Archive for the ‘Theology’ Category

Top Real Bible Questions: The Rapture!

Posted: May 14, 2012 in eschatology (end times), Theology, Top 10 "Real" Bible Questions, Topical Studies, Uncategorized
0

It is slightly ironic that there is so much controversy surrounding the rapture considering that the word “rapture” never even appears in the Bible.  For me personally, the rapture held all sorts of interest and fear in my university days.  I wasn’t following Jesus or attending church at that time.  I knew that I was living a sinful life and that if Jesus did return, I was convinced that I would be “left behind”.  I can still remember vivid nightmares of being left behind, crawling around in black lava rock caves, fire and lava all around, trying desperately to find a place to hide and escape.  Yes, most of this was my subconscious mind working out all the guilt that I had for not following Jesus and living a wrong lifestyle, yet it revealed my fascination with the rapture.

Even though I wasn’t going to church and almost never read my Bible, there was one book that I actually did read:  Revelation.  Movies about the seven signs with Demi Moore didn’t help my eschatology, but they did fuel my paranoia.  Some weekends I would come home from university to spend the weekend at my parent’s house.  They are very committed Christians, and if I returned home and no one was there, I would panic.  I was certain that I had been left behind and had missed the rapture.  Maybe some of you can identify.

The concept of the rapture is based on the passage in 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18.  The Thessalonians are worried that Christians who have already died will miss the rapture.  This is mainly due to their Greek view that there is no resurrection from the dead (bodily that is).  Paul wants to comfort them by letting them know, “For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. After that, we who are still alive and are left will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And so we will be with the Lord forever.”  When the Bible was translated into Latin, the word chosen to translate “caught up” was the word we get the English word rapture from.  The Greek word harpazo has the implications of being “caught up, seized, or taken”.  The Latin word rapio which was chosen unfortunately is the same root word where we also get the English word “rape”.  Yikes!

From the King James to the New American Standard Bible, they all use “caught up”, so I guess we should call this the catching up debate (just not as snazzy as the rapture, huh?).  As you can see, the 1 Thessalonians passage doesn’t give enough detail to give much warning or specifics on when the rapture will happen.  It is simply the trumpet call and loud voice, and the next thing we know, we are all meeting Jesus in the air in our new bodies.  No wars mentioned, earthquakes, years of tribulation, anti-Christs, or anything!  Unfortunately, Revelation doesn’t mention this “catching up” as Paul describes, so some people try to find passages in Revelation that might fit.

The pre-tribulation rapture folks look at Revelation 4:1 where John is told to “Come up here” to heaven as being the rapture of the whole church.  Not much in the text to support this at all as only John is mentioned.  Mid-tribulation rapture people say that Revelation 11:12 where the two witnesses are resurrected and taken up to heaven is the rapture of the whole church.  This might fit the text if you read the 2 witnesses figuratively as the church, but most people who debate the rapture take the 2 witnesses as two literal, end times prophets.  Finally, post-tribulation supporters point to Revelation 19:14 and say that since the armies of heaven (Christians) are riding behind Jesus when He returns, we must meet Him in the air as He is coming down.  Again, since there is no detail given in any of these passages that really fit with 1 Thessalonians, we must draw implications and infer these conclusions.

Of course, all of this debate over when the rapture happens is only within the one view of the end times we talked about called premillennial dispensationalism.  Those who don’t hold to the literal, futurist view simply believe that the church is “caught up” when Jesus returns.  Since they don’t believe that there will be a literal 7 year tribulation before Jesus returns, there is no urgency to determine if the rapture will happen before, in the middle of, or after the suffering in that specific time frame.

Having fun yet?  Waiting for the part where it really hits home?  Recall Jesus’ words to His disciples in Mark 13:32-33, “ “But concerning that day or that hour, no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father. Be on guard, keep awake. For you do not know when the time will come.” Our main role as the church is to be watchful and be doing the Father’s business until Jesus returns.  We may not know when, but we are assured that it WILL happen, and those of us who are Christians are going for a ride on the Jesus express.  It is a one way ticket to heaven, and we are sitting in the first class seats of our new glorified bodies.  All aboard!

Real Bible Questions: the end times part 3 (Millennium continued)

Posted: May 11, 2012 in eschatology (end times), Theology, Top 10 "Real" Bible Questions, Topical Studies
0

One of the advantages of being older and having worked in Biblical studies for a while is that you can see trends or fads in the interests of the church.  For example, spiritual warfare was the topic of the 90’s, with the charismatic movement close behind.  The excitement over events in Toronto and Brownsville fueled this, and so people in Bible schools wanted to know what the Bible said.  Right now, the topic of church and worship are popular due to the Emerging Church movement and the controversy that has been stirred up.  For sure, the end times debate saw its height in the 70’s and 80’s due to books like The Late Great Planet Earth, Left Behind, and the growing concern of nuclear war between the U.S. and the Soviet Union.  So I wonder, who are we allowing to dictate what issues are “most important” in the church, and is it us as individual Christians that should be saying what is most important?

I know the issue over the millennium and even the end times in general isn’t overly “popular” right now, yet I feel some things must be discussed as key to Christianity.  The centrality of eschatology in the Bible should scream at us at its importance to our worldview and daily lives.  The book of Revelation alone would be sufficient to impact us with the relevance of the return of Christ.  Yet, for many, the fact that a host of arguments and weird movies have been made about the end times, is reason enough to stay away from Revelation and the whole topic.  What does it matter to my individual walk with God whether the 1,000 year reign is the church age or a physical kingdom set up when Jesus returns?  I hope by the end of this post, you will see the impact.

In his vision, John describes several things which will take place during this 1,000 year time period: 1) Satan will be bound in the pit and not allowed to deceive the nations; 2) there will be a first resurrection of those martyred and who have not received the mark of the Beast; 3) those who resurrected will reign with Christ and the second death has no power over them.

After the 1,000 years are over, the following occurs: 1) Satan is loosed and deceives the nations in order to gather an army and surround the “camp of the saints”; 2) God destroys Satan and his armies; 3) second resurrection; all dead rise;  4) final judgment and restoration; books are opened.

We asked the question about Satan being bound in the last post, because it is a key argument that people put forth to say that the 1,000 years can’t be the church age and figurative.  However, we must remember what Jesus says about Satan in Mark 3:27.  The crowds have just accused Jesus of casting out demons by the power of Satan.  Jesus replies that Satan wouldn’t cast “himself” out, but rather the strong man has been “bound” so that Jesus can raid the strong man’s house (cast out demons).  The Greek word used for “bound” here and in Revelation 20 is the EXACT same verb.  Jesus is saying that Satan was bound due to the power He brought at the time of His first coming.  We think of Satan bound in the pit as a statement of geography (the where question), but the symbolism here is speaking of power not place (the what question).  Satan’s power was defeated at the cross and the 2nd coming is just the clean up.  So, Satan being bound could be speaking of the church age or a time after the 2nd coming.

The other question we asked was about the multiple resurrections discussed in this passage.  Who is able to be included in this first resurrection?  In some translations, it would seem like it is just one group, the martyrs.  However, the Greek is unclear and it could be two groups, “those who have been beheaded for their testimony” AND “those who had not worshipped the Beast and had not received its mark”.  If it is two groups then, it could be speaking about all Christians.  Remember in Revelation, either you have the seal of God (chapter 7) or you have the mark of the Beast (chapter 13), and based on Ezekiel 9, it is likely that this isn’t speaking of a physical mark, but a spiritual one.  So, the first resurrection could be the spiritual resurrection of all believers in the church age, as the imagery of Ephesians 2:1-4 shows, “You were dead in your sins, but made alive together with Christ”.  That would explain how the 2nd death (lake of fire) has no power over this group, as they are declared righteous in Christ and go to New Jerusalem.  If it is a resurrection in a literal time after Jesus return, it leaves open the question of if people can still be saved in this time (unbelievers when Jesus returns), and if so, when they die, do they have to wait for the 2nd resurrection?

That would mean that the battle with Satan, Gog, and Magog would either be a literal battle fought after the 1,000 year reign of Jesus after the 2nd coming, or it is another picture of the final judgment that happens immediately when Jesus returns.  The differences between the battle here in Revelation and in Ezekiel 38-39 must be explained somehow.  In Ezekiel 38:2, Gog is a “chief prince” where in Revelation 20:8 it appears to be a place.  In Ezekiel 39:4, the “great supper of God” where birds eat the evil dead bodies happens at this battle, where in Revelation 19:17-18 it happens at the return of Jesus and His victory on the white horse.  In Ezekiel 39:9, there is a 7 year time period discussed AFTER the battle is over, where in Revelation 20 we go straight to final judgment and restoration.  Basically, we have some tough questions that we can’t avoid.

How does any of this affect your life now?  To that end, I ask a question:  are you waiting for Jesus to come in power when He returns?  That is a trick question, because the answer is yes and no.  Yes, He will come in power as we observe in Revelation 19.  No, because Jesus has ALREADY come in power when He came and died on the cross.  Many reject the figurative/church age option because they say they don’t see Satan bound and they don’t see Jesus reigning.  This is only seeing things from a physical, limited perspective.  When Jesus came the 1st time, there were only a few people who believed in the true God, most around this area of Israel.  Today, there are over 2 billion Christians, making up 1/3 of all mankind.  Today, there are Christians on every continent and even some of the places we call unreached have been reached at some point in the church age.

Revelation 5:9-10 says, “Worthy are you to take the scroll
and to open its seals,
for you were slain, and by your blood you ransomed people for God
from every tribe and language and people and nation,
10 and you have made them a kingdom and priests to our God,
and they shall reign on the earth”

The New Testament says that Jesus has ALREADY made us into a kingdom of priests, we aren’t waiting for that (1 Peter 2:9-10).  Colossians 2:13-15 says this about the cross and its power, “And you, who were dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses, by canceling the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands. This he set aside, nailing it to the cross. He disarmed the rulers and authorities and put them to open shame, by triumphing over them in him.” No matter your view on the millennium, you have to ask yourself, “Am I living this way?  do I see myself reigning with Christ?”

The end times: part 2 The Millennium

Posted: May 10, 2012 in eschatology (end times), Top 10 "Real" Bible Questions, Topical Studies, Uncategorized
0

It is just 10 little verses, but the amount of discussion surrounding these 10 verses has gone on and on and on (and will keep going until Jesus returns!).  Revelation 20:1-10 is describing God’s ultimate and final victory over Satan.  As John wrote this vision down, he was probably so excited to share such encouraging news to the persecuted church.  Of course, we people have a way of mucking up God’s word.  Instead of the encouragement it was meant to be, it has turned into major theological views that divide the church today.  Classic, right?  I am speaking about the time period mentioned of 1,000 years, or as we Bible nerds like to call it, the Millennium.  Not as infamous as number in chapter 13 of Revelation (666), but has seen its own share of commentary.

We will see that the main views on this passage begin with our discussion from the last post on literal and figurative fulfillments.  However, throwing in an additional monkey wrench, one has to decide whether this passage is in chronological order from chapter 19, or part of the cyclical structure of Revelation.  One main view (premillennial dispensationalism) views this passage as being both chronological and literal.  Most scholars agree that Revelation 19 is the 2nd coming of Christ, so the literal view believes that after Jesus return, He will reign on Earth for 1,000 before final judgment and our journey to the New Jerusalem (heaven).  The second main view (called amillennialism)   is that the 1,000 year reign does not chronologically follow chapter 19, but instead follows the cyclical pattern in revelation and goes back to the church age.  The 1,000 years are meant to be taken figurative and is the same time period as the church age.

Umm, could these two views be more different?  Let us deal with the foundational issues.  First, is there a cyclical pattern within Revelation, or is it chronological?  In other words, do we see events happening in order leading up to the return of Jesus?  I am still quite shocked when I read a commentary on Revelation which doesn’t mention the cyclical structure of the book.  For example, how can one miss how many times the world seems to end? (Rev. 6:12-17, 11:15-19, 14:14-20, 16:1-21, 17:14, 19:17-21).  Especially telling is the repetition from 6:14, “The sky vanished like a scroll that is being rolled up, and every mountain and island was removed from its place.” and 16:20, “And every island fled away, and no mountains were to be found.”  If we are to take this chronologically, then God must destroy the world, then recreate it just so He can destroy it again.  I haven’t heard that interpretation even though people insist ALL of Revelation is in chronological order.

Second, are numbers used mostly figuratively (or symbolically) or literally in Revelation?  One can’t read Revelation without seeing the importance of numbers, especially the number 7 (7 churches, lampstands, stars, seals, trumpets, bowls, etc…)  Seven is the divine number, often meaning “fulfillment/completion).  12 or multiples of 12 are also found throughout the book (24, 144,000).  Of course, there are 7 literal churches John is writing to, but overall apocalyptic literature (which is the genre of Revelation) is characterized by it’s heavy usage of symbolic numbers.  Just because a number is used symbolically, doesn’t mean that it doesn’t have literal value.

None of our evidence so far necessitates one view or another, but it may help us decide what is more likely based on the context of the book.  In the next post, we will go through this passage verse by verse.  Until then, we need to face some facts.  No where else in the Bible does it mention this 1,000 year time period.  We won’t get any help from there.  Jewish tradition doesn’t have anything about a 1,000 year period in eschatology (they mention a 2,000 year one, does that count?).  Strike two.  Old Testament predictions don’t seem to indicate a time between Jesus return and final judgment (not that most of the Jews understood there would be thousands of years between the first and the second coming).   Looks like we will just have to use our powers of inductive study on Revelation alone.

Until then, ask yourself some questions:  what would be the purpose of a 1,000 year literal reign on Earth?  when Jesus comes back, do all people get resurrected bodies or just the ones alive?  who would rebel after 1,000 years?  if the 1,000 years are the church age, how can we say that Satan is bound and in the pit?  why does it seem that only the Christian martyrs get resurrected and get to reign with Jesus?  what ever happened to parachute pants?  how can we be that stupid to pay Starbucks $4 for a cup of coffee?  am I the only one on the planet who didn’t think the show Seinfeld was funny?

Top Real Bible Question #2: Are we in the end times?

Posted: May 9, 2012 in eschatology (end times), Top 10 "Real" Bible Questions, Topical Studies
0

Even the Simpsons can’t avoid the temptation to make fun of Christians when it comes to the end times.  One of my favorite episodes is called “Left Below”, and it parodies the attempt to predict the return of Jesus Christ.  Of course, since it is the Simpsons, there are highly sacrilegious parts, but I feel we need to watch it so we understand how we are often perceived.  If we can’t take the humor, then it will be even more difficult to read about real life tradgedies that occur because of Christians’ views on the end times.  Cult suicides, the events in Waco, Texas, and all the Y2K hysteria should wake us up to the fact that we simply can’t avoid this topic in our Bible studies.

Where do we start with this enormous issue?  Oddly enough, we need to start with some Bible nerd territory:  dealing with fulfillments of predictive prophecy (doesn’t that sound exciting???).  The fact is that most of the Bible’s predictions have already been fulfilled in history.  Many were centered either on Israel in Old Testament times (judgment, return) or were about Jesus 1st coming and the church.  The few remaining predictions are the ones in question (Jesus 2nd coming, final judgment, etc…).  If we could nail down how we deal with these and choose fulfillments, it should guide us in our quest to understand the end times, and to know if we are in them or not.  Sounds easy, right?  Wrong!

There are two main ways that predictions are fulfilled: 1) literal- the prophecy is fulfilled in the exact, literal way that we would expect by reading the passage in a straight forward way.  For example, in Micah 5:2, God says that the Messiah will be born in Bethlehem.  Lo and behold, in Matthew 2:5-6, we are told that is exactly what happens.  Most people today assume that this is how all prophecies are fulfilled as it fits well with our Western, scientific minds.  The problem is that sometimes prophecies are fulfilled in another fashion:  2) figurative (sometimes called spiritual)- the prophecy is fulfilled in a way that we wouldn’t have expected because it is predicted in a figurative fashion.  For example, in Amos 9:11-12, God says that the booth of David (Jerusalem) will be restored, the walls repaired, and that they will possess the remnant of Edom.  We would think that this was fulfilled in the physical return of the Jews in 538 B.C.  However, James quotes this passage in Acts 15:16-17 and says it has a figurative fulfillment in the inclusion of the Gentiles in the church.  Wow!

How do we know when a prediction will have a literal fulfillment and when a prediction will have a figurative fulfillment?  Unless the New Testament quotes it and gives the fulfillment, we can’t be 100 % sure.  The Bible creates this situation, not Bible scholars.  Two quick things to remember: first, saying that it has a figurative fulfillment doesn’t mean that there isn’t something that literally happens.  It means you have to look below the figurative symbol or imagery used, to find the literal event underneath (like the Amos passage which predicted a literal event in Gentiles becoming part of God’s people).  Second, the sound, conservative rule of Biblical prophecy is to not use the concept of double or multiple fulfillments.  It may seem attractive to say a prediction has both literal and figurative fulfillments, but it is a slippery slope.  Once you have double fulfillments, why not three or four or fifteen?  The best guideline is to use the New Testament as the authority and example that there are only single fulfillments.

What does any of this have to do with the end times?  I am glad you asked (or actually I asked for you).  People who only think that the predictions still left to be fulfilled will be fulfilled literally are those we call futurists (also known as premillennial dispensationalists).  This is a predominant view in the evangelical church and is the theology behind the popular Left Behind book and movie series.  People who think that most of the predictions still left to be fulfilled will be fulfilled in a figurative way are known as either historicists or symbolic view (also known as amillenialists or idealists).  Amillenialism was the predominant view in most of church history, and is still the view in many mainstream denominations.  There are a multitude of end times views out there to be sure, but a key decision that determines where you will end up is this decision about literal or figurative fulfillments.  If you believe that all the end times events will happen literally, you place a big emphasis on the modern nation of Israel, events in the Middle East, and future war with the Anti-Christ.  If you believe that all end times events will happen figuratively, you generally believe that when Jesus returns, He will judge all evil doers, reward the righteous, and there are not as many world events that will happen that would tell us that we are definitely in the end times.

In the next few posts, we will look at some key passages like Revelation 20, discuss the main views and their implications, and try to come to a conclusion about what we can really know about the end times.  In the midst of this, we need to have the words of Revelation 22:20 firmly in our minds, “He who testifies to these things says, “Surely I am coming soon.” Amen. Come, Lord Jesus!”  Jesus’ return is a good thing!  It is something that we as Christians look forward to, and have no fear about.  Often the end times can turn into a thing of fear for believers, and that should never be.  If Satan can’t turn it into an argument, he is quite happy to turn it into something we fear and dread.  I say, Come Lord Jesus!

Top Real bible Questions: Israel part 5

Posted: April 15, 2012 in Israel, Top 10 "Real" Bible Questions, Topical Studies
2

One of the most beautiful reports that I have heard about is that there is a church in Israel where both Jewish and Palestinian Christians come together to worship God in one place.  I am sure that there might be more, but my home church has supported and visited this church of rare brotherhood (I won’t mention its name or location for security reasons).  It lets me know what is possible in Christ and in this world, and gives me hope for the future.

There are two issues that I am asked about that didn’t fit into the previous posts.  Are all Gentile Christians called to support the Jews and Israel?  In missions and life, we usually talk about each Christian being called to a specific people group (often their own) or sub group in society (like businessmen).  But, in addition, are we all called to the Jews as Gentiles?  The most often quoted passage in support of this is Psalms 122:6 “Pray for the peace of Jerusalem!”.  When David writes this, Jerusalem has just become the capital of Israel, God’s theocracy.  The other passage is Romans 15:27, “For they were pleased to do it, and indeed they owe it to them. For if the Gentiles have come to share in their spiritual blessings, they ought also to be of service to them in material blessings.”  Here Paul was trying to raise funds from the Gentile church to help the Jews of Palestine and Jerusalem afflicted by a famine.  He saw the offering as a crown on his theology of the olive tree (Rom. 11), Gentiles grafted into one tree with the Jews.

There is a difference however between praying for the peace of Jerusalem, giving to help the poor, and giving money to a secular government or to a lobbying firm in Washington, D.C.  I am not making a value statement here, but I am saying that you should be careful before saying that what you are doing has a “Biblical mandate” behind it.

The other issue is will Israel be the place of the final battle and return of Jesus?  This question can only be answered by a larger look at eschatology that we will do later in this series on top Bible questions.  In a short answer, people who hold a view called premillenial dispensationalism believe that the end times predictions are speaking about literal Israel, and so 1948 and the formation of modern Israel was key to end times prophecies.  Another view called amillenialism believes that the end times predictions are speaking of spiritual or figurative Israel, and so Jesus’ return to Earth will be all at once and global in nature.  The posts on the millenium quetion will go more into detail.

I would like to finish this series of posts with three warnings. First, let’s not simply write off the Jews as being irrelevant to the future of the church.  Paul makes it clear in 11:12 of Romans what their salvation would mean for the world, and it sounds pretty good to me (especially since I am one :).  There is a reason that Paul would go first to the synagogue and then switch to the Gentiles when he entered a new city.  He knew the foundation of theology and the Old Testament that the Jews already had, propelling them forward much faster in their Christianity once they accepted Jesus.

Second, let’s not ignore what is ACTUALLY happening in the modern nation of Israel, giving any of the parties involved a “free pass” to commit crimes and atrocities.  No matter what view you end up with, we can not excuse the violation, torture, or killing of any people group.  God is love (1 John 1), and we as Christians should be known for our love.  I have seen too many Christians turn a blind eye to sins committed by a people group due to their eschatology or views on Israel.

Third, we must not forget that a key focus of the New Testament when it comes to the church is the unity of the people.  Ephesians 4:1ff grind this into the heads of the believers with the repetition of “one”, “one”, “one”.  Not only is this a call to see the reconciliation of Jews and Palestinians, but also among Christians who have differing views on Israel.  What is happening in Israel is difficult and sad, but what is happening with division in the church is inexcusable.  We are one body, one new man, and one church of Jesus Christ.  He is the God of Jews, but also of the Gentiles.  And He is one, right?

Top Real Bible Questions: Israel part 4

Posted: April 13, 2012 in Israel, Top 10 "Real" Bible Questions, Topical Studies
2

Being in Israel was a odd mix of experiences and learning opportunities.  On one level, there was the connection with Biblical history and archeology.  On another level, there was the modern political situation with the issues between the Israelis and the Palestinians.  One moment, I would be looking at various layers of destruction in the ruins of Jericho, and the next moment I was being shown a checkpoint where someone blew themselves up last year.  All of it served to complicate my views on Israel and God’s plan.  Things were much simpler sitting in a classroom in the United States, far removed from the pain and suffering of the land.

So, when people ask me about my views on Israel, I have my views from political science, my views from the Bible, and then I have my personal feelings as an ethnic Jew who has visited the modern nation.  Even though I can discuss passages that pertain to Israel, like we have done the last two posts, in the end, my view of Israel comes from looking at the whole of God’s redemptive plan.  From Genesis to Deuteronomy, God unfolds His plan to create a holy nation bound to Him in covenant and love.  That theocracy was to be guided by priests, prophets, and elders to serve a holy, loving God.  Under civil, ceremonial, and moral law, Israel was given the blessing of being a witness to the surrounding nations by being set apart.

Unfortunately, as the story goes on from Judges to Esther, it is one long, sad tale of their disobedience, idolatry, and social injustice.  This covenant breaking was met with stiff justice as they were taken out of the land and exiled, stripped of the temple, kingship, and their homes. It is abundantly clear that man can’t obtain his own righteousness through the law.  As a physical nation, Israel “blasphemed the name of God among the nations” (Romans 2:24, Isaiah 52:5), and God spoke through the prophets that a new covenant would be needed (Jeremiah 31:31-34).  In this “New” covenant, the law would be on their hearts (Jer. 31), God’s Spirit would be in them (Joel 2:28), and the Suffering Servant would die so that they might have forgiveness from sins (Isaiah 53).

When Jesus did come to earth, He made it clear that He was not there to be king nor to establish a physical kingdom (John 6:15).  The disciples and Jews struggled with this as their messianic expectations were for Israel to be restored and the Romans expelled.  Instead of staying in Jerusalem, Jesus commanded the early church to go out to the “ends of Earth” (Acts 1:8).  Paul’s definition of the “body of Christ”, the church, is one that is spiritual and made up of all ethnicities all over the world (Ephesians 2:14-22).  The old covenant, law, was seen by Paul and the author of Hebrews as a “shadow” of the New Covenant (Hebrews 10:1).  Hebrews 1 – 10 is a consistent argument to not look back to the old covenant, as something much better is here now in Christ.

The question then is, does it fit with this plan to go back to a physical kingdom?  Why would God reestablish Israel as a nation in our modern times, almost two thousand years after it fell to the Romans?  I have heard two different arguments about this, and neither necessitate you being a believer in replacement theology or Christian Zionism.

First, many believe that God is not “going back” to a physical kingdom, but He is merely adding the physical kingdom to the already existing spiritual one in the church.  They point to numerous Scriptures that they feel support their view.  In Acts 1:6, the disciples ask Jesus if He is now going to restore the kingdom of Israel.  Jesus’ reply in Acts 1:7 says, “It is not for you to know the times”.  Jesus doesn’t say, “I am never going to do that”, but instead just tells them that it isn’t their place to know when this will occur.  In Romans 11:11-32, Paul talks about God’s plan to bring the Jews to Him through jealousy of the Gentile believers.  “All Israel being saved” in 11:26 is interpreted to be a huge wave of Jews that will turn back to God shortly before the return of Jesus.  Obviously, this view then interprets most of the Old Testament predictions about the Jews return and Israel in a literal fashion.

Second, some believe that God has concrete plans for the Jews and Israel, but that they are not fulfillments of Biblical prophecy.  This view states that the old covenant is dead, and with it was His focus on a physical nation.  Jesus came to reveal the spiritual kingdom, and it would make no sense to go back to a physical nation anymore.  God does love the Jews and has given them special blessings and gifts, but their existence as a political nation is not necessary for the return of Jesus.  Fitting with this view, they interpret most Old Testament predictions about the future of Israel as pertaining to the church (spiritual fulfillment).  They don’t view the church as replacing Israel at all, but rather they have been “grafted in” to true Israel alongside their Jewish Christian brothers and sisters.  There was never a “replacement”, only an “addition”.

In the next post, I will wrap up this question by addressing a few passages that didn’t fit yet with our previous posts.  Again, there is no way to do full justice to this issue on a blog, but my prayer is that these posts help you and spur you to press into the word of God.  There are so many books and sermons out there on this subject, but we should build our foundation from the Bible alone.  No matter what our view ends up being, let us not grow weary in praying for peace in this situation.  Jews and Palestinians have suffered for so long, and much of our world has given up on the peace process all together.  One new man in Christ.

Top Real Bible Questions: Israel part 3

Posted: April 12, 2012 in Israel, Top 10 "Real" Bible Questions, Topical Studies
0

You have to love those “Ah ha” moments in life.  Like when you figure out that you have to push the bottle cap DOWN as you twist it off (stupid child proof caps).  Or when you realize that the speed limit on that road wasn’t 65 mph, but actually 45 mph, and the police don’t seem to care about your ignorance.  Maybe it is when you finally figure out how to start a new roll of toilet paper without ripping off three layers (seriously, you couldn’t design this any easier???).  For me, I love those “ah ha” moments when you are reading the Bible.  One of my biggest ones came while reading Romans 9.

In Romans 9:6 says, “It is not as though God’s word had failed. For not all who are descended from Israel are Israel.”  What???  What does that mean that “not all who are descended from Israel are Israel”??? That seems to be a completely illogical statement from Paul.  As you read the rest of the chapter, you begin to understand what Paul is doing.  He creates two different Israels in this chapter:  one is the literal nation made up of the physical Jewish people group; the other is a figurative Israel, or spiritual Israel, that has nothing to do with bloodlines and heritage, but has everything to do with faith in Jesus.  He describes how to be in this spiritual Israel in verse 8, “In other words, it is not the children by physical descent who are God’s children, but it is the children of the promise who are regarded as Abraham’s offspring.”  He makes this same point in Galatians 3:7-9, “Understand, then, that those who have faith are children of Abraham. Scripture foresaw that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, and announced the gospel in advance to Abraham: “All nations will be blessed through you.” So those who rely on faith are blessed along with Abraham, the man of faith.”

Paul had been building up to this point in the whole book of Romans.  The church of Rome had split into groups of both Jewish and Gentile home churches.  There was much fighting and ethnic issues between the two groups (Rom. 14:1-15:13).  Paul needed to show them how they are now one body, both Jew and Gentile, in the church of Christ.  He starts with creating a figurative circumcision and Jew in Rom. 2:28-29, “A person is not a Jew who is one only outwardly, nor is circumcision merely outward and physical. No, a person is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the written code. Such a person’s praise is not from other people, but from God.”  This would have been radical enough if Paul stopped there, but he didn’t.  He went on in chapter 4 to declare that there are figurative descendants of Abraham.  As we saw from Galatians, these spiritual descendants are both Jew and Gentile, and are only Abraham’s children due to their faith in Jesus.

So, if we have figurative circumcision, Jews, and Abraham’s children, the next step was just a logical progression:  we can have a figurative (or spiritual) Israel.  This does NOT mean that there is no longer a physical Israel, or that it isn’t important.  In chapters 9 – 11, Paul continues to go back and forth from the physical Jews to spiritual Israel.  I believe that this teaching of Paul’s is one reason that replacement theologians went in the direction that they did.  They had solid Biblical truth in the concept of spiritual Israel.  The real questions however are: 1) how does the teaching of spiritual Israel affect God’s current plans for the Jewish people?; and 2) how does the concept of spiritual Israel affect our interpretation of the fulifillment of Old Testament predictions?  As we saw already, replacement theology sees spiritual Israel as completely replacing physical Israel, therefore God is only focusing on the spiritual Israel in New Testament times, and all Old Testament predictions not fulfilled already in history or Jesus, should be applied to the church.

Let’s tackle the question on Old Testament predictions first, and then we can deal with God’s overall redemptive plan in the next post.  If all Old Testament predictions were fulfilled either in a literal or figurative way, we would have an easy job.  Unfortunately, the Bible just doesn’t do that.  Some predictions have a very literal fulfillment, which is exactly what we would expect to happen.  For example, Micah 5:2 predicts that the Messiah, Jesus, would be born in Bethlehem, and in Matthew 2:1-6, that is exactly what happened.  However, in Amos 9:11-12, Amos predicts that “David’s shelter” will be rebuilt, Jerusalem will be restored, and that they will possess the surrounding nations.  We would expect this to be fulfilled in a literal way.  In Acts 15:12-21, James, the brother of Jesus, stands up and declares that Amos’s prediction has been fulfilled through the Gentile inclusion in the church.  This means that there is a figurative or spiritual fulifillment of Amos in that God is buidling up the spiritual Jerusalem (Galatians 4:26).

The dilemma then is how do we know if an Old Testament prediction will have a literal or a figurative/spiritual fulfillment?  The real answer is that unless the New Testament specifically gives us the fulfillment, we can’t be 100% sure.  Remember how sure the disciples and Jews were about how they thought the predictions about the Messiah would be fulfilled.  They were all looking to a physical king who would come and kick out the Romans and reestablish Israel, and so they missed Jesus and his true mission often.  Hindsight is always 20/20 when it comes to Biblical predictions.  Isaiah 11:11 could have a literal fulfillment in God regathering the Jews, or it could have a figurative one.  We will have to find another way to make our decision on which one is right.  Don’t you love cliffhangers?  Tune in next time, when we tackle that issue.  It will take us to the ultimate big picture question: how does Israel fit into the overall redemptive plan of God for all time?  Easy, right?

Top Real Bible Question: Israel part 2

Posted: April 11, 2012 in Israel, Top 10 "Real" Bible Questions, Topical Studies
0

At the time I thought, “This conversation is getting too strange for me.”  I was talking with a (Gentile) woman from Pennsylvania who was wearing a Jewish prayer shawl (that’s not the strange part).  She had started by telling me that she followed all the Old Testament laws, including the dietary laws of Leviticus.  Then, she threw the big one on me by telling me that Jews today aren’t saved by faith, but are still under the law.  God has two ways for people to gain righteousness and entrance to heaven.  One for Jews and one for Gentiles.  I am not sure what disturbed me more, this American, suburban woman who was basically converting to Judaism, or the fact that she believed Jews are still under the old covenant.

The first thing we need to establish as we discuss the Jews is what Paul clearly states in the book of Romans. Romans 10:11-13 says, “For the Scripture says, “Everyone who believes in him will not be put to shame.” For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, bestowing his riches on all who call on him. For “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.”  I don’t think it can be any clearer than that!  Whatever we say about modern Israel, we can’t hold any thoughts that would mean that God’s eternal salvation plan for the Jews is any different than the Gentiles.  The author of Hebrews also leaves little doubt that the whole old covenant is no longer binding. Hebrews 8:13 states, “In speaking of a new covenant, he makes the first one obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.”

What is clear to me from Scripture is that though God doesn’t save the Jews in a different way, He still has a unique plan for them.  The problem with full blown replacement theology is that it leaves no place for this in the New Testament or God’s plan.  Paul states in Romans 11:28-29, “As regards the gospel, they are enemies for your sake. But as regards election, they are beloved for the sake of their forefathers. For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable.” Yes, irrevocable means irrevocable.  We can’t “un-Jew” the Jews or “un-choose” them.  God has created this people group and given them special blessings, and no whining from Gentiles is going to change that.

The issue that is less clear in Scripture is what has become of the Abrahamic Covenant as regards the land of Israel.  Spiritually, Paul explains that Jesus is the ultimate fulfillment of the promises made to Abram and the Jews in Genesis 12:1-4.  Galatians 3:16, “Now the promises were made to Abraham and to his offspring. It does not say, “And to offsprings,” referring to many, but referring to one,“And to your offspring,” who is Christ.”  Jesus is the “seed/offspring” that “all the families of the earth” are blessed in.  Through faith, we are all “children of Abraham”, both Jews and Gentiles.  What does this mean for the physical promises then?  We can’t quickly dismiss this covenant, because the New Testament never states that it has ended as we saw with the old covenant.

I have seen two answers to this issue.  First, some say that God ALREADY fulfilled the promise to give them the land as seen in 1 Kings 4:20-21, and no longer needs to do that today.  The problem with this view is that God keeps using the word “forever” to describe how long He has given the land to the Jews (Genesis 13:15, Exodus 32:13).  While it is true that we can pull out passages where God uses the word “forever” in regards to the old covenant (Exodus 28:42, Leviticus 3:17), and that is clearly over, we still don’t have God declaring that about the Abrahamic Covenant in the New Testament.  The second answer that I have heard is that the land is “spiritual” now and not physical.  Jesus repeatedly told his disciples that he came to bring a spiritual kingdom and not an earthly one.  God wouldn’t be going back to the physical anymore (Colossians 2:16-17, Hebrews 10:1).

The bottom line is that as inductive students of the Bible, I don’t believe there is enough evidence to say that the land doesn’t still belong to the Jews as promised by God.  This still leaves many questions however, such as:  who is a Jew?  do we use the Biblical test or modern Israel’s?  does Israel have to be following God to receive this promise, or is it unconditional?  Most Jews today  in Israel are not Christians, nor are they even following the laws of Judaism.

In the end, I believe both the verses from Paul about “irrevocable gifts” combined with the Abrahamic Covenant, make replacement theology hard to justify.  Though it leaves us still with many questions about whether modern Israel is a fulfillment of Biblical prophecy or not, it is fitting more with what we see in Scripture.  Next, we will examine the whole teaching on “spiritual Israel” and see what impact it has on our remaining questions.  I realize that fitting stuff like this into a post is ridiculous sometimes.  Any chance you guys would like to read a 50 page post?  I didn’t think so.

Top 10 Real Bible Question #6: Israel

Posted: April 8, 2012 in Israel, Top 10 "Real" Bible Questions, Topical Studies
0

There I was in Israel, having a picnic lunch next to the ancient ruins of Megiddo.  We had just finished hiking around the sites and listening to explanations of the different levels of destruction.  Suddenly, a massive armada of tour buses pulled up, and scores of tour guides poured out of the buses with their extremely American looking passengers.  The main leader of the tour was a famous Christian television personality who shall remain nameless (you’ll see why in a minute).  After a gospel quartet performed (bizarre place to do that), the TV guy preceded to give a teaching on how Megiddo figured into his end times views.  Then he dropped the bomb, “The antichrist is most likely here on Earth already, and I believe he is probably Jewish.”

Seriously??? Right there at the Israeli National Park of Megiddo, with Jews all around, this American Christian says that the antichrist is a Jew.  My point here is that people’s views on Israel and the Jews is all over the board.  From replacement theology to Christian Zionism, the church today has all kinds of “interesting” views on what God is doing with Israel.  For most of church history up until 1948 A.D., this discussion was moot since Israel didn’t exist as a nation.  Something then happened that seemed impossible and against all odds, the Jews reclaimed the promised land and Christians around the world scrambled to explain what was happening.

Replacement theologians explained that all we are witnessing is a modern historical event without Biblical significance.  They believe that in the New Covenant, the church has “replaced” Israel (physical) as God’s people.  All the Old Testament and New Testament predictions that were yet to be fulfilled will all be fulfilled in the church, not the physical nation of Israel.  Of course, saved Jews are part of the church, so God has not rejected the Jews at all.  Merely, the kingdom of Jesus was a spiritual one, not a physical one, where there is no more, “Jew or Greek (Galatians 3:28)”.  The view is not anti-Semitic, but sees no necessity for Israel to be a nation now for end times events to occur.

Christian Zionism falls at the exact opposite side of the spectrum.  They believe that the events happening now in modern Israel are a direct fulfillment of Old Testament predictions that God will “gather His people” and “restore them to the land (Isaiah 11:11-12)”.  Israel will be the site of the final battle in Revelation, and it is the church’s role to support Israel however it can.  This can include giving funds for Jews to return to Israel, lobbying their own governments to support Israel, and praying daily for the “peace of Jerusalem (Psalm 122:6)”.  Most still believe Jews are saved by faith just like Gentiles, but still hold a special calling or status still in God’s eyes (the chosen people).

I have an interesting personal twist to my journey to explore the Bible on this topic.  I am Jewish.  Ok, ok, I am ethnically Jewish, but was raised as a Christian, and never even realized I was Jewish until I was in my 20’s.  I never thought through the care packages we got from my Mom’s family that included those flat, tasteless crackers (Matzah bread- unleavened bread for Passover).  Since it comes from my mother’s side, I could have applied to become an Israeli citizen, as they consider you 100% Jewish if it comes from your mother’s side.  I have gotten some interesting responses from people when I have shared this with them.  The most unusual was that in some Asian countries, they had this starry kind of look in their eye, like I was suddenly seen as being more “special”.

Starting in the next post, I will attempt to do what we have always done on this blog, digging into the Bible and trying to see what it says about this issue.  Don’t try to skip ahead to the end of this series and just look for “what Sean really thinks about all this”.  I will be presenting views and passages, not making absolute conclusions.  Honestly, there are godly, brilliant people on all sides of this issue, and the goal is to challenge us to ponder and pray.  Remember that the church has done everything from killing Jews in the Crusades to giving millions of dollars to support modern Israel.  That is an extreme difference.

Creation: when is a day not a day?

Posted: April 7, 2012 in creation, Top 10 "Real" Bible Questions, Topical Studies
0

I went to a Christian school from 7th grade all the way to graduation.  It seemed like the only argument between Christians and non Christians was evolution vs. creation.  Every Christian science textbook had page after page of details, analysis, and debunking.  One time, I even argued for evolution just to annoy my science teacher and try to make things a little interesting in class (as a teacher now, I profusely apologize for antagonizing my teacher and have paid in full for all the Melchizedek questions I have gotten).  This is why discussing whether the days in Genesis 1 are literal or not is such a powder keg of a question.  People don’t just see it as a question about one chapter, but see the whole creation vs. evolution debate as riding on this interpretation.  I might as well give myself a paper cut and pour lemon juice on it rather than tackling this issue.

The main options that I have heard about Genesis 1 are: 1) Atheist- dismiss the whole Bible as myth and legend, especially the book of Genesis; 2) Theistic Evolutionist- believes that Genesis 1 is not literal, but a poetic expression that God created everything; believes God used evolution to accomplish creation; 3) Age theory- day isn’t a 24 hour day but should be seen as an “age” being thousands of years; 4) Gap theory- between day one and day two, there is a huge gap of time allowing for either long spans of time or the “restoration theory”; 5) Figurative days- Genesis 1 is a poetic way to express the truth that God created everything and it was “very good” (how long this took is unstated allowing for options on how old creation is); 6) Literal days- God literally took 6 days to create everything and rested on the 7th day.

First, we need to discuss the literal vs. figurative debate.  Many people have told me that the figurative approach is very harmful and dangerous.  They say, “if you don’t take Genesis chapter 1 literally, then you can’t believe the rest of the Bible.  I believe the Bible is literal and true.”  I can understand their heart, but as a method of interpretation, their statement doesn’t work at all.  The Bible is full of figurative language and passages that are meant to be taken figuratively.  The mistake that they make is assuming that literal and true are connected in a way as to make figurative and untrue as the necessary opposite.  However, things can be figurative and true!  It is just that the truth is contained within (or underneath) the figurative language.  For example, I am not literally the “body of Christ”.  Jesus had a real body.  Figuratively, I am the “body of Christ”, as Paul explains in 1 Corinthians 12 that the “body of Christ” can mean the church.  We take the “body of Christ” figuratively in 1 Corinthians 12, but we take it as truth.

How do we know when something is figurative or literal?  We make that decision all the time when people are talking or when we read literature like the Bible.  It is true that Genesis is historical narrative (stories) and so it is MOSTLY to be read literally (there really was a man named Abram who left his home).  However, there are parts that are to be taken figuratively (like the expression “Adam KNEW his wife” or Pharaoh’s dreams that Joseph interprets”).  The age debate is different in that it argues about the Hebrew word for “day” having different meanings, and is not arguing about whether it is literal or figurative.  So, is Genesis 1 to be taken literal or figurative?  You would have to look for evidence or clues that Moses meant it to be taken one way or another.

I won’t be discussing the atheist, theistic evolution, or gap theory in this post (or maybe ever since I am a science moron), but in deciding literal or figurative, it does affect the whole range of options.  I have never felt the gap theory has any credible evidence, and the first two options necessitate believing in evolution, which some Christians don’t.  The largest clue in figuring out how to interpret Genesis 1 comes actually from Genesis 2.  Everything is created in Genesis 1, but then it seems like we start all over again in Genesis 2.  Not only is the story of creation repeated, but parts of the story seem to change.  For example, in Genesis 1, man is the last thing created as the climax of creation.  In Genesis 2, God creates man and then creates all the plants for man to garden and after that, different animals as company for man.  Why is the order changed?  The formula that starts the story in Genesis 2:4 “These are the generations of the heavens” is one that is repeated again in Genesis 5:1 to introduce the transition to Noah.  It is almost as if chapter 1 doesn’t fully belong with the literary style of the book.

I am NOT saying that Genesis 1 was added later or is not authentic and from Moses.  I am just saying that there are differences and contrasts that we can’t ignore.  This may be the biggest argument for seeing chapter 1 as using a figurative form of communication.  That would explain why we have two stories with “contradictions”.  We have both a figurative and literal description of creation.  Since the first is poetic, it is not meant to be exact in chronology, but beautiful in its art.  The point is that God was the creator, it was all “very good”, and man was the climax of His creation.  Then, chapter 2 gives the literal account to explain the purpose of man, plants, animals, and marriage (two genders), and begin the story of the Fall.  From this point on, the number 7 will be used often figuratively as the number of perfection or completion.  So, even if chapter 1 is figurative, there would still be literal truth contained in it (like God as creator).

As always, you must investigate this for yourself and make your own decision.  I would maintain that this choice DOES NOT necessitate that you fall into any of the main views that I listed above (there are way more options, but this is supposed to be a blog, not a encyclopedia).  People take chapter 1 literally, but still see lots of figurative parts of the Bible.  People take chapter 1 figuratively, but aren’t evolutionists at all.  I know for some people the whole creation vs. evolution thing seems like old news, and we “post moderns” have moved on from this trap to discuss more important issues like saving the spotted owl, but this is still very important.  Understanding how to interpret the Bible is also key.  Whew, I need a break from this deep stuff.  Time to move on to Top 10 “Real” Bible question #6 “What is God doing with Israel today?”.  At least this question doesn’t have much drama…

Older Entries