No one IS ABLE to come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I shall RAISE HIM UP on the last day. (John6:44)

The doctrines of predestination/election and premillennialism are hinted at in this verse although there are far more substantial and explicit texts to support both which we will come across as we progress through the New Testament. Paul refers on a number of occasions to the fact that Christians are predestined or called according to the purpose of God’s will and that their election was a matter of divine choice, not any foreseen or actual merit on their part. But for what purpose was their calling according to that same Apostle? – it was to establish a people who through self-discipline and applying the resources of celestial grace progressively become conformed to the image of Christ (Rom8:29). Such will become His joint-heirs (no less) provided they “suffer with Him in order to be glorified with Him” (Rom8:17 cf. Greek text). It is not, I suggest, as Augustine first proposed and I for many years believed as a Calvinist – that “the elect” were the proportionately small minority arbitrarily chosen by a deistic divinity to be delivered from eternal misery in Hell. For all things were created through Christ and for Christ and what a sovereign God wants He is bound to get, especially if it were the case that human free will is incapable of choosing or even desiring what is good as Augustine and the later Reformers asserted. Their cosmic horror story is anything but “Good News” and is thankfully contradicted by the Bible as a whole as I am in the business of demonstrating.

Free will?

Predestination may appear to be incompatible with any notion of effectual free will in spiritual matters. Not so if one understands that the bulk of humanity were neither predestined for the glories awaiting Christ’s faithful disciples nor in Paul’s words are mere “vessels of wrath fitted for destruction” (Rom9:22) aka the children of the devil considered in earlier posts. In other words the predestination/free will conundrum can only be resolved by acknowledging three rather than two soteriological categories, the biblical foundation for which is a central theme of my book*. For as our featured verse indicates human free will is indeed  incapable of apprehending the Gospel of Christ unless divinely enabled but it is by nature capable of responding positively to the light Christ has provided to every person (Jn1:9NKJV) being  the principles of  sound reason and humane living operating through the spiritual faculty of conscience – God’s law planted in the heart (Rom2:15) by which all people shall be judged (Mt25:41-46).

Such sentiments and interpretations will be alien to many but they would not have been so to 2nd/3rd century Christian theologians such as Justin Martyr, Irenaeus and Origen. Such widely understood principles of natural law, in view of their ubiquity, must have underpinned the gospel message imparted by the apostles and their immediate appointees to the late first and second century churches. These early assemblies’ doctrinal unity was affirmed by Irenaeus (earlier post), and in turn documented by the Church’s first historian Eusebius (AD263-339) who explicitly affirmed a positive role for natural law. Thanks to the resources available in the digital age such vital historical truths can no longer be concealed. Study for yourself (perhaps starting with Eusebius) and you will quickly discern that what I am saying with respect to natural law, judged by so many to be heretical was the prevailing understanding of the churches prior to Augustine’s novel interpretations regarding the consequences of “original sin” based on his particular reading of Paul’s teaching.

So what is original sin?

Original sin is a biblical reality (cf. Rom5:14) but not as Augustine came to understand Paul’s references to “death” as being a damnable state of the soul from birth. Rather it pertains (in Paul’s language) to the “body of this death” referring to the temporary “vessel” or “tent” the soul inhabits as a result of Adam’s demise, the instincts of which war against the nobler instincts of the “inner man”, mind or spirit (Rom7:23). As Paul goes on to affirm the Christian alone is enabled by celestial grace to “possess his own vessel in sanctity and honour” (1Thes4:4). Such I have come to understand is what the Bible actually means by “being saved” or raised to “eternal Life”. As part of God’s redemptive plan for His earthly creation He chose to establish a people to serve and worship the living God in spirit and truth whilst still incarnate: so that His Son’s Church may become like Israel before her “a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God’s own special people, to proclaim the praises of Him who called them out of darkness into His marvellous light” (1Pet2:9).

The millennial age

As for a further terrestrial age, that is explicitly referred to in Revelation but it is also indicated by Jesus’ statements in Jn6:44&54 that His faithful disciples shall be raised up on the last day. As the Bible makes perfectly clear everyone is to be raised up eventually so what is the Lord’s point? Surely that only Christ’s faithful disciples shall have a part in the first resurrection that will initiate that age (Rev20:6). Such an age is also a corollary to what I now understand Paul to be saying about the nature of the current epoch in which non-Jews from every nation are being added to the “Israel of God”. Many prophecies and divine promises set out in the Old Testament will remain unfilled until Christ returns in glory with His saints.

• A free PDF of which is available HERE
• Author’s Facebook page HERE

Related posts: Predestination and free will & children of the devil  &  The millennial age

⁵¹ I am the living bread that came down out of heaven; if anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever; and the bread also which I will give for the life of the world is My flesh.” ⁵² Then the Jews began to argue with one another, saying, “How can this man give us His flesh to eat?” ⁵³ So Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in yourselves. ⁵⁴ He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.

⁵⁵ For My flesh is true food, and My blood is true drink. ⁵⁶ He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood abides in Me, and I in him. ⁵⁷ As the living Father sent Me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats Me, he also will live because of Me. ⁵⁸ This is the bread which came down out of heaven; not as the fathers ate and died; he who eats this bread will live forever.” (Jn6:52-58 NASB)

Choice of translation

I have chosen the NASB for unlike some versions it is faithful to the Greek text John actually scribed. Some other translations attempt to tone down Jesus’ reference to Himself being food and drink (especially v57: “He who eats Me shall live because of Me”). They prefer we should understand it in a metaphorical or figurative sense of feeding on Christ, as one might feed upon the works of Shakespeare for entertainment or inspiration or feed upon someone’s insecurities: so (they believe) one might figuratively speaking feed on Christ by reading the Bible or through prayerful contemplation.

FACT: Τρώγω utilised in vv56,57 and 58 literally means to gnaw, munch or crunch. As can be confirmed in Bible-hub’s Greek concordance HERE the word is never used metaphorically in the New Testament. That is what so shocked Jesus’ listeners: “How can this man possibly give us His flesh to eat?” (v52). So those who take the bread and wine of the Eucharist to be purely symbolic have a problem. That is especially in view of verses 54 and 56. Feeding on Christ’s flesh and drinking His blood in the sense that Jesus/John intended determines whether or not one is “in Christ” (v56), whether or not one will be raised at the last day (v54b) and as considered in my last post whether or not one possesses Life of an eternal quality (v54a).

The last supper – how literally should Jesus’ words be taken?

So can we be sure what Jesus really meant by eating His flesh and drinking His blood? I have already shown it cannot be purely figurative. But nor can it literally mean “Here I am, take and eat Me like a bunch of cannibals”. There is obviously a mystical element, but in some meaningful sense we must feed on Christ.

Neither does the process have to be explained scientifically anymore than the feeding of the 5000 from a few loaves and fishes can be explained scientifically. It simply cannot – such is the nature of miracles and the work of the Holy Spirit. But I adduce in my book that from these words of Jesus recorded by John and crucially from the evidence we have from the writings of the earliest Christian writers, some of whom were the immediate successors or students of the twelve disciples, the understanding was that the bread and wine they consumed at the Eucharist contained or actually became the flesh and blood of Christ. Quoting from my book:

Historical witness to the real presence

 “Moving backwards from the fourth century, Cyril of Jerusalem  understood that through theEucharist a Christian becomes “concorporeal and consanguineous with Christ”³⁰; Clement (3rd century) declared:“Those who partake (of the Eucharist) are sanctified in body and soul; by the will of the Father, man is mystically united to the Spirit and to the Word”³¹.  From the 2nd century, Justin Martyr speaks of the bread and wine offered at the altar as “that from which our blood and flesh are nourished through its transformation, which is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh”³².

From the end of the first century, Ignatius, tutored by John refers to heretics of his day; “they abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer because they do not admit that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ who suffered for our sins. Those who speak against this gift of God incur death.”^33a The bread of the altar being “the medicine of immortality and the antidote to death^33b. In terms of the Eucharist as sacrifice, Augustine, thoroughly orthodox in this area regarded the Mass as the “highest and true sacrifice…, Christ being at the same time Priest and Victim”³⁴.

The Didache

Even in the oldest post-Biblical authentic writing available (the Didache c. xiv approx. AD96) refers to the “breaking of bread” as a sacrifice and related with the prophecy in Malachi (1:11); the pure offering with incense being offered by the Gentiles. The Malachi prophecy was understood by the early Fathers to be foretelling the universal and perpetuated daily sacrifice³⁵ to be provided under the New Dispensation. Moving to the present day, the Eastern Orthodox Church whom we have observed was a relatively stable element in the sixteenth century debacle has historically regarded the Divine Liturgy as “the awesome sacrifice entrusted to the Church to be re-enacted and given to the faithful for the nourishment of their faith and forgiveness of their sins”³⁶.

It was never intended that the Church delineate essential matters such as the real presence from Scripture alone. Rather, they were part of the sacred Tradition passed on from the apostles to their successors within the Church. For she is the sole depository of apostolic doctrine and the pillar and ground of the truth (1Tim3:15).

References:

30. Cyril of Jerusalem: Mystagogical Catechesis IV,3

31. Clement: “The instructor of children” – “Faith of the early Fathers” Vol 1:410 (W Jurgens)

32. St Justin Martyr – Apologies, chap. 66

33a)  St Ignatius: Letter to Smyrnaeans chap. 7;   b) Epistle of Ignatius to the Ephesians chap. 20 both utilizing the “shorter version” deemed as more reliable

34. Augustine: De Civitate Dei  Book X chap. 20

35. Cyprian (A.D.200-258)  Epistle 53 para 3 – affirms daily sacrifice of Eucharist 

36. Greek Orthodox Arch-Diocese of America – Fundamental Teachings

[Quote from “Fellowship of the Secret” – Chapter One]

********************

A free PDF of author’s latest book is HERE

Author’s Facebook page HERE

⁹ Then the woman of Samaria said to (Jesus), “How is it that You, being a Jew, ask a drink from me, a Samaritan woman?” For Jews have no dealings with Samaritans. ¹⁰ Jesus answered and said to her, “If you knew the gift of God, and who it is who says to you, ‘Give Me a drink,’ you would have asked Him, and He would have given you living water.” ¹¹ The woman said to Him, “Sir, You have nothing to draw with, and the well is deep. Where then do You get that living water? ¹² Are You greater than our father Jacob, who gave us the well, and drank from it himself, as well as his sons and his livestock?” ¹³ Jesus answered and said to her, “Whoever drinks of this water will thirst again, ¹⁴ but whoever drinks of the water that I shall give him will never thirst. But the water that I shall give him will become in him a fountain of water springing up into everlasting life.” . . . ²⁰ Our fathers worshiped on this mountain, and you Jews say that in Jerusalem is the place where one ought to worship.” ²¹ Jesus said to her, “Woman, believe Me, the hour is coming when you will neither on this mountain, nor in Jerusalem, worship the Father. ²² You worship what you do not know; we know what we worship, for salvation is of the Jews. ²³ But the hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth; for the Father is seeking such to worship Him. ²⁴ God is Spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth. (Jn4:9-24NKJV)

The two themes I want out to draw out from this passage have been underlined (vv14+22). The first concerns the nature of “eternal life” and what the Bible means by it. Many understand it to refer to “going to heaven when you die” which is absolutely not the case albeit those who possess it will do just that. But not only they, for as this passage makes clear “eternal life” is a gift of God that was not available until the Word of God became incarnate. It pertains to a state of being not a heavenly destination: “the water that I shall give him will become in him a fountain of water springing up into everlasting life.” For “this is eternal life, that they might know You the only true God and Jesus Christ whom You have sent” (Jn17:3). Eternal life pertains to experiencing a living relationship with Jesus Christ whilst still incarnate – a privilege offered to the Christian alone. That is not to say it does not impact upon one’s eternal destiny for it prepares those who possess it jointly to inherit with Christ “an exceeding and eternal weight of glory”, a concept currently beyond human comprehension (2Cor4:17).

Those who do not possess this divine gift (the vast majority of humanity) are described by Paul as being “dead”, inhabiting as they do “the body of this death” considered in the previous post. Their souls will not be delivered from this condition until their spirit is freed at death: “Then the dust will return to the Earth as it was and the spirit will return to God who gave it” (Eccles12:7). In the meantime, though most (not all) aspire to live worthy lives, like Paul before his conversion “I see in my members another law at war with the law of my mind, making me captive to the law of sin that dwells in my members” (Rom7:23). That is the nature of the spiritual death Paul was referring to – not “damnation” (which pertains to those who are dead in the Pauline sense in body and spirit – Jude1:12) but the concupiscent instincts of the flesh conspiring with the more noble instincts of the “inner man” resulting in an inability to serve and worship God “in spirit and in truth; for the Father is seeking such to worship Him” (v23). For that to happen individuals need to be “saved” from the ravages of their earthly vessel, Paul’s “body of this death”. Those predestined to do so are chosen “not on the basis of any works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy He saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Spirit” (Tit3:5).

Jesus the Jew

“You (Samaritans) worship what you do not know; WE know what WE worship, for salvation is from the Jews” In case anyone should be in doubt the Man Christ Jesus regarded Himself as a Jew: “We (Jews) know what we worship”. Jesus was the Jewish Messiah who came “to save His people from their sins” (Mt1:21) – “His people” being the Jews. Others might be pardoned (i.e. saved from the punishment their sins deserved) but that is not what this particular verse is saying – it is speaking of deliverance from the power of sin. Many may “go to Heaven when they die” but under Plan A only the Jews were to be saved in the gospel sense that I have been describing above. This is to all intents and purposes spelt out by Paul himself in Romans 11 (vv11,12,15 and 30) if only the apostle were believed and taken at his word! He summarises the situation in Eph3:8-11, the “fellowship of the secret (plan)” passage that my book focusses on as well as in the following passage from Colossians:  ^“The secret which has been hidden from ages and from generations, but NOW has been revealed to His saints to whom God willed to make known the riches of the glory of this mystery AMONG THE GENTILES which is Christ in you, the hope of glory  (Col1:26-27).

In terms of salvation history this is the age of the universal church offering salvation to Jew and Gentile alike – but that was not the published plan set out in the Old Testament as Paul has just confirmed (“the secret (plan) which has been hidden from ages and from generations). When the full implications of this mystery are grasped it has profound implications to broader providence. It is also able to resolve numerous scriptural and doctrinal tensions as hopefully I demonstrate in my book (freely available as a PDF HERE).

What is striking as one reads carefully through the gospel accounts is Jesus’ contrasting attitude towards the people He encountered, all of whom were to one degree or another sinful. It might astonish many that in calling His disciples there is little if any reference to their sinfulness. He did not ask His disciples to “acknowledge their lost estate”, simply to follow Him (Mt4:19).  Yet these were ordinary working men. Yes, Simon Peter was conscious of his own unworthiness when he became aware of his Lord’s divinity (Lk5:8), but Jesus’s only recorded comment concerning the moral state of His new recruits was a positive one and that concerned Nathanael: “Behold, an Israelite indeed in whom there is no guile”. This cynical joker was by no means perfect (Jn1:46) but those who are perfect such as the incarnate Word, look for the good in people and love and praise them for it (Mk10:19-23).

This reinforces what I was writing about in an earlier blog concerning God’s character and His regard for fallen human beings; in particular whether He ever has a positive regard towards their character or behaviour. Jesus acted towards Nathanael like the good-hearted magnanimous Man that He was yet at the same time we can be sure He acts and thinks like God the Father, being “the exact expression of God’s substance” (Heb1:3). But can such a comparison with the Father be made to Jesus during His earthly ministry? Seemingly so: “Have I been with you so long, and yet you have not known Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father; so how can you say, ‘Show us the Father’?” (Jn14:9): the key phrase being “have I been with you so long?” – Jesus is not the compassionate face of God, He is the perfect reflection (Greek: eikon) of God ‘s character as a whole even during His earthly ministry, albeit the true effulgence of His glory was only revealed to a few of His disciples at His transfiguration . And it is to be the God-Man Jesus who will judge humanity “for the Father judges no man but has committed all judgment to the Son” (Jn5:22).

As for Christ’s intelligible justice, He assures us He will apply standards we can well understand: “For with what judgment you judge, you will be judged; and with the measure you use, it will be measured back to you” (Mt7:2). As Matthew also affirmed Christ is benevolent towards those who are benevolent to others – all shall enter His heavenly Kingdom regardless of their indiscretions for which He paid the price on His cross: “Assuredly, I say to you, inasmuch as you did (this act of kindness) to one of the least of these My brethren, you did it to Me” (Mt25:40).

But then, as that same passage affirms, there are the “goats”, or as they are referred to elsewhere “the children of the devil” – Satan’s seed (see earlier post). Part of my task is to demonstrate from Scripture that such a description and the fate associated with these people is not referring to the vast swathe of humanity not predestined  to be those, who through a faith that is given and drawn by the Father come to a personal knowledge of Christ in advance of His Apocalypse (cf. Jn6:44; Eph1:11,12; Rev1:7).

Related post on Nathanael

ὅτι ἐκ τοῦ πληρώματος αὐτοῦ ἡμεῖς πάντες ἐλάβομεν καὶ χάριν ἀντὶ χάριτος   -   John1:16 (original text)

Once again it has been necessary to set out the verse as John wrote it, and for the usual reason: variable translations. The (New) King James Version is again on the money:  “And of His fullness we have all received, and grace FOR grace“.

The Greek preposition ἀντὶ can mean a number of things, “upon” not being one of them, yet that is how most modern versions of the Bible render the verse, i.e. as grace upon grace in the sense one would say blessings upon blessings – more of the same. But that is something the preposition  ἀντὶ would never portray. ἀντὶ expresses the idea of substitution or replacement – in this case one form (or source) of grace replacing or enriching another, not more and more of the same commodity; that sense would utilize the preposition ἐπί (upon).

Fear not, expertise in biblical Greek is not required, the matter can be ascertained in this page from Biblehub carefully observing the 17 occurrences of ἀντὶ in the Bible and comparing it  with the use of ἐπί (HERE). You will observe that only in this verse has the preposition been translated in the sense of more of the same. Arguably the NIV has the clearest rendering: Out of his fullness we have all received grace in place of grace already given. Even that is ambiguous: ἀντὶ is more typically used as in 1Peter3:9 – “Do not render evil FOR evil”, i.e. one person’s evil replacing another – clearly a different meaning from “Do not render evil upon evil” which would entirely miss the point of the teaching.

There are obvious theological motivations for translating the verse as most versions have, namely the post-Augustinian perspective that man by nature is devoid of any grace or God-given enlightenment until and unless he receives the celestial variety via conversion to the Christian faith. My previous post indicates why that is not the case. It requires an understanding that a part of man, even in his fallen state, is received directly from God/Christ. It is the spiritual part which survives the body and brain at death and returns to its Creator:  “Then the dust will return to the Earth as it was and the spirit will return to God who gave it” (Eccles12:7).

What God provides is rarely if ever devoid of grace, albeit “the exceedingly abundant grace which is in Christ Jesus” (1Tim1:14) is required for those who are to be saved from the ravages of “the body of this death” whilst still incarnate (previous post) so as to be fitted for the glory that awaits them as joint-heirs of Christ. I am adducing that this is what the Bible and Paul in particular actually mean by “being saved” rather than “going to Heaven when you die” (cf. Mt25:31-46; Lk16:25). I am aware that such proof texting is quite inadequate to make the case – a fuller, more coherent analysis is set out in my book, but note also the witness of the earliest Church Fathers (see NOTE below).

As to what the Bible actually means by grace – more often than not it is referring to God’s favour and kindness towards human beings, but also His enabling power to do what pleases Him. The issue in this context is whether man by nature has any of that commodity such that he is ever able to please God by his actions. The majority of Christians since the time of the Pelagian controversy (4th/5th century) would answer a resounding “NO” as did I for the first 28 years of my Christian life, but now my response is more nuanced. That is not wishful thinking on my part but, humanly speaking, the result of my biblical and (very) early Church history studies, not to mention 50+ years as an adult observing my fellow human beings. I say “humanly speaking” for the new understanding came during what I believe to be a week-long extraordinary encounter with the Holy Spirit that I testify to in my book.

And applying some simple reasoning: does not a true Christian have the mind of Christ? (1Cor2:16) – what pleases him or her in the behaviour of others pleases Christ and His Father. But surely, some will say, “You or I may well delight in the noble or compassionate exploits or well-spent life of a non-Christian who leaves the world a better place than he or she found it, but God is different – He is infinitely more holy than we are.” How true – but if you think being more holy means being less tolerant of sin and human weakness, less compassionate, less magnanimous indeed less gracious than man at his best, you haven’t begun to understand the nature of holiness or indeed the nature of the God whom Scripture defines as love personified (1John4:8) – and  then goes on to  define love itself (1Cor13).

We can also learn from the testimony of the Christian writers of the 2^nd and 3^rd century who were not wholly dependent on biblical exegesis but in some cases had received the Faith from the apostles themselves or their immediate appointees. In particular Irenaeus, Justyn Martyr and the Church historian Eusebius affirm my positive view of natural law and the tripartite nature of man (comprising body soul and spirit) – concepts which Augustine came to reject [see NOTE below]. But most importantly as far as I’m concerned is the testimony of Scripture as a whole as I endeavour to demonstrate in these blogs and have set out more coherently in my book, a free PDF of which is available HERE.

NOTE

[1] The major theologian of the second century Irenaeus recognised that God in His providence is present with all “who attend to moral discipline, paying heed to the natural precepts of the law by which man can be justified” [“Irenaeus against heresies” Book IV chap 13 para 1]. In a previous post I show how Irenaeus gave witness to the unity of essential doctrine within the second century churches. These were clearly not just his own views but the understanding of the churches as a whole. From the same period Justin Martyr spoke of God’s benevolence towards those who walk uprightly and in accordance with right reason ; “a God who accepts those who imitate His own qualities of temperance, fairness and philanthropy and who exercise their free will in choosing what is pleasing to Him” [first apology of Justin chaps. 43 & 46]. Such a perspective on free will and a role for natural law is affirmed by the witness of Eusebius (AD260-340). Known as the Father of Church History, Eusebius documented the succession of the earliest Christian communities in East and West, commenting on the faithfulness (or otherwise) of some of their bishops, providing in the process an invaluable perspective on the doctrinal understanding of his time. In view of his own perspective on the matter, Eusebius indicates that natural law was subsumed within the theological/anthropological perspective of the early Church:

“The Creator of all things has impressed a natural law upon the soul of every man, as an assistant and ally in his conduct, pointing out to him the right way by this law; but, by the free liberty with which he is endowed, making the choice of what is best worthy of praise and acceptance, because he has acted rightly, not by force, but from his own free-will, when he had it in his power to act otherwise, As, again, making him who chooses what is worst, deserving of blame and punishment, as having by his own motion neglected the natural law, and becoming the origin and fountain of wickedness, and misusing himself, not from any extraneous necessity, but from free will and judgment. The fault is in him who chooses, not in God. For God has not made nature or the substance of the soul bad; for he who is good can make nothing but what is good”. [quotation from “The Christian Examiner”, Volume One, published by James Miller, 1824 Edition, p. 66 – my highlighting].

These early Christian viewpoints and no doubt my own own will appear arcane if not positively heretical to many Christians these days. As I trace in my book, I believe one man is primarily responsible for this ancient seismic shift in doctrinal understanding particularly in the West – Augustine, Bishop of Hippo (AD354-430), aka “the Doctor of Grace”, or as I now regard him, the Sustainer of the Providential Mysteries.

Ἦν τὸ φῶς τὸ ἀληθινόν ὃ φωτίζει πάντα ἄνθρωπον ἐρχόμενον εἰς τὸν κόσμον

This supplements my previous post about Christ as the incarnate Logos …. But why have I quoted the verse in the original Greek? Because that is what John actually wrote and regrettably it is often poorly translated, particularly in more modern versions of the Bible. An example of a valid translation is as follows:

 That was the true Light which gives light to every man coming into the world (New King James Version)

Other suitable translations are provided in the King James Version, 1599 Geneva, Vulgate (in unambiguous Latin!), Wycliffe, Douay-Rheims, indeed any translation that links “coming into the world” with “every man” rather than with Christ or the Light. Most modern versions have re-jigged the translation so that it means something quite different. Typical of such is the New American Standard Bible which reads:

There was the true Light which, coming into the world, enlightens every man.

Whilst Biblical Greek can be ambiguous in view of the word ordering and lack of punctuation, in this case we can be quite specific, thanks to the parsing of the word ἐρχόμενον meaning (in this instance) “coming”. More precisely ἐρχόμενον  is a present participle in the middle or passive voice but the key point is it is accusative in case; that is it pertains to the object of the sentence not the subject, the subject being “that or “there” as the NASB has it, referring to “the Light” – the object being “every man”. I am not relying on my Greek studies at Bible college 20 years ago for this analysis, that is distinctly rusty, but if you go to the Greek interlinear HERE  it does most of the hard work for you –  providing you have some understanding of English grammar (verbs, participles, cases, tenses etc.)

 Yet no one is denying that the true Light in persona has indeed come into the world, least of all gospel-writer John – he affirms it a couple of chapters later where he writes: “And this is the judgement, that the light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. (Jn3:19). This time the verb “to come” is in the perfect tense (i.e. a completed action) indicative mood and active voice. But Jn1:9 refers to the fact that Christ has (to a degree) enlightened the soul/spirit of every human being entering the world. That should be no surprise, at least for those (creationists) who accept that the soul is provided by God, not in some way transmitted from its parents, a doctrine known as traducianism  – follow link for the background to the doctrine. For all things were created through Christ and for Christ and there can be no created entity that is more important to God than that which has been created in His own image such as the human soul. So why should not the Cosmic Christ through Whom all things were created not wish innately to enlighten all men (cf. 1Tim2:4), knowing as He does that only a minority would come to know Christ in person or receive a faithful account concerning Himself, His Truth and His Life?

You can judge for yourself (via the above link) but I suggest the concept of traducianism opposes both reason and Scripture – the idea that that which is pure spirit and immortal can be derived from human sperm. And as Thomas Aquinas expressed it –  “the human soul has activities beyond the capacity of matter and the existence of these activities shows that the human soul is both immaterial and immortal—but not independent of God’s causality.” The Roman Catholic Church has long taught that “every spiritual soul is created immediately by God – it is not “produced” by the parents, and also it is immortal..” – to which I concur, but the problem for the creationist is how and why would God  (through Christ) re-create something that is inherently evil if that is what one believes the human soul to be?

There is a solution and it is provided by the Apostle Paul if only he were better understood. It pertains to what he describes as “the body of this death” (somatos tou thanatou toutou Rom7:24) which the soul inhabits during its earthly existence. Now that fleshly part of man is progenerated from our human parents, ultimately from Adam. It is not directly created by God – Adam (ultimately Satan as tempter) is responsible for it, not God. God creates what is holy – man unavoidably procreates what is unholy and the two are combined resulting in the form of moral dualism that Paul expresses in Rom7:15-25, desiring in his innermost being to do what is lawful and right but constantly opposed by his fleshly senses – unless and until he is aided by the grace of the Gospel.

Paul does indeed affirm that “through one person sin entered the world, and through sin, death, and thus death came to all, inasmuch as all sinned (Rom5:12); and likewise “just as in Adam all die, so too in Christ shall all be brought to life” (1Cor15:22). But these texts are not making the case for traducianism: the source of the problem is not man’s soul, which has been created and enlightened by Christ and is governed by the conscience; it is the procreated intellectual vessel (i.e. body and brain) that it temporally inhabits that causes man to sin. “O wretched man that I am; who can deliver me from the body of this death? I thank God it is through Jesus Christ our Lord” (Rom7:25). And for the Christian that deliverance has already begun, such that in Paul’s words he or she is given the spiritual resources to “possess his own vessel in sanctification and honour” (1Thes4:4).

There is great deal more that could be said on this subject and it has been in “The Little Book of Providence”, a free PDF of which is available HERE

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. ² He was in the beginning with God. ³ All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. ⁴ In Him was life, and the life was the light of men. ⁵ And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not ^[a]comprehend it. ⁶ There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. ⁷ This man came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all through him might believe. ⁸ He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light. (Jn1:1-8NKJV)

Profound and mysterious as the opening of John’s gospel may appear there are some essential truths that can be drawn from it, perhaps the most important being its irrefutable witness to the full divinity of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. The reference to John the Baptist’s witness to the Light (vv6-7) confirms that the “Word” (Greek: Logos) is that very Person who “became incarnate of the virgin Mary and was made man”. I emphasize “full divinity” for whether we realize it or not every true Christian “partakes of the divine nature” (2Pet1:4), yet none (I hope) would claim to be  “in the beginning with God”, of His very essence and the One through Whom all things were created as John declares “the Word” to be.

This is important for other Scriptures are less clear concerning Jesu’s divinity. God’s people in the Old Testament did not generally expect their future messiah to be divine, even though arguably such is indicated by the titles the prophet Isaiah ascribed to Him – “God with us” (7:14), “Mighty God” (9:6), etc. As for Jesus Himself, He goes out of His way to emphasize that He is subject to His Father (Jn14:28) and that is the case even after His resurrection and ascension to Glory (Acts1:7). Likewise, the apostle Paul: “For I want you to know that the head of every man is Christ, the head of woman is man, and the head of Christ is God” (1Cor11:3). And concerning Christ’s Kingdom: “Now when all things are made subject to (Christ), then the Son Himself will also be subject to Him who put all things under Him, that God may be all in all” (1Cor15:28).

Such passages emphasize the Monarchical status of God the Father, they are not saying the Son is not equally divine. But there is clearly an order, not to mention a great deal of mystery concerning the economy of the Godhead. An awareness of such is necessary to appreciate aspects of what Paul is teaching concerning “the fellowship of the secret (plan) hidden in God” (Eph3:9) that my book* focusses on. Yet this must be done without ever losing sight of the absolute and uniquely divine heritage possessed by the One who condescends to regard His all-too-human followers as His own kith and kin: “for both He who sanctifies and those who are being sanctified are all of one, for which reason He is not ashamed to call them brethren (Heb2:11). What a mind-blowing privilege it is to be numbered within such a family.

• A free PDF of the e-book is available HERE

Then (Jesus) said to (His disciples) “These are the words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things must be fulfilled which were written in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms concerning Me.” (Luke24:44NKJV)

Jesus’ words were in response to His disciples’ confusion and misgivings concerning their Lord’s suffering, death and resurrection. Yet as He pointed out to them, everything that the Law and Prophets foretold concerning the Messiah must be fulfilled at some point, the only question is when? There is no indication from Jesus Himself that He had any intention of subverting Old Testament prophecy “to fulfil His Own and Israel’s mission in an entirely unexpected way” as at least one renowned theologian has proposed (N T Wright) [note 1] .  At His arrest Jesus had challenged Peter who was trying to defend his Master by force of arms, “But how then could Scripture be fulfilled that said it must happen this way? (Mt26:54). Jesus’s arrest and execution mustn’t just happen, it must happen “this way”, as prophesied. So, on the political front, if the prophets Isaiah and Micah had inferred that the coming Messiah would personally arbitrate with people and nations to bring an end to human warfare (Is2:3-4; Mic4:3), then that is what Jesus expected at some point to be doing. Whilst the Church can pray for peace, preach peace and work for peace, there can be no lasting peace on Earth or universal justice until Satan’s seed are removed and his structures of unrighteousness are destroyed from the Earth, which is to be the task of angels (Mt13:41).

 In the meantime, we look out of our window and observe the world becoming ever more dangerous and ever more secular as the end of the gospel age approaches. And that in spite of the Church, without whose salt and light things would no doubt be far worse. Yet according to Oxfam, the richest one percent of the world’s population own more than the rest of the world put together: the world is not currently in any executive sense under the government of Christ and His people. Isaiah had foretold that the Son who had been born of Mary would “establish (His government) with judgement and justice” (Is9:7). Neither has Our Lord’s judgement been received nor His justice practiced by the world’s authorities in the current age.

What one currently can perceive is the Church as the mystical Body of Christ, or at least that part of it that understands it has any socio-political mandate, doing all within its power to renew humanity along Kingdom principles. But we are two thousand years into that process and the kosmos (world order) is as much under the Wicked One’s influence as it ever has been (cf. 1Jn5:19). Satan has been granted a continued jurisdiction (cf. Eph2:2) and has a particular hold over “the sons of disobedience” (same verse). That would not be the case in the messianic age, during which time the arch-fiend would be bound and out of harm’s way (Rev20:2), as will those who have become his accursed agents (Mt25:41 cf. Greek).

The full realization of God’s Kingdom on Earth anticipated in the Old Testament has been deferred, in Paul’s language, “until the fulness of the Gentiles has come in” (Rom11:25). That deferment (and indeed the Gentiles’ spiritual inheritance) is something “the Law and the Prophets” never anticipated, pertaining as it does to “the fellowship of the secret (plan) hidden in God from the previous age” (cf. Eph3:9) – the secret or mystery (Greek: musterion)  that I endeavour to unravel in my book, a free PDF of which is available HERE

Note

1. “What St Paul Really Said” – N T Wright

Author’s Facebook page HERE

Related post: OT prophecies order and sequence

²⁵ “And there will be signs in the sun, in the moon, and in the stars; and on the earth distress of nations, with perplexity, the sea and the waves roaring; ²⁶ men’s hearts failing them from fear and the expectation of those things which are coming on the earth, for the powers of the heavens will be shaken. ²⁷ Then they will see the Son of Man coming in a cloud with power and great glory. ²⁸ Now when these things begin to happen, look up and lift up your heads, because your redemption draws near.” (Luke21:25-28NKJV)

Jesus is referring in this passage to the “tribulations” that proceed the end of the age. Rather than be distressed by these things, the Lord urges His followers “lift up your heads for your redemption draws near”. For what it’s worth, my assessment is that the tribulations are now starting in earnest but that is not the focus of this short post. What intrigues me is Jesus’ reference to “redemption” (Greek: ἀπολύτρωσις) in this context. The word literally means to be freed or delivered from something by means of a payment. Most Christians would understand that they had already been redeemed, and in a sense they have. Paul affirms this when he writes that Christians, being those who have faith in Christ in advance of His coming (Eph1:12 Greek: προηλπικότας) –  have already been sealed with the Spirit as a down-payment of their glorious inheritance. He affirms also that this pertains to “the ἀπολύτρωσις (redemption) of the purchased possession” (Eph1:14). We know the price paid – it is the Saviour’s blood, no less. As to whom (if anyone) the payment is made, that is another mystery which may feature in a later post. What I’m concerned with here is what is to be redeemed and when it will have been accomplished.

For like Jesus, Paul also refers to an aspect of the Christian’s redemption that is yet to occur. He is more explicit about the matter in another passage where he writes: “ We know that the whole creation has been groaning in labour pains until now; and not only the creation, but we ourselves, who have the first fruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly while we wait for adoption, the “ἀπολύτρωσις” (redemption) of our bodies” (Rom8:22-23 NRSV). And in the same epistle when speaking of the inner struggle we face between the desires of the flesh and the nobler aspirations of the God-given spirit, he writes “I see in my members another law at war with the law of my mind, making me captive to the law of sin that dwells in my members. ²⁴ Wretched man that I am! Who will rescue me from this body of death?” (Rom7:23-24NRSV).  I believe Paul to be saying** that it is the procreated intellectual vessel our soul inhabits at birth that is the source of man’s problem with sin – not the soul itself, having been planted by God, hence “who will deliver me from this body…”, the “me” being the soul/spirit that returns to God when the body and brain dies. Yet the soul being pliant is itself liable to corruption, for which reason Peter urges Christians to “abstain from fleshly lusts which war against the soul”.  Christians are a people called out from the world, elected through unmerited grace to serve the living God in spirit and truth whilst still within this “body of death”. To do so they need to be spiritually regenerated, cleansed through the Blood and empowered by the Spirit.

Yet, Paul is saying, even this is not the end of the story – what will ultimately be needed is a new body. And for those who are joint-heirs with Christ and are to inherit the kingdom in the age to come (cf. previous post) this will be provided: “those who eagerly wait for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ will transform our lowly body that it may be conformed to His glorious body, according to the working by which He is able even to subdue all things to Himself  (Phi3:20-21). Only then will the Christian’s redemption be complete.

** All this is worked out in detail in my book – a free PDF is available HERE

  

Those who are considered worthy of a place in that age and in the resurrection from the dead neither marry nor are given in marriage. ³⁶ Indeed they cannot die anymore, because they are like angels and are children of God, being children of the resurrection [Luke20:35-36]

 Proceeding chapter by chapter through the New Testament I have come to perceive that one does not need to rely on Revelation alone to make a case for pre-millennialism. The apocalyptic passage (ch20:5-6) is explicit concerning a millennial age whereas Jesus’ statement in Luke 20 which was in response to the Sadducees’ attempt to trick Jesus concerning resurrection of the dead at the very least implies there will be two resurrections (as earlier did Jn6:44+54). For, says He, those who are “found worthy” will be resurrected at the end of the current age whereas the Bible is clear enough that everyone is to be resurrected at some stage, worthy or not. Likewise, the righteous, says Jesus, will be “worthy of a place in that age” (Greek: kataxiothentes tou ainos ekeinou tuchein), again supporting the case. In view of what I have come to understand concerning “the fellowship pertaining to the secret plan hidden in God” (previous post) it is no surprise I am a pre-millennialist, albeit not a dogmatic one with regard to the future age’s duration or the precise nature of its activity. But it would follow that matters relating to the Jewish apocalypse that the Old Testament assured God’s first-choice nation their Messiah would undertake for them yet have not (and cannot) be fulfilled by the mission of the Church would be accomplished in the age to come, together with yet more profound matters such as the eradication of evil and reconciliation of nations. The latter is quite impossible whilst Satan and his seed hold sway on Earth, which as both Paul and Peter affirm is to be the case in the current age (1Pet5:8, Eph6:12).

Premillennialism was the predominant view of the ante-Nicene Church. Fathers including Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Hippolytus of Rome, Tertullian, Cyprian, Barnabas and Lactantius and by deduction others whom they had instructed or by whom they had been instructed but had not made their position clear in the writings available. Such were supported initially by Augustine of Hippo together with a good number of his contemporaries inside as well as some breakaway groups outside the Church. It was initially Marcion who challenged the consensus in the second century; he was later clearly shown to be a heretic. The other key influences regarding a millennial age being Augustine (who changed his mind) and Origen of Alexandria (who was inclined to a Platonic spiritualism); these colossi of the Western and Eastern Church ensuring that Millenarian views came to be rejected by the fourth century, reinforced one suspects by the conversion of Roman Emperor Constantine which transformed the Church’s perspective with regard to its relationships with the political structures of the world. More background to why the churches came to reject premillennialism can be found HERE but although it is certainly not my top priority I will endeavour to draw out evidence for such a concept as we proceed through the rest of the New Testament.  

Author’s Facebook Page

⁴¹ Now as (Jesus) drew near (to Jerusalem), He saw the city and wept over it, ⁴² saying, “If you had known, even you, especially in this your day, the things that make for your peace! But now they are hidden from your eyes. ⁴³ For days will come upon you when your enemies will build an embankment around you, surround you and close you in on every side, ⁴⁴ and level you, and your children within you, to the ground; and they will not leave in you one stone upon another, because you did not know the time of your visitation.” (Luke19:41-44NKJV)

The Jews’ two-stage rejection of Jesus and His Kingdom

Confusion has arisen with regard to the implications of the rejection of Jesus as Messiah by His people in terms of the apparent subversion of Old Testament prophecy that, to the mystification of many, Paul refers to a number of times in his epistles. I have utilized one such reference as the title of my book: that is where the apostle explains that he had been called in order to  “enlighten everyone concerning THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE SECRET (plan) known only to God who had created all things through Jesus Christ; (this mystery or secret) having been hidden through the ages from the authorities of Heaven is brought to light through the Church, so revealing the multi-faceted nature of God’s wisdom regarding His purpose for the ages which He accomplished in Christ (Eph3:9-11).

The passage from Luke 19 quoted at the top of this post relates to the first of two rejections by the Jews of their Messiah resulting in turn in two subversions to Old Testament prophecy. Paul refers to it as “the mystery (or secret) that has been hidden through the ages even from the authorities of Heaven (Eph3:9). The first subversion is recognized by Christendom but not Jewry whilst the second has not really been understood by either, being the fellowship of the secret; initial incredulity for Christendom, potential Good News for Jewry and great news for the world. I endeavour to unpack what I mean by that statement in my book and little by little within these posts.

As I pointed out in an earlier post, many ordinary Jewish inhabitants of Jerusalem will have welcomed Jesus to their city but their leaders were indignant and already plotting His downfall. This was the first rejection culminating in the crucifixion, and as Jesus stated (Lk19:42) it put paid to the prophecies indicating that the coming of the Messiah would bring an end to Israel’s political and military problems. The promise of peace and security for Jerusalem, evident in much prophecy including the angelic annunciations concerning the birth of Jesus and John Baptist, would not be secured by Jesus in His earthly lifetime, quite the contrary in fact; worse was to come for Israel in about a generation’s time.

We should not be so surprised that historically the Jews have not perceived the crucified Nazarene prophet to be their Messiah – for truly, He did not in any substantive sense fulfil the geopolitical promises anticipated of Him in the Old Testament. But Jesus has just explained why that should be the case, at least as far as the current age is concerned (note Lk24:44), and Paul clarifies the matter for the churches in his Ephesians reference to God’s secret plan that (humanly speaking) resulted from the Jews’ rejection of their Messiah.

But the Jew’s role in the crucifixion of their intended Messiah is not per se what resulted in the rejection of their nation as sole inheritors of the Kingdom that Paul is actually referring to in Ephesians 3 and also Romans 11 (vv11-15). Such is affirmed in Acts where the apostle indicates that even after Pentecost it was still the Jewish people’s “day of visitation” and they were still not appreciating it. Paul gave this warning to certain Jews at Antioch:

So be careful! – or what the prophets say will happen to you: “Cast your eyes around you mockers; be amazed and perish!  For I am doing something in your own days that you would never believe if you were told of it” (Acts13:40,41 New Jerusalem Bible)

Note the warning is about what will or might happen to the Jewish nation, not what already had happened. Their day of visitation did not end when they crucified Christ: that event that Jesus referred to as His other baptism had been both divinely planned and prophesied (Acts2:23; Is53:5); what was shortly to occur was undoubtedly planned or foreknown (by God) but never prophesied; it concerns the secret fellowship (or community partnership) “hidden in God” even from earlier prophets; it concerned the establishment of a universal Church.

So the second rejection pertained to the fact that so many Jews refused to acknowledge that the resurrection and the miraculous signs associated with the apostles’ teaching were the vindication of Jesus’s earlier claims. They still rejected His Messiah-ship even now that He had been raised to the highest Heavens and empowered His disciples to work miracles in His name.

That, in modern parlance is where they finally blew it. They had already blown the prospect of political peace and security through their rejection of Jesus in His lifetime, now something even more radical was at stake: Kingdom inheritance. The very next Sabbath, these same leaders “filled with jealousy” towards the apostles, just as they had been toward Jesus used blasphemies to contradict everything Paul said (v45), which prompted the apostle to add this:

We had to proclaim the word of God to you (Jews) first, but since you have rejected it, (i.e. the apostle’s message) since you do not think yourselves worthy of eternal life, here and now we turn to the Gentiles. For this is what the Lord commanded us to do when He said “I have made you (Israel) a light to the nations, so that my salvation may reach the remotest parts of the world” (Acts13:46,47).

The prophecy from which Paul quotes (Is49) declares Israel to be God’s servant, through whom He would manifest His glory (v3) and by whom He would bring saving enlightenment to the whole world (v6). They as His chosen people and future heirs of the world (cf. Rom4:13,14) would have come to know “eternal life”, i.e. an intimate relationship with God and life of an eternal quality (Jn17:3) through sanctification in Christ blood (Zech13:1); but as the same prophet foretold this had been prophetically linked with the restoration and liberation of their nation and holy city through the direct intervention of a returning messiah, who as well as residing with his people would act as judge and arbitrator with opposing nations (Is2:4; Mic4:3.) Now, says Paul, as a result of their rejection, the universal enlightenment would go ahead without them by means of a newly formed universal assembly founded by their Messiah and His apostles, none of whom had been drawn from the ranks of the Jewish sacral hierarchy.

Although it is only briefly alluded to in Scripture, the longed-for national liberation and the re-instatement of Israel to “the Kingdom” would now have to wait (Acts1:6). After issuing this warning, Paul and Barnabas symbolically shook the dust from off their feet as they left Antioch (13:51), just as the disciples had done to towns and homes that rejected the “gospel of the Kingdom” preached during Christ’s earthly ministry. Shortly afterwards at Corinth, preaching as usual in the synagogue, certain Jews “turned against (Paul) and started to insult him”. Paul took his cloak and shook it out in front of them, saying:

“Your blood be on your own heads; from now on I will go to the Gentiles with a clear conscience” (Acts18:6 New Jerusalem Bible).

One is bound to ask why Paul’s conscience would not have been clear (literally: clean) if he had brought this gospel to the Gentiles and the Jews hadn’t rejected his message: wasn’t his message of salvation intended for all? Well, yes and no: “for as a result of the Jews’ rejection, salvation has come to the Gentiles to provoke them to jealousy” (cf. Rom11:11).  I had previously understood this to be merely a question of order, but there would no logical reason for such if the privileges of Kingdom service and the eternal life pertaining to it were from the time of Pentecost being offered to the world; apart from which the apostles would have been quite clear in their minds about the matter, which they certainly were not, with the obvious exception of the lately-commissioned Saul of Tarsus. Apart from which, Paul writing to the Romans is adamant: salvation came to the Gentiles as a result of the Jews’ rejection; it was not a question of protocol or order. 

For as I am seeking to explain there is salvation and there is SALVATION. The latter was earmarked for the Jews alone in Old Testament prophecy but was to be made available to the nations through Paul’s revelation of what in short-hand I refer to as “the fellowship of the secret”. “Salvation” as foretold for the Gentile nations meant one would be enlightened, pardoned in the name of Jesus if one acknowledged Him as Lord, leading to acceptance as a subject in God’s Kingdom, for all who call on the name of the Lord would be saved (i.e. spared perdition). SALVATION on the other hand was to be born again by water and Spirit, delivered from corruption by means of sanctification in the blood appointed for sprinkling provided through Calvary (Heb12:24 cf. Greek) resulting in interior communion with Christ, eternal life, participation in God’s royal priesthood and a joint-inheritance with the Son of God, no-less.

Once this mystery is grasped it has wondrous implications to broader providence. This is explained more fully in my book*, along with how such a concept can be reconciled with the rest of the Bible’s teaching.

• A free PDF of the e-book can be accessed HERE
• Author’s Facebook page HERE

Related post: The Samaritan woman

¹⁹ “There was a certain rich man who was clothed in purple and fine linen and fared sumptuously every day. ²⁰ But there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, full of sores, who was laid at his gate, ²¹ desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man’s table. Moreover the dogs came and licked his sores. ²² So it was that the beggar died and was carried by the angels to Abraham’s bosom. The rich man also died and was buried. ²³ And being in torments in Hades, he lifted up his eyes and saw Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.²⁴ “Then he cried and said, ‘Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus that he may dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame.’ ²⁵ But Abraham said, ‘Son, remember that in your lifetime you received your good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things; but now he is comforted and you are tormented. ²⁶ And besides all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed, so that those who want to pass from here to you cannot, nor can those from there pass to us.’ ²⁷ “Then he said, ‘I beg you therefore, father, that you would send him to my father’s house, ²⁸ for I have five brothers, that he may testify to them, lest they also come to this place of torment.’ ²⁹ Abraham said to him, ‘They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.’ ³⁰ And he said, ‘No, father Abraham; but if one goes to them from the dead, they will repent.’ ³¹ But he said to him, ‘If they do not hear Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded though one rise from the dead.’ ” (Luke16:19-31NKJV)

Remarkably, this is effectively the only account we have in Scripture of experience in the afterlife: the account of the rich man and Lazarus, the text of which requires careful attention. It is generally taken to be a parable, although it us unusual for a person to be named (i.e. Lazarus) in such, so many, including the medieval Church, believe Jesus to be referring to real individuals. Although often utilized as such, the narrative is referring neither to Heaven nor Hell but to Hades, the place of the dead. That is an intermediate state between death and resurrection in which, according to Luke’s interpretation of Jesus’ teaching, disembodied spirits are nevertheless conscious and aware of either pain or comfort. They also clearly retain a memory of their past life (“Son, remember that in your lifetime” etc.)

Note carefully, the only stated criterion distinguishing these two men was that one had had a life of ease and comfort whilst the other had been poor and wretched (Lk16:25). It may be deduced (from vv27-31) that the rich man was suffering because of the way he had utilized his wealth; living wantonly whilst failing to show care and compassion for miserable beggars like Lazarus (with whom Jesus personally identifies – Mt25:45), yet no reason is given at all why Lazarus should be comforted after his death other than that he had experienced a life of poverty and sickness (Lk16:25).

The redistributive and compensatory aspects of judgement at death are also emphasized in the letter of James who exhorts the oppressive rich to weep and howl for the miseries that are to come upon them (Ja5:1KJV). It is clear from subsequent verses that James is referring to the materially wealthy who obtained their wealth by defrauding and exploiting of the poor. James (as ever) is reflecting the teaching of Christ, who also had words of warning for the well-to-do:

Alas for you who are rich: you are having your consolation now. Alas for you who have plenty to eat now: you shall go hungry.  Alas for you who are laughing now: you shall mourn and weep (Lk6:24,25). 

I now understand this to be partly a question of redistributive justice but that it also relates to the role and necessity of human suffering (salting) explained in the theodicy (chapter seven of my book).

The Law and the Prophets

In pleading for Lazarus to be raised from the dead so as to warn his five brothers of their impending doom if they do not change their ways, Abraham chides the rich man that as Jews his brothers should be acquainted with “Moses and the Prophets”, an underlying principle of which being the need to care for the needy – loving one’s neighbour as oneself. Those who do not believe that to be at the Law’s heart should take heed to the apostle Paul:  “The entire Law is fulfilled in keeping this one command “Love your neighbour as yourself” (Gal5:14). For the commandments, “You shall not commit adultery,” “You shall not murder,” “You shall not steal,” “You shall not bear false witness,” “You shall not covet,” and if there is any other commandment, they are all summed up in this saying, namely, “You shall love your neighbour as yourself.” (Rom13:9)

But in a sense who needs the Law to determine these matters? – they are intuitive to every human heart. For as hinted at above and suggested within this parable, the wellbeing of the human spirit when the body dies is not determined by one’s religion or lack of it but by one’s dealings with one’s fellows (likewise the final judgement passage in Matthew25 – note religious faith is nowhere mentioned).

However, religious faith and a living relationship with Jesus Christ certainly do play a part in the soul’s eternal destiny, starting with who are to be the co-inheritors with the Lord of Glory at the resurrection of the dead. “The Little Book of Providence” explains all, or at least as much as Scripture has revealed.  

• A free PDF available HERE

Whoever does not bear his cross and come after Me cannot be My disciple. ²⁸ For which of you, intending to build a tower, does not sit down first and count the cost, whether he has enough to finish it— ²⁹ lest, after he has laid the foundation, and is not able to finish, all who see it begin to mock him, ³⁰ saying, ‘This man began to build and was not able to finish’? ³¹ Or what king, going to make war against another king, does not sit down first and consider whether he is able with ten thousand to meet him who comes against him with twenty thousand? ³² Or else, while the other is still a great way off, he sends a delegation and asks conditions of peace. ³³ So likewise, whoever of you does not forsake all that he has cannot be My disciple. (Luke14:27-33NKJV)

It may not be the emphasis that comes across from many pulpits these days but Jesus tells His would-be disciples carefully to evaluate the cost of discipleship, like someone intending to build a tower or a king about to go to war. This implies substantially more than obtaining Church membership, receiving a sacrament, making a profession of faith or reciting a prayer; it is the assessment to be made by those who are to enter pilgrimage as a learner of the Christ. And such who are called, chosen and faithful will be those who are ultimately fitted for Kingdom service in eternal partnership with the One before Whom every knee must bow once He is revealed as Lord of all. That would be the context of the resurrection and imperishable crown for which Paul strove and disciplined his body like an athlete so as not to be disqualified (1Cor9:24-27). It requires God’s grace for sure but also personal self-discipline and effort – “Strive to enter (the Kingdom of God) by the narrow gate, for many I say to you will seek to enter and will not be able” says Jesus.

The irony is that those who weigh up the cost of discipleship and take up the challenge of the gospel and in Paul’s words, “aim for glory and honour and immortality by persevering in good works so as to obtain eternal life” (Rom2:7) will find that as they take the Master’s yoke upon them and learn from Him, He is gentle and lowly of heart, and they will find rest for their souls. Even from an earthly, material perspective, Jesus indicates they will gain “a hundredfold” more than they have sacrificed in service for the Kingdom (Mt19:29). It should also be evident from Jesus’ illustrations and his “narrow gate/broad road” language that this is not to be the destiny of the majority. How that aligns with Scripture’s insistence that God intends to reconcile all redeemable humanity to Himself is set out in my book*.

Author’s Facebook Page

^31 [On that very day some Pharisees came, saying to (Jesus), “Get out and depart from here, for Herod wants to kill You.” ³² And He said to them, “Go tell that fox, ‘Behold, I cast out demons and perform cures today and tomorrow, and the third day I shall be perfected.’ (Luke13:31-32 NKJV)

As referred to in the previous post, many ordinary Jews delighted in Jesus’ words and actions, but their leaders wanted Him dead or at least out of their hair. They tried to persuade the Teacher and Miracle-worker that if He remained in their territory King Herod would have Him killed.  Jesus’ response is typically direct yet the analogy He uses in describing Herod as a fox is drawn from biblical sources. As in many agricultural circles, the fox does not receive a great press in the Bible. In Song of Solomon (2:15) the writer refers to the foxes that destroy the vines of tender grapes, referring either to problems that might arise within a loving relationship or as some think, more figuratively to false prophets who deceive God’s chosen people often depicted as God’s vineyard (e.g. Isaiah5). The latter is certainly the case in Ezekiel (13:4), Israel’s false prophets being described as “foxes in the desert”. Whatever else they may be foxes are inclined to be devious and destructive.

Yet Jesus is determined and confident that neither Herod nor the often equally devious Pharisees will thwart His purposes or destiny. He vows to continue to heal and cast out demons until the time comes for God’s purposes and indeed He Himself to be perfected (Greek teleioumai). Unlike the New King James Version quoted above some versions translate the last phrase in verse 32 along the lines that Jesus’ work will have been perfected (e.g. ERV), whereas  parsing the Greek text affirms the writer to be indicating that it is Jesus Himself who will be perfected (i.e. made complete for purpose) through His work and by His suffering.

This may present a theological problem to some but seemingly not to the writer to the Hebrews. For He declares that “It was fitting for (Jesus), for whom are all things and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons to glory, to make the captain of their salvation perfect through suffering (Heb2:10NKJV). This speaks of a great mystery which I examine in my book*, pertaining as it does to the purpose of suffering for humanity as a whole within God’s munificent purposes for His creation.

• The Fellowship of the Secret – a free PDF available HERE

The Lord then answered (the ruler of the synagogue) and said, ^e]“Hypocrite! Does not each one of you on the Sabbath loose his ox or donkey from the stall, and lead it away to water it? ¹⁶ So ought not this woman, being a daughter of Abraham, whom Satan has bound—think of it—for eighteen years, be loosed from this bond on the Sabbath?” ¹⁷ And when He said these things, all His adversaries were put to shame; and all the multitude rejoiced for all the glorious things that were done by Him. (Luke 13:15-17NKJV)

The Bible-hub study website comments on this passage “The words imply the belief that there was another source than mere bodily disease for the infirmity–in part, at least, the belief that all disease–or very many forms of it–is directly or indirectly traceable to the power of the Enemy”.

My sentiments exactly, and as the writer to the Hebrews affirms, Satan’s realm and authority extends to death itself (Heb2:14). The biology and outworking of viruses, cancers and the like is ingeniously malevolent. Who or what is behind it? Ultimately our sovereign God is behind everything but in this case some distance removed. For extraordinary as it seems, His arch-enemy and ours has been granted substantial authority in the affairs of this world in the current age, which is why Jesus designated him “archon tou kosmou” – prince of the world order (Jn12:31), in which sickness and death along with what Paul refers to as spiritual wickedness in high places are a present reality (Eph6:12). Contrary to the wishful thinking of some, that is and will continue to be the case until Jesus returns in glory; that in spite of the fact that He has already done everything necessary (through His Passion) to defeat the realm of evil and death, at least in principle (Jn12:31-32). The reason such a regime continues for the present is one of the themes of “The Fellowship of the Secret” (a free PDF is available HERE).

My other observation on this short passage pertains to the last verse (17). The multitudes, who will predominantly have been Jewish rejoiced in Jesus’ teaching and practice concerning the Sabbath as a day not just for worship and relaxation but for doing good. Their religious leaders on the other hand appeared to understand the latter with regard to the welfare of their own working animals but not their fellow human beings as Jesus so effectively pointed out – to the shame of the leaders  and the delight of the masses. It again highlights that it was primarily the religious leaders of the Jews who facilitated Satan’s plot to destroy the Prince of Life and Glory, albeit as ever, even this was according to “the definite plan and foreknowledge of God” (Acts2:23).

And as (Jesus) spoke, a certain Pharisee asked Him to dine with him. So He went in and sat down to eat. ³⁸ When the Pharisee saw it, he marvelled that He had not first washed before dinner. ³⁹ Then the Lord said to him, “Now you Pharisees make the outside of the cup and dish clean, but your inward part is full of greed and wickedness. ⁴⁰ “Foolish ones! Did not He who made the outside make the inside also? ⁴¹ “But rather give alms of such things as you have; then indeed all things are clean to you. ⁴² “But woe to you Pharisees! For you tithe mint and rue and all manner of herbs, and pass by justice and the love of God. These you ought to have done, without leaving the others undone (Luke 11:37-42NKJV)

More telling words from Jesus as recorded by Luke. As usual I have highlighted the phrases that particularly came to my attention following my renewed perspective on the Bible’s teaching that resulted in writing “The Fellowship of the Secret” *. Previously such passages had confused if not positively contradicted my understanding of the gospel but now they make better sense. In this narrative, the Lord is using the idea of cleaning the inside and outside of dishes to teach that a person’s heart is more important than what appears on the surface–whereas the Pharisees got it the wrong way round, as many people tend to do. Jesus is warning us to be less concerned about “the outside” and give more importance to “the inside” – not least in the practice of religion.

Giving alms to cleanse the soul

Almsgiving in the proper sense means realizing the needs of others and letting them share in one’s own goods. The Greek word for alms (ἐλεημοσύνη) is derived from ἔλεος  meaning compassion or mercy, which implies more than a mechanical act of donating or tithing. It may be a theologically alien concept to many (including myself in the past) that almsgiving can cleanse the soul or cover sin, but not to Jesus Christ (v41) or indeed his lead disciple (cf. 1Pet4:8). The Pharisees had meticulously tithed herbs according to the requirements of Torah but had neglected vastly more important issues: social justice and “the love of God” (v42). I have come to understand the latter phrase as a genitive of origin. It refers not so much to God’s love for us (a fact, but not the context here) or even ours for Him (hopefully true but only half the story); it pertains rather to the impartation of the divine quality of love (cf. Jn17:26) engrafted by the Spirit such that we come to love others more as God loves them (cf. 1Jn2:5).  That is more clearly indicated where John refers a few verses later in that passage to those who are worldly not having “the love of the Father within them” (1Jn2:15). It is in the context of partaking of the divine nature by which we come to possess more of what God possesses, especially holiness aligned with love; God being love and thrice holy.

The Pharisees, or at least the ones Jesus was addressing, were religious for sure, but they failed to grasp the inner meaning and purpose of the religion JHWE had instituted for the good of their souls and the social wellbeing of the people they led: intended to be a pattern for the society of God’s inaugurated kingdom on Earth.

• A free PDF of the e-book is available HERE

“Why should I (the Lord) not be concerned for Nineveh, the great city, in which are more than 120,000 people who cannot tell their right hand from their left, to say nothing of all the animals?  (the concluding verse of Jonah – 4:11New Jerusalem Bible)

“I knew this would happen”, complained Jonah the prophet after Israel’s enemy had been spared; “I knew You were a tender, compassionate God, slow to anger rich in faithful love, who relents about inflicting disaster. I’m so miserable I just want to die” (cf. Jon4:2,3). Unlike certain revered Christian theologians, Jonah understood the nature of his God very well: compassionate to all, tender hearted, slow to anger, and from Jonah’s perspective disturbingly likely to show mercy towards the ignorant and irreligious Ninevites whom God recognised “could not tell their right hand from their left” – providing of course they repented. Much to the prophet’s chagrin, they did just that. Jonah had feared as much from the start, which is ultimately why he found himself in the belly of a whale. Fanciful as the narrative may sound it received affirmation of the highest order in the gospels by Jesus, no less (Mt12:39-41).   

The God Jonah so accurately describes is the One I have come to know in recent years, especially since the encounter with the Spirit that led to the book** that these posts seek to complement by drawing out sequentially from the Old Testament indicators of God’s thoroughly intelligible and loving nature, equitable justice and munificent providence. It is all so different from the God I first encountered 50 years ago as a young and zealously “Reformed” Evangelical – the God of Augustine, Luther and Calvin. Awesome and dreadful though such a God was, He could not from any human perspective (however enlightened) be regarded as tender and loving by nature or fair to all. Rather, (I then understood), He was merciful and exceedingly gracious towards the proportional few; the majority being understood to be destined at birth for eternal misery, in Augustine’s words “to demonstrate what should have been due to all”. 

I have been shown that such cosmic horror has nothing whatsoever to do with the Gospel (cf. Lk2:10); nor indeed has the equally unbiblical concept that all will be well for everyone, as I make clear in my book and earlier posts with regard to those (from my life experience the minority) who go in the way of Cain and become devoid of that marker which defines those who retain the image of God, being agape (Mt25:45; 1Jn4:7).

The key point from this particular post is that the true God of Israel has precisely the nature that Jonah depicts, but whilst the prophet for over-zealously patriotic reasons was inclined to be miserable about it, I for one am thankful and delighted. So should all people of good will be, especially those privileged and challenged to be called into the service of His Son, “to whom God has made known the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory (Col1:27; cf. Jn6:56).

**The Little Book of Providence – free PDF available HERE.

This series of posts is intended to complement what I have set out in my book “The Fellowship of the Secret”, the title being an abbreviated form of “the fellowship pertaining to the secret (plan) or mystery hidden in God through the ages” (cf. Eph3:9). That secret plan was somewhat inscrutably revealed by the apostle Paul, appropriately so for it concerned the reason for his calling as thirteenth apostle (Matthias having replaced Judas as #12 by Peter who it should be noted had no real understanding of God’s  purposes for the Gentiles until he received a personal revelation – Acts11:5-9;17-18). It was a secret or mystery (Greek: musterion) that pertained to the reconstitution of God’s “Holy Nation” by the establishment of a world-wide Church; something that was a revelation even to the authorities of Heaven (Eph3:10).

OT prophecy subverted

The enactment of this hidden strategy effectively subverted Old Testament prophecy, impacting also upon the interpretation of Jesus’ prophetic statements within the “Olivet discourse” (cf. Mt24). It not only explains why the gospel/church age has taken the intricate and protracted course that it has but also why Old Testament prophecy has tended to be interpreted in such an allegorized and spiritualized rather than literal sense. Paul’s intimations are more explicitly affirmed in Romans chapter11, verses11, 12, 15 and 30, but these have typically been taken to be another example of “Paul being Paul” rather than the possibility that he might mean exactly what he wrote concerning gospel salvation being made available to the Gentiles as a result of the Jewish rejection of their Christ. He had warned his fellow Jews in Antioch:

We had to proclaim the Word of God to you first, but since you have rejected it, since you do not think yourselves worthy of eternal life, here and now we turn to the Gentiles (Acts13:46NJB)

The key word being “it” – i.e. Paul was not about to entrust this stupendous invitation to the Gentiles because the Jews had crucified Christ but because they were rejecting the apostles’ message concerning the matter. The crucifixion had been foretold in scriptural prophecy and it led to the Jewish nation forfeiting its promised political peace and security as Jesus had told them (Lk19:42-44NKJV). However, their negative response to the message concerning the risen, ascended Christ had not been foretold and resulted in their forfeiting their status as sole inheritors of the Kingdom.

This is just one of a number of areas in which the great apostle has historically been misunderstood by the Church, which I now understand to be in accordance with the path of discovery set for her. It does not directly affect the ability of the true Apostolic Church to have fulfilled her gospel mission throughout her history; it has however impacted negatively upon her understanding (and therefore teaching) concerning broader providence, i.e. how God regards and will ultimately deal with the vast majority of people who are not a part of that “holy nation and royal priesthood” which is Israel and the Church (Ex19:5, 6 cf. 1Pet2:9).

An example from Micah 4

And here is such an example: typical of Old Testament prophecy concerning the restoration of the world through Israel is set out in Micah 4, a contemporary of Isaiah whose prophecy of a future earthly reign of Yahweh shares some of the same imagery (cf. Is2:1-4)

 And it will come about in the last days
That the mountain of the house of the Lord
Will be established ^[a]as the chief of the mountains.
It will be raised above the hills,
And the peoples will stream to it.
² Many nations will come and say,
“Come and let us go up to the mountain of the Lord
And to the house of the God of Jacob,
That He may teach us about His ways
And that we may walk in His paths.”
For from Zion will go forth the law,
Even the word of the Lord from Jerusalem.
³ And He will judge between many peoples
And render decisions for mighty, ^[b]distant nations.
Then they will hammer their swords into plowshares
And their spears into pruning hooks;
Nation will not lift up sword against nation,
And never again will they ^[c]train for war.
⁴ Each of them will sit under his vine
And under his fig tree,
With no one to make them afraid,
For the mouth of the Lord of hosts has spoken –  Micah 4 vv1-4

God’s Israel project

 Such was God’s Israel Project: to establish a holy nation of kings and priests amongst whom He would personally reside, initially through His spiritual Presence in the Ark, later through the physical presence of His Son Emmanuel (God with us). The nations who had oppressed His people were to be judged, but as outlined in Joel, the Spirit would be poured out and the good news of the kingdom proclaimed as a witness to all nations before the final judgement came (Mt24:14). Many Gentiles would come to Israel’s light and kings to the brightness of her rising (Is60:3NKJV). That Israel Project was effectively aborted or more strictly deferred as a result of “the fellowship of the secret”. In Paul’s language, Gentiles were to be grafted into the good olive tree that is Israel AGAINST THEIR NATURE so as to put the natural branches to shame and make them jealous (Rom11:11). Yet, Paul affirms, this is to be a temporary state of affairs, albeit one having lasted a couple of thousand years to date. It must continue a little longer until the full complement of Gentiles chosen for the Kingdom has been recruited (Rom11:15, 25).

Free ebook download HERE

Author’s Facebook page HERE

Related posts: Restoring the kingdom to Israel & Isaiah: all to be well for Israel & Solomon’s prayer for Israel & Israel light of the world & Israel light of nations

[This post is a fragment of an expansive revelation concerning divine providence. That was the result of a prophetic insight received by the author, who in view of recent personal phenomena  has come to understand the process he is involved with is itself a fulfilment of scriptural prophecy, both canonical and extra-canonical. That more particularly (but not exclusively) applies to Revelation chapter ten and two related passages from the Book of Enoch (ch93:8-10 and ch104:11-13 Charles edition numbering). The full picture has been set out in “The Little Book of Providence”, freely available as a PDF file, summarized in 95 theses HERE 

All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned everyone to his own way; and the Lord hath laid on Him the iniquity of us all  (Is53:6)

Once again Handel’s glorious Messiah echoes through my mind as I contemplate this passage, albeit that the identity of the suffering servant in Isaiah is by no means clear-cut. In Is49:3 I take it to be referring to Israel (as does Paul in Acts13:47) whereas in chapter 53 it would appear valid to associate the reference more definitively with our Lord, both in view of the content of the narrative itself and its utilization by Philip in his witnessing to the Ethiopian eunuch in Acts8:32-33. On that basis this prophecy from an individual’s perspective is the very heart of the Gospel; the good news that “The Son of God loved me and gave Himself for me” (Gal2:20).

Only the Christian will make such an assertion, yet when one pays careful attention to the text of the New Testament one is struck by the fact that Jesus is consistently described as dying as an offering for sin rather than particular individuals. He became sin for us (2Cor5:21); He gave Himself for our sin (Gal1:4); He bore our sins in His own body on the tree (1Pet2:24); He suffered once for sins (1Pet3:18);  the iniquity of us all  was laid upon Him (Is53:6). In other words, Scripture presents the matter in terms of sin being punished in Jesus; not the sins of specific individuals or groupings – a statement which I shall shortly qualify.

The need for Christ’s Atonement

By an eternal decree there can be no forgiveness of sin without the shedding of blood (Heb9:22) and Jesus as God’s Suffering Servant more than satisfied the penalty owed by human sin. He bled and died for the sins of humanity so as to satisfy God’s own eternal Law of Righteousness. Yet that once-for-all atonement per se neither establishes “eternal life” nor abolishes physical death within any universal exchange because that historical event was never intended to rectify the nature of the vessel transmitted from our first parents that the human soul/spirit is to inhabit – what Paul quite deliberately refers to as “somatos tou thanatou toutou” – the body of this death.

It is evident that our sovereign God was quite content that human souls would inhabit such a corrupted vessel or he would have destroyed Adam and Eve at Eden  – (they had been warned). Instead He continued to utilize this shamed couple as the procreative fountain-head for humanity (cf. Rom8:20). The fact that the Creator chose this course of action was an astounding act of love on His part (in view of the consequences for the Godhead) but unless you accept what I have been indicating in earlier posts, few reading this will currently see it that way – firstly in view of the resulting deeply troubled human history, and secondly in light of their understanding of the eternal fate of those not of the Christian Faith.

For it is surely a substantial majority that has not been willing or suitably enlightened to be discipled by Christ – to “lose their life in order to find Life” (Mt16:25), putting service to Christ and others first and second in their life. It is a small minority indeed who as the called, faithful and chosen, suffer with Christ in order to be glorified with Him as co-heirs of God’s Kingdom (Rom8:17 cf. Greek). For whilst all people of good will may be justified by an underlying “faith” (evinced by compassion Mt25) through the merits of Christ’s faithfulness [note a] , only the Christian can currently participate in the Life of God (Jn6:54-57) through a mystical communion with His Son.

The two-fold benefits of the Atonement

Making such a distinction between the forensic (pardoning) benefits  of the Cross applying to the many and the participatory (cleansing and empowering) benefits applying to the proportionate few who dwell in Christ and He in them (Jn6:56) becomes essential if one is to do justice to God’s  magnanimous Plan for the human race without compromising the role of Gospel, Church or Sacrament. For it can still be affirmed that all human salvation has been made possible by Christ’s atoning death, which continues to provide life for the world and individual cleansing for sin (Jn6:51; 1Jn1:7).

Note

a] (Greek: “ek pisteos christou” e.g Rom3:22; Gal2:16; Gal3:22), which more theologians and the more recent bible translators are recognising needs to be distinguished from cognisant faith in Christ (pisteos en Christo e.g. Gal3:26 ) This pivotal distinction is elaborated upon in chapter 3 of my book = a free PDF of which is available HERE

Author’s Facebook page HERE

Related post: The good shepherd

For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given; and the government will be upon his shoulder. And his name will be called wonderful, counsellor, mighty God, everlasting father, prince of peace. Of the increase of his government and peace there will be no end, upon the throne of David and over his kingdom, to order it and establish it with judgment and justice, from that time forward, even forever. The zeal of the Lord of hosts will perform this. [Isaiah9:5-6NKJV]

A favourite Christmas reading for sure, for most would agree the child referred to is Jesus the Christ. In that sense it might be considered the archetypal Old Testament prophecy – yet it has been quite subverted. It is not that the promised events (Christ’s earthly reign and the defeat of evil) will not occur, they surely will, for “the zeal of the Lord of hosts will perform this” – but not in the order or sequence stipulated, nor with the expected supporting cast.

This is the mystery of God, His not-so-little secret (cf. Rev10). This is how Paul explains it, which virtually no one has grasped, including myself for the first 40 years of my Christian life:

“Unto me (Paul), who is the most inferior of all the saints, was this grace granted that I should preach among the (Gentile) nations, the unsearchable riches of Christ to enlighten all regarding the fellowship of the secret* (plan) hidden in God (the Father) through the ages, who created all things through Jesus Christ – that on account of the Church should now be made known to the sovereignties and authorities in the heavens, the multi-faceted nature of God’s wisdom according to the purpose of the ages made in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Eph3:8-11 from Greek).

Once Paul’s meaning is grasped everything can fall into place, providing one goes on rightly to interpret the rest of the apostle’s teaching regarding the role of the Law, the economy of grace, the context of justification and the psychological dualism between flesh and spirit that results from the disparate immediate origins of the physical and spiritual components of the human species (separated at death) as a result of the Fall (cf. Rom7:17-25).

I know how some of this is likely to sound to conservative Christians (I was a staunch Calvinist for 25 years), but such a reading resolves many tensions and mysteries within Scripture, the three primary ones being the disparity between OT prophecy and NT reality, and the correspondence between God’s compassionate and equitable nature as the Bible presents it and traditionally perceived eschatology. Thirdly it offers an explanation for evil and suffering as grist to prepare mankind for the glorious destiny and future offices God has in store for those created in His own image, more especially and immediately to faithful disciples of His Son. Having been predestined to be conformed to His image (Rom8:29), it is fitting that His joint-heirs should be perfected through suffering (Heb2:10; cf. 2Tim2:12). Such people long for Christ’s appearing, when He shall in a more substantive sense execute His reign – “to order it and establish it with judgment and justice” within a new heaven and a renewed Earth.

*The phrase from which the title of my book is taken: a free PDF is available HERE

• 

As far as the Old Testament age was concerned, the race of Israel was intended to have been a light to the Gentile nations, living as a holy nation faithful to Yahweh, whose name and Law would become honoured amongst other nations:

“Look, as Yahweh my God commanded me (Moses), I have taught you laws and customs for you to observe in the country in which you are to take possession. Keep them and put them into practice and other peoples will admire your wisdom and prudence. Once they know what all these laws are, they will exclaim “No other people is as wise and prudent as this great nation (Israel)” (Deut4:5,6).

Some readers will be aghast at Moses’ statement: the Law (Torah) actually to be practiced so that the world would come to admire Israel and her Law??. Yes indeed, that was the intention. The witness of Israel being faithful to the Law provided through Moses was meant to have been a light for the gentiles: the rest of the world’s “preparation for the Gospel” i.e. their future submission to the Lordship of King Jesus when He eventually came to do exactly what John Baptist expected Him to do: destroy the enemies and oppressors of God’s people and judge the whole world, i.e. put it to rights. Then, supported by the Jewish Nation (the sons of the Kingdom – Mt8:12), He would establish God’s Kingdom on Earth, reconciling other nations to God and each other by inculcating a way of peace along the lines of Isaiah2:4.

It didn’t pan out that way and St Paul explains why (if only he were understood). It’s not the Old Testament being hyper-allegorical, it’s the outworking of Paul’s revelation – the mystery concerning God’s plans for the Gentile nations that I set out in chapter one of The Little Book of Providence – available at the links below:

Review or Purchase paperback or kinder e-book from Amazon.uk HERE or Amazon.com HERE

Download a FREE PDF of e-book from HERE

or a Large-print version of PDF suitable for mobile phones HERE

Wherever in scripture punishment for human sin is quantified, it is typically specified at double the offence; a principle applied quite literally in the Law of Moses for all manner of theft (e.g. Ex22:4,7,9). Likewise in the Prophets, God’s rebellious people are said to pay double for their sins (Is40:2, Jer16:18) as at the universal level do the wicked (Jer17:18, Rev18:6). “Double” need not be taken literally in the latter cases but it is indicative of proportional punishment, which by definition must be finite, for nX≠∞ (where n is the multiple and X is the offence). Even so, thinking back through human history and applying such a principle it is no surprise that Jesus said of a few: “it had been better for them if they had never been born”, especially those who through megalomania or merciless psychopathy have brought untold misery to numerous lives, for they will pay a heavy price.

They will not suffer because of any deficiency or “limit” to Christ’s atonement; nor, it should be noted, is final punishment presented in the gospels in terms of offences against God but against humanity (Mt25:41-46). Why? – because God makes full allowance for ignorance; man’s knowledge of the Divine Glory is at the very best incomplete, especially for the majority who have not received a faithful account of the Gospel. But there is less excuse with regard to dealings with our fellow man, for the requirement to be caring and compassionate is intuitive (Mt25 again), being discerned through the faculty of conscience, by which (to the astonishment of many) Paul asserts that many without the Law do, however feebly, the one thing required to fulfil its purpose (Rom2:14,15; Rom13:8; Gal5:14).

One can take it from Christ Himself that punishment will be proportional. Human sin will be dealt with in accordance with the criteria stipulated by the Judge who is Himself a Man (Jn5:22), applying standards that could hardly be fairer (Mt6:14; 7:2). Of course, with our God there is forgiveness a plenty, but retributive post-mortem proportional punishment and exclusion from the blessings of God’s future Kingdom for some is a biblically inescapable reality [note 1]. It will be seen to be right and just and indeed necessary, once a new heaven and earth is established under Christ with His saints, in which righteousness shall dwell (2Pet3:13).

Note 1: References in the New Testament to punishment being “eternal” are derived from English and Latin translations of the Greek word “aionos” (Strong’s G166) which means age-enduring. For example, according to Revelation the Beast and False Prophet shall be punished for longer “aionas ton aionon (literally “ages of ages” or multiple ages -Rev20:10). All this is considered in more detail in my book, The Little Book of Providence:

Review or Purchase paperback or kinder e-book from Amazon.uk HERE or Amazon.com HERE

Download a FREE PDF of e-book from HERE

or a Large-print version of PDF suitable for mobile phones HERE

Related post: God does not condemn the ignorant

Illustration – The Sistene Chapel painting: “The Final Judgement”

 

I am in the process of working through the Old Testament and highlighting the areas where God’s broader providence is indicated but not generally perceived. In doing so I must not fall into the typical proof-texting trap of being selective – drawing on the passages that support the emphasis I am endeavouring to put across whilst ignoring narratives that might appear to contradict the fundamental principles I wish to impart, being that God is Love personified and is impartial and fair to all. In Paul’s language, when it comes to judgement, God is “no respecter of persons” in spite of what he might appear to be writing in Romans 9 with regard to Isaac and Rebecca’s twin boys. Frankly, the apostle’s own proof-texting in verse 13, dare I say it, is somewhat inventive – he is taking Malachi out of context. [If the apostle actually understood himself to be “composing scripture” rather than preparing pastoral letters, I’m sure he would have given more consideration to how his words were likely to be interpreted centuries later – likewise verse 16, so beloved by Augustinians and Calvinists]. Here Paul is quoting from Malachi where God speaking through the prophet declares that although Esau, patriarch of Edom was Isaac (Israel’s) brother he hated Esau (i.e. Edom) BECAUSE HE WAS INDIGNANT AT THAT NATION’S WICKEDNESS (1:4). But Paul uses that quote to imply that God hated the hairy little infant in Rebecca’s womb even before it was born. That indeed may have been the case in view of God’s foreknowledge of his character though the context of Malachi was the wickedness of the nation that would be Esau’s inheritance as the prophet makes clear.

The point Paul wished to impart was that God’s choice, i.e. His elective grace was not based on a person’s virtue but His sovereign will. That is absolutely the case, but as I say that was not the aspect that God wished to get across to His people through His prophet in Malachi 1. Yet this principle of election by grace alone does not in the least impugn God’s impartiality or equity providing the nature and purpose of such election is properly understood. God’s choice is not referring to whom is arbitrarily to be delivered from eternal punishment (which as His Son makes quite clear is determined by faith evinced by works of compassion – Mt25); election or predestination pertains to who are to be His chosen nation and royal priesthood, the faithful of whom are destined for betrothal to His own Son.

Confusion also arises from Paul’s references in this context to God “showing mercy” to whom He so chooses. Again that is not referring to final judgement (the same general criteria will apply to all albeit allowance is made for ignorance and incapacity); rather the mercy refers to deliverance IN THE PRESENT from “the body of this death” which the Christian alone can experience through the purging of his sin, empowerment to live a holy life and a restored  relationship with His Creator  providing joy and hope for the future. That is mercy indeed and it is quite underserved on the recipient’s part.

It also can pertain (as in Paul’s example of the hardening of Pharaoh’s heart in Romans 9) to how God chooses to deal with the profoundly wicked or seriously misguided (Saul of Tarsus had been the latter). He may show mercy as in Paul’s case or harden the heart further as with the Pharaoh. But even here, Paul makes the point that God had shown mercy towards him because he did what he did in ignorance (1Tim1:13).

Reviewing the lives and destinies of Jacob and Esau as individuals, the former was something of a crafty, cheating deceiver whilst the latter had despised his birth-right and gone on to choose Canaanite brides in defiance of his parents’ wishes. Yet these two flawed brothers are finally depicted together (illustration) showing an extraordinary degree of mutual respect and deference to each other (chapter 33) and later to their father Isaac (who actually favoured Esau), attending to his burial together as Isaac and Ishmael had done with their father Abraham.

Free PDF of my ebook HERE

Author’s Facebook page HERE

Related post: Esau hated by God?  &   The Universal Covenant

Illustration: Jacob and Esau’s reconciliation – Rubens (1624) courtesy Wikipedia 7

(1) Era/“Week”	(2) Events	(3) Character
ONE (93:3)	(PAST) Birth of Enoch (7th part)	Justice and righteousness
TWO (93:4)	Rise of evil; sprouting of deceit The “first end” (Great Flood) A man (Noah) rescued Increase of iniquity Law given for sinners	Evil Judgment Deliverance Evil Expedient law
THREE (93:5)	A man (Abraham) chosen as plant of righteousness	Election and righteousness
FOUR (93:6)	Visions of holy and righteous ones Law given for every generation (Torah) Enclosure made for them (tabernacle)	Permanent law
FIVE (93:7)	House of glory and royalty/ kingdom built (pass. div.) for eternity (Temple)	Permanent temple A

SIX (93:8)         The blind fall away from wisdom     Evil

            A man (Elijah) ascends          Deliverance

            House of royalty/kingdom burned  Evil

            The chosen root scattered    Evil

SEVEN A (93:9–10)

(PAST-PRESENT) Rise of wicked generation Election of the chosen righteous from eternal plant of righteousness Sevenfold instruction on the entire creation

Evil Election and righteousness

SEVEN B (91:11)         Uprooting of oppression      Judgment

Destruction of sinners

EIGHT (91:12–13)

Judgment on oppressors and sinners by the righteous Righteous obtain wealth/ possessions Temple of the Great King built in glory forever

Judgment Reward Permanent temple B

NINE (91:14) Revelation of righteous judgment Judgment to the whole world

Works of the wicked recorded for destruction

All people look to the way of           Righteousness

TEN (91:15–16)

Eternal judgment (7th part) Judgment against watchers and among angels Disappearance of the first heaven Creation of a new heaven Every heavenly power shines sevenfold forever

Permanent judgment Permanent destruction New cosmos

WEEKS WITHOUT      Goodness and righteousness            Permanent cosmic order

NUMBER (93:17)        Memory of sin erased

Brill Publishers:       Author – Loren T. Stuckenbruck