The following is a booklet available from Christian Covenant Church.  It is a collection of articles developing the vision of the fulfillment of the Day of Atonement prophesied in the Law of God.

 

The Dawning of the Day of Atonement

 

God who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in times past unto our fathers by the prophets hath in these last days spoken unto us by His Son and now speaks unto us by His Holy Spirit in this dawning toward the Great Sabbath Day.  Whereas Jesus Christ the Lamb of God, our Passover, the Firstborn, has redeemed us unto God by His precious blood, He has in these brightening days called us to follow Him in obedience to God loving not our lives unto death, by which obedience we gain the authority to remit sins in His stead, that as God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, so hath He also committed unto us this ministry of reconciliation.

 

 

 

 

Death’s Usurped Dominion and the Firstborn Redeemer

 

            Adam was placed in the Garden of Eden to “dress and keep it”.  He was to cultivate the garden.  Plants need mulch to grow and be healthy.  A dressed garden is a well-mulched garden.  Plants feed off of the decayed remains of other dead plants.  The Life/Death/Life Cycle was already in place in the earth when God put Adam in the garden.  He was given the dominion of everything in the earth, including Death.  As husbandman of Eden he had the dominion over Death and used it according to God’s plan. 

Adam was created with blood, and therefore mortal.  “The life of the flesh is in the blood.”[1]   If he could lose his blood, he could die.  The name “Adam” is the noun form of the primary root verb that means “to bleed”.  So, Adam means “he who bleeds”.[2]  The Death for Life Cycle was given to Adam as a picture of his heavenly call.  Adam was created to lay his life down for his friends, as the Good Shepherd lays down his life for the sheep.  This is the mark of the sons of God.  They lay down their lives one for another.  It was the plan from the beginning.

            Nachash, the Whisperer, that old serpent called the devil, began to tempt Eve.  He enticed her to desire the only fruit that God had forbidden them to eat.  The Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil was not an evil tree.  The knowledge of good and evil, or the discernment of good and evil, is not a bad thing, but that discernment cannot come from one’s self.  The Law of God gives us knowledge of good and evil, and that knowledge originates from God.  Our discernment of good and evil must come from God Himself in His revelation to man.

The first thing we are told about trees is that they bring forth after their kind.  The fruit of the trees bears the seeds.  Seeds are planted, and grow into new trees.  The problem with the fruit of this tree was that the knowledge or discernment of good and evil must only originate from God alone.  There could be only one Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil.  Adam and Eve, the dominion gardeners, were forbidden to gather the fruit of this tree.  They were even forbidden to touch it.  For them to partake of the fruit of this tree would release to them a power of discernment that did not originate in God. 

            Eve “saw that the fruit was good for food”, the lust of the flesh; that it was “pleasant to the eyes”, the lust of the eyes; that it was “a tree to be desired to make one wise”, the pride of life[3].  By the criteria of the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, she judged, or discerned, that she should eat it.  She lost faith in God’s commandment and accepted new criteria for judging right and wrong. 

            Although the Garden of Eden and the events recorded about it were natural realities, they are also prophetic and revelatory.  Trees in prophecy represent authorities or governments[4].  Man was given the right of access to and cultivation of every kind of authority on earth, except to Discern Good and Evil.  Even the Tree of Life was accessible to them, that is, the authority to partake of and cultivate Life.  This access they lost because they took to themselves the authority to discern good and evil.  Now access to the Tree of Life had to be taken away lest they mis-order God’s delegated authority forever by ruling according to the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life.  

            How did partaking of the fruit cause them to die?  “In the day that ye shall eat thereof ye shall surely die.”  When Adam and Eve took to themselves to Discern Good and Evil, they lost their God-delegated authority experienced in Eden and had to be expelled. The death was the loss of their place of authority in God’s order ultimately resulting in the dominion of physical death[5].  Partaking of that fruit set the precedent for the jurisdiction of the Earthly realm.  Death now became their master, and they its slaves[6].

No longer were they in dominion over Death, but Death reigned over them and over all men, even those “who had not sinned after the similitude of Adam’s transgression”[7], that is, those who did not judge by the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eye or the pride of life.  Adam had by precedent chosen a law system, the Law System of Sin and Death.  Now man was bound to Death.  Now “through fear of death they were all their lifetime subject to bondage”[8].  We were all “sold under sin”[9], but God promised a Redeemer.

            He had to prepare us to receive this Redeemer. He had to give us a schoolmaster to show us a picture in earthly terms of what must be done in the heavenlies.  He told Moses, “See that thou make all things according to the pattern showed to thee in the mount.”[10]   The picture had to be a perfect representation.

            What was this picture that He gave us?  The first picture that the Law gave us was that the firstborn always belongs to God.  To escape the final plague and flee bondage in Egypt, the Israelites had to offer to God a lamb of the first year, without blemish.  They were required to smear its blood around the doorways of their houses.  Then they had to stay inside and eat all of it before morning, thus saving Israelite firstborn from the Death Angel.  The Passover lamb was a firstborn redemption offering. When John the Baptist said, “Behold the Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the world”, the people understood that he was referring to the Passover lamb, the redemption offering. 

            The firstborn children were representative of all Israel.  What is your firstborn?  Your firstborn is a reproduction of yourself.  He represents all your heart and soul, even your own body, as well as your hope for the future.  God’s claim on the firstborn is like the tithe.  God requires only a tenth of your increase, but it is representative of all your worldly possessions.  Tithing proves one’s acknowledgement of God’s sovereignty over one’s life.  The firstborn was a tithe of the whole nation. 

            Later the Levites were chosen “instead of” the firstborn for the priestly service.  Before the Levites were chosen “instead of”, the people were told to redeem their firstborn sons.[11]  After God had chosen the Levites “instead of” the firstborn, they still had to “redeem” their firstborn sons with a sacrificial lamb.[12] If the Levites were in the stead of the firstborn, why did they still have to “redeem” their firstborn?

            There is a difference between “instead of” and “redeem”.  The Levites were taken vicariously in the place of the firstborn into the service of God and the tabernacle.  The sacrificial lamb is not spoken of as “instead of”. It is said to “redeem”.

            God had bought them out of slavery in Egypt.  He required all their firstborn as the acknowledgement of His purchase. The nation owed itself to God.  The continual redemption of every firstborn son was a reminder that God still owned the entire nation.  The Levites were only representatively sanctified into God’s service for a time.  The lamb represented the firstborn; the firstborn represented the entire nation; the Levites represented the firstborn, and as such, the entire nation.

            As God required Israel’s firstborn representatively for the debt owed by the entire nation for their deliverance from Egypt, so Death required God’s Firstborn in order to buy back the dominion that Adam lost.  The Firstborn, the human reproduction of God Himself, had to submit unto death[13] to redeem the whole world from the jurisdiction of Death.  The Cross of Jesus Christ has re-set the jurisdiction of the earth from the Law of Sin and Death to the Law of the Spirit of Life in Christ Jesus.[14]

 

 

 

 

Jesus the Second Testator

 

Jesus was the only begotten son of the Father.  He perfectly fulfilled all the mandates of the first covenant.  Therefore he alone received the fullness of the promise under the first covenant.  At Jesus’ baptism and his transfiguration, God had said, “This is my beloved son in whom I am well pleased.” He was the fully adopted, begotten son, that is, the son who is fully mature and ready to take over his father’s business.  He owned all the inheritance of God the Father.

Because he was the only full heir of the Father under the first covenant, the True Firstborn, he had to die in order to bequeath that same inheritance to his many brethren[15] under another covenant, called the Second Testament.   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.  ¹⁶ For where a testament[a will] is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.  ¹⁷ For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.  ¹⁸ Whereupon neither the first testament was dedicated without blood.   ¹⁹ For when Moses had spoken every precept to all the people according to the law, he took the blood of calves and of goats, with water, and scarlet wool, and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book, and all the people, ²⁰ Saying, This is the blood of the testament which God hath enjoined unto you. [16]

The blood Moses sprinkled was not the blood of a sin offering.  It was the blood of a covenant, similar to Abraham’s covenantal offering in Genesis 15 when God as a smoking furnace passed between the pieces of the sacrificial animals.  Moses’ offering was a blood covenant offering.  Exodus 24:4-8  “And Moses wrote all the words of the LORD, and rose up early in the morning, and builded an altar under the hill, and twelve pillars, according to the twelve tribes of Israel.  ⁵ And he sent young men of the children of Israel, which offered burnt offerings, and sacrificed peace offerings of oxen unto the LORD.  ⁶ And Moses took half of the blood, and put it in basons; and half of the blood he sprinkled on the altar.  ⁷ And he took the book of the covenant, and read in the audience of the people: and they said, All that the LORD hath said will we do, and be obedient.  ⁸ And Moses took the blood, and sprinkled it on the people, and said, Behold the blood of the covenant, which the LORD hath made with you concerning all these words.”

The blood of a covenant represents the blood/life of the covenant makers.  In relating the First Covenant to a father’s legal will, the writer of the book of Hebrews shows that the blood of this covenant represented the life/blood of God the Father Himself.  In this case it is God Himself who “bleeds” to seal the covenant.  Jesus is the Testator of the Second Covenant who had to die as the son over his own house[17] to bequeath the eternal inheritance to His many brethren.  Whereupon neither the first testament was dedicated without blood,[18] as the second is not dedicated without blood.

In His death as the Testator of the Second Testament, he bequeathed to all who would come to God by him the promise of full inheritance.  Beloved now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.   And every man that hath this hope in him purifieth himself, even as he is pure.[19]   We must become obedient as our Lord, even unto death,[20] and we will obtain the inheritance of the Second Testator.  In his death, Jesus bequeathed to all who come to God by him all that Sonship to the Father had given Him.  He is the firstborn of many brethren.[21]  This is the inheritance of those who will submit to full redemption.

 

 

 

The Twofold Redemption

 

            Our personal redemption is twofold.  There is the atonement, and there is the purging of the conscience.  Both are bought for us by our Lord Jesus on the Cross.

 

Atonement

            Atonement is a legal term.  The Hebrew word is Strong’s #3722 kaphar {kaw-far'}.[22]

It is the waiving of the prescribed punishment of the law.  Sins that are atoned are covered, covered from the punishment of the law.  The required process of atonement does not negate repentance and/or restitution.  On the contrary, confession, repentance and making restitution are necessary steps to atonement[23].  According to Leviticus, after these first steps were accomplished, then the priest shall make an atonement for him.

            How did the priest make an atonement for the sinner?  What did the priest do?  

The priest is the acting intercessor.  In a case where the sinner confesses and repents to the defrauded party, as long as the defrauded party is satisfied with the repentance, they may declare peace with each other, and the incident is over.  There is no need for the law to step in and provide an intercessor.   But what if the sinner repents, but the defrauded party refuses to make peace?  Then there is need for the law to provide an intercessor.  The intercessor acts in the place of the defrauded victim and makes an atonement for the repentant sinner.   

The earthly pattern that God gave Moses for atonement had two parts.  These were two actors, so to speak, in this pre-enactment of the necessary action in the heavens.  The sacrificial goat[24] and the priest both represent the victim of the sin.  The goat loses his life as the victim who has been defrauded of a portion of his life.  The priest, in the place of the victim, makes atonement, in other words, waives the charges against the sinner. 

            Two actors are needed because the goat could lay down his life, but could not intelligently waive the charges.  The priest could waive the charges, but could not die or suffer equal defraudment for every sin he atoned.  So, the priest ate the sin offering[25] to make himself one with the goat, taking on the position of the victim.  It was imperative that the priest ate the sin offering, and only the priest who offered the sacrifice was allowed to eat it.  Because the priest representatively becomes the victim of my sin, he has the right to press charges against me or to waive charges.  What does he do?  The priest waives the charges in the stead of the victim and atonement is made.

            Jesus was able to be both sin offering and priest.  Jesus was “touched with the feeling of our infirmities”[26].  He accepted the weight of pain and grief caused by every sin ever committed bearing it in his own body on the cross.  He is the Victim of all our sin, and He could choose to press or to waive the charges against us.  Thank God, he chose to intercede in the proceedings that were against us making atonement for our sins, not pressing the charges.  Only the victim or one who stands in the victim’s stead can do that.  Jesus is the True Victim who alone holds the right to forgive every sin; and he is our High Priest who “ever liveth to make intercession for us”.[27] 

 

Purging of the Conscience

The atonement of the first covenant made by the priests of old for the people of Israel did provide forgiveness for their sins.  The weakness of that system was not that it didn’t provide forgiveness, but that atonement alone cannot cleanse a defiled conscience[28].  The sinner, through his confession, repentance, and true sorrow shown in restitution, is relieved from the punishment of the law; but within him remains the conscience weakened by yielding to temptation and defiled by the knowledge of sin.   Remaining in this state alone he will sin again[29].

            What this man needs now is to have his conscience purged[30].  This is the second work of our redemption.  This is what Jesus came to do that the law couldn’t do[31].  Jesus came to baptize, to wash us in the Holy Ghost and Fire.  It was this baptism that John the Baptist told Jesus he needed of Him.  Holy Ghost and Fire cannot be separated.  Our God is a consuming fire[32].  The Holy Ghost is the Spirit of Truth; it is Jesus Himself not leaving us comfortless, but coming to us[33].  He said he had to leave, that is, to die, in order to return in spirit as the Comforter[34].  How can this be?

            His Blood, his very Life, the breath of God within him[35], comes upon and within us to burn out all defilement of conscience.  His blood cleanses us from all sin[36].  This is no longer governmental forgiveness alone.  The result of this Baptism of Fire is total purging of even the conscience defiled by sin.  Even temptation has no more wooing power.

            This can happen one sin at a time or all at once.  We must yield to this Holy Ghost baptism.  He will come as fire to purge the dross.  Atonement has released Him to use whatever method will work on you.  He is no longer bound to the judgment prescribed by law.  He is free to arrange your circumstances to bring about the fire you need to thoroughly purge your conscience. 

 

            This was the Baptism that John yearned for[37].  This is the Baptism that Jesus offers, a holy, possibly lifelong, baptism that promises a purged conscience to him who will yield to its work. 

 

            What is its work?  Its work is the Cross in each of our lives[38].  As we lay down our own lives in obedience to God and for others, the fire does the work[39].  It is to bring us to our death[40] with the promise of a better resurrection. [41]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Blood Covenant and a Father’s Will

 

Hebrews 9:22  “… and without shedding of blood is no remission.”

 

The Blood of Moses’ Covenant

Hebrews 9:15-22  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.  ¹⁶ For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.  ¹⁷ For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.  ¹⁸ Whereupon neither the first testament was dedicated without blood.   ¹⁹ For when Moses had spoken every precept to all the people according to the law, he took the blood of calves and of goats, with water, and scarlet wool, and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book, and all the people, ²⁰ Saying, This is the blood of the testament which God hath enjoined unto you.  ²¹ Moreover he sprinkled with blood both the tabernacle, and all the vessels of the ministry.  ²² And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.

 

The blood Moses sprinkled was not the blood of a sin offering.  It was the blood of a covenant, similar to Abraham’s covenantal offering in Genesis 15 when God as a smoking furnace passed between the pieces of the sacrificial animals.  In the same way Moses’ offering was a blood covenant offering.  Exodus 24:4-8  And Moses wrote all the words of the LORD, and rose up early in the morning, and builded an altar under the hill, and twelve pillars, according to the twelve tribes of Israel.  ⁵ And he sent young men of the children of Israel, which offered burnt offerings, and sacrificed peace offerings of oxen unto the LORD.  ⁶ And Moses took half of the blood, and put it in basons; and half of the blood he sprinkled on the altar.  ⁷ And he took the book of the covenant, and read in the audience of the people: and they said, All that the LORD hath said will we do, and be obedient.  ⁸ And Moses took the blood, and sprinkled it on the people, and said, Behold the blood of the covenant, which the LORD hath made with you concerning all these words. 

 

The blood of a covenant represents the blood/life of the covenant makers.  In relating the First Covenant to a father’s legal will, the writer of the book of Hebrews shows that the blood of that covenant represented the life/blood of God the Father Himself.  Therefore the blood of the covenant should never be confused with the idea of a sinner’s punishment.  In this case it is God Himself who “bleeds” to seal the covenant.  In fact the main point of this passage is that Jesus is the Testator of the Second Covenant who had to die as the son over his own house (Heb.3:6) to bequeath the eternal inheritance to His many brethren (Rom. 8:29).   Whereupon neither the first testament was dedicated without blood, as the second is not dedicated without blood.

 

 

Consider the following word study:

 

Word Study:

Remission - Strong’s 859 aphesis, noun form

Remit - Strong’s 863 aphiemi verb form

 

Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance entry #859 aphesis is from #863 aphiemi which is from apo “off, i.e. away; it usually denotes separation, departure, cessation, completion, reversal” and hiemi “to send; to go”.  So, the noun #859 aphesis is the thing accomplished by the verb aphiemi. 

 

Young’s Analytical Concordance shows aphiemi translated 17 different ways in the New Testament.  Among those are: forgive 47 times, leave 52 times, suffer 3 times, and remit 2 times

 

Webster’s 1828 American Dictionary shows “remission” to be a noun  form of “remit”.  He says “remit” comes from the Latin remitto, to send back. 

Remission-  def. #3: release; the discharge (payment, as of a debt) or relinquishment of a claim or a right

 

            The preceding word study should help us understand the use of  the word remission.  If we recognize remission as the discharge, or payment, of a debt, our understanding of this verse becomes more contextual with the entire chapter. 

 

Hebrews 9:22  “… and without shedding of blood is no remission.”

 

Remission of what?  Remission [payment] of the eternal inheritance as mentioned in verse 15.  This chapter is expounding on the two testaments, the first administered by Moses using representative blood of animals to signify the death/blood of the Testator who is God the Father.  The other is the new testament in Jesus’ blood.  Jesus is the Second Testator who must die to bequeath the inheritance to his brethren.  Hebrews 9:16-18   For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.  ¹⁷ For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.  ¹⁸ Whereupon neither the first testament was dedicated without blood.  This is the context of the verse in question.

 

Without the shedding of the blood [of the testator] there is no remission [discharge of the inheritance].  Hebrews 9:22  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Sin Offering:

Commentation on II Corinthians 5:21

 

For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.  II Corinthians 5:21 

 

On this passage the Emphatic Diaglott, an interlinear word for word translation of the New Testament, says in footnote, “There are many passages in the Old Testament where amartia, [translated here as] sin, signifies a ‘sin offering’.  Hosea 4:8  They (the priests) eat up the (sin offerings) of my people.  In the New Testament, likewise, the word sin has the same signification.  Hebrews 9:26-28; Hebrews 13:11”

 

The Hebrew word in Hosea 4:8 translated ‘sin’ in KJV is 2403.

 

2403 chatta'ah {khat-taw-aw'} or chatta'th {khat-tawth'}   1) sin, sinful 2) sin, sin offering 2a) sin 2b)        condition of sin, guilt of sin 2c) punishment for sin 2d) sin-offering 2e) purification from sins of ceremonial uncleanness

Usage:  sin 182, sin offering 116, punishment 3, purification for sin 2, purifying 1, sinful 1, sinner 1; 296

 

In every case where the phrase “sin offering” is used, it comes from one Hebrew word, 2403.  For example:  Exodus 30:10   And Aaron shall make an atonement upon the horns of it once in a year with the blood of the sin offering of atonements and Leviticus 5:9  And he shall sprinkle of the blood of the sin offering upon the side of the altar.  In Psalm 51:2-3  Wash me throughly from mine iniquity, and cleanse me from my sin.  ³ For I acknowledge my transgressions: and my sin is ever before me  both words translated sin are 2403.  So we see that the Hebrew confirms the fact that the context must be consulted to know how to translate this word. 

 

Of the passages noted by the Emphatic Diaglott, Hosea 4:8 and Hebrews 9:28 seem most applicable to this translation.  We must assume the reference to a Greek word, amartia  (Strong’s Concordance 266), in an Old Testament verse is referring to the Septuagint, the ancient Greek translation of the Hebrew scriptures.  That done, the Hosea context seems to uphold the idea of the sin offering being eaten by the priests (albeit wrongfully), as they were supposed to do, not necessarily that the priests ate the people’s sin. 

 

Hebrews 9:26-28  For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.  ²⁷ And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:  ²⁸ So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation. 

 

Hebrews 13:11  For the bodies of those beasts, whose blood is brought into the sanctuary by the high priest for sin, are burned without the camp.

 

Of the two above passages mentioned in the Diaglott, Hebrews 9:28 seems the best suited to the use of sin offering, instead of  sin, for the Greek word amartia.  The verse speaks of Jesus being offered once to bear our sins and that He will come a second time without sin.  The context here upholds the idea of sin offering since the first part of the verse speaks of an offering.  Contrariwise, what would be the significance of mentioning that Jesus will come without sin when He comes the second time?  He came the first time without sin; wouldn’t we expect Him to remain without sin for His second coming? It makes contextual sense to read, So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without [the need of] a sin offering, unto salvation. 

            That brings us back to the original passage in question.  Couldn’t we apply the same reasoning here?  The idea seems not so much that God turned Jesus into sin for us, but that Jesus was made a sin offering for us.  Hence, the following translation, He made him to be a sin offering for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.  It seems to be a valid understanding of this text.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

By the Same Measure

 

Why did David not die for his adultery with Bathsheba and his murder of Uriah?

 

Matthew 7:2  For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.

 

There were two men upon whom David had both reason and opportunity to avenge himself.  Saul had tried to kill him without cause several times, and Nabal had refused to help David’s men with rations after they had spent months protecting Nabal’s sheep.  In each case David came very close to taking the lives of these men, but restrained himself choosing to leave the vengeance to God alone.

 

Because David showed mercy and did not kill Nabal or Saul[42] to avenge himself, God showed mercy on David.  If David had avenged himself on either Nabal or Saul, then David would have died for his adultery and murder in the case of Bathsheba.

 

Jesus gave us two principles that illustrate God’s character in regard to forgiveness, the Principle of Seventy Times Seven and the theme of the parable of the “Unforgiving Servant”[43].  Consider this scenario:

 

A child comes crying to his parents.  He has stolen some of their money.  He returns their money with tears of repentance, though they had not been aware that he took it.

 

The Principle of Seventy Times Seven states that as often as one sins and repents, though it be the same sin repeated, if he repents, he should be forgiven.  So, the child here is forgiven.  If he steals again and again repents, he should be forgiven the same each time. 

 

The principle found  in the “Unforgiving Servant” is different.  Let’s adjust our scenario to illustrate this parable:

 

The repentant child thief is forgiven.  He then goes to his room and finds that his brother has taken the toy sword from one of his action figures and has broken it.  He grabs his brother fiercely and demands the toy sword even if the brother must buy a new figure to provide it.  The other children indignantly report the action to their parents. 

 

Repeated repentance is forgivable.  Unforgiveness causes one to become unforgiven!

 

Since he will not forgive his brother for the broken toy, he now becomes UNFORGIVEN for his theft and is required to pay four-fold according to the Law. 

 

When the Forgiven Child Thief was wronged by his brother, he immediately grabbed his brother to avenge himself.  If he had released personal vengeance, and left righteous vengeance in the hands of his parents, they would have corrected the other brother.  He chose to take vengeance into his own hands, therefore, his forgiveness will be retracted and he will be judged according to the judgment he measured out to his brother.

 

Let’s go back to David’s choices.  In both the cases of Nabal and of Saul, David committed the vengeance to God.  The relationship to our scenario is that David showed mercy in yielding personal vengeance, unlike the Forgiven Child, therefore he received mercy in his own sin.  Forgive and ye shall be forgiven[44].  Do not forgive and you shall not be forgiven.

 

David’s choice of not avenging himself upon Nabal or Saul showed that he was a man after God’s own heart.  David understood God’s character in forgiveness.  David’s choice resulted in God’s forgiveness toward David.  “With what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.

 

 

 

 

Justified and Purged

 

Luke 7:28-35   For I say unto you, Among those that are born of women there is not a greater prophet than John the Baptist: but he that is least in the kingdom of God is greater than he.  ²⁹ And all the people that heard him, and the publicans, justified God, being baptized with the baptism of John.  ³⁰ But the Pharisees and lawyers rejected the counsel of God against themselves, being not baptized of him.  ³¹ And the Lord said, Whereunto then shall I liken the men of this generation? and to what are they like?  ³² They are like unto children sitting in the marketplace, and calling one to another, and saying, We have piped unto you, and ye have not danced; we have mourned to you, and ye have not wept.  ³³ For John the Baptist came neither eating bread nor drinking wine; and ye say, He hath a devil.  ³⁴ The Son of man is come eating and drinking; and ye say, Behold a gluttonous man, and a winebibber, a friend of publicans and sinners!  ³⁵ But wisdom is justified of all her children.

 

            Both verse 29 and verse 35 show that “justified” means “to declare the righteousness of”.  “The people… justified God” – “The people declared the righteousness of God.”  The people declared the righteousness of God in that they had received John’s baptism that it was from God.  “Wisdom is justified of her children” – “Wisdom is declared to be right [by the actions] of her children.”  This seems to agree with the point Jesus is making about himself and John the Baptist.

 

            This sense is not changed when applied to the repentant sinner.  Because of true repentance, the sinner is declared to be righteous in that his sin is no longer remembered against him.

 

Ezekiel 18:21-24  But if the wicked will turn from all his sins that he hath committed, and keep all my statutes, and do that which is lawful and right, he shall surely live, he shall not die.  ²² All his transgressions that he hath committed, they shall not be mentioned unto him: in his righteousness that he hath done he shall live.  ²³ Have I any pleasure at all that the wicked should die? saith the Lord GOD: and not that he should return from his ways, and live? But when the righteous turneth away from his righteousness, and committeth iniquity, and doeth according to all the abominations that the wicked man doeth, shall he live? All his righteousness that he hath done shall not be mentioned: in his trespass that he hath trespassed, and in his sin that he hath sinned, in them shall he die. 

 

According to the definitions, a just man and a righteous man are synonymous.  The difference between a sinner and a righteous man is that the righteous man’s conscience brings him to repentance when he sins.  A sinner sins continually without allowing his conscience to bring him to repentance.  When a sinner comes to repentance, he cannot repent for every individual sin he has ever committed;  he repents for being a sinner.  He is then declared righteous in that his former sins are not remembered against him.  From this point on he is a righteous man who makes obedience to God his goal.  If he sins, his conscience will bring him to repentance at which time he will be justified from that individual sin, also.  Conversely,  if a righteous man turn from his righteous ways, his righteousness will not be remembered.  He is no longer a righteous man, but a sinner.  Ezekiel 18 is proof that the law could declare sinners to be righteous.  Under the First Covenant sinners could be justified.

 

How can that be reconciled with Paul’s teaching in Galatians?

 

Galatians 2:16-17  Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.  ¹⁷ But if, while we seek to be justified by Christ, we ourselves also are found sinners, is therefore Christ the minister of sin? God forbid.

 

First we must ask, “Was Ezekiel saying that the works of the law changed the status of the sinner or was it his repentance?”  Repentance is not repentance except it be by faith, and faithful repentance is shown in obedience.  John the Baptist made that clear when he required the Pharisees to “bring forth fruits meet for repentance” before he would baptize them.  So, the works of the law have never justified a sinner, only faithful repentance can.

 

This brings us to verse 17.  If justification is substitutional and immediate at a salvation experience, why do we yet “seek to be justified”?   Justification is not substitutional; it is actual.  At repentance a person becomes actually righteous, i.e., actually justified. 

 

The text, both in Ezekiel and in Galatians, has to do with the righteous or unrighteous state of a man.  In Galatians, Paul mentions falling again into sin.  We must admit here an acknowledgement that we may sin after coming to Christ.  We are seeking to be justified.  We may be justified as many times as we fall and repent.  Justification alone does not purge the conscience from the effects of sin. 

 

Hebrews 9:13-14  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:  ¹⁴ How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?

 

Hebrews 10:1-2  For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect.  ² For then would they not have ceased to be offered? because that the worshippers once purged should have had no more conscience of sins.

 

The moment a sin is committed the conscience of a person is defiled.  Yielding to sin weakens the conscience both from the ability to feel guilt and to resist the next temptation.  Sins that are repented of are no longer punishable by law.  They are dead to the law; they are dead works.  Once a person has repented there is no need of punishment, but there remains a need that the conscience be purged. 

 

Had the sacrifices of the First Covenant purged the conscience of the repentant, there would have been no need to offer them again each year.  A purged conscience needs no more sacrifice.  Yet we know that forgiveness was real under the First Covenant. “If the blood of bulls and of goats… sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh:  How much more shall the blood of Christ…purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?”  This is an “if/then” logic statement.  For the second statement to be true, the first must be true.  The sacrifices did atone for their sins, but could not purge their conscience.  If our Christianity teaches no more than forgiveness of sins, we have nothing better than the First Covenant.  If our Christianity teaches that in Christ we have blanket forgiveness of all sins, then Christ is become the minister of sin, God forbid, instead of the purger of sin. 

 

Jesus has come to make the comers perfect.  Although the Law provided forgiveness for those who came to offer sacrifices with repentance, its weakness was that the Law could never make the comers thereunto perfect.  Hebrews 10:4, 14  For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins…  For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.  Jesus has come not only to forgive our sins, but to take the very nature of sin out of our hearts.

 

Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

THE HIGH CALLING

 

1.  The Fellowship of His Suffering

 

The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit: a broken and a contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise.   Psalm 51:17  

For thus saith the high and lofty One that inhabiteth eternity, whose name is Holy; I dwell in the high and holy place, with him also that is of a contrite (n) and humble spirit, to revive the spirit of the humble, and to revive the heart of the contrite ones.    Isaiah 57:15  

For our conversation is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ:    Philippians 3:20  

And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith:  ¹⁰ That I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death;  ¹¹ If by any means I might attain unto the resurrection of the dead.    Philippians 3:9-11  

I press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus.  Philippians 3:14

 

(n)  Contrite:  Strong’s  1794 dakah {daw-kaw'}

Meaning:  1) to crush, be crushed, be contrite, be broken 1a) to be crushed, collapse 1b) to be crushed, be contrite, be broken  1c1) to crush down 1c2) to crush to pieces

 

            Jesus is touched with the feeling of our infirmities and was in all points tempted like we are (Heb.4:15).  Did anyone console Jesus in His pain?  With whom did He share His brokenness and suffering all His life, not just on the cross?  -No one then, but now we share with Him.  Every time we bear pain or suffering alone without natural consolation, we are knowing Him in the fellowship of His sufferings.  He lifts us up to His high and lofty place to be revived.  This is the beginning of the resurrection of the dead.  We must first know Him in the fellowship of His sufferings.  Then we will know the power of His resurrection and attain to the resurrection of the dead. 

 

Arm Yourselves with the Same Mind

Father, I will that they also, whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am; that they may behold my glory, which thou hast given me: for thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world.    John 17:24  

 And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus: Ephesians 2:6    

 

Forasmuch then as Christ hath suffered for us in the flesh, arm yourselves likewise with the same mind: for he that hath suffered in the flesh hath ceased from sin;    1 Peter 4:1  

Beloved, think it not strange concerning the fiery trial which is to try you, as though some strange thing happened unto you:  ¹³ But rejoice, inasmuch as ye are partakers of Christ's sufferings; that, when his glory shall be revealed, ye may be glad also with exceeding joy.  ¹⁴ If ye be reproached for the name of Christ, happy are ye; for the spirit of glory and of God resteth upon you: on their part he is evil spoken of, but on your part he is glorified.    1 Peter 4:12-14  

Wherefore let them that suffer according to the will of God commit the keeping of their souls to him in well doing, as unto a faithful Creator.      1 Peter 4:19  

Who, when he was reviled, reviled not again; when he suffered, he threatened not; but committed himself to him that judgeth righteously:    1 Peter 2:23  

 

Only one who has accepted the pain of suffering can understand the forgiveness of reconciliation.  To cover a sin, as did Stephen, the first martyr, without the requirement of prior repentance is the beginning of the ministry of reconciliation.  God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.  2 Corinthians 5:19  

 

Consider this scenario:

A wife is falsely accused by her husband.  ( It doesn’t matter if the accusation is small or great.)  She recounts the facts to him as she knows them.  He disregards her words and adds more cutting statements. 

 

She may choose to grow angry and hold him to pay by her coldness until he admits his wrong at which time she will gladly forgive him.  Or, she may cover his sin not holding him to its charges.   

 

What will become of this husband?  What will become of this wife?  If the wife takes the second choice, the husband will be committed unto the merciful justice of God, instead of being held to the lawful charges of the wife.  The wife who chooses to waive the charges against her husband is committing herself to Him who judges righteously, according to I Peter 2:23, quoted above.

 

            She need not fear.  There is nothing in this world or the next that can induce Father God to ignore the suffering of the innocent.  He will avenge the innocent, but He is just.  Will he allow the perpetrator to fall into double jeopardy, being tried and punished twice for the same sin?  Either the victim will require the vengeance of the Law, or the victim will release vengeance into the hands of the Righteous Judge. 

           

Reconciliation of the world can only be accomplished through all vengeance being released into the hands of Him who said, “I will repay.”[45]  The prescriptions of the Law are weak[46].  They cannot purge sin from the conscience of the sinner[47].  Only the merciful Almighty can find the prescription that will purge each sinner.  Only He can bring the sinner to complete repentance.

 His vengeance will not stop short of a purged conscience!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2.     Adam - What’s in a Name?

A Hebrew Word Study

 

            The Hebrew name Adam means He Who Bleeds.  Hebrew root words are verbs.  Nouns are created out of the action or state of a particular verb. 

 

BLOOD:  Strong’s #1818  dam {dawm}

Meaning:  1) blood 1a) of wine (fig.)

Usage:  blood 342 times, bloody 15 times,  bloodguiltiness 1 time; 361 times in all

 

Strong’s #119   adam {aw-dam'}

Meaning: 1)  to show blood  (in the face) i.e. flush or turn rosy:-to be  (dyed, made) red (ruddy)  2) to be red, red  3) dyed red  4) reddened  5) to cause to show red  6) to emit (show) redness

There is no word in the Bible translated bleed or bled.  In the definition of dam (blood), Strong’s #1818, in Gesenius’ Hebrew-Chaldean Lexicon, the author refers to the development of a related new Arabic verb for to emit blood.  

 

            The verb adam, not the name Adam, is Strong’s #119.  The Strong’s definition is to show blood, then he adds in parenthesis, in the face and gives to flush or turn rosy as an example.  Yet the only word in the Bible translated to flush or blush is Strong’s #3637, an unrelated word that means to hurt or to be ashamed.  #3637 is found in Ezekiel 9:6, Jeremiah 6:15 and Jeremiah 8:12.  Although it is translated as a facial blush, a facial blush is not the intention of the original wording. 

 

In every place where the phrase rams’ skins dyed red occurs, such as, Exodus 25:5, dyed red is Strong’s #119 adam.  There is no word for dyed.  It is incorporated in adam. You could say rams’ skins to show blood or rams’ skins bloody.  –Not likely translations -  Maybe rams’ skins blood red.  (Adam’s name could mean He Who is Dyed Red.  Possibly that is why Mr. Strong added his suggestion of a blush.)  The issue here is not whether the rams’ skins were dyed or left raw; surely they were dyed red for the tabernacle covering.  We are looking for the origin of the word for red.

 

            Precedent from other naming words coming from the original verb form leads us to believe that to show blood or to be red came first, then the nouns derived from that verb.  We say orange both for the fruit and for the color.  Which came first?  Here we have the same question.  Was blood named after the color red or the color red named after blood?

 

            We can compare with similar words.  The name Laban  comes from the word that means to be white or to make white.  Some nouns derived from the same root verb are moon, a whitish shrub, Lebanon (the white mountain),and bricks made from white clay.  In an Arabic cookbook yogurt is called laban.  So, we see that things that are white are named from the root word laban meaning to be white.  Some words derived from #119 adam are adamah (the red earth), admoniy (red hair or a reddish complexion), adom (rosy or red), edom (red), and odem (redness, a ruby or garnet).  Notice dam, blood, is incorporated in each example.

 

            In Hebrew, things which are referred to as red are compared with the color of blood, as if   blood is the original red.  To show blood is to bleed.  How would anyone ever know the color of blood unless someone or something had bled?  Therefore Adam, He Who Bleeds, is named after the verb adam, to bleed. 

 

Adam was called the son of God.  He is He Who Bleeds.  We were all born to lay down our lives for one another.  There is no resurrection without the Cross.  Every Adam must die, that is, lay down his life, so he or she can be resurrected in a celestial body.[48]  

 

            Is Adam’s name a prophecy about the lamb slain from the foundation of the world?  Does it show that Adam, or someone of Adam, would bleed to restore the earth?  Or, maybe it was a prophecy about the suffering of all mankind.  It is all related and could all be true. 

 

One thing we know, God named Adam,

and names denote a nature or a character trait.

 

 

 

 

 

3.     The Image of the Invisible God

 

 

God created a son, a reproduction of Himself, in Adam.  Of all the characteristics of God’s nature, this is the one by which He chose to name His created son.  God the Father bleeds for His creation.  Of course, He is a Spirit and has not flesh and blood, but He lays down His rights and allows Himself to be defrauded in order to forgive His repentant children.  This is the Holiness of the Father.  He is not an unwilling tyrant ready to punish the sinner to the utmost of the Law. 

 

            His holiness does not make Him untouchable to sinners.  Jesus came as the image of the Invisible God.[49]  He said, “He that hath seen me hath seen the Father.”[50]  Jesus chose to accompany himself with sinners.  His light brought them out of their sin.  He was a physician sent to the sick.  “I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.”[51]  This is the image of the Invisible God!  -So holy that He associates with sinners to save them.  “The Son can do nothing of Himself, but whatsoever He sees the Father doing.”[52]

 

            Jesus did what He saw the Father doing.  He went to the sick, lived, slept, and ate among them.  Did God forgive because Jesus forgave, or did Jesus forgive because God forgave?  According to Jesus’ own testimony, He did what He saw the Father doing.  Therefore, we may conclude that Jesus forgave because God forgave. 

 

            Have we seen the Father in the Son?  Do we not separate the character of the Father from that of the Son by our idea of the holiness of God?  Our idea is that God cannot look on sin, that He cannot abide sin in His presence. We are told that is why God forsook Jesus on the cross when He cried, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” 

 

            We are told that at that point Jesus had become the embodiment of all sin, that He became the Sinner in the place of every sinner.  At that point, we are told, God could not look upon Him because Jesus became sin for us, and the Holy God cannot look upon sin. 

 

            Is this the picture Jesus showed us of the Invisible God?  But Jesus was the friend of sinners.  He has been touched with the feeling of our infirmities.[53]  He bore the pain of our pain; He bore our grief, and we have esteemed Him stricken of God.[54]  We thought God was punishing Him in our stead, when all along He was carrying the pain caused by every sin ever committed.  God did not punish Jesus in our stead.  We crucified the Son of God.  Each one of us holds the blame for the nails and the hammer.

 

            So, why did Jesus cry out, “Why have you forsaken me?”  Have you ever felt forsaken by God?  Have you ever spent a desperate and tearful night in loneliness, fear, and emptiness?  Jesus, the Only Begotten of the Father full of grace and truth[55], willingly carried your forsakenness.  He was touched with all of your infirmities.  He, too, knew what it was like to feel forsaken by all, even God.  And He had to endure it without the knowledge of why, just as you have. 

 

            Jesus was not stricken of God and afflicted in our stead.  That is not consistent with the nature of God that Jesus exemplified in all His earthly life.  His wounds were the wounds we gave Him, and still give Him.  He bore all our iniquity against Himself.  He is the Victim of all our sin.  From that status He forgives the repentant, waiving the penalty upon them.  He has not paid the price for your sin; He, as your victim, has waived the price of your sin.  He has borne all the pain of creation since Adam’s Fall, and He does not hold the charges against the repentant.  As Stephen cried out at his death, “Father, lay not this sin to their charge!”[56] so Jesus forgives.

 

He is the image of the Invisible God whose Holy character is to forgive!

 

 

 

 

 

The Dawning of the Day of Atonement

BEYOND THE VEIL

 

Hebrews 9:1-8

Then verily the first covenant had also ordinances of divine service, and a worldly sanctuary.  ² For there was a tabernacle made; the first, wherein was the candlestick, and the table, and the shewbread; which is called the sanctuary.  ³ And after the second veil, the tabernacle which is called the Holiest of all;  ⁴ Which had the golden censer, and the ark of the covenant overlaid round about with gold, wherein was the golden pot that had manna, and Aaron's rod that budded, and the tables of the covenant;  ⁵ And over it the cherubims of glory shadowing the mercyseat; of which we cannot now speak particularly.  ⁶ Now when these things were thus ordained, the priests went always into the first tabernacle, accomplishing the service of God.  ⁷ But into the second went the high priest alone once every year, not without blood, which he offered for himself, and for the errors of the people:  ⁸ The Holy Ghost this signifying, that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing  

 

 

Hebrews 10:19-20

Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus,  By a new and living way, which he hath consecrated for us, through the veil, that is to say, his flesh    

 

 

            We are called to enter in beyond the veil.[57]  How do we enter?  The veil is His flesh, which He gives for the life of the world.[58]  He said, “Take, Eat.”[59]  As He bore our suffering, so must we share in His suffering[60].  As we choose to lay down our own lives and share in His suffering, we are eating His flesh as the priest of old ate the sin offering.[61]  We become one with Him, as the priest and the sin offering became one victim.  His suffering is our suffering, and ours is His.  I eat His flesh and am entered into the Place of Atonement.  In Him, I am the Victim.  I may waive the charges.  I may make atonement.  This is the ministry of reconciliation.[62]  Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted.  As the Father hath sent Me, so send I you.[63]