God and the Bible Are Dispensational (Part Four)

Part One     Part Two     Part Three

Covenant Theology

I hope it seems too convenient to you that men think and say they have a secret system of interpretation.  They apply the unique lemon juice to the Bible and the invisible ink comes to the surface.  God didn’t write that book.  The one He wrote, we can understand as a child (2 Timothy 3:15).  Scripture presents no peculiar scheme for deciphering what the Bible says.

Covenant Theology depends on speculation and human ingenuity to find a hidden meaning of scripture.  The subjectivity of it allows someone to see something others don’t, giving the impression of an extraordinary insight for an exclusive few.  You might read what they say they see in scripture and you don’t see it.  It is not apparent.  Only with their key to understanding, the developed system or code, can you grasp how they got there.

A literal interpretation, a true version of dispensationalism, is true.  Covenant Theology is false.  The Bible is not an opaque book that keeps you guessing.  It isn’t fine having several spiritualized, very personal interpretations.  Could we not just call them “private interpretations” (2 Peter 1:20-21), because they are so individualized?

Subjective and Strange

Someone could dedicate a whole book to the strange interpretations of Covenant Theology.  You can read many of these in their advocates’ commentaries and hear them in their preaching.  I was listening to a presentation a little while ago by well-known Covenant Theologian Kim Riddlebarger (I do love his last name).  He said he was doing a series through the Old Testament book of Joshua, a book which he said was an obvious explanation of God’s future judgment of the world.  Have you heard this kind of preaching?

The book of Joshua doesn’t address endtime judgment.  The conquest of the land testifies to God’s will for His covenant people, Israel.  God required the conquest.  The refusal of a former generation manifested its unbelief.  Joshua led toward faithful obedience of Israel to God’s directive.

I heard John MacArthur provide a brief critique of Covenant Theology, and he gave an example of a Westminster Seminary professor’s preaching.  The man used Isaiah 9:6-7, the part about the government upon the Messiah’s shoulders, to say this was turning over the government of your own life to Jesus.  He made a spiritual interpretation, not connecting it at all to the future, real kingdom of Jesus Christ.  How would anyone think that passage meant future New Testament Christians and their relationship to the Lord?

Contrast with Literal Interpretation

If you pick up the Old Testament and start reading it, early on you get to a point of a real nation Israel.  National, ethnic Israel dominates the Old Testament as a subject matter.  Covenant Theology directs one to read church in a spiritualized way into Old Testament references of Israel.

God makes many promises to Israel.  Will God fulfill the promises He made that are not yet fulfilled?  Yes.  If you never read the Old Testament, and you picked it up to read without having read the New Testament, you could understand what I’m saying here.  This is dispensationalism.

Attraction of Covenant Theology

What for covenant theologians, the main opponents of a literal reading of scripture, makes their system to them so attractive?  I see three reasons.

One, Covenant Theology says that it examines New Testament usage of the Old Testament as an interpretational model.  Two, Covenant Theology accentuates continuity or unity of the Old and New Testaments.  It finds this overt, extreme continuity with its interpretational grid.  Three, Covenant Theology leans on caricatures, exaggerations, and extreme examples of dispensationalism.

Some proponents of dispensationalism provide negative fodder for Covenant Theologians.  The latter use these bad examples from the system of dispensationalism and apply them to the whole.  The extremes do not debunk a literal reading of scripture.

More to Come 

God and the Bible Are Dispensational (Part Three)

Part One     Part Two

The Bible did not come in one neat tidy package.  God delivered it progressively through men over a period of 1500 years during history in real time, even using forty different men as human authors.  As God revealed scripture, it did not come with a separate interpretive handbook and glossary for defining terms.  He expected and presumes people will get it through plain reading.

As God imparted scripture through inspiration, people understood who were hearing in that day.  The Old Testament audience did not need the New Testament to ascertain the writings.  When He delivered more, past writings become better understood in a fuller way, bringing even greater knowledge of God’s message.

God’s Word has one meaning, yet many applications.  People knew the meaning as God revealed scripture.  He required the original audience to believe and practice what He wrote.

Satanic Attack on Dispensationalism

From the very beginning, Satan directly and then through the world system attacks scripture in several ways.  He does this in one key manner by corrupting the meaning of God’s Word.  Satan twists and also confuses the meaning.  He does not want people to know with certainty what God says.  Change of meaning abolishes or invalidates the authority of scripture.

Satan wants people to think and act in a different way than what God said.  He does this in an incremental fashion, where people drift or move further away from scripture.  The doctrine and practice of the Bible changed over the centuries through a modification of its meaning.  By changing its meaning, it becomes at first a slightly different book and finally a very different one.  This fulfills what Satan wants, but also satisfies the innate rebellion of man.

Changes in the meaning of the Bible relate to contemporary events and movements in history.   Rather than adapting to what God said, people conform what God said to their desires or will.  In a plain reading of the New Testament, churches were autonomous assemblies under the authority of the Lord Jesus Christ through His Words.  Satan and his system attacked them in vigorous and violent fashion.

Individual churches were vulnerable to fear of the fierce opposition of the Roman Empire.  This disposed them toward reorganization favoring extra ecclesiastical hierarchy.   Many moved toward greater cooperation and confederation.  Prominent churches took on more dominance and authority for their leaders.

Philosophies of Men

In Colossians 2:8 Paul warns against philosophies.  The New Testament addresses various heresies arising from human philosophy.  Preserved early Christian writings trace the invasion of extra-scriptural thinking into the church.  Doctrine and practice changed through intertwining neoplatonic philosophy with scripture.  The church became something bigger than local.

The church at Rome at the center of the Roman Empire took on enormous prominence.   Emperor Constantine I gave Christianity legal status in the Empire with the Edict of Milan in 313AD.  When Constantine became the sole emperor of the Roman Empire in 324, Christianity became its official religion. Christianity became a state church for the Roman Empire when Emperor Theodosius I issued the Edict of Thessalonica in 380AD.  This is the Roman Catholic Church.  The Roman Empire was Catholic or Universal, so its state church became Catholic too.

Allegorization and Spiritualization

For a true church, local only, to become universal, allegorization or spiritualization of scripture must occur.  This developed over three centuries with a unique influence, it seems, from a theologian, Origen of Alexandria.  This allowed for modification of meaning to allow change in doctrine and practice.  About a hundred years after Origen, Augustine further systematized allegorization of scripture, now known as covenantal theology.  The Bible could become a vessel in which to pour ones own doctrine and practice by allegorizing it.

Allegorization or spiritualization gives a lot of leeway with interpretation, making it highly subjective.  Someone can read what he wants into the text of scripture.  This affects the authority of the Bible.

The Protestant Reformation of the sixteenth century was led by men raised as staunch Roman Catholics.  They reformed Roman Catholic doctrine, however, still preserving much allegorization and spiritualization.  More than Augustine, they composed a hybrid of allegorical and literal interpretation, now still referred as covenant theology.  The immediate spiritual offspring of the Protestant Reformers further systematized an approach to the interpretation of scripture.  Their system of interpretation justified a state church, something not seen in the Bible.  They could find it by spiritualizing the church.

Amillennialism

In the main, the church could become an actual kingdom through spiritualization, a view of the future called amillennialism.  The theologians of Roman Catholicism removed the distinctions by unifying Israel and the church.  The church replaced Israel.  They adapted the Old Testament prophecies of Israel and the kingdom for fulfillment in the church.  Instead of a future fulfillment of the New Testament prophecy of Revelation, they spiritualized it as fulfilled in the destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD.

Liberal theology easily proceeded from amillennialism.   Liberals take the same approach even further, making almost everything in the Bible to mean what they want.  They see now and in the future a spiritualized kingdom, a progressive social order.  Jesus, the cross, the resurrection, and the gospel all take on their own meaning, most often related to advocacy of social issues.  Modernism dovetailed easily and nicely from covenant theology.

Growing In and Out of Favor

Even though God and the Bible are dispensational, dispensationalism grew out of favor in mainstream teaching.  In recent times, institutionalized theology portrays dispensationalism as of recent origin, arising with Darby in the 19th Century.  Premillennialism, a literal interpretation of Christ’s kingdom, traces to the first century with the apostles.  However, believers responded to covenant theology with a systematization of a literal interpretation of scripture in the 19th century.  The Protestant system of covenant theology itself is of historically recent composition.

I contend that the rising popularity of covenant theology above dispensationalism traces to its allure to human pride. Men ascertain from God’s writings their secret meaning.  This allows for a wide variety of contradictory belief and practice.  Men like it when they’re free to do what they want, justified by what “God said.”

More to Come

God does NOT love everyone? A Hyper-Calvinist Error, part 1 of 3

Is it true that God does NOT love everyone?  That is the teaching of hyper-Calvinism.  I recently put together a study entitled God Does Not Love Everyone: A Hyper-Calvinist Error where I examine that question.  I will be summarizing the argument from that larger study in three blog posts. Please read the larger work using the link above for more information.

 

God Loves The Entire World,

So the Idea that God Does Not Love the Non-Elect is False

 

John 3:16 reads: “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.”  This passage plainly teaches that God loves everyone in the world, and the word “world” does not mean “the world of the elect” as hyper-Calvinists and many Calvinists allege. None of the 187 uses of the Greek word kosmos (“world”) in the New Testament use the word “world” of the “world of the elect.”  This Calvinist idea is simply reading into Scripture what it does not say.  1 John 2:2 specifically distinguishes between the elect and the world while positing that Christ died for not the elect alone, but also for the whole world:

 

And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.

 

John 3:16 is conclusive proof that God loves the entire world—including those who never believe and consequently perish in their sins.

 

Jesus Christ Loved Individual Non-Elect

And Eternally Lost Sinners: God Does Not Love Only the Elect

The Lord Jesus’ love for the unconverted rich young ruler proves that God’s love is not limited to the elect alone:

 

17 And when he was gone forth into the way, there came one running, and kneeled to him, and asked him, Good Master, what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life? 18 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God. 19 Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Defraud not, Honour thy father and mother. 20 And he answered and said unto him, Master, all these have I observed from my youth. 21 Then Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him, One thing thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, take up the cross, and follow me. 22 And he was sad at that saying, and went away grieved: for he had great possessions. 23 And Jesus looked round about, and saith unto his disciples, How hardly shall they that have riches enter into the kingdom of God! 24 And the disciples were astonished at his words. But Jesus answereth again, and saith unto them, Children, how hard is it for them that trust in riches to enter into the kingdom of God! 25 It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God. 26 And they were astonished out of measure, saying among themselves, Who then can be saved? 27 And Jesus looking upon them saith, With men it is impossible, but not with God: for with God all things are possible. (Mark 10:17-27)

 

The Son of God loved this unconverted hypocrite whom Scripture presents as a paradigm of large groups of lost men who trust in their riches. The Lord Jesus Christ clearly does not love the elect alone.  His love for the rich young ruler is an instance of the eternal love manifested by the Father, Son, and Spirit towards the fallen and lost world spoken of in John 3:16.

 

Please read God Does Not Love Everyone: A Hyper-Calvinist Error to learn more. The What is Truth? blog also has a variety of articles on Calvinism.

 

TDR

The Watershed Moment in the Decline of the American Church: Distinction Between the Sexes

The Beginning of the Bible

When you open your Bible to the first chapter of Genesis, you read in verse 27:

So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

As if that mattered, God repeats this in Genesis 5:1-2:

1 This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him; 2 Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created.

Male and female.  That’s it.  God created male and female, two different sexes.  When I read scripture I notice also two different genders for mankind, communicated by he, him, his and she, her, and hers.  “It” never refers to a member of mankind, only the masculine or feminine genders.

God Designed

Furthermore, God designed distinction between the sexes.  He gave each a distinct kind or type of body and emotional make-up.  God also differentiated a separate, distinct role for each sex.  Each role complements the other.  According to this truth, God forbade same sex coital activity and marriage.

God also mandated the preservation or keeping of the designed distinctions between male and female.  He banned or outlawed masculinity for women and effeminacy for men.  God never rescinded any of that.  He repeated the regulation in both the Old and New Testaments.  God also instructed on it with varied statements intended for compliant application.

The fall of mankind in Genesis 3 resulted from abrogation of the male and female roles.  The curse of sin on mankind then instructs also in Genesis 3 concerning the future disorientation of sexual roles.  God prohibits men and women from changing or exchanging roles.  He also requires them to preserve clear symbols or marks of distinction in appearance.

Rebellion

The rebellion against God starts with the man abrogating headship.  It continues with the woman usurping male authority.  Mankind perverts the God designed and created hierarchy.

Mankind follows role rebellion with role and then sex confusion.  A person becomes his sex at conception.  God ordains parents to train the conceived and then born male to continue a man in every way; likewise the female to be a woman in all manners.

The animus between male and female in Genesis 3 continues.  People must support God’s design.  They must also oppose all manner of role confusion.  God especially demands this of true churches.

Long ago churches began relinquishing their responsibility to distinguish between sexes.  The world started this decline, but churches followed.  Churches accommodate role rebellion now in numbers of ways.  Some churches take some stand against the decline, but nearly every church capitulates in some manner out of fear, convenience, or pragmatism.

Rick Warren and Southern Baptist Convention

In a very obvious, public way, the Southern Baptist Convention battles right now who can lead their churches.  Will they be men or men and women?  So-called “America’s pastor,” Rick Warren, fights for the egalitarian, role confusion in the Convention.  He threatens the departure of thousands of “purpose-driven” churches from the convention over the issue.

Transgenderism, surgical sex changes, and gender neutral bathrooms make the headlines.  This ship started sailing long ago.  Conservative evangelical John MacArthur preached a standard exposition of Ephesian 5 on the two distinct marriage roles.  Women in mass rose and left the auditorium in protest.

Sixty to seventy years ago, every woman wore a dress or skirt in church, let alone at home.  Of course, every man wore pants.  This was (and still is) the only symbol of sexual distinction.  It’s why transgender “women” wear dresses like Kaitlyn Jenner.  It’s also why transgender “men” wear short hair and pants.

Anecdotal

In the first month after my wife and I moved to Indiana, I went to a junior boys basketball game at the elementary school.  A blue jean wearing woman coached the boys team.  She stomped and yelled like Bobby Knight on the sideline.  No one flinched at her antics.  Just another day in rural, red-state Indiana.  This, my friends, is the new normal.

The next night my wife and I went to an ice cream place and started up a conversation with some professing Christians there.  We continued in pleasant interaction.  Then I told the story of the junior boys game, its four overtimes, ending with sudden death.  I described the coach something like in the previous paragraph. They met my story with no response.  They went mute silent with pained expressions on their faces.  After an awkward moment of hearing the crickets in the background and feet shuffling, subject changed.

For the Future of Churches and America

Maybe at one time in the United States, leadership fires a woman for behaving like a man.  Today, leadership, maybe even female leadership, fires a man for criticizing the woman.  This fits into the contemporary battle of first amendment rights.  According to the Declaration of Independence, these inalienable rights come from God.  The country banishes God from public conversation.  Government and society in general prevent speech from and about God.

If you visit a business promoting transgenderism today, you could say the following.  “I will be back when you stop pushing your left wing religion on me.”  It is a very dogmatic religion established by the state today.

Churches will die with concession on sexual distinction.  The Democrats famously booed including the name of God in their political platform in 2012.  Will churches boo sexual distinction?  Have we reached a moment when this is even an unwelcome subject matter?

To stop American decline, judgment must begin in the house of God.  Churches must stand on the designed distinctions between male and female.  They may say they support supernaturalism and young earth creationism.  Will they worship and serve the creature rather than the Creator?  If creation means anything in a practical way, it means male and female created He them.

John the Baptist and the Lord Jesus and Sending Authority in Matthew 3

Paraginomai Versus Ginomai

The Greek verb paraginomai appears only three times in Matthew, an intense or emphatic form of a common verb, ginomai.   All three occur in Matthew 2 and 3:

2:1, “Now when Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judaea in the days of Herod the king, behold, there came wise men from the east to Jerusalem.”

3:1, “In those days came John the Baptist, preaching in the wilderness of Judaea.”

3:13, “Then cometh Jesus from Galilee to Jordan unto John, to be baptized of him.”

The magi, those kingmakers from a powerful far eastern nation, came with royal authority and bringing kingly gifts.  Herod recognized their authority.  It troubled him.  John the Baptist, the forerunner and herald of the King who would sit on the throne of David forever, came heralding or preaching.  The King Himself, Jesus, came to begin His work in an official capacity.

Luke 7:20 uses the same unique verb, paraginomai, to describe John the Baptist ascending to his divine task, parallel with Matthew 3:1.  The only usage in Mark, 14:43, sees an official, governing body of chief priests, scribes, and elders with Judas coming to arrest Jesus.  The Apostle Paul uses paraginomai in 2 Timothy 4:16, saying, “At my first answer no man stood with me.”  He described no one joining him in an official capacity in public court.  It’s an obviously technical word to denote the function of a person who came into court to defend the accused (John Phillips, Exploring the Pastoral Epistles, p. 454).

Official Capacity

The only use of paraginomai in Hebrews (9:11) reads:

But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building.

This verse describes Christ, the anointed one, come an high priest, so again in a high, official capacity, so with authority.  In the New International Commentary on Hebrews, Paul Ellingworth says concerning Hebrews 9:11, The use of paraginomai instead of the usual ginomai suggests “an official public appearance” (p. 449).  So also Harold Attridge in his Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews, commenting on the dramatic nuance of the word (paragenomenos, participle of paraginomai), says, “He has arrived on the heavenly scene as High Priest” (p. 245).

John the Baptist was a man sent (apostello) from God (John 1:6).  That verb (“sent,” apostello) is also very technical, expressing the nature of an envoy or an ambassador.  Jesus asked (Matthew 21:25), “The baptism of John, whence was it? from heaven, or of men?”  The implication in Matthew by Jesus (cf. Mk 11:30, Lk 20:4) was that God authorized the baptism of John.  He got it from heaven.

The Lord Jesus came like John with sending authority.  Jesus said, “As my Father hath sent (apostello) me, even so send I you” (John 20:21). God also expects sending for all His workers.  It’s more than reading the Great Commission, saying you’ve got it because you read in Matthew 28:18-20.  That command went to a plural, “Go ye.”  One should assume that “ye” meant people in the group.  It did not imply that anyone or everyone could go with His authority (“power”).  “You” is also plural in John 20:21.

Romans 10:15

The Apostle Paul writes in Romans 10:15,

And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things!

The word “preach” is kerusso.  This is the same word applied to John the Baptist and his preaching.  The kerux is someone to announce the Lord’s coming, to give His message, and to prepare the way for Him.  Again, Romans 10:15 asks of the plural, “they.”  Who “sends” (apostello) “them”?  Christ sends as Head of His church.

John the Baptist “came” in an official capacity.  God “sent” John in an official capacity.  The New Testament uses the same terminology for every believer.  How shall they hear without a kerux?  How shall they kerusso except they be apostello?  God the Father sent John and Jesus directly.  Jesus then sends true believers by means of the church.  He heads the church.  God sends believers only through true churches.

A Special Cast of Characters

Ones Christ sends constitute a special cast of characters and yet not one, not one because it applies to everyone.  Every one bringing glad tidings or the gospel of peace should be and must be sent.  That should be every member of a church, a member of Christ’s body with Him as Head.

As a personal example, individual churches sent my wife and I.  A true church sent us in 2020 from California to Oregon.  The same true church sent us in 2021 from Oregon to Utah.  In 2022, a true church in Utah sent us from Utah to Indiana.  The church in Indiana sent us for a few months to England at the end of 2022 and beginning of 2023   Since February 22, 2023, my wife and I function as heralds with authority of or from our church in Indiana.  We requested and received letters, which we possess, from three total churches in all this (California, Utah, and Indiana).

God sent John.  He came.  Sent and came are unique words of sending.  God sent Jesus.  He came.  The same pattern applies to the work of every true believer.

How serious would you take the sending of the Commander-in-Chief of the United States?  If the United States of America authorized you for a legitimate task, would you acknowledge the honor bestowed?  Can you recognize the greater honor of the Lord Jesus sending you through a true church?

Evangelistic Christian T-Shirts, Collared Shirts, Car Magnet

God the Father, Son, and Spirit are seeking for true worshippers (John 4:23); nobody can truly worship the Father through Jesus Christ by the Holy Spirit without being born again (John 3:3).  Have you thought about whether you should have some evangelistic clothing that offers people the gospel, or whether your car can preach the gospel?  In the Millennium even the bells on the horses will be holy to Jehovah (Zechariah 14:20).  Why not make your mode of transportation clearly identified with the risen Christ now?

I created a few designs at Zazzle of evangelistic T-shirts, collared shirts, bumper stickers, and a car magnet with Bible verses that point people to faithsaves.net with its evangelistic material.  (It is almost always best to click through a portal to save a bit extra whenever shopping on the Internet.)

The evangelistic shirt I am wearing in the pic below is one of those I designed.  My wife and I were hiking in God’s creation to the top of a place called Bald Mountain in the Bay Area.  (It is near the town of Ross.  I feel very welcome there-it’s a nice place, for sure.)  I usually wear this neon shirt when I am biking back and forth to work.  That way I am not just visible on my bike, but everyone who goes by can have access to the gospel.  Furthermore, when I am at work I basically need to have someone else initiate the conversation if I am going to talk about the gospel, but if coworkers see the shirt I am wearing when I bike in they know I am a Christian and also know how to find out more about the gospel without me having to say anything, as well as knowing that if they want to learn more about their Creator they have someone to ask about it.  So that is very good.

Bald Mountain hill Marin County Bay Area hike faithsaves.net man woman Christian evangelism evangelistic

By the way, we actually hiked to the planet Saturn on the same walk up Bald Mountain-here are pictures to prove it.

woman Saturn hike bald hill mountain Marin Bay Area

 

faithsaves.net Marin county San Francisco hike Bald Mountain hill hike Christian evangelistic Saturn

So now you know–a What is Truth? exclusive–now you know that all that stuff about Saturn being a gas planet and it being very far away from the sun and very cold is not true.  You can actually hike to Saturn from Marin County near San Francisco, California, and the temperature on Saturn is remarkably temperate.  Maybe the Seventh-Day Adventist prophetess Ellen White was actually right when she counted the moons of Jupiter and Saturn and said that “the inhabitants are a tall, majestic people.”  I’m pretty tall, and at least my wife thinks I can be majestic.  And here I was, hiking to the planet Saturn.  Thanks, Mrs. White!

Fake news you can trust, eh?

This shirt comes in a variety of sizes and colors (you don’t need neon if you don’t want that color.)  My wife Heather also has a nice shirt that says “Ye must be born again” and has the faithsaves.net website on it.

ye must be born again John 3:3 butterfly blue background t shirt

The evangelistic car magnets are also great.  (We have had the bumper stickers for a while already.)  It is a blessing that if we are in the parking lot at the grocery store, or are stuck in traffic, it means that the people next to us have a chance to come to know the true God and receive eternal life instead of spending eternity in hell.  Why should a zillion companies advertise their products on their cars, but believers not evangelize with their cars?

Obviously, God has given us a great deal of liberty within His guidelines of modesty and gender distinction about what we should wear, as long as we do it for His glory (1 Corinthians 10:31).  I would encourage you to consider using that liberty to confess Christ and offer the gospel with evangelistic clothing and evangelistic transportation in this desperately needy, hell-bound world.

TDR

God and the Bible Are Dispensational (Part Two)

Part One

I’m not the first person to call a literal approach to the Bible, a “desert island” approach.  Stuck on an island alone, you have only a Bible.   Except for a plain reading, you have nothing to tell you what it means.  You could only take a literal approach.  You would read a dispensational reading, which is a literal or grammatical-historical reading.

Literal does not mean ignoring poetic language or figures of speech.  If after watching you eat, I said to you, “you’re a hog,” I wouldn’t mean that you were a literal hog.  That is a metaphor.  I am comparing you to a hog.  The use of metaphors and other such figures of speech does not require a different interpretation than a literal one.

Rightly Dividing

Context

The literal interpretation sees dispensations.  That is clear in the desert island reading of the Bible.  This is a reason why literal interpretation stipulates division.  Paul calls it “rightly dividing”  (2 Tim 2:15).  Parts necessitate a division of a whole.  To make up the whole, each part fits into it.

Properly understood, parts of the Bible fit into the whole cohesive story of the Bible.  Those parts conform to their “context.”  You won’t get the parts right if you don’t understand the context.  Right understanding of words requires context.  Words have a root meaning, but their full meaning demands context.

Literary, Grammatical, Historical, or Syntactical

Context does convey division.  One context differs from another.  It might be either a literary or historical context or both.  The same word in one context will very often mean something different in a different one.  Reading a literal interpretation requires right dividing, which requires understanding words in their context.

One must also consider the grammatical or syntactical reading of a word within that context, which we call usage.  In a similar context, we see words used in similar ways.  We know the meaning of a word by the way biblical authors use it.  Very often, we also witness the same or similar wording around a word that informs its meaning.

Divisions in the Bible

How do divisions appear in the Bible?  Divisions appear in the Bible like they would a telling of history or within the narrative of a true story.  At its very start, God creates everything.  No other time compares to that time.  God’s creation of man then separates the first five days from what follows.  A little later, when man sins, everything changes.  Before sin, man is innocent; afterwards, he’s not.  This alters everything, including and most of all man’s relationship with God.

A child for Adam and Eve separates a new age.  Cain’s murder of Abel marks another.  Noah’s flood changes life and history in a most extraordinary way.  The Tower of Babel brings something entirely new, incomparable to the former time.  God’s call of and the obedience of Abraham launches another age.  The deliverance from Egypt, the Exodus, divides one era from another.  So does Moses receiving God’s law on Mt. Sinai.

The Conquest of the Promised Land marks something entirely different.  Reign of Hebrew Kings brought significant change.  Assyria dispersed ten northern tribes into near oblivion.  The forces of Babylon destroyed Solomon’s Temple and deported Israel into captivity.

Malachi ended God’s revelation to and through the prophets.  Emmanuel was born.  The church started.  Jesus died, arose, ascended into heaven, and poured out the Holy Spirit from heaven, who indwelt believers.  The New Testament was complete.  The Lord will return.

Discontinuity and Continuity

Discontinuity

Every division brings a new, different normal.  Scripture is replete with discontinuity.  I’m representing the Bible as a reader.  With a literal reading, distinct breaks occur in the narrative.  The above list is not complete, but it also does not represent the major divisions of biblical history.  Certain divisions are more important or vital than others to the extent that they rise to a greater level of dissection between one period and another.

A primary division occurs between the Old and New Testaments.  You see the comings of Jesus, first and second, and what’s in between, the church.  Before that, Israel takes a prominent place.  Much in the Bible points to a future kingdom, beginning with the Messiah.

Continuity

The central figure of scripture, the One and Only God, holy and immutable, however, brings continuity.  One God wrote one Bible that is one story.  Many major themes cross over or through the points of distinction.  God provides one way of salvation all the way through. Nothing contradicts.

Characters in the Bible speak of the story of the Bible.  They acknowledge continuity and discontinuity.  A few prime examples really mark this reality.  One, godly believers recognize Jesus as fulfilling Old Testament prophecies of the Messiah.  Two, the disciples or apostles expected a real future kingdom earth inaugurated by the promised King.  The resurrection meant Jesus could mark a new era as Savior and much later distinguish another as Judge and King.

If you just picked up a Bible with suitable reading comprehension, it all fits together in one cohesive message with a literal meaning.  You don’t need allegorization or spiritualization to make everything harmonize.  Everything harmonizes with a literal reading.  You don’t have to read anything into the text so that it won’t contradict something else.

More to Come

God and the Bible Are Dispensational (Part One)

God Wants Understanding of His Word

God delivered His Word for men to understand and by which they would live. Men must study it and then rightly divide it (2 Tim 2:15), but God made its meaning accessible (Rom 10:8-10, Deut 30:11-14).  He will judge men according to it (John 12:48).

The Bible is not indecipherable.  Its degree of opaqueness relates almost entirely to desire and belief.  Proverbs 2:3-5 say these such things:

3 Yea, if thou criest after knowledge, and] liftest up thy voice for understanding; 4 If thou seekest her as silver, and searchest for her as for hid treasures; 5 Then shalt thou understand the fear of the LORD, and find the knowledge of God.

Still People May Not Understand God’s Word

Rebellious

On the other hand, Psalm 106:7 says,

Our fathers understood not thy wonders in Egypt; they remembered not the multitude of thy mercies; but provoked him at the sea, even at the Red sea.

God wanted understanding, but those who did not have “ears to hear” could not understand.  Ezekiel 12:2 explains that some “have eyes to see, and see not; they have ears to hear, and hear not: for they are a rebellious house.”  Not understanding does not always relate to supernatural blinding.  A student in class may not like the subject, so he does not comprehend or retain.  Almost everything is lost on him.  Furthermore, Jesus revealed in Matthew 13:13-15:

13 Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand. 14 And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive: 15 For this people’s heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.

Satanic

A sufficient degree of the understanding of scripture becomes unattainable to the one not caring about it or wanting it.  An unbeliever might hear and comprehend, but still miss what God says.  This testifies to the uniqueness of scripture.  Isaiah 8:17 says:  “And I will wait upon the LORD, that hideth his face from the house of Jacob, and I will look for him.”  To some, God hides His face, and others will look for God, apparently finding Him because of that looking.

The Apostle Paul says Satan works toward deluminating blindness.  “[T]he god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them” (2 Cor 4:4).  What someone might ordinarily understand, he cannot because Satan keeps him from getting it through various Satanic means.

God Wrote His Word with Plain Meaning

Since God wrote a book to man to understand, a man would expect a reading of it in accordance with a plain meaning.  God intended accessibility of its message.  Men would live by what He said even from a child.

I didn’t make this up.  But how I explain plain meaning is understanding scripture like the people heard it in that day.  What did the words mean and how were they used at the very time men wrote and received them?

What was God saying in Genesis to the original audience of Genesis?  Or, what was the Lord saying in Matthew to the original audience of Matthew?  When someone gets that interpretation, what God was really saying, what is that called?  Someone might call that a literal interpretation or a grammatical-historical interpretation.

An original audience, the children of Israel, received the original manuscripts of the first five books of the Bible, called the Torah or Pentateuch.  As they read through those writings, they received more understanding of each part as they also knew more of the whole.  When God gave other inspired writings through various other human authors, such as Joshua, Judges, historical books, and poetic ones, the meaning of the previously given books, the Torah, did not change in meaning.  Genesis still means the same as it did when the first readers first set eyes on it.

God Changed His Methods and Manner of Operation Sometimes

Different Eras or Ages

As God gave more writings, one could understand more of His will.  Through history, sometimes God changed His methods or His manner of operations.  God didn’t change.  As He continued communicating with mankind, He used different, sometimes new genres.  He spoke in different ways.  God used symbolic or figurative language among other types of writing.

Looking back at proceeding time periods, historians recognize eras, ages, or periods of time.  They may disagree with the dividing points for these periods, but they admit shifts in thinking and lifestyle.  You’ve heard of premodern, modern, and postmodern as a description.   Surely you’ve heard said, ancient, middle, and modern.  Broader periods can break down into even more detail.

The Bible is Dispensational

The changes of methods and manners of God as seen in scripture also divide into epochs of time.  In order to systematize a literal understanding of scripture, grammatical and historical, men organized scripture into dispensations.  The system of interpretation became known as dispensationalism. Dispensation- alism recognized the continuity and discontinuity of God’s methods and manner of operation across these various ages.

God is dispensational in His revelation of Him and His will.  The Bible is a dispensational book.  Any literal or true view of history is dispensational.

Old Testament Priority

Succeeding new generations of recipients of original scripture could understand what they read in their day.  Scripture did not change in meaning.  However, God makes prophesies.  He uses prophets to tell the future.  The understanding of a divine prophecy could increase with time, closer to or after its fulfillment (cf. Daniel 12:4).  The Babylonian captivity shed light on the prophesies of captivity.  The return to the land after captivity shed light on the prophesies of return to the land.

The added understanding with a fulfillment of prophecy is not a change in meaning.  God wanted understanding of what He said.  He gave His Word to man to be lived.  God meant the original audience of the Old Testament to understand its meaning.  “Hearing” meant understanding (Deut 19:20, 21:21, 31:12-13).  God did inspire the Old Testament with a New Testament priority.  The Bible does not read as though God a thousand or more years later said what He really was saying in what He earlier inspired.

More to Come

Greece, Biblical Christian Tour (Tutku Tours) Can You Come?

Lord willing, from March 15, 2024 to March 23, 2024 we will be on a Christian history tour of Greece with Dr. Mark Wilson and Tutku Educational Tours, visiting the ancient sites associated with the Apostle Paul’s journeys in Greece, as recorded in Scripture, as well as other sites of historical importance, such as the oracle at Delphi.

Christian tour Greece Apostle Paul pastors professors

As the trip brochure indicates, we are scheduled to see places including:

Neapolis, Philippi, Amphipolis, Thessaloniki, Berea, Kalambaka (Meteora), Delphi, Athens, Corinth, and Cenchrea

Part of what is scheduled to take place is as follows:

[We will visit] the port city of Philippi … Paul landed by boat and first brought the gospel to Europe. … We follow the Via Egnatia which the apostle took into the city. Here at Philippi Paul preached his first sermon in Europe (Acts 16:13-15) and baptized the first Christian convert in the continent, a “certain woman named Lydia.” … Extensive Roman and Byzantine ruins have been uncovered and there is a crypt where it is believed Paul and Silas were imprisoned. We leave Philippi and continue to follow the Via Egnatia to Amphipolis (Acts 17:1) to view the Lion Monument that Paul would have seen as he traveled by this city. We pass by Apollonia (Acts 17:1) and return to our hotel in Thessaloniki … Paul spent a number of weeks in Thessalonica during his 2nd Missionary Journey establishing a church (Acts 17:1-9) to whom he would a short time later write two letters (1 & 2 Thessalonians). Visit the Roman Agora (marketplace), where a mob was formed against Paul and an ensuing riot started in the city (Acts 17:5) as well as the Archaeological Museum. … We leave Thessaloniki for a brief visit to Berea (modern Veria), the place whose Jewish citizens “received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true” (Acts 17:11). After viewing the Bema— the spot where tradition has Paul teaching the Bereans—and the beautiful monument dedicated to the apostle[.] … [We visit the] Delphi Museum, whose impressive collection includes an inscription concerning the governor Gallio (Acts 18:12), which plays a crucial role in establishing the chronology of Paul’s life and ministry. … Paul visited Athens during his 2nd Missionary Journey (Acts 17:15- 34). We’ll see the Agora (“Marketplace”) of ancient Athens where the apostle dialogued with the Athenian citizens and philosophers (Acts 17:17) and also at the Areopagus (“Mars Hill”) where Paul addressed the city leaders (Acts 17:19-33). … [We] proceed to nearby Cenchrea, one of the two harbors of ancient Corinth from where Paul sailed on more than one occasion (Acts 18:18) and which was also the home of another early church and an influential Christian woman, Phoebe (Rom. 16:1). We then visit Corinth, the place where Paul ministered for 11⁄2 years (Acts 18:1-18) and [to whom he wrote] 1 & 2 Corinthians). … Extensive ruins of Corinth are visible today, including temples, water fountains, shops, various public buildings, the largest Agora (“Marketplace”) in the ancient world and the Bema, where Paul likely met before the governor Gallio (Acts 18:12-17). The Corinthian Museum contains many significant artifacts, several of which have a direct link to events, items and people mentioned in the New Testament.

We have travelled with Tutku before to Egypt and to Turkey, and they have done a very good job.  The scholars that they have guiding their tours are excellent.  For example, Dr. James Hoffmeier, with whom we visited Egypt, is a leading evangelical Egyptologist.  We recorded numbers of videos with him of things that related to the historicity of Scripture, some of which we have posted online (and others which still need to get live).  I would definitely recommend Tutku for those who wish to visit Israel or other countries with significant sites for Biblical history.

The tour is at a discounted rate and is designed for pastors, professors, and others who might at some point lead a tour or point others to a tour.  So you are also likely to meet interesting and knowledgeable people on these tours.  If you are actively involved in Christian ministry (even if you are not an ordained pastor), it is quite possible that they would let you come.  The price is quite reasonable, and if you can take care of your own airfare with credit card points or miles it becomes even more reasonable.

Would you like to join us?

TDR

DeSantis, Trump, or Otherwise

2024 and 2020 Elections

It looks that the Republican side of the 2024 presidential election will include a hard fought battle that spends millions and millions of dollars for candidates trying to defeat one another.  Apparently, our side could not work together to agree on a candidate to support without a huge war in the party.  Meanwhile, the Democrats will pour huge amounts of money, almost incalculable sums, to further perfect their ballot harvesting strategy.  Instead of preparing themselves for this same tactic, Republicans will spend it bashing each other before general election time.

Evidence shows large numbers of varied entities rigged the 2020 U.S. presidential election, including Covid related ones.  The Durham Report alone proved that and then there’s Hunter Biden’s laptop.  Despite all the forces against President Trump during his presidency, he accomplished much.  I wish he became president in 2020, like many of you readers.

Giving Trump His Due

In addition to all the good things that came out of the Trump presidency, he changed the Republican party in a positive way.  He influenced many other leaders to take a similar combative toughness as he.  He showed them the way.  I thank him for that.  If another Republican besides him wins in 2024, Trump will have made a significant influence to that victory.

Republicans or conservatives should give Trump his due.  They should stop disrespecting him in the manner they are.  This will not help Republicans win 2024.  It will not persuade any Trump supporter to vote for someone else.  Insulting Trump and those who voted for him looks self-serving and virtue signaling.

Everyone knows Trump’s negatives.  Most of what makes him negative is also what makes him positive.  You might say, “He should stop doing this.”  Well, “this” is also what makes him popular.  Trump would not measure what he said for maximum political correctness.  He also pushed back on the mainstream media almost to the extent that it pushes against political candidates it doesn’t want.

Since we will have to choose our candidate, I might still vote Trump, because voters have a lot of time to watch what will happen.  I haven’t made up my mind yet.  The one who gets my vote will stand up and battle for an almost identical agenda as Trump.  I know Trump will fight, because I’ve seen him do it.  Whoever wins for the Republicans will face monumental forces from many different fronts almost like no one in American history.

My Primary Vote

As I look toward the future, right now I predict though that I will vote for Governor DeSantis in the Republican primary.  I don’t know that, but it is what I foresee right now.

Trump did his part.  I give him credit for it, but in the present I believe his time has passed.  He could still win.  I would be happy if he did.  I prefer Governor DeSantis at the moment.  DeSantis could easily pick up the mantle of Trump and do better with it, even if Trump won’t hand it to him.

I get Trump’s anger about disloyalty.  DeSantis could help with this too and bring along more Trump supporters by more strongly giving Trump his due.  He could disarm the Trump disloyalty attack by honoring Trump.  He should have won 2020.  Many Republicans who supported Trump understand why someone would run against him.  Both could happen, a candidate like DeSantis honors Trump and then explains why the Republicans regretfully need someone else.

Advice for DeSantis

Fight

DeSantis could pledge to fight in the example of Donald Trump.  He could tick off all the ways he will emulate Trump and then honor him by winning on his behalf and those who support him.  In an analogical way, I can see Trump not as the candidate like David wasn’t the candidate for building the first Temple.  Trump was uniquely suited for the job he did in taking down Hillary in 2016.  Please don’t say I’m saying Trump is David, the latter who loved God.  Trump brought the fight to the party like it needed and will continue to need.  David fought the Philistines.

At the time Trump became a candidate, the Republican Party needed a fighter extraordinaire.  Of course, the spiritual solution is most important.  Some of you critics rarely preach the gospel.  Don’t be critical of spiritual lack in the political area if you are distracted in the evangelistic area.  Are you really that dedicated to the gospel that you don’t have time to think about religious freedom?  Good for you, but I don’t believe it with most of you.  When’s the last time you even made a disciple in fulfillment of the Great Commission.  You’re just, again, virtue signaling.

Trump’s kickstart of fighting for freedom and the American way is the start.  Everyone now has a standard.  All must surpass it.  DeSantis, I believe, must prove that he will surpass Trump.  I’m not convinced yet.  What I am saying is that I believe he will.  I hope he reads this.

Give Trump His Due

The Florida governor could also pledge to homogenize the MAGA support into a unified team.  Some of the Trumpers could make the cabinet.  This kind of approach to Trump is what will make it difficult for Trump to oppose DeSantis.  Recently Trump said he had a hard time saying a bad word about Gavin Newsom because of how positive Newsom was with him.  Trump takes well to positive reinforcement.  Start every speech with a litany of pro-Trump signals before turning to what makes you the man for whom to vote.

DeSantis should set his sights on the enemies out there.  Fire away at them.  In my opinion, he’s tough, but still not tough enough.  The way to impress Trump voters won’t be doing the Chris Christie, talking tough about Trump (especially to the press).  The way to do that is to talk tough to and at the political elite.  Hone that skill.  Elevate the fire not against Trump, but against them.

I write this because it is what I think.  I was just now ready to say it.  Talk amongst yourselves.

AUTHORS OF THE BLOG

  • Kent Brandenburg
  • Thomas Ross

Archives