ENDTIME ISSUES NEWSLETTER No. 164

“The Centrality of the Cross”

Samuele Bacchiocchi, Ph. D.

Retired Professor of Theology and Church History

Andrews University

How to unsubscribe to this newsletter :

To unsubscribe simply click on this address and send it:

mailto:endtimeissues-unsubscribe@lists.biblicalperspectives.com

No additional words or explanations are necessary. The TAGNET server is set up to automatically remove your address. If you have a problem, send us an email at <mailto:sbacchiocchi@biblicalperspectives.com> saying “unsubscribe me and we will ask TAGNET to remove your address manually.

How to subscribe to this newsletter:

To subscribe simply click on this address and send it:

mailto:endtimeissues-subscribe@lists.biblicalperspectives.com

No additional words or explanations are necessary. The TAGNET is set up to automatically add your address to the list. If you have a problem, send us an email at <mailto:sbacchiocchi@biblicalperspectives.com> saying “subscribe me,” and we will ask TAGNET to enter your address manually. 

You may be wondering how do I chose the topic for a newsletters? The answer is found in different circumstances that alert me to the relevance of a topic. Sometimes I get the clue from email messages, which express concerns about issues debated by some Adventists. This was especially true of ongoing debate over the Trinity that led me to post 4 newsletters by different Adventist scholars. (See Newsletters Ns. 147, 148, 149, and 150).

Sometimes I read a perceptive article which I feel would benefit our readers. This was the case with the newsletter No. 162 “A Fresh Look at the Creation/Evolution Debate” by Allen Shepherd, M. D., Physician and Pastor. I found his article in the Adventist magazine Perspective Digest and immediately I asked Dr. Shepherd for permission to post it in our newsletter.

Sometimes is the rush of natural disasters like Tsunami and Katrina, that caused me to seek for answers to such troubling questions: Why is God allowing such a chain of disasters to occur in such a rapid succession? How can a benevolent God allow earthquakes and hurricanes to kill thousands of people and destroy entire towns and villages? Are these disaster senseless, freaks of nature or do they convey a message from God to mankind through the fearful scenes that have captured the attention of the entire world? You will find a discussion of these question in newsletter No. 138.

Sometimes is the continuous media coverage of a major crisis of our times such as “Islam and Terrorism.” This crisis caused me to investigate first the teachings of the Koran on the use of violence to advance Islam and then the possible prophetic role of Islam as an Antichrist power that persecutes God’s people and promotes false worship. The findings of my research were posted in newsletters 84, 85, and 86. The demand of newsletter No. 86 on “Islam in Prophecy” continues unabated.

The circumstances that led me to post this newsletter on “The Centrality of the Cross,” are almost embarrassing. The inspiration came from the mistake that I made when I asked the printer to reprint twice the same book The Passion of Christ in Scripture and History. When I asked the printer to reprint The Passion of Christ for the second time, I forgot that he had already delivered me the reprint two weeks earlier.

If forgetfulness is a sign of old age, then it is evident that I am getting old. In fact this coming Sabbath, January 27, 2007 our extended family will all come home to celebrate “Nonno=Grandfather” 69th birthday. Other relatives will join us for the celebration. My wife has been cooking much of this week for this event. How nice it would be if I could invitate you to enjoy some tasty (delizioso) Italian food.

When I became aware of the mistake that I made, I was reminded of Romans 8:28: “We know that in everything God works for good with those who love him.” The more I thought and prayed about how to deal with my mistake, the deeper the conviction developed within my heart, that perhaps this was a providential mistake. Perhaps the Lord is telling me that the message of this timely book needs to reach many people around the world. To achieve this goal I have decided to offer The Passion of Christ as an outreach witnessing book at a bargain price. Before telling you about the bargain price, let me introduce you to the content of the book.

What is Special about The Passion of Christ in Scripture and History?

The book The Passion of Christ first came off the press on November 2004 largely as a response to Gibson’s movie on The Passion of the Christ. The first printing of 5000 copies was sold out in a matter of a few weeks, largely as a result of a two hours interview on 3ABN. In the interview I shared the highlights of the book, focusing especially on the major differences between the Catholic and the Adventist view of Christ’s suffering and death.

The response to the 3ABN interview was overwhelming. For the next three weeks the telephone kept on ringing as viewers from different parts of the world were calling to order a copy of the book. At this time we have decided to offer you not only the book at a bargain price but also the 3ABN DVD album with the two hours interview FREE OF CHARGE. The details will be given shortly.

The book has two objectives. The first is to expose the unbiblical teachings found in Gibson’s movie The Passion of the Christ. The movie is largely drawn from Catholic legends and mystical literature that grossly distorts the biblical view of the nature and meaning of Christ’s atoning sacrifice. Gibson has produced a strict Catholic film with a distinctive Catholic message derived from Catholic legends and superstitious beliefs. For example, Mary is portrayed as a co-sufferer with her Son at the 14 Stations of the Cross in order to justify her role as a co-redeemer.

In accordance with Catholic teachings, in the movie Christ is brutally and relentlessly tortured from the time of His arrest until His death, in order to satisfy the demands of divine justice. In other words, for Catholics, Christ had to suffer the punishment for all the sins ever committed by mankind in order to satisfy the demands of divine justice. Is this what the Bible teaches? Are we saved by the intensity of Christ’s suffering or by His perfect life, sacrifice, and intercession for our salvation? This important question is discussed at length in the book The Passion of Christ.

The Subjective and Objective Aspects of the Cross

The second objective is to investigate the biblical teachings regarding the centrality, necessity, and achievements of the Cross. The study shows that the Cross has both a subjective and an objective dimension. Subjectively, through the Cross God reveals the depth of His love in being willing to offer His Son for undeserving sinners.

Objectively, the Cross reveals how God dealt with the objective reality of sin, not by minimizing its gravity, but by revealing its costliness in assuming its penalty. God did not cause His Son to suffer the harsh punishment portrayed in Gibson’s movie to meet the demands of His own justice, but was willing through His Son to become flesh and suffer the punishment of our sins in order to redeem us without compromising His own character.

To understand the achievements of the Cross, I have examined in their socio-historical content the following five word pictures: propitiation, redemption, justification, reconciliation, and intercession. These word pictures take us from the sacrifices in the Temple court (propitiation), to the price paid for the manumission of the slaves in the marketplace (redemption), to a law court where a judge pronounces an accused person “not guilty” (justification), to the renewal of relationships with family and friends (reconciliation), to Christ’s ministry in the heavenly sanctuary (intercession). These word pictures represent partial attempts to capture glimpses of the significance and value of Christ’s death for our present life and future destiny.

An Ideal Book for Witnessing Outreach

The Passion of Christ is an ideal book for witnessing, because on the one hand it helps people to understand the prevailing misconceptions regarding Christ’s suffering and death, and on the other hand it leads people to appreciate the unique, biblical Adventist view of the suffering, death, and heavenly intercession of Christ.

Since the proof is in the pudding, I decided to offer you a taste of The Passion of Christ by posting in three newsletters excerpts from chapter 4 where I deal with “The Cross of Christ.” The chapter is divided in the following three major parts:

1. The Centrality of the Cross

2. The Necessity of the Cross

3. The Achievements of the Cross

Each part will be posted on a separate newsletter. Judge for yourself the value of this Bible Study on the Cross of Christ. If you feel that this study is greatly enriching your understanding and appreciation of Christ’s suffering, death, and intercession for our salvation, then you may wish to hasten to order copies of The Passion of Christ for yourself and for witnessing to your friends. You can view the attractive cover of the book and read its description, by clicking at this link: http://www.biblicalperspectives.com/PassionOffer

Special Offer on the Book The Passion of Christ

To facilitate a large distribution of the book The Passion of Christ in Scripture and History, we are offering for the next 30 days until February 28, 2007, the book at a special “witnessing outreach” price. With the purchase of two or more copies of the book, you will also receive a FREE 3ABN DVD album with my interview on The Passion of Christ. The album regularly sells for $50.00.

This is the special offer for quantity orders of The Passion of Christ in Scripture and History.

1 copy of the book for $25.00, postage paid.

No free 3ABN DVD album included.

2 copies of the book for $40.00, postage paid. ($20.00 each).

Plus ONE free 3ABN DVD album included.

5 copies of the book for $50.00, postage paid. ($10.00 each).

Plus ONE free 3ABN DVD album is included.

20 copies of the book for $100.00, postage paid. ($5.00 each).

Plus TWO free 3ABN DVD albums are included.

50 copies of the book for $150.00, postage paid. ($3.00 each).

Plus THREE free 3ABN DVD albums are included.

Four Ways to Order The Passion of Christ

  (1) Online: By clicking here: http://www.biblicalperspectives.com/PassionOffer

(2) Phone: By calling us at (269) 471-2915 to give us your credit card number and postal address.

(3) Email: By emailing your order to <sbacchiocchi@biblicalperspectives.com>. Be sure to provide your postal address, credit card number, and expiration date.     

(4) Regular Mail: By mailing a check to BIBLICAL PERSPECTIVES, 4990 Appian Way, Berrien Springs, Michigan 4990, USA. We guarantee to process your order immediately.

BENEDICT XVI CLAIMS THAT CHRIST ESTABLISHED SUNDAY OBSERVANCE

Both the late Pope John Paul II and the current Pope Benedict XVI have made determined efforts to defend Sunday as a biblical and apostolic institutions. In my book The Sabbath Under Crossfire I devoted the first chapter to an analysis of John Paul II’s Pastoral Letter “Dies Domini—The Lord’s Day.” In his Letter John Paul makes a passionate plea for a revival of Sundaykeeping by appealing to the moral imperative of the Sabbath commandment to justify Sunday observance. He calls upon the international community of nations to promulgate civil legislation to protect its observance.

Benedict XVI is following the footsteps of John Paul II by making the participation in the Sunday Eucharist the keystone of his program for Catholic renewal. The emphasis of his homilies has been on the need of Christians to be nourished every Sunday by the Eucharistic Bread which contains the body and blood of Christ. “Christians can thus replenish the energy they need to continue on the journey we must make every week.”

From a Catholic perspective Christians draw their strength primarily, not from the Sunday proclamation of the Word or from the daily study of the Bible, but from the partaking of the Eucharistic Bread which at the priestly consecration becomes the very body and blood of Jesus. The study of the Bible is still largely unknown to Catholics. The essence of Catholic Sunday worship is a physical reception of the sacraments. Catholics worship what they can see, touch, and eat. This attempt to objectify the sacred into something that can be manipulated, is at the root of every idolatrous religions.

Our immediate concern is not to discuss the idolatrous nature of Catholic worship (which I may address in a future newsletter), but rather to respond to Benedict XVI’s attempts to promote Sunday as an apostolic institution. In a recent letter (January 9. 2007) addressed to Cardinal Francis Arinze, Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship, Benedict XVI commends the plans of the congress “to examine in depth the theme: ‘Sunday Mass for the sanctification of the Christian People.’”

To give biblical sanction to the Sunday Eucharistic celebration, Benedict XVI states: “Sunday was not chosen by the Christian community but by the Apostles, and indeed by Christ himself, who on that day, “the first day of the week”, rose and appeared to the disciples (cf. Mt 28:1; Mk 16: 9; Lk 24:1; Jn 20:1,19; Acts 20:7; I Cor 16: 2), and appeared to them again “eight days later” (Jn 20:26).” (Emphasis supplied).

Evaluation of the Resurrection

In the Pope’s view, Christ established Sunday observance by resurrecting on the first day of the week and then appearing to the disciples “eight days later.” Numerous Catholic and Protestant Scholars share the same view. In spite of its popularity, the alleged role of the Resurrection in the adoption of Sunday observance lacks biblical and historical support. A careful study of all the references to the Resurrection, reveals the incomparable importance of the event, but it does not provide any indication regarding a special weekly or annual day to commemorate it.

The New Testament attributes no liturgical significance to the day of Christ’s Resurrection simply because the Resurrection was seen as an existential reality experienced by living victoriously by the power of the Risen Savior, and not a liturgical practice associated with Sunday worship. The very designation “Day of the Resurrection” is absent in the New Testament, obviously because the first day of the week on which Christ arose, was not viewed or observed as the memorial of the Resurrection.

Had Jesus wanted to memorialize the day of His Resurrection, He would have capitalized on that day to make it the fitting memorial of that event. When He appeared to the women first and to the disciples later, He would have invited them to come apart and celebrate His resurrection. But none of the utterances of the risen Savior reveal an intent to memorialize the day of His Resurrection by making it the new Christian day of rest and worship. Biblical institutions such as the Sabbath, Baptism, and the Lord’s Supper all trace their origin to a divine act that established them. But there is no such divine act for the institution of a weekly Sunday or an annual Easter Sunday memorial of the Resurrection.

The silence of the New Testament on this matter is very important since most of its books were written many years after Christ’s death and Resurrection. If by the latter half of the first century Sunday had come to be viewed as the memorial of the Resurrection, as the Pope claims, we would expect to find in the New Testament some allusions to the religious meaning and observance of the weekly Sunday and/or annual Easter-Sunday.

Easter-Sunday Introduced by the Bishop of Rome

There are no references in the New Testament even to Easter-Sunday. In fact, when the Bishop of Rome introduced and promoted Easter-Sunday in the second century, he stirred up the so-called “Quartodeciman Controversy—Fourteenth Controversy,” because many Christians refused to accept Easter-Sunday. They insisted on observing Passover according to the biblical date of Nisan 14, thus rejecting the Easter-Sunday celebration demanded by the Pope.

The total absence of any allusion in the NT to a weekly-Sunday or annual Easter-Sunday celebration of the resurrection, indicates that such developments occurred in the post-apostolic period as a result of an interplay of political, social, and religious factors. These factors are examined at length in my dissertation From Sabbath to Sunday.

Prof. Vincenzo Monachino, S. J., who directed my dissertation, had no problems in acknowledging the possible post-apostolic origin of Sunday. In the PREFACE to my dissertation From Sabbath to Sunday, he wrote: “We gladly mention the thesis that Bacchiocchi defends regarding the birth-place of Sunday worship: for him this arose most probably, not in the primitive Church of Jerusalem, well-

known for its profound attachment to Jewish religious traditions, but rather in the Church of Rome. The abandonment of the Sabbath and the adoption of Sunday as the Lord’s Day, are the result of an interplay of Christian, Jewish, and pagan factors” (pp. 7-8). These factors are examined at length in my dissertation.

BACCHIOCCHI RESPONDS TO FALSE ALLEGATIONS

It is evident that the findings of my investigation into the origin of Sunday are not popular with current Catholic authorities who are determined to promote Sunday observance as a biblical, apostolic institution. This may explain the recent attempt of the General Secretary of the Pontifical Gregorian University to attack my moral integrity and to discredit my scholarly credibility. In an official document the General Secretary accuses me of having falsely claimed to have received the summa cum laude academic distinction, the gold medal donated by Pope Paul VI, and the imprimatur for the abridged and unabridged versions of my dissertation.

During the past three months I worked diligently to prepare an official response to these false allegations made against me. I shared my documented response in the Newsletters No. 159 and 160. If you missed these newsletter, you can read my official response by clicking at this link http://www.biblicalperspectives.com/Gregoriana1

On January 3, 2007 I sent by registered airmail my official documented response to the Rector (President) and to the General Secretary of the Pontifical Gregorian University. On January 23 I called the office of the Rector to find out if the documents had been received. The response was that no documents had been delivered to the Rector’s Office. Without delay, I printed another set of documents and this time I sent them UPS express. The trucking Number 4686 0863 232 indicated that they were delivered Friday morning, January 26, at 10:22 a. m. This is the official UPS report:

Tracking Number: 4686 0863 232

Type: Package

Status: Delivered

Delivered on: 01/26/2007 - 10:22 A.M.

Delivered to: IT

Signed by: DI CARE

Service Type: EXPRESS

From the delivery date of January 26, 2007, a period of 60 days is granted to examine my documented response of 46 pages. If no reply is received within 60 days, I will explore my options with legal counsel. I will keep you updated on future developments.

If you are interested to read my documented response sent to the Rector and General Secretary of the Pontifical Gregorian University, just click this link:

http://www.biblicalperspectives.com/Gregoriana1

EDWARD READ’S INACCURATE STATEMENT ON 3ABN

An Australian non-SDA minister just emailed me a message (January 26, 2007), asking me to explain an inaccurate statement made on 3ABN by Pastor Edward Reid, Stewardship Secretary for the North American Division and author of Sunday’s Coming. The 3ABN interview that was aired in Sydney, Australia between 6 to 8 p. m., on January 26, 2007.

The Australian minister writes: “Pastor Reid explicitly said that Martin Luther knew that the Sabbath was still Saturday. Pastor Reid said, ‘I suppose that many of the viewers would be asking the question that if Martin Luther knew that the Sabbath was Saturday and not Sunday, then why didn’t he start keeping the 7th-day Sabbath in line with the Bible?’ He answered and said that Luther had been championing salvation by grace and so not to contradict his position on grace he decided that although the Bible still advocates Saturday that he did not want to confuse the issue with Grace.”

Pastor Reid encouraged the viewers to go to GOOGLE and read article 28 of the Augsburg Confession, an official document of the Lutheran Church. This is exactly what the Australian minister did. He read article 28 of the Augsburg Confession, but he found that Luther did not believe that “the Bible still advocates Saturday .” On the contrary, Luther taught that “Scripture has abrogated the Sabbath-day.”

The minister quotes a lengthy section of article 28 which clearly indicates that Luther believed that the Sabbath had been abrogated with the rest of the Jewish ceremonies by the coming of Christ. The most relevant statement reads: “For those who judge that by the authority of the Church the observance of the Lord’s Day instead of the Sabbath-day was ordained as a thing necessary, do greatly err. Scripture has abrogated the Sabbath-day; for it teaches that, since the Gospel has been revealed, all the ceremonies of Moses can be omitted.” (Emphasis supplied).

In his reaction against those who were promoting seventh-day Sabbathkeeping, Luther several times attacked the Sabbath as a Jewish ceremonial institution nailed to the Cross. He even wrote a booklet against the Sabbath in 1529. Adventist scholars have dealt with this question. See, for example, The Sabbath in Scripture and History pp. 215-218, published by the Review and Herald in 1982.

In the light of these historical facts, the Australian minister asks me to explain how Edward Reid could say on 3ABN that Luther believed that “the Bible still advocates Saturday.” He writes: “This program was aired worldwide and if I am correct in my understanding Luther’s teachings on the Sabbath, then Pastor Reid has done the SDA church a great disservice by making that statement.”

There is no question that inaccurate statements made by church leaders on a TV program aired worldwide, do a disservice to our Adventist church. But we must remember that whatever pastors or church administrators say on historical or theological matters, reflected their limited study of the subject. Their busy schedule hardly allows them to do a thorough investigation. Consequently they often end up sharing their feelings rather than their findings. Let us be forgiving of their mistakes. It would be wise, however, to avoid airing gross mistakes to a worldwide audience. Ultimately these mistakes undermine the credibility of our Adventist Church.

A NEW TOWNHOME COMMUNITY NEAR TO THE CAMPUS OF ANDREWS UNIVERSITY

If you are planning to move to Andrews University, you will be pleased to learn about a new Townhome Community being developed less than a mile away from the campus of Andrews University.

For a description and a picture of the Townhome Units, click at this link: http://www.biblicalperspectives.com/danny

A CHANGE FROM VALUE WEB TO TAGNET

Due to the constant problems I was having with VALUE WEB, I have moved my website, shopping cart, and internet service to TAGNET, which is the largest Adventist networking service.

Hopefully now there will be fewer interruption of service. Truly I can say that the technicians of TAGNET have been most helpful. If you are looking for a web-hosting company or internet service, I would recommend you to contact TAGNET. You can visit their website at http://www.netadventist.org or http://home.tagnet.org/ You may also call their office 800 - 9TAGNET. They are ready and eager to help you.

ALL THE ANNOUNCEMENTS OF WEEKEND SEMINARS AND THE SPECIAL HOLIDAY OFFERS ARE PLACED AT THE END OF THIS NEWSLETTER.

“The Centrality of the Cross”

Samuele Bacchiocchi, Ph. D.

Retired Professor of Theology and Church History

Andrews University

A question that has troubled thinking Christians over the centuries is: Why was it necessary for Christ to suffer and die to pay the penalty of our sins? Can the guilt of a sinner be legitimately transferred and expiated by an innocent person?

Since the release of Mel Gibson’s movie in 2004 The Passion of the Christ, thousands of articles and books on the meaning of Christ’s sufferings and death have been published or posted on websites. The movie has inspired both professional Bible scholars and lay Bible students to take a fresh look at the meaning of the Cross of Christ for twenty-first-century Christians.

A fundamental question many are asking is, Did Christ need to be brutally tortured from the time of His arrest until His death—as portrayed in Gibson’s movie—in order to satisfy the demands of a punitive God? According to the Catholic “Satisfaction View of the Atonement,” Christ had to suffer the punishment of all the sins ever committed by mankind in order to satisfy the demands of divine justice? Is this what the Bible teaches? Are we saved by the intensity of Christ’s suffering or by His perfect life and sacrifice for our salvation? These are important questions that we wish to examine.

The Presence of Sin and the Need for a Savior are Largely Dismissed Today

The question of Christ’s suffering and death to pay the penalty of mankind’s sins, is especially relevant today when the presence of sin and the need for a Savior are largely dismissed as outmoded concepts. No psychology textbooks ever mention “sin” or “divine grace” as factors influencing human behavior.

Our humanistic society has reached the point where social customs have displaced the law of God, social mores have replaced biblical morals, moral relativism has substituted biblical moral absolutes, and belief in human progress has taken the place of faith in divine redemption.

Throughout its history the Christian church has taught that our fundamental human problem is sin and that the Cross of Christ provides the only hope to solve the sin problem. Today, however, the concept of “sin” is regarded by many as an outmoded holdover from the days of simplistic religious beliefs.

Sin implies some form of disobedience against an absolute moral law that governs the relationship between human beings and God. However, many people today question the existence of such a relationship. By accepting Darwinistic teachings regarding the accidental and materialistic human nature, many no longer see the need for believing in an absolute moral law that governs our relationship with God and fellow beings.

The Persistent Awareness of the Reality of Sin

The problem with the materialistic evolutionary view of human nature is that it has not succeeded in eliminating the awareness that there is something transcendent about our human nature—a reality that transcends our physical bodies. We recognize that there is within ourselves a moral nature that expresses itself through our conscience. We know when we say or do things which are wrong or when others do wrong things.

Despite the contemporary dismissal of the reality of sin, guilt remains a constant reality in the human psyche. Psychologist Karl Menninger writes: “I believe there is a general sentiment that sin is still with us, by us, and in us—somewhere. We are made vaguely uneasy by this consciousness, this persistent sense of guilt, and we try to relieve it in various ways. We project the blame on others, we ascribe the responsibility to a group, we offer up scapegoat sacrifices, we perform or partake in dumb-show rituals of penitence and atonement. There is rarely a peccavi [a confession: I have sinned], but there is a feeling.”

This is a phenomenon of our times. Many live under the burden of guilt, fully aware that they have acted against the moral directives of their conscience, yet they dismiss the notion of sin and of the existence of a moral law that stands outside them and above them. They try all sorts of ways to rid themselves of guilty feelings, only to recognize that human remedies do not work. The reason we cannot clear our consciences of guilty feelings is because, as Paul explains, the principles of God’s law are written in the human heart (Rom 2:15).

The message of Scripture is that the solution to the human problem of guilt and sin is to be found not in human devices, but in God’s initiative to enter into human time and flesh to liberate us from the bondage of sin through the sacrificial death of His Son. The message of the Cross is that God has been willing to make the ultimate sacrifice of dying on the Cross in the Person of His Son to pay the penalty of our sins and restore our broken relationship.

The Objectives of this Bible Study

This Bible Study investigates the reasons for Christ’s death, its achievements, and its benefits for our life today. Unfortunately, Gibson’s movie The Passion of the Christ makes no attempt to explain if or why Christ had to be brutally tortured unto death for our redemption. The result is that some are led to believe that God is a punitive Being determined to inflict punishment for every sin ever committed. He is to be feared rather than to be loved.

To appreciate the meaning of the Cross, it is imperative to understand why Christ’s suffering and death were necessary in the first place. The problem is that the Bible does not give us a systematic explanation of the meaning of Christ’s sacrificial death. Trying to piece the scattered references to Christ’s death into one coherent and meaningful explanation, is like attempting to assemble a puzzle without the picture of the puzzle on the cover of the box. We shall attempt to develop an accurate picture of the scope of Christ’s death by taking into consideration the relevant biblical references.

For the sake of clarity, I have divided this study into the following three major parts:

1. The Centrality of the Cross

2. The Necessity of the Cross

3. The Achievements of the Cross

Each of these parts will be posted in a separate newsletter. This will reduce considerably the length of each newsletter, to the relief of those who complain about the excessive length of the newsletters.

THE CENTRALITY OF THE CROSS

Religious and political movements usually have a visual symbol to represent their history or beliefs. Modern Judaism has adopted the so-called Star of David, which represents God’s covenant with David concerning the perpetual duration of his throne and the coming of the Messiah through his descendants. Islam is symbolized by a Crescent, which depicts a phase of the moon. It is a symbol of the expansion and sovereignty of the Moslem conquest.

The Lotus Flower is associated with Buddhism. Sometimes Buddha is depicted as enthroned in a fully open lotus flower. Its wheel shape is supposed to represent the emergence of beauty and harmony out of muddy water and chaos. In 1917 the Soviet government adopted a crossed hammer and sickle to represent the union of factory and field workers. The Swastica was adopted early in the twentieth century by a German group as the symbol of the Aryan race. Hitler took it over and made it the symbol of Nazi racial bigotry.

The Cross is the Symbol of Christianity

Christianity is no exception in having a visual symbol. The Cross in time became the universal emblem of the Christian belief in salvation through Christ’s atoning sacrifice. In the newsletter No. 124 entitled “Is the Christian Cross a Pagan Symbol,” I have shown that the primitive Christians avoided using the Cross as the visual symbol of their faith, though they boldly spoke about the Cross (1 Cor 1:23; Gal 6:14). The reason is that by associating their faith in Christ with the Cross—the shameful symbol of execution of common criminals—they would expose themselves to the wild accusation of worshipping a criminal.

Thus, on the walls and ceilings of the catacombs, the earliest Christians used such noncommittal paintings as the peacock (symbol of immortality), the dove (symbol of the Holy Spirit), a palm branch (symbol of victory), and especially the fish. Only Christians knew that the Greek word for fish, ichthus, was an acronym for Iesus Christos Theou Huios Soter, that is, “Jesus Christ, Son of God, Savior.”

During the second century, Christians began painting such biblical themes as Noah’s ark, the Jonah cycle, the Good Shepherd, the three Hebrews in the fiery furnace, and the resurrection of Lazarus. All of these pictures were intended to represent aspects of Christ’s redemptive mission. Eventually, Christians chose the Cross as the best pictorial symbol of their Christian faith in redemption through Christ’s sacrificial death.

A wide range of emblems were suitable for expressing the Christian faith. Christians could have chosen the manger to symbolize the incarnation, the empty tomb to symbolize the resurrection, the dove to symbolize the outpouring of the Holy Spirit, and the throne to symbolize Christ’s sovereignty. Instead, they chose a simple Cross, because it effectively represented the core of the Christian belief in redemption through Christ’s sacrificial death.

The Catholic crucifix with Christ’s contorted body attached to it “does not appear to have been used before the sixth century.” It represents an evolution from a plain Cross representing one’s belief in salvation through Christ’s sacrificial death, into an elaborate Crucifix venerated as an object of idolatrous worship.

Why the Early Christians Chose the Cross to Represent their Faith?

The Christians’ choice of a Cross to represent their faith is most surprising when we remember that the cross was the cruelest method of execution, reserved for slaves and foreigners who had been convicted as murderers or insurrectionists. The crucifixion was so shameful that Roman citizens were exempted from it. The early enemies of Christianity capitalized on the shame of the crucifixion to ridicule the Christian claim that Christ saved humankind by dying on the Cross.

A fitting example is a graffito from the second century discovered on Palatine Hill in Rome. It is a crude caricature of Christ’s crucifixion. It depicts a man stretched out on a cross with the head of a donkey. On the left stands another man with one arm raised in worship. Underneath are scribbled these uneven words: ALEXAMENOS CEBETE THEON —“Alexamenos worships God.” The accusation that Christians worshipped a donkey reveals the Romans’ contempt for the Christian worship of a crucified Savior.

The fact that the Cross became the symbol of the Christian faith, in spite of its shame and ridicule, shows that the early Christians understood that the sacrificial death of Jesus on the Cross was the foundation and core of their faith. They were not prepared to exchange it for something less offensive. They firmly clung to it, because it was the symbol of their loyalty to their Savior and acceptance of His sacrificial death for their redemption.

Should the Cross be Reclaimed?

It is unfortunate that during the history of Christianity, the Cross has been used in contradictory ways from the sign of redemption, to an ornament to decorate tombs, monuments, churches, or bodies, to an object of idolatrous worship, to a magical relic to protect people from sickness and temptation, and to a sword to slaughter the infidels. During the Crusades, the Cross emblazoned on the tunic of each crusader, became a clarion call to murder the Jews at home and the Moslem in the Holy Land.

It is not surprising that Christians are divided over the use of the Cross. Some venerate the Cross as an object of worship or magic relic, while others (especially Seventh-day Adventists and some Calvinistic churches) reject it as a sign of idolatry and of past atrocities.

In her insightful article “The Cross: Should a Symbol Betrayed Be Reclaimed?” Mary Boys briefly traces the paradoxical history of the Cross. She argues that the Cross is a symbol that has been betrayed and needs to be reclaimed. During the Crusades the Cross was used as a weapon to kill infidels, rather than as an anchor to bring hope to lost sinners. She proposes that “It is now time to ask whether the cross itself can be redeemed.”

Boys concludes her article saying: “Like all symbols, the Cross evokes more than one can explain. It condenses death and life into one symbol. It enfolds some of the deepest fears of humanity—vulnerability, betrayal, pain, forsakeness—and transfigures them into expressions of hope. When Christians proclaim the power of the Cross, they are voicing their confidence that death is not the end, that the grip of evil has been broken, and that the powers and principalities who seem to control this world will be banished. When Christians proclaim the power of the cross, they are declaring, albeit often with tremulous voice, that at times one must simply endure suffering, that certain things in life must be borne. And they are declaring that in the passion of Jesus we find a model for our fidelity.”

But, she continues noting that because the Cross has been abused, “it is not a symbol that can be reappropriated without repentance. The story I have traced serves to remind Christians of their betrayal of Jesus, the Jew from Nazareth, and their defilement of the symbol of His suffering. Too often have Christians become, in Paul’s words, ‘enemies of the cross of Christ’ (Phil 3:18).

She closes, saying: “Just as a church building that has been profaned by a violent or blasphemous deed needs rededication, so too, the symbol the church carries must be purified by its people’s repentance. Only then can the cross embody the power of reconciliation for which Jesus lived and died.”

Should Adventists Object to the Use of the Cross?

Boyd’s appeal to reclaim the Cross, by repenting for its abuse, is a timely message for all Christians to heed, especially Seventh-day Adventists. The many critical comments that I received to my newsletter No. 122, “Should Adventists Object to the Use of the Cross?,” suggest that even our Seventh-day Adventist church needs to reclaim the legitimate meaning and use of the Cross.

Historically Adventists have objected to the use of the Cross outside and inside their church buildings. Until recent times most Adventists churches placed on the top of their church spires what looks like a lightning rod. The absence of a Cross on Adventist church building has led critical onlookers to conclude that Adventists must belong to some strange sectatian non-Christian movement.

The Adventist position has largely been influenced by two major books that argue for the pagan origin of the Christian Cross. The two books are The Two Babylons by Alexander Hislop and Babylon Mystery Religion by Ralph Woodrow. An Adventist wrote: “Alexander Hislop’s, The Two Babylons, clearly proves that the cross was the sign of the false messiah, Tamuz. I was surprised that your scholarship on this subject did not extend that far back into history.”

The fact is that my scholarship extends beyond the Babylonian god Tamuz into the dawn of civilization. Crosses of all sizes and shapes have been used during human history as ornaments, religious symbols, representations of the four points of the compass, the four winds, the cross-like corona of the sun during an eclipse, and even the unity between the male phallus (vertical bar) and the female vagina (horizontal bar).

What my critics ignore is that none of the pagan crosses relate to the meaning and message of the Christian Cross. None of them were used to represent salvation through the sacrificial death of a god. Building an argument from external similarities while ignoring the internal differences of meaning and function, is an unsound method of research. It is like arguing that Italian spaghetti derive from Chinese noodles because they look the same.

It is a well-known and established fact that crosses of all sizes and shapes have been used since the dawn of civilization. But the origin and meaning of the Christian Cross, derives, not from its pagan usages, but from the