March 2023 – Eternity

Thy Kingdom Come – The Pretribulation Rapture (Part 2)

Thy Kingdom Come – The Tribulation (Part 2). The Church.

I. Article Title. The Church. (The nature; The church as a mystery; Distinctions between Israel and the church; The doctrine of imminence; The work of the Restrainer; The necessity of an interval.)

A. The nature of the church.

1. One must carefully observe certain distinctions between the church and Israel which are clearly set forth in the Scripture, but often neglected in the consideration at hand.

a. There is a distinction between the professing church and national Israel. It should be observed that the professing church is composed of those who make a profession of faith in Christ. To some this profession is based on reality and to some on no reality at all. This latter group will go into the tribulation period, for Revelation 2:22 indicates clearly that the unsaved professing church will experience this visitation of wrath. Membership in the group called national Israel is based on a physical birth, and all in this group who are not saved and removed by rapture and who are alive at the time of the rapture will, with the unsaved professing church, be subjected to the wrath of the tribulation.

b. There is a distinction between the true church and the professing church. The true church is composed of all those in this age who have received Christ as Savior. Over against this we have the professing church composed of those who make a profession of receiving Christ without actually receiving Him. Only the true church will be raptured.

c. There is a distinction between the true church and true or spiritual Israel. Prior to Pentecost there were saved individuals, but there was no church, and they were a part of spiritual Israel, not the church. After the day of Pentecost, and until the rapture, we find the church, which is His body, but no spiritual Israel. After the rapture we find no church, but a true or spiritual Israel again. These distinctions must be kept clearly in mind. The rapture will remove, not all who make a profession of faith in Christ, but only those who have been born again and have received His life. The unbelieving portion of the visible church, together with unbelievers in the nation Israel, will go into the tribulation period.

2. Since the church is the body, of which Christ is the Head (Eph. 1:22; 5:23; Col.
1:18), the bride, of which He is the Bridegroom (1 Cor. 11:2; Eph. 5:23), the object of His love (Eph. 5:25), the branch of which He is the Root and Stem (John 15:5), the building, of which He is the Foundation and Cornerstone (1 Cor. 3:9; Eph. 2:19-22); there exists between the believer and the Lord a union and a unity. The believer is no longer separated from Him, but brought into the closest oneness with Him.

3. If the church is in the seventieth week, she is subjected to the wrath, judgment, and indignation which characterizes the period, and because of her oneness with Christ, He, likewise, would be subjected to that same visitation. This is impossible according to 1 John 4:17, for He can not be brought into judgment again. Inasmuch as the church has been perfected and delivered from all judgment (Rom. 8:1; John 5:24; 1 John 4:17), if she is subjected to judgment again, the promises of God would be of none effect and the death of Christ would be ineffectual. Who would dare to assert that the death of Christ could fail to accomplish its purpose?

4. While the members may be experimentally imperfect and need experimental cleansing, yet the church, which is His body, has a perfect standing in Christ and could not need such cleansing. The nature of the testing in the seventieth week, as stated in Revelation 3:10, is not to bring the individual to cleansing, but to reveal the degradation and need of the unregenerate heart. The nature of the church prevents such a testing.

5. Again, Revelation 13:7 makes it clear that all who are in the seventieth week are brought into subjection to the Beast and through him to Satan, who gives the Beast His power. If the church were in this period she would be subjected to Satan, and Christ would either lose His place as Head, or He, Himself, because of His union with the Church, would be likewise subjected to Satan’s authority. Such a thing is unthinkable. Thus it is concluded that the nature of the church and the completeness of her salvation prevent her from being in the seventieth week.

B. The concept of the church as a mystery.

1. Closely related to the previous consideration is the concept given to us in the New Testament that the church is a mystery. It was no mystery that God was going to provide salvation for the Jews, nor that Gentiles would be blessed in salvation. The fact that God was going to form Jews and Gentiles alike into one body was never revealed in the Old Testament and forms the mystery of which Paul speaks in Ephesians 3:1-7; Romans 16:25-27; Colossians 1:26-29. This whole mystery program was not revealed until after the rejection of Christ by Israel.

2. It was after the rejection of Matthew 12:23-24 that the Lord first makes a
prophecy of the coming church in Matthew 16:18. It is after the rejection of the Cross that the church had its inception in Acts 2. It was after the final rejection by Israel that God called out Paul to be the Apostle of the Gentiles through whom this mystery of the nature of the church is revealed.

3. The church is manifestly an interruption of God’s program for Israel, which was not brought into being until Israel’s rejection of the offer of the Kingdom. It must logically follow that this mystery program must itself be brought to a conclusion before God can resume His dealing with the nation Israel, as has been shown previously He will do. The mystery program, which was so distinct in its inception, will certainly be separate at its conclusion. This program must be concluded before God resumes and culminates His program for Israel. This mystery concept of the church makes a pretribulation rapture a necessity.

C. The distinctions between Israel and the church.

1. Chafer has set forth twenty-four contrasts between Israel and the church which show us conclusively that these two groups can not be united into one, but that they must be distinguished as two separate entities with whom God is dealing in a special program. These contrasts may be outlined as follows: (1) The extent of Biblical revelation: Israel—nearly four-fifths of the Bible; Church—about one-fifth. (2) The Divine purpose: Israel—the earthly promises in
the covenants; Church—the heavenly promises in the gospel. (3) The seed of Abraham: Israel—the physical seed, of whom some become a spiritual seed; Church—a spiritual seed. (4) Birth: Israel—physical birth that produces a relationship; Church—spiritual birth that brings relationship. (5) Headship: Israel—Abraham; Church—Christ. (6) Covenants: Israel—Abrahamic and all the following covenants; Church—indirectly related to the Abrahamic and new covenants; (7) Nationality: Israel—one nation; Church—from all nations. (8) Divine dealing: Israel—national and individual; Church—individual only. (9) Dispensations: Israel—seen in all ages from Abraham; Church—seen only in this present age. (10) Ministry: Israel—no missionary activity and no gospel to
preach; Church—a commission to fulfill. (11) The death of Christ: Israel—guilty
nationally, to be saved by it; Church—perfectly saved by it now. (12) The Father: Israel —by a peculiar relationship God was Father to the nation; Church—we are related individually to God as Father. (13) Christ: Israel—Messiah, Immanuel, King; Church— Savior, Lord, Bridegroom, Head. (14) The Holy Spirit: Israel—came upon some temporarily; Church—indwells all. (15) Governing principle: Israel—Mosaic law system; Church—grace system. (16) Divine enablement: Israel—none; Church—the indwelling Holy Spirit. (17) Two farewell discourses: Israel—Olivet discourse; Church—upper room discourse. (18) The promise of Christ’s return: Israel—in power and glory for judgment;
Church—to receive us to Himself. (19) Position: Israel—a servant; Church—members of the family. (20) Christ’s earthly reign: Israel—subjects; Church—co-reigners. (21) Priesthood: Israel—had a priesthood; Church—is a priesthood. (22) Marriage: Israel— unfaithful wife; Church—bride. (23) Judgments: Israel—must face judgment; Church— delivered from all judgments. (24) Positions in eternity: Israel—spirits of just men made
perfect in the new earth; Church—church of the firstborn in the new heavens.

2. These clear contrasts, which show the distinction between Israel and the church, make it impossible to identify the two in one program, which it is necessary to do if the church goes through the seventieth week. These distinctions give further support to the pretribulation rapture position.

D. The doctrine of imminence.

1. Many signs were given to the nation Israel, which would precede the second advent, so that the nation might be living in expectancy when the time of His coming should draw nigh. Although Israel could not know the day nor the hour when the Lord will come, yet they can know that their redemption draweth nigh through the fulfillment of these signs. To the church no such signs were ever given. The church was told to live in the light of the imminent coming of the Lord to translate them in His presence (John 14:2-3; Acts 1:11; 1 Cor. 15:51-52; Phil. 3:20; Col. 3:4; 1 Thess. 1:10; 1 Tim. 6:14; Jas. 5:8; 1 Pet. 3:3-4). Such passages as 1 Thessalonians 5:6; Titus 2:13; Revelation 3:3 all warn the believer to be watching for the Lord Himself, not for signs that would precede His coming. It is true that the events of the seventieth week will cast an adumbration before the rapture, but the object of the believer’s attention is always directed to Christ, never to these portents.

2. This doctrine of imminence, or “at any moment coming,” is not a new doctrine, as is sometimes charged, systematizes, and popularized it. Such a belief in imminency, marked the premillennialism of the early church fathers as well as the writers of the New Testament. In this connection Thiessen
writes: “they held not only the premillennial view of Christ’s coming, but also
regarded that coming as imminent The Lord had taught them to expect His return at any moment, and so they looked for Him to come in their day. Not only so, but they also taught His personal return as being immediately. Only the Alexandrians opposed this truth; but these Fathers also rejected other fundamental doctrines. We may say, therefore, that the early Church lived in the constant expectation of their Lord, and hence was not interested in the possibility of a Tribulation period in the future. “

3. Although the Eschatology of the early church may not be altogether clear on all points, for that subject was not the subject of serious consideration, yet the evidence is clear that they believed in the imminent return of Christ. This same view of imminence is clearly seen in the writings of the Reformers, even though they have had different views on eschatological questions. Chafer quotes some of the reformers to show that they believed in the imminency of the return of Christ. Luther wrote, “I believe that all the signs which are to precede the last days have already appeared. Let us not think that the Coming of Christ is far off; let us look up with heads lifted up; let us expect our Redeemer’s coming with longing and cheerful mind.” Calvin also declares: “Scripture uniformly enjoins us to look with expectation for the advent of Christ.” To this may be added the testimony of John Knox: “The Lord Jesus shall return, and that with expedition. What were this else but to reform the face of the whole earth, which never was nor yet shall be, till that righteous King and Judge appear for the restoration of all things.” Similarly, the words of Latimer: “All those excellent and learned men whom, without doubt, God has sent into the world in these latter days to give the world warning, do gather out of the Scriptures that the last days can not be far off. Peradventure it may come in my day, old as I am, or in my children’s days.”

4. The doctrine of imminence forbids the participation of the church in any part of the seventieth week. The multitude of signs given to Israel to stir them to expectancy would then also be for the church, and the church could not be looking for Christ until these signs had been fulfilled. The fact that no signs are given to the church, but she, rather, is commanded to watch for Christ, precludes her participation in the seventieth week.

E. The work of the Restrainer in 2 Thessalonians 2.

1. The Thessalonian Christians were concerned for fear that the rapture had already taken place and they were in the day of the Lord. The persecutions which they were enduring, as referred to in the first chapter, had given them a basis for this erroneous consideration. Paul writes to show them that such a thing was impossible. First, he shows them in verse 3 that the day of the Lord could not take place until there was a departure of the saints from the earth, as already mentioned in verse 1, is beside the point here. Second, he reveals there was to be the manifestation of the man of sin, or the lawless one, further described in Revelation 13. Paul’s argument in verse 7 is that although the mystery of iniquity was operative in his day, that is, the lawless system that was to culminate in the person of the lawless one was manifesting itself, yet this lawless one could not be manifested until the Restrainer was taken out of the way. In other words, some One is preventing the purpose of Satan from coming to culmination and He will keep on performing this ministry until He is removed (vv. 7-8). Explanations as to the person of this Restrainer such as human government, law, the visible church will not suffice, for they will all continue in a measure after the manifestation of this lawless one. While this is essentially an exegetical problem, it would seem that the only One who could do such a restraining ministry would be the Holy Spirit. This problem will be considered in detail later. However, the indication here is that as long as the Holy Spirit is resident within the church, which is His temple, this restraining work will continue and the man of sin cannot be revealed. It is only when the church, the temple, is removed that this restraining ministry ceases and lawlessness can produce the lawless one. It should be noted that the Holy Spirit does not cease His ministries with the removal of the church, nor does He cease to be omnipresent, with her removal, but the restraining ministry does cease.

2. Thus, this ministry of the Restrainer, which will continue as long as His temple is on the earth and which must cease before the lawless one can be revealed, requires the pretribulation rapture of the church, for Daniel 9:27 reveals that that lawless one will be manifested at the beginning of the week.

F. The necessity of an interval.

1. The word apantēsis (to meet) is used in Acts 28:15 with the idea of “to meet to return with.” It is often argued that that same word used in 1 Thessalonians 4:17 has the same idea and therefore the church must be raptured to return instantly and immediately with the Lord to the earth, denying and making
impossible any interval between the rapture and the return. Not only does the Greek word not require such an interpretation, but certain events predicted for the church after her translation make such an interpretation impossible. These events are: (1) the judgment seat of Christ, (2) the presentation of the church to Christ, and (3) the marriage of the Lamb.

2. Passages such as 2 Corinthians 5:9; 1 Corinthians 3:11-16; Revelation 4:4; 19:8, 14 show that the church has been examined as to her stewardship and has received her reward at the time of the second advent of Christ. It is impossible to conceive of this event as taking place without the expiration of some period of time.

3. The church is to be presented as a gift from the Father to the Son. Scofield
writes: This is the moment of our Lord’s supreme joy—the consummation of all his redemptive work. “Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; that he might sanctify and cleanse it by the washing of water by the word, THAT HE MIGHT PRESENT IT UNTO HIMSELF a glorious church, not having spot or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish” (Eph. 5:25-27). “Now unto him that is able to keep you from falling, and to present you faultless BEFORE THE PRESENCE OF HIS GLORY with exceeding joy” (Jude 24).

4. In Revelation 19:7-9 it is revealed that the consummation of the union between Christ and the church precedes the second advent. In many passages, such as Matthew 25:1-13; 22:1-14; and Luke 12:35-41, the King is seen in the role of Bridegroom at His coming, indicating that the marriage has taken place. This event, likewise, requires the expiration of a period of time and makes the view that the rapture and revelation are simultaneous events impossible. While the length of time is not indicated in this consideration, yet an interval between the rapture and the revelation is required.

II. 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. Other source of information in this article: Henry C. Thiessen.

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/

3. President.

a. Mark Yarbrough. Th. M., Ph. D.

b. Professor of Bible Exposition. Author. Church Pastor/Elder.

Meet Mark Yarbrough, DTS’s Sixth President

Thy Kingdom Come – The Pretribulation Rapture (Part 1)

Thy Kingdom Come – 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.

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/

Thy Kingdom Come – 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/

Thy Kingdom Come – 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/

Thy Kingdom Come – 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/

Thy Kingdom Come – Present Age Prophecies (Part 1)

I. Article Title. Thy Kingdom Come – 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/

Thy Kingdom Come – The New Covenant (Part 3)

I. Article Title. Thy Kingdom Come – 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/

Thy Kingdom Come – The New Covenant (Part 2)

I. Article Title. Thy Kingdom Come – 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/

Thy Kingdom Come – The New Covenant (Part 1)

I. Article Title. Thy Kingdom Come – 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/

Thy Kingdom Come -The Davidic Covenant (Part 3)

I. Title. Thy Kingdom Come – 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/

Thy Kingdom Come -The Davidic Covenant (Part 2)

I. Article Title. Thy Kingdom Come – 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).

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: