Dispensationalism and the Reversal of Pentecost

If we can interpret and establish Rom. 11:15 “……what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead?” to be the same time that the “dead in Christ” are raised, then is it settled that there can be no pre-trib rapture, since the resurrection of the “dead in Christ” is, by all accounts, the rapture, which is, of course, contemporaneous with the resurrection?

We can establish that the national resurrection / birth of the beleaguered nation takes place at the moment of Christ’s return (Isa 66:8; Eze 39:22; Zech 3:9; 12:10; Mt 23:39; 24:30; Lk 21:24; Acts 3:21; Ro 11:25-26; Rev 1:7; 11:2 et al.) But even after we prove the intersection between the national resurrection of the nation and personal resurrection of the saints, we have proven nothing against the rapture, at least not to their peculiar kind of thinking. Let me explain why.

They are instant to grant that Israel’s experience of tribulation ends in national resurrection at the return of Christ, which is simultaneous with the resurrection of OT believers and the martyrs of the tribulation who will come to faith AFTER the rapture. According to their view, everyone saved before Pentecost and after the pre-tribulational rapture belong to a distinct people of God, separate, not only from unbelieving Israel, but even from the regenerate saints of Israel who died before Pentecost, with those who come to faith after the rapture, thus dispensationalism’s famous theory of ‘two peoples’ of God. These groups are thought to belong to different economies or dispensations, thus the term, dispensationalism.

According to pre-tribulational dispensationalism, God’s “foretold” prophetic program for Israel is resumed only after the present ‘mystery’ dispensation (parenthesis / intercalation) that ends with the rapture. Recognizing that the books of Daniel and Revelation depict saints in the tribulation, so-called ‘church saints’distinguished from so-called ‘tribulation saints’. The former are removed by secret translation before the tribulation can begin. They acknowledge that the national resurrection of Israel comes with the end of the times of the gentiles and the sudden regeneration of the nation that Ezekiel and Hosea represent as a resurrection and Isaiah will depict as the moment of birth (Isa 66:8; Eze 37; Hos 6:2). Scripture is clear that the national rebirth or resurrection of the nation is contemporaneous with the post-tribulational resurrection of ‘those who sleep in the dust of the earth’ (Isa 26:16-21; Dan 12:1-2; Job 14:14 with 1Cor 15:52 & Job 19:25-27 with Zech 14:4, 7-9). This does not stop their theory because they simply assign the post-tribulational resurrection of OT saints to another dispensation that begins after the church has been removed. That is to say that saints who died before Pentecost do not go up in the rapture but continue to sleep in the dust of the earth for seven more years.

In contrast to God’s prophetically foretold purpose for Israel, it is believed that the church occupies an entirely distinct and completely un-foretold dispensation that was a mystery in other ages, the so-called, ‘church age’. Of course, we believe this is a complete misinterpretation of what Paul means by his use of the term, ‘mystery’. He is not using the term to dissociate the new revelation that has come to light in Christ from what stood written in the prophets. On the contrary, what has come to light in the gospel, though hidden until the appointed time of revelation, was fully foretold. That was the hallmark of its authenticity and verification that makes the world accountable (Acts 26:22; 1Cor 15:3-4 with Ro 16:25-26; 1Pet 1:11). That something has been newly revealed or brought to much fuller light, does not necessarily mean that it is newly existent. For example, the mystery of Christ and His pre-existence and co-eternality in the Godhead has come to much greater light since the revelation of the gospel. You see the point. I believe the same could be said of the church. It could not have been conceived as the body of Christ prior to the revelation of the mystery of Christ and the gospel, of course, but this does not mean that the church had no prior existence before Pentecost, as believed by dispensationalists.

Dispensationalists believe the mystery is the church as a new organism that has nothing to do with what was foretold in prophecy. Only after God’s mystery program for the church has been completed with the rapture does the focus turn again to God’s prophetic program for Israel (their words). Then begins the Day of the Lord, which they make to include the entirety of Daniel’s last week (another untenable claim). All who are saved after the rapture belong to another, completely distinct people of God. Not only the redeemed of Israel, but all who come to faith after the rapture, and all from among the nations that will be saved throughout the millennium, are NOT to be reckoned as belonging to the body of Christ, which belongs distinctly to the interim between Pentecost and the pre-tribulational rapture.

Dispensationalists will be the first to tell you that unless the body of Christ is restricted to those who are indwelt by the Spirit between Pentecost and the rapture, the case for a pre-tribulation rapture falls apart. Indeed, if the saints depicted in the tribulation in Daniel and Revelation belong to the body of Christ, then the conclusion cannot be avoided that the church is in the tribulation. Therefore, dispensatinalists would probably have no problem acknowledging that ‘life from the dead’ for national Israel coincides with the resurrection of Daniel and all the saints who died either before Pentecost or after the rapture. They know there is a spiritual resurrection of Israel at Christ’s return to establish the kingdom, they just don’t think this interferes with the inferences that they have built around the presupposition that the church, by definition, cannot be in the tribulation. That is what they do. They define the church out of the tribulation by a definition that was unknown until it was first proposed by John Nelson Darby as a break through insight from his sick bed in 1836.

Pre-tribulationists view the time between Pentecost and the rapture as ‘the dispensation of the church’ (the so-called, ‘the church age’). This is based on the belief that the church did not exist in the OT. They will cite Mt 16:18. “Upon this rock, I will (future tense) build my church.” They will point out that only with the pouring out of the Spirit (after the glorification of Jesus as Messiah; Jn 7:39) did the Spirit begin to baptize believers into the newly revealed body of the one new man. We take great exception to this view, but there are many besides dispensationalists who believe (I think incorrectly) that Pentecost was the ‘birthday’ of the church. But quite apart from that discussion, here is what is especially obnoxious to their system: It is the radically baseless inference that they haste to draw from 2Thes 2:7. The restrainer is held to be the Holy Spirit and His removal permits the Antichrist to be revealed. That is not the only interpretation for the identity of the restrainer, but even if it is allowed (though I do not allow) that the restrainer is the Holy Spirit, it would not necessarily follow that when He is withdrawn from His ministry of restraining evil, every believer who is indwelt by the Spirit is also taken away.

This is an inference based on a presupposition that leads to absurd conclusions. Those who take this view do not blush to call this event “a reversal of Pentecost” (Walvoord and many others). I call it a ‘retraction’ of Pentecost, because that’s what the theory implies. They argue that since the Holy Spirit did not indwell saints before Pentecost (on the contrary, saints were indwelt by the Spirit), He will no longer indwell those who come to faith after the rapture. They will be born again but not indwelt (how is that?). Tribulation believers will sustain a relation to the Spirit that they assume (I think falsely) existed before Pentecost. It is believed (quite incorrectly) that the Holy Spirit did not indwell believers before Pentecost. Until Pentecost, He only resided “with” them. This view is built on what can be shown to be a faulty interpretation of Jn 14:17.

The two pillars of dispensationalism that are indispensable to its defense is first the doctrine of imminence and secondly their definition of the church as restricted only to this age. The second pillar is based on two principle presuppositions that are essential to its support: 1). Their own new view of Paul’s use of the term, mystery as applied to the new revelation by the Spirit, and 2), their view that Holy Spirit’s indwelling is restricted to saints living only between Pentecost and the pre-trib rapture. Touch either one of these pillar points and the whole edifice of modern dispensationalism starts to crumble. But that is only if one knows their own system well enough to know what is absolutely necessary to its support.

Most who embrace the pre-trib theory (with its doctrine of an any moment return and new and novel ecclessiology) might give pause if they only knew what the academic defenders of their position must teach in order to hold the system together, things so obnoxious to the normal believer as the thought that none of the righteous who died before Pentecost can participate in the marriage supper of the Lamb. Why? Because it is believed that no one living before Pentecost can belong to the body of Christ. All the righteous of the older dispensation continue their sleep in the dust of the earth for an additional seven years. This is clear from Dan 12:1-2 and a number of other scriptures that show that the resurrection of the OT faithful takes place only AFTER the tribulation at the time of Israel’s deliverance. Not only so, but Jesus said that those who would believe on Him would be raised, not at an undisclosed, pre-trib rapture, but ‘at the last day’ (Jn 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:24; 12:48).

Such observations may not dissuade those who have deeply imbibed academic dispensationalism, but few things could be more obnoxious or theologically untenable to the average believer than the imaginative notion that the Spirit who has been once and for all given (as based on the once and for all glorification of Jesus; Jn 7:39), that His indwelling presence should also be taken away at the rapture, so that He will no longer indwell those who become saints after the rapture. Not only does this so-called ‘reversal of Pentecost’ obtain throughout the last seven years of this age. By the same principle, all who come to faith all throughout the millennium cannot be indwelt by the Spirit. He is with them but not in them, because that distinction is what makes the body unique to this dispensation. Believest thou this? Such is the price of consistency.

This is a point where they stand most to be embarrassed. For the sake of those who might give pause, love bids that we endeavor to educate the unwary of what the academic defenders of dispensationalism admit to be necessary to support the doctrine of an imminent, and therefore pretribulational rapture.

Not only was the Spirit given on the basis of Jesus’ once and for all glorification, which can NEVER be reversed, but as you so well asked, “how will the outpouring / baptism of the Spirit that will come to the penitent Jewish survivors ‘in that day’ NOT also baptize them into the body of Christ?” Exactly! How can the Spirit not put one in the body in that day no less than this? How can one be in Christ and not be in His body? And how can the Spirit who will be poured out upon the the penitent Jewish survivors of tribulation produce a lesser result than Pentecost, particularly when Pentecost was the first fruits of that which is to come? How is it that He baptizes believers now into the revealed body of Christ but He will not do the same for those who receive the ultimate promise made to Israel? Absurd! Not only is this poor eschatology; it is disastrous theology! It belies a terribly deficient understanding of the inward working and abiding union of the Spirit as the basis of that union with the divine nature that is salvation. And, though impossible apart from the cross and resurrection of Jesus, the indwelling of the Holy Spirit is certainly NOT something that began only after the cross, as witness Jesus’ reprimand of Nicodemus for not recognizing that just as a nation cannot be born apart from the Spirit, neither can a person, and so on we could go in demonstrating by many scriptures and evidences too plain to dispute that the Spirit of Christ indwelt, not only the prophets (1Pet 1:11) but all the children born of the Spirit (Gal 4:29 etc.), but that’s another discussion, albeit a needful one.

Posted in Dispensationalism, Pre-Trib Rapture, Romans, The Mystery of Israel | Comments Off on Dispensationalism and the Reversal of Pentecost

The Judge Is Already Standing at the Door

On the question of the time statements, I have written much off and on and really need to collect those observations as many of them, though alive in my spirit, are not all fresh to my memory. But I have written of the unique nature of how the scriptures view time in spiritual dynamic. I note how that every generations stands, in one sense, at an equidistance to the day of the Lord, that great transition point from the present evil age to the age to come. I argue that we must discern what I believe the prophets themselves discerned of an ‘existential’ imminency that is always true, as the powers and the judgements of the last day impinge equally upon all, at all times, as over against a ‘chronological’ imminency that can only be true when the final signs are literally present in their final form, as in Paul’s reference to the necessary precursory appearance of the man of sin as final embodiment of the mystery of iniquity in the context of a besieged Jerusalem.

This can be shown in the way that some prophets centuries later would employ the same vocabulary of imminence (e.g., the DOL [Day of the LORD] “at hand”, “near” and hasting etc.). They would speak this way of their own generation’s close proximity to the DOL in conscious knowledge that the earlier prophet had used this very language to describe an imminent visitation of the day that was not fully realized in the time of the early prophet. What was realized was a historical visitation of judgment that was fulfilled in remarkable detail, though the full end would still remain for a further generation. Yet, the contemporary generation of evil doers did not escape the threatened covenant judgments associated with the ultimate day of the Lord.

For the surviving remnant, there would be a return and partial fulfillment of restored blessing, but the full balance of all that was promised would be postponed to a more distant point of reference, as in the well known mountain range analogy or the phenomenon known as ‘prophetic foreshortening’ or telescoping, where the near and far horizons are blended in a composite vision without clear distinction. Yet, lest we imagine that this is some effort to save prophecy from the appearance of having failed, we can observe in retrospect how many scattered predictions could not have been fulfilled if all that had been foretold in the composite visions had taken place finally and all at once. So the scripture itself makes provision, even requires recognition of a gap between events that were seen as taking place on a single plane that would be fulfilled in distinct periods separated by such distinctions as the seventy years of Jeremiah’s prophecy, as over against Isaiah’s prophecy of a much more protracted exile and desolation of the Land is envisioned as covering “many generations” (Isa 61:4), as many other examples could be cited of this overlapping of events that would be fulfilled in stages and distinct installments over time, with many important foretold events supervening. It’s the nature of a uniquely biblical perspective of time. There is good evidence that the prophets understood this and were not the least disturbed by the earlier prophet’s announcement that the Day of the Lord was imminent from his perspective.

The judgements of that day were indeed realized in part; but until the discipline of the covenant has reached final resolution in the everlasting salvation of Israel, the end is not yet and the day is yet future, always put just beyond a final unequaled time of trouble and national travail. So far from the later prophets’ conceiving of the earlier prophet’s announcement of an imminent end to have failed, the prophets of a later period will apply the same language to their own generation, as yet another gentile aggressor would threaten judgment and exile. The prophets were aware of this continuing cycle of covenant judgment that must continue until the entirety of the nation comes into the everlasting righteousness of the NC. Only such an apocalyptic in-breaking would be sufficient to overcome the nation’s habitual tendency to backslide and thus end forever the constant threat of covenant judgment. As long as there is only a remnant that fulfills the righteousness of faith, covenant jeopardy will continue to hang over the nation, threatening further curses of the broken law according to Lev 26; Deut 28-32, etc.

I call this ‘pattern eschatology’, because it has recurrent cycles every time the threshold of iniquity has been reached. In which case, the Land spews out its chosen inhabitants and this is subject to be repeated as long as the condition of apostasy persists, again and again. So long as Israel is not saved, the curse continues as the world continues to hemorrhage until their full return to their appointed place under the reign of Messiah from Jerusalem. In every repetition of the cycle of judgment, it is a piece of the end drawing near and visiting a particular generation with the judgments of the coming day. This must continue until all Israel, and not only a remnant, is saved with an everlasting salvation (Isa 45:17, 25; 54:13; 59:21; 60:21; Jer 31:34; 32:40 etc.).

Therefore, the ever present ‘at hand-ness’ of the kingdom as a potential spiritual realization, and the equally ever present ‘at hand-ness’ of the judgments of the great day are no surprise at all. It is the Scripture’s way of pressing on everyone at all times, both the access and the potential imminence of being continuously exposed to the dynamic of Israel’s eschatology, as always impinging, as near as a heart beat, as in the parable of the rich fool: “You fool! This night your soul will be required of you” (Lk 12:16-21). There is no person and no generation who does not stand in that kind of existential proximity to the DOL, so it is eminently wise and serviceable to all generations that the scripture should speak in this way, due to the sense in which every generation stands under, and in direct confrontation with the great day, regardless of how removed it may be chronologically. We see this in the gospels where some passages present the Lord’s return as potentially imminent, while others present the same day as heralded in advance by definite signs.

On your question concerning the law, I believe the case can be made that when Paul speaks in negative terms of the Law, he is NEVER finding fault with the law. Rather, it is the fatal presumption that the law’s perfect requirements can be met and satisfied by something in the natural power and will of man. It is the false hope that there is some strength or potential virtue in man that can gain life by anything less than the miracle of resurrection and rebirth. It is the divine rejection of anything meritorious that has its source in man. It is not that the law is set aside or made obsolete. Rather, it is the fulfillment of the law by the Spirit through faith in Christ’s obedience, atonement, and resurrection, as apart from any work or righteousness that has its source in man. The prophet Isaiah said that Messiah would magnify the law and make it glorious (Isa 42:21), but the law is cheapened when it is presumed that its holy demands can be sufficiently met by the strength and will of man to escape wrath and gain eternal life. It is not the end of the law except in the sense that its goal has been realized in Christ. Rather, it is the end of a misplaced trust in man that presumes that life can come by the law, which is to say by man. That is Paul’s concern, not the removal of the law, but the removal of confidence in the flesh, which perverts the proper intent and use of the law.

The only fault with the law is its inability (‘weakness’) to secure life by the inability of fallen man to adequately fulfill its requirement of holy perfection (Jn 7:19). The fault lies with how men look to the law as a means of winning divine acceptance. It is the deadly presumption that man has strength (Ro 5:6). God must resist the pride of this false dependency, since it is impossible for God to be moved or indebted by anything that has its source in man (Ro 11:35-26; 1Cor 4:7). Otherwise, mercy would be conditioned on something in man that could merit and lay claim to the promise by the resident powers of the first creation. This can never be, since the promise made in grace fully assumes that only by a miracle of regeneration can the inherent corruption and inability of the fallen nature be overcome by the God who raises the dead. This great truth is witnessed by Abraham’s deep sleep to show the unilateral nature of the covenant.

For Paul, reliance on the law is nothing more than reliance on the flesh’. It is the presumption that imagines that the law’s unapproachably high standard (Heb 12:18-21) can be met and managed by man. Paul shows that the law was intended to shut persons up to the necessity of a miraculous deliverance of radical, inward transformation that is nothing less than life from the dead. This is Paul’s apocalyptic gospel. So far from encouraging hope in man’s innate abilities, the law was given to drive men off of their self reliance and to crowd them to Christ. The transformation that comes through the Spirit’s revelation of Christ is patterned after Israel’s eschatological new birth and resurrection at the last day when the surviving remnant are transformed as they “look upon Him whom they pierced” (Zech 12:10).

The prophets entertained no such optimism concerning human nature and spoke of another covenant based on better promises of the initiative that God would take to make His people willing in the day of His power (Ps 102:13; 110:3; Gal 1:15-16). The mystery of the gospel is that the power and blessing of that day has, in real measure, come already, as first fruits. Hence, the already and the not yet of an inaugurated eschatology. The gospel reveals the predestined Lamb, slain from the foundation of the world, to be the only means by which God can approach the guilty, since it is only by death to the flesh accomplished by the atonement of the last Adam that the sinner can be free from the law’s sentence of death. Without the atonement of Christ, faith itself would be vain, since it is only through His sacrifice that all who go down into death with Him can be made alive in Him.

According to Paul, the law, rightly perceived, weakens rather than strengthens man. That is its design, to drive men off of carnal confidence that they might put their trust in God and not in themselves. This is why Jesus raises the bar by drawing out the true implications of the law’s demands in the Sermon on the Mount and in His shocking rebuke of the naive humanism of the rich young ruler whose root problem was his optimistic view of man (Mt 19:17 with Jn 2:25). In this, Jesus perfectly anticipates Paul’s theology of total depravity (Ro 7:18). This state of natural helplessness is the corollary of a pervasive corruption that has passed on all men through the fall. It is well said; we are not sinners because we sin; we sin because we are sinners! Sin is not measured just in terms of particular offenses against the law. It is a disease that pervades every aspect of our nature. This condition has been called, ‘original sin’. Judaism’s great error is not in their rejection of a term coined by Christian theologians; it is their denial of what the term stands for.

By such denial, Judaism shows a far greater optimism concerning human nature their prophets who despaired of anything short of an ultimate apocalyptic in-breaking, sufficient to transform the nature of an entire nation in one day, a transformation so radical as to last forever, unto children’s children (Isa 54:13; 59:21; Jer 31:34). The prophets saw Israel as ‘shut up’ by the law to an act of God, exerted dynamically from outside themselves that would radically transform their nature by the outpouring of the Holy Spirit at the revelation of their Messiah (Isa 32:15-17; Eze 39:28; Joel 2:28-29; Zech 12:10; Mt 23:39; 24:30; Rev 1:7)

In that day, they will know that nothing in themselves made them to differ from the generations before them who were not able to enter in. And what the prophets saw for the nation, Paul sees for the individual. The new birth is an apocalyptic concept derived from the pattern of Israel’s eschatology. This is why Jesus holds Nicodemus accountable, as a teacher in Israel, to make this connection. If a nation cannot enter into the kingdom except by a birth of the Spirit, can it be any differently for the individual?

From the standpoint of Israel’s eschatology, it is only when this apocalyptic transformation has been effected that ‘all Israel’ will “know the Lord from that day and forward (Eze 39:22), and so fulfill the demands of the law in such a way as to keep the Land forever, without further threat of affliction from their enemies (2Sam 7:10; Jer 31:40; Amos 9:15). This, since the ever threatening jeopardy of the broken law will have been finally overcome by the Spirit of regeneration, not only for a remnant, but the whole of the nation unto children’s children.

Only such a transformation of the whole of the nation (beginning with the third that survive the tribulation) can guarantee continuance in the Land, which is the logic of the intervention of the Day of the Lord. The promise is therefore NOT the removal of the law in the sense of the holy commandments that define righteousness. Impossible! What is removed is the inability to fulfill all righteousness by the Spirit through the quickening of faith. However, the Spirit cannot be lawfully given unless the enmity is destroyed by the removal of what Paul calls, “the body of sin” (Ro 6:6), and this is only accomplished through the atonement of the last Adam.

For Paul, to be under the law simply means to be under the power of the flesh where the law can only speak death to all that falls short of its perfect requirement to be holy as God is holy. In short, the law is commanding and requiring nothing short of the moral nature of God. For Paul, as long as one is alive to sin through dependency on the flesh (natural will and power), one is under the dominion of the law that must curse all that comes short. To die to the flesh through the Spirit, as only made possible by the body of Christ, is to live to God by the rule of the Spirit of life that is the ever present fulfillment of the law as emanating from the divine nature within. It is God incarnate in jars of clay who is fulfilling the law through the union of sonship by reason of shared nature. The nature and life of the woman’s Seed has been born within and this secures the inheritance promised to all the seed.

Paul is continually contrasting and polarizing these two principles of power, the power of the flesh versus the life and power of the Spirit. They exist in totally different domains, the domain that under the curse of the law through dependence on the flesh for its fulfillment, and the domain of the Spirit that fulfills the law by a faith that depends wholly on what God has done and will do and depends nothing at all on what man can do apart from the life giving Spirit of God. Paul is not saying the law is finished but the tyranny of the flesh that takes occasion by the law, which is to say the presumption of power that there is something in man that can sufficiently meet the law’s demand for a life that is beyond human reach and must therefore be given freely as a divine act of resurrection based on the work of Christ, with no account of merit in the creature.

I believe Paul is absolutely correct to understand that the law requires nothing less than the Son and the nature of the Son in sons; and so the necessity of a new creation that is patterned after Israel’s eschatology of the renewal of all things. Only by being dead to the flesh by a new creation can one be discharged from the obligation to fulfill the law’s full range of obligations by the flawed and limited powers of the first creation. In Paul’s marriage analogy, unless one has become legally and spiritually dead to the law by the body of Christ, the full obligation persists, as the law decrees death to all who fall short. But the law is met and gloriously fulfilled, first by the Messiah on behalf of His people, but then also by His nature within, as the body remains a battleground between flesh and Spirit, where the war has been won but each battle remains decisive for the progressive conquest of the soul to be fully conformed to Christ as the light that grows brighter to the perfect day.

Because we are now in perfect union with the law giver, it is impossible that we, as a new creation, can be at enmity with the righteous requirements of God contained in the law. That’s why Paul could distinguish between the inward man of the Spirit, who could not commit sin from his inmost new nature but still battled the sin that remained in his members (Ro 7:20 with 1Jn 3:9). For the new man of the new creation, all enmity is contained and condemned in the flesh with which the new man of the Spirit (which new man we are if we are Christ’s) is perpetually at war. This is the ongoing struggle between death and life with the goal that the power of Christ’s resurrection might be fully magnified and displayed in our mortal bodies (Phil 1:19-20; 3:10-12). The standard of perfect holiness has not changed, but the means and source of its fulfillment has changed radically. Though the law is no longer looked to as a means; conformity to its righteous demands is no less imperative in any age or dispensation.

That said, there is an important difference, as even the rabbis speak of a ‘change in the law’, not as conceived by Christians, of course, but as observed by the marked changes to the outward ordinances of the law in the messianic age after the day of the Lord. As noted, Jesus and the Apostles conceived of the kingdom as taking a new departure in the present. In the person and work of Christ, the kingdom was ‘at hand’. For Jews this could only mean that the ‘age to come’ was ‘at hand’. From Jesus’ parables concerning the ‘mystery of the kingdom’, it becomes evident that for Jesus, it is the power an presence of the age to come that is not only ‘at hand’; it has come.

With the revelation of Jesus as Messiah and Lord, personal salvation is understood as passing over into the life of the age to come, according to the pattern of Israel’s still to be realized eschatology in the still coming, post-tribulational day of the Lord. Here is an important point. All the prophets understood the dilemma of the covenant as posed by the inability of Israel to ever possess the Land according to the promise of everlasting possession apart from a mighty apocalyptic in-breaking that would accomplish at once the inward transformation of the heart and the external subjugation of the gentiles to the rod iron rule of Messiah. They knew the inadequacy of the law to bring this about, not by any defect in the law, of course, but by the natural enmity of human nature.

For Jesus and the Apostles, the power of that coming day has come in the person of the Spirit through the word and work of Christ. The age to come is here, not in its finality, of course, but in its powerful working by the Spirit of revelation. There is an apocalyptic unveiling before the end, because the ground and basis of the everlasting covenant of promise to Abraham has come to light in the ‘blood of the everlasting covenant’. Jesus is the apocalyptic event that brings the promise and blessing of the age to come into the present, despite the continued presence of evil, thus, the ‘mystery of the kingdom’. That Jesus sees it this way is clear from His application of the everlasting covenant to those who believe on Him in Jn 6.

The promise that guarantees that all the children of redeemed Israel would be ‘taught of God’ has come now. The anomaly is that the passage that Jesus is citing appears in a decidedly post-tribulational, day of the Lord context (Isa 54:13 with Jn 6:45). Thus, Jesus is applying the covenant of peace that is described as coming to post-tribulational Israel to be now available to those who believe on Him. The emphasis on the Spirit’s drawing as necessary pre-requisite to faith stands in notable analogy to the pouring out of the Spirit on the Jewish survivors of the final tribulation. Notice too the implied security of those who trust in Christ in analogy to the ability of post-tribulational Israel to inherit the Land forever without further fear of their enemies, because all Israel will know Him “from that day and forward” (see Isa 4:2-3; 45:17, 25; 54:13; 59:21; 60:21; 66:22; Ps 89:36; Jer 31:34; 32:40; Eze 39:22, 28-29; Zech 3:9; 12:10; Zeph 3:13 and many other scriptures that show a uniformity of Jewish salvation in the millennium that secures the Land as an everlasting possession).

This is the background of Paul’s logic in contrasting the conditionality and weakness of the law as a means of life based on man’s performance, with the unconditionality of the everlasting covenant as based on God’s predetermination in grace to raise those who are dead in sin. The question of the law is the question of the radical pervasiveness of sin as requiring nothing short of resurrection and new birth by the Spirit, not as a reward for doing the law but as a means to do it in truth by the power of God for which no glory can be taken.

I believe we could say that for Paul it was an inexorable rule of the Spirit that a division in the labor means a division in the glory. Paul is not against works. He insists on the necessity of fruits of righteousness. His great concern is with the source. His guard is up against anything of man that would presume to mix the un-mixable. The holiness of the transaction cannot bear even a piece of the leaven of man’s power to be or do apart from divine grace. Else, the whole is spoiled and lost. The presumption of power is pride! The cross has exposed the resident powers of the first creation to be, not only useless to gain life, but an affront to holiness. This false presumption of power is the basis for the misuse of the law that turns it into a law of works when it was never so intended (Ro 9:31-32; Gal 3:19). But works were ruled out as a means of life, even before the law was given. This is seen in so many examples, but particularly in God’s choice of Jacob before the children had been born to do either good or evil, precisely “so that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of Him who calls” (Ro 9:11). Paul is committed to show what Jesus was interested to emphasize. Righteousness is not the cause but the fruit of a divine choice that does not take account of any inherent quality or ability within the power and reach of man. “You have not chosen me but I have chosen you” (Jn 15:16).

This is why Judaism’s denial of original sin is so telling of its rejection of the need for an atonement that deals radically with the root of human nature. It betrays a naive optimism concerning the pervasiveness and power of sin, as though it is something that is humanly manageable. This optimism concerning human potential is at radical odds with the implications of Israel’s eschatology of death and resurrection. It is the grim diagnosis and despair concerning human nature that moved the prophets to call for a new covenant based on better promises, promises that declare what God has determined to do despite the condition of man as dead and without strength (Jn 1:13; Ro 9:16; Jas 1:18), as shown when He put Abraham in a deep sleep before passing through pieces.

I’m going considerably beyond your question, but what I’m pointing out is the too little considered reason that Paul speaks negatively of the law. It is his way of speaking of misplaced confidence, the false presumption of power that imagines to come before God in a righteousness that is in the reach of the will and power of man apart from a sovereign miracle of regeneration. That’s what Paul is getting at. He’s not interested to diminish the law or render it obsolete. He’s interested to magnify it and make it glorious and put it to its proper use till it is seen for all the terror it represents to those who put their trust in man instead of the God who raises the dead. And how dead is dead? That is the question; isn’t it?

The Law is spoken of negatively because of what man does with it through the delusional presumption that there is something sufficiently good in man that can accommodate the holiness and fearful implications of of its demands. This is evident in the requirement of a New Covenant that can guarantee eternal inheritance and safe continuance in the Land only by reason of a divine intervention that gives the the new heart and spirit to a people that would have forever remained unwilling if they had not been brought to the end of their power and so made willing in the day of His power (Ps 102:13; 110:3). It will be like Paul’s sovereign arrest on the road to Damascus (Gal 1:15-16).

We must show Israel that a mere remnant is not enough. Only as ‘all Israel’, fully purged and redeemed, exists as an all holy nation can the Land be secure of abiding inheritance, because only then will Israel’s habitual tendency to backslide will be cured, not only for a remnant but for all the nation, once and for all. Only in this way can there be secure assurance that the next generation will not slide back and come back under the curse of the law. This is the logic of the new covenant as the prophets saw it. It is why they insist that there can be no abiding inheritance until “all Israel” has come into the everlasting righteousness of the New Covenant. And why is it called an ‘everlasting righteousness? It is because it is NOT their own righteousness, but His and preserved by Him. “Their righteousness is of Me” (Isa 54:17). “And this is the name by which He (Messiah) shall be called, “the LORD our righteousness” (Jer 23:5-6). And “in the Lord shall ALL Israel be justified and shall glory” (Isa 45:25), and so on.

This is what Paul is after! He’s not concerned to set light or obviate observance of the law as a stewardship, whether now or in the millennium, except in the case of gentiles for whom the Law was never specifically assigned in all its tedious detail, as witnessed by Judaism’s acceptance of the so-called, Noahic laws. There is some question of unique purpose for this dispensation that I can discuss with you later that also bears on this question and why gentiles were “loosed” of certain obligations towards the law as contained in external ordinances. It is also acknowledged in some parts of Judaism that the arrival of the age to come would bring changes in the law, as we see clearly in Ezekiel 40-48 and even new requirements for gentiles to send an annual delegation to keep the feast of tabernacles in Jerusalem (Zech 14). So there is something to be said of the uniqueness of divine purpose for a given dispensation and this by no means makes one a dispensationalist, with all dispensationalism’s implications for dividing Israel from the church and the recently contrived idea of two separate, albeit regenerate ‘peoples of God’ and so forth.

Paul’s concern was NOT whether one continues to observe Kosher or circumcision, but how one looks at these things and depends on them as a means of life. He is concerned to cast down the fatal mixture of a misplaced and divided trust. He is opposed to mixing the un-mixable. Paul sees trust in the latent powers of the first creation to be subversive of true faith. He sees the necessity of an apocalyptic transformation to be a resurrection event of life from the dead, without the help of man. With the exception of the analogy of marriage, all the metaphors of Israel’s eschatology, birth, resurrection, and new creation are all passive. Man is dead and moribund in his ability until acted upon from outside himself by a sovereign, recreative act of the Spirit. Paul’s whole conception is based on Israel’s eschatology, and shouldn’t it be?

Paul is making consistent application of Israel’s eschatology to the individual. The rule and pattern of travail before birth and death before resurrection is the same. Paul is not concerned with what a living person does with the law so long as they are alive in the doing, not by the law, as by human ability to approach the law in one’s own power, but by faith through the Spirit who reveals and quickens Christ to the heart. If the stewardship of obedience is to keep the law, as Paul says the commandments are still to be kept, then whatever that stewardship decrees is only acceptable if it is done by one who is alive to God by the Spirit of regeneration. In such case, the commandments are kept by the power of a new creation, even the indwelling Messiah through the Spirit. Paul is interested that we put the cart behind the horse. The commandments indeed must and will be kept, but they are kept, not as a means of life but as the fruit of life. Just pair these following two scriptures to get what I mean:

1 Cor 7:19 “Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but the keeping of the commandments of God.”
Gal 6:15 “For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature”

You see, it is not a neglect of the commandments. The commandments must be kept. That has not changed. The question is the source by which they are done. Is it His life or our life? The commandments are acceptably kept and the law fulfilled in only place, namely, “in Christ”, which is another way of saying, “in the Spirit”. It is the mystery of incarnation and the logic behind the New Covenant. It is Jesus in us, the One true Seed, who alone does the only works that can ever count with God. Those are the works of the Spirit through union with Christ by faith; just as Jesus refrained from doing His own works or speaking His own words (Jn 14:10, 24). This is how He could be the moral perfection of the image of God and thus become our representative humanity in His death and resurrection. By circumventing original sin through the virgin birth, to this one, uniquely begotten Son, the Spirit is given without the measure (Jn 3:33). This is how the Messiah can fill up in Himself, by no works of His own, the fullness of the Godhead bodily, so that in Him all fullness was pleased to dwell, that of His fulness we may all receive. How? Through the virgin birth, Jesus was the new Adam, free from the corruption of nature received in the fall and passed down through the seed of the man. Why? Because He never did one thing by Himself. By a dependency that was utter, untainted, and complete, He was the weakest of the weak and thus the meekest of the meek.

The indwelling of the Spirit of Christ is made possible only by the atonement that removes the body of sin. This is why Jesus had to be free from the nature that was received and passed down through the fall. It is why the last Adam had to be born of a virgin. Only in this way could He be free from the mixture of the self sufficient nature received through the fall that tends always to trust in the natural powers of the first creation. It is this misplaced confidence that is the quintessence of idolatry. Whether the self-covering of an apron of leaves or Cain’s sacrifice, in every false approach to salvation, at its root is the delusive presumption of power. To believe that there is some resident quality or power in man that can gain divine approval and fit one to stand before infinite holiness is a cheapening of the work of the cross. No, any so-called work of righteousness that issues out of the natural will and power of man, as apart from the quickening of the Spirit, is rejected as filthy rags (Isa 64:6; Ro 3:10-12; Phil 3:7-8).

Such scriptures aim to rebuke the really evil presumption that something of human ability can hope to contribute anything that has not been first given by the Spirit. A polar antithesis is set forth in scripture between what can be produced by the flesh and what can be produced by the Spirit. Along the lines of the two seeds of Gen 3:15 can be traced the two great mysteries that govern the cosmic conflict, namely, the ‘mystery of iniquity’ (2Thes 2:7) and ‘the mystery of godliness’ (1Tim 3:16).  Both speak of a nature of ultimate contrast found in the children of the flesh and the children of God (Jn 3:6; Ro 9:8; Gal 4:29). God has predestined both natures to be brought to fullest expression in an ultimate incarnation.

The seed is both corporate and personal. The seed of the woman is Christ but also the Spirit of Christ in all the children of God, the corporate ‘seed’ of the Spirit (Isa 53:10; Ro 4:16, 18; 9:7-8; Gal 3:7, 16, 26; 4:28; 1Pet 1:23). Conversely, the seed of the Serpent is the nature of Satan as manifest in the children of the flesh (Ro 9:8 with Gal 4:29) and ultimately embodied in the man of sin (2Thes 2:3-4, 7). This understanding of the two seeds, as two natures that divide humanity, is ruled by the law of Genesis that every seed can only produce ‘after its own kind‘ (Gen 1:11 with Jn 8:33, 37, 39; Gal 3:29). This is how the two seeds are ‘manifest’ (Gal 5:19; 1Jn 3:9-10). Therefore, the only works that can count with God are the works of a new creation, those done out of the nature of Christ in us, namely, the fruits of the Spirit. This is the mystery of Christ in us, the hope of glory.

So Paul is not interested in dismantling the law but of answering the law’s demand for a new creation that is indestructible and eternal. Paul discerns the proper use of the law, to bring us (shut us up) to the Messiah as the one who purchased the right of the Father to give the Spirit to a faith that is itself born of God (1Jn 5:4). And this faith doesn’t only begin after the cross, as Christ was “in” the prophets of the OT, and we may be sure in all the children of the Spirit (Gal 4:29 with Jn 6:63; 1Cor 2:14). The Lamb slain before the foundation of the world was ever the only ground and basis by which God could approach the sinner. The pre-incarnate Jesus is that nature / seed of the Spirit who indwelt the OT faithful (1Pet 1:11), the ‘remnant according to the election of grace’ (Ro 11:5).

The Spirit comes as a free gift that leaves nothing of man to glory, because it is NOT I but Christ. He doeth the work!, not only as God with us; but as God in us. Paul knows that when that seed /  Spirit / Word is truly born in a person, there is no way that it can fail to bring forth fruit after its own kind. It is the law of Genesis. That’s why Paul is so mystified and rebukes the thought that someone may be in grace and yet continuing to willingly practice sin (Ro 6:1-2). This shows how profoundly they were mistaken who accused Paul of antinomianism.

All’s to say, Paul is not opposed to the Law but the perversion of the law when it is looked to, not as a measure and index of life, but as a means to life. This is what we’re doing with the law when we look to ourselves or some innate virtue within ourselves as a ground of hope. This is Judaism. In such case, this misplaced and divided confidence becomes the abomination that makes desolate, because it is quintessential idolatry. This is the fatal trust in the creature rather than the creator who gives the Spirit as the necessary means of life and acceptable obedience. In this, Paul has been greatly misunderstood. Other than Jesus, Paul is not only the best friend the gentiles ever had; he’s the best friend Israel has ever had, if eyes could only see the intentions of this hard to be understood man who was arrested by Jesus and sent to the nations. Yes, like Jesus is thought to be Judaism’s ultimate test, Paul is a test for the church but not in a way that either imagine.

Your devoted friend in the fray, Reggie

Posted in The Day of the Lord, The Last Days | Comments Off on The Judge Is Already Standing at the Door

“Prophetic False Alarms” – UPDATE

Sept 17th, 2015 – Adding this statement to our other articles on Avoiding False Alarms.

It may be attractive to calculate symbolic numbers, 7’s, 40’s and 70’s, Sabbath years and feast days and so on. There may or may not be validity to some inside track detectable to those with the inside knowledge, but none of this is what Jesus specified. He tells us plainly what to look for and mark. And He tells in a way that can be plain to all the sheep, provided they obey His simple directive to read and understand Daniel’s prophecy, with particular attention to one very specific event. This requires no special historical or astronomical knowledge better known to NASA and brainy meticulous chronologers and historians than to the average believer.

I just know God would never put His sheep at the mercy of such endless, mind boggling ‘data’, available only as it comes down from the experts who often are not agreed among themselves. Jesus gave us just enough, no more, no less to be prepared and to escape the ultimate deception when it would count the most. And though it seems to elude the most advanced biblical scholars; it’s marvelously simple!

You begin by simply following His command to search out Daniel in special reference to the abomination that must stand in Jerusalem (Mt 24:15-16, as found in Dan 8:11; 9:27; 11:31; 12:11). From there, it is sufficiently plain what precedes and what follows. Beyond this, a prophet may warn of local earthquake or famine etc., Such specific knowledge, if true, can help the church, just as false prophecy tends to scandalize and shame the church, as it emboldens unbelief and blasphemy. Otherwise, the threat of imminent calamity is always a possibility for every generation, as Jesus showed that such things would belong to the general ebb and flow of the history of a world that lies in wickedness.

When these general characteristics of the age appear, and even when they begin to abound in both frequency and intensity, still, Jesus warns against a premature and misleading excitement, as these are NOT “the sign” that the end has arrived. “See that you are not troubled; for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet.”

This is exactly what Paul is addressing in 2Thes 2:1-8, but carefully note: Paul does not set light by the foretold sign of Jesus’ imminent return. On the contrary, his whole emphasis it to make it unmistakable. His interest is not only to quell a distracting false alarm, but to underscore something he was careful to teach on every occasion, even when his time in Thessolonica would be extraordinarily brief. Paul is no less interested that the critical sign NOT be lost to a lie. This is precisely because he knew that when the time would come, this knowledge will be a critical bulwark of defense from the deception that Jesus said would attend that time. In its proper time, it will be vital and this is why Paul rallies with such great urgency to put down a lie that threatened much more than a premature excitement that enticed some in the church to leave their jobs and become idle.

No, the “end” begins with the abomination, nothing less. Show us something leading directly to the abomination and you will have our attention. Until then, we are to be sober and always watchful as a life style, knowing that desolations are determined (not to be confused with the ultimate desolation of Jerusalem) as characteristic of an age under judgment.

I always think of when the book of the Law was found in the temple. Josiah needed no course in fine prophetic details of eschatology to see the writing on the wall. The only reason God may yet bear the pride of this nation a little longer and of many nations is precisely because it the cup of Babylon’s iniquity is being permitted to fill all the way to the full. Otherwise, if we were to be humbled before the time, it seems to me something deeply humbling would have already come, such as our own Civil War or something of that scale.

Even more fearful than temporal humbling is the greater judgment that permits the cup of wrath to fill to the point of no return. Though the end of the age is full of much judgment, there is an entity called, ‘mystery Babylon’ that is being permitted to become very successful, prosperous, secure, and increasingly oppressive of all godliness. This ‘apparent’ non-judgement is the greatest and most fearful judgment of all.

Our tower is being permitted to reach unto heaven for a purpose. This is the time we must work while it is day, but the greatest impediment to the work is the disarming intoxications and sedation of the spirit of Babylon, the spirit of the age, as most of professing Christendom is ‘at ease in Zion’. As with the northern kingdom at the Amos’s prophecy, a sleepy worldly church only imagines that it wants the day of the Lord to hasten (Amos 5:18).

In one sense, the judge has always been ‘at the door’. Since John wrote his epistle, it has been “the last time.” It is always time to flee from the wrath to come, and to hasten to call out the penitent remnant from the city of destruction. The days of every great empire are numbered, as every individual’s life span. In that sense, the day of the Lord is always ‘at hand’. That can be seen by the use the prophets’ make of that language, applying the same terms of imminence to different times and different threats facing Israel on the contemporary horizon, against which backdrop they would describe the more ultimate and final day of the Lord.

While I fully believe we are at the threshold of the last call before closing, with most (certainly not all), the signs amazingly in place, the urgency of fleeing Babylon and being separate from the world remains no less true in every generation. But now, as never before, most of the long awaited signs are in place. We are nearing the end of the two days of Hos 6:2, and the signs that remain are showing strong evidence of falling, potentially very quickly into place. It is for this reason only that I believe Babylon is being permitted to wax more and more in its pride and false security, perhaps even a more abounding prosperity, till the cup of iniquity has reached to heaven.

Apart from the simple plum line that Jesus gives, all the vain speculations will ultimately have an hardening influence that is calculated to disarm and disaffect the credulous from the real thing when the time does come. That’s just one price we pay for the false alarms of prophetic speculation that make men rich while it emboldens the world. His judgments are perfect in their wisdom to show what is in the heart. That’s my take.

Posted in Avoiding False Alarms, Daniel | Comments Off on “Prophetic False Alarms” – UPDATE

“Lo, in the Volume of the Book It is Written of ME” – [VIDEO]

God is straightening His people into the place of rest; that is, His finished work (the works He has prepared in advance for us to do).

From the Saturday night LIVE Bible studies, this session on Hebrews Chapter 10 was particularly rich with Gospel proclamation. Reggie Kelly’s participation begins about 10 minutes into the study. (With Tom Quinlan, Ryan Couch, Phil Norcom, Travis Bennett and others)

Reggie’s participation begins at about the 10 minute mark. Don’t give up early. This session gets better and better as it goes on.

Posted in The Body of Christ, The Mystery of the Gospel, Video | Comments Off on “Lo, in the Volume of the Book It is Written of ME” – [VIDEO]

Some Thoughts on “Keeping the Law” – [VIDEO]

This is a 13 minute excerpt from the recent study in Hebrews 7. In this clip Reggie mentions one of the first Articles we ever published here at Mystery of Israel. That article is reprinted below for your convenience.

Some Thoughts on “Keeping the Law” or “Torah Observance”

Certainly for Paul, keeping the commandments in a true and living way was the equivalent of a new creation (in the sense of its sure and necessary evidence). This is clearly seen when 1 Cor 7:19 and Gal 6:15 are compared in juxtaposition. But the ‘keeping of the commandments’ is never the cause, but the sure and certain ‘result’ of “a new creation” (defined as vital regeneration, the resurrection life of Christ in every living believer). To ‘get the cart before the horse’ in this matter constitutes ‘another gospel.’

However, Paul just as clearly declared himself (not only gentiles as in Acts 15:10-29) ‘free’ (except for expedience sake) from certain regulations of the law (1Cor 6:12; 1Cor 9:19-21). In some instances, however, these ‘regulations’ were not merely rabbinic custom but divine commandment. How can this be? Since Paul never releases even gentile believers from the keeping of the essential commandments of God (far from it!), what has changed? Why is anyone at any time released from circumcision or any other commandment of the law?

Though not stated so explicitly (or where would be the controversy, and hence the divinely intended crisis?), there is a certain ‘kind’ of commandment that the apostle calls ‘carnal’ Heb 7:16 and 9:10). Which commandments come under this designation?

The evidence suggests to me that such a distinction has in view those particular commandments given specifically to Israel that are ‘physical’ and outward, the performance of which lies within the reach of the natural man, and do not require for their fulfillment the miracle of regeneration. It is not so with the perfect holiness required by the law. By divine intent, this requirement is necessarily beyond natural ability, and possible only to God through the regenerating work of the Holy Spirit, “the power of an endless (or indestructible) life.” It is these physical ordinances in particular that formed part of Israel’s unique stewardship “under the law” that stood between Jew and gentile. But now, since “the time of reformation” Heb 9:10), these particular kinds of commandments are no longer permitted to divide between members of the eschatological ‘one new man.’ God is jealous that this issue of divine contention not be compromised by well meaning believers as did Peter in the episode that Paul records in Gal 2:11.

Paul is clear that to rest in any form of “works” (anything possible to man) for justification is ultimately fatal, but what of the question of observing such humanly doable ordinances strictly for the sake of witness or a presumed ‘higher sanctification’? In my view, this is to surrender something that is critical to the heart of the divine purpose for this dispensation. It misses entirely God’s very point in removing the temple and sacrifice and in giving the Spirit to gentiles “in order to provoke” the ‘observant’ Jew to jealousy [Paul argues that such fastidious ‘observance’ apart from the Spirit falls fatally short of true “commandment keeping”].

It is to miss entirely the very cause and nature of the believer’s distinctive stewardship ( calling / trust / responsibility ) ordained for this present time while the Jew is under the particular form of judgment decreed for this dispensation. To return ‘at this time’ to these particular kinds of ‘dispensationally conditioned’ ordinances is to give back the very ground that Paul rebukes Peter for yielding to the men that came from James (Gal 2:12-18). It is to build again what was destroyed (I ask, what was “destroyed”?), and makes the one returning to the old (something is “old”) standard of division a transgressor. Furthermore, it removes from God the very leverage of appeal that is intended to demonstrate to the Jew that “righteousness does not come by the law” (Gal 2:21; 3:11; Heb 10:8) which in Pauline usage means that perverse “confidence in the flesh” that imagines that the holiness of the law can be approached by man as man. Regardless of time or dispensation, the law is fulfilled only by the power of the Spirit, perfectly and flawlessly in Christ, but substantially and visibly in every ‘living’ believer.

Many of the laws first given at Mt. Sinai are provisional for a theocratic nation ‘in the land’. They are not eternal. Abraham was no less a commandment-keeping man of the Spirit, as are all his true born progeny (see John 8:39), yet he knew nothing of many of the laws first instituted at Mt. Sinai. These were distinctive and restrictive in their intention for the new theocratic nation. However, the righteousness embodied, articulated and required in that distinctive covenant is indeed eternal. The law requires nothing less than the perfect righteousness of God Himself and cuts off all else. This righteousness perfectly fulfilled only in Messiah’s flawless humanity (Lev 18:5; Mt 3:15; Gal 3:12), is in substantial measure fulfilled also in the believer by nothing less than a comparable incarnation of the Spirit (new creation) mediated through a regenerating miracle of divine revelation that issues in true repentance and saving faith. This is the work of the Holy Spirit, and is fundamentally axiomatic for any time or dispensation (the new birth is not peculiar to the New Testament “Are you a master in Israel …?”).

So the law instituted with the Sinaitic covenant is a divine trust given uniquely to the priestly nation, but it also functions as a test and witness to the reality of that nation’s true heart condition, i.e. its fidelity to God; it was a provisional stewardship for Israel in particular, conditioned in some respects on endurance in the Land, and never intended to reach beyond its purpose to bring in a new creation of completed perfection; it was therefore in that sense regarded by the apostles as a temporary dispensation (Heb 9:10). This is in no way contradicted by the recognition that certain elements belonging to that earlier dispensation will again be in force in the coming millennium when the kingdom is restored to Israel. But according to the mystery hid in other ages, the Church of this dispensation is revealed as the eschatological first-fruits, not only of Israel’s millennial salvation, but of something even more ultimate than millennial Israel, namely, the “one new man” of the new creation, the heavenly Zion, the completed assembly, the final tabernacle of God (Gal 4:26; Heb 12:22; 11:40; Rev 21:3). Thus, the mystery of the Body of Messiah reveals the Church in its essential nature as a kind of ‘eighth day’ phenomenon. In its invisible essence, the Church is the present realization of that new creation that is beyond even the millennial dispensation. This is not only the destiny, but the now present heavenly position of every true born child of God. Our citizenship is in heaven. And though no less true of all of the ‘living’ from every age (Mt 12:26-27), this, as so much else, has only come to full light through the revelation of gospel.

Though often confused and improperly differentiated, these important distinctions take absolutely nothing away from the unique role and special stewardship that Israel MUST fulfill throughout the millennium for the sake of ‘that’ necessary and public vindication of covenant faithfulness on God’s part (“This is my covenant with them…”). Rather, it is only to distinguish that the stewardship and calling of the Church of this age is unique to this age, though this is not the last age. The Church is a mystery organism, a phenomenon of divine revelation set ‘between the times’ as a witness to “the powers of the age to come.” Although the “powers” of the coming age have come in unexpected advance of the salvation of the ‘last day’ (Old Testament ‘Day of the Lord’) in the person and work of the Messiah and in the Spirit poured out upon the Church, the age itself is still future.

During this present age and dispensation (the time that Israel is under temporary divine hardening), the Church is to show forth the life, power, and freedom of that new order of existence “apart from the works of the law.” At the same time, through the eschatological gift of the Spirit, the believer (most remarkably the ‘gentile’ believer, Col 1:27) is able now to fulfill in real measure the very righteousness required by the law, which is nothing less than the righteousness of God Himself. The Church (when it is the Church) should be distinguished by those miraculous and inimitable fruits of the Spirit “against which there is no law,” and thus move Israel to jealousy, NOT because it is observant of those outward ordinances that are possible to unaided human performance, but because it manifests the power of the promise of the new age by the gift of faith in Christ’s imputed righteousness to the glory of God alone, and ALL most purposefully and emphatically “apart from the law!” (Ro 3:21). This is God’s method of removing all ground of boasting. This is the very point of divine contention. Shall we surrender it?

In my view, it is not only inconsistent, but a serious defection for the gentile believer to take on the yoke of Sabbaths, feasts and other physical ordinances of like kind, and thus remove from God the very thing that He has appointed to make His case against Israel’s greatest historic tendency and fatal presumption (Ro 9:32), namely, the lie of humanism, the presumption that in man is anything good. It is only as the Church comes into its appointed eschatological fullness that Israel will be made jealous. Israel will NOT be made jealous by an accommodating zeal for sanctification through Sabbatarian and kosher observance. On the contrary, such a presumption, though perhaps unconsciously, reveals the same inherent humanism that only retards the Church’s calling and hinders the fullness that Israel and the end of the age waits. It is by divine design that the Holy Spirit promised to the surviving remnant of Israel at the Day of the Lord should now be seen resting upon unqualified non-observant non-kosher gentiles! This is God’s very point; it is His contention with Israel. We must draw the line where an inspired and inerrant New Testament has drawn it. The offense must continue; it is divinely intended. Israel will come forth from its grave because God insists on being known as “the God that raises the dead,” not because we made them jealous through kosher observance or any other “carnal ordinance” (apostolically so-called; Heb 9:10). There is a place where the believer is obliged to not ‘give place … no, not for an hour; that the truth of the gospel might continue with you” (Gal 2:5). This is where Paul who could otherwise “become all things to all men” was obliged to draw the line.

I am aware that there is much more to this issue that requires consideration, but these few points are offered as a safeguard against the mounting threat of a Judaizing spirit that still stalks the church, though not always in its original Jewish form. I believe we can expect to see this crisis escalate with an unequaled subtlety towards the end. There is good reason to expect that the church’s greatest test will not be the Antichrist, but a deception of a more subtle kind, so that “if it were possible, they (the false anointed ones) shall deceive the very elect.” Signs and wonders are not fatal except as they lend support to a lie, and I believe it will be the lie of works righteousness. Licentious antinomianism is not subtle enough to threaten the very elect. However, works righteousness is subtle beyond imagination, as it only takes the least amount of that leaven to spoil the whole.

In trembling contention for the non-negotiable offense of the gospel,


Posted in Articles, Video | 1 Comment