THE MOST HIGH RULETH

 

 

 

A Study About Government - Past,

Present, and Future

 

 

 

Arlen L. Chitwood

 

 

-------

 

 

[Book cover writing]

 

There is an existing universe which God not only brought into existence but one over which He also exercises absolute, sovereign control. And the Bible is God’s revelation to man concerning His actions in the preceding respect, especially as these actions relate to the earth and to man.

 

 

Man is a latecomer in the universe. He was created after God’s creation of the physical universe, after God’s creation of angels, and after God’s government of the universe had been established and was in full operation. Man’s existence dates back only six millenniums, and he was brought into existence for the specific purpose of replacing a disqualified provincial ruler in God’s kingdom, one who had been ruling for a prior unrevealed period of time.

 

 

Man was created to replace the ruler whom God had, in the beginning, placed over the earth (Ezek. 28: 14). This ruler, Satan, who, because of his rebellion against God’s supreme power and authority, disqualified himself (Isa. 14: 12-15). And man was subsequently brought on the scene to take the sceptre and, along with the woman, rule this one province in God’s kingdom in the stead of Satan and his angels (Gen. 1: 26-28).

 

 

Thus, matters surrounding man’s subsequent fall and redemption both revolve around the reason for his creation - “…let them [the man and the woman together] have dominion…”

 

 

Satan knew why man had been created, and he immediately set about to effect man’ disqualification (through disobedience), as he himself had been disqualified -an act which, if successfully accomplished (as it was), would allow Satan (though disqualified) to continue holding the sceptre (Gen. 3: 1ff & Luke 4: 5, 6).

 

 

And redemption, remaining within the same framework of thought, simply has to do with God providing a means whereby He could not only bring man back into a right relationship with Himself but also a means whereby He could ultimately bring man into a realization of the purpose for which he had been created (Gen. 3: 15; & Heb. 2: 5).

 

 

This is the manner in which Scripture not only begins in the Book of Genesis but also concludes in the Book of Revelation (Rev. 22: 1-5). And all intervening Scripture must be viewed and understood within this same framework.

 

 

 

[Page ii]

 

“And it shall come to pass in the last days, that the mountain of the Lord’s house

shall be established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above

the hills; and all nations shall flow into it” (Isaiah 2: 2).

 

 

 

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

[Page iii]

The Most

High Ruleth

 

 

 

by

Arlen L. Chitwood

 

 

 

The

Lamp Broadcast, Inc.

2629 Wyandotte Way

Norman, Okla. 73071

www.lampbroadcast.org

 

-------

 

2004

 

 

Second Printing

(Revised)

First Printing, 1994

 

 

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

 

[Page iv]

 

By the Same Author -

 

 

THE STUDY OF SCRIPTURE

 

HAD YE BELIEVED MOSES

 

RUN TO WIN

 

SO GREAT SALVATION

 

SALVATION OF THE SOUL

 

FROM ACTS TO THE EPISTLES

 

IN THE LORD'S DAY

 

FOCUS ON THE MIDDLE EAST

 

FROM EGYPT TO CANAAN

 

LET US GO ON

 

REDEEMED FOR A PURPOSE

 

JUDGMENT SEAT OF CHRIST

 

MYSTERIES OF THE KINGDOM

 

THE BRIDE IN GENESIS

 

SEARCH FOR THE BRIDE

 

THE TIME OF JACOB’S TROUBLE

 

SEVEN, TEN GENERATIONS

 

GOD’S FIRSTBORN SONS

 

JUDE

 

RUTH

 

ESTHER

 

 

[Page v]

 

 

CONTENTS

 

 

FOREWORD  -  [Page vii]

 

1. OVER THE HEAVENS AND THE EARTH  -  [Page 1]

 

2. IN THE KINGDOM OF MEN  -  [Page15]

 

3. FROM THE HEAVENS OVER THE EARTH  -  [Page 31]

 

APPENDIX (CROWNED RULERS - CHRIST, CHRISTIANS)  -  [Page 47]

 

SCRIPTURE INDEX  -  [Page 55]

 

 

 

[Page vii]

 

FOREWORD

 

 

Scripture begins with a very brief, succinct statement concerning God’s creation of the material universe:

 

 

“In the beginning God created the heaven [lit., ‘the heavens’] and the earth” (Gen. 1: 1).

 

 

God, at a point in time, brought the material universe into existence. Then God established a perfect form of universal government, allowing Him to exercise absolute, sovereign control over the whole of His creation.

 

 

God placed angels, whom He had also previously created (cf. Job 38: 6, 7; Ezek. 28: 14, 15), in appointed positions to exercise delegated power and authority within His government. That would not only be true of the province upon which man presently resides (the earth) but of innumerable other provinces (undoubtedly multiplied billions) which God created, forming the innumerable galaxies (again, undoubtedly multiplied billions), which comprise a material universe of a size which could only stagger one’s imagination.

 

 

But the creation of man, though created for regal purposes, follows God’s creation of angels, the material universe, and the establishment of His universal government. Man, a latecomer within God’s creative activity, was brought into existence to replace one of God’s provincial rulers, one who had rebelled against Divine power and authority. And man was created on the province (the earth) over which this ruler (Satan) had not only originally been placed but a province which he continued to govern following his fall.

 

[Page viii]

(A principle of Biblical government necessitates that an incumbent ruler, though disqualified, must continue holding the sceptre until his replacement is not only on the scene but ready to assume the sceptre [ref. the account of Saul and David in the Books of 1, 2 Samuel].

 

In this respect, though disqualified to hold the sceptre, Satan [with his angels] could only continue holding the sceptre until God had not only brought forth his replacement [man] but had deemed his replacement qualified and ready to ascend the throne.)

 

 

Thus, man was created for a revealed purpose, which had to do with regality. Man was formed from a part of the earth, to rule the earth:

 

 

“And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion [Heb. radah, let them ‘rule’]...” (Gen. 1: 26; cf. 1: 28; 2: 7, 8).

 

 

Then man’s subsequent fall, recorded in Genesis chapter three, was directly related to the purpose surrounding his creation. And, beyond that, God providing a means of salvation for fallen man was (and remains today) also directly related to the purpose surrounding his creation. The reason for and goal of salvation have to do with man one day occupying the position for which he was created.

 

 

That is to say, the purpose surrounding man’s fall (effected by Satan) had to do with his being brought into a position in which he could not assume the sceptre, allowing the incumbent ruler to continue on the throne; and the purpose surrounding man’s redemption (effected by God) had to do with his one day being brought into a position where he could assume the sceptre.

 

 

Thus, regality pervades the whole of the matter. God rules over all, angels rule under God, man was created to replace a disqualified angelic ruler, and man’s fall and redemption result from and have to do with the reason for his creation.

 

 

And, since the ultimate victory will be the Lord’s, man will one day replace the disqualified, incumbent ruler. “The gifts and calling of God are without repentancewithout a change of mind’]” (Rom. 11: 29). God is not going to change His mind concerning the reason He called man into existence. Man will one day rule the earth in the stead of angels, realizing the reason for his creation in the beginning (Heb. 2: 5).

 

 

*       *       *

 

[Page 1]

1

 

Over the Heavens and the Earth

 

 

The Lord hath prepared his throne in the heavens; and his kingdom ruleth over all.

 

 

Bless the Lord, ye his angels, that excel in strength, that do his commandments, hearkening unto the voice of his word.

 

 

Bless ye the Lord, all ye his hosts; ye ministers of his, that do his pleasure.

 

 

Bless the Lord, all his works in all places of his dominion: bless the Lord, O my soul (Psa. 103: 19-22).

 

 

God exercises absolute, sovereign control over a universe which He Himself brought into existence, and the earth is a province within that universe. There is “no power but of God,” and “the powers that be are ordained of God” (Rom. 13: 1, 2).

 

 

God is the One Who places rulers in positions of power (the power which emanates from Him); and, should it become necessary (both “should” and “when” in man’s case, for he is presently limited by time), God is also the One Who removes rulers from these same positions of power (1 Sam. 15: 17, 23; 31: 3-5; 2 Sam. 1: 3-10; Dan. 4: 17, 25, 32-36; 5: 18-21; Matt. 20: 23; Luke 1: 52).

 

 

Consequently, there is no such thing as a ruler on this province (the earth) or any other province (any other world) in the universe exercising power within a governmental position apart from God. A ruler holds his position because of a Divine act (appointment, placement by God), and he exercises power which emanates from a Divine [Page 2] source (from the One Who appointed, placed him in the position which he occupies, from God Himself).

 

 

In relation to this earth, the ruler himself may or may not acknowledge this (in fact, he may not even acknowledge the existence of God); or he may be a rebellious ruler, seeking to rule apart from God. But the simple fact remains: Any ruler on this earth, or any ruler anywhere in the universe, holds a governmental position and exercises power and authority within that position solely because of Divine appointment (to his position) and Divine delegation (of power and authority). Rulers exercising power and authority after this fashion actually govern, in numerous gradations of positions, within a chain of command which God has established under Himself.

 

 

There are no exceptions.

 

 

God rules from a throne which is located “in the sides [lit., ‘in the uttermost parts’] of the north” (Isa. 14: 13). The direction of the compass locating God’s throne would be in relation to the earth. That is, Scripture states that God sits on a throne north of the earth in what would be either the northernmost point in the universe or a point beyond which no additional physical universe exists (i.e., no more galaxies exist beyond this point).

 

 

Thus, all rule, power, and authority emanate from one Person (God) seated on a throne at a particular revealed point in the universe. And God rules the universe from this place through subordinates who occupy various appointed positions and exercise various degrees of delegated power and authority (Psa. 103: 19; Isa. 14: 13, 14; cf. Dan. 4: 17; 5: 18-21; 7: 9-14; Rom. 13: 1, 2).

 

 

THE UNIVERSE AS A WHOLE

 

 

Man has no idea of the size of the physical universe, outside our galaxy. His telescopes can only see so far, and beyond that he can only surmise, estimate, and guess. And that would even be true, to an extent, of numerous things within our own galaxy.

 

 

Our sun is a medium-size star, and there are an estimated two to four hundred billion other stars (some larger, some smaller) within our galaxy. Then beyond our galaxy it is estimated that billions of other galaxies exist, comprising the physical universe.

 

[Page 3]

It is one hundred thousand light years across our own galaxy (a movement at the speed of 186,000 miles per second for one hundred thousand years), and it is an estimated two to two and one-half million light years to the next nearest galaxy. And beyond that are other galaxies separated by comparable distances. Thus the universe is of a size and design which could only stagger man’s imagination.

 

 

Returning to our own solar system as a beginning point, this system is comprised of nine planets revolving around a medium-size star (possibly ten planets according to late astronomical discoveries); and the earth is apparently unique as the only planet within our solar system upon which God saw fit to place individuals within His ordered system of government.

 

 

But, when viewing the remainder of the galaxy or the universe as a whole, is our own solar system unique in this respect? That is, considering the matter after one fashion, is our sun the only star anywhere in the universe around which planets revolve? Or, considering the matter after another fashion, if other similar solar systems do exist, is the earth within our solar system the only inhabited planet among existing planets within solar systems throughout the universe?

 

 

In line with previous statements, the answer to the questions would have to be, “No.” There is an inhabited universe over which God exercises absolute, sovereign control. Man though, as a creature within that universe, is a different matter. The creation of an individual in the image and likeness of God (Gen. 1: 26, 27), to have a part in God’s governmental rule of the universe, is an act peculiar to the earth. In this respect, the earth would be unique insofar as man himself residing on a province and having a part in the government is concerned, but it would not be unique insofar as there being other similar solar systems with worlds upon which individuals (angels) reside within God’s ordered system of government.

 

 

Astronomers within the scientific community can today state, with certainty, that there are numerous solar systems similar to our own (other stars [suns] with revolving planets). Prior to the time of the Hubble telescope, though astronomers could not see these planets, through infrared techniques developed in recent times they could see systematic blockages of light in connection with different stars which seemingly could only be attributed to planets revolving around these [Page 4] stars.

 

 

Then, once the Hubble telescope was placed in orbit above the earth’s atmosphere, allowing astronomers to look into the heavens and not only see things which they had never been able to see before but also to bring everything into a much clearer focus, any question concerning the existence of other solar systems, similar to our own, was removed. Though revolving planets around other stars still could not be seen, the compilation of additional evidence made available through the use of this telescope removed any possible doubt concerning the existence of numerous other solar systems - possibly billions - in our galaxy alone.

 

 

But all of that is really neither here nor there, for Scripture has already told us that such worlds exist. And man’s scientific discoveries never verify Scripture, for Scripture can’t be verified. “Scripture” is the standard by which all else is judged, and there can be no such thing as the standard being verified by that which is being judged by the standard.

 

 

Where Scripture and Science touch on the same matters, Scripture will always reveal the accuracy or inaccuracy of man’s scientific discoveries. In the case of the astronomers’ deductions concerning planets revolving around numerous other stars in the galaxy, Scripture reveals that they are correct.

 

 

The whole matter of viewing Scripture and Science together is really that simple.

 

 

“Scripture” lies within the realm of the Creator, but “Science” lies within the realm of the created. And the creature never asks the Creator, “Why hast thou made me thus?” (Rom. 9: 20). Accordingly, as in creation itself, the beginning point must always be the Scriptures - the God-breathed Word (originating from and inseparably connected with the Creator) - never Science (the created).

 

 

A main basis for the teaching concerning inhabited planets within other solar systems in the universe is taken from that which is revealed in the first two chapters of the Book of Job. Satan is the messianic angel whom God placed over this earth in the beginning, along with a great host of subordinate ruling angels (Ezek. 28: 14ff; Dan. 10: 13; Matt. 25: 41); and Satan is seen in the Book of Job, on two separate occasions, as he appeared in the Lord’s presence with other “sons of God,” which could only be his equals, for Satan appeared “among them” as one of them (1: 6; 2: 1).

 

[Page 5]

The appearances of the sons of God in the Lord’s presence on these two recorded occasions apparently constituted two of what could only have been scheduled congresses of messianic angels (angels placed over various worlds within the universe). Such is evident, for Satan, whom God had placed over the earth, appeared in God’s presence at these meetings as one of the “sons of God.” And since Satan was the messianic angel whom God had placed over the province upon which man was later created, it can only be concluded that the other “sons of God” among whom Satan appeared - his equals - were messianic angels whom God had placed over provinces in other parts of the universe. They apparently appeared together in God’s presence at scheduled times to render reports concerning activities on the particular provinces over which they had been placed (congresses of the sons of God).

 

 

In both instances in the accounts in Job, attention is directed to Satan and the earth rather than to any of the other messianic angels and other worlds (1: 7ff; 2: 2ff). In fact, other than the simple mention of their presence at these meetings, nothing is revealed concerning the other messianic angels or the worlds over which they ruled.

 

 

And this would be in perfect keeping with the way Scripture is structured, for, in the preceding respect, God’s revelation to man has to do with His government of the earth, not with His government of other parts of the universe. The latter is seemingly introduced in Scripture (in a very limited sense) so man can place things concerning the former in their proper perspective.

 

 

That is, man understanding the overall scope of God’s government of the universe (beginning in the past and extending into the present) could better understand God’s government of a small part of the universe, i.e., His government of the earth - past, present, and future. Thus, for this apparent reason - along with the fact that man, beyond the millennium, will apparently have a part in God’s government of the universe - God has seen fit to reveal certain things concerning the overall structure of the government within His universal kingdom.

 

 

(God actually opens His revelation to man after this fashion, calling attention to the beginning of His universal kingdom and then centering [Page 6] His revelation on one province in that kingdom. Scripture opens with the statement,, “in the beginning God created the heaven [lit., ‘the heavens’] and the earth” [Gen. 1: 1].

 

First, God makes mention of the entire universe out in the heavens, separate from the earth; but then “the earth” is immediately singled out for special consideration. And continuing from this point, Scripture, completely apart from any additional revelation concerning God’s activity in the previously mentioned “heavens,” begins to deal specifically with the earth - “And the earth was without form and void... [lit., ‘But the earth became without form, and void...’]” [Gen. 1: 2a].

 

For further information regarding the preceding understanding of Gen. 1: 2a, refer to the author’s books, THE STUDY OF SCRIPTURE, Ch. 11, or SEVEN, TEN GENERATIONS, the Foreword.

 

The rest of the universe had been mentioned [1: 1a], but God, in His revelation to man, concerns Himself centrally with the earth [and the heavens in the proximity of and associated with the earth], not with the rest of the universe [1: 1b ff ]. And the apparent reason that God’s activity in relation to other parts of the universe is even mentioned in Scripture is as previously stated: Man, viewing God’s activity in relation to the entire universe, could better understand and place within its proper perspective God’s activity relative to a small part of that universe, i.e., His activity relative to the earth, Satan and his angels, man, etc.)

 

 

THE EARTH ITSELF

 

 

Note that Satan’s fall resulted from his seeking a position of power above the other messianic angels, apart from Divine appointment. Actually, such an appointment would have been out of the question, for Satan sought the very position which God Himself occupied.

 

 

In so doing, Satan said:

 

 

“I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God [the other messianic angels]: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation [the meeting place where the kings of the kingdom (the messianic angels) met in God’s presence], in the sides of the north [lit., ‘in the uttermost parts of the north’]:

 

 

I will ascend above the heights of the clouds [lit., ‘the Cloud[Page 7] apparently a reference to Deity]; I will be like the most High” (Isa. 14: 13, 14).

 

 

Thus, Satan became dissatisfied with the governmental position which he occupied (a ruler over only one province in the kingdom, having equals who ruled other provinces in the kingdom). He sought to elevate his throne above all the other messianic angels and occupy the very place which God Himself occupied. He, in this respect, sought to become the supreme ruler of the entire universe.

 

 

As a consequence, God not only rejected him as the appointed ruler over the earth but God reduced the province over which he ruled to a ruin. This is the point in Scripture where “the earth wasbecame’ [See N.I.V. translation footnote]] without form, and void; and darkness wasbecame’] upon the face of the deep” (Gen. 1: 2a).

 

 

However, Satan continued to rule - though over a ruined province in God’s overall kingdom - for a principle of Biblical government necessitates that an incumbent ruler hold his appointed position until he is actually replaced by another appointed ruler. This is the reason Satan is seen in Scripture among the other messianic angels in the Book of Job, millenniums following his fall. He still occupied the throne as the earth’s appointed ruler, for the time when his successor would appear on the scene and take the sceptre awaited a future day.

 

 

And today, millenniums removed from Job’s day, Satan still occupies the same position, for the time when he is to be put down and Another ascend the throne still awaits a future day. Consequently, should there be congresses of the sons of God held during the present time (which there undoubtedly are), Satan would have to attend in the same capacity which he has held since time immemorial - as the earth’s appointed ruler, one of the “sons of God,” one of the messianic angels. Should he be asked questions at any of the present congresses, as at the two meetings revealed in Job, the questions would, of necessity, have to involve one or more of the Lord’s servants on earth today.

 

 

A knowledge of this fact will provide a probable reason for some Christians (past and present) having undergone (or presently be undergoing) untold sufferings in their lives. Such Christians, as Job, may have come under Satan’s accusation and have been “counted worthy” [Page 8] to undergo various trials, testings, or sufferings for Christ’s name (cf. Acts 5: 40-42; Rom. 8: 18; Rev. 12: 10, 11).

 

 

And the inverse of the preceding is equally true. Some [regenerate] Christians seemingly never undergo trials, testings, or sufferings; and the reason is evident. Because of unfaithfulness in their lives they simply find themselves in a category wherein they are not “counted worthy” to suffer for Christ’s name (2 Tim. 3: 11-15).

 

 

That would be to say, within the congresses of the messianic angels, God would have no reason to call such individuals to Satan’s attention (as He did Job); nor would Satan have any cause to bring accusations before God concerning them (as in Job’s case). Consequently, they live their lives apart from the trials, testings, and sufferings of this nature, experienced by certain other - [obedient and faithful regenerate] - Christians.

 

 

Man though has turned this whole thing around and associates “suffering” with God’s disfavour and “blessing” with God’s favour. But God views the matter in a completely opposite framework (Isa. 55: 8, 9). The normal Christian life involves trials, testings, and sufferings. Anything else during the present day and time would, in reality, be abnormal and out of place.

 

 

(The preceding is not to suggest that all trials, testings, and sufferings experienced by Christians during the present time emanate from issues at congresses of the sons of God. It does though suggest that some, possibly more than we may realize, may very well have an origin of this nature.)

 

 

But the “sufferings,” though they must come first, don’t last forever. At some later point in time “blessings” must always follow (cf. Job 2: 7ff; 42: 10-17). This is a Scriptural principle which cannot be broken.

 

 

The same thing is seen in the future - [promised, and manifested Messianic (see Ps. 2: 8; Isa. 6: 3; 35: 2. Cf. Matt. 25: 31; 1 Pet. 1: 7, R.V.)] - glory of Christ following His past sufferings. It was necessary that Christ first suffer. Only then could He “enter into his glory” (Luke 24: 25-27). And the same principle applies to Christians undergoing present sufferings and one day having a part in Christ’s [coming] glory (Rom. 8: 17, 18; 1 Peter 4: 12, 13).

 

 

The latter (the glory) can, under no circumstances, be realized apart from the former (the sufferings). This is the reason Scripture states,

 

 

“If we sufferpatiently endure,’ which involves trials, testings, [Page 9] sufferings (James 1: 2-4)], we shall also reign with him: if we deny him, he also will deny us” (2 Tim. 2: 12).

 

 

Denying in the latter part of 2 Tim. 2: 12 is not denying a person per se (i.e., our denying Christ or Christ denying us). The word “deny” must be understood contextually, and understanding the word in the sense of “disallow” or “not allow” would really better convey the thought which the context demands.

 

 

Contextually, the first use of the word “deny” has to do with Christians not patiently enduring with Christ during the present time (note the first part of the verse). They do not allow the Lord (they deny the Lord in this respect), through the ministry of the [Holy] Spirit, to perform a work in their lives. That is, such Christians deny Christ the central place which He desires to occupy in their lives; and, resultingly, they do not allow the Holy Spirit to progressively work the metamorphosis in their lives, they live apart from patiently enduring with Christ, do not suffer with Him, etc.

 

 

Then the second use of the word “deny” has to do with Christians who pattern their lives after the preceding fashion not being allowed to reign with Christ (again note the first part of the verse). Such Christians will not have allowed the Lord (they will have denied the Lord in this respect), through the ministry of the [Holy] Spirit, to perform a work in their lives during the present time. There will have been no patient endurance involving trials, testings, sufferings; consequently, there can be no future reign.

 

 

“Suffering” must always precede “glory The latter cannot be realized apart from the former, and the former guarantees the latter (1 Peter 4: 12-19; cf. Matt. 5: 11, 12).

 

 

1. THE FIRST MAN, THE FIRST ADAM

 

 

Though Satan’s fall and disqualification to rule resulted in a portion of God’s kingdom being reduced to a ruin, God had plans for the earth as a province within His kingdom which would far exceed anything seen during Satan’s rule. This province would be the place where an individual created in the image and likeness of God would one day rule. Further, and foremost as the rulership relates to Man, this province would be the place where God’s Son (as the second Man, the [Page 10] last Adam, the Head of a new order of Sons) would likewise one day rule. And then, ultimately, this province (actually, the new earth) would be the place where God Himself, along with His Son and man (redeemed through His Son’s finished work at Calvary), would rule the universe.

 

 

To realize all of this though, the earth must first be restored and a new ruler brought forth. And that’s what the opening two chapters of Genesis are about - the restoration of the earth (1: 2b-25), the creation of man as the earth’s new ruler (1: 26-28; 2: 7), along with the removal of the woman from the man to reign as consort queen with him (2: 21-25).

 

 

Thus, the person eventually brought on the scene to take the sceptre was not of the angelic creation. Rather, this individual constituted an entirely new creation in the universe. He was created uniquely different - in the image and likeness of God; and not only was he created uniquely different but he was also created for a revealed purpose, a purpose which had to do with the government of the earth. Man was created to replace the incumbent ruler, to take the sceptre which Satan held - “let them have dominion [i.e., ‘let them rule,’ which, of necessity, would have had to include the man and the woman together, for the woman was part of the man and completed the man]” (Gen. 1: 26-28).

 

 

(In line with the previous, there was both a near and afar purpose for man’s creation. The near purpose had to do with rulership over the earth [which will be realized during the Messianic Era], and the far purpose had to do with rulership within other parts of the universe [which will be realized following the Messianic Era].)

 

 

The ruined earth over which Satan ruled following his fall was restored with a view to man taking the sceptre (Gen. 1: 2bff). However, Satan, knowing what God was in the process of doing through the restoration of the earth and man’s subsequent creation, immediately sought to bring about man’s disqualification. And this is exactly what he did through deceiving Eve, which resulted in Adam having no choice but to also eat of the same forbidden fruit Eve had been deceived into eating.

 

 

Adam fell as the federal head of God’s new creation, man; and this not only resulted in man’s disqualification (placing him in a position [Page 11] wherein he could not assume the sceptre) but it also resulted once again, as before, in a ruined kingdom (the earth brought under a curse but not ruined to the extent that it was uninhabitable for man).

 

 

However, unlike events following Satan’s fall, redemption entered the picture when man fell. God not only provided immediate redemption for Adam and Eve following their fall but He also foretold the ultimate victory (over the incumbent ruler) of mankind’s coming Redeemer (Gen. 3: 15, 21).

 

 

Thus, redemption was to be provided for man, with a view to his ultimately realizing the purpose for his creation. Man was to be redeemed so he could, as God intended, one day take the sceptre and rule within God’s governmental structure of the universe (first over the earth, then throughout the universe itself).

 

 

2. THE SECOND MAN, THE LAST ADAM

 

 

Galatians 4: 4-7 perhaps outlines the entirety of the matter about as well as any similar passage in Scripture. First, there is Christ’s first coming in order to redeem man (vv. 4, 5); and the stated purpose for redemption is then said to be adoption and heirship, which have to do with events surrounding Christ’s second coming (vv. 5-7). This, of course, is the heirship previously mentioned in Gal. 3: 29:

 

 

“And if ye be Christ’s, then are ye Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise” (cf. Gen. 22: 17, 18).

 

 

Christ came as the second Man, the last Adam, for He must not only redeem that which the first man, the first Adam lost in the fall but He must also occupy the headship which Adam possessed. Only through so doing could God one day give His Son “dominion, and glory, and a kingdom,” something which the Son is presently inviting redeemed man to share with Him in the position of co-heir in that coming day when He receives the kingdom from the Father (Dan. 7: 13, 14; Rev. 11: 15; cf. Rom. 8: 16-18; Rev. 2: 26, 27; 3: 21).

 

 

The first man, the first Adam had a bride taken from his body who was to reign as consort queen with him. And so must it be with the second Man, the last Adam. The matter has been set within God’s activities surrounding the man whom He brought forth in Genesis, and it cannot change within His activities surrounding the Man [Page 12] Whom He is about to “again” bring into the inhabited world (Heb. 1: 6, 9; 3: 14; cf. Eph. 5: 30-32).

 

 

A husband-wife relationship of this nature is seen in Scripture at three different points within God’s overall revelation to man - past, present, and future. It is seen in the past in the relationship which existed between Adam and Eve, and it is seen in the future in the relationship which will exist between Christ and His bride. Then it is seen between these times, during the present, in the relationship which exists between a man and woman within the bonds of marriage.

 

 

A man leaves his father and mother, is joined to his wife, and they become “one flesh,” as in the beginning. The man and woman, in this position, as “one flesh,” then become “heirs together of the grace of life.” And the whole matter is said to be a great mystery surrounding “Christ and the Church,” pointing to a relationship which will exist yet future (Gen. 2: 21-24; Eph. 5: 25-32; 1 Peter 3: 7).

 

 

(Note: The preceding is why husbands are “to love their wives as their own bodies” [Eph. 5: 28, 29]. The woman originated from the body of the man.)

 

 

The man and woman in Genesis were to hold the sceptre together; they were to rule and reign as “one flesh.” The Man and woman yet future (Christ and His bride) are also to hold the sceptre together; they are to rule and reign as “one flesh.” And during the present time there is a sense, on a spiritual plane, in which the man and woman are to “reign in life” (holding a sceptre) as “one flesh” through being “heirs together of the grace of life” (cf. Rom. 5: 17-21; 1 Peter 3: 7).

 

 

The latter would, of necessity, have to be the case, for that is the way in which God dealt with matters in the past, establishing an unchangeable pattern which continues into the future (at which time the relationship will be realized in its fullness). And a husband-wife relationship of this nature during the present time could only be looked upon as the highest possible form of the spiritual life within that relationship.

 

 

It is a God-designed apex upon which the marriage relationship should exist and function. This is something which Adam and Eve lost in the fall, this is something which a man and woman can possess on a spiritual plane today, and this is something which will be restored (in its fullness) within the relationship Christ and His bride will [Page 13] possess yet future.

 

 

God has set aside an entire dispensation, lasting two millenniums, during which He is calling out a bride for His Son. This is the time in which we presently live (typified by events in Gen. 24); and God has set aside this rather long period of time, for this one centrally revealed purpose. In order to bring matters to pass within the person of the second Man, the last Adam which were begun in the person of the first man, the first Adam, a bride must be acquired for the Son.

 

 

Salvation made available to man through Christ’s finished work at Calvary is for a purpose, and that purpose is to be realized within the framework of man having a part in God’s governmental rule of the universe. Man’s destiny is to rule and reign, but he must first be redeemed. And during the present dispensation - with the thought in mind of redemption for a purpose, having to do with rulership - God has directed His activities toward the acquisition of a bride to rule as co-heir with His Son. Thus, salvation during the present dispensation is with a view to ascending the throne with God’s Son as His bride, which will be realized during the coming Messianic Era.

 

 

(For a full discussion of the work of the Spirit during the present dispensation, in the preceding respect, refer to the author’s book, SEARCH FOR THE BRIDE.)

 

 

Today we are living very near the end of the dispensation, very near that time when the Church (Christ’s body) will be removed from the earth, the bride will be seen removed from the body (following issues and determinations surrounding the judgment seat), and the bride will be presented back to Christ (with a view to the Messianic Era). The two will be “one flesh,” as in the Genesis account; and the two, as “one flesh,” will take the sceptre and exercise the “dominion” which the first man, the first Adam lost in the fall. Seated on the Son’s throne, holding the sceptre, Christ and His bride will, together, rule the earth for 1,000 years (cf. Rev. 2: 26, 27; 3: 21).

 

 

TIMES OF RESTITUTION OF ALL THINGS

 

 

“And he shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you:

[Page 14]

Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began” (Acts 3: 20, 21).

 

 

The Messianic Era is referred to as “the times of restitutionrestoration’] of all things And this restoration has to do not only with conditions which will exist during the Messianic Era but also with the purpose for this era.

 

 

A restoration of all things will exist during the Messianic Era in the sense that the curse will be lifted and a righteous Provincial Governor will once again administer affairs on the earth, but a restoration itself will also be effected through events occurring during the Messianic Era. This has to do with the purpose for this era.

 

 

Christ is to “put down all rule and all authority and power,” and He (with His bride) is to reign “till he hath put all enemies under his feet.” And once this has been done - which will take 1,000 years - the kingdom is to be “delivered up” to the Father, “that God maybe all in all” (1 Cor. 15: 24-28).

 

 

Preparation is presently being made for that coming era - i.e., the bride is presently being acquired - and preparation will be made during that coming era, by Christ and His bride, for the eternal ages which follow.

 

 

The rule by Christ and His bride will be confined to the earth alone during the Messianic Era (Psa. 2: 6-9; Rev. 2: 26, 27); but during the eternal ages which follow, man’s rule, first announced in Genesis, will extend out into the universe itself (Rev. 22: 1-5).

 

 

(In relation to Satan’s aspirations to exalt his throne, resulting in his fall and disqualification to continue holding the sceptre, note that there is a degree of irony in man one day exercising regal power and authority beyond this earth, out in the universe. This is the realm into which Satan sought to move; and man, brought on the scene to replace Satan, will one day be allowed to move out into this realm.)

 

 

*       *       *

 

[Page 15]

2

 

In the Kingdom of Men

 

 

This matter is by the decree of the watchers, and the demand by the word of the holy ones: to the intent that the living may know that the most High ruleth in the kingdom of men, and giveth it to whomsoever he will, and setteth up over it the basest of men (Dan. 4: 17).

 

 

The Book of Daniel, in its overall scope, concerns itself with one major subject - the complete history of the kingdom of this world, with its centre located in Babylon. “The times of the Gentiles” began during Daniel’s day, with Gentile world power centered in Babylon; and it will end in the immediate future, with Gentile world power once again centered in Babylon. In this respect, Babylon is the only centre which Scripture recognizes for Gentile world power throughout “the times of the Gentiles

 

 

Within this framework, Gentile world power is looked upon after a dual fashion in Scripture. It is spoken of as emanating from many kingdoms (“...all the kingdoms of the world” [Matt. 4: 8]), and it is also spoken of as emanating from one kingdom The kingdom of the world” [Rev. 11: 15, ASV]). The former is the manner in which Scripture views Gentile world power apart from Babylon, and the latter is the manner in which Scripture views Gentile world power in association with Babylon.

 

 

At the time of the events in Matt. 4: 8 (Satan showing Christ “all the kingdoms of the world”), Gentile government was not centered in Babylon (as it was several hundred years prior to that time), for [Page 16] Babylon, as a power among the nations, had ceased to exist. And, accordingly, Scripture referred to the nations after an individual fashion - apart from a centre - though Rome was the central power among the nations at that time. But, at the time of the fulfilment of Rev. 11: 15 (when “The kingdom of the world” becomes “the kingdom of our Lord, and his Christ ASV), Gentile world power will once again be centered in Babylon.

 

 

Gentile world power, in that future day, will be under one man - Antichrist. He will rule the world through a ten-kingdom confederacy (viewed as one world kingdom, under one man), with its governmental centre once again located in Babylon.

 

 

“The times of the Gentiles” began in Babylon, and this period will also end in Babylon - the same Babylon where it began. That’s what the book of Daniel is about. This book covers the complete history of that depicted by the image in chapter two, or that depicted by the four great beasts in chapter seven. It covers that time which begins with Nebuchadnezzar and ends approximately 2,600 years later with Antichrist (though the centre of Gentile world power does not exist in Babylon throughout this period, only for several hundred years at the beginning and immediately prior to the end).

 

 

And the time when the prophecies relating to the end-time form of this Gentile world kingdom will be fulfilled is near at hand. We are living very near the end of man’s allotted 6,000 years, Man’s Day; and it is certainly no mere coincidence that, in the Middle East, during particularly about the past fifteen years, certain events have occurred (and continue to occur) which bring (and continue to bring) things in perfect alignment with the way the prophets said that they would exist in the end time.

 

 

Recent events in the Middle East have caused the attention of the world to become focused on the Persian Gulf area in general and upon Iraq in particular. And, in the light of Biblical prophecy, the reason is easy to understand. A rebuilt city of Babylon on the Euphrates in the country of Iraq is destined to shortly become, once again, the centre of Gentile world power. The unfulfilled Biblical prophecies relating to this city are about to be fulfilled; and they will be fulfilled, in the immediate future, over a very short period of time (the seven years of Daniel’s unfulfilled Seventieth Week [Dan. 9: 26, 27]).

 

[Page 17]

(Note that the kingdom of Babylon included more than just a city. It was a city-state. Sometimes the city alone was referred to by the name “Babylon,” and other times the country itself was referred to by this name.

 

And this is apparently the manner in which conditions will exist in the final form of the Babylonian kingdom. A literal city will exist, but there will apparently also be a city-state comprising the whole of the kingdom, existing within the confines of the original city-state.)

 

 

With these things in mind, the present unfolding of the entire Middle East scenario, in one sense, is really quite easy to understand. These events are as distant hoofbeats (Rev. 6: lff), growing louder with each passing day, which portend the soon fulfilment of the numerous unfulfilled prophecies in Daniel.

 

 

Though Biblical prophecy is not presently being fulfilled through different events transpiring in the Middle East, the stage is rapidly being set for its fulfilment. Biblical prophecy relating to the Middle East in general and Babylon in particular will begin to be fulfilled only when the clock begins marking time in Daniel’s Seventy-Week prophecy once again; and during (and immediately following) this final seven years of Man’s Day, innumerable prophecies - throughout Scripture, from Genesis to Revelation - will be rapidly fulfilled.

 

 

This is where attention is focused in the Book of Daniel; and since this book has to do with the beginning and the end of Gentile world power during Man’s Day, God has seen fit to reveal certain behind-the-scenes things relative to this power. God has seen fit to reveal certain things concerning how He sovereignly governs the earth as a province in His kingdom, though a rebel provincial ruler (Satan) holds the sceptre, and fallen man exercises power under this ruler.

 

 

PRESENT GOVERNMENT OF THE EARTH

 

 

The manner in which the present government of the earth has been established is really quite simple in its overall scope, but within that scope specific matters become quite complex. In its simplicity, God rules over all, Satan (with his angels) rules under God, and man rules under Satan (and his angels). The matter then becomes quite [Page 18] complex within the framework of God’s sovereign control of matters through both a rebel provincial ruler and fallen man.

 

 

With one exception, the manner in which the government of the earth is presently carried out has not changed since the beginning. In the beginning, following the creation of the heavens and the earth, God placed Satan (in his unfallen state) in the position of provincial ruler over the earth, along with a great host of angels occupying various positions of power and authority under him (Gen. 1: 1; Ezek. 28: 14, 15; cf. Matt. 25: 41; Eph. 6: 12; Rev. 12: 4). But, at a point in time following Satan’s fall and disqualification (which would be following the accompanying ruin and subsequent restoration of the earth, recorded in Gen. 1: 2-25), another provincial ruler was brought on the scene to replace the incumbent ruler. But the earth’s second provincial ruler was not of the angelic creation. Rather, an individual created in the image and likeness of God was brought on the scene to take the reins of government (Gen. 1: 26-28).

 

 

This is the one exception to the past and present form of the government of the earth. In the beginning (Gen. 1: 1; Ezek. 28: 14, 15), man did not fit into the equation. But for the past 6,000 years, matters have been different (Gen. 1: 26ff). Though Satan and his angels continue to rule, man now has a part in the government, but not in the manner for which he was created. Man was created to take the reins of government held by Satan; but, because of his fall, man presently rules on the earth, among his own kind, under the incumbent ruler, i.e., under Satan, with his angels.

 

 

That is the manner in which Scripture presents the present structure of the earth’s government - a government in disarray, both within the ranks of the first and second provincial rulers.

 

 

The first provincial ruler, Satan, is not only presently holding the sceptre in a rebel fashion, but his kingdom can only be in disarray. Two thirds of the original contingent of angels, which God appointed in the beginning to rule with Satan (Rev. 11: 4), refused to go along with him in his vain efforts to exalt his throne. Thus, the remaining one-third can only fall far short of the number of angels which God had originally decreed necessary to properly rule the earth.

 

 

Man was created to rule in the stead of Satan and his angels. But man, because of his fall, finds himself occupying a position alien to [Page 19] that for which he was created. He can now only rule under the one he was created to replace.

 

 

Thus, certain things within the present structure of the earth’s government are completely out of place, and they will remain out of place until the end of the present [evil] age. At that time, Satan and his angels will be put down, Christ and His co-heirs will take the kingdom, and a God-ordained number of rulers will once again occupy positions of power and authority.

 

 

1. HEAVENLY PRINGES, EARTHLY PRINCES

 

 

The manner in which the earth is presently governed is clearly set forth in Daniel chapters four and ten. But for purposes of this part of the study, first note that which is revealed in Daniel chapter ten.

 

 

In this chapter, Daniel had been “mourning” (to walk with the head down, to lament) for three full weeks. At the end of this time, Daniel saw a vision (vv. 5-7); and this was followed by the appearance of a heavenly messenger to make known the things in the vision (vv. 10ff), which corresponded to the things within Daniel’s thoughts. The vision had to do with the things which would befall Daniel’s “people in the latter days” (v. 14), which concerned mainly the future day of Antichrist and the ultimate deliverance of the Jewish people (chs. 11, 12).

 

 

(By way of passing, note that Dan. 10: 14 makes it very clear that events in ch. 11 [also ch. 12] have to do with “the latter days,” not with events surrounding Antiochus Epiphanes, over 2,200 years ago as many attempt to teach. Rather, events in this chapter [beyond v. 41 have to do with the future day of Antichrist and the deliverance of the Jewish people at the time Antichrist is put down [11: 45-12: 3]. In this respect, Dan. 11: 24 corresponds to events prophesied in Dan. 8: 3-8, and events in Dan. 11: 5ff correspond to events in Dan. 8: 9ff.)

 

 

However, for purposes of the subject at hand - the government of the earth - another matter other than this fourth and final vision shown to Daniel needs to be considered. The heavenly messenger sent to Daniel, who made known things occurring during his three weeks of mourning (corresponding to things in the vision), had been dispatched at the very beginning of his time of mourning, but detained [Page 20] at a point enroute. He had been detained in the heavens for twenty-one days by “the prince of the kingdom of Persia” (10: 13).

 

 

This prince was so powerful that Michael, “one of the chief princes,” had to be dispatched from that part of the heavens where God dwells in order to effect the deliverance of this messenger. And during this time the heavenly messenger who had originally been sent to Daniel remained in the heavens with “the kings of Persia” (v. 13).

 

 

Comparing this verse with verse twenty, where “the prince of Persia” is again mentioned, along with “the prince of Greece,” an individual can arrive at only one conclusion. Earthly rulers in the human realm have counterparts within Satan’s kingdom in the heavenly realm - powerful angels ruling within a chain of command under Satan. And since “the heavens do rule” (Dan. 4: 26) - beginning with the most High God, with Satan still holding the earth’s sceptre, under God - it can only be further concluded that any rule by man would have to be under Satan and his angels (who rule from the heavens) within this chain of command. And man ruling after this fashion, because of his disqualification to assume the sceptre in Eden, continues to hold a position during the present time described as “a little lower than the angels” (Psa. 8: 4-6; Heb. 2: 7, 8 [note that these verses are set within a context having to do with governmental rule]).

 

 

(But, as will be shown, this rule from the heavens [a rule from Satan’s domain in the heavens through men upon the earth] has to do with the Gentile nations alone, not with Israel.)

 

 

Satan is the provincial ruler, the ruler over all the Gentile nations. Then under Satan, within his heavenly kingdom, there are lesser (but powerful) rulers governing various individual nations. Then under these angelic rulers, still within the heavenly kingdom, there is a further breakdown of powers and authorities (note “the kings of Persia,” which could only be a division of rulers under “the prince of Persia”). Then “the prince of Greece” is mentioned (in a prophetic frame of reference) because he ruled, from the heavens, over the earthly kingdom which would eventually succeed the kingdom of Babylon under the Medes and Persians.

 

 

As seen in Daniel chapter ten, among the Gentile nations on earth, [Page 21] all existing government is structured after a parallel fashion to an existing government in the heavens. There is a breakdown of powers under the earthly rulers which corresponds to a breakdown of powers under the heavenly rulers. And, accordingly, there is no such thing as Gentile rulers occupying positions of power and authority during the present time apart from occupying these positions directly under a breakdown of powers within the kingdom of Satan.

 

 

Thus, 1) God sovereignly rules over all, 2) Satan rules under God, 3) angels within the kingdom of Satan rule under him (occupying various positions of power and authority), and 4) man then rules under these angels (holding various counterpart/parallel positions on earth to those held by angels ruling under Satan in the heavens). And since both fallen angels and fallen men are involved in the government of the earth, numerous things would be done outside the will of God; but nothing would be done outside God’s sovereign control of matters.

 

 

Exactly to what extent earthly rulers are influenced and moved to act on the basis of decrees and determinations rendered by their counterparts in the heavens could only be open to speculation. There are fallen creatures ruling in the ranks of both, and Satan’s kingdom itself is presently in disarray (note again that two-thirds of the angels formerly ruling under Satan refused to have a part in his rebellion [Rev. 12: 4]). Suffice it to say though that possibly far more acts by world leaders than we may realize conceivably have their origin in prior decrees and determinations rendered by powerful fallen angels in Satan’s kingdom in the heavens.

 

 

But, there is one exception to the preceding type rulership among men on earth and angels in Satan’s kingdom. The nation of Israel is not to be “reckoned among the nations” (Num. 23: 9; cf. Deut. 7: 6). Scripture reveals that Michael is the “prince” among heavenly angelic beings over Israel (Dan. 10: 21), and Michael is not part of Satan’s present kingdom.

 

 

Thus, there is the major governmental distinction between Israel and the Gentile nations which would have allowed God to place Israel at the head of the nations within a theocracy during Old Testament days, out from under Satan’s governmental control. Israel could have ruled the nations, within a theocracy, apart from Satan’s kingdom [Page 22] (Ex. 19: 5, 6). But no Gentile nation has ever occupied or ever will occupy a governmental position of the nature occupied and held by Israel.

 

 

(Refer to the author’s book, GOD’S FIRSTBORN SONS, Chapter 2, for more information along the preceding lines.)

 

 

2. WATCHERS AND HOLY ONES

 

 

Daniel chapter four, along with showing God’s sovereign control over the entire matter, reveals another behind-the-scenes facet of the earth’s government. This chapter deals with “watchers” and “holy ones” who are operative within God’s government of the earth (vv. 17, 23-26, 32).

 

 

Nebuchadnezzar was the first king of Babylon within the framework of that period covered by the Book of Daniel - “the times of the Gentiles,” beginning with that period depicted by the head of gold on the image in chapter two and ending with that period depicted by the feet part of iron and part of clay on the same image (vv. 37-45). God had given Nebuchadnezzar a kingdom and had established him as the ruler. And, along with the kingdom and position of power, God had given him, strength, glory, majesty, and honour (cf. 2: 37, 38; 4: 17, 25, 32; 5: 18).

 

 

Nebuchadnezzar though looked upon the matter after a different fashion. Nebuchadnezzar looked at his kingdom, his position, and all that he possessed, and said,

 

“Is not this great Babylon, that I have built for the house of the kingdom by the might of my power, and for the honour of my majesty?” (4: 30).

 

 

And because Nebuchadnezzar had failed to recognize that “the most High ruleth in the kingdom of men, and giveth it to whomsoever he will” (vv. 17, 25, 32), all that he possessed was taken from him. He was suddenly stripped of his power, strength, glory, majesty, and honour; and he was driven into the field to eat grass as the oxen for seven years. And he was forced to remain in this position until he recognized the truth about the origin of all which he possessed as king of Babylon (4: 32ff).

 

 

The matter of Nebuchadnezzar’s attitude and his removal from [Page 23] power is where the “watchers” and “holy ones” enter into the picture. They are revealed as the ones who acted on the Lord’s behalf through watching affairs within the kingdom, issuing decrees, demanding that certain action be taken, and then themselves carrying out that action. And, acting after this fashion under what could only have been fixed laws, previously established by God, that which they did was looked upon as having been done by the Lord Himself (cf. 4: 17, 23-32; 5: 18-20).

 

 

Within this same light, since the watchers and holy ones were the individuals who actually removed Nebuchadnezzar from power and stripped him of all that he possessed, it would logically appear correct to view the watchers and holy ones as having also previously acted on the Lord’s behalf after this same fashion in establishing Nebuchadnezzar in his position of power, at the beginning. And, in this same respect, they were apparently also the ones who re-established Nebuchadnezzar in the kingdom after he had spent seven years in the fields, removed from the kingdom.

 

 

The Lord uses angels after this and related fashions in numerous facets of everything which He does. Note for example that the law was given through “the disposition of angelsthe direction of angels’ - God sovereignly acting through angels],” though the Lord Himself was present (Ex. 19: 3; 24: 16-18; Acts 7: 38, 53; Gal. 3: 19; Heb. 2: 2). Then note how angels will be very instrumental in bringing matters to pass during the coming seven-year Tribulation, as revealed in the Book of Revelation (cf. 7: 1; 8: 2; 10: 1; 14: 6; 15: 1; 16: 1; 17: 1; 18: 1; 19: 14). And, during the present time, angels are very instrumental in the Holy Spirit’s mission to acquire a bride for God’s Son, though the Holy Spirit Himself is present (cf. Heb. 1: 13, 14; Rev. 2: 1, 8, 12, 18; 3: 1, 7, 14).

 

 

Events surrounding the destruction of the cities of the plain during Abraham’s day provide an example of activity within the angelic world similar to that seen in Daniel chapter four. In this case a report had been presented to the Lord concerning activity in the cities of the plain; and the Lord, in the company of two angels, went down to see for Himself whether or not they had done “altogether according to the cry of it.” But even going down to see for Himself (though, in His omniscience, God already knew everything about that which He had come down to see), the two accompanying angels were [Page 24] the ones who actually went on down into Sodom to see and act on the Lord’s behalf. The Lord remained with Abraham in the high country, removed from the cities in the plain (Gen. 18: 20-22; 19: 1ff).

 

 

The two angels, acting on the Lord’s behalf after this fashion (acting under fixed laws, previously established by God), conducted matters after such a manner that the Lord Himself was looked upon as the One doing these things. For example, the two angels brought about the destruction of the cities of the plain, but the Lord Himself was said to be the One Who destroyed these cities (Gen. 19: 13, 24).

 

 

And that’s the fashion after which the present government of the earth has been established and is being carried out. God is sovereign, and He so rules. Nothing escapes His attention; nor is anything done apart from His sovereign control of matters. He is the One Who establishes and removes rulers, along with bestowing upon these rulers all which they possess; and He carries out all things within His kingdom through angels who hold various assigned positions and act on His behalf.

 

 

(Also note man acting in a similar capacity [1 Sam. 15: 1, 17], though angels undoubtedly had a prior part in the matter.)

 

 

Satan and his angels are still in power (acting on the Lord’s behalf, though in a rebel capacity) and will remain in this position until the end of the Tribulation. And man throughout the Gentile nations, occupying positions of power and authority today, must, of necessity, occupy these positions directly under Satan and his angels.

 

 

There is no alternate form under which any present government among the Gentiles nations canfind itself established today.

 

 

3. EARTHLY RULERS

 

 

All rulers on earth today are like Nebuchadnezzar in the sense that they have received everything which they possess from the Lord (their positions of power, glory, honour, etc.). The Lord is the One Who, through the direction of angels, placed them in their respective positions of power and bestowed upon them all which they possess. And, in this capacity, they are as Cyrus, King of Persia during Daniel’s day, or Saul, King of Israel during David’s day - “the Lord’s anointed” [Page 25] (cf. 1 Sam. 15: 17; Isa. 45: 1).

 

 

And within a Scriptural framework, it is very wrong to do that which is being done on a massive scale today - bring accusations against the Lord’s anointed. Such accusations can only reflect, after a negative fashion, upon the Lord Himself, the One previously placing these individuals in their respective positions.

 

 

Note that those under Moses who rebelled against his Divinely appointed leadership were, in reality, rebelling against the One Who appointed him. They were rebelling against God Himself (cf. Num. 14: 2, 9).

 

 

This is why David had such respect for the Lord’s anointed, Saul, even though Saul was a rebel king (typifying Satan within the overall framework of the type). Saul had been placed in his position by God, and this had to be recognized and dealt with accordingly (1 Sam. 15: 1, 17). David refused to stretch forth his hand against Saul during the time he was in exile (1 Sam. 24: 6). Then he later had one of his men slay the Amalekite who had previously slain Saul; and this was for a reason which went far beyond God’s command to slay Amalek and all that he had (cf. Deut. 25: 17-19; 1 Sam. 15: 3). This particular Amalekite had “slain the Lord’s anointed” (cf. 1 Sam. 26: 9-11; 31: 3-6; 2 Sam. 1: 14-16).

 

 

Even Michael, when contending with Satan about the body of Moses, wouldn’t bring “a railing accusation” against him for the simple reason that Satan was (and remains today) the Lord’s anointed. Michael simply said, “The Lord rebuke thee” (cf. Ezek. 28: 14; Jude 9).

 

 

There was a case during David’s day where a man cursed the Lord’s anointed and cast stones at him. And the question was later asked, “Shall not Shimei [the guilty party] be put to death for this ... ?” (2 Sam. 16: 5-7; 19: 21). Though Shimei received mercy at the hands of David (19: 22, 23), his previous actions had been such that the death penalty was brought into consideration.

 

 

4. CHRISTIANS AND POLITICS

 

 

All of the preceding, for Christians, insofar as earthly rulers are concerned, should really be neither here nor there. Christians really should not find themselves involved in the politics of this present world system after any fashion, for Scripture clearly reveals that their [Page 26] political involvement with the government of the earth lies in an entirely different realm.

 

 

Scripture states,

 

 

“For our conversation is in heaven [lit., ‘presently exists in (the) heavens’]; from whence we also look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ” (Phil. 3: 20).

 

 

The word, “conversation,” is a translation of the Greek word, politeuma, and could be better translated in the English text as “citizenship” or “commonwealth.” The word, politeuma, is a form of the Greek word from which we derive our English word “politics” (from politikos). Accordingly, the thought within “citizenship” or “commonwealth” as a translation of politeuma would have to do with “politics.” That stated in the Greek text of this verse, in this respect, could perhaps best be conveyed in English by translating, “For our political sphere of activity presently exists in the heavens...”

 

 

This heavenly political sphere of activity during the present time would centre itself around the heavenly warfare (Eph. 6: 10ff), with a view to Christ’s return and the establishment of His [messianic and millennial] kingdom. Satan and his angels still occupy their appointed positions in the heavens. Thus, Christians cannot rule from a heavenly sphere today.

 

 

The objective though is to overcome in the present warfare in view of one day being accorded a position in the kingdom of the heavens after Christ takes the kingdom and Satan and his angels have been put down. In this respect, Christ is to replace Satan, and Christians are to replace the incumbent rulers presently holding positions of power under Satan (cf. 2 Sam. 1: 10; 2: 4; 5: 3; Dan. 7: 13, 14; Matt. 20: 23; Rev. 2: 26, 27; 3: 21; 11: 15; 19: 11ff).

 

 

(Refer to the Appendix for additional information concerning Christ replacing Satan and Christians replacing angels ruling under Satan in the coming kingdom.)

 

 

With these things in mind, it’s a simple matter to understand how a Christian would be completely out of place involving himself in the political activities of this present world system. His present political sphere of activity is in an entirely different realm - both as to time and [Page 27] place. His outlook, politically, is to be heavenly and future, not earthly and present. It is to encompass the same time and place that the goal of the race in which he is presently involved lies. And while running this race he is not to look around; rather he is to keep his eyes fixed on the goal and not be distracted by the things of this present world system (Heb. 12: 1, 2).

 

 

Should a [regenerate] Christian though choose to involve himself within the present system, he would only be involving himself in a system lying under the governing control of the god of this age. And should he aspire to hold a political office in the present system, he would only be seeking to hold a position of power under a fallen angel in the kingdom of Satan.

 

 

It would be impossible for a [regenerate] Christian to involve himself in the present world system and, at the same time, keep his eyes fixed on the goal - [i.e., fixed upon Christ’s promised ‘inheritance’ (see Ps. 2: 8. Cf. Josh. 17: 4; Ps. 33: 12; Col. 1: 12; 3: 24, R. V.)] - out ahead. These two realms of involvement are completely incongruous; they are totally at odds with one another.

 

 

“No man that warreth entangleth himself with the affairs of this life; that he may please him who hath chosen him to be a soldier.

 

 

And if a man also strive for masteries, yet is he not crowned, except he strive lawfully” (2 Tim. 2: 4, 5).

 

 

In short, this is not the day in which Christians are to have a part in the governmental affairs of the earth. That day for them, as it does for Christ, lies in the future (cf. 1 Cor. 4: 1-8).

 

 

FUTURE GOVERNMENT OF THE EARTH

 

 

The future government of the earth is destined to be administered by man. Man was brought into existence for this purpose, and, according to Rom. 11: 29, “the gifts and calling of God are without repentancewithout a change of mind’].” God will not change His mind concerning the reason He called man into existence.

 

 

The world to come will not be ruled by angels, but by man (Heb. 2: 5). This is really the message of the whole of Scripture. This is the manner in which Scripture both opens and closes; and the central reason for the fall and purpose surrounding redemption must be understood within this same framework.

 

[Page 28]

But, prior to the purpose for redemption being realized, Satan is going to engineer his final thrust to thwart God’s plans and purposes. He is going to bring his man upon the scene, the seed of the serpent - Antichrist (Gen. 3: 15). We’re told though, in this same section of Scripture, at the very beginning, 6,000 years before it actually occurs, that the Seed of the woman will have the final word in the matter. He will be the Victor in that day (cf. Gen. 3: 15; Dan. 7: 11; 11: 36-45; Rev. 19: 11ff), and then God’s purpose for bringing man into existence will begin to be realized.

 

 

1. DAY OF ANTICHRIST

 

 

Satan is to one day give “his power, and his seatthrone’], and great authority” to the final ruler of the kingdom of Babylon (Rev. 13: 2). This is the power, position, and authority which was given unto him, by God, in the beginning; and he can, in turn, give it “to whomsoever” he wishes (Ezek. 28: 14; Luke 4: 5, 6), which is exactly what he will do in the middle of the coming Tribulation.

 

 

Satan will give unto Antichrist the same thing which he offered to Christ in the temptation account (Luke 4: 5, 6). Antichrist, unlike Christ, will accept the offer, and this man will then rule the earth in this capacity for three and one-half years, resulting in troublous times of such a nature that no parallel will have existed throughout man’s past 6,000-year history. Scripture states,

 

 

“For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.

 

 

And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect’s sake, those days shall be shortened” (Matt. 24: 21, 22a).

 

 

The elect is a reference to “Israel.” For Israel’s sake, those days will be shortened.* Then, through Christ’s return at the end of this period, God will bring an end to the earth’s present existing governmental system. The Times of the Gentiles will be brought to an end by a final and fatal blow at the centre of Gentile world power - the Stone smiting the image at its feet, the final form of Gentile world power (Dan. 2: 34, 35, 44, 45). Babylon will be destroyed, Antichrist and those [Page 29] ruling with him will be put down, and Satan will be bound in the abyss for 1,000 years (Rev. 18: 1 - 20: 2). “Man’s Day” will, through this sequence of events, be brought to a close; and then Christ and His co-heirs will move in and take over the government.

 

[* NOTE: There are multitudes of regenerate believers who are amongst ‘the elect’ of God - (relative to being adopted into His redeemed family) - but they may not be allowed to ‘inherit’ His coming Kingdom! See 1 Cor. 6: 9; Eph. 5: 5. Cf. Heb. 12: 14-17, R.V..

 

Others, who rightly believe and teach a Pre-Tribulation rapture - (which must occur sometime before the Antichrist breaks his covenant of peace with the nation of Israel) - but assume all Christians will be ‘accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass’ (Luke 21: 36, A.V.), - on the basis of their regeneration alone!!!

 

If this popular theory is correct, it most certainly does nothing to encourage the Lord’s redeemed people in ‘holy’ and ‘righteous’ living!: and, furthermore, it assumes God will turn a blind eye to any disobedience, unfaithfulness, and ultimate apostasy by His redeemed people! Scripture is filled with Divine threats against the Christian’s disobedience and ‘wilful’ sin (Heb. 10: 26-30); but multitudes of God’s redeemed people today appear to ignore His accountability truths and conditional promises! but the Righteous Judge will not change (Malachi 3: 6); or act contrary to His Word; or allow any  of His disobedient and unrepentant people to escape the dreaded forty-two-month period of persecutions under the coming Antichrist!]

 

 

2. DAY OF CHRIST

 

 

In that coming day when Christ and His co-heirs ascend the throne together and jointly exercise power over the earth, Israel will have been re-established back in her proper place at the head of the nations. And man, in that day, will rule both from the heavens and on the earth.

 

 

The Church [of the firstborn] will be established as the ruling nation in the heavens, exercising power with Christ from His Own throne (cf. Matt. 21: 43; 1 Peter 2: 9, 10; Rev. 3: 21); and Israel will be established as the ruling nation on earth, with Christ reigning from David’s throne in the nation’s midst (cf. Joel 2: 27-32; Luke 1: 31-33). Rulership will emanate from Jerusalem above and from Jerusalem below, through the seed of Abraham (Christ, Israel, and the Church). And the Gentile nations will, in turn, be blessed through the seed of Abraham, fulfilling verses such as Gen. 12: 3; 22: 17, 18.

 

 

That will be the day in which man will come into a full realization of his very existence. And when that future day is ushered in, there will be a 1,000-year period, to be followed by an eternity of endless ages, in which man will occupy positions in God’s government over not only this earth but ultimately out in the universe as well.

 

 

*       *       *

 

[Page 31]

3

 

From the Heavens Over the Earth

 

 

These great beasts, which are four, are four kings, which shall arise out of the earth.

 

 

But the saints of the most High [lit., ‘the saints of the high places’] shall take the kingdom, and possess the kingdom forever, even forever and ever (Dan. 7: 17, 18).

 

 

The final form of the kingdom of Babylon as it will exist under its last king, Antichrist, will be a conglomerate of the whole of the kingdom as it is seen in the Book of Daniel. When the Stone strikes the image at its feet (feet “part of iron, and part of clay,” describing the kingdom in its last days under Antichrist), Scripture states that the Stone will break in pieces together “the iron, the clay, the brass, the silver, and the gold [depicting the kingdom in its final form - a composite form of the whole of the kingdom, viewed from the days of Antichrist back to the days of Nebuchadnezzar]” (Dan. 2: 32-35, 44, 45).

 

 

The Stone striking the image at its feet forms the Biblical description of Babylon’s prophesied destruction. Throughout the Times of the Gentiles, Babylon has never been destroyed. It has been conquered several times and has faded into obscurity, but it has never been destroyed.

 

 

And Babylon must not only be destroyed, but, according to the prophecies in Daniel, it must be destroyed at a particular time and after a particular fashion. It must be destroyed at the end of the Times of the Gentiles (actually, the destruction of Babylon is the event which will [Page 32] mark the end the Times of the Gentiles, for Gentile world power will be centered in Babylon at that time), and it must be destroyed after such a fashion that the kingdom depicted by the entire image - from the head of gold to the feet part of iron and part of clay, the kingdom existing from the days of Nebuchadnezzar to the days of Antichrist - will be destroyed at the same time, never to rise again. This is what is meant by the iron, clay, brass, silver, and gold being “broken to pieces together,” becoming like “the chaff of the summer threshing floors,” and being carried away by “the wind” (Dan. 2: 34, 35).

 

 

Thus, since the kingdom depicted by a part of the image has yet to appear (that part which is to be smitten), the composite form which the kingdom must take at the time of its destruction can only await the re-emergence of Babylon in that future day. The image must be complete at the time of its destruction. This is something which could not have occurred at any point in history; nor can it occur today. It can occur only during the future days of Antichrist, during the days of the last king of Babylon.

 

 

And, remaining within this same line of thought, one can easily understand what is meant in Dan. 7: 4-6, 11, 12 by the first three great beasts (likened to “a lion,” “a bear,” and “a leopard”) having their dominion “taken away” but their lives “prolonged for a season and time.” These beasts depict the kingdom as it existed from the days of Nebuchadnezzar to the days of Alexander the Great; and these three segments of the kingdom, though they have long since faded into obscurity, didn’t die. Rather, they are presented in the Book of Daniel as living down through time, and they are further presented in the book as being alive as an integral part of the final form during the days of Antichrist.

 

 

All of the great beasts in Dan. 7: 4-7 (a “beast” in this section of Scripture represents a form of the kingdom of Babylon [7: 17, 23]) will be present together - comprising the final form of the Babylonian kingdom - and they will be destroyed together.

 

 

Note the first three great beasts in verse twelve in this respect. Their dominion was taken away (in history, not at the time of events in the previous verse, v. 11), but they continued to live, awaiting the days of Antichrist and the destruction of Babylon in its final form (occurring in v. 11).

 

[Page 33]

Thus, the death (destruction) of the first three great beasts (v. 12) occurs at the same time as the death (destruction) of the fourth great beast - when the Stone strikes the image at its feet and breaks in pieces together “the iron, the clay [fourth beast], the brass [third beast], the silver [second beast], and the gold [first beast]” (v. 11; cf. Dan. 2: 34, 35, 44, 45). Verse twelve simply provides additional information to help explain verse eleven and the preceding vision of the four great beasts, and these verses must be understood in the light of that which had previously been revealed about the image in chapter two.

 

 

Then, “the kingdom of the world [one world kingdom, with its governmental centre in Babylon]” will become “the kingdom of our Lord, and of his Christ [a theocracy, with its governmental centre in Jerusalem - Jerusalem above and Jerusalem below]” (Rev. 11: 15, ASV). The kingdom will have previously been given to the Son by the Father (Dan. 7: 13, 14; cf. Psa. 2: 6-9); and the Son, at the time of His return, will then take possession of the kingdom, suddenly and swiftly, through force.

 

 

The Stone “cut out of the mountain without hands” will smite the image at a time when the kingdom will have reached its zenith of world power (note that for the first time in Babylon’s history all four parts of the image will be living together); and in this manner, Gentile world power will suddenly and swiftly be brought to an end (Dan. 2: 34, 35, 44, 45; 7: 11, 23-26; cf. Rev. 19: 11-21).

 

 

(For additional information concerning that depicted by the image in Daniel chapter two and the four great beasts in Daniel chapter seven, refer to the author’s book, THE TIME OF JACOB’S TROUBLE, Chapter 3.

 

Also, note Theonomy - the “Kingdom Now” theology - with particularly respect to the prophecies in Daniel. Theonomy [very prevalent thought in certain segments of Christendom today, especially among those in Charismatic circles] teaches that the Church is to gradually take over the kingdoms of this world, through present spiritual-political means, etc. This is looked upon in the same sense as the leaven permeating the meal, “till the whole was leavened,” in Matt. 13: 33 - a parable often misunderstood and used to depict the spread of that which is “good” rather than that which is “evil,” seeking, through this means, to give credence to false ideologies of this nature. And, viewing matters along these lines, would, correspondingly, form a [Page 34] major reason for Christians to involve themselves in the political structure of the present world system under Satan.

 

Theonomy is simply a re-emergence of the old postmillennial ideology [restructured for the times, etc.], prevalent in Christendom during pre-WWII days. And it is no more true in its restructured form today than it was in its original form. According to Scripture, the Church can have no part - nor should the Church even seek to have a part - in bringing to pass the kingdoms of the present world system being controlled and governed by the Lord at the time of His return.

 

Rather, nothing can be done along the lines of a change in administration until that day when there is once again one world kingdom with its governmental centre located in Babylon. It will be then, not before, that the Stone will strike the image at its feet; it will be then, not before, that “the kingdom of the world” will become “the kingdom of our Lord, and of His Christ” [Dan. 2: 34, 35, 44, 45; Rev. 11: 15]; and it will be then, not before, that “the kingdom and dominion, and the greatness of the kingdom under the whole heaven, shall be given to the people of the saints of the most High [lit., ‘the saints of the high places’ (i.e., ‘heavenly places’)]...” [Dan. 7: 23-27; Cf. v. 18].

 

Also, in this same respect, as previously seen, “the times of the Gentiles” will end with the Stone striking the image at its feet, not before. Thus, this period, which began with Babylon under Nebuchadnezzar, cannot end before Babylon appears in its final form under Antichrist.

 

Some have sought to teach that “the times of the Gentiles” came to an end when the Jews retook the old city of Jerusalem in the 1967 Six-Day War, allowing them to once again have access to the Temple Mount, with a view to rebuilding the temple. However, the Jews having access to or coming into possession of the Temple Mount has nothing to do with the matter. They possessed this Mount in history during the Times of the Gentiles [from about 536 B.C. to 70 A.D.], and they will possess it once again in the immediate future during the Times of the Gentiles [during the first part of the Tribulation, when the Jewish people rebuild their temple]. Aside from that, both Luke 21: 24 and Rev. 11: 2 specifically place the termination of the Times of the Gentiles at the end of the Tribulation, which is when Babylon will be destroyed.)

 

 

SAINTS OF THE HIGH PLACES

 

 

The “kingdom of the heavens” in Matthew’s gospel, or “heavenly [Page 35] places” in Ephesians, or a “heavenly calling” in Hebrews, do not form companion references peculiar to the New Testament. Rather, the overall thought of man occupying heavenly positions in the kingdom, as opposed to earthly positions, was previously set forth different places in the Old Testament, beginning in Genesis (cf. Gen. 14: 18, 19; 15: 5; 22: 17, 18).

 

 

Abraham, five centuries prior to the time of any written revelation understood this matter and looked toward a calling beyond the earthly, to a heavenly (Heb. 11: 8-16). And numerous other Old Testament saints living at different times following Abraham did exactly the same thing. They looked beyond the earthly to the heavenly as well (Heb. 11: 32-40).

 

 

Thus, it is nothing new in either Old or New Testament revelation when one finds a reference to saints being placed in positions of power and authority in the heavens following the overthrow of this present world system, as in the Book of Daniel, Matthew’s gospel, Ephesians, or Hebrews. This is a teaching which has its origin in Genesis.

 

 

Satan and his angels presently rule from the heavens over the earth, and Christ with His co-heirs will one day replace the incumbent governmental powers and rule from the same location, from the heavens. Christ will replace Satan, and Christians will replace the angels ruling under Satan. The whole matter is really set forth in Scripture after that simple of a fashion.

 

 

1. ISRAEL IN THE OLD TE5TAMENT

 

 

Two millenniums following Adam’s fall, God called one man out of the human race to be the instrument through whom His plans and purposes for having brought man into existence would ultimately be realized. God called Abraham out from Ur of the Chaldees. And through the nation which would emanate from the loins of Abraham through Isaac and Jacob, God was going to accomplish three things: a) provide man with a Redeemer, b) provide man with a written revelation, revealing His plans and purposes, and c) ultimately place man in the position for which he had been created.

 

 

The first two of these three purposes have been realized, but the latter awaits fulfilment. It awaits that day in the immediate future when Babylon re-emerges as the centre of Gentile world power, with [Page 36] the last king of Babylon present.

 

 

In the Old Testament, Israel was made the repository for both earthly and heavenly blessings. When viewing Scriptures such as Gen. 14: 18, 19; 15: 5; 22: 17, 18; Dan. 7: 18-27, Israel alone was in view. And the same would be true in Matt. 8: 11, 12 where Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are seen, in that future day, in the kingdom of the heavens. Accordingly, those cast into the darkness outside at this time would have to be looked upon as Israelites (i.e., saved individuals who could have been in the kingdom but, because of unfaithfulness, were cast without [note that the subject matter in this passage has to do with entrance into or exclusion from the heavenly sphere of the kingdom, not with matters surrounding eternal salvation or eternal damnation]).

 

 

There was no [Gentile] Church at this time. Aside from that fact, all spiritual promises and blessings must be realized through, and only through, the seed of Abraham. Thus, only Israel could possibly have been in view.

 

 

(And this will explain a central reason why Christ, when commissioning His twelve disciples to carry the message concerning the kingdom of the heavens to Israel, specifically told them, “Go not into the way of the Gentiles...” [Matt. 10: 5-8]. Israel alone was the repository for the promises and blessings associated with the proffered kingdom of the heavens.

 

The Gentiles were “aliens from the commonwealth of Israel...” [Eph. 2: 12]. “Commonwealth” in this passage is a translation of the Creek word politeia, a cognate form of politeuma, having to do with one’s “political sphere of activity” [refer to the section, “Christians and Politics,” Chapter 2, pp. 25-27].)

 

 

Since Israel alone was in view after this fashion, how can the Church later fit into certain Old Testament promises (or passages such as Matt. 8: 11, 12), which it does? And, since the Church does later fit into certain promises and blessings given to Abraham and his descendants through Isaac and Jacob (or certain passages in the gospel accounts) - which had to do with Israel alone at the time they were given - where does this presently leave Israel?

 

 

Has the Church supplanted Israel, leaving Israel with nothing? Has God finished, is God through, with Israel within His plans and purposes in relation to man?

 

[Page 37]

Some understand matters after the preceding fashion, but Scripture teaches something entirely different. God is no more through with Israel today than He was when certain promises were made to Abraham at the time he was called out of Ur of the Chaldees, four millenniums ago. Israel, as in Moses’ day, is still God’s firstborn sonsonship” implies rulership), and Israel will yet occupy her firstborn status in relation to the nations.

 

 

(This is what was in view when God announced Israel’s firstborn status in Ex. 4: 22, 23 [cf. Ex. 19: 5, 6], at the time Israel was called out of Egypt. And God will yet deal with Israel after the fashion set forth in Exodus, establishing Israel at the head of the nations following Israel’s removal from a worldwide dispersion at the time of Christ’s return [typified by the nation’s removal from Egypt at the time of Moses’ return; cf. Ex. 2: 23-25; 3: 10; 12: 40, 41; Deut. 30: 1-3; Isa. 2: 1-5; Jer. 31: 31-34])

 

 

Paul, in Rom. 11: 1, 2, raised the issue concerning Israel’s present and future status; and he responded after a fashion which leaves no room for questions along these lines:

 

 

“I say then, Hath God cast away his people? God forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.

 

 

God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew...”

 

 

The words, “God forbid,” are a translation of a Greek negative appearing with a verb in the optative mood, which is a very rare mood in the Greek New Testament. Paul used this expression fourteen of the fifteen times in which it appears in the New Testament, and he used it mainly to express his abhorrence to an inference which he had raised (cf. Rom. 3: 4, 6, 31; Gal. 2: 17; 3: 21; 6: 14).

 

 

The inference in Rom. 11: 1 had to do with God casting Israel aside, which was declared to be something completely abhorrent to Paul’s way of thinking. Paul, through the use of the optative mood, declared that such an act, in reality, was “impossible” - i.e., it was “impossible” for God to cast away His people, Israel.

 

 

Then, later in the same chapter, in keeping with what he had declared concerning Israel, he reviewed the present status and future history of Israel (vv. 17-29). And neither Israel’s present status nor [Page 38] future history had anything to do with a nation removed from God’s plans and purposes. Rather, exactly the opposite was true. Paul’s portrayal of Israel set forth a nation - separate from the other nations of the earth - which had been, presently remains, and always will be an integral part of God’s plans and purposes.

 

 

2. CHRISTIANS IN THE NEW TESTAMENT

 

 

But, if God already had a nation through which His plans and purposes could be realized, why call into existence a new entity - the [Gentile] Church - through which at least a part of His plans and purposes would, as well, be realized? Why did God not just simply accomplish the entire matter through the lineal descendants of Abraham, leaving matters, in this respect, as they had stood for the preceding two millenniums?

 

 

The answer is derived from that which Israel did at Christ’s first coming, resulting in reciprocal action on Christ’s part. Israel, as a nation, rejected the proffered kingdom of the heavens. And, not only did the Jewish people reject the message, but they rejected the Messenger as well, ultimately crucifying Him.

 

 

The nation’s rejection of the kingdom of the heavens resulted in this facet of the kingdom (the heavenly promises and blessings) being taken from Israel, with a new entity - the [Gentile] Church - then being called into existence to be the recipient of that which Israel had rejected.

 

 

Following the offer and subsequent rejection of the kingdom of the heavens, with the events of Calvary only several days away, Christ responded to that which Israel had done (and was about to climax at Calvary) through removing the nation from the position it held relative to heavenly promises and blessings. At that time, concluding a parable dealing with the Householder and His vineyard (Matt. 21: 33-39) - which had to do with matters surrounding Christ and Israel - Christ allowed the religious leaders in Israel the opportunity to seal their own fate in this respect.

 

 

Christ asked,

 

 

“When the Lord therefore of the vineyard cometh, what will he do unto those husbandmen [the Jews, those to whom He was speaking, the ones who had rejected the Householder’s Son and were about to cast [Page 39] Him out of the vineyard and slay Him]?”

 

 

And these Jewish religious leaders, not yet realizing that He was speaking about them and the nation at large, responded,

 

 

“He will miserably destroy those wicked men, and will let out his vineyard unto other husbandmen, which shall render him the fruits in their seasons” (vv. 40, 41; cf. v. 45).

 

 

It was then that Christ drew from the Old Testament Scriptures, identifying Himself as the Chief Corner Stone, the One Whom the nation had rejected and was about to cast out of the vineyard and slay (v. 42; cf. Psa. 118: 22, 23). And He then made the announcement concerning the proffered kingdom being taken from Israel, in complete keeping with that which the Jewish religious leaders had already stated:

 

 

“Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God [referring to that facet of the kingdom of God which had been offered, the heavenly portion of the kingdom] shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof” (v. 43).

 

 

Then the Church, an entirely new entity, whose future existence had been previously announced (Matt. 16: 18), was shortly thereafter called into existence for the express purpose of being that “nation bringing forth the fruits thereof” (1 Peter 2: 9, 10). And since all spiritual blessings and promises must flow through Abraham and his progeny (Gen. 12: 1-3; 22: 17, 18), the Church [of the firstborn], in order to be the “nation” spoken of in Matt. 21: 43 and 1 Peter 2: 9, must be identified with Abraham.

 

 

This is accomplished through the Christians’ positional standing “in Christ.” Christ is Abraham’s Seed, and Christians, through their positional standing “in Christ,” are likewise “Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise” (Gal. 3: 16, 29).

 

 

Thus, during the coming age, in relation to the government of the earth and in line with Gen. 22: 17, 18, the Seed of Abraham will occupy positions in both heavenly and earthly places, though the vast majority of the numerous individuals occupying heavenly places in the kingdom will not be lineal descendants of Abraham through Isaac and Jacob. [Page 40] Rather, they will have become “Abraham’s seed” through their positional standing “in Christ

 

 

Governmental rule will emanate from both Jerusalem above and Jerusalem below. Christ with His “companions,” His “co-heirs,” will rule from His Own throne in Jerusalem above (the New Jerusalem, which will apparently be a satellite city of the earth at this time); and Christ Himself will also rule from David’s throne in the midst of Israel in Jerusalem below (Jerusalem in the earthly land covenanted to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob).

 

 

(In the preceding respect, Christ will have a dual reign at this time - both from His Own throne in the heavens and from David’s throne on the earth. But neither Israel nor the Church will occupy a dual status of this nature. Israel - [as a chosen nation] - will be placed at the head of the nations on the earth, and the [resurrected (see Luke 20: 36, R.V.)] Church will rule from the heavens over the earth [which will include all nations, even Israel; cf. Matt. 19: 28; Rev. 2: 26, 27; 3: 21])

 

 

Since the Church has become the repository for the heavenly promises and blessings originally held by Israel, sections of Old Testament Scripture such as Abraham’s seed likened to “the stars of the heaven” (Gen. 22: 17, 18) or “the saints of the most Highsaints of the high places’ (‘heavenly places’)]” (Dan. 7: 18, 22, 25, 27) would today relate to the Church - [of the firstborn]. This would also be true concerning sections in the gospel accounts having to do with the kingdom of the heavens, such as entrance into the kingdom in Matt. 7: 13, 14, 21-23; 8: 11, 12.

 

 

But all of this has nothing to do with [the nation of] Israel’s earthly promises and blessings. These have not been and can never be taken from Israel. And during the coming age, following Israel’s repentance, conversion, and restoration to the land, that which was promised through Abraham relative to the nation’s earthly calling will be realized.

 

 

(But what about those Old Testament saints who looked toward heavenly promises and blessings and died in the faith prior to Christ’s announcement in Matt. 21: 43? Scripture clearly reveals that the removal of this facet of the kingdom from Israel’s possession at Christ’s first coming cannot make null and void any previous acceptance by individual Jews of that which God had promised [cf. Matt. 8: 11, 12; Heb. 11: 13-16, 39, 40]. Christ’s announcement in Matt. 21: 43 though does forever do away [Page 41] with Israel as a nation occupying such a position, continuing to be the repository for these heavenly promises and blessings.

 

Following Christ’s announcement to Israel concerning the kingdom, only one way has existed for Jews to come into a realization of heavenly promises and blessings. They must become a part of the one new man “in Christ” through faith in Israel’s Messiah, the Lord Jesus Christ. Doing this, they relinquish their national identity and earthly calling, becoming “fellow-heirs” with believing Gentiles, who have also relinquished their national identity [but, unlike Jews, had no calling to relinquish (Eph. 2: 12)]. And, “in Christ,” where “there is neither Jew nor Greek [Gentile],” these both, together - as one new man - become partakers of a higher calling, a “heavenly calling” [Gal. 3: 26-29; Eph. 2: 13-15; 3: 1-6; Heb. 3: 1].)

 

 

THE MILLENNIUM AND BEYOND

 

 

According to Dan. 7: 18, 22, 27, the day is coming when “the saints of the most Highsaints of the high places’ (‘heavenly places’)]” are going to take and possess the - [promised (Ps. 2: 8) Millennial and Messianic] - kingdom. It will be exactly the same kingdom which presently exists under Satan - a governed province within God’s universal kingdom. That’s why Scripture states,

 

 

“The kingdom of the world [the present existing kingdom, under Satan] is become the kingdom of our Lord, and of his Christ [the same kingdom, but under a new administration]…” (Rev. 11: 15, ASV).

 

 

In the type, in the Books of 1, 2 Samuel, when Saul was finally put down and David with his faithful men moved in and took over the government, they took and possessed the same kingdom which had previously existed under Saul. It was the kingdom of Israel. The change was in the administration of the kingdom, not in the kingdom itself.

 

 

(Refer to the Appendix for additional information concerning the typology seen in the Books of 1, 2 Samuel.)

 

 

And, as seen in the typology of the Books of 1, 2 Samuel, so will it be in the antitype. When Christ and His co-heirs move in and take over the government, they will rule the same kingdom which Satan and his angels previously ruled. They will rule the one province in the [Page 42] kingdom of God into which chaos entered, and they will rule this province for a specified period of time - for 1,000 years - in order to effect a complete restoration of order in this one part of God’s universal kingdom.

 

 

This is the matter dealt with in 1 Cor. 15: 24-28:

 

 

“Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power.

 

 

For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet.

 

 

The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.

 

 

For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him.

 

 

And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all

 

 

At the beginning of the Millennium, the curse will be lifted (with the creation restored to its condition preceding the fall), and there will be literally millions of individuals (Jews and Gentiles alike [both saved and unsaved among the Gentiles]) entering the earthly sphere of the kingdom ruled by Christ and His co-heirs, with Israel placed at the head of the nations on earth [cf. Isa. 11: 6-9; 35: 1ff, Acts 3: 19-21]). Israel will provide the evangels to carry God’s message to the ends of the earth during this period; and it will require 1,000 years of a righteous rule, “with a rod of iron,” to bring about complete order out of chaos.

 

 

That is, when Christ returns, Gentile world power will be destroyed, suddenly, swiftly, and completely, with Satan and his angels being correspondingly put down after the same fashion. Satan will be bound and cast into the abyss. Then the physical creation will be restored, Israel will be saved and restored to the land at the head of the nations on earth, Christians (previously shown qualified at the judgment seat) will be positioned “in heavenly places” in view of their impending rule as co-heirs with Christ, and the Gentiles surviving the Tribulation will then form the nations entering the kingdom on earth (cf. Matt. 24: 13, 14, 31; 25: 20-23; Rev. 20: 1-3).

 

[Page 43]

These things will apparently occur within the scope of a seventy-five-day period which will exist between the end of the Tribulation and the beginning of the Millennium (Dan. 12: 11, 12); but even with conditions as such, God is still going to take 1,000 years beyond that point to bring complete order out of chaos.

 

 

(Matthew 25: 31-46 comprises a section of the Olivet Discourse often used attempting to show that only saved individuals will populate the earth at the beginning of the millennium. Those following this line of thought teach that this section has to do with a judgment of all living Gentiles surviving the Tribulation, both saved and unsaved, with the saved being allowed to enter into the kingdom and the unsaved being cast into the lake of fire.

 

A teaching of this nature has its sole basis in a misunderstanding of this section of Scripture. By its own internal evidence, eternal salvation or damnation is not the subject matter in Matt. 25: 31-46. The subject at hand has to do with realizing or not realizing an inheritance in the kingdom, not with eternal verifies [v. 34]).

 

And, in keeping with the preceding, the Creek word aionios, translated “everlasting” and “eternal” in vv. 41, 46 would, in the light of v, 34, have to be understood as “age-lasting,” not “eternal” as it has been translated in most versions of Scripture.

 

Neither the Hebrew of the O.T. nor the Greek of the N.T. contains a word for “eternalOlam is the word translated “eternal,” “everlasting,” or “perpetual” in English translations of the O.T., and aion [a noun] or aionios [the adjective form of aion] are the words translated “eternal” or “everlasting” in the N.T. [aidios, an older form of aionios, used only two times and meaning exactly the same as aionios, is the only exception (Rom. 1: 20 and Jude 6)].

 

Olam, aion, and aionios all have to do with “a long period of time,” which, if the context permits, can refer to “eternity” [e.g., the Aionios God in Rom. 16: 26]. But the words standing alone, apart from a context, cannot be understood as “eternal.” Context is the all-important factor to ascertain the length of time in view when these words are used.

 

Aion and aionios are usually thought of and used numerous times in the N.T. in the sense of “an ‘age’.” And a usage of this nature is even brought over into English. For example, the English word “aeon [or ‘eon’]” is derived from the Greek word aion.

[Page 44]

The only way in which the Greek text can express “eternal” apart from textual considerations is through a use of aion in the plural [e.g., Luke 1: 33; Heb. 13: 8, referring to “the agesi.e., ages without end, which would comprise eternity] or a double use of aion, in the plural and articular both times [e.g., Rev. 1: 6; 4: 9, 10, referring to “the ages of the ages,” again, ages without end].

 

And the use of aionios in Matt. 25: 41, 46, referring to an inverse of that seen in verse thirty-four [failing to realize an inheritance in the kingdom] can only be understood as “age-lasting.” It can only be understood as referring to the outcome of a judgment of unfaithful saved Gentiles coming out of the Tribulation.

 

A judgment of the unsaved, with eternal verifies in view, could not possibly be the subject at hand in Matt. 25: 41, 46. First, the context will not permit such an understanding of these verses; and second, inheritance in the kingdom, contextually in view, would limit this judgment to the saved alone. Note Rom. 8: 17: “And if children, then heirs...”

 

“Sheep” and “goats” (vv. 32, 33), can only be understood contextually as a metaphorical way of describing two classes of saved individuals, similar to the parable of the wheat and the tares in Matt. 13: 24-30. The unsaved and eternal verities simply cannot be in view in either passage. Rather, in both passages, only the saved, with a view to an inheritance or non-inheritance in the kingdom, can be in view.

 

The extensive use of “metaphors” in sections of Scripture such as Matt. 13, 24, 25 must be recognized. Note, for example, “meat” or “food” in Matt. 24: 45; 25: 35, 42, all part of the same discourse. The use is metaphorical in chapter twenty four [referring to that which is spiritual, the Word of God], when dealing with the judgment of a servant; and the servant rendering an account at the time of his Lord’s return is with a view to regality [realizing or not realizing a position with Christ in the kingdom (cf. Luke 12: 42-48)]. Why should the matter be viewed after any different fashion in chapter twenty-five when also dealing with a judgment of individuals at the time of the Lord’s return, with a view to inheritance in the kingdom [exactly the same as regality previously seen in chapter twenty-four, though stated in a different manner]?

 

Understanding the preceding after this fashion [which, in reality, is the only contextually correct way to view this section of Scripture] will, again, show that only saved individuals can possibly be in view throughout Matt. 25: 31-46. Both those depicted by [Page 45] the “sheep” and the “goats” are seen as being in a position to dispense “meat,” “food.” Unsaved man cannot occupy a position of this nature.

 

There is no such thing in Scripture as a judgment of unsaved Gentiles at the end of Man’s Day, prior to the millennium. Rather, the millennium itself will form their judgment in this respect, for the millennium will simply be 1,000 years of a righteous judgment, when Christ and His co-heirs will rule the nations with a rod of iron.)

 

 

Man, on the earth during the Messianic Era, will possess a body of flesh, blood, and bone, with the old sin nature still present [i.e., he will possess a “natural” body (a “soulical” body; Gk. psuchikos, Rom. 2: 24; 1 Cor. 15: 44, 46), identical to that which man possesses today]. This will be true both within the camp of Israel and among the Gentile nations. This is the reason Christ will be a King-Priest, after the order of Melchizedek at this time. He will not only be King over the earth but He will also exercise a priestly office as well, representing man to God and God to man. And Christ must be a Priest after a new order, under a new covenant, on Israel’s behalf, for He is not of the Aaronic line.

 

 

(Note that Christ can presently exercise a ministry in the heavenly sanctuary after the order of Aaron, though not of the Aaronic line, for the simple reason that His ministry today is on behalf of Christians [who do not come under covenants made with Israel] rather than with Israel [with whom the old covenant was made]. Christ could not exercise a priestly ministry on behalf of Israel after the order of Aaron [present or future], which will necessitate a change in the priesthood when God restores Israel [Heb. 7: 11, 12].)

 

 

Man, on the earth during that future day, still possessing the old sin nature, will beget children who must be redeemed; and sin and death will correspondingly occur within activities surrounding man at that time. And, as a consequence of man’s condition, Scripture presents the possibility of man rebelling against the authority which will emanate from Jerusalem above and from Jerusalem below (Isa. 65: 20; Zech. 14: 16-19) - something clearly seen in its climactic form in that which is revealed concerning Satan being loosed at the end of the millennium and leading a number described as “the sand of the sea” in rebellion against the King in Jerusalem (Rev. 20: 7-9).

 

[Page 46]

And within this whole scenario lies the reason God has set aside 1,000 years to bring complete order out of chaos. As previously stated, Christ and His co-heirs will reign - “with a rod of ironbreaking the nations and dashing them into pieces, likened unto “a potter’s vessel” being struck and shattered (cf, Psa. 2: 6-9; Rev. 2: 26, 27) - until all things have been brought under subjection.

 

 

At the end of the 1,000 years - after all things have been “subdued” unto Christ and He has “delivered up” the kingdom to the Father (1 Cor. 15: 24, 28) - “all things” will then be made new. Then, not before, there will be no more “death ... sorrow ... crying ... pain...” In that day there will be no need for a priest to represent man to God and God to man, for God Himself will dwell with man, “and they shall be his people, and God Himself shall be with them, and be their God” (Rev. 21: 3-5).

 

 

This will be the scene beyond the millennium, after complete order once again exists in all parts of God’s universal kingdom. There will be a “new heaven [the heaven associated with this earth and solar system, not the universe] and a new earth” (Rev. 21: 1). The New Jerusalem will be the capital of the new earth (Rev. 21: 2), which probably will be a much larger earth than presently exists, large enough to accommodate a city of this size. And universal rule will emanate from “the throne of God and of the Lamb” on the new earth (Rev. 21: 1-3). That is, God Himself will dwell on the new earth and, with His Son, rule the universe from this location.

 

 

And man, in that day, will come into a complete realization of the purpose which God had in mind for His creation in the beginning. Up to this time, man’s rule will have been limited to the earth alone. But, during the eternal ages following the millennium, man will exercise positions of power and authority of a universal nature in God’s kingdom. And even the saved Gentile nations and those Christians not holding positions of power and authority during the millennium will be brought into and have a part in this rule (Rev. 21: 4; 22: 2, 5).

 

 

*       *       *

 

[Page 47]

APPENDIX

 

 

Crowned Rulers - Christ, Christians

 

 

When Christ returns to the earth at the conclusion of the Tribulation, He will have many crowns upon His head (Rev. 19: 12). But these crowns, through comparing this section in Revelation with other Scriptures on the subject, are not crowns which Christ will wear during the Messianic Era. Christ is destined to wear the crown which Satan presently wears; and at the time Christ returns to the earth, Satan will still be in possession of his crown. Satan’s crown will have to be taken from him (by force) and given to Christ before Christ can actually sit upon the throne and occupy, in its fullest sense, the position depicted in Rev. 19: 16: “King of kings, and Lord of lords

 

 

SAUL AND DAVID, SATAN AND CHRIST

 

 

Certain things concerning crowns, especially relative to the crown which Christ is to wear, can possibly best be illustrated by referring to the typology of Saul and David in the Books of 1, 2 Samuel.

 

 

Saul had been anointed king over Israel, but Saul rebelled against the Lord and was rejected (as king) by the Lord (1 Sam. 10: 1ff; 15: 1-23). David was then anointed king in Saul’s stead (1 Sam. 16: 1-13). However, Saul did not immediately relinquish the throne; nor did David make an attempt to immediately ascend the throne. Saul, even though rejected, with his anointed successor on hand, was allowed to continue his reign.

 

 

Affairs continued after this fashion in the camp of Israel until David eventually found himself in exile, living out in the hills (e.g., in [Page 48] the cave of Adullam). During this time, certain individuals who were dissatisfied with existing conditions in the camp of Israel under Saul gathered themselves unto David (1 Sam. 22: 1, 2). They separated themselves from affairs in the kingdom under Saul and lived out in the hills with David. He became “a captain over them”; and they were faithful to him, anticipating the day when Saul would be put down and David would take the kingdom.

 

 

The day eventually came when this occurred. Saul, following a battle and an attempted suicide, was slain by an Amalekite. His crown was taken and delivered to David (1 Sam. 31: 1-13; 2 Sam. 1: 1-10). Then, David and his faithful men moved in and took over the government (2 Sam. 2: l ff).

 

 

The entire sequence of events depicting Saul and David typifies great spiritual truths concerning Satan and Christ.

 

 

Just as Saul was anointed king over Israel, Satan was anointed king over the earth; just as Saul rebelled against the Lord and was rejected, Satan rebelled against the Lord and was rejected; just as David was anointed king while Saul continued to reign, Christ was anointed King while Satan continued to reign; just as David did not immediately ascend the throne, Christ did not immediately ascend the throne; just as David eventually found himself in a place removed from the kingdom (out in the hills), Christ eventually found Himself in a place removed from the kingdom (heaven); just as David gathered certain faithful men unto himself during this time (anticipating his future reign), Christ is presently gathering certain faithful men unto Himself (anticipating His future reign); just as the day came when Saul was put down, the day will come when Satan will be put down; just as Saul’s crown was taken and given to David, Satan’s crown will be taken and given to Christ; and just as David and his faithful followers then moved in and took over the government, Christ and His faithful - [repentant, and obedient] - followers will then move in and take over the [present world] government.

 

 

PURPOSE FOR THE PRESENT DISPENSATION

 

 

A principle of Divine government set forth in the type of Saul and David shows the necessity of an incumbent ruler, although rejected, continuing to reign until replaced by his successor. The government [Page 49] of the earth is a rule under God through delegated powers and authorities. In this respect, Satan rules directly under God (though a rebel ruler), and a great host of subordinate angels rule with him.

 

 

Even though Satan and his followers have been rejected, they must continue in power (as Saul and those ruling with him) until replaced by Christ and His followers (as when David and his faithful followers took the kingdom). God will not, at any time, allow conditions to exist upon the earth in which there is no Divinely administered government through delegated powers and authorities. Even though the government of the earth is in disarray today, because of Satan’s rebellion, it is still under God’s sovereign power and control (Dan. 4: 17-34).

 

 

The present dispensation - [and evil age of apostasy (see Acts 20: 29-31; cf. 1 Tim. 4: 1, 2; 2 Tim. 4: 1-4; Jude 4, R.V.)] - is the time during which the antitype of David’s faithful followers being gathered unto him occurs. As during David’s time, so during the present time - there must be a period, preceding the King - [and His promised Kingdom] -  coming into power, during which the rulers are called out. David’s men - [and faithful obedient-followers] - were the ones who occupied positions of power and authority with him after he took Saul’s crown. Thus will it be when Christ takes Satan’s crown. Those who are being called out during the present time are the ones who will occupy positions of power and authority with Him during that coming [millennial] day.

 

 

Satan will be allowed to continue his reign until God’s purpose for this present dispensation [and evil age] has been accomplished. Then, he and those ruling with him will be put down, and an entirely new order of rulers will take the kingdom. Christ will enter into the position previously occupied by Satan, and - [“accounted worthy” (see Luke 20: 35; cf. Phil. 3: 11; Rev. 2: 25, R.V.)] - Christians will enter into positions previously occupied by angels ruling under Satan.

 

 

And since Christ (replacing Satan) will wear the crown presently worn by Satan, it only naturally follows that Christians (replacing subordinate powers and authorities) will wear crowns presently worn by angels ruling under Satan. All of these are crowns which neither Christ nor Christians can come into possession of until Satan and his angels have been put down at the end of the [Great] Tribulation.

 

 

ANGELIC RULE ABOUT TO END

 

 

The originally established angelic rule over the earth has continued [Page 50] uninterrupted since the beginning, preceding man’s existence on the earth. However, with the creation of Adam, God announced that a change was in the offing. Man, an entirely new creation, made after the image and likeness of God, was brought into existence to take the governmental reins of the earth (Gen. 1: 26-28). But the first man (the first Adam), through sin, was disqualified, necessitating the appearance of the second Man (the last Adam) to effect redemption and the ultimate realization for man’s creation.

 

 

The [full] price has been paid, but redemption - [by Christ Jesus] - includes far more than that which presently exists. Redemption includes the complete man (body, soul, and spirit), it includes the earth (presently under a curse), and the goal of redemption will be realized only - [after the ‘the First Resurrection’ (see Acts 2: 34ff. cf. Ezek. 34: 23ff., R.V.)] - when man has been brought into the position for which he was created (ruling over a restored earth).

 

 

Scripture clearly attests to the fact that the “worldinhabited world’] to come” will not be placed “in subjection” to angels (Heb. 2: 5). Man is the one to whom power and authority will be delegated.

 

 

This is clearly seen through the action of the twenty-four elders in Rev. 4: 10, removing themselves from their thrones (v. 4) and casting their crowns before God’s throne. Their activity can only be with a view to the fact that the government of the earth, at this point in the sequence of events depicted in the book, is about to change hands.

 

 

These twenty-four elders can only be a representative group of heavenly beings (angels) who, up to this time, had held positions within a sphere of governmental power and authority relative to the earth. And at this point in the book, through the action of these elders, the way will be opened for God to transfer the government of the earth from the hands of angels to the hands of man.

 

 

(These crowns are cast before God’s throne [cf. 4: 1-4; 5: 1-7] because the Father alone is the One Who places and / or removes rulers in His kingdom [Dan. 4: 17-37; 5: 18-21]. He alone is the One Who placed those represented by the twenty-four elders in the positions which they occupied, - and He alone is the One Who will place individuals in particular positions in the kingdom of Christ [Matt. 20: 20-23].

 

These crowns cast before God’s throne can only have to do with the government of the earth. And, at this point in the book, they can be worn [Page 51] by angels alone, for the Son will not yet have taken the kingdom [cf. Dan. 7: 13, 14; Rev. 11: 15]. These crowns are relinquished to God at this time [with a view to man, rather than angels, ruling in the kingdom] so that He can appoint those who had previously been shown qualified at events surrounding the judgment seat [chs. 1-3] to positions of power and authority; and those whom God appoints will wear these crowns in Christ's kingdom.)

 

 

The transfer of the government of the earth from the hands of angels into the hands of man, in reality, is what the first nineteen chapters of the Book of Revelation are about; and, as well, this is what the whole of Scripture preceding these nineteen chapters is also about. In this respect, these twenty-four elders casting their crowns before God’s throne forms a key event which one must grasp if he would properly understand the Book of Revelation and Scripture as a whole.

 

 

Christ and His bride, in that coming day, will rule the earth in the stead of Satan and his angels. And, in the process of ruling in this manner, they will wear all the crowns worn by Satan and his angels prior to Satan’s fall.

 

 

Thus, that which is depicted through the action of the twenty-four elders in Rev. 4: 10, 11 is contextually self-explanatory. This has to do with the government of the earth, it occurs at a time following events surrounding the judgment seat (chs. 1-3) but preceding Christ being shown worthy to break the seals of the seven-sealed scroll (ch. 5), and it occurs at a time when Satan’s reign is about to be brought to a close.

 

 

After events in Revelation chapters one through three have come to pass, for the first time in man’s history, the person (the bride) who is to rule with the One to replace Satan (Christ) will have been made known and shown forth. And events in the fourth chapter reflect that fact.

 

 

Only one thing could possibly be in view at this point in the book, for the bride will not only have been made known but will be ready for events surrounding the transfer of power to begin. The twenty-four elders casting their crowns before God’s throne can only depict the angels who did not go along with Satan in his rebellion; and they will willingly relinquish their crowns, with a view to those comprising the bride wearing these crowns during the Messianic Era.

 

[Page 52]

But the crowns worn by Satan and those angels presently ruling with him are another matter. These crowns will have to be taken from Satan and his angels by force when Christ returns to overthrow Gentile world power at the end of the Tribulation (a power exercised during Man’s Day under Satan and his angels [Dan. 10: 13-20]).

 

 

The identity of the twenty-four elders is shown not only by their actions and the place in which this occurs in the book but also by their number. Comparing Revelation chapters four and twelve (4: 4, 10, 11; 12: 3, 4), it appears evident that the government of the earth - originally established by God prior to Satan’s fall - was representatively shown by three sets of twelve, thirty-six crowned rulers. “Three” is the number of Divine perfection, and “twelve” is the number of governmental perfection.

 

 

Those angels who did not follow Satan in his attempt to exalt his throne would be represented by the twenty-four elders - two sets of twelve, showing two-thirds of the original contingent of angels ruling with Satan. And the angels who did go along with Satan, presently ruling with him, would be represented by a third set of twelve, showing the other one-third of the original contingent of angels ruling with Satan (Rev. 12: 3, 4).

 

 

In this respect, these three representative sets of twelve would show Divine perfection in the earth’s government. And, also in this respect, this same perfection in the structure of the earth’s government has not existed since Satan’s attempt to exalt his throne.

 

 

But, this structured perfection will one day again exist in the earth’s government. When Christ and His bride ascend the throne together, crowns worn by those represented by all three sets of twelve will be brought together again. Then, Divine perfection will once again exist in the government of the one province in God’s universe where imperfection has existed for millenniums.

 

 

STEPHANOS, DIADEMA

 

 

There are two words in the Greek text of the New Testament which are translated “crown” in English versions. The first and most widely used word is stephanos (or the verb form, stephanoo), referring to a “victor’s crown” or a crown denoting certain types of “worth” or [Page 53] “valour.” The other word is diadema, referring to a crown denoting “regal authority,” “kingly power

 

 

Stephanos (or the verb form, stephanoo) is the only word used for “crown” in the New Testament outside the Book of Revelation. This, for example, is the word used referring to the “crown of thorns” placed upon Christ’s head immediately preceding His crucifixion (Matt. 27: 29; Mark 15: 17; John 19: 2, 5). This is also the word used throughout the Pauline epistles, referring to “crowns” awaiting faithful Christians (1 Cor. 9: 25; Phil. 4: 1; 1 Thess. 2: 19; 2 Tim. 2: 5; 4: 8). James, Peter, and John also used in this same sense (James 1: 12; 1 Peter 5: 4; Rev. 2: 10; 3: 11). The writer of Hebrews used this word (the verb form, stephanoo) referring to positions which will ultimately be occupied by Christ and His co-heirs in “the worldinhabited world’] to come” (2: 5, 7, 9). Then John used the word six additional times in the Book of Revelation in several different senses (4: 4, 10, 6: 2; 9: 7; 12: 1; 14: 14).

 

 

Diadema, the other word used for “crown” in the New Testament, appears only three times; and all three occurrences are in the latter part of the Book of Revelation (12: 3; 13: 1; 19: 12). The first two references have to do with power and authority possessed by incumbent earthly rulers immediately preceding and within the kingdom of Antichrist, and the latter reference has to do with power and authority which Christ will possess at the time He returns and takes the kingdom.

 

 

The way in which these two words are used in the New Testament relative to the government of the earth must be borne in mind if one is to properly understand the Scriptural distinction between the use of stephanos and diadema. Diadema (referring to the monarch’s crown) is used only where one has actually entered into and is presently exercising regal power. Stephanos is never used in this respect. The word appears in all other occurrences, covering any instance where the word “crown” is used apart from the present possession of regal power (though the possession of such power at a past or future date can be in view through the use of stephanos). Then, diadema is used when one actually comes into possession of this power.

 

 

An understanding of the distinction between stephanos and diadema will reveal certain things about the twenty-four elders which could not otherwise be known. They each cast a stephanos before the throne, [Page 54] not a diadema. This shows that they were not then occupying regal positions, though crowned and seated on thrones.

 

 

At one time they would have occupied such positions (wearing diadems); but with the disarray in the governmental structure of the earth, resulting from Satan’s rebellion, they ceased exercising regal power (for, not participating in his rebellion, they no longer retained active positions in his rule). Their crowns could then be referred to only through the use of the word stephanos; and these crowns would, of necessity, have to be retained until the time of Rev. 4: 10.

 

 

In this respect, overcoming Christians have been promised a stephanos (victor’s crown), never a diadema (monarch’s crown); but the promised stephanos will become a diadema at the time overcoming Christians assume positions on the throne with Christ. There can be no such thing as either Christ or His co-heirs wearing a stephanos in that day. They can only wear the type crown referred to by the word diadema.

 

 

Then, note that the One Who, in time past, wore a crown of thorns (a stephanos), will one day come forth with many diadems upon His head, for the Father will not only have delivered the kingdom into His Son’s hands but the Son will, at that time, have a consort queen and be ready to ascend the throne (cf. Dan. 7: 13, 14; Rev. 19: 7-9). And because of this, when He comes forth, the announcement can be sounded for all to hear: “King of kings, and Lord of lords” (Rev. 19: 16).

 

 

(Crowns to be worn by Christ and His bride, in that coming day, will include the crowns relinquished willingly in Rev. 4: 10 [undoubtedly the crowns on Christ’s head in Rev. 19: 12, which can, at this point in the book, be referred to as diadems] and the crowns subsequently taken by force from Satan and his angels.)

 

 

Christ, at that time, will have entered into His long-awaited regal position. And the first order of business will be the putting down of the Beast, the kings of the earth (Gentile world power, as it will exist in that day), and Satan and his angels (Rev. 19: 17-20: 3). Satan and his angels cannot be allowed to reign beyond the point Christ assumes regal power. Their crowns (diadems) must, at this time, be taken and given to others - those to whom they will then rightfully belong.

 

 

*       *       *       *       *       *       *

 

 

[PART TWO]

 

 

Y’SHUA

 

 

 

THE JEWISH WAY TO SAY JESUS

 

 

 

Moishe Rosen

 

 

[Book cover writing]

 

 

“Long ago, the Jewish Scriptures predicted the coming of one who would redeem the world from evil and usher in a new order of living. This book examines those prophecies to see whether Jesus fulfilled them. If he did not, we Jews should reject him.

 

“But, on the other hand, if Jesus really is the messiah, we owe it to ourselves, to the world, and especially to the God of Israel to believe the Messiah whom He sent.

 

“At the very least, we should be willing to examine the evidence to see if it’s so

 

 

 

MOISHE ROSEN is chairman of ‘Jews for Jesus’, San Francisco.

 

 

 

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

 

 

Y’SHUA

 

 

by

 

Moishe Rosen

 

 

 

MOODY PRESS

 

CHICAGO

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dedication

 

 

To the many Jewish people who have wondered, and to the few Jewish people who have asked the question: Can Jesus be the promised Messiah of Israel? God’s answer to that question and longing is to be found in one word, a name. That name will be honoured above every other name, and eventually every knee shall bow and every tongue shall confess the name of Y’shua.

 

 

“And thou shalt call his name Y’shua, for he shall save his people from their sins

 

                                                                                                                        Matthew 1: 21

                                                                                                                     (literal translation)

 

 

 

Contents

 

 

Preface  Page ix

 

Acknowledgments   Page xiii

 

Introduction: All About the Messiah

(and Everyone Else)  [Page 1]

 

1. “O Little Town of Bethlehem”  Page 11

 

2. Of Snakes and Seed  Page 15

 

3. Fathers and Sons  Page 19

 

4. A Prophet Like Moses  Page 23

 

5. Forerunner  Page 27

 

6. The King-on-a-Donkey  Page 32

 

7. A Clockwork Angel  Page 37

 

8. Benedict Arnold Goes to a Seder  Page 41

 

9. The Crucifixion Psalm  Page 44

 

10. An Unrefreshing Drink  Page 47

 

11. Bones, Bones, Bones  Page 49

 

12. Resurrection!  Page 53

 

13. The Suffering Servant  Page 57

 

Postscript  Page 66

 

 

[NOTE: Appendix 1 - 9 and Indexes are not included]

 

 

-------

 

[Page ix]

Preface

 

 

Traditions! Life is full of them! Families have traditional recipes; national groups have traditional holidays. Even in our private lives, most of us have traditional ways of dressing, traditional routes we take to work, and perhaps most important of all - traditional ways of thinking.

 

 

When it comes to the topic of religion, most people either shy away from the subject or express a traditional viewpoint that has not necessarily been thought out. Many Americans, for instance, hold to a vague traditional belief in God, with the hazy idea that what God really wants from all of us is that we behave nicely and enjoy life.

 

 

Perhaps no group has been as immersed in tradition as the Jewish people. Through centuries of persecution, through times of being tossed from one country to the next, tradition has been the glue that has held us Jews together. Among Jewish traditions there is probably none so firmly ingrained and as little thought about as the one that says Jews are not supposed to believe that Jesus is the Messiah.

 

 

You may ask, as did Tevye in Fiddler on the Roof, “Where did this tradition come from?” And typically, you will get the response that Christians have persecuted the Jews. Indeed, memories of the Crusades, the Inquisition, the Pogroms, and the Holocaust are imbedded deep within the Jewish psyche. Yet, every Passover serves as a reminder that anti-Semitism did not begin with Hitler, or the Czar, [Page x] or the Popes. Anti-Semitism goes back beyond the time of Pharaoh and is as old as the Jewish people themselves.

 

 

No, the issue is not that of persecution. Rather, it is quite simply whether Jesus is the Messiah of Israel. If He is, all Jewish people should believe in Him, as should the rest of those who would serve God.

 

 

But traditional beliefs and prejudices do not die easily. Several years ago while I was in London for a visit, I took a stroll in Hyde Park, a sanctuary and platform for speakers of every ilk. Anyone there can announce and proclaim anything he likes in relative safety.

 

 

I stopped for a while to listen to one man perched on a ladder because he was talking about Christianity. He was an atheist who insisted that no shred of evidence existed to verify that Jesus had ever lived. “Have you ever stopped to consider,” he asked rhetorically, “that the Jews, who were eagerly looking for a Messiah, never took Jesus seriously? Why not, I ask you? They didn’t then, and neither do any today. I know of not one single Jew who ever believed Jesus lived, died, and rose again

 

 

I never like to heckle public speakers; I’m too often in that position myself. Still, I couldn’t let this pass without comment. So I called out from the crowd, “Hey, mister, may I climb your ladder

 

 

“What’s that?” he asked.

 

 

“I want to climb up on your ladder

 

 

“What on earth for?” He looked genuinely puzzled.

 

 

I took a deep breath. I wanted to be sure everyone could hear me. “I want this crowd to see what you claim you’ve never seen. I’m a Jew who believes that Jesus lived, died for my sins, rose again, and sits at the right hand of God in reigning glory

 

[Page xi]

At first his face reddened. But then he got control of himself. “Why, my good man,” he said, “I don't mind at all. I can tell by your accent that you’re an American. I’m sure all the people here would be delighted to behold you.” He smiled sarcastically as he descended the ladder.

 

 

Meanwhile I moved my large frame - I’m six feet two inches tall and I weigh about three hundred pounds - up to the front and climbed to the top of the ladder, where I tottered precariously. My host assumed the role of a sideshow barker. He bowed grandly to the crowd and introduced me - he’d asked me my name before I went up the ladder - as Mr. Moishe Rosen, an oddity from America.

 

 

Before I had to endure much of his acidic commentary, however, another voice from the crowd broke in. “Hey, up there, do you have another ladder

 

 

“My good chap,” the atheist called back, “what do you want another ladder for

 

 

The voice called back with a strong British accent, “I want it because my wife and I are Jews, and we also believe that Jesus is the Messiah, that He lived, died, and rose again - and He is our Lord. We think the crowd ought to see us, too. But there’s not nearly enough room for the two of us to join that big man atop that little ladder

 

 

The crowd burst into laughter, and the atheist’s balloon burst with it, for the man’s preconceptions clearly did not square with actuality.

 

 

Long ago, the Jewish Scriptures predicted the coming of One who would redeem the world from evil and usher in a new order of living. This book examines those prophecies to see whether Jesus fulfilled them. If He did not, we Jews should reject Him. And since those same Scriptures also tell us that it is the duty of every Jew to bring the [Page xii] knowledge of the true God to the world, if Jesus is a fraud, we owe it to our Christian friends to expose Him and to, help free them from their deception, just as the London atheist tried to do.

 

 

If Jesus is not the Messiah, Christianity is merely the concoction of liars or fools, another of the world’s plethora of religions that should be immediately dismissed for being far too otherworldly, for making us weak in the face of our enemies, and for depriving us of the free and uninhibited enjoyment of the sensual pleasures of life. If it’s all naarishkeit (foolishness), Christians are on a path to nowhere; they have deposited the treasures of their lives in a bag full of holes.

 

 

But as Tevye also said, “on the other hand” - Suppose the Christians are right? What if Jesus really is the Messiah? A debate over whether the tomato is a fruit or a vegetable may not be of much consequence; but whether Jesus is the Messiah, a deceiver, a lunatic, or the figment of someone’s imagination - that is a question that will affect us both here and now and for all eternity. For if what Christians have been saying for two thousand years turns out to be right, we owe it to ourselves, to the world, and especially to the God of Israel to believe in the Messiah whom He has sent. At the very least, we should be willing to examine the evidence to see If it’s so.

 

 

If you're willing - turn the page.

 

 

-------

[Page xiii]

 

Acknowledgments

 

 

This book is as much the work of Rich Robinson and Dennis Baker as it is mine. The research and the writing were shared by several.  Zhava Glaser deserves special credit for her work on the indexes.

 

 

Yet together we agree that no one deserves any particular credit for telling the truth. For us, it is a duty, although not one which is unpleasant. Sometimes the truth has made us uncomfortable, but we remember the words of one who said, “Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall set you free

 

 

-------

 

[Page 1]

Introduction:

All About the Messiah

(and Everyone Else)

 

 

THE TERM

 

 

Before we talk about who the Messiah is, it’s important to understand what the term meant to Jewish people from the earliest days up through the time of Jesus. So let’s begin with a look at the kaleidoscope that is the history of the Jewish people before the year 70 C.E.

 

 

The word Messiah is the English transliteration of the Hebrew term mashiach, which means “anointed.” Originally it referred to the way a person (usually a prophet, king, or priest) was designated for an important position by smearing or anointing him with oil in what was the ancient equivalent of a swearing-in ceremony. In time “anointed” came to be used as a synonym for the prophets, the kings, and the high priests themselves. It emphasized the fact that God had designated them for their office. That is why David, for example, although he became an adversary of King Saul, took great pains to see that neither he nor any of [Page 2] his followers inflicted physical harm on the king because he was the Lord’s “messiah,” translated “anointed” (see 1 Samuel 24: 7).

 

 

THE HISTORY

 

 

HERE COME THE BABYLONIANS AND PERSIANS

 

 

When Nebuchadnezzar* and his Babylonian armies captured Jerusalem in 586 B.C.E., the Temple was destroyed and the monarchy was swept away. When the exiles finally returned to the land some seventy years later, they were subjects of a new empire, that of the Persians. Although they could rebuild their Temple and install a new high priest, there was no hope of placing one of David’s descendants on the throne. That God’s anointed would again come and restore Israel to her rightful place of honour and glory became only a dream in the hearts of the Jewish people.

 

 

THREE’S A CROWD

 

 

About 170 years later, Alexander the Great* overthrew the Persian Empire (as you can see, this was a rather busy part of the world) and Israel had still another overlord. When Alexander died in 323 B.C.E., his vast empire was divided among his generals into three parts.

 

 

Macedonia, part of Greece today, came under Antigonid rule. The Seleucid kingdom was the largest part, extending across much of present-day Turkey, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. The Seleucid capital was in Syrian Antioch near the eastern shore of the Mediterranean. The [Page 3] third party, the Plolemaic, was firmly established in Alexandria, Egypt, and from there ruled Libya, the southern islands of the Aegean Sea, Lycia in southwestern Turkey, Cyprus, and Palestine.

 

 

About a century later, however, the Seleucid king, Antiochus III,* captured Palestine and set the stage for further developments.

 

 

THE TEMPLE VIP’S

 

 

During the three centuries between the return of the exiles from Babylon (538 B.C.E.) and the conquest of Antiochus III (201-198 B.C.E.), the high priests in Jerusalem were the most important and influential members of Jewish society. By then the Jews were well scattered throughout the world, but nearly all of them still paid serious homage to the Temple in Jerusalem. Their offerings poured into it, and even non-Jewish rulers bestowed valuable gifts on this prestigious sanctuary and granted tax exemptions to its priests. Consequently, the high priest had both wealth and prestige, so much so that many coveted his office. But it was a hereditary position, passing from father to son, until the conquest of Antiochus III brought that policy to an end. Thereafter the high priesthood became a prize to be seized by intrigue or violence, or sold to the highest bidder. Under Antiochus IV* (Epiphanes), the Seleucid government took an active and profitable part in those proceedings. The rightful high priest was forced to flee to Egypt; thereafter the office in Jerusalem was filled by a succession of men who seem to have been more concerned with winning and keeping the favour of the Seleucid king than with looking after the interests of their own people.

 

[Page 4]

IT’S ALL GREEK TO ME

 

 

As a result of the Hellenizing influence of the high priest there developed a serious conflict between Jewish religion and Greek ideals. One of the chief ways to gain the coveted royal favour of Antiochus IV was to promote the spread of Greek culture and civilization. The idea was to turn Jerusalem into a city modelled after Athens or Sparta. Although the process of hellenization had been going on all over the Near East ever since the conquests of Alexander, its progress had been slow among the Jews.

 

 

Why that was so was understandable. Ever since the dawn of their history, Jews had suffered considerable displacement. After the consolidation of their holdings in Canaan, where they remained for about 700 years, they again suffered displacement, resettlement, and almost constant harassment from neighbours and distant empires. The single constant cord that ran throughout their history was their religion. They worshiped a God who claimed to be the sole Creator and Lord of the entire universe. He was no local deity. Though He might be peculiarly associated with Jerusalem, that was entirely to accommodate His people. There was no escaping Him, no matter where one went. And above all, it was His grace and power that had held the Jews together against all odds.

 

 

Consequently, there was intense interest in the whole record of God’s dealings with Israel. The canon of the Jewish Scriptures had been gradually determined since the time of Ezra and Nehemiah (c. 450 B.C.E.) as the laws, histories, prophetic oracles, and other sacred writings were brought together into one collection.

 

 

Judaism was taking further shape, too, in the emergence [Page 5] of the synagogues as local places of worship in addition to the Temple and its rites. Synagogues began to be established everywhere around the Mediterranean as places where a devout Jew could join with others of like mind to offer praises and prayers, and to hear the Scriptures read and explained.

 

 

Jews experienced an unusual unity among themselves. It transcended national feelings and went back to that sense of God and His calling of them to be His chosen people. They were not just compatriots; they were brothers. This ideal called for intense mutual loyalty, empathy, and dedication.

 

 

Taking all this into account, we can see that the typical loyal Jew - and there were many of them - with his God-given law, his God-ordained destiny, his pure worship, and his happy relationship with his fellow Jews, felt that he had nothing to learn from the Greeks in the realms of religion and morality. The way that the upper-class Jewish people in Jerusalem flirted with Greek culture and aped Greek fashions infuriated him.

 

 

THE HANUKKAH STORY

 

 

The conflict culminated in 167 B.C.E. when Antiochus Epiphanes instituted a program to fully Hellenize Jewish religion. He decreed that the God of the Jews would henceforth be regarded as a local manifestation of Zeus, the supreme Greek deity, later known to the Romans as Jupiter. The rites of the Temple and the services of the synagogue would be altered accordingly. To observe any Jewish law or custom that might contravene this new policy would be punishable by death, and many Jews did, in fact, suffer [Page 6] martyrdom. The ultimate insult was the decision by Antiochus* to sacrifice a pig on the altar of the Temple, thus desecrating it and showing his unbridled contempt for the Jews and their God.

 

 

Public outrage was soon fanned into open revolt by an aged priest named Mattathias. Three of his sons, the famed Maccabees* Simon, Judah, and Jonathan, carried on the revolt with considerable success, thanks partly to dynastic struggles in the Seleucid capital in Syria. Politics distracted the Seleucids from giving serious attention to the Jewish uprising. The Jerusalem Temple was liberated by the Maccabees and rededicated in December, 164 B.C.E., the event we commemorate today as Hanukkah.* From the next Seleucid ruler, Alexander Balas, Jonathan was able to wrest recognition for himself as high priest. He first exercised that office publicly at the autumn feast of Sukkot* in 152. Upon his death, Jonathan’s brother Simon took his place, and by the spring of 142, the Jewish state was relatively independent under his rule. Simon assumed civil as well as spiritual headship, a position to which his descendants fell heir. Simon’s grandson, Alexander Jannaeus, took the title of king, as well as high priest. Thus was established the Maccabean or Hasmonean dynasty, which ruled somewhat precariously from 152 until 37 B.C.E., when Herod the Great* took over. During the heyday of Hasmonean power and prestige, some people in Israel were ready to believe that a Messiah - an anointed individual in whom were crystallized the hopes of the nation - had come in the person of this reigning dynasty.

 

 

Unfortunately, disillusionment came quickly. The descendants of Simon Maccabee became so absorbed with [Page 7] the pursuit of power that they betrayed the original aspirations of the Maccabean revolt. Their dynastic quarrels, incompetence, and misgovernment opened the way for Roman hegemony, which had been spreading steadily eastward for some time. Finally the weakened Hasmoneans called on the Roman general Pompey for aid. He entered and occupied Jerusalem in 63 B.C.E. No independent Jewish state, was to exist again in this territory for 2,011 years.

 

 

PHARISEES AND SADDUCEES

 

 

The period of the Maccabean dynasty is notable for the emergence of two parties in the Jewish community that were destined to play an important part in the formation of Rabbinic Judaism and in the early history of Christianity. Those were the Pharisees and the Sadducees.

 

 

The Sadducees, a small group of wealthy and influential men, occupied the highest religious and civil offices in Israel under the leadership of the high priest. They had a reputation for being brusque in manner, harsh in judgment, and stiffly opposed to any political, social, or theological change. They particularly disliked certain of what they considered “new” doctrines espoused by the Pharisees: for example, that the world’s evils could he explained by the conflict between God and Satan, or that the dead would be raised to live in a future life, and that all would be rewarded or punished in that life according to their behaviour in this one. The Sadducees recognized no binding authority in religious matters apart from the Scriptures. They therefore rejected the commentary of the Pharisees.

 

 

Proportionately the Pharisees were a small group, but [Page 8] their cohesion and identity did not depend on wealth, numbers, or position. Instead it was due to their rigorous standards of faith and conduct. Though they were few, their influence on the general population was enormous. The Pharisees saw a divine purpose at work in history and believed God had revealed that purpose in Scripture and in the traditions of Israel. They attributed delays in the fulfilment of the purpose of God to evil spiritual forces that would eventually be defeated. At this final defeat, loyal Israel would be vindicated by God, and the heathen empires would be replaced by a kingdom ruled by the anointed of God, the Messiah of the Davidic dynasty. Men and women throughout Israel eagerly watched for any sign that might suggest that the coming of this Anointed One was near.

 

 

HEROD THE HATED

 

 

But what signs they saw did not offer much promise. Once the disorders that accompanied the death throes of the Hasmonean line subsided, Herod the Great* came to the throne under Roman patronage. No one could possibly mistake this half-Idumaean, half-Israelite - the embodiment of cunning, violence, and ruthless ambition - for the Lord’s Messiah. The Herodian reign bore no resemblance to the Pharisaic ideal of the kingdom of God. Herod reigned from 37 until 4 B.C.E.; the Gospel of Matthew reports that shortly before his death, Jesus was born.

 

 

Herod’s domain, like Alexander’s had been, was divided by his three surviving sons. Archelaus* inherited Judea and Samaria, which today is middle and southern Israel; Antipas,* known as Herod in the New Testament, received [Page 9] Galilee and Peraea, or the equivalent of modern northern Israel and the westernmost regions of modern Jordan; and to Philip* were allotted territories lying northeast of the Sea of Galilee, part of modern-day Syria. The rule of Archelaus was so oppressive that the Roman Emperor deposed him in 6 C.E. and put his territory under a Roman governor who worked in cooperation with the high priest and the Sanhedrin.* Philip died in 34 C.E., and Antipas was deposed in 39. From the years shortly after Archelaus was deposed, there came a Jewish writing entitled, The Assumption of Moses. Its verses reflect how disillusioned the Jews had been by the later Maccabean rulers; how they detested the rule of Herod and his sons; how they resented Roman domination; and how ardently they hoped for the day when God would overthrow their oppressors and establish His chosen people in a position of unassailable supremacy.

 

 

THE MEANING

 

 

“POPULAR MESSIANICS”

 

 

This last description gives a fair idea of how the man in the street might have defined the word “Messiah” in Israel along about 30 C.E. Originally from the Hebrew mashiach, the word for Messiah made its way into Greek in two forms. Messias was the Greek transliteration of the Hebrew sounds, from which we get messiah. On the other hand, the Greek word christos translates the meaning of the Hebrew anointed, and comes into English as Christ. The word “Christian,” then, is equivalent to “Messianist,” a follower of the Messiah. It becomes apparent that Gentiles who believe in Christ are really following a Jewish religion!

 

[Page 10]

The Messiah, then, was an ideal figure who embodied the hopes of the godly, patriotic Jew of the time. He would be a descendant of David and Solomon. He would be uniquely wise and knowledgeable, upright, courageous, and patriotic, loyally devoted to God. God’s power would back Him, and God’s wisdom would guide Him so that He could overthrow Israel’s enemies and establish God’s kingdom of justice, truth, and peace, wherein the Jewish people would worship and obey the one true God, and enjoy permanent prosperity and happiness.

 

 

That, basically, is what the Messiah was in the minds of those who were looking for Him when Jesus appeared on the scene. We can now turn to examine His messianic claims, and consider how the biblical vision of what the Messiah would be like differed from the popular conception. We will do this by looking closely at those passages in the Holy Scriptures that Jews throughout history have recognized as messianic prophecies.

 

 

-------

 

[Page 11]

Chapter 1

 

“O Little Town of

Bethlehem”

 

 

Few small towns are as well known around the world as one that sits on a hillside about five miles south of Jerusalem. If it were not for the fact that Bethlehem is the birth-place of Jesus, it would today be a place of little prominence. Yet even before Jesus’ time, Bethlehem held an important place in the history of Israel, because it was the home of King David’s family. The book of Ruth, which tells the story of how a Gentile girl became David’s great-grandmother, is set mainly in Bethlehem.

 

 

Its associations with David are numerous. It was his home,1 and the place where Samuel anointed him to be king.2 A Philistine garrison was stationed there.3 It was the home of Elkhanan 4 and the burial place of Asahel.5 King Rehoboam fortified Bethlehem in the late tenth century;6 Jeremiah, Ezra, and Nehemiah all mention it in their [Page 12] records.7 But the most unusual mention of it is found in the book of the prophet Micah, who hails it as the birthplace of the Messiah:

 

 

But thou, Bethlehem Ephrathah,* which art little to be among the thousands of Judah, out of thee shall one come forth unto Me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth are from of old, from ancient days [Micah 5: 11].

 

1. 1 Samuel 17: 12, 15; 20: 6, 28.

2. 1 Samuel 16: 1-13.

3. 2 Samuel 23: 14-16.

4. 2 Samuel 23: 24.

5. 2 Samuel 2: 32.

6. 2 Chronicles 11: 6.

7. Jeremiah 41: 17; Ezra 2: 21; Nehemiah 7: 26.

 

 

Like all the prophets, Micah knew that the Messiah would be a descendant of David. It is not surprising that the Messiah would be born in Bethlehem, David’s city. But what is surprising is that Micah declares that the Messiah existed before his birth in Bethlehem. The Targum* Jonathan, an Aramaic paraphrase of the Scriptures dating from approximately the second century CE, renders the passage, “he whose name was mentioned from before, from the days of creation Raphael Patai, formerly professor at Hebrew University in Jerusalem, remarks, “The concept of the pre-existence of the Messiah accords with the general Talmudic view which holds that ‘The Holy One, blessed be He, prepares the remedy before the wound.’” 8

 

8. Raphael Patai, The Messiah Texts (New York: Avon, 1979), pp. 16-17.

 

 

So a primary qualification for the Messiah was that He had to be born in Bethlehem. Jesus seems to fit the bill nicely. The writers of the New Testament record the birth of Jesus as taking place in Bethlehem in a rather unusual manner.

 

 

Matthew explains that “wise men” (really a class of religious officials from Babylonia or another Eastern country) came to Jerusalem from the East with the curious announcement that they had seen a star in the heavens that [Page 13] signified the birth of the king of the Jews. Herod was rather troubled and inquired of the chief priests and scribes - those who knew the Scriptures - where the Messiah was to be born. Promptly and unhesitatingly they replied, “In Bethlehem of Judea,” and cited Micah’s Prophecy to back up their assertion. Panic-stricken, in a frenzy of carnage, Herod undertook the slaughter of every male child in Bethlehem under the age of two, in an attempt to kill the rightful heir to the throne. But Jesus’ family, learning of the plot, hurried to Egypt and took sanctuary until the danger was past (see Matthew 2: 1-18). That may sound like a good plot for a melodrama, but it is history.

 

 

There is more. Have you ever noticed that Jesus is called “Jesus of Nazareth” and not “Jesus of Bethlehem”? Nazareth is a northern city in the Galilean area of Israel. Bethlehem, on the other hand, is down in the south. The parents of Jesus lived in Nazareth, but the Romans, who were the de-facto rulers over Israel, decided that the time had come to take a census and that everyone had to return to his place of family origins to be counted. Since Joseph was of the house and lineage of David, he and his pregnant wife Mary had to travel from their residence in Nazareth down to Bethlehem, the home of David. Interestingly, a petition for tax relief from the Jews to Caesar Augustus* delayed the census for a period of time, so that Mary came full term while they were still in Bethlehem.

 

 

If anyone might have suspected that the family of Jesus had somehow arranged to have Jesus born in Bethlehem and so fulfil the prophecy about the Messiah’s birthplace, this account should make it clear that far from being prearranged, the circumstances were totally out of their hands. However, there is still another part of Micah’s prophecy [Page 14] that the New Testament touches on elsewhere as well: the statement that the Messiah was to be pre-existent. Matthew’s gospel reports this conversation with the Pharisees:

 

 

Jesus asked them a question, saying, “What do you think about the Christ, whose son is HeThey said to Him, “The son of DavidHe said to them, “Then how does David, in the Spirit call him ‘Lordsaying, ‘THE LORD SAID TO MY LORD, “SIT AT MY RIGHT HAND, UNTIL I PUT THINE ENEMIES BENEATH THY FEET”’? If David then calls Him ‘Lordhow is He his son?” [Matthew 22: 41-45, quoting Psalm 110].

 

 

In other words, the Messiah is a descendant of David, and yet somehow David’s Lord, or ruler! Jesus made a declaration similar to this when he told the Pharisees that “before Abraham was born, I am” (John 8: 58). Considering that Abraham lived almost two thousand years before Jesus, that’s claiming quite a bit! Normally, anyone who talked like that would be considered a lunatic and simply written off as mad. But when they heard Jesus say those things, nobody called him crazy, laughed, or ignored him as we today might treat a babbling derelict in Times Square. Instead, Matthew reports that when asked about David’s son, the Pharisees gave no answer to his question - only taunts. Could it be that, knowing what Micah 5: 1 and Psalm 110 had to say, they had no answer?

 

 

*       *       *

 

[Page 15]

Chapter 2

 

Of Snakes and Seed

 

 

The story of Adam and Eve is so well known that countless poems, stories, paintings, and films have drawn on its theme over the centuries. What is not so well known about that story, though, is that it contains a passage that the rabbis have long considered to be the first gleam of a promise that God would send a Messiah. The curtain has barely risen on humanity when the familiar scene occurs: God commands that a certain fruit should not be eaten; the serpent tempts Eve; she eats the fruit and gives some to her husband as well. At that point the Lord pronounces judgment on them all, beginning with the serpent, to whom He says,

 

 

Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life. And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; he shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel [Genesis 3: 14-15].

 

 

At first sight this seems to be an Aesop-like fable explaining why snakes have no legs. But there are certain curious phrases that compel us to probe more deeply, phrases such as “between thy seed and her seed.” In biblical terminology, “seed” has nothing to do with what you plant in a vegetable garden. Rather, it refers to a progeny [Page 16] or a group of descendants, as when God later promised Abraham that his seed would be as plentiful “as the dust of the earth” (Genesis 13: 16). But if the reference is to countless generations of progeny locked in battle, why do we read “he” instead of “they”? Could this be a veiled hint of a special individual to come? Is it a promise that the forces of evil unleashed by the serpent would someday be fatally destroyed by this unnamed “he”? In other words, could this be more than just a quaint description of how men dash the heads of snakes underfoot and how snakes most often inflict damage near the feet?

 

 

There is something else here that strikes the reader as odd - at least it would if the reader were an ancient Mesopotamian perusing his cuneiform translation of Genesis! It is the phrase “her seed.” Biblical society was strictly patriarchal. The generations were traced through sons and fathers, and even today Jews speak of themselves as the seed of Abraham, not of Sarah. So to our hypothetical Mesopotamian, it must have seemed very strange to refer to the seed of a woman.

 

 

Both Matthew and Luke in the New Testament provide an explanation. They both claim that Jesus was born while Mary was still a virgin. Biologically that is an impossibility from the outset; but it is amazing that those who will accept the fact that God created the universe out of nothing, won’t allow that He could bring about a virgin birth. Nevertheless, the New Testament records this miraculous occurrence as history, and uses an Old Testament prophecy to authenticate it.

 

 

Matthew ties the virgin birth of Jesus to Isaiah 7: 14, a passage that says, “Therefore the LORD Himself shall give you a sign: behold, the young woman shall conceive and [Page 17] bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel [God is with us].” The discussion focuses around whether the Hebrew term almah, employed here, should be properly translated “young woman” or “virgin.” Notice that the sign was to be not only the virgin birth, but the fact that God would be with us. You won’t have to be a linguistics expert to understand the following points.

 

 

Usually, it is said that if Isaiah meant a virgin, he could have chosen another word, bethulah. But bethulah could be used of a married woman who was not a virgin, as in Joel 1: 8. Almah, however, can be shown to mean a virgin in its six other uses in the Hebrew Bible;1 and when Jewish scholars rendered the Scriptures into Greek during the third and second centuries B.C.E., they translated almah in Isaiah 7: 14 by the Greek term parthenos, which could be understood only as meaning “virgin.” That translation represented the best understanding of that day.

 

1. Genesis 24: 43; Exodus 2: 8; Psalm 68: 26; Proverbs 30: 19; Song of Songs 1: 3; 6: 8.

 

 

Furthermore, we must remember that ancient societies placed a much higher premium on virginity than is customary in our Western culture in the twentieth century. A young woman was assumed to be a virgin unless it was explicitly said otherwise. Besides this, remember that Isaiah 7: 14 promised a “sign.” An ordinary birth does not seem especially significant as a sign. The evidence points to the fact that what Isaiah is actually talking about, as incredible as it may seem, is a virgin birth. Matthew 1: 18-25 tells us that when Joseph discovered that Mary was pregnant, he contemplated a quiet divorce. Although they had not yet come together as husband and wife, in that culture a [Page 18] betrothal marked a solemn bonding to each other, so much so that in Jewish law, if Joseph had died before the wedding, Mary would have been considered a widow. God, Matthew continues, had to speak to Joseph directly in a dream to convince him that all was really on the up-and-up. Still, things no doubt looked pretty bad to the neighbours, and we get a hint from John’s gospel of the persistence of some unfounded rumours. There we find Jesus rebuking his compatriots, telling them that they were not behaving like children of Abraham and were therefore not his true children. They replied, “We were not born of fornication; we have one Father, even God” (John 8: 41). The sarcasm implied that he wasn’t one to talk!

 

 

But a study of Isaiah would have shown that a virgin birth was not only possible, but was in God’s plan 700 years before Jesus was born. Not only was Jesus born in Bethlehem, as the Messiah was to be born, but he [only] fulfilled Isaiah’s prophecy about a virgin birth. Maybe some would say that it’s coincidental, but it certainly gets one thinking.

 

 

*       *       *

 

[Page 19]

Chapter 3

 

Fathers and Sons

 

 

When Adam and Eve left the Garden of Eden, they didn’t exactly get on the next train to the Riviera. Their exit was an exile, and they found life difficult. Ensuing generations continued to display a moral deterioration of such magnitude that God had to send a flood on all mankind, sparing only Noah, his family, and the first zoo in recorded history. But God had made a promise back in Genesis 3: 15 (see chapter 2), and He soon took steps to fulfil that promise. He called Abraham to leave his home in Ur* of the Chaldees and to head for the land of Canaan - about the equivalent of God’s asking you to take a hike from Philadelphia to Minneapolis. It takes a certain amount of trust in God to say yes to such a venture! Later, when both Abraham and his wife were old and grey, God promised him that all nations would be blessed through him and that his seed (there’s that word again) would surpass the dust of the earth in number - something that gave even Abraham a crisis of confidence!

 

 

It was thus by a miracle that Isaac came into the world, and God confirmed that the promise of blessing would pass Isaac and not through any other sons of Abraham.1 Later still, the promise was reconfirmed as going [Page 20] through Jacob, one of the sons of Isaac.2 In his old age, Jacob assembled his sons to hear his last will and testament. He announced: “The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor the ruler’s staff from between his feet, as long as men come to Shiloh; and unto him shall the obedience of the peoples be” (Genesis 49: 10). It is interesting to note that a sceptre is the symbolic instrument of a king, not a tribal chieftain. “Shiloh” has been recognized by the rabbis as a title for the Messiah, and Jacob’s words as an indication that the Messiah would come from the tribe of Judah.

 

1. Genesis 17: 19.

 

2. Genesis 27: 29

 

 

Can you see how God progressively narrows down the family line of the Messiah? First of all, in Genesis 3: 15 Messiah was called the “seed of the womanAt the very least he was going to be a real human being, not an angel or a vague spirit entity. We could have also talked about Genesis 9: 27, where the promise goes through the line of Shem, or the Semites. The Messiah could not be Danish, or Ugandan, or Korean. And now, he must be a descendant of Abraham, but not just any descendant. The Messianic promise goes through Isaac, not Ishmael. Then, it goes through Jacob; the Messiah must be Jewish. Next, he must come from the tribe of Judah, which eliminates eleven twelfths of the Jewish people. And finally, we learn that in the family of Judah, the Messianic line goes through King David.

 

 

God promised David that his throne would be established forever. 3 And in fact, David’s descendants kept succeeding to his throne for four centuries, making them record holders. But even four centuries is not the same as [Page 21] forever. We know that no one of David’s lineage ever sat on the throne of Judah or Israel after 586 B.C.E. Has the promise been broken or is there a king in the line of Judah today? There are only three possible answers to that question.

 

3. 2 Samuel 7: 1-17; 1 Chronicles 17: 11-12.

 

 

The first alternative is to decide that the prophecies were mistakes, not given by God, and useless to tell us anything about the future. The second possibility is that the Israeli Knesset will discover an authentic descendant of David. They will then vote to reinstitute the monarchy, crown the fellow, turn the reins of government over to him, and step down - after all the members of the Knesset have been convinced of the wisdom of such a course. To be honest, it seems more likely that our first alternative was the correct one!

 

 

That is, unless the third alternative is true. We can examine the claims that Jesus was a descendant of David and that He will actually reign, as 2 Samuel says, “forever.” How He could reign for all time is something we’ll take a look at later on. For now, though, let’s see if He was, indeed, descended from David. After all, if He wasn’t, we might as well forfeit all claims that He is the Messiah of 1srael.

 

 

In John’s gospel we find an interesting passage:

 

 

Some of the multitude therefore, when they heard these words, were saying “This certainly is the Prophet Others were saying, “This is the Christ Still others were saying, “Surely the Christ is not going to come from Galilee, is He? Has not the Scripture said that the Christ comes from the offspring of David, and from Bethlehem, the village where David was So there arose a division in the multitude because of Him [John 7: 40-43].

 

[Page 22]

Matthew (1: 1-16) and Luke (3: 23-38) each record the genealogies of Jesus. Though they both trace back to David, there is a dissimilarity between them because Matthew follows the line through Solomon while Luke traces it through Nathan, another son of David. It may be that one line traces through Mary (Luke) and the other through Joseph (Matthew).4 Either way, Jesus’ descent from David seems assured.

 

 

 

From Abraham through Isaac, from Jacob through Judah, and from there through the family of King David the messianic lineage was determined. No wonder that when Jesus came to the town of Jericho, a blind beggar named Bartimaeus, hearing him pass by, began to cry out again and again, “Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!” (Mark 10: 47). There was no doubt whatsoever in Bartimaeus’s mind as to Jesus’ family tree; he knew, as did the others of that time, that he was indeed a descendant of King David, and an eligible candidate for the title of Messiah.

 

4 Julius Africanus, a theologian of the third century C.E, attributed the differences to the law of levirate marriage by which a widow with no son would marry her deceased husband’s brother, that is, her brother-in-law. If she then bore a son by her brother-in-law, the child would be named after the deceased to keep the family name alive. Thus Africanus speculated that Joseph was really the son of Heli, the brother-in-law (as in Luke), but that he took the name of Jacob, Heli’s deceased brother (as in Matthew). But as Heli and Jacob were only half-brothers, with the same mother but different fathers, Heli’s father traced his lineage to David back through Nathan (Luke), but Jacob traced his through Solomon (Matthew).

 

 

*       *       *

 

[Page 23]

Chapter 4

 

A Prophet Like Moses

 

 

In the history of Israel, Moses stands in a place by himself. He was the great lawgiver, a worker of extraordinary miracles, a prophet of incomparable stature, a man who spoke with God face to face.

 

 

God promised Moses that in time to come He would raise up a prophet like him, “and I will put My words in his mouth, and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him. And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto My words which he shall speak in My name, I will require it of him” (Deuteronomy 18: 18-19). Many have claimed to be prophets. And false prophets abound who have claimed this passage referred to themselves. Some interpreters regard this promise as having been fulfilled collectively in the line of such prophets as Elijah, Elisha, Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel. Yet, the people of Israel in Jesus’ day were still looking for “the Prophet1 We must conclude that although the passage may refer to many of the prophets, it finds its ultimate fulfilment in some specific, climactic individual who was still being awaited at the time of Jesus.

 

1 John 1: 19-21; 7: 40, 41.

 

 

In the fourteenth century Rabbi Levi ben Gershon wrote: “The Messiah is such a prophet, as it is stated in the [Page 24] Midrash on the verse, ‘Behold, my servant shall prosper. ...’ Moses, by the miracles which he wrought, drew but a single nation to the worship of God, but the Messiah will draw all nations to the worship of God.” 2 Indeed, a bonafide prophet had two functions: first, he was to speak the words of God to the people - and that wasn’t always the most pleasant task! Isaiah, for instance, launched his writing with a scathing attack on the moral standards of ancient Israel. Balancing this were also words of comfort and consolation. But in each case it was the word of God Himself that was proclaimed.

 

 

 

The second function, and the one usually associated with the word “prophet,” was that of accurately foretelling the future. God had, in fact, explicitly warned the Israelites that anyone who predicted falsely was not to be counted as a prophet of God .3 There were to be no Jeanne Dixons in ancient Israel, right some of the time and wrong the rest of the time; it was 100 percent or nothing, and the prophet’s very life was at stake if he was wrong.

 

2. Rachmiel Frydlnd, “Messianic Prophecy” (manuscript, 1980), p. 16.

3. Deuteronomy 18: 21-22.

 

 

Like the other true prophets of Israel, Jesus exercised both functions - forthtelling and foretelling. John the Baptist said that the one “whom God has sent [Jesus] speaks the words of God” (John 3: 34). Thus it is not surprising to find Jesus speaking words of rebuke against the moral lassitude of the people.4 He also uttered predictions, such as the destruction of Jerusalem, which occurred some forty years later in 70 C.E.5 Frequently the prophets performed [Page 25] miracles to authenticate their message as coming from God.6 Jesus also performed miracles.

 

4. Matthew 23.

5. Luke 21: 20-24.

6. See for instance Exodus 7: 10-13; 1 Kings 18: 16-39.

 

 

More specifically, this prophet was to be “like Moses.” We recall the Exodus account where Pharaoh, in fear of the Hebrews, ordered all male babies to be killed. But Moses was hidden and escaped. It is striking to compare that story with Matthew 2, where King Herod, fearful lest the Messiah should be born, ordered the destruction of all male babies in Bethlehem under two years of age, while Joseph, Mary, and their child escaped into Egypt.

 

 

Then, like His counterpart Moses many hundreds of years before, Jesus emerged from Egypt to provide a redemption for His people - this time not a redemption from physical bondage but redemption from slavery to the power of sin. Moses wandered forty years in the Sinai wilderness; Jesus spent forty days in the wilderness of Judea. Like Moses, Jesus worked various miracles, as a reading of the gospels will show. Consider His discussion with some of the Galilean people in the gospel of John. They asked Him, “What then do You do for a sign, that we may see, and believe You? What work do you perform? Our fathers ate the manna in the wilderness; as it is written, ‘He gave them bread out of heaven to eat.’”

 

 

To that Jesus gives an astonishing reply: “I am the bread of life. Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness, and they died. This is the bread which comes down out of heaven, so that one may eat of it and not die. I am the living bread that came down out of heaven.7 In other words, [Page 26] “Though Moses gave you the manna, I will give you a better manna - Myself, the source of life

 

7. John 6: 30-31, 48-51.

 

 

*       *       *

 

[Page 27]

Chapter 5

 

Forerunner

 

 

Every Orthodox Jewish schoolboy trained in the Scriptures knows that before the Messiah appears, a forerunner will precede him like a herald before a king. Thus it is not surprising that Jesus spoke of that prophecy. On one occasion, He brought up the matter of the identity of John the Baptist, that figure whose public activity precedes that of Jesus in the pages of the New Testament. Jesus said that John was he of whom it was written, “Behold, I send My messenger, and he shall clear the way before Me”. (Malachi 3: 1).

 

 

Elsewhere Malachi wrote of the coming of Elijah before the Messianic age.1 Regarding this, Jesus said, “For all the prophets and the Law prophesied until John. And if you care to accept it, he himself is Elijah, who was to come. He who has ears to hear, let him hear” (Matthew 11: 13-15).

 

1. Malachi 4: 5.

 

 

Josephus, the ancient historian of Israel, noted that after the time of the prophet Malachi, from about 400 B.C.E., no more prophets arose in the land. It seemed as if God had suddenly become mute. That makes Yochanan ben Zechariah, better known to history as John the Baptist, all the more significant. He was, by the most traditional standards of Israel, a true prophet. Even his emphasis on [Page 28] mikveh* was not unprecedented. The Jewish people had practiced immersion of Gentile converts to Judaism for nearly a century before John came on the scene. But his use of the ritual was strikingly different. He proclaimed it as an act that signified repentance in preparation for the coming kingdom of God.

 

 

Therefore the penitents were baptized to show their conversion* from sin. 2 This rite was administered to Jews as well as to Gentiles. 3 The ethical implications of baptism gained prominence as John reminded the Pharisees and Sadducees to “bring forth fruit in keeping with repentance” (Matthew 3: 8). And most important was his announcement accompanying the rite: “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand” (Matthew 3: 2). To receive John’s baptism was to turn away from sin in preparation for the approaching kingdom, in expectancy of a mightier one than John who was to come, “I am not fit to untie the thong of His sandals. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire” (Luke 3: 16).

 

2. Luke 3: 3.

3. Mark 1: 5.

 

 

John was a fearless orator, the kind of spellbinder you stop to listen to on a Sunday afternoon in the park. Yet his preaching, with its prominent messianic overtones, represented a serious threat to the security of the local tetrarch or ruler, Herod Antipas, son of Herod the Great.* But John was not content to leave it at that. Herod, you see, had divorced his first wife and had taken for himself his half brother Philip’s wife, Herodias, contrary to Jewish law. John, firebrand that he was, proceeded to denounce Herod for his arrogant lawlessness. Herodias was furious. She had [Page 29] her daughter Salome dance before Herod as a kind of birthday present. He was so pleased that he offered to grant Salome whatever she would ask. With a bit of prompting from her mother, the girl decided that she wanted the head of John the Baptist. 4 This bit of grisly history has long intrigued artists and musicians. It has even been retold in modern symphonic form in Richard Strauss’s Dance of Salome.

 

4. Matthew 14: 6-10.

 

 

Returning to the Tanach* for a moment, note that Isaiah had prophesied, “Hark! one calleth: Clear ye in the wilderness the way of the Lord, make plain in the desert a highway for our God” [Isaiah 40: 3].

 

 

That passage came readily to mind for John’s contemporaries. John had been preaching in the countryside, literally in the wilderness. Thus the gospel writers called him “the voice crying in the wilderness” (Matthew 3: 3), quoting the Septuagint* translation in Greek so common among Jews of that era.

 

 

After more than four hundred years of prophetic silence, we can only guess at the impact John made among the people. The gospels report that multitudes came to him, including tax collectors (who were considered to be extortioners), prostitutes, and soldiers. The Pharisees and Sadducees came to watch, and some of them also submitted to baptism. The sense of expectancy, that God was about to do something powerful and dramatic, must have been intense. Luke records that the crowds who heard him questioned in their hearts whether John was perhaps the Messiah. But John spoke of one to come even greater than himself.

 

[Page 30]

Jesus came down to the Jordan River to be baptized by John, not for the forgiveness of sins but apparently as a means of identifying with those to whom He would soon be preaching. John tried to stop Him, saying, “I have need to be baptized by You, and do You come to meBut Jesus answered, “Permit it at this time; for in this way it is fitting for us to fulfil all righteousness” (Matthew 3: 13-17). After Jesus was baptized, and following a time of testing in the desert, He began His own ministry of teaching and performing astonishing signs and spectacular wonders. News of an especially notable miracle - the raising of a dead man, a widow’s only son - reached John’s ears. Whether to verify the significance of such miracles, or whether because his imprisonment seemed at odds with messianic expectation, he dispatched two of his disciples to ask Jesus, “Are You the Expected One, or do we look for someone else But they did not get an immediate verbal answer. Instead, we read:

 

 

At that very time [Jesus] cured many people of diseases and afflictions and evil spirits; and He granted sight to many who were blind. And he answered and said to them, “Go and report to John what you have seen and heard: the BLIND RECEIVE SIGHT, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, and the deaf hear, the dead are raised up, and the POOR HAVE THE GOSPEL PREACHED TO THEM. And blessed is he who keeps from stumbling over Me” [Luke 7: 21-23].

 

 

What sort of answer was that? Why beat around the bush? But Jesus apparently knew the cardinal rule of all communication: show, don’t merely tell. Every speaker knows that he will surely fail to make his point unless he illustrates it memorably. In these terms Jesus’ answer could not have been clearer nor more unmistakable. John and [Page 31] Jesus were serious Jews. They had undoubtedly memorized large sections of the Torah, the prophets, psalms, and other parts of the Scriptures. Thus John would realize that Jesus was performing the sure signs of the Messiah as prophesied by Isaiah. Three brief passages will illustrate:

 

 

And in that day shall the deaf hear the words of a book, and the eyes of the blind shall see out of obscurity and out of darkness. The humble also shall increase their joy in the LORD, and the neediest among men shall exult in the Holy One of Israel [Isaiah 29: 18-19].

 

 

Then the eyes of the blind shall be opened, and the ears of the deaf shall be unstopped. Then shall the lame man leap as a hart, and the tongue of the dumb shall sing [Isaiah 35: 5-6].

 

 

The spirit of the LORD God is upon me; because the LORD hath anointed me to bring good tidings unto the humble; he hath sent me to bind up the broken-hearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the eyes to them that are bound [Isaiah 61:1].

 

 

Could Jesus have been more explicit?

 

 

*       *       *

 

[Page 32]

Chapter 6

 

The King-on-a-Donkey

 

 

If someone were to ask you to describe the life-style of a king, you would probably think of dazzling palaces, priceless jewels, and for travelling accommodations, either a Mercedes or perhaps an elephant - depending on the country and century you had in mind! The book of the prophet Zechariah also talks about a king, only in rather peculiar terms:

 

 

Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion, shout, O daughter of Jerusalem; behold, thy king cometh unto thee, he is triumphant and victorious, lowly, and riding upon an ass, even upon a colt the foal of an ass. And I will cut off the chariot from Ephraim, and the horse from Jerusalem, and the battle bow shall be cut off, and he shall speak peace unto the nations; and his dominion shall be from sea to sea, and from the River to the ends of the earth [Zechariah 9: 9].

 

 

The Targums* apply this verse to the immediate situation, assigning it no messianic significance because a humble, suffering, and dying Messiah was not acceptable to the Jews of the era in which the Targumim were composed. Yet Zechariah’s words bring us to the very heart of the messianic paradox. It is portrayed in the juxtaposition of the words “triumphant and victorious” with the words “lowly, and riding upon an ass.” Triumph and victory are traditionally associated with stridency, pride, arrogance, and [page 33] strutting. Humility, lowliness, and meekness seem utterly out of place in this setting. Yet what shall we make of it in this passage? We may, like the Targumists, seek to modify it in some manner so that it portrays a triumphant figure without the complementary images of suffering and lowliness. But the only honest alternative is to confront all the data as objectively as possible, seeking, when we are confronted by paradoxes such as occur here, to arrive at a portrait that is as unretouched as possible.

 

 

Those two aspects highlighted the ministry of Jesus. On the one hand, His ministry was characterized by power and triumph. The miracles and wonders He worked attracted enormous crowds. We read of incident upon incident; and many of them were selected for the record, not merely to show that Jesus was a mighty miracle worker, but because they served to illustrate a spiritual point. Some of Jesus’ miracles, for instance, were designed to demonstrate the real meaning of the Sabbath; by healing on the Sabbath, He was able to point out how far the religious leaders had strayed from the true intent of the commandment.

 

 

John concludes his narrative of Jesus’ ministry by saying, “There are also many other things which Jesus did, which if they were written in detail, I suppose that even the world itself would not contain the books which were written” (John 21: 25). We may protest that writers in the ancient Near East were customarily given to hyperbole; yet even in the twentieth-century West, the two largest categories in the Library of Congress are the Civil War and Jesus of Nazareth.

 

 

On the other hand, throughout the gospels, and especially at times of greatest public acclaim in response to His teaching and miracles, Jesus often struck a discordant note [Page 34] that emphasized the cost of discipleship in terms of suffering and sacrifice. Most often this note reflected His understanding that, though He envisioned an ultimate and spectacular triumph, He must first go to Jerusalem and there subject Himself to scorn, derision, shame, and death. For example, we read in Luke:

 

 

And He took the twelve aside and said to them, “Behold, we are going up to Jerusalem, and all things which are written through the prophets about the Son of Man will be accomplished. For He will be delivered to the Gentiles, and will be mocked and mistreated and spit upon, and after they have scourged Him, they will kill Him, and the third day He will rise again And they understood none of these things, and this saying was hidden from them, and they did not comprehend the things that were said [Luke 18: 31-34].

 

 

You probably noticed the title “Son of man” in that passage and wondered what that was all about. We need to examine this title, which occurs in the verses just cited above and very often in the gospels, especially the gospel of Mark.

 

 

“Son of man” was a term first employed in Ezekiel. There it seems to be little more than a stylized equivalent of “man.” However, by the time of the writing of Daniel and of later, non-biblical apocalyptic* literature, the term has taken on exalted proportions. For instance, this portion of the book of Daniel is charged with intensity:

 

 

I saw in the night visions, and, behold, there came with the clouds of heaven one like unto a son of man, and he came even to the Ancient of days, and he was brought near before Him. And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all the peoples, nations, and languages should serve him; his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which [Page 35] shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed [Daniel 7: 13-14].

 

 

By the time, then, that Jesus arrived on the scene, it is likely that the title “Son of man” had accumulated a good deal of mystery around it. Jesus applied it to Himself more readily than any other term. He offered no explanation for it, assuming that His hearers would understand. But, as we observed, it often occurs in settings that speak of both Messianic humiliation and exaltation. The term became a kind of verbal “tip-off” that here was somebody who would suffer and die, and yet reign in triumph.

 

 

With that as background, we should turn to examine the way in which Jesus chose to enter Jerusalem, as described by Mark:

 

 

And as they approached Jerusalem, at Bethphage and Bethany, near the Mount of Olives, He sent two of His disciples, and said to them, “Go into the village opposite you, and immediately as you enter it, you will find a colt tied there, on which no one yet has ever sat; untie it and bring it here

 

 

And they brought the colt to Jesus and put their garments on it; and He sat upon it. And many spread their garments in the road, and others spread leafy branches which they had cut from the fields. And those who went before, and those who followed after, were crying out, “Hosanna! BLESSED IS HE WHO COMES IN THE NAME OF THE LORD; blessed is the coming kingdom of our father David; hosanna in the highest!" [Mark 11: 1-2, 7-10].

 

 

We are struck by Jesus’ deliberate manner. He is consciously arranging to fulfil Zechariah’s oracle. “Aha!” you might say. “Anyone can arrange to fulfil prophecies about the Messiah. I might as well go into the streets and say that I’m the Messiah himself!” But don’t forget- not only was the Messiah to come riding on a donkey, but He had to [Page 36] have a specific birthplace and a specific family-tree, as we’ve already seen. And we’ll look at some prophecies that no one could consciously fulfil. But that Jesus did arrange to fulfil this prophecy says one thing about Him - He believed Himself to be the Messiah. After all, if He denied it, why should we defend Him? But this is a good indication that we should pursue our investigation.

 

 

By the way, “hosanna” is a Hebrew term that means “Save us, we beseech Thee.” It comes from Psalm 118: 25 which was sung on the holiday of Sukkot,* with the congregation waving lulavim, the “leafy branches” of the above passage. In time the term “hosanna” became connected with messianic hopes, and palm branches came to be used at times other than Sukkot (see the apocryphal* books 1 Maccabees 13: 51 and 2 Maccabees 10: 7, the latter showing their use at Hanukkah). Nobody watching Jesus enter Jerusalem that day could have misunderstood either His intent or the expectation of His followers. They clearly saw from His actions that He was declaring Himself to be the messianic king, riding the donkey of Zechariah. Would further events bear out His claim?

 

 

*       *       *

 

[Page 37]

Chapter 7

 

A Clockwork Angel

 

 

Another prophecy about the coming of the Messiah is even more startling than Zechariah’s statement about the King-on-a-donkey. Daniel pinpoints the exact year of the Messiah’s coming in the ninth chapter of his book. The angel Gabriel arrives to give Daniel the following particulars:

 

 

“Seventy weeks are decreed upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sin, and to forgive iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal vision and prophet, and to anoint the most holy place. Know therefore and discern, that from the going forth of the word to restore and to build Jerusalem unto one anointed, a prince, shall be seven weeks; and for threescore and two weeks, it shall be built again, with broad places and moat, but in troublous times. And after the threescore and two weeks shall an anointed one be cut off, and be no more; and the people of a prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary” [Daniel 9: 24-26].

 

 

That passage is difficult to untangle, so let’s get to work. The Hebrew word for “week” used in this passage is shavuah, which means “a period of seven.” It could mean a seven of anything, but here we can understand from the context and the external evidence regarding the entire book of Daniel that the term means a unit of seven years, and that the prophecy deals with seventy times seven years, or [Page 38] 490 years. The word authorizing the rebuilding of Jerusalem probably refers to the edict of Artaxerxes, in about 445 B.C.E. That being the case, 490 years brings us to the first half of the first century of the Common Era. But during the nineteenth century, a British scholar, Sir Robert Anderson, sought to perform much more refined calculations in an effort to pinpoint the intended date. In his book The Coming Prince, he explains that a year in Jewish calculations at the time of Daniel was 360 days. With that in mind, let’s trace his fascinating exercise.

 

 

The Messiah, according to Daniel, will come 173,880 days after Artaxerxes’ decree because the 69 weeks of verse 25 amount to 483 years, which we then multiply by 360 days (483 x 360 = 173,880). In this connection, it is better to take the passage as reading ‘seven weeks and threescore and two weeks’ rather than breaking it up as in the above translation.

 

 

The date of Artaxerxes’ decree was March 14, 445 B.C.E. because the first day of Nisan (Nehemiah 2: 1-6) fell on March 14 in 445, according to the Royal Observatory in Greenwich, England. Anderson figures the imprecise “in the month of Nisan” to be the first day because the Mishnah explains that the first of Nisan “is a new year for the computation of the reign of kings and for festivals

 

 

Anderson sets the day for Jesus’ entry to Jerusalem as April 6, 32 C.E. Luke said Jesus began His ministry in the fifteenth year of Tiberius Caesar, whose reign began in 14 C.E. Most scholars agree that Jesus’ ministry continued for three years, which brings us to 32 C.E. John (12: 1) says Jesus went to Bethany “six days before the Passover” and that He entered Jerusalem the “next day” (12: 12). Passover is always 14 Nisan, which according to the Royal [Page 39] Observatory, fell on Thursday, April 10, 32 C.E. Thus Jesus had arrived at Bethany April 4, which was a Friday. His meal with Lazarus at Bethany must have been a Sabbath meal. That means “the next day” could not have been the Sabbath, when Jesus and His disciples would have rested, but instead, Sunday, April 6, 32 C.E.

 

 

So, we ask, was Sunday April 6, 32 C.E. exactly 173,880 days from Artaxerxes’ decree on March 14, 445 B.C.E.? By counting we can discover that, in terms of the Julian calendar by which we operate, it is 477 years and 24 days. However, we must deduct one year because there was no year “0” between 1 B.C.E. and 1 C.E. That leaves us with 476 years and 24 days which amounts to 173,764 days (476 x 365 + 24 = 173,764).

 

 

Leap years add 119 days to that (476 divided by 4=119), which brings us to 173,883 days. That is remarkably close to the 173,880 days we figured in Daniel, but not exactly the same. Undaunted, Anderson notes that the Julian calendar is still slightly inaccurate to the true solar year. The measure of this imprecision is l/ 128. That is, the Julian calendar year. is l/ 128 of a day longer than a true solar year. Therefore we omit leap years every 128 years on our calendar. During a period of 483 years, as in Daniel’s sixty-nine weeks, there are three such omissions. Hence we may subtract three days from our total and arrive at precisely the same number with which we began, 173,880.

 

 

So it is possible to figure Daniel’s seventy weeks less one to the exact day that Jesus entered Jerusalem on the back of a donkey. Daniel also speaks of the anointed one’s (Hebrew mashiach, or Messiah) being cut off. The Hebrew term yikaret implies a sudden, violent end, which corresponds to Jesus’ crucifixion, If it could be self-fulfilling to [Page 40] ride into Jerusalem on a donkey, it is much harder to arrange the exact day - especially if, to be consistent, it means that you’ll have to arrange for your own execution as well!

 

 

Immediately after that, we read of “the people of the prince who is to come” who will destroy the city and the sanctuary. This corresponds remarkably with the unprecedented destruction wrought upon Jerusalem by the Roman legions of Titus in 70 C.E.

 

 

Even if one were to totally avoid the startling evidence of those computations, one fact stands crystal-clear in this passage - the Messiah had to come before the destruction of the Temple and of the holy city. If Jesus is not the Messiah, what figure in His generation was?

 

 

Does Daniel’s prophecy point to Jesus? Decide for yourself.

 

 

*       *       *

 

[Page 41]

Chapter 8

 

Benedict Arnold Goes

to a Seder

 

 

During His three years of public activity, Jesus repeatedly told His disciples that He would be betrayed into the hands of men and be executed.1 In a portion of the New Testament that reads almost like a modern mystery, the agent of this betrayal turns out to be one of His twelve closest disciples, a man named Judas Iscariot. Here’s how it happened.

 

1 Mark 9: 31.

 

 

After He arrived in Jerusalem, Jesus arranged to eat his last meal, a Passover Seder, with the twelve. That was on Thursday evening prior to His execution the next afternoon. As they went through the ancient rite, He spoke of the fulfilment of the ninth verse of Psalm 41, “He who eats My bread has lifted his heel against Me” (John 13: 18).

 

 

Later, when they were still gathered around the table together, in an ironic counterpoint to the Passover themes of freedom and redemption, Jesus announced more clearly, “One of you will betray Me” (John 13: 21). That this was said at a Seder stirred the disciples’ curiosity all the more. They urged John, who reclined closest to Jesus, to ask whom He meant. When he did, Jesus replied, “That is the [Page 42] one for whom I shall dip the morsel and give it to him” (John 13: 26).

 

 

It was, and still is in the Middle East, a token of intimacy to allow a guest to dip his bread in the common dish. Thus Jesus reaffirmed His closeness to Judas as He handed him the “morsel,” which may have been the karpas or perhaps the charoses. Then Judas slipped into the night to perform his treachery. Precisely what information he delivered to the religious authorities may never be known. Perhaps he simply divulged the location of Jesus’ overnight place of prayer in Gethsemane. Certainly with that information the authorities could arrest Jesus quietly without stirring up the crowds that often applauded and supported Him.

 

 

Matthew details the transaction for us. He reports that Judas had gone to the authorities before this final Seder to ask what they would pay him to betray Jesus. The price they offered: thirty pieces of silver, the price of a common slave. Without blinking an eye, Judas accepted. But later, when he saw that his betrayal would cost Jesus his life, he was seized with horror and fear and tried to return the money to the priests, “for I have betrayed innocent blood.” But the priests, aware of the seriousness of the situation, were in no mood for refunds. So Judas threw the money down in the Temple, left, and committed suicide. The priests used the money to purchase a potter’s field in which to bury strangers. Some 500 years before this, Zechariah had symbolically acted out this very scene, with himself in the role of a good shepherd, a title Jesus used of Himself, and the value placed on him as thirty pieces of silver. Jeremiah also speaks of purchasing a field. Collections of related prophetic messages seem to have existed, listed by the name of one of the prophets. Matthew thus refers to [Page 43] these two passages by combining them in a traditional manner under one heading, “Jeremiah” (see Matthew 27: 3-10; Zechariah 11: 12-13; Jeremiah 32: 6-15).

 

 

The actual betrayal probably took place after midnight on the night of the Last Supper.* Judas led soldiers of the Temple guard and a party of others to Jesus’ nocturnal retreat and identified Him to them by greeting Him with a kiss. As if to emphasize the enormity of this betrayal of trust, Jesus gives almost cosmic significance to the moment:

 

 

And Jesus said to the chief priests and officers of the temple and elders who had come against Him, “Have you come out with swords and clubs as against a robber? While I was with you daily in the temple, you did not lay hands on Me; but this hour and the power of darkness are yours” [Luke 22: 52-53].

 

 

Thus began a sequence of trials and mistreatment that continued through the rest of the early predawn hours and into the morning, till Pilate* at last consented to the cries of the mob and ordered the execution of Jesus. That was not the end of the story, however. An uncanny series of details followed. Events occurred that had been prescribed for this day hundreds of years before in the Scriptures - not the sort of things that would have stood out to readers before the events of Jesus’ crucifixion, nor the sort of things that any but the most sensitive of observers would have noticed. As those fulfilled prophetic details come to a reader’s attention, one feels a profound sense of awe and mystery - a feeling that things unseen may well be more powerful and real than things seen. Let us next examine some of those extraordinary details.

 

 

*       *       *

 

[Page 44]

Chapter 9

 

The Crucifixion Psalm

 

 

“My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” was one of the few things Jesus uttered as He endured the agony of crucifixion. They were not words He dreamed up, but the words of His forefather David, the opening line of the twenty-second psalm. Other verses of that same psalm hold a special interest for us:

 

 

But I am a worm, and no man; a reproach of men, and despised of the people. All they that see me laugh me to scorn; they shoot out the lip, they shake the head: “Let him commit himself unto the Lord! let Him rescue him; let Him deliver him, seeing He delighteth in him” [Psalm 22: 7-9].

 

 

A comparison with the gospel accounts of the crucifixion would reveal some striking similarities:

 

 

And even the rulers were sneering at Him, saying, “He saved others; let Him save Himself if this is the Christ of God, His Chosen One” [Luke 23: 35].

 

 

And those passing by were hurling abuse at Him, wagging their heads, and saying, “Ha! You who are going to destroy the temple and rebuild it in three days, save Yourself and come down from the cross In the same way the chief priests also, along with the scribes, were mocking Him among themselves ... And those who were crucified with Him were casting the same insult at Him [Mark 15: 29-32].

 

[Page 45]

Later in the psalm of David we read:

 

 

I am poured out like water, and all my bones are out of joint; my heart is become like wax; it is melted in mine inmost parts. My strength is dried up like a potsherd; and my tongue cleaveth to my throat; and Thou layest me in the dust of death [Psalm 22: 15-16].

 

 

As poetry, those lines are highly effective in their emotional impact. But beyond being mere poetic description, they are, as physicians have commented, surprisingly clinical descriptions of the sufferings of those undergoing crucifixion!

 

 

The next stanza continues:

 

 

For dogs have compassed me: the assembly of the wicked have enclosed me: they pierced my hands and my feet. I may tell all my bones: they look and stare upon me. They part my garments and cast lots upon my vesture [Psalm 22: 17-19, Harkavy translation].

 

 

The reference to pierced hands and feet is quite peculiar since that practice did not characterize any form of punishment prescribed in the Torah or practiced in ancient Israel or any surrounding nations of the time. Only the later Roman savagery of nailing a man to a cross comes to mind as one reads David’s words here. However, some of the words themselves are in dispute. The early Greek, Syriac, and Latin translations of the Scriptures all read it as we have it above. The Masoretic* text of the Hebrew, on the other hand, prefers “like a lion” in place of “they have pierced.” This produces the unlikely reading, “like a lion my hands and feet” which is construed to mean “like a lion they were at my hands and feet.” We can probably best understand what happened when we realize that, in [Page 46] Hebrew, the phrase “they have pierced” is kaaru while “like a lion” is kaari. The words are identical except that “pierced” ends with the Hebrew letter vav and “lion” with yod. Vav and yod are similar in form, and a scribe might easily have changed the text by inscribing a yod and failing to attach a vertical descending line so that it would become a vav. The evidence suggests that this may be what happened, since the Greek version of the Scriptures, rendered in Egypt before the time of Jesus, preserves the reading of “pierced

 

 

However, the fact that people cast lots for his clothing is clear and undisputed in the text of Psalm 22. Nor does anyone dispute that the detachment of Roman soldiers who carried out Jesus’ execution did precisely that:

 

 

The soldiers therefore, when they had crucified Jesus, took His outer garments and made four parts, a part to every soldier and also the tunic; now the tunic was seamless, woven in one piece. They said therefore to one another, “Let us not tear it, but cast lots for it, to decide whose it shall be” [John 19: 23-24].

 

 

There is nothing contrived and nothing deliberate in this. The un-canniness of it all is disconcerting to those who don’t know that behind the scenes there is a God who “declares unto us the things that shall happen ... and announces to us things to come” (Isaiah 41: 22).

 

 

*       *       *

 

[Page 47]

Chapter 10

 

An Unrefreshing Drink

 

 

After this, Jesus, knowing that all things had already been accomplished, in order that the Scripture might be fulfilled, said, “I am thirsty A jar full of sour wine was standing there; so they put a sponge full of the sour wine upon a branch of hyssop, and brought it up to His mouth. When Jesus therefore had received the sour wine, He said, “It is finished And He bowed His head, and gave up His spirit [John 19: 28-30].

 

 

What did John mean by saying that Jesus was doing is to fulfil the Scripture? Was Jesus so in control even in His final agony that He was busily trying to make sure He fulfilled all the prophecies pertaining to this event before He died, something like checking off a shopping list? Perhaps, but it seems more likely that He really was thirsty and cried out these words for that reason! By the words “that the Scripture might be fulfilled,” John is showing us that the fulfilment of prophecy is evidence of God’s hand at work in history.

 

 

But to what Scripture was John referring? Only one candidate presents itself:

 

 

Thou knowest my reproach, and my shame and my confusion; mine adversaries are all before Thee. Reproach hath broken my heart; and I am sore sick; and I looked for some to show compassion, but there was none; and for [Page 48] comforters, but I found none. Yea, they put poison into my food; and in my thirst they gave me vinegar to drink [Psalm 69: 20-22].

 

 

Again, the parallel is too exact to simply be a coincidence - especially when you consider that the psalm was written some one thousand years before Jesus was even born.

 

 

*       *       *

 

[Page 49]

Chapter 11

 

Bones, Bones, Bones

 

 

The crucifixion of Jesus most likely took place on the eve of Passover, along with that of two thieves. The religious authorities asked Pilate to have the legs of all three broken in order to hasten their deaths and prevent their bodies from remaining displayed during the holiday. What they requested was for purely religious reasons; we might call it a “mercy killing.” In order to appreciate what it was they were requesting, we need to have a little physiology lesson. Victims of crucifixion normally died slowly and painfully from asphyxiation, as they grew too weak to push up with their legs, thus allowing their lungs to function normally. Gradually, their lungs filled with carbon dioxide and they died. So you can see that breaking their legs would hasten their demise considerably.

 

 

The soldiers therefore came, and broke the legs of the first man, and of the other man who was crucified with Him; but coming to Jesus, when they saw that He was already dead, they did not break His legs [John 19: 32-33].

 

 

Jesus had once said that no one would take His life from Him, but that He would lay it down by His own choice.1 Some men were actually known to have endured for days [Page 50] before dying on the cross. But Jesus did as He had said. He gave up His [animating] spirit - [to His Father (Luke 23: 46)], - thereby avoiding broken bones and fulfilling His prophecy.

 

1. John 10: 18.

 

 

One of the major ideas in the New Testament is that Jesus is portrayed as a Passover lamb, and His life is seen as a counterpart to the story in Exodus where a perfect lamb is killed to provide redemption for the Israelites. That is why John especially notes the fulfilment of the regulation regarding the Passover lamb, that not a bone of it shall be broken. 2

 

2. Exodus 12: 46; John 19: 36.

 

 

John continues,

 

 

But one of the soldiers pierced His side with a spear, and immediately there came out blood and water. And he who has seen has borne witness, and his witness is true; and he knows that he is telling the truth, so that you also may believe. For these things came to pass, that the Scripture might be fulfilled ... “THEY SHALL LOOK ON HIM WHOM THEY PIERCED” [John 19: 34-37].

 

 

Remember the discussion of the pierced hands and feet in the last chapter? That was regarding Psalm 22, but there is another passage from Zechariah that also mentions piercing. This is the passage that John quoted above:

 

 

And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplication; and they shall look unto Me because they have thrust him through, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his first-born [Zechariah 12: 10].

 

 

Jesus endured two sorts of piercing at his execution, and Psalm 22 and Zechariah 12: 10 refer to them. Psalm 22 [Page 51] pictured the piercing from the nails driven into the hands and feet. But when John quoted the Zechariah passage, he mentioned the spear that was driven into Jesus’ side.

 

 

It is hard to be certain of the intent of John’s comments about the blood and water. Modern physiology teaches us that blood in a cadaver readily separates into clear serum and red blood cells, thus certifying that the person is clinically dead. John could not possibly have known this; it is for him simply an eyewitness’ detail, but it serves as a fulfilment of the prophecy.

 

 

Getting back to Zechariah, the entire twelfth chapter is an oracle about a day when Israel will be so strategically placed in world affairs that “all the nations of the earth shall be gathered together against it” (Zechariah 12: 3). However, Zechariah continues, the Lord will so reinforce the house of David and Jerusalem that “he that stumbleth among them at that day shall be as David; and the house of David shall be as a godlike being, as the angel of the Lord before them. And it shall come to pass in that day, that I will seek to destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem” (Zechariah 12: 8-9).

 

 

Then according to verse 10, the inhabitants of Jerusalem will recognize the one whom they had pierced. That implies some former mistreatment of one who now is vindicated as righteous, just, and true, and who returns to rescue Israel out of a predicament even greater than that which she faced the Red Sea. If this personage is indeed the Messiah, then He must have been present earlier in a different role in which He suffered and was pierced. Consequently, when the inhabitants of Jerusalem finally recognize Him and their mistake, they will repent with uncontrollable sorrow. A piece of apocalyptic* literature, written by a Jewish [Page 52] Christian, accords with this: “BEHOLD, HE IS COMING WITH THE CLOUDS, and every eye will see Him, even those who pierced Him; and all the tribes of the earth will mourn over Him. Even so. Amen” (Revelation 1: 7).

 

 

*       *       *

 

[Page 53]

Chapter 12

 

Resurrection!

 

 

Few people could live in the Western world today and be unaware of the Christian belief that Jesus rose from the dead - [i.e., from “Hades” (Luke 16: 23, 28-31; Acts 2: 31, 34); “in the heart of the earth” (Matt. 12: 40; cf. Matt 16: 18; 2 Tim. 2: 18, R.V.)]. What is amazing, though, is that people will often reject that belief out of hand without ever examining the evidence to see whether it is true. In this chapter, we’ll present some of that evidence.

 

 

The story is told of a young man who was pondering his dissatisfaction with the great religions of the world. He inquired of an old man as to what would prevent him from founding a new religion of his own, one more to his liking. The ancient reflected, “Not much, but it would be helpful if You could arrange to be executed and to rise from the dead on the third day

 

 

There is unique importance to the death and resurrection of Jesus. The resurrection of Jesus was the great proclamation of the early church. So often did Paul link Jesus with the resurrection in his teaching, that when he went to Athens to preach the Christian message, the inhabitants, polytheistic Greeks that they were, misunderstood and thought that he was introducing them to two new gods, Jesus and Anastasis being Greek for “resurrection”) - gods that they could now merrily add to their pantheon!

 

 

The gospels devote large portions to the resurrection, describing how the disciples discovered Jesus’ tomb to be [Page 54] empty three days after His burial; how they claimed to have seen Him alive, to have spoken with Him, to have dined with Him, to have touched His body and to have seen the marks of the wounds He had received in crucifixion; how they watched Him depart into heaven, and how, after the Holy Spirit came to dwell in them on Shavuot,* they began spreading the news with irrepressible enthusiasm.

 

 

Professor Ellis Rivkin of the Hebrew Union College Jewish Institute of Religion points out that the doctrine of the resurrection of the dead and the life of the world to come came to have new emphasis through the teaching of the Pharisees. Although the concept is found as far back as the books of Job (19: 26-27) and Daniel (12: 1-2), the problem posed by Roman persecution and domination led the Pharisees to expound and develop the idea further. Thus the Pharisees paved the way for the pivotal announcement of the early church that Jesus had risen from the dead, so confirming His claim to be the Messiah.

 

 

The Sadducees, the rationalists of their day and ideological opponents of the Pharisees, sought to entrap Jesus on the matter of the resurrection and consequently to embarrass the Pharisees. They proposed a situation in which one woman had been the wife of seven brothers in turn, as each brother died one after the other. “So in the resurrection,” they asked, “whose wife will she be

 

 

Jesus said to them, “Is this not the reason you are mistaken, that you do not understand the Scriptures, or the power of God? For when they rise from the dead, they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven. But regarding the fact that the dead rise again, have you not read in the book of Moses, in the passage about the burning bush, [Page 55] how God spoke to him, saying, ‘I AM THE GOD OF ABRAHAM, AND THE GOD OF ISAAC, AND THE GOD OF JACOB? He is not the God of the dead, but of the living; you are greatly mistaken” [Mark 12: 24-27].

 

 

In this episode Jesus was fully on the side of the Pharisees. And, when Jesus’ followers later declared that He had risen from the dead, the Pharisees could not dismiss the idea out of hand.

 

 

Peter first announced Jesus’ resurrection publicly in Jerusalem on Shavuot. In doing so he cited the sixteenth psalm, in which David rejoiced because he believed God would “not abandon my soul to the nether-world; neither wilt Thou suffer Thy godly one to see the pit” (Psalm 16: 10). Peter continues, “Brethren, I may confidently say to you regarding the patriarch David that he both died and was buried, and his tomb is with us to this day. And so, because he was a prophet, and knew that GOD HAD SWORN TO HIM WITH AN OATH TO SEAT one OF HIS DESCENDANTS UPON HIS THRONE, he looked ahead and spoke of the resurrection of the Christ”* [Acts 2: 29-31].

 

[* “… For David ascended NOT into heaven!” (verse 34). Cf. Psalm 16: 10; Rev. 20: 4-6.]

 

 

Neither Jesus nor His disciples ever went further than this to substantiate the resurrection from Scripture. They didn’t resort to Job or Daniel; they didn’t need to. The idea was ridiculous only to a few Sadducees. The bulk of the people, influenced as they were by Pharisaical teaching, found the claim reasonable and credible, something they at least ought to investigate further.

 

 

And indeed, on further investigation the resurrection is seen to be true. Run down the possibilities for yourself and see which makes the best sense. Did the Roman authorities steal the body of Jesus from the tomb? Then why didn’t they produce it when the word started being spread that [Page 56] Jesus was risen? Or maybe the disciples stole it. But could such a fabrication on their part account for the change in their attitude? Three days earlier they were disillusioned idealists who had hoped that Jesus would change things around; could a lie now account for their hope, their boldness in the face of official persecution, and the high ethical standards they set? Perhaps Jesus never died; He just fainted on the cross and revived in the tomb. This idea was popularized in the book The Passover Plot some years back. Unfortunately the author overlooked the fact that the Romans pierced Jesus’ side, making sure He was dead; also, there was a contingent of Roman guards watching the tomb as well as a huge stone that blocked its entrance. There was no way that a resuscitated Jesus could have escaped. Or was it all a hallucination? He must have been quite a hallucination to be seen by vastly different kinds of people at different times of day in many different places. You might be able to fool one person, but can you fool 500 who saw Him at one time? All things considered, maybe someone will excuse us if we believe that Jesus rose [out] from the dead after all, just as He said! It certainly makes the most sense of the evidence. And it also explains the prophecy we’ve already talked about (chapter 3) in 2 Samuel 7, where one of David’s descendants will reign forever. Presumably only one who has already died and now lives forever can possibly reign forever. Jesus seems once again to be the most likely candidate for that role.

 

 

*       *       *

 

[Page 57]

Chapter 13

 

The Suffering Servant

 

 

Can you imagine some giant, international mega corporation deciding that it was going to do something about the problems in the world and advertising for applicants for the position of Messiah? Probably in their resumes most of the applicants would emphasize their diplomatic skills, their prowess in waging war and bargaining for peace, and certainly the high reputation they had earned in other circles. Yet if the corporation knew its business, it would accept none of those applicants. Its executives would know that about 2,600 years ago, Isaiah already gave us a resume for the Messiah, and that only one person in history ever matched those credentials.

 

 

This Messianic “resume” occurs in four passages in Isaiah that scholars call the “Servant Songs.” These songs are really four little vignettes. We encounter the first one in Isaiah 42: 1-7. There we meet an unassuming character called the Servant of the Lord, whom God has endowed with His [Holy] Spirit to bring justice to the nations. This Servant work quietly and unobtrusively, yet without failure or discouragement, until He accomplishes His appointed task of bringing justice to the earth. No flashy shuttle diplomacy here!

 

 

Then, in Isaiah 49: 1-6, we find the Servant addressing an audience of foreign nations and reporting a conversation [Page 58] between Himself and God. He tells them how the Lord called Him from birth, hand-crafted him, and kept Him in readiness for His mission, which is to restore Israel to God. And though He seems to feel that He has laboured in vain, God intends Him to convey His salvation not only to Israel, but also to the Gentile nations.

 

 

The servant speaks again in Isaiah 50: 4-9. He relates how God wakens Him daily so that He can listen to God. He has not turned back from His task, which He heard of when the Lord wakened Him. Instead, He hammered away at His work, even though it involved physical abuse. Nevertheless, His vindicator is near. He is confident that no one will be able to have Him arraigned and found guilty of anything.

 

 

Finally, though, we come to the centrepiece of messianic prophecy: Isaiah 52: 13 - 53: 12. Whereas the other three “Servant Songs” can refer to the responsibilities of the nation of Israel as well as to the Messiah, this passage unmistakably is speaking about a single individual. We’ll look at this portion in detail, but first it will be helpful to get an overview of what people have thought of this chapter down through the centuries.

 

 

“OF WHOM DOES THE PROPHET SPEAK

 

 

Many throughout history have asked whom Isaiah is referring to, including an Ethiopian official who asked an early Jewish Christian named Philip.1 Philip did not hesitate to identify the Servant of the Lord as Jesus. In fact, Jesus applied Isaiah 53 to Himself, quoting from it in [Page 59] Luke 22: 37 and alluding to one of its verses in Mark 10: 45. But not everyone has been happy with the idea of a Messiah who suffers and dies.

 

1 Acts 8: 30-35.

 

 

The Servant Songs were regarded as messianic in Jewish writings from the beginning of the Common Era. However, since suffering and death were not exactly what people wanted in their Messiah, they regularly qualified their interpretation. For example, in a Targum of Isaiah - an Aramaic paraphrase of this same period - the phrases describing triumph are interpreted of the Messiah, but the Servant’s sufferings are said to be descriptive of Israel and in some measure of the Gentiles too (see Appendix 1 for interpretations of this fourth Servant Song). Unfortunately, there is no warrant in the text for referring different parts of the prophecy to two different people or groups.

 

 

Later, as the Christians continued to press the messianic interpretation, most Jews, beginning in the Middle Ages with the famous rabbi Rashi, adopted a collective hypothesis that the Servant was Israel. This collective interpretation rests in part on Isaiah 49: 3 where the Servant is addressed as Israel. But since we read there that the Servant’s mission is primarily Israel, it must refer to some individual who incorporates the nation of Israel as a king might be said to embody his people.

 

 

More recently, in the eighteenth century, scholars have argued that Isaiah had a particular king in mind, such as Hezekiah, Uzziah, Jehoiachin, Zerubbabel, or Cyrus. Others have suggested Isaiah himself, or Jeremiah, or Moses, or some unknown contemporary of the prophet.

 

 

But none of those theories has a wide following today. Isaiah did not paint a portrait of one of his contemporaries in the Servant Songs. If the Servant begins as Israel, the [Page 60] picture becomes progressively individualized until in chapter 53, some one person is intended. Let’s now turn to the passage itself and examine the ways in which the New Testament speaks of its fulfilment.

 

 

ECHOES OF THE KING-ON-A-DONKEY

 

 

Behold, My servant shall prosper, he shall be exalted and lifted up, and shall be very high. According as many were appalled at thee - so marred was his visage unlike that of a man, and his form unlike that of the sons of men - so shall he startle many nations, kings shall shut their mouths because of him; for that which had not been told them shall they see, and that which they had not heard shall they perceive [Isaiah 52: 13-15].

 

 

The opening verses of the passage set the tone for the rest of the prophecy, and remind us of the same paradox we saw in Zechariah. There, you’ll remember, we met the “King-on-a-donkey” who came in both great triumph and extreme humility. Here the same idea is repeated, and the following verses develop it in more detail.

 

 

THE UNPOPULAR KING

 

 

“Who would have believed our report? And to whom hath the arm of the LORD been revealed? For he shot up right forth as a sapling, and as a root out of a dry ground; he had no form nor comeliness, that we should look upon him, nor beauty that we should delight in him. He was despised, and forsaken of men, a man of pains, and acquainted with disease, and as one from whom men hide their face: he was despised, and we esteemed him not” [Isaiah 53: 1-3].

 

[Page 61]

You do not need to be aware of the meticulous details of Jesus’ life to see how those words might apply to Him. Have you ever seen those Hollywood movies of Jesus’ life where Jesus stands on Pilate’s balcony and hears the whole crowd crying out for His crucifixion? The production may be hokey, and Jesus may look more Danish than Jewish, but the scene is quite close to what actually happened. In a word, Jesus was rejected.

 

 

And His “visage,” or face, was indeed marred so that He was left without any form or comeliness. The lashes of the Roman whip had disastrous consequences on a human body, and Jesus was subjected to hard, bruising blows about the face and head, and crowned with thorns. A look at John 19: 1-3 will show how graphically this prophecy was fulfilled:

 

 

Then Pilate therefore took Jesus, and scourged Him. And the soldiers wove a crown of thorns and put it on His head, and arrayed Him in a purple robe; and they began to come up to Him, and say, “Hail, King of the Jews and to give Him blows in the face.

 

 

AN UNUSUAL REMEDY

 

 

The next words of the prophet describe how He took on Himself our griefs and sorrows (it could also mean sicknesses and pains in Hebrew), and how through His suffering, people could experience forgiveness for their sins:

 

 

Surely our diseases he did bear, and our pains he carried; whereas we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted. But he was wounded because of our transgressions, he was crushed because of our iniquities; the chastisement of our welfare was upon him, and with his stripes we were [Page 62] healed. All we like sheep did go astray, we turned everyone to his own way; and the LORD hath made to light on him the iniquity of us all [Isaiah 53: 4-6].

 

 

Matthew explains in his gospel that when the townspeople of Capernaum brought to Him “many who were demon-possessed,” Jesus cast out the spirits with a word and healed all who were sick. This, says Matthew, was “in order that what was spoken through Isaiah the prophet might be fulfilled, saying, ‘HE HIMSELF TOOK OUR INFIRMITIES AND CARRIED AWAY OUR DISEASES’” (Matthew 8: 16-17).

 

 

The second idea in this passage might seem strange to our twentieth-century minds: the idea that someone can suffer and die so that others might be spared. But it is not strange to the Bible. The entire system of animal sacrifices was based on this idea. It shows up again in the story in Genesis, where God provides a ram to die in Isaac’s place just as Abraham is about to drive a knife into his heart.

 

 

It surfaces yet again in the New Testament, when John the Baptist, seeing Jesus coming toward him, announces, “Behold, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world!” (John 1: 29). Jesus, foreseeing His own death, spoke of giving His life as a ransom, or substitute, for many (Mark 10: 45). From the very outset, the apostles offered their listeners forgiveness of sins in Jesus’ name; 2 and their audience knew that such forgiveness was inextricably bound up with the idea of the sacrificial death of a substitute. Indeed, the references to the atoning nature of Jesus’ [Page 63] suffering and death in the New Testament are too numerous to mention.

 

2. Acts 2: 38.

 

 

AN OPPRESSED SHEEP

 

 

Isaiah twice goes on to say that the Lord’s servant was silent in the face of those who afflicted him. We read in Matthew that “And while He was being accused by the chief priests and elders, He made no answer. Then Pilate said to Him, ‘Do you not hear how many things they testify against You And He did not answer him with regard to even a single charge, so that the governor was quite amazed” (Matthew 27: 12-14). It is not that Jesus remained utterly mute throughout the time of His trial and execution; He did make a few remarks. There was however, no plea for mercy, no answer to the charges. His behaviour could not have been more aptly characterized than by Isaiah’s words:

 

 

He was oppressed, though he humbled himself and he opened not his mouth; as a lamb that is led to the slaughter, and as a sheep that before her shearers is dumb; yea, he opened not his mouth [Isaiah 53: 7].

 

 

The next verse reemphasizes most of what has already been said:

 

 

By oppression and judgment he was taken away, and with his generation who did reason? For he was cut off out of the land of the living, for the transgression of my people to whom the stroke was due [Isaiah 53: 8].

 

[Page 64]

THE END - OR A NEW BEGINNING?

 

 

We then come to the strange mention of the Servant’s grave:

 

 

And they made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his tomb; although he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth [Isaiah 53: 9].

 

 

It is not difficult to imagine a wealthy wicked man; history is full of them. But that is not how this prophecy was fulfilled for Jesus. He was buried in the tomb of Joseph of Arimathea, a wealthy but not unrighteous man. 3 Joseph was a member of the Sanhedrin and a respected Jewish leader. But Jesus had died a felon’s death - crucifixion, the common way to punish criminals. Consequently, his grave would be considered a wicked man’s grave. The words of Paul, a Jewish believer who had belonged to the party of the Pharisees, come to mind: “He [God] made Him [Jesus] who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him” (2 Corinthians 5: 21).

 

3. Luke 23: 50-53.

 

 

[A select] RESURRECTION [of one Man] REVISITED!

 

 

The next verse not only mentions that the Servant’s death will be a sacrifice for sin, using the technical Hebrew term for this, asham; but it goes on to describe the life of the Servant after His death - in other words, [after] His resurrection:

 

 

Yet it pleased the LORD to crush him by disease; to see if his [Page 65] soul would offer itself in restitution [asham], that he might see his seed, prolong his days, and that the purpose of the LORD might prosper by his hand [Isaiah 53: 10].

 

 

FINALE

 

 

The conclusion of Isaiah 53 mentions no new themes. Instead it reviews and underscores the dominant themes of the preceding verses. The Servant’s death is really an act of God; when the Servant submits to it, much good comes of it, and He ends up sharing a place with the great.*

 

 

[* See Rev. 3: 21. Cf. Luke 20: 35; Phil. 3: 11; Heb. 11: 35b; Rev. 20: 6, R.V.]

 

 

Of the travail of his soul he shall see to the full, even My servant, * who by his knowledge did justify the Righteous One to the many, and their iniquities he did bear. Therefore will I divide him a portion among the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the mighty; because he bared his soul unto death, and was numbered with the transgressors; yet he bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors [Isaiah 51: 11-12].

 

 

“Of whom does the prophet speak?” The conclusion seems inescapable.

 

[* It is the First Person in the Godhead speaking of the Second - our Lord Jesus Christ / Messiah - His anointed King-Priest: and our promised, and only, World-Saviour and Divine Ruler.]

 

[Page 66]

Postscript

 

 

I was extraordinarily naive when, as a relatively young man in the midst of my Jewish community in Denver, Colorado, I came to believe in Jesus. I actually believed that other Jews didn’t believe simply because I hadn’t told them, so I set out to tell them all. It didn’t dawn on me for a long time that I had taken a “fool’s” credentials when I took the name of Jesus. By becoming a friend of Jesus I became an “enemy” to those who disagreed or felt threatened by my newfound faith. In their eyes I became someone to be maligned. There wasn’t much on me in the way of gossip, so they had to dig back in their memories to recall that I had once flunked Spanish, a sure sign of mental retardation. And then, too, there was the time I was laid off from a temporary sales clerk’s job after the Christmas holidays. That got turned into a firing for who-knew-what dark reason.

 

 

I finally emerged from that season licking my wounds, older and, hopefully, wiser. One thing in particular began to dawn on me. My Jewish brethren were not the least bit interested in hearing my account of how I came to believe. Those circumstances that had had a profound bearing on my own life of faith were irrelevant to others. There had to be some other way. This is the way of which the apostle Peter spoke after he recounted the elements of his own eye-witness account. Though he even speaks of his presence [Page 67] with Jesus on the Mount of Transfiguration as evidence of the truth of what he says, he adds, “We have also a more sure word of prophecy” (2 Peter 1: 19, KJV).* Better than an account of an eyewitness is the testimony of the Bible. When I recognized that, it changed the course of my career. Thereafter, when I went to my people with the message that Jesus was the Messiah, I did not offer only the evidence of my own changed life. Instead I offered the evidence of what my people revere as holy, the Law and the Prophets.

 

* King James Version.

 

 

This was brought home to me in 1971 when I was speaking in a church. Afterward a man came up to me. “You probably don't remember me,” he began after he introduced himself, “but eleven years ago you visited my home and talked to me about Christianity. I ridiculed you and your message. I blasphemed and I ordered you out of the house.

 

 

“I was so pleased with the way in which I felt I had utterly defeated you, that I decided to go to work on my neighbour, Irving Schwartz, 1 a man you had already won to your faith. So, I went to my rabbi to get him to show me how to refute your arguments from Isaiah 53. I had studied it pretty closely and decided I probably needed a little professional help.

 

1. Irving Schwartz is a pseudonym.

 

 

“The rabbi said the suffering Servant was Israel. But I couldn’t see how the pronouns lined up to justify that interpretation. I told the rabbi so, and he backed off with the suggestion that maybe Isaiah had Hezekiah in mind. His arguments seemed so weak, I decided to go elsewhere.

 

 

“The next expert told me that Isaiah 53 had never been [Page 68] regarded by any Jews as a messianic text. Then, however, I came across the Targum of Jonathan, and I saw that there, at least, the passage was regarded as messianic.

 

 

“Well, when I saw that, I really began to wonder - and to pray. Finally, in 1966, I received Christ as my own Saviour and Lord. Today I’m a deacon in this church

 

 

Stories like that have sealed my understanding. We do have a more sure word of prophecy, vouched for both by Tanach* and the New Testament:

 

 

I am the LORD, that is My name; and My glory will I not give to another, neither My praise to graven images. Behold, the former things are come to pass, and new things do I declare; before they spring forth I tell you of them [Isaiah 42: 8-9].

 

 

You do well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star arises in your hearts. But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God [2 Peter 1: 19-21].

 

 

May you, the reader of this book, be challenged and moved to consider these scriptural prophecies. They point to the fulfilment of the hopes and aspirations of our people in the person of Jesus of Nazareth, the Messiah of Israel.

 

 

*       *       *       *       *       *       *

 

 

[PART TWO]

 

 

FRONT OF MIND AWARENESS

 

 

Paul Smith, PFI Director*

 

 

[* From ‘Prayer for Israel’ (May Prayer Bulletin 2021)]

 

-------

 

 

For who has known the mind of the Lord, that he will indtruct him?

But we hve the mind of Christ - 1 Corinthians 2: 16.

 

 

During my career in professional marketing, I was intrigued by a piece of branding jargon known as ‘Front of Mind Awareness’. This is an important promotional ‘tool’ for any category of business. For example, if we were to think of a product, be it a car (Jaguar?), vacuum cleaner (Dyson?), or watch (Rolex?), the brands in brackets are likely to be at the front of my mind. This will differ for each ‘customer’. However, I never anticipated ever using it in the context of an editorial for PFI!

 

 

Interestingly, when I became a commissioned evangelist over 10 years ago, the Lord provoked me with His concern for Israel, the Jewish people and the church. No mean thing! The significance of Israel had not previously been at the front of my mind at all as a Christian. My church and friends did not seem to have an issue with it. Consequently, it wasn’t on my radar. This provocation from the Lord really focused my mind then, and still does now: why does the church which speaks of the God of Israel have such an ignorance and problem with Israel, particularly modern Israel?

 

 

The journey from there I will leave for another day. It’s quite a story!

 

 

It is a litmus test for all Christians and starts with the question: does what matters to God matter to me?

 

 

Do We Love What He Loves?

 

 

Faithful believers recognise that in the context of the Jewish people, the “gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable” (Romans 11: 29). They recognise they are still the “apple of His eye” (Deuteronomy 32: 10) and that one day they will awaken from their partial hardening (Romans 11: 25). They will be restored to a covenant relationship with their God until His law is written on their heart (Jeremiah 31: 32).

 

 

By God’s grace these truths become cemented at the front of our minds. They go beyond church denominations and structures. God’s Spirit, Word and promises do not stand on shifting sands of culture, tradition and ‘spirits of the age’.

 

 

Replacing ‘Replacement’ Theology!

 

 

Much of the church in the West arrogantly claim to be Israel’s replacement. This doesn’t sound remotely like being “built upon the foundations of the apostles and Prophets” (Ephesians 2: 20)! And what of God’s promises to Israel? When Paul speaks of the times of the gentiles being fulfilled, we learn of the end of Israel’s partial hardening as she returns to her lord (Romans 11: 25-32).

 

 

This is a people, a nation that He has never forgotten and is being restored to Him today, a Father’s love for His children. The growing messianic congregations in the land testify to it. Additionally, as I write, Israel is celebrating 73 years of independence. Praise God.

 

 

Significant portions of the church in the UK are withering and dying, unsurprisingly. Paul warned of this [apostasy] in Romans 11 in his description of being grafted into the ‘olive tree’ that was Israel. As the root supports the grafted in branches (as opposed to the other way round) it is obvious that the [Gentile] Church faces an important decision in recognising her Hebraic roots and the promises God has planned for the restoration of Israel. The arrogance Paul speaks of will result in withering and death.

 

 

There is a crucial mandate for PFI, for you and I, to pray for the U K church to be attuned to God’s [prophetic] promises and purposes for Israel - for their benefit! If we do not include the Hebraic roots of our faith, then our evangelism will be diluted. This is because the restoration of Israel is at the heart of the gospel we profess to preach (Romans 1: 16).

 

 

If that suffers then, so does the discipleship of new believers, who miss the full story of a redemptive God who is faithful in His promises to His Jewish and gentile children.

 

 

The other side of the coin is this ... “all Israel will one day be saved” (Romans 11: 26; Zechariah 12: 10). As His bride, the church must be found busy sharing the gospel with His own flesh and blood, Israel, when He returns. This is a core desire in PFI. We pray for the day when our Jewish friends say, “blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord” (Matthew 23: 39).

 

 

Finally, Paul reminds us to “not be conformed to this world”, but to renew the way we think (Romans 12: 2). This follows on the back of the previous three chapters about God’s purposes for the Jewish people. Therefore, never mind ‘Front of Mind Awareness’, renew your mind!

 

 

“And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, so that you may prove what the will of God is, that which is good and acceptable and perfect Romans12: 2.

 

 

Bible quotations from the New American Standard Bible.

 

 

*       *       *       *       *       *       *

 

 

[PART THREE]

 

The Days of Noah

 

And

 

“As It Was In The Days of Noah”*

 

 

[* From Chapter 8 & 9 (pp. 127-148) in ‘Earth’s Earliest Ages’ by G. H. Pember, with  G. H. Lang’s Foreword and edited notes.]

 

[Page 127]

Chapter 8

 

THE DAYS OF NOAH

 

 

THE sixth chapter of Genesis contains an account of the days of Noah, a description of momentous interest to us: for our Lord has declared that a similar epoch of worldliness will at length exhaust the forbearance of God towards the present dwellers upon earth, and cause Him to come with fire, and with His chariots like a whirlwind, to render His anger with and His rebuke with flames of fire; to plead with all by fire and by His sword (Isa. 66: 15, 16).

 

 

It becomes, therefore, an obvious duty to consider the progress of wickedness and corruption among the antediluvians, so far as it has pleased God to inform us of it: to acquaint ourselves not merely with the sowing but also with the watering, the growth, and the ripening, of that hideous crop against which the gleaming sickle of the Almighty at length flashed forth from heaven; to note the various incentives to evil as they successively appeared, and to observe the particular influence of each upon the rapidly decomposing masses of society. For by so doing we shall arm ourselves against the errors and temptations which are daily multiplying around us, and be enabled to discern the threatening signs of our own times.

 

 

Now the first-mentioned characteristic of those former days of wickedness and peril is the rapid increase of population (Gen. 6: 1); a circumstance which in itself has ever tended not merely to diffuse but at the same time to intensify sin. For every form of evil which exists in thinly populated countries will also be found where men have multiplied; where there are countless vices peculiar to crowded districts. And, if they are numerous, men support each other in rebellion, and are prone to become far more daring and defiant of God. Among are ourselves, the strongholds of rationalism and atheism are always to be found in large cities.

 

 

Butt while the families of the earth were thus increasing in number, they were at the same time making vast progress in civilization and knowledge. Cain had taught them to settle in communities and build cities (Gen. 4: 17); and the sons of Lamech - speedily followed, no doubt, by many others - [Page 128 CIVILIZATION BEFORE THE FLOOD] had introduced the mechanical and fine arts, and had devised unlawful means of evading the labour imposed by the curse (Gen. 4: 20-22). And in that age, when, instead of being cut off at three score and ten or four score, men lived on for nearly a thousand years, their immense accumulation of knowledge experience, and skill must have advanced science, art, and the invention and manufacture of all the appliances of a luxurious civilization, with a rapidity to us almost inconceivable. 1

 

1 [This suggestion as to life before the Flood has been confirmed by knowledge since gained from the lower strata of Mesopotamia. I have substituted “twenty seventh” for Pember’s “seventeenth century”].

 

 

The one recorded specimen of antediluvian industry, the ark, was built by a Sethite; and yet it equalled in size the Great Eastern, the ship which but a few years ago afforded such marvel to ourselves.

 

 

And doubtless many of the mighty labours accomplished by the earlier descendants of Noah may be considered to have sprung from reminiscences of pristine grandeur, and fragments of lore, handed down by forefathers who had passed a portion of their existence in the previous age of human glory and depravity. Such may have been the daring conception of a literally cloud-capped tower; the stupendous and splendidly decorated edifices of Babylon and Nineveh; and the wondrous structure of the first pyramid, involving, as it apparently does, an accurate knowledge of astronomical truth which would seem to have been at least on a level with the vaunted advances of modern science. For all these great efforts, be it remembered, were in progress during the lifetime of Shem, and probably in that of his brothers also.

 

 

Nor must we forget recent discoveries in regard to the primeval civilization of the Accadians, “the stunted and oblique-eyed people of ancient Babylonia,” whose very existence was unknown to us fifty years ago. Their language was dying out, and had become a learned dialect, like the Latin of the Middle Ages, in the twenty-seventh century before Christ. And yet so great had been their intellectual power that the famous library of Agade, founded by Sargon I [2650 B.C.] was stocked with books “which were either translated from Accadian originals or else based on Accadian texts, and filled with technical words which belonged to the old language.” A catalogue of the astronomical department, which has been preserved, contains a direction to the reader to write down the number of the tablet or book which he requires, and apply for it to the librarian. “The arrangement,” says Sayce, “adopted by Sargon’s librarians must [Page 129 CAINITES AND SETHITES MERGE] have been the product of generations of former experience.” Could we have a stronger proof “of the development of literature and education, and of the existence of a considerable number of reading people in this remote antiquity”?

 

 

According to Berosus there was an antediluvian “Town of Books” in Babylonia; and Sisuthrus, the Chaldean Noah, “is made to bury his books at Sippara before the Deluge, and to disentomb them after the descent from the Ark.” But, apart from tradition, we have evidence that in very early times there were well-known libraries at Erech, Ur, Cutha, and Larsa, to which observatories and universities were attached (see Sayce’s Babylonian Literature).

 

 

If, then, we give but fair weight to these considerations, we seem compelled to admit that the antediluvians may have attained to a perfection in civilization and high culture which has scarcely yet been recovered, much as we pride ourselves upon our own times.

 

 

Since we have no further mention of the Cainites as a separate tribe, and since of the Sethites - who must also have increased in numbers - but one person was translated to God from the evil to come, and only eight were saved through that evil, it is clear that the two families had at length mingled and intermarried. Seduced, probably, by the intellectual pursuits, the gay society, and the easy life, of the wicked, the Sethites first found a pleasure in their company, their luxuries and their many skilful and ingenious inventions; were then enticed to yoke themselves unequally with unbelievers; and as a being drawn into the vortex of sin, disappeared as a separate people.

 

 

Sad and instructive was the result of this amalgamation: for when the time of dividing came, no true worshippers of Jehovah were to be found save in the single family of Noah. Men seem to have so prized their own wisdom, to have thought little of God, that their religion had dwindled to a mere hero-worship of their own famous leaders (Gen. 6: 4), those who, Prometheus-like, brought to them by their inventions the necessaries and comforts of life, and so enabled for the time to foil the purposes of the Supreme Power.

 

 

Then a new and startling event burst upon the world, and fearfully accelerated the already rapid progress of evil. “The sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose” (Gen. 6: 2). These words are often explained to signify nothing more than the intermarriage of the descendants of Cain and [Page 130 THE SONS Of ELOHIM] Seth; but a careful examination of the passage will elicit a far deeper meaning.

 

 

When men, we are told, began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, the sons of God saw the daughters of men (Gen. 6: 1, 2). Now by “men” in each case the whole human race is evidently signified, the descendants of Cain and Seth alike. Hence the “sons of God” are plainly distinguished from the generation of Adam.

 

 

Again, the expression “sons of God (Elohim)” occurs but four times in other parts of the Old Testament, and is in each of these cases indisputably used for angelic beings.

 

 

Twice in the beginning of the Book of Job we read of the sons of God presenting themselves before Him at stated times, and Satan also comes with them as being himself a son of God, though a fallen and rebellious one (Job. 1: 6; 2: 1).

 

 

For the term sons of Elohim, the mighty Creator, seems to be confined to those who were directly created by the Divine hand, and not born of other beings of their own order. Hence, in Luke’s genealogy of our Lord, Adam is called a son of God (Luke 3: 38). And so also Christ is said to give to them that receive Him power to become the sons of God (John 1: 12): For these are born again of the Spirit of God as to their inner man even in the present life. And at the resurrection they will be clothed with a spiritual [and immortal] body, a building of God (2 Cor. 5: 1); so that they will then be in every respect equal to the angels, being altogether a new creation (Luke 20: 36).

 

 

The third repetition of the phrase occurs in a later chapter of Job, where the morning stars are represented as singing together, and the sons of God as shouting for joy, over the creation of our earth (Job. 38: 7).

 

 

And, lastly, the same expression is found in the Book of Daniel (Dan. 3: 25); but in the singular number, and with the necessary difference that bar is the word used for son instead of ben, the singular of the latter being unknown in Chaldee. Nebuchadnezzar exclaims that he sees four men walking in the midst of the fire, and that the form of the fourth is like a son of God, 1 by which he evidently means a supernatural or angelic being, distinct as such from the others.

 

1 There is no definite article in the original.

 

2 This is the view taken by Josephus, Philo Judaeus, and the authors of “The Book of Enoch” and “The Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs”; indeed, it was generally accepted by learned Jews in the early centuries of the Christian era. In regard to the Septuagint, all MSS. render the Hebrew “sons of God” by “angels of God” in Job 1: 6, and 2: 10, and by “My angels” in Job 38: 7 -passages in which there was no dogmatic reason for tampering with the text. In Gen. 6: 2, 4, the Codex Alexandrinus and three later MSS. exhibit the same rendering, while others have “sons of God.” Augustine, however, admits that in his time the greater number of copies read “angels of God” in the latter passage also (De Civit. Dei, xv. 23). It seems, therefore, extremely probable that this was the original reading; and certainly the interpretation which it involves was adopted by the majority of the earlier Christian writers. Those who would pursue this subject further can do so in a recent and exhaustive treatise by the Rev. John Fleming, entitled, The Fallen Angles and the Heroes of Mythology. [See also our Appendix.]

 

 

It appears, therefore, that in the Old Testament the title “sons of God” is restricted to angels. 2 Several. passages are [Page 131 SONS OF ELOHIM ARE ANGELS] indeed adduced to prove its application to men: but upon examination they will all be found wide of the mark, the words of the original being in every case different, and sometimes signifying sons of Jehovah. This last, as we have already seen [pp. 122, 123], is a very different expression, and would probably have been used by the inspired historian in the verse under our consideration if he had wished to distinguish the godly descendants of Seth from the Cainites. For, while it forms a true description of all saints upon earth, it would have been in this place peculiarly appropriate to the Sethites just after the mention of the fact that they had been wont from the birth of Enos to call upon the name of Jehovah.

 

 

It thus appears that the sons of God are angelic beings: and the mysterious statement respecting them in the sixth chapter of Genesis seems to refer to a second and deeper apostasy on the part of some of the High Ones on high. But these more daring rebels are not found among the spirits of darkness which now haunt the air. They no longer retain their position as principalities and powers of the world, or even their liberty; but may be identified with the imprisoned criminals of whom Peter tells us that, after they had sinned, God spared them not, “but cast them down to Hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto Judgment 1 Jude also mentions their present condition in similar terms (Jude 6), and the context of either passage indicates with sufficient clearness the nature of their sin. They chose to leave their own world and, having broken [Page 132 THE NEPHILIM] through God’s limits into another, to go after strange flesh therefore He dashed them down at once to His lowest dungeon as an instant punishment of their impious outrage, and to deprive them for ever of the power of producing further confusion.

 

1. 2 Peter 2: 4. We have given the words of the Authorized Version, but the following would be a more literal rendering of the original. “For if God spared not angels when they had sinned, but cast them down to Tartarus, and committed them to pits of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment.” Tartarus appears to be a place of imprisonment more terrible than Hades, but it cannot be the Lake of Fire and Brimstone, the flames of which are to be kindled specially for the Beast and False Prophet, the first who will be cast into it. Compare Isa. 30: 33 with Rev. 19: 20. In the Greek mythology Tartarus was a dark abode of woe, as far beneath Hades as Earth is below heaven (Hom. II. viii. 16) - a description which fairly corresponds to Peter’s “pits of darkness.” Very significant, too, is the fact that it was thought to the prison of Cronos and the rebel Titans.

 

 

The verse following the announcement of the angels’ sin is a parenthesis of solemn import (Gen. 6: 3): the scene is for a moment shifted from the fearfully increasing wickedness of earth and transferred to the Heaven of heavens. There the invisible God sits enthroned and, looking down upon the rebellion and sin beneath Him, pronounces sentence of doom upon the unconscious world. The end must come: His spirit shall not always strive with men, seeing that they are irrecoverably overpowered by the desires of the flesh: yet they shall have a further respite of one hundred and twenty years.

 

 

Then the history is resumed with a brief hint at the cause which led to intermarriages between the sons of God and the daughters of men, both before and after the flood (Gen. 6: 4). Our translators have again omitted a definite article in the beginning of this verse, which should be rendered, “The Nephilim - or fallen ones - were on the earth in those days, and also afterwards, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men

 

 

Through a misapprehension of the Septuagint, which we will presently explain, the English version renders Nephilim by “giants.” But the form of the Hebrew word indicates a verbal adjective or noun, of passive or neuter signification from Naphal, to fall: hence it must mean “the fallen ones,” that is, probably, the fallen angels. Afterwards, however, the term seems to have been transferred to their offspring, as we may gather from the only other passage in which it occurs. In the evil report which the ten spies give of the land of Canaan, we find them saying: “All the people which we saw in it were men of great stature. And there we saw the Nephilim, the sons of Anak, descended from the Nephilim: and we seemed to ourselves as grasshoppers, and so we did to them” (Numb. 13: 32, 33).

 

 

It was doubtless the mention of the great stature of these men, together with the Septuagint rendering … [Gigantes] that suggested our translation “giants.” The roots of the Greek [gigas] have, however, no reference to great stature, but point to something very different. The word is merely another form of … [geegenees]: it signifies “earth-born,” and was used of the Titans, or sons of Heaven and Earth - Coelus and Terra - because, though [Page 133 THE NEPHILIM] superior to the human race, they were, nevertheless, of partly terrestrial origin. The meaning of “giants” in our sense of the term, is altogether secondary, and arose from the fact that these beings of mixed birth were said to have displayed a monstrous growth and strength of body. It will, therefore, be apparent that the rendering of the Septuagint correctly expresses the idea which was in the mind of the translator, since he appears to have taken Nephilim in each case to signify the offspring of the sons of God and the daughters of men. We, however, as we have explained above, prefer understanding the word primarily of the fallen angels themselves.

 

 

Now, in speaking of the sin of some of these, Jude (Jude 6) tells us that, despising the position of dignity and responsibility in which God had placed them, they voluntarily left their own home 1 in the Kingdom of the Air, prompted it would seem by earthward desires, and began to exercise an unlawful influence over the human race. And, perhaps, as a punishment, their return was prohibited; they were banished altogether from heaven and confined to the limits of earth; just as Satan and the remainder of his angels will be hereafter, a short time before the appearing of Christ to cast them into the still lower abyss.

 

1 [Or, disrobed themselves of the spiritual body proper to them as beings of heaven, and materialized for themselves an earth-body; for the word used, … oikeeteerion, in the only other place in N.T. (2 Cor. 5: 2) means heavenly body with which the believer longs to be clothed.]

 

 

But, however this may be, they were from some cause dwelling upon earth at the time, and the fact is apparently mentioned to account for their inter-marriages with the daughters of men. If, then, their continued residence below was voluntary, they soon passed on to a far more frightful sin: if, on the contrary, it was penal, instead of humbling themselves under the mighty hand of God, and patiently enduring until He remitted His just punishment, they did not hesitate to defy Him still more daringly, and to violate the law of their being. 2

 

2 This they did, not merely by consorting with beings of a different order, also by the very act of marriage itself; since our Lord tells us that, in their normal condition, angels “neither marry, nor are given in marriage” (Matt. 22: 30).

 

 

The assertion of a similar occurrence after the Deluge agrees with the passage in Numbers where the sons of Anak are said to have been Nephilim, or of the Nephilim (Numb. 13: 33); and seems also to account for God’s command that the whole race of the Canaanites should be extirpated. For immediately after the commission of the antediluvian sin, the [Page 134 AGUSTINE’S STATEMENT] doom of the world was pronounced: and prophecy intimates that the future confinement of the angels of darkness to earth will be the proximate cause of the great rebellion which will call forth the Lord Jesus in flaming fire to take vengeance (Rev. 12; 13).

 

 

The children of these unlawful connections before the flood were the renowned heroes of old: the subsequent repetition of the crime doubtless gave rise to the countless legends of the loves of the gods, and explains the numerous passages in the Classics, as well as in the ancient literature of other languages, in which human families are traced to a half Divine origin.

 

 

Before passing on, we should, perhaps, notice the most common objection to our interpretation, which is, that angels, as spiritual beings, could not take wives of the daughters of men. We are, however, unable to recognize the cogency of such an argument, because those who advance it lay claim to a more intimate acquaintance with angelic nature than we can concede as possible. On this point, therefore, we will merely quote a passage from Augustine - an opponent of the angel-theory - containing an admission which has been made by many other writers of various ages and climes, and which, absurd as it may have seemed to ourselves some years ago, is now rendered more probable by the disclosures of modern Spiritualism.

 

 

After citing the hundred and fourteenth Psalm to prove that angels are spirits, the great theologian proceeds as follows (De Civit. Dei, xv. 23):-

 

 

“However, that angels have appeared to men in bodies of such a nature that they could not only be seen but even touched, the same most true Scripture declares. Moreover, there is a very general rumour that Silvans and Fauns, who are commonly termed incubi, improbos saepe exstitisse mulieribus, et earurn appetisse ac peregisse concubitum. Many trustworthy persons assert that they have had personal experience of this, or that they have been informed by those who have experienced it. And that certain demons, whom the Gauls call Dusii, are continually attempting and effecting the crime is so generally affirmed that it would seem impudent to deny it1

 

1. To the prevalence of this idea we have no slight testimony in the fact that the name of the demons is one of the Celtic words which have survived in our language. It is the origin of the English Deuse, or Deuce, which is still used in exclamatory or interjectional phrases.

 

 

So Augustine. And that Paul had some such thought in [Page 135 THE EARTH CORRUPT] his mind when he bade the woman to worship with covered head “on account of the angels” (1 Cor. 11: 10) is, to say the least, within the limits of possibility.

 

 

The foundations of established order being thus destroyed by the irruption of the fallen angels, the whole world became corrupt, and its morals were inverted. Men no longer recognized a God to Whom personally all obedience and worship is first due, and Whose equal relation to all men as their Creator imperatively demands from each a love for his neighbour as great as that which he bears to himself. But they judged that whatsoever was pleasant to any man was also right for him; and after thus bursting the bands of God asunder and casting His cords from them, it was not long before they went on to believe that the attainment of a desired end justified every means, that the coveted possession must be secured even if it were necessary to use deceit or violence. Blinded by the selfishness of the flesh, which can see nothing beyond itself, they pursued their several objects without consideration or even thought of their fellows, except when any either stood in the way or might be made subservient. And hence there sprang up a thick crop of frauds and assassinations, of open quarrels and violence, till the whole earth was filled with corruption and bloodshed.

 

 

And yet all this seems to have existed side by side with luxury, a refined culture, and a love of art and music. Such minglings of things apparently incongruous have not been infrequent in postdiluvial times. The profligacy, immorality, and sensuous intellectuality of Athens is an example.

 

 

A parallel might also be sought in the descriptions given by Tacitus, Juvenal, and others, of the times of the Caesars. For then the whole body of society was corrupted, and even the streets of Rome were accustomed to violence. And yet the worst of vices, the most absolute immorality, the most profligate gluttony, the most wanton cruelty, prevailed in company with a splendid magnificence, a high appreciation of music, sculpture, and art generally, and a taste for literature, and especially for poetry, so great that recitations and readings were a common amusement. A very characteristic production of this age was the philosopher Seneca, who has been lately termed a seeker after God, on account of his books on morals, but who did not find the writing of beautiful sentiments any hindrance to a life of shocking depravity, and who presented to the world, as the fruit of his combined teaching and example, the proverbial monster Nero.

 

[Page 136 THE FLOOD FORETOLD]

Nor were the times of Leo the Tenth [Pope 1513-1521] without resemblance to the days of Noah; when that famous Pontiff, seated amid every possible sensuous and intellectual refinement, and surrounded by the most brilliant cluster of stars that has ever adorned the firmament of art, exclaimed: “This Christianity! how profitable a farce it has proved to us!” When, in a time which produced paintings, sculpture. and architecture, still marvels to the world, the sun as it rose day by day would expose the floating corpses of the assassinated in the Tiber; and infidelity and lawlessness kept such rapid pace with the culture of the beautiful that even Machiavelli [d. 1527], who will not be accused of too tender a conscience, declared that Italy had lost all principles of piety and all religious feeling; that the Italians had become a nation of impious cut-throats.

 

 

Such, though on a far greater scale, was the wickedness of the antediluvian world. But the end was approaching. God looked down a second time upon the spreading demoralization beneath Him (Gen. 6: 5-7), and saw that it would be necessary, at the close of the years of respite, to sweep man and beast creeping thing and fowl, from the face of the earth.

 

 

Yet a third time the Creator beheld, and lo! evil had made such fearful progress that all flesh had corrupted its way upon earth (Gen. 6: 12-21). Then He foretold the impending ruin to Noah, who alone found grace in His sight, and instructed him how he might avoid the universal doom. The commands laid upon the patriarch were a strong trial of his faith. He was to proclaim the speedy coming of a catastrophe which to unbelievers would appear simply irrational, of an overwhelming flood which should sweep away all life from the face of the whole earth.

 

 

It may be that men felt a momentary uneasiness at the first utterance of this prophecy of woe. Discussion may have taken place similar to those among ourselves, when the conjectured possibility of a collision between the earth and Donati’s comet caused a brief anxiety to those who believed in it. But, this qualm over, we can readily picture to ourselves the contempt and derision which must have been poured upon the prophet. Our own times will teach us how the men of science soon proved that such a thing as a universal flood was an absolute impossibility, contrary to all the known laws of nature. And since Noah persisted, the world doubtless settled down into a belief that he was a weak-minded fanatic, void of intellect, and altogether unworthy of notice.

 

 

But Noah was not only directed to foretell the approaching [Page 138 JUDGMENT AND MERCY] doom: he was also bidden to make open preparations for avoiding it, preparations, too, of vast magnitude, and such as must have attracted general attention. And a grievous burden it undoubtedly was to endure the scoffs and deridings with which he must have been continually assailed while building his immense ship on the dry land, far, it may be, from any water; but by faith he persevered, and at last the days of his trial drew on to their close.

 

 

None had listened to his warnings: not one beyond the inner circle of his own family was accounted worthy to be saved. But the ark was now completed, and he was instructed to enter it with his wife, his sons and their wives, and all the creatures which were impelled by God to go with him. He was at no loss to understand the significance of the command; he knew well that the wrath of God was being restrained only till those who should be saved had been taken out of the way; and we can imagine his feelings as he watched the long procession slowly filing into the ark, and at length followed in its rear, leaving the unconscious world, friends and foes like, in the inexorable grasp of destruction. ...

 

 

And yet, as our Lord Himself tells us, the doomed multitudes knew it not. They had often heard, but had refused to listen: the voice of the prophet had seemed to them as the voice of one that mocked. Even on the morning of the fatal day, earth resounded with the noise of revelry and merriment: men were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage: they were absorbed in the pleasures of the moment: and discerned not the slowly rising spectre of Death amid the gathering clouds, the destroyer, with uplifted scythe, about to mow down all flesh at one fell stroke.

 

 

But their dream of security was at length rudely dispelled. … On the day in which Noah entered into the ark the windows of heaven were opened, and the waters that were above the firmament began to descend. The world wondered; and then, remembering the words of Noah, trembled at the fast falling raindrops, the first they had ever beheld. 1

 

1 In Gen. 2: 5, 6, we are told that the LORD God had not caused it to rain, but that a mist went up from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground. Probably this state of things continued until the flood, when the windows of heaven were for the first time opened. The rainbow must have been a new phenomenon when it was given as a token to Noah: the words of God imply as much. Besides which, had the bow been seen before the flood, its subsequent reappearance could never have suggested security. But if there was no rainbow, there could scarcely have been rain.

 

 

Nor was this all. A fearful roaring from the sea announced that some mighty convulsion, equally beyond the calculation [Page 138 JUDGMENT AND MERCY] of the scientific men of the day, had commenced in the great deep. All its sealed fountains were bursting up: God had removed the bounds of ocean: its proud waves were no longer stayed, but were rising with prodigious tumult, and beginning to advance again upon the dry land.

 

 

What scenes of horror must have been presented beneath the dismal rainfall at this awful time! What affrighted groups! What countenances of dismay! What shrieks of terror! What faintings for fear! What headlong flights to any place which appeared to offer safety for the moment!

 

 

Yet the mercy of God seems even then to have been mingled with His judgment. ... His mercy devised a doom which, though inexorable and complete, was, nevertheless, not instantaneous, but gave time for repentance before death, that by the destruction of the flesh the spirits of many might be saved.

 

 

The waters continued to increase: the ark was upborne upon them ... and earth was again almost as it had been before the six days of restoration, covered above its highest mountain tops with a shoreless ocean. ...

 

 

Woeful was the proof that man, if unrestrained, if left to his own devices, is not merely incapable of recovering his innocence, but will rush madly down the steep of sensuousness and impious self-will until he finds himself engulfed in the abyss of perdition. The trial of freedom had failed: the second of the ages was ended.

 

 

*       *       *

 

 

[Page 139]

CHAPTER 9

 

“AS IT WAS IN THE DAYS OF NOAH”

 

 

WE have just endeavoured to trace the flow of history from its source to the great catastrophe which swept corruption and violence from the earth. We have seen its clear spring proceeding from the throne of the Everlasting God, and have then lost sight of it as it wound its way through vast regions that may not be trodden by mortal foot. Once or twice we have climbed an accessible height, and from the distance gazed with strained eyes upon something which sparkled in the rays of God’s Word, and which we supposed to be the waters of the river we were seeking: but we could obtain no certain knowledge of the mysterious stream, until we saw its turbid and foaming torrent emerging in fearful cataract from between the dark mountains which concealed its previous course.

 

 

We have followed it into a land of delight, in which it gradually calmed and brightened again, while its banks teemed with all that is beautiful and lovely: we have traced it as it passed the limits of that joyous realm, and hurried through dry and barren tracts, with ever increasing volume and rapidity, till at length its agitated waters were violently engulfed in the great ocean of the flood.

 

 

We must not, however, dismiss the story of doom which we have just been considering without some reflections on the solemn warning drawn from it by the Saviour. “But as the days of Noah were is His awful declaration, “so shall also the coming of the Son of Man be. For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered into the ark, and knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of Man be” (Matt. 24: 37-39). Thus the closing scenes of this present [evil and apostate] age will be a reproduction of the days of Noah: the same intense worldliness, and at last positive inability to care for the [Prophetic and Judgmental] things of God, which was displayed by the antediluvians, will also be characteristic of our world when Christ begins the judgments that will quickly culminate in the glory of His appearing. It seems fair, then, to infer that this second manifestation of [Page 140 FEATURES OF NOAH’S DAY] the spirit that worked in them who were disobedient before the flood will be effected by a conjunction of causes similar to that which formerly produced it. And hence, as we have already remarked, it becomes a matter of the greatest practical importance to comprehend those causes: for whenever they are again found to be simultaneously affecting the masses of the world’s population, the fact will afford a strong presumption that we are drifting rapidly to the great consummation of wickedness; that the avenging glory of the Lord is about to be revealed, so that all flesh shall see it together.

 

 

For us, therefore, the great question is, Are these fatal influences now in operation? Are they more universally characteristic of this epoch than of any other? Mature consideration has impelled many to return an affirmative answer: let us ses whether facts warrant us in holding the same view. It is impossible to exaggerate our interest in the investigation. If the present times - [of compulsive lying, deceit, and a wilful decision to refuse to  disclose the many known accountability truths of Holy Scripture*] - are only beginning to take the complexion of those of Noah, they send forth a piercing cry of warning admonishing us to stand with our loins girded about and our lamps burning, waiting for the summons of the Lord. For He will remove His - [faithful, holy, and obedient] - Church, as He removed Enoch, before the wickedness of man has come to its worst. He will take away that which He Himself has called the salt of the earth, and then the corruption of all flesh will go on unchecked, and the world speedily ripen for its doom.

 

 

The seven great causes of the antediluvian apostasy have been already noticed, and may be summed up as follows.

 

 

I. A tendency to worship God as Elohim, that is, merely as the Creator and Benefactor, and not as Jehovah the covenant God of mercy, dealing with transgressors who are appointed to destruction, and finding a ransom for them.

 

 

II. An undue prominence of the female sex, and a disregard of the primal law of marriage.

 

 

III. A rapid progress in the mechanical arts, and the consequent invention of many devices whereby the hardships of the curse were mitigated, and life was rendered more easy and indulgent. Also a proficiency in the fine arts, which captivated the minds of men, and helped to induce an entire oblivion of God.

 

 

IV. An alliance between the nominal Church and the World, which speedily resulted in a complete amalgamation.

 

 

V. A vast increase of population.

 

[Page 141 THE WAY OF CAIN]

VI. The rejection of the preaching of Enoch [and Noah], whose warnings thus became a savour of death unto the world, and hardened men beyond recovery.

 

 

VII. The appearance upon earth of beings from the Principality of the Air, and their unlawful intercourse with the human race.

 

 

These causes concurred to envelop the world in a sensuous mist which no ray of truth could penetrate. They brought about a total forgetfulness of God and disregard of His will; and thus, by removing the great Centre Who alone is able to attract men from themselves, rendered the dwellers upon earth so selfish and unscrupulous that the world was presently filled with lewdness, injustice, oppression, and bloodshed. It remains, therefore, for us to consider whether similar influences are now acting upon society.

 

 

And certainly we cannot but confess that the first-mentioned cause is eminently characteristic of our times. For in all the professing Churches of Christendom, as well as among Jews, Mahometans, and Pagans, there are countless and ever-increasing multitudes who go in the way of Cain (Jude 2), acknowledging the Supreme Being, but not recognizing His holiness and their own depravity, and so denying all necessity of a Mediator between God and man. Many of these are willing to look upon Christ as some great one, and will talk of His wise philosophy and exemplary life: but they neither confess Him to be the Only Begotten Son of the Father, nor feel the need of His atonement. Consequently, they reject His revelation, as an absolute authority at least, trusting rather to the darkness them which they call light; and thus, closing their eyes to the true relations of man with his Creator, form their own conceptions both of the Deity and of themselves. This involves nothing less than a claim on their part to supreme wisdom and authority: it is moulding an idol out of their own imagination before which to fall down and worship. Nor need we wonder that it leads to a virtual deification of men of transcendent intellect or great renown. Who has not detected the working of this leaven in his own circle? Who has not observed this “pure Theism,” as it is called, rising to the surface in all the sects of Christendom?

 

 

If the second cause be rightly inferred from the scanty hints given to us, it is also in operation at the present time: for the female sex has certainly commenced a migration into a new sphere and more prominent position. And the looseness in regard to the marriage tie, which has long obtained on the [Page 142 DIVORCE AND LUXURY] Continent, is now spreading in England also, as we may see from the records of our recently-established divorce courts. Nay, there are not wanting those who, instead of fearing to put asunder that which God has joined, openly affirm that wedlock should be a contract, not for life, but only for so long a time as may be agreeable to the contracting parties.

 

 

At the close of the previous dispensation the same sin was frequent among the Pharisees, who held that divorce is permissible for any reason; even, as Rabbi Akibah shamelessly says, “if a man sees a woman handsomer than his own wife.” Hence the Lord’s continual mention of adultery in His denunciations of the Pharisees: for the marriage after divorce which they legalized, He declared to be criminal. In the wonderful sermon contained in the fifteenth, sixteenth, and seventeen` chapters of Luke, He brings it forward with a startling abruptness, as a most open and undeniable sin, which would at once convict His hearers of having proved as disobedient to the Law and the Prophets as they were to the Gospel (Luke 16: 18). We know the punishment which quickly overtook them for this and their many other transgressions. In a few short years their lusts were extinguished in their blood: the fair walls and streets of their city were levelled with the ground: their beautiful temple in which they trusted perished in the flames, and the idolatrous shrine of Jupiter rose insultingly upon its ruins.

 

 

Of the third cause, the spread of science, art, and luxury, it is unnecessary to speak: for none will deny that this is a great characteristic of our days: nay, the fact is a common subject of boasting. And alas! how many instances have we of the self-deifying arrogance which frequently arises from a little knowledge of the laws of nature, or a marked success in those arts, sciences, and philosophies which are the delight of cultivated and refined intellects! 1 With what confidence, too, and carelessness do men settle themselves amid the comforts and indulgences of this luxurious age! Seeing good only in the present life, how little thought do they give to God, how deaf are they to any mention of the World to Come! How incredulous, even if their mouths be not filled with mocking, when they hear but a whisper of that tempest of God’s fury which will shortly burst upon the apathetic world, and hurry multitudes away from all that they love into the dungeons of His wrath! (Isa. 2: 12-17; Isa. 32: 11; Ezek. 39: 6). ...

 

1 For let it not be supposed that these remarks are directed absolutely against the pursuit of science and art. They are only intended to refer to the insubordinate and atheistical spirit which seems too commonly to arise from it.

 

[Page 143 WORLDLY RELIGION]

To reproduce the fourth cause the Prince of this World has long been striving, and certainly now seems near to his victory. It is the natural result of the first error, the denial of our position as sinners before God, as doomed to destruction unless a ransom be found. Let the Church surrender that truth, and what hinders her from living in perfect accord with the World? If the practical teaching of religion be that God is fairly satisfied with our conduct, troubles but little about our sins, highly appreciates our works of virtue, even though pride be their mainspring, and looks with pleasure upon bold deeds and intellectual displays, why should such a theology clash with the cravings of fallen men? How could they hate a deity so like to themselves?

 

 

And have we not been describing the creed of vast numbers in the professing Church? Are not the walls of the city of God thus continually broken down before our eyes, so that the stranger may enter at will? Men do indeed frequent their        churches and chapels in crowds: they excite a feeling, which they term religious, by grand buildings, by painted windows, by splendid vestments, by gorgeous ceremonies, by beautiful music, by sentimental or intellectual discourses, and by strong sectarian or political convictions. But if they clothe themselves the semblance of devotion in their worship, they altogether lose this outward distinction in the world, and bewilder those who are honestly asking what they shall do to be saved by plunging into all the gaieties, frivolities, pursuits, and business, of this life, as if they were to remain among them for ever. They act as though God had promised that they at least should not be hurried out of the world as so many of their fellows are, but should have due warning and ample space and inclination for repentance (John 6: 44). They seem to be assured that they will never be unexpectedly startled by the dread sentence, “Thou fool, this night shall thy soul be required of thee” ( Luke 12: 20); nor suddenly appalled by the blast of the arch-angel’s trumpet, and the thunder of the voice of God. They have conceded that it is rational to seek contentment and pleasure in an existence of awful brevity, which was only granted to them for the decision of one stupendous question, whether it shall be followed by everlasting life, or by shame and everlasting contempt. The powers of the World to Come have l ost their hold upon them, they are even as other men: so many points have been yielded, amusements permitted, and vices condoned, that it is almost impossible to distinguish them from non-professors unless they recite their creed. Nay, some would appear to be holding a doctrine of the ancient Gnostics who, [Page 144 WORLDLY FELLOWSHIP] denying the resurrection, affirmed that, their spirits being saved, they were at liberty to do what they would with the body inasmuch as after death they would have no further concern either with it or its deeds. And although many are ready to confess that the Christian must take up his cross, yet being thoroughly satisfied that in these modern times the unwearied zeal of Christ and His apostles would be quite out of place, they can by no means find a cross to bear. If, however, God in His anger smite them with sickness, bereavement, disappointment or loss, they talk of their trials, and comfort themselves with the thought that they are imitating the Lord by enduring troubles which they cannot in any way avoid.

 

 

Oh that those who are thus blinded by Satan would consider while there is yet time; would earnestly and prayerfully meditate upon the words of the Lord Jesus, and interpret them by His most holy life! Then would they see the inconsistency of their position, and keenly feel that they have been fulfilling to the letter the prophecy of the last times, that men should have a form of godliness, but deny the power thereof (2 Tim. 3: 5). For the world will allow the mere statement of any doctrine, provided no attempt be made to put it into practice. It is only when faith begins to produce works that the Christian is confronted with bitter antagonism; when he feels that he must redeem the time because the days are evil; when, being conscious of a dispensation committed to him, he is impelled to preach the Word in season and out of season, to speak as a dying man to dying men; when he can no longer take part in frivolous gaieties or time-killing pleasures, knowing that such things are but as a painted curtain used by the foul fiend to hide from men the brink of death on which they are walking, until the time comes to tear it away and thrust them over the precipice.

 

 

If any be thus earnestly minded, they will have no difficulty in regard to the line of separation: they will quickly find the cross they have to bear: they will feel that, like their Master, they are not of this world, and will indeed have tribulation in it. But let them be of good cheer: for He is at hand, and great will be their joy at His coming.

 

 

Nor are the concessions of the nominal Church in point of doctrine less deplorable than those which concern conduct. We have before seen that men were ever prone to soften and corrupt those parts of God’s Word which oppose their own thoughts and aspirations. But a strange and impious idea now prevalent is destroying the last vestiges of Biblical authority, and sweeping away every remaining barrier to peace between the professing Church and the World. This is a rapidly growing objection to [Page 145 DOGMA DISCARDED] what is called dogma. Now did the objection apply only to the too positive assertion by men of their own opinions, the sentiment would be wholesome: but upon inquiry we discover that “dogma” is practically a conventional term for the revelations and commandments of the Most High God. And many who profess a belief in the Bible, instead of strengthening “the things which remain, that are ready to die” (Rev. 3: 2), are never weary of admonishing us to be charitable in regard to those who reject every vital doctrine of Scripture, and even deny the Lord Who bought them. We are told that, provided men be “honest,” all will be well with them at last: that we must not be narrow-minded: that there are other entrances into the fold besides the door (John 10: 7): that those are not necessarily thieves and robbers who climb over the wall; but, it may be, bolder and more manly spirits than their fellows.

 

 

It is easy to see that by such a line of reasoning all power is extracted from the Scriptures. Instead of being recognized as the living Word of Him Who shall hereafter judge the living and the dead by the things which are written in them, they are regarded merely as an ordinary volume of advice to man, who, in assuming the right to accept or reject them at will, arrogantly places the crown of Deity upon his own head. And thus the great means which God has appointed for the separation of His Church from the World is destroyed: the light which reveals the continual peril and the fearful termination of the broad road is put out, and men go heedlessly on, amused with the trifles of the moment, until they fall headlong into the jaws of the pit.

 

 

Upon the fifth cause there is no need to enlarge. For, without troubling the census papers, almost every Englishman could speak of the rapid growth of his own neighbourhood. Nor has the world ever previously beheld so vast an aggregation of human life as that which our metropolis now exhibits. Yet at the same time crowds of emigrants are leaving the country, and filling the solitary places of the earth. And statistics show that the population of almost every part of the world is also increasing.

 

 

But, in addition to this, there is a phenomenon of gloomy portent. For, while they multiply, men are also beginning to exhibit impatience of restraint: and, since they are learning to act together, and seem to be growing inflated with reliance on their fancied power, they will probably soon go on to deeds of unpious daring. Large organizations, which are no longer confined to the frontiers of one people, forebode a second rebellion of Babel. The time of the shaking of all nations is approaching, and the hearts of many are already failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth. [Page 146 WARNINGS REJECTED] Let believers consider their ways  for the Lord will shortly descend to see what the children of men are doing.

 

 

Whenever the Word of God is faithfully preached it cannot return unto Him void: it will accomplish that which He pleases and prosper in the thing whereto He sent it (Isa. 55: 11): some effect it must produce upon all who hear. It separates the wheat from the chaff: it either draws men nearer to God, or renders them more callous than before, and prepares them for speedy judgment. “For we are unto God,” says Paul, “a sweet savour of Christ, in them that are being saved, and in them that are perishing. To the one we are the savour of death unto death; and to the other the savour of life unto life” (2 Cor. 2: 15, 16).

 

 

And so the powerful appeals of Enoch, his loud calls to repentance and threatenings of judgment to come, since they were slighted by the world, must have mightily hardened the hearts of men, and caused the Spirit of God to cease striving with them. Very probably many were at first impressed and alarmed: but after a while, when they saw day following day without any sign of the predicted vengeance, they lost their fear: they went back to their favourite sins, as the dog to his vomit: they could no longer be roused as before: they began to be scoffers, and mocked at the most solemn warnings: the demon, who had been for a brief space expelled, returned with seven others more wicked than himself: so that their last state was worse than the first (Luke 11: 24-26).

 

 

In this case also history appears to be repeating itself. For some fifty years God has supplied an unbroken stream of evangelical testimony which has been gradually increasing in power; and there is now sounding forth such a proclamation of the Gospel as the world has never, perhaps, heard since the days of the apostles. The Spirit has fallen upon the Church with Pentecostal vigour: revivals, missions at home and abroad, and the efforts of many individuals, have caused the conversion of thousands. Those who are really Christ’s seem to be strenuously urged by a sense of their responsibilities: they are going out into the streets and lanes, into the highways and hedges, constraining men to come in: the wedding-hall is rapidly filling with guests.

 

 

And amid the calls to repentance and offers of grace, amid the mutual exhortations to walk as children of the light, there peals forth, waxing ever louder and louder, the solemn cry, “Behold, the Bridegroom cometh, go ye out to meet Him” 1 [Page 147 THE GOSPEL REJECTED]  (Matt. 25: 6); while the testimony of the faithful to the world is assuming its last form: “Fear God, and give glory to Him, for the hour of His judgment is come” (Rev. 14: 7). Indications of this new epoch have been growing more and more apparent for some years, and many papers and periodicals have been devoted to the resucitation of the long-neglected truth so prominently set forth by our Lord and His apostles. Hundreds of books and pamphlets have been written on the same subject; while the majority of the later-revival preachers, and a daily increasing number of other witnesses, have promulgated it to such an extent that it would now be difficult to find a moderately intelligent Christian who is ignorant of the great hope, even if he does not accept it as his own.

 

1.  [Probably the strict application of this passage is to an hour still fixture, quite immediately before the Lord shall come.]

 

There is also a significant change passing over this testimony, and rendering it far more. consistent and powerful. For although but a short time has elapsed since the disagreement of prophetic writers was almost proverbial, the great body of them are now beginning to exhibit a wonderful harmony on all main points, and to proclaim that the solemn event which all should be awaiting is the command that will summon the Church into the presence of her Lord. We may, therefore, in several particulars find a remarkable analogy between the preaching of God’s people in the present time and the prophesying of Enoch before the days of Noah.

 

 

But the masses of the world are again rejecting God’s more urgent appeals, and, as a natural consequence, His Spirit is ceasing to strive with them: infidelity and superstition are beginning to overshadow even the most favoured countries of Christendom. In our own land, how great an excitement was caused some twenty years ago by the publication of Essays and Reviews: but that book, though hailed with such delight by those who were unwilling to submit to the Divine revelation, has now been swept out of memory by the flood of more daring infidel literature which has since been continually issuing from the press. How few of our newspapers, reviews, and periodicals, escaped the contagion! How great a multitude of propagating secularists does our country contain, from the bold blasphemer coarsely inveighing against the Word of God, and either denying His existence or charging Him with injustice, to the refined and subtle reasoner who would fain make the ineffable light of his Creator pale before the flickering lamp of human intellect! It is, however, needless to enlarge on so obvious a matter, or to waste time in proving the simultaneous spread of Ritualism and Popery, which is now sufficiently evident even to the most careless observer ; while in regard to [Page 148 SPIRITISM REVIVED] the prevalence of sorcery we shall have more to say anon.

 

 

Have we not, then, reason to infer both from these apostasies, and from the general resemblance of our days to the perilous times of the end as described by Paul (2 Tim. 3: 1-9), that Christendom, as the inevitable punishment of a general rejection of the Gospel [of the Kingdom], is being judicially blinded and irremediably hardened?

 

 

The seventh and most fearful characteristic of the days of Noah was the unlawful appearance among men of beings from another sphere. This, many would quickly reply, is certainly an event which has not yet startled our age, strange as our experiences may be: we have still something at least to await before the completion of that fatal circle of influences which ruined the old world. But a diligent comparison of Scripture with the things that are now taking place among us will give a very different impression, and induce a strong conviction that the advanced posts of this last terrible foe have already crossed our borders. For it is no longer possible to deny the supernatural character of the apostasy called Spiritualism, which is spreading through the world with unexampled rapidity, and which attracts its votaries, and retains them within its grasp, solely by continual exhibitions of the miraculous. It is vain to speak of that power as mere jugglery which has convinced some of the elite of the literary world, which has caught in its meshes many scientific men, who at first only troubled to investigate for the purpose of refutation. Nor indeed can anything be more dangerous than utter incredulity: for the wholly incredulous, if suddenly brought face to face with the supernatural, is of all men the most likely to yield entire submission to the priests of the new wonder. Better far is it to inquire prayerfully whether these things are possible, and if so, in what light the Bible teaches us to regard them. We shall thus be armed against all the wiles of the Devil.

 

 

But an exposition of the nature and history of Spiritualism of sufficient length to exhibit its apparent identity with the antediluvian sin is a serious matter, and must not be commenced at the end of a chapter.

 

 

*       *       *       *       *       *       *

 

 

[PART FOUR]

 

FALLEN ANGELS TAKING HUMAN FORM*

 

 

A Study of Genesis 6: 1-7

 

 

By G. H. LANG

 

 

-------

 

 

APPENDIX

 

[Page 310]

Dr. Patrick Fairbairn, in the Imperial Bible Dictionary (article “Son or Sons of God”), while taking an opposite view to that of this article, says that the opinion here advocated is given in the Book of Enoch, and was taken by many of the fathers, and by not a few of the Catholic and Lutheran theologians. Of the last mentioned he names, Stier, Hofmann, Kurtz, and Delitzsch. Darby says it was the almost universal opinion of early Christians (Letters, Vol. III, p. 165).

 

 

IN a diary describing a visit by the writer to the ruins of ancient Egyptian temples, the following passage occurred:

 

 

Who that has stood amidst the shadows of the towering pillars of the great Hypostyle Hall of the vast temple of Luxor will easily forget the beauty of the scene as one looked across the large forecourt of Amenhotep III, and caught the glow of the sun, now setting behind the Theban Hills, irradiating with a golden brilliance the mighty columns of the colonnades?

 

 

Yet the grandeur of the open court is of less interest than is the story depicted upon the walls of that apartment near the Sanctuary which is called the Birth Room. The reliefs tell how the god Amen-Ra took to himself the form of Thothmes IV and visited his queen Muternua. She, supposing the visitor to be her royal husband, received him to her chamber. Before leaving her the god revealed himself and told her the child of their union should be named Amenhotep.

 

 

In the mortuary temple of Hatshepsut at Dir-el-Bahri is given a story, somewhat similar in its detail, and identical in the essential feature of Amen-Ra becoming the father of Queen Hatshepsut, by visiting, under the guise of her husband, the queen Aahmes.

 

 

And in the temple of Isis at Phylae is a further somewhat similar series of reliefs.

 

 

Whether the very king and the very queen named in these inscriptions were of semi-superhuman origin we do not say. It may be that this was alleged of them merely to give them greater hold upon the superstitious peoples over whom they ruled and whose worship they guided.

 

 

But was there anything or nothing of fact ever behind this alleged matter of gods taking human form, visiting such of the [Page 311 SCRIPTURE TESTIMONY] daughters of men as they would, and becoming the fathers of their children? Is it a mere invention, or does it point to the most terrible of all evils that have afflicted this world?

 

 

Before summarily dismissing the idea as impossible, as merely a cunning invention of priestcraft for the purpose of deceiving mankind in its own interests, the thoughtful will consider some facts.

 

 

(1) Moses was “instructed in all the wisdom of the Egyptians” (Acts 7: 22), and could not have been ignorant of these stories. Indeed, he may have seen these very reliefs upon which the visitor still looks.

 

 

(2) The Israelites also, by reason of their long sojourn in Egypt, must have been familiar with these alleged events.

 

 

(3) Yet when Moses rejected the gods of Egypt to serve the only true God, Jehovah, and when he led Israel out of Egypt, and denounced all idolatry in unmeasured terms, he not only did not instruct his followers that these stories were “fond things vainly invented,” mere abominable deceits of men, but, on the contrary, he, in narrating for Israel’s benefit the history of former times, declares that both before the Flood, and after that [divine] judgment also, certain of “the sons of Elohim saw the daughters of adam (man) that they were fair; and they took them wives of all that they chose” (Gen. 6).

 

 

That these “sons of God” were angelic beings is clear from the following particulars:

 

 

(a) The contrast in the terms “the sons of Elohim” and “the daughters of adam” (“the adam” the descendants of the one so named, Adam).

 

 

(b) That the offspring of such unions were, as might be expected, markedly “mighty,” and did such deeds as made them “men of renown.” These features in the children are not accounted for on the supposition that the fathers were only men, even if godly men.

 

 

(c) That the consequence on earth was the so great abounding of wickedness, and specially the corrupting of the imaginations of men’s hearts, that God could no more tolerate the scene, and judgment swept over the world of the ungodly. This special inward corrupting of man suggests, some special inward spiritual agency and influence.

 

 

(d) That the term “sons of Elohim” in the literature of the time meant angelic beings. Job was a contemporary writing with Genesis, and was given for the instruction of the same people, Israel. To have used such a remarkable term for men in the one book, and of angels in the other book, would have been confusing. But in Job 1: 6 and 2: 2, Satan is seen in the company of the “sons of God”; and the locality is heavenly, for Satan informs Jehovah that he has come to that place of meeting “from going to and fro in the earth

 

 

And yet more conclusive is chapter 38: 7, for there God indicates that the “sons of God” were in existence before the earth was made, for at the creation of it they shouted for JOY.

 

[Page 312 THE SONS OR ELOHIM]

In Psalm 82: 1, 6, the “elohim” are again spoken of, and as “sons of the Most High.” Here they are threatened that, if they go on in the evil of which God complains in verse 2, they shall “die like Adam” (man). Now if children of Adam were the persons addressed, it were superfluous so to warn them, for their death would be a matter of course; hence these “sons of the Most High” must be the “sons of Elohim,” not of Adam. It may be remarked that when our Lord quoted this verse (John 10: 34), He made no mention of what order of beings God addressed in this Psalm. His use of the passage to prove the inviolability of the Word of God is as pertinent whoever were the beings in question, whether angels or men.

 

 

ANGELS MATERIALIZING

 

 

(4) Seeing that angels can so materialize to themselves bodies as to eat the food of men (Gen. 18: 8), to draw Lot by their hands (Gen. 19: 10, 16), etc., there need be no difficulty in believing them able to perform other bodily functions, if they so wish.

 

 

If Matthew 22: 30 be urged to the contrary, it may be pointed out that our Lord states what is the condition of things “in heaven”: He does not allege that angels cannot violate that order, and act otherwise on earth. Whilst in Jude, verses 6, 7, we are plainly told that there have been “angels who kept not their own principality, but left their proper habitation”; and it is explained that Sodom and Gomorrah, in going after strange flesh, sinned “like these” angels.

 

 

The thoughtful, we say, will consider these facts and scriptures and will not fail to note that this abhorrent and terrible subject is of practical moment, inasmuch as the Son of God has forewarned us that the days before His appearing again on earth will present a true likeness to the days of Noah and to the state of Sodom in the days of Lot.

 

 

Let the modem westerner marvel and cavil if he please; but these stones plainly tell us that the men of old knew the possibility of these dark things. And Genesis 6 tells us who were the real gods of paganism, who thus, for the purpose of debasing mankind, “left their proper habitation,” namely, rebellious angels. “Whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our instruction

 

 

OBJECTIONS CONSIDERED

 

 

When writing as above I was not unaware that another view of Genesis 6: 2 has been advanced.

 

 

Defending that other interpretation one reader of the diary was good enough to quote from a well-known work as follows: “But the race of Seth also became infected with the vices of the Cainites. This seems to be the only reasonable sense of the intercourse between the ‘sons of God’ (sons of Elohim) and [Page 313] the ‘daughters of men’ (daughters of Adam). We may put aside all fancies borrowed from heathen mythology respecting the union of superhuman beings with mortal women, and assume that both parties were of the human race. The family of Seth, who preserved their faith in God, and the family of Cain who lived only for this world, had hitherto kept distinct; but now a mingling of the two races took place, which resulted in the thorough corruption of the former, who falling away plunged into the deepest abyss of wickedness. We are also told that this union produced a stock conspicuous for physical strength and courage; and this is a well known result of the intermixture of different races.” (Smith’s Student’s Old Testament History.)

 

 

As we suppose that this will be accepted as a good statement of that interpretation we will examine it a little closely.

 

 

I. It is scarcely fair to those who hold the view under discussion that it should be summarily dismissed as “a fancy borrowed from heathen mythology.” For that view is deduced from numerous Scriptures, and considerations arising therefrom, of which many are before suggested, and were mythology silent upon the subject it would still, as we think, be deducible and maintainable from the Word of God.

 

 

Nor is it true, wise, or scientific to dismiss all ancient mythology, as necessarily false to fact, and as being therefore unworthy of consideration.

 

 

Having seen in the Word of God itself reason for entertaining the view before advocated, those who advance it point, by way of corroboration, to the unquestionable and remarkable fact that the ancient mythologies, which, be it specially noted, carry us back to the same period of history which the book of Genesis covers, reveal this as the almost universal belief of the whole ancient world at and after that period, and as being indeed a foundation of their religions.

 

 

How did this extraordinary conception come into existence and command such universal and permanent assent? We think that those who reject the explanation which is offered by Genesis 6. (upon our reading of its meaning) can give no explanation of this pregnant fact.

 

 

THE REAL “GODS” OF PAGANISM

 

 

Our own view of paganism is that it was instituted by Satan, and his angelic co-rebels, for sinister purposes in opposition to the will of God.

 

 

This is the explanation given in the Scriptures, which definitely and repeatedly instruct us that it is to demons that [Page 314 THE NATURE OF MYTHOLOGY] idolatrous worship is really and finally directed (Deuteronomy 32: 17; Psalm 106: 37; 1 Corinthians 10: 20).

 

 

This being so, certainly much concerning Satan and his workings may be learned from paganism, if only it is studied in the light of God’s revelation in Scripture.

 

 

Now mythology enshrines the remembrance by man of the earliest actings and teachings of these fallen angels. And this is the only explanation which meets the facts of the case as they always have existed and do still exist.

 

 

The general correspondence of pagan worship in various lands and times, and particularly the secret and esoteric teaching which makes all paganisms and mythologies one body of demonology, finds here its sole and sufficient explanation.

 

 

The persistency of these ideas, and of rituals embodying these ideas, through thousands of years, in spite of the decay and passing of nations, is also thus readily explained.

 

 

The solemn fact that the essential doctrines of these old pagan philosophies are even now subtly and widely permeating the western world, in spite of its education and scientific progress, and are captivating multitudes who would boast of intellectual superiority to the “poor heathen,” finds a prompt and adequate explanation in the thought that the mighty “god of this age” is powerfully working to reinfect the latest descendants of Japheth with the very same conceptions as blinded their forefathers and still blind the sons of Shem; conceptions which hide from men the true God and so make them the more ready prey to God’s enemy and would-be usurper.

 

 

Nor is this a difficult work, seeing that peoples who have had the Word of God are largely refusing to walk in the light which that Word sheds forth, and are thus easily deluded by Theosophy, Spiritism, Christian Science, and the like philosophies, the essential teachings of which are identical with the pantheistic views of Hinduism and Buddhism, as well as the Grecian and Egyptian systems of thought which once flourished with, but have been outlived by, their more eastern relations.

 

 

Wisdom calls upon the discerning to be prepared to hear some solemn warnings from paganism, and so to detect some of Satan’s wiles and depths, and to be kept therefrom.

 

 

And where, as in the point under review, the Scriptures of truth and the general belief of the ancient world strictly accord (as they do upon our view of those Scriptures), it is not wise, and may be dangerous, peremptorily to refuse even to listen to the united testimony.

 

 

Paganism pressed hard upon both Jews and Christian disciples, and was a constant spiritual menace to both ; and [Page 315 FALSE ASSUMPTIONS] much of the deeper, finer meaning of the utterances of prophets and apostles can only be appreciated when this fact is understood and kept in mind.

 

 

THE WEAKNESS OF THE OBJECTION

 

 

II. The fundamental weakness of the case upheld by the writer quoted was never more clearly revealed than when he wrote as above, “we may ... assume that both parties were of the human race

 

 

That is precisely the basis upon which the exposition rests: it is assumption. It is a fact that in each other place where the exact term “sons of Elohim” is employed it designates angelic beings; and therefore it must be assumed that in Genesis 6, it means men, for that cannot be proved. Let us notice how many and great are the assumptions involved in that one.

 

 

(1) It is assumed that the descendants of Seth as a whole kept true to Jehovah. This is nowhere stated, nor even implied. Of even the patriarchs it cannot be proved, except in the cases of Enoch and Noah.

 

 

Indeed, the very fact that in a genealogy the former is singled out for mention as being one who “walked with God” almost suggests that he differed in that particular from the others named, for had they all walked with God why should his doing so be remarked upon and the rest be left without this praise?

 

 

(2) But if Seth’s descendants did for a time fear God it is at any rate an assumption that they continued to do so through the many long centuries down to about the year of the world 1536; and,

 

 

(3) It is a further assumption, for it is not so stated, that the collapse of their godliness took place just 120 years before the flood.

 

 

Nor is any explanation forthcoming as to why they had not sooner noticed the daughters of men as being attractive, or why, if they had noticed them, they were not sooner overcome by their charms.

 

 

Were the daughters of Seth’s family without beauty that the fairness of the Cainite women suddenly and so disastrously conquered them? or had the two families, though rapidly multiplying, and living in the same region, never touched each other?

 

 

In order to explain the might and prowess of the off-spring it is assumed that Sethites and Cainites were separate races.

 

 

In point of fact no national or racial distinctions were known at that time, for the differences are plainly stated to have [Page 316 FALSE ASSUMPTIONS] commenced after the flood with the confounding of the one language hitherto spoken by all.

 

 

Hence our earlier remarks under 3 (b) (c) are not invalidated.

 

 

(5) It is an assumption, having no warrant in other places where the term is used, that when God says “sons of Elohim” he means “sons of Seth”

 

 

An argument that requires that its every premise be assumed cannot be maintained.

 

 

I was further referred to the footnote to Genesis 6 in Dr. C. I. Scofield’s edition of the English Bible.

 

 

It is there denied that the term “sons of Elohim” always elsewhere denotes angelic beings. But in support he refers to but one passage (Isa. 43: 6); and lo! on referring to this solitary citation it is to find that the term under consideration is not there used! Jehovah does not in that place describe Israel as “sons of Elohim,” but merely as “my sons

 

 

It is by no means denied that men are in a true sense sons of God. Adam, as created by God, is so called in Luke 3: 38, by implication from verse 23; and in the same creaturely sense, of relationship to the Creator, all Adam’s race are termed God’s “offspring” (Acts 17: 28).

 

 

Moreover, by regeneration of the inward man all believers of every age become spiritual sons of God. But these usages of the term “son” in no degree establish that a distinct and very seldom used term so peculiar as is “sons of Elohim” also means men, when in the rest of the places where it is found it plainly denotes angelic beings.

 

 

That it means human beings is one more assumption, and a very large one, since it must be made in antagonism to the uniform biblical usage of the term.

 

 

SUMMING UP

 

 

III. We would restate the matter as follows:

 

 

(1) Reading Genesis 6, it is observed that certain beings termed “sons of God” are said to have consorted with the “daughters of Adam.” Who are these “sons of Elohim”? The contrast between the two terms suggests other than human beings, for the natural description of these latter would be “sons of Adam.” Also if Sethites and Cainites were meant, why were not those terms used, for so no ambiguity would have been left?

 

 

(2) The presumption that angelic beings are meant is strongly confirmed when it is found that in the other places in Scripture where this exact term is employed it plainly means angels.

 

[Page 317 ANAKIM, NEPHILIM, REPHAIM]

(3) That this is the meaning is further established by the statement of the Holy Spirit through Jude that there were, at an earlier period, angels who kept not their own principality, their assigned region of the universe, but left “their proper habitation” (oiketerion: only elsewhere used in 2 Corinthians 5: 2, “to be clothed upon with our habitation which is from heaven”).

 

 

Hence these angels left that form, that spiritual body, in which they were created, and took a “house,” a bodily dwelling, which did not belong to them by God’s will; that is, as Jude describes it, comparing it with the unnatural intermixtures of the Sodomites, they “went after strange (heteros) flesh,” that is, they mingled with heterogeneous beings, creatures of a different nature by constitution.

 

 

Such violations of His divisions and limitations amongst His creatures God suffers not in any sphere of life (see Lev. 19: 19), and condign punishment was commanded (Ex. 22: 19). Similarly, these particular angels were cast down to “pits of darkness” 1 and there enchained, pending the final assize of the universe (Jude 6, 7 and 2 Pet. 2: 4).

 

 

(4) This sense of the passage is strongly confirmed by the fact of the monstrous offspring which resulted in those days before the flood and also after that great judgment - offspring gigantic in size, power, and wickedness.

 

 

The Anakim who terrified the Israelitish spies, the Nephilim, and the Rephaim, all will be suitably accounted for by this parentage, with its infusion of superhuman vitality and force.

 

 

The very term Nephilim (fallen ones) reminds of Jude’s utterance, “angels ... he cast down.” The term is found only in Genesis 6: 4, “The Nephilim were in the earth in those days (i.e., before the flood) and also after that (judgment), etc.”; and in Numbers 13: 33, where the Israelitish spies report of Canaan, “and there we saw the Nephilim, the sons of Anak, which come of the Nephilim

 

 

Here the name is given both to the giant descendants and also to their progenitors, but the two are distinguished, “We saw the Nephilim ... which come of the Nephilim

 

 

Why this peculiar usage? It were strange and needless to say, “We saw the English ... which come of the English

 

 

1 “Pits of darkness.” Greek Tartarus. 2 Peter 2: 4, only. The Holy Spirit here employs a term well known in the then current Greek mythology, with which the readers of the Epistle were surrounded in Asia Minor. He thus definitely confirms two of the pagan notions associated with that term: (1) That there is such a region, and that it is a prison. (2) That superhuman beings are therein confined. This is itself a hint that a distinct element of fact and truth mingles with the false in ancient mythology.

 

[Page 318 THESE ELOHIM ARE JUDGES]

But allow for the supernatural character of those who first bore the name, and a suitable explanation is found for distinguishing between the race and their originators.

 

 

INFLUENCING EARTHLY AFFAIRS

 

 

In Psalm 82: 7 the cognate verb to the noun Nephilim (fallen ones) is used and is translated “fall,” and appears to refer back to the same dire event of the remote past in the heavenly world.

 

 

There God is described as standing in the congregation of the “Elohim,” which cannot mean earthly judges since there is no hint in Scripture of God standing in the midst of a gathering of such and revising their doings; whereas there are plain instances given of His doing so with heavenly beings (Job 1: 6-12; 2: 1-6; 1 Kings 22: 19-23).

 

 

These “Elohim” are reproached for perverting justice on the earth; and their subtle influence upon godless earthly judges is the only adequate explanation of the virtually universal corruptness of the law courts and officials, a state of affairs so manifestly disastrous to the people, and yet almost everywhere acquiesced in by its victims, and seemingly beyond remedy, save only where God’s holy Word has created a strong public opinion demanding equity in public affairs.

 

 

These “Elohim” are then warned that unless they mend their ways, by rightly using their powers on behalf of the needy and afflicted, they “shall die like a man (or Adam), and fall like one of the princes”

 

 

If men were here in view, plainly the threat that they should die like a man were needless, since that end would be theirs for certain, and whether they were just or unjust in public duties. Nor, supposing they were men, can any definite meaning be assigned to the warning that they should “fall like one of the princes

 

 

But when we take the preceding verse, “I said, Ye are elohim (beings akin to myself, the mighty El), and all of you sons of the Most High,” to apply to heavenly rulers (“the world-rulers of this darknessEph. 6: 12), then all is plain and harmonious.

 

 

The present rebel rulers, not yet dispossessed from office, are warned that, by going on in the course of prostituting their powers to evil ends they will deserve and share the same fate as man, they will die - that is, will pass from their original sphere and state into a lower and miserable condition of banishment from God and from their glorious region of the universe, the heavens.

 

[Page 319 MYTHOLOGY AND SCRIPTURE AGREE]

Thus, like those former princes of their order, they too shall fall. And the prophetic picture of this downfall is given in Revelation 12: 7-12, and their imprisonment, like those earlier fallen princes, is pointed to in Revelation 20: 1-3, and their final dreadful doom, subsequent to the millennial Kingdom, in verse 10 and in Matthew 25: 41.

 

 

Thus our view of Genesis 6. is confirmed by its agreement with other passages, all these Scriptures illuminating, amplifying, and corroborating one another.

 

 

MYTHOLOGY AGREES

 

 

(5) It is further confirmatory that the mythologies of all ancient peoples, preserving as they do the traditions of their earliest beliefs, definitely and constantly embody this conception; and do this so persistently, and so without attempt to persuade to the acceptance thereof, as to create the presumption that some reality, which none in those times questioned, lay at the root of the belief.

 

 

This explanation of mythology agrees with the statement of the Scriptures that the offspring of the illicit unions became the “men of renown” (literally “the men of the name”); their mighty and abominable doings, with those of their angelic begetters, forming, upon this view, the historical background upon which much of the stories of the gods of mythology was based.

 

 

(6) The reading of the term “sons of Elohim” as meaning men does violence to all the facts included in the foregoing observations, refutes none of the arguments drawn from these facts, and requires numerous pure assumptions to give it any seeming basis.

 

 

Upon analysis of the thinking of those who object to the view here advocated, it will probably be found that the only radical objection may be stated in the question, “How can these things be

 

 

This objection is anticipated in paragraph 4 of section 4, of our opening remarks. The control by angels of the material universe, animate and inanimate, is largely exemplified, though not formally discussed, throughout God’s Word. But even could we not find an answer to the question “How?” that would not warrant our not accepting the foregoing statements of Scripture in their simple and solemn meaning.

 

 

A CONCLUDING ARGUMENT

 

 

(7) Lastly, we will advance one other consideration which seems conclusive even by itself.

 

[Page 320]

It is alleged that the term “daughters of Adam” means the women of the Cainite family.

 

 

This implies that the previous term, “when men began to multiply,” means Cainite men only, since it is their daughters who are in question.

 

 

But this is a plainly impossible, because plainly inaccurate use of the term, since the Sethites were equally “men

 

 

And it is equally impossible that the former term should mean Cainite women as distinct from and in contrast to Sethite women. It is vital to the view we reject that the term should apply to the Cainite women only. Without this being allowed the argument is gone.

 

 

But it is positive and plain that the Sethite women were, equally “daughters of Adam” and that therefore the term could not with any correctness apply exclusively to the women of either family, but necessarily covered them all.

 

 

So that the term “sons of Elohim” does most certainly stand in sharp contrast to both of the terms “daughters of men” and “men,” and implies that those so described were not men.

 

 

If any ask whether this question is worth labouring, we can but reply that all Scripture being given to us by the love and wisdom of God, it must be of value accurately to understand it; and we must again reflect that the days of Noah present a picture of the times to precede our Lord’s return.

 

 

To be forewarned from a right understanding of those former days is to be forearmed to meet the terrible dangers of the last days, toward which season, as so many devout students believe, we are fast approaching, if we have not already felt and seen their first chill shadows.

 

 

He who foresees cries, “I say unto all, Watch! Watch and pray, lest ye enter into temptation

 

 

FINIS