(Inside front cover)

If this present dispensational program of pure grace had been revealed prior to Israel’s rejection of The Risen Christ then they would have had an excuse, legitimate or otherwise, for that rejection. The "70" A.D. crisis definitely ended a cycle of ages and began another.

Scripture Research 

Volume 3 Number 4

Scripture Research, Inc., P.O. Box 51716 Riverside, CA 92517

Ewalt Memorial Bible School, Atascadero, California

                                                                      Page

New Testament Usage of Quotations

From The Old Testament. ………………… 1

by Russell H. Schaefer.

The COM INGS of The Lord ………………27

by Russell H. Schaefer

The Splendor Of His Glory ……………….. 77

by Russell H. Schaefer

Daniel's Seventy Weeks …………………… 80

by Russell H. Schaefer

The Riches of The Glory Of

This Mystery ……………………………….. 82

by Keith McDonald

The Hope Of Glory ………………………... 84

by Russell H. Schaefer

The Pleroma ……………………………...... 85

by Douglas Falk

Notes From A Letter ..................................... 89

Dethroned Principalities and Powers …….. 90

by Russell H. Schaefer

To Complete The Word of God

…………………………. Outside back cover

by Russell H. Schaefer

Re: Quotations, Dr. E.W. Bullinger who wrote: "There is no misquotation by the Apostle, but the perfect liberty of the Divine author: a liberty claimed and used by human authors in quoting their own previous writings."

(Fr. The Great Cloud of Witnesses, P. 460)

Re: The Comings of The Lord. Dr. E. R. Hooper, M.D. Toronto, Canada was asked: "What would you do if The Lord were to return today?" He aptly answered, "… continue correcting these papers."

Re: The Splendor of His Glory, The Riches of The Glory, The Hope of Glory, and The Pleroma: All these seek to see The Perfect Christ reflected in the Body of Christ as a fore-runner of what God has in store for all.

His Visage was so marred more than any man, 

and His form, more than the sons of men.

Isa. 52:14

Burdened, under the terrible timber,

He leans and falls,

The furrowed back an encasement of

our sins and. woes.

The sorrows of Mankind are carved

upon His face: And,

on His thorned brow,

the pain inflicted on the race.

Midst tramping beat of horse and soldier's feet, His gentle words to a

kneeling woman's tears, "weep

not for me." No, not for Him

we cry, but for those for whom

He dies.

In His stark beauty we trace out creation's

cause —

Lo, feel the Heart of God! Lo, share the

glory of God's Giving Love — a Love that writes over all men's sins "Forgive, Forgive"

No gulf remains, no distance of stars,

space, or, sin.

In Him, Heaven reaches down, and Lifteth up —

t o H i m .

Russell H. Schaefer

NEW TESTAMENT USAGE OF QUOTATIONS

FROM THE OLD TESTAMENT

By Russell H. Schaefer

Nearly all of the Old Testament quotations found in the New Testament are from the LXX, not the Hebrew or Aramaic text. Intriguing as it may be to suppose the original text of the New Testament to be either Hebrew or Aramaic, no definitive proof has been forthcoming to that effect. The occurrences of Hebrew and Aramaic words and phrases are no proof that the originals were in those languages, any more than the vast number of foreign words in William Shakespeare's work prove that the originals were other than English. Rather, it would be highly abnormal not to find Hebrew and Aramaic usage in the New Testament, as even Shakespearean idioms have become a part of our English-American heritage. In the Greek New Testament, which is the basis of nearly all New Testament translations, the Old Testament quotations are taken from the LXX, that is, the Greek Old Testament called the Septuagint, translated 300-130 B.C.

As to why the LXX was used as the basis of the quotations, it may have been because the Hebrew language was local, restricted, and largely unknown even to most of the Jewish people. It may have been a simple matter of finance. The Hebrew text was protected and controlled by the Scribes, an elite class, and an edition of the Old Testament with five errors or less cost in the amount of $30,000; a LXX edition transmitted in one of the slave writing schools would cost about $3.20. Greek was the language used throughout the Roman Empire and was the language of convenience everywhere. Each district and nationality would add its flavor to the language, just as it is done with English.

The problem of the Old Testament quotations in the New Testament not only involves the usage of the Old Testament in the New but has a bearing upon interpretation. The Old Testament accounts were largely literal or factual in relationship to the events spoken of or the persons involved. The dictum of interpretation has been, "Literal if possible, figurative if impossible." This would seem

1

at first glance to be a sane and safe rule. However, one who takes the time to look up the New Testament usage of the Old Testament might be in for a very rude awakening. Any contravening of the accepted dictum by one claiming to love The Word of God is unacceptable, yet, a greater truth might be lost not to do so.

To state the contrary briefly so as not to be misunderstood: The New Testament quotations of the Old Testament have largely the spiritual import of the text in mind. Thus, the quotation may ignore the setting of the original text, the meaning of the original text, and application or interpretation of the original text. or, it may have a completely different thought than ever imagined by the original text usage. As a rule, the spiritual meaning is stressed in the New Testament. Nor is the wording of the original text slavishly used, as we are prone to do. There is freedom in quoting that is alien to fundamentalism. Sometimes New Testament writers bring together sections from several verses that are completely unrelated in the Old Testament. It is hoped that the following texts will illustrate New Testament quotations of the Old so that in looking at these quotations we may be made richer in spiritual things.

Before we go into the texts, it might be well to mention that the early Christians, and many Jewish writers, carried the analogous method of interpretation of both the Old and New Testaments into the realm of fancy. Fundamentalism and the literalism of the western mind have gone to the other extreme. Christ Himself had to correct the over-literalness of His disciples in respect to His statements that they must eat His flesh and drink His blood. He bluntly told them, "The flesh profits nothing; the words that I speak unto you are spirit and life." He was trying to show them vividly that His life must become a part of us in a spiritual way. His hearers were thinking in cannibalistic terms. Later, an association was made with the so-called Lord's Supper, or Communion, the drinking of the wine and eating of the bread. The true mysticism of The Word of God sets forth a living conscious relationship with God and a life lived in relationship and union with The Lord Jesus Christ. True worship is in Spirit and in Truth, not in physical

2

postures, places, food, dress or drink. In the kindergarten of life or religion the area of touch, sound, sight and feeling is paramount; it is unfortunate that instead of growing up into Christ in all things we drag along the nursery toys.

Marcion (AD 140), instead of looking at the Old Testament as being the ABCs of revealed religion finding its fulfillment and fullness in the New Testament, looked upon the brutal physicalness found in the Old Testament and pronounced it an inferior revelation to the New. The physical and historical process is stressed in the Old Testament. The fulfillment of types and shadows would, of course, be spiritual, and lend itself to the highest conception of God.

In being the constant manifestation of God, The Lord Jesus Christ is and has always been The same Christ. As His person, office and work unfold, our perceptions take on added meaning and dimensions. We see Him, yet we do not see all that is to be seen. As photography is the study of light and form, so Christ is The Substance of our knowledge of God, His nature and His being. Truly the words to Peter, that "flesh and blood" had not revealed this to him, should alert us that there is a spiritual by-faith appropriation of the things of God in terms of Christ that is beyond the "flesh and blood" attainments. Truth in relationship to the person and perfections of Christ and the completeness of His work that is rejected is truth which we cannot bear the consequences of embracing.

The quotations from the Old Testament found in the New, upon investigation, offer some surprises. The original of the quotation is supposed to apply directly to the circumstance, person, or event to which it is related in the New Testament.

And he arising took unto him the child and its mother by night, and retired into Egypt; and was there until the death of Herod, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the lord through the prophet, saying, Out of Egypt called My Son (Matt. 2:14, 15).

3

The original of this quotation is found in Hosea 11:1:

When Israel was a child, then I loved him, and called My son out of Egypt.

The passage in Hosea has reference to Israel's being called out of Egypt, and as a nation being called God's Son, His Firstborn (see Ex. 4:22, 23). While Israel was in Egypt, the role of protector and provider — the Firstborn — was filled by Pharaoh. Israel was again to assume her rightful place in order to be the medium of God's blessing all the nations of the earth. The pronouncement of Hosea was for the very opposite reason, to show how Israel was to fall from her role of Firstborn into bondage of the Assyrian, which for the Ten Tribes (the Northern Kingdom) took place about 600 B.C. The text in the New Testament applies the quotation to Christ, The only true Firstborn, not only now of Israel, the nations, but of all creation. Instead of having been in bondage in Egypt, He was there provided for and protected until Herod's death. If God's ultimate goal, of which Israel was the intermediate step, was fulfilled in Christ, then the passage and other kindred passages take on a luster of grace and beauty, and God is vindicated in all His ways.

Another passage a few verses on from the foregoing one is interesting:

Then Herod, seeing that he had been mocked by the wise men, was exceedingly enraged, and sent and slew all the male children that were in Bethlehem, and in all its bounds, from two years old and under, according to the time which he had ascertained from the wise men.

Then was fulfilled that which was spoken through Jeremiah the prophet, saying:

A voice in Ramah was heard, Weeping and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children, And would not be comforted, Because they are not (Matt. 2:16-18).

4

In the original Old Testament text (Jer. 31:15-17) Ramah is a city of Benjamin, not Bethlehem. The context is just the opposite of the New Testament quotation. Rachel (ancient mother of the tribe of Benjamin) wept that her children were in captivity in Babylon. God offered her hope that her son (the tribe of Benjamin) would return from captivity. He did, with Judah. Thus, the Jeremiah passage was a message of hope, while the New Testament quotation of it was one of despair. The feeling of the verse, aside from its original context and intent, was in keeping with the slaughter of the innocents. The letter of the text gave way to the sentiment of the verse, and God's Spirit let it serve to describe the suffering of those who died when Herod sought to kill The Christ.

There is no Old Testament passage which corresponds to the following quotation of Matthew's from "the prophets":

... and came and fixed his dwelling in a city called Nazareth, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken through the prophets, A Nazarene shall He be called (Matt. 2:23).

Some of the sayings of the prophets are not recorded. This is likely the case here. If there is a connection between being a Nazarene and a Nazarite, it is obscure (Cf. netser, Isa. 41:1; see also 53:2).

In the verses following, a subject is presented about which much controversy has arisen. The context of the original verse in the Old Testament dare not be consulted or it would reduce (to some) the uniqueness of our Lord's Divine conception. Childbirth, while not taking away from the purity of Mary, would void any physical virginity on her part. This she admitted by her offering of two turtledoves or pigeons (Lk. 2:22-24) for her purification according to the Law. The birth process and virginity are mutually exclusive.

But all this hath come to pass that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by The Lord through the prophet, saying:

5

Lo! a Virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they call His name Emmanuel, which is being translated, God with us (Matt. 1:22, 23).

The quotation is from Isaiah 7:14. It should read, "Behold the young woman," i.e., "my wife," the prophetess, Isaiah's second wife (Isa. 8:3), "is with child, and is about too bring forth a son, and she shall call his name Immanuel" (The Student's Commentary, George Williams, in loco). This child was also called Maher-shalal-hash-baz, Haste-spoil-speed-prey. Before the child would be weaned or could talk (Isa. 7:16 and 8:4), judgment would fall upon the House of David, the two tribes (Isa. 7:10-13), so that the land would be forsaken of both her kings (Isa. 7:16).

It was not at all unusual for persons to be signs in the Old Testament. One needs only to look at the various wives of Hosea, with their sons, as signs.

A wife of whoredoms ... So he went and took Gomer, the daughter of Diblaim, which conceived and bare him a son … Jezreel … a daughter … Lo-ruhamah … and … a son . . . Lo-ammi (Hos. 1:2-9).

Gomer means completion, i.e., filling up of idolatry. She was from Diblaim, which means a double cake of figs, symbol of sensual pleasure. Jezreel means May God Scatter, or May God Sow—Israel will be scattered and sown among the nations; yet may be sown in her own land. Lo-ruhamah, not compassionated, rendered "not beloved" in Romans 9:25 and "not having obtained mercy" in 1 Peter 2:10. God would take away the kingdom which belonged to them. The second son's name, Lo-ammi, means Not My People (notes from the Companion Bible).

Another wife was taken by Hosea (Hos. 3), an adulteress, the northern tribes being so designated. The cheap price paid for her marked the worthlessness of this wife, the symbolism being transferred to the adulterous people. Because of her unfaithfulness (hence, that of the people of Israel and Judah), there could not be a

6

national relationship with God, a fact epitomized in the words written — no king, no prince, no sacrifice, no priestly functions. The varied functions of Hosea 3:4 make the prophecy inclusive of all the twelve tribes.

It is interesting that the Apostle Paul should bring together several texts from Hosea and combine them with passages from Isaiah:

As also in Hosea He saith - I will can the Not-My-People, My People And the Not-Beloved, Beloved. And it shall be - In the place where it was said to them - Not My people are ye!  There shall they be called - Sons of the Living God (Rom. 9:25-26, from Hos. 1:10, 2:23).

Isaiah moreover exclaimed over Israel – Though the number of the sons of Israel be as the sand of the sea The remnant shall be saved; For a complete and concise account will The Lord make upon the earth. And even as Isaiah hath before said - If The Lord of Hosts had not left us a seed As Sodom had we become And as Gomorrah had we been made (Rom. 9:27-29, from Isa. 10:22, 1:9).

The quotation is a lengthy one but it illustrates several things about this subject. The context of the Romans passage is in direct opposition to the original concept in Hosea. There it was spoken of the Ten and the Two Tribes, while in Romans Paul uses the language to mean the inclusion of the Gentiles, as he states in Romans 9:24. Paul looks upon the nations as being partners in God's original call to the riches of His glory (see Rom. 9:23, 24). Of course, Paul was correct in this, as over against the Jews' feeling that they alone were called to God's glory. The Gentile makes the same mistake as did the Jew. Pride knows no racial boundaries. It is too frequently

7

forgotten that Abraham was a Gentile, not a Jew, not an Israelite, God’s purpose was that in the Seed of Abraham (that Seed is Christ, as in Galatians 3:16), all families of the earth were to be blessed; and, they had indeed been, albeit they knew it not.

Paul uses the word Jews in Rent. 9:24 and adds to that the nations. He uses the Hosea passage to buttress this enlarged concept of the Jew. On the other hand, Paul's use of the passages from Isaiah projects the diminution and rejection of Israel as a theocratic kingdom and sees the salvation of God operating only on an individual basis to a remnant of that people. Paul is not here speaking of limits imposed upon God's grace, salvation, or justification to anyone or at any time. Rather, he asserts that Israel as a nation was rejected in the days of which Isaiah spoke; and parallel to this act 700 years earlier, in the case of the fathers of Israel, it could be true again in Paul's day.

It should be pointed out that even while the Twelve Tribes were in captivity, any one person could have communion and fellowship with God. The writers of the Captivity were good examples of this. But the nation of Israel would not function as a theocracy, a nation to be a light to the nations of the earth.

Paul's usage of these passages was for other ends than that seen in the original. It is possible that Paul looked at the condition of the people at the time of the prophecy and saw that in effect they were not different from the nations about them; the physical marks on their bodies, their claims of being Abraham's physical seed, all were to no avail in giving them a special claim on God. Could it be that this is the reason he included the nations in applying the passages? It could be so. As they stand written, they are out of context. As they were used, they convey a blessed truth, that no one is out of the reach of God's grace, on a personal basis. Unfortunately, Israel sought God too frequently on a national basis, as though God owed them something because of a national calling.

God owes us nothing because of a national calling, whatever our forefathers may have had in mind for this America. We never were God's theocracy, but we can have a personal relationship just

8

as well as did Daniel, or Jeremiah, or anyone else living then, or now.

In 1 Peter 2:10 the Hosea passage is again quoted. Peter addresses his epistle to the sojourners of the dispersion, and in this connection the Hosea text would call to mind God's former mercies to this people. Peter's epistle was in-keeping with the dispensational setting of the Book of Acts inasmuch as God was once again giving the Twelve Tribes an opportunity to become "His people." To use the terms as Peter does of a "chosen generation," "a kingly priesthood," "a holy nation" (see Exodus 19:5, 6) in 1 Peter 2:9 gives them a far different meaning than they had when they were used of Israel of old. Peter used the terms of a "spiritual house," not the temple at Jerusalem; of a "holy priesthood," but not to offer up bloody sacrifices as did the priests of old, rather to offer "spiritual sacrifices" (1 Peter 2:5). These were spiritual concepts; then, too, the "holy nation" must also be spiritual. This was God's intention all along.

Peter also explains that the Rock of Zion (1 Peter 2:6-8) is The Lord Jesus Christ, not a piece of stone, but a living person. The book of Hebrews uses the very same analogy in Hebrews 12:22 when it speaks of those who were leaving behind the ABCs of the Old Covenant and were coming to Him in Whom was embodied the New:

But ye have approached Unto Zion's Mountain (Heb. 12:22a).

Zion's Mountain is Christ, and these are said to have come to it at that time, not in some future time or place. They are also said to have come to the City of the Living God, not in an after life or a future state, but then. They were also receiving and possessing a kingdom that cannot be shaken (Heb. 10:28). Was the kingdom spiritual? Was Abraham seeking a spiritual kingdom as well? If he was in reality seeking a "walled city," a "city of defense," …? Was Christ this to him?

Paul, in the Galatian letter, writes what our literal western mind refuses to accept:

9

Which things are an allegory (Gal. 4:24, KJV).

Which things may bear another meaning (Rotherham).

Notice the immediate context of the Galatian passage (Galatians 4:21-26): Two sons, two women, two covenants, two mountains, two cities.

According to Paul's own analogy the two sons represent respectively law and promise. The two women represent that which was of the flesh versus that which was of promise. The two mountains represent the covenants, one of bondage (the Laws of Sinai which the Twelve Tribes pledged to keep but did not) and the other Mount Zion (from whence the Deliverer was to come) giving freedom. The cities were both named Jerusalem. The earthly one was hardly the "possessor of peace," but it was there that The Prince of Peace was slain. In contrast to this, Abraham wanted a "City of Peace," a place where the heart could be at rest with itself and God.

Rotherham's translation, "... which things may bear another meaning," may sum up how so much of the usage and quotations may be used. Peter called Noah's ark "a figure" (1 Pet. 3:20, 21), and from the figure (not the literal ark) drawing the analogy, "a baptism that saves." It was not the washing away of the filth of the flesh; it was not "water," as that would have to do with the flesh, and no water touched those in the ark, as no water touched those crossing the Red Sea. Those in the ark were delivered from the water, so the figure consisted in the analogy of safety and of shelter. For those in Noah's day, this safe shelter was the ark; and in another and a different sense, Christ is that Shelter and Safe Place for us from any storm of judgment that might have fallen.

Truly, Christ called His death a baptism (Lk. 12:50) and Paul speaks of the believer's union with Christ's redemptiveness a baptism into death (Romans 6). No mere man can place another into Christ, into His death and into His resurrection. The blessed Colossian letter states that this was a spiritual baptism in which the believer and Christ were co-buried and co-raised through faith in the operation of God (Col. 2:12), not of man at all. Again and again

10

this special spiritual note is struck when figures or types or even historical events or persons are used to illustrate higher truths. Even in the Old Testament physical circumcision is used of not only the body but the mind and affections. It is carried a step higher in Colossians 2:11 where it identifies us in being "cut off" in the cutting off" of Christ, i.e., His death and rejection.

The early scholars may have been prone to over-spiritualize The Word of God in their efforts to understand it, but our western mind may be guilty of just the opposite. Whatever may be our reasoning, inductive or deductive, may the end product of it, as it was with Paul, be The Christ. Paul used analogical applications of the Old Testament in the sense of fulfillment, carrying symbolism to its utmost end. It was Christ who was The Passover (1 Cor. 5:7); it was Christ who was The Rock (1 Cor. 10:4); it is the believer who is the inner dwelling place of God through the spirit (Eph. 2:21, 22); and Christ is That Spirit who dwells there in love through means of our faith (Eph. 3:17); our blessings are all in Christ, in the heavenlies, not material or political (Eph. 1:3). "Christ is all, and in all, Christ" seems to be the constant thrust of Paul's message to us.

Some of the Old Testament writers depict a very high degree of spirituality as do most of the New Testament writers. It is common to all of human nature to desire physical blessings and material gain, if only to feel a bit of religious merit, as proof of our spirituality or walk with God. Unfortunately, as with Israel, the gifts soon take the place of the Giver; and religion, with its form, is so easily substituted for a vital living fellowship with God. It is difficult to understand that Israel's classroom of religion was not intended for our enrollment. We are given the opportunity to start off with a perfect Christ, a complete work, a simple faith, plus nothing of merit or demerit, and a future of exploring the riches of His grace and love, and serving Him because we find Him worthy of service, a service outflowing from love alone.

One of the unusual quotations in the New Testament is found in Galatians 3:16. The text is given in full, but the words actually

11

quoted will be italicized , otherwise they might be difficult to recognize.

Now unto Abraham were spoken the promises -and unto his seed;

He saith not - And unto thy seeds as of many, But as of one – and unto thy seed, which is Christ (Gal. 3:16).

This is taken from Genesis 21:12, where the word "seed" is singular, corresponding with Isaac. In Genesis 17:7, 9 the word "seed" is plural [in meaning, not in the Hebrew form to correspond with "after thee, for generations," implying plurality of offspring. The text of Genesis 21:12 has to do with Isaac, the son that had been promised to Abraham with Sarah, his wife. Thinking that time was running out on both of them, Abraham had a child by a slave, the supposed heir, Ishmael. Abraham was 86 years old at Ishmael's birth (Gen. 16:16). He was 100 years old at the birth of Isaac (Gen. 21:5). Therefore, Ishmael was 14 years old at the birth of Isaac.

Weaning of a child was looked upon as a special event and usually took place at five years of age, so Ishmael was nearly 20 years old when Isaac was weaned (Gen. 21:8). The "mocking" of Hagar over Isaac's transition from babyhood to boyhood was accompanied by persecution from Ishmael (Gal. 4)19), a persecution with the intent to murder, as Cain murdered Abel.

Instead of the death sentence, both mother and son were banished, Ishmael to become the father of the Arabian nation or people. Isaac means "Laughter." He was a promised son, begotten when both his parents were beyond the age of bearing children, a son of laughter, one meant to give joy and laughter. He was to depict an only son, one that would be obedient unto death, that would bear the wood up a hill, that would be "slain in type," who would ask his father, "... Where is the Lamb?" and who would elicit the response from Abraham, "My son, God will provide Himself a Lamb" (Gen. 22:1-13).

12

It is no wander, then, that Paul looked at the account of the calling of Isaac and saw a foreshadowing of Christ. Making use of the singular noun "seed," he boldly sets forth Christ as The summation of Abraham's seed. Truly, all pointed to Him eventually, all was fulfilled in Him; so Paul boldly, under inspiration, makes the transition and says, "... unto thy seed, which is Christ." Paul was making a spiritual application of the Genesis passage. No one looking at Genesis 21:12 would have come to Paul's conclusion aside from inspiration.

"Seed" is used in the plural in Genesis in relationship to Abraham. Paul feels at complete freedom to see in this plural usage the inclusion of "those of Abraham's faith" as Abraham's children and sons (Rom. 4:11-17; Gal. 3:6-8), and this, without distinctions of race or nationality.

A quotation that has been the center of a lot of controversy is found in Romans 9:12 and 13. Unwarranted conclusions deduced from these and similar verses may be an impeachment of God's character while devastating the aspirations of those who would express faith in God's Christ but feel they may not be among the elect. The quotation is the forte of those that feel that God Himself is not a totally free agent; that He, as well as we, is bound by some sort of fate from which there can be no appeal or change of destiny. In the following the quotation part of the text is italicized for clarity:

It was said unto her (to Rebekah, Gen. 25:23, 1834 BC) the elder shall serve the younger; even as it is written (to Israel, Mal. 1:1-3, 374 BC) Jacob have I loved but Esau have I hated (Rom. 9:12, 13).

It must be noted that the quotation in Romans is from two different sections of The Word of God, periods separated by 1460 years. The choice of Jacob over Esau was made before either one was born, but the explanation in Genesis 25:23 is that God is speaking of nations, not individuals; of two manners of people, and that not of their personal relationship to God but their role in God's theocratic kingdom purposes to bring the Savior into the world and

13

to be a blessing thereby to all nations. There is absolutely no evidence in The Word of God that Jacob was served by Esau during their lifetime. The opposite seems to be the case. Esau was called Edom (Red, Ruddy). As such, he and his descendants, Edomites, were to be given access to the congregation of The Lord, according to Deuteronomy 23:9. Deuteronomy cautions the Israelite:

Thou shalt not abhor an Edomite; For he is thy brother (Deut. 23:7).

Seven hundred years after the pronouncement of Genesis 25:23 to the effect that the elder should serve the younger, Edom was servant to David; 150 years later, Edom (Esau) revolted under Jehoram (2 Kings 8:20). Esau or Edom was again conquered by John Hyrcanus in 129 BC, who compelled the Edomites to be circumcised "and to be absorbed into the Jewish nation. The builder of the last temple was Herod the Great, an Edomite. So, at the end, not only was the yoke of Jacob broken, but an Edomite ruled Israel!

It was "for cause" that God made choice of Jacob over against Esau. Jacob was a man of the field, a quiet man, a judicial, contemplative man with great potential for spiritual leadership (Gen. 25:27). From the descendants of this man, rather than of Esau the Hunter, God made a choice that of Jacob would come The Seed of the Woman. Both sons were qualified as Abraham's seed. Of both God made great nations; both were given blessings. To Esau the promise was made, "Behold, thy dwelling shall be the fatness of the earth, and the dew of heaven from above." But, both could not be the medium of the promised Messiah. Both could not be given the area wherein would be enacted God's unfolding glory in The Person of our Lord and the wonders of His words and works.

With respect to what nations, or nation, is to effect His purposes, God is sovereign. He may exalt one and let another de-cline if it suits His design. At a certain point in time He had chosen the whole nation of Israel, en masse, and gave national preference to the posterity of Jacob rather than Esau or Edom. The statement to Rebekah was directed to their posterity, when they would

14

become nations. It did not affect the intimate personal spiritual life of either, nor was the pronouncement intended to do so. The same choices were made with respect to Manasseh and Ephraim, Joseph's two sons; and this was also the case with David, the youngest son of seven brothers (1 Sam. 16:6-13). As for Manasseh, he would become a people but his younger brother Ephraim would become greater than he (Gen. 48:19). Nevertheless, both were blessed, though not to the same end. Twenty years after the rupture of their personal relationship, the brothers, Esau and Jacob, were to meet once again. Jacob called Esau his lord and himself Esau's servant (Gen. 32:18).

The choice of Jacob, i.e., Israel, over Esau, i.e., Edom, caused the history of the two people to, run parallel over centuries until the time of Malachi, the last prophet noted in the Old Testament Scriptures. Two centuries before Malachi, all Judah and Edom had been taken captive to Babylon (593 BC, 2 Chron. 36:20). Sixty years later, the Ten Tribes (known as Israel) came back from captivity, but Edom, or Esau, remained captive and their country was devastated. Jeremiah (49:7-22) gives a portrait of this devastation. Yet, although restored to their land, the Israelites complained that God was dealing harshly with them. This was the point in Israel's history that gave rise to the original text of which Romans 9:13 is a quotation. Within thirty years of the spiritual awakening attending the Exile's return to their homeland, Israel's condition was desperate. The prophet Malachi takes up their lament:

I have loved you, saith The Lord.  Yet, ye say, Wherein hast Thou loved us? (Mal. 1:2)

Then the prophet quotes what Edom (Esau) had been saying, that in spite of being impoverished they would return from their kindred exile and build the desolate places. Israel is assured that they are still in God's theocratic purposes, that their state is far better than that of the Edomites. This was all there was to the original text of loving Jacob and hating Esau. It has no sinister overtones of a "final destiny" as some would fain read into it. It had to do with the nation of Israel, not individuals who had been dead for

15

nearly two thousand years. Even some of the finest men of God look at these verses as though God were making a choice among men as a chess-player (they have used this figure!), sending some to heaven and others to hell on a whim, capriciously.

But, is not the word "hate" used here? To some, the meaning must be weighted with dread. But, our English word carries with it an intensity of emotion and animosity that is not found in the Hebrew usage. Christ spoke of a man's "hating" his family or else not being His disciple (Lk. 14:26), but this is no problem with us as we know our Lord merely meant that the disciple should "love his family less." The Law spoke of a wife "loved" and another "hated" (Deut. 21:15). Of Jacob's wives it is written, "Jacob loved Rachel more than Leah; and Jehovah saw that Leah was 'hated'" (Gen. 29:30). In each case, the context must determine how intense is the meaning of the word "hate." Scripture plainly de-clares that God "loves" the world (John 3:16), is the Savior of all men (1 Tim. 4:10), and desires all men to be saved (1 Tim. 2:4). In the case of Jacob and Esau (Israel and Edom) both nations prospered, as promised (Gen. 27:29, 39); both were treated the same when they sinned. As nations, there was not a great deal of difference between them except for God's choice of Israel over Edom to accomplish His theocratic-redemptive purposes in the earth and for the earth. After the period covered by Malachi, the nation of Israel went into a spiritual eclipse and no divine voice was heard until John the Baptist came in the wilderness announcing the advent of the Messiah.

The point Paul is making in the Romans quotation is that God, at different times and places, selected individuals and nations, for cause, to accomplish certain purposes. God is free to use other instruments, or to change instruments as circumstances warrant. At one point in His program God included all the physical seed of Abraham; then a selection was made within the seed; then to just One Seed, The Christ; then the process was refined to include only those of the faith and deeds of Abraham; then the seed concept was broadened to include all of those "of faith" although not physically related to Abraham at all. This last was possible once The Seed of

16

the Woman, The Christ, had come. The need for a more rigid physical lineage could then give way to faith. The inclusion of Gentiles in God's Theocratic Kingdom should have come as no surprise as even Malachi stated that this was God's intention all along:

My Name shall be great among the Gentiles (Mal. 1:11).

It is a matter of Israel's history that frequently she had been "diminished" to a subordinate role and Gentile powers thrust to the dominant position. More often than not, Israel was classified by God as "not My people." This was spoken of her in her national character; individually, men could walk with God apart from their national part in God's providence among nations. Christ, as The Messiah, has always been a Stone of Stumbling for the Jew. As Paul points out in Romans 9:30-33, few Israelites embraced the justification that "is realized in one's experience "by faith," rather than "legalism" or "law-works."

Once the structure for the coming of The Lord in His first advent had fulfilled its purpose, the structure (Israel) could be taken down, changed, or a substitution or addition made to it or for it. During the book of Acts period, of which Romans is a part, a change was made in the structure. Only a few true spiritual Israelites were left in the structure. Old limits were effaced and new spiritual dimensions were added, administratively and governmentally. The movement was increasingly toward the nations and away from Israel as a nation (not individually, since individually there was no difference between Jew and Gentile).

As we look at a building, our perceptions will vary according to our disposition and training. One person thinks of the architect, another of the structural configuration, and yet another will ponder the purpose for which the building was erected. The purpose of the ages, "the eternal purpose" (Eph. 3:22, KJV), this enactment of events upon the stages of time, was pointing in one direction — the unfolding of the nature, character and being of God. On this stage has been seen the kaleidoscope of creation with its form of angels

17

and of men; of The Redeemer and the drama of redemption; until at last all the variegated forms give way to One, The very Framer of the ages and cosmic systems introduced in human guise with wounded hands and a broken heart to harmonize the discordant parts and hearts into a wondrous whole. Israel was selected to be the medium to introduce Him to the world and in Him to reveal the glory of God. In her national life she was a parody of the ills that have beset the whole world. If she failed in being the vessel for the glory of the Lord, then our failure has been no less than hers. Initially, all the advantages were hers, but we no less than she have had The Scriptures of Truth, and The Heavenly Christ. Unlike her, we do not have the attending signs and wonders — our clothes wear out and our garments fail. These bodies enter no promised land in the full vigor of youth. But, spiritual blessings are only limited by The Fullness which is God's, and we have been given these without limit.

By necessity one is almost compelled to consider Romans 9:14-24 and the Old Testament quotations referred to therein. A great deal of controversy has raged about these texts in tine past. They have been made to teach the arbitrary callings of God, i.e., that some individuals are called of God to salvation and others to damnation. This would, of course, include infants and children.

In examining some of these texts, consideration will be given to the historical Old Testament setting, and then to the most unusual application Paul makes of the quotations. The reader is asked to note how Rotherham translates these texts. The actual quotations from the Old Testament will be italicized and will be identified as to source.

For unto Moses He saith - I will have mercy upon whomsoever I can have mercy, And, I will have compassion upon whomsoever I can have compassion (Rom. 9:15, from Ex. 33:19).

Hence then, it is not of him that wisheth nor of him that runneth, 

18

But, of the mercy-shewing God (Rom. 9:16).

For the Scripture saith unto Pharaoh – Unto this end have I raised thee up, That I may thus shew in thee My power And that I may declare My Name in all the earth (Rom. 9:17, from Ex. 9:16).

The balance of texts will follow, but of the foregoing the reader must again be reminded of Rotherham's translation both in the Old Testament and the New. "Whenever God can have compassion. He does."*

In Romans 9:15 we have a quotation from Exodus 33:19, the context of which is the promotion of Israel, the going up to possess the land and to be thus favored (engraced) and to have this special mercy shown to Moses and to the people. God had said, "Ye are a stiff-necked people; in one moment — if I should go up in thy midst should I make an end of thee" (Ex. 33:5). This followed the experience of the golden calf and Moses consequent entreating God on behalf of Israel. God could and did still have mercy. Later, that whole generation was destroyed, with the exception of two people.

Israel had failed to understand God's purpose in calling her out from among the nations; and that this calling in its out-working was contingent and conditional upon a corresponding fulfillment on her part. God even threatened to forfeit Israel and use instead the personal family of Moses, to accomplish His purposes. It is in this context that the use of "mercy" means "promotion" or "favor." When it is said that Joseph was shown "mercy" in prison (Gen. 39:21), it is with this meaning of preferential treatment and position

__________

*The Hebrew verb is a Potential Imperfect, properly translated, as Rotherham does, with the auxiliary can.

19

that the word is used. Psalm 75:6, 7 is applicable:

In this connection, For promotion cometh neither from the east, nor from the west, nor from the south.  But God is the Judge; He putteth down one, and setteth up another.

In Romans 9:15 Paul prepared his readers for the judicial pronouncement that Israel was to be demoted to the "tail," as prophesied in Deuteronomy 28. The ascendancy of the nations is boldly stated in Romans 11:25. The "fullness" of the nations there spoken of has no direct application to God's program today. In the dispensation of the grace of God, God is not dealing with nations as such in contrast to Israel; rather, He is dealing with individuals without any national distinctions whatever. All blessings are "in Christ"; all are spiritual, and that apart from Israel. It is unfortunate that we try to read ourselves back into the Acts program, into God's national purposes for Israel, rather than into that which is oriented to all without distinction. God gave Israel every inducement to serve Him, along with sanctions to ward off disobedience. With promotion from God comes attending responsibilities; we fain would steal all their blessings and leave them their curses, but the package is one as is seen clearly by reading Deuteronomy 26:16 through 28:68. All blessings and cursings of Israel were conditional.

Now, as to the conclusion drawn from the history of the Pharaoh of the Exodus, it is written concerning him:

Then arose a new king over Egypt who had not known Joseph (Ex. l:8a).

Joseph personally had been dead for centuries, so the text must refer to Joseph's people, the sons of Jacob who had sojourned out of their homeland for 430 years. They had been welcomed in Egypt, but a new dynasty had arisen through conquest. Of this ruler we read that he had enslaved the people and ordered all male children to be executed. The attitude of his heart is reflected in the statement of Exodus 5:2.

20

Who is Jehovah, that I should obey His voice? (Ex. 5:2)

This was the primary cause of Pharaoh's hardening his own heart. The occasion was the then impending Exodus of the Israelites from his reign of slavery and death. Psalm 18:26 is very apt in this context:

With the pure Thou didst show Thyself pure.  But with the perverse Thou didst shew Thyself ready to contend.

This is similar to Ephraim's being left alone because he was mated to his idols (Hos. 4:17); of men's being left to their own desires {Rom. 1:24, 26). Strangely enough, frequently God's method of judgment was just to let men go their own way without a "staying" hand to keep them from their own folly. There is nothing said about one's not enjoying his "folly."

The Companion Bible gives these notes at Exodus 4:21 concerning the words "I will harden":

I will harden = I will embolden. By Heb. idiom active verbs of doing are used of suffering or permitting a thing to be done. Cp. Gen. 31:7: e.g. Heb. "God did not give him to do me evil." Cp. A.V. Ex. 5:22. Psa. 16:10 (give = suffer); Jer. 4:10 (deceived = suffered to be deceived). So Eze. 14:9; 20:25; Matt. 6:13; 11:25 (hid = not revealed); 13:11. Acts 13:29 (took him down = permitted). Rom. 9:18 (hardeneth = suffered to be). Used six times by Jehovah (Ex. 9:12; 10:1, 20, 27; 11:10; 14:8), but not till Pharaoh had done it seven times. (See complete note in Companion Bible).

Ten times Pharaoh is warned and ten times restrained. Pharaoh repented but it lasted only as long as the judgment was imposed.

Rotherham's Emphasized Bible has a lengthy note on this verse, placed between the Old and New Testaments. The following

21

is suggested of his thoughts on the hardening of Pharaoh's heart.

1. An external occasion is used as though it were the primary or true cause of action. The real reason or motivation might be hidden.

2. Positive commands are often accepted in the Old Testament language as "permission" to do a thing. In each of the incidents following the Hebrew is much more flexible than the English, although the English has caught the sense intended.

Permit: "Noah sent forth" (Gen. 8:7, 8). Actually, Noah merely had to release the birds and their own disposition would cause them to fly.

"Send me away," literally, "let me go, do not hinder me" (Gen. 24:54). The servant wanted to leave.

"Saved the children alive" (Ex. 1:17), i.e., let them live, did not slay them.

Do we "cause" a book to fall; or will it fall, because of gravity, if no restraint is placed upon it? Rotherham gives several instances of direct commands being in reality permission to do a thing:

"Run" commanded only after permission to run had been requested (2 Sam. 18:23).

"Send" (2 Kings 2:16-18); note, however, "Did I not say, Do not go?"

God is not unjust, nor is God the author of sin. Christ attributed the evil that men do to themselves, their own hearts (Matt. 15:18, 19), as did James (James 1:33 ff.).

The point Paul is making is that God can promote whom He will for cause. When Israel hardened their heart in the past, they were denied entry into the land (Heb. 3:8-11). If they continued to

22

harden their hearts during the book of Acts period, the forty years of probation following the crucifixion, they would be refused the promised "rest" allotted them as a nation. The "faithful" were called outside the camp of religious Jerusalem, as it was to be destroyed. There remained a small company of Circumcision believers awaiting the Kingdom of God when Paul revealed the truths of the Mystery Epistles, Ephesians and Colossians (see Col. 4:11).

Romans 9:19-24 remains to be briefly considered. The background of the texts is the Potter's House of Jeremiah 18:3, 4. We must remember that Paul is trading on the principle involved with this illustration, i.e., that God is free in His promotion of one nation or people as over against another. Pharaoh and Egypt had been demoted and Israel made God's Firstborn among the nations. The fact that God was reversing that procedure with the nations instead of with Israel was no reflection on God's character. Again, individually and aside from God's national purpose for Israel, anyone could enter into a personal relationship with God. The thrust of the letter to the Romans was a personal relationship with God based upon God's forensic provision of justification for all, and the redemption in Christ Jesus. What a message this would have been for the whole nation of Israel to bring to the world rather than through just the Apostle Paul!

In the homes of that day would be found a bench about four feet high with three holes for vessels in it. This was the water-jar stand. These jars were smaller than the bathing vessels found provided for the guests of the wedding at Cana (John 2). This "holder of jars" provided for two jars of four or five gallons capacity, and one small drinking vessel. The first vessel in line was called "the vessel of honor." It was purchased usually as a wedding gift; it had two handles and was beautifully shaped and publicly carried on the head or right shoulder to and from the fountain. 2 Timothy 2:20, 21 plays upon this figure. It was the vessel from which was poured pure water for anyone who might ask that their thirst be quenched. Genesis 24:12-26 gives a beautiful account of the use of this type of vessel. Aside from its figurative use of giving God's free gift of life, it occupied an honorable place in the homes and hearts of these people.

23

Next to the vessel of honor on the bench was a vessel known as the vessel of dishonor. This was never carried out in public but stayed in the home and received the stale water left at the end of the day. The water might still be used, but it was not fresh. Jeremiah 22:28 spoke of this as a vessel empty of pleasure; this would-be true, as the container became slimy and the water "abominable," as mentioned in Isaiah 65:4.

The vessel of mercy mentioned in the text had reference to a small vessel convenient for travelers to refresh themselves with, to wash away the stain and wear of travel.

The vessel of wrath (Rom. 9:22) was a vessel that had cracked upon firing. Such vessels were carefully mended with a mixture of powdered pottery and the blood of the fasuka insect. The potter would again fire the vessel, and maybe yet again (the longsuffering mentioned in the text). The vessel could never be used as a vessel of honor or mercy but it could still be used for waste water or a wash pot (Psalm 60:8).

In Scripture there is reference to a "chosen vessel" (Paul, Acts 9:15). This was a vessel made by the potter for a special purpose. It was fired again and a-gain to give it depth and beauty. It was the showpiece of the potter to denote his artistry and craftsmanship or workmanship. It was tortured in the glazing and the kiln until it was ready for the master's approval.

With the foregoing, one can realize Paul's meaning in using the figure of the Potter's House and the vessels created at his wheel. God wanted vessels that would be always "giving forth"; then those that would ease the toil and burden of the day; those that would share the little cup of refreshment for those that thirst after God; the chosen vessels that give depth and meaning to all of life, especially as they give forth of the life of Christ and the life in Christ.

The Jew thought the cup of mercy was only for them, but God granted it to all (Ran. 9:23, 24). All were to see the riches of His glory -- not merely those who beheld the cloud and pillar of fire.

24

Dishonor — how it shames a nation and a person! How was the beautiful David soiled by uncontrollable desires! Yet, in his heart he longed to please God. How fortunate all of us are that man looks at the outward appearance while God looks upon the heart. Our flesh, too, would make us into vessels of dishonor not fit for the master's use. God is not unjust in making choice of certain men or nations to accomplish His purposes.

The natural sequence of events in the book of Acts should have been the history of the men and women who had been with our Lord throughout His earthly ministry. Instead of this, a man by the name of Paul is introduced, and the first apostles are phased out.

Looking back over the varied histories in The Scriptures, we see that God frequently has substituted one for another, for cause. Pharaoh, a vessel of wrath, a cracked pot whom God tried to mend and with whom, as the Potter, he suffered long. God could have released Israel with one blow; but no, the tyrant must be given every opportunity to repent. How different was this man from another ruler in Babylon who financed the return of Israel and opened his treasures that Israel might be restored in her land and have her temple rebuilt! Truly, judgment is God's strange work.

How fortunate we are to live in the time when God is in a complete state of grace-amnesty to the world! He is not imputing the sin of the world against it. He has a real and vital basis on which He proceeds to deal with all in terms of the perfect Savior who has accomplished a complete redemption satisfactory to God, and which should be satisfactory to us. Ones does not tell the Potter the nature or quality of his produce. The Potter knows that. He knows the end for which creation is made. Even the shards were still used of those ancient potters. They were the writing tablets of that day. The "holy vessels" mentioned in Scripture were those used alone in the sacred service of God. Only our Lord fulfilled this figure. He was the Vessel "poured out" to give His life for the world.

25

There is an unending series of contrasts in the writers of the New Testament in their use of the Old Testament. Paul seems to look for a principle, others for an event of like nature, others for a literal and precise fulfillment of the Old. Some references in the Old Testament that speak directly to The Messiahship of Christ are used of Him, while others with the same import are used of Israel; and others of Israel in their original are used of Christ in the New Testament. Is this implying a certain unity?

The writer of Hebrews uses the Codex Alexandrinus of the LXX while others use the Codex Vaticanus of the LXX. In it all, our Lord is honored, and the man of the street had within his hands The Word of Life.

The Hebrew Scriptures may yield treasures almost unknown to the Greek language, awareness of such treasures may be limited to the scholar and the schoolman. New Testament Greek is largely the Greek of the tradesman, the vendor, the store clerk. Out of that language have come the translations of The Sacred Text for all men, in all languages, everywhere.

__________

The Companion Bible, Appendix #107, deals at length with this subject. It lists five different usages of the O.T. quotations in the N.T. with ample illustrations.

The United Bible Societies, 1865 Broadway, N.Y. 10023, publish a booklet, Old Testament Quotations in the N.T. This gives listings of where N.T. quotations are to be found in the O.T.

Crawford H. Toy 's, Quotations in the N.T. at once identifies whether the N.T. quotations are taken from the Hebrew, the Vat. or Alex. Sept., or the Aramaic.

H.R. Swete's, Introduction To The Old Testament in Greek (part of a 3-Vol. set) treats extensively of the LXX.

26

THE COMINGS OF THE LORD

by Russell H. Schaefer

In general parlance, "The Coming of The Lord" is taken to mean the so-called "Second Coming," as if only two comings were mentioned in Scripture. That there are many and varied "comings" seems incredible to some and the one making the suggestion is anathematized. (1 Corinthians 15:23 and 1 Thessalonians 4:15 are the usual proof texts cited for this event. However, 1 Corinthians 1:7 identifies this eagerly awaited caning as being the apocalyptic caning (Greek text, ten apokalypsin, the apocalypse], the one associated with the last trumpet of the book of Revelation.)

What is known as the First Advent is the most memorable coming of our Lord, even if it was not the first in time. In that coming, the manhood of our Lord was embraced into The Godhood to accomplish redemption. That Christ was indeed the unique Son (ho monogenes huios) of God and Man. In Him, in the perfections of His person and completeness of His work, is mirrored all that God is to us and all that we are to God. Amid a spectrum of purposes involved in that coming, one touches us all:

… that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners (1 Tim. 1:15).

The whole judicial, relationship of God to man and man to God was resolved by that event. While the historical moment of redemption was capsulated in the public spectacle of Calvary its inception was before the foundation of the world, and its processes will continue until sin is no longer a marring factor in God's creation.

The following beautiful verses from the tenth chapter of Hebrews epitomize the manner in which this caning abolished the Mosaic-Levitical economy in order to establish another without specifying places of worship, priests, rituals, sacrifices, and offerings.

27

Wherefore, when He cometh into the world, He saith, "Sacrifice and offering Thou wouldest not, But, a body hast Thou prepared Me: In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin Thou hast had no pleasure.  Then said I, "LO, I COME . . . to do Thy WILL, O God." … He taketh away the first, that He may establish the second.  By the which WILL we are sanctified through the Offering of The Body of Jesus Christ, once for all.

And when Abram was ninety years old and nine, The LORD appeared to Abram, … And Abram fell on his face: and God talked with him (Gen. 17:1, 3).

And The Lord appeared unto him in the plains of Manure … Lo, three men stood by him … (Gen. 18:1, 2).

And the men rose up from thence … and Abraham went with them … and The Lord said … And the men turned their faces from thence, and went toward Sodom: but Abraham stood yet before The Lord (Gen. 18:16-22).

And there came two angels to Sodom … And when the morning arose, then the angels hastened Lot (Gen. 19:1, 15).

Observe that these three beings are called men. In verse 22, one is called "The LORD," and later the two are called "angels."

The LORD's coming and appearing to Abram was in a man-like form whose feet could be washed, and who could partake of food. Thus it was a true "coming."

28

The expression of Genesis 18:21 ("I [Jehovah] will go down now") frequently marks a caning of The Lord in respect to impending judgment. Note the following usage:

And The LORD came down to see the city and the tower (Gen. 11:5). I will go down now (Gen. 18:21, regarding Sodom and Gomorrah). And I will come down to deliver them out of the hand of the Egyptians (Ex. 3:8). So The LORD of Hosts came down to fight for Mount Zion (Isa. 31:4).

A visible presence, the Captain of the Hosts of The Lord, led Joshua's assault against Jericho (Josh. 5:13-15). Joshua worshiped Him and called Him, "Lord."

In Israel's history, God many times brought the armies of the aliens to destroy her. Thus, He came in judgment with respect to His people, also.*

Clouds have been associated with the comings of The Lord in both the Old and New Testaments. One should also compare the manifestations of God in conjunction with clouds at Sinai, the pillar of cloud, the Shekinah, the transfiguration and the coming spoken of in Revelation 1:7. These cloud comings all have to do with the people of Israel, including the transfiguration with the appearance of Moses and Elijah (Matt. 17:1-4).

It is worthy of note that Israel's cloud involvement (Ex. 13:21) was that of Jehovah visibly leading His people. In Exodus 14:19, 20 the cloud is identified with The Angel of God, i.e., Jehovah of the Burning Bush (Ex. 3:2), God (Ex. 3:4), and Jehovah (Ex. 3:7). The Angel is distinguished from the cloud, and is represented as antedating its movements and directing it.

__________

*Christ said that the faithless husbandmen were to be destroyed (Lk. 10:16). The offended Stone (Christ) was to grind to powder (Lk. 20:18). Did our Lord, as The Son of Man, come in a judgmental way to guide the army of Titus in its destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70? As The Son of Man, He would execute judgment (John 5:27).

29

The meaning of "clouds" in Scripture varies with its usage. In Hebrews 12:1 the writer speaks of a "great cloud" of witnesses. In 1 Corinthians 10:1-5 it is stated that all the fathers were under the cloud and that "all" had passed through the Sea. This was not factual, as many of the fathers of Israel had died in the previous 430 years of exile from their homeland. Many of Israel's forebears had seen The Divine Visitant with the signs or credentials, the miracles of inducement, and the wonders of judgment so that in the Corinthian passage Paul could use them as a warning to those living in his day (during the Acts period), since they, too, would perish if they did not "heed."

And The LORD (Jehovah) said unto Moses, "Lo, I come into thee in a thick cloud … The LORD (Jehovah) will come down in the sight of all the people upon Mount Sinai … The LORD descended upon it in fire … And The LORD came down upon Mount Sinai (Ex. 19:9, 11, 18, 19). And The LORD descended in the cloud, and stood with him there (Ex. 34:5).

In the above verses two different descents are mentioned. If one were to take the time to count all the descents of God in the Old Testament visitations and manifestations, one would be surprised to learn that these were frequent, sometimes in great majesty, sometimes with attending phenomena and at other times without. In the above occurrences the coming of The LORD (capital letters denote Jehovah) was with a cloud. The context shows it was with an appearance of "fire," much like the burning bush, except for the magnitude, or what Israel had experienced at the Exodus from Egypt. Exodus 40:38 speaks of this attending presence through the journeys of Israel. Compare Numbers 9:16 and 10:34. The uniqueness of the Sinai coming was its personal aspect, of Moses speaking "face to face" with God.

In Daniel 7:13 we read the following strange account of a vision:

30

Behold, one like The Son of Man cane with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of Days, and brought Him near before Him (Dan. 7:13).

The clouds could obscure as well as reveal Him (Ps. 97:2). Clouds are His chariot (rather than a mere vaporous substance) and speak of His glory (Ps. 104:-1-3). His angels are spoken of as a "flaming fire" in Psalm 104:4. They are spoken of as "the dust of His feet" in Nahum 1:3. So, the whole question involved with "clouds" is an open one. A whole gamut of meanings is open to us. In Revelation 1:7 it is with (meta) clouds; in Mathew 24:30 it is upon (epi) clouds; and in Mark 13:26 it is in, or among (en) clouds. Neither the nature of the cloud is defined", nor why it is called into account. Is this poetic imagery, or are these literal clouds? Do they represent an energy field outside of our present understanding? Are they vapors of fire? Or, as in Hebrews 12:1, are they clouds of witnesses? If so, are they earthly or heavenly?

Revelation 1:7 states that every eye shall see Him. Does this mean every eye without exception from the dawn of time and through out all time; or, as the context seems to imply, the eyes of those living at that time, the generation that pierced Him? Even Paul, a part of that generation, expected to live until the return of Christ. Yet, he died, as did others who shared that expectation, without experiencing a literal return of Christ in the clouds.

John's Gospel reveals a multifarious coming of The Lord.

He (The Father) shall give you another Comforter ... I (Christ) will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you … and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him … and The Father will love him, and We (the Father and Christ) will cone unto him … But The Comforter … Whom The Father will send .. I go away, and come unto you ... I (Christ) will send Him (The Comforter) unto you (John 14:16, 18, 21, 23, 26, 28; 16:7).

31

The Holy Spirit is to come from The Father.

Christ was to come to them.

Both Christ and The Father were to come to them.

Christ was to manifest Himself and thus, them.

Christ was to send The Holy Spirit.

After His ascension Christ is called that Spirit (2 Cor. 3:17), and a life-giving Spirit (1 Cor. 15:45). After His resurrection but prior to His ascension Christ denied being "a spirit" (Lk. 24:37, 39), here used of an apparition or specter. As one should know, the Greek word pneuma, frequently translated "spirit," carries several meanings, including blowing, breathing, wind, the breathing out of air, breath, spiritual state of mind, disposition, spirit being, the nature of man as a breathing being.

Unless one is completely enamored with the so-called second coming, it should be obvious that the coming of the Comforter was a real coming, albeit different in kind from that given to the world in His incarnation.

Let the reader determine what bearing John 20:22, 23 has upon the question of the coming.

He (Christ) breathed strongly and said unto them, Receive ye the Holy Spirit (pneuma hagion, no articles).

Whosesoever sins ye shall remit, they are remitted unto them.

Whosesoever (sins) ye shall retain, they are retained.

These words were spoken to all the disciples, not, as in Matthew 16:18, just to Peter. This event was before His ascension and certainly before Pentecost. The delegation of authority to remit and to retain was in full keeping with other prophets of Israel and certainly the opening chapters of the book of Acts deal only with the House of Israel and the House of Judah, i.e., the ten and two tribes of Israel. This close-in ministry was not altered until seven years later with Peter protesting his commission to go to Cornelius (Acts 10).

32

And Lo: I am with you all the days, until the conclusion of the age (Matt. 28:20).

Could these words have meaning of a spiritual presence, the Comforter of John 14? These words hardly fit into the concept of a Christ absent for several thousand years as we are prone to interpret them. The words do not seem to refer to a far, distant presence. The authority mentioned in Matthew 28:18, "All authority in heaven and on earth hath been given to me," seems to refer to an immediate assumption of authority to empower the Apostles to bring into effect the repentance of Israel that they as the representative theocratic kingdom might be instrumental in disciplining all nations in accord with the intent of Matthew 28:18. This immediacy would call for The Spirit's unique presence and power, as recorded in the second and third chapters of Acts. The role of the apostles would be authenticated, and through their ministry and miracles every inducement would be given to all Israelites everywhere to grasp the divine amnesty and become a ministering nation to the nations.

The forty year period of the book of Acts was indeed a last chance for that generation of Israelites. The seed of the theocratic kingdom was then inherent in the faithful remnant of that people, but the harvest never came to the rest of the nation. How tragic that the mainstream of that people were bypassed and that God's message of redemption, justification, and reconciliation was carried out by an apostle outside the ranks of the Twelve! Some physical blessings ware offered in accompaniment with spiritual blessings during "Acts" but not on the scale promised in Deuteronomy 26-28. What a boon this would have been to the needy of the world, but they were tied in and were a measurement of Israel's spiritual state.

Actual and legitimate offers of restoration were made to all Israel in Acts. The Old Testament passages quoted by the apostles had this premise in mind, not a fallacious religious system of Christianity. Acts 3:24 mentions that all the prophets from Samuel onward had foretold the events then transpiring. Joel's prophecy related directly to that issue, not a pseudo-pentecostalism. There was an out-pouring of God's Spirit in power upon all (kinds of) flesh,

33

sons and daughters did prophesy in Acts (cf. Acts 21:9), and there were those who had visions; some great, some small. Some protest that the signs spoken of as transpiring in heaven and on earth (Acts 2:19, 20) never took place, neither in Acts or afterwards in the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. Historically, A.D. 67-72 were times of vast and extensive earthquake and volcanic activity in that part of the world, which is the most anyone can make of these texts, if a literal interpretation is called for. To assume for even a moment that the sun was literally extinguished is farfetched, as it is to assume that the moon became literal "blood." At best (aside from eclipses) the passages refer to earthquakes and volcanic fire with an attending loss of life on earth and a discoloration of the atmosphere from volcanic ash, an apt-description of they aftermath of St. Helens' eruption in 1980. It must also be remembered, if one lets The Bible explain itself, that similar language was used in the Old Testament to depict the fall of empires, for which see Isaiah 13:10 (Babylon), 24:23 (Tyre), 34:4 (Bozrah and Idumea). See also Isaiah 50:3; 60:19, 20; and Ezekiel 32:7.

The whole House of Israel is seen in Acts (Acts 2:14. and 2:36). The supposed "Lost Tribes" of Israel were not lost during the forty years of Acts. The Twelve-tribed Nation was referred to by Paul (Acts 26:7) James (James 1:1) and Peter (1 Peter 1:1). All tri-bal records were destroyed by Titus in A.D. 70.

Certainly, as prophesied by Zechariah (Zech. 12:10), a spirit of grace and supplication is seen in the early chapters of Acts as many of the families of Israel were saved. Israel did look upon Him Whom they had pierced, as prophesied by Zechariah (Zech. 12:10), and this is said to be fulfilled at the crucifixion (John 19:3. There was a Fountain (Christ) opened for sin and cleanness to the inhabitants of Jerusalem (Zech.) 13:1). The "wounding" of Zechariah 13:6, 7 was at His betrayal, and the attending "scat-tering" following mentioned as taking place in Matthew 26:31. Upon resurrection and ascension Christ is declared to "both Lord and Christ" (Acts 2:36). The "seating" The ascended Christ is said to be upon the throne of David (Acts 2:30), giving us an insight that David's throne portended God's throne in the heavens, ruling over

34

all while a mediatorial kingdom was needed. The statements of the second Psalm find a fulfillment in Acts 4:24-27.

Thus, the promised Comforter came. Power from on high came. Christ, as That Spirit, came. The We of John 14:23 came. Truly, John 14:21b was fulfilled: "… and I will love him, and will manifest Myself to him." "This was the coming of The Father and Son for the purpose of making station (Greek monen) with them" (Edersheim).

The Son of Man title was the one used most frequently by The Lord of Himself. It is a title used by The Creator of Himself in relationship to His creation. It speaks of the conceptual image of The Perfect Man residing in the consciousness of God before the advent of man in creation, and before the advent of our Lord's incarnation.

The title was a familiar one to the readers of Daniel's prophecy. Its usage in Daniel 7:13, 14 has to do with a Cloud-Comer, dominion, glory, and a kingdom. These same concepts apply to its New Testament usage.

To have meaning, the title must mean more than the mere humanity of our Lord. Matthew 8:20 is contrasting the estate of the Highest and the lowly; the fox forager having a den, while The Creator asserting His role as Son of Man in and with humanity, is homeless. This prior station of The Son of Man in heaven is mentioned in John 3:13:

As no one hath ascended into heaven, Save He that out of heaven descended The Son of Man.

The climactic act of Israel's rejection was The Son of Man's being "lifted up" (John 3:14) as Israel had aforetime rejected God's provision as symbolized by the serpent "lifted up" in the wilderness. That Stephen should testify in his dying moments of seeing in vision

35

The Son of Man in heaven so infuriated his accusers that having stopped their ears, they then killed him.

The inception of The Son of Man was not as The Divine Son of Mary, but antedating this, the place of His origin (heaven) and the place of His ascension were the same:

What then if ye should view The Son of Man ascending where He was before? (John 6:62)

The "body" prepared for Him for the purposes of redemption was that of a slave's form, but antedating this was another, the original ikon, that master pattern from whence man was to be imaged, an the measurement toward which man is recreated "in Christ." This bypasses the intermediate image we inherited in our ancestry from Adam. Our restoration is not to a state bequeathed by Adam, but rather to one we have never known, that state of The Man at God's right hand. This is indeed a "glory" once possessed by Christ, and that to which He refers as having had with The Father before the world began (John 17:5). This glory He repossesses in His ascension and seating. The servant's form, possessed of flesh and blood, gives way to that original concept, that divine original of all things. The prototype, the grand concept, was called The Son of Man. The eighteenth Psalm well describes One who for a moment was made "lower than the angels" but who was destined to have dominion over the works of God's hands.

As The Son of Man The Lord was to "seek and save" that which was lost. As The Son of Man He was to give His life a ransom, but it was only fitting that He was the one given the right to exercise the essential prerogative of Deity, the right to forgive sins (Luke 5:21, 24).

The unique impact of this title is readily seen in the pronouncement of Christ before His accusers:

. . .If Thou art The Christ Art thou The Christ, The (Messiah) tell us! ... If I Son of The Blessed? And should tell you, in no wise Jesus said, I AM; and ye would ye believe, and if I shall see The Son of Man should put questions, in no sitting on The Right Hand 

36

wise would ye answer; but, of Power, and coming with henceforth shall The Son of the clouds of heaven … Man be seated on the Right and they all condemned Him Hand of the Power of God. To be worthy of death.  They all said, Thou Then (Mk. 14:61-64) art The Son of God? And He unto them said, Ye say it, because I AM (Lk. 22:66-70).

There certainly is an interweaving of the Messianic, The Son of God, and The Son of the Blessed titles in all that they imply combined with The Son of Man title. The accusers of Christ understood the connection, hence their violent reaction. When Christ made use of The Son of Man title, the council condemned Him to death. In a grim parallel the title becomes the warrant used by Christ to implement judgment upon this same nation.

For neither doth The Father judge anyone, But all judging hath given unto The Son: And authority hath He given Him to be executing judgment, because The Son of Man is He! (John 5:22, 27)

That there is a coming of The Son of Man to Israel in judgment is clear in Scripture. The time and manner of that coming are open to question. However, whatever the varied interpretations of the texts involved, there is no suggestion that the passage of several thousand years of human history are projected prior to their fulfillment. In the following passage note how soon this caning was to be.

37

The death of Christ did not set this commission aside. The apostles did engage in a ministry to the whole House of Israel before and after the crucifixion of Christ. The ministry was attended with signs and wonders, and this was to be followed by tribulation — the end of which they were to see, to endure, and from whose dire final stroke they were to find a way of escape. This last was to be measured by their public ministry in the cities of Israel. Is it any wonder then that the apostles stayed so close to Jerusalem during the first seven years of the book of Acts? They did not go to all the cities of Israel, much less the world.

After The Lord had informed His disciples that He would suffer and be slain in Jerusalem He again bracketed His coming as The Son of Man within the lifetime of sane of those who heard His words. Matthew 16:27, 28 will be quoted, but the same context is found in Mark 8:38 and 9:1, and Luke 9:26, 27.

For The Son of Man is destined to be coming In the glory of His Father, With His messengers, And then will He give back unto each one according to his practice.  Verily I say unto you there are some of those here standing who indeed shall in no wise taste of death until they see The Son of Man coming in His Kingdom (Matt. 16:27, 28).

The coning was balanced between the time elements that would see the death of some of His hearers and yet within the lifetime of others. A round figure would be within the century when these words were spoken. Some point out that in all the passages related, the scenes of the Mount of Transfiguration follow, and that these passages are fulfilled in the Mount. 2 Peter 1:16-18 does mention that this scene was indeed a display of The Majesty of our Lord, and that it betokened His inherent Divinity.

There is a "form of God" (Phil. 2:6) in which Christ continually subsists. Although this "form" was hidden by the fashion of a man in which He found Himself accomplish redemption,

38

nonetheless a glimpse of that "form" may have been shown here. Only Matthew's account of the Transfiguration mentions the face of Christ, "shining as the sun." In Paul's encounter with the heavenly Christ (Acts 26:13-15) this same luminescence is mentioned. As to whether the Transfiguration was "the coming in His Kingdom" as some suppose, or even a foretaste of the Kingdom, or if it was but a glimpse of spiritual realities alone, it is difficult to surmise with finality. Luke's account (Luke 9:31) alone mentions that our Lord's soon decease was a subject under discussion. This generally would not be thought of as being in the context of the Kingdom. However, if a legitimate offer of the Kingdom and King was to be made to Israel, then the medium to take away Israel's sins (and ours), i.e., His death, the discussion is altogether fitting and proper. Peter sees it as a "glimpse" of His coming (2 Pet. 1:16-18).

In respect to Matthew 16:27, 28 E.W. Bullinger in the Companion Bible has some interesting notes. On verse 28 he writes the following:

some = some of those.

till = The particle an, with the Subjunctive mood, gives this hypothetical force. Cp. the four "tills" (10:23; 16:28; 23:39; 24:34; 26:29).

see = may have seen.

coming, etc. The premise of this coming was definitely repeated later, in Acts 3:19-26, and was conditional on the repentance of the nation. Hence the particle an, which (though untranslatable) expresses the condition or hypothesis implied. Their continuing to live until Acts 28:25, 26 was certain; but the fulfillment of the condition was uncertain,

The question arises, was the coming of The Son of Man in judgment upon Israel identical with the "sending of Jesus Christ" in times of refreshing as mentioned in Acts 3? If Israel had repented in the period of the Acts, then Acts 3:21 mentions "the times of restitution of all things"; but what would happen if she did not repent; as she did not? Would a judgmental-coming fall upon Israel? More in tune with the Acts passage is Matthew 19:27, 28.

39

Then, making answer, Peter said unto Him, Lo! we have left all and followed Thee, What then shall there be for us?

And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, As for you who followed me in the regeneration when The Son of Man shall take His seat on His throne of glory, Ye also shall be seated upon twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.

Here, as in Acts 3, there is a mention of a restoration, a throne of glory and thrones for accomplishing the restoration by the twelve apostles of Israel. The Twelve made the same mistake that is so frequently made today as to the nature of their task, then present or future. In Matthew 20:20-28 we have an account of how a mother sought by special pleading to have her sons enthroned upon the left and right hands of Christ in His kingdom. Christ pointed out very vividly that greatness is measured by service, ministry by giving! all of one's self in behalf of others. The only purpose of the twelve circumcision apostles ministry to the Twelve Tribes as "Judges" is vague, how one ruled over another was not. The admonition of Matthew 20:26, "Not so is it among you," might well be heeded as a principle for those inclined, disposed or feeling that they are given a mandate to rule over others. Christ embodied this servant "to all" role. Never was He more kingly than when He died for our sins!!

Not only is the coming spoken of in Acts 3:19-26 conditional, as E.W. Bullinger states, but an implicit pronouncement of judgment is made upon whoever will not hear Christ, an utter destruction (Acts 3:23). Once again, Israel stood at the line of demarcation, the prophecies of the ages were on the threshold of fulfillment (Acts 3:24) and Israel could be the instrument of God's peace, glory and blessings to all the nations of the earth Acts 3:25), in keeping with God's ancient covenant. To great privilege are added great responsibilties. No nation on earth was given the inducements to serve God as was Israel (Deut. 26:16-19; 28:1-13); nor was any nation given greater warnings if they should disobey (Deut. 27:14-26; 28:14-68).

40

Both blessing and cursing were conditional. One need but read these Deuteronomy passages to be assured of that God's ultimate purposes will be accomplished. One goal may be long deferred, one means may have to give way to another, one man in place of many, the last apostle instead of the first — but the goal will be reached.

Not only is the coning of Acts 3 conditional, as mentioned above, but also the fact of Israel's "seeing" The Lord in a favorable light:

For I say unto you In no wise may ye see me henceforth Until ye say, Blessed is He that cometh in The Name of The Lord (Matt. 23:39).

In respect to the "seeing" of Christ by Israel, it is placed or positioned only after the heartfelt conversion of the nation, not before it, as some are affirming. One "seeing" by the tribes of the land mentioned in Revelation 1:7 is a seeing of judgment, not conversion. As mentioned in another context, Israel did indeed "look upon Him whom they had pierced" when they crucified Him (John 19:37), but this did not confirm their faith then; rather, it deepened their rejection and unbelief.

In a peculiar way, the generation that lived, partook of, and witnessed the earthly ministry of Christ, was one of which the apostle Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians:

... to whom the ends (telos, limit, conclusion, termination) of the ages has arrived (1 Cor. 10:11, Nestle text).

Rotherham interestingly translates this passage as follows:

… unto Whom the ends of the ages have reached along.

41

The Son of Man was a sign unto that generation just as Jonah was to another (Luke 11:30-32). Like Christ, Jonah had been entombed for three days and three nights. The Ninevites believed although given forty days to repent; Israel was given forty years and her unbelief determined her destruction. That generation was uniquely guilty and of it The Lord uttered the following grim words:

That the blood of all the prophets which hath been shed from the foundation of the world may be sought out from this generation (Luke 11:50).

In Israel's rejection of The Lord the measuring cup of the wrath of God was being filled to the full: "And ye fill up (WH: will fill up) the measure of your fathers!" (Matt. 23:32). Truly, Christ's words in Matthew 23:36, "Verily I say unto you, all these things will come fulfilled upon this generation," were literally fulfilled.

Any consideration of the comings of The Lord must take into account the twenty-fourth chapter of Matthew. Any comings of The Lord mentioned in this chapter are not "pre-tribulation" by the remotest stretch of the imagination. The thought that certain "select ones" are to be raised or resurrected from the dead prior to the "Last Days" is not found in any of the Gospel accounts.

Christ avows the "first resurrection" to be the "Last Day" of the prophetic period then spoken of in the context. Of those given to Christ of The Father, none were to be lost, but to be raised up "at the Last Day." In the Gospel of John The Lord repeatedly stressed that the resurrection was to be at the Last Day.

And this is the will of Him that sent me That of all that which He hath given me, I should lose nothing, But should raise it up at the Last Day (John 6:39).

42

For this is the will of My Father that everyone that vieweth The Son and believeth on Him should have age-abiding life, and I should raise him up at the Last Day (John 6:40).

No man can come unto Me except The Father who sent Me draw him, and I will raise him up at the last Day (John 6:44).

He that feedeth upon My flesh and drinketh My blood hath life age-abiding, and I will raise him up at the Last Day (John 6:54).

This whole issue has been obscured by the invention of an unscriptural teem known as "the rapture." It is found nowhere in The Word of God. If "resurrection" is meant then this term was already in use and within its varied contexts it is satisfactory. However, the proof texts used for the sudden rapture theory have the "resurrection" as their theme and that is bound by the context of the Last day. Christ did not correct Martha in defining the common hope of her day when she said Lazarus should rise again in the resurrection in the Last Day (John 11:24). Those to whom the words of comfort were addressed in the Gospels were still living during the book of Acts period and figured in the then prophetic events depicted for that time and deeply associated with the "last days."

In respect to Matthew 24, the Gospels of Mark and Luke also report the events concerning the destruction of the Temple, the desolation of Jerusalem, the coming of The Son of Man, and the end of the "age." The A.V. translates "age" as "world" and, unfortunately, doomsday prophets have been talking of the "end of the world" ever since. It should read "end of the age," meaning the age then spoken of in the context. It is not speaking of this "unprophetic time" in which we are living,* nor of the current events happening about us.

_________

*It is amazing that some should hold that the "last days" spoken of in 2 Timothy 3:1 should be thought of as the "last days" of the Dispensation of Grace, not seeing that these are a direct contradiction of terms. Paul's Acts ministry among the Gentiles was

43

That was a specific age having to do with a specific! people, Israel as a nation. It did not have to do with "Jews" as individuals, for as such they could heed the warnings and escape the impending judgments. The words of Luke 21:22 are graphic in their import:

For days of avenging are these for all the things written to be fulfilled.

These were the words addressed to the personal disciples of our Lord, not to those living a thousand or more years in the future. It was some of these who were to live to see these events transpire. Forty years after the Olivet discourse the sign of the surrounding legions of Rome appeared. At the time the words were spoken such an event would seem impossible as the empire of Rome, and Israel's part in it, were at peace. The day of avenging had come for Israel, and it was time that their debt of rebellion to Rome and to God be exacted by many stripes. They hardly supposed that the brutal cross wherewith Christ was crucified was to be the mode whereby the land would be stripped of wood to impale the living after the siege; that the very words "level thee with the ground" were literally fulfilled except for the three bowers left standing as a testimonial to the vastness of the temple area's fortification and the greatness of the army of Titus. Israel did not want to follow in the train of the Savior, but said, "We have no king but Caesar" (John 19:15), yet they were to follow in Titus' Train of Triumph, 42,000 wasted prisoners, while all under 17 years of age were sent into the mines from whence there was no return to the land of the living. Millions ware at Jerusalem for the Feast of the Passover when they were trapped in the siege. The words of Matthew 27:25 were grimly prophetic: "His blood be upon us and upon our children."

__________________________________________________________

to bring them within the "blessing of Abraham" by bringing them to Christ. Paul was a prisoner in Acts as well as after. That he was released from the charges and was "delivered from the mouth of the lion" seems to fit the internal evidence that he had another missionary journey after Acts.

44

Their blood and that of their children was to flow like a river until even the hardened legionaires were sickened by so much death, fire and destruction.

There is no intimation in Matthew 24, as Christ directed His remarks to His personal disciples, that the events foretold were beyond their personal involvement. They and others believed the signs they saw about them and fled to Pella beyond Jordan to escape the days of vengeance such as no nation had known before this time. Those reading Matthew 24 lose the meaning of the passages if they try to read them into the present unprophesied program of God, which, in contradistinction to the judgmental program of Matthew 24, is one of grace without judgment, the untraceable riches of Christ as over against the prophesied kingdom in Matthew, the Gentiles and Jews without distinction as to race or covenant, no "Israel of God" in effect now as over against the judgments effected upon Israel then. The "Jew" now is one only in religion, not of race, since no proof can be found to substantiate a lineal descent from the "fathers," and anyone can lay claim to being a "Jew."

Again, there is no Israel of God, i.e., a nation called to be God's Theocratic Kingdom on earth, a nation that would live up to the meaning of "Israel," that is, "to rule as God," or "to rule as a prince with God." The nation now laying claim to that title, occupying the land by force of arms, is without credentials, physically, morally or spiritually.

Those who see a foreshadowing of coming events may well be right, but it will have no bearing on Biblical prophecy. Already, those who wrote so vividly as to what would happen to the rest of the world after the 1967 war only proved how inept they were as students of The Word of God. Fortunately, their blunders did not approach those writers of the 1940s who saw the antichrist in every public political figure. The dispensationalist, those knowing the divine dispensation of the grace of God, should have known better, but even now tempt themselves with trying to fit their theology into the Never-never Land of prophecy that has nothing in common with God's present unprophesied program.

45

Even without the last Mastery Epistles of Paul, the book of Romans envisioned grace at least as extensive as the effects of Man's sin … sin indeed flowed, but grace overflowed. God's forensic justification and reconciliation of all is in effect, and is the basis of His redemption and forgiveness, and the "not imputing their trespasses unto them." If that was true during Acts, how much more so after the great revelation to the apostle Paul of God's grace as God's rule instead of Israel's law-works economy. One would suppose that prophecy preachers would have learned that something was drastically wrong when year after year the same pap is fed to people with the same resulting failure to "deliver" the goods promised so glibly.

Many outlines and studies have been made of Matt 24. The major portion of the chapter is Christ's direct response to the question of His disciples, presented by them in a three-fold way:

Tell us, when these things shall be, - and, what the sign of Thy Presence, - and, the conclusion of the Age?

The question rephrased in Mark's Gospel presents events as a single package: Tell us, when these things shall be, - and, what the sign when all these things shall be about to be concluded?

In asking the question, it is doubtful that the disciples had in mind the complex arrangement of texts relating to the prophetic program of the centuries. More than likely they were simply asking when Jerusalem would be destroyed along with any outward signs would attest demonstratively that these events were being directed and caused by The Son of Man; and how that period of judgment would be concluded. At that point in time in which the question was asked none of the disciples believed that Christ would allow Himself be delivered over into the hands of His enemies to slain, to be slain, to be buried — certainly they did not believe His rising from the dead. Scripture is absolutely clear upon this point. The events took them by surprise even though Christ had sought to instruct

46

them as to the sequence (Luke 18:34). And, when He had been slain, they did not believe in His resurrection. Hence, not believing in an abrupt end to Christ's Incarnation Advent they were not looking for a Second Advent in our sense of the term. They accepted the fact that He was going somewhere but would soon reappear to establish a political kingdom molded on that of the empires that had gone before in history, but with Israel as dominant over the nations and themselves serving as "Judges" to Israel proper. "Judging" used in this concept (Matt. 19:28) could variously mean the Twelve Apostles¹ ordaining, directing, or guiding Israel.

The length of time that has elapsed since these words of Matthew 24 were spoken has caused most commentaries to seek one solution or another to counter the urgency and immediacy found in the chapter. Matthew 24, with Mark 13 and Luke 21:1-36, binds together the signs, the times and the events. Indeed, that very generation was not to pass away in death until all the things spoken of were fulfilled (Mark 13:30). The O.T. considered a generation to be about 40 years. Of course, the dilemma of centuries passing by with each current generation trying to interpret these verses of themselves made the prophecy teachers change "generation" into "race," i.e., that the Jewish race would not pass away until all this had been fulfilled. It would be sheer folly to read "race" into the series of "generations" in Matthew 1:17, and just as foolish here.

While Christ did give general data concerning these events, He did not specify the absolute day or hour (Mark 13:32). To overcome the local atmosphere of Jerusalem and the Jewish nation, some explain the prophecy of Matthew 24 (and kindred prophecies) as being two-fold, having a local and immediate fulfillment, and then a distant fulfillment thousands of years in the future. The distant fulfillment is alleged to coincide with whatever is happening around the world at the moment or whenever nations rise and fall or the earth moves. Others look at prophecy and ignore the Jewish factor of the first century completely, thrusting it all within the context of the twentieth century of our time and society. This does sell books, and the Christian is made to feel guilty if he is not riding on the prophecy bandwagon.

47

This does not change the fact that Christ was ministering to His own immediate disciples and to those living in the same time zone and structure with them, warnings and admonitions are for them in their generation and within the scope of their life-time. There is no attempt by Christ to extend the fulfillment of events far into our century. The prophetic import bounded by a people living under the Law of Moses as such "keeping Sabbath," to those in Judea (not other lands or nations) who were told to "flee into mountains." Christ was not asking those in other cultural settings to scale their steep-roofed homes, to escape over their rooftops. The flat roofs of land were a real part of their living area.

Again, the immediacy of the fulfillment of those prophecies at that time and within that generation meets us on every hand. The "must shortly (with speed) to pass" of Revelation 1:1 is not "speedy" at all thousands of years are involved; nor could the historical churches of Revelation living in the same time bracket! of the prophecies of Matthew 24 have any comfort several thousand years were to intervene ere fulfillment of the prophecies. There was a historic fulfillment of the prophecies of Matthew 24 in the de- struction of Jerusalem and the Jewish state in A.D. 70. There were some prophecies unfulfilled as well. How is this to be accounted for?

It has been pointed out earlier in this study that the blessings of God's Covenant with Israel were conditional as well as was Israel's role as God's Theocratic Kingdom people. If one still doubts this fact, if one is unwilling to accept this fact, one should at least take the time to read Deuteronomy 26:16 through Deuteronomy 29:15, if this has not been done. Unfortunately, space will not allow the verses to be presented here in full. Chapters 30 and 31 mention Israel's "breaking My Covenant." If the covenant could be so easily broken with such disastrous consequences, it was not meant to be eternal but temporal and conditional. If the conditions were not met, then the rest of the prophecy would be a dead issue. God is free in Himself to accomplish His purposes in whichever way He chooses. He chose to tie in the blessings of Israel (and they were earned under those circumstances) with corresponding judgments if they were disobedient to the heavenly charter. They could "break the

48

covenant" with corresponding loss.

It is difficult to face up to this truth in The Word as there is abroad a distorted view of God's sovereignty — a view that so binds God that He is not free to deal differently under varied or changing circumstances even though in Scripture this is boldly demonstrated. The Darby-Schofield system of Biblical interpretation holds the front and center stage and has done so since early in the eighteenth century with its "Instant and Imminent Return of Christ" theories tied into a "Pre-tribulation Rapture" concept of which The Scriptures are silent unless a few texts are tortured out of context. The last is not found in Matthew 24 as is commonly taught, nor in the context of the "Last Trump" of 1 Corinthians 15:52, which in honesty must be identified with the "Last Trumpet" of Revelation 11.

Charles Welch aptly wrote of the conditional nature of Israel's in-gathering:

The gathering of scattered Israel will be contingent upon their repentance. If Israel and Judah return to the land in unbelief that will not be the gathering of The Lord, but a human attempt to bring about the restoration by evil means, which will end in disaster, and such an abortive movement has taken place, with disastrous consequences in our own time (The Eastern Question, p. 11).

This well describes the Israeli government now occupying the land by virtue of arms, but no merit can be attached to anyone claiming to be Israel (the Ten Tribes) or Judah (the Two Tribes). Even after the Exile in Babylon, the full complement of the Ten Tribes was obscure, and during the time of Christ a representative number from these so-called "lost tribes" counted for the whole. As a matter of history, the last that is known of the House of Israel and Judah as such ends with the first century. The forty years of the Acts was their grace-period to become "God's People" not only in a personal sense as we tend to think of it, but as an instrument of God to lead the nations in righteousness, love and truth. The present

49

Zionist movement in Palestine has opportunist birds many hues within its roost and is a far cry from even David Ben Gurion envisioned for that land, does it have anything to do with Bible prophecy, roust be repeated, those claiming to be Jews can do only on the basis of religion or a culture based upon that religion, not upon a physical lineage from Biblical parentage. Just as there is no Israel of today so there is not a corresponding spiritual Israel nor a "Judah" representing the Two Tribes or an Israel representing the Ten Tribes mentioned in The Bible.

There are those who very devoutly and honestly look for the Messiah of Isaiah 53 and do not see Him in Christ of Christianity. Unfortunately, Christianity if it is to be judged by its history and its churches and religion, has very little to do with The Word of God. At least in the USA, and elsewhere the world where a "Hollywood" showpiece type of Christianity is found, all this is distinct from the "worshipping The Father in spirit and in Truth" that Lord enjoined. It is distant, too, from the Perfect Christ and the complete work, redemption-wise, that He accomplished, and has nothing in common with the simple faith with which we are to enter into it and through which it is to mature in our lives.

If Israel did not repent during the Book of Act period the following texts spell out the fate of people:

Every soul whatsoever which shall not hearken unto that Prophet (Christ) shall be utterly destroyed from among the people (Acts 3:23b);

How shall we escape, if so great a salvation as this we have neglected? (Heb. 2:3a)

So I sware in mine anger -— They shall not enter into my rest ! And we see that they were not able to enter because of unbelief (Heb. 3:11, 19).

Of how much sorer punishment suppose ye shall he be accounted worthy who hath trampled underfoot The Son of God, and the blood of the covenant hath

50

esteemed a profane thing … a fearful thing it is to fall into the hands of a living God (Heb. 10:29a, 31).

If the blood of the New Covenant that which would have made Israel distinct from all other people was despised, then they were trampling underfoot The Son of God. If under the terms of the Old Covenant they were judged and scattered how much more under the New upon trampling under foot The Son of God? In Acts a remnant of that people did repent; truly a fountain was opened for sin and uncleanness and they heeded the meaning implied in the wounded hands of Christ and did look upon Him who was pierced according to Zechariah 13:1, 6, and did mourn for Him, according to Zechariah 12:10-11, but the national leaders "looked upon Him" as well, and rejected Him according to the statement of John 19:37:

They shall look on Him whom they pierced.

They looked … and treated him with scorn. They looked and hardened their hearts and the die was cast that would spell out their destruction.

The sad lament of Matthew 23:37-39 spoken through tears has echoed down through the corridors of time:

Jerusalem, Jerusalem …

Jerusalem means "Possession of Peace." Yet, instead of being a harbinger of peace to the world its soil has been literally bathed in blood. The Lord's "Ye would not — though I would" is a reflection of their sad history. So our Lord passed from the Temple area and His public ministry was stilled on this tragic note.

And Jesus coning forth from the Temple was taking His departure, when His disciples came forward to point out to Him the buildings of the Temple.

51

While Matthew generalizes on the varied buildings that