Sunday, November 18, 2007

annie's view on the atonement and life of Jesus Part 2

In response to the following question:

annie...this is wonderful....but how do you think the shed blood of Jesus actually works and empowers us? What and why is the power in the blood?

annie...my best buddy, chum cyber pal...who has been my confidante and advisor in many very trying personal issues...always an open ear....and an open heart. I find it almost shocking that we see things so much alike!!! I know we are all part of the body of Christ..but she and I must be located right next to each other since our view of things so closely matches. Most of the time, she forges the spiritual path and I find myself following along saying...."yes, yes..yes....that's the way I see it too!!!" Her thoughts bearing witness with my spirit....putting to words what I know in my heart.

aisi, "the blood" (metaphorically, not literally) is the perfect cure, the "vaccine" against sin. tempted as we are (in his humanity, exposed to sin, the "antigen"), yet without sin (immune, the "antibodies"). i am one who accepts the duality of Jesus, as God incarnate - no less divine because of his humanity; no less human in his divinity. if he had been only divine, he would not have been our "high priest who is not untouched by the feelings of our infirmities". if he had been only human, he could have sympathized, but would have been powerless to help. as the "first adam", merely a living soul, incapable of imparting life. but, as the One who died and rose again, conquering death, paul wrote in 1 corinthians 15 that he became a "Life-giving Spirit", able to indwell and empower - "Christ IN you, the hope of glory". the "seed that fell into the ground and died" does not remain alone, single, but produces an abundant harvest of souls. the "eternal" life that he now imparts to us has more to do with the quality of that life than merely the duration. i don't believe it was Christ's physical death that was so important, but rather, his dying to self. the physical death only proved to what great lengths that full submission would go - that there was nothing he would hold back, that he would give all. and his physical death was for us in that he blazed the trail as the "first-born from among the dead". he had to die in order to be resurrected - for us. he didn't die to PAY for our sins. Jesus died that he might conquer death in his resurrection and deliver us, not from the experience of physical death (duh - we still die. even lazarus, whom Jesus raised went on to die), but from the fear of death and the power of death. in our minds, death is so permanent. God's design has always been for death to be temporary - it will one day be "swallowed up". the book of hebrews offers some keen insights into Christ's work of at-one-ment, helping to answer the question, "why did Jesus have to die?" let me quote a few verses with a bit of commentary on each.


1.1 God, after he spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways, 2 in these last days has spoken to us IN HIS SON, whom he appointed heir of ALL things, through whom also he made the world, 3 and HE IS THE RADIANCE OF HIS GLORY AND THE EXACT REPRESENTATION OF HIS NATURE, and upholds ALL things by the word of his power. when he had made PURIFICATION of (not payment for) sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high....
2.8 for in subjecting ALL things to him [Jesus], he [God] left nothing that is not subject to him, but NOW we do NOT YET see all things subjected to him (the "now and not yet" expressed in 1 john 3.2) 9 but we do see him who has been made FOR A LITTLE WHILE lower than the angels, namely, Jesus BECAUSE OF THE SUFFERING OF DEATH, crowned with glory and honor, that by the grace of God, he might taste death for EVERY one. 10 for it was fitting for him, for whom are ALL things, and through whom are ALL things, IN BRINGING MANY SONS TO GLORY, to PERFECT THE AUTHOR OF THEIR SALVATION THROUGH SUFFERINGS, 11 for both he who sanctifies and those who are sanctified are ALL from one Father, for which reason he is not ashamed to call them brethren.


this is UR in a nutshell - Jesus the heir of ALL things, fulfilling one of his purposes, to be the express revelation of God upon the earth. wanna know who God is? scripture falls short of describing him - but we can see him fully manifested in Jesus. "perfect" in 2.10 doesn't mean that Jesus was screwed up and had to be fixed. it would better translate "complete". without suffering on the earth, incarnating into the human experience, Jesus as Savior, would have been incomplete. the writer goes on to explain more:


2.14 since the children share in flesh and blood, he himself likewise also partook of the same, that THROUGH DEATH HE MIGHT RENDER POWERLESS HIM WHO HAD THE POWER OF DEATH, THAT IS, THE DEVIL (consistent with 1 john 3.8), 15 and might DELIVER those who through fear of death were subject to slavery all their lives... 17 therefore, HE HAD TO BE MADE LIKE HIS BRETHREN IN ALL THINGS (including death), that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make propitiation (rescue, not payment) for the sins of the people. 18 for he himself was tempted in that which he has suffered, HE IS ABLE TO COME TO THE AID OF THOSE WHO ARE TEMPTED.


what was he "tempted" to do? his own will of course. tempted to save himself as the onlookers at the cross taunted him to do. yet, he chose to "trust himself to the One who judges righteously". frankly, i think most fundamentalists are too hung up on the blood of Jesus. my faith is not "in the shed blood of the Lamb", but rather in the PERSON of Christ. his blood was not payment for sin, but rather a testimony to the impotence of death over the One who IS Life. paul, in 1 corinthians 6, called Jesus our "passover Lamb". the blood on the doorposts that caused the "death angel" to "pass over" was not in payment for any sin, but rather a testimony of deliverance from death.


more from hebrews as to what was accomplished in Jesus' death:


5.7 in the days of his flesh, when he offered up both prayers and supplications with loud crying and tears to him who was able to save him from death, and who was heard because he was a Son, 8 although he was a Son, he learned obedience from the things which he suffered; 9 and having been made perfect, he became to all those who obey him the SOURCE OF ETERNAL SALVATION.


and "ALL those who obey him" will indeed one day be ALL, for EVERY knee shall bow and EVERY tongue confess Jesus as Lord to the glory of God the Father (philippians 2). how else could one experience obedience/submission without having to submit their own will to something that is in opposition to that self-will? God granted to each one of us self-governance with the intent that we learn to set aside and give back to him that independence - to offer ourselves as living sacrifices, even as Jesus did (romans 12.1-2).


the rest of hebrews focuses on the idea that since Jesus has already done his part, let us, as co-creators with him, do our part to fulfill/complete the circle. here's where i have a beef with "the finished work of the cross" folks. it's good theology to help deliver folks from a mentality that they just never quite measure up to what God expects, those who still think God is mad at them and need to be reassured that Jesus bought him off so that they are fully forgiven. but, that doctrine rather misses the point. it still stinks of the penal substitution, taking the focus away from God's original purpose and ongoing process of the creation of man in his likeness. when Jesus said, "it is finished", HIS work was finished, not ours. otherwise, why would paul exhort us to "forget what lies behind" and "press onward to the goal of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus" (philippians 3)? in fact, the writer of hebrews expresses this same idea:


6.10 for God is not unjust so as to forget your work and the love which you have shown toward his name [nature], in having ministered and still ministering to the saints, 11 and we desire that each one of you show the same diligence so as to realize the full assurance of hope until the end, 12 that you may not be sluggish, but imitators of those who through faith and patience inherit the promises".


in hebrews 9, it can get confusing, if one previously has a mindset that God demands blood payment for sin. the significance of the blood is not payment, but rather the death of the old covenant. it was not offered as PAYMENT, but rather as a TESTIMONY.


9.7 but into the second (holy of holies) only the high priest enters once a year, not without taking blood, which he offers for himself and for the sins of the people committed in ignorance, 8 the Holy Spirit is signifying this, that the way into the holy place has not yet been disclosed, WHILE THE OUTER TABERNACLE (the flesh) IS STILL STANDING, 9 which is a SYMBOL for the time then present, according to which both gifts and sacrifices are offered WHICH CANNOT MAKE THE WORSHIPPER PERFECT IN CONSCIENCE... 14 how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish to God, cleanse YOUR CONSCIENCE from dead works to serve the living God?


nothing here about paying God, but rather, the cleansing of our conscience, our soul, our heart and mind. and here's where most folks will only quote the last half of 9.22, but it reads:


and according to the Law, one may almost say, all things are cleansed with blood, and without shedding of blood there is no remission of sin.


hmmm.... "one may almost say". sounds more rhetorical/metaphorical to me than a good supporting scripture for blood payment of sin. also, note that it is "according to the Law". another note: it speaks to the "remission" of sin. "forgiveness" here would also be an accurate translation if tradition hadn't distorted the intent of forgiveness.... God's "forgiveness" has nothing to do with letting folks off the hook for the PENALTY of sin and everything to do with providing deliverance from the POWER of sin (and death). i think 9.14 very much speaks to a girardian view of the atonement, reinforcing the truth that it was never God who needed to be reconciled to US, but rather WE who were at enmity with him and needed to be reconciled IN OUR MINDS, IN OUR CONSCIENCE. it took the death of the Innocent to deliver us from our self-justifying deceptions. i know it might sound bizarre (blasphemous to some), but the work of at-one-ment is truly all about metanoia, about what's going on in our soul - the mind, will and emotions. our spirit never needed "saving". it is the essence of God within us. our flesh is disposable and won't be saved. truly, we have never been outside of God, for it is in him that we live and move and have our being. our alienation from him is in our MINDS, our independent self-will. God never left us. again the "separation" has been in OUR minds, with the manifestation of the resulting poor behaviors. like proverbs says, "as a man thinks in his heart, so is he". Christ's atoning work awakens us to who we really are, delivers us from deception and death, and turns our hearts back to our Father. Jesus said that we would know the truth and the truth would set us free. that's the "power of the blood" - it is a testimony to the truth that sets us free from our deceptions. james points out that sin is conceived in our minds... it is the deception of self-protection/self-provision "apart" from God and his perfect will.


long explanation... and i don't think i've adequately explained it yet... but, you could have cut Jesus' finger 2000 yrs ago, smeared his blood all over yourself and it wouldn't have done a thing except draw flies. it's not the literal blood of Jesus that is the point, but rather the "death of the testator" to which the blood testified. "power in the blood" is a better song lyric than doctrinal truth. it was only the evidence of his loving, sacrificial obedience. it is Christ himself, not his blood, that is "able to save us to the uttermost" because "as he is, so are we in this world" and he is the "first-born among many brethren". in revelation, those who overcome do so by "the blood of the Lamb (the testimony of Jesus), the word of their testimony, and that they LOVED NOT THEIR LIVES EVEN TO DEATH. just as Jesus gave up his life, so must we lose our lives in order to find our [true] life which is "hid in Christ". the "now and not yet" of our at-one-ment will not be fully manifested until we are transformed, all one in the One.


was any of this what you were getting at? if there's something specific i've forgotten, please add it. it's hard for me to address "atonement" like it's a separate issue. all of creation (aisi) is our journey "out" from and back at-one with God (though we never truly "left"). love that is forced is not love, so there had to be freedom to "perfect" it. God set us free, even to hate and mistrust him, with the intent that we one day reciprocate that love in pure uninhibited fellowship, oneness, with our Father/Creator. the power is not in the blood, but in the Love. -annie

1 comment:

Sue said...

Hey dude,

This little two-parter looks pretty interesting and I'm sure it'll be food for thought, as usual. I shall be back after work to read.

In the meantime, know you've been tagged:

http://discombobula.blogspot.com/2007/11/7-random-things-about-myself.html

:)