Though trouble was widespread in the Roman Empire from 60-70AD, the greatest blow would come to Judea. This is the period that Jesus spoke of in Matt 24:21. Jesus called this the time of the abomination and desolation spoken of by Daniel the prophet. (Matt 24:15) In Luke, Jesus said that this was when the armies of Rome would encircle and destroy Jerusalem (Luke 21:20). See also Mark 13:14.
How is it possible that such a momentous season of trouble, that Jesus so clearly warned about, would not be in the apostle’s mind in some way and referred to in their writings in the New Testament? When the siege of Jerusalem finally occurred, Jews from the whole known world were there, for the siege began at Passover (Josephus, Wars, 6, 9, 3.). “Accordingly, the multitude of those that therein perished exceeded all the destructions that either men or God ever brought upon the world.” (Wars, 6 9, 4.).
And the people of the prince that shall come (Rome) shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end shall be with a flood and to the end of the war desolations are determined…And for the overspreading of abominations He shall make it desolate; even until the consummation (end) and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate. (Dan 9:26-27).
The Appearing
It is in such a climate that Peter encouraged the church concerning the appearing of Christ. We repeat the text:
That the trial of your faith, being much more precious than of gold that perishes, though it be tried with fire, be found to praise and honour at the appearing of Jesus Christ. (1 Pet 1:7).
What might this term appearing mean in this context? It is referring to His kingdom, His intervention in the affairs of men at His appointed time, for the vindication of our faith and the comfort of the church with days of peace. Those who remain faithful to the Lord during the day of trial will be vindicated at the appearing of Christ’s authority. Our trials are not in vain, not only for our own souls, but also for the blessing and heritage we leave.
We see this meaning portrayed in Luke, where Jesus stated that He was speaking about the siege of Jerusalem:
And when you see these things begin to come to pass, then look up (be encouraged) and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near…So likewise you, when you see these things come to pass, know you that the kingdom of God is near at hand. Truly I say to you, this generation shall not pass away until all be fulfilled. (Luke 21:28, 31-32).
Could it be put any plainer? Jesus was not speaking to us, but to His disciples. He said that they would see all of this. He repeated it, saying that their generation would not pass away until all this was fulfilled. It is clear in the context that the redemption and the kingdom were the deliverance of the saints from their persecution by the Jews and Rome.
The Jewish and Roman persecution stopped. Roman persecution did not start again until the mid 3rd Century. There was sporadic persecution in the Roman Empire, but persecution did not become a state policy again until the reign of Decius in the mid 3rd Century and more so in the reigns of Diocletian and Galerius in the late 3rd and early 4th Centuries.
Parousia means coming and appearing. It is not limited to one event at the end of the world, at the resurrection of the dead. The word relates to the kingdom of Christ. It means Christ rules and He appears to the church, through the church and in history.
His kingdom and authority reign through the New Covenant. He comes to save, to fill with His Spirit, to vindicate His saints, to take to heaven when saints die, to bring down earthly kingdoms and to raise up new ones and He comes to end the curse at the resurrection, when corruption puts on incorruption.
There is no doubt that the apostles used the term Christ’s appearing to exhort the disciples in the perilous times that they were then going through, without meaning that the end of the whole world was at hand. They did not think that the whole world was about to end.
It is likely that references to last-days in Acts 2:7, 2 Tim 3:1, James 5:3, 1 Pet 1:5, 1 Pet 1:20, 2 Pet 3:3, 1 John 2:18 and Jude 18 do not refer to the end of this whole world. References to the last day in John 6:40, 44, 54, 11:24, 12:46 and 1 Cor 15:23 do refer to the end of this age at the second resurrection and final judgment. We discuss this in the next chapter.
However, Peter was not speaking of the end of the world, but of the fulfilment of the Jewish prophets, the time of consummation, when Jesus came to redeem us:
Who (Jesus Christ) truly was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you. (1 Pet 1:20).
Monday, 18 October 2010
Sunday, 17 October 2010
Appearing of Christ
That the trial of your faith, being much more precious than of gold that perishes, though it be tried with fire, be found to praise and honour at the appearing of Jesus Christ. (1 Pet 1:7).
If we remember what was happening in these days it brings a lot of meaning to the context. Christians were being burnt by Rome. Not only was Jerusalem against the church, but in Nero’s time Rome had become an enemy of the gospel. Nero demanded emperor worship, which the Christians would not give.
Rome burnt many Christians. Nero used them for human candles to light the streets of Rome at night. They were tortured and killed by gladiators and lions in Nero’s games as he tried to please the multitudes with entertainment, as Nero’s temperament grew worse and worse.
It is hard to imagine how we could read the New Testament without reflecting on the impact that these things made on its context. If today’s Christians were commonly burnt as street lamps and if a despotic and insane ruler was tearing down the fabric of society, our writings would comment on the trouble. This is exactly the context of the much of the New Testament. But with a Dispensationalist outlook, we shift our mind’s attention from their day to our day. This is not genuine exegesis of scripture.
Suetonius Tranquillus, a Roman government official, described Nero’s behaviour, which was not too dissimilar to what may happen in our own time:
He castrated the boy Sporus and actually tried to make a woman of him; and he married him with all the usual ceremonies, including a dowry and a bridal veil, took him to his home attended by a great throng and treated him as his wife. And the witty jest that someone made is still current, that it would have been well for the world if Nero's father Domitius had that kind of wife.
This Sporus, decked out with the finery of the empresses and riding in a litter, he took with him to the courts and marts of Greece and later at Rome through the Street of the Images, fondly kissing him from time to time.
Tacitus described the persecution of Nero against Christians:
An immense multitude was convicted…of hatred against mankind. Mockery of every sort was added to their deaths. Covered with the skins of beasts, they were torn by dogs and perished, or were nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and burnt, to serve as a nightly illumination, when daylight had expired. (Tacitus Annals XV.44).
Tacitus wrote generally of this period:
The history on which I am entering is that of a period rich in disasters, terrible with battles, torn by civil struggles, horrible even in peace…there were civil wars, more foreign wars and often both at the same time.
He went on to describe distress all over the empire, natural catastrophes and the many people who died and concluded:
Besides the manifold misfortunes that befell mankind…never was it more fully proved by awful disasters of the Roman people or by indubitable signs that the gods care not for our safety, but for our punishment. (Tacitus, The Histories).
If we remember what was happening in these days it brings a lot of meaning to the context. Christians were being burnt by Rome. Not only was Jerusalem against the church, but in Nero’s time Rome had become an enemy of the gospel. Nero demanded emperor worship, which the Christians would not give.
Rome burnt many Christians. Nero used them for human candles to light the streets of Rome at night. They were tortured and killed by gladiators and lions in Nero’s games as he tried to please the multitudes with entertainment, as Nero’s temperament grew worse and worse.
It is hard to imagine how we could read the New Testament without reflecting on the impact that these things made on its context. If today’s Christians were commonly burnt as street lamps and if a despotic and insane ruler was tearing down the fabric of society, our writings would comment on the trouble. This is exactly the context of the much of the New Testament. But with a Dispensationalist outlook, we shift our mind’s attention from their day to our day. This is not genuine exegesis of scripture.
Suetonius Tranquillus, a Roman government official, described Nero’s behaviour, which was not too dissimilar to what may happen in our own time:
He castrated the boy Sporus and actually tried to make a woman of him; and he married him with all the usual ceremonies, including a dowry and a bridal veil, took him to his home attended by a great throng and treated him as his wife. And the witty jest that someone made is still current, that it would have been well for the world if Nero's father Domitius had that kind of wife.
This Sporus, decked out with the finery of the empresses and riding in a litter, he took with him to the courts and marts of Greece and later at Rome through the Street of the Images, fondly kissing him from time to time.
Tacitus described the persecution of Nero against Christians:
An immense multitude was convicted…of hatred against mankind. Mockery of every sort was added to their deaths. Covered with the skins of beasts, they were torn by dogs and perished, or were nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and burnt, to serve as a nightly illumination, when daylight had expired. (Tacitus Annals XV.44).
Tacitus wrote generally of this period:
The history on which I am entering is that of a period rich in disasters, terrible with battles, torn by civil struggles, horrible even in peace…there were civil wars, more foreign wars and often both at the same time.
He went on to describe distress all over the empire, natural catastrophes and the many people who died and concluded:
Besides the manifold misfortunes that befell mankind…never was it more fully proved by awful disasters of the Roman people or by indubitable signs that the gods care not for our safety, but for our punishment. (Tacitus, The Histories).
Saturday, 16 October 2010
Perilous Times
We are saying that the term last-days was primarily about this transition for Israel, between the Old and the New Covenants. Many resisted this transition and still tried to live as though under the law, even as Christians. But when the temple was removed in 70AD they could no longer do this. This transition occurred during what the Bible called perilous times. In other places it was called great tribulation.
(We do not say that last-days only refers to that period. If can refer more generally to this present evil age, which is under God’s judgement, in which the lives of people are but a vapour [brief]. We speak of this in the next chapter. The principles that the 1st Century met still apply.)
Israel had entered this messianic age that they were expecting and that which the Essenes were preparing for. It was only that this messianic age was not as many of them had expected. Instead of ruling from Jerusalem in the Middle East, Jesus was ruling from the heavenly Jerusalem.
We will now look at how Peter used the term last time, or the end. Peter spoke of the salvation ready to be revealed at the last time. He spoke of the appearing of Jesus Christ. He said that the end of all things was at hand (1 Pet 4:7). What could he have meant by this?
1. The end of the whole world, in which case he was wrong. It is 2,000 years since Peter said this and the world has not ended.
2. He meant that the end was “at hand” or near from God’s perspective. But Peter was not speaking of God’s perspective here. He was speaking to those he wrote to and said to them plainly that the end was at hand.
3. By “at hand” Peter meant that we could die at any time and must be ready for judgement. That is, the end is always at hand for all of us. It is difficult to show that Peter meant this. He was referring to the historical events the people of that time were passing through.
4. Or was Peter referring to the perilous time of that generation, leading up to the destruction of Jerusalem?
It is clear that they were living in exceptionally perilous times. Paul had said perilous times would come in “the last-days”, while addressing how Timothy should conduct himself, meaning that Paul was referring to their own time (2 Tim 3:1).
In 1 Cor 7:26 Paul recommended not marrying, if any had the gift, due to the “present distress”. Paul addressed this in 1st Thessalonians 5, when speaking of the approaching trouble. Paul said that the Thessalonians (a mixture of Jew and non-Jewish believers) should be prepared for this, intimating that this was to happen in their own time.
Jay Adams, a respected Evangelical author, wrote in Trust and Obey: A Practical Commentary on First Peter:
In six or seven years from the time of writing, the overthrow of Jerusalem, with all its tragic stories, as foretold in the Book of Revelation and in the Olivet Discourse upon which that part is based, would take place.
Titus and Vespasian would wipe out the old order once and for all. All those forces that led to the persecution and exile of these Christians in Asia Minor—the temple ceremonies (outdated by Christ’s death), Pharisaism (with its distortion of O.T. law into a system of works-righteousness) and the political stance of Palestinian Jewry toward Rome—would be erased.
The Roman armies would wipe Jewish opposition from the face of the land. Those who survived the holocaust of A.D. 70 would themselves be dispersed around the Mediterranean world. “So,” says Peter, “hold on; the end is near.” The full end of the Old Testament order (already made defunct by the cross and the empty tomb) was about to occur.
We fully agree with Adam’s appraisal expressed here.
(We do not say that last-days only refers to that period. If can refer more generally to this present evil age, which is under God’s judgement, in which the lives of people are but a vapour [brief]. We speak of this in the next chapter. The principles that the 1st Century met still apply.)
Israel had entered this messianic age that they were expecting and that which the Essenes were preparing for. It was only that this messianic age was not as many of them had expected. Instead of ruling from Jerusalem in the Middle East, Jesus was ruling from the heavenly Jerusalem.
We will now look at how Peter used the term last time, or the end. Peter spoke of the salvation ready to be revealed at the last time. He spoke of the appearing of Jesus Christ. He said that the end of all things was at hand (1 Pet 4:7). What could he have meant by this?
1. The end of the whole world, in which case he was wrong. It is 2,000 years since Peter said this and the world has not ended.
2. He meant that the end was “at hand” or near from God’s perspective. But Peter was not speaking of God’s perspective here. He was speaking to those he wrote to and said to them plainly that the end was at hand.
3. By “at hand” Peter meant that we could die at any time and must be ready for judgement. That is, the end is always at hand for all of us. It is difficult to show that Peter meant this. He was referring to the historical events the people of that time were passing through.
4. Or was Peter referring to the perilous time of that generation, leading up to the destruction of Jerusalem?
It is clear that they were living in exceptionally perilous times. Paul had said perilous times would come in “the last-days”, while addressing how Timothy should conduct himself, meaning that Paul was referring to their own time (2 Tim 3:1).
In 1 Cor 7:26 Paul recommended not marrying, if any had the gift, due to the “present distress”. Paul addressed this in 1st Thessalonians 5, when speaking of the approaching trouble. Paul said that the Thessalonians (a mixture of Jew and non-Jewish believers) should be prepared for this, intimating that this was to happen in their own time.
Jay Adams, a respected Evangelical author, wrote in Trust and Obey: A Practical Commentary on First Peter:
In six or seven years from the time of writing, the overthrow of Jerusalem, with all its tragic stories, as foretold in the Book of Revelation and in the Olivet Discourse upon which that part is based, would take place.
Titus and Vespasian would wipe out the old order once and for all. All those forces that led to the persecution and exile of these Christians in Asia Minor—the temple ceremonies (outdated by Christ’s death), Pharisaism (with its distortion of O.T. law into a system of works-righteousness) and the political stance of Palestinian Jewry toward Rome—would be erased.
The Roman armies would wipe Jewish opposition from the face of the land. Those who survived the holocaust of A.D. 70 would themselves be dispersed around the Mediterranean world. “So,” says Peter, “hold on; the end is near.” The full end of the Old Testament order (already made defunct by the cross and the empty tomb) was about to occur.
We fully agree with Adam’s appraisal expressed here.
Friday, 15 October 2010
Former Sins
Jeremiah showed that in the New Covenant God would forget former sins, remove sin altogether and forever sanctify His people. The purpose of the New Covenant was, “I will put your sin from Me, as far as the east is from the west.” (Ps 103:12). This would make us New Creations. This gives us a new heart. Because of this new heart we do not forsake the Lord. This is the whole reason that Jesus came.
God’s problem with the Old Covenant was that the people broke it, “Which…covenant they broke…” (Jer 31:31-33) There was a continual cycle of sin, captivity, prophet, repentance, blessing, sin…(See the book of Judges.) This is not the life of one who is born again.
In Christ He has put all those former things away, “For I will forgive their iniquity and I will remember their sins no more.”. Jeremiah continues in chapter 31 to say that God has not cast off His people despite their sin, but will bring them into this New Covenant of renovation and change of heart. This is what the book of Hebrews describes.
Isaiah also showed that former things are gone:
…because the former troubles (sins) are forgotten and because they are hid from mine eyes (through Christ’s blood). For, behold, I create new heavens and a new earth: and the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind.
But be glad and rejoice for ever in that which I create: for, behold, I create Jerusalem a rejoicing and her people a joy. (Is 65:16-18).
The gospel is such good news.
A New Heart
A New Jerusalem is a new heart. We have something to sing about! Why would we be dragged back under an Old Covenant religious mindset, as if Jesus Christ did not prevail in fulfilling these prophecies? Hebrews describes this New Jerusalem:
But you are come to mount Zion, to the city of the living God, to the heavenly Jerusalem…to the general assembly and church of the Firstborn, which are written in heaven and to God the judge of all and to the spirits of just men made perfect and to Jesus…(Heb 12:22-23).
We have come to this now. We are in this New Creation that God has made in Jesus Christ. This is what the gospel is. This new order is our redemption:
For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second. For finding fault with them, He said, Behold, the days come when I will make a New Covenant… (Heb 8:7-8).
Passages such as 2 Chron 7:14 do not apply to the church:
If My people who are called by My name shall humble themselves and pray and seek My face and turn from their evil ways: then will I hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and will heal their land.
This was the problem of the Old Covenant. The people did not know God and did not continue in His ways. God kept sending them deliverers and they would go back into sin. Considering the state of their heart under the Old Covenant God cried out, “Behold, I make all things new.”. We are not saying that we never sin, but God’s people who are in Christ are not repeatedly brought down into a cycle of sin and deliverance and should not expect to be, nor should they pray like that.
A backslidden nation needs to pray this prayer and the people of that nation given a new heart. Then our nation’s lands will be healed.
God’s problem with the Old Covenant was that the people broke it, “Which…covenant they broke…” (Jer 31:31-33) There was a continual cycle of sin, captivity, prophet, repentance, blessing, sin…(See the book of Judges.) This is not the life of one who is born again.
In Christ He has put all those former things away, “For I will forgive their iniquity and I will remember their sins no more.”. Jeremiah continues in chapter 31 to say that God has not cast off His people despite their sin, but will bring them into this New Covenant of renovation and change of heart. This is what the book of Hebrews describes.
Isaiah also showed that former things are gone:
…because the former troubles (sins) are forgotten and because they are hid from mine eyes (through Christ’s blood). For, behold, I create new heavens and a new earth: and the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind.
But be glad and rejoice for ever in that which I create: for, behold, I create Jerusalem a rejoicing and her people a joy. (Is 65:16-18).
The gospel is such good news.
A New Heart
A New Jerusalem is a new heart. We have something to sing about! Why would we be dragged back under an Old Covenant religious mindset, as if Jesus Christ did not prevail in fulfilling these prophecies? Hebrews describes this New Jerusalem:
But you are come to mount Zion, to the city of the living God, to the heavenly Jerusalem…to the general assembly and church of the Firstborn, which are written in heaven and to God the judge of all and to the spirits of just men made perfect and to Jesus…(Heb 12:22-23).
We have come to this now. We are in this New Creation that God has made in Jesus Christ. This is what the gospel is. This new order is our redemption:
For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second. For finding fault with them, He said, Behold, the days come when I will make a New Covenant… (Heb 8:7-8).
Passages such as 2 Chron 7:14 do not apply to the church:
If My people who are called by My name shall humble themselves and pray and seek My face and turn from their evil ways: then will I hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and will heal their land.
This was the problem of the Old Covenant. The people did not know God and did not continue in His ways. God kept sending them deliverers and they would go back into sin. Considering the state of their heart under the Old Covenant God cried out, “Behold, I make all things new.”. We are not saying that we never sin, but God’s people who are in Christ are not repeatedly brought down into a cycle of sin and deliverance and should not expect to be, nor should they pray like that.
A backslidden nation needs to pray this prayer and the people of that nation given a new heart. Then our nation’s lands will be healed.
Thursday, 14 October 2010
Not a Temple of Stone
Dispensationalism claims that the above passage (Is 66:21-23) is about Jesus returning to Jerusalem and setting up the temple and making Gentiles literal Levites in the temple. This is wrong for several reasons:
1. Jesus never said this and neither did any apostle in the New Testament.
2. It denies the clear intention of prophetic language.
3. It is literalism.
4. It denies the New Covenant in Christ.
The clear interpretation of these passages by the apostles cannot be denied:
To whom (Jesus) we come, as to a living stone, disallowed indeed by men, but chosen by God and precious. You also as living stones, are built up a spiritual house, a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ. Wherefore also it is contained in scripture, Behold, I lay in Zion a chief corner stone, elect, precious: and he that believes on Him shall not be confounded. (1 Pet 2:4-6).
True Zionism is Jesus Christ and His church. So how can it be said that we are spiritualizing the texts? This is what Peter said: “A spiritual house.”.
1. Jesus never said this and neither did any apostle in the New Testament.
2. It denies the clear intention of prophetic language.
3. It is literalism.
4. It denies the New Covenant in Christ.
The clear interpretation of these passages by the apostles cannot be denied:
To whom (Jesus) we come, as to a living stone, disallowed indeed by men, but chosen by God and precious. You also as living stones, are built up a spiritual house, a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ. Wherefore also it is contained in scripture, Behold, I lay in Zion a chief corner stone, elect, precious: and he that believes on Him shall not be confounded. (1 Pet 2:4-6).
True Zionism is Jesus Christ and His church. So how can it be said that we are spiritualizing the texts? This is what Peter said: “A spiritual house.”.
Wednesday, 13 October 2010
New Heaven/Earth
God applied the same language to the removal of Israel and the Old Covenant and the bringing in of the reign on His Son in the New Covenant. This is the greatest establishment of a New Order in prophetic history.
And I will also take of them for priests and for Levites, says the Lord. For as the new heavens and the new earth, which I will make, shall remain before Me, says the Lord, so shall your seed and your name remain. And it shall come to pass, that from one new moon to another and from one Sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to worship before Me, says the Lord. (Is 66:21-23).
This is about the New Covenant, as the Gentiles worship the Lord. God said that He will take of the Gentiles and make us Levites and priests. The term Levites here means that God will make priests of the Gentiles through the New Covenant. Levites is not used literally, but symbolically for priests.
Imagine the outrage of the early Jews over this. “How could those Gentiles be made priests?”. We are made priest through Jesus Christ, through new birth and by the gift of the Spirit. This is the only priesthood now and it includes believing Jews also.
Then God said that this New Heaven and New Earth would remain before Him forever. That is, the new order, the New Covenant, is an eternal covenant in His Son. There is no doubt that the New Heaven and New Earth are symbolic of the New Covenant, the everlasting covenant where there is an eternal remission of sin by one sacrifice.
Heb 9:10 claimed that the Old Covenant was “ordinances imposed on them until the time of reformation”, meaning correction or perfection. Kittel, in Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, commented on the Greek word διόρθωσις (reformation), saying that the Old Covenant:
Lasted until the setting up of the order of the fulfilled time…when the Law and the Prophets were replaced by the διόρθωσις…the time of the true order…From this time on there is in force the order of the dawning time of consummation in the fashioning of the relation between God and man. Thus διόρθωσις is a witness to the fulfilment of Judaism in Christianity and an expression of the eschatological faith of primitive Christianity.
Eschatology in the mind of early Christendom meant the fulfilment of the Old Testament expectation in Christ. Is 66:23 also uses the term Sabbath symbolically for worship. Paul said that the literal Sabbath was abolished forever in Christ (Col 2:16). The literal Sabbath will never return. To say it will return in a future dispensation opposes the finished work of Christ.
Hag 2:5-7 and Heb 12:26-28 together also show that the New Heaven and New Earth refer to the New Covenant. This is the contextual meaning of the passages. (We discussed in the previous chapter.)
And I will also take of them for priests and for Levites, says the Lord. For as the new heavens and the new earth, which I will make, shall remain before Me, says the Lord, so shall your seed and your name remain. And it shall come to pass, that from one new moon to another and from one Sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to worship before Me, says the Lord. (Is 66:21-23).
This is about the New Covenant, as the Gentiles worship the Lord. God said that He will take of the Gentiles and make us Levites and priests. The term Levites here means that God will make priests of the Gentiles through the New Covenant. Levites is not used literally, but symbolically for priests.
Imagine the outrage of the early Jews over this. “How could those Gentiles be made priests?”. We are made priest through Jesus Christ, through new birth and by the gift of the Spirit. This is the only priesthood now and it includes believing Jews also.
Then God said that this New Heaven and New Earth would remain before Him forever. That is, the new order, the New Covenant, is an eternal covenant in His Son. There is no doubt that the New Heaven and New Earth are symbolic of the New Covenant, the everlasting covenant where there is an eternal remission of sin by one sacrifice.
Heb 9:10 claimed that the Old Covenant was “ordinances imposed on them until the time of reformation”, meaning correction or perfection. Kittel, in Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, commented on the Greek word διόρθωσις (reformation), saying that the Old Covenant:
Lasted until the setting up of the order of the fulfilled time…when the Law and the Prophets were replaced by the διόρθωσις…the time of the true order…From this time on there is in force the order of the dawning time of consummation in the fashioning of the relation between God and man. Thus διόρθωσις is a witness to the fulfilment of Judaism in Christianity and an expression of the eschatological faith of primitive Christianity.
Eschatology in the mind of early Christendom meant the fulfilment of the Old Testament expectation in Christ. Is 66:23 also uses the term Sabbath symbolically for worship. Paul said that the literal Sabbath was abolished forever in Christ (Col 2:16). The literal Sabbath will never return. To say it will return in a future dispensation opposes the finished work of Christ.
Hag 2:5-7 and Heb 12:26-28 together also show that the New Heaven and New Earth refer to the New Covenant. This is the contextual meaning of the passages. (We discussed in the previous chapter.)
Tuesday, 12 October 2010
All Nations to Battle
Prophets such as Joel and Zechariah spoke of the “latter days”. By this they meant the end of the nation of Israel under the Old Covenant or Mosaic era. The period was definitely in the latter days of Israel’s nationhood, hundreds of years after those prophets wrote. Our mistake is that we do not read the Bible from the perspective at the time that it was written.
They spoke about all nations coming against Israel. Nations means ethnos, Gentile people groups. This was fulfilled by Rome which gathered the nations in that region into its army (much as a UN army would today) and destroyed the state of Israel. This is where the rulers of Israel fell, its governors and priests, as stars and the sun from heaven. Any historical commentary would show us this.
The prophets also referred to many battles that would precede this last event, such as Ezekiel’s reference to Gog and Magog. Historical commentaries show that these were tribes in that region that came against Israel in the Intertestamental period.
The prophets then spoke of a restoration of Israel in the New Covenant after its destruction in the 1st Century. This restoration was fulfilled by the gospel. This is what John the Baptist declared in the opening of his ministry. The nation was about to be thrown into the fire, but there was an escape through the Son of God.
God has not cast off His people, but has called them into His Son, where all His promises are fulfilled. This is how Paul and the early apostles interpreted the prophets and these events.
Idumea
So we are speaking about the fall of the nation state of Israel, as declared by the prophets and the restoration of those called to salvation through the Seed of David. The language used to depict this fall was the same language used concerning the judgement of Idumea;
And all the host of heaven shall be dissolved and the heavens shall be rolled together as a scroll: and all their host shall fall down, as the leaf falls off from the vine and as a falling fig from the fig tree. For my sword shall be bathed in heaven: behold, it shall come down upon Idumea and upon the people of my curse, to judgement. (Is 34:4-5).
Here again is a parousia (come down). It is used in terms of judgement. The Lord said that the heavens would be dissolved. All the stars would fall down and the heavens would be rolled up as a scroll.
This is the same language that Peter used in his second epistle. Peter said, “The heavens being on fire shall dissolve (2 Pet 3:12). We read this and suppose that Peter was speaking literally. But was he? Are we not interpreting his words according to pagan chiliasm (spoken of in our previous chapter) and not according to the Hebrew literary intention?
If the heavens were not literally destroyed in the reference to Idumea, but it referred to their leaders and kingdom being completely removed and dissolved, as it was, then why should we apply a different principle of interpretation to Peter’s prophecy? Again, why the distinction? We will address this prophecy of Peter further below.
They spoke about all nations coming against Israel. Nations means ethnos, Gentile people groups. This was fulfilled by Rome which gathered the nations in that region into its army (much as a UN army would today) and destroyed the state of Israel. This is where the rulers of Israel fell, its governors and priests, as stars and the sun from heaven. Any historical commentary would show us this.
The prophets also referred to many battles that would precede this last event, such as Ezekiel’s reference to Gog and Magog. Historical commentaries show that these were tribes in that region that came against Israel in the Intertestamental period.
The prophets then spoke of a restoration of Israel in the New Covenant after its destruction in the 1st Century. This restoration was fulfilled by the gospel. This is what John the Baptist declared in the opening of his ministry. The nation was about to be thrown into the fire, but there was an escape through the Son of God.
God has not cast off His people, but has called them into His Son, where all His promises are fulfilled. This is how Paul and the early apostles interpreted the prophets and these events.
Idumea
So we are speaking about the fall of the nation state of Israel, as declared by the prophets and the restoration of those called to salvation through the Seed of David. The language used to depict this fall was the same language used concerning the judgement of Idumea;
And all the host of heaven shall be dissolved and the heavens shall be rolled together as a scroll: and all their host shall fall down, as the leaf falls off from the vine and as a falling fig from the fig tree. For my sword shall be bathed in heaven: behold, it shall come down upon Idumea and upon the people of my curse, to judgement. (Is 34:4-5).
Here again is a parousia (come down). It is used in terms of judgement. The Lord said that the heavens would be dissolved. All the stars would fall down and the heavens would be rolled up as a scroll.
This is the same language that Peter used in his second epistle. Peter said, “The heavens being on fire shall dissolve (2 Pet 3:12). We read this and suppose that Peter was speaking literally. But was he? Are we not interpreting his words according to pagan chiliasm (spoken of in our previous chapter) and not according to the Hebrew literary intention?
If the heavens were not literally destroyed in the reference to Idumea, but it referred to their leaders and kingdom being completely removed and dissolved, as it was, then why should we apply a different principle of interpretation to Peter’s prophecy? Again, why the distinction? We will address this prophecy of Peter further below.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)