img01

 

[It is recommended that the following collection of writings should be read in conjunction with “Back to Pentecost” by Andrew Murray.]

 

 

-------

img02

[NOTE.  Cover picture above, and the information on page 5, are from: “Herald - the magazine of Christian Witness to Israel, June-August 2014.”]

 

 

*       *       *

 

 

“HE THAT PUTTETH HIS TRUST IN ME SHALL POSSESS THE LAND, AND SHALL INHERIT MY

HOLY MOUNTAIN ISAIAH 57: 13.

 

 

-------

 

“And thou shalt observe the feast of weeks,

of the first fruits of wheat harvest

 

 

The central thought in connection with each of Israel’s “feasts” was the gathering together of the people around Jehovah Himself, on the ground of redemption accomplished.  Thus, it was corporate responsibility which is here in view, and, we may add, corporate privilege, for there is no greater privilege enjoyed on earth than for God’s saints to be gathered together, in festive assembly, around Himself.

 

 

The “feast of weeks better known as “Pentecost is described at greatest length in Lev. 23: 15-21.  Here it is connected with “the first fruits of wheat harvest  This at once makes us think of James 1: 18: “Of His own will begat He us with the Word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of His creatures  Dispensationally, the feast received a partial fulfilment at the descent of the Spirit in Acts 2.  We say “partial fulfilment for Peter’s words in Acts 2: 16, “But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel rather than “this is the fulfilment of that which was spoken by [the prophet] Joel tell us that the complete realization is yet future: as indeed it is.  The “two loaves” of Lev. 23: 17 pointed, first, to Jew and Gentile now gathered together and made fellow-members of the Body of Christ, but, ultimately they foreshadowed the re-uniting of the two houses of Israel (cf. Ezek. 37: 16) when, after this dispensation [or “evil age”] has run its course, the Jews will be restored once more to Divine favour.

 

 

“And the feast of ingathering at the year’s end

 

 

This is better known as “the feast of tabernacles  It was the final one on Israel’s religious calendar.  Its dispensational fulfilment is therefore yet future.  “The feast of tabernacles is the joy of the millennium, when Israel hath come out of the wilderness, where their sins have placed them: but to which will be added this first day (the ‘eighth day” of Lev. 23: 36” A. W. P.) of another week - the resurrection joy of those who are [to be] raised [from amongst the dead and be] with the Lord Jesus, to which the presence [and indwelling] of the Holy Spirit answers meanwhile.  Consequently, we find that the feast of tabernacles took place after the increase of the earth had been gathered in, and, as we learn elsewhere, not only after the harvest, but after the vintage also; that is, after separation by judgment,* and the final execution of judgment on the earth, when heavenly and earthly saints shall all be gathered in” (Mr. J. N. Darby).

 

[* NOTE.  This “Judgment” takes place after the time of Death, and before the time of Resurrection; and the result of this “Judgment” will be the determining factor, as to who, from amongst the redeemed people of God, will be “accounted worthy to attain to that age” – (the Lord’s millennium) – “and the resurrection from the dead” (Luke 20: 35, R.V.)  See also Phil. 3: 11.

 

“It is, I hope, unnecessary to say that “Hades” and the “Lake of Fire” are totally sundered localities.  The Lake of Fire, is never said to be in actual existence until after the Second Advent (Rev. 19: 20)” - D. M. Panton.)].

 

 

“Thrice in the year shall all your men children appear before the Lord God,

the God of Israel.”

 

 

The particular occasions specified were, “in the feast of unleavened bread, and in the feast of Weeks, and in the feast of tabernacles” (Deut. 16: 16).  Really, those feasts contemplated three distinct dispensations: the first, the O. T., when Israel was separated unto the Lord.  The second, this present interval, when in addition to the  “remnant according to the election of grace” (Rom. 11: 5) from the stock of Abraham, God is also visiting “the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for His name” (Acts 15: 14).  The third, to the millennium, when the Lord “will return, and will build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down; and will build again the ruins thereof, and will set it up: That the residue of men might seek after the Lord, and all the Gentiles, upon whom My name is called” (Acts 15: 16, 17).  We may add that each of the three persons in the Godhead are, distinctively, contemplated in these feasts.  The feast of unleavened bread, which is inseparably connected with the Passover, speaks to us of God the Son.  The feast of weeks or Pentecost is marked by the descent of the [Holy] Spirit (Acts 2: 2; Joel 2: 28).  The feast of tabernacles will witness the answer to that oft-prayed petition, “Our Father which art in heaven ... Thy kingdom come” (compare Matt. 13: 43; 16: 27).  The order is the same as in the three-one parable of Luke 15: the work of the Shepherd, the work of the [Holy] Spirit, bringing into the Father’s house.  Thus it is experimentally.

 

 

As we have said, the “feasts” had to do with corporate responsibility, and corporate privilege too, for, “Behold, how good and how pleasant it is for brethren to dwell together in unity” (Psa. 133: 1).  But alas, history has repeated itself.  At the beginning of Israel’s national history, they were a united “congregation  So it was at the beginning of this dispensation: “And all that believed were together” (Acts 2: 44).  For a time all went well; then failure and sin came, followed by Divine chastisement and judgment; true alike of Israel and Christendom.  Ultimately Israel was carried captive into Babylon, so too, all through the ‘dark ages’ the “mystery, Babylon” of Rev. 17 dominated Europe.  A remnant of Israel returned from Babylon and the true worship of God was restored in Israel, though not after its primitive glory.  So there was a Reformation, a remnant was delivered from the papacy, and God again was magnified, though the streams of truth was not as pure as it was at the beginning.

 

 

But at the end of the Old Testament period the corporate testimony of Israel was a complete wreck and ruin: the priesthood had “corrupted the covenant of Levi” (Mal. 2: 7, 8); polluted bread was offered upon God’s altar (Mal. 1: 7).  Judah had “profaned the holiness of the Lord” (Mal. 2: 11), and Jehovah had to say, “I have no pleasure in you ... neither will I accept an offering at your hand” (Mal. 1: 10).  In like manner, the corporate testimony of Christendom has long since fallen into ruins.  The last of the Epistles to the churches depicts Christ as being on the outside (Rev. 3: 20), and His voice is addressed to the individual only, “If any man hear My voice

 

 

“For I will cast out the nations before thee and enlarge thy borders: neither shall any man desire thy land, when thou shalt go up to appear before the Lord thy God thrice in the year” (v. 24).  How remarkably does this verse illustrate Prov. 16: 7: “When a man’s ways please the Lord, He maketh even his enemies to be at peace with him.”  God will not allow any man to he His debtor: He has promised, “Them that honour Me, I will honour” (1 Sam. 2: 30).  So it was here.  These Israelites were going up to the temple to worship the Lord; in their absence He would guard their homes.

 

 

“Neither shall any man desire thy land, when thou shalt go up to appear before the Lord thy God thrice in the year  How strikingly does this demonstrate the absoluteness of God’s control of His creatures!  And man, though fallen and rebellious, is no exception.  As Dan. 4: 35 tells us, “He doeth according to His will in the army of heaven, and among the inhabitants of the earth: and none can stay His hand  So it was here.  The male Hebrews were to leave their farms and go up to the temple in Jerusalem (Deut. 16: 16) - for many of them, a long journey.  They were surrounded by hostile heathen but so complete is God’s control of man, every man, that none shall be allowed to molest their families or flocks while they were away.  Thus, we see that God not only restrains the activities of the wicked, but even regulates the desires of their evil hearts: “The king’s heart is in the hand of the Lord, as the rivers of water: He turneth it whithersoever He will” (Prov. 21: 1).

 

 

“Thou shalt not offer the blood of My sacrifice with leaven.”

 

 

God was very jealous of the types.  Why?  Because they pointed forward to the person and work of Christ. Thus, His jealousy of the types was His guarding of the glory of His beloved Son.  Therefore, inasmuch as the sacrifices pointed forward to the Lord Jesus, leaven (which is an emblem of evil) must be excluded, for He is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners” (Heb. 7: 26).

 

 

“Thou shalt not offer the blood of My sacrifice with leaven

 

 

Very wonderful and blessed is it to observe how the Lord here refers to the sacrifice: He does not say “the blood of thy sacrifice but, “MY sacrifice  This is also the language of the antitype: The Sacrifice “offered once for all was of God’s appointing, was of God’s providing, was for God’s satisfaction.  Man had no part or lot in it whatsoever.  “Salvation is of the Lord  Frequently is this same truth brought out in the types.  In Gen. 22: 8 we hear Abraham saving to his son’s query of “Where is the lamb for the burnt offering? - God will provide Himself a lamb  In Ex. 12: 27 we are told, “It is the Lord’s Passover  In connection with the two goats on the day of atonement, lots were cast, “one lot for the Lord” (Lev. 16: 8): and so on.

 

 

“Neither shall the sacrifice of the of the passover be left

unto the morning

 

 

The paschal lamb was to be eaten on the same night it had been slain and roasted in fire, not left over to be partaken of on the morrow (see 12: 10).  The application of this detail of the type is very solemn and searching.  To have eaten the lamb on the morrow, would have been to dissociate it front the import of its death.  The eating of the lamb speaks to us of the believer (already sheltered by His blood) feeding on Christ: eating the lamb the same night it was killed, tells us that we are ever to feed upon Christ with a deep sense in our souls of His death and bearing judgment for us (“roast with fire”) really involved for Him.  Note how Christ Himself emphasized this in John 6: first vv. 50, 51, then vv. 53-56!

 

 

“The first of the firstfruits of thy land thou shalt

bring unto the house of the Lord thy God

 

 

This Divine ordinance receives amplification in Deut. 26: 1-11.  The interested reader would find it profitable to prayerfully study in detail the whole of that passage for himself; we can but summarise its teaching here. First,       it had to do with Israel’s possession of their [earthly] inheritance (v. 1).  Second, this “first of the firstfruits of thy land” was the Divine pledge or earnest of the COMING harvest (v. 2).  Third, Israel acknowledged this by their presentation unto the priest (v. 3).  Fourth, the Israelite was then required to look back and acknowledge his previous state of shame and bondage (v. 5-7).  Fifth, he then owned the Lord’s goodness in deliverance (v. 8).  Sixth, he expressed his gratitude for the goodly portion the Lord had given him (v. 9).  Seventh, he presented the “firstfruits” in worship before Him (vv. 10, 11).

 

 

All of the above is rich in its typical teaching, much of which has already been before us in other connections. That which is here distinctive, is the contrast presented between what we find in Ex. 34: 22 and here in v. 26. The [“first of the] firstfruits of wheat harvest” refers to Christ (cf. [Acts 2: 22-28, 31-34]; John 12: 24 with 1 Cor. 15: 23).  But the “first of the fruit of thy land” or “inheritance”* speaks, we believe, of the Holy Spirit, who is “the earnest of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession” (Eph. 1: 13, 14).  Do we not get the antitype of Ex. 34: 26 in Rom. 8: 22, “Ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit And in the light of Deut. 26: 10, 11 are we not taught that we should thank God as heartily for the gift of the [Holy] Spirit as for the gift of His Son?  Do we realize that we are as much indebted to, and therefore have as much cause of praise for, the work of the [Holy] Spirit in us, as the work of Christ for us!

 

[*NOTE. “The redemption of the purchased possession,” can also have reference to an “inheritance” in “the land,” at the time of the redemption (i.e., the setting free) of “the whole creation,” which “groaneth and travaileth in pain until now,” (Matt. 5: 5; Rom. 8: 22, R.V.)!  This earthly “inheritance,” says the inspired apostle, is what regenerate believers can lose; and therefore they are encouraged to “Run that ye may attain” (1 Cor. 6: 9; 9: 24, R.V.).  See  Gal. 5: 19-26; Eph. 5: 5, 6.

“No believer will be brought before the judgment before Christ, to determine whether or not he is justified by faith: all believers have already received that, by the grace of God.  Therefore, he is no longer an enemy, but a servant.  He most certainly is eternally saved.  But our Lord and His Apostles teach that all servants will give an account to Him regarding their behaviour since they first believed, and will be rewarded or punished, according as their deeds deserve, (Romans chapters 2; 14:10-13; 2 Corinthians 5: 10 - to take no more passages).  This is the doctrine of several of our Lord’s parables; such as the Unmerciful Servant, the Steward, the Talents, and the Pounds.  What means that – ‘Its like a man going away: He leaves his house in charge of his servants, each with his assigned task, and tells the one at the door to keep watch.  Therefore keep watch because you do not know when the owner of the house will come back - whether in the evening, or at midnight, or when the cock crows, or at dawn.  If he comes suddenly, do not let him find you sleeping.  What I say to you, I say to everyone: Watch (Mark 14: 34-37).” - (R. Govett.)

“This is the high ideal.  It is our reasonable service.  Give it unrestrainedly, and the day is coming when you will rejoice that you did not hold back.  Refuse the appeal, do not respond and you will be saved, and have nothing to show for your life.  Why seek an easeful estate now and miss this rich inheritance which might be yours by serving the Lord on the mission field or in some ministry of love which would cost you something for His sake?  Why spend so much of your powers for present passing things which breed vanity and emptiness, when the highest service beckons you, and meanwhile will fit you for an infinitely larger enjoyment of God in the age to come.  Serve the Lord and you will never regret it.  How sweet it will be to be greeted by our blessed Lord, with the words ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance the Kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world’.  There is no anticipation so glorious as this  - (D. M. Panton.)

“This inheritance, as previously affirmed, has reference to the Millennial kingdom, a portion of which is being reserved for all those revealed to be with Christ in His presence (1 Cor. 15: 23).  They will be those begotten ones who have walked “worthy of God, who has called [us] into His kingdom and glory” (1 Thess. 2: 12).  To be numbered among the worthy of our “hope of His calling” (Eph. 1: 18).  This inheritance is the reward of Col. 3: 24.  It is the ‘reward’ to be brought with Christ upon His return, Rev. 22: 12” (C. Dines, “Being Glorified Together With Him” pp. 133) – supplied today by Amazon Books.

Is it not true to say that the majority of Christ’s servants are fast asleep today - dreaming that the world is getting better, and is about to be converted by the preaching of the Gospel of God’s grace?  Will Christians, who reject this promised “inheritance” in the “Age” to come, be “accounted worthy” to receive it from the Lord as a reward”?  Look and see:-  Lk. 20: 35; Matt. 5: 5, 20, Rom. 8: 17b; 1 Cor. 3: 12-15; Eph. 5: 5, 6; 2 Cor. 4: 2-4; 1 Thess. 2: 10-12; 4: 2-8; 2 Thess. 1: 3-5; 1 Tim. 6: 17-19; 2 Tim. 2: 3-6; Rev. 2: 10, 11; 3: 10, 11, 21, 22. ]

 

 

“Thou shalt not seethe a kid in his mother’s Milk

 

 

Upon this we have nothing better to offer than the brief comment of Mr. Dennett: “This remarkable prohibition is found three times in the Scriptures (Ex. 23: 19; 34: 26: Dent. 14: 21).  God will have His people tenderly careful, guarding them from the violation of any instinct of nature.  The milk of the mother was the food, the sustenance of the kid, and hence this must not he used to seethe it as food for others

 

 

“And the Lord said unto Moses. Write thou these words: for after the tenor of these words have I made a covenant with thee and with Israel

 

 

This verse summarises all that has been before us in the previous verses of the chapter.  An imperishable record was to be made of all that Jehovah had said unto His servant.  The words, “I have made a covenant with thee (the typical mediator) and with Israel gives assurance that all will yet be made good through the person and millennial administration of Christ.  Israel failed in the past, but there will be no failure with Him who shall yet effectuate God’s counsels and glorify Him in this very scene where His people have so grievously dishonoured Him.  May the Lord hasten that glad day.*

 

 

- ARTHUR  W.  PINK, (Taken from Gleanings in Exodus, pp. 365-367.)

 

[*NOTE. “ ‘THAT GLAD DAY’ will be when: “‘The earth shall yield her increase,’ and ‘God’s blessing’ shall be added when ‘he shall judge the people righteously, and govern the nations upon earth’ (Psa. 67: 4, 6).   The creatures shall again rejoice under man’s dominion, when He who is ‘made a little lower than the angels, and then crowned with glory and honour,’ receives ‘praise out of the mouth of babes and sucklings,’ - the little children of whom His kingdom is composed, - and ‘stills the enemy and the avenger’ (Psa. 8; Heb. 2).  And then also, they who are accounted worthy to receive that world [Age], and the resurrection [out] from the dead, shall neither marry nor be given in marriage, neither shall they any more be liable to death, for they shall be as the angels of God (Luke 20: 35, 36).

 

“Then shall be realized what some impious dreamers would affect to aim at now; and plenty, peace, and purity shall reign.  Then may those laws and institutions be safely dispensed with or disparaged, which at present restrain the lawless passions that otherwise would make this earth a hell.  But woe to all who would prematurely touch these safeguards, whether with the rude hand of violence, or the more refined subtle influence of a fictitious sanctity and a spurious kind of purity, - such as, at the best, is but an unequal warfare with the impure.  Woe to those who remove landmarks, or encourage insubordination, or despise holy marriage, whether for the license of unbridled lust, or in vain idolatry of the virgin state,” - R. S. Candlish, - (From his “Expositions of Genesis.)]

 

 

*       *       *

 

 

 

 

FIRSTFRUITS AND HARVEST

 

 

By

 

 

G. H. LANG

 

 

 

 

 

A Study in Resurrection

and Rapture

 

 

-------

 

 

 

 

INTRODUCTION

 

 

“We must not adhere to those systems of doctrine that never can bear an infringement of a view that is held popularly. For instance, perhaps we have all been brought up in the notion that all the children of God, in all ages, compose the church of God. Now it will be found on closer research that this is not supported by the Word of God*(William Kelly, Occasional Lectures, vii, 19.)

 

 

The world system that occupies the earth is aged and decrepit.  Like some vast, worn-out machine it creaks and groans as at the breaking-point.  The age is as weary as wicked, and the only solid comfort is that its consummation seems to be nearing.  The death-throes of this vast body corporate will be desperate and painful; yet they will be also the birth-throes of a better age.

 

 

The chief need of the world is competent government.  Even the best disposed and ablest rulers prove signally unequal to relieving the woes of the nations, but for this urgent need the mercy of God has made full provision.  He has in readiness a perfect Sovereign for heaven and earth, His own Son, Jesus Christ the Lord, and His coming to earth to assume the government is a chief theme of the Word of God. (Psm. 96: 9-14; 97: 1: etc.)*

 

[* NOTE. Quotations are usually from the Revised Version.]

 

 

In this expectation the apostles of Christ as devout Jews were trained; but their Lord when about to leave them intimated that there were circumstances connected with that expectation which yet awaited disclosure, and that the [Holy] Spirit [page 8 - Christ’s Germinal Teachings] of God, Who had visited and inspired the prophets, should come to them also, to abide with them, and to guide them into all the truth, and to disclose unto them those things to come (John 16: 13).

 

 

One of these yet undisclosed particulars Christ had just hinted in the words of John 14: 2, 3: “In my Father’s house are many abiding places; if it were not so I would have told you; for I go to prepare a place for you.  And if I go and prepare a place for you, I come again, and will receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also

 

 

This intimation was probably as yet obscure to the apostles.  It suggested: 1. That for them the Lord had in mind an abode away from the earth in the heavenly regions; 2. That that place was not yet ready, but that He was about to go thither and prepare it for their use; 3. That He would come again from heaven; 4. That at His coming He would take them away from the earth to that prepared region; 5. That this was in order that they might be in His company in His heavenly abode.

 

 

Here then is the introduction of the subject of the removal of some of mankind from the earth to dwell in the heavens.  In his Progress of Doctrine in the New Testament (24), Bernard has well said, and shown, “that there is no part of the later and larger doctrine [of the New Testament] which has not its germs and principles in the words which Christ spake with His own lips in the days of His flesh.  It is provided that all which is to be spoken after shall find support and proof from His own pregnant and forecasting sayings  This is a fact, and it is of the first importance for a right interpreting of the New Testament.  The four Gospels open the truths expanded in the epistles; the latter must be construed with the former and cannot be rightly explained in separation from them.  The doctrine of the rapture is an instance.  It is rooted in this germinal saying of our Lord, even as that of the first resurrection is rooted in His words in Luke 20: 34-36: “The sons of this age marry and are given in marriage: but they that are accounted worthy to attain to that age [the age to follow this age, the age of the kingdom], and the resurrection which is out from among the dead, neither marry nor are given in marriage: for neither can they die any more [as those individuals raised [page 9 - Going To Heaven] from the dead before that resurrection had done and could yet do]: for they are equal to angels; and are sons of God, being sons of the resurrection

 

 

The doctrine of the Rapture is thus rooted in this germinal saying of our Lord in John 14: 2, 3.  The idea itself was not wholly new.  Enoch and Elijah while living had been removed bodily from the earth to the heavenly world; but that a similar honour was open to themselves was probably a new idea to the apostles; nor did Christ here make clear whether the subjects of this favour would be found living at the moment or be raised from the dead. These and other particulars were afterwards revealed by the [Holy] Spirit and our present purpose is to set forth briefly some main elements of the New Testament teaching upon this theme.

 

 

I. THE H0PE

 

 

1. The Necessary Change of Body.  Man by constitution is made of and for the earth.  He is physically incapable of living in the presence of God (1 Cor. 15: 50; 1 Tim. 6: 16), so that a change of body is indispensable (1 Cor. 15: 50-58; Phil. 3: 20, 21; 2 Cor. 4: 16-5: 10).  It is not at death but at the coming of the Lord that this change will be effected and we shall be made like Him (Col. 3: 4; 1 John 3: 1-3).

 

 

2. With the Lord.  The purpose and effect of this removal and change is that the Lord may have us with Himself, like Himself, to share His glory and authority and to assist in ruling His [millennial] kingdom (John 14: 3, 17, 24; 1 Thess. 4: 17; Rev. 3: 4, 5, 21; 14: 4; 17: 14; 20: 4).

 

 

3. This is Unique in the Ways of God.  The expression “going to heaven” has become a commonplace, used as the equivalent of a sinner being delivered from hell, but it implies vastly more.  A king may pardon a rebel liable to death without taking him to live in the royal palace and appointing him to high office and, honour.  So sinners might have been saved from eternal death and been given eternal life without their ever being removed to the heavens as their abode.  This certainly will be the lot of multitudes of the saved and might have been of all.  There will be a new earth with saved nations, and God coming down to them, not their being taken up to His region (Rev. 21: 1-31, 24).  That some [page 10 – ENOCH] of the saved are to be honoured as above indicated seems to be exceptional in the ways of God and is the final secret of His eternal counsels.* Since God cannot make any superior to His Son, He can do nothing greater than to cause some to share His Son’s glory and authority.  This is the highest possible to the creature to all eternity.

 

* Col. 2: 3: omit “even Christ,” and read “in which,” that is, “the mystery of God in which are all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge hidden.” See Alford, and Darby, New Translation.

 

 

4. The Principle of Selection.  In view of our sinful state and wicked works it is evident that this “holy calling” to share His own kingdom and glory is given to us by God “not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before times eternal” (2 Tim. 1: 9).  But since not all the saved of mankind will enjoy this highest destiny there must be some principle of selection, for God always acts on moral grounds, not arbitrarily or by caprice.

 

 

(a) Enoch was translated alive to heaven before that first age developed its worst degree of corruption and long before the judgment of heaven was poured out.  Concerning him the [Holy] Spirit emphasizes that he looked forward to the coining of the Lord and forewarned the wicked of the judgment then to fall (Jude 14: 15), as also that he “walked with God” (Gen. 5: 24) in such wise that “before his translation he hath had witness borne to him that he had been well-pleasing unto God” (Heb. 11: 5).  Nothing therefore can be clearer than that the unique privilege of translation must be preceded by such a life of faith in God as produces a clear witness, and a holy walk which God already endorses as well-pleasing to Himself, and which He will crown by a removal to His own sphere of the universe.  Unless this were the lesson for us of this christian age why are these pointed comments upon Enoch made in the New Testament?

 

 

(b) Concerning certain Old Testament saints we are told that they desired that heavenly country, looked for that heavenly city, and therefore in practical daily life walked in separation from the world, confessing that they were strangers and pilgrims in the earth.  This manner of life amongst the godless and violent was attended by manifold [page 11 - MAKING ELECTION SURE] inconveniences and perils (Gen. 13: 7-9; 14: 22, 23; 21: 25; 23: 4, 16; 26: 15-21).  The divine comment on these men of faith and this way of living is, “Wherefore God is not ashamed of them, to be called their God: for [that is, it is evident He is not ashamed of them, because] He hath prepared for them a city” (Heb. 11: 8-16), which He would not do for any of whom He might be ashamed.  This “wherefore” is most significant.  It shows that it was this same manner of life, their response and devotion to the call of God’s grace, that made sure to them their calling, by God’s choice, to the heavenly world.  They had not been ashamed to serve the true and living God among men who did not wish to retain Him in their knowledge (Rom. 1: 20); He is not ashamed of them who thus confessed Him.  They embraced the offer that grace made them of a place in the heavens, and in consequence they walked a sanctified life in separation from the godless; and therefore He Who was their sanctifier was not ashamed of them, and shall bring them to glory (Heb. 2: 10-11), by the first resurrection.

 

 

To us also this applies: to us those of old are set forth as a weighty example (Heb. 11); to us the Scripture, speaking specifically of our obtaining a rich entrance (i.e., by the first resurrection, instead of by the second resurrection after the millennial age) into the eternal kingdom and glory to which we are called, cries: “Give diligence to make your calling and election sure” (2 Pet. 1: 10, 11; 1 Pet. 5: 10).  For it was to such as had just confessed Him to be the Christ of God that Jesus solemnly said, “Whosoever shall be ashamed of Me and of My words, of Him shall the Son of Man be ashamed, when He cometh in His own glory, and the glory of the Father, and of the holy angels” (Lk. 9: 20-26; comp. Mk. 8: 38; Mat. 10: 32, 33; Lk. 12: 8, 9; 2 Tim. 2: 10-13).

 

 

(c) Thus translation, both of the living, as of the dead by the first resurrection, is consequent upon a life of faith which seizes upon the offer of the heavenly calling and shapes its course and conduct accordingly.  So the Lord, dealing with the first and select resurrection [of reward], spoke of those that are accounted worthy to attain to that age and the resurrection from among the dead (Lk. 20:34-36). “That age” (singular) is not a Bible term for eternity, which is not one age but [page 12 - THE OUT‑RESURRECTION] many, “the ages of the ages” (thirteen times in the Revelation).  “That age” is set by Christ in direct contrast to “this age and so means the age of the [millennial] kingdom to follow this age.  A general resurrection the Jews expected (Jo. 11: 34; Acts 24: 15), but here Christ speaks of “the resurrection which is out from among the dead” (tees anastaseos tees ek nekron).  This is the first clear intimation of such a limited, select resurrection (this doctrine also, as has been pointed out, being rooted in a germinal saying of Christ), and its terms are the key to and must control all subsequent instruction upon the subject.  And it is made very clear that this resurrection is a privilege to which one must “attain” and be “accounted worthy” thereof.  The notion that a share in the first resurrection is a certainty, irrespective of attainment and worthiness, can only be held in direct disregard of this primary declaration by the One who will effect the resurrection and determine who shall participate therein, the Son of God.

 

 

It was through Paul that the Holy Spirit saw fit to give in permanent written form fuller particulars as to this theme (1 Cor. 15; 1 Thess. 4), and it is Paul who elsewhere repeats the words of our Lord Jesus just considered, declaring that, whereas justifying righteousness is verily received through faith in Christ, not by our own works, yet, in marked contrast, “the resurrection which is from among the dead (teen exanastasin teen ek nekron) is a privilege at which one must arrive (katanteeso) by a given course of life, even the experimental knowledge of Christ, of the power of His resurrection, and of the fellowship of His sufferings, thereby becoming conformed unto His death (Phil. 3: 7-21).  Surely the present participle (summorphizomenos becoming conformed) is significant, and decisive in favour of the view that it is a process, a course of life that is contemplated.

 

 

It has been suggested that Paul here speaks of a present moral resurrection as he does in Romans 6.  But in that chapter it is simply a reckoning of faith that is proposed, not a course of personal sufferings.  The subject discussed is whether the believer is to continue in slavery to sin (douleuein), as in his unregenerate days, or is the mastery (kurieuo) of sin to be immediately and wholly broken?  It should be remembered that when writing to the Philippians [page 13 - IF BY ANY MEANS] Paul was near the close of his life and service.  Could a life so holy and powerful as his be lived without first knowing experimentally the truth taught in Romans 6?  Did the Holy Spirit at any time use the apostles to urge others to seek experiences which the writer had not first known, and to which therefore he could be a witness?  And again, if by the close of that long and wonderful career Paul was still only longing and striving to attain to death to the “old man” and victory over sin, when did he ever attain thereto?  Such reflections upon the apostle are unworthy, and, as has been indicated, the experience set forth in Romans 6 is not to be reached, or to be sought, by suffering, by attaining, by laying hold, by pressing on, or any other such effort as is urged upon the Philippians, but by the simple acceptance by faith of what God says He did for us in Christ in relation to the “old man

 

 

Thus this suggested exposition is neither sound experimental theology nor fair exegesis.  Paul indicates as plainly as language can do that the first resurrection may be missed.  His words are: “If by any means I may arrive at the resurrection which is out from among the dead  “If by any means” (ei pos) “I may” - “if” with the subjunctive of the verb - cannot but declare a condition; and so on this particle in this place Alford says, “It is used when an end is proposed, but failure is presumed to be possible”: and so Lightfoot: “The apostle states not a positive assurance, but a modest hope”: and Grimm-Thayer (Lexicon) give its meaning as, “If in any way, if by any means, if possible and Ellicott to the same effect says, “the idea of an attempt is conveyed, which may or may not be successful  Both Alford and Lightfoot regard the passage as dealing with the resurrection of the godly from death, and Ellicott’s note is worth giving in full. “‘The resurrection from the dead’; i.e., as the context suggests, the first resurrection (Rev. 20: 5), when, at the Lord's coming the dead in Him shall rise first (1 Thess. 4: 16), and the quick be caught up to meet Him in the clouds (1 Thess. 4: 17); comp. Luke 20: 35.  The first resurrection will include only true believers, and will apparently precede the second, that of non-believers, and disbelievers, in point of time.  Any reference here to a merely ethical resurrection (Cocceius) is wholly out of the [page 14 - HOPING TO ATTAIN] question.” With the addition that the second resurrection will include [regenerate] believers not accounted worthy of the first, this note is excellent.

 

 

The sense and force of the phrase “if by any means I may arrive” are surely fixed beyond controversy by the use of the same words in Acts 27: 12: “the more part advised to put to sea from thence, if by any means they could reach [arrive at] Phoenix, and winter there” (ei pos dunainto katanteesantes), which goal they did not reach.

 

 

Further, speaking upon the very subject of the resurrection and the kingdom promised afore by God, Paul used the same verb, again preceded by conditional terms, saying (Acts 26: 6-8), “unto which promise our twelve tribes, earnestly serving God night and day, hope to attain.”  Here the force of elpizei katanteesai “unto which they hope to attain” is the same as his words in Philipplans ei pos kantanteeso, “if by any means I may attain  This hope of the Israelite of sharing in Messiah’s kingdom is plainly conditional (Dan. 12: 2, 3).  It is assured to such an Israelite indeed as Daniel (12: 13), and to such a faithful servant of God in a period of great difficulty as Zerubbabel (Hag. 2: 23).  It was also offered to Joshua the high priest, but upon conditions of obedience and conduct.  Joshua had been relieved of his filthy garments and arrayed in noble attire (Zech. 3: 1-5), but immediately his symbolic justification before Jehovah had been thus completed, and his standing in the presence of God assured, the divine message to him is couched in conditional language: “And the Angel of Jehovah protested unto Joshua, saying, Thus saith Jehovah of hosts, If thou wilt walk in My ways, and if thou wilt keep My charge, then thou also shalt judge My house, and shalt also keep My courts, and I will give thee places to walk among these that stand by” (ver. 6, 7).

 

 

It is at this point that the “ifs” of the Word of God come in, and are so solemn and significant.  Whenever the matter is that of the pardon of sin, the justifying of the guilty, the [free] gift of eternal life, Scripture ever speaks positively and unconditionally.  The sinner is “justified freely by God’s grace and “the free gift of God is eternal life” (Rom. 3: 24; 6: 23), in which places the word “free” means free of conditions, not only of payment.  Eternal life therefore [page 15 - CONDITIONAL PROMISES] is what is called in law an absolute gift, in contrast to a conditional gift.  The latter may be forfeited if the condition be not fulfilled; the former is irrevocable.  But as soon as the sinner has by faith entered into this standing before God, then the Word begins at once to speak to him with “Ifs.”  From this point and forward every privilege is conditional.

 

 

It is truly “in all wisdom and prudence” that God has made known to us the mystery of His will (Eph. 1: 8, 9).  The indispensable minimum, justification, without which no further blessing is possible, and which the sinner is utterly unable to acquire, having no nature that can produce ought acceptable to God, this God grants freely through the atoning work of the Lord Jesus.  But now that a new nature has been implanted by grace, capable through the [Holy] Spirit of pleasing God, all attainment is made conditional upon the exertion that this new nature is able to make, and must make.  The whole promised land, together with the title to share it and the power to conquer it, are gifts of covenant grace, but no one shall get an inch more than he sets his own foot upon, by the use of the power freely granted to faith that obeys.  And some who had equal title with the rest shall not reach the inheritance at all, though neither shall they ever get back to Egypt. “Let him that readeth understand and ponder the “ifs” of the epistle to the Hebrews.*

 

* See my “Firstborn Sons.”

 

 

The comments of Mr. David Baron upon the incident of Joshua are impressive. (The Visions and Prophecies of Zechariah, 103-105.)  I extract the following.  “The word ‘protested’ means solemnly to protest, and is intended to express the solemnity and importance of the charge about to be made. The expressions, ‘Walk in My ways’ and ‘Keep My charge’ are frequently used in the Pentateuch for ‘holding on in the way of life, well-pleasing to God, and for keeping the charge given by God.’  The first part of the charge refers particularly to Joshua’s personal attitude towards the Lord - to fidelity in his personal relations to God; and the second to the faithful performance of his official duties as high priest.  And the reward of his thus studying (in his personal and official capacity) to present [page 16 - BARON ON JOSHUA THE HIGH PRIEST] himself approved unto God will be (a) ‘Then thou shalt also judge My house ...’ (b) ‘And shalt also keep My courts ...’ (c) But the climax of promise in this verse is reached in the last clause, ‘And I will give thee places to walk among these that stand by...’  ‘These that stand by’ - as we see by comparing the expression with verse 4 - are the angels, who were in attendance on the Angel of Jehovah, and who ‘stood before Him’ ready to carry out His behests. The Jewish Targum ... is, I believe, nearer the truth [than many christian commentators] when it paraphrases the words, ‘In the resurrection of the dead I will revive thee, and give thee feet walking among these seraphim.’  Thus applied to the future the sense of the whole verse would be this: ‘If thou wilt walk in My ways and keep My charge, thou shalt not only have the honour of judging My house and keeping My courts, but when thy work on earth is done thou shalt be transplanted to higher service in heaven, and “have places to walk” among these pure, angelic beings who stand by Me, hearkening unto the voice of My word’ (Ps. 103: 20, 21).  Note the ‘ifs’ in this verse, my dear reader, and lay to heart the fact that, while pardon and justification are the free gifts of God to all that are of faith, having their source wholly in His infinite and sovereign grace, and quite apart from work or merit on the part of man, the honour and privilege of acceptable service and future reward are conditional upon our obedience and faithfulness: therefore seek by His grace and in the power of His Spirit to ‘walk in His ways and to keep His charge,’ and in all things, even if thine be the lot of a ‘porter’ or ‘doorkeeper’ in the House of God, to present thyself approved unto Him, in remembrance of the day when ‘we must all be made manifest before the judgment-seat of Christ, that each one may receive the things done in the body, according to what he hath done, whether it be good or bad’ (2 Cor. 5: 10).”

 

 

By virtue of their relationship to Abraham all Israelites are natural sons of the kingdom which is the goal of their national hopes according to the purpose and promise of the God of Abraham; but the King has told them plainly, first, that Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, together with all the prophets - that is, all the men of faith and devotion - shall be in that [page 17 - ISRAEL AND THE KINGDOM] kingdom, but secondly, that it is very possible that some of the sons of the kingdom may forfeit their entrance thereinto (Matt. 8: 10-12: Luke 13: 28-29); for there are those who may have been first in privilege and opportunity who shall be last in final attainment.

 

 

If, therefore, an Israelite attains to that kingdom it will be on the basis of a covenant made by God with his federal head, Abraham; the source of which covenant is the grace of God in Christ, the working principle of which on man’s side is faith proving itself by obedience.  Wherein now does this differ in basic principle from that new and better covenant which introduces to better, that is, to heavenly privileges, to sharing the heavenly sphere of that same kingdom, not only its earthward side?  This new and higher order of things is also derived from a covenant made with our federal Head, its source is in that same grace of God, its working principle on our side is a faith that proves its quality in obedience.

 

 

Moreover, since the man of true faith in that earlier age could aspire to this same heavenly city and country as ourselves there manifestly was no difference in his position and ours in this matter, though it may be he had only a more distant view and not so full a revelation of the purpose of God in all this project.  So that if they of old could miss their share, on what principle of righteousness shall we be exempted from their need of diligence and obedience?  Such exemption not only would contain an invidious and inexplicable distinction, but it would prove highly dangerous to our moral fibre and our zeal for godliness.  And has not this been seen? We heard it boldly stated from a platform, that the sharing in the bridal glories of the wife of the Lamb is guaranteed absolutely no matter what our practical life may or may not have been.  But obviously if the very highest of all honours cannot possibly be forfeited plainly nothing is forfeitable, and the whole notion of reward for effort, so heavily emphasized in Holy Scripture, is swept away.  For ourselves we repudiate this common teaching as grossly immoral in its tendency, the sheerest antinomianism, and flatly repugnant to the Word.

 

 

The Lord told His disciples that status in the kingdom of the heavens was to be determined by the measure of obedience and of having encouraged others to obedience, and [page 18 - STRETCHING FORWARD] He as clearly added that entrance itself into that kingdom was conditional upon a certain degree of practical righteousness (Matt. 5: 19, 20).  He further plainly warned the apostles themselves that except they turned from their high-mindedness, and became as humble as a little child, they should on no account enter into the kingdom (Matt. 18: 3).  And this same possibility of missing our inheritance by practical misconduct became a stock element in the apostolic teaching of their converts, and most especially and notably of Paul (1 Cor. 6: 7-10; Gal. 5: 19-21; Eph. 5: 5).

 

 

It followed that godly Israelites, bent on securing a share with Abraham in the kingdom of Messiah, served God, as Paul says, with the utmost earnestness and ceaselessly: “earnestly (en ekteneia) serving God night and day” (Acts 26: 7).  It is an intensive form of this very word which Paul employs in the Philippian passage (epekteinomenos) to describe his own strenuous endeavours in godly service and suffering to reach that same goal, the out-resurrection.  The word pictures the racer leaning far forward, stretched out toward the goal, straining every fibre to win the coveted prize.  It is the sharpest possible rebuke to the complaisant idea that so great a reward is guaranteed to all believers irrespective of piety, zeal, devotion, and life-long perseverance.

 

 

Nor is there warrant for the assertion that to Paul only or even first were these themes made known.  He indeed learned them direct from the Lord, but so did other “holy apostles and prophets according to his own statement (Eph. 3: 5).  These mighty truths were as much the need of and as much the property of those many saints whom Paul never taught as of that portion of the church of God to whom he ministered.  And that the other apostles did in fact know and teach the truth of a select resurrection [of reward], prior to the general resurrection of all men, and thus knew and taught prior even to Paul’s conversion, is seen from the statement in Acts 4: 2, that from the very earliest days they “proclaimed in Jesus the resurrection which is out from among the dead” (teen anastasin teen ek nekron).  The clearness of their understanding of this first, select resurrection, of which the Lord had spoken while with them, is shown by the definiteness and vigour with which they announced it, for katangello, [page 19 - OF CHRIST JESUS] in the A.V. weakly rendered “preach,” means “to proclaim with authority, as commissioned to spread the tidings throughout those who hear them” (Westcott, on 1 John 1: 5).  Therefore such a resurrection was not revealed for the first time when Paul wrote to the Thessalonians; those who were apostles before him made it their business to announce this truth to all to whom they proclaimed the gospel, for, as Paul himself tells us, it was the “commandment of the eternal God” that the secret counsel of which the first resurrection is part should be “made known unto all the nations” (Rom. 16: 26), which demanded that other heralds before and besides Paul should receive and proclaim the message.

 

 

When first writing to the Thessalonians he could say that they already “knew perfectly” about the day of the Lord, and when writing again he added that he had told them about these things when with them (1 Ep. 5: 2; 2 Ep. 2: 5).  This is further shown by the way he speaks without explanation of those who “will be left unto the presence of the Lord to His parousia.  How could he have enlarged when with them upon these topics and yet not even himself have known about the vital matter of the first resurrection?  Yet this is necessarily involved in the assertion that this truth was not made known before the first letter to the Thessalonians.

 

 

II. WHO ARE THOSE “OF CHRIST JESUS”?

 

 

But it is urged that two important scriptures upon the topic of resurrection seem to contemplate all believers as sharing in the first resurrection. These are 1 Thess. 4 and 1 Cor. 15.

 

 

The former passage speaks of those who “have fallen asleep through Jesus” (1 Thess. 4: 14, R.V. marg.).  Is this of necessity the fact concerning the end of all believers?  Is there not such a thing as death through Satan, acting as the executioner of the sentence of the court of heaven against a [regenerate] believer’s [wilful] sins?. (1 Cor. 5: 5; 11: 30; Acts 5: 10 [Heb. 10: 26-31]: comp. 1 Tim. 1: 19, 20: 1 Jo. 5: 16, 17: Jas. 5: 19-20).

 

 

Man through sin is by nature in the power of Satan as the one who, by his angel servants, ends human life when the [page 20 - DEATH IS GAIN] Most High requires.*  But the sinner who in faith submits to Christ is transferred from Satan’s authority and is put under that of the Son of God (Col. 1: 13), and thenceforth the Evil One cannot touch him (1 Jo. 5: 18).  In life his Lord protects him and in death puts him to sleep.  But on account of gross sin, of living again as if a servant of Satan, he may be “delivered unto Satan as regards his present experience (Matt. 5: 23, 26; 6: 13; 18: 34, 35) and his bodily life, in which case Satan may be permitted to cut short his life, as the above cited passages show.

 

* Heb. 2: 14; Acts 12: 23; Luke 12: 20, marg. “they,” i.e., angels: contrast Job 2: 6.

 

 

It is not such a death that is “gain” within the meaning of Phil. 1: 21.  When Paul wrote of death as “gain” he made no general statement concerning all believers.  He said, “For to me to live is Christ and to die is gain At that time he was a prisoner, and it was not certain that he would not shortly die for the faith.  That was the death immediately in question, and similarly such an one as the faithful Stephen, dying as a witness for Christ, could say, “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit  The Lord accepted the trust, and the simple record of that dreadful moment is, “he slept  Doubtless not martyrs alone but each who can truly say, “for to me to live is Christ” may add truly, “to die is gain  Those who thus fall asleep will, as we expect, share in the first resurrection; others have no guarantee that they will do so.

 

 

But it is further urged that in 1 Cor. 15: 51, the Scripture declares that though “we shall not all sleep but some be alive at the descent of the Lord, yet “we shall all be changed and surely, says the objector with emphasis, all means all.  Truly; but in verse 22, “For as in Adam all die, so also in the Christ shall all be made alive,” “all” means all of mankind, for every child of Adam will at some time be raised by Christ (Jo. 5: 28, 29).  But not all at the first resurrection (Rev. 20: 5).  Therefore in this very chapter “all” means different things, and in verse 51 requires limiting, since it refers to a smaller company than in verse 22.

 

 

The last and immediate context is in verses 48, 49, which speak of those who are to “bear the image of the heavenly that is, are to share with the Lord in His heavenly form, [page 21 - MAGE OF THE HEAVENLY] glory, and sovereignty.  Now the more difficult, and therefore the more probable reading here is as in the R.V. margin: “As we have borne the image of the earthy, let us also bear the image of the heavenly It is evident that one copying a document is not likely to insert by mistake a more difficult word or idea than is in the manuscript before him; so that, as a general rule, the more difficult reading is likely to have been the original reading.  Moreover, in this case “let us also bear” is so well attested by the manuscripts as to have been adopted as the true reading by Lachmann, Tischendorf, Tregelles, Alford, and Westcott and Hort, and is given as the text in the latest editions of the Greek Testament, those of Nestle and Von Soden.  Ellicott prefers the common reading, but on subjective and internal grounds only, and his remark on the external authority is emphatic: “It is impossible to deny that the subjunctive, phoresomen is supported by very greatly preponderating authority Alford (on Romans 9: 5) well says, “that no conjecture [i.e., as to the true Greek text] arising from doctrinal difficulty is ever to be admitted in the face of the consensus of MSS. and versionsWeymouth gives the force well by the rendering “let us see to it that we also bear

 

 

By this exhortation the apostle places upon Christians some responsibility to see that they secure that image of the heavenly which is indispensable to inheriting “the kingdom of God” (ver. 50).  In this Paul is supported by Peter, who also writes of that “inheritance which is reserved in heaven” (1 Pet. 1: 4), which he describes by the later statement that “the God of all grace called you unto His eternal glory in Christ” (5: 10).  But Peter goes on to urge the called to “give the more diligence to make your calling and election sure” (2 Pet. 1: 10), thus showing that this calling to share the glory of God has to be made sure.  He is not at all discussing justification by faith or suggesting that it must be made sure by works done after conversion. Justification and eternal life are not in the least his subject.  He writes expressly to those “who have [already] obtained like precious faith with us in the righteousness of our God and Saviour Jesus Christ” (2 Pet. 1: 1).  The calling of grace is to share in God’s own eternal glory, or, as Paul expresses it, to share God’s “own kingdom and glory and he tells [page 22 - FIRSTFRUITS RESURRECTION] us that he exhorted, encouraged, yea, and testified, to the end that his children in faith should “walk worthily of God” Who had called them to such supreme dignity (1 Thess. 2: 11-12).

 

 

Since therefore this most honourable calling must be “made sure” by “walking worthily in order that we may be “counted worthy of the kingdom of God, for which ye also suffer” (2 Thess. 1: 5), the reading “let us also bear the image of the heavenly” becomes consistent and important.  Thus 1 Cor. 15: 51, 52 is addressed to those who are assumed (whether it be so or not) to have responded to that exhortation, and it will mean that “we [who shall be accounted worthy to bear that heavenly image] shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed Of that company it is strictly true that all means all.

 

 

Further, the primary antecedent to verse 52 is in verse 23: “But each [shall be made alive] in his own order: Christ the first-fruits; then they that are Christ's in His Parousia: then the end ...”  Does not the whole sentence, in the light of other passages, carry the force: But each shall be made alive, not all at the same hour, but each in his own class or company (tagma); first-fruit, Messiah; then, next, those of the Messiah, i.e., in His character as first-fruit, at His Parousia; then, later, the end of all dispensations, involving the resurrection of all, saved and unsaved, not before raised?  Here is additional reason for R. C. Chapman’s view (to be considered later) that the first resurrection is one of “first-fruitsand not of all who will be finally raised in the “harvest” of eternal life.

 

 

The translation “they that are Christ’s” is not an exact rendering.  The Greek reads: “then those of the Christ (hoi tou Christou) in His Parousiaand it is not a question of what these words may mean to an English reader to-day with his mind obsessed by a certain theory, but what did they convey to a Greek ear of the day when they were written.  (See Appendix.)

 

 

In the ideal and possibility all who are “in Christ” are “of Christ but that it is possible to be a believer on Him unto salvation from hell and not to be of that privileged personal circle which He will acknowledge before God, angels, and men as His companions, is plainly taught in the [page 23 - THE KING’S COMPANIONS] Word.  “If I wash thee not, thou [Peter, my believing, devoted follower until now] hast no part with Me” - not “in Me that would have forfeited all, including salvation; but “with Me which means that unwashed thou canst not continue in My company, My circle (John 13: 8).  Again, “Thou hast a few names in Sardis who did not defile their garments, and they shall walk [walk about habitually, peripateesousin] with Me in white, for they are worthy”; that is, they shall be My companions (Rev. 3: 4: compare the personal associates of king Rehoboam, those that had “grown up with him (1 Kin. 12: 7-10).  With these who have thus walked with Christ in humiliation and shall walk with Him in glory contrast those mentioned in John 6: 66: “Upon this many of His disciples went back, and walked no more with Him  But of those who go on with Him He graciously adds, “The one overcoming shall thus [as the consequence and counterpart of having walked in white on earth, of having ‘kept himself unspotted from the world Jas. 1: 27] - shall thus be arrayed in white raiment [as a companion of the King; indeed, as His wife, Rev. 19: 8]; and I will, in no wise blot his name out of the book of life, and I will confess his name before My Father and before His angels”; the King’s public acknowledgment that such are of His honoured and intimate circle.*

 

* Rev. 3: 4, 5: comp. Luke 12: 9, with the use the apostle and the early church made of that saying, as in 2 Tim. 2: 11-13.

 

 

The fact that such as show special trust in and fidelity to God are granted intimacy with Him beyond others is very natural and it runs throughout Scripture.  Instances are: Abraham, peculiarly the friend of God, from whom Jehovah would hide none of His purposes (Gen. 18: 17-19): Moses, privileged beyond others of the people of God with mouth to mouth converse with Him, because he was faithful (Num. 12: 7, 8): the prophets, without informing whom Jehovah would not act (Amos 3: 7): of which Elisha is a notable instance, as witness the tone of surprise in his words, “Jehovah hath hid it from me and hath not told me (2 Kin. 4: 27).  So God, reproving false prophets,* says: “Who [of them] hath stood in the council of Jehovahand, “If they had stood in My council” (Jer. 23: 18, 22) - not [page 24 - MY FRIENDS IF] counsel, as A.V., but in “My secret council as the Hebrew means, whither faithful prophets were transported in spirit (1 Kin. 22: 19).

 

[* Who are these “false prophets”?  All - both regenerate and unregenerate alike - who teach contrary to the Words and Prophecies of God.

 

“Hymenaeus and Philetus have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already, and overthrow the faith of some” (2 Tim. 2: 17, 18, R.V.)

 

The apostasy by Christians today, is due to the influence of Gnosticism: - a belief that all matter is evil!  Therefore, they erroneously conclude that Christians ascend into Heaven - (as spirits or human phantoms, at the time of Death), and not at a time our Lord Jesus’ return! (1 Thess. 4: 16.)  This false teaching is rampant today throughout all of Christendom!  “‘The Spirit saith expressly that in later times’ - as the Age closes - ‘some shall fall away from the faith’ – apostatize – ‘giving heed to seducing spirits’ – an apostasy therefore that will be frankly Spiritualistic” (D. M. Panton).

 

“What their ‘profane,’ secular, unspiritual, ‘bablings’ were, we can only guess, but the reference to a ‘resurrection past already’ helps us in guessing.  It is likely that we have here one of the earliest allusions to a type of thought known later as Gnosticism, or the ‘Gnosis’; the religion of ‘Knowledge’ rather than of ‘Faith; a teaching which claimed to lead its disciple past the common herd of mere believers to a superior and gifted circle who should know the mysteries of being, and who by such knowing should live emancipated from the slavery of matter, ranging at liberty in the world of spirit.” (H. C. G. Moule, D.D.)]

 

 

Thus also in the New Testament we learn of very many hundreds who believed on Jesus when He was here (1 Cor. 15: 6, e.g.), but of these, some few enjoyed His special love, as the Bethany family (John 11: 5); a small band were honoured to share peculiarly His toil, ministry, reproach, and company, and will therefore be specially honoured in His kingdom (Lk. 22: 28-30; Rev. 22: 14): of which few again a smaller circle were more especially favoured with His confidence (Lk. 9: 28; Matt. 26: 37), and one was loved above them all (Jo. 13: 23; 19: 26, 21: 7, 20).

 

 

But as there is no respect of persons, no favouritism, with the Lord, as we are repeatedly and emphatically assured (Col. 3: 25; 1 Pet. 1: 17: etc.), there must have been reason for this distinguishing of some.  In John 15: 14, 15, Christ lays down its condition in the words: “No longer do I call you slaves [though it is to be well noted from the openings of the epistles that that is exactly what they continued evermore to call themselves]; for the slave knoweth not what his lord doeth: but I have called you friends; for all things that I heard from My Father I have made known unto you  Thus as with Abraham His friend, so with these, He had hid nothing from them, had had no secrets, but had made known unto them all that He had heard.  But the terms of this incomparable friendship were, and are, “Ye are My friends if ye do the things which I command you a condition nowhere attached to the forgiveness of sins or to the obtaining of eternal life, but of the simple nature of things in friendship between the Creator and the creature, the King and the subject.  To this privileged circle all indeed may attain, but it is reached by such only as pay the (in reality) purely nominal but quite unavoidable price of full obedience to their Saviour as their Lord.

 

 

Thus also in Hebrews 3: 12-14, we learn that “we have become companions* of the Messiah (metochoi tou Christou), [page 25 - GOD'S HOUSE IF] if it be so that (eanper) we hold fast the beginning of our confidence firm unto the end  And in verse six preceding we are told that we are the household over which the Son of God is ruler “if we hold fast our boldness and the glorying of our hope firm unto the end Israel, though redeemed by blood and delivered, did not become the “house” of God until one whole year after redemption (Ex. 40: 1); and, though the people of God by covenant and redemption, they only narrowly escaped the penalty of never having God dwelling among them and so of not being to Him as a house (Ex. 33: 1-3).  To be a pardoned rebel, restored to being a loyal subject of the sovereign, is one thing, and is great indeed, but to be a member of the royal house, a chosen intimate of the sovereign, is much greater.  His pardon of the rebel, sealed and delivered, God never recalls; but the privilege of belonging to His Son’s personal circle is contingent and may be forfeited.

 

* Darby, New Translation, note: “I use the word ‘companions’ as being the same one as in c.1: 9 metochoi, to which, I doubt not, it alludes; that is, to the passage quoted, Ps. 45. ‘Partakers of Christ’ has indeed quite a different sense

 

 

The type of tabernacle and temple when taken in its entirety shows that the “house” of God may be forsaken by Him and be temporarily destroyed (Jer. 7: 12; Ps. 78: 60, 61; Jer. 12: 7; Ps. 74: 7; Matt. 23: 38); and the New Testament solemnly declares the same as to the believer: “Know ye not that ye are a sanctuary of God, and the Spirit of God dwelleth in you.  If any man destroyeth the sanctuary of God [mars it - see Jer. 17: 7, 9, where the LXX use this word - so rendering the house unfit as a dwelling for the Holy One], him shall God destroy (see 1 Cor. 5: 5: etc.), for the sanctuary of God is holy, which sanctuary ye are” (1 Cor. 3: 16, 17). The believer who so lacks the spirit of Christ, and so walks according to flesh, as to incur that judgment, will indeed, by the changeless grace of God and through the eternal virtue of redemption by the precious blood of Christ, be himself, as to his person, saved, yet only “so as through fire” (ver. 15); but such will not be sharers of the privileges pictured as being the “house” of God or “companions of the Messiah,” the King.  But inasmuch as all who rise in the first resurrection will share those very privileges (Rev. 20: 4-6), it results that such as are adjudged by the Lord unworthy thereof will not have part in that resurrection, even as the many scriptures reviewed declare.

 

 

Thus the expressions “fallen asleep through Jesus” and [page 26 - GRACE AND FAITH] “those of Him in His Parousia” (those who are to be companions with Him during the period of His “presence” as King of this earth), both allow for the solemn possibility of some who might have been “accounted worthy to attain unto that age [of the Presence] and the resurrection which is from among the dead” (Lk. 20: 35) failing to attain thereto.

 

 

Passages which deal with a matter from the point of view of God’s plan and willingness use general, wide terms to cover and to disclose His whole provision.  But these must be ever considered in connection with any other statements upon the same subject which reveal what God foresees of the human element which, by His own creation of responsible creatures, He permits to interact with His working.  Out of these elements, through self-will in the believer, arises the possibility of individuals not reaching unto the whole of what the grace of God had offered in Christ.

 

 

The isolation of the former class of passages produced Calvinism, of the latter Arminianism.  Truth is found by construing all Scripture together.  The principle of the divine provision is grace: the principle of our attaining is faith; and “according to your faith be it unto you” is the inflexible condition.  Now faith is not merely an apprehending of ideas by the intellect, nor only the assent of the reason, though it includes of necessity both of these elements: faith is a principle of action which produces obedience to God and works out in love to men.  Incipient faith obeys God upon the primary point of trusting to Christ for salvation from wrath, and it secures that primary benefit for which it trusts.  Developing faith obeys God upon various successive points of His holy will; this issues in sanctity of character and purity of conduct; and according to this advance of faith in practical godliness will be the weight of glory which each will be capable of bearing.  Any particular possibility for which one’s measure of faith does not qualify will not be obtained. “The path of sorrow is not indeed the meriting, but the capacitating preparation for glory” (Moule on Rom. 8: 18).

 

 

It is unquestionable that this unchanging, because unavoidable, rule operates undeviatingly as to benefits available in this life: the Scripture shows plainly that it operates as to benefits available beyond this life.  Of these one is the [page 27 - ACCORDING TO FAITH] sharing in the first resurrection and so inheriting the [millennial] kingdom of God.  There is not any ground in Scripture or reason why these particular privileges should be an exception to the invariable rule stated; for the rule lies in the essential nature of man and his relationships with God, and no suspension or exception seems possible so long as God is God and man is man.  Apart from faith it is impossible for man to be pleasing to God or for God to grant to him the blessing of such as please Him. The measure of blessing in the possibility is the immeasurable merit of Christ, freely made available to sinners by the grace of God: the measure of blessing in actual attainment is our faith, faith as above defined and evidenced.  Therefore both translation and the “better resurrection” are consequent upon a life of faith that pleases God (Heb. 11: 5, 35).

 

“Such faith in us, 0 God, implant,

And to our prayers Thy favour grant,

Through Jesus Christ, Thine only Son,

Who is our fount of health alone.”

 

 

When it is said that the acceptance of the believer in Christ involves the imputation to him of all the acceptability of Christ, and that he is thereby qualified to share the eternal glory of Christ in the presence of the Father, and that consequently his own life and works can have no place in the matter, we point out that, inasmuch as the merit of Christ is imputed judicially to every believer equally, therefore every believer should of necessity share equally in all and every privilege, and no distinction in reward would be possible, one star could not then differ from another star in glory.  But the opposite of this is taught in the Word.  The imputation of righteousness in Christ gives to every believer equality of standing and of opportunity, but it does not, and cannot, do away with the necessity for faith, or alter the rule that attainment is according to faith.

 

 

It being therefore the case that the first resurrection, while open indeed to all, is a prize which must be attained, and which, like every prize, may be forfeited, it is at once made clear why in Rev. 20: 4-6, where the two resurrections are set, one at the opening of the Millennial kingdom and the [page 28 - THE BOOK OF LIFE] other at its close, it is said that “blessed and holy” is he that hath part in the former, including pre-eminently those who in varying degree had suffered for and with Jesus and for the word of God.  And that some believers not accounted worthy of that resurrection, will rise in the second resurrection unto eternal life, though they will have missed reigning with Christ in His [Millennial] Kingdom, fitly explains why at the final judgment the book of life will be opened and searched (Rev. 20: 11-15).  Were it known as a fact that no possessors of eternal life would or could be there this examining of the book of life would not be required, nor should we expect the statement that “if any was not found written in the book” he was cast into the lake of fire; for in that event the natural expression would be “as their names were not found, etc.”

 

 

A correct understanding of future events is of high value in the life of the Christian, but it is not fundamental to the gospel, neither does any rearranging of the order or particulars of those events imperil the faith.  Men of undoubted orthodoxy and greatly used of God have taken very divergent views on these topics, which teaches that great names cannot prove any one view to be the true meaning of Scripture.  On the other hand, this divergence should assure toleration and earnest research, so that more light may be gained and ever closer agreement be reached.

 

 

It is worthy of mention that Hudson Taylor and R. C. Chapman held the view here advocated. In the Appendix to his small work on The Song of Songs, entitled Union and Communion (ed. 5, p. 83), Hudson Taylor wrote of such as “if saved, are only half-saved: who are for the present more concerned about the things of this world than the things of God.  To advance their own interests, to secure their own comfort, concerns them more than to be in all things pleasing to the Lord. They may [page 29 - HUDDSON TAY4OR AND CHAPMAN] form part of that great company spoken of in Rev. 7: 9-17, who come out of the great tribulation, but they will hot form part of the 144,000, ‘the first-fruits unto God and to the Lamb’ (Rev. 14: 1-5).  They have forgotten the warning of our Lord in Luke 21: 34-36; and hence they are not ‘accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of Man.’ They have not, with Paul, counted ‘all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus the Lord,’ and hence they do not ‘attain unto’ that resurrection from among the dead, which Paul felt he might miss, but aimed to attain unto.

 

 

We wish to place on record our solemn conviction that not all who are Christians, or think themselves to be such, will attain to that resurrection of which St. Paul speaks in Phil. 3: 11, or will thus meet the Lord in the air.  Unto those who by lives of consecration manifest that they are not of the world, but are looking for Him, ‘He will appear without sin unto salvation’.”

 

 

Robert Chapman about the year 1896 issued a series of Suggestive Questions. Number 10 includes the following: “Are not the redeemed in Rev. 4 and 5 the same with those in ch. 20: 4, ‘Thrones and they sat upon them’? (verse 5) ‘This is the first resurrection  Is it not a resurrection of first-fruits?” ... Now in the essential nature of the case first-fruits are but a portion of the whole harvest, and so the Question proceeds: ‘And the rest of the dead (in the same verse) do they not include all the family of God? not the wicked dead only.  Hence, in verse 12, ‘Another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works’ (verse 15).  ‘And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into.the lake of fire’.”

 

 

Further as to this last passage, the exact rendering in the Revised Version, “if any was not found written in the book of life he was cast into the lake of fire by its negative form strongly supports this view.  If it should be said of the crowd at a platform barrier that, If any was found not to have a ticket he was refused admittance, no one would suggest the meaning that not one of all who were there had a ticket or was allowed to pass. [page 30 - DOCTRINE AND HOLINESS]

 

 

The late Mr. E. S. Pearce was intimately acquainted with Mr. Chapman’s views for he lived with him many years.  He wrote to me as follows: “It was Mr. Chapman’s desire that, by so walking with God and by obedience to His Word in all things, he might not shut himself out from the honour of reigning with Christ.  He saw no authority from the Scripture for saying that all the children of God would.  Rev. 20: 4, ‘And they sat upon them Mr. Chapman considered were distinguished persons, not all the saints

 

 

Now from verses 4 and 6 of Rev. 20, “they lived and reigned” and “Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection ... they shall reign it is clear that all who rise in the first resurrection do reign, from which it certainly follows that such as are not accounted worthy to reign do not rise at that time. Who shall say to what large degree this searching, conscience‑quickening belief contributed to the blamelessness of Mr. Chapman's beautiful life? The doctrine of the coming of our Lord is in the Scripture so set forth as to promote holiness of life (1 John 3: 3; 2 Pet. 3: 11-14; 1 Pet. 1: 13).  That line of exposition will be found most accordant with Scripture which makes the most imperative demand for holiness.

 

 

To gain that ‘prize’ I towards that goal will struggle

Which God has set before;

To gain that prize ’gainst sin and death I’ll battle

And with the world make war;

And if it brings me here but shame and troubles

And scorn, if pain life fills,

Yet seek I nothing of earth’s empty baubles;

My God alone my longing stills.

 

 

To gain that ‘prize to reach that ‘crown’ I’m pressing

Which Christ doth ready hold;

I mean His great reward to be possessing,

His booty for the bold.

I will not rest, no weariness shall stay me,

To hasten home is best,

Where I some day in peace and joy shall lay me

Upon my Saviour’s heart and rest.

 

                             - (From the German).

 

 

*       *       *

[page 31 - THE FIRST RESURRECTION]

 

 

III. THE PERIOD OF THE PAROUSIA.

 

 

The first resurrection, accompanied by the removal of the living, will take place at a certain moment when the Lord Himself shall descend from His present place at the right hand of the throne of God, in the upper heavens, to the neighbourhood of the earth (1 Thess. 4: 15-17).  He is now absent from the earth: then He will be present again.  This will be the commencement of His Parousia (presence).  The Word of God shows that this descent will take place at the end of that Great Tribulation which is to be inflicted upon the saints by the Beast at the very close of this age.  It has been suggested that the phrase sat down on the right hand of the Majesty in the heights (Heb. 1: 3) does not imply place, but merely dignity.  Yet this will not be said of 1 Kin. 2: 19: “The king sat down on his throne, and caused a throne to be set for the king’s mother, and she sat on his right hand  There is a spot in the heaven of heavens where the Father is throned in light unapproachable by man in the flesh.  There the Son sits at the right hand of God, and thence He will descend at the hour which the Father has set within his own authority.

 

 

1.  Christ stated that a time would come when His enemies should “see the Son of man sitting at the right hand of power, and coming on the clouds of heaven” (Matt. 26: 64): from which it would appear that down to an hour when He is to be seen by the godless at the right hand of power He remains there, which place therefore He did not leave for the air several years before that time.  Christ had said before that the hour when the world should thus see Him would follow the Great Tribulation (Matt. 24: 29, 30).

 

 

2. Now under seal 6 (Rev. 6) the godless are shown fleeing in terror from the face of God and from the wrath of the Lamb and are hiding in the rocks.  This accords with paragraph one above and with Isa. 2: 10, 19, 21.  The latter passage fixes the hour as that when “Jehovah ariseth to shake terribly the earth again showing at what point the Lord leaves the throne on high.  Seal 6 repeats the many signs in heaven and earth which Christ said should follow the Tribulation (Matt. 24: 29, 30), which confirms that the [page 32 - THE BLESSED HOPE] “arising” of the Lord and the appearing of His glory to men follow that Tribulation.

 

 

3. According to Paul himself the “blessed hope” of the church is the “appearing of the glory of our great God and Saviour Jesus Christ” (Tit. 2: 13), not any secret, invisible event.  The words in italics are a repetition of words used by Christ on the same topic (Matt. 24: 29, 30).  So that at the close of His then presence with His disciples the Lord pointed them onward to His appearing in glory, and they adopted that appearing as their hope.  But the Lord stated that this His appearing would be after the signs that should immediately follow the Great Tribulation.

 

 

The suggestion that the “blessed hope” is a first event and the appearing a second is denied by the grammar of the passage in Greek.  “Hope and appearing belong together” (Alford.  See also Bloomfield, Conybeare, Weymouth, etc.). “‘The blessed hope’ is the appearing” (Speaker's Commentary).

 

 

4. The Lord stated next (Matt. 24: 31) that at that moment of His appearing He would gather together His elect. That the elect are Christians, not Jews, is certain.  (a) No gathering of Jews to Palestine at this hour is known to Scripture.  There is to be one before the reign of the Beast, for he will persecute them there, and another, expressly termed the second, after Christ shall have come to Jerusalem (Isa. 11: 10-12).  If this at the moment of the appearing were of Jews that later one would be the third.  (b) This gathering of the elect is universal: were it of Israelites none of these would be left for that later and second gathering.  (c) The Gentile nations, not angels, will be agents of that second gathering of Israel (Isa. 11: 12; 14: 2; 49: 22; 66: 19-20).  (d) This gathering takes place while Christ is yet in the clouds, whereas Israel are not to be gathered there, but to their land and city.  (e) The term “elect” is applied to angels (1 Tim. 5: 21) and to Christ (Lk. 13: 35; 1 Pet. 2: 6). “Election” is used of God’s purpose concerning Jacob (Rom. 9: 11).  The cognate verb “chosen” is used of Jehovah’s choice of Israel as His earthly people (Acts 13: 17), of guests selecting the chief seats (Lk. 14: 7), and of Mary choosing the good part (Lk. 10: 42).  None of these places has any bearing upon the interpretation of Matt. 24: 31 and Mk. 13: 27: [page 33 - THE ELECT GATHERED] and in every other place of the many in the New Testament the invariable application of these terms is to Christians.  Even in Rom. 11: 5, 7, 28, though Israelites are in view, it is as Christians they form the “remnant according to the election of grace  Nothing arises to suggest that Christ meant the term in another sense to His former use in Luke 18: 7, “shall not God do justice to His own elect or for supposing that the Christians to whom the Gospels first came could think it to have any other than its by that time fixed application to Christians.

 

 

5. Christ further stated that the gathering of the elect should be accompanied by “a great sound of a trumpet” (Matt. 24: 31).  This is repeated in 1 Thess. 4: 16, and 1 Cor. 15: 52 describes this as the “last trump  The last trump of Scripture is recorded in Rev. 11: 15-18.  Under it four events are grouped: (1) The anger of the nations and God’s wrath upon them; (2) The time of the dead to be judged - the godly dead, for it is before the millennium: comp. Dan. 7: 22; (3) The rewarding of the prophets, saints, and those who fear God; (4) The destruction of the destroyers of the earth.

 

 

Thus the raising and rewarding of the godly take place at the same epoch as the destruction of the wicked, and all is after the Tribulation, for it is the time of the destruction of the Beast, and is after he has persecuted, and has killed the Two Witnesses in Jerusalem (Rev. 11: 1 ‑ 13).

 

 

6. This is confirmed by the declaration of the strong angel whose message follows trumpet 6 (Rev. 10: 5-7).  He announces that the mystery of God shall be completed during the period of the seventh trumpet.  Paul taught concerning: (1) the mystery (secret); (2) that it was according to the gospel (good tidings); (3) that it was made known according to the commandment of the eternal God; (4) and that this was done through the writings of the prophets (Rom. 16: 25-27).  The angel repeats these four particulars concerning (1) the mystery; (2) that it was according to the good tidings (the same word as gospel); (3) that it was declared by God; (4) through His servants the prophets.  The two passages read thus:

 

 

Rom. 16: 25-27: “Now unto Him that is able to establish you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery which hath been [page 34 - SCRIPTURE TESTIMONY ONE] kept in silence through times eternal, but now is manifested, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the eternal God, is made known unto all the nations unto obedience of faith. ...”

 

 

Rev. 10: 7: “... in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, when he is about to sound, then is finished the mystery of God, according to the good tidings which He declared to His servants the prophets

 

 

The attempt to make out that these are not the same mystery, and that there are two divine purposes of which all four particulars are equally and separately true, will surely only be made in the interests of some special theory of interpretation.

 

 

The mystery that was such a vital element in apostolic teaching is shown by Eph. 3: 1-13 to be the gathering of the church from Jews and Gentiles, and therefore was it to be made known unto all the nations.  This work will be completed by the resurrection and rapture, which will be under trumpet 7, which will be after the Tribulation, as shown above under (5).

 

 

7. Other Scriptures also reveal this same grouping of events. In 2 Thess. 1: 6-8, it is said that the delivering of the saints from trouble at the hands of the godless will be at the time of the destruction of the latter by the Lord at His revelation in flaming fire with His angels.  Thus the church of God is viewed as continuing in affliction right down to the apocalypse (public appearing) of Christ.

 

 

1 Thess. 4: 13-18 and 5: 1-11, belong together, though often arbitrarily dissevered, and they similarly associate these events for the godly and the godless respectively.  The “times and the seasons” of verse 1 necessarily means the times and the seasons in which will come the events just mentioned.  No other events have been mentioned, so that there is no other antecedent to the expression, which thus connects the paragraphs.

 

 

Thus the earliest revelations by Christ, the middle period teachings of Paul and others (see 2 Pet. 3: 15, that Peter and Paul taught alike), and the latest through John (Rev. 10: 11), agree.

 

 

8. This harmony is seen further in the passages which picture the Lord as coming as a thief.

 

[page 35 - COMING AS A THIEF]

 

 

Christ used the figure to warn His own servants of His own household (Matt. 24: 42, 44: Lk. 12: 39).  Peter, who heard that warning, repeats it to those who had “obtained like precious faith” with himself “in the righteousness of our God and Saviour Jesus Christ” (2 Pet. 3: 10, 11; 1: 1).  Paul reminds the Thessalonians that they, by his particular instruction, knew of that thief-like coming, and so they need not be caught unawares by its unannounced arrival, only they must be very careful to keep awake, continuing watchful and sober (1 Thess. 5: 21).  The Lord from heaven repeats these warnings to the church at Sardis (Rev. 3: 3), plainly declaring that it is possible for Christians to cease to watch (comp. Mk. 13: 36), and so to be overtaken by that day as a thief. Finally, just as wicked spirits are gathering the armies of the Beast for the final battle with the Lamb at His return, the Lord interjects the announcement, “Behold, I come as a thief” (Rev. 16: 15).  This were a singularly inappropriate place for the renewal of this warning if in fact the coming as a thief had taken place long previously at a supposed coming of the Lord before the end days entirely.

 

 

Thus it appears that the “houseand the Lord’s servants in it, continue on earth in His absence down to the close of the Tribulation era when the Beast is preparing for the final battle.

 

 

9. That the first resurrection takes place after the Tribulation is clear from the fact that those martyred by the Beast share therein (Rev. 20: 4).  The supposition that this resurrection will be completed in stages, of which this will be the last, is not needed and seems without Scripture authority.

 

 

10. In Rev. 14 there is a series of six visions. In the first a company of saints are seen on the Mount Zion with the Lamb, in the region of the throne of God, for the elders and the living creatures are present, before the throne.* These saints have been “purchased out of the earth” (showing that they are not then on earth), and they learn [page 36 - THE HARVEST] the song of heaven. In the second vision the hour of judgment strikes; that is, the end days begin. In the third we learn that the Harlot, Babylon, has been destroyed, which vision is amplified in ch. 17.  In the fourth the Great Tribulation is contemplated, for the Beast is persecuting.  After this the fifth vision shows: (1) The Son of man now on the clouds, having therefore come down from Mount Zion.  (2) His angels (the sickle, comp. Matt. 13: 39) are gathering up from the earth His “harvest the ripened saints He has grown as wheat, and will gather into His barn in safety.  The sixth and last vision pictures the destruction of the Beast and his armies, which is further shown in ch. 19: 11-21.

 

* In Revelation “before the throne” always means a heavenly locality, not on earth.  It is the place of the presence of God, of the elders, living creatures, angels, the glassy sea, the heavenly throne and altar. See 4: 5, 6, 10; 7: 9; 8: 3; 14: 3; 20: 12; all its occurrences.

 

 

Here again the presence on the clouds, with the gathering up of the godly, is put between the Tribulation and the destruction of the lawless. With unique emphasis Christ had taught that the “wheat” must remain in the field with the “tares” “until the harvest” and that the harvest is the “consummation of the age” (Matt. 13: 30-39), not any point of time prior to the End Days.  In Rev. 14 this harvest is shown appropriately as the last great event but one in this age.

 

 

The whole New Testament agrees in putting at this point the appearing in glory of the Son of man, which was seen from afar by Old Testament prophets; nor does the Scripture know of any earlier descent of the Lord from the throne to the air.  And so Paul in one sentence (2 Thess. 2: 1-5) grouped together (a) the Parousia, (b) our gathering together unto the Lord, and (c) the Day of the Lord, and most expressly announced and warned that these all must be preceded by the apostasy and the revelation of the Man of Sin.  George Muller said: “having been a careful diligent student of the Bible for nearly fifty years, my mind has long been settled upon this point, and I have not the shadow of a doubt about it.  The Scripture declares plainly that the Lord Jesus will not come until the apostasy shall have taken place, and the man of sin, the ‘son of perdition’ (or personal Antichrist) shall have been revealed, as seen in 2 Thess. 2.”

 

 

*       *       *

 

 

IV. THE PRE-TRIBULATION RAPTURE.

 

 

There are two principal views upon the matters here [page 37 - ESCAPE POSSIBLE] considered: one, that the Parousia will commence prior to the Times of the End, and that at its inception all believers of the heavenly calling, dead and living, will be taken to the presence of the Lord in the air; the other, that the Parousia will occur at the close of the Great Tribulation, until when no believers will be raised or changed.  The one view says that no believers will go into the End Times, the other that none then living will escape them.  The one involves that the utmost measure of unfaithfulness or carnality in a believer puts him in no peril of forfeiting the supreme honour of rapture or of having to endure the dread End Days: the other view involves that no degree of faithfulness or of holiness will enable a saint to escape those Days. As regards this matter, godliness and unfaithfulness seem immaterial on either view; which raises a doubt of both views.

 

 

Our study thus far has shown that the former view is unfounded: we have now to see that the latter is partly right and partly wrong.  It is right in asserting that the Parousia will commence at the close of the Great Tribulation, but wrong in declaring that no saints living as the End Times near will escape that awful period.

 

 

1. For our Lord Jesus Christ has declared distinctly that escape is possible.  In Luke 21 is a record of instruction given by Him to four apostles on the Mount of Olives.  It is a parallel report to Matt. 24 and 25 and Mark 13, and it deals specifically with the Times of the End and His Parousia.  He foretold great international wars, accompanied with earthquakes, famines, and pestilences, to be followed by terrors and great signs from heaven (vv. 10, 11: comp. Seals 1-4, Rev. 6).  These things are to be preceded by a general persecution of His followers (ver. 12), which will be the first indication that the End Days are at hand.  Then Jerusalem is to be trodden down by the Gentiles right on until the Times of the Gentiles run out (ver. 24: comp. Rev. 11: 2. where the same term “trodden down” is used, and Zech. 14: 1-5).  This shows that it is the End-times of which Christ is speaking, as is further shown by His earlier statement that at that time of vengeance “all things that are written” shall be fulfilled.  All things that are written in the prophets concerning [page 38 - ESCAPE CONDITIONAL] Jerusalem, Israel, and the Gentiles were not by any means fulfilled at the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70.

 

 

Then He mentions the disturbances in nature and the fears of mankind that are grouped under seal 6 in Rev. 6: 12-17, and adds explicitly that “then shall they see the Son of Man coming in a cloud with power and great glory and that when these things begin His disciples may know that their redemption draweth nigh (ver. 27, 28).

 

 

In concluding this outline of the period of the Beast the Lord then uttered this exhortation and promise: “But take heed to yourselves, lest haply your hearts be overcharged with surfeiting, and drunkenness, and cares of this life, and that day come on you suddenly as a snare: for so shall it come upon all them that dwell on the face of all the earth.  But watch ye at every season, making supplication, that ye may prevail to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of Man

 

 

This declares distinctly: (1) That escape is possible from all those things of which Christ had been speaking, that is, from the whole End-times.  (2) That that day of testing will be universal, and inevadable by any then on the earth, which involves the removal from the earth of any who are to escape it.  (3) That those who are to escape will be taken to where He, the Son of Man, will then be, that is, at the throne of the Father in the heavens.  They will stand before Him there.  (4) That there is a fearful peril of disciples becoming worldly of heart and so being enmeshed in that last period.  (5) That hence it is needful to watch, and to pray ceaselessly, that so we may prevail over all obstacles and dangers and thus escape that era.

 

 

This most important and unequivocal statement by our Lord sets aside the opinion that all Christians will escape irrespective of their moral state, and also negatives the notion that no escape is possible.  There is a door of escape; but as with all doors, only those who are awake will see it, and only those who are in earnest will reach it ere the storm bursts.  In every place in the New Testament the word “escape” has its natural force - ekpheugo, to flee out of a place or trouble and be quite clear thereof.*  It never means [page 39 - THE ESCAPE COMPLETE] to endure the trial successfully.  In this very discourse of the Lord it is in contrast with the statement, “He that endureth (hupomeno) to the end [of these things] the same shall be saved” (Matt. 24: 13).  One escapes, another endures.

 

 

* It comes only at Luke 21: 36; Acts 16: 27; 19: 16; Rom. 2: 3; 2 Cor. 11: 33; 1 Thess. 5: 3: Heb. 2: 3; 12: 25. In comparison with Rom. 2: 3, see its use in the LXX in the interpolated passage after Esth. 8: 13: “they suppose that they shall escape the sin-hating vengeance of the ever-seeing God”; also Judg. 6: 11; Job. 15: 30; Prov. 10: 19; 12: 13. The sense is invariably as stated above.

 

 

The attempt to evade the application of this passage to Christians on the plea that it refers to “Jewish” disciples of Christ, is baseless: (a) No “Jewish” disciples of Christ are known to the Scriptures (Gal. 3: 28; Eph. 2: 14 - 18).  (b) The God-fearing remnant of Israel of the End-days, will in no wise escape these things that shall come to pass (Mal. 3: 14; Zech. 13: 8, 9; Jer. 30: 7, 8).  (c) Nor will they believe on Jesus as their Messiah until they see Him coming in glory (Zech. 12: 9, 10; 13: 6; Matt. 23: 39).  (d) The assertion that the title Son of Man is “Jewish” is equally unwarranted, for the term “man” is necessarily universal to the race, and does not belong peculiarly to any one nation. (Comp. John 3: 14, 15; 5: 25-29: “whosoever” and “all”).

 

 

2. In harmony with this utterance of our Lord is His further statement to the church at Philadelphia (Rev. 3: 10): “Because thou didst keep the word of My patience, I also will keep thee from (ek) the hour of trial, that hour which is to come upon the whole inhabited earth, to try them that dwell upon the earth  Here also are declared: (a) The universality of that hour of trial, so that any escape from it must involve removal; (b) the promise of being kept from it, (c) the intimation that such preservation is the consequence of a certain moral condition: “Because thou didst keep ... I also will keep  As this is addressed to a church no question of a “Jewish” application can arise.  Nor do known facts or the Scriptures allow of the supposition that every Christian keeps the word of Christ’s patience (Matt. 24: 12; Rev. 2: 5; Gal. 6: 12: Col. 4: 14 with 2 Tim. 4: 10 concerning Demas); so that this promise cannot be stretched to mean all [regenerate] believers.

 

 

In The Bible Treasury, 1865, p. 380, there is an instructive note by J. N. Darby (see also Coll. Writings, vol. 13, Critical [page 40 - THE WOMAN IN HEAVEN] 1, 581) on the difference between apo and ek.  The former regards hostile persons and being delivered from them; the latter refers to a state and being kept from getting into it.  On Rev. 3: 10 he wrote: “So in Rev. 3 the faithful are kept from getting into this state, preserved from getting into it. or, as we say, kept out of it. For the words here answer fully to the English ‘out of’ or ‘from’.”  That the thought is not being kept from being injured in soul by the trials is implied in the expression “Keep thee out of that hour”; it is from the period of time itself that the faithful are to be kept, not merely from its spiritual perils.

 

 

3. Of this escape and preservation there are two pictures as there are two promises.

 

 

In Rev. 12 is a vision of (a) a woman; (b) a man-child whom she bears; (c) the rest of her family. Light on this complex figure may be gained from Hosea 4 and Isa. 49: 17-21; 50: 1.  Israel and Zion, viewed as corporate systems in continuity, are a “woman,” a “mother”; individual Israelites at any one time are the “children.” This usage is the same as when an individual Romanist calls the church his “mother  The “mother” is that system continuing through the centuries; yet in one sense, the woman at a given hour is composed of her children.

 

 

As to this “woman” the dominant fact is that at one and the same time she is seen in heaven arrayed with heavenly glory and on earth in sorrow and pain.  This simultaneous and contradictory experience is true of the church of God only (comp. Eph. 2: 6 with 3: 13 and 6: 10-13; and 1 Pet. 1: 3-5 with vv. 6, 7).  In Scripture Israel corporately has no standing in the heavens: her destiny and glory are earthly.  The national divisions of earth do not continue in heaven.

 

 

As to the Man-child, his birth and rapture, as with the whole of this book from c. 4: 1, pointed to events which the angel distinctly said were future to the time of the visions.  There is no exception to this, and therefore there is no possible reference to the resurrection and ascension of Christ.  Nor, in the fact, did our Lord at His birth escape from Satan by rapture to the throne of God: on the contrary, the Dragon slew Him in manhood and only thereafter did He ascend to heaven.  Nor at the ascension of Christ was Satan cast [page 41 - THE MAN CHILD] out of heaven.  Thirty years later, when Paul wrote to the Ephesians, he and his servants were still there (Eph. 6: 12), and another thirty years later again, when John saw the visions, his ejection was still future (Rev. 12).

 

 

The identity of this Man-child is indicated by the statement that he “is to rule all the nations with a rod of iron for this is a repetition of the promise (Rev. 2: 26, 27), “And he that overcometh, and he that keepeth My works unto the end [comp. the keeping the word of My patience, as above], to him will I give authority over the nations, and he shall rule them with a rod of iron  This promise is given only to Christ and the overcomers of the churches.  As it cannot here (Rev. 12) apply to Him it can only apply to them.

 

 

This removal of the Man-child cannot be the event foretold in 1 Thess. 4: 15-17, for those there in view will be taken up only as far as to the air around this earth when the Lord descends thereto from heaven, but this removal takes the Man-child to the throne of God, which is where Christ now is, in the upper heavens.  This fulfils the promise that such as prevail to escape shall “stand before the Son of Man

 

 

As we have seen, the Lord does not descend from heaven till the close of the Great Tribulation, not before Satan is cast down. Moreover, this one child can be only a part of the whole family, not the completed church in view in 1 Thess. 4* and 1 Cor. 15.  The “woman” out of whom he is born remains on earth, and after his ascent the “rest of her seed” are persecuted by the Beast; but his removal is before the Beast is even on the scene or Satan is cast out of heaven. Thus those who will form this company escape all things [page 42 - FIRSTI7RUITS, HARVEST, VINTAGE] that will occur in the End-times, as Christ promised; and the identification with the overcomers declares that they had lived that watchful, prayerful, victorious life, upon which, as the Lord said, that escape will depend.*

 

 

* In 1 Thess. 4: 15, 17 the word perileipo, “that are left,” deserves notice.  It is not found elsewhere in the New Testament, but the force may be seen in the LXX of Amos. 5: 15, and of the verb (in some editions) at 2 Chron. 34: 21; Hag. 2: 3.  In each case it means, to be left after others are gone.  So the lexicons also, and they are confirmed by The Vocabulary of the Greek Testament.  In this place it seems redundant save on our view that the rapture there in question is at the close of the Tribulation and that some saints will not have been left on earth until that event, but will have been removed alive earlier; for to have marked the contrast with those that had died it would have been enough to have said “we that are alive,” without twice repeating this unusual word.

 

[* “When the teaching of the return of Christ (before the Millennium) began to spread, it was the privilege of the writer to hear and accept the truth.  It certainly was the message of the hour.  There was, however, a note lacking.  The lacking note was the imperative demand for holiness of heart and life as the necessary qualification for this supreme event.  Little or nothing was said upon this subject by these first messengers.  The fact of the return of Christ, imminent and certain, was all the people were prepared for; and even this was resented by the vast majority of those who heard it.  So unpopular was this message that it could only be propagated through faith and self-sacrifice.  Indeed, we remember instances when those who preached it were not only ostracised, but ‘shamefully entreated  Little by little, however, the truth prevailed, until the outstanding ministers began to preach it boldly.  Now, for the past twenty-five or thirty years, the evangelists and Bible teachers who specialize in this doctrine receive large emoluments and favourable notoriety instead of abuse.

 

Having been taught this truth from childhood, among people who knew nothing of sanctification, the writer naturally wondered what would become of their unsanctities as these saints were ‘caught up  We cannot help feeling that the preaching of the Second Coming of Christ, as it was preached fifty years ago, has lost its power of conviction, and has become largely a matter of entertainment.  We have arrived at this definite conclusion: that it is no longer ‘the message of the hour,’ and that the preachers who proclaim the near coming of Christ, and fail at the same time to stress the necessity of sanctification, are deceiving their hearers, and rocking them to sleep in a cradle of self-indulgence and sin.” – W. T. MacArthur.]

 

 

Consequent upon this removal of the watchful, Satan is cast out of heaven, and presently brings up the Beast, who persecutes the rest of the woman’s family (12: 17, 18; 13: 7-10).  So that one section of the family escapes the End-times by being rapt to heaven, and the rest, the more numerous portion, as the term indicates, go into the Great Tribulation.  These latter are such as “keep the commandments of God and hold the testimony of Jesus” (ver. 17).  In Rev. 14: 12, such are termed “the saints which in New Testament times, was the term regularly used by Christians of one another; and among their number John had already included himself (1: 2, 9).  It covers therefore the church of God, of which he was a leader.

 

 

4. The second picture of this pre-Tribulation rapture is given in Rev. 14.  In this chapter there are six scenes:-

 

 

1. “First-fruits” with the Lamb on the Mount Zion (1-6).

 

2. The hour of judgment commences (6, 7).

 

3. “Babylon” is announced as having fallen (8).

 

4. The Beast period is present and persecution is in progress (9-13).

 

5. The Son of Man on a white cloud reaps His “harvest” (14-16).

 

6. The “vintage” of the earth is gathered, and is trodden in the winepress on earth (17-20).

 

 

The agricultural figure wrought into this chapter by the Holy Spirit is the key to its teaching. In the early summer the Jew was to gather a sheaf of corn as soon as enough was ripe, and this was to be presented to God in the temple at Jerusalem as “first-fruits” (Lev. 23: 9-14).  After some time (ver. 15) the whole of the fields would be ripened by the great summer heat and the whole harvest would be reaped.  But this, though removed indeed from the fields where it had grown, would not be taken so far as to the temple, but only to the granary on the farm.  Then the season closed with the vintage, and the clusters were not taken away from where they had grown, the winepress being in the vineyard and the grapes being crushed therein. [page 43 – FIRSTFRUITS] Thus the “first-fruits” are shown as on Mount Zion with the Lamb, the “harvest” is taken only as far as to the clouds, which accords with 1 Thess. 4; and the vintage is trodden outside the city of Jerusalem, where the armies of Antichrist are camped.

 

 

The last scene is the destruction of the Beast by the Lord at His descent to Jerusalem (Rev. 19: 15).  Next prior to that event is the removal of the elect to the clouds: immediately before this is the period of the Tribulation: preceding that is the destruction of the harlot system of Rev. 17 (see ver. 16-18): this event follows first upon the striking of the hour of divine judgment: but before any of those things of the End commence the First-fruits are seen with the Lamb in heaven, as He promised (Lk. 21: 36).

 

 

The First-fruits cannot be a picture of the whole of the redeemed as they will finally appear at the end of the drama of those days, for first-fruits cannot be more than a portion of the whole harvest, neither can first-fruits describe the final ingathering.  It were a contradiction to speak thus.  Firstfruits must be gathered first, before the reaping of the remainder.  The number 144,000 need not be taken literally.  In the Apocalypse numbers are sometimes literal, but sometimes figurative.

 

 

As has been noted above, these had been purchased out of the earth, which shows that they were not then on earth, and they learn the song of the heavenly choir.  Nor can this Mount Zion be at Jerusalem, but must be that in the heavens, for the Lord will not descend to the earthly Zion till after the Tribulation, not before it, as this scene is placed.

 

 

The 144,000 of ch. 7 are a different company.  They are the godly Remnant of Israel seen on earth after the appearing and the gathering of the elect to the clouds, and are sealed (comp. Ezek. 9) so as to be untouched by the wrath of the Lamb now to be poured upon the godless (Zeph. 2: 3; Isa. 26: 20, 21).

 

 

The identity of these First-fruits is revealed by a similar means to that which reveals the identity of the Man-child.  These persons are shown as connected with the Father, the Lamb, and the Mount Zion, which also refers back to the promises to the overcomers, and shows that the First-fruits will be a portion of the company of the victors, who, it is [page 44 - TWO RAPTURES] promised, will be marked as connected with the Father, the Son, and the New Jerusalem (Rev. 3: 12).  These three marks of identification come together in these two passages only.  Now the moral features attributed to these First-fruits show that they had lived just that pure, faithful Christian life which necessarily results from watchfulness, prayerfulness, and patient obedience to the words of Christ, as inculcated in the corresponding passages quoted.

 

 

As the Man-child and the rest of the woman’s seed were but one family, only removed in two portions, one before the Beast and the other after his persecutions, so first-fruits and harvest were grown from one sowing in one field, only they were reaped in two portions, one before the hour of judgment and the other after the Beast had persecuted.  We have remarked above that these latter are termed “saints and that this was the regular title that Christians gave to one another; that it is amplified by the double description “they that keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesusand that in this description John had before twice included himself; so that the terms mean that company in which John had membership, the church of God. Moreover, as the Jewish remnant will not have owned Jesus during the period in view the terms can apply only to Christians.

 

 

Finally, as between the gathering of the sheaf of first-fruits and the ingathering of the harvest there came the intensest summer heat, so between the removal of the First-fruits and the reaping of the Harvest there is placed (ver. 9-13) the Great Tribulation, that final persecution which while, like all persecution, it will wither the un-rooted stalk (Matt. 13: 21), ripens the matured grain.  It is ripeness, not the calendar or the clock, that determines the time of reaping (Mk. 4: 29).  The Heavenly Husbandman reaps no unripe grain: hence, “the hour to reap is come” when the harvest is “dried up” (Rev. 14: 15), for the dryness of the kernel in the husk is its fitness for the gamer and for use.  Thus the Great Tribulation will be a true mercy to [some of] the Lord’s people by fully developing and sanctifying them for their heavenly destiny and glory.

 

 

It thus appears that the foretold order of events will be:-

 

 

1. The removal of such as prevail to escape the Times of the End.  These will be taken up to God and to His [page 45 - THE FORETOLD ORDER] throne on the Mount Zion, not to the air.  Nor does the Lord come for them; they are simply taken, like Enoch or Elijah: taken to stand before Him and His throne.  Nor is a resurrection announced for this moment.  The dead, because dead, will have escaped the End-times, which escape is the announced object of this rapture.

 

 

2. The Beast arises and persecutes.

 

 

3. The Lord descends to the clouds and gathers together His elect (Matt. 24: 29-31; 1 Cor. 15: 51, 52; 1 Thess. 4: 15-17; Tit. 2: 13; Rev. 14: 14-16).  At this time there will be the first resurrection. Each who shall be accounted worthy of the coming age will “arise into his lot at the end of the days not sooner, certainly not before the End days have commenced (Dan. 12: 13).  Nor may we assume of the First-fruits that they will have priority in the Kingdom over equally faithful saints of earlier times.

 

 

4. After an interval the Lord descends to the Mount of Olives, destroys the Beast and his armies, and establishes the Kingdom of the heavens on the earth.

 

 

It is therefore our wisdom to give earnest, unremitting attention to our Lord’s most solemn exhortation “take heed to yourselves, lest haply your hearts be overcharged with surfeiting and drunkenness [that is, fleshly indulgence], and cares of this life [that is, its burdens through either poverty or riches], and that day come on you suddenly as a snare: for so shall it come on all them that dwell on the face of all the earth.  But watch ye at every season, making supplication, that ye may prevail to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of Man” (Lk. 21: 34-36).*

 

[* “The divorce between the teaching of consecration and the heralding of the Second Advent is a painful and dangerous development of the moment.  … And since it might be difficult to find an Advent Testimony meeting up and down the land where warnings are given to any but the unsaved, Advent truth has lost it grip, and seems to the outsider little more than an unreal, speculative, academic forecast of events and dates.  The Judge standing before the doors is no longer the dynamic truth that shook the Apostolic Church to its foundations.  And the reason is obvious.  It is almost universally assumed among prophetical students that the Advent is solely a matter of standing, and not a matter of walk; so that for all the saved it will be pure, unmixed, inevitable joy; an instant, miraculous deliverance so wrapt up in the gift of salvation that it covers the worst backslider.  Thus there is, and can be, no demand for any sanctity beyond salvation, and the tremendous thunders of the Apocalypse leave myriads of Christians unawake.  The issue is thus a grave one.  Our Lord’s outburst from heaven into the world is neither a comforting anodyne for the most disobedient disciple, or else it is one of the most rousing of all truths - it cannot be both– D. M. Panton.]

 

 

Oh, dare and suffer all things!

Yet but a stretch of road,

Then wondrous words of welcome,

And then - the FACE OF GOD!

 

 

Many of the perplexities felt as to these themes are caused by misconceptions upon three subjects - the constitution of man, the place and state of the dead, the judgment of the Lord upon His people.  Some discussion of these matters follows.

 

 

*       *       *

[page 46]

 

 

SOUL OR SPIRIT, WHICH IS THE MAN?

 

 

V.  AN ENQUIRY AS TO MAN-S CONSTITUTION AND FUTURE,

WITH REMARKS ON HADES AND PARADISE.

 

 

As treasures heavy and valuable may hang upon a small hook, so consequences weighty and far-reaching may follow the settlement of what may seem a small point.

 

 

Because at death the spirit of man returns to God who gave it (Eccl. 12: 7), it is generally thought that man goes then to God in heaven.  If the passage meant this it would teach that the ungodly, as well as the godly, go to heaven at death, for it refers to man as man.  This alone shows that this is not the sense of the passage. But further, the meaning given assumes that the man, the conscious entity, the person, the ego, is his spirit. But if this is not so, then the opinion stated, has no support in Scripture.

 

 

Again, many annihilationists deem that the man, the person, consists of two parts only, the body and the spirit, and that when these are parted at death the person, the conscious, ego, ceases to exist until the two parts are reunited in resurrection.  But if the conscious personality has ceased to exist, it is extremely difficult to conceive that it is the identical conscious person that comes into existence again. Would it not rather be a new personality that comes into being at resurrection? How can continuity of personality persist during non-existence, and how, then, shall this new man be held morally responsible for the deeds of that former person, and be righteously liable to judgment therefor?

 

 

Moreover, this would involve (what indeed we have heard asserted) a disintegration of the person of the Man, Christ Jesus, between His death and resurrection.  According to the theory, during that period His humanity was non-existent.  So that whilst the Son of God existed, Christ did not until resurrection.  This is fatal heresy, and alone forbids the doctrine in question.

 

 

The alternative must be for the annihilationist to adopt the first mentioned view, that personality attaches to the spirit, as others of that school do.  But if it be, that the soul is the [page 47 – MAN FORMED] person, and that after death the soul has its own separate existence, then the whole assertion fails.

 

 

Inasmuch therefore as most serious issues are involved, this inquiry is of great practical importance.  Indeed, it may be said that many most interesting and profitable themes can only be understood aright by a right understanding of our question - Soul or Spirit, Which is the Man?

 

 

It must here be remarked that this theme, like all such profounder topics of the Word of God, cannot be studied in the English Authorised Version. It is not possible, on account of the deliberate irregularity in translation used by the Translators so as to secure pleasing English. We quote here generally the English Revised Version, and sometimes the New Translation of J. N. Darby (Morrish, London).  This, one of the earliest individual translations, remains, in our opinion, by far the most helpful of all such.

 

 

1. THE CREATION OF MAN.

 

 

The creation of man is described in Gen. 2: 7: “And Jehovah Elohim formed man, dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul

 

 

Here are three stages.  1. A material form fashioned but of material particles, dust.  This is the body.  2. A somewhat inbreathed by God, named in Eccl. 12: 7, “spirit   That the “breath” of Gen. 2: 7, and the “spirit” of Eccl. 12: 7 are one is confirmed by the combination of the two terms in Gen. 7: 22: “All in whose nostrils was the breath of the spirit of life 3. The result, that man became what is here called “soul,” a living soul.

 

 

1. As to the body, it is to be observed that it was not itself the man.  It lay there, fashioned and prepared, but the man was not yet there.  The body was an inanimate form, which preceded the existence of the man.  This as against the Sadducean materialist and his assertion that the body is the man, and that when it dies his existence ends.

 

 

2. The same is true of the breath or spirit, which God inbreathed. It also was in existence prior to the man, for God breathed it into the body. It was not God; it is not divine: it is not said that God breathed of Himself, or [page 48 - MAN A TRINITY] breathed His Spirit into the body, but a somewhat not to be defined by us as to its substance or nature, but which God terms “spirit  In Zech. 12: 1 it is declared to be a created thing, a thing “formed,” as an article made by a potter. It is the same word as “potter” in Zech. 11: 13, and is found first at Gen. 2: 8, God “formed man  This as against the pantheist, and the doctrine akin to pantheism, that there is a measure of divinity in all men by creation.  The immanence of God in all creation is truth, the identity of all things, or of any created thing, with God is error, deadly error.

 

 

Thus the spirit was not the man, for he only came into existence by reason of the inbreathing of the spirit into the body, which conjunction of two separate, previously existing things, resulted in the creation of a third: “man became a living soul

 

 

3. It remains only that the man is what he is here described to be, “a living soul  The man is the soul, not the spirit, even as he is not the body.  This as against the annihilationist theory above mentioned.

 

 

It is fairly certain that every false philosophy that has beclouded the thoughts of man had been instilled into men’s minds by spirits of darkness in Babylon before Moses wrote Genesis, and had thence infected all races. In that case he would have been instructed in them in Egypt among the rest of its learning; and when he was re-instructed by the God of truth, he so described the creation of the universe, and of man in particular, as to deny every false idea current then or since.

 

 

This threefold composition of man is implied everywhere in the Word of God, and sometimes is distinctly stated.  Thus in 1 Thess. 5: 3: “And the God of peace himself sanctify you wholly; and may your spirit and soul and body be preserved entire, without blame in the parousia of our Lord Jesus Christ  The body is distinguished from the spirit in James 2: 26: “The body apart from (the) spirit is dead”; and the soul from the spirit in Heb. 4: 12, “The word of God ... piercing to the dividing of soul and spirit

 

 

The man has a body with which he operates upon the material world; but the body is not the man. He has also [page 49 - DEATH] a spirit with which he has dealings with the spiritual realm; but the spirit is not the man.  The man himself, the conscious ego, is the soul.  Personality in man inheres in the soul, which will become yet more apparent as we proceed, but may be seen in such passages as Ex. 1: 5: “all the souls were seventy souls”; Lev. 4: 2: “if a soul shall sin” 5: 2: “if a soul touch”; Lev. 5: 4: “if a soul swear” 7: 18: “the soul that eateth”, etc., etc.  The evident sense is: “If a person” do this or that.  See also LXX Ezk. 16: 5.

 

 

2. THE MEANING OF THE WORD DEATH.

 

 

Now “the body without spirit is dead” (Jas. 2: 26), and the soul, the man, cannot use or inhabit a dead body.  The spirit imparts to the body vitality, animation, and makes it usable by man.  Thus so long as the two are united man is a living soul, but when God recalls the spirit which He gave, the body ceases to have life, the soul vacates it, and thenceforth, until resurrection, the man is dead.

 

 

But it is carefully and always to be remembered that in Scripture the term “life” does not mean simply existence, but much more and much rather it means a certain mode or quality of existence, and equally so the term “death,” therefore, does not mean, non-existence, but an opposite state or mode of existence.  Many things exist which do not exhibit the property called “life  All annihilationist reasoning which we have read assumes this false sense of the words “life” and “death” and cannot proceed without it.

 

 

Yet in some real sense Adam died the day he disobeyed God, according to the sentence, “in the day that thou eatest of it thou shalt certainly die” (Gen. 2: 17), but he did not cease to exist that day.  So, by a powerful antithesis, it is said, “she that giveth herself to pleasure is dead while she liveth which cannot be read, ceases to exist while she exists (1 Tim. 5: 6).  In much the same way we speak of a living death.

 

 

Equally arresting is our Lord’s argument against the annihilationists of His day (Lk. 20: 37, 38).

 

 

He first admits that Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are dead, saying, “But that the dead are raised and at once adds that “God is not the God of the dead, but of the living, for [page 50 - DEATH, ITS DURATION] all live unto Him  So dead in one sense, they are yet alive in another, showing that both terms describe only relative conditions of existence.  Similarly the Lord makes the father of the prodigal say: “This my son was dead, and is alive again” (Lk. 15: 24), though in another sense he had been as much alive in the far country as after his return. Further, it is clear that the first death does not cause the annihilation of the sinner or there could be no second death for him.

 

 

Thus the word death does not of itself mean ceasing to be, and such as say that the second death means annihilation are bound to show that the Scripture adds to the word this sense which does not belong to it.  The second death is the “lake of fire” (Rev. 20: 14).  The beast and the false prophet are cast thereinto before the thousand years reign of Christ (Rev. 19: 20); they are still there at the close of that period when Satan is cast there (Rev. 20: 10); so that a thousand years in the second death has not destroyed their existence, and the sentence upon all three is that “they shall be tormented day and night for the ages of the ages  It would be impossible to torment that which had ceased to be.

 

 

It is consistent with the holiness and the love of God - for it is fact - that angels that abused His favour shall be confined in that place of misery, Tartarus, for already thousands of years (2 Pet. 2: 4); that Dives (Lk. 16), who abused His goodness on earth, shall be tormented in a flame in Hades for a period unknown to us, for it is not yet ended; that the Beast and the false prophet, who blasphemed His holy name, shall be in the lake of fire for more than a thousand years at least.  As this is consistent with the love and justice of God why should it not be so for 10,000 years, for 100,000, for a billion years, or for ever, and especially in the case of those who rejected His amazing love in Christ, trampled under foot the Son of God, and definitely resisted the Spirit of truth?  We are not competent to form our own opinion as to what God may or may not, do consistently with His character and because of it.  We can only bow to what He has revealed, assured that He will ever act consistently with what He is, for He is not able to do otherwise.  We can best estimate what sentence a judge may pass by considering what sentences he has before passed, as well as what statements he may have made as to future sentences. [page 51 - DEATH, ITS NATURE]

 

 

3. WHAT TAKES PLACE AT DEATH?

 

 

The passage before cited tells us that “the dust returns to the earth as it was, and the spirit returns unto God who gave it” (Eccl. 12: 7). But what becomes of the soul?

 

 

An actual case is better than much speculation, an ounce of fact being worth a ton of theory.  Of the Man Christ Jesus we ate told distinctly what took place at His death.

 

 

1. His dead body was laid in the tomb.

 

 

2. His last words on the cross were, “Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit” (Lk. 23: 46), the human spirit thus returning unto God who gave it.  That the human spirit is not the divine Spirit is seen clearly in the case of our Lord, for His entire holy humanity was a created thing conceived by an operation of the Holy Spirit in Mary (Lk. 1: 35); years later it was anointed with power by the Spirit of God coming upon it; and at last on the cross, He surrendered His human spirit to the Father: an act impossible in relation to the Spirit of God with Whom He as God was in indissoluble union.  The distinction - necessary and unavoidable - between the human and the divine is thus ever maintained.  It was the human spirit which vitalized His body that Jesus gave up that He might die.

 

 

3. But the Spirit of prophecy in David (Ps. 16: 10) had put into Messiah’s mouth these other words: “Thou wilt not leave my soul to Sheol which words were later, on the day of Pentecost, applied by Peter to Christ.  “Thou wilt not leave my soul unto Hades” (Acts 2: 27).

 

 

The error of Apollinaris (cent. 4), that the person of Christ consisted of a human body and soul only, with the divine Spirit (or Logos) taking the place in Him of a human spirit, must be steadfastly resisted.  His humanity, as ours, consisted of body, soul, and spirit.

 

 

Sheol and Hades are equivalent words in Hebrew and Greek respectively.  Of this region there is abundant information in Scripture.  It is very far from the fact, as spiritualists assert, that no certain information as to the state after death is available save what they think they receive from spirits through mediums.  But most unfortunately the reader of the Authorized Version is completely stopped from this study by the variety of the terms employed.  Sheol and Hades are [page 52 - SPIRIT NOT THE PERSON] rendered “grave,” “pit,” and “hell  The last in its older English meaning was not inaccurate, but it has come now to mean only the final place of the lost, the lake of fire, which never is the sense of Sheol or Hades.  However, any diligent reader can pursue the subject in the Revised Version, for these original terms are given in either text or margin where ever they occur.  This is one example, and an important one, of the superiority of the R.V. over the A.V.

 

 

4. WHERE IS HADES?

 

 

So the soul of our Lord was in Hades between His death and His resurrection on the third day.  And Eph. 4: 9, 10 shows beyond question (1) that the “soul” was the Lord Himself, the personality, and (2) where Hades is situate.  It says: “Having ascended up on high he has led captivity captive, and has given gifts unto men.  Now this, having ascended, what is it but that He also descended into the lower parts of the earth? He that descended is the same who has also ascended far above all heavens, that he might fill all things

 

 

1. The Person that ascended is the same Person that had descended, and from His own express words to Mary directly after His resurrection it is certain that He himself did not go to the Father at the hour of death, for He said to her: “I have (perf. ind., anabebeeko) not yet ascended to my Father; but go to my brethren and say unto them, I ascend to my Father” (Jo. 20: 17).  As His ascent to the Father had yet to take place it is clear that His human spirit, which He had commended to His Father as He died, was not Himself.  Nor would the words admit the thought; for a man cannot send his personality, his self, away from himself, but we read of Jesus that “he gave up the spirit or, breathed out the spirit, expired, as we say, the exact reversal of the act of creation when God breathes in the spirit.

 

 

The spirit therefore was not Himself, but a part of His composite humanity that He could dismiss by an act of the will. Man does not possess the power to do this; he must use violence to terminate his life: but Christ had received this power specially from His Father, according to His statement [page 53 - HADES, ITS LOCATION] that the Father had given Him authority to lay down His life by His own act (Jo. 10: 17, 18).

 

 

2. The realm to which Christ descended, elsewhere, as we have seen, named Hades, is in this place in Ephesians stated plainly to be in “the lower parts of the earth  Scripture always locates it there and nowhere else.  So Jacob of old said: “I will go down to Sheol to my son” (Gen. 37: 35); and so the great prophet Samuel, when permitted by God to come from the world of the dead to announce the doom of Saul (an exceptional permission and event) said: “Why hast thou disquieted me to bring me up (1 Sam. 28: 15). And so Christ said of Capernaum: “Shalt thou be exalted unto heaven? thou shah go down unto Hades” (Matt. 11: 23).  As certainly as heaven is above the surface of the earth so certainly is Hades in the opposite direction.

 

 

Readers of the great classics will not need to be reminded that it was the common belief of the ancient world that the place of the dead was within the earth.  We are not aware that any other opinion was then in men’s minds.  Their details of that place and its conditions are not to be accepted without Scripture confirmation, even as those of mediaeval writers like Dante are not to be; but the general facts of the location of the world of the dead within the earth, and of its having two divided regions, one of pain and one of bliss, are plainly adopted in Holy Scripture (as in Lk. 16), and so are confirmed as facts.  And it could be shown that some details also are thus confirmed; as that the poets made visitors to and from that realm go and come through some cave or opening in the earth, and the Revelation similarly represents demon hordes as coming from the abyss through a shaft or opening therefrom (Rev. 9: 1-11).  We take the idea in each case to represent the conception that the realm of the dead is within the earth.

 

 

5. BUT DO NOT SAINTS AT DEATH “GO TO HEAVEN”?

 

 

The death of Stephen presents the exact features seen at the death of his Lord.  We are told that “he called upon the Lord, saying, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit ... and ... he fell asleep” (Acts 7: 59, 60).  His body did not fall asleep: it was battered to death by brutal ill-usage, and devout men [page 54 - ON "GOING TO HEAVEN"] buried it.  It does not say that his spirit fell asleep, but that he surrendered it to his Lord.  We shall see later that neither does the soul “sleep” in relation to that other realm to which it goes at death; so that the expression “fell asleep” can only mean as to its relation to this earth-life which it leaves at death.

 

 

But did not Stephen “go to heaven” when he died?  Do not all who die in Christ do so?  It has been the almost universal belief of Protestants, but there is no Scripture for it.  If Solomon’s words, “the spirit returns to God who gave it mean this, then the saints before the time of Christ must have gone there, and, as before remarked, not saints only, but the ungodly also, for the statement applies to all men.

 

 

It has been often asserted that when the Lord rose he released from Hades the godly dead and removed them to Paradise in the presence of God, and that ever since all His people go there at death.  The Scripture nowhere declares this, but is wholly against it.

 

 

It should be asked, Where were these multitudes of souls during the forty days before Christ himself ascended? Raised at His resurrection, as the theory asserts, what was their location during that period?

 

 

But it is known definitely that one of the most renowned of Old Testament men of God did not ascend to heaven with the Lord, for at Pentecost, which was after the ascension, Peter distinctly stated that “David has not ascended into the heavens” (Darby, Acts 2: 34).  Why was David left behind?  There is no reason to think he was: the other godly dead also stayed there, as far as Scripture is concerned.

 

 

Alford translates: “David himself [i.e., in contrast to Christ] is not ascended”: Whitby: “David is not (yet) ascended”: Canon Cook (Speaker’s Commentary) remarks: “David’s soul was still in the intermediate state Had David in fact ascended even but a few weeks before Peter was speaking, the latter could not have made the assertion “David ascended not  The aorist used (anabee) covered all preceding time, from the death of David to the speech of Peter.  Moreover, if at any time David had ascended the point and conclusiveness of Peter’s argument were gone.  Its cogency lay in the fact that no one but Jesus Christ had ascended: therefore He and He alone fulfilled the prophecy; for if [page 55 - THE COMMON BELIEF WRONG] any one else had ascended from the grave to the throne of God how should it be certain that he did not fulfil the prediction?

 

 

In his great work on The Creed (Art. 5, He descended into Hell) Bishop Pearson shows how little basis the opinion in question has. He says: “The next consideration, is whether by virtue of His descent, the souls of those who before believed in Him, the Patriarchs, Prophets, and all the people of God, were delivered from that place and state, in which they were before; and whether Christ descended into Hell to that end, that He might translate them into a place and state, far more glorious and happy.  This has been, in the later ages of the Church, the vulgar opinion of most men ...

 

 

“But even this opinion, as general as it hath been, hath neither the consent of Antiquity, nor such certainty as it pretendeth.  Indeed, very few (if any) for above five hundred years after Christ, did so believe that Christ delivered the saints out of Hell, as to leave all the damned there.  Many of the Ancients believed not, that they were removed at all, and few acknowledged that they were removed alone

 

 

But it is asked, What became of those who came forth from their graves after Christ had risen and who appeared unto many? (Matt. 27: 52, 53).  Did they not “go to heaven” with the Lord?  Let those say what became of these to whom God may have given private information upon the point; but it cannot be learned from Scripture that they went to heaven.  And in return it may be asked, What became of Lazarus and the other persons who were resuscitated, as mentioned in Scripture?  Did they go to heaven without dying again or, are they still on earth? or, did they not in due time go back to the death state, from which they had been temporarily recalled to exhibit the power of God?

 

 

That Christ “led captivity captive” carries no suggestion that He took the godly dead to heaven.  The figure itself forbids the idea.  It is taken from the ancient practice that a victorious commander dragged many, and the most noble, of his captives to his capital city and exhibited them for his glory at his triumphal entry.  The expression could in no wise apply to the possible recovery of some of his own subjects from captivity by his enemy and their return home with him in liberty. The sense may be seen plainly in the place in [page 56 – PARADISE] Judges 5: 12, from which the phrase is quoted in the later passages.  As the conqueror Barak returns from the victory over Sisera, Deborah cries: “Arise, Barak, and lead away thy captives  It is the Lord’s conquest of the hosts of darkness that is celebrated in the New Testament passages (Eph. 4: 8; Col. 2: 15), as it is also the theme in Ps. 68: 18, from which the quotation is actually made.  The figure is again military.  God is pictured as among a mighty host: “The chariots of God are twenty thousand, even thousands upon thousands and then it is said, “Thou hast led away captives the phrase formerly used of Barak.

 

 

6. WHEN AND WHERE IS PARADISE?

 

 

Paradise is not the actual dwelling place of God, the house or temple in heaven.  The meaning of the word will not allow this, for it describes the pleasure grounds of a great man, say a king.  Thus Solomon using the word says, “I builded me houses; I planted me vineyards; I made me gardens and parks (paradises, LXX), and I planted trees in them of all kinds of fruits” (Eccl. 2: 4, 5).  The parks were not the houses.  The former, like the vineyards, might be at a distance from the palace.  In the Septuagint (LXX) the word is used of the garden of Eden.

 

 

Paul says that he was “caught away into the paradise” (2 Cor. 12: 4), which, in view of the meaning of the word, does not mean the heaven of heavens where God has His own especial dwelling.  The word “caught up” is not exact, for the Greek word harpazo does not in itself indicate the direction.  Nor is it certain that by “the paradise” he means the “third heaven” to which he had been taken according to the verse preceding, because he had said (ver. 1) that he was about to speak of “visions,” not of only one vision, whereas he did not mention more than one, unless the two are separate events.

 

 

But if the article “the paradise” points to one such region that is pre-eminently Paradise, and if that is in the upper world, what follows?  Nothing, as to our theme; certainly not that all saints go thither at death.  Paul is using the experience as proof that he had exceptional tokens that he was an apostle, which requires that the experience itself be [page 57 - THE PARADISE IN HADES] exceptional, not general.  Moreover, that an unusual event happened to one Christian during life is no proof that it happens to all Christians at death.

 

 

But the article “the paradise” does not require the sense of a region in the heavens, because Christ used it when he said to the thief, “To-day shalt thou be with me in the paradise” (Lk. 23: 43), and it is beyond question, as we have seen, that Christ did not go to the heavenly regions that day, but to Hades, in “the lower parts of the earth  Therefore the blissful region of Hades, “Abraham's bosom” (Lk. 16: 22) was paradise; and ought not we, the followers of the Lord, to feel that a region which was suitable to Him in the death state must be fully suitable for us?

 

 

As far as the meaning of the word goes there may be many paradises, even as Solomon says, “I made me paradises”; and so it may be that  “the Paradise of God where grows the tree of life of which saints that have conquered in the battles of life shall be privileged to eat, is heavenly in location (Rev. 2: 7; 22: 14); but in any case that is future, not present, as to our enjoyment of it, and does not touch the place and state of the dead.

 

 

The Lord Jesus in His universal presence is not only in heaven; He is also in the midst of two or three living saints gathered to His name on earth.  He is in Hades also: “He descended ... He ascended, that He might fill all things” might occupy the universe (ta panta), might pervade it all with His presence, as the odour of the ointment did the house (John 12: 3), where the same verb is used as in Eph. 4: 10 (pleeroo).  Thus, without vacating His place at the right hand of God, He could present Himself personally and repeatedly to His imprisoned and hard-pressed servant on earth (Acts 23: 11; 2 Tim. 4: 16, 17), and can also communicate with the dead, as we shall see shortly.

 

 

And the [disembodied] soul, freed from the trammels of this enfeebled, deranged body of our humiliation, can in consequence appreciate that presence more keenly and enjoy it more blessedly, and so Paul could rightly say that to depart and to be with Christ would be very far better than to be chained day and night to a rough pagan soldier, as was at that time his distressing lot (Phil. 1: 23).  It is however to be noted that the apostle does not here make any general statement that “to [page 58 - SOULS UNDER THE ALTAR] die is gain”; strictly his assertion is made of himself only.  He had just stated his “earnest expectation and hope” that Christ should continue to be “magnified in his body, whether by life or by death  Not every [regenerate] believer lives with this as his fixed and paramount intention.  Not every Christian has so dedicated his body to Christ as to be as willing for death as for life.  Then Paul adds: “For to me to live is Christ, and to die is gain” (Phil. 1: 20, 21). Doubtless this is true of each who lives to magnify Christ; but it is not said of [regenerate] believers who may not so live, as those, for example, who are cut off prematurely in their sins, as were Ananias and Sapphira and the evil living Christians in the Corinthian church (Acts 5: 1; Cor. 11: 30).

 

 

7. THE SOULS UNDER THE ALTAR.

 

 

It is a serious loss to many believers that they regard the book of the Revelation as beyond comprehension, and are afraid to accept its symbols and visions as a revelation.  Hence, when appeal is made to it they decline to accept its testimony.  But symbols, pictures, figures of speech, being used by the [Holy] Spirit of truth with divine care, teach with accuracy, and indeed with superior vividness, those who have eyes to see and ears to hear.  Hieroglyphs have plain meaning to those who can read them, and this had been just as much the fact during the period when men could not read them, or in the later period when scholars differed as to their meaning.  Patient research brought explanation and reconciliation.

 

 

One of the most illuminating portions of Scripture upon our present interesting and necessary themes is in Revelation 6: 9-11.  John [the apostle] says: “And when the Lamb opened the fifth seal, I saw underneath the altar the souls of them that had been slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held: and they cried with a great voice, saying, How long, O sovereign ruler, the holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth?  And there was given to them, to each one, a white robe; and it was said unto them that they should rest yet for a little time, until their fellow-bondmen also and their brethren, who should be killed even as they were, should have fulfilled their course

 

[page 59 - CONSCIOUSNESS IN HADES]

 

 

At the time here in view the resurrection of the godly has not yet come, for the roll of the martyrs is not complete.  These brethren therefore are still without their resurrection bodies.  But to John, rapt in spirit into that super-sensuous world (c. 1: 10: “I became in spirit that is, in an ecstatic state), those “souls” were visible.  Therefore death does not end the existence of the soul.  Moreover, they are conscious: they remember what befell them on earth at the hands of the godless; they know what the future will bring of vengeance; they ponder the situation, and they wonder at the seeming delay of their vindication by God; they appeal to their Lord; they are given answer, counsel, and encouragement; they receive the sign of their Master’s approval, the white robe, at once His recompense for that they did not defile their garments in this foul world, and His assurance that they shall be His personal and constant associates in His [millennial] kingdom (Rev. 3: 4, 5).  This last item - the giving of the white robes - shows further that not all saints await a session of the judgment seat of Christ when at last He shall come from heaven; for His decision and approval are here made known to these in advance of His coming and of their resurrection.

 

 

The vision contains also something more, and which is completely unseen by most readers.

 

 

When Samuel came from Hades to speak to Saul (1 Sam. 28: 12-14) he was seen by the medium.  She saw him “coming up out of the eartha further plain Intimation that Sheol is within the earth.  She described him, saying it was “an old man” who had appeared, and he was “covered with a robe  The description was so accurate that Saul, who had long known Samuel on earth, recognized him by it and was satisfied that the real Samuel was present, though he had not himself seen the appearance; for it says that “he perceived (Heb., knew),” not that he saw that it was Samuel.  Equally does his question to the witch “What seest thou tell that he had not himself seen the form.

 

 

This makes evident (a) that the disembodied soul has form and garments, such as can be seen by one endowed with vision therefore, as were the medium then and John later; and (b) that the psychical form and clothing of that state correspond recognizably to the outer material form and clothing of the former earth life.  This has bearing upon the [page 60 - PSYCHICAL FORM AND CLOTHING] question of recognition after death, and upon other interesting points not now to be examined.

 

 

The reality of this psychical form is often assumed or asserted in Scripture.  Dives in Hades (Lk. 16) has a body that can feel anguish from a “flame  There is “water” that could cool his “tongue  Lazarus has a “finger  Both Dives and Abraham have eyes and ears and voices; they see and hear and speak.  The reality of bliss in that state must be surrendered if the reality of torment there be denied.  That those realities are subtle as compared with their grosser counterparts of this world, does not make them or the experiences less real, but rather the more acute.

 

 

Thus also it is as to the souls “under the altar  John sees them, and sees that to each of them is given a “robe” that is both suitable and significant.

 

 

It was for a similar, yet even higher, experience that Paul longed; for, while the disembodied state would indeed be far better than his painful lot as a prisoner, yet in itself it is not the best.  And so on another occasion, when he was in freedom and rejoicing in his wondrous and privileged service, he spoke differently (2 Cor. 5: 1-10).  First he spoke of the present: “We that are in this tent-dwelling [the body] do groan, being burdened”: then he mentioned the intermediate state after death: “not for that we would be unclothed” (without adequate covering), for this is not to be desired, it is as unpleasant and unseemly for the soul as for the body*; and then he spoke of the future: “we long to be clothed upon with our habitation which is from heaven; if so be that being clothed we shall not be found naked that is, at [the time of] the coming of the Lord.

 

* Compare the evident longing of the evil spirit to return into the body he had left.  Without a material body he wandered restless, like a thirsty man seeking water in a desert (Matt. 12: 43-45).  Demons also begged to enter the bodies of even swine, when driven from the body of a man.  This misery of disembodied beings is recognized by the heathen, who often, by reason of dread and unholy contact with the demon world, have more sense of these matters than the materialized modern westerner.  Thus a Chinese driver explained the whirling dust spouts of the Gobi desert as being spirits: “What they want is a body, and for lack of a better one they pick up a shroud of sand” (Misses Cable and French, Something Happened, 191).

 

[page 61 - SUITABLE CLOTHING DEMANDED]

 

 

This “if so be” implies the possibility of not having part in the first resurrection, for (1 Cor. 15: 54) that is the hour when “what is mortal shall be swallowed up of life by the soul being clothed upon with its “building from God, a house not made with hands, eternal, in the heavens a “house” in contrast to this present body, the frail transitory tent.

 

 

This is the meaning of his earlier prayer above noticed, that “the spirit and soul and body be preserved entire, unblemished and so un-blamable (amemptbs includes both) when the Lord shall come (1 Thess. 5: 22).  No “naked,” that is, un-embodied, soul can be presented before the presence of God's glory, because for that it must be without blemish (amomos), not to be blamed (Jude 24; Eph. 1: 4).  Were a man, however perfect his form, and even were he of the royal family, to present himself naked on a court day before the king upon his throne he would be severely blamed.  Not only comeliness of person, but clothing, and suitable clothing, is indispensable.  Indeed, the officers of the court would prevent anything so utterly unseemly.  Shall the King of kings receive less respect?  He that hath ears to hear let him hear this, and lay to heart that not death, but resurrection or rapture fits for translation to the realms above and the court of the God of glory.  It was thus with Christ himself.

 

 

For entrance into the holy places the priest had not only to be one of the redeemed people of God; he had also to be unblemished as to his person (Lev. 21), and he had further to be clothed in garments of glory and beauty (Ex. 28).  Both were indispensable for access to the presence of God.  Moreover, before the perfect form could be clothed in such garments it had to be washed with water (Lev. 8: 6; 16: 4), which is the work our Moses, Christ, wishes to effect in us in this earthly life by His word (Eph. 5: 25-27) and by discipline (Heb. 12: 10), in preparation for that coming day of our being clothed for access to and service in the true sanctuary above.

 

 

If it be asked whether the righteousness [of Christ] imputed to the believer upon first faith in Christ does not include all this that is evidently necessary, the answer is a distinct negative.  One consideration settles this. That imputed righteousness is the “righteousness of God,” and this is of necessity indefectible, untarnishable.  But, according to the regulations, [page 62 - GARMENTS MAY BE LOST] the priest may possibly be defective in form or defiled in person and clothing: were it not so, what need of the regulations and purifying ceremonies?

 

 

For the forgiveness of sins, and for life as a forgiven man in the camp, neither perfection of form, nor washing at the gate of the tabernacle, nor special clothing, were demanded; but for access to God and for priestly service all these were as indispensable as the atoning blood.  Imputed righteousness settles completely and for ever the judicial standing of the believer as justified before the law of God; but practical righteousness must be added in order to secure many of the mighty privileges which become possible to the justified.  Let him that hath ears hear this also, for loss and, shame must be his at last who has been content to remain deformed and imperfect in moral state, or is found to have neglected the washing, and so to be unfit to wear the noble clothing required for access to the throne of glory.  Such neglect of present grace not only causes the loss of heart access to God, as the careless believer surely knows, but will assure the forfeiture of much that grace would have granted in the future.

 

 

Here lies the weight of the warning which our Lord announces from heaven as to be specially applicable when His coming draws near:  “Behold, I come as a thief. [This, message is set in the midst of the gathering of the hosts of Antichrist for the battle of Har Magedon, and so indicates the period when the coming will be]. Blessed is he that watcheth, and keepeth his garments, lest he walk naked and they see his shame” (Rev. 16: 15).  Therefore “garments” may be lost.  If the reference is to the imputed righteousness [of Christ], then justification [by faith] may be forfeited, and the once [eternally] saved be afterwards lost.  But let those who rightly reject this, inquire honestly what it does properly mean as to the eternally justified. And let them face what is involved in the loss of one’s garments.

 

 

In the temple of old the guards were placed at nightfall at their posts.  The captain of the temple, at any hour he chose, went round with a posse of men unannounced, and if a guard was caught asleep at his post, he was stripped of his clothes, which were burned, and he was left to go forth in his shame.  The shame of his nakedness was the outward counterpart of the deeper shame that he had slept when on duty.  Not in that dishonoured state dare he enter the house of God [page 63 - MAN NOT A SPIRIT] and sing or serve.  And it would be long ere the disgrace of that night would fade from memory, his own or others.  My soul, keep awake through this short night of duty while thy Lord is away!  Thou knowest not in which watch of the night He will come, and it were dreadful to be left unclothed with that house which is from heaven should He come suddenly and find thee sleeping!

 

 

To return to seal 5.  These, then, are “souls” not “spirits  Man has spirit as part of his composite being, but he is not a spirit, as angels are.  In the 397 places where the word “spirit” comes in the New Testament man is never called a spirit, because he himself is not one, but is a soul.  Hence, by the way, the “in-prison spirits” of 1 Pet. 3: 19 are not human beings,* but those fallen angels whom Peter again mentions (2 Pet. 2: 4: comp. Gen. 6: 1-4 and Jude 6).  This is put beyond question by the fact that these are in the underworld, in prison, in Tartarus - a region well known to the ancient world, and by this name that Peter uses, as the deepest and most dreadful part of Hades, a prison of fallen angels; whereas the [animating] spirit of man does not go to the underworld, but to “God who gave it

 

[* NOTE.  Peter is believed to be referring to the “Nephilim” or “Giants” here.  That is, those described in Gen. 6: 2, 4 are believed to be the offspring from “the daughters of men” and “the sons of God” (fallen angelic creatures); described as, – “the mighty men which were of old, the men of renown” (verse 4, R.V.): they are neither human of angelic!]

 

It is therefore the soul which is the person; and - against the annihilationist - the soul has not ceased to exist, or lost its sense of personality, because of being without spirit or body.  Yet neither can man in this incomplete condition stand in the all-holy presence of God in heaven.  For entrance into the holy of holies the high priest himself must be arrayed in garments specially pure and glorious.  It was only in His resurrection body of glory that the Man Christ Jesus entered into the holy place on high, and so only can the under-priests, His followers, do so.  To stand there the being must be complete in structure and perfect morally, which is the point of Paul’s prayer for fellow-saints: “The God of peace himself sanctify you wholly; and may your spirit and soul and body be preserved entire, blameless in the parousia [the presence, at His coming] of our Lord Jesus Christ” (1 Thess. 5: 23).  This shows that the phrase “the spirits of just men made perfect” points to [the time of] resurrection.  It has just before been said of them, that “apart from us they” - [i.e., Old Testament saints are included, (see verses 4-39) in this chapter. – Ed.] – “could not be made perfect” (Heb. 12: 23; 11: 40).  All [page 64 - UNDER THE ALTAR] the other glories to which in this passage we are said, to have come are future, to be realized actually at the coming of the Lord.  See my “Firstborn Sons,” 84 ff.

 

 

The use of spirit in this place (Heb. 12: 23) may seem at variance with the statement that man is not called a “spirit  It is a rare instance, perhaps in the New Testament the only instance, of Cremer’s fourth sense in which the term is used.  It “comes to denote an essence without any corporeal garb for its inner reality”; that is, in Heb. 12: 23, which he cites, the man, the soul, without its body, is described as spirit, meaning a spiritual substance destitute of a material covering.  This does not cancel the regular distinction in Scripture between soul and spirit, but indicates only the immateriality of the soul, the ego, in itself.  The student should by all means study Cremer’s treatment of pneuma and psuche (Lexicon of N.T. Greek), and note his conclusion that “psuche [soul] is the subject or ego of life

 

 

Now these souls that John saw are “under the altar  Not one of the first six seals, of which this is the fifth, pictures events in the presence of God in heaven; all deal with affairs of earth, or as seen from the earth.  This altar, then, is not in heaven.  There is an altar in heaven pictured in the book, but it is specified as being the “golden altar that is, the one for incense (comp. Ex. 30: 3), and as being “before the throne” or “before God” (Rev. 8: 3; 9: 13).  In this book “before the throne” always means the upper heavens.  But this other altar is one of sacrifice, though not of atoning sacrifice.  We Christians have an altar of atoning sacrifice (Heb. 13: 10): it is the cross of Jesus, the Lamb of God.  But that is not in view here.

 

 

The picture is really quite simple.  The brazen altar of sacrifice in the tabernacle was square and hollow, with a grating upon which rested the wood and the victims.  When the fire had done its work the remains of the sacrifice fell through the grating to beneath the altar, whence they could be removed on occasion.  Now the place, the “altar,” where these martyrs of Christ sacrificed person and life in His cause is obviously this earth, and thus this vision simply declares what we have seen from other scriptures, that the place of the dead is under the earth: “He descended into the lower [page 65 - IMMORTAL SOUL] parts of the earth”; whence those still there will be removed at [the time of their] resurrection.

 

 

Since these pages were written I have learned that this was the explanation of the earliest known Latin commentator on the Apocalypse, Victorihus of Pettau (died 303).  Mr. F. F. Bruce summarized this in The Evangelical Quarterly (Oct., 1938) as follows: “The altar (6: 9) is the earth: the brazen altar of burnt-offering and the golden altar of incense in the Tabernacle correspond to earth and heaven respectively.  The souls under the altar, therefore, are in Hades, in that department of it which is ‘remote from pains and fires, the rest of the saints’

 

 

This confirms Bishop Pearson cited above as to the view held in the earliest Christian centuries.

 

 

A great deal more concerning Hades can be learned from Scripture, but it would require separate treatment. Here we deal with the matter only as connected with the subject in hand.

 

 

It is true, as above indicated on Heb. 12: 23, that the words soul and spirit take, by much usage, shades of meaning derived from their primary sense.  The student will discover these, and will not be confused thereby if only the primary, dominant sense of each has been first grasped firmly.  And keeping that sense before him, we believe he will find it to illuminate many obscure scriptures and subjects to see that the soul is the person - a living soul while on earth - a dead soul while in the underworld - and to be made alive in immortality at the [time of] resurrection, with a body of glory incorruptible, indestructible.

 

 

The term “immortal soul” is incorrect and misleading when used of our present state or of the dead.  To be immortal is to be incapable of dying.  Man is not this as yet.  Neither the innocent humanity of Adam, nor even the sinless humanity of Jesus was immortal, for both were capable of dying, and did in fact die.  But the saved of men will become immortal in resurrection, as the man Christ Jesus did.  The soul, the man, has now endless existence but not immortality, in the proper sense of the word, until resurrection; and then only the saved will be incapable of dying; the lost will exist for ever, but in a state termed “dead the “second death[page 66 - INDISSOLUBLE LIFE]

 

 

We rightly describe death as a “dissolution,” for the partnership between man’s [animating] spirit and soul and body is dissolved.  Of our Lord in resurrection we read the glorious fact that “He liveth in the power of indissoluble life” and “death no more hath dominion over Him” (Heb. 7: 16: Rom. 6: 9, 10).  This life His [redeemed] people will share for ever and ever.  But for them, as for Him, it can be reached only by resurrection or rapture, never by death.  It will be no small profit from this discussion if it be seen that the opinion that the believer goes at death to glory diminishes the sense of need of resurrection or rapture, and consequently of the return of Christ when these will take place; and also if it thus cause some hearts to feel that these events are utterly indispensable, the proper, the blessed hope of the believer.  As Peter exhorts, let us “set our hope perfectly [that is, undividedly] on the favour that is being brought unto us at the revelation of Jesus Christ” (1 Pet. 1: 13).

 

 

*       *       *

[page 67]

 

THE JUDGMENT SEAT OF CHRIST

 

 

1. God has an inescapable duty to be the “Judge of all the earth” (Gen. 18: 25).  Those who submit to Him are subject to this judgment equally with the insubordinate: “The Lord shall judge His people” (Deut. 32: 36; Ps. 135: 14; Heb. 10: 30).  The children of the sovereign are amenable to the laws and the courts and liable to penalty for misconduct.

 

 

2. This judgment is ever in process.  There is a perpetual overruling of human affairs by higher authorities. Prominent instances are Job (ch. 1 and 2), Ahah (1 Kin. 22), Nebuchadnezzar (Dan. 4).  The first case shows the judicial proceedings effecting perfecting, the second death, the third reformation.

 

 

Job was a godly man under discipline for his good: an upright man was made a holy man.  Thus still does God chasten His sons that they may become partakers of His holiness (Heb. 12: 10, 11).

 

 

Sinning Christians were disciplined even unto premature death, and it is explained that this operates to save them from liability to condemnation at the time when God will deal with the world at large (1 Cor. 11: 32).

 

 

3. But this continuous judicial administration has its crisis sessions, its special occasions.  Instances are: the Flood; the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah; the judgments on Egypt at the time of the exodus of Israel; the destruction of the seven nations of Canaan by Israel; the overthrow of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar; and later by Titus.

 

 

Hereafter there will come the destruction of Gentile world dominion and the punishment of Antichrist.  Then the judgment at Jerusalem of the living (Joel 2; Matt. 25), when the Lord has returned to Zion.  And after the thousand years the final session of the court of God, the great white throne, whereat will be declared the eternal destiny of those there judged.

 

 

But it is most necessary to keep in mind that all such separate and specific sessions are but part of the ceaselessly operating judicial administration of heaven and earth. [page 68 -THE SUPREME JUDGE]

 

 

4. It is important to remember that the Son of man is the chief Judge of the universe.  It was He who acted at the Flood: “Jehovah sat as king at the Flood” (Ps. 29: 10).  It was He who, in holy care that only justice should be done, came down to enquire personally whether Sodom and Gomorrah ought to be destroyed (Gen. 18: 20, 21), and Who again came down to deliver Israel from Egypt (Ex. 3: 7, 8).  It was His glory as judge that was seen by Isaiah (ch. 6; John 12: 41), and later by Ezekiel (ch. 1).

 

 

He is the Man appointed to judge the world in righteousness on behalf of God the Father (Acts 17: 31); for the Father has entrusted all judgment unto the Son, in order that He may receive equal honour with the Father (John 5: 19-29).

 

 

5. Yet it is particularly needful to note that the last cited passage is in reference to the future sessions of the divine judgment, for the judging in question is there set in direct connection with the raising of men from the dead (John 5: 21, 22, 27-29).  For when the Son of God became man He ceased for the present to supervise those judgments of heaven.  This was among the dignities of which He emptied, that is, divested Himself, for His immediate and blessed purpose in becoming man was their salvation from judgment (John 5: 24). Therefore He said: “God sent not the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world should be saved through Him” (John 3: 17); nor has He yet resumed the office of supreme Judge, though appointed thereto as man.  In relation to the world He is still the Dispenser of the grace of God, not yet the Executor of His holy wrath, as He will one day become.

 

 

This is clear from three chief considerations:

 

 

(1) That the Father has called Him to sit at His own right hand until the time when His enemies are to be put under His feet (Ps. 110: 1; Heb. 1: 13; 10: 13).  That is, He is not yet sitting upon His own throne and asserting His own right and authority, as He will do in a later [millennial] day (Rev. 2: 26, 27; 3: 21; Matt. 25: 31); but He is waiting expectantly that coming day.

 

 

(2) And therefore is it twice pictured that, as Son of man, the Lamb, He is hereafter to be brought before the Father to be invested officially with that authority to judge and to make [page 69 - CHRISTIANS JUDGED NOW] war the title to which is His already but the exercise of which is in abeyance (Dan. 7: 13, 14; Rev. ch. 4 and 5).  In both of these scenes it is God the Father who is shown acting from the throne of judgment until the Son has been thus formally installed as Judge.

 

 

(3) And therefore is He now the Advocate of His people before the Father (1 John 2: 1).  But the Advocate cannot be at the same time the Judge.

 

 

6. Thus during this interval the especial concern and sphere of the Son of man is the company He is calling out of the world, the church of God.  The building of His church is His present work (Matt. 16: 18): the regulating of the affairs of the house of God, over which He as Son is the appointed ruler (Heb. 3: 6), is His immediate and dear concern.

 

 

And this work calls for both grace and judgment.  He “can bear gently with the ignorant and the erring, sympathizing with our infirmities” (Heb. 5: 2; 4: 15), but dealing with kind severity with the wilful of His people.  “Behold then the goodness and severity of God” (Rom. 11: 22).  Nor may we abuse His goodness by making light of His severity; or if we do, it will be unto painful disillusionment.

 

 

7. Judgment upon His own [redeemed] people therefore God exercises now; this is the very period for it; but the general judgment of the world is deferred: “The time is come for judgment to begin at the house of God” (1 Pet. 4: 17).  And again: “If we discriminated [sat in strict judgment upon] ourselves, we should not be judged, but when [failing in this holy self-judgment] we are judged, we are chastened by the Lord [here perhaps the Father, comp. Heb. 12: 5, 9, where He who chastens is the Father of spirits] that we may not be con­demned with the world” (1 Cor. 11: 30, 31).  And this chastening may extend to bodily weakness, positive sickness, or even death.  So it was in the cases of Ananias and Sapphira (Acts 5: 1-11, and see Jas. 5: 19, 20; 1 John 5, 16, 17; Matt. 5: 21-26; 18: 28-35).

 

 

8. The Lord made many most serious statements as to His dealings with “His own” servants at [the time of] His return.  Some of these are: [page 70 - LORD AND SLAVE] (1) Luke 12: 22-53.  From dealing with the crowd He turns and speaks specifically to His own disciples (ver. 22).  Only genuine disciples, regenerated persons, are able to fulfil His precepts here given.  To mere professors the task is impossible, and such cannot be in view.  They are to live without any anxiety as to the necessities of life, and in this are to be in express contrast to the nations; they are His “little flockfor whom the Father intends the kingdom, and therefore they are to give away, not to hoard, and so to lay up treasure in heaven (21-34).  It is impossible to include the unregenerate in such a passage; nor would it be attempted save to avoid the application to Christians of part of the succeeding and connected instruction.

 

 

This instruction is that disciples are like the personal household slaves of an absent master, who upon his return will deal with each according to his conduct during the master’s absence.  In particular, the steward set over the household will be dealt with the more strictly that his office, opportunities, and example were the higher.  The goodness of the master is seen in exalting the faithful (though from one point of view he had done no more than his duty and was an unprofitable servant) to almost unlimited privilege and power: “He will set him over all that he hath” (ver. 44): his severity is shown by “cutting in sunder”* the servant who had abused his trust, and appointing his portion with the unfaithful (35-53)

 

 

* Equals “severely scourge,” because the scourge used cut deeply into the flesh - see margin.

 

 

(2) This is elaborated and enforced in later statements. Luke 19. 11-27. The picture is the same, namely, the absent master and the faithful or unfaithful servants. The “pound” represents that deposit of truth entrusted to the saints (Jude 3), for their use among men while Christ is away: “Trade ye till I come  The Nobleman himself held and used it while here, and left it with us when He went to receive the kingdom.  If we traffic with knowledge it increases in our hands and we gain more; if we neglect to do so it remains truth, retaining its own intrinsic value (“thou hast thy pound”), but we do not accumulate knowledge, nor benefit others, nor bring to our Lord any return for His confidence in us.  In this parable it is not the personal life of the slave that is in [page 71 - THE EVIL SERVANT] question; that may have been good: it is his use of the truth in either spreading it among man, or hiding his light under a bushel of silence, or, as the picture is here, burying the pound in the earth.

 

 

The unfaithful servant loses opportunity further to serve his lord, the pound is taken from him.  Sadder still, his lord has no confidence in him.  But he is not an enemy of his lord, nor is treated as such.  He does not lose his life.  The contrast is most distinct between him, however unfaithful, and the foes and rebels: “But these mine enemies that would not that I should reign over them, bring hither and slay them before me” (ver. 27).

 

 

(3) Matt. 24: 42-25, 30.  Only a few days later the Lord repeated this instruction, with fuller detail.  The head slave, set as steward of the house during the absence of the master, will be set over all his lord’s possessions if only he have acted faithfully (45-47). “But if that evil servant” abuses his position, and becomes self-indulgent and tyrannical, he will be “severely scourged and his portion be allotted with the hypocrites, where he will weep and gnash his teeth over his folly and lot.*

 

[* See Heb. 12: 6-8, 14-17, R.V.)]

 

 

Only a believer who does not consider his own heart will assert that a Christian cannot act the hypocrite, be unfaithful, or arbitrary and unloving.  But the pronoun “that” - “But if that evil servant, etc.,” leaves no option but to regard him as a believer, for it has no antecedent to whom it can refer except the faithful servant just before described, no other person having been mentioned.  “That evil servant” what evil servant? and there is no answer but that the faithful steward has become unfaithful*: And such cases are known.  Nor will we, for our part, join to consign all such to eternal ruin rather than accept the alternative of the temporary, though severe, punishments intimated by the Lord being possible to a [regenerate] believer.  Those who take the latter course, mainly influenced to support certain dispensational theories, have surely never weighed the solemnity of thus easily consigning so many backsliders to endless misery.

 

*Weymouth is definite: “But if that man, being a bad servant” plainly identifies the good and bad servant as one person.  And see Alford.

 

[page 72 - THOU WICKED SERVANT]

 

Since, then, an unbeliever is (a) not set by the Lord over His house, nor (b) could feed the souls of his fellows, nor (c) could be so faithful as to become at last ruler of all the possessions of the Lord, this man must be a true believer.  But when such a one may lapse from his fidelity he does not thereby become unregenerate; consequently the unfaithful steward is still called one of the Lord’s “own servants”; and therefore a believer may incur the solemn penalties veiled, under the figures used.

 

 

If it be thought inconceivable that the Lord should describe, one of His blood‑bought and beloved people as a “wicked servant” (Matt. 25: 26), it must be weighed that He had before applied the term to a servant whose  “debt” had been fully remitted: “thou wicked servant, I forgave thee all that debt” (Matt. 18: 32).  Thus one who, as an act of compassion by the Lord, has been fully forgiven all his failure as a servant may prove a “wicked servant,” his wickedness consisting in this, that though forgiven he would not forgive. To deny that a child of God can be unforgiving is to blind the eyes by denying sad and stem fact. The Lord left no room for doubt that members of the divine family were in His mind by the application of the parable He then and there made: “Even so shall my heavenly Father do unto you [Peter, whose question as to forgiving had drawn forth the parable, and the other disciples, ver. 1, 21], if ye forgive not, each one of you (hekastos), his brother from your hearts” (35).  It is the Father and the brothers who are in question, not here those outside the family circle.

 

 

Moreover, if this parable be pressed to include a mere professing but unregenerate person some inevitable implications must be accepted.  It is by no means denied that there are such persons, but if they are in view here these consequences follow:-

 

 

(a) An unregenerate person has had “all his debt forgiven

 

 

(b) In spite of this free forgiveness he remains unregenerate.

 

 

(c) A forgiven sinner can have the free pardon of his sins, revoked, in which case he will thereafter stand in his former lost estate exposed to the eternal wrath of God.  He may be saved to-day yet lose this to-morrow.

 

 

(d) Though delivered to the “tormentors” he may entertain hope that he may yet himself “pay all that is due” [page 73 - THE TORMENTORS] (ver. 34); that is, the wrath of God against the unregenerate can be somehow, some time satisfied by the sufferings and efforts of the sinner himself.  In these cases therefore “Christ died for nought”; they can at last secure their own deliverance.

 

 

In the fact, however, being “delivered to the tormentors” has no reference to the eternal judgment of the lost.  In the lake of fire neither lost angels nor lost men are stated to torment one another, but are all alike in the same torment.  It is a picture of present and temporal chastisement under that continually proceeding judgment of God above indicated, and which applies to His family as to others.  Regarded thus the above confusing implications do not arise, implications which no one divinely illuminated could accept.  But it results that the wicked servant is a real servant, not a hypocrite, and were it not for the severity of the punishment no one would be likely to question this.

 

 

It is not difficult to see what the punishment is.

 

 

(a) The forgiveness of his great failures as a servant can be revoked, and he be made to feel the sin and bitterness of not having walked by the same spirit as his Lord, nor rendered to Him the due use and return of the benefits grace had bestowed.

 

 

(b) Paul says of some who had once had faith and a good conscience (or they could not have thrust these away), and who had started on the voyage of faith (or they could not have made shipwreck), “whom I delivered to Satan” (the present “tormentor,” as of Job); but not to be afflicted by him in hell, but for their recovery, “that they might be taught not to blasphemewhich the torments of the damned will not teach them, as far as we see in the Word (1 Tim. 1: 19, 20. See also 1 Cor. 5: 3-5).

 

 

(4) We remark upon one other instance of these solemn testimonies by Christ, the parable of the virgins (Matt. 25).  It is to the same effect.

 

 

(a) They are all virgins, the foolish equally with the wise, which figure is inappropriate to indicate a worldling in his sins, even though he be a professing Christian.  In the only other places where it is used figuratively and spiritually it certainly means true Christians (2 Cor. 11: 2; Rev. 14: 4).

 

[page 74 - THE FOOLISH VIRGINS]

 

(b) They are all equally the invited guests of the bridegroom, not strangers, let alone his enemies.

 

 

(c) They all have oil, or, the foolish could not say “our lamps are going out  Without some oil the lamps could not even have been lit, for a dry wick will not kindle and certainly could not have burned during the time they had slept.

 

 

(d) But the foolish had no supply to replenish the dimly burning flax and revive their testimony.  They had formerly been “light in the Lord,” but had been thoughtless as to grace to continue alight.

 

 

(e) They found means for this renewing for in spite of the darkness they gained the bridegroom’s gate.

 

 

(f) They did not lose their lives, as enemies, but they did lose the marriage feast, and were left in the darkness outside the house.  This is parallel to the “wicked servant who also did not lose his life but did lose the entrance into the joy of his master at his return, and was cast into “outer darkness

 

 

Two observations are vital to grasping the meaning of these judgments.

 

 

(1) A marriage feast is obviously no picture of anything eternal.  Plainly it is a temporary matter.  Grand, intensely happy, a highly coveted honour, especially when the king’s son, the heir apparent, is the bridegroom, it yet is but the prelude to a life, a reign, not anything long-extended, let alone permanent. Does not this correspond to the joy of the millennial kingdom as the glorious prelude to the eternal kingdom?  For the “marriage of the Lamb” comes at the immediate inception of that millennial kingdom (Rev. 19: 6-9).  And are not the invited virgins those of whom verse 9 says, “Blessed are they that are bidden to the marriage supper of the Lamb rather than the wife herself?  A bride is not usually invited to her wedding feast: it cannot (save, perhaps, among Moslems) be held without her.  Does not this give the clue to what the virgins and the unfaithful servant lose?

 

 

(2) “Outer darkness” is no picture of the lake of fire.  It is the realm just outside the palace where the feast is held, not the public prison or execution ground.  If the strict sense of Scripture pictures be kept, and imagination be not allowed [page 75 - A CONTRAST] to fill in what the Divine Artist did not put in, much confusion will be avoided.

 

 

It has been felt that the words of the bridegroom to the virgins, “Verily I say unto you, I know you not” preclude us from taking these to represent His true people.  But again the picture itself will give the real sense. The bridegroom is here pictured as standing within the heavy and thick outer door that secures every eastern house of quality, and the door is shut.  He does not open it, or he would see who they are, and that they are some of his own invited guests, but standing the other side of the closed door he says, in idiomatic English, I tell you sincerely, I don’t know who you are (Ameen lego humin, ouk oida humas).  Into such a picture it is not permissible to read in divine omniscience; it must be taken simply as it is given.

 

 

Its force may be gathered more readily by the distinction between what is here said and what the Lord said in Matt. 7: 15-23.  There He spoke of false prophets, bad trees, men who, like the sons of Sceva in Acts 19: 13, used His holy name without warrant.  Picturing Himself as standing face to face with these He protests, I never at any time made your acquaintance!  Here the scene is changed; there is no closed door between: the verb to know is different: and the word rendered “never” is most emphatic and gives force and finality to the assertion (Oudepote egnon humas).  He did not speak thus to the virgins.

 

 

9. It is not our present purpose to consider all such testimony of the Word.  Enough has been advanced to show how much and how solemn is the teaching of Scripture as to judgment upon careless Christians.  We wish only to deal now with the time of the judgment seat of Christ as to His people.

 

 

The most general opinion is that this judgment lies between the moment of the Lord’s descent to the air, when they, dead and living, are caught up to Him there, and that later moment when He is to descend with them to the earth to set up His [millennial] kingdom. That is, the judging of His saints will take place during the Parousia.

 

 

Observations

 

 

(1) No passage of Scripture seems distinctly to place this [page 76 – SUPPOSITIONS] judgment in this interval and in the air. It seems to be rather assumed that it must take place then and there since the effects of it are to be seen in the different positions and honours in the kingdom immediately to follow.

 

 

(2) As regards the parabolic instruction Christ gave when here it is to be observed that it speaks only of persons who will be found alive when the “nobleman,” “the master of the house” returns.  Strictly, therefore, these parables tell nothing as to the time and circumstances of the judgment of dead believers.  It must be allowed that the principles of justice will be the same for dead and living, but the details as to the judgment of the former cannot be learned from these passages.

 

 

(3) Some presuppositions held are:

 

 

(a) That every believer will share in the first resurrection and the millennial kingdom.

 

 

(b) The opposite, that not every believer will do so.

 

 

(c) That the judgment of the Lord will result in some of His people suffering loss of reward because of unfaithfulness, but nothing more than loss.  This involves that none of the positive and painful inflictions denounced can affect true believers.

 

 

(d) The opposite, that the regenerate may incur positive chastisement as a consequence of the Lord’s judgment at that time.  Thus in “Touching the Coming of the Lord” (84, 85. ed. 1), upon Col. 3: 25, “For he that doeth wrong shall receive again the wrong that he hath done (margin): and there is no respect of persons Hogg and Vine apply this text to that judgment of Christ at His parousia, and say: “It may be difficult for us to conceive how God will fulfil this word to those who are already in bodies of glory, partakers of the joy of the redeemed in salvation consummated in spirit, soul and body. Yet may we be assured that the operation of this law is not to be suspended even in their case. He that ‘knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptation, and to keep the unrighteous under punishment unto the day of judgment’ (2 Pet. 2: 9), knows also how to direct and to use the working of His law of sowing and reaping in the case of His children also. The attempt to alleviate the text of some of its weight by suggesting that the law operates only in this life, fails, for there is nothing in the text or [page 77 – IMPOSSIBILITIES] context to lead the reader to think other than that while the sowing is here the reaping is hereafter.  It is clear that if it were not for this supposed difficulty of referring the words to the Christian in the condition in which, as we know from other Scriptures, he will appear at the Judgment seat of Christ, the question whether that time and place were intended would not be raised

 

 

(e) Some (Govett, Pember, and others) who hold that the millennial kingdom may be forfeited by gross sin, suppose that all believers rise in the first resurrection, appear before the judgment-seat of Christ, and being adjudged by Him unworthy of the kingdom they return to the death state to await the second resurrection and the great white throne judgment.  Their names being then as believers found in the book of life, they have eternal life in the eternal kingdom, but they will have missed the honour of sharing in and reigning in the millennial age.

 

 

These two last ideas (d) and (e) seem alike utterly impossible.  It seems wholly inconceivable that a body heavenly, spiritual, glorified, like indeed to the body of the Son of God himself, can be subjected to chastisement for guilt incurred by misuse of the present sin-marred body.  Not only the manner of the infliction but the fact of it seems to us out of the question.

 

 

It seems equally so that a body that is immortal and incorruptible can admit of its owner passing again into the death state.  The ideas and the terms are mutually contradictory and exclusive.  Of those who rise in that first resurrection the Lord said plainly: “neither can they die any more” (Lk. 20: 36).

 

 

What, then, is the solution of these difficulties?

 

 

10. We turn to passages dealing directly with the subject.

 

 

(1) 2 Cor. 5: 10. “We make it our aim, whether at home or absent, to be well-pleasing unto Him.  For we must all be made manifest before the judgment-seat of Christ; that each one may receive the things done through the body, according to what he hath done, whether it be good or bad  This chief statement leaves unmentioned the time and place of the judgment.

 

 

(2) Heb. 9: 27. “It is laid up for men once to die and after this judgment” (meta de touto krisis, no article). Thus [page 78 - JUDGMENT AFTER DEATH] judgment may take place at any time after death.  Luke 16 shows Dives suffering anguish immediately after death, for the scene is Hades, the realm of the dead between death and resurrection, and his brothers are still alive on earth.  But again, Rev. 20: 11-15, shows another, the final judgment, after resurrection, after the millennial kingdom.  Both are “after death” [verse 12].

 

 

Neither of these passages suggests the parousia in the air as the time or place.

 

 

(3) The statements of the Lord as to His, dealing with His own servants at His return, contemplate that His enemies will be called before Him immediately after He will have dealt with His own household: “But these mine enemies, who would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me” (Lk. 19: 27).  “Hither,” that is, to the same spot where He had just been dealing with His servants.  This, as to servants then alive on earth at least, excludes the parousia in the air, for His enemies will not be gathered there.

 

 

(4) Luke 16: 19-31. Dives and Lazarus are seen directly after death in conditions the exact reverse of those just before known on earth.  The passing of the soul to that other world, and the bringing about of so thorough a change of condition, is too striking, too solemn just to happen.  Some one must have decided and ordered this reversal; that is, there must have been a judging of their cases and a judicial decision as to what should be their lot in the intermediate state.

 

 

This judgment therefore may take place at or immediately after death, as Heb. 9: 27 above.  And in the time of Christ thus almost all men believed.  See, for example, the judgment of Ani directly after death, before Osiris the god of the underworld, in the Egyptian Book of the Dead.  Or, as to the Pharisees, to whom particularly Christ spoke of Dives and Lazarus, see Josephus, Antiquities, 18: 3.

 

 

(5) 2 Tim. 4: 6, 7, 8. “I am already being poured out as a drink offering, and the time of my departure is come.  I have fought the good fight, I have kept the faith; I have finished the course, henceforth there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give to me at that day: and not only to me, but also to all them that have loved His appearing

 

 

Paul was now certain he had won his crown.  When [page 79 - THE CROWN WON] writing to the Philippians a few years before (3: 10-14) he spoke uncertainly: “not that I have already obtained for then he had not yet finished the course; but now he writes with certainty.  How could this assurance have become his save by communication from the Righteous Judge?  But this implies that the Judge had both formed and communicated His decision upon Paul’s life and service, even though Paul had not yet actually died.  In such a case, as it would seem, any session of the judgment seat “in that day” will be only for bestowment of the crown already won and allotted, not for adjudication upon the race or contest, the latter having before taken place as to such a person.

 

 

(6) The expression “I have finished my course” is taken from the athletic world which held so large a place in Greek life and interest and is so often used by Paul as a picture of spiritual effort. In 1 Cor. 9: 24-27, it is used as a plain warning that the coveted prize may be lost.  Phil. 3: 12-14 employs it to urge to intense and unremitting effort to win that prize.  The Lord is the righteous Judge, sitting to adjudicate upon each contestant in the race or contest.

 

 

Now of unavoidable necessity the judge of the games automatically formed his decision as to each racer or wrestler as each finished the course or the contest.  The giving of the prizes was indeed deferred to the close of the whole series of events: Paul’s crown would be actually given “in that day”; but not till then did the judge defer his decision as to each item or contestant.  It could not be, for the most celebrated of the Greek games, the Olympic, lasted five days.

 

 

The figure, taken with the case of Paul, and in the light of Dives and Lazarus, suggests a decision of the Lord as to each believer before or at the time of his death.  That decision issues in determining the place and experience of the man in the intermediate state, and may extend to assurance that he has won the crown, the prize of the high calling.

 

 

(7) Rev. 6: 9, 11.  The Fifth Seal.  As before shown, these martyrs “under the altar” are not yet raised from the dead, for others have yet to be killed for Christ’s sake, and only then will they be all vindicated and avenged. But to each one of them separately a white robe is given.  Now ch. 3: 4, 5, shows that the white robe is the visible sign, conferred by the Lord, of their worthiness to be His companions in [page 80 - JUDGMENT BEFORE RESURRECTION] His glory and kingdom.  This again makes evident that for these the Lord’s judgment has been formed and announced.  No later adjudication upon such is needful or conceivable: only the giving of the crown “in that day

 

 

11. From these facts and considerations it seems fairly clear that the judgment of the Lord upon the dead of His people is not deferred to one session but is reached and declared either (a) immediately before death (as Paul), when there is no further risk of the racer failing, or (b) immediately after death (as Lazarus), or (c) at least in the intermediate state of death (the souls under the altar).

 

 

If this is so, then it will follow that the decision of the Lord as to whether a believer is worthy of the first resurrection and reigning in the kingdom is reached prior to resurrection, in which case the two insoluble problems above stated simply do not arise; that is, there is no question of one raised in a deathless state returning to the death state, nor of bodies of glory being subjected to chastisement.  Believers adjudged not worthy of the first resurrection will not rise, but will remain where they are until the second resurrection.

 

 

We agree fully that the judgment seat of Christ will issue in chastisement for unworthy living by Christians, but this will not be inflicted after resurrection.

 

 

(8) Rev. 11: 18 repays exact study.  The four and twenty elders worship God because He has put forth His “power, His great power” (teen dunamin sou teen megaleen) and has exercised His sovereignty.  In consequence of this asserting of power there are five results.  (1) The nations are angry, (2) God’s wrath replies, (3) there arrives “the season for the dead to be judged(4) for the faithful to be rewarded, and (5) for the destruction of the destroyers of the earth.

 

 

Since prophets and saints are to receive their reward at the resurrection of the just (Luke 14: 14), the first resurrection (Rev. 20: 1-6), the season for the dead to be judged and rewarded is here found directly before the destruction of the Antichrist and his helpers in the wasting of the lands.

 

 

Concerning this judging of the dead three features are to be noted.

 

 

1. It must be of godly dead, for it is before the thousand years, whereas the judgment of the ungodly dead is thereafter (Rev. 20: 1, 11-15).

 

[page 81 - JUDGED WHILE DEAD]

 

2. It is a judgment of persons who are dead at the time they are judged.  There is no ground for reading in that they have been raised from the dead before the judgment takes place.  They are styled “the dead  No one would think of styling living persons “the dead  The term employed (nekros) is nowhere used of persons who are not actually dead, physically or morally.  Moreover, resurrection does not of itself assure life.  That unique and glorious change to be the portion of such as share the first resurrection (1 Cor. 15) is their special privilege; it does not attach to all resurrection.  Dead persons can be raised dead.  In John 5: 29 our Lord creates a clear contrast: “They that have done good shall come forth unto resurrection of life; and they that have done evil unto resurrection of judgment.”  The Lord did not say that they shall come forth out of the tombs alive, but that they shall come forth unto resurrection of life or “unto resurrection of judgment” (eis anastasin).  There seems no scripture, indeed, that at the moment they come forth they have even a body, other than that psychical counterpart before noticed and which persists in the death state. Thus in Rev. 20: 12 also it is as dead that they are judged:  “I saw the dead standing before the throne ... and the dead were judged  It should therefore be supposed that those there present whose names are found in the book of life will thereupon be restored to life, that is, will be given an immortal body, even as the Lord said: “The Father raiseth the dead (egeirei tous nekrous) and makes them live (zoopoiei), thus also the Son makes to live whom He will” (zoopoiei, John 5: 21).  Here two operations are distinguished by the “and makes them live

 

 

3. The verb to be judged, “the season of the dead to be judged,” is the infinitive passive aorist (kritheenai). Being an aorist it has the force of a completed and final action.  But this final judgment, which disposes of the case, may be the conclusion of a process of judgment.  This is seen in another place where this aorist is twice used, Acts 25: 9, 10.  Festus asked Paul whether he would be willing to go up from Caesarea to Jerusalem  “there to be judged of these things before me  Paul answered that he already stood before Caesar’s court “where I ought to be judged” (kritheenai).  Both Festus and Paul meant that a final verdict should be reached and the [page 82 - HEARINGS AND VERDICT] case be determined; hence the aorist.  But the history shows that Paul had been many times before the courts, twice before the Sanhedrin and several times before Felix (Acts 23 and 24).  Thus this passage in Rev. 11: 18, does not forbid that believers may have been before judged by Christ, either in this life or after death, or both; what it states is that at the season indicated the decision of the Lord will be given, announcing, as we suggest, whether the person is of the “blessed and holy” who are accounted worthy of the impending resurrection from among the dead and of place and reward in the [millennial] kingdom then about to be inaugurated.

 

 

This short discussion is no more than suggestive, directed to certain obscurities and perplexities found in our main theme, designed to provoke enquiry so as further to elucidate truth and dispel darkness.  May the Lord in grace use it to this end.

 

 

*       *       *

[page 83]

 

VII. APPENDIX TO PAGE 22.

 

 

On the meaning of the genitive “of Christ” (tou Christou) in 1 Cor. 15: 23.

 

 

(This critical study is submitted with respect to those able to examine it.)

 

 

The force of this genitive may be studied in the following passages.

 

 

1. In Acts 16: 33 it is said of the jailer at Philippi that “he was baptized, himself and all those of him (hoi autou),” that is, all those who happened to form his household circle at that particular midnight hour.

 

 

2. In the first chapter of the epistle that is before us (1 Cor. 1: 12) the apostle reproves the believers on account of the contentions among them. “Now this I mean, that each one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ (Christou).”  It cannot be supposed that these believers were attributing their redemption to Paul, Apollos, or Peter; so that the meaning is, “I am of Paul’s circle; I of Apollos’; I of Peter’s; I of Christ’s circle.”  It was sectionalism, schism, denominationalism, sectarianism; although all alike were on the only foundation (ch. 3: 10, 11).

 

 

Family relationship alone did not make the jailer’s relatives to be “of him” at that particular hour.  It was those who were actually in his house at that time, which would include servants and slaves (if any).  All believers were equally children of God, but some were “of Paul others “of Peter etc.  Thus these two instances show that it is not relationship, natural or spiritual, but open membership in a known visible circle that is the idea in the term “of him

 

 

3. Romans 14: 4 reads “Who art thou that judgest the servant of another? (oiketees, household dependent; Lk. 16: 13; Acts 10: 7; 1 Pet. 2: 18: all places).  To his own lord he standeth or falleth  Verses 7, 8 add: “For none of us liveth to himself, and none dieth to himself.  For whether we live, we live unto the Lord; or whether we die, we die unto the Lord: whether we live therefore, or die, we are the Lord’s” (we are of the Lord, tou Kuriou esmen. The [page 84 - IDEAL OR ACTUAL] German can express this, as the Greek, by case ending, “wir sind des Herrn Elberfeld version).  “For to this end Christ died, and lived again, that He might be Lord of [might rule over] both dead and living” (Darby).  Christ’s lordship, His proprietorship of and authority over all, is indisputable: in the apostle’s argument all are assumed to be owning it: “he that regardeth the day, regardeth it unto the Lord: and he that eateth, eateth unto the Lord” (ver. 6), but, as we shall see shortly, not all believers do in fact own that lordship, or do not own it continuously and to the end of life.  Thus ideally all are “of Him,” but actually some who might be, and ought to be, are not.*

 

* Herodotus narrates that Astyages, king of the Medes, ordered a courtier, Harpagus, to kill the infant Cyrus, the king's grandson. The courtier says: “But for safety’s sake it is necessary for me that this child should die; it is necessary however that one of those of Astyages himself (ton tina Astyageos) should be the slayer and not (one) of mine (ton heemon).  This he said and straightway sent a messenger to (one) of the herdsmen of Astyages (ton Astyageos) whom he knew...” and left the matter to him (Hdt. I. 109, 110).  Here two circles are distinguished, that of the king and that of the courtier, and each, in relation to its head, is described by the genitive.  This force of the genitive occasions in English the italicized words in 1 Cor. 1: 11, “them which are of the household of Chloe,” where the original has simply ton Chloees (those of Chloe).

 

 

4. This same meaning is to be seen in 2 Cor. 10: 7, “Ye look at the things that are before your face. [It is something visible that is in question.] If anyone has confidence in himself of Christ to be (Christou einai), this let him consider with himself, that as he is of Christ (Christou) thus also are we”: that is, I Paul am evidently and obviously of Christ’s circle at least as much as my critic is: in proof of which he adduces the known public features of the measure and power of his ministry of the Word, which were the Lord’s open acknowledgment of His faithful servant.

 

 

5. The same thought of a circle of persons that may be contrasted with other circles lies in the statement in Gal. 5: 24, “And those of Christ Jesus (hoi tou Christou leesou) crucified the flesh with the [its] passions and the [its] cravings  In fallen human nature there works a powerful principle of evil, described in christian terms as, “the old man which [page 85 - THE FLESH CRUCIFIED] gets more and more corrupt according to the [its] deceitful cravings” (Eph. 4: 22).  Its cravings deceive man into indulging them, because they promise satisfaction though they produce corruption.  Through partaking of the divine nature the believer in Christ is afforded a way of escaping “from the corruption that is in the world through lust [the cravings of the old man]” (2 Pet. 1: 4); but it abides a certainty, to the Christian as well as to the unbeliever, “that the one sowing to the flesh out of the flesh shall reap corruption” (Gal. 6: 8).

 

 

How this corrupting principle in human nature originated perplexed philosophers and how to master it baffled moralists.  Various schools had different methods.  The circle of Epicurus proposed the sensually agreeable plan of stifling the flesh by satiating it.  That of the Stoics advocated a stem rigid suppression.  Eastern philosophy, as in Buddhism, recommended a sustained passive ignoring of all desire.

 

 

The circle which bore the name of Christ Jesus had a method peculiar to itself.  It was neither satiating, suppressing, nor ignoring, but crucifying: “those of Christ Jesus crucified the flesh  They taught that Christ died on account of the old man himself, as well as his corrupt doings.  They held that, judicially, before God, man’s creator and judge, the death of the Substitute was the death of the sinner, that therefore the old man “was crucified with Christ” (Rom. 6: 6).  The messengers of this faith offered a promise from God that whoever would accept from the heart this view, with its implications and practical consequences, should receive power from His eternal Spirit to live in freedom from the old tyranny of sin.  The new method worked effectively where all other attempts had failed.  Moral crucifixion with Christ led on to moral resurrection with Him, and the circle that bore His name became, as a circle, and by contrast, conspicuous for holiness.

 

 

No doubt this crucifixion was more distinctly apprehended and more fully exhibited by some than by others; we know that in fact some in the circle were not children of God at all - they seemed to be “of Christ Jesus” in the sense of publicly belonging to the circle that bore His name, though they were not “in Christ Jesus” by spiritual union: but the thought in the statement before us is that a certain known [page 86 - INFANTS OR SONS] circle or school - “those of Christ Jesus” - was  characterized by a certain attitude and doctrine, which its members were presumed to have adopted, and were expected and exhorted to maintain in practical conduct.

 

 

6. The important argument in Gal. 3: 23-29, contains the same conception.  “But if ye are of Christ, then are ye Abraham’s seed, etc.” (ei de humeis Christou, ver. 29).  Those who fear God are viewed by Him in two classes: first, such as in, spiritual growth are yet infants, and therefore under control by rules - “thou shalt ... thou shalt not”; second, those who have become of age, grown up sons, who are freed from such restrictions; are at liberty.  The former are under a tutor, the law (ver. 23-25), who orders their conduct, who restrains and punishes the outworking of their carnal nature: the “sons” are “of Christ” (“but if ye are of Christ”), Who enables them by the [Holy] Spirit to walk by the free, holy impulses of the new nature.

 

 

Translation from the one status and association into the other is by faith and baptism: that is, by an act of the heart known to God, but also by a public act seen by men; for we become “in Christ Jesus by faith” (ver. 26), but we “put on Christ” by baptism (ver. 27).  Thus here also to be “of Christ” means something more than to have exercised faith in Him, even to have associated openly by immersion with those who profess to have died out of the old circle and to have risen again into a new circle, that of Christ Jesus.

 

 

7. In 2 Tim. 2: 19-21, the apostle again speaks of things plain and visible; such as a foundation stone, and the inscription carved upon it; a house built on the foundation; the various utensils of the house, of either valuable or common materials, gold and silver or wood and earth.

 

 

The picture is very like Paul’s earlier metaphor in 1 Cor. 3. where also is the foundation, the superstructure, the precious or the perishable materials, either of which may be built by the believer into the life-work and character which each is erecting on the one foundation.  He exhorts the Corinthian Christians not to use the perishable: in Timothy he exhorts to purge out of one’s character the common elements, that the gold and silver of the divine nature, created in us by the [Holy] Spirit upon the ground of redemption, may alone remain, and one be thus a vessel fit for the immediate use of the [page 87 - FOUNDATION AND SUPERSTRUCTURE] divine Master, not one relegated to the lower purposes of the great house.

 

 

The said inscription on the foundation reads thus: “Knows the Lord those being of Him (tous ontas autou), and, Let every one naming the name of the Lord depart from unrighteousness  That is, the Lord, on His side, knows distinctly each one who in reality, according to the Lord’s standard, is of His circle.  On our side the sign that warrants any person being accorded by us a place in that circle is that he forsakes unrighteousness.  He who never yet has forsaken unrighteousness (wrong doing, adikia, as 1 Cor. 6: 8, 9) is not “of Him,” (that is, not as the Lord judges), even though he may hold membership in a Christian church.  He who having forsaken wrong doing afterward returns thereto is to be put out of the Christian circle (1 Cor. 5: 13), and thus ceases to be “of Him” for the purposes of this expression.

 

 

This does not affect the final salvation of every believer; for one is saved before he is added to the church, and therefore final salvation does not depend upon membership in that privileged company who will form “the church* This cuts away the root of the Romish error that one must belong to the church to be saved.  But the wrong doers of the church circle are plainly warned that they “shall not inherit God’s kingdom” (1 Cor. 6: 9: etc.).  Such will not be “accounted worthy of the kingdom of God” (2 Thess. 1: 5, 11), and hence will not be of the “blessed and holy” who will rise in that first resurrection which assures reigning in that kingdom.

 

 

8. The expression under review is in Romans 8: 9: “But ye are not in flesh but in spirit, if at least spirit of God dwells in you.  But if any one has not spirit of Christ, this one is not of Him

 

 

The omission from verse 1 preceding of the clause “who walk not according to flesh but according to spirit” is of first importance, showing that the justification of a believer in Christ is not dependent upon his walk as a Christian.  At the very moment that a repenting sinner rests his salvation upon the atoning work that Christ accomplished upon the cross, and therefore before he has had opportunity for doing any works, he acquires a new standing.  By that faith in Christ he obtains access to the standing of one who is in [page 88 - FLESH OR SPIRIT] the favour of God (Rom. 5: 1, 2).  He is then and there seen by God, his judge, no longer as he is in himself, but as he now is “in Christ  He is deemed to have met his doom and to be free therefrom.  The storm of wrath due to him on account of his sins has burst upon him in the person of his Divine Substitute: he has thus endured its full fury; that storm has exhausted itself, and “there is therefore now no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus

 

 

But this eternally justified believer may henceforth walk either by the impulses of his old fleshly nature or by the leading of that new spirit nature which is created in us when we believe on Christ.  That a justified person may walk “according to flesh” is certain from many Scriptures and much sad experience. “I, brethren says Paul, “was not able [formerly] to speak to you as to spiritual but as fleshly ... But neither yet now am I able, for yet fleshly ye are.  For whereas there is among you jealousy and strife, are ye not fleshly, and walk according to menthat is, not according to God? (1 Cor. 3: 1-3.  See also Gal. 5: 13-26, for a sustained contrast between “flesh” and “spirit,” the old nature and the new, in the believer).

 

 

To the Romans the apostle declared that if they lived according to flesh they would be unable to please God and were liable to die (8: 7, 8, and comp. 1 Cor. 10: 1-6).  Upon this possibility of premature death we have before spoken.  But, he adds, “ye are not in flesh but in spirit, if at least (eiper) spirit of God dwells in you This “if at least”* shows clearly the possibility of one who is for ever free from condemnation not being indwelt by “spirit of God  It is God the Spirit Who creates and energises the new nature, but it is not the Holy Spirit as a person that is here in view: the question is whether the believer is ruled still by the mind of the old nature, which is “flesh,” or by the mind of the new nature, which is “spirit,” according to the exhortations “be renewed in the spirit of your mind”: “Have this mind [page 89 - OF CAESAR] in you which was also in Christ Jesus” (Eph. 4: 23; Phil. 2: 5).  And, adds the Scripture (Rom. 8: 9), “If any one has not spirit of Christ, this one (emphatic) is not of Him (ouk estin autou).”

 

* “The Greek particle is more than merely ‘if’ (which often equals ‘since’ or ‘as’), and suggests just such doubt and enquiry as would amount to self-examination.  See 2 Cor. 13: 5  Moule, Camb. Bible for Schools, in loco.  So Alford: “if so be thatprovided that’; not ‘since’ ... that this is the meaning here is evident by the exception which immediately follows).”

 

 

In the light of the other places considered this will mean that one not ruled by the same spirit which animated Christ is not of that company which He owns as His circle, His household.  “He is not His (belongs not to Him, in the higher and blessed sense of being united to Him as a member of Him)” Alford, in loco; italics mine.

 

 

In his learned critical work Licht vom Osten (Light from the East ‑ ed. iv. 322) Professor Adolph Deissmann has remarked upon the parallel between this genitive Christou, of Christ, and doulos Christou Christ’s slave, and the expressions Kaisaros of Caesar, and Caesar’s slave, belonging to Caesar, his own personal property; that is, his personal retinue and slaves as distinct from the vast host of his subjects outside of his immediate household.  In illustration he cites several of the passages here examined, including the one chiefly before us, 1 Cor. 15: 22, “they that are of Christ in His Parousia  This usage is found in Phil. 4: 22: “All the saints salute you, especially they that are of Caesar’s household” (hoi ek tees Kaisaros oikias).  Comp. also Matt. 22: 21 and parallels: “the things that are Caesar’s” (of Caesar, ta Kaisaros) contrasted with the other circle, “the things that are God’s” (ta tou Theou).  Similarly, Christ also has a vast number who do acknowledge Him as Saviour but have not learned to be His slaves, and so are not “of Him” within the force of this term.

 

 

Many of the topics of this pamphlet are opened more fully, in

 

 

THE REVELATION OF

JESUS CHRIST

 

 

Some of the themes of this pamphlet are enlarged in

 

 

FIRSTBORN SONS

Their Rights and Risks

 

 

*       *       *

 

 

THE FIRST RESURRECTION, OVERCOMERS

AND THE MILLENNIAL KINGDOM.

 

 

1. There is no charge of intentional misleading, on the part of those Bible teachers who assume, that the Christian enters into his final glory at death.  Eschatological teaching would be greatly simplified if we were able to take that for granted.  Assuming that to be the final statement of truth, then it would disqualify several important Christian doctrines.  The Second Advent of our Lord would be one of them.  Why should it be necessary for Him to - “come again and receive you unto Myself if His people go to Him in a final sense at death?  The N.T. doctrine of the resurrection of the dead, when the Lord shall so come, would be redundant if we were able to say of all departed saints that “the resurrection is past already  It would not be the first time in the Christian era that such a disastrous thing has been taught (2 Tim. 2: 18).

 

 

Consider for a moment the evidence of this mistaken conception, in those well-known lines of Charles Wesley as follows:- “Come, let us join our friends above, who have received the prize … Let all the saints terrestrial sing with those to glory gone  Judge for yourself as to whether the perfect poet was also a perfect theologian, by an enquiry like this: is “the prize received” in the hymn, the same as one anticipated by Paul in Phil. 3: 10-14 - “I press toward the mark, for the prize of the high calling, of God in Christ Jesus”?  If so, then there would be this difference between Paul and Wesley - the former expected it in the “out-resurrection from among the deadwhich he sought so diligently to attain, and the latter at the time of his death.  It is one thing to sing:- “Around the throne of God in heaven, thousands of children stand but quite another thing to prove it from the Holy Scriptures.

 

 

- Joseph Ellison.

 

 

 

 

2. Paul assures us (Phil. 3: 11) that he was seeking with all his spiritual energy to “attain unto the out-resurrection out of the dead” (lit.).  That is, he says there is an elect resurrection from among the dead - though he had “obtained mercy had been counted faithful, and had been put into the ministry (1 Tim. 1: 12, 13); though he had received a special and unusual call from God (Gal. 1: 15, 16); though in his ministry he had endured unparalleled trials (2 Cor. 11: 23-33); though he had been given divine revelation beyond the ordinary (2 Cor. 12: 1-5); though his possession of divine gifts surpassed that of any in the church (1 Cor. 14: 18, 37) - he yet was pressing toward that he might “attain”.  If Paul thus earnestly counted this “resurrection” a goal to be attained, the Christian, whose eyes are earthward, like the man with the muckrake of whom Bunyan speaks, can surely not be considered as a possible winner of such a prize.

 

 

– The Alliance Weekly.

 

 

 

 

3. The harvest is composed of those for whom Christ has overcome, the FIRSTFRUITS are those in whom and through whom He has overcome, as well as having overcome for them.

 

 

The Apostle Paul had no doubt about his place in the main body, for his testimony is clear, “I know Whom I have believed and am persuaded that He is able to keep that which I have committed unto Him against that day” (2 Tim. 1: 12).  When, however, he was writing to the Philippians (3.) he told them that there was one thing he was seeking above all else, “the prize of the upward calling of God in Christ Jesus that he might by any means attain to the out-resurrection from among the dead.  He was sure of having a place in the general harvest, but not sure, as yet, of being one of the FIRSTFRUITS as an OVERCOMER.

 

 

If Peter, James, John, and Andrew needed the warnings give them by our Lord to “Take heed” to “watch and pray” (Mark 13: 3, 5, 9, 23, 33), and “be ye also ready” (Matt. 24: 44), it is clear that something more is wanted of us than faith in Christ for salvation if we would be ripe enough for the firstfruits.  The teaching that everyone who believes is ready for the Coming of the Lord is a deadly narcotic.  No wonder the Church is asleep!

 

 

If, on the other hand, we see that, being saved, there is yet a prize to be won which is worth the counting of all else as refuse, then we find in it a powerful stimulant to a holy and victorious life in union with our coming Lord.

 

 

– A. Champion.

 

 

 

 

4. It is most evident that our Lord intended the recital of the events connected with His coming to act as a solemn warning to us, and a spur to holiness.  What becomes of our Lord’s warnings if all, whatever be their spiritual state, are to share the First Rapture and none who are saved miss it?  ‘But watch ye at every season, making supplication, that ye may prevail to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of man’: Luke 21: 36.  It seems worse than trifling to say, as I have heard it said, that the Rapture is not mentioned in the first three Gospels, or, as a writer says, that ‘Christ is speaking to His disciples as the representatives of the Jewish nation  We believe both these statements to be untrue and that He was speaking to them as representing His Church.  In Luke 21: 17 it is Christians, not Jews, that are hated for Jesus’ sake.  Jews are never raptured to ‘stand before the Son of man’ and escape the tribulation, for Christ never comes to the earth itself before Armageddon, which proves it to be a rapture to heaven.  Now this earnest exhortation is made again and again.  We are to watch and be ready, lest He find us spiritually sleeping.

 

 

– C. H. Mercer, B.A.

 

 

 

 

5. With the current foolishly optimistic view - that as soon as we believe we are in possession of all the glorious possibilities that are set before us - it is not strange that Christians neglect the admonition to pass the time of their sojourning in fear (1 Pet. 1: 17); that they ignore the warning, “Many are called, but few chosen” (Matt. 22: 14); and that they are not rendered anxious even by the thought that those only who are accounted worthy shall escape the things that are coming to pass, and shall obtain the Millennial Age and the resurrection from the dead.

 

 

- G. H. Pember, M.A.

 

 

 

 

6. The Apocalypse has shown us throughout that only ‘the overcomer’ has the promise of victory and rulership ahead of him (2: 26, 27; 3: 21).  Nor is this taught only in this closing book, but throughout the New Testament.  We are, in our exposition, just where ‘the Kingdom’ is to be set up - are there no Scriptures that in clearest statement, declare that “they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God”?  What “such things”?  See Gal. 5: 19-21, R.V., “Now the works of the flesh are … fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, sorcery, enmities, strife, jealousies, wraths, factions, divisions, heresies (mgn. Parties), envyings, drunkenness, revilings, and such like: of the which I forewarn you (mgn., tell you plainly), that they which practise such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God  And this passage is to believers without a question, for it is in a discussion concerning walking in the flesh, or in the Spirit - hence the ‘world’ is out of sight.  And such warnings are also in the Epistles to the Romans (8: 5-8), to the Corinthians (1 Cor. 5: 9-13; 6: 9, 10), to the Ephesians (5: 5), to the Colossians (3: 5, 6; 4: 11).

 

 

Paul ever warns regarding these things, but popular teaching has become so easy-going that anyone can slip into God’s highest and best – because, forsooth, “Its all of grace  But ‘grace’ leaves no room for sin - if Paul teaches that it does, pray where?  Rather does he write, “Even so might grace reign through righteousness (not through sin, God forbid!) unto eternal life” (Rom. 5: 21 - 6: 7.).

 

 

– W.F. Roadhouse.

 

 

 

 

7. Here lies the mistake of most commentators.  It is assumed, that there is no difference between reward and bare salvation.  It is taken for granted that “the crown” is only a figurative expression for simple salvation.  It is supposed that “eternal life” and the “kingdom of God” are the same thing. …

 

 

On such assumptions, passages like the above present very great, or, we may say, insuperable difficulties to the Christian reader.  Not that even insuperable difficulty is sufficient reason for our rejecting a doctrine made known by the testimony of God.  But a view of the difference between eternal life and the [millennial] kingdom of God disentangles the matter.  The two portions of bliss are set on quite different grounds.  Eternal life is the testimony chiefly to those without.  The kingdom of Messiah in the dispensation of the fulness of times, is the prize offered to the believer.

 

 

- Robert Govett.

 

 

 

 

8. Apart from direct prophecy there must of necessity be a Millennium, or personal reign of Christ on earth, to fulfil the promises made to Abraham.  The promise of Canaan was made not only to his “seed” but to himself; “I will give unto thee, and to thy seed after thee, the land of Canaan” was the promise; and we know as a fact that Abraham has never so far owned the land “so much as to set his foot on save the cave in which he buried his wife.  Nor has his seed ever yet possessed “the lands from the river of Egypt to the river Euphrates,” as promised, even in the reign of Solomon. …

 

 

 

 

9. Like the locomotive on its two steel rails, so our thoughts must run along the appointed track, if we are to reach the terminus of TRUTH in safety.  Alignment of truth is imperative, both for the in-working of our salvation, and the out-working of it IN THE NEAR FUTURE; and this is the alignment we follow.  The First Advent of Christ into this world, is the gateway for some, into eternal salvation: His Second Advent into this world, will be the gateway for some, - (from amongst His redeemed: see Lk. 20: 35; Rev. 3: 21. cf. Lk. 22: 28-30; Heb. 11: 35b) - into “THE GLORIES THAT SHOULD FOLLOW” (1 Pet. 1: 11). 

 

 

 

 

10. “The former is the controlling factor of grace, the latter is the governing factor of our expectations, which is to be consummated by a mighty, collective movement UPWARD … “It is, therefore, an axiom of Christian doctrine, that there IS AN INTERVAL OF TIME lying between the Christian’s death, and the coming of the Lord to receive him unto Himself 

 

 

- J. Ellison.

 

 

 

 

11. It is interesting to know by name some of those who shall be resurrected and share in the Kingdom.  “Ye shall see Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob and all the prophets [Moses must therefore be included] in the Kingdom  Daniel will be there, according to specific promise; “thou shalt stand in thy lot at the end of the days”; David will be there; “My servant David shall be king over them” - no doubt as regent under his great Son, through whose mother the promise was made that He should be given the throne of His father David.  We are told too by our Lord Himself of some of those who will not be there.  Some of “the sons of the Kingdom” who have forfeited their right thereto; and it is most significant that exactly the same words are used as to their exclusion, as are used in reference to the exclusion of the unprofitable servant – Christ’s “own servant to whom He had delivered His goods while away in the far country.  “Cast forth into outer darkness, where shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth” (Cp. Matt. 8: 12, and Matt. 25: 30); not into ‘the Gehenna of fire,’ but somewhere - known to the Lord - outside, in each case, of the heavenly and earthly spheres of the Kingdom.

 

 

Jews too, it seems, shall be missionaries of the Kingdom, and even now many have become missionaries of the Gospel.

 

 

- From ‘Israel in the Kingdom Dawn, vol. 8, pp. 564, 565.

 

 

*       *       *

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[PART TWO]

 

 

 

THE RESTORATION OF ISRAEL

AND THE KINGDOM OF GOD

 

 

By  Tim Price*

 

* “Tim Price is currently UK National Co-ordinator for the CMJ (the Church’s Ministry Amongst the Jewish people.”

 

 

-------

 

 

 

‘Israel’ and ‘Zion(ism)’ are two words that raise passions in our world today, yet why should these words which fill the pages of Scripture have come to be regarded as pejorative by so many within the church?  The prophet Isaiah said:

 

 

The Lord will have compassion on Jacob; once again he will choose Israel and will settle them in their own land.  Aliens will join them and unite with the house of Jacob.  Nations will take them and bring them to their own place.  And the house of Israel will possess the nations as menservants and maidservants in the Lord’s land. (Isa. 14: 1-2)

 

 

For Zion’s sake I will not keep silent, for Jerusalem’s sake I will not remain quiet, till her righteousness shines out like the dawn, her salvation like a blazing torch. (Isa. 62: 1)

 

 

In these two readings lies the redemption of these names that have become the source of such bitterness.  They hold out both the hope of reconciliation between Arab and Jew, Israeli and Palestinian, and also the glorious destiny of Jerusalem within the eschatological purposes of world redemption, when, instead of being a source of division, she becomes the centre of the kingdom of God.  Isaiah writing of this time said:

 

 

In that day there will be a highway from Egypt to Assyria ... The Egyptians and Assyrians will worship together.  In that day Israel will be the third, along with Egypt and Assyria, a blessing on the earth.  The Lord Almighty will bless them, saying, ‘Blessed be Egypt my people, Assyria my handiwork, and Israel my inheritance.’ (Isa. 19: 23-25)

 

 

This glorious vision of reconciliation has clearly yet to be fulfilled.  The whole of biblical revelation finds its focus in this one nation Israel.  Our theological understanding is shaped by the story of Israel and centres on the person of Jesus, the Jewish Messiah, who embodies and represents Israel.  Around Him, the people of God, both Jew and Gentile, find their identity, mission and goal.  Israel is the name that Jesus uses to describe the Land and the nation of which He is both chief citizen and King.  It is the name that remained throughout the whole canon of Scripture.

 

 

Yet as I grew up, another name for the Land was in common usage.  Bibles and Bible reference books would refer, for example, to Palestine in the time of Jesus and this name, despite being post-biblical, is the generic name by which the Land has largely been known by the Christian world since Roman times.  The name Palestine as a description for Israel is not found in Scripture.  It only came into usage in 134 CE after the Romans finally crushed the second and last Jewish revolt against its rule.  They renamed Israel Syria-Palaestina, after the Philistines, Israel’s most implacable enemy, as a deliberate affront to Jews.  There began the great Jewish exile from the Land and the battle for the soul of the Land.

 

 

Today the names of Israel and Palestine have become powerful symbols around which the church has become polarised, as Israelis and Palestinians each seek to assert national sovereignty and to claim the moral, historical, physical and indeed spiritual right to the Land.  The issue of the restoration of Israel has become the focus of appalling disunity within the body of Christ.

 

 

5th International Sabeel Conference 2004

 

 

At the 5th International Sabeel Conference held in Jerusalem in April 2004, the theme of the conference was ‘Zionism, Christian Zionism and the Challenge to the Church’.  The Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, in his keynote paper ‘Holy Land and Holy People’ wrote this:

 

 

The subject of this conference is one that goes deeper than simply the critique of a deeply eccentric form of Christian theology, and it should take us further than yet another analysis of the cyclical patterns of violence and injustice in the conflicts of the region.  It should also be an opportunity for us to clarify something of what as Christians we can say about Israel, as one dimension of a ‘liberation theology’ that will carry good news to all in the Holy Land and more widely.

 

 

The two extreme positions with which we are wearily familiar will fail to carry such good news.  At one end of the spectrum, there is the view that argues for unconditional support of any decision made by the Israeli government (whose claims for maximal territory and security are based on grounds whose relation to both Hebrew and Christian Scripture is tenuous to say the least).  At the other is the view that there is essentially nothing to be said about the Jewish people and the State of Israel from the standpoint of Christian theology, a view which runs up against the complexities of much Christian Scripture, not least Paul’s great and tormented meditation in Romans 9-11.

 

In other words, Archbishop Rowan concludes: ‘I am not at all sure that we best respond to distorted theologies by denying that there could be a good theology of Israel

 

 

A tale of two theologies

 

 

None of us who witnesses the ongoing crisis between Israel and the Palestinians comes to it from a neutral stance.  The church’s attitude both for or against Israel is shaped by two theologies whose roots go back to the early church.  Before the Council of Nicaea (325 CE) the church substantially believed in the restoration of Israel.  They believed that God would restore the kingdom to Israel in response to the disciples’ question: ‘Lord, are you at this time going to restore the kingdom to Israel and Jesus’ enigmatic reply: ‘It is not for you to know the times or dates the Father has set by his own authority’ (Acts 1: 6-7), a verse which itself has been interpreted down partisan lines to defend or detract from a literal or physical restoration of Israel.

 

 

Certainly up to 100 CE, the time at which Jewish believers formed the majority within the church, the prevailing view was that the restoration of Israel would be both literal and physical, and that the Messiah would reign bodily, with the church, as King over a restored Israel.  They would play a centre-stage role in evangelising the nations.  This view was held subsequently by the Puritans, who themselves believed that the greatest world evangelisation would take place only when Israel was restored and in her own Land.  Much of Jewish thought until 100 CE mirrored that of the church, which believed in a literal restoration of the kingdom to Israel, of a human Messiah who would reign as King in Jerusalem and of a literal reign of 1,000 years.  It was classic historic pre-millennialism from which dispensationalism would eventually emerge in the nineteenth century under the Millerites and J. N. Darby and which today has been popularised in the writings of Hal Lindsey (The Late Great Planet Earth) and Tim La Haye (Left Behind series).

 

 

However, for much of the last 2,000 years, and certainly since the Council of Nicaea, the historic church has itself been dominated by a theology shaped by the early church fathers.  They sought to put ‘clear blue water’ between the emerging rabbinic Judaism and Christianity, and so asserted the supremacy of church over synagogue.  As we shall see later, the marginalisation and the gradual withering of the Jewish wing of the church following the two Jewish revolts against Rome in 70 and 134 CE, led ultimately to the dominance of the Gentile expression of Christianity at the expense of its Jewish origins.

 

 

The increasing enmity between church and synagogue fuelled the belief that the church had replaced or superseded Israel within the purposes of God, and indeed was now herself the ‘new Israel’.  This significantly contributed to the view that the church, as the inheritors of the kingdom of God and thus the new people of God, would extensively grow and expand until all the nations were ‘Christianised’.  The church would then hand over the kingdom to Christ as His inheritance, and they would then reign with Christ over the nations. This view was substantially post-millennial in outlook, with Christ coming again only at the end of the ‘Church Age’, or at the end of an indefinitely timed millennium in which the church rules with the unseen Christ, until Christ comes in person to usher in the new heaven and new earth.

 

 

This view by the church has significantly shaped the church’s attitude to Jewish people, breeding an arrogance towards them in which they are but the ghosts at the Christian banquet, consigned to be damned and cursed for ever, and denying them any future role within the purposes of God or even as an independent nation.  Any ongoing theological role for them is restricted to that within a Gentile-dominated church, in which any Jewish expression has been marginalised or excluded.  It has been the dominant theology that has led to Christian anti-semitism and paradoxically to the very Zionism about which it is often so voluble and vitriolic today.

 

 

Today the church is polarised around two theological positions whose origins go back to the early church.  On the one hand we have dispensationalism, which has its roots in classic pre-millennialism, and on the other hand covenant or replacement theology, whose roots lie in the traditional teaching that the church has now superseded Israel.

 

 

The Christian world largely mirrors that divide, with one end advocating the restoration of Israel to its full biblical borders, and the other coming to the rescue of a beleaguered part of the church, oppressed by a nation that it regards as having no ongoing spiritual significance and indeed scarcely any legal or moral right to exist at all.  For one, the Land is covenanted to Israel, the Jewish people, for ever; for the other, the Land only has significance as it relates to all the people of God, rather than to an ethnic group whose historic claim has been forfeited by divine decision and as the outcome of their long departure from that Land.  This powerful polarisation can be expressed by two leading proponents at opposite ends of the divide.  Naim Ateek, Canon of St George’s Cathedral, Jerusalem, and a leading figure within Sabeel, for example, in the 2003 winter edition of Cornerstone says in his article ‘The Dark Side of Religion’: ‘Without any shadow of doubt, Christian Zionism is one, if not the most dangerous, biblical distortion that is challenging us today  By contrast the late Derek Prince, in probably his final message ‘A Call to Britain’, gives a warning of judgement to the church if it persists in its belief that the church has replaced Israel.  He says: ‘The truth of the matter is, we determine our destiny on how we respond to what God is doing for Israel  He goes on to quote from Isaiah 60: [12] ‘The nation and the kingdom that will not serve you, (re-gathered Israel,) will perish.  Those nations will be utterly ruined

 

 

The vision

 

 

How have we got into this position and is there any way in which those differences can be reconciled?

 

 

Perhaps an appropriate place to begin is to look at the bigger picture of God’s great purpose for world redemption, the bringing of the nations under the lordship of Christ through the whole people of God, Jew and Gentile.  That is the vision of Psalm 2 when the Lord promises to give to the Anointed One, literally the Messiah (Hebrew) or the Christ (Greek), the nations as His inheritance.

 

 

The overarching message of Scripture is not about either Israel or indeed the church; it is about the restoration of our [sin cursed] world to God’s rule.  It concerns the establishment of the kingdom of God in which the kingdoms of this world become the kingdom of God and of His Christ.  It is epitomised in that image from Daniel 2 of the huge statue representing the empires of this world being brought to nothing by the stone from heaven, which eventually grows to fill the whole earth - a similar picture to the gradual in-breaking of the kingdom of God, which like a grain of mustard ‘though it is the smallest of all your seeds, yet when it grows it is the largest of garden plants’ (Mt. 13: 32).

 

 

The establishment of God’s kingdom then is played out in the theatre of nations and through the instruments that God has brought into being to fulfil His purposes, namely Israel and the church.  The final outcome of that work is seen in pictures given both in Hebrews and in Revelation.  The [W] writer of Hebrews, recording the faith of Abraham, says of him that ‘he was looking forward to the city with foundations, whose architect and builder is God’ (Heb. 11: 10).  John, in Revelation, describes that city as the New Jerusalem on whose gates are inscribed the twelve tribes of Israel, and on whose wall’s foundations are inscribed the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb (Rev 21: 12).  In this profound picture of the new heaven and earth we see the ultimate goal of God's redemptive purpose in which God comes to dwell with humanity.  It marks the reconciliation of earth and heaven, of nature and spirit, of Israel and the church.  It marks the goal of redemption when God indeed dwells on earth with man.

 

 

Jesus said: ‘I tell you the truth, at the renewal of all things, when the Son of Man sits on his glorious throne, you who have followed me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel’ (Mt. 19: 28). This passage is significant because it encapsulates the core issue that divides the church today - the restoration of Israel.  In two separate commentaries on this passage, the authors reach very different conclusions about the relationship between the twelve tribes, Israel, and the twelve apostles, the church.  R. T. France concludes that the twelve apostles supersede the twelve tribes and rule over them as the new Israel, whereas Edward Schweizer sees the apostles as being installed as regents over Israel, which itself will be restored, during the last days, to its full complement of twelve tribes.  The climax or goal is reached when, as 1 Corinthians 15: 24 states: ‘Then the end will come, when he [Christ] hands over the kingdom to God the Father after he has destroyed all dominion, authority and power  God’s purpose in establishing His kingdom under the rule of Christ is to bring the nations of the earth back under His sovereignty and once He has established God’s undisputed title, so His ‘servant’ role is completed as He hands back the kingdom to God the Father.

 

 

As I have made clear from Revelation, on the new earth that parity of relationship between Israel and the church is restored, as symbolised by the gates of the tribes of Israel and the walls of the apostles of the church in the new Jerusalem where dwells the presence of God.  This wonderful picture of reconciliation, renewal and transformation is depicted by John so well:

 

 

I did not see a temple in the city, because the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are its temple.  The city does not need the sun or the moon to shine on it, for the glory of God gives it light, and the Lamb is its lamp.  The nations will walk by its light, and the kings of the earth will bring their splendour into it ... the glory and honour of the nations will be brought into it. (Rev. 21: 22-26)

 

 

The descent of the new Jerusalem to the renewed earth marks the culmination of God’s completed work where God Himself comes to dwell with mankind.  It answers that question of Solomon after the dedication of the Temple: ‘But will God really dwell on earth?’ (1 Kings 8: 27).

 

 

God’s plan of redemption is far bigger and greater than we can imagine, and is global in concept, encompassing all the nations of the world.  It concerns the ultimate restoration of our world to its right and lawful rule under God.  Although God is sovereign over the whole cosmos, the kingdom of God has to be seen first in the mending then the renewal of creation, and concerns the expulsion of sin and the bringing of the [whole] world under God’s direct rule and authority.

 

 

Both Israel and the church are God’s chosen instruments for bringing in the kingdom, and are therefore the agents and executives of His government under Christ.

 

 

Israel, the church and the kingdom

 

 

The overwhelming emphasis in the teaching of Jesus is on the kingdom of God or the kingdom of heaven, for both mean the same thing.  The thrust of Jesus’ ministry was always to teach and display what the reign or rule of God means in practice. The signs and demonstrations of power, whether through the stilling of the storm, the feeding of the five thousand, the diverse array of healings, the deliverance from the demonic, the raising from the dead, His ethical and moral teaching, the parables of the kingdom were all to describe the nature of the kingdom and to show the meaning of life under the rule of God.  So often when we think about the kingdom of God, we think of it in territorial terms, yet time and again in Scripture the emphasis is first and foremost on the person of the King.  The kingdom is present when the King is present.  Kingdom events happen when the King comes and the [bodily] presence of the King is seen and observed.  At present the kingdom is displayed through the indwelling presence of the King in the life [and heart] of the believer, but one day that kingdom will expand to fill the whole earth with the knowledge of God as the waters cover the sea.

 

 

Kingdom teaching set against the backdrop of Israel

 

 

Jesus’ kingdom teaching is always set against the backdrop and context of Israel, because Jesus saw His mission as exclusively to Israel.  Israel is the dominant motif throughout the whole of Scripture, both Old and New Testaments, and the kingdom of God relates to the outworking of both the mission and the task of Israel. It is noteworthy that there are only two references to the church throughout the gospel accounts, and in both cases they can be seen as relating to the community of Israel.  Yet today the emphasis is on the church rather than on the kingdom of God, and Israel is seen as an embarrassment, a relic of God’s earlier purposes and of a nation whose services are no longer required.  What a travesty of the truth!

 

 

Kristell Sandell, writing in Christ’s Lordship and Religious Pluralism, says: ‘It remains a fact worth pondering that Jesus preached the Kingdom while the Church preached Jesus.  And thus we are faced with a danger.  We may so preach Jesus that we lose the vision of the Kingdom, the mended and restored creation

 

 

One plan

 

 

The church needs to rediscover its mission of being an agent and an instrument of God’s kingdom whose purpose is to bring this world under the rule of its King and to share in that rule.  As the body of Christ, we are not only called as co-heirs with Christ, we are also called to co-reign with Him [Rom. 8: 17b].  We need to understand that both the election and choice of Israel and the church are not Plan A and Plan B, but are complementary to one another in the outworking of God’s one and only plan. This plan began with its announcement in the Garden of Eden, known as the proto-gospel, where God promises to rescue and restore mankind and indeed the whole [of this sin-cursed] creation, and concludes with its culmination in the new heaven and the new earth.  The whole of biblical revelation then concerns the outworking and fulfilling of this great plan of redemption.  Paul commentating on God’s original curse on creation and anticipating its glorious liberation says:

 

 

The creation waits in eager expectation for the sons of God to be revealed.   For the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the glorious freedom of the children of God. (Rom 8: 19-21).

 

 

The ultimate goal of world redemption is then the lifting of the original curse over creation and its ultimate liberation within the kingdom of God.  The prophet Isaiah indicates what that will mean in terms of the nations of the world when he says of the Servant: ‘On this mountain [Zion], he will destroy the shroud that enfolds all peoples, the sheet that covers all nations’ (Isa. 25: 7).  Just as Paul says there is a shroud or veil preventing Israel from recognising its own Messiah (2 Cor. 3: 14-15), so there is a veil over all the nations, and this veil is only lifted as God brings to completion His goal of world redemption and liberation of the creation under the sons of God.

 

 

Paul gives the reason as to why this veil hangs over all the peoples when he says: ‘The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers,* so that they cannot see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God’ (2 Cor. 4: 4).  For nearly 2,000 years there has been a veil covering the Jewish people caused by their unbelief, but Paul says that one day that veil will be lifted and all Israel will be saved (Rom 11: 26).  Perhaps this is a foretaste of God’s final strategy for bringing the nations under His lordship.  And just as the veil over Israel is even now being lifted, so this will happen among all the nations.

 

[* NOTE.  The “unbelievers” must also include some of His own redeemed people; - those whose minds are being blinded by Satan relative to the “gospel (or ‘good news’) of the glory of Christ,” R.V. 

 

This “gospel” - (or ‘good news’ of Messiah’s coming “glory”) - has to do with a future “Age”, when “He cometh in His own glory” (Lk. 20: 35; 9: 26) to built up Zion; when “the peoples are gather together” and when He will appear “in His glory” (Psa. 102: 13-22, R.V.).  See also Psa. 2: 8; 22: 27, 28; 33: 8-12; 37: 34; 47: 3, 4; 67: 4-7; 72: 1-11, R.V., etc., etc. ]

 

 

This brings us to the priority of mission, for just as the priority for individual salvation and incorporation into the kingdom of God is ‘first for the Jew, then for the Gentile’ (Rom 1: 16) so too, of nations, Israel first then the nations.   Christ will receive all the nations as His inheritance and the very glory of those nations is taken into the new heaven and new earth!  However, for the time being, the focus of God’s work lies elsewhere.

 

 

The ecclesia (church) - kingdom people

 

 

For the present, God is drawing out a community of people, kingdom people, who live and walk by faith, and who are making His kingdom purposes their primary consideration, transcending their Jewishness or Gentileness.  They are called to reign with Christ in His kingdom, first [in their hearts] under His unseen rule and then [upon this earth] later as it becomes visible and manifest.  Waiter Riggans has commented that when Jesus urges His followers to ‘seek first the kingdom of God’ this is tantamount to saying, ‘seek first the outworking of God’s redemptive plan.’  When we pray, ‘Your kingdom come, on earth as it is in heaven,’ we are praying principally for two things: first, for the manifestation of God’s kingly presence now among the community of believers gathered in Christ’s name, but secondly we are anticipating the glorious day to come, when His kingship is acknowledged by the whole world, as the kings, the rulers of this world, throw their crowns at His feet.

 

 

A principal feature of the kingdom of God (or kingdom of heaven) is the manifestation of God’s redemptive power at work in the affairs of humanity.  At present this is partial - ‘now but not yet’.  The kingdom is embryonic, but one day we will see it in its full maturity.  For the present we see small outbreaks of His kingdom, but one day we will witness it in its totality as John records:

 

 

And they [the elders], sang a new song: ‘You are worthy to take the scroll and to open its seals, because you were slain, and with your blood you purchased men for God from every tribe and language and people and nation.  You have made them to be a kingdom and priests to serve our God, and they will reign on the earth.’ (Rev 5: 9-10)

 

 

As the Life Application Bible puts it: ‘The song of God’s people praises Christ’s work.  He was slain and through that act purchased men by his blood sacrifice and so gathered a kingdom of priests who are appointed to reign on earth  Jesus has already died and paid the penalty for sin.  He is now gathering us into His kingdom from every ethnic group, language, people and nation, and making us priests.  In the future - [if “accounted worthy” (Lk. 20: 35, R.V.)] - we will reign with Him when He fully establishes His kingdom on earth as it is in heaven. Someone has remarked that the church, in its truest expression, is shown as colonies of heaven where the evidence of God’s reign can be observed through the kingdom lifestyle of its citizens.

 

 

America was once just a series of small and disparate colonies, but today it is a whole nation, indeed a superpower.  One day the colonies of heaven on earth will give way to the full expression of God’s reign in the affairs of men.  The kingdom will be as real and substantial on earth as it is at, present in heaven when ‘he will rule the world in righteousness and his people with the truth’.  We are not short of examples of what this means, for times of revival are evidence of the in-breaking of God’s kingdom, where whole communities are transformed by the manifest presence of God.  During the Welsh Revival of 1904/5, the last major revival in Britain, public houses were closed, police and magistrates stood down, because there was no need for them. The rule of God was tangible and real!

 

 

So then the kingdom of God is literally the reign of God as King in the affairs of men.  However, God has chosen two vehicles, two instruments, to bring in His kingdom: Israel and the church.  Although often perceived as two separate and unrelated entitles, they are intricately connected and dependent on one another. To have the church without Israel is not the church, and to have Israel without the church is not Israel.  In a sense they are two sides of one coin.  This is a fact largely overlooked by the church during the church era. We need to see, in a much more holistic sense, both the election or choice of Israel and the election of the church.  In the Old Testament, the church or ecclesia was present but hidden.  As Paul said: ‘The mystery that has been kept hidden for ages and generations, but is now disclosed to the saints’ (Col. 1: 26).  The writer of Hebrews records the great Old Testament saints.  Similarly in the New Testament, though the ecclesia or church is to the forefront, Israel does not cease to have relevance.  There cannot then be one without the other nor, if they ever did, could one replace or supersede the other.  There is mutuality in their calling and election.

 

 

Election

 

 

‘Election’ and ‘choice’ are unfortunate words because they often imply favouritism, and sadly that has been true in the way the church has regarded itself as having gained or acquired God’s favour from Israel.  However, in the biblical understanding of election or choice, it is not because either is special in or of itself, though time and again God describes both Israel and the church as His ‘beloved’.  They are special primarily in relation to the function and purpose for which they have been chosen or elected.  Their ‘belovedness’ is related to the person who has bestowed that ‘belovedness’.  God makes it quite clear that His choice is not based on any intrinsic merit on the part of Israel (Dent. 7: 7) or indeed the church.  Their value is the outcome of their election and choice by God.  Indeed the Bible makes clear that the choice of Israel is not because they are the greatest or the most powerful of all the nations, but because they are the least.  Paul makes a similar point to the Corinthian church, who were caught up in factionalism, when he says: ‘Not many of you were wise by human standards; not many were influential; not many were of noble birth.  But God chose the foolish things to shame the wise; God chose the weak things of the world to shame the strong’ (1 Cor. 1: 26-27).  Election or choice in God’s book is never intended to be a source of pride, arrogance or superiority, but simply the means through which God accomplishes His purposes.  It is meant to instil a sense of humility and complete dependence upon God.

 

 

When Paul quotes Malachi 1: 2-3 in Romans 9: 13, ‘Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated’, this is not a statement of God’s emotional reaction to these twin sons of Isaac, but a statement of God’s intention to prefer the younger to the older for the carrying forward of His elective purpose.  It could then be translated: ‘Jacob I loved, but Esau I loved less  We need to look at Israel and the church with this in mind.

 

 

The election of Israel

 

 

Why did God choose Israel and for what purpose?  The first indications are given in the promise made to Abraham: ‘Leave your country, your people and your father’s household and go to the land I will show you.  I will make you into a great nation and I will bless you; I will make your name great, and you will be a blessing.  I will bless those who bless you, and whoever curses you I will curse; and all peoples on earth will be blessed through you’ (Gen 12: 1-3).  Here we see announced God’s intention to bless all the peoples on earth through Abraham.  This promise is later confirmed by the covenant, which itself is later ratified through circumcision:

 

 

‘I will make nations of you, and kings will come from you.  I will establish my covenant as an everlasting covenant between me and you and your descendants after you for the generations to come, to be your God and the God of your descendants after you.  The whole land of Canaan, where you are now an alien, I will give as an everlasting* possession to you and your descendants after you; and I will be their God.’ (Gen 17: 6-8)

 

[* That is, “an everlasting possession” in the sense of as long as this earth remains.]

 

 

Of course, Abraham’s decision to accomplish God’s promise by having a child by Hagar has complicated the issue.  The Arab nations base their claim to the Land through the line of Ishmael.  Indeed in Islamic tradition it is not Isaac that is offered up on Mount Moriah, but Ishmael (Q. Sura 39: 97-110).

 

 

However, that may be Islamic tradition, but it is not biblical, and in fact God makes it clear that the covenant will be through the union of Abraham and Sarah, through Isaac.  Indeed it is just after Abraham offers up Isaac that God reaffirms the covenant, and says:

 

 

‘I swear by myself, declares the Lord, that because you have done this and have not withheld your son, your only son [Ishmael is not recognised], I will surely bless you and make your descendants as numerous as the stars in the sky and as the sand on the seashore ... and through your offspring all nations on earth will be blessed, because you have obeyed me.’ (Gen 22: 15-18)

 

 

Then, as if to leave us in no doubt as to the line, God renews the covenant with Jacob at Bethel, making it very specific that the covenant relates to his family line:

 

 

And God said to him, ‘I am God Almighty; be fruitful and increase in number.  A nation and a community of nations will come from you, and kings will come from your body.  The land I gave to Abraham and Isaac I also give to you, and I will give this land to your descendants after you.’ (Gen 35: 11-12)

 

 

Later, when God encounters Moses at the burning bush, He makes Himself known through linking His name to that of a particular lineage: ‘I am the God of your father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob’ (Ex. 3: 6).

 

 

The covenant is unconditional and everlasting

 

 

If we are left in any doubt as to whom the covenant is for, and how permanent it is, other passages make this clear: ‘For the Lord your God is a merciful God; he will not abandon or destroy you or forget the covenant with your forefathers, which he confirmed to them by oath’ (Deut. 4: 31), or Jeremiah: ‘This is what the Lord says: ‘Only if the heavens above can be measured and the foundations of the earth below be searched out will I reject all the descendants of Israel because of all they have done, declares the Lord’ (Jer 31: 37).

 

 

Ezekiel, one of several of the post-exilic prophets, speaking of a future restoration declares:

 

 

This is what the Sovereign Lord says: It is not for your sake, 0 house of Israel, that I am going to do these things, but for the sake of my holy name, which you have profaned among the nations where you have gone.  I will show the holiness of my great name ... the name you have profaned among them.  Then the nations will know that I am the Lord, declares the sovereign Lord, when I show myself holy through you before their eyes. (Ezek. 36: 22-23).

 

 

The central calling of Israel then is that she should be a blessing to the nations and the means through which God’s name will be sanctified, made holy, among the nations.  God’s faithfulness to Israel is ultimately linked to the manifestation of [Himself and] His holiness to the nations.  That is why, despite [false teachings by those within the Church and] Christian tradition, there is ultimately no discontinuity between the two Testaments, for the New Testament bears witness that God has never and will never break covenant with Israel.

 

 

Of special significance then for Christians is the fact that in the New Testament Luke includes, in the opening words of his Gospel, the testimony of Zechariah that the covenant with Abraham was still in effect, coming now to its great fulfilment but not its completion: ‘Praise be to the Lord, the God of Israel, because he has come and has redeemed his people ... to show mercy to our fathers and to remember his holy covenant, the oath he swore to our father Abraham’ (Luke 1: 67-73).

 

 

For those who insist that these verses now apply to all* the people of God in Christ, Paul asks: ‘Did God reject his people?  By no means (Rom 11: 1).  He then goes on to stress his own Israelite pedigree and so identifies himself as part of national or ethnic Israel, Israel according to the flesh.  And later: ‘As far as the gospel is concerned, they are enemies on your account; but as far as election is concerned, they are loved on account of the patriarchs, for God’s gifts and his call are irrevocable’ (Rom. 11: 28).  Let’s look then at how this calling was to be expressed.

 

[* NOTE. The divine promise will not ‘apply to all the people of God in Christ’!  It applies only to those who are obedient! 

 

See Gen. 22: 15-18 above, and compare with 1 Pet. 1: 22: “Ye have purified your souls in your obedience to the truth” - (concerning our “hope” and “the grace that is to be brought unto you at the revelation of Christ” verse 13.).  Again in 1 Pet. 2: 7, 8: -  “… they stumble at the word being disobedient  This is an overcomer’s promise with reference to ‘the thousand years,’ and is therefore conditioned by a Christian’s faith in that Kingdom - and his obedience to the precepts of its coming King, Matt. 7: 21; 8: 11, 12; Rev. 2: 25, 26; 3: 21.]

 

 

Mosaic covenant

 

 

It is at Mount Horeb, or Sinai, that Israel’s central calling is articulated, in the covenant God makes with Israel: ‘Now if you obey me fully and keep my covenant, then out of all nations you will be my treasured possession.  Although the whole earth is mine, you will be for me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation’ (Ex. 19: 5-6).

 

 

This covenant is very different from that made with Abraham.  It is a conditional covenant.  There are clear conditions attached to it, which result in consequences if it is broken by either party.  The most serious consequence was exile, but not banishment from the Land.  This has happened only twice with the Babylonian exile and what has become known in Jewish tradition as ‘the Great Exile’, the nearly 2,000-year exile which began in CE 70 and only ended with the re-establishment of the State of Israel in 1948.  The hymn writer J. M. Neale picks up this theme in his Advent hymn: ‘0 come, 0 come, Emmanuel, and ransom captive Israel that mourns in lonely exile here  Israel had and still has a high calling to be a priest to the nations, as the imagery within the verses of this hymn depicts.  On Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement, the high priest offered a bullock as a sacrifice on behalf of the nation of Israel.  During the Feast of Tabernacles the priests at the Temple in Jerusalem offered up 70 bullocks on behalf of the nations (goyim), thus demonstrating their priestly role to the nations.

 

 

One of the titles the Lord gives to Israel is ‘firstborn’, showing just how intimately His name is associated with the Jewish people, but perhaps more profoundly still that Israel is the primus inter pares, holding a unique but not exclusive position among the nations.  Although they may be His firstborn, in this respect, they are not His ‘only’ born. God’s longing is for all the nations to acknowledge His fatherhood.

 

 

A paradigm nation

 

 

Israel out of all the nations of the world belongs exclusively to God and has a high calling over all the nations of the world.  Archbishop Rowan Williams, in ‘Holy Land and Holy People’, says:

 

 

It helps to ask what covenantal promise is thought to be for in the Hebrew Scriptures.  And the answer is given in various forms in parts of Leviticus, in many strands of the prophetic tradition especially Isaiah, in aspects of the Wisdom literature and might be summarised by saying Israel is called to be the paradigm nation, the example held up to all the nations of how a people lives in obedience to God and justice with one another.  This is how a nation is meant to be: living by law, united by a worship that enjoins justice and rev­erence for all, exercising a special concern for those who have fallen outside the safety of the family unit (widows and orphans) and those who fall outside the tribal identities of the people (the resident alien, ‘the stranger within the gates’).  What is more, as Deuteronomy insists (Deut. 4: 5, 6, 32-34; 17: 7, 8), this is a people, a community, that exists solely because of God’s loving choice; they have been called out of another nation, specifically to live as a community, whose task is to show God’s wisdom in the world.

 

 

This is maybe the reason why we become so offended when we see Israelis mistreat Palestinians, behaving as if they have no right to be within the Land; why we are shocked that Israel has the highest abortion rate in the world.  The millions of unborn aborted children greatly exceed the loss of life experienced by Israel in all its many wars.  We somehow know that God has called Israel to be that paradigm nation and we want to hold it to account for its actions when it steps over what we regard as acceptable bounds.

 

 

This covenant then outlines how God expects Israel to live under His kingship; it does not abrogate His earlier covenant with Abraham.  The writer of Galatians, commentating on the relationship between the two covenants, says: ‘The law, introduced 430 years later, does not set aside the covenant previously established by God and thus do away with the promise’ (Gal. 3: 17). Clearly then the Abrahamic covenant is not nullified at Sinai.  It is stated that Israel is God’s firstborn son (Ex. 4: 22; Deut. 8: 5), and this call came through Abraham.

 

 

The national constitution: Israel and Torah

 

 

One way of putting it is to say that it is as if God formed a people through Abraham, and then created a national constitution for that people through Moses.  They are to be a holy people called to serve a holy God. In Leviticus this is articulated: ‘I am the Lord your God; consecrate yourselves and be holy, because I am holy’ (Lev. 11: 44).  In order for the people to live in a holy way, God needs to provide directions to make His will known, to teach His people about Himself and His requirements, and this revelation of God’s will is precisely what is conveyed by the Hebrew term ‘Torah’.

 

 

The standard translation of this word is ‘Law’, which not only falls to do justice to the original Hebrew, but it has become positively harmful.  Why? Because Christians see the word ‘Law’ and then conjure up images of Jewish legalism and bondage to the Law.  However, although Torah does contain laws, it contains far more than just laws.  Torah comes from the root word ‘to fire at a target’.  The best single word is ‘Instruction’.  It conveys a sense of direction, directions on how to get to a goal, but also a sense of authority; when your leader gives a directive, then you make sure you do it.  Christian theology has too readily forgotten that the Torah was God’s idea!  As Paul writes in Romans: ‘So, then, the law is holy, and the commandment is holy, righteous and good ... the law is spiritual

 

 

At this point it is important to clear up a major misunderstanding that has dogged our understanding of the relationship between grace and Law.  ‘Law’ is not an Old Testament concept and ‘grace’ a New Testament one. The Abrahamic covenant is entirely of grace.  There was nothing that Abraham had to do to keep covenant with God.  Everything within this covenant is accomplished by God from start to finish.  Abraham is even put to sleep when it is put into effect!  What more definite illustration of the unilateral action of God in effecting this covenant is required?  Grace precedes Law by at least 430 years, and even earlier with Noah: ‘For Noah found grace in the eyes of the Lord

 

 

One of the most deeply ingrained Christian stereotypes is that Israel’s relationship with God is based on living a life of righteousness, constantly in fear of God, whereas the New Testament (Christian) way is said to be based entirely on the gracious love of God.  This perception and teaching is not only mistaken, but insulting and damaging to Jewish people, not to say a distortion of the New Testament witness about Christian lifestyle.  The truth is that both Testaments present the same teaching about a covenant relationship with God.  It is always based on God’s prior grace and will, and it always makes demands on the people who are involved, with respect to how they must live their lives once they are in a special relationship with God.

 

 

Christ the goal of the Law and the embodiment of Israel

 

 

Christians often say that the coming of Christ marks the end to the Law, and justify their stance from Romans: ‘Christ is the end of the law’ (Rom. 10: 4).

 

 

However, the choice of the word ‘end’ is unfortunate, because it implies termination.  The Greek word for ‘end’ is telos, which also means ‘goal’.  Christ is the goal, fulfilment or culmination of the Law, and the purpose of the Law is to bring us to Christ.  The Christian is no longer ‘under the Law’ since Christ has freed us from its condemnation, but the Law still plays a role in our lives.  We are now set free by the Holy Spirit to fulfil its moral demands.  As Christians our lives centre on the one who kept the Law perfectly, and who fulfils it entirely in His person.  In this respect Jesus embodies the Law, showing what it truly means to be Israel. Ultimately He is the only true Israelite.  As Christians we are under a greater obligation than Israel of old.

 

 

Obedience to God is as central to New Testament teaching as it is to the Old Testament.  However, while Israel sought to obey God by keeping the Law, the church is required to obey God through recognising the lordship of Christ in every aspect of its life.  To come under the lordship of Christ is the only way we can keep the Law of God and not come under its judgement.  Jesus requires of us a far higher standard: ‘If you love me, you will obey what I command’ (Jn. 14: 15).  Jesus did not ignore the Torah, the Law of Moses; He obeyed it fully and increased our understanding of its true intent.  As John says, the keeping of His commands enables us to know we are His children (see 1 Jn. 3).  Jesus as the true Son of Israel embodies the Law, and by the power of the Holy Spirit we are empowered to obey Him and so to keep the Law.

 

 

Israel’s election and calling is to be that paradigm nation through whom all the nations of the world will [one ‘Day’] be blessed, and whose election and calling is supremely embodied in the one who personifies Israel.  The church, by contrast, is called to ‘flesh out’ what that means, through becoming a community of believers drawn from Israel and the nations, who by their lives reflect the Messiah of Israel, becoming, to use Paul’s analogy, the body of the Messiah, with Messiah himself as its head.  Messiahship is both individual, located in the person of Jesus, and corporate in so far as the church, the ecclesia, is called to model and demonstrate the kingdom values of the Messiah.  To understand that, we need to look at Israel’s relationship to God as King.

 

 

Royal Israel

 

 

Perhaps one of the saddest verses of the Bible is where the Lord says to Samuel: ‘Listen to all that the people are saying to you; it is not you they nave rejected, but they have rejected me as their king’ (1 Sam. 8: 7).  As we have seen earlier, Israel’s calling was supremely to be a theocratic nation living under the rule of God.  This was the very purpose for which Israel was called out from among the nations, to model what a nation under God means.  However, the very rejection of God as King was the catalyst to bring about God’s kingdom in our world.  God granted Israel’s request for a king, and later, through a covenant with one king in particular, He pushed forward His strategy for world redemption and divine sovereignty over the nations.

 

 

King David longed to build the Lord a permanent dwelling place in Jerusalem, yet the Lord made clear that it would not be David who built the Temple, but his son, Solomon.  Yet through that seeming rejection, God promises to David something far greater:

 

 

The Lord declares to you that the Lord himself will establish a house for you.  When your days are over and you rest with your fathers, I will raise up your offspring to succeed you, who will come from your own body, and I will establish his kingdom.  He is the one who will build a house for my Name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom for ever.  I will be his father, and he shall be my son. (2 Sam. 7: 11-13)

 

 

The reigns of David and Solomon were seen as the golden age of Israel.  Under David the tribes were finally united and the borders of the Land reached their furthest extent.  It is no wonder that years later, when the nation yearned for a Messiah, they looked to the reign of David as their model.  He united the country against enemies, established peace throughout the kingdom, exercised justice and laid the foundations for the great prosperity of the nation under his son, Solomon.

 

 

Later, through the writings of the prophets, the role of the Messiah became defined with clear expectations of what He would do, and by what line He would come.  Luke, announcing the birth of Jesus, describes the descendant of David in this way: ‘He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High.  The Lord God will give him the throne of his father David* and he will reign over the house of Jacob for ever.  His kingdom will never end’ (Luke 1: 32-33).  This prophecy, if for no other reason, should convince us that Jesus is supremely Israel’s Messiah, who has yet to establish His universal reign of peace.

 

[* That is, from David’s throne in Jerusalem, (Psa. 2: 6; Zech. 8: 3); not from His Father’s throne in the Heavens, as multitudes of regenerate believers imagine!]

 

 

Stephen Travis, in End of Story, says:

 

 

And there is one Messiah for all.  This is a hard thing to say.  Isn’t it arrogant for Christians to say to Jews, ‘You are missing the heart of your faith.  The Messiah for whom you’re waiting has already come, and his name is Jesus’?  Aren’t we disqualified from saying such things by centuries of Christian anti-semitism and persecution of the Jewish people?  Didn’t Hitler think he was speaking for ‘Christian civilisation’ when he wrote in Mein Kampf: ‘By warding off the Jews I am fighting for the Lord’s work’?

 

 

Yet to give up on Christian witness to Jewish people would be to saw off the branch on which we are sitting.  Christian faith rests on the conviction that Jesus came to be the Messiah, and we are committed to sharing that faith with Jews whose Messiah He came to be.  Deny that He is the Messiah and there is no reason for Christianity to exist.  If Jesus is not the Messiah of the Jewish people, He cannot be my Saviour or the Saviour of the world.

 

 

It is significant that at the beginning and end of His life, Jesus is given the title ‘King of the Jews’.  In the birth narratives it is the Magi who enquire of Herod the Great: ‘Where is the one who has been born king of the Jews(Mt. 12).  In the superscription above the cross is recorded the crime for which He is convicted: ‘The King of the Jews’ (Mk. 15: 26).  There is one in heaven who is not only the Saviour of the world but who remains King of Israel, entitled to take up the earthly throne of His father David.   During His earthly ministry Jesus never asserted His physical kingship over the pretenders to the throne, or to those appointed to rule over Israel by the Roman occupying power.  Israel has yet to acknowledge His Messiahship over them - something Jesus Himself alludes to in His prophecy over Jerusalem when He declares: ‘You will not see me again [0 Jerusalem] until you say, “Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord” [until you greet me as Messiah]’ (Mt. 23: 37).  A prophecy of hope after judgement.  It follows the prophecy of desolation and dereliction of both the people and the Land of Israel, but anticipates that glorious [millennial] day to come when the very nation that once rejected its Messiah will receive Him.  Earlier Jesus had warned the leadership of Israel of impending judgement in the Parable of the Tenants when He says: ‘Therefore I tell you that the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people who will produce its fruit’ (Mt. 21: 43).

 

 

Certainly this passage speaks of the transfer of that which hitherto had been Israel’s prerogative to the new community forged around Israel’s Messiah.  That was not to the exclusion of an ongoing national expression of Israel.  The kingdom may now be invested in the community of the Messiah, but Jews formed the exclusive and core nucleus of that community until the grafting in of Gentile believers.

 

 

Paul makes clear that Israel as a nation has been set aside but not removed from God’s purposes.  The kingdom of God may have been transferred and now be expressed in the Messiah, but God has not forsaken or rejected His covenant people.  ‘Did God reject his peopleasks Paul, to which he emphatically replies: ‘By no means  And again: ‘God did not reject his people’ (Rom. 11: 1-2).  The stumbling of Israel was to draw in the Gentiles, who had previously been excluded from Israel, and as a consequence to make Israel envious.

 

 

The Gentile church owes a deep debt of gratitude to Israel, and she has been warned that if she becomes arrogant she will suffer a similar fate to Israel.  Israel has been set aside for the benefit of the Gentiles.  Paul goes on to say that if her rejection is the reconciliation of the world, what will her acceptance mean but life from the dead?  If her transgression means riches for the world and her loss means riches for the Gentiles, how much greater riches will her fullness bring?  The desolation of Israel has led to great blessings for the Gentiles, but Paul says that even blessings as great as these will pale into insignificance when the Jews return to centre stage.  For the last nearly 2,000 years we have seen a largely Gentile body of the Messiah, with only a very faint glimmer of Jewish expression.  The kingdom of God is incomplete.

 

 

The Puritans believed that the re-gathering and restoration of Israel would lead to the greatest evangelisation the world has ever witnessed, and would indeed usher in the fullest expression of the kingdom of God and the return of the King to reign.  Perhaps when Paul speaks of ‘the salvation of all Israel’, he is speaking of the coming together of Israel according to the Spirit, the body of the Messiah, the ecclesia, together with a large part but not necessarily all of the nation of Israel.  The prophet Zechariah reinforces the view of a national turning by Israel to her Messiah: ‘I will pour out on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem a spirit of grace and supplication.  They will look on me, the one they have pierced, and they will mourn for him as one mourns for an only child, and grieve bitterly for him as one grieves for a firstborn son’ (Zech. 12: 10).

 

 

That is the ultimate goal of the gospel: to bring in the kingdom of God.  Israel could not do it, as it rejected its own Messiah and so rejected its own King, around whom the kingdom would be gathered.  The Gentile church can only bring it in so far.  It requires both Jew and Gentile together, united under the [bodily presence of the] Messiah of Israel, to bring in the kingdom that will renew the face of the earth. National Israel may be subordinate to the body of the Messiah for the purposes of completing world redemption and to bring in the kingdom of Christ, but in the ‘age’ to come, both Israel and the church come together as the walls and gates of the celestial city which descends to the renewed earth and where the God and the Lamb will reign for ever.

 

 

 - From ‘Israel His People, His Land, His Story’ pp. 15-37.  (This book was supplied by Amazon Books.)

 

 

*       *       *

 

 

THE ROAD TO THE HOLOCAUST

 

 

A Brief Survey of the History of Christian Anti-semitism

 

 

By

 

 

Derek White

 

 

January 2005 marked the sixtieth anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz and the national observation of ‘Holocaust Memorial Day’.  It is therefore appropriate to address the connection of historic Christian attitudes to the Jews with the horror of the Holocaust when, during the Second World War, some 6 million Jews - men, women and children - perished in the extermination camps of Nazi-occupied Europe, in what Hitler called ‘the final solution of the Jewish problem’.

 

 

The pages of this dark period are stained not only with the inhuman actions of the immediate Nazi perpetrators, but with the apathy of the free world, who, by almost total failure to speak and act on behalf of the Jews of Europe, gave Hitler a free hand to pursue his diabolical plan.  The free Western nations, including the USA and Britain, stand guilty in silent acquiescence.  Asking the reasons for this silence, the Jerusalem Post commented on the prevailing belief both in London and Washington that saving millions of Jews was not a desirable war aim, combined with genuine doubts about Jewish veracity.*

 

* Jerusalem Post, 24 August 1993.

 

 

Britain carries a full share of responsibility through the indifference of the British Foreign Office to the information received from Occupied Europe.  ‘Why should the Jews be spared distress and humiliation when they have earned it?’ reads one Foreign Office minute.  And another: ‘In my opinion, a disproportionate amount of the time of the Office is wasted on dealing with these walling Jews  And another: ‘What is disturbing is the apparent readiness of the new Colonial Secretary to take Jewish Agency “sob-stuff” at its face value*

 

* The Listener, 16 September 1983.

 

 

It is not generally appreciated to what extent the ground for the Holocaust was prepared by the Christian church, so that a major portion of guilt must be apportioned to long-standing and deep-rooted Christian attitudes to the Jewish people.   The history of nearly 19 centuries of Christian anti-semitism is a black stain on the record of the Christian church, although recognised by very few, and without it the Holocaust might conceivably have never taken place.

 

 

Christ-Killers?

 

 

The kernel of Christian anti-semitism is historically the charge of ‘deicide’ or ‘God-killing’ - that the Jews crucified and killed Christ.  Let it be said at the outset that the gospels in no way allow this charge to be brought against the Jewish people.  The synoptic Gospel records (Matthew, Mark, Luke) show without any shadow of doubt that the Jewish people in general did not assent to the crucifixion, but rather that the political manoeuvrings of the religious leaders (chief priests and elders) were delayed by the popular acceptance of Jesus (Mt. 21: 46; Mk. 11: 18; 12: 12; 14: 2; Lk. 19: 47-48; 22: 2).

 

 

Jesus’ arrest and subsequent death was engineered by the religious leaders only with the support of an incited rabble (Mt. 26: 47, 59-62; 27: 20), who also formed a majority of those present at the trial and who replied with the fateful words: ‘His blood be on us and on our children’ (Mt. 27: 25).

 

 

Concerning the high priest, a Jewish scholar states that, in addition to being an ignorant man and a Sadducee heretic, he was the appointee of Roman power - for not only did the Romans give the high priest power, they actually selected him and appointed him to office.  Thus the high priest who handed Jesus over to the Romans, fearing that His activities would offend the Roman occupying officials, was not acting on behalf of Jewish religion, which he did not represent, but in his capacity as a Roman-appointed police chief (Jn. 11: 48).*

 

* Hyam Maccoby, Judaism in the First Century (Sheldon Press, 1989), p.8.

 

 

Peter, in his sermon on the Day of Pentecost, summed up the situation in these words: ‘And now, brothers, I know that you acted in ignorance, as did your leaders’, and this was confirmed by the massive response among his Jewish hearers to his preaching (Acts 3: 17).

 

 

The idea that the Jews crucified Christ, murdered the Saviour, killed God, took root like a cancer in the early Christian centuries and has persisted until almost the present day, being the pretext for every form of pillage, humiliation, murder and pogrom.  It soon became common belief that the whole Jewish people were guilty of the death of Christ, for all time, and that they and their children’s children to the last generation were condemned by God to a life of misery and degradation.  It became easy to spill Jewish blood on the pretext that the perpetrators were carrying out the will of God.

 

 

It may be noted that opinions differ as to whether or not anti-semitism as such existed in the church during the first three centuries.  What, however, is ominous is the emergence of a teaching clearly enunciated in St Hippolytus and Origen, that the Jews are a people punished for their deicide who can never hope to escape their misfortunes - a teaching that greatly contributed to the course of anti-semitism from the fourth century onwards.  Thus Origen (185-254) stated: ‘We say with confidence that they will never be restored to their former condition.  For they committed a crime of the most unhallowed kind, in conspiring against the Saviour of the human race ...’*

 

* Edward H. Flannery, The Anguish of the Jews (Paulist Press, 1985),  p. 41.

 

 

We should note that the growth of Christian anti-semitism is closely linked with the development of the theology of replacement.

 

 

Early Christian writings

 

 

A survey of Christian writings, as reflecting then current preaching and teaching down the centuries, is a sufficient testimony to the scope and nature of these hostile Christian attitudes, and when the power of the church is taken into account during centuries of ‘Christian Europe’, their influence on the beliefs and behaviour of the masses can be understood.

 

 

One of the earliest was Justin, surnamed the Martyr (100-c. 165), described as ‘one of the earliest and most distinguished apologists of the Christian Church’.* In his Dialogue with Trypho the record of an actual discussion with a rabbi, he wrote:

 

* Chambers Encyclopedia, 1901.

 

 

‘You hate and (whenever you have the power) you kill us  Justin was the first to give voice to the theme that Jewish misfortunes are the consequence of divine punishment for the death of Christ.  ‘Tribulations were justly imposed upon you, for you have murdered the just One  Justin further insisted that the scriptures and promises were now no longer the property of the Jews, but were now the property of the church.*

 

* Edward H. Flannery, op.cit., pp. 35, 39-40.

 

 

The nature of such early Christian preaching and writing is illustrated by the language of St John Chrysostom (CE 347-407) ‘the Golden-Mouthed’, one of the greatest of the church fathers, whom Cardinal Newman described as ‘a sensitive heart, a temperament open to emotion and impulse; and all this elevated, refined, transformed by the touch of heaven - such was St John Chrysostom’.*  The chief venting of his ire was six sermons delivered in his see of Antioch, where Jews were numerous and influential and where, apparently, some of his flock were frequenting synagogues and Jewish homes.  ‘The synagogue,’ he said, ‘is worse than a brothel ... it is the den of scoundrels and the repair of wild beasts ... the temple of demons devoted to idolatrous cults ... the refuge of brigands and debauchees, and the cavern of devils  ‘Whatever name even more horrible could be found, will never be worse than the synagogue deserves  ‘As for me, I hate the synagogue ... I hate the Jews for the same reason** He was the first Christian preacher to publicly accuse the Jewish people of ‘deicide’:  ‘The Jews have assassinated the Son of God!  How dare you take part in their festivals? ... You dare to associate with this nation of assassins and hangmen! ... 0 Jewish people!  A man crucified by your hands has been stronger than you and has destroyed you and scattered you***

 

* Historical Sketches, II, 234, quoted in Malcolm Hay, The Roots of Christian Antisemitism (Freedom Library Press, 1981), chap. 1, p. 27.  ** Ibid, chap. 1, pp. 27-8.   *** Ibid, chap. 1. p. 30.

 

 

He taught that they were hated of God: ‘Why then did He rob you?  Is it not obvious that it was because He hated you, and rejected you once for all?’*  On the strength of Psalm 106: 37 he said in CE 387 that the Jews: ‘sacrificed their sons and daughters to devils; they outraged nature; and overthrew from their foundations the laws of relationship.  They are become worse than the wild beasts, and for no reason at all, with their own hands they murder their own offspring, to worship the avenging devils who are the foes of our life.  The synagogues of the Jews are the homes of idolatry and devils.  The Jews do not worship God but devils, so that all their feasts are unclean.  God hates them, and indeed has always hated them.  It was of set purpose that He concentrated all their worship in Jerusalem that He might more readily destroy it.  It is childish in the face of their absolute rejection to imagine that God will ever allow the Jews to rebuild their Temple or return to Jerusalem.  When it is clear that God hates them, it is the duty of Christians to hate them too**

 

* Sixth Homily Against the Jews, quoted in Malcolm Hay, op.cit., chap. 1. p. 30.  ** Chrysostom, Homilae Adversus Iudaeos.  A similar selection is given by Edward H. Flannery, op.cit.’ pp. 50-52, 306; Marvin H. Wilson, Our Father Abraham (William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company & Centre for Judiac-Christian Studies, 1989), p. 95; Denis Prager and Joseph Telushkin, Why the Jews? (Simon & Schuster, 1985), p. 94.

 

 

These three words of St John Chrysostom, ‘God hates you’, have echoed down the centuries in the ears of both Christians and Jews.

 

 

Jerome (345-420), universally regarded as the most learned and eloquent of the Latin church fathers, said: ‘There could never be expiation for the Jews ... God had always hated them  He called it incumbent on all Christians to hate the Jews who, he said, ‘were assassins of Christ, and worshippers of the devil’.*

 

* Jerome revised the Latin New Testament in 382, and between 390 and 405, while living in Bethlehem, made a new translation of the Old Testament into Latin from the Hebrew “the Vulgate).

 

 

St Augustine (354-439), a contemporary of Chrysostom, wrote: ‘The Jews held him; the Jews insulted him, the Jews bound him, they crowned him with thorns, dishonoured him by spitting upon him, they scourged him, they heaped abuses upon him, they hung him upon a tree, they pierced him with a lance*

 

* Augustine, The Creed, 3: 10, cited by Edward H. Flannery, op.cit., pp. 52-53.

 

 

To these could be added Cyprian, Eusebius, Hippolyttis, St Gregory of Nyssa, St Agobard (Archbishop of Lyons), Pope Gregory VII, as well as others, and all these set the tone for the church’s attitude for centuries to come.  It is not true to say that these men were not real Christians.  One certainly cannot say this of the early church fathers, nor Luther, nor countless others.  The fact that they were, in part, victims of contemporary attitudes in no way excuses the deep wrong of their words.

 

 

Separation from the roots

 

 

Efforts to sever the church from her Jewish roots were unrelenting in church history, and a quotation from Constantine indicates the spirit of the Roman imperial church of the fourth century and onwards: ‘We ought not therefore to have anything in common with the Jews, for the Saviour has shown us another way ... In unanimously adopting this mode [Easter Sunday], we desire, dearest brothers, to separate ourselves from the detestable company of the Jews*

 

* Life of Constantine 3. 18-19.

 

 

Such a severance has resulted in incalculable loss to sincere Christians and an impoverishment of their faith, and it has provided a door to serious misunderstandings and distortions of the Bible and its teaching.

 

 

The Crusades

 

 

To the average Christian, the Crusades of the eleventh century constitute a romantic chapter in the story of England and Europe, with such popular heroes as Godfrey de Bouillon and Richard the Lion-Hearted. Unhappily the Crusades, carried out in the name of Christ and His church, were for the Jewish people a blood-drenched episode in their history, resulting in the slaughter of countless thousands of Jews.  Wherever the Crusaders came, from the Rhine to the Holy Land, they bathed the ground with Jewish blood.  Surely one of the strangest anomalies in Christian history was this setting forth of thousands of Christians to deliver the sepulchre of the Jewish Saviour with their hands stained with Jewish blood.  Even the heroic knight Godfrey de Bouillon declared that he would avenge the blood of Jesus on that of the Jews.

 

 

The first Crusade began to move down the Rhine Valley in May 1096.  The hordes were fired by such words as:

 

 

‘We are marching a great distance to seek our sanctuary and to take vengeance on the Moslems.  Lo and behold, there live among us Jews whose forefathers slew Jesus and crucified Him for no cause.  Let us avenge ourselves on them first, and eliminate them from among the nations, so that the name of Israel no longer be remembered, or else let them be like ourselves and believe in the son of Mary*

 

* Meyer Passow, Five Great Dates (WIZO, Israel), p. 8.

 

 

One chronicler, Guibert of Nogent (1053-1124), reported the Crusaders of Rouen as saying: ‘We desire to combat the enemies of God in the East; but we have under our eyes the Jews, a race more inimical to God than all the others.  We are doing this whole thing backwards  Turning this logic into action, the Crusaders fell upon the Jews in Rouen and other places in Lorraine, massacring those who refused baptism.*

 

* Edward H. Flannery, op.cit., pp. 91-2.

 

 

They fell upon the Jews of Germany, where by July 10,000 Jews had been slaughtered, and whole Jewish communities reduced to a memory.  At Treves, women, having deliberately tied stones to themselves that they might sink, plunged from the bridge to save their honour and escape baptism.  The survivors of the massacre fled to the bishop’s palace as a place of refuge.  They were received by the bishop Engelbert with the words: ‘Wretches, your sins have come upon you; ye who have blasphemed the Son of God and calumniated his Mother.  This is the cause of your present miseries - this, if ye persist in your obduracy, will destroy you body and soul forever  Some in despair accepted baptism as the price of life, but most refused to be ‘defiled by the proud waters’.  Fathers rather killed their wives and daughters, brother slew brother.*

 

* Henry Hart Lalman, Dean of St Paul’s, History of the Jews (John Murray, 1866), Vol. 3, pp. 176-8.

 

 

Having thus plundered and killed in the Rhine Valley they entered Bohemia, where they wiped out the Jewish community of Prague.  On 15 July 1099, after a siege of five weeks, the Crusaders entered Jerusalem. Maddened by their victory they rushed through the streets and into the houses and mosques killing all they met - men, women and children alike.  A band of Crusaders forced an entry into the al-Aqsa mosque and slew everyone.

 

 

No one can say how many victims perished, but 70,000 Muslims were slaughtered.  The Jews fled in a body to their chief synagogue, but no mercy was shown to them.  The building was set on fire and they were burned alive.*  Then, in the words of a chronicler: ‘sobbing with an excess of joy and embracing one another with joy and release, the Crusaders rushed to the Church of the Holy Sepulchre where they folded their blood-stained hands in prayers of thanksgiving’. **

 

* Steven Runciman, The First Crusade (CUP, 1980), chp. 14: Malcolm Hay, op.cit., chp. 2. 

 

** ** Passow, op.cit., p.10; Edward H. Flannery, op.cit., p. 92.

 

The crusaders took Jerusalem by assault on July 15 1099, after a siege of five weeks.  No age or sex was spared; infants on the breast were pierced by the same blow with their mothers, who implored for mercy; even a multitude to the number of 10,000, who had surrendered themselves prisoners and were promised quarter, were butchered in cold blood by these ferocious conquerors.  The streets of Jerusalem were covered with dead bodies; and the triumphant warriors, after every enemy was subdued and slaughtered, immediately turned themselves with sentiments of humiliation towards the (church of the) Holy Sepulchre!

 

They threw away their arms still streaming with blood: they advanced with reclined bodies, and naked feet and hands, to that sacred monument; they sang anthems to their Saviour, who had there purchased their salvation by his death and agony; and their devotion so overcame their fury, that they dissolved in tears, and bore the appearance of every soft and tender sentiment! (Abbe Vertot; Hume). Joseph Haydn, Dictionary of Dates (Edward Moxon, 1853), under ‘Crusades’.

 

 

The second Crusade (1146-7) brought the same sufferings as the first.  Peter the Venerable, the influential abbot of the French monastery of Cluny, wrote an angry letter to the French king Louis VII urging him to punish the Jews because ‘they defile Christ and Christianity’.  He continued: ‘I do not require you to put to death these accursed beings ... God does not wish to annihilate them; but like Cam the fratricide, they must be made to suffer fearful torments and be preserved for greater ignominy, for an existence more bitter than death*

 

* Edward H. Flannery, op.cit., under ‘Ritual Murder Accusations’; Henry Hart Milman, op.cit., pp. 224-8.

 

 

There was one notable exception in this tide of murder in the person of St Bernard of Clairvaux.*  Despite his repeating those sentiments concerning the Jews current at his time, during the second Crusade he wrote many letters in defence of the Jews.  R. Joseph ben Meir records in his Chronicles:

 

 

‘The Lord heard their cry, and remembered His Covenant ... and He sent ... the Abbot St Bernard of Clairvaux (who said): ‘Come, let us go up unto Zion, to the sepulchre of their Messiah; but take ye heed that ye speak to the Jews neither good nor bad; for whoever toucheth them is like as if he touched the apple of the eye of Jesus; for they are His flesh and His bone*

 

* Henry Hart Milman, op.cit., p. 181.

 

 

Sadly, however, St Bernard also preached sermons almost as provocative as those of St John Chrysostorn: ‘You see, 0 Jew, that I am milder than your own prophet, I have compared you to the brute beasts; but he sets you even below these’, and ‘0 evil seed ... whence hast thou these figs crude and coarse? ... For war was their business, wealth their whole craving, the letter of the Law the only nurture of their bloated minds, and great herds of cattle, bloodily slaughtered, their form of worship*

 

* Malcolm Hay, op.cit., p. 181.

 

 

The trail of Jewish suffering and ruin ran on through the second and third Crusades, and all was done ‘in the name of Christ and in the sign of the cross’.  When the Crusaders arrived in the Holy Land there were 300,000 Jews living there.  When Benjamin of Tudela, a Spanish Jew, visited the Holy Land in CE 1169, he found only some 1,000 Jewish families still alive.

 

 

The blood libel

 

 

About the time of the second Crusade the blood libel found its origin in the English city of Norwich in CE 1144.  According to a contemporary Christian document: ‘The Jews of Norwich brought a child before Easter, and tortured him with all the tortures wherewith our Lord was tortured, and on Long Friday hanged him on a rod in hatred of our Lord, and afterwards buried him*

 

* Dennis Brager and Joseph Telushkin, Why the Jews? (Simon & Schuster, 1985), p. 98.

 

 

The horrifying lie, which claimed that Jews need Christian blood for their various religious rites, especially for the Passover matzot, first claimed its victims in the French city of Blois in May CE 1171, when about 40 Jews of the city were burned alive.  Between the twelfth and fifteenth centuries Jews, and often whole Jewish communities, were put on trial on over 150 occasions for engaging in ritual murder.  In almost every instance Jews were tortured and put to death.  Historian Haim Hillel Ben-Sasson wrote: ‘Generation after generation of Jews in Europe was tortured and Jewish communities were massacred or dispersed because of the libel

 

 

The blood libel in fact persisted into the twentieth century.  In central Europe there were almost more examples of the accusation between 1880 and 1945 than in the whole of the Middle Ages.*  An instance is recorded as recently as 1928 in New York State, and in the Polish town of Kielce in July 1948 when 42 Jews were murdered - and the blood libel was used by the Nazis for anti-Jewish propaganda.** Although common coinage in the Islamic world, a recent blood libel was in 1993 when Prada accused the Lubavitch of ritually sacrificing two members of the Orthodox novitiate.  Some time later the accusation was rebutted in Isvestia.

 

* Ibid, p. 100.   ** See Edward H. Flannery, op.cit., under ‘Ritual Murder Accusations’; Henry Heart Milman, op.cit., pp. 224-8.

 

 

The Inquisition

 

 

The period of the Inquisition in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries brought further horrors.  Most Christians remember the Inquisition for the many true Christian believers who were tortured or burned to death.  What many do not know is that hundreds of thousands of Jews died equally terrible deaths at the hand of the inquisitors - ‘in the name of Christ and in the sign of the cross’ - and whole Jewish communities were destroyed.

 

 

So one could go on, mentioning the pogroms in Russia of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, carried out to the age-old cry of ‘Christ-killers’, and often at Christmas or Easter. *

 

* See Henry H. Flannery, op.cit., under ‘Spanish Inquisition’.

 

 

Martin Luther

 

 

For the evangelical Christian, it is a particular sorrow to recollect the words of Martin Luther towards the end of his life.  In 1523 he had written:

 

 

‘Popes, bishops, sophists, monks and other fools treated Jews like dogs.  They were called names and had their belongings stolen.  Yet they are blood-brothers and cousins of the Saviour.  No other people have been singled out by God as they have; they have been entrusted with His Holy Word.’

 

 

Luther, however, was disappointed that the Jews made little response to his evangelistic overtures, and in 1543 he published a pamphlet entitled ‘On the Jews and their Lies’ in which he wrote: ‘Doubt not, beloved in Christ, that after the Devil you have no more bitter, venomous, violent enemy, than the real Jew, the Jew in earnest in his belief

 

 

He set out ‘his honest advice’ as to how Jews should be treated:

 

 

‘First, their synagogues or churches should be set on fire, and whatever does not burn up should be covered or spread over with dirt so that no one may ever be able to see cinder or stone of it.  And this ought to be done for the honour of God and of Christianity in order that God may see that we are Christians, and that we have not wittingly tolerated or approved of such public lying, cursing and blaspheming of His Son and His Christians.

 

 

‘Secondly, their homes should likewise be broken down and destroyed.  For they perpetrate the same things there that they do in their synagogues.  For this reason they ought to be put under one roof or in a stable, like gypsies, in order that they may realise that they are not masters in our land, as they boast, but miserable captives, as they complain of us incessantly before God with bitter wailing.

 

 

‘Thirdly, they should be deprived of their prayer books and Talmuds in which such idolatry, lies, cursing and blasphemy are taught.

 

 

‘Fourthly, their Rabbis must be forbidden under threat of death to teach any more.

 

 

‘Fifthly, passport and travelling privileges should be absolutely forbidden to the Jews.  For they have no business in the rural districts since they are not nobles, nor officials, nor merchants, nor the like.  Let them stay at home.

 

 

‘Sixthly, they ought to be stopped usury.  All their cash and valuables of silver and gold ought to be taken from them and put aside for safekeeping.  For this reason, as said before, everything that they possess, they stole and robbed from us through their usury, for they have no other means of support.  This money should be used in the case (and in no other) where a Jew has honestly become a Christian, so that he may get for the time being one or two or three hundred florins, as the person may require.  This, in order that he may start a business to support his poor wife and children, and the old and feeble.  Such evilly-acquired money is cursed, unless, with God’s blessing, it is put to some good and necessary use.

 

 

‘Seventhly, let the young and strong Jews and Jewesses be given the flail, the axe, the hoe and spade, the distaff and spindle, and let them earn their bread by the sweat of their noses as is enjoined upon Adam’s children.  For it is not proper that they should want us cursed Goyim to work in the sweat of our brow and that they, pious crew, idle away their days at the fireside in laziness, feasting and display.  And in addition to this, they boast impiously that they have become masters of the Christians at our expense.  We ought to drive the rascally lazy bones out of our system.

 

 

‘If, however, we are afraid that they might harm us personally, or our wives, children, servants, cattle, etc. when they serve us or work for us - since it is surely to be presumed that such noble lords of the world and poisonous bitter worms are not accustomed to any work and would very unwillingly humble themselves to such a degree among the cursed Goyim - then let us apply the same cleverness (expulsion) as the other nations, such as France, Spain, Bohemia, etc. and settle with them for that which they have extorted usuriously from us, and after having divided it up fairly, let us drive them out of the country for all time.  For, as has been said, God’s rage is so great against them that they only become worse and worse through mild mercy, and not much better through severe mercy.  Therefore away with them.

 

 

‘To sum up, dear princes and nobles who have Jews in your domains, if this advice of mine does not suit you, then find a better one so that you and we may all be free of this insufferable devilish burden - the Jews.’*

 

* Encyclopedia Judaica, article on ‘Anti-Semitism’; Edward H. Flannwet, op.cit., pp. 152-4.

 

 

The Holocaust

 

 

The Holocaust stands out as the most horrific expression of anti-semitism, possibly of all recorded history. This systematic attempt to destroy all European Jewry began in the last week of June 1941, and continued without respite for nearly four years.

 

 

At its height, during the autumn of 1941 and again in the summer of 1942, many thousands of Jews were killed every day, and by the time Nazi Germany had been defeated, as many as 6 million of Europe’s 8 million Jews had been slaughtered.  It is impossible to grasp the magnitude of this event.  Perhaps one can only appreciate something of it by isolated cameos which to a degree represent the whole.

 

 

Treblinka was one of the Nazi death camps deep in the heart of the Polish countryside.  It is recorded that some 800,000 (others say 1 million) were exterminated in Treblinka over a period of 13 months between July 1942 and August 1943.  In one month in the summer of 1942, 300,000 Jews died.  At its peak Treblinka was killing 15,000 people a day.  It took only 50 Germans, 150 Ukrainians and just over 1,000 Jewish prisoners to accomplish it.

 

 

Treblinka railway station, where Jews from all over Europe disembarked, was made to look like an ordinary railway station, complete with a uniformed ticket collector, a left luggage room, the facade of a restaurant, timetables, and even a station clock (with painted hands).  Deceptions continued all the way to the camp, with false shop-fronts, a little zoo and a final street sign announcing ‘TO THE GHETTO’, although this was in fact the road to the gas chambers.

 

 

At the entrance to the gas chambers was a small booth in which a ‘cashier’, guarded by SS men and Ukrainians, demanded all money and valuables.  The transfer from the ‘cashier’s’ booth to the place of execution took six to seven minutes.  The final bizarre deception arrived when the naked, frightened people came face to face with an elegant stone building, in the style of an ancient temple with wide ornamental doors and all around flowers and potted plants.  Above the doors was the single word ‘BATHHOUSE’.

 

 

Beyond these doors lay the gas chamber, and all around, armed guards, ferocious dogs and pitiless SS men, driving human beings forward to their death.  A thousand people at a time were driven into the gas chamber. After execution, seven ‘dentists’ extracted teeth with gold fillings and then the bodies were thrown into enormous pits - the furnaces of Treblinka.

 

 

The whole process, from the arrival of the train to the remains being hurled into the pit, took less than two hours and most of the victims never fully realised where they were or what was happening until it was too late.

 

 

According to one account, ‘the pyres of dead bodies burned by day and night.  The smoke that rose from the chimneys of dozens of crematoria could be seen over the entire district.  Human dust settled down on the entire area, and the death factory never ceased its work even for a single day

 

 

The sadism in Treblinka did not cease even in the brief hours that elapsed between arrival and death.  The same account tells of one of the Nazis who lived in the camp together with his family: ‘It was this man’s habit to murder a few Jews before his meals, otherwise he could not sit down at table.  The Untersturmer Meuter and Scharfuhrer Fast used to amuse themselves by setting dogs on Jewish children*

 

* Martin Gilbert, Final Journey: The Fate of the Jews in Nazi Europe (Allen & Unwin, 1979), chp. 9, pp. 121-2.

 

 

Treblinka was but one of many similar camps scattered throughout greater Germany and German-dominated Europe, including names such as Dachau, Buchenwald, Ravensbruck, Sobibor and Auschwitz.  The atrocities committed by the German armies as they advanced throughout Russia are another horrific story.  Hitler had launched his attack on the Soviet Union in June 1941.  As the German army advanced, special killing squads - Einsatzgruppen or strike commandos - massacred the Jews in every town and village.  For more than a year these killings continued, diligently accounted for in report after report, in every village of Lithuania, eastern Poland and western Russia.  It is recorded that more than 90 per cent of the Jews of these areas were killed, a total of 1,400,000 people.

 

 

Adolf Eichmann himself inspected the Einsatzgruppen at work.  At his trial in Jerusalem in 1961 he told the court how, near Minsk, he had seen the young troopers shooting into a pit already full of writhing bodies.  ‘I can still see’, he said in his interrogation, ‘a woman with child.  She was shot and then the baby in her arms*

 

* Ibid, chp. 4, p. 62.

 

 

Later that year (1941) Eichmann formulated the Nazi ‘Final Solution’.  Heydrich explained, from a draft memo prepared by Eichmann, ‘in the course of the practical implementation of the final solution, Europe will be combed from east to west’.  It was intended, according to the statistics that had been prepared by Eichmann for the Waldsee Conference, that a total of 11 million Jews should ‘fall away’, including those of countries yet to be conquered, including Britain, Ireland, Spain and Portugal.*

 

* Idid, p. 64.

 

 

It must be asked: how could a cultured and Protestant nation such as Germany be corporately involved in such a crime?  It is sometimes urged that the initiative lay with Hitler and his immediate associates.  The explanation has been offered that ‘we fell under Hitler’s spell’ and ‘we acted under orders’.  Indeed Hitler and his immediate associates do carry a major responsibility for this darkest stain in Germany’s history as a nation. Yet it has been shown as a result of recent studies that in fact Hitler gave relatively few explicit orders for the carrying out of his schemes, and left very wide scope to the initiative and interpretation of his subordinates. Although he sanctioned the policies and actions of his subordinates, these were not necessarily the result of his direct instructions.

 

 

In 1932 a majority of Germans knowingly voted for parties committed to the overthrow of German democracy.*  The fact of the matter is that ordinary Germans, as well as other nationalities, were the agents of the demeaning and later wholesale murder of the Jews of Europe.

 

* Laurence Rees, The Nazis; A Warning from History (BBC Books, 1997).

 

 

‘The testimonies of more than 50 eye witnesses, many of whom were committed Nazis ... confirm that there was massive collaboration with the Nazi regime, both at home and on the war fronts, and that the terrible atrocities in the east were the work not just of elite killing squads but also of ordinary German soldiers and of local civilian populations*

 

* Ibid, jacket cover.

 

 

A recent author similarly presents the thesis that the Holocaust was as much a product of the anti-semitism of the average German as it was of a Nazi blueprint for genocide.*  The Holocaust did not come about out of the blue.  The way had been prepared by centuries of anti-Jewish attitudes, mainly from ‘the church’, and sadly it seems that the words of Luther provided the final preparation for Hitler’s hatred of the Jews to find acceptance in the heart of the German nation.

 

* Daniel Goldhagen, Hitler’s Willing Executioners: Ordinary Germans and the Holocaust.  Review by The Times 12 Jan. 1998, p. 12.

 

 

Hans Kung, a Swiss-born theologian who went through World War II as a teenager, wrote in 1974: ‘The mass murder of Jews by the Nazis was the work of godless criminals, but without the almost 2,000-year history of Christian anti-semitism ... it would have been impossible

 

 

‘The killing of the Jews in the twentieth century was the final result of a tradition of denigration and rejection of Jews and Judaism dating from early in Christian history, which also tried to strip Jesus of his Jewishness to produce a home-made God and Saviour, a Gentile hero*

 

* The Times, 3 April 1985.

 

 

Hitler was appointed Chancellor of the Third Relch on 30 January 1933.  In April 1933, following his decision to establish concentration camps and to boycott Jewish shops, Hitler said to Cardinal Faulhaber: ‘I am only doing what the Church itself has been preaching and practising against the Jews  He repeated this in a conversation with Bishop Berning and Msgr Steinman, Berlin’s Vicar-General, on 26 April 1933, shortly before signing the Concordat between the Vatican and the Third Reich on 20 July the same year.  It was when signing this crowning achievement of 13 years’ work by the man who was to become Pope Plus XII that Hitler acknowledged himself a Catholic.

 

 

A few years later, in 1938, in the presence of his legal adviser, Hans Frank, Hitler said: ‘In the Gospels the Jews called out to Pilate when he refused to crucify Jesus: “His blood be upon us and upon our children’s children  Perhaps I have to fulfil this curse  It is no wonder that in his book Mein Kampf Hitler could write: ‘I believe that I am today acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jews, I am fighting for the work of the Lord*

 

* Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf (Houghton Miflin, 1943), p. 65; quoted by Edward H. Flannery, op.cit., p. 210.

 

 

When Julitis Strelcher in 1941 recommended ‘the extermination of that people whose father is the devil’ he was simply echoing the sentiments of Bernard of Clairvaux in the twelfth century when he had described the Jewish people as ‘a race who had not God for their father, but were of the devil, and were murderers as he was a murderer from the beginning’. *

 

* Malcolm Hay, op.cit., chp. 2.

 

 

Passive support for Hitler’s policies towards the Jews came from many sections of the church.  During the Holocaust, M. D. Weissmandel, a Polish Jew, appealed for help to the Papal Ambassador, asking him to intervene on behalf of innocent Jews, especially children.  He was told: ‘There is no innocent blood of Jewish children in the world.  All Jewish blood is guilty.  You have to die.  This is the punishment that has been awaiting you because of that sin’ (namely the crucifixion of Jesus).*

 

* Eliezer Berkovits, Faith after the Holocaust (Ktav, 1973), p. 19.

 

 

The official attitude of the Protestant Church during this period was also by and large a matter of shame.  On 17 December 1941 German Protestant church leaders published a statement on the position of Protestant Jews within the church:

 

 

‘The National Socialist leadership of Germany has given irrefutable documentary proof that this world war was instigated by the Jews ... As members of the German national community, the undersigned Protestant provincial churches and church leaders stand in the front line of this historic struggle which has made enemies of the Reich and the world. Even Martin Luther, from bitter experience, advocated stringent measures against the Jews and demanded their expulsion from Germany.

 

 

‘From the crucifixion to this day the Jews have fought against Christendom or exploited and misrepresented it for their own ends.  Baptism changes nothing in the racial separateness, national status, or biological character of the Jews.  The task of any German Evangelical Church is to cultivate and promote the religious life of Germans.  Christians who are Jewish by race have no place and no rights in this Church.  The undersigned German Protestant churches and church leaders have therefore severed all links with Jewish Christians.  We are determined not to tolerate any Jewish influence on German religious life.’

 

 

Even as late as 1948 the German Evangelical Conference proclaimed: ‘The terrible Jewish suffering in the Holocaust was a divine visitation and a call to the Jews to cease their rejection and ongoing crucifixion of Christ

 

 

Thankfully in 1980 this same conference was able to declare: ‘Stricken, we confess the co-responsibility and guilt of German Christendom for the Holocaust ... We believe in the permanent election of the Jewish people of God and understand that through Jesus Christ the Church is taken into the covenant of God with His people

 

 

Despite such welcome changes in attitude, can it nevertheless be any surprise to us that so many Jewish people regard Christians, the church and all attempts to preach the gospel of Jesus Christ to them with the deepest suspicion?  Their history is etched deeply into their minds and hearts.  So many today, either personally or in their immediate families, have suffered in the Holocaust, which is understandably seen by them as the final expression by a Protestant nation of centuries of Christian anti-semitism.

 

 

Elie Weisel, Holocaust survivor and Nobel Prize Winner said in 1996:

 

 

You must understand why I feared Christians, why I had to change side-walks when I saw a priest and why I resent it when you say that the Holocaust is a problem for both of us.  I say, ‘No! The victims are my problem, the killers are yours  I say, ‘You must understand that the cross for you is a symbol of love and compassion; for us Jews it is a symbol of suffering and oppression.’

 

 

Lest it be objected that we today in the West no longer repeat the crude anti-semitism of our forebears, let us face up to the fact that anti-Zionism - opposition to the restoration of the Jews to their Land and to the State of Israel - is also Jew-hatred.  Moreover, the widespread Christian teaching that the Jews have forfeited their position as God’s covenant people and have been replaced by the church as the ‘new Israel’ is of the same sort.

 

 

It may be that we no longer cry ‘Christ-killers’.  It is now ‘Israel the aggressor’.  Anti-Zionism is the new expression of anti-semitism which has drawn thousands of sincere Christians, as well as non-Christians, into its snare.*

 

* See Edward H. Flannery, op.cit., pp. 267-69.

 

 

God’s call to repentance

 

 

‘In that [coming millennial] day, when history shall be written in the light of truth, the people of Israel will be known not as Christ-killers, but as the Christ-bearers; not as the God-slayers, but as the God-bringers to the world

 

 

The Christian church is in deep need of repentance for its past, and sometimes present, attitudes.  There is a great need for Christians everywhere to say to the Jewish people, ‘We are sorry - please forgive us,’ and to show the reality of that repentance by practical support and by standing alongside the Jewish people.  Christians need to stand alongside Israel and pray for her.  Christians need to do all in their power to prevent any new tide of anti-semitism from rising or spreading.  Christians must also accept and understand the deep-seated suspicions with which we are so easily viewed by Jewish people, as their history is etched so unmistakably into their hearts and minds, even their history of suffering at the hands of Christians.  Perhaps then we might be able to humbly ask that the Jewish people at least consider reaching out in forgiveness towards us.

 

 

God’s attitude to the Jewish people is declared clearly in the Scriptures:

 

 

But Zion said, ‘The Lord has forsaken me, the Lord has forgotten me  ‘Can a mother forget the baby at her breast and have no compassion on the child she has borne?  Though she may forget, I will not forget you!  See, I have engraved you on the palms of my hands; your walls are ever before me (Is. 49: 14-16)

 

 

In all their distress he too was distressed, and the angel of his presence saved them.  In his love and mercy he redeemed them; he lifted them up and carried them all the days of old. (Is. 63: 9)

 

 

Let our heart attitude be that of the God we profess to know and worship.

 

 

Sources of information

 

 

Brown, Michael L., Our Hands are Stained with Blood (Destiny Image, 1992).

 

Flannery, Edward H., The Anguish of the Jews (Paulist Press, 1985).

 

Gilbert, Martin, Final journey: The Fate of the Jews in Nazi Europe (Allen & Unwin, 1979).

 

Guinness, Paul Grattan, Hear, 0 Israel (Vantage Press: New York, 19 8 3).

 

Hay, Malcolm, The Roots of Christian Antisemitism (Freedom Library Press: New York, 1981).

 

Passow, Meyer, Five Great Dates (WIZO: Israel).

 

Prager, Dennis and Joseph Telushkin, Why the Jews? (Simon & Schuster: New York, 1985).

 

Rees, Laurence, The Nazis: A Warning from History (BBC Books: London,1997).

 

 

*       *       *

 img03

 img04

it just too sensitive a subject.  Jesus and His teachings have been blamed for the Holocaust by so many people, and especially Jewish people-in large because of the ghastly way that Jesus’ name has been used and abused to make hateful statements about Jewish people.

   The video cannot undo decades of tragic and untrue correlation between Jesus and the hatred that made the Holocaust possible, but we believe the film presents a much needed counter perspective.  Not only that, but if the gospel cannot speak to this heinous human tragedy, how is that same gospel to save us from our sin and its awful power to forever separate us from God?  Indeed, in view of such a horrific demonstration of what sin can do, the gospel stands out as the only hope for humanity.

   Have you ever tried to share the gospel with someone who is furious with God because of a personal tragedy?  I have heard these words: “How dare you speak to me of a loving God when He allowed my child to suffer and die such a cruel death before my very eyes  For that parent, this is a personal and private holocaust.  So what do we do?  We weep with those who weep.  We don’t force the issue.  But neither do we dare desist from offering Jesus, the only hope, to people who are in such great pain.

   In the midst of the heated reactions we received to That Jew Died For You, Susan Perlman received a call from Rabbi Bernhard Rosenberg, the son of Holocaust survivors and the former chairman of the New York Board of Rabbis Commission on the Holocaust.  Rabbi Rosenberg was calling to thank us for producing what he called, “a film made from compassion.” (You can see the Rabbi’s full response online at: www.jewsforjesus.org/publications’realtime/april-2014/tidfyrr).  Rabbi Rosenberg states unequivocally that he is not a believer in Jesus, and yet he took the risk of offending people by stating that Jesus, a Jew, was not responsible for the Holocaust.  Who knows how many people will question the lie linking Jesus to the Holocaust thanks to this rabbi’s courageous words?

   The purpose of truth-telling is not to offend, but that doesn’t mean that those conditioned to disbelieve won’t be offended.  Paul said it best when he wrote: “For we are to God the fragrance of Christ among those who are being saved and among those who are perishing.  To the one we are the aroma of death leading to death, and to the other the aroma of life leading to life.  And who is sufficient for these things?” (2 Corinthians 2: 15-16)  Who indeed?*

 

 

* This writing is from: “Jews For Jesus” (June 2014): – “A newsletter for the Christian who wants to know more about Jews and evangelism 

 

 

Watch the video at: thatjewdiedforyou.com

 

“To date over 1.5 million people have viewed the film on YouTube, including 1000.000 Israelis.

 

The film caught the attention of the media in the UK, Israel, France and the USA.

 

On April 25 Julia Pascoe was interviewed alongside Rabbi Laura Janner-Klausner on the Radio 4 Today Programme 5 Live. 

 

The Independent and the Guardian posted the video on the online site as did the Jewish Chronicle

 

 

*       *       *

 

 

THE DAY OF THE LORD

 

 

By  David Noakes*

 

* “David Noakes has had a long standing relationship with Prophetic Word Ministries in a number of roles, and is Chairman of the Board of Hatikvah Film Trust.  He is respected as a Bible teacher and acknowledged for his deep understanding of the ministry of the prophets

 

 

-------

 

 

There is today a famine of the truth of the word of God in many parts of the church, and it is a famine which is increasing in severity.  It is of the greatest importance that in the difficult days that lie ahead, God’s people should not find themselves either deceived by false teaching or taken unawares by events that their teachers had not told them to expect.  It is a matter of urgency that we try to grasp clearly and accurately the whole of what Scripture predicts for the closing days of this age - but stripped of the speculation and sensationalism which so often surrounds it.

 

 

To establish truth, we need the illumination of the Holy Spirit; and we need to allow Scripture to interpret Scripture, allowing the word of God to be its own commentary upon itself, and letting the weight of the whole of the prophetic writings taken together build up a clear picture of the events which are being predicted.  It could be likened to a jigsaw puzzle, scattered through the pages of the books of the prophets, which only the Holy Spirit can assemble correctly.

 

 

The topic of ‘the Day of the Lord’ is a thread that is interwoven into the Scriptures from the time of the earliest writing prophet, Obadiah, right through to the book of Revelation.  Almost every prophet makes reference to it, either directly or indirectly.  Sometimes, as with Isaiah in chapters 9-12, their prophetic vision leaps back and forth, from the time of the immediate future of which they are speaking, to the time of the end of this age.  Sometimes, as with Joel and Zephaniah, the Day of the Lord is completely central to their writings, and the prophetic revelation arises either out of considering historical events that have already taken place - in Joel’s case a judgement on the Land of Israel by means of an invasion of locusts which had already happened in his own day (Joel 1: 1 - 2: 11) - or as with Zephaniah, out of a prophetic awareness of the imminence of the invasion and destruction of Judah by the Babylonians, which took place some 45 years later in 586 BCE (Zeph 1: 4 - 2: 3; 3: 1-13).

 

 

A major theme of biblical prophecy

 

 

The Day of the Lord is a theme to which the prophets were drawn like moths to a candle flame.  What is this great event that so occupied their thoughts and which keeps breaking into their writings as if they had suddenly taken off their reading glasses and instead had picked up a telescope to gaze with astonishing clarity of vision into the distant future?

 

 

It is a major theme of biblical prophecy, running like an unbroken thread through the writings of the Hebrew prophets, in which the phrase ‘the Day of the Lord’, with its unique significance, occurs 21 times between Isaiah 2: 12 and the very last verse of the Old Testament, Malachi 4: 5.  Parallel to that phrase is another that has similar theological significance when used by the prophets: ‘in that day’, which is found 107 times in their writings and out of which 80 references are directly relative to the future Day of the Lord.

 

 

The Day of the Lord is thus mentioned by the prophets more than 100 times.  It is continuously into the book of Isaiah, appearing in no fewer than 17 of the first 35 chapters.  Of the 17 books of the Old Testament prophets, only five fail to mention it directly by name; and of those five, Daniel in chapters 7-12 deals with the subject extensively, while both Nahum and Habakkuk also contain relevant prophecy relating to the closing days of this age.  This prophetic theme continues through the New Testament, emerging, for example, in the Olivet Discourse (Mt. 24: 15-31; Mk. 13: 14-27; Lk. 21: 20-36), in 1 Corinthians, Philippians, 1 and 2 Thessalonians, Hebrews, 2 Peter, Jude and of course almost the whole of the book of Revelation.

 

 

How should we understand this term ‘the Day of the Lord’ and its counterpart ‘In that day’?  What do they signify?  There is no special significance in the actual Hebrew or Greek words used in the two phrases.  In the  Hebrew Old Testament the ordinary Hebrew word for day, yom, is used; while in the Septuagint and the New Testament the usual Greek word, hemera, is found.  Yom is translated variously in the Scriptures as ‘day’, ‘time’ or ‘year’.  It can express either a particular point in time, or a period of time that may extend during months or even years.  When included in the phrases ‘the Day of the Lord’ or ‘in that day’, it is used prophetically to indicate a particular future period of time when God’s personal and direct intervention in human history will occur in order to fulfil His purposes.

 

 

God’s purposes

 

 

What are these purposes?  The evidence from Amos 5: 18 indicates that the popular understanding among the people at the time of his ministry in the northern kingdom of Israel (c.760 BCE) was that it would be a day when God would intervene in such a way as to exalt Israel to be chief among the nations, irrespective of Israel’s unfaithfulness towards Him.  This was the view being taken by the people at a time of relative peace and prosperity, which had led to great complacency (Amos 6: 1-7).  Amos, however, hastens to disabuse them of such an idea.  The Day of the Lord will certainly be an occasion when God intervenes, but first to punish sin, which has reached a climax: ‘Woe to you who long for the day of the Lord!  Why do you long for the day of the Lord?  That day will be darkness, not light ... will not the day of the Lord be darkness, not light - pitch-dark, without a ray of brightness?’ (Amos 5: 18, 20).

 

 

All the prophetic writings confirm Amos’s understanding of the Day of the Lord as a day of terror, involving the invasion of Israel and an experience of unparalleled destruction.  Zephaniah, prophesying to Judah in about 630 BCE, says:

 

 

The great day of the Lord is near - near and coming quickly.  Listen!  The cry on the day of the Lord will be bitter, the shouting of the warrior there.  That day will be a day of wrath, a day of distress and anguish, a day of trouble and ruin, a day of darkness and gloom, a day of clouds and blackness, a day of trumpet and battle cry against the fortified cities and against the corner towers. (Zeph 1: 14-16)

 

 

Both these and other passages in the prophetic writings underscore the fact that the Day of the Lord is to be a day when the terror of divine Judgement is to be poured out on the unbelieving nation of Israel (see, e.g., Isaiah 2: 6-21; Jeremiah 30: 4-17; Joel 1: 15 - 2: 11; Malachi 4: 1).  Yet this by no means represents the whole of God’s purposes at that time.  The unbelieving nations of the world will also be brought into judgement; and in addition a surviving remnant of the nation of Israel will enter into a national conversion, forgiveness of sins, cleansing, and restoration to possession of the entirety of the Land that God Promised to Abraham (see, e.g., Isaiah 4: 2-6; Jeremiah 30: 18-31:40; Micah 4: 1-8; Zechariah 12: 10 - 13: 2).

 

 

The tribulation period

 

 

The Day of the Lord is always found in the context of a prophetic prediction of a future disaster, involving certain signs that will portend its arrival, notably convulsions of nature and periods of darkness in the sky.  The Day itself involves the direct intervention of God in the affairs of men, bringing judgement and great destruction upon Israel through military invasion by the Gentile nations, which in turn results in destruction by God of those armies at the return of the Lord Jesus and deliverance for the repentant remnant of Israel.  This leads directly into the fullness of restoration of both the nation and the Land of Israel, God’s judgement upon the Gentile nations, and the establishment of the millennial kingdom of the Messiah upon the earth.

 

 

What we are describing is thus that period of prophetic prediction in human history known in the New Testament as the Tribulation or the Great Tribulation.  It may be helpful to tabulate some of the other terms used in the Old Testament to represent this period of time.  It is variously referred to as:

 

 

The Time of Jacob’s Trouble .   Jeremiah 30: 7

 

Israel’s Day of Disaster.   Deuteronomy 32: 35

 

His wrath.   Isaiah 26: 20

 

The Overwhelming Scourge .   Isaiah 28: 15, 18

 

God’s Strange Work.   Isaiah 28: 21

 

God’s Alien Task.   Isaiah 28: 21

 

Day of Vengeance.   Isaiah 34: 8; 35: 4; 61: 2

 

The Seventieth Week of Daniel .   Daniel 9: 27

 

The Time of Wrath.   Daniel 11: 36

 

The Time of Distress.   Daniel 12: 1

 

The Day of Pitch-darkness, without a ray of brightness.   Amos 5: 18

 

The Day of Darkness and Gloom.   Joel 2: 2; Zephaniah 1: 15

 

The Day of Clouds and Blackness.   Joel 2: 2; Zephaniah 1: 15

 

The Day of Judah’s Disaster.   Obadiah 13

 

The Day of Wrath.   Zephaniah 1: 15

 

The Day of Distress and Anguish.   Zephaniah 1: 15

 

The Day of Trouble and Ruin.   Zephaniah 1: 15

 

The Day of Trumpet and Battle-Cry.   Zephaniah 1: 15

 

 

These descriptions alone are sufficient to indicate that this period will be a time of unparalleled distress for the whole world, but pre-eminently for the house of Jacob, for whom it will be the final outworking of God’s judgement upon their national sin and apostasy.  This must come to pass before the restoration of the kingdom to Israel (Acts 1: 6) can take place.  That it will be a time of unequalled distress in Judah is confirmed by Jesus in Matthew 24: 15-29 in the course of speaking to His disciples about the events leading to the end of the age.

 

 

The uniqueness of the nation of Israel

 

 

To understand rightly what the Scriptures reveal, it is of critical importance to bear in mind that what we are examining is the writings of Hebrew prophets, prophesying to Hebrews about what is primarily, in the purposes of God, an event which involves His final dealing in judgement with the nation of Israel before her national vindication and restoration.  His judgements on the nations, vital though they are, take second place to His dealings with His covenant people so far as the heart of God is concerned.

 

 

It is impossible to understand the events that will mark the closing days of this age without understanding the relationship between Hebrew Israel, the physical descendants of Jacob, and the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.  This relationship is special, unique and irreplaceable; and no third party, including the church, can ever be a substitute within it.

 

 

A key biblical distinction is between the place of Israel and the place of the church, and failure to observe and maintain that distinction leads to misunderstanding of much of what the Bible teaches.  As far as eschatology is concerned, the distinction is vital, for a right understanding of the covenant relationship between Israel and her God is crucial in comprehending the revelation of Scripture as to its outworking.  That relationship is pivotal, the hub at the centre of the wheel, around which all the other events of the last days revolve.  If it is not in proper position in our thinking, other matters of eschatology become as loose spokes of the wheel, with no central point of reference.

 

 

The Bible speaks of Israel as the Wife of the God of Jacob and of the Church as the Bride of Christ.  They are by no means the same in this age, although ultimately they will be united in the new Jerusalem.  Israel is revealed progressively in Scripture as a wife married to God, who becomes adulterous, is separated, then divorced, then punished, rejected and abandoned, but finally restored into the fullness of the marriage covenant (Is. 54: 1-8; Is. 62: 4-5; Hos. 2: 14-23).  The church, however, is represented as a betrothed virgin who is not yet joined by marriage to her husband; the wedding feast is yet to come.  Unlike Israel, the adulterous forgiven, cleansed and restored, the church is in the future to be presented to Christ as a pure virgin (1 Cor. 11: 2; Eph. 5: 25-27).  The two are presented in Scripture as being different and distinct from one another, and it is important to realise that God deals with them as such.

 

 

The consistent testimony of the many passages of Scripture that relate to God’s future dealings with the nation of Israel - which will include both the formerly divided kingdoms of Israel and Judah (see, e.g., Is. 11: 12-14; Jer. 31: 27, 31; Ez. 37: 15-23) - leaves no room for doubt that the faithfulness of the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ will every promise and every prediction made concerning the Hebrew people, with whom He remains in a covenant relationship.  As He says in Malachi 3: 6: ‘I the Lord do not change.  So you, 0 descendants of Jacob, are not destroyed

 

 

Judgement and salvation

 

 

Scriptures predict exactly what we see today in the nation-state of Israel: a nation being restored to her Land in a state of unbelief.  The prophetic word of God is being visibly fulfilled in our own day, which is a cause for rejoicing since it heralds the imminent return of Messiah.  It is nevertheless at the same time a cause of foreboding, for the Scriptures also make it plain that before Messiah comes, this restoration to the Land must be the inevitable prologue to a final terrible outpouring of satanic anti-Semitic hatred.  This will bring about the completion of God’s judgements upon His covenant nation in her own Land in the Day of the Lord, which Jeremiah 30: 7 describes as ‘the time of Jacob’s trouble’: ‘Alas! for that day is great, so that none is like it: it is even the time of Jacob’s trouble; but he shall be saved out of it’ (KJV).

 

 

An examination of the passages of Scripture dealing with the topic of the Day of the Lord leads to the realisation that, as we have already said, the period of time being described in the Old Testament writings is the same as that which the New Testament identifies as the great tribulation (Rev 7: 14).  At every place in Scripture where the phrase ‘the Day of the Lord’ is to be found, it is in a context which relates it to the tribulation period.

 

 

Although the period of the tribulation is first and foremost the time of Jacob’s trouble, it will include also God’s judgement on the Gentile nations and will result in the salvation and restoration of the surviving remnant of the nation of Israel.  In addition, as it runs its course, it will bring about a worldwide harvest of salvation among the Gentiles (Rev 7: 9-17).

 

 

To put some more flesh on these bones and to substantiate what has been said, we need to examine certain key passages of Scripture that make detailed reference to the Day of the Lord.  Since, however, the theme runs like a continuous thread through the prophetic writings, from Isaiah to Revelation, we cannot attempt to cover every place where it is mentioned.

 

 

Let us begin with the book of Joel, after Obadiah the first of the writing prophets to deal with the subject of the Day of the Lord.  He prophesied to the southern kingdom of Judah, probably in the reign of King Joash, about 835 BCE.  Certainly he must predate Amos, who prophesied to the northern kingdom of Israel in the following century during the reign of Jeroboam II (Amos 1: 1), because Amos quotes Joel twice: Joel 3: 16 is quoted in Amos 1: 2, and Joel 3: 18 in Amos 9: 13.

 

 

Military invasion of the Land of Israel

 

 

In chapter 1: 2-14, Joel describes an actual historical invasion of the Land by locusts in four successive waves (v. 4), bringing total destruction of the crops.  From an examination of Jeremiah 15: 3 and Ezekiel 14: 21, it is apparent that, prophetically, four stages of a disaster indicate its completeness.  It brings lamentation among the people and a call to the priests for national repentance (vv. 13-14).  From the springboard of this account of an actual invasion by locusts in Joel’s own day, he moves immediately into the prophetic future, using the analogy of the invasion by locusts to describe an invasion of the Land of Israel which will take place at the end of this age, in the Day of the Lord.  This will be similar to the plague of locusts in that it will bring a complete devastation to the Land.  The account begins in verse 15, where the theme of the Day of the Lord is introduced and is stated to involve destruction in the Land of Israel.  This continues to verse 11 of chapter 2.

 

 

Although there was at least some limited measure of fulfilment of this prophecy in both the Assyrian and the Babylonian invasions of 722 BCE and 586 BCE respectively, this passage has its real and ultimate fulfilment in an even more catastrophic event yet to come.  This invasion will be the worst in Israel’s entire history (2: 2b).  It will involve a vast army (2: 2, 11), which will bring destruction by fire upon the whole Land (1: 19-20; 2: 3).  The devastation will be complete (1: 16-20).  Although it will be a hostile army that will invade Israel and bring the disaster, this is nevertheless the hand of God at work in the final judgement to fall upon Israel.  It is ‘destruction from the Almighty’ (1: 15) and the army is described as the Lord’s army in 2: 11.

 

 

More than three centuries later, following the return of the remnant of Judah from the Babylonian exile, the prophet Zechariah received a more detailed account of that same invasion, which even the post-exileic period was still revealed as a future event.  In Zechariah 12, the Lord states in verses 2 and 3: ‘I am going to make Jerusalem a cup that sends all the surrounding peoples reeling.  Judah will be besieged as well as Jerusalem.  On that day, when all the nations of the earth are gathered against her, I will make Jerusalem an immovable rock for all the nations  In Zechariah 14: 2 the word of God further states: ‘I will gather all the nations to Jerusalem to fight against it; the city will be captured, the houses ransacked, and the women raped.  Half of the city will go into exile, but the rest of the people will not be taken from the city  It is generally understood that this situation will be the culmination of the campaign of Armageddon (Rev 16: 12-16).

 

 

Turning to the book of Zephaniah, whose central theme is also that of the Day of the Lord (1: 14), we find that the whole of chapter 3 is speaking to the unrepentant city of Jerusalem concerning God’s future judgement, and beyond that to the subsequent restoration of a saved remnant of her people.  Again, we are told that God’s judgement will be executed at the hands of Gentile nations, who will in turn themselves be judged by the Lord.  Zephaniah 3: 7-8 reads:

 

 

‘I said to the city, “Surely you will fear me and accept correction Then her dwelling would not be cut off, nor all my punishments come upon her.  But they were still eager to act corruptly in all they did.  Therefore, wait for me declares the Lord, ‘for the day I will stand up to testify.  I have decided to assemble the nations, to gather the kingdoms and to pour out my wrath on them - all my fierce anger.  The whole world will be consumed by the fire of my jealous anger

 

 

To digress briefly at this point, the translation here may be somewhat misleading.  The final sentence, translating the Hebrew word erets, which is translated only rarely as ‘world’, but more usually as either ‘earth’ or ‘land’, says that the whole world will be consumed, while the KJV renders it ‘All the earth shall be devoured  Both translations appear to assume that God has here turned His attention to speaking solely of His judgement on the Gentile nations of the world.  However, God never states that He is jealous over the nations of the world, but states frequently that He is jealous over His people Israel and over the city of Jerusalem; and in the context of the whole passage, it may be that the final sentence of 3: 8 should read: ‘The whole land will be consumed by the fire of my jealous anger  This statement can be understood either to be literal, or as a metaphorical expression of the overflowing of the Lord’s heated indignation against the corruption about which He has already protested with solemn warnings.

 

 

The likelihood of this possibility appears to be reinforced by an examination of the language used by Zephaniah in chapter 1.  In verses 2 and 3, which clearly refer to widespread destruction on the whole inhabited earth in the day of the Lord’s judgement, the word translated ‘earth’ is adamah; whereas in verse 18, in the context of a passage which begins in verse 4 and in which the prophet is specifically addressing Judah, the word erets is chosen.  This distinction in the choice of language in the original inspired texts is surely significant for our understanding and interpretation: adamah is used to describe the earth as a whole, erets when the Land of Judah is in view.

 

 

God speaks primarily to Israel, secondarily to the Gentiles

 

 

A factor of importance in our eschatological understanding of biblical prophecy concerning the closing days of this age is that although it is not at all unusual for the prophets to speak of specific Gentile nations as being the recipients of God’s judgement, when they do it is almost invariably made clear by the fact that those nations are mentioned by name.  Except where that is the case, we need to bear in mind that the usual task of the Hebrew prophets was to prophesy to their own people concerning the nation and the Land of Israel or Judah.  If the Gentile church were to gain a firm grasp on this principle, much confusion would be removed.  It is very common, for example, among Christians to find the belief that the campaign of Armageddon is bound to involve a worldwide military conflict, including a nuclear holocaust.  This may of course prove to be so, but the Scriptures do not necessarily seem to warrant this particular conclusion.  We must beware of falling into the trap of ‘going beyond what is written’ (1 Cor. 4: 6) in the revelation of the word of God.  What is clear is that the military action of the campaign of Armageddon will take place in the Land of Israel.

 

 

The rest of the world will, of course, experience the supernatural manifestations of the wrath of God as revealed in appalling detail in the Book of Revelation; and the clear implication of scriptures such as those found, for example, in Isaiah 24 and in the Olivet Discourse is that the entire world will experience the shakings and disasters that result from the overflowing of God’s judgement upon the sin of all the nations (cf. Hag. 2: 20-22 and Heb. 12: 26-27).  When the world’s cup of iniquity is full, His final judgements will fall in the Day of the Lord.

 

 

Worldwide warning signs

 

 

We have already quoted Amos 5: 18 and 20, stating that the Day of the Lord will be ‘darkness, not light - pitch-dark, without a ray of brightness’.  Returning to Joel 2: 2 we find similarly, that the day will be one of ‘darkness and gloom, a day of clouds and blackness’, and in 2: 10 that ‘the earth shakes, the sky trembles, the sun and moon are darkened, and the stars no longer shine’.  This is not just symbolic darkness; there will also be a literal aspect to it.  Jesus said in Luke 21: 25 that ‘there will be signs in the sun, moon and stars’.  Even as there was physical darkness when Jesus was enduring the judgement of God against sin at Calvary (Mt. 27: 45), so Scripture also speaks of more than one period of physical darkness in the time of the judgements that will take place in the Day of the Lord.

 

 

The terrible invasion described in Joel 2 brings forth God’s call to Israel to repentance in order to avert the disaster before the destruction is total (2: 12-17).  They are to call upon the name of the Lord, reminding Him that they are His covenant people and that the Land is His inheritance (v. 17; cf. Ps. 79: 10).

 

 

Salvation of a remnant

 

 

Following this repentance, God responds to the surviving remnant and delivers those who have called upon Him for salvation (2: 32; see also Mal. 3: 16 - 4: 3).  The second part of Joel’s prophecy moves from the invasion and destruction of Israel to the salvation and restoration of Israel.  The invading army (2: 20) will be destroyed by God in the desert of the Negev, and it will be so large as to be pushed at either end into the Dead Sea and the Mediterranean respectively.  The Land will be restored (vv. 19, 21-27).  Following this deliverance there will be an outpouring of the Holy Spirit on all the survivors of the nation of Israel (vv. 28-29).

 

 

Thus far, we see the Day of the Lord as being a time of terrible judgement on the Land and nation of Israel. Joel 2: 30-31 tells us that there will be dramatic and awful warnings of the impending arrival of that Day by means of:

 

 

(a) upheavals in nature;

 

 

(b) a period of unnatural darkness.

 

 

These are warnings to all those who have ears to hear and especially to Israel, together with an assurance (v. 32) that there will be deliverance on Mount Zion and in Jerusalem for those who call upon the Lord for salvation - but they will only be the surviving elect remnant of Israel.  Zechariah 13: 8-9 speaks of this remnant and says:

 

 

‘In the whole land,’ declares the Lord, ‘two-thirds will be struck down and perish; yet one-third will be left in it.  This third I will bring into the fire; I will refine them like silver and test them like gold.  They will call on my name and I will answer them; I will say, “They are my people and they will say, “‘The Lord is our God.’”

 

 

Romans 9: 26-29, Paul quotes from Hosea 1: 10, Isaiah 10: 22-23 and Isaiah 1: 9 to establish the fact that a remnant of Israel will be saved; and on examination of the scripture that he quoted from Isaiah 10, we find that it is at the time of the Day of Lord, the complete quotation beginning in verse 20 with the theologically significant phrase ‘in that day’.  The whole passage, Isaiah 10: 20-23, reads:

 

 

In that day the remnant of Israel, the survivors of the house of Jacob, will no longer rely on him who struck them down but will truly rely on the Lord, the One of Israel.  A remnant will return, a remnant of Jacob will return to the Mighty God.  Though your people, O Israel, be like the sand by the sea, only a remnant will return.  Destruction has been decreed, overwhelming and righteous.  The Lord, the Lord Almighty, will carry out the destruction decreed upon the whole land.

 

 

Jesus also confirmed that there would be a surviving remnant.  In Matthew 24: 15, He turns His attention to the time of the great tribulation and gives prophetic warnings relating to it.  It is to be, in Judea particularly (v. 16), a time of unparalleled distress (v. 21) from which there would be no survivors except for divine intervention (v. 22), but God will intervene and bring an end to the tribulation in Judea ‘for the sake of the elect’ - that is, the remnant of Israel that is to be saved out of it.

 

 

The ‘Little Apocalypse’ of Isaiah 24-27

 

 

Another key passage of Scripture that is prophetic of the Day of the Lord is the ‘Little Apocalypse’ of Isaiah 24-27.  Many commentators appear to think that the whole of chapter 24 is speaking about God’s judgement solely on a worldwide basis, but this assumption does not seem to equate with the usual prophetic methods of expression.

 

 

We noted previously that when the Hebrew prophets are speaking about nations other than Israel and Judah, they specifically name those nations.  Between chapters 13 and 23, Isaiah has prophesied judgement concerning Babylon, Assyria, Philistia, Moab, Damascus, Ethiopia, Egypt, Edom, Arabia and Tyre; in chapter 24, however, no individual nation is named.  This may be, of course, because the prophet intends to include every nation without distinction, and it has been assumed by many that because in translation this chapter speaks over and over again of ‘the earth’, the prophecy is therefore entirely to do with events that are to occur on a worldwide basis.  However, as with the book of Zephaniah, on 15 occasions out of 17 the word translated ‘the earth’ is again the Hebrew ‘erets’, which can equally well be translated as ‘the land’.  It is interesting to note that Dr David Stern’s translation of Isaiah 24 in The Complete Jewish Bible relates verses 1-12 to the Land of Israel, but renders verses 13-23 as having global application.

 

 

It appears significant when considering the language of Isaiah 24 that when the prophet wishes to make reference to the earth in a worldwide sense, he uses a different Hebrew word.  In this context he does not use erets but adamah, which means the ground or the soil of the dry land.  Adamah is used in Isaiah 23: 17, where Tyre is said to ‘ply her trade with all the kingdoms on the face of the earth’.  It is also the case that in verse 21 of chapter 24, which reads ‘in that day the Lord will punish the powers in the heavens above and the kings on the earth below’, Isaiah, having used the word erets throughout the chapter until that point, suddenly switches and uses the word adamah in speaking of the kings on the earth on what is obviously intended as a worldwide basis.  This deliberate choice of the different words under the influence of the Holy Spirit cannot be without reason.

 

 

Of the two occasions when the word translated as ‘the earth’ or ‘the world’ is not the usual erets, Isaiah employs the word adamah, once in verse 21; while on the other occasion in verse 4, he uses the less common word for the habitable earth, tebel, sandwiched between two uses of erets in the very same verse.  Why should there be these variations of usage on only two out of seventeen occasions when ‘the earth’ is in view?

 

 

It is easy to see in verses 21-23 that the prophetic revelation shifts its emphasis into a clear global perspective of judgement upon world rulers, both human and spiritual; hence the change of emphasis signified by the sudden use of the different word adamah.  In verse 4, however, the sudden single use of tebel may be to enable the prophet to speak in the same sentence of the simultaneous total impoverishment of both the Land of Israel and the whole of the rest of the planet.  The cause in both cases is he outpouring of God’s judgement - the cup of iniquity - on both His own covenant people and also the global community of the Gentile nations, to bring to an end the rebellion of both against His sovereign rulership.  The result of this global judgement will be the repentance and total restoration of Israel as the redeemed messianic covenant nation, taking her appointed place as chief among the nations of the world (Jer. 31: 7), and the judgement of the returned Messiah upon the Gentile nations on the basis of their acceptance or rejection of His covenant people in the hour of their great distress.

 

 

It seems very probable, from the actual content of this chapter also, that the prophecy does relate primarily to the Land of Israel and only secondarily to the earth as a whole.  The prophecies of laying waste, devastation and plundering that it contains are entirely at one with the prophetic predictions elsewhere in the Scriptures concerning the invasion of Israel and the siege of Jerusalem.  Verse 5 is extremely thought-provoking; the charge is that the Land ‘is defiled by its people’ who have ‘disobeyed the laws, violated the statutes and broken the everlasting covenant’ thereby bringing upon themselves a curse (v. 6).  The only nation mentioned in Scripture as having received laws and statutes, the breaking of which brings a curse, is Israel.  Neither have the Gentile nations of the world ever been party to any ‘everlasting covenant’ which they have broken, although the Noahic covenant is also expressed to be everlasting in Genesis 9: 16.  That covenant, however, is unilateral on the part of God; and taken in its context, the only tenable argument for its infraction by the earth’s inhabitants would seem to lie in the sin of shedding innocent blood (vv. 4-5).  In view of the increasing global violence and bloodshed in our day, as in the days of Noah, and particularly the widespread sin among the nations of the mass murder of unborn children through legalised abortion, there is perhaps at first sight something in favour of that possible argument.

 

 

However, in the context in which Isaiah is writing in chapter 24, it seems much more likely that the broken covenant which is in the prophet’s view is God’s covenant with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, expressed in 1 Chronicles 16: 15-18 and Psalm 105: 8-11 to be an ‘everlasting covenant’ concerning Israel’s inheritance of the Land of Canaan, ultimately to be possessed by the restored nation in its entirety from the Mediterranean Sea to the River Euphrates (Deut 11: 24).  What, one must ask, would amount to an infraction of this covenant by God’s chosen people?  Could it be that in the sight of God the willingness to surrender His Land (Joel 3: 2) in return for a spurious peace amounts to such a denial of that covenant He has made with His people?

 

 

In verses 10 and 12 we find reference to a ruined, desolate city, which would fit with the condition of Jerusalem according to the prediction of Zechariah 14: 2.  In verse 13 comes a reference to an olive tree being beaten; the translation of this verse in the KJV is: ‘When thus it shall be in the midst of the land among the people, there shall be as the shaking of an olive tree, and as the gleaning grapes when the vintage is done  There is a similar reference to Jacob as an olive tree in Isaiah 17: 6 (and see also Jeremiah 11: 16 and Hosea 14: 6).  In Romans 11: 24 the whole nation of Israel is, of course, referred to as an olive tree.  No other nation is so described in Scripture.

 

 

In verses 18b-20 of Isaiah 24 the Scripture makes reference to a great earthquake.  Is this to be a worldwide earthquake?  In Zechariah 14: 4-5 it is predicted that in the Day of the Lord there will be a great earthquake in the Land of Israel which splits the Mount of Olives in two immediately prior to the Lord’s Second Coming. Revelation 11, which speaks of events in Jerusalem during the tribulation, tells us in verse 13 that there will be a severe earthquake which causes a tenth of the city of Jerusalem to collapse.  However, the earthquake mentioned in Zechariah 14 is probably that which is predicted in Revelation 16: 17-21.  It appears that this earthquake certainly could be of worldwide proportions, since it is stated to be the greatest earthquake that has ever occurred since man has been on earth (v. 18); it causes Jerusalem (the ‘great city’ - see Revelation 11: 8) to be split into three parts, and also we are told that ‘the cities of the nations collapsed’ (v. 19).  All of this, taken together, appears as compelling evidence that Isaiah 24 is speaking of the Day of the Lord in a way that is entirely consistent with other prophetic writings, first concerning the final judgement on Judah and Jerusalem prior to the return of her Messiah in deliverance, and secondly of the outpouring of God’s wrath on the Gentile world whose rebellion has filled its cup of iniquity to the full.  The three following chapters, 25-27, also fit with the predictions of the other prophets, speaking not to the Gentile nations, but principally of the Lord’s renewed favour to the restored and converted nation of Israel, after the period of tribulation has been ended by the return of her Messiah.  Terrible though it is to contemplate, the last and most awful expression of satanically inspired anti-Semitism has yet to occur.  However, this will constitute the very action which brings that cup of iniquity to the full, resulting in God’s judgement on the Gentile world system and the deliverance of His covenant people through the return of Messiah Yeshua.

 

 

God’s subsequent judgement of the nations

 

 

Returning to the book of Joel, the prophet’s attention turns in chapter 3 towards the judgement of the Gentile nations of the world.  This also forms part of the events of the Day of the Lord, and will happen (v. 1) the time of God’s restoration of the fortunes of Judah and Jerusalem.  It will take place in the Valley of Jehoshaphat, the Kidron Valley between Jerusalem and the Mount of Olives.

 

 

Judgement on their armies

 

 

Verses 9-11 underline that the nations have come to Israel for war.  The Hebrew of verse 9 means literally ‘sanctify a war’.  The armies of the nations, summoned by the Antichrist to a ‘holy war’ against Israel the aim of wiping her out totally, and lured by the influence of demonic powers released in the sixth bowl judgement of Revelation 16: 12-16, will have assembled in the valley of Megiddo in northern Israel.  They will move south against Jerusalem and take the city after which God will intervene personally through the return of Messiah (Zech. 14: 3-15; Rev. 19: 11-21) to overthrow the armies and to deliver Judah and Jerusalem.  He will halt those armies by sending upon them madness, panic, plague and blindness (Zech. 12: 1-9; 14: 1-3, 12-15).

 

 

Judgement on the individual Gentile survivors on that Day

 

 

Following this deliverance, and the repentance and restoration of the surviving remnant and of the Land, which we have already mentioned and which is also described in Zechariah 12: 10-13: 1 and 14: 6-11, the returned Messiah will bring the survivors of all the nations before Him for judgement in the Valley of Jehoshaphat (Joel 3: 1-8, 12-17).  They will be there in huge numbers (v. 14).

 

 

The judgement of God upon the Gentiles will be on the basis of either their anti-Semitism or their pro-Semitism (v. 2).  His charges against them will be those of scattering the people of Israel, dividing up the Land and enslaving the people (vv. 2-3).  They will be judged on the basis of their attitudes and behaviour towards the Hebrew people, and this is re-affirmed by Jesus in Matthew 25: 31-46, where He speaks of dividing the people of the nations into the categories of sheep or goats according to whether they treated His brethren well or badly.  Joel 3:13 speaks of the salvation of some in the figure of getting in the harvest, and of the condemnation of others in the figure of the crushing of the grapes in the winepress (see also Isaiah 63: 1-6).

 

 

Judgement of particular nations

 

 

Space will not permit the lengthy examination of God’s dealings with specific individual nations, but Scripture has much to say on the subject.  For example:

 

 

Babylon and Edom (the descendants of Esau) will both become permanent desolate wastelands, dwelling-places only for demons (Jer. 50: 35-40; 51: 37-43 [Babylon]; Jer. 49: 13, 15-18; Obad. 15-18; Is. 34: 5-16 [Edom]).

 

 

The descendants of Lot (the nations of Moab and Ammon) will be restored after judgement (Jer 48: 47; 49: 6).

 

 

After judgement, both Egypt and Assyria will enter into the blessing of the Lord and a close relationship with Israel (Is. 19: 23-25).

 

 

Philistia will be taken over by Israel (Obad. 19; Is. 11: 14), and so will Lebanon (Obad. 20).  The judgement of both is mentioned in Joel 3: 4-7.

 

 

The establishment of the millennial kingdom

 

 

The final outcome of the Day of the Lord is the establishment of the millennial kingdom.  The Lord will dwell in Zion (Joel 3: 17, 21).  In verse 18 the prophet tells us that the fruitfulness of the Land will be restored, there will be abundant water, ending the problem of drought.  The same verse refers to the millennial river, also described in Ezekiel 47: 1-12 and Zechariah 14: 8, which will flow from below the threshold of the millennial temple.  From Ezekiel 47: 13 - 48: 29, we learn also that time Israel will at last possess the entirety of the Land promised to Abraham’s descendants in Genesis 15: 18-19.  That covenant was conditional; the ‘everlasting covenant’ of which we have already spoken, God will have proved His faithfulness to keep His covenant to the letter.  His word cannot fail, because He cannot be unfaithful to what He has unconditionally undertaken to do.

 

 

What will be the signs to warn us of the

impending approach of the Day of the Lord?

 

 

1. Specific to the nation of Israel will be the re-establishment of the ministry of the prophet Elijah, which will have the particular emphasis of calling the nation to repentance in the area of its collapsing family relationships (Mal. 4: 5).

 

 

2. We have already seen in Joel 2: 31-32 the prophetic prediction that ‘before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord’, there will be certain signs:

 

 

(a) ‘wonders in the heavens and on the earth, blood and fire and billows of smoke’ (v. 30), corresponding to the effects of the first, second, fifth and sixth trumpet judgements found in Revelation 8: 7-9 and Revelation 9: 1-21;

 

 

(b) ‘the sun will be turned to darkness and the moon to blood’ (v. 32), corresponding to the judgement released at the Lamb’s opening of the sixth seal in Revelation 6: 12-17.

 

 

The whole of the order of nature in the heavens and on the earth will be thrown into turmoil and upheaval as a result of the out-pouring of the judgements of God, before the culmination of the Day of the Lord in the Armageddon campaign and the Second Coming of Messiah.

 

 

Isaiah 13: 9-10, Amos 5: 20 and Zephaniah 1: 15 all speak similarly of periods of darkness coming over the earth at that time, and Jesus underlined these events during the Olivet Discourse.  He says in Luke 21 that:

 

 

(a) there will be ‘wars and revolutions’ (v. 9);

 

 

(b) ‘Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom’ (v. 10);

 

 

(c) we’ll see ‘great earthquakes, famines and pestilences in various places’ (v. 11);

 

 

(d) there will be ‘fearful events and great signs from heaven’ (v. 11);

 

 

(e) ‘before all this, they will lay hands on you and persecute you’ (v. 12).  All these events of war, and upheavals of nature on earth and in the heavenly bodies, have been predicted by more than one of the writing prophets.  Daniel 9: 26, speaking of the times of the end when the Antichrist will rule, says: ‘The end will come like a flood: War will continue until the end, and desolations have been decreed’ (see also Psalm 46: 8).

 

 

3. To these predictions, however, Jesus adds one more: the severe persecution of the church, together with the apostasy this will bring about (Mt. 24: 9-13).

 

 

4. This apostasy is mentioned by Paul in 2 Thessalonians 2: 3, which leads us on to one final and crucial indication that the Day of the Lord is drawing near.  This will be the emergence of the ‘man of lawlessness’, the Antichrist.  Paul writes to the church at Thessalonica in 2 Thessalonians 2: 1-4:

 

 

Concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to him, we ask you, brothers, not to become easily unsettled or alarmed by some prophecy, report or letter supposed to have come from us, saying that the day of the Lord has already come.  Don’t let anyone deceive you in any way, for that day will not come until the rebellion [Greek apostasia] occurs and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction.  He will oppose and exalt himself over everything that is called God or is worshipped, so that he sets himself up in God’s temple, proclaiming himself to be God.

 

 

What will initiate the Day of the Lord,

the period of the tribulation?

 

 

The final sign, just mentioned, is that of the emergence into recognition of the man of sin, the Antichrist.  The same figure appears constantly as a king in Daniel chapters 7, 8, 9 and 11.  We read in 7: 25: ‘He will speak against the Most High and oppress his saints and try to change the set times and the laws’; in 8: 25: ‘He will destroy many and take his stand against the Prince of princes.  Yet he will be destroyed, but not by human power’; and again in 11: 36: ‘The king will do as he pleases.  He will exalt and magnify himself above every god and will say unheard-of things against the God of gods.  He will be successful until the time of wrath is completed, for what has been determined must take place

 

 

This same figure is in focus in Daniel 9: 24-27, the well-known passage to the 70 weeks of years that Daniel prophesied.  There is still remaining one period of seven years to run in God’s prophetic time-clock for Israel. The event that will initiate this final seven-year period is that which is specified; the Antichrist will make a seven-year covenant with nation of Israel: ‘He will confirm a covenant with many for one “seven” but the middle of that “seven” he will put an end to sacrifice and offering (v. 27).’  This latter event marks the starting point of the of three-and-a-half years of the great tribulation, the Day of the period of the Hebrew prophets. The passage concludes by telling us of the Antichrist: ‘And on a wing of the temple he will set up an abomination that causes desolution, until the end that is decreed is poured out on him

 

 

The warning of Jesus is specific: ‘So when you see standing in the holy place “the abomination that causes desolation”, spoken of through the prophet Daniel ... then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains … For then there will be great distress, unequalled from the beginning of the world until now - and never to be equalled again’ (Mt. 24: 15-16, 21).

 

 

Speaking of the Antichrist, 2 Thessalonians 2: 4 says: ‘He sets himself up in God’s temple, proclaiming himself to be God  This event, breaking His covenant made with Israel, will be the clear signal to the Jewish nation that their time of false security (for that is what it will have been) is over and that the final and intense period of Jacob’s trouble, their last great persecution at the hands of the Gentile nations, is about to begin.

 

 

What are the purposes of the Day of the Lord?

 

 

1. To bring a great harvest of salvation from all nations into the kingdom of God (Rev. 7: 9-17).

 

 

2. To break the stubbornness of the nation of Israel against God (Dan. 12: 5-7).  This will come about through the severity of the judgement upon her, followed by the national restoration of the surviving repentant remnant.

 

 

3. To deal with the sin of the Gentile nations, of which Babylon in Isaiah 13: 9-13 is a representative example (and see also Isaiah 2: 10-21).

 

 

4. To usher in the millennial kingdom, with Jesus on the throne in Jerusalem (Ps.  2; Obad. 21; Mic. 4: 1-5; 5: 3-5, 7-9; Zeph. 3: 14-17; Zech. 14: 9-11, 16-21; Rev. 11: 15-18; 20: 4-6).  Appropriately, the book of Obadiah closes his prophecy concerning the Day of the Lord with the simple statement: ‘And the kingdom will be the Lord’s

 

 

*       *       *

 

 

The Indestructible Jew

 

 

[Selected from “The Vanguard Reprints”]

 

 

By D. M. Panton.

 

 

“The preservation of the Jew during so many centuries of complete dispersion is a fact standing nearly, if not absolutely, alone in the history of the world.  It is at variance with all other experience of the laws which govern the amalgamation with each other of different families of the human race(Duke of Argyll).  There is no land without a Jew; and so fecund and virile is the race that in fifty years it has leapt up from four millions to twelve, and now exceeds by five millions the Jewish census of the time of King David.  Between Babylon and Rome stretches the vast chain of Gentile empire: Babylon crushed the royalty of Israel, and Rome crushed her priesthood: Babylon has been a ruin for two thousand years, and the Rome of the Caesars is a dream, - yet the Jew survives, “The world has found out by this time that it is impossible to destroy the Jew.” (Lord Beaconsfield).

 

 

Nor is the racial type altered.  Other races have suffered dispersion, but dispersion in colonies; the Jew alone has been a race in solution among other races: yet what he was on the Jordan and the Euphrates, that he is to-day on the Thames and the Hudson.  “The black hair, the dark eyes, the sharply cut nose, the somewhat prominent lips, the pale complexion, the piercing glance, the slight figure, the foreign accent, foreign in all lands, the politeness and servility, the combination of a love of appearance with slovenliness, the overweening estimate of money and money’s worth, - this is no Negro, no Turk, no Egyptian; this is simply and only the Israelite  Jewish births compared with Gentile are as five to three; and the Jews who exceed ninety years of age, compared with Gentiles, are as five to two.  “We still preserve laws,” says a son of Israel, “that were given to us in the first days of the world: our history begins at the cradle of mankind, and it is likely to be preserved to the very day of universal destruction

 

 

We are now confronted with a startling fact.  The ineradicable instinct of the Jew has been to seek absorption among the nations.  Even in the golden age of Israel the Psalmist had to say, - “They mingled themselves with the nations and learned their works” (Psa. 106: 35); and it was the unceasing grief of Jehovah that Israel, His Bride, was never weary of breaking wedlock.  So eagerly did Israel absorb a Babylonian atmosphere that, after seventy years, Nehemiah had to translate the Law into Hebrew (Neh. 8: 8), and a thousand years later the language of Palestine was still a compound manufactured in Babylon.  Yet every instinct of absorption has been defied by an invisible barrier of mysterious destiny.  Intermarriages with Gentiles have but one third to one fourth the fertility of pure Jewish marriages.  A ring of fire has kept the Jew lonely, isolated, and indestructible.  “Experience shows that this conservation is due in a great degree to the very hatred which they have incurred” (Spinoza).

 

 

It was the persecutions of a Pharaoh which first isolated the Jew into a national consciousness, and made him a nation.  It was the whips of Philistia, and the scorpions of Egypt and Syria, which kept him a nation for a thousand years.  For two thousand more, in Ghettos and Pales of Settlement, by Jew baiting and ‘pogroms’ a nation has been forged now more vital and united than at any time since the Fall of Jerusalem, - a burning bush, unconsumed.

 

 

The indestructibility of the Jew is a fact of unsurpassable significance.  There could be no more startling proof as to Who it was that hung upon the Cross than these nineteen centuries of un-exhausted expiation.  “For our SINS” - the Jews have confessed every year since the burning of the Temple - “we have been exiled from our land  Now mark: - in seventy years, that is, in two generations, Israel in Babylon discovered its sin, and was cured of idolatry for ever: in nineteen hundred years, or seventy generations, the sin producing the second dispersion has never been discovered or expiated.

 

 

Nor could it be the transgression of the Mosaic Law alone; for Jehovah had explicitly promised, that, on repentance, “the Lord thy God will TURN THY CAPTIVITY, and have compassion upon thee” (Deut. 30: 3).  No people has fasted longer, or prayed more fervently; no nation has so studied the Law, or sought more earnestly to obey its precepts: yet not a single blessing, that was to follow obedience, has been procured, and not a single curse, which was to follow disobedience, has been averted.  What immediately preceded this tremendous catastrophe.  CALVARY.  “All the people answered and said, His blood be on us, and on our children” (Matt. 27: 25).  “This scattered, undying people offer the most irresistible evidences of the Divine mission of the Christ whom they crucified” (Bishop Geo. Moberley).  Calvary is the solitary clue to eighteen centuries of exile.

 

 

The survival of the Jew is an equally arresting proof of the love of God.  The worlds that roll around our earth are no more indestructible than the people of God’s choice.  “Thus saith the Lord, which giveth the sun for a light by day, and the ordinances of the moon and of the stars for a light by night: If these ordinances depart from before me, saith the Lord, then the seed of Israel also shall cease from being a nation before me for ever” (Jer. 31: 35).  All blessing for the world God has lodged in the Jew.  “In thee shall all the nations of the earth be blessed”: with the absorption of the Jew among the nations, therefore, would disappear, as a river that sinks out of sight, the hope of the world, and his survival is essential to the salvation of the race.  The indestructible Jew carries in ‘the wandering feet and weary breast’ the irrefutable proof of the crucifixion of the Son of God, and the perpetual witness of Jehovah’s un-exhausted love.

 

 

Take the Jew from the world, and what becomes of the Bible?  Take the Bible from the world, and how do you explain the Jew?  Interpret one by the other and the proof is overwhelming that God has sent His Son into the world, that through Him the world might have life.

 

 

2

 

 

The Glories of Israel

 

 

“It is not easy,” says McCheyne, writing on Mount Carmel, “to pray really for Israel; it needs you to have much of the peculiar mind of God  Now that mind unchanged (for Paul uses the present tense) is revealed in nine glories which God has given irrevocably to Israel. Rom. 9: 3-5.

 

 

1. - Israelites.  Not Jacobites, but Israelites: not men’s supplanters, but wrestlers on their behalf with God; princes by conquest in intercession.  “Thou hast striven with God and with men, and hast prevailed” (Gen. 32: 28).  It was Israel’s glory to be God’s intermediary: the Temple was “the house of prayer for all the nations” (Mark 11: 17).  Rom. 11: 18.  Isa. 61: 6.

 

 

2. - The Adoption.  Ex. 4: 22, Jer. 31: 9.  The Church receives an adoption as sons (Gal. 4: 5); Israel received an adoption as a people; and it is a national adoption confined to Israel for ever.  “Hath God assayed to go and take Him a nation ... according to all that the Lord your God did for you (Deut. 4: 34): “He hath not dealt so with any nation” (Ps. 147: 20).  Israel is God’s solitary and peculiar people, - the only nation to whom the Messiah personally ministered (Matt. 15: 24), and the only nation, as such, for which He is said to have died.  John 11: 50.

 

 

3. - The Glory.  God’s Shekinah Fires never dwelt in the midst of any nation except Israel.  “He made thee to see His great fire; and thou heardest His words out of the midst of the fire” (Deut. 4: 36).  From a burning Bush Israel was called; by a burning Cloud Israel was led; on a burning Mercy Seat God dwelt in the midst of His people: Israel is the sole nation that has ever beheld and contained the devouring fires of Deity.  Num. 14: 14.

 

 

4. - The Covenants.  Apart from Noah, God has never entered into a covenant with any man but a Jew.  Eight covenants were made with Abraham; one with Moses; at least two with Israel; and the New Covenant, the blood of which has been shed (Luke 22: 20), and the ministers of which have been appointed (2 Cor. 3: 6), has yet to be made with the Houses of Israel and Judah (Heb. 8: 8).  Covenants between God and man belong only to the blood of Abraham.

 

 

5. - The Law.  Jehovah’s descent in person on Sinai, with a Decalogue written by the fingers of Deity, is an unique glory of Israel.  “He showeth His word unto Jacob, His statutes and His judgments unto Israel.  He hath not dealt so with any nation: and as for His judgments, they [the nations] have not known them” (Ps. 147: 19).  The mind of God was distilled in the Law, ministered through angels, and deposited at last in the hands of the Jew.

 

 

6. - The Worship. ‘Jew’ means ‘praise’: and God’s liturgy, the sole mode of ritual access into His presence under the Law, was revealed to the Jew only. “If thou bearest the name of a Jew, [thou] restest upon the law, and gloriest in God, and knowest His will ... being instructed out of the law” (Rom. 2: 17).  God planned every knob and tent-pin in Tabernacle and Temple, and no Gentile ever crossed the threshold of the Holy Place, much less ministered in the divine ritual.

 

 

7. - The Promises.  All promises are held in germ in one promise to Abraham; - “In thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed” (Gen. 22: 18).  ‘Thy seed’ is a Jew: whether, therefore, by way of circumcision, or through faith, salvation is of the Jews, because salvation is from a Jew.  So also the promise of the Spirit was first given to the Jew.  Gal. 3: 14.  Acts 2: 39.

 

 

8. - The Fathers.  God’s providence never leaves the Jew because His love never leaves their fathers.  “Because He loved thy fathers, therefore He chose their seed after them” (Deut. 4: 37).  No man ever gave God a name but a Jew: He is not known as the God of Adam, or the God of Noah; but, - “I am the God of thy father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob” (Ex. 3: 6).  No nation ever had divine priests but Israel (except Melchizedek): for two thousand years none other had divine prophets (except Balaam): no other nation has had divinely anointed kings: and there is no author of divine Scripture but a Jew (except Luke).  Rom. 3: 2.

 

 

9. - The Christ.  In Bethlehem lies Israel’s consummate distinction. “Of whom is Christ as concerning the flesh, who is over all, God blessed for ever  The Son of a Jewess, of the seed of David (Rom. 1: 3), of the tribe of Judah (Rev. 5: 5), the Word tabernacled in flesh of Israel.  Heb. 2: 16.  Eternity can hold no racial glory so unique.  Here, then, is the mind of God.  None of these glories sprang from natural excellence, but all from supernatural grace, so revealing how peculiarly God has isolated Israel in honour, as “the dearly beloved of My soul” (Jer. 12: 7), “My glory” (Isa. 46: 13).  Oh, for more of this mind of God!  He who had it most fully could say, - “I could wish that I myself were anathema from Christ for my brethren’s sake, my kinsmen according to the flesh” (Rom. 9: 3).

 

 

3

 

 

Garnering the Wheat

 

 

Ripeness.  The vital principle of all harvesting has been laid down by our Lord once for all: - “When the fruit is RIPE, immediately he putteth in the sickle” (Mark 4: 29).  No farmer reaps his field because a fixed date is come, but because his corn is ripe; the reaping of unripe corn is utterly unknown; and the farmer cuts only those sections of his field which are ripe.  So it is in the spiritual sphere: study nature, and learn grace; for they are from the hand of one Maker.  Wheat, our Lord reveals - for He defines the wheat-plants as the children of the Kingdom, growing, without intermission, between the first sowing by the Son of Man and the End of the Age (Matt. 13: 38, 39) - is the Church: ‘wheat’ is a type of Christian, not Jewish, experience.  Thus our Lord unfolds a momentous principle.  It is not wheat that the Angels (Matt. 13: 41) reap, but ripe wheat: neither the individual believer, nor the Church as a whole, is ripe simply because they are wheat: (our Lord’s words indicate a delay between the springing of the wheat and its maturity): and it is not Christ’s return that rules the ripeness of the wheat, but the ripeness of the wheat that rules the date of Christ’s return.

 

 

The Sheaf.  The spiritual Harvest is inaugurated by the reaping of a solitary Sheaf.  “When ye shall reap the harvest, then ye shall bring the sheaf of the first fruits” - one selected from among the earliest ripe ears - “and the priest shall wave the sheaf before the Lord” (Lev. 23: 10).

 

 

Paul gives us the clue to the type.  “Now hath Christ been raised from the dead”; (resurrection involves rapture, as God does not leave the risen to dwell on earth): and so our Lord was ‘carried up into heaven to be waved before God in the upper Temple, - “the first-fruits of them that are asleep.  But each in his own order” - his own batch or company; each in his own harvesting - “Christ the first-fruits; then they that are Christ’s in His Presence” - during His Parousia (1 Cor. 15: 20).  Thus part of the harvest has already gone*: a Christian rapture has already taken place: Christ, presumably with a group of risen saints of choice ripeness (Matt. 27: 52), has already been reaped.  This Sheaf, and this Sheaf alone, consecrates the whole Harvest: “to be accepted for you” (Lev. 23: 11); a surety of the ultimate harvesting of all the wheat: “for if the first-fruit is holy, so” - in fundamental wheat-nature, though not necessarily in present maturity - “is the lump” (Rom. 11: 16).

 

 

The First-fruits.  So this illuminating clue, furnished by the Holy Spirit, establishes the whole Type; and reveals at once that, even among the First-fruits, there is more than one rapture.  For seven Sabbaths after, on the fiftieth day - an immense period, an era of dispensational completeness, when the Jubilee Sabatismos (Heb. 4: 9) arises - the next removal of wheat occurs, and it is still First-fruits. “Seven Sabbaths shall there be complete, and ye shall offer a new meal offering unto the Lord, two wave loaves baken with leaven, for first-fruits unto the Lord” (Lev. 23: 15).  That this ‘fine flour’ was to be baken ‘with leaven’ at once proves that it is not Christ, for no offering that stands for Christ was ever offered with leaven, which was strictly forbidden (Lev. 2: 11): besides, the Sheaf of Christ had gone long before: here is a holy group - two loaves, Jew and Gentile, consecrated ‘for Jehovah’; yet with the leaven of indwelling sin up to the very moment of rapture - a part of whom is unveiled to us on the heavenly Mount.  “These were purchased from among men to be the first-fruits unto God and unto the Lamb: they are without blemish” (Rev. 14: 4).  So here is a second rapture.

 

 

The Harvest.  Now we arrive at Harvest. “Ye shall reap the harvest of your land” (Lev. 23: 22); usually some three weeks after First-fruits; for these are wholly severed: if first-fruits are gathered simultaneously with harvest, they are not first-fruits; it is a time-word, and implies fruit cut (like our Lord) earlier than the general crop.  So the Apocalypse also reveals both the maturity which is the determining factor in the date of rapture, and also the consequent plurality of reaping.  For, after First-fruits have already appeared on high, the message reaches the Son of Man in the Parousia-cloud, - “Send forth [for the sickle is a reaping band of angels] thy sickle, and reap: for the hour to reap is come: FOR the harvest of the earth is over-ripe” (Rev. 14: 15).  Here therefore is a fresh rapture.  As grain ripens in the hottest season, so the fierce heats of the Tribulation will dry up roots which once clung tenaciously to earth, and which, had they but sheltered in warmer valleys and rooted themselves in richer soil, would never have been left so long un-garnered.  “When the fruit yields itself” - yields itself to its gracious Sun, spontaneously unfolding into full-orbed ripeness - “straightway he putteth in the sickle” (Mark 4: 29).  Christ is responsible for the sowing of the Wheat, but not for the date of its maturity.  So here is a fresh clue to the Type - the ‘harvest’ is Christian rapture: for Christian believers only (and not Jews, nor Gentiles) are bodily removed by descending angels.

 

 

The Corners of the Field.  But even so the reaping is not yet exhausted: the Harvest itself does not remove all the grain from the Field.  “When ye reap the harvest of your land, ye shall not wholly reap the corners of thy field, neither shalt thou reap the gleaning of thy harvest” (Lev. 23: 22).  Here, then, is yet another rapture. “For we must all be made manifest before the judgment seat of Christ” (2 Cor. 5: 10), sometime during the Parousia, throughout which the Bema remains set up: the whole Field must ultimately be reaped: and, in wonderful accordance thereto, at the very close of Antichrist’s reign, sandwiched in between two descriptions of Armageddon, and couched in terms always addressed to the Church, a warning cry goes forth to the un-gleaned Corners of the Field.

 

 

“Behold, I come as a thief.  Blessed is he that watcheth, and keepeth his garments, lest he walk naked, and they see his shame” (Rev. 16: 15).

 

 

*       *       *

 

 

REDEMPTION AT THE HEART OF PROPHECY*

 

 

By Derek Rous

 

[* The following can be found in: “Prayer For Israel, Summer Magazine 2014,” pp.10-13.)]

 

 

 

CALLED TO BE A PROPHET

 

 

One thing you can’t avoid noticing in the Bible is that the life of a prophet was not an easy one.  All of them enjoyed the privilege of close communion with God, but also a life of conflict, trial, pain and suffering from the community to whom they were called to serve.  In the end, many faced an early death.  Please read Hebrews 11: 32-40.

 

 

But how could you know whether a prophet was from God or not?  The answer is simple.  Whilst false prophets always acted as a group and wanted to speak pleasantries, never challenging the lifestyle of the people.  By contrast true prophets were always loners and realists who spoke about painful truths in order to bring a message from the heart of God, which if acted upon, would bring the hearers back into a relationship with God.  Theirs was an intercessory ministry and they acted as priests for people.  Even so, there were times when even with their best and faithful efforts, God told them to stop because He was withdrawing Himself from speaking anymore to His people.

 

 

Take Jeremiah for example in Jer. 11: 14, despite identifying himself with the people by confessing their sin, God repeats Himself that He will not hear their cry 14: 11-12.  Jeremiah’s grief reaches a peak in 20: 7 when he appeals to God to relieve him of his post.  With tears, he passionately lays down his commission only to find that the Word of God in him was like a burning fire and he became weary of holding it back.  Now he’s in a conflict.  Fear on every side but inside this burning fire!  Finally, he discovers and proclaims triumphantly, “But the Lord is with me as a mighty awesome One.  Therefore my persecutors will stumble and will not prevail.  They will be greatly ashamed for they will not prosper.  Their everlasting confusion will never be forgotten

 

 

Perhaps that’s why there are so few true prophets today - those fashioned in the Biblical mould.  The privilege is great but the cost is high.  Of course there are numerous prophetic ministries but how many can truly be regarded as Prophets of God bringing God’s unchanging message?

 

 

JESUS IS CENTRAL

 

 

Rev. 19:10 says, “And I felt at his feet to worship him.  And he said unto me, See [thou do it] not: I am thy fe[low-servant. and of thy brethren that have the testimony of Jesus.  Worship God - for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy

 

 

The book of Revelation is a true prophecy from a man suffering for his faith, designed to inform believers of things that must take place shortly [in a short time].  More importantly, its central theme is the message of redemption which had come through the person and work of Jesus the Messiah.  His testimony had been at the core of Prophetic utterance from the beginning and now was at the centre of this message from John for the last days.  It showed that the purpose of prophecy for Israel throughout history was to open their eyes to the redemptive plan of God, that would finally be fulfilled and made manifest through salvation in Yeshua of Nazareth.

 

 

Redemption is the heart of all the prophet’s messages to Israel, as it is to all the nations that dwell at the ends of the earth.  For Israel the message of the prophets was “Return to Me! Turn back to MeZech. 1: 8.  It continues into the NT with the apostles, “Repent therefore and be converted, that your sins may be blotted outActs 3: 19.  To the world it was and still is, repent and believe the good news - “There is no other name given under heaven whereby we must be savedActs 4: 12.

 

 

KINGDOM NOW?

 

 

So the message was not primarily about preaching a “Kingdom Now” of justice and peace to the world, as commendable as it seems and “bringing in the Kingdom of God,” since this could never come to pass until Jesus comes Himself to rule and reign.  Every effort at righteous government over the past 2000 years through the power of a State Church has only ended in misery and failure.  Why?  Because the preaching of the Gospel of Kingdom of God was never intended to set up a righteous government outside of Israel, run by Jewish or Gentile Christians.  Rather the job of saved believers in Jesus was to point the way to the Kingdom that could only be entered individually by faith in the person and completed work of Jesus the Messiah. 1 Cor. 1: 23; 2 Tim. 4: 2.  He would be the Saviour for Israel first and then for the world - for which God also had a love.  John 3: 16; 2 Peter 3: 9.  Here the world is the one He made and not the corrupted world inhabited by Satan.  Only Jesus would bring the Kingdom into reality by His coming in person to rule and reign as The King.  But before that comes to pass, life will get increasingly difficult for [faithful] believers in Jesus.  2 Tim. 3: 12.

 

 

To repeat - the message of the prophets, taken up by the N.T. apostles was that the only way to establish the Kingdom of God was not by the efforts of men to control laws and governments, but to preach a faithful gospel message that would make citizens of the Kingdom, through repentance and faith in His finished work.  No matter how diligent, energetic and visionary people might be, the efforts of men would always be inadequate. It’s one thing to yearn and pray for it but only God will build His Kingdom and the new Church needed to recognize this as it prayed the prayer that Jesus taught His disciples to pray privately, recorded in Matt. 6: 9-13.  Jesus said that His kingdom was not of this world, if it was, then His disciples would fight.  Their job was to faithfully preach the way into the Kingdom and consequently make disciples of all nations and not try to build a political entity based on God’s laws.

 

 

MESSAGE OF THE N.T. CHURCH

 

 

Acts 3: 18-26.  The Apostles message to Israel after Pentecost is that prophecy has been fulfilled in the birth, life, death and resurrection of Jesus.  The prophets foretold it.  It happened in their midst but they have just killed the prince of life.  Their response was inevitable.  If that’s the case, “What can they doActs 2: 37. And the answer was - nothing - except “Repent and be baptized” “Be saved” Acts 2: 38, 40.  “Repent and be converted” Acts 3: 19.  It wasn’t the disaster they thought, indeed quite the opposite.  In fact it was all meant to happen this way.  The apostle’s message to Israel therefore was full of hope because all the prophets foresaw this day “when the Salvation of Israel would come ‘to’ and ‘out of Zion.’”  Isaiah 59: 10 and Romans 11: 26.  All the prophets pointed towards this vital message that demonstrated God’s faithfulness to His people but unless Israel (as a whole) turned back to God, they would be dispersed to the ends of the earth.

 

 

IS THE GOSPEL RELEVANT TO JEWS?

 

 

There are those who believe that Jews don’t need to convert - they are O.K. as they are.  There are also those who believe that there are two separate covenants - one for Jews and one for gentiles.  And now there are a third group who promote that Jews have already got Jesus within their midst but they just don’t recognize Him. (Mark Kinser and Messianic Orthodox movement - Post Missionary Messianic Judaism P.14 lower para.) So what does Acts 3: 19 mean when it says, “Repent and be converted  Surely, it suggests that yes indeed, they do need to convert.  The question is of course to what do they need to be converted into?  For centuries, the established state church of the Roman Empire taught that they must renounce their Jewish identity and practices and be converted to gentile Christianity.

 

 

But the message of the gospel was “Make Teshuvah Repent and be converted to God and become saved and Godly Jews.  You need to be saved.  The Law will not save you only Jesus can save you.  Paul’s letter to the Romans says,

 

 

1. Gospel is to the Jew first.  Rom. 1: 16.

 

 

2.  There is no partiality with God (regarding [eternal] salvation). Rom. 2: 11.

 

 

3.  A true Jew is not one who is just outwardly identifiable - but inwardly.  Circumcision identifies you with Israel but it needs also to be of the heart. Rom. 2: 28.

 

 

4.  By the deeds of the Law, no flesh is justified in His sight.  The Law exposes sin.  It’s a “Schoolmaster” to bring us to Christ. Rom. 3: 20; Gal. 3: 24.

 

 

5.  The Law is established through faith - believers are not to be lawless. Rom. 3: 31.

 

 

6. “The Law is holy, the commandment holy and just and good Rom. 7: 12.  God would write it on their hearts.

 

 

PROPHECY REQUIRES CONSISTENT INTERPRETATION

 

 

If prophecies relating to Jesus are true, then so are the ones relating to Israel.  Otherwise it's a matter of personal choice.  Supercessionism (SSC’s) or Replacement Theology denies the consistency of Biblical interpretation.  It’s rooted in Anti-Semitism that denies the fulfilment of scripture in the return of the Jews to the Land or any blessing still remaining on Israel because of a supposed self-imposed eternal guilt for the death of Jesus.  “His death be upon us and our childrenMt. 27: 25.

 

 

The increasingly “gentilised” Church blamed “the Jews” for killing Jesus.  In John 20: 19 the KJV uses the term “for fear of the Jews” rather than “Jewish leaders”.  This created the unfortunate impression that the disciples and Jesus Himself were not Jews.

 

 

Anchor verse for SSC’s is Gatations 6: 16 “And as many as walk according to this rule, peace be on them, and mercy, and upon the Israel of God In modern translations it says “... peace be upon them who are the Israel of God  But here it actually defines two distinct groups (1) Jews and Gentiles who as part of the Church walk according to this rule - peace be upon them.  Believers have received God’s mercy - but Israel still needs to know the grace and mercy of God and this is what it states.  Israel will not know the peace of God until Jesus is acknowledged.  What they need is God’s mercy through believing in Yeshua!  Also Phil. 3: 3; Rom. 2: 28, 29.  There is no need for Jews to become gentiles, nor for gentiles to try and become Jews.  Key verse is 1 Cor. 7: 17-24.

 

 

THE RESTORATION OF ALL THINGS

 

 

Acts 3: 18-21.  Three commentaries say little about what restoration here means.  (New International ‑ FF Bruce, IVP - IVP - IH Marshall, Online Critical commentary by J, F and B)  Some talk of the restoration of the ideal kingdom WHEN Jesus returns but none really deal with the prophetic fulfilments necessary BEFORE the return of Jesus.

 

 

Here Peter is referring to the greatest restoration or restitution that will take place in the Latter days, which is the return of the Jews to the Land as a precursor to His return - even though in difficult and challenging times for Israel and the World as a whole. (See also Jesus prophecies in Matt. 24.)

 

 

O.T. PROPHETS WERE NOT AFRAID TO TALK

OF THE SALVATION OF ISRAEL

 

 

Jeremiah 31 - the New Covenant was to be made first with Israel and Judah.  Ezekiel 36 - talks of the restoration of Israel first to the Land and then restoration to God.  Hosea chapter 5 talks of Israel’s stubborn rejection of God, so much so that it caused Him to withdraw Himself.  But as with God, He is always a merciful God.  The purpose of this withdrawal is positive and constructive so that in the trouble that inevitably came upon them, they would cry out to God and He would answer them. Hosea 5: 15.

 

 

In the end, when all prophecies will find their fulfilment, Zechariah declares, “Many nations shall be joined to the Lord in that day and become MY PEOPLE”.  Jerusalem shall again become the focal point of all things.  Zechariah’s focus is on Jerusalem and the coming of the Messiah.  Zechariah 2: 7-12.

 

 

Isn’t it a lot more edifying to listen to the true prophets of God rather than false ones?

 

 

-------

 

 

 

Don’t let the world, or any false teachings by Anti-millennialists, or others within the Church of God, “squeeze you into their way thinking