Eternity

The Kingdom Of God – The Pretribulation Rapture (Part 1)

The Tribulation (Part 1)

I. Article Title. The basis of the pretribulation rapture.

A. The interpretation of the question of the time of the pretribulation rapture in relation to the tribulation period holds that the church, the body of Christ, in its entirety, will, by resurrection and translation, be removed from the earth before any part of the seventieth week of Daniel begins.

B. Pretribulation rapturism rests essentially on one major premise—the literal method of interpretation of the Scriptures. As a necessary adjunct to this, the pretribulationist believes in a dispensational interpretation of the Word of God. The church and Israel are two distinct groups with whom God has a divine plan. The church is a mystery, unrevealed in the Old Testament. This present mystery age intervenes within the program of God for Israel because of Israel’s rejection of the Messiah at His first advent. This mystery program must be completed before God can resume His program with Israel and bring it to completion. These considerations all arise from the literal method of interpretation.

II. The essential arguments of the of the pretribulation rapture.

A. The literal method of interpretation.

1. If the literal method of interpretation of the Scriptures be the right method
premillennialism is the correct interpretation. Thus we can see that our doctrine of the premillennial return of Christ to institute a literal kingdom is the outcome of the literal method of interpretation of the Old Testament promises and prophecies. It is only natural, therefore, that the same basic method of interpretation must be employed in our interpretation of the rapture question. It would be most illogical to build a premillennial system on a literal method and then depart from that method in consideration of the related questions. It can easily be seen that the literal method of interpretation demands a pretribulation rapture of the church.

2. The literal method of interpretation, consistently employed, can lead to no other conclusion than that the church will be raptured before the seventieth week.

B. The seventieth week fundamental characteristics.

1. There are a number of words used in both the Old and New Testaments to describe the seventieth week period, which, when considered together, give us the essential nature or character of this period: (1) wrath (Rev. 6:16-17; 11:18; 14:19; 15:1, 7; 16:1, 19; 1 Thess, 1:9-10; 5:9; Zeph. 1:15, 18); (2) judgment (Rev. 14:7; 15:4; 16:5-7; 19:2); (3) indignation (Isa. 26:20-21; 34:1-3); (4) punishment (Isa. 24:20-21); (5) hour of trial (Rev. 3:10); (6) hour of trouble (Jer. 30:7); (7) destruction (Joel 1:15); (8) darkness (Joel 2:2; Zeph. 1:14-18; Amos 5:18). It must be noted that these references describe the period in its entirety, not just a portion of it, so that the whole period bears this characterization. As to the nature of the tribulation (although limiting it to the last half of the week).

2. Let us get clearly in mind the nature of the Tribulation, that it is divine “wrath” (Rev 6:16, 17; 11:18; 14:8, 10, 19; 15:1, 7; 16:1, 19) and divine “judgment.” (14:7; 15:4; 16:7; 17:1; 18:10; 19:2). We know that our blessed Lord bore for us the wrath of God and His judgment; therefore we who are in Him “shall not come into judgment.” The antithesis of I Thess. 5:9 is conclusive evidence: “For God appointed us not unto wrath, but unto the obtaining of salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ.” Wrath for others, but salvation for us at the Rapture, “whether we wake or sleep” (vs. 10).

C. The realm of the seventieth week.

1. There can be no question that this period will see the wrath of God poured out upon the whole earth. Revelation 3:10; Isaiah 34:2; 24:1, 4-5, 16-17, 18-21, and many other passages make this very clear. And yet, while the whole earth is in view, this period is particularly in relation to Israel. Jeremiah 30:7, which calls this period “the time of Jacob’s trouble,” makes this certain. The events of
the seventieth week are events of the “Day of the Lord” or “Day of Jehovah.” This use of the name of deity emphasizes God’s peculiar relationship to that nation. When this period is being anticipated in Daniel 9, God says to the prophet, “Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city” (v. 24). This whole period then has special reference to Daniel’s people, Israel, and Daniel’s holy city, Jerusalem.

2. Inasmuch as many passages in the New Testament such as Ephesians 3:1-6;
Colossians 1:25-27 make it clear that the church is a mystery and its nature as a body composed of Jew and Gentile alike was unrevealed in the Old Testament, the church could not have been in view in this or any other Old Testament prophecy. Since the church did not have its existence until after the death of Christ (Eph. 5:25-26), until after the resurrection of Christ (Rom. 4:25; Col.3:1-3), until after the ascension (Eph. 1:19-20), and until after the descent of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost with the inception of all His ministries to the believer (Acts 2), the church could not have been in the first sixty-nine weeks of this prophecy. Since it had no part in the first sixty-nine weeks, which are related only to God’s program for Israel, it can have no part in the seventieth week, which is again related to God’s program for Israel after the mystery program for the church has been concluded.

3. In an extended treatment of each major passage in the Word on the subject of the tribulation, in passages such as Matthew 24, Daniel 12, Luke 21, Mark 13, Jeremiah 30, Revelation 7 (as follows) per William Kelly, “Lectures on the Second Coming of the Lord Jesus Christ (pp 186-237).”

“The view here maintained follows on a close investigation of every distinct
passage that Scripture affords upon the subject of the great tribulation. No Scripture can point out one word which supposes a Christian or the Church on the earth when the great tribulation arrives. Have we not seen that the doctrine of Old and New Testament—of Jeremiah, of Daniel, of the Lord Jesus, and of the apostle John—is this, that, just before the Lord appears in glory, will come the last and unequalled trouble of Israel, though Jacob shall be delivered from it; that there will be…“the great tribulation,” out of which a multitude of Gentiles emerge; but that both Jacob and the Gentiles are totally distinct from the Christians or the Church. As regards the Christian, the positive promise of the Lord is, that such as have kept the word of His patience He will keep out of the hour of trial, which is about to come upon the whole habitable world, to try them that dwell upon the earth.”

4. It must be concluded with the above information that since every passage dealing with the tribulation relates it to God’s program for Israel, that the scope of the tribulation prevents the church from participating in it.

D. The purpose of the seventieth week. The Scriptures indicate that there are two major purposes to be accomplished in the seventieth week.

1. The first purpose is stated in Revelation 3:10, “I also will keep thee from the
hour of temptation, which shall come upon all the world, to try them that dwell upon the earth.” Apart from the question involved as to who will be in this time of testing there are several other important considerations in this verse. (1) First of all we see that this period has in view “them that dwell on the earth” and not the church. This same expression occurs in Revelation 6:10; 11:10; 13:8, 12, 14; 14:6 and 17:8, In its usage it is not giving us a geographical description but rather a moral classification. Thiessen writes (Joseph Henry Thayer, “Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, p 498), as follows:

a. “Now the word “dwell” used here (katoikeo) is a strong word. It is used to
describe the fulness of the Godhead that dwelt in Christ (Col. 2:9); it is used of
Christ’s taking up a permanent abode in the believer’s heart (Eph. 3:17), and of
demons returning to take absolute possession of a man (Matt. 12:45; Luke 11:26). It is to be distinguished from the word oikeo, which is the general term for “dwell,” and paroikeo, which has the idea of transitoriness, “to sojourn.” Thayer remarks that the term katoikeo has the idea of permanence in it. Thus the judgment referred to in Rev. 3:10 is directed against the earth-dwellers of that day, against those who have settled down in the earth as their real home, who have identified themselves with the earth’s commerce and religion.”

b. Since this period is related to “earth dwellers,” those that have settled down to permanent occupancy, it can have no reference to the church, which would be subjected to the same experiences if it were here. (2) The 2nd consideration to be noted here is the use of the infinitive peirasai (to try) to express purpose. Thayer defines this word, when God is its subject, “to inflict evils upon one in order to prove his character and the steadfastness of his faith.” Since the Father never sees the church except in Christ, perfected in Him, this period can have no reference to the church, for the true church does not need to be tested to see if her faith is genuine.

2. The second major purpose of the seventieth week is in relation to Israel. In
Malachi 4:5-6 it is stated: “Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and terrible day of the Lord: And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse.

a. The prophet states that the ministry of this Elijah was a ministry to prepare the people for the King who was shortly to come. In Luke 1:17 it is promised that the son born to Zacharias would “go before him in the spirit and power of Elias” to perform this very ministry and “to make ready a people prepared for the Lord.” Concerning the coming of Elijah which was to have been a sign to Israel, the Lord states: “Elias verily cometh first, and restoreth all things; and how it is written of the Son of man, that he must suffer many things, and be set at naught. But I say unto you, that Elias is indeed come, and they have done unto him whatsoever they listed, as it is written of him [Mk. 9:12-13].”

b. The Lord was showing the disciples that John the Baptist had this ministry of preparing a people for Him. And to remove all doubt, the word in Matthew 11:14 is conclusive, “if ye will receive it, this is Elias, which was for to come.” John’s ministry was a ministry to prepare the nation Israel for the coming of the King. It can only be concluded then that Elijah, who is to come before the great and terrible day of the Lord, can have only one ministry: that of preparing a remnant in Israel for the advent of the Lord. It is evident that no such ministry is needed by the church since she by nature is without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, but is holy and without blemish. “

3. These two purposes, the testing of earth dwellers, and the preparation of Israel for the King, have no relation to the church whatsoever. This is supporting evidence that the church will not be in the seventieth week.

E. The coherence of the seventieth week.

1. It should be observed from the three preceding considerations that the entire seventieth week is in view when it is described and predicted in prophecy. While all would agree, on the basis of Daniel 9:27; Matthew 24:15; and Revelation 13, that the week is divided into two parts of three and one-half years each, yet the nature and character of the week is one, permeating both parts in their entirety.

2. It becomes impossible to permit the existence of the church in the week as a unit, and it becomes equally impossible to adopt the position that the church,
although exempt from a portion of the seventieth week, may be in the first half of it, for its nature is the same throughout. The impossibility of including the church in the last half makes it equally impossible to include it in the first half, for while Scripture divides the time of the week, it does not make any distinction as to the nature and character of the two parts of it.

III. Article References.

Lewis Sperry Chafer, Th. D. (1871-1952). J. Vernon McGee, Th. D. (1904-1988). Merrill F. Unger, Ph. D. (1909-1980). Charles L. Feinberg, Ph. D. (1909-1995). John F. Walvoord, Th. D. (1910-2002). J. Dwight Pentecost, Th. D. (1915-2014). Charles C. Ryrie, Ph. D. (1925-2016). Robert L. Thomas, Th. D. (1928-2017). Stanley D. Toussaint, Th. D. (1928-2017). Robert P. Lightner, Th. D. (1931-2018). Harold W. Hoehner, Ph. D. (1935-2009). Thomas S. McCall, Th. D. (1936-2021). Edward E. Hindson, Ph. D. (1944-2022).

A. One of the most difficult and most important factors of writing an article is related to sources of information. A writer must ensure that such sources have a high degree of knowledge on the subjects that are being written, and also must have a high degree of respect from other writers. A second factor that must be considered relates to how to lawfully use material of other writers. In this web site, copyright statutes are not violated. Also, “public domain,” is to be considered. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_domain

B. In this article, I have chosen theologians whom have proven themselves to be highly respected by others in the Biblical doctrine of eschatology (the study of what Scripture teaches about the end times), and other doctrines of scripture. All of the references in this article have a connection with Dallas Theological Seminary (DTS) as graduate or instructor.

C. For education and other supporting data for each source of information in this article, please refer to my Page, “About My References.” The following links show information about Dallas Theological Seminary; I encourage you to familiarize yourself with the Seminary. It is important to understand that DTS is not a denominational seminary, and is totally independent of such.

D. About Dallas Theological Seminary (DTS).

1. General Info. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dallas_Theological_Seminary

2. Doctrinal Statement. https://www.dts.edu/about/doctrinal-statement/

The Kingdom Of God – Present Age Prophecies (Part 4)

I. Article Title. Present Age Course. The letters to the seven churches in Rev 2-3. The Close Of The Age.

A. The Time Period Of time Of Revelation Two and Three.

1. The course of this present age is presented in a second passage found in
Chapters 2 and 3 of the book of Revelation. Whereas Matthew thirteen surveyed this present age in its relation to the inter advent age, Revelation two and three outline the present age in reference to the program in the church.

a. The time period of Revelation two and three.

b. John, in the book of Revelation, is writing concerning things that were past, things that are present, and things that are future (Rev. 1:19).

c. The great divisions of the book are here written for the instruction of the Church of God. (1)“What thou hast seen” refers to the vision of Christ just beheld (verses 12-16). (2) “The things that are” refer to the several successive, broadly defined features of the professing Church and of Christ’s relation thereto, till its final rejection, not yet accomplished (chaps. 2 and 3). (3) “The things that are about to be after these things.” In this third division, the world and the Jews, and, we may add, the corrupt and apostate Church, i.e., that which is to be “spued out,” are embraced in this strictly prophetic part of the Apocalypse (4—22:5).

d. Nothing has more contributed to throw discredit on prophetic studies, than
the erroneous principle on which it has been sought to interpret this book. Here is the key for its interpretation hanging at the door; take it down, use it, and enter in. There is simplicity and consistency in apportioning the main contents of the book to a past, a present, and a future. It would seem evident, then, that John, in writing to the seven churches, is depicting this present age from the inception of the church to the judgment of the apostate church prior to the second advent. Thus the period of time covered by these chapters would essentially parallel the period covered by Matthew thirteen. As has been previously stated, this time period covers the time from the rejection of Christ in Matthew 12:24 until the time of the return of Jesus to set up his kingdom in Matthew 24:29-30, and is known as the inter-advent age.

2. The purpose of the seven letters. A threefold purpose in the writing of the
seven letters may be suggested.

a. John is writing to seven local congregations in order to meet the needs of these individual assemblies. “There can be no doubt that these letters were
primarily intended for the communities to which they are inscribed, and deal with actual circumstances of the time.” Therefore, there would also be a corresponding direct historical application to that which is here, to that which is recorded for each of the seven churches.

b. These letters would reveal the various kinds of individuals and assemblies
throughout the age. Thus, the seven Churches represent seven varieties of Christians, both true and false. Every professer of Christianity is either an Ephesian in his religious qualities, a Smyrnaote, a Pergamite, a Thyatiran, a Sardian, a Philadelphian, or a Laodicean. It is of these seven sorts that the whole church is made up.

c. Every community of Christian professors has some of all the varied classes which make up Christendom at large. There are Protestant Papists, and Papistical Protestants; sectarian anti-sectarians, and partyists who are not schismatics; holy ones in the midst of abounding defection and apostasy, and unholy ones in the midst of the most earnest and active faith; light in dark places, and darkness in the midst of light. Thus the seven Churches are found in every Church, giving to those Epistles a directness of application to ourselves, and to professing Christians of every age, of the utmost solemnity and importance.

d. When taken together, these churches exhibit every phase of Christian society which would ever be found in the various parts of Christendom, and so enabled the Lord to give comfort, advice, exhortation, warning, and threatening, from which something could be found to suit any possible circumstance of His people till the end of the age (Matt 24:29-30). Thus, there would be a spiritual application, in addition to the historical interpretation.

e. There is a prophetic revelation as to the course of the age in the letters. i.e.,
“In the order in which they were given, they foreshadowed the successive predominant phases through which the nominal Church was to pass, from the time when John saw the vision until the Lord came.”

f. The seven churches, which were only seven of many which John could have chosen to address, seem to have been specifically chosen because of the significance of their names. Ephesus means “beloved” or perhaps “relaxation.” Smyrna means “myrrh” or “bitterness.” Pergamos means “high tower” or “thoroughly married.” Thyatira means “pereptual sacrifice” or “continual offering.” Sardis means “those escaping” or “renovation.” Philadelphia means “brotherly love.” Laodicea means “the people ruling or speaking” or “the judgment of the people.”

g. The names of the seven churches, themselves, suggest the succession of the development of the periods within the age. Concerning this development, Ecclesiastical pretension and departure from first love characterized the close of the apostolic-period—Ephesus (2:1-7). Next succeeded the martyr-period, which brings us down to the close of the tenth and last persecution, under Diocletian— Smyrna (2:8-11). Decreasing spirituality and increasing worldliness went hand in hand from the accession of Constantine and his public patronage of Christianity on to the seventh century—Pergamos (2:12-17).

h. The papal church, which is Satan’s masterpiece on earth, is witnessed in the assumption of universal authority and cruel persecution of the saints of God. Its evil reign covers “the middle ages,” the moral characteristics of which have been well termed “dark.” Popery blights everything it touches—Thyatira (2:18-29).

i. The Reformation was God’s intervention in grace and power to cripple papal authority and introduce into Europe the light which for 300 years has been burning with more or less brilliancy.

j. Protestantism with its divisions and deadness shows clearly enough how far short it comes of God’s ideal of the Church and Christianity—Sardis (3:1-6). Another Reformation, equally the work of God characterized the beginning of last century—Philadelphia (3:7-13).

k. The present general state of the professing Church, which is one of
luke warmness, is the most hateful and nauseous of any yet described. We may well term the last phase of church-history on the eve of judgment, the christless period —Laodicea (3:14-22). Note that the history of the first three churches is consecutive; whereas the history of the remaining four overlaps, and then practically runs concurrently to the end—the Coming of the Lord.

l. While these seven epochs are seen to be successive, it is important to observe that the succeeding epoch does not terminate the preceding one. The number of parables [in Matthew 13] and of epistles is seven, that number being significant of dispensational completeness; and, in each of the two prophecies, we apparently have set before us seven successive phases or characteristic epochs, which embrace the whole. These epochs commence in the order in which they are given; but any of them may overlap that which succeeds it, or even extend its influence, in a greater or less degree, to the end of the age (Matt 24:29-30).

3. The parallelism between Matthew thirteen and Revelation two and three. While the mystery of the inter-advent age is not synonymous with the visible church, yet, since the time period is essentially the same in the two passages, we may reasonably expect that there would be a parallelism of development. It is not intended to infer that there is an identity in the revelation in the two passages, rather, that there is a similarity in the progress of the course of the age as revealed in the two portions.

B. The Close Of The Present Age (Matthew 24:29-30).

1. Within this present age between the two advents of Christ, God is bringing to fulfillment two distinct programs: that with the church, which will be completed at the rapture of the church, and that with Israel, which will be completed after the rapture at the second advent of Christ. Both of these have descriptive passages concerning the end times of their respective programs.

2. There is a reference to the “last times” for the church (1Pet. 1:20 and Jude 18) and to the “last time” for the church (1 Pet. 1:5 and 1 John 2:18).

3. There is reference to the “latter days” for Israel (Dan. 10:14; Deut. 4:30) and for the church (1 Tim. 4:1). Scripture refers to the “last days” for Israel (Isa. 2:2;
Micah 4:1; Acts 2:17) and also for the church (2 Tim. 3:1; Heb. 1:2).

4. There is also a reference to the “last day” for Israel (John 6:39, 40, 44, 54), although this usage of “day” may refer to a program rather than to a time period. In these observations it is important to observe that the references to any given time period must be related to the program of which it is a part.

5. When used in reference to Israel’s program it can not refer to the program for the church. Distinction must be made between the “last days” for Israel—the days of her kingdom glory in the earth (cf. Isa. 2:1-5)—and the “last days” for the Church, which are days of evil and apostasy (cf. 2 Tim. 3:1-5). Likewise, discrimination is called for between the “last days” for Israel and for the church and “the last day,” which, as related to the Church, is the day of the resurrection of those who have died in Christ (cf. John 6:39-40, 44, 54).

6. Careful distinction must be made, or one will relegate to the church that which constitutes closing events for Israel or vice-versa. In this present consideration attention is not directed to the events concerning the close of the age in reference to Israel. This will be considered later and will include all those prophecies which take place after the translation of the church preceding the second advent of Christ.

7. Attention is directed to the events connected with the close of the age in relation to God’s program for the church. A very extensive body of Scripture bears on the last days for the Church. Reference is to a restricted time at the very end of, and yet wholly within, the present age. Though this brief period immediately precedes the great tribulation and in some measure is a preparation for it, these two times of apostasy and confusion—though incomparable in history—are wholly separate the one from the other.

8. Those Scriptures which set forth the last days for the Church give no consideration to political or world conditions but are confined to the Church itself. These Scriptures picture men as departing from the faith (1 Tim. 4:1-2). There will be a manifestation of characteristics which belong to unregenerate men, though it is under the profession of “a form of godliness” (cf. 2 Tim. 3:1-5). The indication is that, having denied the power of the blood of Christ (cf. 2 Tim 3:5 with Rom. 1:16; 1 Cor. 1:23-24; 2 Tim. 4:2-4), the leaders in these forms of righteousness will be unregenerate men from whom nothing more spiritual than this could proceed (Cf. 1 Cor. 2:14).

9. The following is a partial list of the passages which present the truth respecting the last days of the Church: 1 Timothy 4:1-3; 2 Timothy 3:1-5; 4:3-4; James 5:1-8; 2 Peter 2:1-22; 3:3-6; Jude 1:1-25. Since the church is given the hope of an imminent return of Christ there can be no signs given to her as to when this event will take place. Therefore we pass by the subject of “the signs of the times” in reference to the closing days for the church. However, from the Scriptures cited above, there are certain revelations concerning the condition within the professing church at the end of the age.

10. The following conditions center around a system of denials. There is a denial of God (Luke 17:26; 2 Tim. 3:4-5), a denial of Christ (1 John 2:18; 1 John 4:3; 2 Pet. 2:6), a denial of Christ’s return (2 Pet. 3:3-4), a denial of the faith (1 Tim. 4:1-2; Jude 3), a denial of sound doctrine (2 Tim. 4:3-4), a denial of the separated life (2 Tim. 3:1-7), a denial of Christian liberty (1 Tim. 4:3-4); a denial of morals (2 Tim. 3:1-8, 13; Jude 18), a denial of authority (2 Tim. 3:4). This condition at the close of the age is seen to coincide with the state within the Laodicean Church, before which Christ must stand to seek admission. In view of its close it is not surprising that the age is called an “evil age” in Scripture.

II. Article References.

III . Article Considerations.

D. About Dallas Theological Seminary (DTS).

1. General Info. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dallas_Theological_Seminary

2. Doctrinal Statement. https://www.dts.edu/about/doctrinal-statement/

The Kingdom Of God – Present Age Prophecies (Part 3)

I. Article Title. Present Age Course. Parables’ Interpretations.

Matthew 13 (continued)

The interpretation of the parables.

It is not possible nor necessary to give a detailed exposition of these parables at this point. To trace the Lord’s revelation concerning the course of this present age will suffice in this eschatological consideration

a. The Sower and the Soils (Matt. 13:3-9; 18-23). From the interpretation given by the Lord several important facts are to be learned concerning this present age. (1) This age is one that is characterized by the sowing of seed, which, in the parallel portion in Mark 4:14, is shown to be the Word, but here is seen to be men who are sons of the kingdom. (2) Within the age there is a marked difference in the preparation of the soils for the reception of the seed sown. (3) The age is marked by opposition to the word from the world, the flesh, and the devil. (4) During the course of the age there will be a decreasing response to the sowing of the seed, from “a hundredfold” to “sixty” to “thirty.” Such is the course of the age. Mark 4:13 reveals that this parable, with the revelation of the program which it makes, is basic to the understanding of the other parables in the discourse. The remaining parables deal with the development of the
seed-sowing program.

b. The Wheat and the Tares (Matt. 13:24-30; 36-43). This second parable is likewise interpreted by the Lord. Several important facts are revealed through it concerning the course of the age. (1) The true sowing, mentioned in the first parable, is to be imitated by a false sowing. (2) There is to be a side-by-side development of that which is good with that which is evil as the result of these two sowings. (3) There will be a judgment at the end of the age to separate the good from the evil. The good will be received into the millennial kingdom and the evil excluded. (4) The essential character of each sowing can be determined only by the fruitfulness or fruitlessness of that which was sown, not by outward observation.

There are many feel that this second parable is to be related particularly to the tribulation period and is to be distinguished from the sowing of the first parable. In the first parable the emphasis was on the “Word,” and in the second on the “children of the kingdom” (Matt. 13:38). In the first parable the seed is sown in the hearts of men and in the second in the world. In the first parable there is no mention of judgment and in the second the age ends in judgment. This would seem to indicate that two sowings are indicated; the first that throughout the age, principally by the church, and the second in the tribulation period just prior to the end of the age when God is again dealing with Israel. There are indications in the second parable that this is related to Israel, rather than to the church: (1) the term children of the kingdom is used in Matthew to refer to Israel (Matt. 8:11-12); (2) the judgment outlined relates to the time when God will again be dealing with Israel as a nation, that is at the end of the age; (3) the wheat and tares grow together until the judgment, but the church will be raptured before the tribulation begins; (4) the judgment that falls upon the wicked comes through the angels before the righteous are rewarded, so that the chronology here depicts the removal of the wicked so that only righteous are left; (5) the millennial kingdom is set up immediately after this judgment; (6) the church is never judged to determine who will enter into glory and who will be excluded. This seems to indicate that this parable has primary reference to Israel during the tribulation period. Yet it is true that the entire age is to be characterized by a false sowing in competition with the true.

(An explanation of the terms “rapture” and “catching up,” will be provided at the end of this article.)

c. The Mustard Seed (Matt. 13:31-32). This parable is properly interpreted as the prediction of the inevitable expansion of God’s kingdom throughout the world in the present age. In Jewish idiom a mustard seed was used to weigh what was considered the smallest measurable amount. Thus the insignificant beginning of the present age of the kingdom is being stressed. The mustard is a plant that grows in one year from seed to a height of twenty to thirty feet. This part of the parable stresses the great growth of the kingdom when once it is introduced. The kingdom will grow from an insignificant beginning to great proportions. Historically the present age of the kingdom of God had its beginning with only a few to propogate it, but in spite of that it will reach to great size. In Daniel’s prophecy (4:1-37) the tree represented Nebuchadnezzar’s kingdom (vs. 20-22). The birds in the tree represented the peoples that received benefit from Nebuchadnezzar’s kingdom (v. 12). Here the mustard reveals that the kingdom in the present age will have an insignificant beginning, but will grow to great size and multitudes will benefit from it. Note that the terms, “present age,” and “interadvent age,” both related to the time of the rejection of Christ by Israel (Matthew 12:22-24), to His return to earth at the end of the tribulation and the beginning of the Davidic Kingdom on earth (the earthly reign of Christ; Matthew 24:29-30; 2 Samuel 7:12-16). Jesus is the ultimate fulfillment of these promises (Luke 1:31-33) and, although at this present time He is not ruling from the throne of David (Hebrews 12:2), at His second coming He will assume this throne (Matthew 19:28; Acts 15:15-17).

d. The Leaven Hidden in the Meal (Matt. 13:33). When leaven is used in Scripture it frequently connotes evil (Ex. 12:15; Lev. 2:11; 6:17; 10:12; Matt. 16:6; Mark 8:15; 1 Cor. 5:6, 8; Gal. 5:9). Its use in the sacrifices that represent the perfection of the person and work of Christ (Lev. 2:1-3) shows it is not always so used. Here the emphasis is not on leaven itself as though to emphasize its character, but rather on the fact that the leaven has been hidden in meal, thus stressing the way leaven works when once introduced into the meal. When leaven is introduced into the meal an irreversible process has begun that will continue until it has completed its leavening action. This is intended to stress the way the present age of the kingdom will develop.

The power in the kingdom will not be external but internal. By its internal working it will effect an external transformation. All previous kingdoms had been introduced by military might; Babylon came to power by defeating Assyria, Medo-Persia ruled by defeating Babylon, Greece came to ascendancy by conquering Medo-Persia, and Rome dominated by overwhelming Greece. But this present age of the kingdom will flourish, not by military might, but by a new principle—the power within. The parable of the mustard and the leaven hidden in meal, then, stress the growth of the present age of the kingdom.

e. The Hid Treasure (Matt. 13:44). The purpose of this parable is to depict the
relationship of Israel to this present age. Although set aside by God until this age is completed, yet Israel is not forgotten and this age does have reference to that program. We observe (1) that an individual, who is the Lord Jesus Christ, is purchasing a treasure. This purchase was effected at the cross. (2) This treasure is hidden away in a field, unseen by men, but known to the purchaser. (3) During the age the purchaser does not come into the possession of His purchased treasure, but only into the possession of the place in which the treasure resides. The parable is showing that Christ has laid the foundation for Israel’s acceptance in this age, even though the age ends without His having appropriated His treasure. The treasure will be unearthed when He comes to establish His kingdom. Israel is now in blindness, but possessed.

f. The Pearl (Matt. 13:45-46). While some relate the pearl to the believing remnant saved at the end of the age, most interpreters relate the pearl to the church. Thus the Lord is showing that within this present age, in addition to acquiring the treasure, Israel, He will also acquire for His personal possession that which was born through injury, the church. We observe (1) that the church, like the pearl, becomes the possession of the “merchantman,” Christ, by purchase; (2) the church, like the pearl, is to be formulated by gradual accretion; (3) the church, like the pearl, can only become His adornment by being lifted out of the place in which it was formed. This is to be related to the present age purpose, previously considered.

g. The Dragnet (Matt. 13:47-50). This parable indicates that the age is to end in a judgment, principally upon Gentile nations, since the net is to be cast into the sea (Matt. 13:47). This is in contrast to the judgment on Israel depicted in the second parable. The unsaved will be excluded from the kingdom that is to be established, as previously taught in the parables, and the righteous taken into it.

It is to be observed that there is a parallel between the “mysteries of the kingdom of heaven” of Matthew 13 and the mysteries referred to by Paul. The mystery of the sower closely parallels the mystery of godliness of 1 Timothy 3:16. The parable of the wheat and tares and the parable of the mustard seed parallel the mystery of lawlessness of 2 Thessalonians 2:7, which depicts the individual who is the head of a system. The parable of the leaven parallels the Babylon mystery of Revelation 17:1-7. The parable of the hid treasure parallels the mystery of Israel’s blindness of Romans 11:25. The parable of the pearl parallels the mystery applicable to the church mentioned in Ephesians 3:3-9; Colossians 1:26-27; Romans 16:25.

II. Explanation of the catching up of the saints, also known as the rapture of the church. A more detailed discussion of the significance of the rapture will take place in a later article.

Regarding the term rapture and its use in theology, the following discussion should answer any questions about the rapture. Such a teaching is that the catching up of the church is imminent, which means that it can happen at any time. Also, there is no OT event that can precipitate the rapture, because of imminency, such as the feast of trumpets.

This discussion examines the rapture 1 Thes 4:16-17, but the following scriptures tell the same story of Jesus coming in the air (not to stand on the earth) to take His born again believers to Heaven with Him, as they are seen in Rev 4-5. As an example, if believers are not caught up to Heaven, “how do they get there?” [John 14:2-3; vs 6, tells of an action of Jesus, as well as a belief in Jesus; 1 Thes 4:13-18; 1 Cor 15:51-54; Titus 2:13].

Our modern understanding of rapture appears to have little or no connection with the eschatological event. However, the word is properly used of that event. Rapture is a state or experience of being carried away. The English word comes from a Latin word, rapio, which means to seize or snatch in relation to an ecstasy of spirit or the actual removal from one place to another. In other words, it means to be carried away in spirit or in body. The Rapture of the church means the carrying away of the church from earth to heaven.

The Greek word from this term “rapture” is derived appears in 1 Thes 4:17, translated “caught up.” The Latin translation of this verse used the word rapturo. The Greek word it translates is harpazo, which means to snatch or take away. Elsewhere it is used to describe how the Spirit caught up Philip near Gaza and brought him to Caesarea (Acts 8:39) and to describe Paul’s experience of being caught up into the third heaven 2 Cor 12:2-4). Thus, there can be no doubt that the word is used in1 Thes 4:17 to indicate the actual removal of people from earth to heaven. The Latin Vulgate actually used a different form of the same verb –“Rapiemur” instead of “Rapturo,” which has the same meaning as “rapturo.”

III. Article References.

IV . Article Considerations.

D. About Dallas Theological Seminary (DTS).

1. General Info. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dallas_Theological_Seminary

2. Doctrinal Statement. https://www.dts.edu/about/doctrinal-statement/

The Kingdom Of God – Present Age Prophecies (Part 2)

I. Article Title. Present Age Course.

The age from the rejection of the Messiah by Israel unto His reception by Israel at His second advent is outlined in two portions of the Word: Matthew thirteen and Revelation two and three; the former from the viewpoint of God’s kingdom program, and the latter from the viewpoint of the church program. The course of this present age will be traced from these two passages.

A. Matthew 13.

Matthew 13:11 reveals that our Lord is speaking in order that He may give the
course of the “mysteries of the kingdom of heaven.” This instruction comes through the proper interpretation of the parables which are recorded here. There are three different basic approaches to this chapter. There are, first of all, those who divorce any prophetic significance from this passage and study it only for its spiritual or moral lessons as it affects believers today. Since they emphasize the unity of God’s purpose from the fall of man until the eternal state, they fail to make any distinction between God’s program for Israel and that for the church and, as a consequence, they see only church truth in this portion. In spite of the contradictions that such a method entails, they persist in it.

There are those, in the second place, who, recognizing the distinction between
Israel and the church, hold that this portion is totally limited to God’s program for Israel and relegate it to a revelation concerning Israel in the tribulation period when God is preparing them for the coming King. This is the ultradispensational approach

Then there are those, in the third place, who believe that this portion of Scripture gives a picture of conditions on the earth in respect to the development of the kingdom program during the time of the King’s absence from the earth. These parables describe the events of the entire inter-advent period. Such is the approach to the passage adopted in this study.

1. The use of the parabolic method. There seems to be a note of surprise and
amazement in the question “Why speakest thou unto them in parables?” (Matt. 13:10). A variation in emphasis in the reading of this question will indicate several possible causes for this surprise. If it is read, “Why speakest thou unto them in parables?” the question would raise the problem as to why the Lord would speak to the multitude, as He is in Matthew 13:1-3, when, in the previous chapter, after the manifest rejection of the testimony of the Holy Spirit to the person of Christ by the nation Israel, He has characterized them as “an evil and adulterous generation” (v. 39). The problem thus would be: Why do you continue to teach a nation that has publicly announced their decision that you are a son of Satan?

The nature of the Lord’s reply in the verses that follow would indicate that the
question ought to be understood, “Why speakest thou unto them in parables?” There was nothing new in the use of parables themselves, for the Lord had used such with frequency before, both to instruct and to illustrate the truths He desired to convey. The disciples must have recognized a new emphasis in our Lord’s teaching method.

In reply to the disciples’ question the Lord gives three purposes in the use of this parabolic method of instruction. (1) It was a means of substantiating His claim to Messiahship (Matt. 13:34-35). In addition to the other signs to prove His claim there was the sign in relation to Isaiah’s prophecy. (2) It was a method of imparting truth to the believing hearer (Matt. 13:11). (3) It was a method of hiding truth from the unbelieving hearer (Matt. 13:13-15). The reason why it was necessary to hide truth will be seen in the following consideration.

2. The setting of the chapter in the Gospel.

a. The Gospel of Matthew is the Gospel which presents the Lord Jesus Christ as Yahweh’s King and Israel’s Messiah. It unfolds the presentation of the Messiah to Israel.

[(Lexicon: 3068, Yahweh, the proper name of the God of Israel; also LORD, all caps: Gen 4:26, “At that time people began to call on the name of Yahweh.”) Gen 4:1, “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” (God = Elohim, Lexicon, 430, elohim: God, god) Phonetic Spelling: (el-o-heem). a generic term for deity. God, Elohim, a generic term for deity, as well as a proper name for the true God. It is used of pagan gods. The form of the word is plural. NASB translation, divine (1), divine being (1), exceedingly (1), God (2326), god (45), God’s (14), goddess (2), godly (1), gods (204), great (2), judges (3), mighty (2), rulers (1), shrine (1).]

b. More than any other of the Gospels, Matthew’s is allied with the Hebrew
Scriptures in theme and tone.

1. Their subjects are its subjects, the Messiah, Israel,
the Law, the Kingdom, the Prophecy.

2. Jewish ideas and terms characterize the whole record.

3. Its witness would not have impressed either the Roman, for whom Mark wrote, or the Greek, for whom Luke wrote, but to Jews its significance would be inescapable.

c. This fact is borne out by the numerous references to the Son of David (1:1, 20; 9:27; 12:23; 15:22; 20:30-31; 21:9, 15; 22:42, 45), to the fulfillment of prophecy (1:22; 2:5, 15, 17, 23; 4:14; 8:17; 12:17; 13:35; 21:4, 42; 26:31, 54, 56; 27:9-10), to Jewish customs (15:1-2; 27:62), to the Mosaic Law (5:17-19, 21, 27, 31, 33, 38, 43; 7:12; 11:13; 12:5; 15:6; 22:36, 40; 23:23), to the Sabbath (12:1-2, 5, 8, 10, 11, 12; 24:20; 28:1), and to the holy city and the holy place (4:5; 24:15; 27:53). Christ is related to prophecy throughout. This will have important bearing on the meaning of the term “kingdom of heaven.”

d. This thirteenth chapter holds a unique place in the development of the theme of the Gospel. Throughout the book Christ is seen in His presentation as Messiah. In chapters one and two His legal right to the throne is presented; in chapter three is depicted the dedication of the King; in chapter four the moral right of the King is demonstrated; in five through seven the judicial right of the King is shown; in eight through ten is presented the authority of the King, as his prophetical right is demonstrated by His ministry to Israel; and in chapters eleven and twelve we see the opposition to the King. The great question before Israel is: “Is not this the son of David?” (Matt. 12:23). It is evident that Israel is answering in the negative. Christ shows that both He and His forerunner have been rejected (11:1-9), and this rejection will result in judgment (11:20-24). Because of the ultimate rejection of the cross Christ can give a new invitation (11:28-30), an invitation to all. In chapter twelve the rejection comes to a climax. The populace was debating the person of Christ (12:23). The answer
given by the Pharisees was: “This fellow doth not cast out devils, but by Beelzebub the prince of the devils” (12:24.) The Holy Spirit had borne His witnesses to the Person of Christ through His words and His works, and the leaders who examined the evidence have decided that His credentials are the credentials of hell, not those of heaven. The great warning of judicial blindness and judgment is given by the Lord to the nation (12:31-32). As the chapter closes (12:46-50) the Lord indicates that He is setting aside all natural relationships, such as Israel sustained to Him and to the covenant promises by a physical birth, and establishes a new relationship, based on faith.

e. Jesus renounced all earthly connection for the present time. The only tie He
acknowledges now is relationship to a heavenly Father, formed through the word of God received into the soul. Thus we have in this chapter the Lord closing with Israel, as far as testimony is concerned. In the next chapter we shall find what comes dispensationally of those new relations that the Lord was about to unfold.

f. Now that Israel has rejected the offered kingdom, the question naturally arises, “What will happen to God’s kingdom program now that the kingdom has been rejected and the King is to be absent?” Since this kingdom was the subject of an irrevocable covenant it was unthinkable that it could be abandoned. The chapter gives the events in the development of the kingdom program from the time of its rejection until it is received when the nation welcomes the King at His second advent.

3. The use of the term kingdom of heaven. (1) the Gentile kingdoms, (2) the kingdoms of Israel and Judah, (3) the kingdom of Satan, (4) God’s universal kingdom, (5) a spiritual kingdom, and (6) the millennial Davidic kingdom. It is noted that there is general agreement among theologians concerning the first four of these classifications. The last two are concerned with the realm of Eschatology and are the subject of debate. It is necessary to make some observations concerning these.

a. The spiritual kingdom, which is closely related with God’s universal kingdom, is composed of believers of all the ages, who have experienced a new birth by the power of the Holy Spirit. This kingdom can not be entered apart from such a new birth. It is referred to in Matthew 6:33; 19:16, 23, 24; John 3:3-5; Acts 8:12; 14:22; 19:8; 20:25; 28:23; Romans 14:17; 1 Corinthians 4:20; 6:9-10; 15:50; Galatians 5:21; Ephesians 5:5; Colossians 4:11; 1 Thessalonians 2:12; 2 Thessalonians 1:5.

b. The millennial kingdom is declared to be a literal, earthly kingdom over which Christ rules from David’s throne in fulfillment of the Davidic covenant (2 Sam. 7:8-17; Matt. 1:1; Luke 1:32). This kingdom is the subject of Old Testament prophecy (2 Sam. 7:8-17; Isa. 9:6-7; 11:1-16; Jer. 23:5; 33:14-17; Ezek. 34:23; 37:24; Hosea 3:4-5; Micah 4:6-8; 5:2; Zech. 2:10-12; 8:20-23; Psalm 2:6, 8-10; 72:11, 17; Mal. 3:1-4). This kingdom was proclaimed as being “at hand” at Christ’s first advent (Matt. 3:2; 4:17; 10:5-7); but was rejected by Israel and therefore postponed (Matt. 23:37-39). It will again be announced to Israel in the tribulation period (Matt. 24:14). It will be received by Israel and set up at the second advent of Christ (Isa. 24:23; Rev. 19:11-16; 20:1-6).

c. In regard to the terms kingdom of God and the kingdom of the heavens, while not synonymous, they are used interchangeably. What distinctions there are are not inherent in the words themselves, but in their usage in the context.

d. Both of these terms are used to designate the millennial kingdom and the spiritual kingdom. While we recognize the distinctions between the earthly and the eternal aspects of the kingdom program, we must guard against making the terms kingdom of God and the kingdom of the heavens absolute. Only the context can determine the meaning intended to be conveyed by the terms.

4. The time element in Matthew thirteen. Ryrie writes to show that these parables are limited to the inter-advent period, which extends from the rejection of Christ by Israel until the second coming of Christ.

“The kingdom of the heavens has become like unto.” This sets the time limit
for the beginning of the subject matter involved. In other words, the inter advent age is described in the parables as that time when Christ was personally ministering on the earth. The end of the time period covered by these parables is indicated by the phrase “end of the world” or more literally “the consummation of the age” (verses 39-49). This is the time of the Second Advent of Christ when He shall come in power and great glory. Therefore, it is clear that these parables are concerned only with that time between the days when Christ spoke them on earth and the end of this age. This gives a clue to the meaning of the phrase “the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven,” i.e., the inter advent age includes more than the church, as it overlaps the church age. On the other hand, it must be observed, this mystery, the interadvent age has reference to things that were hitherto unrevealed, is definitely limited as to time, and represents the entire sphere of profession in the present age. Re: the end of the age scriptures: Notice that the subject is not addressed in Mark, Luke, John.

Matthew 13: 39-40. “39 and the enemy who sowed them is the devil, and the harvest is the “end of the age;” and the reapers are angels. 40 So just as the tares are gathered up and burned with fire, so shall it be at the “end of the age.”

Matthew 13:49^.“So it will be at the “end of the age;” the angels will come forth and take out the wicked from among the righteous,”

Matthew 24:3. As He was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to Him privately, saying, “Tell us, when will these things happen, and what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the “end of the age?””

Matthew 28:20. ¹⁸And Jesus came up and spoke to them, saying, “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. ¹⁹Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, ²⁰teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the “end of the age.”

5. The interpretation of the chapter. There are several keys to be used in the interpretation of this passage which will keep one from error. (1) First of all, some of the parables are interpreted by the Lord Himself. There can be no uncertainty as to their meaning, nor the method by which the rest of the parables are to be interpreted. Any interpretation of the whole must, of necessity, be in harmony with that which has been interpreted by the Lord. (2) A second important key is to observe that, while many of the parables are in figurative language, these figures are familiar ones throughout the Word and, therefore, will have the same usage here as used consistently elsewhere. The fact that these are not isolated figures makes interpretation easier.

The key to the interpretation of these parables is in ver. 52 of this chapter: “Every scribe which is instructed unto the kingdom of heaven is like unto a man that is an householder, which bringeth forth out of his treasure things new and old.” These words are spoken of the things which precede, and surely speak of the parables as some new and some old. But which are old and which are new? In ver. 1, we read that our Lord “went out of the house, and sat by the seaside” and taught; and in ver. 36 “then Jesus sent the multitude away, and went into the house” and taught. Thus the parables are divided into four spoken in public, and three spoken in private; and the evidence goes to show (if ver. 52 is the key) that the first four are the new treasures of truth, and the last three are the old —that is, truths revealed before. Assuming this, the present Age is presented to our view in a series of seven progressive pictures, describing the course of the kingdom in mystery.

B. Parables Preview.

New Things.

1. The Seed and the Soils: The Proclamation of the Kingdom. 2. The Wheat and the Darnel: false Imitation in the Kingdom. 3. The Mustard Tree: Wide, visible Extension of the Kingdom. 4. The Leaven in the Meal: insidious Corruption of the Kingdom.

The Old Things.

5. The Treasure: The Israelitish Nation. 6. The Pearl: The Jewish Remnant during the Tribulation. 7. The Dragnet: The Judgment of the Nations at the end of the Tribulation.

C. The interpretation of the parables will be seen in the following article.

II. Article References.

III . Article Considerations.

D. About Dallas Theological Seminary (DTS).

1. General Info. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dallas_Theological_Seminary

2. Doctrinal Statement. https://www.dts.edu/about/doctrinal-statement/

The Kingdom Of God – Present Age Prophecies (Part 1)

I. Article Title. The Kingdom Of God – Present Age Prophecies (Part 1).

II. Article References.

III. Article Narrative – The Present Age Course.

A. God’s Program For The Ages.

1. Any individual who refers to the Scriptures as the Old and New Testaments bears witness to the fact that God has divided His program into time segments. The history of revelation evidences the progress of divine revelation through successive ages. Chafer sets forth this program as he writes:

a. The dispensational study of the Bible consists in the identification of certain
well-defined time-periods which are divinely indicated, together with the revealed purpose of God relative to each.

b. The unrestrained, sovereign purpose of God is seen in the ordering of the
succession of the ages. That God has a program of the ages is disclosed in many
passages (cf. Deut. 30:1-10; Dan. 2:31-45; 7:1-28; 9:24-27; Hos. 3:4, 5; Matt. 23:37—25:46; Acts 15:13-18; Rom. 11:13-29; 2 Thess. 3:1-12; Rev. 2:1—22:31). Likewise, there are well-defined periods of time related to the divine purpose. The Apostle Paul writes of the period between Adam and Moses (Rom. 5:14); John speaks of the law as given by Moses, but of grace and truth as coming by Christ (John 1:17). Christ also speaks of the “times of the Gentiles” (Luke 21:24), which are evidently to be distinguished from Jewish “times and seasons” (Acts 1:7; 1 Thess. 5:1). Likewise, He spoke of a hitherto unannounced period between His two advents and indicated its distinctive features (Matt. 13: 1-51), and predicted a yet future time of “great tribulation” and defined its character (Matt. 24:9-31). There are “last days” for Israel (Isa. 2:1-5) as well as “last days” for the Church (2 Tim. 3:1-5). The Apostle John anticipates a period of one thousand years and relates this to the reign of Christ, at which time the Church, His bride, will reign with Him (Rev. 20:1-6). That Christ will sit on the throne of David and reign over the house of Jacob forever is declared by the angel Gabriel (Luke 1:31-33), and that there will be an ever abiding new heaven and new earth is as clearly revealed (Isa. 65:17; 66:22; 2 Pet. 3:13; Rev. 21:1). In Hebrews 1:1, 2 sharp contrast is drawn between “time past” when God spoke to the fathers by the prophets and “these last days” when He is speaking unto us by His son. Similarly, it is clearly disclosed that there are ages past (Eph. 3:5; Col. 1:26), the present age (Rom. 12:2; Gal. 1:4) and the age, or ages, to come (Eph. 2:7; Heb. 6:5; note Eph. 1:10, where the future age is termed the dispensation…of the fullness…of times.

2. As one turns, then, to this present age, he is examining only one portion of the eternal program of God.

C . The relation of Christ to the ages. An examination of passages in the New
Testament that make reference to the program of the ages will show us that Christ is the very center of that program. In Hebrews 1:2 He is said to be the one on whose account the ages were ordered. 2 In 1 Timothy 1:17 Christ is related to the program of the ages, where He is called the “king of the ages.” In Hebrews 9:26 and 1 Corinthians 10:11 the ages are seen to center in His cross work for the sins of the world. This very work was planned before the ages began, 1 Cor 2:7; 2 Timothy 1:9; Titus 1:2, and in past ages that which is now known was not revealed, Romans 16:25. Thus the ages are the time periods within which God is revealing His divine purpose and program as it centers in the Lord Jesus Christ.

D. The use of age in the New Testament. The word aiōn (age), frequently translated world, is essentially a time word. Abbott-Smith defines it thus:

1.…a space of time, as, a life, a generation, period of history, an indefinitely
long period; in NT of an indefinitely long period, an age, eternity.

2.…the sum of the periods of time, including all that is manifested in them.

E. While kosmos (world) refers to the ordered universe, the scheme of material things, and oikoumenē (world) refers to the inhabited earth, this word aiōn (world) views the world under the aspect of time. There are occasions when it seems to be synonymous with oikoumenē, and to be used of the inhabited earth, as in Titus 2:12. Again, on occasion, it seems to be used synonymously with kosmos, to refer to the organized system under the domination of Satan, as in 2 Corinthians 4:4; Ephesians 6:12 and 2 Timothy 4:10. When it is so used it has the same ethical connotation as kosmos, which Abbott-Smith says is used “in ethical sense, of the ungodly, the world as apart from God and thus evil in its tendency:” Jo 7:7, 14:17, 27, 1 Co 1:21, Ja 1:27, 1 Jo 4:4.

F. Aiōn is frequently used in the sense of eternity, the sum total of all the ages (Matt. 6:13; Luke 1:33, 55; John 6:51, 58; 8:35; 12:34; Rom. 9:5; 11:36; 2 Cor. 9:9; Phil. 4:20; Heb. 7:17, 21; 1 Pet. 1:25; Rev. 15:7 are but a few). It is also used frequently in regard to the separate ages of God’s dealing with men. When so used it may refer to a past age, the present age, or a coming age.

1. There is reference to a present age for Israel in Matthew 12:32 and Mark 4:19, and also to a future age for Israel in Matthew 12:32; 13:39-40; 24:3; Mark 10:30; and Luke 18:30; 20:35. In regard to the program for the church there is also a reference to this present age in 1 Corinthians 1:20; Galatians 1:4, and to a future age in Ephesians 1:21. In the use of these terms present age and future age it should be borne in mind that their connotation may not always be the same.

2.The present age for the church, spoken of by Paul, is not the same as the present age for Israel, spoken of by Christ. Nor is the expectation in the future age for the church the same as that for Israel. In order to determine the usages of these terms one must clearly define the scope of the passage and those to whom it is addressed. Confusion has resulted from a failure to see this distinction.

G. As it is used in the New Testament, according to the normal usage of the words, this present age refers to that period of time in which the speaker or writer then lived. As used in reference to Israel in the Gospels this present age referred to the period of time in which Israel was anticipating the coming of the Messiah to fulfill all her covenant promises. The coming age was the age to be inaugurated by the Messiah at His advent. In reference to the church the term “this present age” refers to the inter-advent period, that period from the rejection of the Messiah by Israel to the coming reception of the Messiah by Israel at His second coming. The phrase the coming age could be used in its earthly aspect, to which the church will be related (as in Eph. 1:21), or in its eternal aspect (as in Eph. 2:7).

H. According to the New Testament “this present age” has an unwholesome
designation. It is called “an evil age” (Gal. 1:4). It is so called because it is under the dominion of Satan, who is its “God” (2 Cor. 4:4). This age is marked by spiritual “darkness” (Eph. 6:12). This darkness produces its own wisdom, in which there is no light (1 Cor. 2:6-7). As a result it is marked by “ungodliness” and “lusts” (Titus 2:12), from which the believer is to turn away (Rom. 12:2), even though formerly he walked in conformity to its wisdom and standards (Eph. 2:2).

I. The distinction between this present age and the preceding ages. There are a number of ways in which this present age differs from all the ages that preceded.

(a) In all previous ages Christ was anticipated, but in this present age He has not only come, but has died, been resurrected and is looked to now, in His position, at the right hand of the Father. (b) The Holy Spirit, who in previous ages came upon certain men to empower them to a given task, has taken up His residence in every believer. (c) In previous ages the good news announced was anticipatory, but in this present age the declaration of the good news announces an accomplished salvation through Christ. (d) The revelation in previous ages was incomplete, but in this present age, since Christ came to reveal the Father, revelation is completed. (e) Since this present age is marked
by antagonism to God and His anointed, it bears a distinct characterization as an evil age, which was not applied to any previous age. (f) This age is, consequently, under the domination of Satan, its god, in a unique and unprecedented way. (g) The nation Israel has been set aside as the particular object of God’s dealing and can not expect the fulfillment of her promises during this age. These seven distinctions establish the fact that this present age is distinct from all preceding ages.

IV. Article Narrative – God’s Purpose For The Present Age. The Old Testament age, in which the purpose of God for Israel is stated in the covenants into which God entered and by which He is bound, closes with those purposes unrealized.

A. After the death of Christ, God instituted a new divine program, not to replace the program for Israel, but to interrupt that divinely covenanted program. This new program is anticipated by the Lord in His upper room discourse in John thirteen to sixteen and becomes actual after the advent of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost. The Jerusalem council (Acts 15:14) announced that “God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name.” The “taking out of a people” thus constitutes God’s present-age program. This people constitutes the church, the body of which He is the head (Eph. 1:22-23), the bride of which He is the bridegroom (Eph. 5:25-27, 32), the branch of which He is the supporting vine (John 15:1), the flock of which He is the Shepherd (John 10:7-27), the temple of which He is the cornerstone
(Eph. 2:19-22; 1 Pet. 2:5), the ministering priests of which He is the high priest (1 Pet. 2:5-9), the new creation of which He is the head and the first fruits (1 Cor. 15:45). The reason for this calling out is stated in Ephesians 2:7, “That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Jesus Christ.” The divine purpose in the outcalling of the church is to display the infinity of His grace. Chafer writes:

1. There was that in God which no created being had ever seen. They had seen
His glory, His majesty, His wisdom, and His power; but no angel or man had ever seen His grace.

2. Other attributes might be subject to a variety of demonstrations; but the manifestation of grace is restricted to what God may do for those among men who, in spite of the fact that they deserve His judgments, are objects of His grace.

3. As every other attribute or capacity of God must have its perfect exercise and exhibition—even for His own satisfaction—in like manner, His grace must also have its infinitely perfect revealing within the restricted undertaking by which He saves the lost.

4. To say that a sinner is saved by grace is to declare that, on the ground of a Substitute’s death and in response to faith in that Savior, God has wrought a work so perfect in its entirety and so free from the cooperation of other beings that it is a complete all-satisfying-to-God demonstration of His grace.

5. A statement of this kind may be made as easily as words form a sentence; but who on earth or in heaven is able to comprehend the infinity of such a salvation?

B. This demonstration, it should be added, will, by the very nature of the case, have its outshining in the life of each individual thus saved. It would seem, then, that God, in this present age, is pursuing a program through which His infinite grace shall be perfectly displayed throughout all eternity.

V. Article Narrative – The Character Of This Present Age.

A. This present age, dating from the rejection of the Messiah by Israel unto the
coming reception of the Messiah by Israel at His second advent, is viewed in Scripture as a mystery. Consider the following writing of the Apostle Paul:

1. Who now rejoice in my sufferings for you, and fill up that which is behind of
the afflictions of Christ in my flesh for his body’s sake, which is the church: Whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God which is given to me for you, to fulfil the word of God: Even the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints: To whom God would make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory (Col. 1:24-27).]

2. In this passage the apostle Paul very clearly calls the divine program developed in the church “a mystery,” something which was not formerly revealed, and therefore unknown, but now is made known by God. With this teaching other Scripture is in agreement (Rom. 16:25-26; 1 Cor. 2:7; Eph. 3:5-9).

B. While the modern usage of the word relates a mystery to that which is mysterious or unknown, Scripture uses the word for that divine purpose or program of God, known to Him from eternity, but which could not and would not have been known unless it was revealed by God; unknown in other ages, but now known by revelation. Mysteries are sacred secrets, hitherto unknown, but now known by revelation. In the twenty-seven New Testament usages of the word mystery (excluding 1 Corinthians 2:7, where the marginal reading is preferred), it will be observed that the body of truth referred to as a mystery is particular truth related to this present age. These mysteries comprise the added revelation given concerning this present age, which supplements the Old Testament revelation. Chafer, commenting on Ephesians 3:5, writes:

1. No better definition of a New Testament mystery will be found than that set
forth in this context. A New Testament mystery is a truth hitherto withheld, or “hid in God” (vs. 9), but now revealed. The sum total of all the mysteries in the New Testament represents that entire body of added truth found in the New Testament which is unrevealed in the Old Testament. On the other hand, the New Testament mystery is to be distinguished from the mystery of the cults of Babylon and Rome, whose secrets were sealed and held on penalty of death; for the New Testament mystery, when it is revealed, is to be declared to the ends of the earth (vs. 9), and is restricted only to the extent of the limitation of the natural man (I Cor. 2:14).

2. The existence of this present age, which was to interrupt God’s established program with Israel, was a mystery (Matt. 13:11). That Israel was to be blinded so that Gentiles might be brought into relation to God was a mystery (Rom. 11:25). The formulation of the church, made up of Jews and Gentiles to form a body, was a mystery (Eph. 3:3-9; Col. 1:26-27; Eph. 1:9; Rom. 16:25).

3. This whole program of God that results in salvation was called a mystery (1 Cor. 2:7). The relation of Christ to men in redemption was called a mystery (Col. 2:2; 4:3). The incarnation itself is called a mystery (1 Tim. 3:16), not as to fact but as to its accomplishment. The development of evil unto its culmination in the man of sin (2 Thess. 2:7) and the development of the great apostate religious system (Rev. 17:5, 7) both constitute that which was called a mystery. That there should be a new method by which God received men into His presence apart from death was a mystery (1 Cor. 15:51). These, then, constitute a major portion of God’s program for the present age, which was not revealed in other ages, but is now known by revelation from God.

4. The existence of an entirely new age, which only interrupts temporarily God’s program for Israel, is one of our strongest arguments for the premillennial position. It is necessary for one who rejects that interpretation to prove that the church itself is the consummation of God’s program.

5. Paul then is explaining, not limiting, the mystery there set forth. The concept must stand that this whole age with its program was not revealed in the Old Testament, but constitutes a new program and new line of revelation in this present age. It has been illustrated how this whole age existed in the mind of God without having been revealed in the Old Testament.

6. There are many places in Scripture in which this passing over of the present
Dispensation is very plainly evident; and where, in our reading, we have, like our Lord, to “close the book.” If we fail to do this, and if we refuse to notice these socalled “gaps,” we cannot possibly understand the Scriptures which we read. We give a few by way of example, placing this mark (—) to indicate the
parenthesis of this present Dispensation, which comes between the previous
Dispensation of Law, and the next Dispensation of Judgment which is to follow this Present Dispensation of Grace. Consider the following verses.

a. Ps. cxviii. 22, “The stone which the builders refused (—) is become the headstone of the corner.” b. Isa. ix. 6, “For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: (—) and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.” (Compare Luke 1, 31, 32.) c. Isa. liii. 10, 11, “It pleased the Lord to bruise him; he hath put him to grief; when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin (—) he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in his hands. He shall see of the travail of his soul and be satisfied.” d. Zech. ix. 9, 10, “Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion; shout, O daughter of Jerusalem; behold, thy King cometh unto thee: he is just, and having salvation: lowly, and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt the foal of an ass. (—) And I will cut off the chariot from Ephraim, and the horse from Jerusalem, and the battle bow shall be cut off: and he shall speak peace unto the heathen: and his dominion shall be from sea even to sea, and from the river even to the ends of the earth.” e. Luke i. 31, 32, “And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name Jesus. (—) He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David.

7. Allowance was thus made for this present age, without its actual existence ever having been specifically revealed in the Old Testament. The times of the Church are not properly a part of the fifth dispensation, but a parenthesis fixed in it on account of the perversity of the Jews; an inserted period, unknown to Old Testament prophecy, and set apart for the preparation of a heavenly, and not an earthly people.

VI . Article Considerations.

D. About Dallas Theological Seminary (DTS).

1. General Info. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dallas_Theological_Seminary

2. Doctrinal Statement. https://www.dts.edu/about/doctrinal-statement/

The Kingdom Of God – The New Covenant (Part 3)

I. Article Title. The Kingdom Of God – The New Covenant (Part 3).

II. Article References.

III. Article Narrative.

A. Eschatological Implications Of The New Covenant.

1. A reference to the provisions of this covenant, stated earlier, which have never been fulfilled to the nation Israel, but which must yet be fulfilled, will show how extensive an eschatological program awaits fulfillment.

2. The nation of Israel, according to this covenant, must be restored to the land of Israel, which they will possess as their own. This also entails the preservation of the nation.

3. Israel must experience a national conversion, be regenerated, receive the forgiveness of sins and the implantation of a new heart. This takes place following the return of Messiah to the earth.

4. Israel must experience the outpouring of the Holy Spirit so that She may produce righteousness in the individual and teach the individual so that there will be the fulness of knowledge.

5. Israel must receive material blessings from the hand of the King into whose kingdom they have come.

6. The land of Israel must be reclaimed, rebuilt, and made the glorious center of a new glorious earth in which dwelleth righteousness and peace.

7. The Messiah who came and shed His blood as the foundation of this covenant must personally come back to the earth to effect the salvation, restoration, and blessing of the national Israel.

8. All of these important areas of eschatological study are made necessary by this covenant.

B. Conclusion.

1. Four of the five covenants with the nation Israel have been surveyed to show that they are unconditional and eternal covenants, made with a covenant people, and to be fulfilled because of the faithfulness of the One making the covenants with those to whom they are given.

2. These covenants not only had a relation to the nation at the time of their inception and gave a basis on which God dealt with Israel, but they bind God to a course of action in relation to future events, which determines the course of Eschatology.

3. When the covenants are studied analytically we find seven great features which are determinative: (a) a nation forever, (b) a land forever, (c) a King forever, (d) a throne forever, (d) a kingdom forever, (d) a new covenant, and (e) abiding blessings. These seven features will be developed later in the course of these studies.

IV. Article Considerations.

C. For education and other supporting data for each source of information in this article, please refer to my Page, “About My References.” The following links show information about Dallas Theological Seminary. I encourage you to familiarize yourself with the Seminary. It is important to understand that DTS is not a denominational seminary, and is totally independent of such.

D. About Dallas Theological Seminary (DTS).

1. General Info. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dallas_Theological_Seminary

2. Doctrinal Statement. https://www.dts.edu/about/doctrinal-statement/

The Kingdom Of God – The New Covenant (Part 2)

I. Article Title. The Kingdom Of God – The New Covenant (Part 2)

II. Article References.

III. Article Narrative. The Fulfillment Of The New Covenant.

A. There are those who use the New Testament references to the new covenant to prove that the church is fulfilling the Old Testament promises to Israel. Thus there would be no need for a future earthly millennium inasmuch as the church is the kingdom. Consider their view of Hebrews 8:8-12 .

1. The passage speaks of the new covenant. It declares that this new covenant has been already introduced and that by virtue of the fact that it is called “new” it has made the one which it is replacing “old,” and that the old is about to vanish away. It would be hard to find a clearer reference to the gospel age in the Old Testament than in these verses in Jeremiah.

2. In reply to such allegations, it is necessary to observe certain essential facts about the new covenant.

B. The nation with whom the covenant is made. It should be clear from a survey of the passages already cited that this covenant was made with Israel, the physical seed of Abraham according to the flesh, and with them alone. This is made clear for three reasons:

1. First, it is seen by the fact of the words of establishment of the covenant.
Jeremiah 31:31. Other passages which support this fact are: Isaiah 59:20-21; 61:8-9; Jeremiah 32:37-40; 50:4-5; Ezekiel 16:60-63; 34:25-26; 37:21-28.

2. Secondly, that the Old Testament teaches that the new covenant is for Israel, is also seen by the fact of its very name, contrasted with the Mosaic covenant, the new covenant is made with the same people as the Mosaic. The Scripture clearly teaches that the Mosaic covenant of the law was made with the nation Israel only, per Romans 2:14, Romans 6:14, Galatians 3:24-25, 2 Corinthians 3:7-11, Leviticus 26:46, Deuteronomy 4:8. There can be no question as to whom pertains the law. It is for Israel alone, and since this old covenant was made with Israel, the new covenant is made with the same people, with no other group or nation being in view.

3. Thirdly, that the Old Testament teaches that the new covenant is for Israel, is also seen by the fact that in its establishment the perpetuity of the nation Israel and her restoration to the land is vitally linked with it (Jer. 31:35-40). Thus we conclude that for these three incontrovertible reasons, the very words of the text, the name itself, and the linking with the perpetuity of the nation, the new covenant according to the teaching of the Old Testament is for the people of Israel.

C. The time of the fulfillment of the New Covenant. It has been agreed that the
time of the new covenant was future. It was always viewed as future when reference is made to it in the Old Testament prophecies [Hosea 2:18-20, Isaiah 55:3, Ezekiel 16:60, 62; 20:37; 34:25-26] all spoke of it as future. It must be viewed as yet future, for this covenant can not be realized by Israel until God has effected her salvation and restoration to the land.

1. Ryrie says: The sequence of events set up by the prophet [Jer. 32:37, 40-41] is that Israel will first be regathered and restored to the land and then will experience the blessings of the new covenant in the land. History records no such sequence. God cannot fulfill the covenant until Israel is regathered as a nation. Her complete restoration is demanded by the new covenant, and this has not yet taken place in the history of the world. Fulfillment of the prophecies requires the regathering of all Israel, their spiritual rebirth, and the return of Christ.

2. This covenant must follow the return of Christ at the second advent. The blessings anticipated in the covenant will not be realized until Israel’s salvation, and this salvation follows the return of the Deliverer. And so all Israel shall be saved: As it is written, “There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob: for this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins “[Rom. 11:26-27].

3. The covenant referred to here must of necessity be the new covenant, for that is the only covenant expressly dealing with the removal of sins. And it is said to be actual after the coming of the Deliverer.

4. This covenant will be realized in the millennial age. Passages such as Jeremiah 31:34; Ezekiel 34:25; and Isaiah 11:6-9, which give descriptions of the blessings to be experienced in the time of the fulfillment of the new covenant, show that the new covenant will be realized by Israel in the millennial age.

5. The conclusion, therefore, would be that this covenant, which was future in the time of the prophets, and was future in the New Testament, can only be realized following the second advent of Christ in the millennial age.

D. The relation of the church to the new covenant. There are four clear references to the new covenant in the New Testament: Luke 22:20; 1 Corinthians 11:25; 2 Corinthians 3:6; Hebrews 8:8; 9:15. In addition to these, there are five other references to it: Matthew 26:28; Mark 14:24; Romans 11:27; Hebrews 8:10-13, and 12:24. The question arises as to the relationship of the believers of this present age to the new covenant of Jeremiah 31:31-34. This question is important, for, as has been seen previously, the contention of some is that the church is now fulfilling these Old Testament prophecies and therefore there need be no earthly millennium.

1. There are three premillennial views as to the relation of the church to the new covenant made with Israel. Consider each view, as follows.

a. There is one and only one new covenant in Scripture, made with the houses of Israel and Judah and to be realized at a future time, to which the church bears no relationship whatsoever.

(1) This covenant of the letter is made with Israel, not with us (the church); but we get the benefit of it. By Israel not accepting the blessing, God brought out the church, and the Mediator of the covenant went on high. We are associated with the Mediator. It will be made good to Israel by-and-by.

(2) The gospel is not a covenant, but the revelation of the salvation of God. It proclaims the great salvation. We enjoy indeed all the essential privileges of the new covenant, its foundation being laid on God’s part in the blood of Christ, but we do so in spirit, not according to the letter. The new covenant will be established formally with Israel in the millennium.

(3) The foundation of the new has been laid in the blood of the mediator. It is not to us that the terms of the covenant, quoted from Jeremiah by the apostle, have been fulfilled, or that we are Israel and Judah; but that while the covenant is founded, not upon the obedience of a living people, to whom the blessing thereupon was to come, and the blood of a victim shed by a living mediator, but upon the obedience unto death of the Mediator Himself, on which (as its secure, unalterable foundation of grace) the covenant is founded.

(4) It is, then, the annexed circumstances of the covenant with which we have to do, not the formal blessings which in terms have taken place of the conditions of the old, though some of them may, in a sense, be accomplished in us (the church).

(5) In the New Testament it has no reference whatever to the church in this age, although the blessing of that covenant comes to others beside Israel now, since the blood was “shed for many.” It will, however, be fulfilled literally in the millennium.

(a) The new covenant of Jeremiah 31 necessitated the work of a Mediator and the death of Christ is that which makes a new covenant possible. (b) The new covenant was originally made with the houses of Israel and Judah and will be fulfilled in them literally in the millennium. The covenant can only be fulfilled literally by those with whom it was made and, since the church is not Israel, the church can not fulfill that covenant. (c) All the blessings which come to the church today are based upon the blood of Christ, which was necessarily shed to make possible the new covenant.

b. “The New Covenant secures the perpetuity, future conversion, and blessing of Israel; it secures the eternal blessedness of all who believe.” Thus, there is one new covenant with a twofold application; one to Israel in the future and one to the church now.

(1) The blood of the New Covenant shed upon the cross of Calvary is the basis of
all of the blessings of the believer in the present age. The believer, therefore,
participates in the worth to the sinner of the New Covenant, so that he partakes of the Lord’s supper in remembrance of the blood of the New Covenant (I Corinthians 11:25), and he is also a minister of the New Covenant, (II Cor. 3:6).

(a) The believer is a child of Abraham because he is of faith (Gal. 3:7), and of Christ, (Gal. 3:29). (b) He is also to partake of the root and fatness of the olive tree, which is Abraham and Israel, (Rom. 11:17). (c) So too, though as an unbelieving Gentile he is an “alien” and a “stranger,” (Eph. 2:12), he is no longer such, (Eph. 2:19), because he has been made nigh by the blood of Christ, (Eph. 2:13). (d) He benefits in the New Covenant as a fellow citizen of the saints and of the household of God, (Eph. 2:19), and not as a member of the commonwealth of Israel, (Eph. 2:12).

(2) We must remember that God is speaking here explicitly of His earthly
people, and not of any heavenly one, the people with whom this covenant will be made will be a people in that day entirely according to His mind. It will be asked how, according to this, the new covenant applies at all to us. Other scriptures answer this clearly by assuring us that if we have not the covenant
made with us, it can yet, in all the blessings of which it speaks, be ministered to us.

c. Also:

(1) The references in the gospels and in Hebrews 8:6; 8:7-13 and 10-17; 9:15; 10:29; 12:24; 13:20 refer to the new covenant with Israel.

(2) The new covenant of Jeremiah 31:31-34 must and can be fulfilled only by the nation Israel and not by the church. Since this was a literal covenant made with the physical seed of Abraham, any relationship of the church to the blood required by that covenant can not change the essential promises of God in the covenant itself. Apart from any relationship of the church to this blood, the covenant stands as yet unfulfilled and awaits a future literal fulfillment.

2. The question may arise as to why reference is made to Jeremiah 31 in Hebrews if the church is not fulfilling that covenant. In spite of the contention of others that Hebrews 8 “declares that this new covenant has been already introduced,” no such statement or intimation is made in the passage. On the contrary, the quotation from Jeremiah is used to show that the old covenant itself was recognized as ineffectual and temporary and was ultimately to be superseded by an effectual covenant, so that the Hebrews should not be surprised that a new and better covenant should be preached, nor should they place further trust in that which had been done away.

(a) Walvoord says: the argument of Hebrews 8 reveals the truth that Christ is the Mediator of a better covenant than Moses, established upon better promises (Heb. 8:6). The argument hangs on the point that the Mosaic covenant was not faultless, was never intended to be an everlasting covenant (Heb. 8:7). In confirmation of this point, the new covenant of Jeremiah is cited at length, proving that the Old Testament itself anticipated the end of the Mosaic law in that a new covenant is predicted to supplant it. The writer of Hebrews singles out of the entire quotation the one word “new” and argues that this would automatically make the Mosaic covenant old (Heb. 8:12). A further statement is made that the old covenant is “becoming old” and “is nigh unto vanishing away.” It should be noted that nowhere in this passage is the new covenant with Israel declared to be in force. The only argument is that which was always true, the prediction of a new covenant automatically declares the Mosaic covenant as a temporary, not an everlasting covenant.

(b) Thus, in Hebrews 8 the promise of Jeremiah is quoted only to prove that the old covenant, that is the Mosaic, was temporary from its inception, and Israel never could trust in that which was temporary, but had to look forward to that which was eternal. Here, as in Hebrews 10:16, the passage from Jeremiah is quoted, not to state that what is promised there is now operative or effectual, but rather that the old covenant was temporary and ineffectual and anticipatory of a new covenant that would be permanent and effectual in its working. It is a misrepresentation of the thinking of the writer to the Hebrews to affirm that he teaches that Israel’s new covenant is now operative with the church.

3. In its historical setting, the disciples who heard the Lord refer to the new
covenant in the upper room the night before His death would certainly have
understood Him to be referring to the new covenant of Jeremiah 31. Several things are to be observed concerning the record of this reference on that occasion. In Matthew 26:28 and Mark 14:24 the statement is recorded: “This is my blood of the new covenant. “In this statement emphasis would be placed upon the soteriological aspects of that covenant. The blood that was being offered was that required by the promised new covenant and was for the purpose of giving remission of sins. In Luke 22:20 and 1 Corinthians 11:25 the statement is recorded: “This is the new covenant in my blood.” This statement would emphasize the eschatological aspects of the new covenant, stating that the new covenant is instituted with His death. This would be according to the principle of Hebrews 9:16-17: For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator. For a testament is of force after men are dead, otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.

a. Since the disciples would certainly have understood any reference to the new covenant on that occasion as reference to Israel’s anticipated covenant of Jeremiah, it seems that the Lord must have been stating that that very covenant was being instituted with His death, and they were ministers of the blood (the soteriological aspects) of that covenant (2 Cor. 3:6), but these to whom it was primarily and originally made will not receive its fulfillment nor its blessings until it is confirmed and made actual to them at the second advent of Christ, when “all Israel shall be saved…for this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins” (Rom. 11:26-27).

b. There certainly is a difference between the institution of the covenant and the realization of the benefits of it. Christ, by His death, laid the foundation for Israel’s covenant, but its benefits will not be received by Israel until the second advent (Rom. 11:26-27).

4. There are several considerations which support the view that the church is not now fulfilling Israel’s new covenant. (a) The term Israel is nowhere used in the Scriptures for any but the physical descendants of Abraham. Since the church today is composed of both Jews and Gentiles without national distinctions, it would be impossible for that church to fulfill these promises made to the nation. (b) Within the new covenant, as its provisions have previously been outlined, there were promises of spiritual blessings and
promises of earthly blessing. While the church, like Israel, is promised salvation, the forgiveness of sin, the ministry of the Holy Spirit, yet the church is never promised inheritance in a land, material blessings on the earth, and rest from oppression, which were parts of the promise to Israel. The new covenant not only promised Israel salvation, but a new life on the millennial earth as all her covenants are realized. The church certainly is not fulfilling the material portions of this covenant. (c) Since the church receives blessings of the Abrahamic covenant (Gal. 3:14; 4:22-31) by faith without being under or fulfilling that covenant, so the church may receive blessings from the new covenant without being under or fulfilling that new covenant. (d) The time element contained within the covenant itself, both in its original statement and in its restatement in Hebrews, precludes the church from being the agent in which it is fulfilled. The covenant can not be fulfilled and realized by Israel until after the period of Israel’s tribulation and her deliverance by the advent of Messiah. While the church has had periods of persecution and tribulation it never has passed through the great tribulation of prophecy. Certainly the church is not now in the millennial age. Romans 11:26-27 clearly indicates that this covenant can only be realized after the second advent of the Messiah. Since the tribulation, second advent, and millennial age are yet future, the fulfillment of this promise must be yet future, and therefore the church can not now be fulfilling this covenant.

IV. Article Considerations.

C. For education and other supporting data for each source of information in this article, please refer to my Page, “About My References.” The following links show information about Dallas Theological Seminary. I encourage you to familiarize yourself with the Seminary. It is important to understand that DTS is not a denominational seminary, and is totally independent of such.

D. About Dallas Theological Seminary (DTS).

1. General Info. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dallas_Theological_Seminary

2. Doctrinal Statement. https://www.dts.edu/about/doctrinal-statement/

The Kingdom Of God – The New Covenant (Part 1)

I. Article Title. The Kingdom Of God – The New Covenant (Part 1)

II. Article References.

III. Article Narrative.

A. The Importance Of The New Covenant.

1. The last of the four great determinative covenants into which God entered with Israel is the new covenant.

2. The new covenant guarantees Israel a converted heart as the foundation of all her blessings. According to the Old Testament principle that such a conversion can not be effected permanently without the shedding of blood, this covenant necessitates a sacrifice, acceptable to God, as the foundation on which it is instituted. Inasmuch as the offering up of the Son of God is the center of the age-long plan of redemption, and since this covenant entails that offering, great importance is to be attached to it. The whole covenant takes on importance, in addition, there are those who attempt to show that the church is fulfilling Israel’s covenants because the church today is redeemed by blood. If the church fulfills this covenant, she may also fulfill the other covenants made with Israel and there is no need for an earthly millennium. Because of these considerations the covenant must be examined.

B. The Provisions Of The New Covenant.

1. The new covenant promised to Israel was stated in Jeremiah 31:31-34, where we read: “Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah: Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the Lord: But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people. And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the Lord: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.”

2. Ryrie well summarizes the provisions of this covenant when he says: “The following provisions for Israel, the people of the new covenant, to be fulfilled in the millennium, the period of the new covenant, are found in the Old Testament.”

(a) The new covenant is an unconditional, grace covenant resting on the “I
will” of God. The frequency of the use of the phrase in Jeremiah 31:31-34 is
striking. Cf. Ezekiel 16:60-62. (b) The new covenant is an everlasting covenant. This is closely related to the fact that it is unconditional and made in grace…(Isa. 61:2, cf. Ezek. 37:26; Jer. 31:35-37). (c) The new covenant also promises the impartation of a renewed mind and heart which we may call regeneration (Jer. 31:33, cf. Isa. 59:21). (d) The new covenant provides for restoration to the favor and blessing of God (Hos. 2:19-20, cf. Isa. 61:9). (e) Forgiveness of sin is also included in the covenant, “for I will remove their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more” (Jer. 31:34b). (f) The indwelling of the Holy Spirit is also included. This is seen by comparing Jeremiah 31:33 with Ezekiel 36:27. (g) The teaching ministry of the Holy Spirit will be manifested, and the will of God will be known by obedient hearts (Jer. 31:34). (k) As is always the case when Israel is in the land, she will be blessed materially in accordance with the provisions of the new covenant, Jeremiah 32:41; Isaiah 61:8; Ezekiel 34:25-27. (i) The sanctuary will be rebuilt in Jerusalem, for it is written “I will set my sanctuary in the midst of them for evermore. My tabernacle also shall be with them” (Ezek. 37:26-27a). (j) War shall cease and peace shall reign according to Hosea 2:18. The fact that this is also a definite characteristic of the millennium (Isa. 2:4) further supports the fact that the new covenant is millennial in its fulfillment. (k) The blood of the Lord Jesus Christ is the foundation of all the blessings of the new covenant, for “by the blood of thy covenant I have sent forth thy prisoners out of the pit wherein is no water” (Zech. 9:11).

3. By way of summary, it may be said that as far as the Old Testament teaching
on the new covenant is concerned, the covenant was made with the Jewish
people. Its period of fulfillment is yet future beginning when the Deliverer shall
come and continuing throughout all eternity. Its provisions for the nation Israel are glorious, and they all rest and depend on the very Word of God.

4. Confirmation of this covenant is given in the statement in Isaiah 61:8-9, where it is called everlasting, and again in Ezekiel 37:21-28. There the following points are to be observed:

(a) Israel to be regathered; (b) Israel to be one nation, ruled by one king; (c)
Israel no longer to be idolatrous, to be cleansed, forgiven; (d) Israel to dwell
“forever” in the land after regathering; (e) the covenant of peace with them to be everlasting; (f) God’s tabernacle to be with them, i.e., He will be present with them in a visible way; (g) Israel to be known among Gentiles as a nation blessed of God. All of these promises are implicit in the basic passage of Jeremiah, but they confirm, enrich, and enlarge the covenant.

5. This covenant, then, has to do with the regeneration, forgiveness, and justification of Israel, the outpouring of the Holy Spirit with His subsequent ministries, Israel’s regathering and restoration to the place of blessing, all founded on the blood of Jesus Christ.

C. The Character Of The New Covenant.

Once again the principle is observed that, like all Israel’s covenants, this covenant is a literal and unconditional covenant. (1) It is called eternal in Isaiah 24:5; 61:8; Jeremiah 31:36, 40; 32:40; 50:5. (2) This covenant is a gracious covenant that depends entirely upon the “I will” of God for its fulfillment, Jeremiah 31:33. It does not depend upon man. (3) This covenant amplifies the third great area of the original Abrahamic covenant, the area of “blessing.” Inasmuch as this is only an amplification of the original Abrahamic covenant, which has been shown to be unconditional and literal, this covenant must be also. (4) This covenant is largely occupied with the question of salvation from sin and the impartation of a new heart. Salvation is solely the work of God. Thus the covenant that guarantees salvation to the nation Israel must be apart from all human agency and therefore unconditional.

IV. Article Considerations.

C. For education and other supporting data for each source of information in this article, please refer to my Page, “About My References.” The following links show information about Dallas Theological Seminary. I encourage you to familiarize yourself with the Seminary. It is important to understand that DTS is not a denominational seminary, and is totally independent of such.

D. About Dallas Theological Seminary (DTS).

1. General Info. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dallas_Theological_Seminary

2. Doctrinal Statement. https://www.dts.edu/about/doctrinal-statement/

The Kingdom Of God -The Davidic Covenant (Part 3)

I. Title. The Kingdom Of God – The Davidic Covenant (Part 3).

II. Article References.

Lewis Sperry Chafer, Th. D. (1871-1952). Charles C. Ryrie, Ph. D.(1925-2016). Merrill F. Unger, Ph. D. (1909-1980). John F. Walvoord, Th. D. (1910-2002). Harold W. Hoehner, Ph. D. (1935-2009). Stanley D. Toussaint, Th. D. (1928-2017). Edward E. Hindson, Ph. D. (1944-2022). Robert L. Thomas, Th. D. (1928-2017). J. Dwight Pentecost, Th. D. (1915-2014). Robert P. Lightner, Th. D. (1931-2018). Charles L. Feinberg, Ph. D. (1909-1995). J. Vernon McGee, Th. D. (1904-1988).

III. Article Narrative. The Eschatological Implications Of The Davidic Covenant.

A. Because of an anticipated future literal fulfillment, certain facts present themselves concerning Israel’s future.

1. The covenanted Davidic throne and Kingdom, allied as it is with the Jewish
nation necessarily requires a preservation of the nation. This has been done;
and today we see that nation wonderfully continued down to the present,
More powerful enemies, including the strongest nations and most powerful empires, have perished.

2. None of this is chance work; for, if our position is correct, this is
demanded, seeing that without a restoration of the nation it is impossible to
restore the Davidic Kingdom. The covenant language, the oath of God, the
confirmation of promise by the blood of Jesus, the prophetic utterances, all
notwithstanding the nations’ unbelief, requires its perpetuation, that through it finally God’s promises and faithfulness may be vindicated. God so provides that His Word may be fulfilled. Every Jew, if we will but ponder the matter, that we meet on our streets is a living evidence that the Messiah will yet some day reign gloriously on David’s throne and over His Kingdom, from which to extend a worldwide dominion.

3. The fulfilment of the covenant promises implies, in view of this restored
Davidic throne and Kingdom, that the Messianic Kingdom is a visible, external
Kingdom, not merely spiritual, although embracing spiritual and divine things. Its visibility, and a corresponding acknowledgement of the same, is a feature
inseparable from the language of promise. Therefore the following is necessary to take place.

(a) Israel must be preserved as a nation.

(b) Israel must have a national existence, and be brought back into the land of her inheritance. Since David’s kingdom had definite geographical boundaries and those boundaries were made a feature of the promise to David concerning his son’s reign, the land must be given to this nation as the site of their national homeland.

(c) David’s Son, the Lord Jesus Christ, must return to the earth, bodily and literally, in order to reign over David’s covenanted kingdom. The allegation that Christ is seated on the Father’s throne reigning over a spiritual kingdom, the church, simply does not fulfill the promises of the covenant.

(d) A literal earthly kingdom must be constituted over which the returned Messiah reigns. The fulfilment of the covenant promises implies, in view of this restored Davidic throne and Kingdom, that the Messianic Kingdom is a visible, external Kingdom, not merely spiritual, although embracing spiritual and divine things. Its visibility, and a corresponding acknowledgement of the same, is a feature inseparable from the language of promise.

(e) This kingdom must become an eternal kingdom. Since the “throne,” “house,” and “kingdom” were all promised to David in perpetuity, there must be no end to Messiah’s reign over David’s kingdom from David’s throne.

B. It thus becomes evident that the Davidic covenant is of vital importance to the understanding of future events.

IV. Article Considerations.

C. For education and other supporting data for each source of information in this article, please refer to my Page, “About My References.” The following links show information about Dallas Theological Seminary. I encourage you to familiarize yourself with the Seminary. It is important to understand that DTS is not a denominational seminary, and is totally independent of such.

D. About Dallas Theological Seminary (DTS).

1. General Info. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dallas_Theological_Seminary

2. Doctrinal Statement. https://www.dts.edu/about/doctrinal-statement/

The Kingdom Of God -The Davidic Covenant (Part 2)

I. Article Title. The Kingdom Of God – The Davidic Covenant (Part 2).

II. Article References.

Charles C. Ryrie, Ph. D.(1925-2016). Merrill F. Unger, Ph. D. (1909-1980). John F. Walvoord, Th. D. (1910-2002). Harold W. Hoehner, Ph. D. (1935-2009). Stanley D. Toussaint, Th. D. (1928-2017). Edward E. Hindson, Ph. D. (1944-2022). Robert L. Thomas, Th. D. (1928-2017). Lewis Sperry Chafer, Th. D. (1871-1952). J. Dwight Pentecost, Th. D. (1915-2014). Robert P. Lightner, Th. D. (1931-2018). Charles L. Feinberg, Ph. D. (1909-1995). J. Vernon McGee, Th. D. (1904-1988).

III. Article Narrative. The Character Of The Davidic Covenant.

Introduction.

The Davidic covenant, of which much has been said, was to the effect that his seed would sit upon his throne and had its natural fulfillment in the reign of King Solomon. Its eternal aspects include the Lord Jesus Christ of the seed of David; and in the book of Acts, Peter insists that Christ’s resurrection and Ascension fulfilled God’s promise to David that his seed should sit upon his throne. (See Acts 2:30.)

A. The Davidic covenant is unconditional in its character. The only conditional element in the covenant was whether the descendants of David would continually occupy the throne or not. Disobedience might bring about chastening, but never abrogate the covenant.

1. David anticipated that there would not be an unbroken succession of kings in his line, but nevertheless he affirms the eternal character of the covenant. In Psalm 89 David foretold the overthrow of his kingdom (vv. 38-45) before the realization of that which had been promised (vv. 20-29). Yet he anticipates the fulfillment of the promise (vv. 46-52) and blesses the Lord. Such was the faith of David.

2. Several reasons support the position that the covenant is unconditional (1) First of all, like the other of Israel’s covenants, it is called eternal in 2 Samuel 7:13, 16; 23:5; Isaiah 55:3; and Ezekiel 37:25. The only way it can be called eternal is that it is unconditional and rests upon the faithfulness of God for its execution. (2) Again, this covenant only amplifies the “seed” promises of the original Abrahamic covenant, which has been shown to be unconditional, and will therefore partake of the character of the original covenant. (3) Further, this covenant was reaffirmed after repeated acts of disobedience on the part of the nation. Christ, the Son of David, came to offer the Davidic kingdom after generations of apostasy. These reaffirmations would and could not have been made if the covenant were conditioned upon any response on the part of the nation.

B. The Davidic covenant is to be interpreted literally.

1. The covenant is distinctively associated with the Jewish nation and none other. 2. It is called a perpetual covenant, i.e. one that shall endure forever. It may, indeed, require time before its fulfillment; it may even for a time be held, so far as the nation is concerned, in the background, but it must be ultimately realized. 3. It was confirmed by oath (Ps. 132:11, and 89:3, 4, 33), thus giving the strongest possible assurance of its ample fulfilment. 4. To leave no doubt whatever, and to render unbelief utterly inexcusable, God concisely and most forcibly presents His determination (Ps. 89:34): “My covenant will I not break, nor alter the thing that is gone out of my lips.” It would have been sheer presumption and blindness in the Jews to have altered (under the plea—modern—of spirituality) the covenant, and to have refused to accept of the obvious sense covered by the words; and there is a heavy responsibility resting upon those, who, even under the most pious intentions, deliberately alter the covenant words and attach to them a foreign meaning.

2. Consider the following list of some twenty-one reasons for believing that the whole concept of the Davidic throne and kingdom is to be understood literally.

3. If the Davidic throne and Kingdom is to be understood literally, then all other promises necessarily follow; and as the reception of this literal fulfilment forms the main difficulty in the minds of many, a brief statement of reasons why it must be received, is in place. 1. It is solemnly covenanted, confirmed by oath, and hence cannot be altered or broken. 2. The grammatical sense alone is becoming a covenant. 3. The impression made on David, if erroneous, is disparaging to his prophetical office. 4. The conviction of Solomon (2 Chron. 6:14-16) was that it referred to the literal throne and Kingdom. 5. Solomon claims that the covenant was fulfilled in himself, but only in so far that he too as David’s son sat on David’s throne. 6. The language is that ordinarily used to denote the literal throne and Kingdom of David, as illustrated in Jer. 17:25 and 22:4. 7. The prophets adopt the same language, and its constant reiteration under Divine guidance is evidence that the plain grammatical sense is the one intended. 8. The prevailing belief of centuries, a national faith, engendered by the language, under the teaching of inspired men, indicates how the language is to be understood. 9. This throne and Kingdom is one of promise and inheritance, and hence refers not to the Divinity but to the Humanity of Jesus. 10. The same is distinctively promised to David’s son “according to the flesh” to be actually realized, and, therefore, He must appear the Theocratic King as promised. 11. We have not the slightest hint given that it is to be interpreted in any other way than a literal one; any other is the result of pure inference. 12. Any other view than that of a literal interpretation involves the grossest self contradiction. 13. The denial of a literal reception of the covenant robs the heir of His covenanted inheritance. 14. No grammatical rule can be laid down which will make David’s throne to be the Father’s throne in the third heaven. 15. That if the latter is attempted under the notion of “symbolical” or “typical,” then the credibility and meaning of the covenants are left to the interpretations of men, and David himself becomes “the symbol” or “type” (creature as he is) of the Creator. 16. That if David’s throne is the Father’s throne in heaven (the usual interpretation), then it must have existed forever. 17. If such covenanted promises are to be received figuratively, it is inconceivable that they should be given in their present form without some direct affirmation, in some place, of their figurative nature, God foreseeing (if not literal) that for centuries they would be preeminently calculated to excite and foster false expectations, e.g. even from David to Christ. 18. God is faithful in His promises, and deceives no one in the language of His covenants. 19. No necessity existed why, if this throne promised to David’s Son meant something else, the throne should be so definitely promised in the form given. 20. The identical throne and Kingdom overthrown are the ones restored. 21. But the main, direct reasons for receiving the literal covenanted language [is that] David’s throne and Kingdom [are made] a requisite for the display of that Theocratic ordering which God has already instituted (but now holds in abeyance until the preparations are completed) for the restoration and exaltation of the Jewish nation (which is preserved for this purpose), for the salvation of the human race (which comes under the Theocratic blessing), and for the dominion of a renewed curse-delivered world.

4. Such a throne and Kingdom are necessary to preserve the Divine Unity of Purpose in the already proposed Theocratic line.

C. This whole proposition is supported by certain additional evidence. The portions of the covenant that have been fulfilled have been fulfilled literally.
As has been seen before, the partial fulfillment determines the method to be used in the unfulfilled portions. Ryrie says: It is only necessary to mention briefly that David had a son, that David’s throne was established, that David’s kingdom was established, that Solomon built the temple, that his throne was established, and that he was punished for disobedience.

1. Evidence is added from the way in which David was led to understand it. It is
seen that he had no thought but that it was a literal covenant, to be fulfilled literally. a. How did David himself understand this covenant? This is best stated in his own language. Read e.g. Ps. 72, which describes a Son infinitely superior to Solomon; reflect over Ps. 132, and after noticing that “the Lord hath sworn in truth unto David, He will not turn from it; of the fruit of thy body will I set upon thy throne” (which Peter, Acts 2:30, 31, expressly refers to Jesus).

2. consider the numerous Messianic allusions in this and other Psalms (89th, 110th, 72nd, 48th, 45th, 21st, 2d, etc.), so regarded and explicitly quoted in the New Test. by inspired men; ponder the fact that David calls Him “my Lord,” “higher than the kings of the earth,” and gives Him a position, power, dominion, immortality, and perpetuity, that no mortal King can possibly attain to, and most certainly we are not wrong in believing that David himself, according to the tenor of the covenant “thy Kingdom shall be established forever before thee,” expected to be in this Kingdom of His Son and Lord both to witness and experience its blessedness.

3. And again, David himself, in his last words (2 Sam. 23:5), emphatically says: “He hath made with me an everlasting covenant, ordered in all things and sure; for this is all my salvation and all my desire.” The prophet Isaiah reiterates (55:3), pronouncing it “an everlasting covenant, even the sure mercies of David.” Surely no one can fail to see that this denotes, “an unchanging and unwavering covenant, a covenant which was not to be revoked,” one which was not to be abrogated, but which was to be perpetual, and that “God would ratify this covenant.”

4. And yet again, that David himself expected a literal fulfilment of the promise is evident from his language which follows the giving of the covenant; and in this literal anticipation of the promise he returns thanks to God and praises Him for thus selecting his house for honor and in thus establishing it for the ages, even forever (2 Sam. 7:8, etc., 1 Chron. 17:16, etc.). It is presumption to suppose that David returned thanks, and thus prayer under a mistaken idea of the nature of the covenant.

5. It is therefore evident that David was led by God to interpret the covenant literally. There is ample evidence for the literal interpretation of the covenant from the interpretation of the covenant by the nation Israel.

a. Reference has been made to the literal aspects emphasized in all the Old Testament prophetic books. This literal emphasis continued throughout Jewish history. Ryrie says: The concept which the Jews had of this kingdom at this time may be summed up under the following characteristics: (The hope was for an earthly kingdom)

(1) earthly

(2) national

(3) Messianic

(4) moral

(5) future

b. When Israel saw its land under the rule of a foreign power, her hope was the more intensified, because the kingdom she expected was one that would be set up on the earth and one that would naturally carry with it release from foreign domination. The kingdom was to be national; that is, the expected kingdom had a specific relationship to Israel, being promised to that nation alone. The kingdom was to be a moral kingdom, for Israel was to be cleansed as a nation.

c. Obviously the kingdom was not yet in existence and was therefore future at the time of the first coming of the Lord Jesus Christ. Even all the glory under David and Solomon was not comparable to the expected kingdom. Consequently, all of Israel’s beliefs concerning this kingdom were of the nature of unrealized hopes. Israel looked to the future.

6. There is evidence for the literal interpretation from the New Testament
references to the covenant made with David. Walvoord speaks of the New Testament as a whole, when he writes: a. The New Testament has in all fifty-nine references to David. It also has many references to the present session of Christ. A search of the New Testament reveals that there is not one reference connecting the present session of Christ with the Davidic throne, it is almost incredible that in so many references to David and in so frequent reference to the present session of Christ on the Father’s throne there should be not one reference connecting the two in any authoritative way. The New Testament is totally lacking in positive teaching that the throne of the Father in heaven is to be identified with the Davidic throne. The inference is plain that Christ is seated on the Father’s throne, but that this is not at all the same as being seated on the throne of David.

7. It can be shown that in all the preaching concerning the kingdom by John (Matt. 3:2), by Christ (Matt. 4:17), by the twelve (Matt. 10:5-7), by the seventy (Lk. 10:1-12), not once is the kingdom offered to Israel anything but an earthly literal kingdom. Even after the rejection of that offer by Israel and the announcement of the mystery of the kingdom (Matt. 13) Christ anticipates such a literal earthly kingdom (Matt. 25:1-13, 31-46). The New Testament never relates the kingdom promised to David to Christ’s present session.

8. It is interesting to observe that the angel, who did not originate his own message, but announced that which was delivered to him by God, says to Mary: “And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt
call his name JESUS. He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David: And he shall reign over the house of Jacob forever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end [Luke 1:31-33. ]”

9. The angelic message centers around the three key words of the original Davidic covenant, the throne, the house, and the kingdom, all of which are here promised a fulfillment.

10. The Davidic covenant holds an important place in the discussion at the first church council. Walvoord comments on Acts 15:14-17, where this covenant is discussed, as follows:

a. The problem of this passage resolves into these questions: (1) What is meant by the “tabernacle of David”? (2) When is the “tabernacle of David” to be rebuilt? The first question is settled by an examination of its source, Amos 9:11, and its context. The preceding chapters and the first part of chapter nine deal with God’s judgment upon Israel. It is summed up in two verses which immediately precede the quotation: “For, lo, I will command, and I will sift the house of Israel among all the nations, like as grain is sifted in a sieve, yet shall not the least kernel fall upon the earth. All the sinners of my people shall die by the sword who say, The evil shall not overtake nor meet us” (Amos 9:9-10.).

b. Immediately following this passage of judgment is the promise of blessing
after the judgment, of which the verse quoted in Acts fifteen is the first.

c. The context of the passage deals, then, with Israel’s judgment. The entire
passage confirms that the “tabernacle of David” is an expression referring to the whole nation of Israel, and that in contrast to the Gentile nations.

d. What then is the meaning of the quotation of James? He states, in effect, that it was God’s purpose to bless the Gentiles as well as Israel, but in their order. God was to visit the Gentiles first, “to take out of them a people for his name.” James goes on to say that this is entirely in keeping with the prophets, for they had stated that the period of Jewish blessing and triumph should be after the Gentile period.

e. Instead of identifying the period of Gentile conversion with the rebuilding of the tabernacle of David, it is carefully distinguished by the first (referring to Gentile blessing), and after this (referring to Israel’s coming glory.) The passage, instead of identifying God’s purpose for the church and for the nation Israel, established a specific time order. Israel’s blessing will not come until “I return.”

f. God will first conclude His work for the Gentiles in the period of Israel’s dispersion. Then He will return (Matt 24:29-30) to bring in the promised
blessings for Israel. It is needless to say that this confirms the interpretation that Christ is not now on the throne of David, bringing blessing to Israel as the
prophets predicted, but He is rather on His Father’s throne waiting for the coming earthly kingdom and interceding for His own who form the church.

g. Ryrie, dealing with the same passage, comments:

(1) [In regard to] the Amos quotation in Acts 15:14-17, Gaebelein gives a good
analysis of James’ words citing four points in the progression of thought. First,
God visits the Gentiles, taking from them a people for His name.

(2) In other words, God has promised to bless the Gentiles as well as Israel, but each in his own order. The Gentile blessing is first. Secondly, Christ will return. This is after the out-calling of the people for His name. Thirdly, as a result of the Coming of the Lord, the tabernacle of David will be built again; that is, the kingdom will be established as promised in the Davidic covenant. Amos clearly declares that this rebuilding will be done “as in the days of old” (9:11); that is, the blessings will be earthly and national and will have nothing to do with the Church. Fourthly, the residue of men will seek the Lord, that is, all the Gentiles will be brought to a knowledge of the Lord after the kingdom is established. Isaiah 2:2; 11:10; 40:5; 66:23 teach the same truth.

(3) Thus, throughout the New Testament, as well as in the Old, the Davidic covenant is everywhere treated as literal.

h. The Davidic covenant demands a literal fulfillment. This means that Christ must reign on David’s throne on the earth over David’s people forever, in spite of the following:

(1) there has been no continuous development or continued authority of the political kingdom of David, (2) Israel’s captivity and the downfall of the kingdom would seem to argue against a literal interpretation for a future fulfillment, and (3) the centuries which have passed since the first advent of Christ would seem to indicate that a literal fulfillment should not be expected; the premillennial position holds that the partial historic fulfillment in no way mitigates against the future fulfillment for these four reasons. First, the Old Testament prophets expected a literal fulfillment even during Israel’s periods of great apostasy. Secondly, the covenant demands a literal interpretation which also means a future fulfillment. Thirdly, the New Testament teaches that the present mystery form of the kingdom no way abrogates the future literal fulfillment. Fourthly, the very words of the covenant teach that, although Solomon be disobedient, the covenant would nevertheless remain in force, and that Solomon’s seed was not promised perpetuity. The only necessary feature is that the lineage cannot be lost, not that the throne be occupied continuously.

i. The interruption of the kingdom did not mean the whole program was set aside. As long as the prerogatives of the throne were intact the kingdom might be reestablished.

(1) Walvoord says: “the line which was to fulfill the promise of the eternal throne and eternal kingdom over Israel was preserved by God through a lineage which in fact did not sit on the throne at all, from Nathan down to Christ. It is, then, not necessary for the line to be unbroken as to actual conduct of the kingdom, but it is rather that the lineage, royal prerogative, and right to the throne be preserved and never lost, even in sin, captivity, and dispersion. It is not necessary, then, for continuous political government to be in effect, but it is necessary that the line be not lost.

(2) Reference has already been made to many New Testament passages to show that the expectation there was for a literal fulfillment. The interruption in the Davidic kingdom did not militate against the expectancy of a literal restoration of that same kingdom as far as the New Testament writers were concerned.

j. Has this covenant been fulfilled historically?

1. Reference has already been made to many New Testament passages to show that the expectation there was for a literal fulfillment. The interruption in the Davidic kingdom did not militate against the expectancy of a literal restoration of that same kingdom as far as the New Testament writers were concerned.

2. Inasmuch as this covenant has not been fulfilled literally in Israel’s history, there must be a future literal fulfillment of the covenant because of its unconditional character.

IV. Article Considerations.

C. For education and other supporting data for each source of information in this article, please refer to my Page, “About My References.” The following links show information about Dallas Theological Seminary. I encourage you to familiarize yourself with the Seminary. It is important to understand that DTS is not a denominational seminary, and is totally independent of such.

D. About Dallas Theological Seminary (DTS).

1. General Info. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dallas_Theological_Seminary

2. Doctrinal Statement. https://www.dts.edu/about/doctrinal-statement/

V. Video. On Listenng.

Dr. Stanley Toussaint, DTS Senior Professor Emeritus of Bible Exposition, speaks about the refreshment and revelation that comes from the Word of God, and the one thing more important than listening to God is how to listen.

The Lord appeared to Abram and said, “To your descendants I will give this land.” So he built an altar there to the Lord who had appeared to him. (GEN 12:7). Notice the upper case of LORD.

The LORD

יְהוָה֙
(Yah·weh)

3068: the proper name of the God of Israel

Strong’s Concordance
Yhvh: the proper name of the God of Israel
Original Word: יְהוָֹה
Part of Speech: Proper Name
Transliteration: Yhvh
Phonetic Spelling: (yeh-ho-vaw’)
Definition: the proper name of the God of Israel

Jews In Scripture – Prophets – Isaiah – 2

I. Article Title. Jews In Scripture – God Works Through A Sinful Nation.

II. Article References.

III. Article Introduction. In the first chapter of Isaiah, we saw a sinful nation in Israel, and God’s denunciation with them. Looking ahead, we will see how God moves forward to work for the redemption of sinful mankind through Israel. Consider the words in Scripture that tell of the importance of Jews in God’s plan for the redemption of mankind, “…salvation is from the Jews” (John 4:22).

IV. Article Narrattive.

A. Overview.

1. Isaiah has often been called “the evangelical prophet” because he says so much about the redemptive work of Messiah. More about the person and work of Christ is found in the Book of Isaiah than in any other book of the Old Testament. Consequently, there are many important and favorite passages in the book, some of which are 1:18; 2:4; 6:3, 8; 7:14; 9:6-7; 11:9; 26:3; 35:1; 40:3; 48:16; chap. 53; 55:1; 57:15; 59:1; 61:1-3.

2. Isaiah 1:1 states that the prophecy of Isaiah relates to Judah and Jerusalem. It should be stated that Isaiah 9:10 has nothing to do with the 911 attack on the Twin Towers in New York City. Isaiah addresses God’s judgment on Israel, as well as His blessings on His chosen people (Deu. 14:2). Gentiles enter Isaiah’s prophecy only as they are incidental to God’s dealings with Israel, e.g. the Tribulation, and the Davidic Kingdom, during the Millennium.

B. Isaiah, a man with a mission.

1. The Lord had shown Isaiah a glimpse of His glorious throne and placed a call on his life. As a prophet, he spoke God’s words. For the most part, these were words of confrontation, exhortation, and warning, words that made him extremely unpopular. But even when he faced opposition Isaiah continued to stand up for the truth.

2. The God had called Isaiah to warn the people of their headlong rush into disaster. The Book of Isaiah records these prophetic words of warning, but it also records Isaiah’s words of promise and hope. One day, a Messiah would come who would save, comfort, and bless His people.

C. Audience.

1. As a prophet, Isaiah spoke to three historical epochs. In chapters 1–39, he delivered his message of condemnation to the eighth-century Israelites, pronouncing judgment on their immoral and idolatrous lifestyles. This judgment came quickly, for during Isaiah’s ministry, Tiglath-Pileser III (745–727 B.C.) set out to extend Assyria’s rule into the west, and in doing so put pressure on Israel and Judah. In 722 b.c. another Assyrian king, Sargon II, conquered the northern kingdom. Only the nation of Judah was left. But Isaiah predicted that even Judah would fall, as much later it did, in 586 B.C.

2. In chapters 40–55, Isaiah comforted the future generation of weary exiles, the Jews who thought that God had forgotten them (40:27). In a brilliant series of prophecies, Isaiah presented the case that Israel’s captivity was not due to the superiority of Babylon’s idols, but to the disciplining rod of Israel’s Lord (42:23–25). He predicted the exiles’ return and encouraged them to rouse themselves (52:1–10), to flee Babylon (48:20, 21), and to entrust their future to the Almighty (41:14–20).

3. Finally in the third section (chs. 56–66), Isaiah exhorted the Jews who had returned to the land. This was the period before the temple was rebuilt (58:12; 61:4; 64:10) or perhaps while it was being rebuilt (66:1). Isaiah encouraged these Jews to put away greed (56:9–11), self-indulgence (56:12), idolatry (57:3–10), cynicism (57:11–13), and hypocritical self-righteousness (58:1–5). But he also predicted that the community would be split between true and false worshipers (see chs. 65; 66). The complete restoration of Israel was still to come (49:8–26). The promised Messiah would appear in the future (61:1–3). Then Gentiles would join Israel’s godly remnant to become the “servants” of the Lord (56:3; 65:1, 15, 16) in a new nation (65:1; 66:8). The ultimate triumph of good over evil would have to await the new heaven and the new earth (65:17–19).

D. Christ In The Scriptures.

1. Following are some of Isaiah’s Christological prophecies and their New Testament fulfillments: Isaiah 9:6 is fulfilled in Luke 2:11 and Ephesians 2:14–18; Isaiah 50:6 plays out with unbelievable precision in Matthew 26:67; 27:26, 30. Isaiah 61:1, 2 is nothing less than the personal mission Jesus verbalizes and embraces when He reads the scroll at the synagogue in Nazareth, as recorded in Luke 4:17–19.

2. Of particular importance is Isaiah’s description of the five aspects of Jesus’ saving work on our behalf. They appear in the five stanzas of Isaiah 52:13–53:12. There we read of Jesus’ wholehearted sacrifice, His perfect character, His atonement that results in peace with God, His payment that results in our forgiveness, and His death that nullifies the effects of sin. Isaiah refers to Jesus’ earthly ministry and His crucifixion as well as His eventual return to earth as the reigning King.

V. Article Considerations.

C. For education and other supporting data for each source of information in this article, please refer to my Page, “About My References.” The following links show information about Dallas Theological Seminary. I encourage you to familiarize yourself with the Seminary. It is important to understand that DTS is not a denominational seminary, and is totally independent of such.

D. About Dallas Theological Seminary (DTS).

1. General Info. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dallas_Theological_Seminary

2. Doctrinal Statement. https://www.dts.edu/about/doctrinal-statement/

VI. Video.

Lord, You’re Holy – Prestonwood Choir & Orchestra

“Holy, Holy, Holy, is the Lord of hosts,
The whole earth is full of His glory.” (Isaiah 6:3).

The Kingdom Of God -The Davidic Covenant (Part 1)

I. Article Title. The Kingdom Of God – The Davidic Covenant (Part 1).

II. Article References.

III. Article Narrative.

A. Introduction.

1. The eschatological implications of the Abrahamic covenant lie in the words land and seed. The land promises are enlarged and confirmed through the Palestinian covenant. In the next of Israel’s great covenants, that made with David, God is enlarging and confirming the seed promises. This will be noted in the passages dealing with the formulation of the Davidic covenant.

a. And when thy days be fulfilled, and thou shalt sleep with thy fathers, I will set up thy seed after thee, which shall proceed out of thy bowels, and I will establish his kingdom [2 Sam. 7:12].

b. I have made a covenant with my chosen, I have sworn unto David my servant, Thy seed will I establish forever, and build up thy throne to all generations [Ps. 89:3-4].

c. As the host of heaven cannot be numbered, neither the sand of the sea measured; so will I multiply the seed of David my servant, and the Levites that minister unto me.

d. Thus saith the Lord; If my covenant be not with day and night, and if I have not appointed the ordinances of heaven and earth; then will I cast away the seed of Jacob, and David my servant [Jer. 33:22, 25-26].

2. The seed promise contained in the Abrahamic covenant is now made the center of the Davidic promise. The seed promises in general and the seed line of David, with his kingdom, house, and throne, are amplified.

B. The Importance Of The Davidic Covenant.

1. The Scriptural basis for the teaching of the Davidic Covenant is the premillennial view of a literal thousand year kingdom. is Rev. 20:1-6, after an Old Testament content has been poured into it.

2. A literal premillennial view of Scripture forms a determining place in the Scriptures of the Davidic covenant, with its promises of a kingdom and king.

C. The Provisions Of The Davidic Covenant.

1 . The promise made by God to David is given in 2 Samuel 7:12-16, where we read: And when thy days be fulfilled, and thou shalt sleep with thy fathers, I will set up thy seed after thee, which shall proceed out of thy bowels, and I will establish his kingdom. He shall build an house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom for ever. I will be his father, and he shall be my son. If he commit iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men, and with the stripes of the children of men: But my mercy shall not depart away from him, as I took it from Saul, whom I put away before thee. And thine house and thy kingdom shall be established forever before thee: thy throne shall be established forever.

2. The historical background of the Davidic covenant is well known. Inasmuch as David had come to power and authority in the kingdom and now dwelt in a house of cedar, it seemed incongruous that the One from whom he derived his authority and government should still dwell in a house of skins. It was David’s purpose to build a suitable dwelling place for God. Because he had been a man of war, David was not permitted to build this house. That responsibility was left to Solomon, the prince of peace. However, God does make certain promises to David concerning the perpetuity of his house.

3. The provisions of the Davidic covenant include, then, the following items: (1)
David is to have a child, yet to be born, who shall succeed him and establish his
kingdom. (2) This son (Solomon) shall build the temple instead of David. (3) The throne of his kingdom shall be established forever. (4) The throne will not be taken away from him (Solomon) even though his sins justify chastisement. (5) David’s house, throne, and kingdom shall be established forever.

4. The essential features, eschatologically, of this covenant are implicit in three words found in 2 Samuel 7:16: house, kingdom, throne. Walvoord well defines these terms as used in this covenant. He writes: What do the major terms of the covenant mean? By David’s “house” it can hardly be doubted that reference is made to David’s posterity, his physical descendants. It is assured that they will never be slain in toto, nor displaced by another family entirely. The line of David will always be the royal line.

5. By the term “throne” it is clear that no reference is made to a material throne, but rather to the dignity and power which was sovereign and supreme in David as king. The right to rule always belonged to David’s seed. By the term “kingdom” there is reference to David’s political kingdom over Israel. By the expression “for ever” it is signified that the Davidic authority and Davidic kingdom or rule over Israel shall never be taken from David’s posterity.

6. The right to rule will never be transferred to another family, and its arrangement is designed for eternal perpetuity. Whatever its changing form, temporary interruptions, or chastisements, the line of David will always have the right to rule over Israel and will, in fact, exercise this privilege.

7. As in other of Israel’s covenants, we find that this covenant is restated and
confirmed in later Scriptures. In Psalm 89 the Psalmist is extolling God for His mercies. In verse 3 these mercies are seen to come because: I have made a covenant with my chosen. I have sworn unto David my servant, Thy seed will I establish for ever and build up thy throne to all generations [Ps. 89:3-4. ].

8. These promises of are sure because: My covenant will I not break, nor alter the thing that is gone out of my lips. Once have I sworn by my holiness that I will not lie unto David. His seed shall endure for ever, and his throne as the sun before me [Ps. 89:34-36].

9. The Davidic covenant is confirmed again in such passages as Isaiah 9:6-7; Jeremiah 23:5-6; 30:8-9; 33:14- 17, 20-21; Ezekiel 37:24-25; Daniel 7:13-14; Hosea 3:4-5; Amos 9:11; Zechariah 14:4, 9. This promise to David is established by God as a formal covenant and then thereafter is referred to as the basis on which God is operating in regard to the kingdom, the house, and the throne.

IV. Article Considerations.

C. For education and other supporting data for each source of information in this article, please refer to my Page, “About My References.” The following links show information about Dallas Theological Seminary. I encourage you to familiarize yourself with the Seminary. It is important to understand that DTS is not a denominational seminary, and is totally independent of such.

D. About Dallas Theological Seminary (DTS).

1. General Info. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dallas_Theological_Seminary

2. Doctrinal Statement. https://www.dts.edu/about/doctrinal-statement/

V. Video.

J. Dwight Pentecost, Th. D. In Christ.

“For I determined to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ, and Him crucified” (1 Corinthians 2:2).

Jews In Scripture – Prophets – Isaiah 1

I. Article Title. Jews In Scripture – Prophets – Isaiah 1

II. Article References.

Charles C. Ryrie, Th. D., Ph. D., D. Litt. Merrill F. Unger, Th. D., Ph. D. John F. Walvoord, Th. D., D. Litt. Harold W. Hoehner, Th. D., Ph. D. Stanley D. Toussaint, Th. D. Edward E. Hindson Th. D., Ph. D. Robert L. Thomas, Th. D. Lewis Sperry Chafer, Th. D., D. Litt. J. Dwight Pentecost, Th. D. Robert P. Lightner, Th. D.

III. Article Narrative.

A. Introduction To Chapters 1-5.

The relationship of chapters 1-5 to Isaiah’s call in chapter 6 is problematic. Do the first five chapters describe the prophet’s ministry before he received his call-is the order chronological, or do they constitute an introduction to the anthology of prophecies that follow Isaiah’s call-is the order literary? The commentators take both views. My preference is to view these prophecies not necessarily as the first ones Isaiah delivered in his ministry but as those he placed here to form an introduction to his whole book. They present in a succinct way the problems that the rest of the book deals with. They are typical of many of Isaiah’s succeeding prophecies and set forth his major emphases. Isaiah’s call (ch. 6) is the most concise statement of the solution to the Israelites’ problem, and the chapters after that one spell it out in more detail. Probably Isaiah, or whoever arranged these prophecies in their final form, put these prophecies here to set before the reader the situation facing Israel that Isaiah addressed in the rest of the book.

B. Israel’s Condition And God’s Solution (Chapter 1).

1. As chapters 1-5 introduce the whole book, so chapter 1 introduces the rest of the introduction to the book (chs. 2-5). It presents the situation in Judah in the second half of the eighth century B.C. and reveals God’s will for His people. This chapter summarizes all of Isaiah’s characteristic and essential teachings. Judgment from the Lord had to come on the people of Judah because they had sinned against Him. This judgment would purify and perfect them because God had a future for them. God’s indictment of His people is similar to a covenant lawsuit (i.e., a rib oracle).

2. “True prophets are like good doctors: They diagnose the case, prescribe a remedy, and warn the patient what will happen if the prescription is ignored.”

C. Verse Discussions.

1. Verse 1. (The title of the book). The book claims Isaiah as its author. His name summarizes the revelation of the book, namely, that it is Yahweh who saves. Obadiah was the only other writing prophet who described his book as a vision. This unusual title stresses that what Isaiah wrote reflects reality accurately; he saw it. This word does not mean that everything that Isaiah wrote is what he saw in one or more visions. Though, unstated, this vision (the prophecies that constitute this book) came from God. According to Jewish tradition Isaiah’s father, Amoz (not the prophet Amos), was the brother of King Amaziah, Uzziah’s father, which would have made Isaiah King Uzziah’s cousin. Isaiah ministered in and to the people of Jerusalem and Judah, but he saw them as the real Israel since they lived under the Davidic kings, in contrast to the residents of the Northern Kingdom of Israel. The kings of Judah mentioned ruled from 792-686 B.C.

2. Verses 2-3.

a. Israel was guilty of forsaking her God and, as a result, she had become broken and desolate.

b. God Himself charged the Israelites with their sin. He called the heavens and earth to witness His indictment against His people (cf. Deuteronomy 30:19; Deuteronomy 32:1). His people had not only violated His covenant but common decency and good sense. Isaiah’s references to the Mosaic Covenant were less explicit than Jeremiah’s were, though both men viewed the covenant as the basis of Israelite life.

c. It was unthinkable that children should revolt against a loving father who nurtured them. Even stupid oxen and donkeys know their master, but the Israelites did not realize who cared for them. The Israelites made animals look intelligent.

3. Verses 4-9.

a. The prophet amplified God’s charge and proved it by referring to Israel’s condition. He lamented that Israel’s state was the logical outcome of her behavior. “The interjection ’ah’ [Isaiah 1:4] (the Hebrew word [hoy] is sometimes translated ’woe’) was a cry of mourning heard at funerals (see 1 Kings 13:30; Jeremiah 22:18-19; Amos 5:16). When Isaiah’s audience heard this word, images of death must have appeared in their minds.”

b. God’s people had forsaken the Holy One of Israel, “the transcendent God, who is wholly separate from the frailty and finiteness of Creation (his majesty-holiness), and wholly separate from the sinfulness and defilement of man (his purity-holiness).” [Note: Gleason L. Archer Jr., “Isaiah,” in The Wycliffe Bible Commentary, p. 609.] Israel was consequently experiencing the destructive results of her sin in national disease and in political and social catastrophes (Isaiah 1:5-6; cf. Isaiah 53:4-10; Deuteronomy 27-30). It was customary in Isaiah’s day for people to squeeze the puss out of a wound, to pull a cut together with a bandage, and to pour olive oil on sores to aid healing. [Note: Young, 1:51-52.].

c. Isaiah moved from describing Israel as a sick and injured body to a desolate, conquered land (Isaiah 1:7-9; cf. Leviticus 26; Deuteronomy 28-29). The description “daughter of Zion” (Isaiah 1:8) emphasizes that God feels about His wayward people as a father feels about his daughter. He loves her, has committed himself to protecting her, and takes pains to guard her from all evil and danger.

d. Many Israelite families lived in villages but built little shelters in their fields and camped there during the harvest season. After the harvest these little shacks looked pitiful, abandoned, useless, and deteriorating. Unless the LORD of armies had preserved a few faithful in Judah, as He preserved Lot and his family, He would have destroyed the nation as He destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah (Isaiah 1:10; cf. Genesis 19; Romans 9:29).

e. All the writing prophets except Ezekiel, Joel, Obadiah, and Jonah used the title “LORD of Hosts” (“LORD Almighty”) to stress that Yahweh has numberless assistants who are ready and able to carry out His bidding (cf. 2 Kings 6:15-18). This is also the first reference in Isaiah to the remnant, the faithful few in Israel who formed a distinct group within the apostate nation. This remnant constitutes a significant group and motif in the book.

4. Versed 10-20. (God’s Solutions).

a. Even though God had not yet destroyed Jerusalem as He had Sodom and Gomorrah, the city was like those corrupt towns in that the people and their rulers had turned from God’s holy standard. The people needed to heed the instruction (Heb. torah) of their God.

b. The prophet laid out two alternatives for the people to choose between in relating to God in their pitiful condition. They could continue to rely on religious ritual (cult) to manipulate God (Isaiah 1:10-15), or they could change their ways and live morally and ethically pure lives (Isaiah 1:16-17). The choice was theirs (Isaiah 1:18-20).

5. Verses 11-15. The Israelites tended to fall into a pattern of thinking that religious ritual and their pagan neighbors’ worship encouraged. They thought that going through the motions of worshipping God exactly as He specified satisfied Him. They forgot that God intended their ceremonies to be symbolic of their attitude toward Him. Their attitude to Him was more important than their flawless performance of worship rituals. Even their prayers would be ineffective if their attitude to God was not right (Isaiah 1:15). We have the same problem today. This passage repeats descriptions of the Israelites’ worship so often that the reader gets tired of them, just as God did. Hands full of bloodshed (Isaiah 1:15) is a figure of guilt for abusing others. [Note: Franz Delitzsch, Biblical Commentary on the Prophecies of Isaiah , 1:95.].

6. Verses 16-17.

a. Having shown what God does not want, Isaiah now told the people what He does want (cf. Isaiah 66:1-4; Isaiah 66:17). His demands are short and simple in contrast to the elaborate rituals described above (cf. Deuteronomy 10:12-13; Micah 6:8). Three negative commands relate to the past and five positive ones to the future. Washing (Isaiah 1:16) is symbolic of repenting (cf. Acts 2:38; Acts 13:24; Titus 3:5).

b. “The passage clearly reveals a concern over the social injustices of the time. Such social injustices, however, could only be corrected by a change of heart upon the part of individuals.” [Note: Young, 1:74.]

7. Verses 18-20. (The wisdom of obeying God.) The Lord now challenged Israel to a formal trial. In the light of Israel’s condition (Isaiah 1:2-17), there was only one reasonable course of action. The Israelites could continue as they were and be destroyed, or submit to God’s will and be blessed. If they were disposed to consent and obey, God would again bless them with fertility (cf. Isaiah 1:3). If they decided to refuse and rebel, He would allow their enemies to defeat and destroy them. Behavioral change, the fruit of repentance, needed to demonstrate an attitude of repentance. It always does.

8. Verses 21-23. (The depth of Judah’s apostasy). Spiritual rot had penetrated even the capital of Israel, and what marked Jerusalem characterized the whole nation. The people, seen in the personification of their capital, who had formerly been devoted to the Lord, had become unfaithful to Him by pursuing other gods. Former glories were now tarnished, and what was once strong was now weak. The leaders of the nation, who formerly had been pure and valuable, were now adulterated and cheap. Rather than serving the people, they served themselves. Idolatry had led to social injustice, as it always does unless checked.

9. Verses 21-31. (Israel’s response). While God’s invitation to repent was genuine (Isaiah 1:16-20), the nation had so thoroughly departed from Him that repentance was not forthcoming and discipline was inevitable. The prophet bemoaned the depth of Israel’s apostasy and announced that the Lord would have to purify His people in the furnace of affliction before they would become what He intended them to be. The structural form of Isaiah 1:21-26 is palistrophic, with Isaiah 1:23-24 forming the center and focal point of the chiasm.

10. Verses 24-26. (The announcement of judgment).

a. Isaiah’s unusual three-fold description of God as the sovereign (Lord) God of armies (hosts), who is the Mighty God of Israel, boded ill for Judah. Isaiah crowded together more names of God in Isaiah 1:24 than he did anywhere else (cf. Isaiah 3:1; Isaiah 3:15; Isaiah 10:6; Isaiah 10:33; Isaiah 19:4). The specter of God arising to judge His people for their sins just mentioned is a fearful prospect (cf. Hebrews 12:29). God judges sin wherever He finds it, among pagans and among His own people.

b. “Any facile statement that God always hates the sin but loves the sinner needs to be countered by Isaiah’s insistence that those who transgress are my foes and my enemies.”

c. God would subject His people to fires of adversity, but only to purify them, not destroy them. Just rulers would emerge and the city would once again enjoy a reputation for righteousness and faithfulness to God. This is the first allusion in Isaiah to a coming Judge who will establish justice and create righteous conditions, about whom the prophet revealed much more later. The restoration described here will find fulfillment in the millennial reign of Christ.

11. Verses 27-31. (The fate of the wicked). Even though Zion (a poetic synonym for Jerusalem) will experience redemption by God’s justice and righteousness (Isaiah 1:25-26), the Lord will destroy individuals who continue in their sins and do not repent. This is the first occurrence of “redemption” as well as “Zion” in Isaiah, both of which received considerable attention from this prophet. The Israelites had turned to objects of idolatry (“oaks”) and places of idolatry (“gardens,” Isaiah 1:29), and in doing so had forsaken the Lord. God had chosen Israel, but Israel had chosen a tree! It is impossible to turn from the Lord and not turn to an idol. God’s people would feel betrayed because of their choice one day (cf. Isaiah 29:3; Isaiah 45:7; Psalms 34:5; Psalms 119:6). Those who consider themselves strong and self-sufficient, as oaks and gardens, but rely on the creation rather than the Creator to sustain them-will wither and dry up (Isaiah 1:30). Both they and their works will inevitably burn in the fires of God’s judgment, like felled trees.

IV. Article Considerations.

C. For education and other supporting data for each source of information in this article, please refer to my Page, “About My References.” The following links show information about Dallas Theological Seminary. I encourage you to familiarize yourself with the Seminary. It is important to understand that DTS is not a denominational seminary, and is totally independent of such.

D. About Dallas Theological Seminary (DTS).

1. General Info. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dallas_Theological_Seminary

2. Doctrinal Statement. https://www.dts.edu/about/doctrinal-statement/

V. Video. Jews In Song. Avinu Malkeinu (Our Father, Our King).

Park Avenue Synagogue, New York City, New York. Consider the reverence of those in the synagogue. May Jews come to know Yeshua as Messiah.

The Kingdom Of God – The Land Covenant (Part 2)

I. Article Title. The Kingdom Of God – The Land Covenant (Part 2).

II. Article References.

III. Article Narrative.

A. The Character Of The Land Covenant.

1. This covenant made by God with Israel in regard to their relation to the land must be seen to be an unconditional covenant. There are several reasons to support this.

a. First, it is called by God an eternal covenant in Ezekiel 16:60. It could be eternal only if its fulfillment were divorced from human responsibility and brought to rest on the Word of the Eternal one.

b. Second, it is only an amplification and enlargement of parts of the Abrahamic covenant, which itself is an unconditional covenant, and, therefore, this amplification must be eternal and unconditional also.

c. Third, this covenant has the guarantee of God that He will effect the necessary conversion which is essential to its fulfillment. Romans 11:26-27; Hosea 2:14-23; Deuteronomy 30:6; Ezekiel 11:16-21 all make this clear. This conversion is viewed in Scripture as a sovereign act of God and must be acknowledged to be certain because of His integrity.

d. Fourth, portions of this covenant have already been fulfilled literally. Israel has experienced the dispersions as judgments for unfaithfulness. Israel has experienced restorations to the land and awaits the final restoration. Israel’s history abounds in examples of her enemies who have been judged. These partial fulfillments, which were literal fulfillments, all indicate a future literal fulfillment of the unfulfilled portions in like manner.

2. It may be argued by some that this covenant is conditional because of the
statements of Deuteronomy 30:1-3: “when…then.” It should be observed that the only conditional element here is the time element. The program is certain; the time when this program will be fulfilled depends upon the conversion of the nation. Conditional time elements do not make the whole program conditional, however.

B. The Eschatological Implications Of The Land Covenant.

1. From the original statement of the provisions of this covenant, it is easy to see that, on the basis of a literal fulfillment, Israel must be converted as a nation, must be regathered from her worldwide dispersion, must be installed in her land, which she is made to possess, must witness the judgment of her enemies, and must receive the material blessings vouchsafed to her.

2. This covenant is seen to have a wide influence on our eschatological expectation. Since these things have never been fulfilled, and an eternal and unconditional covenant demands a fulfillment, we must provide for just such a program in our outline of future events.

a. Such is the expectation of the prophets who write to Israel: Isaiah 11:11-12; 14:1-3; 27:12-13; 43:1-8; 49:8-16; 66:20-22; Jeremiah 16:14-16; 23:3-8; 30:10-11; 31:8, 31-37; Ezekiel 11:17-21; 20:33-38; 34:11-16; 39:25-29; Hosea 1:10-11; Joel 3:17-21; Amos 9:11-15; Micah 4:4-7; Zephaniah 3:14-20; Zechariah 8:4-8.

b. Such was the promise offered to the above listed saints. Whether they should live to see the Messiah confirm these promises, or whether they reached the land through resurrection, peace was theirs as they awaited that which God promised.

IV. Article Considerations.

C. For education and other supporting data for each source of information in this article, please refer to my Page, “About My References.” The following links show information about Dallas Theological Seminary. I encourage you to familiarize yourself with the Seminary. It is important to understand that DTS is not a denominational seminary, and is totally independent of such.

D. About Dallas Theological Seminary (DTS).

1. General Info. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dallas_Theological_Seminary

2. Doctrinal Statement. https://www.dts.edu/about/doctrinal-statement/

V. Video.

Dr. Jason R. Wiesepape, D. Min. Personal Testimony.

Jews In Scripture – Prophets – Isaiah

I. Article Title. Jews In Scripture – Prophets – Isaiah

II. Article References.

III. Jews In Scripture – Isaiah (Introduction).

A. Isaiah is justly accounted the chief of the writing prophets. He has the more comprehensive testimony and is distinctively the prophet of redemption. Nowhere else in the Scriptures written under the law have we so clear a view of grace. The New Testament Church does not appear (Ephesians 3:3-10), but Messiah in His Person and sufferings, and the blessing of the Gentiles through Him, are in full vision.

B. Apart from his testimony to his own time, which includes warnings of coming judgments upon the great nations of that day, the predictive messages of Isaiah cover seven great themes: Israel in exile and divine judgment upon Israel’s oppressors. The return from Babylon. The manifestation of Messiah in humiliation (e.g. Chap. 53). The blessing of the Gentiles. The manifestation of Messiah in judgment (“the day of vengeance of our God”). The reign of David’s righteous Branch in the kingdom-age. The new heavens and the new earth.

C. Isaiah is in two chief divisions: Looking toward the captivities, Isaiah 1:1-8. Key verses, Isaiah 1:1,Isaiah 1:2. Looking beyond the captivities, Isaiah 40:1-24. Key verses, Isaiah 40:1,Isaiah 40:2.

D. These chief divisions fall into subdivisions, as indicated in the text. The events recorded in Isaiah cover a period of 62 years. This Introduction comes from Scofield Reference Notes, 1909 A.D. Each page of Isaiah’s prophecy is dated from 760 B.C. to 698 B.C.

E. Isaiah 1:1-2 is key to understanding the prophecy of the Jewish prophet to the Jewish people of his time, and is not addressed to Gentiles. Isaiah does not prophecy anything about the USA, New York City, or 911. Isaiah’s prophecy, or parts of its prophecy, can not be claimed by anyone, for any purpose, other than for Isaiah’s prophecy to the Jews and Israel. Isaiah’s Prophecy relates to the last days of Israel, but not to the church. His “last days prophecy” relates to the tribulation (24:1-13), kingdom age of the millennium (2:1-4), and eternal state (66:22), as well as other verses. Gentiles who are left behind from the rapture will experience the effects of the tribulation in all areas of the earth, but are incidental to Isaiah’s prophecy to Israel. Gentiles who come to faith in Christ during the Tribulation will be born again and enter the Kingdom age (millennium), along with Jews who have had the same experience; both groups will experience the blessings of the eternal state (Rev 21:1-2. new heaven, new earth, new Jerusalem).

IV. Article Considerations.

C. For education and other supporting data for each source of information in this article, please refer to my Page, “About My References.” The following links show information about Dallas Theological Seminary. I encourage you to familiarize yourself with the Seminary. It is important to understand that DTS is not a denominational seminary, and is totally independent of such.

D. About Dallas Theological Seminary (DTS).

1. General Info. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dallas_Theological_Seminary

2. Doctrinal Statement. https://www.dts.edu/about/doctrinal-statement/

The Kingdom Of God – The Land Covenant (Part 1)

I. Video. Jump. The Priority of Heaven Mark Yarbrough (Ph. D.), President, Dallas Theological Seminary.

II. Article References.

III. Article Narrative. I. The Importance Of The Land Covenant.

A. The importance of the Land Covenant.

1. In the closing chapters of the book of Deuteronomy the children of Israel, the
physical seed of Abraham, are facing a crisis in their national existence. They are about to pass from the proved leadership of Moses into the unproven leadership of Joshua. They are standing at the entrance to the land that was promised to them by God in such terms as:

a. Unto thy seed will I give this land [Gen. 12:7].

b. For all the land which thou seest, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed for ever
[Gen. 13:15].

c. And I will establish my covenant between me and thee, and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee. And I will give unto thee, and to thy seed after thee, the land wherein thou art a stranger, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession; and I will be their God [Gen. 17:7-8].

2. But this land is possessed by Israel’s enemies, who have shown they will resist any attempt by Israel to enter the land promised them. It is impossible for them to return to their former status as a slave nation and the land to which they were journeying as “strangers and pilgrims” seemed shut before them. As a result, certain important considerations must be faced by the nation. Is the land of Palestine still their possession? Did the inauguration of the Mosaic covenant, which all agree was conditional, set aside the unconditional Abrahamic covenant? Could Israel hope to enter into permanent possession of their land in the face of such opposition? To answer these important questions God stated again His covenant promise concerning Israel’s possession of and inheritance in the land in Deuteronomy 30:1-10, which statement we call the Land covenant, because it answers the question of Israel’s relation to the land promises of the Abrahamic covenant.

3. Great importance is attached to this covenant (1) in that it reaffirms to Israel, in no uncertain terms, their title deed to the land of promise. In spite of unfaithfulness and unbelief, as manifested so frequently in Israel’s history from the time of the promise to Abraham until that time, the covenant was not abrogated. The land was still theirs by promise. (2) Further, the introduction of a conditional covenant, under which Israel was then living, could and did not set aside the original gracious promise concerning the purpose of God. This fact is the basis of Paul’s argument when he writes: “The covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect”
(Gal. 3:17). (3) This covenant is a confirmation and enlargement of the original
Abrahamic covenant. This Land covenant amplifies the land features of the Abrahamic covenant. The amplification, coming after willful unbelief and disobedience in the life of the nation, supports the contention that the original promise was given to be fulfilled in spite of disobedience.

B. The Provisions Of The Land Covenant.

1. The Land covenant is stated in Deuteronomy 30:1-10, where we read:

a. And it shall come to pass, when all these things are come upon thee, the blessing and the curse, which I have set before thee, and thou shalt call them to mind among all the nations, whither the Lord thy God hath driven thee.

b. And shalt return unto the Lord thy God, and shalt obey his voice according to all that I command thee this day, thou and thy children, with all thine heart, and with all thy soul.

c. That the Lord thy God will turn thy captivity, and have compassion upon thee, and will return and gather thee from all the nations, whither the Lord thy God hath scattered thee.

d. And the Lord thy God will bring thee into the land which thy fathers possessed, and thou shalt possess it.

e. And the Lord thy God will circumcise thine heart, and the heart of thy seed, to love the Lord thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, that thou mayest live.

f. And the Lord thy God will put all these curses upon thine enemies.

g. And thou shalt return and obey the voice of the Lord, and do all his commandments which I command thee this day.

h. And the Lord thy God will make thee plenteous. For the Lord will again rejoice over thee for good.”

2. An analysis of this passage will show that there are seven main features in the program there unfolded: (1) The nation will be plucked off the land for its unfaithfulness (Deut. 28:63-68; 30:1-3); (2) there will be a future repentance of Israel (Deut. 28:63-68; 30:1-3); (3) their Messiah will return (Deut. 30:3-6); (4) Israel will be restored to the land (Deut. 30:5); (5) Israel will be converted as a nation (Deut. 30:4-8; cf. Rom. 11:26-27); (6) Israel’s enemies will be judged (Deut. 30:7); (7) the nation will then receive her full blessing (Deut. 30:9).

a. As one surveys the wide areas included in this one passage, which sets forth this covenant program, one is compelled to feel that God takes Israel’s relation to the land as a matter of extreme importance. God not only guarantees its possession to them, but obligates Himself to judge and remove all Israel’s enemies, give the nation a new heart, a conversion, prior to placing them in the land.

b. This same covenant is confirmed at a later time in Israel’s history. It becomes a subject of Ezekiel’s prophecy. God affirms His love for Israel in the time of her infancy (Ezek. 16:1-7); He reminds her that she was chosen and related to God by marriage (vv. 8-14); but she played the harlot (vv. 15-34); therefore, the punishment of dispersion was meted out to her (vv. 35-52); but this is not a final setting aside of Israel, for there will be a restoration (vv. 53-63). This restoration is based on the promise: “Nevertheless I will remember my covenant with thee in the days of thy youth, and I will establish unto thee an everlasting covenant. Then thou shalt remember thy ways, and be ashamed, when thou shalt receive thy sisters, thine elder and thy younger; and I will give them unto thee for daughters, but not by thy covenant. And I will establish my covenant with thee; and thou shalt know that I am the Lord [Ezek. 16:60-62].”

3. Thus the Lord reaffirms the Land covenant and calls it an eternal covenant by which He is bound.

IV. Article Considerations.

C. For education and other supporting data for each source of information in this article, please refer to my Page, “About My References.” The following links show information about Dallas Theological Seminary. I encourage you to familiarize yourself with the Seminary. It is important to understand that DTS is not a denominational seminary, and is totally independent of such.

D. About Dallas Theological Seminary (DTS).

1. General Info. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dallas_Theological_Seminary

2. Doctrinal Statement. https://www.dts.edu/about/doctrinal-statement/

The Kingdom Of God – The Abrahamic Covenant (Part 3)

I. Video. Jump-Starting A Depleted Spiritual Battery. Mark Yarbrough (Ph. D.), President, Dallas Theological Seminary.

II. Article References.

III. Article Narrative. The Eschatological Implications Of The Abrahamic Covenant.

A. When it has been determined that the Abrahamic covenant is an unconditional covenant made with Israel, and therefore cannot be either abrogated or fulfilled by people other than the nation Israel, it is seen that Israel has promises regarding a land and a seed, which determine the future program of God. These words land and seed, together with the word blessing, summarize the essential features of the eschatological portion of the covenant. An examination of the promises of God to Abraham will show this twofold emphasis in the promise.

1. Unto thy seed will I give this land [Gen. 12:7]. 2. For all the land which thou seest, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed forever. And I will make thy seed as the dust of the earth: so that if a man can number the dust of the earth, then shall their seed also be numbered [Gen. 13:15-16]. 3. In the same day the Lord made a covenant with Abram, saying, Unto thy seed have I given this land [Gen. 15:18]. 4. And I will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee. And I will give unto thee, the land wherein thou art a stranger, all the land of Canaan, for everlasting possession [Gen. 17:7-8].

B. It is impossible to escape the conclusion that the promise included features related to the physical seed of Abraham and features related to the land given that seed. It is necessary, then, to examine the areas of the seed and the land to determine their effect on future events.

C. Ryrie outlines the implications of the covenant. He says: All agree that the Abrahamic covenant is one of the outstanding covenants in the Word of God. Its crucial issues in relation to premillennialism are two:

1. Does the Abrahamic covenant promise Israel a permanent existence as a nation? If it does, then the Church is not fulfilling Israel’s promises, but rather Israel as a nation has a future yet in prospect; and ,

2. Does the Abrahamic covenant promise Israel permanent possession of the promised land? If it does, then Israel must yet come into possession of the land, for she has never fully possessed it in her history.

D. Who is the seed of Abraham? It would seem obvious to all who are not
deliberately trying to pervert the plain teaching of Scripture that the seed of Abraham, of necessity, is the term applied to the physical descendants of Abraham. Walvoord writes:

1. An examination of the whole context of the Abrahamic Covenant shows that first of all it was vitally connected with Abraham’s physical seed, Isaac. God said of Isaac before he was born, “I will establish my covenant with him for an everlasting covenant and with his seed after him” (Gen. 17:19). How did Abraham understand the term seed here? Obviously, it had reference to the physical seed, Isaac, and his physical descendants. God did not say that no spiritual blessing would come to those outside the physical seed, but the physical line of Isaac would inherit the promises given to the “seed of Abraham.”

a. Nothing should be plainer than that Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob understood the term seed as referring to their physical lineage.

b. And again: The term “Israel.” As a title given to Jacob, meaning prince of God, it has commonly been used to designate the physical descendants of Jacob. Israel must mean Israel, and the kingdom promises in the Old Testament concern Israel and are to be fulfilled to Israel literally.

2. It is not denied that the Abrahamic covenant offers universal blessings to those who are not the physical seed of Abraham, but it is affirmed that the national promises can only be fulfilled by the nation itself. Thus, the word Israel is taken in its usual, literal, sense to mean the physical descendants of Abraham

E. The kinds of seeds mentioned in Scripture. The whole issue may be clarified if one observes that the Scripture does not present just one kind of seed that is born to Abraham. The failure to observe this differentiation of Scripture has led to confusion. Walvoord writes: There are, then, three different senses in which one can be a child of Abraham.

1. First, there is the natural lineage, or natural seed. This is limited largely to the descendants of Jacob in the twelve tribes. To them God promises to be their God. To them was given the law. To them was given the land of Israel in the Old Testament. With them God dealt in a special way.

2. Second, there is the spiritual lineage within the natural. These are the Israelites who believed in God, who kept the law, and who met the conditions for present enjoyment of the blessings of the covenant. Those who ultimately possess the land in the future millennium will also be of spiritual Israel.

3. Third, there is the spiritual seed of Abraham who are not natural Israelites. Here is where the promise to “all the families of the earth” comes in. This is the express application of this phrase in Galatians 3:6-9. In other words, the children of Abraham (spiritually) who come from the heathen or Gentiles fulfill that aspect of the Abrahamic Covenant which dealt with Gentiles in the first place, not the promises pertaining to Israel. The only sense in which Gentiles can be Abraham’s seed in the Galatians context is to be “in Christ Jesus”
(Gal. 3:28). It follows: “And if ye be Christ’s, then are ye Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise” (Gal. 3:29). They are Abraham’s seed in the spiritual sense only and heirs of the promise given “to all the families of the earth.”

4. A spiritual seed for Abraham includes Gentiles, and fulfills the
promises given to the natural seed, that the promises to the seed of Abraham are fulfilled by Gentile believers. To make the blessings promised all the nations the same as the blessings promised the seed of Abraham is an unwarranted conclusion. This distinction will explain how the church may be related to the promises of the covenant without being the covenant people in whom the national promises will be fulfilled. Because we are the seed of Abraham spiritually by the new birth, it does not mean we are the physical seed of the patriarch.

F. The church is not Israel. The only logical conclusion that can grow out of this
discussion is that the Gentile believers of the present day, while reckoned as a seed to Abraham, are not the seed in which national promises are to be fulfilled. This is well proved by observing certain facts in the New Testament usage of the words.

(1) Natural Israel and the Gentiles are contrasted in the New Testament (Acts 3:12; 4:8; 21:28; Rom. 10:1). The fact that Israel is addressed as a nation after the establishment of the church and that the term Jew continues to be used as distinct from the church (1 Cor. 10:32) shows that the Gentiles do not supplant Israel in God’s covenant program.

(2) Natural Israel and the church are contrasted in the New Testament (Rom. 11:1-25; 1 Cor. 10:32). In Romans 11 it is shown that God has taken the nation Israel out of the place of blessing temporarily, but will restore them to that place of blessing when His program with the church is terminated. This consideration shows that the church does not supplant Israel in God’s covenant program.

(3) Jewish Christians, who would be a part of spiritual Israel, and Gentile Christians are contrasted in the New Testament (Rom. 9:6, where Paul contrasts these promises which belong to Israel according to the flesh and those which belong to Israel who enter into them by faith; Gal. 6:15-16, where Paul specifically mentions believing Jews in the benediction pronounced on the whole body of Christ). The point seems to be well established, then, that the church today is not Israel in whom these covenants are fulfilled. It is strange that those, who argues that the covenants need not be fulfilled because they were conditional and the conditions were not met by Israel, and who argues further that they will not be fulfilled because they have been historically fulfilled in the Solomonic kingdom, now argues that they are being fulfilled by the church. If they were conditional or already fulfilled why not ignore the covenant promises entirely? Why make such an issue of it? The only answer is that the covenants form such a foundation for the whole expectation of the Word of God that they can not be ignored, even by those who deny their existence or their relevancy to the eschatological program.

G. The relation of the church to the covenant.

1. Since the church is not the seed in whom the covenants will be finally and literally fulfilled, it is well to consider the question of her relation to the whole covenant program. Any relationship which the church sustains to the promises is based, not on physical birth, but on a new birth, and is hers because the individuals are “in Christ.”

2. It is said that “the Seed” shall inherit the land; and we are told by many that this was fulfilled in the history of the Jews under Joshua, the Judges, and the
Kings. What, however, are the facts as given by the Holy Spirit?

a. Certainly, in the interpretation of covenant promise, Holy Writ should be allowed to be its own interpreter, that we may ascertain the meaning intended by God. Let God, then, and not man, explain: “Now (Gal. 3:16) to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, ‘And to seeds’ as of many, but as of one, ‘And to thy seed,’ which is Christ.”

b. If language has any definite meaning, then, without doubt we have here the simple declaration that when God promised “Unto thy seed will I give this land,” He meant that the land of Canaan should be inherited by a single Person—preeminently the Seed—descended from Abraham, even Jesus Christ.

3. The church receives of the promises solely because of relationship to the One in whom the promises find fulfillment. She participates with Him in all He does to bring the covenant to completion. In citing the Abrahamic covenant, Peter, in Acts 3:25, applies only the universal aspects of the covenant to those to whom he speaks. The national aspects must await future fulfillment by the nation Israel.

H. Will the seed possess the land?

1. It is evident from the previous discussion of Abraham was promised the eternal possession of the land. The promise of possession of the land by the seed of Abraham is a prominent feature of the covenant, and the way the promise is given enhances its significance. The promise as given emphasizes that: (1) it is gracious in its principle; (2) the land is an inheritance of the seed; (3) its title is given forever; (4) the land is to be possessed forever; (5) the land promised includes specific territory defined by boundaries.

2. This promise is the basis of the expectation of the Old Testament, and the substance of the prophets’ message. If Israel has been rejected as a nation because of its unbelief, this great line of Old Testament prophecy would be without the possibility of fulfillment. Ryrie well answers the argument that Israel has been set aside. He writes: “Since some insist that the nation has been completely rejected of God, two passages of Scripture must be carefully examined.”

a. The first one is Matthew 21:43: “Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of
God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits
thereof.”

b. An accurate interpretation of this verse must answer these questions.

(1) what will be taken away, (2) from whom is it taken, (3) and to whom is it given? It is the kingdom of God that is taken from them. The kingdom of God is the sphere of true faith in God. The Lord is saying to these Jews that, because they had rejected Him, they could not enter the kingdom of God, for “except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God” (John 3:3). From whom was the kingdom of God taken? It seems clear the you refers to the generation to whom the Lord was speaking. To whom would the kingdom be given? By application, the “nation bringing forth the fruits thereof” may mean any generation which will turn to Christ; but in its strict interpretation it refers to the nation Israel when she shall turn to the Lord and be saved before entering the millennial kingdom.

c. The second passage which shows conclusively that Israel will be restored is the passage which deals with her future salvation, Romans 11:26-27.

(1) And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written. There shall come out of Sion
the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob; For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins.

(2) Careful exegetes agree that Israel means Israel in this passage. This
passage teaches, then, that all Israel, in contrast to the remnant being saved today, will be saved at the Second Coming of Christ.

d. From these two passages it is clear that Israel has not been cast off but will be restored to the place of blessing in the future. Israel, because she has not been disinherited, will be in a position to fulfill the Abrahamic covenant.

I. Has the Abrahamic covenant been fulfilled?

1. There are those who contend that this covenant will not be fulfilled in the future because it has been fulfilled already in the past. The literalist reminds us of the word “forever” which to him is the all important word here. We are frequently reminded that the “forever” must mean “FOREVER.” This is not without difficulty even for the literalist.

a. Man’s tenure of any part of the earth is not permanent. “It is appointed unto man once to die and after that the judgment.” His leases and contracts in material possessions must come to an end. What, then, does God mean? What would Abraham understand by the word “forever”?

b. If a man is threatened with eviction from his home and a friend of
proven ability, to implement his promises, will give him a promise that he shall
possess that home forever, how shall he interpret those words? He will not expect to live there eternally. The most he could expect from the promise would be that he should spend his natural life there and that his dust should rest there after death. This was what God plainly promised and fulfilled to Abraham. He possessed the land of Canaan in every sense in which a man can possess a land.

2. How empty to contend that the covenanted possession of the land is fulfilled in that the ashes of Abraham rest in its soil! To say that all this was fulfilled in the occupation of Canaan, by the preparatory or initiatory possession of it by the descendants of Abraham, is not only contradicted by Scripture, but is a virtual limiting of the promise.

3. Whatever may be said respecting the temporary possession of Canaan, or
whatever may be asserted respecting the descendants being meant “as yet in his loins,” etc., one thing is most positively stated in the Bible, viz.: that this promise was not fulfilled in the Patriarchs, in any of the forms alleged by unbelief. The Spirit, foreseeing this very objection, provided against it, lest our faith should stumble. Thus Stephen, full of the Holy Spirit, tells us (Acts 7:5) that “He (God) gave him (Abraham) none inheritance in it, no, not so much as to set his foot on, yet He promised that He would give it to him for a possession and to his seed after him. This should be decisive, especially when confirmed by Paul (Heb. 9:8, 9, and 11:13-40), who expressly informs us that the Patriarchs sojourned in “the land of promise,” which they were to receive as “an inheritance,” “pilgrims and strangers,” and that “they died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed that they were pilgrims and strangers on the earth.” How, with such evidence before us, can we attribute to only their posterity what is directly asserted of themselves personally?

4. This Abrahamic covenant, which contained individual promises to Abraham,
promises of the preservation of a nation, and the possession of a land by that nation, was given to a specific covenant people. Since it was unconditional and eternal, and has never yet been fulfilled, it must await a future fulfillment, Israel must be preserved as a nation, must inherit her land, and be blessed with spiritual blessings to make this inheritance possible.

5. The restoration of Israel is the capstone of the grand structure of doctrine relating to the Abrahamic Covenant. In bringing to a close consideration of this covenant, attention should be directed again to the strategic importance of this revelation to Scriptural truth. It has been seen that the covenant included provisions not only to Abraham but to Abraham’s physical seed, Israel, and to Abraham’s spiritual seed, i.e., all who follow the faith of Abraham whether Jew or Gentile in this age. It has been shown that Abraham interpreted the covenant literally as pertaining primarily to his physical seed.

6. The unconditional character of the covenant has been demonstrated—a covenant resting upon God’s promise and faithfulness alone. The partial fulfillment recorded to the present has confirmed the intent of God to give literal fulfillment to the promises.

7. It has been shown that Israel’s promise of perpetual possession of the land is an inevitable part and conclusion of the general promises given to Abraham and confirmed to his seed. Israel’s continuance as a nation, implied in these
promises, has been sustained by the continued confirmation of both Testaments.

8. It was shown that the New Testament church in no wise fulfills these promises given to Israel. Finally, Israel’s restoration as the natural outcome of these promises has been presented as the express teaching of the entire Bible. If these conclusions reached after careful examination of the Scriptural revelation are sound and reasonable, it follows that premillennialism is the only satisfactory system of doctrine that harmonizes with the Abrahamic Covenant.

I. A discussion on premillennialism.

A. Originally a doctoral dissertation, The Basis of the Premillennial Faith established the Old Testament foundation of premillennialism: “Holding to a literal interpretation of the Scriptures, [premillennialists) believe that the promises made to Abraham and David are unconditional and have, had, or will have a literal fulfillment. In no sense have these promises made to Israel been abrogated or fulfilled by the church, which is a distinct body in this age having promises and a destiny different from Israel’s” (p. 12). With this foundation, Ryrie develops the Abrahamic covenant (Genesis 12:1-3), showing that this covenant awaits a literal, future fulfillment with the establishment of Israel in the Promised Land. This can only be properly understood when recognizing the distinction between Israel and the church (cf. 1 Corinthians 10:32). The church does not receive the fulfillment of these promises; they were made to Israel and will be fulfilled to that nation.

B. Premillennialism is further established through the unconditional Davidic covenant (2 Samuel 7:12-16), which promises: (1) a posterity; (2) David’s throne will be established forever; (3) David’s kingdom will be established forever (p. 77). Many OT passages confirm the future fulfillment of the Davidic covenant (Psalm 89; Isaiah 9:6-7; Jeremiah 23:5-6; 30:8-9; 33:14-21; Ezekiel 37:24-25; Daniel 7:13-14; Hosea 3:4-5; Amos 9:11). Christ did not inaugurate this kingdom at His First Advent; it awaits His future return for fulfillment (p. 93).

C. Premillennialism also has a basis in the new covenant (Jeremiah 31:31-34), which provides unconditional grace, forgiveness, and restoration to the favor and blessing of God. While an aspect of it applies to the church, its complete fulfillment “requires the regathering of all Israel, their spiritual rebirth, and the return of Christ” (p. 111). Ultimately, “the new covenant is for Israel” (p. 124) and awaits fulfillment at Jesus’ return.

IV. Article Considerations.

C. For education and other supporting data for each source of information in this article, please refer to my Page, “About My References.” The following links show information about Dallas Theological Seminary. I encourage you to familiarize yourself with the Seminary. It is important to understand that DTS is not a denominational seminary, and is totally independent of such.

D. About Dallas Theological Seminary (DTS).

1. General Info. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dallas_Theological_Seminary

2. Doctrinal Statement. https://www.dts.edu/about/doctrinal-statement/

The Kingdom Of God – The Abrahamic Covenant (Part 2)

I. Video. Revering God: Punishment on the Day of the Lord – Jason DeRouchie (M. Div., Ph. D.)

II. Article References.

III. Article Narrative. The Abrahamic Covenant (Part 2).

A. The Abrahamic Covenant’s Character.

1. Since the Abrahamic covenant deals with Israel’s title deed to the land of Israel, her continuation as a nation to possess that land, and her redemption so that she may enjoy the blessings in the land under her King, it is of utmost importance to determine the method of the fulfillment of this covenant. If it is a literal covenant to be fulfilled literally, then Israel must be preserved, converted and restored. If it is an unconditional covenant, these events in Israel’s national life are inevitable. The answer to these questions determines one’s whole eschatological position.

2. The conditional element in the covenant program with Abraham. While
Abraham was living in the home of Terah, an idolator (Josh. 24:2), God spoke to him and commanded him to leave the land of Ur, even though it entailed a journey to a strange land he did not know (Heb. 11:8), and made certain specific promises to him that depended on this act of obedience. Abraham, in partial obedience inasmuch as he did not separate himself from his kindred, journeyed to Haran (Gen. 11:31). He did not realize any of the promises there. It was not until after the death of his father (Gen.11:32) that Abraham begins to realize anything of the promise God had given to him, for only after his father’s death does God take him into the land (Gen. 12:4) and there reaffirm the original promise to him (Gen. 12:7). It is important to observe the relation of
obedience to this covenant program. Whether God would institute a covenant
program with Abraham, or not, depended upon Abraham’s act of obedience in leaving the land. When once this act was accomplished, and Abraham did obey God, God instituted an irrevocable, unconditional program. This obedience, which became the basis of the institution of the program, is referred to in Genesis 22:18, where the offering of Isaac is just one more evidence of Abraham’s attitude toward God, which is clearly stated as follows:

(a) As given in the Scriptures, the Abrahamic Covenant is hinged upon only one
condition. This is given in Genesis 12:1. The original covenant was based upon
Abraham’s obedience in leaving his homeland and going to the land of promise.

(b) No further revelation is given him until he was obedient to this command after the death of his father. Upon entering Canaan, the Lord immediately gave Abraham the promise of ultimate possession of the land (Gen. 12:7), and subsequently enlarged and reiterated the original promises.

(c) The one condition having been met, no further conditions are laid upon
Abraham; the covenant having been solemnly established is now dependent upon divine veracity for its fulfillment.

3. Whether there would be a covenant program with Abraham depended upon Abraham’s act of obedience. When once he obeyed, the covenant that was instituted depended, not upon Abraham’s continued obedience, but upon the promise of the One who instituted it. The fact of the covenant depended upon obedience; the kind of covenant inaugurated was totally unrelated to the continuing obedience of either Abraham or his seed.

4. Arguments to support the unconditional character of the covenant.

a. The question as to whether the Abrahamic covenant is conditional or unconditional is recognized as the crux of the whole discussion of the problem relating to the fulfillment of the Abrahamic covenant. Extensive argument has been presented to support the unconditional character of this covenant.

b. The following presents ten reasons for believing that this covenant is unconditional:

(1) All Israel’s covenants are unconditional except the Mosaic. The Abrahamic
Covenant is expressly declared to be eternal, and therefore unconditional in
numerous passages (Gen. 17:7, 13, 19; 1 Chron. 16:17; Ps. 105:10). The Land
Covenant is likewise declared to be everlasting (Ezek. 16:60). The Davidic
Covenant is described in the same terms (2 Sam. 7:13, 16, 19; 1 Chron. 17:12;
22:10; Isa. 55:3; Ezek. 37:25). The New Covenant with Israel is also eternal (Isa. 61:8; Jer. 32:40; 50:5; Heb. 13:20). (2) Except for the original condition of leaving his homeland and going to the promised land, the covenant is made with no conditions, whatsoever. (3) The Abrahamic Covenant is confirmed repeatedly by reiteration and enlargement. In none of these instances are any of the added promises conditioned upon the faithfulness of Abraham’s seed, or of Abraham himself. Nothing is said about it being conditioned upon the future faithfulness of either Abraham or his seed. (4) The Abrahamic Covenant was solemnized by a divinely ordered ritual symbolizing the shedding of blood and passing between the parts of the sacrifice (Gen. 15:7-21; Jer. 34:18). This ceremony was given to Abraham as an assurance that his seed would inherit the land in the exact boundaries given to him in Genesis 15:18-21. No conditions, whatsoever, are attached to this promise in this context. (5) To distinguish those who would inherit the promises as individuals from those who were only physical seed of Abraham, the visible sign of circumcision was given (Gen. 17:9-14). One who was not circumcised was considered outside the promised blessing. The ultimate fulfillment of the Abrahamic Covenant and possession of the land by the seed is not hinged, however, upon faithfulness in the matter of
circumcision. In fact, the promises of the land were given before the rite was
introduced. (6) The Abrahamic Covenant was confirmed by the birth of Isaac and Jacob, to both of whom the promises are repeated in their original form (Gen. 17:19; 28:12-13). (7) Notable is the fact that the reiterations of the covenant and the partial early fulfillment of the covenant are in spite of acts of disobedience. It is clear that on several instances Abraham strayed from the will of God. In the very act, the promises are repeated to him. (8) The later confirmations of the covenant are given in the midst of apostasy.
Important is the promise given through Jeremiah that Israel as a nation will
continue forever (Jer. 31:36). (9) The New Testament declares the Abrahamic Covenant immutable (Heb 6:13-18; cf. Gen. 15:8-21). It was not only promised but solemnly confirmed by the oath of God. (10) The entire Scriptural revelation concerning Israel and its future as contained in both the Old and New Testaments, if interpreted literally, confirms and sustains the unconditional character of the promises given to Abraham.

5. A word of explanation is necessary concerning the event recorded in Genesis 15 because of its bearing on the question of the unconditional character of this covenant. In Genesis 14 Abraham, because he was trusting God, refused to take riches from the king of Sodom. Lest a question should arise in Abraham’s mind as to whether he had made a mistake in thus trusting God, Abraham is given an assurance from God that He is Abraham’s protection (shield) and provision (reward) (Gen. 15:1). In response to Abraham’s question about the promised heir, God affirms that he will have a son, and “Abraham believed God” (Gen. 15:6). In response to Abraham’s faith, as substantiating evidence that he has not trusted God in vain, a sign is given to Him that that promise will be fulfilled (Gen. 15:9-17). In order to reaffirm the covenant to Abraham concerning
the seed and the land (Gen. 15:18) Abraham is told by God to prepare animals of
sacrifice that together they might enter into a blood covenant.

a. The proceeding corresponding rather to the custom, prevalent in many ancient nations, of slaughtering animals when concluding a covenant, and after dividing them into pieces, of laying the pieces opposite to one another, that the persons making the covenant might pass between them.

b. Thus, God condescended to follow the custom of the Chaldeans, that He might in the most solemn manner confirm His oath to Abram the Chaldean, it is evident from Jer. xxxiv. 18, that this was still customary among the Israelites of later times.

c. Abraham would be familiar with this manner of entering into a binding agreement. Without doubt the large number of animals prescribed by God would impress Abraham with the importance of that which was being enacted, since one animal would have been sufficient for the enactment of the covenant. When the sacrifice was prepared Abraham must have expected to walk with God through the divided animals, for custom demanded that the two who entered into a blood covenant should walk together between the parts of the sacrifice. He would recognize the solemnity of the occasion, for the ritual meant that the two who were entering into the covenant were bound by blood to fulfill that covenanted, or the one breaking the covenant would be required to pour out his blood in forfeit as the blood of the animals that bound them had been poured out. However, when the covenant was to be entered into, Abraham was put to sleep so that he could not be a participant in the covenant, but could only
be a recipient of a covenant to which he brought nothing in the way of obligations.

1. From the nature of this covenant, it followed, however, that God alone went
through the pieces in a symbolical representation of Himself, and not Abram also. For although a covenant always establishes a reciprocal relation between two individuals, yet in that covenant which God concluded with a man, the man did not stand on an equality with God, but God established the relation of fellowship by His promise and His gracious condescension to the man.

2. God is thus binding Himself by a most solemn blood covenant to fulfill to Abraham, unconditionally, the promises concerning the seed and the land which were given to him. It is scarcely possible for God to make it any clearer that what was promised to Abraham was given to him without any conditions, to be fulfilled by the integrity of God alone.

3. It is important to observe that an unconditional covenant, which renders a
covenanted program certain, may have conditional blessings attached. The program will be carried to fulfillment, but the individual receives the blessings of that program only by conforming to the conditions on which the blessings depend. Such is true with the Abrahamic covenant. And further, it has already been pointed out that whether God instituted a covenant program with Abraham depended on his act of obedience in leaving his home, but when once the covenant was inaugurated it was without any conditions, whatsoever. And finally, the covenant is reaffirmed and enlarged to Abraham after definite acts of disobedience (Gen. 12:10-20, 16:1-16).

a. That obedience was vitally connected with the Abrahamic covenant is shown with especial clearness by the fact that there was connected with it a sign,
the rite of circumcision, to the observance of which the utmost importance was
attached. Cutting off from the covenant people was the penalty for failure to
observe it. The rite was in itself an act of obedience (1 Cor. vii. 19).

b. The partial fulfillment of the covenants supports the premillennial view. Any
examination of the portions of the Abrahamic covenant that have had either a partial or complete fulfillment supports the contention that the covenant was to be interpreted as a literal and unconditional covenant. God’s method in fulfilling parts of the Abrahamic covenant has been literal.

(1) In fulfillment of the personal promises, Abraham was specially blessed of God.

a. Abraham was blessed personally in temporal things: (1) he had land (Gen.
13:14, 15, 17); (2) He had servants (Gen. 15:7, etc.); (3) He had much cattle, silver, and gold (Gen. 13:2, 24:34, 35).

b. Abraham was blessed personally in spiritual matters: (1) He had a happy
life of separation unto God, (Gen. 13:8; 14:22, 23); (2) He enjoyed a precious life of communion with God, (Gen. 13:18); (3) He had a consistent life of prayer, (Gen. 28:23-33); (4) He was sustained of God constantly, (Gen. 21:22); (5) He possessed the peace and confidence that comes from an obedient life, (Gen. 22:5, 8, 10, 12, 16-18).”

(2) He had a great name.

(3) He was a channel of divine blessing to others, for he not only blessed his
household, his posterity, but the world at large through the Bible, the Savior, and the gospel.

(4) History has borne out the fact that nations which have persecuted Israel,
even when that very persecution was in fulfillment of God’s discipline, have been punished for dealing with Abraham’s seed. This has been true in both blessings and cursing in the case of the slaughter of the kings (Gen. 14:12-16); in the case of Melchizedek (Gen. 14:18-20); in the case of Abimelech (Gen. 20:2-18; 21:22-34); in the case of Heth (Gen. 23:1-20); and in other experiences in Israel’s history (Deut. 30:7; Isa. 14:1-2; Joel 3: 1-8; Matt. 25:40-45).

(5) Abraham did have an heir by Sarah (Gen. 21:2). Denial that these aforementioned promises have been fulfilled is foolish. This point is well illustrated from Psalm 69. All of the predictions concerning the humiliation and affliction of Christ were literally fulfilled. That which follows His death is
seen to be the fulfillment of the covenants, for the Psalmist says:

“For God will save Zion, and will build the cities of Judah, that they may dwell there and have it in possession. The seed also of His servants shall inherit it; and they that love His name shall dwell therein [Ps. 69:35-36].”

B. Conclusion. The Abrahamic Covenant is literal, eternal and unconditional.

1. As the picture of Messiah’s death was literally fulfilled it can only be concluded that that which flows from Messiah’s death in fulfillment of the covenants will be literally fulfilled also. It should be obvious that the method used by God to fulfill prophecies that have been fulfilled historically will be His method in the fulfillment of all prophecies. Inasmuch as all prophecies that have been fulfilled have been fulfilled literally, consistency demands that this method must be adopted for those portions of the prophetic Scriptures that, as yet, may be unfulfilled. Since the portions of the Abrahamic covenant that have been fulfilled were fulfilled literally, it would be concluded that the unfulfilled portions will be fulfilled in like manner.

2. It seems quite evident that the patriarchs themselves understood the covenant to be eternal, unconditional, unequivocable, and therefore certain as to its fulfillment.

3. The statement of Isaac to Jacob when Jacob went away bears this out:

“God Almighty bless thee, and make thee fruitful, and multiply thee, that thou
mayest be a multitude of people; and give thee the blessing of Abraham, to thee
and to thy seed with thee, that thou mayest inherit the land, wherein thou art a
stranger, which God gave unto Abraham [Gen. 28:3-4.]”

IV. Article Considerations.

C. For education and other supporting data for each source of information in this article, please refer to my Page, “About My References.” The following links show information about Dallas Theological Seminary. I encourage you to familiarize yourself with the Seminary. It is important to understand that DTS is not a denominational seminary, and is totally independent of such.

D. About Dallas Theological Seminary (DTS).

1. General Info. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dallas_Theological_Seminary

2. Doctrinal Statement. https://www.dts.edu/about/doctrinal-statement/

The Kingdom Of God – The Abrahamic Covenant (Part 1)

I. Video. Has The Church Replaced Israel? David Brickner, (Left M.A.); Darrell Bock (Right, Ph. D.), Mitch Glaser (Screen, Ph. D.). All are Messianic Jews in Christian Ministry.

II. Article References.

III. Article Narrative. The Abrahamic Covenant (Part 1).

A. The Abrahamic Covenant’s Importance.

1. The first of the four great determinative covenants made by God with the nation Israel was the Abrahamic covenant, which must be considered as the basis of the entire covenant program.

2. The Scriptures abound in references to the covenant into which God entered with Abraham, and its application is seen in many different realms. This covenant has an important bearing on the doctrines of Soteriology. Paul, in writing to the Galatians, shows that believers enter into the blessings promised to Abraham. The argument of Paul in Romans is based upon this same covenant promise made with Abraham. Immediately after the fall of man God revealed His purpose to provide salvation for sinners. This program was gradually unfolded by God to man. The promise made to Abraham represents a progressive step in this revelation. In him the Divine Purpose becomes more specific, detailed, contracted, definite, and certain.

(a) Specific, in distinguishing and separating him from others of the race; (b) detailed, in indicating more of the particulars connected with the purpose of salvation; (c) contracted, in making the Messiah to come directly in his line, to be his “seed”; (d) definite, in entering into covenant relation with him, as his God; (e) and certain, in confirming his covenant relationship by an oath.

3. Again, this covenant has an important bearing on the doctrine of resurrection. The promise entailed in the covenant is the basis of the Lord’s refutation of the unbelief of the Sadducees in the fact of resurrection.
To those who denied the possibility of resurrection the Lord affirmed that resurrection was not only possible but necessary. Since God had revealed Himself as the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (Ex. 3:15), with whom He had entered into covenant relationships, and since these men had died without receiving the fulfillment of the promises (Heb. 11:13), inasmuch as the
covenants could not be broken it was necessary for God to raise these men from the dead in order to fulfill His word. Paul, before Agrippa (Acts 26:6-8), unites “the promise to the fathers” with the resurrection of the dead in his defense of the doctrine. Thus the fact of physical resurrection is proved by the Lord and Paul from the necessity laid upon God to fulfill His covenant, even though it entails physical resurrection to do so. Consequently the fact of the believer’s resurrection is united to the question of the kind of covenant made with Abraham.

4. Further, this covenant has a most important bearing on the doctrines of
Eschatology. The eternal aspects of this covenant, which guarantee Israel a permanent national existence, perpetual title to the land of promise, and the certainty of material and spiritual blessing through Christ, and guarantee Gentile nations a share in these blessings, determine the whole eschatological program of the Word of God. This covenant becomes the seed from which are brought forth the later covenants made with Israel. The essential areas of the Abrahamic covenant, “the land, the seed, and the blessing,” are enlarged in the subsequent covenants made with Israel. The interrelationship of the eternal, gracious covenants of God with Israel might be graphically set forth in the following manner:

a. The general basic covenant with Abraham. (1) The promise of a national land [Gen 12:1; 13:14-15, 17]. (2) The promise of “redemption,” national and universal [Gen 12:3; 22:18; Gal 3:16]. (3) The promise of numerous descendants to form a great nation [Gen 12:2; 13:16; 17:2-6, etc.].

b. The other covenants. (1) The land covenant gave Israel particular assurance of final, permanent restoration to the land [Deu 30:3-5; Ezek 20:33-37, 42-44.]. (2) The New Covenant has particularly to do with Israel’s spiritual blessing and redemption [Jer 31:31-40; Heb 8:6-13, etc.]. (3) The Davidic Covenant has to do with promises of “dynasty, nation, and throne.” [II Sam 7:11, 13, 16; Jer 33:20, 21; Jer 31:35-37, etc.].

5. Thus it may be said that the land promises of the Abrahamic covenant are developed in the land covenant, the seed promises are developed in the Davidic covenant, and the blessing promises are developed in the new covenant. This covenant, then, determines the whole future program for the nation Israel and is a major factor in Biblical Eschatology.

B. The Abrahamic Covenant’s Provisions.

1. The covenant made with Abraham in Genesis 12:1-3, and confirmed and enlarged to him in Genesis 12:6-7; 13:14-17; 15:1-21; 17:1-14; 22:15-18, entitled certain basic promises. These have been summarized:

[The things promised by God are the following: 1. That Abraham’s name shall be great. 2. That a great nation should come from him. 3. He should be a blessing so great that in him shall all families of the earth be blessed. 4. To him personally (“to thee”) and to his seed should be given the land of Israel forever to inherit. 5. The multitude of his seed should be as the dust of the earth. 6. That whoever blessed him should be blessed, and whosoever cursed him should be cursed. 7. He should be the father of many nations. 8. Kings should proceed from him. 9. The covenant shall be perpetual, “an everlasting covenant.” 10. The land of Canaan shall be “an everlasting possession.” 11. God will be a God to him and to his seed. 12. His seed shall possess the gate of his enemies. 13. In his seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed.]

2. When these particulars are analyzed it will be seen that certain individual promises were given to Abraham, certain national promises respecting the nation Israel, of which he was the father, were given to him, and certain universal blessings that encompassed all nations were given to him.

a. The language of the Abrahamic Covenant is plain and to the point. The
original covenant is given in Genesis 12:1-3, and there are three confirmations and amplifications as recorded in Genesis 13:14-17; 15:1-7; and 17:1-18. Some of the promises are given to Abraham personally, some to Abraham’s seed, and some to Gentiles, or “all families of the earth” (Gen. 12:3).

b. The promise to Abraham. Abraham himself is promised that he would be the
father of a great nation (Gen. 12:2) including kings and nations other than the
“seed itself” (Gen. 17:6). God promises His personal blessing on Abraham. His
name shall be great and he himself shall be a blessing.

c. The promise of Abraham’s seed. The nation itself should be great (Gen. 12:2)
and innumerable (Gen. 13:16; 15:5). The nation is promised possession of the
land…the Abrahamic Covenant itself is expressly called “everlasting” (Gen. 17:7) and the possession of the land is defined as “an everlasting possession” (Gen. 17:8).

d. The promise to Gentiles…“all families of the earth” are promised blessing
(Gen. 12:3). It is not specified what this blessing shall be. As a general promise it is probably intended to have a general fulfillment.

3. In the development of this covenant it is of utmost importance to keep the different areas in which promise was made clearly in mind, for if the things covenanted in one area are transferred to another area only confusion will result in the subsequent interpretation. Personal promises may not be transferred to the nation, and promises to Israel may not be transferred to the Gentiles.

IV. Article Considerations.

C. For education and other supporting data for each source of information in this article, please refer to my Page, “About My References.” The following links show information about Dallas Theological Seminary. I encourage you to familiarize yourself with the Seminary. It is important to understand that DTS is not a denominational seminary, and is totally independent of such.

D. About Dallas Theological Seminary (DTS).

1. General Info. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dallas_Theological_Seminary

2. Doctrinal Statement. https://www.dts.edu/about/doctrinal-statement/

The Kingdom Of God – Intro To Covenants

I. Video. A Brief History Of DTS.

II. Article References.

III. Introduction.

A. We will now consider Biblical covenants. As with any study, context must be the key factor in determining which covenants relate to the Kingdom of God, and God’s plan for His chosen people, “Israel” (Deu 14:2), as well as in any other area of Scriptural study. It has been said that a text that is not within its proper context is nothing more than a pretext. This following definition of “Context” comes from the Merriam-Webster Dictionary.

1 : the parts of a discourse that surround a word or passage and can throw light on its meaning 2 : the interrelated conditions in which something exists or occurs : environment, setting the historical context of the war contextless ˈkän-ˌtekst-ləs adjective contextual kän-ˈteks-chə-wəl kən- -chəl -chü-əl adjective contextually adverb Did you know?

B. All of God’s Word is for us, but not all of God’s Word is about us.

1 .Consider Scripture. 2 Timothy 3:16. All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness.

2. Consider context in Scripture.

a. Matthew 27:5,“Judas “threw the pieces of silver into the temple sanctuary and departed; and he went away and hanged himself.

b. Deuteronomy 12:30, “that I may do likewise.”

c. Leviticus 1:4-6, 4 And he shall lay his hand on the head of the burnt offering, so that it may be accepted for him to make atonement on his behalf. 5 Then he shall slaughter the bull before the LORD; the priests shall offer up the blood and sprinkle the blood around on the altar that is at the doorway of the tent of meeting. 6 He shall then skin the burnt offering and cut it into its pieces. 7 And the priest shall put fire on the altar and arrange wood on the fire.

IV. Article Narrative. Introduction To Biblical Covenants.

A. The covenants contained in the Scriptures are of primary importance to the interpreter of the Word and to the student of Eschatology. God’s eschatological program is determined and prescribed by these covenants and one’s eschatological system is determined and limited by the interpretation of them. These covenants must be studied diligently as the basis of Biblical Eschatology.

B. It must be observed at the very outset of this study that the Biblical covenants are quite different from the theological covenants posited by the Covenant theologian, who sees the ages of history as the development of a covenant made between God and sinners, by which God would save, through the value of the death of Christ, all who come to Him by faith. The covenants of the Covenant theologian may be summarized as follows:

1. The Covenant of Redemption (Tit 1:2; Heb. 13:20) into which, it is usually thought by theologians, the Persons of the Godhead entered before all time and in which each assumed that part in the great plan of redemption which is their present portion as disclosed in the Word of God. In this covenant the Father gives the Son, the Son offers Himself without spot to the Father as an efficacious sacrifice, and the Spirit administers and empowers unto the execution of this covenant in all its parts. This covenant rests upon but slight revelation. It is rather sustained largely by the fact that it seems both reasonable and inevitable.

2. The Covenant of Works, which is the theologian’s designation for those
blessings God has offered men and conditioned on human merit.

a. Before the fall, Adam was related to God by a covenant of works.

b. Until he is saved, man is under an inherent obligation to be in character like his Creator and to do His will.

3. The Covenant of Grace, which is the term used by theologians to indicate all
aspects of divine grace toward man in all ages. The exercise of divine grace is
rendered righteously possible by the satisfaction to divine judgments which is
provided in the death of Christ.

4. While there is much in the position of the Covenant theologian that is in agreement with Scripture, Covenant theology is woefully inadequate to explain the Scriptures eschatologically, for it ignores the great field of the Biblical covenants which determine the whole eschatological program.

5. The theological terms, Covenant of Works and Covenant of Grace, do not occur in the Sacred Text. If they are to be sustained it must be wholly apart from Biblical authority. Upon this human invention of two covenants, Reformed Theology has largely been constructed. It sees the empirical truth that God can forgive sinners only by the freedom which is secured by the sacrifice of His Son— anticipated in the old order and realized in the new—but that theology utterly fails to discern the purposes of the ages; the varying relationships to God of the Jews, the Gentiles, and the Church, with the distinctive consistent human obligations which arise directly and unavoidably from the nature of each specific relationship to God. A theology which penetrates no further into Scripture than to discover that in all ages God is immutable in His grace toward penitent sinners, and constructs the idea of a universal church, continuing through the ages, on the one truth of immutable grace, is not only disregarding vast spheres of revelation but is reaping the unavoidable confusion and misdirection which part-truth engenders.

C. This study, then, is not occupied with the covenants contained in Reformed theology, but rather with the determinative covenants set forth in Scripture.

1. The Scriptural use of the word covenant. If one consults a concordance it will be seen that the word covenant is one which occurs with frequency in both the Old and New Testaments. It is used of relationships between God and man, man and man, nation and nation. It is used in things temporal and things eternal. There are references to minor and temporal covenants in Scripture. Covenants are made by individuals with other individuals (Gen. 21:32; 1 Sam. 18:3). Covenants may be made between an individual and a group of individuals (Gen. 26:28; 1 Sam. 11:1-2). Covenants may be made by one nation with another nation (Ex. 23:32; 34:12, 15; Hos. 12:1). There were covenants in the social realm (Prov. 2:17; Mal. 2:14). Certain natural laws were viewed as covenants (Jer. 33:20, 25). With the exception of these last, which were established by God, all of the uses above govern the relationships made between men.

2. The Scriptures also contain references to five major covenants, all of which were made by God with men. The four unconditional covenants, with the formula “I WILL,” are found in (1) Genesis 12:1-3, where the formula is found, either expressed or understood, seven times; (2) Deuteronomy 30:1-10, where it is found, either expressed or understood, twelve times; (3) II Samuel 7:10-16, where it is found seven times; and (4) Jeremiah 31:31-40, where it is found seven times. The conditional covenant, with the formula “IF YE WILL,” is found (5) besides in Exodus 19:5 ff., also in Deuteronomy 28:1-68; verses 1-14, “If thou shalt hearken diligently…blessings”; verses 15-68, “If thou wilt not hearken…cursing.”

3. It will be quite obvious that eschatological studies are not concerned with the minor covenants made by man with man, nor with the Mosaic covenant made by God with man, inasmuch as all these are temporary and non-determinative in respect to future things, but only with the four eternal covenants given by God, by which He has obligated Himself in relation to the prophetic program.

V. Article Considerations.

C. For education and other supporting data for each source of information in this article, please refer to my Page, “About My References.” The following links show information about Dallas Theological Seminary. I encourage you to familiarize yourself with the Seminary. It is important to understand that DTS is not a denominational seminary, and is totally independent of such.

D. About Dallas Theological Seminary (DTS).

1. General Info. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dallas_Theological_Seminary

2. Doctrinal Statement. https://www.dts.edu/about/doctrinal-statement/

The Kingdom Of God – Epistle Covenants

I. Video. Chinzo Jargalsaikhas’s Passion To Bring Jesus To Mongolia. (Acts 1:8)

II. Article References.

III. Article Narrative. Covenants In The Epistles. The Covenants in the Epistles.

A. The definition of a covenant. A divine covenant may be defined as follows: (It is to be observed that this definition does not depart from the customary definition and usage of the word as a legal contract into which one enters and by which his course of action is bound.)

1. a sovereign disposition of God, whereby he establishes an unconditional or declarative compact with man, obligating himself, in grace, by the untrammelled formula, “I WILL,” to bring to pass of himself definite blessings for the covenanted ones.

2. or, a proposal of God, wherein he promises, in a conditional or mutual compact with man, by the contingent formula “IF YE WILL,” to grant special blessings to man provided he fulfills perfectly certain conditions, and to execute definite punishment in case of his failure.

B. The kinds of covenants. There are two kinds of covenants into which God entered with Israel: conditional and unconditional.

1. In a conditional covenant that which was covenanted depends for its fulfillment upon the recipient of the covenant, not upon the one making the covenant. Certain obligations or conditions must be fulfilled by the receiver of the covenant before the giver of the covenant is obligated to fulfill that which was promised. It is a covenant with an “if” attached to it. The Mosaic covenant made by God with Israel is such a covenant. In an unconditional covenant that which was covenanted depends upon the one making the covenant alone for its fulfillment. That which was promised is sovereignly given to the recipient of the covenant on the authority and integrity of the one making the covenant apart from the merit or response of the receiver. It is a covenant with no “if” attached to it whatsoever.

2. To safeguard thinking on this point, it should be observed that an unconditional covenant, which binds the one making the covenant to a certain course of action, may have blessings attached to that covenant that are conditioned upon the response of the recipient of the covenant, which blessings grow out of the original covenant, but these conditioned blessings do not change the unconditional character of that covenant. The failure to observe that an unconditional covenant may have certain conditioned blessings attached to it had led many to the position that conditioned blessings necessitate a conditional covenant, thus perverting the essential nature of Israel’s determinative covenants.

C. The nature of the covenants. There are certain facts which are to be observed concerning the covenants into which God has entered.

1. First of all, these covenants are literal covenants and are to be interpreted.

2. In the second place, these covenants, according to the Scriptures, are eternal.

3.In the third place, inasmuch as these covenants are literal, eternal, and depend solely upon the integrity of God for their fulfillment they must be considered to be unconditional in character.

4. Finally, these covenants were made with a covenant people, Israel. In Romans 9:4 Paul states that the nation Israel had received covenants from the Lord. In Ephesians 2:11-12 he states, conversely, that the Gentiles have not received any such covenants and consequently do not enjoy covenant relationships with God. These two passages show us, negatively, that the Gentiles were without covenant relationships and, positively, that God had entered into covenant relationships with Israel.

D. As we have already seen, biblical covenants dominated the thinking of the writers of Old Testament Scripture. And while those covenants play a prominent role in the Gospels, little reference is made to covenants in the New Testament epistles. This supports the idea that during this present age, in which a new form of the kingdom is being developed, God has temporarily set aside the nation of Israel, His covenant people, and is developing a new
kingdom program.

1. Romans.

a. We must also recognize, however, that the New Testament writers most certainly recognize the existence of the biblical covenants and refer to them when appropriate. For example, Paul, in his great epistle to the Romans, wrote to vindicate the righteousness of God. Paul, writing under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, argued that God is righteous in judging sinners (1:18-3:20). He is righteous in justifying men by faith (3:21-5:21). He is righteous in providing for a believer’s sanctification by identifying him with Christ in His death and resurrection (6:1-8:27). And He is righteous in providing for the believer’s ultimate glorification (vv. 28-39).

b. Paul then showed that God is righteous in dealing with the nation Israel (Rom. 9-11). Paul proved this by pointing out that Israel’s hope is based on the covenants and promises God gave to that people (9:4), but that those promises will only be realized by those who have Abraham’s faith (vv. 6-13). God is sovereign in His display of mercy (vv. 14-24), and God’s mercy may be extended even to the Gentiles (vv. 25-33). Therefore, Israel’s covenanted promises are not realized, not because God is unfaithful, but because Israel refused to acknowledge their sin and to believe God (10:1-21).

c. Paul also said that though Israel has been set aside and is not now experiencing the fulfillment of the covenants, that does not mean God is unfaithful, for some in Israel are experiencing the blessings of salvation (11:1-6). In fact, the setting aside of Israel opens the door of opportunity to the Gentiles to find the salvation through Israel’s Messiah (vv. 7-12). Israel, in keeping with the sovereign purposes of God, had been put in the place of blessing and became the channel through which God would accomplish His purposes in the world. Israelis viewed as a branch in a tree, drawing its life from the root. But because the nation was an unproductive branch it was cut off, and wild branches, that is the Gentiles, were grafted in. The Gentiles were put in the place of blessing and could by grace draw life from the root.

d. Warning was then given to the Gentiles that if they became unfruitful branches, they could be removed just as Israel had been removed. But the setting aside of Israel was not permanent, only temporary. Paul wrote, “if you were cut out of an olive tree that is wild by nature, and contrary to nature were grafted into a cultivated olive tree, how much more readily will these, the natural branches, be grafted into their own olive tree!” (v. 24). Paul assured his readers that, “The Deliverer will come from Zion; He will turn godlessness away from Jacob. And this is My covenant with them when I take away their sins” (vv. 26-27).

e. We can see clearly that in the analogy of the olive tree, Paul was viewing the root as the covenant that put Israel in a privileged position and guarantees restoration to that position when the Deliverer comes out of Zion and turns away ungodliness from Jacob. God’s covenant program was prominent in the apostle’s thinking as he vindicated the faithfulness of God in dealing with His people Israel.

2. Hebrews.

a. Since the writer to the Hebrews was writing to Jewish believers, it’s not surprising that we would find reference to the covenants in that epistle. It must be noted that, though reference is made to Israel’s covenants in writing epistles to believers in the church, it does not mean that the church becomes Israel or deprives Israel of a future fulfillment of the covenants made with that nation.

b. Whenever “Israel” is used in the Scripture, whether in reference to an individual (Rom. 11:1) or a nation (9:4), without exception it refers to those who are physical descendants of Abraham. Paul makes this clear when he defines an Israelite as “a descendent of Abraham” in 11:1. Gentiles, by faith in Christ and by virtue of their relationship to Christ, who is a descendant of Abraham, are called the seed of Abraham (Gal. 3:29). The covenants were made with the physical descendants of Abraham. Those related to Abraham by faith may receive benefits from the covenants God gave that people, but they do not supplant the nation as recipients of the covenants.

c. The covenants did provide for universal blessings, which are applicable to Gentiles and to the church. Universal blessing was part of the Abrahamic promises (Gen. 12:3), which are fulfilled through Christ as Abraham’s seed. Universal blessings are promised through the Davidic covenant, for Gentiles will be a part of the kingdom ruled over by David’s son (Luke 2:10). These blessings come on the Gentiles who participate in Messiah’s earthly rule. Universal blessings are promised through the new covenant (Joel 2:28-32). These blessings will be experienced by Gentiles when the Spirit is poured out on all flesh, so that “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved” (v. 32). However, the enjoyment of these blessings that flow from Israel’s covenants does not mean that the nation will not eventually enjoy the fullness of those blessings into which we enter by faith today.

IV. Article Considerations.

C. For education and other supporting data for each source of information in this article, please refer to my Page, “About My References.” The following links show information about Dallas Theological Seminary. I encourage you to familiarize yourself with the Seminary. It is important to understand that DTS is not a denominational seminary, and is totally independent of such.

D. About Dallas Theological Seminary (DTS).

1. General Info. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dallas_Theological_Seminary

2. Doctrinal Statement. https://www.dts.edu/about/doctrinal-statement/

The Kingdom Of God – Uses Of The Kingdom

I. Video. Seminary Preview Day.

II. Article References.

III. Article Narrative. Uses of “the Kingdom.”

A. While there are many references to the kingdom in the New Testament epistles, on closer examination we find the term “the kingdom” used in several different ways.

B. It is used of the future earthly Davidic kingdom to be established at the second advent of Jesus Christ. In 2 Timothy 4:1 Paul wrote, “In the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who will judge the living and the dead, and in view of His appearing and His kingdom, I give you this charge.” This must refer to the earthly Davidic kingdom that will be established on earth, since that is the kingdom which will follow the second advent of Jesus Christ and the
judgments associated with that momentous event (Matt. 25:1-46).

C. Paul also wrote, “Christ, the firstfruits; then, when He comes, those who belong to Him. The end will come, when He hands over the kingdom to God the Father after He has destroyed all dominion, authority and power” (1 Cor. 15:23-24). Here Paul outlined a resurrection program that began with the resurrection of Christ and will continue with the resurrection of those that are Christ’s at His second advent.

1. The completion of the resurrection program does not come until after the reign of Christ here on earth, following His second coming. At the conclusion of that resurrection program, Christ will have delivered up the
kingdom to God (v. 24).

2. It is quite obvious, therefore, that the kingdom referred to here is the millennial kingdom over which Christ reigns on earth, following His second advent. Thus the idea of a future earthly Davidic kingdom is not at all foreign to the apostle’s thinking.

D. Besides the future earthly Davidic kingdom, we also find that the future eternal kingdom is referred to in the epistles. In 2 Timothy 4:18 Paul declared, “The Lord will rescue me from every evil attack and will bring me safely to His heavenly kingdom.” Paul obviously was anticipating the eternal reign of Christ in His eternal kingdom. Peter declared, “You will receive a rich welcome into the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ” (2 Pet. 1:11). Peter likewise was anticipating his participation in that eternal reign of Christ.

E. Elsewhere Paul wrote, “Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable” (1 Cor. 15:50). Here Paul seems to be using “kingdom of God” in reference to the eternal state of the believer. Thus “kingdom” or “kingdom of God” may refer to the eternal reign of Christ.

F. While the term “kingdom” is used in these two senses in the epistles, its third and most common use, by far, is in reference to the present form of the kingdom, that into which a believer enters by faith in Jesus Christ. Paul stated that God “has rescued us from the dominion of darkness and brought us into the kingdom of the Son He loves, in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins” (Col. 1:13-14). Here the phrase “the kingdom of the Son He loves” is equated with the redemption and the forgiveness of sins received by faith in Jesus Christ.

G. In Galatians 5:19-21 Paul listed the works of the flesh and then declared “that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God.” He made a similar statement in Ephesians 5:3-5, where he listed grievous sins of the flesh and then stated that those who participate in such things do not have “any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God” (Eph. 5:5).

1. This concept is also found in 1 Corinthians 6:9,10. 1. In these passages Paul is saying that men who are characterized by these sins are not saved, because it is evident they have never received by faith the salvation that comes through Jesus Christ. Therefore they are not participants in the kingdom of God.

2. Thus we see again that the term “kingdom of God” is equated with salvation and must refer to participation in or exclusion from the present kingdom form.

H. Believers are exhorted to live lives worthy of God, who calls them into His kingdom and glory (1 Thess. 2:12). Here Paul seems to be referring to the participation of believers in the present form of the kingdom, who consequently are to walk worthy of that position. Paul commended the Thessalonians for their faithfulness and patience in the midst of
persecutions and testings (2 Thess. 1:4), which validated their membership in the kingdom. By that conduct they were deemed “worthy of the kingdom of God,” for which they were suffering (v. 5). Paul was not encouraging them to have patience and faithfulness in order to be able to participate in a future millennial kingdom; but, rather, to conduct themselves in a manner worthy of their participation in the kingdom’s present form.

I. Paul told the Corinthians, “The kingdom of God is not a matter of talk but of power” (1 Cor. 4:20). In other words, if those in Corinth were actually saved and in the kingdom of God, they would demonstrate that by manifesting the power of the kingdom in their daily lives. Mere profession was not a sufficient demonstration of salvation or participation in the kingdom of God; that relationship must be established and demonstrated by the work of the
Holy Spirit, who is the power in the present form of the kingdom of God.

J. James made reference to the kingdom in James 2:5, where he asserted that entrance into that kingdom is for those who are “rich in faith.” A popular Jewish concept said that he whom the Lord loves He makes rich, and that those who had material wealth received it because God approved of their righteousness. Therefore, many sought riches as a basis for assurance of their acceptance by God. James, however, said that it is not those who are rich in this world’s goods, but those who are rich in faith, who will “inherit the kingdom.” Like Paul and Peter, James equated participation in the kingdom with salvation received by faith.

K. As a final note, according to Colossians 4:11 Paul considered himself a laborer on behalf of the kingdom of God, and he saw those faithful servants who worked with him as fellow workers in the kingdom.

L. From this survey, then, we see that the most frequent reference to the “kingdom” or the “kingdom of God” in the epistles is a reference to the present form of the kingdom, in which individuals by faith in Jesus Christ, and because of His death and resurrection, receive salvation and the gift of eternal life. All these are a part of the kingdom of God.

IV. Article Considerations.

C. For education and other supporting data for each source of information in this article, please refer to my Page, “About My References.” The following links show information about Dallas Theological Seminary. I encourage you to familiarize yourself with the Seminary. It is important to understand that DTS is not a denominational seminary, and is totally independent of such.

D. About Dallas Theological Seminary (DTS).

1. General Info. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dallas_Theological_Seminary

2. Doctrinal Statement. https://www.dts.edu/about/doctrinal-statement/

The Kingdom Of God – Acts

I. Video. Swindoll Tower At DTS.

II. Article References.

III. Article Narrative. The Kingdom In Acts.

A. Following His resurrection, Jesus spent time with those whom He had chosen [John 15:9,15,16 , ⁹Just as the Father has loved Me, I have also loved you. ¹⁵No longer do I call you slaves, for the slave does not know what his master is doing; but I have called you friends, for all things that I have heard from My Father I have made known to you. ¹⁶You did not choose Me but I chose you, and appointed you that you would go and bear fruit, and that your fruit would remain], instructing them concerning the new form of the kingdom and preparing them for their ministry of introducing that new form to Jew and Gentile alike. He reiterated His promise of empowerment by the Holy Spirit for the work of their ministry. On Pentecost the promised Spirit was poured out and indwelt believers as His temple. In the book of Acts their ministry of proclaiming the new message of the new form of the kingdom is recorded, by which the gospel was proclaimed and spread throughout the world.

B. The kingdom of God in this present age, formed through the preaching of the gospel would be made up of Jews and Gentiles. This was made clear to Peter in the vision given to him in Acts 10. When Peter, in obedience to the Levitical law, refused to eat that which was unclean, he was told, “Do not call anything impure that God has made clean” (v. 15). To make sure there was no misunderstanding, the command was repeated three times. It later became apparent that Peter understood that the distinctions inherent in the
Levitical law had been removed, for when he was in the house of Cornelius he declared, “I now realize how true it is that God does not show favoritism but accepts men from every nation who fear Him and do what is right” (vv. 34-35).

C. Peter felt free to proclaim the gospel of the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles assembled in Cornelius’s house In response to their faith, “The Holy Spirit came on all who heard the message” (v. 44). The evidence that Gentiles had received the Holy Spirit was that they spoke with tongues (v. 46). “Tongues were evidence to the apostles of the genuine conversion of the Gentiles and of their inclusion in the body of believers.” In response, “these Gentiles showed their identification with Jesus Christ and the company of believers by being baptized.”

D. Even so, Jerusalem had to be convinced of God’s acceptance of Gentiles into the church and the kingdom. So Peter testified to the genuineness of their conversion by recounting in his dream what had happened next. And those in Jerusalem, “When they heard this, they had no further objections and praised God, saying, ‘So then, God has granted even the Gentiles repentance unto life” (11:18). This question was submitted to the apostles in Jerusalem, and Peter testified to the salvation of the Gentiles by faith in Jesus Christ “apart from the law (15:7-11).” His testimony is further corroborated by Barnabas and Paul (v. 12), and James, who presided at this council and rendered its decision. It was evident that “God was dealing with Gentiles as Gentiles,” taking from the Gentiles a people for Himself (v. 14).

E. James found this in keeping with the prophetic program, as was given by God to the Jewish Prophet Amos, who gave the prophecy to Jews.

1. Amos, a Jew, but prophesying (B.C. 776-763) in the northern kingdom exercised his ministry during the reign of Jeroboam II, an able but idolatrous king who brought his kingdom to the zenith of its power. Nothing could seem more improbable than the fulfilment of Amos’s warnings; yet within fifty years the kingdom was utterly destroyed. The vision of Amos is, however, wider than the northern kingdom, including the whole “house of Jacob.”

2. Amos is in four parts: Judgments on the cities surrounding Israel. Judgements on Judah and Israel. God’s controversy with “the whole family” of Jacob. The future glory of the Davidic kingdom.

a. Amos 9:9-10, “A vision of the Lord judging:” ⁹“For behold, I am commanding, And I will shake the house of Israel among all nations
As grain is shaken in a sieve, But not a kernel will fall to the ground.
¹⁰“All the sinners of My people will die by the sword,” Those who say, ‘The calamity will not overtake or confront us.’

b. Amos 9:11-12, “The Restoration of Israel:” ¹¹In that day I will raise up the fallen booth of David, And wall up its breaches; I will also raise up its ruins And rebuild it as in the days of old; ¹²That they may possess the remnant of Edom And all the nations who are called by My name,” Declares the Lord who does this. (verse 11 comment: “In that day.” The aspect of the Day of the Lord known as the Millennium. “booth of David.” The dynasty of David, though humbled for a time, will be reinstated to rule over all the world (v. 12; see Acts 15: 15-17).

3. It was prophesied that after the period in which Israel was disciplined because of disobedience, and the Davidic throne left empty for a time, the Davidic throne would be restored and the Davidic kingdom would be instituted. When it is reinstituted, the kingdom will include not only the physical descendants of Abraham but also a multitude of Gentiles. Therefore the restored Davidic kingdom under its rightful Davidic king would be composed of both Jews and Gentiles. In that kingdom “Gentiles would not be made into Jews; instead, they would be in the kingdom as Gentiles.” This allowed James to conclude that if God had a program for “Gentiles, as Gentiles, in the future Davidic kingdom established here on the earth,” there was no reason to deny that God could include “Gentiles, as Gentiles,” in this present form of the theocracy through faith in Jesus Christ; Gentiles are equal participants with believing Jews in the present form of the kingdom of God.

F. Paul’s life was dedicated to the preaching of the grace of God. He wrote, “Now I know that none of you among whom I have gone about preaching the kingdom will ever see me again” (Acts 20:25). Paul clearly equated preaching the gospel of the grace of God with the preaching of the kingdom of God. Once again we see that “the two terms are used interchangeably,” as in 28:23 when Paul arrived in Rome and “they arranged to meet Paul on a certain day and came in even larger numbers to the place where he was staying. From morning till evening he explained and declared to them the kingdom of God and tried to convince them about Jesus from the Law of Moses and from the Prophets.” Again “the preaching of the gospel was referred to as testimony concerning the kingdom of God.” And in verses 30-31 this identification was again made, where for two whole years Paul stayed there in his own rented house and welcomed all who came to see him. Boldly and without hindrance “he preached the kingdom of God and taught about the Lord Jesus Christ.”

G. Thus as we survey Paul’s ministry from the book of Acts, we see him as an
ambassador of the kingdom of God, but his message was salvation through the death and the resurrection of Jesus Christ. “No reference is made to support the notion that the earthly Davidic kingdom had been established.” Rather, the message concerns entrance into a present form of the kingdom of God by faith in Jesus Christ.

IV. Article Considerations.

C. For education and other supporting data for each source of information in this article, please refer to my Page, “About My References.” The following links show information about Dallas Theological Seminary. I encourage you to familiarize yourself with the Seminary. It is important to understand that DTS is not a denominational seminary, and is totally independent of such.

D. About Dallas Theological Seminary (DTS).

1. General Info. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dallas_Theological_Seminary

2. Doctrinal Statement. https://www.dts.edu/about/doctrinal-statement/

The Kingdom Of God – Mysteries

I. Video. Why Dallas Theological Seminary?

II. Article References.

Charles C. Ryrie, Th. D., Ph. D., D. Litt. Merrill F. Unger, Th. D., Ph. D. John F. Walvoord, Th. D., D. Litt. Harold W. Hoehner, Th. D., Ph. D. Stanley D. Toussaint, Th. D. Lewis Sperry Chafer, Th. D., D. Litt. J. Dwight Pentecost, Th. D.

III. Article Narrative.

A. The Course Of This Present Age.

1. The age from the rejection of the Messiah by Israel, unto His reception by Israel at His second advent, is outlined in two portions of the Word: Matthew 13 and Revelation 2 and 3; the former from the viewpoint of God’s kingdom program, and the latter from the viewpoint of the church program.

2. The course of this present age will be considered as we discuss Matthew 13, in this study. The study of Revelation 2 and 3 has already been discussed in a study of the book of Revelation.

3. Matthew 13:11 reveals that our Lord is speaking in a way that He may give the course of the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven. This instruction comes through the proper instruction of the parables which are recorded here.

B. The Program Altered (The kingdom postponed).

1. The thirteenth chapter of Matthew marks a new division in the gospel, in which Jesus addresses Himself to the problem of what will occur when He goes back to heaven as the rejected King. The gospel of Matthew began with the proofs that Jesus was indeed the promised Son who would reign on the throne of David (chap. 1), supported by the visit of the wise men and the early ministry of John the Baptist (chaps. 2-3). After His temptation, Jesus presented the principles of His coming kingdom in the Sermon on the Mount (chaps. 5-7), emphasizing spiritual and moral principles that govern the kingdom of God, but especially as these applied to the prophesied kingdom on earth, which the Messiah-King was to bring when He came. The Sermon on the Mount accordingly contained timeless truths always applicable, some truths that were immediately applicable to Christ’s day on earth, and some truths that were to have their fulfillment in the millennial kingdom.

2. Chapter 13 faces the question, “what will happen when the rejected king goes back to heaven and the kingdom promised is postponed until His second coming?” The concept of a kingdom postponed must be understood as a postponement from the human side and not from the divine, as obviously God’s plans do not change. It may be compared to the situation at Kadesh-Barnea, when the children of Israel, bound for the promised land, because of unbelief, had their entrance postponed for forty years. If they had believed God, they might have entered the land immediately.

3. What is contingent from the human standpoint, however, is always planned from the divine standpoint. The rejection of Christ by His own people and His subsequent death and resurrection were absolutely essential to God’s program. Humanly speaking, the kingdom, instead of being brought in immediately, was postponed. From the divine viewpoint, the plan always included what actually happened. The human responsibility remains, however, and the rejection of the kingdom from this standpoint caused the postponement of the promised kingdom on earth.

4. This chapter, accordingly, does not only introduce a new subject and a new approach but also involves a new method of teaching, namely that of parables. While many of the illustrations which Christ used were designed to make plain the truth, parables were intended to reveal the truth only to believers and required explanation in order to understand them. In a sense, they were riddles which required a key, but supplied with the key, the truth became prophetically eloquent.

5. Jesus deliberately adopted the parabolic method of teaching at a particular stage in His ministry for the purpose of withholding further truth about Himself and the kingdom of heaven from the crowds, who had proved themselves to be deaf to His claims and irresponsive to His demands. From now onwards, when addressing the unbelieving multitude, He speaks only in parables, which He interprets to His disciples in private.

6. In this chapter are presented in the parables the mysteries of the kingdom. The parables are designed to reveal the mysteries of the kingdom, that is, the present age.

7. Mysteries, a word used of secret rites of various religious cults, refers to truth that was not revealed in the Old Testament but is revealed in the New Testament. More than a dozen such truths are revealed in the New Testament, all following the basic definition of Colossians 1:26, which defines a mystery as that “which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints.” A mystery truth, accordingly, has two elements. First, it has to be hidden in the Old Testament and not revealed there. Second, it has to be revealed in the New Testament. It is not necessarily a reference to a truth difficult to understand, but rather to truths that can be understood only on the basis of divine revelation.

8. The Old Testament reveals, in clear terms, the earthly reign of Christ when He comes as King to reign on the throne of David (which truths are not mysteries). Matthew 13 introduces a different form of the kingdom, namely the present spiritual reign of the King during the period He is physically absent from the earth, prior to His second coming. The mysteries of the kingdom, accordingly, deal with the period between the first and second advent of Christ and not the millennial kingdom which will follow the second coming.

C. The Mysteries Of The Kingdom Of Heaven (The Parables).

1. This period includes the time from Pentecost, in Acts 2, to the rapture; that is, the age of grace (which we also call the age of the Holy Spirit, or the church age). Although this period includes the church age, it extends beyond it, for the parables of Matthew 13 precede Pentecost and extend beyond the rapture.

2. These parables do not primarily concern the nature, function, and influence of the church. Rather, they show the previously unrevealed form in which God’s theocratic rule would be exerted in a previously unrevealed age, made
necessary by Israel’s rejection of Jesus Christ. In Matthew 13 there are eight parables, each one providing an essential characteristic of the kingdom in this present age.

3. Seed, sowers, and soils. The first feature of this age is that it is characterized by a sowing of the seed by sowers and by varied responses to the sowing. In this parable, the seed (Matt. 13:3-8) represents the word, or “the message about the kingdom,” and the field represents the “heart” of the individual hearer (v. 19). In Scripture, the “heart” often indicates intellectual capacity. A message, then, was being proclaimed and heard, but there were varying responses. Some seed showed no sign of life at all (that sown by the wayside).Some produced no fruit (that sown on rocky places).

4. The sewing of seed gave promise of bearing fruit but was eventually fruitless (that sown among the thorns). There was seed that produced a crop, yielding a 100, 60, or 30 times what was sown (v. 23). Jesus was saying that instead of the fruitage of the Gospel showing an increase, there would be a marked decrease.

5. Mark recorded another parable by Jesus on the theme of sowing seed. This parable (Mark 4:26-29) was designed to teach that the fruit depends not on the sower but on the life that is in the seed itself. Regardless of what the sower did, the seed germinated, sprouted, grew, produced grain, and eventually yielded a bountiful harvest, which the man reaped. Jesus wanted to make it clear that any harvest they saw would be the result of sowing and then allowing the life in the seed to manifest itself by growth and yield.

6. Weeds among wheat. The second parable (13:24-29) was designed to supplement the first to teach that there would be a false sowing alongside the sowing of the Word of God. The field had been sown with good seed, and the sower could anticipate a harvest for his labors. Later, the sower was told that an enemy had sown the field with the seed of weeds.

7. This false sowing evidently took place immediately after the good seed had been sown. Then both kinds of seed germinated and sprouted. In the process of waiting for the harvest, it became evident that weeds had been sown in the wheat field. The presence of weeds would crowd out the growth of the fruit-bearing wheat. The servants, concerned as they were with the results of their labors, suggested that they try to remove the weeds from the field. However, the owner of the field recognized that it would be impossible to remove
the weeds without destroying the wheat. So the servants were commanded to let both ripen, and at the time of wheat harvest they would then separate the good grain from the worthless weeds, without destroying the wheat. The weeds could be burned and destroyed, while the wheat would be gathered into storage. Through this parable Jesus prepared these men to be on guard for Satan’s work of sowing false seed, or false doctrine, while they were sowing the good seed. Satan’s false kingdom would continue to exist alongside the new form of God’s kingdom.

8. The mustard seed. The third parable (13:31-32) reveals that this new form of the kingdom will have an almost imperceptible beginning. The emphasis in the parable is on the contrast between the size of the seed and the plants that are produced. “Small as a mustard seed” was a Jewish proverb to indicate a very minute particle. But out of that insignificant seed in one year would grow a plant which became large enough for birds to nest in. In Ezekiel 31:6 and Daniel 4:12, the figure of a spreading tree, in which birds lodge, indicates a great kingdom that can protect and provide benefits for many peoples. Christ would
commission only 11 men to become His emissaries (John 17:18). This would seem to be an insignificant beginning, yet Jesus predicted that the world would hear His message from such a small beginning. Thus the parable teaches that the new form of the kingdom, while it did have an insignificant beginning, would eventually spread to the ends of the earth.

9. The hidden leaven. The fourth parable (13:33) was designed to show how the
kingdom program would develop and operate in the present age. Some have referred to this as “The Parable of the Leaven,” but that title puts emphasis on what leaven is or signifies. Actually, this is “The Parable of Leaven Hidden in Meal.” In other words, the parable emphasizes what leaven does or how leaven works. When the leaven, or yeast, was introduced into the flour, a process began that was steady, continuous, and irreversible. That process continued until the whole mixture was leavened. Thus Jesus was teaching that the kingdom would not be established by outward means; this was because no external force could make the dough rise. Rather, this new form of the kingdom would operate according to an internal force that would be continuous and progressive until the whole mixture had been leavened. Here the emphasis was on the Holy Spirit and concerned His ministry to the world. Christ would again speak of this in John 15:26 and 16:7-11.

10. Hidden treasure and the expensive pearl, The fifth and sixth parables reveal what accrues to God through the kingdom in this present age. In the “Parable of the Treasure Hidden in the Field” (13:44), Jesus revealed that a multitude from Israel will become God’s purchased possession through this present age.

11. In the “Parable of the Merchant Looking for Fine Pearls” (13:45-46), Jesus revealed that God will obtain a treasure not only from the nation Israel but from the Gentiles as well. We understand this because a pearl comes out of the sea, and quite frequently in Scripture the sea represents Gentile nations. Therefore, we see that a treasure from among the Gentiles becomes God’s by purchase.

12. The dragnet. The seventh parable (vv. 47-50) reveals that this new form of the kingdom will conclude in a judgment separating the righteous from the unrighteous. The net drawn up from the sea brings all kinds of fish, some useful and some useless. Through this parable Christ taught that the age will end in a judgment to determine who enters the future millennial kingdom and who is excluded.

13. Righteousness is a prerequisite for entrance into the kingdom. The righteous are taken into it, but the unrighteous are excluded. The destiny of the wicked is not the blessing of the kingdom, but rather the judgment of eternal fire. This same truth, concerning the judgment prior to the institution of the millennial kingdom, is taught in Matthew 25:1-30, where Christ predicted judgment on the nation Israel, and in verses 31-46 where He described judgment on living Gentiles. The judgment predicted here is not a judgment on the dead but on the living, and it will take place at the time of Christ’s second advent to the earth.

14. The householder The eighth and final parable of Matthew 13 is that of the householder (v. 52), which teaches that some features of the new form of the kingdom are identical to features previously revealed about the new and have no correspondence to what had been revealed about the millennial form of the kingdom.

D. A New Form Of The Kingdom.

1. As we survey the Matthew 13 parables, we find that in light of Israel’s rejection of Christ, He foresaw postponement of the millennial form of the kingdom. He announced the introduction of a new form of the kingdom, one that would span the period from Israel’s rejection of Christ until Israel’s future reception of Christ at His second advent.

2. This present age, with its new form of the kingdom, is characterized by the sowing of the Word, to which there will be varying responses depending on the soil’s preparation (the soils). The harvest that results from the sowing is the result of the life that is in the sown seed (the seed growing of itself). Concurrent with the sowing of the Word is a false counter-sowing (the weeds).

3. The new form of the kingdom had an insignificant beginning, but it will grow to great proportions (the mustard seed). The power in the kingdom is not external but internal (the leaven hidden in meal). God will gather a peculiar treasure to Himself through this present age (the hidden treasure and the pearl of great price).

4. The present form of the kingdom will end in a judgment to determine who are righteous, and therefore eligible to enter the future millennial form of the kingdom, as well as who are unrighteous thus to be excluded from the millennial kingdom to come.

5. This revelation of the new form through which the theocracy would be administered in this present age was followed by a specific prophecy: “I will build My church” (Matt. 16:18). The nature and function of the church is not explained here, but it is revealed in its historical development in the book of Acts, with its doctrines explained in the epistles (Acts and Epistles’ explanations will follow).

IV. Article Considerations.

A. One of the most difficult and most important factors of writing an article is related to sources of information. A writer must ensure that such sources have a high degree of knowledge on the subjects that are being written, and also must have a high degree of respect from other writers. A second factor that must be considered relates to how to lawfully use material of other writers. In this web site, copyright statutes are not violated. Also, the term “public domain,” is a factor that is often considered. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_domain

C. For education and other supporting data for each source of information in this article, please refer to my Page, “About My References.” The following links show information about Dallas Theological Seminary. I encourage you to familiarize yourself with the Seminary. It is important to understand that DTS is not a denominational seminary, and is totally independent of such.

D. About Dallas Theological Seminary (DTS).

1. General Info. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dallas_Theological_Seminary

2. Doctrinal Statement. https://www.dts.edu/about/doctrinal-statement/

The Kingdom Of God – Judgment On Israel

I. Video. Dallas Theological Seminary Campus Tour.

II. Article References.

III. Article Narrative.

A. Jesus’ Judgment Upon Israel.

1. Jesus viewed the explanation by the leaders as indicative of the course which that generation would follow. He viewed His rejection as if it were final, although it would not be finalized until His trial and crucifixion. The message that He began to proclaim was no longer “Come to Me, all who are weary and heavy-laden, and I will give you rest” (Matt. 11:28 NASB), but rather it was a message of judgment. Viewing the nation as being confirmed in their rejection and unbelief, Jesus from this time on speaks of the judgment to come.

2. In the parable of the wicked vinedressers (Matt. 21:33-44), after the leaders kill the heir, God, the owner, will destroy those wicked men miserably (Matt. 21:41). So, too, “the kingdom of God will be taken from you [that generation in Israel] and given to a nation [or generation] bearing the fruit of it. And whoever falls on this stone will be broken but on whomever it falls, it will grind him to powder” (Matt. 21:43-44, author’s translation). This signifies the withdrawal of the offer of the covenanted kingdom to Israel and its postponement to the future.

3. This same judgment is depicted in Matthew 22:1-7, where the guests (the nation Israel), who had been invited to a wedding banquet (Messiah’s kingdom) but refused to come, suffered the consequences of rejecting the king’s invitation. The king “sent out his armies, destroyed those murderers, and burned up their city.” This parable reveals the form of judgment: Roman armies, under Thus, would attack the city of Jerusalem, destroy it, and either kill or disperse its inhabitants.

4. Another specific prediction of the coming judgment is given in Matthew 23:37-24:2. Jesus declared He had sought to provide peace and security for Israel, but it was not experienced because “you were not willing.” As a consequence, “Your house is left to you desolate” (Matt. 24:38). The house could refer to the temple, or to the city of Jerusalem, in which the temple stood, or to the Davidic house, whose throne would be left empty. The severity of the judgment is seen in the declaration: “Not one stone shall be left here upon
another, that shall not be thrown down” (Matt. 24:2).

5. Luke is very specific in recording Jesus’ message of judgment. In Luke 19:11-27 the nobleman declared, concerning the unfaithful, “Take the mina from him… but bring here those enemies of mine, who did not want me to reign over them, and slay them before me.” In this parable it is significant that judgment fell on those who refused to submit themselves to the One who had the right to reign. This was the sin of that generation in Israel.

6. Once again, the judgment is predicted forcefully in Luke 21:20-24: “When you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation is near. Then let those in Judea flee to the mountains, let those who are in the midst of her depart, and let not those who are in the country enter her. For these are the days of vengeance that all things which are written may be fulfilled. But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days! For there will be great distress in the land and wrath upon this people. And they will fall by the edge of the sword, and be led away captive into all nations. And
Jerusalem will be trampled by Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled” (NKJV).

7. Thus we see that the message of Jesus was initially a message of hope, of blessing, and of salvation. But after the announcement by the leaders that Jesus received His power from Satan, and so was a blasphemous impostor, His message turned to one of judgment on that generation in Israel. While this announcement did not cancel the covenants and promises given to Israel concerning the earthly kingdom of David’s greater Son, but only postponed the realization of those hopes, yet it did consign that generation to a physical and
temporal judgment which was inescapable (Luke 19:27). Thus the kingdom program for Israel, which began with such high hopes at the beginning of Jesus’ ministry, ends with the somber note of judgment and postponement.

B. The Kingdom in the Present Age.

1. In light of all this, the following questions arise. What happens to God’s kingdom, of which the Davidic millennial kingdom is only an earthly form, in this present age when the millennial kingdom has been postponed? What form does the kingdom take in this present age? What are the essential characteristics or features of God’s kingdom in this present age?

2. In answer, Jesus referred to “the secrets of the kingdom” (Matt. 13:11). He was not referring to the covenanted Davidic, or millennial, kingdom. That there would be such a kingdom was no “secret” in the Old Testament! It clearly revealed the essential features or characteristics of the millennial kingdom. But what the Old Testament had not revealed was that an entire age would intervene between the offer of the kingdom by the Messiah and Israel’s reception of the King and enjoyment of full kingdom blessings. With this background, we see that the time period covered by the parables in Matthew 13 extends from Israel’s rejection until its future reception of the Messiah. Thus this new program began while Christ was still on the earth, and it will extend until His return to the earth in power and great glory.

IV. Article Considerations.

A. One of the most difficult and most important factors of writing an article is related to sources of information. A writer must ensure that such sources have a high degree of knowledge on the subjects that are being written, and also must have a high degree of respect from other writers. A second factor that must be considered relates to how to lawfully use material of other writers. In this web site, copyright statutes are not violated. Also, the term “public domain,” is a factor that is often considered. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_domain

B. In this article, I have chosen theologians whom have proven themselves to be highly respected by others in the Biblical doctrine of eschatology (the study of what Scripture teaches about the end times), and other doctrines of scripture. All of the references in this article had a connection with Dallas Theological Seminary (DTS) as graduate or instructor, and all are deceased.

C. For education and other supporting data for each source of information in this article, please refer to my Page, “About My References.” The following links show information about Dallas Theological Seminary. I encourage you to familiarize yourself with the Seminary. It is important to understand that DTS is not a denominational seminary, and is totally independent of such.

D. About Dallas Theological Seminary (DTS).

1. General Info. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dallas_Theological_Seminary

2. Doctrinal Statement. https://www.dts.edu/about/doctrinal-statement/

The Kingdom Of God – Overview

I. The importance of Dallas Theological Seminary (DTS) to this study.

II. Overview References: Dr. Charles C. Ryrie, Th. D., Ph. D., D. Litt., (DTS). Dr. Merrill F. Unger, Th. D., Ph. D. (DTS). Dr. J. Dwight Pentecost, Th. D. (DTS). Dr. John F. Walvoord, Th. D., D. Litt., (DTS). Dr. Harold Hoehner, Th. D., Ph. D. (DTS). Dr. Stanley D. Toussaint, Th. D. (DTS). Lewis Sperry Chafer, Th. D., D. Litt. (DTS).

III. Overview Narrative. God is Sovereign, and as Sovereign He rules eternally in a kingdom in which He is the absolute authority. In order to understand the biblical concept of “kingdom,” we must recognize that it includes several ideas: the right to rule, a realm in which ruling authority is exercised, and the reality of that authority actually being exercised.

A. The Kingdom in Eternity.

1 Concerning God’s kingdom, the Bible presents two aspects: the eternal aspect and the temporal aspect. The eternal kingdom is characterized by four essential truths: 1) It is timeless; 2) it is universal; 3) it is providential; 4) it is miraculous.

2. In eternity past, before the creation of the angels, the earth, and man, a kingdom existed in the sphere of “the heavenlies” because of the relationship among the members of the Trinity. God the Father was sovereign. God the Son, although equal in person, was subordinate to the Father. God the Holy Spirit was the active executor of the will of the Father (Gen. 1:2-3). Thus in eternity past there was a kingdom, involving the right to rule, as well as the sphere in which the right operated and the rule was exercised. Indeed, all the elements
essential to a kingdom were present.

3. This kingdom arises from the character of God and reaches from eternity to eternity. God’s kingdom was displayed in the angelic realm before it was developed on the earth. The created angelic hosts in that kingdom were subject to the Sovereign, and they worshiped Him and obeyed Him. This continued until the fall of Lucifer and the angels who followed him in rebellion.

B. The Kingdom on Earth (Pre-Abrahamic).

1. To demonstrate His right to rule, God ordered this earthly sphere as the place where He would rule. He populated it with creatures who were responsible to recognize that right, submit to it, and give the Ruler that which was due Him. Our sovereign God, in every period of theocratic administration, has ruled through those to whom He assigned His authority. It was the responsibility of administrators to subjugate all to God’s authority, to reward those who do good, to punish evildoers, and to provide an atmosphere in which the subjects of the King might live in peace. In the garden, Adam was the theocratic administrator whose responsibility was to subject all creation to himself, so that through him creation might be subject to the authority of God. When this form of administration failed, God brought a judgment and expelled Adam and Eve from the garden.

2. God instituted a new form of theocratic administration in which He wrote His law in the hearts of men and subjected man to His law. That law was man’s conscience (Rom. 2:15), and as men subjected themselves to the rule of conscience, they were in subjection to the authority of God. But that too failed. And when men rebelled against that form of theocratic administration, God wiped the human race off the face of the earth by a flood.

3. God then instituted a new form of theocratic administration in which authority was given to human government (Gen. 9:6). It was the responsibility of human government to curb lawlessness and to bring man in subjection to the authority of God. Again, man failed miserably. And when men organized in open rebellion against God; the Lord scattered them from there over all the earth, and they stopped building the city. That is why it was called Babel-because there the Lord confused the language of the whole world (Gen. 11:8-9).

C. The Kingdom in Israel.

1. With the call of Abraham, God introduced a new form of theocratic administration. He instituted the Abrahamic Covenant that promised Abraham a land, seed, and blessing. Throughout the Old Testament-through that expanding covenant program-God administered His theocracy here on earth.

2. The kingdom program was then developed with the nation Israel through the
covenants God made with them: the Abrahamic (Gen. 15:18), the Davidic (2 Sam. 7:14), the New (Jer. 31:31-34), and the Land, (Deut. 28-30). These eternal, unconditional, irrevocable covenants determined the ultimate form of the kingdom of the God of heaven on earth.

3. While the covenants promised a kingdom here on earth, it was the prophets who described the glories of that kingdom. The prophets of the Old Testament had proclaimed a message of hope that caused Israel to eagerly anticipate the fulfillment of God’s covenants and promises to them. David’s son the Messiah would come to bring peace, righteousness, and prosperity to the nation. He would come as a Savior to redeem and as a Sovereign to reign. The nations which had persecuted Israel would be subjugated to Him, and Israel would
know the promised peace which the Prince of Peace would bring. Her accumulated sins would be put away and she would experience forgiveness and life in righteousness. Such was the hope of Israel.

4. Years passed before an official proclamation was made by the prophesied forerunner, John the Baptist, who heralded his message to the nation: “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand” (Matt. 3:2 NASB). When Jesus began His ministry He made the same proclamation: “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand” (Matt. 4:17 NASB). The call to repentance shows that this was a contingent offer and that the blessings of the kingdom depended on the nation’s response. This does not mean, however, it was not a genuine offer.
The reference to the kingdom needed no explanation; it was the covenanted kingdom under David’s son the Messiah, of which the prophets had so clearly spoken and for whom the nation was waiting. The nation was plunged into a great debate concerning His person. Who is this Jesus of Nazareth who claims to be the son of David and the Son of God? Is He what He claims to be? If so, He truly is the promised and covenanted Messiah. If not, He is a blasphemous impostor who is worthy of death. Jesus made His claims concerning His
person very clear. He validated those claims convincingly by His miracles, and He challenged people to accept His claims and to put faith in Him, so as to receive a righteousness from Him that would enable them to enter His forthcoming kingdom.

5. From the inception of His ministry two responses to His presentation were evident. John says: “He came to His own [things], and His own did not receive Him. But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name” (John 1:11-12). His rejection is clearly seen in the response of those in Nazareth, who heard Him claim to be the One who would fulfill the prophecy of Isaiah 61:1-2. These responses climax in the incident recorded in Matthew 12:22-24. There were those who, on the basis of the evidence He had presented about Himself as the son of David, the Messiah, expressed their .willingness to accept Him as the Messiah. But there were also those who rejected the evidence and sought to explain it away, so that they would be guiltless for their rejection. There were two supernatural powers who could perform miracles: Satan and God. If the leaders acknowledged that Jesus performed miracles by God’s power, they would be without excuse for their unbelief; but if He performed miracles by Satan’s power, they could justify their rejection. Thus they sought to dissuade those who believed by saying: “This fellow does not cast out demons except by Beelzebub, the ruler of the demons” (Matt. 12:24).

Matthew Chapter 28

I. The Resurrection Of The Rejected King.

II. Scripture Text.

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matthew+28&version=NASB1995

III. Overview. References: Dr. Charles C. Ryrie, Th. D., Ph. D. (DTS). Dr. Merrill F. Unger, Th. D., Ph. D. (DTS). Dr. J. Dwight Pentecost, Th. D. (DTS). Dr. John F. Walvoord, Th. D. (DTS). Dr. Harold Hoehner, Th. D., Ph. D. (DTS).

A. Appearance of Jesus to the Women, 28:1-10.

1. The resurrection of Jesus on the first day of the week is detailed in all four gospels (Mk 16:1-14; Lk 24:1-49; Jn 20:1-23). The probable order of events was as follows:

a. Appearance to Mary Magdalene when she returned after a preliminary visit of the women to the tomb (Mk 16:9-11; Jn 20:11-18).

b. Appearance to the women who had been to the tomb and were bearers of the message of the angels (Mt 28:8-10).

c. Appearance to Peter on the afternoon of the resurrection day (Lk 24:34; 1 Co 15:5).

d. Appearance to the disciples on the road to Emmaus (Mk 16:12; Lk 24:13-32).

e. Appearance to the ten disciples on the evening of the resurrection day, Thomas being absent (Lk 24:36-43; Jn 20:19-25).

f. Appearance a week later to the eleven, Thomas being present (Jn 20:26-31; 1 Co 15:5).

g. Appearance to seven of the disciples beside the Sea of Galilee (Jn 21:1-14).

h. Appearance to about five hundred brethren as well as the apostles (Mt 28:16-20; Mk 16:15-18; 1 Co 15:6).

i. Appearance to James, the half brother of Jesus (1 Co 15:7).

j. Appearance on the day of ascension from the Mount of Olives (Mk 16:19-20; Lk 24:44-53; Ac 1:3-12).

2. Matthew records that “Mary Magdalene and the other Mary” came “to see the sepulchre” (28:1) early that resurrection morning. There were other women, however, including Salome (Mk 16:1). The women were the same group that had beheld the burial of Jesus and therefore knew where the tomb was. Mary, the mother of Jesus, apparently was not with them.

3. Mark 16:3 records their question, as they approached the tomb, concerning who would roll away the stone. Upon arrival at the scene, there was a great earthquake, and an angel descended from heaven and rolled back the stone. Matthew describes him, “His countenance was like lightning, and his raiment white as snow” (28:3).

4. The Roman soldiers were paralyzed with fear, but the angel said to the women, “Fear not ye: for I know that ye seek Jesus, which was crucified. He is not here: for he is risen, as he said. Come, see the place where the Lord lay. And go quickly, and tell his disciples that he is risen from the dead; and, behold, he goeth before you into Galilee; there shall ye see him: lo, I have told you” (vv. 5-7). Luke 24:1-8 gives further details on the message of the angel and indicates that the women entered into the tomb, but the body of the Lord was gone. Matthew records, “They departed quickly from the sepulchre with fear and great joy; and did run to bring his disciples word” (28:8).

5. The account concerning Mary Magdalene would indicate that she saw the stone rolled away but did not linger long enough to understand the full meaning of it, and informed Peter and John simply that the tomb was empty. It was on her second visit to the tomb that Jesus first appeared to Mary Magdalene. She, who sought Jesus most earnestly, was honored to be the first to see the resurrected Christ. Matthew records the second appearance to the other women as they also had left the tomb in order to tell the disciples, and records that the women “held him by the feet, and worshipped him” (v. 9). Jesus instructed them, as the angel had also mentioned in verse 7, to tell the brethren to go into Galilee, where they would see Jesus. However, He appeared to them that evening and apparently again a week later before the Galilee appearances occurred. For Matthew, the Galilean appearance was the climax of Jesus’ ministry. It was there that Christ witnessed to many outside of Judaism, an anticipation of His worldwide witness.

B. Report of the Soldiers, 28:11-15.

1. Just as Matthew alone records the request of the priests and Pharisees, the watch by the soldiers at the tomb, so Matthew alone records the outcome following the resurrection of Christ. Some of those guarding the tomb went to the chief priests and reported what had happened. It is astounding that the chief priests heard of the resurrection of Jesus before the disciples. The result was that they gave a bribe, described by Matthew as “large money,” to the soldiers and instructed them to report that the disciples had stolen the body by night while the soldiers slept. They also promised the soldiers that if it reached the Roman governor’s ears that they would protect them and persuade the governor not to punish them.

2. Under Roman law, the soldiers could be put to death for failure to do their duty, as was done to the soldiers who were watching Peter (Ac 12:19). The soldiers, glad both for the money and for the protection, did as they were instructed and started the rumor among the Jews that the body of Jesus had been stolen.

3. The dishonesty and lack of integrity on the part of the scribes and Pharisees, when confronted with the fact of the resurrection of Jesus, all too frequently are found in other forms of unbelief. Liberal scholarship today shows the same incredible blindness to the facts and tends to give credence to any criticism of the scriptural record more than to the Scriptures themselves. The unbelief of the scribes and Pharisees is shown here in all its stark wickedness, and their stooping to bribery and lies shows the extremity into which they fell. The very soldiers who were ordered to prevent the fulfillment of the prophecy of Christ’s resurrection were the first witnesses of it. It is possible that some were beneficially influenced and may be numbered among those who did come to Jesus in the early days of the church, as recorded in Acts.

4. The story of the soldiers, of course, was obviously false. How could they know that the disciples stole the body if they were actually asleep? So often the truth is more reasonable than the theories seeking to contradict the truth. The three thousand at Pentecost who believed Peter’s message concerning the death and the resurrection of Christ no doubt had investigated the story, had seen the empty tomb, and were fully persuaded that the facts as presented by Peter were the truth. The story served to bolster those, however, who, for various reasons, did not want to believe in Jesus, and Matthew reports the story was still common at the time he wrote the gospel.

C. Jesus’ Meeting with His Disciples in Galilee, 28:16-20.

1. The closing verses of Matthew’s gospel record Christ’s meeting with the eleven disciples in Galilee, prophesied in 28:7, 10. This is not clearly identifiable with any other appearance of Jesus. The appearance recorded in Mark 16:15-18, though often considered the same as this appearance in Matthew, could just as well fit the meeting on the second Sunday night, recorded in John 20:26-31. Sometimes also, the reference in Matthew 28 is linked with 1 Corinthians 15:6, where Jesus is said to have appeared unto more than five hundred brethren at once. The meeting mentioned in 1 Corinthians, however, may be another appearance of Jesus not found anywhere else in the gospels. The fact that “some doubted,” that is, were not sure the person they were seeing was Jesus, as mentioned in Matthew 28:17, might indicate that there was a larger crowd than just the eleven.

2. The one hundred and twenty which met in Jerusalem in Acts 1:15 were a smaller company, and, because of the many converts in Galilee, a group of five hundred there would be understandable. The meeting in Galilee has a prominence in Scripture because it was mentioned three times before, in Matthew 26:32; 28:7, 10. Just as the mountains of Galilee had been the scene of some of Christ’s great messages, such as the Sermon on the Mount, and had been the scene of His transfiguration, Galilee was a fitting place for a last meeting with a large group of His disciples.

3. The fact that “some doubted” is at first glance a problem, but it seems to indicate only a preliminary reaction as to whether or not this was indeed Jesus, not doubt concerning His resurrection. This doubt was soon dispelled, as Jesus spoke saying, “All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen” (28:18-20). Only Jesus could speak such words, and it must have brought reassuring faith to all who were there. The commission is mandatory, not optional. High mountains, deep oceans, wide deserts, starvation, shipwreck, death are not to be excuses for not going! We are to preach the Gospel to every creature.

4. In keeping with the theme of Matthew’s gospel, presenting Jesus as the King who was rejected but who will return to reign in majesty and power, these words were the final orders of the King concerning what should go on in His absence. He began by reaffirming His power or authority, both in heaven and in earth. On the basis of this authority, they, as His representatives, were to teach all nations. This was much wider than the purpose of Jesus in relation to Israel. Now the worldwide results of His death and resurrection must be publicized. As they recognized believers by the act of water baptism in the name of the Triune God, they were to instruct them concerning the obedience required by their faith in Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord.

5. In commanding them to observe “whatsoever I have commanded you,” Jesus was not referring to all His teachings in general, some of which were interpretative of the Law of Moses and were under the older dispensation, but to what He had commanded them as the believers who would be members of the church which was His body. Specifically, in using the word commanded, He was recalling the new commandment which He had given them in the upper room and the particular instructions that applied to the disciples in the organic union, symbolized by the vine and the branches. His presence with them, captured in the statement “ye in me, and I in you” (Jn 14:20), was going to be enjoyed by believers to the end of the world, that is, the end of the present age, which would culminate in His coming for them.

6. In these words, the gospel of Matthew, which began with the genealogy of the King and recorded His lowly coming in Bethlehem, where according to Luke, He was laid in swaddling clothes in a manger, ends with His reigning authority and commission to those He left behind. Ours is the glorious commission to proclaim the good news of what Jesus accomplished in His first coming and also to announce the fact that He is coming again.

Matthew Chapter 27

I. The Trial And Death Of The Rejected King.

II. Scripture Text.

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+27&version=NASB1995

III. Overview. References: Dr. Charles C. Ryrie, Th. D., Ph. D. (DTS). Dr. Merrill F. Unger, Th. D., Ph. D. (DTS). Dr. J. Dwight Pentecost, Th. D. (DTS). Dr. John F. Walvoord, Th. D. (DTS).

A. Jesus Delivered to Pilate, 27:1-2.

No doubt realizing that the trials before Annas and Caiaphas in the night were illegal both in the way they were conducted and in their outcome, the chief priests and elders reviewed their case against Jesus at a meeting held the next morning. Mention of this is made in the other gospels (Mk 15:1; Lk 23:1; Jn 18:28). The problem was not only the illegality of the trial, but the fact that the Jews did not have the authority to put Jesus to death. This could only be done by an order from a Roman ruler. Accordingly, at the close of this third trial before a Jewish authority, Jesus was bound and led away to be delivered to Pontius Pilate, the governor, for the first of the three trials before Roman rulers. Before proceeding with the account of the trial of Christ, Matthew records the remorse of Judas.

B. Judas Repents Too Late, 27:3-10.

1. The sad end of Judas Iscariot, recorded only in Matthew in the gospels, is mentioned by Luke in Acts 1:16-19 in connection with the election of Matthias as his successor. According to Matthew’s account, when Judas found that Jesus had been condemned to die, he repented of his act and attempted to return the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and the elders. Apparently, Judas had not believed that the arrest of Jesus would lead to His condemnation, or perhaps he was confronted now with his wicked betrayal of Jesus. In his conversations with the chief priests he said, “I have sinned in that I have betrayed the innocent blood” (27:4). While his feelings concerning the claim of Jesus to be the Messiah may still have been mixed with unbelief, he knew that Jesus was not worthy of death. The priests, however, were quite unconcerned and threw the problem back at him. This encounter with the chief priests and elders may have been before Caiaphas’ palace, as Lenski suggests.

2. Upon being spurned by them, however, Judas went to the temple and hurled the silver into the sanctuary (Gr. naos), meaning the entrance to the holy place. He then went out and hanged himself. Acts 1:18-19 describes the horrible deed in detail. The chief priests, confronted with what to do with this blood money, decided it could not be put in the treasury but could be used to buy a potter’s field in which to bury strangers. This they did; and according to Matthew, the field became known as “The field of blood,” or, as Acts 1:19 calls it, “Aceldama.” The whole transaction reflected on the one hand the casuistry of the Pharisees and their indifference to their crime, and on the other hand, the despair of Judas, for whom there seems to have been no road to forgiveness, even though he had remorse.

3. Matthew notes that this was a fulfillment of “that which was spoken by Jeremy the prophet, saying, And they took the thirty pieces of silver, the price of him that was valued, whom they of the children of Israel did value; And gave them for the potter’s field, as the Lord appointed me” (27:9-10). The reference to this as a quotation from Jeremiah has caused difficulty to expositors, as it is actually a quotation of Zechariah 11:12-13. How can this apparent discrepancy be explained?

4. Probably the best explanation is that the third section of the Old Testament began with the book of Jeremiah and included all that followed. Just as the first section was called the law, after the first five books, and the second section was called the psalms, although other books were included, so the third part began with Jeremiah, and the reference is related to this section of the Old Testament rather than to the book of Jeremiah. The references sometimes cited in Jeremiah, such as 18:2-12 and 19:1-15, do not correspond sufficiently to justify the quotation.

5. In Zechariah 11:12-13, the thirty pieces of silver are paid to dispose of Israel’s shepherd. In Matthew, the actual fulfillment is found in that the price was paid to dispose of Jesus, the true Shepherd of Israel. Obviously, Matthew is referring to the idea in Zechariah rather than to the precise wording.

C. Trial Before Pilate, 27:11-26.

1. The other gospels, in their description of the trial before Pilate, include some details not given by Matthew (cf. Mk 15:2-15; Lk 23:2-25; Jn 18:28-19:16). As Luke 23:6-12 indicates, Pilate, after a preliminary hearing of the case and on learning that Jesus was of Galilee, as a friendly gesture, sent Him to Herod, who was in Jerusalem at the time. Herod, after encountering complete silence from Jesus, sent Him back to Pilate to be judged. Jesus had three Roman trials, first before Pilate, then before Herod, and then again before Pilate. Matthew, Mark, and John combine the two trials before Pilate.

2. According to Luke 23:1-2, the trial began with various accusations being leveled against Jesus, including that He perverted the nation, forbade to give tribute to Caesar, and claimed that He was a king. It is at this point that Matthew begins his record because of the special interest in the gospel of Matthew in Jesus Christ as King.

3. Pilate asked Jesus, according to Matthew 27:11, “Art thou the King of the Jews?” Jesus replied, “Thou sayest,” in other words, affirming that it was true. The full conversation between Jesus and Pilate is recorded in John 18:33-38. From John’s account, it is evident that Pilate explored fully the possibility that Jesus was a king who might threaten his rule and satisfied his mind that there was nothing to the charge. His conversation with Jesus ended up with the philosophical question, “What is truth?” According to John 18:38, Pilate at this time declared Jesus innocent in the words, “I find in him no fault at all.”

4. After Jesus was pronounced innocent, the chief priests and scribes renewed their vehement accusations, in reply to which Jesus was completely silent. This is the second important silence of Christ, the first being in Matthew 26:63 and the third in John 19:9. Pilate marveled that Christ could keep silent under the circumstances. The fact is that after Pilate pronounced Him innocent, Jesus was under no obligation to answer the Jews further; and, if more investigation was required, it was up to Pilate to reverse his former judgment and continue the examination. It was in the course of further accusation by the chief priests and the scribes that Pilate learned that Jesus was from Galilee and used this as an occasion to refer the whole matter to Herod.

5. When Jesus was later sent by Herod back to Pilate, a plan occurred to Pilate to get out of his problem. According to Matthew 27:15, it had been the custom for many years to release a prisoner whom the people would choose on the occasion of the feast. Pilate picked the worst possible prisoner, Barabbas, who, according to Mark 15:7, was guilty of insurrection and murder. (There is an interesting play on words here, as Barabbas means “son of the father.” Barabbas was released instead of Jesus who was the true Son of the Father.) Pilate, assured that Jesus was popular with the people and that the plot against Him was connived by the Jewish leaders, thought the people would choose Jesus rather than Barabbas and thus relieve him of the problem of making a final judgment. Matthew 27:18 notes that Pilate knew that the chief priests had delivered Jesus to him because of envy.

6. While in the process of discussing this, the wife of Pilate sent him a message which said, “Have thou nothing to do with that just man: for I have suffered many things this day in a dream because of him” (v. 19). There has been much speculation as to who Pilate’s wife was and what the background of this incident could have been. The simplest explanation is that she had such a dramatic dream that she felt compelled to share it with her husband, with whom, no doubt, she had discussed Jesus on previous occasions. Pilate’s wife was concerned at the possibility of an innocent man of prophetic character being killed unjustly.

7. Meanwhile, however, the chief priests and elders had been busy persuading the people to ask for Barabbas and to request that Jesus be killed. To Pilate’s amazement, when the question was posed to the people, they asked for Barabbas to be released. In his astonishment, he asked, “What shall I do then with Jesus which is called Christ?” He hoped for a punishment short of death. They replied, “Let him be crucified” (v. 22).

8. Pilate was now occupied not only with the justice in the case but how he could reasonably sentence a man who had not been convicted of any real crime. Accordingly, he asked again, “Why, what evil hath he done?” But the people cried all the more, “Let him be crucified.” Unquestionably, they were influenced by the chief priests and elders.

9. Pilate, then, under great pressure lest there be an insurrection against him which would be damaging to his reputation, publicly took water and washed his hands before the multitude saying, “I am innocent of the blood of this just person: see ye to it.” Remarkably, in the same chapter, Jesus is pronounced innocent both by Judas and by Pilate (vv. 4, 24). The people recklessly responded, “His blood be on us, and on our children.” How tragically these words seem to have been fulfilled in the destruction of Jerusalem and the slaughter of several hundred thousand Israelites on that occasion.

10. Having reversed his earlier judgment that Jesus was innocent, Pilate now released Barabbas, scourged Jesus, and delivered Him to be crucified.

D. Jesus Mocked and Scourged, 27:27-32.

1. According to Matthew and Mark, Jesus was taken by the soldiers into the common hall, the praetorium, which was thronged with Roman soldiers. There, they stripped Him and mocked Him by putting on Him a purple robe and a crown of thorns. The indignities included being spit upon and being repeatedly beaten on the head. A parallel account is given in Mark 15:16-20, but Luke says only that Pilate delivered Jesus “to their will” (Lk 23:25). The fullest account is found in John 19:1-16, where the actual order of events which took place is given.

2. Putting the accounts together, it seems that Pilate himself observed and supervised this abuse of Jesus. His motivation was to degrade Him and to make His claim as a King of the Jews to be ridiculous. It is probable that Pilate hoped by this means to get off without actually having to order the crucifixion of Jesus. While Matthew introduces this idea of crucifixion in 27:26, John 19:16 makes clear that the order for crucifixion came at the end of the mockery rather than at the beginning. Matthew is simply recording the facts without necessarily giving the order of events.

3. That Jesus was submissive to this entire procedure is the measure of His total submission to the will of God. Here, the Lord of glory, capable of destroying anyone who put a hand upon Him, allowed Himself to be abused in this painful and humiliating way. Although the Scriptures are graphic, even they state only the essentials. The prophet Isaiah anticipated this when he stated in Isaiah 52:14, “His visage was so marred more than any man, and his form more than the sons of men.” Jesus was beaten about the head and the body until He was almost unrecognizable.

4. Few incidents in history more clearly illustrate the brutality in the desperately wicked heart of man than that which was inflicted on Jesus the Son of God. The mockery of the crown of thorns, painful as well as humiliating, His being stripped naked in front of the large crowd; the mockery of the purple robe, intended to represent a kingly garment; His being spit upon and beaten over the head repeatedly as well as the mocking worship testified to the unbelief and sordidness of the actors in this situation. It was only after enduring all of this in complete silence, except for the conversation between Christ and Pilate recorded in John 19:8-11, that Jesus was finally led away to the crucifixion.

5. As the custom was, the accused had to bear His own cross. Luke 23:26-32 records some of the incidents that occurred on the way to Golgotha. Because of Christ’s suffering, He was too weak to carry the cross Himself; and Simon of Cyrene, who is identified in Mark 15:21 as the father of Alexander and Rufus, was forced to carry the cross for Jesus. Some believe he was black, not of Jewish background. The hour had come for the Lamb of God to die for the sins of the whole world.

E. Jesus Crucified, 27:33-44.

1. The account of Matthew and the parallel accounts in the other gospels (Mk 15:22-32; Lk 23:33-43; Jn 19:17-24) need to be combined to give the full account of the incidents that occurred at the crucifixion leading up to His death. The order of events seems to be as follows:

a. The arrival at Golgotha (Mt 27:33; Mk 15:22; Lk 23:33; Jn 19:17)

b. The offer of the wine mingled with gall (Mt 27:34; Mk 15:23)

c. The act of crucifixion between the two thieves (Mt 27:35-38; Mk 15:24-28; Lk 23:33-38; 19:18)

d. The first cry from the cross, “Father, forgive them” (Lk 23:34)

e. The soldiers taking the garments of Jesus, leaving Him naked on the cross (Mt 27:35; Mk 15:24; Lk 23:34; Jn 19:23)

f. The Jews mocking Jesus (Mt 27:39-43; Mk 15:29-32; Lk 23:35-37)

g. The conversation with the thieves (Mt 27:44; Mk 15:32; Lk 23:39-43)

h. The second cry from the cross with the words, “Today shalt thou be with me in paradise” (Lk 23:43)

i. The third cry, “Woman, behold thy son!” (Jn 19:26-27)

j. The darkness which overtakes the scene on Calvary (Mt 27:45; Mk 15:33; Lk 23:44)

k. The fourth cry, beginning, “My God, my God” (Mt 27:46-47; Mk 15:34-36)

l. The fifth cry, “I thirst” (Jn 19:28)

m. The sixth cry, “It is finished” (Jn 19:30)

n. The seventh cry, “Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit” (Lk 23:46)

o. The Lord dismissing His spirit by an act of His own will (Mt 27:50; Mk 15:37; Lk 23:46; Jn 19:30).

2. Matthew notes that Golgotha is “a place of a skull,” which is what Golgotha means, apparently from the idea that the hill Calvary looked something like a human skull. The hill above the garden tomb discovered by Gordon has a skull-like appearance from the side. The top of the hill is now a Muslim cemetery, and there is a convenient tomb which is identified as the tomb of Jesus at the foot of the hill in the garden. Positive identification of this site, of course, is impossible today.

3. Matthew records Christ’s refusal to drink the sour wine mingled with a drug, which would have tended to dull His senses and make the cross easier to bear. Matthew simply records His crucifixion ‘without going into details, as the crude spikes were driven through His hands and His feet, and the entire cross was set up by being placed in a hole in the ground.

4. The soldiers took His garments, tearing them in four pieces so that each soldier could have a part, but they cast lots for the coat, which was a woven garment, as John 19:23-24 explains. Matthew regards this as a fulfillment of the prophecy of Psalm 22:18. Textual evidence seems to indicate that this was added to Matthew’s gospel, but that in John 19:24, it is properly included. In any case, the prophecy was fulfilled.

5. The event of His crucifixion, as stated in Mark 15:25, reckoned according to Jewish time, was the third hour, or 9:00 a.m., or, as mentioned in John 19:14, the sixth hour, according to Roman time, actually meaning after 6:00 a.m., or early in the morning.

6. According to John 19:19, Pilate himself had ordered that the accusation made against Jesus should be nailed to His cross; and Matthew records this as, “THIS IS JESUS THE KING OF THE JEWS” (27:37). The wording in each gospel varies, and the title itself was written in Hebrew, Greek, and Latin (Jn 19:20). Putting the accounts together, the full inscription was, “This is Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews.” All the accounts contain the phrase, “The King of the Jews,” which was the substance of the accusation. Pilate intended this as a rebuke to the Jews, but at the same time it was a testimony to the person of Christ.

7. Mention is also made of the two thieves who were crucified on either side of Jesus. Only Luke 23:39-43 describes the conversion of one of the thieves. Matthew records the mocking of the crowd and the chief priests and scribes and elders, as they challenged Christ to come down from the cross, if He were indeed the Son of God who had said that He could destroy the temple and build it in three days.

8. How tragically true it was, as recorded in Matthew 27:42, “He saved others; himself he cannot save.” It was not that He lacked power; it was because it was the will of the Father that He should die. The mockery accurately fulfilled the anticipation of Psalm 22:6-13. Tasker notes there were three classes of mockers: (1) “Ignorant sinners”; (2) “religious sinners”; (3) “condemned sinners.” The tragedy was not that one was dying on the cross, but that the people beheld Him in hardness of heart and wickedness of unbelief.

F. Jesus Dies on the Cross, 27:45-56.

1. The closing events of the life of Jesus as He died on the cross are recorded in all gospels (Mk 15:33-41; Lk 23:44-49; Jn 19:30-37). Matthew records that from the sixth hour, or noon in Jewish reckoning, there was darkness over the land until the ninth hour, or 3:00 p.m. This darkness seems to have begun after the third cry of Christ on the cross in which He put His mother, Mary, under the care of John (Jn 19:26-27). It was in this period of darkness that Jesus became the sin offering and, as such, was forsaken by God the Father. Matthew records the fourth cry of Jesus on the cross as being spoken in a loud voice: “Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” (27:46). Matthew’s account uses the Hebrew for “My God,” eli, but “lama sabachthani” is Aramaic, the spoken language of the Jews. Mark changes the Hebrew eli to eloi, which is Aramaic. The petition of Jesus is, of course, the quotation of Psalm 22:1, although the gospels do not mention it as a fulfillment.

2. The cry of Jesus has been variously interpreted, but it seems clear that God had judicially forsaken Jesus on the cross in contrast to the fact that He had strengthened Him in the garden of Gethsemane. Here Jesus was bearing the sins of the whole world, and even God the Father had to turn away as Jesus bore the curse and identified Himself with the sins of the whole world. When Jesus actually died, He commended Himself back into the Father’s hands.

3. Those who heard Jesus utter this cry mistook the word eli for Elias, and thought that He was calling for Elijah. Matthew records that one of them took a sponge, filled it with sour wine, and put it on a reed, in order to bring it to the lips of Jesus, to enable Him to speak more clearly. The rest of the observers, however, said that he should let Jesus alone to see whether Elijah actually came to save Him. While they observed, according to Matthew, “Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost” (27:50). Luke 23:46 records that Jesus said: “Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit.” John records simply that Jesus said, “It is finished” (Jn 19:30). Jesus had lived as no man has ever lived, and He died as no man ever died. Having completed His act of sacrifice, He dismissed His spirit by an act of His will. As He had stated earlier, in John 10:18, in regard to His life, “No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again.”

4. At the moment of His death, a number of awesome things took place. An earthquake occurred, and the heaving ground brought fear to those who observed. According to Matthew 27:51, the heavy veil of the temple, which separated the holy of holies from the holy place, was torn in two from the top to the bottom. As the divine commentary in Hebrews 10:19-22 signifies, the death of Jesus opened the way for ordinary believers to go into the holy of holies, where formerly only the Jewish high priests could go.

5. Although not immediately known to those who witnessed the scene of Christ’s death, Matthew also records an event not mentioned elsewhere in the Bible: “And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose, and came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared to many” (27:53). As a careful reading of this account reveals, the raising of the bodies of the saints, although mentioned here, actually occurred after the resurrection of Jesus. This event is nowhere explained in the Scriptures but seems to be a fulfillment of the feast of the first fruits of harvest mentioned in Leviticus 23:10-14. On that occasion, as a token of the coming harvest, the people would bring a handful of grain to the priest. The resurrection of these saints, occurring after Jesus Himself was raised, is a token of the coming harvest when all the saints will be raised.

6. The centurion, impressed by the darkness and the earthquake, although he probably was not informed of the tearing of the veil of the temple, according to the Scriptures, feared greatly, saying, “Truly this was the Son of God” (27:54). Although he had witnessed many executions, there never before had been one like this.

7. Matthew comments that many of the women who had followed Christ were beholding this from a distance. Among them were Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James and Joses, and the mother of Zebedee’s children. No doubt, with the coming of evening and the knowledge that Christ had died, they went sorrowfully to their homes.

G. Burial of Jesus, 27:57-61.

1. Ordinarily, there was little ceremony in connection with those crucified, and their bodies would be thrown into a shallow grave or even on a refuse heap. The problem of what to do with the body of Christ was quickly solved, however, by the intervention of Joseph of Arimathaea. The account given in all four gospels (Mk 15:42-47; Lk 23:50-56; Jn 19:38-42) indicates that he was a wealthy and influential man, a member of the Sanhedrin (Lk 23:51), and one who had been secretly a disciple of Jesus (Jn 19:38). He went boldly in to Pilate, although this involved ceremonial defilement for a Jew during the feast, and requested the body of Jesus. Mark 15:44-45 records Pilate’s surprise that Jesus was already dead, his inquiry from the centurion to verify the fact, and his permission to Joseph.

2. Matthew and the other gospels record the details of His burial. In the custom of the Jews, He was wrapped in clean linen cloth, and His body was placed in a new tomb hewn out of the rock. The stone door was rolled before the opening of the tomb, as they completed the act of burial. Matthew records that the two women, Mary Magdalene and “the other Mary,” identified in Mark 15:47 as “mother of Joses,” watched the burial. John 19:39-40 adds that Nicodemus, who first encountered Jesus in the incident recorded in John 3, participated in the burial, bringing myrrh and aloes of about one hundred pounds, the spices being used to saturate the linen cloths in which the body of Jesus was bound. John also records that the place of burial was in a garden.

3. The entire burial operation was done with some haste, because the Sabbath, which began at sundown, was already beginning (Mk 15:42; Lk 23:54; Jn 19:42). The Sabbath following the Passover had a special meaning, leading as it did to the seven-day Feast of Unleavened Bread.

H. Sealing of the Tomb, 27:62-66.

1. Only Matthew records the incident of the chief priests and Pharisees coming to Pilate the next day, which was Saturday, and requesting that the tomb be sealed to keep the disciples from stealing the body of Jesus and then claiming that He was risen from the dead. It is most interesting that the chief priests and Pharisees, who were unbelievers, remembered the prediction of Jesus that He would rise again after three days, while this truth does not seem to have penetrated the consciousness of the disciples in their sorrow. With Pilate’s permission, the Jews sealed the stone, which had closed the tomb’s door, and set a watch of soldiers to be sure there was no interference with the tomb.

2. The temple soldiers were not used for this purpose, as their jurisdiction was only the temple area. A regular detachment of Roman soldiers was sent to watch the tomb. Pilate had said to them, “Make it as sure as ye can,” and so they did. Stealing the body of Jesus was an impossibility, but chief priests, and Pharisees, and all the power of the Roman government could not prevent Jesus rising from the grave. Their care in thus guarding the tomb only added to the certainty of the evidence when the resurrection took place.

IV. Sources Of Information and Credentials. (DTS relates to those who were Instructors or Students at Dallas Theological Seminary).

A. Sources.

Dr. Charles C. Ryrie, Th. D., Ph. D. (DTS). Dr. Merrill F. Unger, Th. D., Ph. D. (DTS). Dr. J. Vernon McGee, Th. D. (DTS). Dr. J. Dwight Pentecost, Th. D. (DTS). Dr. John F. Walvoord, Th. D. (DTS).

B. Credentials.

1. Ryrie. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Caldwell_Ryrie

2.Unger.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merrill_Unger

3. McGee. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._Vernon_McGee

4. Pentecost.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._Dwight_Pentecost

5. Walvoord. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Walvoord

Matthew Chapter 26

I. Jesus’ Last Hours Before Crucifixion

II. Scripture Text.

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+26&version=NASB1995

III. Overview. Dr. Charles C. Ryrie, Th. D., Ph. D. (DTS). Dr. Merrill F. Unger, Th. D., Ph. D. (DTS). Dr. J. Dwight Pentecost, Th. D. (DTS). Dr. John F. Walvoord, Th. D. (DTS).

A. Final Announcement of His Coming Death, 26:1-5.

1. Having concluded His comprehensive answer to the disciples’ questions concerning the end of the age, Jesus returned to the consideration of the impending events (cf. Mk 14:1-2; Lk 22:1-2). He said to His disciples, “Ye know that after two days is the feast of the Passover, and the Son of man is betrayed to be crucified” (Mt 26:2). This notation concerning the time indicates that Jesus was speaking on Tuesday of the last week and that Matthew’s account of that Tuesday begins in 21:23 and extends through 26:5.

2. Liberal scholars try to make the most of what they believe is an inaccuracy here. Part of the problem is that Mark 14:1-2, in the parallel account, adds also “and of unleavened bread,” referring to the seven-day feast which followed the Passover. All this, however, is much ado about nothing, because, although the expression “after two days” may have more than one interpretation, it clearly connotes that two days or more would elapse before the Passover would occur. The Passover also used unleavened bread, and if more than two days elapsed before the Feast of Unleavened Bread, which follows the Passover, there would be no real error in fact. The practical point is that they were faced with the final betrayal and crucifixion of Jesus.

3. There is no record of the disciples’ comment on this, but Matthew records that even as Jesus was speaking, the chief priests, the scribes, and the elders of the people had assembled in the palace of the high priest Caiaphas, plotting to take Him when the people would not be around to prevent it. It is possible that they had in mind waiting until after the Feast of Unleavened Bread, which would be ten days later, when the pilgrims would have begun returning to their homes, but Jesus said, “after two days.” And so it was. The early arrest of Jesus was to be made possible by the betrayal of Judas Iscariot. Only hours separated Jesus from the cross on Calvary.

B. Jesus Anointed for Burial, 26:6-13.

1. During these last days before His crucifixion, Jesus stayed in Bethany on the eastern slope of the Mount of Olives, probably residing with Lazarus, Mary, and Martha. The incident, recorded here in Matthew and in Mark 14:3-9 and more in detail in John 12:1-8, occurred in the house of Simon the leper. While some have taken this as another name for Lazarus or possibly for Lazarus’ father, there is no reason it should not be another home, for Jesus had many friends in Bethany. In any event, Lazarus, Martha, and Mary were there. Matthew and Mark omit any reference to them, but John states plainly that Lazarus was there, that Martha served, and that it was Mary who anointed the feet of Jesus (Jn 12:1-3).

2. As they were reclining about the table in the cool of the evening, Mary took an expensive alabaster box containing a precious ointment, which John describes as “a pound of ointment of spikenard, very costly” (Jn 12:3), and anointed Jesus. Matthew 26:7 and Mark 14:3 refer to the anointing of only His head. John adds that she also anointed His feet and wiped His feet with her hair (Jn 12:3). The fragrant perfume permeated the entire house.

3. This amazing act of devotion coming from Mary, who had sat at Jesus’ feet and perhaps more nearly than any other really understood that He would die, aroused criticism from the disciples. John mentions that it was Judas Iscariot who spoke up and asked why the ointment had not been sold for three hundred denarii and the proceeds given to the poor (Jn 12:4-5). John observes that Judas Iscariot said this not because of his concern for the poor but because he was a thief and was the treasurer of the twelve (v. 6). It is possible that the other disciples were also indignant, for Matthew and Mark both picture more than one of the disciples participating in the criticism (Mt 26:8; Mk 14:4). Jesus, perceiving the genuineness of Mary’s devotion, rebuked His disciples saying, “Why trouble ye the woman? for she hath wrought a good work upon me” (Mt 26:10). He went on to say that they would have the poor with them always, and Mary had done this by way of preparing His body for burial. He predicted, “Wheresoever this gospel shall be preached in the whole world, there shall also this, that this woman hath done, be told for a memorial of her” (v. 13).

4. The loving and sacrificial act of Mary has many connotations. While the disciples were slow to accept the repeated prophecies of His death, Mary seems to have comprehended it at least in part. Although she was not as active as the disciples or in a place of leadership, and though she did not serve as Martha had done, sitting at the feet of Jesus had given her insight into spiritual things which many in their busy lives never achieve. Undoubtedly, the precious ointment had been a treasure held in the family for some time, and the reckless abandon with which she dedicated it to the anointing of Jesus was not a senseless extravagance but an act of supreme devotion. That Jesus permitted it without rebuke was to Judas Iscariot the final evidence that led him to question that Jesus was indeed the Messiah, and the verses which follow record his covenant to betray Jesus.

C. Judas Seeks to Betray Jesus, 26:14-16.

When Judas went to the high priest (cf. Mk 14:10-11; Lk 22:3-6), Jesus had already cleansed the temple, as He had done it on Monday morning, and they were eager to find some way by which they could lay their hands on Him privately. Nothing is said concerning how they bargained back and forth, but they agreed on thirty pieces of silver. The price was not high, as it was the same as the fine for killing a slave accidentally (cf. Ex 21:32), but Judas was all too willing to sell the King of kings for the price of a slave. No doubt, the money was immediately weighed out to him, fulfilling Zechariah 11:12 precisely, as Judas was not going to take the risk of betraying Christ and then going penniless. He knew all too well that if he did not carry out his bargain, the money would have to be returned, as the Jews could have had him arrested at any time. Matthew records, “And from that time he sought opportunity to betray him” (26:16). The time was going to come earlier than even the chief priests had thought possible.

D. The Last Passover, 26:17-25.

1. Matthew gives only a brief account of the preparations for the last Passover which Jesus celebrated with His disciples (cf. Mk 14:12-16; Lk 22:7-13; Jn 13:1-12). The parallel passages describing the preparation of the Passover in Mark and Luke give more details. The time was Thursday; Friday was the day of the crucifixion of Christ. The two disciples, designated to find the place under the special instructions which Jesus gave them, were Peter and John, according to Luke 22:8. The rest of the disciples were not to know the place until that evening, when they would be led there by Jesus Himself.

2. No explanation is given for the somewhat secretive way in which preparations for the Passover were made. Jesus, of course, knew that the chief priests and scribes were plotting to arrest Him and that Judas had agreed to betray Him. The other disciples also were somewhat aware of the dangers of His being in Jerusalem, especially at night away from the crowds. Accordingly, the plan to keep the place completely secret from Judas and the rest of the disciples, except Peter and John, was necessary to avoid premature arrest and interference with the events of the evening.

3. None of the accounts indicate the name of the owner of the house, though apparently he was someone who recognized Jesus and was a disciple. Speculation is useless as to the identity of this man, and even the location is unknown, although visitors to Jerusalem today are often shown a traditional site for the Last Supper. The Passover was to be a hallowed occasion for Christ and the disciples, their last night together after more than three years of association, a night never to be forgotten.

4. The account of the Passover itself is recorded not only in Matthew but in Mark 14:17-21 and Luke 22:14-30. John 13:1-12 records the incident of Christ washing the disciples’ feet, which followed the Passover meal.

5. Matthew records that when evening (Thursday) came, which after sundown was actually the beginning of Friday, Jesus sat down with His twelve disciples. The verb sat down actually means to recline or to lie down. They lay on couches arranged around a table which was low enough to permit them to feed themselves while reclining. There was probably a long table with the disciples arranged in a U shape around one end with the other end acting as a serving table. The traditional picture of Jesus and His disciples seated about a table is inaccurate. The record of the situation in the various gospels indicates there had been some contest among them concerning who would sit close to Jesus.

6. Judging by the conversation between Jesus, John, Peter, and Judas, John, the youngest disciple and the one whom Jesus loved, was on one side of Jesus. It may be that Judas Iscariot was on the other, and that Peter, ambitious for one of these places, ended up on the opposite side of the table. In any case, Peter does not seem to be close to Jesus (Jn 13:24). The spirit of contest among them as to which should be the greatest (Mt 18:1-4; Mk 9:33-37; Lk 9:46-48), which had been going on for six months, and which Jesus had previously rebuked, was again evident at the Last Supper and was the occasion of the demonstration by Jesus of washing the disciples’ feet.

7. While none of the accounts in the four gospels give all the details, it is obvious that Matthew is providing only a concise summary. The extended discourse of Jesus in John 15-17 is not mentioned by Matthew. The events in Matthew, Mark, and Luke are treated topically and not necessarily in order chronologically. From Matthew’s point of view, the important point was the betrayal of Jesus by Judas, and this is what he introduced immediately into the narrative of the last Passover.

8. It is probable that most of the Passover feast was observed before Judas was identified. After washing the disciples’ feet and making introductory comments, the order of events was probably this: (1) Jesus gave thanks and they drank from the cup; (2) the bitter herbs were introduced, symbolizing their rigorous life in Egypt; (3) Jesus introduced the unleavened bread and the lamb which had been killed and roasted according to the instructions, as well as any other sacrificial meat; (4) Jesus ate the bitter herbs, and the others followed suit; (5) Jesus mixed the wine and the water for the second cup, which, in an ordinary home situation, would occasion the son asking the meaning of the Passover feast and the father explaining; (6) they sang the Hallel, Psalms 113 and 114 and then they drank again from the cup; (7) Jesus ceremonially washed His hands, then taking two cakes of bread, went through the ceremony of breaking one, laying it on the unbroken bread, blessing the bread, wrapping the broken bread with herbs, dipping in the juices of the roasted lamp, and eating of the meat; (8) the rest joined Him in eating the food that had been prepared.

9. The Passover celebration was normally concluded by the drinking of a third cup, the singing of Psalms 115-118, and then one or more drinks from the cup. The conclusion would be singing from Psalms 120-137. Whether all these details were followed by Jesus, the Scriptures do not make clear. It was probably at the end or near the end of the Passover that Judas was identified.

10. It must have been a great shock to the disciples, in the context of this hallowed feast, for Jesus to have said, as He did in Matthew 26:21, “Verily I say unto you, that one of you shall betray me.” Matthew records that they all were extremely sorry and asked the question, “Lord, is it I?” Judas himself apparently was strangely silent for a time. In answer to the question of the other disciples, Jesus affirmed simply, “He that dippeth his hand with me in the dish, the same shall betray me” (v. 23). The whole incident must be interpreted as a gracious attempt on the part of Jesus to make Judas realize his terrible sin and turn from it before it was too late. That he would reject His pleas and harden his heart is all too evident in the words of Jesus in verse 24, “The Son of man goeth as it is written of him: but woe unto that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed! it had been good for that man if he had not been born.”

11. Up to this time, Judas had not been identified clearly. According to John 13:21-26, Peter motioned to John, who was leaning on Jesus’ bosom, to ask who it was. John was informed, according to John 13:26, “He it is, to whom I shall give a sop, when I have dipped it. And when he had dipped the sop, he gave it to Judas Iscariot, the son of Simon.” Peter and John accordingly knew that Judas was the betrayer.

12. Whether this prompted Judas to ask the question is not revealed, but according to Matthew 26:25, “Then Judas, who betrayed him, answered and said, Master, is it I? He said unto him, Thou hast said.” If Judas was immediately to one side of Jesus, it is possible that the other disciples did not hear. The Scriptures do not indicate whether any heard the conversation between Jesus and Judas. Matthew does not record Judas’ response, but John 13:27-30 indicates that immediately after the conversation and his identification by receiving the sop, Judas went out into the night. Jesus had said to him, “That thou doest, do quickly” (Jn 13:27).

13. The question had apparently arisen in Judas’ mind whether Jesus actually knew that he had plotted against Him. Judas was torn between faith and unbelief, but with the cunning of a heart that is desperately wicked, he reasoned that if Jesus was indeed the Messiah, his betrayal of Him would not be effective. On the other hand, if He were not the Messiah and He were crucified as He had predicted, Judas at least would be ahead thirty pieces of silver. With the crooked reasoning of the natural mind, Judas concluded that he could not lose. His problem was that while he wanted to follow a King who would reign gloriously, he did not want to follow a crucified Saviour.

E. An Added Event To The Passover Meal, 26:26-30.

1. Probably at this point in the sequence of events, after Judas left, something new was added to the Passover feast. All the gospels record the event (Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:17-20; Jn 13:12-30). Further instruction is given by Paul in 1 Corinthians 11:23-34. It was while they were involved in eating the major portion of the Passover feast that this special ceremony was introduced.

2. Engaging the disciples’ attention, Jesus took the ceremonial bread and after prayer broke it, giving pieces to the disciples with the instructions, “Take, eat; this is my body.” Following this, He also took the cup, and, again giving thanks, He gave the cup to them saying, “Drink ye all of it.” He then explained the ceremony in Matthew 26:28, “For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.” The new ceremony, instead of relating to the lamb slain in Egypt, now was referring to Christ as the new Passover Lamb, the one who would be slain on the cross. Although it was a new ceremony, it was also their last meal together, and He concluded the last supper with the words of verse 29, “But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom.” Here He was referring to the millennial kingdom, when Christ will return to the earth with His resurrected disciples and participate once again in the earthly scene. There is no indication anywhere that wine will be drunk in heaven. Concluding with the final hymn of the Passover feast, they left the upper room and went to the Mount of Olives.

3. This ceremonial ending of the last Passover meal has been a point of controversy in the history of the church. Of the bread and the cup, the Roman church holds to transubstantiation, that the elements actually are transformed into the body and blood of Christ. The Lutheran church, historically, has held that while the bread remains bread and the wine remains wine, it is actually invested with the character of the body and blood of Christ, and that partaking of one is the same as partaking of the other.

4. Calvin held that the Lord’s spiritual presence was in the elements but not His physical presence. Zwingli suggested that they were merely symbols and represented the body of Christ. The controversy cannot be settled, but many have concluded that Zwingli was probably right and that the bread and the cup become the body and blood of Christ no more than Jesus became a vine because of His words, “I am the true vine.” These are figures of speech, although wonderfully eloquent in their meaning. The important point is to partake of Christ in reality, not physically. The truth is that the believer is in Christ and Christ is in the believer in a wonderful, organic union of eternal life.

F. Jesus’ Teaching on the Way to the Garden, 26:31-35.

1. As the group walked from the upper room toward the Garden of Gethsemane at the foot of the Mount of Olives, Jesus delivered His final teachings to His disciples, recorded mostly in the gospel of John (13-17). Matthew records Jesus’ prediction in 26:31 that all the disciples would forsake Him on that fateful night; “Then saith Jesus unto them, All ye shall be offended because of me this night: for it is written, I will smite the shepherd, and the sheep of the flock shall be scattered abroad.” The word translated “shall be offended” is a Greek word from which we get the word scandal, with the meaning here of causing one to stumble.

2. The events of the evening were to be too much for all the disciples, and Matthew records in 26:56 that they all “forsook him, and fled.” Jesus called their being offended a fulfillment of prophecy, as recorded in Zechariah 13:7, “Smite the shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered.”

3. Jesus, however, also had anticipated His resurrection (Mt 26:32) and that they would meet again in Galilee. Actually, of course, Jesus met His scattered disciples first in Jerusalem before they all went to Galilee. Peter had been previously informed, according to John 13:38, that he would deny Jesus, but apparently Peter could not believe it, and here again, Matthew 26:33 records Peter’s renewed conversation with Jesus on this point and with the same warning from Jesus in verse 34 that Peter would deny Him before morning. The other disciples joined in their profession of faithfulness to Jesus even unto death (v. 35).

G. Jesus in Gethsemane, 26:36-46.

1. Having left the city of Jerusalem, and having crossed the Kidron Valley, Jesus was now at the foot of the Mount of Olives. They had come to a place called Gethsemane, meaning “oil press,” probably located in a grove of olive trees for the purpose of pressing oil from the olives. Visitors today are shown a place called Gethsemane at the foot of the Mount of Olives. There is no way to identify the place accurately. In a parallel account in Mark 14:32-42, Gethsemane is also named, but in the account in Luke 22:39-46, it is called simply the Mount of Olives. John 18:1 calls it a garden beyond the Brook Kidron.

2. Asking eight of the disciples to sit down, Jesus took Peter, James, and John, and they went farther into the garden. These three, who seem to form the inner circle, had been with Him on the mount of transfiguration (Mt 17:1-9; Mk 9:2-13; Lk 9:28-36), had seen the girl raised at the house of Jairus (Mt 9:18-25; Mk 5:35-43; Lk 8:40-56), and were apparently the three from whom Jesus could most expect sympathy and understanding in this hour.

3. These three disciples perceived that Jesus was greatly agitated. A comparison of Matthew’s description with that of Mark and Luke emphasizes the fact that Jesus was experiencing great sorrow and inner struggle such as the disciples had never before witnessed. He said to them, “My soul is exceeding sorrowful, even unto death: tarry ye here, and watch with me” (Mt 26:38). This did not mean that Jesus was in danger of dying on the spot, but it did mean that He was in extreme inner conflict. In this hour, He desired the sympathetic understanding of the three disciples. However, He went a little farther into the garden, away from even the three, and there began to pray (v. 39).

4. Many have commented on this experience of Jesus and have attempted to enter into the struggle which is revealed in the threefold prayer, and to discuss the contrast between Jesus in His agony and the sleepy disciples. While many truths can be derived from a study of this passage, the overwhelming impression is one of the loneliness of Jesus in His hour of crucifixion.

5. G. Campbell Morgan describes the progression of Jesus away from the multitude and toward the loneliness of the cross. Jesus first had left the multitude in order to be with His disciples in the upper room. There Judas had forsaken him. He went with the remaining eleven to the entrance to the Garden of Gethsemane. There, He had left eight of the disciples and took the faithful three with Him into the inner garden. Then He had left the three and retired to pray. The incidents relating to the whole scene emphasize the loneliness of Christ as He took upon Himself the sins of the whole world.

6. As Christ retired from even His closest three disciples, Matthew records that He “fell on his face, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless not as I will, but as thou wilt” (v. 39). Luke 22:41 states that He “kneeled down”; it is probable that He kneeled first, and then, in the process of His prayer, sank down until He was completely on His face on the ground. Hebrews 5:7 is the commentary on this prayer, speaking as it does of “strong crying and tears.” This was an hour of supreme agony on the part of Jesus.

7. He addressed His prayer to “my Father,” claiming Their intimate eternal relationship. The clause, “if it be possible,” and the petition, “let this cup pass from me,” indicate the natural desire of Jesus’ human heart to avoid the supreme issue that was before Him. No man, in sinful and mortal flesh, can understand the conflict in the holy soul of Jesus who had never experienced the slightest shadow of sin and had never known any barrier between Himself and the Father. Now upon this holy One had come the hour when He would bear all the terrible sin of the world—past, present, and future—and would experience being the sin offering forsaken by the Father.

8. The human desire to avoid such an issue is not incompatible with the immutability of the divine nature. While this presents no theological problem to anyone accepting the full humanity as well as the full deity of Christ, at the same time, it offers no basis for men to understand the agony of Jesus. It is clear that whatever the desire of the human nature may have been, the will of Jesus was always without wavering to do the will of the Father.

9. After His first prayer and petition, Jesus returned to the three disciples, who probably were very near, and found them asleep. Matthew records that He addressed His words to Peter, and Mark 14:37 adds “Simon.” The address, however, was in the plural, “What, could ye not watch with me one hour?” In the hour of Christ’s supreme need, Peter, who had affirmed that he would die with His Lord, could not even keep awake. Recognizing the limitations of the human flesh, Jesus exhorted them, “Watch and pray, that ye enter not into temptation: the spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak” (Mt 26:41). Christ did not question their desire to stay alert, but their will was not equal to the occasion.

10. Leaving the disciples a second time, He prayed, “O my Father, if this cup may not pass away from me, except I drink it, thy will be done” (v. 42). This time, the condition is stated in the negative, which may indicate a progression in His prayer and a recognition that the cup could not pass away. Returning to the three disciples, He again found them sound asleep. Leaving them a third time, He prayed again, repeating the same words as in the second petition.

11. Luke 22:40-44 records only one of the three petitions, probably the last of the three, and indicates that Jesus withdrew “about a stone’s cast” from the three disciples. Luke records, however, the appearance of an angel from heaven to strengthen Him as He continued praying, and that His agony was so great that “his sweat was as it were great drops of blood falling down to the ground” (vv. 43-44). Short of death itself, Jesus could not have been in more agony of soul.

12. Coming back to His disciples for the third time, He found them again asleep, and to them He said the sad words, “Sleep on now, and take your rest: behold, the hour is at hand, and the Son of man is betrayed into the hands of sinners” (Mt 26:45). Many have tried to analyze this statement of Jesus as being sarcastic or cutting. It probably was said in sad recognition of His own loneliness. Jesus said, in effect, that they should take their rest, for He knew that in a few moments, their rest would be interrupted, and a sleepless night was ahead of them all.

13. Matthew does not indicate that any time elapsed between verses 45 and 46, but probably there was a brief interval. Then Jesus, awakening them for the third time, said, “Rise, let us be going: behold, he is at hand that doth betray me.” The agony of Gethsemane was behind Him. The brutality of His arrest, beating at the hands of the soldiers, and the crown of thorns were ahead, but even this was just the prelude to the cross itself.

H. Betrayal and Arrest of Jesus, 26:47-56.

1. As Jesus was awakening His disciples, the crowd led by Judas was seen approaching the garden. In the parallel accounts of Mark 14:43-50; Luke 22:47-53; and John 18:3-11, it is apparent that this was a large company of possibly several hundred people, including the chief priest and elders, a motley crowd which had been gathered by Jewish leaders to assist them, and may have included the two hundred Roman soldiers assigned to the use of the Sanhedrin.

2. The fact that they carried short swords would identify the Roman soldiers, and the clubs would identify those hired as temple police. Some also carried torches and lanterns. The size of the company indicated the apprehension of the Jewish leaders that, even at such a late hour in the night, the pilgrims who thronged Jerusalem might interfere with the arrest of Jesus. The importance of the event to the chief priests and scribes is indicated by their presence on the night of the Passover for the occasion of Christ’s arrest.

3 . Judas kept his sordid bargain with the Jews, and, in keeping with the prearranged plan to identify Him with a kiss, he came out of the multitude to Jesus and said, “Hail, master,” and kissed Him (Mt 26:49). His respectful address was the extreme in hypocrisy, and his kiss expressed, as no other means could possibly have done, his wicked unbelief, which rejected the evidence that Jesus was indeed the Messiah. In his heart, he was done with the whole concept that Jesus was the King and that he would reign with Him. The Greek verb translated “kissed” indicates that he kissed Him again and again, so that in the darkness, all would see and understand.

4. The fact that Christ permitted him to do it was in keeping with His purpose to be submissive to the will of God, even unto the death on the cross. But for Judas himself, it was also the last attempt of Jesus, even in this hour, to let Judas repent of his sin and unbelief. Jesus addressed Judas as “friend” which is translated from the Greek hetaire meaning friend or associate, but in contrast to phile, which would have meant a beloved friend. There was no hypocrisy in Christ’s words, and He asked searchingly, “Wherefore art thou come?”

5. Why, indeed, would one who heard the matchless sermons of Jesus and witnessed hundreds of miracles turn away from such a wonderful person? Such is the hardness of the human heart and the blinding of satanic influence that one who had every reason to trust in Christ and had been blessed as no unsaved man had ever been blessed, would persist in his hardness of heart and unbelief. Judas, like Pharaoh of old, had gone beyond the point of no return.

6. Only John records the conversation between Jesus and those who had come to arrest Him (18:4-9). According to John’s gospel, Christ asked the question, apparently after He had already been identified by Judas, “Whom seek ye?” When they answered, “Jesus of Nazareth,” Jesus replied, “I am he.” John records that after Jesus said, “I am he,” that “they went backward, and fell to the ground.” Apparently, there was a momentary display of divine power, a final witness to Judas who betrayed Him, to the disciples who were to flee from Him, and to the crowd that was filled with hatred for Him. Jesus then told them again that He was the one that they sought and then added that they should let the disciples go their way.

7. It is at this point that Matthew picks up the story and records the incident of Peter smiting a servant of the high priest. Only John identifies the disciple and gives the name of the servant, Malchus (Jn 18:10). By the time this was recorded in John, Peter was already dead.

8. Jesus had told them in the upper room that the time had come when one not having a sword should sell his garment and buy one, and they replied that they had two swords, which the Lord said were enough (Lk 22:36-38).

9. When it became apparent that Jesus was about to be arrested, Peter, with sudden courage, drew his sword and struck at the servant of the high priest, no doubt intending to hit him on the top of the head and kill him. He missed, however, and the sword cut off the ear of the servant and probably hit the armor covering the shoulder. If Peter had killed the servant, it is possible that he would have been crucified at the same time as Jesus. To him, however, Jesus addressed the words, “Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword” (Mt 26:52). The time would come when Peter would die as a martyr for the faith, but this was not the hour, nor was the sword the way by which he should serve Christ.

10. To make it plain that Jesus needed no defender, He told Peter that all He needed to do was to pray to the Father and He would be given twelve legions of angels. A Roman legion consisted of from three thousand to six thousand men, and therefore, twelve legions was a company far in excess of the multitude that had gathered against Jesus. 11. It was not, however, the will of God that Jesus should be so rescued, and Jesus posed the question, “But how then shall the scriptures be fulfilled, that thus it must be?” (26:54). Complete submission to the will of God and to the path that led to the cross is evident in the words of Christ.

11. To the multitude who had gathered, Jesus addressed the biting words, “Are ye come out as against a thief with swords and staves for to take me? I sat daily with you teaching in the temple, and ye laid no hold on me” (26:55). He was reminding them that the force that was gathered here was not because He would resist arrest but because the chief priests and the scribes feared the retaliation of those who had put their trust in Him. Matthew adds, “But all this was done, that the scriptures of the prophets might be fulfilled.” This was the will of God.

12. At this point, fear overtook the disciples, and Matthew records sadly, “Then all the disciples forsook him, and fled.” Jesus was indeed alone in this tragic hour, but out of the tragedy would come salvation and restoration even for those who had forsaken Him and fled. The majestic person of Christ may have impressed some of those in the multitude that arrested Him. Who knows whether some of them may not have been included in the multitude who became His followers on the day of Pentecost and afterward?

I. Trial of Jesus Before Caiaphas and the Sanhedrin, 26:57-68.

1. Having arrested and bound Jesus as a dangerous prisoner, they led Him away, according to Matthew’s account, to Caiaphas—the high priest—and the Sanhedrin. A parallel account is given in Mark 14:53-65. John mentions that Jesus first had a brief trial before Annas (Jn 18:13-23) and that Annas had sent Him to Caiaphas (Jn 18:24). Matthew and Mark do not mention the trial before Annas, and Luke does not mention either of these trials. The whole procedure was highly illegal, as they were not to hold trials like this at night.

2. The purpose of these preliminary trials was to find a legal basis on which Jesus could be condemned to death. Matthew 26 indicates that they sought false witnesses, but they could not get even the false witnesses to agree, until finally they found two that agreed, as Matthew quotes them in 26:61, “This fellow said, I am able to destroy the temple of God, and to build it in three days.” Even this, however, was not a sufficient ground for condemnation.

3. In desperation, the high priest addressed Jesus saying, “Answerest thou nothing? what is it which these witness against thee?” (v. 62). Jesus, however, did not answer until the high priest said to Him, “I adjure thee by the living God, that thou tell us whether thou be the Christ, the Son of God” (v. 63). At this official and direct question, Jesus responded, “Thou has said: nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven” (v. 64).

4. It is strange that the high priest was unable to produce any witnesses to confirm his charges, as Jesus had freely claimed His deity and Messiahship, but the words of Jesus were all the high priest needed. Jesus not only claimed to be “the Christ, the Son of God,” but He added that He would sit at the right hand of God and come in clouds of heaven as the predicted Messiah. This clear claim of deity prompted the high priest to tear his clothes and say, “He hath spoken blasphemy. What think ye?” The crowd answered, “He is guilty of death” (vv. 65-66).

5. The issue was clear enough. If Jesus were not all He claimed to be, indeed He was guilty of death, according to the Jewish law. What the chief priests and the scribes ignored was the fact that Jesus had not only made the claim but He had fully supported it by the very credentials and miracles which the Old Testament had attributed to Him.

6. Then, contrary to both Jewish law and Roman law, they abused Him. “Then did they spit in his face, and buffeted him; and others smote him with the palms of their hands, saying, Prophesy unto us, thou Christ, Who is he that smote thee?” (vv. 67-68). This cowardly abuse of Jesus was not limited to servants; the text indicates the Sanhedrin itself lowered its dignity to participate. Tasker is too kind when he states, “It would seem highly improbable that such an august body would have demeaned themselves by such undignified behaviour.” They hated Jesus and delighted in this opportunity to hurt Him. In all this abuse, Jesus was silent. He was ready to answer sincere questions of faith but not the slanted questions of unbelief.

J. Peter’s Three Denials, 26:69-75.

1. Peter, who had followed Jesus into the high priest’s court at a safe distance and had gone in to sit with the guards (26:58), hoped that no one would notice him. However, he was drawn to the scene as if by a magnet and wanted desperately to know what would become of Jesus. Parallel accounts of his denial are found in Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62; and John 18:15-18, 25-27. The three denials recorded by Matthew were probably interrupted by some of the other incidents.

2. The first to detect Peter’s identity was a maid who accused, “Thou also wast with Jesus of Galilee” (Mt 26:59). But Peter was loud in his denial. Peter then went out into the porch, where another maid saw him and accused him, “This fellow was also with Jesus of Nazareth” (v. 71). This time, Peter denied more emphatically and even denied with an oath that he did not know Jesus. Mark 14:68 records that after the second denial, the cock crowed. The third denial came some time later, which Luke refers to as after “about the space of one hour” (Lk 22:59). The third denial came when the crowd itself said to Peter, “Surely thou also art one of them; for thy speech [betrayeth] thee” (Mt 26:73).

3. At this third accusation, Matthew records, “Then began he to curse and to swear, saying, I know not the man” (v. 74). It was then that the cock crowed the second time. Matthew, Luke, and John record only this crowing of the cock, but Mark records that the cock crowed twice, “And the second time the cock crew. And Peter called to mind the word that Jesus said unto him, Before the cock crow twice, thou shalt deny me thrice. And when he thought thereon, he wept” (Mk 14:72). Luke records that at this point, “The Lord turned, and looked upon Peter” (Lk 22:61). It was the look of Jesus that caused Peter to remember the prediction of Jesus that he would deny Him thrice. Peter, who thought he was willing to die for his Lord, now faced the bitter truth that in the hour of testing, he had failed.

IV. Source Credentials.

A. Dr. Charles C. Ryrie.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Caldwell_Ryrie

B. Dr. John F. Walvoord.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Walvoord

C. Dr. Merrill F. Unger.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merrill_Unger

D. Dr. J. Dwight Pentecost.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._Dwight_Pentecost

Matthew Chapter 25

I. The Rejected King Describes The Coming Judgments.

II. Scripture Text.

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=MATTHEW+25&version=NASB1995

III. Overview. Dr. Charles C. Ryrie, Th. D., Ph. D. (DTS). Dr. Merrill F. Unger, Th. D., Ph. D. (DTS). Dr. J. Dwight Pentecost, Th. D. (DTS). Dr. John F. Walvoord, Th. D. (DTS).

A. Parable of the Ten Virgins, 25:1-13.

1. The kingdom of heaven” is the same as that foretold in the Old Testament and proclaimed by John the Baptist (3:2), Jesus 4:17, 23; 9:35), and the disciples of Jesus (10:7). The aspects of “the kingdom of heaven” were specifically made known by the King in Matthew 13. The familiar illustration of the ten virgins, as presented in Matthew 25, is a further effort by Christ to drive home the necessity of watchfulness and preparation for His second coming. An oriental wedding had three stages: first, the legal marriage arranged by the parents of the bridegroom and the bride; second, the traditional ceremony, when the bridegroom, accompanied by his friends, would proceed from his home to the home of the bride and claim her as his own; third, the marriage feast held at the home of the bridegroom. The ten virgins represent the remnant of Israel after the church has been taken. The Lord is teaching that following the second advent, and His regathering of Israel, there will be a judgment on the earth for living Israel to determine who will go into the kingdom, called the “marriage feast,” and who will be excluded from it. The judgment of Jewish survivors is described in Ezekiel 20:34-38 and illustrated in Matthew 25:1-30; Ezekiel states that it will occur after all surviving Israelites have been regathered from the ends of the earth to the land of Israel. Christ will cause them to “pass under the rod” (see Lev 27:32) to purge out the rebels. As a result those rebels (unsaved) will not enter the land of Israel (Ezekiel 20:28) but will be cast into outer darkness (Matt 25:30). In contrast, those who successfully pass through this judgment will enter the millennial kingdom t0 enjoy the blessings of the New Covenant (Ezekiel 20:37).

2. The illustration presumes that the legal marriage has already taken place and can reasonably be identified with the marriage of Christ and the church already consummated at the rapture. When Christ returns at His second coming, He will bring His bride with Him. The five virgins who bring oil in their vessels illustrate those that are ready for His return. The five foolish maidens, although outwardly prepared, are not really ready. When the time comes for the marriage feast, they are not prepared to enter into the procession and join the feast.

3. Although interpretation is not given in this passage, oil may be taken here as representative of the Holy Spirit and His work of salvation. When Christ comes to earth with His bride, only those prepared by new birth will enter into the wedding feast, which seems to be fulfilled in the millennium or at least the first portion of the millennium. Some commentators desire to apply the ten virgins to the church in the present age. The fact that the word then is used in 25:1 seems to refer to the second coming of Christ to the earth.

4. Although worthy expositors can be cited in support of this view, it is preferable to interpret it strictly in the context of the second coming of Christ. Actually, the bride, the church, is not in view specifically. Although the Syriac and Vulgate versions of verse 1 read that they “went forth to meet the bridegroom and the bride,” it is questionable whether this addition was in the original text, even though it is true that Christ will bring His bride with Him. The important point here, as in the preceding illustration, is that preparation should precede the second coming of Christ and that it will be too late when He comes.

5. What is true of the second coming is, of course, also true of the rapture, and believers today can derive a secondary application of this passage for their own need. In our modern world, where superficial religion is all too evident, this passage reminds us once again that apart from the work of the Holy Spirit, symbolized by the oil, no one is ready for the coming of the Lord.

B. Parable of the Talents, 25:14-30.

1 . The familiar parable of the talents in Matthew 25 is the sixth and final illustration Christ used in regard to preparedness for His second coming. Here, the emphasis is on serving rather than watching, as in the parable of the virgins.

2. As was customary in the ancient world, the master of the servants was pictured as turning over his property to his servants because he was going on a journey. He divided his property to his three servants according to their ability, giving five talents to one, two to another, and one talent to the third.

3. A talent was a large sum of money, varying greatly in value according to whether it was silver or gold, and could weigh from fifty-eight to eighty pounds. A silver talent could be worth as much as $2,000, and a gold talent could be worth as much as $30,000. With the rise in price of these metals, today the value would even be higher. When taking into consideration that a man’s wage in Christ’s time was sixteen cents a day, the purchasing power of this amount of money was very large. At maximum, the five-talent man could have received as much as $150,000, a fortune, which would be worth millions today in purchasing power.

4. In the absence of his lord, the five-talent man doubled his money. In like manner, the two-talent man also doubled his money. The one who had received the single talent, however, buried his money in the earth and did nothing with it.

5. In the illustration, the lord of the servants, upon his return, called in his servants for their report. The five-talent man was able to report proudly that he had doubled his money. The two-talent man did likewise. It is significant that both the five-talent and the two-talent man were given precisely the same commendation, “Well done, thou good and faithful servant: thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord” (25:21). The principle that rewards are given according to faithfulness is illustrated well in this parable.

6. The one-talent man, however, had to report that he had done nothing but bury his money. He offered the lame excuse, “Lord, I knew thee that thou art an hard man, reaping where thou hast not sown, and gathering where thou hast not strawed: And I was afraid, and went and hid thy talent in the earth: lo, there thou hast that is thine” (vv. 24-25). Whether or not the servant’s accusation was true, it was only an excuse at best. If the servant had actually believed what he had said, it should have made him all the more diligent. His lord, accordingly, answered him abruptly and denounced him as a “wicked and slothful servant.” He pointed out that the least he could have done was to put his money in the bank where it would have received interest.

7. An interesting question that is not directly answered in the text is why the one-talent man did not put it in the bank. Most expositors are rather vague in their explanation of this detail. The explanation seems to be that this wicked man had the same kind of cunning that Judas Iscariot used when he accepted the money for the betrayal of Christ. Judas had reasoned that if Jesus was indeed the Messiah, his betrayal would not matter, and he would be ahead thirty pieces of silver. If Jesus was not the Messiah, he at least would have the silver. So, the wicked one-talent man likewise reasoned: If my lord returns, I will be able to give him back his talent and cannot be accused of being a thief, but if he does not return, there will be no record that the money belongs to him, such as would be true if I deposited it in the bank, and then I will be able to use the money myself. His basic problem, like the problem of Judas, was a lack of faith.

8. The one-talent man did not believe that it was sure his lord was coming back. It is therefore clear that his basic problem was that of being an unbeliever, not simply being unfaithful in service. Accordingly, the conclusion of the illustration, “For unto every one that hath shall be given, and he shall have abundance: but from him that hath not shall be taken away even that which he hath” (v. 29), refers to everyone who has faith or who is lacking faith.

9. Here, as elsewhere in Scripture, while works may be an evidence of salvation, they are never the ground of salvation. The one-talent man, while deficient in works, was condemned because of his lack of faith. Accordingly, the one-talent man is not an illustration of a backsliding Christian, as no Christian justified by faith and declared righteous by God could ever be cast into the outer darkness. A person who really believes in the first coming of Christ will also believe in His second coming and for the same reasons.

10. Taken as a whole, the illustrations, which interpret the doctrine of the second coming and make practical application of the truth, emphasize the two themes of watching and serving. What is true for those anticipating the second coming is also true for those who anticipate Christ’s coming for His church.

C. Judgment of the Nations, 25:31-46.

1. The third section of the Olivet discourse begins with 25:31. The first section, 24:4-31, had answered the questions of the disciples concerning the signs of the end of the age and the coming of the Lord. The second section, 24:32-25:30, presented interpretations and applications of the truth of the second coming of Christ. Beginning in 25:31, Jesus went beyond the questions of the disciples to describe the period following the second coming.

2. This is a judgment related to the second coming of Christ. After Christ has dealt with Israel, He will turn in judgment to the Gentiles. He will enact His role of judge as the “Son of man” (Matt 8:20; Dan 7:13; Matt 16:28); the second Adam about to take over the restored sovereignty of the earth forfeited ay the first Adam. “The He will sit upon the throne of His glory (i.e., “His glorious throne,” 19:28, NASB) the rule promised to David through his posterity (2 Sam 8:12-16). The “throne,” moreover is not the Father’s throne in heaven, which Christ now occupies (Rev 3:21), but His own earthly millennial throne (2 Sam 7:16; Jer 23:5).

3. A strict exegesis of this passage, however, does not support the conclusion that this is a general judgment. There is no mention of resurrection of either the righteous or the wicked, and “all nations” seems to exclude Israel. Accordingly, if the view that there is a kingdom of Christ on earth for a thousand years after His second advent is supported by other Scriptures, this passage fits naturally in such a prophetic framework, and, as such, constitutes the judgment of the living who are on earth at the time of the second coming of Christ in respect to their entrance into the millennial kingdom. This judgment therefore should be contrasted to the judgment of Israel (Eze 20:34-38) and the judgment of the wicked (Rev 20:11-15) which comes after the millennium has concluded. This passage, more precisely than any other, describes the judgment of the world at the beginning of Christ’s millennial kingdom.

4. The time of the judgment is stated to be the period following the second coming of Christ, Matthew 25:31, “When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory.” This judgment, therefore, should be distinguished from the judgment of the church in heaven, the judgment of the wicked at the end of the millennium, and the judgment of Israel.

5. At this judgment, “all nations,” better translated “all Gentiles,” are gathered before Him and are described as sheep and goats intermingled. In the judgment, the sheep are put on His right hand and the goats on His left. The sheep are invited to inherit His kingdom, and Christ will address them: “Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in: Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me” (vv. 34-36). When the sheep reply, in verses 37-39, asking when they did these deeds of kindness, the King will reply, “Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me” (v. 40). In mentioning “my brethren,” He is referring to a third class, neither sheep nor goats, which can only be identified as Israel, the only remaining people who are in contrast to all the Gentiles.

6. The King will then address the goats and dismiss them into everlasting fire, declaring that they have not done these deeds of kindness. When they protest, asking when they omitted these deeds, the King will reply, “Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me” (v. 45). The passage concludes with the goats dismissed into everlasting punishment and the righteous entering into the blessings of eternal life.

7. This judgment fits naturally and easily into the prophetic program as usually outlined by premillenarians. The throne is an earthly throne, fulfilling the prediction of Jeremiah 23:5. Those who are judged are Gentiles (Gr. ethne), which, although sometimes used for Jews (Lk 7:5; 23:2; Jn 11:48, 51, 52; 18:35; Ac 10:22), is more characteristically used of Gentiles as distinguished from Jews, as for instance in Romans 11:13; 15:27; 16:4; Galatians 2:12; and is used in contrast to Jews in Romans 3:29 and 9:24.

8. If the evidence sustains the conclusion that this applies to Gentiles living on earth at the time of the second coming of Christ, a further problem is introduced by the nature of the judgment. How can deeds, such as giving the thirsty to drink, clothing the naked, and doing other deeds of kindness, form a basis for salvation? Ephesians 2:8-9 makes plain, “For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, that any man should boast.” The Bible clearly teaches in many passages that salvation is by grace and by faith alone and is not based on works (Ro 3:10-12, 21, 28). The answer to this problem is that works are presented here, not as the ground of salvation, but as the evidence of it, in the sense of James 2:26, where it is declared, “Faith without works is dead”; that is, it is not real faith unless it produces works. While this solves the problem in part, the question still remains whether such deeds of kindness are sufficient to demonstrate salvation.

9. The answer to this problem is found in the context of this passage. Those described here are people who have lived through the great tribulation, a time of unparalleled anti-Semitism, when the majority of Jews in the land will be killed. Under these circumstances, if a Gentile befriends a Jew to the extent of feeding and clothing and visiting him, it could only mean that he is a believer in Jesus Christ and recognizes the Jews as the chosen people. Accordingly, in this context, such works become a distinctive evidence that the Gentiles described as the sheep are those who are children of God by faith in Jesus Christ.

10. This judgment, which results in the goats being cast into everlasting fire, is in keeping with the previous prediction of Christ in the parable of the wheat and tares and the parable of the dragnet (Mt 13:24-30, 31-43, 47-50), and is also clearly taught in Revelation 14:11 and 19:15. No adults who are not converted will be allowed to enter the millennial kingdom. The judgment here is not a final judgment, but is preparatory to establishing the kingdom of righteousness and peace, of which many Scriptures speak.

11. In this passage, Christ comes to a world that is basically anti-Christ and worshiping a man satanically empowered. There is no basis here for concluding this to be a judgment of all men living and dead. It is quite different than the judgment of the great white throne (Rev 20:11-15), which takes place in space, whereas this judgment takes place on earth.

12. Although the question of whether Christ will come for His church before the tribulation (the pretribulational view) or at the time of His second coming to earth (the posttribulational view) is not dealt with in this passage, the implications are clearly in favor of the pretribulational view. If the rapture and translation of the church occur while Christ is coming from heaven to earth in His second coming to set up His kingdom, and the church meets the Lord in the air, it is obvious that this very act would separate all the saved from the unsaved. Under these circumstances, no judgment of the nations would be necessary subsequent to the second coming of Christ, because the sheep and the goats would already be separated.

13. The implication of this passage in Matthew is that no rapture of living saints occurs at the time Christ comes to set up His kingdom. This implies that there is a time period between the rapture and the time Christ comes to set up His kingdom, during which a new body of saints, both Jews and Gentiles, is created by faith in Christ.

14. Furthermore, when these saints are judged, they are not given new bodies, but enter the millennium in their natural bodies, in keeping with the millennial predictions of Scripture which describe the saints as bearing children, building houses, and otherwise having a natural life (Is 65:18-25).

15. A proper exegesis of this passage, accordingly, tends to support both the premillennial and the pretribulational point of view, even though this is not the main purpose of this prophecy.

16. Taken as a whole, the Olivet discourse is one of the great prophetic utterances of Scripture and provides facts nowhere else given in quite the same way. In it, Christ, the greatest of the prophets and the master Teacher, described the end of the age as the climax of the troubles of earth in a great tribulation. The time of unprecedented trouble will be terminated by the second coming of Christ. The saved and the unsaved will be separated, and only the saved will enter the millennial kingdom. This is the final word, which Matthew brings in answer to the leading question of this first gospel, concerning the fulfillment of the prophecies of the Old Testament of a glorious kingdom on earth. Matthew states clearly that while Christ, in His first coming, suffered and died and was rejected as both King and Saviour by His own people, He will come again and, in triumph, will bring in the prophesied kingdom literally, just as the Old Testament prophecies had anticipated. There is postponement but not annulment of the great prophecies of the kingdom on earth.

17. It is clear that the disciples did not understand these prophecies at the time. In the few days that followed, they were to witness the death and then the resurrection of Jesus Christ. They were to ask again the question of when the kingdom would be brought in on the day of the ascension of Christ (Ac 1:6). As further revelation was given in the writing of the New Testament, and the disciples pondered the words that they had not understood before, they gradually comprehended the truth that Christ was first coming for His own in the rapture of the church, but then that there would be a fulfillment of the predicted time of trouble. This, in turn, would be climaxed by the second coming of Christ and the establishment of the kingdom. Not one prophecy will be left unfulfilled when history has completed its course and the saints are gathered in the New Jerusalem in the new heaven and the new earth.

IV. Dr. Charles C. Ryrie, Th. D., Ph. D. (DTS). Scripture Text Examination.

A. 25:32. “All the nations.” Lit., All the Gentiles. This is a judgment of those Gentiles who survive the Tribulation, and whose heart-relation to God is evidenced by their treatment of the Jews (Christ’s brethren, v 40), especially during that time. Surviving Jews will also be judged at the same time. See Ezek 20:33-44 note. [This section describes the coming judgment of those Jews who will be living at the time of the conclusion of the Tribulation period when Christ returns to earth. The Chief Shepherd (Christ) will then examine His flock (pass under the rod, v 37; cf Lev 27:32), “purge … the rebels” (v 38), and bring the faithful into the blessing of the New Covenant in the kingdom. At this same time, Gentile survivors of the Tribulation period will also be judged so that all who live through that terrible time will, at its conclusion, either enter the kingdom or be case into hell. Thus, at the very beginning of the Millennium, all who enter it in earthly bodies will have proven through these two judgments that they are redeemed.]

B. 25:35. To do these deeds of kindness to Jewish people during the Tribulation will undoubtedly expose the doers to persecution and even death at the hands of the Antichrist and his agents.

C. 25:37. “when.” They are unconscious of their goodness, in contrast to the ostentation of the Pharisees. In v 44 we see the opposite: the unconscious neglect of duty.

V. Everybody reads material that has been written by someone else. So, it is imperative for us to trust our sources of information, so that we can feel confident that our writings are based on the knowledge and understanding of such Biblically sound authors. Please understand that my articles are based on the prior writings of knowledgeable and trustworthy theologians, of whom “had no ax to grind,” other than the ax of doctrinal truth.

VI. In this article, I have chosen theologians whom have proven themselves to be highly respected by others in the Biblical doctrine of eschatology (study of the end times), and other areas of scripture. Notice, in the following information, that each of my references are deceased and had lengthy times of ministry and instruction throughout much of their lives.

A. Dr. Charles C. Ryrie.

https://obits.dallasnews.com/us/obituaries/dallasmorningnews/name/charles-ryrie-obituary?id=18085097

B. Dr. Merrill F. Unger.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merrill_Unger

C. Dr. J. Dwight Pentecost.

https://voice.dts.edu/contributor/j-dwight-pentecost/

D. Dr. John F. Walvoord.

https://voice.dts.edu/article/john-f-walvoord-1910-2002-home-for-christmas-dallas-theological-seminary/

VII. For education and other supporting data for each source of information in this article, please refer to my Page, “About My References.” The following link shows information about Dallas Theological Seminary, from which many of my sources have a connection, of student, graduate, instructor. I encourage you to familiarize yourself with the Seminary. It is important to understand that DTS is not a denominational seminary, and is totally independent of such.

A. Dallas Theological Seminary Wikipedia info.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dallas_Theological_Seminary

B. Faculty.

https://www.dts.edu/employee/?employee_role=Faculty&employee_department=

C. About DTS.

https://www.dts.edu/

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this: