Jerusalem remains the most contested city on earth, having fallen to invading forces more than 20 times throughout its recorded history. The land to which God sent Abraham some 4,000 years ago lies at the very crossroads of three continents. It is also holy to three religions.
More than 2,500 years ago God revealed to the prophet Daniel that the land of His people would be fought over throughout the centuries (as described in chapter 3 of this booklet). Interestingly, we see a long time gap in Daniel's prophecy that accurately foretold what would happen in the centuries ahead. To understand this, we need to turn again to Daniel 11.
As earlier explained, the first 35 verses of Daniel 11 are an accurate, detailed account of what would befall the people of Judah caught up in a conflict between the Ptolemaic dynasty of Egypt to the south and the Seleucids of Syria to the north. The rulers of these kingdoms were descended from generals of Alexander the Great, who also was foretold in the book of Daniel.
(In an interesting historical footnote, the first-century Jewish historian Josephus recounts a meeting between Alexander and the Jewish high priest in Jerusalem, who pointed out that Alexander's coming had been prophesied by Daniel more than two centuries before he emerged on the scene! See Antiquities of the Jews, Book 11, chap. 8, sec. 5.)
The four verses that follow in Daniel, verses 36-39, appear to jump forward in time. As explained earlier, verses 32-35 appear to concern the faithful Maccabees, who would not abandon God's laws for pagan Greek ways. Yet these same verses appear to be dual, as the group referred to in verse 35 continues to the "time of the end"—meaning that God's faithful people in New Testament times, His Church, are included.
Verse 36 continues the story line— but at what point? Since verse 40 clearly advances the story to the "time of the end," it may be that verses 36-39 apply to the whole history of the kingdom of the North from the time of the Maccabees and the beginnings of the New Testament Church continuing up to the time of the end (just as verse 35 appears to extend from ancient times all the way to the end time).
And who was the king of the North during this period? In 65 B.C., Seleucid Syria was swallowed up by the Roman Empire. Thus that empire then became the kingdom of the North. Verses 36-38 appear to describe the actions of the Roman emperors and their successors, leading all the way up to the final leader of the end time, as we will see. While the duality of the prophecy serves to advance the time frame, Antiochus Epiphanes himself being a type of this end-time ruler, we might wonder why there are such major jumps to the future.
State of Israel had to be established to fulfill prophecy
Why the time gap in Daniel's prophecy between the ancient world and the world of today—a period of at least 2,000 years —with only sparse and cursory details of events in between? The answer is simple: For almost 2,000 years there was no Jewish nation in the Middle East. The restoration of the Jewish state in 1948 has made the kings of the North and South relevant again to impacting the Jewish people in the Holy Land.
End-time prophecy could not be fulfilled without the restoration of the Jews to their homeland. Although their nation is called Israel, remember that the 10 tribes of the ancient northern kingdom known as Israel were taken into captivity by Assyria more than a century before the kingdom of Judah (comprising the Israelite tribes of Judah and Benjamin, with a considerable portion of Levi) was invaded and its people taken to Babylon.
Many of the Jews returned from their captivity, but the 10 tribes seemingly disappeared. The Bible shows that in time all the tribes of Israel will return to the Promised Land, but at this point only the tribe of Judah—or at least a portion of it—has been restored to its historic home.
In the Old Testament prophetic book of Zechariah we read that Jerusalem and Judah (Jews constituting the modern state of Israel) are at the center of world conflict immediately before Christ's return. But this prophesied event could not have taken place without the physical restoration of Judah (now named Israel) to some extent in the Holy Land before the end of the age.
In Zechariah 14:3-5 we see this prophecy about Christ's second coming: "Then the LORD will go forth and fight against those nations, as He fights in the day of battle. And in that day His feet will stand on the Mount of Olives, which faces Jerusalem on the east. And the Mount of Olives shall be split in two, from east to west, making a very large valley; half of the mountain shall move toward the north and half of it toward the south. Then you shall flee through My mountain valley ..." Clearly, this prophecy is still for the future.
The preceding verses show that the reason the people need to flee is because Jerusalem will once again be a scene of great turmoil: "For I will gather all the nations to battle against Jerusalem; the city shall be taken, the houses rifled, and the women ravished. Half of the city shall go into captivity, but the remnant of the people shall not be cut off from the city" (verse 2).
Previously Zechariah had recorded these words from God: "Behold, I will make Jerusalem a cup of drunkenness to all the surrounding peoples, when they lay siege against Judah and Jerusalem. And it shall happen in that day that I will make Jerusalem a very heavy stone for all peoples; all who would heave it away will surely be cut in pieces, though all nations of the earth are gathered against it" (Zechariah 12:2-3).
Judah (the Israelis, most of whom are Jews) and Jerusalem are destined to be at the very center of end-time events. The nations that come against her will be so ideologically and emotionally driven they will not be able to think straight (the "drunkenness" Zechariah refers to). Already, some nations and peoples are obsessed with destroying the Jewish homeland of Israel. Another prophet tells of the fall of end-time Israel (descendants of the northern lost 10 tribes) and Judah (the Jews) together, apparently in the same month, an event that never happened in ancient history. We read of this in Hosea 5.
Condemning Israel and Judah for their repeated idolatry, God says: "The pride of Israel testifies to his face; therefore Israel and Ephraim stumble in their iniquity [sin]; Judah also stumbles with them ... They have dealt treacherously with the LORD ... Now a New Moon shall devour them and their heritage" (verses 5, 7). A New Moon "devouring" them would seem to mean that they both will fall within a month, a 30-day period. (To understand where the other 10 tribes of Israel are today, request or download our free booklet The United States and Britain in Bible Prophecy.)
The struggle continues
We can now understand more clearly why the struggle between the kings of the North and South resumes again "at the time of the end" (Daniel 11:40).
The verse continues to describe how "the king of the South shall attack him [the king of the North]; and the king of the North shall come against him like a whirlwind, with chariots, horsemen, and with many ships [all symbols of military action]; and he shall enter the countries, overwhelm them and pass through."
Clearly, at the time of the end another round of great turmoil will engulf the Middle East, only this time it will be far worse than anything ever seen before.
And again, the fulfillment of this prophecy would not have been possible until after the fall of the Ottoman Empire and the division of those Arab territories that were a part of it into the various nations of the Middle East today.
From chapter 3 of this booklet we saw that the expression "king of the North" applied anciently to the Seleucid dynasty of Syria, while the "king of the South" referred to the Ptolemaic dynasty in Egypt. But who might these terms refer to in our time or the time of the end? It's doubtful that they could once again apply to Syria and Egypt, as they are now brother Arab and Islamic nations. Also, while relatively strong by regional standards, neither currently has the military might to fulfill this prophecy.
As already noted, Rome swallowed up Syria and became the kingdom of the North thereafter. But did not Rome fall in ancient times?
Part of the key to understanding this passage is to realize that the center of the prophecy is the Holy Land and Jerusalem, the historic land given to the children of Israel. The "kings" referred to are powerful leaders who will come from regions to the north and south and vie for control of the area, trampling all over Judah in the process.
A century ago no one could have understood many of the prophecies relating to this part of the world because the Ottoman Empire ruled over the places now occupied by the chief adversaries in the Mideast conflict. This fact helps us understand God's words to Daniel at the end of his prophetic book: "Go your way, Daniel, for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end" (Daniel 12:9). It would have been impossible for Daniel, living in the sixth century B.C., to have understood the astounding changes that would lead up to today's complex Middle East situation.
Just as the modern states of Israel, Egypt, Iraq and Syria did not exist a century ago, so at this time the final kings of the North and South have not emerged—yet. But the Bible does help us understand what to expect.
We read in the prophetic books of Daniel and Revelation that another global superpower will arise at the end of this age. We find further details of this end-time power in Revelation 17. Just as Daniel saw various beasts that represented the dominant powers to come, so the apostle John saw a vision of another beast that would dominate the world at the very time of the end (verse 3).
The ten horns referred to here, as an angel explained to John, represent 10 rulers who receive power "for one hour" —symbolic of a short time—with a single ruler who is also called "the beast" (Revelation 17:12-13). Notice the time setting of these events: "These will make war with the Lamb [the returning Jesus Christ], and the Lamb will overcome them ..." (verse 14). This prophecy, then, is for the future, and leads right into the return of Jesus Christ to earth.
But these are not the only significant end-time players. A religious leader symbolized as having "two horns like a lamb" but who speaks "like a dragon" (Revelation 13:11) will play a prominent role in this end-time union of nations. Jesus Christ is the true Lamb of God (John 1:29, 36; Revelation 5:8-9; 19:7-9), so this religious leader apparently will claim to be Christian. But he is really of Satan, "the dragon who ... deceives the whole world" (Revelation 12:9).
The "beast" referred to in Revelation 17 is a continuation of the four beasts of Daniel 7. As we saw earlier, Daniel, while in captivity in Babylon, recorded a vision of "four great beasts" (verse 3), gentile empires that would dominate the Middle East and have a major impact on the people of God. The empires were, in chronological order, the Babylonian Empire, the Medo-Persian Empire, the Greek Empire of Alexander the Great and the Roman Empire.
Attempts to revive the Roman Empire are to succeed dramatically at the time of the end. At that time a successor empire is prophesied to restore the European unity that Rome first achieved more than 2,000 years ago. This empire is to lead right into Christ's return and the establishment of the Kingdom of God on earth (verses 9-14).
Since the fourth beast described in Daniel 7 exists at the time of Jesus Christ's return, and the same is true of the beast John saw in Revelation 17, both prophecies speak of an end-time resurrection of the Roman Empire. This is the other key to understanding the prophecy. The kingdoms of North and South concern successive powers. Rome took over Syria. And Rome did indeed fall. But the Roman Empire has been revived in numerous forms over the centuries. And one final revival remains.
This final resurrection of the Roman Empire, like the original empire, will be centered in Europe. It appears that it can be seen today in its embryonic form in the European Union. That is not to say that all current EU nations will be part of the final configuration, but those that choose to participate will combine to form a powerful military force that will involve itself in the Middle East.
This end-time king of the North spoken of in Daniel 11, then, appears to be the final ruler of this end-time, European- centered superpower, the same one called "the beast" in Revelation 17.
The final king of the South
What about the king of the South? To understand who that might be, we must first have some understanding of the history and thinking of the people in this region.
In Islamic thinking, the world is divided into two spheres, dar al-Islam, meaning "the land of Islam," and dar al-harb, meaning "the land of the unbeliever" or "the land of struggle." The Koran teaches that Allah "sent for His apostle [Muhammad] with guidance and the true faith, so that he may exalt it above all religions, much as the idolators may dislike it" (Surah 61:9, Dawood translation). A fundamental aspect of Islamic teaching is that Islam must eventually become the dominant religion of the entire world.
Remember also that the dream of the Arab peoples is for Arab unity. The warring tribes of Arabia were first united by Muhammad through a new religion, Islam. The Ummah, the community of Islam, has been a constant dream through the centuries. For 750 years now the sons of Ishmael have not been united. Only in the last 50 years have they even been independent of foreign control. The dream is still there, unfulfilled.
For a time, after the 1952 revolution in Egypt, President Nasser was the inspiration for Arab unity, and many thought he would bring it about. More recently Iraq's Saddam Hussein thought the same way, desiring to unite the Arab world against the United States and Israel.
Going back further in time, Sudan's Muhammad Ahmed Ibn el Sayed (1844-1885) proclaimed himself the Islamic messiah, the mahdi ("divinely guided one") who would unite Muslims and defeat the infidels. He failed in his mission, but he had greater success at uniting Arabs than the secular leaders have had. We should also note that many Muslims believe that another mahdi is prophesied to appear in a tumultuous time to restore the Islamic faith and ensure its final victory over all other religions.
In more recent times Osama bin Laden became the spiritual successor of the Sudanese mahdi and found considerable success in uniting Muslims against the West. Wherever you go in the Islamic world, Bin Laden is the peoples' hero, giving them hope of a final triumph.
As Muhammad's followers brought about the defeat of the two great superpowers of his day, Byzantium and Persia, so Osama bin Laden and his followers have desired to bring down the two superpowers of our era. One, the Soviet Union, dissolved in 1991—its collapse due in large part to the Afghan rebels, led by Bin Laden, who defeated the Soviets in Afghanistan.
Sept. 11 showed how vulnerable the second superpower, the United States, is to terrorism. Repeated warnings from Washington have made it clear that the country remains susceptible to terrorist attacks potentially even more devastating than the first.
This end-time king of the South will rise up to defy the West, striking out against the king of the North. Whoever the end-time king of the South might be—whether a popular figure similar to Osama bin Laden, a political leader as were Gamal Abdel Nasser and Saddam Hussein, or a religious figure such as the Ayatollah Khomeini or the prophesied mahdi to come—someone will engage in this final conflict against the West—possibly in yet another attempt to bring about long-sought Arab and Islamic unity. He will unwittingly set in motion a cascade of events that will lead to unimaginable carnage before Jesus Christ intervenes to put a stop to it.
The climactic Mideast war unfolds
Returning to Daniel 11:40, we see that the forces of these two end-time leaders, the kings of the North and South, will clash: "At the time of the end shall the king of the south push at him: and the king of the north shall come against him like a whirlwind, with chariots, and with horsemen, and with many ships; and he shall enter into the countries, and shall overflow and pass over" (King James Version).
The word "push" is translated from the Hebrew word nagach, which can mean either "to push" or "to attack." It is used of a bull or ram attacking with its horns. Figuratively, this means "to war against." The form this "push" or "attack" may take isn't spelled out.
What is evident, however, is that this end-time leader from the south will attack the north in such a way as to warrant a major military invasion of the Middle East. Considering the ways Islamic extremists have attacked the Western powers in recent years, something like a series of major terror attacks against European targets could be the "push" referred to here. From this point on the king of the South is no longer specifically mentioned in Scripture. What happens to him isn't spelled out.
The same chapter shows that the king of the North, the European-centered Beast power, will be the victor, as he invades the Holy Land and overthrows "many countries" (verse 41). Among them are Egypt and the Libyans and Ethiopians (understand that these biblical names for peoples and places may not be precisely identical with today's national borders, although the regions are certainly the same.)
First and second woes
However, "news from the east and the north shall trouble him," and "he shall go out with great fury to destroy and annihilate many" (verse 44). These actions by the end-time king of the North appear to be connected with the fifth trumpet or "first woe" of Revelation 9:1-11, as both the forces bringing the first woe and the end-time Beast power are described as ascending out of the bottomless pit (verses 1-2; Revelation 11:7; 17:8). For more details, request or download our free booklet The Book of Revelation Unveiled.
At the time the book of Revelation was written, the eastern border of the Roman Empire was the Euphrates River, which begins in Turkey and bisects Syria and Iraq before emptying into the Persian Gulf. The countries referred to in the last few verses of Daniel 11 are all far to the west of this river. Yet in the end-time events prophesied in the book of Revelation this river is a significant geographic marker.
Notice Revelation 9:13-16: "Then the sixth angel sounded: And I heard a voice from the four horns of the golden altar which is before God, saying to the sixth angel who had the trumpet, 'Release the four angels who are bound at the great river Euphrates.' So the four angels, who had been prepared for the hour and day and month and year, were released to kill a third of mankind. Now the number of the army of the horsemen was two hundred million; I heard the number of them."
Here we have the sixth trumpet (and second woe) identified as a massive 200-million-man army "released to kill a third of mankind." Clearly we are talking about major clashes between the Western world (in the form of the forces of the king of the North) and a massive army from regions along or beyond the Euphrates River.
Threatened by a major foreign military presence that has invaded North Africa and modern-day Israel, this military force combines to fight against it.
What nations come together to form these vast armies? Two possibilities seem likely in today's geopolitical climate—or a combination of the two.
The presence of non-Islamic forces (infidels) on Islamic ground has been a source of contention in the region since the time of the Crusades almost 1,000 years ago. The presence in the Middle East of forces of the revived Roman Empire—the prophesied Beast power, a spiritual successor to the Crusaders—will no doubt inflame Islamic feelings once again.
It is possible, therefore, that this massive army is a multinational Islamic force formed from some or all of the Islamic countries along or to the north and east of the Euphrates. This would include nations like Turkey, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan, and even participants from India (with the second-largest Muslim population in the world, after Indonesia, though most of its citizens are Hindus).
Further to the north and east of the Holy Land are the relatively new Islamic nations that came into existence after the fall of the Soviet Union—Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan, Tajikistan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan. The world's Muslim population totals some 1.3 billion, most of whom are in this general geographic area.
Another possibility for these forces includes Russia and China, two major world powers that often share common interests, along with their allies and other nations from the Far East. A threat to the Persian Gulf oil supplies, real or imagined, could provoke action by these nations. China, with its population of 1.3 billion, could certainly field a massive military force, and Russia's weapons technology still makes it a formidable military power.
Additionally, it is possible that all these forces will come together briefly, fearful of the increased military might and presence of the king of the North. Indeed, important defense and economic ties already exist between Russia and China and some Muslim nations of Central Asia and the Middle East.
Setting the stage for Armageddon
Later, as part of the chain of events that follow the sounding of the seventh trumpet in Revelation 11:15, we find the Euphrates River mentioned again: "Then the sixth angel poured out his bowl on the great river Euphrates, and its water was dried up, so that the way of the kings from the east might be prepared" (Revelation 16:12).
Who these leaders and forces are isn't explicitly spelled out either; we know only that they come from east of the Euphrates. Like the earlier 200-million-man army, it appears this force is primarily from either the Muslim world or from China and/or Russia and their allies. Or again, it could be a combination of some or all these nations. In fact, it could well be the same general power bloc as that in Revelation 9, though, this being a different episode, it doesn't have to be.
Contributing to this conflict, "demons, performing signs,... go out to the kings of the earth and of the whole world, to gather them to the battle of that great day of God Almighty ... And they gathered them together to the place called in Hebrew, Armageddon" (verses 14-16).
In the end it doesn't seem to matter specifically which countries are involved in this growing world war at which point in time, for ultimately Revelation 16:14 tells us that the kings "of the whole world" will be gathered to the Middle East for a final battle. So it seems likely that all of the aforementioned Eastern powers will be engaged at some point.
Indeed, however it plays out, virtually all remaining military forces apparently will be drawn into this final maelstrom of destruction to some degree, just as happened in the two great world wars of the 20th century. Yet ironically, this is all part of God's plan and absolutely necessary for peace to finally be established in this war-torn region.
Christ's intervention to save mankind
All this maneuvering, destruction and devastation —which takes the lives of at least a third of the human race (Revelation 9:15, 18)—is the prelude to Jesus Christ's second coming. He has to return to save mankind from this final cataclysmic conflict that otherwise would leave no human survivors. As He said of the time immediately preceding His return to earth, "unless those days were shortened, no flesh would be saved ..." (Matthew 24:22).
But at His return, the peoples of the world will not automatically accept Him. As we saw earlier, the 10 kings allied with the Beast will fight against Him (Revelation 17:14).
Revelation 16:16 tells us that armies will be gathered "to the place called in Hebrew, Armageddon." Armageddon is the Greek form of the Hebrew name Har Megiddon, meaning hill or mountain of Megiddo, an ancient town about 55 miles north of Jerusalem and 15 miles inland from the Mediterranean Sea. It overlooks the Valley of Jezreel or Esdraelon, a large open plain.
Yet the final battle will not be here. Instead it appears that this will be the final staging area for the armies that will fight against Jesus Christ. The battle itself will take place in the Valley of Jehoshaphat near Jerusalem, as prophesied in Joel 3: "For behold, in those days and at that time, when I bring back the captives of Judah and Jerusalem, I will also gather all nations, and bring them down to the Valley of Jehoshaphat ... Assemble and come, all you nations ... For there I will sit to judge all the surrounding nations" (Joel 3:1-2, 11-12). Jehoshaphat even means "Judgment of the Eternal."
Revelation 19:11-16 describes what happens next: "Now I saw heaven opened, and behold, a white horse. And He who sat on him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness He judges and makes war. His eyes were like a flame of fire, and on His head were many crowns ..." This is a description of the returning Jesus Christ, who will now execute God's judgment on a rebellious, sin-filled world and on those who resist Him by force.
"He was clothed with a robe dipped in blood, and His name is called The Word of God. And the armies in heaven, clothed in fine linen, white and clean, followed Him on white horses ... Now out of His mouth goes a sharp sword, that with it He should strike the nations ... And He has on His robe and on His thigh a name written: KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS."
Several verses describe what will happen to the assembled forces that fight Jesus at His return (verses 17-18, 21; Zechariah 14:12). But like all human resistance to God's plan and purpose, it will prove futile.
Peace at last
After so much death and destruction, and centuries of war and unrest in the Middle East, imagine what a difference the second coming of Jesus Christ will make.
Jews, Christians and Muslims not only have a common spiritual ancestor in Abraham; adherents of all three religions expect, in different ways, a Messiah.
Only after the true Messiah comes can all three begin to live in true harmony. Devoid of religious differences and finally understanding and appreciating the blood ties between them, they will be able to work together under the returned Jesus Christ to resolve their differences.
Haggai 2:6-7 prophesies of this time: "Once more ... I will shake heaven and earth, the sea and dry land; and I will shake all nations, and they shall come to the Desire of All Nations ..." The "Desire of All Nations" is the promised Messiah, the hope of all three faiths.
Described as "the Prince of Peace" in Isaiah 9:6, Jesus Christ will establish His government on earth with Jerusalem as its capital. "Now it shall come to pass in the latter days that the mountain [prophetic symbol of a government] of the LORD'S house shall be established on the top of the mountains [over all other governments of the world] ... and peoples shall flow to it. Many nations shall come and say, 'Come, and let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, to the house of the God of Jacob; He will teach us His ways, and we shall walk in His paths.' For out of Zion the law shall go forth, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem" (Micah 4:1-2).
All the children of Abraham—Arab, Jew and Israelite alike—along with all the inhabitants of the entire earth, will then have the opportunity to learn God's truth and receive His gift of salvation. No longer will they be at war, but they will be allies, cooperating together in a spirit of peace and brotherhood, all acknowledging the true God and living according to His ways, all receiving His blessings (Isaiah 19:20-25). To better understand this time and how it will finally come about, request or download our free booklet The Gospel of the Kingdom.
Satan the devil, the instigator of so much war and suffering and the unseen influence behind the scenes, will be locked away so he can no longer deceive and oppress the nations (Revelation 12:9; 20:1-3). To discover more about this evil being and his influence, request or download our free booklet Is There Really a Devil?
Under Christ's righteous rule, peace, not war, will break out in this long- troubled land. "He shall judge between many peoples, and rebuke strong nations afar off; they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks; nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war anymore. But everyone shall sit under his vine and under his fig tree, and no one shall make them afraid; for the mouth of the LORD of hosts has spoken" (Micah 4:3-4).
Terror-ravaged Jerusalem will be fearful no longer. God decrees: "I will return to Zion, and dwell in the midst of Jerusalem. Jerusalem shall be called the City of Truth, the Mountain of the LORD of Hosts, the Holy Mountain ... Old men and old women shall again sit in the streets of Jerusalem, each one with his staff in his hand because of great age. The streets of the city shall be full of boys and girls playing" (Zechariah 8:3-5).
Zechariah 14:8-9 adds to the beautiful picture of the wonderful, glorious future ahead: "And in that day it shall be that living waters shall flow from Jerusalem ... And the LORD shall be King over all the earth."
Finally, beyond the darkness and gloom, after thousands of years of war and travail, at long last mankind will see peace in Jerusalem and throughout the land that God gave to Abraham 4,000 years ago—a peace that will extend across the entire Middle East and ultimately fill the whole world.
© 1995-2006 United Church of God
Friday, June 30, 2006
Thursday, June 29, 2006
Why Do People Hate Us So Much?
The horrific Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, accompanied by the hijackings and subsequent crashing of four domestic passenger jets, were universally condemned by almost all governments, including many that have been traditional foes of the United States.
Amid all the carnage and the confusion that Americans felt, one question frequently asked was: "Why do people hate us so much?" Pictures of people rejoicing in the streets of other nations stood out in stark contrast to news reports of expressions of sympathy and support from around the world. Obviously hatred of the United States has grown intense and deep in some parts of the world. Quite rightly, people want to know why.
The simplistic answer to that question is that the United States backs Israel. Mounting frustration with the situation in the Middle East has increased anger against America. Many in the area feel that if the United States puts pressure on Israel it would make concessions to the Palestinians.
Israel's existence is certainly one contributing factor. Another is the presence of American and British troops on Muslim soil (see "Anger Mounts Following 1991 Gulf War,"). But these explanations overlook the fact that there is much hatred and resentment directed toward the United States throughout the world, not just in the Middle East.
No doubt many factors contribute to this increased anti-American feeling, not the least of which is jealousy over America's great wealth. But one scripture helps us to understand why the problem has worsened in recent decades: "Righteousness exalts a nation, but sin is a disgrace to any people" (Proverbs 14:34, NIV).
Not so long ago America was looked up to by the rest of the world. After the failure of their kings and emperors to avoid the carnage of World War I, Europeans looked to President Woodrow Wilson to show them a new and better way. But lack of support at home meant that America was not able to stay involved. It was different after World War II. This time, Americans were committed to helping the rest of the world, and the United States took over the responsibility of leading the free nations.
Even in the Middle East, combatants looked to the United States to take the lead. It was President Carter who brought Egypt and Israel together. Successive presidents have been involved in the area and have always been able to talk with both sides. But in the aftermath of the Sept. 11 attacks, Americans saw Palestinians dancing in the streets and celebrating America's agony.
Clearly, respect and appreciation for America are not as great as they were before. The Bible helps us understand this change in America's fortunes.
The Old Testament book of Deuteronomy, chapter 28, promises blessings for obedience to God's laws and curses—serious negative consequences—for disobedience. It may seem illogical to see this as an explanation of the terrorist attacks on the United States, but the fact is that America is not as respected as it used to be, and many sound reasons exist for this decline in respect.
Islamic fundamentalists, who are behind many such attacks, fear America's cultural influence on their societies. Of course, hatred and terrorism are utterly evil and inexcusable responses, no matter what the basis for such thinking is. Indeed, America is hated for many right principles that should not be altered. Jesus Christ was hated and He was a perfect human being. Nevertheless, we should consider that some negative feelings toward the United States have been engendered by views and behavior that are immoral and nationally degrading.
American television shows and movies constantly undermine the traditional family, both in the United States and around the world. The characters are frequently shown scantily dressed, using foul language, showing no respect to their elders and constantly obsessing about sex. Other shows portray an image of an extremely violent society. Western countries, sadly, have grown so accustomed to such images and behavior that they no longer think anything of it—but more religious countries feel increasingly threatened by these degenerate influences. This has only worsened in the last decade with satellite television and the Internet now widely available.
News of perverse sexual scandals at the very top of American society and government have lessened respect for America's political institutions. Information on these is more widespread as a result of advances in communications during the last few years.
Additionally, the United States accounts for some 80 percent of the world's pornography, freely available in many countries. In others, illegal adult movie theaters show X-rated American videos. Though clearly there's a double standard involved, many people watching them have only contempt for the United States—and even more so those religious people who are appalled at America's perverse yet lucrative exports.
Deuteronomy 28 shows that obedience to God's laws results in a nation being "set on high above all nations of the earth" (verse 1), as the United States was in the years that followed its humble beginnings right up until after World War II. The chapter promises specific blessings for obedience, including God's support against hostile powers (verse 7). America's history certainly shows the nation was blessed when its behavior and laws were based primarily on God's commandments.
Beginning in verse 15 we see the negative consequences of disobedience. Verse 16 says, "Cursed shall you be in the city." Those living in many U.S. cities no longer find them safe and secure.
Many will read this and feel that the responsibility for diminished security lies elsewhere. Yet the book of Joshua, chapter 7, contains a story of one man, Achan, who committed a sin that affected the whole nation's security. The biblical account clearly shows that Achan himself had committed the sin of taking spoil from recently conquered Jericho, against God's specific instructions to the people of Israel. Yet God's judgment was that "Israel has sinned" (Joshua 7:11). Joshua had to find and punish the transgressor before Israel could expect another victory.
The account shows the importance of everyone conducting himself in a way that is pleasing to God if a nation is to reap God's blessings.
© 1995-2006 United Church of God
Amid all the carnage and the confusion that Americans felt, one question frequently asked was: "Why do people hate us so much?" Pictures of people rejoicing in the streets of other nations stood out in stark contrast to news reports of expressions of sympathy and support from around the world. Obviously hatred of the United States has grown intense and deep in some parts of the world. Quite rightly, people want to know why.
The simplistic answer to that question is that the United States backs Israel. Mounting frustration with the situation in the Middle East has increased anger against America. Many in the area feel that if the United States puts pressure on Israel it would make concessions to the Palestinians.
Israel's existence is certainly one contributing factor. Another is the presence of American and British troops on Muslim soil (see "Anger Mounts Following 1991 Gulf War,"). But these explanations overlook the fact that there is much hatred and resentment directed toward the United States throughout the world, not just in the Middle East.
No doubt many factors contribute to this increased anti-American feeling, not the least of which is jealousy over America's great wealth. But one scripture helps us to understand why the problem has worsened in recent decades: "Righteousness exalts a nation, but sin is a disgrace to any people" (Proverbs 14:34, NIV).
Not so long ago America was looked up to by the rest of the world. After the failure of their kings and emperors to avoid the carnage of World War I, Europeans looked to President Woodrow Wilson to show them a new and better way. But lack of support at home meant that America was not able to stay involved. It was different after World War II. This time, Americans were committed to helping the rest of the world, and the United States took over the responsibility of leading the free nations.
Even in the Middle East, combatants looked to the United States to take the lead. It was President Carter who brought Egypt and Israel together. Successive presidents have been involved in the area and have always been able to talk with both sides. But in the aftermath of the Sept. 11 attacks, Americans saw Palestinians dancing in the streets and celebrating America's agony.
Clearly, respect and appreciation for America are not as great as they were before. The Bible helps us understand this change in America's fortunes.
The Old Testament book of Deuteronomy, chapter 28, promises blessings for obedience to God's laws and curses—serious negative consequences—for disobedience. It may seem illogical to see this as an explanation of the terrorist attacks on the United States, but the fact is that America is not as respected as it used to be, and many sound reasons exist for this decline in respect.
Islamic fundamentalists, who are behind many such attacks, fear America's cultural influence on their societies. Of course, hatred and terrorism are utterly evil and inexcusable responses, no matter what the basis for such thinking is. Indeed, America is hated for many right principles that should not be altered. Jesus Christ was hated and He was a perfect human being. Nevertheless, we should consider that some negative feelings toward the United States have been engendered by views and behavior that are immoral and nationally degrading.
American television shows and movies constantly undermine the traditional family, both in the United States and around the world. The characters are frequently shown scantily dressed, using foul language, showing no respect to their elders and constantly obsessing about sex. Other shows portray an image of an extremely violent society. Western countries, sadly, have grown so accustomed to such images and behavior that they no longer think anything of it—but more religious countries feel increasingly threatened by these degenerate influences. This has only worsened in the last decade with satellite television and the Internet now widely available.
News of perverse sexual scandals at the very top of American society and government have lessened respect for America's political institutions. Information on these is more widespread as a result of advances in communications during the last few years.
Additionally, the United States accounts for some 80 percent of the world's pornography, freely available in many countries. In others, illegal adult movie theaters show X-rated American videos. Though clearly there's a double standard involved, many people watching them have only contempt for the United States—and even more so those religious people who are appalled at America's perverse yet lucrative exports.
Deuteronomy 28 shows that obedience to God's laws results in a nation being "set on high above all nations of the earth" (verse 1), as the United States was in the years that followed its humble beginnings right up until after World War II. The chapter promises specific blessings for obedience, including God's support against hostile powers (verse 7). America's history certainly shows the nation was blessed when its behavior and laws were based primarily on God's commandments.
Beginning in verse 15 we see the negative consequences of disobedience. Verse 16 says, "Cursed shall you be in the city." Those living in many U.S. cities no longer find them safe and secure.
Many will read this and feel that the responsibility for diminished security lies elsewhere. Yet the book of Joshua, chapter 7, contains a story of one man, Achan, who committed a sin that affected the whole nation's security. The biblical account clearly shows that Achan himself had committed the sin of taking spoil from recently conquered Jericho, against God's specific instructions to the people of Israel. Yet God's judgment was that "Israel has sinned" (Joshua 7:11). Joshua had to find and punish the transgressor before Israel could expect another victory.
The account shows the importance of everyone conducting himself in a way that is pleasing to God if a nation is to reap God's blessings.
© 1995-2006 United Church of God
Wednesday, June 28, 2006
Anger Mounts Following 1991 Gulf War
On Feb. 23, 1998, the London-based Arabic-language newspaper Al-Quds al-Arabi published a piece titled "Declaration of the World Islamic Front for Jihad Against the Jews and the Crusaders." Osama bin Laden and other leaders of militant Islamic groups in Egypt, Pakistan and Bangladesh were among the signers.
The declaration, a translation of which appeared in an article by Bernard Lewis in the November-December 1998 issue of Foreign Affairs, began by quoting several militant passages from the Koran and sayings of Muhammad, then continued:
"Since God laid down the Arabian peninsula, created its desert, and surrounded it with its seas, no calamity has ever befallen it like these Crusader hosts that have spread in it like locusts, crowding its soil, eating its fruits, and destroying its verdure [foliage]; and this at a time when the nations contend against the Muslims like diners jostling around a bowl of food."
The statement continues, condemning the United States for three main reasons:
"First—For more than seven years the United States is occupying the lands of Islam in the holiest of its territories, Arabia, plundering its riches, overwhelming its rulers, humiliating its people, threatening its neighbors, and using its bases in the peninsula as a spearhead to fight against the neighboring Islamic peoples ...
"Second—Despite the immense destruction inflicted on the Iraqi people at the hands of the Crusader-Jewish alliance and in spite of the appalling number of dead, exceeding a million, the Americans nevertheless, in spite of all this, are trying once more to repeat this dreadful slaughter ...
"Third—While the purposes of the Americans in these wars are religious and economic, they also serve the petty state of the Jews, to divert attention from their occupation of Jerusalem and their killing of Muslims in it."
The signatories conclude that these "crimes" amount to "a clear declaration of war by the Americans against God, his Prophet, and the Muslims." The declaration reminds readers that throughout the centuries, the ulema—authorities on theology and Islamic law—have ruled unanimously that when Muslim lands are attacked by enemies, every Muslim's personal duty is jihad, a religious conflict that no Muslim can ignore.
Sensitivities over Arabia go back almost 1,400 years to the very beginnings of Islam. Commenting on the declaration, Professor Lewis, professor emeritus of Near Eastern studies at Princeton University and a noted authority on the Middle East, writes: "The classical Arabic historians tell us that in the year 20 after the hijra (Muhammad's move from Mecca to Medina), corresponding to 641 of the Christian calendar, the Caliph Umar decreed that Jews and Christians should be removed from Arabia to fulfill an injunction the Prophet uttered on his deathbed: ‘Let there not be two religions in Arabia.' The people in question were the Jews of the oasis of Khaybar in the north and the Christians of Najran in the south."
He continues: "... The expulsion of religious minorities is extremely rare in Islamic history—unlike medieval Christendom, where evictions of Jews and ... Muslims were normal and frequent ... But the decree was final and irreversible, and from then until now the holy land of the Hijaz [the region of Mecca and Medina and sometimes applied to all of Saudi Arabia] has been forbidden territory for non-Muslims ... For a non-Muslim to even set foot on the sacred soil is a major offense ..."
"Where their holy land is involved, many Muslims tend to define the struggle—and sometimes also the enemy—in religious terms, seeing the American troops sent to free Kuwait and save Saudi Arabia from Saddam Hussein as infidel invaders and occupiers. This perception is heightened by America's unquestioned primacy among the powers of the infidel world."
Professor Lewis's piece, written three years before the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, concludes with these words: "... Some Muslims are ready to approve, and a few of them to apply, the declaration's extreme interpretation of their religion. Terrorism requires only a few. Obviously, the West must defend itself by whatever means will be effective. But in devising strategies to fight the terrorists, it would surely be useful to understand the forces that drive them."
Religious affairs writer and historian Karen Armstrong also helps us understand Islamic fundamentalism in her book Islam. She notes that, as the 20th century ended, "some Muslims ... have made sacred violence a cardinal Islamic duty. These fundamentalists often call Western colonialism and post-colonial Western imperialism al-Salibiyyah: the Crusade."
This is a chilling term for Muslims, calling to mind the violent clashes between the forces of medieval Christendom and Islam almost 1,000 years ago. European armies went on a series of crusades to free the Christian holy places from the forces of Islam, frequently committing horrific atrocities during the period. "The colonial crusade has been less violent but its impact has been more devastating than the medieval holy wars," she notes. Western cultural values have greatly impacted all the countries of the world and are greatly resented by many people.
Karen Armstrong continues: "All over the world, as we have seen, people in all the major faiths have reeled under the impact of western modernity, and have produced the embattled and frequently intolerant religiosity that we call fundamentalism" (2000, p. 180, emphasis added).
Fundamentalist movements are not confined to Islam. Nor are religious clashes confined to Christianity and Islam. Predominantly Hindu India has witnessed conflict between fundamentalist Hindus and minority Muslims.
However, conflict between Christians and Muslims has been a constant theme of history for 14 centuries. This conflict is not confined to the Western world. In recent years Indonesia has witnessed appalling violence as Muslims went on the rampage beheading Christians. The two religions have been fighting a civil war in the African nation of Sudan for more than three decades. The war in Chechnya between Russians and native Chechens is a war between Christian and Muslim. And, of course, the Balkans have been a major flash point between the two religions for generations.
Although Islamic nations have their often-serious internal divisions, typically between Islamic fundamentalists and the more moderate national leaders, no Muslim countries allow Christian missionaries to operate freely or Christians to immigrate and receive citizenship. This has ensured that Islamic nations remain essentially Muslim, with some tolerance for minority religions that predate Islam. In contrast, Western nations have allowed significant immigration from Muslim countries since World War II, and their now-sizable Muslim minorities are complicating Western governments' attempts to deal with this growing conflict.
© 1995-2006 United Church of God
The declaration, a translation of which appeared in an article by Bernard Lewis in the November-December 1998 issue of Foreign Affairs, began by quoting several militant passages from the Koran and sayings of Muhammad, then continued:
"Since God laid down the Arabian peninsula, created its desert, and surrounded it with its seas, no calamity has ever befallen it like these Crusader hosts that have spread in it like locusts, crowding its soil, eating its fruits, and destroying its verdure [foliage]; and this at a time when the nations contend against the Muslims like diners jostling around a bowl of food."
The statement continues, condemning the United States for three main reasons:
"First—For more than seven years the United States is occupying the lands of Islam in the holiest of its territories, Arabia, plundering its riches, overwhelming its rulers, humiliating its people, threatening its neighbors, and using its bases in the peninsula as a spearhead to fight against the neighboring Islamic peoples ...
"Second—Despite the immense destruction inflicted on the Iraqi people at the hands of the Crusader-Jewish alliance and in spite of the appalling number of dead, exceeding a million, the Americans nevertheless, in spite of all this, are trying once more to repeat this dreadful slaughter ...
"Third—While the purposes of the Americans in these wars are religious and economic, they also serve the petty state of the Jews, to divert attention from their occupation of Jerusalem and their killing of Muslims in it."
The signatories conclude that these "crimes" amount to "a clear declaration of war by the Americans against God, his Prophet, and the Muslims." The declaration reminds readers that throughout the centuries, the ulema—authorities on theology and Islamic law—have ruled unanimously that when Muslim lands are attacked by enemies, every Muslim's personal duty is jihad, a religious conflict that no Muslim can ignore.
Sensitivities over Arabia go back almost 1,400 years to the very beginnings of Islam. Commenting on the declaration, Professor Lewis, professor emeritus of Near Eastern studies at Princeton University and a noted authority on the Middle East, writes: "The classical Arabic historians tell us that in the year 20 after the hijra (Muhammad's move from Mecca to Medina), corresponding to 641 of the Christian calendar, the Caliph Umar decreed that Jews and Christians should be removed from Arabia to fulfill an injunction the Prophet uttered on his deathbed: ‘Let there not be two religions in Arabia.' The people in question were the Jews of the oasis of Khaybar in the north and the Christians of Najran in the south."
He continues: "... The expulsion of religious minorities is extremely rare in Islamic history—unlike medieval Christendom, where evictions of Jews and ... Muslims were normal and frequent ... But the decree was final and irreversible, and from then until now the holy land of the Hijaz [the region of Mecca and Medina and sometimes applied to all of Saudi Arabia] has been forbidden territory for non-Muslims ... For a non-Muslim to even set foot on the sacred soil is a major offense ..."
"Where their holy land is involved, many Muslims tend to define the struggle—and sometimes also the enemy—in religious terms, seeing the American troops sent to free Kuwait and save Saudi Arabia from Saddam Hussein as infidel invaders and occupiers. This perception is heightened by America's unquestioned primacy among the powers of the infidel world."
Professor Lewis's piece, written three years before the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, concludes with these words: "... Some Muslims are ready to approve, and a few of them to apply, the declaration's extreme interpretation of their religion. Terrorism requires only a few. Obviously, the West must defend itself by whatever means will be effective. But in devising strategies to fight the terrorists, it would surely be useful to understand the forces that drive them."
Religious affairs writer and historian Karen Armstrong also helps us understand Islamic fundamentalism in her book Islam. She notes that, as the 20th century ended, "some Muslims ... have made sacred violence a cardinal Islamic duty. These fundamentalists often call Western colonialism and post-colonial Western imperialism al-Salibiyyah: the Crusade."
This is a chilling term for Muslims, calling to mind the violent clashes between the forces of medieval Christendom and Islam almost 1,000 years ago. European armies went on a series of crusades to free the Christian holy places from the forces of Islam, frequently committing horrific atrocities during the period. "The colonial crusade has been less violent but its impact has been more devastating than the medieval holy wars," she notes. Western cultural values have greatly impacted all the countries of the world and are greatly resented by many people.
Karen Armstrong continues: "All over the world, as we have seen, people in all the major faiths have reeled under the impact of western modernity, and have produced the embattled and frequently intolerant religiosity that we call fundamentalism" (2000, p. 180, emphasis added).
Fundamentalist movements are not confined to Islam. Nor are religious clashes confined to Christianity and Islam. Predominantly Hindu India has witnessed conflict between fundamentalist Hindus and minority Muslims.
However, conflict between Christians and Muslims has been a constant theme of history for 14 centuries. This conflict is not confined to the Western world. In recent years Indonesia has witnessed appalling violence as Muslims went on the rampage beheading Christians. The two religions have been fighting a civil war in the African nation of Sudan for more than three decades. The war in Chechnya between Russians and native Chechens is a war between Christian and Muslim. And, of course, the Balkans have been a major flash point between the two religions for generations.
Although Islamic nations have their often-serious internal divisions, typically between Islamic fundamentalists and the more moderate national leaders, no Muslim countries allow Christian missionaries to operate freely or Christians to immigrate and receive citizenship. This has ensured that Islamic nations remain essentially Muslim, with some tolerance for minority religions that predate Islam. In contrast, Western nations have allowed significant immigration from Muslim countries since World War II, and their now-sizable Muslim minorities are complicating Western governments' attempts to deal with this growing conflict.
© 1995-2006 United Church of God
Tuesday, June 27, 2006
Not Enemies Forever
In spite of the best efforts of the players in the current Middle East peace process, today the Arab and Jewish nations still have difficulty coexisting peacefully. Yet they have not always been enemies. Indeed, for centuries Jews thrived in an Arab civilization.
Shortly after the death of Muhammad in A.D. 632, Arabs began conquering vast tracts of the known world. Soon they possessed North Africa, Arabia, Palestine, Persia, Sicily, southern Italy and much of Turkey and Spain. For the next few centuries, Arab civilization was considerably more advanced than its European counterpart.
Bertrand Russell described the way the Jews flourished under the Arabs in his book History of Western Philosophy. After describing the persecution of Jews in Christian Europe, and the corresponding lack of Jewish cultural contributions, Russell continued: "In Mohammedan countries, on the contrary, Jews at most times were not in any way ill treated. Especially in Moorish Spain, they contributed to learning... [Then, when] the Christians reconquered Spain, it was largely the Jews who transmitted to them the learning of the Moors. Learned Jews, who knew Hebrew, Greek and Arabic, and were acquainted with the philosophy of Aristotle, imparted their knowledge to less learned schoolmen" (1969, p. 324).
Europe's rediscovery, by Arabs and Jews, of many Greek texts led eventually to the Renaissance and the rise of European culture. Today Europeans, Arabs and Jews could gain much from cooperation. Sadly, crusades, persecutions and jihads have been all too common in their history.
Nevertheless, in the coming reign of the Messiah, the Christ, the descendants of all three groups will learn to flourish in cooperation and peace.
© 1995-2006 United Church of God
Shortly after the death of Muhammad in A.D. 632, Arabs began conquering vast tracts of the known world. Soon they possessed North Africa, Arabia, Palestine, Persia, Sicily, southern Italy and much of Turkey and Spain. For the next few centuries, Arab civilization was considerably more advanced than its European counterpart.
Bertrand Russell described the way the Jews flourished under the Arabs in his book History of Western Philosophy. After describing the persecution of Jews in Christian Europe, and the corresponding lack of Jewish cultural contributions, Russell continued: "In Mohammedan countries, on the contrary, Jews at most times were not in any way ill treated. Especially in Moorish Spain, they contributed to learning... [Then, when] the Christians reconquered Spain, it was largely the Jews who transmitted to them the learning of the Moors. Learned Jews, who knew Hebrew, Greek and Arabic, and were acquainted with the philosophy of Aristotle, imparted their knowledge to less learned schoolmen" (1969, p. 324).
Europe's rediscovery, by Arabs and Jews, of many Greek texts led eventually to the Renaissance and the rise of European culture. Today Europeans, Arabs and Jews could gain much from cooperation. Sadly, crusades, persecutions and jihads have been all too common in their history.
Nevertheless, in the coming reign of the Messiah, the Christ, the descendants of all three groups will learn to flourish in cooperation and peace.
© 1995-2006 United Church of God
Monday, June 26, 2006
Islamic Fundamentalism Resurges
Arabs call the Crusades al- Salibiyyah. The term is highly emotional to them, reminding them of European atrocities committed during the 200-year-long campaign to bring the Holy Land under Catholic control.
To the peoples of the Arab world, those weren't the only crusades. In their minds, two more crusades have followed.
The next crusade was the colonial period when the Arab world came under the control of the British, French and other European powers. This frustrated Arab dreams of unity and brought a sense of inferiority as they were incapable of overthrowing the Europeans for such a long time.
The current crusade is the one that, in the eyes of fundamentalists, most threatens their way of life. It is what is often called American imperialism. Unlike the British and French, Americans have made no attempt to annex an Arab territory as a colony of the United States. Americans themselves were originally under colonial rule and fought a revolutionary war to be rid of it and replace it with the modern American republic, so Americans are not inclined to colonize as did the Europeans of the 19th century.
However, inadvertently, American culture threatens the traditional way of life of all the Islamic peoples. This is a major cause of resentment if not outright hatred toward the United States.
Partly this is the result of technological advancement. Radio and television have brought Western culture into peoples' homes all over the world. American movies are universal; wherever you go in the world they seem to be available. The message they send is not a good one. They depict an immoral and very violent country, far from the reality of many American families—but foreign audiences don't know that. They also depict liberated and scantily clad women and know-it-all children who show contempt for their parents—both highly offensive to Islamic values.
The pervasiveness of Western culture has only worsened in recent years with the introduction of satellite television. Now more people can watch Western movies and television shows, resulting in increased anti-Western feeling.
Additionally, people throughout the Arab world can now see nightly news footage of Palestinian suffering, for which they blame the United States. The logic is simple—Israel kills Palestinians, America supports Israel, therefore blame America.
Because America is already perceived as a violent country, it is considered responsible for the violence. Exacerbating feelings further has been American military action against Muslims, seen as an anti-Islamic stance on the part of the United States.
The fact that the United States and its allies supported Muslims against the Serbs and Croats in the Balkan wars of the 1990s is overlooked. From the perspective of many in the Muslim world, the American liberation of Afghans from the oppressive Taliban regime in Afghanistan in 2001-2002 and the Iraq war to remove Saddam Hussein from power in 2003 were simply attacks on fellow Muslims. It should be remembered that many countries do not allow freedom of the press or the airwaves, and news there is usually controlled and heavily slanted. This is true throughout the Arab and Muslim worlds.
Roots of Islamic extremism
Such factors have contributed to the rise of Islamic fundamentalism. It's not a new phenomenon. As with other religions, fundamentalists come and go. This has been the case with Islam as it has been with nominal Christianity.
In the 18th century, Ibn Abdul Wahhab (1703-1792) was born in what is now Riyadh in Saudi Arabia. His followers, who form a Sunni sect, are known as Wahhabis. They are the most extreme of all the branches of Islam—violent, intolerant and fanatical. Their rise to prominence in Arabia was not the result of the European Crusades, but rather the decadence of the Ottoman Sultans. Ibn Abdul Wahhab established a state in the Arabian Peninsula that was modeled after the Ummah of the seventh century, an Islamic community that would live by the sharia, Islamic law.
Wahhabism is still the dominant religion of Saudi Arabia, and it has many followers in the Persian Gulf states. It is from this area that the terrorists came who staged the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the World Trade Center in New York. It has been said that not all Muslims are terrorists, but all terrorists are Wahhabis. Although this is an overstatement, it is true that most of the mosques in Western countries are financed by the Saudis, with the imams teaching their adherents the Wahhabi interpretation of the Koran. As early as 1801 the followers of Wahhab were killing all who opposed them—they fell upon the Shiite city of Karbala that year and killed 2,000 innocent civilians.
Fundamentalism, however, was not confined to Arabia. Later in the same century the British fought a man claiming to be the mahdi in Sudan, another fundamentalist who wanted to unite all Arabs in a holy war against the infidels invading from the West. The British defeated him and continued to dominate the area until after World War II.
Fundamentalists strike back
Islamic fundamentalism was to affect the West again in 1979. This time the United States was the target as America's most powerful ally in the region was overthrown by fundamentalist masses. The shah of Iran had been pro-Western and, with the help of the United States, had built up his forces to become the strongest military power in the Persian Gulf, the oil-rich area of vital economic and strategic interest to all the Western world.
The shah was overthrown by followers of the extremist Shiite Ayatollah Khomeini. Militant students took over the American embassy in Tehran and held dozens of American embassy employees hostage for 444 days. The West feared that Islamic extremism would spread to other countries in the region.
That was also the year in which the Soviets invaded Afghanistan. Forces there had overthrown their king in 1973 and eventually a procommunist government took control. When this, too, was overthrown, Moscow intervened. Their intervention and a costly, protracted, demoralizing war led directly to the collapse of the Soviet Union a little over a decade later.
The United States, concerned about Soviet advances around the world, helped the Afghans rebel against Soviet domination. They began supplying arms through Muslim Pakistan to the Afghan mujahadin, the guerilla forces who were led by Osama bin Laden. Eventually the Soviets were defeated, their country collapsed and Afghanistan came under the control of Sunni fundamentalists called the Taliban ("students," referring to those who were taught in Islamic seminaries, or madrasas). With the collapse of the Soviet Union, vast lands in Central Asia broke away from Russia and became independent Islamic republics, thereby further increasing the number of Islamic nations around the world.
Islamic fundamentalists were quickly becoming a major force throughout the Islamic world. They especially appealed to poor people frustrated and angered by leaders who often lived a lavish lifestyle while their people suffered in poverty and oppression. Similarly, in Western nations, Islamic fundamentalists proselytize among the poor and in prisons where they have gained many recruits. Throughout the Arab world people grew tired of their dictatorial regimes that had replaced the corrupt kings. The new presidents had turned out to be no different.
Fundamentalists soon learned that power cannot always be achieved through the democratic process. In Algeria they won the election in 1992, replacing the Arab nationalist government that had led Algeria to independence from France 30 years earlier—following an eight-year rebellion. After 30 years, the economic conditions of the people had only worsened with many, ironically, having to leave for France just to survive.
The fundamentalists seemed better organized and were certainly more honest. But the military stepped in to stop fundamentalist rule. Since then, Algeria has been plagued by frequent terrorist attacks by the forces of fundamentalism, and more than 100,000 Algerians have been killed. French support for the military action only increased resentment and distrust of the West—all the Western talk of democracy seemed to count for little when it mattered.
Shifting tide against the United States
The 1990s saw rising bitterness directed at the United States, now the dominant Western force and the world's only remaining superpower.
The U.S.-led Persian Gulf War against Iraq in 1991 received a great deal of support from other Arab nations. Iraq's leader, Saddam Hussein, had sent his forces into neighboring Kuwait, annexing the small oil-producing nation. His justification for this invasion went back to the days of the Ottoman Empire when what is now Kuwait was part of an administrative zone of the empire that included a large part of Iraq.
The United States and its allies defeated Iraq, but fears of Saddam Hussein remained because Iraq was known to possess weapons of mass destruction, such as chemical and biological weapons, and was aggressively pursuing development of nuclear weapons. By the time this fear came to a head with the 2003 Iraq War, the United States found that many allies of the first Gulf War were no longer supportive. In the interim, the world had changed.
The great turning point was Sept. 11, 2001. As with the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand in the previous century, this was to change everything. The world has not been the same since.
Immediately following the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington, D.C., when terrorists flew hijacked airliners into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, the world was generally sympathetic toward America. But within a year after the United States responded with its war on terror, demonstrating its awesome military power in Afghanistan and looking ahead to possible conflicts with what President Bush called the "Axis of Evil," in the eyes of many America's role had changed from victim to villain.
Suppressed resentment against the world's dominant superpower and fear of isolation and possible terrorism over being too closely allied to the United States contributed to international rejection of America's role as the world's policeman. Increasingly others, even including some Americans, began blaming the United States for Sept. 11, claiming it was a justified response to American foreign policy.
In 2003, in the eyes of many Muslims and their leaders, America was setting a precedent by invading Iraq to remove Saddam Hussein. If one president could be removed, all the other leaders in the region felt they likewise could be removed by U.S. military force. Additionally, public anger at the suffering of the Palestinians had risen with access to satellite television—and especially al-Jazeera, the first Arabic-language satellite station broadcasting from Qatar in the Persian Gulf.
Islamic fundamentalism gains ground
Well before Sept. 11 the threat to the United States from Islamic terrorism was becoming apparent. An article in the November-December 1998 issue of Foreign Affairs quotes from a declaration against the West issued by Osama bin Laden and other militants (see "Anger Mounts Following 1991 Gulf War,").
Their demands were for the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Saudi Arabia—the land of Mecca and Medina, the two holiest cities of Islam. They also called for an end to the bombing of Iraq and the UN sanctions imposed against that country following the Gulf War. And, thirdly, they condemned American support for Israel against the Palestinians. (After victory in the Iraq War, the United States addressed all three grievances, announcing it would withdraw its troops from Saudi Arabia, lifting sanctions against Iraq and pursuing a new peace plan for Israel and the Palestinians.)
Following Sept. 11 America suffered further setbacks as Islamic fundamentalists made additional gains in a number of countries. Pakistan's leader, General Pervez Musharraf, a supporter of Washington's war on terror, saw his country elect an Islamic government, although the general retained overall control of the country.
Surprisingly, almost 80 years after the overthrow of the sultan and the declaration of an Islamic republic, Turkey also elected an Islamic party majority in the November 2002 election. Other countries throughout the region likewise have experienced gains by fundamentalists.
Egypt's President Anwar Sadat was assassinated in 1982 by Islamic fundamentalists, who 15 years later massacred foreign tourists visiting some of Egypt's ancient monuments in an effort to undermine the national economy by destroying the tourism industry.
In Indonesia, the world's most populous Islamic country, fundamentalists have been killing Christians, and in late 2002 a bombing on the Hindu island of Bali killed almost 200 Western tourists, half of them Australians. In India and the Indian-administered section of Kashmir, Muslim fundamentalists have attacked Hindus and Christians, deliberately trying to provoke conflict between Pakistan and India, two of the world's recent nuclear powers.
In Africa, also, Islamic fundamentalism has left its mark. In Sudan, the Muslims of the north actively persecute the Christians of the south, even taking thousands of them into slavery. In Nigeria's northern Muslim states, sharia law has been introduced, and the most popular name given to newborn boys since Sept. 11, 2001, has been Osama in honor of Osama bin Laden.
One factor in this growth of Islamic fundamentalism is the high birthrate in Islamic countries. In most economically backward countries half the people are young people, as couples tend to have six to eight children. As economic policies in these nations often restrict business activity rather than encourage it, many young people cannot find jobs.
Without a means to support a family, the young men cannot marry. The promise of instantly available young virgins upon death as a martyr in a jihad, or holy war, is tempting, so they believe they have nothing to lose in sacrificing themselves to advance Islamic aims. As an additional incentive, some Islamic governments have given thousands of dollars to the surviving family, a princely sum in the slums of refugee camps.
Dilemma for the West
However, poverty is not the main cause of the problem. Almost all the Sept. 11 suicide bombers came from affluent backgrounds, and Osama bin Laden came from one of the wealthiest families in Saudi Arabia. Many other factors have contributed to the rise of Islamic fundamentalism and subsequent terrorism, including the Israeli-Palestinian problem and the domination of American culture.
Further American intervention in the region is likely to only feed the flames of fundamentalism further in the long run. Not one country in the Arab world can be said to be politically stable. All are at risk from fundamentalists. America really is caught in a no-win situation. The U.S. military may win the wars, but America is unlikely to effectively win the peace.
A further complication for the United States and other countries, particularly those of Western Europe, is the presence of Islamic fundamentalists within their own borders, largely the result of changes to immigration laws since World War II. Interestingly, while most Western nations allow immigration from Muslim countries and allow Muslims to become citizens, no Islamic nation allows people from Christian countries to permanently enter and become citizens unless they convert to Islam. The followers of Islam are aware that their religion and Western secular liberalism are incompatible.
Further conflict between the Islamic world and the West is inevitable—and foretold in Bible prophecy, as we'll see in the next chapter.
© 1995-2006 United Church of God
To the peoples of the Arab world, those weren't the only crusades. In their minds, two more crusades have followed.
The next crusade was the colonial period when the Arab world came under the control of the British, French and other European powers. This frustrated Arab dreams of unity and brought a sense of inferiority as they were incapable of overthrowing the Europeans for such a long time.
The current crusade is the one that, in the eyes of fundamentalists, most threatens their way of life. It is what is often called American imperialism. Unlike the British and French, Americans have made no attempt to annex an Arab territory as a colony of the United States. Americans themselves were originally under colonial rule and fought a revolutionary war to be rid of it and replace it with the modern American republic, so Americans are not inclined to colonize as did the Europeans of the 19th century.
However, inadvertently, American culture threatens the traditional way of life of all the Islamic peoples. This is a major cause of resentment if not outright hatred toward the United States.
Partly this is the result of technological advancement. Radio and television have brought Western culture into peoples' homes all over the world. American movies are universal; wherever you go in the world they seem to be available. The message they send is not a good one. They depict an immoral and very violent country, far from the reality of many American families—but foreign audiences don't know that. They also depict liberated and scantily clad women and know-it-all children who show contempt for their parents—both highly offensive to Islamic values.
The pervasiveness of Western culture has only worsened in recent years with the introduction of satellite television. Now more people can watch Western movies and television shows, resulting in increased anti-Western feeling.
Additionally, people throughout the Arab world can now see nightly news footage of Palestinian suffering, for which they blame the United States. The logic is simple—Israel kills Palestinians, America supports Israel, therefore blame America.
Because America is already perceived as a violent country, it is considered responsible for the violence. Exacerbating feelings further has been American military action against Muslims, seen as an anti-Islamic stance on the part of the United States.
The fact that the United States and its allies supported Muslims against the Serbs and Croats in the Balkan wars of the 1990s is overlooked. From the perspective of many in the Muslim world, the American liberation of Afghans from the oppressive Taliban regime in Afghanistan in 2001-2002 and the Iraq war to remove Saddam Hussein from power in 2003 were simply attacks on fellow Muslims. It should be remembered that many countries do not allow freedom of the press or the airwaves, and news there is usually controlled and heavily slanted. This is true throughout the Arab and Muslim worlds.
Roots of Islamic extremism
Such factors have contributed to the rise of Islamic fundamentalism. It's not a new phenomenon. As with other religions, fundamentalists come and go. This has been the case with Islam as it has been with nominal Christianity.
In the 18th century, Ibn Abdul Wahhab (1703-1792) was born in what is now Riyadh in Saudi Arabia. His followers, who form a Sunni sect, are known as Wahhabis. They are the most extreme of all the branches of Islam—violent, intolerant and fanatical. Their rise to prominence in Arabia was not the result of the European Crusades, but rather the decadence of the Ottoman Sultans. Ibn Abdul Wahhab established a state in the Arabian Peninsula that was modeled after the Ummah of the seventh century, an Islamic community that would live by the sharia, Islamic law.
Wahhabism is still the dominant religion of Saudi Arabia, and it has many followers in the Persian Gulf states. It is from this area that the terrorists came who staged the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the World Trade Center in New York. It has been said that not all Muslims are terrorists, but all terrorists are Wahhabis. Although this is an overstatement, it is true that most of the mosques in Western countries are financed by the Saudis, with the imams teaching their adherents the Wahhabi interpretation of the Koran. As early as 1801 the followers of Wahhab were killing all who opposed them—they fell upon the Shiite city of Karbala that year and killed 2,000 innocent civilians.
Fundamentalism, however, was not confined to Arabia. Later in the same century the British fought a man claiming to be the mahdi in Sudan, another fundamentalist who wanted to unite all Arabs in a holy war against the infidels invading from the West. The British defeated him and continued to dominate the area until after World War II.
Fundamentalists strike back
Islamic fundamentalism was to affect the West again in 1979. This time the United States was the target as America's most powerful ally in the region was overthrown by fundamentalist masses. The shah of Iran had been pro-Western and, with the help of the United States, had built up his forces to become the strongest military power in the Persian Gulf, the oil-rich area of vital economic and strategic interest to all the Western world.
The shah was overthrown by followers of the extremist Shiite Ayatollah Khomeini. Militant students took over the American embassy in Tehran and held dozens of American embassy employees hostage for 444 days. The West feared that Islamic extremism would spread to other countries in the region.
That was also the year in which the Soviets invaded Afghanistan. Forces there had overthrown their king in 1973 and eventually a procommunist government took control. When this, too, was overthrown, Moscow intervened. Their intervention and a costly, protracted, demoralizing war led directly to the collapse of the Soviet Union a little over a decade later.
The United States, concerned about Soviet advances around the world, helped the Afghans rebel against Soviet domination. They began supplying arms through Muslim Pakistan to the Afghan mujahadin, the guerilla forces who were led by Osama bin Laden. Eventually the Soviets were defeated, their country collapsed and Afghanistan came under the control of Sunni fundamentalists called the Taliban ("students," referring to those who were taught in Islamic seminaries, or madrasas). With the collapse of the Soviet Union, vast lands in Central Asia broke away from Russia and became independent Islamic republics, thereby further increasing the number of Islamic nations around the world.
Islamic fundamentalists were quickly becoming a major force throughout the Islamic world. They especially appealed to poor people frustrated and angered by leaders who often lived a lavish lifestyle while their people suffered in poverty and oppression. Similarly, in Western nations, Islamic fundamentalists proselytize among the poor and in prisons where they have gained many recruits. Throughout the Arab world people grew tired of their dictatorial regimes that had replaced the corrupt kings. The new presidents had turned out to be no different.
Fundamentalists soon learned that power cannot always be achieved through the democratic process. In Algeria they won the election in 1992, replacing the Arab nationalist government that had led Algeria to independence from France 30 years earlier—following an eight-year rebellion. After 30 years, the economic conditions of the people had only worsened with many, ironically, having to leave for France just to survive.
The fundamentalists seemed better organized and were certainly more honest. But the military stepped in to stop fundamentalist rule. Since then, Algeria has been plagued by frequent terrorist attacks by the forces of fundamentalism, and more than 100,000 Algerians have been killed. French support for the military action only increased resentment and distrust of the West—all the Western talk of democracy seemed to count for little when it mattered.
Shifting tide against the United States
The 1990s saw rising bitterness directed at the United States, now the dominant Western force and the world's only remaining superpower.
The U.S.-led Persian Gulf War against Iraq in 1991 received a great deal of support from other Arab nations. Iraq's leader, Saddam Hussein, had sent his forces into neighboring Kuwait, annexing the small oil-producing nation. His justification for this invasion went back to the days of the Ottoman Empire when what is now Kuwait was part of an administrative zone of the empire that included a large part of Iraq.
The United States and its allies defeated Iraq, but fears of Saddam Hussein remained because Iraq was known to possess weapons of mass destruction, such as chemical and biological weapons, and was aggressively pursuing development of nuclear weapons. By the time this fear came to a head with the 2003 Iraq War, the United States found that many allies of the first Gulf War were no longer supportive. In the interim, the world had changed.
The great turning point was Sept. 11, 2001. As with the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand in the previous century, this was to change everything. The world has not been the same since.
Immediately following the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington, D.C., when terrorists flew hijacked airliners into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, the world was generally sympathetic toward America. But within a year after the United States responded with its war on terror, demonstrating its awesome military power in Afghanistan and looking ahead to possible conflicts with what President Bush called the "Axis of Evil," in the eyes of many America's role had changed from victim to villain.
Suppressed resentment against the world's dominant superpower and fear of isolation and possible terrorism over being too closely allied to the United States contributed to international rejection of America's role as the world's policeman. Increasingly others, even including some Americans, began blaming the United States for Sept. 11, claiming it was a justified response to American foreign policy.
In 2003, in the eyes of many Muslims and their leaders, America was setting a precedent by invading Iraq to remove Saddam Hussein. If one president could be removed, all the other leaders in the region felt they likewise could be removed by U.S. military force. Additionally, public anger at the suffering of the Palestinians had risen with access to satellite television—and especially al-Jazeera, the first Arabic-language satellite station broadcasting from Qatar in the Persian Gulf.
Islamic fundamentalism gains ground
Well before Sept. 11 the threat to the United States from Islamic terrorism was becoming apparent. An article in the November-December 1998 issue of Foreign Affairs quotes from a declaration against the West issued by Osama bin Laden and other militants (see "Anger Mounts Following 1991 Gulf War,").
Their demands were for the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Saudi Arabia—the land of Mecca and Medina, the two holiest cities of Islam. They also called for an end to the bombing of Iraq and the UN sanctions imposed against that country following the Gulf War. And, thirdly, they condemned American support for Israel against the Palestinians. (After victory in the Iraq War, the United States addressed all three grievances, announcing it would withdraw its troops from Saudi Arabia, lifting sanctions against Iraq and pursuing a new peace plan for Israel and the Palestinians.)
Following Sept. 11 America suffered further setbacks as Islamic fundamentalists made additional gains in a number of countries. Pakistan's leader, General Pervez Musharraf, a supporter of Washington's war on terror, saw his country elect an Islamic government, although the general retained overall control of the country.
Surprisingly, almost 80 years after the overthrow of the sultan and the declaration of an Islamic republic, Turkey also elected an Islamic party majority in the November 2002 election. Other countries throughout the region likewise have experienced gains by fundamentalists.
Egypt's President Anwar Sadat was assassinated in 1982 by Islamic fundamentalists, who 15 years later massacred foreign tourists visiting some of Egypt's ancient monuments in an effort to undermine the national economy by destroying the tourism industry.
In Indonesia, the world's most populous Islamic country, fundamentalists have been killing Christians, and in late 2002 a bombing on the Hindu island of Bali killed almost 200 Western tourists, half of them Australians. In India and the Indian-administered section of Kashmir, Muslim fundamentalists have attacked Hindus and Christians, deliberately trying to provoke conflict between Pakistan and India, two of the world's recent nuclear powers.
In Africa, also, Islamic fundamentalism has left its mark. In Sudan, the Muslims of the north actively persecute the Christians of the south, even taking thousands of them into slavery. In Nigeria's northern Muslim states, sharia law has been introduced, and the most popular name given to newborn boys since Sept. 11, 2001, has been Osama in honor of Osama bin Laden.
One factor in this growth of Islamic fundamentalism is the high birthrate in Islamic countries. In most economically backward countries half the people are young people, as couples tend to have six to eight children. As economic policies in these nations often restrict business activity rather than encourage it, many young people cannot find jobs.
Without a means to support a family, the young men cannot marry. The promise of instantly available young virgins upon death as a martyr in a jihad, or holy war, is tempting, so they believe they have nothing to lose in sacrificing themselves to advance Islamic aims. As an additional incentive, some Islamic governments have given thousands of dollars to the surviving family, a princely sum in the slums of refugee camps.
Dilemma for the West
However, poverty is not the main cause of the problem. Almost all the Sept. 11 suicide bombers came from affluent backgrounds, and Osama bin Laden came from one of the wealthiest families in Saudi Arabia. Many other factors have contributed to the rise of Islamic fundamentalism and subsequent terrorism, including the Israeli-Palestinian problem and the domination of American culture.
Further American intervention in the region is likely to only feed the flames of fundamentalism further in the long run. Not one country in the Arab world can be said to be politically stable. All are at risk from fundamentalists. America really is caught in a no-win situation. The U.S. military may win the wars, but America is unlikely to effectively win the peace.
A further complication for the United States and other countries, particularly those of Western Europe, is the presence of Islamic fundamentalists within their own borders, largely the result of changes to immigration laws since World War II. Interestingly, while most Western nations allow immigration from Muslim countries and allow Muslims to become citizens, no Islamic nation allows people from Christian countries to permanently enter and become citizens unless they convert to Islam. The followers of Islam are aware that their religion and Western secular liberalism are incompatible.
Further conflict between the Islamic world and the West is inevitable—and foretold in Bible prophecy, as we'll see in the next chapter.
© 1995-2006 United Church of God
Sunday, June 25, 2006
A Rising Tide of Arab Nationalism
One of the most significant developments in the region following the Treaty of Versailles ending World War I was rising Arab nationalism. Frustrated at the betrayal by the European powers, Iraqis rebelled against their British rulers. The British soon regretted their involvement in Iraq, which cost them a great deal of money for little or no return. At a time when they were already financially weakened after fighting World War I for more than four years, they now found themselves forced to try to keep the peace in a hostile region.
The establishment of the independent Jewish homeland was also of great significance. There is no doubt that the history of the Middle East following World War II would have been completely different had Israel not been created. It was difficult enough for Arabs to accept European domination of parts of the Arab world, but now they were faced with what they considered a colony of infidel Westerners who intended to live permanently on Arab land.
Initially Arabs didn't blame the West for Israel's existence. In the early days of the Jewish state, the communist countries of Eastern Europe played a vital role in ensuring the people had arms with which to fight the Arab armies. Because many Israelis lived a communal existence on collectivist farms called kibbutzim, the Soviet-bloc countries thought that Israel would be a foothold for them in the Middle East, a region still under the domination of the European imperial powers at the time.
Later, American Jews would be instrumental in securing American backing for what is also the only Western-style democracy in the region. The Soviets meanwhile found another possible foothold in the area.
Frustrated at their defeat in the 1948 war to destroy Israel and angry at the corruption of their Westernized ruler, King Farouk, Egyptian army officers overthrew the monarchy in 1952, establishing a revolutionary republic in Egypt that inspired others throughout the region. The dream of Arab unity seemed about to be realized.
The radical new leadership of Gamal Abdel Nasser inspired Egyptians and all Arabs to throw out Western influence. Nasser nationalized the British- and French-owned Suez Canal, leading to a British-French-Israeli military mission to recover the Canal and overthrow the radical Arab government that threatened Western and Israeli interests. But the Eisenhower administration, fearful of increased Soviet influence in the region, forced the allies to withdraw. The Soviets got in anyway, supporting Egypt and other Arab nations against Israel for the next 25 years. Washington and Moscow were now heavily involved in the region.
After Egypt, it was Iraq's turn to overthrow its pro-Western monarchy. It should be noted that the kings and other hereditary rulers of the Arab world are usually educated in the Western world, mostly Britain and the United States, so they tend to be pro-Western. More importantly, they are also often Westernized, which irks their more religious subjects.
In 1932 the British had left Iraq with an established governmental system, a constitutional monarchy with an elected assembly, along British lines. Neither survived very long after the British left. The military, important under the Ottomans, took over in 1958 in a bloody coup in which the Hashemite King Faisal and most members of the royal family were killed. Constitutional government has not been successful in the Arab world and has had little success elsewhere among Muslims.
Eventually Iraq came under the domination of Saddam Hussein's dictatorship. Similarly, King Idris of Libya was overthrown in 1969 and replaced by the radical anti-Western leader, Colonel Muammar Gadhafi. As monarchies were overthrown, the successor republics became dictatorships. Syria has even become a dynastic republic with the son of the previous president taking over after his death. This will likely be copied in other Arab countries. It was certainly the intent in Iraq before the 2003 Gulf War that led to the downfall of Saddam Hussein.
In 1958 Egypt, Syria, Yemen and the United Arab States formed the United Arab Republic, an attempt at Arab unity that did not last, continuing only until 1961. But the desire for unity remained.
One reason behind this persistent goal was the wish to be able to more effectively oppose Israel militarily. The Jewish state achieved yet another military victory in the 1967 Six-Day War. Provoked by Arab armies, Israel fought a rapid war that led to her gaining control of the West Bank (taken by Jordan in the 1948 war), the Golan Heights (formerly owned by Syria) and the Gaza Strip (seized by Egypt in the 1948 war). Additionally, for the first time since the diaspora, the Jews had control of Jerusalem.
Further victory followed in the longer October War of 1973, often called the Yom Kippur War as it started with a multinational Arab attack on the Day of Atonement, the Jews' holiest day of the year. Between these wars Palestinian terrorism began, and after the 1973 war the Arab world first used the oil weapon to put pressure on the West, quadrupling the price of oil and destabilizing the world economy.
All these defeats only further convinced the Arabs of the need for unity. But unity eluded them. Today most of the countries in the region are led either by conservative Muslim monarchies or radical and despotic nationalists. Though in some ways these forms of governments are opposites, both maintain an iron grip on power over their people.
In this cauldron of nationalism, resentment toward the West, hatred of Israel and frustration among citizens with their own governments and leaders, an ancient force has reemerged to bring terrorism and grave concern to the heart of the West—Islamic fundamentalism.
© 1995-2006 United Church of God
The establishment of the independent Jewish homeland was also of great significance. There is no doubt that the history of the Middle East following World War II would have been completely different had Israel not been created. It was difficult enough for Arabs to accept European domination of parts of the Arab world, but now they were faced with what they considered a colony of infidel Westerners who intended to live permanently on Arab land.
Initially Arabs didn't blame the West for Israel's existence. In the early days of the Jewish state, the communist countries of Eastern Europe played a vital role in ensuring the people had arms with which to fight the Arab armies. Because many Israelis lived a communal existence on collectivist farms called kibbutzim, the Soviet-bloc countries thought that Israel would be a foothold for them in the Middle East, a region still under the domination of the European imperial powers at the time.
Later, American Jews would be instrumental in securing American backing for what is also the only Western-style democracy in the region. The Soviets meanwhile found another possible foothold in the area.
Frustrated at their defeat in the 1948 war to destroy Israel and angry at the corruption of their Westernized ruler, King Farouk, Egyptian army officers overthrew the monarchy in 1952, establishing a revolutionary republic in Egypt that inspired others throughout the region. The dream of Arab unity seemed about to be realized.
The radical new leadership of Gamal Abdel Nasser inspired Egyptians and all Arabs to throw out Western influence. Nasser nationalized the British- and French-owned Suez Canal, leading to a British-French-Israeli military mission to recover the Canal and overthrow the radical Arab government that threatened Western and Israeli interests. But the Eisenhower administration, fearful of increased Soviet influence in the region, forced the allies to withdraw. The Soviets got in anyway, supporting Egypt and other Arab nations against Israel for the next 25 years. Washington and Moscow were now heavily involved in the region.
After Egypt, it was Iraq's turn to overthrow its pro-Western monarchy. It should be noted that the kings and other hereditary rulers of the Arab world are usually educated in the Western world, mostly Britain and the United States, so they tend to be pro-Western. More importantly, they are also often Westernized, which irks their more religious subjects.
In 1932 the British had left Iraq with an established governmental system, a constitutional monarchy with an elected assembly, along British lines. Neither survived very long after the British left. The military, important under the Ottomans, took over in 1958 in a bloody coup in which the Hashemite King Faisal and most members of the royal family were killed. Constitutional government has not been successful in the Arab world and has had little success elsewhere among Muslims.
Eventually Iraq came under the domination of Saddam Hussein's dictatorship. Similarly, King Idris of Libya was overthrown in 1969 and replaced by the radical anti-Western leader, Colonel Muammar Gadhafi. As monarchies were overthrown, the successor republics became dictatorships. Syria has even become a dynastic republic with the son of the previous president taking over after his death. This will likely be copied in other Arab countries. It was certainly the intent in Iraq before the 2003 Gulf War that led to the downfall of Saddam Hussein.
In 1958 Egypt, Syria, Yemen and the United Arab States formed the United Arab Republic, an attempt at Arab unity that did not last, continuing only until 1961. But the desire for unity remained.
One reason behind this persistent goal was the wish to be able to more effectively oppose Israel militarily. The Jewish state achieved yet another military victory in the 1967 Six-Day War. Provoked by Arab armies, Israel fought a rapid war that led to her gaining control of the West Bank (taken by Jordan in the 1948 war), the Golan Heights (formerly owned by Syria) and the Gaza Strip (seized by Egypt in the 1948 war). Additionally, for the first time since the diaspora, the Jews had control of Jerusalem.
Further victory followed in the longer October War of 1973, often called the Yom Kippur War as it started with a multinational Arab attack on the Day of Atonement, the Jews' holiest day of the year. Between these wars Palestinian terrorism began, and after the 1973 war the Arab world first used the oil weapon to put pressure on the West, quadrupling the price of oil and destabilizing the world economy.
All these defeats only further convinced the Arabs of the need for unity. But unity eluded them. Today most of the countries in the region are led either by conservative Muslim monarchies or radical and despotic nationalists. Though in some ways these forms of governments are opposites, both maintain an iron grip on power over their people.
In this cauldron of nationalism, resentment toward the West, hatred of Israel and frustration among citizens with their own governments and leaders, an ancient force has reemerged to bring terrorism and grave concern to the heart of the West—Islamic fundamentalism.
© 1995-2006 United Church of God
Saturday, June 24, 2006
The Creation of the Modern Middle East
For hundreds of years the Arabs did not have a government of their own. From the conquest of the Arab lands by the Ottoman Turks in the early 16th century, they were not an independent people. Until World War I most of the Arab world lay within the Ottoman Empire. Other parts had become colonial territories of the European powers during the 19th century as the Ottoman Empire began to shrink.
The Arabs yearned for a free and independent Arabic-speaking nation. In the 20th century they were to become independent—yet not one nation but more than 20. One great frustration for the Arab world today is that there are 22 Arab countries and little immediate prospect of Arab unity.
While subjects of the Ottoman sultan as the 20th century dawned, the Arab world was at peace. Few would have guessed then how fundamentally this region was to change in the next few decades. In the year 1900 the Middle East was indeed, as described in the introduction, a "political backwater."
The catalyst that rearranged the regional map was World War I. The assassination of the Austrian Archduke Franz Ferdinand in Sarajevo on June 28, 1914, was the event that triggered the war. Within weeks all the major powers of Europe were involved. Problems in the Balkans had been building up as the Ottoman Empire declined and retreated from its territories there. Nationalist sentiment among the various ethnic groups was stirring up feelings against foreign imperial rule, directed against the Austro-Hungarian Empire as well as the Turks.
At the onset of war, it was not clear which side the Ottomans would be on. Finally they opted to support Germany and Austria against the alliance of Britain, France and Russia. This proved to be a fatal error in judgment. Within a few years it led to the collapse of the Ottoman Empire and the end of Turkish domination of the Arab world after centuries of rule.
A century later it is still difficult to comprehend how the assassination of a fairly obscure European archduke could lead to such tumultuous change and to a century of seemingly never-ending violence, but that shot heard 'round the world is still reverberating.
Nationalist and ethnic aspirations lead to change
Before the assassination, ethnic aspirations were surfacing throughout Europe and the Middle East. In the Victorian era imperialism had been the vogue. The idea that one nation, usually considered superior, could rule over others less able, was perfectly acceptable in a Europe dominated by multiethnic empires.
Many of these empires were quite benign, allowing different ethnic groups within their borders a great deal of freedom, including the freedom to carry out business and to prosper. But the desire for national homelands was building up partly as a result of increased educational opportunities that encouraged the reading of national literature, thereby fostering a sense of national identity.
This rise in ethnic consciousness was not limited to Europe. The Middle East was another area where people wanted to fulfill their national aspirations.
The trend for each ethnic group to seek independence was one that would play a large role in the 20th century, fulfilling the words of Jesus Christ in Matthew 24. When asked by His disciples what would be the sign of His coming and of the end of the age, one of the problems He foretold was an increase in ethnic tension. "For nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom," He prophesied (verse 7). The Greek word translated "nation" is ethnos—from which the English word ethnic is derived.
With the development of democratic institutions in a number of countries, ethnic groups had representation in capitals and were able to press their case for more autonomy. Many, though, wanted total independence. This tension was a leading cause of World War I and a major consideration at the peace conference in Paris that followed.
The Paris conference led to the 1919 Treaty of Versailles, which led to the creation of new countries throughout Europe and the Middle East. The old empires were gone—new, smaller nations replaced them, further complicating international relations. The "war to end war" had been replaced by the "Peace to end Peace," as British officer Archibald Wavell put it.
Brewing Arab revolt
On the eve of World War I the British already constituted a major power in the Middle East. Originally they had become involved to protect their lifeline to India, the most prized possession of the British Empire. Benjamin Disraeli, a British prime minister of Jewish descent, had arranged the financing of the Suez Canal, considered a vital artery of the empire.
The British controlled Egypt, the location of the canal, but did not annex it as a colony. They also ruled Aden, at the southern tip of Arabia, and held other strategic territories around the Persian Gulf.
Thus when World War I broke out, the British were in a perfect position to sponsor an Arab revolt against the Turks, allies of their enemy Germany. This Arab revolt began in the Hejaz, the coastal region of Arabia along the Red Sea where Mecca and Medina sit, on June 10, 1916, two years into the First World War. The revolt was led by the grand sharif of Mecca and leader of the Hashemite clan, Hussein ibn Ali (1852-1931), a descendant of Muhammad through the prophet's grandson Hasan. Hussein was an ancestor of the present Jordanian monarch, also a Hashemite.
Ironically, in this revolt the Arabs sided with Christian British forces against the Muslim Turks, but the desire for an independent Arab nation was paramount. Two of the sharif's sons led the Arab forces, financed by the British and assisted in the field by the famous British soldier T.E. Lawrence (Lawrence of Arabia). The Arabs understood that victory would mean an Arab nation.
This understanding came about as a result of correspondence between the British high commissioner in Egypt, Sir Henry McMahon, and Sharif Hussein between July 14, 1915, and March 30, 1916. In a series of 10 confidential letters between the two, Sharif Hussein offered to help the British by revolting against the Turks, in exchange for a promise of independence for the Arabs after victory. The British agreed to this, with the exclusion of some areas, including those under British control.
The uprising was successful. In October 1917 Allied forces under British General Allenby invaded Palestine, capturing Jerusalem on Dec. 9. For the first time since the Crusaders were defeated in 1244 the city was once again in Christian hands. Now, after 400 years of peace under the Ottomans, began a century of conflict centering on the City of Peace.
Earlier the same year the British had taken Baghdad. The following year Damascus fell. Three days after falling to the forces of the Arab revolt, General Allenby and Prince Faisal, the son of Sharif Hussein, entered the city. Faisal, leading 1,000 horsemen, was lauded by the populace, relieved at the end of Ottoman rule and elated at the prospect of an independent Arab kingdom.
Following the defeat of the Axis powers, the empires of Germany, Austria and the Ottomans all collapsed. The Russian Empire—allied to Britain, France and, later, the United States—had already fallen to communism.
The world was never to be the same again. World War I marked the end of the old order.
Contradictory promises set the stage for conflict
Anxious to win the war, the British had given contradictory promises to the Arabs and Jews and also to their allies, the French and Russians.
In November 1917, with the fall of Russia to the Bolsheviks, the revolutionaries suddenly found themselves in possession of secret papers from the former czarist regime and the interim government. They made public a secret agreement made in May 1916 called the Sykes-Picot agreement, named for Sir Mark Sykes and Georges Picot, the chief British and French negotiators. This agreement showed that the British and French had plans to carve up the Ottoman Empire, dividing the spoils among themselves, without giving any territory to the Arabs.
In the same month, just five days before the Bolsheviks took power in Russia, the British had issued the famous Balfour Declaration, named after their foreign secretary, Arthur James Balfour. This declaration pledged British support for a national Jewish homeland in Palestine. These conflicting promises were to cause endless problems for the British in the years to come—and even greater problems for the Arabs and Jews.
Arabs had fought with the British against the Turks, contributing to the Allied victory over the Central European powers. In return, they expected full control of all Arab lands, other than those already under European colonial rule such as Egypt, Aden and Algeria. They certainly expected Arabia, Iraq, Syria and Palestine to be directly and exclusively controlled by Arabs.
Palestine, the modern name for the ancient biblical territories of Israel and Judah, often referred to as the Holy Land, had been under Islamic control since the seventh century, except for a brief period during the Crusades in the 11th century. Jews could live in Palestine, but any attempt to create a Jewish homeland would be resisted.
At the peace conference in Paris that led to the signing of the Treaty of Versailles, Arab delegates (and T.E. Lawrence) were betrayed as the victorious allies divided the Ottoman Empire between British and French spheres of influence. The newly formed League of Nations formally gave Britain a mandate to rule over Palestine, Transjordan and Iraq. The French received a similar mandate to rule over Syria and Lebanon. Neither the Jews nor the Arabs received what they had been promised—not then, at least.
Britain inherits a dilemma
Palestine was the biggest problem. For a while the British allowed unrestricted Jewish immigration, but this led to Arab outcries. Fearful of a Jewish takeover, the Arabs demanded that the British end Jewish immigration. This they did—but on the eve of World War II, in which 6 million Jews would be put to death in the Nazi Holocaust. The escape route to Palestine had been cut off just when it was needed most.
In the three decades that the British controlled Palestine, the political map of the region continued to change. The Egyptians regained their sovereignty in 1922 and Iraq in 1932, though Britain continued to have considerable influence in both. Lebanon received independence from France in 1941. Syria followed five years later in 1946, the same year in which the British created an independent Palestinian- Arab state when it gave independence to Transjordan (shortened to Jordan).
Following the end of World War II in 1945, an exhausted Britain began her withdrawal from empire. Pakistan and India were given independence in 1947. A withdrawal from Palestine was to follow less than a year later.
The British could no longer keep peace between the Arabs and Jews. Jewish terrorists had blown up the King David Hotel, British military headquarters in Jerusalem, with the loss of almost 100 British soldiers. As with India, there was no longer any support at home for Britain to risk the lives of its men to preserve peace between hostile forces. The British notified the recently formed United Nations, successor to the pre-war League of Nations, that they would leave Palestine, giving the UN six months' notice.
The birth of Israel
The United Nations voted to divide Palestine between the Arabs and the Jews, with Jerusalem to become an international city. The Israelis accepted the plan; the Arabs rejected it. As the British left, Jewish leaders proclaimed the birth of the independent Jewish nation of Israel the evening of May 14-15, 1948. Within hours, armies from five surrounding Arab nations attacked Israel, determined to destroy the fledgling state with its population of a mere half-million.
The war lasted until early the following year, with Israel gaining territory in addition to the land granted by the UN resolution. Most of the Arabs in those areas left their lands and have been refugees ever since, consigned to makeshift settlements in the West Bank, Gaza, Lebanon, Syria, Jordan and Egypt. Those Arabs who stayed in Israel were granted citizenship in the new country—and, ironically, today enjoy considerably more personal freedoms than their fellow Arabs in Arab-ruled countries.
More wars followed. In 1956, Israel sided with the British and French against Egypt in an attempt to take back the Suez Canal, seized by Egypt's revolutionary government. American intervention forced the three nations out, a big boost to Arab nationalism. Within a few years the French lost Algeria and became irrelevant in the region. The British lost almost all their empire within a decade of the Suez Canal crisis and withdrew completely from the region by 1971.
Replacing them were the Americans and the Soviets, the two Cold War antagonists using proxy states in the Middle East to thwart the other's interests and ambitions.
Old empires swept away
But Arab nationalism was unstoppable. The desire for Arab unity was still on the minds of people throughout the Middle East.
And the Arabs were not alone in breaking away from European colonial rule. New nations around the world were being born with the collapse of the European empires after World War II. World War I had seen the collapse of those European empires that ruled over large parts of Europe. Now those empires that had colonies around the world were following suit. Never before had the map of the world changed so dramatically.
To illustrate just how fundamental a change took place, realize that immediately after the 1919 Treaty of Versailles there were no independent Arab nations. Apart from Persia (Iran) and Afghanistan, both non-Arab countries, there were no independent Islamic nations anywhere on earth.
The overthrow of the Ottoman sultan had led to the establishment of the secular Turkish Republic—that is, while its people remained mostly Islamic, the government officially became secular and moved in a Western direction. Although Egypt was independent from 1922, its king was not an Arab and the British still dominated the country behind the scenes. All other Islamic regions of the world were under European control. Oddly enough, the biggest Islamic power at this time was Great Britain by virtue of its ruling the Indian sub-continent, including what are now Pakistan, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka.
Today there are 57 Islamic nations, most of them ruled by Muslims. This includes 22 Arab countries, which hold the majority of the world's known reserves of oil—the lifeblood of the world's economy. Is there any wonder that the Middle East and Islam have suddenly come to the forefront of world affairs?
© 1995-2006 United Church of God
The Arabs yearned for a free and independent Arabic-speaking nation. In the 20th century they were to become independent—yet not one nation but more than 20. One great frustration for the Arab world today is that there are 22 Arab countries and little immediate prospect of Arab unity.
While subjects of the Ottoman sultan as the 20th century dawned, the Arab world was at peace. Few would have guessed then how fundamentally this region was to change in the next few decades. In the year 1900 the Middle East was indeed, as described in the introduction, a "political backwater."
The catalyst that rearranged the regional map was World War I. The assassination of the Austrian Archduke Franz Ferdinand in Sarajevo on June 28, 1914, was the event that triggered the war. Within weeks all the major powers of Europe were involved. Problems in the Balkans had been building up as the Ottoman Empire declined and retreated from its territories there. Nationalist sentiment among the various ethnic groups was stirring up feelings against foreign imperial rule, directed against the Austro-Hungarian Empire as well as the Turks.
At the onset of war, it was not clear which side the Ottomans would be on. Finally they opted to support Germany and Austria against the alliance of Britain, France and Russia. This proved to be a fatal error in judgment. Within a few years it led to the collapse of the Ottoman Empire and the end of Turkish domination of the Arab world after centuries of rule.
A century later it is still difficult to comprehend how the assassination of a fairly obscure European archduke could lead to such tumultuous change and to a century of seemingly never-ending violence, but that shot heard 'round the world is still reverberating.
Nationalist and ethnic aspirations lead to change
Before the assassination, ethnic aspirations were surfacing throughout Europe and the Middle East. In the Victorian era imperialism had been the vogue. The idea that one nation, usually considered superior, could rule over others less able, was perfectly acceptable in a Europe dominated by multiethnic empires.
Many of these empires were quite benign, allowing different ethnic groups within their borders a great deal of freedom, including the freedom to carry out business and to prosper. But the desire for national homelands was building up partly as a result of increased educational opportunities that encouraged the reading of national literature, thereby fostering a sense of national identity.
This rise in ethnic consciousness was not limited to Europe. The Middle East was another area where people wanted to fulfill their national aspirations.
The trend for each ethnic group to seek independence was one that would play a large role in the 20th century, fulfilling the words of Jesus Christ in Matthew 24. When asked by His disciples what would be the sign of His coming and of the end of the age, one of the problems He foretold was an increase in ethnic tension. "For nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom," He prophesied (verse 7). The Greek word translated "nation" is ethnos—from which the English word ethnic is derived.
With the development of democratic institutions in a number of countries, ethnic groups had representation in capitals and were able to press their case for more autonomy. Many, though, wanted total independence. This tension was a leading cause of World War I and a major consideration at the peace conference in Paris that followed.
The Paris conference led to the 1919 Treaty of Versailles, which led to the creation of new countries throughout Europe and the Middle East. The old empires were gone—new, smaller nations replaced them, further complicating international relations. The "war to end war" had been replaced by the "Peace to end Peace," as British officer Archibald Wavell put it.
Brewing Arab revolt
On the eve of World War I the British already constituted a major power in the Middle East. Originally they had become involved to protect their lifeline to India, the most prized possession of the British Empire. Benjamin Disraeli, a British prime minister of Jewish descent, had arranged the financing of the Suez Canal, considered a vital artery of the empire.
The British controlled Egypt, the location of the canal, but did not annex it as a colony. They also ruled Aden, at the southern tip of Arabia, and held other strategic territories around the Persian Gulf.
Thus when World War I broke out, the British were in a perfect position to sponsor an Arab revolt against the Turks, allies of their enemy Germany. This Arab revolt began in the Hejaz, the coastal region of Arabia along the Red Sea where Mecca and Medina sit, on June 10, 1916, two years into the First World War. The revolt was led by the grand sharif of Mecca and leader of the Hashemite clan, Hussein ibn Ali (1852-1931), a descendant of Muhammad through the prophet's grandson Hasan. Hussein was an ancestor of the present Jordanian monarch, also a Hashemite.
Ironically, in this revolt the Arabs sided with Christian British forces against the Muslim Turks, but the desire for an independent Arab nation was paramount. Two of the sharif's sons led the Arab forces, financed by the British and assisted in the field by the famous British soldier T.E. Lawrence (Lawrence of Arabia). The Arabs understood that victory would mean an Arab nation.
This understanding came about as a result of correspondence between the British high commissioner in Egypt, Sir Henry McMahon, and Sharif Hussein between July 14, 1915, and March 30, 1916. In a series of 10 confidential letters between the two, Sharif Hussein offered to help the British by revolting against the Turks, in exchange for a promise of independence for the Arabs after victory. The British agreed to this, with the exclusion of some areas, including those under British control.
The uprising was successful. In October 1917 Allied forces under British General Allenby invaded Palestine, capturing Jerusalem on Dec. 9. For the first time since the Crusaders were defeated in 1244 the city was once again in Christian hands. Now, after 400 years of peace under the Ottomans, began a century of conflict centering on the City of Peace.
Earlier the same year the British had taken Baghdad. The following year Damascus fell. Three days after falling to the forces of the Arab revolt, General Allenby and Prince Faisal, the son of Sharif Hussein, entered the city. Faisal, leading 1,000 horsemen, was lauded by the populace, relieved at the end of Ottoman rule and elated at the prospect of an independent Arab kingdom.
Following the defeat of the Axis powers, the empires of Germany, Austria and the Ottomans all collapsed. The Russian Empire—allied to Britain, France and, later, the United States—had already fallen to communism.
The world was never to be the same again. World War I marked the end of the old order.
Contradictory promises set the stage for conflict
Anxious to win the war, the British had given contradictory promises to the Arabs and Jews and also to their allies, the French and Russians.
In November 1917, with the fall of Russia to the Bolsheviks, the revolutionaries suddenly found themselves in possession of secret papers from the former czarist regime and the interim government. They made public a secret agreement made in May 1916 called the Sykes-Picot agreement, named for Sir Mark Sykes and Georges Picot, the chief British and French negotiators. This agreement showed that the British and French had plans to carve up the Ottoman Empire, dividing the spoils among themselves, without giving any territory to the Arabs.
In the same month, just five days before the Bolsheviks took power in Russia, the British had issued the famous Balfour Declaration, named after their foreign secretary, Arthur James Balfour. This declaration pledged British support for a national Jewish homeland in Palestine. These conflicting promises were to cause endless problems for the British in the years to come—and even greater problems for the Arabs and Jews.
Arabs had fought with the British against the Turks, contributing to the Allied victory over the Central European powers. In return, they expected full control of all Arab lands, other than those already under European colonial rule such as Egypt, Aden and Algeria. They certainly expected Arabia, Iraq, Syria and Palestine to be directly and exclusively controlled by Arabs.
Palestine, the modern name for the ancient biblical territories of Israel and Judah, often referred to as the Holy Land, had been under Islamic control since the seventh century, except for a brief period during the Crusades in the 11th century. Jews could live in Palestine, but any attempt to create a Jewish homeland would be resisted.
At the peace conference in Paris that led to the signing of the Treaty of Versailles, Arab delegates (and T.E. Lawrence) were betrayed as the victorious allies divided the Ottoman Empire between British and French spheres of influence. The newly formed League of Nations formally gave Britain a mandate to rule over Palestine, Transjordan and Iraq. The French received a similar mandate to rule over Syria and Lebanon. Neither the Jews nor the Arabs received what they had been promised—not then, at least.
Britain inherits a dilemma
Palestine was the biggest problem. For a while the British allowed unrestricted Jewish immigration, but this led to Arab outcries. Fearful of a Jewish takeover, the Arabs demanded that the British end Jewish immigration. This they did—but on the eve of World War II, in which 6 million Jews would be put to death in the Nazi Holocaust. The escape route to Palestine had been cut off just when it was needed most.
In the three decades that the British controlled Palestine, the political map of the region continued to change. The Egyptians regained their sovereignty in 1922 and Iraq in 1932, though Britain continued to have considerable influence in both. Lebanon received independence from France in 1941. Syria followed five years later in 1946, the same year in which the British created an independent Palestinian- Arab state when it gave independence to Transjordan (shortened to Jordan).
Following the end of World War II in 1945, an exhausted Britain began her withdrawal from empire. Pakistan and India were given independence in 1947. A withdrawal from Palestine was to follow less than a year later.
The British could no longer keep peace between the Arabs and Jews. Jewish terrorists had blown up the King David Hotel, British military headquarters in Jerusalem, with the loss of almost 100 British soldiers. As with India, there was no longer any support at home for Britain to risk the lives of its men to preserve peace between hostile forces. The British notified the recently formed United Nations, successor to the pre-war League of Nations, that they would leave Palestine, giving the UN six months' notice.
The birth of Israel
The United Nations voted to divide Palestine between the Arabs and the Jews, with Jerusalem to become an international city. The Israelis accepted the plan; the Arabs rejected it. As the British left, Jewish leaders proclaimed the birth of the independent Jewish nation of Israel the evening of May 14-15, 1948. Within hours, armies from five surrounding Arab nations attacked Israel, determined to destroy the fledgling state with its population of a mere half-million.
The war lasted until early the following year, with Israel gaining territory in addition to the land granted by the UN resolution. Most of the Arabs in those areas left their lands and have been refugees ever since, consigned to makeshift settlements in the West Bank, Gaza, Lebanon, Syria, Jordan and Egypt. Those Arabs who stayed in Israel were granted citizenship in the new country—and, ironically, today enjoy considerably more personal freedoms than their fellow Arabs in Arab-ruled countries.
More wars followed. In 1956, Israel sided with the British and French against Egypt in an attempt to take back the Suez Canal, seized by Egypt's revolutionary government. American intervention forced the three nations out, a big boost to Arab nationalism. Within a few years the French lost Algeria and became irrelevant in the region. The British lost almost all their empire within a decade of the Suez Canal crisis and withdrew completely from the region by 1971.
Replacing them were the Americans and the Soviets, the two Cold War antagonists using proxy states in the Middle East to thwart the other's interests and ambitions.
Old empires swept away
But Arab nationalism was unstoppable. The desire for Arab unity was still on the minds of people throughout the Middle East.
And the Arabs were not alone in breaking away from European colonial rule. New nations around the world were being born with the collapse of the European empires after World War II. World War I had seen the collapse of those European empires that ruled over large parts of Europe. Now those empires that had colonies around the world were following suit. Never before had the map of the world changed so dramatically.
To illustrate just how fundamental a change took place, realize that immediately after the 1919 Treaty of Versailles there were no independent Arab nations. Apart from Persia (Iran) and Afghanistan, both non-Arab countries, there were no independent Islamic nations anywhere on earth.
The overthrow of the Ottoman sultan had led to the establishment of the secular Turkish Republic—that is, while its people remained mostly Islamic, the government officially became secular and moved in a Western direction. Although Egypt was independent from 1922, its king was not an Arab and the British still dominated the country behind the scenes. All other Islamic regions of the world were under European control. Oddly enough, the biggest Islamic power at this time was Great Britain by virtue of its ruling the Indian sub-continent, including what are now Pakistan, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka.
Today there are 57 Islamic nations, most of them ruled by Muslims. This includes 22 Arab countries, which hold the majority of the world's known reserves of oil—the lifeblood of the world's economy. Is there any wonder that the Middle East and Islam have suddenly come to the forefront of world affairs?
© 1995-2006 United Church of God
Friday, June 23, 2006
The Jews: From the Dispersion to the Modern Israeli State
By the time the prophet Muhammad was preaching the tenets of the new Islamic religion, the Jews had not had a state for some five centuries. They had rebelled against Roman rule in A.D. 66, a rebellion that took the Romans four years to crush. Thereafter, the Jerusalem temple lay in ruins.
A later rebellion from 132 to 135 (the Bar-Kokhba revolt) led to the utter destruction of Jerusalem. The Romans built a new town on its ruins, renaming it Aelia Capitolina. No Jew was allowed to set foot there on pain of death. The Jewish nation-state was no more. It was not to exist again until the middle of the 20th century.
Following defeat in the two Jewish revolts, many of the surviving Jews fled Judea for other parts of the Roman Empire and beyond. From 638 to 1917 Jerusalem was under Islamic rule except for a short period during the Crusades.
Scattered throughout the nations, the Jewish people yearned to return to their homeland. Persecuted by governments and the Roman church, denied equal rights, frequently expelled from the new nations in which they had settled, the Jewish people's suffering continued down through the centuries.
Toward the end of the 19th century Jews began to return to their traditional homeland as the Zionist movement was born. Under the rule of the declining Ottoman Turks, the returning Jews joined other Jews who had remained in the area for centuries. They prospered and grew in number.
In 1917, after the defeat of the Ottoman Turks, the area came under the control of the British. In the same year, the British government announced the Balfour Declaration, named for the British foreign secretary Arthur Balfour, which promised Zionists a national homeland in Palestine. Meanwhile, encouraging Arab revolt against the Ottoman Turks who had sided with Germany in World War I, the British were making promises to the Arabs of independence, offering them their own homelands—two promises that would prove violently contradictory.
During the three decades of British rule the Jewish population in the area continued to grow—and to be increasingly seen as a threat by the native Arab population. Clashes between the two ethnic groups became more and more frequent. Jewish resistance against British rule and unmanageable civil strife led to a British withdrawal and the division of Palestine by the United Nations. The 1947 UN-approved Resolution 181 called for partitioning the British-ruled Palestine Mandate into a Jewish state and an Arab state and for Jerusalem to be an international UN-administered city. The resolution was accepted by the Jews in Palestine, but rejected by the Arabs there and by all Arab states.
The Jewish nation of Israel was declared the evening of May 14-15, 1948, with a population of half a million. It was immediately attacked by armies from five Arab nations—Lebanon, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Egypt. Israel triumphed, but decades of violence were to follow, with additional wars in 1956, 1967, 1973 and 1982. Arab resentment at Israel's existence remains unresolved, the Jewish state still insecure in a troubled, hostile region.
The majority of the Jewish people still reside outside the land of Israel—many living in the United States, Europe and Russia.
© 1995-2006 United Church of God
A later rebellion from 132 to 135 (the Bar-Kokhba revolt) led to the utter destruction of Jerusalem. The Romans built a new town on its ruins, renaming it Aelia Capitolina. No Jew was allowed to set foot there on pain of death. The Jewish nation-state was no more. It was not to exist again until the middle of the 20th century.
Following defeat in the two Jewish revolts, many of the surviving Jews fled Judea for other parts of the Roman Empire and beyond. From 638 to 1917 Jerusalem was under Islamic rule except for a short period during the Crusades.
Scattered throughout the nations, the Jewish people yearned to return to their homeland. Persecuted by governments and the Roman church, denied equal rights, frequently expelled from the new nations in which they had settled, the Jewish people's suffering continued down through the centuries.
Toward the end of the 19th century Jews began to return to their traditional homeland as the Zionist movement was born. Under the rule of the declining Ottoman Turks, the returning Jews joined other Jews who had remained in the area for centuries. They prospered and grew in number.
In 1917, after the defeat of the Ottoman Turks, the area came under the control of the British. In the same year, the British government announced the Balfour Declaration, named for the British foreign secretary Arthur Balfour, which promised Zionists a national homeland in Palestine. Meanwhile, encouraging Arab revolt against the Ottoman Turks who had sided with Germany in World War I, the British were making promises to the Arabs of independence, offering them their own homelands—two promises that would prove violently contradictory.
During the three decades of British rule the Jewish population in the area continued to grow—and to be increasingly seen as a threat by the native Arab population. Clashes between the two ethnic groups became more and more frequent. Jewish resistance against British rule and unmanageable civil strife led to a British withdrawal and the division of Palestine by the United Nations. The 1947 UN-approved Resolution 181 called for partitioning the British-ruled Palestine Mandate into a Jewish state and an Arab state and for Jerusalem to be an international UN-administered city. The resolution was accepted by the Jews in Palestine, but rejected by the Arabs there and by all Arab states.
The Jewish nation of Israel was declared the evening of May 14-15, 1948, with a population of half a million. It was immediately attacked by armies from five Arab nations—Lebanon, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Egypt. Israel triumphed, but decades of violence were to follow, with additional wars in 1956, 1967, 1973 and 1982. Arab resentment at Israel's existence remains unresolved, the Jewish state still insecure in a troubled, hostile region.
The majority of the Jewish people still reside outside the land of Israel—many living in the United States, Europe and Russia.
© 1995-2006 United Church of God
Thursday, June 22, 2006
The Coming of Islam
The descendants of Ishmael lived in relative obscurity throughout the period of the kingdoms of Israel and Judah and the Assyrian, Babylonian, Persian, Greek and Roman Empires. They mostly kept to themselves in the Arabian Peninsula where desert life was hard, frequently fighting among themselves. But this changed early in the seventh century, less than 600 years after the time of Jesus Christ, when the most famous of Ishmael's descendants came on the scene.
Until the early 600s the Arabs were idol worshipers. The great temple in Mecca had 365 idols (one for each day of the year) and was a source of considerable revenue for local merchants who relied on pilgrims visiting the site for their income.
This religious landscape was to change dramatically with the prophet Muhammad and the religion he founded, Islam.
Muhammad (sometimes spelled Mohammed or Mahomet) was of the Hashemite family (in Arabic, Beni Hashim) of the powerful Koreish (or Quraish) tribe, which controlled the pagan temple in Mecca. According to Islamic belief, it was near Mecca, at Mt. Hira, that the archangel Gabriel first appeared to Muhammad in A.D. 610, revealing wisdom from God. This and subsequent revelations form the Koran (or Quran), the holy scriptures of Islam, a book roughly the length of the New Testament.
Muhammad, whose name means "highly praised," became a courageous and determined preacher of monotheism, the belief in one God, a belief that threatened the commercial prosperity of other members of his tribe. Their attempts to have him killed failed, and in a short time Muhammad brought an end to the polytheistic idolatry of the area, replacing it with Islam (literally meaning "surrender" or "submission" to the one true God, Allah).
Muhammad's preaching achieved something that had eluded Ishmael's descendants from the beginning—unity, thereby enabling them to become a great nation that could spread out and influence other nations.
From these lowly beginnings in the desert of the Arabian Peninsula, Islam has spread throughout the world. Today 57 countries are in the Islamic Conference, comprising more than a quarter of all the nations on earth.
Although 22 of them are Arab nations, many of which are populated with descendants of Ishmael, another 35 nations also are either exclusively or significantly Islamic. These range geographically from West Africa across the center of the world to Indonesia, a wide belt of nations that identify with each other as followers of Islam.
In addition, millions more Muslims, followers of Islam, live in North America and Western Europe. The religion continues to expand rapidly due to a high birth rate and aggressive proselytizing.
Today Islam (pronounced Is-LAM, with the emphasis on the second syllable) has around 1.3 billion followers. They all worship Al-LAH (similar emphasis on the second syllable), whom they consider to be the one true God. They worship in mosques, with Friday as their chosen day of worship, though it is also permissible for adherents to work on that day.
Their one-sentence creed, called the shahadah ("testimony") is only eight words in Arabic—La illaha ila Allah, wa Muhammadun rasul Allah—meaning "There is no God but Allah, and Muhammad is His Prophet." A solemn and sincere recitation of these words is the sole requirement for being a Muslim. The word Muslim (or Moslem) means "one who submits (to Allah)."
Muslims date their years from the hijrah (sometimes spelled hejira or hegira), Muhammad's flight from Mecca to Medina in A.D. 622. As the Muslim year is set according to the lunar calendar, there are 354 or 355 days in each year, which means that their year is about 11 days shorter than a year in the Western world, which is based on the Gregorian solar calendar. This means that Islamic festivals fall on different days each year according to the Gregorian calendar and gradually work their way back through the Gregorian year.
Muhammad died on June 8, A.D. 632, leaving no male heir and no designated successor. The result was chaos and confusion throughout the Islamic Empire, which after only a decade had already grown to one third the size of the present 48 continental United States.
Only one child by his beloved first wife Khadija had survived him, the beautiful Fatima. She grew to adulthood, married and bore children who also survived. It is through Fatima that all Muhammad's present descendants, called sharifs and sayyids, trace their ancestry. Fatima's husband, Ali ibn Abi Talib, first cousin and adopted son to Muhammad, was also his first convert after Khadija. Ali and Fatima had two young sons at the time of Muhammad's death.
As the nearest blood relative, many thought that Ali should be Muhammad's successor as their leader. After a great deal of argument, he was rejected in favor of a wealthy Meccan cloth merchant who had been an early convert and Muhammad's companion on his famous camel-back flight 10 years earlier. His name was Abu Bakr. He was also the father of Muhammad's favorite wife, Ayesha, and had been appointed to take the place of the prophet leading public prayers at the time of Muhammad's last illness.
The revelations had been to Muhammad, so Abu Bakr was not fully succeeding Muhammad. However, he was given authority over the secular political and administrative functions of the empire, with the title "Khalifah rasul Allah" meaning "Successor to the Messenger of God." In English the title is usually shortened to "caliph" and is given to the head of state in Muslim-governed countries. The office of Islamic Caliphate remained an Islamic institution right down to the creation of the Turkish Republic in 1924 when it was abolished by the secular government of Kemal Ataturk.
Although the transition following the death of Muhammad was sudden and unexpected and caused some bad feeling among the followers of Ali, Fatima's husband, the tribes remained united under Abu Bakr.
Rapid expansion of the Islamic Empire
Before he died Abu Bakr appointed Omar ibn al-Khattab as his successor. Caliph Omar (or Umar) was the first caliph to assume the illustrious title Amir al-Muminin, meaning "Commander of the Faithful." It was during his 10-year reign that the first great wave of Islamic territorial expansion occurred as the children of Ishmael pushed outward in all directions from their ancient desert homeland.
Caliph Omar was an able commander of his troops and proved a formidable foe to the two great superpowers of his day, the Byzantine and Persian Empires. The former was the Eastern Roman Empire, which had developed out of the older Roman Empire after Constantine, in the fourth century A.D., established a new capital in Byzantium (renaming it Constantinople, after himself)—now Istanbul, Turkey. It controlled Asia Minor, the Aegean Peninsula, much of North Africa and the Near East.
To the northeast of the Arabian Peninsula lay the Persian, or Sassanid, Empire. The Persian and Byzantine Empires were constantly fighting each other, weakening them and making them vulnerable to the new, vigorous, zealous and youthful Islamic Empire coming out of Arabia. The Sassanid Empire fell, but the Byzantine remained as a continually threatened and shrinking empire, finally falling to Muslim Turks in 1453.
To cries of Allahu Akbar ("God is Great!"), the Islamic call to arms, the camel- and horse-mounted Arab warriors were formidable opponents, defeating all the forces that were sent against them. Not since the days of Alexander the Great had there been such a force, conquering all before it so quickly. A century of conquest lay before them. Syria and the Holy Land were taken in 635-6; the area of Iraq, the following year; Egypt and Persia, four years later.
Jerusalem was their greatest prize, captured in 638. Called Al-Kuds in Arabic, meaning "the Holy," Jerusalem remains the third-holiest city of Islam, after Mecca and Medina. Muslims believe that Muhammad ascended to heaven on his winged steed Burak from the rock that is visible inside the Dome of the Rock, built in the late seventh century and one of the most architecturally magnificent buildings on earth.
Muslims also believe this is where Abraham came to sacrifice his son—the son, however, being Ishmael rather than Isaac as the Bible attests (Genesis 22:1-14). Built on the great platform of the Temple Mount constructed centuries earlier by Herod the Great, the Dome of the Rock and the surrounding area is today the most bitterly contested piece of real estate on earth.
Within a century after the death of Muhammad, the Arab Empire stretched from the Middle East across North Africa to Spain in the west and eastward across Central Asia to India. One of their advances even reached the gates of Paris before being halted by Charles Martel at the Battle of Tours near Poitiers in 732, exactly 100 years after Muhammad's death.
Rapid Muslim expansion now halted until the 12th century, when another great expansion of Islam took place under the Sufis (Muslim mystics) who spread Islam throughout India, Central Asia, Turkey and sub-Saharan Africa. Muslim traders helped spread the religion even further, to Indonesia, the Malay Peninsula and China.
"Islam's essential egalitarianism within the community of the faithful and its official discrimination against the followers of other religions won rapid converts," notes the Encyclopaedia Britannica (15th Edition, Vol. 9, p. 912, "Islam"). Although Jews and Christians, as "people of the Book" were tolerated, they had to pay a special tax called jizyah. However, "pagans ... were required to either accept Islam or die" (ibid.).
Following the assassination of the Caliph Omar in November 644 while leading prayers in the mosque of Medina, a body of electors once again bypassed Ali when choosing a successor. The caliphate was bestowed on Othman ibn Affan, who had been an early convert to Islam and a close companion of the prophet.
During his period of rule the Koran was completed in its present form. Previously, most of its contents had simply been memorized in the heads of Muhammad's followers (Muhammad, himself illiterate, had never written them down). These were now collected by a team of men authorized to put the sacred writings together, under the leadership of the Islamic scholar Zayd ibn Thabit.
Muslims believe the Koran is the literal word of God (Kalimat Allah), not the words of Muhammad. The first words of the Koran are Bism'illah ir-Rahman ir-Rahim, meaning "In the name of Allah, the Merciful, the Compassionate."
Islam splits over succession
Othman ruled 12 years (644-656) before being assassinated in Medina. His assassination heralded open religious and political conflicts within the Islamic community that continue to this day.
After Othman's death, leadership of the community finally fell to Ali, Fatima's aging husband, who had been living in retirement as a scholar. To his followers, Ali was the first and only lawful caliph. Most Muslims accepted him as the fourth caliph, but many were bitterly opposed to his rule.
The empire was to suffer continual political and religious strife, uprisings and rebellions. Five years later Ali, too, was assassinated. Before any of his sons could be appointed as successor, Othman's nephew, head of the Umayyad (or Omayyad) branch of the Koreish tribe, assumed control, bringing the dispute between the factions to a head.
Ali's followers believed that all caliphs must be descended from Ali as Muhammad's closest blood relative. This group was called the "party of Ali" (in Arabic, the Shiat Ali, or Shiites). The majority believed that anybody could be appointed caliph, regardless of lineage. This group was called the Sunni Muslims, sunna being the "path" or the "way" of the Prophet. In contrast to the Shiites, the Sunnis have generally accepted the rule of the caliphs.
Violence followed in 680 when Ali's son Hussein, a grandson of Muhammad, was killed along with 72 of his relatives and companions at Karbala in what is now Iraq. The Shiites now had a martyr. They grew in numbers and resolve and were increasingly embittered at the dominance of the Sunni Muslims. This animosity continues to the present day.
The majority Sunnis make up about 85 percent of all Muslims, and the Shiites (or Shia) constitute the remainder. Although they agree on the fundamentals of Islam, political, theological and philosophical differences have further widened the gap between the two. Complicating things even further has been the tendency among the Shiite Muslims to break up into various sects.
Today, the Shiites are the dominant force in Iran and the biggest single religious community in Lebanon and Iraq. Remembering the fanaticism of the Iranian Revolution that overthrew the shah in 1979, many people think Shiites are inclined toward terrorism. However, most anti-Western terrorists come from the Wahhabi sect of Sunni Islam, which originated in Saudi Arabia in the 18th century.
One of the appeals of Islam is the emphasis on Ummah or community. "Though there have been many Islamic sects and movements, all followers are bound by a common faith and a sense of belonging to a single community" (ibid., p. 912). This sense of community has only been strengthened in the last 200 years during the period of Western supremacy. Achieving Arab and Islamic unity is very much a desire of Muslims in today's world.
Ishmael becomes the prophesied "great nation"
After Ali's death the Umayyads turned the caliphate into a hereditary office, ruling from Damascus for almost a century until 750. During this time most of the Iberian Peninsula (Spain and Portugal) was conquered along with what was left of North Africa. To the east, Islamic armies swept over Central Asia toward India and China. Before the end of their period of rule, the Muslims built an empire that was larger than Rome's, converting millions to Islam.
The Umayyads were replaced by the Abbasid dynasty, whose 37 caliphs ruled from Baghdad for five centuries (750-1258). At this time, while much of Europe was still in the Dark Ages (isolated in no small part by hostile Muslims along its borders), the Islamic world was a great civilization, preserving the literature and learning of the ancient world, leading the world in knowledge and understanding of mathematics, chemistry, physics, astronomy, geography and medicine.
As had been divinely promised to Abraham and Hagar concerning their son so many centuries earlier, Ishmael truly did become a "great nation" (Genesis 17:20; 21:18)—one of the greatest empires the world has ever known.
Like all civilizations, however, the Abbasid dynasty came to an end after falling into a slow decay and decline. During this period, as central authority waned, the unity of Islam was shattered, a problem that impedes Muslims to this day. The deathblow for the empire came when the Mongol hordes descended on Baghdad in 1258, killing the last caliph, slaughtering the city's inhabitants and ending the empire.
The Crusades: Battle for the Holy Land
During the reigns of the Abbasid caliphs, a major clash occurred between Islam and Catholic Europe. With the expansion of Islam into the Iberian Peninsula and the attempt to conquer France, there had already been conflict between the two, but the wresting of Jerusalem from the forces of Islam on July 15, 1099, was the beginning of a long and protracted period of rivalry between the two religious forces.
The European Crusaders pillaged, raped, murdered and enslaved the peoples of Jerusalem in a frenzy of carnage that both Jews and Muslims remember to this day. The sacred Dome of the Rock was taken over and turned into a church, with the Christian cross replacing the Islamic crescent. Muslims were incensed and vowed to retake the city from the infidels (meaning "unbelievers," originally a Latin word used by Catholics to label Muslims).
Not until Oct. 2, 1187, were Islamic forces able to take back control of Jerusalem, under the leadership of Saladin (Salah ad-Din, meaning "Righteousness of the Faith"), the sultan of Egypt and Syria. Saladin proclaimed jihad (holy war) to retake Palestine from the enemies of Islam.
The golden cross at the top of the Dome of the Rock was replaced by the Muslim crescent, but Saladin did not seek revenge on his opponents. Instead, he treated both enemy soldiers and the civilian population with mercy and kindness—a stark contrast to the Europeans who had slaughtered tens of thousands when they took the city.
There were to be more Crusades for another century, briefly retaking Jerusalem from 1229 to 1239 and 1243 to 1244, but the forces of the cross eventually had to leave the Holy Land to Muslims. Not until 1917, during World War I, were Western Christians again able to retake Jerusalem, and then they kept control of the city for only three decades.
The rise of the Ottoman Empire
The next great power in the region was that of the Ottoman Turks, who seized control of Constantinople in 1453, finally destroying the collapsing Byzantine Empire founded by Rome more than a millennium earlier. The Turks, an Islamic but non-Arab people, took control of Jerusalem in 1517 and were to dominate the Middle East for the following four centuries.
The Ottomans expanded rapidly into southeastern Europe and on to the gates of Vienna before being pushed back toward the end of the 17th century. A period of decline followed in the 19th century with nations throughout the Balkans and North Africa breaking away from Ottoman rule.
The Arabs resented Turkish control and waited patiently for an opportunity to regain their independence and the former days of glory.
Ishmael's sons would be heard from again.
© 1995-2006 United Church of God
Until the early 600s the Arabs were idol worshipers. The great temple in Mecca had 365 idols (one for each day of the year) and was a source of considerable revenue for local merchants who relied on pilgrims visiting the site for their income.
This religious landscape was to change dramatically with the prophet Muhammad and the religion he founded, Islam.
Muhammad (sometimes spelled Mohammed or Mahomet) was of the Hashemite family (in Arabic, Beni Hashim) of the powerful Koreish (or Quraish) tribe, which controlled the pagan temple in Mecca. According to Islamic belief, it was near Mecca, at Mt. Hira, that the archangel Gabriel first appeared to Muhammad in A.D. 610, revealing wisdom from God. This and subsequent revelations form the Koran (or Quran), the holy scriptures of Islam, a book roughly the length of the New Testament.
Muhammad, whose name means "highly praised," became a courageous and determined preacher of monotheism, the belief in one God, a belief that threatened the commercial prosperity of other members of his tribe. Their attempts to have him killed failed, and in a short time Muhammad brought an end to the polytheistic idolatry of the area, replacing it with Islam (literally meaning "surrender" or "submission" to the one true God, Allah).
Muhammad's preaching achieved something that had eluded Ishmael's descendants from the beginning—unity, thereby enabling them to become a great nation that could spread out and influence other nations.
From these lowly beginnings in the desert of the Arabian Peninsula, Islam has spread throughout the world. Today 57 countries are in the Islamic Conference, comprising more than a quarter of all the nations on earth.
Although 22 of them are Arab nations, many of which are populated with descendants of Ishmael, another 35 nations also are either exclusively or significantly Islamic. These range geographically from West Africa across the center of the world to Indonesia, a wide belt of nations that identify with each other as followers of Islam.
In addition, millions more Muslims, followers of Islam, live in North America and Western Europe. The religion continues to expand rapidly due to a high birth rate and aggressive proselytizing.
Today Islam (pronounced Is-LAM, with the emphasis on the second syllable) has around 1.3 billion followers. They all worship Al-LAH (similar emphasis on the second syllable), whom they consider to be the one true God. They worship in mosques, with Friday as their chosen day of worship, though it is also permissible for adherents to work on that day.
Their one-sentence creed, called the shahadah ("testimony") is only eight words in Arabic—La illaha ila Allah, wa Muhammadun rasul Allah—meaning "There is no God but Allah, and Muhammad is His Prophet." A solemn and sincere recitation of these words is the sole requirement for being a Muslim. The word Muslim (or Moslem) means "one who submits (to Allah)."
Muslims date their years from the hijrah (sometimes spelled hejira or hegira), Muhammad's flight from Mecca to Medina in A.D. 622. As the Muslim year is set according to the lunar calendar, there are 354 or 355 days in each year, which means that their year is about 11 days shorter than a year in the Western world, which is based on the Gregorian solar calendar. This means that Islamic festivals fall on different days each year according to the Gregorian calendar and gradually work their way back through the Gregorian year.
Muhammad died on June 8, A.D. 632, leaving no male heir and no designated successor. The result was chaos and confusion throughout the Islamic Empire, which after only a decade had already grown to one third the size of the present 48 continental United States.
Only one child by his beloved first wife Khadija had survived him, the beautiful Fatima. She grew to adulthood, married and bore children who also survived. It is through Fatima that all Muhammad's present descendants, called sharifs and sayyids, trace their ancestry. Fatima's husband, Ali ibn Abi Talib, first cousin and adopted son to Muhammad, was also his first convert after Khadija. Ali and Fatima had two young sons at the time of Muhammad's death.
As the nearest blood relative, many thought that Ali should be Muhammad's successor as their leader. After a great deal of argument, he was rejected in favor of a wealthy Meccan cloth merchant who had been an early convert and Muhammad's companion on his famous camel-back flight 10 years earlier. His name was Abu Bakr. He was also the father of Muhammad's favorite wife, Ayesha, and had been appointed to take the place of the prophet leading public prayers at the time of Muhammad's last illness.
The revelations had been to Muhammad, so Abu Bakr was not fully succeeding Muhammad. However, he was given authority over the secular political and administrative functions of the empire, with the title "Khalifah rasul Allah" meaning "Successor to the Messenger of God." In English the title is usually shortened to "caliph" and is given to the head of state in Muslim-governed countries. The office of Islamic Caliphate remained an Islamic institution right down to the creation of the Turkish Republic in 1924 when it was abolished by the secular government of Kemal Ataturk.
Although the transition following the death of Muhammad was sudden and unexpected and caused some bad feeling among the followers of Ali, Fatima's husband, the tribes remained united under Abu Bakr.
Rapid expansion of the Islamic Empire
Before he died Abu Bakr appointed Omar ibn al-Khattab as his successor. Caliph Omar (or Umar) was the first caliph to assume the illustrious title Amir al-Muminin, meaning "Commander of the Faithful." It was during his 10-year reign that the first great wave of Islamic territorial expansion occurred as the children of Ishmael pushed outward in all directions from their ancient desert homeland.
Caliph Omar was an able commander of his troops and proved a formidable foe to the two great superpowers of his day, the Byzantine and Persian Empires. The former was the Eastern Roman Empire, which had developed out of the older Roman Empire after Constantine, in the fourth century A.D., established a new capital in Byzantium (renaming it Constantinople, after himself)—now Istanbul, Turkey. It controlled Asia Minor, the Aegean Peninsula, much of North Africa and the Near East.
To the northeast of the Arabian Peninsula lay the Persian, or Sassanid, Empire. The Persian and Byzantine Empires were constantly fighting each other, weakening them and making them vulnerable to the new, vigorous, zealous and youthful Islamic Empire coming out of Arabia. The Sassanid Empire fell, but the Byzantine remained as a continually threatened and shrinking empire, finally falling to Muslim Turks in 1453.
To cries of Allahu Akbar ("God is Great!"), the Islamic call to arms, the camel- and horse-mounted Arab warriors were formidable opponents, defeating all the forces that were sent against them. Not since the days of Alexander the Great had there been such a force, conquering all before it so quickly. A century of conquest lay before them. Syria and the Holy Land were taken in 635-6; the area of Iraq, the following year; Egypt and Persia, four years later.
Jerusalem was their greatest prize, captured in 638. Called Al-Kuds in Arabic, meaning "the Holy," Jerusalem remains the third-holiest city of Islam, after Mecca and Medina. Muslims believe that Muhammad ascended to heaven on his winged steed Burak from the rock that is visible inside the Dome of the Rock, built in the late seventh century and one of the most architecturally magnificent buildings on earth.
Muslims also believe this is where Abraham came to sacrifice his son—the son, however, being Ishmael rather than Isaac as the Bible attests (Genesis 22:1-14). Built on the great platform of the Temple Mount constructed centuries earlier by Herod the Great, the Dome of the Rock and the surrounding area is today the most bitterly contested piece of real estate on earth.
Within a century after the death of Muhammad, the Arab Empire stretched from the Middle East across North Africa to Spain in the west and eastward across Central Asia to India. One of their advances even reached the gates of Paris before being halted by Charles Martel at the Battle of Tours near Poitiers in 732, exactly 100 years after Muhammad's death.
Rapid Muslim expansion now halted until the 12th century, when another great expansion of Islam took place under the Sufis (Muslim mystics) who spread Islam throughout India, Central Asia, Turkey and sub-Saharan Africa. Muslim traders helped spread the religion even further, to Indonesia, the Malay Peninsula and China.
"Islam's essential egalitarianism within the community of the faithful and its official discrimination against the followers of other religions won rapid converts," notes the Encyclopaedia Britannica (15th Edition, Vol. 9, p. 912, "Islam"). Although Jews and Christians, as "people of the Book" were tolerated, they had to pay a special tax called jizyah. However, "pagans ... were required to either accept Islam or die" (ibid.).
Following the assassination of the Caliph Omar in November 644 while leading prayers in the mosque of Medina, a body of electors once again bypassed Ali when choosing a successor. The caliphate was bestowed on Othman ibn Affan, who had been an early convert to Islam and a close companion of the prophet.
During his period of rule the Koran was completed in its present form. Previously, most of its contents had simply been memorized in the heads of Muhammad's followers (Muhammad, himself illiterate, had never written them down). These were now collected by a team of men authorized to put the sacred writings together, under the leadership of the Islamic scholar Zayd ibn Thabit.
Muslims believe the Koran is the literal word of God (Kalimat Allah), not the words of Muhammad. The first words of the Koran are Bism'illah ir-Rahman ir-Rahim, meaning "In the name of Allah, the Merciful, the Compassionate."
Islam splits over succession
Othman ruled 12 years (644-656) before being assassinated in Medina. His assassination heralded open religious and political conflicts within the Islamic community that continue to this day.
After Othman's death, leadership of the community finally fell to Ali, Fatima's aging husband, who had been living in retirement as a scholar. To his followers, Ali was the first and only lawful caliph. Most Muslims accepted him as the fourth caliph, but many were bitterly opposed to his rule.
The empire was to suffer continual political and religious strife, uprisings and rebellions. Five years later Ali, too, was assassinated. Before any of his sons could be appointed as successor, Othman's nephew, head of the Umayyad (or Omayyad) branch of the Koreish tribe, assumed control, bringing the dispute between the factions to a head.
Ali's followers believed that all caliphs must be descended from Ali as Muhammad's closest blood relative. This group was called the "party of Ali" (in Arabic, the Shiat Ali, or Shiites). The majority believed that anybody could be appointed caliph, regardless of lineage. This group was called the Sunni Muslims, sunna being the "path" or the "way" of the Prophet. In contrast to the Shiites, the Sunnis have generally accepted the rule of the caliphs.
Violence followed in 680 when Ali's son Hussein, a grandson of Muhammad, was killed along with 72 of his relatives and companions at Karbala in what is now Iraq. The Shiites now had a martyr. They grew in numbers and resolve and were increasingly embittered at the dominance of the Sunni Muslims. This animosity continues to the present day.
The majority Sunnis make up about 85 percent of all Muslims, and the Shiites (or Shia) constitute the remainder. Although they agree on the fundamentals of Islam, political, theological and philosophical differences have further widened the gap between the two. Complicating things even further has been the tendency among the Shiite Muslims to break up into various sects.
Today, the Shiites are the dominant force in Iran and the biggest single religious community in Lebanon and Iraq. Remembering the fanaticism of the Iranian Revolution that overthrew the shah in 1979, many people think Shiites are inclined toward terrorism. However, most anti-Western terrorists come from the Wahhabi sect of Sunni Islam, which originated in Saudi Arabia in the 18th century.
One of the appeals of Islam is the emphasis on Ummah or community. "Though there have been many Islamic sects and movements, all followers are bound by a common faith and a sense of belonging to a single community" (ibid., p. 912). This sense of community has only been strengthened in the last 200 years during the period of Western supremacy. Achieving Arab and Islamic unity is very much a desire of Muslims in today's world.
Ishmael becomes the prophesied "great nation"
After Ali's death the Umayyads turned the caliphate into a hereditary office, ruling from Damascus for almost a century until 750. During this time most of the Iberian Peninsula (Spain and Portugal) was conquered along with what was left of North Africa. To the east, Islamic armies swept over Central Asia toward India and China. Before the end of their period of rule, the Muslims built an empire that was larger than Rome's, converting millions to Islam.
The Umayyads were replaced by the Abbasid dynasty, whose 37 caliphs ruled from Baghdad for five centuries (750-1258). At this time, while much of Europe was still in the Dark Ages (isolated in no small part by hostile Muslims along its borders), the Islamic world was a great civilization, preserving the literature and learning of the ancient world, leading the world in knowledge and understanding of mathematics, chemistry, physics, astronomy, geography and medicine.
As had been divinely promised to Abraham and Hagar concerning their son so many centuries earlier, Ishmael truly did become a "great nation" (Genesis 17:20; 21:18)—one of the greatest empires the world has ever known.
Like all civilizations, however, the Abbasid dynasty came to an end after falling into a slow decay and decline. During this period, as central authority waned, the unity of Islam was shattered, a problem that impedes Muslims to this day. The deathblow for the empire came when the Mongol hordes descended on Baghdad in 1258, killing the last caliph, slaughtering the city's inhabitants and ending the empire.
The Crusades: Battle for the Holy Land
During the reigns of the Abbasid caliphs, a major clash occurred between Islam and Catholic Europe. With the expansion of Islam into the Iberian Peninsula and the attempt to conquer France, there had already been conflict between the two, but the wresting of Jerusalem from the forces of Islam on July 15, 1099, was the beginning of a long and protracted period of rivalry between the two religious forces.
The European Crusaders pillaged, raped, murdered and enslaved the peoples of Jerusalem in a frenzy of carnage that both Jews and Muslims remember to this day. The sacred Dome of the Rock was taken over and turned into a church, with the Christian cross replacing the Islamic crescent. Muslims were incensed and vowed to retake the city from the infidels (meaning "unbelievers," originally a Latin word used by Catholics to label Muslims).
Not until Oct. 2, 1187, were Islamic forces able to take back control of Jerusalem, under the leadership of Saladin (Salah ad-Din, meaning "Righteousness of the Faith"), the sultan of Egypt and Syria. Saladin proclaimed jihad (holy war) to retake Palestine from the enemies of Islam.
The golden cross at the top of the Dome of the Rock was replaced by the Muslim crescent, but Saladin did not seek revenge on his opponents. Instead, he treated both enemy soldiers and the civilian population with mercy and kindness—a stark contrast to the Europeans who had slaughtered tens of thousands when they took the city.
There were to be more Crusades for another century, briefly retaking Jerusalem from 1229 to 1239 and 1243 to 1244, but the forces of the cross eventually had to leave the Holy Land to Muslims. Not until 1917, during World War I, were Western Christians again able to retake Jerusalem, and then they kept control of the city for only three decades.
The rise of the Ottoman Empire
The next great power in the region was that of the Ottoman Turks, who seized control of Constantinople in 1453, finally destroying the collapsing Byzantine Empire founded by Rome more than a millennium earlier. The Turks, an Islamic but non-Arab people, took control of Jerusalem in 1517 and were to dominate the Middle East for the following four centuries.
The Ottomans expanded rapidly into southeastern Europe and on to the gates of Vienna before being pushed back toward the end of the 17th century. A period of decline followed in the 19th century with nations throughout the Balkans and North Africa breaking away from Ottoman rule.
The Arabs resented Turkish control and waited patiently for an opportunity to regain their independence and the former days of glory.
Ishmael's sons would be heard from again.
© 1995-2006 United Church of God
Wednesday, June 21, 2006
The Four Empires of Daniel's Prophecies
Among the Jewish captives taken from Judah and exiled to Babylon was a young man whose Hebrew name was Daniel, renamed Belteshazzar by the Babylonians (Daniel 1:1-7). Daniel lived in the remarkable times of the downfall of the kingdoms of both Judah and Babylon. He served as a high official in both the Babylonian government and that of its successor, the Medo-Persian Empire.
Daniel's book prophesied events fulfilled many centuries ago as well as major events yet to come. It reveals a history of the region, written in advance, from Daniel's time right up to the return of Jesus Christ.
Yet at the end of the book God instructed Daniel to "shut up the words, and seal the book until the time of the end; many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall increase" (Daniel 12:4). This indicates that certain major prophecies that previously wouldn't have made sense will be understandable as the end approaches.
The prophecies of Daniel provide proof of the accuracy of the Bible. Many of his prophecies are so detailed and specific that they have long confounded Bible critics.
In fact, some skeptics have not challenged the content of Daniel's prophetic accuracy. Rather than admit that his words are indeed inspired, they have simply labeled his book a fraud. They claim that it was not written by Daniel in the sixth century B.C.—timing which is evident by events written of in the book—but that it was penned by an unknown author in the 160s B.C., long after many of the events prophesied in the book came to pass. This, the critics allege, is the real reason for the book's startling prophetic accuracy!
Daniel's testimony challenges the critics. But let's first consider the nature of the critics' approach. They dispute Daniel's authorship because he refers to himself in the early chapters in the third person, as if writing about someone else. However, as The Expositor's Bible Commentary points out, this "was the custom among ancient authors of historical memoirs ..." (1985, Vol. 7, p. 4). In relating some of his experiences Daniel did write in the first person (Daniel 7:15; 8:15; 9:2; 10:2).
The identity of Daniel's critics is significant as well. The first person to question the authenticity of Daniel's authorship was the Greek scholar and historian Porphyry, who lived A.D. 233-304. He is labeled by historians as a Neoplatonist, which means he subscribed to the doctrines of the Greek philosopher Plato rather than the Bible. "Porphyry is well known as a violent opponent of Christianity and defender of Paganism" (Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th edition, Vol. 22, p. 104, "Porphyry").
Since Porphyry was an enemy of Christianity, his objectivity is open to question. He had no factual basis for his opinion, and his view contradicted the testimony of Jesus Christ, who referred to Daniel as the author of the book (Matthew 24:15).
The biblical scholar Jerome (A.D. 340-420) refuted Porphyry's contention. Thereafter no one took Porphyry's remarks seriously again until many centuries later. "... He was more or less dismissed by Christian scholarship as a mere pagan detractor who had allowed a naturalistic bias to warp his judgment. But during the time of the Enlightenment in the eighteenth century, all supernatural elements in Scripture came under suspicion ..." (Expositor's, p. 13).
Some of today's scholars with liberal leanings have recycled these centuries- old arguments. Old Testament historian Eugene Merrill says their beliefs are built on feeble evidence. "[Daniel's] rhetoric and language are eminently at home in the sixth century [B.C.] ... It is only on the most subjective and circular lines of evidence that the man and his writing have been denied historicity" (Kingdom of Priests, 1996, p. 484).
Phenomenal prophecy and fulfillment
The accuracy of Daniel's prophecies of remotely distant events is spectacular. For example, in the "70 weeks" prophecy recorded in Daniel 9:24-27, "Daniel predicts the precise year of Christ's appearance and the beginning of his ministry in A.D. 27" (Expositor's, p. 9).
Another amazing prophecy recorded by Daniel is his interpretation of Nebuchadnezzar's dream in chapter 2. In the second year of his reign the Babylonian king had a troubling dream that none of his counselors could explain. Babylonian culture placed considerable emphasis on dreams, and Nebuchadnezzar was convinced that this one was of great importance (Daniel 2:1-3).
His dream gives us a "disclosure of God's plan for the ages till the final triumph of Christ" and "presents the foreordained succession of world powers that are to dominate the Near East till the final victory of the Messiah in the last days" (Expositor's, pp. 39, 46).
Without prior knowledge of its content, Daniel explained the details of the dream to Nebuchadnezzar: "You, O king, were watching; and behold, a great image! This great image, whose splendor was excellent, stood before you; and its form was awesome. This image's head was of fine gold, its chest and arms of silver, its belly and thighs of bronze, its legs of iron, its feet partly of iron and partly of clay" (Daniel 2:31-33).
Daniel told Nebuchadnezzar that his Babylonian Empire was represented by the head of gold (verses 37-38). The silver, bronze and iron components of the image, or statue, represented three powerful empires that were to follow mighty Babylon (verses 39-40).
This interpretation provided an astounding preview of history. Nebuchadnezzar's dream occurred and was interpreted by Daniel about 600 B.C. The image represented, in symbolic form, the sequence of great empires that would dominate the region's political scene for centuries.
"The silver empire was to be Medo- Persia, which began with Cyrus the Great, who conquered Babylon in 539 ... This silver empire was supreme in the Near and Middle East for about two centuries" (Expositor's, p. 47).
"The bronze empire was the Greco-Macedonian Empire established by Alexander the Great ... The bronze kingdom lasted for about 260 or 300 years before it was supplanted by the fourth kingdom" (ibid.).
"Iron connotes toughness and ruthlessness and describes the Roman Empire that reached its widest extent under the reign of Trajan" (ibid.). Trajan reigned as emperor A.D. 98-117, and the Roman Empire itself ruled for many centuries.
The fourth empire was depicted as having 10 toes. The feet and toes were composed partly of iron and partly of clay, as verse 41 explains. "Verse 41 deals with a later phase or outgrowth of this fourth empire, symbolized by the feet and ten toes—made up of iron and earthenware, a fragile base for the huge monument. The text clearly implies that this final phase will be marked by some sort of federation rather than by a powerful single realm" (ibid.). (For more details, request or download our free booklet The Book of Revelation Unveiled.)
Another dream adds important details
Additional aspects of this succession of world-ruling empires were revealed to Daniel in a later dream. This time the four empires were represented by four beasts: a lion (Babylonian Empire), a bear (Medo-Persian Empire), a leopard (Greco-Macedonian Empire) and a fourth beast described as "terrible" and unlike the other three (Daniel 7:1-7).
Notice what verse 7 says about this fourth creature: "After this I saw in the night visions, and behold, a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible, exceedingly strong. It had huge iron teeth [paralleling the iron legs of the prior dream]; it was devouring, breaking in pieces, and trampling the residue with its feet. It was different from all the beasts that were before it, and it had ten horns."
What does this description mean? It too is a reference to the great power of Rome, which crushed all who opposed it. "Thus the superior power of the colossus of Rome ... is emphasized in the symbolism of this terrible fourth beast" (Expositor's, p. 87).
Verse 8 of Daniel 7 elaborates on the 10 horns: "I was considering the horns, and there was another horn, a little one, coming up among them, before whom three of the first horns were plucked out by the roots." Later in the chapter we see that this little horn exalts himself to the position of an internationally powerful religious leader (verses 24-25), even commanding a false religious system that persecutes the true followers of God.
Daniel 7:9-14 takes us right through to Christ's establishment of the Kingdom of God on earth: "Then to Him was given dominion and glory and a kingdom, that all peoples, nations, and languages should serve Him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and His kingdom the one which shall not be destroyed." So this Roman system, through its periodic revivals down through history, continues right to the time of the end when Jesus Christ returns to rule the earth.
Revelation 17 also helps us in understanding this end-time power. In this chapter it is again depicted as a beast, but now we see that its final manifestation includes 10 "kings"—leaders of nations or groups of nations—who "receive authority for one hour" with the ruler of this end-time superpower, an individual the Bible refers to as "the beast" (Revelation 17:12-13). This final revival of the Roman Empire leads into Christ's return as they "make war with the Lamb" (verse 14).
All of this concurs with Daniel 2:44, which obviously indicates that the second coming of Christ will occur in a time during which vestiges of the fourth beast or kingdom (the Roman Empire) still exist: "And in the days of these kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom which shall never be destroyed; and the kingdom shall not be left to other people; it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand forever."
The greater part of these prophetic events, as detailed by the two dreams, has already been fulfilled. Their detailed completion affirms the divine inspiration of the Bible. The odds of any person foreseeing this on his own defy credibility. "... There is a God in heaven who reveals secrets, and He has made known to King Nebuchadnezzar what will be in the latter days" (Daniel 2:28).
The Bible's most detailed prophecy
Daniel 11 records another phenomenal prophecy. The chronological setting is given in Daniel 10:1 as the "third year of Cyrus king of Persia." A "man" (verse 5), no doubt an angel (compare Daniel 9:21), came to tell Daniel what would occur "in the latter days" (Daniel 10:14).
The prophecy that follows is the most detailed in all the Bible. The third year of Cyrus was more than 500 years before the birth of Christ. Yet this prophecy foretells events that began to occur almost immediately and will continue until the return of Christ. The initial stages of the prophecy confirm the Bible because they have already been fulfilled, as can be verified by a study of the Persian and Greek empires. No man could foresee such fine historical detail.
Some elements of what follows are intricate, requiring close attention. But a comparison of the prophetic words with the historical record makes them clear.
Protracted political intrigue
The first 35 verses of Daniel 11 give an account, written years in advance, of the intrigue between two political entities— the "king of the South" and the "king of the North." In secular history, the king of the South is often referred to as Ptolemy. The Ptolemaic dynasty ruled from Alexandria in Egypt. The king of the North ruled from Antioch in Syria under the name Seleucus, or Antiochus.
With this in mind, let's examine some of the details of the prophecy. It is important because it reveals the political climate and tensions in the Middle East preceding both the first and second appearances of Jesus Christ as the Messiah. In both instances, Jerusalem is at the center of the political conflicts of the time.
You can find more information on the historical fulfillment of much of this prophecy in resources such as The Expositor's Bible Commentary, which we quote below, or other reliable reference works. Rather than our quoting the entire scriptural passage, we recommend that you read in your own Bible the verses we cite, and remember that these details were foretold far in advance of their occurrence.
Daniel 11:2: The "three more kings" are Cambyses, the elder son of Cyrus; pseudo-Smerdis, an impostor who passed himself off as Cyrus's younger son, who had been secretly killed; and Darius the Persian. "The Persian king who invaded Greece was ... Xerxes, who reigned 485-464 B.C." (Expositor's, p. 128).
Verses 3-4: "Verse 3 introduces us to ... the rise of Alexander the Great" (ibid.). The language in verse 4 "clearly suggests that this mighty conqueror was going to have a comparatively brief reign ... In seven or eight years he accomplished the most dazzling military conquest in human history. But he lived only four years more; and ... died of a fever in 323 ..." (ibid.).
Alexander's kingdom was divided "among four smaller and weaker empires" (Expositor's, p. 129). Alexander's infant son had been murdered in 310 and an illegitimate brother assassinated in 317. "Thus there were no descendants or blood relatives to succeed Alexander himself" (ibid.). So his kingdom was not divided among his posterity (verse 4).
Alexander's generals warred for control of his empire. The ensuing struggles for domination eliminated all but four, who became heads of the four divisions of his empire. The four were Cassander, reigning in Greece and the West, Lysimachus in Thrace and Asia Minor, Ptolemy in Egypt and Seleucus in Syria. Of these four, two—Ptolemy and Seleucus—expanded their rule and territory. These were the kings of Egypt and Syria, respectively.
The machinations that follow relate to these two. They are referred to as the king of the South (Ptolemy) and the king of the North (Seleucus) because of their location relative to Jerusalem.
Verse 5: "The king of the South was to be Ptolemy I" (Expositor's, p. 130). The biblical expression "one of his princes" refers to Seleucus. He had originally served under Ptolemy. In the intrigue after Alexander's death, Seleucus ultimately gained control over Syria and became king of the North. Seleucus eventually wielded more power than Ptolemy. The dynasty of the Seleucid line was to continue until 64 B.C.
The Laodicean war
Verse 6: A state of tension and hostility existed between the king of the South and the king of the North. Ptolemy I died in 285 B.C. In 252 the two powers attempted a treaty under which Berenice, the daughter of Ptolemy II, was to marry Antiochus II, the king of the North. Laodice, the first wife of Antiochus II, was angry because he had divorced her. In retaliation, she manipulated a conspiracy from her place of banishment. She had Berenice and her infant son assassinated. "Not long afterward the king himself [Antiochus II] was poisoned ..." (ibid.).
Laodice established herself as queen, because her son Seleucus II was too young to rule. The prophecy "she [Berenice] shall be given up" refers to the coup that Laodice engineered to effect the execution of Berenice. Some nobles who had supported Berenice as queen were also brought down.
Verses 7-9: Retaliation followed. A series of military actions, which came to be known as the Laodicean War, resulted. Ptolemy II died soon after Laodice killed his daughter, Berenice. Ptolemy III sought to avenge his sister's death. He attacked the king of the North and captured the Syrian capital of Antioch. Verse 8 describes the recapture by Ptolemy of "long-lost idols and sacred treasures" (Expositor's, p. 131) that had been stolen from Egypt by Cambyses in 524 B.C.
Peace was concluded between Ptolemy III and Seleucus II in 240, and hostilities ceased until 221, when Ptolemy III died.
Verses 10-12: The sons of Seleucus II attacked the king of the South after their father died. One of these sons, Seleucus III, reigned for only three years. His military activity was relatively minor. He died by poisoning. Another son, Antiochus III (the Great), did "overwhelm and pass through." He conquered Judea.
Ptolemy IV, the king of the South, retaliated (verse 11) and defeated the larger army of Seleucus III at the Battle of Raphia. After his victory Ptolemy turned to a life of debauchery during which he slaughtered tens of thousands of Jews in Egypt (verse 12). Through all this he weakened his kingdom.
Verses 13-16: The phrase "at the end of some years" refers to an incident when, 14 years after his defeat, Antiochus III came against Ptolemy V, still a young boy. (Ptolemy IV had died in 203.) The Egyptian provinces were in turmoil because of the wretched rule of Ptolemy IV. Many of the people—including Jews sympathetic to the king of the North—joined with Antiochus against the king of the South. The rebellion was ultimately crushed by the Egyptian general Scopus (verse 14).
Scopus also rebuffed the forces of Antiochus during the winter of 201-200. The king of the North responded with another invasion. He captured the city of Sidon ("a fortified city"), where Scopus surrendered (verse 15). Antiochus acquired complete control of the Holy Land, the "Glorious Land" (verse 16).
Verse 17: The Revised English Bible reads: "He [the king of the North] will resolve to advance with the full might of his kingdom; and, when he has agreed terms with the king of the south, he will give his young daughter in marriage to him, with a view to the destruction of the kingdom; but the treaty will not last nor will it be his purpose which is served." Having defeated Scopus, Antiochus desired to gain control of Egypt itself. He gave his daughter, Cleopatra, to Ptolemy V in marriage. Antiochus believed she would act in his favor and betray the interests of her husband. But she frustrated his plans by siding with Ptolemy.
Verses 18-19: In his frustration, Antiochus attacked islands and cities of the Aegean area. He also gave asylum to Rome's enemy, Hannibal of Carthage, who assisted him in landing in Greece. Rome responded by attacking Antiochus and inflicting defeat on his forces. The Romans deprived him of much of his territory and took several hostages to Rome, including Antiochus's son. Rome exacted heavy tribute of him (verse 18).
Antiochus returned in disgrace to his stronghold, Antioch. Unable to pay the heavy fees exacted by the Romans, he attempted to plunder a pagan temple. His action so enraged local inhabitants that they killed him, bringing him to an inglorious end (verse 19).
Verse 20: While not Scripture, the apocryphal book of 2 Maccabees 3:7-40 says that Antiochus's other son, Seleucus IV, was also unable to pay the taxes. Seleucus sent a Jew, Heliodorus, to plunder the temple at Jerusalem. Heliodorus went to the holy city but obtained nothing. Seleucus was later poisoned by Heliodorus, and so killed, "but not in anger or in battle."
Antiochus Epiphanes
Daniel 11:21-35: These verses speak of the infamous Antiochus IV (known also as Epiphanes), the brother of Seleucus IV, who had earlier been taken hostage to Rome. He was a "tyrannical oppressor who did his utmost to destroy the Jewish religion altogether" (Expositor's, p. 136).
Antiochus passed laws that forbade the practice of the Jewish religion, under penalty of death. He was a man of incredible cruelty. On his orders "an aged Scribe, Eleazar, was flogged to death because he refused to eat swine's flesh. A mother and her seven children were successively butchered, in the presence of the governor, for refusing to pay homage to an image. Two mothers who had circumcised their new-born sons were driven through the city and cast headlong from the wall" (Charles Pfeiffer, Between the Testaments, 1974, pp. 81-82).
Verse 31: This refers to the momentous events of Dec. 16, 168 B.C., when a crazed Antiochus entered Jerusalem and killed 80,000 men, women and children (2 Maccabees 5:11-14). He then desecrated the temple by offering a sacrifice to the chief Greek god, Zeus. This outrage was a forerunner of a comparable event that Jesus Christ said would occur in the last days (Matthew 24:15).
Verses 32-35: These verses appear to describe, on one level, the indomitable will and courage of the Maccabees, a family of priests who resisted Antiochus and his successors. The Maccabees' revolt against the Syrian king was triggered when "Mattathias, the leading priest in the city of Modein ..., after killing the officer of Antiochus who had come to enforce the new decree concerning idolatrous worship ..., led a guerrilla band that fled to the hills ..." (Expositor's, p. 141).
Mattathias was aided in his cause by five sons, most notably Judah or Judas, nicknamed Maqqaba (Aramaic for hammer, whence derives the name Maccabees). Many of these patriots died in this cause, but their heroics ultimately drove the Syrian forces from the country.
On another level, these verses could even refer to the New Testament Church, with their references to mighty works, persecution and apostasy.
Indeed, at this point Daniel's prophecy definitely takes on a different tone, referring explicitly to "the time of the end" near the end of verse 35. To quote Expositor's: "With the conclusion of the preceding pericope [extract] at v. 35, the predictive material that incontestably applies to the Hellenistic empires and the contest between the Seleucids and the Jewish patriots ends. This present section (vv. 36-39) contains some features that hardly apply to Antiochus IV, though most of the details could apply to him as well as to his latter-day antitype, ‘the beast.'
"Both liberal and conservative scholars agree that all of chapter 11 up to this point contains strikingly accurate predictions of the whole sweep of events from the reign of Cyrus ... to the unsuccessful effort of Antiochus Epiphanes to stamp out the Jewish faith" (Expositor's, p. 143).
From this point forward a little more than a century would pass before the Roman general Pompey would conquer Jerusalem. Much of the Middle East passed to the control of the Roman Empire, and much of its power in turn passed to its eastern leg, the Byzantine Empire, in the following centuries.
But then, as we'll see in the next chapter, a remarkable new power and religion arose on the scene to dominate the Middle East for centuries—the Islamic Empire.
© 1995-2006 United Church of God
Daniel's book prophesied events fulfilled many centuries ago as well as major events yet to come. It reveals a history of the region, written in advance, from Daniel's time right up to the return of Jesus Christ.
Yet at the end of the book God instructed Daniel to "shut up the words, and seal the book until the time of the end; many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall increase" (Daniel 12:4). This indicates that certain major prophecies that previously wouldn't have made sense will be understandable as the end approaches.
The prophecies of Daniel provide proof of the accuracy of the Bible. Many of his prophecies are so detailed and specific that they have long confounded Bible critics.
In fact, some skeptics have not challenged the content of Daniel's prophetic accuracy. Rather than admit that his words are indeed inspired, they have simply labeled his book a fraud. They claim that it was not written by Daniel in the sixth century B.C.—timing which is evident by events written of in the book—but that it was penned by an unknown author in the 160s B.C., long after many of the events prophesied in the book came to pass. This, the critics allege, is the real reason for the book's startling prophetic accuracy!
Daniel's testimony challenges the critics. But let's first consider the nature of the critics' approach. They dispute Daniel's authorship because he refers to himself in the early chapters in the third person, as if writing about someone else. However, as The Expositor's Bible Commentary points out, this "was the custom among ancient authors of historical memoirs ..." (1985, Vol. 7, p. 4). In relating some of his experiences Daniel did write in the first person (Daniel 7:15; 8:15; 9:2; 10:2).
The identity of Daniel's critics is significant as well. The first person to question the authenticity of Daniel's authorship was the Greek scholar and historian Porphyry, who lived A.D. 233-304. He is labeled by historians as a Neoplatonist, which means he subscribed to the doctrines of the Greek philosopher Plato rather than the Bible. "Porphyry is well known as a violent opponent of Christianity and defender of Paganism" (Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th edition, Vol. 22, p. 104, "Porphyry").
Since Porphyry was an enemy of Christianity, his objectivity is open to question. He had no factual basis for his opinion, and his view contradicted the testimony of Jesus Christ, who referred to Daniel as the author of the book (Matthew 24:15).
The biblical scholar Jerome (A.D. 340-420) refuted Porphyry's contention. Thereafter no one took Porphyry's remarks seriously again until many centuries later. "... He was more or less dismissed by Christian scholarship as a mere pagan detractor who had allowed a naturalistic bias to warp his judgment. But during the time of the Enlightenment in the eighteenth century, all supernatural elements in Scripture came under suspicion ..." (Expositor's, p. 13).
Some of today's scholars with liberal leanings have recycled these centuries- old arguments. Old Testament historian Eugene Merrill says their beliefs are built on feeble evidence. "[Daniel's] rhetoric and language are eminently at home in the sixth century [B.C.] ... It is only on the most subjective and circular lines of evidence that the man and his writing have been denied historicity" (Kingdom of Priests, 1996, p. 484).
Phenomenal prophecy and fulfillment
The accuracy of Daniel's prophecies of remotely distant events is spectacular. For example, in the "70 weeks" prophecy recorded in Daniel 9:24-27, "Daniel predicts the precise year of Christ's appearance and the beginning of his ministry in A.D. 27" (Expositor's, p. 9).
Another amazing prophecy recorded by Daniel is his interpretation of Nebuchadnezzar's dream in chapter 2. In the second year of his reign the Babylonian king had a troubling dream that none of his counselors could explain. Babylonian culture placed considerable emphasis on dreams, and Nebuchadnezzar was convinced that this one was of great importance (Daniel 2:1-3).
His dream gives us a "disclosure of God's plan for the ages till the final triumph of Christ" and "presents the foreordained succession of world powers that are to dominate the Near East till the final victory of the Messiah in the last days" (Expositor's, pp. 39, 46).
Without prior knowledge of its content, Daniel explained the details of the dream to Nebuchadnezzar: "You, O king, were watching; and behold, a great image! This great image, whose splendor was excellent, stood before you; and its form was awesome. This image's head was of fine gold, its chest and arms of silver, its belly and thighs of bronze, its legs of iron, its feet partly of iron and partly of clay" (Daniel 2:31-33).
Daniel told Nebuchadnezzar that his Babylonian Empire was represented by the head of gold (verses 37-38). The silver, bronze and iron components of the image, or statue, represented three powerful empires that were to follow mighty Babylon (verses 39-40).
This interpretation provided an astounding preview of history. Nebuchadnezzar's dream occurred and was interpreted by Daniel about 600 B.C. The image represented, in symbolic form, the sequence of great empires that would dominate the region's political scene for centuries.
"The silver empire was to be Medo- Persia, which began with Cyrus the Great, who conquered Babylon in 539 ... This silver empire was supreme in the Near and Middle East for about two centuries" (Expositor's, p. 47).
"The bronze empire was the Greco-Macedonian Empire established by Alexander the Great ... The bronze kingdom lasted for about 260 or 300 years before it was supplanted by the fourth kingdom" (ibid.).
"Iron connotes toughness and ruthlessness and describes the Roman Empire that reached its widest extent under the reign of Trajan" (ibid.). Trajan reigned as emperor A.D. 98-117, and the Roman Empire itself ruled for many centuries.
The fourth empire was depicted as having 10 toes. The feet and toes were composed partly of iron and partly of clay, as verse 41 explains. "Verse 41 deals with a later phase or outgrowth of this fourth empire, symbolized by the feet and ten toes—made up of iron and earthenware, a fragile base for the huge monument. The text clearly implies that this final phase will be marked by some sort of federation rather than by a powerful single realm" (ibid.). (For more details, request or download our free booklet The Book of Revelation Unveiled.)
Another dream adds important details
Additional aspects of this succession of world-ruling empires were revealed to Daniel in a later dream. This time the four empires were represented by four beasts: a lion (Babylonian Empire), a bear (Medo-Persian Empire), a leopard (Greco-Macedonian Empire) and a fourth beast described as "terrible" and unlike the other three (Daniel 7:1-7).
Notice what verse 7 says about this fourth creature: "After this I saw in the night visions, and behold, a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible, exceedingly strong. It had huge iron teeth [paralleling the iron legs of the prior dream]; it was devouring, breaking in pieces, and trampling the residue with its feet. It was different from all the beasts that were before it, and it had ten horns."
What does this description mean? It too is a reference to the great power of Rome, which crushed all who opposed it. "Thus the superior power of the colossus of Rome ... is emphasized in the symbolism of this terrible fourth beast" (Expositor's, p. 87).
Verse 8 of Daniel 7 elaborates on the 10 horns: "I was considering the horns, and there was another horn, a little one, coming up among them, before whom three of the first horns were plucked out by the roots." Later in the chapter we see that this little horn exalts himself to the position of an internationally powerful religious leader (verses 24-25), even commanding a false religious system that persecutes the true followers of God.
Daniel 7:9-14 takes us right through to Christ's establishment of the Kingdom of God on earth: "Then to Him was given dominion and glory and a kingdom, that all peoples, nations, and languages should serve Him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and His kingdom the one which shall not be destroyed." So this Roman system, through its periodic revivals down through history, continues right to the time of the end when Jesus Christ returns to rule the earth.
Revelation 17 also helps us in understanding this end-time power. In this chapter it is again depicted as a beast, but now we see that its final manifestation includes 10 "kings"—leaders of nations or groups of nations—who "receive authority for one hour" with the ruler of this end-time superpower, an individual the Bible refers to as "the beast" (Revelation 17:12-13). This final revival of the Roman Empire leads into Christ's return as they "make war with the Lamb" (verse 14).
All of this concurs with Daniel 2:44, which obviously indicates that the second coming of Christ will occur in a time during which vestiges of the fourth beast or kingdom (the Roman Empire) still exist: "And in the days of these kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom which shall never be destroyed; and the kingdom shall not be left to other people; it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand forever."
The greater part of these prophetic events, as detailed by the two dreams, has already been fulfilled. Their detailed completion affirms the divine inspiration of the Bible. The odds of any person foreseeing this on his own defy credibility. "... There is a God in heaven who reveals secrets, and He has made known to King Nebuchadnezzar what will be in the latter days" (Daniel 2:28).
The Bible's most detailed prophecy
Daniel 11 records another phenomenal prophecy. The chronological setting is given in Daniel 10:1 as the "third year of Cyrus king of Persia." A "man" (verse 5), no doubt an angel (compare Daniel 9:21), came to tell Daniel what would occur "in the latter days" (Daniel 10:14).
The prophecy that follows is the most detailed in all the Bible. The third year of Cyrus was more than 500 years before the birth of Christ. Yet this prophecy foretells events that began to occur almost immediately and will continue until the return of Christ. The initial stages of the prophecy confirm the Bible because they have already been fulfilled, as can be verified by a study of the Persian and Greek empires. No man could foresee such fine historical detail.
Some elements of what follows are intricate, requiring close attention. But a comparison of the prophetic words with the historical record makes them clear.
Protracted political intrigue
The first 35 verses of Daniel 11 give an account, written years in advance, of the intrigue between two political entities— the "king of the South" and the "king of the North." In secular history, the king of the South is often referred to as Ptolemy. The Ptolemaic dynasty ruled from Alexandria in Egypt. The king of the North ruled from Antioch in Syria under the name Seleucus, or Antiochus.
With this in mind, let's examine some of the details of the prophecy. It is important because it reveals the political climate and tensions in the Middle East preceding both the first and second appearances of Jesus Christ as the Messiah. In both instances, Jerusalem is at the center of the political conflicts of the time.
You can find more information on the historical fulfillment of much of this prophecy in resources such as The Expositor's Bible Commentary, which we quote below, or other reliable reference works. Rather than our quoting the entire scriptural passage, we recommend that you read in your own Bible the verses we cite, and remember that these details were foretold far in advance of their occurrence.
Daniel 11:2: The "three more kings" are Cambyses, the elder son of Cyrus; pseudo-Smerdis, an impostor who passed himself off as Cyrus's younger son, who had been secretly killed; and Darius the Persian. "The Persian king who invaded Greece was ... Xerxes, who reigned 485-464 B.C." (Expositor's, p. 128).
Verses 3-4: "Verse 3 introduces us to ... the rise of Alexander the Great" (ibid.). The language in verse 4 "clearly suggests that this mighty conqueror was going to have a comparatively brief reign ... In seven or eight years he accomplished the most dazzling military conquest in human history. But he lived only four years more; and ... died of a fever in 323 ..." (ibid.).
Alexander's kingdom was divided "among four smaller and weaker empires" (Expositor's, p. 129). Alexander's infant son had been murdered in 310 and an illegitimate brother assassinated in 317. "Thus there were no descendants or blood relatives to succeed Alexander himself" (ibid.). So his kingdom was not divided among his posterity (verse 4).
Alexander's generals warred for control of his empire. The ensuing struggles for domination eliminated all but four, who became heads of the four divisions of his empire. The four were Cassander, reigning in Greece and the West, Lysimachus in Thrace and Asia Minor, Ptolemy in Egypt and Seleucus in Syria. Of these four, two—Ptolemy and Seleucus—expanded their rule and territory. These were the kings of Egypt and Syria, respectively.
The machinations that follow relate to these two. They are referred to as the king of the South (Ptolemy) and the king of the North (Seleucus) because of their location relative to Jerusalem.
Verse 5: "The king of the South was to be Ptolemy I" (Expositor's, p. 130). The biblical expression "one of his princes" refers to Seleucus. He had originally served under Ptolemy. In the intrigue after Alexander's death, Seleucus ultimately gained control over Syria and became king of the North. Seleucus eventually wielded more power than Ptolemy. The dynasty of the Seleucid line was to continue until 64 B.C.
The Laodicean war
Verse 6: A state of tension and hostility existed between the king of the South and the king of the North. Ptolemy I died in 285 B.C. In 252 the two powers attempted a treaty under which Berenice, the daughter of Ptolemy II, was to marry Antiochus II, the king of the North. Laodice, the first wife of Antiochus II, was angry because he had divorced her. In retaliation, she manipulated a conspiracy from her place of banishment. She had Berenice and her infant son assassinated. "Not long afterward the king himself [Antiochus II] was poisoned ..." (ibid.).
Laodice established herself as queen, because her son Seleucus II was too young to rule. The prophecy "she [Berenice] shall be given up" refers to the coup that Laodice engineered to effect the execution of Berenice. Some nobles who had supported Berenice as queen were also brought down.
Verses 7-9: Retaliation followed. A series of military actions, which came to be known as the Laodicean War, resulted. Ptolemy II died soon after Laodice killed his daughter, Berenice. Ptolemy III sought to avenge his sister's death. He attacked the king of the North and captured the Syrian capital of Antioch. Verse 8 describes the recapture by Ptolemy of "long-lost idols and sacred treasures" (Expositor's, p. 131) that had been stolen from Egypt by Cambyses in 524 B.C.
Peace was concluded between Ptolemy III and Seleucus II in 240, and hostilities ceased until 221, when Ptolemy III died.
Verses 10-12: The sons of Seleucus II attacked the king of the South after their father died. One of these sons, Seleucus III, reigned for only three years. His military activity was relatively minor. He died by poisoning. Another son, Antiochus III (the Great), did "overwhelm and pass through." He conquered Judea.
Ptolemy IV, the king of the South, retaliated (verse 11) and defeated the larger army of Seleucus III at the Battle of Raphia. After his victory Ptolemy turned to a life of debauchery during which he slaughtered tens of thousands of Jews in Egypt (verse 12). Through all this he weakened his kingdom.
Verses 13-16: The phrase "at the end of some years" refers to an incident when, 14 years after his defeat, Antiochus III came against Ptolemy V, still a young boy. (Ptolemy IV had died in 203.) The Egyptian provinces were in turmoil because of the wretched rule of Ptolemy IV. Many of the people—including Jews sympathetic to the king of the North—joined with Antiochus against the king of the South. The rebellion was ultimately crushed by the Egyptian general Scopus (verse 14).
Scopus also rebuffed the forces of Antiochus during the winter of 201-200. The king of the North responded with another invasion. He captured the city of Sidon ("a fortified city"), where Scopus surrendered (verse 15). Antiochus acquired complete control of the Holy Land, the "Glorious Land" (verse 16).
Verse 17: The Revised English Bible reads: "He [the king of the North] will resolve to advance with the full might of his kingdom; and, when he has agreed terms with the king of the south, he will give his young daughter in marriage to him, with a view to the destruction of the kingdom; but the treaty will not last nor will it be his purpose which is served." Having defeated Scopus, Antiochus desired to gain control of Egypt itself. He gave his daughter, Cleopatra, to Ptolemy V in marriage. Antiochus believed she would act in his favor and betray the interests of her husband. But she frustrated his plans by siding with Ptolemy.
Verses 18-19: In his frustration, Antiochus attacked islands and cities of the Aegean area. He also gave asylum to Rome's enemy, Hannibal of Carthage, who assisted him in landing in Greece. Rome responded by attacking Antiochus and inflicting defeat on his forces. The Romans deprived him of much of his territory and took several hostages to Rome, including Antiochus's son. Rome exacted heavy tribute of him (verse 18).
Antiochus returned in disgrace to his stronghold, Antioch. Unable to pay the heavy fees exacted by the Romans, he attempted to plunder a pagan temple. His action so enraged local inhabitants that they killed him, bringing him to an inglorious end (verse 19).
Verse 20: While not Scripture, the apocryphal book of 2 Maccabees 3:7-40 says that Antiochus's other son, Seleucus IV, was also unable to pay the taxes. Seleucus sent a Jew, Heliodorus, to plunder the temple at Jerusalem. Heliodorus went to the holy city but obtained nothing. Seleucus was later poisoned by Heliodorus, and so killed, "but not in anger or in battle."
Antiochus Epiphanes
Daniel 11:21-35: These verses speak of the infamous Antiochus IV (known also as Epiphanes), the brother of Seleucus IV, who had earlier been taken hostage to Rome. He was a "tyrannical oppressor who did his utmost to destroy the Jewish religion altogether" (Expositor's, p. 136).
Antiochus passed laws that forbade the practice of the Jewish religion, under penalty of death. He was a man of incredible cruelty. On his orders "an aged Scribe, Eleazar, was flogged to death because he refused to eat swine's flesh. A mother and her seven children were successively butchered, in the presence of the governor, for refusing to pay homage to an image. Two mothers who had circumcised their new-born sons were driven through the city and cast headlong from the wall" (Charles Pfeiffer, Between the Testaments, 1974, pp. 81-82).
Verse 31: This refers to the momentous events of Dec. 16, 168 B.C., when a crazed Antiochus entered Jerusalem and killed 80,000 men, women and children (2 Maccabees 5:11-14). He then desecrated the temple by offering a sacrifice to the chief Greek god, Zeus. This outrage was a forerunner of a comparable event that Jesus Christ said would occur in the last days (Matthew 24:15).
Verses 32-35: These verses appear to describe, on one level, the indomitable will and courage of the Maccabees, a family of priests who resisted Antiochus and his successors. The Maccabees' revolt against the Syrian king was triggered when "Mattathias, the leading priest in the city of Modein ..., after killing the officer of Antiochus who had come to enforce the new decree concerning idolatrous worship ..., led a guerrilla band that fled to the hills ..." (Expositor's, p. 141).
Mattathias was aided in his cause by five sons, most notably Judah or Judas, nicknamed Maqqaba (Aramaic for hammer, whence derives the name Maccabees). Many of these patriots died in this cause, but their heroics ultimately drove the Syrian forces from the country.
On another level, these verses could even refer to the New Testament Church, with their references to mighty works, persecution and apostasy.
Indeed, at this point Daniel's prophecy definitely takes on a different tone, referring explicitly to "the time of the end" near the end of verse 35. To quote Expositor's: "With the conclusion of the preceding pericope [extract] at v. 35, the predictive material that incontestably applies to the Hellenistic empires and the contest between the Seleucids and the Jewish patriots ends. This present section (vv. 36-39) contains some features that hardly apply to Antiochus IV, though most of the details could apply to him as well as to his latter-day antitype, ‘the beast.'
"Both liberal and conservative scholars agree that all of chapter 11 up to this point contains strikingly accurate predictions of the whole sweep of events from the reign of Cyrus ... to the unsuccessful effort of Antiochus Epiphanes to stamp out the Jewish faith" (Expositor's, p. 143).
From this point forward a little more than a century would pass before the Roman general Pompey would conquer Jerusalem. Much of the Middle East passed to the control of the Roman Empire, and much of its power in turn passed to its eastern leg, the Byzantine Empire, in the following centuries.
But then, as we'll see in the next chapter, a remarkable new power and religion arose on the scene to dominate the Middle East for centuries—the Islamic Empire.
© 1995-2006 United Church of God
Tuesday, June 20, 2006
The Rise and Fall of Ancient Israel
One of God's most remarkable claims is found in Isaiah 46:9-10: "For I am God, and there is no other; I am God and there is none like Me, declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times things that are not yet done, saying, 'My counsel shall stand ...'" (emphasis added throughout).
Here God not only says that He can reveal the future; He also claims the power to bring it to pass!
Nowhere is this more evident than in the remarkable prophecies of what would happen to Abraham's descendants through Jacob's offspring, the 12 tribes of Israel.
God's promises to Abraham, while astounding in their magnitude, nevertheless started small—with the promise of a son, Isaac, to be born to him and Sarah (Genesis 17:19-21; 21:1-3). Isaac in turn had two sons, Jacob and Esau (Genesis 25:19-26). Jacob had 12 sons, from whom the 12 tribes of Israel are descended.
Prophesied birth of a nation
But long before this, before Abraham even had a son at all, God revealed to Abraham the fact that his descendants would go through one of the most remarkable "birth processes" a people could go through—they would be enslaved in a foreign land before emerging as a nation.
We find this prophesied in Genesis 15:13-14: "Know certainly that your descendants will be strangers in a land that is not theirs, and will serve them, and they will afflict them four hundred years. And also the nation whom they serve I will judge; afterward they shall come out with great possessions."
This is referring, of course, to the Exodus. The remarkable chain of circumstances leading to the fulfillment of this prophecy is spelled out in Genesis 37-50 and Exodus 1-14.
While the Exodus itself is one of the Bible's best-known stories, the events that led up to it aren't so well understood. In brief, Jacob's favorite of his 12 sons, Joseph, was sold as a slave by his jealous brothers and ended up in Egypt (Genesis 37). There, through a series of events and God's blessings, Joseph thrived and amazingly rose to the highest position in the Egyptian government under the pharaoh (chapters 39-41).
When a famine struck the region, Joseph's family migrated to Egypt, which, thanks to Joseph's foresight, had stored enough grain to survive the famine (chapters 42-47). Joseph recognized that God had been behind all these events and that things had worked out this way so that his family would be spared and God's prophecies fulfilled (Genesis 50:19-20).
The 12 sons of Jacob—progenitors of the tribes of Israel—thrived in Egypt (Exodus 1:1-7). But then "there arose a new king over Egypt, who did not know Joseph" (verse 8). The new pharaoh, feeling threatened by the growing number of Israelites, enslaved them and "made their lives bitter with hard bondage" (verse 14).
God called the son of two of these Hebrew slaves, Moses, who through miraculous circumstances had himself been a prince of Egypt but was later a fugitive, to lead Israel out of their enslavement. "I am the God of your father—the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob," He announced to Moses (Exodus 3:6).
God then followed with a remarkable prophecy of what He intended to do with Moses and his countrymen: "I have surely seen the oppression of My people who are in Egypt, and have heard their cry because of their taskmasters, for I know their sorrows. So I have come down to deliver them out of the hand of the Egyptians, and to bring them up from that land to a good and large land, to a land flowing with milk and honey ... Come now, therefore, and I will send you to Pharaoh that you may bring My people, the children of Israel, out of Egypt" (verses 7-10).
What God proposed to do was stunning —to deliver a people from enslavement at the hands of the greatest superpower of their day! The following chapters— covering the 10 plagues and the awesome parting of the Red Sea—show how God indeed miraculously delivered the Israelites, even down to the detail of fulfilling His promise to Abraham that "they shall come out with great possessions" (Genesis 15:14; compare Exodus 11:2; 12:35-36).
Israelites in the Promised Land
Following Israel's miraculous deliverance from Egypt came the periods of the 40 years in the wilderness, the conquest of the Promised Land and the period of the Israelite judges. Many specific minor prophecies were given and fulfilled during this time as recorded in the biblical books of Exodus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua and Judges.
When we come to the establishment of the Israelite monarchy, we find that the dynasty of Israel's most famous king, David, had been prophesied to arise from the tribe of Judah centuries before, while the Israelites were still in Egypt (Genesis 49:8, 10). Like many prophecies, this was dual—meaning it had more than one intended meaning or fulfillment—in that it also foretold that the coming Messiah, Jesus Christ, would come from the tribe of Judah (compare Hebrews 7:14).
Because of space limitations we won't go into the dozens of specific prophecies that were given and fulfilled during the several centuries that the kingdoms of Israel and Judah existed, but will touch on only the most significant.
After righteous King David's passing, his son Solomon ascended the throne. Solomon had it all—a powerful kingdom he inherited from his father, humility, and wisdom and wealth granted to him by God (1 Kings 3:11-13). Under his reign the kingdom of the combined tribes of Israel grew even more powerful, dominating the region.
But, regrettably, while Solomon knew what he should do, he lacked the personal character and conviction to carry it out. His heart was turned from serving the one true God to serving the pagan gods and idols of the lands around him (1 Kings 11:4-8).
The kingdom divides
Solomon's ill-chosen path set the kingdom on a road from which there would be no recovery. Because of Solomon's sins, God announced that He would tear the kingdom away from him and give it to one of Solomon's subjects (verses 11-13). Indeed, most of the kingdom would split away to follow a rival; only a minority would remain to follow Solomon's son and the kings of David's line.
This prophecy was fulfilled a few years later at Solomon's death when most of the tribes broke away to follow Jeroboam, leader of the northern kingdom, Israel. The rest remained with Solomon's successor, Rehoboam, leader of the southern kingdom of Judah (1 Kings 12; 2 Chronicles 10-11). The two kingdoms would become rivals—and sometimes enemies—for the next two centuries.
Most people assume that the Jews and Israelites are one and the same. But this is clearly not true. Any look at history and these relevant Bible chapters shows they were two separate kingdoms, the kingdom of Israel and the kingdom of Judah (from which the term Jew is derived). As an interesting historical note, the first time the word Jews appears in the Bible, it is in 2 Kings 16:5-6 (King James Version) where Israel is allied with another king and at war with the Jews.
Israel's first king, Jeroboam, quickly established a pattern of idolatry and syncretism (mixing elements of true and false worship) from which the northern kingdom would never depart (1 Kings 12:26-33). God sent many prophets to warn the Israelite kings of the destruction that would come their way if they didn't return to Him.
The first of these was Ahijah, who gave this warning to Jeroboam's wife: "For the LORD will strike Israel, as a reed is shaken in the water. He will uproot Israel from this good land which He gave to their fathers, and will scatter them beyond the River ..." (1 Kings 14:15).
This was a clear pronouncement of the northern kingdom's fate if they wouldn't repent—they would be taken captive "beyond the River" (the Euphrates) at the hands of the coming Assyrian Empire.
Many other prophets followed, repeating God's warnings to the Israelites and their kings, pleading with them to repent lest they suffer that awful fate. Among these prophets were Amos, Hosea, Isaiah and Micah, whose messages are recorded for us in the biblical books that bear their names.
But the messages of these prophets went unheeded. Finally, in 722 B.C., after a series of attacks, invasions and deportations, the northern kingdom was crushed and its people carried away into captivity at the hands of the Assyrians—"beyond the River" as God had warned their first king two centuries earlier.
Judah follows in Israel's footsteps
The story of Judah, the southern kingdom, is somewhat different though equally tragic. Both kingdoms quickly abandoned the true God and sank into moral and spiritual depravity. While the northern kingdom never once had a righteous king, Judah at least had a handful who turned to God and instituted religious reforms aimed at turning the people to proper worship of the true God.
These righteous kings were somewhat successful, at least for a while. As a result, the kingdom of Judah outlasted its northern neighbor by more than a century. Yet eventually those in Judah, too, would pay a heavy price for rejecting their Creator.
They should have learned a lesson from the captivity of the 10 northern tribes, especially since some of the same Assyrian invasions devastated much of Judah. In Hezekiah's day virtually all of Judah except for its capital, Jerusalem, was conquered by the Assyrians—and Jerusalem, too, would have fallen had God not supernaturally delivered the city (2 Kings 18-19).
The prophet Isaiah, speaking to Hezekiah, was the first to reveal the specific enemy that would subjugate Judah if they, too, refused to change: "... 'Behold, the days are coming when all that is in your house, and what your fathers have accumulated until this day, shall be carried to Babylon; nothing shall be left,' says the LORD. 'And they shall take away some of your sons who will descend from you, whom you will beget; and they shall be eunuchs in the palace of the king of Babylon'" (2 Kings 20:16-18).
God sent many other prophets— including Micah, Zephaniah, Habakkuk and Jeremiah—to warn Judah, but to no avail. As the Assyrians vanquished the Israelites in several waves of invasions and deportations, so the Babylonians took away the Jews in several deportations before and after the fall of Jerusalem in 586 B.C. Many details of the biblical accounts of the downfalls of Israel and Judah are confirmed by Assyrian and Babylonian records from the time, demonstrating again the accuracy of the biblical record.
Judah's exile and return
The outcome of Judah's exile, however, was far different from that of the northern kingdom. Israel was deported to the far reaches of the Assyrian Empire and its people lost their national and ethnic identity (for more details and to understand who they are today, request or download our free booklet The United States and Britain in Bible Prophecy). But God gave Judah an encouraging promise through this prophecy from Jeremiah:
"For thus says the LORD: After seventy years are completed at Babylon, I will visit you and perform My good word toward you, and cause you to return to this place. For I know the thoughts that I think toward you, says the LORD, thoughts of peace and not of evil, to give you a future and a hope. Then you will call upon Me and go and pray to Me, and I will listen to you. And you will seek Me and find Me, when you search for Me with all your heart. I will be found by you, says the LORD, and I will bring you back from your captivity ..." (Jeremiah 29:10-14).
Here, too, we find a remarkable prophecy that was fulfilled to the letter. This 70-year period appears to have begun with the fall of Jerusalem and the destruction of Solomon's temple—the center of Jewish worship—in 586 B.C. and to have concluded with the completion of a new Jerusalem temple in 516 B.C. The biblical books of Ezra and Nehemiah record the return of many of the Jewish exiles from Babylon.
© 1995-2006 United Church of God
Here God not only says that He can reveal the future; He also claims the power to bring it to pass!
Nowhere is this more evident than in the remarkable prophecies of what would happen to Abraham's descendants through Jacob's offspring, the 12 tribes of Israel.
God's promises to Abraham, while astounding in their magnitude, nevertheless started small—with the promise of a son, Isaac, to be born to him and Sarah (Genesis 17:19-21; 21:1-3). Isaac in turn had two sons, Jacob and Esau (Genesis 25:19-26). Jacob had 12 sons, from whom the 12 tribes of Israel are descended.
Prophesied birth of a nation
But long before this, before Abraham even had a son at all, God revealed to Abraham the fact that his descendants would go through one of the most remarkable "birth processes" a people could go through—they would be enslaved in a foreign land before emerging as a nation.
We find this prophesied in Genesis 15:13-14: "Know certainly that your descendants will be strangers in a land that is not theirs, and will serve them, and they will afflict them four hundred years. And also the nation whom they serve I will judge; afterward they shall come out with great possessions."
This is referring, of course, to the Exodus. The remarkable chain of circumstances leading to the fulfillment of this prophecy is spelled out in Genesis 37-50 and Exodus 1-14.
While the Exodus itself is one of the Bible's best-known stories, the events that led up to it aren't so well understood. In brief, Jacob's favorite of his 12 sons, Joseph, was sold as a slave by his jealous brothers and ended up in Egypt (Genesis 37). There, through a series of events and God's blessings, Joseph thrived and amazingly rose to the highest position in the Egyptian government under the pharaoh (chapters 39-41).
When a famine struck the region, Joseph's family migrated to Egypt, which, thanks to Joseph's foresight, had stored enough grain to survive the famine (chapters 42-47). Joseph recognized that God had been behind all these events and that things had worked out this way so that his family would be spared and God's prophecies fulfilled (Genesis 50:19-20).
The 12 sons of Jacob—progenitors of the tribes of Israel—thrived in Egypt (Exodus 1:1-7). But then "there arose a new king over Egypt, who did not know Joseph" (verse 8). The new pharaoh, feeling threatened by the growing number of Israelites, enslaved them and "made their lives bitter with hard bondage" (verse 14).
God called the son of two of these Hebrew slaves, Moses, who through miraculous circumstances had himself been a prince of Egypt but was later a fugitive, to lead Israel out of their enslavement. "I am the God of your father—the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob," He announced to Moses (Exodus 3:6).
God then followed with a remarkable prophecy of what He intended to do with Moses and his countrymen: "I have surely seen the oppression of My people who are in Egypt, and have heard their cry because of their taskmasters, for I know their sorrows. So I have come down to deliver them out of the hand of the Egyptians, and to bring them up from that land to a good and large land, to a land flowing with milk and honey ... Come now, therefore, and I will send you to Pharaoh that you may bring My people, the children of Israel, out of Egypt" (verses 7-10).
What God proposed to do was stunning —to deliver a people from enslavement at the hands of the greatest superpower of their day! The following chapters— covering the 10 plagues and the awesome parting of the Red Sea—show how God indeed miraculously delivered the Israelites, even down to the detail of fulfilling His promise to Abraham that "they shall come out with great possessions" (Genesis 15:14; compare Exodus 11:2; 12:35-36).
Israelites in the Promised Land
Following Israel's miraculous deliverance from Egypt came the periods of the 40 years in the wilderness, the conquest of the Promised Land and the period of the Israelite judges. Many specific minor prophecies were given and fulfilled during this time as recorded in the biblical books of Exodus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua and Judges.
When we come to the establishment of the Israelite monarchy, we find that the dynasty of Israel's most famous king, David, had been prophesied to arise from the tribe of Judah centuries before, while the Israelites were still in Egypt (Genesis 49:8, 10). Like many prophecies, this was dual—meaning it had more than one intended meaning or fulfillment—in that it also foretold that the coming Messiah, Jesus Christ, would come from the tribe of Judah (compare Hebrews 7:14).
Because of space limitations we won't go into the dozens of specific prophecies that were given and fulfilled during the several centuries that the kingdoms of Israel and Judah existed, but will touch on only the most significant.
After righteous King David's passing, his son Solomon ascended the throne. Solomon had it all—a powerful kingdom he inherited from his father, humility, and wisdom and wealth granted to him by God (1 Kings 3:11-13). Under his reign the kingdom of the combined tribes of Israel grew even more powerful, dominating the region.
But, regrettably, while Solomon knew what he should do, he lacked the personal character and conviction to carry it out. His heart was turned from serving the one true God to serving the pagan gods and idols of the lands around him (1 Kings 11:4-8).
The kingdom divides
Solomon's ill-chosen path set the kingdom on a road from which there would be no recovery. Because of Solomon's sins, God announced that He would tear the kingdom away from him and give it to one of Solomon's subjects (verses 11-13). Indeed, most of the kingdom would split away to follow a rival; only a minority would remain to follow Solomon's son and the kings of David's line.
This prophecy was fulfilled a few years later at Solomon's death when most of the tribes broke away to follow Jeroboam, leader of the northern kingdom, Israel. The rest remained with Solomon's successor, Rehoboam, leader of the southern kingdom of Judah (1 Kings 12; 2 Chronicles 10-11). The two kingdoms would become rivals—and sometimes enemies—for the next two centuries.
Most people assume that the Jews and Israelites are one and the same. But this is clearly not true. Any look at history and these relevant Bible chapters shows they were two separate kingdoms, the kingdom of Israel and the kingdom of Judah (from which the term Jew is derived). As an interesting historical note, the first time the word Jews appears in the Bible, it is in 2 Kings 16:5-6 (King James Version) where Israel is allied with another king and at war with the Jews.
Israel's first king, Jeroboam, quickly established a pattern of idolatry and syncretism (mixing elements of true and false worship) from which the northern kingdom would never depart (1 Kings 12:26-33). God sent many prophets to warn the Israelite kings of the destruction that would come their way if they didn't return to Him.
The first of these was Ahijah, who gave this warning to Jeroboam's wife: "For the LORD will strike Israel, as a reed is shaken in the water. He will uproot Israel from this good land which He gave to their fathers, and will scatter them beyond the River ..." (1 Kings 14:15).
This was a clear pronouncement of the northern kingdom's fate if they wouldn't repent—they would be taken captive "beyond the River" (the Euphrates) at the hands of the coming Assyrian Empire.
Many other prophets followed, repeating God's warnings to the Israelites and their kings, pleading with them to repent lest they suffer that awful fate. Among these prophets were Amos, Hosea, Isaiah and Micah, whose messages are recorded for us in the biblical books that bear their names.
But the messages of these prophets went unheeded. Finally, in 722 B.C., after a series of attacks, invasions and deportations, the northern kingdom was crushed and its people carried away into captivity at the hands of the Assyrians—"beyond the River" as God had warned their first king two centuries earlier.
Judah follows in Israel's footsteps
The story of Judah, the southern kingdom, is somewhat different though equally tragic. Both kingdoms quickly abandoned the true God and sank into moral and spiritual depravity. While the northern kingdom never once had a righteous king, Judah at least had a handful who turned to God and instituted religious reforms aimed at turning the people to proper worship of the true God.
These righteous kings were somewhat successful, at least for a while. As a result, the kingdom of Judah outlasted its northern neighbor by more than a century. Yet eventually those in Judah, too, would pay a heavy price for rejecting their Creator.
They should have learned a lesson from the captivity of the 10 northern tribes, especially since some of the same Assyrian invasions devastated much of Judah. In Hezekiah's day virtually all of Judah except for its capital, Jerusalem, was conquered by the Assyrians—and Jerusalem, too, would have fallen had God not supernaturally delivered the city (2 Kings 18-19).
The prophet Isaiah, speaking to Hezekiah, was the first to reveal the specific enemy that would subjugate Judah if they, too, refused to change: "... 'Behold, the days are coming when all that is in your house, and what your fathers have accumulated until this day, shall be carried to Babylon; nothing shall be left,' says the LORD. 'And they shall take away some of your sons who will descend from you, whom you will beget; and they shall be eunuchs in the palace of the king of Babylon'" (2 Kings 20:16-18).
God sent many other prophets— including Micah, Zephaniah, Habakkuk and Jeremiah—to warn Judah, but to no avail. As the Assyrians vanquished the Israelites in several waves of invasions and deportations, so the Babylonians took away the Jews in several deportations before and after the fall of Jerusalem in 586 B.C. Many details of the biblical accounts of the downfalls of Israel and Judah are confirmed by Assyrian and Babylonian records from the time, demonstrating again the accuracy of the biblical record.
Judah's exile and return
The outcome of Judah's exile, however, was far different from that of the northern kingdom. Israel was deported to the far reaches of the Assyrian Empire and its people lost their national and ethnic identity (for more details and to understand who they are today, request or download our free booklet The United States and Britain in Bible Prophecy). But God gave Judah an encouraging promise through this prophecy from Jeremiah:
"For thus says the LORD: After seventy years are completed at Babylon, I will visit you and perform My good word toward you, and cause you to return to this place. For I know the thoughts that I think toward you, says the LORD, thoughts of peace and not of evil, to give you a future and a hope. Then you will call upon Me and go and pray to Me, and I will listen to you. And you will seek Me and find Me, when you search for Me with all your heart. I will be found by you, says the LORD, and I will bring you back from your captivity ..." (Jeremiah 29:10-14).
Here, too, we find a remarkable prophecy that was fulfilled to the letter. This 70-year period appears to have begun with the fall of Jerusalem and the destruction of Solomon's temple—the center of Jewish worship—in 586 B.C. and to have concluded with the completion of a new Jerusalem temple in 516 B.C. The biblical books of Ezra and Nehemiah record the return of many of the Jewish exiles from Babylon.
© 1995-2006 United Church of God
Monday, June 19, 2006
The Sons of Abraham
It's impossible to understand the present Middle East without a knowledge of the three great religions that emanate from the area—Judaism, Christianity and Islam. These three faiths all trace their spiritual roots back to the same individual, Abraham. The towering historical figures behind these three religions—Moses, Jesus Christ and Muhammad—were all direct descendants of Abraham.
Abraham, born in the Mesopotamian city of Ur, was the son of Terah, a descendant of Shem, a son of Noah. Born almost 4,000 years ago, Abraham's impact on the Middle East is still with us to this day. As a descendant of Noah's son Shem, Abraham and his descendants were a Semitic people. In Genesis 11 we see that Shem's great-grandson Eber (verse 14-16) was a direct ancestor of Abraham, and it is from Eber that the term Hebrew comes.
Called "the father of the faithful" (compare Romans 4:11), Abraham obeyed God's instruction to leave his native Ur and move to Haran. As Stephen, the devout first martyr of the Christian era, put it: "The God of glory appeared to our father Abraham when he was in Mesopotamia, before he dwelt in Haran, and said to him, 'Get out of your country and from your relatives, and come to a land that I will show you'" (Acts 7:2-3).
Both Ur and Haran were cities in Mesopotamia, which refers to the area between the Euphrates and Tigris rivers. Haran was a natural stopping-off point for Abraham and Sarah, who were about to be sent by God to a new land, a significant turning point in the history of the region.
We read of this move in Genesis 12:1-4, following the death of Abraham's father, Terah. Again, notice his example of unquestioning obedience: "Now the LORD had said to Abram [this being his original name, which was later expanded to Abraham]: 'Get out of your country, from your family and from your father's house, to a land that I will show you. I will make you a great nation; I will bless you and make your name great; and you shall be a blessing ...' So Abram departed as the LORD had spoken to him ..." Hebrews 11:8 adds: "And he went out, not knowing where he was going."
God was working with Abraham to establish him and his descendants in the land of Canaan (later called the Promised Land and often referred to as the Holy Land). At the crossroads of Asia, Africa and Europe, this area was ideal for God's chosen people, who were to be an example to the rest of the world (Deuteronomy 4:5-8).
On arriving in the new land, God promised Abraham that He would give the land to his descendants (Genesis 12:7). "And the LORD said to Abram,... 'Lift your eyes now and look from the place where you are—northward, southward, eastward, and westward; for all the land which you see I give to you and your descendants forever'" (Genesis 13:14-15).
God added: "And I will make your descendants as the dust of the earth; so that if a man could number the dust of the earth, then your descendants also could be numbered" (verse 16). Significantly, God later changed Abram's name to Abraham (Genesis 17:5). His earlier name meant "high (exalted) father." God renamed him "father of a multitude," saying, "I will make you exceedingly fruitful; and I will make nations of you, and kings shall come from you" (verse 6).
At the time these prophecies must have seemed ironic to Abraham, for his wife Sarah was barren. Her infertility was to be very significant in the development of the modern Middle East.
God promised Abraham in Genesis 15:4 that he would have an heir: "one who will come from your own body." Impatient, Sarah told Abraham to take her Egyptian handmaid Hagar and to produce a child by her. This took place "after Abram had dwelt ten years in the land of Canaan" (Genesis 16:1-3).
Abraham's first son is born
"So he went in to Hagar, and she conceived. And when she saw that she had conceived, her mistress became despised in her eyes" (Genesis 16:4). The relationship between Sarah and Hagar quickly deteriorated and Hagar fled.
But a divine message was given to Hagar, telling her to return. It also reassured her that her son would have many descendants—but descendants with traits that would be evident throughout their history: "I will so increase your descendants that they will be too numerous to count ... You are now with child and you will have a son. You shall name him Ishmael ['God hears'], for the LORD has heard of your misery. He will be a wild donkey of a man; his hand will be against everyone and everyone's hand against him, and he will live in hostility toward all his brothers" (verses 10-12, New International Version).
This description of Hagar's descendants is significant because many of today's Arabs are Ishmaelites—descendants of this same Ishmael, whose father was Abraham. Muhammad, the founder and prophet of Islam, was descended from Kedar, one of the 12 sons of Ishmael (Ismail in Arabic). Today 22 nations in the Middle East and North Africa are Arabic nations, most of whose people are adherents of Islam. An additional 35 countries are members of the Islamic Conference, most of them with Islamic governments, but whose people are of different descent.
Even before Ishmael's descendants arrived in the area, the term arab was used to denote the peoples of the Arabian peninsula. With the spread of Islam, Arabs and the Arabic language today encompass a vast region.
The divinely prophetic words spoken to Hagar are still of great significance today. The prophecy that Ishmael "will be a wild donkey of a man" is not meant as an insult. The wild donkey was the aristocrat of the wild beasts of the desert, the preferred prey of hunters. The prophecy is a reference to how Ishmael's descendants would emulate the lifestyle of the wild donkey, leading a free and noble existence in the desert.
"His hand will be against everyone, and everyone's hand against him" similarly refers to this independent lifestyle. Ishmael's descendants have always resisted foreign domination. "He will live in hostility towards all his brothers" is a reference to the enmity that has historically existed among the Arabs and between the Arabs and the other sons of Abraham.
Abraham's second son
Fourteen years after the birth of Ishmael, God blessed Abraham with another son, this time by his wife Sarah. He told them to name their son Isaac (meaning "laughter" for the incredulous reaction they had when told they would have a son at their advanced age as well as the joy that he would later bring to his parents, Genesis 17:17, 19; 18:10-15; 21:5-6). Isaac in turn fathered Jacob, also named Israel, the father of the Israelites. Ishmael's and Isaac's descendants are therefore cousins.
"So the child [Isaac] grew and was weaned. And Abraham made a great feast on the same day that Isaac was weaned. And Sarah saw the son of Hagar the Egyptian, whom she had borne to Abraham, scoffing. Therefore she said to Abraham, 'Cast out this bondwoman and her son; for the son of this bondwoman shall not be heir with my son, namely with Isaac'" (Genesis 21:8-10).
This displeased Abraham, who had grown to love Ishmael. "But God said to Abraham, '... Whatever Sarah has said to you, listen to her voice; for in Isaac your seed shall be called" (verse 12). God further reassured Abraham: "Yet I will also make a nation of the son of the bondwoman [Ishmael], because he is your seed" (verse 13). "So God was with the lad; and he grew and dwelt in the wilderness ..." (verse 20).
It cannot be said that Ishmael hated Isaac. But after 14 years as an only child, Isaac's arrival fundamentally changed Ishmael's relationship with his father Abraham. Afterward, Ishmael felt envy and rivalry toward his half-brother, feelings that tribally have survived down through the centuries and which affect the politics of the Middle East today.
Isaac's two sons
Further family complications were ahead. Isaac in turn had two sons, Jacob and Esau, twins by his wife Rebekah. Even before they were born, "the children struggled together within her" (Genesis 25:22). God explained: "Two nations are in your womb, two peoples shall be separated from your body; one people shall be stronger than the other, and the older shall serve the younger" (verse 23). Both brothers were to father great nations, a blessing from God to Abraham's grandsons.
Normally the firstborn would receive the birthright, but here it was to be different. The Bible records that Esau sold his birthright to Jacob for a bowl of lentil stew (verses 29-34), showing how little it meant to him. Sometime later, Jacob tricked his father into giving him the birthright blessing (chapter 27). For this, "Esau hated Jacob" (verse 41).
Again, the consequences of this are with us to this day.The descendants of Esau (also called Edom, Genesis 25:30) intermarried with Ishmael's descendants, their bitterness and resentment against Jacob's descendants intensifying through the centuries. Esau's grandson Amalek (Genesis 36:12) was the father of the Amalekites, who became bitter foes of the descendants of Jacob, the 12 tribes of Israel. A prophecy about Amalek foretold endless war between them "from generation to generation" (Exodus 17:16). Some scholars believe that many of today's Palestinians are largely the descendants of the Amalekites.
Next let's now turn to the remarkable story of the tribes of Israel—their prophesied rise and fall.
© 1995-2006 United Church of God
Abraham, born in the Mesopotamian city of Ur, was the son of Terah, a descendant of Shem, a son of Noah. Born almost 4,000 years ago, Abraham's impact on the Middle East is still with us to this day. As a descendant of Noah's son Shem, Abraham and his descendants were a Semitic people. In Genesis 11 we see that Shem's great-grandson Eber (verse 14-16) was a direct ancestor of Abraham, and it is from Eber that the term Hebrew comes.
Called "the father of the faithful" (compare Romans 4:11), Abraham obeyed God's instruction to leave his native Ur and move to Haran. As Stephen, the devout first martyr of the Christian era, put it: "The God of glory appeared to our father Abraham when he was in Mesopotamia, before he dwelt in Haran, and said to him, 'Get out of your country and from your relatives, and come to a land that I will show you'" (Acts 7:2-3).
Both Ur and Haran were cities in Mesopotamia, which refers to the area between the Euphrates and Tigris rivers. Haran was a natural stopping-off point for Abraham and Sarah, who were about to be sent by God to a new land, a significant turning point in the history of the region.
We read of this move in Genesis 12:1-4, following the death of Abraham's father, Terah. Again, notice his example of unquestioning obedience: "Now the LORD had said to Abram [this being his original name, which was later expanded to Abraham]: 'Get out of your country, from your family and from your father's house, to a land that I will show you. I will make you a great nation; I will bless you and make your name great; and you shall be a blessing ...' So Abram departed as the LORD had spoken to him ..." Hebrews 11:8 adds: "And he went out, not knowing where he was going."
God was working with Abraham to establish him and his descendants in the land of Canaan (later called the Promised Land and often referred to as the Holy Land). At the crossroads of Asia, Africa and Europe, this area was ideal for God's chosen people, who were to be an example to the rest of the world (Deuteronomy 4:5-8).
On arriving in the new land, God promised Abraham that He would give the land to his descendants (Genesis 12:7). "And the LORD said to Abram,... 'Lift your eyes now and look from the place where you are—northward, southward, eastward, and westward; for all the land which you see I give to you and your descendants forever'" (Genesis 13:14-15).
God added: "And I will make your descendants as the dust of the earth; so that if a man could number the dust of the earth, then your descendants also could be numbered" (verse 16). Significantly, God later changed Abram's name to Abraham (Genesis 17:5). His earlier name meant "high (exalted) father." God renamed him "father of a multitude," saying, "I will make you exceedingly fruitful; and I will make nations of you, and kings shall come from you" (verse 6).
At the time these prophecies must have seemed ironic to Abraham, for his wife Sarah was barren. Her infertility was to be very significant in the development of the modern Middle East.
God promised Abraham in Genesis 15:4 that he would have an heir: "one who will come from your own body." Impatient, Sarah told Abraham to take her Egyptian handmaid Hagar and to produce a child by her. This took place "after Abram had dwelt ten years in the land of Canaan" (Genesis 16:1-3).
Abraham's first son is born
"So he went in to Hagar, and she conceived. And when she saw that she had conceived, her mistress became despised in her eyes" (Genesis 16:4). The relationship between Sarah and Hagar quickly deteriorated and Hagar fled.
But a divine message was given to Hagar, telling her to return. It also reassured her that her son would have many descendants—but descendants with traits that would be evident throughout their history: "I will so increase your descendants that they will be too numerous to count ... You are now with child and you will have a son. You shall name him Ishmael ['God hears'], for the LORD has heard of your misery. He will be a wild donkey of a man; his hand will be against everyone and everyone's hand against him, and he will live in hostility toward all his brothers" (verses 10-12, New International Version).
This description of Hagar's descendants is significant because many of today's Arabs are Ishmaelites—descendants of this same Ishmael, whose father was Abraham. Muhammad, the founder and prophet of Islam, was descended from Kedar, one of the 12 sons of Ishmael (Ismail in Arabic). Today 22 nations in the Middle East and North Africa are Arabic nations, most of whose people are adherents of Islam. An additional 35 countries are members of the Islamic Conference, most of them with Islamic governments, but whose people are of different descent.
Even before Ishmael's descendants arrived in the area, the term arab was used to denote the peoples of the Arabian peninsula. With the spread of Islam, Arabs and the Arabic language today encompass a vast region.
The divinely prophetic words spoken to Hagar are still of great significance today. The prophecy that Ishmael "will be a wild donkey of a man" is not meant as an insult. The wild donkey was the aristocrat of the wild beasts of the desert, the preferred prey of hunters. The prophecy is a reference to how Ishmael's descendants would emulate the lifestyle of the wild donkey, leading a free and noble existence in the desert.
"His hand will be against everyone, and everyone's hand against him" similarly refers to this independent lifestyle. Ishmael's descendants have always resisted foreign domination. "He will live in hostility towards all his brothers" is a reference to the enmity that has historically existed among the Arabs and between the Arabs and the other sons of Abraham.
Abraham's second son
Fourteen years after the birth of Ishmael, God blessed Abraham with another son, this time by his wife Sarah. He told them to name their son Isaac (meaning "laughter" for the incredulous reaction they had when told they would have a son at their advanced age as well as the joy that he would later bring to his parents, Genesis 17:17, 19; 18:10-15; 21:5-6). Isaac in turn fathered Jacob, also named Israel, the father of the Israelites. Ishmael's and Isaac's descendants are therefore cousins.
"So the child [Isaac] grew and was weaned. And Abraham made a great feast on the same day that Isaac was weaned. And Sarah saw the son of Hagar the Egyptian, whom she had borne to Abraham, scoffing. Therefore she said to Abraham, 'Cast out this bondwoman and her son; for the son of this bondwoman shall not be heir with my son, namely with Isaac'" (Genesis 21:8-10).
This displeased Abraham, who had grown to love Ishmael. "But God said to Abraham, '... Whatever Sarah has said to you, listen to her voice; for in Isaac your seed shall be called" (verse 12). God further reassured Abraham: "Yet I will also make a nation of the son of the bondwoman [Ishmael], because he is your seed" (verse 13). "So God was with the lad; and he grew and dwelt in the wilderness ..." (verse 20).
It cannot be said that Ishmael hated Isaac. But after 14 years as an only child, Isaac's arrival fundamentally changed Ishmael's relationship with his father Abraham. Afterward, Ishmael felt envy and rivalry toward his half-brother, feelings that tribally have survived down through the centuries and which affect the politics of the Middle East today.
Isaac's two sons
Further family complications were ahead. Isaac in turn had two sons, Jacob and Esau, twins by his wife Rebekah. Even before they were born, "the children struggled together within her" (Genesis 25:22). God explained: "Two nations are in your womb, two peoples shall be separated from your body; one people shall be stronger than the other, and the older shall serve the younger" (verse 23). Both brothers were to father great nations, a blessing from God to Abraham's grandsons.
Normally the firstborn would receive the birthright, but here it was to be different. The Bible records that Esau sold his birthright to Jacob for a bowl of lentil stew (verses 29-34), showing how little it meant to him. Sometime later, Jacob tricked his father into giving him the birthright blessing (chapter 27). For this, "Esau hated Jacob" (verse 41).
Again, the consequences of this are with us to this day.The descendants of Esau (also called Edom, Genesis 25:30) intermarried with Ishmael's descendants, their bitterness and resentment against Jacob's descendants intensifying through the centuries. Esau's grandson Amalek (Genesis 36:12) was the father of the Amalekites, who became bitter foes of the descendants of Jacob, the 12 tribes of Israel. A prophecy about Amalek foretold endless war between them "from generation to generation" (Exodus 17:16). Some scholars believe that many of today's Palestinians are largely the descendants of the Amalekites.
Next let's now turn to the remarkable story of the tribes of Israel—their prophesied rise and fall.
© 1995-2006 United Church of God
Sunday, June 18, 2006
The Middle East: Worlds in Collision
You need to understand what is prophesied to yet happen in the Middle East. Whether you realize it or not, or understand it or not, events there are destined to affect the lives of every person on earth.
Why does the Middle East dominate the headlines so often? One obvious answer is oil, the lifeblood of modern economies. Without oil to run factories, heat homes, fuel transportation and provide energy and raw materials for thousands of uses, the economies of many nations would grind to a halt. The crucial importance of oil alone ensures that the Middle East will remain in the headlines for years.
But there's more that keeps the Middle East in the news. It is the birthplace of the world's three great monotheistic religions—Judaism, Christianity and Islam. Too often it has not been just their birthplace, but their battlefield, with adherents warring against each other for control of territory they consider holy.
Nowhere are these conflicts more obvious than in Israel, and specifically in Jerusalem. If you've never been to Jerusalem, it's hard to imagine how so much history, religion and culture can collide and stand in literal heaps. Nowhere is this more evident than at the Temple Mount, flash point for many a conflict over the centuries.
The site first came to the attention of Israel's King David, who bought a threshing floor and built an altar on it, intending it for the site of the temple (1 Chronicles 21-22). The Temple Mount is so named because it is the location of the temple built by David's son Solomon (destroyed by the Babylonians in 586 B.C.) and its replacement built by Zerubbabel and later enlarged by Herod the Great (ultimately razed by the Roman general Titus in A.D. 70).
Here Jesus of Nazareth worshiped, taught and confronted the money changers, scribes, Pharisees and other religious authorities. After His death and resurrection, Christianity was born in the temple's shadow. His followers continued to worship and teach there for several more decades until the legions of Rome crushed a Jewish rebellion and carted away most of the Jewish population they hadn't killed. A later Jewish rebellion, in 132-135, led to a Roman decree that no Jew was to set foot in Jerusalem, on pain of death.
Centuries later, in 638, Muslim Arabs took the city. In 691 Muslims built the Dome of the Rock on that same Temple Mount, enclosing the spot from which, Muslims believe, Muhammad ascended to heaven. Today Muslims consider it the third-holiest site in Islam, after Mecca, where Muhammad was born, and Medina, where he found refuge and died.
Several more centuries passed before the Crusaders captured Jerusalem, slaughtered Muslim and Jew alike and converted the Dome of the Rock into a church. Their hold on the city lasted less than a century before Muslims recaptured it. Jerusalem changed hands three more times before Muslims took control of the city and held it from 1244 until 1917, when the Ottoman Empire lost its hold in World War I and the city came under British administration.
In 1948 the modern state of Israel was born, and in the 1967 war the Israelis gained control of all of Jerusalem, though leaving the Temple Mount under Islamic authority.
Today one can watch Muslims praying at the Dome of the Rock atop the Temple Mount, Jews praying at the Western Wall barely a stone's throw below and Christians praying along the Via Dolorosa and at the Church of the Holy Sepulcher a few hundred yards to the north and west. And all around one sees the rubble of the centuries of conflict over this holy place.
Who will write the next chapter in the history of this troubled city? Believe it or not, the final chapters are already written—prophesied centuries ago in the pages of the Bible. Ominously, they mesh remarkably well with today's headlines. In the following pages we provide you with an overview of the past and the headlines of tomorrow.
© 1995-2006 United Church of God
Why does the Middle East dominate the headlines so often? One obvious answer is oil, the lifeblood of modern economies. Without oil to run factories, heat homes, fuel transportation and provide energy and raw materials for thousands of uses, the economies of many nations would grind to a halt. The crucial importance of oil alone ensures that the Middle East will remain in the headlines for years.
But there's more that keeps the Middle East in the news. It is the birthplace of the world's three great monotheistic religions—Judaism, Christianity and Islam. Too often it has not been just their birthplace, but their battlefield, with adherents warring against each other for control of territory they consider holy.
Nowhere are these conflicts more obvious than in Israel, and specifically in Jerusalem. If you've never been to Jerusalem, it's hard to imagine how so much history, religion and culture can collide and stand in literal heaps. Nowhere is this more evident than at the Temple Mount, flash point for many a conflict over the centuries.
The site first came to the attention of Israel's King David, who bought a threshing floor and built an altar on it, intending it for the site of the temple (1 Chronicles 21-22). The Temple Mount is so named because it is the location of the temple built by David's son Solomon (destroyed by the Babylonians in 586 B.C.) and its replacement built by Zerubbabel and later enlarged by Herod the Great (ultimately razed by the Roman general Titus in A.D. 70).
Here Jesus of Nazareth worshiped, taught and confronted the money changers, scribes, Pharisees and other religious authorities. After His death and resurrection, Christianity was born in the temple's shadow. His followers continued to worship and teach there for several more decades until the legions of Rome crushed a Jewish rebellion and carted away most of the Jewish population they hadn't killed. A later Jewish rebellion, in 132-135, led to a Roman decree that no Jew was to set foot in Jerusalem, on pain of death.
Centuries later, in 638, Muslim Arabs took the city. In 691 Muslims built the Dome of the Rock on that same Temple Mount, enclosing the spot from which, Muslims believe, Muhammad ascended to heaven. Today Muslims consider it the third-holiest site in Islam, after Mecca, where Muhammad was born, and Medina, where he found refuge and died.
Several more centuries passed before the Crusaders captured Jerusalem, slaughtered Muslim and Jew alike and converted the Dome of the Rock into a church. Their hold on the city lasted less than a century before Muslims recaptured it. Jerusalem changed hands three more times before Muslims took control of the city and held it from 1244 until 1917, when the Ottoman Empire lost its hold in World War I and the city came under British administration.
In 1948 the modern state of Israel was born, and in the 1967 war the Israelis gained control of all of Jerusalem, though leaving the Temple Mount under Islamic authority.
Today one can watch Muslims praying at the Dome of the Rock atop the Temple Mount, Jews praying at the Western Wall barely a stone's throw below and Christians praying along the Via Dolorosa and at the Church of the Holy Sepulcher a few hundred yards to the north and west. And all around one sees the rubble of the centuries of conflict over this holy place.
Who will write the next chapter in the history of this troubled city? Believe it or not, the final chapters are already written—prophesied centuries ago in the pages of the Bible. Ominously, they mesh remarkably well with today's headlines. In the following pages we provide you with an overview of the past and the headlines of tomorrow.
© 1995-2006 United Church of God
Saturday, June 17, 2006
The Middle East In Bible Prophecy
Introduction
You need to understand what is prophesied to yet happen in the Middle East. Whether you realize it or not, or understand it or not, events there are destined to affect the lives of every person on earth.
Where were you on Sept. 11, 2001? If you're like most people, the horrifying images and emotions of that day are permanently etched into your mind. Who can forget the sight of a giant airliner slamming into the World Trade Center, the trapped men and women plunging to their deaths, the collapse of the towers and the cloud of pulverized concrete and debris that covered Manhattan?
The awful events of that day changed our world forever. At the beginning of a new century, it heralded a new age of mass terrorism directed at civilians. America's sense of security—that it could never happen on its shores—was forever shattered. Other nations quickly realized that similar catastrophes could strike their cities. Ever since, terrorism has become a very real threat for countless millions around the globe.
That day's horror also catapulted the Middle East to the forefront on news programs around the world. Suddenly, what was happening thousands of miles away could affect people regardless of where they lived. A region that, to many, had seemed irrelevant now became the focus of attention as nations everywhere awakened to the reality of how the Middle East impacts us all.
The reality quickly came home that problems thousands of miles away can have a greater impact on us than decisions made by our own local or national governments. The fall of the Twin Towers had an immediate effect on the American economy far greater than any decision made on nearby Wall Street, with an estimated $100 billion loss in direct damages and $2 trillion in short-term stock market losses.
The Middle East affects us all
But Sept. 11 was not the start of terrorism, Islamic fundamentalism or conflict in the Middle East. As part of a historic continuum, it was simply the date on which the accumulated problems of thousands of years finally reached America's shores.
Considering how much the Middle East now dominates the news, it's hard to believe that at the beginning of the last century the Middle East "was of only marginal concern" to the Western world. "The region had become a political backwater," according to historian David Fromkin, author of A Peace to End All Peace (1989, p. 24), a book about the birth of the modern Middle East. "Few Europeans of Churchill's generation knew or cared what went on in the languid empires of the Ottoman Sultan or the Persian Shah," he notes (p. 25).
A century later, however, nations around the world are all affected by what happens in this volatile region. The global economy runs on oil, most of which lies under the sand of Middle Eastern deserts. Oil is the lifeblood of Western economies and affluence, and a plentiful and cheap supply is essential to continued Western prosperity. This dependence on oil has fundamentally altered the Western nations' relationship with the region, transforming it into a strategically vital part of the world.
A second fundamental change has taken place in the Middle East in the last 100 years—the creation of many new nations, which has vastly complicated the politics of the area. The establishment of one country in particular has led to a cycle of violence and upheaval that is seemingly without end. Yet, surprisingly, the Bible prophesied the establishment of this nation thousands of years ago and predicted the growing conflict that would follow its rebirth.
A peace to end all peace
World War I was often called "the war to end all wars." At the close of the peace conference following the worst conflict in history, Archibald Wavell, an officer who served with the British Army in Palestine and was later promoted to field marshal, prophetically declared, "After ‘the war to end war' they seem to have been pretty successful in Paris at making a ‘Peace to end Peace'" (Fromkin, p. 5).
Before World War I the Middle East was dominated by the Ottoman Empire, the empire of the Turks who ruled over all the lands whose names are now so familiar to us. The countries that are now Turkey, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Kuwait, Jordan, Israel and others were all ruled by a declining empire that had once also presided over vast lands in both North Africa and southeastern Europe. Within this empire different peoples lived in relative harmony. About 40 percent of the people were Turks and 40 percent Arabs, with the remainder a mixture of different ethnic groups—Armenians and Jews being the most numerous of these.
It might have continued this way were it not for World War I. At the onset of war, it was not clear which side the Ottoman Empire would support. Both the British and the Germans courted the Turks. Finally the sultan opted to support the German kaiser, a fatal decision that ultimately led to the birth of many new nations—and wars seemingly without end. One of the nations that eventually came into being was the Jewish state of Israel, complicating the geopolitical situation in the region and destined to affect all nations on earth.
What few realize is this one crucial fact: After 1,900 years, the restoration of a Jewish homeland in the Middle East was necessary to fulfill ancient prophecies you can find in the Bible. This region, once a "political backwater" of little or no interest to the Western powers, is destined to become the center of the final global crisis that will usher in cataclysmic events leading humanity to the brink of extinction—and ultimately change our world forever.
© 1995-2006 United Church of God
You need to understand what is prophesied to yet happen in the Middle East. Whether you realize it or not, or understand it or not, events there are destined to affect the lives of every person on earth.
Where were you on Sept. 11, 2001? If you're like most people, the horrifying images and emotions of that day are permanently etched into your mind. Who can forget the sight of a giant airliner slamming into the World Trade Center, the trapped men and women plunging to their deaths, the collapse of the towers and the cloud of pulverized concrete and debris that covered Manhattan?
The awful events of that day changed our world forever. At the beginning of a new century, it heralded a new age of mass terrorism directed at civilians. America's sense of security—that it could never happen on its shores—was forever shattered. Other nations quickly realized that similar catastrophes could strike their cities. Ever since, terrorism has become a very real threat for countless millions around the globe.
That day's horror also catapulted the Middle East to the forefront on news programs around the world. Suddenly, what was happening thousands of miles away could affect people regardless of where they lived. A region that, to many, had seemed irrelevant now became the focus of attention as nations everywhere awakened to the reality of how the Middle East impacts us all.
The reality quickly came home that problems thousands of miles away can have a greater impact on us than decisions made by our own local or national governments. The fall of the Twin Towers had an immediate effect on the American economy far greater than any decision made on nearby Wall Street, with an estimated $100 billion loss in direct damages and $2 trillion in short-term stock market losses.
The Middle East affects us all
But Sept. 11 was not the start of terrorism, Islamic fundamentalism or conflict in the Middle East. As part of a historic continuum, it was simply the date on which the accumulated problems of thousands of years finally reached America's shores.
Considering how much the Middle East now dominates the news, it's hard to believe that at the beginning of the last century the Middle East "was of only marginal concern" to the Western world. "The region had become a political backwater," according to historian David Fromkin, author of A Peace to End All Peace (1989, p. 24), a book about the birth of the modern Middle East. "Few Europeans of Churchill's generation knew or cared what went on in the languid empires of the Ottoman Sultan or the Persian Shah," he notes (p. 25).
A century later, however, nations around the world are all affected by what happens in this volatile region. The global economy runs on oil, most of which lies under the sand of Middle Eastern deserts. Oil is the lifeblood of Western economies and affluence, and a plentiful and cheap supply is essential to continued Western prosperity. This dependence on oil has fundamentally altered the Western nations' relationship with the region, transforming it into a strategically vital part of the world.
A second fundamental change has taken place in the Middle East in the last 100 years—the creation of many new nations, which has vastly complicated the politics of the area. The establishment of one country in particular has led to a cycle of violence and upheaval that is seemingly without end. Yet, surprisingly, the Bible prophesied the establishment of this nation thousands of years ago and predicted the growing conflict that would follow its rebirth.
A peace to end all peace
World War I was often called "the war to end all wars." At the close of the peace conference following the worst conflict in history, Archibald Wavell, an officer who served with the British Army in Palestine and was later promoted to field marshal, prophetically declared, "After ‘the war to end war' they seem to have been pretty successful in Paris at making a ‘Peace to end Peace'" (Fromkin, p. 5).
Before World War I the Middle East was dominated by the Ottoman Empire, the empire of the Turks who ruled over all the lands whose names are now so familiar to us. The countries that are now Turkey, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Kuwait, Jordan, Israel and others were all ruled by a declining empire that had once also presided over vast lands in both North Africa and southeastern Europe. Within this empire different peoples lived in relative harmony. About 40 percent of the people were Turks and 40 percent Arabs, with the remainder a mixture of different ethnic groups—Armenians and Jews being the most numerous of these.
It might have continued this way were it not for World War I. At the onset of war, it was not clear which side the Ottoman Empire would support. Both the British and the Germans courted the Turks. Finally the sultan opted to support the German kaiser, a fatal decision that ultimately led to the birth of many new nations—and wars seemingly without end. One of the nations that eventually came into being was the Jewish state of Israel, complicating the geopolitical situation in the region and destined to affect all nations on earth.
What few realize is this one crucial fact: After 1,900 years, the restoration of a Jewish homeland in the Middle East was necessary to fulfill ancient prophecies you can find in the Bible. This region, once a "political backwater" of little or no interest to the Western powers, is destined to become the center of the final global crisis that will usher in cataclysmic events leading humanity to the brink of extinction—and ultimately change our world forever.
© 1995-2006 United Church of God
Friday, June 16, 2006
Government & Rulers - Walter Martin
April 23, 1966
In the 2nd Psalm God tells us the Heathen are "people who imagine a vain thing, kings and rulers who set themselves to break The Bands and cast away The Cords" of restraint of God's Laws and Commandments. In Acts 4:25 the disciples of Jesus Christ, God in the flesh, lifted up their voices in prayer to God, acknowledging the fulfillment of the prophecy of the 2nd Psalm in their own observation and experience as they had witnessed the death of Christ at the hands of the religious and secular leaders and rulers who were now threatening them.
Persecutions among the heathen were supported under the pretense that Christians brought in new gods. The persecutions under the Roman Catholics were under the pretext of the Protestants introducing heresies into the Church.
However, does any know of an instance, among mankind, of rulers persecuting "religion itself?" Well, we submit that the "powers that be" in this great land are doing that very thing today! The ruling and edicts of our Supreme Court is openly and avowedly against: "Prayer," the greatest key to every blessing -- that is, in so far as our children and young people in the public schools! Surely the Almighty did not speak in vain when He said a number of times in His Word of supposedly His people: "Worse than the heathen!"
We certainly should not put all the blame on the Supreme Court! Look to yourselves, as well as the President, the Senators, the Congressmen, the Judges, etc., great numbers of whom either support the High Court, or are more or less indifferent to the whole matter! Is not the great power of the Army, Air Force, Navy, F.B.I., etc., standing by, if needed, to fight to enforce the decrees to prevent prayer in our public schools:
"Prayer, the greatest key to every blessing!" Are not the high and mighty offices and pulpits of the clergy, the great doctors and scholars of the great seats of learning, largely filled with such as are in accord with the persecution of religion itself: "Prayer itself, the greatest key to every blessing!"
When I read the title of the first chapter of Mr. John Stormer's book, "None Dare Call It Treason;" "Have we gone crazy," the answer that came immediately to my mind way: "No doubt of it!"
The heathen had a reason for persecuting. The Catholics had a reason for their persecutions. We asked if any knew of an instance, among mankind, of rulers persecuting religion itself: "Prayer," the greatest key to every blessing Maybe we also have a "first" -- or a "scoop" as I think they say -- in another matter: Does any know of any civilized or enlightened people of history that allowed her citizens to go about in public in near nakedness? Has not that always been reserved for the pagans, savages, and benighted people who sexually live more or less as dogs and the beasts that perish?
But let us talk of a remedy. The Scriptures in Luke 8.27, etc., tells us: "When Jesus went forth to land, there met Him out of the city a certain man, which had devils long time, and wore no clothes . . . !" Read on and you will find that after Jesus treated him and the folks of the city came out to see what was done: "They found the man, out of whom the devils were departed, sitting at the feet of Jesus, 'clothed,' and in his right mind; and they were afraid." However, the change was not without cost, somebody lost some hogs in getting rid of the devils, and they did not want to pay the cost. They preferred to have a man walking about naked and full of devils than suffer the loss of some hogs. They asked Jesus to leave! Ruskin said the trouble with most of us is: "We cannot see in a plain way!"
A certain historian says that after the fall of the western part of the Roman Empire, for generation after generation there was murder, rape, pillage, fire, etc., and one thing, and only one thing, kept Europe from returning to the days of the savage and hyena; and that was the humble followers of Jesus Christ. The proud, the presumptous, the lecherous, the coveteous, the hypocrites, the heretics, the apostates and their kinsfolk have got our nation and generation on the toboggan slide headed towards the dogs and hyenas.
It is time for the humble followers of Jesus Christ to get busy and bring our "naked" day and generation to Him who is able to cast out legions of devils and cause her to get in her right mind, put on "clothes" and sit at His feet. An approximate quote of Martin Luther:
"Prayer is the only omnipotent empress of human affairs; by her we can change all things and overcome all evils; mend that which might be repaired and reclaimed, and take away that which is too evil and bad to mend."
It has been said that John Knox prayed Mary, Queen of Scots, off the Throne of Scotland, and maybe to her death at the hands of Queen Elizabeth!"
It may be, for the benefit of some of our modern college students, and maybe doctors and professors, too, it should be pointed out that this was not the present reigning Queen Elizabeth, no indeed, but the great queen who reigned several hundred years ago. Am prompted to make this explanation in view of the meager intelligence some of them manifest in view of their conduct in many schools and universities all over the nation. Also, judging from several letters I have had from some of these "brilliants," the way they handled the subject matter under discussion, it is surprising they are not still "walking on all-fours."
In the 2nd Psalm God tells us the Heathen are "people who imagine a vain thing, kings and rulers who set themselves to break The Bands and cast away The Cords" of restraint of God's Laws and Commandments. In Acts 4:25 the disciples of Jesus Christ, God in the flesh, lifted up their voices in prayer to God, acknowledging the fulfillment of the prophecy of the 2nd Psalm in their own observation and experience as they had witnessed the death of Christ at the hands of the religious and secular leaders and rulers who were now threatening them.
Persecutions among the heathen were supported under the pretense that Christians brought in new gods. The persecutions under the Roman Catholics were under the pretext of the Protestants introducing heresies into the Church.
However, does any know of an instance, among mankind, of rulers persecuting "religion itself?" Well, we submit that the "powers that be" in this great land are doing that very thing today! The ruling and edicts of our Supreme Court is openly and avowedly against: "Prayer," the greatest key to every blessing -- that is, in so far as our children and young people in the public schools! Surely the Almighty did not speak in vain when He said a number of times in His Word of supposedly His people: "Worse than the heathen!"
We certainly should not put all the blame on the Supreme Court! Look to yourselves, as well as the President, the Senators, the Congressmen, the Judges, etc., great numbers of whom either support the High Court, or are more or less indifferent to the whole matter! Is not the great power of the Army, Air Force, Navy, F.B.I., etc., standing by, if needed, to fight to enforce the decrees to prevent prayer in our public schools:
"Prayer, the greatest key to every blessing!" Are not the high and mighty offices and pulpits of the clergy, the great doctors and scholars of the great seats of learning, largely filled with such as are in accord with the persecution of religion itself: "Prayer itself, the greatest key to every blessing!"
When I read the title of the first chapter of Mr. John Stormer's book, "None Dare Call It Treason;" "Have we gone crazy," the answer that came immediately to my mind way: "No doubt of it!"
The heathen had a reason for persecuting. The Catholics had a reason for their persecutions. We asked if any knew of an instance, among mankind, of rulers persecuting religion itself: "Prayer," the greatest key to every blessing Maybe we also have a "first" -- or a "scoop" as I think they say -- in another matter: Does any know of any civilized or enlightened people of history that allowed her citizens to go about in public in near nakedness? Has not that always been reserved for the pagans, savages, and benighted people who sexually live more or less as dogs and the beasts that perish?
But let us talk of a remedy. The Scriptures in Luke 8.27, etc., tells us: "When Jesus went forth to land, there met Him out of the city a certain man, which had devils long time, and wore no clothes . . . !" Read on and you will find that after Jesus treated him and the folks of the city came out to see what was done: "They found the man, out of whom the devils were departed, sitting at the feet of Jesus, 'clothed,' and in his right mind; and they were afraid." However, the change was not without cost, somebody lost some hogs in getting rid of the devils, and they did not want to pay the cost. They preferred to have a man walking about naked and full of devils than suffer the loss of some hogs. They asked Jesus to leave! Ruskin said the trouble with most of us is: "We cannot see in a plain way!"
A certain historian says that after the fall of the western part of the Roman Empire, for generation after generation there was murder, rape, pillage, fire, etc., and one thing, and only one thing, kept Europe from returning to the days of the savage and hyena; and that was the humble followers of Jesus Christ. The proud, the presumptous, the lecherous, the coveteous, the hypocrites, the heretics, the apostates and their kinsfolk have got our nation and generation on the toboggan slide headed towards the dogs and hyenas.
It is time for the humble followers of Jesus Christ to get busy and bring our "naked" day and generation to Him who is able to cast out legions of devils and cause her to get in her right mind, put on "clothes" and sit at His feet. An approximate quote of Martin Luther:
"Prayer is the only omnipotent empress of human affairs; by her we can change all things and overcome all evils; mend that which might be repaired and reclaimed, and take away that which is too evil and bad to mend."
It has been said that John Knox prayed Mary, Queen of Scots, off the Throne of Scotland, and maybe to her death at the hands of Queen Elizabeth!"
It may be, for the benefit of some of our modern college students, and maybe doctors and professors, too, it should be pointed out that this was not the present reigning Queen Elizabeth, no indeed, but the great queen who reigned several hundred years ago. Am prompted to make this explanation in view of the meager intelligence some of them manifest in view of their conduct in many schools and universities all over the nation. Also, judging from several letters I have had from some of these "brilliants," the way they handled the subject matter under discussion, it is surprising they are not still "walking on all-fours."
Thursday, June 15, 2006
Hell and Judgement - Walter Martin
Walter Martin is the Original Bible Answer Man.
"Who is on The Lord's side?" This quotation is from Exodus 32: 26. Moses asked the question of the children of Israel and called on all those who were on The Lord's side to come to him, and all the sons of Levi gathered themselves together unto him. Moses himself belonged to this tribe of Levi which God had set aside for His special service. These men were ordered to do a terrible thing, witness: "Thus saith the Lord God of Israel, Put every man his sword by his side, and go in and out from gate to gate throughout the camp, and slay every man his brother and every man his companion, and every man his neighbor. And the children of Levi did according to the word of Moses: and there fell of the people that day about three thousand men!" Was not this a terrible thing to do, and a terrible thing to have to take part in?
About this time, or just a little later, there were numbered of the nation 603,000 men 20 years of age and over that were able to be soldiers and go to war, and this indicated there were probably over three million men, women, and children total population. The killing of the three thousand is not so terrible when you consider that they perished instead of the three million, for God had told Moses: "Now therefore let Me alone, that My wrath may wax hot against them, and that I may consume them and I will make of thee a great nation" -- God's anger bursting into flame and burning them up!
The object of this article is to present the facts, the setting, the context, concerning the question "Who is on The Lord's side?" which appears nowhere else in The Bible, we think, in just these words. We carelessly and glibly sing the song "Who is on The Lord's Side" and doubtless feel that means us because we have joined the Church and have not been put in jail, maybe because we did not get caught, not yet. About six weeks before Moses asked this question he stood with the others at the foot of Mt. Sinai: Picture in your own mind what they saw as recorded in Exodus 19:17, etc:
"And Moses brought forth the people out of the camp 'To meet with God' . . . and Mt. Sinai was altogether on a smoke, because the Lord descended upon it in a fire: and the smoke thereof ascended up as the smoke of a furnace, and the whole mount quaked greatly. And when the voice of the trumpet sounded long, and waxed louder and louder, Moses spake, and God answered him by a voice."
Out of this fearful and terrible scenery they heard the voice of God speak the Ten Commandments. "And all the people saw the thunderings, and the lightning, and the noise of the trumpet, and the mountain smoking; and when the people saw it, they removed and stood afar off. And they said unto Moses, Speak thou with us, and we will hear, but let not God speak with us, lest we die." "And so terrible was the sight, that Moses said, I exceedingly fear and quake." -- Hebrews 12:21. After God finished speaking the Commandments to the people, He called Moses up into the Mount. There he spent forty days with God, receiving detailed laws concerning the peoples relations with one another, and to their God; and also instructions for building a tabernacle for God to come and abide with them; and then God gave him "The Ten Words" written on two tables of stone.
"The stones were the work of God, and the writing was the writing of God, written with the finger of God."
Beginning with the 32nd chapter it appears that Moses conference with God was interrupted, and He told Moses to go down and see about his people for they had quickly forgotten their experiences and promises at Sinai, had made a golden calf an idol and were worshipping it! It was then that the wrath and anger of God would have burst into flame and consumed all the three millions of them had not Moses stood in the breach and interceded for them, and as a result of Moses' mediation, they escaped with only three thousand being slain, instead of the three millions! When Moses stood in the gate of the camp, and said, Who is on the Lord's side? Let him come unto me! These were called upon to execute the vengeance of God!
If we consider ourselves as "being on The Lord's side" we would do well to consider our attitude towards the terribleness of sin and rebellion against God's Commandments. "The wages of sin is death, eternal death, but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus our Lord." When Moses saw the idolatry of the people, and how in their perverted worship they "sat down to eat and drink and rose up to play" -- this makes one think of things going on in many of our churches these days -- he became angry and threw down the two tables of stone on which the Commandments were written, and broke them. Later, God told him to cut out two stones and present them to God for a rewriting of The Commandments "with the finger of God." God now calls on you and me to present the tables of our heart to Him in order that The Spirit of God might write His Commandments upon them. Beware, take heed, if you are one who thinks and claims "Christ is in you" and yet there is not the desire to be obedient to every Commandment of God:
"Blessed are they that do His Commandments, that they may have a right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city." Rev. 22:14. "Who is on The Lord's side?"
January 4, 1964
"Who is on The Lord's side?" This quotation is from Exodus 32: 26. Moses asked the question of the children of Israel and called on all those who were on The Lord's side to come to him, and all the sons of Levi gathered themselves together unto him. Moses himself belonged to this tribe of Levi which God had set aside for His special service. These men were ordered to do a terrible thing, witness: "Thus saith the Lord God of Israel, Put every man his sword by his side, and go in and out from gate to gate throughout the camp, and slay every man his brother and every man his companion, and every man his neighbor. And the children of Levi did according to the word of Moses: and there fell of the people that day about three thousand men!" Was not this a terrible thing to do, and a terrible thing to have to take part in?
About this time, or just a little later, there were numbered of the nation 603,000 men 20 years of age and over that were able to be soldiers and go to war, and this indicated there were probably over three million men, women, and children total population. The killing of the three thousand is not so terrible when you consider that they perished instead of the three million, for God had told Moses: "Now therefore let Me alone, that My wrath may wax hot against them, and that I may consume them and I will make of thee a great nation" -- God's anger bursting into flame and burning them up!
The object of this article is to present the facts, the setting, the context, concerning the question "Who is on The Lord's side?" which appears nowhere else in The Bible, we think, in just these words. We carelessly and glibly sing the song "Who is on The Lord's Side" and doubtless feel that means us because we have joined the Church and have not been put in jail, maybe because we did not get caught, not yet. About six weeks before Moses asked this question he stood with the others at the foot of Mt. Sinai: Picture in your own mind what they saw as recorded in Exodus 19:17, etc:
"And Moses brought forth the people out of the camp 'To meet with God' . . . and Mt. Sinai was altogether on a smoke, because the Lord descended upon it in a fire: and the smoke thereof ascended up as the smoke of a furnace, and the whole mount quaked greatly. And when the voice of the trumpet sounded long, and waxed louder and louder, Moses spake, and God answered him by a voice."
Out of this fearful and terrible scenery they heard the voice of God speak the Ten Commandments. "And all the people saw the thunderings, and the lightning, and the noise of the trumpet, and the mountain smoking; and when the people saw it, they removed and stood afar off. And they said unto Moses, Speak thou with us, and we will hear, but let not God speak with us, lest we die." "And so terrible was the sight, that Moses said, I exceedingly fear and quake." -- Hebrews 12:21. After God finished speaking the Commandments to the people, He called Moses up into the Mount. There he spent forty days with God, receiving detailed laws concerning the peoples relations with one another, and to their God; and also instructions for building a tabernacle for God to come and abide with them; and then God gave him "The Ten Words" written on two tables of stone.
"The stones were the work of God, and the writing was the writing of God, written with the finger of God."
Beginning with the 32nd chapter it appears that Moses conference with God was interrupted, and He told Moses to go down and see about his people for they had quickly forgotten their experiences and promises at Sinai, had made a golden calf an idol and were worshipping it! It was then that the wrath and anger of God would have burst into flame and consumed all the three millions of them had not Moses stood in the breach and interceded for them, and as a result of Moses' mediation, they escaped with only three thousand being slain, instead of the three millions! When Moses stood in the gate of the camp, and said, Who is on the Lord's side? Let him come unto me! These were called upon to execute the vengeance of God!
If we consider ourselves as "being on The Lord's side" we would do well to consider our attitude towards the terribleness of sin and rebellion against God's Commandments. "The wages of sin is death, eternal death, but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus our Lord." When Moses saw the idolatry of the people, and how in their perverted worship they "sat down to eat and drink and rose up to play" -- this makes one think of things going on in many of our churches these days -- he became angry and threw down the two tables of stone on which the Commandments were written, and broke them. Later, God told him to cut out two stones and present them to God for a rewriting of The Commandments "with the finger of God." God now calls on you and me to present the tables of our heart to Him in order that The Spirit of God might write His Commandments upon them. Beware, take heed, if you are one who thinks and claims "Christ is in you" and yet there is not the desire to be obedient to every Commandment of God:
"Blessed are they that do His Commandments, that they may have a right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city." Rev. 22:14. "Who is on The Lord's side?"
January 4, 1964
Wednesday, June 14, 2006
Hell and Judgement - Walter Martin
"I will also forget thy children!" Is there not something wrong with the young people today? Maybe some light can be thrown on the situation by considering this quotation, for it is God Himself speaking.
"My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge: because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will also reject thee, that thou shalt be no priest to me: seeing thou has forgotten The Law of Thy God, I will also forget thy children!" Hosea 4:6.
Weigh these words! It is a terrible message of judgement! Destroyed on account of "lack of knowledge" or ignorance. Rejection and ignorance of "The Law of Our God!" The results: they shall be no priest to God, and God will forget their children, seeing they have forgotten "The Law of Thy God!" -- Protestantism gives us the true teaching of God's Word that every sincere believer is a priest unto his God. Have we not forgotten "The Law of Our God!" We "breach the Sabbath," and destroy "The Goods of God!" We mock and scorn His Laws regarding the home, marriage and sex relations. Our land is lousy with murderers, and yet quite a number of our states have decided that The Almighty did not know what He was talking about when He said:
"Whoso killeth any person, the murderer shall be put to death -- Moreover ye shall take no satisfaction for the life of a murderer, which is guilty of death: but he shall be surely put to death -- So ye shall not pollute the land wherein ye are: for blood it defileth the land: and the land cannot be cleansed of the blood that is shed therein, but by the blood of him that shed it. Defile not therefore the land which ye shall inhabit, wherein I dwell: for I The Lord dwell among the children of Israel." Numbers 35: 30-34.
Our land is also filled with stealing, lying and coveteousness. If this writer's appraisal is correct even many of the laws of our nation and states encourage its people to covet that which in God's sight belongs to another instead of teaching and urging them to take heed to one of the very first laws of God to fallen man to live by "the sweat of his own brow." We are trying to run over Almighty God Himself! And in order to make peace with men who deny and blaspheme The God we claim to serve, we turn and make war on God Himself! Shall we have peace with man by making war on God Almighty? Was it not Bill Shakespeare who said: "What fools these mortals be!"
"My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge!" What is your vocation, doctor, lawyer, teacher, etc.? Say you are a lawyer: If you had spent that same amount of time on your law books, court cases, decisions, etc. as you have on studying the Law of God and His Judgements, what kind of a lawyer would you be? If a doctor, what sort of doctor would you be if you had spent no more time studying the necessary subjects than you have spent learning of The Creator of the body -- "we are fearfully and wonderfully made" -- and taking heed to the injunction and invitation of The Great Physician to "Learn of Me?" Whatever one's vocation may be, their success or failure doubtless depends on their knowledge of the subject and their ability to make application of same. But fail or succeed, it is only temporal. But the knowledge of God, or lack of it, has to do with our Eternal Life, or eternal death! God says: "Cursed be the man that trusteth in man," and "He that trusteth in his own heart is a fool!"
"Search the Scriptures, they testify of Me," said Jesus Christ. "The Scriptures cannot be broken." Search and you will find the Almighty pleading with you:
"And the Lord said unto me, -- 0 that there were such an heart in them, that they would fear me, and keep all my commandments always, that it might be well with them, and with their children forever!" Deut. 5. 28-29.
"Oh, that my people had hearkened unto me, and Israel had walked in my ways! I should have soon subdued their enemies, and turned My Hand against their adversaries. The haters of The Lord should have submitted themselves unto Him: but their time should have endured forever. He should have fed them with the finest of the wheat: and with honey out of the rock should I have satisfied thee." Psalm 81: 13-16.
"Thus saith the Lord, thy Redeemer -- 0 that thou hadst hearkened to my commandments! Then had thy peace been as a river, and thy righteousness as the waves of the sea: thy seed had been as the sand." Isaiah 48. 17-17.
For the sake of the children we should not forget the "Law of Our God!"
MAY 19, 1962
"My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge: because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will also reject thee, that thou shalt be no priest to me: seeing thou has forgotten The Law of Thy God, I will also forget thy children!" Hosea 4:6.
Weigh these words! It is a terrible message of judgement! Destroyed on account of "lack of knowledge" or ignorance. Rejection and ignorance of "The Law of Our God!" The results: they shall be no priest to God, and God will forget their children, seeing they have forgotten "The Law of Thy God!" -- Protestantism gives us the true teaching of God's Word that every sincere believer is a priest unto his God. Have we not forgotten "The Law of Our God!" We "breach the Sabbath," and destroy "The Goods of God!" We mock and scorn His Laws regarding the home, marriage and sex relations. Our land is lousy with murderers, and yet quite a number of our states have decided that The Almighty did not know what He was talking about when He said:
"Whoso killeth any person, the murderer shall be put to death -- Moreover ye shall take no satisfaction for the life of a murderer, which is guilty of death: but he shall be surely put to death -- So ye shall not pollute the land wherein ye are: for blood it defileth the land: and the land cannot be cleansed of the blood that is shed therein, but by the blood of him that shed it. Defile not therefore the land which ye shall inhabit, wherein I dwell: for I The Lord dwell among the children of Israel." Numbers 35: 30-34.
Our land is also filled with stealing, lying and coveteousness. If this writer's appraisal is correct even many of the laws of our nation and states encourage its people to covet that which in God's sight belongs to another instead of teaching and urging them to take heed to one of the very first laws of God to fallen man to live by "the sweat of his own brow." We are trying to run over Almighty God Himself! And in order to make peace with men who deny and blaspheme The God we claim to serve, we turn and make war on God Himself! Shall we have peace with man by making war on God Almighty? Was it not Bill Shakespeare who said: "What fools these mortals be!"
"My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge!" What is your vocation, doctor, lawyer, teacher, etc.? Say you are a lawyer: If you had spent that same amount of time on your law books, court cases, decisions, etc. as you have on studying the Law of God and His Judgements, what kind of a lawyer would you be? If a doctor, what sort of doctor would you be if you had spent no more time studying the necessary subjects than you have spent learning of The Creator of the body -- "we are fearfully and wonderfully made" -- and taking heed to the injunction and invitation of The Great Physician to "Learn of Me?" Whatever one's vocation may be, their success or failure doubtless depends on their knowledge of the subject and their ability to make application of same. But fail or succeed, it is only temporal. But the knowledge of God, or lack of it, has to do with our Eternal Life, or eternal death! God says: "Cursed be the man that trusteth in man," and "He that trusteth in his own heart is a fool!"
"Search the Scriptures, they testify of Me," said Jesus Christ. "The Scriptures cannot be broken." Search and you will find the Almighty pleading with you:
"And the Lord said unto me, -- 0 that there were such an heart in them, that they would fear me, and keep all my commandments always, that it might be well with them, and with their children forever!" Deut. 5. 28-29.
"Oh, that my people had hearkened unto me, and Israel had walked in my ways! I should have soon subdued their enemies, and turned My Hand against their adversaries. The haters of The Lord should have submitted themselves unto Him: but their time should have endured forever. He should have fed them with the finest of the wheat: and with honey out of the rock should I have satisfied thee." Psalm 81: 13-16.
"Thus saith the Lord, thy Redeemer -- 0 that thou hadst hearkened to my commandments! Then had thy peace been as a river, and thy righteousness as the waves of the sea: thy seed had been as the sand." Isaiah 48. 17-17.
For the sake of the children we should not forget the "Law of Our God!"
MAY 19, 1962
Tuesday, June 13, 2006
Applied Christianity - Walter Martin
The Voice of Retribution:
"For I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me; and showing mercy unto thousands of them that love me and keep my commandments." -- Part of the Second Commandment, Exodus 20:5-6.
If you are one of those who belong to a Protestant Christian Church, and yet rail at God here revealed, may we suggest that you make haste and delay not to have your name rubbed off the rolls -- if it may be a lengthening of your tranquility!
History makes some singular developments in respect tc the retributive justice of God. Nations, communities, families, individuals, furnish fearful illustrations that "the wicked is snared in the work of his own hand," and that "the way of the transgressor is hard!" Wrong doing, oppression, crime, are, by no means reserved only for a future retribution. They draw after them an almost certain retribution in this world. "There is no peace to the wicked, saith my God!" He may seem to prosper -- riches may increase -- he may revel in pleasures, and shine in honors, and seem to have all that heart can wish; yet there is a canker-worm somewhere gnawing at the very vitals of happiness -- a blight somewhere upon all that he possesses. History bears at least an incidental yet decisive testimony on this point.
Perilous it is indeed to a man's well being in this life -- to his peace, his reputation, his best interest -- to do wrong. Possibly the wrong doer may not suffer himself, yet most certainly his children, and his children's children will pay the penalty of his misdeeds. Man is undoubtedly so constituted, whether regard be had to his physical, social, intellectual, and moral nature, as to make him a happy being. The right, the unperverted use of all his powers and susceptibilities would not fail to secure to him a high an(t continual state of earthly happiness and prosperity. And not only is the human machine itself so fitted up as to accomplish such an end, but the whole external world, the theatre in which man has to live, act, and enjoy, is fitted up in beautiful harmony with the same benevolent end. Every jar of human happiness, every arrest or curtailment or extinction of it, is the fruit of transgression or perversion. The violation of a natural law is as sure to be followed by retribution as the violation of a Divine Law. The history of individuals, families, communities, nations, is full of such retributions!
"Be sure your sin will find you out" Numbers 32:23.
"It shall not be well with the wicked." Ecclesiastes 8:13.
"As I have done, so God hath requited me." Judges 1:7.
"Oh, that they would consider their latter end." Deut. 32:29.
The domestic peace and prosperity of the good old patriarch Jacob was sadly marred. He is compelled to become at an early age, an exile from his father's house -- to flee before the aroused wrath of his brother -- to suffer a long oppression and wrong in the family of Laban, his kinsman; and no sooner is he relieved from these domestic afflictions, than suddenly he is bereaved of his favorite wife -- Joseph is violently torn from his embrace by his own sons -- and at length Benjamin, the only object on which the affections of the aged father seemed to repose, must be yielded up to an uncertain destiny, and his cry is heard: "All these things are against me!"
Pharaoh defied the God of heaven and raised his hand to oppress the chosen people, and he perished miserably amid the ruins of his own kingdom. Egypt never recovered from the sock of Pharaoh's sin, but since has been the "basest of kingdoms."
David was a good man, yet he sinned a great sin. And his sin was of a domestic character. And how grievously was be afterward afflicted in his domestic relations, his subsequent history remains the sad memorial: The Voice of God announced, "The sword shall never depart from your house!" His son Amnon raped his half-sister Tamar. Absalom, her brother, killed Ammon! Later on Absalom usurped his father's throne and drove him out, etc., etc. Yet David was a "man after God's heart" -- a man after God's heart in the way he repented and accepted the severe judgment of God, reminding one of the words of Job: "Yea, though He slay me, yet will I trust Him!"
Adonibezek, who had conquered 70 kings, and having cut off their thumbs and big toes, made them eat under his table, is at length conquered by the invading Israelites, who in turn cut off his thumbs and big toes. He acknowledged the retributive justice of the act when he said, "As I have done, so God hath requited me."
Examples crowd upon us from every quarter; every neighborhood furnishes them! Haman was hung on the gallows he built for Mordecai. Dogs ate the carcass of Queen Jezebel, and licked up the blood of her husband, King Ahab. The Herods furnish fearful examples. But consider Pontius Pilate: many of us quote his name every Sunday in public worship: "Suffered under Pontius Pilate!"
"Pilate, vacillating between the monitions of conscience and a miserable time serving policy, delivered up Jesus to be crucified. He believed him to be innocent; yet that his own loyalty to Caesar might not be suspected, he did violence to his conscience and condemned the innocent. He must secure his friendship of Caesar, though it be fit the expense of the most appalling crime. But how miserably he failed; and there was in the retribution which followed a striking fitness of the punishment to the crime. He hesitated at nothing to please his imperial master at Rome. Yet but two years afterward he was banished by this same emperor into a distant province, where, in disgrace and abandonment, and with a burden on his conscience which was as the burning steel, he put an end to an existence which was too wretched to be borne!" "Be sure your sin will find you out!" "He that confesseth and forsaketh his sin shall find mercy."
OCTOBER 30, 1965
"For I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me; and showing mercy unto thousands of them that love me and keep my commandments." -- Part of the Second Commandment, Exodus 20:5-6.
If you are one of those who belong to a Protestant Christian Church, and yet rail at God here revealed, may we suggest that you make haste and delay not to have your name rubbed off the rolls -- if it may be a lengthening of your tranquility!
History makes some singular developments in respect tc the retributive justice of God. Nations, communities, families, individuals, furnish fearful illustrations that "the wicked is snared in the work of his own hand," and that "the way of the transgressor is hard!" Wrong doing, oppression, crime, are, by no means reserved only for a future retribution. They draw after them an almost certain retribution in this world. "There is no peace to the wicked, saith my God!" He may seem to prosper -- riches may increase -- he may revel in pleasures, and shine in honors, and seem to have all that heart can wish; yet there is a canker-worm somewhere gnawing at the very vitals of happiness -- a blight somewhere upon all that he possesses. History bears at least an incidental yet decisive testimony on this point.
Perilous it is indeed to a man's well being in this life -- to his peace, his reputation, his best interest -- to do wrong. Possibly the wrong doer may not suffer himself, yet most certainly his children, and his children's children will pay the penalty of his misdeeds. Man is undoubtedly so constituted, whether regard be had to his physical, social, intellectual, and moral nature, as to make him a happy being. The right, the unperverted use of all his powers and susceptibilities would not fail to secure to him a high an(t continual state of earthly happiness and prosperity. And not only is the human machine itself so fitted up as to accomplish such an end, but the whole external world, the theatre in which man has to live, act, and enjoy, is fitted up in beautiful harmony with the same benevolent end. Every jar of human happiness, every arrest or curtailment or extinction of it, is the fruit of transgression or perversion. The violation of a natural law is as sure to be followed by retribution as the violation of a Divine Law. The history of individuals, families, communities, nations, is full of such retributions!
"Be sure your sin will find you out" Numbers 32:23.
"It shall not be well with the wicked." Ecclesiastes 8:13.
"As I have done, so God hath requited me." Judges 1:7.
"Oh, that they would consider their latter end." Deut. 32:29.
The domestic peace and prosperity of the good old patriarch Jacob was sadly marred. He is compelled to become at an early age, an exile from his father's house -- to flee before the aroused wrath of his brother -- to suffer a long oppression and wrong in the family of Laban, his kinsman; and no sooner is he relieved from these domestic afflictions, than suddenly he is bereaved of his favorite wife -- Joseph is violently torn from his embrace by his own sons -- and at length Benjamin, the only object on which the affections of the aged father seemed to repose, must be yielded up to an uncertain destiny, and his cry is heard: "All these things are against me!"
Pharaoh defied the God of heaven and raised his hand to oppress the chosen people, and he perished miserably amid the ruins of his own kingdom. Egypt never recovered from the sock of Pharaoh's sin, but since has been the "basest of kingdoms."
David was a good man, yet he sinned a great sin. And his sin was of a domestic character. And how grievously was be afterward afflicted in his domestic relations, his subsequent history remains the sad memorial: The Voice of God announced, "The sword shall never depart from your house!" His son Amnon raped his half-sister Tamar. Absalom, her brother, killed Ammon! Later on Absalom usurped his father's throne and drove him out, etc., etc. Yet David was a "man after God's heart" -- a man after God's heart in the way he repented and accepted the severe judgment of God, reminding one of the words of Job: "Yea, though He slay me, yet will I trust Him!"
Adonibezek, who had conquered 70 kings, and having cut off their thumbs and big toes, made them eat under his table, is at length conquered by the invading Israelites, who in turn cut off his thumbs and big toes. He acknowledged the retributive justice of the act when he said, "As I have done, so God hath requited me."
Examples crowd upon us from every quarter; every neighborhood furnishes them! Haman was hung on the gallows he built for Mordecai. Dogs ate the carcass of Queen Jezebel, and licked up the blood of her husband, King Ahab. The Herods furnish fearful examples. But consider Pontius Pilate: many of us quote his name every Sunday in public worship: "Suffered under Pontius Pilate!"
"Pilate, vacillating between the monitions of conscience and a miserable time serving policy, delivered up Jesus to be crucified. He believed him to be innocent; yet that his own loyalty to Caesar might not be suspected, he did violence to his conscience and condemned the innocent. He must secure his friendship of Caesar, though it be fit the expense of the most appalling crime. But how miserably he failed; and there was in the retribution which followed a striking fitness of the punishment to the crime. He hesitated at nothing to please his imperial master at Rome. Yet but two years afterward he was banished by this same emperor into a distant province, where, in disgrace and abandonment, and with a burden on his conscience which was as the burning steel, he put an end to an existence which was too wretched to be borne!" "Be sure your sin will find you out!" "He that confesseth and forsaketh his sin shall find mercy."
OCTOBER 30, 1965
Monday, June 12, 2006
Applied Christianity - Walter Martin
May 31, 1975
In the First Psalm, God says the man that delights himself in "The Law of the Lord" shall be like a tree planted by the riverside, his leaf shall not wither and whatsoever he doeth shall prosper."
"But the wicked are like the troubled sea, when it cannot rest, whose waters cast up mire and dirt. There is no peace, saith My God to the wicked." Isaiah 57:20, 21
We cry peace, peace, but make little effort, if any, to cut out our personal wickedness and indifference, or to rise up and put away the lawlessness all about and around. In Amos 5:23-24, God says:
"Take thou away from me the noise of thy songs, for I will not hear the melody of thy viols. But let judgement run down as waters, and righteousness as a mighty stream."
In plain everyday language God is here saying: I am sick of your songs and music, take it away. What I want is judgment and righteousness established in the land like mighty rivers and streams that bless the earth and her inhabitants. That God's Kingdom might come and His will be done on earth as in Heaven!
"The lapse of Church discipline was a certain symptom of political and social anarchy," said the English Historian, Terry, as he looked across centuries of experiences of the English people. Church anarchy in doctrine and conduct produces political and social anarchy. Neglect and unbelief of God's Book, The Bible, produces Church anarchy! If you are a Church member you can do something to correct this situation by being faithful to your vows to serve God.
"When thou vowest a vow unto God, defer not to pay it, for He hath no pleasure in fools; Pay that which thou hast vowed." Eccles. 5:4
All that has been said in the above concerning God's message in the Second Psalm, might be summed up in just one short verse of The New Testament, Romans 6:23:
"For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord." "Sin is any want of conformity unto, or, transgression of the law of God."
It is the duty of every true and faithful witness of Jesus Christ to "cry aloud and spare not" to denounce every transgression of the law of God, and the rejection and departure from "one jot or tittle" of God's Ten Commandments which reveal the very character of the Omnipotent Creator. Such witnesses are not your enemies, but friends in that they seek to turn you away from the wrath of God. The wages of sin is death, and these faithful witnesses are seeking to "smite death's threatening wave before you."
This quote is from the old and beloved Christian Hymn:
"God be with you till we meet again, smite death's threatening wave before you, keep love's banner floating over you, --"
The Almighty has engaged Himself by means of the New Covenant, and the work and ministry of The Lord Jesus Christ and The Holy Spirit, to write these Laws upon the hearts and in the minds of true and faithful believers. "We are workers together with God," don't rage against Him!
"The wages of sin is death; but the Gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ Our Lord." Death does a mighty big business every day! Probably all over the world at this moment there are between 150,000 and 200,000 dead bodies waiting to be buried. And tomorrow there will be an additional like number, with you and me included in one of those tomorrows! If just one day's "crop of death" was gathered in one place, what a territory would be covered! Great nations, great institutions, companies, unions, and concerns of all kinds also die, perish off the earth.
John Bunyan said, give a little thought every day to your own funeral in order that you might be prepared! "O Death --!" The Lord Jesus Christ is the Mighty Conqueror of Death! He raised the dead! He raised Himself from the dead! Don't neglect and reject Him and His "Wonderful Words of Life." Surrender! Submit! -- We deliberately use the word "Submit" rather than "Commit", as it appears to us there is quite a difference. In Mark 1:15, Jesus said, " --The time is fulfilled, and the Kingdom of God is at hand; repent ye and believe the Gospel"
"God be with you -- smite death's threatening wave before you!"
In the First Psalm, God says the man that delights himself in "The Law of the Lord" shall be like a tree planted by the riverside, his leaf shall not wither and whatsoever he doeth shall prosper."
"But the wicked are like the troubled sea, when it cannot rest, whose waters cast up mire and dirt. There is no peace, saith My God to the wicked." Isaiah 57:20, 21
We cry peace, peace, but make little effort, if any, to cut out our personal wickedness and indifference, or to rise up and put away the lawlessness all about and around. In Amos 5:23-24, God says:
"Take thou away from me the noise of thy songs, for I will not hear the melody of thy viols. But let judgement run down as waters, and righteousness as a mighty stream."
In plain everyday language God is here saying: I am sick of your songs and music, take it away. What I want is judgment and righteousness established in the land like mighty rivers and streams that bless the earth and her inhabitants. That God's Kingdom might come and His will be done on earth as in Heaven!
"The lapse of Church discipline was a certain symptom of political and social anarchy," said the English Historian, Terry, as he looked across centuries of experiences of the English people. Church anarchy in doctrine and conduct produces political and social anarchy. Neglect and unbelief of God's Book, The Bible, produces Church anarchy! If you are a Church member you can do something to correct this situation by being faithful to your vows to serve God.
"When thou vowest a vow unto God, defer not to pay it, for He hath no pleasure in fools; Pay that which thou hast vowed." Eccles. 5:4
All that has been said in the above concerning God's message in the Second Psalm, might be summed up in just one short verse of The New Testament, Romans 6:23:
"For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord." "Sin is any want of conformity unto, or, transgression of the law of God."
It is the duty of every true and faithful witness of Jesus Christ to "cry aloud and spare not" to denounce every transgression of the law of God, and the rejection and departure from "one jot or tittle" of God's Ten Commandments which reveal the very character of the Omnipotent Creator. Such witnesses are not your enemies, but friends in that they seek to turn you away from the wrath of God. The wages of sin is death, and these faithful witnesses are seeking to "smite death's threatening wave before you."
This quote is from the old and beloved Christian Hymn:
"God be with you till we meet again, smite death's threatening wave before you, keep love's banner floating over you, --"
The Almighty has engaged Himself by means of the New Covenant, and the work and ministry of The Lord Jesus Christ and The Holy Spirit, to write these Laws upon the hearts and in the minds of true and faithful believers. "We are workers together with God," don't rage against Him!
"The wages of sin is death; but the Gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ Our Lord." Death does a mighty big business every day! Probably all over the world at this moment there are between 150,000 and 200,000 dead bodies waiting to be buried. And tomorrow there will be an additional like number, with you and me included in one of those tomorrows! If just one day's "crop of death" was gathered in one place, what a territory would be covered! Great nations, great institutions, companies, unions, and concerns of all kinds also die, perish off the earth.
John Bunyan said, give a little thought every day to your own funeral in order that you might be prepared! "O Death --!" The Lord Jesus Christ is the Mighty Conqueror of Death! He raised the dead! He raised Himself from the dead! Don't neglect and reject Him and His "Wonderful Words of Life." Surrender! Submit! -- We deliberately use the word "Submit" rather than "Commit", as it appears to us there is quite a difference. In Mark 1:15, Jesus said, " --The time is fulfilled, and the Kingdom of God is at hand; repent ye and believe the Gospel"
"God be with you -- smite death's threatening wave before you!"
Sunday, June 11, 2006
ARMINIUS, TO CALVIN, TO PAUL - Miles J. Stanford
There are three men whose theology has a greater influence upon the lives of Christians today than that of any who have ever lived. Sad to say, Jacobus Arminius and John Calvin are far in advance of the Apostle Paul.
JACOBUS ARMINIUS (1560-1609) -- Jacob Arminius was born in Amsterdam, Holland, four years before the death of John Calvin. In time, he became a champion of Calvinistic Dutch Reformed theology. Ultimately chosen to write a defense against attacks upon Calvinism, Arminius came to the conclusion that many of Calvin's doctrines were indefensible. In rejecting Calvinism, and in the attempt to construct his own scheme of beliefs, Arminius made the fatal mistake of mixing Pelagian dogma with the Scriptures.
PELAGIUS -- Early in the fifth century, the English monk Pelagius sought to reform the Roman Catholic Church. He thus became a life-long theological antagonist of Augustine. Pelagius insisted that man did not inherit Adam's sinfulness, but was only affected by his example. He believed that man's will was free to choose for, or against, God. Hence, via Arminius, we have our present-day "Christian humanism," i.e., man is master of his fate, with God's help--if he chooses it.
ARMINIANISM TODAY -- Coming from humanistic Pelagianism instead of from the Scriptures, Arminianism bases salvation upon the will of fallen man. It is an anti-sovereignty, anti-security, anti-dispensational, anti-grace, pro-works religion. The teaching is that God, through redemption, bestows a "common grace" upon all men, thereby making it possible for the individual to exercise his free will either for, or against, God.
FREE WILL? -- According to Arminianism, man is not totally depraved--his will remains free to decide his own destiny. Its maxim is, "It is mine to be willing to believe, and it is the part of God's grace to assist." To Arminianism, "foreknowledge" means that God foreknows those who will receive the Saviour, and upon that basis He elects them. Those who choose to reject the Saviour, He condemns.
Since the final decision is made by man, and God then acts upon that decision, man is sovereign. In that case, God determines nothing, He gives nothing except so-called common grace which removes the inability to choose Him, and He secures nothing.
Thus the sinner's choice of God, and not God's choice of the sinner, is the ultimate factor in Arminian salvation. Those elected by God are chosen only in the sense that He foresaw their faith and good works--which arise from themselves and are not wrought of God. The human will is exalted to the place of sovereignty and, according to this system, man becomes his own saviour.
As Dr. A.H. Strong wrote, "It is important to understand that, in Arminian usage, grace is simply the restoration of man's natural ability to act for himself; grace never actually saves him, but only enables him to save himself ... if he will.
SOVEREIGN MAN? -- In that the Arminian begins on the premise of his own free will, his end is on the same assumption. He feels that since he can come in, he can therefore go out, by his free will. What little security and assurance of salvation he has is founded upon his own momentary merit, plus whatever emotional experiences he can muster along the way. "After I accepted Jesus I wasn't sure if I was really saved; but when I had my "baptism in the Holy Ghost," and spoke in tongues, then I was sure." Consequently the Arminian's existence is experience-based, only to be beset by fears, uncertainties, backslidings, and failure.
Doctrinally established unconditional eternal security grounded upon faith in the finished work of the Lord Jesus Christ is utterly rejected by the Arminian. He sedulously avoids all Scripture that establishes eternal security, or at best seeks to discredit and deny it. He gravitates to out-of-context references that seem to him to militate against eternal security.
Arminianism's misleading error in the field of salvation is that it persists in attempting to build the Christian's standing upon his feeble and faltering daily life, rather than on the sufficient and immutable merit of the Lord Jesus Christ. The Arminian salvation becomes little more than a system of human conduct; for, though the idea of regeneration is incorporated, it is, in the Arminian idea of it, of no abiding value, being supported only by a supposed human merit. --L.S. Chafer (Systematic Theology III:356)
SEMI-PELAGIANISM -- Through a process of modification, Pelagianism spawned Semi-Pelagianism. It has been described as follows:
Though it retained much of the philosophical basis of its parent's humanism and rationalism, as opposed to divine revelation, Semi-Pelagianism compromised with truth sufficiently to gain favorable audience with some Christians. It became, thus, a far more dangerous form of infidelity than its parent. As such, it eventually overcame the Roman Catholic Church and returned it to the very Pelagianism condemned by Augustine. Semi-Pelagianism changed its disguise and further altered its voice at a later date to become known as Arminianism, following some refinements and adjustments to Christianity.
Dr. Lorraine Boettner has stated:
Arminianism existed for centuries only as a heresy in the outskirts of true Christianity. In fact, it was not championed by an organized Christian Church until the year 1784, at which time it was incorporated into the system of doctrine of the Methodist Church in England by John Wesley.
Today, Christendom has been overrun by Arminianism. It has been spread mainly by the Pentecostal and Holiness movements, and especially by the out-of-control Charismatic movement. Then too, there is the influence of the many Arminian denominations, such as the Assembly of God, Nazarene, Mennonite, Christian & Missionary Alliance, and many others.
Almost all truly born-again Christians begin as Arminians, with their "free will" and their self-centered life and service for "Jesus." The tragedy is that far too many never get beyond that baby stage, but go on into the fleshly emotionalism of full-fledged charismatic Arminianism.
A clearer view of Arminianism may be gained from the following listing:
Human depravity has not rendered man incapable of savingly exercising his will to trust Jesus for salvation.
God's grace is resistible in the final sense so that man can ultimately thwart His purpose to save him.
God's election is conditioned upon His divine foresight of faith in certain men whom God, then, designates as His elect.
Jesus' atonement was exactly the same for everyone with no discrimination whatever, rendering all men savable, but actually guaranteeing the salvation of none.
Final salvation is possible for believers, but ultimate victory rests with their continuance in faith, so that ultimate apostasy may be possible for the saved.
STATEMENT -- Dominated by the free will of man, Arminianism is characterized by fleshly lawlessness. The Arminian's center and object is himself. It is all to be rejected! "Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them who cause divisions and offenses contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them" (Rom. 16:17).
JOHN CALVIN (1509-1564) -- Calvin was the theologian of the Reformers, second only to Arminius in the extent of his doctrinal influence upon believers today. Calvin's tenets were Bible-based, and could be classed as "far right." However, he had a tendency to extremism, and hence went too far in some areas of his theology. "Too far," whether right or left, usually results in heresy.
Conversely, Arminius, the one-time Calvinist, in his recoil from Calvin's extremes, went all the way to the left, and kept right on going over the edge into Semi-Pelagianism. In these two men we have the far right and the far left of theology among believers today.
The core of original Calvinism is seen in the following five doctrinal points, known as "TULIP"-- the tulip that never blossomed!
Total depravity
Unconditional election
Limited atonement
Irresistible grace
Perseverance of the saints
There are many "moderate" Calvinists today who do not adhere to some of the original extremes, such as point three. Hence there are three-point, four-point, and four-and-a-half-point Calvinists. We will simply comment on the more prevalent aspect of Calvinism, known as Covenant theology.
COVENANT CALVINISM -- We will only consider the first point of Calvinist error, Total Depravity. Calvin did not possess all-important doctrinal balance. By pushing the truth of God's sovereignty to an extreme in the realm of the new birth, he all but eliminated man's responsibility.
Calvinists define Total Depravity as "total inability." Their proof text is Ephesians 2:1, "And you hath He made alive, who were dead in trespasses and sins." Their illustration for total inability is a man physically dead, who cannot see, hear, feel, speak, or move. Hence he is totally unable to respond to God in any way--he cannot believe.
Calvinism's solution to their self-created problem is regeneration. It is taught that the Holy Spirit first regenerates those whom God has elected; He thereby gives them life so that they can exercise faith and live. In all of their writings it can be seen that they place regeneration before faith--one must be saved in order to be saved!
In their book, Five Points of Calvinism Defended, D. Steele and C. Thomas write:
The Holy Spirit creates within the sinner a new heart or a' new nature. This is accomplished through regeneration or the new birth by which the sinner is made a child of God and is given spiritual life. His will is renewed through this process so that he spontaneously comes to Christ of his own free choice.
Because he is given a new nature so that he loves righteousness, and because his mind is enlightened so that he understands and believes the Gospel, the renewed sinner freely and willingly turns to Christ by the inward supernatural call of the Spirit, who through regeneration makes him alive and creates within him faith and repentance.
How simple is the refutation of this scholarly error: The corpse is not the man! Death is always separation, not obliteration. Paul wrote to Timothy, "But she that liveth in pleasure is dead while she liveth" (1 Tim. 5:6). James stated, "Of His own will begat He us with the Word of truth" (James 1: 18). The Lord Jesus said, "The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God; and they that hear shall live" (John 5:25).
Dr. Samuel Ridout was clear about this:
"Being born again (regenerated), not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible seed, by the Word of God, which liveth and abideth forever" (1 Pet. 1:23). The new birth is "by the Word of God." That it is a sovereign act of God, by His Spirit, none can question. But this verse forbids us to separate, as has sometimes been done, new birth from faith in the Gospel.
It is often taught that new birth precedes faith; but here we are told that the Word of God is the instrument in the new birth. "Faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the Word of God"; "the Word which by the Gospel is preached." John 3:3 and 3:16 must ever go together. There is no such anomaly possible as a man born again, but who has not yet believed the Gospel.
COVENANTISM -- Without benefit of Scripture, Calvinism is based upon a single "covenant of grace," whereby all of Israel's covenants are "spiritualized," thereby making the Church to be spiritual Israel: "the continuing covenanted community." As Martyn Lloyd-Jones put it, "Paul is asserting that the Church is now the Kingdom, that what the Jewish nation was in the OT the Church is now." (The Unsearchable Riches of Christ, p. 48)
VICARIOUS LAW-KEEPING -- Calvinist teaching concerning salvation is that Christ gained eternal life for the elect by keeping the Law on their behalf ("active obedience"), and, in dying ("passive obedience"), He paid the penalty of the broken Law. The heart of all Calvinism is the Law! Remove their doctrine from that center and there is total collapse.
Dr. Wm. R. Newell refutes this "vicarious" error as follows:
"Christ is the end of the Law for righteousness to everyone that believeth" (Rom. 10: 4). The words "Christ is the end of the Law" cannot mean that He is the fulfillment of what the Law required. The Law required obedience to its precepts--death for disobedience. Now Christ died for our disobedience!
If it be answered, that before He died He fulfilled the claims of the Law, kept it perfectly, and that this law-keeping of His was reckoned as over against our breaking of the Law, then I ask, Why should Christ die?
If the claims of the Law were met in His earthly obedience, and if that earthly life of earthly obedience was "reckoned" or "credited" to those who believe, the curse of the Law has been removed by "vicarious law-keeping." If so, why should Christ die? "For if righteousness come by the Law, then Christ is dead in vain" (Gal. 2:21).
It is because Covenant theology has kept us Gentiles under the Law--if not as a means of righteousness, then as a "rule of life,"--that all the trouble has arisen. The Law.; is no more a rule of life than it is a means of righteousness. Walking in the Spirit has now, in this dispensation of Grace, taken the place of walking in ordinances. The Father has another principle under which He has placed His saints: "ye are not under law, but under grace"! (Romans, Verse by Verse, p. 391)
WILDERNESS WANDERING -- Calvinism will go as far as the Cross for salvation, but then it turns back to the OT and the Synoptics, in order to have a rule for the Christian life. Like the Israelites whom it seeks to spiritually emulate, it fears the freedom of Canaan, only to turn back into the wilderness struggle. It is Romans Seven all the way for the Calvinist. Arminianism at least goes as far as Pentecost, only to turn back to its pre-Cross "Jesus."
The disqualification of Calvinism is in its failure to "rightly divide" between Israel and the Church, Law and Grace--it considers the Body of Christ to be "spiritual Israel." As John Stott put it, "Although Jesus was greater than Moses and although His message was more Gospel than Law, yet he did choose twelve apostles as the nucleus of a new Israel to correspond to the twelve patriarchs and tribes of old." (Christian Counter-Culture --
The Message of the Sermon on the Mount -- Inter Varsity Press)
In his Systematic Theology VII:211, Dr. Chafer struck down that error:
It should be made emphatic that to observe distinction between Judaism and Christianity is the beginning of wisdom in understanding the Bible. Theologians of past generations have made no greater mistake than to suppose, despite all the scriptural evidence to the contrary, that Judaism and Christianity are one and the same, or as some have put it, "One is the bud and the other is the blossom." Judaism has not merged into Christianity. This is a colossal error of Covenant theology perpetuated to the present day.
ECCENTRIC EXEGESIS -- Calvinism insists that Jesus taught the spiritual aspects of the Mosaic Law in the Sermon on the Mount, and that He instructed His disciples in that law. That is true. Since the disciples were saved, their reasoning goes, the Church is therefore subject to the law-teachings of the Sermon. That is untrue!
At that time, in that dispensation, the disciples were not Christians. There was no such thing as a Christian until the day of Pentecost. These believing disciples were Messianic Jews, "saved" unto the earthly kingdom. Their Messiah-King was instructing them concerning the laws of that coming millennial, theocratic kingdom.
No Christian ever was, ever is, nor ever will be under law, whether Mosaic, Sermonic, or Millennial! Arminianism and Calvinism may put the Christian under law, the believer may put himself under law as his rule of life, but the Lord Jesus never did, Paul never did, and the Holy Spirit never will!
Rather than put the believer under law, the Spirit places him into death via the Cross, and thereby positions him above the law and into the freedom of the life of the glorified Lord Jesus Christ. "Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be joined to another, even to Him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God." "Now we are delivered from the law, having died to that wherein we Were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter [law]" (Rom. 7:4,6).
LIFE, NOT LAW! -- Within the believer the Holy Spirit applies "the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus"; not the law of condemnation and death (Rom. 8:2; 2 Cor. 3:6-9). The Spirit of Christ does not write any law upon the heart of any Christian--He ministers life, "that the life also of Jesus might be made manifest in our mortal flesh" (2 Cor. 4:11).
The kingdom law will be written on the heart of the redeemed Jew in the millennial kingdom, but now it is "Christ in you" (Col. 1:27). The Christian is not under law, nor is he under promise; he has the effect of the accomplished fact: "for to me to live is Christ" (Phil. 1:21).
The believer, dead to the law and alive to God in Christ risen, looks upon his Lord, not Israel's law. Christians, "with unveiled face beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord," not "even as by the law of the Lord" (2 Cor. 3:18).
Just as the Ten commandments were the declaration of the mind of God under the dispensation of the law; so now the Church is the engraving of Christ, "written, not in tables of stone, but in fleshly tables of the heart," to show forth the virtues of Him "who hath called us out of darkness into His marvelous light."
Law demands everything, but gives and changes nothing--it is meant to condemn. We may even turn the Lord Jesus into that letter of condemnation; we may take His life, for instance, and make it our law. We may say, "He has loved me, and done all this for me, and I ought to love Him, and do so much for Him, in return for His love, etc." Thus if we turn His love into our rule of life, it becomes the ministration of death; for the only thing a rule can do is condemn. Christianity is a nature, not a regulation.
LAW-BOUND -- The entire realm of the believer's identification with the Lord Jesus in His death and ascension is not only misunderstood, but usually avoided by Calvinism. Although Paul explicitly wrote that "sin shall not have dominion over you, for ye are not under law but under grace" (Rom. 6:1-4), Calvinism insists that the Spirit will enable the believer to live by the principle of law.
Paul pleads especially with these Calvinists: "Know ye not, brethren (for I speak to them that know the law), how that the law hath dominion over a man as long as he liveth?" (Rom. 7:1). They fail to understand the believer's death to the law. Beyond justification they lose their doctrinal footing and slip back to the ground of death (law), failing to move forward onto the ground of growth (Christ, our life).
Typical of all Covenant theologians, Dr. John Stott wrote in his Christian Counter-Culture, p. 75:
It is a new heart-righteousness which the prophets foresaw as one of the blessings of the Messianic age. "I will put my law within them, and I will write it upon their hearts," God promised through Jeremiah (31:33). How would He do it? He told Ezekiel: "I will put My Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in My statutes" (36:27).
Thus God's promises to put His law within us and to put His Spirit within us coincide. We must not imagine (as some do today) that when we have the Spirit we can dispense with the law, for what the Spirit does in our hearts is, precisely, to write God's law there.
It was not only to Timothy that Paul wrote, "Study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the Word of truth" (2 Tim. 2:15). Neither Jeremiah nor Ezekiel nor anyone else from Adam on down ever dreamed of such a thing as the Church, to say nothing of a Christian! That wondrous truth was God's hidden mystery, until Paul. We share Merrill Unger's thought:
The Church is said to be a "mystery" (Eph. 3:3), "the mystery of Christ" (Eph. 3:4). It was foretold, but not explained, by the Saviour (Matt. 16:18). was a truth unknown and unrevealed to anyone in OT times (Eph. 3:5), indeed a revelation and purpose "hid in God" throughout the ages (Eph. 3:9), first realized historically at Pentecost, and first revealed doctrinally to the Apostle Paul (Eph. 3:3-7). (The Baptizing Work of the Holy Spirit , p. 29)
Actually, God said through Jeremiah, "This shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel: I will put My law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts, and I will be their God, and they shall be My people" (Jer. 31:33). And through Ezekiel He promised to His nation, Israel, "Ye shall dwell in the land that I gave to your fathers; and ye shall be My people, and I will be your God" (Ezek. 36:28).
Dr. Chafer sets the record straight concerning Israel's kingdom:
There is a dangerous and entirely baseless sentiment abroad which assumes that every teaching of Jesus must be binding during this dispensation simply because He said it. The fact is overlooked that the Lord Jesus, while living under, keeping, and applying the Law of Moses, also taught the principles of His future kingdom, and, at the end of His ministry and in relation to His Cross, He also anticipated the teachings of grace. If this threefold division of the teachings of Christ is not recognized, there can be nothing but confusion of mind and consequent contradiction of truth.
The teachings of the kingdom (as centered in the Sermon on the Mount) have not yet been applied to any man. Since they anticipate the binding of Satan, a purified earth, the restoration of Israel, and the personal reign of the King, they cannot be applied until God's appointed time when these accompanying conditions on the earth have been brought to pass.
The kingdom laws will be addressed to Israel and, beyond them, to all nations which will enter the millennial kingdom. It will be the first and only universal reign of righteousness and peace in the history of the world. One nation was in view when the Law of Moses was in force on the earth; the individual is in view during this dispensation of grace. The whole social order of mankind will be in view when the kingdom is set up on earth.
The teachings of grace are perfect and sufficient in themselves. They provide for the instruction of the child of God in every situation which may arise. There is no need that they be supplemented, or augmented, by the addition of precepts from either the Law of Moses or the teachings of the kingdom. Law cannot give life, nor have, therefore, any control over it. (Systematic Theology IV:207)
John Darby was clear on the all-important differentiation:
I learn in the law that God abhors stealing, but it is not because under the law that I do not steal. All the Word of God is mine, and written for my instruction; yet for all that I am not under law. I am a Christian who has died with Christ on the Cross, and am not in the flesh, to which the law applied. I have died to the law by the body of Christ (Rom. 7:4).
We are not seeking to take away, nor negate any portion of the blessed Word of God. "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness" (2 Tim. 3:16). It is simply that the law as a rule of life for the believer obliterates the realization of identification with, and liberty in, the glorified Lord Jesus Christ.
BEWARE! -- Listed here are some of the better-known anti-dispensational, pro-law Calvinist authors whose theology has permeated the thinking of vast numbers of fundamental and dispensational believers today:
Adams, J. Edwards, J. Mauro, P. Steele, G.
Allis, 0. Fletcher, J. Morris, L. Stonehouse, N.
Bass, C. Fuller, D. Murray, G. Stott, J.
Baxter, R. Gerstner, J. Murray, J. Thomas, C.
Berkof, L. Gill, J. Nicole, R. Van Til, C.
Berkouwer, G. Goodwin, T. Owen, J. Van Til, H.
Boettner, L. Haldane, R. Packer, J. Vos, G.
Boice, J. Hamilton, F. Payne, H. Warfield, B.
Bonar, A. Hodge, A. Pink, A. Watson, R.
Boston, T. Hodge, C. Romaine, Wm. Watson, T.
Brown, D. Kromminga, D. Ryle, J. Wyngaarden, M.
Bunyan, J. Kuiper, H. Schaeffer, F.
Conn, H. Kuyper, A. Shedd, Wm.
Cox, Wm. Lloyd-Jones, M. Smeaton, G.
STATEMENT -- Calvinism emerged from the dark ages, but is still in the twilight--half in the darkness and death of the law, half in the light and life of the Saviour. It has a fleshly affinity for fetters, hence it is the life of the 'hang-dog' heart, the wretchedness of Romans Seven .
THE APOSTLE PAUL -- Finally, we come to the one who is least influential in the realm of doctrine among Christians today. There are three prominent reasons for this sad fact--the first two are negative, the third is positive.
FIRST -- Due to its humanistic base, Arminianism is suited to the carnal, Adam dominated Christian. As Dr. Kenneth Good states:
Man is by nature Arminian. The basically human philosophical foundation of Arminianism is quite compatible with man's inherent rationalism. Arminianism succeeds (and exceeds) because it appeals to the natural mind of man. It seems so reasonable! Unregenerate man approves it. It is eminently naturalistic, comfortably human. In this day of unprecedented emphasis upon the sufficiency of man, the doctrine must inevitably be successful among those who will not be regulated by divine revelation.
Arminianism is a subjective religion, swayed by human emotions rather than living by the Word of God. From start to finish it is man-centered, instead of God-centered. Man is really the object of it, not God.
SECOND -- Because of its objective, legalistic base, Calvinism is also compatible with the carnal, Adam-dominated Christian. As a rule, Calvinism emphasizes the external law, which hampers internal growth. Typical of the Calvinistic bent, the late Dr. Martyn Lloyd-Jones insisted that "the Christian must never say farewell to the law. Thank God, we are no longer under it as a way of salvation; but we are to keep it, we are to honor it, we are to practice it in our daily life" (Romans, Chapter Seven, p. 27).
Dr. James Kennedy, typical of the Calvinist "Reconstructionists," takes the law beyond the Church, stating: 'There is an old saying, 'You can't legislate morality.' I ask, What else can you legislate? The nation that endeavors to live according to His law is the nation that will be most free [!], the nation where people will enjoy the most happiness."
THIRD -- Because of Paul's near-exclusive teaching of the death-dealing Cross in the life of the believer, and the glorified Lord Jesus Christ as his life, the Apostle's ministry is in total opposition to the carnal Christian. This includes death to the law, to the world, and to the principle of indwelling sin as centered in the old Adamic man.
Wm. R. Newell explains the perennial problem concerning Paul's ministry:
Just as definitely as Moses received the law for Israel, so Paul received the Gospel of grace for us. How unutterably sad to find many Christians shutting their doors in the face of Paul as he comes to tell them the glories of the heavenly message given to him--the unsearchable riches of Christ. In his ..last epistle Paul mourns that "all which are in Asia"--of, which Ephesus was the capital! --"turned away from me" (2 Tim. 1: 15).
LIFE FROM DEATH -- While the Lord Jesus was on earth He ministered mainly to the nation of Israel, and to His Jewish disciples. His message had primarily to do with Himself as Messiah and King, and with His coming millennial kingdom.
Since Pentecost the glorified Lord Jesus ministers exclusively to the members of His Body, mainly via the Epistles of Paul. His life in the Christian is not by law, but by "the law of the Spirit of life." And that life is manifested as the fruit of the Spirit, which is "love, joy, peace, long-suffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, self-control; against such there is no law" (Gal. 5:22,23).
Paul's focal points are the believer's crucifixion with Christ, and His risen life in the believer. "For we who live are always delivered unto death for Jesus' sake, that the life also of Jesus might be made manifest in our mortal flesh" (2 Cor. 4: 11). The death of the Cross and the life of Christ are ministered to the believer by the indwelling Holy Spirit. He does not minister the law of Moses, nor the law of the King, but rather the life of the Lord. "For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death" (Rom. 8:2).
TO THE ROMANS, Paul ministered death to sin and the law: "Knowing this, that our old man is [was] crucified with Him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin." "Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ, that ye should be married to another, even to Him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God" (Rom. 6:6; 7:4).
TO THE CORINTHIANS, Paul presented the Object for the Christian's growth and walk: "But we all, with unveiled face beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord" (2 Cor. 3:18).
"For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shone in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ" (2 Cor. 4:6).
"For we who live are always delivered unto death for Jesus' sake, that the life also of Jesus might be made manifest in our mortal flesh" (2 Cor. 4:11).
TO THE GALATIANS, Paul ministered death to the law: "For I through the law died unto the law, that I might live unto God. I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I that live, but Christ liveth in me: and that life which I now live in the flesh I live in faith, the faith which is in the Son of God, who loved me, and gave Himself up for me" (Gal. 2:19,20).
TO THE EPHESIANS, Paul ministered the believer's position in Christ ascended: "And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus" (Eph. 2:6). "Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ" (Eph. 1:3).
TO THE COLOSSIANS, Paul focused upon Christ ascended: "If (since) ye, then, be risen with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ sitteth on the right hand of God. Set your affection on things above, not on things on the earth. For ye have died, and your life is hidden with Christ in God" (Col. 3:1-3).
TO THE PHILIPPIANS, Paul ministered the principles of the Christian life: "That I may know Him, and the power of His resurrection, and the fellowship of His sufferings, being made conformable unto His death" (Phil. 3:10).
CRITICAL CONTRASTS -- Judaism is earthly, horizontal; Christianity is heavenly, vertical. There is very little vertical, positional, in either Arminianism or Calvinism. Hence the former is characterized by self-gratification, the latter by self-righteousness.
Arminianism is horizontal. It cannot rise above man and his "free will," which binds the Arminian to himself: "I feel...." "God told me...." "Jesus, bless me, help me, heal me...." Arminianism is subjective, experience-centered; it seeks to feel life. Coming mainly from man, it has little or no defense against Adamic humanism--the world, the flesh, and the devil.
Calvinism is likewise horizontal. It struggles under the unbearable burden of the law as a "rule of life," centering upon Israel's millennial kingdom. Coming from man, Calvinism seeks to legislate life, hence has little or no defense against the power of sin and self-righteousness, spawned by the law.
Christianity is vertical, heavenly. It descends from There to here and the responsibilities and needs of a sin-bound and judged world. The Christian life is begins in and comes from heaven, to be manifested here as the light of life. "That the life also of Jesus might be made manifest in our mortal flesh" (2 Cor. 4:11).
Christianity, coming from the Lord Jesus Christ above, primarily via Paul, is by the Cross freed from the power and dominion of both humanistic Adam and death-dealing law. "For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death" (Rom. 8:2). "Reckon ye also yourselves to have died indeed unto sin [and the law], but to be alive unto God in Jesus Christ, our Lord" (Rom. 6:11). There is no rest or peace in Adamic sin, Mosaic law, or Satan's world. The ascended Lord Jesus Christ is alone our Object, our Rest, our Peace, our All.
Whatever our privileges in union with our risen Lord, it is all-important for the believer to live in the fear and faith of God, according to "the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus." It is not man's responsibility without law or under law; it is all over with us on either ground.
It is the responsibility of the new life of faith, which is that of a pilgrim and a stranger here--a life come down from heaven--a life which man lives as passing through this world, yet wholly out of it in spirit--a life of faith which finds in the Father's presence fullness of joy. --J. B. Stoney
STATEMENT -- The Church never has escaped from the law, the problem of Galatianism, to this day. During the early centuries, Romanism saw to that. The Reformation rescued the Church from the law as a way of justification, but not from the law as a means of sanctification (growth).
The crippling problem in the Body of Christ today is not so much the aberration of Arminianism, but the "righteousness" of Calvinism--the self-righteousness of the law. That has always been the issue, the answer to which was given to us through the apostle Paul. "Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty" (2 Cor. 3:17).
MAN-, LAW-, OR CHRIST-CENTERED?
CHARISMATIC ARMINIANISM -- MAN-CENTERED
CAUSE -- The error, the excess, the abject failure of Charismatic Arminianism can be summed up in one reversed principle: "Not Thy will, but mine be done." The Arminian founds his religion upon the theory of free will, i.e., his will. Thus the cause of the charismatic confusion and chaos is--sovereign man!
ELECTION -- Humanism can be clearly seen in the Arminian's "election." He claims that God chooses, or elects, those whom He foreknows will of their own volition, choose His Son. Hence the sinner's free-will choice of the Saviour, not God's eternal choice of the sinner, is the basis of the charismatic's election.
CONVERSION -- The Arminian does not believe man's depravity is total, but he does admit that some assistance is needed from God in order for him to choose the Saviour. To this end he invented the non-biblical "sufficient grace." This is said to remove the effects of the Fall to the extent that the sinner can exercise his free will in order to be saved.
SECURITY -- Since the Arminian's election and conversion are founded upon his free will, he can never have the benefit of eternal security--he can never be sure! Hence his constant reliance upon new (same old) ecstatic experiences, and repeated trips to the altar for yet another salvation experience.
THE TRUE BAPTISM -- The Arminian admits that the Holy Spirit indwells, or at least comes upon, those who choose the Saviour. But because the true baptism by the Spirit is non-experiential--a matter of faith in the Word--it is never enough for the experience-oriented charismatic. For him, faith without fireworks is dead!
THE CHARISMATIC BAPTISM -- This self-induced experience of fleshly feelings is sought by the Arminian for the following reasons: (a) Instead of founding his salvation upon justification (God's work for us in Christ), he bases his all upon sanctification (God's work in us by the Holy Spirit). The charismatic baptism in the Holy Spirit is the end, and Christ but the means to that end. (b) The true baptism by the Spirit being non-experiential, he considers it to be insufficient. (c) Therefore, he feels he must have a sensual, sanctifying baptism in order to live the Christian life and be fitted for heaven; he requires a "second blessing," a false baptism of enablement.
FICTITIOUS FAITH -- The charismatic Arminian claims that his subsequent baptism is received by faith; but faith, for him, is always a matter of feelings and works. In order to receive his baptism there are a number of "conditions" (works) that first must be fulfilled. To mention but a few, he must appropriate all that God has for him; he must yield himself completely; he must rid himself of all known sin. The effort, the agonizing, and the psychological pressure that he undergoes in seeking to meet these conditions are the very things that produce this nerve-fostered, self-satisfying "baptism" of feeling and sound.
TONGUES -- Because he must be holy in order to maintain his Christian life and have a semblance of assurance, he claims that this "baptism of fire" fills him with the "Holy Ghost," makes him righteous, and empowers him for service. His experience is the result of an over-wrought nervous system, which is evidenced by the ecstatic feelings and out-of-control chattering of the vocal chords. The climax is his all-important "gift of tongues."
Here is the vortex and substance of his faith--the hypnotic, hysterical, nerve-shattering experience of irrational feeling and noise. He has arrived! He is in the center of Charismatic Christianity. Yes, he has arrived, while at best barely begun--he has no real assurance of salvation, nor eternal security. His Christianity is contingent upon his free will, his obedience, his good works, his experiences; but there is neither reality nor security there--and he knows it. But how can he forsake that which feels so good?
HEALING HOAX -- The stress and strain of all this striving and insecurity, to say nothing of the unnatural toll upon his already over-wrought nervous system, soon bring on emotional illness and often breakdown. Psychosomatic symptoms make the charismatic a pawn in the hands of his fellow-charismatics--the egocentric, money-mad, nerve-manipulating "healers."
"DEMONISM" -- Since God to the Arminian is less than sovereign, Satan soon takes on that attribute in his thinking. Ere long this would-be "warrior" is reduced to a pathetic, harried victim of his own inflamed imagination--he is overwhelmed by sin, events, objects, people-controlled, and manipulated by "demons." God, his "Jesus," and the "Holy Ghost" become to him smaller and smaller, weaker and weaker; while Satan and his clouds of evil spirits become larger and larger, stronger and stronger.
BEWARE! -- "You can help these poor duped ones by intercession, by example (your own growth, security, and rest in the Lord Jesus Christ), and by assiduous avoidance. Fraternization only strengthens them in and subjects you to their errors. They cannot hear a word you say; their all-consuming intent is to get you into their "baptism."
"Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them who cause divisions and offenses contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them. For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ but heir own body, and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the innocent" (Rom. 16:17,18).
COVENANT CALVINISM -- MOSES-CENTERED
CAUSE -- Covenant Calvinism is at the opposite extreme of the theological spectrum from Charismatic Arminianism. To the Calvinist, God is absolutely sovereign, and unregenerate man is absolutely dead in sin.
CONVERSION -- The Calvinist reasons that since man is totally lost and dead in his sins he cannot possibly have any part in his conversion, unless God first regenerates him and gives him the necessary faith to believe.
LORDSHIP SALVATION -- To add to the legal confusion, the Calvinist insists that the sinner must submit to His Lordship in order to accept the Saviour. Law to begin with, law to continue with.
SECURITY? -- The Calvinist abhors as "pernicious" and "perverse" the term "eternal security," insisting upon the highly indicative term, "the perseverance of the saints"--which is no assurance of security at all, leaving him no better off than the apprehensive Arminian.
The late Dr. John Murray, highly respected Covenant theologian, wrote:
Let us not take refuge in our sloth or encouragement in our lust from the abused doctrine of the security of the believer. But let us appreciate the doctrine of the perseverance of the saints and recognize that we may entertain the faith of our security in Christ only as we persevere in faith and holiness to the end. (Redemption Accomplished and Applied, p. 155)
Under this legal stricture the Calvinist has no assurance of eternal security prior to his very end!
LAW -- The Calvinist is anti-dispensational, which causes him to err concerning the law. He is unable to keep the law in its scriptural realm (pre-Cross; post-Rapture), but seeks to use it as the Christian's "rule of life."
Dr. John R. Stott -- "We are set free from the law as a way of acceptance (justification). It is as a ground of justification that the law no longer binds [it never did!]. But as a standard of conduct (sanctification) the law is still binding." (Man Made New, p. 43)
THE LIFE OF GROWTH -- CHRIST-CENTERED
CAUSE -- The growing, Christ-centered believer knows the Father in His sovereignty, and understands His divine purpose for him: predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son (Rom. 8:29).
EFFECT -- His life is based upon the Father's pure grace and His perfect will. He is thankful that he is a "vessel of mercy," and that it is God who works in him both to will and to do of His good pleasure (Rom. 9:23; Phil. 2:13).
ELECTION -- The dependent believer acknowledges that the Father is the sole source of his election, and not his own will. "According as He hath chosen us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before Him, in love having predestinated us unto the adoption of sons by Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the good pleasure of His will" (Eph. 1:4,5).
CONVERSION -- In the Word he sees that God the Father sovereignly chose and then called him to salvation, that God the Holy Spirit prepared and drew him in such a manner that he responded to this calling and received God the Son willingly and responsibly. "In whom [Christ] ye trusted, after ye heard the Word of truth, the Gospel of your salvation, in whom also having believed, ye were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise" (Eph. 1:13).
SECURITY -- This believer rests eternally secure in the risen Lord Jesus Christ on the foundation of His finished work on the Cross and His faithful presence on his behalf at the right hand of God the Father. He rejoices that his life is safely "hidden with Christ in God" (Col. 3:3).
"ONE BAPTISM" -- The resting believer is assured by the Word that at conversion the Holy Spirit came to indwell him, never to depart (John 14:16), while at the same time He baptized him into the Body of Christ (1 Cor. 12:13). He is satisfied with this one all-inclusive baptism by the Spirit, and needs no other. "One Lord, one faith, one baptism" (Eph. 4:5). Believer's water baptism by immersion is but an illustration of, a testimony to, this one and only spiritual baptism.
"DEAD TO THE LAW" --The Pauline dispensational view of Scripture enables the life-centered believer to rightly divide the Word of truth to the extent that he knows the place and purpose of God's law.
He honors that law the Holy Spirit applied as a means of convicting him of sin, which prepared him for receiving the Saviour. "By the law is the knowledge of sin" (Rom. 3:20).
When converted he was positioned in the ascended Lord Jesus; he was not only identified with His risen life, but with His Calvary death unto sin as well (Rom. 6:3). In that death both the Lord Jesus and the believer died to the law. "The law hath dominion over a man as long as he liveth." "Ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ." "Now we are delivered from the law, having died to that in which we were held" (Rom. 7:1,4,6). By co-crucifixion we were delivered from the dominion of the law.
The law's just penalty--"the soul that sinneth, it shall die" (Ezek. 18:4)--was fulfilled by the believer's death with Christ. "For I, through the law, am dead to the law, that I might live unto God" (Gal. 2:19). Thus God's holy law is upheld, honored, and its claims fully met. It has no more jurisdiction over the dead and risen believer; he is now "married to another, even to Him who is raised from the dead" (Rom. 7:4).
THE CROSS -- It is by the work of the Cross that the Spirit deals with Adamic sin in the believer, not by law. When the growing believer struggles against the power of sin he finally learns the futility of his efforts, as set forth in Romans Seven. Then he sees that in the Lord Jesus he died unto sin's dominion (Rom. 6:7).
As he learns to reckon himself to have died unto sin and the law (Rom. 6: 11), he begins to rely upon the Holy Spirit to apply that finished work of the Cross to the old Adamic man within. He is thereby progressively liberated from the power of sin and the law, and has ever-increasing freedom to grow in the life that is Christ (2 Cor. 4: 11).
THE CHRIST-LIFE -- As for the NT "law of Christ," and the commands and exhortations that apply to the believer, his reliance is upon the Holy Spirit for their fulfillment in his life. "All the law is fulfilled in one word: Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself." "The love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Spirit" (Gal. 5:14; Rom. 5:5). The Word guides and instructs him as to his dependence upon, his walk in, the Spirit. "For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death" (Rom. 8:2).
The growing believer realizes that "the law is not made for a righteous man but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners" (1 Tim. 1:9). He learns to abide above in the Lord Jesus at the right hand of the Father, far above and beyond the law's dominion. His life, the life of the Lord Jesus Christ, is manifested by the "fruit of the Spirit," not by the works of the law. "The law is not of faith"; it was never meant to produce this fruit, which is Life! (Gal. 3:12).
It is true that in the mind of the Father we are always over Jordan. But though here in the wilderness the joys of heaven are ours--like the grapes of Eschol--the reality of being over is not known until by faith we accept it as having died and risen with Christ; and that therefore heaven is our position, we know it to be our place, and that this side is not our place, and we know that it is not.
The more you are with the Lord in spirit on the other side, the less disappointed you will be here, for when you are there you import new joys and new hopes into this old world, from an entirely new one, and you therefore in every way surpass the inhabitants of this judged world. May this be more and more your happy song. --J.B. Stoney
"Christ is the Head of the Body, the Church; who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in all things He might have the pre-eminence" (Col. 1:18).
JACOBUS ARMINIUS (1560-1609) -- Jacob Arminius was born in Amsterdam, Holland, four years before the death of John Calvin. In time, he became a champion of Calvinistic Dutch Reformed theology. Ultimately chosen to write a defense against attacks upon Calvinism, Arminius came to the conclusion that many of Calvin's doctrines were indefensible. In rejecting Calvinism, and in the attempt to construct his own scheme of beliefs, Arminius made the fatal mistake of mixing Pelagian dogma with the Scriptures.
PELAGIUS -- Early in the fifth century, the English monk Pelagius sought to reform the Roman Catholic Church. He thus became a life-long theological antagonist of Augustine. Pelagius insisted that man did not inherit Adam's sinfulness, but was only affected by his example. He believed that man's will was free to choose for, or against, God. Hence, via Arminius, we have our present-day "Christian humanism," i.e., man is master of his fate, with God's help--if he chooses it.
ARMINIANISM TODAY -- Coming from humanistic Pelagianism instead of from the Scriptures, Arminianism bases salvation upon the will of fallen man. It is an anti-sovereignty, anti-security, anti-dispensational, anti-grace, pro-works religion. The teaching is that God, through redemption, bestows a "common grace" upon all men, thereby making it possible for the individual to exercise his free will either for, or against, God.
FREE WILL? -- According to Arminianism, man is not totally depraved--his will remains free to decide his own destiny. Its maxim is, "It is mine to be willing to believe, and it is the part of God's grace to assist." To Arminianism, "foreknowledge" means that God foreknows those who will receive the Saviour, and upon that basis He elects them. Those who choose to reject the Saviour, He condemns.
Since the final decision is made by man, and God then acts upon that decision, man is sovereign. In that case, God determines nothing, He gives nothing except so-called common grace which removes the inability to choose Him, and He secures nothing.
Thus the sinner's choice of God, and not God's choice of the sinner, is the ultimate factor in Arminian salvation. Those elected by God are chosen only in the sense that He foresaw their faith and good works--which arise from themselves and are not wrought of God. The human will is exalted to the place of sovereignty and, according to this system, man becomes his own saviour.
As Dr. A.H. Strong wrote, "It is important to understand that, in Arminian usage, grace is simply the restoration of man's natural ability to act for himself; grace never actually saves him, but only enables him to save himself ... if he will.
SOVEREIGN MAN? -- In that the Arminian begins on the premise of his own free will, his end is on the same assumption. He feels that since he can come in, he can therefore go out, by his free will. What little security and assurance of salvation he has is founded upon his own momentary merit, plus whatever emotional experiences he can muster along the way. "After I accepted Jesus I wasn't sure if I was really saved; but when I had my "baptism in the Holy Ghost," and spoke in tongues, then I was sure." Consequently the Arminian's existence is experience-based, only to be beset by fears, uncertainties, backslidings, and failure.
Doctrinally established unconditional eternal security grounded upon faith in the finished work of the Lord Jesus Christ is utterly rejected by the Arminian. He sedulously avoids all Scripture that establishes eternal security, or at best seeks to discredit and deny it. He gravitates to out-of-context references that seem to him to militate against eternal security.
Arminianism's misleading error in the field of salvation is that it persists in attempting to build the Christian's standing upon his feeble and faltering daily life, rather than on the sufficient and immutable merit of the Lord Jesus Christ. The Arminian salvation becomes little more than a system of human conduct; for, though the idea of regeneration is incorporated, it is, in the Arminian idea of it, of no abiding value, being supported only by a supposed human merit. --L.S. Chafer (Systematic Theology III:356)
SEMI-PELAGIANISM -- Through a process of modification, Pelagianism spawned Semi-Pelagianism. It has been described as follows:
Though it retained much of the philosophical basis of its parent's humanism and rationalism, as opposed to divine revelation, Semi-Pelagianism compromised with truth sufficiently to gain favorable audience with some Christians. It became, thus, a far more dangerous form of infidelity than its parent. As such, it eventually overcame the Roman Catholic Church and returned it to the very Pelagianism condemned by Augustine. Semi-Pelagianism changed its disguise and further altered its voice at a later date to become known as Arminianism, following some refinements and adjustments to Christianity.
Dr. Lorraine Boettner has stated:
Arminianism existed for centuries only as a heresy in the outskirts of true Christianity. In fact, it was not championed by an organized Christian Church until the year 1784, at which time it was incorporated into the system of doctrine of the Methodist Church in England by John Wesley.
Today, Christendom has been overrun by Arminianism. It has been spread mainly by the Pentecostal and Holiness movements, and especially by the out-of-control Charismatic movement. Then too, there is the influence of the many Arminian denominations, such as the Assembly of God, Nazarene, Mennonite, Christian & Missionary Alliance, and many others.
Almost all truly born-again Christians begin as Arminians, with their "free will" and their self-centered life and service for "Jesus." The tragedy is that far too many never get beyond that baby stage, but go on into the fleshly emotionalism of full-fledged charismatic Arminianism.
A clearer view of Arminianism may be gained from the following listing:
Human depravity has not rendered man incapable of savingly exercising his will to trust Jesus for salvation.
God's grace is resistible in the final sense so that man can ultimately thwart His purpose to save him.
God's election is conditioned upon His divine foresight of faith in certain men whom God, then, designates as His elect.
Jesus' atonement was exactly the same for everyone with no discrimination whatever, rendering all men savable, but actually guaranteeing the salvation of none.
Final salvation is possible for believers, but ultimate victory rests with their continuance in faith, so that ultimate apostasy may be possible for the saved.
STATEMENT -- Dominated by the free will of man, Arminianism is characterized by fleshly lawlessness. The Arminian's center and object is himself. It is all to be rejected! "Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them who cause divisions and offenses contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them" (Rom. 16:17).
JOHN CALVIN (1509-1564) -- Calvin was the theologian of the Reformers, second only to Arminius in the extent of his doctrinal influence upon believers today. Calvin's tenets were Bible-based, and could be classed as "far right." However, he had a tendency to extremism, and hence went too far in some areas of his theology. "Too far," whether right or left, usually results in heresy.
Conversely, Arminius, the one-time Calvinist, in his recoil from Calvin's extremes, went all the way to the left, and kept right on going over the edge into Semi-Pelagianism. In these two men we have the far right and the far left of theology among believers today.
The core of original Calvinism is seen in the following five doctrinal points, known as "TULIP"-- the tulip that never blossomed!
Total depravity
Unconditional election
Limited atonement
Irresistible grace
Perseverance of the saints
There are many "moderate" Calvinists today who do not adhere to some of the original extremes, such as point three. Hence there are three-point, four-point, and four-and-a-half-point Calvinists. We will simply comment on the more prevalent aspect of Calvinism, known as Covenant theology.
COVENANT CALVINISM -- We will only consider the first point of Calvinist error, Total Depravity. Calvin did not possess all-important doctrinal balance. By pushing the truth of God's sovereignty to an extreme in the realm of the new birth, he all but eliminated man's responsibility.
Calvinists define Total Depravity as "total inability." Their proof text is Ephesians 2:1, "And you hath He made alive, who were dead in trespasses and sins." Their illustration for total inability is a man physically dead, who cannot see, hear, feel, speak, or move. Hence he is totally unable to respond to God in any way--he cannot believe.
Calvinism's solution to their self-created problem is regeneration. It is taught that the Holy Spirit first regenerates those whom God has elected; He thereby gives them life so that they can exercise faith and live. In all of their writings it can be seen that they place regeneration before faith--one must be saved in order to be saved!
In their book, Five Points of Calvinism Defended, D. Steele and C. Thomas write:
The Holy Spirit creates within the sinner a new heart or a' new nature. This is accomplished through regeneration or the new birth by which the sinner is made a child of God and is given spiritual life. His will is renewed through this process so that he spontaneously comes to Christ of his own free choice.
Because he is given a new nature so that he loves righteousness, and because his mind is enlightened so that he understands and believes the Gospel, the renewed sinner freely and willingly turns to Christ by the inward supernatural call of the Spirit, who through regeneration makes him alive and creates within him faith and repentance.
How simple is the refutation of this scholarly error: The corpse is not the man! Death is always separation, not obliteration. Paul wrote to Timothy, "But she that liveth in pleasure is dead while she liveth" (1 Tim. 5:6). James stated, "Of His own will begat He us with the Word of truth" (James 1: 18). The Lord Jesus said, "The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God; and they that hear shall live" (John 5:25).
Dr. Samuel Ridout was clear about this:
"Being born again (regenerated), not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible seed, by the Word of God, which liveth and abideth forever" (1 Pet. 1:23). The new birth is "by the Word of God." That it is a sovereign act of God, by His Spirit, none can question. But this verse forbids us to separate, as has sometimes been done, new birth from faith in the Gospel.
It is often taught that new birth precedes faith; but here we are told that the Word of God is the instrument in the new birth. "Faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the Word of God"; "the Word which by the Gospel is preached." John 3:3 and 3:16 must ever go together. There is no such anomaly possible as a man born again, but who has not yet believed the Gospel.
COVENANTISM -- Without benefit of Scripture, Calvinism is based upon a single "covenant of grace," whereby all of Israel's covenants are "spiritualized," thereby making the Church to be spiritual Israel: "the continuing covenanted community." As Martyn Lloyd-Jones put it, "Paul is asserting that the Church is now the Kingdom, that what the Jewish nation was in the OT the Church is now." (The Unsearchable Riches of Christ, p. 48)
VICARIOUS LAW-KEEPING -- Calvinist teaching concerning salvation is that Christ gained eternal life for the elect by keeping the Law on their behalf ("active obedience"), and, in dying ("passive obedience"), He paid the penalty of the broken Law. The heart of all Calvinism is the Law! Remove their doctrine from that center and there is total collapse.
Dr. Wm. R. Newell refutes this "vicarious" error as follows:
"Christ is the end of the Law for righteousness to everyone that believeth" (Rom. 10: 4). The words "Christ is the end of the Law" cannot mean that He is the fulfillment of what the Law required. The Law required obedience to its precepts--death for disobedience. Now Christ died for our disobedience!
If it be answered, that before He died He fulfilled the claims of the Law, kept it perfectly, and that this law-keeping of His was reckoned as over against our breaking of the Law, then I ask, Why should Christ die?
If the claims of the Law were met in His earthly obedience, and if that earthly life of earthly obedience was "reckoned" or "credited" to those who believe, the curse of the Law has been removed by "vicarious law-keeping." If so, why should Christ die? "For if righteousness come by the Law, then Christ is dead in vain" (Gal. 2:21).
It is because Covenant theology has kept us Gentiles under the Law--if not as a means of righteousness, then as a "rule of life,"--that all the trouble has arisen. The Law.; is no more a rule of life than it is a means of righteousness. Walking in the Spirit has now, in this dispensation of Grace, taken the place of walking in ordinances. The Father has another principle under which He has placed His saints: "ye are not under law, but under grace"! (Romans, Verse by Verse, p. 391)
WILDERNESS WANDERING -- Calvinism will go as far as the Cross for salvation, but then it turns back to the OT and the Synoptics, in order to have a rule for the Christian life. Like the Israelites whom it seeks to spiritually emulate, it fears the freedom of Canaan, only to turn back into the wilderness struggle. It is Romans Seven all the way for the Calvinist. Arminianism at least goes as far as Pentecost, only to turn back to its pre-Cross "Jesus."
The disqualification of Calvinism is in its failure to "rightly divide" between Israel and the Church, Law and Grace--it considers the Body of Christ to be "spiritual Israel." As John Stott put it, "Although Jesus was greater than Moses and although His message was more Gospel than Law, yet he did choose twelve apostles as the nucleus of a new Israel to correspond to the twelve patriarchs and tribes of old." (Christian Counter-Culture --
The Message of the Sermon on the Mount -- Inter Varsity Press)
In his Systematic Theology VII:211, Dr. Chafer struck down that error:
It should be made emphatic that to observe distinction between Judaism and Christianity is the beginning of wisdom in understanding the Bible. Theologians of past generations have made no greater mistake than to suppose, despite all the scriptural evidence to the contrary, that Judaism and Christianity are one and the same, or as some have put it, "One is the bud and the other is the blossom." Judaism has not merged into Christianity. This is a colossal error of Covenant theology perpetuated to the present day.
ECCENTRIC EXEGESIS -- Calvinism insists that Jesus taught the spiritual aspects of the Mosaic Law in the Sermon on the Mount, and that He instructed His disciples in that law. That is true. Since the disciples were saved, their reasoning goes, the Church is therefore subject to the law-teachings of the Sermon. That is untrue!
At that time, in that dispensation, the disciples were not Christians. There was no such thing as a Christian until the day of Pentecost. These believing disciples were Messianic Jews, "saved" unto the earthly kingdom. Their Messiah-King was instructing them concerning the laws of that coming millennial, theocratic kingdom.
No Christian ever was, ever is, nor ever will be under law, whether Mosaic, Sermonic, or Millennial! Arminianism and Calvinism may put the Christian under law, the believer may put himself under law as his rule of life, but the Lord Jesus never did, Paul never did, and the Holy Spirit never will!
Rather than put the believer under law, the Spirit places him into death via the Cross, and thereby positions him above the law and into the freedom of the life of the glorified Lord Jesus Christ. "Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be joined to another, even to Him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God." "Now we are delivered from the law, having died to that wherein we Were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter [law]" (Rom. 7:4,6).
LIFE, NOT LAW! -- Within the believer the Holy Spirit applies "the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus"; not the law of condemnation and death (Rom. 8:2; 2 Cor. 3:6-9). The Spirit of Christ does not write any law upon the heart of any Christian--He ministers life, "that the life also of Jesus might be made manifest in our mortal flesh" (2 Cor. 4:11).
The kingdom law will be written on the heart of the redeemed Jew in the millennial kingdom, but now it is "Christ in you" (Col. 1:27). The Christian is not under law, nor is he under promise; he has the effect of the accomplished fact: "for to me to live is Christ" (Phil. 1:21).
The believer, dead to the law and alive to God in Christ risen, looks upon his Lord, not Israel's law. Christians, "with unveiled face beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord," not "even as by the law of the Lord" (2 Cor. 3:18).
Just as the Ten commandments were the declaration of the mind of God under the dispensation of the law; so now the Church is the engraving of Christ, "written, not in tables of stone, but in fleshly tables of the heart," to show forth the virtues of Him "who hath called us out of darkness into His marvelous light."
Law demands everything, but gives and changes nothing--it is meant to condemn. We may even turn the Lord Jesus into that letter of condemnation; we may take His life, for instance, and make it our law. We may say, "He has loved me, and done all this for me, and I ought to love Him, and do so much for Him, in return for His love, etc." Thus if we turn His love into our rule of life, it becomes the ministration of death; for the only thing a rule can do is condemn. Christianity is a nature, not a regulation.
LAW-BOUND -- The entire realm of the believer's identification with the Lord Jesus in His death and ascension is not only misunderstood, but usually avoided by Calvinism. Although Paul explicitly wrote that "sin shall not have dominion over you, for ye are not under law but under grace" (Rom. 6:1-4), Calvinism insists that the Spirit will enable the believer to live by the principle of law.
Paul pleads especially with these Calvinists: "Know ye not, brethren (for I speak to them that know the law), how that the law hath dominion over a man as long as he liveth?" (Rom. 7:1). They fail to understand the believer's death to the law. Beyond justification they lose their doctrinal footing and slip back to the ground of death (law), failing to move forward onto the ground of growth (Christ, our life).
Typical of all Covenant theologians, Dr. John Stott wrote in his Christian Counter-Culture, p. 75:
It is a new heart-righteousness which the prophets foresaw as one of the blessings of the Messianic age. "I will put my law within them, and I will write it upon their hearts," God promised through Jeremiah (31:33). How would He do it? He told Ezekiel: "I will put My Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in My statutes" (36:27).
Thus God's promises to put His law within us and to put His Spirit within us coincide. We must not imagine (as some do today) that when we have the Spirit we can dispense with the law, for what the Spirit does in our hearts is, precisely, to write God's law there.
It was not only to Timothy that Paul wrote, "Study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the Word of truth" (2 Tim. 2:15). Neither Jeremiah nor Ezekiel nor anyone else from Adam on down ever dreamed of such a thing as the Church, to say nothing of a Christian! That wondrous truth was God's hidden mystery, until Paul. We share Merrill Unger's thought:
The Church is said to be a "mystery" (Eph. 3:3), "the mystery of Christ" (Eph. 3:4). It was foretold, but not explained, by the Saviour (Matt. 16:18). was a truth unknown and unrevealed to anyone in OT times (Eph. 3:5), indeed a revelation and purpose "hid in God" throughout the ages (Eph. 3:9), first realized historically at Pentecost, and first revealed doctrinally to the Apostle Paul (Eph. 3:3-7). (The Baptizing Work of the Holy Spirit , p. 29)
Actually, God said through Jeremiah, "This shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel: I will put My law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts, and I will be their God, and they shall be My people" (Jer. 31:33). And through Ezekiel He promised to His nation, Israel, "Ye shall dwell in the land that I gave to your fathers; and ye shall be My people, and I will be your God" (Ezek. 36:28).
Dr. Chafer sets the record straight concerning Israel's kingdom:
There is a dangerous and entirely baseless sentiment abroad which assumes that every teaching of Jesus must be binding during this dispensation simply because He said it. The fact is overlooked that the Lord Jesus, while living under, keeping, and applying the Law of Moses, also taught the principles of His future kingdom, and, at the end of His ministry and in relation to His Cross, He also anticipated the teachings of grace. If this threefold division of the teachings of Christ is not recognized, there can be nothing but confusion of mind and consequent contradiction of truth.
The teachings of the kingdom (as centered in the Sermon on the Mount) have not yet been applied to any man. Since they anticipate the binding of Satan, a purified earth, the restoration of Israel, and the personal reign of the King, they cannot be applied until God's appointed time when these accompanying conditions on the earth have been brought to pass.
The kingdom laws will be addressed to Israel and, beyond them, to all nations which will enter the millennial kingdom. It will be the first and only universal reign of righteousness and peace in the history of the world. One nation was in view when the Law of Moses was in force on the earth; the individual is in view during this dispensation of grace. The whole social order of mankind will be in view when the kingdom is set up on earth.
The teachings of grace are perfect and sufficient in themselves. They provide for the instruction of the child of God in every situation which may arise. There is no need that they be supplemented, or augmented, by the addition of precepts from either the Law of Moses or the teachings of the kingdom. Law cannot give life, nor have, therefore, any control over it. (Systematic Theology IV:207)
John Darby was clear on the all-important differentiation:
I learn in the law that God abhors stealing, but it is not because under the law that I do not steal. All the Word of God is mine, and written for my instruction; yet for all that I am not under law. I am a Christian who has died with Christ on the Cross, and am not in the flesh, to which the law applied. I have died to the law by the body of Christ (Rom. 7:4).
We are not seeking to take away, nor negate any portion of the blessed Word of God. "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness" (2 Tim. 3:16). It is simply that the law as a rule of life for the believer obliterates the realization of identification with, and liberty in, the glorified Lord Jesus Christ.
BEWARE! -- Listed here are some of the better-known anti-dispensational, pro-law Calvinist authors whose theology has permeated the thinking of vast numbers of fundamental and dispensational believers today:
Adams, J. Edwards, J. Mauro, P. Steele, G.
Allis, 0. Fletcher, J. Morris, L. Stonehouse, N.
Bass, C. Fuller, D. Murray, G. Stott, J.
Baxter, R. Gerstner, J. Murray, J. Thomas, C.
Berkof, L. Gill, J. Nicole, R. Van Til, C.
Berkouwer, G. Goodwin, T. Owen, J. Van Til, H.
Boettner, L. Haldane, R. Packer, J. Vos, G.
Boice, J. Hamilton, F. Payne, H. Warfield, B.
Bonar, A. Hodge, A. Pink, A. Watson, R.
Boston, T. Hodge, C. Romaine, Wm. Watson, T.
Brown, D. Kromminga, D. Ryle, J. Wyngaarden, M.
Bunyan, J. Kuiper, H. Schaeffer, F.
Conn, H. Kuyper, A. Shedd, Wm.
Cox, Wm. Lloyd-Jones, M. Smeaton, G.
STATEMENT -- Calvinism emerged from the dark ages, but is still in the twilight--half in the darkness and death of the law, half in the light and life of the Saviour. It has a fleshly affinity for fetters, hence it is the life of the 'hang-dog' heart, the wretchedness of Romans Seven .
THE APOSTLE PAUL -- Finally, we come to the one who is least influential in the realm of doctrine among Christians today. There are three prominent reasons for this sad fact--the first two are negative, the third is positive.
FIRST -- Due to its humanistic base, Arminianism is suited to the carnal, Adam dominated Christian. As Dr. Kenneth Good states:
Man is by nature Arminian. The basically human philosophical foundation of Arminianism is quite compatible with man's inherent rationalism. Arminianism succeeds (and exceeds) because it appeals to the natural mind of man. It seems so reasonable! Unregenerate man approves it. It is eminently naturalistic, comfortably human. In this day of unprecedented emphasis upon the sufficiency of man, the doctrine must inevitably be successful among those who will not be regulated by divine revelation.
Arminianism is a subjective religion, swayed by human emotions rather than living by the Word of God. From start to finish it is man-centered, instead of God-centered. Man is really the object of it, not God.
SECOND -- Because of its objective, legalistic base, Calvinism is also compatible with the carnal, Adam-dominated Christian. As a rule, Calvinism emphasizes the external law, which hampers internal growth. Typical of the Calvinistic bent, the late Dr. Martyn Lloyd-Jones insisted that "the Christian must never say farewell to the law. Thank God, we are no longer under it as a way of salvation; but we are to keep it, we are to honor it, we are to practice it in our daily life" (Romans, Chapter Seven, p. 27).
Dr. James Kennedy, typical of the Calvinist "Reconstructionists," takes the law beyond the Church, stating: 'There is an old saying, 'You can't legislate morality.' I ask, What else can you legislate? The nation that endeavors to live according to His law is the nation that will be most free [!], the nation where people will enjoy the most happiness."
THIRD -- Because of Paul's near-exclusive teaching of the death-dealing Cross in the life of the believer, and the glorified Lord Jesus Christ as his life, the Apostle's ministry is in total opposition to the carnal Christian. This includes death to the law, to the world, and to the principle of indwelling sin as centered in the old Adamic man.
Wm. R. Newell explains the perennial problem concerning Paul's ministry:
Just as definitely as Moses received the law for Israel, so Paul received the Gospel of grace for us. How unutterably sad to find many Christians shutting their doors in the face of Paul as he comes to tell them the glories of the heavenly message given to him--the unsearchable riches of Christ. In his ..last epistle Paul mourns that "all which are in Asia"--of, which Ephesus was the capital! --"turned away from me" (2 Tim. 1: 15).
LIFE FROM DEATH -- While the Lord Jesus was on earth He ministered mainly to the nation of Israel, and to His Jewish disciples. His message had primarily to do with Himself as Messiah and King, and with His coming millennial kingdom.
Since Pentecost the glorified Lord Jesus ministers exclusively to the members of His Body, mainly via the Epistles of Paul. His life in the Christian is not by law, but by "the law of the Spirit of life." And that life is manifested as the fruit of the Spirit, which is "love, joy, peace, long-suffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, self-control; against such there is no law" (Gal. 5:22,23).
Paul's focal points are the believer's crucifixion with Christ, and His risen life in the believer. "For we who live are always delivered unto death for Jesus' sake, that the life also of Jesus might be made manifest in our mortal flesh" (2 Cor. 4: 11). The death of the Cross and the life of Christ are ministered to the believer by the indwelling Holy Spirit. He does not minister the law of Moses, nor the law of the King, but rather the life of the Lord. "For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death" (Rom. 8:2).
TO THE ROMANS, Paul ministered death to sin and the law: "Knowing this, that our old man is [was] crucified with Him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin." "Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ, that ye should be married to another, even to Him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God" (Rom. 6:6; 7:4).
TO THE CORINTHIANS, Paul presented the Object for the Christian's growth and walk: "But we all, with unveiled face beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord" (2 Cor. 3:18).
"For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shone in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ" (2 Cor. 4:6).
"For we who live are always delivered unto death for Jesus' sake, that the life also of Jesus might be made manifest in our mortal flesh" (2 Cor. 4:11).
TO THE GALATIANS, Paul ministered death to the law: "For I through the law died unto the law, that I might live unto God. I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I that live, but Christ liveth in me: and that life which I now live in the flesh I live in faith, the faith which is in the Son of God, who loved me, and gave Himself up for me" (Gal. 2:19,20).
TO THE EPHESIANS, Paul ministered the believer's position in Christ ascended: "And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus" (Eph. 2:6). "Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ" (Eph. 1:3).
TO THE COLOSSIANS, Paul focused upon Christ ascended: "If (since) ye, then, be risen with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ sitteth on the right hand of God. Set your affection on things above, not on things on the earth. For ye have died, and your life is hidden with Christ in God" (Col. 3:1-3).
TO THE PHILIPPIANS, Paul ministered the principles of the Christian life: "That I may know Him, and the power of His resurrection, and the fellowship of His sufferings, being made conformable unto His death" (Phil. 3:10).
CRITICAL CONTRASTS -- Judaism is earthly, horizontal; Christianity is heavenly, vertical. There is very little vertical, positional, in either Arminianism or Calvinism. Hence the former is characterized by self-gratification, the latter by self-righteousness.
Arminianism is horizontal. It cannot rise above man and his "free will," which binds the Arminian to himself: "I feel...." "God told me...." "Jesus, bless me, help me, heal me...." Arminianism is subjective, experience-centered; it seeks to feel life. Coming mainly from man, it has little or no defense against Adamic humanism--the world, the flesh, and the devil.
Calvinism is likewise horizontal. It struggles under the unbearable burden of the law as a "rule of life," centering upon Israel's millennial kingdom. Coming from man, Calvinism seeks to legislate life, hence has little or no defense against the power of sin and self-righteousness, spawned by the law.
Christianity is vertical, heavenly. It descends from There to here and the responsibilities and needs of a sin-bound and judged world. The Christian life is begins in and comes from heaven, to be manifested here as the light of life. "That the life also of Jesus might be made manifest in our mortal flesh" (2 Cor. 4:11).
Christianity, coming from the Lord Jesus Christ above, primarily via Paul, is by the Cross freed from the power and dominion of both humanistic Adam and death-dealing law. "For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death" (Rom. 8:2). "Reckon ye also yourselves to have died indeed unto sin [and the law], but to be alive unto God in Jesus Christ, our Lord" (Rom. 6:11). There is no rest or peace in Adamic sin, Mosaic law, or Satan's world. The ascended Lord Jesus Christ is alone our Object, our Rest, our Peace, our All.
Whatever our privileges in union with our risen Lord, it is all-important for the believer to live in the fear and faith of God, according to "the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus." It is not man's responsibility without law or under law; it is all over with us on either ground.
It is the responsibility of the new life of faith, which is that of a pilgrim and a stranger here--a life come down from heaven--a life which man lives as passing through this world, yet wholly out of it in spirit--a life of faith which finds in the Father's presence fullness of joy. --J. B. Stoney
STATEMENT -- The Church never has escaped from the law, the problem of Galatianism, to this day. During the early centuries, Romanism saw to that. The Reformation rescued the Church from the law as a way of justification, but not from the law as a means of sanctification (growth).
The crippling problem in the Body of Christ today is not so much the aberration of Arminianism, but the "righteousness" of Calvinism--the self-righteousness of the law. That has always been the issue, the answer to which was given to us through the apostle Paul. "Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty" (2 Cor. 3:17).
MAN-, LAW-, OR CHRIST-CENTERED?
CHARISMATIC ARMINIANISM -- MAN-CENTERED
CAUSE -- The error, the excess, the abject failure of Charismatic Arminianism can be summed up in one reversed principle: "Not Thy will, but mine be done." The Arminian founds his religion upon the theory of free will, i.e., his will. Thus the cause of the charismatic confusion and chaos is--sovereign man!
ELECTION -- Humanism can be clearly seen in the Arminian's "election." He claims that God chooses, or elects, those whom He foreknows will of their own volition, choose His Son. Hence the sinner's free-will choice of the Saviour, not God's eternal choice of the sinner, is the basis of the charismatic's election.
CONVERSION -- The Arminian does not believe man's depravity is total, but he does admit that some assistance is needed from God in order for him to choose the Saviour. To this end he invented the non-biblical "sufficient grace." This is said to remove the effects of the Fall to the extent that the sinner can exercise his free will in order to be saved.
SECURITY -- Since the Arminian's election and conversion are founded upon his free will, he can never have the benefit of eternal security--he can never be sure! Hence his constant reliance upon new (same old) ecstatic experiences, and repeated trips to the altar for yet another salvation experience.
THE TRUE BAPTISM -- The Arminian admits that the Holy Spirit indwells, or at least comes upon, those who choose the Saviour. But because the true baptism by the Spirit is non-experiential--a matter of faith in the Word--it is never enough for the experience-oriented charismatic. For him, faith without fireworks is dead!
THE CHARISMATIC BAPTISM -- This self-induced experience of fleshly feelings is sought by the Arminian for the following reasons: (a) Instead of founding his salvation upon justification (God's work for us in Christ), he bases his all upon sanctification (God's work in us by the Holy Spirit). The charismatic baptism in the Holy Spirit is the end, and Christ but the means to that end. (b) The true baptism by the Spirit being non-experiential, he considers it to be insufficient. (c) Therefore, he feels he must have a sensual, sanctifying baptism in order to live the Christian life and be fitted for heaven; he requires a "second blessing," a false baptism of enablement.
FICTITIOUS FAITH -- The charismatic Arminian claims that his subsequent baptism is received by faith; but faith, for him, is always a matter of feelings and works. In order to receive his baptism there are a number of "conditions" (works) that first must be fulfilled. To mention but a few, he must appropriate all that God has for him; he must yield himself completely; he must rid himself of all known sin. The effort, the agonizing, and the psychological pressure that he undergoes in seeking to meet these conditions are the very things that produce this nerve-fostered, self-satisfying "baptism" of feeling and sound.
TONGUES -- Because he must be holy in order to maintain his Christian life and have a semblance of assurance, he claims that this "baptism of fire" fills him with the "Holy Ghost," makes him righteous, and empowers him for service. His experience is the result of an over-wrought nervous system, which is evidenced by the ecstatic feelings and out-of-control chattering of the vocal chords. The climax is his all-important "gift of tongues."
Here is the vortex and substance of his faith--the hypnotic, hysterical, nerve-shattering experience of irrational feeling and noise. He has arrived! He is in the center of Charismatic Christianity. Yes, he has arrived, while at best barely begun--he has no real assurance of salvation, nor eternal security. His Christianity is contingent upon his free will, his obedience, his good works, his experiences; but there is neither reality nor security there--and he knows it. But how can he forsake that which feels so good?
HEALING HOAX -- The stress and strain of all this striving and insecurity, to say nothing of the unnatural toll upon his already over-wrought nervous system, soon bring on emotional illness and often breakdown. Psychosomatic symptoms make the charismatic a pawn in the hands of his fellow-charismatics--the egocentric, money-mad, nerve-manipulating "healers."
"DEMONISM" -- Since God to the Arminian is less than sovereign, Satan soon takes on that attribute in his thinking. Ere long this would-be "warrior" is reduced to a pathetic, harried victim of his own inflamed imagination--he is overwhelmed by sin, events, objects, people-controlled, and manipulated by "demons." God, his "Jesus," and the "Holy Ghost" become to him smaller and smaller, weaker and weaker; while Satan and his clouds of evil spirits become larger and larger, stronger and stronger.
BEWARE! -- "You can help these poor duped ones by intercession, by example (your own growth, security, and rest in the Lord Jesus Christ), and by assiduous avoidance. Fraternization only strengthens them in and subjects you to their errors. They cannot hear a word you say; their all-consuming intent is to get you into their "baptism."
"Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them who cause divisions and offenses contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them. For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ but heir own body, and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the innocent" (Rom. 16:17,18).
COVENANT CALVINISM -- MOSES-CENTERED
CAUSE -- Covenant Calvinism is at the opposite extreme of the theological spectrum from Charismatic Arminianism. To the Calvinist, God is absolutely sovereign, and unregenerate man is absolutely dead in sin.
CONVERSION -- The Calvinist reasons that since man is totally lost and dead in his sins he cannot possibly have any part in his conversion, unless God first regenerates him and gives him the necessary faith to believe.
LORDSHIP SALVATION -- To add to the legal confusion, the Calvinist insists that the sinner must submit to His Lordship in order to accept the Saviour. Law to begin with, law to continue with.
SECURITY? -- The Calvinist abhors as "pernicious" and "perverse" the term "eternal security," insisting upon the highly indicative term, "the perseverance of the saints"--which is no assurance of security at all, leaving him no better off than the apprehensive Arminian.
The late Dr. John Murray, highly respected Covenant theologian, wrote:
Let us not take refuge in our sloth or encouragement in our lust from the abused doctrine of the security of the believer. But let us appreciate the doctrine of the perseverance of the saints and recognize that we may entertain the faith of our security in Christ only as we persevere in faith and holiness to the end. (Redemption Accomplished and Applied, p. 155)
Under this legal stricture the Calvinist has no assurance of eternal security prior to his very end!
LAW -- The Calvinist is anti-dispensational, which causes him to err concerning the law. He is unable to keep the law in its scriptural realm (pre-Cross; post-Rapture), but seeks to use it as the Christian's "rule of life."
Dr. John R. Stott -- "We are set free from the law as a way of acceptance (justification). It is as a ground of justification that the law no longer binds [it never did!]. But as a standard of conduct (sanctification) the law is still binding." (Man Made New, p. 43)
THE LIFE OF GROWTH -- CHRIST-CENTERED
CAUSE -- The growing, Christ-centered believer knows the Father in His sovereignty, and understands His divine purpose for him: predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son (Rom. 8:29).
EFFECT -- His life is based upon the Father's pure grace and His perfect will. He is thankful that he is a "vessel of mercy," and that it is God who works in him both to will and to do of His good pleasure (Rom. 9:23; Phil. 2:13).
ELECTION -- The dependent believer acknowledges that the Father is the sole source of his election, and not his own will. "According as He hath chosen us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before Him, in love having predestinated us unto the adoption of sons by Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the good pleasure of His will" (Eph. 1:4,5).
CONVERSION -- In the Word he sees that God the Father sovereignly chose and then called him to salvation, that God the Holy Spirit prepared and drew him in such a manner that he responded to this calling and received God the Son willingly and responsibly. "In whom [Christ] ye trusted, after ye heard the Word of truth, the Gospel of your salvation, in whom also having believed, ye were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise" (Eph. 1:13).
SECURITY -- This believer rests eternally secure in the risen Lord Jesus Christ on the foundation of His finished work on the Cross and His faithful presence on his behalf at the right hand of God the Father. He rejoices that his life is safely "hidden with Christ in God" (Col. 3:3).
"ONE BAPTISM" -- The resting believer is assured by the Word that at conversion the Holy Spirit came to indwell him, never to depart (John 14:16), while at the same time He baptized him into the Body of Christ (1 Cor. 12:13). He is satisfied with this one all-inclusive baptism by the Spirit, and needs no other. "One Lord, one faith, one baptism" (Eph. 4:5). Believer's water baptism by immersion is but an illustration of, a testimony to, this one and only spiritual baptism.
"DEAD TO THE LAW" --The Pauline dispensational view of Scripture enables the life-centered believer to rightly divide the Word of truth to the extent that he knows the place and purpose of God's law.
He honors that law the Holy Spirit applied as a means of convicting him of sin, which prepared him for receiving the Saviour. "By the law is the knowledge of sin" (Rom. 3:20).
When converted he was positioned in the ascended Lord Jesus; he was not only identified with His risen life, but with His Calvary death unto sin as well (Rom. 6:3). In that death both the Lord Jesus and the believer died to the law. "The law hath dominion over a man as long as he liveth." "Ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ." "Now we are delivered from the law, having died to that in which we were held" (Rom. 7:1,4,6). By co-crucifixion we were delivered from the dominion of the law.
The law's just penalty--"the soul that sinneth, it shall die" (Ezek. 18:4)--was fulfilled by the believer's death with Christ. "For I, through the law, am dead to the law, that I might live unto God" (Gal. 2:19). Thus God's holy law is upheld, honored, and its claims fully met. It has no more jurisdiction over the dead and risen believer; he is now "married to another, even to Him who is raised from the dead" (Rom. 7:4).
THE CROSS -- It is by the work of the Cross that the Spirit deals with Adamic sin in the believer, not by law. When the growing believer struggles against the power of sin he finally learns the futility of his efforts, as set forth in Romans Seven. Then he sees that in the Lord Jesus he died unto sin's dominion (Rom. 6:7).
As he learns to reckon himself to have died unto sin and the law (Rom. 6: 11), he begins to rely upon the Holy Spirit to apply that finished work of the Cross to the old Adamic man within. He is thereby progressively liberated from the power of sin and the law, and has ever-increasing freedom to grow in the life that is Christ (2 Cor. 4: 11).
THE CHRIST-LIFE -- As for the NT "law of Christ," and the commands and exhortations that apply to the believer, his reliance is upon the Holy Spirit for their fulfillment in his life. "All the law is fulfilled in one word: Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself." "The love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Spirit" (Gal. 5:14; Rom. 5:5). The Word guides and instructs him as to his dependence upon, his walk in, the Spirit. "For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death" (Rom. 8:2).
The growing believer realizes that "the law is not made for a righteous man but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners" (1 Tim. 1:9). He learns to abide above in the Lord Jesus at the right hand of the Father, far above and beyond the law's dominion. His life, the life of the Lord Jesus Christ, is manifested by the "fruit of the Spirit," not by the works of the law. "The law is not of faith"; it was never meant to produce this fruit, which is Life! (Gal. 3:12).
It is true that in the mind of the Father we are always over Jordan. But though here in the wilderness the joys of heaven are ours--like the grapes of Eschol--the reality of being over is not known until by faith we accept it as having died and risen with Christ; and that therefore heaven is our position, we know it to be our place, and that this side is not our place, and we know that it is not.
The more you are with the Lord in spirit on the other side, the less disappointed you will be here, for when you are there you import new joys and new hopes into this old world, from an entirely new one, and you therefore in every way surpass the inhabitants of this judged world. May this be more and more your happy song. --J.B. Stoney
"Christ is the Head of the Body, the Church; who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in all things He might have the pre-eminence" (Col. 1:18).
Saturday, June 10, 2006
Applied Christianity - Walter Martin
December 7, 1963
On a certain day two sermons had been preached, one by Martin Luther and the other by a friend and his co-laborer we will call Doctor B.
Luther said to his friend:
"You preached a good sermon, but I liked mine better than yours."
"Well, Doctor, I will acknowledge your superiority."
"No," replied Luther, "that is not it. The reason I liked mine better than yours is that every child and illiterate servant present could understand mine and knew what I was talking about, but much of yours was only understood by the learned and the scholars."
Some years ago there was a prominent politician in this State who had some oratorical ability along with a "flowery gift of gab." After one of his speeches two farmers met and one asked the other if he had heard the speech, and on learning that he had not he said, "Man, you don't know what you missed. I believe that was the finest speech I ever heard. He sure went to town!"
"What did he talk about," asked his friend. After hesitating a little:
"I don't know, he never did say what he was talking about!"
On a number of occasions letters have come asking the objective of this column, which probably is another way of asking "what are you talking about?" Our first article appeared on the first Saturday of March, 1962, and with the exception of the following week there has been one in every Saturday paper, and in the first one and in all the following ones, directly or indirectly, we have talked about the fact that generally speaking, the Church is corrupt and has junked discipline, and the results of "corrupting God's way in the earth" will mean in the end, and the end might be near, the visitation of the wrath and curse of God upon us as individuals, our nation, and the world, calling attention to the fact that this was the cause of the destruction of the world in the days of Noah, the cause of the visitation of the wrath and curse of God upon the Jewish people down through the centuries, the cause of the disappearance from the face of the earth of great cities and nations and kingdoms of antiquity, and the cause of all the disasters, troubles, etc. of mankind, including the calamities we read about in every day's newspaper!
The "heathen rage" to get rid of God's Moral Law, Ten Commandments, and The Almighty holds them in derision, laughs and vexes them with all adversity. We have also in these articles continually talked about the fact that God sent His Son to the earth to keep His Commandments perfectly, and that He will impute that perfect righteousness to every soul that sincerely accepts and believes on Jesus Christ, and will write His Commandments in their hearts, or in other words, fix them up where they will want to "obey God, and keep His Commandments, which is the whole duty of man."
"It is singular how long the rotten will hold together, provided you do not handle it roughly." Picture a rotten apple hanging on a tree or elsewhere. It holds together a long time unless it falls or is handled a little roughly, and then you have "rotten apple sauce." One meaning of "corruption" is "rottenness." The earth became corrupt, or rotten in the days of Noah. God handled it rather roughly. It went to pieces and there was none left except for the man who found grace in God's sight, the man who feared God, and obeyed Him!
Some have estimated there might have been 480 billions of people in the earth when the flood came! The Jewish nation as a whole became corrupt, rotten. God has handled them roughly through the centuries and behold their history, suffering, and how they have been scattered. There is much rottenness and corruption in the home and family life of our nation; there is much rottenness and corruption in the political life of our nation; the main cause of the corruption and rottenness in the family and governmental life of our nation can be traced to corruption and rottenness in our Protestant Christian Church life, and every one of us who have taken such vows are especially responsible!
Did not God handle us roughly when He permitted our President to be assassinated? No doubt in our mind but that this "permissive providence" of The Almighty is a rebuke to the entire nation! Generally speaking, The Church refuses to "get rough" with its own rottenness of unbelief, apostacy, rejection of God's Laws and Word, and so the corruption holds together and increases; the civil powers of government refuse to "get rough" with murder, robbery, vile immorality -- I have heard it said time and again that the City of Washington, the seat of the great power of this nation, is the worst "sink of sin and cesspool of iniquity" of such crimes in all this great land, and therefore, corruption and rottenness "hold together."
What can one man do? He can do the "one thing needful," read what it is in Luke 10:41, 42:
"And Jesus answered and said unto her, Martha, Martha, thou art careful and troubled about many things: But "one thing is needful;" and Mary hath chosen "that good part," which shall not be taken away from her. "The good part Mary chose was to "sit at the feet of Jesus and Hear His Word."
Go and do likewise, get rid of the corruption and rottenness, become "good fruit by the power of God!"
On a certain day two sermons had been preached, one by Martin Luther and the other by a friend and his co-laborer we will call Doctor B.
Luther said to his friend:
"You preached a good sermon, but I liked mine better than yours."
"Well, Doctor, I will acknowledge your superiority."
"No," replied Luther, "that is not it. The reason I liked mine better than yours is that every child and illiterate servant present could understand mine and knew what I was talking about, but much of yours was only understood by the learned and the scholars."
Some years ago there was a prominent politician in this State who had some oratorical ability along with a "flowery gift of gab." After one of his speeches two farmers met and one asked the other if he had heard the speech, and on learning that he had not he said, "Man, you don't know what you missed. I believe that was the finest speech I ever heard. He sure went to town!"
"What did he talk about," asked his friend. After hesitating a little:
"I don't know, he never did say what he was talking about!"
On a number of occasions letters have come asking the objective of this column, which probably is another way of asking "what are you talking about?" Our first article appeared on the first Saturday of March, 1962, and with the exception of the following week there has been one in every Saturday paper, and in the first one and in all the following ones, directly or indirectly, we have talked about the fact that generally speaking, the Church is corrupt and has junked discipline, and the results of "corrupting God's way in the earth" will mean in the end, and the end might be near, the visitation of the wrath and curse of God upon us as individuals, our nation, and the world, calling attention to the fact that this was the cause of the destruction of the world in the days of Noah, the cause of the visitation of the wrath and curse of God upon the Jewish people down through the centuries, the cause of the disappearance from the face of the earth of great cities and nations and kingdoms of antiquity, and the cause of all the disasters, troubles, etc. of mankind, including the calamities we read about in every day's newspaper!
The "heathen rage" to get rid of God's Moral Law, Ten Commandments, and The Almighty holds them in derision, laughs and vexes them with all adversity. We have also in these articles continually talked about the fact that God sent His Son to the earth to keep His Commandments perfectly, and that He will impute that perfect righteousness to every soul that sincerely accepts and believes on Jesus Christ, and will write His Commandments in their hearts, or in other words, fix them up where they will want to "obey God, and keep His Commandments, which is the whole duty of man."
"It is singular how long the rotten will hold together, provided you do not handle it roughly." Picture a rotten apple hanging on a tree or elsewhere. It holds together a long time unless it falls or is handled a little roughly, and then you have "rotten apple sauce." One meaning of "corruption" is "rottenness." The earth became corrupt, or rotten in the days of Noah. God handled it rather roughly. It went to pieces and there was none left except for the man who found grace in God's sight, the man who feared God, and obeyed Him!
Some have estimated there might have been 480 billions of people in the earth when the flood came! The Jewish nation as a whole became corrupt, rotten. God has handled them roughly through the centuries and behold their history, suffering, and how they have been scattered. There is much rottenness and corruption in the home and family life of our nation; there is much rottenness and corruption in the political life of our nation; the main cause of the corruption and rottenness in the family and governmental life of our nation can be traced to corruption and rottenness in our Protestant Christian Church life, and every one of us who have taken such vows are especially responsible!
Did not God handle us roughly when He permitted our President to be assassinated? No doubt in our mind but that this "permissive providence" of The Almighty is a rebuke to the entire nation! Generally speaking, The Church refuses to "get rough" with its own rottenness of unbelief, apostacy, rejection of God's Laws and Word, and so the corruption holds together and increases; the civil powers of government refuse to "get rough" with murder, robbery, vile immorality -- I have heard it said time and again that the City of Washington, the seat of the great power of this nation, is the worst "sink of sin and cesspool of iniquity" of such crimes in all this great land, and therefore, corruption and rottenness "hold together."
What can one man do? He can do the "one thing needful," read what it is in Luke 10:41, 42:
"And Jesus answered and said unto her, Martha, Martha, thou art careful and troubled about many things: But "one thing is needful;" and Mary hath chosen "that good part," which shall not be taken away from her. "The good part Mary chose was to "sit at the feet of Jesus and Hear His Word."
Go and do likewise, get rid of the corruption and rottenness, become "good fruit by the power of God!"
Friday, June 09, 2006
God and History - Walter Martin
MARCH 08, 1975
We trust it will be an encouragement to all the true and sincere people of God to be reminded of several long periods of time in the earth when men dwelt without fear for their families, loved ones, and property, due to kings, rulers, and governing authorities who would not countenance or put up with lawlessness. May I ask any or all in whatever category you may belong who claim to believe that the "death penalty" does not prevent crime: Did you ever see a dead man commit murder? Did you ever see a dead man rape a woman or girl? Do you reckon there was any rape, adultery, homosexuality, or other crimes in Sodom on that morning shortly after Lot went out of the City and God rained fire and brimstone from heaven upon it?
The following statement is made not for the purpose of offending any man, but rather for the purpose of the writer not offending God Almighty: From my knowledge of The Bible, if I take the position the "death penalty" does not restrain and prevent, I make God out to be a liar many times in His Word, and in fact reject the entire economy of The Almighty revealed in John 3-16: "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish but have everlasting life." Maybe we need to meditate on these words of The Lord Jesus Christ: "Ye do err, not knowing The Scriptures, nor The Power of God!" Meditate on them, and repent!
Regardless of what others do, or profess, you continue to "Fear God and keep His Commandments: for this is the whole duty of man." "Be not weary in well-doing, for in due season we will reap, if we faint not." "Thy Kingdom come, Thy will be done, in earth, as it is in Heaven. Deliver us from evil." Remember that a number of times God has told us in His Word: "The earth shall be full of the knowledge of the glory of the Lord, as the waters cover the sea." For nothing should the people of God more devoutly pray than that "their great men might be good and God-fearing men!"
"Democratic Institutions exist by reason of their virtue. If ever they perish it will be when you have forgotten the past, become indifferent to the present, and utterly reckless as to the future." "When you have forgotten the past!" The following is a reminder of a few incidents of the past:
Not forgetting the past: let's turn to Oliver Cromwell about the 1650's A.D., and remember that God used him in England, Scotland and Ireland to put down evil, rebellion and disorder.
Not forgetting the past: in the year 617 A.D. Edwin was crowned King of Northumbria, one of the seven divisions of England in the period of The Heptarchy. It was from this King that Edinburgh got her name. It was said first of him that in his days "a woman with her babe might walk scathless from sea to sea." The people tilled their fields and gathered their harvests in quiet and safety. Men no longer feared the thief and robber; stakes were driven by the roadside spring, where the traveler found a brass cup hanging for his use, and no thief durst carry it off . . . "Thus the church as the great civilizer, had already begun its work in Teutonic Britain."
Again, not forgetting the past; in the year 1066 A.D. the grandson of a Norse pirate was recognized as King of England. His ways were masterful and his measures severe, but the results were beneficial. He was a hard drillmaster; but England needed a drillmaster, and the English were the first to recognize it. Life and property were protected as they had never been done and protected under native English kings. Even the Chronicle is forced to recognize "the good peace he made in the land, so that a man might go over the realm alone with his bosom full of gold unhurt. Nor durst any man slay another, how great so ever the evil he had done." "The good peace he made in the land!"
Don't forget again that the conqueror's son, Henry I demanded respect and obedience to his laws, and won the title -- "Lion of Justice." "And no man durst misdo against another."
Not forgetting the past: around 1200 to 1230 A.D., Genghis Khan came out of the Gobi desert and conquered the cities of civilization. No other man except Alexander the Great, long before the time of Genghis Khan ever made such a change in the world during one lifetime. Southern China was conquered, he swept over Russian princes, and over the brave Poles and Hungarians. His general, Subotai, got as far as Vienna, where his forces turned back from Europe of their own accord -- doubtless because France and Germany went to their knees in prayer to God Almighty! Genghis Khan demanded obedience to his Law: Mongol accounts say cart loads of gold and silver stood nearby without any guards to watch over them, so utterly was the Law of Genghis Khan, which forbade stealing, obeyed!
Somewhere, somehow, this Magnificent Barbarian had gotten ahold of God Almighty's Commandment: "Thou shalt not steal." He believed it! He enforced it! (Would God we would do the same!) Because of that Law peace prevailed for thousands of miles around him. At a "Council of his Conquerors," he said,
"I have gained the mastery by carrying out our Law. Only severity keeps men obedient. An action is only good if you carry it out to the end."
His commandments were obeyed even after his death. It was as if he sat on the raised throne of the council of the Mongol Khan. Everything written down in his Law was carried out by the generations that followed him. When his grandson, Batu Khan, ruled there was a saying in Russia that "a dog cannot bark without permission of Batu Khan." And it was also said that a young girl alone could carry a sack of gold safely from the River Don to the City of The Khans. What is wrong with such power when it is used to stop stealing, and protect women?
Above records of five rulers testify to the ability of men to keep law and order. Suggest we think on our ways. What is the trouble?'The answer is as plain as the nose on your face: We have forsaken the Commandments of our God!
We trust it will be an encouragement to all the true and sincere people of God to be reminded of several long periods of time in the earth when men dwelt without fear for their families, loved ones, and property, due to kings, rulers, and governing authorities who would not countenance or put up with lawlessness. May I ask any or all in whatever category you may belong who claim to believe that the "death penalty" does not prevent crime: Did you ever see a dead man commit murder? Did you ever see a dead man rape a woman or girl? Do you reckon there was any rape, adultery, homosexuality, or other crimes in Sodom on that morning shortly after Lot went out of the City and God rained fire and brimstone from heaven upon it?
The following statement is made not for the purpose of offending any man, but rather for the purpose of the writer not offending God Almighty: From my knowledge of The Bible, if I take the position the "death penalty" does not restrain and prevent, I make God out to be a liar many times in His Word, and in fact reject the entire economy of The Almighty revealed in John 3-16: "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish but have everlasting life." Maybe we need to meditate on these words of The Lord Jesus Christ: "Ye do err, not knowing The Scriptures, nor The Power of God!" Meditate on them, and repent!
Regardless of what others do, or profess, you continue to "Fear God and keep His Commandments: for this is the whole duty of man." "Be not weary in well-doing, for in due season we will reap, if we faint not." "Thy Kingdom come, Thy will be done, in earth, as it is in Heaven. Deliver us from evil." Remember that a number of times God has told us in His Word: "The earth shall be full of the knowledge of the glory of the Lord, as the waters cover the sea." For nothing should the people of God more devoutly pray than that "their great men might be good and God-fearing men!"
"Democratic Institutions exist by reason of their virtue. If ever they perish it will be when you have forgotten the past, become indifferent to the present, and utterly reckless as to the future." "When you have forgotten the past!" The following is a reminder of a few incidents of the past:
Not forgetting the past: let's turn to Oliver Cromwell about the 1650's A.D., and remember that God used him in England, Scotland and Ireland to put down evil, rebellion and disorder.
Not forgetting the past: in the year 617 A.D. Edwin was crowned King of Northumbria, one of the seven divisions of England in the period of The Heptarchy. It was from this King that Edinburgh got her name. It was said first of him that in his days "a woman with her babe might walk scathless from sea to sea." The people tilled their fields and gathered their harvests in quiet and safety. Men no longer feared the thief and robber; stakes were driven by the roadside spring, where the traveler found a brass cup hanging for his use, and no thief durst carry it off . . . "Thus the church as the great civilizer, had already begun its work in Teutonic Britain."
Again, not forgetting the past; in the year 1066 A.D. the grandson of a Norse pirate was recognized as King of England. His ways were masterful and his measures severe, but the results were beneficial. He was a hard drillmaster; but England needed a drillmaster, and the English were the first to recognize it. Life and property were protected as they had never been done and protected under native English kings. Even the Chronicle is forced to recognize "the good peace he made in the land, so that a man might go over the realm alone with his bosom full of gold unhurt. Nor durst any man slay another, how great so ever the evil he had done." "The good peace he made in the land!"
Don't forget again that the conqueror's son, Henry I demanded respect and obedience to his laws, and won the title -- "Lion of Justice." "And no man durst misdo against another."
Not forgetting the past: around 1200 to 1230 A.D., Genghis Khan came out of the Gobi desert and conquered the cities of civilization. No other man except Alexander the Great, long before the time of Genghis Khan ever made such a change in the world during one lifetime. Southern China was conquered, he swept over Russian princes, and over the brave Poles and Hungarians. His general, Subotai, got as far as Vienna, where his forces turned back from Europe of their own accord -- doubtless because France and Germany went to their knees in prayer to God Almighty! Genghis Khan demanded obedience to his Law: Mongol accounts say cart loads of gold and silver stood nearby without any guards to watch over them, so utterly was the Law of Genghis Khan, which forbade stealing, obeyed!
Somewhere, somehow, this Magnificent Barbarian had gotten ahold of God Almighty's Commandment: "Thou shalt not steal." He believed it! He enforced it! (Would God we would do the same!) Because of that Law peace prevailed for thousands of miles around him. At a "Council of his Conquerors," he said,
"I have gained the mastery by carrying out our Law. Only severity keeps men obedient. An action is only good if you carry it out to the end."
His commandments were obeyed even after his death. It was as if he sat on the raised throne of the council of the Mongol Khan. Everything written down in his Law was carried out by the generations that followed him. When his grandson, Batu Khan, ruled there was a saying in Russia that "a dog cannot bark without permission of Batu Khan." And it was also said that a young girl alone could carry a sack of gold safely from the River Don to the City of The Khans. What is wrong with such power when it is used to stop stealing, and protect women?
Above records of five rulers testify to the ability of men to keep law and order. Suggest we think on our ways. What is the trouble?'The answer is as plain as the nose on your face: We have forsaken the Commandments of our God!
Thursday, June 08, 2006
The Bible - God's Word - Walter Martin
MARCH 26, 1962
About fifty years ago a young man sat in a class at a University and heard an eminent Doctor Professor say regarding the first part of Genesis: "It is a myth." And about the same time another Professor said to his class: "All thinking people have gotten over the idea that the Bible is inspired." Having been raised in the atmosphere and climate of "faith" that "The Scriptures of The Old and New Testaments were the only infallible rule of faith and practice whereby to glorify God," such statements troubled this young man, for he considered that these men had more sense than he did and that they were probably better educated than his former teachers. However, though just a boy as he now looks back, he is thankful for one reaction he immediately had towards the prominent Doctor, for he seemed to "smell a rat," or the odor of hypocrisy and asked himself:
"What is he doing in The Church and a prominent officer in his Church and why doesn't he get out?"
Whether the other "bird" was a Church member or not is not definitely known, but think he was. If either of these men had honesty and integrity enough to realize they were breaking solemn vows made to God, in His House, in the presence of His people as witnesses, doubtless their pride and presumption and self-conceit had choked to death at birth any such sentiments, or very soon thereafter! For a time this boy shared some of these men's unbelief, but after "Searching The Scriptures" in order to determine whether to get out or stay in the Church he was fully persuaded to more and more and further and further "get in." He also soon "got the number" of these learned men when he found that "In the wisdom of God, the world by its wisdom knew not God."
For his own profit, and for any he might have opportunity to influence, later on, he made an analysis of these two men. You can make it of yourself or another by knowing or guessing at their age. Make it especially concerning those who attack "The Word of God" -- and today their name is many legions," even in our churches passing themselves off as Christians and "called of God to preach!" The analysis was suggested by a question God asked of Job when He appeared to him:
"Where were you when I laid the foundations of the world, when the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?"
The younger of these two men was probably in his late twenties: so where was he just about 30 years ago? He was in his father's loins -- rather difficult to imagine what he looked like then! 29 years ago he was in his mother's womb. 28 years ago he was a helpless little baby unconscious of being alive, and unable to utter intelligent speech. About 27 years ago he was still a helpless infant but beginning to say, "What's this, what's that, why this, why that, etc?" Marvel of marvels, however, for a little more than a score of years and he is sitting in a Professor's chair in a University passing out the information that The Bible, The Word of God Almighty is not inspired!
The Bible: The Book of Books which has endured through the centuries and has borne the burden and heat of battles with kings, rulers, worldly wise, and men and devils ever since the "Snake in The Garden" lifted up its voice against it! Its enemies have fought it with fire, sword, gibbets, crosses and every sort of torture men and devils could devise! Yet it has come forth victorious over all and still stands to bless or curse mankind:
"The savour of life unto life or of death unto death -- For The Word of God is quick and powerful, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart."
You just ought to read and get familiar with it, and saturate your mind and heart with "every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God." Don't try to appraise it, but rather search to see how it appraises you yourself! It is your duty if you have taken vows to God in joining some Evangelical Protestant Church. God has given us one day in seven especially for this purpose. "Be sure your sin will find you out!" While this is true concerning every secret sin of the thief, the adulterer and fornicator, the murderer, etc., yet the direct connection in which God speaks these words is to those who made a promise and then failed to perform and fulfill it. Numbers 32:23:
"But if ye will not do so, Behold, ye have sinned against The Lord, and be sure your sin will find you out."
"But if ye will not do so" has reference to a promise they had made, and a promise which was going to be very costly and self-denying to fulfill. Consider what this passage reveals regarding God's attitude towards our promises to do this, or that, pay our debts, etc., but above all, the promise and vow we made to God in joining His Church! In another place God says that they who make a covenant in His House and fail to keep it "Pollute His Name."
Speaking of "pollution" we do well to remember that God says our very land is "defiled and polluted" by bloodshed in murder, and it can only be cleansed by man shedding the blood of the murderer to make atonement! Is there any rage today against The Lord and His Annointed? Do we not make war on God and fight against Him when we substitute the precepts of man for "The Law of our God?" By the way, God's Word tells us one result of following the precepts of man rather than God's precepts is that "the wisdom of their wise men will fail" and "princes become fools." Did not our wisdom and the wisdom of our leaders and wise men fail utterly in giving recognition to Russia about thirty years ago? If Stalin made fools of us at Potsdam, Yalta, Teheran, etc., it appears that we are still unwilling to admit it, but go on increasing our folly by rejecting, neglecting and ignoring The Law of Our God for the precepts of man, and are in danger of fulfilling again The Scripture:
"Behold, ye are risen up ... an increase of sinful men, to augment yet the fierce anger of the Lord . . . "
"Shall the throne of iniquity have fellowship with Thee, which frameth mischief by a law?" Psalm 94:20.
Doubtless we all share in the responsibility for the serious condition our nation and the world are in, but it especially lays at the door of those of us who have made vows to God and failed to keep them. Our sin is surely finding us out! Is not repentance and restitution in order?
About fifty years ago a young man sat in a class at a University and heard an eminent Doctor Professor say regarding the first part of Genesis: "It is a myth." And about the same time another Professor said to his class: "All thinking people have gotten over the idea that the Bible is inspired." Having been raised in the atmosphere and climate of "faith" that "The Scriptures of The Old and New Testaments were the only infallible rule of faith and practice whereby to glorify God," such statements troubled this young man, for he considered that these men had more sense than he did and that they were probably better educated than his former teachers. However, though just a boy as he now looks back, he is thankful for one reaction he immediately had towards the prominent Doctor, for he seemed to "smell a rat," or the odor of hypocrisy and asked himself:
"What is he doing in The Church and a prominent officer in his Church and why doesn't he get out?"
Whether the other "bird" was a Church member or not is not definitely known, but think he was. If either of these men had honesty and integrity enough to realize they were breaking solemn vows made to God, in His House, in the presence of His people as witnesses, doubtless their pride and presumption and self-conceit had choked to death at birth any such sentiments, or very soon thereafter! For a time this boy shared some of these men's unbelief, but after "Searching The Scriptures" in order to determine whether to get out or stay in the Church he was fully persuaded to more and more and further and further "get in." He also soon "got the number" of these learned men when he found that "In the wisdom of God, the world by its wisdom knew not God."
For his own profit, and for any he might have opportunity to influence, later on, he made an analysis of these two men. You can make it of yourself or another by knowing or guessing at their age. Make it especially concerning those who attack "The Word of God" -- and today their name is many legions," even in our churches passing themselves off as Christians and "called of God to preach!" The analysis was suggested by a question God asked of Job when He appeared to him:
"Where were you when I laid the foundations of the world, when the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?"
The younger of these two men was probably in his late twenties: so where was he just about 30 years ago? He was in his father's loins -- rather difficult to imagine what he looked like then! 29 years ago he was in his mother's womb. 28 years ago he was a helpless little baby unconscious of being alive, and unable to utter intelligent speech. About 27 years ago he was still a helpless infant but beginning to say, "What's this, what's that, why this, why that, etc?" Marvel of marvels, however, for a little more than a score of years and he is sitting in a Professor's chair in a University passing out the information that The Bible, The Word of God Almighty is not inspired!
The Bible: The Book of Books which has endured through the centuries and has borne the burden and heat of battles with kings, rulers, worldly wise, and men and devils ever since the "Snake in The Garden" lifted up its voice against it! Its enemies have fought it with fire, sword, gibbets, crosses and every sort of torture men and devils could devise! Yet it has come forth victorious over all and still stands to bless or curse mankind:
"The savour of life unto life or of death unto death -- For The Word of God is quick and powerful, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart."
You just ought to read and get familiar with it, and saturate your mind and heart with "every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God." Don't try to appraise it, but rather search to see how it appraises you yourself! It is your duty if you have taken vows to God in joining some Evangelical Protestant Church. God has given us one day in seven especially for this purpose. "Be sure your sin will find you out!" While this is true concerning every secret sin of the thief, the adulterer and fornicator, the murderer, etc., yet the direct connection in which God speaks these words is to those who made a promise and then failed to perform and fulfill it. Numbers 32:23:
"But if ye will not do so, Behold, ye have sinned against The Lord, and be sure your sin will find you out."
"But if ye will not do so" has reference to a promise they had made, and a promise which was going to be very costly and self-denying to fulfill. Consider what this passage reveals regarding God's attitude towards our promises to do this, or that, pay our debts, etc., but above all, the promise and vow we made to God in joining His Church! In another place God says that they who make a covenant in His House and fail to keep it "Pollute His Name."
Speaking of "pollution" we do well to remember that God says our very land is "defiled and polluted" by bloodshed in murder, and it can only be cleansed by man shedding the blood of the murderer to make atonement! Is there any rage today against The Lord and His Annointed? Do we not make war on God and fight against Him when we substitute the precepts of man for "The Law of our God?" By the way, God's Word tells us one result of following the precepts of man rather than God's precepts is that "the wisdom of their wise men will fail" and "princes become fools." Did not our wisdom and the wisdom of our leaders and wise men fail utterly in giving recognition to Russia about thirty years ago? If Stalin made fools of us at Potsdam, Yalta, Teheran, etc., it appears that we are still unwilling to admit it, but go on increasing our folly by rejecting, neglecting and ignoring The Law of Our God for the precepts of man, and are in danger of fulfilling again The Scripture:
"Behold, ye are risen up ... an increase of sinful men, to augment yet the fierce anger of the Lord . . . "
"Shall the throne of iniquity have fellowship with Thee, which frameth mischief by a law?" Psalm 94:20.
Doubtless we all share in the responsibility for the serious condition our nation and the world are in, but it especially lays at the door of those of us who have made vows to God and failed to keep them. Our sin is surely finding us out! Is not repentance and restitution in order?
Wednesday, June 07, 2006
The Bible - God's Word - Walter Martin
JUNE 30, 1962
In the 2nd Psalm, God asks this question: "Why Do the Heathen Rage?" and then answers it. He tells who the heathen are, why they rage, and His reaction and the consequences of their rage. God also gives instruction, warning, and an invitation. Webster says
"A heathen is one who does not believe in The God of The Bible." This definition fits in with what God says:
"People (who) imagine a vain thing -- kings of the earth -- and the rulers -- (who) take counsel against the Lord, and His Annointed, to Break The Bands, cast away The Cords," and restraints The Almighty has thrown across our paths to hold us back from damning ourselves, children and posterity in time and eternity. In other words, their rage is against The Truth of The Bible, God's Moral Law and His Ten Commandments.
In telling of God's reaction to this rage and rebellion, there is a good picture and description of the world today, its present and recent experiences, as God has spoken in His Wrath, vexing in His sore displeasure, pouring contempt upon kings and rulers, bringing the princes of the earth to do nothing, and making the judges of the earth as vanity. Elijah, the prophet who was taken to heaven without dying, said to King Ahab:
"I have not troubled Israel; but thou, and thy father's house, in that ye have forsaken the commandments of God." Said Christ: "If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded though one rose from the dead."
Many modern prophets don't believe that Jesus rose from the dead. Probably Herod will have a better chance of heaven than they, for he believed in the resurrection of the dead: He had killed John the Baptist against his own will in order to keep a rash vow -- many of these modern prophets don't hesitate to break a solemn vow they took at ordination -- yet when Christ's fame began to spread abroad, Herod said: "It is John the Baptist, he is risen from the dead." Herod believed in the resurrection after a very short period of Christ's fame, yet many of our modern prophets that are "highly esteemed among men" don't believe after nearly two thousand years of His fame of wonder working and power in the lives of men, women, children and nations of every kindred, tribe and tongue! It was just before Christ told of the man in the torments of hell fire that He said:
That which is highly esteemed in the sight of men is abomination in the sight of God!"
Doesn't that make you tremble? It does this party!
"A heathen is one who does not believe in The God of The Bible."
In the April 11th issue of The Presbyterian Journal there was a letter from a minister reader in which he quoted another minister as saying to him: "I would not walk across the street to speak to the God of The Old Testament!" Whose minister is this man? Christ identified Himself as being "One" with The God of The Old Testament! "O God, the heathen are come into Thine inheritance; Thy holy temple have they defiled." Psalm 79:
1. According to recent published reports in news and church papers, at a recent meeting of The Assembly of one of the great Protestant Denominations, over 350 of the delegates took the position that parts of the Bible were unreliable, and it was not The Infallible Word of God, and only about 70 held to the historical position of the founders and developers of genuine Protestantism, and the great world-wide denominations that have so blessed the world and laid the foundations from which have sprung modern civilization and the wonders of science.
"Genuine Protestantism does not consist only of the doctrines of Justification by Faith and The Supreme Authority of The Scriptures, for it implies, as its name indicates, an energetic protest, formulated in the name of these doctrines, against ecclesiastical abuse of every kind.
"If Modernism was a separate movement in itself, built its own churches, launched its own institutions, projected its own denominations, then we could look at it as just another of the many sects that appear on the surface of history. But Modernism itself builds nothing; it is a parasite that grows on institutions already built. The physician tells us that a given virus can multiply and cause disease only when it is within cells. This is a picture of historical Modernism. It grows on the work, the heritage, the sacrifice of the orthodox. The humble disciples of Christ make the converts, evangelize the fields, build the churches launch institutions, erect the denominations -- then Modernism destroys the life from within."
Don't know who the author of the above quote is, but he sure "hit the nail on the head" and this is a faithful witness. Probably the Modernists should not be classed as parasites, usurpers, or hypocrites, if they accept membership in the Unitarian-Universalist Church of The Larger Fellowship. But no, doubtless they consider themselves too important personages for that small crowd, too inflated with self, pride and presumption to disappear from the view of mankind in that little bunch, and so as parasites they have wormed themselves way up to some of the top positions, if not in the majority, often of the great Protestant Denominations "While men slept."
Is it not time we genuine Protestants woke up?! If we do not, we are in danger of sleeping the sleep of eternal death, where forever and forever there is no rest day or night! Rev. 14:11. Maybe we can wake up by meditating on the 1st Psalm, and rating ourselves as to whether we in reality belong to The Godly, or ungodly class. Here we have a word picture given us by God of both classes. Consider, and decide from which frame you look out. The picture of the Godly Man has to do with His Walk, His Stand, and His Seat, and these are all determined by that in which "He delights." "His delight is in the law of the Lord, and in His law doth he meditate day and night." A little while spent while the sun is shining with your Bible, and a little while spent with your Bible after it sets, might fix that up.
This picture further shows the Godly Man to be very fruitful, like a tree planted by the river -- it takes time to grow fruit. The picture of the ungodly man is quickly drawn with just a few words: "He is not so," as the Godly Man, he is chaff driven away by the wind, and he shall not be able to "stand" in the judgment. Which picture "frame" are you looking out of? Rate yourself! We would make a suggestion if you have no delight in The Law of The Lord and are concerned about it, pray and ask God to fulfill His promise and give you a New Heart wherein are written The Commandments of God by the Holy Spirit. If you are sincere, and continue in sincerity in God's good time you will be enabled to rejoice and sing: "I know the Lord has laid His Hands on Me!"
In the 2nd Psalm, God asks this question: "Why Do the Heathen Rage?" and then answers it. He tells who the heathen are, why they rage, and His reaction and the consequences of their rage. God also gives instruction, warning, and an invitation. Webster says
"A heathen is one who does not believe in The God of The Bible." This definition fits in with what God says:
"People (who) imagine a vain thing -- kings of the earth -- and the rulers -- (who) take counsel against the Lord, and His Annointed, to Break The Bands, cast away The Cords," and restraints The Almighty has thrown across our paths to hold us back from damning ourselves, children and posterity in time and eternity. In other words, their rage is against The Truth of The Bible, God's Moral Law and His Ten Commandments.
In telling of God's reaction to this rage and rebellion, there is a good picture and description of the world today, its present and recent experiences, as God has spoken in His Wrath, vexing in His sore displeasure, pouring contempt upon kings and rulers, bringing the princes of the earth to do nothing, and making the judges of the earth as vanity. Elijah, the prophet who was taken to heaven without dying, said to King Ahab:
"I have not troubled Israel; but thou, and thy father's house, in that ye have forsaken the commandments of God." Said Christ: "If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded though one rose from the dead."
Many modern prophets don't believe that Jesus rose from the dead. Probably Herod will have a better chance of heaven than they, for he believed in the resurrection of the dead: He had killed John the Baptist against his own will in order to keep a rash vow -- many of these modern prophets don't hesitate to break a solemn vow they took at ordination -- yet when Christ's fame began to spread abroad, Herod said: "It is John the Baptist, he is risen from the dead." Herod believed in the resurrection after a very short period of Christ's fame, yet many of our modern prophets that are "highly esteemed among men" don't believe after nearly two thousand years of His fame of wonder working and power in the lives of men, women, children and nations of every kindred, tribe and tongue! It was just before Christ told of the man in the torments of hell fire that He said:
That which is highly esteemed in the sight of men is abomination in the sight of God!"
Doesn't that make you tremble? It does this party!
"A heathen is one who does not believe in The God of The Bible."
In the April 11th issue of The Presbyterian Journal there was a letter from a minister reader in which he quoted another minister as saying to him: "I would not walk across the street to speak to the God of The Old Testament!" Whose minister is this man? Christ identified Himself as being "One" with The God of The Old Testament! "O God, the heathen are come into Thine inheritance; Thy holy temple have they defiled." Psalm 79:
1. According to recent published reports in news and church papers, at a recent meeting of The Assembly of one of the great Protestant Denominations, over 350 of the delegates took the position that parts of the Bible were unreliable, and it was not The Infallible Word of God, and only about 70 held to the historical position of the founders and developers of genuine Protestantism, and the great world-wide denominations that have so blessed the world and laid the foundations from which have sprung modern civilization and the wonders of science.
"Genuine Protestantism does not consist only of the doctrines of Justification by Faith and The Supreme Authority of The Scriptures, for it implies, as its name indicates, an energetic protest, formulated in the name of these doctrines, against ecclesiastical abuse of every kind.
"If Modernism was a separate movement in itself, built its own churches, launched its own institutions, projected its own denominations, then we could look at it as just another of the many sects that appear on the surface of history. But Modernism itself builds nothing; it is a parasite that grows on institutions already built. The physician tells us that a given virus can multiply and cause disease only when it is within cells. This is a picture of historical Modernism. It grows on the work, the heritage, the sacrifice of the orthodox. The humble disciples of Christ make the converts, evangelize the fields, build the churches launch institutions, erect the denominations -- then Modernism destroys the life from within."
Don't know who the author of the above quote is, but he sure "hit the nail on the head" and this is a faithful witness. Probably the Modernists should not be classed as parasites, usurpers, or hypocrites, if they accept membership in the Unitarian-Universalist Church of The Larger Fellowship. But no, doubtless they consider themselves too important personages for that small crowd, too inflated with self, pride and presumption to disappear from the view of mankind in that little bunch, and so as parasites they have wormed themselves way up to some of the top positions, if not in the majority, often of the great Protestant Denominations "While men slept."
Is it not time we genuine Protestants woke up?! If we do not, we are in danger of sleeping the sleep of eternal death, where forever and forever there is no rest day or night! Rev. 14:11. Maybe we can wake up by meditating on the 1st Psalm, and rating ourselves as to whether we in reality belong to The Godly, or ungodly class. Here we have a word picture given us by God of both classes. Consider, and decide from which frame you look out. The picture of the Godly Man has to do with His Walk, His Stand, and His Seat, and these are all determined by that in which "He delights." "His delight is in the law of the Lord, and in His law doth he meditate day and night." A little while spent while the sun is shining with your Bible, and a little while spent with your Bible after it sets, might fix that up.
This picture further shows the Godly Man to be very fruitful, like a tree planted by the river -- it takes time to grow fruit. The picture of the ungodly man is quickly drawn with just a few words: "He is not so," as the Godly Man, he is chaff driven away by the wind, and he shall not be able to "stand" in the judgment. Which picture "frame" are you looking out of? Rate yourself! We would make a suggestion if you have no delight in The Law of The Lord and are concerned about it, pray and ask God to fulfill His promise and give you a New Heart wherein are written The Commandments of God by the Holy Spirit. If you are sincere, and continue in sincerity in God's good time you will be enabled to rejoice and sing: "I know the Lord has laid His Hands on Me!"
Tuesday, June 06, 2006
Thy Word Is Truth - By Walter Martin
What do we mean when we say, "the Bible is the Word of God?" It is obvious that we are asserting that the Bible is a revelation from God -- that it does not just illumine our thinking but reveals to our minds things which God knows and which we are incapable of learning apart from His communication with us.
Now, it is true that the Bible contains quotations from men (Acts 17:28), angels (Matt. 1:20), demons (Mark 5:9), Satan (Job 1:9), and God Himself (Exod. 20:1ff.). However, the Bible is called the Word of God because the whole transcript is an inspired, faithful, and infallible record of what God determined essential for us to know about Himself, the cosmos in which we live, our spiritual allies and adversaries, and our fellow man.
The Bible, then, was produced by men whose recording of events was divinely supervised and preserved from all the frailties of human error and judgment which are so common in all other religious literature.
How could such faithful recording come about? By what method could God bring such a thing to pass? Such questions can be answered simply by pointing out an illustration from the late Donald Grey Barnhouse. Dr. Barnhouse maintained that even as the Holy Spirit came upon the womb of the Virgin Mary and, despite her sinful nature, imperfections, and limitations, produced sinless and perfect humanity for Christ in the Incarnation, so He moved upon the minds and spirits of the recorders of Scripture such that, despite limitations in language, culture, and even scientific knowledge, He produced His perfect message to humankind. Both phenomena were miraculous; both were perfect births -- one of the Son of Man and the other of a Book, the Word of God.
When we speak of the inspiration of the Scriptures, then, we are talking about the process that God used to convey His message. This process is described by the apostle Paul as a type of spiritual "breathing" (2 Tim. 3:16; cf. 2 Pet. 1:21). In fact, the Greek word for "inspiration" (theopneustos) literally means "God-breathed."
The inspiration of the Bible and the concepts just mentioned refer only to the initial "breathing" of God upon the authors of Scripture to produce a copy of His thoughts for man. It is for this original text of Scripture, revealed by God and faithfully recorded by His servants, that the Christian church claims infallibility.
Through the centuries God has preserved literally thousands of copies and fragments of these initial manuscripts with only minor, insignificant transmissional mistakes made by scribes over the years. Historic Christianity affirms the plenary or "full" inspiration of the Bible, and it further holds that inspired concepts can be communicated only by inspired words. Thus, the church's belief in the verbal inspiration of the Bible is logically inseparable from the doctrine of plenary inspiration.
To illustrate, the label on all RCA records at one time contained a picture of a dog listening to an old Victrola with the caption, "His Master's Voice." Dr. Eugene Nida of the translation department of the American Bible Society has pointed out that the dog listening to the Victrola will hear an imperfect transmission of his master's voice because the needle scratches the surface of the record. However, no matter how scratchy the record sounds, the needle cannot obliterate the sound of the master's voice -- the message still comes through loud and clear.
Expanding on this concept a little more, we can see that the Bible is represented by the record and that the imperfections of human nature and the limitations of human knowledge are represented by the needle. The passage of time is represented by the turntable. Just as any record becomes scratchy in time through wear, so is this true (though in a much lesser degree) with the copies of Scripture. But despite these limitations (which are the direct product of human freedom and its resultant sin), we can still hear our Master's voice with absolute clarity, just as the dog does on the record label. The "scratches" in the copies of Scripture -- which, I might add, are exceedingly minimal -- do not prevent God from clearly communicating His message to humankind.
We might also note that the "scratches" are being "erased" as time goes on by archeology, by older and better texts, and by scientific discoveries. More of the "original" is thus being "dubbed" back into the already-very-accurate copies, so that year by year we are getting closer to the "master tape" from which all the duplicates (copies of manuscripts) were recorded. Thus the accuracy of our Bible copies increases rather than decreases with time.
Because of advancing knowledge about the Bible and its times, great gains have been made in solving problems which a hundred years ago were considered by some reputable scholars to be "insoluble." Thus it would be foolish indeed to abandon faith in the authority of God's initial revelation simply because there remains a relatively small percentage (less than 1/2 of 1 percent in the New Testament) of questionable material in the copies about which we do not yet have enough data to properly evaluate. Contemporary disciples of those who gave up their faith in the absolute authority of Scripture a hundred years ago would do well to remember that advancing knowledge confirms rather than diminishes the accuracy of the Bible.
A special note of thanks to Bob and Pat Hunter for their help in the preparation of this ASCII file for BBS circulation.
Copyright 1994 by the Christian Research Institute
Now, it is true that the Bible contains quotations from men (Acts 17:28), angels (Matt. 1:20), demons (Mark 5:9), Satan (Job 1:9), and God Himself (Exod. 20:1ff.). However, the Bible is called the Word of God because the whole transcript is an inspired, faithful, and infallible record of what God determined essential for us to know about Himself, the cosmos in which we live, our spiritual allies and adversaries, and our fellow man.
The Bible, then, was produced by men whose recording of events was divinely supervised and preserved from all the frailties of human error and judgment which are so common in all other religious literature.
How could such faithful recording come about? By what method could God bring such a thing to pass? Such questions can be answered simply by pointing out an illustration from the late Donald Grey Barnhouse. Dr. Barnhouse maintained that even as the Holy Spirit came upon the womb of the Virgin Mary and, despite her sinful nature, imperfections, and limitations, produced sinless and perfect humanity for Christ in the Incarnation, so He moved upon the minds and spirits of the recorders of Scripture such that, despite limitations in language, culture, and even scientific knowledge, He produced His perfect message to humankind. Both phenomena were miraculous; both were perfect births -- one of the Son of Man and the other of a Book, the Word of God.
When we speak of the inspiration of the Scriptures, then, we are talking about the process that God used to convey His message. This process is described by the apostle Paul as a type of spiritual "breathing" (2 Tim. 3:16; cf. 2 Pet. 1:21). In fact, the Greek word for "inspiration" (theopneustos) literally means "God-breathed."
The inspiration of the Bible and the concepts just mentioned refer only to the initial "breathing" of God upon the authors of Scripture to produce a copy of His thoughts for man. It is for this original text of Scripture, revealed by God and faithfully recorded by His servants, that the Christian church claims infallibility.
Through the centuries God has preserved literally thousands of copies and fragments of these initial manuscripts with only minor, insignificant transmissional mistakes made by scribes over the years. Historic Christianity affirms the plenary or "full" inspiration of the Bible, and it further holds that inspired concepts can be communicated only by inspired words. Thus, the church's belief in the verbal inspiration of the Bible is logically inseparable from the doctrine of plenary inspiration.
To illustrate, the label on all RCA records at one time contained a picture of a dog listening to an old Victrola with the caption, "His Master's Voice." Dr. Eugene Nida of the translation department of the American Bible Society has pointed out that the dog listening to the Victrola will hear an imperfect transmission of his master's voice because the needle scratches the surface of the record. However, no matter how scratchy the record sounds, the needle cannot obliterate the sound of the master's voice -- the message still comes through loud and clear.
Expanding on this concept a little more, we can see that the Bible is represented by the record and that the imperfections of human nature and the limitations of human knowledge are represented by the needle. The passage of time is represented by the turntable. Just as any record becomes scratchy in time through wear, so is this true (though in a much lesser degree) with the copies of Scripture. But despite these limitations (which are the direct product of human freedom and its resultant sin), we can still hear our Master's voice with absolute clarity, just as the dog does on the record label. The "scratches" in the copies of Scripture -- which, I might add, are exceedingly minimal -- do not prevent God from clearly communicating His message to humankind.
We might also note that the "scratches" are being "erased" as time goes on by archeology, by older and better texts, and by scientific discoveries. More of the "original" is thus being "dubbed" back into the already-very-accurate copies, so that year by year we are getting closer to the "master tape" from which all the duplicates (copies of manuscripts) were recorded. Thus the accuracy of our Bible copies increases rather than decreases with time.
Because of advancing knowledge about the Bible and its times, great gains have been made in solving problems which a hundred years ago were considered by some reputable scholars to be "insoluble." Thus it would be foolish indeed to abandon faith in the authority of God's initial revelation simply because there remains a relatively small percentage (less than 1/2 of 1 percent in the New Testament) of questionable material in the copies about which we do not yet have enough data to properly evaluate. Contemporary disciples of those who gave up their faith in the absolute authority of Scripture a hundred years ago would do well to remember that advancing knowledge confirms rather than diminishes the accuracy of the Bible.
A special note of thanks to Bob and Pat Hunter for their help in the preparation of this ASCII file for BBS circulation.
Copyright 1994 by the Christian Research Institute
Monday, June 05, 2006
The Judgments of God By Walter Martin
Of all the doctrines taught in the Bible, none is declared with more consistency and fervor than the doctrine of divine judgment.
But how many judgments are there? And who will be judged? Though there are a number of judgments that may be found in the pages of Scripture, there are five that I believe are particularly important. Let us briefly examine these.
The first judgment I want to mention will take place at the return of the Lord Jesus Christ (Matt. 16:27; 1 Cor. 4:4-5; Rev. 22:12), and will be a judgment of the works of believers. Whatever the Christian has built upon the foundation (Christ) -- whether it be gold, silver, precious stones, or else wood, hay, and stubble -- it must be tried by the fire of divine judgment. The work of some believers will stand the test while that of others will be burned away. But even though a man's works may be consumed, his faith in the imperishable foundation will remain and his salvation rests secure (1 Cor. 3:11-15).
It should be noted that Paul's counsel is directed here to Christians, for only the Christian will appear before the judgment seat (Greek: Bema) of Christ. This Bema judgment has nothing whatever to do with the unsaved, for they are never mentioned in connection with it.
One of the greatest errors ever perpetrated in Christian theology is the idea that one great judgment will take place at the end of the age, at which all men will be gathered before the Great White Throne. There is absolutely no basis in the Word of God for such an idea.
A second divine judgment concerns the righteous judgment of all nations. Scripture declares that this judgment will also take place at the return of Jesus Christ (Matt. 25:32). It should be distinguished from the final judgment of the wicked -- which takes place at the Great White Throne -- since three distinct groups of individuals are represented: sheep, goats, and brethren. And, according to verse 31, the setting of this judgment is the earth (i.e., not a Great White Throne).
A third judgment in Scripture concerns the nation Israel. Bible scholars may disagree about the nature and extent of this judgment, but they are fairly well agreed that such a judgment must take place. Such passages as Ezekiel 20:37-38, Isaiah 1:24-26, and Malachi 3:2-5 definitely teach such a judgment.
Certainly, as Paul puts it in Romans 11:2, "God hath not cast away his people" (Israel). But it will be necessary for them to pass through great tribulation so that a godly remnant may be saved out of the wrath that is to come.
A fourth judgment is that of Satan, the beast, the false prophet, and Satan's multitudinous emissaries -- the fallen angels. Jesus once declared, "Now is the time for judgment on this world; now the prince of this world will be driven out" (John 12:31). In that statement Satan's doom was sealed. Although sentence was pronounced upon him at the Cross, it is not until Revelation 20:10 that the sentence is executed: "And the devil, who deceived them, was thrown into the lake of burning sulfur, where the beast and the false prophet had been thrown. They will be tormented day and night for ever and ever."
A fifth judgment in the Word of God concerns that of the Great White Throne (Rev. 20:11-15). In this judgment the saints will be seated with Christ, and the wicked -- those "not found in the book of life" -- will be judged. The fate of those who endure this judgment is the second death, everlasting separation from the presence of the Lord (Rev. 21:8).
The wonder of the doctrine of divine judgment is the fact that the Christ of Calvary's cross will be the Judge of the Great White Throne. What a comfort it is for the believer to realize that he has passed from death to life and will not be judged in the final Great White Throne judgment.
These facts should cause us as believers to judge ourselves (1 Cor. 11:31). Indeed, since Peter tells us that "judgment must begin at the house of God" (1 Pet. 4:17), we ought to examine ourselves closely.
The Christian has nothing to fear from these judgments. He need only see that his works be composed of the gold, silver, and precious gems that will endure the fire of God's holiness.
A special note of thanks to Bob and Pat Hunter for their help in the preparation of this ASCII file for BBS circulation.
Copyright 1994 by the Christian Research Institute.
But how many judgments are there? And who will be judged? Though there are a number of judgments that may be found in the pages of Scripture, there are five that I believe are particularly important. Let us briefly examine these.
The first judgment I want to mention will take place at the return of the Lord Jesus Christ (Matt. 16:27; 1 Cor. 4:4-5; Rev. 22:12), and will be a judgment of the works of believers. Whatever the Christian has built upon the foundation (Christ) -- whether it be gold, silver, precious stones, or else wood, hay, and stubble -- it must be tried by the fire of divine judgment. The work of some believers will stand the test while that of others will be burned away. But even though a man's works may be consumed, his faith in the imperishable foundation will remain and his salvation rests secure (1 Cor. 3:11-15).
It should be noted that Paul's counsel is directed here to Christians, for only the Christian will appear before the judgment seat (Greek: Bema) of Christ. This Bema judgment has nothing whatever to do with the unsaved, for they are never mentioned in connection with it.
One of the greatest errors ever perpetrated in Christian theology is the idea that one great judgment will take place at the end of the age, at which all men will be gathered before the Great White Throne. There is absolutely no basis in the Word of God for such an idea.
A second divine judgment concerns the righteous judgment of all nations. Scripture declares that this judgment will also take place at the return of Jesus Christ (Matt. 25:32). It should be distinguished from the final judgment of the wicked -- which takes place at the Great White Throne -- since three distinct groups of individuals are represented: sheep, goats, and brethren. And, according to verse 31, the setting of this judgment is the earth (i.e., not a Great White Throne).
A third judgment in Scripture concerns the nation Israel. Bible scholars may disagree about the nature and extent of this judgment, but they are fairly well agreed that such a judgment must take place. Such passages as Ezekiel 20:37-38, Isaiah 1:24-26, and Malachi 3:2-5 definitely teach such a judgment.
Certainly, as Paul puts it in Romans 11:2, "God hath not cast away his people" (Israel). But it will be necessary for them to pass through great tribulation so that a godly remnant may be saved out of the wrath that is to come.
A fourth judgment is that of Satan, the beast, the false prophet, and Satan's multitudinous emissaries -- the fallen angels. Jesus once declared, "Now is the time for judgment on this world; now the prince of this world will be driven out" (John 12:31). In that statement Satan's doom was sealed. Although sentence was pronounced upon him at the Cross, it is not until Revelation 20:10 that the sentence is executed: "And the devil, who deceived them, was thrown into the lake of burning sulfur, where the beast and the false prophet had been thrown. They will be tormented day and night for ever and ever."
A fifth judgment in the Word of God concerns that of the Great White Throne (Rev. 20:11-15). In this judgment the saints will be seated with Christ, and the wicked -- those "not found in the book of life" -- will be judged. The fate of those who endure this judgment is the second death, everlasting separation from the presence of the Lord (Rev. 21:8).
The wonder of the doctrine of divine judgment is the fact that the Christ of Calvary's cross will be the Judge of the Great White Throne. What a comfort it is for the believer to realize that he has passed from death to life and will not be judged in the final Great White Throne judgment.
These facts should cause us as believers to judge ourselves (1 Cor. 11:31). Indeed, since Peter tells us that "judgment must begin at the house of God" (1 Pet. 4:17), we ought to examine ourselves closely.
The Christian has nothing to fear from these judgments. He need only see that his works be composed of the gold, silver, and precious gems that will endure the fire of God's holiness.
A special note of thanks to Bob and Pat Hunter for their help in the preparation of this ASCII file for BBS circulation.
Copyright 1994 by the Christian Research Institute.
Sunday, June 04, 2006
Insights on Spiritual Warfare By Walter Martin
Christians need to recognize the reality of spiritual conflict and warfare. We are born in conflict -- against the world, against our carnal natures, and against the Devil. And if you do not know the nature of your enemy -- if you do not know who your foes are -- you can't fight. It's only when you realize what you're up against that you can be victorious.
The Bible says we must stand against such foes as Christian soldiers (2 Tim. 2:4). When God calls you into the church of Jesus Christ, you have enlisted in the army of God. You can truthfully sing, "Onward Christian soldiers, marching as to war," because you are at war.
The moment you enlist in the army of God, you personally become a target. You need to remember that if you're living for and walking with Jesus Christ, the powers of darkness are aligned against you. You are on Satan's hit list! The following four principles will help you be victorious in spiritual warfare as a Christian soldier.
Learn to Endure Hardship. 2 Timothy 2:3 tells us: "Endure hardship with us like a good soldier of Christ Jesus." If you want to be a soldier, you need to get in shape. You can't go out and fight hand-to-hand combat when you're loaded with flab. If you're sitting on your surpluses, the enemy is going to have you for breakfast, lunch, and dinner. You need to strengthen your spiritual muscles and gear up your spiritual reflexes. You need to be able to respond. If you can't respond in physical combat, you die. It's as simple as that. Likewise, you must learn to respond in spiritual combat, or you become spiritually wounded.
A key to strengthening spiritual muscles and enduring hardship is finding strength in the Word of God. Never forget this: ignorance of the Bible is ignorance of the Lord Jesus Christ. And ignorance of Christ is ignorance of your own defense. You can't defend yourself unless you are walking in the light with Him.
Be Self-Controlled and Alert. You must learn to "be self-controlled and alert" for "your enemy the devil prowls around like a roaring lion looking for someone to devour" (1 Pet. 5:8). There's no such thing as a sleepy, successful soldier. Sleepy soldiers -- soldiers who are not alert -- have one thing in common. They're all dead. God says if you want to succeed in spiritual war, you must be self-controlled and alert. Only then will you be able to spiritually discern and resist the enemy's subtle attacks.
Maintain Faith in Christ. Faith is absolutely critical to victory in spiritual conflict. Scripture tells us: "For everyone born of God overcomes the world. This is the victory that has overcome the world, even our faith. Who is it that overcomes the world? Only he who believes that Jesus is the Son of God" (1 John 5:4-5). Our faith is in Jesus Christ -- the divine Conqueror -- who admonishes His followers: "Take heart! I have overcome the world" (John 16:33).
Christ imparts the capacity of conquest to our lives every single day that we are willing to believe Him. You need to get up in the morning and say, "Lord Jesus, I believe you have conquered the world. Conquer today through me. I believe in you. Give me victory. Take away my doubts. Give to me the measure of faith that is necessary for me to survive today."
Put On Spiritual Armor. Ephesians 6:11 tells us: "Put on the full armour of God so that you can take your stand against the devil's schemes." Are you catching this? You can stand against Satan. You can be victorious.
Ephesians 6:10-20 speaks of the various pieces of spiritual armor God has provided us. Nobody goes out to war in their underwear. You go out with 30 or 40 pounds of equipment.
There are Christians running around today in their spiritual underwear, trying to conduct spiritual warfare against our powerful enemy. And they don't understand why the flaming arrows of the wicked one are sticking out of their spiritual derrieres.
You must put on the whole armor of God -- the belt of truth, the breastplate of righteousness, the readiness to preach the gospel, the shield of faith, the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the Word of God (Eph. 6:10-20). These are God's gifts for spiritual conquest.
Note that every piece of armor in Ephesians 6 is for the front of the body. There isn't a single piece for your rear end. Do you know why? Because soldiers do not turn around in the middle of combat, they go forward. And the reason some Christians become ineffective and weak and drained is that in the midst of conflict and combat, they fail to believe in Jesus Christ and they turn around and run away. And the flaming arrows of the wicked one have lodged in their spiritual rumps.
There is only one way to get your strength back: get down on your knees and confess your sins, ask Jesus Christ to pull out the arrows, and then apply what we've learned: endure hardship as a soldier of Christ, be self-controlled and alert, maintain faith in Christ, and put on the armor of God. God will give you the victory. You can count on it!
The Bible says we must stand against such foes as Christian soldiers (2 Tim. 2:4). When God calls you into the church of Jesus Christ, you have enlisted in the army of God. You can truthfully sing, "Onward Christian soldiers, marching as to war," because you are at war.
The moment you enlist in the army of God, you personally become a target. You need to remember that if you're living for and walking with Jesus Christ, the powers of darkness are aligned against you. You are on Satan's hit list! The following four principles will help you be victorious in spiritual warfare as a Christian soldier.
Learn to Endure Hardship. 2 Timothy 2:3 tells us: "Endure hardship with us like a good soldier of Christ Jesus." If you want to be a soldier, you need to get in shape. You can't go out and fight hand-to-hand combat when you're loaded with flab. If you're sitting on your surpluses, the enemy is going to have you for breakfast, lunch, and dinner. You need to strengthen your spiritual muscles and gear up your spiritual reflexes. You need to be able to respond. If you can't respond in physical combat, you die. It's as simple as that. Likewise, you must learn to respond in spiritual combat, or you become spiritually wounded.
A key to strengthening spiritual muscles and enduring hardship is finding strength in the Word of God. Never forget this: ignorance of the Bible is ignorance of the Lord Jesus Christ. And ignorance of Christ is ignorance of your own defense. You can't defend yourself unless you are walking in the light with Him.
Be Self-Controlled and Alert. You must learn to "be self-controlled and alert" for "your enemy the devil prowls around like a roaring lion looking for someone to devour" (1 Pet. 5:8). There's no such thing as a sleepy, successful soldier. Sleepy soldiers -- soldiers who are not alert -- have one thing in common. They're all dead. God says if you want to succeed in spiritual war, you must be self-controlled and alert. Only then will you be able to spiritually discern and resist the enemy's subtle attacks.
Maintain Faith in Christ. Faith is absolutely critical to victory in spiritual conflict. Scripture tells us: "For everyone born of God overcomes the world. This is the victory that has overcome the world, even our faith. Who is it that overcomes the world? Only he who believes that Jesus is the Son of God" (1 John 5:4-5). Our faith is in Jesus Christ -- the divine Conqueror -- who admonishes His followers: "Take heart! I have overcome the world" (John 16:33).
Christ imparts the capacity of conquest to our lives every single day that we are willing to believe Him. You need to get up in the morning and say, "Lord Jesus, I believe you have conquered the world. Conquer today through me. I believe in you. Give me victory. Take away my doubts. Give to me the measure of faith that is necessary for me to survive today."
Put On Spiritual Armor. Ephesians 6:11 tells us: "Put on the full armour of God so that you can take your stand against the devil's schemes." Are you catching this? You can stand against Satan. You can be victorious.
Ephesians 6:10-20 speaks of the various pieces of spiritual armor God has provided us. Nobody goes out to war in their underwear. You go out with 30 or 40 pounds of equipment.
There are Christians running around today in their spiritual underwear, trying to conduct spiritual warfare against our powerful enemy. And they don't understand why the flaming arrows of the wicked one are sticking out of their spiritual derrieres.
You must put on the whole armor of God -- the belt of truth, the breastplate of righteousness, the readiness to preach the gospel, the shield of faith, the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the Word of God (Eph. 6:10-20). These are God's gifts for spiritual conquest.
Note that every piece of armor in Ephesians 6 is for the front of the body. There isn't a single piece for your rear end. Do you know why? Because soldiers do not turn around in the middle of combat, they go forward. And the reason some Christians become ineffective and weak and drained is that in the midst of conflict and combat, they fail to believe in Jesus Christ and they turn around and run away. And the flaming arrows of the wicked one have lodged in their spiritual rumps.
There is only one way to get your strength back: get down on your knees and confess your sins, ask Jesus Christ to pull out the arrows, and then apply what we've learned: endure hardship as a soldier of Christ, be self-controlled and alert, maintain faith in Christ, and put on the armor of God. God will give you the victory. You can count on it!
Saturday, June 03, 2006
The Doctrine of the Trinity - By Walter Martin
The Doctrine of the Trinity teaches that within the unity of the one Godhead there are three separate persons who are coequal in power, nature, and eternity. This doctrine is derived from the clear teaching of Scripture, and is not a man-made doctrine as some (such as the Jehovah's Witnesses) have claimed. Let us briefly examine some of the New Testament evidences for this important doctrine.
1. The Incarnation. The birth of the Lord Jesus Christ as described in the accounts in Matthew and Luke show that the doctrine of the Trinity was not a later invention of theologians. Luke records what an angel said to Mary: "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. So the holy one to be born will be called the Son of God" (Luke 1:35).
Since other passages of Scripture reveal that the term "Most High" refers to God the Father, we have in Luke a concrete instance of the Holy Spirit, the Father, and the Son all being mentioned together in the supernatural event of the Incarnation.
2. The Baptism of Our Lord. When Jesus Christ was baptized, the heavens opened and the Holy Spirit "descended on him in bodily form like a dove. And a voice came from heaven: 'You are my Son, whom I love; with you I am well pleased'" (Luke 3:21-22). In these verses we see the Son being baptized, the Spirit descending upon Him, and the Father bearing testimony.
3. Discourses of Christ. In John 14--16 Christ speaks of the persons of the Trinity in His Upper Room Discourse. Jesus declared to the disciples, "And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Counselor to be with you forever -- the Spirit of truth. The world cannot accept him, because it neither sees him nor knows him. But you know him, for he lives with you and will be in you" (John 14:16-17). Our Lord here prays to the Father for the Spirit, and His emphasis on triunity is quite apparent. In John 14:26 and 15:26 Christ uses the same formula, mentioning the three persons of the Deity and indicating their unity, not only of purpose and will but of basic nature.
4. Paul's Letters. The apostle Paul definitely taught the triune nature of God. He wrote: "May the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all" (2 Cor. 13:14). It would have been difficult for Paul to give this benediction if the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit were not equal persons within the Godhead.
5. The Great Commission. In Matthew 28:18-20 the Lord Jesus commissions the disciples to go out and preach the gospel and to make disciples of all nations. He commands them also to baptize "in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit." Taken with the other passages bearing on the subject, this becomes an extremely powerful argument for the Christian doctrine of the trinity.
6. Creation. Although the Bible does not explain to us how the three persons are the one God, it tells us most emphatically that the Spirit of God created the world (Gen. 1:2), the Father created the world (Heb. 1:2), and the Son created the world (Col. 1:16). If you check the creation references in the New Testament, you will see that these particular references are bolstered by several others teaching the same things.
The apostle Paul declared in Acts 17:24, "the God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples built by hands." This forces us to an irresistible conclusion. As creation has been attributed to the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit singly and collectively, they are the one God. There cannot be three gods. The Scripture declares: "Turn to me and be saved, all you ends of the earth; for I am God, and there is no other" (Isa. 45:22). Hence there is unity in trinity and trinity in unity.
7. The Resurrection of Christ. A final instance of Trinitarian emphasis is that of the resurrection of our Lord. In John 2 Christ declared to the Jews, "Destroy this temple, and I will raise it again in three days" (v. 19). John hastens to tell us that Jesus was speaking of the resurrection of His earthly body (v. 21). Other Scriptures, however, state that Christ was raised by the agency of the Holy Spirit (e.g., Rom. 8:11). And Peter explicitly states that the Father raised the Son (Acts 3:26). So, again, God's Word affirms the triune nature of God. We may not fully understand the great truth of the Trinity. However, we can see the rays of light which emanate from God's Word and which teach us that, in a mysterious sense beyond the comprehension of man's finite mind, God is one in nature but three in person.
Copyright 1994 by the Christian Research Institute.
1. The Incarnation. The birth of the Lord Jesus Christ as described in the accounts in Matthew and Luke show that the doctrine of the Trinity was not a later invention of theologians. Luke records what an angel said to Mary: "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. So the holy one to be born will be called the Son of God" (Luke 1:35).
Since other passages of Scripture reveal that the term "Most High" refers to God the Father, we have in Luke a concrete instance of the Holy Spirit, the Father, and the Son all being mentioned together in the supernatural event of the Incarnation.
2. The Baptism of Our Lord. When Jesus Christ was baptized, the heavens opened and the Holy Spirit "descended on him in bodily form like a dove. And a voice came from heaven: 'You are my Son, whom I love; with you I am well pleased'" (Luke 3:21-22). In these verses we see the Son being baptized, the Spirit descending upon Him, and the Father bearing testimony.
3. Discourses of Christ. In John 14--16 Christ speaks of the persons of the Trinity in His Upper Room Discourse. Jesus declared to the disciples, "And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Counselor to be with you forever -- the Spirit of truth. The world cannot accept him, because it neither sees him nor knows him. But you know him, for he lives with you and will be in you" (John 14:16-17). Our Lord here prays to the Father for the Spirit, and His emphasis on triunity is quite apparent. In John 14:26 and 15:26 Christ uses the same formula, mentioning the three persons of the Deity and indicating their unity, not only of purpose and will but of basic nature.
4. Paul's Letters. The apostle Paul definitely taught the triune nature of God. He wrote: "May the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all" (2 Cor. 13:14). It would have been difficult for Paul to give this benediction if the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit were not equal persons within the Godhead.
5. The Great Commission. In Matthew 28:18-20 the Lord Jesus commissions the disciples to go out and preach the gospel and to make disciples of all nations. He commands them also to baptize "in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit." Taken with the other passages bearing on the subject, this becomes an extremely powerful argument for the Christian doctrine of the trinity.
6. Creation. Although the Bible does not explain to us how the three persons are the one God, it tells us most emphatically that the Spirit of God created the world (Gen. 1:2), the Father created the world (Heb. 1:2), and the Son created the world (Col. 1:16). If you check the creation references in the New Testament, you will see that these particular references are bolstered by several others teaching the same things.
The apostle Paul declared in Acts 17:24, "the God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples built by hands." This forces us to an irresistible conclusion. As creation has been attributed to the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit singly and collectively, they are the one God. There cannot be three gods. The Scripture declares: "Turn to me and be saved, all you ends of the earth; for I am God, and there is no other" (Isa. 45:22). Hence there is unity in trinity and trinity in unity.
7. The Resurrection of Christ. A final instance of Trinitarian emphasis is that of the resurrection of our Lord. In John 2 Christ declared to the Jews, "Destroy this temple, and I will raise it again in three days" (v. 19). John hastens to tell us that Jesus was speaking of the resurrection of His earthly body (v. 21). Other Scriptures, however, state that Christ was raised by the agency of the Holy Spirit (e.g., Rom. 8:11). And Peter explicitly states that the Father raised the Son (Acts 3:26). So, again, God's Word affirms the triune nature of God. We may not fully understand the great truth of the Trinity. However, we can see the rays of light which emanate from God's Word and which teach us that, in a mysterious sense beyond the comprehension of man's finite mind, God is one in nature but three in person.
Copyright 1994 by the Christian Research Institute.
Friday, June 02, 2006
The Coming King - By Walter Martin
As far back as the Book of Genesis, when man first fell into sin, God had provided a Redeemer. Scripture says in Genesis 3 that the "seed of the woman" would crush the serpent's head.
Now, we know that the serpent symbolized Satan (see Rev. 12:9). And we know that the "seed of the woman" is a reference to the coming Messiah. This Messiah was to come through the royal line of David (2 Sam. 7:14-16). In direct fulfillment of prophecy, Jesus was indeed born of a woman (Gal. 4:4) from the line of David (Matt. 1:1; 2:1).
Now, the early Jewish theologians in the time of our Lord had a great deal of difficulty in understanding Jesus' messianic office. The reason for this is that they were schooled to believe that the Messiah would come in the clouds of heaven to crush the earthly governments under His feet and establish Israel as the ruling nation of the world. Therefore, when the Lord Jesus came, presenting Himself as the Savior and as the sacrifice for sin, they could not accept Him.
We must clearly understand that Christ's role in Scripture is twofold. He is both the suffering servant and He is the coming King. In Isaiah 53 we have recorded for us a prophecy concerning the coming of Jesus Christ in His first advent:
He was despised and rejected by men, a man of sorrows, and familiar with suffering. Like one from whom men hide their faces he was despised, and we esteemed him not. Surely he took up our infirmities and carried our sorrows, yet we considered him stricken by God, smitten by him, and afflicted. But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are healed. We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own way; and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all.(Isa. 53:3-6).
Clearly, then, Christ came the first time to suffer humiliation -- despised and rejected among men, a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief. But Christ is coming a second time as King. He who bore the sorrows of the world and who cried out in agony on the cross, "Father, forgive them for they know not what they do," will one day come again in great glory and majesty.
In his great portrayal in the Book of Revelation, John the Apostle reminds us of this second aspect of the Lord Jesus Christ's coming in terms of great, glowing beauty:
I saw heaven standing open and there before me was a white horse, whose rider is called Faithful and True. With justice he judges and makes war. His eyes are like blazing fire, and on his head are many crowns. He has a name written on him that no one knows but he himself. He is dressed in a robe dipped in blood, and his name is the Word of God. The armies of heaven were following him, riding on white horses and dressed in fine linen, white and clean. Out of his mouth comes a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations. "He will rule them with an iron sceptre." He treads the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God Almighty. On his robe and on his thigh he has this name written: KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS. (Rev. 19:11-16).
The Scriptures point out -- in terms which few can fail to understand -- that time does have an end; that God will intervene in the world of men; that God has a destiny for those who are willing to trust and believe in Him; and that the Messiah of Israel and the Savior of humanity will judge the world and sift the sons of men.
For believers there is a glorious destiny ahead. Scripture portrays it this way: "I did not see a temple in the city, because the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are its temple. The city does not need the sun or the moon to shine on it, for the glory of God gives it light, and the Lamb is its lamp. The nations will walk by its light, and the kings of the earth will bring their splendour into it" (Rev. 21:22-24).
Oh what a wonderful testimony this is to the sovereignty of the God of all creation, who alone can say, "I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End. To him who is thirsty I will give to drink without cost from the spring of the water of life. He who overcomes will inherit all this, and I will be his God and he will be my son" (Rev. 21:6-7).
Let us with confidence exult in what God will do for believers in the eternal state: "He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away. He who was seated on the throne said, 'I am making everything new!' Then he said, 'Write this down, for these words are trustworthy and true'" (Rev. 21:4-5).
Let us with great confidence "fix our eyes on Jesus, the author and perfecter of our faith, who for the joy set before him endured the cross, scorning its shame, and sat down at the right hand of the throne of God" (Heb. 12:2).
Let us place our faith and our trust in Him, who alone could say: "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me" (John 14:6).
And let us peer through the darkness of the future in the searchlight of God's Word, knowing certainly that "one day, one golden daybreak, Jesus will come; One golden daybreak, battles all won. He will shout the victory, He will break through the blue; One golden daybreak, for me and for you."
-------------------------------------------------------------------
A special note of thanks to Bob and Pat Hunter for their help in the preparation of this ASCII file for BBS circulation.
Copyright 1994 by the Christian Research Institute.
Now, we know that the serpent symbolized Satan (see Rev. 12:9). And we know that the "seed of the woman" is a reference to the coming Messiah. This Messiah was to come through the royal line of David (2 Sam. 7:14-16). In direct fulfillment of prophecy, Jesus was indeed born of a woman (Gal. 4:4) from the line of David (Matt. 1:1; 2:1).
Now, the early Jewish theologians in the time of our Lord had a great deal of difficulty in understanding Jesus' messianic office. The reason for this is that they were schooled to believe that the Messiah would come in the clouds of heaven to crush the earthly governments under His feet and establish Israel as the ruling nation of the world. Therefore, when the Lord Jesus came, presenting Himself as the Savior and as the sacrifice for sin, they could not accept Him.
We must clearly understand that Christ's role in Scripture is twofold. He is both the suffering servant and He is the coming King. In Isaiah 53 we have recorded for us a prophecy concerning the coming of Jesus Christ in His first advent:
He was despised and rejected by men, a man of sorrows, and familiar with suffering. Like one from whom men hide their faces he was despised, and we esteemed him not. Surely he took up our infirmities and carried our sorrows, yet we considered him stricken by God, smitten by him, and afflicted. But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are healed. We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own way; and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all.(Isa. 53:3-6).
Clearly, then, Christ came the first time to suffer humiliation -- despised and rejected among men, a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief. But Christ is coming a second time as King. He who bore the sorrows of the world and who cried out in agony on the cross, "Father, forgive them for they know not what they do," will one day come again in great glory and majesty.
In his great portrayal in the Book of Revelation, John the Apostle reminds us of this second aspect of the Lord Jesus Christ's coming in terms of great, glowing beauty:
I saw heaven standing open and there before me was a white horse, whose rider is called Faithful and True. With justice he judges and makes war. His eyes are like blazing fire, and on his head are many crowns. He has a name written on him that no one knows but he himself. He is dressed in a robe dipped in blood, and his name is the Word of God. The armies of heaven were following him, riding on white horses and dressed in fine linen, white and clean. Out of his mouth comes a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations. "He will rule them with an iron sceptre." He treads the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God Almighty. On his robe and on his thigh he has this name written: KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS. (Rev. 19:11-16).
The Scriptures point out -- in terms which few can fail to understand -- that time does have an end; that God will intervene in the world of men; that God has a destiny for those who are willing to trust and believe in Him; and that the Messiah of Israel and the Savior of humanity will judge the world and sift the sons of men.
For believers there is a glorious destiny ahead. Scripture portrays it this way: "I did not see a temple in the city, because the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are its temple. The city does not need the sun or the moon to shine on it, for the glory of God gives it light, and the Lamb is its lamp. The nations will walk by its light, and the kings of the earth will bring their splendour into it" (Rev. 21:22-24).
Oh what a wonderful testimony this is to the sovereignty of the God of all creation, who alone can say, "I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End. To him who is thirsty I will give to drink without cost from the spring of the water of life. He who overcomes will inherit all this, and I will be his God and he will be my son" (Rev. 21:6-7).
Let us with confidence exult in what God will do for believers in the eternal state: "He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away. He who was seated on the throne said, 'I am making everything new!' Then he said, 'Write this down, for these words are trustworthy and true'" (Rev. 21:4-5).
Let us with great confidence "fix our eyes on Jesus, the author and perfecter of our faith, who for the joy set before him endured the cross, scorning its shame, and sat down at the right hand of the throne of God" (Heb. 12:2).
Let us place our faith and our trust in Him, who alone could say: "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me" (John 14:6).
And let us peer through the darkness of the future in the searchlight of God's Word, knowing certainly that "one day, one golden daybreak, Jesus will come; One golden daybreak, battles all won. He will shout the victory, He will break through the blue; One golden daybreak, for me and for you."
-------------------------------------------------------------------
A special note of thanks to Bob and Pat Hunter for their help in the preparation of this ASCII file for BBS circulation.
Copyright 1994 by the Christian Research Institute.
Thursday, June 01, 2006
Essays From Walter Martin Archives - August 25, 1963
"And though shalt remember all the way the Lord thy God hath led thee these forty years" -- Deuteronomy 8: 2.
For your consideration: The same Lord God has led our nation these 150 odd years, 1777-1930. Generally speaking, it was in the 1930s our nation and her Government began to turn away from honoring and following after the God of our fathers, The God of the Bible, His Ways, His Laws, and His Commandments. However, we kept on writing on our money "In God we Trust," and still do, in spite of the fact that we have "cast away the Law of the Lord of Hosts" in many respects: concerning idolatry, profaneness, Sabbath desecration, dishonoring of father and mother, murder, adultery, stealing, false witnessing, and coveteousness -- "coveteousness is idolatry."
Christ said of Himself: "The Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath Day." Have we not taken away His Lordship of the sacred Day and turned it over to the Kings of Sport, the world, the flesh, and the devil? Also, do we not almost boast that we have nearly done away with the Death Penalty commanded by The Almighty, and are saving the lives of murderers, rapists, whoremongers, homosexuals, and others whom God commanded His people to put to death and send their spirits back to Him who gave them? We will not take time to speak of our heavy and growing crop of crime, thieves, liars, coveteous, etc.
"Be not deceived; God is not mocked; For whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap. For he that soweth to his flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the 'spirit' shall of the 'spirit' reap life everlasting." Galatians 6: 7-8.
Since this Column began, over 600 times it has presented God's question to man in the Second Psalm: "Why Do The Heathen Rage?" together with His statement as to who are the heathen: "People who imagine a vain thing, their kings and rulers," and that their rage is against God Himself, and His Anointed, and for the purpose of getting rid of His Laws and Commandments: "Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us." In this Psalm God also reveals to us the fruit and harvest of this anarchy will bring the...
"Contempt of the Almighty," "He that sitteth in the Heavens shall laugh: The Lord shall have them in derision. Then shall He speak unto them in His wrath, and vex them in His sore displeasure."
During the past thirty years or more have we not been very successful and made a good job of "breaking God's and Christ's bands asunder and casting away their cords from us?" Is not the rise of crime, rape, riots, pillage and burning of our cities good evidence that God meant what He said about "holding in derision and vexing with all adversity" those who reject His Laws and Commandments?
"And God is angry with the wicked every day -- The wicked shall be turned into hell, and all the 'Nations' that forget God!" Psalm 7:11 and Psalm 9:17.
"I have not sent these prophets, yet they ran; I have not spoken to them, yet they prophesied. But if they had stood in My counsel, and had caused My people to hear My words, then they should have turned them from their evil way, and from the evil of their doings." -- Jeremiah 23: 21-22.
"Of making many books there is no end -- let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter [of life and death]; Fear God and keep His Commandments: for this is the whole duty of man. For God shall bring every work into judgment, With every secret thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil." Ecclesiastes 12: 12-14.
"Now therefore, fear The Lord, and serve Him in sincerity and truth -- and if it seem evil unto you to serve The Lord, choose ye this day whom ye will serve -- but as for me and my house, we will serve The Lord." Joshua 24. 14-15.
Maranatha!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
