Wednesday, November 27, 2024
By Faith = By Works?
Monday, November 25, 2024
Satan's Usurpation of the Political World
United To Christ by Faith (Spurgeon)
What think ye?
Friday, November 22, 2024
Study To Be Quiet?
Note that the word "revellings" is from the Greek word "kōmos" and means:
"a revel, carousal a nocturnal and riotous procession of half drunken and frolicsome fellows who after supper parade through the streets with torches and music in honour of Bacchus or some other deity, and sing and play before houses of male and female friends; hence used generally of feasts and drinking parties that are protracted till late at night and indulge in revelry." (Outline of biblical usage by Strong)
"Let us walk honestly, as in the day; not in rioting and drunkenness, not in chambering and wantonness, not in strife and envying." (Rom. 13: 13)
Here "rioting" is from "kōmos" and it and the word "reveling" cannot be thought to be a quiet affair, but rather loud and noisy. Such kinds of wicked parties are not examples of living a quiet life. James speaks of the noise of war and conflict when he writes:
"Where do wars and fights come from among you? Do they not come from your desires for pleasure that war in your members?" (James 4: 1 nkjv)
"Being quiet can be a struggle, but it can also be a good virtue to have. The Bible commends those who are able to keep the peace and listen, however, discourages being quiet due to timidness." (AI)
There are lots of texts in the Bible that encourage us to appreciate silence. Oftentimes we are talking, often loudly, when we ought to be quiet and other times we are silent when we ought to be speaking. We need wisdom in judging each circumstance.
Saturday, November 16, 2024
Expository Preaching Postscript
Friday, November 15, 2024
Deception By Sorceries
Thursday, November 14, 2024
Why Did Christ Forbid Preaching To Gentiles? (iii)
Pentecost writes further under "THE THEOCRATIC KINGDOM OFFER WITHDRAWN AND POSTPONED AFTER THE REJECTION BY ISRAEL":
"It has been shown in tracing the theme of the Gospel of Matthew that the pivotal point in the Lord’s ministry to Israel was reached in the twelfth chapter, where the rejection of Israel by Christ, because of their announced rejection of Him, and the withdrawal of the offer of the kingdom is recorded. Gaebelein, speaking of the events in chapters eleven and twelve, says: “It is the great turning point in this Gospel and with it the offer of our Lord to Israel as their King, as well as the offer of the Kingdom ceases.” Barnhouse notes the importance of the event recorded in Matthew 12:14- 15:
The hatred in the hearts of the religious leaders had come to the point where they held a council against Him, how that they might destroy Him (Mt. 12:14). It was then that there occurred an act, so dramatic and so significant that we must not fail to see it. We read that “when Jesus knew it”—knew that they were holding a council against Him—“He withdrew Himself from thence” (v. 15). It was a sad day for Israel. When the Messiah of Israel withdrew Himself from His people, there could be nothing but bitterness left in their cup."
The rejection of Jesus as Israel's King and Messiah was a rejection of the kingdom promised in the old testament scriptures. Further, as we have seen, their acceptance of Jesus as Lord and King will occur in conjunction with Christ' second coming.
Pentecost continues:
"Because the nation has rejected Him, the Lord announces the severance of every natural tie by which He was bound to the nation (Matt. 12:46-50).
From this announcement of the Lord concerning the rejection of the nation a definite movement may be traced in the withdrawal of the offer of the kingdom. In the parables (Matt. 13: 1-50) the Lord outlines the program in the development of the theocratic kingdom during the period of the King’s absence, and announces the inception of an entirely new, unheralded, and unexpected program—the church (Matt. 16:13-20). He prepares the disciples for a long delay in the kingdom program as it relates to Israel (Luke 19:11-27). He promises the second advent, at which time the kingdom program with Israel will be resumed (Matt. 24:27-31), and gives the nation signs that will herald His second advent (Matt. 24:4-26). He prepares the disciples for their ministry in the new age (John 14-16), but promises them participation in the kingdom, despite its delay (Matt. 19:28-30; Luke 22:28-30). The Lord even gives to the disciples a miniature and premature picture of the second coming of Christ to establish His kingdom (Matt. 16:27-17:8). Thus we see the Lord is preparing the disciples for the withdrawal of the offer of the kingdom and the institution of a new program and age before the kingdom program is consummated."
We are in the time of Christ' absence and in the time when his kingdom has been delayed until his second coming. His kingdom is to some extent realized by every individual Jew or Gentile, or by the church, but the full realization will occur when Christ comes. So Paul connects Christ future appearing with the coming of the kingdom. (II Tim. 4: 1)
Pentecost continues:
"In the Lord’s public ministry there is a progression of announcements that assert the withdrawal of the offer of the kingdom. The announcement of the woes upon the leaders of the nation (Matt. 23) signifies that they have no expectation but that of judgment. The statement of the Lord is final:
O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not! Behold, your house is left unto you desolate. For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord [Matt. 23:37-39].
If thou hadst known, even thou, at least in this thy day, the things which belong unto thy peace! but now they are hid from thine eyes. For the days shall come upon thee, that thine enemies shall cast a trench about thee, and compass thee round, and keep thee in on every side, And shall lay thee even with the ground, and thy children within thee; and they shall not leave in thee one stone upon another; because thou knewest not the time of thy visitation [Luke 19:42-44]. …Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled [Luke 21:24].
The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord’s doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes? Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof [Matt. 21:42-43].
There are two explanations of the “nation” to whom the kingdom of God was now to be given. (1) The first explanation understands the word nation as “generation” and would interpret the passage thus: the kingdom of God, which is being offered to this generation, will no longer be offered to this generation of Israel, but will be offered to that generation of Israel living in a future day before the advent of Christ, which manifests belief in the coming of Messiah by their works. This is to say that the kingdom, then being offered, will again be offered to Israel prior to the second advent. This is in keeping with the promise that the gospel of the kingdom will be preached again and accepted by a remnant in Israel (Matt 24:14). (2) The second explanation interprets the word nation in reference to the Gentiles, to whom the good news would go after the death of Christ and through whom the kingdom program would be developed (the mystery program of Matt. 13) until its final realization at the second advent.
Whichever of these two views be adopted, the Lord’s word still constitutes the announcement of the withdrawal of the offer of the kingdom to Israel at that time because of their rejection of Him as Messiah."
First, let us notice two times in the above texts where our Lord uses the word "till" or "until" in regard to the time when the kingdom will be restored to Israel. The kingdom will not be restored to Israel "until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled." The kingdom will not be restored, and Christ will not come again, until the nation is converted, until they say "blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord."
Pentecost continues in Chapter XXVII titled "THE KINGDOM PROGRAM IN THE PRESENT AGE":
"That God is continuing the development of His over-all theocratic kingdom program has been presented previously in the study of the parables in Matthew 13. It was entirely unknown in the Old Testament that a great interval of time would intervene between the offer of the kingdom by Messiah at His coming to the earth and the reception of that offer. The parables of Matthew 13 reveal the whole course of the development of the theocratic kingdom from the rejection of the King by Israel during His first advent until His reception as Messiah by Israel at His second advent. In commenting on Luke 19:11-27, Peters develops the whole program. He writes:
Jesus uttered this parable “because they thought that the Kingdom of God should immediately appear.” In His reply there is no intimation…that the Jews were mistaken in their idea of the kingdom, and that, if modern notions are correct, the Kingdom had already come and was established. If this had been so, then the answer of Jesus would be cruelly irrelevant; but with the proper conception of the Kingdom it is finely consistent and forcibly expressed. For there is (as there could not be) no declaration that they were wrong in believing that the Kingdom which they expected, the Messianic, was still in the future. They were only mistaken in the opinion, carefully announced, “that the Kingdom of God should immediately appear.” Now the parable is given to correct this belief in the immediate setting up of the Kingdom, but only after an undefined period of time had elapsed. For He represents Himself as a nobleman, who, having a right to the Kingdom, goes “into a far country to receive” (to have His title confirmed) “for Himself a Kingdom, and to return.” During His absence His servants “occupy till I come.” Then after an interval of time, not definitely stated, the period having come to enter upon His reign, having received the Kingdom, He returns, judgment follows, and those who rejected Him (saying, “we will not have this man to reign over us”) are destroyed. Here we have: (1) the Jews thought that the Kingdom would now appear; (2) but it was not nigh, for (a) He would leave, (b) they had refused His proffered reign, (c) those, however, who were devoted to Him should “occupy” until He returned, (d) during His absence there was no Kingdom, being gone to receive the power to reign; (3) He would return and then manifest His acquired power…in the establishment of His Kingdom. Thus we have the absence, and then “the appearing and Kingdom” of Christ."
Why did Jesus in Acts 1: 6-7 not answer the question of the apostles by saying "there is to be no restoration of the kingdom to Israel"? Or why did he not say "the kingdom is being replaced by the church"? Amillennialists say that the question by the apostles manifested their misunderstanding about the nature of the kingdom and that the reason why Christ answered the way he did was because he was in a hurry to depart into the heavens and would save correcting them to another time and by the later teaching of the Holy Spirit. I find that totally untenable however for several reasons. Let us notice these comments from the commentaries of Albert Barnes and John Gill:
"It is not for you to know - The question of the apostles respected the time of the restoration; it was not whether he would do it." (Barnes)
"...when should be the time, the day, and hour of the coming of the son of man, when he shall set up his kingdom in a more glorious manner, and the kingdoms of this world shall become his; or when the kingdom shall be restored to Israel." (Gill)
I believe these two comments are spot on.
In concluding this short series I want to address a common objection by Amillennialists about the nature of the promised kingdom of God. One of the adjectives they use to deny a literal kingdom on earth is the word "political." They deny that the kingdom of God will be a political rule on earth, believing that such a description denies that the kingdom is spiritual. But, nothing could be further from the truth.
Political (or governmental) Rule
The Kingdom that will be realized when Christ comes again will see a mass conversion of the Jews and the destruction of those Jews who refuse to submit to him. This kingdom will also involve the Jewish nation becoming leaders over the Gentile nations in the next age to come (or the millennium). It will be a literal kingdom and political, and involve the elimination of sickness and disease, and of death for many, and also a new heavens and earth. The church also will be in a leadership position in that age. So we read in the Book of Revelation:
"The one who conquers and who keeps my works until the end, to him I will give authority over the nations, and he will rule them with a rod of iron, as when earthen pots are broken in pieces, even as I myself have received authority from my Father." (Rev. 2: 26-27)
We see this repeated in the twentieth chapter where we read where the resurrected saints are seated on thrones. We also see it in connection with the second coming of Christ in Rev. 11: 5 where the text reads:
"Then the seventh angel blew his trumpet, and there were loud voices in heaven, saying, 'The kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ, and he shall reign forever and ever.'"
That shows that the reign of Christ and that of his people is 1) yet future, and 2) involves political rule over the nations of the earth in the millennial age of the kingdom.
Another verse that shows us the political aspect of the reign of Christ and his people is seen in the prophecy of Daniel who wrote:
"Then the sovereignty, power and greatness of all the kingdoms under heaven will be handed over to the holy people of the Most High. His kingdom will be an everlasting kingdom, and all rulers will worship and obey him." Dan. 7: 27)
Though some Amillennialists want to say that this prophecy has been fulfilled in the church institution, it is clear that it is not. The "kingdoms under heaven" denotes every nation and its governments and its fulfillment is seen in Rev. 11: 5 and occurs in the time of Christ' coming again (or his Apocalypse). This taking over the political rule or government of the nations of the world is also described by the prophet Isaiah when he wrote:
"For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. Of the greatness of his government and peace there will be no end." (Isa. 9: 6-7)
Thursday, November 7, 2024
Why Did Christ Forbid Preaching To Gentiles? (ii)
The above chart gives my understanding of the kingdom program in the bible, with minor changes. The kingdom promised in the old testament to Israel was offered (or presented) to Israel in the person of the Messiah the King, but they having rejected him rejected his kingdom (the nation as a whole) and thus we now in the church age have the kingdom in mystery form, the theocratic kingdom of the prophecies being postponed until the second coming. Many scriptures need to be studied that relate to this question.
Some Amillennialists that I heard when I was a Hardshell Baptist would denounce as ridiculous the idea that the kingdom was offered to Israel and that it was postponed. But, to this we may look at other such things that were postponed due to the unbelief and impenitence of people. The Israelite nation that came out of Egyptian bondage could have entered into the land of promise within two years but its entering was postponed for another thirty eight years. Other examples we could give but will let the above suffice. Perhaps a better word than "postponed" would be "delayed." There are delays in God's program. In Revelation we have the words "delay shall be no more" (Rev. 10: 7) We also have the words of Christ who said:
"And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened." (Matt. 24: 22)
"Those days" may be shortened or lengthened, i.e. delayed. So the apostle Peter also spoke of how believers are "looking for and hastening the coming of the day of God" (II Peter 3: 12). So, some things in God's program for the ages may be hastened and some delayed.
Now let us proceed further in addressing the question as to whether the kingdom was offered to the Jewish nation. In doing this let us continue with our citations from Pentecost on this point. Keep in mind that there are several central questions involved in this subject: 1) what is the kingdom of God announced by John the Baptist, Christ, and his apostles? 2) was it postponed or delayed until the second coming? 3) was the type of kingdom altered so that the kingdom is now purely spiritual? 4) was the creation of the new testament church the kingdom of God promised by the old testament prophets?
Pentecost says under the sub-heading "The relation of Christ to the offer":
"The kingdom was offered in the person of the king. The Lord’s statement is: “behold, the kingdom of God is within you” (Luke 17:21). The Lord is not asserting that His kingdom was to be a spiritual kingdom in the hearts of men. Such is contrary to the entire tenor of the Word of God. He is asserting that the kingdom to which they were looking was already “at hand” in the person of the king. The rightful king was present and all that was required was repentance on the part of the nation and a reception of Christ as the theocratic Messiah."
That is true. A bible student should read how Pentecost traces the various movements in the Book of Matthew which show how and when the kingdom was offered, when it was rejected, and when the Lord announced how the kingdom would be postponed and the kingdom would exist only in mystery form throughout the age of the church.
Pentecost writes further under the sub-heading "The contingency of the offer":
"The offer of the kingdom was a contingent offer. God knew full-well the response of the nation Israel to the offer of the kingdom, yet the establishment of the theocratic kingdom depended upon the repentance of the nation, the recognition of John the Baptist as the promised forerunner, and the reception of Jesus Christ as the theocratic king. McClain says:
More than one expositor has stumbled over the ultimatum of Christ, “I was not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” The only adequate explanation is to see, what our Lord understood clearly, the contingent nature of His message of the Kingdom. To put the matter in a word: the immediate and complete establishment of His Kingdom depended upon the attitude of the nation of Israel, to whom pertained the divine promises and covenants.…That our Lord clearly understood the contingent nature of His Kingdom message is plain from His evaluation of John the Baptist and his meteoric career. Every intelligent Jew knew that the final word of the final Old Testament prophet predicted the appearance of Elijah as the precursor to the establishment of the Kingdom. And Jesus declares, in Matthew 11, concerning John, “If ye are willing to receive him, this is Elijah, that is to come.” Still later, when historical events have demonstrated the certainty of His rejection and death at the hands of the Jewish nation, our Lord again refers to John, but now the die is cast, “Elijah indeed cometh, and shall restore all things,” He assures the disciples; but He adds, “I say unto you that Elijah is come already, and they knew him not.” I do not hesitate to say that you have here the key to one of the most puzzling problems of New Testament eschatology in relation to the Kingdom: The immediate establishment of the Mediatorial Kingdom on earth was contingent upon the attitude of Israel."
The rejection of Israel's Messiah and King by its leaders and by the general population was not a surprise to the Lord. He knew in advance that this rejection of the King and kingdom would occur. Even the old testament prophets spoke of this rejection such as in Isaiah chapter fifty three. Joseph being rejected by his brethren and sold into Egypt foreshadowed it. His plan in regard to both the kingdom of God and the salvation of Jews and Gentiles had this rejection included in it. What Pentecost points out in the above citation affirms that Christ pushed the establishment of the kingdom to his second coming, and to a future coming of Elijah the prophet.
Under the sub-heading "The bona fide offer" Pentecost wrote:
"This offer of the kingdom was, nevertheless, a bona fide offer. It would be a mockery for God to present the theocratic kingdom if it were not a genuine offer. Peters says: This Kingdom was offered to the nation in good faith, i.e. it would have been bestowed provided the nation had repented. The foreknown result made no difference in the tender of it, so far as the free agency of the nation is concerned; that result flowed from a voluntary choice. The national unbelief did not change God’s faithfulness, Rom. 3:3 (did not change God's plans or his word of promise- SG). It would be derogatory to the mission of Christ to take any other view of it, and the sincerity and desire of Jesus that the nation might accept, is witnessed in His tears over Jerusalem, in His address to it, in His unceasing labors, in sending out the twelve and the seventy, and in His works of mercy and love. It follows, then, that the Jews had the privilege accorded to them of accepting the Kingdom, and if the condition annexed to it had been complied with, then the Kingdom of David would have been most gloriously reestablished under the Messiah."
God's foreknowledge that the Jews as a whole, with only few exceptions, would reject Jesus their King and the kingdom of God, did not prevent him from sincerely offering himself and the kingdom. We could say the same thing about the gift of salvation. God knows who is going to accept the gift and who will refuse it, yet he still sincerely offers salvation to all.
Pentecost writes further:
"There are many who argue that the bona fide offer of a kingdom at the first advent minimizes the cross and leaves no place for the accomplishment of the redemptive program of God. In reply to this contention it may be said that the offer and the rejection of the theocratic kingdom was the design of God by which His eternal purpose was actually accomplished. That which accomplished the divine purpose of salvation through Christ’s death was the rejection of a kingdom offered to Israel. Peters well observes:
The question, How, then, would the atonement have been made by the shedding of blood? has nothing whatever to do with the sincerity of this offer, for “the manifold wisdom of God” would have been equal to the emergency, either by antedating to some other period, or by providing for it previously; or in some other, to us unknown, way. As it was, God’s purposes, His determinate counsel, are shaped by what was a foreseen voluntary choice of the nation. God’s mercy was willing to bestow, but the nation’s depravity prevented the gift. That the Kingdom would have been established had the nation believed, is evident from Deut., ch. 32; 2 Chron. 7:12-22; Isa. 48:18; Ps. 81:8-16, etc. …Paul’s argument in Romans proceeds on the supposition that the nation had the power of choice, that it wilfully chose the evil, and that God in mercy overruled its fall for the salvation of the Gentiles. They stumbled and fell, not through necessity, and not because God’s Purpose required it, but solely through their own unbelief; and God’s plan, as the Omniscient, embraced the same as a foreknown result, and made provision accordingly."
Recall the words of the apostle John - "he came unto his own and his own received him not." (John 1: 11) This rejection of "the King of the Jews" by the Jews generally (with few individual exceptions of course) was a rejection of the promised kingdom of God by the Jewish prophets and on this Paul has much to say in the eleventh chapter of his Roman epistle. There he writes:
"11 I say then, have they stumbled that they should fall? Certainly not! But through their fall, to provoke them to jealousy, salvation has come to the Gentiles. 12 Now if their fall is riches for the world, and their failure riches for the Gentiles, how much more their fullness! 13 For I speak to you Gentiles; inasmuch as I am an apostle to the Gentiles, I magnify my ministry, 14 if by any means I may provoke to jealousy those who are my flesh and save some of them. 15 For if their being cast away is the reconciling of the world, what will their acceptance be but life from the dead?" (Vss. 11-15 nkjv)
The rejection of the Messiah by Israel was foreknown and God's plan was circumscribed by that fact. It was included in his plan. Because Israel rejected him and his kingdom, salvation has come to the Gentiles. Further, salvation coming to the Gentiles will work to provoke Israel to one day realize their error and turn to Christ in repentance and faith. Recall the words of Jesus to the nation of Israel: “Therefore I say to you, the kingdom of God will be taken from you and given to a nation bearing the fruits of it. (Matt. 21: 43 nkjv) This nation is described by Peter when he writes to the members of the church (or body of Christ):
"But you are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, His own special people, that you may proclaim the praises of Him who called you out of darkness into His marvelous light." (I Peter 2: 9 nkjv)
Though the Jews and their leaders rejected Christ, yet there was an exception. Some individual Jews and Gentiles did accept Christ and they are addressed as being that nation or people to whom the promises of the kingdom belong. But, that does not negate the truth that one day the entire nation of the Jews will become believers in their Messiah and when God will fulfill all his covenant promises made to them. Notice these words from the Gospel of Luke:
"Now as they heard these things, He spoke another parable, because He was near Jerusalem and because they thought the kingdom of God would appear immediately. A certain nobleman went into a far country to receive for himself a kingdom, and to return." (Luke 19: 11-12 nkjv)
This is another decisive text. Rather than affirming that the kingdom of God promised by the old testament prophets was now fulfilled, was not set up and established on earth, the text says the kingdom of God did not immediately appear but that Christ left this world and went into heaven (far country) in order to there receive the kingdom and to return, at which time of his coming the kingdom of God will be fully realized.
In the next chapter we will continue with these things.




