It's not Good to be Alone

18 And the Lord God said, “It is not good that man should be alone; I will make him a helper comparable to him.” 19 Out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the air, and brought them to Adam to see what he would call them. And whatever Adam called each living creature, that was its name. 20 So Adam gave names to all cattle, to the birds of the air, and to every beast of the field. But for Adam there was not found a helper comparable to him.

21 And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall on Adam, and he slept; and He took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh in its place. 22 Then the rib which the Lord God had taken from man He made into a woman, and He brought her to the man.

23 And Adam said:

“This is now bone of my bones
And flesh of my flesh;
She shall be called Woman,
Because she was taken out of Man.”

24 Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.

25 And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.

In Genesis 2:18, we find the first mention of "not good." Throughout the entirety of Genesis 1, we read about the first day, and God says it is good. The second day, God says it is good. The third day, God says it is good. All the way through to the seventh day, God says, "It is very good." Now we reach the first time that God says, "It is not good..." Isn't it fascinating that the first thing God says is not good is loneliness? 

Notice that God does not say it is sin. It is not sin to be alone, or to feel alone. Loneliness is something that we have all experienced at some time. The Hebrew word is bad (bawd). It has the implication of a branch severed from the tree, a body part disconnected. This is not mere isolation, but a disconnect from the whole. 

God's response to this loneliness is to "make a helper." The Hebrew word is etser, which comes from the root atsar - to surround. Etser means "one who helps," but seems like the implications are companionship and camaraderie, not service or assistance. It is also more than someone to talk to and be around. This suitable helper is supposed to be one that can come alongside and fill out the areas in life that are incomplete. 

We have in verses 19-20 the scene of Adam naming the animals. This has two implications. First, it implies hierarchy. Adam was "over" the animals in that he names them; they don't name themselves. In Daniel 1, Daniel and his three companions are given new names. The king of Babylon does this to show he has ownership over those young men. He named them; he owns them. The second implication is found in what a name represents. The Hebrew word shem (pronounced shame) means character. Adam would have deeply searched the soul of those animals to name them precisely as they are. Their name is the essence of their being. It takes intimacy with that other being in order to name them. You have to know them in their deeps and see what the animal truly is.

We come to verse 21 and God puts Adam in a deep sleep. The Hebrew word is tardemah. It means a trance, or a deep sleep (as if dead). The Greek equivalent is used in Revelation 1 when John sees Jesus and falls down before Him as if dead. Daniel sees a vision in Daniel 10, and falls down on his face into a "deep sleep." This is the same thing. It's the idea of being unconscious or in a coma or something. It makes me think of Paul when he said, "Whether in the body or out of the body, I don't know..." 

This idea of Adam being brought into a deep unconscious slumber, as if dead, is all the more amplified by the verb in the following phrase. Yashen means physical relaxation/being languid, but figuratively implies death. God took a rib out of Adam and from that rib made a woman. She was called such because when Adam awoke, he said, "Woah, man..." (That was a pathetic attempt at a joke). 

In the wording, "bone of my bone and flesh of my flesh," we actually have an idiom. To understand what this means, it is actually a comparison of bone and flesh. Whereas bone is hard, flesh is soft. Where I am weak, she is strong, but where I am strong, she is weak. We complete one another. This is the helper that Adam needed. This is the kind of relationship that was needed in order to not be "alone." In the case of Adam, it was a wife that was necessary. In the case of many people in our world today, it is not necessarily a wife or a husband. The implications of what it means for them to be a wife or husband is found prominently in the next couple verses.

Before we get to that point, lets further investigate this scene. The Hebrew for rib is tselath. It means side, but can be used in anatomy, architecture, or figuratively. Depending on the context, we would call it a beam, side, rib, plank, etc. It comes from the Hebrew tsala, which means "to limp." Tsala is used in Genesis 32:22-32 when Jacob wrestled the angel and walked away limping. For Adam to be put into a deep sleep, as though dead, and then a rib taken from his side, we're looking at a metaphor for resurrection. Just as Jacob transformed from Jacob to Israel, so Adam is transforming from man to humanity. It was male and female - He made them in God's image. There is something about man and woman uniting to bring forth the image of God.

The Hebrew for woman is ishah; the Hebrew for man being ish. The woman has a hey at the end of ishah. The man has a yod in the middle of ish. When you bring together the yod with the hey, you have yah, which is the name of God. To be truly united, we bring Christ in us to one another, the God that He invested inside of you. When I as a male bring the image of God in me to my wife, and she brings the image of God in her to me, we make a complete yah, and therefore have a three chord strand that is not easily broken. 

To build a relationship upon Christ instead of upon "I love her" is completely different. Notice in verse 23 that Adam never named the woman. There isn't a hierarchy. Adam is not over the woman. Paul notes that the woman was created for man, not visa versa. What's going on here? Paul cannot be saying that man is over the woman. Thus, it must mean that woman is to serve God with man, not as a lesser, but not alone either. The reason for this is because of what I've already mentioned the "bone of my bone" idiom stands for. In the ways of God, He has purposed that woman should serve Him alongside of man. We'll dive into this a little more deeply in a minute.

The word for one used in verse 24 is echad. Echad is used many times in the Old Testament to mean one. It does not mean a multiplicity of ones. I've heard the argument that it is like one bundle of sticks compared to one stick. The truth is, echad would be used to describe both the bundle as well as the single stick. But here is what we do know: Adam and Eve would not have ended up somehow mutating together to become one being. They were still two distinct entities: male and female. Never does Adam become one with Eve in the sense of a merging of the flesh to become one person instead of two. So echad, even though it means one, is being used figuratively to make a point.

When we read in the shema, we read that the word echad is used at the end (the Lord your God is one). Jesus prayed in John 17:21 that we would be one as He and the Father are one. In Ephesians 5:31-32, Paul says that this is a mystery that is speaking of Christ and His Church. The very words in Genesis 2:24 are somehow now being related to Christ and His Church. 

I said previously that for Adam, the loneliness was cured by a wife. But for we in the twenty first century, it isn't necessarily marriage that cures loneliness. It comes from two sources, both being related inseparably. We are to be married to Christ, which is to say that we are to be one with Christ. That sounds nice and all, but what does that look like and actually mean? The ironic thing is that this is where the second implication comes in. To be one with Christ is to be one with one another. When we are willing to be intimate with one another, to the degree that you cannot tell where the one begins and the other ends, we are now being united with Christ.

It is beholding in one another's faces that we move from glory to glory (2 Corinthians 3:17-18). We're given a clue in Genesis 2:25 as to what it would mean to be one with one another. They were naked and felt no shame. Nakedness is not simply stripping down. There is a stripping that is not of clothing. There is a nakedness that does not involve nudity. Nakedness is transparency. We read in James 5:16 to confess our faults one to another and to pray for one another. Paul says to carry each other's burdens, for when one part of the Body hurts, the whole Body hurts. That kind of openness of confession to one another, and that kind of love to pray for one another instead of lording over one another is completely other worldly. 

In openness and honesty and nakedness, there was no shame for faults and failures. In all things, man was innocent. Could you imagine what it would be like to be that kind of person to someone else? Are you able to conceive what it would mean to be able to unload your heart to someone, and instead of judging or condemning, they embrace you and say with heartfelt tears, "Me too?" We've all failed in one place, and even if I've never committed adultery, I'm no better than the one who has. I've done things that the adulterer or murderer would never conceive of. The visions in my mind sometimes are so perverted and evil that to confess it would be to expose myself. I'm not a good person.

Yet, it is in the midst of that kind of relationship to one another that we find healing and freedom. We find healing from our sins, and we find innocence because we're not looking to hide or deceive. To be united one to another, so that we are no longer male and female, Jew or Gentile, black or white, slave or free, but are all one in Christ requires that we would be transparent before one another. The cure to loneliness is not to be around other people. The cure to loneliness is confession.

When we're united to a Body of believers that is naked before one another, shame is not felt. Adam and Eve were naked and felt no shame. This kind of innocence has been lost to us, but we can understand it and be a part of it through Christ. Honesty and transparency is being more naked than nudity would require. We don't like the idea of being that open and bare. We like to clothe ourselves and hide behind our fig leaves. It takes the Spirit of Christ itself to even get us to consider opening up and being real. 

The heck of it is that to be united to the Body here and now is actually more than just being united to the Body here and now. There is an unbroken continuum of saints that stretch back to Adam being a son of God, Abel offering a sacrifice that God accepted, Seth's descendants being the first mention of "At that time men began to call upon the name of the Lord", Enoch entering into eternity by faith, and all the other amazing saints that we're in line with throughout all ages. This is called the invisible cloud of witnesses. 

We are interwoven with this invisible cloud. Even when you feel alone, you are not alone. The others that have gone before you are ever and always about you. When we enter into the Body of Christ, we enter an eternal Body that spans from everlasting to everlasting. Before the foundations of the world, Jesus was the eternal Son of God. To enter into His Body is to enter into Him. To enter into Him is to enter into the Triune God. As the Bride of Christ, we are more than human. Divinity and humanity have been married, and in being united one to another, we are actually a fourth aspect of the Godhead. That isn't to say that we are divine as individuals, but to say that the marrying of Israel and the Church, Spirit and flesh, Heaven and Earth, and God and man brings us into an exalted place. We are somehow more than human, and even exalted above the angels, but not on par with Christ.

Just as the woman was created to serve God alongside of man, the Bride of Christ is to rule and reign alongside of Christ. The woman is not less than man, nor is she under man. She is not to be "ruled over", nor is she to be the head of the house. There is no "head" but Christ. When man and woman have been made equal and serve God together - one alongside of the other - we are displaying a mystery of how God has made the Bride to rule and reign with Christ in equality to Christ, and not in subjectivity or "underneath" Christ. 

Oh the depths and riches of our God! The tender mercies that would make man a little lower than the angels, but to be raised up unto Him as Sons and Daughters - co-heirs with Christ. Who is like the Lord? And who has been His counselor? To Him be glory in the Bride, forever and ever, amen.

What is Divine Inspiration?

I've been challenged to provide a definition of inspiration. Words have meaning. Therefore, it behooves us to come to terms seeking to understand what that term means. To place upon a word our own interpretation of that word is both disservice and dangerous. The most extreme case to point to would be Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union. Both Hitler and Stalin redefined what it meant to be a person. Because they redefined what it means to be a person anyone who does not add up to that definition is then less than human - subhuman. Subhumanity is dispensable, so can we truly say that the annihilation of 6,000,000 Jewish people is really that terrible? You get my point.

When we come to the idea of inspiration, we use phrases that are very fuzzy. I've heard that Divine inspiration means that the Bible says the words that God had intended the Bible to say. Well, who gets to determine what exactly that means? Or the classic example of what I've heard Divine inspiration would mean would be to say that the words are "God breathed." Yet, once again, we don't have a very specific idea as to what that means. These are general definitions, but I'm afraid that our definitions are intentionally fuzzy so that we are not required to take a stand.

Then there are the King James only-ers. These are people that aren't necessarily wrong in criticizing English translations of the Bible - many times quite accurately. Yet, the problem that I have is that they use unequal weights and measures. For example, the Hebrew is poetic. Words are not simply translated because "ruach" means spirit. Ruach has three "translations": spirit, breath, and wind. Which of those three translations do we choose? Oh, well you choose whichever fits the best. But the problem really lies in that Hebrew paints pictures with its words. Ruach is the Divine energy that stirs up the creation. So, if we're going to translate it as wind, we would be correct. In fact, it is equally as correct as breath and spirit. So how do we translate it? That's the difficulty.

I'm not going to say that any one translation is better than another. I think that all English translations have their shortcomings, and the different manuscripts that we have of both Hebrew and Greek show slight variations. They are very slight, but they exist. So, if we're going to say that Divine inspiration means that God had literally breathed this version of the Bible, and every other version must line up to this plumb line, we're left with a difficulty. Which one do we pick? If we say that the King James Version is the ultimate, then what about the later versions that had better technique and understanding in how to translate the biblical Greek?

But then this also goes with all the other versions. If we say that the New International Version of the Bible is the absolute authority, then we end up having to ask about those pesky verses that are omitted from the Bible. But what if we're actually going about this all wrong? I believe in the inspiration of Scripture, and therefore I believe in a literal creation of the world exactly as it is stated in Genesis 1-11 (or so). I believe that when the prophet spoke, they spoke the very words of God.

So how would I define inspiration if not by saying that these are the very words of God in textual form? In order to answer that, we only need to ask why it is important to have an inspired text? What is the point of Divine inspiration?

When I engage, or I hear of others engaging, in dialogue about the Bible, the most common criticism is that the manuscripts aren't exactly the same, and we really can't be sure that they were written when we say they were written, and how do we know that this wasn't added years later? The attack isn't so much about what is said, but instead on when it is said. The attack isn't so much on whether what was said is true or not, but instead on whether it was ever said, or if we just made the whole thing up. Why? It is easier to attack the manuscripts and say that we can't be certain of their validity than it is to disprove the statements. If the texts that make the statements can be proven fallacious, then the whole of the text is fallacious.

So Divine inspiration is really getting at the heart of, "Yea, hast God said?" This isn't an issue of whether the Bible is correct when it uses this word rather than that, but instead an issue of the revelation of God. So when we're trying to define what Divine inspiration is, we need to stand it up against the understanding that this reveals God as He is. Divine inspiration, then, is not found in the original texts, nor in the modern English versions. It is found solely in the person of Jesus Christ. From that revelation, we come to a further questioning of the texts. Does what is written here in my English version align with the person of Christ Jesus and who He has revealed God to be?

The debate is not over textual analysis and whether we translated the words correctly. The debate is over whether this reveals the heart of God, or whether it instead reveals something contrary to God. So debates on whether this or that passage/verse is supposed to be in here, should we go with the Texas Receptus, or the Latin Vulgate, or the Massoretic, or the Septuagint, etc are really only a little higher than nonissue. What is first and foremost to be presented is Christ and the character of God. Once we have that established, lets then go into the texts and decide as to which one seems to fit the best. Slight copyist errors and other minor variations in the original manuscripts can be trifled about later. First and foremost, we need to ask whether this is truly revealing God, or if it is a perversion.

Divine inspiration is the idea that God has breathed the whole of Scripture to reveal Himself. That is slightly different than saying that this or that version is the word of God. It is taking up the whole counsel and then wrestling from that revelation of Christ with the smaller details. Lets first and foremost get the foundation laid. When we're debating with atheists or Muslims or our Jewish brethren over whether the New Testament documents are valid, the best thing to do is not to quarrel over various texts and we believe the King James, but instead to display the glory of Christ and how the whole of the Bible displays the progressive revelation of God.

I don't believe the Bible is the word of God because I read "All Scripture is inspired..." I believe the Bible is the word of God because God has revealed Himself to me through the eternal Spirit giving illumination. God took out my heart of stone and replaced it with a heart of flesh. Now when I read the Bible, whether I'm reading the NIV, NASB, NKJV, KJV, or the Message, I have something greater than the words on the page to line up to. Sometimes things just aren't worded correctly, and when we go back to original language we ask, "Why did they translate it like that?" Sometimes we need to read a cumulative and broad range of English versions to understand the point being made. But the reason I read the Bible the first place was because of the Spirit bearing witness in me. It was not until later, after I had learned a bit more about the whole of the Bible, that I started even asking such questions.

Ultimately, I think that when we simplify too much we lose a lot of doctrinal reality. God is Triune, therefore I believe that He has and does communicate with Himself. He has also communicated and revealed Himself to His creation through speaking. Because He has communicated Himself, I have every reason to believe that He has given us an inspired Word that reveals Him perfectly - not because such and such text is 100% accurately speaking the very inclinations and thoughts of God, but rather because God has given a revelation of Himself through those texts.

There are sometimes where I would say, yes, God is speaking directly through this text the very words out of His mouth. There are other times, like in the book of Job, where there is a revelation of God being expressed. God was upset with Job's friends because they did not accurately depict Him. That is the beauty of inspiration. It shows us God as He in fact is, so that when we read His word we can better understand His heart through the revelation that He continues to express through the Spirit. We don't read it as undiscerning nincompoops. We have been given every tool necessary to discern the text for what it is truly saying. That is the Divine inspiration: the Spirit bearing witness.

The Beauty of Holiness

I woke up this morning with a phrase in my heart: the beauty of holiness. Then I opened up my Bible to the Psalm of the day (Psalm 29 for the 29th day of September). "Ascribe to the Lord, O mighty ones, ascribe to the Lord glory and strength. Ascribe to the Lord the glory due His name; worship the Lord in the beauty of His holiness."

Ultimately, I have very little understanding of this. What I do know is this: the Greeks worshipped the holiness of beauty, whereas the Jews found beauty in holiness. The Greeks found beauty as something to prize and adorn. But how do we define beauty? Is beauty objective?

I can't fathom that beauty would be objective. Actually, I assume that it is not. In the Greek form of beauty, we aren't going to be able to define what beautiful truly is. I like brunettes, but does that mean that blondes are not beautiful? Obviously it would be absurd to say that. But why would it be absurd? In the Greek mindset, beauty is skin deep. Beauty is the ultimate, and never the penultimate. The absolute end to humanity is to strive to be beautiful. Whatever that means, that is one of our primary objectives in life. If we are naturally beautiful, then we have been blessed by the gods.

There is another way to look at it. The Hebrews saw it that there is beauty in holiness. The phrase is actually, "the beauty of holiness." Beauty does not come from appearance, but from substance. A sunset is not beautiful because of the colors, nor the blend of those colors. A sunset is beautiful because of what it is: a reflection of the Divine glory (Psalm 19:1). Peter tells wives to not adorn themselves like the pagans do. You don't need all of that make-up and jewelry. Put on the beauty of holiness. What does that beauty look like?

"Your beauty should not come from outward adornment, such as braided hair and the wearing of gold jewelry and fine clothes. Instead, it should be that of your inner self, the unfading beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is of great worth in God's sight. For this is the way the holy women of old who put their hope in God used to make themselves beautiful. They were submissive to their own husbands, like Sarah, who obeyed Abraham and called him her master. You are her daughters if you do what is right and do not give way to fear," 1 Peter 3:3-6.

Dear brethren, this is not a text for women only, but for us who are the Bride of Christ as well. It is as much for we men to gain learning of how we ought to obey Christ as it is for wives to obey their husbands. I'm not going to get into that now, and I'll instead focus upon what it says for we who are Christ's Bride. What is the 'beauty of our inner self?' Peter defines it as a gentle and quiet spirit. But gentleness and quietness don't mean timidity, shyness, or weakness. You can be gentle and yet be strong. You can be quiet and yet make powerful statement.

This is the beauty of holiness. In the Old Testament, Divine holiness and beauty are encountered in the sanctuary. But now there is no Temple built with human hands - we are living stones built up together for God. We are the Temple. God dwells in us. The Divine holiness and beauty are not found by going to a sanctuary, but rather found in the day to day interactions between the saints. When we behold one another's faces, we are beholding the very image and glory of God. In my life, and in my character, and in my conduct, I display Christ. When I don't, it is known by all who see me. This is part of what it means to be community. I need the brethren to tell me in love when I am in fault.

"Worship the Lord in the beauty of His holiness." Isn't what is truly being asked here is to worship Him in spirit and truth? We cannot do this in our own strength and ability, but instead through the truth of our relationship unto Him and unto those other believers He has placed around us. We worship in the Spirit that God has sealed us with. Our worship is not our own, but ultimately stimulated by Him. As John puts it, "He has loved us first..."

While I sought to understand the phrase, "the beauty of holiness," I am actually coming to the idea that maybe what I need to understand is beauty. Beauty itself is not something external, but rather internal. The scandal of beauty is that we don't "see" it, but intuit it. Some of the women that I know that are not physically attractive are some of the most beautiful women after you get to know them and their heart. I noticed in high school that the more I got to know the girls I was crushing on, the more attractive they became.

To some, our beauty is actually an affront. The character that we live from is something to despise. Gentleness and quietness are things that the world sees as weak and foolish. They don't see the strength in weakness. They don't see the statement in quietness. They don't see the authority in gentleness. They don't see the beauty of holiness.

We ought to be of a different caliber. Our hearts and lives covet the Kingdom of God and His righteousness. We don't desire the strength of the world, but rather the adoration of our Husband. Christ Jesus is the one we are submissive to. Because He had the servant heart displayed manifestly unto the world, we too display that servant heart. It is grotesque when the Body will then take a servant's heart and use it as a term meaning that we are to abuse our brethren.

The beauty of holiness is the beauty of God with us. It is Christ in us - the hope of glory.

Eschatology 101

Eschatology 101

T. Justin Comer

Introduction

I. Summary of theocracy

-The main theme of the Bible

-A clash between darkness and light

-Who will rule over this cosmos?

-A coming kingdom

-Eschatology explains how and why God is now able to dwell on earth.

II. Nation state versus Redeemed Israel

The current state of Israel is not the redeemed Israel spoken of in prophecy. Instead, it is the Israel that is under God’s judgment, and they will continue to be until that final restoration unto glory.

-Israel’s final redemption comes with world peace

            +Isaiah 35:10, Joel 2:19,

-Israel’s final redemption means they believe in the Lord their God

            +Isaiah 10:20, 48:8-11, 52:6, Jeremiah 31:1, Ezekiel 34:30-31, Hosea 2:7, Zechariah 8:8,

-Israel’s final redemption happens at Christ’s return

            +Genesis 49:10, Isaiah 16:4-5, 33:17-18, Ezekiel 34:23-24, Hosea 3:4-5, Zechariah 9:16,

-Ezekiel 22:19-22

            +Current Israel is fulfillment of prophecy, but not promise.

            +Isaiah 11:11, 63:18,

III. Summary of Principalities and Powers

-One government/influence over all nations

            +Genesis 11, Revelation 13:3, Luke 4:5-7, Daniel 10:13,

-Antichrist Kingdom

            +Daniel 2, Revelation 17:9-11, Daniel 7:1-5, Revelation 13:1-2, Isaiah 14:12-14, Ezekiel 28:11-19, Zechariah 1:19, Revelation 17-19, Genesis 11:2, Psalm 109:16-20,

-Defeat only by God’s wisdom

            +Cross

                        -1 Corinthians 18-2:8, Psalm 82:5,

            +Ephesians 3:10

                        -Revelation 12:11, Deuteronomy 32:21,

IV. Israel’s purpose

-Covenant

            +The covenant is an eternal covenant. The eternal covenant is not necessarily with Israel, but with all of God’s elect. God has chosen a specific people for Him to put His name upon, and all other nations must come unto them in order to worship the Lord. The covenant unfolds throughout the Scripture gaining more and more detail, until finally it culminates in the man Christ Jesus – the true Israel and firstfruit from the dead.

            +Genesis 9:25-27, 12:2-3, 15:1-21, 22:18, 25:23, 26:4, 28:14, 35:11, 48:19, Deuteronomy 4:1, 5:3, 6:25, 10:12-13, 11:26-28, 16:19-20, 26:17-18, 29:9, Joshua 1:5, 2:9, Psalm 105:8, Romans 11:28-29,

-Center of nations

            +God has chosen a specific place (Zion) for His rule. Israel will be heralded as the center of all nations when Christ sets up His literal Kingdom and rule on the earth.

            +Ezekiel 5:5, Deuteronomy 28:1, 28:13, 32:8-9,

-God’s nation among nations

            +The purpose for Israel is this very thing: it is God’s nation among all nations. That has a couple implications: priesthood, theocracy, display of God’s character, and His witness unto the four corners of the earth.

            +Deuteronomy 4:34, Zechariah 8:6, Deuteronomy 7:6, Isaiah 51:4a,

V. Tribulation

-Seven years

            +Daniel 9:27,

            +The number 7 is vitally important to the Scriptures. There were 7 days of creation; some of the rabbis have speculated the world is on a 7000 yearlong clock, the last 1000 years being the reign of Messiah. Joshua marched around Jericho for 7 days, 7 times on the seventh day. When you offer a sin offering, you pour out the blood 7 times upon the altar. The number 7 speaks of perfection, not merely completion. For the age to end with a 7 year Tribulation seems perfectly legitimate and absolutely patterned.

-Final judgment

            +There are a lot more Scriptures than I put here. Ultimately, the proof is in the pudding, and the pudding needed to be displayed to other places before it became repetitive. To answer the question of how we know that this is the final judgment and that there is no more judgment after this, we simply need to ask “why?” Why is God sending the Tribulation? It is to redeem a people that have rejected Him, and to establish His literal Kingdom upon this earth. If His people are no longer disobedient, and the world is in peace, then why would there need to be another judgment upon the earth? The Judgment Seat comes after the 1000-year reign of Christ, after certain peoples and nations gather again against Jerusalem led by Satan Himself (Revelation 20:7 and onward)

            +Isaiah 51:11, Daniel 9:24-27,

-Christ returns at end

            +Daniel 9:24 (with respect to Ezekiel 45:17), Ezekiel 34:23-24, Daniel 2:34,

VI. Beginning of Seven Years (first 3 ½ years)

-Covenant/treaty made

            +This is one of the most powerful, yet subtle, understandings. There simply are not very many Scriptures to indicate a covenant or treaty to be made. The point isn’t the treaty made with the Antichrist, but instead is that Israel trusts in the arm of the flesh. Instead of trusting in their God, they look to “Egypt” to protect them.

            +Deuteronomy 23:6, Isaiah 28:15, 30:1, Daniel 9:27,

-Peace and Security

            +Isaiah 30:2-5 (note in Bible: If Egypt’s help is Israel’s shame and disgrace, how much more the Antichrist’s?), Jeremiah 6:14, Daniel 8:25 (when they feel secure),

            +I think that the best thing to note is that Jesus tells us to watch; Paul and Peter also both talk about the Day of the Lord coming like a thief. To those that are not watching, they will be taken by surprise. Why? For those that are the people of God, they will not expect sudden calamity. Those that are not of the Lord will not find anything strange or ‘unnatural’ signs to clue them in.

-Trusting in man/arm of the flesh

            +Isaiah 31:1, 31:3, 57:11-13, Jeremiah 17:5-8,

-Temple and Sacrifices

            +What does God think about the sacrifices that Israel will be offering during the first 3 ½ years of the Tribulation?

            +Deuteronomy 32:17, Psalm 40:6, 51:16-17, Isaiah 1:11, 66:3-4, Daniel 8:11 (there must be a third temple for them to be brought low), Amos 5:22,

VII. Middle of Seven Years (somewhere around 1,260-1,290 days before Jesus’ return)

-Covenant broken

            +Isaiah 24:5, Daniel 9:27, Isaiah 28:18, 33:8, Daniel 11:30-32, 12:7,

-Antichrist

            +King of the North

                        -Not so much about specific verses that say the King of the North is the Antichrist, but that the King of the North is typically always the one to come against Israel and Jerusalem

                        -Jeremiah 1:13b-14, 6:1, 6:22, 10:22, 13:20, Ezekiel 26:7, Daniel 11:28,

            ++Isaiah 19:4, Daniel 7:8, Jeremiah 48:25, Daniel 7:24-25, 8:23-25, 11:21, Micah 5-6, Jeremiah 51:25 & Zechariah 4:7, Matthew 4:8 (in reference to Revelation 13:2), Matthew 24:24, Luke 19:43-44, 2 Thessalonians 2:4, Revelation 13:1-8 (Isaiah 27:1 mentions the piercing of the Leviathan, a type of antichrist {beast from the sea}),

-Abomination of Desolation

            +Psalm 74:7-8, 79:1, Jeremiah 7:30, 51:51, Daniel 9:27, 11:31, Matthew 24:15, Ezekiel 7:24b, 8:3, Daniel 8:11, 9:26-27, Matthew 24:15, Luke 21:20, Revelation 13:14-15,

VIII. Jacob’s Trouble

-Jeremiah 30:7

            +No time worse

                        -Daniel 12:1, Deuteronomy 28:53, 28:62-63, 29:22-28, Psalm 9:13-14, 42:3, 44:9-11, 83:4, 88:13-18, 102:1-11, Isaiah 1:25, 3:18-26, 7:17, 13:12, 24:6, Jeremiah 9:25-26, Ezekiel 5:12, 7:25-26, Joel 1:2-3, Matthew 24:21, Luke 21:22-24,

-Antichrist Wars with the Saints

            +Daniel 7:21, 7:25, Revelation 13:7, Psalm 79:2, Daniel 8:10, 11:33-35, Luke 21:16-17,

-Israel’s flight

            +Amos 9: , Deuteronomy 4:26-27-31, Jeremiah 31:31-37, Deuteronomy 8:2-3, 28:20, 28:25, 32:26-27, Isaiah 5:13, 6:13, 22:1-3, 48:21, 59:9-13, Jeremiah 12:4, Ezekiel 6:8, 20:33-35, 34: 4-6, 36:19-20, Amos 5:18, 9:1-4, Zechariah 2:6, 14:2, Matthew 12:30, Luke 22:31-32, Revelation 12:6,

-Strength and Power of Israel Broken

            +The strength and power of Israel is their pride. God must break it off of them if the strength and pride of all other nations is to be broken off as well.

            +Deuteronomy 32:36, Psalm 102:23, Isaiah 2:17-18, 3:22, 22:8-11, 23:9, Ezekiel 7:24a, Daniel 12:7, Leviticus 26:19, Zechariah 13:8-9, Luke 21:31,

-Refuge in wilderness

            +Ezekiel 20:33-35, Genesis 32:30, Isaiah 28:11, Jeremiah 5:18, 31:2, Amos 9:8-10, Zechariah 10:9, Matthew 24:45 (in reference to Revelation 12:6), Revelation 12:6, 12:13-14,

-Our witness to the Jews/wrestle principalities

            +Daniel 11:35-40, Psalm 14:7, Romans 11:25-26, Psalm 53:6, Isaiah 14:32, 40:9-11, 58:1, Jeremiah 49:12, Matthew 10:1, 17:20-21, 25:14-30 (parable of the talents – the talents are the Jewish people coming into our hands, according to context of Matthew 24:45-46), Matthew 25:40, Luke 21:14-15, 1 Corinthians 1:26-31, 2:6-8, Ephesians 3:10-11, Revelation 12:11, 12:17,

IX. Restoration

-Gog and Magog/Antichrist war

            +Revelation 19: , Ezekiel 38-39, Zech 12, 14, Psalm 33:10-11, 48:4-7, 74:13-14, 75:8, Isaiah 8:9-10, Isaiah 13:4, 18:6 (Revelation 19:17-18, Ezekiel 39:4), Isaiah 27:1 (Revelation 19:12-21), Isaiah 29:3 (Luke 21:20), Isaiah 29:5-8, 31:4, 31:8, Jeremiah 7:33, Joel 2:20, 3:1-3, Zechariah 12:3, 12:9, Matthew 24:28 (in reference to Revelation 19:17-18), 2 Thessalonians 2:8, Revelation 14:14-20, 19:11-21,

-Return of Christ/Establishment of the Branch

            +Deuteronomy 18:15, Psalm 2:6-9, 80:15-17, Isaiah 4:2-6, 9:6-7, 11:4, Zech 12:10, Isaiah 31:6, 41:2, 42:1-4, 66:18, Ezekiel 34:22-24, 37:23-24, Daniel 7:13-14, Amos 9:11, Zechariah 3:8-9, 6:13, Malachi 3:1-4, Matthew 24:27, Luke 1:32-33, Luke 21:27, 1 Thessalonians 3:13, Revelation 11:15,

-Judgment of Nations

            +Joel 3:1-3, Obadiah 15, Micah 4:3, Matthew 13:41-42, Revelation 11:18,

-Gathered from Nations

            +Psalm 107:2-3, 111:9, Isaiah 11:12, 14:1, 35:10, 43:5-7, 54:6-7, Jeremiah 3:18, 12:15-17, 30:8-9, 31:8, 32:37-40, Ezekiel 11:16-17, 20:41-43, 28:25-26, 34:13-16, 36:24-30, 39:25, Zechariah 10:10, Matthew 8:11-12, 24:31,

-Full Redemption

            +Romans 11:26, Isaiah 27:9, Deuteronomy 12:2-3, 30:1-6, Psalm 50:15, 66:12, Isaiah 12:3 (John 7:37-38), Isaiah 30:19-22, 32:15, 45:17, Jeremiah 31:31-37, 32:8, Ezekiel 11:18-21, Obadiah 17, Zephaniah 3:11-13, Zechariah 9:11-12 (in reference to Matthew 26:28 as the Covenant), Zechariah 12:10-13:2, Ephesians 1:14,

-In One Day

            +Isaiah 10:17, 10:20-23, 66:8-9, Ezekiel 36:33-36 (on the day), Zechariah 3:9, 9:16,

-Principalities and Powers Defeated

            +Revelation 20:1-5, Isaiah 24:21-22, Psalm 2, Ezekiel 28:17, Matthew 8:29,

-Veil that Covers Nations

            +The veil that covers the nations is their pride. It is ultimately put there by demons. The Church must wrestle those demonic powers to overcome them and break off the veil that blinds Israel, so that at Israel’s redemption the veil will be broken off of the nations.

            +Isaiah 25:7, 54:3 (Genesis 9:27), Ezekiel 28:25, 35:23, 36:36, Daniel 7:11-12,

-Jesus Rules from Jerusalem and Zion

            +Isaiah 2, Zechariah 14:16, Deuteronomy 11:12, 15:6, Psalm 48:1-3, 50:2, 65:1-3, 99:1-2, 102:21-22, 110:1-2, Isaiah 24:23, Jeremiah 31:5, Joel 2:32, Micah 4:1-2, Zechariah 8:1-3,

-Jeremiah 23:7-8

            +Deuteronomy 7:14, Psalm 37:9-11, Isaiah 31:5, 16:14-15, Jeremiah 16:14-15,

X. 1000 year reign

-World peace

            +Isaiah 2:4, 60:17b, Daniel 7:21-22, Joel 3:10 (in reference to Isaiah 2:4)?, Joel 3:17, Micah 4:3, Zechariah 9:10, 14:11,

-Israel as Priests

            +Genesis 33:10, Deuteronomy 18:2, Exodus 19:6, Deuteronomy 4:6, 17:8-13, Joshua 4:24, Psalm 18:43, Isaiah 12:4, 14:2b, 55:5, 60:1-3, 60:12, Ezekiel 37:26-28, Zechariah 3:4 (Joshua being a symbol of priestly Israel), Zechariah 8:13, 8:23,

-Redemption of Nations

            +Deuteronomy 32:43, Psalm 9:20, 22:27-28, 47:7-8, 79:10, Isaiah 52:15, Psalm 86:9, 94:10, 96:7-9, 98:2-3, Isaiah 2:2-3, 10:13-14, 18:7, 26:9b, 45:22-24, 51:4-5, 56:4-8, Ezekiel 37:28, Daniel 7:14, 7:27, Amos 9:12, Zechariah 2:11, 8:20-22, 14:16, Malachi 1:11, 1:14, Romans 11:11-15,

-Church as Spiritual Rulers

            +Isaiah 32:1, Jeremiah 23:4, Daniel 7:18, Zechariah 14:5b, John 1:51 (with reference to Zechariah 3:8-10 & Genesis 28:12), Romans 8:18-21,

-First Resurrection

            +Revelation 20:4-6, Psalm 17:15, Daniel 12:13, 1 Corinthians 15:23, 15:42-44, 15:50-53, Philippians 3:10-11, 3:20-21, 1 Thessalonians 4:15-17, Revelation 20:4-6,

Do we need blood to be atoned for?

I've been listening to some Dr. Michael Brown lectures on "answering Jewish objections." The first couple were fabulous, but then we hit this point where it seems like the main point for every message is to talk about how repentance is not enough and we need blood sacrifices or there is no remission of sin. Of course, Dr. Brown is saying that we rely on the blood of Jesus, but it has gotten me thinking. Do we need the blood? If so, why do we need the blood?

A simple reading of the Torah (first 5 books of the Bible) that sacrifices and offerings are necessary to "draw near to God." The first chapter of Leviticus is about the burnt offering. Out of everything that could be spoken of, this is the first one. Why? Because it is the blood that takes away sin, for "the life is in the blood." In order for the priests to be consecrated (Leviticus 8), there needed to be blood sacrifices. In order to consecrate the things of the tabernacle, and even the tabernacle itself, there needed to be sacrifices (Exodus 40:29).

Obviously blood atonement is a huge factor of the Old Testament. The High Priest needed to offer a sacrifice for himself and for the congregation of Israel on the Day of Atonement. What Dr. Brown was attempting to do was show that in exile, there is no way to have remission of sins. Prayer isn't good enough: you're under judgment. It is upon the restoration of Israel from exile that they start to rebuild the Temple and offer sacrifices again. Why? If prayer was enough, then why did the generation of Nehemiah and Ezra need to start offering sacrifices again?

But what got me thinking wasn't so much the necessity of blood atonement. What caught me was that in the many statements being made, the point being argued was that God looked forward to an ultimate sacrifice. We presently look back to Jesus the Messiah, but they previously looked forward to the Messiah. I'm not sure that I truly agree with this. It's nice; it's cliched; it's glib. Ultimately, what I have a problem with is not so much about the blood atonement. What I have a problem with is that God had established this covenant with them. If you walk in the ways that He has ordained in the Law, then you were righteous. That's it. There wasn't anything outside of that that was necessary. That was the covenant that God had set up.

So to argue the Jewish people about whether they need blood sacrifices in order to be blameless is pretty well missing the point. The question is not whether prayer suffices. Lets say it does! The question to ask is when God changed His covenant. As soon as you start talking about a change in the 'eternal covenant,' you are coming to a place where it gets very sticky very quickly. What exactly is the eternal covenant? Has that covenant ever been changed?

It says in Galatians 3:8 that Abraham believed in the Gospel. But Jesus hadn't died! Does this mean that Abraham believed that God would send a man named Jesus that would die upon a cross to take away his sin and pave the path for him to enter heaven? Certainly not. For Abraham to believe the Gospel is explained in the rest of the verse. He believed God when He said, "In you shall all nations be blessed." That was the Gospel. Where is it mentioned about blood, or the Messiah, or a cross, or repentance? The point isn't about any of that stuff. There is an eternal covenant that the animal sacrifices and the Levitical Law was only a shadow of.

The cross wasn't necessarily part of that eternal covenant either. What I'm trying to get at is that Jesus fulfilled all of the sacrifices. He didn't just fulfill the blood sacrifices, but even the meal offering, the offering of firstfruits, the peace offering (which is also a blood sacrifice), and even the sin and trespass offerings. Jesus is the fulfillment of them all, or the fulfillment of none. He is the eternal covenant because it is in Him, not just His blood (although it is extremely important), that we find all of these sacrifices and offerings fulfilled.

He is our High Priest. He is our offering. He is our sacrifice. He is our Passover Lamb. He is our Firstfruit (the feast). He is our Unleavened Bread - the Word of Truth. It was upon Pentecost (Feast of Weeks) that the Spirit was poured out. Guess who's Spirit that was! It is upon the Last Trump that Jesus will return (Feast of Trumpets). He is going to judge the nations as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats (Matthew 25:32; Day of Atonement). He will then tabernacle with us for 1000 years (Feast of Tabernacles).

In fact, it is mentioned in Zechariah 14:16 that any nation that does not come up to the Feast of Tabernacles to celebrate when Jesus returns will have no rain. There is a judgment given to those nations that will not come up to Jerusalem to celebrate the Feast of Tabernacles.

Are you starting to see my point? Yes, blood is necessary. Yes, without the blood there is no remission of sins. But if we solely base Jesus on a blood atonement, then we lose the holism. We lose the extravagance. Why is it that we can pray and not need to offer sacrifices anymore? Why is it that God sees repentance as enough? Because Jesus has taken upon Himself the fulfillment of that eternal covenant. The covenant was not made with us that we have to do something. Even salvation itself is a work of the Spirit!

Back in Genesis 15, God establishes a covenant with Abram. Abram offers these sacrifices to God, he lays them in halves opposite one another to make a pathway in which you must walk through the sacrifices. The context is that if you wanted to covenant with someone, you would do this and one person would stand on one side, the other person would stand on the other side, and then you would both walk to the middle in order to make the pact. You are essentially making the statement, "Let it be unto me like these sacrifices if I break my covenant." But when you read Genesis 15, God walks through the sacrifices while Abram is just waking up. God walks through the whole thing. It is saying, "Abram, you offered these sacrifices, but it won't be about you. I will do this because I have established my covenant. Let it be unto me like these sacrifices if I don't fulfill my covenant with you. You aren't held responsible by any means."

God has taken upon Himself the eternal covenant. It isn't about us. It is about Him. It is about His faithfulness.

In Revelation 6:6, the claim is made that there will be famine in the last days. But an angel calls out, "Do not hurt the oil and the wine..." Why? These are representations of the Spirit and the Covenant. The wine is the wine of the Covenant, which is to say Christ. The oil is the anointing of the Spirit, which is to say the Holy Spirit. Many believe that the Holy Spirit will be taken out of the earth during the time of the Tribulation. This cannot be so. God says do not take these out. He desires that there be some who are saved. How can they be saved if there is no Spirit? How can they be saved if He removes the covenant?

It is eternal - stems from the foundations of the world to the consummation of the age. The covenant is not that Jesus must die upon a cross, but that God will provide the Lamb (Genesis 22:8). Though during the time before Jesus' death and resurrection the sacrifices were ordained of God for the remission of sins, now God has ordained a different covenant. You aren't considered righteous because of what you perform, but instead because of what you are. Because God has now written the Law upon your heart, and has transformed you in the very deeps of who you are (put truth in the inner parts - Psalm 51:6).

Why does David say in Psalm 51:16 that God does not desire sacrifice or burnt offering? The answer is found in the next verse: "The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit; a broken and a contrite heart, O God, you will not despise." The point is not that the sacrifices have been abolished, but instead that God wants to make our lives a sacrifice. He wants to do such a work in us that we are a priesthood. We are the sacrifice and the altar. Jesus alone is the one to fulfill that, but it is through Him that we are now made like Him. We are now transformed to being the sacrifice and altar - true priestliness.

In being the sacrifice and altar ourselves (Romans 12:1-2), we are no longer obligated to offer sacrifices. We have the blood poured out once and for all by our great High Priest. He is the ultimate fulfillment of all oblations and sacrifices. Now we go and do the same by pouring ourselves out like drink offerings to anyone and everyone that we know are in need. This is the eternal covenant. This is why we no longer need to offer sacrifices.

If we're witnessing to the Jews, and this comes up, how do we respond? How should we tell them that their prayer is not enough? How do we know that our prayer is enough? It is solely based upon the resurrection reality. Because we have been raised from the dead - something that you will know whether indeed it has or has not happened to you - we know that our prayers are answered. Resurrection does not mean that we are somehow now holier than thou, but in contrast would indicate a life of meekness.

Our righteous deeds are not something manifest to us. We live and move and have our being in simply doing good works. You don't need to ask me in order for me to do something for you. Typically, it seems like I end up buying groceries, sending money, encouraging and edifying, promoting and glorying in, and providing for any and every need that I am able without being asked. We know that so and so doesn't have much money, so we provide them food. We know that so and so is a single mom with 3 kids, so we buy school supplies, or pay the bills, or donate a gas card. We know so and so is entering into a new phase of life, so we encourage them however the Spirit leads.

Why do we need the blood of Messiah? We need the blood of Messiah because we need His Spirit poured out as a drink offering. We need the blood of Messiah because we need His Unleavened Bread - the Word of Truth - as a living reality within us (Psalm 51:6). We need the blood of Messiah because we need the incense, the sin offering, the burnt offering, the peace offering, the drink offering, the meal offering, and even the priestly functions that I haven't mentioned. We need the blood of Messiah because we need Him to fulfill all of the Law and Prophets. We cannot do this on our own, and so we look to Him to do it in us, through us, for us, and by us.

The blood is as important as every other aspect of the Law. For, "To sin in one aspect is to transgress the whole Law," James 2:10. We aren't under the Law in the sense that we are obligated to offer sacrifices. We are under a new Law. We are under the Law of Grace, which is in all aspects more difficult to follow than the written Law. God expects much more of us. These Jews that live more devoutly than we have even considered possible - it is in regard to them that Jesus says, "Unless your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the Pharisees, you cannot enter the Kingdom of Heaven."

Mystery of Messiah

Why does the Old Testament talk about the nations being judged because of their treatment of Israel, and then the New Testament speaks of judgment coming to the nations because of Jesus?

In the book of Isaiah, when you reach chapter 40 and onward, it seems as though there is a blur between Israel and their judgment and the Messiah’s suffering. Many times you read of Israel being the servant of God. But then only a few verses later you read of a servant that will deliver Israel. And then you read again of how Jacob is God’s chosen – His elect. And then you read of the Messiah that is the elect being called of name by God. It almost seems as though the Messiah and Israel are both intertwined and to receive judgment/chastisement. Maybe that is why the orthodox Jews find Isaiah 53 being about Israel instead of Messiah.

Part of what we’re seeing here is that Israel is a victim. Their past and their history show a lot of persecution and suffering. So when we are in Isaiah 53, we as Christians read this as Jesus. Some Jews, however, are able to internalize it and see Israel. So I know that when I say this I’m stepping on toes and hitting a nerve. But I think that the difference between the Jewish translation of this passage being Israel and the Christian translation being Messiah is that the former sees self as a victim and the latter sees self as a victor.

This is important to note. When you read the prayers of the prophets, and when you read about the salvation of Israel, you find over and over again that the people Israel need to acknowledge that they are the ones at fault. This isn’t the goyim (nations) that are persecuting us. It is God Himself chastising. This isn’t suffering being inflicted by godless men. This is God Himself judging. If they are unwilling to receive the judgment of God as from God, but will only receive it as victims of a cruel anti-Semitic world, then they will continue to undergo suffering and persecution – each time getting worse than the last.

But this is something every Christian needs to understand as well. If God did not spare His own Son, and if God did not spare His own people, why would He spare we that are grafted in as wild branches? Do not boast. Do not be arrogant or conceited. God has grafted you into their root for purpose. But God will cut you off and graft them back in.  There will come a time where they will be regrafted, but it won’t be at the expense of the Gentile believers. Only if you are diligent and don’t boast against the true branches will you endure to the end.

So get back to the initial question of “How do you reconcile the Old Testament saying that the judgment of the nations comes down to how they treat the Jew and the New Testament saying that the judgment of the nations comes down to what they do with Jesus?” How do these things come together? It is a paradox, but if you will study this, you will find that it comes together in the cross. It is the pattern of God that suffering goes before the glory. Before there was resurrection, there had to be death.

God’s pattern has been established in the cross of Jesus. When you read the prophecies concerning Israel’s redemption, it always either states that there will no longer be tribulation, persecution, suffering, tears, etc, or it comes right after passages about judgment. It is always one or the other. And the reason for that is because it is the pattern of God. The end of the age will conclude with Jesus’ return. But it comes immediately after suffering like the world has never seen.

So what am I getting at here?

The paradox is something of hermeneutic. Many times in the prophets they said there would be death and pestilence and famine and judgment. All of these things happened. But did it happen exactly like the prophet said? Many times no. There was an immediate fulfillment, and yet there was only a partial fulfillment. The way this is worded is, “already and not yet.” It has already happened, but has yet to happen.

So the paradox of Israel and the Messiah come to a crux at this. Yes, many of the Scriptures that are referenced in the New Testament have been fulfilled. Peter said that the latter days outpouring of the Spirit had come in Acts 2. Peter indicated in his first epistle chapter 2 that we are living stones building a spiritual temple as a spiritual priesthood and offering spiritual sacrifices. This is probably a reference to Hosea 3:4 where God said that Israel shall for a time be without temple, sacrifice, priest, and ephod until David their king comes and rules over them.

But has that been fulfilled? Peter says yes, but there is an obvious sense in which it has not been fulfilled. Jesus has not returned. There has not been an antichrist to cut off sacrifices at the temple. There has not been an abolition of death. There hasn’t been the final defeat of Satan. World peace has not been established. So there must be something yet future that will take place that will fulfill all these prophecies. Though they have had partial fulfillment, and we can even say that there are spiritual implications in them, there has not been the literal fulfillment of any of these things.

And so the main point is not to split the Messiah and Israel. It is not to distinguish between which prophecies are about Jesus and which prophecies are about Israel in the last days. The main point is to understand that their callings are the same. The Messiah is the first fruit. He suffered and was raised from the dead before that ultimate suffering and resurrection of Israel. But it doesn’t stop there. There is another mystery at work here.

We are the Body of Christ. Those who have the testimony of Jesus and follow the commandments of God are now called to live out and fulfill the very same Scriptures given to Christ. We are also called to be a suffering servant. That isn’t to say that we are to be victims, but that we are to suffer on behalf of. The suffering servant of Isaiah 53 is not one that continuously is persecuted. The suffering servant of Isaiah 53 is one that lays down his life for the benefit of all.

This was fulfilled in the cross of Jesus. But there is another fulfillment still yet to come in the Church. And then there will be the final fulfillment in Israel’s death and resurrection at the end of the age. We are all heading to this. The glory of God being revealed from on high cannot come until the suffering and death of all three of these. Messiah is the first fruit, a remnant of the Church is then to have that same achievement and obtain the first resurrection, and then Israel will also suffer the death and resurrection to be the priestly nation to the nations in the Millennial Kingdom. The first has already happened, the last two are yet future.

This is why we need to be extremely careful in our Christology. We can actually attribute to Christ something that deteriorates God. Use extreme caution when saying something is fulfilled in Christ, and therefore it doesn’t need to happen in the future. This is heresy.

The reason that the nations get judged by how they treat Israel and what they do with Jesus is in this. They are the same question. Ultimately, what you are saying in your treatment of these two issues is what you are saying about God. It is the exact same pattern of God being worked out before the nations. If they deny Jesus, they will also deny the work of God in Israel. If they deny the work of God in Israel, they will also deny Jesus. To deny the one is to deny the other. We're talking about God's chosen servant in both cases. This gets to the heart of the matter.

If a Christian claims belief in Jesus, but then renounces this kind of scenario with Israel, then they are ultimately denying the very same Gospel message they proclaim. The cross is foolishness, but why? It is foolishness because who has ever heard of the idea that we gain our victory in our death? Who would call this logical that he who loses his life shall find it? It was true of Jesus, it is true for us, and it will be true for Israel in the last days.
]]>

The Amalekites are wolves

I want to introduce a thought that I've been having for a while, but haven't quite figured out how to express it. Because the thought is rather deep, I wanted to introduce it in a way that wasn't so deep. I'll first put the thought out, and then we'll go into a further explanation.

Every nation that is mentioned in the Bible is stemmed from Genesis 10. Genesis 10 is called "the Table of Nations." It gives you the lineage of the original three sons of Noah, and each of these patriarchs made a nation. From these nations in Genesis 10 come every other nation. Knowing how they are all linked back gives us a good insight into these nations for multiple reasons:

1) God still holds these nations accountable, even though they are not "technically" still around today.
2) All current nations and past nations stem from those peoples, and God sees a continuum from them to the present day.
3) Each nation has a spirit, or characteristic, that is intrinsic to that people. 

The nations mentioned in Genesis 10 have a certain characteristic about them that distinguishes them from all other nations. It isn't enough to say that they have this or that lineage, and they were named this, and so that is what makes them different. What makes them different is the spirit - the principality or power - that is ruling over that nation. We can be of a certain lineage and act quite contrary. Jesus said to the Jews that were questioning Him in John 8, "If you were Abraham's children, you would act like Abraham." They were technically Abraham's offspring by birth, but that did not count them worthy of that title. If Jesus saw it this way, then God always sees it this way. The two views are the same. 

When we dive into our Bible, we find many times that God will somehow throw out these strange phrases. An example would be when He said, "I brought you up out of Egypt and redeemed you from the land of slavery. I sent Moses to lead you, also Aaron and Miriam," Micah 6:4. Was the generation that Micah spoke to the same generation that God called out of Egypt? No. This isn't wiped away by playful metaphor or rhetorical language either. God charged the people that Micah spoke to as if they were the very same generation that came out of Egypt. He saw no difference, though it were centuries later and completely different people. He sees an unbroken continuum between these generations according to character, and not according to name.

When we look at the nations in the Bible, we find that certain nations seem to be condemned with no remedy. Why? Because what God is condemning is not the people of Egypt, but the spirit of Egypt. He is condemning the spirit of Babylon. He is condemning the spirit of Tyre. When we lose this understanding, we find it excruciatingly difficult to see how it could be that God would speak such harsh things against these nations. He speaks against what they represent. Any person that would subscribe that that spirit is to receive that judgment, but anyone who subscribes to this spirit will receive of this blessing.

Lets look at the Amalekites. Who were they? We find that the Amalekites are a descendant of Esau. Esau is Jacob's brother. We read in Exodus 17 about how the Amalekites, when Israel came out of Egypt, would stay afar off behind the house of Israel and would slay the weak, the fatigued, the elderly, the children, and anyone else that could not keep up with the majority. They would hunt like wolves. They swarm the sick, the ones that are not able to defend themselves.

Jesus said of such people, "Beware." They come to you in sheep's clothing - pretending to be a descendant of your brother, or in modern language, a part of Christ's Body - but they are inwardly ravenous wolves. A wolf is one that stays away from the strong. They take the weak, the sick, the young, and any who cannot defend themselves. Wolves are cowards. They bite at the leg so that you cannot get away, and then they all come in and swarm around you gnashing their teeth.

This is exactly what the Amalekites did. Saul was charged by God to slay them. But he didn't. He was told to utterly destroy them - don't even allow for the animals to survive. Instead, Saul allowed the king and all of the best of the animals to survive. He took the animals "as an offering" unto the Lord. It was this kind of disobedience that caused the prophet Samuel to weep through the night.

What is so horrible about allowing some animals to survive? After all, they were supposed to be an offering unto the Lord.

Saul did not recognize that he was being called upon to take out the enemy of God. He was being called upon to eradicate an enemy that torments and exterminates the weak and oppressed. God was calling upon Saul to stand up for the weak, stand up for the small, stand up for the child, stand up for the elderly, and stand up for those that cannot stand up themselves. Instead, Saul took it as a bizarre sort of command, and did not take it seriously enough.

That kind of half obedience is not obedience. It caused the prophetic man who understood what they Amalekites represented to weep through the night.

Only a few chapters later we find that Saul completely and utterly destroys Nob. Nob was a town of priests. The very time of extermination that was required of Saul to kill the enemy of God, which he could not perform, was the degree of extermination that Saul was able to slay the priests of God. What would cause him to be able to exterminate the priests, but not the enemies? The priests helped out David, and therefore Saul figured they were not fit to live.

Ministers, elders, deacons, pastors, and the fathers in the faith are called to this one task: utterly destroy the Amalekites. Those that would purport to be sheep, but are inwardly ravenous wolves: kill them. There is no other option. Those that are wolves in our congregations, in our fellowships, in our friends, in our families, or any other kind of relation where they might attack the weak, we are given the command of God to protect the weak at any cost - even the cost of wolf bashing. You will offend. It takes that kind of offense to ensure the safety of those that God has entrusted to you.

Those that are rams are to guard and protect the flock. Any goat or wolf or fox that acts like a sheep, but is not a sheep, is to be opposed to the uttermost. Don't allow one to continue to stand. That spirit that was in Saul that did not equip him to destroy the Amalekites is alive and well in our leaders today. It took David to destroy them. Nothing less than a David, which is in every point and particular the spirit of Jesus, will suffice. Our leadership needs to lead in the spirit of Jesus, and never in the spirit of our own ability. "Not by strength, nor by might, but by my Spirit, says the Lord."

Every nation has a spirit that they represent. The enemies of God are to be overthrown. Many of us have not come into that Land that God has promised - which is Zion - because we have not yet began to overcome the 7 spirits that are bigger and stronger than you. It takes the power of the Spirit to overcome these nations. Nothing short of the cross and death working in our own lives will deliver them into our hands. One of the biggest battles of the book of Joshua was won because God sent hailstones down from heaven, and God killed more that day than the entire army of Israel.

This is the beginning of my thought. I haven't quite wrestled with all of the implications, but I believe that at the end of the age, Jesus will separate the nations as a Shepherd separates the sheep from the goats (Matthew 25:32). When we have been content to assume that God will judge each man according to his work, maybe the words of Jesus speak a bit more of a truth that we will all be gathered according to the nations that we represent. Each man will be judged accordingly, and I have no doubt that God is able to judge us as individuals, but maybe there is something to this nations thing. I haven't quite gotten my head around it, but I find that even in Revelation 22, when there aren't supposed to be nations, there is a mention of the nations outside of the City of God that must come up to the City and take of the fruit of the Tree of Life. This is supposed to be heaven, and yet there are nations that didn't make it into being the Bride of Christ, and at the same time are present in heaven?

Maybe our understanding is all too Greek, and we need to be taken out from that understanding and brought into a Hebraic view. I don't claim to have it. I just simply mean that what I see in the Bible seems to contradict many of our most precious views about eternity and what it means to be the people of God.