Off The Beaten Path [2 ed.]

Citation preview

About the Title I just know that someone glancing at the cover will think of Jeremiah 6:16: “Thus says the LORD: “Stand in the ways and see, And ask for the old paths, where the good way is, And walk in it; Then you will find rest for your souls. But they said, ‘We will not walk in it.’” Well, by “beaten path” I am referring to the well-trodden rut that Christianity has found itself in, especially in the last couple of centuries. We need to get off of this stale modern path and rediscover afresh the faith that actively engaged the world, as light and salt, and not merely entertained it. Or bored it by trying to entertain it, amusing the goats and starving the sheep. The Jews told Paul they would like to hear more about this new faith of the Christians, Acts 28:20, “But we desire to hear from you what you think; for concerning this sect, we know that it is spoken against everywhere.” Our faith today does not get this same response. It is largely ignored as something irrelevant. The fault is not in the message, but is largely in our misunderstanding and miscommunication of the Message.

About the Book The articles in this book are quite different from each other. Many of them were born of various internet discussions. Some of these discussions were friendly and casual, others more technical or in a debating mode. This explains why the articles are different in style. I thought at first that I should "fix" this, but I think now that variety is a good thing. Hopefully in this variety you will find something to suit your preference or needs. My goal in each one of these articles is to help the family of God to grow in grace and knowledge. Truth has many layers, falsehood many versions. Most of the articles here are explorations of Biblical passages and themes. But some - and I try to keep these in the minority - are critical of movements and teachers whose doctrines I believe require correction. Responses are always welcomed. Feel free to email me at [email protected] with any comments, kudos, or corrections. If you like this book please share it with others.

About this 2nd Edition Aside from correcting typos and a few textual changes, page numbers have been added. Tip: To navigate to a certain page simply type, with the quotation marks, “page (your number)”.

This free book is available as a PDF or EPUB. If you like it, please, share it!

Table of Contents 1. We Know so Little about God 2. Teachable Teachers 3. Eology: The Christian Study of Beginnings 4 . What Happened “On That Day”? Genesis 2:17 5. A Study on the High Priest: Aaron and Christ 6. David’s Census: Pride, Plague, and Prophecy 7. The Two Pillars of God’s Presence 8. If My People: 2 Chronicles 7:14 9. Isaiah 40 – 66: Jerusalem, Earthly & Heavenly 10. Isaiah 40 – 66: Overview 11. Isaiah 40 – 51: “Jerusalem” & “Zion” 12. Isaiah 60:10-22: Zion’s Latent and Everlasting Glory 13. Six Promises of Christ to His People and City: Daniel 9:24 14. A.W. Tozer Reconsidered 15. A.W. Tozer’s Mystical Influences: Julian of Norwich 16. Clement’s Epistle to the Corinthians Written Pre-AD 66 17. The Magi: Who were they? And what did they follow? 18. “This is My Beloved Son. Hear Him!” Hebrews 1; Luke 9 19. Christ our Prophet, Priest, and King 20. “Rise, let us go from Here” 21. Four Unities Prove 1st Century Rapture: 1 Thess. 4:13-18 22. Notes on Resurrection in 1 Cor. 15: How are the dead raised? 23. Katargeo: A Word often Mistranslated 24. The Judgment of the Sheep and the Goats

1 3 4 5 6 9 12 15 18 19 22 25 29 43 49 54 56 59 61 64 66 69 72 77

We Know so Little about God But we use big words as if we didn't (know so little).

Every statement from us about Christ is bound to be an understatement (because of verses like Isa. 55:9). Even if we have the words right (and that is usually when we are closest to just using Scripture) we still understate in the sense that we don't really understand the concepts we use of God. We are not yet speaking about God, but of the words themselves. Words, in the final analysis, are pitiful instruments to tell of the wonderful truths of God - or many other things in this life. Very often, whether in some other branch of knowledge or in theology, we use words, not to come to grips with something hard to understand - but to make it go away. We do this with a semblance of having tackled the problem. We give a name to the strange force of electricity. We tag it and bag it with eleven letters and neatly slot it away from our consciousness. But what is this electricity? Really? Gravity? Music? Color? Photosynthesis? Such knowledge is too wonderful for us. Eternity? I made a chart and used it in teaching both at church and at school to show that we don't really fathom what is involved by glibly saying “God is infinite!”. The demonstration works like this: I first ask them a "stupid" question, as one of my students might have categorized it: "How many infinities are there?" They almost invariably answer "one". Then I draw an X/Y chart on the board, showing, first of all, how there is an infinite number of positive numbers from zero to infinity. This is a no-brainer. Then I draw another line from zero backwards to negative infinity. Heads start scratching here - the more insightful ones. This, after all, is another infinite set, and we have only drawn two lines! I can then show them that there seems to be (I stay away from the indicative mode at this point. I want conclusions to come from them, or not at all) an infinite number of sets: We have an infinity of all odd numbers, Of all even numbers, Of all multiples of, say, 8 And this can go on, well, ad infinitum, each set trailing off into its own domain of infinity. All separate yet, so it seemed at first, equal. An infinite number of infinities! I finally end my demonstration with putting a large circle around the whole X/Y chart, saying that this represents all that we can fathom about infinity. Then I write a large "G" in front. And a large "D" at the other end, spelling "GOD". This clumsily visualizes the truth that God is bigger than we can ever imagine. Page 1

(I have since found out that my personal discovery on infinities has much earlier been made by a mathematician of two centuries ago, George Cantor, and that there is a whole branch of math called "set theory".) We say God is "infinite". But we are saying much more than we can comprehend. How is God infinite? Infinite in time: Eternality: Moses said of Him (Psalm 90:2) “From everlasting to everlasting You are God.” (“everlasting to everlasting”= Eternal). Only God is truly eternal. Though Christians have eternal life, it is only so from this time forward, not backward. See also Deut. 32:40; 1st Tim. 6:16. Infinite in Knowledge: Omniscient: (“all-knowing”).Psalm 139 describes this and the following two aspects of God (omnipotent and omnipresence). Verses 1- 6 refer to omniscience. Also Psa. 147:4- 5. Everything God planned, He did from eternity past. He knows the future because His will is done in it and His wisdom and omnipotence brings it about. Infinite in Power: Omnipotent: (“All-powerful”) “El Shaddai”. This is God’s total ability to achieve His perfect will. “Is anything too hard for God?” Jer. 32:17, 27 Infinite in Space (Immensity): Omnipresent: He is everywhere. Psalm 139:7- 12. God fills every part of space with His whole Being! “Do I not fill heaven and Earth?”: I Kings 8:27. See also Isa. 66:1, Jer. 23:23- 24. This is not pantheism. God is everywhere, but He is not everything. “Immensity” means not just that God is everywhere, but that He is surely present in every place. All of God is in the room in which you, my friend, are reading these words, wherever you are. Or as inspired David wrote, Psalm 139:7-10: “Where can I go from Your Spirit? Or where can I flee from Your presence? If I ascend into heaven, You are there; If I make my bed in hell, behold, You are there. If I take the wings of the morning, And dwell in the uttermost parts of the sea, Even there Your hand shall lead me, And Your right hand shall hold me.”

Page 2

Teachable Teachers I remember this man at my yard sale in Winston-Salem over thirty years ago. He saw a number of commentaries I had for sale, stood facing me, his legs in a stance like he was braced for a hurricane. He pointed his finger at me and challenged, "What is your position on Acts 2:38!?" I forget what I answered, or what he answered, except that it was somewhat abrasive. He was poised for a hermeneutical harangue. But it is funny that I still remember him after all these years. Maybe because it reminds me of an attitude that I have seen all too often. I have done it myself: Started a discussion and downgraded to an argument. I have slowly come to understand that the people I learn the most from are those gentle spirits that shine more light then generate heat. And there are good verses on this topic. "But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control;" - Gal. 5:22-23 “Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves. You will recognize them by their fruits. Are grapes gathered from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? So, every healthy tree bears good fruit, but the diseased tree bears bad fruit. A healthy tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a diseased tree bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Thus you will recognize them by their fruits." - Matt. 7:15-20 "And the Lord’s servant must not be quarrelsome but kind to everyone, able to teach, patiently enduring evil, correcting his opponents with gentleness. God may perhaps grant them repentance leading to a knowledge of the truth," - 2 Timothy 2:24-25 From these verses we see that spiritual teachers demonstrate spiritual gifts. Carnal teachers have no choice but to show their carnal attitudes. This is, of course, a general rule. Spiritual teachers certainly have their off days and carnal teachers and false prophets can muster up a virtue or two when occasion really demands. But when we get to know different teachers over a period of months their true center becomes obvious. Recently on certain Christian Facebook pages I have seen this principle at work. A teacher - a selfappointed expert on a certain doctrine, by an unspiritual demeanor, discredits whatever position he is teaching, whatever books he is selling.

Page 3

Eology: The Christian Study of Beginnings Disclaimer: I am not saying that outside evidences are without value. My concern is, in the building and articulating of the Scriptural worldview (including recent discussions I have had of how many “days” are in those "six days” of Exodus 20:11), which kind of evidences are exhibit A and which are lowered down to exhibit B. A lot of coined words are born out of frustration and a perceived need for the term. I used the term “eology” to differentiate a purely Biblical discipline from a science that mixes “Thus saith the Lord” with “This just in…”. I believe that in all areas of Bible study there should be a discipline that is foremost (and preferably exclusively) a Scriptural investigation of the study at hand and not a borrowing from Athens, Alexandria – or Cal Tech. When Christians who believe in the inerrancy of the Bible discuss, say, eschatology or soteriology, they do not usually accredit current events/commentary or pop-psychology, respectively, with the same authority on those two topics as they do. But when it comes to beginnings, well, the attitude is often different. Methodology of argument is different. All too many Christians hitch their wagons to the stars of dubious scientific apologetics instead of putting Scriptural evidences first. Which evidence should be more important, for instance: A. Exodus 20: 11 “For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth” or B. the geologic table and it’s “index fossils”. For Christians the answer, it seems to me, should be A. But how many Christians needlessly weary themselves trying to untangle knots and strands of contradictory outside evidence (often shifting as fashions change, cow replacing sacred cow) instead of using the same effort to really attempt to plumb the depths of God’s Word, taking Him at His word when He said that He really did say the last – and the best – word on our origins and on all things that have to do with life and holiness? John Owen’s comments in his "Christologia", though given in a somewhat different connection, seem appropriate here: “The revelations that he has made of himself, and of the glorious properties of his nature,in the works of creation and providence, are, in themselves, clear, plain, and manifest: Psalm 19: 1, 2; Romans 1:19, 20. Those which are made in Christ are sublime and mysterious. Howbeit, the knowledge we have of him as he is represented unto us in Christ is far more clear, certain, steady, effectual and operative, than any we can attain in and by all other ways of revelation.” Owens ends with this: “It is the knowledge of “God in Christ” alone that is effectually powerful to work the souls of men into a conformity unto him. Those alone who behold the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ are changed into the same image, from glory to glory.”

Page 4

What Happened "On That Day"? Genesis 2:17 Why did God say to Adam that he would die on the day that should he eat of the forbidden fruit when he clearly did not die on that day? It never seemed quite satisfactory an explanation that God meant that he would only begin to die after the Fall happened, that Adam would not die until almost a millennium later. I am not denying that this was also true, that there was certainly a great change in all of nature, including humanity, from that very time of disobedience. But this does not really account for all of what was implied in the divine prohibition. And it dances around the phrase "in that day". First of all, there must be a distinction between what God threatened and what He carried out. Second, we do not need to go far afield to imagine what the Hebrew here might mean. We have the context to guide us. Specifically, in order to know what is meant by "in that day" we only need to see how the phrase is used in a nearby parallel verse. Satan told Eve, Gen. 3:5: "God knows that in the day you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.” Now, are we also going allow for a time lapse here? I think not. The eye-opening was immediate. It happened on that day - just as Satan said. (On this point the Serpent was correct, although he connived to let Eve connect the other dots according to his own plan.) So neither "in that day" involve a lapse of time. Their eyes were opened that very day. Death happened that very day. But for Adam and Eve it was not a physical death. It was a substitutionary death. This brings us to Genesis 3:21: "The LORD God made garments of skin for Adam and his wife, and clothed them." What were these garments of skin? They were from animals that had to be killed. The animal (or animals) had to die because of the sin of Adam and Eve. This was the beginning of the sacrificial system. How did Abel later know just how to perform an acceptable sacrifice? He must have learned it from his dad. And Cain, for whatever reason, seemed to not put as much stock into this. In Genesis we have two oblique glimpses of the redemption story, the Protovangelion in Genesis 3:15 and this one in verse 21. No, Adam did not die physically that day. But physical death was a possibility that day. Moreover, along with that, spiritual death, and eternal death would have been the outcome. If God had not provided clothing for them, if they had not put on that clothing, they would have died in every way that very day. But, thank God, He allowed them to put on that clothing - just as we put on Christ, the Lamb of God. Page 5

A Study on the High Priest: Aaron and Christ In order to understand better Christ as our High Priest it helps to note some characteristics of the high priest in the Old Testament. Several other things could be mentioned but for the purpose of this study I focus on just these seven. And these details all have to do with only the high priest and only on the annual Day of Atonement. 1.The High Priest shed blood. 1 2.The High Priest was clothed in linen. Normally Aaron wore special garments that gave honor to his office 2, but on this one day he wore linen, just like the other priests. No gold-trimmed attire, no ephod, or miter. This is to show that he is one of them, also greatly in need of atonement. 3.The High Priest brought incense. The priest with "his hands full of incense" 3 and burning coals from the altar are brought before the Holy of Holies. He puts the incense in the brazen pan. 4.The High Priest was hidden at a certain time. When the high priest enters in the Holy Place the other priests cannot enter in. And when he throws the incense on the fire smoke arises, obscuring the view. This is "so that the cloud of incense might cover the atonement cover" Lev.16:13 (Lexham English Bible) 5.The High Priest sprinkled blood. The blood of the bull is sprinkled seven times before the atonement cover. After killing the goat he does the same with its blood. Lev. 16:15 6.The High Priest left his linen. After this yearly ministration is done the high priest changes his garment again, leaving the linen behind. Lev.16:23. No persons, priests or any other persons, are allowed in the tent of meeting when the high priest does this ministration. 7.The High Priest died. This goes without saying, but it is the last important detail I want to focus on in this study to compare with the High Priest that we have now. What does this tell us about our eternal High Priest, Jesus Christ? Here are some interesting details. 1. Christ also shed blood. He did not bring the sacrifice. He was the sacrifice. 1 Peter 1:18-19 2. Christ also was clothed in linen. When He was buried it was in linen cloths. 4 3. Christ also had incense, including - just like Aaron - myrrh. John 19:40 4. Christ was also hidden from view when He ascended. "And when he had said these things, as they were looking on, he was lifted up, and a cloud took him out of their sight." Acts 1:9 The latter, phrase I believe, is a sign that He is entering into His ministry as High Priest. Page 6

5. Christ, as High Priest, applies His blood for our cleansing. Heb. 9:14, 1 Pet. 1:2, 1 John 1:7 5 6. Christ also left his linen behind folded deliberately, neatly. Just like the high priest of old did. Luke 24:12, John 20:5-7 7. Christ, as we already know, never dies. He ever lives to make intercession for us. "Also there were many priests, because they were prevented by death from continuing. But He, because He continues forever, has an unchangeable priesthood. Therefore He is also able to save to the uttermost those who come to God through Him, since He always lives to make intercession for them." Hebrews 9:23-25 The Gospel story did not end at Calvary or the empty tomb. Because our High Priest-King has the power of an endless life He ever lies to make intercession for us. The Gospel story has no end because He has no end. As the angel in Revelation 14:6 declared, it is the everlasting Gospel. NOTES 1. He does this first for himself and his family, a young bull and a ram Lev. 16:3, entering the sanctuary with the blood of these two. Then he later takes from the congregation - and for the congregation - two goats for a sin offering (1) and a ram for a burnt offering. One of the goats is slain, the other (the scapegoat) is freed. 2. Ex. 28:2 "And you shall make holy garments for Aaron your brother for glory and for beauty." The items are then described in verses 3 through 43. 3. Ex.30:34 details the composition of the incense. Compare with Matt. 2:11, John 12:3, 7, and John 19:39. 4. This was an important particular, mentioned by all Gospel writers: Matt.27:59, Mark 15:46, Luke 23:53, 24:12, John 19:40, 20:5-7 (three times). 5. A study of these three verses shows that the blood, in each case, is applied to Christians, that is persons who have already been saved by the sacrificial blood of Christ at Calvary. This is a distinct application of the blood. Here are some other books and web sites. Read with discrimination (and an open Bible) they are helpful for further study. ------------------------------John Owen: Works, Vol. 18: Part 4, Concerning the Sacerdotal Office of Christ Martin Luther: Christ Our Great High Priest https://www.sacred-texts.com/chr/luther/highpre.htm John Flavel: The Intercession of Christ our High-Priest https://www.monergism.com/intercession-christ-our-high-priest Horatius Bonar: Christ our High Priest Bearing the Iniquity of our Holy Things https://www.chapellibrary.org/pdf/books/cohp.pdf Thomas Watson: Christ the High Priest https://www.apuritansmind.com/the-christian-walk/christ-the-priest-by-thomas-watson-c-1620-1686/ Page 7

Henry Mahan: Two studies: The High Priest Intercedes http://articles.ochristian.com/article15252.shtml The King-Priest: Psalm 110 http://articles.ochristian.com/article15298.shtml Frederick George Patterson: Christ as High Priest https://bibletruthpublishers.com/christ-as-high-priest/frederick-george-patterson/collected-writings/f-gpatterson/la58924 Brandon Crowe: Our Great High Priest https://faculty.wts.edu/posts/our-great-high-priest/ Penny Noyes: Why Do We Need Jesus as Our High Priest? https://www.christianity.com/wiki/jesus-christ/why-do-we-need-jesus-as-our-high-priest.html J.C. Philpot:Jesus the Great High Priest https://www.gracegems.org/20/priest.htm

Page 8

David's Census: Pride, Plague, and Prophecy: Reading through Chronicles, you often come across details that are missing from the parallel accounts in Samuel and Kings. This episode in the later life of David is a good case in point.

1st Chronicles 21:1-22:1 21:1 "An adversary opposed Israel, inciting David to count how many warriors Israel had. 2 David told Joab and the leaders of the army, "Go, count the number of warriors from Beersheba to Dan. Then bring back a report to me so I may know how many we have." 3 Joab replied, "May the Lord make his army a hundred times larger! My master, O king, do not all of them serve my master? Why does my master want to do this? Why bring judgment on Israel?" 4 But the king's edict stood, despite Joab's objections. So Joab left and traveled throughout Israel before returning to Jerusalem...- NET Bible

Some versions translate the instigator of verse 1 as "Satan". This may well be, since the absence of the article in Hebrew usually means a person or group of persons is meant. Others, like the translators of the NET Bible, believe it was a neighboring country that was inciting David to strategic readiness. The military build-up and saber rattling, perhaps, of one of King David's enemies probably distracted him from his usual reliance of God and prompted him to assess his military strength. Pride However, the important issue here is not who the adversary is, but Who David forgot about when he decided to number his men of war. Whether Satan in person or a mere adversarial enemy nation was behind it, David forgets that the LORD is his (and Israel's) Strong Tower. So he sends Joab out to number all the men of war that Israel can muster, if need be. This exhibits a lack of trust in the LORD, who then expresses His great displeasure with David. After repenting, David still has to face the consequences of what he did. 21:8 David said to God, "I have sinned greatly by doing this. Now, please remove the guilt of your servant, for I have acted very foolishly." 9 The Lord told Gad, David's prophet, 10 "Go, tell David, 'This is what the Lord says: "I am offering you three forms of judgment from which to choose. Pick one of them."'"11 Gad went to David and told him, "This is what the Lord says: 'Pick one of these: 12 three years of famine, or three months being chased by your enemies and struck down by their swords, or three days being struck down by the Lord, during which a plague will invade the land and the Lord's messenger will destroy throughout Israel's territory.' Now, decide what I should tell the one who sent me." 13 David said to Gad, "I am very upset. I prefer to be attacked by the Lord, for his mercy is very great; I do not want to be attacked by men." 14 So the Lord sent a plague through Israel, and seventy thousand Israelite men died.

Page 9

Plague God offers David the choice of famine, sword or plague. This seems to be God's designated means of chastising those who are, or claim to be, His own (see Ezek. 6:11 - 12; Deut. 28: 21 - 26; 32:24 - 25; Isaiah 5:19; Jer. 14:12; Rev. 6:8. That last NT verse might be better understood by cross-referencing with the ones before). Even in judgment, David shows a trust in God. He would rather be chastened by Him than to fall into the hands of enemies. He knows that the merciy of God is great and perhaps He will relent, at least partially (which He does do, in fact). 15 God sent a messenger to ravage Jerusalem. As he was doing so, the Lord watched and relented from his judgment. He told the messenger who was destroying, "That's enough! Stop now!" The Lord's messenger was standing near the threshing floor of Ornan the Jebusite. 16 David looked up and saw the Lord's messenger standing between the earth and sky with his sword drawn and in his hand, stretched out over Jerusalem. David and the leaders, covered with sackcloth, threw themselves down with their faces to the ground. 17 David said to God, "Was I not the one who decided to number the army? I am the one who sinned and committed this awful deed! As for these sheep, what have they done? O Lord my God, attack me and my family, but remove the plague from your people!"

Prophecy Some have seen a parallel here between David's response and Christ's praying on the cross, "Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do." If true, there is only the faintest similarity. A more likely connection to Christ is the fact that the avenging angel stops at the very place where the temple will be, where God will be propitiated by the offering of the Son. It is at this spot where David buys the land of sacrificial implements from Ornan ("Araunah" in Kings). This is where he makes his offering to God, and where he sees fire coming down from Heaven, showing that God's wrath is appeased.

26 David built there an altar for the Lord and offered burnt sacrifices and tokens of peace. He called out to the Lord, and the Lord responded by sending fire from the sky and consuming the burnt sacrifice on the altar. 27 The Lord ordered the messenger to put his sword back into its sheath. 28 At that time, when David saw that the Lord responded to him at the threshing floor of Ornan the Jebusite, he sacrificed there. 29 Now the Lord's tabernacle, which Moses had made in the desert, and the altar for burnt sacrifices were at that time at the worship center in Gibeon. 30 But David could not go before it to seek God's will, for he was afraid of the sword of the Lord's messenger. 22:1 David then said, "This is the place where the temple of the Lord God will be, along with the altar for burnt sacrifices for Israel. By all means, don't stop at the end of the chapter! The next verse was unwisely separated from the previous section: David recognizes where the temple will be. He was already told that Solomon would build it. Now he knows where the site will be. Page 10

Points to consider: 1. David, perhaps feeling spiritually secure, still did not know all that was in his heart. Instead of trusting in God as his strong tower, he wanted visible assurances of his own strength. We can be sure that when we betray the same distrust in God's promises and abilities, we likewise grieve the Spirit of God. 2. God's saints can sometimes find God's greater good even in times of disaster and judgment. It was during this plague that David discovered where the future Temple was to be sited. 3. Ornan, even after seeing the avenging angel in mid-air ready to strike, continued doing what he had been doing - plowing the field. Unlike his sons, who tried to hide themselves, he recognized that God is sovereign and does what He will. At any rate, there is no hiding from Him. Moreover, his conscience seems more clear than that of his sons'. 4. David & Ornan both saw the angel in the air. They went ahead and continued their selling of Ornan's property (the future temple site) even though the angel was still poised to strike. Would you or I have been able to do something sensibly with an overwhelming angel of God's judgment plainly visible? 5. Who of any of us knows what great temptations and evil days lie ahead for us still? If we knew the evil days in advance, perhaps we would stay in bed. This is impossible, of course, so the better tack is to walk daily and humbly with our LORD, closely relying on Him to see us through the good days and the bad. If we walk in the Spirit we will not fulfill the desires of the flesh, Galatians 5:16. If we acknowledge Him in all that we do. He will direct our paths, Proverbs 3:6. 6. Familiarity breeds contempt. Sometimes we think we know God and withhold from Him the respect and obedience we should give. David probably didn't need to hear any detailed reasoning from Gad as to whether or not he sinned. he knew he was guilty. Sometimes we bring judgments upon ourselves for treating the wonderful Lord of our salvation as "the man upstairs" or as "the good Lord". Voltaire, on his deathbed was reported as saying, "God will forgive. It's His job." It is one thing that the unsaved have vapid and trite notions of the Almighty. It is truly out of place and a cause for chastisement - when Christians slight the Eternal One and don't give Him the glory that they know He deserves.

Page 11

The Two Pillars of God's Presence “And he raised up the pillars before the temple, one on the right hand, and the other on the left; and called the name of that on the right hand Jachin, and the name of that on the left Boaz.” 2 Chron. 3:17 Studying the account of these two pillars, 1st Kings 7; 2 Chron. 3, we notice a startling fact: These pillars don't hold anything up! Why is that? Merely decorative? Hardly. All the details of this temple were given to Solomon's father David, and faithfully handed down. No, they had a purpose, but what? What’s in a Name? A Big Clue. The first clue is in the names themselves, Jachin and Boaz. And this is where mistakes are already made, even in many of our Bible margins. Most are in agreement for the first name, that it means :"He shall establish" or something similar. It is at "Boaz" where we find surprising disagreement. ISBE (International Standard Bible Encyclopedia), representative of many, has this to say: "[Jachin and Boaz] were the names of the two bronze pillars that stood before the temple of Solomon. They were not used in supporting the building; their appearance, therefore, must have been solely due to moral and symbolic reasons. What these are it is not easy to say." Part of the reason for ISBE's puzzlement is their rendering of Boaz to mean "in it is strength". It! Whose temple is this anyway? And whose are the details? God's, ultimately. Does it make sense that a structure that God ordained to be built would actually teach idolatry? This is precisely the sort of thing that God judges, not blesses. It would be easier to imagine Solomon setting up some idol in the twilight of his defecting life, erecting a "thing of brass" at the prompting of one of his many idolatrous wives, and saying "In this is strength". But not at this early point when Solomon is so manifestly blessed and blessing. It is amazing, also, that many notes in our study Bibles (and in the margin of my NASB) also translate Boaz the same way. What were they thinking?! To be sure, Boaz can be translated that way, in the same way that in many languages (Koine Greek, German) pronouns aren't always fixed to particular gender. But this can also be rendered - and should be rendered - "In Him is strength". How is this even doubtful? Not doing this obscures an important truth that is quite clear elsewhere, that only in God do we have true strength - not in some giant dashboard Jesus. For the record, many commentators, especially the older ones, speak clearly to this point. Matthew Henry, commenting on the parallel 2 Kings 7, writes of these pillars: "Their significancy is intimated in the names given them (v. 21): Jachin-he will establish; and Boaz-in him is strength. Some think they were intended for memorials of the pillar of cloud and fire which led Israel through the wilderness: I rather think them designed for memorandums to the priests and others that came to worship at God's door, [1.] To depend upon God only, and not upon any sufficiency of their own, for strength and establishment in all their religious exercises. When we come to wait upon God, and find our hearts wandering and unfixed, then by faith let us fetch in help from heaven: Jachin-God will fix this roving mind. It is a good thing that the heart Page 12

be established with grace. We find ourselves weak and unable for holy duties, but this is our encouragement: Boaz-in him is our strength, who works in us both to will and to do. I will go in the strength of the Lord God.… "The gospel church is what God will establish, what he will strengthen, and what the gates of hell can never prevail against." The Visible Points to the Invisible. These pillars which Solomon raised up were much more stable than those which merely hold up temples, like the one Samson was able to bring down with puny human might, Judges 16:25. Joachin and Boaz hold up nothing. That was the point of these columns seeming uselessness. But they point (to faith-given hearts) to the God who holds up everything. They point to the invisible temple, of which Solomon's was only the visible type, and to the invisible God. It should not be surprising that the God of metaphors, parables and types should also fill the House in which He put His name with these same helps to our faith. The invisible God condescends to use visual aids. These two "useless" pillars are just that. They are aids to our faith, as well as witnesses of God's presence and sovereignty, that He establishes and is the source of our strength. The Pillars are God’s The ones fashioned in the earthly temple were made by Hiram of Tyre and directed and financed by Solomon. But the heavenly pillars - all true pillars - are God's: "For the pillars of the earth are the LORD'S, and he has set the world upon them." 1 Sam. 2:8 Where else in Scripture have we seen Two Pillars? Both before these passages (in Kings and Chronicles)and after do we have occurrences of two pillars. Before this time, of course, there were the two pillars of God, the cloud by day and the fiery one by night, guiding Israel and assuring them of His presence. It is interesting that, out of the nine Hebrew words for "pillar", the word used for both the pillars in the wilderness and those of Solomon's Temple is the same, AMMUD. However this is the most common word for "pillar". AMMUD is used in the Bible for all references to those pillars that accompanied Israelite. It is also used for all other references to the Tabernacle and the temple. The other two pillars are in Revelation. Remember the Angel of Revelation 10:1-2? "And I saw still another Mighty Angel coming down from heaven, clothed with a cloud. And a rainbow was on His head, His face was like the sun, and His feet like pillars of fire. He had a little book open in His hand. And He set His right foot on the sea, and His left foot on the land," You might have noticed that I used capitalization here (though my NKJV doesn't) because I believe this is a reference to not just any angel, but the Lord Jesus Christ Himself. The same Christ who was with Israel in the wilderness ("The shout of a Prince is among them"), the Angel of the Covenant, shows Himself here to have authority over all land and seas (all the nations). Later on this same Angel gives John the "little book". Like David and Ezekiel (Psalm 19:10; Ezek. 3:1ff) John eats the bittersweet book and is empowered to preach. Like the Old Testament prophets he is given his commission, vs. 11: "You must prophesy again about many peoples, nations, tongues, and kings". Page 13

Other Pillar References Returning to the pillar theme, there are a couple more occurrences of the word in the New Testament that are interesting: Those who overcome, Christ promises, will "be made pillars in the temple of My God", Rev. 3:12. I remember reading this as a young Christian, not being particularly thrilled at the prospect of this! Great, I get to be part of a building... forever. Of course that was when I took things a lot more literally than I do now. A similar metaphorical use is that of Paul. In 1st Timothy 3:15 he describes the church of the Living God as "the pillar and ground of the truth". He also refers to Peter and John as ones who "seemed to be pillars". How is this Important for Us? So how does this all tie together? Because the Bible is unified we can often trace out wonderful themes throughout God's book, though spelled out and typified in different ways. The God of Old and New Testament is the same. He is the Boaz and Jachin, Establisher and Strengthener, of all who believe. He is the Alpha and Omega, the Author and Finisher of our faith. "He who has begun a good work in you will complete it until the day of Christ Jesus", Phil. 1:6. Reading this passage in Chronicle we should never doubt God's power and mercy to those who have faith in His promises.

Page 14

If My People: 2 Chronicles 7:14 A Promise God Never Made and a Prophetic Application Overlooked

“If My people who are called by My name will humble themselves, and pray and seek My face, and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin and heal their land.”

This verse is, first of all – as it is often presented – a promise never made. The implication in many American websites, sermons, books, posters, songs, and bumper-stickers is that if America, or the Christians in America, will seek God’s face then He will hear their prayer and heal their country. The reason why many misconstrue this verse as having special application for America and for her revival is that they take these words out of context, focusing instead on special words and phrases that can be reloaded with other meaning. Once the text is denatured and re-natured it comes out red-white-and-blue – but totally at odds with the context. Here are the essential points of misunderstanding: “My people” = Americans. Rational: Were we not a Christian nation? “Called by My name” = Christians. Are we not called by Christ’s name? “I … will heal their land” = America. God will heal our country. As I wrote, these applications are arrived at by seeing this verse as self-contained. One well-meaning pastor even makes this verse part of his “single, stand-alone Scripture series”! But to see any verse – especially one like the present – as stand-alone is a recipe for exegetical disaster. Context, always helpful for understanding Other websites I visited – only a minority of them, unfortunately – gave due credit to the rest of the passage, chapters 6 and 7 of 2nd Chronicles. As one reads the rest of the passage one notices a recurring theme: the Temple! This whole passage is set in Solomon’s Temple, and was God’s answer in the night to Solomon. It was after Solomon’s dedication of the Temple, and in response to his prayer during that dedication, 2nd Chron. 6:1-42. And what did Solomon pray? That God would honor prayers of His people “toward this place”. He refers to “this place”, “this temple” thirteen times: 6:18, 20 (twice), 21, 22, 24, 26, 29, 32, 33, 34, 38, and 40. God’s answer to Solomon, likewise, refers six times to “this place” or “this temple”. He also mentions four times the “name” that is associated with this temple. My point in all this enumeration is to show that God’s promise is closely associated, not only with the ancient covenant with His people, but with the Temple as well. It is revealing that those who quote 2nd Chron. 7:14 rarely quote the defining context, verses before and those that follow immediately after, or notice the bolded words in the text: Page 15

“Then the LORD appeared to Solomon by night, and said to him: ‘I have heard your prayer, and have chosen this place for Myself as a house of sacrifice.”, vs. 12.“Now My eyes will be open and My ears attentive to prayer made in this place. For now I have chosen and sanctified this house, that My name may be there forever; and My eyes and My heart will be there perpetually.” vss. 15 – 16. Looking at this context we see that God’s oft-quoted “I will hear from heaven” must be qualified with the very next verse, His ears being “attentive to prayer made in this place” [that is, the Temple]. Not prayers in America, but Jerusalem. And if one sees how important the context and setting is here then it is much easier to follow the application: the “land” spoken of which God, upon prayer and repentance, promised to heal was Israel, not America. The whole point is that this promise was made to the only nation on the Earth that had (past tense) a national covenant with God – Israel. And, thus, the only nation that could ever have expected corporate healing per this promise is Israel. America has nothing to do with this promise. America, as a nation, has no right to this promise. American Christians have no need for it.

But what about the Principle? Surely, someone might object, there must be some application for us? Yes. One is that God is faithful in all His promises. Even in those situations that don’t apply to us. But one principle we cannot draw out from this passage is that we are able to pull a nation out of a moral nosedive, or into a “national revival”, by the spiritual exertions of a Christian minority, however sincere. That is the promise not given. We have the proof of this in Ezekiel 14:13 – 20: “‘Son of  man,  if  a  country  sins  against  Me  by committing unfaithfulness, and I stretch out My hand against it, destroy its supply of bread, send famine against  it, and cut off from it both man and beast, even though these three men, Noah, Daniel,  and  Job were  in  its midst, by their own righteousness they could only deliver themselves,’ declares the Lord God.” In this whole passage God makes it clear that the unrighteous nation – and America certainly has the right to put themselves in this verse, Ezekiel 14 – will not avoid judgment by the spiritual exertions of the righteous few. Second Chronicles 7:14 was a promise given to national, covenantal Israel at the height of their spiritual blessedness. It was for a limited time, as well: the age of legitimate temple worship. How ironically inappropriate and anachronistic for any nation to take this specific promise for themselves!

But the misuse of this verse not only entails a wrong application; it also covers up a Messianic truth. Page 16

A Prophetic Messianic Application Overlooked “But He was speaking of the temple of His Body.” John 2:21. See also 1st Peter 2:4 – 10.“Jesus said to her, ‘Woman, believe Me, the hour is coming when you will neither on this mountain, nor in Jerusalem, worship the Father… “God is Spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth.” John 4:21, 24“For all the promises of God in Him are Yes, and in Him Amen, to the glory of God through us.” 2nd Cor. 1:20 There is much in the Old Testament that is prophetic of the brighter, clearer New Testament revelation. Not only teaching and prophecy, but also types point to Christ. The Temple is one of those types that points to Christ, our Messiah. Christ is our Temple. As we abide in Christ, “a holy nation” studying His Word, worshiping in the Spirit and in Truth, we are also being built up (edified) into a holy building, living stones resting upon – and resting in – the living, precious Stone of Christ. This is the point of 2nd Peter 2:4 – 10. This passage should remind us of both Matthew 7:24 – 27 (the house on the Rock) and Matthew 16:18 (on this Rock I will build My church). How does this relate to 2nd Chronicles 7:14? The whole setting and basis for God’s erstwhile promise has changed. It is not as though the Old Testament assurance has become null and void. No, rather it has been amplified in Christ our Savior:

Prayers once made in the earthly temple are now made in Christ. Worship once performed between temple walls, in Jerusalem, is now done in spirit and in truth – everywhere. The holy name Solomon invoked we know now to be the name above all names, the One in whose name we pray. And, Peter tells us, we are the holy nation – believing Jews and Gentiles – the largest nation in the world, a spiritual diaspora that will know no boundaries, nor ultimate defeat.

All of these things were wonderfully prefigured in 2nd Chronicles chapter 7. To isolate that one verse 14 and make it be merely about America is to cover up something comforting, gloriously prophetic, and Messianic with something transient and – by comparison – quite shoddy.

Page 17

Isaiah 40 – 66: Jerusalem, Earthly & Heavenly I have often been intrigued with the theme of the heavenly Jerusalem/ spiritual Zion found in Isaiah, and also with the connection with Daniel 9. The more I followed this through the wider the study went, to the point where I could no longer manage it as originally envisioned. The topic had gotten too wide, spilled over into several other books! But that is really a good thing. It taught me that this is truly an important truth for Christians - Jews and Gentiles. One of the best ways to approach Daniel 9 (all of Daniel, for that matter) is to show how it points to Christ as fulfillment. Once that is done it should be easier to show earthly Judaism and earthly Jerusalem as being type and promise for something infinitely better. Or some ONE infinitely better. By showing that the promises in Daniel 9 also are “Yes, and in Him Amen”, 2nd Cor. 2:20, we make clearer the Christology of this wonderful book. As well, we can then better make the case that Judaism - as a nation and religion - no longer has it's God-given purpose without seeming to be an anti-Semite. A careful study of these things has shown me, rather, that I was being antichristian by denying some prophetic passages in the Old Testament their distinct Messianic fulfillment. Daniel and ... fill in the blank "Daniel and Revelation", right? I believe that we have been so constantly taught through the years to associate the book of Daniel with Revelation that we have a hard time seeing other connections. Yet they are there. I hope later to show the connection that Daniel has to Leviticus and Deuteronomy, helping us to understand the divine mathematics of God’s dealing with Israel. It was clearly a case of “I told you so”, but Israel went the way of all flesh anyway. Also, speaking of math, I plan to in a future article/book make the case as to where the original (previous) 490 years began (with the help of James Ussher and others). I believe it had to do with a certain “asked for” king (Saul) who couldn’t wait for Samuel’s (or God’s) timing and made the offering that was the cause of his own desolation, though not the nation. Samuel said after this event that the Lord would not establish his kingdom, 1 Samuel 13:1314. Later he calls Saul’s rebellion against God to account and adds “The Lord has torn the kingdom from you today…”, 1 Samuel 15:28. From this time on Saul was a desolate man; all that was left for him was the actual dying. We Christians need to get out of the rut of all the usual associations. We need to be on the lookout, in our daily study, of different and fresh associations, tying down familiar verses with unfamiliar. Comparing the worn pages of our Bible with some of the clean pages. As God points out sections and passages that truly go together (as opposed to those which merely seem to) our Bible gets a better and better binding – how’s that for a metaphor? – New Testament with Old, and ancient promise with Christ-fulfillment. The entire blessed Word of God for our present world.

Page 18

Isaiah 40 – 66: Overview It’s often helpful to study a larger section of Scripture by examining the use of a certain word or concept. I did this with the word “Jerusalem” in this second part of Isaiah. I was tempted almost to say “second Isaiah” because the theme from chapter 40 onward is somewhat different than the previous, just the same as the theme of the 40th book of the Bible (Matthew) is different from the first 39 books (the Old Testament). In this sense Isaiah’s 66 chapters seem to actually be prophetical of the completed Bible’s 66 books. But I don’t refer to the second half of Isaiah as “second Isaiah” because there are actually people who believe that there were two – or three! – Isaiah’s. I don’t. They believe this because otherwise they would have to believe in inspired prophecy – which they don’t. Much of modern scholarship is merely a new face put on ages-old unbelief. So what did I find out about ”Jerusalem”? The meaning of the word is slightly controversial, but probably means either “in it is peace” or “possession of peace”. Interestingly, this last half of Isaiah has twenty occurrences of the word: * Ten in chapters 40 through 52. * None in the more explicitly Messianic section and following chapters, 53 – 61. * Ten again in chapters 62 through 66. I don’t necessarily put spiritual significance to the interesting pattern (10 – 0 –10) but it is helpful to keep in mind. Jerusalem: Physical and Spiritual The first thing I noticed, tying this in with Daniel 9, is that the passage is certainly about physical Jerusalem. It is, in fact, addressed to Jerusalem: “'Comfort, yes, comfort My people!’ says your God. Speak comfort to Jerusalem, and cry out to her, That her warfare is ended, That her iniquity is pardoned; For she has received from the Lord’s hand Double for all her sins.” See verse 9: “O Zion, you who bring good tidings, Get up into the high mountain; O Jerusalem, you who bring good tidings” Note, there are both usages of the word “Jerusalem” in these chapters, physical and spiritual. Some are clearly physical, but others are obviously spiritual. Those who claim that we “spiritualizers of Scripture” are not taking the Word literally, do the very same thing – only with different verses. They certainly understand the above verses to refer to more than just physical Jerusalem. To not do this is to imagine a ridiculous interpretation, a city climbing a mountain!

Page 19

A Tale of Two Temples, Physical and Spiritual But what about the Daniel passage? Do we spiritualize those too? Yes and no. We actually do both. First comes the physical fulfillment. Through many trials and temptations the Israelites, with sword and trowel, finally build their physical city, temple and walls. But as they do so, they are already being assured by the new breed of post-exilic prophets that there is more going on here than meets their eye. The older temple builders were especially saddened by what they saw, because they remembered the previous grand temple of Solomon’s. But Haggai encouraged them: “’The glory of this latter house shall be greater than the former’, says the Lord of hosts. “And in this place I will give peace,’ says the Lord of hosts.” Haggai 2:9 But how can this be? It was a smaller temple. Surely God didn’t mean the self-aggrandizing additions that Herod made? No, the “glory” referred to here – and the “peace” – is Christ Himself, “the Messenger who suddenly comes to His temple”, Mal. 3:1. Paul speaks of this “Peace”, teaching us that “He himself is our peace, who has made both [Jew and Gentile] one, and has broken down the middle wall of separation,” Eph. 2:14. He goes in to say that we, believing Jews and Gentiles, are being “built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the chief cornerstone [that is, main foundation], in Whom the whole building, being fitted together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord, in whom you are also are being built together for a dwelling place of God in the Spirit.” Eph. 2:20 – 22. How does this temple in Haggai have a greater glory? 1. The spiritual is more glorious than the physical. (Though it necessarily comes after, 1 Cor. 15:46). 2. The outreach to the world is greater than that of physical Israel, so the works are greater, John 10: 16; 14:12. 3. Christ has come to the temple, fulfilled all requirements, signs and prophecies that pointed to Him, and has become our once-for-all temple Sacrifice. He is also our High Priest, entering into the Holy of Holies on our behalf. God is, of course, not just a temple builder. His deeper aim is to build a people up, to gather them together and grow them as His own unique people. That is why the temple passages in the Bible eventually give way to the Zion or Jerusalem passages, until finally we see in the last book the heavenly Jerusalem, a city without a temple. It has no need for one, because we have Christ and are in Christ. Temple & City But these verses are all about the temple. What about the city? The same Paul who writes about the temple uses the city metaphor elsewhere. He says that the true children of Abraham are citizens of “the Jerusalem above”. Gal. 5:26. In Hebrews we are told that we have not come to Sinai (a point that is lost on some of us Reformed folks with their overemphasis of the Decalogue) but we have “come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem”, Heb. 12: 18, 22- 23. This is the very same heavenly Jerusalem that is pictured descending from heaven in Rev. 21:2! But wait, you might say, that’s all future! But how do you know that that particular verse is future? As we continue looking into Isaiah – no, I haven’t forgotten the title of this post – we will see a lot of apocalyptic (assumingly future) elements put to historical use. Historical from our standpoint. Page 20

This is where we live now, Christian brothers and sisters! We are citizens of the greatest nation in the world Greatest in extent, Greatest in Foundation, Most glorious in outlook! What a thrilling prospect we have in Christ Jesus our Savior, Prophet, Priest, and King! When I first began these studies in Isaiah I was convinced of the Amill view of eschatology. But at some point in these chapters that view no longer seemed tenable. Neither did partial preterism. But that is a topic for a different time.

Page 21

Isaiah 40 – 51: “Jerusalem” & “Zion” In a way, a study of the occurrences of the words “Jerusalem” and “Zion” is somewhat artificial, since the idea of God’s holy city is inherent in some other verses, though those actual words are not. But it is a useful starting point for a really wonderful faith-confirming investigation. By the way, I suggest reading all of Isaiah 40 to 66 in one sitting, twice or more if you can. In a very real sense, taking one verse from the context – or even a passage – is like taking a petal and thinking you have the whole essential flower. Here are the next Jerusalem verses in the second half of Isaiah: 40:2, 9 – This was covered in the previous article. “Speak comfort to Jerusalem; … go up into the high mountain and lift your voice.” 41:27 – “The first time I said to Zion, ‘Look, there they are!’ And I will give to Jerusalem one who brings good tidings.” This is one of many verses in the whole Bible, 54 according to my Online Bible, that couple Zion with Jerusalem. 44:24 – “I am the Lord, who makes all things”

44:26 – 28 continues…. “Who confirms the word of His servant, And performs the counsel of His messengers; Who says to Jerusalem, ‘You shall be inhabited,’ To the cities of Judah, ‘You shall be built,’ And I will raise up her waste places; “Who says to the deep, ‘Be dry! And I will dry up your rivers’; “Who says of Cyrus, ‘He is My shepherd, And he shall perform all My pleasure, Saying to Jerusalem, ‘You shall be built,’ And to the temple, ‘Your foundation shall be laid.’” Parenthetical comment: Many Bible writers who mistakenly make Cyrus’s edict the starting point of the Seventy Weeks also put the focus on the temple, putting the city way in the background. But here the city is mentioned first. Page 22

Now consider this next Zion passage, 51:1 – 4: “‘Listen to Me, you who pursue righteousness, You who seek the Lord: Look to the rock from whence you were hewn, And to the hole of the pit from which you were dug. “Look to Abraham your father, And to Sarah who bore you; For I called him alone, And blessed him and increased him. “For the Lord will comfort Zion, He will comfort all her waste places; He will make her waste places like Eden, And her desert like the garden of the Lord; Joy and gladness will be found in it, Thanksgiving and the voice of melody. “Listen to Me, My people; And give ear to Me, O My nation: For law will proceed from Me, And I will make My justice rest As a light for the peoples.’” Do you see how the idea of “holy city” takes on a richer meaning? “Jerusalem” = “Zion” = “My nation” (and this is our “holy nation” of all the redeemed, 1 Pet. 2:9). Read on in Isaiah 51:1 – 8 and you will see that the holy nation takes her message, the Gospel, to those who have never heard. Saints who “know righteousness” (Christ is our righteousness) need not fear opposition, since God is with us. Notice also the apocalyptic imagery that is now seen in a different light: The earth grows old and those who live in it will die in the same way (v. 6). They will be destroyed by – what? An angel? An act from the book of Revelation? – no, by the moth and the worm (v. 8). As the Gospel goes outward the contrast between the Word of God and the world gets more and more apparent, 1 Pet. 1:22 – 25; 1 John 2:15 – 17; James 5:1 – 3. My NKJV doesn’t capitalize “rock” in verse 2, but it probably should, since Paul apparently seems to use this very passage in a Christological sense in pleading with his fellow Jews, Rom. 9:30 - 10: 5.

Page 23

On a side note: Isaiah does not tell them to “look to Moses”, but “look to Abraham”. The emphasis here is like that of the New Testament, where the example of Abraham is seen as, well, exemplary (= our pattern, the “footsteps of Abraham”, “whose faith follow”), Rom. 4, Gal. 3. Moses’ example, by contrast, is seen as parenthetical, Gal. 3:16- 19.

We follow the pattern. We don’t dwell in the parenthesis. Abraham’s life, more than Moses’, points us to Mt. Zion and Calvary. I believe that many Christians – Reformed especially – have too much of a Sinai-centric faith. I believe God’s words to Elijah when he fled to that very mountain should apply also to them as well – those who want to dwell in Sinai’s shadow: “What are you doing here?” (1 Kings 19:13). Isaiah 51:17: “‘Awake, awake! Stand up, O Jerusalem, You who have drunk at the hand of the Lord The cup of His fury; You have drunk the dregs of the cup of trembling, And drained it out.’” God goes on to tell Jerusalem that this punishment has come from Him, “desolation and destruction, famine and sword”. But He also comforts them with the assurance that this cup has been taken from them and given to their enemies.

Page 24

Isaiah 60:10 – 22: Zion's Latent and Everlasting Glory Man looks on the outward appearance, God on the heart. It has ever been thus. It is true in life in general, in the way we see each other, the way we judge the world around us. It is especially true in our theology and, specifically, in our eschatology. This is why the message of these chapters is so misunderstood by much of modern Christianity: it does not conform to their charts and expectations. Appearances – or lack of appearances – warps their eschatology. If I may use the somewhat clichéd witticism: Their ship came in but they were at the airport. More to our point: The Kingdom came in - is coming in - and they miss it. The Temple is being built, stone upon Living Stone, and the Heavenly Jerusalem is growing mountainlike, Dan. 2:34-35, 44, before their very eyes but they are fixing their gaze on a parcel of obsolete geography, waiting for a visible temple that will never appear. The truth needs to really sink in that the Kingdom did not - and does not ever - "come with observation". It came. It is among us. Like the disciples of Christ's time who fixated on the marvelous stones of the doomed earthly temple they need to see things as they really are. The things that are eternal are invisible. Getting back to Isaiah's modern misinterpreters: Their end-time paradigm prejudices them against the truths revealed here in these closing chapters, truths that are, as we will continue to show, reaffirmed and cross-referenced in Revelation. From this 60th chapter to the end of the book (but especially the next three or four chapters) there is a very instructive series of parallel themes and motifs between the two books. This should not be surprising since the topic and general time of fulfillment is the same, Calvary to the fall of Jerusalem. Two aspects of our Kingdom of Zion in this passage deserve special notice: The latency ("hiddenness") of it and the glory of it - "glory" or "glorify" occurring eight times on this chapter. Zion is "latent" in the sense of being unrecognized by many Jews and Gentiles - both then and now. God's Kingdom - just like the King Himself - came in under the radar, so to speak. It grows, like the seed in Mark 4:26, and man "knows not how". 10 “The sons of foreigners shall build up your walls, And their kings shall minister to you; For in My wrath I struck you, But in My favor I have had mercy on you.

Zion's walls: Isa. 49:16; 62:6 (compare with Acts 15:14ff). The physical rebuilding of Jerusalem began with the permission of Artaxerxes Longimanus but the spiritual fulfillment is described in that passage in Acts. Page 25

Here is a great irony: The Jews destroyed their own city in order to defend it against foreigners – they did this twice (during both sieges, Babylonian and Roman) - and now the “sons of foreigners” build up the walls! Spiritual Zion is being rebuilt by “willing converted strangers” (Edward J. Young). 11 Therefore your gates shall be open continually; They shall not be shut day or night, That men may bring to you the wealth of the Gentiles, And their kings in procession. Gates not shut (Rev. 21 also): If we can trust the secular historian Josephus there was a portentous miracle concerning the Temple's Eastern Gate: The massive structure opened of its own accord in 66 AD during the Feast of Tabernacles. 12 For the nation and kingdom which will not serve you shall perish, And those nations shall be utterly ruined. 13 “The glory of Lebanon shall come to you, The cypress, the pine, and the box tree together, To beautify the place of My sanctuary; And I will make the place of My feet glorious. 14 Also the sons of those who afflicted you Shall come bowing to you, And all those who despised you shall fall prostrate at the soles of your feet; And they shall call you The City of the LORD, Zion of the Holy One of Israel. 15 “Whereas you have been forsaken and hated, So that no one went through you, I will make you an eternal excellence, A joy of many generations. 16 You shall drink the milk of the Gentiles, And milk the breast of kings; “Milk the breast of kings”! The Bible has several inelegant imageries like this, but I believe that it is phrased like this in order to shock us into considering the impossibility of it. Similar is the passing of a camel through the eye of a needle. With man these things are impossible, but with God all things are possible. Although this is clearly metaphorical it reveals an accomplishment that only God can do; only God can turn the hearts, open the purse strings, and overrule scepters of kings. You shall know that I, the LORD, am your Savior And your Redeemer, the Mighty One of Jacob. Page 26

17 “Instead of bronze I will bring gold, Instead of iron I will bring silver, Instead of wood, bronze, And instead of stones, iron. I will also make your officers peace, And your magistrates righteousness. City Improvement Caesar Augustus boasted, “I found Rome a city of brick and left it a city of marble”. But his improvements were a mere veneer of glory, superficial adornment. God's Zion, being as the King's daughter, Psa. 45 “is all glorious within.” Man is always cleaning the outside of the cup and whitewashing walls. Only God can clean up cities and souls. Man is impressed and misled by outward facades. God desires truth and inward excellence – both for individual saints and for the kingdom as a whole. 18 Violence shall no longer be heard in your land, Neither wasting nor destruction within your borders; But you shall call your walls Salvation, And your gates Praise. 19 “The sun shall no longer be your light by day, Nor for brightness shall the moon give light to you; But the LORD will be to you an everlasting light, And your God your glory. Lit. “There shall not be to you...” suggests comparison to the first commandment. The implication here is that Christ is not only our Light, but He is the fulfillment of the Law. 20 Your sun shall no longer go down, Nor shall your moon withdraw itself; For the LORD will be your everlasting light, And the days of your mourning shall be ended. 19-20: There are seven mentions of our light. See Isa. 60:1-2. The point is that at the same time darkness will still prevail elsewhere. There is light in the kingdom and there is outer darkness elsewhere. This is the “ruling in the midst of enemies”. (Psalm 110:2) “Let your light so shine that” Gentiles and kings can “come to the brightness of your rising.” v.3 There is throughout our time a false light as well as the true light. Those who follow the false lights, “the sparks”, will “lie down in sorrow”. Isa. 50:11. Likewise Paul warns of “angels of light”, 2 Cor. 11:14, who oppose the true light of the Gospel. Application: Rev. 21's light is also partial. There is darkness elsewhere. The light of the Lamb and outer darkness. Page 27

The moon has a further significance here. The fact that it will not “withdraw itself” anymore means that there will no longer be the observances of the feasts of the Law, since they are necessarily based on the moons phases (withdrawals). Another indication of Christ fulfilling and mooting the Law, making it of no effect. “The days of our mourning shall be ended”. This comfort is for the mourners of Matt. 5:4: “Blessed are the mourners, for they shall be comforted.” God comforts all of us who mourn over our sins, over the great and humbling disparity between our profession and our walk. And He "gives grace to the humble", James 4:6. 21 Also your people shall all be righteous; They shall inherit the land forever, The branch of My planting, The work of My hands, That I may be glorified. They “shall all be righteous.” No exceptions. This reminds us of Isa. 54:13 and John 6:45, “They shall all be taught of God.” Likewise the oft-misused verse of Romans 11:26 “All Israel will be saved.” finds its application here. 1. The Israel of Romans 11:26 is the Jew of Romans 2:29. 2. The inwardly changed Jews (actually, Jews and Gentiles) make up the Israel of Romans 11:26. 3. These are the ones who will all be righteous. 4. These are the ones who are taught by God. 5. If we are Christians we are also all of the above. 22 A little one shall become a thousand, And a small one a strong nation. I, the LORD, will hasten it in its time.” God promised Isaiah's hearers that He would hasten it in its time. But when the time came the Apostle Paul announced, "Behold, now is the accepted time; behold, now is the day of salvation." 2 Cor. 6:2. The Kingdom is here now. Do you see it? Are you in it? Page 28

Six Promises of Christ to His People and City: Daniel 9:24 A correction I made to the original article is in the title, which did not include “and city”. But that qualifying phrase is prophetically significant. There may very well be as many interpretations as there are weeks to this prophecy of Daniel 9:24– 27. While many different views have been around for a number of centuries a sizable consensus of Christianity has agreed that the fulfillment of these six promises were to be achieved through the Messiah - and that they were all fulfilled during the century of Christ’s life on earth. That second phrase, although more controversial for some, is borne out by Scripture. I hope to show – and here we differ from many other full preterists – all six of these promises were fulfilled at Calvary and shortly thereafter. [0a] The Apostle Paul, writing to the Hebrews concerning Christ, refers to Him as “the Author and Finisher of our faith”, Hebrews 12:2. This prophetical passage before us dwells and details the wonderful steps of those promises, promises given to the Jews and - by His grace-given faith – to all of us who have also entered into those same promises, Galatians 3:16; 6:16; 2nd Cor. 1:20. To know this passage and to meditate on its truths can’t help but strengthen our faith and magnify our Redeemer. But the modern futurist and dispensational interpretation tends to downplay this and trade it for fictions that have much to do with Antichrist but - except for the white horse scene at the very end – little to do with Christ. [0b] Certainly, in eternity we will finally enter into the real blessing of being with Christ but, we recognize that much of what others are looking for in the future we already have now. How many of us Preterists, when singing the usual hymns with our futurists friends, have had to mumble other words in those obligatory 4th stanza Jesus-is-coming-soon lines! We finally understand that much of the supposed future comfort is or ought to be a present possession. The Blessed Hope is not a verb but a noun. It is not a transient event, but a Person who reigns right now. And because He reigns we overcome, as salt and light. And as soldiers in the Good Fight. Not heading for our mental bunkers. All of this becomes much more a reality for us when we take these six promises in Daniel 9 to heart, studying how Christ has fulfilled every one for our benefit and application. Here is the text that we need to study: “Seventy weeks are determined upon your people and upon your holy city, to finish [“restrain”] the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.” “Seventy weeks” = one unit = 490 years. This topic will be dealt with in other articles. If I can convince you what the six foretold events here are, and to Whom they refer, the timing will take care of itself. Page 29

These are the six actions that Christ has brought about: 1. Finish transgression. 2. Make an end for sins. 3. Make reconciliation for iniquity. 4. Bring in everlasting righteousness. 5. Seal up the vision and prophecy. 6. Anoint the Most Holy. Gabriel comes to Daniel in answer to his prayer. Actually the angel’s answer is even larger than the prophet’s prayer. (This reminds of Eph. 3:20-21 and Romans 8:26). Daniel had asked for understanding of the two visions, Dan. 7 and 8, respectively, in light of his finally understanding from Jeremiah that the Captivity must soon come to an end. Daniel asked for clarity on the physical captivity of his people. The angel, exceeding his expectations, declared also the release of the people of God from spiritual captivity. This is now the second time that Gabriel appeared to Daniel. In the previous chapter, two years earlier, he had given understanding concerning the earlier kingdoms and the destruction of Solomon’s Temple as well as the times afterward. An instructive compare/contrast study would be the two temple judgments in these two chapters, Dan. 8 and 9. There are similarities and differences. In Dan. 8:13 we read of that earlier temple’s “transgression of desolation”. That earlier desolation, severe as it was, was not permanent. After a period of about six and a third years the temple was finally cleansed, v. 14. However, the judgment of the temple mentioned in Daniel 9, Herod’s Temple, faced permanent destruction, which the Messiah later referred to as the “abomination of desolation”, Matt. 24:15, which had an “end with a flood”, Dan. 9:26 – 27. [0c] One reason the verses in Daniel 9 are often misunderstood is because they are plucked out, isolated without regard for clarifying context of previous chapters of like theme, in this case, Daniel chapters 2, 7, and 8. Each of these chapters deal with the same trials afflicted on the people of God. [0d] His People, His City When we read this passage we should remember that the response of Gabriel, first of all, has reference to the concerns of Daniel – to his people, city (mentioned six times in his prayer), and sanctuary. Of course we, by faith and gracious inheritance, enter also into these promises, but there is a danger when Christians rush to the universal application, forgetting context. To understand the recipients and context of the passage helps to nail down both application and timeline.

Page 30

The first three events promised in Daniel were of things to be removed, taking care of a negative situation – our sin. For God to do His work, He must first rectify the mess we have made. This reminds us of God’s mission for the prophet Jeremiah, Jer. 1:10: “See, I have this day set you [speaking to the prophet] … To root out and to pull down, To destroy and to throw down. To build and to plant.” While it is important to see ourselves in this passage in Daniel 9 it is just as important to see the antecedents: the transgression of Daniel’s people and city and people, v.11, and going back to the archtransgression in the Garden.

To Finish THE Transgression Notice that it is “THE transgression”, not transgression in general. This likely points ultimately to a single foundational transgression. Daniel had indeed confessed that “all Israel have transgressed your Law” but I think that the angel’s reference to transgression, while encompassing Daniel’s concern, also points back to the sin of Adam. The transgression of the first Adam was ended by the obedience of the Second Adam. And that, of course, was how the transgression was finished. Romans 5:12 – 19 brings this out. Verses 12, 15, and 18-19 summarize this point pretty well: 12. Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned— 15. But the free gift is not like the offense. For if by the one man’s offense many died, much more the grace of God and the gift by the grace of the one Man, Jesus Christ, abounded to many. 18. Therefore, as through one man’s offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation, even so through one Man’s righteous act the free gift came to all men, resulting in justification of life. 19. For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so also by one Man’s obedience many will be made righteous. And Paul in 1 Corinthians 15:21-22 writes in the same vein: For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man. For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive. And in verse 45 he strengthens the connection, identifying Christ as the “last Adam”. It should be obvious with a careful reading of these six promises that they all have their fulfillment in that period. There is no gap. Not a two thousand-year one, nor a forty-year one. This plain reading is very often overlooked by many futurists as well as many Preterists, Partial and especially all too many Full Preterists. [1a] Page 31

2.To Make an End of Sins Many of us older folks remember the first Gulf War and the televised images of oil wells in the Gulf region burning almost out of control. The smoke from the burning could be seen clearly from space. I say “almost” out of control, because, though it took awhile, every one of those fires was extinguished. The point is this: The method used to extinguish those fires illustrates the first and second of these prophesied events: 1. First the fires had to be capped. It would be pointless to attempt extinguishing fires while they were still being fed at the source, while fuel was still pouring out. So the firefighters stopped the fire by means of a momentary explosion, arrested the pouring out of fuel (both liquid and oxygen). They then capped the well before it could re-ignite. This is similar, in a way, to what Jesus did. First he took care of sin (singular) at its source. As far as we are concerned, He capped (covered) sin. This is the principle of sin, and Satan as the arch Fire-Starter. In Christ’s perfect life, death on the Cross and resurrection we have the strong man overcome by the Stronger Man, Mark 3:27, Luke 11:21– 22, Satan bound, Rev. 20:1- 3. He triumphed openly over him by the Cross, Col. 2:13- 15. This is that “shutting up” of transgression. 2. Then the individual fires (plural) could be put out. The Gulf War firefighters may not have used foam, but I will use it for this part of the illustration, since it fits the Hebrew word used here fairly well. (KJV “make an end of”) really means “to cover up” – and because it is covered up, to hide from view. (Song of Sol. 4:12 is a good example). This is where God casts our sins behind His back because of Christ’s death for us. This happened only at Calvary and will never be repeated. Once again – it did not happen at AD 70 nor will it some time in the future. Nor was it, as some Preterists imagine, a process of covering up culminating in AD 70. I suspect that, like in the previous clause, a definition is forced into the words, and not drawn out of the words. And, like in the previous clause, the assumption is that this clause (“make an end of sins”) is referring to the end times, and not to the times of Christ, since clearly, sin has not been made an end of. No, that is true: Sin still exists to afflict, at times, the best of Christians – yet they are covered up. [2b, 2c] That is why the saint doesn’t lose his salvation by an act of sin. For that matter, that is also why Old Testament saints like David did not lose theirs. “Blessed is he whose transgression is forgiven, whose sin is covered.” - Psalm 32:1 3.To Make Reconciliation for Iniquity We now come to the third event of Christ’s ministry for His people. We are told in this passage that He will come “to make reconciliation for iniquity”. This reconciliation had occurred at the cross. This is when reconciliation was effected, by the perfect life and sinless death of the God-man, Christ Jesus, the perfect sacrificial Lamb of God. Because there was (is) no blemish in His sacrifice, or fault in His life of demonstrated holiness, we too, who believe in Christ’s sacrifice for us, are totally accepted in Christ, Eph. 1:6. Page 32

“Reconciliation” means to “hide”, “cover” or “pardon”. This is what God does with our sins in view of Christ’s payment for them. It is not as though, strictly speaking they cease to exist. We are pardoned because of the peace attained for us by Christ, Eph. 2:14- 22; especially verses 13- 16. “But now in Christ Jesus you were once far off are made near by the blood of Christ. For He is our peace, who has made both one, and has broken down the middle wall of partition between us; having abolished in His flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; to make in Himself of two one new man, so making peace; and that He might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby;” Eph. 2:13- 16 Christ is our peace. Matthew Henry writes: “He is not only the peace-maker, but the peace. He is the atonement.” He is our reconciliation, our ongoing means of acceptance with God. This prophesied reconciliation is not only found here in Dan. 9, but was promised as far back as Genesis 3:15, when our first parents were first encouraged with the good news of a coming Savior. Where else do we read of this reconciliation that we have through Christ Jesus? Here are just some of the many verses that could be quoted: And not only so, but we also joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now received the atonement. - Rom. 5:11 And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation; - 2 Cor. 5:18 And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven. - Col. 1:20 Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people. Heb. 2:17 Think of it! How greatly this doctrine magnifies Jesus Christ. Approaching the altar as eternal Priest without blemish He presented the perfect sacrifice – Himself! Who among the wisest of the Old Testament Priests could have foreseen that they were, in their persons and vocation, types of such an astounding act of God? Christ is the High Priest who puts an end to all other priests – and to the Levitical priesthood altogether. Jesus Christ became at the same time “Priest of the most high God”, Heb. 7:1, “holy, innocent, undefiled, separate from sinners”, verse 26, and the “Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world”, John 1:29, both sacrificer and sacrifice, pure and unblemished.

Page 33

GENERAL COMMENTS ON THE FINAL THREE EVENTS These last three prophesied events confirm the Messiah as Priest, Prophet and King: A. His Priesthood is shown by his bringing in everlasting righteousness. He did this by living a righteous – perfect – life, and by being the spotless Lamb, sacrificed for our sin. His death, as well as His life, pleads for us. What has this to do with “everlasting righteousness”? Everything. It is at the Cross that Christ is able to be, as our Perfect Priest [4a], “both just and justifier of him who has faith in Jesus”, Rom. 3:26. In Christ we are declared righteous by imputation so that we can be increasingly righteous in experience. This is having “Christ formed in us”. [4b] B. His office as Prophet is shown by his sealing up of vision and prophecy. God spoke before to us in various ways, but from the time of the unveiling of the Gospel He has now spoken to us through the Son. Christ is the Prophet who puts an end to all prophets and prophecy, Heb. 1:1- 2. C. His Kingship is shown by his anointing of the Most Holy. Some versions imply that the anointing is of the most holy place, yet that word is not in the original. Textually, either “place” or “person” is a possible recipient of “anoint”.[4c] Notice that these blessed events all happen through the agency of Christ fulfilling His Messianic mission. They all happened at the Cross. All six of these tremendous benefits for saints everywhere – because the city and people of Daniel’s concern have now expanded worldwide – these can all be nailed down at Calvary, all six of them. There are no loose ends that require fulfillment in AD 66 or 70 or – God forbid – way off in our future. [4d] 4. BRING IN EVERLASTING RIGHTEOUSNESS The fourth of these promises has often been misunderstood, both as to interpretation and to timing. In fact, to get the first right assures the second will be correct as well. This is the first of three positive statements. The first three events prophesied in Daniel were largely negative, that is, a taking care of a negative situation the estrangement of Daniel’s people and city from God through sin. For God to do His work. Remember, for Daniel these were all still in the future. For us in 2023 these events are both history and present reality. In reading different commentaries I noticed that some writers dwell almost exclusively on the local application, but touched only lightly on timeless significance. All of the promises of God are Yes and Amen in Christ Jesus. If Christ is ours, these promises are also ours by inheritance. Now we get into God’s building up (edification) through Jesus Christ. This bringing in of “everlasting righteousness” is nothing less than the new life that we have in Christ Jesus. “Not having our own righteousness”. This is the righteousness that the Holy Spirit convinces the saints (and saints-to-be) of Page 34

(John 16:10). Sadly, very many of the Jews had missed (and still miss) the glory of this righteousness, having held onto their own works-righteousness, Rom. 10:3- 4. There are many passages in the Old Testament that promise this righteousness to come to God’s people. And there are many New Testament passages that encourage the 1st century saints on this righteousness brought to them through Christ. [4e] So what is the interpretation of this “bringing in everlasting righteousness”? What exactly is this? Clearly it is the work of God, not man. The New Testament – especially Romans [4f] – has much to say about righteousness in general and, specifically, the righteousness of Christ which is ours on the basis of faith. Two examples here are: "But now, apart from the law, the righteousness of God has been revealed, as attested by the Law and the Prophets. And this righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe.” - Romans 3:21-22a “It is because of Him that you are in Christ Jesus, who has become for us wisdom from God: our righteousness, holiness, and redemption.” - 1 Corinthians 1:30 5. SEAL UP VISION AND PROPHECY These last two events (sealing up and anointing) are perhaps the most controversial of all, not only as to the timing but as to the respective meanings. But if we keep in mind that these events, like the previous four, must have been fulfilled within the contiguous (gapless) Seventy Weeks we will already have eliminated many wrong interpretations. Understanding also that there should be no separation between the three components of the 70 weeks (7 + 42 + 1) directs us to find the fulfillment for this prophecy in the first century. If we believe that the six events here in verse 24 are in order or, at least, with some events happening at the same time but not listed out of order, then we have a clue as to what the sealing up of vision and prophecy cannot be, and that is the end of inspired writing. I say this because the sixth and final promise in this passage, the anointing of the Most Holy, clearly precedes, inspired Scripture. In other words, events five and six would be reversed in time. Highly unlikely. So much for what the phrase does not mean. What does it mean? First of all it should be mentioned that the actual phrase is “to seal up the vision and prophet”. Let us take a look at this “seal up” (“chatam”). See the note [5A] below for how Scripture uses the term elsewhere. And then we have this “sealing” passage in Daniel 12:4: “But you, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.” (See also verse 9) Page 35

Even though Daniel uses this same term in the twelfth chapter it seems that the usage is not exactly parallel. The sealing of 12:4 is one that Daniel himself is able to do. And the sealing of 12:9 is already accomplished at the time of the writing of Daniel (“the words are – present tense – closed up and sealed till the time of the end.”) Yet the “sealing up” (back to 9:24) of “vision and prophet” is clearly part of God’s grand purpose for His people. As such, this sealing up is tied to the Messianic promise, in line with rest of this prophecy. So what does “seal” mean here? It is one of Daniel 9‘s many covenant-related words (see Neh. 9:38) . It means also to shut up, to “seal up”. Consequently, it has come to mean “to finish” (see Gesenius) It has to do with authority and ownership, 1 Kings 21:8, Jer. 32:44. When God uses this word, however, we are speaking of His sovereignty and lordship over His own. I believe Paul had this in mind when he wrote 2 Tim. 2:19 and Eph. 1:13. The NT word “seal” or “sealed” is related to “chatam” in its application. For the believer (whether true Israel or Christian of the NT or our time) the sealing is a sign of God’s ownership of us, and of His protection of us, 2nd Cor. 1:22, Eph. 4:30, Rev. 7:3: 9:4. The sealing up of vision and prophet is both a blessing and a curse, depending on the recipient. [5b] There were many back then, just as now, who thought they were standing on the promises when they were just sitting in the premises. It was to no advantage to them at all that their premises was the Temple or the holy city. This sealing up turns out to be two-edged sword. Because all of the promises in the Old Testament had to do with Christ, in some way or other, once Christ came All those who persistently reject – or put off – obedience to the truth that they know make themselves prone to this judicial hardness of that same Word that could have saved them. The same sun that melts the wax hardens the clay. “Take heed how you hear”. The overwhelming majority of Jews, when their promised Messiah came, didn’t recognize Him because he didn’t conform to their carnal and blind idea of what the Messiah should be like. So, by the 1st century, the vision and prophecy was sealed up. It had done its work. The “Annas” and “Simeons” – the receptive few – were benefited by promises. But “the rest were blinded”. The “sealing up” (“finish”) of Christ is the completion of His work on the cross, when He cried, “It is finished!” Sealing up of the vision and prophecy is not the same as the closing of the canon, or the end of prophecy in general. It has a specific reference to Messiah, all the prophecies concerning this passage has to do with Him. Albert Barnes’s comment is worth sharing at length: “According to this interpretation the meaning would be, that the prophecies would be sealed up or settled by the coming of the Messiah. The prophecies terminated on him (compare Rev 19:10); they Page 36

would find their fulfillment in him; they would be completed in him – and might then be regarded as closed and consummated – as a book that is fully written and is sealed up. All the prophecies, and all the visions, had a reference more or less direct to the coming of the Messiah, and when he should appear they might be regarded as complete.”

6. ANOINT THE MOST HOLY This anointing spoken of in Daniel 9:24 is the anointing of the Christ in the New Testament. Though there are references to His followers anointing Him, the primary application is to the Father [6A]. The physical temple ceased to be a factor in prophecy when Christ died on the Cross: “Jesus, when He had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost. And behold, the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom…” Matt. 27:50 God did here what we have all with items of lesser importance: When we are done with it, we tear it in half. But, more importantly, it signifying the entrance to the Holy of Holies was opened. And, because of Christ’s entering in [6b], we also have had access through Him: “…having therefore, brothers, boldness to enter into the Holiest by the blood of Jesus. By a new and living way which He has consecrated for us through the veil, that is, His flesh.” ! Heb. 10:19. WHY IS ALL THIS IMPORTANT? Hopefully I have shown, having gone through all of the six prophesied actions of the Messiah in Daniel 9:24, that these were all fulfilled in the time of Christ’s first coming. To understand that these all relate to Calvary is to gain greater insight into what Christ has done for us, His elect. It actually magnifies Christ and encourages faith in Him. It not only proves that we will be, but that we already are overcomers through Him and in Him. The more these truths sink in, the more you will see the alternate view (a supposed future fulfillment of some or all of these events) as greatly devaluing Messiah’s redemption on the Cross. The people that the writer of Hebrews speaks of are those same people of God that Daniel prays for in Dan. 9. The more we go over these verses in Daniel 9:24 ff., the more we will see how the New Testament has the cross-references that enable us to make sense of them. We have no desire of, nor need for, “newspaper theology” when it comes to parsing out this passage. By nailing down the New Testament fulfillment, we make more sure the present application to us: We can rest that much more securely in our salvation in Christ. All of these six promises were fulfilled at the time of Christ’s incarnation. My suggestion to you – and a reminder to myself as often as I read this – is to further our study of these present riches that we have in Christ!

Page 37

>

[0a] But not all the events prophesied in Daniel 9:24-27 happen during the 70 weeks. The latter parts of verses 26 and 27, respectively, were fulfilled during the Jewish War. It is a mistake to assume that those events were part of the 70 weeks. The math doesn’t work out. The recipients of the promises of this prophecy were God’s people (“peculiar people”, 1 Peter 2:9) and city, spiritual – not carnal – Jerusalem. [0b] The Talmud, being more spiritually astute than many modern Christians – and definitely than most modern Jews – teaches that all the prophecies of the prophets referred to Messiah. The Talmud would agree here with Paul that “all the promises of God in Him are Yes, and in Him Amen”, 1 Cor. 1:20. [0c] A good study is to consider why the first temple was not abominated like the second one was. The answer is that the Jews of the New Testament sinned against a greater Light, that light being Christ. See John 15:22. What makes the “last days” last is precisely this violent and fatal rejection of a most irrefutable personal testimony and demonstration of Messiah Himself. The tenants of the vineyard did not “respect the son”, Matt. 21:37. This, also, is why there could never be any future “last days”. They sinned against the greatest light ever witnessed – the personal presence, miracles, and teaching of Messiah Himself. [0d] And each of these passages in Daniel give us descriptions of their coming Messiah, each time with additional insights: In 2:34, 44 He is the “Stone ... cut out of the mountain without hands” which “broke in pieces the iron, the bronze, the clay, the silver, and the gold”. (Many commentaries that I came across refer this to the Kingdom, not the Person, of Christ, but the Patristic consensus favors more the personal application.) In 7:13 – 14 He is “One like the Son of Man, coming with the clouds of heaven!” In 8:25 He is the “Prince of princes”. Here in chapter 9 He is named two or three times, depending on interpretation. 9:25 “Messiah the Prince”, 9:26 “Messiah” and (according to some) “the Prince who will come”, an interpretation I agree with. 10:13 lit. “Michael, first of the chief princes” (see Gill, Pool, Henry) and again in verse 21, “Michael your Prince”. And, lastly, in 12:1 He is “Michael ... The great Prince who stands watch over the sons of your people.” [1a] Some Preterists insist, on the basis of the phrase in verse 24 “and your city”, that the desolation of the temple and destruction of the city must thus also be included within the 70 weeks. But this overlooks the desolation already announced by Christ 40 years earlier in Matt. 23:37-38: “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the one who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were not willing! See! Your house is left to you desolate” [2b] John Owen says this about this part of Daniel 9:24: “And the most proper sense of the word [CHATHAM] is “to cover or conceal,” and thence “seal,” because thereby a thing is hidden…Now, to hide sin or transgression, in the Old Testament, is to pardon it, to forgive it. As, then, the former expression (KALA) respected the stop that was put to the power and progress of sin by the grace of the gospel, as Titus 2:11, 12, so does this the pardon and removal of the guilt of it by the mercy proclaimed and tendered in the gospel.”

Page 38

[2c] Here are the Old Testament uses of the word KALA: Ge 8:2 The fountains also of the deep and the windows of heaven were stopped, and the rain from heaven was restrained; Ge 23:6 Hear us, my lord: thou art a mighty prince among us: in the choice of our sepulchres bury thy dead; none of us shall withhold from thee his sepulchre, but that thou mayest bury thy dead. Ex 36:6 And Moses gave commandment, and they caused it to be proclaimed throughout the camp, saying, Let neither man nor woman make any more work for the offering of the sanctuary. So the people were restrained from bringing. Nu 11:28 And Joshua the son of Nun, the servant of Moses, one of his young men, answered and said, My lord Moses, forbid them. 1Sa 6:10 And the men did so; and took two milch kine, and tied them to the cart, and shut up their calves at home: 1Sa 25:33 And blessed be thy advice, and blessed be thou, which hast kept me this day from coming to shed blood, and from avenging myself with mine own hand. Ps 40:9 I have preached righteousness in the great congregation: lo, I have not refrained my lips, O LORD, thou knowest. Ps 40:11 Withhold not thou thy tender mercies from me, O LORD: let thy lovingkindness and thy truth continually preserve me. Ps 88:8 Thou hast put away mine acquaintance far from me; thou hast made me an abomination unto them: I am shut up, and I cannot come forth. Ps 119:101 I have refrained my feet from every evil way, that I might keep thy word. Ec 8:8 There is no man that hath power over the spirit to retain the spirit; neither hath he power in the day of death: and there is no discharge in that war; neither shall wickedness deliver those that are given to it. Isa 43:6 I will say to the north, Give up; and to the south, Keep not back: bring my sons from far, and my daughters from the ends of the earth; Jer 32:2 For then the king of Babylon’s army besieged Jerusalem: and Jeremiah the prophet was shut up in the court of the prison, which was in the king of Judah’s house. Jer 32:3 For Zedekiah king of Judah had shut him up, saying, Wherefore dost thou prophesy, and say, Thus saith the LORD, Behold, I will give this city into the hand of the king of Babylon, and he shall take it; Eze 31:15 Thus saith the Lord GOD; In the day when he went down to the grave I caused a mourning: I covered the deep for him, and I restrained the floods thereof, and the great waters were stayed: and I caused Lebanon to mourn for him, and all the trees of the field fainted for him. Da 9:24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy. Hag 1:10 Therefore the heaven over you is stayed from dew, and the earth is stayed from her fruit. [4a] The best source for studying out the priesthood of Christ is the book of Hebrews. Every chapter from the 2nd to the 10th has at least one reference to the priesthood of Christ, and what this means for the believer. That would be a study in itself. Here are some verses from Hebrews that speak of Christ the High Priest: 2:17; 3:1; 4:14-15; :5:1, 5, 10; 6:20; 7:1, 26; 8:1-3; 9:7, 11, 25; 10:21; 13:11. [4b] But was there not righteousness in the Old Covenant? Yes and no. The righteousness of those earlier saints was always a qualified, not absolute, righteousness. Abraham believed God and it was counted (imputed) to him for righteousness. Old Testament righteousness was by obedience of faith to the Law. New Testament righteousness, is worked by the Spirit of Christ in regenerated hearts. The righteousness brought by Christ is absolute and internal.

Page 39

It is a righteousness born of changed hearts and minds. Both degrees of righteousness are found in Isa. 56:1: “Thus says the Lord, Keep justice, and do righteousness: for my salvation is soon to come, and my righteousness to be revealed.” And this revelation of God’s righteousness is shown to be fulfilled in Romans 3:21: “But now the righteousness of God apart from the Law is manifested, being witnessed by the Law and the prophets.” The “everlasting salvation” here is this same everlasting righteousness. The “Israel” here is not national Israel, but the true “Israel of God”, Gal. 5:16, Rom. 2:28- 29; 11:26- 27, redeemed people of both Jews and Gentiles. Romans 5 is a rich source of information of this righteousness that is the possession of all saints. Since we are reconciled by His death, vs. 10)we are likewise saved by His life. We now reign in life because of the gift of God’s grace, applying Christ’s righteousness to us, vs. 17ff. Not only this, but we also are enabled to actively work out Christ’s righteousness in our lives, Romans 6:13-23, Phil. 2:12- 13, Rev. 19:8. All saints are perfectly righteous positionally, yet we are far from perfect experientially. To be sure, I believe we will always have faults up until the last day of our lives, yet every true saint will grow in grace. God does not have any still-born children. There are very many other passages that beautifully elaborate this righteousness we have in Christ: 2 Cor. 5:20- 21; John 6:40; Phil. 3:9, etc.

[4c]. This belief that the text refers to the Messiah, as opposed to His Temple, was shared, interestingly, by many Jews throughout history. Nachmanides wrote: “This holy of the holies is the Messiah, who is sanctified from among the sons of David.” The irony is that modern dispensationalists are at odds with this understanding of Jewish scholars, even while at the same time underscoring their interpretation as being God’s plan for the Jews. [4d]. Suggested line of study: Consult a modern dispensational work, like Charles Ryrie’s or John MacArthur’s Study Bibles, or one of John Hagee’s books, and find out which of these six prophesied events they say still await fulfillment (or at least Full-fulfillment). It is interesting to see how they are quite willing to see some of these as having been fulfilled at the time of Christ’s first coming and yet others still awaiting future fulfillment. But wouldn’t it make more sense to see all of these as having been fulfilled at the same era – the time of Christ’s earthly generation? And not just within that generation but that all six of these promises were realized at Calvary? The torn veil signifying access at last into the Holy of Holies for the Highest High Priest, Christ, giving edifying gifts, Ephesians 4:7-12 to the church. The veil, though torn down from their temple, still remained over the eyes and hearts of the Jews who disbelieved their Messiah. That veil can only be taken away in Christ: “But their minds were blinded. For until this day the same veil remains unlifted in the reading of the Old Testament, because the veil is taken away in Christ. But even to this day, when Moses is read, a veil lies on their heart. Nevertheless when one turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away” - 2 Cor. 3:14-16 Dispensational authors like those cited seem to also have a veil over their minds (We hesitate to say hearts) when it comes to the Jews. Misunderstanding limited purpose of the Jewish dispensation has necessarily blinkered their eschatological vision.

Page 40

[4e] . Passages from the Old Testament (especially Isaiah) and New Testament (especially Romans) dwell on the righteousness brought to the saints. “Thus says the LORD, Keep judgment, and do justice: for my salvation is near to come, and my righteousness to be revealed.” - Isaiah 56:1 “But Israel shall be saved in the LORD with an everlasting salvation: ye shall not be ashamed nor confounded world without end.” - Isaiah 45:17 See also Isaiah 9:7; 45:13, 24; 46:13. [4f] “Righteousness” occurs 39 times in Romans. [5a] Here is a representative sampling of the twenty plus uses of the Hebrew term: “So she wrote letters in Ahab’s name, and sealed them with his seal, and sent the letters unto the elders and to the nobles that were in his city, dwelling with Naboth.” 1Kings 21:8 “And because of all this we make a sure covenant, and write it; and our princes, Levites, and priests, seal unto it.” Neh. 9:38 “Write also for the Jews, as it pleases you, in the king’s name, and seal it with the king’s ring: for the writing which is written in the king’s name, and sealed with the king’s ring, may no man reverse.” Esther 8:8 “Men shall buy fields for money, and subscribe evidences, and seal them, and take witnesses in the land of Benjamin, and in the places about Jerusalem, and in the cities of Judah, and in the cities of the mountains, and in the cities of the valley, and in the cities of the south: for I will cause their captivity to return, says the LORD.” Jer. 32:44 “Bind up the testimony, seal the law among my disciples.” (Isaiah 8:16. See also 29:9- 16 and comments below) [5b] Consider Isaiah 29:9– 16. It is very helpful in showing us what the “sealing up” means for those who do not “take care how they hear” the Word of God: “Stay yourselves, and wonder; cry ye out, and cry: they are drunken, but not with wine; they stagger, but not with strong drink. For the LORD hath poured out upon you the spirit of deep sleep, and hath closed your eyes: the prophets and your rulers, the seers hath he covered. And the vision of all is become unto you as the words of a book that is sealed “(chatam”), which men deliver to one that is learned, saying, Read this, I pray thee: and he saith, I cannot; for it is sealed (“chatam”) : And the book is delivered to him that is not learned, saying, Read this, I pray thee: and he saith, I am not learned. Wherefore the Lord said, Forasmuch as this people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their heart far from me, and their fear toward me is taught by the precept of men: Therefore, behold, I will proceed to do a marvellous work among this people, even a marvellous work and a wonder: for the wisdom of their wise men shall perish, and the understanding of their prudent men shall be hid.

Page 41

Woe unto them that seek deep to hide their counsel from the LORD, and their works are in the dark, and they say, Who seeth us? and who knoweth us? Surely your turning of things upside down shall be esteemed as the potter’s clay: for shall the work say of him that made it, He made me not? or shall the thing framed say of him that framed it, He had no understanding?” This is the sealing up. And an awesome, sobering truth it is too. We must all take care how we hear. [6A]. Anointing of Christ in the New Testament is primarily from God, secondarily from humans, Luke 7:38, 46; John 11:2; 12:3, etc.. See also these verses: The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised, Luke 4:18 He first findeth his own brother Simon, and saith unto him, We have found the Messias, which is, being interpreted, the Christ. (= the Anointed One) John 1:41 For of a truth against thy holy child Jesus, whom thou hast anointed, both Herod, and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel, were gathered together, Acts 4:27 How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him. Acts 10:38 Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.  Heb 1:9 [6b] O. T. Allis in Prophecy and the Church indicates this may mean the entrance of Jesus Christ into Heaven itself when “by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption ”, Hebrews 9:12, for all His elect.” This happened at the Ascension. What reason would there be for it to be delayed further? But, if number 5 really is the closing of the canon, then we would have these last two events out of order. What would be the logic in that. It seems more reasonable that these six events are listed sequentially.

Page 42

A.W. Tozer Reconsidered Introduction | Mystic Sidetracks | Open Secret, or Second Work of Grace? | Tozer and the Word This is the first of several articles on A.W. Tozer, his life and teaching. It is part of a projected larger series of studies on several teachers of the last century or so who, however else they differ, have one thing in common: Devaluing of the Word of God and of the simplicity of the Gospel. To be sure, Tozer is right on the money in some of his assessments of the 20th (now 21st) century church. But we cannot simply ignore other harmful tenets to be seen in much of Tozer’s works. Someone has written me recently asking why I should feel it necessary to name names and “attack persons”? The answer is quite simply that these very names have become an impervious refuge for some of the most obstinate errors in our church. We are against error in principal, but are not always aware of it in particular. For instance, I could write generally against some of the errors of AW Tozer – without naming him – and get comments of agreement. But when I pin an author to these errors (see below) and give accurate quotes, I get defensive letters from some  … and enthusiastic Amens from others. So this is why I “attack” Tozer. I don’t hate the man. I love the Truth he himself – albeit unwittingly – attacks. Please consider this article if you are still unconvinced. Introduction I am sure I am not the only one here who has been much influenced by Aiden W. Tozer. His devotional writings have been praised by a wide spectrum of appreciative believers within Christendom, myself included. Recently however my praise for this writer has been replaced with a growing awareness of a tendency in his teaching, a major tendency, to turn his readers away from God-appointed means of sanctification. The Word of God is not only our message of salvation; it is also our method of salvation. Lastly, it is our Man of salvation – He is the Word of God, the God-Man Christ Jesus. In all of these – and in a few other areas, as well – Tozer comes up short, as we shall see. A.W. Tozer is a revered authority for many, and to attack him almost seems to be an attack on sanctification and holiness itself. But, with him as well as ourselves, we need to always apply the tests of Scripture on the teachers of Scripture. None of us are immune from this necessary crossexamination. That is what these articles are about. If you find that my lines here spark in you a desire to write back to me, well, great! But if you are all set to defend your man, don’t shoot from the hip. Quote from the Book. I am certainly open to correction. Mystic Sidetracks Our author’s indebtedness to the Catholic mystics of the Middle Ages becomes apparent to anyone who studies Tozer. He often does not bother to divulge precisely where his quotes are from, though whether by design or intentional neglect is hard to ascertain. Teresa of Avila, Nicholas of Cusa, Meister Eckhardt, the anonymous penman of  “The Cloud of Unknowing”, and several more, are called as testimonies for his pressing for the need for a closer walk with God. Page 43

But who would argue the need for this closer walk? Not us. What we disagree with is the calling in of these dubious authorities when the Scriptures are a much better means – in fact the only sure source – that we need to have Christ formed in us. “To the Word and to the testimony!”, Isaiah warns us, Isa. 8:20, “If they speak not according to this word there is no light in them.” To this we can add Acts 17:11. Later in this article we will take a closer look at Tozer’s favorite authorities, and see if they are to be trusted. Many do not know much about these mystics and monks that Tozer references. If they did, their respect for them – and for anyone who quotes them approvingly – would lessen considerably. Tozer observes: “That evangelism which draws friendly parallels between the ways of God and the ways of men is false to the Bible and cruel to the souls of its bearers. The faith of Christ does not parallel the world, it intersects it. In coming to Christ we do not bring our old life up onto a higher plane; we leave it at the cross. The corn of wheat must fall into the ground and die.” – A.W. Tozer, Man: The Dwelling Place Of God, 1946, Published 1966 Yes, he has some good points, yet his approving quotes of mystics constitutes this same “friendly parallel between the ways of God … and men”. Nicolas, John of the Cross, Teresa of Avila and many others of Tozer’s “saints” were active supporters of the anti-Christian papal system, and of the worksrelated method of salvation. Are they considered holy just because they speak of sanctification, Christ and heaven? The Devil does as much. Tozer bemoaned the fact that these writers are virtually unknown in modern times. In this we agree – if they were more thoroughly known then Tozer’s quotes can be shown for what they really are – passages taken largely out of context from a system that has much more of the Counter-Reformation than the Reformation. And his quoting of these mystics is more frequent than you might expect. In his slim volume, “Knowledge of the Holy”, for instance, there are at least eighteen such quotes that are to be found. An “Open Secret” or a Second Work of Grace? An additional problem with his views on sanctification is that he downplays doctrine. This is from his “Root of the Righteous”: “Bible Taught or Spirit Taught? It may shock some readers to suggest that there is a difference between being Bible taught and being Spirit taught. Nevertheless it is so.” Although Tozer’s point – especially the very next paragraph – is valid, there is indeed a false dichotomy being set up here. It should not Bible taught versus Spirit taught. The Spirit of Christ unlocks, teaches and applies the Word of Christ to us. “They shall all be taught of God” (John 6:45) assumes this very growth in knowledge. The Holy Spirit will not teach of things other than Christ. He is “the way, the truth, and the life”.

Page 44

Tozer continues: “It is altogether possible to be instructed in the rudiments of the faith and still have no real understanding of the whole thing. And it is possible to go on to become expert in Bible doctrine and not have spiritual illumination, with the result that a veil remains over the mind, preventing it from apprehending the truth in its spiritual essence.” This is all true, yet, this is not the whole story. Also I believe we should instinctively distrust when someone who is quick to use the word “doctrine” in a limitedly pejorative sense, as Tozer often does throughout his works. This should become obvious as we look further into Tozer’s words. “I am a Bible Christian and if an archangel with a wingspread as broad as a constellation shining like the sun were to come and offer me some new truth, I’d ask him for a reference. If he could not show me where it is found in the Bible, I would bow out and say, I’m awfully sorry, you don’t bring any references with you”. But the problem is not with the readily identifiable archangel. It is with those subjective experiences. This is where we must unflinchingly apply the standard of God’s Word. It is also with our choice of spiritual teachers. Tozer did not ask for spiritual references when he effusively praised the ecstatic utterances of Julian of Norwich, nor of the “insights” of that “master of the inner life” (his words), Evelyn Underhill, the ecumenicist mystic. If he would have asked for proper Scriptural backing from them, and found them wanting, he would have saved himself much confusion – and the church much polluting error that is now hard to eradicate. When I first decided to wrote on Tozer I wondered if I wasn’t just being bitter and overly fault-finding. But the more I study him, the more I see him as a clear danger for Christianity. His influence is wide and he is accepted by a broad spectrum of religionists (including, but not restricted to, Christians). His doctrine and practice are so often overlooked by many other wise astute Bereans who cry “Wolf!” at the same infractions in more recognizable enemies. Tozer and the Word Perhaps the best single mark to judge someone’s teaching is their pronouncements on the importance of the Word of God. If a writer is strongly committed to holding the Word of God as being central, then we already have a hopeful indication of orthodoxy in that teacher. At the very least we can hold that writer to his own professed adherence to Scripture. However Tozer is somewhat hard to pin down here because he is not consistent on this central topic. In some places (like in the first quotation below) he seems to hold a high regard for the Bible, yet in others (the very next quote) he all but negates this. So, on the issue of the Word of Life, Tozer speaks against Tozer. Two passages from his “The Pursuit of God” are particularly helpful in illustrating this; the first from the preface, the second from the very first chapter: Page 45

“Sound Bible exposition is an imperative must in the Church of the Living God. Without it no church can be a New Testament church in any strict meaning of that term. But exposition may be carried on in such way as to leave the hearers devoid of any true spiritual nourishment whatever. For it is not mere words that nourish the soul, but God Himself, and unless and until the hearers find God in personal experience they are not the better for having heard the truth. The Bible is not an end in itself, but a means to bring men to an intimate and satisfying knowledge of God, that they may enter into Him, that they may delight in His Presence, may taste and know the inner sweetness of the very God Himself in the core and center of their hearts.” The first statement is the best. It is basically a restatement of what the Word itself asserts about itself. And – if we did not know where Tozer will be going with the arguments – we wouldn’t find fault either with the Bible being referred elliptically as “mere words” or that it “is not an end in itself”. After all, the church of our time, just as in Tozer’s, suffers greatly in many quarters from a lifeless literalism that clutches to the killing letter of mechanical compliances. While David taught that God “desires truth in the inward parts”,Psa. 51:6, many followers settle into mere superficial sanctity (that is, false). Tozer deserves high marks for diagnosing the disease. It is his cure that is the cause of concern. That brings us to his second passage, from the first chapter entitled “Following Hard After God”. Again, emphasis is mine. I also numbered these five paragraphs for ease of reference. Special attention is drawn to the first and last paragraph: 1. “If we would find God amid all the religious externals we must first determine to find Him, and then proceed in the way of simplicity. Now as always God discovers Himself to “babes” and hides Himself in thick darkness from the wise and the prudent. We must simplify our approach to Him. We must strip down to essentials (and they will be found to be blessedly few). We must put away all effort to impress, and come with the guileless candor of childhood. If we do this, without doubt God will quickly respond. 2. When religion has said its last word, there is little that we need other than God Himself. The evil habit of seeking God-and effectively prevents us from finding God in full revelation. In the “and” lies our great woe. If we omit the “and” we shall soon find God, and in Him we shall find that for which we have all our lives been secretly longing. 3. We need not fear that in seeking God only we may narrow our lives or restrict the motions of our expanding hearts. The opposite is true. We can well afford to make God our All, to concentrate, to sacrifice the many for the One. 4. The author of the quaint old English classic, The Cloud of Unknowing, teaches us how to do this. [Not the Bible? Hmm] “Lift up thine heart unto God with a meek stirring of love; and mean Himself, and none of His goods. And thereto, look thee loath to think on aught but God Himself. So that nought work in thy wit, nor in thy will, but only God Himself. This is the work of the soul that most pleaseth God.” 5. Again, he recommends that in prayer we practice a further stripping down of everything, even of our theology. “For it sufficeth enough, a naked intent direct unto God without any other cause than Himself.” Yet underneath all his thinking lay the broad foundation of New Testament truth, for he Page 46

explains that by “Himself” he means “God that made thee, and bought thee, and that graciously called thee to thy degree.” And he is all for simplicity: If we would have religion “lapped and folden in one word, for that thou shouldst have better hold thereupon, take thee but a little word of one syllable: for so it is better than of two, for even the shorter it is the better it accordeth with the work of the Spirit. And such a word is this word GOD or this word LOVE. “” The entire passage of five paragraphs has been kept intact so that none might accuse me of selectively making my case by cherry-picking quotes out of context. In paragraph 1 we read of the need of simplifying our approach to God, and of “stripping down to essentials”. Now according to Tozer’s first quote, in the introduction, the Word of God is an essential, yet now the whole issue is in doubt as we read the last paragraph 5: We must, so teaches our guide (the nameless mystic writer of “Cloud of Unknowing”), strip away from ourselves … “even of our theology“! “Well”, you might caution me, “he only refers to superfluous or bad theology. Let’s not overreact.” I wish that were so. Let’s continue. God “is all for simplicity”. What kind of simplicity? Why none other than monosyllabic simplicity: The word “God” and the word “Love”. Do you see what is going on here? Contrast with this single-word simplicity the inspired word of God: For I have not shunned to declare unto you all the counsel of God. Acts 20:27 Paul tells the Ephesians that he taught them all of Scripture. Nowhere does he even hint at the hocuspocus theology of Tozer’s. With Tozer doctrine is being subtly, but with deadly effect, devalued. The theology we are to strip away, or at least to put at arms length when we pray, is the very Word that we need to approach Him as we pray. We need to always be aware of who God is – and that is theology, the knowledge of God in the form of words that He has revealed to us. What does Scripture say? “I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also”, 1 Cor. 14:15. By the way, Tozer is being true to his mystical roots, especially those mystics who came after the Roman Catholic Counter-reformation, when he so emphasizes God-knowledge as a wholly (not “holy”) separate way of approaching Him than through that Word which God Himself gave us for that very purpose. He is being true to them, but false to the Word of God. The same God who said, “I am the Way, the Truth, the Life,” also said “Thy Word is truth.” Consider these passages as well: And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. 2 Tim. 3:15 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 2 Tim. 3:16 And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment. Mark 12:30. Page 47

Jesus answered the would-be mystic, the proto-Mariolater who cried out, “Blessed is the mother who gave you birth and nursed you!” with “Blessed rather are those who hear the Word of God and obey it.” Luke 11:27- 28 Our love and devotion to God is always to be according to the Word of God, as well as corrected and strengthened by the Word of God. And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment.: Mark 12:30. In this passage above the Word of God is being set below the Word of men. Who is the writer of “The Cloud of Unknowing“? We don’t really know. Neither does it matter. Yet in a chapter about following after God Tozer puts this writer above the Bible! Nowhere in this whole chapter is there a single passage pointing to the Word of God as our means of knowing God, of growing in Him and, yes, of praying to Him. We grow in grace as we use the means of grace. Our main means of grace, day in and day out, are the Scriptures which can make us wise unto salvation. The Word is our lamp, our bread, our armor, our weapon of righteousness, our mirror and the sword that pierces us, Heb. 4:12, much deeper than we are comfortable with. All of this is missing in Tozer’s instruction of how to approach God.

Page 48

A.W. Tozer's Mystical Influences: Julian of Norwich Introduction The writings of A.W. Tozer seem to have two currents running through them. One current is the frequent references to the Bible. But the other – like an underground stream that feeds his narrative are the enthusiastic endorsements of the mystical experiences and writings of those whose life and doctrine are quite contrary to the Bible. He endorses both. He sees no conflict between those two currents. In order for us to both disclose Tozer's indebtedness to unbiblical sources and, at the same time, to demonstrate this conflict in his teaching we need to look more closely at just a few of these "supersaints" that Tozer often alludes to. In the next few articles different mystics who figure largely in Tozer's devotional writings will be examined. Julian of Norwich: A Closer Look This article deals with Julian of Norwich, an English Mystic (1342 - 1416). When she was thirty years old she had a  severe health crisis. At this time she had a series of visions purportedly from God. When she regained her health she published her account of this vision - rather, a series of visions - in two separate accounts. These accounts became the basis for the published work, "Sixteen Revelations (or, Showings) of Divine Love", c. 1393. A.W. Tozer, in his book "Knowledge of the Holy" alone, quotes three or four times from Julian of Norwich. Before we get to Tozer's comments, here are a few excerpts from Julian's visions: "Highly ought we to rejoice that God dwelleth in our soul, and much more highly ought we to rejoice that our soul dwelleth in God. Our soul is made to be God's dwelling-place; and the dwelling-place of the soul is God, Which is unmade. And high understanding it is, inwardly to see and know that God, which is our Maker, dwelleth in our soul; and an higher understanding it is, inwardly to see and to know that our soul, that is made, dwelleth in God's Substance: of which Substance, God, we are that we are. "And I saw no difference between God and our Substance: but as it were all God; and yet mine understanding took that our Substance is in God: that is to say, that God is God, and our Substance is a creature in God. For the Almighty Truth of the Trinity is our Father: for He made us and keepeth us in Him; and the deep Wisdom of the Trinity is our Mother, in Whom we are all enclosed; the high Goodness of the Trinity is our Lord, and in Him we are enclosed, and He in us. We are enclosed in the Father, and we are enclosed in the Son, and we are enclosed in the Holy Ghost. And the Father is enclosed in us, and the Son is enclosed in us, and the Holy Ghost is enclosed in us: Almightiness, AllWisdom, All-Goodness: one God, one Lord." Page 49

... "And thus was my understanding led of God to see in Him and to understand, to perceive and to know, that our soul is made-trinity, like to the unmade blissful Trinity, known and loved from without beginning, and in the making oned [as in "make into one"] to the Maker, as it is aforesaid. This sight was full sweet and marvellous to behold, peaceable, restful, sure, and delectable. "And because of the worshipful oneing that was thus made by God betwixt the soul and body, it behoveth needs to be that mankind shall be restored from double death: which restoring might never be until the time that the Second Person in the Trinity had taken the lower part of man's nature; to Whom the highest [part] was oned in the First-making. And these two parts were in Christ, the higher and the lower: which is but one Soul; the higher part was one in peace with God, in full joy and bliss; the lower part, which is sense-nature, suffered for the salvation of mankind." Tozer Commends Julian: "Julian of Norwich, who lived six hundred years ago, saw clearly that the ground of all blessedness is the goodness of God. Chapter six of her incredibly beautiful and perceptive little classic, Revelations of Divine Love..." However this "classic" is more beautiful than "perceptive". It is nothing less than the message of a deceived soul having duped been by an angel of light. This becomes apparent later in her writings. It is understandable that readers might take Tozer's praise at face value, since they had no access to her writings - or to the many other mystics he lauds. Until the Internet these "Classics" were hard to find. But now you can read this one, for instance by going here: http://www.ccel.org/j/julian/revelations/cache/revelations.txt Wonderful Internet. Makes honest scholars of us all. Where is That in the Bible? The poor reader, reading Tozer's "Knowledge of the Holy", taking the author's assessment on Julian at face value will assume a greater respect for her than is merited. Tozer conveniently hides much about Julian's life and theology: That she was well within the Roman Catholic belief-boundaries. Or that she prayed for stigmata and a fatal illness in order to suffer like Christ. Or that she received as an "answer" to her prayer fourteen visions of Christ and Mary where she was pointedly taught much that is counter to what us more ordinary Christians have to be content with in our ordinary Bibles. Where, in our Bibles, for instance, do we find that Christ is "our Mother"? (More on this later). Page 50

Once again, we get into the Tozer vs. Tozer theme, where he speaks well of the Bible on the one hand ... only to build up credibility, it seems, for his speaking even better of those whose teachings and pronouncements are contrary to that blessed Bible. But don't take my word for it. Let us continue. Julian wrote the following: "The Showings of Divine Love" The Eleventh Revelation [Showing] CHAPTER XXV [These are the supposed words of "Jesus" in Julian's vision]: “And with this same cheer of mirth and joy our good Lord looked down on the right side and brought to my mind where our Lady stood in the time of His Passion; and said: Wilt thou see her? And in this sweet word [it was] as if He had said: I wot well that thou wouldst see my blessed Mother: for, after myself, she is the highest joy that I might shew thee, and most pleasance [pleasure] and worship to me; and most she is desired to be seen of my blessed creatures. And for the high, marvellous, singular love that He hath to this sweet Maiden, His blessed Mother, our Lady Saint Mary, He shewed her highly rejoicing, as by the meaning of these sweet words; as if He said: Wilt thou see how I love her, that thou mightest joy with me in the love that I have in her and she in me?” [Note: This Jesus said "Mary is the most desired to be seen of His creatures". Also see how that Jesus' love for Mary is on a higher plain than the other saints. In fact, even here being called "Saint Mary" distances her from the many other Christians who, in Roman Catholic theology, are not so called. This is all typical doctrine from Rome, of course, and wouldn't have even be worth mentioning except to remind the reader that this is the writing that Tozer calls "perceptive". My purpose in this article is not to discuss the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church, but to show that many of Tozer's saints are well within this belief-system and, in light of this, Tozer ought to have been more transparent on this point.] Julian continues: “And also (unto more understanding this sweet word) our Lord speaketh to all mankind that shall be saved, as it were all to one person, as if He said: Wilt thou see in her how thou art loved? For thy love I made her so high, so noble and so worthy; and this pleaseth me, and so will I that it doeth thee.” [Julian may or may not have taught Universalism: The belief that all mankind will be saved eventually. Because the language of Julian can be taken two ways, however, this charge cannot be insisted on.] “For after Himself she is the most blissful sight.” [This is wrong on many levels, not the least of which is the fact that God will not give His glory to another.] Page 51

“But hereof am I not learned to long to see her bodily presence while I am here, but the virtues of her blessed soul: her truth, her wisdom, her charity; whereby I may learn to know myself and reverently dread my God. And when our good Lord had shewed this and said this word: “Wilt thou see her? I answered and said: Yea, good Lord, I thank Thee; yea, good Lord, if it be Thy will. Oftentimes I prayed this, and I weened to have seen her in bodily presence, but I saw her not so. And Jesus in that word shewed me ghostly sight of her: right as I had seen her afore little and simple, so He shewed her then high and noble and glorious, and pleasing to Him above all creatures. “And He willeth that it be known; that [so] all those that please them in Him should please them in her, and in the pleasance [pleasure] that He hath in her and she in Him. And, to more understanding, He shewed this example: As if a man love a creature singularly, above all creatures, he willeth to make all creatures to love and to have pleasance in that creature that he loveth so greatly.” [Why bother having the Incarnation or death and resurrection of Christ if all this is true of Mary? How is it possible that Tozer did not see this Mary-mediatrix theology? Or did he pass it over as being a minor issue? In all of Tozer's commendations of these mystics, I have never come across any cautionary disclaimers on his part.] “And in this word that Jesus said: Wilt thou see her? methought it was the most pleasing word that He might have given me of her, with that ghostly [spiritual] Shewing that He gave me of her. For our Lord shewed me nothing in special but our Lady Saint Mary; and her He shewed three times. The first was as she was with Child; the second was as she was in her sorrows under the Cross; the third is as she is now in pleasing, worship, and joy." [End of Julian's 11th vision] Aah! At least the Goddess is worshiping. Such blatant blasphemy throughout this one vision! Now, here is the question that I have: What were Tozer's thoughts about this book? Had he read it through? He most probably did. Does he believe these teachings: An elevated Mediatrix Mary? But there is more in the writings of Julian that we need to touch on. Notice especially the underlined phrases: "For he is our Mother, Brother and Saviour. And in our good Lord the holy Ghost we have our rewarding and our yielding, for our living and our travail, and endless overpassing all that we desire in his marvelous courtesy of his high plenteous grace. For all our life is in three. In the first we have our being. And in the second we have our increasing. And in the third we have our fulfilling.   The first is nature.The second is mercy.   The third is grace.  For the first, I saw and understood that the high might of the Trinity is our Father. And the deep wisdom of the Trinity is our Mother. And the great love of the Trinity is our Lord. And all this we have in nature and in our substantial making. Page 52

And furthermore I saw that the second Person who is our substantial Mother, that same dearworthy Person is now  become our sensual Mother. For we are double of God's making, that is to say, substantial and sensual. Our substance is the higher part, which we have in our Father God Almighty.And the second Person of the Trinity is our Mother in nature in our substantial making, in whom we are grounded and rooted. And he is our Mother in mercy in our sensuality taking flesh. And thus our Mother is working to us in diverse ways in whom our parts are kept undivided. For in our Mother Christ we profit and increase." This last section is all that is needed to show that Julian of Norwich has nothing to teach a Christian, that she is herself deceived. Anyone who quotes her, whether selectively - as Tozer is in the habit of doing - or wholesale, only confuses the truth of Christ. Why go into all this detail about Tozer’s mystic influences, Julian of Norwich being just one of several examples that cold be brought up? The answer is that Tozer is considered a credible teacher of Christianity. His influence, over half a century after his death, continues to be felt in Christian circles. His stated for concern for holiness and right worship is bound to connect with sincere Christians. These main strokes of his ministry are, of course, admirable. But those who take him more seriously, who study him more closely, notice heinous methodology and inner workings that not only stifle spiritual growth but – if persisted in – lead to much bitter fruit. Christ said, Luke 6:40, “The disciple is not above his master: but every one that is perfect, shall be as his master.” Those who seriously apply themselves to Tozer will end up like him, indebted to and infused with the unbiblical mystical teachings of deluded so-called saints, seeking experiences they see often showcased in Tozer’s writings rather than the simple everyday Manna from the Word of God. Those who come to respect Tozer often see him as more than just another Christian writer. He himself seems to encourage this, saying “"Help me to remember that I am a prophet; not a promoter, not a religious manager—but a prophet." In 1950 he published an article titled “For Pastors Only: Prayer of a Minor Prophet”. Does this encourage Berean cross-checking? Do you see the problem here?

Ultimately we all have to be students of the Word, praying and weighing. That is our foundation.

Page 53

Clement's Epistle to the Corinthians Written Pre-AD 66 About the dating of Clement: I first began to rethink the dating of his epistle when I encountered some articles touting this earlier date. Then I read Clement's actual Epistle more carefully, paying close attention to the Greek. I am now totally convinced of an earlier, pre-AD 66 date, and that on several counts. Notice especially the following: Clem 5:1 – 6 “But, to pass from the examples of ancient days, let us come to those champions who lived nearest [ENGISTA] to our time. Let us set before us the noble examples which belong to our generation. By reason of jealousy and envy the greatest and most righteous pillars of the Church were persecuted, and contended even unto death. Let us set before our eyes the good Apostles.” He goes on to describe the exemplary testimonies and martyrdoms of Peter and Paul. Notice that he uses the word "nearest". If he was writing in the 90s, a generation later, he would not have used that term. But, on the contrary, he refers to them as "belong[ing] to our generation." This definitely does not fit if written in the 90s. There certainly were other persecutions, other noble examples, that would have precluded Clement's use of the superlative here. On the face of it, a person reading this letter - if his view wasn't already tainted by other presumed authorities - would think that Clement was writing about a very recent example. This fits very well with Clement's letter being before AD 66. In Clem 40:1 - 5 he speaks of the Jewish ministrations as still being current. The Temple is still standing. Note especially the last section. “They therefore that make their offerings at the appointed seasons are acceptable and blessed: for while they follow the institutions of the Master they cannot go wrong. For unto the high priest his proper services have been assigned, and to the priests their proper office is appointed, and upon the Levites their proper ministrations are laid. The layman is bound by the layman's ordinances.” The next section has this. Note here, once again, we have a series of present tenses: “Not in every place, brethren, are the continual daily sacrifices offered, or the freewill offerings, or the sin offerings and the trespass offerings, but in Jerusalem alone. And even there the offering is not made in every place, but before the sanctuary in the court of the altar; and this too through the high priest and the afore said ministers, after that the victim to be offered hath been inspected for blemishes. They Page 54

therefore who do any thing contrary to the seemly ordinance of His will receive death as the penalty. Ye see, brethren, in proportion as greater knowledge hath been vouchsafed unto us, so much the more are we exposed to danger.” Perhaps the most telling evidence that this was written pre-AD 66 is not what what Clement wrote, but what he didn't write. Supposedly his epistle here was written two or three decades after the cataclysmic fall of Jerusalem. Yet he makes no mention of the fact, though he writes much of the actual worship of the Jews. This all fits if we realize that Clement was describing the Jerusalem of his time - before the day of doom came to the worshipers of the old dispensation. Likewise there is no mention of the Millennium - as a thousand year reign - to come. It is my contention that that teaching was a much later one, resorted to when the overwhelming majority of Christian writers in earlier decades were no longer around to give their voice. The teaching on the Millennium is just one of several teachings that were creeping into the church. Another teaching that crept into the church was a slow relapse into a Jewish concept of the Kingdom of God, with a visible return and reign of a visible, physical Jesus. These were all mistaken doctrines that Christ and His inspired Apostles had spoken clearly against. The ages have not been kind to this original, spiritual concept of the Kingdom of God. Religious wars have been fought in the very name of Christ - using the very swords that Christ told to leave in the scabbard. His Kingdom is not of this world, but traditional Christianity has made it very much of this world. I hope to add to this article other details of Clement's epistle. Some have to do with further proof of the early date for the letter. Others have to do with underscoring some of the memorable lines from this work. Although it is not inspired, yet it is worthy of greater attention than has been given to it. It is a labor of tested and matured Christian faith - probably (in my opinion, at least) the same Clement mentioned in Paul's letter to the Philippians. There are passages of great power and encouragement: "How blessed and marvelous are the gifts of God, dearly beloved! Life in immortality, splendor in righteousness, truth in boldness, faith in confidence, temperance in sanctification! And all these things fall under our apprehension. What then, do you think, are the things preparing for them who are patiently waiting for Him? The Creator and Father of the Ages, the All-holy One Himself knows their number and their beauty!" Page 55

The Magi Who were they? And what did they follow?

Did you ever wonder just who the Magi of the familiar Christmas story were? And why did God use them, of all people, seeing that they were foreigners and assumed strangers to the promises of Abraham? A little background might be helpful. “In the past God spoke to our forefathers through the prophets at many times and in various ways, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he made the universe.” Heb.1:1- 2 One of those “various ways” that God spoke to the Jews at the closing of their age, and at the dawning of the age to come, was the “star” that pointed to the Messiah’s birth. In revealing His Son to the world, God chose to use instruments from afar – the Magi from the East.

Honor and Contempt Christ was honored from afar – and treated with contempt by his countrymen. “He came unto His own, and his own received Him not”. Yet these foreigners honored Him with luxurious gifts, gold, frankincense and myrrh. This is also how it is in a wider sense: Christ’s Incarnation and ongoing work is a subject of much admiration, honor and interest in Heaven, but our world, by contrast, treats Christ with contempt. What an irony: A “star” announces his presence from afar – and leads the wise men right to their King! The Good Shepherd and Bread of Life comes to bring life to His own sheep. The word “Magi” originally meant someone from the Medes. It has come to mean wise men (including knowledge of wisdom, astronomy and, sometimes, astrology). The Magi from Matthew most likely came from Persia. But they were not kings. They were not necessarily – nor even likely – three in number. This was an unhelpful guess from the later Church Fathers and the Roman Catholic Church, assuming that because the gifts were three the kings necessarily were as well. * They were also called “kings” because of an assumed connection to Psalm 72:10: “the kings of Tarshish, and of the Isles, and of Sheba, would offer gifts to the Lord,” More than likely they were part of a much larger entourage then we have been taught to imagine. It may be that Herod became afraid, not only for their message – they were looking for his replacement, after all! – but also for their large number. It might have been quite a caravan of impressive strangers that turned heads in Jerusalem. Theology, not Astrology One of the best proofs that the Magi were not working as astrologers is the fact that what they followed was not a star. It did not act “starlike”. Page 56

It led them. It disappeared. It changed directions, first leading them westward, then southward. It “stood over” (Matt. 2:9) the exact spot where Jesus was. Stars don’t do this. Neither do configurations of bright planets, however remarkable. And bear in mind that these were wise men who knew astronomical phenomena. We are left with the choice of either this not being a normal star (or planet)… or that these weren’t particularly wise wise men. I don’t doubt that these Magi knew things that to the Jews were forbidden. I believe that it is a condescension of God that he used “inferior” (from the believer’s viewpoint) methods to communicate His truth to whomever He wished. This would not be the first time he did this. The Philistines learned more about the holiness of God from the “golden tumors” and the toppling of their Dagon in their temple then the wicked sons of the High Priest Eli ever learned in the very Tabernacle. Daniel is full of miraculous imagery and messages that use, but do not condone, Pagan culture. It is the same way here with the Magi.

Prophecy of the Star – Jesus Christ “I see him, but not now; I behold him, but not near. A star will come out of Jacob; a scepter will rise out of Israel. He will crush the foreheads of Moab, the skulls of all the sons of Sheth.” Numbers 24:17 This was an important prophecy concerning the coming Messiah, given by the unbelieving Balaam. This very prophecy may have been known to the Magi, and when they told Herod about His star, they probably had this in mind. Remember that when the Israelites were finally overcome and taken away in judgment by Sargon (730-728 BC), they were settled in various parts of the Median Kingdom (2nd Kings 17:6). They necessarily took with them their knowledge of this prophecy. These Jews lost their holy distinctness as a people of God, but God used the knowledge of this prophecy to bring these Magi from their country to search for the coming King of the world. The prophecy was like an ancient seed that, after centuries of dormancy, did not return void, but came to life, accomplishing it’s intended purpose, Isaiah 55:11. By the way, many Jews, having not recognized their Messiah, fell for a counterfeit in AD 130- 135, Bar Kochba (“Son of the Star”) who artfully connived his credentials from the very same verse of Numbers 24:17. The prophecy was also pointedly aimed at the wicked King Herod. The phrase “He will crush the foreheads of Moab” had an application to Herod’s time as well as that of Balaam’s patron, Balak. He was Idumean, of Moabite stock. Balak’s (and Balaam’s) fulfillment of this verse were at Baal Peor, but other fulfillments are found in the first century. Page 57

Magic of the Magi? I have read accounts of them that put undue prominence on their (supposed or actual) astrological prognostication. I believe that this is foremost an example of God miraculously revealing Himself to people from afar. The focus is on God’s providence, not on man’s understanding. The story of the Magi is certainly not an example of how to find God or His will. For that we have the Bible and the Spirit of God who opens that Bible for us, revealing all truths we need to know.

And the Moral of the Story is … A good message to draw from this passage in Matthew 2 is that Christ is found by those who seek Him. He opens the eyes of those whom He chooses. Both the wise men and King Herod professed a desire to come and worship the Christ child. The latter, of course, was hypocritical and devious in his profession. The former found Who they were looking for, giving prophetical gifts as well as heartfelt worship. ________________________________________ * Their skulls (according to tradition) ended up in Cologne, Germany. These dubious relics are still on display in the Cathedral in the cathedral of that city. I remember seeing them when we visited there in the early 60‘s. Rather creepily impressive for a child. ________________________________________

Not Stars, Comets, or Planets The issue here is whether a star, comet, or planet – could wander to the extent that the passage in Matthew relates. Yes, planets have a retrograde motion, perhaps known to the Magi. But these are not what the Bible is describing. Consider these points: 1. Planets would have very slight deviations in orbit – not accounting for the great direction changes in the story and, more importantly 2. They take weeks to go through these retrogrades – not the short time the Magi were there. 3. Comets, also just could not make the direction change that is described in the Christmas Story. From what I remember from astronomy class – long time ago – Mercury had the shortest retrograde, measured in weeks. Others took months. The bottom line is that, whether weeks or months, this was a very unusual event. How could a star or a planet, something usual, regular, and predictable be a guiding sign? These were, after all, the wise men, not simpletons.

Page 58

"This is My Beloved Son. Hear Him!" Hebrews 1:1-3 and Luke 9:28-35 The Book of Hebrews is the epitome of the Old Testament focused through Gospel lens. Nowhere does this Gospel message come into sharper focus than in these opening verses of this epistle. CHRIST Several years ago I taught a Bible study on Hebrews and was especially struck during this prolonged look at that wonderful book with how central Christ is in our salvation. And how that all-importance of Christ in our lives actually crowds out and rids me of cherished notions I used to hold on to as a Christian. Yes, I know that Christian readers might right now just skip over that sentence about Christ being central, as if I was stating the obvious. "Yea, I know all that. And...?" But I am not stating the obvious. I am pointing out the overlooked. I mean that the utter, crucial centrality of Christ in our lives is something that is really neglected today: Many Christians are quite clear on what Christ did on the Cross. They have certainly heard enough sermons. And they see clearly that Christ is their hope of glory when this life is done. But one major area that is unclear is that great, turbulent in-between period from Calvary to Glory: How to live the Christian life, how to walk with joy, discernment and integrity in a very complex, dark world which Christ - we profess! - conquered? We read that Christ has conquered the world, John 14, and that without Him we can do nothing, John 15:5, but we are fearful as if He hasn't conquered - and we look for the Lord in all the wrong places and neglect Him in the right places. We forget that all the treasures we have are in Christ, and in His Word. Well, one of the best ways to un-forget is to meditate on Hebrews 1:1-3 and to know in our hearts that Christ is the Beginner and Finisher of our faith, Alpha and Omega, Prophet, Priest, and King, and to know it in a practical way for our everyday life. The Prophetical Last - and Lasting - Word: Christ! Take a look at the first two verses of Hebrews 1: "God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets, has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, through whom He also made the ages (lit. "aeons")" Have you noticed the following? 1.Prophecy, from the perspective of this verse, is a thing of the past. He spoke in a variety of ways through prophets in the past, but now He speaks to us by His Son (lit. “in Son”). 2. It is the "last days" that is specifically marked out as a time when the Son is speaking. This is the exact opposite of what many teach; They use the fact that we are now supposed to be in the last days to explain and justify people prophesying (in the specific sense of fore-telling). Page 59

3. The "last days" or "last times" may not be what you think it is. Every time these phrases are found in the Bible they are addressed to Jewish people. Don't take my word for it, look it up yourself. Paul, in writing to Gentiles, or speaking to them (as in Mars Hills) never mentions the term. The last days – termed “last hour” in the later writings of John – did not last to our time. 4. The ages were created through Christ. This refers not to planetary worlds (which would be out of context) but, considering the theme of this book, to the Jewish Age fading away into the Church Age. 5. Most importantly of all is the fact that all prophecy points to, and is completed in Christ. "The spirit of prophecy is Jesus". Christ is our prophet for today, our King, our Lawgiver, our Priest... everything. Salvation - all of it, every aspect - is of the LORD. Luke 9:28-35 relates the Transfiguration incident, a baffling event for the disciples. When Peter, John and James saw Jesus transfigured and Moses and Elijah talking with Him Peter blurted out "Let's make a shelter for all three of you!" But when the other two disappeared, leaving only Christ, God's point was made. There is no more need for Moses or Elijah, personifying the Law and the Prophets, for God's people. Christ is the One we need. To make absolutely sure of this point we have the voice of God telling them - and us: "This is My beloved Son. Hear Him." The Law which came through Moses, the kingship inherent through him, the priesthood of Levi, the prophetical mantle of Elijah - all pass over to Christ. Points to keep in mind: 1. Christ as Prophet, Priest, and King is evident in these first three verses of Hebrews. 2. Every deviation in Christendom can be traced to losing sight of at least one of these three offices of Christ. 3. To know these offices, to trust in Christ as our Prophet, Priest and King is to have a strong safeguard against any grace-combating wind of doctrine. 4. The Christian, as Christ's representatives on Earth, are to be Christlike in these three aspects: Prophets, priests, kings. Now that last point, especially, requires careful qualifications. But it is found in Scripture. One of the main reasons why Christianity today is so anemic and marginalized - but we did it to ourselves! - is that we just do not know who we are and Whose we are! With all of the stresses and uncertainties of these last few years: Covid and the draconian responses to Covid, wars in Ukraine, Palestine, Syria, and elsewhere, corruption in our governments, it is very important that we always keep our eyes on Christ, our source of peace and joy, and our guarantor of ultimate security and protection.

Page 60

Christ our Prophet, Priest, King: Hebrews 1:1 - 3 But what does this mean? It is a shame that Hebrews is so often neglected by many Christians. They don't know what they are missing. I can't speak for others, but the reason why I had earlier read sparingly from it for a long time is because I thought it was mainly "Jewish stuff", written for those who came to Christ from a Jewish background. Well, yes and no. It is that - and much more. Hebrews not only leads Jews to Christ, it also makes the Old Testament come alive. It Christianizes much of the Old Testament. "God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets, has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, through whom He also made the ages (aeons); who being the brightness of His glory and the express image of His person, and upholding all things by the word of His power, when He had by Himself purged our sins, sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high," Did you notice that that last verse demonstrates, not only Christ's deity, but all three of Christ's offices? He is our God: Christ is "the brightness of His glory and the express image of His person". He who sees Christ has seen the Father. He is our Prophet: "upholding all things by the word of His power". He has the words of eternal life, John 6:63, and we live by every word that comes out of His mouth, Matt. 4:4. He is our Priest: "when He had by Himself purged our sins". He is our King: He "sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high," One of the best, concise explanations of Christ in His three offices is given by Louis Berkhof (Systematic Theology. p.357, ): "As Prophet He represents God with man; as priest He represents man in the presence of God, and as King He exercises dominion and restores the original dominion of man." Do we believe in this strong, this powerful of a Savior? He not only is our Lord and Savior, but He has spoken to us (perfect tense, once for all, verse 1) as our Prophet, the very one promised in Deut. 18. He has cleansed us at Calvary, yet still intercedes as our Priest in heaven - Did you know that? (If you doubt this look at Heb. 7:24-25). And He is our King, overcoming our sin by His day-by-day grace. Our daily Bread of Life, the hidden Manna. Because the only ones being anointed in the Old Testament were prophets, priests, and kings it stands to reason - and is verified by Scripture - that the Messiah ("Anointed One") would perfectly assume all three offices. That is exactly what He did. At the public revelation of His Messianic ministry, Luke 4:18-19, Christ reveals His mission, showing aspects of all three offices. Yet the Jews rejected Him - in all three offices! They rejected Him as Prophet, John 6:60. "This is a hard saying; who can understand it?" They rejected Him as Priest, Heb. 10:29. They rejected Him as King, John 19:14-15 and Luke 19:14. "We have no king but Caesar!", "We will not have this man to rule over us." Page 61

But before we are too hard on them, and on the unbelief of many of them, we need to add that many, very many, in Christendom have done - and are doing - the very same thing. Many, while professing belief in Christ as Savior, reject Him as Prophet, Priest, and King. All the unhealthy and dangerous doctrine in Christendom through the ages has come about because of rejection of one, two, or all three of these aspects of Christ's lordship. Many reject Him as Prophet. Christ was specifically promised to His people as the Prophet of Deut. 18. Some blatantly reject His prophethood by calling His veracity to account, and by denying Christianity in general. But others, while not denying that Jesus is prophet, believe also in prophets after New Testament times, after the close of inspired Scripture. But the Word of God is not a loose-leaf binder. But they do this by ignoring certain safeguards in the Word itself. Rev. 22:18-19 warns against either adding to, or taking away from, the Word of God. To have a "word from the Lord" is to add to the other words from the Lord which were written down for all of us - the Bible. Or do we believe that God gives out His word in varying qualities: Inspired and semi-inspired? No, the Bible says that in Him there is no untruth and "all the promises of God are Yes and Amen in Christ Jesus". Preachers who turn babes in Christ from the simple Word with "God also said this..." cheapen the revelation of God and interrupt the growth of Christians who, instead of growing by the "sincere milk of the Word", 1 Pet.2:2, are being taught to listen to this "word from the Lord" and that "anointed message". Its no wonder so many do not grow up in Christ, and do not have their senses matured to discern good from evil, Heb 5:14! All of this comes from not honoring Christ as our Prophet. Though we have Christ's words written, He still speaks those words to us everyday. The Spirit of Christ brings to mind, comforts and strengthens us with our daily Bread according to each day's peculiar need. Many reject Him as Priest. They either reject His priestly ministry at Calvary or in heaven, Heb.7:24-25; 8:1-2. Those who reject - or find insufficient - His sacrifice at the cross try to add to their salvation by having some good works (just in case). The formal name for this in some denominations is "merit" or "supererogation", but the idea is the same: What if the hymn is not true? What if Calvary did not cover it all? I have met a number of these restless, sad, jittery people (many probably true Christians) who seem to have "God-haunted" personalities. They talk much about sacrifice, hardships, judgment - but very little about joy and peace. They are often the ones who are judgmental against others who maybe, just maybe, have found a sweet, private fulfillment in the promise of Matt. 11:29, "and you will find rest for your souls." One of the most powerful encouragements for me was to understand how Christ both ministered at Calvary for me and continues to minister in heaven for me. What an awesome savior we have!

Page 62

Another way that many reject Christ as Priest is when they erect a whole system - as many Roman Catholics do, as well as "Orthodox" - of priesthoods that the Bible does not require. There is one priestly mediator between man and God, but they have fatally convoluted this. The eternal Melchizedek Priesthood of Christ, Heb.6:20-7:21, leaves absolutely no room for any other priesthoods, priests, or sacrifices. It is all taken up in Christ. Many reject Him as King. Some do it out of sheer disbelief and unrepentant carnal addictions. They see no need for Christ or salvation or any of that "God stuff". But there are others who are more subtle, trying to hold on to both a carnal life and godly hope. Very often they say things like "I have a problem in this area.", or "I'm still struggling with (blank)". While this is true of most Christians - who doesn't have struggles at different times? - there comes a time when that comment becomes disingenuous. Elisabeth Elliot confronted one person who said this, answering him, "You aren't struggling with sin. You are putting off obedience." I like that. That is strong, bitter medicine. But it has the ring of truth. Think of this. Christ conquered sin. He conquered the world. If we are in Christ we can do all things through the one who strengthens us, Phil. 4:13. The "all things" certainly includes walking in the Spirit, loving God, loving our neighbors as ourselves, growing in grace. We work out our salvation in fear and trembling. He also makes us overcomers. Christ is our King. He is stronger than Satan, or our sins, or the world. If we sin, it is not Satan's doing, it is our doing. At that point we are denying that Christ is King. We are denying that Christ has come into this world, saving His own. This is not the faith of a Christian. John 4:1-4 warns us that it is a different spirit altogether. Many Christians act as if Christ is sort of a powerless king. Unable or unconcerned while the real powers, corrupt governments and shady globalists, are wreaking havoc in this present world. But this is far from the truth. And it is a special opportunity for us to grow in grace and flex our God-given faith. “Grace grows best in Winter.” This is how we make a real difference on the world, showing that we are not moved whatever waves come our way. Our eyes are on Christ. And they will stay there. “Joy to the world, the Lord is come Let Earth receive her King Let every heart prepare Him room And Heaven and nature sing”

Page 63

“Rise, let us go from Here” There are two times in Bible times when this intriguing sentence was spoken. The first one we will look at is not actually from the Bible, but reported by contemporary historians, most notably Josephus. “Moreover at that feast which we call Pentecost [June 66 AD], as the priests were going by night into the inner [court of the] temple, as their custom was, to perform their sacred ministrations, they said that, in the first place, they felt a quaking, and heard a great noise, and after that they heard a sound as of a great multitude, saying, ‘Let us remove hence.’” [Wars 6.299 (6.5.3)] An interesting comment from Ed Stevens: “Note that Josephus gives us the exact day and hour when this event occurred (on the day of Pentecost at the hour of the evening sacrifices), where it occurred (in the Jerusalem Temple), and who witnessed it (the officiating priests). The Jewish priests testified about what they felt and heard in the Temple at night on Pentecost in the year AD 66, at the very time when the Zealot war with Rome was about to begin. “This transfer of a large multitude from one place to another in the unseen realm seems to have been the resurrection of the dead and the change of the living saints, when they were caught up to be with Christ. This event occurred at Pentecost, fifty days after Passover. Notice also that it occurred at night, not during the daytime. That explains why no one noticed the snatching away of the living saints.” — page 221, Final Decade, Ed Stevens There is much more that needs to be said about this remarkable event, both as to who were involved in it and the nature of the event itself, but that needs to wait for a different article.

The Sentence in John But there was also an earlier occurrence of this sentence. We have this from John 14:31 (ESV) “… but I do as the Father has commanded me, so that the world may know that I love the Father. Rise, let us go from here.” I do not think that the inspired writers of the New Testament would include this last phrase if it was as trivial as it sounds. There has to be more than is on the surface. Many sermons and commentaries assume that this was spoken just after they had left the Upper Room. But John Gill makes two observations that merit consideration. He says that John 14:31 was spoken before Jesus and His disciples went to the Upper Room, that they were, in fact, arising from Bethany and just now going to their appointed room. More significantly he shows that the phrase that Christ spoke, and the phrase that was spoken in the night air in 66 AD, had a possible Jewish significance. This would lead to a possible eschatological connection that has been overlooked by many. Notice the several “possibles”. I am frankly not sure of the suggestion from Gill on the background of the phrase, but I think it is worth considering. Page 64

John Gill also mentions these sayings: P Jose and R. Chiyah say to one another as they sat, , “arise, and let us go hence” (f). (f) Zohar in Exod. Fol. 74. 1.” (I was unsuccessful in finding this quote from Zohar. Any help in locating this would be appreciated. At any rate, whether or not this phrase has a Jewish background is minor to the main point of this article.)

The Eschatological Connection “I tell you I will not drink again of this fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom.” — Matthew 26:29 This comment from Jesus in the Upper Room makes the connection between this Last Supper and the Parousia, at the beginning of which the saints in Hades rise up and the living believers are raptured. If this event did indeed happen right at the “Let us depart from here” utterance recorded by Josephus it raises the possibility that the quote in John was more than just a casual comment, but had an added prophetical meaning. When it comes to ascertaining the details of these events the Bible is, of course, our best and most sure authority by far. But historians like Josephus, although fallible, are also helpful in that they help provide information on events that occurred after the time of inspired Scripture. This would include that remarkable night in the Temple vicinity in AD 66.

Page 65

Four Unities Prove 1st Century Rapture: Good News for all Christians 1 Thess. 4:13 – 18 13, But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope. 14, For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him. 15, For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep. 16, For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: 17, Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord. 18, Wherefore comfort one another with these words. By emphasizing “unity” I am just underscoring that this is one single, tremendous event, that happens to both groups of believers: The dead in Christ, waiting in Hades and the living saints. The more we dwell on this point the clearer the picture becomes. It is not something that happened in an (ethnically and geographically) limited way in AD 70 but with the Main Event still in the future (as some futurists and Partial-Preterists believe). Neither can this profound event have happened and yet having the surviving saints of the time still physically on the Earth, unchanged and still unrescued from ongoing tribulation. Aside from proofs that I will get to below that this is impossible we have the express words of Jesus, Matt. 24:22, that “unless those days had been cut short, no life would have been saved“. The “cutting short” is the Rapture. Neither is it a mere positional change for living believers from that time onward per the Corporate Body View (CBV) of Don K. Preston, Mike Sullivan and their fellow Covenant Eschatology colleagues. A careful study of these unities show that would be a Scriptural and logical impossibility. Unity of Time: One event. “the dead in Christ shall rise first: , Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them” Although there are technically two stages of the event here they must necessarily have happened almost simultaneously.

Page 66

Unity of Action: One Action – rising up. Same passage: “rise first“, “caught up together“ What happened to the redeemed dead is what happened to the living. However different the two groups started from the same event brings them together. Problem for the futurist: The dead in Christ must still be in the ground, or in Hades, if their scenario is to be believed. Yet Scripture foretold that this event would happen in that first-century generation. Unity of Essence: No longer Physical (And for this one I need to go to other passages) Although the two groups were quite different prior to the Rapture, only the living saints being still physical, both groups are now made fit for eternity. “Flesh and blood cannot enter into the Kingdom of God“, I Cor. 15:50 “For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven.” Matt. 22:30 “We shall be like Him” 1st John 3:2 And how, exactly, shall we be like Him: As He was “in the days of His flesh”, Heb. 5:7, or as He prayed to return to in John 17:5? Now, if we believe the Corporate Body View version of Preterism, we would bizarrely have two groups who are quite different. However they might concede this change on those who were in Hades the CBV Preterists would have believers who were still quite physical at the Parousia. So they are forced to make the change here of the surviving Christians being merely positional. Or they emphasize the ongoing nature of the change, as Christians die they are translated into their new life and presence with Christ. Well, that is true, but these passages are not speaking of Christians throughout the ages. They are speaking of – and to – Christians of that time. Unity of Place – in the clouds, with Christ forever – NOT on Earth. We have the two groups both in one place. They are first in the clouds. Note: This is very important. The saints on the Earth are in the clouds. No longer making footprints on the Earth. A mere positional change in the living saints just does not satisfy the text here. Then they are with Christ forever. And we will join them when we die. The proof for that is in plenty of other passages.

Page 67

Comforting Truth When I first wrote the earlier post I was annoyed to see that verse 18 was bolded and in a much larger font. I do not know how that happened but I am glad now that it did. I left it as it is. What better emphasis than that last verse!? “Wherefore comfort one another with these words.” This passage, rightly understood, certainly has plenty of comfort, for them and for us. For first century Christians it proved that their faith in those numerous and specific promises of relief and reward from Christ and His Apostles was well-placed. For us it is also an assurance of our reward and relief. The faith is the same. So is the Object. “All the promises of God are Yes and Amen in Christ Jesus.” 2 Cor. 1:20

Page 68

Notes on Resurrection in I Corinthians 15 “How are the dead raised? With what kind of body do they come?” The questions, in the context, were foolishly raised. But the topic, not foolish at all, or trivial, is a vital one for Christians: What kind of body will we have in the next life? It is ironic that this passage is used as a go-to silver bullet against Preterism. But nothing could be further from the truth. Rather, Corinthians 15 is perhaps the single most helpful chapter in laying out our position. Perhaps more than any other it is the clearest exposition of what our new nature in Christ will be when we leave this life. Paul wrote, 15:36-38: “Thou fool, that which thou sowest is not quickened, except it die: And that which thou sowest, thou sowest not that body that shall be, but bare grain, it may chance of wheat, or of some other grain: But God giveth it a body as it hath pleased him, and to every seed his own body.” It is not “the selfsame body”. “Thou sowest not the body that shall be.” The sinful flesh will be destroyed, dissolved – λύω. Our souls are and will exist forever. – somewhere. The continuity is in our invisible part, 2 Cor. 4:16 – 5:2. Let’s look more closely at that very passage that many say Preterists avoid in Greek, especially verses 42-44: “So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption: It is sown in dishonour; it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power: It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.” Notice that this resurrection of the dead has a fourfold contrast: It is sown in corruption (φθορά); it is raised in incorruption (ἀφθαρσία): It is sown in dishonour (ἀτιμία); it is raised in glory (δόξα): it is sown in weakness (ἀσθένεια); it is raised in power (δύναμις): It is sown a natural (ψυχικός) body; it is raised a spiritual (πνευματικός) body. I realize that the sticking point here  is in that word ψυχικός. But I want to first note that this sowing, described in fourfold aspect, is not at the time of death. A corpse, for instance, would not be characterized as “weak“, but lifeless. Further proof that Paul is not thinking of sowing as dying is the fact that he had earlier, vs. 36, distinguished the two, making one contingent upon – but not simultaneous with – the other. All four of those things in that fourfold contrast being sown are to be destroyed. To argue for the destruction of three, but the restoration of one is to be inconsistent. If (as one critic wrote) these Page 69

“selfish, imperfect (physical) bodies” will be “restored as spiritual, perfect (physical) bodies” we do not have the ψυχικός being destroyed, but merely changing. Does it stand to reason that, out of the four things being sown (all clearly bad), only three of them are to be destroyed or done away with, but the last merely restored? Another argument that is made is the close relationship between ψυχικός and ψυχή (Spirit, spirit, breath, life, depending on context). But this is not a valid proof. I had written about this in my article earlier. Two words may have been related etymologically but diverged considerably in usage. And that is the case here. ψυχικός is to ψυχή (that is, “soul” is to “soulish“) as “self” is to “selfish“. “Self”, like “soul”, has generally kept its good or neutral connotations. (“Save yourselves from this evil generation.”, etc.) “Selfish” is like “soulish” in that they both share a worse connotation. They are both products of the Fall. ψυχικός is found here in the New Testament: 1 Cor. 2:14; 15:44 (twice); 46; James 3:15; Jude 10, 19. In all of these ψυχικός is shown to be undesirable, art of those things that have no part – even in reconstituted form – in the New Creation. I believe the biggest initial obstacle for those considering what I am arguing for – a spiritual resurrection – is an unwillingness to think outside the body. Christ said that in the resurrection we “will be like the angels”. The fact that so many are against this is, I believe, because of a culturally inherited predisposition, not the biblical evidence.

“We shall be like Him”, Not He shall be like Us “And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness:” There was a down-payment of that intent in Creation, of course, and a further realization in the new creation (the new creature) as we turn to the Lord. We went from mere God-consciousness to (at least some degree of) Christlikeness. I brought up Christlikeness because that is an essential topic of 1 Corinthians 15. I suppose it is obvious to say that a Christian enjoys two stages of it. God’s Spirit working in us produces a certain degree of it, but after this life we will have much more of it. In the chapter we have a series of contrasts between the new life and the old, the things we will become contrasted to those things we are being saved from. Those good qualities of the new creature, v. 42-44, are: incorruption, glory, power, spiritual. Then we read about the originators of the two classes, Adam and Christ. Adam “became a living being”. Christ, “a life-giving Spirit.” King James Version unhelpfully provides “became“, which is not at all the point.

Page 70

A Very Important Teaching Concerning our Destined Nature Then we come to a very important, oft-overlooked, detail. Overlooked in application, the origins of these two persons: “The first man is of the earth (ἐκ γῆς), earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven (ἐξ οὐρανοῦ) .” This passage is a continuation of verse 40: somata epigeia and somata epourania now become “ek ges” and “ex ouranou”. This preposition (ek, ex – the forms only differ because of euphonics) shows origin. Adam came from the earth, from the dust. This brings to mind the very passage from Genesis. The “Second Adam” came from heaven. Important Note: In both cases, the origins determine the essence of who these two are – and (v. 48) the essence of their “followers”. Verse 49 says that “we shall [or “let us”] bear the image of the heavenly man” (the Second Adam, from heaven).

Application: We shall be like Christ, just as those first-century raptured saints became like Christ. And what is Christ like – according to this passage? He is like He was before He came to Earth. He is spiritual. Was Christ fleshly before he came here to Earth? No. He was pure Spirit. We – according to this passage – will also be like Him. Spiritual bodies. Spirits of just men made perfect, as we are told in Hebrews.

We cannot have part Adam’s essence (“dust”) and part Christ’s, seeing that we could not then “enter into the Kingdom of God”. “Dust” has to do with “flesh and blood”, not spirit.

Page 71

Katargeo: A Word often Mistranslated This important New Testament term, has very often not fared well at the hands of Bible translators. Here are all twenty-seven occurrences (including some in passive) of the word in the New Testament, twenty-six being in Paul's writing. The words in ALLCAPS show the various ways this word has been translated in the New King James Version (NKJV). Notice that in 1 Cor.13:8 the word occurs twice, translated two different ways. __________________________________________________________ Then he said to the keeper of his vineyard, ‘Look, for three years I have come seeking fruit on this fig tree and find none. Cut it down; why does it USE UP the ground?’ Luke 13:7 For what if some did not believe? Will their unbelief make the faithfulness of God WITHOUT EFFECT? Rom. 3:3 Do we then MAKE VOID the law through faith? Certainly not! On the contrary, we establish the law. Rom. 3:31 For if those who are of the law are heirs, faith is made void and the promise MADE OF NO EFFECT, Rom. 4:14 knowing this, that our old man was crucified with Him, that the body of sin might BE DONE AWAY WITH, that we should no longer be slaves of sin. Rom. 6:6 For the woman who has a husband is bound by the law to her husband as long as he lives. But if the husband dies, she IS RELEASED from the law of her husband. Rom. 7:2 But now we HAVE BEEN DELIVERED from the law, having died to what we were held by, so that we should serve in the newness of the Spirit and not in the oldness of the letter. Rom. 7:6 and the base things of the world and the things which are despised God has chosen, and the things which are not, to BRING TO NOTHING the things that are, 1 Cor. 1:28 However, we speak wisdom among those who are mature, yet not the wisdom of this age, nor of the rulers of this age, who ARE COMING TO NOTHING. 1 Cor. 2:6 Foods for the stomach and the stomach for foods, but God will DESTROY both it and them. Now the body is not for sexual immorality but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body. 1 Cor. 6:13 Page 72

Love never fails. But whether there are prophecies, they will FAIL; whether there are tongues, they will cease; whether there is knowledge, it will VANISH AWAY. 1 Cor. 13:8 But when that which is perfect has come, then that which is in part WILL BE DONE AWAY. 1 Cor. 13:10 When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child; but when I became a man, I PUT AWAY childish things. 1 Cor. 13:11 Then comes the end, when He delivers the kingdom to God the Father, when He PUTS AN END TO all rule and all authority and power. 1 Cor. 15:24 The last enemy that WILL BE DESTROYED is death. 1 Cor. 15:26 But if the ministry of death, written and engraved on stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not look steadily at the face of Moses because of the glory of his countenance, which glory WAS PASSING AWAY, 2 Cor. 3:7 For if what IS PASSING AWAY was glorious, what remains is much more glorious.

2 Cor. 3:11

unlike Moses, who put a veil over his face so that the children of Israel could not look steadily at the end of what WAS PASSING AWAY. 2 Cor. 3:13 But their minds were blinded. For until this day the same veil remains unlifted in the reading of the Old Testament, because the veil is TAKEN AWAY in Christ. 2 Cor. 3:14 And this I say, that the law, which was four hundred and thirty years later, cannot annul the covenant that was confirmed before by God in Christ, that it should MAKE the promise OF NO EFFECT. Gal. 3:17 You have BECOME ESTRANGED from Christ, you who attempt to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace. Gal. 5:4 And I, brethren, if I still preach circumcision, why do I still suffer persecution? Then the offense of the cross HAS CEASED. Gal. 5:11 Eph. 2:15 HAVING ABOLISHED in His flesh the enmity, that is, the law of commandments contained in ordinances, so as to create in Himself one new man from the two, thus making peace, And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord will consume with the breath of His mouth and DESTROY with the brightness of His coming. 2 Thess. 2:8 Page 73

but has now been revealed by the appearing of our Savior Jesus Christ, who HAS ABOLISHED death and brought life and immortality to light through the gospel, 2 Tim. 1:10 Inasmuch then as the children have partaken of flesh and blood, He Himself likewise shared in the same, that through death He MIGHT DESTROY him who had the power of death, that is, the devil, Heb. 2:14 __________________________________________________________ The purpose of this word study is to demonstrate that: 1. The choice of words translators employ to render the exact same word (though in different tenses) reveals more about their theology than the actual meaning of the text, and 2. When these twenty-seven occurrences are rendered more faithfully it will make clearer a more consistent interpretation of the texts. Yes, it is true that one single word may have various shades of meanings. But surely a reader or translator of a text should always at least first consider consistency of meaning before he allows possible personal viewpoints to subtly suggest nuances to the sacred text. I believe that is exactly what is going on here with “katargeo”; an a priori assumption of futurist eschatology is biasing the translator away from the straightforward impact of these verses. This will be demonstrated later when we get down to particulars and inconsistencies of some of these verse quoted above. The first problem is unwarranted variation on the part of translators when they come to this particular word. In many cases words are chosen that are not at all accurate. Other times the translators are plainly inconsistent, using two different words for this one word. First, the variations. The King James Version translates “katargeo”, in all its forms, as: abolish, cease, cumber, destroy, do, effect, fail, loose, nought, pass, put, sever, vanish, void. Yet the reason for using this considerable spread of words comes from without - from the translators perception of what ought to be in the text, not what is plainly signified. A futurist, for instance, expects Jesus to come with visible fire, clearly dealing with His enemies. Thus we have 1 Cor. 15:24: "Then comes the end, when He delivers the kingdom to God the Father, when He PUTS AN END TO all rule and all authority and power." Page 74

But just what kind of “end” are we to envision here? Certainly not the popular futurist version. The real meaning becomes clear when we maintain consistency, keeping other “katargeo” passages in mind. Consider these from the same epistle, 1 Cor. 1:28 and 2:6: "and the base things of the world and the things which are despised God has chosen, and the things which are not, to BRING TO NOTHING the things that are," "However, we speak wisdom among those who are mature, yet not the wisdom of this age, nor of the rulers of this age, who ARE COMING TO NOTHING." Just who are these rulers? They are the spiritual leaders of the Jewish age. Hardened in their antipathy toward their Messiah they were to feel the force of this word we are studying. They were coming to nothing, made irrelevant, rendered useless. They have lost all real power. Their rule is abolished. But many of them did not die. Those that survived the war were taken captive, quite a few of them as captives to Rome. But here is the point that is overlooked: 1 Cor. 2:6 and 1 Cor. 15:4 describe the very same event, the "rulers of this age" have their power "put to an end". Their "kingdom" that Christ delivers to the Father is the Jewish Kingdom, Spiritual Zion now totally replacing the last remnants of Geographical Zion. To be sure, all power was already given to the risen Lord almost four decades earlier, Matthew 28:18, this being to the true beginning of Christ’s Kingdom. What was put an end to was the outward shell of the Jewish Kingdom. Inconsistency in translation is perhaps most notable in 1 Cor.13:8: Love never fails. But whether there are prophecies, they will fail; whether there are tongues, they will cease; whether there is knowledge, it will vanish away. KATARGEO appears twice in this one verse. Can you guess which one? Read it over and give it your best shot. Did you guess "fail"? Well, you are half right. Unbelievably, the two "fails" in this one verse are from entirely different words (PIPTO, "to fall", and KATARGEO). The second "fail" is our KATARGEO. Also "vanish away" is the second appearance of KATARGEO. Now two questions come to mind: 1. Why did the translators needlessly limit themselves, rendering two different Greek words with the same English "fail"? 2. Why did the translators see fit to vary the same Greek term in the same verse into "fail" and "vanish away"?

Page 75

I can only surmise, along with the previously mentioned theological preconceptions, a concern for Paul's style. But I would rather have the Bible's at times admittedly inelegant style, with all of its occasional unstylistic repetitions (as here) and seeming non sequiturs to find out what the Spirit of God is actually saying. In these studies please don't think that I see myself as infallible. I have been wrong many times on the past. But usually my errors have come from relying too much on books and authors. The slower but safer approach is always to carefully sift over the Biblical text, especially the Greek, at the same time keeping up a personal neutrality concerning the tenets being investigated. I appreciate any and all insight from fellow lovers of God and His Word. What a wonderful blessing it is to be digging into this Word of Life!

Page 76

The Judgment of the Sheep and the Goats This judgment has, I believe, a bearing on the topic of the two Covenants. It also shows the overlap of the two covenants, though only one being valid. Here is the passage, Matthew 25:31 - 46, with further comments below: 31 “When the Son of Man comes in His glory, and all the holy angels with Him, then He will sit on the throne of His glory. 32 All the nations will be gathered before Him, and He will separate them one from another, as a shepherd divides his sheep from the goats. 33 And He will set the sheep on His right hand, but the goats on the left. 34 Then the King will say to those on His right hand, ‘Come, you blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: 35 for I was hungry and you gave Me food; I was thirsty and you gave Me drink; I was a stranger and you took Me in; 36 I was naked and you clothed Me; I was sick and you visited Me; I was in prison and you came to Me.’ 37 “Then the righteous will answer Him, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see You hungry and feed You, or thirsty and give You drink? 38 When did we see You a stranger and take You in, or naked and clothe You? 39 Or when did we see You sick, or in prison, and come to You?’ 40 And the King will answer and say to them, ‘Assuredly, I say to you, inasmuch as you did it to one of the least of these My brethren, you did it to Me.’ 41 “Then He will also say to those on the left hand, ‘Depart from Me, you cursed, into the everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels: 42 for I was hungry and you gave Me no food; I was thirsty and you gave Me no drink; 43 I was a stranger and you did not take Me in, naked and you did not clothe Me, sick and in prison and you did not visit Me.’ 44 “Then they also will answer Him, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see You hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to You?’ 45 Then He will answer them, saying, ‘Assuredly, I say to you, inasmuch as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to Me.’ 46 And these will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.” ___________________________________________ By the way, the word in verse 32, "ethne" translated variously in NKJV as "nations" or "Gentiles", depending on the context, perceived or assumed. [1] The assumed futurist and global applications of some of the verses leads some versions to favor "nations" as in "nations of the world". Likewise, this whole passage is often given the misleading heading “Judgment of the Nations”. The term can either mean: 1. All people, Jews and non-Jews 2. Only non-Jews (Gentiles) 3. (Rarely) a group predominately Jewish , Acts 4:25. See the whole context, Acts 4:13-31. The "nations" of Matt 25:32 clearly do not refer just to Gentiles but to the nation of Jews as well, wherever the Gospel had spread, Matt 28:19. "If I had not come and spoken to them they would not have sin. But now they have no cover for their sin". John 15:22 .[2] Page 77

Notice that in the Judgment of Sheep and Goats it is actually possible to have two people, one under the Law of Christ, the other still under the Law of Moses, to have the same record of outward righteousness but to have tragically different judgments. Imagine that those two individuals helped the very same number of needy people, visited the same number of prisoners, etc. Why then should the judgment have been so different? It is because the one in the Law of Liberty in Christ is rewarded for what he did do, the one still under the Law of Moses was condemned for what he did not do. Ultimately it was not a judgment on outward actions, but on the condition of their respective hearts and souls. Outworking of grace-given faith versus works of the flesh. The second person, by clinging to the Law, was committed to total obedience to it, James 2:10. ___________________________________________ NOTES: 1. Feel free to skip this part, unless you are a detail geek like me! For those of you who are interested, here are all uses of "ethne" as given in the NKJV. When I study a subject I like to comb through all uses to see if interesting details emerge. Interesting (to me, at least) is that Revelation consistently translates the term in the NKJV as "nations". Paul’s use of the word is almost always translated as “Gentiles”:

Matt 6:32 Gentiles; 12:21 Gentiles; 25:32 nations; 28:19 nations Mark 13:10 nations Luke 12:30 nations; 21:24 nations; 24:47 nations Acts 4:25 (Why did the) nations...; 10:45 Gentiles; 11:1 Gentiles; 13:19 nations; 13:46 Gentiles; 13:48 Gentiles; 14:16 nations; 15:7 Gentiles; 15:17 Gentiles; 18:6 Gentiles; 21:21 Gentiles; 22:21 Gentiles Romans 2:14 Gentiles; 9:30 Gentiles; 15:9 Gentiles (twice); 15:10 Gentiles; 15:11 Gentiles; 15:12 Gentiles (twice); 15:16 Gentiles (twice) ; 15:27 Gentiles; 16:26 nations 1 Cor. 10:20 Gentiles; 1 Cor. 12:2 Gentiles Gal 2:9 Gentiles; Gal 2:14 Gentiles; Gal 3:8 Gentiles, nations; Gal 3:14 Gentiles Eph. 2:11 Gentiles; Eph 3:6 Gentiles; Eph 4:17 Gentiles 1 Thess 4:5 Gentiles 2 Tim 4:17 Gentiles Rev 11:18; 12:5; 14:8; 15:4; 17:15; 18:3,23; 19:15; 20:3,8; Rev 21:24 - nations used throughout. 2. Is this “cover” in the Old Testament prophetical sense? A different word is used, but this would be a worthy study.

Page 78

AD 66 – Definitive Date of Preterism If you talk with most of us Preterists about their beliefs fairly soon the date AD 70 will come up. It is almost like shorthand for the whole theology. It is, we are told, the date of the resurrection, the realization of the New Heaven and the New Earth. It is, we are also told, the definitive end of the Old Covenant. The destruction of the Temple demonstrated also the irrevocable passing away of the whole Jewish dispensation, their very means of worship. But is any of this true? Lets start with the verse that is used most often to prove the above assertion, Hebrews 9:8-9: "the Holy Spirit indicating this, that the way into the Holiest of All was not yet made manifest while the first tabernacle was still standing. It was symbolic for the present time in which both gifts and sacrifices are offered which cannot make him who performed the service perfect in regard to the conscience” NKJV This is perhaps the well-worn passage for those Preterists who mistakenly posit the grand covenantal change precisely at AD 70, the Old Covenant ending at this time. But there is a basic error here in their application of this Hebrews passage, especially verse 8. Many translations of the phrase about the "standing" ("while the first tabernacle was yet standing" KJV2) gives the impression that a physical standing is meant - which is not true. The phrase is better translated “while the first tabernacle has standing" – that is, while it still had validity. Almost every single translation follows the KJV. But Young's Literal Translation, thankfully, accounts for a word in the original that the other versions ignored – ἐχούσης – from ἔχω, which means “to have”. Here is the Greek of Hebrews 9:8: τοῦτο δηλοῦντος τοῦ Πνεύματος τοῦ Ἁγίου, μήπω πεφανερῶσθαι τὴν τῶν ἁγίων ὁδὸν ἔτι τῆς πρώτης σκηνῆς ἐχούσης στάσιν, There is a great difference between the Tabernacle “standing” and the Tabernacles “having a standing”. But the latter is the actual intent of the passage. The meaning is that as long as the Tabernacle (the Temple) had a legitimacy then the New Covenant could not be brought in. When did this happen? At Calvary – not decades later. We learn this, among other places, in the very passage before us, Hebrews 9:11-12: “11. But Christ came  as High Priest of the good things to come, with the greater and more perfect tabernacle not made with hands, that is, not of this creation. 12. Not with the blood of goats and calves, but with His own blood He entered the Most Holy Place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption.” NKJV Page 79

By looking more carefully at these two verses we can answer several important questions. 1. Christ “entered the Most Holy Place once for all” 2. He did this by means of “His own blood” 3. He “obtained eternal redemption”. When did all this happen? It did not happen at AD 70. It happened at the Cross. This is why – and when – the Tabernacle (and Temple) no longer had a standing, was no longer valid in the eyes of God. This is when two great changes happened: 1. The Old Covenant ended – completely. 2. The New Covenant commenced – effectively. The proof of this timing is in Matthew 5:18: “For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled.” This explicitly proves that the Old Covenant was totally in force until a point in time - the Cross. And then it had totally passed away. This is the precise moment when we had the grand change in Covenants. AD 70 has nothing to do with this. A closer look at Matthew 5:17-18 17“Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill.  18For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one  tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled.” This means that all 613 commandments in the Law were still in force. However, all of these 613 commandments passed away at the Cross – at the same time. Together. This is what the text explicitly states. This passing away of the Law, the end of the Old Covenant, was demonstrated to the Jews by the torn veil. It did not happen when the physical temple was destroyed. The New Covenant is what was established at the Cross, where Christ abolished the Old Covenant through His death. The end of the Old Covenant was signaled by, among other things, the temple veil torn, top to bottom. The New Covenant was demonstrated by the giving of the Holy Spirit. Christ told His disciples, "This cup that is poured out for you is the New Covenant in My blood.", Luke 22:20. If the Law really did continue until AD 70 the Jews as well as Christian Jews would still have been obligated to follow every single one of those 613 commandments. And Paul would have been in error in Galatians, not Peter, for speaking against the Law. He would have been the one that Christ described as “least in the Kingdom of Heaven”, Matt. 5:19. Page 80

The passing away of the Old Covenant happened at the same time as the beginning of the New Covenant. When and How was the Law abolished? To answer the first question is to answer the second as well. Paul wrote to the Ephesians that Christ "abolished in His flesh the enmity, even the Law of commandments contained in ordinances...", Eph. 2:15. When was this? Clearly "in the days of His flesh", Hebrews 5:7. So this abolishing of the Law happened at the Cross, not decades later. How, then, can anyone teach that Christians – let alone inspired Apostles! - were obligated to obey something that our Savior died to abolish? To believe or teach this is, in the words of Paul, to make yourself a transgressor, building up what Christ had already once for all torn down! Gal. 2,18, Eph, 2:13-15. Heb. 9:15-17 pinpoints for us when the New Covenant took effect. “15 Therefore he is the mediator of a new covenant, so that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance, since a death has occurred that redeems them from the transgressions committed under the first covenant. 16 For where a will is involved, the death of the one who made it must be established. 17 For a will takes effect only at death, since it is not in force as long as the one who made it is alive.” Covenants, like wills, only take effect at the death of the one making it. The death of Christ immediately made the New Covenant available. What possible reason would there be to have the preciously bought benefit delayed, denied to those for whom He died, for four decades?? Objections Considered 1. How can the Law have passed away at the Cross when Hebrews tells us, decades later, it was still in the process of fading away? 2. How can the New Covenant already have come if Christ, speaking of a time just before the Parousia, that their redemption was still “drawing near”? 3. If the Law had passed away at the Cross why did Paul obey the Law when he returned to Jerusalem, Acts 21:20 – 26. 4. How can the Covenant have come already if Hebrews 9:8-9 states it cannot come as long as the Tabernacle is still standing? (This was already answered above, but I put it here for the sake of completeness. See also the comments of various commentators on this supposed problem in the notes below). Responses to Objections 1-3 1. "Why in Hebrews 8:13 would Paul describe the law as "vanishing" rather than being ended?" We must consider the context, which is a quotation from Jeremiah. It is not, specifically, that Paul is describing the Old Covenant as vanishing at the time that Paul was writing. Rather, he was enlarging on the writing of Jeremiah, not describing the current situation. Page 81

I think many of the commentators are helpful here, even though most are futurists. Ellicot, for instance, writes: "(13) In that he saith . . .—Rather, In saying “new” He hath made the first old: now that which groweth old and is failing for age is nigh unto vanishing away. The very language of the prophet contains a declaration of the speedy dissolution of the former covenant. If “nigh unto vanishing” at the time when Jeremiah wrote, well might it now be believed to have passed away." John Owen, in his very helpful Commentary on Hebrews writes: The Old Covenant “was continued whilst this first tabernacle, or the tabernacle in this sense, was “standing.” “Having its station,” that is, according unto the mind of God, it had its state and use in the church. This it had absolutely until the death of Christ, and no longer.” - Owen, Commentary on Heb. 9:8 A search of other, especially older, commentaries brings up similar comments. The “vanishing” of the Old Covenant had only to do with the physical instruments of the Old Covenant, the Temple, the deprecated rites. They no longer had effect on the faithful, nor spiritual validity in the eyes of God. The Old Covenant, the Law, can no longer lord it over the believer, though it was still, for a short while, physically present. A good illustration of this reality is found in John 8, the woman accused of adultery. The accusers, the Jews, were all ready to stone her according to their law. But when Jesus wrote on the ground, and when He said, “Whoever is without sin can cast the first stone” their power was already gone at that point. They left her, starting with the oldest. This is a good way to think of the Law at this time. Still physically present but, thanks to Jesus Christ, utterly powerless over those who come to Him. 2. “How can the New Covenant have arrived at the Cross if, decades later, “redemption” was still “drawing near”.” The two things, New Covenant and redemption, are not synonymous. Doing a study of the occurrences of “covenant” (or similar words or phrases) will show that this was very much a present possession of saints in the period between the Cross and Parousia. For one, we have Romans 11:27. “For this my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins.” Did the saints of that interim period have their sins taken away? Certainly. They were in the New Covenant. See also Galatians 4:24-26. The saints, if they were not in the “Jerusalem which is above” covenant, must still then be under the covenant of “Mount Sinai.” One or the other. There is no third place for them to be. 3. “Why did Paul sometimes still follow the Law, as in Acts 21:20 – 26?” First of all Paul did not "obey the Law". He, rightly or wrongly, became as a Jew to the Jews. At any rate I would rather place the explicit words of Christ over the actions of His apostles. Consider that nowhere do we have a record of God commanding Paul to do this. And consider the immediate consequence. Not what he had planned, probably. Page 82

Paul had written to the Galatians that "if you are led by the Spirit you are not under the Law", Gal 5:18? After writing that how could Paul himself obey the Law? For that matter, the choosing of Matthias was not necessarily the plan of God, seeing that Paul fit the position better. If we have a clear record that Peter -and somewhat advanced already in his ministry – was at fault, Galatians 2:14, is it a stretch that Paul might also at times been in err in some action (not inspired teaching)? Timeline of Events In order to make the case for an AD 66 rapture it will be helpful to map out the major events that have a bearing on this topic. For the sake of brevity, these are only a few of the most important events. More in-depth discussion and chronology of the years surrounding the Parousia can be found in the links below. AD 62 Book of Revelation finished AD 63 Book of Hebrews finished AD 63 Possible time of flight to Pella, Christians having been warned from the two previous books and the earlier prophecy of Christ, Rev. 18:4, Heb. 13:13-14, Luke:21:20-21.(See note below) AD 64 Beginning of the Neronic persecution AD 66 the Abomination of Desolation spoken of by Daniel. Sacrifices cease. AD 66 May – Passover. Appearance of Christ in the sky AD 66 June – Pentecost. Rapture. Temple priests hear a great noise, voices saying “Let us remove hence!” Apparitions. AD 66 The Abomination of desolation AD 66 August, Jewish War begins AD 70 Jerusalem falls, the Temple is destroyed AD 71 Fortress Machaerus falls to the Romans AD 72 Fortress Herodium fall to the Romans AD 73 Fortress Masada falls to the Romans, effective end of the First Jewish War Josephus attests to these tremendous events: “Moreover at that feast which we call Pentecost [June 66 AD], as the priests were going by night into the inner [court of the] temple, as their custom was, to perform their sacred ministrations, they said that, in the first place, they felt a quaking, and heard a great noise, and after that they heard a sound as of a great multitude, saying, ‘Let us remove hence.’” [Wars 6.299 (6.5.3)]

Page 83

An interesting comment from Ed Stevens: “Note that Josephus gives us the exact day and hour when this event occurred (on the day of Pentecost at the hour of the evening sacrifices), where it occurred (in the Jerusalem Temple), and who witnessed it (the officiating priests). The Jewish priests testified about what they felt and heard in the Temple at night on Pentecost in the year AD 66, at the very time when the Zealot war with Rome was about to begin. “This transfer of a large multitude from one place to another in the unseen realm seems to have been the resurrection of the dead and the change of the living saints, when they were caught up to be with Christ. This event occurred at Pentecost, fifty days after Passover. Notice also that it occurred at night, not during the daytime. That explains why no one noticed the snatching away of the living saints.” — page 221, “Final Decade”, Ed Stevens “Let us Remove”, Ed Stevens, p. 10-11, 16, Fulfilled Magazine, Winter 2012 (free pdf.) Correct application of one verse – those wonderful Aha! moments – often leads to other obscure passages finally being clear. On the other hand, misapplied Scripture almost always leads to other Bible passages brought in for mistaken confirmation. This has been the case with this all-important topic. It is so easily for any of us to give in to confirmation bias, seeing what we want to see from the biblical evidence.

Problems with AD 70 as the end of the Old Covenant 1 The Old Covenant requires obedience to all of the Law. But sacrifices ended in AD 66 2 It assumes the end of the Old Covenant to be during August and coinciding with the Feast of Trumpets. But that feast was in the Fall, not Summer. 3 The biggest problem is that it goes against explicit Scripture, most notably Hebrews 9 (as I explained above), that pinpoints the Old Covenant to have been done away with at the Cross.

Facts favoring AD 66 for the beginning of the Parousia and for the Rapture. 1 There are many passages that connect this climactic gathering of the saints (rapture) with wheat harvest. (See “Wheat and Harvest passages” below) 2 The “Let us go hence” event reported by Josephus happened at Pentecost of that year, AD 66. The event matches with the time of the feast.

Page 84

Wheat and Harvest passages Matt. 3:12 (comp. Luke 3:17), Matt. 13:25-30, Matt. 13:39. These passages all refer to the good harvest at the rapture. But we also have another harvest passage of the second sort, Rev. 14:14-20. This describes the bloody harvest of AD 70.

The Significance of the AD 70 destruction of temple and fall of Jerusalem First, AD 70 was not the end of the Old Covenant. The sacrifices had already ceased four years before the destruction of the temple. The priests quit sacrificing in AD 66, not being able to continue because of all the fighting. So – no sacrificing, no Law. No Law, no Old Covenant. The Abomination of Desolation foretold in Daniel had happened at that point. Whatever remaining faint semblance of Old Covenant practice evaporated then. The destruction of the Temple four years later was, in effect, a mere demolition of a structure long since out of use or purpose. It was a demonstration and a sign to the unbelieving Jews, but no longer one that they could spiritually benefit from.

A Note Concerning the Flight to Pella There were actually three clear warnings to flee Jerusalem given. From John (Revelation) and Paul (Hebrews) and, much earlier, from the Lord (Luke 21). The one from Christ is the only one that specifically mentions armies surrounding Jerusalem. This warning from Him was the last warning. There seems to have been more than one escape to Pella. The first escape (or escapes) were from those who did not need to see armies surrounding Jerusalem to quit the place. They had already recognized the doom of the city. (Reading Josephus on the mid 60s gives good background on this). The warning from Christ would have been the last chance. And there were probably very few that could take advantage of it.

Conclusions Preterists should quit using AD 70 as a shorthand for their beliefs. It is misleading. Aside from the Rapture having happened at AD 66 the real pivotal date, the blessed change of Covenants happened four decades earlier. Preterists should pay closer attention to what the Bible actually teaches, not what our favorite Preterist authors teach. That goes for me too, obviously. I always welcome Scriptural correction and feedback on what I teach. If you convince me of my errors (as some have certainly done in the past) I will consider you a good friend. Preterism, rightly understood, really is the new Reformation. We should all do our best to “clean up our act”, to sharpen each other to search out the truth from Scripture. We have the real answer that today’s weird and anemic Christianity is lacking, a truly Christ-honoring and Christ-centered message. Page 85