- Published on
00:00
00:00
Chapter 0
by George Sidney Hurd
The Apostle Peter spoke of the final restoration of all things as having been prophesied since the world began (Acts 3:21). As Universal Restorationists, we believe that the restoration of all speaks of the restoration of all of mankind to a condition, not only equal to, but superior to the original state of Adam and Eve before the fall. But what about the rest of thinking, feeling rational beings who have suffered the consequences of man’s fall? Would not the restoration of all include all animal life as well? In this blog I hope to demonstrate from the Scriptures that all of creation, including animals, will be set free from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the sons of God.
The following is an excerpt from chapter 5 of my book: “The Ways of God.” I am posting this at the insistence of a friend who strongly feels that many need to know that God’s glorious plan for the ages culminates in the final restoration of all, including our beloved pets.
****************
“For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us. For the earnest expectation of the creation eagerly waits for the revealing of the sons of God. For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it in hope; because the creation itself also will be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God. For we know that the whole creation groans and labors with birth pangs together until now. Not only that, but we also who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, eagerly waiting for the adoption, the redemption of our body.” (Rom 8:18-23)
We see in this passage that God Himself subjected the whole creation to futility, and presently every rational created being capable of groaning in pain is in travail, eagerly awaiting the time of the manifestation of the sons of God when all creation will be set free. As with mankind, this jubilee will be experienced universally throughout all of God’s creation, to the exclusion of none. Every living soul (Heb. nephesh) that has ever lived - which includes all animal life that has ever suffered evil or shall suffer evil, will be delivered at the consummation when there will no longer be any more pain nor sorrow, for the former things will have passed away. All, absolutely all, will be made new:
“And God will wipe away every tear from their eyes; there shall be no more death, nor sorrow, nor crying. There shall be no more pain, for the former things have passed away. 5 Then He who sat on the throne said, ‘Behold, I make ALL things new.’ And He said to me, ‘Write, for these words are true and faithful.’” (Rev 21:4-5)
We would all agree (with the exception of the Partialists who must interpret “all” as including only the few that are saved before Christ’s coming) that as far as mankind is concerned, when it says that there shall be no more death, sorrow, crying or pain, it means all mankind of all time since creation. But wouldn’t Christ’s words: “Behold I make all things new” also include all animal life that has ever been born into a world subjected to futility and infected with evil, who suffered a lifetime of pain and died? We must remember that our English word “things,” which to us means inanimate objects like trees and rocks, did not even exist in Greek and therefore His words should read: “I make all new,” which certainly would include the animals, as well as mankind, and not simply the trees and rocks. John, in a heavenly vision, saw every creature singing praises to God at the final consummation:
“And every creature which is in heaven and on the earth and under the earth and such as are in the sea, and all that are in them, I heard saying: ‘Blessing and honor and glory and power be to Him who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb, forever and ever!’” (Rev 5:13)
John saw a time when every creature, including those who are presently in heaven, those who are on earth and even those who are now under the earth in the invisible world of Hades, before the throne of God magnifying His name. There is coming a time when all God’s creation will have been restored and God will then be all in all. “For of Him and through Him and to Him are all things, to whom be glory forever. Amen” (Rom 11:36). Paul here is saying that all that which proceeded from God at creation is sustained by Him and will return to Him in the times of the restoration of all things, at the time of the manifestation of the sons of God when all creation will be set free into the glorious liberty of the sons of God (Acts 3:21; Rom 8:19-22). Again, Paul speaks of a time when all will be reunited in Christ:
“having made known to us the mystery of His will, according to His good pleasure which He purposed in Himself, 10 that in the dispensation of the fullness of the times He might gather together in one (anakephalaiomai “reunite”) all things in Christ, both which are in heaven and which are on earth — in Him.” (Eph 1:9-10)
The mystery revealed in this passage is that it has always been God’s predetermined purpose to reunite all things in heaven and on earth (i.e. all that which Christ created in the beginning) back under Christ’s headship in the final dispensation of the fullness of the times. The phrase: “gather together in one” is a composite word made up of ana which normally means “again” and kephalaioo and is best translated as “to reunite or unite again under one head,” since only this rendering retains the meaning of the prefix ana. [1] So, what is being revealed here is the final restoration of all things when all creation will be reunited, and God will then become all in all (1Cor 15:28).
Partialists deny what these passages are saying in more than one way. When we insist that it is referring to all people, they reply that it only refers to all who become believers before they die or Christ returns, plus all of creation. Yet when this passage is presented as evidence that the entire creation will be restored, including the animal kingdom, they often insist that it doesn’t include animals either. However, although there will be a new heaven and earth, it is improbable that the reuniting of all in Christ is here referring to inanimate creation. To “reunite” speaks of reconciling or restoring unity which is only applicable to intelligent life. In like manner, the reference in Romans 8 to creation being delivered from bondage into the liberty of the Sons of God would be irrelevant to inanimate objects like mountains and trees.
So, what they end up saying is that “all things being reunited in Christ” is restricted to possibly ten percent of all mankind who have ever lived since the beginning, plus the angels of God, who in reality don’t even need to be restored since they never fell. If the animals who have lived, suffered and died throughout history are not included in the “all” that will be reunited, heaven will be quite an empty place. Some speculate that God will create new animals for heaven. However, that would not constitute a “reunion.” Should we take these Scriptures seriously or are they nothing more than exaggerated speech? I personally believe that the Lord would have us understand them just as written.
I read numerous articles discussing the issue of whether or not we will be reunited with our pets in heaven and was troubled at the callousness with which most theologians treat the subject of an afterlife for animals. In the 17th Century the father of Rationalism, Descartes, considered animals as nothing more than automatons who felt neither emotion nor pain. I was taught as a child in school that they lived entirely by instinct. However, Scriptures, modern science and even personal observation, has amply demonstrated that they are very much thinking, feeling, willful and rational beings with all the characteristics of a living soul. In spite of this, theologians continue regarding them pretty much as Descartes did centuries ago.
While only man was created in the image and likeness of God, in the Scriptures we discover that animals are called living souls. Although most translations obscure this truth, animals are called living souls (Heb. nephesh) numerous times in Scripture. The only translation I could find which consistently translates nephesh as “soul” throughout the entire Old Testament is the Concordant Literal Translation. Other translations, viewing animals as mere brute beasts without feelings or intelligence, translated nephesh as “creature” or “beast,” instead of “soul” in every reference to animals, according to the translator’s beliefs, rather than translating according to the real meaning of the word. The nephesh or soul is what distinguishes the animal from plant life or organic life without a soul. That animals have value in the eyes of God is demonstrated by the fact that the life of innocent animals was accepted in man’s place for a sin sacrifice and not plants, as Cain found out the hard way.
Also, we see the value God places upon each individual animal in that He is said to sustain them and that not even a sparrow falls to the ground without our Father taking note of it (Matt 10:29; Ps 104:27-30). David the psalmist even says that the Lord saves both man and the animals:
“Your righteousness is like the mountain ranges of El, Your judgment like the vast abyss: Both human and beast (animal) You save, O Yahweh.” (Ps 36:6 CLV)
David here says that God saves both humans and animals. No matter what he meant by “save” here, God’s loving care for his animal kingdom is very evident throughout Scripture. It is common to hear detractors say that Jesus didn’t die to save animals. But, while clearly His primary mission was to save man, would that salvation not encompass the animals as well? They were created for man, then subjected to vanity when man lost his dominion over the earth to Satan. When Christ died and rose again, destroying Satan’s dominion, wouldn’t the restoration include the animals as well? Even if one could argue that the restoration of all does not include animals (which we cannot reasonably do) what do we do with Colossians 1, where it is very emphatic that absolutely everything in the entire creation was reconciled to God through the blood of His cross?
“For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for Him… 20 and by Him to reconcile all things to Himself, by Him, whether things on earth or things in heaven, having made peace through the blood of His cross.” (Col 1:16,20)
When Christ shed His blood upon the cross, He not only reconciled all mankind unto God but all the rest of His creation as well, whether in heaven or on earth, visible or invisible. Not that the animals were moral beings that sinned so as to need salvation as is the case with man, but they are saved from man’s curse that brought upon them suffering and death. I personally don’t know of any way that one can take the Scriptures seriously and exclude the animal kingdom from His redemptive work.
Do we find animals in the age to come? Yes, we do. Isaiah describes numerous animals in the millennial kingdom:
“The wolf also shall dwell with the lamb, the leopard shall lie down with the young goat, the calf and the young lion and the fatling together; and a little child shall lead them. 7 The cow and the bear shall graze; their young ones shall lie down together; and the lion shall eat straw like the ox. 8 The nursing child shall play by the cobra's hole, and the weaned child shall put his hand in the viper's den. 9 They shall not hurt nor destroy in all My holy mountain, for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord as the waters cover the sea.” (Isa 11:6-9)
Also, the Lord speaks through the prophet Hosea concerning that time, not only indicating that they will be in the Millennium but that He will make a covenant with them to assure their safety:
“In that day I will make a covenant for them, with the beasts of the field, with the birds of the air, and with the creeping things of the ground. Bow and sword of battle I will shatter from the earth, to make them lie down safely.” (Hos 2:18)
Although the millennial kingdom is on earth and the animals appear to be alive in their natural bodies, we nevertheless see God’s loving care and His restoration of the same animal kingdom, even making a covenant promising their safety. Are there presently animals in heaven? Again, although not much is said about them, the answer is yes. Elijah was taken into heaven on a chariot led by horses (2Kings 2:11). When the Syrians came against Israel, Elisha’s servant’s eyes were opened, and he saw a heavenly army with chariots and horses to defend them. When Christ returns, He will come upon a white horse and His army will follow Him on white horses (Rev 19:11; 20:11,14). While there is no mention of other classes of animals in heaven, it is doubtful that heaven has, or will have, less diversity than we presently see on earth.
There is no reason for not believing that the animals who lived, suffered and died on earth are waiting for us in heaven. The last words of many believers upon departing to be with the Lord are descriptions of their departed family members and their beloved pets that had died and were at their bedside to welcome them. Isn’t it to be expected from a benevolent God who has declared that He will restore all of His creatures?
Some refer to this expectation as sentimentalism. They also categorize us as sentimentalists when we speak of the final restoration of all mankind or Universalism. But should God’s people be past feeling? Is it sentimentalism to rejoice in the plain declarations of Scripture concerning a universal restoration of all creation? I would suggest that the real problem is not that we are sentimental, but rather that some have become callous and their hearts so hardened by the dark doctrines of men that they have become like the Pharisees who neither enter the kingdom themselves nor permit those who would enter to go in.
On the other hand, many of the Early Church Fathers took these Scriptures literally, believing in the final restoration of all, including the souls of animals. Saint Jerome himself said as late as in the early 5th Century that the majority still believed that all would be restored, both those in heaven and on earth:
“Most persons regard the story of Jonah as teaching the ultimate forgiveness of all rational creatures, even the devil.” [2]
“The apostate angels, and the prince of this world, and Lucifer, the morning star, though now ungovernable, licentiously wandering about, and plunging themselves into the depths of sin, shall in the end, embrace the happy dominion of Christ and his saints… No rational creature before God will perish forever.” [3] (emphasis mine)
Partialists may call our hope sentimentalism, but since I came to understand that God will finally restore all things – including the animal kingdom, I have not grieved over the loss of my beloved pets as I once did before I had that assurance. I love my dogs and I used to grieve for weeks when one of them died. Now I know they are in a much better place where there is no more suffering or pain, and that knowledge helps alleviate the sting of their death.
Likewise, it used to trouble me seeing nature programs where the animals suffer so much under the effects of the fall, especially knowing that God Himself subjected creation to futility when man fell and lost dominion over the earth (Rom 8:20). I once shot a deer because she kept eating from my garden. At first I felt bad for killing her, but after seeing how many fleas, ticks and open sores she had all over her body I realized I had done her a favor putting her out of her misery. Since that time, I have felt compassion for the wildlife who do not have owners to care for them. But now, knowing that when their brief lives of suffering come to an end, all creation will be reunited in their Creator and man will once again be restored to the place of dominion over the earth, co-reigning with Christ, I can rejoice concerning their future, no matter what they may have to go through during their short lifetimes. After a life of suffering, these animals will enjoy an eternal bliss which will be even more glorious for them than if they had never been born into a fallen world and been restored, since, being living souls, they will always remember the contrast of their new life of bliss with their former one on the earth.
[1] Other examples of composite words with ana prefixed where ana clearly means “again or re…” are as follows: anagennao, “to be born again”; anaginosko, lit. “to know again,” or “to read”; anagnosis, “(the act of) reading”;
anazao, “to live again”; anazopureo, to re-enkindle; anathallo, “to revive”; anakainoo, “to renew”; anamnesis, “to remember”; ananeoo, “to reform”; anastauroo, to recrucify, crucify again”; anapsuxis, “a recovery of breath, (figuratively) revival” anapsucho, “to relieve.”
[2] Jerome. In Ps. xcii. 9.22
[3] Jerome. In Ps. xcii. 9.22
The Apostle Peter spoke of the final restoration of all things as having been prophesied since the world began (Acts 3:21). As Universal Restorationists, we believe that the restoration of all speaks of the restoration of all of mankind to a condition, not only equal to, but superior to the original state of Adam and Eve before the fall. But what about the rest of thinking, feeling rational beings who have suffered the consequences of man’s fall? Would not the restoration of all include all animal life as well? In this blog I hope to demonstrate from the Scriptures that all of creation, including animals, will be set free from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the sons of God.
The following is an excerpt from chapter 5 of my book: “The Ways of God.” I am posting this at the insistence of a friend who strongly feels that many need to know that God’s glorious plan for the ages culminates in the final restoration of all, including our beloved pets.
****************
“For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us. For the earnest expectation of the creation eagerly waits for the revealing of the sons of God. For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it in hope; because the creation itself also will be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God. For we know that the whole creation groans and labors with birth pangs together until now. Not only that, but we also who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, eagerly waiting for the adoption, the redemption of our body.” (Rom 8:18-23)
We see in this passage that God Himself subjected the whole creation to futility, and presently every rational created being capable of groaning in pain is in travail, eagerly awaiting the time of the manifestation of the sons of God when all creation will be set free. As with mankind, this jubilee will be experienced universally throughout all of God’s creation, to the exclusion of none. Every living soul (Heb. nephesh) that has ever lived - which includes all animal life that has ever suffered evil or shall suffer evil, will be delivered at the consummation when there will no longer be any more pain nor sorrow, for the former things will have passed away. All, absolutely all, will be made new:
“And God will wipe away every tear from their eyes; there shall be no more death, nor sorrow, nor crying. There shall be no more pain, for the former things have passed away. 5 Then He who sat on the throne said, ‘Behold, I make ALL things new.’ And He said to me, ‘Write, for these words are true and faithful.’” (Rev 21:4-5)
We would all agree (with the exception of the Partialists who must interpret “all” as including only the few that are saved before Christ’s coming) that as far as mankind is concerned, when it says that there shall be no more death, sorrow, crying or pain, it means all mankind of all time since creation. But wouldn’t Christ’s words: “Behold I make all things new” also include all animal life that has ever been born into a world subjected to futility and infected with evil, who suffered a lifetime of pain and died? We must remember that our English word “things,” which to us means inanimate objects like trees and rocks, did not even exist in Greek and therefore His words should read: “I make all new,” which certainly would include the animals, as well as mankind, and not simply the trees and rocks. John, in a heavenly vision, saw every creature singing praises to God at the final consummation:
“And every creature which is in heaven and on the earth and under the earth and such as are in the sea, and all that are in them, I heard saying: ‘Blessing and honor and glory and power be to Him who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb, forever and ever!’” (Rev 5:13)
John saw a time when every creature, including those who are presently in heaven, those who are on earth and even those who are now under the earth in the invisible world of Hades, before the throne of God magnifying His name. There is coming a time when all God’s creation will have been restored and God will then be all in all. “For of Him and through Him and to Him are all things, to whom be glory forever. Amen” (Rom 11:36). Paul here is saying that all that which proceeded from God at creation is sustained by Him and will return to Him in the times of the restoration of all things, at the time of the manifestation of the sons of God when all creation will be set free into the glorious liberty of the sons of God (Acts 3:21; Rom 8:19-22). Again, Paul speaks of a time when all will be reunited in Christ:
“having made known to us the mystery of His will, according to His good pleasure which He purposed in Himself, 10 that in the dispensation of the fullness of the times He might gather together in one (anakephalaiomai “reunite”) all things in Christ, both which are in heaven and which are on earth — in Him.” (Eph 1:9-10)
The mystery revealed in this passage is that it has always been God’s predetermined purpose to reunite all things in heaven and on earth (i.e. all that which Christ created in the beginning) back under Christ’s headship in the final dispensation of the fullness of the times. The phrase: “gather together in one” is a composite word made up of ana which normally means “again” and kephalaioo and is best translated as “to reunite or unite again under one head,” since only this rendering retains the meaning of the prefix ana. [1] So, what is being revealed here is the final restoration of all things when all creation will be reunited, and God will then become all in all (1Cor 15:28).
Partialists deny what these passages are saying in more than one way. When we insist that it is referring to all people, they reply that it only refers to all who become believers before they die or Christ returns, plus all of creation. Yet when this passage is presented as evidence that the entire creation will be restored, including the animal kingdom, they often insist that it doesn’t include animals either. However, although there will be a new heaven and earth, it is improbable that the reuniting of all in Christ is here referring to inanimate creation. To “reunite” speaks of reconciling or restoring unity which is only applicable to intelligent life. In like manner, the reference in Romans 8 to creation being delivered from bondage into the liberty of the Sons of God would be irrelevant to inanimate objects like mountains and trees.
So, what they end up saying is that “all things being reunited in Christ” is restricted to possibly ten percent of all mankind who have ever lived since the beginning, plus the angels of God, who in reality don’t even need to be restored since they never fell. If the animals who have lived, suffered and died throughout history are not included in the “all” that will be reunited, heaven will be quite an empty place. Some speculate that God will create new animals for heaven. However, that would not constitute a “reunion.” Should we take these Scriptures seriously or are they nothing more than exaggerated speech? I personally believe that the Lord would have us understand them just as written.
I read numerous articles discussing the issue of whether or not we will be reunited with our pets in heaven and was troubled at the callousness with which most theologians treat the subject of an afterlife for animals. In the 17th Century the father of Rationalism, Descartes, considered animals as nothing more than automatons who felt neither emotion nor pain. I was taught as a child in school that they lived entirely by instinct. However, Scriptures, modern science and even personal observation, has amply demonstrated that they are very much thinking, feeling, willful and rational beings with all the characteristics of a living soul. In spite of this, theologians continue regarding them pretty much as Descartes did centuries ago.
While only man was created in the image and likeness of God, in the Scriptures we discover that animals are called living souls. Although most translations obscure this truth, animals are called living souls (Heb. nephesh) numerous times in Scripture. The only translation I could find which consistently translates nephesh as “soul” throughout the entire Old Testament is the Concordant Literal Translation. Other translations, viewing animals as mere brute beasts without feelings or intelligence, translated nephesh as “creature” or “beast,” instead of “soul” in every reference to animals, according to the translator’s beliefs, rather than translating according to the real meaning of the word. The nephesh or soul is what distinguishes the animal from plant life or organic life without a soul. That animals have value in the eyes of God is demonstrated by the fact that the life of innocent animals was accepted in man’s place for a sin sacrifice and not plants, as Cain found out the hard way.
Also, we see the value God places upon each individual animal in that He is said to sustain them and that not even a sparrow falls to the ground without our Father taking note of it (Matt 10:29; Ps 104:27-30). David the psalmist even says that the Lord saves both man and the animals:
“Your righteousness is like the mountain ranges of El, Your judgment like the vast abyss: Both human and beast (animal) You save, O Yahweh.” (Ps 36:6 CLV)
David here says that God saves both humans and animals. No matter what he meant by “save” here, God’s loving care for his animal kingdom is very evident throughout Scripture. It is common to hear detractors say that Jesus didn’t die to save animals. But, while clearly His primary mission was to save man, would that salvation not encompass the animals as well? They were created for man, then subjected to vanity when man lost his dominion over the earth to Satan. When Christ died and rose again, destroying Satan’s dominion, wouldn’t the restoration include the animals as well? Even if one could argue that the restoration of all does not include animals (which we cannot reasonably do) what do we do with Colossians 1, where it is very emphatic that absolutely everything in the entire creation was reconciled to God through the blood of His cross?
“For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for Him… 20 and by Him to reconcile all things to Himself, by Him, whether things on earth or things in heaven, having made peace through the blood of His cross.” (Col 1:16,20)
When Christ shed His blood upon the cross, He not only reconciled all mankind unto God but all the rest of His creation as well, whether in heaven or on earth, visible or invisible. Not that the animals were moral beings that sinned so as to need salvation as is the case with man, but they are saved from man’s curse that brought upon them suffering and death. I personally don’t know of any way that one can take the Scriptures seriously and exclude the animal kingdom from His redemptive work.
Do we find animals in the age to come? Yes, we do. Isaiah describes numerous animals in the millennial kingdom:
“The wolf also shall dwell with the lamb, the leopard shall lie down with the young goat, the calf and the young lion and the fatling together; and a little child shall lead them. 7 The cow and the bear shall graze; their young ones shall lie down together; and the lion shall eat straw like the ox. 8 The nursing child shall play by the cobra's hole, and the weaned child shall put his hand in the viper's den. 9 They shall not hurt nor destroy in all My holy mountain, for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord as the waters cover the sea.” (Isa 11:6-9)
Also, the Lord speaks through the prophet Hosea concerning that time, not only indicating that they will be in the Millennium but that He will make a covenant with them to assure their safety:
“In that day I will make a covenant for them, with the beasts of the field, with the birds of the air, and with the creeping things of the ground. Bow and sword of battle I will shatter from the earth, to make them lie down safely.” (Hos 2:18)
Although the millennial kingdom is on earth and the animals appear to be alive in their natural bodies, we nevertheless see God’s loving care and His restoration of the same animal kingdom, even making a covenant promising their safety. Are there presently animals in heaven? Again, although not much is said about them, the answer is yes. Elijah was taken into heaven on a chariot led by horses (2Kings 2:11). When the Syrians came against Israel, Elisha’s servant’s eyes were opened, and he saw a heavenly army with chariots and horses to defend them. When Christ returns, He will come upon a white horse and His army will follow Him on white horses (Rev 19:11; 20:11,14). While there is no mention of other classes of animals in heaven, it is doubtful that heaven has, or will have, less diversity than we presently see on earth.
There is no reason for not believing that the animals who lived, suffered and died on earth are waiting for us in heaven. The last words of many believers upon departing to be with the Lord are descriptions of their departed family members and their beloved pets that had died and were at their bedside to welcome them. Isn’t it to be expected from a benevolent God who has declared that He will restore all of His creatures?
Some refer to this expectation as sentimentalism. They also categorize us as sentimentalists when we speak of the final restoration of all mankind or Universalism. But should God’s people be past feeling? Is it sentimentalism to rejoice in the plain declarations of Scripture concerning a universal restoration of all creation? I would suggest that the real problem is not that we are sentimental, but rather that some have become callous and their hearts so hardened by the dark doctrines of men that they have become like the Pharisees who neither enter the kingdom themselves nor permit those who would enter to go in.
On the other hand, many of the Early Church Fathers took these Scriptures literally, believing in the final restoration of all, including the souls of animals. Saint Jerome himself said as late as in the early 5th Century that the majority still believed that all would be restored, both those in heaven and on earth:
“Most persons regard the story of Jonah as teaching the ultimate forgiveness of all rational creatures, even the devil.” [2]
“The apostate angels, and the prince of this world, and Lucifer, the morning star, though now ungovernable, licentiously wandering about, and plunging themselves into the depths of sin, shall in the end, embrace the happy dominion of Christ and his saints… No rational creature before God will perish forever.” [3] (emphasis mine)
Partialists may call our hope sentimentalism, but since I came to understand that God will finally restore all things – including the animal kingdom, I have not grieved over the loss of my beloved pets as I once did before I had that assurance. I love my dogs and I used to grieve for weeks when one of them died. Now I know they are in a much better place where there is no more suffering or pain, and that knowledge helps alleviate the sting of their death.
Likewise, it used to trouble me seeing nature programs where the animals suffer so much under the effects of the fall, especially knowing that God Himself subjected creation to futility when man fell and lost dominion over the earth (Rom 8:20). I once shot a deer because she kept eating from my garden. At first I felt bad for killing her, but after seeing how many fleas, ticks and open sores she had all over her body I realized I had done her a favor putting her out of her misery. Since that time, I have felt compassion for the wildlife who do not have owners to care for them. But now, knowing that when their brief lives of suffering come to an end, all creation will be reunited in their Creator and man will once again be restored to the place of dominion over the earth, co-reigning with Christ, I can rejoice concerning their future, no matter what they may have to go through during their short lifetimes. After a life of suffering, these animals will enjoy an eternal bliss which will be even more glorious for them than if they had never been born into a fallen world and been restored, since, being living souls, they will always remember the contrast of their new life of bliss with their former one on the earth.
[1] Other examples of composite words with ana prefixed where ana clearly means “again or re…” are as follows: anagennao, “to be born again”; anaginosko, lit. “to know again,” or “to read”; anagnosis, “(the act of) reading”;
anazao, “to live again”; anazopureo, to re-enkindle; anathallo, “to revive”; anakainoo, “to renew”; anamnesis, “to remember”; ananeoo, “to reform”; anastauroo, to recrucify, crucify again”; anapsuxis, “a recovery of breath, (figuratively) revival” anapsucho, “to relieve.”
[2] Jerome. In Ps. xcii. 9.22
[3] Jerome. In Ps. xcii. 9.22
- Published on
00:00
00:00
6The Identity of the Hundred and 44 thousand (3 of 3)
by George Sidney Hurd
There has been much fanciful speculation concerning the identity of the 144,000 mentioned in Revelation 7. Are they made up of Church saints or a Jewish remnant? Will there be literally 144,000 sealed, or does that number have some hidden spiritual meaning?
It is my conviction that the confusion is the result of ignoring clear identifying statements within the passages themselves, much as we saw with the indicators within the sign of the woman and the man-child in Revelation 12, revealing their identities. Sound exegesis always draws the meaning from the text itself, instead of reading one’s understanding into the text. The following is an excerpt from chapter 9 of my book: “Focusing in on End-Time Events,” in which I point out the identity of the 144,000 from the text itself.
*****************
In Revelation chapter 7 there is mention of 144,000 servants of God from the twelve tribes of the children of Israel who are sealed. There are two basic interpretations as to their identity. The first is that they are to be seen symbolically as representing the Church saints, and the second is that it is referring to literal Israelites – 12,000 from each of the twelve tribes as listed in verses 5 thru 8 who will be sealed at the end of the age, just prior to the judgments which will be inflicted upon those who dwell on the earth. The arguments presented in defense of a symbolic interpretation will be first examined before explaining their identity using the literal approach.
Arguments against a Literal Interpretation of the 144,000 in Revelation 7
1) Revelation is a Book Full of Symbolism and should not be Interpreted Literally
It is argued that the 144,000 should be understood as simply referring to a great multitude and should not be taken literally. This position is defended in spite of the fact that much detail is given specifying that the 144,000 are children of Israel, composed of 12,000 from each of the twelve tribes mentioned in verses 5 thru 8. In reality, the passage is very specific as to the number of the sealed. It is in verses 9 thru the end of the chapter that we see a non-specific number of blood washed saints from all nations who come out of the Great Tribulation, as seen in distinction from the 144,000 Jews who are sealed in verses 1 thru 8. In verse 9 John says: “After these things I saw a great multitude which no man can number…” Why would so much attention be given to detail, specifying 144,000 individuals in one passage and then right afterwards refer to a non-specific number by simply saying “a great multitude” if the 144,000 are also meant to be understood as a non-specific number? The most obvious progression of chapter seven is to show first, those of literal Israel who will survive the tribulation, and then the great multitude of blood washed Church saints from all nations who will also come out of the Great Tribulation.
The same school of thought which would spiritualize the number 144,000, usually does not interpret the 1,000-year millennium or the three-and-a-half-year period of the Great Tribulation literally either. This they do in spite of the several ways it is expressed; “three and a half years,” “time, times and half a time,” “forty-two months” and “twelve hundred and sixty days.” It is as if God, anticipating that men would want to spiritualize these numbers, made them specific in every possible way. Nevertheless, many persist in seeing the numbers as nonspecific. One commentary actually states in reference to the 144,000: “The number is too exact and artificial to suppose that it is literal.” Since when do specific details instead of general terms argue for not taking them literally? Clearly the opposite is true.
In Old Testament prophecies that specify numbers, we can see that they were fulfilled literally. In Daniel the numbers are literally fulfilled. Should we expect anything different in Revelation, the companion volume? In Jeremiah 29:10, it is revealed that the captivity would last 70 years. Did Daniel understand it literally? Yes. And exactly 70 years later the captivity ended as prophesied. Even though there was a secondary application revealed to him in Daniel 9:24-27 that would be fulfilled in 7 times 70 years, the primary prophecy was fulfilled literally, and the secondary fulfillment is also being fulfilled literally. Although prophetic Scriptures contain symbolism, we only have liberty to interpret symbolism symbolically. Literal prophecies should never be interpreted symbolically. A rule of interpretation should generally be recognized: “When the plain sense of Scripture makes common sense, seek no other sense.”
The same interpreters arbitrarily take many other numbers in Revelation literally, such as the New Jerusalem with 12 foundations and 12 gates; 7 seals, 7 trumpets, 7 bowls, etc. Generally speaking, whenever God chooses to communicate with numbers, He wants us to think in terms of numbers.
2) The 10 Tribes of the Northern Kingdom were Dispersed Never to be Found Again
It is argued that the 10 tribes of the Northern Kingdom are lost tribes. After the reign of Solomon, the Kingdom of Israel was divided. The tribes of Judah and Benjamin remained in Judea under the rule of Solomon’s son Rehoboam, and the other ten tribes formed the northern kingdom under Jeroboam. The northern kingdom abandoned the worship of God and persisted in idolatry until they were delivered over to the Assyrians around 722 B.C. They were then dispersed among the nations, and foreigners were sent to repopulate their cities. Those who argue against the 144,000 being the literal children of Israel say that the ten tribes of Israel were dispersed among the nations and lost forever and therefore could not be the 144,000 at the end of the age. However, God made an irrevocable promise that neither the nation of Israel nor Judah, which was also later sent into captivity, would be lost forever:
“For behold, the days are coming,' says the Lord, 'that I will bring back from captivity My people Israel and Judah,' says the Lord. 'And I will cause them to return to the land that I gave to their fathers, and they shall possess it….'" For I am with you,' says the Lord, 'to save you; though I make a full end of all nations where I have scattered you, yet I will not make a complete end of you. But I will correct you in justice, and will not let you go altogether unpunished.” (Jer 30:3,11)
“Thus says the Lord, who gives the sun for a light by day, the ordinances of the moon and the stars for a light by night, who disturbs the sea, and its waves roar (The Lord of hosts is His name): "If those ordinances depart from before Me, says the Lord, then the seed of Israel shall also cease from being a nation before Me forever." Thus says the Lord: "If heaven above can be measured, and the foundations of the earth searched out beneath, I will also cast off all the seed of Israel for all that they have done, says the Lord.” (Jer 31:35-37)
In these verses, and many others, God unconditionally promises that they will never entirely cease to be God’s elect people, contrary to what many may say. He also promises that however lost they may seem to be, He will re-gather them into their own land and will restore to them their kingdom in the latter days:
"Then say to them, 'Thus says the Lord God: "Surely I will take the children of Israel from among the nations, wherever they have gone, and will gather them from every side and bring them into their own land; and I will make them one nation in the land, on the mountains of Israel; and one king shall be king over them all; they shall no longer be two nations, nor shall they ever be divided into two kingdoms again.” (Ezek 37:21,22)
“After many days you (Gog) will be visited. In the latter years you will come into the land of those brought back from the sword and gathered from many people on the mountains of Israel, which had long been desolate; they were brought out of the nations, and now all of them dwell safely…. You will come up against My people Israel like a cloud, to cover the land. It will be in the latter days that I will bring you against My land, so that the nations may know Me, when I am hallowed in you, O Gog, before their eyes.” (Ezek 38:8,16)
“For the children of Israel shall abide many days without king or prince, without sacrifice or sacred pillar, without ephod or teraphim. Afterward the children of Israel shall return and seek the Lord their God and David their king. They shall fear the Lord and His goodness in the latter days.” (Hos 3:4-5)
In these passages we see clearly that, far from being lost forever, in the latter days both Israel and Judah will be back in the land of Israel as one nation with one king over them. I consider the fallacies of Replacement Theology which teaches that the Church replaced national Israel in my blog Has God Rejected His People Israel?
Early Christians would have had no problem accepting that all twelve tribes of Israel could be sealed. All twelve tribes were present and worshipping God at the time of the writing of the New Testament over 700 years after the dispersion. On the day of Pentecost, we see that the devout Jews of the dispersion, representing all the house of Israel, were in Jerusalem for the Passover Feasts:
“And there were dwelling in Jerusalem Jews, devout men, from every nation under heaven. And when this sound occurred, the multitudes came together, and were confused, because everyone heard them speak in his own language… ‘Men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a Man attested by God to you by miracles, wonders, and signs which God did through Him in your midst, as you yourselves also know… Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly that God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ.” (Acts 2:5,6, 22,36)
Here we see that on the day of Pentecost, Jews representative of the whole house of Israel were present in Jerusalem for the Feast (all twelve tribes were referred to as Jews as well as Israelites since the Babylonian captivity). Paul, speaking before Agrippa, presents in his speech something that was common knowledge – there were devout Jews serving God from all twelve tribes in his time:
“To this promise our twelve tribes, earnestly serving God night and day, hope to attain. For this hope's sake, King Agrippa, I am accused by the Jews.” (Acts 26:7)
James wrote his epistle to all twelve tribes of the Jews of the dispersion:
“James, a bondservant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad: Greetings.” (James 1:1)
Though not all from the ten tribes returned to the land of Israel (that awaits the latter times), they were definitely not all forever lost, nor absorbed by the nations. And of those that apparently are lost, they are only lost to men, not to God.
The Jewish lineage in biblical times was traced through the father’s line and not the mother’s line. Throughout the Scriptures we see that a child continues to be a Jew even if the child’s mother is non-Jewish as long as the father is Jewish. Joseph married an Egyptian, yet his two sons became the fathers of the two half tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh. Moses married a Midianite. In the Messianic genealogy of Matthew chapter one, we see that Rahab the harlot of Jericho was the mother of Boaz, but Boaz continued to be included in the line of Judah. He in turn married Ruth, a Moabite. So, although there were Gentiles in Jesus’ bloodline, that did not exclude Him from being a legitimate descendent of Judah and thus qualified to be the Messiah as a descendant of David from the tribe of Judah. God knows the paternal descent of every Jew and is fully capable of distinguishing them and sealing them.
There are many devout Jews in the world today who know they are Jews but do not know with certainty of which tribe they are. Some conclude that because their surnames are Levi or Cohen that they are of the tribe of Levi but even that is not conclusive. Genealogical records cannot be traced back more than a few generations. Israelites have been banished from many nations, persecuted, slaughtered, and obligated to embrace Christendom or the Muslim faith, further complicating things (for a timeline showing how the Jews have been trampled underfoot by the Gentiles see the following link: ( [i] ). It is a miracle that they remain a distinct people after so many attempts to destroy them. Many modern-day Jews have continued to practice the Jewish faith as passed down from their ancestors even though they may not know of which tribe they are descended from. Be what it may, God knows their paternal descent and knows whom He has chosen to be sealed from each tribe at the end of the age.
3) The Fact that the Tribes are not mentioned in the Usual Manner Indicates that it was Not Intended to be Interpreted Literally
Those who maintain that the 144,000 symbolically represent the Church point out that the twelve tribes of Israel in Revelation 7 are not mentioned in the usual order, the tribe of Dan is excluded and instead of mentioning Ephraim he is replaced with his father Joseph. Also, the Levites, who are normally excluded from the lists of tribes because their heavenly calling as priests excluded them from earthly inheritances, are here included. From this it is argued that it was not meant to be taken literally. In reality the contrary is true. The fact that they are not listed in the usual order from the oldest to youngest and that there are exclusions should call our attention. Why is Dan excluded? Why is Joseph named instead of Ephraim? Why was Levi included? These differences should be a call to attention, causing us to investigate the reason for the changes.
The reason for the exclusion of Dan and Ephraim is implied in that Dan was the first of the tribes to turn to idolatry upon entering Canaan and Ephraim followed suit:
“Then the children of Dan set up for themselves the carved image; and Jonathan the son of Gershom, the son of Manasseh, and his sons were priests to the tribe of Dan until the day of the captivity of the land.” (Judg 18:30)
“Ephraim is joined to idols, let him alone.” (Hos 4:17)
The idea expressed in these texts is that both tribes rejected the worship of the true God and persisted in their idolatry until they were given over to a reprobate mind. Jacob even prophetically implied that Dan would be a stumbling block for the nation of Israel when he blessed his sons in Genesis 49:17. He said,
“Dan shall be a serpent by the way, a viper by the path that bites the horse's heels so that its rider shall fall backward.”
Levi would naturally be included among the tribes sealed because, although the Levites were not given an earthly inheritance, the seal of God is unto the heavenly inheritance of which they are heirs and ministers.
So, the differences in the list of tribes from the normal order, actually favor the conclusion that they should be taken literally. A Jew would naturally ask why two tribes are not mentioned and knowing the history of idolatry in the tribes of Dan and Ephraim would have understood the message that God meant to communicate by their exclusion.
As has been demonstrated, the arguments for not taking the 144,000 as being 12,000 literal Jews from each tribe listed do not stand up under closer examination. Israel has not been lost and absorbed by the nations. And God has promised that, though they will be judged for their sin and idolatry, He will not cast them off forever, no matter what they may have done.
Reason for Sealing the Foreheads of the 144,000
The reason for sealing the 144,000 is implied in Revelation 7 verses 1 thru 3:
“After these things I saw four angels standing at the four corners of the earth, holding the four winds of the earth, that the wind should not blow on the earth, on the sea, or on any tree. Then I saw another angel ascending from the east, having the seal of the living God. And he cried with a loud voice to the four angels to whom it was granted to harm the earth and the sea, saying, “Do not harm the earth, the sea, or the trees till we have sealed the servants of our God on their foreheads.” (Rev 7:1-3)
The judgments described in the seals alone will cause the death of at least one fourth of the world’s population (Rev 6:7), not to mention the loss of life in other events described in the trumpet and bowl judgments. The seal of God in their foreheads is for their protection from these judgments and the wrath of the dragon who will seek to destroy them after he is cast down to the earth. We see this demonstrated when the demons that ascend from the bottomless pit are not permitted to harm those who have the seal of God in their forehead (9:4). This is similar to a vision that Ezekiel was shown:
“Now the glory of the God of Israel had gone up from the cherub, where it had been, to the threshold of the temple. And He called to the man clothed with linen, who had the writer's inkhorn at his side; and the Lord said to him, ‘Go through the midst of the city, through the midst of Jerusalem, and put a mark on the foreheads of the men who sigh and cry over all the abominations that are done within it.’ To the others He said in my hearing, ‘Go after him through the city and kill; do not let your eye spare, nor have any pity. Utterly slay old and young men, maidens and little children and women; but do not come near anyone on whom is the mark; and begin at My sanctuary.’” (Ezek 9:3-6)
The Mark in Revelation, as in Ezekiel, is for Protection of the Servants of God
A change in John’s visions is often introduced by the words “after this I saw”, or “after these things I saw” or simply “then I saw”. These expressions are not to indicate that the contents of the visions chronologically follow the events of the prior visions but rather what John sees in the new vision follows what he saw in the prior one. John is shown repeated visions of the same three-and-a-half-year period of the Great Tribulation, giving different details of the same timespan. They are not to be understood as one three-and-a-half-year period followed by another three-and-a-half-year period, but rather two visions where he sees the same timespan from a different perspective.
Recapitulation is a common characteristic of the book of Revelation. When he says, “after these things I saw…” in 7:1 he is not saying, “after the seven seals have already wiped out over a quarter of the world’s population I saw that the 144,000 were sealed to protect them from being harmed,” but rather that he saw in the next vision that the four angels continued to hold back the four winds of the earth so that no harm would be done to it until the 144,000 servants of God had been sealed. The vision takes him back to the beginning, before any of the seals which will bring devastation to the earth and its inhabitants are broken.
Identity of the 144,000
Having established that the 144,000 are 12,000 natural Jews from each of the twelve tribes of Israel listed, the question still remains as to their identity. They are called servants of God, which speaks of their devotion to Him. However, if they were blood washed Church saints, they would not need a sealing to protect them distinct from that which one receives upon appropriating salvation in Christ:
“In Him you also trusted, after you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation; in whom also, having believed, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise.” (Eph 1:13)
“And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption.” (Eph 4:30)
“who (God) also has sealed us and given us the Spirit in our hearts as a guarantee.” (2Cor 1:22)
Though man cannot see the seal, both angels and demons alike see it. Angels, as ministering spirits, provide protection to those sealed of God, and demons are not permitted to touch us without God’s permission. God only permits Satan to afflict His elect children when it is necessary for their sanctification. In the case of one who does not judge sin in his life, it becomes necessary for God to “deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of the flesh that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus” (1Cor 5:5). God will discipline His children in order that they may not be condemned with the world. Even one who loves the Lord like Peter, and longs to serve Him full-heartedly, must be broken and divested of self. And in order to accomplish this, God permits Satan to sift us like wheat, so we may learn to trust in Him, putting no confidence in the flesh.
Messianic Jews, in the same manner as Gentile believers, are sealed by God for the day of redemption upon believing. They are no longer distinct from the Church but rather joint members with the Gentiles. Church saints will be protected from the wrath of God during the tribulation, but many will also be privileged to die as martyrs under the reign of the Antichrist:
“Here is the patience of the saints; here are those who keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus. Then I heard a voice from heaven saying to me, Write: ‘Blessed are the dead who die in the Lord from now on.' Yes, ‘says the Spirit,’ that they may rest from their labors, and their works follow them.” (Rev 14:12-13)
Many Christians who refuse the mark or the name of the beast in their foreheads will be put to death. For them it is said to be a privilege to die in the Lord. The same could not be said, however, of devout Jews who have not yet believed in Jesus Christ as their Messiah and Savior. They must be preserved alive until the Second Coming of Christ, at which time they will be saved:
“For I do not desire, brethren, that you should be ignorant of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own opinion, that blindness in part has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in. And so all Israel will be saved, as it is written: 'The Deliverer will come out of Zion, and He will turn away ungodliness from Jacob; for this is My covenant with them, when I take away their sins.' Concerning the gospel they are enemies for your sake, but concerning the election they are beloved for the sake of the fathers. For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable.” (Rom 11:25-29)
How is all Israel saved? By the Deliverer when He comes from Zion. They will continue throughout the tribulation period as devout Jews but in unbelief until they see their Deliverer coming in the clouds of heaven. At that moment they will be saved.
“And I will pour on the house of David and on the inhabitants of Jerusalem the Spirit of grace and supplication; then they will look on Me whom they pierced. Yes, they will mourn for Him as one mourns for his only son, and grieve for Him as one grieves for a firstborn.” (Zech 12:10)
When is it that God pours out upon the house of Israel the Spirit of grace and supplication? When the Deliverer comes from Zion. Then they will look upon the wounds in His hands and feet. They will see His pierced side and will mourn – not for themselves but for Him whom they pierced. It will be a time of deep repentance for those 144,000 of Israel who survive the most horrible holocaust ever under the Antichrist that will apparently result in every Jew being killed except for those who are sealed for protection. Romans 11:26 says, “all Israel will be saved” when the Deliverer comes. In other words, as a result of the coming holocaust, only the 144,000 sealed will be saved alive. Their protection from the dragon and the Antichrist can be seen in Revelation twelve where the woman, or Israel, is persecuted by Satan after giving birth to the man-child:
“Now when the dragon saw that he had been cast to the earth, he persecuted the woman who gave birth to the male Child. But the woman was given two wings of a great eagle, that she might fly into the wilderness to her place, where she is nourished for a time and times and half a time, from the presence of the serpent. So the serpent spewed water out of his mouth like a flood after the woman, that he might cause her to be carried away by the flood. But the earth helped the woman, and the earth opened its mouth and swallowed up the flood which the dragon had spewed out of his mouth. And the dragon was enraged with the woman, and he went to make war with the rest of her offspring, who keep the commandments of God and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.” (Rev 12:13-17)
Here we see that the dragon pursues the woman, but the Lord comes to the woman’s aid, keeping her from his reach. The 144,000 are not only protected from the wrath of God, as are the Christians, but they are also protected from Satan’s wrath, enabling them to survive until they are saved after the fullness of the Gentiles has come in and the Deliverer comes from Zion. In his frustration and rage at not being able to touch the woman, the dragon focuses his wrath upon the rest of the woman’s offspring, the Christians.
So, we see that the 144,000 are non-messianic Jews who are chosen and sealed to survive the worst and final holocaust under the Antichrist and stand before the Son of God, believing on Him only when they see His wounds and pierced side when He returns to earth. They will probably be the only surviving Jews, since genetic research is rapidly replacing genealogical records with DNA testing, potentially making it possible to positively determine Jewish descent under the persecution of the Antichrist.
[i] http://www.simpletoremember.com/articles/a/HistoryJewishPersecution/
There has been much fanciful speculation concerning the identity of the 144,000 mentioned in Revelation 7. Are they made up of Church saints or a Jewish remnant? Will there be literally 144,000 sealed, or does that number have some hidden spiritual meaning?
It is my conviction that the confusion is the result of ignoring clear identifying statements within the passages themselves, much as we saw with the indicators within the sign of the woman and the man-child in Revelation 12, revealing their identities. Sound exegesis always draws the meaning from the text itself, instead of reading one’s understanding into the text. The following is an excerpt from chapter 9 of my book: “Focusing in on End-Time Events,” in which I point out the identity of the 144,000 from the text itself.
*****************
In Revelation chapter 7 there is mention of 144,000 servants of God from the twelve tribes of the children of Israel who are sealed. There are two basic interpretations as to their identity. The first is that they are to be seen symbolically as representing the Church saints, and the second is that it is referring to literal Israelites – 12,000 from each of the twelve tribes as listed in verses 5 thru 8 who will be sealed at the end of the age, just prior to the judgments which will be inflicted upon those who dwell on the earth. The arguments presented in defense of a symbolic interpretation will be first examined before explaining their identity using the literal approach.
Arguments against a Literal Interpretation of the 144,000 in Revelation 7
1) Revelation is a Book Full of Symbolism and should not be Interpreted Literally
It is argued that the 144,000 should be understood as simply referring to a great multitude and should not be taken literally. This position is defended in spite of the fact that much detail is given specifying that the 144,000 are children of Israel, composed of 12,000 from each of the twelve tribes mentioned in verses 5 thru 8. In reality, the passage is very specific as to the number of the sealed. It is in verses 9 thru the end of the chapter that we see a non-specific number of blood washed saints from all nations who come out of the Great Tribulation, as seen in distinction from the 144,000 Jews who are sealed in verses 1 thru 8. In verse 9 John says: “After these things I saw a great multitude which no man can number…” Why would so much attention be given to detail, specifying 144,000 individuals in one passage and then right afterwards refer to a non-specific number by simply saying “a great multitude” if the 144,000 are also meant to be understood as a non-specific number? The most obvious progression of chapter seven is to show first, those of literal Israel who will survive the tribulation, and then the great multitude of blood washed Church saints from all nations who will also come out of the Great Tribulation.
The same school of thought which would spiritualize the number 144,000, usually does not interpret the 1,000-year millennium or the three-and-a-half-year period of the Great Tribulation literally either. This they do in spite of the several ways it is expressed; “three and a half years,” “time, times and half a time,” “forty-two months” and “twelve hundred and sixty days.” It is as if God, anticipating that men would want to spiritualize these numbers, made them specific in every possible way. Nevertheless, many persist in seeing the numbers as nonspecific. One commentary actually states in reference to the 144,000: “The number is too exact and artificial to suppose that it is literal.” Since when do specific details instead of general terms argue for not taking them literally? Clearly the opposite is true.
In Old Testament prophecies that specify numbers, we can see that they were fulfilled literally. In Daniel the numbers are literally fulfilled. Should we expect anything different in Revelation, the companion volume? In Jeremiah 29:10, it is revealed that the captivity would last 70 years. Did Daniel understand it literally? Yes. And exactly 70 years later the captivity ended as prophesied. Even though there was a secondary application revealed to him in Daniel 9:24-27 that would be fulfilled in 7 times 70 years, the primary prophecy was fulfilled literally, and the secondary fulfillment is also being fulfilled literally. Although prophetic Scriptures contain symbolism, we only have liberty to interpret symbolism symbolically. Literal prophecies should never be interpreted symbolically. A rule of interpretation should generally be recognized: “When the plain sense of Scripture makes common sense, seek no other sense.”
The same interpreters arbitrarily take many other numbers in Revelation literally, such as the New Jerusalem with 12 foundations and 12 gates; 7 seals, 7 trumpets, 7 bowls, etc. Generally speaking, whenever God chooses to communicate with numbers, He wants us to think in terms of numbers.
2) The 10 Tribes of the Northern Kingdom were Dispersed Never to be Found Again
It is argued that the 10 tribes of the Northern Kingdom are lost tribes. After the reign of Solomon, the Kingdom of Israel was divided. The tribes of Judah and Benjamin remained in Judea under the rule of Solomon’s son Rehoboam, and the other ten tribes formed the northern kingdom under Jeroboam. The northern kingdom abandoned the worship of God and persisted in idolatry until they were delivered over to the Assyrians around 722 B.C. They were then dispersed among the nations, and foreigners were sent to repopulate their cities. Those who argue against the 144,000 being the literal children of Israel say that the ten tribes of Israel were dispersed among the nations and lost forever and therefore could not be the 144,000 at the end of the age. However, God made an irrevocable promise that neither the nation of Israel nor Judah, which was also later sent into captivity, would be lost forever:
“For behold, the days are coming,' says the Lord, 'that I will bring back from captivity My people Israel and Judah,' says the Lord. 'And I will cause them to return to the land that I gave to their fathers, and they shall possess it….'" For I am with you,' says the Lord, 'to save you; though I make a full end of all nations where I have scattered you, yet I will not make a complete end of you. But I will correct you in justice, and will not let you go altogether unpunished.” (Jer 30:3,11)
“Thus says the Lord, who gives the sun for a light by day, the ordinances of the moon and the stars for a light by night, who disturbs the sea, and its waves roar (The Lord of hosts is His name): "If those ordinances depart from before Me, says the Lord, then the seed of Israel shall also cease from being a nation before Me forever." Thus says the Lord: "If heaven above can be measured, and the foundations of the earth searched out beneath, I will also cast off all the seed of Israel for all that they have done, says the Lord.” (Jer 31:35-37)
In these verses, and many others, God unconditionally promises that they will never entirely cease to be God’s elect people, contrary to what many may say. He also promises that however lost they may seem to be, He will re-gather them into their own land and will restore to them their kingdom in the latter days:
"Then say to them, 'Thus says the Lord God: "Surely I will take the children of Israel from among the nations, wherever they have gone, and will gather them from every side and bring them into their own land; and I will make them one nation in the land, on the mountains of Israel; and one king shall be king over them all; they shall no longer be two nations, nor shall they ever be divided into two kingdoms again.” (Ezek 37:21,22)
“After many days you (Gog) will be visited. In the latter years you will come into the land of those brought back from the sword and gathered from many people on the mountains of Israel, which had long been desolate; they were brought out of the nations, and now all of them dwell safely…. You will come up against My people Israel like a cloud, to cover the land. It will be in the latter days that I will bring you against My land, so that the nations may know Me, when I am hallowed in you, O Gog, before their eyes.” (Ezek 38:8,16)
“For the children of Israel shall abide many days without king or prince, without sacrifice or sacred pillar, without ephod or teraphim. Afterward the children of Israel shall return and seek the Lord their God and David their king. They shall fear the Lord and His goodness in the latter days.” (Hos 3:4-5)
In these passages we see clearly that, far from being lost forever, in the latter days both Israel and Judah will be back in the land of Israel as one nation with one king over them. I consider the fallacies of Replacement Theology which teaches that the Church replaced national Israel in my blog Has God Rejected His People Israel?
Early Christians would have had no problem accepting that all twelve tribes of Israel could be sealed. All twelve tribes were present and worshipping God at the time of the writing of the New Testament over 700 years after the dispersion. On the day of Pentecost, we see that the devout Jews of the dispersion, representing all the house of Israel, were in Jerusalem for the Passover Feasts:
“And there were dwelling in Jerusalem Jews, devout men, from every nation under heaven. And when this sound occurred, the multitudes came together, and were confused, because everyone heard them speak in his own language… ‘Men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a Man attested by God to you by miracles, wonders, and signs which God did through Him in your midst, as you yourselves also know… Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly that God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ.” (Acts 2:5,6, 22,36)
Here we see that on the day of Pentecost, Jews representative of the whole house of Israel were present in Jerusalem for the Feast (all twelve tribes were referred to as Jews as well as Israelites since the Babylonian captivity). Paul, speaking before Agrippa, presents in his speech something that was common knowledge – there were devout Jews serving God from all twelve tribes in his time:
“To this promise our twelve tribes, earnestly serving God night and day, hope to attain. For this hope's sake, King Agrippa, I am accused by the Jews.” (Acts 26:7)
James wrote his epistle to all twelve tribes of the Jews of the dispersion:
“James, a bondservant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad: Greetings.” (James 1:1)
Though not all from the ten tribes returned to the land of Israel (that awaits the latter times), they were definitely not all forever lost, nor absorbed by the nations. And of those that apparently are lost, they are only lost to men, not to God.
The Jewish lineage in biblical times was traced through the father’s line and not the mother’s line. Throughout the Scriptures we see that a child continues to be a Jew even if the child’s mother is non-Jewish as long as the father is Jewish. Joseph married an Egyptian, yet his two sons became the fathers of the two half tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh. Moses married a Midianite. In the Messianic genealogy of Matthew chapter one, we see that Rahab the harlot of Jericho was the mother of Boaz, but Boaz continued to be included in the line of Judah. He in turn married Ruth, a Moabite. So, although there were Gentiles in Jesus’ bloodline, that did not exclude Him from being a legitimate descendent of Judah and thus qualified to be the Messiah as a descendant of David from the tribe of Judah. God knows the paternal descent of every Jew and is fully capable of distinguishing them and sealing them.
There are many devout Jews in the world today who know they are Jews but do not know with certainty of which tribe they are. Some conclude that because their surnames are Levi or Cohen that they are of the tribe of Levi but even that is not conclusive. Genealogical records cannot be traced back more than a few generations. Israelites have been banished from many nations, persecuted, slaughtered, and obligated to embrace Christendom or the Muslim faith, further complicating things (for a timeline showing how the Jews have been trampled underfoot by the Gentiles see the following link: ( [i] ). It is a miracle that they remain a distinct people after so many attempts to destroy them. Many modern-day Jews have continued to practice the Jewish faith as passed down from their ancestors even though they may not know of which tribe they are descended from. Be what it may, God knows their paternal descent and knows whom He has chosen to be sealed from each tribe at the end of the age.
3) The Fact that the Tribes are not mentioned in the Usual Manner Indicates that it was Not Intended to be Interpreted Literally
Those who maintain that the 144,000 symbolically represent the Church point out that the twelve tribes of Israel in Revelation 7 are not mentioned in the usual order, the tribe of Dan is excluded and instead of mentioning Ephraim he is replaced with his father Joseph. Also, the Levites, who are normally excluded from the lists of tribes because their heavenly calling as priests excluded them from earthly inheritances, are here included. From this it is argued that it was not meant to be taken literally. In reality the contrary is true. The fact that they are not listed in the usual order from the oldest to youngest and that there are exclusions should call our attention. Why is Dan excluded? Why is Joseph named instead of Ephraim? Why was Levi included? These differences should be a call to attention, causing us to investigate the reason for the changes.
The reason for the exclusion of Dan and Ephraim is implied in that Dan was the first of the tribes to turn to idolatry upon entering Canaan and Ephraim followed suit:
“Then the children of Dan set up for themselves the carved image; and Jonathan the son of Gershom, the son of Manasseh, and his sons were priests to the tribe of Dan until the day of the captivity of the land.” (Judg 18:30)
“Ephraim is joined to idols, let him alone.” (Hos 4:17)
The idea expressed in these texts is that both tribes rejected the worship of the true God and persisted in their idolatry until they were given over to a reprobate mind. Jacob even prophetically implied that Dan would be a stumbling block for the nation of Israel when he blessed his sons in Genesis 49:17. He said,
“Dan shall be a serpent by the way, a viper by the path that bites the horse's heels so that its rider shall fall backward.”
Levi would naturally be included among the tribes sealed because, although the Levites were not given an earthly inheritance, the seal of God is unto the heavenly inheritance of which they are heirs and ministers.
So, the differences in the list of tribes from the normal order, actually favor the conclusion that they should be taken literally. A Jew would naturally ask why two tribes are not mentioned and knowing the history of idolatry in the tribes of Dan and Ephraim would have understood the message that God meant to communicate by their exclusion.
As has been demonstrated, the arguments for not taking the 144,000 as being 12,000 literal Jews from each tribe listed do not stand up under closer examination. Israel has not been lost and absorbed by the nations. And God has promised that, though they will be judged for their sin and idolatry, He will not cast them off forever, no matter what they may have done.
Reason for Sealing the Foreheads of the 144,000
The reason for sealing the 144,000 is implied in Revelation 7 verses 1 thru 3:
“After these things I saw four angels standing at the four corners of the earth, holding the four winds of the earth, that the wind should not blow on the earth, on the sea, or on any tree. Then I saw another angel ascending from the east, having the seal of the living God. And he cried with a loud voice to the four angels to whom it was granted to harm the earth and the sea, saying, “Do not harm the earth, the sea, or the trees till we have sealed the servants of our God on their foreheads.” (Rev 7:1-3)
The judgments described in the seals alone will cause the death of at least one fourth of the world’s population (Rev 6:7), not to mention the loss of life in other events described in the trumpet and bowl judgments. The seal of God in their foreheads is for their protection from these judgments and the wrath of the dragon who will seek to destroy them after he is cast down to the earth. We see this demonstrated when the demons that ascend from the bottomless pit are not permitted to harm those who have the seal of God in their forehead (9:4). This is similar to a vision that Ezekiel was shown:
“Now the glory of the God of Israel had gone up from the cherub, where it had been, to the threshold of the temple. And He called to the man clothed with linen, who had the writer's inkhorn at his side; and the Lord said to him, ‘Go through the midst of the city, through the midst of Jerusalem, and put a mark on the foreheads of the men who sigh and cry over all the abominations that are done within it.’ To the others He said in my hearing, ‘Go after him through the city and kill; do not let your eye spare, nor have any pity. Utterly slay old and young men, maidens and little children and women; but do not come near anyone on whom is the mark; and begin at My sanctuary.’” (Ezek 9:3-6)
The Mark in Revelation, as in Ezekiel, is for Protection of the Servants of God
A change in John’s visions is often introduced by the words “after this I saw”, or “after these things I saw” or simply “then I saw”. These expressions are not to indicate that the contents of the visions chronologically follow the events of the prior visions but rather what John sees in the new vision follows what he saw in the prior one. John is shown repeated visions of the same three-and-a-half-year period of the Great Tribulation, giving different details of the same timespan. They are not to be understood as one three-and-a-half-year period followed by another three-and-a-half-year period, but rather two visions where he sees the same timespan from a different perspective.
Recapitulation is a common characteristic of the book of Revelation. When he says, “after these things I saw…” in 7:1 he is not saying, “after the seven seals have already wiped out over a quarter of the world’s population I saw that the 144,000 were sealed to protect them from being harmed,” but rather that he saw in the next vision that the four angels continued to hold back the four winds of the earth so that no harm would be done to it until the 144,000 servants of God had been sealed. The vision takes him back to the beginning, before any of the seals which will bring devastation to the earth and its inhabitants are broken.
Identity of the 144,000
Having established that the 144,000 are 12,000 natural Jews from each of the twelve tribes of Israel listed, the question still remains as to their identity. They are called servants of God, which speaks of their devotion to Him. However, if they were blood washed Church saints, they would not need a sealing to protect them distinct from that which one receives upon appropriating salvation in Christ:
“In Him you also trusted, after you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation; in whom also, having believed, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise.” (Eph 1:13)
“And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption.” (Eph 4:30)
“who (God) also has sealed us and given us the Spirit in our hearts as a guarantee.” (2Cor 1:22)
Though man cannot see the seal, both angels and demons alike see it. Angels, as ministering spirits, provide protection to those sealed of God, and demons are not permitted to touch us without God’s permission. God only permits Satan to afflict His elect children when it is necessary for their sanctification. In the case of one who does not judge sin in his life, it becomes necessary for God to “deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of the flesh that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus” (1Cor 5:5). God will discipline His children in order that they may not be condemned with the world. Even one who loves the Lord like Peter, and longs to serve Him full-heartedly, must be broken and divested of self. And in order to accomplish this, God permits Satan to sift us like wheat, so we may learn to trust in Him, putting no confidence in the flesh.
Messianic Jews, in the same manner as Gentile believers, are sealed by God for the day of redemption upon believing. They are no longer distinct from the Church but rather joint members with the Gentiles. Church saints will be protected from the wrath of God during the tribulation, but many will also be privileged to die as martyrs under the reign of the Antichrist:
“Here is the patience of the saints; here are those who keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus. Then I heard a voice from heaven saying to me, Write: ‘Blessed are the dead who die in the Lord from now on.' Yes, ‘says the Spirit,’ that they may rest from their labors, and their works follow them.” (Rev 14:12-13)
Many Christians who refuse the mark or the name of the beast in their foreheads will be put to death. For them it is said to be a privilege to die in the Lord. The same could not be said, however, of devout Jews who have not yet believed in Jesus Christ as their Messiah and Savior. They must be preserved alive until the Second Coming of Christ, at which time they will be saved:
“For I do not desire, brethren, that you should be ignorant of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own opinion, that blindness in part has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in. And so all Israel will be saved, as it is written: 'The Deliverer will come out of Zion, and He will turn away ungodliness from Jacob; for this is My covenant with them, when I take away their sins.' Concerning the gospel they are enemies for your sake, but concerning the election they are beloved for the sake of the fathers. For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable.” (Rom 11:25-29)
How is all Israel saved? By the Deliverer when He comes from Zion. They will continue throughout the tribulation period as devout Jews but in unbelief until they see their Deliverer coming in the clouds of heaven. At that moment they will be saved.
“And I will pour on the house of David and on the inhabitants of Jerusalem the Spirit of grace and supplication; then they will look on Me whom they pierced. Yes, they will mourn for Him as one mourns for his only son, and grieve for Him as one grieves for a firstborn.” (Zech 12:10)
When is it that God pours out upon the house of Israel the Spirit of grace and supplication? When the Deliverer comes from Zion. Then they will look upon the wounds in His hands and feet. They will see His pierced side and will mourn – not for themselves but for Him whom they pierced. It will be a time of deep repentance for those 144,000 of Israel who survive the most horrible holocaust ever under the Antichrist that will apparently result in every Jew being killed except for those who are sealed for protection. Romans 11:26 says, “all Israel will be saved” when the Deliverer comes. In other words, as a result of the coming holocaust, only the 144,000 sealed will be saved alive. Their protection from the dragon and the Antichrist can be seen in Revelation twelve where the woman, or Israel, is persecuted by Satan after giving birth to the man-child:
“Now when the dragon saw that he had been cast to the earth, he persecuted the woman who gave birth to the male Child. But the woman was given two wings of a great eagle, that she might fly into the wilderness to her place, where she is nourished for a time and times and half a time, from the presence of the serpent. So the serpent spewed water out of his mouth like a flood after the woman, that he might cause her to be carried away by the flood. But the earth helped the woman, and the earth opened its mouth and swallowed up the flood which the dragon had spewed out of his mouth. And the dragon was enraged with the woman, and he went to make war with the rest of her offspring, who keep the commandments of God and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.” (Rev 12:13-17)
Here we see that the dragon pursues the woman, but the Lord comes to the woman’s aid, keeping her from his reach. The 144,000 are not only protected from the wrath of God, as are the Christians, but they are also protected from Satan’s wrath, enabling them to survive until they are saved after the fullness of the Gentiles has come in and the Deliverer comes from Zion. In his frustration and rage at not being able to touch the woman, the dragon focuses his wrath upon the rest of the woman’s offspring, the Christians.
So, we see that the 144,000 are non-messianic Jews who are chosen and sealed to survive the worst and final holocaust under the Antichrist and stand before the Son of God, believing on Him only when they see His wounds and pierced side when He returns to earth. They will probably be the only surviving Jews, since genetic research is rapidly replacing genealogical records with DNA testing, potentially making it possible to positively determine Jewish descent under the persecution of the Antichrist.
[i] http://www.simpletoremember.com/articles/a/HistoryJewishPersecution/
- Published on
00:00
00:00
#The Manifest Sons of God (2 0f 3)
by George Sidney Hurd
“For as many as are being constantly led by God's Spirit, these are sons of God. For you did not receive a spirit of slavery again with resulting fear, but you received the Spirit who places you as adult sons, by whom we cry out with deep emotion, Abba, [namely] Father. The Spirit himself is constantly bearing joint-testimony with our [human] spirit that we are God's children, and since children, also heirs; on the one hand, heirs of God, on the other, joint-heirs with Christ, provided that we are suffering with Him in order that we also may be glorified together, for I have come to a reasoned conclusion that the sufferings of the present season are of no weight in comparison to the glory which is about to be revealed upon us. For the concentrated and undivided expectation of the creation is assiduously and patiently awaiting the revelation of the sons of God; for the creation was subjected to futility, not voluntarily, but on account of the One who put it under subjection upon the basis of the hope that the creation itself also will be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the liberty of the glory of the children of God. For we know that the whole creation groans and travails together up to this moment, and not only, but we ourselves also who have the firstfruit of the Spirit, we ourselves also are groaning within ourselves, assiduously and patiently waiting the full realization of our adult sonship at the time of the redemption of our body.” (Rom 8:14-19) [1]
In Romans chapter eight, cited above from the translation of the renowned Greek scholar Kenneth Wuest, the Holy Spirit speaks through the apostle Paul of a future unveiling or revelation (apocalupsis) of the sons of God. It is said to be an event eagerly awaited, not only by all of creation but also by the saints having the firstfruit of the Spirit. Creation has been subjected to futility since Adam forfeited his dominion to Satan when he disobeyed God in Eden. That futility will continue unchallenged until the manifestation of the Sons of God when they will begin to walk in all the authority of Christ, the Last Adam. What is being described here, and when will it begin to manifest? These are questions which will be considered in this section.
Who are the Manifest Sons of God?
Who are these sons of God who will be manifest or unveiled at the close of this age? The language of the passage that Paul utilizes and his references to the Greek culture are very enlightening. In the Greek language there are several words used to distinguish different stages of a son’s development from birth to manhood. The first word is brephos which is used to refer to an infant or even an unborn child. We do not become part of the family of God by adoption but by birth. The term “adoption” will be explained later. We all begin as newborn babes in the family of God:
“Having been born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, through the word of God, which lives and abides forever... As newborn babes (brephos), desire the pure milk of the word, that you may grow thereby.” (1Peter 1:23; 2:2)
The second word used is nepios. When speaking of the stages of one’s development it refers to a toddler, one who has not yet been weaned or is immature:
“And I, brethren, could not speak to you as to spiritual people but as to carnal, as to babes (nepios) in Christ. I fed you with milk and not with solid food; for until now you were not able to receive it, and even now you are still not able.” (1Cor 3:1-2)
“For everyone who partakes only of milk is unskilled in the word of righteousness, for he is a babe (nepios).” (Heb 5:13-14)
The third stage in development from infant to adult is referred to as teknion or teknon. Both terms refer to childhood, but teknion is a more endearing term which is usually translated “little children”. John uses this term throughout his first epistle. In 1John 2:12 he uses it to refer to the spiritual children in contrast with the young mature sons who are overcomers and the older mature sons who have developed intimacy with Christ:
“I write to you, little children (tecnion), because your sins are forgiven you for His name's sake. I write to you, fathers, because you have known Him who is from the beginning. I write to you, young men, because you have overcome the wicked one.” (1John 2:12-14)
In this passage, we can see different levels of spiritual maturity among believers. The little children are at the level where they know that their sins have been forgiven through Jesus Christ. The young men have matured and have learned to walk in the authority of Christ, overcoming Satan. The fathers are those who, having discovered justification by faith and their authority in Christ, have pressed on to greater intimacy with Him.
The word used to express the mature sons is the Greek word huios. While the word huios is also used to refer to lineage without regard to age (even today we would present our baby or child saying “this is my son”), when it is used to refer to the level of one’s maturity, huios refers to an adult son along with all the privileges and responsibilities of an adult. In Galatians 4:1-7 we see this illustrated:
“Now I say, that as long as the heir is in his minority, he does not differ one bit from a slave, even though he is owner of all, but is under guardians and stewards until the time previously fixed by his father. In like manner, we also, when we were in our minority, were in a permanent state of servitude under the rudimentary first principles of mankind. But when there came the fullness of the time, God sent off His Son, woman-born, made subject to law, in order that He might deliver those under law to the end that we might be placed as adult sons (huiothesia). And because you are sons, God sent forth the Spirit of His Son into your hearts crying, Abba [namely], my Father. So that no longer are you a slave but a son (huios), and since you are a son, you are also an heir through God.” [2]
Here we see that a child, even though he is an heir, must mature to the point where the father determines he is a responsible adult (huios) before he can be entrusted with his inheritance.
What is Meant by “Adoption”?
Many have mistakenly applied the western concept of adoption to the Greek word huiothesia translating it “adoption”. The word simply means “to place as an adult son” (it is a compound word composed of “son” <huios> and <tithemi> “to place”).
Both Vines Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words and Doctor C.I. Scofield, make the following comments concerning the meaning of the term huiothesia:
“In Eph 1:5 they are said to have been foreordained unto ‘adoption as sons’ through Jesus Christ, RV; the KJV, ‘adoption of children’ is a mistranslation and misleading. God does not ‘adopt’ believers as children; they are begotten as such by His Holy Spirit through faith. ‘Adoption’ is a term involving the dignity of the relationship of believers as sons; it is not a putting into the family by spiritual birth, but a putting into the position of sons. In Rom 8:23 the ‘adoption’ of the believer is set forth as still future, as it there includes the redemption of the body, when the living will be changed and those who have fallen asleep will be raised.” [3]
“Adoption (huiothesia, ‘placing as a son’) is not so much a word of relationship as of position. The believer’s relation to God as a child results from the new birth (John 1:12, 13), whereas adoption is the act of God whereby one already a child is, through redemption from the law, placed in the position of an adult son (Gal. 4:1-5). The indwelling Spirit gives the realization of this in the believer’s present experience (Gal. 4:6); but the full manifestation of the believer’s sonship awaits the resurrection change and translation of saints, which is called ‘the redemption of the body’ (Rom. 8:23; 1Thess. 4:14-17; Eph. 1:14; 1John 3:2) (emphasis added).” [4]
The Three Stages to Sonship in Hebrew Tradition
These three stages of development of a Hebrew son into adulthood were celebrated with three Jewish ceremonies: 1) Circumcision, 2) Bar Mitzvah and 3) Huiothesia or placement as an adult son. The first stage is from circumcision on the eighth day after birth until the child reaches twelve years of age. During this stage, the child is taught the law. In his thirteenth year the child enters into adolescence. During the second stage the son learns the statutes of the Torah and is instructed in the father’s business. Reference is made to all three stages in Doctor Kittel’s authoritative work:
“In the Jewish family, sons received the covenant sign of circumcision the eighth day after birth and from early youth were instructed by their fathers in the Torah. When taught the Law, the boy in his thirteenth year becomes fully responsible for observance of the commandments from that time on.... In the Qumran and Rabbinical literature there are precise rules for each age. 1 QSa 1:6-19a says that in the end time the instruction of the young Israelite in the statutes of the covenant will take place from youth up….The stages of human life are divided ...with 30 to maturity, with 40 to understanding, with 50 to counsel, with 60 to age, with 70 to old age, with 80 to hoary old age, with 90 to being bowed down, with 100 as dead and gone from the world (emphasis added).” [5]
When did the full manifestation of sonship occur in the development of a Hebrew son? Upon reaching maturity around the age of 30, the father would make an open declaration in a public place, usually the market. David Webber comments on this ceremony:
“The word ‘Huiothesia’ means ‘Son Placement,’ and indicates the time when a male child reached what was considered to be the age of maturity (somewhere around 30). At this time, the father of the young man would place his hand on the head of his son and openly proclaim, ‘This is my beloved son in whom I am well pleased! I bestow upon him now all of my riches and power and authority (through power of attorney) so that he might act on my behalf in all of my affairs’." [6]
Some associate the term huiothesia with the Bar Mitzvah when a child turns thirteen and is considered morally responsible for his actions (bar mitzvah in Hebrew means “son of the commandments”). However, a child beginning his adolescence in his thirteenth year would not have been considered sufficiently mature to receive his inheritance, as we saw described in Galatians 4:1-7.
Jesus’ life and ministry illustrates the stages toward sonship. He was circumcised on the eighth day (Luke 2:21). When He was twelve years old, He spoke in the temple and all who heard Him were amazed at His understanding and His answers. When His parents found Him in the temple, he said to them: “Do you not know that I must be about My Father’s business?” (Lu 2:49). This transition marks the second stage of His development from Bar Mitzvah until he was thirty years old, during which time a son learned his father’s business. Then at thirty years of age He was baptized, fulfilling all righteousness. At that time the Holy Spirit descended upon Him, and His Father said publicly “You are My beloved Son; in You I am well pleased” (Lu 3:22). The following verse says: “Now Jesus Himself began His ministry at about thirty years of age…” Though He was a Son, he learned obedience, awaiting the time of His Father.
It is the Mature Sons who will be Manifest in the End of the Age
Looking again at Romans 8:14-19, we can see that it is the mature sons of God that are being referred to. In verse nine he says that every child of God has the indwelling Spirit of Christ: “If anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he is not His.” Every child born of God has the Spirit of Christ dwelling in them, including the immature. Even the carnal Christians in Corinth who were reproved for fornicating had the Holy Spirit dwelling in them. Paul said to them: “…do you not know that your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you?” (1Cor 6:19). He exhorts believers in Ephesians 4:30 saying: “And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption.”
However, from verse fourteen on in Romans 8, Paul begins to speak of those mature sons who not only have the indwelling Holy Spirit but are also led by the Spirit: “For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are sons (huios) of God.” While it can be said of every child of God that they have the Spirit of Christ, only the mature sons are continually led by the Spirit. They are no longer driven by every need that presents itself, but only do that which the Spirit leads them to do, even as Jesus only did what He saw the Father doing. An immature believer is usually governed by circumstances, reason and the opinion of others. The adult sons, however, are led by the Spirit and the rhema Word of God. The Spirit bears witness with every child of God that we are his children (teknon), that we have the Spirit that brings us to sonship, and are also potential fellow heirs with Christ if we mature into adult sons, having suffered with Him, thus qualifying us to reign with Him (vv. 15-17).
Comparing the use of huiothesia in Romans eight with the other places it occurs, we can see that sonship is reserved for the mature. In 8:17 we see that the inheritance is reserved for those who have participated in Christ’s suffering, qualifying them to reign with Him. In Hebrews 5:8 we discover that even Jesus “learned obedience by the things which He suffered.” We also are matured in the school of suffering. Our level of maturity is measured by the degree we are conformed to the image of Christ, only doing what we see the Father doing - obeying the Father in all things.
In Ephesians 1:4-6 we see that “He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before Him. In love having predestined us to adoption as sons by Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the good pleasure of His will.” The term, “predestined,” is pro-orizo which is pro “beforehand” and horizo “to set boundaries (horizon), to mark out.” Put together, the word means literally “to set boundaries beforehand”. The idea expressed is that God sets out boundaries beforehand in the lives of His elect that will bring them to the place of maturity required in order to receive sonship. Predestination is like a fence on either side of us which becomes closer and closer one to the other. As we move forward, the set boundaries narrow us down to the place where God destined us to arrive – the place of sonship. Comparing this with Romans 8:29, we see what the measure of maturity is that God has predestined us to:
“And we know that all things work together for good to those who love God, to those who are the called according to His purpose. For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren. Moreover whom He predestined, these He also called; whom He called, these He also justified; and whom He justified, these He also glorified.” (Rom 8:28-30)
Here we see that the boundaries set beforehand in the lives of those whom He has foreknown are designed to bring us into conformity to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren. When we have reached the measure of the fullness of the stature of Christ (Eph 4:13), then we as the body of Christ will be mature and will enter into the fullness of sonship.
In Galatians 3:23 thru 4:7, we see the relationship of the people of God under the Old Covenant compared to that of a child under the tutor of the Law to bring them to Christ – the place of sonship. Under the New Covenant, our relationship is no longer comparable to that of a child under tutors but to that of an adult son:
“Now I say that the heir, as long as he is a child, does not differ at all from a slave, though he is master of all, but is under guardians and stewards until the time appointed by the father. Even so we, when we were children, were in bondage under the elements of the world. But when the fullness of the time had come, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the law, to redeem those who were under the law, that we might receive the adoption as sons. And because you are sons, God has sent forth the Spirit of His Son into your hearts, crying out, ‘Abba, Father!’ Therefore you are no longer a slave but a son, and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ.” (Gal 4:1-7)
Here we see that adoption or sonship is not conferred to a son until the time appointed by the father, when he determines that the son has matured sufficiently to be recognized as an adult son. We see that a child, though he is an heir, does not receive his inheritance until such a time as his father determines that he is sufficiently responsible, which traditionally was 30 years of age. However, Paul’s use of the term “adoption” (huiothesia) to describe our new relation to God as adult sons, in contrast to the Old Covenant relation under the law as children, is not to be confused with what he is describing in Romans 8 when he speaks concerning the manifestation of the sons of God. In Galatians 4, it is referring to something that commenced in the past with the initiation of the New Covenant. However, in Romans 8, it is describing something yet future that Paul and the early believers were longing for but had not yet experienced:
“because the creation itself also will be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God. For we know that the whole creation groans and labors with birth pangs together until now. Not only that, but we also who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, eagerly waiting for the adoption, the redemption of our body.” (Rom 8:21-23)
As both Scofield and Vine point out, the full manifestation of sonship (huiothesia) awaits the time of the transformation when the sons receive the redemption of their bodies. Paul said that even they themselves who had the firstfruits of the Spirit were still awaiting the manifestation of the sons of God.
Although the full manifestation awaits the millennium, there are indications that the manifestation will begin through those who have reached the maturity of sonship prior to Christ’s physical return to earth. Isaiah 60 says that the glory of the Lord will arise upon His sons of glory during a time of great darkness:
“Arise, shine; for your light has come! And the glory of the Lord is risen upon you. For behold, the darkness shall cover the earth, and deep darkness the people; but the Lord will arise over you, and His glory will be seen upon you. The Gentiles shall come to your light, and kings to the brightness of your rising.” (Isa 60:1-3)
The latter glory described here, which will begin to dawn during the darkest hour, seems to be what Paul anxiously awaited: “For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us. For the earnest expectation of the creation eagerly waits for the revealing of the sons of God.” (Rom 8:18,19).
It appears that it will only be the mature sons at the close of the age, prior to the Great Tribulation, who will make up the man-child company and manifest the latter glory during the time of greatest darkness. However, all those who have attained maturity in past generations will also be manifested as sons of God to all of creation during the millennium. Those who have been purified by the fires of the Great Tribulation will also reign in glory with Him during the millennium. Though we of this generation should count it a great privilege to potentially be the firstfruits of the manifestation of the sons of God at the close of the age, the rest of the overcomers will also reign with Him and manifest His glory in the coming ages. All those who suffer with Him will also reign with Him.
Before the Throne of God and on Earth at the Same Time?
There is an indication that the sons of glory in Isaiah 60, in addition to being the manifest sons of God, are also the man-child company of Revelation 12. Many conclude that, since the man-child is caught up to God and to His throne, the man-child company cannot also be on the earth. However, it is possible to be in the heavenlies and on earth at the same time. Jesus, even in the days of His flesh, when speaking with Nicodemus said:
“No one has ascended to heaven but He who came down from heaven, that is, the Son of Man who is in heaven.” (John 3:13)
Jesus stated that He who was speaking to Nicodemus on earth was in heaven in that same moment. After His resurrection, Jesus ascended and descended at will. Jesus, after His resurrection, could manifest His presence on earth or in heaven at will. He didn’t have to become absent from heaven in order to appear on earth. John says: “...it has not yet been revealed what we shall be, but we know that when He is revealed, we shall be like Him, for we shall see Him as He is.” (1John 3:2). In Revelation 14:3 it says that the 144,000 are “before the throne”. However, in verse four it says that they “follow the Lamb wherever He goes”. In the natural this is not possible, but it is possible in the spirit realm.
That is not to say that the man-child company will be omnipresent. That is an attribute only God possesses. But even now in the days of our flesh it is possible to be aware of our presence in the heavenlies where we are seated with Christ. The reality that we are seated with Christ in a place of authority is more than simply “positional truth”. Until we begin to see ourselves seated with Christ, far above all principality and power and dominion, we will not mature into the place of sonship. Our spirit is always before God as believers in spite of the fact that our body and soul are earthbound. It is thus possible to be in communion with God while at the same time carrying on our responsibilities here on earth, following the Lamb wherever He goes. In addition to the promise to the overcomers of the church in Philadelphia that they would be kept from the hour of trial, it is also said: “He who overcomes, I will make him a pillar in the temple of My God, and he shall go out no more” (Rev 3:12). We all understand that this is not saying that those who overcome will never do anything or go anywhere else for all of eternity, but rather that he will always be spiritually in the very presence of God, even while serving Him and following the Lamb. When David speaks of dwelling in the house of the Lord forever, are we to understand that he will never be anywhere else, or that he will be reigning in the millennial kingdom, among other activities, at the same time he is in the presence of God?
When Jesus delayed His arrival in Bethany, Lazarus had already been dead four days. When Jesus said to Martha, “Your brother will rise again” she replied, “I know that he will rise again in the resurrection at the last day.” To her faith in the resurrection at the last day Jesus replied, "I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in Me, though he may die, he shall live. And whoever lives and believes in Me shall never die. Do you believe this?” (John 11:25-26). I believe that Jesus here presents two levels of faith concerning death that are greater than that expressed by Martha when she said she believed in a future resurrection. The first was that which was demonstrated, raising Lazarus from the dead; faith to come back to life after having died. This level of faith has been demonstrated many times in the Bible and in history when the dead have been raised. The second level of faith has rarely been seen as of yet; “he who lives and believes in me shall never die.” Apart from Enoch and Elijah, this faith for translation without seeing death has not been manifested. However, it seems that there will be an Elijah company of saints that will be given revelation for this level of faith. Even as Elijah knew he would be translated without seeing death, there will be a man-child company who will be caught up to the throne of God without seeing death.
It seems that this man-child company is also referring to the sons of glory who will shine in the midst of the darkness at the end of the age, resulting in a great harvest of souls. They will do the greater works that Jesus spoke of. They will be able to tirelessly reach the unreachable, going where the Church has not yet been able to go – to the ends of the earth. This may seem incredible to some. However, it seems that God will do many incredible things at the close of this age in order to bring in the final harvest before the Second Coming. Although Chuck Girard probably does not share this interpretation - at least not in its entirety, he expresses this well in his prophetic song “Name Above All Names”: “I am Jehovah, I am that I am, and my trumpet shall soon call out. I formed the worlds with just a whisper, but I’m getting ready to shout!” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=owJ62Yu95S0). He is coming soon but He will not come before the gospel of the Kingdom has been heard throughout the whole earth.
In Revelation 14:6-7 it appears that even the angels will take part in the proclamation of the everlasting gospel at the end of the age. Why would he not also use the manifest sons of God – the glorified man-child company?
Some have argued that it is elitism to teach that the manifest sons of God are a group distinct from the Church at large. However, the privilege is for all who attain the conditions of sonship. The responsibility lies, to a great extent, with us. Are we willing to suffer with Him in order that we may be glorified with Him? Will we cleanse ourselves from the flesh so as to be vessels of honor fit for the Master’s use? Will we humble ourselves under the mighty hand of God that He may exalt us in due time? Will we be among those who endure, so that, after having done the will of God we may receive the promise? Will we be watchful and praying that we may be counted worthy to escape all these things that will come to pass? The overcomers – not an elite group, will rule with a rod of Iron. Those who have kept the word of His patience will be those kept from the hour of trial. The wise virgins will be those permitted to enter in. God is not a respecter of persons. Let us make it our goal to lay hold of everything Christ desired for us when He laid hold of us.
“Not that I have already attained, or am already perfected; but I press on, that I may lay hold of that for which Christ Jesus has also laid hold of me. Brethren, I do not count myself to have apprehended; but one thing I do, forgetting those things which are behind and reaching forward to those things which are ahead, I press toward the goal for the prize of the upward (high) call of God in Christ Jesus. Therefore let us, as many as are mature, have this mind; and if in anything you think otherwise, God will reveal even this to you.” (Phil 3:12-15)
[1] Kenneth S. Wuest, The New Testament: An Expanded Translation (Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1961).
[2] Ibid.
[3] Vine's Expository Dictionary of Biblical Words, (Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1985).
[4] Scofield Reference Bible, ( Oxford University Press, New York, 1945), note on Eph. 1:5.
[5] Kittel’s Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (10 volumes). By Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1972-1989), huios strongs 5207
[6] http://www.tlchrist.info/worship/adoption.htm
“For as many as are being constantly led by God's Spirit, these are sons of God. For you did not receive a spirit of slavery again with resulting fear, but you received the Spirit who places you as adult sons, by whom we cry out with deep emotion, Abba, [namely] Father. The Spirit himself is constantly bearing joint-testimony with our [human] spirit that we are God's children, and since children, also heirs; on the one hand, heirs of God, on the other, joint-heirs with Christ, provided that we are suffering with Him in order that we also may be glorified together, for I have come to a reasoned conclusion that the sufferings of the present season are of no weight in comparison to the glory which is about to be revealed upon us. For the concentrated and undivided expectation of the creation is assiduously and patiently awaiting the revelation of the sons of God; for the creation was subjected to futility, not voluntarily, but on account of the One who put it under subjection upon the basis of the hope that the creation itself also will be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the liberty of the glory of the children of God. For we know that the whole creation groans and travails together up to this moment, and not only, but we ourselves also who have the firstfruit of the Spirit, we ourselves also are groaning within ourselves, assiduously and patiently waiting the full realization of our adult sonship at the time of the redemption of our body.” (Rom 8:14-19) [1]
In Romans chapter eight, cited above from the translation of the renowned Greek scholar Kenneth Wuest, the Holy Spirit speaks through the apostle Paul of a future unveiling or revelation (apocalupsis) of the sons of God. It is said to be an event eagerly awaited, not only by all of creation but also by the saints having the firstfruit of the Spirit. Creation has been subjected to futility since Adam forfeited his dominion to Satan when he disobeyed God in Eden. That futility will continue unchallenged until the manifestation of the Sons of God when they will begin to walk in all the authority of Christ, the Last Adam. What is being described here, and when will it begin to manifest? These are questions which will be considered in this section.
Who are the Manifest Sons of God?
Who are these sons of God who will be manifest or unveiled at the close of this age? The language of the passage that Paul utilizes and his references to the Greek culture are very enlightening. In the Greek language there are several words used to distinguish different stages of a son’s development from birth to manhood. The first word is brephos which is used to refer to an infant or even an unborn child. We do not become part of the family of God by adoption but by birth. The term “adoption” will be explained later. We all begin as newborn babes in the family of God:
“Having been born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, through the word of God, which lives and abides forever... As newborn babes (brephos), desire the pure milk of the word, that you may grow thereby.” (1Peter 1:23; 2:2)
The second word used is nepios. When speaking of the stages of one’s development it refers to a toddler, one who has not yet been weaned or is immature:
“And I, brethren, could not speak to you as to spiritual people but as to carnal, as to babes (nepios) in Christ. I fed you with milk and not with solid food; for until now you were not able to receive it, and even now you are still not able.” (1Cor 3:1-2)
“For everyone who partakes only of milk is unskilled in the word of righteousness, for he is a babe (nepios).” (Heb 5:13-14)
The third stage in development from infant to adult is referred to as teknion or teknon. Both terms refer to childhood, but teknion is a more endearing term which is usually translated “little children”. John uses this term throughout his first epistle. In 1John 2:12 he uses it to refer to the spiritual children in contrast with the young mature sons who are overcomers and the older mature sons who have developed intimacy with Christ:
“I write to you, little children (tecnion), because your sins are forgiven you for His name's sake. I write to you, fathers, because you have known Him who is from the beginning. I write to you, young men, because you have overcome the wicked one.” (1John 2:12-14)
In this passage, we can see different levels of spiritual maturity among believers. The little children are at the level where they know that their sins have been forgiven through Jesus Christ. The young men have matured and have learned to walk in the authority of Christ, overcoming Satan. The fathers are those who, having discovered justification by faith and their authority in Christ, have pressed on to greater intimacy with Him.
The word used to express the mature sons is the Greek word huios. While the word huios is also used to refer to lineage without regard to age (even today we would present our baby or child saying “this is my son”), when it is used to refer to the level of one’s maturity, huios refers to an adult son along with all the privileges and responsibilities of an adult. In Galatians 4:1-7 we see this illustrated:
“Now I say, that as long as the heir is in his minority, he does not differ one bit from a slave, even though he is owner of all, but is under guardians and stewards until the time previously fixed by his father. In like manner, we also, when we were in our minority, were in a permanent state of servitude under the rudimentary first principles of mankind. But when there came the fullness of the time, God sent off His Son, woman-born, made subject to law, in order that He might deliver those under law to the end that we might be placed as adult sons (huiothesia). And because you are sons, God sent forth the Spirit of His Son into your hearts crying, Abba [namely], my Father. So that no longer are you a slave but a son (huios), and since you are a son, you are also an heir through God.” [2]
Here we see that a child, even though he is an heir, must mature to the point where the father determines he is a responsible adult (huios) before he can be entrusted with his inheritance.
What is Meant by “Adoption”?
Many have mistakenly applied the western concept of adoption to the Greek word huiothesia translating it “adoption”. The word simply means “to place as an adult son” (it is a compound word composed of “son” <huios> and <tithemi> “to place”).
Both Vines Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words and Doctor C.I. Scofield, make the following comments concerning the meaning of the term huiothesia:
“In Eph 1:5 they are said to have been foreordained unto ‘adoption as sons’ through Jesus Christ, RV; the KJV, ‘adoption of children’ is a mistranslation and misleading. God does not ‘adopt’ believers as children; they are begotten as such by His Holy Spirit through faith. ‘Adoption’ is a term involving the dignity of the relationship of believers as sons; it is not a putting into the family by spiritual birth, but a putting into the position of sons. In Rom 8:23 the ‘adoption’ of the believer is set forth as still future, as it there includes the redemption of the body, when the living will be changed and those who have fallen asleep will be raised.” [3]
“Adoption (huiothesia, ‘placing as a son’) is not so much a word of relationship as of position. The believer’s relation to God as a child results from the new birth (John 1:12, 13), whereas adoption is the act of God whereby one already a child is, through redemption from the law, placed in the position of an adult son (Gal. 4:1-5). The indwelling Spirit gives the realization of this in the believer’s present experience (Gal. 4:6); but the full manifestation of the believer’s sonship awaits the resurrection change and translation of saints, which is called ‘the redemption of the body’ (Rom. 8:23; 1Thess. 4:14-17; Eph. 1:14; 1John 3:2) (emphasis added).” [4]
The Three Stages to Sonship in Hebrew Tradition
These three stages of development of a Hebrew son into adulthood were celebrated with three Jewish ceremonies: 1) Circumcision, 2) Bar Mitzvah and 3) Huiothesia or placement as an adult son. The first stage is from circumcision on the eighth day after birth until the child reaches twelve years of age. During this stage, the child is taught the law. In his thirteenth year the child enters into adolescence. During the second stage the son learns the statutes of the Torah and is instructed in the father’s business. Reference is made to all three stages in Doctor Kittel’s authoritative work:
“In the Jewish family, sons received the covenant sign of circumcision the eighth day after birth and from early youth were instructed by their fathers in the Torah. When taught the Law, the boy in his thirteenth year becomes fully responsible for observance of the commandments from that time on.... In the Qumran and Rabbinical literature there are precise rules for each age. 1 QSa 1:6-19a says that in the end time the instruction of the young Israelite in the statutes of the covenant will take place from youth up….The stages of human life are divided ...with 30 to maturity, with 40 to understanding, with 50 to counsel, with 60 to age, with 70 to old age, with 80 to hoary old age, with 90 to being bowed down, with 100 as dead and gone from the world (emphasis added).” [5]
When did the full manifestation of sonship occur in the development of a Hebrew son? Upon reaching maturity around the age of 30, the father would make an open declaration in a public place, usually the market. David Webber comments on this ceremony:
“The word ‘Huiothesia’ means ‘Son Placement,’ and indicates the time when a male child reached what was considered to be the age of maturity (somewhere around 30). At this time, the father of the young man would place his hand on the head of his son and openly proclaim, ‘This is my beloved son in whom I am well pleased! I bestow upon him now all of my riches and power and authority (through power of attorney) so that he might act on my behalf in all of my affairs’." [6]
Some associate the term huiothesia with the Bar Mitzvah when a child turns thirteen and is considered morally responsible for his actions (bar mitzvah in Hebrew means “son of the commandments”). However, a child beginning his adolescence in his thirteenth year would not have been considered sufficiently mature to receive his inheritance, as we saw described in Galatians 4:1-7.
Jesus’ life and ministry illustrates the stages toward sonship. He was circumcised on the eighth day (Luke 2:21). When He was twelve years old, He spoke in the temple and all who heard Him were amazed at His understanding and His answers. When His parents found Him in the temple, he said to them: “Do you not know that I must be about My Father’s business?” (Lu 2:49). This transition marks the second stage of His development from Bar Mitzvah until he was thirty years old, during which time a son learned his father’s business. Then at thirty years of age He was baptized, fulfilling all righteousness. At that time the Holy Spirit descended upon Him, and His Father said publicly “You are My beloved Son; in You I am well pleased” (Lu 3:22). The following verse says: “Now Jesus Himself began His ministry at about thirty years of age…” Though He was a Son, he learned obedience, awaiting the time of His Father.
It is the Mature Sons who will be Manifest in the End of the Age
Looking again at Romans 8:14-19, we can see that it is the mature sons of God that are being referred to. In verse nine he says that every child of God has the indwelling Spirit of Christ: “If anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he is not His.” Every child born of God has the Spirit of Christ dwelling in them, including the immature. Even the carnal Christians in Corinth who were reproved for fornicating had the Holy Spirit dwelling in them. Paul said to them: “…do you not know that your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you?” (1Cor 6:19). He exhorts believers in Ephesians 4:30 saying: “And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption.”
However, from verse fourteen on in Romans 8, Paul begins to speak of those mature sons who not only have the indwelling Holy Spirit but are also led by the Spirit: “For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are sons (huios) of God.” While it can be said of every child of God that they have the Spirit of Christ, only the mature sons are continually led by the Spirit. They are no longer driven by every need that presents itself, but only do that which the Spirit leads them to do, even as Jesus only did what He saw the Father doing. An immature believer is usually governed by circumstances, reason and the opinion of others. The adult sons, however, are led by the Spirit and the rhema Word of God. The Spirit bears witness with every child of God that we are his children (teknon), that we have the Spirit that brings us to sonship, and are also potential fellow heirs with Christ if we mature into adult sons, having suffered with Him, thus qualifying us to reign with Him (vv. 15-17).
Comparing the use of huiothesia in Romans eight with the other places it occurs, we can see that sonship is reserved for the mature. In 8:17 we see that the inheritance is reserved for those who have participated in Christ’s suffering, qualifying them to reign with Him. In Hebrews 5:8 we discover that even Jesus “learned obedience by the things which He suffered.” We also are matured in the school of suffering. Our level of maturity is measured by the degree we are conformed to the image of Christ, only doing what we see the Father doing - obeying the Father in all things.
In Ephesians 1:4-6 we see that “He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before Him. In love having predestined us to adoption as sons by Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the good pleasure of His will.” The term, “predestined,” is pro-orizo which is pro “beforehand” and horizo “to set boundaries (horizon), to mark out.” Put together, the word means literally “to set boundaries beforehand”. The idea expressed is that God sets out boundaries beforehand in the lives of His elect that will bring them to the place of maturity required in order to receive sonship. Predestination is like a fence on either side of us which becomes closer and closer one to the other. As we move forward, the set boundaries narrow us down to the place where God destined us to arrive – the place of sonship. Comparing this with Romans 8:29, we see what the measure of maturity is that God has predestined us to:
“And we know that all things work together for good to those who love God, to those who are the called according to His purpose. For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren. Moreover whom He predestined, these He also called; whom He called, these He also justified; and whom He justified, these He also glorified.” (Rom 8:28-30)
Here we see that the boundaries set beforehand in the lives of those whom He has foreknown are designed to bring us into conformity to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren. When we have reached the measure of the fullness of the stature of Christ (Eph 4:13), then we as the body of Christ will be mature and will enter into the fullness of sonship.
In Galatians 3:23 thru 4:7, we see the relationship of the people of God under the Old Covenant compared to that of a child under the tutor of the Law to bring them to Christ – the place of sonship. Under the New Covenant, our relationship is no longer comparable to that of a child under tutors but to that of an adult son:
“Now I say that the heir, as long as he is a child, does not differ at all from a slave, though he is master of all, but is under guardians and stewards until the time appointed by the father. Even so we, when we were children, were in bondage under the elements of the world. But when the fullness of the time had come, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the law, to redeem those who were under the law, that we might receive the adoption as sons. And because you are sons, God has sent forth the Spirit of His Son into your hearts, crying out, ‘Abba, Father!’ Therefore you are no longer a slave but a son, and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ.” (Gal 4:1-7)
Here we see that adoption or sonship is not conferred to a son until the time appointed by the father, when he determines that the son has matured sufficiently to be recognized as an adult son. We see that a child, though he is an heir, does not receive his inheritance until such a time as his father determines that he is sufficiently responsible, which traditionally was 30 years of age. However, Paul’s use of the term “adoption” (huiothesia) to describe our new relation to God as adult sons, in contrast to the Old Covenant relation under the law as children, is not to be confused with what he is describing in Romans 8 when he speaks concerning the manifestation of the sons of God. In Galatians 4, it is referring to something that commenced in the past with the initiation of the New Covenant. However, in Romans 8, it is describing something yet future that Paul and the early believers were longing for but had not yet experienced:
“because the creation itself also will be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God. For we know that the whole creation groans and labors with birth pangs together until now. Not only that, but we also who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, eagerly waiting for the adoption, the redemption of our body.” (Rom 8:21-23)
As both Scofield and Vine point out, the full manifestation of sonship (huiothesia) awaits the time of the transformation when the sons receive the redemption of their bodies. Paul said that even they themselves who had the firstfruits of the Spirit were still awaiting the manifestation of the sons of God.
Although the full manifestation awaits the millennium, there are indications that the manifestation will begin through those who have reached the maturity of sonship prior to Christ’s physical return to earth. Isaiah 60 says that the glory of the Lord will arise upon His sons of glory during a time of great darkness:
“Arise, shine; for your light has come! And the glory of the Lord is risen upon you. For behold, the darkness shall cover the earth, and deep darkness the people; but the Lord will arise over you, and His glory will be seen upon you. The Gentiles shall come to your light, and kings to the brightness of your rising.” (Isa 60:1-3)
The latter glory described here, which will begin to dawn during the darkest hour, seems to be what Paul anxiously awaited: “For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us. For the earnest expectation of the creation eagerly waits for the revealing of the sons of God.” (Rom 8:18,19).
It appears that it will only be the mature sons at the close of the age, prior to the Great Tribulation, who will make up the man-child company and manifest the latter glory during the time of greatest darkness. However, all those who have attained maturity in past generations will also be manifested as sons of God to all of creation during the millennium. Those who have been purified by the fires of the Great Tribulation will also reign in glory with Him during the millennium. Though we of this generation should count it a great privilege to potentially be the firstfruits of the manifestation of the sons of God at the close of the age, the rest of the overcomers will also reign with Him and manifest His glory in the coming ages. All those who suffer with Him will also reign with Him.
Before the Throne of God and on Earth at the Same Time?
There is an indication that the sons of glory in Isaiah 60, in addition to being the manifest sons of God, are also the man-child company of Revelation 12. Many conclude that, since the man-child is caught up to God and to His throne, the man-child company cannot also be on the earth. However, it is possible to be in the heavenlies and on earth at the same time. Jesus, even in the days of His flesh, when speaking with Nicodemus said:
“No one has ascended to heaven but He who came down from heaven, that is, the Son of Man who is in heaven.” (John 3:13)
Jesus stated that He who was speaking to Nicodemus on earth was in heaven in that same moment. After His resurrection, Jesus ascended and descended at will. Jesus, after His resurrection, could manifest His presence on earth or in heaven at will. He didn’t have to become absent from heaven in order to appear on earth. John says: “...it has not yet been revealed what we shall be, but we know that when He is revealed, we shall be like Him, for we shall see Him as He is.” (1John 3:2). In Revelation 14:3 it says that the 144,000 are “before the throne”. However, in verse four it says that they “follow the Lamb wherever He goes”. In the natural this is not possible, but it is possible in the spirit realm.
That is not to say that the man-child company will be omnipresent. That is an attribute only God possesses. But even now in the days of our flesh it is possible to be aware of our presence in the heavenlies where we are seated with Christ. The reality that we are seated with Christ in a place of authority is more than simply “positional truth”. Until we begin to see ourselves seated with Christ, far above all principality and power and dominion, we will not mature into the place of sonship. Our spirit is always before God as believers in spite of the fact that our body and soul are earthbound. It is thus possible to be in communion with God while at the same time carrying on our responsibilities here on earth, following the Lamb wherever He goes. In addition to the promise to the overcomers of the church in Philadelphia that they would be kept from the hour of trial, it is also said: “He who overcomes, I will make him a pillar in the temple of My God, and he shall go out no more” (Rev 3:12). We all understand that this is not saying that those who overcome will never do anything or go anywhere else for all of eternity, but rather that he will always be spiritually in the very presence of God, even while serving Him and following the Lamb. When David speaks of dwelling in the house of the Lord forever, are we to understand that he will never be anywhere else, or that he will be reigning in the millennial kingdom, among other activities, at the same time he is in the presence of God?
When Jesus delayed His arrival in Bethany, Lazarus had already been dead four days. When Jesus said to Martha, “Your brother will rise again” she replied, “I know that he will rise again in the resurrection at the last day.” To her faith in the resurrection at the last day Jesus replied, "I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in Me, though he may die, he shall live. And whoever lives and believes in Me shall never die. Do you believe this?” (John 11:25-26). I believe that Jesus here presents two levels of faith concerning death that are greater than that expressed by Martha when she said she believed in a future resurrection. The first was that which was demonstrated, raising Lazarus from the dead; faith to come back to life after having died. This level of faith has been demonstrated many times in the Bible and in history when the dead have been raised. The second level of faith has rarely been seen as of yet; “he who lives and believes in me shall never die.” Apart from Enoch and Elijah, this faith for translation without seeing death has not been manifested. However, it seems that there will be an Elijah company of saints that will be given revelation for this level of faith. Even as Elijah knew he would be translated without seeing death, there will be a man-child company who will be caught up to the throne of God without seeing death.
It seems that this man-child company is also referring to the sons of glory who will shine in the midst of the darkness at the end of the age, resulting in a great harvest of souls. They will do the greater works that Jesus spoke of. They will be able to tirelessly reach the unreachable, going where the Church has not yet been able to go – to the ends of the earth. This may seem incredible to some. However, it seems that God will do many incredible things at the close of this age in order to bring in the final harvest before the Second Coming. Although Chuck Girard probably does not share this interpretation - at least not in its entirety, he expresses this well in his prophetic song “Name Above All Names”: “I am Jehovah, I am that I am, and my trumpet shall soon call out. I formed the worlds with just a whisper, but I’m getting ready to shout!” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=owJ62Yu95S0). He is coming soon but He will not come before the gospel of the Kingdom has been heard throughout the whole earth.
In Revelation 14:6-7 it appears that even the angels will take part in the proclamation of the everlasting gospel at the end of the age. Why would he not also use the manifest sons of God – the glorified man-child company?
Some have argued that it is elitism to teach that the manifest sons of God are a group distinct from the Church at large. However, the privilege is for all who attain the conditions of sonship. The responsibility lies, to a great extent, with us. Are we willing to suffer with Him in order that we may be glorified with Him? Will we cleanse ourselves from the flesh so as to be vessels of honor fit for the Master’s use? Will we humble ourselves under the mighty hand of God that He may exalt us in due time? Will we be among those who endure, so that, after having done the will of God we may receive the promise? Will we be watchful and praying that we may be counted worthy to escape all these things that will come to pass? The overcomers – not an elite group, will rule with a rod of Iron. Those who have kept the word of His patience will be those kept from the hour of trial. The wise virgins will be those permitted to enter in. God is not a respecter of persons. Let us make it our goal to lay hold of everything Christ desired for us when He laid hold of us.
“Not that I have already attained, or am already perfected; but I press on, that I may lay hold of that for which Christ Jesus has also laid hold of me. Brethren, I do not count myself to have apprehended; but one thing I do, forgetting those things which are behind and reaching forward to those things which are ahead, I press toward the goal for the prize of the upward (high) call of God in Christ Jesus. Therefore let us, as many as are mature, have this mind; and if in anything you think otherwise, God will reveal even this to you.” (Phil 3:12-15)
[1] Kenneth S. Wuest, The New Testament: An Expanded Translation (Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1961).
[2] Ibid.
[3] Vine's Expository Dictionary of Biblical Words, (Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1985).
[4] Scofield Reference Bible, ( Oxford University Press, New York, 1945), note on Eph. 1:5.
[5] Kittel’s Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (10 volumes). By Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1972-1989), huios strongs 5207
[6] http://www.tlchrist.info/worship/adoption.htm
- Published on
00:00
00:00
The Man-Child Company (1 of 3)
by George Sidney Hurd
In the next couple of blogs, I will be sharing with you something that has been close to my heart ever since the Lord opened my understanding to it nearly forty years ago in what I can only describe as an open-heaven encounter with Him. It wasn’t until later that I began to see how the Scriptures themselves spoke of what I had seen in the spirit during that time. Since that experience, I have come across many who have received a similar vision for what the Lord is going to do through His chosen, prepared sons at the close of this age.
I realize that not everyone reading this will see the unfolding of final events in the same manner as I do, and my purpose in sharing it is not to be contentious, but to simply share what I feel the Lord has shown me, hoping that some may be encouraged by it and receive a renewed vision as to their own role and purpose in the final days of this age.
For me personally, this expectation has been an anchor for my soul through difficult times. Even when the doctors held out no hope for me, the vision I received concerning the latter glory kept my hope alive. Whenever I was tempted to feel that the doctors were right and I was dying, I would remember what the Lord showed me and would repeat, “I shall not die but live and see the glory of the Lord in the land of the living.”
Twenty-two years after the doctors gave me only a few months to live, I am not only alive but totally healed and have a new liver. Even though I am now in my 70s and am often tempted to feel that I have outlived my usefulness, my hope is still kept alive by reminding myself of the vision and declaring, “I shall not die but live and see the glory of the Lord in the land of the living.” This is an excerpt from chapter 8 of my book, “Focusing in on End-Time Events.” I am posting this, at the risk of being misunderstood by those who haven't read the previous chapters which further lay the foundation for this belief.
**************
In Revelation chapter twelve John is shown a vision describing four personages or people groups: 1) A woman with child, 2) The dragon with seven heads and ten horns, 3) The man-child who is born of the woman and 4) the rest of the woman’s descendants (i.e., those born of the woman who are not the man-child).
Who is the Woman?
The vision is introduced with the words, “Now a great sign appeared in heaven.” Again, when the dragon is introduced, it says: “Another sign appeared in heaven” (v. 3). One key to identifying the woman and the man-child she gives birth to is to understand that both she and the dragon are signs and therefore must be interpreted symbolically as signs. In verse nine it states that the dragon is Satan, but recognizing the symbolism represented in the sign, we see that it is not simply Satan but more specifically, Satan as he will manifest during the final three and a half years of the age. He is said to be Satan, but more specifically Satan with seven heads and ten horns having seven crowns on his heads. In Revelation 17:12 it explains the symbolism of the ten horns:
"The ten horns which you saw are ten kings who have received no kingdom as yet, but they receive authority for one hour as kings with the beast.” (Rev 17:12)
Here we see that although the dragon is a symbol of Satan, it is not Satan acting in the past, but Satan as seen operating through the Antichrist and the ten kings during the final hour of this age. This is key to a correct interpretation because it reveals that the whole vision is concerning the future when Satan will appear in that particular form. Any interpretation that seeks to find fulfillment of this vision in history is not giving attention to the details of the symbolism in the signs. According to Revelation 4:1, everything shown to John in vision has to do with future events.
If the dragon is a sign describing the end-time manifestation of Satan, then the woman giving birth is also yet future, since it is Satan in his final manifestation as the dragon with seven heads and ten horns that is seen waiting to devour the man-child as soon as he is born.
Then who does this woman represent who will give birth to the man-child three and a half years before the end of the age? The Catholic Church has traditionally interpreted her as Mary who gives birth to Jesus. That is why Mary is commonly depicted in Catholic art as standing on a crescent moon with twelve stars above her head. However, we see that the woman, upon giving birth to the man-child, is pursued by the dragon and is protected by God in the wilderness during the final three and a half years of this age (vv. 13-16). So, clearly it is not referring to the historical virgin birth of Jesus, since the woman is seen to be fleeing into the desert where she will remain during the Great Tribulation or the last three-and-a-half years of the age (v.14).
Neither is the woman representative of the Church, since the Church is mentioned in verse 17 as being the woman’s offspring.
“And the dragon was enraged with the woman, and he went to make war with the rest of her offspring, who keep the commandments of God and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.” (Rev 12:17)
When the dragon sees that he cannot devour the man-child, he pursues the woman. Because of divine intervention, he cannot touch her either. Then, enraged, he vents his fury on the rest of her offspring who keep the commandments of God and have the testimony of Jesus Christ. And who are those who have the testimony of Jesus Christ? The Church of Jesus Christ. In the following chapter, chapter thirteen, we see a description of the dragon’s persecution of the Church:
“And he was given a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies, and he was given authority to continue for forty-two months. It was granted to him to make war with the saints and to overcome them. And authority was given him over every tribe, tongue, and nation.” (Rev 13:5, 7)
While he is granted permission to make war on the Church, we see that the woman is protected by God and out of reach of the dragon. Who is this woman, and why is she protected from the dragon while the rest of her offspring – the Church, is given into his power?
The symbolism of the sign of the woman helps us discover her identity. In Revelation 12:1 it says that she is “clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a garland of twelve stars.” Comparing this with Joseph’s dream in Genesis 37:9-10, we can see that she represents the nation of Israel:
“Then he dreamed still another dream and told it to his brothers, and said, ‘Look, I have dreamed another dream. And this time, the sun, the moon, and the eleven stars bowed down to me.’ So he told it to his father and his brothers; and his father rebuked him and said to him, ‘What is this dream that you have dreamed? Shall your mother and I and your brothers indeed come to bow down to the earth before you?” (Gen 37:9-10)
Joseph had a dream in which the sun, the moon, and the eleven stars bowed down to him. Jacob himself gives the interpretation of the sign of the woman in heaven. The sun is Jacob, the moon is Rachel, and the stars are the twelve tribes of Israel (including Joseph they would be twelve). So, the woman is representative of the nation of Israel. However, Paul says in Romans 9:6, “they are not all Israel who are of Israel”. He then goes on to explain that the true Israel are those who come through the promised line – not Ishmael but Isaac; not Esau but Jacob etc. Today there are many descendants of Israel, but it is only the elect Israel who are the true seed of Israel. Because of Israel’s failure to recognize their Messiah, God has turned his favor towards the Gentiles, resulting in many being born into the Kingdom of God. Because of Israel’s unbelief, the Gentiles have been grafted into the olive tree which represents the family of Abraham. Because of God’s judgment upon Israel for their rejection of their Messiah, we can now say as Gentiles that we are one body along with the Jewish believers and Abraham’s seed.
“For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you are Christ's, then you are Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.” (Gal 3:26-29)
This partial blinding of Israel will continue until the last elect Gentile of this age has been birthed into the Church. Then all of Israel will be saved at the Second Coming of their Messiah:
“For I do not desire, brethren, that you should be ignorant of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own opinion, that blindness in part has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in. And so all Israel will be saved, as it is written: ‘The Deliverer will come out of Zion, and He will turn away ungodliness from Jacob; for this is My covenant with them, when I take away their sins.’ Concerning the gospel they are enemies for your sake, but concerning the election they are beloved for the sake of the fathers. For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable.” (Rom 11:25-29)
So, the suffering that Israel has undergone since their rejection of the Messiah has served to bring forth the Church, made up of Gentiles and a remnant of Jewish believers. It is not until they see the Deliverer coming out of Zion that all unbelief will be removed from Israel. Meanwhile God has not rejected Israel. They continue to be the beloved of God because his gifts and calling are irrevocable.
The 144,000 sealed of all the tribes of Israel are the elect Israel who are sealed for protection and divinely kept out of reach of the dragon, thus preserving their lives until Christ comes from Zion at which time they will all be saved. Meanwhile their rejection is reconciliation of the world (Rom.11:15). While she has suffered in travail since her rejection of the Messiah, the Church has been coming forth.
Who is the Man-Child?
Many assume that the man-child being born to Israel is referring to Jesus, since it says that the man-child is destined to rule the nations with a rod of iron, and it is said of Jesus in Revelation 19:15 that He will rule with a rod of iron. However, the same is also said of the overcomers in Revelation 2:26,27:
“And he who overcomes, and keeps My works until the end, to him I will give power over the nations — ‘He shall rule them with a rod of iron; They shall be dashed to pieces like the potter's vessels' — as I also have received from My Father.” (Rev 2:26-27)
This is a quote from a messianic Psalm:
“Ask of Me, and I will give You the nations for Your inheritance, and the ends of the earth for Your possession. You shall break them with a rod of iron; you shall dash them to pieces like a potter's vessel.” (Ps 2:8-9)
This was a promise given to the Son of God. Why would He in turn give it to the overcomers? Because He did not receive all authority and power in order to have it for Himself. He was already Almighty God with all power and authority. He emptied Himself and became the Son of Man, the Last Adam in order to recover all the authority the first Adam forfeited to Satan and much more, so that He could then give it to us, thus bringing many sons to glory. Since He already had all authority and power, He didn’t obtain it for Himself. He obtained it to give it to us. If we fail to overcome in the trials that are designed to prepare us to reign with Him, we will delay His ultimate purpose in redemption which is not only to save us from sin but also to conform us to His image. Even now, according to Ephesians 2:6, we are seated with Him in His exalted position in Heavenly places. But how many of us are already now reigning in life through Him?
So, while it is evident that Christ will rule with a rod of iron, the same is also said of the overcomers. Although it is an individual that is depicted in the vision of Revelation 12, we have already seen that the vision uses symbolism. The woman is not one individual, but a people. The dragon is also seen to not only represent the devil, but also the whole Antichrist system. Would we not expect that the man-child would be representative of a company of saints as well?
Also, the use of the plural “they” in verse 6 implies that the man-child is not referring to just one individual. “She bore a male Child who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron. And her Child was caught up to God and His throne. Then the woman fled into the wilderness, where she has a place prepared by God, that they should feed her there one thousand two hundred and sixty days.” (Rev 12:5-6). In the context, the subject of the verb “they should feed” (tréfosin) which is plural, would be the man-child. This would seem to imply, not only that the man-child is a group rather than an individual, but also that, although they will be caught up in spirit to heavenly realms, they will also be ministering on the earth during the last three and a half years of this age.
Another observation that would indicate that it is not referring to the birth of Christ is the timeframe of the vision. The man-child is born at a time when Satan appears as the ten horned dragon, which places his birth at the end of the age. Satan, in that form, is seen standing before the woman in order to devour the man-child as soon as he is born. But when he is born, it says that “her child was caught up to God and His throne” (Rev 12:5). Jesus, the child, grew in wisdom and stature and defeated the devil at the cross before rising from the dead and ascending to the Father. The man-child, on the other hand, is caught up to God and His throne the very moment he comes forth before the devil is able to do him harm. When the man-child of Revelation 12 is caught up, the woman flees from the dragon into the wilderness where she is protected and sustained by God for one thousand two hundred and sixty days (v.6), or during the period of the Great Tribulation. There she is kept alive until the Deliverer comes out of Zion. So, the timeframe of the vision is limited to the last three and a half years of this age, rather than covering more than two thousand years, which is what would be required in order to make it refer to the birth of Jesus.
If the context of Revelation 12 is future, commencing just prior to the Great Tribulation, then who is the man- child? The man-child company seems to be those who overcome – those who have reached maturity prior to the Great Tribulation, which is designed to prepare the unprepared of the bride of Christ for the marriage of the Lamb. The man-child company will be kept from that hour since they already persevered under previous trials (Rev 3:10). They will be accounted worthy to escape all those things which will come to pass and stand before the Son of Man (Luke 21:36). They are those who have already learned to reign in life while on earth, and will now begin to reign from the heavenlies. With the assistance of Michael and his legions they will do warfare in the heavenlies and Satan and his angels will be cast down to earth (Rev 12:7-12). While only Michael and his angels are mentioned in this battle, the flow of the context would imply that this company of overcomers who will rule with a rod of iron, having already become accustomed to walking in ascension power while still on earth, will have begun to exercise that authority given to them in the heavenlies also. Jesus said to his disciples:
"I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven. Behold, I give you the authority to trample on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy, and nothing shall by any means hurt you.” (Luke 10:18-19)
"Assuredly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.” (Matt 18:18)
These overcomers, while still on earth, took these words literally and by faith exercised that authority over all the power of the enemy, binding evil forces they could not even see, trusting that all the angels of heaven would back them. How much more so will they bind and loose now that they are in the heavenly realm, now being able to see the enemy under their feet and the angels waiting to carry out their bidding!
What a privilege granted to the latter day saints (not Mormons), to be living in the end of the age when those who keep His works to the end will be granted the privilege of standing before the Son of God, beginning to conquer from the heavenlies even before His Second Coming, where it is said after the dragon and his angels have been cast from the heavenlies: “Now salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God and the power of His Christ have come.” (Rev 12:10). The man-child company will have already begun to reign with Christ from the heavenlies before the Great Tribulation. Far from being a pretribulational escape for an unprepared bride, stained and wrinkled by the flesh and the world, it will be a first-fruits company of the bride to be, the rest of whom will be made ready in the fires of the Great Tribulation prior to the Second Coming of Christ when the marriage feast of the Lamb will take place (Rev 19:7-16). It is high time that the Church of Jesus Christ awakes to the call. As Jesus said:
"But take heed to yourselves, lest your hearts be weighed down with carousing, drunkenness, and cares of this life, and that Day come on you unexpectedly. For it will come as a snare on all those who dwell on the face of the whole earth. Watch therefore, and pray always that you may be counted worthy to escape all these things that will come to pass, and to stand before the Son of Man.” (Luke 21:34-36)
In the next couple of blogs, I will be sharing with you something that has been close to my heart ever since the Lord opened my understanding to it nearly forty years ago in what I can only describe as an open-heaven encounter with Him. It wasn’t until later that I began to see how the Scriptures themselves spoke of what I had seen in the spirit during that time. Since that experience, I have come across many who have received a similar vision for what the Lord is going to do through His chosen, prepared sons at the close of this age.
I realize that not everyone reading this will see the unfolding of final events in the same manner as I do, and my purpose in sharing it is not to be contentious, but to simply share what I feel the Lord has shown me, hoping that some may be encouraged by it and receive a renewed vision as to their own role and purpose in the final days of this age.
For me personally, this expectation has been an anchor for my soul through difficult times. Even when the doctors held out no hope for me, the vision I received concerning the latter glory kept my hope alive. Whenever I was tempted to feel that the doctors were right and I was dying, I would remember what the Lord showed me and would repeat, “I shall not die but live and see the glory of the Lord in the land of the living.”
Twenty-two years after the doctors gave me only a few months to live, I am not only alive but totally healed and have a new liver. Even though I am now in my 70s and am often tempted to feel that I have outlived my usefulness, my hope is still kept alive by reminding myself of the vision and declaring, “I shall not die but live and see the glory of the Lord in the land of the living.” This is an excerpt from chapter 8 of my book, “Focusing in on End-Time Events.” I am posting this, at the risk of being misunderstood by those who haven't read the previous chapters which further lay the foundation for this belief.
**************
In Revelation chapter twelve John is shown a vision describing four personages or people groups: 1) A woman with child, 2) The dragon with seven heads and ten horns, 3) The man-child who is born of the woman and 4) the rest of the woman’s descendants (i.e., those born of the woman who are not the man-child).
Who is the Woman?
The vision is introduced with the words, “Now a great sign appeared in heaven.” Again, when the dragon is introduced, it says: “Another sign appeared in heaven” (v. 3). One key to identifying the woman and the man-child she gives birth to is to understand that both she and the dragon are signs and therefore must be interpreted symbolically as signs. In verse nine it states that the dragon is Satan, but recognizing the symbolism represented in the sign, we see that it is not simply Satan but more specifically, Satan as he will manifest during the final three and a half years of the age. He is said to be Satan, but more specifically Satan with seven heads and ten horns having seven crowns on his heads. In Revelation 17:12 it explains the symbolism of the ten horns:
"The ten horns which you saw are ten kings who have received no kingdom as yet, but they receive authority for one hour as kings with the beast.” (Rev 17:12)
Here we see that although the dragon is a symbol of Satan, it is not Satan acting in the past, but Satan as seen operating through the Antichrist and the ten kings during the final hour of this age. This is key to a correct interpretation because it reveals that the whole vision is concerning the future when Satan will appear in that particular form. Any interpretation that seeks to find fulfillment of this vision in history is not giving attention to the details of the symbolism in the signs. According to Revelation 4:1, everything shown to John in vision has to do with future events.
If the dragon is a sign describing the end-time manifestation of Satan, then the woman giving birth is also yet future, since it is Satan in his final manifestation as the dragon with seven heads and ten horns that is seen waiting to devour the man-child as soon as he is born.
Then who does this woman represent who will give birth to the man-child three and a half years before the end of the age? The Catholic Church has traditionally interpreted her as Mary who gives birth to Jesus. That is why Mary is commonly depicted in Catholic art as standing on a crescent moon with twelve stars above her head. However, we see that the woman, upon giving birth to the man-child, is pursued by the dragon and is protected by God in the wilderness during the final three and a half years of this age (vv. 13-16). So, clearly it is not referring to the historical virgin birth of Jesus, since the woman is seen to be fleeing into the desert where she will remain during the Great Tribulation or the last three-and-a-half years of the age (v.14).
Neither is the woman representative of the Church, since the Church is mentioned in verse 17 as being the woman’s offspring.
“And the dragon was enraged with the woman, and he went to make war with the rest of her offspring, who keep the commandments of God and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.” (Rev 12:17)
When the dragon sees that he cannot devour the man-child, he pursues the woman. Because of divine intervention, he cannot touch her either. Then, enraged, he vents his fury on the rest of her offspring who keep the commandments of God and have the testimony of Jesus Christ. And who are those who have the testimony of Jesus Christ? The Church of Jesus Christ. In the following chapter, chapter thirteen, we see a description of the dragon’s persecution of the Church:
“And he was given a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies, and he was given authority to continue for forty-two months. It was granted to him to make war with the saints and to overcome them. And authority was given him over every tribe, tongue, and nation.” (Rev 13:5, 7)
While he is granted permission to make war on the Church, we see that the woman is protected by God and out of reach of the dragon. Who is this woman, and why is she protected from the dragon while the rest of her offspring – the Church, is given into his power?
The symbolism of the sign of the woman helps us discover her identity. In Revelation 12:1 it says that she is “clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a garland of twelve stars.” Comparing this with Joseph’s dream in Genesis 37:9-10, we can see that she represents the nation of Israel:
“Then he dreamed still another dream and told it to his brothers, and said, ‘Look, I have dreamed another dream. And this time, the sun, the moon, and the eleven stars bowed down to me.’ So he told it to his father and his brothers; and his father rebuked him and said to him, ‘What is this dream that you have dreamed? Shall your mother and I and your brothers indeed come to bow down to the earth before you?” (Gen 37:9-10)
Joseph had a dream in which the sun, the moon, and the eleven stars bowed down to him. Jacob himself gives the interpretation of the sign of the woman in heaven. The sun is Jacob, the moon is Rachel, and the stars are the twelve tribes of Israel (including Joseph they would be twelve). So, the woman is representative of the nation of Israel. However, Paul says in Romans 9:6, “they are not all Israel who are of Israel”. He then goes on to explain that the true Israel are those who come through the promised line – not Ishmael but Isaac; not Esau but Jacob etc. Today there are many descendants of Israel, but it is only the elect Israel who are the true seed of Israel. Because of Israel’s failure to recognize their Messiah, God has turned his favor towards the Gentiles, resulting in many being born into the Kingdom of God. Because of Israel’s unbelief, the Gentiles have been grafted into the olive tree which represents the family of Abraham. Because of God’s judgment upon Israel for their rejection of their Messiah, we can now say as Gentiles that we are one body along with the Jewish believers and Abraham’s seed.
“For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you are Christ's, then you are Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.” (Gal 3:26-29)
This partial blinding of Israel will continue until the last elect Gentile of this age has been birthed into the Church. Then all of Israel will be saved at the Second Coming of their Messiah:
“For I do not desire, brethren, that you should be ignorant of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own opinion, that blindness in part has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in. And so all Israel will be saved, as it is written: ‘The Deliverer will come out of Zion, and He will turn away ungodliness from Jacob; for this is My covenant with them, when I take away their sins.’ Concerning the gospel they are enemies for your sake, but concerning the election they are beloved for the sake of the fathers. For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable.” (Rom 11:25-29)
So, the suffering that Israel has undergone since their rejection of the Messiah has served to bring forth the Church, made up of Gentiles and a remnant of Jewish believers. It is not until they see the Deliverer coming out of Zion that all unbelief will be removed from Israel. Meanwhile God has not rejected Israel. They continue to be the beloved of God because his gifts and calling are irrevocable.
The 144,000 sealed of all the tribes of Israel are the elect Israel who are sealed for protection and divinely kept out of reach of the dragon, thus preserving their lives until Christ comes from Zion at which time they will all be saved. Meanwhile their rejection is reconciliation of the world (Rom.11:15). While she has suffered in travail since her rejection of the Messiah, the Church has been coming forth.
Who is the Man-Child?
Many assume that the man-child being born to Israel is referring to Jesus, since it says that the man-child is destined to rule the nations with a rod of iron, and it is said of Jesus in Revelation 19:15 that He will rule with a rod of iron. However, the same is also said of the overcomers in Revelation 2:26,27:
“And he who overcomes, and keeps My works until the end, to him I will give power over the nations — ‘He shall rule them with a rod of iron; They shall be dashed to pieces like the potter's vessels' — as I also have received from My Father.” (Rev 2:26-27)
This is a quote from a messianic Psalm:
“Ask of Me, and I will give You the nations for Your inheritance, and the ends of the earth for Your possession. You shall break them with a rod of iron; you shall dash them to pieces like a potter's vessel.” (Ps 2:8-9)
This was a promise given to the Son of God. Why would He in turn give it to the overcomers? Because He did not receive all authority and power in order to have it for Himself. He was already Almighty God with all power and authority. He emptied Himself and became the Son of Man, the Last Adam in order to recover all the authority the first Adam forfeited to Satan and much more, so that He could then give it to us, thus bringing many sons to glory. Since He already had all authority and power, He didn’t obtain it for Himself. He obtained it to give it to us. If we fail to overcome in the trials that are designed to prepare us to reign with Him, we will delay His ultimate purpose in redemption which is not only to save us from sin but also to conform us to His image. Even now, according to Ephesians 2:6, we are seated with Him in His exalted position in Heavenly places. But how many of us are already now reigning in life through Him?
So, while it is evident that Christ will rule with a rod of iron, the same is also said of the overcomers. Although it is an individual that is depicted in the vision of Revelation 12, we have already seen that the vision uses symbolism. The woman is not one individual, but a people. The dragon is also seen to not only represent the devil, but also the whole Antichrist system. Would we not expect that the man-child would be representative of a company of saints as well?
Also, the use of the plural “they” in verse 6 implies that the man-child is not referring to just one individual. “She bore a male Child who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron. And her Child was caught up to God and His throne. Then the woman fled into the wilderness, where she has a place prepared by God, that they should feed her there one thousand two hundred and sixty days.” (Rev 12:5-6). In the context, the subject of the verb “they should feed” (tréfosin) which is plural, would be the man-child. This would seem to imply, not only that the man-child is a group rather than an individual, but also that, although they will be caught up in spirit to heavenly realms, they will also be ministering on the earth during the last three and a half years of this age.
Another observation that would indicate that it is not referring to the birth of Christ is the timeframe of the vision. The man-child is born at a time when Satan appears as the ten horned dragon, which places his birth at the end of the age. Satan, in that form, is seen standing before the woman in order to devour the man-child as soon as he is born. But when he is born, it says that “her child was caught up to God and His throne” (Rev 12:5). Jesus, the child, grew in wisdom and stature and defeated the devil at the cross before rising from the dead and ascending to the Father. The man-child, on the other hand, is caught up to God and His throne the very moment he comes forth before the devil is able to do him harm. When the man-child of Revelation 12 is caught up, the woman flees from the dragon into the wilderness where she is protected and sustained by God for one thousand two hundred and sixty days (v.6), or during the period of the Great Tribulation. There she is kept alive until the Deliverer comes out of Zion. So, the timeframe of the vision is limited to the last three and a half years of this age, rather than covering more than two thousand years, which is what would be required in order to make it refer to the birth of Jesus.
If the context of Revelation 12 is future, commencing just prior to the Great Tribulation, then who is the man- child? The man-child company seems to be those who overcome – those who have reached maturity prior to the Great Tribulation, which is designed to prepare the unprepared of the bride of Christ for the marriage of the Lamb. The man-child company will be kept from that hour since they already persevered under previous trials (Rev 3:10). They will be accounted worthy to escape all those things which will come to pass and stand before the Son of Man (Luke 21:36). They are those who have already learned to reign in life while on earth, and will now begin to reign from the heavenlies. With the assistance of Michael and his legions they will do warfare in the heavenlies and Satan and his angels will be cast down to earth (Rev 12:7-12). While only Michael and his angels are mentioned in this battle, the flow of the context would imply that this company of overcomers who will rule with a rod of iron, having already become accustomed to walking in ascension power while still on earth, will have begun to exercise that authority given to them in the heavenlies also. Jesus said to his disciples:
"I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven. Behold, I give you the authority to trample on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy, and nothing shall by any means hurt you.” (Luke 10:18-19)
"Assuredly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.” (Matt 18:18)
These overcomers, while still on earth, took these words literally and by faith exercised that authority over all the power of the enemy, binding evil forces they could not even see, trusting that all the angels of heaven would back them. How much more so will they bind and loose now that they are in the heavenly realm, now being able to see the enemy under their feet and the angels waiting to carry out their bidding!
What a privilege granted to the latter day saints (not Mormons), to be living in the end of the age when those who keep His works to the end will be granted the privilege of standing before the Son of God, beginning to conquer from the heavenlies even before His Second Coming, where it is said after the dragon and his angels have been cast from the heavenlies: “Now salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God and the power of His Christ have come.” (Rev 12:10). The man-child company will have already begun to reign with Christ from the heavenlies before the Great Tribulation. Far from being a pretribulational escape for an unprepared bride, stained and wrinkled by the flesh and the world, it will be a first-fruits company of the bride to be, the rest of whom will be made ready in the fires of the Great Tribulation prior to the Second Coming of Christ when the marriage feast of the Lamb will take place (Rev 19:7-16). It is high time that the Church of Jesus Christ awakes to the call. As Jesus said:
"But take heed to yourselves, lest your hearts be weighed down with carousing, drunkenness, and cares of this life, and that Day come on you unexpectedly. For it will come as a snare on all those who dwell on the face of the whole earth. Watch therefore, and pray always that you may be counted worthy to escape all these things that will come to pass, and to stand before the Son of Man.” (Luke 21:34-36)
- Published on
Considering how to differentiate between Biblical and Unbiblical Varieties of Universalism
by George Sidney Hurd
In writing this blog I have two primary groups of individuals in mind. The first group are those who, having been misinformed, think that all forms of Universalism are without any solid biblical foundation. This is primarily due to the fact that many preachers and teachers categorically villainize all Universalists, placing them in the same general category with heterodox Pluralistic Liberalism. Many are totally unaware that there are many good and sound biblical arguments for the belief that all will eventually be saved and restored, and that, far from being unorthodox, Biblical Universalism was actually the prevailing doctrine of the Early Church Fathers during the first five centuries before Constantine politicized Christianity and Augustine popularized the doctrine of Eternal Torment. I demonstrate this in my blog, The Testimony of the Fathers.
The second group of individuals I have in mind in this blog are those who have come to believe from Scripture that all will eventually be saved and restored, but feel overwhelmed and confused by the many diverse and often conflicting beliefs of those who teach Christian Universalism. As a Conservative Universalist, I see two basic categories of Christian Universalists: 1) Those who have a high view of Scripture as the inerrant Word of God and derive their doctrine of Universal Salvation from the Scriptures alone, and 2) Those who have a low view of Scripture and deny its inerrancy, and therefore feel free to base their doctrine of universal salvation upon what they themselves consider to be reasonably attributable to God. Since they do not believe that all Scripture is God-breathed, they feel at liberty to selectively apply or reject portions of Scripture, formulating doctrines according to their own moral judgments and philosophical reasoning.
Those who base their beliefs solely upon the Scriptures will inevitably differ on some points of doctrine, since we are all fallible in our understanding of Scripture. However, where the doctrinal confusion and fluidity of beliefs is most prolific is among those who rely primarily upon their own reason and sensibilities for understanding, rather than the Scriptures alone. Once the inerrancy of Scripture is abandoned, there remains no objective standard of truth upon which to base our doctrines, and the tendency is to deconstruct, going from certainty and conviction to doubt and confusion, often making shipwreck of one’s faith.
In the remainder of this blog, I will be briefly considering these two groups with their major subgroups in order to assist those who believe in the inerrancy of Scripture in distinguishing the biblical forms of Universalism from the diverse non-biblical forms. If you are questioning the doctrine of the inerrancy of Scripture, I would encourage you to first read my series of blogs on the subject on my website: The Evangelical Conservative Universalist.
Throughout this blog I will be providing underlined links in the text or in parenthesis which substantiate or further explain many points that are only here touched upon in passing.
Biblical Universalism
By Biblical Universalism, I mean Universalists who believe in the inerrancy of Scripture and therefore derive their doctrine of the final salvation of all from the Scriptures alone. The title Conservative Universalism is essentially the same as Biblical Universalism, since theologically Conservative Christians defend and conserve the faith once and for all delivered to the saints in the Scriptures. In contrast, the Progressives argue that we have outgrown the Scriptures, and therefore need to reject or nuance many passages in Scripture in the name of progress. The great drawback to the title Conservative Universalism is that it is easily confused with political conservatism.
While some prefer other titles, such as Evangelical Universalism, Patristic Universalism or Trinitarian Universalism, those titles can be misleading, since many who identify themselves by these names no longer hold to the inerrancy of Scripture. For example, The Early Fathers defended the inerrancy of Scripture, and their understanding encompassed the penal substitutionary aspects of Christ’s atonement, yet many who today call themselves Patristic Universalists deny one or both of those essential elements. I demonstrate that the Early Fathers believed in the Penal Substitutionary Atonement in my blog, (The Early Fathers and Penal Substitutionary Atonement).
Biblical Universalists believe that salvation and forgiveness of sins was only made possible through Christ’s Penal Substitutionary Atonement for our sins, and that one must believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and receive Him in order to be saved and born again, receiving the eternal life of God (Jn 1:12-13; 3:16; 8:24; Rom 3:22; 3:28; 3:30; Gal 2:16; 3:8; 3:24; Eph 2:8; Php 3:9; 2Tim 3:15 ; Acts 16:31; etc.)
Biblical Universalists believe in the Trinity and the full deity of Christ. They believe in the existence of a personal Satan, fallen angels and demons, who seek to steal, kill and destroy and must be resisted in the name of Jesus. They believe in one resurrection of the dead, as opposed to reincarnation.
Generally speaking, Biblical Universalists believe the same doctrines as other Evangelicals, except that they understand, as did the Early Church Fathers, that hell is eonian, in the sense that it is not eternal, but endures into the coming ages, and its primary purpose and goal is correction and restoration, rather than unending torment.
Among Biblical Universalists, one will find Charismatics who believe that the gifts of the Spirit are still operative today, as well as Cessationists who believe that the supernatural gifts ceased in the first century. Some see the freewill of man as predominant, much like the Arminians, whereas others believe in divine determinism, as do many Calvinists. Taking into account God’s middle knowledge by which God not only knows what will happen, but also what would happen under different circumstances, I believe that our ultimate salvation is accomplished through a perfect interplay between both the freewill of man and the sovereignty of God that unfailingly results in all eventually being effectually drawn to Christ without violating man’s will or compromising God’s sovereignty (Isa 45:22-24). I demonstrate how Universalism harmonizes with the overall teaching of Scripture in a way that Arminianism and Calvinism are unable to do in my book: “The Universal Solution.”
So, Biblical Universalists believe in all of the orthodox doctrines held by the Church throughout history, including the doctrine of postmortem punishments in Gehenna or the Lake of Fire. The only difference is concerning the purpose and duration of God’s postmortem punishments. I present a comprehensive consideration of the biblical basis for the belief in the temporal restorative nature of God’s punishments and the final restoration of all in my book: “The Triumph of Mercy.”
Having briefly considered what Biblical Universalism is, we can now turn our attention to what I consider to be some of the aberrant forms of Universalism. Sadly, the opponents of Universalism almost always ignore the sound biblical arguments of the Biblical Universalists, attacking instead the easy target of Liberal and Progressive forms of Universalism. While the beliefs among those who depart from the doctrine of inerrancy are difficult to categorize due to their diversity, I see them as generally falling into three categories: 1) Liberal Universalism, 2) Progressive Universalism and 3) Extrabiblical Hybrid forms of Universalism.
I. Liberal Universalism
Liberal Modernism arose with the Age of Enlightenment and its rationalistic anti-supernaturalism in the 18th century. Since the Bible is a supernatural book from cover to cover, it took the brunt of their attack against the supernatural. They denied anything that didn’t have a rational explanation or the backing of empirical evidence. The Bible’s claim to be the divine Word of God, along with the miracles, the virgin birth and deity of Christ, as well as the Trinity, were all denied. Christ’s Penal Substitutionary Death on our behalf was rejected in favor of a social Pelagianist gospel.
The resurgence of the biblical doctrine of Universal Salvation that began with the Reformation and flourished in the 19th century, resulted in the formation of the Universal Convention, also known as the Universalist Church of America, which for a brief time was the third largest denomination in America. However, it later succumbed to Unitarian Liberalism, forming what today is known as the Unitarian Universalist Association. As of 2006, less than 20% of their members still identified themselves as Christian. [1]
II. Progressive Universalism
Over the last fifty years, beginning with the cultural revolution of the Hippies, the rational anti-supernatural Modernism began to give way to Postmodernism, which abandoned Modernist certainties for a Progressive Relativism which embraces uncertainty and the supernatural. Mankind cannot live very long in the vacuum of secular materialism without any belief in the supernatural, and the cultural revolution of the 60s and 70s was a rejection of naturalistic secular materialism.
Even prior to that, in the early 20th century, theologians like Karl Barth and Thomas F. Torrance, in reaction against Liberalism, began to formulate a new theology which became known as Neo-Orthodoxy. While still denying the inerrancy of Scripture as defended by Charles Haddon Spurgeon and the Princetonians A. A. Hodge and B. B. Warfield, they argued that the Bible nevertheless contains the Word of God in that it is a witness to Christ, who, to them, is the only true Word of God. Barth, while affirming the divine origin of the Bible, nevertheless opposed the doctrine of inerrancy saying, “it is mere self-will and disobedience to try to find some infallible elements in the Bible.” [2] T. F. Torrance likewise depreciates the belief in inerrancy saying: “We came up with the idea of inerrancy because we needed another mediator between God and man other than Jesus.” [3]
This same low view of Scripture is commonly held by Progressive Universalists today. For example, Steve McVey says:
“If you want to say the Bible is the word with a lower-case w, that it is a way that God speaks to us, I have full agreement with that.” [4] “Literally speaking, the Bible is not the Word of God – Jesus is.” [5]
Brian Zahnd, a hopeful Universalist, shows a blatant contempt for the Bible in his book entitled, “Sinners in the Hands of a Loving God” when he says: “Jesus is the Savior of all that is to be saved…including the Bible. Jesus saves the Bible from itself!” [6] Among Progressives I have heard such depreciative comments as: “I believe in the inerrant Word of God, and He has a beard.”
What they fail to take into account is the teaching of Jesus Himself concerning the infallibility of the written Word of God. He called the Scriptures the Word of God and said that they could not be broken and that not even one jot nor tittle could pass from them without being fulfilled (Jn 10:35; Matt 5:18). I further consider the fallacy of depreciating the written Word of God in the name of Jesus in my blog: “What does the Word Word Mean to Jesus?”
Inclusive Universalists
There are three main beliefs among Universalists concerning the way of salvation. Biblical Universalists are Exclusivists, which means they hold that one must personally believe and receive the gospel in order to be saved (Rom 10:13; Mark 16:16; Acts 16:31). That is the reason why most Biblical Universalists are evangelistic, making sacrifices in order to preach the Gospel to the ends of the earth.
In stark contrast to this, some Progressive and Liberal Universalists are Pluralists, teaching that Jesus is not the only way to God, but only one of many paths leading to Him. However, Scriptures are very emphatic in declaring that Jesus is the only way to the Father (Jn 14:6; Acts 4:12).
A somewhat more reserved view held by many is that of the Inclusivists who, while insisting that Christ is the only way to God, nevertheless argue that it is not necessary for one to explicitly place faith in the person and work of Jesus Christ in order to be saved. To them, one can be saved by implicit faith in a general revelation of God without ever having heard and positively responded to the gospel. They reason that one’s faith need not be cognitive as long as it is sincere and reverent. In this manner it becomes possible for one to be saved without having ever even heard of Christ. A sincere Buddhist, Muslim, or even an Atheist, can be saved through the once and for all sacrifice of Christ at Calvary without ever having consciously believed on Him – or even heard of Him, for that matter. Those individuals who are said to be Christians without even knowing it are sometimes referred to by them as “anonymous Christians.”
However, a rapidly growing number of Progressive and Liberal Universalists are now transitioning from Pluralism and Inclusivism towards a radical form of Inclusivism which says that it is not necessary for anyone to believe the gospel in order to be saved since everyone was already saved 2,000 years ago at the cross. This teaching was first popularized by Carlton Pearson with the publication of his book: “The Gospel of Inclusion: Reaching Beyond Religious Fundamentalism to the True Love of God and Self,” published in 2007. Since then, Pearson has further deconstructed into New Age Expanded Consciousness and New Thought. I consider the fallacies of this new form of Inclusivism in my blog: “What must I do to be Saved?”
They often redefine sin, presenting it as not being something that we commit against God, but simply against one’s own self. This removes the need for Christ’s Penal Substitutionary Atonement. Since sin is not against God, they further deny that man has ever been separated from God, except in his own mind. I consider these and other related fallacies in my blog: “The Blurring of Biblical Distinctions.”
The Denial of a Postmortem Hell
Although Biblical Universalists deny that hell is eternal, they nevertheless believe in the reality of some form of hell in the afterlife, just as the Early Church Fathers did. However, many Progressive Universalists today deny that there is a hell beyond what we make for ourselves in this life. While space doesn’t allow us to consider in detail the purpose and duration of hell, the Scriptures are clear that there will be Postmortem punishment and correction for the unjust, both in Hades, as well as in the Lake of Fire for those who are still not found written in the Book of Life at the White Throne Judgment.
Many Progressive Universalists deny the conscious state of the soul, either in Paradise or in Hades after death. Don Keathley, in his recent book “Hell’s Illusion (Exposing the Myth of Hell),” says that the only Hell that anyone will ever experience is the Hell we undergo in our own minds when we have been programmed by religion to believe in the myth of Hell. He claims that there is no need to receive Christ in order to be saved from sin, Hell and the wrath to come, because we were never separated from God to begin with. Our sins are not against God, according to him, but only against ourselves, and therefore there is no divine retribution for the unrepentant in Hell. He says: “There is no such destination after we pass from the physical realm to a place called Hell, even if you didn’t pray the magic prayer!” [7] The “magic prayer” he refers to is the prayer of repentance and faith when we receive Jesus Christ as our personal Lord and Savior. I consider the fallacies of the doctrine of soul-sleep in my book “Extermination or Restoration?” and also in my blog: “Is Sheol the Grave?”
III. Extrabiblical Hybrid forms of Universalism
Two-Gospel Hyper-Dispensational Universalists
I want to mention one final group that has occasioned much confusion among Universalists. It is that of the two-gospel doctrine. This doctrine was first developed by A. E. Knoch early in the 20th century. He also translated the Concordant Literal Version of the Bible. He was excommunicated from the Plymouth Brethren for his divisive, contentious spirit and deviate doctrines. He denied the Trinity and the full deity of Christ, insisting that, while the Son was exalted above all creation and created before all things, including time, He was nonetheless somehow a creature created by God at some point in eternity before time. He somehow failed to take into account the fact that there can be no beginnings in eternity before time.
While not denying the inerrancy of Scripture, he relegated all of the New Testament, with the exception of Paul’s epistles, to a previous dispensation, thereby invalidating the rest of the Scriptures for all practical purposes. The main proponent of this two-gospel doctrine today is Martin Zender. I consider the fallacies of this Hyper-Dispensational form of Universalism in a four part series of blogs beginning with the blog, “Are there Two Different Gospels in the New Testament.”
Conclusion
There are other deviations from Biblical Universalism which could be pointed out, but for space I will not elaborate further. Once one departs from the Scriptures as the sole infallible and authoritative source of faith and doctrine, the tendency is to either devolve into a swamp of subjectivity, as do the Progressives, or else superimpose men’s doctrines upon the Scriptures, as we see with Knoch’s two-gospel doctrine.
In passing, I would like to point out the fact that none of these three categories are exclusive to Universalism. The same categories exist among those who believe in eternal torment, including those who hold to the two-gospel doctrine.
Applying the Reformer’s theme, Sola Scriptura, searching the Scriptures as did the Bereans to see if what we have been told is in agreement with what the Bible actually teaches, we begin to discover God’s glorious plan for the ages which culminates with all being restored and reunited in Christ and God becoming all in all, as we pass from the realm of time into eternity.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universalism#cite_note-110
[2] Karl Barth, Church Dogmatics, I/2, ed. G. W. Bromiley and T. F. Torrance (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 2010), 531.
[3] Q & A Session (FGC 2016) Video 27:00
[4] Steve McVey: The Word of God is. Video 17:50
[5] Steve McVey: The Word of God is. Video 22:00
[6] Zahnd, Brian. Sinners in the Hands of a Loving God: The Scandalous Truth of the Very Good News (p. 57). The Crown Publishing Group.
[7] Keathley, Don. Hell's Illusion (p. 46). Don Keathley. Kindle Edition.
by George Sidney Hurd
In writing this blog I have two primary groups of individuals in mind. The first group are those who, having been misinformed, think that all forms of Universalism are without any solid biblical foundation. This is primarily due to the fact that many preachers and teachers categorically villainize all Universalists, placing them in the same general category with heterodox Pluralistic Liberalism. Many are totally unaware that there are many good and sound biblical arguments for the belief that all will eventually be saved and restored, and that, far from being unorthodox, Biblical Universalism was actually the prevailing doctrine of the Early Church Fathers during the first five centuries before Constantine politicized Christianity and Augustine popularized the doctrine of Eternal Torment. I demonstrate this in my blog, The Testimony of the Fathers.
The second group of individuals I have in mind in this blog are those who have come to believe from Scripture that all will eventually be saved and restored, but feel overwhelmed and confused by the many diverse and often conflicting beliefs of those who teach Christian Universalism. As a Conservative Universalist, I see two basic categories of Christian Universalists: 1) Those who have a high view of Scripture as the inerrant Word of God and derive their doctrine of Universal Salvation from the Scriptures alone, and 2) Those who have a low view of Scripture and deny its inerrancy, and therefore feel free to base their doctrine of universal salvation upon what they themselves consider to be reasonably attributable to God. Since they do not believe that all Scripture is God-breathed, they feel at liberty to selectively apply or reject portions of Scripture, formulating doctrines according to their own moral judgments and philosophical reasoning.
Those who base their beliefs solely upon the Scriptures will inevitably differ on some points of doctrine, since we are all fallible in our understanding of Scripture. However, where the doctrinal confusion and fluidity of beliefs is most prolific is among those who rely primarily upon their own reason and sensibilities for understanding, rather than the Scriptures alone. Once the inerrancy of Scripture is abandoned, there remains no objective standard of truth upon which to base our doctrines, and the tendency is to deconstruct, going from certainty and conviction to doubt and confusion, often making shipwreck of one’s faith.
In the remainder of this blog, I will be briefly considering these two groups with their major subgroups in order to assist those who believe in the inerrancy of Scripture in distinguishing the biblical forms of Universalism from the diverse non-biblical forms. If you are questioning the doctrine of the inerrancy of Scripture, I would encourage you to first read my series of blogs on the subject on my website: The Evangelical Conservative Universalist.
Throughout this blog I will be providing underlined links in the text or in parenthesis which substantiate or further explain many points that are only here touched upon in passing.
Biblical Universalism
By Biblical Universalism, I mean Universalists who believe in the inerrancy of Scripture and therefore derive their doctrine of the final salvation of all from the Scriptures alone. The title Conservative Universalism is essentially the same as Biblical Universalism, since theologically Conservative Christians defend and conserve the faith once and for all delivered to the saints in the Scriptures. In contrast, the Progressives argue that we have outgrown the Scriptures, and therefore need to reject or nuance many passages in Scripture in the name of progress. The great drawback to the title Conservative Universalism is that it is easily confused with political conservatism.
While some prefer other titles, such as Evangelical Universalism, Patristic Universalism or Trinitarian Universalism, those titles can be misleading, since many who identify themselves by these names no longer hold to the inerrancy of Scripture. For example, The Early Fathers defended the inerrancy of Scripture, and their understanding encompassed the penal substitutionary aspects of Christ’s atonement, yet many who today call themselves Patristic Universalists deny one or both of those essential elements. I demonstrate that the Early Fathers believed in the Penal Substitutionary Atonement in my blog, (The Early Fathers and Penal Substitutionary Atonement).
Biblical Universalists believe that salvation and forgiveness of sins was only made possible through Christ’s Penal Substitutionary Atonement for our sins, and that one must believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and receive Him in order to be saved and born again, receiving the eternal life of God (Jn 1:12-13; 3:16; 8:24; Rom 3:22; 3:28; 3:30; Gal 2:16; 3:8; 3:24; Eph 2:8; Php 3:9; 2Tim 3:15 ; Acts 16:31; etc.)
Biblical Universalists believe in the Trinity and the full deity of Christ. They believe in the existence of a personal Satan, fallen angels and demons, who seek to steal, kill and destroy and must be resisted in the name of Jesus. They believe in one resurrection of the dead, as opposed to reincarnation.
Generally speaking, Biblical Universalists believe the same doctrines as other Evangelicals, except that they understand, as did the Early Church Fathers, that hell is eonian, in the sense that it is not eternal, but endures into the coming ages, and its primary purpose and goal is correction and restoration, rather than unending torment.
Among Biblical Universalists, one will find Charismatics who believe that the gifts of the Spirit are still operative today, as well as Cessationists who believe that the supernatural gifts ceased in the first century. Some see the freewill of man as predominant, much like the Arminians, whereas others believe in divine determinism, as do many Calvinists. Taking into account God’s middle knowledge by which God not only knows what will happen, but also what would happen under different circumstances, I believe that our ultimate salvation is accomplished through a perfect interplay between both the freewill of man and the sovereignty of God that unfailingly results in all eventually being effectually drawn to Christ without violating man’s will or compromising God’s sovereignty (Isa 45:22-24). I demonstrate how Universalism harmonizes with the overall teaching of Scripture in a way that Arminianism and Calvinism are unable to do in my book: “The Universal Solution.”
So, Biblical Universalists believe in all of the orthodox doctrines held by the Church throughout history, including the doctrine of postmortem punishments in Gehenna or the Lake of Fire. The only difference is concerning the purpose and duration of God’s postmortem punishments. I present a comprehensive consideration of the biblical basis for the belief in the temporal restorative nature of God’s punishments and the final restoration of all in my book: “The Triumph of Mercy.”
Having briefly considered what Biblical Universalism is, we can now turn our attention to what I consider to be some of the aberrant forms of Universalism. Sadly, the opponents of Universalism almost always ignore the sound biblical arguments of the Biblical Universalists, attacking instead the easy target of Liberal and Progressive forms of Universalism. While the beliefs among those who depart from the doctrine of inerrancy are difficult to categorize due to their diversity, I see them as generally falling into three categories: 1) Liberal Universalism, 2) Progressive Universalism and 3) Extrabiblical Hybrid forms of Universalism.
I. Liberal Universalism
Liberal Modernism arose with the Age of Enlightenment and its rationalistic anti-supernaturalism in the 18th century. Since the Bible is a supernatural book from cover to cover, it took the brunt of their attack against the supernatural. They denied anything that didn’t have a rational explanation or the backing of empirical evidence. The Bible’s claim to be the divine Word of God, along with the miracles, the virgin birth and deity of Christ, as well as the Trinity, were all denied. Christ’s Penal Substitutionary Death on our behalf was rejected in favor of a social Pelagianist gospel.
The resurgence of the biblical doctrine of Universal Salvation that began with the Reformation and flourished in the 19th century, resulted in the formation of the Universal Convention, also known as the Universalist Church of America, which for a brief time was the third largest denomination in America. However, it later succumbed to Unitarian Liberalism, forming what today is known as the Unitarian Universalist Association. As of 2006, less than 20% of their members still identified themselves as Christian. [1]
II. Progressive Universalism
Over the last fifty years, beginning with the cultural revolution of the Hippies, the rational anti-supernatural Modernism began to give way to Postmodernism, which abandoned Modernist certainties for a Progressive Relativism which embraces uncertainty and the supernatural. Mankind cannot live very long in the vacuum of secular materialism without any belief in the supernatural, and the cultural revolution of the 60s and 70s was a rejection of naturalistic secular materialism.
Even prior to that, in the early 20th century, theologians like Karl Barth and Thomas F. Torrance, in reaction against Liberalism, began to formulate a new theology which became known as Neo-Orthodoxy. While still denying the inerrancy of Scripture as defended by Charles Haddon Spurgeon and the Princetonians A. A. Hodge and B. B. Warfield, they argued that the Bible nevertheless contains the Word of God in that it is a witness to Christ, who, to them, is the only true Word of God. Barth, while affirming the divine origin of the Bible, nevertheless opposed the doctrine of inerrancy saying, “it is mere self-will and disobedience to try to find some infallible elements in the Bible.” [2] T. F. Torrance likewise depreciates the belief in inerrancy saying: “We came up with the idea of inerrancy because we needed another mediator between God and man other than Jesus.” [3]
This same low view of Scripture is commonly held by Progressive Universalists today. For example, Steve McVey says:
“If you want to say the Bible is the word with a lower-case w, that it is a way that God speaks to us, I have full agreement with that.” [4] “Literally speaking, the Bible is not the Word of God – Jesus is.” [5]
Brian Zahnd, a hopeful Universalist, shows a blatant contempt for the Bible in his book entitled, “Sinners in the Hands of a Loving God” when he says: “Jesus is the Savior of all that is to be saved…including the Bible. Jesus saves the Bible from itself!” [6] Among Progressives I have heard such depreciative comments as: “I believe in the inerrant Word of God, and He has a beard.”
What they fail to take into account is the teaching of Jesus Himself concerning the infallibility of the written Word of God. He called the Scriptures the Word of God and said that they could not be broken and that not even one jot nor tittle could pass from them without being fulfilled (Jn 10:35; Matt 5:18). I further consider the fallacy of depreciating the written Word of God in the name of Jesus in my blog: “What does the Word Word Mean to Jesus?”
Inclusive Universalists
There are three main beliefs among Universalists concerning the way of salvation. Biblical Universalists are Exclusivists, which means they hold that one must personally believe and receive the gospel in order to be saved (Rom 10:13; Mark 16:16; Acts 16:31). That is the reason why most Biblical Universalists are evangelistic, making sacrifices in order to preach the Gospel to the ends of the earth.
In stark contrast to this, some Progressive and Liberal Universalists are Pluralists, teaching that Jesus is not the only way to God, but only one of many paths leading to Him. However, Scriptures are very emphatic in declaring that Jesus is the only way to the Father (Jn 14:6; Acts 4:12).
A somewhat more reserved view held by many is that of the Inclusivists who, while insisting that Christ is the only way to God, nevertheless argue that it is not necessary for one to explicitly place faith in the person and work of Jesus Christ in order to be saved. To them, one can be saved by implicit faith in a general revelation of God without ever having heard and positively responded to the gospel. They reason that one’s faith need not be cognitive as long as it is sincere and reverent. In this manner it becomes possible for one to be saved without having ever even heard of Christ. A sincere Buddhist, Muslim, or even an Atheist, can be saved through the once and for all sacrifice of Christ at Calvary without ever having consciously believed on Him – or even heard of Him, for that matter. Those individuals who are said to be Christians without even knowing it are sometimes referred to by them as “anonymous Christians.”
However, a rapidly growing number of Progressive and Liberal Universalists are now transitioning from Pluralism and Inclusivism towards a radical form of Inclusivism which says that it is not necessary for anyone to believe the gospel in order to be saved since everyone was already saved 2,000 years ago at the cross. This teaching was first popularized by Carlton Pearson with the publication of his book: “The Gospel of Inclusion: Reaching Beyond Religious Fundamentalism to the True Love of God and Self,” published in 2007. Since then, Pearson has further deconstructed into New Age Expanded Consciousness and New Thought. I consider the fallacies of this new form of Inclusivism in my blog: “What must I do to be Saved?”
They often redefine sin, presenting it as not being something that we commit against God, but simply against one’s own self. This removes the need for Christ’s Penal Substitutionary Atonement. Since sin is not against God, they further deny that man has ever been separated from God, except in his own mind. I consider these and other related fallacies in my blog: “The Blurring of Biblical Distinctions.”
The Denial of a Postmortem Hell
Although Biblical Universalists deny that hell is eternal, they nevertheless believe in the reality of some form of hell in the afterlife, just as the Early Church Fathers did. However, many Progressive Universalists today deny that there is a hell beyond what we make for ourselves in this life. While space doesn’t allow us to consider in detail the purpose and duration of hell, the Scriptures are clear that there will be Postmortem punishment and correction for the unjust, both in Hades, as well as in the Lake of Fire for those who are still not found written in the Book of Life at the White Throne Judgment.
Many Progressive Universalists deny the conscious state of the soul, either in Paradise or in Hades after death. Don Keathley, in his recent book “Hell’s Illusion (Exposing the Myth of Hell),” says that the only Hell that anyone will ever experience is the Hell we undergo in our own minds when we have been programmed by religion to believe in the myth of Hell. He claims that there is no need to receive Christ in order to be saved from sin, Hell and the wrath to come, because we were never separated from God to begin with. Our sins are not against God, according to him, but only against ourselves, and therefore there is no divine retribution for the unrepentant in Hell. He says: “There is no such destination after we pass from the physical realm to a place called Hell, even if you didn’t pray the magic prayer!” [7] The “magic prayer” he refers to is the prayer of repentance and faith when we receive Jesus Christ as our personal Lord and Savior. I consider the fallacies of the doctrine of soul-sleep in my book “Extermination or Restoration?” and also in my blog: “Is Sheol the Grave?”
III. Extrabiblical Hybrid forms of Universalism
Two-Gospel Hyper-Dispensational Universalists
I want to mention one final group that has occasioned much confusion among Universalists. It is that of the two-gospel doctrine. This doctrine was first developed by A. E. Knoch early in the 20th century. He also translated the Concordant Literal Version of the Bible. He was excommunicated from the Plymouth Brethren for his divisive, contentious spirit and deviate doctrines. He denied the Trinity and the full deity of Christ, insisting that, while the Son was exalted above all creation and created before all things, including time, He was nonetheless somehow a creature created by God at some point in eternity before time. He somehow failed to take into account the fact that there can be no beginnings in eternity before time.
While not denying the inerrancy of Scripture, he relegated all of the New Testament, with the exception of Paul’s epistles, to a previous dispensation, thereby invalidating the rest of the Scriptures for all practical purposes. The main proponent of this two-gospel doctrine today is Martin Zender. I consider the fallacies of this Hyper-Dispensational form of Universalism in a four part series of blogs beginning with the blog, “Are there Two Different Gospels in the New Testament.”
Conclusion
There are other deviations from Biblical Universalism which could be pointed out, but for space I will not elaborate further. Once one departs from the Scriptures as the sole infallible and authoritative source of faith and doctrine, the tendency is to either devolve into a swamp of subjectivity, as do the Progressives, or else superimpose men’s doctrines upon the Scriptures, as we see with Knoch’s two-gospel doctrine.
In passing, I would like to point out the fact that none of these three categories are exclusive to Universalism. The same categories exist among those who believe in eternal torment, including those who hold to the two-gospel doctrine.
Applying the Reformer’s theme, Sola Scriptura, searching the Scriptures as did the Bereans to see if what we have been told is in agreement with what the Bible actually teaches, we begin to discover God’s glorious plan for the ages which culminates with all being restored and reunited in Christ and God becoming all in all, as we pass from the realm of time into eternity.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universalism#cite_note-110
[2] Karl Barth, Church Dogmatics, I/2, ed. G. W. Bromiley and T. F. Torrance (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 2010), 531.
[3] Q & A Session (FGC 2016) Video 27:00
[4] Steve McVey: The Word of God is. Video 17:50
[5] Steve McVey: The Word of God is. Video 22:00
[6] Zahnd, Brian. Sinners in the Hands of a Loving God: The Scandalous Truth of the Very Good News (p. 57). The Crown Publishing Group.
[7] Keathley, Don. Hell's Illusion (p. 46). Don Keathley. Kindle Edition.
- Published on
Considering the formation of the Biblical Canon
by George Sidney Hurd
How can we be confident that all the 66 books contained in our Bibles are those, and only those, which were inspired of the Holy Spirit, and therefore God’s authoritative Word for us today?
Some who endeavor to undermine the Scripture’s authority have claimed that an elite group of bishops under the authority of the Emperor Constantine, arbitrarily decided which books were to be included in the Canon of Scripture at the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD.
However, there are no early records indicating that the subject was even brought up at that council. This notion is based upon a late 9th century myth which claimed that the bishops at the Council of Nicaea placed a large number of different books on the divine table in the house of God and prayed that only the inspired books would remain on the table, and that all the spurious books would be under the table when they finished their prayer. And, as the myth goes, lo and behold, when they opened their eyes, only the inspired books remained on the table.
In the 17th century, Voltaire, the Deist and opponent of Christianity, cited this myth to ridicule the Bible. And later in 2003, when Dan Brown wrote his fiction novel, Da Vinci Code, he presented the myth as if the false claim were true and the Canon had indeed been determined in the Council of Nicaea. As a result, many today believe that the myth is true history.
The Biblical Canon was formed Organically and Spontaneously
The English word Canon comes from the Greek κανών, which means “rule” or “measuring stick,” and came to be used of those books which meet the standard of divinely inspired Scripture. A careful examination of the history and transmission of the sacred texts we presently have in our Bible reveals that no human council imposed them upon the Church, but rather, the people of God in general recognized their divine inspiration and authority from the very moment of their writing.
The 39 books we have contained in our Old Testament are the same as in the Hebrew Bible of Judaism, except they are arranged differently into 24 books. Most of them, except for some of the prophets, were received as part of the Canon from the very moment they were written. Even the prophets, who were often hated by the Jews for their message of judgment for their sins, were later included, seeing that their short-range prophecies passed the test of a true prophet, as set forth in Deuteronomy 18:21-22.
During Jesus’ earthly ministry, the Scriptures were divided into three main groups, the Law of Moses, the Prophets, and the Psalms. Jesus affirmed all three of these categories as authoritative Scripture (Luke 24:44-45). Also, the Apostles used the same Scriptures (1Cor 15:3; 2Tim 3:15-17). So, for the purpose at hand, there is no need to further dwell on the Canon of the Old Testament.
While Jesus Himself did not write Scripture, He told His disciples when He was alone with them in the upper room that the Holy Spirit would bring to their remembrance all that He had taught them; that the Spirit would guide them into all truth, and show them things which would take place in the future (Jn 14:25-26; 16:13). The Early Church understood this passage as primarily applying to the Apostles and regarded their teaching as authoritative for the Church, continuing steadfastly in their doctrines (Acts 2:42). The writer of Hebrews even said that it was a greater offense to neglect the message which “first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed to us by those who heard Him,” than it was for a Jew under the Old Covenant to disregard the Law, given by Moses (Heb 2:2-3). So, the Apostles are seen to have confirmed the teaching of Jesus.
Just as Moses and the Prophets were foundational to Judaism, so the teaching of the Apostles and the Prophets were foundational to the Church (Eph 2:19-20; 1 Cor 3:10-11). Paul referred to the words contained in his writings, as well as the writings of the other Apostles, as binding traditions and sound words which were to be held fast to, since they were the very words of God (1 Cor 14:37; 1Thess 2:13; 2Thess 2:15; 3:6,14; 2Tim 1:13).
Likewise, the Apostle Peter called upon the Church to be mindful of the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the commandment of us, the apostles of the Lord and Savior” (2Peter 3:2). We also see that Peter referred to Paul’s writings as Scripture along with the writings of the Old Testament prophets. He said:
“…our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given to him, has written to you, 16 as also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which untaught and unstable people twist to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures.” (2 Peter 3:15-16)
Here we see that, by the time the second epistle of Peter was written, which had to have been before his martyrdom in 68 AD, all of Paul’s epistles were not only widely circulated among the churches, but they were also regarded as forming part of the Holy Scriptures. Peter is not here establishing Paul’s writings as Scripture, but simply stating an already acknowledged fact among believers.
Towards the close of the first century, Jude exhorted believers to “contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints” (Jude 3). Here one can see that, by the end of the first century, the Church was already very Canon conscious, only receiving as Scripture the Old Testament and the teaching of the Apostles as written, either by them, or by their direct associates. In this exhortation, Jude says that we must contend for the faith “once and for all delivered” to the saints. This militates against an “open Canon” which would admit into the divine Canon writings subsequent to the Apostles.
Also, we see that Paul already considered at least the Gospel of Luke to be Scripture. Writing to Timothy, Paul said: “For the Scripture says, ‘You shall not muzzle an ox while it treads out the grain,' and, 'The laborer is worthy of his wages’” (1 Tim 5:18). The only place in Scripture where it says, “The laborer is worthy of his wages,” is in the Gospel of Luke where Jesus said, “remain in the same house, eating and drinking such things as they give, for the laborer is worthy of his wages” (Luke 10:7).
So, we see that the New Testament came into being organically, just as did the Old Testament. Once the books were written, they were promptly circulated among the Churches as New Covenant Scripture (1Thess 5:27; Col 4:16-17).
As soon as John, the last of the Apostles, had written the book of Revelation at the close of Domitian’s reign in 95 – 96AD, the Canon of Scripture was closed. Taking into account that the Scriptures, from Genesis to Revelation, are one organic whole, I believe that the divinely inspired final words in Revelation 22 served to seal the Canon once and for all. It closes with these words:
“For I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds to these things, God will add to him the plagues that are written in this book; 19 and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part from the Book of Life, from the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.” (Rev 22:18-19)
It is more than significant that none of the Apostolic Fathers (100 – 150AD), nor any of the Ante Nicene Fathers, spoke authoritatively, as do the authors of the New Testament. To the contrary, they continually cited the New Testament books as their authority. The Apostolic Fathers quote the New Testament fifty times more frequently than the Old Testament. Even those which were debated among some of them, such as Hebrews, James, 2 and 3 John and the epistles of Peter, were frequently quoted by them.
Ignatius (35 – 107AD), known as the disciple of John, called the New Testament writings circulated among them in his day “the gospels and the apostles.” While he only specifically mentioned seven of the New Testament books, the broad category “the gospels and the apostles,” potentially encompasses the entire New Testament. Polycarp (69 – 155AD), also a disciple of John, mentions 15 of them. Clement (35-99AD) mentions at least eight. Irenaeus, the great Early Church historian (120-200AD), mentions 21 of the 27 books. Hippolytus (170 – 235AD) spoke of 22 books. If you combine all their writings, none of the 27 books went without being mentioned by them.
It wasn’t until late in the second century that the rise of certain Gnostic heresies made it necessary for the Church to begin forming formal canonical lists of books. Around the middle of the second century, a Gnostic heretic named Marcion of Sinope (85 – 160AD), began teaching that the Old Testament God was not the same god as the God of the New Testament. He taught that the God of the Old Testament was harsh and vindictive, whereas the God of the New Testament was always loving, kind and gracious (not unlike the revisionist beliefs expressed by many Progressives today). Since Marcion only accepted some of Paul’s writings, and those parts of the Gospels which presented God as having a permissive, non-judgmental love towards everyone, he compiled his own Canon consisting only of his own edited version of the Gospel of Luke and 10 of Paul’s epistles, excluding Paul’s pastoral epistles and Hebrews.
The first known Canon was the Muratorian Canon, which was an unknown author’s compilation of all the books which he knew to have been accepted by the Church as canonical in his day. He lists all of the New Testament books except for Hebrews, James, 3 John and 1 and 2 Peter. He specifically mentions a couple of pseudo books which he excluded, saying that they were forged in Paul’s name to further the heresy of Marcion.
Origin (184-253AD) presented a Canon which included all the books currently in the New Testament, with the exception of James, 2nd and 3rd John and 2 Peter. He, as with most in his day, believed that the book of Hebrews was written by Paul, and included it in his Canon.
Around 350 AD, Cyril of Jerusalem presented a Canon which included the entire Old Testament, plus one book of the Apocrypha, and 26 books of the New Testament, leaving out Revelation. The Council of Laodicea in 363 AD presented the same list of 26 books as Cyril. Then in 367 AD, Athanasius of Alexandria presented a complete list of the 27 books which we presently have in our New Testament, and actually referred to them as “being canonized” (kanonizomena). This became the prototype for the subsequent councils of Hippo (393AD) and Carthage (397AD), which also included the same 27 books in the Canon.
These councils were necessitated by the great number of books that began to be circulated among the churches at that time. Some of them were useful but were not included in the final Canons, either because they were written after the time of the Apostles, or else because they did not bear the qualities consistent with divine inspiration. There were also many Gnostic pseudo-gospels being passed off as Scripture, as well as other heretical Gnostic writings. The 2nd century Church historian Eusebius gives a long list of spurious or heretical books which existed in his day. Although they were never received by the Church at large, many were being deceived by them, making it necessary for the Church to clearly define which books should be received as part of the Holy Scriptures.
The decisions of the councils were not arbitrary, but rather they used logical guidelines to determine which books were truly inspired of the Holy Spirit. Books were not recognized as inspired because they were declared canonical, but rather, they were declared canonical because they were inspired. The criteria for recognizing which books were inspired were: 1) The author had to either be an Apostle, or else be a close associate of an Apostle; 2) The book had to have been already recognized as inspired by the Church at large since the time of the Apostles and 3) The book had to be consistent with the rest of Scripture in its message and morals.
While the Roman Catholic Bible contains 73 books, including also the 7 referred to as the Apocrypha, meaning “hidden” or “secret” (also referred to by Catholics as “the Deuterocanon” or “second Canon”), and the Orthodox Churches include some of the pseudepigrapha books, sometimes including as many as 81 books in their Bible, these Apocryphal writings are normally not regarded so much as being authoritative as informative.
Today it is common to hear some argue that some of the Gnostic pseudo-gospels should have been included within the Canon. However, reading through them, I cannot fathom how anyone knowing their content would still consider them to be inspired of God and Canon-worthy.
The Gospel of Thomas is the one most commonly said to have been wrongfully excluded from the Canon. However, apart from the fact that evidence indicates that it was written after the time of the Apostles, between 135 AD – 200 AD, it borders on the absurd. It is a list of sayings purported to be those spoken by Jesus. Some are actual sayings of Jesus as they were previously recorded in the 4 Gospels, but most of them which were not recorded in the Gospels are simply esoteric nonsense. Here are a few examples:
“Jesus said, ‘Blessed is the lion which becomes man when consumed by man; and cursed is the man whom the lion consumes, and the lion becomes man.’” [1]
“On the day when you were one you became two. But when you become two, what will you do?” [2]
“Jesus said to them, ‘If you fast, you will give rise to sin for yourselves; and if you pray, you will be condemned; and if you give alms, you will do harm to your spirits.’” [3]
“Jesus said, ‘Blessed is he who came into being before he came into being. If you become my disciples and listen to my words, these stones will minister to you.’” [4]
I will here include just one more example which presents Jesus and the disciples as though they had great contempt for women. I find it hard to imagine that anyone today would want to have it included in our Bible. It reads:
“Simon Peter said to him, ‘Let Mary leave us, for women are not worthy of life.’ Jesus said, ‘I myself shall lead her in order to make her male, so that she too may become a living spirit resembling you males. For every woman who will make herself male will enter the kingdom of heaven.’” [5]
Imagine being a Christian apologist, attempting to defend the veracity of the Scriptures, if such sayings were included in our Bibles!
In the Pseudo-Gospel of Mary, Mary Magdalene is presented, not only as a disciple of Jesus, but as His favorite, receiving from Him esoteric teachings which the other disciples were not capable of comprehending. When Peter protests, asking why they should listen to a woman, Levi responds saying:
“If the Savior made her worthy, who are you then, for your part, to cast her aside? Surely the Savior knows her full well. That is why he has loved her more than us.”
In the Pseudo-Gospel of Peter, Jesus is presented as having to be sustained by two giant angels as He comes out of the tomb after His resurrection. Following behind them is a cross that talks. After Jesus and the cross had come out of the tomb, the cross says the following:
“And they heard a voice from the heavens, saying, ‘Have you preached to them that sleep.’ And a response was heard from the cross, ‘Yes.’”
I think that we could all agree that such Gnostic esoteric and misogynist nonsense was justifiably excluded from the Canon, not only by the councils, but by the Early Church in general.
Much more could be said, but, in conclusion, I believe we can reasonably conclude that all the 66 books of the Bible which we presently have are those, and only those, which divine providence and oversight have preserved for us from the moment that they proceeded from the mouth of God and were put in writing.
[1] *Gospel of Thomas (marquette.edu) verse 7
[2] *Gospel of Thomas (marquette.edu) verse 11
[3] *Gospel of Thomas (marquette.edu) verse 14
[4] *Gospel of Thomas (marquette.edu) verse 19
[5] *Gospel of Thomas (marquette.edu) verse 114
by George Sidney Hurd
How can we be confident that all the 66 books contained in our Bibles are those, and only those, which were inspired of the Holy Spirit, and therefore God’s authoritative Word for us today?
Some who endeavor to undermine the Scripture’s authority have claimed that an elite group of bishops under the authority of the Emperor Constantine, arbitrarily decided which books were to be included in the Canon of Scripture at the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD.
However, there are no early records indicating that the subject was even brought up at that council. This notion is based upon a late 9th century myth which claimed that the bishops at the Council of Nicaea placed a large number of different books on the divine table in the house of God and prayed that only the inspired books would remain on the table, and that all the spurious books would be under the table when they finished their prayer. And, as the myth goes, lo and behold, when they opened their eyes, only the inspired books remained on the table.
In the 17th century, Voltaire, the Deist and opponent of Christianity, cited this myth to ridicule the Bible. And later in 2003, when Dan Brown wrote his fiction novel, Da Vinci Code, he presented the myth as if the false claim were true and the Canon had indeed been determined in the Council of Nicaea. As a result, many today believe that the myth is true history.
The Biblical Canon was formed Organically and Spontaneously
The English word Canon comes from the Greek κανών, which means “rule” or “measuring stick,” and came to be used of those books which meet the standard of divinely inspired Scripture. A careful examination of the history and transmission of the sacred texts we presently have in our Bible reveals that no human council imposed them upon the Church, but rather, the people of God in general recognized their divine inspiration and authority from the very moment of their writing.
The 39 books we have contained in our Old Testament are the same as in the Hebrew Bible of Judaism, except they are arranged differently into 24 books. Most of them, except for some of the prophets, were received as part of the Canon from the very moment they were written. Even the prophets, who were often hated by the Jews for their message of judgment for their sins, were later included, seeing that their short-range prophecies passed the test of a true prophet, as set forth in Deuteronomy 18:21-22.
During Jesus’ earthly ministry, the Scriptures were divided into three main groups, the Law of Moses, the Prophets, and the Psalms. Jesus affirmed all three of these categories as authoritative Scripture (Luke 24:44-45). Also, the Apostles used the same Scriptures (1Cor 15:3; 2Tim 3:15-17). So, for the purpose at hand, there is no need to further dwell on the Canon of the Old Testament.
While Jesus Himself did not write Scripture, He told His disciples when He was alone with them in the upper room that the Holy Spirit would bring to their remembrance all that He had taught them; that the Spirit would guide them into all truth, and show them things which would take place in the future (Jn 14:25-26; 16:13). The Early Church understood this passage as primarily applying to the Apostles and regarded their teaching as authoritative for the Church, continuing steadfastly in their doctrines (Acts 2:42). The writer of Hebrews even said that it was a greater offense to neglect the message which “first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed to us by those who heard Him,” than it was for a Jew under the Old Covenant to disregard the Law, given by Moses (Heb 2:2-3). So, the Apostles are seen to have confirmed the teaching of Jesus.
Just as Moses and the Prophets were foundational to Judaism, so the teaching of the Apostles and the Prophets were foundational to the Church (Eph 2:19-20; 1 Cor 3:10-11). Paul referred to the words contained in his writings, as well as the writings of the other Apostles, as binding traditions and sound words which were to be held fast to, since they were the very words of God (1 Cor 14:37; 1Thess 2:13; 2Thess 2:15; 3:6,14; 2Tim 1:13).
Likewise, the Apostle Peter called upon the Church to be mindful of the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the commandment of us, the apostles of the Lord and Savior” (2Peter 3:2). We also see that Peter referred to Paul’s writings as Scripture along with the writings of the Old Testament prophets. He said:
“…our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given to him, has written to you, 16 as also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which untaught and unstable people twist to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures.” (2 Peter 3:15-16)
Here we see that, by the time the second epistle of Peter was written, which had to have been before his martyrdom in 68 AD, all of Paul’s epistles were not only widely circulated among the churches, but they were also regarded as forming part of the Holy Scriptures. Peter is not here establishing Paul’s writings as Scripture, but simply stating an already acknowledged fact among believers.
Towards the close of the first century, Jude exhorted believers to “contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints” (Jude 3). Here one can see that, by the end of the first century, the Church was already very Canon conscious, only receiving as Scripture the Old Testament and the teaching of the Apostles as written, either by them, or by their direct associates. In this exhortation, Jude says that we must contend for the faith “once and for all delivered” to the saints. This militates against an “open Canon” which would admit into the divine Canon writings subsequent to the Apostles.
Also, we see that Paul already considered at least the Gospel of Luke to be Scripture. Writing to Timothy, Paul said: “For the Scripture says, ‘You shall not muzzle an ox while it treads out the grain,' and, 'The laborer is worthy of his wages’” (1 Tim 5:18). The only place in Scripture where it says, “The laborer is worthy of his wages,” is in the Gospel of Luke where Jesus said, “remain in the same house, eating and drinking such things as they give, for the laborer is worthy of his wages” (Luke 10:7).
So, we see that the New Testament came into being organically, just as did the Old Testament. Once the books were written, they were promptly circulated among the Churches as New Covenant Scripture (1Thess 5:27; Col 4:16-17).
As soon as John, the last of the Apostles, had written the book of Revelation at the close of Domitian’s reign in 95 – 96AD, the Canon of Scripture was closed. Taking into account that the Scriptures, from Genesis to Revelation, are one organic whole, I believe that the divinely inspired final words in Revelation 22 served to seal the Canon once and for all. It closes with these words:
“For I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds to these things, God will add to him the plagues that are written in this book; 19 and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part from the Book of Life, from the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.” (Rev 22:18-19)
It is more than significant that none of the Apostolic Fathers (100 – 150AD), nor any of the Ante Nicene Fathers, spoke authoritatively, as do the authors of the New Testament. To the contrary, they continually cited the New Testament books as their authority. The Apostolic Fathers quote the New Testament fifty times more frequently than the Old Testament. Even those which were debated among some of them, such as Hebrews, James, 2 and 3 John and the epistles of Peter, were frequently quoted by them.
Ignatius (35 – 107AD), known as the disciple of John, called the New Testament writings circulated among them in his day “the gospels and the apostles.” While he only specifically mentioned seven of the New Testament books, the broad category “the gospels and the apostles,” potentially encompasses the entire New Testament. Polycarp (69 – 155AD), also a disciple of John, mentions 15 of them. Clement (35-99AD) mentions at least eight. Irenaeus, the great Early Church historian (120-200AD), mentions 21 of the 27 books. Hippolytus (170 – 235AD) spoke of 22 books. If you combine all their writings, none of the 27 books went without being mentioned by them.
It wasn’t until late in the second century that the rise of certain Gnostic heresies made it necessary for the Church to begin forming formal canonical lists of books. Around the middle of the second century, a Gnostic heretic named Marcion of Sinope (85 – 160AD), began teaching that the Old Testament God was not the same god as the God of the New Testament. He taught that the God of the Old Testament was harsh and vindictive, whereas the God of the New Testament was always loving, kind and gracious (not unlike the revisionist beliefs expressed by many Progressives today). Since Marcion only accepted some of Paul’s writings, and those parts of the Gospels which presented God as having a permissive, non-judgmental love towards everyone, he compiled his own Canon consisting only of his own edited version of the Gospel of Luke and 10 of Paul’s epistles, excluding Paul’s pastoral epistles and Hebrews.
The first known Canon was the Muratorian Canon, which was an unknown author’s compilation of all the books which he knew to have been accepted by the Church as canonical in his day. He lists all of the New Testament books except for Hebrews, James, 3 John and 1 and 2 Peter. He specifically mentions a couple of pseudo books which he excluded, saying that they were forged in Paul’s name to further the heresy of Marcion.
Origin (184-253AD) presented a Canon which included all the books currently in the New Testament, with the exception of James, 2nd and 3rd John and 2 Peter. He, as with most in his day, believed that the book of Hebrews was written by Paul, and included it in his Canon.
Around 350 AD, Cyril of Jerusalem presented a Canon which included the entire Old Testament, plus one book of the Apocrypha, and 26 books of the New Testament, leaving out Revelation. The Council of Laodicea in 363 AD presented the same list of 26 books as Cyril. Then in 367 AD, Athanasius of Alexandria presented a complete list of the 27 books which we presently have in our New Testament, and actually referred to them as “being canonized” (kanonizomena). This became the prototype for the subsequent councils of Hippo (393AD) and Carthage (397AD), which also included the same 27 books in the Canon.
These councils were necessitated by the great number of books that began to be circulated among the churches at that time. Some of them were useful but were not included in the final Canons, either because they were written after the time of the Apostles, or else because they did not bear the qualities consistent with divine inspiration. There were also many Gnostic pseudo-gospels being passed off as Scripture, as well as other heretical Gnostic writings. The 2nd century Church historian Eusebius gives a long list of spurious or heretical books which existed in his day. Although they were never received by the Church at large, many were being deceived by them, making it necessary for the Church to clearly define which books should be received as part of the Holy Scriptures.
The decisions of the councils were not arbitrary, but rather they used logical guidelines to determine which books were truly inspired of the Holy Spirit. Books were not recognized as inspired because they were declared canonical, but rather, they were declared canonical because they were inspired. The criteria for recognizing which books were inspired were: 1) The author had to either be an Apostle, or else be a close associate of an Apostle; 2) The book had to have been already recognized as inspired by the Church at large since the time of the Apostles and 3) The book had to be consistent with the rest of Scripture in its message and morals.
While the Roman Catholic Bible contains 73 books, including also the 7 referred to as the Apocrypha, meaning “hidden” or “secret” (also referred to by Catholics as “the Deuterocanon” or “second Canon”), and the Orthodox Churches include some of the pseudepigrapha books, sometimes including as many as 81 books in their Bible, these Apocryphal writings are normally not regarded so much as being authoritative as informative.
Today it is common to hear some argue that some of the Gnostic pseudo-gospels should have been included within the Canon. However, reading through them, I cannot fathom how anyone knowing their content would still consider them to be inspired of God and Canon-worthy.
The Gospel of Thomas is the one most commonly said to have been wrongfully excluded from the Canon. However, apart from the fact that evidence indicates that it was written after the time of the Apostles, between 135 AD – 200 AD, it borders on the absurd. It is a list of sayings purported to be those spoken by Jesus. Some are actual sayings of Jesus as they were previously recorded in the 4 Gospels, but most of them which were not recorded in the Gospels are simply esoteric nonsense. Here are a few examples:
“Jesus said, ‘Blessed is the lion which becomes man when consumed by man; and cursed is the man whom the lion consumes, and the lion becomes man.’” [1]
“On the day when you were one you became two. But when you become two, what will you do?” [2]
“Jesus said to them, ‘If you fast, you will give rise to sin for yourselves; and if you pray, you will be condemned; and if you give alms, you will do harm to your spirits.’” [3]
“Jesus said, ‘Blessed is he who came into being before he came into being. If you become my disciples and listen to my words, these stones will minister to you.’” [4]
I will here include just one more example which presents Jesus and the disciples as though they had great contempt for women. I find it hard to imagine that anyone today would want to have it included in our Bible. It reads:
“Simon Peter said to him, ‘Let Mary leave us, for women are not worthy of life.’ Jesus said, ‘I myself shall lead her in order to make her male, so that she too may become a living spirit resembling you males. For every woman who will make herself male will enter the kingdom of heaven.’” [5]
Imagine being a Christian apologist, attempting to defend the veracity of the Scriptures, if such sayings were included in our Bibles!
In the Pseudo-Gospel of Mary, Mary Magdalene is presented, not only as a disciple of Jesus, but as His favorite, receiving from Him esoteric teachings which the other disciples were not capable of comprehending. When Peter protests, asking why they should listen to a woman, Levi responds saying:
“If the Savior made her worthy, who are you then, for your part, to cast her aside? Surely the Savior knows her full well. That is why he has loved her more than us.”
In the Pseudo-Gospel of Peter, Jesus is presented as having to be sustained by two giant angels as He comes out of the tomb after His resurrection. Following behind them is a cross that talks. After Jesus and the cross had come out of the tomb, the cross says the following:
“And they heard a voice from the heavens, saying, ‘Have you preached to them that sleep.’ And a response was heard from the cross, ‘Yes.’”
I think that we could all agree that such Gnostic esoteric and misogynist nonsense was justifiably excluded from the Canon, not only by the councils, but by the Early Church in general.
Much more could be said, but, in conclusion, I believe we can reasonably conclude that all the 66 books of the Bible which we presently have are those, and only those, which divine providence and oversight have preserved for us from the moment that they proceeded from the mouth of God and were put in writing.
[1] *Gospel of Thomas (marquette.edu) verse 7
[2] *Gospel of Thomas (marquette.edu) verse 11
[3] *Gospel of Thomas (marquette.edu) verse 14
[4] *Gospel of Thomas (marquette.edu) verse 19
[5] *Gospel of Thomas (marquette.edu) verse 114
- Published on
by George Sidney Hurd
The objective of this article is threefold. First, I hope to demonstrate that the manner in which the Scriptures describe their own inspiration grammatically and logically requires that they be without error.
Secondly, we will be considering how God could have produced an infallible text using human authors without violating their own freewill. And finally, I will briefly consider what inerrancy entails and what we should expect to find in an inerrant text which has been inspired of God and yet written by human authors.
The Nature of Divine Inspiration requires Inerrancy
“from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings (τα ιερα γραμματα), which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. 16 All Scripture is breathed out by God (πασα γραφη θεοπνευστος) and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.” (2 Tim 3:15-17 ESV)
Properly understood, divine inspiration, as described here in 2Timothy 3:16, precludes the possibility of error in any part of the Holy Scriptures (sacred writings). It here says that it is the “Scripture,” which is inspired, not merely the human authors who wrote them. The end-product itself is what is said to be inspired.
The Greek word rendered in the KJV as “inspiration of God” is θεοπνευστος, composed of θεος - “God,” and πνέω – “to breathe,” and is best rendered literally as “God-breathed,” or “breathed out by God.” Jesus expressed the same concept when He said that man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God (Matt 4:4).
To illustrate, when I want to communicate something, I carefully choose the right words in order to best express myself. Then, the moment I give expression to my thoughts by sounding out words with my mouth as I exhale, they become “my-breathed” words to my hearers. The Scriptures even refer to speaking as “breathing out” (Acts 9:1). Once those breathed-out words are put in writing, they become my-breathed words in written form, and others can discover my thoughts by reading what I have written.
In a similar manner, the Holy Scriptures are God-breathed words, having proceeded from His mouth as they were being communicated to and through the human authors as they wrote the Scriptures. The main difference is that we are fallible and commit errors, whereas God is truth and cannot err. It logically follows, then, that all Scripture is the inerrant expression of the mind and will of God, preserved for us in written form. That is why Paul says that Scripture in its entirety, is profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness.
Some Errantists attempt to arrange the wording in 2Timothy 3:16 in a manner which, according to them, would leave room for error in some portions of Scripture. In Greek, the first phrase of the passage simply reads, πασα γραφη θεοπνευστος και ωφελιμος… “every writing God-breathed and profitable…” In English the linking verb “is” must be supplied by the translators.
Those who deny inerrancy argue that “is” should be placed at the end of the phrase. That would make it read, “Every God-breathed Scripture is and profitable…,” instead of the correct reading, “Every Scripture is God-breathed and (και) profitable...” In order for them to place “is” at the end of the phrase they must either drop the conjunction και from the Greek text altogether, or else render the conjunction και as “also” rather than the more natural contextual rendering, “and.” However, this reading is also ruled out by the context itself, since it is evident from the previous verse that Paul means to say every Scripture within the Holy Scriptures is God-breathed. Logically, if God is the source of every portion of the Holy Scriptures, they must be inerrant, just as Jesus repeatedly affirmed (Jn 17:6,14,17; Jn 10:35; Matt 5:18, etc.).
How could God use fallible humans to produce Inerrant Scripture without violating their own Freewill?
The opponents of inerrancy argue that it would be impossible for God to use fallible men to produce an infallible Bible without violating their individual freewill. However, contrary to what some believe, God’s sovereign freewill is not bound by the freewill of man. For example, when king Saul came to take David captive, the Spirit of the Lord came upon him and he prophesied all night, even though that wasn’t his desire nor his intention (1Sam 19:23-24). Also, God initiated the trances or open visions through which He spoke to Peter and Paul, giving them special revelation (Acts 10:10-16; 22:17-21).
Some portions of Scripture were even dictated by God and the human authors simply wrote down what God said, much as a secretary would do (Deut 27:3,8; Jer 30:2; Isa 8:1; 30:8). John the revelator was told what to write eleven times, and once he was even told not to write what he saw (Rev 1:11;19, cf. Rev 10:4). Certainly, the Scriptures came into being primarily by the will of God and not by the “freewill” of man.
However, while God’s sovereignty is not limited by our freewill, and indeed, He has at times intervened in human affairs against man’s will when necessary, few Inerrantists would argue that God bypassed the will of the human authors as they wrote the Scriptures in a manner similar to how a spirit might produce automatic writing through a medium in a trance state. The human author’s individual perspectives, emotions and writing styles are evident throughout the sacred text. So, how could God produce inerrant Scriptures, using fallible human authors, without overriding their freewill? I believe that Peter explains how. He said:
“knowing this first, that no prophecy (προφητεία) of Scripture is of any private interpretation, 21 for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved (φερομενοι) by the Holy Spirit.” (2 Peter 1:20-21)
Peter begins by pointing out that no prophecy (προφητεία) of Scripture is the private interpretation or opinions of the human author. The word προφητεία (propheteia) is not exclusive to predictive prophecy, as one might think. It refers to anything spoken under the influence of divine inspiration, with or without reference to future events. [1] What Peter is saying is that no part of Scripture is merely the human author’s own opinions or beliefs.
This goes against the claim of many Progressive scholars who argue that when God breathed into the human authors, He condescendingly allowed for the inclusion of the human author’s own erroneous ancient Near-Eastern beliefs, as well as other human errors.
In verse 21, Peter further explains that no Scripture was simply what the human authors decided to write, but rather, holy men of God spoke as they were moved, or born-along (φερομενοι) by the Holy Spirit. The word rendered “moved” is φερω, (phero), and is used in Acts to refer to the wind which moves a ship at sea (Acts 27:15). The idea is that the Holy Spirit moved upon the human authors in such a manner that they only wrote what God wanted them to write.
Returning to the question as to how God could use fallible humans to produce Inerrant Scripture without violating their freewill, Peter explains that God’s chosen human instruments were not common self-willed men whom He had to bit and bridle in order to make them say what He wanted to say, but rather, they were “holy men of God,” upon whom the Holy Spirit was able to move without resistance, breathing through them the very words written in the sacred text. They were men after God’s own heart who would have been sensitive to the moving of the Spirit as He breathed God’s words through them. There was no need for God to violate their freewill, since their will was already fully surrendered to Him, only needing the Spirit’s illumination and prompting.
Also, when one takes into account God’s middle knowledge, in which He knows, not only what one will say, but what they would have said under different circumstances, making it possible for God to work all things according to the council of His will, it becomes evident that God could so prepare His human vessels that they would infallibly express His own heart and mind. God is well able to work in His vessels both to will and to do His good pleasure (Php 2:13).
What is meant by Inerrancy?
As already pointed out, the human author’s own distinct writing style can be observed throughout the Scriptures, so even the parts which were dictated by God were nevertheless freely written through the human authors, rather than it being like automatic writing in which the spirit possesses the medium and moves the author’s hand while being in a trance state.
Also, we see that God saw fit to include the human author’s personal statements which have little or no spiritual or authoritative application to us, such as Paul saying things like, “Bring the cloak that I left with Carpus at Troas when you come — and the books, especially the parchments” (2 Tim 4:13), or telling Timothy to drink a little wine for the stomach’s sake (1Tim 5:23). While all Scripture is equally inspired and therefore reliable and inerrant, not every part of Scripture is directly applicable to the believer today. What we see throughout Scripture is God’s divine supervision of what the human authors wrote, resulting in its verbal plenary inerrancy without the need for His dictation of every word. I think that the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy, formulated by a large representative group of Evangelical leaders in 1978, expresses very well the Scripture’s own teaching on the subject of inspiration:
“Holy Scripture, being God's own Word, written by men prepared and superintended by His Spirit, is of infallible divine authority in all matters upon which it touches: it is to be believed, as God's instruction, in all that it affirms, obeyed, as God's command, in all that it requires; embraced, as God's pledge, in all that it promises…” [2]
“Being wholly and verbally God-given, Scripture is without error or fault in all its teaching, no less in what it states about God's acts in creation, about the events of world history, and about its own literary origins under God, than in its witness to God's saving grace in individual lives.” [3]
The Holy Spirit superintended the human authors, bearing them along as they wrote in such a manner that all of Scripture’s affirmations are God’s affirmations; all its teachings are God’s teachings; all of its requirements are God’s requirements; and all of its promises are God’s promises.
How are we to approach perceived discrepancies in Scripture?
Space here doesn’t allow for a worthy treatment of this subject. For those interested, I would recommend reading “The Big Book of Bible Difficulties” by Norman Geisler and Thomas A. Howe, as well as “New International Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties” by Gleason Archer.
Here I would just like to point out that many perceived errors in Scripture are removed when we take into account the rich variety of literary genres and devices in Scripture. Poetry must be understood as poetry, allegory as allegory, hyperbole as hyperbole, historical narrative as historical narrative, etc. There are at least ten literary genres present in the Bible, as well as some twenty different literary devices. Once they are identified and interpreted as such, most apparent Bible discrepancies disappear. Actually, this same variety in literary style is not peculiar to biblical times, since the same diversity is present in our everyday speech. We’re just so accustomed to it that it goes unnoticed.
Some have been greatly troubled by the differences of details in the Gospel narratives because they think they should read like a police report rather than the biographical literature that they are. Each Gospel writer was writing to a distinct audience, emphasizing different details of Christ’s life, ministry and teaching, while leaving out other details.
In writing a biography, many authors do not give a strict chronological account, covering all the details of one’s life in succession. They will often begin by describing a high-point in one’s life, rather than beginning with one’s birth, or they might emphasize certain details, whereas another author might describe the events from a different angle or leave out the same details altogether. There is almost as much liberty of style in biographical literature as there is poetic liberty when writing poems.
The amazing thing is that, all things considered, none of the Scripture’s higher critics have been able to positively identify any untruth or patently false statement in the Gospel accounts. While there are perceived discrepancies, they are not without plausible solutions. And, just as the accused are innocent until proven guilty, so the Bible is true until proven false. It has been on trial now for nearly 2,000 years without any incontrovertible evidence presented against its veracity that would stand up in a court of law.
Some have argued that the Bible contains errors when it comes to matters of science, geography and cosmology. While it is obviously not the purpose of Scripture to teach on matters of science, nevertheless, taking into account the Scriptures’ use of literary devices, it becomes evident that there are no demonstrable errors in science contained in the Bible.
Some, failing to consider the Bible’s use of figurative language, have supposed that the Bible teaches a cosmology in which the earth is flat. However, taking into account its literary style, it is evident that the earth is described figuratively in masonry terms as a building.
God says to Job: “Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth? Or who stretched out the measuring line upon it? Who laid its cornerstone? Or who shut in the sea with doors, when it burst forth and issued from the womb; when I made the clouds it’s garment?” (Job 38:4-9). Throughout the Scriptures the same figurative speech is used to describe the earth as a building with pillars and four corners, etc.
Did God mean for us to understand that He literally used an immensely long measuring line to measure the earth, or was He simply making use of the mason’s terminology? Did God literally shut the sea with bars and doors, or is that also figurative, comparing the earth to a building? Would anyone in their right mind take God literally when He said that he clothed the earth with the clouds as a garment? As far as I know, not even the flat-earth society thinks that the earth has four corners. Clearly, this is figurative language, rather than a lecture on cosmology.
Even scientists today continually say things that are not cosmologically precise such as “the sun is rising” or “the sun is in my eyes,” but no one in their right mind would correct them as being in error. Even if those living in ancient times believed that the earth was literally a building with doors keeping the water out, and even if the Bible’s human authors thought the earth was flat, which is very doubtful, nowhere does the Bible teach that the earth is flat. The doctrine of inerrancy simply affirms that the Bible is without error in all that it teaches.
So, the Scriptures testimony concerning itself is that it is the eternal, infallible Word of God, written by holy men of God as they were born-along by the Holy Spirit. And in spite of the fact that it is the most attested of all ancient literature, it has been the most criticized and assaulted of all literature throughout its history.
Nevertheless, after nearly two millennia of attacks from the greatest secular minds, it continues being by far the best-selling book of all time, with an estimated 5 billion copies having been sold. The second best-seller of all time is “The Little Red Book, Quotations from Chairman Mao Tse-Tung,” which has sold 1.1 billion copies. However, while the Bible still continues as the best-seller after 1,900 years, today, only a little more than a half century after it was first published in 1967, very few people are still purchasing copies of Tse-Tung’s Little Red Book. The testimony of Scripture concerning itself has proven itself to be true over the centuries when it says:
"All flesh is as grass,
And all the glory of man as the flower of the grass.
The grass withers,
And its flower falls away,
But the word of the Lord endures forever." (1 Peter 1:24-25)
[1] Louw and Nida Greek and English Lexicon.
[2] The Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy, A Short Statement, article 2
[3] The Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy, A Short Statement, article 4
The objective of this article is threefold. First, I hope to demonstrate that the manner in which the Scriptures describe their own inspiration grammatically and logically requires that they be without error.
Secondly, we will be considering how God could have produced an infallible text using human authors without violating their own freewill. And finally, I will briefly consider what inerrancy entails and what we should expect to find in an inerrant text which has been inspired of God and yet written by human authors.
The Nature of Divine Inspiration requires Inerrancy
“from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings (τα ιερα γραμματα), which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. 16 All Scripture is breathed out by God (πασα γραφη θεοπνευστος) and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.” (2 Tim 3:15-17 ESV)
Properly understood, divine inspiration, as described here in 2Timothy 3:16, precludes the possibility of error in any part of the Holy Scriptures (sacred writings). It here says that it is the “Scripture,” which is inspired, not merely the human authors who wrote them. The end-product itself is what is said to be inspired.
The Greek word rendered in the KJV as “inspiration of God” is θεοπνευστος, composed of θεος - “God,” and πνέω – “to breathe,” and is best rendered literally as “God-breathed,” or “breathed out by God.” Jesus expressed the same concept when He said that man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God (Matt 4:4).
To illustrate, when I want to communicate something, I carefully choose the right words in order to best express myself. Then, the moment I give expression to my thoughts by sounding out words with my mouth as I exhale, they become “my-breathed” words to my hearers. The Scriptures even refer to speaking as “breathing out” (Acts 9:1). Once those breathed-out words are put in writing, they become my-breathed words in written form, and others can discover my thoughts by reading what I have written.
In a similar manner, the Holy Scriptures are God-breathed words, having proceeded from His mouth as they were being communicated to and through the human authors as they wrote the Scriptures. The main difference is that we are fallible and commit errors, whereas God is truth and cannot err. It logically follows, then, that all Scripture is the inerrant expression of the mind and will of God, preserved for us in written form. That is why Paul says that Scripture in its entirety, is profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness.
Some Errantists attempt to arrange the wording in 2Timothy 3:16 in a manner which, according to them, would leave room for error in some portions of Scripture. In Greek, the first phrase of the passage simply reads, πασα γραφη θεοπνευστος και ωφελιμος… “every writing God-breathed and profitable…” In English the linking verb “is” must be supplied by the translators.
Those who deny inerrancy argue that “is” should be placed at the end of the phrase. That would make it read, “Every God-breathed Scripture is and profitable…,” instead of the correct reading, “Every Scripture is God-breathed and (και) profitable...” In order for them to place “is” at the end of the phrase they must either drop the conjunction και from the Greek text altogether, or else render the conjunction και as “also” rather than the more natural contextual rendering, “and.” However, this reading is also ruled out by the context itself, since it is evident from the previous verse that Paul means to say every Scripture within the Holy Scriptures is God-breathed. Logically, if God is the source of every portion of the Holy Scriptures, they must be inerrant, just as Jesus repeatedly affirmed (Jn 17:6,14,17; Jn 10:35; Matt 5:18, etc.).
How could God use fallible humans to produce Inerrant Scripture without violating their own Freewill?
The opponents of inerrancy argue that it would be impossible for God to use fallible men to produce an infallible Bible without violating their individual freewill. However, contrary to what some believe, God’s sovereign freewill is not bound by the freewill of man. For example, when king Saul came to take David captive, the Spirit of the Lord came upon him and he prophesied all night, even though that wasn’t his desire nor his intention (1Sam 19:23-24). Also, God initiated the trances or open visions through which He spoke to Peter and Paul, giving them special revelation (Acts 10:10-16; 22:17-21).
Some portions of Scripture were even dictated by God and the human authors simply wrote down what God said, much as a secretary would do (Deut 27:3,8; Jer 30:2; Isa 8:1; 30:8). John the revelator was told what to write eleven times, and once he was even told not to write what he saw (Rev 1:11;19, cf. Rev 10:4). Certainly, the Scriptures came into being primarily by the will of God and not by the “freewill” of man.
However, while God’s sovereignty is not limited by our freewill, and indeed, He has at times intervened in human affairs against man’s will when necessary, few Inerrantists would argue that God bypassed the will of the human authors as they wrote the Scriptures in a manner similar to how a spirit might produce automatic writing through a medium in a trance state. The human author’s individual perspectives, emotions and writing styles are evident throughout the sacred text. So, how could God produce inerrant Scriptures, using fallible human authors, without overriding their freewill? I believe that Peter explains how. He said:
“knowing this first, that no prophecy (προφητεία) of Scripture is of any private interpretation, 21 for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved (φερομενοι) by the Holy Spirit.” (2 Peter 1:20-21)
Peter begins by pointing out that no prophecy (προφητεία) of Scripture is the private interpretation or opinions of the human author. The word προφητεία (propheteia) is not exclusive to predictive prophecy, as one might think. It refers to anything spoken under the influence of divine inspiration, with or without reference to future events. [1] What Peter is saying is that no part of Scripture is merely the human author’s own opinions or beliefs.
This goes against the claim of many Progressive scholars who argue that when God breathed into the human authors, He condescendingly allowed for the inclusion of the human author’s own erroneous ancient Near-Eastern beliefs, as well as other human errors.
In verse 21, Peter further explains that no Scripture was simply what the human authors decided to write, but rather, holy men of God spoke as they were moved, or born-along (φερομενοι) by the Holy Spirit. The word rendered “moved” is φερω, (phero), and is used in Acts to refer to the wind which moves a ship at sea (Acts 27:15). The idea is that the Holy Spirit moved upon the human authors in such a manner that they only wrote what God wanted them to write.
Returning to the question as to how God could use fallible humans to produce Inerrant Scripture without violating their freewill, Peter explains that God’s chosen human instruments were not common self-willed men whom He had to bit and bridle in order to make them say what He wanted to say, but rather, they were “holy men of God,” upon whom the Holy Spirit was able to move without resistance, breathing through them the very words written in the sacred text. They were men after God’s own heart who would have been sensitive to the moving of the Spirit as He breathed God’s words through them. There was no need for God to violate their freewill, since their will was already fully surrendered to Him, only needing the Spirit’s illumination and prompting.
Also, when one takes into account God’s middle knowledge, in which He knows, not only what one will say, but what they would have said under different circumstances, making it possible for God to work all things according to the council of His will, it becomes evident that God could so prepare His human vessels that they would infallibly express His own heart and mind. God is well able to work in His vessels both to will and to do His good pleasure (Php 2:13).
What is meant by Inerrancy?
As already pointed out, the human author’s own distinct writing style can be observed throughout the Scriptures, so even the parts which were dictated by God were nevertheless freely written through the human authors, rather than it being like automatic writing in which the spirit possesses the medium and moves the author’s hand while being in a trance state.
Also, we see that God saw fit to include the human author’s personal statements which have little or no spiritual or authoritative application to us, such as Paul saying things like, “Bring the cloak that I left with Carpus at Troas when you come — and the books, especially the parchments” (2 Tim 4:13), or telling Timothy to drink a little wine for the stomach’s sake (1Tim 5:23). While all Scripture is equally inspired and therefore reliable and inerrant, not every part of Scripture is directly applicable to the believer today. What we see throughout Scripture is God’s divine supervision of what the human authors wrote, resulting in its verbal plenary inerrancy without the need for His dictation of every word. I think that the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy, formulated by a large representative group of Evangelical leaders in 1978, expresses very well the Scripture’s own teaching on the subject of inspiration:
“Holy Scripture, being God's own Word, written by men prepared and superintended by His Spirit, is of infallible divine authority in all matters upon which it touches: it is to be believed, as God's instruction, in all that it affirms, obeyed, as God's command, in all that it requires; embraced, as God's pledge, in all that it promises…” [2]
“Being wholly and verbally God-given, Scripture is without error or fault in all its teaching, no less in what it states about God's acts in creation, about the events of world history, and about its own literary origins under God, than in its witness to God's saving grace in individual lives.” [3]
The Holy Spirit superintended the human authors, bearing them along as they wrote in such a manner that all of Scripture’s affirmations are God’s affirmations; all its teachings are God’s teachings; all of its requirements are God’s requirements; and all of its promises are God’s promises.
How are we to approach perceived discrepancies in Scripture?
Space here doesn’t allow for a worthy treatment of this subject. For those interested, I would recommend reading “The Big Book of Bible Difficulties” by Norman Geisler and Thomas A. Howe, as well as “New International Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties” by Gleason Archer.
Here I would just like to point out that many perceived errors in Scripture are removed when we take into account the rich variety of literary genres and devices in Scripture. Poetry must be understood as poetry, allegory as allegory, hyperbole as hyperbole, historical narrative as historical narrative, etc. There are at least ten literary genres present in the Bible, as well as some twenty different literary devices. Once they are identified and interpreted as such, most apparent Bible discrepancies disappear. Actually, this same variety in literary style is not peculiar to biblical times, since the same diversity is present in our everyday speech. We’re just so accustomed to it that it goes unnoticed.
Some have been greatly troubled by the differences of details in the Gospel narratives because they think they should read like a police report rather than the biographical literature that they are. Each Gospel writer was writing to a distinct audience, emphasizing different details of Christ’s life, ministry and teaching, while leaving out other details.
In writing a biography, many authors do not give a strict chronological account, covering all the details of one’s life in succession. They will often begin by describing a high-point in one’s life, rather than beginning with one’s birth, or they might emphasize certain details, whereas another author might describe the events from a different angle or leave out the same details altogether. There is almost as much liberty of style in biographical literature as there is poetic liberty when writing poems.
The amazing thing is that, all things considered, none of the Scripture’s higher critics have been able to positively identify any untruth or patently false statement in the Gospel accounts. While there are perceived discrepancies, they are not without plausible solutions. And, just as the accused are innocent until proven guilty, so the Bible is true until proven false. It has been on trial now for nearly 2,000 years without any incontrovertible evidence presented against its veracity that would stand up in a court of law.
Some have argued that the Bible contains errors when it comes to matters of science, geography and cosmology. While it is obviously not the purpose of Scripture to teach on matters of science, nevertheless, taking into account the Scriptures’ use of literary devices, it becomes evident that there are no demonstrable errors in science contained in the Bible.
Some, failing to consider the Bible’s use of figurative language, have supposed that the Bible teaches a cosmology in which the earth is flat. However, taking into account its literary style, it is evident that the earth is described figuratively in masonry terms as a building.
God says to Job: “Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth? Or who stretched out the measuring line upon it? Who laid its cornerstone? Or who shut in the sea with doors, when it burst forth and issued from the womb; when I made the clouds it’s garment?” (Job 38:4-9). Throughout the Scriptures the same figurative speech is used to describe the earth as a building with pillars and four corners, etc.
Did God mean for us to understand that He literally used an immensely long measuring line to measure the earth, or was He simply making use of the mason’s terminology? Did God literally shut the sea with bars and doors, or is that also figurative, comparing the earth to a building? Would anyone in their right mind take God literally when He said that he clothed the earth with the clouds as a garment? As far as I know, not even the flat-earth society thinks that the earth has four corners. Clearly, this is figurative language, rather than a lecture on cosmology.
Even scientists today continually say things that are not cosmologically precise such as “the sun is rising” or “the sun is in my eyes,” but no one in their right mind would correct them as being in error. Even if those living in ancient times believed that the earth was literally a building with doors keeping the water out, and even if the Bible’s human authors thought the earth was flat, which is very doubtful, nowhere does the Bible teach that the earth is flat. The doctrine of inerrancy simply affirms that the Bible is without error in all that it teaches.
So, the Scriptures testimony concerning itself is that it is the eternal, infallible Word of God, written by holy men of God as they were born-along by the Holy Spirit. And in spite of the fact that it is the most attested of all ancient literature, it has been the most criticized and assaulted of all literature throughout its history.
Nevertheless, after nearly two millennia of attacks from the greatest secular minds, it continues being by far the best-selling book of all time, with an estimated 5 billion copies having been sold. The second best-seller of all time is “The Little Red Book, Quotations from Chairman Mao Tse-Tung,” which has sold 1.1 billion copies. However, while the Bible still continues as the best-seller after 1,900 years, today, only a little more than a half century after it was first published in 1967, very few people are still purchasing copies of Tse-Tung’s Little Red Book. The testimony of Scripture concerning itself has proven itself to be true over the centuries when it says:
"All flesh is as grass,
And all the glory of man as the flower of the grass.
The grass withers,
And its flower falls away,
But the word of the Lord endures forever." (1 Peter 1:24-25)
[1] Louw and Nida Greek and English Lexicon.
[2] The Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy, A Short Statement, article 2
[3] The Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy, A Short Statement, article 4
- Published on
by George Sidney Hurd
We saw in the previous blog that the Church Fathers, as well as every prominent leader within the Church throughout its history, have firmly and unequivocally defended the inerrancy of Scripture against its critics who, for one reason or the other, have sought to undermine its credibility. It has been a conviction so strong that many have been willing to die for it, even in our day, risking their lives in order to possess or distribute the Holy Bible into Communist or Islamic countries, considering it to actually be what it claims to be, the Word of God.
However, many Progressive Christians today consider the inerrancy of Scripture to be irrelevant and divisive in our Postmodern, relativistic and all-inclusive culture. Some, often use the catchphrase: “I follow Jesus, not the Bible,” without considering what Jesus Himself taught concerning the Holy Scriptures. In reality, that saying shows more contempt for the Bible than it does reverence of Christ. Brian Zahnd, in his typically sardonic, sanctimonious style, expresses the not-so-subtle contempt for the doctrine so prevalent among Progressives when he says: “I do believe in the inspired, infallible Word of God, and His name is Jesus.” [1]
However, they fail to take into account that, when Jesus used the word “Word,” He was always referring to the Scriptures, not Himself. Indeed, Jesus is only referred to as the Word by John, and even then John only uses the term in that manner four times (Jn 1:1,14; 1Jn 1:1; 5:7; Rev 19:13). It is often unmistakable that John is referring to the Scriptures as the Word of God, rather than Christ, as we see clearly demonstrated in John 10:35 where Jesus Himself said: “If He called them gods, to whom the word of God (ο λογος του θεου) came, and the Scripture cannot be broken…” Here Jesus Himself is referring to the Scriptures as the Word of God, not Himself (cf. Jn 17:6,14,17). I consider the fallacies of this indirect argument against the authority of Scripture in my blog, “What does the word ‘Word’ mean to Jesus.”
In this article, we will be considering four primary reasons why we should insist upon the inerrancy of Scripture in its entirety.
1. Jesus Himself affirmed the Authority and Inerrancy of Scripture as the very Word of God.
For me personally, this, combined with the inner testimony of the Spirit, has been my primary motive for believing in and defending the inerrancy of Scripture from the moment of my first encounter with Christ more than 55 years ago. It may be possible for one to know Christ as Savior without affirming the inerrancy of Scripture. However, taking into consideration His teaching on the subject, I don’t believe it is possible to be a true disciple of Jesus while at the same time disagreeing with Him on this vital subject. Jesus made numerous affirmations concerning the Scriptures.
(1) The Scriptures are from the mouth of God.
Jesus said: “It is written, ‘Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God’” (Matt 4:4). That He is to be understood as referring to the Scriptures is clear, considering that Paul later said that all Scripture is “breathed out from God (θεόπνευστος)” (2Tim 3:16). They also understood that the Scriptures were the result of the Holy Spirit speaking through holy men of God like David and Isaiah (Acts 1:16; 28:25; 2Peter 1:21).
(2) The Scriptures are infallible.
Jesus said of the Scriptures that they were the infallible “Word of God” and therefore they cannot be broken (Jn 10:35). He said that all that is written in the Scriptures must be fulfilled (Mark 14:49: Luke 24:44), and that it would be easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for even one jot or tittle of Scripture to pass away unfulfilled (Matt 5:18).
(3) The Scriptures are inerrant.
Jesus said that Scripture is the Word of God and that it is truth (Jn 17:17, cf. Ps 119:160; Pro 30:5). If it is truth, then logically, it cannot contain error. Based upon the fact that the entirety of God’s Word is truth, Jesus said that any doctrinal error is due to our ignorance of the Scriptures rather than the other way around (Matt 22:29).
(4) The “Word of God” can be invalidated by tradition.
We already saw in John 10:35 that Jesus considered the Scriptures to be the “Word of God,” saying that they cannot be broken. He further accused the Scribes and Pharisees of invalidating the “Word of God” with their traditions (Mark 7:13). What Jesus was insisting upon was that man is to live by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God, rather than submitting to manmade traditions which often make the Word of God of no effect.
(5) The Scriptures have a unified Christocentric message.
One of the strongest testimonies to the divine authorship of the Old Testament Scriptures is the consistency of its underlying theme of redemption in Christ, the Messiah. It was written by many different human authors of distinct backgrounds, and yet the overall message is one harmonious whole, revealing what would take place in their future. Only the true God who inhabits eternity is able to declare the end from the beginning, as we see Him doing throughout the Scriptures (Isa 46:9-10).
After Christ’s resurrection, He appeared to the two disciples on the road to Emmaus and explained to them how that all the Scriptures, from Genesis to Malachi, bore testimony to Him:
“And beginning at Moses and all the Prophets, He expounded to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning Himself.” (Luke 24:27)
Afterwards, He also appeared to the rest of His disciples and reminded them of how He had previously taught them from the Scriptures that everything concerning His life, death and resurrection had to be fulfilled:
“Then He said to them, ‘These are the words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things must be fulfilled which were written in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms concerning Me.’ And He opened their understanding, that they might comprehend the Scriptures.” (Luke 24:44-45)
If the Scriptures were nothing more than the fallible words and prognostications of men, or even if it were a mixture of God’s words with man’s words, Jesus wouldn’t have insisted as He did that all the Scriptures had to be fulfilled (cf. Matt 26:54,56). Why would He have needed to open their understanding to understand the Scriptures if in fact they were nothing more than the fallible words of men?
There is one passage which some Progressives have misrepresented as if Christ were depreciating the Scriptures, but, in reality, He was elevating them, saying that the Scribes and Pharisees needed to take a closer look at the Scriptures because they all bore testimony of Him. Jesus said to them:
“Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me. 40 And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life.” (John 5:39-40 KJV)
To me, it is unfortunate that many translations have rendered “Search (ερευνατε) the Scriptures,” which is the present active imperative form of the verb, as “You search the Scriptures.” Rendering it in this manner, as if it were an indicative rather than an imperative, has given place for some to misconstrue Jesus’s words as if He were depreciating the Scriptures, saying that they needed to turn from the Scriptures in order to find life in Him.
Quite the contrary! Either way one renders the phrase, Jesus was certainly not minimizing the Scriptures. He was either telling them to go back and search the Scriptures again, or else reproaching them for having searched the Scriptures all their lives and yet failed to capture its central message. He was telling them that all the Scriptures point to Him, and yet they refused to come to Him.
Jesus said that it is the goal of a disciple to become like one’s master in all things (Matt 10:24-25). If we want to be true disciples of Jesus Christ, we must desist from sitting as judges of what is true or false in the Word of God and become like Jesus, speaking of the Holy Scriptures just as He spoke of them. Otherwise, we will become like those whom Paul described as “always learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth” (2 Tim 3:7).
2. The Scriptures testimony concerning itself.
When we examine the Old Testament Scriptures, it becomes obvious that the claim that they were the Word of God, rather than merely the words of men, didn’t originate with Jesus but preceded His teachings. The final words of David are recorded for us in 2 Samuel, where it says:
“Now these are the last words of David…the sweet psalmist of Israel: ‘The Spirit of the Lord spoke by me, and His word was on my tongue.’” (2 Sam 23:1-2)
Moses likewise said concerning the Law which he received from God: “man shall not live by bread alone; but man lives by every word that proceeds from the mouth of the Lord. (Deut 8:3). So, we see that the words spoken and written by the human authors of Scripture were understood as being the very words which God wanted to be recorded.
That should not be construed as being divine dictation, as we will see with more detail in the next article. God moved upon holy men of God in such a manner that they freely spoke and wrote, yet they only wrote that which God willed, without Him dictating every word.
For example, in the Scriptures we see that we are not to hate anyone in our heart (Lev 19:17). Nowhere does Scripture teach us to hate our enemies, as does the Koran. In fact, Jesus spoke out against a Rabbinical teaching which made allowance for one to hate their enemies (Matt 5:43-48). Nevertheless, God, for example, allowed for David’s full expression of his own emotions in the Psalms, sometimes showing a passionate hatred towards God’s enemies (Ps 139:21-22).
Indeed, many of the sins and imperfections of man are intentionally recorded in the Scriptures, such as David’s adulterous relationship and murder to cover up his sin, or the false council of Job’s companions. The Scriptures record attitudes and practices which they forbid, such as hatred of one’s enemies, adultery and false testimony, but nowhere do the Scriptures affirm or teach such practices. For that reason, it is important to understand that Scripture is inerrant in all that it affirms or teaches – not in all that it records.
Coming to the New Testament epistles, we see the same view of divine inspiration as that described by David, and also by Jesus in the Gospels. Jesus, quoting Moses, said:
“It is written, ‘Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God’” (Matt 4:4). Paul states the same truth in different words, saying that “all Scripture is breathed out from God.” He said:
“But you must continue in the things which you have learned and been assured of, knowing from whom you have learned them, 15 and that from childhood you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. 16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God (θεοπνευστος, lit. “breathed out from God”) and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.” (2 Tim 3:14-17)
Paul said of the Holy Scriptures (Sacred Writings) that they are breathed out from the very mouth of God. Moses and Jesus expressed the same concept, saying that every word proceeds from the mouth of God. Therefore, God breathed out His words through human instruments in such a manner that they are said to be infallible. Peter could say, quoting Isaiah 40:6-8 concerning the Scriptures: “the word of God lives and abides forever,” and again: “the word of the Lord endures forever. Now this is the word which by the gospel was preached to you” (1Peter 1:23-25). We will consider how God could use human vessels in such a manner so as to produce His infallible and inerrant Word without overriding their own will, in the next article.
3. The Scriptures, being the Word of God, cannot err.
Since God is perfect and the Scriptures are breathed out from Him, it logically follows that they are perfect and true in all that they affirm. That is why the psalmist could say: “The entirety of Your word is truth” (Ps 119:160), and Jesus reaffirmed the words of the psalmist, saying to the Father:
“I have given them Your word… 17 Sanctify them by Your truth. Your word is truth.” (John 17:14,17)
Jesus told the Father that He had given them His Word. This is in agreement with what Jesus told His disciples after His resurrection, reminding them that during His earthly ministry He had taught them all things concerning Him from the Scriptures (Luke 24:44-45). Note also that Jesus didn’t simply say that His Word contains truth, as many who deny inerrancy would argue, but rather that His Word is truth.
4. The denial of inerrancy undermines Scripture’s authority.
The final argument I want to present here for contending for the inerrancy of Scripture is that denying inerrancy undermines the Scripture’s authority as the Word of God. Some “Partial Inerrantists” (as if such an oxymoron were logically possible), argue that it is not necessary that the Scriptures be free of error on non-essentials, as long as the central truths of Christ’s life, death and resurrection are recognized as undeniable historical facts.
However, since the very beginning when the serpent tempted Eve to doubt God’s Word with the question, “Did God really say?”, history has demonstrated time after time that doubting God’s Word on one point is like cutting the one thread that holds all truth together, and inevitably one’s faith begins to unravel little by little until one reaches the point where he begins to doubt the most fundamental truths, such as the resurrection of Christ or even the very existence of God. Instead of letting God be true and every man a liar, as Paul said, many have arrived to the point where they believe man and doubt God.
That is why Jude said that we must earnestly contend for the faith once and for all delivered to us in the Holy Scriptures. He said:
“Beloved, while I was very diligent to write to you concerning our common salvation, I found it necessary to write to you exhorting you to contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints. 4 For certain men have crept in unnoticed, who long ago were marked out for this condemnation, ungodly men, who turn the grace of our God into lewdness and deny the only Lord God and our Lord Jesus Christ.” (Jude 3-4).
Also, Paul was shown that in the latter days many would depart from the faith once and for all delivered to the saints, giving heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of demons, exchanging the truth of God for myths or mysticism (1Tim 4:1; cf. 2Tim 4:4). Today, even more than in those days, we are living in a time when it is not socially acceptable to contend earnestly for anything, much less for the faith or that body of truth once and for all delivered to the saints which we have preserved for us in the Bible. Now, doubtlessly more than at any time in history, ungodly scholars are subverting the Scriptures and turning the grace of God into a license for immorality, even denying the Deity of our Lord Jesus Christ and His substitutionary death as our Redeemer.
Paul, just as Judas, said to Timothy: “Hold fast the pattern of sound words which you have heard from me, in faith and love which are in Christ Jesus. 14 That good thing which was committed to you, keep by the Holy Spirit who dwells in us” (2 Tim 1:13-14). The only way in which we are going to be able to hold fast that pattern of sound words which has been once and for all delivered to us in the form of the Holy Scriptures is to continue insisting with the psalmist that the entirety of His Word is truth and that we are to live by every word which proceeds from the mouth of God, having been breathed out by the Holy Spirit Himself, and preserved for us in the original languages of the “Sacred Writings (2Tim 3:15, τα ιερα γραμματα ), or what we today call the Holy Bible, which is also derived from the Greek τα ιερα βιβλία, which means, “the Sacred Book”).
I would remind those who feel that our generation is too enlightened to believe such things of the testimony of the Church Fathers which I cited in the previous article. It wasn’t until the age of Enlightenment, beginning in the seventeenth century, that men began to consider themselves too enlightened to believe that the Bible is what it claims to be. In this present age, many have set themselves as judges of God and His Word, rather than acknowledging Him as their Judge and only Sovereign. But those who truly know Him as Lord, today as always, submit themselves unconditionally to His absolute authority in all matters of faith and practice.
It is my prayer that a new generation will arise who, rather than questioning and despising His Word, would say with the psalmist:
“I love Your commandments more than gold, yes, than fine gold! Therefore all Your precepts concerning all things I consider to be right.” (Ps 119:127-128)
“The words of the Lord are pure words, like silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.” “Every word of God is pure.” (Ps 12:6; Prov 30:5)
[1] 2015 Word of Grace Annual Conference - Brian Zahnd - Session 1 video 11:47 min.
We saw in the previous blog that the Church Fathers, as well as every prominent leader within the Church throughout its history, have firmly and unequivocally defended the inerrancy of Scripture against its critics who, for one reason or the other, have sought to undermine its credibility. It has been a conviction so strong that many have been willing to die for it, even in our day, risking their lives in order to possess or distribute the Holy Bible into Communist or Islamic countries, considering it to actually be what it claims to be, the Word of God.
However, many Progressive Christians today consider the inerrancy of Scripture to be irrelevant and divisive in our Postmodern, relativistic and all-inclusive culture. Some, often use the catchphrase: “I follow Jesus, not the Bible,” without considering what Jesus Himself taught concerning the Holy Scriptures. In reality, that saying shows more contempt for the Bible than it does reverence of Christ. Brian Zahnd, in his typically sardonic, sanctimonious style, expresses the not-so-subtle contempt for the doctrine so prevalent among Progressives when he says: “I do believe in the inspired, infallible Word of God, and His name is Jesus.” [1]
However, they fail to take into account that, when Jesus used the word “Word,” He was always referring to the Scriptures, not Himself. Indeed, Jesus is only referred to as the Word by John, and even then John only uses the term in that manner four times (Jn 1:1,14; 1Jn 1:1; 5:7; Rev 19:13). It is often unmistakable that John is referring to the Scriptures as the Word of God, rather than Christ, as we see clearly demonstrated in John 10:35 where Jesus Himself said: “If He called them gods, to whom the word of God (ο λογος του θεου) came, and the Scripture cannot be broken…” Here Jesus Himself is referring to the Scriptures as the Word of God, not Himself (cf. Jn 17:6,14,17). I consider the fallacies of this indirect argument against the authority of Scripture in my blog, “What does the word ‘Word’ mean to Jesus.”
In this article, we will be considering four primary reasons why we should insist upon the inerrancy of Scripture in its entirety.
1. Jesus Himself affirmed the Authority and Inerrancy of Scripture as the very Word of God.
For me personally, this, combined with the inner testimony of the Spirit, has been my primary motive for believing in and defending the inerrancy of Scripture from the moment of my first encounter with Christ more than 55 years ago. It may be possible for one to know Christ as Savior without affirming the inerrancy of Scripture. However, taking into consideration His teaching on the subject, I don’t believe it is possible to be a true disciple of Jesus while at the same time disagreeing with Him on this vital subject. Jesus made numerous affirmations concerning the Scriptures.
(1) The Scriptures are from the mouth of God.
Jesus said: “It is written, ‘Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God’” (Matt 4:4). That He is to be understood as referring to the Scriptures is clear, considering that Paul later said that all Scripture is “breathed out from God (θεόπνευστος)” (2Tim 3:16). They also understood that the Scriptures were the result of the Holy Spirit speaking through holy men of God like David and Isaiah (Acts 1:16; 28:25; 2Peter 1:21).
(2) The Scriptures are infallible.
Jesus said of the Scriptures that they were the infallible “Word of God” and therefore they cannot be broken (Jn 10:35). He said that all that is written in the Scriptures must be fulfilled (Mark 14:49: Luke 24:44), and that it would be easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for even one jot or tittle of Scripture to pass away unfulfilled (Matt 5:18).
(3) The Scriptures are inerrant.
Jesus said that Scripture is the Word of God and that it is truth (Jn 17:17, cf. Ps 119:160; Pro 30:5). If it is truth, then logically, it cannot contain error. Based upon the fact that the entirety of God’s Word is truth, Jesus said that any doctrinal error is due to our ignorance of the Scriptures rather than the other way around (Matt 22:29).
(4) The “Word of God” can be invalidated by tradition.
We already saw in John 10:35 that Jesus considered the Scriptures to be the “Word of God,” saying that they cannot be broken. He further accused the Scribes and Pharisees of invalidating the “Word of God” with their traditions (Mark 7:13). What Jesus was insisting upon was that man is to live by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God, rather than submitting to manmade traditions which often make the Word of God of no effect.
(5) The Scriptures have a unified Christocentric message.
One of the strongest testimonies to the divine authorship of the Old Testament Scriptures is the consistency of its underlying theme of redemption in Christ, the Messiah. It was written by many different human authors of distinct backgrounds, and yet the overall message is one harmonious whole, revealing what would take place in their future. Only the true God who inhabits eternity is able to declare the end from the beginning, as we see Him doing throughout the Scriptures (Isa 46:9-10).
After Christ’s resurrection, He appeared to the two disciples on the road to Emmaus and explained to them how that all the Scriptures, from Genesis to Malachi, bore testimony to Him:
“And beginning at Moses and all the Prophets, He expounded to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning Himself.” (Luke 24:27)
Afterwards, He also appeared to the rest of His disciples and reminded them of how He had previously taught them from the Scriptures that everything concerning His life, death and resurrection had to be fulfilled:
“Then He said to them, ‘These are the words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things must be fulfilled which were written in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms concerning Me.’ And He opened their understanding, that they might comprehend the Scriptures.” (Luke 24:44-45)
If the Scriptures were nothing more than the fallible words and prognostications of men, or even if it were a mixture of God’s words with man’s words, Jesus wouldn’t have insisted as He did that all the Scriptures had to be fulfilled (cf. Matt 26:54,56). Why would He have needed to open their understanding to understand the Scriptures if in fact they were nothing more than the fallible words of men?
There is one passage which some Progressives have misrepresented as if Christ were depreciating the Scriptures, but, in reality, He was elevating them, saying that the Scribes and Pharisees needed to take a closer look at the Scriptures because they all bore testimony of Him. Jesus said to them:
“Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me. 40 And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life.” (John 5:39-40 KJV)
To me, it is unfortunate that many translations have rendered “Search (ερευνατε) the Scriptures,” which is the present active imperative form of the verb, as “You search the Scriptures.” Rendering it in this manner, as if it were an indicative rather than an imperative, has given place for some to misconstrue Jesus’s words as if He were depreciating the Scriptures, saying that they needed to turn from the Scriptures in order to find life in Him.
Quite the contrary! Either way one renders the phrase, Jesus was certainly not minimizing the Scriptures. He was either telling them to go back and search the Scriptures again, or else reproaching them for having searched the Scriptures all their lives and yet failed to capture its central message. He was telling them that all the Scriptures point to Him, and yet they refused to come to Him.
Jesus said that it is the goal of a disciple to become like one’s master in all things (Matt 10:24-25). If we want to be true disciples of Jesus Christ, we must desist from sitting as judges of what is true or false in the Word of God and become like Jesus, speaking of the Holy Scriptures just as He spoke of them. Otherwise, we will become like those whom Paul described as “always learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth” (2 Tim 3:7).
2. The Scriptures testimony concerning itself.
When we examine the Old Testament Scriptures, it becomes obvious that the claim that they were the Word of God, rather than merely the words of men, didn’t originate with Jesus but preceded His teachings. The final words of David are recorded for us in 2 Samuel, where it says:
“Now these are the last words of David…the sweet psalmist of Israel: ‘The Spirit of the Lord spoke by me, and His word was on my tongue.’” (2 Sam 23:1-2)
Moses likewise said concerning the Law which he received from God: “man shall not live by bread alone; but man lives by every word that proceeds from the mouth of the Lord. (Deut 8:3). So, we see that the words spoken and written by the human authors of Scripture were understood as being the very words which God wanted to be recorded.
That should not be construed as being divine dictation, as we will see with more detail in the next article. God moved upon holy men of God in such a manner that they freely spoke and wrote, yet they only wrote that which God willed, without Him dictating every word.
For example, in the Scriptures we see that we are not to hate anyone in our heart (Lev 19:17). Nowhere does Scripture teach us to hate our enemies, as does the Koran. In fact, Jesus spoke out against a Rabbinical teaching which made allowance for one to hate their enemies (Matt 5:43-48). Nevertheless, God, for example, allowed for David’s full expression of his own emotions in the Psalms, sometimes showing a passionate hatred towards God’s enemies (Ps 139:21-22).
Indeed, many of the sins and imperfections of man are intentionally recorded in the Scriptures, such as David’s adulterous relationship and murder to cover up his sin, or the false council of Job’s companions. The Scriptures record attitudes and practices which they forbid, such as hatred of one’s enemies, adultery and false testimony, but nowhere do the Scriptures affirm or teach such practices. For that reason, it is important to understand that Scripture is inerrant in all that it affirms or teaches – not in all that it records.
Coming to the New Testament epistles, we see the same view of divine inspiration as that described by David, and also by Jesus in the Gospels. Jesus, quoting Moses, said:
“It is written, ‘Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God’” (Matt 4:4). Paul states the same truth in different words, saying that “all Scripture is breathed out from God.” He said:
“But you must continue in the things which you have learned and been assured of, knowing from whom you have learned them, 15 and that from childhood you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. 16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God (θεοπνευστος, lit. “breathed out from God”) and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.” (2 Tim 3:14-17)
Paul said of the Holy Scriptures (Sacred Writings) that they are breathed out from the very mouth of God. Moses and Jesus expressed the same concept, saying that every word proceeds from the mouth of God. Therefore, God breathed out His words through human instruments in such a manner that they are said to be infallible. Peter could say, quoting Isaiah 40:6-8 concerning the Scriptures: “the word of God lives and abides forever,” and again: “the word of the Lord endures forever. Now this is the word which by the gospel was preached to you” (1Peter 1:23-25). We will consider how God could use human vessels in such a manner so as to produce His infallible and inerrant Word without overriding their own will, in the next article.
3. The Scriptures, being the Word of God, cannot err.
Since God is perfect and the Scriptures are breathed out from Him, it logically follows that they are perfect and true in all that they affirm. That is why the psalmist could say: “The entirety of Your word is truth” (Ps 119:160), and Jesus reaffirmed the words of the psalmist, saying to the Father:
“I have given them Your word… 17 Sanctify them by Your truth. Your word is truth.” (John 17:14,17)
Jesus told the Father that He had given them His Word. This is in agreement with what Jesus told His disciples after His resurrection, reminding them that during His earthly ministry He had taught them all things concerning Him from the Scriptures (Luke 24:44-45). Note also that Jesus didn’t simply say that His Word contains truth, as many who deny inerrancy would argue, but rather that His Word is truth.
4. The denial of inerrancy undermines Scripture’s authority.
The final argument I want to present here for contending for the inerrancy of Scripture is that denying inerrancy undermines the Scripture’s authority as the Word of God. Some “Partial Inerrantists” (as if such an oxymoron were logically possible), argue that it is not necessary that the Scriptures be free of error on non-essentials, as long as the central truths of Christ’s life, death and resurrection are recognized as undeniable historical facts.
However, since the very beginning when the serpent tempted Eve to doubt God’s Word with the question, “Did God really say?”, history has demonstrated time after time that doubting God’s Word on one point is like cutting the one thread that holds all truth together, and inevitably one’s faith begins to unravel little by little until one reaches the point where he begins to doubt the most fundamental truths, such as the resurrection of Christ or even the very existence of God. Instead of letting God be true and every man a liar, as Paul said, many have arrived to the point where they believe man and doubt God.
That is why Jude said that we must earnestly contend for the faith once and for all delivered to us in the Holy Scriptures. He said:
“Beloved, while I was very diligent to write to you concerning our common salvation, I found it necessary to write to you exhorting you to contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints. 4 For certain men have crept in unnoticed, who long ago were marked out for this condemnation, ungodly men, who turn the grace of our God into lewdness and deny the only Lord God and our Lord Jesus Christ.” (Jude 3-4).
Also, Paul was shown that in the latter days many would depart from the faith once and for all delivered to the saints, giving heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of demons, exchanging the truth of God for myths or mysticism (1Tim 4:1; cf. 2Tim 4:4). Today, even more than in those days, we are living in a time when it is not socially acceptable to contend earnestly for anything, much less for the faith or that body of truth once and for all delivered to the saints which we have preserved for us in the Bible. Now, doubtlessly more than at any time in history, ungodly scholars are subverting the Scriptures and turning the grace of God into a license for immorality, even denying the Deity of our Lord Jesus Christ and His substitutionary death as our Redeemer.
Paul, just as Judas, said to Timothy: “Hold fast the pattern of sound words which you have heard from me, in faith and love which are in Christ Jesus. 14 That good thing which was committed to you, keep by the Holy Spirit who dwells in us” (2 Tim 1:13-14). The only way in which we are going to be able to hold fast that pattern of sound words which has been once and for all delivered to us in the form of the Holy Scriptures is to continue insisting with the psalmist that the entirety of His Word is truth and that we are to live by every word which proceeds from the mouth of God, having been breathed out by the Holy Spirit Himself, and preserved for us in the original languages of the “Sacred Writings (2Tim 3:15, τα ιερα γραμματα ), or what we today call the Holy Bible, which is also derived from the Greek τα ιερα βιβλία, which means, “the Sacred Book”).
I would remind those who feel that our generation is too enlightened to believe such things of the testimony of the Church Fathers which I cited in the previous article. It wasn’t until the age of Enlightenment, beginning in the seventeenth century, that men began to consider themselves too enlightened to believe that the Bible is what it claims to be. In this present age, many have set themselves as judges of God and His Word, rather than acknowledging Him as their Judge and only Sovereign. But those who truly know Him as Lord, today as always, submit themselves unconditionally to His absolute authority in all matters of faith and practice.
It is my prayer that a new generation will arise who, rather than questioning and despising His Word, would say with the psalmist:
“I love Your commandments more than gold, yes, than fine gold! Therefore all Your precepts concerning all things I consider to be right.” (Ps 119:127-128)
“The words of the Lord are pure words, like silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.” “Every word of God is pure.” (Ps 12:6; Prov 30:5)
[1] 2015 Word of Grace Annual Conference - Brian Zahnd - Session 1 video 11:47 min.
- Published on
by George Sidney Hurd
This is the first of a series of four articles in which I will be considering the doctrine of the inerrancy of the Holy Scriptures. I would normally begin by arguing from the testimony of Jesus and the Scriptures themselves as to their own infallibility. Indeed, that has been the common approach among scholars who defend the inspiration and authority of the Bible in the past.
However, due to a recent approach in the assault against inerrancy, I felt the need to begin by citing the position of the Early Church Fathers, as well as other prominent figures throughout Church History on the subject of inerrancy.
Towards the end of the 19th century, two prominent Princeton scholars, A. A. Hodge and B. B. Warfield, earnestly defended the doctrine of inerrancy against the rising tide of Liberal higher critics who, through the influence of Modernism, sought to discredit all things supernatural, including the divine inspiration of the sacred text. In response to their defense of inerrancy, the 1923 the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church claimed that inerrancy was invented by the Princeton scholars. This claim gained widespread acceptance among the Neo-Orthodox and Progressives beginning in 1979 with the publication of the book, “The Authority and Interpretation of the Bible: An Historical Approach,” coauthored by Jack Rogers of Fuller Seminary and Donald McKim of Dubuque Theological Seminary.
However, as will be seen in the following quotes, this claim is demonstrably false and calls into question the intellectual integrity of those scholars who knowingly promoted such revisionist statements concerning the historic position of the Church on this all-important subject.
The Early Fathers were defending the authority and inerrancy of the Scriptures against the Gnostics and other heretics such as Celsus and Porphyry who attacked the Scriptures, much as do modern-day skeptics like Bart Ehrman and Richard Dawkins. As a result of this, we find a great abundance of affirmations concerning the inerrancy of Scripture in their writings. However, for brevity, I will only cite and briefly comment on a few leading voices within the Church throughout its history. The few I cite here will more than adequately demonstrate that the allegation that the concept of biblical inerrancy was a recent invention of Benjamin Warfield and A. A. Hodge a little over a century ago, is false.
The Early Church
Clement of Rome (35 - 99AD) Clement, who became the bishop of Rome right after Paul and Peter’s martyrdom, is the nearest in time to the Apostles and the completion of the New Testament, and so his view of inspiration most likely reflects that of the Apostles. He said:
“Look carefully into the Scriptures, which are the true utterances of the Holy Spirit. Observe that nothing of an unjust or counterfeit character is written in them.” [1]
At this early date we see that the Apostolic Fathers considered the Scriptures to have been the infallible utterances of the Holy Spirit, speaking through its human authors. In saying nothing in Scripture is “counterfeit” (Gr. parapepoimenon), it is evident that he considered the Scriptures to be inerrant.
Justin Martyr (100 – 165AD), recognizing the divine source of Scripture, does not allow for any real contradictions in the Bible. He said:
“since I am entirely convinced that no Scripture contradicts another, I shall admit rather that I do not understand what is recorded, and shall strive to persuade those who imagine that the Scriptures are contradictory, to be rather of the same opinion as myself.” [2]
Those who today deny inerrancy, do so based upon perceived errors and contradictions within the Scriptures. In contrast to this, Justin Martyr was convinced that the Scriptures were one harmonious whole, without any contradictions. He, as other Early Fathers, compares the process of divine inspiration to that of the Master Musician using the human authors as a musical instrument in such a way as to produce a perfectly harmonious melody. He said:
“For neither by nature nor by human conception is it possible for men to know things so great and divine, but by the gift which then descended from above upon the holy men, who had no need of rhetorical art, nor of uttering anything in a contentious or quarrelsome manner, but to present themselves pure to the energy of the Divine Spirit, in order that the divine plectrum itself, descending from heaven, and using righteous men as an instrument like a harp or lyre, might reveal to us the knowledge of things divine and heavenly.” [3]
He then further alludes to 2Peter 1:20-21, saying:
“When you hear the utterances of the prophets spoken as it were personally, you must not suppose that they were spoken by the inspired themselves, but by the Divine Word who moves them.” [4]
This is in agreement with Peter’s words when he said that no prophecy of Scripture is merely man’s interpretations, but rather, holy men of God spoke as they were born-along by the Holy Spirit.
Irenaeus (115–202AD), in his writings “Against Heresies,” insists that the Scriptures must be regarded as perfect since God Himself is its ultimate author:
“If, however, we cannot discover explanations of all those things in Scripture which are made the subject of investigation, yet let us not on that account seek after any other God besides Him who really exists. For this is the very greatest impiety. We should leave things of that nature to God who created us, being most properly assured that the Scriptures are indeed perfect, since they were spoken by the Word of God and His Spirit…” [5]
Certainly, Irenaeus would not have called the Holy Scriptures perfect unless he believed in their inerrancy. To him, arguing that the Scriptures were imperfect, containing error, would be tantamount to attributing error to God Himself, since God was its author.
Athenagoras (133–190AD) also presents the Holy Spirit as moving upon the human authors as a musician playing musical instruments to produce a flawless melody. He said:
“It would be irrational for us to cease to believe in the Spirit from God, who moved the mouths of the prophets like musical instruments, and to give heed to mere human opinions.” [6]
He further describes the process of divine inspiration, saying that the human authors were “lifted in ecstasy above the natural operations of their minds by the impulses of the Divine Spirit, uttering the things with which they were inspired, the Spirit making use of them as a flute player.” [7] To him and the rest of the Fathers, it was unthinkable that the Divine Spirit could produce a flawed melody.
Clement of Alexandria (150–215AD) affirms the infallible, verbal, plenary nature of divine inspiration when he says:
“I could adduce ten thousand Scriptures of which not ‘one tittle shall pass away’ without being fulfilled; for the mouth of the Lord the Holy Spirit hath spoken these things.” [8] He further said that they were an “infallible criterion of faith.” [9]
Not even the Princetonians Hodge and Warfield could have expressed the doctrine of inerrancy with more specific terms than those used here by Clement.
Origen (184 – 254 AD) says concerning the verbal, plenary nature of inspiration:
“We cannot say of the writings of the Holy Spirit that anything in them is useless or superfluous, even if they seem to some obscure.” [10]
He further compares the Scriptures to a perfectly tuned musical instrument, and says that those who think they contain errors are simply lacking in understanding or unwilling to learn. He says:
“there is in the Divine oracles nothing crooked or perverse, for they are all plain to those who understand… That which appears to others to be a conflict in the Scriptures is no conflict… All the Scripture is the one perfect and harmonized instrument of God, which from different sounds gives forth one saving voice to those willing to learn.” [11]
Tertullian (160–220AD), affirms the verbal and plenary nature of the inspiration of Scripture down to the letter when he says:
“The Divine Scripture has made us united in one body; the very letters are our glue.”[12]
This is reminiscent of Jesus’ words when He said that we are to live by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God and that not one jot nor tittle would pass without being fulfilled (Matt 4:4; 5:18).
Caius (180–217AD) does not spare words in denouncing those who denied the inerrancy of the Scriptures. He said:
“For either they do not believe that the divine Scriptures were dictated by the Holy Spirit, and are thus infidels; or they think themselves wiser than the Holy Spirit, and what are they then but demoniacs?” [13]
Athanasius of Alexandria (293–373AD), speaking out against those who denied the inerrancy of Scripture, expresses himself just as any defender of the infallibility of Scripture would today. He said:
“Now it is the opinion of some, that the Scriptures do not agree together, or that God, who gave the commandment, is false. But there is no disagreement whatever, far from it, neither can the Father, Who is truth, lie.” [14]
The argument of Athanasius in response to the critics of his day was that, because God Himself is the author of Scripture, it cannot contain any error or real contradictions in anything it affirms.
John Chrysostom (349–407AD), clearly understood Scripture to be verbally and plenarily inspired, right down to the very syllables, as well as the tenses and moods of its verbs, since its author was the Holy Spirit. He said:
“Let us act so as to interpret everything precisely and instruct you not to pass by even a brief phrase or single syllable contained in the Holy Scriptures. After all they are not simply words, but words of the Holy Spirit, and hence the treasure to be found in even a single syllable is great.” [15] He further says, “For the Scripture by no means speaks falsely.” [16]
Commenting on John 12:39-41, Chrysostom refers to the Scriptures as inerrant when he says, “He (Isaiah) desires hence to establish by many proofs the unerring truth of Scripture, and that what Isaiah foretold fell not out otherwise, but as he said.” [17]
So much for the claim that the doctrine of inerrancy is the recent invention of radical Princetonian Fundamentalists!
Gregory of Nazianzus (329–390AD), who is widely considered one of the greatest theologians of all time, also defended the verbal plenary inspiration of Scripture. He said:
“We, however, who extend the accuracy of the Spirit to the merest stroke and tittle, will never admit to the impious assertion that even the smallest matters were dealt with haphazard by those who have recorded them, and have thus been borne in mind down to the present day.” [18]
Basil the Great (330–379AD). Contrary to how some today would interpret 2Timothy 3:16, Basil specifically includes the entirety of Scripture, including both the Old and New Testaments, as inspired or God-breathed (θεόπνευστος). He says:
“Never neglect reading, especially of the New Testament... Just so, all Scripture is God inspired and profitable, and there is nothing in it unclean.” [19]
Gregory of Nyssa (331-395AD) agrees with his brother Basil, saying that the entirety of the Holy Scriptures are God-breathed and therefore inerrant. He says:
“Thus it is by the power of the Spirit that the holy men who are under Divine influence are inspired, and every Scripture is for this reason said to be ‘given by inspiration of God,’ because it is the teaching of the Divine afflatus.” [20]
Elsewhere he says: “Whatever the Divine Scripture says is the voice of the Holy Spirit.” [21] And then, “the Scripture does not lie.” [22]
Jerome (347–420AD), while notorious for his inconsistency and indecisiveness, nevertheless says:
“I am not, I repeat, so ignorant as to suppose that any of the Lord’s words is either in need of correction or is not divinely inspired.” [23]
Saying that none of the Lord’s words need correction is just another way of affirming the inerrancy of Scripture.
The Medieval Church
Augustine (354–430AD). Entering into the Medieval period of Church history, beginning with Augustine, we see that they were no less emphatic concerning the divine source and inerrancy of the Scriptures than the Early Fathers. Augustine writes:
“For it seems to me that the most disastrous consequences must follow upon our believing that anything false is found in the sacred books: that is to say, that the men by whom the Scripture has been given to us, and committed to writing, did put down in these books anything false… For if you once admit into such a high sanctuary of authority one false statement… there will not be left a single sentence of those books which, if appearing to any one difficult in practice or hard to believe, may not by the same fatal rule be explained away, as a statement in which, intentionally...the author declared what was not true.” [24]
Elsewhere he writes:
“For I confess to your Charity that I have learned to yield this respect and honor only to the canonical books of Scripture: of these alone do I most firmly believe that the authors were completely free from error. And if in these writings I am perplexed by anything which appears to me opposed to truth, I do not hesitate to suppose that either the manuscript is faulty, or the translator has not caught the meaning of what was said, or I myself have failed to understand it.” [25]
Here we see that Augustine believed that only the original autographs were inspired, just as those who affirm the inerrancy of Scripture today. Also, since he knew little Greek, he was largely dependent upon Jerome’s Latin translation. He further says:
“the authority of the Divine Scriptures becomes unsettled (so that every one may believe what he wishes, and reject what he does not wish) if this be once admitted, that the men by whom these things have been delivered unto us, could in their writings state some things which were not true…” [26]
Clearly, if Augustine was convinced that the human authors, being under divine inspiration, were incapable of writing things which were not true, then he believed in the inerrancy of the Scriptures.
Anselm of Canterbury (1033–1109) states that any perceived error in the Holy Scriptures is in fact an error of his own understanding of them, rather than an error in the Scriptures themselves. He said:
“For I am sure that, if I say anything which is undoubtedly contradictory to Holy Scripture, what I say is wrong; and, if I become aware of such a contradiction, I do not wish to hold to that opinion.” [27]
Thomas Aquinas (1225–1274). Article two of the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy states: “Holy Scripture, being God’s own Word, written by men prepared and superintended by His Spirit, is of infallible divine authority in all matters upon which it touches: it is to be believed, as God’s instruction, in all that it affirms.” This is in agreement with what Thomas Aquinas affirmed, as can be seen in the following quotes:
“It is plain that nothing false can ever underlie the literal sense of Holy Writ.” [28]
“other disciplines derive their certitude from the natural light of human reason, which can err, whereas theology derives its certitude from the light of the divine knowledge, which cannot be misled.” [29]
The Church of the Reformation
Martin Luther (1483–1546). Contrary to what some would affirm, Martin Luther also clearly believed in the inerrancy of Scripture. He said that the Scriptures “never erred” and “cannot err.” [30] In other words, the Scriptures are both inerrant (do not err), and infallible (cannot err). That is no different from what present-day Conservative Christians affirm. The following quotes further substantiate his firm belief in inerrancy:
“But everyone, indeed, knows that at times they [the Fathers] have erred as men will; therefore I am ready to trust them only when they prove their opinions from Scripture, which has never erred.” [31]
“It is impossible that Scripture should contradict itself, only that it so appears to the senseless and obstinate hypocrites.” [32]
“Whoever is so bold that he ventures to accuse God of fraud and deception in a single word and does so willfully again and again after he has been warned and instructed once or twice will likewise certainly venture to accuse God of fraud and deception in all of His words. Therefore it is true, absolutely and without exception, that everything is believed or nothing is believed. The Holy Spirit does not suffer Himself to be separated or divided so that He should teach and cause to be believed one doctrine rightly and another falsely.” [33]
“One little point of doctrine means more than heaven and earth, and therefore we cannot suffer to have the least jot thereof violated.” [34]
“For it is established by God’s Word that God does not lie, nor does His word lie.” [35]
While Luther recognized that there were difficult texts that he had no explanation for, his confidence in the inerrancy of the Holy Scriptures as God’s Word was unwavering.
John Calvin (1509–1564). Contrary to the nuanced approaches to inspiration presented by Progressives today who ironically claim to affirm “inerrancy” while at the same time denying it, Calvin stands firm in his conviction that the Old Testament is not the mere words of Moses and the Prophets, but the very words of God Himself. Commenting on 2 Timothy 3:16, he says:
“…we know that God hath spoken to us, and are fully convinced that the prophets did not speak at their own suggestion, but that, being organs of the Holy Spirit, they only uttered what they had been commissioned from heaven to declare. Whoever then wishes to profit in the Scriptures, let him first of all, lay down this as a settled point, that the Law and the Prophets are not a doctrine delivered according to the will and pleasure of men, but dictated by the Holy Spirit. Moses and the prophets did not utter at random what we have received from their hand, but, speaking at the suggestion of God, they boldly and fearlessly testified, what was actually true, that it was the mouth of the Lord that spake… Accordingly, we need not wonder if there are many who doubt as to the Author of the Scripture; for, although the majesty of God is displayed in it, yet none but those who have been enlightened by the Holy Spirit have eyes to perceive what ought, indeed, to have been visible to all… We owe to the Scripture the same reverence which we owe to God; because it has proceeded from him alone, and has nothing belonging to man mixed with it.” [36]
Heinrich Bullinger (1504–1575). Lastly, Heinrich Bullinger, the Swiss Reformer and successor of Zwingli, is in agreement with the Church Fathers throughout all history concerning the inerrancy of Scripture when he says:
“all the words of God are true, steadfast, and undoubted. For heaven and earth shall pass away, but the eternal word of God shall never perish, nor shall one jot or tittle fall from it.” [37]
Charles Haddon Spurgeon (1834–1892):
I would like to cite one final quote by Charles Haddon Spurgeon, since he ministered during the generation just prior to the Princetonians A. A. Hodge and B. B. Warfield, whom the critics of inerrancy claim were the inventors of the doctrine. Spurgeon says concerning the inerrancy of the Bible:
“I believe that there is no mistake whatever in the original Holy Scriptures from beginning to end. There may be, and there are, mistakes of translation; for translators are not inspired; but even the historical facts are correct. Doubt has been cast upon them here and there, and at times with great show of reason—doubt which it has been impossible to meet for a season; but only give space enough, and search enough, and the stones buried in the earth cry out to confirm each letter of Scripture. Old manuscripts, coins, and inscriptions, are on the side of the Book, and against it there are nothing but theories, and the fact that many an event in history has no other record but that which the Book affords us. The Book has been of late in the furnace of criticism; but much of that furnace has grown cold from the fact that the criticism is beneath contempt. ‘The words of the Lord are pure words’: there is not an error of any sort in the whole compass of them. These words come from him who can make no mistake, and who can have no wish to deceive his creatures. If I did not believe in the infallibility of the Book, I would rather be without it. If I am to judge the Book, it is no judge of me. If I am to sift it, like the heap on the threshing-floor, and lay this aside and only accept that, according to my own judgment, then I have no guidance whatever, unless I have conceit enough to trust to my own heart. The new theory denies infallibility to the words of God, but practically imputes it to the judgments of men; at least, this is all the infallibility which they can get at. I protest that I will rather risk my soul with a guide inspired from heaven, than with the differing leaders who arise from the earth at the call of “modern thought.” [38]
Conclusion
So according to Spurgeon, and history bears him witness, what is actually a “new theory” is not the doctrine of inerrancy, but the denial of inerrancy. We have already seen abundant testimony that, all through history, the Church has unanimously held to the inerrancy of the Scriptures until recent times.
Paul actually saw our day and forewarned us, saying:
“Preach the word! Be ready in season and out of season. Convince, rebuke, exhort, with all longsuffering and teaching. 3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine, but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; 4 and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables.” (2 Tim 4:2-4)
Jude enjoins us to “contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints.” (Jude 3). The faith once and for all delivered to the saints is that body of truth which we have contained in the Holy Scriptures. Paul foresaw our day and warned us, saying:
“Now the Spirit expressly says that in latter times some will depart from the faith, giving heed to deceiving spirits and doctrines of demons, speaking lies in hypocrisy, having their own conscience seared with a hot iron.” (1Tim 4:1-2)
Paul said that false teachers would speak lies in hypocrisy, having their conscience seared. This, to me, is an apt description of those scholars in our day who have made the false claim that inerrancy is a new invention. I am taken aback by the degree of intellectual dishonesty that would be required in order for one to meticulously comb through all the writings of the Church Fathers, passing over all of their clear affirmations of the inerrancy of Scripture in their search of a few scant quotes which could be misconstrued as implying that they did not believe what they most adamantly affirm throughout all their writings.
Whatever one’s view concerning the inerrancy of Scripture, it is outright deception to try to gain an advantage against those of us who uphold the Scripture’s own testimony concerning itself by falsely claiming that the doctrine of inerrancy is a new doctrine.
Having demonstrated this popular presenting argument against inerrancy to be false, in the next article we will see why the Church Fathers unanimously believed in the inerrancy of the Scriptures, and we will consider in what manner they were inspired of the Holy Spirit.
[1] 1 Clement 45:3
[2] Dialogue with Trypho, a Jew, LXV in Ante-Nicene Fathers, edited by Philip Schaff (Peabody: Hendrickson Publishers, 1999), 1:230
[3] Horatory Address to the Greeks, VIII in ibid., 276.
[4] The First Apology, XXXVI in ibid., 175.
[5] Against Heresies, II.XXVIII.2 in ibid., 399. See also III.V.1, 417.
[6] A Plea for Christians, VII in Ante-Nicene Fathers, 2:132.
[7] Ibid., IX, 133.
[8] Exhortation to the Heathen, IX in ibid., 195.
[9] Stromata, II.IV in ibid., 349–50.
[10] Origen, Homily 27. 1.7.
[11] Origen, book II volume IX, Commentary on Matthew
[12] On Modesty, V in ibid., 78.
[13] Fragments, III in Ibid., 5:602.
[14] Letter XIX.3 in ibid., 546.
[15] Homily 15.3 in Homilies on Genesis 1–17, translated by Robert C. Hill (Washington, DC: Catholic University of America Press, 1986), 195.
[16] “Concerning the Statues,” II.22 in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, edited by Philip Schaff (Peabody: Hendrickson Publishers, 1999), 9:352.
[17] Homily LXVIII, in Ibid., 14:252.
[18] “Orations,” II.105, in Ibid., 7:225.
[19] Letter XLII.3, in Ibid., 8:145.
[20] “Against Eunomius,” VII.1, in Ibid., 5:193.
[21] Our God-Breathed Book, John R. Rice, Sword of the Lord, 2000, 143
[22] Against Eunomius,” VII.2.
[23] Epistles, XXVII.1, in Ibid., 6:44.
[24] Letter XXVIII.3 in Ibid., 1:251–52.
[25] Letter LXXXII.3 in Ibid., 350
[26] Letter XXVIII.3 in Ibid., 1:252.
[27] Why God Became Man, in Anselm of Canterbury: The Major Works (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008), 298.
[28] The Summa Theologica of St. Thomas Aquinas, part. 1, question 1, article 10 (New York: Benziger Brothers, 1948), 7.
[29] Ibid., p1.q1.a5, 3.
[30] Works of Martin Luther (St. Louis, MO: Concordia Publishing House, 1968), XV:1481; XIX:1073.
[31] Ibid., XXXII:11.
[32] Ibid., IX:650
[33] D. Martin Luthers Werke: kritische Gesammtausgabe (Weimar: Hermann Böhlaus Nachfolger, 1928), 54:158.
[34] Works of Martin Luther, IX:650
[35] Ibid., XX:798
[36] Calvin’s Commentaries, 2Timothy 3:16.
[37] “Letter CCCLIII” from 24 August 1554 in Original Letters Relative to the English Reformation, volume 2, edited and translated by Hastings Robinson (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1847), 750.
[38] “The Bible Tried and Proved,” preached on 5 May 1889. Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit (Pasadena, TX: Pilgrim Publications, 1975), 35:253–64
This is the first of a series of four articles in which I will be considering the doctrine of the inerrancy of the Holy Scriptures. I would normally begin by arguing from the testimony of Jesus and the Scriptures themselves as to their own infallibility. Indeed, that has been the common approach among scholars who defend the inspiration and authority of the Bible in the past.
However, due to a recent approach in the assault against inerrancy, I felt the need to begin by citing the position of the Early Church Fathers, as well as other prominent figures throughout Church History on the subject of inerrancy.
Towards the end of the 19th century, two prominent Princeton scholars, A. A. Hodge and B. B. Warfield, earnestly defended the doctrine of inerrancy against the rising tide of Liberal higher critics who, through the influence of Modernism, sought to discredit all things supernatural, including the divine inspiration of the sacred text. In response to their defense of inerrancy, the 1923 the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church claimed that inerrancy was invented by the Princeton scholars. This claim gained widespread acceptance among the Neo-Orthodox and Progressives beginning in 1979 with the publication of the book, “The Authority and Interpretation of the Bible: An Historical Approach,” coauthored by Jack Rogers of Fuller Seminary and Donald McKim of Dubuque Theological Seminary.
However, as will be seen in the following quotes, this claim is demonstrably false and calls into question the intellectual integrity of those scholars who knowingly promoted such revisionist statements concerning the historic position of the Church on this all-important subject.
The Early Fathers were defending the authority and inerrancy of the Scriptures against the Gnostics and other heretics such as Celsus and Porphyry who attacked the Scriptures, much as do modern-day skeptics like Bart Ehrman and Richard Dawkins. As a result of this, we find a great abundance of affirmations concerning the inerrancy of Scripture in their writings. However, for brevity, I will only cite and briefly comment on a few leading voices within the Church throughout its history. The few I cite here will more than adequately demonstrate that the allegation that the concept of biblical inerrancy was a recent invention of Benjamin Warfield and A. A. Hodge a little over a century ago, is false.
The Early Church
Clement of Rome (35 - 99AD) Clement, who became the bishop of Rome right after Paul and Peter’s martyrdom, is the nearest in time to the Apostles and the completion of the New Testament, and so his view of inspiration most likely reflects that of the Apostles. He said:
“Look carefully into the Scriptures, which are the true utterances of the Holy Spirit. Observe that nothing of an unjust or counterfeit character is written in them.” [1]
At this early date we see that the Apostolic Fathers considered the Scriptures to have been the infallible utterances of the Holy Spirit, speaking through its human authors. In saying nothing in Scripture is “counterfeit” (Gr. parapepoimenon), it is evident that he considered the Scriptures to be inerrant.
Justin Martyr (100 – 165AD), recognizing the divine source of Scripture, does not allow for any real contradictions in the Bible. He said:
“since I am entirely convinced that no Scripture contradicts another, I shall admit rather that I do not understand what is recorded, and shall strive to persuade those who imagine that the Scriptures are contradictory, to be rather of the same opinion as myself.” [2]
Those who today deny inerrancy, do so based upon perceived errors and contradictions within the Scriptures. In contrast to this, Justin Martyr was convinced that the Scriptures were one harmonious whole, without any contradictions. He, as other Early Fathers, compares the process of divine inspiration to that of the Master Musician using the human authors as a musical instrument in such a way as to produce a perfectly harmonious melody. He said:
“For neither by nature nor by human conception is it possible for men to know things so great and divine, but by the gift which then descended from above upon the holy men, who had no need of rhetorical art, nor of uttering anything in a contentious or quarrelsome manner, but to present themselves pure to the energy of the Divine Spirit, in order that the divine plectrum itself, descending from heaven, and using righteous men as an instrument like a harp or lyre, might reveal to us the knowledge of things divine and heavenly.” [3]
He then further alludes to 2Peter 1:20-21, saying:
“When you hear the utterances of the prophets spoken as it were personally, you must not suppose that they were spoken by the inspired themselves, but by the Divine Word who moves them.” [4]
This is in agreement with Peter’s words when he said that no prophecy of Scripture is merely man’s interpretations, but rather, holy men of God spoke as they were born-along by the Holy Spirit.
Irenaeus (115–202AD), in his writings “Against Heresies,” insists that the Scriptures must be regarded as perfect since God Himself is its ultimate author:
“If, however, we cannot discover explanations of all those things in Scripture which are made the subject of investigation, yet let us not on that account seek after any other God besides Him who really exists. For this is the very greatest impiety. We should leave things of that nature to God who created us, being most properly assured that the Scriptures are indeed perfect, since they were spoken by the Word of God and His Spirit…” [5]
Certainly, Irenaeus would not have called the Holy Scriptures perfect unless he believed in their inerrancy. To him, arguing that the Scriptures were imperfect, containing error, would be tantamount to attributing error to God Himself, since God was its author.
Athenagoras (133–190AD) also presents the Holy Spirit as moving upon the human authors as a musician playing musical instruments to produce a flawless melody. He said:
“It would be irrational for us to cease to believe in the Spirit from God, who moved the mouths of the prophets like musical instruments, and to give heed to mere human opinions.” [6]
He further describes the process of divine inspiration, saying that the human authors were “lifted in ecstasy above the natural operations of their minds by the impulses of the Divine Spirit, uttering the things with which they were inspired, the Spirit making use of them as a flute player.” [7] To him and the rest of the Fathers, it was unthinkable that the Divine Spirit could produce a flawed melody.
Clement of Alexandria (150–215AD) affirms the infallible, verbal, plenary nature of divine inspiration when he says:
“I could adduce ten thousand Scriptures of which not ‘one tittle shall pass away’ without being fulfilled; for the mouth of the Lord the Holy Spirit hath spoken these things.” [8] He further said that they were an “infallible criterion of faith.” [9]
Not even the Princetonians Hodge and Warfield could have expressed the doctrine of inerrancy with more specific terms than those used here by Clement.
Origen (184 – 254 AD) says concerning the verbal, plenary nature of inspiration:
“We cannot say of the writings of the Holy Spirit that anything in them is useless or superfluous, even if they seem to some obscure.” [10]
He further compares the Scriptures to a perfectly tuned musical instrument, and says that those who think they contain errors are simply lacking in understanding or unwilling to learn. He says:
“there is in the Divine oracles nothing crooked or perverse, for they are all plain to those who understand… That which appears to others to be a conflict in the Scriptures is no conflict… All the Scripture is the one perfect and harmonized instrument of God, which from different sounds gives forth one saving voice to those willing to learn.” [11]
Tertullian (160–220AD), affirms the verbal and plenary nature of the inspiration of Scripture down to the letter when he says:
“The Divine Scripture has made us united in one body; the very letters are our glue.”[12]
This is reminiscent of Jesus’ words when He said that we are to live by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God and that not one jot nor tittle would pass without being fulfilled (Matt 4:4; 5:18).
Caius (180–217AD) does not spare words in denouncing those who denied the inerrancy of the Scriptures. He said:
“For either they do not believe that the divine Scriptures were dictated by the Holy Spirit, and are thus infidels; or they think themselves wiser than the Holy Spirit, and what are they then but demoniacs?” [13]
Athanasius of Alexandria (293–373AD), speaking out against those who denied the inerrancy of Scripture, expresses himself just as any defender of the infallibility of Scripture would today. He said:
“Now it is the opinion of some, that the Scriptures do not agree together, or that God, who gave the commandment, is false. But there is no disagreement whatever, far from it, neither can the Father, Who is truth, lie.” [14]
The argument of Athanasius in response to the critics of his day was that, because God Himself is the author of Scripture, it cannot contain any error or real contradictions in anything it affirms.
John Chrysostom (349–407AD), clearly understood Scripture to be verbally and plenarily inspired, right down to the very syllables, as well as the tenses and moods of its verbs, since its author was the Holy Spirit. He said:
“Let us act so as to interpret everything precisely and instruct you not to pass by even a brief phrase or single syllable contained in the Holy Scriptures. After all they are not simply words, but words of the Holy Spirit, and hence the treasure to be found in even a single syllable is great.” [15] He further says, “For the Scripture by no means speaks falsely.” [16]
Commenting on John 12:39-41, Chrysostom refers to the Scriptures as inerrant when he says, “He (Isaiah) desires hence to establish by many proofs the unerring truth of Scripture, and that what Isaiah foretold fell not out otherwise, but as he said.” [17]
So much for the claim that the doctrine of inerrancy is the recent invention of radical Princetonian Fundamentalists!
Gregory of Nazianzus (329–390AD), who is widely considered one of the greatest theologians of all time, also defended the verbal plenary inspiration of Scripture. He said:
“We, however, who extend the accuracy of the Spirit to the merest stroke and tittle, will never admit to the impious assertion that even the smallest matters were dealt with haphazard by those who have recorded them, and have thus been borne in mind down to the present day.” [18]
Basil the Great (330–379AD). Contrary to how some today would interpret 2Timothy 3:16, Basil specifically includes the entirety of Scripture, including both the Old and New Testaments, as inspired or God-breathed (θεόπνευστος). He says:
“Never neglect reading, especially of the New Testament... Just so, all Scripture is God inspired and profitable, and there is nothing in it unclean.” [19]
Gregory of Nyssa (331-395AD) agrees with his brother Basil, saying that the entirety of the Holy Scriptures are God-breathed and therefore inerrant. He says:
“Thus it is by the power of the Spirit that the holy men who are under Divine influence are inspired, and every Scripture is for this reason said to be ‘given by inspiration of God,’ because it is the teaching of the Divine afflatus.” [20]
Elsewhere he says: “Whatever the Divine Scripture says is the voice of the Holy Spirit.” [21] And then, “the Scripture does not lie.” [22]
Jerome (347–420AD), while notorious for his inconsistency and indecisiveness, nevertheless says:
“I am not, I repeat, so ignorant as to suppose that any of the Lord’s words is either in need of correction or is not divinely inspired.” [23]
Saying that none of the Lord’s words need correction is just another way of affirming the inerrancy of Scripture.
The Medieval Church
Augustine (354–430AD). Entering into the Medieval period of Church history, beginning with Augustine, we see that they were no less emphatic concerning the divine source and inerrancy of the Scriptures than the Early Fathers. Augustine writes:
“For it seems to me that the most disastrous consequences must follow upon our believing that anything false is found in the sacred books: that is to say, that the men by whom the Scripture has been given to us, and committed to writing, did put down in these books anything false… For if you once admit into such a high sanctuary of authority one false statement… there will not be left a single sentence of those books which, if appearing to any one difficult in practice or hard to believe, may not by the same fatal rule be explained away, as a statement in which, intentionally...the author declared what was not true.” [24]
Elsewhere he writes:
“For I confess to your Charity that I have learned to yield this respect and honor only to the canonical books of Scripture: of these alone do I most firmly believe that the authors were completely free from error. And if in these writings I am perplexed by anything which appears to me opposed to truth, I do not hesitate to suppose that either the manuscript is faulty, or the translator has not caught the meaning of what was said, or I myself have failed to understand it.” [25]
Here we see that Augustine believed that only the original autographs were inspired, just as those who affirm the inerrancy of Scripture today. Also, since he knew little Greek, he was largely dependent upon Jerome’s Latin translation. He further says:
“the authority of the Divine Scriptures becomes unsettled (so that every one may believe what he wishes, and reject what he does not wish) if this be once admitted, that the men by whom these things have been delivered unto us, could in their writings state some things which were not true…” [26]
Clearly, if Augustine was convinced that the human authors, being under divine inspiration, were incapable of writing things which were not true, then he believed in the inerrancy of the Scriptures.
Anselm of Canterbury (1033–1109) states that any perceived error in the Holy Scriptures is in fact an error of his own understanding of them, rather than an error in the Scriptures themselves. He said:
“For I am sure that, if I say anything which is undoubtedly contradictory to Holy Scripture, what I say is wrong; and, if I become aware of such a contradiction, I do not wish to hold to that opinion.” [27]
Thomas Aquinas (1225–1274). Article two of the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy states: “Holy Scripture, being God’s own Word, written by men prepared and superintended by His Spirit, is of infallible divine authority in all matters upon which it touches: it is to be believed, as God’s instruction, in all that it affirms.” This is in agreement with what Thomas Aquinas affirmed, as can be seen in the following quotes:
“It is plain that nothing false can ever underlie the literal sense of Holy Writ.” [28]
“other disciplines derive their certitude from the natural light of human reason, which can err, whereas theology derives its certitude from the light of the divine knowledge, which cannot be misled.” [29]
The Church of the Reformation
Martin Luther (1483–1546). Contrary to what some would affirm, Martin Luther also clearly believed in the inerrancy of Scripture. He said that the Scriptures “never erred” and “cannot err.” [30] In other words, the Scriptures are both inerrant (do not err), and infallible (cannot err). That is no different from what present-day Conservative Christians affirm. The following quotes further substantiate his firm belief in inerrancy:
“But everyone, indeed, knows that at times they [the Fathers] have erred as men will; therefore I am ready to trust them only when they prove their opinions from Scripture, which has never erred.” [31]
“It is impossible that Scripture should contradict itself, only that it so appears to the senseless and obstinate hypocrites.” [32]
“Whoever is so bold that he ventures to accuse God of fraud and deception in a single word and does so willfully again and again after he has been warned and instructed once or twice will likewise certainly venture to accuse God of fraud and deception in all of His words. Therefore it is true, absolutely and without exception, that everything is believed or nothing is believed. The Holy Spirit does not suffer Himself to be separated or divided so that He should teach and cause to be believed one doctrine rightly and another falsely.” [33]
“One little point of doctrine means more than heaven and earth, and therefore we cannot suffer to have the least jot thereof violated.” [34]
“For it is established by God’s Word that God does not lie, nor does His word lie.” [35]
While Luther recognized that there were difficult texts that he had no explanation for, his confidence in the inerrancy of the Holy Scriptures as God’s Word was unwavering.
John Calvin (1509–1564). Contrary to the nuanced approaches to inspiration presented by Progressives today who ironically claim to affirm “inerrancy” while at the same time denying it, Calvin stands firm in his conviction that the Old Testament is not the mere words of Moses and the Prophets, but the very words of God Himself. Commenting on 2 Timothy 3:16, he says:
“…we know that God hath spoken to us, and are fully convinced that the prophets did not speak at their own suggestion, but that, being organs of the Holy Spirit, they only uttered what they had been commissioned from heaven to declare. Whoever then wishes to profit in the Scriptures, let him first of all, lay down this as a settled point, that the Law and the Prophets are not a doctrine delivered according to the will and pleasure of men, but dictated by the Holy Spirit. Moses and the prophets did not utter at random what we have received from their hand, but, speaking at the suggestion of God, they boldly and fearlessly testified, what was actually true, that it was the mouth of the Lord that spake… Accordingly, we need not wonder if there are many who doubt as to the Author of the Scripture; for, although the majesty of God is displayed in it, yet none but those who have been enlightened by the Holy Spirit have eyes to perceive what ought, indeed, to have been visible to all… We owe to the Scripture the same reverence which we owe to God; because it has proceeded from him alone, and has nothing belonging to man mixed with it.” [36]
Heinrich Bullinger (1504–1575). Lastly, Heinrich Bullinger, the Swiss Reformer and successor of Zwingli, is in agreement with the Church Fathers throughout all history concerning the inerrancy of Scripture when he says:
“all the words of God are true, steadfast, and undoubted. For heaven and earth shall pass away, but the eternal word of God shall never perish, nor shall one jot or tittle fall from it.” [37]
Charles Haddon Spurgeon (1834–1892):
I would like to cite one final quote by Charles Haddon Spurgeon, since he ministered during the generation just prior to the Princetonians A. A. Hodge and B. B. Warfield, whom the critics of inerrancy claim were the inventors of the doctrine. Spurgeon says concerning the inerrancy of the Bible:
“I believe that there is no mistake whatever in the original Holy Scriptures from beginning to end. There may be, and there are, mistakes of translation; for translators are not inspired; but even the historical facts are correct. Doubt has been cast upon them here and there, and at times with great show of reason—doubt which it has been impossible to meet for a season; but only give space enough, and search enough, and the stones buried in the earth cry out to confirm each letter of Scripture. Old manuscripts, coins, and inscriptions, are on the side of the Book, and against it there are nothing but theories, and the fact that many an event in history has no other record but that which the Book affords us. The Book has been of late in the furnace of criticism; but much of that furnace has grown cold from the fact that the criticism is beneath contempt. ‘The words of the Lord are pure words’: there is not an error of any sort in the whole compass of them. These words come from him who can make no mistake, and who can have no wish to deceive his creatures. If I did not believe in the infallibility of the Book, I would rather be without it. If I am to judge the Book, it is no judge of me. If I am to sift it, like the heap on the threshing-floor, and lay this aside and only accept that, according to my own judgment, then I have no guidance whatever, unless I have conceit enough to trust to my own heart. The new theory denies infallibility to the words of God, but practically imputes it to the judgments of men; at least, this is all the infallibility which they can get at. I protest that I will rather risk my soul with a guide inspired from heaven, than with the differing leaders who arise from the earth at the call of “modern thought.” [38]
Conclusion
So according to Spurgeon, and history bears him witness, what is actually a “new theory” is not the doctrine of inerrancy, but the denial of inerrancy. We have already seen abundant testimony that, all through history, the Church has unanimously held to the inerrancy of the Scriptures until recent times.
Paul actually saw our day and forewarned us, saying:
“Preach the word! Be ready in season and out of season. Convince, rebuke, exhort, with all longsuffering and teaching. 3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine, but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; 4 and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables.” (2 Tim 4:2-4)
Jude enjoins us to “contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints.” (Jude 3). The faith once and for all delivered to the saints is that body of truth which we have contained in the Holy Scriptures. Paul foresaw our day and warned us, saying:
“Now the Spirit expressly says that in latter times some will depart from the faith, giving heed to deceiving spirits and doctrines of demons, speaking lies in hypocrisy, having their own conscience seared with a hot iron.” (1Tim 4:1-2)
Paul said that false teachers would speak lies in hypocrisy, having their conscience seared. This, to me, is an apt description of those scholars in our day who have made the false claim that inerrancy is a new invention. I am taken aback by the degree of intellectual dishonesty that would be required in order for one to meticulously comb through all the writings of the Church Fathers, passing over all of their clear affirmations of the inerrancy of Scripture in their search of a few scant quotes which could be misconstrued as implying that they did not believe what they most adamantly affirm throughout all their writings.
Whatever one’s view concerning the inerrancy of Scripture, it is outright deception to try to gain an advantage against those of us who uphold the Scripture’s own testimony concerning itself by falsely claiming that the doctrine of inerrancy is a new doctrine.
Having demonstrated this popular presenting argument against inerrancy to be false, in the next article we will see why the Church Fathers unanimously believed in the inerrancy of the Scriptures, and we will consider in what manner they were inspired of the Holy Spirit.
[1] 1 Clement 45:3
[2] Dialogue with Trypho, a Jew, LXV in Ante-Nicene Fathers, edited by Philip Schaff (Peabody: Hendrickson Publishers, 1999), 1:230
[3] Horatory Address to the Greeks, VIII in ibid., 276.
[4] The First Apology, XXXVI in ibid., 175.
[5] Against Heresies, II.XXVIII.2 in ibid., 399. See also III.V.1, 417.
[6] A Plea for Christians, VII in Ante-Nicene Fathers, 2:132.
[7] Ibid., IX, 133.
[8] Exhortation to the Heathen, IX in ibid., 195.
[9] Stromata, II.IV in ibid., 349–50.
[10] Origen, Homily 27. 1.7.
[11] Origen, book II volume IX, Commentary on Matthew
[12] On Modesty, V in ibid., 78.
[13] Fragments, III in Ibid., 5:602.
[14] Letter XIX.3 in ibid., 546.
[15] Homily 15.3 in Homilies on Genesis 1–17, translated by Robert C. Hill (Washington, DC: Catholic University of America Press, 1986), 195.
[16] “Concerning the Statues,” II.22 in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, edited by Philip Schaff (Peabody: Hendrickson Publishers, 1999), 9:352.
[17] Homily LXVIII, in Ibid., 14:252.
[18] “Orations,” II.105, in Ibid., 7:225.
[19] Letter XLII.3, in Ibid., 8:145.
[20] “Against Eunomius,” VII.1, in Ibid., 5:193.
[21] Our God-Breathed Book, John R. Rice, Sword of the Lord, 2000, 143
[22] Against Eunomius,” VII.2.
[23] Epistles, XXVII.1, in Ibid., 6:44.
[24] Letter XXVIII.3 in Ibid., 1:251–52.
[25] Letter LXXXII.3 in Ibid., 350
[26] Letter XXVIII.3 in Ibid., 1:252.
[27] Why God Became Man, in Anselm of Canterbury: The Major Works (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008), 298.
[28] The Summa Theologica of St. Thomas Aquinas, part. 1, question 1, article 10 (New York: Benziger Brothers, 1948), 7.
[29] Ibid., p1.q1.a5, 3.
[30] Works of Martin Luther (St. Louis, MO: Concordia Publishing House, 1968), XV:1481; XIX:1073.
[31] Ibid., XXXII:11.
[32] Ibid., IX:650
[33] D. Martin Luthers Werke: kritische Gesammtausgabe (Weimar: Hermann Böhlaus Nachfolger, 1928), 54:158.
[34] Works of Martin Luther, IX:650
[35] Ibid., XX:798
[36] Calvin’s Commentaries, 2Timothy 3:16.
[37] “Letter CCCLIII” from 24 August 1554 in Original Letters Relative to the English Reformation, volume 2, edited and translated by Hastings Robinson (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1847), 750.
[38] “The Bible Tried and Proved,” preached on 5 May 1889. Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit (Pasadena, TX: Pilgrim Publications, 1975), 35:253–64
- Published on
by George Sidney Hurd
--
The Declarations of the Nearness of His Coming.
“The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him to show His servants — things which must shortly take place… 3 Blessed is he who reads and those who hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written in it; for the time is near.” (Rev 1:1,3)
“Behold, I am coming quickly! Blessed is he who keeps the words of the prophecy of this book.” (Rev 22:7)
In spite of the unanimity of concrete external evidences indicating a late AD 96 date of John’s vision which we considered in the previous article, the Preterists persist in seeking interpretive arguments in support for their AD 66 – AD 70 coming of Christ within the book of Revelation. One of the main arguments they present is based upon the statements declaring the nearness of Christ’s return. However, having already seen that it wasn’t written until AD 96, it is evident that the coming of Christ being referred to could not possibly be an AD 70 coming of Christ. The coming of Christ mentioned in Revelation must have still been future in AD 96 when the Revelation was given to John. Also, it is worthy of consideration that all of the Early Church Fathers unanimously believed that the Second Coming of Christ in Revelation was yet in their future. So how are we to understand the multiple references to Christ’s soon return in the book of Revelation?
The book of Revelation opens and closes with Jesus’ declarations that His coming would not only take place quickly or suddenly, but that His return was also to be perceived as being near. Six times throughout Revelation Jesus says that He will come quickly. (2:5; 2:16; 3:11; 11:14; 22:7; 22:12; 22:20) After Jesus declares His last words in Revelation 22:20 saying, “Surely I am coming quickly,” John follows up by saying “Amen. Even so. Come Lord Jesus!” Two things are evident in John’s heart-cry “Even so. Come Lord Jesus”: First, that he did not know the exact timing of Christ’s return, and also that he longed for and anticipated His soon return – hopefully even within his own lifetime. Truly that has been the blessed hope of every love-sick saint from that day until now (Titus 2:13; 2 Tim 4:8).
As argued in my article, “Where is the Promise of His Coming?” it is the obvious divine intent that every generation should live with a sense of expectancy, with the hope that they may live to see His coming. Jesus, in His humanity, said that even He did not know the exact time of His return. He simply instructed us to live with expectancy, watching for the signs of His coming:
“But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father. 33 Take heed, watch and pray; for you do not know when the time is. 34 It is like a man going to a far country, who left his house and gave authority to his servants, and to each his work, and commanded the doorkeeper to watch. 35 Watch therefore, for you do not know when the master of the house is coming — in the evening, at midnight, at the crowing of the rooster, or in the morning — 36 lest, coming suddenly, he find you sleeping. 37 And what I say to you, I say to all: Watch!” (Mark 13:32-37)
After His resurrection and ascension to the Father, Jesus evidently knew the hour when He would return. However, when the disciples inquired as to the timing of His coming, He withheld that information from them, emphasizing instead the task at hand:
“Therefore, when they had come together, they asked Him, saying, ‘Lord, will You at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?’ 7 And He said to them, ‘It is not for you to know times or seasons which the Father has put in His own authority. 8 But you shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be witnesses to Me in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth.” (Acts 1:6-8)
From just these two passages alone, we should understand that God wants each generation to focus upon the work at hand, while at the same time living with the expectancy that His return could be within their own lifetime. As discussed in “Where is the Promise of His Coming?", God often intentionally hides from us the exact timing of the fulfillment of His promises. In the hidden council of His own unsearchable wisdom He withholds certain information from us for our own good and also in order to fulfill His own good purposes.
“The secret things belong to the Lord our God, but those things which are revealed belong to us and to our children forever, that we may do all the words of this law.” (Deut 29:29)
God gives us information on a need-to-know basis that we might better concentrate upon the work at hand. We see this very same thing expressed in a parable Jesus gave to those who were expecting the kingdom of God to immediately appear:
“Now as they heard these things, He spoke another parable, because He was near Jerusalem and because they thought the kingdom of God would appear immediately. 12 Therefore He said: “A certain nobleman went into a far country to receive for himself a kingdom and to return. 13 So he called ten of his servants, delivered to them ten minas, and said to them, ‘Do business till I come.” (Luke 19:11-13)
That it would be counter-productive for us to know the exact time is evident. If we were to think it was immediate, we would not do the business He left us to accomplish. If we were to know that it is in the distant future – beyond our lifetime, we would also tend to procrastinate and occupy ourselves with nonessentials, much as we tend to wait until a deadline and then cram at the last minute for an exam.
As an example of the human tendency to remain passive when under the assumption that nothing will happen in our own lifetime, consider the unbridled consumerism and wastefulness of our generation. Even knowing that our excesses are depleting the earth’s natural resources and contaminating the environment, only those who have become convinced that they or their children will personally have to reap the consequences in their own lifetime have begun to take the necessary measures to prepare for the survival of future generations.
Many, even knowing we are nearing a crisis in natural resources; in their covetousness, deny the validity of the warning signs in order to justify continuing in their excesses. The same is true with regards to the expectancy of Christ’s Second Coming and the end of the age. The Preterists, argue that the end of the age is already behind us; that Christ already came in AD 70; that we are now living in the new age and Christ will not come again until the far distant future – possibly even a million years from now. [1] They often mock their Futurist brethren who have labored in their generations under the belief that Christ could return even in their own lifetime. They accuse them of “escapism” and complacency – completely ignoring all that the Church has accomplished while looking for the blessed hope and glorious appearing of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ (Titus 2:13).
Also, we see from 1Peter 4:7 that it is not only the coming of Christ which is said to be near, but also the end of the entire order of things as we know it: “But the end of all things is at hand; therefore be serious and watchful in your prayers” (1Peter 4:7). Surely the localized AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem cannot be reasonably referred to as “the end of all things.” George Eldon Ladd makes a good observation concerning the nature of eschatological prophecy:
“There is in biblical prophecy a tension between the immediate and distant future, the distant is viewed through the transparency of the return of the Lord, and it is the nature of biblical prophecy to make it possible for every generation to live in expectancy of the end. To relax and say ‘where is the promise of his coming?’ is to become a scoffer of divine truth. The ‘biblical’ attitude is ‘take heed, for you do not know when the time will come.” [2]
Peter prophesied saying that “scoffers will come in the last days, walking according to their own lusts, and saying, ‘Where is the promise of His coming?’” (2Peter 3:3,4). In response to these mockers, Peter explains that time is irrelevant to the God who inhabits eternity: “with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.” (v.8). He continues explaining that the Lord is taking His time and will continue waiting until all the elect of this age have come to repentance (v.9). Note that when He does come, it will not be in any way comparable to the AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem:
“But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in which the heavens will pass away with a great noise, and the elements will melt with fervent heat; both the earth and the works that are in it will be burned up….13 Nevertheless we, according to His promise, look for new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells.” (2Peter 3:10,13)
The Second Coming described in this passage, and also in the book of Revelation, is obviously referring to something more global in scope than the localized destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. Contrary to what Welton and other Preterists argue, when the word for earth (ge) is used in conjunction with the heavens it always refers to the Planet Earth and not a localized region like the land of Israel. It is the same construction as used in Genesis 1:1 (LXX), and not even the Preterists would argue that the original creation only included the land of Israel. The heavens and the earth which will be made new in the day of the Lord cannot possibly be referring to the localized destruction of Jerusalem nearly 2,000 years ago. If the Second Coming of Christ were nothing more than the destruction of Jerusalem, then unbelievers would be justified in mocking us.
If unbelievers should mock us (or even our Preterist brethren for that matter), may it be for our patient and continued hope in the glorious return of our Lord in the clouds to take His Bride to be with Him:
“Therefore be patient, brethren, until the coming of the Lord. See how the farmer waits for the precious fruit of the earth, waiting patiently for it until it receives the early and latter rain. 8 You also be patient. Establish your hearts, for the coming of the Lord is at hand.” (James 5:7-8)
They shall look upon Him whom they have pierced
“Behold, He is coming with clouds, and every eye will see Him, even they who pierced Him. And all the tribes of the earth will mourn because of Him. Even so, Amen.” (Rev 1:7)
This is one of the strongest passages declaring the global planetary scope of Christ’s Second Coming. In the first place, it says that every eye shall see Him when He comes in the clouds. It should be obvious that it cannot be limited to the eyes of those living in Israel in AD 70, as Preterists must argue. Apart from the fact that Revelation was not even written until 25 years later, as we have already seen, the book of Revelation wasn’t even written to those living in the land of Israel, but rather to the seven churches in far-away Asia Minor. It is probable that the majority living in that region were not even aware that Jerusalem’s siege had taken place. They didn’t have the news media to make them globally aware as we do in the 21st Century.
Even Welton admits that the Thessalonians would have been too far from Jerusalem to know that Jerusalem had been destroyed.[3] But even if they were able to personally witness the destruction of Jerusalem with their own eyes, seeing Jerusalem destroyed by the Romans is still a far cry from seeing “Him” – Jesus, coming with clouds. Seeing Jerusalem destroyed is not the same as seeing Jesus return. When Christ truly comes again to rule in the millennial earth, future theologians and historians will not be debating as to whether or not He actually came. His coming will be an undebatable event. After the Second Coming of Christ, there will no longer be any mockers still saying: “Where is the promise of His coming?” All will know that He has come to reign:
“And the stars of heaven fell to the earth, as a fig tree drops its late figs when it is shaken by a mighty wind. 14 Then the sky receded as a scroll when it is rolled up, and every mountain and island was moved out of its place. 15 And the kings of the earth (ge), the great men, the rich men, the commanders, the mighty men, every slave and every free man, hid themselves in the caves and in the rocks of the mountains, 16 and said to the mountains and rocks, ‘Fall on us and hide us from the face of Him who sits on the throne and from the wrath of the Lamb! 17 For the great day of His wrath has come, and who is able to stand?” (Rev 6:13-17)
The declaration that “every eye will see Him” is not the only indicator in Revelation 1:7 which reveals that He will be seen on a planetary level when He comes with clouds. The saying “every tribe of the earth” cannot be reasonably limited to those who were in the land of Israel and witnessed Jerusalem’s destruction as the Preterists argue. Wherever the expression “all the tribes of the earth” (pasai fulai tes ges) appears in the Scriptures, it refers to the whole of humanity (Gen 12:3; 28:14; Ps 72:17; Zech 14:17 LXX cf. Acts 3:25). As we have already seen, the Greek word ge normally is the proper name for our planet, unless the immediate context limits its meaning. The “earth” (ge), is mentioned just two verses earlier in 1:5 where it refers to Christ as “the ruler over the kings of the earth (ge).” Clearly, Christ’s sovereignty is here declared to be over the entire Planet Earth and not just the land of Israel. The other instances in Revelation where the tribes of the earth are mentioned also emphasize that the term is used with reference to the whole Earth and not just a locality:
“And they sing a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open its seals; because thou hast been slain, and hast redeemed to God, by thy blood, out of every tribe, and tongue, and people, and nation, 10 and made them to our God kings and priests; and they shall reign over the earth (ge).” (Rev 5:9-10 Darby)
I don’t believe that any Preterists would want to argue that the blood of Christ only redeemed those living in the land of Israel or that the kingdom reign is limited to Israel rather than covering the whole Earth.
“It was granted to him (the Beast) to make war with the saints and to overcome them. And authority was given him over every tribe, tongue, and nation. 8 All who dwell on the earth (ge) will worship him, whose names have not been written in the Book of Life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.” (Rev 13:7-8)
Preterists argue that the Beast referred to here who will have authority over every tribe, tongue and nation upon the earth was Nero who reigned from AD 54 – AD 68. However, here, once again, they must limit the scope of every tribe and all those who dwell on the earth (ge), to the old Roman empire under Nero – something they would not attempt to do in Revelation 13:9,10, since there they would also be limiting the scope of Christ’s redemption to a locality. Also, in order to argue that Nero is the Beast of Revelation, they must first establish that Revelation was written before he committed suicide in AD 68, which, as we have already seen, they are not able to do. Also, they must go against the belief of the early Church since the Early Church Fathers regarded the Beast as being a yet future Antichrist.
Also, in Revelation 3 we see that the church of Philadelphia in Asia Minor was given the promise of exemption from the prophesied hour of trial which would come upon the “whole inhabited world” (tes oikoumeneis holeis), to test those who dwell on the earth (ge):
“Because you have kept My command to persevere, I also will keep you from the hour of trial which shall come upon the whole world (tes oikoumeneis holeis), to test those who dwell on the earth (ge). 11 Behold, I am coming quickly! Hold fast what you have, that no one may take your crown.” (Rev 3:10,11)
That Philadelphia would be kept from that hour of trial would go without saying if ge was limited to the land of Israel, since Asia Minor was hundreds of miles from the affected region in Israel. Also, we see here that earth (ge) cannot be limited to a localized geographical region in this context, since it is used in conjunction with tes oikoumineis holeis, which literally means “the whole inhabited world.” The promise is obviously directed to the church in Philadelphia in order to reassure them that they would not have to experience the world-wide persecution under the coming Antichrist. The church of Philadelphia had already suffered greatly, and in the context Jesus was giving them words of comfort. He wanted them to know that the Great Tribulation, described in the rest of the book of Revelation, would not affect them.
The Preterists argue that the phrase, “even they who pierced Him,” must have reference to the Jews of the very same generation that crucified Him (Other Preterists would say it refers to the Roman soldiers instead of the Jews). However, literally speaking, it was only one individual - a Roman soldier, who actually pierced Him (Jn 19:34). In a real sense, however, all who have ever sinned against God pierced Him, since “He was wounded for our transgressions, He was bruised for our iniquities, and the Lord has laid on Him the iniquity of us all.” (Isa 53:5,6). Many of us have already looked upon Him whom we have pierced and repented of our sins against Him. However, all of Adam’s race will one day look upon Him whom they have pierced – not just that one individual Roman soldier, but all the sons of Adam.
The passage in Revelation 1:7 is actually a quote from Zechariah’s prophecy. When seen in its context, it is obvious that seeing the One whom they pierced is an act of God’s grace and produces repentance, and therefore cannot be applied to a judgment without mercy upon Jerusalem in AD 70, as Preterists maintain:
“And I will pour on the house of David and on the inhabitants of Jerusalem the Spirit of grace and supplication; then they will look on Me whom they pierced. Yes, they will mourn for Him as one mourns for his only son, and grieve for Him as one grieves for a firstborn.” (Zech 12:10)
This is a clear reference to the true Second Coming of Christ - the time when the Deliverer comes out of Zion, saving Israel and removing all ungodliness from Jacob. It is a coming for their salvation and not for their destruction:
“And so all Israel will be saved, as it is written: ‘The Deliverer will come out of Zion, and He will turn away ungodliness from Jacob; 27 for this is My covenant with them, when I take away their sins.’ 28 Concerning the gospel they are enemies for your sake, but concerning the election they are beloved for the sake of the fathers.
For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable.” (Rom 11:26-29)
Contrary to what the Preterists affirm, the Second Coming is for Israel’s salvation – not for her destruction. Although national Israel has been hardened in part by God in order that salvation might come to the Gentiles; when Christ comes out of Zion, He will save all Israel.
So, we see that Revelation 1:5 and 1:7, which are key introductory verses to understanding the book of Revelation, do not favor an AD 66 – AD 70 fulfillment of its prophecies as the Preterists would claim. From beginning to end, the Preterists use their own creativity in interpreting the details of the book of Revelation. According to individual preferences, they either apply a literal or symbolical/spiritual meaning to any given passage. Since they do not abide by the normal obvious sense of the text and show a disregard for the basic rules of hermeneutics, I have not been able to find even two Preterists who are wholly in agreement in their interpretations of the book of Revelation. Rather than lose ourselves in a morass of subjectivity concerning the details of their interpretations of Revelation, I will just focus on a few points in which they all seem to be in agreement.
The Temple of Revelation 11
“Then I was given a reed like a measuring rod. And the angel stood, saying, ‘Rise and measure the temple of God, the altar, and those who worship there. 2 But leave out the court (aule) which is outside the temple, and do not measure it, for it has been given to the Gentiles. And they will tread the holy city underfoot for forty-two months.” (Rev 11:1,2)
The Preterists present this passage as evidence that the book of Revelation was written before Herod’s Temple in Jerusalem was destroyed in AD 70. Welton represents the argument of most Preterists when he says:
“The first important detail here is the fact that the Temple is standing in the vision… This is yet another proof that Revelation was not written in AD 96. If it was written in AD 96, it makes no sense that John does not ever mention the ‘past’ destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple. Of course, the obvious reason he doesn’t mention it as a past event is because it wasn’t. Instead, he was prophesying it was about to happen. Also, it’s important to note that forty-two months is three and a half years, the exact length of time the siege of Jerusalem took place, from AD 66–70. It was started by the Emperor Nero (the beast) and ended finally under General Titus.” [4]
The Preterists, in order to establish a pre-AD 70 fulfillment of the book of Revelation, must demonstrate that the Temple being described in the vision of Revelation Chapter eleven is Herod’s Temple and not a future Temple on the same site. Further, they must demonstrate that the details of the forty-two months (1,260 days) correspond with the AD 66 – AD 70 Roman siege, rather than being prophetic of yet future events. Once again, however, the weight of evidence is not in their favor.
Revelation is not a history book.
Preterists argue that the mention of the Temple in Jerusalem is proof that Revelation was written before it was destroyed in AD 70. They say that if Jerusalem and Herod’s Temple had already been destroyed at the time of writing, John certainly would have mentioned such a significant historical event.
However, the focus of the book of Revelation is not upon historical events - it is prophesying concerning future events. Also, we must keep in mind that John is writing to churches in far-away Asia Minor, more than a quarter of a century after Herod’s Temple had been destroyed. If God were to give revelation to the church concerning future events today in the 21st Century, it is doubtful that the prophet, even if he lived in New York, would enter into details concerning the 2001 terrorist attack upon the twin-towers in New York City, even though it was a significant historical event. Prophecy is not about history - it’s about the future. Therefore, the reason John doesn’t give details concerning the destruction of the Temple is not because it hadn’t yet taken place, but because he was prophesying, rather than giving a history lesson.
The measuring of the Temple.
Also, we can see that the details do not fit those of the historical Second Temple. Herod’s Temple was destroyed in AD 70 at the end of the Roman siege with not one stone upon another, just as Jesus predicted. John is commanded by the angel to measure the Temple and the worshipers within. He is then told not to measure the outer court. As we already saw in Chapter 5, the outer court (aule) is referred to as the “holy place” (topos hagion) in the Old Testament (Lev 6:16). It is where Jesus says that the abomination of desolation will be set up, marking the beginning the Great Tribulation in Matthew 24:15.
Why is John commanded to measure the Temple and its worshippers? Obviously, he wasn’t being commanded to measure the Herodian Temple. That would have been superfluous, since its measurements could have easily been obtained from existing records. Also, what purpose could be served by knowing the measurements of an already existing Temple? However, if they were dimensions of a future Temple in Jerusalem revealed to John in vision, then we can understand the importance of the measurements.
Although we do not know what the Temple of Revelation measured, its dimensions were obviously revealed to John since he measured it, even though he did not specify them for us. However, it was something measurable, although non-existent in John’s time, except in vision. To my way of understanding, based upon my past experience as a carpenter, measurements are normally given for future reference. They are usually related to something planned out but not yet in existence.
The Temple measurements revealed to Ezekiel were also for a Temple yet future at the time of writing (Ezek 40-48). At the time of Ezekiel’s vision, Jerusalem was also without a Temple, since the first Temple had already been destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar. The measurements were given to him, also using a measuring rod, just as we see in John’s vision. We also see that the Temple revealed in Ezekiel’s vision has reference to a yet future Temple because Herod’s Temple was much smaller. Daniel was also shown events related to a yet future Temple, since he wrote during the Babylonian captivity when there was no longer a Temple in Jerusalem (cf. Dan 8:11-14; 9:27; 12:11).
Contrary to the preterist argument for an early date based upon the mention of the Temple in Jerusalem, we see that John’s visions follow the same pattern established in Daniel and Ezekiel - prophesying concerning an as yet non-existent Temple.
The court is given to the Gentiles.
“But leave out the court (aule) which is outside the temple, and do not measure it, for it has been given to the Gentiles.” (Rev 11:2)
Why is John told to leave the court out of the measurements? The reason is stated: “for it has been given to the Gentiles.” I believe that this could potentially be more than relevant to the present situation in Israel. At present, the Muslims do not even allow the Jews to pray on the Temple Mount. However, the Zionist Jews are determined not only to reclaim their right to pray on the mount but are also actively working towards the rebuilding of the third Temple. The Temple Institute has been making preparations and seeking world-wide support for their right to have their own Temple on the Temple Mount. [5] Some Jews insist that the new Temple must be built on the present site of the Al-Aqsa Mosque. Although sharing the mount with the Muslims is unacceptable to most Zionists, others are willing to share the mount with the Muslims as well as people of other faiths in order to have their own Temple. Some have proposed building the Temple beside the existing Mosque. If this compromise is agreed upon, it could explain why the Temple court (Gr. aule) also referred to as the holy place (topos hagios) (cf. Lev 6:16 LXX), is said to be given to the Gentiles. In this manner it could easily become a representative inter-faith center for ecumenical religious unity, thus preparing the way for the false prophet to set up the Image of the Beast or the abomination of desolation in the holy place, also known as the Temple court, and putting an end to their daily sacrifices (Matt 24:15; Dan 9:27; Rev 13:14-18; 2Thess 2:4; Dan 11:36).
Forty-two-month Gentile occupation of the Holy City
“But leave out the court (aule) which is outside the temple, and do not measure it, for it has been given to the Gentiles. And they will tread the holy city underfoot for forty-two months.” (Rev 11:2)
Preterists argue that this verse has reference to the Roman siege of Jerusalem, which, according to them, lasted for three and a half years. Welton dogmatically states that this was precisely fulfilled at that time. Quoting his words again, he says:
“it’s important to note that forty-two months is three and a half years, the exact length of time the siege of Jerusalem took place, from AD 66–70. It was started by the Emperor Nero (the beast) and ended finally under General Titus.” [6] (emphasis mine)
Gentry, on the other hand, is more cautious when he states: “And the fact is that it took almost exactly forty-two months for Rome to get into a position to destroy the Temple in the Jewish War of A.D. 67-70” [7] (emphasis added) Gentry subtly admits that it cannot be established that the siege lasted exactly three and a half years, or to be more precise (as was the angel with John), 1,260 days. For a more in-depth study revealing the uncertainty as to the exact timing of the siege, I recommend Hitchcock’s dissertation. [8]
I would only like to point out one additional argument against the claim that the Roman siege lasted exactly forty-two months. If it was precisely fulfilled, the early church would have been the first to recognize it. However, the Early Church Fathers believed in a yet future forty-two-month fulfillment during the reign of the coming Antichrist.
Also, the fact that in Revelation 11:2 the Temple court is “given over to the Gentiles” and the Gentiles “will tread the holy city underfoot for forty-two months,” rules out a fulfillment during the Roman siege of Jerusalem since the Roman army was neither within Jerusalem nor in the Temple court during the extended siege. They surrounded the city and sealed it off, but they did not enter until AD 70 when they finally breached the wall and destroyed the Temple.
Gentry recognizing this, says that it took the Romans forty-two months “to get into a position to destroy the Temple.” This does not coincide with the passage in Revelation 11. In the first place, we see that according to 11:2, both the Temple court and the city of Jerusalem will be occupied and dominated by Gentiles for forty-two months. They will not be outside the city walls until the very end, as was the case with the Roman siege from AD 66 to AD 70. Actually, the time of the siege was probably the first time ever under Roman rule when there were actually no Gentiles within the city of Jerusalem.
Secondly, there is no indication in Revelation that the Temple will be destroyed at the end of the forty-two months, as was the case in AD 70. If the detailed description in Revelation 11 were a description of the AD 70 destruction, we would expect it to end by saying: “And after the forty-two months are completed the city and the Temple shall be destroyed.” But rather than saying that, it simply limits the time of gentile occupation to forty-two months.
The Beast is not Nero.
Preterists identify the Beast of Revelation as Nero. However, Nero cannot possibly be the Beast mentioned here in Revelation 11, as becomes evident when we continue reading the passage:
“And I will give power to my two witnesses, and they will prophesy one thousand two hundred and sixty days, clothed in sackcloth.’ 4 These are the two olive trees and the two lampstands standing before the God of the earth. 5 And if anyone wants to harm them, fire proceeds from their mouth and devours their enemies. And if anyone wants to harm them, he must be killed in this manner. 6 These have power to shut heaven, so that no rain falls in the days of their prophecy; and they have power over waters to turn them to blood, and to strike the earth with all plagues, as often as they desire. 7 When they finish their testimony, the beast that ascends out of the bottomless pit will make war against them, overcome them, and kill them. 8 And their dead bodies will lie in the street of the great city which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified. 9 Then those from the peoples, tribes, tongues, and nations will see their dead bodies three-and-a-half days, and not allow their dead bodies to be put into graves. 10 And those who dwell on the earth will rejoice over them, make merry, and send gifts to one another, because these two prophets tormented those who dwell on the earth. 11 Now after the three-and-a-half days the breath of life from God entered them, and they stood on their feet, and great fear fell on those who saw them. 12 And they heard a loud voice from heaven saying to them, "Come up here." And they ascended to heaven in a cloud, and their enemies saw them. 13 In the same hour there was a great earthquake, and a tenth of the city fell. In the earthquake seven thousand people were killed, and the rest were afraid and gave glory to the God of heaven.” (Rev 11:3-13)
Simultaneous with the forty-two-month Gentile occupation of the Temple court and the city of Jerusalem, God raises up two witnesses who become a thorn in the side of the Beast and his followers. For the same period of forty-two months or 1,260 days they will have power to testify unhindered. Then, after the 1,260 days - when they finish their testimony, the beast that ascends out of the bottomless pit will make war against them; overcome them and kill them. This presents an obvious problem for Preterists. The reign of the Beast is said to last for the forty-two-month period (Rev 13:5). His reign is brought to an abrupt end by the Second Coming of Christ (Rev 19:11-18). At Christ’s coming the Beast unites the nations in battle against Him and is defeated. The Beast is then cast alive into the lake of fire, together with the false prophet (Rev 19:20).
This does not parallel with the life of Nero and the circumstances of his reign. Nero did not even live to see the destruction of Jerusalem. Neither was he cast alive with a false prophet into the lake of fire. He committed suicide on June 9 AD 68 after being displaced by Galba as Emperor. Throughout the brief time of the rebellion of Jerusalem, five Emperors were on the throne in Rome. Nero initially sent troops to quell the rebellion in Jerusalem. Shortly before he committed suicide, Galba took power. Galba was followed by Otho, Vitellius, and finally Vespasian. When Vespasian assumed the throne in July of AD 69, he gave his son Titus (who would later become the tenth Emperor), the task of ending the Jerusalem rebellion. The actual siege itself took place under Titus’ command and only lasted six months - from February AD 70 to August AD 70. It wasn’t until the very end of the siege, in August AD 70, that the Romans were finally able to penetrate the northern wall and enter the city.
The city of Jerusalem and the Temple court was not occupied by Gentiles for forty-two months, as we see in Revelation 11. It was occupied by Jewish Zealots. Nero did not live to see the end of the Jewish revolt and the destruction of Jerusalem. So, he could not have put the “two witnesses” to death after 1,260 days. Therefore, Nero was not the Beast of Revelation.
The two witnesses
Preterists, in order to argue for a pre-AD 70 fulfillment of Revelation 11, must also find a historical fulfillment of the vision concerning the two witnesses. John is shown that for 1,260 days the two witnesses will be prophesying in Jerusalem against the Beast and his followers. They are given supernatural power for protection until the forty-two months are completed. At the end of 1,260 days, the Beast will be allowed to kill them. While their dead bodies lay in the streets of Jerusalem for three-and-a-half days, the whole world will rejoice. But then God raises them from the dead, and before the watching world they are caught up in a cloud into heaven. Then Jerusalem is shaken by a great earthquake, killing 7,000 people. The rest give glory to God.
The Preterists are hard-pressed to find an AD 70 fulfillment, since there is no record of two prophets of God prophesying for three and a half years in Jerusalem from AD 66 to AD 70 with such phenomenal signs following their testimony. There is no record of two individuals being killed by Nero (or any other “Beast” for that matter), and then being raised from the dead after three and a half days and then caught up in a cloud while the world looked on. Neither is there any record of an earthquake killing 7,000 people in Jerusalem in AD 70 with the rest of the onlookers giving glory to God.
Many Futurists believe that the two witnesses will be Moses and Elijah who appeared with Jesus and were speaking with him on the mount of Transfiguration. As the disciples descended from the mount, they asked Jesus about the promise of the coming of Elijah, prophesied in Malachi 4:5,6. Jesus replied saying to them: “Indeed, Elijah is coming first and will restore all things.” (Matt 17:11). Surely, in the light of the context of Jesus’ words referring to a future coming of Elijah immediately after meeting with Elijah together with Moses, it is reasonable to surmise that the two witnesses who are to come before the day of the Lord could be Moses and Elijah.
This presents a problem for the Preterists who must find a pre-AD 70 fulfillment for the two witnesses. Since there was no known literal fulfillment during the siege of Jerusalem, they must resort to a symbolic fulfillment to explain the two witnesses. Welton explains their way of getting around this interpretive problem. He says:
“This passage is not talking about the actual Moses and Elijah; rather, Moses and Elijah are the symbols that represent the Law and the Prophets.” [9]
If it is as he claims, then several questions immediately come to mind: Were Moses and Elijah on the mount of transfiguration also symbols speaking with Jesus rather than persons? When Jesus explained that Elijah had already come in John the Baptist, He was referring to a person. When He said that Elijah would come and restore all things, are we to understand that it will not also be in a person as was the case with John the Baptist? Also, how could it be said that the “Law” and the “prophets” were killed and laid dead on the streets of Jerusalem for three and a half days? Welton anticipates this question and attempts to reply:
“The question is, If the two witnesses represent the Law and the Prophets, how can they be put to death? I believe the two witnesses (the Old Testament Law and Prophets) were witnessing about Jesus to the Jews before the AD 70 destruction, but ultimately the Law and the Prophets were ignored, rejected, and ‘killed’ by the Jews. The Law and the Prophets testified as witnesses of Jesus as the Messiah-King and of Israel as the covenant-breaking nation that stood guilty.” [10]
However, the text says that the Beast, and not the Jews, will kill the two witnesses. In what way did “Nero” kill the Law and the Prophets? This explanation only presents other anomalies with the text: In what sense were the bodies of the “Law” and the “Prophets” left unburied for three and a half days without being put in their graves? What motivated the world at that time to celebrate their death? Listen to Welton’s fanciful reply:
“In other words, the AD 70 world was happy to see Jerusalem destroyed and, with it, all the Old Testament rules, regulations, sacrifices, and ceremonies.” [11]
For the remaining details concerning their resurrection and ascension into heaven and the great earthquake, he refers us to R.C. Sproul’s creative explanation:
“After the dust from Jerusalem’s destruction had settled, ‘the breath of life from God’ came back into the two witnesses (Rev. 11:10). The voice of the Law and the prophets rose again. Then the two witnesses were called back into heaven (Rev. 11:12), but at that same time ‘there was a great earthquake’ (Rev. 11:13). As we have discussed before, in apocalyptic language earthquakes represented a demolition or transfer of authority. Indeed, two witnesses were taken to heaven, but the Law and the prophets continued to sound through the Church. The voices of two witnesses were transferred to the Church, and hence, the Law and the prophets continue sounding forth the voice of God even today.” [12]
This spiritualization of the text ignores the specific details of the vision. If the earthquake only represented a transfer of power, why bother saying that a tenth of the city fell and that there were 7,000 fatalities as a result of it? And why say that the survivors gave glory to God upon witnessing it? Even when the visions are symbolic and not literal, each detail of the vision must have a literal application. In my own personal opinion, the mental gymnastics required in order to follow their “interpretive” imagination is almost overwhelming. If the plain sense makes common sense, we should not seek any other sense - even if it means we must modify our doctrines to conform to the obvious meaning of the text.
Therefore, it should be evident to any unbiased reader that Revelation 11 is speaking of a yet future Temple in Jerusalem. None of the details of this vision correspond to the AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple. The Temple court was not given to the Gentiles for three and a half years; Jerusalem was occupied by Jewish Zealots and not Gentile Roman soldiers; there is no record of two witnesses giving testimony in Jerusalem for 1,260 days, and their “Beast,” Nero, wasn’t even alive to kill them in AD 70. Also, as we saw in Chapter 3, the earliest Church Fathers, who were closest in time to the actual historical event of the AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple, uniformly believed in a future Temple and a future Antichrist.
The Beast of Revelation
“Then I stood on the sand of the sea. And I saw a beast rising up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and on his horns ten crowns, and on his heads a blasphemous name. 2 Now the beast which I saw was like a leopard, his feet were like the feet of a bear, and his mouth like the mouth of a lion. The dragon gave him his power, his throne, and great authority. 3 And I saw one of his heads as if it had been mortally wounded, and his deadly wound was healed. And all the world marveled and followed the beast. 4 So they worshiped the dragon who gave authority to the beast; and they worshiped the beast, saying, ‘Who is like the beast? Who is able to make war with him?’ 5 And he was given a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies, and he was given authority to continue for forty-two months. 6 Then he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme His name, His tabernacle, and those who dwell in heaven. 7 It was granted to him to make war with the saints and to overcome them. And authority was given him over every tribe, tongue, and nation. 8 All who dwell on the earth will worship him, whose names have not been written in the Book of Life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.” (Rev 13:1-8)
“The beast that you saw was, and is not, and will ascend out of the bottomless pit and go to perdition. And those who dwell on the earth will marvel, whose names are not written in the Book of Life from the foundation of the world, when they see the beast that was, and is not, and yet is.
9 Here is the mind which has wisdom: The seven heads are seven mountains on which the woman sits. 10 There are also seven kings. Five have fallen, one is, and the other has not yet come. And when he comes, he must continue a short time. 11 The beast that was, and is not, is himself also the eighth, and is of the seven, and is going to perdition.
12 The ten horns which you saw are ten kings who have received no kingdom as yet, but they receive authority for one hour as kings with the beast. 13 These are of one mind, and they will give their power and authority to the beast. 14 These will make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb will overcome them, for He is Lord of lords and King of kings; and those who are with Him are called, chosen, and faithful.” (Rev 17:8-14)
The Sixth King was not Nero
In order for Preterism to be possible, they must demonstrate that the book of Revelation was written prior to A D 66, during the reign of Nero. Furthermore, they must make out Nero as being the Beast of Revelation, since the three-and-a-half-year period they apply to Jerusalem’s destruction is also the time referred to as the reign of the Beast. Welton presents the seven kings of Revelation 17:10 as being Roman Emperors, with Nero as the sixth king of Revelation:
“They are also seven kings. Five have fallen, one is, the other has not yet come; but when he does come, he must remain for only a little while (Revelation 17:10). This passage, which is speaking of the line of rulers in Rome, tells us exactly how many rulers had already come, which one was currently in power, and that the next one would only last a short while. Take a look at how that perfectly fits with Nero and the Roman Empire of the first century. The rule of the first seven Roman Emperors are as follows:
Julius Caesar (49–44 BC)
Augustus (27 BC–AD 14)
Tiberius (AD 14–37)
Caligula (AD 37–41)
Claudius (AD 41–54) ‘Five have fallen...’
Nero (AD 54–68) “One is...”
Galba (June AD 68–January AD 69, a six-month ruler-ship) ‘the other has not yet come; but when he does come, he must remain for only a little while.’
Of the first seven kings of the Roman Empire, five had come (Julius Caesar, Augustus, Tiberius, Gaius, and Claudius), one was now in power (Nero), and one had not yet come (Galba), but would only remain a little time (six months). The vast majority throughout Church history have understood that the beast in Revelation 17 is a reference to Nero.” [13]
Contrary to Welton’s claim that “the vast majority throughout Church history have understood that the beast in Revelation 17 is a reference to Nero,” the most important witnesses throughout Church history – the early Church of the first five centuries, did not believe that Nero was the Beast. They regarded the Beast of Revelation to be one who would reign in their future, during the final three and a half years, and that his reign would come to an end by the Second Coming of Christ.
There are many reasons why Nero could not have been the Beast. We have already seen that Nero committed suicide on June 9, AD 68. Jerusalem and the Temple were not destroyed by Nero. It wasn’t destroyed until August of AD 70 after four other Emperors had already succeeded him on the throne. The Beast is permitted to reign over the world for three and a half years, during which time he is permitted to overcome the saints (Rev 13:5-8). After the three and a half years come to an end, he will cause the two witnesses to be put to death (Rev 11:7); he, together with the ten final kings, will form an army against Christ at His coming, and will be finally cast alive into the lake of fire and brimstone (Rev 17:14; 19:19-20). Preterists, on the other hand, have Christ coming through their Beast, Nero, for the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70.
Also, the list of Emperors Welton presents commences with Julius Caesar who is not recognized by any historian as a Roman Emperor. He was a general under the old Roman Republic who took power and governed a military state for four years between 49 and 44 BC. After his death, the Roman Senate continued to govern the Republic for another seventeen years before Augustus was finally declared the first Emperor of the new Roman Empire in 27 BC. Therefore, any historian would tell them that Galba was the sixth Emperor and not Nero.
Additionally, it isn’t likely that Galba fills the description of the seventh king, who is said to also be the eighth, and will reign for a little while. Galba was followed by more than one hundred and fifty Emperors - forty-eight of them between his reign and the reign of Constantine.
The book of Revelation puts the primary focus upon the seventh and final king, who reigns for a little while, together with the other ten kings (Rev 17:9-14). His brief reign, together with the ten kings, is brought to an abrupt end by the Second Coming of Christ to save His people Israel and unite with His Bride for the wedding feast. Not just the kingdom of the Beast, but all the kingdoms of man come to an end at the Second Coming, when the kingdoms of this world will have become the kingdoms of our Lord and of His Christ, and He shall reign into the ages of the ages! (Rev 11:15).
The Preterists must also argue that the ten kings were involved in the AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem, since Revelation 17:12-14 says that they will reign with the Beast, whom Preterists claim was Nero. Harold Eberle, in Victorious Eschatology, seeks to demonstrate that the ten kings were providences of the Roman Empire who participated in the AD 66 – AD 70 war against Jerusalem. He argues the following:
“We also know that the Roman Empire was divided into ten regions with ten leaders governing those regions. This corresponds to the ten horns of the dragon.
The 10 Provinces of the Roman Empire: Achaia, Gaul, Africa, Germany, Asia, Italy, Britain, Spain, Egypt, Syria.” [14]
Even if it could be demonstrated that the Roman Empire was at that time divided into these ten provinces and all ten could somehow be demonstrated to have participated in the siege, the ten horns of the Beast could not have any application to them whatsoever, since John was shown that, at the time of the vision, they were not yet kings:
“The beast that was, and is not, is himself also the eighth, and is of the seven, and is going to perdition. 12 “The ten horns which you saw are ten kings who have received no kingdom as yet, but they receive authority for one hour as kings with the beast. 13 These are of one mind, and they will give their power and authority to the beast. 14 These will make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb will overcome them, for He is Lord of lords and King of kings; and those who are with Him are called, chosen, and faithful.” (Rev 17:11-14)
The text specifically states that the ten kings did not yet have a kingdom at the time the Revelation was given to John. The one hour they will have with the Beast will lead to war against the Lamb when He comes. Their corpses will lay upon the mountains of Israel (Isa 34:3). Christ – the Lamb, did not come with the Beast and the ten kings to destroy Israel, as Preterists would have us believe. Rather, the Beast and the ten kings will be destroyed by the Lamb, when He comes out of Zion to deliver His people Israel from the armies that come against Jerusalem (Rom 11:26).
The Seven Kings Represent Seven Empires throughout Israel’s History
What, or who, then, is represented by this final Beast, with seven heads and ten horns that is allowed to wield worldwide power for the final three and a half years prior to Christ’s Second Coming? A key to understanding Revelation is to see that it is built upon the foundation of the revelation given in the book of Daniel. To Daniel are revealed the four major powers that would affect God’s people Israel from his day, down to the end of the age. We see in the Image shown in Nebuchadnezzar’s dream that the head was of gold (Dan 2:36-45). Daniel said to Nebuchadnezzar: “you are this head of gold.” Its chest and arms were silver and represented the Medo-Persian Empire which followed. Then came the third kingdom, the Greek Empire represented by the thighs of brass. The fourth kingdom was the Roman Empire represented by the legs of iron. The Roman Empire was divided into two divisions in AD 395, as represented by the legs. The final form, composed of the feet with the ten toes: part iron and part clay, are descriptive of the kingdom of the Beast in Revelation, with the seven heads and ten horns. It is at the close of this final kingdom when Christ will return:
“And in the days of these kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom which shall never be destroyed; and the kingdom shall not be left to other people; it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand forever.” (Dan 2:44)
Daniel was shown that in the days of the ten final kings the kingdom of God will come like a rock cut without hands, falling from heaven and demolishing all the kingdoms of man, establishing an everlasting kingdom. While Preterists would argue that this event occurred in AD 70, it is obvious from the description that it is something that will happen suddenly when Christ comes. They must argue that Christ – the stone cut without hands, came and demolished the kingdoms of this world nearly two-thousand years ago – something that is pretty hard to demonstrate historically in a very convincing manner.
So, back to the question: Who are the seven kings, and who is the seventh king who will rule over ten kings? The seven kings are also called seven heads and seven hills. The heads are seven kings or kingdoms – five of them having come and gone before John’s time. The seven heads are also called seven “hills” which, in keeping with the symbolic nature of the vision, would speak of the rise and decline of powers - better describing empires which rise and decline than emperors. Had five empires already existed in Israel’s history with a sixth in power in John’s day? Yes. The one that was in John’s time was the Roman Empire. There are only five other empires in history, previous to Rome, who had any significant impact upon God’s chosen people. The first empire was the Egyptian Empire which enslaved the people of Israel. The second was the Assyrian Empire which conquered and dispersed the ten northern tribes of Israel. That takes us up to Daniel’s day when the third kingdom, the Babylonian Empire, took Judah captive. The fourth was the Medo-Persian Empire and the fifth was Greece.
That the seven heads are representative of World Empires rather than Roman Emperors can be further seen by comparing the beasts of Daniel’s vision with the beast of Revelation. Daniel’s vision is described in the following manner:
“The first was like a lion and had eagle's wings. I watched till its wings were plucked off; and it was lifted up from the earth and made to stand on two feet like a man, and a man's heart was given to it. 5 And suddenly another beast, a second, like a bear. It was raised up on one side, and had three ribs in its mouth between its teeth. And they said thus to it: 'Arise, devour much flesh!' 6 After this I looked, and there was another, like a leopard, which had on its back four wings of a bird. The beast also had four heads, and dominion was given to it. 7 After this I saw in the night visions, and behold, a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible, exceedingly strong. It had huge iron teeth; it was devouring, breaking in pieces, and trampling the residue with its feet. It was different from all the beasts that were before it, and it had ten horns. 8 I was considering the horns, and there was another horn, a little one, coming up among them, before whom three of the first horns were plucked out by the roots. And there, in this horn, were eyes like the eyes of a man, and a mouth speaking pompous words.” (Daniel 7:4-8)
Comparing the beasts of Daniel’s vision to that of Revelation we can observe important similarities:
“Then I stood on the sand of the sea. And I saw a beast rising up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and on his horns ten crowns, and on his heads a blasphemous name. 2 Now the beast which I saw was like a leopard, his feet were like the feet of a bear, and his mouth like the mouth of a lion.” (Rev 13:1,2)
Comparing the Beast of Revelation with both the image and the beasts of Daniel, we see that the Beast described in Revelation is a composite beast, made up of all four of the beasts of Daniel. It has the mouth of the first beast - Babylon; The feet of the second beast - Medo-Persia; the body of the third beast - Greece, and the ten horns of the fourth beast – Rome. The seven heads of the Beast of Revelation would also indicate that this final Empire will somehow also encompass all the six prior kingdoms.
Therefore, the final Beast of Revelation is not simply a revival of the Roman Empire or the fourth beast of Daniel (although it is that). The ten horns of the Beast of Revelation are the ten horns of Daniel’s final beast which represents Rome. Also, the ten toes of Daniel’s image represent the latter form of the Roman Empire. However, the Beast of Revelation encompasses all the prior kingdoms as well.
The Personage of the Beast
The individual person of the Beast of Revelation is “the little horn” that rises among the ten horns or kings, and at some point, plucks up three of the ten horns by its roots (Dan 7:8). Even as Daniel referred to Nebuchadnezzar as the representative head of the first Empire – the head of gold (Dan 2:38), John, in Revelation often makes reference to the individual representative head of the beast of Revelation, who himself is called the Beast. It appears that the man referred to as the “Beast” receives a mortal wound as he is rising in influence:
“And I saw one of his heads as if it had been mortally wounded, and his deadly wound was healed. And all the world marveled and followed the beast. 4 So they worshiped the dragon who gave authority to the beast; and they worshiped the beast, saying, ‘Who is like the beast? Who is able to make war with him?’ 5 And he was given a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies, and he was given authority to continue for forty-two months.” (Rev 13:3-5)
“And he (the false prophet) exercises all the authority of the first beast in his presence, and causes the earth and those who dwell in it to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed. 13 He performs great signs, so that he even makes fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men. 14 And he deceives those who dwell on the earth by those signs which he was granted to do in the sight of the beast, telling those who dwell on the earth to make an image to the beast who was wounded by the sword and lived.” (Rev 13:12-14)
As we can see here, one of the heads (the person of the Beast), receives a mortal wound by the sword and raises back from the dead. When this happens, the whole world will worship him. He will be allowed to continue for forty-two months or three and a half years. In the light of the assassination and resuscitation of the seventh king or the Beast, we can now understand the enigmatic phrase in Revelation 17:11: “The beast that was, and is not, is himself also the eighth, and is of the seven, and is going to perdition.” In Revelation 17, John is being given more details of the Beast. In Chapter 13, John sees the seven-headed Beast arise out of the sea. Then, as he looks on, one of its heads is mortally wounded, only to be brought back to life. In Chapter 17, the angel explains to John that the one head that was assassinated was himself the seventh king and becomes the eighth when he is brought back to life. However, it will not be a true resurrection since the entity entering his corpse and giving him life will have ascended from the pit (17:8). This entity, inhabiting the body of the seventh king – thus becoming the eighth, will be given power for forty-two months and the whole world will be deceived by him.
A Mixed Alliance
In Nebuchadnezzar’s dream, the feet and the ten toes, made partly of iron and partly of clay, are explained by Daniel:
“Whereas you saw the feet and toes, partly of potter's clay and partly of iron, the kingdom shall be divided; yet the strength of the iron shall be in it, just as you saw the iron mixed with ceramic clay. 42 And as the toes of the feet were partly of iron and partly of clay, so the kingdom shall be partly strong and partly fragile. 43 As you saw iron mixed with ceramic clay, they will mingle with the seed of men; but they will not adhere to one another, just as iron does not mix with clay. 44 And in the days of these kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom which shall never be destroyed; and the kingdom shall not be left to other people; it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand forever.” (Dan 2:41-45)
Daniel says that the feet and toes will be made up of two elements which do not adhere one to the other. If the inclusion of elements of each of Daniel’s four beasts in the description of the Beast of Revelation is referring to the same geographical areas occupied by all of those prior Empires put together, then we would have a kingdom made up of an incompatible mix of western nations with radical Islamic Mid-Eastern and African nations. This would be a very volatile mix and could help explain the revival of the barbaric practice of decapitation as we see mentioned in Revelation (Rev 20:4).
Therefore, as we have seen, all evidence - both external and internal, indicate that the book of Revelation was written in AD 95 or AD 96, at the close of Domitian’s reign. Although the date of writing is not a vital issue for Futurists, it is absolutely essential for the Preterists to demonstrate that Revelation was written prior to AD 66, in order to argue that it prophecies concerning an AD 66 – AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem. Otherwise, according to their interpretation, it would be a history book written after the fact rather than a revelation of future events. However, nothing they have to present warrants abandoning the Futurist interpretation of the Scriptures held by the Early Church Fathers for their more recent doctrine of Preterism.
This blog is an excerpt from my book: “Last Days – Past or Present?”
[1] Milton Terry, Biblical Apocalyptics (Whitefish, MT: Kessinger Publishing, 2009), 451.
[2] George Eldon Ladd, A Commentary on the Revelation of St. John (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1972. p. 22.
[3] Welton, Jonathan (2013-11-01). Raptureless: An Optimistic Guide to the End of the World - Revised Edition
Including The Art of Revelation (Kindle Location 2320). BookBaby. Kindle Edition.
[4] Welton, Jonathan (2013-11-01). Raptureless: An Optimistic Guide to the End of the World - Revised Edition Including The
Art of Revelation (Kindle Locations 5071-5077). BookBaby. Kindle Edition.
[5] https://www.templeinstitute.org/
[6] Welton, Jonathan (2013-11-01). Raptureless: An Optimistic Guide to the End of the World - Revised Edition Including The
Art of Revelation (Kindle Locations 5075-5077). BookBaby. Kindle Edition.
[7] Gentry, Kenneth Before Jerusalem Fell: Dating the Book of Revelation. Tyler TX: Institute for Christian Economics, 1989, p. 250.
[8] Hitchcock, Mark. “A Defense of the Domitianic Date of the Book of Revelation.” Dissertation for Dallas Theological Seminary. December 2005. p. 28. http://www.pre-trib.org/data/pdf/hitchcock-dissertation.pdf
[9] Welton, Jonathan (2013-11-01). Raptureless: An Optimistic Guide to the End of the World - Revised Edition
Including The Art of Revelation (Kindle Locations 5088-5089). BookBaby. Kindle Edition.
[10] Welton, Jonathan (2013-11-01). Raptureless: An Optimistic Guide to the End of the World - Revised Edition
Including The Art of Revelation (Kindle Locations 5112-5116). BookBaby. Kindle Edition.
[11] Welton, Jonathan (2013-11-01). Raptureless: An Optimistic Guide to the End of the World - Revised Edition
Including The Art of Revelation (Kindle Locations 5132-5133). BookBaby. Kindle Edition.
[12] R.C Sproul, The Last Days According to Jesus (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1998), 186-187.
[13] Welton, Jonathan (2013-11-01). Raptureless: An Optimistic Guide to the End of the World - Revised Edition Including The
Art of Revelation (Kindle Locations 2387-2397). BookBaby. Kindle Edition.
[14] Eberle, Harold R. (2007-12-04). Victorious Eschatology (Kindle Locations 2390-2406). Worldcast Publishing.
Kindle Edition.
--
The Declarations of the Nearness of His Coming.
“The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him to show His servants — things which must shortly take place… 3 Blessed is he who reads and those who hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written in it; for the time is near.” (Rev 1:1,3)
“Behold, I am coming quickly! Blessed is he who keeps the words of the prophecy of this book.” (Rev 22:7)
In spite of the unanimity of concrete external evidences indicating a late AD 96 date of John’s vision which we considered in the previous article, the Preterists persist in seeking interpretive arguments in support for their AD 66 – AD 70 coming of Christ within the book of Revelation. One of the main arguments they present is based upon the statements declaring the nearness of Christ’s return. However, having already seen that it wasn’t written until AD 96, it is evident that the coming of Christ being referred to could not possibly be an AD 70 coming of Christ. The coming of Christ mentioned in Revelation must have still been future in AD 96 when the Revelation was given to John. Also, it is worthy of consideration that all of the Early Church Fathers unanimously believed that the Second Coming of Christ in Revelation was yet in their future. So how are we to understand the multiple references to Christ’s soon return in the book of Revelation?
The book of Revelation opens and closes with Jesus’ declarations that His coming would not only take place quickly or suddenly, but that His return was also to be perceived as being near. Six times throughout Revelation Jesus says that He will come quickly. (2:5; 2:16; 3:11; 11:14; 22:7; 22:12; 22:20) After Jesus declares His last words in Revelation 22:20 saying, “Surely I am coming quickly,” John follows up by saying “Amen. Even so. Come Lord Jesus!” Two things are evident in John’s heart-cry “Even so. Come Lord Jesus”: First, that he did not know the exact timing of Christ’s return, and also that he longed for and anticipated His soon return – hopefully even within his own lifetime. Truly that has been the blessed hope of every love-sick saint from that day until now (Titus 2:13; 2 Tim 4:8).
As argued in my article, “Where is the Promise of His Coming?” it is the obvious divine intent that every generation should live with a sense of expectancy, with the hope that they may live to see His coming. Jesus, in His humanity, said that even He did not know the exact time of His return. He simply instructed us to live with expectancy, watching for the signs of His coming:
“But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father. 33 Take heed, watch and pray; for you do not know when the time is. 34 It is like a man going to a far country, who left his house and gave authority to his servants, and to each his work, and commanded the doorkeeper to watch. 35 Watch therefore, for you do not know when the master of the house is coming — in the evening, at midnight, at the crowing of the rooster, or in the morning — 36 lest, coming suddenly, he find you sleeping. 37 And what I say to you, I say to all: Watch!” (Mark 13:32-37)
After His resurrection and ascension to the Father, Jesus evidently knew the hour when He would return. However, when the disciples inquired as to the timing of His coming, He withheld that information from them, emphasizing instead the task at hand:
“Therefore, when they had come together, they asked Him, saying, ‘Lord, will You at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?’ 7 And He said to them, ‘It is not for you to know times or seasons which the Father has put in His own authority. 8 But you shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be witnesses to Me in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth.” (Acts 1:6-8)
From just these two passages alone, we should understand that God wants each generation to focus upon the work at hand, while at the same time living with the expectancy that His return could be within their own lifetime. As discussed in “Where is the Promise of His Coming?", God often intentionally hides from us the exact timing of the fulfillment of His promises. In the hidden council of His own unsearchable wisdom He withholds certain information from us for our own good and also in order to fulfill His own good purposes.
“The secret things belong to the Lord our God, but those things which are revealed belong to us and to our children forever, that we may do all the words of this law.” (Deut 29:29)
God gives us information on a need-to-know basis that we might better concentrate upon the work at hand. We see this very same thing expressed in a parable Jesus gave to those who were expecting the kingdom of God to immediately appear:
“Now as they heard these things, He spoke another parable, because He was near Jerusalem and because they thought the kingdom of God would appear immediately. 12 Therefore He said: “A certain nobleman went into a far country to receive for himself a kingdom and to return. 13 So he called ten of his servants, delivered to them ten minas, and said to them, ‘Do business till I come.” (Luke 19:11-13)
That it would be counter-productive for us to know the exact time is evident. If we were to think it was immediate, we would not do the business He left us to accomplish. If we were to know that it is in the distant future – beyond our lifetime, we would also tend to procrastinate and occupy ourselves with nonessentials, much as we tend to wait until a deadline and then cram at the last minute for an exam.
As an example of the human tendency to remain passive when under the assumption that nothing will happen in our own lifetime, consider the unbridled consumerism and wastefulness of our generation. Even knowing that our excesses are depleting the earth’s natural resources and contaminating the environment, only those who have become convinced that they or their children will personally have to reap the consequences in their own lifetime have begun to take the necessary measures to prepare for the survival of future generations.
Many, even knowing we are nearing a crisis in natural resources; in their covetousness, deny the validity of the warning signs in order to justify continuing in their excesses. The same is true with regards to the expectancy of Christ’s Second Coming and the end of the age. The Preterists, argue that the end of the age is already behind us; that Christ already came in AD 70; that we are now living in the new age and Christ will not come again until the far distant future – possibly even a million years from now. [1] They often mock their Futurist brethren who have labored in their generations under the belief that Christ could return even in their own lifetime. They accuse them of “escapism” and complacency – completely ignoring all that the Church has accomplished while looking for the blessed hope and glorious appearing of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ (Titus 2:13).
Also, we see from 1Peter 4:7 that it is not only the coming of Christ which is said to be near, but also the end of the entire order of things as we know it: “But the end of all things is at hand; therefore be serious and watchful in your prayers” (1Peter 4:7). Surely the localized AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem cannot be reasonably referred to as “the end of all things.” George Eldon Ladd makes a good observation concerning the nature of eschatological prophecy:
“There is in biblical prophecy a tension between the immediate and distant future, the distant is viewed through the transparency of the return of the Lord, and it is the nature of biblical prophecy to make it possible for every generation to live in expectancy of the end. To relax and say ‘where is the promise of his coming?’ is to become a scoffer of divine truth. The ‘biblical’ attitude is ‘take heed, for you do not know when the time will come.” [2]
Peter prophesied saying that “scoffers will come in the last days, walking according to their own lusts, and saying, ‘Where is the promise of His coming?’” (2Peter 3:3,4). In response to these mockers, Peter explains that time is irrelevant to the God who inhabits eternity: “with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.” (v.8). He continues explaining that the Lord is taking His time and will continue waiting until all the elect of this age have come to repentance (v.9). Note that when He does come, it will not be in any way comparable to the AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem:
“But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in which the heavens will pass away with a great noise, and the elements will melt with fervent heat; both the earth and the works that are in it will be burned up….13 Nevertheless we, according to His promise, look for new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells.” (2Peter 3:10,13)
The Second Coming described in this passage, and also in the book of Revelation, is obviously referring to something more global in scope than the localized destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. Contrary to what Welton and other Preterists argue, when the word for earth (ge) is used in conjunction with the heavens it always refers to the Planet Earth and not a localized region like the land of Israel. It is the same construction as used in Genesis 1:1 (LXX), and not even the Preterists would argue that the original creation only included the land of Israel. The heavens and the earth which will be made new in the day of the Lord cannot possibly be referring to the localized destruction of Jerusalem nearly 2,000 years ago. If the Second Coming of Christ were nothing more than the destruction of Jerusalem, then unbelievers would be justified in mocking us.
If unbelievers should mock us (or even our Preterist brethren for that matter), may it be for our patient and continued hope in the glorious return of our Lord in the clouds to take His Bride to be with Him:
“Therefore be patient, brethren, until the coming of the Lord. See how the farmer waits for the precious fruit of the earth, waiting patiently for it until it receives the early and latter rain. 8 You also be patient. Establish your hearts, for the coming of the Lord is at hand.” (James 5:7-8)
They shall look upon Him whom they have pierced
“Behold, He is coming with clouds, and every eye will see Him, even they who pierced Him. And all the tribes of the earth will mourn because of Him. Even so, Amen.” (Rev 1:7)
This is one of the strongest passages declaring the global planetary scope of Christ’s Second Coming. In the first place, it says that every eye shall see Him when He comes in the clouds. It should be obvious that it cannot be limited to the eyes of those living in Israel in AD 70, as Preterists must argue. Apart from the fact that Revelation was not even written until 25 years later, as we have already seen, the book of Revelation wasn’t even written to those living in the land of Israel, but rather to the seven churches in far-away Asia Minor. It is probable that the majority living in that region were not even aware that Jerusalem’s siege had taken place. They didn’t have the news media to make them globally aware as we do in the 21st Century.
Even Welton admits that the Thessalonians would have been too far from Jerusalem to know that Jerusalem had been destroyed.[3] But even if they were able to personally witness the destruction of Jerusalem with their own eyes, seeing Jerusalem destroyed by the Romans is still a far cry from seeing “Him” – Jesus, coming with clouds. Seeing Jerusalem destroyed is not the same as seeing Jesus return. When Christ truly comes again to rule in the millennial earth, future theologians and historians will not be debating as to whether or not He actually came. His coming will be an undebatable event. After the Second Coming of Christ, there will no longer be any mockers still saying: “Where is the promise of His coming?” All will know that He has come to reign:
“And the stars of heaven fell to the earth, as a fig tree drops its late figs when it is shaken by a mighty wind. 14 Then the sky receded as a scroll when it is rolled up, and every mountain and island was moved out of its place. 15 And the kings of the earth (ge), the great men, the rich men, the commanders, the mighty men, every slave and every free man, hid themselves in the caves and in the rocks of the mountains, 16 and said to the mountains and rocks, ‘Fall on us and hide us from the face of Him who sits on the throne and from the wrath of the Lamb! 17 For the great day of His wrath has come, and who is able to stand?” (Rev 6:13-17)
The declaration that “every eye will see Him” is not the only indicator in Revelation 1:7 which reveals that He will be seen on a planetary level when He comes with clouds. The saying “every tribe of the earth” cannot be reasonably limited to those who were in the land of Israel and witnessed Jerusalem’s destruction as the Preterists argue. Wherever the expression “all the tribes of the earth” (pasai fulai tes ges) appears in the Scriptures, it refers to the whole of humanity (Gen 12:3; 28:14; Ps 72:17; Zech 14:17 LXX cf. Acts 3:25). As we have already seen, the Greek word ge normally is the proper name for our planet, unless the immediate context limits its meaning. The “earth” (ge), is mentioned just two verses earlier in 1:5 where it refers to Christ as “the ruler over the kings of the earth (ge).” Clearly, Christ’s sovereignty is here declared to be over the entire Planet Earth and not just the land of Israel. The other instances in Revelation where the tribes of the earth are mentioned also emphasize that the term is used with reference to the whole Earth and not just a locality:
“And they sing a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open its seals; because thou hast been slain, and hast redeemed to God, by thy blood, out of every tribe, and tongue, and people, and nation, 10 and made them to our God kings and priests; and they shall reign over the earth (ge).” (Rev 5:9-10 Darby)
I don’t believe that any Preterists would want to argue that the blood of Christ only redeemed those living in the land of Israel or that the kingdom reign is limited to Israel rather than covering the whole Earth.
“It was granted to him (the Beast) to make war with the saints and to overcome them. And authority was given him over every tribe, tongue, and nation. 8 All who dwell on the earth (ge) will worship him, whose names have not been written in the Book of Life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.” (Rev 13:7-8)
Preterists argue that the Beast referred to here who will have authority over every tribe, tongue and nation upon the earth was Nero who reigned from AD 54 – AD 68. However, here, once again, they must limit the scope of every tribe and all those who dwell on the earth (ge), to the old Roman empire under Nero – something they would not attempt to do in Revelation 13:9,10, since there they would also be limiting the scope of Christ’s redemption to a locality. Also, in order to argue that Nero is the Beast of Revelation, they must first establish that Revelation was written before he committed suicide in AD 68, which, as we have already seen, they are not able to do. Also, they must go against the belief of the early Church since the Early Church Fathers regarded the Beast as being a yet future Antichrist.
Also, in Revelation 3 we see that the church of Philadelphia in Asia Minor was given the promise of exemption from the prophesied hour of trial which would come upon the “whole inhabited world” (tes oikoumeneis holeis), to test those who dwell on the earth (ge):
“Because you have kept My command to persevere, I also will keep you from the hour of trial which shall come upon the whole world (tes oikoumeneis holeis), to test those who dwell on the earth (ge). 11 Behold, I am coming quickly! Hold fast what you have, that no one may take your crown.” (Rev 3:10,11)
That Philadelphia would be kept from that hour of trial would go without saying if ge was limited to the land of Israel, since Asia Minor was hundreds of miles from the affected region in Israel. Also, we see here that earth (ge) cannot be limited to a localized geographical region in this context, since it is used in conjunction with tes oikoumineis holeis, which literally means “the whole inhabited world.” The promise is obviously directed to the church in Philadelphia in order to reassure them that they would not have to experience the world-wide persecution under the coming Antichrist. The church of Philadelphia had already suffered greatly, and in the context Jesus was giving them words of comfort. He wanted them to know that the Great Tribulation, described in the rest of the book of Revelation, would not affect them.
The Preterists argue that the phrase, “even they who pierced Him,” must have reference to the Jews of the very same generation that crucified Him (Other Preterists would say it refers to the Roman soldiers instead of the Jews). However, literally speaking, it was only one individual - a Roman soldier, who actually pierced Him (Jn 19:34). In a real sense, however, all who have ever sinned against God pierced Him, since “He was wounded for our transgressions, He was bruised for our iniquities, and the Lord has laid on Him the iniquity of us all.” (Isa 53:5,6). Many of us have already looked upon Him whom we have pierced and repented of our sins against Him. However, all of Adam’s race will one day look upon Him whom they have pierced – not just that one individual Roman soldier, but all the sons of Adam.
The passage in Revelation 1:7 is actually a quote from Zechariah’s prophecy. When seen in its context, it is obvious that seeing the One whom they pierced is an act of God’s grace and produces repentance, and therefore cannot be applied to a judgment without mercy upon Jerusalem in AD 70, as Preterists maintain:
“And I will pour on the house of David and on the inhabitants of Jerusalem the Spirit of grace and supplication; then they will look on Me whom they pierced. Yes, they will mourn for Him as one mourns for his only son, and grieve for Him as one grieves for a firstborn.” (Zech 12:10)
This is a clear reference to the true Second Coming of Christ - the time when the Deliverer comes out of Zion, saving Israel and removing all ungodliness from Jacob. It is a coming for their salvation and not for their destruction:
“And so all Israel will be saved, as it is written: ‘The Deliverer will come out of Zion, and He will turn away ungodliness from Jacob; 27 for this is My covenant with them, when I take away their sins.’ 28 Concerning the gospel they are enemies for your sake, but concerning the election they are beloved for the sake of the fathers.
For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable.” (Rom 11:26-29)
Contrary to what the Preterists affirm, the Second Coming is for Israel’s salvation – not for her destruction. Although national Israel has been hardened in part by God in order that salvation might come to the Gentiles; when Christ comes out of Zion, He will save all Israel.
So, we see that Revelation 1:5 and 1:7, which are key introductory verses to understanding the book of Revelation, do not favor an AD 66 – AD 70 fulfillment of its prophecies as the Preterists would claim. From beginning to end, the Preterists use their own creativity in interpreting the details of the book of Revelation. According to individual preferences, they either apply a literal or symbolical/spiritual meaning to any given passage. Since they do not abide by the normal obvious sense of the text and show a disregard for the basic rules of hermeneutics, I have not been able to find even two Preterists who are wholly in agreement in their interpretations of the book of Revelation. Rather than lose ourselves in a morass of subjectivity concerning the details of their interpretations of Revelation, I will just focus on a few points in which they all seem to be in agreement.
The Temple of Revelation 11
“Then I was given a reed like a measuring rod. And the angel stood, saying, ‘Rise and measure the temple of God, the altar, and those who worship there. 2 But leave out the court (aule) which is outside the temple, and do not measure it, for it has been given to the Gentiles. And they will tread the holy city underfoot for forty-two months.” (Rev 11:1,2)
The Preterists present this passage as evidence that the book of Revelation was written before Herod’s Temple in Jerusalem was destroyed in AD 70. Welton represents the argument of most Preterists when he says:
“The first important detail here is the fact that the Temple is standing in the vision… This is yet another proof that Revelation was not written in AD 96. If it was written in AD 96, it makes no sense that John does not ever mention the ‘past’ destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple. Of course, the obvious reason he doesn’t mention it as a past event is because it wasn’t. Instead, he was prophesying it was about to happen. Also, it’s important to note that forty-two months is three and a half years, the exact length of time the siege of Jerusalem took place, from AD 66–70. It was started by the Emperor Nero (the beast) and ended finally under General Titus.” [4]
The Preterists, in order to establish a pre-AD 70 fulfillment of the book of Revelation, must demonstrate that the Temple being described in the vision of Revelation Chapter eleven is Herod’s Temple and not a future Temple on the same site. Further, they must demonstrate that the details of the forty-two months (1,260 days) correspond with the AD 66 – AD 70 Roman siege, rather than being prophetic of yet future events. Once again, however, the weight of evidence is not in their favor.
Revelation is not a history book.
Preterists argue that the mention of the Temple in Jerusalem is proof that Revelation was written before it was destroyed in AD 70. They say that if Jerusalem and Herod’s Temple had already been destroyed at the time of writing, John certainly would have mentioned such a significant historical event.
However, the focus of the book of Revelation is not upon historical events - it is prophesying concerning future events. Also, we must keep in mind that John is writing to churches in far-away Asia Minor, more than a quarter of a century after Herod’s Temple had been destroyed. If God were to give revelation to the church concerning future events today in the 21st Century, it is doubtful that the prophet, even if he lived in New York, would enter into details concerning the 2001 terrorist attack upon the twin-towers in New York City, even though it was a significant historical event. Prophecy is not about history - it’s about the future. Therefore, the reason John doesn’t give details concerning the destruction of the Temple is not because it hadn’t yet taken place, but because he was prophesying, rather than giving a history lesson.
The measuring of the Temple.
Also, we can see that the details do not fit those of the historical Second Temple. Herod’s Temple was destroyed in AD 70 at the end of the Roman siege with not one stone upon another, just as Jesus predicted. John is commanded by the angel to measure the Temple and the worshipers within. He is then told not to measure the outer court. As we already saw in Chapter 5, the outer court (aule) is referred to as the “holy place” (topos hagion) in the Old Testament (Lev 6:16). It is where Jesus says that the abomination of desolation will be set up, marking the beginning the Great Tribulation in Matthew 24:15.
Why is John commanded to measure the Temple and its worshippers? Obviously, he wasn’t being commanded to measure the Herodian Temple. That would have been superfluous, since its measurements could have easily been obtained from existing records. Also, what purpose could be served by knowing the measurements of an already existing Temple? However, if they were dimensions of a future Temple in Jerusalem revealed to John in vision, then we can understand the importance of the measurements.
Although we do not know what the Temple of Revelation measured, its dimensions were obviously revealed to John since he measured it, even though he did not specify them for us. However, it was something measurable, although non-existent in John’s time, except in vision. To my way of understanding, based upon my past experience as a carpenter, measurements are normally given for future reference. They are usually related to something planned out but not yet in existence.
The Temple measurements revealed to Ezekiel were also for a Temple yet future at the time of writing (Ezek 40-48). At the time of Ezekiel’s vision, Jerusalem was also without a Temple, since the first Temple had already been destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar. The measurements were given to him, also using a measuring rod, just as we see in John’s vision. We also see that the Temple revealed in Ezekiel’s vision has reference to a yet future Temple because Herod’s Temple was much smaller. Daniel was also shown events related to a yet future Temple, since he wrote during the Babylonian captivity when there was no longer a Temple in Jerusalem (cf. Dan 8:11-14; 9:27; 12:11).
Contrary to the preterist argument for an early date based upon the mention of the Temple in Jerusalem, we see that John’s visions follow the same pattern established in Daniel and Ezekiel - prophesying concerning an as yet non-existent Temple.
The court is given to the Gentiles.
“But leave out the court (aule) which is outside the temple, and do not measure it, for it has been given to the Gentiles.” (Rev 11:2)
Why is John told to leave the court out of the measurements? The reason is stated: “for it has been given to the Gentiles.” I believe that this could potentially be more than relevant to the present situation in Israel. At present, the Muslims do not even allow the Jews to pray on the Temple Mount. However, the Zionist Jews are determined not only to reclaim their right to pray on the mount but are also actively working towards the rebuilding of the third Temple. The Temple Institute has been making preparations and seeking world-wide support for their right to have their own Temple on the Temple Mount. [5] Some Jews insist that the new Temple must be built on the present site of the Al-Aqsa Mosque. Although sharing the mount with the Muslims is unacceptable to most Zionists, others are willing to share the mount with the Muslims as well as people of other faiths in order to have their own Temple. Some have proposed building the Temple beside the existing Mosque. If this compromise is agreed upon, it could explain why the Temple court (Gr. aule) also referred to as the holy place (topos hagios) (cf. Lev 6:16 LXX), is said to be given to the Gentiles. In this manner it could easily become a representative inter-faith center for ecumenical religious unity, thus preparing the way for the false prophet to set up the Image of the Beast or the abomination of desolation in the holy place, also known as the Temple court, and putting an end to their daily sacrifices (Matt 24:15; Dan 9:27; Rev 13:14-18; 2Thess 2:4; Dan 11:36).
Forty-two-month Gentile occupation of the Holy City
“But leave out the court (aule) which is outside the temple, and do not measure it, for it has been given to the Gentiles. And they will tread the holy city underfoot for forty-two months.” (Rev 11:2)
Preterists argue that this verse has reference to the Roman siege of Jerusalem, which, according to them, lasted for three and a half years. Welton dogmatically states that this was precisely fulfilled at that time. Quoting his words again, he says:
“it’s important to note that forty-two months is three and a half years, the exact length of time the siege of Jerusalem took place, from AD 66–70. It was started by the Emperor Nero (the beast) and ended finally under General Titus.” [6] (emphasis mine)
Gentry, on the other hand, is more cautious when he states: “And the fact is that it took almost exactly forty-two months for Rome to get into a position to destroy the Temple in the Jewish War of A.D. 67-70” [7] (emphasis added) Gentry subtly admits that it cannot be established that the siege lasted exactly three and a half years, or to be more precise (as was the angel with John), 1,260 days. For a more in-depth study revealing the uncertainty as to the exact timing of the siege, I recommend Hitchcock’s dissertation. [8]
I would only like to point out one additional argument against the claim that the Roman siege lasted exactly forty-two months. If it was precisely fulfilled, the early church would have been the first to recognize it. However, the Early Church Fathers believed in a yet future forty-two-month fulfillment during the reign of the coming Antichrist.
Also, the fact that in Revelation 11:2 the Temple court is “given over to the Gentiles” and the Gentiles “will tread the holy city underfoot for forty-two months,” rules out a fulfillment during the Roman siege of Jerusalem since the Roman army was neither within Jerusalem nor in the Temple court during the extended siege. They surrounded the city and sealed it off, but they did not enter until AD 70 when they finally breached the wall and destroyed the Temple.
Gentry recognizing this, says that it took the Romans forty-two months “to get into a position to destroy the Temple.” This does not coincide with the passage in Revelation 11. In the first place, we see that according to 11:2, both the Temple court and the city of Jerusalem will be occupied and dominated by Gentiles for forty-two months. They will not be outside the city walls until the very end, as was the case with the Roman siege from AD 66 to AD 70. Actually, the time of the siege was probably the first time ever under Roman rule when there were actually no Gentiles within the city of Jerusalem.
Secondly, there is no indication in Revelation that the Temple will be destroyed at the end of the forty-two months, as was the case in AD 70. If the detailed description in Revelation 11 were a description of the AD 70 destruction, we would expect it to end by saying: “And after the forty-two months are completed the city and the Temple shall be destroyed.” But rather than saying that, it simply limits the time of gentile occupation to forty-two months.
The Beast is not Nero.
Preterists identify the Beast of Revelation as Nero. However, Nero cannot possibly be the Beast mentioned here in Revelation 11, as becomes evident when we continue reading the passage:
“And I will give power to my two witnesses, and they will prophesy one thousand two hundred and sixty days, clothed in sackcloth.’ 4 These are the two olive trees and the two lampstands standing before the God of the earth. 5 And if anyone wants to harm them, fire proceeds from their mouth and devours their enemies. And if anyone wants to harm them, he must be killed in this manner. 6 These have power to shut heaven, so that no rain falls in the days of their prophecy; and they have power over waters to turn them to blood, and to strike the earth with all plagues, as often as they desire. 7 When they finish their testimony, the beast that ascends out of the bottomless pit will make war against them, overcome them, and kill them. 8 And their dead bodies will lie in the street of the great city which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified. 9 Then those from the peoples, tribes, tongues, and nations will see their dead bodies three-and-a-half days, and not allow their dead bodies to be put into graves. 10 And those who dwell on the earth will rejoice over them, make merry, and send gifts to one another, because these two prophets tormented those who dwell on the earth. 11 Now after the three-and-a-half days the breath of life from God entered them, and they stood on their feet, and great fear fell on those who saw them. 12 And they heard a loud voice from heaven saying to them, "Come up here." And they ascended to heaven in a cloud, and their enemies saw them. 13 In the same hour there was a great earthquake, and a tenth of the city fell. In the earthquake seven thousand people were killed, and the rest were afraid and gave glory to the God of heaven.” (Rev 11:3-13)
Simultaneous with the forty-two-month Gentile occupation of the Temple court and the city of Jerusalem, God raises up two witnesses who become a thorn in the side of the Beast and his followers. For the same period of forty-two months or 1,260 days they will have power to testify unhindered. Then, after the 1,260 days - when they finish their testimony, the beast that ascends out of the bottomless pit will make war against them; overcome them and kill them. This presents an obvious problem for Preterists. The reign of the Beast is said to last for the forty-two-month period (Rev 13:5). His reign is brought to an abrupt end by the Second Coming of Christ (Rev 19:11-18). At Christ’s coming the Beast unites the nations in battle against Him and is defeated. The Beast is then cast alive into the lake of fire, together with the false prophet (Rev 19:20).
This does not parallel with the life of Nero and the circumstances of his reign. Nero did not even live to see the destruction of Jerusalem. Neither was he cast alive with a false prophet into the lake of fire. He committed suicide on June 9 AD 68 after being displaced by Galba as Emperor. Throughout the brief time of the rebellion of Jerusalem, five Emperors were on the throne in Rome. Nero initially sent troops to quell the rebellion in Jerusalem. Shortly before he committed suicide, Galba took power. Galba was followed by Otho, Vitellius, and finally Vespasian. When Vespasian assumed the throne in July of AD 69, he gave his son Titus (who would later become the tenth Emperor), the task of ending the Jerusalem rebellion. The actual siege itself took place under Titus’ command and only lasted six months - from February AD 70 to August AD 70. It wasn’t until the very end of the siege, in August AD 70, that the Romans were finally able to penetrate the northern wall and enter the city.
The city of Jerusalem and the Temple court was not occupied by Gentiles for forty-two months, as we see in Revelation 11. It was occupied by Jewish Zealots. Nero did not live to see the end of the Jewish revolt and the destruction of Jerusalem. So, he could not have put the “two witnesses” to death after 1,260 days. Therefore, Nero was not the Beast of Revelation.
The two witnesses
Preterists, in order to argue for a pre-AD 70 fulfillment of Revelation 11, must also find a historical fulfillment of the vision concerning the two witnesses. John is shown that for 1,260 days the two witnesses will be prophesying in Jerusalem against the Beast and his followers. They are given supernatural power for protection until the forty-two months are completed. At the end of 1,260 days, the Beast will be allowed to kill them. While their dead bodies lay in the streets of Jerusalem for three-and-a-half days, the whole world will rejoice. But then God raises them from the dead, and before the watching world they are caught up in a cloud into heaven. Then Jerusalem is shaken by a great earthquake, killing 7,000 people. The rest give glory to God.
The Preterists are hard-pressed to find an AD 70 fulfillment, since there is no record of two prophets of God prophesying for three and a half years in Jerusalem from AD 66 to AD 70 with such phenomenal signs following their testimony. There is no record of two individuals being killed by Nero (or any other “Beast” for that matter), and then being raised from the dead after three and a half days and then caught up in a cloud while the world looked on. Neither is there any record of an earthquake killing 7,000 people in Jerusalem in AD 70 with the rest of the onlookers giving glory to God.
Many Futurists believe that the two witnesses will be Moses and Elijah who appeared with Jesus and were speaking with him on the mount of Transfiguration. As the disciples descended from the mount, they asked Jesus about the promise of the coming of Elijah, prophesied in Malachi 4:5,6. Jesus replied saying to them: “Indeed, Elijah is coming first and will restore all things.” (Matt 17:11). Surely, in the light of the context of Jesus’ words referring to a future coming of Elijah immediately after meeting with Elijah together with Moses, it is reasonable to surmise that the two witnesses who are to come before the day of the Lord could be Moses and Elijah.
This presents a problem for the Preterists who must find a pre-AD 70 fulfillment for the two witnesses. Since there was no known literal fulfillment during the siege of Jerusalem, they must resort to a symbolic fulfillment to explain the two witnesses. Welton explains their way of getting around this interpretive problem. He says:
“This passage is not talking about the actual Moses and Elijah; rather, Moses and Elijah are the symbols that represent the Law and the Prophets.” [9]
If it is as he claims, then several questions immediately come to mind: Were Moses and Elijah on the mount of transfiguration also symbols speaking with Jesus rather than persons? When Jesus explained that Elijah had already come in John the Baptist, He was referring to a person. When He said that Elijah would come and restore all things, are we to understand that it will not also be in a person as was the case with John the Baptist? Also, how could it be said that the “Law” and the “prophets” were killed and laid dead on the streets of Jerusalem for three and a half days? Welton anticipates this question and attempts to reply:
“The question is, If the two witnesses represent the Law and the Prophets, how can they be put to death? I believe the two witnesses (the Old Testament Law and Prophets) were witnessing about Jesus to the Jews before the AD 70 destruction, but ultimately the Law and the Prophets were ignored, rejected, and ‘killed’ by the Jews. The Law and the Prophets testified as witnesses of Jesus as the Messiah-King and of Israel as the covenant-breaking nation that stood guilty.” [10]
However, the text says that the Beast, and not the Jews, will kill the two witnesses. In what way did “Nero” kill the Law and the Prophets? This explanation only presents other anomalies with the text: In what sense were the bodies of the “Law” and the “Prophets” left unburied for three and a half days without being put in their graves? What motivated the world at that time to celebrate their death? Listen to Welton’s fanciful reply:
“In other words, the AD 70 world was happy to see Jerusalem destroyed and, with it, all the Old Testament rules, regulations, sacrifices, and ceremonies.” [11]
For the remaining details concerning their resurrection and ascension into heaven and the great earthquake, he refers us to R.C. Sproul’s creative explanation:
“After the dust from Jerusalem’s destruction had settled, ‘the breath of life from God’ came back into the two witnesses (Rev. 11:10). The voice of the Law and the prophets rose again. Then the two witnesses were called back into heaven (Rev. 11:12), but at that same time ‘there was a great earthquake’ (Rev. 11:13). As we have discussed before, in apocalyptic language earthquakes represented a demolition or transfer of authority. Indeed, two witnesses were taken to heaven, but the Law and the prophets continued to sound through the Church. The voices of two witnesses were transferred to the Church, and hence, the Law and the prophets continue sounding forth the voice of God even today.” [12]
This spiritualization of the text ignores the specific details of the vision. If the earthquake only represented a transfer of power, why bother saying that a tenth of the city fell and that there were 7,000 fatalities as a result of it? And why say that the survivors gave glory to God upon witnessing it? Even when the visions are symbolic and not literal, each detail of the vision must have a literal application. In my own personal opinion, the mental gymnastics required in order to follow their “interpretive” imagination is almost overwhelming. If the plain sense makes common sense, we should not seek any other sense - even if it means we must modify our doctrines to conform to the obvious meaning of the text.
Therefore, it should be evident to any unbiased reader that Revelation 11 is speaking of a yet future Temple in Jerusalem. None of the details of this vision correspond to the AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple. The Temple court was not given to the Gentiles for three and a half years; Jerusalem was occupied by Jewish Zealots and not Gentile Roman soldiers; there is no record of two witnesses giving testimony in Jerusalem for 1,260 days, and their “Beast,” Nero, wasn’t even alive to kill them in AD 70. Also, as we saw in Chapter 3, the earliest Church Fathers, who were closest in time to the actual historical event of the AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple, uniformly believed in a future Temple and a future Antichrist.
The Beast of Revelation
“Then I stood on the sand of the sea. And I saw a beast rising up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and on his horns ten crowns, and on his heads a blasphemous name. 2 Now the beast which I saw was like a leopard, his feet were like the feet of a bear, and his mouth like the mouth of a lion. The dragon gave him his power, his throne, and great authority. 3 And I saw one of his heads as if it had been mortally wounded, and his deadly wound was healed. And all the world marveled and followed the beast. 4 So they worshiped the dragon who gave authority to the beast; and they worshiped the beast, saying, ‘Who is like the beast? Who is able to make war with him?’ 5 And he was given a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies, and he was given authority to continue for forty-two months. 6 Then he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme His name, His tabernacle, and those who dwell in heaven. 7 It was granted to him to make war with the saints and to overcome them. And authority was given him over every tribe, tongue, and nation. 8 All who dwell on the earth will worship him, whose names have not been written in the Book of Life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.” (Rev 13:1-8)
“The beast that you saw was, and is not, and will ascend out of the bottomless pit and go to perdition. And those who dwell on the earth will marvel, whose names are not written in the Book of Life from the foundation of the world, when they see the beast that was, and is not, and yet is.
9 Here is the mind which has wisdom: The seven heads are seven mountains on which the woman sits. 10 There are also seven kings. Five have fallen, one is, and the other has not yet come. And when he comes, he must continue a short time. 11 The beast that was, and is not, is himself also the eighth, and is of the seven, and is going to perdition.
12 The ten horns which you saw are ten kings who have received no kingdom as yet, but they receive authority for one hour as kings with the beast. 13 These are of one mind, and they will give their power and authority to the beast. 14 These will make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb will overcome them, for He is Lord of lords and King of kings; and those who are with Him are called, chosen, and faithful.” (Rev 17:8-14)
The Sixth King was not Nero
In order for Preterism to be possible, they must demonstrate that the book of Revelation was written prior to A D 66, during the reign of Nero. Furthermore, they must make out Nero as being the Beast of Revelation, since the three-and-a-half-year period they apply to Jerusalem’s destruction is also the time referred to as the reign of the Beast. Welton presents the seven kings of Revelation 17:10 as being Roman Emperors, with Nero as the sixth king of Revelation:
“They are also seven kings. Five have fallen, one is, the other has not yet come; but when he does come, he must remain for only a little while (Revelation 17:10). This passage, which is speaking of the line of rulers in Rome, tells us exactly how many rulers had already come, which one was currently in power, and that the next one would only last a short while. Take a look at how that perfectly fits with Nero and the Roman Empire of the first century. The rule of the first seven Roman Emperors are as follows:
Julius Caesar (49–44 BC)
Augustus (27 BC–AD 14)
Tiberius (AD 14–37)
Caligula (AD 37–41)
Claudius (AD 41–54) ‘Five have fallen...’
Nero (AD 54–68) “One is...”
Galba (June AD 68–January AD 69, a six-month ruler-ship) ‘the other has not yet come; but when he does come, he must remain for only a little while.’
Of the first seven kings of the Roman Empire, five had come (Julius Caesar, Augustus, Tiberius, Gaius, and Claudius), one was now in power (Nero), and one had not yet come (Galba), but would only remain a little time (six months). The vast majority throughout Church history have understood that the beast in Revelation 17 is a reference to Nero.” [13]
Contrary to Welton’s claim that “the vast majority throughout Church history have understood that the beast in Revelation 17 is a reference to Nero,” the most important witnesses throughout Church history – the early Church of the first five centuries, did not believe that Nero was the Beast. They regarded the Beast of Revelation to be one who would reign in their future, during the final three and a half years, and that his reign would come to an end by the Second Coming of Christ.
There are many reasons why Nero could not have been the Beast. We have already seen that Nero committed suicide on June 9, AD 68. Jerusalem and the Temple were not destroyed by Nero. It wasn’t destroyed until August of AD 70 after four other Emperors had already succeeded him on the throne. The Beast is permitted to reign over the world for three and a half years, during which time he is permitted to overcome the saints (Rev 13:5-8). After the three and a half years come to an end, he will cause the two witnesses to be put to death (Rev 11:7); he, together with the ten final kings, will form an army against Christ at His coming, and will be finally cast alive into the lake of fire and brimstone (Rev 17:14; 19:19-20). Preterists, on the other hand, have Christ coming through their Beast, Nero, for the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70.
Also, the list of Emperors Welton presents commences with Julius Caesar who is not recognized by any historian as a Roman Emperor. He was a general under the old Roman Republic who took power and governed a military state for four years between 49 and 44 BC. After his death, the Roman Senate continued to govern the Republic for another seventeen years before Augustus was finally declared the first Emperor of the new Roman Empire in 27 BC. Therefore, any historian would tell them that Galba was the sixth Emperor and not Nero.
Additionally, it isn’t likely that Galba fills the description of the seventh king, who is said to also be the eighth, and will reign for a little while. Galba was followed by more than one hundred and fifty Emperors - forty-eight of them between his reign and the reign of Constantine.
The book of Revelation puts the primary focus upon the seventh and final king, who reigns for a little while, together with the other ten kings (Rev 17:9-14). His brief reign, together with the ten kings, is brought to an abrupt end by the Second Coming of Christ to save His people Israel and unite with His Bride for the wedding feast. Not just the kingdom of the Beast, but all the kingdoms of man come to an end at the Second Coming, when the kingdoms of this world will have become the kingdoms of our Lord and of His Christ, and He shall reign into the ages of the ages! (Rev 11:15).
The Preterists must also argue that the ten kings were involved in the AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem, since Revelation 17:12-14 says that they will reign with the Beast, whom Preterists claim was Nero. Harold Eberle, in Victorious Eschatology, seeks to demonstrate that the ten kings were providences of the Roman Empire who participated in the AD 66 – AD 70 war against Jerusalem. He argues the following:
“We also know that the Roman Empire was divided into ten regions with ten leaders governing those regions. This corresponds to the ten horns of the dragon.
The 10 Provinces of the Roman Empire: Achaia, Gaul, Africa, Germany, Asia, Italy, Britain, Spain, Egypt, Syria.” [14]
Even if it could be demonstrated that the Roman Empire was at that time divided into these ten provinces and all ten could somehow be demonstrated to have participated in the siege, the ten horns of the Beast could not have any application to them whatsoever, since John was shown that, at the time of the vision, they were not yet kings:
“The beast that was, and is not, is himself also the eighth, and is of the seven, and is going to perdition. 12 “The ten horns which you saw are ten kings who have received no kingdom as yet, but they receive authority for one hour as kings with the beast. 13 These are of one mind, and they will give their power and authority to the beast. 14 These will make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb will overcome them, for He is Lord of lords and King of kings; and those who are with Him are called, chosen, and faithful.” (Rev 17:11-14)
The text specifically states that the ten kings did not yet have a kingdom at the time the Revelation was given to John. The one hour they will have with the Beast will lead to war against the Lamb when He comes. Their corpses will lay upon the mountains of Israel (Isa 34:3). Christ – the Lamb, did not come with the Beast and the ten kings to destroy Israel, as Preterists would have us believe. Rather, the Beast and the ten kings will be destroyed by the Lamb, when He comes out of Zion to deliver His people Israel from the armies that come against Jerusalem (Rom 11:26).
The Seven Kings Represent Seven Empires throughout Israel’s History
What, or who, then, is represented by this final Beast, with seven heads and ten horns that is allowed to wield worldwide power for the final three and a half years prior to Christ’s Second Coming? A key to understanding Revelation is to see that it is built upon the foundation of the revelation given in the book of Daniel. To Daniel are revealed the four major powers that would affect God’s people Israel from his day, down to the end of the age. We see in the Image shown in Nebuchadnezzar’s dream that the head was of gold (Dan 2:36-45). Daniel said to Nebuchadnezzar: “you are this head of gold.” Its chest and arms were silver and represented the Medo-Persian Empire which followed. Then came the third kingdom, the Greek Empire represented by the thighs of brass. The fourth kingdom was the Roman Empire represented by the legs of iron. The Roman Empire was divided into two divisions in AD 395, as represented by the legs. The final form, composed of the feet with the ten toes: part iron and part clay, are descriptive of the kingdom of the Beast in Revelation, with the seven heads and ten horns. It is at the close of this final kingdom when Christ will return:
“And in the days of these kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom which shall never be destroyed; and the kingdom shall not be left to other people; it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand forever.” (Dan 2:44)
Daniel was shown that in the days of the ten final kings the kingdom of God will come like a rock cut without hands, falling from heaven and demolishing all the kingdoms of man, establishing an everlasting kingdom. While Preterists would argue that this event occurred in AD 70, it is obvious from the description that it is something that will happen suddenly when Christ comes. They must argue that Christ – the stone cut without hands, came and demolished the kingdoms of this world nearly two-thousand years ago – something that is pretty hard to demonstrate historically in a very convincing manner.
So, back to the question: Who are the seven kings, and who is the seventh king who will rule over ten kings? The seven kings are also called seven heads and seven hills. The heads are seven kings or kingdoms – five of them having come and gone before John’s time. The seven heads are also called seven “hills” which, in keeping with the symbolic nature of the vision, would speak of the rise and decline of powers - better describing empires which rise and decline than emperors. Had five empires already existed in Israel’s history with a sixth in power in John’s day? Yes. The one that was in John’s time was the Roman Empire. There are only five other empires in history, previous to Rome, who had any significant impact upon God’s chosen people. The first empire was the Egyptian Empire which enslaved the people of Israel. The second was the Assyrian Empire which conquered and dispersed the ten northern tribes of Israel. That takes us up to Daniel’s day when the third kingdom, the Babylonian Empire, took Judah captive. The fourth was the Medo-Persian Empire and the fifth was Greece.
That the seven heads are representative of World Empires rather than Roman Emperors can be further seen by comparing the beasts of Daniel’s vision with the beast of Revelation. Daniel’s vision is described in the following manner:
“The first was like a lion and had eagle's wings. I watched till its wings were plucked off; and it was lifted up from the earth and made to stand on two feet like a man, and a man's heart was given to it. 5 And suddenly another beast, a second, like a bear. It was raised up on one side, and had three ribs in its mouth between its teeth. And they said thus to it: 'Arise, devour much flesh!' 6 After this I looked, and there was another, like a leopard, which had on its back four wings of a bird. The beast also had four heads, and dominion was given to it. 7 After this I saw in the night visions, and behold, a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible, exceedingly strong. It had huge iron teeth; it was devouring, breaking in pieces, and trampling the residue with its feet. It was different from all the beasts that were before it, and it had ten horns. 8 I was considering the horns, and there was another horn, a little one, coming up among them, before whom three of the first horns were plucked out by the roots. And there, in this horn, were eyes like the eyes of a man, and a mouth speaking pompous words.” (Daniel 7:4-8)
Comparing the beasts of Daniel’s vision to that of Revelation we can observe important similarities:
“Then I stood on the sand of the sea. And I saw a beast rising up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and on his horns ten crowns, and on his heads a blasphemous name. 2 Now the beast which I saw was like a leopard, his feet were like the feet of a bear, and his mouth like the mouth of a lion.” (Rev 13:1,2)
Comparing the Beast of Revelation with both the image and the beasts of Daniel, we see that the Beast described in Revelation is a composite beast, made up of all four of the beasts of Daniel. It has the mouth of the first beast - Babylon; The feet of the second beast - Medo-Persia; the body of the third beast - Greece, and the ten horns of the fourth beast – Rome. The seven heads of the Beast of Revelation would also indicate that this final Empire will somehow also encompass all the six prior kingdoms.
Therefore, the final Beast of Revelation is not simply a revival of the Roman Empire or the fourth beast of Daniel (although it is that). The ten horns of the Beast of Revelation are the ten horns of Daniel’s final beast which represents Rome. Also, the ten toes of Daniel’s image represent the latter form of the Roman Empire. However, the Beast of Revelation encompasses all the prior kingdoms as well.
The Personage of the Beast
The individual person of the Beast of Revelation is “the little horn” that rises among the ten horns or kings, and at some point, plucks up three of the ten horns by its roots (Dan 7:8). Even as Daniel referred to Nebuchadnezzar as the representative head of the first Empire – the head of gold (Dan 2:38), John, in Revelation often makes reference to the individual representative head of the beast of Revelation, who himself is called the Beast. It appears that the man referred to as the “Beast” receives a mortal wound as he is rising in influence:
“And I saw one of his heads as if it had been mortally wounded, and his deadly wound was healed. And all the world marveled and followed the beast. 4 So they worshiped the dragon who gave authority to the beast; and they worshiped the beast, saying, ‘Who is like the beast? Who is able to make war with him?’ 5 And he was given a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies, and he was given authority to continue for forty-two months.” (Rev 13:3-5)
“And he (the false prophet) exercises all the authority of the first beast in his presence, and causes the earth and those who dwell in it to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed. 13 He performs great signs, so that he even makes fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men. 14 And he deceives those who dwell on the earth by those signs which he was granted to do in the sight of the beast, telling those who dwell on the earth to make an image to the beast who was wounded by the sword and lived.” (Rev 13:12-14)
As we can see here, one of the heads (the person of the Beast), receives a mortal wound by the sword and raises back from the dead. When this happens, the whole world will worship him. He will be allowed to continue for forty-two months or three and a half years. In the light of the assassination and resuscitation of the seventh king or the Beast, we can now understand the enigmatic phrase in Revelation 17:11: “The beast that was, and is not, is himself also the eighth, and is of the seven, and is going to perdition.” In Revelation 17, John is being given more details of the Beast. In Chapter 13, John sees the seven-headed Beast arise out of the sea. Then, as he looks on, one of its heads is mortally wounded, only to be brought back to life. In Chapter 17, the angel explains to John that the one head that was assassinated was himself the seventh king and becomes the eighth when he is brought back to life. However, it will not be a true resurrection since the entity entering his corpse and giving him life will have ascended from the pit (17:8). This entity, inhabiting the body of the seventh king – thus becoming the eighth, will be given power for forty-two months and the whole world will be deceived by him.
A Mixed Alliance
In Nebuchadnezzar’s dream, the feet and the ten toes, made partly of iron and partly of clay, are explained by Daniel:
“Whereas you saw the feet and toes, partly of potter's clay and partly of iron, the kingdom shall be divided; yet the strength of the iron shall be in it, just as you saw the iron mixed with ceramic clay. 42 And as the toes of the feet were partly of iron and partly of clay, so the kingdom shall be partly strong and partly fragile. 43 As you saw iron mixed with ceramic clay, they will mingle with the seed of men; but they will not adhere to one another, just as iron does not mix with clay. 44 And in the days of these kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom which shall never be destroyed; and the kingdom shall not be left to other people; it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand forever.” (Dan 2:41-45)
Daniel says that the feet and toes will be made up of two elements which do not adhere one to the other. If the inclusion of elements of each of Daniel’s four beasts in the description of the Beast of Revelation is referring to the same geographical areas occupied by all of those prior Empires put together, then we would have a kingdom made up of an incompatible mix of western nations with radical Islamic Mid-Eastern and African nations. This would be a very volatile mix and could help explain the revival of the barbaric practice of decapitation as we see mentioned in Revelation (Rev 20:4).
Therefore, as we have seen, all evidence - both external and internal, indicate that the book of Revelation was written in AD 95 or AD 96, at the close of Domitian’s reign. Although the date of writing is not a vital issue for Futurists, it is absolutely essential for the Preterists to demonstrate that Revelation was written prior to AD 66, in order to argue that it prophecies concerning an AD 66 – AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem. Otherwise, according to their interpretation, it would be a history book written after the fact rather than a revelation of future events. However, nothing they have to present warrants abandoning the Futurist interpretation of the Scriptures held by the Early Church Fathers for their more recent doctrine of Preterism.
This blog is an excerpt from my book: “Last Days – Past or Present?”
[1] Milton Terry, Biblical Apocalyptics (Whitefish, MT: Kessinger Publishing, 2009), 451.
[2] George Eldon Ladd, A Commentary on the Revelation of St. John (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1972. p. 22.
[3] Welton, Jonathan (2013-11-01). Raptureless: An Optimistic Guide to the End of the World - Revised Edition
Including The Art of Revelation (Kindle Location 2320). BookBaby. Kindle Edition.
[4] Welton, Jonathan (2013-11-01). Raptureless: An Optimistic Guide to the End of the World - Revised Edition Including The
Art of Revelation (Kindle Locations 5071-5077). BookBaby. Kindle Edition.
[5] https://www.templeinstitute.org/
[6] Welton, Jonathan (2013-11-01). Raptureless: An Optimistic Guide to the End of the World - Revised Edition Including The
Art of Revelation (Kindle Locations 5075-5077). BookBaby. Kindle Edition.
[7] Gentry, Kenneth Before Jerusalem Fell: Dating the Book of Revelation. Tyler TX: Institute for Christian Economics, 1989, p. 250.
[8] Hitchcock, Mark. “A Defense of the Domitianic Date of the Book of Revelation.” Dissertation for Dallas Theological Seminary. December 2005. p. 28. http://www.pre-trib.org/data/pdf/hitchcock-dissertation.pdf
[9] Welton, Jonathan (2013-11-01). Raptureless: An Optimistic Guide to the End of the World - Revised Edition
Including The Art of Revelation (Kindle Locations 5088-5089). BookBaby. Kindle Edition.
[10] Welton, Jonathan (2013-11-01). Raptureless: An Optimistic Guide to the End of the World - Revised Edition
Including The Art of Revelation (Kindle Locations 5112-5116). BookBaby. Kindle Edition.
[11] Welton, Jonathan (2013-11-01). Raptureless: An Optimistic Guide to the End of the World - Revised Edition
Including The Art of Revelation (Kindle Locations 5132-5133). BookBaby. Kindle Edition.
[12] R.C Sproul, The Last Days According to Jesus (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1998), 186-187.
[13] Welton, Jonathan (2013-11-01). Raptureless: An Optimistic Guide to the End of the World - Revised Edition Including The
Art of Revelation (Kindle Locations 2387-2397). BookBaby. Kindle Edition.
[14] Eberle, Harold R. (2007-12-04). Victorious Eschatology (Kindle Locations 2390-2406). Worldcast Publishing.
Kindle Edition.