The Two-Sided Existence

SIX

The two-sided existence

I need to turn in here to reemphasize that we indeed live in a two-sided existence. It is both corporeal and spiritual. It is wise to often remind ourselves of this. It is a strain on our attention to even recognize another human; we look then we look away. If we look at a man and say to ourselves, oh, it’s a man, we’ve recognized no more than the corporeal. How often do we actually attend the spiritual half of our existence? Our twofold existence is an issue that spans religions, philosophies, cultures, and eons. Christianity is not central to the issue, merely one satellite in orbit of its influence.

But Christian thinkers, have invested much thought in this important theme. Hebrews 11:3 says,

“Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.” Man recognizes that the spiritual is the greater aspect of our two-sided existence. It is a lazy tendency to ascribe reality to the more solid. It is erroneous to think of the more ethereal as the sole reflection. We look and feel real by way of our solidity, but science points to the ethereal spaces between our atoms and asks, what is the real power that keeps us from flying apart?

When we consider the spiritual side of our existence, the prevalent concept is of a full-fledged ‘world’ at least on a par with our own. Matthew 12:32 puts it this way, “Neither in this world, neither in the world to come.” Not only are we made up of God particles, but Christian thought ascribes ownership of both sides to God. Innately, by way of comparison, I think that all of us, choosing between our brain and our body, will ascribe ownership to the brain. That ownership walks a fine line, and must necessarily enjoin that symbiosis through concession.

If the brain makes the hand pass through a flame, the brain suffers with the body. 1 Corinthians 6:20 informs us, “For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God's.” God makes certain sacrifices to maintain the relationship. The greatest, of course, was the sacrifice of His Son. God making regular sacrifice is not an alien concept when one remembers that the pattern for the Israeli temple altar came from the altar that was real in Heaven. It is not so burdensome, then, to think that sacrifice on our part is necessary to the maintenance of our

relationship to the other side of existence, indeed, to the other side of our nature. 1 Corinthians 15:19

says this about sacrifice, “If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most

miserable.”

We are told that we may know and understand the spiritual side of existence, and even God, Himself, through things commonly known and understood here on the corporeal side. It is upon this that parables, as straight gates to the truth, are based. (Side note: ‘parable’ seems strikingly similar

to ‘parallel’). Parables make comparisons that lead the mind from the corporeal illustration to the

spiritual parallel. It is a device that will keep many out, and yet, those who are most interested, those

who ‘strive to enter in’ will discover the key.

It seems fitting that the key to all parables is another parable. Mark 4:13 points to such a key, “Know ye not this parable? and how then will ye know all parables?” It has been placed within our own powers that we can see these things for ourselves. Luke 21:29-31, “And He spake to them a parable; Behold the fig tree, and all the trees; When they now shoot forth, ye see and know of your own selves that summer is now nigh at hand. So likewise ye, when ye see these things come to pass, know ye that the kingdom of God is nigh at hand.”

Fiery Serpents

 FIVE

The Classic Pattern:

Fiery Serpents

A pattern is a representation of a reality. If that reality must be built, the pattern is a representation of something in the future. The classic pattern is that of the ‘fiery serpent’. Normally, we associate ‘serpent’ with the devil. Yet, our aspiration is to view the ‘bigger picture’. We deal with shadows. This is a pattern that represents Christ.

It is a physical healing that indicates a spiritual healing, and it is by no means chance that a snake on a pole is the physician’s symbol.

Numbers 21:6-9 begins thusly: “And the Lord sent fiery serpents among the people, and they bit the people; and much people of Israel died. Therefore the people came to Moses, and said, We have sinned, for we have spoken against the Lord, and against thee; pray unto the Lord, that He take away the serpents from us. And Moses prayed for the people. And the Lord said unto Moses, Make thee a fiery serpent, and set it upon a pole: and it shall come to pass, that every one that is bitten, when he looketh upon it, shall live. And Moses made a serpent of brass, and put it upon a pole, and it came to pass, that if a serpent had bitten any man, when he beheld the serpent of brass, he lived.”

Now, of course, many things must be taken into account. First, however, let me forestall the conclusion that Christ and Satan are somehow one and the same. This serpent, in no wise, represented the enemy in its foreshadowing of Christ.

It represented the sins of the people.

The people had set themselves up for calamity; God delivered.

The brass snake on a pole was a pattern for sin crucified. The serpent does not represent Christ, but the sin He became on our behalf. The Hebrews had to look upon the serpent to live: they had to look upon their own sin. An interesting undertone to that scenario is that the thing they ran afoul of was the thing that saved them.

This may also be applied to our spiritual salvation. John 3:14-15 says, “And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: That whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have eternal life.”

It is a step forward to go from recognition to belief. But, here we are. A man must do more than simply see Christ on the cross.

Man must learn not to downplay the communications God sends our way. Today, we are very much like the men in Christ’s day. We look at the Bible and say, oh, that’s just written by man. Our backs are turned on God. Should we, like the men of old, ever turn back around and look into the mirror, we would see God in man.

I have written that the image in a mirror reenacts our every posture. Christ communicated that His actions were the reflection of God’s actions. John 8:28 shows that. “Then said Jesus unto them, When ye have lifted up the Son of man, then shall ye know that I am He, and that I do nothing of Myself; but as My Father hath taught Me, I speak these things.”

Christ pointed to connections between God and man. Man would not see. Likewise, modern Christians reject the deeper connections between Christ and Man. (“In the third day He will raise us up.”)

This study is not about simple directions a man may go in, but more aptly about transitions of the nature of man. We are the image and glory of God, but we have turned away. If we should turn back, the underlying formational transition implied in the word “unto” from the next scripture reference makes perfect sense. John 12:32 tells us, “And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me.”

Just what if: this is not the directional up to heaven ‘unto’, but a spiritual upgrade in present man, so that each of us can be a Jesus. Check out Psalms 68:18, “Thou hast ascended on high (attained a spiritual state), thou hast led captivity captive (a dead end no more): thou hast received gifts (light) for men; yea, for the rebellious also, that the Lord God might dwell among them.”

Chapter Four: Patterns and Shadows

FOUR

Patterns & Shadows

In the evolution of communication, man first had to work through what he saw and what he knew. With that level attained, he then went on to express the more abstract by way of comparison to the familiar. Matters of a higher order had to be bodied forth using low end language. Spiritual issues were described by words heretofore used for the corporeal. Thus, examples and indications, hints and clues, became ‘patterns’ and ‘shadows’. Shadow came first, I think: it was a part of their reality, like the shadow of a high rock, or a tent: as in Isaiah 32:2 for example, “the shadow of a great rock in a weary land.”

Whereas a shadow originally might reference an object able to cast that shadow (as something needful or useful), the language soon associated the shadow with the expectation of it, as in whatever gave relief, refreshing, or revival. Job 7:2 says this, “As a servant earnestly desireth the shadow.”

Man then was able to use the fact symbolically as an example (a pattern) of higher forms of relief, refreshing, and revival. Even the saving of one’s life could be used as a pattern for something higher. If a great rock may cast a saving shadow, it is easy to step up to the next level: thus, symbolically, the great rock in a weary land becomes a savior; the shadow becomes a spiritual salvation. A ‘shadow’ now speaks of heavenly things, as says Hebrews 8:5, “Who serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things, as Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make the tabernacle: for, See, saith He, that thou make all things according to the pattern shewed to thee in the mount.”

It is in the same manner that Isaiah 4:6 becomes a reference to our Lord, “And there shall be a tabernacle for a shadow in the daytime from the heat.”

It is familiar to the well read that spiritual patterns are realized in the corporeal world. The Tabernacle that was carried for so long by the tribes of Israel is a prime example. Exodus 25:40 speaks of this, “And look that thou make them after their pattern, which was shewed thee in the mount.”

There is a spiritual, or heavenly, alter. God gave a blueprint to Moses in the mount. Joshua 22:28 says, “Behold the pattern of the altar of the Lord.” That altar was the mirror image of something that really existed in Heaven, a reflection of a spiritual object that was composed of God particles: a reality.

Not only the Tabernacle is a reflection, but all the lesser objects as well. Numbers 8:4 speaks of a candlestick that existed spiritually, “According unto the pattern which the Lord had shewed Moses, so he made the candlestick.” All the accouterments were included. Exodus 25:9 says, “According to all that I shew thee, after the pattern of the tabernacle, and the pattern of all the instruments thereof, even so shall ye make it.”

As to whether or not the spiritual objects still exist in Heaven while there is no corporeal reflection, I will not venture to guess.

The word ‘shadow’ came to use as an indication of the unseen ‘ghost’ or ‘spirit’. This may be seen to stem from such application as is found in Job 17:7, “And all my members are as a shadow.” Job’s application is of what ‘is not there’, for he had withered away as a corporeal being. While the language still struggled, man was getting ever better at abstract thought. By way of comparative symbolisms, man could point to the spiritual. Man gave words to the invisible, and expanded the scope of his reality.

Symbols such as ‘fire’ and ‘light’ sprang to the lead position, indicating that of the highest order. God is light, and in Him is no darkness; His only begotten son is the light of the world. Words may at any point be symbols. If the Holy Spirit speaks through the written word, then it behooves us to pay closer attention to such words. Is Jesus a spiritual pattern realized in a single man?

Matthew 4:16 says this, “And to them which sat in the region and shadow of death light is sprung up.”

Here, ‘shadow of death’ is used in the same manner as ‘shadow of a great rock’. One initially imagines that a shadow is cast due to a light source from behind it. It could well be that God is the light that causes both shadows, for God claimed that He also creates evil. Else, shadow may here be used simply to identify a ‘region’ without light. Could be the world. If a light is sprung up in the world, it must be the light of the world.

To continue in this vein, James 1:17 tells us, “Every good gift and every perfect gift (light) is from above, and cometh down (to the region and shadow of death) from the Father of lights

(individuals like Jesus), with whom is no variableness, neither shadow (indication) of turning.”

Psalms 91:1 continues, “He that dwelleth in the secret (unseen or spiritual) place of the most High

shall abide under the shadow (protection or authority) of the Almighty.”

I get ‘shadow’ as authority from Judges 9:15 “Then come and put your trust in my shadow.” This, of course was the Old Testament parable of the trees seeking a king (albeit, their heads were already in Heaven).

Christ, then, may be seen in a pattern. The pattern of His work in our lives may also be seen. To which pattern do I refer? I refer to the corn of wheat that must fall into the ground and die. The pattern is of bearing fruit as shown us in 1 Timothy 1:16, “Howbeit for this cause I obtained mercy, that in me first Jesus Christ might shew forth all longsuffering, for a pattern to them which should hereafter believe on Him to life everlasting.”

Likewise in Titus 2:7, “In all things shewing thyself a pattern of good works.” This, unlike prior patterns, works in reverse. The former pattern worked from the spiritual to the corporeal, the latter pattern works from the corporeal to the spiritual - as an extension of the former. The whole work, thus being finished, may be called perfect.

God looks through the mirror to man and sees Himself; He gives man a gift (the pattern working from spiritual to corporeal). That perfect gift: that light, being planted, bears fruit and is given to God, the pattern now working from corporeal to spiritual. Now, God, His image and glory being man, is magnified. This theme will receive more attention later; suffice it to say, it is one of the truths that the writer of the book of Hebrews saw and wrote of. Hebrews 10:1 explains, “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.”

Shadows may be things that are, or things hoped for. Faith has no color; faith has no texture. One may not hold the certainty of their faith in the palm of their hand to test its weight. Everything that is exists within God, made of the stuff that God is made of. Within that framework is a river of communication. The head of that river is Christ. Anything that is in us, first passed through the head, by way of communication, to the ocean that is us. We are not separate from the river, for the communication continues in circuit. Everything we are given, we return again, as the pattern of communication turns around upon itself.

Colossians 2:16-17 puts it before our eyes, “Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.”

Chapter Three

THREE

God with man

I wrote earlier that certain corporeal acts amounted to ‘turning away’ from God: rebellions which God took seriously; acts through which early man delivered himself over to perils, calamities, and plagues. Remember: God also creates evil. Perhaps these outcomes may be viewed as boundaries, beyond which man is not able to extend his will. And, mankind is definitely a rebellious lot; he seeks to extend his will. But God is willing, it seems, to work with us when some acts of ‘turning away’ are needful.

Witness Exodus 30:11-12, “And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, When thou takest the sum of the children of Israel after their number, then shall they give every man a ransom for his soul unto the Lord, when thou numberest them; that there be no plague among them, when thou numberest them.”

Early concepts of man’s connection to God placed a division between God and man. Such primitive concepts still abound. It is like saying the island is separate and different from the ocean floor that surrounds it. The Hebrew view of God set Him at a distance (in the heavens), watching. God was big and scary; He could sneak up on you and was just as apt to drop the hammer as do a favor. As they saw Him, God was either for you or against you; He was either with you or with the other guy. The Hebrew psyche revolved around a responsive lifestyle meant (hopefully) to keep God on their side.

Numbers 14:9 points to this, “Only rebel not ye against the Lord, neither fear ye the people of the land; for they are bread for us: their defence is departed from them, and the Lord is with us: fear them not.”

Deuteronomy 1:42 also points to this, “And the Lord said unto me, Say unto them. Go not up, neither fight; for I am not among you; lest ye be smitten before your enemies.”

Likewise, Judges 6:16, “And the Lord said unto him, Surely I will be with thee, and thou shalt smite the Midianites as one man.”

Between man and God, there is an interface: it is, if you will, a mirror. God stands on the one side while man stands on the other. Each looks through to their reflection. Man looks at God and sees himself; God looks at man and sees Himself. The next verse shows that God is not as far away as man has placed Him.

Numbers 17:5 shows us how close God really is, “And it shall come to pass, that the man's rod, whom I shall choose, shall blossom: and I will make to cease from Me the murmurings of the children of Israel, whereby they murmur against you.”

To most it was, and still is, enough to hope that God was with man; it was enough to know that God was with certain special individuals. These individuals exemplified the general consensus of the greater qualities of God. Not only was greater power seen in the lives of these individuals, but they seemed to be in possession of the very nature of God. Great characters of the Bible (Moses, David, Samuel, etc.) were often and highly praised for ‘higher’ attributes usually associated with God.

1 Samuel 16:17-18 points to some attributes praised in David, “And Saul said unto his servants, Provide me now a man that can play well, and bring him to me. Then answered one of the servants, and said, Behold, I have seen a son of Jesse the Bethlehemite, that is cunning in playing, and a mighty valiant man, and a man of war, and prudent in matters, and a comely person, and the Lord is with him.”

More follows in 1 Samuel 18:14, “And David behaved himself wisely in all his ways; and the Lord was with him.”

These attributes, usually of a mental nature and having a relationship to ‘communication’, will later be seen in abundance. It must be said that the relationship between God and man has never been static. There has always been communication; in fact, that is one of the most visible hallmarks of the relationship. There was, of course, communication from man to God, usually a formal or ritualized prayer. There was also communication from God to man. The most normal and acceptable to the mindset of the time was a pronouncement from a priest. Certain individuals, however, could be seen speaking to God. These men were rare and spooky, for God’s answer could be seen. Moses was such a man; Elijah was such a man; and Samuel was such a man.

1 Samuel 12:18 shows this, “So Samuel called unto the Lord; and the Lord sent thunder and rain that day: and all the people greatly feared the Lord and Samuel.”

Communication is the issue here, and the image of God is that part of a man that can be communicated with. This is the reasoning: if an invisible God looks into the mirror at man and sees Himself, is the reflection corporeal or spiritual? It will be asserted that our cognitive abilities are spiritual; that ‘spiritual’ and ‘communication’ go hand in hand; that there is no action without communication.

Numbers 14:20 states, “And the Lord said, I have pardoned according to thy word.”

Take a close look at 1 Samuel 3:19. “And Samuel grew, and the Lord was with him, and did let none of His words fall to the ground.” Such a verse as this one indicates the personal nature of the relationship between God and mankind. To what do I draw your attention but the phrase “fall to the ground?”

The reference in this verse is to a seed, but how are we to interpret it? Of references that involve seeds, the mind might go toward sayings of Jesus, such as mustard seeds that grow big in a good way, or wheat seeds that fall to the ground and die (a reference to Christ’s work). However, in regard to a personal relationship, one’s attention should be drawn to the childless widow of the Old Testament. The brother was responsible for taking her to himself. He was called upon to have a relationship with her, to communicate seed to her, that she could produce heirs in her husband’s name.

In a similar manner, God has taken man to Himself. Indeed, our relationship with God is often couched in intimate terms: for instance, Christ referred to Himself as the ‘bridegroom’. What is the point of this study? It is to investigate the ‘mirror’: that interface between God and man. Man looks into that mirror, yet struggles to make sense of it. Man’s language struggles too, for how does one describe an invisibility? Such a burden! - and yet, volumes have been written. Man’s approach to the invisible has normally been by way of comparison. Among man’s many writings on what he cannot see, two words stand forth to bear the weight of his attempts.

Chapter Two

TWO

Images

Let’s talk about images, then. In the early history of the Hebrews, the ‘graven image’ was a

big deal. I think most of us have at least a passing familiarity with this: God really had a thing about

graven images. The Hebrews lived among nations that regularly crafted images for worship, and they were sometimes drawn in. Aaron’s golden calf is a good example. Such things, back then, were the norm. But God had called the Hebrews apart from the norm; He sought to make a nation better than all the others, and a people peculiar unto Himself, a treasure. God wanted a people that lived closer to the truth. With that in mind, one can see that the Lord’s commands were more than just arbitrary restrictions.

Exodus 20:4 shows such a command, “Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.”

We today have images all around us; we have fine art and we have cheesy home interior. They are things to look at, and so we wonder: ‘what was the big deal about images?’ Deuteronomy 16:22 shows us God’s very human opinion toward them, “Neither shalt thou set thee up any image; which the Lord thy God hateth.”

The next question, necessarily, is why does God hate the image? Surely, they’re no threat to God - they are inanimate objects, but the next verse will give us several important clues in this regard. They are important because they lead us beyond the obvious.

Deuteronomy 5:8-9 says, “Thou shalt not make thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the waters beneath the earth: Thou shalt not bow down thyself unto them, nor serve them: for I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate Me.”

This is actually quite a famous verse. It is famous for its use by nonbelievers. They use it to point to what they see as cruel and arbitrary in God - that the children must pay for the sins of the fathers. The word ‘sin’ is of a different flavor than the word ‘iniquity’. ‘Iniquity’ points more toward double-dealing than toward simply breaking the law, as implied in the word ‘sin’. This comes from the Spirit. Therefore, the word ‘iniquity’ speaks of agreements and covenants. To answer the nonbeliever, the iniquity perpetrated by the fathers is not an isolated thing, but a thing taught and perpetuated down through the generations. The children are actually punished for their own iniquity.

When the father makes and worships a graven image, more goes on than meets the eye. First, the

Hebrew, having entered an agreement with God, breaks it fully knowing that God will take it as a

hostile act ( . . . Them that hate Me . . . ). Second, by the very act of worshiping a corporeal object,

a man turns his back on his spiritual God. With all the effort God invested in the Hebrews to lead

them from slavery, and take them as His own, such an act may be viewed as theft ( . . . for I the

Lord thy God am a jealous God . . . ). One can only be jealous of what truly is in His possession.

Third, on top of the iniquity of covenant breaking; on top of the sins of rebellion and theft, to teach

your own children to be the enemies of God is simply ignorant and uncaring of the good of others.

The above verse gives us a beginning clue of how directly related the corporeal is to the spiritual.

We can see then that there is a connection, from our actions, that crosses over into the spiritual realm. It anchors into something: does scripture give a clue as to what?

See Revelation 19:20, “And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone.” The 'false prophet' is a flesh and blood image of a spiritual 'beast'.

I had mentioned a covenant. The Hebrews made an agreement with God; promises were made on both sides. Terms were set. This was the agreement by which the Hebrews were exalted above all other nations; they belonged to God and would bask in His favor so long as they kept their end of the bargain. For the Hebrews, there were only two places to be: with God as God’s own, or with the other nations, who were at that time out of favor with God for such things as idol worship.

God warned His possession, His “peculiar treasure,” in Deuteronomy 4:23-24 “Take heed unto

yourselves, lest ye forget the covenant of the Lord your God, which He made with you, and

make you a graven image, or the likeness of any thing, which the Lord thy God hath forbidden

thee. For the Lord thy God is a consuming fire, even a jealous God.”

A ‘consuming fire’ is a thing that spreads in direct relation to the fuel offered to it. If you put a fire in a field of brush, it will consume everything that is dry and dead.

This study is currently exploring ‘images’, both corporeal and spiritual. It has looked at the corporeal image; taken note of God’s stand on the issue, and examined some of the reasons involved. We have gained an understanding of man’s relation to a spiritual God - that God has attempted to lead His people toward a proper relationship. We have seen that idol worship is a relationship toward the other end of the spectrum. Now we need to place our gains in a framework. When we put our previously studied ‘reasons’ within the framework of a higher reason, a new level is attained. It is like knowing where you live by way of daily familiarity, but then to stand on a hilltop and see where you live within a more concise context and from the vantage of an overview.

Leviticus 26:1 reminds me that man is the image of God, “Ye shall make you no idols nor graven image, neither rear you up a standing image, neither shall ye set up any image of stone in your land, to bow down unto it: for I am the Lord your God.”

Man is the image of God; perhaps that is why Christ said that seeing Him was seeing the Father. Perhaps that is why scripture called men gods (John 10:34-35). However, the artisan took rocks and trees and carved things that looked like corporeal flesh, and bowed to that.

Now, the next verse to be cited may seem to cast an unrelenting barrier between God and His image on earth, but it does not. Those who might try to assert that it does are comparing apples to oranges. No, the verse merely contrasts the corporeal with the spiritual.

Romans 1:23 says, “And(the workman) changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.”

Man, not man’s image, is the image of God: the ‘likeness’, to put it in another familiar term. Yes, to see a man is to see God - but not so much the flesh (and here I add another level to our vantage point) as the part that can be communicated with: the mind: (. . . If He called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture can not be broken . . . ).

That is why God has such disdain for the crafted image, as we see in Hosea 8:6, “The workman made it; therefore it is not God.”

We know that God did not prohibit all graven images. 2 Chronicles 3:10 says, “And in the most holy house he made two cherubims of image work, and overlaid them with gold.”

Only those images that will, through ignorance, cause a man to turn away from God are proscribed. Why would God ever want or need us to craft images of God? He did that, Himself, when He made man. Romans 1:23, above, spoke of the ‘glory’ of God. With the next verse, I add again a level to our comprehension of man’s relation to an invisible and uncorruptible God.

1 Corinthians 11:7 says plainly, “man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God.”

In being the ‘image and glory’ of God, man is still, nevertheless, corporeal (a shadow of what he can be). On this issue the Christian faith, though prominent, is not the only faith to hinge upon an aspiration for spiritual evolution. Man, as a being, has studied his spiritual nature since time immemorial. That the corporeal is a mere marker along our way has never been a ‘what if’ scenario.

1 Corinthians 15:49 puts it thusly, “And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also

bear the image of the heavenly.”

The Christian hope for this is a lively hope; it is a well-defined concept upon which millennia of serious thought has been dedicated, and a topic of interest voluminously recorded. The pivot on which our understanding of these matters swings is the life and death of God as a man.

Romans 6:5 states, “If we have been planted together in the likeness of His death, we shall be also in the likeness of His resurrection.”

We have seen that man is the ‘image and glory’ of God. Pre-eminent of all men is God as a

man: Jesus Christ. After all, when one looks into a mirror, the reflection is one’s own. In putting

such things together within a framework, as this study attempts to do, a higher vantage point for

perception is attained.

Things may now be seen in a new light; as part of a bigger picture, and sweet as that is, greater discoveries are still to come. We look into the mirror for a glimpse of God; we find that the reflection is not God but us. Then the realization hits home that the mirror, and all else as well, is God.

Colossians 1:15-17 astounds us, “Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: For by Him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by Him, and for Him: And He is before all things, and by Him all things consist.”

We consist of God. We are made of God particles. Both the spiritual and the corporeal consist of God. We, ourselves, are a level (powers) in the cosmic order created by Christ. Strong meat, indeed! But here, we must stop and take a step back. In order that all may realize the truth, a reasonable effort must be applied to the gradual transition upward, building level upon level.

Book One, Chapter One

Table of Content

Book One:

The Great Reflection

1. Introduction

2. Images

3. God With Man

4. Patterns and Shadows

5. The Classic Pattern:

Fiery Serpents

6. The Two-Sided Existence

7. Mirror Image

8. Facing the Mirror

9. Through the Interface

10. Elusive Reality

11. USMs: Universal Spiritual Mechanics

Laws and Theories

12. Rhyme and Reason

Book Two:

The Spiritual / Corporeal Handshake

1. Dualities

2. Following Suit

3. Actions Initiated From the Other Side

4. Does the Spiritual Require the Corporeal?

5. Ups and Downs

6. More Toward the Spirit

7. Working the Lines

8. Man / Son of Man

Part One

Book Three:

The Upper Room

1. Man / Son of Man

Part Two

2. Man / Son of Man

Part Three

3. Ingestion

4. The Holy Ghost

5. Holy Communication

6. Spirit and Truth:

a Two-Sided Coin

7. Man and God:

a Two-Sided Coin

8. The Power of the Mind

9. A New Focus

Book Four

What Exactly is Spiritual?

1. The Effort to See

2. Our New Mind

3. Crook’d Staff in Hand

4. Am I a Rock, Am I an Island?

(Are your thoughts really your own?)

5. What Exactly is Spiritual?

6. Perception

7. Practicing the God-Mind

8. Mapping Out Your New Mind

9. The Purpose of the New Mind

10. Every Man is a Letter

11. Realization

12. Embracing Spirituality

13. Discerning Spirits

14. Heart and Mind

15. Discerning Evil Spirits

16. Levels and Types

Emotional Levels

Lost Levels

Social Levels

Aggregate Levels

The Mindful Type

The Spiritual Archetype

Three Bonus Studies

Book One

The Great Reflection

INTRODUCTION

I am entering a study that chases shadows; that pursues phantoms. It will be a study that will

stalk secrets and clutch clues. I will conclude with a greater understanding of the relationship

between what is corporeal and what is spiritual. I will look at the interface between the two; a

looking glass not unlike Alice’s, where secret transactions occur, and the stirrings of enlightenment

are broadcast.

We are familiar with the concept that the earthly temple is a reflection of the Heavenly, a

shadow of things to be. This study, then, will deal with ‘mirror images’; and of all reflections, I will

begin with man, for man was created in the ‘likeness’ or ‘mirror image’ of his creator; and while the

flesh may be a secondary issue, we may see that, of our nature, we have inherited certain family

traits. If we, then, derive what we call human nature from God, it should be no surprise that God

displays some of those same traits.

Micah 1:8 gives us an image of God in His own words, “Therefore I will wail and howl, I will go stripped and naked: I will make a wailing like the dragons, and mourning as the owls.”

We, as a race, struggle with our search for a concept of God. It is a real issue for us because

we ‘feel’ connected, but are hardly sure how. Accordingly, many cling to a fragmented concept: the

group on the right will say God is love; the group on the left will say God is a man of war - both

concepts are scripturally based. Both, however, are examples of people seeking a single, simple

answer. I might be jumping ahead of myself, to introduce the meat of the word of God to those not

yet weaned from the milk, but quite frankly, a stronger constitution is needful to bear up under the

weight of the ‘bigger picture’.

Isaiah 45:7 gives us that bigger picture thusly, “I form the light, and create darkness: I

make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things.”

This may not sit well with those who believe that God ‘cannot’ look upon evil. It may not

sit well with those who believe that God ‘cannot’ lie. As for me, I think it wise not to place

limitations on God. He can do whatever He wants to do. He’s God. I don’t have a problem with that

concept of God; to me, He is still Holy and Reverend. The point I wish to stress in regard to Isaiah

45:7 is that if we are made in the likeness of God, we should not whitewash His or our nature. I think

we must simply trust that He has a plan. Some people, and not a few, get caught up in that whole

‘how can God allow bad things to happen to good people’ thing.

Hosea 6:1-3 gives us a better mental approach to the issue, “Come, and let us return unto the Lord: for He hath torn, and He will heal us; He hath smitten, and He will bind us up. After two days will He revive us: in the third day He will raise us up, and we shall live in His sight. Then shall we know, if we follow on to know the Lord: His going forth is prepared as the morning; and He shall come unto us as the rain, as the latter and former rain unto the earth.”

An interesting note about this particular verse is its reference to ‘cyclic’ occurrences such as

rain, such as the rising sun. The word ‘prepared’ is significant, as will be seen later. Note, too, that

the ‘cyclic’ reference is but a small part of a larger reference, or ‘a shadow’: and that is our salvation

in Christ through His resurrection - He being lifted, or raised up, draws all men up with Him. It bears

repeating that this study will deal with shadows and reflections. If you are desirous of truth, as am

I, then what we want out of all this is an understanding. We just want to know. By and by, we will

know, that is if we do not trip ourselves up on old preconceptions. It would not do if our best

reasoning only led us back to incomplete first thoughts.

If God’s word is, as the scripture states and I believe, a treasure chest containing both old and new treasure, should we ignore the new? Take for example the concept bodied forth in Isaiah 43:10. As concepts go, this will seem foreign to many staunch advocates of God’s God-ness. So many times have I heard from them that God has no beginning and no end, even though they will completely accept that Christ is the Alpha and Omega (beginning and end).

Here is what Isaiah 43:10 says: “Ye are my witnesses, saith the Lord, and My servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe Me, and understand that I am He: before Me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after Me.”

And here is my paraphrased version of that verse: “You are My witness and My chosen servant, says God, that you may both know and believe that I am actually God. There was no god formed before Me, and there shall be no god formed after Me.”

If we truly believe the verity of God’s written word, then what we see here is God, Himself,

indicating how He came into being: by some process (here unstated) of formation or realization. In all of our experience, the process of formation requires an external power or agency to form the thing that is formed. In the absence of another power, God was the agency that formed himself.

In a closed loop of serial recurrences, the Trinity may be the diagram of that process.

So then, what of man: that we are formed in His image? Is not a reflection an image of something

that we believe to be real? If we look into a mirror, our reflection reenacts our every posture, and the

image appears just as real.

A Heads-up

Just a thankful heads-up to anyone who takes the time to read what I write. I have decided to return to my roots, so to speak. I plan to edit my first book, "The Great Reflection", and post it as a blog, chapter by chapter. Look for the first installment tomorrow.

There You Have It

I began topically, striving to reach a point in mentation whereby understanding of the scriptures began with and revolved around definition. The work, somehow, transformed itself into a serial attempt at broader clarity, as I went through the book of Luke point by point. I will not continue through the book of John in similar fashion, as I think that book deserves a study unto itself.

No. This is a good place to end this study, and perhaps, to make a return to the topical nature this work began with. I began this study with a pet peeve – namely, how people use a word or concept without first defining it. They seem to think if they say it loudly enough, the meaning will, somehow, come through on its own. I began this study with the much-maligned concept of 'Love'. I said I might return to it, as well the concept that the strait gate might be a Biblical passage.

I am not trying to extend this study, but rather, to bring it to an adequate end. Still, these topics are due further scrutiny. I, of course, will continue to ponder such things – I am an affirmed seeker, after all. But, what about you? Have I reached my fellow-seekers? If I have, here are a few things you might try on your own.

Choose a topic you might find in the Bible. That topic might be 'love', or 'key', 'spirit', 'knowledge', or anything you decide upon. Get yourself a good Bible engine for your computer. Type in that word and search out every instance of its use. Collect them. Place them together and arrange them in an order that helps you to better understand the concept. Combine them into a synthesis that is not overly loquacious. Let it be as brief and lean as possible. Let there be definition. It'll be good.

I leave you with these thoughts. We are seekers. How does one define a seeker? A seeker might seek anything thing. If we claim we seek truth, someone might counter, “What is truth? Are mine the same as yours?” Language contains many words. They orbit concepts like planets and moons. There may be no single answer to existence and purpose of life, rather many individual definitions. However, I see and seek in an existence that is inclusive – it holds the one and it holds the many.

A lot of people seek only their individuality and license. They are like the waves in the sea. Some others seek oneness. They are also like waves in the sea. Even those who imagine they are Captains of their own vessels, charting a course under their own steam, cannot deny they are still part of something bigger than themselves – something that includes them with all else it holds.

All existence, life, being, seeking – they are directional, they are developmental. We move toward something by moving away from something else. We become. The seeker is a 'becomer'. We do not seek idle states of trivia-glut. When we finally find that which we have sought, we add it to ourselves. We become ourselves, plus that which we have discovered. Then – what if what we have discovered is the whole? What if our adding the whole to ourselves is only us mirroring the whole adding us to itself?

A physical Jesus said that which is born of the spirit is spirit. Be the seeker, be the treasure you find. One may be the question and the answer. One may be the wave and the sea.    

The Vanishing Savior

The following, in my opinion, is one of the coolest stories in the new testament. It is later on the same day that the women discover Jesus is missing from the tomb. They went down very early that Sunday morning and after the discovery, they went to the disciples with their news. Peter went to the grave to see for himself.

The group of disciples to which the women brought their news included much more people than the core group. Luke 24:9 informs us that the women brought their news to “the eleven, and all the rest.” When we think of the following of Jesus, we think of men and women together. Some women followed Jesus from the beginning of his ministry in Galilee. Some men traveled with their wives and sisters and mothers. There is evidence of children among the followers.

So, the news of the resurrection was announced in the early morning hours and later in the day, two of the disciples took off walking down a road openly and without fear. They were on their way to a town named Emmaus. That particular town was believed to be approximately seven miles from Jerusalem. When I walk at a fast pace, I can cover three miles in about forty-five minutes. Since they were taking their time, I give them a walking time of around three hours.

Of the two disciples, one is immediately named. He is Cleophas, with some translations being Alphaeus or Clopas. Many scholars identify this disciple as the brother of Joseph, the husband of Mary. His wife was also named Mary and his sons included Jude, James, and Simon, half-brothers or cousins of Jesus. The unnamed disciple may have been Cleophas' son Simon. More on that later.

These two disciples are joined on the road to Emmaus by Jesus himself, only they do not recognize him. Their eyes are closed to his true identity. While it is possible that Jesus looked different after his death on the cross and three days in the grave, this is not the only instance where Jesus is not recognized after his resurrection. From an account in another gospel, Mary Magdalene sees him but thinks he might be the groundskeeper.

When the two disciples reached their home in Emmaus, they invited Jesus to eat with them. The reason why is found in Luke 24:29. It was getting close to dark, as the verse says, “it is toward evening, and the day is far spent.” I mention this only to point out the time of departure from the main group. An approximate three-hour walk would have placed their departure around noon.

As they ate, Jesus took the bread, blessed it and broke it – sort of a signature move. One of the core disciples would have recognized that from the last supper, but no doubt, in his three years of ministry, Jesus would have often eaten with his followers, perhaps breaking bread, in the same way, each time. It was at the point where Jesus blessed and broke the bread that the two disciples' eyes were opened and they recognized the man as Jesus.

He sat right there with them. He had been in their company for hours preaching from the scriptures, but only now they saw him for who he was. Their mouths must have fallen open only to be stammering and speechless. There he sat – Jesus, back from the dead. They recognized their Lord – and then he just vanished. In our day and age, we are used to many fantastic representations in TV and film, but he vanished as he sat between them. Did the bread fall from hands no longer there?

They had not recognized him until that moment, but something in them wanted to. They may have thought the style and delivery of preaching seemed familiar – they just couldn't place it with the face. They reasoned among themselves, in verse thirty-two, “Did not our heart burn within us, while he talked with us by the way, and while he opened to us the scriptures?”

Of course, they had to jump right up and run back to the other disciples. Another three-hour trek, perhaps this time made in half the time. And here is the part I mentioned earlier that I would get back to. They recounted their adventure to the others, perhaps waking them to do so, and they said in verse thirty-four, “The Lord is risen indeed,” and here, they did not say that Jesus had revealed himself unto them, which might have seemed more natural, but they mentioned a name, “and hath appeared to Simon.”

Had Cleophas blinked or looked away at the critical moment? Was Cleophas very old with diminished eyesight? If he was revealed to Simon, then is that Simon the unnamed disciple? Even as they recounted their tale, Jesus appeared to all of them. It startled them, hearts were racing. Many still did not believe the resurrection, they had just lost their Lord to the cruelty of the Romans, a thing that all their experience told them was permanent.

He proved to them that he was real, that he was back. He ate something in their sight. He showed his physical wounds to them. In other gospel accounts, Jesus upbraids them for their unbelief, but not in Luke. As he had done for the two disciples on the road to Emmaus, Jesus explained everything. He then led them to Bethany where he blessed them and was “carried” up into heaven.

Carried by what, or by whom? Was it a moonlit evening? Was it cloudy? Certainly, as endings go, this one is brief. Some accounts have him around for as many as forty days after his resurrection. In those other accounts, he heals and preaches and is seen by thousands. Did he reveal himself to his accusers, or did they hear of his presence, perhaps seeking verification, but all too late? Did Pilate hear of his doings in those final forty days? All of that would make a great movie, but more importantly, and lastly, what was the significance of Luke's exclusion of the forty days? Was there significance in Jesus revealing only “unto the eleven, and to all the rest?” Was there significance to the location of the Ascension? Bethany was the home of Lazarus (another resurrected) and Mary.

Things We Don't Notice

We turn our attention to the last chapter in the book of Luke. We look at the first twelve verses. The women from chapter twenty-three return to the sepulcher. They had followed to see where Joseph placed the body, then they went home to prepare the spices. After that, they observed the Sabbath – in other words, they had to wait a whole day before they could return with the spices they had prepared.

So. let us check our facts. It is very early on a Sunday morning. The women who returned to the grave of Jesus are listed in verse ten. They were Mary Magdalene, Joanna, and Mary the mother of James. Wikipedia tells us this about Mary the mother of James:

Although James the younger is often identified with James, son of Alphaeus, the New Advent Encyclopedia identifies him with both James, son of Alphaeus and James the brother of Jesus (James the Just). According to the surviving fragments of the work Exposition of the Sayings of the Lord of the Apostolic Father Papias of Hierapolis, who lived c. 70–163 AD, "Mary, mother of James the Less and Joseph, wife of Alphaeus was the sister of Mary the mother of the Lord, whom John names of Cleophas"

These three women were not alone, they were in the company of other women. Verse one calls them “certain others” while verse ten calls them “other women that were with them.” So, there were at least two other women present with the listed three. In all probability, there were more than two. These were the women who had followed Jesus from the beginning of his ministry in Galilee.

Again, early on the first day of the week, these women who had followed Jesus from Galilee went to the tomb. In verses two through four, they found the stone rolled away, they entered the tomb only to discover that the body was gone, and they were “much perplexed.” They were bewildered, uncertain, and troubled over the turn of events.

I mention all of this in preparation for making a point. Of course, they were surprised to find the body missing, but my point is that the stone being rolled away was just as much an eye-opener. They had followed to see Jesus buried. There is little doubt they also saw the stone being rolled into place.

Did these women go to the grave expecting to see the stone rolled away? The short answer is no. At least five of them went to the grave – perhaps, they thought that such a number was sufficient to roll the stone away. This little bit of information is perhaps a clue to the size of the stone and the entrance to the grave. More clues to follow.

A dead body is like a sack of potatoes. It is hard to manage. The size of the grave entrance had to be sufficient for at least two men to carry a body through it. Since no mention of the women having trouble entering the grave is made, one may assume that the sepulcher was designed with a slight descent into the cavity.

So, the women who actually entered came back out with the news, and as they stood perplexed, two men appeared in shining garments. White garments were not unheard of in that culture, but the implementation of the word 'shining' suggests something other than merely white cloth. When Jesus was on the mountaintop with Moses and Elijah, all three of them were shining. We have a kind of naturally shiny view of angels. But, it was also around dawn when these events transpired. The sun was coming up. The light could have caught the white garments in an especially eye-catching manner.

The women were so taken by the appearance of the two men that, in fear, they fell on their faces. Now, one may think of that culture and time as a people who would fall on their faces at the drop of a hat, but a sudden reflexive fear is more in keeping with human nature as we know it. For instance, what does one do when he or she perceives the near report of gunfire? They hit the deck. It is only human nature to duck and cover.

The women of the Bible are not as often mentioned as the men. In this particular case, we find them equal to the men in a certain sense. That is, they had to be reminded what Jesus told them. They were with Jesus from the beginning; they heard all of his sermons, all of his sayings. Yet, like the men, they had to be reminded. This too is human nature.

If only they had believed his words from the beginning! All of us who have grown old reach a point of personal realization where we think, 'why didn't I listen to my parents? They were right from the beginning. How much I might have spared myself if only I had listened.'

They thought he was dead, but then, they were reminded of his words – and they believed. They ran to tell the apostles. Herein lies another point we don't notice. We have bought into the general concept of frightened apostles cowering in darkened rooms for fear of their lives. Multitudes followed Jesus. They followed him to Jerusalem. They lost him for a time but found him again after the trial. They followed him to the crucifixion and stood afar off.

The remaining eleven apostles were not the only apostles of Jesus, they were just his inner circle. Aside from the general multitude, there were at least seventy-two other appointed apostles. You may recall that Jesus, in chapter ten, sent them two by two, in the same manner, he had sent out the twelve – preaching and healing. When the women went to the eleven with their news, verses nine and ten inform us that “the apostles” noted in verse ten included “all the rest” mentioned in verse nine.

And then there was Peter. He was somewhat mercurial in nature. When first receiving the news, he with the others did not believe. He thought they were idle tales. But Peter gave the matter a second thought. Maybe, just maybe, they were right. What was it Jesus had said? So, Peter leaps to his feet and “runs” to the sepulcher.

Here is another clue about the grave – that is to say, about its design. Peter, in verse twelve, did not enter the grave but stooped down and looked inside. “Stooping down” is that clue. From a stooping position outside the grave entrance, Peter was able to see the place where the body had been laid. The body was absent but the “linen clothes” were still there.

Some depictions of the sepulcher have a great round wheel of a stone that may only be moved by the strength of many. Some scholars imagine a grave where the entrance is on top and the body has to be lowered into the cavity. It is human nature that we run with whatever is in front of us. When they say big wheel, we go with it. When they say hole in the ground, we go with it.

We think one thing by excluding all other possibilities. Well, here is another possibility. The grave was small enough to stoop down and see inside. The stone that was rolled away from the entrance was small enough that approximately five women thought they could move it.