Conference yukon::christian

Foundation
If my understanding of the plan of redemption was likened to a
house, the foundation has two pillars.  The first pillar is the
character of God.  "God is love" (1 John 4:16).  Jesus is the
express image of the Father and the cross is the clearest image
of God that we have.  I believe the self-emptying character of
God revealed at the cross describes God's posture toward all of
creation for all time.  This thought will be developed.

The second pillar is the nature of what condemns man.  I believe
sin condemns man.  "The sting of death is sin" (1 Corin 15:56).

Now, the following may seem a little complicated, but its really
not.  Its hard, I believe, because of incredibly strong
preconceptions which are also misconceptions.  There is a
difference between inherent and consequential condemnation.  If
a person has cancer and dies, that person dies because of a
destruction inherent to the malignant tumor (inherent).  The
person did not die because an external party decided to kill him
because he had cancer (consequential).  The tumor and the tumor
alone killed this person.  So also, I believe, sin ultimately
destroys the lost.  This thought will be developed as well.

A Pillar
Just above this foundation is another exceedingly fundamental
pillar.  This pillar is the idea that love, on the very basis of
what it is (and also of who God is as God is love) draws and it
draws by revelation and revelation alone.  Revelation of love
alone changes the heart of an individual.  As love doesn't
force, the individual's response to that love is what allows
that love (that word) to perform a good work.  We often call
this revelation of love grace and our response to that
revelation faith (which is also enabled by God).

Always God appeals to us through love.  Always it is voluntary. 
Always the choice to respond is ours.  Paul, who by this time
was very much molded after the Divine character, echoes this
attribute of God as he demonstrates it in his own heart.


Philemon 8-9,14
Therefore, though I might be very bold in Christ to command you
what is fitting, 9  yet for love's sake I rather appeal to you
-- being such a one as Paul, the aged, and now also a prisoner
of Jesus Christ --
But without your consent I wanted to do nothing, that your good
deed might not be by compulsion, as it were, but voluntary.


Always God changes our hearts by the appeal of a revelation of
His love.  It is never any other way.



Lucifer and the Fallen Angels
Our omniscient God knew the awful choice Lucifer would make.  He
knew Lucifer would choose the path of sin and would not depart
from that path.  God tried to save Satan and the rest of the
fallen angels the exact same way He tries to save man - by a
revelation of His love.  Ultimately, the fallen angels so
rebelled against God that His love could no longer change them. 
They continued in a life of sin even in the presence of so much
love that their hearts were too hardened for them to ever choose
to serve Him again.  God had done all He could and by their
awful choices, love could no longer appeal.  As no appeal was
left, the angelic host was lost without any chance of salvation.

A Dilemma of Sin
Some of what has been said would seem to be refuted by the fact
that we, as sinners, are still alive.  If condemnation is
inherent to sin, why hasn't sin killed us?  Why wasn't Satan
destroyed when he first sinned?  Or Adam and Eve when they first
sinned?

The reason why is because the destructive force of sin can be
anesthetized.  By what?  By a concealing of the love of God. 
"The sting of death is sin, and the strength of sin is the law."
(1 Corin 15:56).

The law, being a transcript of God's character, gives sin its
strength to sting.  Just as hot dishwater would more clearly
expose how cold a person's frostbitten hands are, so would a hot
revelation of God's love more acutely expose the coldness of
one's heart.  Were a person in a pitch black cave for a few
days, just as a flash of lightning would destroy his eyesight,
so would the bright fire of God's love destroy a person's
sin-blackened heart.  For this reason, part of God's redemptive
response is the veil - a concealing of His love for us.  The
revelation of His love for us must be progressive.

The Great Controversy
From the beginning, Satan's war against God has always been one
of issues.  His battle has always been one of deception.  His
tail drew a third of the heavenly host (Rev 12:4) and the tail
is the prophet who speaks lies (Isaiah 9:15).  That is, Satan
deceived a third of the heavenly host.  He is also the deceiver
of the nations and only until the millenium would he deceive
them no more (Rev 20:4).  Through the little horn power, he
casts truth down to the ground and the little horn seems to do
rather well in the forum of issues with his pompous words
(Daniel 8:12,7:8,11).  

As Satan obviously is working through this little horn power,
the pompous words the little horn power speaks are the words of
Satan.  Well, if there is a war of issues and if, even until
just before the destruction of the little horn, these pompous
words still ring out without adequate retaliation, just what
might be the war issues?  What is Satan leveling at God?


Genesis 3:1-5 
Now the serpent was more cunning than any beast of the field
which the LORD God had made. And he said to the woman, "Has God
indeed said, 'You shall not eat of every tree of the garden'?" 2
And the woman said to the serpent, "We may eat the fruit of the
trees of the garden; 3 "but of the fruit of the tree which is in
the midst of the garden, God has said, 'You shall not eat it,
nor shall you touch it, lest you die.' " 4 Then the serpent said
to the woman, "You will not surely die. 5 "For God knows that in
the day you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be
like God, knowing good and evil."

This Genesis passage indicates the main war of issues waged
between Christ and Satan.  Christ told Adam and Eve that sin
caused death while Satan told them that sin did not cause death,
but rather is a means to an even more exalted way of life.


God said:  Sin causes death.

Satan said:  No!  Life can be had within a life of sin.


Another aspect of the great controversy is that Satan contends
that God is a harsh taskmaster, that obedience to His precepts
is burdensome.  God says otherwise.


1 John 5:3
For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments. And
His commandments are not burdensome.

 
This great controversy idea will be more fully developed.

The Impact of Sinful Flesh
Sinful flesh has a characteristic that is extremely relevent to
our consciousness from a moral perspective.  In fact, there is a
death inherent to our flesh that is equated to the death of the
cross.  This truth, while unorthodox, is critical.


Romans 6:23
For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal
life in Christ Jesus our Lord.


This scripture is used as a cornerstone text for showing that
the death of the cross is the punishment as a result of sin. 
What gets real interesting is reading on in Romans 7 as it
continues to discuss this death.  (And remember, no chapter
divisions in the original epistle.  Romans 7 is a continuation
of Romans 6 and the context of sin and death remains in ch 7.)


Romans 7:9
I was alive once without the law, but when the commandment came,
sin revived and I died.


Here, we see Paul is dying the death of Romans 6:23.  The truth
of Paul dying this death is incompatible for many because of how
they understand the gospel.  Why?  Because Paul, being a
Christian, is thought by many to be exempt from this death as
Christ died it in his stead and he accepted this price of
Christ's.  How it is that Paul died this death and Christ also
died this death for him will be developed.


Romans 7:24
O wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of
death?


Here, Paul refers to his body as a body of the death of Romans
6:23.  What does this mean?  How can simply having the flesh we
have imply, in some way, the death of the cross?

First of all, scripture tells us that the flesh must have some
characteristic that is relevent to morality - to right and
wrong.  It is not morally neutral (scripture says).  A look at
Galatians 5:19-21 shows a few of the lusts of the flesh.  These
verses are fraught with terrible sins.  Note especially verse 24:


Galatians 5:24
And those who are Christ's have crucified the flesh with its
passions and desires.


Notice that the flesh is crucified.  The cross experience is
inclusive of the crucifixion of the flesh.  Notice also that
within the context of all those sins listed in verses 19-21 is
the flesh being characterized as having passions and desires. 
These passions and desires are an urge, placed upon the mind, to
do the things listed in those verses.

I had a recent experience which I think is very pertinent.  I
plead with God for a birth pang - for an experience of seeing my
sin in a deeper light.  Shortly thereafter, I was in a set of
circumstances wherein I felt I was the object of significant
injustice.  This went on for weeks.  The level of desire to want
to lash back at those I felt were unjust toward me was
absolutely intense.  I would fantasize about saying something
hurtful to them or even picture myself hitting one of them!  It
was awful.  I knew God called me to love these people
unconditionally, but the force applied by my flesh seemed to
just saturate my consciousness.  It seemed to offer little or no
room to walk according to another way (the Spirit).

But, the main point I want to make is that often I did not
harbor bad thoughts.  However, I was just engulfed in a sea of
desires.  It need not even have been sin.  It was just an
experience of seeing desires emanating from my flesh.  And what
did that feel like?  I felt so evil.  I felt like God was so far
away.  I felt separated from Him.  An inner sense of sinfulness
was very acute in me - at least relative to my own past
experiences.  In my experience, nothing causes my hold on God to
weaken more than a personal sense of my wretchedness.  And that
sense can come to us not only when we sin, but when the lusts and
desires of our flesh is exposed to us.  (This point is huge.)

If you think this through, the burden of sin can stem from our
flesh.  Our character, hypothetically, could be spotless, and
we could still have this heavy load.

The Cross of Christ
Have you ever thought of just how Jesus had the cross experience
He had?  What caused it?  Galatians 4:4 says Jesus was born
under the law and links this to His being "born of a woman." 
Job has a few things to say about being born of a woman.  


Job 14:1-4 
"Man who is born of woman Is of few days and full of trouble. 2 
He comes forth like a flower and fades away; He flees like a
shadow and does not continue. 3  And do You open Your eyes on
such a one, And bring me to judgment with Yourself? 4  Who can
bring a clean thing out of an unclean? No one!

Job 15:14
What is man, that he could be pure? And he who is born of a
woman, that he could be righteous?

Job 25:4-6
How then can man be righteous before God? Or how can he be pure
who is born of a woman? 5  If even the moon does not shine, And
the stars are not pure in His sight, 6  How much less man, who
is a maggot, And a son of man, who is a worm?"


The answer to this quandary is of course Jesus Christ who came
born of a woman, born under the law and who blazed a trail of
righteousness  that we may behold and thus be enabled to follow.

There is something about entering the genetic stream of
humanity, about being "one with us" that implies a certain
experience.

Romans 7:9 says that the coming of the commandment is what
revives sin and induces death.  James 1:23-25 discusses the
experience of seeing oneself by looking in a mirror and calls
this mirror the "perfect law of liberty."  Isaiah 6 describes
Isaiah seeing the throne room and, as a result, feeling an
overwhelming sense of sinfulness.

It is a deepening sight of the holiness of God that reveals our
sin.  

Now, consider Jesus "growing in wisdom and stature" (Luke 2:52).
As Jesus took the same flesh we have, with all its passions and
lusts (yet without sin, i.e. He never submitted to them), what
do you think He felt?

When He perceived the lusts and passions of the flesh He took,
He inherently bore guilt according to what He saw.  He bore that
sense of sinfulness.  Jesus progressively grew in wisdom and
stature and this walk culminated in going behind the veil.  That
is, He saw His Father's holiness unveiled and this "mirror"
fully exposed all the lusts and passions of the flesh he took. 
He thus had the sense of being that sinful person.  He thus bore
that sense of a load of sin in exact proportion to the lusts and
passions that He saw.  He saw all that the flesh desired and
felt to be that rotten scoundrel (yet without sin).

This explains how the cross can be seen to be progressive.  As
Christ says,


Luke 14:27
"And whoever does not bear his cross and come after Me cannot be
My disciple."

And Paul said,

Galatians 2:20
"I have been crucified with Christ; it is no longer I who live,
but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the
flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave
Himself for me.


And notice that though Paul was born of a woman, he can be
enabled to live an altogether different life.  A clean thing (a
righteous character) can be brought from an unclean thing
(sinful flesh).  This is the mystery of godliness.

But, what of the cross event itself?  Well, the experience of
progressively seeing the lusts and desires of our flesh is
likened to travail as of a woman in birth pangs.  The
progressive bearing of the cross can be likened to all birth
pangs previous to the final one which immediately precedes birth.

The final birth pang then is facilitated by seeing all of the
holiness of God.  This then produces a full revelation of the
lusts and passions of our sinful flesh.  The consciousness, upon
beholding the fulness of the exceeding sinfulness of sin, feels
to be that wretched sinner and inherently bears the load of
guilt that accompanies.

This is the death of the cross.  This is what Jesus did.  The
death of the cross was His consciousness bearing this load of
guilt.  The resurrection of the cross was not caving in despair,
but in maintaining a faith-connection to His Father.  I am not
denying the physical death and resurrection that took place,
however, I believe they are schoolmasters.  They are physical
events pointing to wholly spiritual realities.  The death of
Romans 7:9 (a death wherein one is physically alive during it)
and the resurrection of that same death of Romans 7:9.  Indeed,
did not Jesus say, before physical death and resurrection, "It
is finished!"?

How Did Jesus Overcome?
Jesus overcame by faith in the word.  He was built up by the
word.  He progressively beheld His Father's love and as He drank
in that revelation by faith, He grew in wisdom and stature.  I
believe Jesus saw all that the flesh is capable of at Gethsemane
and He was built up by the word at the time.  An angel came and
encouraged Him.  At this time, His 'house' was entirely built. 
It could withstand all the gates of hell.

On Calvary, Jesus again saw the full load of sin.  This time He
was not encouraged by His Father communicating to Him His word. 
(In that sense, He really was forsaken/left alone.)  But, Jesus
was already built up by the word.  It was resident in His
consciousness.  And He survived by that word.


Psalm 22:9-10
But You are He who took Me out of the womb; You made Me trust
while on My mother's breasts. 10  I was cast upon You from
birth. From My mother's womb You have been My God.

He relies on memory.  There is no word, from above, coming to Him
at this time.  Something is being demonstrated by this fact.

What Then Is Salvation?
Salvation is from sin.  God's work of salvation is removing all
sin from our hearts.  It is a very delicate work for removing
our sin requires the choice of our will - repentence.  Which
requires its exposure to our consciousness which implies
inherently bearing its load of guilt.  For guilt is inherently
borne as sin is seen.

God knew that there is only one path to salvation, the path of
the cross.  He also knew that we could never survive that path
without He blazing that path Himself.  Jesus was crucified
alone.  We, as Paul, are crucified with Christ.  

The experience of salvation has to be progressive like the birth
pangs.  We could never have the final birth pang, without all
preceding ones, and survive.  The path of salvation is the path
of progressively seeing the love of God as demonstrated at
Calvary and by virtue of that, seeing our sin, and by repenting
of that sin.  The path of salvation is God working in us as Paul
says, 


Philippians 2:12-13 
Therefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, not as in my
presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your
own salvation with fear and trembling; 13 for it is God who
works in you both to will and to do for His good pleasure.


Here, salvation is described as something being worked out and
as God working in us.

For all preceding generations, the path was never completed.  It
ended in the grave.  These people were being saved.  When they
first responded to the saving word of Christ (which is the
merits of the cross) by faith, they began to undergo salvation
and God looked at them as being fully as righteous as Jesus
Christ Himself.  What He started, He would finish.  (Romans 4)

To settle the great controversy, God needs to demonstrate
something in a generation.  Those in the grave would have to
wait until the great controversy of issues is settled.   After
its settling, they would be risen and their salvation would
continue and be completed before their arrival to heaven.  They
would be saved in the same way everyone is saved.


1 John 3:2-3
Beloved, now we are children of God; and it has not yet been
revealed what we shall be, but we know that when He is revealed,
we shall be like Him, for we shall see Him as He is. 3 And
everyone who has this hope in Him purifies himself, just as He
is pure.


This process will be much easier for the resurrected saints as 
they will not have sinful flesh as a constant witness and they 
will have the company of Jesus Christ, unfallen angels, etc.  I 
suspect it may take just a moment before the revelation of Jesus' 
love perfectly saves their hearts from sin.

Meanwhile, what of those already in heaven?  What of Enoch,
Moses, and Elijah?  I can think of only one reason they would
already be in heaven while some, like David, are still in the
grave.  It must be that God respects Satan's arguments until
they are silenced and Satan claims the sleeping saints as his
own partially on the basis that they did not perfect righteous
characters.  (If sin destroys, how then can sinners be saved?) 
Until the end of time, his claims are not silenced.

How then can Enoch, Elijah, and Moses be exceptions?  There can
be only one explanation.  By the grace of God, they perfected
righteous characters.  They became sinless by the merits of the
cross and Satan's arguments had no sway regarding them (where
they would have sway in the case of sinners such as David who is
still in the grave, Acts 2:29,34.)

Thus salvation is through the cross.  We are saved as we bear
the cross.  The means of our salvation is the revelation of the
cross of Christ shed abroad in our hearts.  The imparting of
this revelation must be a progressive work and is the work of
God.  It has ended by death for all previous generations, but it
ends at Calvary for the final generation.

Revelation 14:1-5 
Then I looked, and behold, a Lamb standing on Mount Zion, and
with Him one hundred and forty-four thousand, having His
Father's name written on their foreheads. 2 And I heard a voice
from heaven, like the voice of many waters, and like the voice
of loud thunder. And I heard the sound of harpists playing their
harps. 3 They sang as it were a new song before the throne,
before the four living creatures, and the elders; and no one
could learn that song except the hundred and forty-four thousand
who were redeemed from the earth. 4 These are the ones who were
not defiled with women, for they are virgins. These are the ones
who follow the Lamb wherever He goes. These were redeemed from
among men, being firstfruits to God and to the Lamb. 5 And in
their mouth was found no deceit, for they are without fault
before the throne of God.


Hebrews 13:12-13
Therefore Jesus also, that He might sanctify the people with His
own blood, suffered outside the gate. 13 Therefore let us go
forth to Him, outside the camp, bearing His reproach.


The Revelation text describes the last generation.  The Father's
name (character) is written on their foreheads.  They are
sinless.  They follow the Lamb everywhere He goes.  The Hebrews
verse gives the purpose of the cross - to cleanse us, with His
blood (the word, see John 6:53,63), from sin.  It then indicates
the process, i.e. we go to the cross.  We go outside the camp
where Jesus was at Calvary and bear His reproach.  We are
crucified with Christ.

What Is The Settling of the Great Controversy? 
Just what settles the great controversy?  We know that the
church settles the great controversy at the end of time.


Romans 16:20
And the God of peace will crush Satan under your feet shortly.
The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you. Amen.

 
Satan is crushed under our feet.  When does this occur?  Well,
in the last days, Satan's pompous words speak through his
vehicle, the little horn power.


Daniel 7:8-11
"I was considering the horns, and there was another horn, a
little one, coming up among them, before whom three of the first
horns were plucked out by the roots. And there, in this horn,
were eyes like the eyes of a man, and a mouth speaking pompous
words. 
9I watched till thrones were put in place, And the Ancient of
Days was seated; His garment was white as snow, And the hair of
His head was like pure wool. His throne was a fiery flame, Its
wheels a burning fire; 10  A fiery stream issued And came forth
from before Him. A thousand thousands ministered to Him; Ten
thousand times ten thousand stood before Him. The court was
seated, And the books were opened. 11 "I watched then because of
the sound of the pompous words which the horn was speaking; I
watched till the beast was slain, and its body destroyed and
given to the burning flame.


The beast is slain at the end of time, at the time of the
judgment.  As judgment is a time when all evidence is heard such
that a verdict can be rendered, Satan is figuratively crushed by
the saints providing heretofore never seen evidence that acquits
God and silences Satan.


Daniel 7:25-27
He shall speak pompous words against the Most High, Shall
persecute the saints of the Most High, And shall intend to
change times and law. Then the saints shall be given into his
hand For a time and times and half a time.
But the court shall be seated, And they shall take away his
dominion, To consume and destroy it forever. 27  Then the
kingdom and dominion, And the greatness of the kingdoms under
the whole heaven, Shall be given to the people, the saints of
the Most High. His kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, And all
dominions shall serve and obey Him.'


"And they shall take away his dominion."  Who is "they?"  The
saints (verse 25).  Whose dominion do they take away?  The
little horn's.  Note, the saints are given into the little
horn's hands for a time.  But, at the judgment, the tables are
turned and the pompous words are wiped out.

Recall that the great controversy included Satan's allegation
that sin is a viable lifestyle.  God's contention is that there
is no life in sin.  Not only this, but God demonstrates through
His saints at the end of time, just how viable righteousness is.
When the righteous endure the final birth pang, they endure
what the lost (sinners) cannot.


Jeremiah 30:5-7
"For thus says the LORD: 'We have heard a voice of trembling, Of
fear, and not of peace. 6  Ask now, and see, Whether a man is
ever in labor with child? So why do I see every man with his
hands on his loins Like a woman in labor, And all faces turned
pale? 7  Alas! For that day is great, So that none is like it;
And it is the time of Jacob's trouble, But he shall be saved out
of it.


This is the unique feature of Jacob, "But, he shall be saved out
of it."

Do you see how this all follows?  All people, at the end of
time, are smitten by the sword - the word.  All are ultimately
given a full revelation of the glory of God.  All experience
travail as of a woman in birth pangs.  Jacob, the last
generation of God's faithful, overcomes and becomes Israel. 
Jacob has the exact same load of guilt because of sinful flesh. 
The lost have no more load of guilt (than the righteous do).  They 
feel no more a sinner than does Jacob.  However, they respond to 
that load of guilt with despair and are consumed.

When God perfects the last generation, He can then afford to
allow it to tread the winepress for they are now equipped to
survive the experience as their Forerunner did.  When they
survive and the lost do not, God has just demonstrated the
viability of righteousness and the nonviability of sin.  Now,
with Satan's arguments cast down, Satan has no argument against
the sleeping saints.  The controversy is ended.  Satan is
crushed under the feet of the saints, Christ can come, and take
all His children home with Him.

Furthermore, it was suggested that Satan claims God is a harsh
taskmaster while 1 John 5:3 says that God's commandments are not
burdensome.  Clearly, any sinner, sometimes finds God's
commandments to be burdensome.  There must be some explanation
for this.  The explanation is that one must KNOW his Master. 
When we know Him fully enough, we will then find Him easy to serve.

This is why Satan's method of battle is deception.  He must keep
us from knowing how good God is.  This is what he does through
the little horn power.

Daniel 8:12
Because of transgression, an army was given over to the horn to
oppose the daily sacrifices; and he cast truth down to the
ground. He did all this and prospered.


He cast truth down to the ground.  In contrast, our victory is
by faith which is through His word.  Or to put another way, the
truth sets us free.  The truth that was cast to the ground, is
now arisen in our hearts and is a wellspring of life unto life. 
Then, when we know our God in truth, we find Him easy to serve.


1 John 5:3-5
For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments. And
His commandments are not burdensome. 4 For whatever is born of
God overcomes the world. And this is the victory that has
overcome the world -- our faith. 5 Who is he who overcomes the
world, but he who believes that Jesus is the Son of God?


When we are held up by the word, we not only find God's
commandments to be easy, we demonstrate how viable a lifestyle
righteounsess is and in so doing allow God to demonstrate how
nonviable a lifestyle sin is.

Finally, after the millenium, the demonstration of the
nonviability of sin is given in a grand scale.  As Satan rallies
the lost to overtake the New Jerusalem, they are destroyed by
fire.  The fire of God's love will arouse their sin and cause
their destruction.  The smoke of their torture (a reminder of
the awfulness of sin) will be remembered by the saved forever.

Developing Thoughts
I mentioned a few thoughts that would be developed.  They were:

"The tumor and the tumor alone killed this person.  So also, I
believe, sin ultimately destroys the lost.  This thought will be
developed as well."

It has been shown that the load of guilt borne by a person as he
sees his sin and responds to that load with despair is what
ultimately consumes him.  This is how sin destroys.  By blinding
the person from appropriating God's unconditional love and thus
causing the person to despair.


"This great controversy idea will be more fully developed."

I hope I have adequately demonstrated that there is a great
controversy over issues, that it is settled by God working
through his saints, and that its settling involves silencing the
little horn's pompous words through a demonstration wrought out
by God through His saints.  I hope I have also clearly shown
just what the issues of the great controversy are.


"How it is that Paul died this death and Christ also died this
death for him will be developed."

This is seen as it is realized that the path of righteousness is the
cross.  Christ went to the cross not to exempt us from it, but
to enable us to bear it.  Our cross would  have been that
forerunner cross.  One where there is no example to follow, no
revelation of the cross to behold.  In that sense, the cross of
Christ is entirely vicarious/substitutionary.  However, we still
go to the cross as Paul and Christ both say.

And finally the most important as it suggests a beautiful
perspective on Paul's words....

Galatians 6:14
But God forbid that I should boast except in the cross of our
Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world has been crucified to me,
and I to the world.

"I believe the self-emptying character of God revealed at the
cross describes God's posture toward all of creation for all
time.  This thought will be developed."


I really hope you think on this.  Now, I don't want to get into
God's intervention in causing the end of anyone's earthly life
for this is merely an interruption.  There is a resurrection of
just and unjust.  I tend to think God sometimes intervenes to
end people's lives when their influence on the world is so evil
that His work to reveal His character to His believers is
suppressed.  Sort of like what the effects of some of the
nations camped outside Israel may have been had God not
facilitated their eradication.

But, think on the above gospel in the light of the cross.  This
gospel accomadates the idea that God is the love of the cross
for all people.  Consider the lost.  What will they see at the
end of time?  God will give them the same thing He gives us.  He
will show them how much He loves them.  They will see Christ
hung for them.

But, what will be the result?  This revelation will expose all
of their sins as in a moment.  It will be like a fire.  It will
invade every evil crevice of their consciousness.  It will
eradicate sin for God's holiness does just that.  This "coming
of the commandment" or unveiled revelation of God's infinite
love for them, will arouse sin and cause sin to destroy them.

This is an awesome truth!  It shows how God is entirely
consistent.  Entirely unarbitrary.  He is love.  He loves
sinners and saints alike.  He loves the lost though His hands
are tied and His revelation of His love for them will destroy
them.

Finally, let us consider God's motive.  Why allow the lost to
suffer so?  Because He needs them to feel pain for their sakes?
No!  Because of the benefit of that revelation for His followers.
They benefit by seeing the awful inherent destruction of sin.

    Hello,
    
    A lot of interesting thoughts. However...
    
    We will all stand before the judgement seat of Christ, and there will
    be a book brought there, the book of life (Rev.20,21). This book has
    all the names of those who have been purchased by the blood of Christ,
    by the atonement which he accomplished through his death. Certainly
    many were at one tome in this book, but because they did not overcome,
    their names were removed (Rev 3).  
    
    Eternal life through  Jesus Christ, the Lamb of God, comes from
    believing the gospel and being baptized. We commit ourselves in this
    new covenant to Jesus as our Lord. He cleanses us from our sins and
    justifies us. If we are faithful to this new covenant which we have
    entered, and truly follow Jesus as our Lord, continuing in his word,
    remaining in him, our names will never be removed from this book, but
    we shall inherit all things and rule with Christ. Otherwise there
    awaits an eternal destruction of great torment, a place which God has
    prepared for Satan and the angels, and where all shall go who are not
    written in the Lambs book of Life.
    
    In Acts 2,37-41 we see how 3000 names were written into this book in a
    single day. Yet it was not the result of a holy life, but rather the
    believing of the message of Peter and being baptized. The way to have
    your name written into this book has not changed even until this day.
    
    
    Rodger Dusatko

      Hi Rodger,
    
        We most likely see the underlying basis (for God accounting one
        who first has faith as being perfectly righteous) differently.
    
        Thanks for your inputs!
    
    						Tony

Hi Tony,
    
    I would like to comment on the below first.  And over time I may get to
    the rest.
    
>As a preface, I used the term 'tapestry' to describe one's 
>scriptural support of truth.  I like the term because it can
>connotate the idea of being inclusive of sections of scripture,
>but also missing some pieces.
    
    I noted that you called this "My Tapestry".  I applaud your honesty in
    that this is your tapestry, one you've woven, and is therefore seen as
    such.
    
    I'm not sure what you mean but I think the statement "to describe one's
    scriptural support for truth" may be a Freudian slip or it may be
    exactly what you mean or it may be simply a confusing sentence structure.
    As you have stated it, you are identifying truth as a presupposition
    against  which you apply "supporting" Scriptures.
    
    The biblical way to understand truth is to let God's word be truth and
    to bring everything else into captivity to this truth.  So, for
    example, God's love cannot be ultimately defined or limited based upon 
    what we observe or what we feel or what we believe. First and foremost 
    we must understand God has he has revealed himself in his whole counsel, 
    both indirectly and directly, and nothing else.

>Also, I hope this suggests a more complete meaning of glorying
>in NOTHING save the cross...
    
    This should be interesting.


>Well, here is my tapestry.  For the most part, I am not using
>scripture.  Not because I don't believe there is scripture to
>support, but because I want this to be as readable as possible. 
>I want it to be as brief as possible.  I'll use small amounts of
>scripture to suggest (I say suggest because thats all I believe
>a small amount can do) support for ideas that would probably be
>considered fairly unorthodox to most of you.
    
    I think a bigger question is to what extent are you willing to submit
    the tapestry you've woven to what the Bible says, particularly where a
    contradiction is evident?  And this last paragraph is more evidence
    that you are submitting yourself to a presuppositional understanding of 
    God to which you submit God's Word ultimately.  This must, by necessity
    Tony, lead to erroneous conclusions.  How will you respond to charges of
    illogic?
    
    jeff

    I haven't read through Tony's notes, but I think that Jeff points out
    something very important when doing Biblical study. Jeff said:

>    As you have stated it, you are identifying truth as a presupposition
>    against  which you apply "supporting" Scriptures.
>    
>    The biblical way to understand truth is to let God's word be truth and
>    to bring everything else into captivity to this truth.

    I have been reading both Jewish and Christian writings recently, and what
    has struck me is a general difference in style of approach. The approach
    I have noticed amongst Christians is to start with: "Here is my doctrine, 
    and here is Scripture to support my doctrine." The Jewish approach I have
    been seeing is start with: "Here is a passage of Scripture, what is it 
    saying to us?" Since Scripture is God's revelation to us, I really think
    we need to look at Scripture and ask what it is telling us, rather than
    starting with some doctrine and then fitting Scripture to it.

    This is not to say that all Jewish answers are correct, and all Christian
    answers are wrong! But I think Christians also need to begin with the text
    and study it to find out what it is saying.

    Leslie

re: .20

Hi Jeff,
    
    *I noted that you called this "My Tapestry".  I applaud your honesty in
    *that this is your tapestry, one you've woven, and is therefore seen as
    *such.
    
    Romans 2:16
    In the day when God will judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ
    according to MY gospel.

    (emphasis supplied)

    Clearly, it would be fair for me to require you to insist the same
    for Paul as the language (use of the word "my") is IDENTICAL.

    You thus also say:

    I noted that you called this "your gospel."   Paul, I applaud your 
    honesty in that this is your gospel, one you've woven, and is therefore 
    seen as such.
    
    Human language should be allowed to have a flexibility of possible
    meanings - at least in so far as scripture's own use of human language.
    Paul said "MY GOSPEL" all the while we don't chastise him.

    Your willingness to be a respector of persons, in this regard, and not
    to allow me the same possibilities of meaning that would be allowed 
    another who uses the exact same language, such as Paul, tells me enough.

    I honestly don't have any desire to dialogue with someone who is so
    willing to make the kind of presumptions you made.  If I discern a
    difference, such that I will consider dialogue with you to be worth-
    while, I will let you know.

    My lack of a desire to dialogue with you is not because I lack confidence
    that the Lord has shown me some truth in His word.  Because I believe
    He has.

    I truly mean to offer no condemnation, but (sadly), I don't wish to
    converse, in this way, with your heart.  I perceive it would be
    fruitless.

							Tony

Allow me to apologize, Tony.  I simply don't have it in me right now to dive
into this with you, and I think that 'diving' is what it would really require. 
I don't think a casual perusal of what you've entered would really accomplish
much.

But I don't want to simply ignore your setting forth so much here.

God bless, brother

Paul

    
    Tony, it is altogether different for Paul to say "my gospel" than it is
    for you to say "my gospel".  Paul is an Apostle, you are not.  Paul's
    words are without a doubt God's words for the whole world, yours are
    not. 
    
    Am I to deduce from your reply that you will not respond to my replies 
    which question you?
    
    jeff

    Doesn't gospel simply mean good news? Paul's good news, is in fact then,
    good news for everyone because it is the news of the Messiah's atonement
    for sin and reconcilliation between people and God. It is not Paul's
    personal doctrine, it is God's good news for all humanity.

    Leslie

      Paul,
    
        No need to apologise!
    
      Leslie,
    
        My only point is that Paul used the word "my" and obviously
        we know that the gospel he preached was not his.  Human language
        allows this flexibility of meaning.  
    
        As it does, I would simply ask that this flexibility be extended
        to my use of language.
    
      Jeff,
    
        The point is not whether or not Paul is an apostle.  The point
        is that Paul used the word "my" all the while the gospel he
        preached was not his, but God's.
    
        I did the same.  I used the word my, but did not mean it to be
        "mine," but simply my understanding.  Do you really think I
        purposed the word "my" to be inclusive of the thought that it
        was woven by my sinful nature and not by God's Holy Spirit?
    
        I don't want to claim inerrancy, but I sure did not mean to
        suggest the above!
    
        And yes, I have no desire to converse with you on this.  Your
        words say something to me about you and, because of your words,
        I have absolutely no desire to discuss with you.
    
    						Tony
                              

    Tony, I've read through it.  Some of it we've hashed over before, some
    of it seems new (from you).  I'm speechless right now (and not in a
    positive way).  I think I'll have to take more time reviewing it, maybe 
    as much as you took to write it.
    
    One question though: is your "Great Controversy" and you-know-who's just 
    coincidental?
    
    thanks,
    Mike

      Hi Mike,
    
        Redemption, I believe, is the transformation of the heart.
        Hearts are transformed by one thing - the blood (message)
        of the cross.  This transformation is also the path of the
        cross.
    
        Its actually not that complicated.
    
        Ellen White did believe in a great controversy theme, but more
        important, the Bible does.  She didn't really develop it though.
    
        Romans speaks of a time when God overcomes when *He* is judged
        (3:4).
    
        One last thing.  This is a works gospel.  But, it is entirely 
        God's work to transform our hearts.  We contribute nothing.
    
        					Tony

    Tony,
    
    I too need time to read this completely.  Please be patient with me.  I
    will get to it soon.
    
    
    
    Jill
    

      Oh, I'll be patient.  The following is not directed at you,
      but is a general statement aimed at no one in particular.
    
      Orthodoxy will perceive the remnant who go to the cross just
      as orthodoxy perceived Christ who went to the cross.
    
      Sort of like Job's orthodox friends.  Or the religious establish-
      ment during Christ's day.
    
      "All these things happened as examples..."
    
    							Tony

    
    It is convenient, Tony, to personally blame the rejection of our
    unsound beliefs and proposals on someone else, especially a group, and 
    among those extremely marginalized sects it seems to always be the
    orthodox who are to blame.  And then usually following right behind
    that is the comparison of today's orthodox with the orthodox of
    Christ's day.  It may be effective to bolster your argument to some 
    degree among the weak minded and confused but it won't work generally 
    among the serious Bible student - never has, never will.
    
    Orthodoxy or sound teaching is very important in the scheme of the
    Bible and we have much instruction about what it is and how
    intransigent error should be viewed.
    
    jeff
    
    

      Hi Jeff,
    
        Isaiah 4:1-4.
    
        Women symbolic of churches.  Seven symbolic of completeness.
        Superimpose this with Rev 13, the seal of God/mark of the 
        beast movements.
    
        It will happen again.  All seven woman will wear their
        own apparel and have the word how they want it.
    
    						Tony

    
    I would say, Tony, that the ideas you are promoting are a perfect
    example right now of "having the word as they want it".  Your own
    teaching makes you the fulfillment of your own prophecy.
    
    jeff

As a moderator....

Jeff, you're dancing near the edge of personal disparagement.  Please don't go
over.  I'm not going to 'step in' as a moderator, but I see you two (you and
Tony) going down a path that usually leads to notes that need to be hidden.

Please, both of you, be gracious.

Paul

      Not that its right, but I believe I was in reaction mode.

Reply: Note 53.150

Hi Wayne,

I parsed this into 5 replies so as to make it more palatable.

*Dawn breaks over (my) Marblehead!  From your tapestry in note 66 I now see why
*the state of the dead is such an important issue for you.

*You have concluded that God's ultimate purpose in Jesus Christ is to perfect
*sinful flesh.  And since no sinful flesh has yet been made perfect, none who
*have died in the flesh yet live.  Have I captured the gist of your position?

No.  Not to perfect sinful flesh (or did you mean to perfect *IN* sinful
flesh?).  To do two things.

1) Save us.  This is from sin.  Its removal is from our hearts.

2) Safeguard us from sin forever.  This is by revelation.  Its by
   the demonstration of remnant just prior to 2nd coming (who survive
   that sense of guilt because they have Jesus' faith/character) and
   by the demonstration of the lost at the 2nd coming and after the
   millenium (who have the same sense of guilt, but are destroyed by it
   because they are sinners and cannot appropriate the love/mercy of God).
   Even though its STILL extended to them for God is love.

   This is so HUGE.  Daniel, that SEALED book (until the end of time)
   really explodes here.  That vehicle of Satan, the little horn, just
   keeps preaching those pompous words.  And casting truth down to the
   ground.

   What is the real magnitude of judgment?  Is it to punish the lost?
   Not really.  It is to silence BY FORCE OF ARGUMENT the little horn
   power.  Who silences the little horn?  God via the last generation
   of His faithful.

   If you really think upon this, the solemness is awesome.  God, via
   human beings, will win the great controversy for all time.  What a
   solemn thing God wishes to fulfill in us!  Unbelievable!

   If the truth that the death of Romans 6:23 is inherent to our flesh
   is realized, and how it (that death) is facilitated (God's word exposes 
   all its  lusts and desires causing us to feel like that sinner regard-
   less of character), then it can be seen that if the sword comes all 
   the way, judgment has come.  All God needs is a people prepared to 
   survive that sword.  And if you look at the judgment texts, the main 
   characteristic is that revelation comes in a BIG way.  Whether the 
   metaphor is fire, water (see Ezra 10 for example), a sword, a cup.  
   Whatever.

   Man, if you can see this and couple it with the idea that we can hasten
   or delay the 2nd coming (Isaiah 5/2 Pet 3:12), the fundamentals of 
   apocalyptic meaning is pretty much understood.  It is seen to be so 
   momentous as to be obvious.

*Are you asserting that dead saints are not yet saved, i.e., that no one will be
*actually delivered from sin until someone besides Christ has lived for some
*arbitrary amount of time without sin in the flesh?  And believers need not be
*concerned with dying before sinful flesh is made perfect because God in fact
*will enable an end-time people to live without sin, and on that basis He will
*perfect all who have died in faith.

Now, here is someone who at least has been willing to try to understand.
(Well, there are others - Hi Jill!).

I am simply saying that God's work of salvation is from sin.  To remake the
heart.  Those that go to the grave sinners did not have this work completed.
It was interrupted.  I am also saying that God will settle the great contro-
versy through a last generation and that, in a sense, He acknowledges Satan's
arguments until they are silenced.

The dead remain in the grave because Satan's argument is not silenced.  But, 
when it is, the dead will be raised with the identical character they had
when they died for character is changed by beholding the cross and this was
interrupted by death.  When they are resurrected, they will behold the cross
and the work of salvation will be finished in them.

*Thus, our faith is NOT in seeing our sin put to death in Christ and ourselves
*raised with Him unto life and righteousness, but rather in God's perfecting at
*least one yet-to-be-revealed person or group in sinful flesh.  In other words,
*our hope is NOT in seeing ourselves made like Jesus without sin, but rather in
*believing that God raised Jesus to make an end-time people perfect, so that we
*might be delivered from sin in spirit after their example in the flesh.

Wayne, the following is KEY.  Our salvation REMAINS to rest our faith in
the cross of Christ.  I just believe there is a different basis why!  I.e.
recall Abe in Romans 4 and when he actually become completely convinced that
what God promised He could perform.  The most complete fulfillment of that
is as Abe is a corporate man and survives the 3 day Mount Moriah exp.

Either way, it is all the cross, but the UNDERLYING REASON, I suggest, is
different, because what the PURPOSE of the cross is, is different (to cleanse
the heart from sin).

*Or, we might hope/strive to be among those who are delivered from sin in our
*earthly life such that God is free to perfect saints who have died, to put sin
*away from His creation forever, and to usher in His eternal kingdom.

Hebrews 11:40
God having provided something better for us [I believe the "us" is that
people the author of Hebrews exhorts to rest perfectly in Christ], that they
should not be made perfect apart from us.

1 Corinthians 15:29
Otherwise what will they do who are baptized for the dead, if the dead do 
not rise at all.  Why then are they baptized for the dead?

Romans 4:20-22
He did not waver at the promise of God through unbelief, but was strenghtened
in faith, giving glory to God,
and being fully convinced that what He had promised, He was also able to
perform.
And THEREFORE [therefore what?  Because of something exclusively
accomplished in Christ?  NO Because of what the merits of the cross
PRODUCED in Abraham!  The ONLY basis given and let us believe it for the
Bible tells us so!] "it [faith] was accounted to him for righteousness."

*That is tantamount to saying our salvation depends NOT on grace by faith in
*Jesus Christ ALONE, but on someone else's will to be made perfect, and not just
*their willingness, but their actually being made perfect in the flesh.  And our
*hope IS in this life only, if not for ourselves, then for someone else besides
*Christ, such that the promise of eternal life can be fulfilled.

Yes, but a salvation produced by the merits of the cross.  I guess I have to
admit this.  But, consider looking at the above scriptures, especially 
Heb 11:39-40.  THEY CANNOT BE MADE PERFECT APART FROM THAT PERFECTED LAST
GENERATION.  That is clearly who the "us" is in Hebrews.  The entire book
is an exhortation for a corporate body to do something stupendous (by the 
grace of God of course).

In a sense, I believe you are boxing in a corner.  I mean...supposing the
problem is our sinful hearts and supposing another problem is that God's
followers don't really understand how awful sin is and how good righteousness
is, the solution has got to tie into God solving that problem.  And also
supposing that God, in a sense, honors Satan's argument until it is silenced
and that part of Satan's argument is a reasoning that claims sinners as his
own ("after all, they are sinners and sin is death you said...")

That is, the efficaciousness of the cross has got to have some relevence to
its power to change hearts.  AND IF ONE ACKNOWLEDGES THAT, partial basis
for salvation is what the cross produces OUTSIDE OF CHRIST AND IN HIS PEOPLE.

And if you accept that, the cat is out of the bag.  We could seem to be in
subjective territory, i.e. "Well, if what the cross produces is important,
just HOW MUCH need it be shown to be able to produce?"

Does God need to demonstrate that He can save to the uttermost?

1 Peter 1:5
who are kept by the power of God, through faith for salvation READY TO
BE REVEALED IN THE LAST TIME (in the future)

What does THAT mean?  Does God do anything for unimportant reasons?  Or
does He do things because they are vital?  Does He need to reveal?

To summarize, if salvation is the change of heart, the efficacy of the 
cross has got to have some pertinence in that realm.  (I would say all
pertinence.)

And if not, then where are we?  Salvation is then not the transformation
of our hearts.  Well, then what is it?  What are we saved from?  In addition,
why the 2000 year wait?  Is God this insensitive to the overwhelming pain
this planet has endured?  If the cross finished everything, why wait?  (Why
allow thousands of babies in Rumania to lie in sickbeds with the AIDS
virus?  As one of teeming examples.)

I suggest that placing everything to only the cross (and not to what it
produces) finds one in quite a theological pickle and my 'pickle' really
isn't one if it can be understood that the basis for the efficacy of the
cross is its power to transform hearts and (given that), that production
must be demonstrated.

Did not Paul say in Galatians that they saw Christ hung for them and
were they now made perfect in the flesh?  Did he not say to the Corinthians
that Christ was hung for them so that they should no longer live for 
themselves?  Well, if so, is it not highly possible that this purpose of
the cross must be validated???  Isn't that exactly what heb 11:39-40 says?

*Are you asserting that the basis for "soul sleep" is Satan's legitimate claim
*on all who die until such time as sinful flesh is made perfect in earthly life?
*Again, dead saints are in the grave awaiting the perfection of someone besides
*Jesus.

I don't know if its *the* basis, but I believe it is *a* basis.

** I'm assuming you meant to say that God perfected righteous characters in
   Enoch, Moses and Elijah.

Yes.

   *Does Scripture support the only explanation left open by your position,
   *that Enoch, Moses and Elijah became sinless in the flesh?

I think scripture is fairly silent with Enoch, but suggests with Elijah and
Moses.  The 144,000 sing the song of Moses.  This I believe refers to them
sharing in a similar experience.  It is the message of Elijah that brings
the rain, that facilitates the closing scense (1 Kings 17:1/Malachi 3:1-3,
4:1-6).

You said:

| <How it is that Paul and Christ died the same death> is seen as it is
| realized that the path of righteousness is the
| cross.  Christ went to the cross not to exempt us from it, but
| to enable us to bear it.  Our cross would  have been that
| forerunner cross.  One where there is no example to follow, no
| revelation of the cross to behold.  In that sense, the cross of
| Christ is entirely vicarious/substitutionary.  However, we still
| go to the cross as Paul and Christ both say.

*You assert that Paul shared Christ's death figuratively, but nonetheless
*remained a sinner literally; therefore, Paul's understanding was imperfect to
*see himself with the Lord when he died because neither his nor anyone else's
*sinful flesh was yet perfected.

Thats complicated!  I believe the cross is progressive, yes.  Was Paul
perfected?  I don't know.

Wayne, why do you keep referring to sinful flesh being perfected?  Flesh
is a physical object.  I refer to a nonphysical thing being perfected
(our characters).  Sinful flesh is not perfected, it is crucified.

*Are we to see Christ's uniqueness primarily in His being our forerunner?  Was
*Christ the only begotten Son of God conceived by the Holy Ghost, 

Yes.

*or was He the
*Son of man by virtue of being perfected in the flesh 

He was the son of man by virtue of being made of the seed of David.

*as the first of many with
*the will and ability to go where no man had gone before?

Oh, but please differentiate His cross from ours,  His was the Forerunner
death.  He trod the winepress alone.  He enables ours.  We could never
trod His path.  

And don;t forget that Christ said that of His own self, He could do nothing.
Even He said, "Of My own will I can do nothing" so I don't know why you're
bringing will into it.  You make it sound personally meritorious.

I don't want to get complicated by talking of will and ability.  The last
generation will depend completely on Christ and not on self.

Either way, His cross is essential for my salvation.

I join Mike in being left speechless.  I find untenable the subtle shift in
*emphasis

*	- from the person and work of Christ alone

Then the cross' production of a heart-change must be insisted to need no
validation.  I see as logically and scripturally untenable any insistence
that there must not be any validation of the work that something was set
out to do.  In this case, the purpose of the cross is always said to be
to change our hearts.  Always.

*	- to a revelation of the cross effecting sinless perfection in
*	another person's or group's sinful flesh

Everyone is called to glory in nothing save the cross.  This does not change.

*as the key "freeing" God to finally save us.

Given that God has said He will accomplish this and given that the duration
of time in the grave is meaningless (to me), I honestly don't see this as
a real big point.  But, I can see your concern.  I really can.  I never 
thought of it before.  Thanks.

*I understand that you see perfection as entirely the work of God's grace, in no
*way our own.  But your gospel bases our salvation on Christ PLUS SOMEONE ELSE
*being (made) sinless in the flesh!

Wayne, I am not sure.  But, I do believe that God has revealed that He will 
and must settle the great controversy.

I candidly acknowledge being in a bit of a quandary, *however*, I believe
I would be in a far bigger one if I believed as you do.  2000 years of untold
suffering AFTER the cross - and for what?  Your position has some very 
seemingly untenable features as well.

Mine is only including the idea that God 'honors' (not the perfect word)
the idea that Satan poses an argument, claims sinners as His own, and God
will honor that argument until He silences it through what He produces in
the saints.  From this perspective, I see my view as fairly tenable.

And again...if any work is said to do anything (I don't care what it is),
I see as extremely tenable, the need for what that work is said to do
to be validated.   Christ came to change hearts (Gal. 3:1-3/2 Corin 5:13-15/
and this group - Acts 3:25/Gal. 3:8/Acts 3:26) and to change them to the
uttermost and, given this, I don't see too much problem should He wait to
take all His children home until He validates what He says He can do.

I have nowhere to go.  You have raised a good point, but I see your position
as having far larger liabilities.

*In Christ who is our life,

Amen.

						Tony

Hi, Tony.

I'm responding by the order and structure you've set.  I appreciate the spirit
of this dialog.  My intent is NOT to change your mind, rather to identify
those facets of your tapestry that are not commended to my heart as Truth by
the Word and the Spirit.

We both likely will be impelled at some point to just let some things go in
light of the following:

"Of <Christ> we have many things to say, and hard to be uttered, seeing ye are
dull of hearing. For when for the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need
that one teach you again which be the first principles of the oracles of God;
and are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat. For every
one that useth milk hath no experience in the word of righteousness: for he is
a babe. But strong meat belongeth to them that are perfect, those who by reason
of perfection have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil.

"Therefore leaving the word of the beginning of Christ, let us go on unto per-
fection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of
faith toward God, Of the doctrine of baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and
of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment. And this will we do, if
God permit.

"For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of
the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, And have tasted
the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come, If they shall fall
away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves
the Son of God afresh, and put Him to an open shame.

"For the earth which drinketh in the rain that cometh oft upon it, and bringeth
forth herbs meet for them by whom it is dressed, receiveth blessing from God:
But that which beareth thorns and briers is rejected, and is nigh unto cursing;
whose end is to be burned.

"But, beloved, we are persuaded better things of you, and things that accompany
salvation, though we thus speak. For God is not unrighteous to forget your
work and labour of love, which ye have shewed toward His name, in that ye have
ministered to the saints, and do minister. And we desire that every one of you
do shew the same diligence to the full assurance of hope unto the end: That ye
be not slothful, but followers of them who through faith and patience inherit
the promises." (from chapters 5 and 6 of the epistle to the Hebrews)

I think "we are persuaded better things of" each other, so let us move forward.

| No.  Not to perfect sinful flesh (or did you mean to perfect *IN* sinful
| flesh?).

** Yes, I meant to perfect IN sinful flesh.  I used that exact wording else-
   where, but I did in fact use different phraseology interchangeably.

   Again, to be clear, I mean to perfect _in_ sinful flesh.

| To do two things.

| 1) Save us.  This is from sin.  Its removal is from our hearts.

** With this I wholeheartedly agree.  Actually, I see God delivering us from
   the (inherent) penalty of sin, and the power of sin (to condemn).

| 2) Safeguard us from sin forever.

** And I agree with this!  I see God delivering us from the presence of sin,
   both internal and external.

|                                   This is by revelation.  Its by
|    the demonstration of remnant just prior to 2nd coming (who survive
|    that sense of guilt because they have Jesus' faith/character) and
|    by the demonstration of the lost at the 2nd coming and after the
|    millenium (who have the same sense of guilt, but are destroyed by it
|    because they are sinners and cannot appropriate the love/mercy of God).
|    Even though its STILL extended to them for God is love.

** I disagree with your understanding of how we're separated from sin forever.
   I see God accomplishing the removal of sin from us, and our removal from
   sin, through grace by faith, "according to the working of His mighty power,
   Which He wrought in Christ, when He raised Him from the dead..." (see
   Ep.1:15-23)

   We trust in Christ "after we heard the word of truth, the gospel of our
   salvation: In whom also, after that we believed, we were sealed with that
   Holy Spirit of promise, Which is the earnest of our inheritance until the
   redemption of the purchased possession, unto the praise of His glory."
   (see Ep.1:1-14)

|    If you really think upon this, the solemness is awesome.  God, via
|    human beings, will win the great controversy for all time.  What a
|    solemn thing God wishes to fulfill in us!  Unbelievable!

** Indeed God is doing a holy work in us!  The evidence, however, is not
   sinlessness in sinful flesh, but rather the manifestation of His life, the
   fruit of the Spirit, if you will, in our sinful flesh.  Our sin was put to
   death in Christ's flesh, "And us hath He quickened, who were dead in
   trespasses and sins...That in the ages to come He might shew the exceeding
   riches of His grace, in His kindness toward us, through Christ Jesus. For
   by grace are we saved through faith; and that not of ourselves: it is the
   gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast. For we are His
   workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before
   ordained that we should walk in them." (see Ep.2)

   On the cross Christ delivered us from the (inherent) penalty or wages of
   sin.  The Holy Spirit and the Word are keeping us from the power of sin
   even as we groan within ourselves "waiting for the adoption, to wit, the
   redemption of our body" (Ro.8:23) "that mortality might be swallowed up of
   life" (2Co.5:4) "when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and
   this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass
   the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory." (1Co.15:54)

| The dead remain in the grave because Satan's argument is not silenced.  But, 
| when it is, the dead will be raised with the identical character they had
| when they died for character is changed by beholding the cross and this was
| interrupted by death.  When they are resurrected, they will behold the cross
| and the work of salvation will be finished in them.

** Actually, Satan's "argument" was silenced in Job, and is rendered moot in
   every believer who walks by faith and not by sight (in sinful flesh).

| Wayne, the following is KEY.  Our salvation REMAINS to rest our faith in
| the cross of Christ.

** I agree this is KEY.  Our salvation is wrought by grace through faith in
   Christ who died on the cross in our place, the last Adam who was raised and
   "made a quickening spirit." (1Co.15:45)

| Either way, it is all the cross, but the UNDERLYING REASON, I suggest, is
| different, because what the PURPOSE of the cross is, is different (to cleanse
| the heart from sin).

** The purpose of the cross was to purchase our redemption.  The Holy Spirit
   and the Word cleanse us from sin.

| Hebrews 11:40
| God having provided something better for us [I believe the "us" is that
| people the author of Hebrews exhorts to rest perfectly in Christ], that they
| should not be made perfect apart from us.

** I agree with your view of who "us" is.  But I do not agree that the
   "something better" is being made sinless in sinful flesh.  I believe the
   better thing is being able looking BACK on the cross, hearing the Holy
   Spirit bear witness with our spirit that we are the children of God, and by
   faith seeing ourselves made like Christ who died for our sins, was buried
   and raised again according to the scriptures, and was seen of men before
   ascending to be seated on the right hand of our Father.

   With the Apostle Paul I confess, "But by the grace of God I am what I am:
   and His grace which was bestowed upon me was not in vain." (1Co.15:10)  I
   consider myself the least of God's servants, but I am accepted in God's
   Beloved!  All glory to Him!

| 1 Corinthians 15:29
| Otherwise what will they do who are baptized for the dead, if the dead do 
| not rise at all.  Why then are they baptized for the dead?

** I dealt with this verse in note .104.

| Romans 4:20-22
| He did not waver at the promise of God through unbelief, but was strenghtened
| in faith, giving glory to God,
| and being fully convinced that what He had promised, He was also able to
| perform.
| And THEREFORE [therefore what?  Because of something exclusively
| accomplished in Christ?  NO Because of what the merits of the cross
| PRODUCED in Abraham!  The ONLY basis given and let us believe it for the
| Bible tells us so!] "it [faith] was accounted to him for righteousness."

** I disagree your stated basis.  What God accounted to Abraham for righteous-
   ness was his not wavering at the promise through unbelief, but rather giving
   glory to God and being fully convinced that God was able to do what He
   promised.  I see righteousness accounted to Abraham by grace through faith.
   Abraham's obedience, or the works produced by his faith, if you will, give
   evidence of righteousness, i.e., he acted as if God could do what He said.
   Faith evidenced by obedience, NOT perfection, in sinful flesh is the basis
   for imputed righteousness!

| Yes, but a salvation produced by the merits of the cross.  I guess I have to
| admit this.  But, consider looking at the above scriptures, especially 
| Heb 11:39-40.  THEY CANNOT BE MADE PERFECT APART FROM THAT PERFECTED LAST
| GENERATION.  That is clearly who the "us" is in Hebrews.  The entire book
| is an exhortation for a corporate body to do something stupendous (by the 
| grace of God of course).

** No, Tony, that's not the necessary interpretation of the passage.  Again, I
   agree with the "us" being those exhorted to rest in Christ.  But I do not
   see "us" being made perfect in sinful flesh as prerequisite for dead
   saints being made perfect.  Rather, we are children of the promise without
   whom the saints will not be made perfect.

   "And all these (including Enoch and Moses, by the way), having obtained a
   good testimony through faith, did not receive the promise, God having
   provided something better for us, that they should not be made perfect
   apart from us." (NKJ)

   The better thing is having "the prophetic word confirmed (by both eye-
   witnesses and the witness of the Holy Spirit in our own hearts), which we
   do well to heed as a light that shines in a dark place, until the day dawns
   and the morning star rises in our hearts." (see 2Pe.1:16-21)

| To summarize, if salvation is the change of heart, the efficacy of the 
| cross has got to have some pertinence in that realm.  (I would say all
| pertinence.)

** I'm not sure I've followed everything you've said up to this point, but
   I'll press on. :-)

   I agree that the efficacy of Christ's death on the cross is inseparably
   linked with His power to change hearts.  He "gave Himself for our sins,
   that He might deliver us from this present evil world, according to the
   will of God and our Father." (Ga.1:4)  Again, I see the basis for salvation
   as our sin being put to death, or we dying to sin, in Christ, and our being
   made alive by Him as a quickening Spirit.

| And if not, then where are we?  Salvation is then not the transformation
| of our hearts.  Well, then what is it?  What are we saved from?  In addition,
| why the 2000 year wait?  Is God this insensitive to the overwhelming pain
| this planet has endured?  If the cross finished everything, why wait?  (Why
| allow thousands of babies in Rumania to lie in sickbeds with the AIDS
| virus?  As one of teeming examples.)

** We who believe are being transformed, inside out.  We are set free from the
   (condemnation of) sin that so easily besets us.  The power of sin is (being)
   broken in us.

   Why wait?  So that the gospel may be preached to the benefit of those who
   hear with faith.  "It is good that a man should both hope and quietly wait
   for the salvation of the Lord." (La.3:26)  "Consider that the longsuffering
   of our Lord is salvation." (2Pe.3:15a)

   Now here's something interesting:  You hold that the Lord is waiting until
   a group of people is perfected in the flesh.  Scripture says that "the
   heavens and earth which are now preserved by the same word (that brought
   the heavens and earth into existence), are reserved for fire until the day
   of judgment and PERDITION OF UNGODLY MEN. But...The Lord is not slack
   concerning His promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward
   us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to
   repentance." (2Pe.3:7-9, NKJ)  "For that Day will not come unless the
   falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of per-
   dition, who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that
   is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself
   that he is God." (see 2Th.2)

   I submit that there is reason to believe that God is waiting for "the
   mystery of lawlessness" to work "that they all may be condemned who did not
   believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness."

   Tony, I believe "the overwhelming pain this planet has endured" serves to
   establish that sin leads to death, i.e., there is no life in lawlessness.
   I believe God is waiting until men who will not receive the love of the
   truth unto salvation are prepared to actually substitute "the son of perdi-
   tion," or Antichrist, for God, or until sin becomes exceeding sinful, if
   you will.

| I suggest that placing everything to only the cross (and not to what it
| produces) finds one in quite a theological pickle and my 'pickle' really
| isn't one if it can be understood that the basis for the efficacy of the
| cross is its power to transform hearts and (given that), that production
| must be demonstrated.

** Yes, I too would say that "placing everything to only the cross" and not
   to the work of Christ in us would leave us "in quite a theological pickle."

   I believe the power of God to transform hearts has been, is being and will
   be demonstrated until we who are kept by His power "be clothed upon with
   our house which is from heaven." (2Co.5:2)

   The faithful will be left standing when deceived, ungodly men are bowing to
   antichrist.  We will bow to none but the One True God.  As the three men in
   the fiery furnace, we will be delivered when Antichrist and those who
   worship him are consumed "with the spirit of His mouth" and destroyed "with
   the brightness of His coming." (2Th.2:8)

   You correctly point out that we will be in the fire but not consumed!

| Did not Paul say in Galatians that they saw Christ hung for them and
| were they now made perfect in the flesh?  Did he not say to the Corinthians
| that Christ was hung for them so that they should no longer live for 
| themselves?  Well, if so, is it not highly possible that this purpose of
| the cross must be validated???  Isn't that exactly what heb 11:39-40 says?

** We've discussed before the implications of the Holy Spirit through Paul
   calling us perfect.  To be perfect in the flesh need not be seen as sinless-
   ness.  Rather, being perfect or complete in sinful flesh is receiving God's
   grace through faith by which He declares us righteous.

   The purpose of God to save sinners in Christ has been, is being and will be
   validated until death is swallowed up in victory.

Hi All,

Well, I have just succeeded in becoming the "Conference
heretic."  That's all right.  I can handle it.

I had a few thoughts since yesterday and some which I want to
share.

How many people do you think there might be in heaven who will
turn to another and say, "If not for you, I wouldn't be here!"

I wonder how many people, for example, Dr. Livingstone might
have witnessed to  in Africa such as they surrendered their
hearts to Jesus Christ and were among the redeemed.  This man
was such a wonderful missionary that when Britain wanted his
dead remains transported from Africa to Westminster Abbey,
Africans allowed them to - on one condition.  They removed his
heart and said that he gave his heart to Africa and there it
will remain.  What a truly wonderful story!

Anyway, couple the above thought (that we can thank others for
our being in heaven, those who, for us, were fishers of  men)
with something Wayne said:

****************************************************************************

I join Mike in being left speechless.  I find untenable the subtle shift in
*emphasis

*	- from the person and work of Christ alone


*	- to a revelation of the cross effecting sinless perfection in
*	another person's or group's sinful flesh

***************************************************************************

Shouldn't saying one wouldn't be in heaven if not for this or
that person leave all of us speechless if Wayne is right? 
Doesn't the above reasoning have valid application?  Shouldn't it 
be all the cross and nothing else?  But, if its nothing else, how 
can we be anything less than heretical if we give any thanks to this
person or that person for our being saved?

There is a foundation that will be removed during the painful
transition of covenant that awaits.  The foundation that is
leveled is the idea that the cross is a legal solution for
anything and the foundation that replaces this foundation is the
truth that the cross is a revelatory solution and is no solution
any other way.

Conscious existence is nothing more than  what we perceive and
how we process that which we perceive.  From a moral
perspective, we perceive good and bad.  The mode of processing
good in such a way that the good is permitted to redeem us is 
called faith.  God has enabled every man to exercise faith, to 
receive the word in that way and thus permit it to be grafted 
into the heart and thus to redeem our souls.


James 1:21 
Therefore lay aside all filthiness and overflow of wickedness,
and receive with meekness the implanted word, which is able to
save your souls.


When one foundation is leveled and the other put in its proper
place, it is realized that the only pertinence to the cross of
Christ is what its revelation does in one's heart.  Once this is
realized, redemptive significance cannot possibly be given
exclusively to the doing and dying of Jesus Christ.  It must
also be given to the proclamation of the revelation of the doing
and dying of Jesus Christ.

This may sound a bit heady (philosophical), but this is
precisely how it is that one might have 'led' another person to
salvation.  There is only one way.  They must have been a vessel
through which the word (blood) of Jesus Christ was transmitted
to a faithful hearer.  And that faithful hearer received that
word by faith and that word was implanted in their very hearts
and (thus) performed the redemptive work that James 1:21 alludes
to.

Now a complete salvation, I believe includes such a sealing of
our consciousness that we can never be deceived to sin again. 
Satan's arguments will hold absolutely zero say.

He coerced a third of the heavenly host into sin and eternal
condemnation by force of argument.  His warfare is rendered impotent,
in part, by the revelation to all of creation, that his deceptive
arguments are a complete crock, a sham.  

Say what you want, but these arguments are silenced by the remnant
AND THIS HAS REDEMPTIVE SIGNIFICANCE.

All I am saying is that the last generation happens to be that
vessel through which the Lord works through.  He transmits the
blood of the cross through them (or at least some of the blood)
and it is more effectively communicated by them to the universe.

That may seem a heretical statement.  How can I possibly say
that the blood of the cross is, in any way, more effectively
communicated through the last generation than through the Person
Jesus Christ?

God needs to demonstrate that life is inherent to righteousness
and death is inherent to sin.  Ultimately, the saved universe is
sealed with this revelation.  Righteousness (lawkeeping, loving with
agape, whatever you want to call it) has salvation wrapped up 
inherently in it.  Conversely, sin has condemnation inherently
wrapped up in it.

In lieu of this, I offer three reasons why the last generation,
in some ways, is a more effectual transmitter of the blood of the
cross than even Jesus Christ.

1) Because Jesus is God.  Did Jesus survive because He is God or
because He was righteous and held up by the word?  How can we
know?  We will all know that the last generation survived
exclusively because they are righteous, because they are held up
by the word.  Because Jesus is God, He could not give this revelation
as forcefully as the last generation.

2) Jesus was only One.  The last generation is 144,000 (whether
a literal or a symbolic number, I do not know).  The testimony
of an entire last generation surviving is more compelling than
the testimony of a single person.  There is One God, but many 
people!  Again, the ultimate reason is because Jesus is God.

3) Jesus never sinned.  The testimony of the 144,000 is a
testimony given by people redeemed.  Thus their testimony
conveys something about God's power to redeem as they were once
sinners.  Did Jesus survive the very gates of hell in part because 
He never was a sinner?  How can we be sure?  Ahhh, but if those
who really and actually previously were sinners survive, now
that is a testimony Jesus cannot give!

Canaan symbolically is an experience.  It is where only righteousness
dwells.  Exodus says God gave the Sabbath as a sign of creation.  Deut. 5
says God gave the Sabbath as a sign of being delivered from Egypt and
carried to Canaan (redemption).

We can look at creation week and learn about redemption.

1) Creation week tells us that God created by the word and thus that
   God redeems by the word, i.e. by revelation.

2) Creation week tells us that God created in no other way and thus we
   see that there is no redemption outside of a revelatory one, i.e. the
   implanted WORD which recreates our hearts.

3) Creation week tells us that creation took 6 days and thus that redemption
   takes 6000 years.

4) Creation week tells us that A MANIFESTATION OF THE WORD OF GOD, has
   revelatory significance.  People can be led to God via the revelation
   of creation.  So also it tells us that a manifestation of Christ in
   His believers has redemptive significance as the word they proclaim
   is spread to hearers, which word, received by faith, can implant their
   hearts and begin transforming them.

5) Creation week was not finished until afterman was created in the image of 
   God and all the universe looked upon the scene and said, "It is very good."
   (I know God said this, but I contend the universe looked on - just as with
   Abraham up Mount Moriah, i.e. "Now I know!"  Of course God knew!)
   So also, THE SABBATH TELLS US THAT THE RECREATED IMAGE OF MAN AT THE END
   OF 6000 YEARS, AND THE REVELATION OF IT, BEING PART OF THE 6TH DAY HAS 
   REDEMPTIVE SIGNIFICANCE.  (This of course is the remnant, the saints who
   are used by God to smash all of Satan's deceptions for all time.)

   The Sabbath tells us more, but I'll stop here.

Jill said:

    "all this was given to me, it just takes a long
    long while (most likely this entire lifetime) for me to totally
    understand what is mine and to become that person."

    I'll be more inclusive then "to totally understand" and (instead)
    suggest "to undergo a total change of heart."

    Jill, this is redemption.  Totally understanding IS redemption.
    Totally understanding is fairly synonymous with what it means to
    receive the implanted word.  The implanted word is PERCEIVED.  The
    word was given to every man (saved and lost alike), but has it been
    received totally?  If it has, it is the essence of total understanding
    and already has totally changed your consciousness.

    Do you see what I'm saying?  What you call "not totally understanding"
    is the essence of salvation which is a change of heart.   Thus, it
    is ongoing, not all at once, and not finished in you (or I).

    You also said:
    
    "I am saved from sin through Jesus's death on the cross."

    No.  You are saved through the work of the word of the cross implanted
    and changing who you are.  The Priest takes the blood, sprinkles it 
    on the sanctuary, and this is what justifies it (makes it righteous/
    redeems it).

    You also said:

    "We have been made holy through the sacrifice of the body
    of Jesus Christ once for all. (Hebrews 10:10)"

    Romans 4 (again).  Holiness is an attribute of conscious existence.  It
    has zero relevence outside of conscious existence.  If you are holy, it
    is manifested by holiness of living.  Are you sinless Jill?  If you sin,
    even for a moment, God's work of redeeming you (making you holy) is
    incomplete.  He has more of the revelation of the cross to implant in 
    your soul so as to finish saving it.

						Tony

    
    Thank you, Wayne, for struggling to understand what Tony has written
    and then responding to it from the context of the faith which was once
    and for all delivered to the saints.  I appreciate your efforts.
    
    jeff

  Hi All,

    I want to thank most of you and especially Wayne and Jill for
    being kind to me during this dialogue.  Mike, thanks to you
    as well.
 
    I really believe holiness of living includes that love of the
    cross being our "all in all."  There is no room for anything
    else.  We should be no respector of persons.  Theological belief
    is not a reason to be partial to anyone.  We are called to love -
    regardless.

    You guys have done just that.  You find some of my beliefs heretical
    and yet you have maintained a level of love that I find refreshing.

    Wayne and Jill...I especially thank you two for being willing to
    go through the mental gymnastics to understand what I am trying
    (albeit so poorly) to express.  I think that is a wonderful quality.
  
    I probably won't be able to contribute until Sunday, but Wayne,
    I'll extract your most recent replies (haven't even read them yet -
    what I posted was written at home) and give them a thorough read.

    God bless you all...

						In His Love,

						Tony

| I think scripture is fairly silent with Enoch, but suggests with Elijah and
| Moses.  The 144,000 sing the song of Moses.  This I believe refers to them
| sharing in a similar experience.  It is the message of Elijah that brings
| the rain, that facilitates the closing scense (1 Kings 17:1/Malachi 3:1-3,
| 4:1-6).

** Actually, Scripture isn't silent on Enoch.  Rather, Scripture nowhere
   suggests that Enoch was sinless in the flesh.  The record is that "Enoch
   walked with God" and that before God translated him, he had the testimony
   "that he pleased God."  Do not believers have that same testimony?

   Does the song of Moses imply that Moses was sinless?  Moses did not go into
   the promised land because he disobeyed God in Horeb.  What then is the song
   of Moses referred to in Re.15:3?  "Blessed be the Lord, that hath given
   rest unto His people Israel, according to all that He promised: there hath
   not failed one word of all His good promise, which He promised by the hand
   of Moses His servant." (1Ki.8:56)  The song of Moses is glorifying God who
   does all He promised!

   Does the message of Elijah imply that Elijah was sinless?  "Elijah was a man
   subject to like passions as we are" who prayed earnestly. (Ja.5:17)  Being
   an earthy man through whom God speaks does not imply sinlessness in sinful
   flesh.  But bringing the message does give evidence of faith unto
   obedience!

| Wayne, why do you keep referring to sinful flesh being perfected?  Flesh
| is a physical object.  I refer to a nonphysical thing being perfected
| (our characters).  Sinful flesh is not perfected, it is crucified.

** Clarified earlier as being perfected _in_ sinful flesh.

| He was the son of man by virtue of being made of the seed of David.

** Scripture refers to Jesus the Christ of God as the Son of man.  We are sons
   of man, He was the Son of man, God found in fashion as a man.

   What if Satan "argued" that even God Himself could not live in earthy
   flesh without sin, i.e., fulfil the righteousness demanded by His own law?
   What if Satan thought that his power over sinful man were greater than
   God's, and that he could establish himself as god of this world because
   no "spotless lamb" could ever be found among earthy men?  What if Satan
   were convinced he could destroy anything God made subject to fleshly
   lusts?

   Our faith does "not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God.
   Howbeit we speak wisdom among them that are perfect: yet not the wisdom
   of this world, nor of the princes of this world, that come to nought: But
   we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, the hidden, which God ordained
   before the world unto our glory: Which none of the princes of this world
   knew: for had they know, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.

   "But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have
   entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them
   that love Him. But God hath revealed unto us by His Spirit: for the Spirit
   searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God." (1Co.2:5-10)

   Where sin abounds, grace much more abounds.  And where the mystery of
   lawlessness works, so also the mystery of godliness.

   My God, how great Thou art!

| And don;t forget that Christ said that of His own self, He could do nothing.
| Even He said, "Of My own will I can do nothing" so I don't know why you're
| bringing will into it.  You make it sound personally meritorious.

| I don't want to get complicated by talking of will and ability.  The last
| generation will depend completely on Christ and not on self.

** I'm confused, then.  Aren't you saying that an end-time group will have
   the will and ability to not sin?  Or have you come full circle to say that
   sinlessness in an end-time group accrues to Christ as a quickening Spirit?

| Either way, His cross is essential for my salvation.

** Christ's life, death and burial in the flesh, and His bodily resurrection
   as a quickening Spirit, are essential for our salvation.

| Then the cross' production of a heart-change must be insisted to need no
| validation.  I see as logically and scripturally untenable any insistence
| that there must not be any validation of the work that something was set
| out to do.  In this case, the purpose of the cross is always said to be
| to change our hearts.  Always.

** Tony, do you really not see evidence of a heart-change in yourself and
   others who believe?  That we who were dead in trespasses and sins desire
   to please God can only be according to the working of His mighty power in
   us!

   Satan asserts that sinful man cannot love God whom he cannot see.  The love
   of God shed abroad in our hearts testifies to the power of God to save!

   Of course fruit of the Spirit will be manifest!  I do NOT insist that there
   be no "validation of the work" that God set out to do.  Quite the contrary!
   I insist that God is changing our hearts.  I just do not insist that
   validation requires someone besides Christ being sinlessly perfect in our
   flesh.

   God in Christ was made subject to fleshly lusts, yet He did not sin.
   Satan's head was placed under the heel!

   As sinless man, Christ died for sinners, under the law to pay the (inherent)
   penalty of sin.  There is no more condemnation for us who believe!

   Ah, but Satan still sees sinful man in flesh he can destroy, as he saw
   Jesus in flesh he thought he could destroy.  No, God raised His Christ from
   the dead!  There can be no argument because Christ was sinless.  What
   Satan did not understand was that Christ's death purchased our redemption,
   and in being made a quickening Spirit our Lord now lives in and through us.

   The shoe has dropped to bruise Satan's head, according to Scripture:  To the
   serpent God said, "<The seed of woman> shall bruise thy head, and thou
   shalt bruise his heel." (Ge.3:15)

   "But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth His Son, made of
   a woman, made under the law, To redeem them that were under the law, that
   we might receive the adoption of sons. And because we are sons, God hath
   sent forth the Spirit of His Son into our hearts, crying, Abba, Father."
   (Ga.4:4-6, KJV)

| Given that God has said He will accomplish this and given that the duration
| of time in the grave is meaningless (to me), I honestly don't see this as
| a real big point.  But, I can see your concern.  I really can.  I never 
| thought of it before.  Thanks.

** Again, I see a "real big point" around insisting that God must make another
   person or group live without sin in sinful flesh to effect our salvation.

| Wayne, I am not sure.  But, I do believe that God has revealed that He will 
| and must settle the great controversy.

** Assuming that there is a "great controversy." :-)  I find making God
   subject to Satan in this way untenable!

| I candidly acknowledge being in a bit of a quandary, *however*, I believe
| I would be in a far bigger one if I believed as you do.  2000 years of untold
| suffering AFTER the cross - and for what?  Your position has some very 
| seemingly untenable features as well.

** I dealt with the "untold suffering AFTER the cross" question in a previous
   note.

   I would be happy to address any and all "untenable features" you have
   presumed in my position, as God wills.  Again, I simply believe our salva-
   tion is by grace through faith in Jesus Christ alone, whom God has placed
   "Far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every
   name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to
   come: And hath put all under His feet, and gave Him the head over all to the
   church, Which is His body, the fulness of Him that filleth all in all."
   (Ep.1:21-23, KJV)

| Mine is only including the idea that God 'honors' (not the perfect word)
| the idea that Satan poses an argument, claims sinners as His own, and God
| will honor that argument until He silences it through what He produces in
| the saints.  From this perspective, I see my view as fairly tenable.

** As I said, if God were bound to "honor" Satan's accusations, then He
   has already silenced him in believers who walk by faith and not by sight
   in sinful flesh.

| And again...if any work is said to do anything (I don't care what it is),
| I see as extremely tenable, the need for what that work is said to do
| to be validated.   Christ came to change hearts (Gal. 3:1-3/2 Corin 5:13-15/
| and this group - Acts 3:25/Gal. 3:8/Acts 3:26) and to change them to the
| uttermost and, given this, I don't see too much problem should He wait to
| take all His children home until He validates what He says He can do.

** Again, I agree that the validity of God's promise is established by His
   doing what He promised.  God is bound by His own Word!  What I do not agree
   with is your insistence that validation of God's power requires sinless
   perfection in earthly flesh besides Christ.  God is fully vindicated by
   reciprocated love in His creatures motivated to walk by faith in sinful
   flesh demanding to see!

| I have nowhere to go.  You have raised a good point, but I see your position
| as having far larger liabilities.

** I would be more than happy to address any and all "far larger liabilities"
   you see in my position.  One presumption already addressed by Mike in note
   53.151 is a belief that must not be ascribed to my "orthodox" position.
   The least to be gained in further dialog is an understanding of the gospel
   to which I respond by faith. :-)

/Wayne

    Hi Tony I'd like to jump in here.
    
    > I suggest that placing everything to only the cross (and not to what it
    > produces) finds one in quite a theological pickle and my 'pickle'
    > really isn't one if it can be understood that the basis for the
    > efficacy of the cross is its power to transform hearts and (given
    > that), that production must be demonstrated.
    
    Hhhmmm just curious, is it the cross itself or Christ's love. The
    crucifixion occurred because of God's love for us. I would think that
    it is God's love that transforms the heart. You talk about the
    revelation of the cross, do you really mean the revelation of God's love
    for us as portrayed in the crucifixion?
    
    Sorry to interrupt. A very very interesting discussion.
    
    Peter

|Doesn't the above reasoning have valid application?  Shouldn't it 
|be all the cross and nothing else?  But, if its nothing else, how 
|can we be anything less than heretical if we give any thanks to this
|person or that person for our being saved?
    
    It is all the cross and you don't have valid application because you
    have no way of proving that this would happen in heaven.  We may be too
    busy worshiping at the throne of God.  You also have no basis for
    thanking anyone else but Christ.  Dr. Livingstone was a servant of
    Christ.  He preached Christ's vicarious atonement on the cross. 
    Livingstone didn't die for anyone's atonement.

    Re: Song of Moses
    
    There are actually 3 Songs of Moses that cover deliverance and
    judgment:
    
    1. Exodus 15 - quoted by Rev. 15:3
    2. Deut. 32
    3. Psalm 90

    In addition to the fruits of the Holy Spirit, I think a perfect 
    testimony/test for those truly saved is the epistle of 1 John.  There 
    are several things stated by the Holy Spirit in 1 John that we can 
    *KNOW* NOW, even while in the flesh, but renewed by the Spirit.  I
    believe 1 John was provided by God to show us the evidence (or lack) of
    our salvation.
    
    When you read/study 1 John, key on the word "KNOW"
    
    Mike

      Wayne,
    
        Oh, I interrupted your sequence of replies!  (Sorry.)
    
      Mike,
    
        We would (again) drift back into just what exactly was
        satisfied at the cross.  As I believe the only redemption
        is the change of my heart and the only way it is redeemed
        is by the implanted word, the cross satisfied the 'generation'
        (or production) of the revelation which saves.
    
        I believe a completely nonrevelatory redemption (and EVERYTHING
        being satisfied at the cross excludes including the giving of
        revelation as a subset of that which saves) is the satisfaction
        of a bloodthirsty God who requires an infinite sacrifice in
        order to be appeased.
    
        Just what exactly is satisfied at the cross?  What is satisfied
        by a 100% nonrevelatory atonement (nonscriptural though that
        be for the day of atonement is *thoroughly* described as inclusive
        of the High Priest sprinkling the blood [the word] on the sanctuary
        [our hearts] and I realize your fondness for entirely ignoring 
        this rather huge and fundamental aspect of the word of God)?
    
        What is satisfied is something GOD NEEDS (and not something we
        need).  It is God needing to kill because of His broken law, but
        1 Corin 13 which is an expression of the law says that love
        keeps no record of wrongs.  Also Jesus said the Father committed 
        judgment to the Son and "in that day" He will not judge, but the
        WORD will judge.  I.e. it is a process/spiritual reality.
    
        Anyway, I invite you to show me exactly what a completely non-
        revelatory atonement satisfies and how it is you ignore the
        passages that refer to a revelatory component.
    
        But, I agree we have an impasse here and I also submit to you 
        that I find your atonement position to be completely untenable
        on rational, scriptural, and ethical grounds (orthodox though
        it be).
    
    						Tony
                                        

    I see your point.  That we would deem acceptable a person's thanking
    another person for their standing in the kingdom of heaven should allow
    the flexibility to see, and be grateful for, some person or group being
    made sinless in the flesh so that we could be perfected, too.
    
    True.
    
    However, I see a difference between thanking someone for bringing the
    good news of the gospel that I heard with faith and relying on someone
    besides Jesus to be perfected in sinful flesh in order to effect my
    salvation.

    Thus saith the Lord God, "Behold, I lay in Zion for a foundation a
    stone, a tried stone, a precious corner, a sure foundation: he that
    believeth shall not make haste." (Is.28:16)
    
    "The fear of the wicked, it shall come upon him: but the desire of the
    righteous shall be granted. As the whirlwind passeth, so is the wicked
    no more: but The Righteous is an everlasting foundation." (Pr.10:24&25,
    upper case emphasis my own)
    
    "For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus
    Christ...But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon."
    (1Co.3:11&10b)
    
    The Foundation of Jesus Christ will NOT be removed!

    I suspect that delving into this note would be taken as beginning to
    hammer the pillars of Seventh Day Adventism.  I am not impelled to do
    that at this time.
    
    What I will say is that the points presented still do not require that
    someone besides Jesus be perfected in sinful flesh.  The end of the
    promise is seen when death is swallowed up in victory, and that happens
    when we are changed, this corruptible putting on incorruption, and this
    mortal putting on immortality.

|        [our hearts] and I realize your fondness for entirely ignoring 
|        this rather huge and fundamental aspect of the word of God)?
    
    Tony, care to explain this?

    But Livingstone may indeed have been "baptized for the dead!"
    
    I submit that he laid down his life in ministry to those dead in
    trespasses and sins.
    
    And glory accrues to Christ, not Livingstone.

    Except that I have not seen an end-time group perfected in sinful
    flesh, yet by faith I see myself (being) saved by the same working of
    His mighty power revealed in my Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ.
    
    Jesus said to Thomas, "because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed:
    blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed." (Jn.20:29)
    
    Again, we need not see someone else besides Jesus made sinless in
    earthy flesh.

      Hi Wayne,
    
        I used 'foundation' a different way.  I agree with you regarding
        Jesus Christ being the foundation (and your use of it).
    
        I suppose there is a lot that could be said, but the main force
        of my position, that the cross' purpose is revelatory only is
        really the pillar of our differences.
    
        Sharing how the remnant could be a more effective proclaimer
        of the blood of Christ, I believe, was entirely rational and
        scriptural.  If we are benefitted from the destruction of all
        persuasions to sin by the destruction of Satan's arguments,
        then it is clear the saints in the last day are the vehicle
        used by God.
    
        This is what Daniel and other books say.
    
        I suppose this road has a few forks, but the main one is the
        contrasting views of revelatory verses nonrevelatory atonement.
        If one sees that the purpose of the blood is revelation, things
        are seen in a much different light.
    
      Hi Mike,
    
        You say the atonement is finished at the cross.  This implies
        all is satisfied there and this implies that revelation has
        no redemptive significance.
    
        My point is that the atonement is described in the OT as being
        inclusive of revelation which means revelation is an aspect
        of atonement which means the atonement could not be finished 
        at the cross.
    
        This beautifully points to John 6 in an apocalyptic setting.
        Jesus told the hearers that they must drink His blood and eat
        His body in order to have life.  He later said the word and
        spirit (revelation) give life.  Thus showing us that the blood
        is the word.
    
        Most of the hearers said, "This is a hard saying" and walked 
        with Him no more.
    
        We are justified by the blood and as the blood is the word, we
        are justified by the implantation of that word in our hearts.
        As atonement, generally understood, means the complete satisfaction
        of justification, a revelatory component must be dismissed.
    
        An endtime message of John 6 will be proclaimed which says the
        blood justifies AS revelation.
    
        Most will find this a hard saying and will follow Him no more.
    
        I'm not saying this applies now, but I believe the day will come
        when it will.
    
    							Tony
                           

    Doesn't answer my question.  You seem to assume an awful lot about me.

    Re: .53
    
    Wayne you said,
    
    > As sinless man, Christ died for sinners, under the law to pay the
    > (inherent) penalty of sin.  There is no more condemnation for us who
    > believe!
    
    this has sparked some questions for me. Before I ask them though, they
    may not be exactly related to this discussion so I would be willing to
    move them if Tony, or anyone wanted. I also want to say that I'm not
    asking to question belief but to learn and understand more.
    
    Christ's death on the cross was a sacrifice, similar to the one Israel
    performed at the first passover and all the subsequent ones. He is
    called the Lamb of God, a lamb is sacrificed, He is sinless, an
    unblemished lamb was used and none of His bones were broken just as the
    passover lambs bones.
    
    Ok here are the questions keep in mind I'm not questioning to dismantle
    our faith but to come to a more complete understanding and of course
    I'm definitly looking for scripture.
    
    1. Why was a sacrafice needed?
    2. Under the law the penalty for sin is what?
    3. Why does this penalty have to be paid?
    4. Wayne you said "There is no more condemnation for us who believe!",
       believe what?
    5. Depending on how the above have been answered, how is Christ's
       sacrifice made effacious to us now. The passover sacrifice was made
       effacious by the sprinkling of the lambs blood and the consumption
       of the lamb at least to my limited understanding of passover.
    
    I realize that some of you at this point may be saying, "if this guy is
    asking these questions then he is not a Christian". Well I know the
    stock answers to these question and just because I ask them does
    not mean that I don't believe them, but feel free to post them. I'm
    trying to look a little deeper, trying to have the crucifixion have
    even more meaning to me. This note has generated some confusion in me
    that I'm trying to sort out and these questions may help. No I'm not
    losing my faith, it is stronger then ever! The confusion may well be the
    Spirit leading me into something deeper that's all.
    
    Thanks,
    
    Peter

    Not to mention Psalm 106:
    
    "Our fathers understood not thy wonders in Egypt...Nevertheless He
    saved them for His name's sake, that He might make His mighty power to
    be known...Then believed they His words; they sang His praise. They
    made haste, they forgat His works; they waited not for His counsel: But
    lusted exceedingly in the wilderness, and tempted God in the desert...
    Therefore He said that He would destroy them, had not Moses His chosen
    stood before Him in the breach, to turn away His wrath, lest He should
    destroy."
    
    The song of Moses covers deliverance and judgment in the context of
    sinfulness, NOT a shared experience of sinlessness!
    
    ==========================================================================
    
    Tony, I stipulate that God is able to perfect man in sinful flesh,
    according to His will.
    
    What I cannot support is your insistence that God MUST make someone
    besides Jesus sinless in sinful flesh in order to effect our salvation
    and that of dead saints "which are asleep."
    
    My "orthodoxy" may seem heretical to some because I am NOT counting on
    the pre-trib rapture of end-time believers.  In fact, I believe that if
    I'm still clothed in earthy flesh when the man of iniquity is revealed,
    then by grace through faith I will stand in the fire and not be
    consumed.  I do not see myself being delivered from sin by virtue of
    being made sinless, rather I see myself being delivered by the perfect
    Deliverer in whom I trust.
    
    Nebuchadnezzar asked, "who is that God that shall deliver you out of my
    hands?"  Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego said, "O Nebuchadnezzar, we are
    not careful to answer thee in this matter. If it be so, our God whom we
    serve is able to deliver us from the burning fiery furnace, and He will
    deliver out of thine hand, O king. But if not, be it known unto thee, O
    king, that we will not serve thy gods, or worship the golden image
    which thou hast set up."
    
    Then Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego were cast into the furnace heated
    seven times hotter than usual, and the fire killed the men who took
    them to the furnace.  The three fell down bound into the midst of the
    burning fire.
    
    The record is that Nebuchadnezzar was astonished to see FOUR men loose,
    walking in the fire without hurt.  He then called Shadrach, Meshach and
    Abednego forth from the fiery furnace.  All gathered there saw that the
    fire had no power upon the three men's bodies, nor was their hair
    singed, neither were their coats burned, nor did they have the smell of
    fire.
    
    Nebuchadnezzar blessed God and said, God "hath sent His angel, and
    delivered His servants that trusted in Him, and have changed the king's
    word, and yielded their bodies, that they might not serve nor worship
    any god, except their own God...there is no other God that can deliver
    after this sort." (chapter 3 of the book of Daniel)
    
    I see that which bound Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego as they fell into
    the fire as sin.  The fire consumed that which bound, but left
    untouched that in which they were clothed.  And the record does not say
    that they saw "the form like the Son of God" in the fire with them, but
    the fourth person was seen by Nebuchadnezzar.  I need to see neither
    the Son of God in the fire with me, nor perfection in someone else's
    sinful flesh, in order to be delivered!  The important thing is that
    others see the One who delivers me in and from the fire!
    
    So, Tony, I would that men see Jesus, my Deliverer, not anyone or
    anything else!  By God's grace through faith in Christ may I stand!
    
    /Wayne

    Ok I read through today's notes now...
    
    Wayne, in .52 you refer to a quickening spirit 
    I have no idea what you mean by this.  Help?
    
    Tony, what struck me after reading all these again is actually rather
    simple.  
    
    I believe that God's purpose in all this isn't to convince *Satan* but to 
    convince *us* fully of His love.  
    
    What do you think of that?
    
    For God so loved the world that He sent His Son ...
    
    I don't know about you, but it takes a lot of convincing to make me
    believe that God loves me...that much...
    
    To fully believe this so totally that nothing matters except for God's 
    love?  Except to be (spiritually) with Him? ...sounds like this final 
    generation to me...can you visualize the strength and power of a group
    like that?  What could man do to them?  A group whose only strength
    comes through relying totally on God, not on themselves, but on God and
    walking that way in total faith... 
    
    
    Jill
                                      

      Mike,
    
        I tried to answer the question.  I'll try again.
    
    		1) Does the cross include all that redeems man?
    
    		2) If yes, do you contend the cross is inclusive
    		   of the work of revealing the word that saves?
    
    		3) If yes to #2, would you please explain how the cross
    		   includes redemption being given?
    
    		4) If no, do you then contend that the work of revealing
    		   the word that saves is not a redemptive work?
    
    		5) If it is not a redemptive work, would you explain how
    		   it is not given that one cannot be redeemed outside of
    		   revelation?
    
    						Tony

      Hi Wayne,
    
        I see that you have a real problem with the idea that a
        vessel outside of Christ may be used by God to transmit 
        any revelation that saves.
    
        I don't because that is simply the way it is.  We are called
        to be lights.  And it is light that saves.  We just reflect
        from another Source, but God uses us.
    
        I'm sorry if this offends, but I feel like you are ignoring
        certain points.  Such as sealing the universe through revelation
        and three ways I offered that show how the remnant can be a
        more effective vessel through which the blood of Christ (revelation
        of His love) flows.
    
        You also seem to not be discussing salvation in any way from the
        standpoint of revelation of the word being given.  How does this
        fit with the plan of redemption (to you)?
    
        I also don't see how inherent penalty can be transferrable.  Yes,
        Jesus was a Forerunner, but in so doing, He does not bypass
        reality.  He just eases things a lot by giving us Himself to look
        to in faith!  Still, inherent reality is not circumvented one bit.
        
        Wouldn't transferring inherent penalty be dishonest/unjust?
    
        Romans 4 is the only BASIS I see. The reason Abe is accounted
        righteous is because of a faith that is equivalent to the faith
        of a remnant and as all things happened as examples, the fullest
        fulfilment is Abe as a last day corporate man.
    
        What is your take on the basis being something PRODUCED in Abe
        and not on the doing and dying of Christ?  How does this fit in
        your tapestry?
    
        I don't know...if a revelational framework is looked at, the idea
        of people being used as vessels to proclaim revelation which 
        assists in sealing hearts for eternity seems entirely possible
        to me.
    
        Why not?
    
        I don't look to the remnant as Saviours - I look at them the 
        same way as anyone who is a light to the world.  The Source of
        that light remains Christ.  They have no light of their own.
        They just reflect.
    
      Hi Jill,
    
        Yeah, I agree that a HUGE thing is the followers of God being
        shown that revelation that totally destroys all of Satan's
        arguments, but even Satan someday will bow before God and 
        assent to His rightness in all His ways.  Even he'll acknowledge.
    
    						Tony

      Correction: In number 3, I meant to say revelation being given
      and not reemption being given.

    |                -< I'm Trying Mike!  (and sorry for assuming) >-
    
    Thanks.  this is the question I was asking about (why you keep assuming
    things about me).  It seems to be happening a lot this week.
    
    ...but while I'm at it.
    
|    		1) Does the cross include all that redeems man?
    
    "Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to think any thing as of
     ourselves; but our sufficiency is of God;" 2 Cor. 3:5
    
    "And he said unto me, My grace is sufficient for thee: for my strength is
     made perfect in weakness. Most gladly therefore will I rather glory in
     my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me." 2 Cor. 12:9
    
|    		2) If yes, do you contend the cross is inclusive
|    		   of the work of revealing the word that saves?
    
    Rev. 19:13  
    And He was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and His name is
    called The Word of God.
    
|    		3) If yes to #2, would you please explain how the cross
|    		   includes redemption being given?
    
    1 Peter 1:18  
    Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things,
    as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition
    from your fathers;
    
    Galatians 3:13  
    Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for
    us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree:
    
    1 Cor. 1:30  
    But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and
    righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption:
    
    Col. 1:14  
    In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:
    
    Eph. 1:7  
    In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of
    sins, according to the riches of his grace;
    
    Heb. 9:12  
    Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he
    entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for
    us.
    
    Heb. 9:15  
    And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means
    of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the
    first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal
    inheritance.
    
    Romans 3:24  
    Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in
    Christ Jesus:

    You changed the question while I was replying.  I believe this is now
    what you want.
    
|    		3) If yes to #2, would you please explain how the cross
|    		   includes *revelation* being given?
    
    Before I answer, I need to know revelation of *WHAT* being given from
    the cross.
    
    thanks,
    Mike

    Hi, Jill.
    
    "The first man Adam (in whom all die) was made a living soul; the last
    Adam (Christ in whom shall all be made alive) was made a quickening
    spirit." (1Co.15:45)
    
    Check out the context to see that the Spirit makes the Word efficacious
    to save our souls.
    
    /Wayne

Hi, Peter.

I would not prevent one who seeks a deeper revelation of my Lord and my God.
Thanks for thinking...and asking!  And yours is a proper use of confusion to
motivate a more intimate relationship with Jesus.

Again, I answer your direct questions with no claim of inerrancy or infalli-
bility, but as truth commended to my own heart by the Word and the Spirit.
    
|   1. Why was a sacrafice needed?

** The LORD said to Moses, "For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I
   have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for
   it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul." (Le.17:11)

   "And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shed-
   ding of blood is no remission." (He.9:22)

|   2. Under the law the penalty for sin is what?

** "For the wages of sin is death..." (Ro.6:23)

   "For when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is
   finished, bringeth forth death." (Ja.1:15)

   "The sting of death is sin; and the strength of sin is the law." (1Co.15:56)

   "He that despised Moses' law died without mercy under two or three
   witnesses." (He.10:28)

|   3. Why does this penalty have to be paid?

** "For if the word spoken by angels was stedfast, and every transgression and
   disobedience received a just recompense of reward; How shall we escape, if
   we neglect so great salvation; which at the first began to be spoken by the
   Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard; God bearing witness,
   both with signs and wonders, and with divers miracles, and distributions of
   the Holy Ghost, according to His own will?" (He.2:2-4)

   "Now where remission of <sins and iniquities>, no more offering for sin."
   (He.10:18)

   If there is no remission of sin, then there must be offering.  And the
   offering is sacrifice (of life).

|   4. Wayne you said "There is no more condemnation for us who believe!",
|      believe what?

** "For God sent not His Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the
   world through Him might be saved. He that believeth on Him is not condemned:
   but He that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not
   believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. And this is the
   condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness
   rather than light, because their deeds were evil...But he that doeth truth
   cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are
   wrought in God." (Jn.3:17-21)

   Jesus said, "Verily, verily, He that heareth my word, and believeth on Him
   that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation;
   but is passed from death unto life." (Jn.5:24)

   "There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus,
   who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. For the law of the
   Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and
   death. For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh,
   God sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and by a sacrifice
   for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: That the righteousness of the law might
   be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit."
   (Ro.8:1-5)

|   5. Depending on how the above have been answered, how is Christ's
|      sacrifice made effacious to us now. The passover sacrifice was made
|      effacious by the sprinkling of the lambs blood and the consumption
|      of the lamb at least to my limited understanding of passover.

** "For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that
   believeth. For Moses describeth the righteousness which is of the law, That
   the man which doeth those things shall live by them. But the righteousness
   which is of faith speaketh on this wise, Say not in thine heart, Who shall
   ascend into heaven? (that is, to bring Christ down:) Or, Who shall descend
   into the deep? (that is, to bring up Christ again from the dead.) But what
   saith it? The word is nigh thee, in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is,
   the word of faith, which we preach; That if thou shalt confess with thy
   mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised
   Him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. For with the heart man believeth
   unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.
   For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on Him shall not be ashamed."
   (Ro.10:4-11)

   "The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam a quickening
   spirit." (1Co.15:45)

   "For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer
   sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh: How much
   more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered
   Himself without fault to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve
   the living God?" (He.9:13&14)

   "Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our
   hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure
   water." (He.10:22)

   "If we say that we have fellowship with Him, and walk in darkness, we lie,
   and do not the truth: But if we walk in the light, as He is in the light,
   we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ His Son
   cleanseth us from all sin. If we say that we have no sin, we deceive our-
   selves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, He is faithful
   and just to forgive us sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If
   we say we have not sinned, we make Him a liar, and His word is not in us."
   (1Jn.1:6-10)

   "Of His own will begat He us with the word of truth, that we should be a
   kind of firstfruits of His creatures...Wherefore lay apart all filthiness
   and superfluity of naughtiness, and receive with meekness the engrafted
   word, which is able to save your souls. But be ye doers of the word, and
   not hearers only, deceiving your own selves." (Ja.1:18-22)

   "Reckon yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through
   Jesus Christ our Lord...Neither yield ye your members as instruments of
   unrighteousness unto sin: but yield yourselves unto God, as those that are
   alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness unto
   God." (Ro.6:11-13)

   Christ's sacrifice is made efficacious by the Word and the Spirit given to
   us.  The sacraments are useful to help us lay hold of spiritual reality as
   long as we remember "that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of
   God." (1Co.15:50)

/Wayne

Hi, Tony.

|       I see that you have a real problem with the idea that a
|       vessel outside of Christ may be used by God to transmit 
|       any revelation that saves.

** Did I say that?  God has chosen to use earthen vessels to carry the gospel
   to all who will hear.
    
|       I don't because that is simply the way it is.  We are called
|       to be lights.  And it is light that saves.  We just reflect
|       from another Source, but God uses us.

** Agreed.
    
|       I'm sorry if this offends, but I feel like you are ignoring
|       certain points.  Such as sealing the universe through revelation
|       and three ways I offered that show how the remnant can be a
|       more effective vessel through which the blood of Christ (revelation
|       of His love) flows.

** I've not knowingly ignored certain points.  I do not share your understand-
   ing, and I do have a real problem with the assertion that "the remnant can
   be a more effective vessel through which the blood of Christ (revelation of
   His love) flows."

   I thought I addressed your note .47 in my note .61, but since you so
   pointedly accused me of ignoring certain points, I see no way to avoid
   confrontation.

===============================================================================

| 1) Because Jesus is God.  Did Jesus survive because He is God or
| because He was righteous and held up by the word?  How can we
| know?  We will all know that the last generation survived
| exclusively because they are righteous, because they are held up
| by the word.  Because Jesus is God, He could not give this revelation
| as forcefully as the last generation.

** This seems almost nonsensical to me.  ** Note, I'm saying the logic escapes
   me, not that it is actually illogical. **

   Of course Jesus was righteous.  The very point is that the righteous will
   be delivered.

   The issue then becomes do we believe God when He declares us righteous in
   Christ?  If we don't believe God, then we will perish with all who have not
   received the love of the truth that they might be saved.

| 2) Jesus was only One.  The last generation is 144,000 (whether
| a literal or a symbolic number, I do not know).  The testimony
| of an entire last generation surviving is more compelling than
| the testimony of a single person.  There is One God, but many 
| people!  Again, the ultimate reason is because Jesus is God.

** "More compelling" to whom?  People who see perfection of sinful flesh are
   not saved by grace through faith.  Now I'm not saying that people aren't
   drawn to Christ seen in others, I'm rather suggesting that those who believe
   based on actually seeing God perfect sinful flesh might not walk by faith.

   Since faith is the basis for imputed righteousness, I see a red flag on
   this position.

| 3) Jesus never sinned.  The testimony of the 144,000 is a
| testimony given by people redeemed.  Thus their testimony
| conveys something about God's power to redeem as they were once
| sinners.  Did Jesus survive the very gates of hell in part because 
| He never was a sinner?  How can we be sure?  Ahhh, but if those
| who really and actually previously were sinners survive, now
| that is a testimony Jesus cannot give!

** True.  Jesus was not a sinner, but He became our sin.  That He became our
   sin and died, but was raised again to life is the basis for our hope,
   establishing Jesus as the Christ of God.  Only the Lamb is worthy to
   receive glory as our Deliverer!

===============================================================================

   Yours is the prerogative to deem me blind to the truth.  And I might con-
   clude that you need to see more than I.

   May it be unto us according to our faith.
    
|       You also seem to not be discussing salvation in any way from the
|       standpoint of revelation of the word being given.  How does this
|       fit with the plan of redemption (to you)?

** Really?  Then you've not heard what I said, perhaps because I'm unable to
   use your terminology.  See my last note to Jill (.75) and my next note to
   Peter (.77).

   Tony, the record is that "the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us,
   (and we beheld His glory, the glory of the only begotten of the Father,)
   full of grace and truth." (Jn.1:14)

   You may deem me unready to stand by grace through faith.  Again, that's
   your prerogative.  I will not apologize for looking only to Jesus, the
   Author and Finisher of my faith.
    
|       I also don't see how inherent penalty can be transferrable.  Yes,
|       Jesus was a Forerunner, but in so doing, He does not bypass
|       reality.  He just eases things a lot by giving us Himself to look
|       to in faith!  Still, inherent reality is not circumvented one bit.

** You seem to claim unique comprehension of "inherent reality."  Your words
   do not convey meaning to my heart.
        
|       Wouldn't transferring inherent penalty be dishonest/unjust?

** Huh?  Is the law unjust?
    
|       Romans 4 is the only BASIS I see. The reason Abe is accounted
|       righteous is because of a faith that is equivalent to the faith
|       of a remnant and as all things happened as examples, the fullest
|       fulfilment is Abe as a last day corporate man.

** That is what you see.  I do not see what you see.  So be it.
    
|       What is your take on the basis being something PRODUCED in Abe
|       and not on the doing and dying of Christ?  How does this fit in
|       your tapestry?

** I treated this passage in note .43.
    
|       I don't know...if a revelational framework is looked at, the idea
|       of people being used as vessels to proclaim revelation which 
|       assists in sealing hearts for eternity seems entirely possible
|       to me.

** Again, I am sealed by the Holy Spirt, and He uses other people to
   strengthen my faith.  I have no problem with that.  He has used you, Tony,
   to strengthen my faith.

   I repeat:  I do not need to see someone else perfected in sinful flesh
   besides Jesus to be fully persuaded that God can and will do what He
   promised.  I will not speak for others.
    
|       Why not?

** I stipulate that God reveals Himself through people to people.
    
|       I don't look to the remnant as Saviours - I look at them the 
|       same way as anyone who is a light to the world.  The Source of
|       that light remains Christ.  They have no light of their own.
|       They just reflect.

** Okay.  But you do see the remnant as the key "unlocking" our salvation,
   right?

My sense is that I'm to say no more.

Go with the peace that shall keep our hearts and minds through Christ Jesus,
my brother.

/Wayne

  Hi,

    Just a couple thoughts...

     1) I haven't done justice to the more recent replies.  Too busy
        and I've just only glanced at them.

     2) I thought of the hebrews verse that says "looking unto Jesus,
        the Author and finisher of our faith who for the joy that was
  	set before Him endured the cross, despising the shame..."

   	No way I want to contradict the clear and beautiful meaning
	of this.  But, then I thought of what Paul said, "I am crucified
	with Christ, neverthless I live, yet not I, but Christ lives in
	me..."

	This seems to suggest that a demonstration like I speak of is
	all of Christ.  They are DEAD and all we are seeing is the
	manifestation of Christ in them.  We'd be looking unto Jesus
	for all they reflect is Him and not themselves.

	Would not looking unto the remnant at the time of the end be only
	looking unto Jesus during a certain fulness of a manifestation
	of His word?  Does not the Sabbath tell us salvation is a 6000
	year process?

     3) Mike, in the reply where you responded with scripture, could you
	do me a big favor?  This time, would you use your own words and
	explain to your heart's (actually _my_ heart's  ;-)  ) content???
	What a passage says and what it means to either of us may differ.

     4) I really don't see salvation, from a time standpoint as perhaps
    	others do.  I see the sleeping saints as merely 'suspended' and 
	see salvation as the experience of life after sin and sinners are
	no more.  I believe any dead saved person, if in heaven, would be
	in utter anguish.  Heaven is not a place as much as an experience
	and the experience of seeing sinning earthlings in the mire of our
 	experience as well as (worse yet) lost people, would be sheer agony.

	I wouldn't want that for anybody.  What a blessing to sleep until
	the madness is all over (well, at least suspended for a millenium).

	Take care.  Gotta go.

	Wayne, I've learned much from you.  Thanks.  (And some from you 
	others too.)

	Its cool with me if you think I am some lost heretic.  I love ya
	anyway!

							Tony

Hi, Tony.

Recent interest in the red heifer sin offering under Mosaic law sparked some
research on my part.  You seem to glean much from metaphors, symbols and types,
so I would challenge you to review the OT sacrifical system, particularly the
various sin offerings.  Since you cannot hear my words, I would point you back
to the Scriptures.

|       I also don't see how inherent penalty can be transferrable.  Yes,
|       Jesus was a Forerunner, but in so doing, He does not bypass
|       reality.  He just eases things a lot by giving us Himself to look
|       to in faith!  Still, inherent reality is not circumvented one bit.
        
|       Wouldn't transferring inherent penalty be dishonest/unjust?

** My initial response was to ask if the law is unjust.  Now I encourage you to
   carefully examine how God ordained that sin should be handled/regarded under
   Mosaic law.

   As I've said before, reality is what God sees, not what we see.  Satan
   cannot change reality, and if there is in fact a "great controversy," then
   Satan can argue only from his own perception.  Even he knows that what God
   has done is done, but what he doesn't know is the mind of God!

   I believe 1Co.2:6-10 teaches that Satan, the prince of this world and "of
   the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of dis-
   obedience," did not understand the mystery of godliness, nor the mystery
   of iniquity, for that matter, even as he "walketh about, seeking whom he
   may devour."  Satan was not counting on the mind of Christ being in us,
   "builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit." (Ep.2:22)

The Apostle Paul to Timothy, his "own son in the faith," said, "And WITHOUT
CONTROVERSY great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh,
justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed
on in the world, received up into glory." (1Ti.3:16)

"Love not the world, neither the things in the world. If any man love the world,
the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world, the lust of
the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the
Father, but is of the world. And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof:
but he that doeth the will of God abideth forever." (1Jn.2:15-17)

To what are we vulnerable in earthly life?

 1 - Lust of the flesh is the passionate desire for self-satisfaction which
     springs from our base sin nature, appealing to EMOTION and basic needs
     (see Ge.3:6 - tree was good for food).

 2 - Lust of the eyes is the desire to "see," to "know" and to "have" as
     higher aspects of our sin nature, appealing to INTELLECT (see Ge.3:6 -
     tree was pleasant to the eyes, desirable to make one wise).

 3 - Pride of life is confidence in our own ability (to obtain) versus
     dependence on God, appealing to VOLITION (see Ge.3:5 - be as gods,
     knowing good and evil).

Christ was tempted in all aspects as we are:

 1 - Need for food (Lk.4:2-4).

 2 - Power and possession outside God's will (Lk.5:5-8).

 3 - Self sufficiency, establish identity, be master of own fate (Lk.4:9-12).

Yet without sin!

We would be prudent to sort through what we build on the foundation of Jesus
Christ, especially in terms of what we need to "see," to "know" and to "have."
Certainly, for Satan remains only the proof in seeing because he cannot have
the mind of Christ.  By God's grace through faith let us see what Satan cannot.
Let us not be deceived by Satan's lie that God must prove Himself, given the
revelation of God in Jesus the Christ, our Lord and Saviour.

/Wayne

    Hi Mike,
    
    re .73, .74
    
    Can you add some words to these scriptures for me?  I mean explain what
    they mean to you in regard to these questions?  I'm feeling dense
    today.
    
    
    Thanks
    Jill
    

    Hi Wayne, 
    
    re: .75
    Oh I see now, thanks.  Its what you are always saying, let the Spirit
    comment the words to your heart.  :-)   "quickening spirit" 
    
    
    Jill
    
    
    
    

    re .71
    
    Hi Tony,
    
      Yeah, I agree that a HUGE thing is the followers of God being
      shown that revelation that totally destroys all of Satan's
      arguments, but even Satan someday will bow before God and 
      assent to His rightness in all His ways.  Even he'll acknowledge.
    
    What do you think matters more to God, convincing Satan or convincing
    his children?
    
    
    Jill
    

    You've got it!!
    
    Jesus asks us, "But whom say ye that I am?"  To those who answer, Thou
    art the Christ, the Son of the living God," Jesus says:
    
    "Blessed are you: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee,
    but my Father which is in heaven." (Mt.16:15-19)
    
    All glory, laud and honor to Him!
    
    /Wayne

    re .83
    
    Yea, too bad I typed in "commend" wrong though!
    
    
    Jill
    

    Re: .79
    
    Wayne you wrote to Tony,
    
    > Recent interest in the red heifer sin offering under Mosaic law sparked
    > some research on my part.  You seem to glean much from metaphors,
    > symbols and types, so I would challenge you to review the OT sacrifical
    > system, particularly the various sin offerings.  Since you cannot hear
    > my words, I would point you back to the Scriptures.
    
    Heh this is exactly what I was thinking of doing, not because of the
    red heifer, but more because of the note I posted here and you
    responded to. BTW thanks, I want to read it a couple of times.
    
    Peter
    

|    		1) Does the cross include all that redeems man?
    
    "Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to think any thing as of
     ourselves; but our sufficiency is of God;" 2 Cor. 3:5

We can do nothing on our own.  We are 100% reliant on God to save us because we
aren't capable of doing what He has already done!  God does all the work.  Our
sufficiency is in God.  Our confidence and competence in God comes 100% as
a result of Christ's vicarious atonement on the cross.

    "And he said unto me, My grace is sufficient for thee: for my strength is
     made perfect in weakness. Most gladly therefore will I rather glory in
     my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me." 2 Cor. 12:9

In addition to the above, the cross of Christ forms the supreme example of
"power in weakness" (2 Cor. 13:4).  This grace of Christ (2 Cor. 13:11) is
adequate for us precisely because divine power finds its full scope and strength
only in human weakness - the greater the Christian's acknowledged weakness, the
more evident Christ's enabling strength (cf. Eph. 3:16; Philippians 4:13).
Boasting in our weaknesses for Christ's sake affords us a powerful testimony and
the ability of Christ's power to be effective in our lives.
    
|    		2) If yes, do you contend the cross is inclusive
|    		   of the work of revealing the word that saves?
    
    Rev. 19:13  
    And He was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and His name is
    called The Word of God.

We keep seeing "revealing word that saves" and other similar phrases.  Jesus
Christ *IS* The Word of God that saves.  He is the Living Word!  Cross-reference
this verse with Isaiah 63:1-6, which is well known for its Messianic
application.  We as Christians, saved by the cross, have every reason to believe
that this vesture dipped in blood is Christ's own, not that of His enemies.
Every mention of blood-stained garments in Revelation points back to the blood
shed by Jesus Christ.

Jesus in His earthly life bore reliable and consistent witness in all His words
and actions to the purposes of God and was completely obedient in doing this.
In Him, the will of God found full expression.  The Word of God and the person
of Christ are one.  Hebrews 13:8 tell us "Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and
to day, and for ever."  Among several other titles, Jesus Christ has always been
the Word of God, even when the Word became flesh (John 1:14).
    
|    		3) If yes to #2, would you please explain how the cross
|    		   includes redemption being given?
    
    1 Peter 1:18  
    Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things,
    as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition
    from your fathers;

"REDEEMED" is past tense.  The Christian life is lived out of knowledge of the
redemption that Christ has *ALREADY* accomplished.  We are no longer like pagans
(Peter is obviously addressing ex-pagans).  Christians are REDEEMED.
    
    Galatians 3:13  
    Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for
    us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree:

"REDEEMED" is past tense.  Christ is the *ONLY* possible means of redemption.
We are not our own, we were redeemed (bought) by a price (Acts 20:28, 1 Peter
1:18-19).  He became a curse for us (Deut. 21:23).  He became sin for us (2 Cor.
5:21) so that Christians can know they are REDEEMED.  1 John 5:13 says that
these things are written so that we *KNOW* we are saved.
    
    1 Cor. 1:30  
    But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and
    righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption:

REDEEMED people must realize that salvation is all of God's grace: it is because
of his effective plan that they are in saving union with Christ (cf. John
15:1-7; Romans 5:12-21).  This saving relationship is a true one because Christ
has been made for us wisdom from God, so that through Him we have come to know
God (John 1:18; 14:6-9) and are made "wise for salvation" (2 Tim. 3:14-17).
Paul shifts from "you" to "we" to make certain the readers understand that all
Christians, including himself, have this vital union with Christ.

Paul adds other effects or results of our union with Christ: He is
righteousness, sanctification, and redemption for us.  These concepts are best
seen as explanatory of God's wise plan that is effective in the substitutionary
atonement.  Christ has become our righteousness, having our sin on Himself (2
Cor. 5:21).  He has become our sanctification, having made possible our growth
in grace in the Christian life (Romans 8:9-10; Eph. 2:8-10; 2 Pet. 3:18).  He is
our redemption - the one by who we have been delivered from sin (Romans 3:24),
the devil, hell, and the grave (1 Cor. 15:55-57).  We glory in the Lord for His
great salvation!
    
    Col. 1:14  
    In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:

By virtue of our union with Christ, redemption and forgiveness are ours.
"Redemption" (Strong's 667) is a term that Paul often used to refer to our
salvation through Christ.  This term speaks of a release brought about by the
payment of a price, was used of the deliverance of slaves from bondage or of
prisoners of war from captivity.  "We have" teaches that the believer's
redemption is a PRESENT POSSESSION.  "Forgiveness" (Strong's 912) speaks of the
removal of our sins from us, so that they are no longer barriers that separate
us from God.  By putting redemption and forgiveness in apposition to each
other,the Holy Spirit teaches that the central feature of redemption is the
forgiveness of sins.

    Eph. 1:7  
    In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of
    sins, according to the riches of his grace;

Here our redemption is specified as being "through His blood" (cf. Col. 1:20).
The price paid for our redemption from bondage to sin was costly beyond measure;
it was the very life-blood of Christ Himself, poured out in His death on the
cross.  What was foreshadowed in the Levitical system of sacrifices was realized
at the cross when the Son of God laid down His life and ransomed us from sin.
    
|    Heb. 9:12  
|    Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he
|    entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for
|    us.
|    
|    Heb. 9:15  
|    And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means
|    of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the
|    first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal
|    inheritance.

Again, this is getting repetitive, but notice the tense: "having OBTAINED
eternal redemption for us."  This has been well covered in the red heifer topic
as well - a beautiful picture of what has already happened!  No other generation
to wait for - nobody else can do what has already been done.  God is not the
author of confusion (1 Cor. 14:33).
    
|    Romans 3:24  
|    Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in
|    Christ Jesus:

We can only be justified before God by His grace in the redemption purchased for
us by Jesus Christ.  There is no other way (John 14:6).

    re .86
    
    Thanks Mike, thats a wonderful note.
    
    
    Jill
    

    I no longer have the desire or time to prepare a complete response to
    Tony's tapestry.  I think he's demonstrated to me the heart of the
    differences between us:
    
    1. Spiritualizing Scripture where it shouldn't be done.
    2. Incomplete consideration for all aspects of God's nature.
    
    Tony, if you would like me to address some specific passages, I'll try
    to do so.  After everything that has been said and done this past week,
    I just don't see the point in addressing your entire tapestry.
    
    God Bless,
    Mike

      Hi All,
    
        I am forming a response from home.  At the earliest, it will be
    	a week from today.
    
    	Please be patient.
    
    							Tony

In note .44 I suggested that our Lord is not waiting for the desire and will-
ingness of an endtime group to be made perfect in sinful flesh, rather He will
not return until "there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be
revealed" in the flesh (see 2Th.1&2).  Moreover, 1Ti.4, Da.7 and Re.13 are
integral.

I have been unable to find Scripture explicitly stating that our Lord's revela-
tion from heaven awaits the perfection of an endtime group in sinful flesh,
i.e., revelation of God in our flesh besides Christ.  Implicit support for this
position has been induced from a good deal of Scripture, but I've seen nothing
with nearly the combined strength of Mt.24:21-31; 1Co.15:50-58; 1Th.4:13-18; and
2Th.2, none of which indicates perfection in sinful flesh, let alone provides
pivotal significance to same.

    Wayne, you're preaching to the choir!

    Actually, I wanted to bring closure to my own critique of Tony's
    tapestry by identifying the crux of my difficulty, the one issue that
    renders others moot, in my mind.
    
    By God's grace I remain open to address the particular "orthodox"
    problems that motivated Tony to seek a better understanding.

      Hopefully, I'll have the replies ready by Sunday.
    
    					Tony

    I'd like to provide a pointer to something that may help all of us in
    this discussion: "The Kingdom of the Cults" by the late Dr. Walter
    Martin.  He has an appendix on 7th Day Adventism which I started
    reading.  Dr. Martin states that he believes SDA's are Christians, but
    they have some cultic teachings.  In reading the first few pages of the
    SDA section, I see some very familiar themes.  Dr. Martin's
    presentation seems to be as theologically beneficial thus far as my 
    Pastor's (another ex-SDA) tape series "Foundations of Adventism."  I
    recommend getting a copy of Dr. Martin's book for this discussion. 
    Actually, no Christian library should be without it.  He has some
    excellent information on several organizations.
    
    Mike

      I am a cultic according to Martin's systematic guidelines.
      (Well, at least he is systematic!)
    
      Two counts...
    
      I believe Jesus took sinful flesh [sarx].
    
      I believe the atonement is not yet finished and won't be finished
      until the congregation is cleansed from all their sins before 
      the Lord (Lev. 16).  Atonement including the revelation of the
      cross installed in the hearts if God's believers so fully that
      sin is eradicated.
    
    						Tony

    
    
    Hi Tony,
    
    I'm curious, Tony, to what authority do you submit your beliefs.  For
    example, many of your beliefs are at odds with nearly 2000 years of
    doctrinal development by the church Christ has built.  Your beliefs are
    at odds with the great majority here, and with the thousands of other
    biblical Christians the people here fellowship with and so on.
    
    You once made a statement publicly that you did not agree with the
    choice of the standard of this conference, the Bible only.  Is this a
    key to understanding where your "authority" is not?  
    
    And I'm sorry if you've stated this before, maybe many times, but how 
    much of your beliefs are SDA doctrine - 50%, 10%, etc.?  And if some of 
    your beliefs are not SDA doctrine, from where do they come?  And what
    would your church say of these beliefs?
    
    jeff

    I had lunch with Tony yesterday.  Although there are many issues that
    we still disagree on, I believe even more strongly that Tony's heart is
    centered on the Lord and thats what really counts.  I am glad to count
    Tony as a brother and I continue to learn from him (even if I don't agree 
    with all he says).
    
    It hurts me when this conversation becomes an attack on my brother.
    
    
    Jill
    

    Jill, I don't think we're attacking Tony.  We trying to be
    understanding.

Reply: Note 66.96

  Hi Jeff,
    
  First off, I really appreciate the spirit of your reply!  	

  *I'm curious, Tony, to what authority do you submit your beliefs.  For
  *example, many of your beliefs are at odds with nearly 2000 years of
  *doctrinal development by the church Christ has built.  Your beliefs are
  *at odds with the great majority here, and with the thousands of other
  *biblical Christians the people here fellowship with and so on.
    
  Yes, this is true, however, there has been a great falling away.
  The little horn did cast truth to the ground.  So, that leads me to
  look at things a certain way.

  But, another thing which is HUGE for me is my conviction that what took
  place in Israel 2000 years ago serves as a type for the last days.  You
  give a lot of deference to the gospel built by the Protestant Reformation
  and I think that's great.  Likewise, a Jew ought to have given the same
  for the theology God gave them regarding their sacrificial system.

  However, there is a precedent with Israel.  Partial purpose of their
  theology was a preparation for something which would take place later.
  The animal sacrificial system was God-given and it gave them a sort of
  symbolic pointer to enable them to see deeper truth when it came, i.e.
  the sacrifice of Jesus.

  I believe much of the presently understood gospel has the same character-
  istic which the Israel gospel had.  It serves as an intermediary and
  is meant to give way to another.

  In fact, a facet of the abomination of desolation is an insistent perpetu-
  ation of a system of truth beyond its intended time.

  So, I likewise have deference for the Protestant gospel; I just believe 
  it is intended to give way to another.

  *You once made a statement publicly that you did not agree with the
  *choice of the standard of this conference, the Bible only.  Is this a
  *key to understanding where your "authority" is not?  
    
  Jeff, I don't believe I ever said that.  I believe the Bible is 100%
  inspired.  I also believe creation is a standard (being a manifestation
  of the word of Christ).  I believe we can also find inspiration in the
  testimony of what Christ has done in others.  And in the still small 
  voice of the Holy Spirit in ourselves.  Of course all ought submit to
  the word.

  Can you quote where I stated the Bible is not a standard?

  I do remember disagreeing with the Conference extending from saying the
  Bible is our standard to getting into the business of interpreting it
  for us.  As in stating that Jesus is God (which I wholeheartedly agree
  He is).  I disagree with this as sincere people happen to hold the Bible
  as 100% authoritative and yet, for whatever reasons, have different 
  interpretations.  After all, this notes conference is not a denomination
  and (as such) I personally feel it ought just rest with the Bible and
  the Bible only and it ought not *interpret* it in so far as Conference
  guidelines are concerned.

  *And I'm sorry if you've stated this before, maybe many times, but how 
  *much of your beliefs are SDA doctrine - 50%, 10%, etc.?  

  A lot of them are.  I'm not sure how many.  In terms of how Adventism,
  I believe, foreshadows a last day clearer understanding of the gospel,
  not a whole lot.  Adventism is hanging out in the shadows and not in
  what they are meant to symbolize.

  *And if some of your beliefs are not SDA doctrine, from where do they come?  

  Excellent question!

  There is a small circle who have been discussing some gospel concepts.
  The idea of condemnation being entirely inherent to sin for example.

  The following is from a manuscript titled 'Answer To Reason: The Unfinished
  Task of Divine Justice' by Randy Neall.  It follows his thought that 
  Adventism has some ideas, but they are at an embryo stage and need to
  undergo much development:

 "Within this embryo are three unshaped, and yet familiar, aggregates of
  cells that have shaped this book.  These three have been so extensively
  treated by others as to give the impression, not of an embryo, but of an
  adult, with every eyelash painstakingly catalogued.  But this is misleading.
  Surprises are in store.

  The first of the three is what Adventism calls "the great controversy 
  theme," that is, the idea that this earth is the theater of a conflict
  between good and evil played out over thousands of years for the benefit
  of the entire universe.  Adventism is ambivalent on what the issues of
  that conflict are, what God must prove by it, and why it has taken this
  long.  Nonetheless, there is an untapped power in this concept, the idea
  of God submitting His case to the judgment of other rational minds through
  appeal to objective evidence.

  The second cell aggregate, related to the first, is the implication that
  the process of salvation and atonement undergoes a last-day transition
  of some sort, together with the related implication that the cross, 
  whatever it attained, left significant judicial issues unresolved, such 
  that another occasion of atonement is still required.   Herein lies the
  core of Adventism's problem and potential.  This aggregate, too, will 
  surprise us as it assumes its final form and function.

  The third group of cells in the Adventist embryo is the idea of a special
  test to which the population is to be subjected and the related idea of
  an agonizing mental ordeal through which the remnant will pass.  This 
  cell group, with the others, will mature into an entity that will challenge
  our own moral and theological concept in ways we little anticipate."

  *And what would your church say of these beliefs?

  Randy Neal mentioned the idea of embryo ultimately maturing to full adult-
  hood.  When the embryo is fully developed, my church, I believe, will 
  respond to that adult in exactly the same way Israel responded to Christ
  2000 years ago.  (1 Corin 10:11)

  I believe, by the grace of God, that I have some inklings as to what this
  adult looks like.

  Adventism, I believe, is a movement facilitated by God.  However, it is
  much like Israel.  It was given much truth, but that truth lay in symbol,
  in metaphor.  For example, two such ideas are the seventh day Sabbath and
  the day of atonement.

  To illustrate an example, I'll use the seventh-day Sabbath.  Adventism
  at large professes the Sabbath as a symbol while mainly (and I use the
  term "mainly" loosely as Adventism is quite a mixed bag these days) 
  embracing the Protestant gospel at least in its fundamentals.  The 
  unique pillars are peripheral to an understanding of the gospel while 
  they are not peripheral to me.

  In contrast, here is how I embrace the seventh day Sabbath:

  o It is a sign of creation and of redemption.

  o It tells me we are redeemed by the word (the message of the cross).

  o It tells me there is no nonrevelatory redemption whatsoever.  Just as
    creation was by the word only, so is redemption *by the word only*.

  o It tells me redemption takes 6000 years.

  o It tells me the six 'days' of redemption are inclusive of the demon-
    stration of what God produces in a remnant.  "It is very good."

  o As it is all by revelation, it forecasts a transition where the 
    Protestant 'legal' model of the gospel (which is entirely nonrevelatory,
    i.e. the heart-change is a byproduct and not salvation itself) gives 
    way to a spiritual reality gospel whose entire relevence is what that
    revelation does in our consciousness.

  So while many Adventists trumpet the need to rest on the 7th day, I am
  much more moved to trumpet fresh gospel concepts which the 7th day
  points to.  And 'old' concepts which it does not point to and which will
  go away as did concepts of the Jewish gospel.

  						Tony

    
    Thank you for your thorough response, Tony.
    
    jeff

  Hi Jeff,

    Your welcome.  I anticipate that you find *what* I said to be
    cultic and I understand that.

    I just want to quickly discuss what is retained.  What is retained
    is the efficacy of the cross.

    I believe the efficacious death of the cross was Jesus feeling to
    be entirely evil and inherently bearing the guilt that naturally
    accompanies this 'statement' (for want of a better word).  By the
    way, I believe the source of this experience lay in Jesus taking
    sinful flesh, progressively seeing the glory of His Father and 
    having that glory reveal the lusts and passions of His flesh.  At
    Calvary, the process reached its maximum.  Jesus peered behind the
    veil and saw all of the glory of His Father.  This glory fully
    revealed all of the passions and lusts of the flesh He took.  He
    felt to be that sinner and bore that load of guilt.  

    Romans 7:9.  The death of Romans 6:23.  A death wherein one is 
    entirely alive throughout; by that I mean not physically dead.

    The resurrection of the cross was Jesus maintaining a faith-connection
    to His Father and not despairing.  Ultimately, Jesus triumphed over
    the temptation to just give up and peace was entirely restored to
    Him as He commended His whole being to His Father.  His physical 
    death came after His mental triumph.

    His cry "It is finished!" indeed embraced death and resurrection.
    The work was done.  Previous to physical death and resurrection.
    These are object lessons pointing to wholly spiritual realities.

    The remnant will eventually focus on nothing save the cross of their
    Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.  The love expressed there will be an
    implanted word in their hearts (as they receive it by faith) and will
    transform them to be like He whom they behold.
  
    The cross will also encourage them for they are progressively seeing
    the same thing their Forerunner behind the veil saw.  While Jesus 
    was crucified alone, they, as Paul, are crucified with Christ.  They
    yoke up with Him.  Their entire dependence is on Him.  Self is completely
    lost.  If there be any focus on self, they would be consumed.

    Here are examples of the last day transformation from physical to
    spiritual; from symbol to very image.  Christ's hemoglobin is not
    seen to be efficacious.  The blood is the word (John 6:53,63) and
    it *speaks* better things than the blood of Abel (Hebrews 12:24), 
    i.e. is revelation.

    The remnant undergoes the cross experience...

    Hebrews 13:12-13
    Therefore Jesus also, that

    [why did Jesus suffer outside the camp?]

    He might sanctify the people with 

    [with what?]

    His own blood, suffered outside the gate.
    Therefore let us go forth to Him, outside the camp, bearing His
    reproach.

    Physical blood doesn't cleanse nonphysical things (our consciousness).
    The message of the cross, which is the power of God unto salvation,
    does.  And that is what the blood of Christ does - it sanctifies us.

    The gospel I believe in relies 100% on the blood of Jesus.  I just
    suggest that what salvation is, what the blood is, and how it saves,
    are different.  The transition is not only from the cattle yard to 
    Calvary, it is from physical symbols to the spiritual realities they
    point to.  

    I in no way intend to draw away from the truth of salvation by grace 
    working through faith.

    						Tony

      Hi,
    
        I just want to say I am still working on a reply to Wayne's
        five reply posting (back around .42).  I am very comfortable
        with taking my time and in fact think it may be better to
        have times of rest from this discussion as well as to relax
        and be a lot more thorough.
    
    						Take Care,
    
    						Tony