Powered By Blogger

Monday, September 21, 2015

Times of the Gentiles


Times of the Gentiles Fulfilled


In the closing days of His ministry, Jesus wept over Jerusalem saying,
“O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not! Behold, your house is left unto you desolate. For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord” (Matthew 23:37-39).
[blogimg]http://www.endtime.com/wp-content/uploads/IS.jpg[/blogimg]
In Matthew 24:2, Jesus continued to talk about Jerusalem, the city where God chose to place His name – “And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.”
A few years later in 70 AD, just as Jesus had prophesied, the Roman armies destroyed Jerusalem and burnt the Second Temple to the ground. Thus began the 2,000-year exile of the Jewish people from their Promised Land and their Holy City.

God Turns to the Gentiles

The Apostle James spoke to the leaders of the early church as they were attempting to understand how God would turn to the Gentiles. In Acts 15:14 he said, “Simeon hath declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name.”
Because Israel was too proud of her role as God’s chosen people, she was unable to receive a meek and lowly Messiah. In His wisdom, God turned to the lowly Gentiles who were humble enough to receive a salvation that they did not deserve. God was looking for a people He could have mercy upon—not one who felt it deserved His divine favor. Thus the “times of the Gentiles” began.
The Apostle Paul attempted to explain this truth to the Gentiles in Romans 11:25 27:
For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles be come in. And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob: For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins.
Paul also warned the Romans against being lifted up in pride because they had been favored by God with salvation. He explained the mystery that the blindness of Israel would not last forever. He told them that this condition would only last until “the fullness of the Gentiles be come in.” Then he explained that all of Israel, that existed when the fullness of the Gentiles was completed, would be saved. He went on in the chapter to explain that God first concluded the Gentiles in unbelief so that He might have mercy on the Gentiles. He then explained that the Jews are now consigned to unbelief, so that He might have mercy on the Jews. He summarizes his discourse in Romans 11:32 – For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all.

Times of the Gentiles Fulfilled

When Jesus spoke of the destruction of Jerusalem, he placed a time on its desolation. In Luke 21:24, He said, “And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.”
From 70 AD until today, Jerusalem has continued to be under Gentile control. When Jerusalem was captured by Israel in the 1967 War, many Bible students thought the times of the Gentiles were over. However, Israel’s secular government returned control of the Temple Mount to the Muslims. Revelation 11:1-2 explains when the times of the Gentiles will come to an end:
And there was given me a reed like unto a rod: and the angel stood, saying, Rise, and measure the temple of God, and the altar, and them that worship therein. But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months.
Remember, Jerusalem will be trodden down of the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled. This passage tells us that the Gentiles will tread the holy city under foot for forty-two Jerusalem months. Forty-two months here refers to the three and one half year period known as the great tribulation, which immediately precedes the battle of Armageddon. In Revelation 13:5, we are told that power was given to the beast (the Antichrist) to continue forty two months. This is the same forty two months that will conclude the times of the Gentiles.
When Jesus comes back to earth, destroys the Antichrist, and establishes His kingdom, the times of the Gentiles will be completed, and all of Israel that has survived the great tribulation will turn to Jesus when He descends onto the Mount of Olives. Jerusalem is the most disputed piece of real estate on earth today. The nation of Israel is now reborn after almost 2,000 years of exile. A peace treaty that will settle the control of the Temple Mount is being crafted by representatives of the world community. All of these factors speak loud and clear to us. The times of the Gentiles are almost over and the second coming of our Lord and Savior is very near! Come quickly Lord Jesus!

Sunday, September 20, 2015

Annihilationism




annihilationism
“The teaching that after death unbelievers suffer the penalty of God’s wrath for a time, and then are ‘annihilated,’ or destroyed, so that they no longer exist. Some forms of this teaching hold that annihilation occurs immediately upon death.”1

Scripture teaches that annihilationism is false:
And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life. (Matthew 25:46 ESV)

And another angel, a third, followed them, saying with a loud voice, “If anyone worships the beast and its image and receives a mark on his forehead or on his hand, 10 he also will drink the wine of God’s wrath, poured full strength into the cup of his anger, and he will be tormented with fire and sulfur in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb. 11 And the smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever, and they have no rest, day or night, these worshipers of the beast and its image, and whoever receives the mark of its name.” (Revelation 14:9-11 ESV)
From The London Baptist Confession of Faith, 1689:
Chapter 32: Of the Last Judgment

1._____ God hath appointed a day wherein he will judge the world in righteousness, by Jesus Christ; to whom all power and judgment is given of the Father; in which day, not only the apostate angels shall be judged, but likewise all persons that have lived upon the earth shall appear before the tribunal of Christ, to give an account of their thoughts, words, and deeds, and to receive according to what they have done in the body, whether good or evil.

2._____ The end of God’s appointing this day, is for the manifestation of the glory of his mercy, in the eternal salvation of the elect; and of his justice, in the eternal damnation of the reprobate, who are wicked and disobedient; for then shall the righteous go into everlasting life, and receive that fulness of joy and glory with everlasting rewards, in the presence of the Lord; but the wicked, who know not God, and obey not the gospel of Jesus Christ, shall be cast aside into everlasting torments, and punished with everlasting destruction, from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power.

From Coram Deo: In Judgment by Stephen J. Wellum:
(3) What, then, about the issue of justice and fairness? Is eternal conscious punishment unjust? There are a number of things that could be said here, but I will only mention one. In order to evaluate the justice or fairness of eternal punishment judgment must not only be viewed as retributive, which it is in Scripture, it must also be viewed in light of the person against whom we have sinned. And who is that? Of course, the answer that thunders forth from Scripture is that we have sinned against the majestic and glorious God of heaven and earth, the God of infinite worth and value. Our sin is not just against each other on a merely horizontal plane – that would be bad enough. But we have sinned first and foremost against the great and glorious God of Scripture! Why then is hell eternal? Simply, because we have sinned against God and an eternal hell is nothing less than what we rightly deserve. Sin falls short of the glory of God, and if the punishment of our sin is to be just at all and fitting with what we deserve, it must, in the end, be eternal.

Do we not have to see all of this in light of the cross? If we look at the flip-side of divine judgment, that is, the remedy to our sin, we discover that salvation is only accomplished in nothing less than the enfleshment of God the Son and His going to a cross and laying down His life for the likes of us! And when we hear from Golgotha the cry of the Lord of Glory – “My God, my God why have you forsaken me?” – do we not have to ask ourselves: if my salvation was only possible at such great cost, then why should I doubt that outside of this cross and this Christ that my punishment will be eternal?

These are difficult issues no doubt. When we think about divine judgment, hell, and the state of the unbeliever, these are not pleasant realities. Even though I disagree with John Stott over these issues I think he is right when he writes: “I long that we could in some small way stand in the tearful tradition of Jeremiah, Jesus, and Paul. I want to see more tears among us. I think we need to repent of our nonchalance, our hard-heartedness” [David Edwards and John Stott, Essentials: A Liberal-Evangelical Dialogue (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1988), 313].

From 18 Words by J. I. Packer:
Some hold that [the texts in scripture that mention ‘eternal destruction,’ or ‘eternal punishment,’ etc.] these texts imply the annihilation of the rejected — one searing moment in the fire, and then oblivion. But it seems clear that in reality the ‘second death’ is no more a cessation of being than is the first. For (i) the word rendered ‘destruction’ in 2 Thess. 1:9 (olethros) means, not annihilation, but ruin (cf. its use in 1 Thess 5:3). (ii) The insistence in these texts that the fire, punishment and destruction are eternal (aionios, literally ‘age-long’) and that the worm in Gehenna is undying, would be pointless and inappropriate if all that is envisaged is momentary extinction; just as it would be pointless and inappropriate to dwell on ‘unending’ pain resulting from an immediately fatal bullet wound. Either these words indicate the endlessness of torment, or they are superfluous and misleading. (iii) To the argument that aionios means only ‘relating to the age to come’, without any implications of endless duration, it seems sufficient to say that if in Matthew 25:46 ‘eternal’ life means endless bliss (and surely it does), then the ‘eternal’ punishment mentioned there must be endless too. (iv) We are told that in the ‘lake of fire’ (the ‘eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels’, Matt. 25:41) the devil will be ‘tormented day and night for ever and ever’ (Rev. 20:10). That any man sent to join him will endure a similar eternity of retribution is clear from the parallel language of Revelation 14:10f.: ‘he (the beast-worshipper) shall be tormented with fire and brimstone … the smoke of their torment goes up for ever and ever; and they have no rest, day or night.’

It seems plain that what these texts teach is not extinction, but the far worse prospect of an endless awareness of God’s just and holy displeasure. Grievous as we may find it to contemplate, and sickening as we may find the Jewish apocalyptic imagery in which Christ and the apostles speak of it (this is, after all, the post-holocaust era), and endless hell can no more be removed from the New Testament than an endless heaven can. This is why physical death (the first death) is so fearful a prospect for Christless men; not because it means extinction, but precisely because it does not mean extinction, only the unending pain of the second death. The godless man dimly senses this, through God’s general revelation (Rom. 1:32); no wonder, then, that he fears to die.

Saturday, September 19, 2015

Apostasy in the Christian church


Apostasy in the Christian church
by Matt Slick

"Let no one in any way deceive you, for it [Jesus' return] will not come unless the apostasy comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction," (2 Thess. 2:3, NASB).

Apostasy means to fall away from the truth. Therefore, an apostate is someone who has once believed and then rejected the truth of God. Apostasy is a rebellion against God because it is a rebellion against truth. In the Old Testament, God warned the Jewish people about their idolatry and their lack of trust in Him. In the New Testament, the epistles warn us about not falling away from the truth. Apostasy is a very real and dangerous threat.

The verse at the top of the page tells us that there will be an apostasy that is associated with the appearance of the Antichrist. Most Christians are looking for the arrival of the Antichrist, but very few are looking for "the apostasy" that must come first. The arrival of the Antichrist cannot occur until sufficient apostasy has happened in the world. The Antichrist, who is the ultimate of liars, cannot abide in a world where the truth of God's Word is taught. This is why the Bible says that the apostasy will come first and then the Antichrist will be revealed.

Therefore, we must, as Christians, ask this question, "Is there an apostasy occurring in the Christian church today?" Some would say no and others yes. But, as we look for the arrival of the Antichrist, should we not also be looking for the arrival of apostasy? And where else should we first look but in our own house for the Bible tells us that judgment will begin in the house of the Lord (1 Peter 4:17).

If there is indeed an apostasy occurring in the Christian Church, we would not know it unless we first examined the Bible closely and then compared the present-day Church to the Word of God. It is only after a standard of truth is established that we would then have a measuring rod by which apostasy can be detected. Therefore, I propose the following list of Biblical truths as a sample of essential Christian and non-essential doctrines by which we might compare other teachings and phenomena. Note this is not absolute, and the nuances of several topics can be debated since not all will agree with the categorization of all points. Still, we need to use the Bible as our standard, and it gives us plenty of information by which we can know what the truth really is.

Primary Essentials (Nature and work of Christ)--Cannot deny and be Christian since they are explicitly stated as required in Scripture.
Jesus is both God and man (John 1:1, 14, 8:24, Col. 2:9, 1 John 4:1-4).
Jesus rose from the dead physically (John 2:19-21).
Salvation is by grace through faith (Rom. 5:1, Eph. 2:8-9, Gal. 5:1-5).
The gospel is the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus (1 Cor. 15:1-4, Gal. 1:8-9).
There is only one God (Exodus 20:1-3, Isaiah 43:10, 44:6, 8)
Secondary Essentials--(Nature of God) Cannot deny and be Christian.
God exists as a Trinity of persons: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. (See Trinity)
Virgin Birth of Jesus--relates to incarnation of Christ as God and man.
Primary Non-Essentials (Bible, Church ordinances, and practice)--Denial does not void salvation yet principles are clearly taught in Scripture. Denial suggests apostasy.
Male eldership and pastorate (1 Tim. 2:12-13, 3:15, Titus 1:5-7).
Fidelity in marriage in heterosexual relationships (1 Cor. 6:9).
The condemnation of homosexuality (Rom. 1:26-27).
Inerrancy of Scripture (2 Tim. 3:16).
Secondary Non-Essentials--does not affect one's salvation relationship with God. Debated within Christianity. Denial or acceptance does not suggest apostasy.
Baptism for adults or infants.
Predestination, election, and free will.
Communion every week, monthly, or quarterly, etc.
Saturday or Sunday Worship.
Worship with or without instruments, traditional or contemporary.
Pre-tribulation rapture, mid-tribulation rapture, post-tribulation rapture.
Premillennialism, amillennialism, and postmillennialism.
Continuation or cessation of the charismatic gifts.
Etc.
Of course, the non-essentials are debatable (which unfortunately leads to denominational fragmentation). But by way of explanation, the Primary Essentials are those doctrines that the Bible states if they are denied, damnation follows. I have written on this in Essential Doctrines. For brevity, the Bible states that if you deny Jesus is God, you are dead in your sins (John 8:24, 58, cf. Exodus 3:14), if you deny Jesus' physical resurrection, your faith is in vain (1 Cor. 15:14, cf. John 2:19-21), if you add works to salvation, you are not in Christ (Gal. 3:1-3, 5:1-4) and that if you preach a gospel contrary to what the apostles preached, you are accursed (Gal. 1:8-9, cf. 1 Cor. 15:1-4). Therefore, to deny any of these doctrines, according to Scripture, is to be outside the camp of Christ and invited eternal damnation. This would obviously be apostasy.

The Secondary Essentials are essentials that further clarify orthodoxy, but there is no explicitly Scriptural statement regarding each (that I am aware of) which states that denying them results in damnation the way the Primary Essentials do. The Secondary Essentials deal primarily with the nature of God. The fact that there is one God who is a Trinity is clearly essential to Christian orthodoxy, but there is no Scriptural statement stating that to believe in the Trinity is necessary for salvation. However, that does not mean that denial of the Trinity is acceptable. A person can be saved without knowing about the Trinity. But, since the Trinity is a Biblical truth and the believer is indwelt by the Holy Spirit who bears witness of truth, a true Christian will not openly denounce the Trinity once he has been taught it from Scripture. So, it could be said that the Secondary Essentials are essentials to the faith as well as the Primary Essentials are.

The Primary Non-Essentials are Biblical teachings that if denied do not affect one's salvation. But, because the Bible teaches them, denying them is a sign of apostasy. The Secondary Non-Essentials do not affect one's position with God, nor do they affirm or deny Biblical teaching since they are debatable. Having differing beliefs in these is not a sign of apostasy--just differences of opinion. Again, I am aware that the categorization of the non-essentials is debatable, but I must draw the line somewhere. Sadly, it is in Secondary non-essential doctrines that most denominational fragmentation occurs. This is a sad display that most division occurs over that which is least important. Furthermore, I believe that it is in the area of the Non-Essentials that apostasy can first be detected.

2 Thessalonians 2
As quoted above, there is a prophecy in 2 Thessalonians about a coming apostasy that is associated with the disclosure of the anti-Christ.

"Let no one in any way deceive you, for it [Jesus' return] will not come unless the apostasy comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction," (2 Thess. 2:3, NASB).

Have you been looking for the coming of the anti-Christ? Are you waiting for him to pop up on the world scene? If you are, are you also looking for the related apostasy? Most Christians are looking for the anti-Christ but are not looking for signs of apostasy.

The Bible is God's Word, and it tells us what is right and wrong. To the degree that anyone disagrees with the truths of God's Word, to that same degree they are falling away from it. What, then, might be some of the signs of apostasy? I've compiled a representative list of issues. You may or may not agree with all of these, but I provide them as food for thought.

Denial of basic Christian doctrines such as the Trinity, the deity of Christ, the deity of the Holy Spirit, salvation by grace, and moral absolutes as found in the Bible.
God's Word is true. Deviation from the basics of its truth is surely apostasy.
Countless denominational divisions that contradict John 13:35 and 1 Cor. 1:10.
Of course, there are bound to be divisions in the body of Christ and differences of opinions are permitted (Rom. 14:1-12). But, the amount of divisions in the Church is ridiculous and contrary to Col. 3:14.
Ordination of homosexuals.
Homosexuality is clearly condemned in God's Word (Lev. 18:22, 1 Cor. 6:9). To ordain homosexuals into ministry is clearly contrary to Biblical truth and clearly apostasy.
Women elders and pastors.
Whether people like it or not in this politically correct environment, the Bible does not support women as elders or as pastors (1 Tim. 2:12-14, 3:2, Titus 1:5-7). Men are called to be leaders in the church. The fact that women elders and pastors exist is a sign that men are not doing their God-given job.
Also, if you believe in women pastors and elders, do not dismiss this article. You must always examine yourself to see if what you believe is Biblical.
Not preaching the gospel per 1 Cor. 15:1-4.
The gospel is the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus for our sins. It is not a message of convenience or embarrassment. Do not be ashamed of the gospel (Rom. 1:16).
Using the Lord's name in vain, something a surprising number of Christians do.
God's name and title are to be used only by Christians in a reverent and respectful manner and never in casual exclamation. Just because the sinners do it, does not mean it is okay for the Christians.
Not sending out or failing to support missionaries (or cutting back unnecessarily) in violation of Matt. 28:18-20.
Carrying out the Great Commission is the command of Jesus. Any church that is able to support missionary work and does not is in direct violation of Christ's command in the Great Commission.
Marketing and merchandising.
Those in ministry should make a living from their labor. Churches should seek to spread the gospel best they can and selling things to do it is acceptable. But, how many trinkets and bobbles are offered in the name of Christ that do not honor God but are merely for the purpose of financial gain? Is the duty of the church business or the gospel? Remember how Jesus cleansed the temple?
Pastors who are more concerned with growing a church than preaching the truth.
Whoever and wherever they are, they need to repent. Pastors must stand on the truth of God's Word even if it costs them financially and materially.
Pastors who don't pray and seek God's face.
Of course, this should be rare. But, any pastor who does not seek God's face in humility is seeking to do a job, not a ministry, under his own power.
Pastors who cave in to pressures from the church in contradiction to the Word of God.
Any pastor who does this should repent now or step down from the pulpit. Pastors are to stand upon and for God's Word, no matter what the obstacles or the cost.
Pastors who fail to equip their congregations according to God's Word.
Pastors are called to equip the Christian for the work of the ministry in all aspects of life (Eph. 4:11): apologetics, evangelism, missionary work, prayer, service, love, etc. Far too many congregations are not being equipped with even the basics of Christianity and are instead being taught political correctness.
Pastors who don't teach damnation.
We are not saying that you must preach fire and brimstone all the time. But the fact is the gospel that offends no one is not the gospel of the Bible. The truth of the gospel is that people will face damnation. This is part of the Christian message, and it should be part of Christian preaching.
Christians gathering teachers to themselves to make them feel good.
Is comfort or truth the primary objective for the Christians? Are we divine in nature or sinners saved by grace? Do we deserve to be saved, or are we saved by God's free choice? Christians who want merely to be entertained and comforted from the pulpit are still children. They should be challenged to grow and take risks.
Evolution
Denominations that either adopt evolutionary principles or refuse to take a stand on evolution.
Apostasy is all around us in varying degrees. As Christians, we need to be very sure that we are clinging to the truth of God's Word and resisting the inclusion of liberalism, moral relativism, and the oncoming secularism that is all around us. We need to stand on the Word of God and never be ashamed of the truth of the Gospel:

"For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek," (Rom. 1:16).

Friday, September 18, 2015

The Law of Double Reference


The Law of Double Reference

The fifth law of interpretation is The Law of Double Reference.
The Law of Double Reference is the principle of associating similar or related ideas which are usually separated from one another by long period of times, and which are blended into a single picture like the blending of pictures by a stereopticon.
Study the following passages of Scripture and determine where the Law of Double Reference was employed:
Psalm 16:1-11;
Psalm 22:1-31;
Psalm 40:1-10;
Isaiah 11:1-5;
Jeremiah 29:10-14.
Explanation
The next principle for investigation in our study of Hermeneutics is what is termed the law of double reference. We are now in a position to study this most important rule, which is found through the prophetic portion of the Word. We have seen that the basic rule of all interpretation is what is properly called the golden rule of interpretation, which insists upon our taking every word at its primary, ordinary, usual, literal meaning, unless the facts of the immediate context, studied in the light of related passages, demand a departure from the literal, ordinary meaning and require that we understand a passage as figurative or metaphorical. When we have mastered this rule until we can apply it unconsciously to our Bible study, and when we have made a note of the fact that we must recognize the law of first mention, we are then in a position to study the law of double reference.

I. Statement Of The Law
The law of double reference is based upon one of the fundamental laws of psychology: the principle of the association of similar or related ideas. Similarities always suggest comparisons. Thus the prophets constantly depicted that which was as a rule in the immediate future or present. Since history repeats itself, as all admit, the prophets looked out into the future and saw similar situations arising like those which were confronting them or immediately in the future. Thus the transition from describing that which was immediately before them to that which was in the remote future was very easy, normal, and natural.

This principle has been illustrated by mountain scenery. I recall traveling through the western prairies of the province of Alberta and approaching the Canadian Rockies. In the distance, as our train was speeding along, I could see the low-lying hills, as they rose from the plains. But towering above them in the far distance, I could see larger and higher mountains. Upon reaching the summit of the nearer mountains, or the foothills, I could see a long valley separating this range from the higher and more massive ones still in the distance. But as I was approaching the foothills, the valley separating the two ranges was not visible. This little phenomenon, familiar to all peoples, may enable us to understand how it was that the prophets spoke of something in the immediate future or present in their day and then blended this description with a situation that would arise in the distant future.

I may also emphasize this principle by calling attention to a stereopticon lantern that gives the dissolving effect. One picture is thrown upon a screen. The audience sits, rapt with attention, enjoying the sight. Presently the members of the group notice that the scene is beginning to fade, or become dim. Then there presently appear the faint outlines of another picture. By the time the first one has disappeared from the screen, the second one is in full view. Speaking in terms, then, of the pictures of the stereopticon, I would say that the prophets threw upon the screen the picture of the present or immediate future and then, when this picture began to fade, the dim outlines of another and more distant one began to be thrown before the gaze of the audience. Finally the first picture disappears entirely and the observer sees only the second one.

The student must be very careful in reaching the conclusion that the principle of double reference obtains in a given place. Every word of a description must be taken at its primary, usual literal meaning, unless the facts studied in the light of related passages indicates otherwise. In other words, we must believe that the prophets were honest and capable of expressing themselves exactly as they thought and as the truth was revealed to them. We are never justified in interpreting a passage as an illustration of the law of double reference unless there are facts that show positively that the speaker ceased to talk about the thing immediately before him and began to describe something in the distant future. The facts of the context alone are to guide one in this particular. When the student sees that the prophet went far beyond his own day and time and was describing a second scene but a different one, then and only then, must he call to his aid the principle of the law of double reference or a manifold fulfillment of prophecy. A careless observance of this rule will only lead to endless confusion and misunderstanding.

When anyone is convinced that the facts in a passage indicate that the prophet was following the principle of double reference and he interprets the passage upon that principle, he should by all means check his interpretation of the facts by other passages which are plain and positive, and about which he cannot be mistaken. Understanding these general principles, we are now in a position to examine certain passages of the Scriptures illustrative of these fundamentals.

II. Examination Of Examples Of The Law Of Double Reference
The first example to which I wish to call attention is Psalm 16. I ask the reader to stop at this moment, return to this psalm, and read it very carefully. Everyone who does this will be well repaid — many-fold.

In the first seven verses David, the human author of this poem, used the personal pronouns I, me, my, and mine. Everything that appears in these verses was literally true of David and of the experiences through which he passed. Thus if we follow the ordinary rules of interpretation, we are to apply everything in these verses to the historic King David, the author of the poem.

But when we look at verses 8-11, we see that he still uses the personal pronouns (I, me, my, and mine) of the first person. At the same time we know that David did not enjoy the experiences that are mentioned here. To show that David was not speaking of his own experiences, I will quote these last four verses (Psalm 16:8-11):

I have set Jehovah always before me: Because he is at my right hand, I shall not be moved.
9 Therefore my heart is glad, and my glory rejoiceth: My flesh also shall dwell in safety.
10 For thou wilt not leave my soul to Sheol; Neither wilt thou suffer thy holy one to see corruption.
11 Thou wilt show me the path of life: In thy presence is fullness of Joy; In thy right hand there are pleasures for evermore.”

The historic David did not keep the Lord always before him. He got his eyes off the Lord and fell, sinning most miserably and wretchedly. One unconfessed sin called for another, and that one, still unconfessed, called for another. David was enmeshed in a series of moral lapses and sins. He certainly was moved. His heart was not always glad. Neither did his soul rejoice; and his flesh was not always dwelling in safety. Moreover, when he died, he went to Sheol and, so far as the record goes, remained there. His body was placed in the tomb and saw corruption(Psalm 16:8-11)that is, decomposition and decay. When he went down into Sheol, the Lord did not point out to him the path of life and he did not come forth.

But the one of whom David actually speaks in these verses always had the Lord before Him; He was never moved; He was never guilty of a moral lapse. His heart rejoiced in God, His soul was glad, and His flesh always dwelt in safety. God was protecting Him. He died. His body was laid in the tomb. His spirit went to Sheol. But, according to this prediction, He comes forth. His spirit re-enters the body and He comes forth, bringing life and immortality to light(Psalm 16:8-11)showing that there is a blessed life of immortality out beyond death. Everything, therefore, in verses 8-16 shows that though David did speak thus, he was not describing his own experience.

Of whom then, was he speaking? Being a prophet and knowing God had sworn with an oath that of the fruit of his loins he would raise one to sit upon his throne, David spoke of the resurrection of the Messiah, his Greater Son. David was a type of the Messiah, being an anointed one who sat upon the throne of Judah. It was natural for him, upon the principles set forth in the first part of this article, to speak of his own experiences and then to be carried by the Spirit of God into the future and to move in a circle of experiences that far transcended any through which he passed. We therefore know that he was speaking of the Messiah in the latter part of the psalm. This psalm, therefore, is an illustration of the principle of double reference, or the manifold fulfillment of prophecy. See Acts, chapter two.

Let us now look to Psalm 22 which was also written by David. In the first twenty-one verses it is clear that David, though he began by speaking of some personal experiences of his own, was describing those of the Messiah, who would be crucified for the sins of the world. That verses 1-21 was a prediction of the crucifixion of the Messiah has been held by all believing scholars in the Christian world throughout the present Dispensation. This portion of the psalm was thus interpreted by the Apostles and the early church and has been accepted as the correct position throughout the Christian centuries. In the latter part of this first section, in verses 19-21, we see the silent Sufferer finally expiring, gasping His last, yet with confidence that God would hear His cry and deliver Him.

In verses 22-31, however, the scene has been changed. A great transformation has taken place. There is a gap between verses 21 and 22. This break of thought is properly expressed by the translators of the American Standard Version in that they left a break between those verses, that is, a space, indicating a gap in time and change of thought. In verses 22-31 we see this one come back to life again. He is in the midst of the great assembly of the redeemed. He is praising the Lord for what He has done for Him and through Him; and He it is who takes the kingdom of the world into His own strong hands and accepts the reverence, worship, and filial obedience of all nations. He is the triumphant Messiah and Redeemer of the world.

Thus in the first twenty-one verses we see the Messiah as He makes the supreme sacrifice of laying down His life for His people at His first coming. In the second section we see Him, after He has made that sacrifice, and after He has come forth from the other world and at His second coming, when He takes the world into His own hands and establishes a world-wide reign of righteousness — which thing He will do at His second coming. Thus in this psalm we see an illustration of the law of double reference.

We may turn to Psalm 40 and read the first ten verses. This hymn was written by the human author, David, king of Israel. He uses the personal pronouns of the first person, I, me, my. Everything that is said in the first five verses was true of the historic King David. About this position there can be absolutely no question whatsoever.

But when we consider verses 6-10 we see that they go far beyond any experience that David ever had. Because of the importance of these verses I wish to quote them (Psalm 40:6-10):

Sacrifice and offering thou hast no delight in; Mine ears hast thou opened: Burnt-offering and sin-offering hast thou not required.
7 Then said I, Lo, I am come; In the roll of the book it is written of me:
8 I delight to do thy will, 0 my God; Yea, thy law is within my heart.
9 I have proclaimed glad tidings of righteousness in the great assembly; Lo, I will not refrain my lips, 0 Jehovah, thou knowest.
10 I have not hid thy righteousness within my heart; I have declared thy faithfulness and thy salvation; I have not concealed thy lovingkindness and thy truth from the great assembly.”

David could under no conditions say that God did not delight in sacrifices and offerings, “burnt-offering and sin-offering,” and that therefore he had come to do the will of God in respect to these sacrifices. No mortal man could claim this. Those sacrifices had a typical meaning, as everyone who knows the Scriptures realizes. Here the author of the verses under consideration declares that these offerings are insufficient, do not do the will of God, and do not meet the question of sin at all. They had their function to perform and were used of God in performing this function. But here the writer or speaker of these verses declares that He himself is able to do the will of God with reference to the sin question which those sacrifices could never accomplish. When we realize this, and when we realize the further truth that “in the roll of the book it is written of me: I delight to do thy will, 0 my God; Yea, thy law is within my heart,” we know that the one who is doing the speaking here is none other than the Messiah of Israel, the Saviour of humanity, the Lord Jesus Christ.

The facts of the first five verses demand that we understand them as referring to David. There is no negative evidence pointing in an opposite direction. But all of the evidence of verses 6-10 shows positively that, although David did use the personal pronouns of the first person, he was not speaking of himself; but, being a prophet of God and knowing the promises that God had made to him, he spoke for his Greater Son, the Lord Jesus Christ. This passage, therefore, is an illustration of the principle of the law of double reference.

Let us now turn to Isaiah, chapter 11, and read carefully the first ten verses. When we study the first two verses of this passage, we know that the prophet Isaiah was speaking of the Messiah and of His coming to the earth to redeem the world, which verses were fulfilled at the first coming of the Lord Jesus Christ. All conservative scholars are agreed on this point.

But in verses 3-5 we see a prediction which will be fulfilled only when the Lord Jesus returns in glory and power to judge the world. That you, dear reader, may see this I quote these verses (Isaiah 11:3-5):

And his delight shall be in the fear of Jehovah; and he shall not judge after the sight of his eyes, neither decide after the hearing of his ears; 4 but with righteousness shall he judge the poor, and decide with equity for the meek of the earth: and he shall smite the earth with the rod of his mouth: and with the breath of his lips shall he slay the wicked. 5 And righteousness shall be the girdle of his waist, and faithfulness the girdle of his loins.”

When our Lord was here the first time, He refused to become an arbiter in the settling of an estate. He pronounced judgment upon no one in the sense of a judge who renders a legal decision. Because He is the Son of man, as we learn in John 5:26,27, God has committed all judgment to Him. He will play this role when He returns, which event will take place at the end of the Tribulation.

This prediction, dealing with Christ's judging the world at His second coming, is followed by one in verses 6-9 which deals with the lifting of the curse and with the freeing of the animal creation from the bondage of the curse which fell upon all creation when man disobeyed God. The lifting of the curse we know does not occur until Christ returns. Then in verse 10 of this chapter we see a short, glorious description of Jerusalem as it will be when our Lord reigns there personally in glory.

When we thus examine all of these verses, 1-10, we see that verses 1 and 2 refer to the first coming. Between verses 2 and 3 the entire Christian Dispensation intervenes. It is passed over without a single reference to it. Then verses 3-10 apply to what will occur at the return of our Lord. In this passage, therefore, we have an application of the principle of double reference, the blending of two widely separated events by a long period of time — the two comings of the one Messiah, separated by the Christian Dispensation.

In Jeremiah, chapter 29, we have a letter which the prophet, who was in Jerusalem, wrote to the captives who went when Jehoiachin was carried by Nebuchadnezzar to Babylon. The exiles were restive and were being stirred up by false prophets who declared that they would soon have the privilege of returning to the land of their nativity in the very near future. In order to counteract these false prophecies, Jeremiah wrote to the captives and declared that they would have to remain there for seventy years. They were therefore to settle down to a quiet, orderly life and to wait the time when God would bring them back. This is set forth in Jeremiah 29:10,11 which I now quote:

For thus saith Jehovah, After seventy years are accomplished for Babylon, I will visit you, and perform my good word toward you, in causing you to return to this place. 11 For I know the thoughts that I think toward you, saith Jehovah, thoughts of peace, and not of evil, to give you hope in your latter end.”

In order for God to carry out His plan for Israel yet in the future, Jeremiah said that the Lord would have to bring them back from exile at the end of the seventy years, just as He had foretold in chapter 25 of this book.

In verses 12-14, however, we have a different prophecy which is as follows (Jeremiah 29:12-14):

And ye shall call upon me, and I will hearken unto you. 13 And ye shall seek me, and find me, when ye shall search for me with all your heart. 14 And I will be found of you, saith Jehovah, and I will turn again your captivity, and I will gather you from all the nations, and from all the places whither I have driven you, saith Jehovah; and I will bring you again unto the place whence I caused you to be carried away captive.”

Here we see the promise that God would turn Israel's captivity again and would gather them from all the nations and from all the places to which He had driven them and would bring them again into their own land. This is a regathering and a restoration from a world-wide dispersion. Jeremiah promised this restoration when Israel seeks God with all of her heart and soul. This prophecy was not fulfilled at the end of the seventy years of the Babylonian captivity. There were approximately fifty thousand Jews who returned under Zerubbabel, Ezra, and Nehemiah. The bulk of the captives remained in Babylon. But the restoration mentioned in verses 12-14 is yet out in the future. It is the second restoration that God will accomplish for Israel when He puts forth His hand to gather them from the places whither they have been scattered, even from the four corners of the earth.

In view of these facts we see that the period from the first restoration after the Exile to the final restoration of Israel to the land of the fathers is passed over between 11 and 12. Thus there is a blending of the two restorations in this one prediction. This passage therefore is an example of the law of double reference.

The prophets often resorted to this method of presenting their messages. It becomes absolutely necessary that the student of prophecy master this principle of double or manifold fulfillment of prophecy, if he is to get a clear-cut picture of the messages of the prophets. To this end may the Lord bless this little exposition is my sincere longing and prayer.

Thursday, September 17, 2015

The Law of First Mention


The Law of First Mention

The fourth rule of interpretation is The Law of First Mention.
The meaning of the law of First Mention: The Law of First Mention may be said to be the principle that requires one to go to that portion of the Scriptures where a doctrine is mentioned for the first time and to study the first occurrence of the same in order to get the fundamental inherent meaning of that doctrine.
When this law is applied the simple precedes the complex.
A history of the development of anything will show that it sprang from something in the very simplest form (for example the steamship; airplane; automobile).
In the Scriptures the growth and development of ideas and doctrine might be illustrated by some simple word.
Throughout the history of a term it may have increased its meaning and undergone certain changes, yet the basic, original, fundamental thought is seldom lost.
The fundamental concept usually controls or is dominant in coloring every shade of idea expressed by a term in its current usage.
Exercises
Trace how the writer of Psalm 8 and Hebrews 2 related their messages to the doctrines which are mentioned for the first time in Genesis 1:2-2:3. These doctrines are as follows:
The original creation;
Disaster which overtook the primitive earth;
The reconstruction and repairing of this damage;
The beginning of the present human race.
Study the doctrine concerning man in his original state and his fall given in Genesis 2 and 3.
The first mention of the doctrine of sin is given in chapter 3 of Genesis. Study how the writer of Romans 7:17 developed his message upon the doctrines given in Genesis 3.
Study the doctrine concerning sacrifices.
When man first disobeyed God and tried to cover his nakedness with fig leaves the Lord gave him a covering made from the skins of animals. Why the skins of animals? Why couldn't He have used another material? No answer is given in Genesis
The account of Cain and Abel bringing their offerings to the Lord reveals that Abel by faith brought his flock and placed such on the altar to atone for sin. This pleased the Lord. See Genesis 4 and Hebrews 11:4.
Animal sacrifices in the beginning of the history of man were typical of the sacrificial death of the Lord Jesus Christ on Calvary's tree.
Study Bible chronology.
Chronology is to the story of redemption given in the Bible what the skeleton is to the rest of our body.
If all the bones of our body were removed our flesh would be a pile of jumbled matter.
If chronology were removed from the Scriptures, the Scriptures would be a mass of jumbled facts.
Biblical chronology had its beginnings in the book Of Genesis, and God was very careful to give hundreds of dates here and there throughout the Scriptures to show the orderly development of events recorded in the Bible.
Study the six days of creation recorded in Genesis 1.
Study the genealogies of the theocratic line given in Genesis 11.
Observe how God dated events in the Bible from the time of the creation of man, “Anno Homonis” (A.H.).
Study the doctrine concerning the wrath of God and His judgments.
Observe how God has dealt with the sinfulness of man on an international scale (Genesis 6 to 8).
Observe how God must deal with the sinfulness of mankind yet in the future (Luke 17:26-30; Revelation 19:15).
Study he Rainbow Covenant which God made with man (Genesis 9:1-16) and observe the following:
The Rainbow Covenant is an everlasting covenant.
God entered into this covenant with all humanity.
God's obligation under this covenant, “the everlasting covenant” is never again to destroy the earth water.
Man's obligation under this covenant is to obey the four provisions of the covenant God laid down for man's benefit (Genesis 9:3-7). Read Isaiah 24:5; Revelation 4:3.
Study the beginning of Hebrew history.
God made a covenant with Abraham (Genesis 12:1-3).
To confirm the fact that God chose Israel, read Deuteronomy 32:8,9.
NOTE: The Book of Genesis is the seed plot of every doctrine found in the Scriptures for every doctrine is found there in simple form.

Explanation
Having studied the first step in interpretation, the second step in interpretation, and the golden rule of interpretation we are now ready for the fourth principle of interpretation, which may be properly designated as: The Law of First Mention. Those who have followed the series thus far can see that this is the next step logically to take in this most important line of thought.

I. The Simple Preceding The Complex
Life and experience teach us that the only proper way to study or investigate anything is to begin with the simple and go to the complex; to start with the fundamental, basic principle and then to develop the subject in its complexities. A glance at the history of the development of anything shows that everything which we have now in our modern life sprang from something in the very simplest form. For example, consider the steam engine. From our standpoint the first one invented was the very embodiment of simplicity, with practically no controlling gadgets. As this most useful invention was developed, more devices were invented that tended to increase the efficiency of the engine. Today the modern locomotive is complexity almost to the nth degree. In the Smithsonian Institute at Washington we have some of the very earliest models of the airplane. A glance at them and a comparison of them with present-day modern planes reveals the fact that the first machines were simplicity itself in comparison with the models of today.

The growth and development of ideas and doctrines might be illustrated by some simple word. An examination of a lexicon or a dictionary shows the root, fundamental meaning of the words. Throughout the history of a term it has increased its meaning and has changed certain shades of ideas. Yet the basic, original fundamental thought is seldom ever lost. The fact is that this fundamental concept usually controls or is dominant in coloring every shade of idea expressed by a term in its current usage. This may be verified by looking at various words in an unabridged dictionary.

From the facts just stated, we can see the importance of studying the simplest form of a machine and of the subsequent models in order to understand the very latest one. The same thing is true with reference to words of all languages. This same fundamental idea is also applicable to the study of doctrine. In order for anyone to understand the fundamentals of Christianity as revealed in the New Testament, it becomes necessary for him to understand the principle that is designated as The Law of First Mention.

II. The Meaning Of The Law Of First Mention
The law of first mention may be said to be the principle that requires one to go to that portion of the Scriptures where a doctrine is mentioned for the first time and to study the first occurrence of the same in order to get the fundamental inherent meaning of that doctrine. When we thus see the first appearance, which is usually in the simplest form, we can then examine the doctrine in other portions of the Word that were given later. We shall see that the fundamental concept in the first occurrence remains dominant as a rule, and colors all later additions to that doctrine. In view of this fact, it becomes imperative that we understand the law of first mention.

III. An Examination Of Various Examples
The book of Genesis has Properly been called the “seed-plot” of the Bible. The word, Genesis, comes from the Greek expression which in its verbal form means to begin, or, to come into existence. This first book of the revelation of God is properly called, therefore, “the book of beginnings.” According to its name and its position in the canon, one naturally expects an account of the beginnings of things. When anyone studies it, he is not disappointed. In this short exposition I wish to call attention to seven fundamental doctrines that are found in this “Book of Beginnings.” The basic concept that is here presented is enlarged upon and enriched by later statements and discussions of the same facts or principles.

A. The Creation of the Universe
The account of the beginning of the universe, the disaster which overtook the primitive earth, and the reconstruction and the repairing of this damage, together with the beginning of the present human race, are set forth in Genesis 1:1-2:3. This passage gives us, in panoramic form, a clear-cut definite idea of the past and points to things future from the standpoint of “the days of reconstruction.” In the first verse, “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth,” we see that portion of eternity which antedated time and the creation of the material universe. But in the second verse we see that a cataclysmic catastrophe wrecked the earth and reduced it to a chaotic condition. Nothing, however is said with reference to the damage wrought throughout the rest of the material universe. There are, however, little hints here and there in later passages of the Scripture that throw some light upon this question.

There were six days of reconstruction, during which God was engaged in repairing, to a certain extent, the damage that had been wrought. It was impossible for Him, under His moral government, to restore the primitive, sinless order. He therefore repaired the wreckage that was necessary in order that He might create man in His own image, to whom He would give authority and dominion over the entire earth and all of its denizens. But man, as we shall learn later, forfeited his right and authority to dominion over the world. Knowing God as we do, we may be certain that He would not be thwarted in His plans and purposes by any of the machinations of Satan and of his wicked purposes. In keeping with this general thought, we see that Psalm 8 takes up this very idea and shows that God will restore to man his forfeited authority, and that He will do that by paying man a special visit. Psalm 8 looks out, therefore, into the future, is quoted in Hebrews, chapter 2, and is applied to the great Kingdom Age of the future. Thus when we grip all of these facts, we can see that eternity past and time — the period during which the present material universe is in existence — are presented in Genesis 1:1-2:3, together with the eighth psalm and Hebrews, chapter 2, which are the outgrowth of the Genesis original. Thus these passages give us in general the outline of the developments of the Almighty's plans from eternity in the past out to the end of the Millennial Age. Everything else that is mentioned in the Scriptures fits into this general picture. Without this plan of the ages, one is unable to locate and to pigeonhole, figuratively speaking, events that are referred to in the subsequent writings of the Scriptures. In view of the facts just mentioned, one can see that it is of the utmost importance that we study carefully and microscopically the first account of the creation of the heavens and the earth, of the primitive disaster which wrecked the earth, of God's repairing the damage wrought, and His creating man upon it. Man, as we shall see, is an immortal spirit, who lives on after his earthly life has passed. He is destined to live somewhere throughout all eternity. Thus there is laid in this first portion of the Scriptures the fundamental outline of eternity past, of time, and of eternity throughout the ages of the ages which follow the great Millennial Era.

B. The Creation of Man
We are told that, on the first day, God created the fishes of the sea and the great sea monsters and the fowls of the air. On the sixth day He created the land animals, that were docile, and that lived in peace with the others.

But, before the Lord finished His creative activity, there was a conference held by the Godhead, in which the three personalities constituting the one true God participated: God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. They decided to make man in their own image and in their likeness. No such conference as this was held, so far as the Scriptures are concerned, in regard to the making of the beasts of the field or the monsters of the sea. In this conference a decision was reached to make man in the image of God. There are the three personalities of the Godhead, and yet they all have the same image. They are therefore of the same nature, substance, and essence. To see one is to see the other. To deal with one is to deal with the other. Though they are three personalities, they are one in a different sense. Thus there is reflected in the account of the creation of man the plurality and the unity of the Godhead and of man's being patterned after the Holy Trinity.

God gave to the animals their natural or physical life with very limited intelligence — when compared with man. The animals have never given any evidence of development throughout the centuries. The first nest that a bird makes is just as good as the last one that it makes. The species has not improved in its architecture. What is said of the birds may be said correctly of all animals. The beaver, for instance, does things by instinct and not by reason, logic, and progress.

God made man's body out of the dust of the earth and breathed into his nostrils “the breath of lives” and he became a living soul, “an immortal spirit.” That which was imparted to him and made to dwell within him is called “a living soul” or “immortal spirit.” Nothing like this was given to the beasts of the field. It is this immortal spirit that differentiates him, therefore, from the animal kingdom. This superiority of man over the beast is reflected in the fact that God authorized man to add the flesh of animals to his diet, whereas He forbade man to kill his fellow-being (Genesis 9:1ff). The fact that man may take those animals that are good for food, kill them, and eat them shows that the animals do not have an immortal spirit. But the prohibition against one man's killing another proves that man is on a much higher level than that of the animal. That which makes man superior to the animal is, as we have already seen, God's breathing into man's nostrils the breath of lives and his becoming an immortal spirit.

The account of God's creating man thus in this manner, as we see in Genesis, chapters 1 and 2, emphasizes the importance of our studying the first account that we have of man in the Holy Writings. All that we learn of man as to his constitution and of the place which he has in the plan of God fits into this original conception. Thus the basic teachings found in these original passages are essential to our understanding other references to him and to his future.

C. The Doctrine of Sin
When God placed man in the Garden of Eden, He gave him the privilege of eating of the fruit of all the trees therein, with the exception of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Concerning it the Lord said: “The day that thou eatest thereof, dying thou shalt surely die” (Genesis 2:17, lit. trans.). In Genesis, chapter 3, we see that man disobeyed the Lord and partook of the fruit of this forbidden tree. When he did this, he had a new experience, one that he had not anticipated. For the first time he and his wife had the sense of shame in the presence of each other and in the presence of God who came visiting them on different occasions. Thus when the Lord made His first visit to them after they had sinned, they tried to cover their nakedness with robes of fig leaves. They also hid, or attempted to hide, from His presence.

When the Lord came and talked with them, He told them that the curse had fallen upon them and upon the earth. As a result of this disobedience there would be sickness and disease, which ultimately would result in death. The earth would bring forth thorns and thistles. Man would have to wrench his daily food from the earth in the sweat of his face. All of these facts indicate that some great change came over the world and the sphere of the human family, when man disobeyed the one and only prohibition that the Lord placed upon him. This which entered the world had changed his nature as well as had affected the earth. This fundamental conception of sin lies engraven upon the account of the first mention of disobedience in the Word of God.

As we study the Word, this conception will appear throughout the Scriptures. New shades of ideas will be added to it. The classic passage, however, which goes into a detailed account of the nature of sin is Romans, chapter 7. In this passage the Apostle in a figure transferred to himself the case of man in general. What a person in his sober moments desires to do, he is unable to carry to completion. What he does not want to do, he very often does. Paul declares that, if such is anyone's experience, it is not he who does it, but sin “which dwelleth in me” (Romans 7:17). From this statement we see that sin in the scriptural sense of the term is basically an evil, wicked force which drives man to do things that he knows he should not, and which prevents his doing those things that his better nature dictates to him to do. The information therefore which we get when we first read about the entrance of sin into the world is basic to our understanding of the sin doctrine as it is set forth in this fullest statement concerning it in Romans, chapter 7.

D. Sacrifices
When man first disobeyed God and tried to cover his nakedness with fig leaves, the Lord gave him a covering made from the skins of animals: “And Jehovah God made for Adam and for his wife coats of skin, and clothed them” (Genesis 3:21). Instantly one asks, from what source were those skins derived? There can be but one answer which is that the Lord slew animals, took their skins, and made clothing out of them for His disobedient children. Why the skins of animals? Why did He not make clothing out of something else besides the skins of animals? This is a legitimate question. It is not answered in this account. But when anyone turns to the fourth chapter of Genesis and reads the account of Cain and Abel's bringing offerings to the Lord, and when he studies this historical account carefully, he arrives at a very definite conclusion with reference to this subject. Abel, as we learn, by faith brought of his flocks sacrifices which he made to the Lord, to atone for sin. Cain, his brother, substituting his wisdom for that of God and his desires for the commandments of the Lord, brought of the fruit of the field an offering to God.

The Lord, we are told, “had respect unto Abel and to his offering,” because he did it by faith. Evidently the Lord had instructed him just what type of sacrifice to bring and the spirit in which it should be done. We cannot avoid this conclusion when we read Hebrews, chapter 11, and find there that Abel by faith brought his sacrifice. The fact that the Lord rejected the vegetable sacrifice which Cain brought shows that his offering was not acceptable. He did not do it by faith. He failed to follow the Lord's instructions but instead substituted his own wisdom and ideas for those of God. Thus in this case we see that the fundamental idea of sacrifice is that of meeting the demands of a holy and righteous God. Thus there is a very close connection between the animal sacrifices and man's being acceptable in the sight of his Maker.

Thus we see from these first intimations concerning sacrifices the fundamental conception underlying such offerings. This conception is enlarged and enriched by later revelations which show that the animal sacrifices under the Mosaic economy were simply typical of the real sacrifice made by the Lord Jesus Christ nineteen hundred years ago on Calvary's cross. Thus the original idea of sacrifice runs through all the instructions and the teachings concerning sacrifices that are found in the Book.

E. Biblical Chronology
Throughout the Old Testament there are hundreds upon hundreds of dates here and there in the Scriptures. God is careful to give the age of various ones of His servants. This is seen by looking at Genesis, chapters 5 and 11. In various portions of Genesis we are given data concerning the year of the birth of a certain one, how old this one was at a given crisis in his life, and when he died. In the Books of Exodus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy, we have quite a bit of chronological data. In the Book of Joshua there are a few passages that bear upon this subject. The Book of Judges has much chronological data. In the historical Books of Samuel, Kings, and Chronicles we have hundreds of dates given. In the Books of the prophets many of their oracles are dated. Since God has given so much data of this type, evidently it plays a very important part in His revelation.

But the questions come, How are we to understand this chronological data? What does the Lord mean by a year? What does He mean by a hundred and thirty years? Or nine hundred and sixty-nine years? In other words, are the months and years mentioned in the Scriptures the same as the months and years of our calendar? In Genesis, chapter 5, we have the first chronological tables in connection with the genealogies of the theocratic line. We are told of the creation of Adam; then we are given his age when his first son was born. Usually we are told that he had other sons and daughters. Finally, we are informed that he died at a certain age. If a person will take his pencil and paper and put down the figures that are given here, he will see how God wrote chronology. He will see that Noah was born in the year 1056 A.H., (that is, in the year of man). The chronology is counted from the creation of Adam and is reckoned as the centuries passed. This system of chronology is different from the B.C. dates with which most of us are familiar. Thus in this study of the fifth chapter of Genesis we learn how God writes history and the importance that He attaches to chronology.

Let me say in this connection that the chronological system set forth in the Old Testament is to the history found therein just what our skeletons are to our bodies. If by some kind of electrical or chemical process our skeletons could be removed from our bodies without injuring our vital organs, we would instantly fall down in just a mass of flesh. Of course we could not survive under such conditions. We are able to stand erect and to perform our duties only because we have skeletons that enable us to stand erect. What our skeletons are to our bodies, therefore, the chronological system of the Old Testament is to it. The Old Testament is not a jumble of facts to me since I have studied chronology. It is a living organism, vibrating with life and power (I have discussed practically every date in the Old Testament in the fourth volume of my “Messianic Series,” Messiah: His First Coming Scheduled).

F. The Judgment of the Wrath of God
In Genesis, chapters 6-8, we have an account of the causes of the Flood judgment and the Flood itself. This shows us how God thought concerning sin and how He punished it on a world-wide scale. Of course, circumstances alter cases. From the account of the Flood, we see that man can continue in sin and go so very far that God must intervene and deal drastically with all concerned. What the world needs today is to learn these basic truths that are found in the records of the first instances of man's disobedience to the divine will. Then, as a person studies the Word more and more, he will see how God must deal with sin on a world-wide scale yet in the future. Thus the Flood judgment lays down the fundamental principles of God's dealing with sin on an international scale.

G. The Rainbow Covenant
In Genesis 9:1-16 we have an account of God's entering into covenant relationship with all humanity. This covenant was made when Noah came forth out of the ark and sacrificed to the Lord. There are four conditions that were imposed upon the race in this covenant. The sign of this compact is the rainbow. It is called “the everlasting covenant.” Whenever, therefore, anyone sees the rainbow in the sky, he should recall that it is a reminder that God entered into a covenant with all humanity. It is a reminder that God is looking on the world and is going to hold it responsible for carrying out those four conditions that are stipulated in the covenant. In Isaiah, chapter 24, we have a prophecy concerning the judgment of the great Tribulation and of the terrible destruction of life and property that will result from these judgments. In Isaiah 24:5 we are told that they will come upon the world because the inhabitants thereof “have transgressed the laws, violated the statutes, broken the everlasting covenant.” The mention of this everlasting covenant which men will have broken, and which disobedience will bring on the Tribulation, instantly suggests the original covenant and the rainbow, the symbol of the same. Thus we can see immediately why it is that God will be just in punishing the world as He will in the Tribulation.

In the fourth chapter of the Book of Revelation we catch a vision of God's throne. Encircling it is a rainbow. What is the significance of this unusual sight? When a person remembers the law of first mention and looks back to Genesis 9:1-16, he will see why the rainbow appears above the throne of God in the fourth chapter of Revelation. God will bring His judgments upon the world during the Tribulation mainly because of the people's having violated the everlasting covenant.

H. Beginnings of Hebrew History
In Genesis 12:1-3 we have the account of God's entering into a covenant with Abraham. In this He laid down His plans for blessing the entire world. This passage is the cornerstone of all prophecy. God chose Abraham and his seed to be the channel through which He will bless the world. He has given us His revelation through the descendants of Abraham, but they have not yielded to Him and allowed Him to do for the world that which He longs to accomplish for fallen humanity. But He will yet use His disobedient ancient people in bringing a blessing to the entire world.

When God divided the peoples and separated them at Babel, He did so with reference to the children of Israel. This is seen in Deuteronomy 32:8,9. Throughout the Bible we have the history of Israel written. We see mention of other nations only as they came in touch with the Chosen People. Thus Israel is rightly called the “hub” of the nations. Thus the fundamental principles of God's dealing with Israel, are set forth in the first passage dealing with that people as a whole. Everything subsequent to that passage is given with reference to the original one.

The field in which the law of first mention operates is wide indeed. It is a very important law. If a person wishes to understand the revelation of God, he must study the Book of Genesis, which lays down the fundamentals that are developed and set forth in the rest of the Scriptures. There are, however, certain themes that are mentioned later on in the Scriptures for the first time. Thus the first mention of them gives the fundamental conception of such teachings. That the law of first mention, therefore, is of greatest importance to the Bible student can be readily seen from this brief study.

Wednesday, September 16, 2015

The Word of the Eternal God


The Word of the Eternal God

David L. Cooper, Th.M., Ph.D., Litt. D.
The title of this chart is The World's Greatest Library. These words are not empty but are freighted with the greatest meaning possible. Ashurbanipal, one of the great Assyrian kings, collected at Nineveh, his capital, one of the great libraries of the ancient world. At Alexandria, Egypt, the Ptolemies founded what in that day proved to be the world's greatest library. Its destruction was one of the great calamities which have struck the earth, in that much valuable information concerning the ancient world was wiped out at one blow. Today there are many and famous libraries. For instance, at the Vatican in Rome, one of the world's great collections of manuscripts and books has been gathered. The Bibliotheque nationale in Paris likewise is one of the world's famous libraries. Our own Congressional Library at Washington undoubtedly stands in the foremost ranks of the accumulation of the world's knowledge in the form of something like two million volumes (according to a statement which I heard In Washington — unofficially however). At the famous universities of Oxford and Cambridge mammoth collections of books are to be found. But of all the libraries in the world, however, according to information which I have received, the British Museum in London is the greatest. It was my privilege in 1936 and 1937 to take advantage of its facilities in pursuing my research work.

After we have faced the facts and looked, at things as they are and have given ample credit where it is due, I am bold to assert that the Bible, the Holy Scriptures, God-breathed, a volume consisting of sixty-six books, is indeed the world's greatest library. There is no volume which can be compared to it. It is indeed peerless. All of the works of men combined pale into insignificance in comparison with it. The world's greatest thinkers who have studied the Scriptures and have surveyed the fields of human thought acknowledge this Holy Book of God as occupying the first place in literature, judged from every standpoint.

The Reason For Its Pre-Eminence
There are reasons for men's pronouncing things good, better, or best; or, on the other hand, as poor, poorer, poorest. There evidently, is a reason why the best thinkers and writers pronounce the Bible as the best of all literature in existence. The reason is that it was God-breathed and written by holy men of God as they were borne along by the Holy Spirit (II Peter 1:21).

Abundant and overwhelming is the proof that the Scriptures are God-breathed. No open-minded truth-seeker can weigh the evidence for the divine origin of the Scriptures and can arrive at the conclusion that the books of the Bible were written by uninspired men.

There are many lines of proof which lead men to this conclusion, but I shall speak of only one. There is an absolute unity which pervades these sixty-six books that were written over a period of four thousand years by something like forty or more different writers, who lived under dissimilar circumstances and varying environments. That this greatest library of the world was thus given to the human family over a period of approximately four millenniums is evident from an investigation of all of the data. God, during the first four thousand years of human history, spoke at various times. This is seen from the fact that Enoch, the seventh from Adam, was a prophet who spoke for God. Jude quotes one of his prophecies. Lamech, likewise, was a prophet, who uttered a prophecy as is seen in Genesis 5:28-31. Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are likewise called prophets (Psalm 105:13-16). Abraham, according to Genesis 26:5, “obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws.” This statement God made to Isaac. There were statutes, commandments, and laws given by the Lord and obeyed by Abraham who lived approximately four hundred years before Moses. We are therefore forced by the evidence to conclude that God gave His revelation in part during the twenty-five hundred years from Adam to Moses (for a full discussion of this point see Chapter 1 of my volume, Messiah: His First Coming Scheduled).

The evidence therefore is positive that God at various times through the period from Adam to Christ broke the silence and gave that portion of the revelation of His will that met the crises and conditions which obtained at the time of His speaking.

A careful examination of all the Scriptures shows that the plan which is announced in Genesis 3:15 is consistently carried through the Scriptures. This verse is the text of the Bible. All that follows is but the unfolding of that one divine purpose which runs through the ages and which will culminate in the “dispensation of the fullness of the times“ when God will head up all things under the Lord Jesus Christ (Ephesians 1:10). There are no contradictions in the Scriptures. To the superficial reader there appear some disagreements, but upon thorough investigation those things which seem to be discrepancies prove to be glorious, convincing harmonies.

Should sixty-six books, written by men — forty-odd authors — over a period of forty centuries be brought together in one volume, there would exist irreconcilable incongruities. Should one challenge this statement, let him select sixty-six volumes written by as many men during the same length of time and under as many various circumstances as those under which the inspired authors wrote. Then let him examine these writings and prove that there is the unity which is manifested through-out the Scriptures. Gentlemen, it cannot be done! The Bible is unique from this standpoint. The Bible is a miracle. There is not one chance in a billion that it could have been produced by uninspired men. It is the wonder book of all the ages and is properly entitled “The World's Greatest Library.”

No one can claim to be truly educated who has not a working knowledge of this marvelous collection of books of Holy Writ. This fact has been recognized by the outstanding thinkers of the centuries.

Aids To Bible Study
The Greek mathematician, Euclid, is reported to have told the young Ptolemy once, “There is no royal road to geometry.” This statement was made to the young prince when he wanted to know it there were not an easier way to gain a knowledge of that science. To those who are wishing to master the Scriptures or to obtain a working knowledge of them, I would say that there is no royal road to such a goal. There is but one way to become acquainted with the Scriptures, which is to study them faithfully with an eye single to know and to do the will of God.

Though one must study very hard to acquire a knowledge of the Scriptures, there are certain aids which will assist very materially in the acquisition of biblical knowledge.

In making recommendations to one who is not acquainted with the vast amount of biblical helps, I would like to suggest in the first place that an earnest student of the Bible should procure the revised translation of the Scriptures. Such a Version, according to my opinion, is essential to the proper understanding of the oracles of God.

There are today a number of editions of the Bible that contain notes and helps, which are indispensable for the beginner. There are also some reference Bibles that are not of great practical value. A person should be very careful, in view of this situation, that he knows what he is purchasing before procuring one. If anyone obtains any such Bible with helps, he should be very careful not to use the notes as a crutch. On the contrary, he should with an open mind study the suggestions and arrive at his own conclusions — by the help of God.

A good concordance of the Scriptures is of great value — especially for the young student. By this means he can, when he learns to use this help, find any passage for which he is looking. Maps of Bible lands are indispensable to all--the young student and the mature Christian — in order that they might have a clear picture of the portion of Scripture which they are studying. There are several such excellent works by sane, sound, scholarly authors. Any one of these will be of great service to the student. A good encyclopedia is likewise indispensable.

Monday, September 14, 2015

The Golden Rule of Interpretation


The Golden Rule of Interpretation
David L Cooper
The third rule of interpretation is as follows: When the plain sense of Scripture makes common sense, seek no other sense; therefore, take every word at its primary, ordinary, usual, literal meaning unless the facts of the immediate context, studied in the light of related passages and axiomatic and fundamental truths indicate clearly otherwise.
Seek the plain, literal meaning of the Scriptures.
The sum and substance of this most important rule is that one should take every statement of the Scriptures at its face value, if possible.
The following is an analysis of the adjectives “primary,” “ordinary,” and “usual.”
“Primary” emphasizes the original, inherent idea in the term.
“Ordinary” and “usual” are practically synonyms, especially in this definition, “usual” being employed for the sake of emphasis.
“Literal” is used to emphasize the thought that every word must first be taken literally as expressing the exact thought of the author at the time when it was used; and one is not to go beyond the literal meaning of the Scriptures unless the facts of the context indicate a deeper, hidden or symbolic meaning.
Seek the figurative meaning only when the facts demand such an interpretation.
Modernism and rationalism are the logical outgrowth of forcing a figurative meaning upon a passage that is clearly literal, or vice versa.
Study every statement of the Scriptures in context. A TEXT APART FROM ITS CONTEXT IS A PRETEXT. Then study the facts of the context in the light of related passages and axiomatic fundamental truths. “... No prophecy of scripture is of private (special) interpretation” (II Peter 1:20); “The sum of thy word is truth” (Psalm 119:160).
Study the following texts and apply the Golden Rule of Interpretation:
Zechariah 9:9,10
Jeremiah 29:9-14
Ezekiel 34:20-24 (Will David be king over Israel?)
The Golden Rule of Interpretation is one of the most important principles governing us in our interpretation of the Scriptures. If we follow this rule, we shall never go very far wrong; but if we fail to follow it, we shall never go right.

Explanation
In the discussion of the first step in interpreting the Scriptures, we saw that it is most important for the biblical reader to understand who the human author was, the one addressed, the times in which the writer lived, the occasion of his writing, and all facts that may be gathered in order to have the proper approach to any one passage of Scripture. In the discussion of the second step of interpreting the Scriptures, we also saw that one must gather the facts that are stated in any given passage and must note the exact language that is employed. When one has therefore followed these instructions to the best of his ability, he must observe what is properly called the golden rule of interpretation which is as follows:

When the plain sense of Scripture makes common sense, seek no other sense; therefore, take every word, at its primary, ordinary, usual, literal meaning unless the facts of the immediate context, studied in the light of related passages and axiomatic and fundamental truths, indicate clearly otherwise.

The sum and substance of this most important rule is that one should take every statement of the Scriptures at its plain face value, unless there are indications that a figurative or metaphorical meaning was intended by the original writer. In other words, one is to take the Scriptures as they are written and is not to attempt to read into the Sacred Writings his own ideas or the thoughts of men. Since this golden rule of interpretation is such a very important one, it becomes necessary for us to look at it more minutely.

I. The Plain, Literal Meaning Of The Scriptures
The first part of this rule urges us to take every word at its primary, ordinary, usual, literal meaning — unless there is positive evidence pointing beyond this plain face meaning. Our words today have a history behind them. Originally, when words are coined, they represent a fundamental primary idea. Throughout the period of its being used, each word has taken on new shades of ideas, all of which as a rule are related to the fundamental original conception. Usually the inherent idea of a word still clings to it. There are of course exceptions to this general trend of the development of words. Certain terms have changed their meaning so very radically that they connote the exact opposite now from what they did originally. As an example of this, we may note the word let. In the time the King James Version was translated, it meant to hinder. Today it means exactly the opposite — to permit, to allow. But this is a rather strange and extreme example of a word which changes its meaning entirely.

According to our rule we are to take the primary, ordinary, usual, literal meaning. The adjective primary emphasizes the original, inherent idea in the term. Ordinary and usual are practically synonyms, especially in this definition, “usual” being employed for the sake of emphasis. The word literal is used to emphasize the thought that every word must be taken as referring to the actual thought of the time when it used. Literal, therefore, is opposed to figurative or symbolic.

This part of the rule must be observed strictly; otherwise the interpreter will, in many instances, miss the meaning of the sacred writer. As an illustration of the importance of this part of our rule I wish to call attention to the statement found in Jonah 2:2,3:

And he said, I called by reason of mine affliction unto Jehovah, And he answered me; Out of the belly of Sheol cried I, And thou heardest my voice. For thou didst cast me into the depth, in the heart of the seas. And the flood was round about me; All thy waves and thy billows passed over me.”

The Prophet, in explaining how it was that he had been to Sheol, stated that he had been cast into the depth, that the flood had been round about him, and that the waves and billows had been passing over him. If we observe this part of our rules, we are to take the words, depth, flood, waves, and billows, literally as referring to water — unless there are indications showing that he did not use these terms literally. When we read chapter 1 we see that Jonah was thrown overboard and landed in the water — the literal sea. He was there in the depths. The flood was round about him; and the waves and billows were passing over him. To interpret Jonah 2:3 figuratively is to miss the meaning entirely. The presumption is that every word is to be taken at its primary, ordinary, usual, literal meaning unless there are facts that indicate a departure from the face meaning. Some have ignored this important element of the rule and have insisted that it is used figuratively. In support of this contention those espousing this position have called attention to Psalm 69:2:

I sink in deep mire, where there is no standing:
I am come into deep waters, where the floods overflow me.”

They triumphantly point to the fact that there are no waters in this passage, although David did use the words, waters and floods. They are correct in saying that there are no waters or floods in Psalm 69. How do we know that? The facts of the context point positively in the direction that these words are used figuratively. To read waters into this passage would be to do violence to the Scriptures and to inject into them a meaning that they do not have. On the other hand, to close one's eyes to the literal sea into which Jonah was thrown when he was cast from the ship is to do violence to the Book of Jonah. The author says that he was thrown out into the water and records the prophet's prayer while he was bobbing up and down in the water before he sank. Thus he spoke literally when he said that the flood was round about him and that the waves and the billows were passing over his head.

II. Seek Figurative Meaning Only When Facts Demand Such An Interpretation
Though this point has been partially covered in discussing Jonah 2:3, it is such a vital element of our rule, I feel that I should emphasize it at this point. Possibly a violation or two of this principle will help to show emphatically why it is so very important. There are those of the rationalistic persuasion who do not believe that there ever was such a man as Abraham, the patriarch of whom we read in Genesis. If one should read Legends of Genesis by Gunkel, he would see how the rationalists break the force of the Scriptures arbitrarily and make them to mean something entirely different from what they say. They tell us that there was no such man as Abraham, the great progenitor of the Hebrew race. Having thus deprived us of this historical character, they proceed to explain to us how it is that the name of Abram, or Abraham, as it was later called, appears on the sacred page. According to the rationalistic theory the Jews, as they came in contact with other nations of antiquity, wanted to objectify their history as the nations did. They did this by inventing some great illustrious hero from whom they were descended. Instead of Israel's having descended from Abram, a resident of the Ur of Chaldea, they were simply the descendants of various nomadic tribes that wandered around in the Arabian Desert until they finally crossed over the border into the fertile crescent, into Palestine. The so-called historians of the eighth and ninth centuries B.C. drew upon their imaginations, created the characters, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Joseph, and thus manufactured the history which we read in the Pentateuch and in the earlier historical portions of the Scriptures. It is hard for us who are in the habit of believing that the Bible is the very Word of God to see how men — brilliant, scholarly men — can deal with history and facts in such a fast and loose manner. But such is the logical outcome of the violation of this phase of the golden rule of interpretation.

In this connection I wish to call attention to what one of my old professors in the University of Chicago said in lecturing on Genesis. During his lecture (as I sat as a student in the class) he said that most scholars denied the historicity of the Hebrew patriarchs, and that he had taken the same position with reference to all of them at one time; however, he had changed his mind in regard to Abraham. The thing that caused him to revise his opinion regarding the Father of the Faithful was that a clay tablet had been discovered upon which the name Abram appeared. This man rented a wagon to another person in order that he might make a journey from Chaldea to the land of Ammuru, the westland. Think of it! A brilliant scholarly man denied the existence of Abraham, notwithstanding all that the Bible says about him. But that which caused him to change his opinion was a clay tablet on which the contract for renting a wagon was recorded. This account caused the learned professor to change his mind and to believe in the historicity of Abraham.

If a person can take a plain passage of Scripture, close his eyes to its real meaning, and read into it a figurative or symbolic meaning, he will be forced to do the same thing with related passages — if he is logical. In doing this, he is forced to reconstruct large sections of the Scripture and to impose upon them a meaning foreign to that of the original writer. When one has once adopted this method, one has no place to stop — short of a denial of the records and of forcing a meaning upon the Word of God contrary to all facts and reason. As we have seen above, the rationalistic critics have simply carried this spiritualizing process to its inevitable conclusion. Modernism and rationalism are the logical outgrowth of forcing a figurative meaning upon a passage that is clearly literal. In the light of these facts we can see how very important it is for us to apply the golden rule of interpretation rigidly to every passage in the Word of God.

III. Studying Obscure Passages In The Light Of Related Texts And Axiomatic And Fundamental Truths
Frequently one comes across a statement which is made with little detail. It is therefore difficult to study it simply in the light of its context. Whenever we come to such a passage as this, it becomes necessary for us to lay such a text beside a related one about which there can be no doubt, and concerning which there are full details. But we must be absolutely certain that the passage from which we hope to get light on the obscure one is dealing with the same subject and is relevant. False identification always brings confusion.

As an illustration of this principle, let us look at Psalm 2. In the first three verses we read of an international, atheistic, anti-Christian, religio-political convention, that meets for the purpose of putting the religion of Jehovah, the God of Israel, and His Messiah, the Christ, under the ban. That these verses foretell such a conference is evident from the fact that the delegates are the kings of the earth and the rulers. That it is an atheistic convention is evident from the fact that it is called together for the purpose of taking action against God. That it is an anti-Semitic congress is reflected in the fact that it is against Jehovah, the God who revealed Himself to Israel. That it is an anti-Christian gathering is also evident from the fact that action is taken against God's Anointed, God's Messiah, the Christ. That it is a religious convention is seen from the fact that it meets for the purpose of deciding whether or not the religion set forth in the Old Testament and that in the New is to be tolerated. That it is a political assembly is seen from the fact that politicians, the rulers and kings of the earth, are the delegates. Having learned that this passage foretells such a convention, we must if possible learn when it will occur. In vain we look at Psalm 2.

Some call our attention to the fact that the first two verses of this psalm are quoted in Acts 4:25,26 and are applied to the action Herod, Pontius Pilate, the Jewish Sanhedrin, and the people of Israel took against Jesus. What these did against the Lord Jesus is only a partial, limited, incomplete fulfillment of the prediction. Since such a gathering has never been called, and since the Word of God can never be broken, we may be certain that if will yet be convened in the future. When a person studies Daniel 9:36ff, he will see that the willful king spoken of in this passage takes drastic action against all religion and puts forth his own type of divine service and imposes it upon humanity. This action he will take in the middle of the Tribulation, for there will be only three and one-half more years of it to run until it is finished. Thus when Psalm 2:1-3 is studied in connection with Daniel 11:36-12:13, the impression is immediately made that in all probability David in Psalm 2 was talking about the action that the willful king, the world dictator, will take in the middle of the Tribulation. When we pursue our studies a little further and investigate the teaching of Revelation, chapter 13, the profound conviction is made upon the mind that without doubt David in Psalm 2 was speaking of the events of Revelation, chapter 13. In this passage we read of a great beast who is none other than the Antichrist, and of the unparalleled role which he will play in world affairs. He forbids the nations of the world to worship any gods, even the true God; but demands that they worship him alone. His assistant, the second beast of this chapter, issues a decree that all shall take the mark of the beast upon their foreheads or their hands. These and other facts that are in Revelation, chapter 13, lead one to believe that the action of Psalm 2 is to be located in the middle of the Tribulation. Thus we interpret Psalm 2 in the light of a related passage, Revelation, chapter 13, which gives full details.

That part of our rule which we have under consideration says that we should study an obscure passage in the light of related ones and axiomatic and fundamental truths. God is the author of all axiomatic principles. We may be certain that whatever utterances are found in the Word are to be interpreted in the light of these axiomatic and fundamental truths. Usually there are related passages from which we can get light on obscure texts. But we can always be certain that no statement of Scripture sets aside axiomatic and fundamental principles. Hence we shall interpret all Scripture in the light of these axioms.

IV. Applying The Golden Rule Of Interpretation
Having looked at the various parts of our rule, we are now in a position to apply it and see what results we have. Let us take the controverted passage of Isaiah 7:14: “Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.” The revelation found in Isaiah, chapter 7, was occasioned by an alliance formed by the king of Israel with the king of Syria to come against Jerusalem, to dethrone Ahaz, and to set up an appointee of the two kings. This report brought nothing but consternation to the inhabitants of Jerusalem. The young king, Ahaz, began to inspect the water system, a vital factor in time of war and siege. To him God sent the Prophet Isaiah in order that he might strengthen his faith by giving a message from the Almighty. Ahaz, who had already initiated negotiations with the king of Assyria, to come to his assistance, did not wish to give up his ideas and plans. At the revelation of God Isaiah offered to perform a miracle either in the heavens above or in the depths, sea, beneath, according as the king wished. Hence the word rendered sign means either a miracle, something wrought by supernatural power, or an ordinary fact or event to which an arbitrary meaning might be attached. Since it has these two connotations, the context in which this word appears must be consulted to determine what is its exact meaning in such a case. It is clear that Isaiah meant by sign a miracle, for he offered to perform this sign either in the heavens above or in the sea beneath. This offer shows clearly what Isaiah meant by the word, sign — an act, the result of supernatural power.

Ahaz did not wish his faith to be strengthened because he did not wish to give up his plans and purposes. He therefore spurned the offer by a pious, hypocritical dodge. When he assumed this attitude, the prophet turned from such an impious one as he and addressed the house of David, saying, “Is it a small thing for you [the Hebrew word is in the plural number] to weary men, that ye will weary my God also?” which passage shows that the prophet was no longer talking to Ahaz as an individual, but to the royal house of David. Since the prophet was looking out into the future, we must conclude that he had not only the royal house of David then living in mind, but also those who would live in the future. To the regal house therefore he promised to give a sign, which is expressed in the verse, quoted above.

The birth of this child is miraculous. This conclusion we cannot avoid since, in the mention of the word, sign, to Ahaz, the prophet gave it a supernatural connotation. When Ahaz refused to ask the Lord to perform such a sign, the prophet was led to promise to the house of David that God would perform a sign in a sense similar to its meaning when he employed it the first time. Then he told us of what this supernatural sign would consist, namely, that the virgin “shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel,” which means. God with us. It is clear from the prophet's language that he was thinking of miraculous conception and virgin birth of the child who is promised to the house of David.

But there are those who say that the word rendered by the English term virgin means a young, married woman. This word occurs seven times in the Hebrew Scriptures. An examination of the other six occurrences in the light of their contexts leads unmistakably to the conviction that the word here used indicates an unmarried woman of marriageable age (I have discussed this question fully in my volume, Messiah: His Nature and Person). There are two occurrences of musical notations in the Psalms which may be our same word modified and with a different connotation. But they have no bearing upon the issue now under discussion. Thus a thorough understanding of the word here rendered “virgin” makes the profound conviction upon the mind of the truth seeker that Isaiah promised the house of David that there would be miraculously conceived and born of a virgin one who would be recognized as God in human form. Hence His name would be called, according to Isaiah, Immanuel — God with us, or, God is with us.

The facts of this chapter through verse 14 demand this interpretation. By no sleight-of-hand tricks or mental gymnastics can any other meaning logically be forced upon this passage. We must accept it as a promise of the virgin birth of King Messiah.

But, in verses 15-17, we read of another child, whose birth was to be out in the immediate future from the time of the prophet's speaking this prediction. This fact is seen by the statement that this child would be eating butter and honey, when he was old enough to know to refuse the evil and to choose the good. Moreover, before the child “shall know to refuse the evil, and choose the good,” the land of the kingdoms of Israel and of Syria would be devastated. We know from contemporary history, as it has been recovered from the monuments of the Assyrian monarchs, that, beginning about 734 B.C., Syria was laid waste, and that, by 719 B.C., the kingdom of Israel likewise was overthrown and trodden down. Since these lands were to be devastated before the child would know to choose the good and refuse the evil, and since we know when those lands were overrun, we know that in verses 15-17 the prophet was talking about a child that would be born in his day. Some have thought that this child was that of the prophet himself, for in 8:1-4 Isaiah tells about the birth of his son, Maher-shalal-hash-baz.

If we are to let the record give forth its message just as written, we cannot avoid the conclusion that there are two children mentioned in these verses. The evidence is very plain and positive to this effect, but the description of the one is blended with that of the other. But such a method of revelation is not strange to the one who is familiar with the Old Testament predictions. Frequently we see that two events, separated by a long period of time, are mentioned together. As an illustration of this, see Zechariah 9:9,10: “Rejoice greatly, 0 daughter of Zion; shout, 0 daughter of Jerusalem: behold, thy king cometh unto thee; he is just, and having salvation; lowly, and riding upon an ass, even upon the foal of an ass. 10 And I will cut off the chariot from Ephraim, and the horse from Jerusalem; and the battle bow shall be cut off; and he shall speak peace unto the nations: and his dominion shall be from sea to sea, and from the River to the ends of the earth.” An examination of verse 9 show that the prophet was speaking of the first coming of the Messiah. A study of verse 10 shows unmistakably that in it Zechariah was speaking of the second coming of Christ. Thus between verses 9 and 10 intervenes the entire Christian Dispensation. Nevertheless, there is no indication of this separating period. A blending of descriptions regarding two other widely separated events may be seen again in such a passage as Jeremiah 29:9,10 which speaks of the restoration of the Jews from Babylonian captivity, and which was fulfilled by Zerubbabel and Joshua, who brought back the captives to the Holy Land. Jeremiah 29:11-14 gives a prediction of Israel's world-wide regathering in the time of the end. Thus between verses 10 and 11 intervenes the period between Israel's restoration from Babylon and her final restoration in the end time. The principle of blending such widely-removed events and presenting them as one picture is known as the law of double reference and might be illustrated by the stereopticon lantern that gives the dissolving effect. This machine throws one picture upon the screen. As the audience looks at it, the picture begins to fade. At the same time the dim outlines of another picture begin to appear. By the time the first one has disappeared, the second one is in full view. This is a perfect illustration of the law of double reference. When we recognize this fact and read Isaiah, chapter 7, with a knowledge of this principle and allow the words to deliver their message to us unmodified by human opinion, we come to the conclusion that two different children are mentioned in the passage, and that they are real children. The first one mentioned is the virgin-born Messiah, the Saviour of the world: the second one was a child who was born in the immediate future from the standpoint of the prophet. Thus we get a clear picture of the prophecy when we apply the golden rule of interpretation and recognize the law of double reference, which principle will be studied later in this series of articles.

From all that has been said it is clear that The Golden Rule of Interpretation is one of the most important principles governing us in our interpretation of the Scriptures. If we follow this rule, we shall not go very far wrong: it we fail to follow it, we shall never go right.