"The Narrow Road": Blogs By Shane Kastler

When Jesus Comes Back

By Shane Kastler

Your life on earth will end in either one of two ways.  Either you will die, or you will live until Jesus returns.  In both cases, your life as you presently know it will be over.  And what awaits you on the other side will either be infinitely glorious or infinitely miserable.  The Bible speaks of the glorification of Christians, saying: “Behold, I tell you a mystery; we will not all sleep, but we will all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet; for the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed.” (1 Corinthians 15:51-52 NASB)

                Many people scoff at the idea of Jesus returning.  Of course the Bible told us 2000 years ago that people would scoff saying: “In the last days mockers will come with their mocking, following after their own lusts, and saying, “Where is the promise of His coming? For ever since the fathers fell asleep, all continues just as it was from the beginning of creation.” (2 Peter 3:3-4 NASB)  But, just as sure as the sun rises in the morning and sets in the evening; so shall Christ one day return.  This he has promised and this he will do.  Are you ready for this?

                The fact is that some will rejoice at the return of Christ while others will mourn greatly.  For those who know and love the Lord, the return of Christ means the end of suffering.  No longer will there be persecution, pain, or sorrow.  Christians will be in the presence of their Lord who died for them.  And their joy will be complete.  But a much different future awaits those who are not followers of Christ.

                For unbelievers, the return of Christ will be a time of judgment and condemnation.  Just as believers will be judged and declared innocent and righteous based on their faith in Christ, so too shall unbelievers be judged and condemned because of their rejection of Christ.  The Hell to which they go shall be eternal, just as Heaven will be eternal for believers.

                Once Christ returns, all hope for salvation will be gone.  The time to consider these eternally important truths is today.  There is hope today, while you still have life.  Are you ready for the return of Christ?  If it were to happen today would you be joyful or sorrowful?  On that day, will Jesus be your savior or your eternal judge?  Consider these things today.  Repent of your sin and believe in Jesus.  Follow him and have life.  Then look with eager expectation toward his return.

Why Global Warming is Unbiblical

By Shane Kastler

There are many  popular issues that you hear about in the media, that are designed to scare you.  And sometimes the concern is legitimate. Sometimes it is not.  The issue of “global warming” is one that government funded scientists have completely blown out of proportion.  Aside from the fact that the scientists have a vested, financial interest in the “studies” being shown one way (in other words the scientists are not objective and can't be trusted) there is another very compelling reason to reject global warming.  The Bible refutes it.
    Al Gore, the former Vice-President (and con man in my opinion), managed to make a fortune off the global warming scam.  All the while doing nothing to lessen his own “carbon footprint”; he continued to live it up in luxury jets and live in energy sucking mansions as he jet-setted the world lecturing others on the cataclysmic dangers of global warming.  Of course, Al's ruse was exposed when certain parts of the planet began to experience record lows and record snowfalls.  Buffalo, NY just had one that dropped over six feet of snow on them. So much for “global warming.”
    So now the scam gets a new name:  “climate change.”  Now they can claim any weather phenomenon as something they predicted.  And brazenly command you to obey them and give them control, lest the world end in catastrophe.  But the world will not end by global warming.  At least not “man-made” global warming.
    After the flood, Noah was promised that God would never flood the earth with water again.  But God made some other promises that are often forgotten.  The book of Genesis records this:  “While the earth remains, Seed time and harvest, And cold and heat, And summer and winter, And day and night, Shall not cease.” (Genesis 8:22 NASB)  If you think the world will burn up because you use too much hair spray, think again.  It's not happening.  Or if you think our planet will spin wildly out of control and we will all freeze to death. Think again, it's not happening.  At least according to God it's not.  So who will you believe?  Atheistic scientists who hate the God they claim doesn't exist.  Or the God who created all things and works all things after the counsel of His will (Eph. 1:11).  Trust God and reject the alarmists.  If you want to fret, then fret about your soul.  Fear Him who can destroy both body and soul in Hell. (see Matthew 10:28)  The earth will end in God's way and God's time.  Until then, summer and cold; seed time and harvest.  Praise God for His provision and mercy.  Trust in Him. Reject His naysayers.  Follow Christ. And live in peace.

Why American Christians Are Confused About Israel

By Shane Kastler

It doesn't really matter if America calls Jerusalem or Tel Aviv the capital of Israel.  At least for American Christians it shouldn't matter.  America isn't Israel. In fact, Israel isn't even Israel in the Biblical sense. Modern day American Christians frequently get themselves into trouble by taking Old Testament, Old Covenant promises made by God to the nation of Israel and applying them to the modern day United States. Incidentally, it is equally incorrect to take promises made in the Old Testament to Israel and apply them to modern day Israel. Such errors result in mistaken notions being made in areas of foreign policy, law, and war. A proper hermeneutical approach is necessary to understand the Bible; and much of this is rooted in understanding the “covenant”that God made with Israel (which is no longer in effect according to Jesus, see Matthew 26:28). And the “New Covenant” God made with followers of Christ (which is not primarily about an “earthly” kingdom according to Jesus, see John 18:36). In fact, when the New Testament teachings of Christ are understood they have a tendency to offend both those on the political left and the political right. Liberals are often offended by Jesus' notion that all religions are not included in his “New Covenant” but only those “in Christ.” While conservatives are often offended by the notion that the New Covenant was not made with the nation of Israel. As is the case with many things in life, the true teaching of Scripture doesn't reside with the political left, political right, or even the middle. It's in an entirely different realm, just as Jesus said his kingdom was. While some may be well intentioned, many American Christians misinterpret the Bible, then draw erroneous political conclusions as a result of their flawed interpretations. Let me explain.

The “Old Covenant” was a covenant that God made in the Old Testament with Abraham, promising that God would make him a mighty nation. Abraham's descendants did become a mighty nation. Consequently this covenant has been fulfilled in a physical sense. Furthermore, the true fulfillment, according to the New Testament, is spiritual in nature anyway. The Apostle Paul taught that the true sons of Abraham are those who have Abraham's faith, rather than Abraham's bloodlines (see Galatians 3:7). John the Baptist taught the same thing (see Luke 3:8). As did Jesus....repeatedly (see Matthew 12:25-28; Luke 16:19-31, John 8:36).

As a part of the Old Covenant, the “Law” was given to Moses to govern the conduct of the children of Israel. This “Law” was quite heavy-handed in many ways and is often quoted by modern day naysayers of religion as an example of how ridiculous the Bible is. The Law included such things as the stoning of adulterers and disobedient children, dietary rules banning the consumption of pork and shellfish, and even restrictions on what kinds of material could be used in the clothing an Israelite wore. Theological debates have flourished for centuries over why certain laws were handed down by God to Moses, but the New Testament sheds much light on the issue in the book of Galatians. According to the Apostle Paul, the Law was given to the children of Israel to serve as a “schoolmaster” or “tutor” to drive them to Christ (see Galatians 3:24). In other words the “heaviness” of the Law was intended to lead Israel to despair of their ability to keep it – so that they would cry out to God for mercy. Then “when the fullness of time came, God sent forth his son” (Galatians 4:4) who lived a life of sinless perfection, fulfilling the Law and granting spiritual salvation to all who trust in him. Under the New Covenant, all (regardless of nationality) are granted salvation, if they are believers in Jesus Christ. One of the primary teachings of Christianity is that Christ's life of sinless perfection is credited to the account of the believer; while the punishment for the believer's sin is poured out on Jesus as he was crucified; commonly called 'the atonement' (see 2 Corinthians 5:21). These basic Christian axioms are often misunderstood by modern Christians who fail to see what covenant they are living under. Then use Old Testament (and Old Covenant) teachings designated for Israel to justify some of their modern day political positions. Here are a few examples.

Often times, the example of Old Testament Israel's conquering of nations is used to justify American attempts to conquer nations in modern times. While there is no denying God commanded “Old Covenant” Israel to conquer certain peoples, this has absolutely nothing to do with 21^st century America. Any attempt to take a commandment specifically given to Israel under the Old Covenant and apply it to America is a blatant misinterpretation of the Scriptures. Not only would the Old Testament passages in question not apply to America; they wouldn't even apply to modern day Israel. Since the Old Covenant is no more, having been replaced with a “new and better covenant” that is spiritual in nature, according to New Testament teaching (see Hebrews 8:4). Which leads to another common misinterpretation of Biblical teaching.

While the Old Covenant was made with a specific ethnic nation (Israel) the New Covenant was also specific in that it was NOT made with a particular ethnic nation. To the contrary, the New Covenant initiated by Christ includes those “from every tongue, tribe, people, and nation” (Revelation 5:9). This doesn't mean that every individual on the planet is included in this covenant, but it does mean that there will be representatives from every nation (or people group) on the earth. The nation of Israel is not the focus of the New Covenant. And certainly America is not the focus of the New Covenant; though there will be some from both Israel and America included in it. While the condition for the Old Covenant was simply physical birth (i.e, if you were born a Jew you were a part of the covenant community), the condition for the New Covenant is “spiritual” birth; which is where we get that famous phrase from Jesus “you must be born again” (John 3:3). This leads to one final point.

Regarding matters of ethical conduct, members of the New Covenant do not live according to the letter of Old Testament Law; but rather they are guided by the Holy Spirit. Rather than looking to the heavy-handed law of Moses which was meant to drive the Jews to Christ; Christians look to the ethical instructions of Jesus and the New Testament Scriptures to guide their lives. Loving God and loving your neighbor as yourself, as the indwelling Holy Spirit empowers, is the governing factor for those in the New Covenant.

In conclusion, 21^st century America is not the same thing as “Old Covenant” Israel; therefore passages from the Old Testament delivered to Israel cannot be legitimately used by Americans to justify wars of conquest. The Old Covenant “Law” delivered to Moses on Mount Sinai is not the ethical standard for members of the New Covenant; since that Law was intended for the nation of Israel and had a temporary purpose, being fulfilled by the earthly life of Christ (Matthew 5:17). And consequently, no ethnic nation on earth can claim a divine right as the “people of God” since Christ established his “New Covenant” with those from every nation who exercise faith in Him. Jesus declared that his kingdom “is not of this world.” So while we strive to live at peace in this temporal world, Christians are also to recognize that their ultimate reality will be consummated in Christ in his eternal, heavenly kingdom. Things will eventually play out on earth according to God's plan; but the Christian's greatest joy is not in being “American” or “Israeli” or “Canadian” or any other nationality. The Christian's greatest joy is in being a “citizen of Heaven” (Philippians 3:20) and in living their life with that in view, rather than the establishment of an earthly kingdom that is destined to come to an end.

Why Christians Should NOT Desire A Jerusalem Temple: Some Thoughts From Sam Storms

By Shane Kastler

Recently I spoke with a Christian who was very excited about the possibility of a new Jewish temple being built in Jerusalem. He told me, “They have the blueprints for the temple! It won't be long now!” I marveled at this statement and responded by asking him, “Why on earth would you, a Christian, even desire there to be a new Jewish temple built?” Of course I already knew the answer; though I think it to be extraordinarily misguided. This man, like many Christians today, think a new temple will usher in the return of Christ. He believes that many of the prophecies made regarding the temple cannot come to pass until a new temple is erected. After all, how can the Anti-Christ Barack Obama desecrate the holy place by sacrificing a pig on the altar, unless the temple is rebuilt and the sacrficial system re-instituted?  (please note the mild sarcasm)  Aside from the fact that this is undoubtedly a major misinterpretation about when and how various temple prophecies might have already been fulfilled; the fact that a Christian would long for a physical temple flies in the face of New Testament teaching.

Sam Storms in his book Kingdom Come: The Amillennial Alternative makes this statement, which I think is very helpful: “It's entirely possible, of course, that people in Israel may one day build a temple structure and resume their religious activities within it. The political and military implications of such, not to mention the religious furor it would provoke, are obvious. Whether or not this will ever occur is hard to say, but if it does it will have no eschatological or theological significance whatsoever, other than to rise up as a stench in the nostrils of God. The only temple in which God is now and forever will be pleased to dwell is Jesus Christ and the Church, his spiritual body.” (pg. 20)

Storms rightly cites 2 Corinthians 6:16 where the Apostle Paul writes, “For we are the temple of the living God; just as God said, 'I will dwell in them and walk among them. I will be their God and they shall be my people.” Here Paul purposely (and under the Holy Spirit's inspiration) uses Old Covenant “Israel” language that he applies to New Covenant believers. That reality in and of itself is enough to send many dispensational Christians into a tailspin. But Paul goes on to use “temple” language that he also applies to the church.

The temple, like so many other Old Testament/Old Covenant realities was a typological shadow that finds its “substance” in a New Covenant reality. This common form of typology is further explained by Paul in Colossians: “Therefore no one is to act as your judge in regard to food or drink or in respect to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath day— things which are a mere shadow of what is to come; but the substance belongs to Christ.” (Colossians 2:16-17 NASB) The Sabbath was a shadow that finds its substantive fulfillment in Christ. Just as the temple was a shadow that finds its substantive fulfillment in Christ and His church. Jesus referred to himself as “this temple” during his earthly ministry and greatly annoyed the Jews in doing so. “Jesus answered them, 'Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.' The Jews then said, 'It took forty-six years to build this temple, and will You raise it up in three days?' But He was speaking of the temple of His body.” (John 2:19-21 NASB)

Storms goes on to say in his book: “It would be an egregious expression of the worst imaginable redemptive regression to suggest that God would ever sanction the rebuilding of the temple. It would be tantamount to a denial that the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. It would constitute a repudiation of the Church as the temple of God and thus an affront to the explicit affirmation of Paul here in 2 Corinthians 6 and elsewhere.” (pg. 21) Of course some might say Storms is overstating his case here; and some might claim that most dispensationalists would never repudiate the church, a point I suspect Storms would readily concede. But Storms' point is not an overstatement at all because the mindset of thinking a future Jewish temple is necessary for God's eschatalogical purposes very much is a repudiation of the New Covenant church and would rightly be called a “stench in the nostrils of God.” I am in complete agreement with Storms assessment on this issue and fear that too many Christians have become overly obsessive about middle-eastern matters as a result of it.

As I have written in other places, America might be wise to support Israel for diplomatic reasons; but not for theological ones. Israel is not the chosen the people of God. The “elect” from “every tongue, tribe, people, and nation” are. (Revelation 5:9) The true Sabbath is Jesus. And the true “Temple” where the Lord dwells can be found in Christ and His church.

If anything should be conclusive regarding God's views toward a physical temple it should be the judgment Jesus pronounced during his earthly ministry. “And while some were talking about the temple, that it was adorned with beautiful stones and votive gifts, He said,“As for these things which you are looking at, the days will come in which there will not be left one stone upon another which will not be torn down.” (Luke 21:5-6 NASB) Of course this prophecy was fulfilled in 70 A.D. when the Roman general Titus overthrew Jerusalem and utterly annihilated the temple. Literally leaving “no stone upon another.” The Bible says of marriage, “what God has joined together let no man put asunder.” (Mark 10:9) I believe the opposite is equally true. What God has destroyed let no man seek to rebuild.

In conclusion I would warn Christians against the inclination to seek earthly, physical fulfillments of what the New Testament describes as spiritual, eternal realities. Make no mistake, the spiritual, eternal realities are much, much greater. Jesus really is greater than the Sabbath. The Holy Spirit indwelt church really is greater than any ethnic nation. And the combination of Christ and His church really are greater than a building in Jerusalem, no matter how ornate its stones and walls. The true “promised land” is far greater than a sandy middle-eastern dessert. And we would do ourselves well to heed the New Testament admonition “For here we have no lasting city. We seek a city which is to come.” (Hebrews 13:14)

So rather than longing for an “old style” Jewish temple built with human hands and made of earthly stones. Rejoice that you are a part of a new temple, made with “living stones” as Peter spoke of: “Coming to Him as to a living stone which has been rejected by men, but is choice and precious in the sight of God, you also, as living stones, are being built up as a spiritual house for a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ.” (1 Peter 2:4-5 NASB) We are these living stones. Our lives are these spiritual sacrifices. And our Lord is the fulfillment and culmination of our redemption. We do not need a physical temple for the Lord's plan to come to fulfillment, nor should we desire one. For the true temple is here and is continually being built out of “living stones” that God graciously brings to life and fits together according to His glorious, divine, eternal and spiritual purpose.

BOOK REVIEW: Victory In Jesus: The Bright Hope of Postmillennialism By Greg L. Bahnsen (Reviewed By Shane Kastler)

By Shane Kastler

Not many theological issues are more divisive than eschatology (the study of end times) and not many aspects of eschatology are more divisive than the nature and extent of the “Millennial kingdom”-- that thousand year reign of Christ spoke of in Revelation 20:3.

In Victory In Jesus: The Bright Hope of Postmillennialism, the late Greg Bahnsen makes a defense of the eschatalogical system of Postmillennialism. He lays out the basic tenets of the three major millennialism positions: Premillennialism, the belief that Christ returns before the Millennium then sets up an earthly reign. This view is by far the most popular (and in my opinion least biblically defensible), Amillennialism (the belief that the Millennial kingdom is symbolic of the extended period between the first and second comings of Christ); and Postmillennialism which is similar to Amillennialism in terms of the timing of the Millennium (between the first and second advent) and to Premillennialism in a belief of gospel dominance in this present world.

This book gives a good basic overview of the various positions and a good layout of the Postmillennial case from Scripture. And while Postmillennialism is much more plausible than Premillennialism; some of the texts Bahnsen uses seem to be a bit forced at best.

For example, when Jesus speaks of the wheat and the tares growing together; then the tares being separated at the end. (Matt. 13) Banhsen points out that it is a wheat field, not a tare field, which is to say that there will be more actual wheat (believers) in the world than tares (unbelievers). Aside from the fact that Bahnsen might be pushing an analogy way too far; Jesus' main point was that in the end God knows those who are genuinely his and will save and judge in proper fashion.

Another sketchy proof text that Bahnsen uses is the great commission's charge to “make disciples of all the nations.” (Matt. 28:19) Of course this passage is also translated “go into all the nations and make disciples” which would have a much different potential application. Is Jesus saying that all the nations will be effectively “Christianized” in this present world? Or is he saying that ultimately God has elect that he will save from “every tongue, tribe, people, and nation.” (Rev. 5:9) The latter seems to be a more natural reading of the texts at hand. Especially when you factor in verses such as Matthew 7:14 where Jesus said, “Narrow is the road that leads to life and few there be that find it. But broad is the road that leads to destruction and many find it.” The idea of God saving SOME from every nation fits in well; but the idea of the majority of this world becoming Christians would seem to be hard to reconcile with Christ's words.

Bahnsen devotes a large chapter to the Postmillennial views of various leaders in church history; primarily from the Reformation on. This particular section is interesting and helpful in giving a background but does little to convince a person of Postmillennial validity. After all, most people would say that just because John Calvin or Jonathan Edwards believed it doesn't make it true. While these are eminent theologians, the case must be made from a Scriptural perspective for it to hold water.

The final section of the book deals with the work of Satan on the earth. What is he doing and how successful will his diabolical goals be in light of Scriptural teaching and God's sovereignty. Bahnsen implies that anything other than Postmillennialism gives Satan more power than he deserves and implies more success for Satan than is warranted. But this simply isn't the case; given the fact that both Premillennialism and Amillennialism have many adherents who hold to the sovereignty of God over all things. Satan will be allowed a certain amount of success in this sin cursed world where he is referred to in Scripture as the “god of this world” and the “prince of the power of the air” (Eph. 2). This doesn't mean he is more powerful than God; nor more successful than God. It does mean God has given him a certain amount of influence; and at many times and in many places; a lot of influence.

Bahnsen does an excellent job of decimating Premillennialism throughout the book by pointing out, for example, that death is defeated at the return of Christ in 1 Cor. 15, so death cannot come back as people live and die during the Millennium. Furthermore, a division of the rapture and the 2^nd coming is near impossible to defend Scripturally unless massive surmises are made by the interpreter.

He also attempts to critique Amillennialism as being too focused on the eternal state rather than seeing gospel success in the hear and now. But again, Bahnsen's arguments rise or fall based on an interpretation that is questionable. When Isaiah wrote of a future time when the earth would be “full of the knowledge of the glory of the Lord as the waters cover the sea”; does that mean worldwide acceptance of Christianity? Or does it mean representatives from all nations? When Jesus said, ““This gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all the nations, and then the end will come.” (Matt. 24:14) He didn't say the majority of the hearers would believe; but that every nation would hear; and based on Revelation 5:9 some from every nation would be saved.

The defense Bahnsen gives for seeing the Millennial kingdom as existing between the first and second advents of Christ was admirable and I found myself agreeing with much of it. But to expect a “golden age” of Christianity in this present world was something I found hard to accept exegetically and practically. When I would read such statements by Bahsen I seemed to repeatedly hear the words of Jesus “my kingdom is not of this world” popping into my head.

In conclusion; I would recommend this book as a good overview of Postmillennialism; though I suspect there are better overviews out there. It should be noted that Bahnsen did not set out to write this book but rather this book is a compilation of sermons he preached on the subject. Sometimes this can be seen in a choppy sentence structure that is rarely seen in Bahsen's other written works. His writing, typically being, very coherent and lucid. I would have also liked to see a full orbed defense of the date Revelation was written since a Pre-70 A.D. date is utterly vital to most forms of Premillennial eschatology. But all in all, it was a good book that gives ample information on a topic that most people find confusing. I did not come away convinced of the Postmillennial position. But I did know more of what they believe and what Scriptures they use to defend it. The book definitely gives you food for intellectual thought as you try to sort out the things that “are to come.”

 

Why Israel Is NOT The Chosen People of God

By Shane Kastler

In the New Testament, the “promised land” is something far greater than middle-eastern sand (see Hebrews 11:10). And the “chosen people” of God are not from one nation, but come from “every tongue, tribe, people, and nation.” (see Revelation 5:9)  Abraham was looking forward to a city "which has foundations, whose builder and maker is God." (Hebrews 11:10)  "For here we have no lasting city, but we seek a city which is to come." (Hebrews 13:10)  When the Bible speaks of a "promised land" it is speaking of something far greater and more glorious than any earthly city or land.  It's speaking of a heavenly city that is eternal (not temporal) in nature.

Recently Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky was castigated by Republicans for pointing out that some Christians seem a little too zealous to go to war over the “chosen people” and the “promised land” (both references to Israel). While bashing Paul may be popular for pro-war hawks like John McCain and Lindsey Graham and for left wing Repubs like Chris Christie; the fact on this issue is that Paul is right. Some Christians defend Israel too strongly for reasons that are more rooted in incorrect theology than diplomatic wisdom.

Dispensationalism is the belief that God has a separate future plan for Israel than he does other Christians. And rabid Dispensationalism is the rule of thumb in most American churches. While the extent of this article is not to get into the flaws of Dispensationalism (and there are many), I would like to point out that two of those flaws lead to extreme foreign policy views by some on the political right.

Under the Old Covenant, Israel was known as the “chosen people” of God (see Deuteronomy 7:6-8). But under the New Covenant, as revealed in the New Testament, the chosen people of God are from every nation. In this sense, Old Testament Israel served as a typological picture of New Testament Christianity. When John the Baptist came preaching, he warned the Jews not to think their status as “Israel” granted them special favor. “Do not begin to say to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham for our father,’ for I say to you that from these stones God is able to raise up children to Abraham.” (Luke 3:8 NASB)

Peter picks up the same theme when he addresses the Christian church by using descriptions of Old Testament Israel. “But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for his own possession, that you may proclaim the excellencies of him who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light.” (1 Peter 2:9 ESV)  While some get angry at any attempt to "spiritualize" Israel; this is exactly what Peter does.  It's also what Paul does.

The Apostle Paul is crystal clear in this assessement when he writes: “For not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel, and not all are children of Abraham because they are his offspring, but “Through Isaac shall your offspring be named.” This means that it is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God, but the children of the promise are counted as offspring.” (Romans 9:6-8 ESV)

Paul tells the Galatians: “Know then that it is those of faith who are the sons of Abraham. And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham, saying, “In you shall all the nations be blessed.” So then, those who are of faith are blessed along with Abraham, the man of faith.” (Galatians 3:7-9)

The point is this: while the nation of Israel was the chosen people of God under the Old Covenant; they are not the chosen people under the New Covenant. According to the New Testament, the true descendants of Abraham are those with the faith (not the bloodlines) of Abraham. For this reason, the extreme view of some that a lack of support for the nation of Israel means that God will judge America is scripturally unfounded. Jesus did not ascend the throne when the United States helped create the modern state of Israel in 1948; and Jesus will not fall off of the throne if such a nation ceases to exist. With that said, there might be many diplomatic, military, and govermental reasons to be an ally of Israel. We certainly have more in common with them than we do other Middle Eastern nations. But the return of Christ and the blessing of God doesn't hinge upon supporting any ethnic nation, including Israel.  To see the nation of Israel as "chosen of God" is to confuse the Old and New Covenants and to cling to the Old which has been fulfilled in Jesus Christ (Matt. 5:17, Eph. 2:15), rather than to understand and live in the New which is now inaugurated.

Some defend the uniqueness of Israel in God's eyes based on passages such as Romans 11:

"I ask, then, has God rejected his people? By no means! For I myself am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, a member of the tribe of Benjamin. God has not rejected his people whom he foreknew. Do you not know what the Scripture says of Elijah, how he appeals to God against Israel? “Lord, they have killed your prophets, they have demolished your altars, and I alone am left, and they seek my life.” But what is God’s reply to him? “I have kept for myself seven thousand men who have not bowed the knee to Baal.” So too at the present time there is a remnant, chosen by grace.” (Romans 11:1-5 ESV)

But the entire point that Paul is making in this passage is not that Israel is the elect people of God; but rather that some within Israel are included in the elect people of God who come from every tribe, tongue, people, and nation (including Israel). In fact the very word Paul uses (remnant) implies that there are many who are ethnic Israel who are specifically not numbered among God's elect. Paul goes on to say that “All Israel will be saved.” (Rom. 11:26) Yet this clearly doesn't mean every indiviual who is a member of that ethnic people will be spiritually saved.

In Jesus' day, he referred to many of the Jews as “sons of the Devil.” (John 8:44) And in Moses' day it was said that many of the Hebrews perished “because of unbelief.” (Hebrews 3:19) To take Romans 11:26 as a declaration of universal salvation for an ethnic people is to take the entire Biblical teaching on soteriology (doctrine of salvation) and render it meaningless. To declare, as some do, that Romans 11 is teaching that a Jew can reject Christ their entire life, die and still go to Heaven, is both Biblically unjustified and experientally dangerous. Furthermore it would be a gross misinterpretion of what it means to be elect, who the elect are, and how the elect are manifested in the world. To be elect means to be “chosen of God.” The elect come from every nation including Israel, but not exclusiely Israel. And the elect from every nation are manifested by repentance from sin and faith in Jesus Christ. Any other concept of the elect is simply not a Biblical concept.

From an economic standpoint, there is a lot of money to be made over Israeli fervor. Entire ministerial empires have been built and millions of books sold over the nation of Israel, the Great Tribulation, the pretribulational rapture (also a concept not taught in Scripture), and millenialism. I'm not saying that every “End Times” guru is financially motivated; but I suspect some are. But even those who are sincere have no right to imply that a different view on Israel should have one branded as a liberal, a heretic, or anti-semitic.  Sadly you're declared to be a heretic to conservative politics if you don't jump on the Israel bandwagon; and if you suggest that America might not have the resources nor the place to fight Middle Eastern wars.

In conclusion, while many think that theological matters are for ivory tower seminaries, or stained glass church houses; the truth is that theology affects more than most people realize. An incorrect Biblical interpretation of the nation of Israel has led many Christians to embrace a military foreign policy of zeal for God's people, who are not really God's people. If those on the political right want to support Israel, then by all means do so. But using faulty heremeneutics to do it is not only wrong, but dangerous. As Christians, let us not look to the things that are seen, but to those unseen. Let us “seek peace with all men”. And let us remember that the Kingom of Christ will come in His way and in His time and no nation on earth (including Israel, America, Syria, or Iran) can stop it.

Your First Day in Glory (A Poem of Heaven)

By Shane Kastler

 
A flash of light and instantly, I entered in this place.

I lived for Him below on earth, now I behold His face.

The sights I see remind me of the things I read down there.

Streets of gold and pearly gates; Such splendor bright and fair.

 

There is no sun, there is no need; God’s glory shineth bright.

There is no fear, nor any crime; Not even any night.

I scarce can think of life on earth, or why I loved it so.

It seems like such a dream to me; Back in a world below.

 

The feelings that I feel right now are quite beyond description.

I’ve had some glimpses down on earth, but none like this to mention.

The man from Tarsus wrote about the things he saw up here.

Inexpressible expressions, An enigma to the ears.

 

The angels sing the praises of the Godhead, one in three.

And now I can’t help joining in; The worship is so free.

Unto the Father, Glory goes, for He ordained it all.

The Spirit drew me unto Him, And saved me from the fall.

 

And Christ the Son, Eternal Word who came to earth and died.

A perfect life, A sacrifice; For sinners crucified.

I heard the words I longed to hear, come from His lips to me.

Well done my servant, joy is yours; It lasts eternally.

 

I see departed loved ones, Who before me entered in.

They loved the Lord as I do; And they died but live again.

Reunited with a love; More deep than e’re before.

We worship Him together; With our faces on the floor.

 

The greatest pleasures known to earth, multiplied by billions.

Can’t begin to scratch the surface of each moment here in Heaven.

There is no sin, there is no want; The curse has been destroyed.

Only pure and clean affections; Govern all that I employ.

 

So fear not death, if you’re in Christ.  It is but just a doorway.

To take you from this life below, So you can know a new way.

And don’t forget that all you gain on earth is not the story.

It won’t compare to all you’ll see… Your first full day in Glory.

The REAL End of the World

(Note: This article will appear in the May 25 edition of the Linn County News.)

Recently, doomsday prophet Harold Camping predicted that the church would be raptured on May 21, and the end of the world would follow 6 months later.  As all who read this know, the events of May 21 failed to transpire and the delusional status of the heretic Harold Camping should be firmly established.  The Bible clearly warns against making such predictions, as Jesus said: “as to the hour and the day, no one knows.” (Matthew 24:36)

            The sad part of this whole fiasco is the reproach Camping has brought to the name of Christ.  Non-believers the world over now think they have a reason to mock Christianity; and some of Camping’s own followers are now skeptical of the Bible.  But let it be known…just because Camping is crazy, does not mean that Scripture is wrong.  Indeed, Christ is coming again; and indeed this world will one day end.

            The question for you is:  will you be ready when that day really does come?  As sinners, all people are deserving of the eternal wrath of Almighty God.  The only hope for such sinners is to repent and place their faith in Jesus Christ as Lord.  Many who mock today may perish tomorrow.  They deserve eternal damnation, but through Christ they could find eternal redemption.

            The Apostle Peter wrote: “Know this first of all, that in the last days mockers will come with their mocking, following after their own lusts, and saying, ‘Where is the promise of His coming? For ever since the fathers fell asleep, all continues just as it was from the beginning of creation’….But do not let this one fact escape your notice, beloved, that with the Lord one day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years like one day. The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance.” (2 Peter 3:3-4; 8-9)

            In other words, Christ will return when it’s really time for him to return.  This will occur in accordance with God’s (not Harold Camping’s) timetable.  If the Lord so chooses to return today, would you be ready?  Is Jesus the Lord of your life?  Is that evidenced by your daily love and commitment to him?

            For all of his lunacy, Harold Camping got one thing right….Jesus is coming back one day.  Forget about the delusional ramblings of the heretic; and heed the true warning of Holy Scripture.  Just as Christ once ascended into Heaven, one day soon he will come again in like manner to receive his people unto himself and to judge those who have rejected him.  Will you be ready, when that day comes?

 

When Is The Millennial Kingdom? The Four Major Views

I’ve been deeply enmeshed recently in the study of the end times (eschatology). The topic of the Millennium frequently comes up when we study through the prophets and hear of glorious times in the future. Is this talking of the Millennium? Is this speaking of a time prior to Christ’s return? Or is this the “new heavens and the new earth?”

It seems that anytime you study eschatology, you will by necessity have to spend some time trying to understand Revelation 20 which speaks of a thousand year reign of Christ, otherwise known as the “Millennium.” Basically, there are four predominant views concerning this time: Historic Premillennialism, Dispensational Premillennialism, Amillennialism, and Postmillennialism.  And, within each of these views there are numerous sub-branches of various kinds that fall under the main title. Here are the four views in a nutshell.

Historic Premillennialism is the belief that Christ will return BEFORE the millennial kingdom is established and will reign for a literal thousand years upon the earth with his resurrected saints. The idea is that all of the prophecies concerning a time of abundant earthly blessing will take place during this time. Historic Premillennialism, in large part, sees no distinction between the nation of Israel and the Christian Church. In other words, they see many of the prophecies concerning Israel to be fulfilled either in Jesus Christ, or the Church, which is “spiritual Israel” as opposed to “physical Israel.” This idea comes from Paul’s statement in Romans that: “For they are not all Israel who are descended from Israel;  nor are they all children because they are Abraham's descendants , but: "THROUGH ISAAC YOUR DESCENDANTS WILL BE NAMED." That is, it is not the children of the flesh who are children of God, but the children of the promise are regarded as descendants.” (Romans 9:6-8 NASB)

Another aspect of Historic Premillennialism that sends Dispensational Premillennialism into a tail spin, is the idea of a pre-tribulational, secret rapture. Historic Premillinnialsits reject this idea and see the rapture and the second coming of Christ as being the same event. Whereas Dispensationalists see it as two separate events separated by the seven year “Great Tribulation.” Historic Premillennialism greatest advocated during the twentieth century was the late George Eldon Ladd who addressed the rapture issue in his book, “The Blessed Hope” which I recently reviewed.

All of the millennial views have potential problems when trying to coordinate them with the rest of Scripture. Both brands of Premillennialism have to account for the idea of sin still existing during the Millennial kingdom. In other words, Christians who die, go to heaven to be with Jesus…then must return to earth for a thousand years and reign with him in a world where sin still exists. Because at the end of the thousand years, Satan is allowed to gather the nations and rebel against Christ and His people….only to be destroyed by God.

Another potential problem with Premillennialism is the fact that it seems to separate the resurrections into two distinct times; while other Scriptures seems to indicate that Christians and Non-Christians will be resurrected at the same time. Jesus said: “Do not marvel at this; for an hour is coming, in which all who are in the tombs will hear His voice, and will come forth; those who did the good deeds to a resurrection of life, those who committed the evil deeds to a resurrection of judgment.” (John 5:28-29 NASB) Premillennialists teach that these two groups are resurrected a thousand years apart, before and after the millennial kingdom.

Dispensational Premillennialism has two distinctions. First, it is by far the most popular view among American Christians today. Second, it has the most exegetical problems (in my opinion). Of course within Dispensationalism you have various extremes and often times unnecessary Scriptural divisions. To one extreme, you have those who say that most of the gospels were written for the Jews and not Gentiles. Therefore, Gentiles are not commanded to “repent” only Jews. They would teach that Gentiles must only “believe” in Jesus in some vague and non-committal way in order to be saved. Not all Dispensationalists would believe this, given the fact the John Macarthur, a Dispensationalist, has devoted much of his ministry to speaking out against “easy believism” as its taught within his own theological camp. Some Dispensationalists also see divisions between the nation of Israel and the church that seem rather hard to justify. But other Dispensationalists are less dogmatic on such issues.

A new brand of Dispensationalism known as “Progressive Dispensationalism” moves further towards Historic Premillennialism while still retaining some of Dispensationalism’s marks. This view, advocated by Darrell Bock and Craig Blaising in their book “Progressive Dispensationalism” still holds to a pre-tribulational rapture, but does see some of the Old Testament prophecies as being fulfilled in the New Tesatment Church on in Jesus Christ.

The one constant which can be seen in Dispensationalism is the idea of the pre-tribulational, secret rapture of believers. This is the idea that most evangelical Christians embrace today, as made popular in the Left Behind series of Tim Lahaye and Jerry Jenkins. The problem with this view is that there seems to be no Scriptural warrant for separating the Rapture from the 2^nd coming of Christ into two separate events. And it appears that none of the New Testament church, nor the first and second century Christians held to such a view. In fact, no one seems to have held to a pre-tribulational rapture view until the 1800’s with the emergence of John Nelson Darby and the Plymouth Brethren church. Darby’s views didn’t go over as well in Europe, both his views were widely embraced in America. My fear is that Americans have embraced the pre-tribulational rapture idea because it allows them to avoid suffering. Whereas, Scripture teaches believers to expect…and even EMBRACE suffering for the cause of Christ.

The greatest argument against a pre-trib rapture, in my opinion is in 2 Thessalonians where the church was afraid they had missed the “Day of the Lord.” Most Bible scholars are in agreement that the “Day of the Lord” refers to the 2^nd coming of Christ when He will bring judgment on the nations. According to the Dispensational view of the rapture, the easiest way for a Christian to know they haven’t missed the “Day of the Lord” is because they’ll be raptured seven years prior to it. Yet, strangely, the Apostle Paul mentions nothing of a secret rapture in comforting them. Paul writes: “Now we request you, brethren, with regard to the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him,  that you not be quickly shaken from your composure or be disturbed either by a spirit or a message or a letter as if from us, to the effect that the day of the Lord has come.  Let no one in any way deceive you, for it will not come unless the apostasy comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction,  who opposes and exalts himself above every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, displaying himself as being God.” 2 Thessalonians 2:1-4 (NASB)

While Paul does seem to mention a rapture….he doesn’t tell them to expect it prior to the “Day of the Lord.” In fact, if anything he tells them to be looking for an “apostasy” and a “man of lawlessness” rather than a secret rapture. Why doesn’t he just tell them to relax about the “Day of the Lord” since they’ll be raptured beforehand? Some Dispensationalists have asserted that “apostasy” really means rapture because it can mean a falling away….or a “taking away.” But this seems to be an asinine interpretation of “apostasy” which has to do with a rebellion against authority. To see a pre-trib rapture, separated by seven years of tribulation, followed by the “Day of the Lord” in this text is to force way too much upon the text than it actually says. Dispensationalism claims to always embrace the “plain meaning of the text.” If so, then the plain meaning of this text is to see the rapture and the 2^nd coming of Christ as the same event.

Amillennialism is the view that the 1000 year reign of Christ is meant to be taken as a figurative number that represents the time in which Christ reigns in Heaven between His first and second coming. This view seems to have become popular when taught by St. Augustine in the 4^th century. It was widely accepted and taught by the Reformers and is still prevalent today among most Reformed Theologians. It avoids the problems of Premillennialism’s idea of sin during the earthly reign of Christ by saying that the Millennium is a reign of Christ from Heaven, rather than on the earth. It would also explain the resurrection timeframe by simply accepting a view that the just and the unjust will be resurrected at the same time when Christ returns.

The problem that Amillennialism runs into is the accusation that they “spiritualize” texts that should be taken literally. Their rebuttal is that the book of Revelation is apocalyptic literature that is full of symbolism that must be taken into account. Much like the Old Testament prophets and the parables of Jesus, Revelation is giving us symbols to teach Divine truth.

Some see a problem with Amillennialism because Revelation 20 mentions that Satan will be bound during the Millennium….and it’s easy to look at our world today and see that Satan’s influence is profound. Amillennialists would counter by saying that Revelation 20 gives a specific reason for Satan’s being bound: “so that he no longer can deceive the nations.” (Revelation 20:3) They say that during Old Testament times, all the nations were enslaved to Satan except for Israel, and that Jesus commissions the church to go into “all the nations” and preach the gospel (Matthew 28:19-20) with a guarantee that some will be saved from “every nation.” (Revelation 5:9) In other words, Amillennialists would say that Satan still exercises much power and influence in our world today, but that he is “bound” in the sense that he cannot deceive entire nations because the gospel is going forth into all the world, with a certain measure of success.

Another potential problem with Amillennialism is the interpretation of martyrs who “come to life” and reign with Christ during the Millennial kingdom. While many would interpret this as a physical resurrection, Amillennialism takes this to mean the Spiritual “coming to life” that occurs when a soul enters the Presence of Christ in Heaven. Some Amillennialists see this as the preferred interpretation because the setting for Revelation 20 is “heaven” rather than “earth” because John says he saw the “souls” of those who had been martyred (v.4). Revelation 20 goes on to say that Satan is loosed at the end of the Milliennium so that he can once again deceive the nations and gather them against Christ. This would seem to explain a brief period of “Great Tribulation” right before Jesus returns.

Postmillennialism is by far the least accepted view today, though during the days of the Puritans it was widely embraced. It is similar to Amillennialism in that it sees the Millennium as occurring before the return of Christ. Postmillennialism believes that there is a 1000 year period on the earth whereby the gospel advances with success and ultimately “Christianizes” all nations. Postmillennialism is a very optimistic view of the earth’s future that has traditionally been accepted by those who experience great revival, such as Colonial America during the Great Awakening. But Postmillennialism lost much popularity during the bloody days of the Twentieth Century, where two world wars and millions of lives were lost to evil worldly empires.

It’s my belief that an in depth study of the four main Millennial views will show all views have their strengths and their weaknesses. We must remember that God has revealed SOME things to us…but not ALL things. For this reason, I’m not extremely dogmatic on eschatology, other than to say that Jesus is definitely coming back sometime, and that Christians should live their lives expecting His return…and expecting to suffer in this world until that happens. At the end of the day, it must be enough for us to say that we trust God to work all things out in His way and in His time. We should by all means study Scripture fervently to understand all we can. We must also realize that on some issues, such as these, there will not always be unanimous agreement by Bible believing Christians. All four Millennial views are held by holy and devout Christians that believe they are making all of their conclusions from Scripture. So, with that said, I’ll just end this blog the same way John ends the book of Revelation. Be it pre, post, or amillennial, let us remember the final words of Christ. “He who testifies to these things says, "Yes, I am coming quickly." Amen. Come, Lord Jesus.” Revelation 22:20 (NASB)

...

Note: For those interested in studying the 4 views in one book, I recommend "The Meaning of the Millennium: Four Views" edited by Robert Clouse.  It presents an essay by a Bible scholar that espouses each view, followed by a critic from the other three scholars.

BOOK REVIEW: The Blessed Hope: A Biblical Study of the Second Advent and the Rapture By George Eldon Ladd

“We are looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus.” Titus 2:13

Will Christians be raptured prior to the Great Tribulation, as most believe?  Or will Christians endure the Great Tribulation, looking for the Second Coming of Jesus Christ?  What is the “Blessed Hope” of the church today? Is it the escape of tribulation or is it the visible return of Jesus Christ to the earth to redeem His people and judge His enemies? George Eldon Ladd, in The Blessed Hope: A Biblical Study of the Second Advent and the Rapture, argues for the latter, attempting to debunk the theory that the Rapture and the Second Coming of Christ are two distinct events separated by the seven year “Great Tribulation.”

George Eldon Ladd is widely considered one the most influential Bible scholars of the 20^th century. After pastoring two Baptist churches early in his career, he eventually settled in as New Testament professor at Fuller Theological Seminary in California. Throughout his career he sought to engage the broader academic community with Biblical writing that liberal scholars would have to take seriously. He also sought to promote more unity within the conservative, evangelical world.

In Ladd’s day, much like our own, Dispensationalism was the predominant view of the church. In fact, some were so rabidly Dispensational, that they considered any other eschatological (end times) view to be heretical and dangerous. Ladd argues that such a stance is unnecessary and divisive. He gives a brief historical lesson in this book showing that many stalwart Christian defenders of the faith were NOT Dispensational in their theology. Ladd’ s view is that there should be plenty of room for various views, as long as the views are defended from Scripture. Ladd’s personal view is Historic Premillennialism, which is similar to Dispensationalism in that it espouses a literal 1000 year reign of Christ on earth. But it differs from Dispensationalism in that it see’s the rapture occurring at the same time as the Second Coming of Christ, at the END (rather than beginning) of the Great Tribulation.

Regardless of one’s end times viewpoint, it should be noted that Ladd makes a good case for a post-tribulation rapture both from a historical and a Biblical standpoint. Most of the early church fathers appear to have believed in a literal 1000 year reign of Christ (millennialism) and saw the 2^nd coming and rapture as occurring at the same time. Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, and Tertullian are some of the church fathers Ladd presents as holding to these views. Perhaps the most significant of these is Irenaeus who was a disciple of Polycarp, who was a disciple of John the Apostle. While it doesn’t guarantee the validity of the Historic Premillennial position, it is intriguing that a Christian who is one generation removed from John the writer of Revelation would hold these views. Furthermore, the apparent acceptance of other church fathers makes the case from history compelling. But, at the end of the day, it’s Scripture that must be the deciding factor in the case. And Ladd’s primary arguments are from Scripture.

Ladd points out that nowhere in Scripture does it explicitly teach that there will be a “pre-tribulational” rapture. First Thessalonians clearly teaches a “rapture” when we shall be gathered together with the Lord in the air. But to suggest that this rapture will occur prior to the Great Tribulation is an inference that is not explicitly stated. The passage states: “For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. Then we who are alive and remain will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so we shall always be with the Lord.” 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17 (NASB)

Ladd’s case is presented throughout that New Testament Christians were not looking to be raptured out of tribulation, but instead the Bible taught Christians to expect tribulation. Given this fact, that Christians throughout the centuries have endured persecution unto death….why would God change this course with the “end times?”

One Scripture that Ladd uses effectively is from 2 Thessalonians 2, where the Thessalonian Christians were afraid they had missed the “Day of the Lord.” “Now we request you, brethren, with regard to the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him,  that you not be quickly shaken from your composure or be disturbed either by a spirit or a message or a letter as if from us, to the effect that the day of the Lord has come.  Let no one in any way deceive you, for it will not come unless the apostasy comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction,  who opposes and exalts himself above every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, displaying himself as being God.”2 Thessalonians 2:1-4 (NASB)

Paul sets their mind at ease by telling them the “Day of the Lord” won’t occur until the “apostasy” and the “son of destruction” is revealed. Why doesn’t Paul simply tell them to relax about the Day of the Lord since, as Christians, they’ll be raptured before it occurs? Was Paul unaware of a pre-tribulation rapture? That seems unlikely since Paul is the one who wrote the most significant passage on the rapture in 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18. Since most scholars are in agreement that the “Day of the Lord” refers to Christ’s coming in judgment at his Second Advent, the passage in 2 Thessalonians seems to give credence to the belief that the Second Coming and the Rapture are simultaneous events that occur at the end of the Great Tribulation.

Another argument that Ladd addresses is the idea of an “any moment” rapture. Those who oppose Historic Premillennialism state that it takes away the idea that Christ could return at “any moment” as taught in Scripture. Ladd points out that the “any moment” passages refer to the outplaying of all the “end times” events that could being at “any moment.” Furthermore, he states that the Dispensational view requires a “nation of Israel” to be in existence before the rapture of Christ. Therefore, those with a Dispensational view couldn’t have held to an “any moment” rapture anyway, until 1948 and the re-emergence of Israel as an actual physical nation.

Regardless of what you “end times” view is, “The Blessed Hope” is a book that Christians should read and examine with an open mind. While you may not agree with all of his conclusions, it would do any Christian well to consider the validity of Ladd’s arguments. Ladd’s hope was that Christians of various camps could debate these issues in Christian love without breaking fellowship. It was also Ladd’s concern that many Christians would one day find themselves unprepared for tribulation because of their blind hope in a pre-tribulation rapture that was unlikely to occur. Ladd makes a good case for his viewpoint, and the wise Christian will prayerfully consider if he’s on the right track regarding future events.