Featured Studies

The Five Visions of Daniel



Recent Posts



Untenable Tenets of the Dispensational System

Untenable Tenets of the Dispensational SystemIt is not the new birth, or even special empowerment by the Spirit that dispensationalists deny to the saints of the tribulation. How could they? [more]

A Son Perfected Through Suffering: A Purified Bride Translated and Caught Up

A Son Perfected Through Suffering: A Purified Bride Translated and Caught UpSometime back, I did a short essay called, "Where God is Taking the Church" I believe it touched on this question: Do you guys have anything [more]

Convocation 2018 - Is There One?

Convocation 2018 - Is There One?Tommy and Kimberly Comer are hosting a convocation at Rosedale Bible College in Irwin, Ohio from August 16th to the 19th. “This convocation focuses upon [more]

Reggie Kelly Testimony: The Anatomy of a Revelation [VIDEO]

Reggie Kelly Testimony: The Anatomy of a Revelation [VIDEO]This interview was recorded in preparation for "Covenant and Controversy II: The City of the Great King" by FAI Missions. It is included as [more]

The 4th Beast of Daniel 8

The 4th Beast of Daniel 8I would love to know your thoughts on the Islamic Caliphate (700 ad) as the the fourth beast of Daniel rather than the traditional interpretation [more]

Israel Today and Everlasting Security in the Land

Israel Today and Everlasting Security in the LandI'm very interested in the overall impression that you will get while there [in Israel]. One thing is for sure, like you said, "So much [more]

How Faith in Jesus Fulfills the Law Once and Forever

How Faith in Jesus Fulfills the Law Once and ForeverMy own view is that vital regeneration puts one in the New or Everlasting covenant, which is the sure and continuous fulfillment of the standard [more]

The Final Chapter of God's Work [Audio]

The Final Chapter of God's Work [Audio]This message was given by Reggie Kelly in 2010 in Texas.   (1hr:25min)   Right Click to Download The Final Chapter of God's Work - by Reggie Kelly [more]

The Timing of Ezekiel 38 and 39

The Timing of Ezekiel 38 and 39Ezek.38 and 39 is on the spot now. I can see that is about what happens in the end of the tribulation. But 38 is little confusing; [more]

More Thoughts on the Law

More Thoughts on the LawWe started a study on Galatians here and I watched the first part of your Galatians study. At some point you say smthg like "The [more]

Old Testament Proofs of Messiah's Rejection by His Own

Old Testament Proofs of Messiah's Rejection by His OwnWhen I noticed Isa 49:7 was not listed in this brother's fine work charting Messiah's rejection, particularly by His own nation (see 1st link above), [more]

The Prophetic Timeline in Hosea - [VIDEO]

The Prophetic Timeline in Hosea - [VIDEO]Reggie discusses the prophetic framework (and yes... even timeline) upon which the mysteries of the faith do [more]

A Woman Shall Encompass a Man

A Woman Shall Encompass a ManJer 31:22 How long wilt thou go about, O thou backsliding daughter? for the Lord hath created a new thing in the earth, A woman [more]

The Apostolic Approach to Evangelism

The Apostolic Approach to Evangelism[...] The approach builds around the well known story of Joseph, as type and parable of both comings of Christ to Israel. The idea is [more]

After Two Days He Will Revive Us...

After Two Days He Will Revive Us...Originally published in Oct of 2013, we are bringing this article back to the front page for reference of an up-coming article. "After two days He [more]

Pre-Wrath vs Post-Trib

Pre-Wrath vs Post-TribI was recently talking with someone about the Pre-Wrath view. The way I understand it, it seems so close to Post-trib with maybe a few [more]

The Sure Mercies of David

The Sure Mercies of DavidIn reading 2 Samuel 7:14 KJV, I came across a passage that took me aback: "I will be his father, and he shall be my [more]

The Prophetic Necessity of a Third Temple (Even Before the Destruction of the Second)

The Prophetic Necessity of a Third Temple (Even Before the Destruction of the Second)The Jews who read Daniel as inspired prophecy would have understood that the temple that God commanded the returning exiles to rebuild (see Hag / [more]

Not of Works, But of Him Who Calls

Not of Works, But of Him Who CallsSo long as I have a sense of uncompleted or failed stewardship of what I've been entrusted, an imminent prospect of going home isn't greeted [more]

Perspectives on Israel: What's at Stake?

Perspectives on Israel: What's at Stake?Reformed theologians emphatically maintain that their Covenant Theology is not Replacement Theology. I have read their arguments in support of their position over and [more]

What Hope of a Pre-trib Rapture Requires One to Also Believe

What Hope of a Pre-trib Rapture Requires One to Also BelieveSomeone recently gave me a commentary on Daniel by Arno Gaebelein written in 1909. After reading his comments on the 70th week, and then Daniel [more]

Daniel and the "Big Picture" - [VIDEO]

Daniel and the Reggie discusses what Daniel would have inherited from Moses, the Psalms, and the prophets that preceded him, and how this would have been interpreted in [more]

Observing the Sabbath

Posted: October 26th, 2007, by Reggie Kelly

Dearly esteemed Brother Reggie!

I am a christian of gentile origin but I am deeply into the jewish way of thinking and I would dare to call myself a hebrew christian. Salvation and the gift of righteousness through faith is a precious gift which I embrace with vigour and zeal. Still I have a deep reverence for celebrating the sabbath on saturdays…not in a legalistic way but in the way of freedom and love for God. This day was indeed sanctified at the creation of the world and the law was given much later. How would you think I can honour this day without falling into that which Paul warned the galatians about. Could you plese bestow some of your wisdom and give me some instructions how to celebrate without going wrong here.

Truly yours in Messiah Yehoshua

It seems to me, that as long as you make the distinction that you so passionately express here, there’s little risk that your love of the Sabbath would ever spill over into some of the errors that are beginning again to plague the church.

Contrary to some suspiciously labored qualifications by some teachers, Paul makes this a matter of liberty and personal conscience, not to be judged by another. So you are free to use your Shabbat blessing as you choose, as a sweet offering to the Lord, and as refreshment to your soul, your family, and as many as are inclined to observe with you. It is unto the Lord that you regard the day; and He is honored by what’s in your heart. After all, the day was not made for its own sake, but for you. However, mark well that IF we were still under the law as a binding administration, this would not be so. It would then be a very particular matter indeed, and no part of all the appurtenances of Sabbath observance could be left undone without spoiling the whole.

Also, If I am correct to understand that the literal interpretation of scripture receive first priority, I see that the regathered Jews will be observing a somewhat modified Sabbath in the Land during the millennium, and that the nations will be obliged to honor the feast of tabernacles. This is clearly not required now, but will be then. At that time, the mystery of the gospel is no longer hidden from the entirety of the nation (Isa 8:14-17; 25:7; Ezek 39:22; Zech 12:10), since at that time, all will know Him, and so never again have occasion to evangelize a Jewish neighbor (Jer 31:34 et al.). I mention this because a return to certain elements of the law will then be safe from confusion among the Jews, because the unique test and demonstration designed for this current dispensation will have accomplished its purpose. For this reason, certain elements of the law are clearly not imposed, not even enjoined, upon the Gentile believers of this age only. The millennium will have its own distinctive requirements, stewardship, tests.

Such provisional ‘loosing’ of certain requirements of the law as evident in many scriptures can only be accounted for by a special divine intention unique to this time. Here’s where interpretations differ; but it seems undeniable that some kind of divine statement is being made to Israel, such as how the Spirit is received by faith alone, and this by non-observant Gentiles. Unthinkable! Exactly! The supreme stumbling block, and it was so intended.

As I’ve suggested elsewhere, the unique stewardship, or the test for the church of this time, is different for the sake of the testimony suited to this time, particularly as it pertains to the ‘mystery’ of the gospel. Though once and for all revealed, the gospel remains a mystery for the Jew where Christ is not acknowledged as ‘the LORD our righteousness’, as the only ground of an eternal justification. What then is included in such a divine statement that would justify what the writer of Hebrews calls “a change in the law?” What a radical challenge to Israel that Gentiles should be released from the law. What’s God’s point? The relationship of the covenants and the issue of continuity and discontinuity between the testaments is one of the most nuanced and difficult subjects in all of theology, particularly if you happen to be committed to a literal and therefore millennial view of prophecy.

Although there is a very clear ‘loosing’, or relaxation of the outward ordinances (called ‘carnal ordinances’ in Heb 7:16; 9:10, in manifest distinction to the law in the heart). Still, Paul is just as clear that there is freedom of conscience in this matter, so long as it doesn’t result in judgment of another brother’s liberty. Would to God we could recover the generous spirit of this apostolic balance. “Where the Spirit of the Lord is there is liberty.” But that doesn’t mean liberty from stewardship, and certainly not from obedience, whether in the OT, now, or in the millennium to come. But rather the liberty to be ‘led of the Spirit’ and so fulfill the law of Christ. Therefore, if a brother or sister is so ‘led’ to observe Sabbath, whether the weekly, the eternal, or both in the true spirit of the ordinance, and not the mere form of the letter, then what believer would not rejoice?

I do not believe that the Sabbath can be regarded as ‘mandatory’ simply because it predates the law. The covenant of circumcision also predates the law (“not because it is of Moses, but of the Fathers”).

It is typically argued by Seventh Day Adventists that the Sabbath is exceptional to circumcision and other aspects of the outward ordinances of the law on the ground that it is a ‘creation ordinance’. By making a case for the pre-Sinaitic existence of the other ten commandments, it is held that the Sabbath should be regarded as just as binding for all time. The reasoning goes: If Sabbath observance pre-existed the law as an ‘everlasting’ ordinance, we might reasonably infer that it should be no less ‘required’ than any other of the ‘big ten’. As an ‘everlasting’ ordinance, the Sabbath transcends the more temporal imposition of circumcision and other features of the Sinaitic institutions. (Note, however, that circumcision was also called an ‘everlasting’ covenant; Gen 17:13).

The argument runs: If all other aspects of the moral law remain in force in the NT, shouldn’t the Sabbath also retain its eternal status as also defining and declaring something about the moral character of God? Never are any of the other commandments considered optional or a matter of liberty or personal conscience. Why, then, shouldn’t the Sabbath be just as mandatory? However, according to certain, albeit disputed, NT passages, Sabbath observance, unlike all other inward moral commandments, is no longer “required” in the sense of a punishable moral obligation, else Paul could not speak of the Sabbath in the liberal way he does. The other moral commandments of God are certainly NOT treated as optional, NOT a matter of liberty. So what has changed? And why should this be so? Particularly since regenerate Israel is shown in some clearly post-day of the Lord (millennial) passages as celebrating certain feasts and features of the law’s ancient institutions in the Land during the millennium? Of course, this is only a problem for us so-called ‘literalists’.

I think that part of the answer is that in this dispensation the stress is placed on the Spirit, and the coming in of the eternal realm of the new creation (the so-called ‘age to come’). So in order to enforce the divine testimony that the outward forms have now realized their prefiguring goal and fulfillment in Christ, the outward is removed (‘loosed’) only to demonstrate that the inward and eternal has come as everlasting fulfillment. The eternal life of the resurrection is demonstrated, not by outward diet or ritual, or observance of a particular feast or day, but by the signs of the Spirit, as beyond mere natural human ‘do-ability’. Thus, the true goal of the law is fulfilled by Christ in the believer in things that are incapable of fulfillment apart from the power of His life, proof of incarnation. This kind of commandment fulfillment is beyond human reach, and less capable of confusing the chasm that exists between nature and grace. To underscore this new centrality of the now revealed secret, some of the outward forms are temporarily (or permanently, depending on your view of the millennium) suspended in order to stress the issue of the Spirit through Christ. This puts the Jew on the spot as nothing else, but only if the Christian is not provoking him to jealousy by demonstrating the evidence of the Spirit’s power, otherwise, it is the supreme stumbling block, and serves rather to support him in his unbelief. It would almost seem as if God doesn’t play ‘fair’, putting the burden of proof on the church, and making Israel’s destiny to be bound up with what is manifest only “through the church.”

Sorry if I strayed from the topic a bit; but your question provoked some of my own reflections and questions, as there are still outstanding issues in this whole area about which I remain tentative. But this is my general view as it now stands.

Yours in the Beloved, Reggie

Response from a reader on Oct 27, 2007:

I really appreciated your article on the Sabbath. It is beautifully put and strikes chords that are stirring in my own heart. I am curious about a sentence in the next to last paragraph. Did you really mean “not” provoking? If you did would you elaborate?

I meant ‘not’ provoking. Because when we ‘fail’ to demonstrate the compelling evidence of the Spirit’s power, the Jew is all the more reinforced in his view that believers are ‘illegitimately’ liberated from the Law by those nefarious Jewish apostates, Jesus and Paul. We believe on the other hand that we are legitimately liberated from the law, not because the Word of God has changed, but because through Christ, we are the walking fulfillment of the law as new creations, showing the law’s goal through love shed abroad in the heart by the Holy Spirit, and in order that the issue not be blurred but pressed home, there is the actual ‘loosing’ of New Covenant believers from some of the old forms.

When the Jew sees the power of the Spirit in undeniable manifestation, this gives serious pause to the boldness of their rejection. When they see the signs of the Spirit performed in Jesus’ name, it sends shock waves through all of their categories. That said, however, I believe that the truest and fullest witness to the Jew takes even more than the manifestation of the miraculous; and it should! I say this because I’ve heard many of the ultra orthodox dismiss Jesus’ miracles on the basis of Deut 13:1-10. Jesus was a self-deceived false prophet with the power of sorcery, actually raised up by God to test the hearts of the righteous remnant concerning their devotion to the law. If you read that passage, you’ll see that this is also likely the text in mind that justified the stoning of Stephen. As I’ve pointed out elsewhere, ‘this generation’, the generation that killed the prophets, has by no means passed away. All that is lacking is political power to manifest again this kind of house cleaning. This is where the miracle of Christian love for the enemy (albeit beloved enemy) shines through the most brightly, as in Jesus’ words from the cross, in Stephen’s impassioned plea, and Paul’s will to absorb their curse in himself. That’s the love that has redeemed you and me; may it shine in us towards Israel, as it shines towards our detractors who are actually servants to our calling to test and mature this kind of love in us, the inimitable love of the Father.

Appreciatively, in His precious service, Reggie

The Deeper Conversion of the Converted

Posted: October 25th, 2007, by Reggie Kelly

To: Mr. Reggie Kelly,
How are you?
I have a question. Upon reading “Apostolic Conversion” and having understood what “Many saved, few converted” meant, I raised a statement during one of my class discussion at a university I am attending at the moment in my Church History class, when asked by the professor: “Was Constantine ever saved?”. Many people answered both sides, some said that he was saved and some said that he was not saved. The topic for discussion for that day was, “The Conversion of Constantine”. I raised my hand and made the statement that there are perception of “many saved, few converted”, perhaps to state that Constantine was maybe saved but not fully converted. When I made this statement, the professor pointed out that she kind of understood where I was going with this, but strongly stressed that that was not Biblical, expressing that the New Testament’s definition of “repent” meant a 180 degree turn from the previous lifestyle apart from Christ and that the Old Testament in the Shema was simply to believe on the Lord and nowhere in the Bible does that term or concept of “many saved, few converted” existed. Can you fully explain how I am supposed to answer others when faced with this dilemma?

Thank you.

Your servant in Christ,

Although knowing and appreciating Art’s meaning in that title, I used to tell him that it might have been more accurately entitled “FEW saved and even fewer converted,” that is, converted in the sense that Peter was ‘turned’ after the great blow to his presumption. I wrote an article entitled “the deeper conversion of the converted,” in which I showed the evidence that Peter was indeed regenerate (the common meaning attached to the word ‘converted’), but was not as yet completely ‘turned’ (broken and emptied of self-reliance) in the sense that Jesus uses the word in that instance.

When Peter asked “will those who are saved be few?” Jesus said the gate was exceeding straight and the way narrow, and only the few and not the many ever find it. The NT example of this truth is embodied in the episode of the ‘rich young ruler’. The Lord’s answer to the young man evokes an astonishment of despair in the disciples raising the question, “who then can be saved?” Rather than soothing their fears, Jesus presses the dread implications to their divinely intended conclusion with the statement, “with man this is impossible.” But lest despair of man end in despair itself, He adds the cheering and gracious good news that “with God nothing shall be impossible.”

So manifestly, biblical salvation is something much more than commonly assumed. Many have written on the distinguishing traits of true christian character, perhaps the classic on the topic is Jonathan Edwards’ “Religious Affections.” Whatever might have been lacking in Edward’s theology, he was a bright light on this issue. Most cannot bear to read a Bunyan or an Edwards because the fear of God burns so deeply in their writings, but also the sweetness of comfort shows through in Bunyan as few since Paul.

As to Constantine, if the story is true that he put off baptism till his death was certainly imminent (because of his belief in the early heresy of ‘baptismal regeneration’), then I have little hope of his eternal condition, despite any great works to his credit (Mt 7:21). I say this because this leaves little question that he did not understand the gospel at all. There is no difference between what Constantine does here with baptism and what the Galatians did with circumcision. A mixed gospel is no gospel at all. “A little leaven leavens the whole lump.” And the gate gets even more narrow when we understand that even a right intellectual grasp of the gospel (though itself rare enough) is not by itself sufficient apart from a living revelation quickened by the Spirit. It is the ‘quickened’ Word that saves, the Word that divides between soul and spirit. This alone puts pride and human self-reliance to death, so that the humbled (slain; Ro 7:11) sinner might be raised by nothing less than the power of God, as “revealed” in the gospel (Ro 1:16-17). In fact, the only real knowledge of God that counts is to know Him as “the God that raises the dead.” And as Paul shows, this knowledge comes only at the end of human self-reliance (2Cor 1:9). In the earliest church, only fruits giving evidence of authentic regeneration (Mt 3:8; Acts 8:37; 10:47) made one a candidate for the public seal of his confession in baptism. Otherwise, baptism avails nothing (Gal 6:15).

So I say that wherever the gospel is confused or distorted, hope of salvation is proportionately dimmed. This is where I see Constantine’s great danger. But as to the tile of Art’s booklet, I agree that even beyond initial regeneration, though true and vital (more rare than we know), there often remains a yet deeper work of the Spirit, where, through a personal ‘Jacob’s trouble’ – like experience (Gen 32:24-31; Jer 30:7), the residue of our ‘power’ and false dependency is more deeply shattered (compare Deut 32:36; Dan 12:7). Where, and to the measure this has occurred, there will be a proportionate incarnation of resurrection life in the now more deeply converted (broken) believer. An example would be the corresponding devastation and transformation that takes place only when Isaiah “SAW the Lord … (Isa 6) showing again the primacy of God’s sovereign initiative to reveal himself in the resurrection event of true regeneration (see 2Cor 3:18 with Jn 6:40 with Gal 1:15-16; Zech 12:10). So regardless of Constantine’s role in Christianizing the empire, and even his personal reformation after the sign at the Milvian Bridge, if he was as beclouded on the gospel as suggested by this account (I’ve not verified the story), then no amount of humanistic optimism can circumvent the evidence of scripture that such a view betrays a fatally misplaced trust (if Paul’s letter to the Galatians means anything). “I dare not trust the sweetest frame, but wholly lean on Jesus name.” The greatest grace is an undivided, undistributed trust in the completeness of Christ work for us, and the faithfulness of His work in us. But this is comparatively rare; because “with man this is impossible.”

Your brother in Christ, Reggie Kelly

In The Year That King Uzziah Died…

Posted: October 22nd, 2007, by Reggie Kelly

On 10/21/07, Aaron wrote:
Mr. Kelly,

I have been reading and praying through one of Art’s articles on Isaiah 6. I think that I heard you make reference to it on one of the tapes of last year’s school. I just wanted to ask you some questions about it. First, the issue of it being in the year King Uzziah died. I think that it is no coincidence that it happened particularly in that year. But do you think that there must be a death of those who we might see as kings or leaders or people above us so to speak, even brothers in the Lord, that we might defer to that which paves the way for the sending event? Oswald Chambers made mention of this somewhere in My Utmost for His Highest, I beleive. I am just trying to make this practical, and so I am wondering if it could be a man like Art who died and in turn it made possible this sending phenoma? Could it be an organization or community like Ben Israel that had a similiar result? I kind of ask, because I think the Lord has quickened me to pray through this chapter, not for me personally, but I am not sure why. I know Art touches on some of this further on in the paper. Also I am wondering if Uzziah could be our own ability. For instance I learn and gain knowledge easily; I love to read the Word and the books of men and women who have gone before me. I think sometimes my pursuit of truth takes me away from the source of it. Is it possible for someones own ability or gift (even if it is God given) to become an Uzziah? Which makes sense.

I think what we’re reaching for here is to try to find something of the pattern or dynamic in Isaiah’s transforming vision from which all else followed. Is there a key? What manner of preliminary grace or deep dealings prepares the soil for such a divine in-breaking?

In traveling with Art and interacting with him over the Isa 6 message, I pointed out the significant analogy of Isaiah’s experience with Israel’s apocalyptic revelation when “they shall LOOK upon Me whom they have pierced” (Zech 12:10; Mt 23:39). This is, of course, the great day of the Lord when the Deliverer comes out of Zion to accomplish Israel’s final redemption. But there is more to this than the mere visible return of Christ. We must not neglect why this event has such a different effect on the beleaguered remnant than same event will have on the demonically driven nations. It is the element of gracious revelation; “the Spirit of grace and supplication.” Otherwise, the vision of the returning Lamb would be unbearable, as in the case of the mark bearing ‘earth dwellers’.

This is the transforming vision for Israel that NOT INCIDENTALLY coincides with the pouring out of the Spirit, and this in significant conjunction with the end of the age-long hiding of God’s face from the nation as a whole (Isa 8:14-17; Ezek 39:22-29). This is the time that the new heart of eschatological promise is imparted to the penitent remnant that survives Jacob’s trouble; but all in conjunction with the apocalyptic unveiling and UNSEALING of the sealed vision (Isa 8:16; Dan 9:24; 12:4, 9; i.e., the ‘mystery of the gospel’, the one ground of the sinner’s ‘eternal’ justification, the coming in of the “everlasting righteousness” by which the tension of the conditional covenant is eternally resolved and satisfied, providing the ground for the fulfillment of the superior ‘everlasting covenant’).

This revelation, of course, fits the surviving remnant to become apostolic in their mission as mediating heralds and witnesses of the salvation of God out from a restored Zion (Isa 2:3; 60:3-5; 61:6-9; 66:19; Zech 8:23 with Ps 51:13). And, of course, Paul is the premiere prototype of the coming apprehension of the nation by the same ‘Spirit of revelation’, (“a nation born in one day; Isa 66:8; Ezek 39:22; Zech 3:9). I think we’d have to acknowledge that in all of these cases, there is a preliminary preparation of a profound kind, a ‘breaking up of the fallow ground’. We see it certainly in the case of the remnant of Israel that has lately passed through the travail of Jacob’s trouble. So I would take the dynamics that we observe working in the case of end-time Israel, and then see how far this can be applied to Isaiah and Paul and to the church of God, which is you and me. Then we might gain some perspective into the nature of soil preparation. By the way, I think the paradigm of Israel’s salvation informed and shaped all of apostolic thinking concerning the nature of salvation. This doesn’t mean it was any-the-less revealed by the Spirit, since it is the Spirit that calls this to our attention.

As strong as my views on the freedom of God’s sovereignty, it is equally clear that the work of God never operates in a vacuum, but is prepared in advance. There’s no convenient ‘presto – chango’ where the holy things of revelation and grace are concerned. True regeneration only occurs where there has been a deep that has reached to the deep, sufficient to ‘break up’ all the fountains of the deep. So, if we take Jacob’s trouble as our key, we find a very revealing word that appears in three very important passages that deal with the end of Israel’s exile (particular the last verse from Daniel that deals specifically and unambiguously with the concentrated period of Jacob’s trouble; see Lev 26:19; Deut 32:36; Dan 12:7). That word is ‘ power’. Israel sees Jesus at the end of their power. That’s the only place that any of us really see Him. That’s why we are killed all the day long. Christ is the end of the law, simply because He is revealed at the end of our strength, since the law, rightly understood, was given to take away our false strength. This is the death that brings resurrection, the weakness that brings power, but all by revelation that most often works in a context of ‘tribulation’ (Heb. batsar; narrow; tight place; crowded; Gk. thlipsis; pressure, burdened; Acts 14:22 etc.).

God is the God that quickens the dead; so the revelation that is the death blow to confidence in the flesh is also the revelation that reveals and quickens Christ (These things said Isaiah, when he saw His glory, and spake of Him” (John 12:41). According to Paul, there is a necessary travail that precedes the inward formation of Christ (Gal 4:19). That’s a powerful rule we mustn’t overlook! Thus, the “travail of Zion” becomes a paradigm of all salvation. So whatever was at work in Isaiah and Paul, we may fairly reckon that there was a prior removal of strength and false dependency. ” But we had the sentence of death in ourselves, that we should not trust in ourselves, but in God which raises the dead” (2 Cor 1:9). This ‘power’, I believe, is a deep and intractable residual humanism that can beset even a Peter (as seen in his presumptuous boast of superior rectitude and endurance under trial). And, if we are correct in our assumption that Isaiah’s chapter 6 commission came after an earlier call to the office of prophet, then we may safely assume that there was yet something high in Isaiah that had still to come down. In every case, there is evidence of a preparatory crisis. But note; this preliminary weakening and removing of soulish ‘power’, however prolonged, is not by itself sufficient. Not even the crescendo of crisis and travail of soul, but only the transitional moment of apocalyptic unveiling and intervention, the ‘event’ of divine revelation. This alone brings the final death blow to the remains of carnal confidence.

For the unregenerate, this is the regenerational event/ moment. For the Christian, even the most earnest disciple, this is the moment of deeper conversion (deep breaking; example Peter), what some have called the “second blessing.” It is the crisis transition that breaks in and transforms an entirely bound or partially bound person into one that is fit for apostolic sending. This comes only AFTER one has been devastated and raised by the power of God, and such devastation of carnal confidence comes as a sovereign, unconstrained ( i.e., ‘humanly’ unconstrained) act of divine self-disclosure, the ‘apocalyptic‘ event. This spells the end of Satan’s dominion, whether his power be broken over an individual, or an elect nation. I call it ‘the war against the veil’, because Satan is the god of the veil, so that when his power is broken, in this case through the ‘scattering of Israel’s power’, all these things are accomplished (Dan 12:7), the mystery is finished (Rev 10:7), and the veil, the covering, spread over all peoples is destroyed (Isa 25:7). See the connection? All of this is contained in the revelation of the gospel, IF it is deeply, not superficially, apprehended. And this is my great hope for the church of the last persecution, a church that will travail till Christ is formed unto full maturity of corporate stature, a bright, unhindered incarnational expression of true Christ-likeness, birthing an army of unswerving followers of the ‘Lamb’, not loving their mortal lives unto death.” Now that’s real freedom! As one of our corresponding brothers lately used Churchill’s famous phrase to describe that time as the church’s “finest hour.” This is my reading of Rev 12; but that’s another topic.

So, what does such a revelation accomplish? What would be its evidence? Great zeal, energy, and unction in speaking? Not necessarily. I think rather, a very reduced. simplified, and unassuming vessel with no greater delight than to yield his or her all to the transforming goodness of redeeming love. And we may be sure that such mission constraining love will be defined by a holy fear that is commensurate with a vision of the majesty of God and the ‘everlasting burnings’ of un-propitiated holiness. Now that would be “apostolic;” regardless whether one be an Apollos or a country bumpkin, far more likely the latter. In fact, if I know the Lord at all, there’s something deep in God that will not be satisfied until His greatest last day’s speaking will come through the tongues of those that stammer, particularly the foolish tongues of unqualified Gentiles (see Isa 28:11; noting also that Moses stammered, and Paul’s speech was regarded as contemptible and his bodily presence weak).

So the object of divine shaking is any false dependency, regardless of the form that false comfort or confidence might take. Though a bit speculative, it is quite possible that Isaiah looked to the godly Uzziah as a check and restraint, a preservative against Israel’s downward spiral into apostasy, hastening judgement and exile. He must have felt that if things are this bad under just Uzziah, one of the rare instances of godly leadership, what will it be now in his absence? So, in a sense, with Uzziah’s death, the bottom drops out and a sense of despair steels upon the prophet. That’s possible; but any event, when the bottom drops out, it’s usually to show that “underneath are the everlasting arms,” and this takes its greatest force in the light of the all comprehending, invincible, majesty of the sovereignty of God, such as Isaiah was blessed to see.

My second question or thought is, recently I was talking to my wife about the absence of the fear of the Lord within the body and I thought that the deeper root of it was the absence of the knowledge of God as He is. Which Art makes reference to. But how does one know God as He is? Is it the grace of God in a supernatural revelation or intervention? Or is it through time and waiting and seeking? Or is it through making ourselves available to Him? Or a combination of all of the above?

I think that’s a definite “all of the above” answer. But I would add that the simple answer to “how does one know God as He is,” must always be through God’s Word. But how does the living Word make us alive? Therefore, it must be the ‘quickened’ Word, the Word that divides, and this brings us again to the urgency of revelation. That said, however, the English divines made much of a conscientious attendance to what they called “the means of grace.” They knew that only a crisis experience of travail and soul quickening revelation would suffice to raise the dead spirit of the natural man. However, contrary to popular opinion, they did not regard man as impotent to avail himself of the divinely prescribed ‘means of grace’ by which alone that grace is pleased to work. They called it the “Method of G race,” as presented in an excellent book by that title, written by the precious John Flavel.

The Puritans understood that God has as much respect for the divinely appointed means, as for the end itself. Their strong views of God’s sovereignty did not make them passive, but all the more reverential of the necessity to cooperate with God. Man could do this; but only to a point. To them, neglect of the graciously proffered ‘means of grace’ was dangerous presumption and high rebellion. Still, the emphasis has to be placed on the moment of revelation. That’s why I’m so attracted to the whole area of ‘apocalyptic‘, because it embodies and explains so much of what we’re discussing here. When Jesus said “upon this rock I will build my church,” I think he was referring to something deeper and even more foundational than even the correct identification of Messiah as Son of God. Rather, I believe He was referring to this very phenomenon of Spirit quickened revelation, but, of course, only as it attains its goal in Him. It is “the Christ of revelation” that is made to us a quickening spirit, not merely “the Christ of the creed.” See what I mean? It is the prerogative of the Father to quicken whom He will, to reveal to Peter what flesh and blood is impotent to receive; THAT is the “Rock” that distinguishes the true church of God, even as it is the foundation of God (2Tim 2:19). It is ‘the rock of revelation’. This is the quickening revelation that is specific to God’s elect.

Thirdly is it possible to agree with the doctrine and actually really believe cerebrally and genuinely that man is fallen and in depravity and yet still lack an understanding of it, truly in his heart? Is it possible to really see yourself if you have not first know God as He is?

Again, it is important to observe the order in Isa 6 and in the aforementioned analogies. All hangs on the seeing. Whether initially or by degree, it is as we SEE or HEAR (“take heed how you hear”) that we are changed from glory to glory. This process has its crisis beginning, but can also be progressive in nature. In fact, any true believer will tell you that they are “killed all the day long” as they are taken ‘from crisis to crisis’, just so they may be continually induced to recover to themselves and to maintain a clear and ever clearer vision of the Lord. “Be thou my vision!” is the cry of every regenerate heart. If not, we may be sure that Fatherly discipline is at the door. God will not leave a true son in complacency. But as you point out, it was only as Isaiah SAW the Lord that he saw himself. Whether by degree or a sudden burst of devastating discovery, that is the rule, and again, it is all contingent on Spirit quickened revelation. And it was only as Isaiah tasted of God’s goodness that repentance was complete unto the willing obedience of the indwelling Christ (1Pet 1:11), now fully formed in Him. It will be so with Israel after Jacob’s trouble, and it will be so with us according to the same pattern.

Also Art touches on the “haunting” issue of who? Which implies few; and he is correct. But I am wondering who is in a place of hearing that has not expirienced the above? Who can hear the voice of God unless he is familiar with that voice? Who really wants to be sent to bear that type of word who has not first known the awesomeness and majesty of God? I see this on the front of numerous t-shirts and banners yet who really even understand the totality of that call and what that type of being sent means? Surely it is not bliss and acceptance?
If it is true, as I think it is, that we do not know God as God can we really know sin as sin? As the abominable thing in the eyes of the Lord.

This whole issue seems so pivotal and lost to us or me especially. But when I consider it I realize I am just lacking in so many ways and just immature more than I know. But what is the right response? Or is it just a matter of time and death and seeking and failing and the like?

You’re right; it all starts with ‘hearing the voice’ or with SEEING God as He is. Until this, we’re spinning our well meaning religious wheels. It is God that must move us to the place of hearing, just as He must move Jacob, as He moved Isaiah and Paul to that place. And this does not take place UNTIL the “set time” (Ps 102:13), until the “time appointed” because “that which is determined shall be done” (Dan 8:19; 11:27, 35-36; Gal 4:2; see esp. Gal 1:15 “when it PLEASED GOD to reveal His Son in me”). We must be ‘crowded’ to Christ. We are ‘shut up’ to a faith that MUST be ‘revealed’, not only chronologically, but existentially (Gal 3:23). True, we must be willing and obedient; but then again, when will Israel be willing? According to scripture; that will only come “in the day of His power” (Ps 110:3). It is not in man to seek God; not this God; not the God that reveals Himself only to the destitute (see esp. Ps 102:17). But then again, who is really completely helpless UNTIL God takes this divine initiative? Jacob’s trouble shows us this; as only by a true revelation, quickened by the Holy Spirit, are we able to hear, see, and know God, and therefore know something of our own depravity in that light. “The heart is deceitful above all things and desperately wicked; WHO CAN KNOW IT?” Indeed, it impossible apart from revelation.

It is impossible for flesh and blood to promote such a personal ‘Jacob’s trouble’ process apart from divine inducements that we would never choose? He has appointed the crisis. He has ‘set things up’ for the sake of His own glory. “For with man, this is impossible.” That’s always the point. In this way, no flesh can glory, because the glory of God is mutually exclusive of any human glory. In speaking of Paul’s conversion in manifest analogy with the day of Israel’s salvation, I like to make humorous analogy with the slogan claimed for the Royal Canadian Mounties who ‘always get their man’. Well, I like to say that as much as God ‘got His man’ on the Road to Damascus, He knows how to ‘get His nation’. And that is always by a sovereign divine arrest of apocalyptic intervention and revelation.

He knows how to get us too, Aaron, as we pray that He will graciously cut off all our vain options, our futile ‘escape routes’. We may thus take great hope that as much as it is God that has put it in our hearts to seek His face continually, then this is grace is the most reliable evidence and hopeful prospect that we will yet come to know Him in the way we so earnestly covet. A saint deeply exercised by the evils of the age around him (in analogy with Nehemiah’s tears over the charred remains of the name and testimony of God in the earth), will groan in himself; and the promise assures us that such holy groaning will in due time (Ps 126:6) be rewarded by heaven’s invitation to “come up hither”, there to receive a more expansive view. Such a view will doubtless be ‘bitter sweet’, because it unveils not only the incomprehensible glory of undeserved mercy, but the terrible severity of divine justice that forms the incomprehensible background for a grace that is made by that severity to appear all the more amazing. BEHOLD the goodness and the severity! There’s the balance; both are to the uttermost.

I know I ask alot of questions and probably wear you out with emails but thanks as always.

It is the business of the enemy to “wear out the saints” (Dan 7:21), but your questions always stir me to blessed remembrance of important topics of mutual interest. ” But exhort one another daily, while it is called To day; lest any of you be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin. For we are made partakers of Christ, if we hold the beginning of our confidence steadfast unto the end” (Heb 3:13-14). By such exhortation, we are mutual helpers in our own perseverance to the desired haven.

Appreciating both your questions and your prayer, the Lord be with your faith, my dear young brother, Reggie