CONSIDER THE FIG TREE

What about that tree putting forth leaves...is that the modern nation of Israel becoming a Nation?

Look at the passages that seem to indicate this.

"Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves,... ye know that summer is nigh:" Matthew 24:32

Here we see that Jesus is declaring a sign of a tree indicating by its leaves being put forth that summer is near. I do not see anything about a nation. Is he not just saying that sometimes there are undeniable and irrefutable signs of a coming event...(Any coming event...even summer).

We should probably let all the words of Jesus come to bear on this topic before we make conclusions...so...

The parallel passage for the Matthew one is Luke 21. Here

"And he spake to them a parable; Behold the fig tree, and all the trees; When they now shoot forth, ye see and know of your own selves that summer is now nigh at hand." Luke 21:29-30

If the tree in Matthew 24 is representative of the Nation of Israel then in the parallel passage that is speaking of exactly the same event in both the Matthew and Luke passage, then we should carry that figurative representation over into the Luke passage...RIGHT?

Here we are told to consider the fig tree, (ostensibly representing Israel), But then he includes "ALL THE TREES" If the Fig tree in this story is representing the nation of Israel, then ALL THE TREES must be representing all the rest of the nations of the world. Note what it says about ALL THE TREES. "When THEY SHOOT FORTH".

SO if the fig tree bearing leaves is Israel in the future becoming a nation...then ALL THE TREES--SHOOTING FORTH, would have to be all the rest of the nations of the world becoming a nation.

What other nations have become nations in conjunction with Israel becoming a nation in 1948? The Chinese became communist about that time...but that is only one nation. Did the United States, Britain, Mexico, Canada, Germany...did any of them BECOME nations in 1948?

The whole thing breaks down. The fig leaves blooming can in NO WAY be representative of Israel becoming a nation in anyway.

Is there another explanation?

WHO ARE WE GOING TO BELIEVE?

Really, Who are we going to believe? The words and teaching of the Apostles...or the words of our favorite theologian.

The esteemed C.S. Lewis said that the return of Christ was an embarrassment to Christianity because it did not happen.

Problem is, C.S. Lewis should be embarrassed, for Christs return happened EXACTLY as He and his apostles taught...In the first century.

To declare and teach anything else is to make Christ and his divinely inspired apostles to be liars. I prefer to conclude that the theologians who do not see the truth of the first century parousia are wrong.

"Say what you like," we shall be told, "the apocalyptic beliefs of the first Christians have been proved to be false. It is clear from the New Testament that they all expected the Second Coming in their own lifetime. And, worse still, they had a reason, and one which you will find very embarrassing. Their Master had told them so. He shared, and indeed created, their delusion. He said in so many words, ‘this generation shall not pass till all these things be done.’ And He was wrong. He clearly knew no more about the end of the world than anyone else. It is certainly the most embarrassing verse in the Bible."

Essay "The World's Last Night" (1960), found in The Essential C.S. Lewis, p-385.

SIGNS OF A DYING OR DECAYING CHRISTIAN

Signs of a Dying or Decaying Christian



By George Burder (June 5, 1752—May 29, 1832)






1. When you are so indifferent to public worship, or frequenting the church of God, that you can be satisfied to come, or not come, at your own pleasure.
2. When, in your most solemn worship, you are quickly weary without warrantable cause.
3. When few sermons will please you; either you like not the matter, or manner, or man, or place.
4. When you think you know enough.
5. When a small occasion will keep you from Christ’s table, or communion with the church of God.
6. When you have usually no great desire for prayer.
7. When reading the Holy Scriptures is more burdensome than delightful.
8. When you are very inquisitive after novelties or new things, rather than wholesome doctrine.
9. When you are so little prepared for the solemn assemblies, that they come before you think of them, or long for them.
10. When you come to the assembly more for fear of the brethren's eye, than Christ’s omniscient and all-piercing eye.
11. When you will rather betray the name of Christ Jesus and the credit of his gospel by your silence, than appear for it to your own suffering and disparagement.
12. When, at a small offence, you are usually so impatient that you commit great sin.
13. When you are more careful to get the words of Christ’s people than the spirit of Christ’s people, the form than the power.
14. When you are not much troubled at your own miscarriages, while they are kept from public view.
15. When you love least those Christians that deal most faithfully with you, in showing you your faults and pointing you to the remedy.
16. When you pray more that afflictions may be removed than sanctified.
17. When under God's calamity you find neither the need nor the benefit of humbling yourself by fasting and prayer.
18. When the thought of your bosom-lust, or any other sin, is more prevalent with you than pleasing God.
19. When you are curious about the lesser matters of God's law, and careless about the weightier.
20. When the Holy Spirit’s help to the great work of mortification seems not of absolute necessity to you.
21. When you are so ignorant of your spiritual standing that you know not whether you grow or decay.
22. When great sins seem smaller, and small sins seem none at all.
23. When a watchful care of a godly life and a Christian conversation is more accidental than habitual.
24. When care for your body is usually most pleasant, and care for your soul usually most irksome.
25. When you are much a stranger to the practical part of meditation on the word and works of God.
26. When the thoughts of a dying Jesus for your sins little dissuade you from an unchristian conversation.
27. When you can commit sin without pain, and reflect upon it with indifference.
28. When you find greater satisfaction in the company of the world than with the people of God.

George Burder (June 5, 1752—May 29, 1832) was an English Nonconformist divine. In his youth he was an engraver, but in 1776 he began preaching, and was minister of the Independent church at Lancaster from 1778 to 1783. Subsequently he held charges at Coventry (1784 1803) and at Fetter Lane, London (1803-1832). He was one of the founders of the British and Foreign Bible Society, the Religious Tract Society, and the London Missionary Society, and was secretary to the last-named for several years. As editor of the Evangelical Magazine and author of Village Sermons, he commanded a wide influence. A Life (by Henry Forster Burder) appeared in 1833.

SIGNS OF A LIVING OR GROWING CHRISTIAN

Signs of a Living or Growing Christian

By George Burder (June 5, 1752—May 29, 1832)


THE RIGHTEOUS SHALL FLOURISH LIKE THE PALMTREE;
HE SHALL GROW LIKE A CEDAR IN LEBANON." PSA. 92:12




1. WHEN your chief delight is with the saints, especially them that excel in virtue. Psa. 16:3.
2. When the smitings of the righteous are not a burden to you, and you can hear of your faults with affectionate attention. Psa. 141:5.
3. When reproach for Christ makes you not ashamed of Christ. Mark 8:38; Heb. 11:26.
4. When wandering thoughts, in time of duty, find less entertainment than formerly. Psa. 139:23; 1Cor. 13:11.
5. When length of standing in the profession of Christianity, works increase of hatred to all sin. Psa. 119:104-113.
6. When you carry about with you a constant jealousy over your own heart, that it turn not aside from God and goodness. Prov. 18:14.
7. When every known mercy begets new thankfulness, and that with delight. Psa. 145:2.
8. When known calamity in God's house begets deep sorrow in your heart. Neh. 1:4.
9. When, under deep distress or languishing, the word of God is precious to you. Psa. 119:92.
10. When any condition in the world, though in itself mean, as it comes from God is most welcome. Job 1:21; Hab. 3:17,18.
11. When your chief care, to avoid all sin, is as truly occasioned through fear of dishonoring God and incurring his present displeasure, as of the wrath to come. Neh. 5:15; Gen. 39:9.
12. When every company is burdensome to you, that is not designing your Father's glory, but derogating there from.
Psa. 120:5; 2 Peter 2:7,8.
13. When the sins of others come so near your heart that you walk sadly to see such persons transgress God's commandments. Psa. 119:136.
14. When the company of the pious poor is preferred to that of the ungodly rich.
15. When it is truly painful to you to see sinners going heedlessly on in the broad road to ruin.
16. When you are willing to part with all for Christ.
17. When the yoke of self-denial, as imposed by Christ Jesus, is not grievous, but pleasant to you.
Matt. 11:29,30 ; Mark 10:28.
18. When increase of time in Christ's acquaintance, works increase of delight in communion with Christ. Psalm 92:12-14.
19. When the majesty of the great God, considering how visible you are in his sight, has an awful prevalence upon your heart. Job 31:4.
20. When you are at open war and constant hostility with bosom sin, as displeasing to God, and forbidden by his law.
Psa. 18:23.
21. When you have a thirsting desire to get the power of godliness in your heart, rather than the form of godliness in the head, or outward profession. 2 Cor. 1:12.
22. When the worship of God, agreeable to his word, is highly prized and faithfully practised in the worst of times.
Mal. 3:14-16.
23. When the soul is more hungry for the word of God, than the body is for temporal food.
Job 23:12; Psa. 119:72,162.

George Burder (June 5, 1752—May 29, 1832) was an English Nonconformist divine. In his youth he was an engraver, but in 1776 he began preaching, and was minister of the Independent church at Lancaster from 1778 to 1783. Subsequently he held charges at Coventry (1784 1803) and at Fetter Lane, London (1803-1832). He was one of the founders of the British and Foreign Bible Society, the Religious Tract Society, and the London Missionary Society, and was secretary to the last-named for several years. As editor of the Evangelical Magazine and author of Village Sermons, he commanded a wide influence. A Life (by Henry Forster Burder) appeared in 1833.

WHO ARE THE 144,000 OF REVELATION

Who are the 144,000 of Revelation? It is interesting to note that they are mentioned twice in the book of Revelation, seven chapters apart. The two references are in Chapters 7 and 14, they are as follows.

Revelation 7:4 "And I heard the number of them which were sealed: and there were sealed an hundred and forty and four thousand of all the tribes of the children of Israel."

Revelation 14:1 "And I looked, and, lo, a Lamb stood on the mount Sion, and with him an hundred forty and four thousand, having his Father's name written in their foreheads.

Revelation 14:3-4 "And they sung as it were a new song before the throne, and before the four beasts, and the elders: and no man could learn that song but the hundred and forty and four thousand, which were redeemed from the earth. These are they which were not defiled with women; for they are virgins. These are they which follow the Lamb whithersoever he goeth. These were redeemed from among men, being the firstfruits unto God and to the Lamb."

One thing we learn from the passage in chapter 14 is that these are the "Firstfruits" unto God and to the Lamb.

What does that mean?

Does the New Testament define in further detail who the "Firstfruits" are, or is Revelation 14 the only passage.

Romans 8:23 "And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body."

Here Paul is saying that they in the first century had the firstfruits of the Spirit. This is something that they possessed in the first century not something they were going to have to wait thousands of years for.

Romans 16:5 "Likewise greet the church that is in their house. Salute my well beloved Epaenetus, who is the firstfruits of Achaia unto Christ."

Here again, Paul using the term "Firstfruits" is describing Epaenetus, a first century Roman believer in Jesus Christ. One of the FIRST in
Rome to come to faith in Jesus Christ.

1 Corinthians 16:15 "I beseech you, brethren, (ye know the house of Stephanas, that it is the firstfruits of Achaia, and that they have addicted themselves to the ministry of the saints,)"

Now in the church of Corinth, Paul calls Stephanas, a person who lived in the first century as the "Firstfruits of Achaia".

It is interesting that Epaenetus was a Gentile and Stephanas was a Jew. So we have representative firstfruits from both Jew and gentile.

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."

James also uses the term Firstfruits to describe..."We who were begat of his own will, by the word of truth". Is he talking about "WE" in the 21st century? No, he is writing to a group of Jews in the first century who had been dispersed by first century persecution. James was chronologically the first epistle of the New Testament to be penned. It is instructive that so early in the church history, James says that there were those who were considered by inspiration of the Holy Spirit to be the "Firstfruits.

So let's apply this expanded definition of Firstfruits to the passages in Revelation. Using this definition, we would be hard pressed to produce textual evidence that the 144,000 could be a group of people that John is describing that exist 2000+ years after his writing.

On the contrary, based on the use of the word "Firstfruits" by the apostles Paul and James, John is describing a group of believers, (probably mostly Jewish) that existed in the first century.

In dispensational futurism, the teaching is that these 144,000 Jews do not come to exist until during the end of the tribulation period and they go through the last of the tribulation and then are ushered into the kingdom where they populate the Millennial kingdom.

How is that a legitimate use of the word Firstfruits when in actuality that teaching is identifying them as the LAST fruits. In that way of thinking, they are the last fruits to come unto God and to the Lamb. It really does not make sense. The only thing that makes sense is that these 144,000 are the first believers to come to faith in Jesus Christ in the first century.

BUT I SAY UNTO YOU

Moses declared in Deuteronomy chapter 18

The LORD thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken;

Then God reiterates the same thing, stating it himself:
I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.
And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him.


Here it is prophesied that God would send another prophet, like Moses, who coming out of the midst of the nation of Israel (Of thy brethren) will speak the words of God himself. This prophet is to be OBEYED. And those who will not obey this prophets words, will be judged, (I will require it of him).

This prophecy was fulfilled in Jesus Christ, and one of the first sermons he preached, the Sermon on the Mount, had in it the declaration from Jesus that He was indeed that prophet who would speak God's words. And he proceeded to declare himself as a superior prophet to Moses.

His use of the phrases; "Ye have heard that it was said",...(Speaking of Moses)
and then following with; "But I say unto you", was his way of showing that He was THAT prophet that Moses spoke of. And He (Jesus Christ) is the New Covenant law giver. He would also become the fulfillment of the old covenant priest, king, sacrifice. Jesus is declaring that he was superior to all of the types shadows and prophecies of the old covenant. Behold a greater than Moses is here...Hallelujah.

The following text in Matthew 5 is all about magnifying Christ's role as the New Covenant law giver.

***Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment:

--But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.

***Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery:

--But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.

***It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement:

--But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.

***Again, ye have heard that it hath been said by them of old time, Thou shalt not forswear thyself, but shalt perform unto the Lord thine oaths:

--But I say unto you, Swear not at all; neither by heaven; for it is God's throne:

***Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth:

--But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.

***Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbor, and hate thine enemy.

--But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;


What has Jesus said unto you?

SERMON RATINGS

Thanks to David Curtis

A preacher by the name of Wilbur Reese once preached a message in which he presented a listener's guide to sermons. Reese stated that sermons ought to be rated in much the same way that movies were rated.

"G" sermons are messages that are generally acceptable to everyone, they contain phrases such as "Go ye into all the world and smile" or "What the world needs is peace, motherhood, and fewer taxes." Sermons such as these are often greeted with the response "Oh wasn't that marvelous?", or "That was simply wonderful." Every one loves a good "G" message, and they will never offend anyone. There are some people who would refuse to listen to a message that wasn't rated "G"

"PG" sermons are for more mature congregations, and they have mild suggestions for change, but they're subtle enough to allow the preacher to back peddle and change his meaning if he finds that he has inadvertently offended someone. An example of a brilliant "PG" statement would be, "The either/or of the existential situation provides a plethora of alternatives, both specific and non-specific. When one grasps the eschatological aspect of incarnationial Christology." You know that someone has preached a message like this when people walk away in wonderment shaking their heads and saying things like, "That was deep, most thought provoking." Of course if you've done a "PG" sermon really well, nobody actually knows what you said, but nobody is willing to admit it.

Then there are the "R" rated sermons; this is when the Preacher tells it like it is. These usually indicate that the pastor has an outside source of income and a fairly healthy self image. Sermons like these are usually followed by comments such as, "Disturbing or controversial." These sermons definitely aren't intended for everyone, only for those who wish to be challenged in their spiritual walk.

And then there are the "X-rated" sermons. These are the explosive ideas of the kind that got the prophet Amos run out of town, and Jeremiah thrown into the well; that is Jeremiah the prophet not Jeremiah the Bullfrog. When you preach an "X-rated" sermon", you preach them with your suitcase packed and the moving van ready. Comments range from, "Shocking and disgraceful" to "Being in poor taste".

YOU MIGHT BE A DISPENSATIONALIST IF...

1. You think other Christians are anti-Semitic
2. You’ve never read Hebrews
3. You can justify being 2000 years late for an appointment
4. You’re really bad at math
5. You think Kirk Cameron is a fine actor
6. When the going gets rough, you’re nowhere to be found
7. You sleep nude so your post-rapture bed is tidy
8. You were born after 1830
9. You love Christian television
10. You use your newspaper for morning devotions
11. You’d rather have been outside Noah’s ark
12. You don't think satan really noticed the cross
13. You prefer the shadows
14. Always always means always except sometimes
15. You went to Dallas Theological Seminary
16. Bad news excites you
17. You feel Scofields notes were inspired
18. You can’t speak b/c you are in parenthesis
19. You’ll only be a 2nd class citizen of paradise
20. You think THIS means THAT
21. You think NEAR means FAR
22. You thought about naming your kid Darby
23. You decided it’s too late to have kids
24. You’re offended by this list

THE DOCTRINE OF ANTICHRIST

From where do people get their doctrine about "antichrist"?

It certainly is not from John the Apostle...the only Apostle who wrote about the antichrist. And oh by the way, he never mentioned the antichrist in the book of Revelation or in his Gospel. As a matter of Fact, we might note that the book of Revelation is self titled in the first verse of the book; “The Revelation of Jesus Christ”. Note it does not call itself “The Revelation of Antichrist”, so don’t bother going to the book of revelation to look for antichrist. The word or phrase antichrist is ONLY mentioned in the epistles of 1st John, and 2nd John. In those mentions he says they (plural) were in the world in his day and that there were many who had this antichrist "spirit". NOWHERE Does John EVER say that antichrist was a singular person, and NOWHERE in any text of scripture is there a justifiable reason to equate the "Beast" and antichrist.

Let's look at the passages in 1st John to get some perspective.

"Children it is the LAST HOUR, and as you have heard that antichrist is coming, so NOW MANY antichrists HAVE COME. Therefore we KNOW that it IS the LAST HOUR." 1 John 2:18

In this text we learn many great truths. In Johns day in the first century it was already the LAST HOUR...we are not now in 2010 living in the "Last Days" the Apostles were and they claimed to be so. We also learn that MANY antichrists were ALREADY come in to the world in the first century. Who were these people of the first century to whom John refers?

He gives us a clue in the next verse that he uses about antichrist. In 1 John 2:22 he says;

"Who is a LIAR but he who DENIES that Jesus IS the Christ? This is the antichrist. He who denies the Father and the Son.”

So john tells us that those who deny that Jesus is the Christ...that person is an antichrist. In the entire New testament do we read about any like this? Indeed we do. In the gospel of John Chapter 9-verse 22 John writes that the parents of the one born blind but who Jesus healed, said this: "He will speak for himself". His parents said these things because they feared the Jews…,

“for the Jews had already agreed that if ANYONE SHOULD CONFESS JESUS TO BE THE CHRIST, he was to be put out of the synagogue."

WOW!!!

Right there in John 9:22 The same writer who told us what antichrist is...gives us a clear example of them existing in the first century.

In Matthew 26:62-68 the high priest scribes and elders are questioning Jesus and asked him if he were the Christ...when he admitted he was, they tore their robes and called Jesus a "Blasphemer". They were clearly denying that Jesus is the Christ. This denial was rampant in the first century and that is why John in his epistles could say that antichrist is already here.

What about 1 John 4:3...
"And EVERY spirit that does not CONFESS JESUS is not from God. THIS IS the spirit of antichrist which you have heard was coming and now is in the world already."

Here John says that antichrist are people with a spirit that denies that Jesus is from God. A simple test, right? Do we find such people in the New testament? Yes, we certainly do, and again it is from John...the seeming first century expert on antichrist. In the gospel of John 5:18, the Jews were seeking to kill Jesus for not only breaking the Sabbath,

"...but he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God". Then in John 10:33 "The Jews answered him, :It is not for a good work that we are going to stone you but for blasphemy, because you, being a man, make yourself God."

Here again John gives the test and shows examples of how antichrist was in the first century, not the 21st century.

I will stop here for two reasons...1---I wanted to be brief. 2---If you want to reply, there is a lot here already, and I need to let you get started.

If you could maybe you could start by giving me a text of scripture that clearly ties together the antichrist of Johns day with the beast. I suspect you will not find one, as one does not exist. But the system of dispensationalism demands it so you would expect to find a text to support it. We need to get away from insisting on doctrine because of a theological system and start studying God's word as workmen who need not be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth and stop dividing the people of God. Thanks for your time and your continued Berean spirit.

INTRO TO ISAIAH

1:1 The vision of Isaiah the son of Amoz, which he saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem in the days of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah, kings of Judah.

2 Hear, O heavens, and give ear, O earth;
for the Lord has spoken:
“Children have I reared and brought up,
but they have rebelled against me.
3 The ox knows its owner,
and the donkey its master's crib,
but Israel does not know,
my people do not understand.”

4 Ah, sinful nation,
a people laden with iniquity,
offspring of evildoers,
children who deal corruptly!
They have forsaken the Lord,
they have despised the Holy One of Israel,
they are utterly estranged.

5 Why will you still be struck down?
Why will you continue to rebel?
The whole head is sick,
and the whole heart faint.
6 From the sole of the foot even to the head,
there is no soundness in it,
but bruises and sores
and raw wounds;
they are not pressed out or bound up
or softened with oil.

7 Your country lies desolate;
your cities are burned with fire;
in your very presence
foreigners devour your land;
it is desolate, as overthrown by foreigners.

8 And the daughter of Zion is left
like a booth in a vineyard,
like a lodge in a cucumber field,
like a besieged city.

9 If the Lord of hosts
had not left us a few survivors,
we should have been like Sodom,
and become like Gomorrah.

10 Hear the word of the Lord,
you rulers of Sodom!
Give ear to the teaching of our God,
you people of Gomorrah!

11 “What to me is the multitude of your sacrifices?
says the Lord;
I have had enough of burnt offerings of rams
and the fat of well-fed beasts;
I do not delight in the blood of bulls,
or of lambs, or of goats.

12 “When you come to appear before me,
who has required of you
this trampling of my courts?

13 Bring no more vain offerings;
incense is an abomination to me.
New moon and Sabbath and the calling of convocations—
I cannot endure iniquity and solemn assembly.

14 Your new moons and your appointed feasts
my soul hates;
they have become a burden to me;
I am weary of bearing them.

15 When you spread out your hands,
I will hide my eyes from you;
even though you make many prayers,
I will not listen;
your hands are full of blood.

16 Wash yourselves; make yourselves clean;
remove the evil of your deeds from before my eyes;
cease to do evil,

17 learn to do good;
seek justice,
correct oppression;
bring justice to the fatherless,
plead the widow's cause.

18 “Come now, let us reason together, says the Lord:
though your sins are like scarlet,
they shall be as white as snow;
though they are red like crimson,
they shall become like wool.

19 If you are willing and obedient,
you shall eat the good of the land;

20 but if you refuse and rebel,
you shall be eaten by the sword;
for the mouth of the Lord has spoken.”

21 How the faithful city
has become a whore, 4
she who was full of justice!
Righteousness lodged in her,
but now murderers.

22 Your silver has become dross,
your best wine mixed with water.

23 Your princes are rebels
and companions of thieves.
Everyone loves a bribe
and runs after gifts.
They do not bring justice to the fatherless,
and the widow's cause does not come to them.

24 Therefore the Lord declares,
the Lord of hosts,
the Mighty One of Israel:
“Ah, I will get relief from my enemies
and avenge myself on my foes.

25 I will turn my hand against you
and will smelt away your dross as with lye
and remove all your alloy.

26 And I will restore your judges as at the first,
and your counselors as at the beginning.
Afterward you shall be called the city of righteousness,
the faithful city.”

27 Zion shall be redeemed by justice,
and those in her who repent, by righteousness.

28 But rebels and sinners shall be broken together,
and those who forsake the Lord shall be consumed.

29 For they shall be ashamed of the oaks
that you desired;
and you shall blush for the gardens
that you have chosen.

30 For you shall be like an oak
whose leaf withers,
and like a garden without water.

31 And the strong shall become tinder,
and his work a spark,
and both of them shall burn together,
with none to quench them.

SUBVERTING THE SOUL

Acts 15:4-31

“But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying, That it was needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses. And the apostles and elders came together for to consider of this matter. And when there had been much disputing,

Disputing about circumcision and keeping the MOSAIC LAW. These are the same issues that we deal with today.

Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe. And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us;

It is this giving of the Holy Ghost that made all the difference

And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.

There it is, note that none of them had their hearts purified by LAW…NO NO NO one thousand times NO!!!! The only purification of any hearts was BY FAITH! Living based on law keeping is not found in the Apostles teachings.

Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear? But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they. Then all the multitude kept silence, and gave audience to Barnabas and Paul, declaring what miracles and wonders God had wrought among the Gentiles by them.
And after they had held their peace, James answered, saying, Men and brethren, hearken unto me: Simeon hath declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name. And to this agree the words of the prophets; as it is written After this I will return, and will build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down; and I will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up:
That the residue of men might seek after the Lord, and all the Gentiles, upon whom my name is called, saith the Lord, who doeth all these things.
Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world.
Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God:
But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood.

(Note: he never told them that they had to keep the Ten Commandments).

For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every Sabbath day.
Then pleased it the apostles and elders, with the whole church, to send chosen men of their own company to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas; namely, Judas surnamed Barsabas, and Silas, chief men among the brethren:
And they wrote letters by them after this manner; The apostles and elders and brethren send greeting unto the brethren which are of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia:
Forasmuch as we have heard, that certain which went out from us have troubled you with words, subverting your souls, saying, Ye must be circumcised, and keep the law: to whom we gave no such commandment:

You mean Telling someone to be circumcised and KEEP THE LAW, is subverting a person’s soul???

Well that is what the Apostle James said. Note: it was NOT I who made that accusation…it was James, the half-brother of our Lord, the eye-witness of Christ’s death burial and resurrection, the Apostle to the circumcision according to Galatians 2, and the Apostle to those brethren in the Diaspora, and the leader of the church in Jerusalem. Interesting that He James says that you subvert a person’s soul by putting them under LAW.

It seemed good unto us, being assembled with one accord, to send chosen men unto you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul,
Men that have hazarded their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.
We have sent therefore Judas and Silas, who shall also tell you the same things by mouth.
For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things;
That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well.

So anyone laying on a “GREATER BURDEN than “THESE NECESSARY THINGS”…would be guilty of Legalism, according to the Apostles from the Council of Jerusalem.

As for me, personally, I have never eaten meats offered to idols [knowingly], I have never eaten blood or things strangled [knowingly], I have abstained from fornication, so I assume I have done all that I am required to do. See how simple law living is? But you know as well as I do that there is another matter beyond just those restrictions…that is the heart, but to be led by law living would clearly keep one from seeing that.

So when they were dismissed, they came to Antioch: and when they had gathered the multitude together, they delivered the epistle:
Which when they had read, they rejoiced for the consolation.”

This teaching brought “consolation” to the church in the first century…if this teaching is embraced by the 21st century church it will bring consolation to us as well.

IDEAS FOR THE FIRE

In the history of the printed word...The only time books have been burned have been out of fear, not hatred.



FEAR OF IDEAS.



When one person could not answer or refute the ideas of his opponent he would seek to destroy the ideas in the fire. I have no problem with the ideas of Islam. I can refute them easily from logic, scripture and history. I can show the ideas of the Koran to be false and passing away. I do not fear the ideas found in the Koran.

So, I do not desire to burn it.

The other problem is that soon after books are burned to squelch an idea....people are burned. And much for the same reason.

Most Christians (if not all) who have been burned at the stake throughout church history were burned for their ideas. Even heretics. But a heretical idea should be easy to refute logically and biblically so really there is no reason to burn heretics either.

A THANKSGIVING FORMULA

BOOK RECOMMENDATION

If you can get this book, READ IT!

If you cannot, I have a a copy you can borrow.

The best book on the subject of eschatology I have read.

I will probably do a review of this book in the near future.

WHO BROKE GOD'S COVENANT?

I have been told by my dispensational friends that many in Israel violated and even broke God's covenant that he made with them as a nation. But, God has never will never and would never break his covenant with his people Israel.

If that is true...How then do we deal with Zechariah 11:10-11???

Zechariah 11:10-11 "And I took my staff, even Beauty, and cut it assunder, that I might break my covenant which I had made with all the people. And it was broken in that day: and so the poor of the flock that waited upon me knew that it was the word of the LORD."

It appears from Zechariah, that God finally had enough with Israel breaking his covenant that he ultimately broke it himself.

Zechariah 11:14 "Then I cut asunder mine other staff, even Bands, that I might break the brotherhood between Judah and Israel."

Now we see that God destroyed any further connection between the Southern and Northern kingdoms of Judah and Israel.

Zechariah 11:14 "For, lo, I will raise up a shepherd in the land, which shall not visit those that be cut off, neither shall seek the young one, nor heal that that is broken, nor feed that that standeth still: but he shall eat the flesh of the fat, and tear their claws in pieces."

Here God promises to send his own Shepherd (which would be the messiah, Jesus) and this shepherd would no longer heal the broken, feed the sheep or have any shepherd like concern for those about to be cut off. This shepherd is coming in judgment.

Zechariah 12:2 "Behold, I will make Jerusalem a cup of trembling unto all the people round about, when they shall be in the siege both against Judah and against Jerusalem."

In chapter 12 of Zechariah we have the time period set for these events...it is when God will make Jerusalem a cup of trembling, and he will lay siege against Judah and Jerusalem. Historically this only happened once after the writing of Zechariah, and it was in 70 A.D.

As you read Zechariah's description of this judgment in chapter 12 he again confirms the timing by using the phrase "In That Day" seven times to highlight that all these things would happen concurrently in this awful Day of judgment. All of these things occurred in 70 A.D. when God finally put an end to the old mosaic covenant and forever abrogated his relationship with that rebellious nation Israel.

TILL I COME

John 21:22 Jesus saith unto him, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee? follow thou me.

I wonder what people thought when they heard Jesus say this. Here are two things they might have thought. Pick the one you think seems more reasonable.

1. John might possibly live all through the rest of the Mosaic age and all through the Christian age, which could be thousands or millions of years.
2. Jesus was going to come back soon, in that generation, in a very little while, shortly--certainly within one human lifetime since it was possible John might not die and Jesus had also said some of them might still be alive when He came in His kingdom to reward every man according to His works.
*****************************************************
I wonder what the readers of Revelation thought the following verse meant.

Revelation 2:25 But that which ye have already hold fast till I come.

1. Hold fast what you have till you die.
2. Hold fast what you have till I come, which certainly won't be in your lifetime so you really can't do what I'm telling you to do.
3. Hold fast what you have till I come--because I AM coming while you're still alive and capable of holding fast.
*****************************************************
I wonder what Timothy thought when Paul said the following:

1 Timothy 4:13 Till I come, give attendance to reading, to exhortation, to doctrine.

1. Do these things till I get there because I am coming in your lifetime.
2. Do these things till you die; see you in heaven.

And What do YOU think??

WHEN WAS/IS THE SALVATION OF ISRAEL TO OCCUR?

I love this video...Passionate, Patriotic and a great performance. I heard it for the first time today. I highly recommend.

...And YES, I know the video has nothing to do with the topic of the post.

When was/is the salvation of Israel to occur? Past or Future?

The promise was given...
Isaiah 49:8 Thus saith the LORD, In an acceptable time have I heard thee, and in a day of salvation have I helped thee: and I will preserve thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, to establish the earth, to cause to inherit ...the desolate heritages;

It seems that Paul answers the question by declaring the fulfillment of Isaiah 49:8 (above) in the New Testament passage of 2 Cor 6:2 (Below)

2 Cor 6:2 (For he saith, I have heard thee in a time accepted, and in the day of salvation have I succored thee: behold, now is the accepted time; behold, now is the day of salvation.)

According to Paul it was "NOW", in his day in the first century that this promise of Israels salvation was being fulfilled. So it cannot be in some future mythological millennial, earthly kingdom.

Your thoughts?

HEAVEN AND EARHT HAVE ALREADY PASSED AWAY?

How Heaven and Earth Passed Away
Written by Don Preston

Have heaven and earth passed away? Ridiculous you say? Let us ask another question: Do you believe the Old Covenant has been done away? I dare say you will say it has. Few believers in Jesus would deny he has established his New Covenant. If you believe the Old Covenant has passed away, then you must believe "heaven and earth" have passed away.

Please read the words of Jesus: "Think not that I am come to destroy the Law and the Prophets; I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. Verily I say unto you, until heaven and earth pass, not one jot or one tittle shall pass from the law until all be fulfilled".(Matthew 5:17-18)

This little tract will attempt to answer a few questions about these verses. First, what did Jesus say had to happen before the law could pass away? Second, does the Bible tell us when these requirements would be met? Let us answer the first question.

Until Heaven and Earth Pass
Did you notice that Jesus said heaven and earth had to pass away before the law could pass? Yes, he really did say it; please, get your Bible right now and read it for yourself. It has been my experience that a lot of people have never seen those words before. A relative of mine read the verse five times before admitting it actually says this.

Has the heaven and earth passed away? Well, obviously, physical heaven and earth haven't been destroyed. But read the text again will you? Jesus did say until heaven and earth pass away the Old Law could not pass. Our choices here are limited.

If we understand the "heaven and earth" as literal, physical heaven and earth then this means the Old Law is still in effect. Simply put the argument would go like this: If heaven and earth had to pass before the Old Law could pass; and if heaven and earth refers to literal, physical heaven and earth, then, since literal, physical heaven and earth still exist, (have not passed), it must be true that the Old Law has not passed.

A person could say the Law here is the Law of Jesus; but this will not work because Jesus had not yet died to confirm his New Covenant. He was living under the Old Law at the time also. The Jews standing there were not concerned with the passing of Jesus' law. They did not believe he even had one. They were concerned with the Old Law. Finally, if this is speaking about the passing of Christ's law it contradicts the verses in the New Testament that teach Jesus' word will never pass away, Matthew 24:35.

On the other hand, if we understand the "heaven and earth" as figurative language referring not to physical creation, but to something else, it is possible that this "heaven and earth" could pass away, allowing for the passing of the Law. Let us explore the definition of the heaven and earth momentarily.

Defining Heaven and Earth
Sadly many Bible students are unfamiliar with the apocalyptic, and figurative language of the Bible. So many people like to say "The Bible says what it means and means what it says". They seem to be saying there is no such thing as figurative or spiritual language. This is sad because a lot of the Bible is symbolic language. The term heaven and earth is a good example. (I are not saying the term heaven and earth never refers to material creation — I am saying this term is very often used figuratively).

Remember, Jesus was a Jew. As such he was raised hearing the Old Testament prophets taught in the synagogues. These prophets utilized spiritual language. As the prophet of and to Israel, Matthew 15, Jesus was not only familiar with the language of the prophets, he used the same language. How did the prophets use the term heaven and earth?

The prophet Isaiah predicted the passing of heaven and earth in chapter 24. He said the earth would be utterly broken down, clean dissolved, and completely removed, vs. 19. Now this sounds like the destruction of material creation but closer examination reveals it to be speaking of the destruction of Israel's Covenant World under the imagery of "heaven and earth". Note verse 5 gives the reason for the destruction — "they have broken the everlasting covenant". What covenant was that? It was the Mosaic Covenant. God was going to destroy "heaven and earth" because Israel had broken her covenant with Jehovah. Are we to believe that one day the universe will be destroyed because Israel broke her covenant?

A dilemma is created for the literal interpretation of the text when we come to verse 22. In these verses God is depicted as dwelling gloriously in Mount Zion, that is, in Jerusalem, after the destruction of heaven and earth. Reader, if the earth has been destroyed how could literal Mount Zion still exist? We believe the best explanation is to see Isaiah predicting the destruction of Israel's covenant heaven and earth because she had violated the Mosaic Covenant with Jehovah. As a result God's righteousness would remain in a New Zion — in a new covenant heaven and earth.

Another example of "heaven and earth" being referent to the Covenant World of Israel and not literal creation is Isaiah 51:16.

"I have put my word in your mouth and have covered you with the shadow of my hand, to establish the heavens, to found the earth, and to say to Zion, 'You are my people'". (NASV)

(Unfortunately, the New International Version incorrectly translates this verse. Check several translations.)

What is the point? Notice that God is speaking to Israel. He says he gave them his law, the Mosaic Covenant, the same law Jesus is speaking about in Matthew 5:17-18, to establish heaven and lay the foundation of the earth! Clearly Jehovah is not saying he gave the Mosaic Covenant to Israel to create literal heaven and earth! Material creation existed long before Israel was ever given the Mosaic Covenant.

The meaning of the verse is that Jehovah gave his covenant with Israel to create their world — a covenant world with Jehovah.

God created Israel's "heaven and earth" by giving them his Covenant. Now if he destroyed that Old Covenant heaven and earth and gave a New Covenant, would he not thereby be creating a new heavens and new earth? This is precisely the thought in the New Covenant scriptures.

Old Israel's covenant was about to pass away, II Corinthians 3:10ff; Hebrews 8:13; 12:25ff. The New Covenant of Christ was being given, Ephesians 3:3ff; Hebrews 2:1ff. Since the giving of Covenant created "heaven and earth" the New Heaven and Earth of Christ would not be completed until the New Covenant was completely revealed. It therefore follows that if the New Heavens and Earth of Christ has not arrived then Christ's New Covenant has not yet been fully revealed. If Christ's New Covenant has been fully revealed then the new heavens and new earth have fully come. Consider this carefully in light of II Peter 3 and Revelation 21-22, passages written as the process of revealing the New Covenant was yet incomplete.

In Isaiah 51:5-6 God predicted the "heaven and earth" would vanish. This is the same "heaven and earth" he had established at Sinai. This is not a prediction of the passing of literal heaven and earth--it is a prediction of the passing of the Old World of Israel so that the New Covenant World of Messiah would be established. We believe this heaven and earth that Isaiah said would perish is the same heaven and earth Jesus said must pass before the Old Law would pass.

Isaiah 65-66 also predicted the passing of "heaven and earth" but as with the other prophecies noted above it does not refer to the passing of physical creation. In chapter 65 God predicted that Israel would fill the measure of her sin, vs. 7; he would destroy them, vs. 8-15; create a new people with a new name, vs. 15-16; create a new heaven and earth with a new Jerusalem, vs. 17-19. The creation of the new heavens and earth would follow the destruction of the Jews after they had filled the measure of their sins and been destroyed at the coming of the Lord in fire with his angels, Isaiah 66:15ff. The new creation of Isaiah 66 is depicted as a time of evangelism and Jew and Gentile being brought together under the banner of God, vss 19ff.

Now Isaiah 65 said the new creation would come when Israel had filled the measure of her sin and was destroyed. Do we have any clue as to when this was to happen?

In Matthew 23:31-39 Jesus said Israel would fill up the measure of her sins in his generation. In chapter 24 he predicted the passing of Israel's heaven and earth at his coming, vs. 29-36. Now notice:

1.) Isaiah said Israel's old heaven and earth would not be destroyed until Israel had filled her sin;

2.) The new heaven and earth would not come until Israel's old heaven and earth was destroyed;

3.) Jesus said Israel would fill up the measure of her sin and be destroyed at his coming in his generation;

4.) Therefore, Israel's "heaven and earth" was destroyed at Jesus' coming against Israel, when the measure of her sin was full, in that generation.

In Matthew 24 Jesus predicted the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem. This Temple was the very center of the Jewish world. This is where the sacrifices for sin were offered by the genealogically confirmed Levitical priests. For Jesus to predict the utter desolation of this temple was the same as saying their world was about to come crashing down around their ears!

In graphic detail Jesus chronicled the events to occur before that disaster and the signs indicating its imminence, vss. 14-15. In highly apocalyptic, (symbolic) language he described the fall itself:

"The sun shall be darkened, and the moon shall not give its light, and the stars will fall from the sky, and the powers of the heaven shall be shaken, and then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they shall see the Son of Man coming in the clouds of the sky with power and great glory".

In verses 32-33 Jesus said that by heeding the signs they could know his coming was at hand. In verse 34 he assured them that generation would not pass away before all those things happened. In verse 35 Jesus reassured them that what he had said was true. He said "Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my word shall never pass away".

This verse is Jesus' way of contrasting the Old World of Israel that was to perish, and his New World that would remain. That Old World would surely perish as he had just said — but his World will never pass.

In verse 36 Jesus gave a final warning about knowing the time of those events. Although he informed them how to know when the event was imminent and reassured them that it would definitely happen in that generation, he tells them they cannot know the precise day and hour. They must therefore be watchful, verse 42ff.

Can you see the relationship of Jesus' prediction of the passing of the "heaven and earth" in Matthew 24 with his statement in chapter 5:17-18? In chapter 24 he said their world, symbolized by the temple and city, was to pass away; and he expressed it in the imagery of the passing of heaven and earth. In chapter 5 he had already said the "heaven and earth" had to pass before the Law could pass. We shall see below the perfect correspondence with this idea and Jesus' statement that all of the Old Covenant had to be fulfilled for the Law to pass.

Hebrews 12:25-28 is another text that speaks of the passing of the Old Covenant World under the imagery of the passing of heaven and earth.

The writer alludes to the giving of the Law at Sinai, (remember Isaiah 51), as the shaking of earth. He says God promised to shake not only earth, but heaven also. This shaking signified removing them; therefore God was promising to remove heaven and earth. Why? So that something that could not be removed would remain. Now notice: in verse 28 he says they were at that time receiving, (they had not already completely received it), a kingdom "that cannot be shaken". If they were receiving an unshakable kingdom, this of necessity means the "heaven and earth" was being removed. (Remember Jesus' words in Matthew 24:35 about the "heaven and earth" passing but his word not passing? Jesus' world then is unshakable. Hebrews is discussing the shaking of one world and receiving of another unshakable kingdom. See the comparison?)

Physical heaven and earth was not being removed; but Hebrews was written just a few years before the fall of Jerusalem and the Temple. Further, the Gospel had been preached for some time declaring the superiority of Christ and the imminent demise of the Old World. The Old World of Israel was on the verge of destruction; the New World was being delivered. Thus, we have another example of the Bible speaking of the passing of heaven and earth when it means the passing of the Old World of Israel.

Space forbids full discussion of II Peter 3 and Revelation as further examples of scriptures speaking of the passing of heaven and earth when the meaning was the passing of the Old World of Israel. Suffice it to say both Peter and John say the heaven and earth that was to perish was the same heaven and earth the Old Covenant had predicted to perish. See II Peter 3:1-2 and Revelation 22:6. The significance of this fact will become apparent below.

What have we seen then? We have seen that both the Old and New Covenant predicted the passing of "heaven and earth" when physical heaven and earth was not the subject. The World of Israel was the subject. We believe this is precisely what Jesus had in mind in Matthew 5:17-18 when he said "until heaven and earth pass, not one jot or one tittle shall pass from the law". He was saying that until Israel's "world," symbolized by the city and temple, was destroyed, the law would not pass away.

Until All Is Fulfilled
Not only did Jesus say the Law would not pass until heaven and earth passed, he said the Law could not pass until it was all fulfilled.

It has been the unfortunate practice of many to essentially ignore the first "until" in Matthew 5:17-18. The Sabbatarians are most observant of the first one, insisting that since (physical) heaven and earth still stand the Law still stands. This would be fine except there are two "untils" in these verses and they are of equal force. Jesus said when all the Law was fulfilled the Law would pass--and the Bible is very emphatic in telling us when all the Law would be fulfilled.

In Daniel 9:24-27 Daniel was told that 70 weeks had been determined on his people and city, i.e. Jerusalem. By the end of this prophetic time period God promised that six things would be accomplished. Daniel was told that by the end of that period God would "seal up vision and prophecy". In my book "Seal Up Vision and Prophecy" I demonstrate the wide agreement among Hebrew scholars that "seal up vision and prophecy" means the complete fulfillment of all prophecy.

Daniel's prophecy then tells of the time when all prophecy would be fulfilled. When would this be? The end of Daniel's vision was the destruction of Jerusalem that occurred in 70 AD. See verse 27 and compare it with Matthew 24:15ff where Jesus said the Abomination of Desolation and his coming would occur in his generation.

The last book in the Bible confirms that all prophecy was to be fulfilled at the fall of Jerusalem. This book is the story of the fall of the great city, Babylon. Many differing interpretations have been offered to identify this city and yet the most obvious interpretation of all has been ignored. Revelation specifically identifies Babylon — it is the great city "where our Lord was crucified", 11:8.

Jesus was not crucified in Rome; he was not crucified "in" the Roman Catholic church, he was not crucified "in" apostate Christianity. Jesus was crucified in Jerusalem!

Our point is this, John predicted the fall of Babylon, the city where our Lord was crucified. He expressed this under the imagery of the passing of heaven and earth. He said all this was to "shortly take place". See the correlation with Daniel 9, Matthew 5 and Matthew 24? Such beautiful harmony is no accident.

Finally, we have Jesus' own words as to when all prophecy was to be fulfilled. In Luke 21:22 our Lord spoke of the destruction of Jerusalem and said "These be the days of vengeance in which all things that are written must be fulfilled". In verse 32 he emphatically said "this generation will not pass away until all things take place". Verse 33 contains Jesus' statement that "heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words will by no means pass away".

Luke 21 thus contains the identical elements of Matthew 5:17-18; the passing of heaven and earth, and the fulfillment of all prophecy emphatically placed within the context of the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD. Are you willing to accept Christ's inspired word?

Note the perfect correlation of Daniel 9, Matthew 24, Revelation and Luke 21. They all tell of the time when all prophecy would be fulfilled; they all identify that time as the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD.

In Matthew 5:17-18 Jesus said the Old Law would not pass away until all of it was fulfilled; Jesus said all that was written would be fulfilled when Jerusalem fell in his generation; therefore the Law did not pass until Jerusalem fell in Jesus' generation.

Now, Jesus said "until heaven and earth pass" the law would not pass. He also said "until all be fulfilled" the law would not pass. We have seen that the passing of the Old World of Israel in the destruction of her city and temple in 70 AD is spoken of as the passing of heaven and earth. We have also seen that Jesus said that was when all things that were written would be fulfilled. Since Israel's heaven and earth would pass when Jerusalem and the temple was destroyed, and since all things would be fulfilled when Jerusalem and the temple was destroyed, we conclude that is the time when the Old Law would completely pass.

Yes, But...Objections Considered
There are basically four objections to what we have just studied. First, it is objected that the end of the world did not happen and Jesus did not come in the fall of Jerusalem. Second, it is said that the Law could not pass at the destruction of Jerusalem because the Bible says it was nailed to the Cross of Jesus at his death. Third, and a corollary to number two, it is insisted the Bible teaches that all the Old Law was fulfilled at the Cross. Finally, many insist there is a difference between the "Law" that had to be fulfilled and the Prophets. Let us begin with the first objection.

Did Christ Come In 70 AD?
To some this may seem a ridiculous question--to serious Bible students this is not a debatable point. The Bible is quite emphatic that Jesus was to return in that first century generation before all of his disciples died. Jesus so stated in Matthew 16:27-28. In chapter 24:29-34 it speaks of him coming in power, with angels and great glory to gather the saints. In verse 34 he said "Verily I say to you, this generation will not pass, until all these things be fulfilled".

Please note Jesus said "Verily I say to you", Matthew 16:28; 24:34. This word "verily" means "Truly" and is the strongest assertion of the validity and solemnity of what is said.

James said "The coming of the Lord is at hand" and "the judge stands right at the door," James 5:7-9. He told his readers to be patient "until the coming of the Lord". Peter said "the end of all things is at hand," and asserted Christ was "ready to judge the living and the dead," when he wrote, I Peter 4:5,7. The Hebrew writer said "In a very little while, he that will come will come and will not tarry," 10:37. In Revelation God's Son said "Behold, I come quickly" several times, see chapter 22.

Some one will object that Jesus did not come back because time continues. This objection overlooks the very thing we have sought to establish earlier — the prophets did not predict the end of time, they predicted the passing of the "heaven and earth" of Old Testament Israel! The end of time is not a Biblical subject!

Reader, Jesus said he was coming back in the generation that was living when he spoke. Are you willing to accept the word of the Lord of heaven or your own preconceived ideas about the end of the world? Just what does the authority of the Scriptures mean to you? What does inspiration mean?

The "Already-But Not Yet" of the Passing of the Law
The second objection cited above says the Law could not have passed at the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD because Paul says the Law was nailed to the cross of Jesus when he was crucified, Colossians 2:14f. Please read that text; sounds impressive does it not? But there is more to the picture than most want to admit.

There is in scripture something the scholars call the "already but not yet". Simply put, the writers of the Bible often spoke of certain things as present realities in certain texts while in other passages they spoke of the same things as coming in the near future. In other words, they said they had them (the blessings), but they did not (fully) have them yet. This is true of the passing of the Old Law.

In Ephesians 2 Paul taught about the passing of the Law and that the cross was the power of that passing. It is equally clear from Paul's other writings that he believed the full passing of the Law was future to him.

In II Corinthians 3 the apostle discusses the passing of the Law written and engraved in stones, the Old Covenant. In verse 11 he says "If what is passing away (that is the Old Law, DKP) was glorious, what remains is much more glorious". (NKJV) The reader will please notice the present tense of the verse. Reader, this passage was written over 20 years after the Cross, yet Paul said the Old Law was passing, not had passed, away.

To drive this home even more see the next verse — but before that see Romans 8:24-"hope that is seen is no hope". Something realized is no longer anticipated — no longer the object of hope. Remember this as we go back to II Corinthians 3.

In verse 12 Paul says "Seeing then that we have such hope". What hope was that? Please go there right now and see for yourself that it was the passing away of the Old Law. Paul, 20 years after the death of Jesus on the cross, called the passing of the Old Law a hope.

The passing of the Law was for Paul "already but not yet"! Without controversy the Cross was the power of the passing. Some have called it the beginning of the end. But as we have seen, all the Law had to be fulfilled before the Law could pass, and all of the Old Law was not fulfilled at the Cross.

All Fulfilled At the Cross?
The third objection says in effect that on the Cross Jesus fulfilled ALL THAT WAS NECESSARY for the passing of the Old Law, i. e. his sacrifice, and therefore the Law could pass when his passion was completed. The verse offered as proof for this position is Luke 24:44- "These are the words I spoke to you while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled which were written in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms concerning me".

These words are construed by those who insist the Law fully passed at the Cross to mean that Jesus was saying his death was the fulfillment of all things necessary for the passing of the Law!

One thing that should immediately strike the reader is the fact that Jesus is not even speaking of the passing of the law and the prerequisites for that. He IS speaking of the necessity of the fulfillment of the law to be sure--but in contrast to those who appeal to this text he is not saying "now here is all that is necessary for the Old Covenant to pass away; I must suffer". In Matthew 5 Jesus IS speaking of the prerequisites for the passing of the Law, and he says it must ALL be fulfilled. In Luke 24 Jesus was saying that his passion was one of the constituent elements of the Law that had to be fulfilled not the only thing in the Law that had to be fulfilled.

Does Jesus limit "the fulfillment of all things" in Luke to his passion? Hardly! Go back to verse 27. Jesus taught his disciples: "And beginning at Moses and the prophets, he expounded to them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself". Notice the reference to all the scriptures.

Now read verse 26- "Ought not the Christ to have suffered these things and to enter his glory?" (emphasis mine) Reader, in expounding the scriptures and the need for him to fulfill all things Jesus did not stop at the cross, He spoke of the glory to follow the cross.

Even those who believe the Law ended at Calvary do not believe Jesus entered his glory at the Cross; they place that at Pentecost. Now since Jesus was expounding on the need to fulfill all things written in the Law and Prophets, and since he did not stop at the Cross but spoke of the glory to follow, it must be true that the fulfillment of all things written in the Law and Prophets had to include Christ's entrance into the "glorious things" and this was sometime after the Cross.

These thoughts are corroborated in Acts 3:18ff. In verse 18 Peter says Jesus fulfilled all things written concerning his suffering. Notice verses 21 and following.

Peter tells them Christ would remain in heaven until all things foretold by the prophets i.e. the restoration of all things, were fulfilled. The restoration of all things is equivalent to the consummation of the glory of the Messiah. It means the Messiah is fully established in his kingdom. Thus, Peter, in speaking of the restoration of all things was speaking of the fulfillment of the rest of the Old Covenant scriptures — and this fulfillment was directly related to the glory of Messiah. When we examine Luke 24 and see that Jesus said it was necessary for him to suffer and enter his glory we can see it involves more than just the cross, the ascension and Pentecost. It involves the full establishment of the Kingdom of Messiah.

In addition, in Luke 24:44-47 Jesus said that not only must he suffer and enter his glory, but that "remission and repentance of sins should be preached in all nations beginning at Jerusalem". The fulfillment of all things included world evangelism. This did not happen at the cross or Pentcost.

And consider: to say that all that was necessary to abrogate the Old Law was the Passion is to directly reverse Jesus' words in Matthew 5:17-18. Jesus said none of the law would pass until all was fulfilled. But the view that the Law passed at the Cross makes Jesus to say all the Law would pass when some of it was fulfilled. Specifically, this objection has Jesus saying that all the law would pass when one prediction, that of his passion, was fulfilled. But Jesus said all the Law and prophets had to be fulfilled; not just one specific prediction. Reader, when an interpretation completely reverses Christ's words there is something wrong. Jesus not only said he had to suffer, he said he had to enter his glory; he said the gospel had to preached in all the world. Fulfillment of all things positively entailed more than the cross, thus the Law could not pass at the Cross since Jesus said all of it had to be fulfilled before any of it could pass.

Finally, if you say the law passed at the cross then "heaven and earth" passed at the cross. Yet Hebrews 12, which positively is speaking about the passing of the Old Law under the imagery of the passing of heaven and earth, was written after the Cross and that passing was still future. Further, it does not explain how all of the law was not fulfilled at cross, in light of Luke 21:22. These are serious objections to the view that the Law fully passed at the Cross.

Law Versus prophets?
Many try to negate the force of Matthew 5:17-18 by saying what Jesus really meant was that he would fulfill all the legal and moral mandates of the Old Law and the Old Law would then pass; but he did not really mean all prophesies had to be fulfilled. Thus, in this interpretation there is a distinction between the Law and the Prophets.

This interpretation contradicts Luke 24:44. In that text Jesus said "all things must be fulfilled which were written in the Law of Moses, and the Prophets and the Psalms concerning me". Reader, you cannot delineate between "the law" and the "prophets" in Matthew 5 and then appeal to Luke 24 to prove Jesus fulfilled just "the law" in his passion. Luke 24 speaks about the law, the prophets, and the Psalms and Jesus said all things had to be fulfilled.

If Jesus was saying he had to fulfill the things written about his death, and if all he had to fulfill was "the Law" as distinct from the prophets, then the Law of Moses predicted that death.

Reader, the Law had a predictive element to it; it was far more than legal mandates and moral legislation. See Colossians 2:16f.

In that passage Paul told the Colossians not to be judged in regard to meat and drink, feast days, and Sabbaths. These were all part of the legislation of the Old Law. But notice, in verse 17 Paul says they all foreshadowed Christ — they were "shadows of things to come". (Please note those things were still viewed as coming. They had not fully arrived yet.)

Jesus said "the law" was predictive in nature. In Matthew 11:13 our Lord said "For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John". Did you catch that? Jesus said the law and the prophets prophesied. How then can one delineate between the prophets and "the law"? He cannot Biblically do so.

In addition, in Hebrews 10:1-4 the writer says the Law was a shadow of good things to come, (once again those things were viewed as not yet fully come).

Our point is that one cannot delineate between the Law and the Prophets for the Law itself was prophetic! Jesus had to fulfill all the prophetic scriptures whether couched in types, symbols, visions, or oracles.

Further, the prophets are very clearly called "the law". In I Corinthians 14:21-22 Paul quotes from Isaiah 28 and specifically calls it "the law". A quick check of Romans 3:10ff will reveal that Paul quotes from the Psalms, Jeremiah, Proverbs and Isaiah and calls all of them "the Law", vs. 19. In addition, as noted above, the Law prophesied, Matthew 11:13. Now since the prophets are called "the law", and since "the law" prophesied one cannot delineate between the law and prophets in Matthew 5.

Our point is that the term "the Law" was the abbreviated way of referring to the entire Old Covenant. When Jesus said "one jot or one tittle will in no wise pass from the Law until all be fulfilled" he was using the form of speech prevalent in his time. He did not need to say "Law and Prophets" or "Law, Prophets and Psalms" each and every time.

When Jesus said he did not "come to destroy the Law and the Prophets but to fulfill" he was saying he came to fulfill all the Law and prophets. He was using a form of ellipsis. When he said he did not come to destroy the Law and Prophets but to fulfill he did not have to say "all the Law and Prophets" again; it was understood that was what he meant. This being true it is patent that Jesus did not say just the Law, to the exclusion of the prophets, had to be fulfilled before the old system could pass. He in fact, did say all the prophets had to be fulfilled before the Old Law could pass.

What we see then is that when one attempts to have Jesus say all he had to do was fulfill the legal and moral mandates of the law before the Law could pass he imposes a non-scriptural distinction upon the term "the Law". Second, he ignores the elliptical language of Matthew 5:18; and ignores the fact that the Old Law itself, even the legislative edicts, were prophetic in nature. Jesus did indeed have to fulfill all the Law and prophets before the Old Law could pass.

Fulfilling the Promises and Purpose of the Law
I would like to ask you a question: If a law or covenant has been abrogated, are any of its penalties or promises applicable anymore? Yes, or No? Will you please get a pencil and circle the one you believe is correct?

Now common sense says that if a law is no longer in effect then its penalties or promises are voided. Well, consider this in light of Jesus' words in Matthew 5:17-18. If the Old Covenant was abrogated at the Cross does this not mean that all Old Covenant promises and penalties were either fulfilled or abrogated at that time? If not, why not? Now lets see what this means.

Paul emphatically says his eschatology is taken directly from the Old Covenant, Acts 24:14ff; Acts 26:21ff. Specifically, he tells us that the promise of the resurrection was an Old Covenant promise made by and to Moses and all the prophets. But Paul was speaking about this promise Several years after the cross where, we are told, The Old Covenant was taken away. But if the Old Covenant was taken away at the Cross how could Paul, years afterward, still be preaching Old Covenant promises? You see, if the law was nullified at the Cross, then all of it was nullified. Remember, Jesus said none would pass until all was fulfilled. If all was not fulfilled then none of it passed. The Old Covenant stands or falls as a whole.

The Old Covenant had several constituent prophetic elements and it was essential they all be fulfilled before the Old Covenant could pass and the New Covenant World be fully established. The Old Covenant predicted the salvation of the remnant of Israel, Isaiah 2-4; the gathering of the Gentiles, Isaiah 49:6ff; the giving of a New Covenant, Jeremiah 31:29ff; the filling up of the measure of Israel's sin leading to their destruction, Isaiah 65:7ff; the coming of the Lord in judgment of the nations, Isaiah 66, Joel 3:1; Zechariah 14; the outpouring of the Holy Spirit, Joel 2:28ff; the passing of the "heaven and earth" of Israel, Isaiah 24, 65, 66; and much more. If the Old Covenant was abrogated at the cross, how could any of these prophecies be valid after the cross? Quite simply, they could not; yet the New Testament writers repeatedly refer to these prophecies after Pentecost and anticipate their fulfillment. This proves the Old Covenant was not abrogated at the cross.

This is also demonstrated in another way. In Acts 13:40f Paul preached to the Jews at Antioch. They rejected the gospel and Paul warned them "Behold ye despisers and wonder and perish; for I work a work in your days, a work, which ye shall in no wise believe, though a man declare it unto him". What is the significance of Paul's words? They are taken from Habakkuk 1:5. Paul, in Acts 13, years after the Old Covenant was supposedly taken away, was threatening Israel with Old Covenant wrath.

National destruction for violating the Covenant was part and parcel of the Law delivered to Israel, Leviticus 26; Deuteronomy 28-30. But if that covenant was abrogated at the cross, how could Paul still be threatening Israel with covenant wrath? He could not.

Note my argument:
Major Premise: No promise or penalty of a covenant is applicable if that covenant has been abrogated.

Minor Premise: But Paul applied Old Covenant penalties to Israel, Acts 13.

Conclusion: Therefore the Old Covenant penalties were still applicable.

Note another argument:
Major Premise: No promise or penalty of a Covenant is applicable if that Covenant has been abrogated.

Minor Premise: The promises of the coming of the Lord, judgment of the nations, and the resurrection are Old Covenant promises, Isa. 66; Dan. 12; Joel 3:1f, etc.

Minor Premise: The Old Covenant was abrogated at the Cross- traditional view of the Old Covenant.

Conclusion: Therefore the promises of the coming of the Lord, the judgment of the nations, and the resurrection, being Old Covenant promises, were abrogated at the Cross!

If there is a single Old Testament prophecy that is unfulfilled, then the Old Covenant still stands. If the Old Testament is truly abrogated, then the eschatological prophecies of the Old Testament must be fulfilled or nullified.

The view that the Old Law passed at the Cross strips the New Testament scriptures of all eschatology and demands that every promise of "last things" was fulfilled at the Cross and then God started over on Pentecost with a totally new set of "last things" promises. This is patently false; the New Testament writers constantly affirm that they are simply reiterating the Old Covenant promises, II Peter 3:1, 13; Revelation 10:6ff.

The truth is that the Old Covenant promises of the coming of the Lord, judgment and resurrection had to be fulfilled before the New Covenant World of Jesus could be perfected. Those promises of "the end" as seen above, do not deal with the end of time but with the end of the Old Covenant World of Israel and the full establishment of the New Covenant World of Christ.

The Old Law could not pass until it had accomplished its purpose — this is established in Galatians 3:23-25. Paul here says those under the law were "under guard", "kept for the faith which would afterward be revealed". He says the Law was given to serve as a "tutor" (NKJV) to bring them to Christ. He then concludes by saying "after faith is come we are no longer under a tutor".

It is clear that "The Faith" Paul has in mind is not the subjective faith of individuals but the objective system of faith we call the Gospel System. The Law was to continue until "The Faith" came.

Did "The Faith" come at the cross? No — although the cross is where the New Covenant of "The Faith" was confirmed by the death of Jesus the Testament maker, Galatians 3:15.

The Old Covenant predicted the coming of a New Covenant, Jeremiah 31:29ff. Did the Old Covenant pass away before that predicted New Covenant was delivered? If so the Old Covenant passed away before it had fulfilled its purpose in bringing Israel to a New Covenant.

In Hebrews 8:8-13 the writer recalls God's promise given in Jeremiah and then says "In that he says 'a new covenant' he has made the first obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away".

The Hebrew writer was living in the days in which the New Covenant was being delivered. As he writes he recalls God's promise to give the New Covenant and says the Old was ready to vanish away! Reader, the Old had not yet been fulfilled! It had not yet fulfilled its function because the promised New Covenant was not yet fully delivered. But the writer says the Old was "ready to vanish". "Ready to vanish" does not mean it had already vanished.

It is clear then that the Old Law was in a time of transition. The New Covenant had to be fully given before the full purpose of the Old was completed and Paul very clearly says the Law was to last until "The Faith" was delivered. Would anyone assert the New Covenant was fully delivered at the cross? At Pentecost? Surely not. Therefore until the Law had fulfilled its purpose in bringing the Jews to the New Covenant it did not pass away.

Summary and Conclusion
We have seen that heaven and earth had to pass away before the Old Law could pass away. We have defined "heaven and earth" as the Old Covenant world of Old Israel. We have seen that instead of predicting the destruction of physical heaven and earth the Bible predicted the passing of Old Israel's world in order for God to create the New World of his Son-the Kingdom of God-the church of the living God. We have seen that the Bible very clearly tells when ALL prophecy was to be fulfilled — when heaven and earth would pass — in 70 AD with the destruction of the city of Jerusalem, the very heart and core of Israel's world. We have examined several objections and found them to be based upon false suppositions. We have seen that if the Old Covenant has been abrogated then all of its prophecies including the predictions of the "end" must be fulfilled or abrogated. If those prophecies have not been fulfilled, then the Old Covenant still stands. We have seen that the Old Law could not pass until it had fulfilled its purpose and that purpose included deliverance to the New Covenant — that was not fulfilled until all the New Covenant was revealed and confirmed. That did not happen at the Cross or Pentecost.

The ideas presented here are representative of what is called Covenant Eschatology. This is the view that God has kept his promises in fulfilling all prophecy by the time of the passing of Old Israel in 70 AD. The fall of Jerusalem was far more than the passing of the capital of Judaism — it was a spiritually cosmic event. It was the time of the coming of Jesus, Matthew 24:29-34; the judgment, Matthew 16:27-28. It was at that time that the salvation in Christ was fully revealed, Colossians 3:1ff. It is because of what happened then, as the consummation of the work started on the Cross, Hebrews 9:26-28, that you and I can have confidence in the Word of God and the God of the Word. Christ did come in judgment of the Old World in 70 AD and fully establish the unending New Covenant Heaven and Earth. This is when all things foretold by the prophets was fulfilled and that is how heaven and earth passed away!