity is essential to his kingdom. That the soft heart is the norm, and the hardened heart is the product of sin, that has only become hard out of the need for self protection and survival in this sinful world, and the need to respond in a manner other than by love.

The cross of Christ appeals to the heart emotionally, with very little response from the mind being involved, and the Spirit appeals to the heart to recognise through the cross, the sensitivity of love in action, and the guilt which that reveals. This is why there are many Christians who are so, not because of appeals to the mind through learning or intellect, but because they have experienced a heart response to the gospel message. This is also why there are many who, having entertained an intellectual response and used that response to sideline or even reject the heart response, [their own and that of others] although claiming to be Christians, have missed the boat.

There are many people who get “kicked in the teeth” because they exhibit a softness which is then treated with disdain and contempt, and this occurs in some so called Christian circles as well as society in general.

To receive Jesus “as a little child” means to be emotionally affected so that the real root core of your being is changed, not just modified by the mind’s influence which then sets up whole new parameters of ways by which to avoid the confession of the truth. “Ever learning, but never able to acknowledge the truth”. Where we are talking about death pain and suffering, and then forgiveness and eternal life, if this is not emotional, then it is not real.

Many sects use this intellectual approach to try and discredit the belief systems of other Christians, to claim superiority on the basis of ‘superior knowledge’ or ‘doctrinal purity’. But do not be deceived, because without the sensitivity of the heart brought about by love which comes from the Spirit, there is no life in them, and their refusal to see Christ in others just because their belief system is different proves it, just as the lack of this Spirit of love and truth also explains their blindness.

[The hardened heart is dead in sin and cannot love][The mind of the heart is superior to the mind of the flesh].

THE SPIRIT OF LIFE HAS SET YOU FREE. HASN’T IT? [740c]

“…..as an offering for sin he condemned sin in the flesh, in order that  …  ‘we will no longer walk in the flesh but in the Spirit’

Those who belong to Christ are those who have joined with him in the separation of themselves from their flesh. They accepted the death of their flesh as having already taken place, and this according to law. They joined with him whose flesh had literally died, and for whom now they also have symbolically died.

IS THIS TRUE?

Inasmuch as his death represented the pain and suffering that we have caused him, then this death is the completeness of the total debt owed to sin, or through sin. If this debt has been “paid out” then all flesh is free of judgement and condemnation for having sinned, and this debt payment is permanent and forever, Christ suffered “ONCE for all, the just FOR the UNJUST, to bring us to God”.

But having been freed from the FATE and the EFFECTS of sin that placed us in this isolation from God, we now must be reconciled to him in order to leave behind those effects and draw on his goodness for our revival and survival. In having accepted the rightness of their death as shown in Christ, they are now free to leave the deadness of this fleshly body and to join with him in the Spirit of his resurrection.

By assent, we allow the judgement that fell on him, to have been OUR judgement also, we agree with it, with the premise that we and all flesh are death-worthy. That the death of Christ having freed us from the penalty of death, [by his love] did free us from death’s jurisdiction, so we might then leave ITS jurisdiction and move into HIS jurisdiction. That we leave the dead body behind us and cleave to the spiritual body which has been provided for us.

We do this by faith in hope of this literal resurrection also being ours, and also in hope of which we lay claim by the same faith, by which we create, make real, our spiritual resurrection NOW in this life. We are born again ‘into’ Him and he ‘into’ us by his Spirit, the result of the first earthly birth having terminated symbolically in the death that he provided for that very purpose.

Because our sentence of death was taken by Him, we are no longer under it. We have been freed from it so that in and from that freedom, we might use it to cleave to him, to flee from our unrighteousness, now “dead” in Him, and to cleave to his righteousness, which is found in his living Spirit of life, freely available for the asking, and freely given.

Inasmuch as he freed himself from death by his righteousness and by his love, he will give us righteousness also as a gift because we believe in his righteousness as having exerted mercy towards us in having absorbed the damage against his love, by his love, in the suffering of the loving forgiveness of his creation. Having been freed from death, he became a life giving Spirit to all who accepted him. And to all that accepted him, he gave the power and authority to become sons of God.

“He laid on Him the iniquity of us all”. His death was our death. We were made to die to law through the body of Christ, that we might be raised through faith in his healing love for us. The son suffered the consciousness of all sin death for all of us, and now his suffering has been reckoned to have been our suffering also. He tasted death for all men. The Father and the son, through their love bond, suffered all there was to suffer for all time, unless we refuse them, refuse to acknowledge their suffering, the suffering that only love suffers. Refusing to allow them to have suffered it for us, will then leave us in the realm of that suffering, and his sacrifice will be of no avail to us. Our suffering became his suffering unless we disallow it by denial of it, in which case we will continue to suffer, and to bear the fullness of it at the end.

HARDNESS OF THE ARTERIES WILL KILL YOU, BUT HARDNESS OF THE HEART DOES IT SOONER. [741]

There must be many verses concerning the hardness of the heart. “Today, when you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts…”

Hardening of the heart, or having a “hardened heart”, means that you have closed yourself off to a “normal” emotional response. In fact, the hardened  heart has become the norm in this world of emotional injury and moral bankruptcy.

And so it is where it says in relation to the cross, “…I will turn the hearts of the Fathers back to the sons…”

There is a level of emotional involvement which is to be expected between fathers and sons, in the old currency of lineage, of blood line inheritance, and just plain old family relationships. And on the subject of hardness or softness of heart there is the matter that, traditionally, boys who later became men, were discouraged from crying. There has been this comment that says “toughen up princess”,  as if to say that to live a normal life you are expected to cover up or dismantle your emotions. Of course in the bad old days where men and boys were pushed into wars where at any moment they might expect to see their innards being torn open, there can be some understanding of this attitude which reflected the expectation of being pressed into military service with hard discipline being applied.

And all of this is understandable within a society which wrongly accepts that hardness of heart is necessary to be able to cope with all the emotional hurts and disappointments of this life. But God is saying that softness of heart and sensitivity is essential to his kingdom. That the soft heart is the norm, and the hardened heart is the product of sin, that has only become hard out of the need for self protection and survival in this sinful world, and the need to respond in a manner other than by love.

The cross of Christ appeals to the heart emotionally, with very little response from the mind being involved, and the Spirit appeals to the heart to recognise through the cross, the sensitivity of love in action, and the guilt which that reveals. This is why there are many Christians who are so, not because of appeals to the mind through learning or intellect, but because they have experienced a heart response to the gospel message. This is also why there are many who, having entertained an intellectual response and used that response to sideline or even reject the heart response, [their own and that of others] although claiming to be Christians, have missed the boat.

There are many people who get “kicked in the teeth” because they exhibit a softness which is then treated with disdain and contempt, and this occurs in some so called Christian circles as well as society in general.

To receive Jesus “as a little child” means to be emotionally affected so that the real root core of your being is changed, not just modified by the mind’s influence which then sets up whole new parameters of ways by which to avoid the confession of the truth. “Ever learning, but never able to acknowledge the truth”. Where we are talking about death pain and suffering, and then forgiveness and eternal life, if this is not emotional, then it is not real.

Many sects use this intellectual approach to try and discredit the belief systems of other Christians, to claim superiority on the basis of ‘superior knowledge’ or ‘doctrinal purity’. But do not be deceived, because without the sensitivity of the heart brought about by love which comes from the Spirit, there is no life in them, and their refusal to see Christ in others just because their belief system is different proves it, just as the lack of this Spirit of love and truth also explains their blindness.

[The hardened heart is dead in sin and cannot love][The mind of the heart is superior to the mind of the flesh].

THE SPIRIT OF LIFE HAS SET YOU FREE. HASN’T IT? [740b]

“…..as an offering for sin he condemned sin in the flesh, in order that  …  ‘we will no longer walk in the flesh but in the Spirit’

Those who belong to Christ are those who have joined with him in the separation of themselves from their flesh. They accepted the death of their flesh as having already taken place, and this according to law. They joined with him whose flesh had literally died, and for whom now they also have symbolically died.

IS THIS TRUE?

Inasmuch as his death represented the pain and suffering that we have caused him, then this death is the completeness of the total debt owed to sin, or through sin. If this debt has been “paid out” then all flesh is free of judgement and condemnation for having sinned, and this debt payment is permanent and forever, Christ suffered “ONCE for all, the just FOR the UNJUST, to bring us to God”.

But having been freed from the FATE and the EFFECTS of sin that placed us in this isolation from God, we now must be reconciled to him in order to leave behind those effects and draw on his goodness for our revival and survival. In having accepted the rightness of their death as shown in Christ, they are now free to leave the deadness of this fleshly body and to join with him in the Spirit of his resurrection.

By assent, we allow the judgement that fell on him, to have been OUR judgement also, we agree with it, with the premise that we and all flesh are death-worthy. That the death of Christ having freed us from the penalty of death, [by his love] did free us from death’s jurisdiction, so we might then leave ITS jurisdiction and move into HIS jurisdiction. That we leave the dead body behind us and cleave to the spiritual body which has been provided for us.

We do this by faith in hope of this literal resurrection also being ours, and also in hope of which we lay claim by the same faith, by which we create, make real, our spiritual resurrection NOW in this life. We are born again ‘into’ Him and he ‘into’ us by his Spirit, the result of the first earthly birth having terminated symbolically in the death that he provided for that very purpose.

Because our sentence of death was taken by Him, we are no longer under it. We have been freed from it so that in and from that freedom, we might use it to cleave to him, to flee from our unrighteousness, now “dead” in Him, and to cleave to his righteousness, which is found in his living Spirit of life, freely available for the asking, and freely given.

Inasmuch as he freed himself from death by his righteousness and by his love, he will give us righteousness also as a gift because we believe in his righteousness as having exerted mercy towards us in having absorbed the damage against his love, by his love, in the suffering of the loving forgiveness of his creation. Having been freed from death, he became a life giving Spirit to all who accepted him. And to all that accepted him, he gave the power and authority to become sons of God.

“He laid on Him the iniquity of us all”. His death was our death. We were made to die to law through the body of Christ, that we might be raised through faith in his healing love for us. The son suffered the consciousness of all sin death for all of us, and now his suffering has been reckoned to have been our suffering also. He tasted death for all men. The Father and the son, through their love bond, suffered all there was to suffer for all time, unless we refuse them, refuse to acknowledge their suffering, the suffering that only love suffers. Refusing to allow them to have suffered it for us, will then leave us in the realm of that suffering, and his sacrifice will be of no avail to us. Our suffering became his suffering unless we disallow it by denial of it, in which case we will continue to suffer, and to bear the fullness of it at the end.

THE SPIRIT OF LIFE HAS SET YOU FREE. HASN’T IT? [740a]

“…..as an offering for sin he condemned sin in the flesh, in order that  …  ‘we will no longer walk in the flesh but in the Spirit’

Those who belong to Christ are those who have joined with him in the separation of themselves from their flesh. They accepted the death of their flesh as having already taken place, and this according to law. They joined with him whose flesh had literally died, and for whom now they also have symbolically died.

IS THIS TRUE?

Inasmuch as his death represented the pain and suffering that we have caused him, then this death is the completeness of the total debt owed to sin, or through sin. If this debt has been “paid out” then all flesh is free of judgement and condemnation for having sinned, and this debt payment is permanent and forever, Christ suffered “ONCE for all, the just FOR the UNJUST, to bring us to God”.

But having been freed from the FATE and the EFFECTS of sin that placed us in this isolation from God, we now must be reconciled to him in order to leave behind those effects and draw on his goodness for our revival and survival. In having accepted the rightness of their death as shown in Christ, they are now free to leave the deadness of this fleshly body and to join with him in the Spirit of his resurrection.

By assent, we allow the judgement that fell on him, to have been OUR judgement also, we agree with it, with the premise that we and all flesh are death-worthy. That the death of Christ having freed us from the penalty of death, [by his love] did free us from death’s jurisdiction, so we might then leave ITS jurisdiction and move into HIS jurisdiction. That we leave the dead body behind us and cleave to the spiritual body which has been provided for us.

We do this by faith in hope of this literal resurrection also being ours, and also in hope of which we lay claim by the same faith, by which we create, make real, our spiritual resurrection NOW in this life. We are born again ‘into’ Him and he ‘into’ us by his Spirit, the result of the first earthly birth having terminated symbolically in the death that he provided for that very purpose.

Because our sentence of death was taken by Him, we are no longer under it. We have been freed from it so that in and from that freedom, we might use it to cleave to him, to flee from our unrighteousness, now “dead” in Him, and to cleave to his righteousness, which is found in his living Spirit of life, freely available for the asking, and freely given.

Inasmuch as he freed himself from death by his righteousness and by his love, he will give us righteousness also as a gift because we believe in his righteousness as having exerted mercy towards us in having absorbed the damage against his love, by his love, in the suffering of the loving forgiveness of his creation. Having been freed from death, he became a life giving Spirit to all who accepted him. And to all that accepted him, he gave the power and authority to become sons of God.

“He laid on Him the iniquity of us all”. His death was our death. We were made to die to law through the body of Christ, that we might be raised through faith in his healing love for us. The son suffered the consciousness of all sin death for all of us, and now his suffering has been reckoned to have been our suffering also. He tasted death for all men. The Father and the son, through their love bond, suffered all there was to suffer for all time, unless we refuse them, refuse to acknowledge their suffering, the suffering that only love suffers. Refusing to allow them to have suffered it for us, will then leave us in the realm of that suffering, and his sacrifice will be of no avail to us. Our suffering became his suffering unless we disallow it by denial of it, in which case we will continue to suffer, and to bear the fullness of it at the end.

THE SPIRIT OF LIFE HAS SET YOU FREE. HASN’T IT? [740]

“…..as an offering for sin he condemned sin in the flesh, in order that  …  ‘we will no longer walk in the flesh but in the Spirit’

Those who belong to Christ are those who have joined with him in the separation of themselves from their flesh. They accepted the death of their flesh as having already taken place, and this according to law. They joined with him whose flesh had literally died, and for whom now they also have symbolically died.

IS THIS TRUE?

Inasmuch as his death represented the pain and suffering that we have caused him, then this death is the completeness of the total debt owed to sin, or through sin. If this debt has been “paid out” then all flesh is free of judgement and condemnation for having sinned, and this debt payment is permanent and forever, Christ suffered “ONCE for all, the just FOR the UNJUST, to bring us to God”.

But having been freed from the FATE and the EFFECTS of sin that placed us in this isolation from God, we now must be reconciled to him in order to leave behind those effects and draw on his goodness for our revival and survival. In having accepted the rightness of their death as shown in Christ, they are now free to leave the deadness of this fleshly body and to join with him in the Spirit of his resurrection.

By assent, we allow the judgement that fell on him, to have been OUR judgement also, we agree with it, with the premise that we and all flesh are death-worthy. That the death of Christ having freed us from the penalty of death, [by his love] did free us from death’s jurisdiction, so we might then leave ITS jurisdiction and move into HIS jurisdiction. That we leave the dead body behind us and cleave to the spiritual body which has been provided for us.

We do this by faith in hope of this literal resurrection also being ours, and also in hope of which we lay claim by the same faith, by which we create, make real, our spiritual resurrection NOW in this life. We are born again ‘into’ Him and he ‘into’ us by his Spirit, the result of the first earthly birth having terminated symbolically in the death that he provided for that very purpose.

Because our sentence of death was taken by Him, we are no longer under it. We have been freed from it so that in and from that freedom, we might use it to cleave to him, to flee from our unrighteousness, now “dead” in Him, and to cleave to his righteousness, which is found in his living Spirit of life, freely available for the asking, and freely given.

Inasmuch as he freed himself from death by his righteousness and by his love, he will give us righteousness also as a gift because we believe in his righteousness as having exerted mercy towards us in having absorbed the damage against his love, by his love, in the suffering of the loving forgiveness of his creation. Having been freed from death, he became a life giving Spirit to all who accepted him. And to all that accepted him, he gave the power and authority to become sons of God.

“He laid on Him the iniquity of us all”. His death was our death. We were made to die to law through the body of Christ, that we might be raised through faith in his healing love for us. The son suffered the consciousness of all sin death for all of us, and now his suffering has been reckoned to have been our suffering also. He tasted death for all men. The Father and the son, through their love bond, suffered all there was to suffer for all time, unless we refuse them, refuse to acknowledge their suffering, the suffering that only love suffers. Refusing to allow them to have suffered it for us, will then leave us in the realm of that suffering, and his sacrifice will be of no avail to us. Our suffering became his suffering unless we disallow it by denial of it, in which case we will continue to suffer, and to bear the fullness of it at the end.