PRESENT EVIL AND FUTURE JUDGMENT

The prosperity of evil people has been a nagging problem for believers throughout the ages. For example, in the past, Asaph was depressed and confused about why wicked people do so well (Psalm 73). Even in the future, the martyrs of the tribulation will cry out; “how long, O Lord, holy and true, will You refrain from judging and avenging our blood on those who dwell on the earth?” (Rev. 6:10). In the present, we are upset by those who appear to break God’s laws with impunity.

The point is: if God is holy, and if in fact He has issued commands to His creation, then should He not do something when those commands are violated or ignored? But people regularly don’t obey. They do indeed ignore those standards that God Himself has set up. And furthermore, while engaged in such things, it seems there is a high level of disdain for God and His standards. We see, in our own country, political leaders who lie and deceive and whose arrogance knows no bounds. They seem to be a law unto themselves, as God’s laws are irrelevant. Daily in the public forum, “reality” stars, movie stars and many other “famous” folks flaunt their immorality and post on the internet their fleshly indulgences and depraved behaviors. And nothing seems to happen. The impression is that God has grown disinterested in all of this, or that perhaps, over the millennia, He has grown a little more tolerant toward such behaviors. His apparent inaction is quite troubling deep down in the souls of many of those who follow Him. The resulting confusion is what Isaiah spoke about centuries ago (Isaiah 5:20-21).

“Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; who substitute darkness for light and light for darkness; who substitute bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter! Woe to those who are wise in their own eyes, and clever in their own sight.”

And Malachi 2:17 and 3:14-15 record something quite similar.

“You have wearied the Lord with your words. Yet you say, “How have we wearied Him?” In that you say, “Everyone who does evil is good in the sight of the Lord, and He delights in them,” or, “Where is the God of justice?”

“You have said, ‘It is vain to serve God; and what profit is it that we have kept His charge, and that we have walked in mourning before the Lord of hosts?’ So now we call the arrogant blessed; not only are the doers of wickedness built up, but they also test God and escape.”

With tears, the prophet Jeremiah added another verse to the song.

“For all of them are adulterers, an assembly of treacherous men…lies and not truth prevail in the land; for they proceed from evil to evil.”

These prophets represent accurately the thoughts of many who see evil flourish but with few, if any, negative consequences. So people conclude that it really makes little difference if a person does or does not live by biblical truth. It does appear that God has absented Himself from the world scene. Of course, we know that God’s Word states that God has not withdrawn from life here on earth. In fact, in answer to the question of Malachi 2:17, “where is the God of justice?”; the next verses make it clear that He is coming in judgment. Malachi 3:15 suggests that the “arrogant” and “evil doer” are seen as blessed, but in 4:1 the “arrogant” and “evil doer” are seen as being consumed like chaff in God’s fiery furnace of judgment.

So, the short answer is that God will, in His time, judge those who break His laws. No one gets away with flaunting evil in the face of the holy God. But as we consider present evil and future judgment, we should remember certain facts.

Fact #1: God has not changed over the centuries. Any idea that God has evolved to being a deity who now sees righteous and unrighteousness in a new light, is just plain wrong. One of the attributes of God is that He is immutable (does not change). He has not diminished in holiness, love or any other attribute. In fact, that point is made in Malachi 3:6 where God declares; “For, I, the Lord do not change; therefore you, O sons of Jacob, are not consumed.” God’s holiness has not changed but then neither has His love and mercy. And for that, Israel (and all of us) was to be very thankful. So, the issue is not that God has changed and is now more tolerant of sins. The line between righteousness and unrighteousness has not become blurred. He is the same today as He was millennia ago. His love and mercy do not change and neither does His attitude towards evil.

Fact #2: God is patient, but He is not indulgent. Perhaps the most succinct statement on this matter is one that God Himself made in Exodus 34:6-7. Moses had asked God to reveal Himself, and in these verses the nature and attitude of God is declared in a wonderful way. God revealed that He is slow to anger, gracious and compassionate. He is so very kind and patient towards sinners. Yet, if people do not respond to Him and forsake their sinning, He will indeed enter into judgment against them. Later Old Testament writers were well aware of these important verses given at Mt. Sinai. But Israelites, Americans and everyone else must never interpret the absence of immediate judgment as proof that God has become indifferent or careless about violations of His righteous standards. He is so very patient, but He remains intolerant of sin and evil.

Fact #3: God greatly desires that people avoid judgment by trusting His Son for eternal life and deliverance from the lake of fire. The Apostle Peter put it well when he said that the Lord does not want anyone to perish, but prefers that all would come to repentance (2 Pet. 3:9). When Jesus died on the cross, the testimony of scripture is that He fully and completely paid for all sin for all time. Salvation (deliverance from damnation and the reception of eternal life) is available to all. It is up to each individual to simply trust in Jesus, the Son of God and deliverer from sin, in order to receive that salvation (John 3:16; 5:24). God the Spirit works 24/7 convincing people of their need of a savior, and people must respond or face the awful consequences of their non-response.

Fact #4: God has declared that judgment will come and it will be both terrible and eternal. If anything makes it clear that God has not “gone soft” on the sins of people, it is the powerful truth of the nature of future judgment. Man’s offenses are against an infinitely holy God and the punishment must properly fit the crime. There are some basic biblical truths which teach the terrible nature of future punishment.

• Eternal. The fate of the unbeliever is an eternal one. Just as believers receive eternal life, so the judgment of the unbeliever will be endless (Matt. 25:41, 46; Rev. 14:11; 20:11; 2 Thess. 1:9). The warped theological idea of the annihilation of the wicked (that is, these go out of existence forever) is nothing more than wishful thinking and bad exegesis. Jesus and the Apostles tell us with certainty that the punishment will be an endless one.
• Separated from God. Even atheists today have a relationship with God through “common grace.” This is God’s unmerited favor towards all men, so that (for example) the rain falls on the just and unjust alike. But this “common grace” will be not exist in the future. We can only imagine what the full scope of being totally separated from God will mean experientially to the unbeliever. (2 Thess. 1:9). The eternal fate of the unbeliever is the “lake of fire” which is declared to be the “second death”. (The word death has the basic idea of “separation.”) This is, therefore, the place of eternal separation from the Lord God.
• Meaningless life. The scriptures repeatedly tell us that life has no real meaning unless a person is rightly related to their Creator/Savior. A life with no purpose or meaning breeds deep depression and even suicide. We are built for a close relationship with God. But an empty, meaningless existence will be the forever experience of the unbeliever! (2 Thess. 1:9; Eccles. 2:25)
• Suffering. Usually the first thing that comes to mind, when the fate of the unbeliever is contemplated, is the matter of intense suffering. And the Bible does indeed support this perspective. (2 Thess. 1:8-9; Matt. 8:12; 13:41-42, 49-50; 22:13; 25:30, 46; Rev. 14:9-11; 20:10). Jesus and the Apostles speak in terms that dramatically communicate great sufferings. Even the term “lake of fire” visually communicates the idea of a suffering that will be intense. But all that is involved in this suffering is likely beyond anything we can even imagine.

When we contemplate, even briefly, the terrible future of the one who remains in unbelief, we can better appreciate why the gracious God patiently tries to bring men to belief, and so avoid this eternal consequence. The Lord understands perfectly the nature of this future judgment, and He knows why such a judgment is necessary.

We will never have God’s level of knowledge on this matter. But we can understand that people don’t get away with violating God’s righteous requirements, and that God is not careless or unconcerned about evil that exists in His creation.

Armed with this biblical perspective, as followers of Jesus Christ, we are to see our world (culture) through the lens of the Scriptures. Perhaps the best way to end this brief discussion is by hearing the words of the Apostle Paul in Ephesians 5.

“Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of these things the wrath of God comes upon the sons of disobedience. Therefore do not be partakers with them; for you were formerly darkness, but now you are light in the Lord; walk as children of light….And do not participate in the unfruitful works of darkness, but instead even expose them; for it is disgraceful even to speak of the things which are done by them in secret….Therefore be careful how you walk, not as unwise men, but as wise, making the most of your time because the days are evil. So then do not be foolish, but understand what the will of the Lord is.” (Ephesians 5:6-8, 10-12, 15-17)

THE PRE-TRIB RAPTURE IS NOT WISHFUL THINKING (Part 4) (Biblical and Theological Reasons for Pre-Tribulationalism)

In one of the very last paragraphs penned by the Apostle Paul, he spoke of loving and anticipating the appearing of the Lord Jesus Christ (2 Tim. 4:8). And this should cause each of us to ask ourselves the question, “Do I love His appearing”? “Do I really want to see Him?” And as we discuss and debate the fine points of the coming of Jesus at the Rapture event, we must not lose sight of this most important personal attitude.

In this article, we will finish this short series where we have been setting forth some of the key factors which point to the Rapture being before the start of the period of the Tribulation. So far we have presented four arguments: (1) the distinction that exists between the Church and the nation of Israel which moves us towards a pre-tribulational rapture; (2) the stated purposes for the Tribulation found in the Bible do not include the Church and this points to a pre-tribulational rapture; (3) the lack of evidence for the Church being in the Tribulation in the biblical tribulation passages and this supports a pre-tribulational position; and (4) the clear statement of scripture that the Church is excluded from the coming wrath of God which becomes a compelling support for the pre-tribulational rapture position. Several other evidences will now be presented as we wrap up our abbreviated discussion.

5) The Concept of the “Imminent” Coming of Christ. The word “imminent” is not found in the Bible but has become the word to express the theological idea of the “any moment” coming of the Lord Jesus. The imminent coming simply means there are no signs or events that must take place before He could return and take His bride (the church) to be with Himself. The imminent coming of Jesus is not the same as saying the “soon coming” of Jesus. Though the return is imminent, it may or may not be soon (unless, of course, you have received some divine revelation on the matter). As the NT writers addressed the issue of Christ’s return, they used terms that anticipated this as an any-moment event; that is, that no intervening events had to take place. So they encouraged readers to be watching and waiting for the Lord’s return. They did not suggest they should be looking for an event or sign which might signal Christ’s coming. We must remember that the Second Coming of Christ has the distinction of not being seen as imminent, since many signs such as the appearing of the Antichrist and the setting up of the “abomination of desolation” in a Jerusalem temple must first take place (cf. 2 Thess. 2:3-4; Matt. 24:15). But the Rapture is an imminent event and the Church is exhorted to look for the Lord’s appearance and not for certain events or some particular signs.

Here are some scriptures, which when read normally, lead to the conclusion that the writers of the NT believed in an imminent coming of Jesus.

• James 5:7-9. Believers are exhorted to live righteously because Judge Jesus is right at the door and could come through it at any time.
• 1 Thessalonians 1:10. Here believers are encouraged to patiently be waiting for Jesus, not for signs or events.
• 1 Corinthians 1:7. Paul praises these believers because they too were anticipating the coming of the Savior, not tribulation events.
• 1 Thessalonians 4:15. Paul clearly saw himself as alive at Jesus’ coming which could happen at any time.
• Titus 2:13. Again, believers are exhorted to be looking for the blessed hope, which is the glorious appearing of Christ and not the tribulation period.
• 1 Corinthians 16:22. The conclusion to this letter includes the use of “Maranatha” which conveys the hope that Jesus could return at any time. Even more Scriptures suggest that the writers and recipients did anticipate an any-moment return of the Lord (e.g. Rom. 13:11-14; 1 Cor. 15:51-53; Phil. 4:5; and 1 John 2:28-3:3).

(6) The Distinction Between the Events of the Rapture and the Second Coming. There are, of course, some similarities between these two events since both focus on the same Person, Jesus, returning from the same place heaven to deal with the same subjects, namely, human beings. But similarities between two events does not mean that they are the same or that they take place at the same time. (e.g. hearing the national anthem while standing with a crowd of people in a stadium does not mean you are at opening day of the major league baseball season. There are countless events which could match this setting). Some of these distinctions are: (1) at the Rapture the saints meet Jesus in the air while at the 2nd Coming Jesus returns to the earth to the Mount of Olives; (2) There is an unmistakable element of judgment on unbelievers at the 2nd Coming but no such element at the Rapture; (3) There is no mention of the Messianic kingdom (the millennium) being set up in connected with the Rapture, but that is the main reason for the 2nd Coming; (4) At the Rapture both living saints and dead saints receive glorified bodies, but in 2nd Coming passages there is no reference to living believers being changed; (5) The Rapture occurs before the wrath of God is poured out while the 2nd Coming follows the time of wrath in the day of the Lord; (6) The Rapture has no signs that precede it while the 2nd Coming has dozens and dozens of signs and events; (7) At the Rapture, the Lord returns with His people to the “Father’s house” while at the 2nd Coming He returns to the earth and stays there; and (8) At the Rapture all believers are removed from the world leaving just unbelievers, while at the 2nd Coming all unbelievers are removed in judgment leaving only believers in the world.

(7) An Interval is Needed Between the Rapture and the Second Coming to Allow for Three Key Events. This point is directed just to the post-tribulational/pre-millennial view since all other views have some amount of time between the Rapture and the Second Coming. Three events would require some element of time (and would not fit with rising to meet Christ in the air and immediately turning around and descending back to earth). These three events are: (1) the judgment seat of Christ; (2) the marriage of the Lamb; and (3) the salvation of people after the Rapture event who will then populated the earth during the Messianic kingdom.

The judgment seat of Christ will involve hundreds of millions of church age saints. If this time of the evaluation of all believers is to have meaning (not just to the individual but to all of creation) there must needs be time involved. God does not “need” time but He is here dealing with people for whom He created time, and time is significant to the creation.

The marriage of the lamb (Rev. 19:8-9) is a highly important event to the Bridegroom as well as to the Bride. It hardly seems that the dignity and grandeur of the event would be captured “in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye”. God’s dealings with man invariably involve some time, whether it is His time of judging the world in the tribulation or in sending the Son in the “fullness of time.”

The Messianic age begins with believers only. But if all believers are raptured and glorified at the 2nd Coming, then there would be no believers with non-glorified bodies left to enter the millennium. Such people are essential for reproduction of human life in the messianic age, since those in glorified bodies do not reproduce.

Those of us who hold to the Pre-tribulational rapture do so with some good, solid biblical and theological supports. This view is not wishful thinking. We can have confidence that when we approach the Scriptures and interpret them normally, as one would any literature, this position rests on a solid foundation. Yet, behind all the discussion lies the key question. “Do I really love His appearing?” This is the question every believer in Jesus Christ is obligated to ask no matter what theological view they take on the timing of the Rapture event.

THE PRE-TRIB RAPTURE IS NOT WISHFUL THINKING (Part 3) (Biblical and Theological Reasons for Pre-Tribulationalism)

When the writers of the New Testament discussed the Rapture event, it was in the context of godly living. The truth of the Rapture was to bring about changes in the way believers thought and lived. It was to assist believers become more loving, diligent, generous and righteous, and less impacted by sin and the culture of the world. In all of our theological discussions, the end result ought to be a movement towards greater godliness in our personal lives and a greater love for the Savior who is returning. Far from breeding an “escapist” mentality in many believers, the doctrine of a pre-tribulational rapture has fueled a passion to serve Christ Jesus effectively in whatever time is available. With this attitude in view, we present another argument for the Rapture occurring prior to the seven years of tribulation.

In the first two articles in this series, we set forth three arguments that point to a pre-tribulational rapture: (1) the distinction between the church and Israel; (2) the purposes of the tribulation do not include the church; and (3) the lack of evidence for the church being in those last seven years (the tribulation). This articles continues with a fourth line of evidence.

(4) The Church is Excluded from the Coming Wrath of God. Most rapture views agree that God has promised the church of Jesus Christ exemption from the future wrath of God. (For example; the mid-tribulational rapture view sees just the second half of the Tribulation as a time when God’s wrath is present; thus, the church is taken out at the half way point prior to the outpouring of the wrath of God). The Apostle Paul has clearly stated in 1 Thessalonians that the church will not experience the wrath of God.

“…to wait for His Son from heaven, who He raised from the dead, that is Jesus, who delivers us from the wrath to come.” (1:10) “For God has not destined us for wrath, but for obtaining salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ…” (5:9)

God’s promise of exemption does not mean that the church will avoid all trials, troubles and persecution. In fact, the Scriptures are quite clear that times of tribulation and difficulty await the church (e.g. John 15:18-20; 1 Peter 4:12-16). But this kind of tribulation and persecution is not the future wrath of God that will be poured out on this world.

In1 Thessalonians 1:9-10 the Apostle praises these believers for their confident, patient looking for the coming of Christ. He will deliver believers from the coming wrath. The word “deliver” (rhuomai) carries with it the idea of rescuing from something by a forcible act. The word puts an emphasis on a mighty act which delivers from a great peril of some kind. This powerful rescue by the Lord Jesus at His coming (the rapture) does not include everyone on the planet but only believers in Him. This passage affirms that Jesus Christ will rescue believers “out from” (ek) the coming wrath. We will be rescued out of the time of wrath, not preserved with it. It speaks of a complete removal and rescue from the period of God’s future wrath.

In 1 Thessalonians 5:9-10 also points to the removal of the church prior to the time of God’s future wrath. In these verses, the Apostle states that it is God’s sovereign determination to delivers us from wrath. God simply will not bring His wrath on His own people. We look forward to the coming of the Lord Himself, and not to the coming wrath poured out on the world. In this passage, Paul makes a sharp distinction between the fate of the world (“they”) and the different destiny of believers (“us”). It is the Lord Jesus who brings us deliverance and keeps us safe.

We should also observe the Apostle John’s statement in Revelation 3:10 where protection is promised believers to keep them from (ek) the hour of testing (the tribulation period). We are specifically promised that we are kept from “the hour of testing”, and not simply kept from testing. This promise necessitates actual removal from the time period itself and not preservation through it.

If it can be demonstrated the entire seven year period sees the wrath of God on the earth, then we have very compelling evidence that the church is removed before the seven year period begins. And there is such evidence.

First, it needs to be noted that Jesus declared that all judgment has been given over to Him by the Father (John 5:22, 27). This declaration establishes an important foundational point when interpreting the Book of Revelation, namely that all divine judgments come from the Son of God.

In the heavenly scene found in Revelation 4 and 5, the Father who sits on the throne has a scroll in His hand; a scroll which is sealed with seven seals. The significance of the seals is that they keep the scroll secure; that is, no one can change the scroll or tamper with it. In this heavenly scene, it becomes clear that no one in all the universe has the authority to take the scroll and open it. But there is one exception---the Lion-Lamb (Jesus Christ). When the Lord Jesus takes the scroll and begins to break the seals, the judgments of God (His wrath) begin to fall on the earth. The breaking of the first seal by Christ is a divine judgment.

God’s wrath is seen in all the judgments on the scroll, which includes the three series of judgments---the seals, the trumpets and the bowls. God’s wrath includes those judgments that are direct supernatural acts (such as the great disturbances in heaven and the one hundred pound hailstones pounding the earth), as well as those forces, elements and individuals that God uses in an indirect way (such as war, famine, the Antichrist and Satan). It is erroneous to speak of “man’s wrath” and “Satan’s wrath” in some of these judgments. Christ will use a variety of things to judge, but they will all be God’s judgments. In a similar way, the armies of Assyria, Babylon and others were used by God as instruments of His wrath in the Old Testament. These are not to be seen as the wrath of man, but for what it is, God’s wrath on Israel using foreign armies.

It is of supreme importance that we note that God has specifically told us what His wrath “looks like” in many Old Testament passages. In the first seal judgments, which start the seven years of tribulation, there will be famine, disease, the sword and wild beasts of the earth. In Ezekiel 14:21, God speaks of these four things (famine, disease, sword and wild beasts) as His four severe judgments. The context of Ezekiel 14:21 (vss. 12-21) indicates that these four things are the expressions of God’s wrath. This verse is but one of many that identify these four as the wrath of God (note Lev. 26:21-28; Deut. 11:17; 28:20-26; 32:22-25; Jer. 15:1-9; 16:4-11;; 19:7-9; Ezek. 5:11-17; 6:11-12; 7:3-15; Num. 11:33;; 16:46; 25:8-11). It is no off-handed comment that the Apostle John makes when he specifically mentions these four entities in Revelation 6. There is a deep and pervasive OT background to these four things; as indicators of God’s wrath.

When King Jesus break the very first seal on the scroll, the wrath of God begins to be poured out on the earth. And the fact that the church has been exempted from God’s wrath and is promised removal from the time of wrath itself, is compelling evidence that the church is removed before the Tribulation period begins.

We will explore additional supports for the pre-tribulational rapture in the next article.

IT’S NOT HERE YET, BUT IT’S COMING (A Look at the Day of the Lord in 2 Thessalonians 2:1-12)

What a person believes determines how they behave. There is the homicide bomber who believes that he is pleasing his god by blowing himself up and taking the lives of many others as well. Or the one who puts powerful, but destructive, drugs into her body because she believes that present pleasure far outweighs any future consequences. And then there are those who generously give because they believe the biblical admonition that giving is better than receiving. Everyone believes things which in turn gives direction to both attitudes and behaviors.

In the young church at Thessalonica believers were fearful because of something they believed. They had become convinced that the “day of the Lord” had begun and they had entered the time of great tribulation. They had listened to false prophets, likely a persuasive teacher as well as a pseudo-letter claiming to be from the Apostle Paul, with the result that many believed they were in the tribulation. Paul wrote 2 Thessalonians 2:1-12 to assure them that their belief was not true and that they were to live confidently and not fearfully.

This passage in 2 Thessalonians has some difficult matters connected with it, however, in this brief study we want to highlight certain pivotal points in order to understand what it is teaching. We will approach this by looking at several key issues.

Defining the “Day of the Lord”. The “day of the Lord” is a concept that is mentioned frequently in the Old Testament. It refers to a time of special divine intervention in this world (e.g. Joel 2, 3; Zechariah 12-14; Zephaniah 3; Matt. 24:29). It includes three events: that of the 7 years tribulation period, the Second Coming of Christ to the earth and the Messianic (millennial) kingdom. Since the “day of the Lord” would begin with the terrible time of tribulation, this is what the Thessalonian believers had come to believe they were in. Because of their persecutions, some were promoting this false idea that they were in the “day of the Lord.”

The Sequence of Events in the “Day of the Lord”. As an apostle, Paul could have just said: “no, you are not in the “day of the Lord”. And even though he had apostolic authority, there were those who challenged his authority. However, he also had the authority of the prophets of the O.T. which would carry a great deal of weight. So instead of just saying “no, you are not in it”, he pointed out that an event clearly taught in the O.T. as the starting point of the “day of the Lord” had not taken place. And if it had not taken place, then obviously the “day of the Lord” could not have started. Daniel 9:27 teaches that the tribulation period begins with the signing of a treaty between the Antichrist (the leader of a western nation) and the leaders of Israel. This event not only starts the seven year period of time but also reveals the Antichrist. But no such event had occurred which meant the “day of the Lord” could not have begun. Later the N.T. would add the point that at the outset of the tribulation period will be THE apostasy (the massive turning from God’s truth on the part of the “church”). This apostasy is closely connected to the unveiling of the Antichrist (the “man of lawlessness”.) Paul mentions this end of the age defection from the truth of God by those allegedly part of the church and John would give details later on. (Revelation 17)

The Event Prior to the “Day of the Lord” and the Rapture Event. But there is more. In 2:6-7 these believers are reminded that presently sin’s full blown manifestation is being contained. That will change, however, when the Holy Spirit (2:7) ceases His ministry of the restraining of sin. (Note that the Spirit Himself is not “taken out” of the world; as it is impossible for an omnipresent God to be removed from anywhere. Also, the reality is that the Spirit must be present on the earth since no one could be saved without the working of the Spirit in conviction and regeneration. Multitudes will be saved during the tribulation). It is the ministry of the restraint of sin that is removed. There is a clear sequence that must here be noted in 2:7-9. The ministry of restraining sin is removed and then Satan’s man is revealed as the Antichrist (at the covenant signing).

At this point it should be observed that in history the Spirit has used God ordained agencies to restrain sin in the world; namely the family, human government and the Church. Human government in the end time will be totally corrupted by Satan’s forces and the family is likely a shadow of what God intended (being badly degraded in much of the world). The church is the great agency of restraining sin and the removal of the Church out of the world in these end times will have a breathtaking impact on the world. The Church, with all of its imperfections and flaws, still retards evil in this world. The removal of restraint is best understood as the removal of the church at the Rapture event. The Spirit indwells the Church (1 Cor. 3:16-17 where “you” is plural and is speaking of the church body and not the individual believer. The individual believers is indwelt as well according to 1 Cor. 6:19). The removal of restraint takes place before the unveiling of the Antichrist (which starts the tribulation). Again, this points to the church’s removal prior to the tribulation. This affirms Paul’s teaching that the church has no part in the time of tribulation.

And the statement of 2:1 must be noted. Here Paul bases this discussion on our “gathering together to Him” which is the rapture event. He is calling the Thessalonian believers back to his first letter where he twice emphasized that believers in Jesus Christ are “delivered out of the wrath to come” (1:10), and that “God has not destined us for wrath” (5:9). These are powerful statements revealing the exempting of Christians from the future wrath of God; that is, the tribulation aspect of the “day of the Lord.” So Paul based his discussion of the “day of the Lord” on his previously given instruction on the rapture event; an event which removes believers out of the world prior to the “day of the Lord”.

As Paul winds down his discussion in 2:13-14, he encourages them that they have been chosen by God “for salvation” (which basically means “deliverance”). In light of the context of future events, the “salvation” is most likely not looking at regeneration/new birth but at our “deliverance” from these terrible days of tribulation; reinforcing what he already said in his first letter to the Thessalonians.

The Events Within the “Day of the Lord”. So the Apostle taught that the sequence is: the removal of restraint followed by the apostasy/unveiling of the man of sin. Paul then adds a couple of other truths about this Antichrist. He will take his place in the temple, and by so doing, declare himself to be deity. This is Daniel’s famous “abomination of desolation” that Jesus referred to as the great end time sign in Matthew 24:15 which occurs at the half way point of the seven year tribulation. Also, Paul informed his readers that this blasphemy is short lived as the Lord will bring Antichrist to his end at the Second Coming. But between his unveiling and his termination, the Antichrist will have extraordinary powers by which he will deceive multitudes of people during the tribulation period. Many will believe him and this belief will dictate how they live their lives during those terrible days.

Concluding Thoughts. So the believers at Thessalonica have been informed by Paul that some were believing that which was not true. There was no reason to live in fear and worry. They were not in the “day of the Lord.”

What we believe about future events also plays an important role in how we behave. If we live in a genuine anticipation of the Lord’s return and our immediate appearance before Him at the judgment seat, then we will purify our lives, says 1 John 2:28-3:3. We will live more focused lives for Christ, deal aggressively with sin and live in anticipation of seeing Him. However, if we are like the slave that Jesus spoke of in Matthew 25 who believed that “my lord delays his coming”, then we will be like that slave. He is described as one that lived badly and very sinfully. We must not think and thus believe “my Lord delays His coming.”

The Savior’s Second Coming is spoken of much more than was His first coming to the earth. We celebrate that coming each December because we know He came. His Second Coming is even “more certain” as it is spoken of many more times. Our real beliefs determine our behaviors.

IS THE CHURCH REALLY THE “NEW ISRAEL”? (Part 5)

When my children were little tikes they loved watching “Sesame Street” and particularly liked the “which of these does not belong” segment. In that segment, several objects were seen on the TV screen with one of them being different than the rest. For example, there might be three triangles and one square. My children (being unusually brilliant) usually figured out pretty quickly that the square did not belong with the triangles.

In the theological world, some things are just not the same and “do not belong” together. The church of Jesus Christ and the nation of Israel are not the same, and in spite of attempts by Replacement Theologians (RT) to equate them, they are not the same entity. RT does not have any NT passage which teaches that the church has replaced national Israel. They only can come up with passages that “imply” or “suggest” the position they are attempting to establish. The absence of any NT discussion of the church replacing Israel is significant because God spent 2000 years (from the days of Abraham and Moses) declaring that Israel was His “chosen people”; His covenant nation. The OT scriptures constantly reinforce the truth that God and national Israel were in a binding covenant relationship; a covenant that the Faithful God would fulfill. In light of the hundreds of references to the unique place of national Israel in the plan and purposes of God, we would rightly expect God to give us a chapter or two in the NT (or maybe a whole letter) explaining to us that Israel has been set aside and replaced by the church. No such NT passage exists which ought to alert everyone to the very real probability that no such replacement has taken place. Some things “do not belong” together. .

In our previous four studies, the focus was on certain scriptures that are used to promote RT, and it was seen that none of them do so. In this study, we want to give some other biblical evidences as to why these two are not the same things; that is, why the church is not a continuation of OT Israel. .

(1) A DIFFERENT STARTING POINT. The nation of Israel began with the calling of Abraham (around 2100 BC) while the church began on the “Day of Pentecost” (around 33 AD). The church did not and could not exist before the Ascension of Jesus Christ back into heaven after His resurrection. Ephesians 1:20-23 says,

“…which He brought about in Christ, when He raised Him from the dead, and seated Him at His right hand in the heavenly places, far above all rule and authority and power and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this age, but also in the one to come. And He put all things in subjection under His feet, and GAVE HIM AS HEAD OVER ALL THINGS TO THE CHURCH, WHICH IS HIS BODY, the fullness of Him who fills all in all.”

The Body of Christ did not begin to form until after the Ascension and could not, therefore, have been in existence in some other form in 2100 BC. Furthermore, it could not have been formed prior to Pentecost because that is the day, in Acts 2, when the Holy Spirit’s ministry of “baptism” began. And the only way that a believing person gets into the Body of Christ is through Spirit baptism (1 Cor. 12:13; Acts 1:5). No Spirit baptism, no Body/no church. This underscores another important reality and that is there are no unbelievers in the church, the Body of Christ, but there were many unbelievers in OT Israel. They are not the same. .

To try to present the church as a newer form of OT Israel does not align well with the distinctive starting points of the two entities; they really are not the same. It is like trying to say the square has corners like the triangle and, therefore, it really is one though just a bit different. .

(2) THE UNIQUE CHARACTER OF THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST. One of the Apostle Paul’s great contributions to the doctrine of the church is found in his letter to the Ephesians. Among other things, he instructs believers that the church is (1) a mystery and (2) that it is one new man. These points focus on the unique character of the church as compared to national Israel. .

(1) A Mystery. In Ephesians 3:1-6, Paul reveals a truth not previously found in the OT; that is, that believing gentiles would be equal with believing Jews in the Body. The truth is not that gentiles would be saved, since that was clearly spoken about in various OT scriptures. But equality of the two is different. This informs us that the makeup of the Body and the makeup of Israel is different; thus, they are not the same.

(2) One New Man. It is in Ephesians 2:14-15 that the Apostle teaches that believing Jews and believing gentiles were made “into one” group, and that the two are now “one new man.” This one new man is an entirely new entity. It is not a gentile nation nor is it the nation of Israel. The church is not a continuation of Israel. This Body is something distinct from Israel. .

It must be noted here that RT love to use this passage in Ephesians to prove that gentiles who are now “brought near” and are “fellow citizens” are seen as being incorporated into Israel. And they go on to declare that because gentiles are now part of Israel, there is no distinct future for national Israel. .

Aside from the fact that this contradicts the distinct place of the Abrahamic covenant in God’s program (see Part 2, August 2015), it also assumes that being a participant in something automatically means equality within that entity. Believing gentiles are “partakers” (Romans 11) in the Abrahamic covenant but not the fulfillers of it. It was made between God and Israel. Furthermore, if Paul had wanted to say that gentiles were part of Israel, he could have done so. He does not. It is just as important to observe what Paul does not say as well as what he does say. The “one new man” is a soteriological organism which is entered by faith alone in Christ alone. Soteriological oneness does not equate with oneness in God’s past or future dealings. It does not mean that gentiles are now Israelites. Believing gentiles share with believing Israelites in many of God’s promises but this hardly means that they become Israelites. The truth of gentile salvation was seen from the very beginning when God told Abraham that in him “all the nations would be blessed” (Gen 12:3; 18:18). Most likely, Paul would have said gentiles were “into” Israel and not “with” Israel, if he were teaching that God’s promises to national Israel has been aside and given to the church. He is simply demonstrating the present equality of Jews and gentiles in the entity called the “church”. He is not setting aside God’s covenant commitments, nor is he denying a future for the nation of Israel. .

(3) INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL DIFFERENCES. Without spending much time on this point, we can say that there are external differences between Israel and the church. For example, Israel had an army; required the payment of taxes (tithes); and had national boundaries. These are not true of the church. Internally there are also marked differences. In Israel there were only some who were priests (the tribe of Levi), while all believers are priests in the church. Another example is that the nation of Israel operated under a very different covenant than the church. In the church, all are believers but that is not the case in Israel. .

The church and Israel are different and Replacement theology simply has no definitive NT passage which states that the church is the “new Israel” or that the church has replaced Israel. Therefore, they are forced to see “implications” or “suggestions” as they attempt to establish their position. Non-replacement theology has the bulk of the OT as well as the powerful discussion of the Apostle Paul in Romans 9-11. God has not set Israel aside and He has not made the church the “new” Israel.

IS THE CHURCH REALLY THE “NEW ISRAEL”? (Part 4)

All Scripture is inspired and important but there are times when some scriptures rise to a place of greater importance because a certain subject is the focus of attention. In our current discussion, we are addressing the subject of the church replacing Israel in God’s program. And as we saw in our last study, Galatians 6:16, Romans 9:6 and 11:26 take on greater importance than usual when the matter of “church-Israel” is the subject. Another important scripture in the discussion is that of Matthew 21:43. This is often used by Replacement Theology (RT) to try and establish its’ position. In this article, we want to view several scriptures used by RT but will highlight Matthew 21:43.

Matthew 21:43

“Therefore I say to you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and be given to a nation producing the fruit of it.” (NASB)

This verse is generally used by RT to show that Jesus is permanently removing the kingdom from national Israel.

The Context of Matthew 21:43. The earthly ministry of Jesus was now entering the final week, the “passion week”. A year earlier, in Matthew 12, the nation’s leaders had declared openly that Jesus had not come from God, but was really an agent of the Devil. With this terrible, willful sin of rejection by Israel’s leaders, Jesus turned from the nation. Things changed dramatically in Jesus’ ministry, and He now talked of His death, but also introduced the church, declaring that “I will build My church” (Matt. 16:18). And during the last year of His ministry, Jesus and the religious leaders were periodically engaged in contentious debates. Such is the situation in Matthew 21 which records events on Tuesday of the last week of Jesus’ ministry. The discussion begins at 21:23. The View of Replacement Theology. RT sees this as the moment when Jesus permanently removed the kingdom from Israel and gave it to the church. The “nation” mentioned in 21:43 is said to be the church. The following quote reflects this idea as it is found in RT literature.

“As a matter of fact, Israel having rejected its king, the kingdom of God would therefore be taken from it and given to a nation bearing its appropriate fruits (Matt. 21:43). For this eventuality Jesus made provision by the establishment of His church, the new Israel and the people of God.” (Zorn, Christ Triumphant, 30)

The term “church”, of course, is not actually found in the verse but is the interpretation of the author, based primarily on his theological position.

The View of Non-Replacement Theology.

In fairness to everyone, all interpreters face the problem of dealing with something that is prophetic in nature. The kingdom will be taken away and it will be given to someone else. So all must look past this statement to see what lies down the road.

Several points need to be made. First, the Lord Jesus is speaking to the Jewish leadership; specifically the chief priests, elders and Pharisees. These leaders had effectively pronounced judgment on themselves (21:41, 45). Jesus’ rhetoric is aimed at them (as it would be in Matthew 23) which explains the harshness of His statements. However, the leaders did in fact represent the nation and the people of the nation of Israel. The nation stood condemned. Those who had seen and heard Jesus were again being informed that they have lost out on God’s gracious offer of the very soon arrival of the Messiah’s kingdom. But the statement doesn’t automatically mean what RT says it means. First, it does not say specifically that Israel for all time will lose the kingdom. Second, it does not say specifically that it is the church that would get the kingdom of Messiah. Better is the view that it is the present generation of Israelites (the ones rejecting Jesus) that will lose out. But aren’t we doing the same things as RT; that is, letting our theological framework interpret an unclear passage? The difference is that Jesus again deals with this very matter two days later on Thursday afternoon. And since we all believe in the progress of revelation, where new revelation adds to, clarifies, or expands previous revelation (does not contradict it), then His statements given 48 hours later do help clarify. In Matthew 23, Jesus again denounces the religious leaders and now makes it clear that judgment is falling on that generation (23:36). But the next verses are very important because it is revealed by Jesus that Christ’s rejection of Israel, and Israel’s rejection of Christ, is not permanent and eternal. In 23:39, the word “until” (ews) coupled with the following statement of messianic recognition, clearly affirms that Jesus will come again once the nation is repentant, recognizing Him as their Messiah. So we conclude that Matthew 21:43 is indeed looking at a change but it is from an unrighteous present generation in Israel to a righteous future generation in Israel (the kind describe by Romans 11:25-27; Zech. 12 and 13; Ezekiel 36:24-28, etc). The verse is, therefore, not describing an ethnic change from Israel to gentiles. Michael Vlach notes that RT must prove that Matthew 21:43 rules “out the possibility that a future nation of Israel will experience the fulfillment of the kingdom. But Matt. 21:43 does not do this.” (Vlach, Church Replaced Israel? 143)

1 Peter 2:9-10 In this passage, the Apostle Peter uses a number of OT designations as he speaks about the privileged position of believers in the church. RT generally sees this as Peter identifying the church as a new Israel. Peter says that the church is a “chosen people” (which emphasizes our common life because of God’s initiative in selecting us); a “royal priesthood” (which points to our privilege of ruling and serving); a “holy nation” (which focuses on us being separate from the nations of the world and a unique community of people); and a “people belonging to God” (which emphasizes that we are God’s private possession). All these terms have an OT background which would have special meaning to Jews. And it should be noted that the recipients of Peter’s letter were most likely believing Jews (not denying there could have been a few gentiles in the mix), which would be something an apostle to the Jews would do!

It important to observe that nowhere does Peter declare the church to be the new Israel. There is continuity between Israel and the church in that we, as recipients of His election and grace, are chosen by God to do His work in the world right now. We are assigned by God to be His witness in the world to unbelievers, just as Israel was given that task in the OT. Hiebert has a good summary of Peter’s statements.

“It does not naturally follow from the parallels between Israel and the church that Peter believed that the church has permanently replaced Israel, and that the latter will not again enjoy a separate existence under the favor of God. Israel’s future is inseparably connected with it acceptance by faith of the returning Messiah (Zech. 12:10-14:11; Acts 3:19-26; Rom. 11:25-27). D.E. Hiebert, 1 Peter, 147

Michael Vlach adds that there are times in the Scriptures when “Israel imagery” is applied to non-Israelites without these becoming Israelites; as in the case of Egypt in Isaiah 19:24-25 (Vlach, 149). So without Peter saying “church = Israel” or that the church has now permanently replaced Israel, the proof that RT is looking for is not found here.

Galatians 3:29 Here Paul refers to gentile believers as the “seed of Abraham” which is used by RT to prove that gentiles are now spiritual Jews. But this phrase does not mean that believing gentiles in the church now fulfill the promises given in the covenants to national Israel. There are, in fact, several ways that “seed” of Abraham is used. It is used of the physical descendants of Abraham (remember that Abraham had a number of sons); it is used of Jewish believers; and it is used (as in Galatians) of gentile believers (who spiritual father is Abraham the believer). (For an excellent discussion of the “seed of Abraham”, see Dr. Fruchtenbaum’s, “Israelology: The Missing Link in Systematic Theology, 126 ff.) He notes that RT would have a much better case if the subject were the “seed of Jacob/Israel.” While each of these scriptures could have so much more written on them, it does become clear that RT cannot come up with any definitive, objective evidence for its’ position. At best, things are “implied” or “suggested”, which does not meet the standard of clear exposition. And such exposition is required if the supposed great change from Israel to church did occur in the plan of God. More on this in upcoming articles.

IS THE CHURCH REALLY THE “NEW ISRAEL”? (Part 3)

As we walk down the airport concourse to the departure gates, we note that the planes are fairly close together. The plane at Gate 14 seems to be just a few yards away from the plane at Gate 15. However, just because they appear to be close together, no traveler thinks that it really doesn’t make any difference which plane you board. Soon after take-off the difference would be apparent. If you want some time at the beach then the flight to San Diego at Gate 14 would be the better choice than the flight to Topeka at Gate 15. It does indeed make a huge difference which plane you get on.

To many Christians in today’s church, it makes little difference if one boards the theological plane called Replacement Theology (RT) or if the other one which sees Israel and the Church as distinct is boarded. They are, after all, so close together. But, of course, they really are not. And the theological plane you board will take you to very different prophetic destinations.

We have observed thus far that there are two basic approaches in the matter of Israel-Church; those that see a distinction between Israel and the Church in God’s program and those that don’t (RT). In our last study, we saw that the unconditional, unfulfilled Abrahamic covenant is a formidable challenge to the legitimacy of RT. We also noted that to prove their point that the Church has replaced Israel, RT must show that the NT scriptures teach that “church” and “Israel” are used interchangeably; or in the words of RT William Cox (in our previous study), “as a matter of scriptural fact, these terms are used interchangeably….” The following is a brief discussion of the scriptures most often used by RT.

Galatians 6:16 Almost all in RT will reference Galatians 6:16 in their quest to show Israel and the Church are used interchangeably, and therefore, that the Church replaces Israel in God’s program. The verse reads as follows:

“And those who walk by this rule, peace and mercy be upon them, and upon the Israel of God.”

This verse is part of the conclusion to the Apostle Paul’s letter. He has argued carefully that the Law cannot justify a person. He has explained that both Jews and gentiles are justified by faith alone in Christ alone (Gal. 2:16). He then made it clear that we began our new life in Christ by the working of the Holy Spirit and we are sanctified by the same Holy Spirit’s work (3:2-3). In other words, we are both justified and sanctified by faith. When he speaks of “those who walk by this rule” he is speaking about believing Jews and believing gentiles who have come to understand this great truth. He then pronounces a blessing on these believing Jews and believing gentiles.

The View of Replacement Theology. RT holds that Paul has been emphasizing the unity of Jews and gentiles, and that it is, therefore, unlikely that he would end his letter with a statement that would separate them. Their argument hinges on the word “and” (kai). They state that this word can be used in explicative sense; in other words, it should be translated “even.” Thus Paul would be pronouncing a blessing on “them” (gentile believers) “even upon the Israel of God.” The explicative use of “kai” is like an equals sign; gentile believers = the Israel of God.

The View of Non-Replacement Theology. The normal and usual use of “kai” is that of a copulative sense (“and”). By far, this is the usual way the word is used in the NT. The explicative sense (“even”), though possible, is unusual. So there should be something in the text which would compel one to this secondary usage. But there is nothing to lead the expositor away from the natural copulative sense. So, as a number of grammarians have noted, making “kai” to mean “even” is forced and unnatural. Blessing is pronounced on believing gentiles and on believing Jews.

As we noted, Galatians builds a strong case for justification and sanctification by faith. But it also contains a harsh rebuttal of Judaizers who wanted to include Law keeping as part of the equation. The Apostle commends Jews who have come to understand “this rule” (2:16), and singles them out for blessing. Gentiles who did not struggle with keeping the Mosaic Law (though they had their own struggles) are also blessed because they have come to accept God’s righteousness on the basis of faith alone. But the believing Jews who “walk by this rule” are seen as the true Israel of God.

It is more than strange (if RT is correct) that Paul would introduce such as seismic theological shift (that the church is now the true/new Israel) in the conclusion to a letter with no explanation. Surely, if he had wanted to reveal such a profound change, he would have detailed it in the body of this letter where theological analysis took place. And it makes little sense that he would introduce such a major doctrinal change based on the secondary use of “kai” used in a rather casual way.

It must be noted that since this is the key verse to prove a “church = Israel” change, it reveals a very weak foundation. The grammar and the context are resolutely against RT. And to compound the problem for RT, they have little else to work with.

Romans 9:6 The View of Replacement Theology. This verse is used to try and demonstrate that Paul is using “Israel” in a way that goes beyond the normal ethnic boundaries.

“But it is not as though the Word of God has failed, for they are not all Israel who are descended from Israel.”

The point made is that ethnic Israel is seen as distinct from “spiritual” Israel; implying that all who are believers are “Israel”, including the Church. But a closer inspection shows that this verse offers no support for RT.

The View of Non-Replacement Theology. In Romans 9:1-5, the Apostle is giving the eight prerogatives given to national Israel, who are Paul’s “kinsmen according to the flesh” in 9:3. The term “Israel” is used ten times (in Romans 9-11) in this unique section of Romans devoted to the past, present and future of Israel. It is used only of ethnic Israel. Paul’s contrast in 9:6 is simply between believing Jews and unbelieving Jews. There is no mention of the church or of gentiles in 9:1-6. In fact, there is no doubt that “Israel” is defined by the statement that these are the Apostle’s “kinsmen according to the flesh.”

Romans 11:26-29

“and thus all Israel shall be saved; just as it is written, ‘the Deliverer will come from Zion, He will remove ungodliness from Jacob.’ And this is My covenant with them, when I take away their sins. From the standpoint of the gospel they are enemies for your sake, but from the standpoint of God’s choice they are beloved for the sake of the Fathers; for the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable.”

The View of Replacement Theology. Some RT believe that “all Israel” refers to the church, but the consistent use of “Israel” in Romans 9-11 as an ethnic group speaks loudly against this. Other RT see this as a reference to Jews being saved throughout history, but this is unlikely since Romans 11 is looking into the future salvation at the end times. Furthermore, the fact that a relatively few Jews have come to faith in each generation doesn’t fit with the great doxology at the end nor with the need for this inspired discussion. Still other RT concede that this is speaking of the national salvation of Israel in the future, but do not concede that the future restoration of national Israel is included.

The View of Non-Replacement Theology. It is vital to see that Paul ties in Israel’s future redemption with God’s covenant promises to the “fathers.” God is faithful to all His covenant promises. It will start with bringing Israel into the New Covenant. And then, as Jesus observed in Matthew 23:39, a redeemed national Israel will then be ready for Messiah’s coming and ruling in His kingdom as well as Israel’s restoration to the Land that was given to them. Israel means Israel.

While our study has of necessity been brief, a deeper study of these verses will validate these conclusions. These verses simply do not support the position of RT. And, as we will see in our upcoming studies, there are important lines of evidence and important scriptures which show that national Israel does have a future in the plan of God. Israel will indeed be restored back to their former position because of the faithfulness and loyal love of their covenant keeping God. We need to board the right plane.