Isaiah Series 01: Understanding Isaiah’s role as prophet

POST OVERVIEW. The first post in “The Isaiah Series,” a series of devotional studies based on selected passages from Isaiah 41-66. Each devotional study will seek to reveal the beauty and the power of Isaiah’s prophecy and will interpret the meaning of the passage so that the disciple of Jesus is encouraged.

This study will serve both as a preamble for the series and as a description the role of the prophet in biblical prophecy.

This post inaugurates what I hope to be a series of devotional studies covering the writings of Isaiah from chapter 41 through the end of the book in chapter 66.

THE ROLE OF THE PROPHET IN BIBLICAL PROPHECY

The prophecy of Isaiah is some of the finest prose ever penned in terms of its rhetorical quality. The imagery Isaiah evokes and the mystery and power of the LORD that he conveys are breathtaking. But Isaiah is not the focus of his book. In fact, for all the accolades that could be heaped on this man, Isaiah’s personal characteristics and his own thoughts and opinions disappear and are rendered inoperative as the LORD’s voice thunders forth His divine truth. For all his literary talent, Isaiah the prophet was merely the human conduit through whom the LORD spoke His message. The son of Amoz became a chosen instrument, an amanuensis appointed to precisely record the words dictated to him by the Spirit of the living God. For we know that “all Scripture is God-breathed” (2 Tim. 3:16), and if God breathes out the Word, then His scribe must merely record what he hears. We also know that the Old Testament prophets often did not understand what they themselves wrote but obediently wrote God’s Word as they received it, knowing that God would use His Word for His glory (1 Peter 1:10-12). Finally we know that God’s Word is sure because it is not made up by an act of human will but was written by “men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God” (2 Peter 1:19-21).

And so it is that when we read the powerful words of Isaiah’s prophecy, we read not the mere musings of a Hebrew man who lived in the 8th century before Christ, but we read the words of the eternal God. Through His chosen instrument the infinite God infinitely condescends to communicate His truth to His people. The goal of these studies is to understand the message of the LORD in these passages so that we may be edified and we may glorify the LORD with our lives.

Soli Deo gloria            rmb                 12/4/2023                   #680

Why was “baptize” not translated but transliterated?

POST OVERVIEW. An exploration of why, during the Reformation, translators of the New Testament transliterated the Greek words “βαπτίζω” and “βάπτισμα.”

THE PROCESS AND GOAL OF TRANSLATION

Although the Bible is the word of the living God, and even though all Scripture is God-breathed and profitable, the process of translation of the New Testament from koine Greek into a modern language is no different than the translation of any other book or document into another language. The process begins by determining the meaning of a given word in the original language (in this case, Greek). Next, any necessary rules of grammar in both the original language (Greek) and the target language are taken into account. Then the meaning of the original word is translated into the most accurate word in the target language having the same meaning. Then another (Greek) word is selected and the process repeats. The goal of New-Testament translation is that the precise meaning of the original koine Greek is preserved by the translation into the target language. Preservation of meaning is paramount. Poor translations are those which, either intentionally or accidentally, introduce wrong, ambiguous, or misleading meanings into the text of the target language.

TRANSLITERATION, NOT TRANSLATION

When translating from koine Greek into a target language like English, there are times when transliteration also occurs. What is transliteration? Transliteration is when the translator, for one reason or another, decides not to translate the meaning of the Greek word, but instead simply reproduces or approximates the sound of the Greek word in the target language. The overwhelming majority of examples of transliterations are the names of people and places given in the Greek New Testament. In fact, there is really no other circumstance where transliteration is appropriate since the paramount objective of any translation is to preserve the meaning of the original Greek and transliteration would obviously obscure meaning.

TRANSLITERATION OF “BAPTIZO” INTO ENGLISH

The background given above brings us to a very interesting question. Why, during the Reformation, did the English-speaking translators of the New Testament choose to transliterate the Greek words “βαπτίζω” and “βάπτισμα” (baptize and baptism, respectively) rather than translate them? For it is not as though the translators did not know the meaning of these Greek words. The meaning, for example, of “βαπτίζω” is known by all Greek scholars. It means “immerse” or “submerge.” But if the meaning of “βαπτίζω” was well known, as it certainly was, why was the meaning of the word not preserved in the translations into English?

The only logical reason that the word “βαπτίζω” was transliterated and not translated was to obscure the meaning of the Greek word. But why would English-speaking translators want to obscure the meaning of words like “βαπτίζω” and “βάπτισμα”? The reason was because virtually all the Reformers who were able to understand Greek and so were able to translate the Greek New Testament into English were committed Paedobaptists. They were committed to the practice of sprinkling infants and calling that practice “baptism.” If the Reformers had translated “βαπτίζω” into English as “immersed” or “submerged,” not only would infant “baptism” have been exposed as an unbiblical practice, but they would also have been affirming the Anabaptist practice of baptism by immersion. To avoid these problems, the Reformers hid the true meaning of βαπτίζω under an English transliteration. And the beauty of a transliterated word is that you can give it whatever meaning you want because it’s your word. So transliteration of these words into English proved to be a convenient way to separate the original meaning of βαπτίζω from its place in the new language, especially when the original meaning would produce theological difficulties. The average readers in the pew who did not know Greek would never discover the irregularity and would assume that the word “baptize” had always existed and had always meant the practice that they witnessed in church, namely the sprinkling of a few drops of water on the head of a passive infant. In this way, infant baptism became “baptism” and appeared to be according to the biblical practice.

TRANSLITERATION OF “BAPTIZO” INTO OTHER LANGUAGES

This same phenomenon of transliteration of βαπτίζω has been used in all the so-called Romance languages, including French, Italian, Romanian, Spanish, and Portuguese, and it has been used for the same reason. The translators, whether Protestant or Catholic, were Paedobaptists and wanted to avoid the problems that a translation of βαπτίζω would create. Transliteration provided the needed alternative.

A LUTHERAN EXAMPLE

Martin Luther, a committed Paedobaptist, used a different approach with his 1545 German translation of the New Testament. Now, we know that the Greek word βαπτίζω has the meaning of “immerse” or “submerge.” Luther knew this as well. The German word for “immerse” or “submerge” is “tauchen.” Therefore, when translating βαπτίζω into German, Luther used the word “tauchen,” right? Wrong. Instead of “tauchen,” Luther invented the word “taufen” and assigned the meaning of “baptize” to his word.

But here we should pause and ask the question, “Why did Luther not use the existing German word ‘tauchen’?” It accurately expresses the meaning of the Greek word βαπτίζω. What could be the problem? The problem was that Lutherans were Paedobaptists who sprinkled drops of water on the heads of infants as their practice of baptism. If the people in the pews of the Lutheran churches started reading the word “tauchen” in their New Testament, eventually they would start asking awkward questions about the so-called baptizing of infants by sprinkling. To prevent that from happening, Luther invented the word “taufen” (a word that sounded a lot like “tauchen”) and gave it the meaning of “baptize.”

What were the results of Luther’s mistranslation? For every Lutheran, “taufen” (baptize) came to mean the sprinkling or christening of an infant because of the “infant faith” (another Lutheran invention) of the subject being “baptized.” By means of this mistranslation, the βαπτίζω of the New Testament, which involved the public immersion (“tauchen”) in water of a new believer as an expression of their commitment to Christ, became a ceremony (“taufen”) performed on passive infants by sprinkling a few drops of water on the infant’s head.

SUMMARY. A brief account of how the Greek word βαπτίζω was transliterated by Paedobaptist translators during the Reformation to obscure the word’s real meaning.

Soli Deo gloria            rmb                 11/20/2023                 #679

Discipleship in terms of holiness, obedience, and usefulness

POST OVERVIEW. A post considering how holiness, obedience, and usefulness develop in the disciple’s life. Usefulness requires maturity. Why Christ was supremely “useful.”

In the past few months, I have been thinking a lot about discipleship and how we, as disciples of the Lord Jesus, can be more effective in our growth toward Christlikeness. My plan is to gather these thoughts together in the next several months and publish a book on personal discipleship targeted at those individuals who desire to invest themselves in others so that others may grow in practical righteousness. The pattern is expressed by Paul in 2 Timothy 2:2: “And the things that you have heard from me in the presence of many witnesses, these entrust to faithful men who will be able to teach others also.”

HOLINESS, OBEDIENCE, AND USEFULNESS

One of the ideas that I have developed is the concept that our growth in increasing Christlikeness can be classified as growth in Holiness, Obedience, and Usefulness.

In thinking about these terms, we would say that Holiness and Obedience are aspects of our discipleship that we are “working out with fear and trembling” (Phil. 2:12). That is, the disciple can work on these independently of others and the progress the disciple makes largely depends on how much effort the disciple expends. It is the disciple’s goal and his responsibility to grow in his personal Holiness and his personal Obedience. It should also be noticed that this growth in Holiness and Obedience is done by the disciple and for the disciple. No one else benefits directly from this growth.

Usefulness, by contrast, can only be done for others. It is impossible for the disciple to be useful without some reference to other people. The best way for the disciple of Jesus to be useful is to do God-honoring, Christ-exalting works for others. By definition, Usefulness involves the disciple intentionally serving one or more people.

WHEN COMES USEFULNESS?

In this context, we also observe that, for every disciple of Jesus, growth in Holiness and Obedience continues from the moment of salvation until the disciple’s last breath and requires considerable focus and effort. In practice, this means that, especially in the early years of the disciple’s walk with Christ, his efforts are concentrated in the areas of Holiness and Obedience, and his Usefulness to others is necessarily limited. In other words, the usual pattern of growth for the disciple is for him to reach a level of maturity in Holiness and Obedience before he becomes useful to the Master (2 Tim. 2:21). Our Usefulness is (typically) delayed because we must first put to death our flesh and the deeds of the old man. One way this has been expressed is that God does not greatly use dirty vessels. Those who are greatly used by the Lord are usually those who have labored to present themselves to Him as a “living and holy sacrifice” (Rom. 12:1).

CONSIDER JESUS

What we have described so far is the situation with every disciple of Jesus. Disciples must wrestle with and strive to overcome their inherent fallenness and sinfulness before they enter into their Usefulness.

But consider the contrast between any disciple of Jesus and the Lord Jesus Himself. While every disciple must expend great time and energy to continue their fight against sin and their striving toward Holiness and Obedience, Jesus does not need to spend even one moment or expend one calorie of effort growing in His personal Holiness and Obedience, for He has been perfect in these from eternity past. As God, Jesus is perfectly holy (Isaiah 6:3) and as the Son of God, Jesus perfectly obeys the Father at all times (John 8:29).

Thus, what we see in Jesus’ earthly ministry is that all His words and actions are entirely devoted to the works the Father gave Him to do (John 17:4). Because He is already perfect in Holiness and Obedience, all His time and effort are poured out in Usefulness to others in works which glorify the Father who sent Him.

A STRATEGY TO INCREASE OUR USEFULNESS

Since it seems that the disciple must first make some measure of progress in Holiness and Obedience before he is prepared for Usefulness, it occurs to me that we as disciples of Jesus should strive to pour all the energy and effort we can muster into personal Holiness and Obedience so that, as early as possible in our walk with the Lord, we can operate in the realm of Usefulness. Let us then, as quickly as possible, cast off the rags of the old man, and lay aside every weight and the sin which so easily entangles us, and let us serve with Usefulness and produce thirty, sixty, a hundredfold.

Soli Deo gloria            rmb                 11/10/2023                 #678

A soldier in active service (2 Timothy 2:4)

POST OVERVIEW. A devotional study of 2 Timothy 4:2.

No soldier in active service entangles himself in the affairs of everyday life, so that he may please the one who enlisted him as a soldier. – 2 Timothy 2:4 (NASB)

SOLDIER. Paul’s instructions in this verse are directed very narrowly to a specific kind of person. The exhortation that follows is first of all exclusively for soldiers. Only soldiers are being addressed. If you are not a soldier, this verse does not concern you. In Paul’s mind, the world is made up of soldiers and not-soldiers. Here he is writing to soldiers.

What is a soldier? What does Paul have in mind? The definition of soldier here would need to connect with the preceding verse where Paul tells Timothy to “suffer hardship with me as a good soldier of Christ Jesus” (2:3). A good soldier, then, is a disciple of Jesus who willingly suffers hardship for Jesus’ sake. “Suffering hardship” means consistently making choices according to the instructions and the intentions of the soldier’s commanding officer in disregard of any consequent personal pain , loss, dishonor, or sacrifice. The good soldier of Christ Jesus does not seek hardship, but neither does the good soldier avoid it. Rather, the presence or absence of hardship has been removed from the good soldier’s consideration.

So in this verse Paul is addressing those who are soldiers according to these terms. Are you a good soldier of Christ Jesus? What is your attitude toward voluntary hardship? Is your obedience to the Lord conditioned by what it will cost you? Only good soldiers need to read on.

But actually there does exist another group of disciples whom we could call “the not-yet soldiers.” These are those disciples who long to be “good soldiers,” who long to shed the rags of timidity and to discard the false safety of compromises and small disobediences and instead to put on the mantle of a soldier and charge out into the mission where your only concern is obedience to the King. If you have a burning desire to become a good soldier, then let Paul’s words fan your desire into a flame (Psalm 37:4; 2 Tim. 1:6).

We have spent some time defining a (good) soldier of Christ Jesus (2:3) because we need to determine if 2 Tim. 2:4 is written for us. Paul is not writing to all believers here, because not all believers are “good soldiers” according to this definition. Paul would desire that all disciples were soldiers, but the reality is that all are not, so Paul makes his first “cut.”

A SOLDIER IN ACTIVE SERVICE. But now Paul introduces another qualification to further narrow the funnel. As Paul knows that, among disciples, there are soldiers and there are not-soldiers, so also there are soldiers in active service and there are soldiers not in active service. So all “not-soldiers” have been excluded and now all soldiers not in active service are cut from the team.

What does it mean “to be in active service?” In a military sense, a soldier in active service is one who has been trained and equipped to be useful as a soldier and who has subsequently been deployed by his commanding office to accomplish a specific mission. His identity as a soldier compels him to be in active service and impels him toward the front lines. He lives for a mission. This is a military soldier in active service.

What, then, is Paul’s message or instruction when he speaks to Timothy as a soldier of Christ Jesus? What is the image that comes to mind for the disciple of Jesus who longs to be a soldier “in active service?” It turns out that the analogy between soldier and disciple works very well. Like the soldier, the disciple is aware that he has been deployed by his commanding officer, the Lord Jesus Christ, to accomplish the specific mission of the Great Commission (Matt. 28:19-20). His identity as a disciple of Jesus compels him to be conscious of his Commander’s mission and impels him to proclaim Jesus to the world as His witness (Acts 1:8). The disciple lives for the gospel. For the disciple in active service, Christ is his life (Phil. 1:21; Col. 3:4). He longs to be useful to the Master, prepared for any good work (2 Tim. 2:21).

DOES NOT ENTANGLE HIMSELF IN THE AFFAIRS OF EVERYDAY LIFE. Now we come to the heart of the verse and to the vital instruction that Paul is going to give to Timothy and to all disciple-soldiers in active service. Paul’s words are at once an exhortation and a warning. “Soldier, never entangle yourself in civilian affairs.”

IDENTITY. You are not a civilian, you are a soldier. Therefore, you are to live the life of a soldier, which is a life of discipline, self-control, rigor, and training.

The affairs of civilian life will dull your preparedness and distract you from your mission. Once you have tasted the ease, comfort, luxury, and safety that are part of the everyday life of a civilian, your zeal for pleasing the Master as a soldier who is dangerous to the enemy will begin to erode. The danger of everyday life is that you begin to resent the hardship of the soldier’s life. When the Commander calls you to a new mission, He finds that you are no longer eager to follow orders that involve hardship or risk. Ease and luxury and, most dangerous of all, safety begin to be values, and duty and suffering for our King gradually lose their appeal.

The life of a soldier is a life stripped down to the bare essentials. “But godliness is actually a means of great gain. If we have food and covering, with these we will be content” (1 Tim. 6:6, 8). The life of a disciple is a simple life. “Make it your ambition is to lead a quiet life and attend to your own business and work with your hands” (1 Thess. 4:11). As disciples of Jesus, we do not want to be “led astray from the simplicity and purity of devotion to Christ” (2 Cor. 11:3). As the disciple grows better equipped and more useful to the Master, the complications of his life are willingly sloughed off and discarded as unnecessary weight.

PLEASE THE ONE WHO ENLISTED HIM AS A SOLDIER. The soldier’s purpose is to “please the one who enlisted him as a soldier” (2:4). Getting involved in the entanglements of everyday life will cause you to lose sight of your purpose, to question your purpose, and to compromise your purpose. The sweetness of pleasing the Master by being dangerous to the domain of darkness gradually loses its satisfaction.

The soldier needs to remember the words of Hebrews 12:1: “Therefore, since we have so great a cloud of witnesses surrounding us, let us also lay aside every weight and the sin which so easily entangles us, and let us run with endurance the race that is set before us, fixing our eyes on Jesus.”

CONCLUSION

The disciple of Jesus is a soldier in active service, joyfully enduring hardship as he battles the domain of darkness, proclaims the glories of Christ, and avoids the entanglements of the world.

Soli Deo gloria            rmb                 11/1/2023                   #677

Matthew 24:34 – An exegetical study

POST OVERVIEW. In Matthew 24-25, we find the so-called Olivet Discourse, where our Lord tells His disciples of the things that are to come in the future.

This is a long and technical article that does a detailed exegesis of Matthew 24:34 in order to discover the correct understanding of this difficult verse.

Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place. – Matthew 24:34 (NASB)

AN INTERPRETIVE CHALLENGE

The reason I want to study this verse is because it presents us with an interpretive challenge. Jesus, the Son of God, is the Person speaking in this verse. Because Jesus is the Son of God, we know that He is always correct when He speaks. Yet, as we read this verse, we encounter a situation in which it seems that Jesus may not be correct. What do I mean?

THREE SIGNIFICANT FUTURE EVENTS

In response to questions from His disciples (Matthew 24:3), Jesus has just spoken to them about three significant future events, namely, about the destruction of the temple and of Jerusalem, which occurred in AD 70, and about the events of the end of the age and the sign of His coming (παρουσία), both of which have not occurred to this day. Since we are in the 21st century almost two thousand years after Jesus spoke these words, it is obvious that “this generation” (24:34) has long since passed away, yet it seems that “all these things” have not taken place. So, this is the interpretive challenge: “How do we reconcile Jesus’ words with our historical reality?”

TWO POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS

As we consider this quandary, it becomes apparent that there are only two possible solutions to this dilemma. Either the correct understanding of “this generation” in Matthew 24:34 reveals that Jesus spoke truth in this verse, or the correct understanding of “all these things” reveals the truth of Jesus’ words. In our study, we will examine each of these possible solutions to determine which one is the most reasonable.

AN OVERVIEW OF MATTHEW 24:2-35

Before we begin to dig deep into Matthew 24:34, however, it would be helpful to get an overview of Matthew 24:2-35 so that we can see the context of these verses and better understand our Lord’s teaching about the end of the age.

Jesus begins the dialog (Matt. 24:2) by making a prophecy about the destruction of the temple buildings. We know that the temple was destroyed by the Romans in AD 70, approximately forty years after Jesus spoke these words. The Greek and the English (NASB) of Matt. 24:2 follow.

Matthew 24:2

ὁ δὲ ἀποκριθεὶς εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, Οὐ βλέπετε ταῦτα πάντα; ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, οὐ μὴ ἀφεθῇ ὧδε λίθος ἐπὶ λίθον ὃς οὐ καταλυθήσεται.

And He said to them, “Do you not see all these things? Truly I say to you, not one stone here will be left upon another, which will not be torn down.”

Matthew 24:3

This is a key verse in the discourse, because here the disciples ask the questions that will form the basis for Jesus’ prophecies about the future. The disciples ask three questions in Matt. 24:3 – “When . . . what . . . what?”

Just as an aside, it is likely that the disciples thought they were asking about one event with three different features. That is, they probably assumed that the destruction of the temple (“these things”), Jesus’ coming, and the end of the age would happen simultaneously in one cataclysmic event. In fact, however, they were asking questions about three distinct events.

  1. Prompted by Jesus’ words about the destruction of the temple and “all these things” in 24:2, the disciples ask, “When will (all) these things happen?” Here the disciples were asking the question, “When will the temple be destroyed?”
  2. Next, they ask, “What will be the sign of your coming?” Here the disciples were asking for the signs that will occur just before or during Jesus’ coming (παρουσία).
  3. Then they ask, “(What will be the sign) of the end of the age?” In other words, “What extraordinary events will occur in the last days of the last days that tell us that the end is near?”

These are the three questions the disciples asked Jesus, and these are the three questions that Jesus answers in Matthew 24:5-35. The disciples asked, “When . . . what . . . what?” and Jesus will answer their questions with “When . . . what . . . what.”

The verses that address each of the three questions are as follows:

  • Matt. 24:15-20 and 24:34 address the destruction of the temple (and of Jerusalem) (“all these things” in 24:2 and “these things” in 24:3). In 24:15-20, Jesus tells what will occur in AD 70 so that “not one stone will be left upon another” (24:2). Then in 24:34 Jesus tells when “all these things” will occur.
  • Matt. 24:5-14 and 24:21-28 tells what the signs of the end of the age will be. These are the extraordinary events that will occur which indicate the end is near. Within these verses there seems to be an intensification of evil as the end approaches. For example, 24:5-8 twice hints that things will get worse (24:6, 8), and then in 24:9-14 things do get worse until “then the end will come” (24:14). In 24:21-22, the “great tribulation” occurs and those days must be cut short to allow some of the elect to be saved. Finally, in 24:27-28, Jesus makes clear that His coming (“the coming of the Son of Man”) will mark the end of the age.  
  • Matt. 24:29-31 explicitly tells what the signs of the coming (παρουσία) of the Son of Man will be.

Now we will examine the two possible solutions.

FIRST POSSIBLE SOLUTION: CHANGE THE MEANING OF “THIS GENERATION”

In the first possible solution, the assumption is made that “all these things” includes all the events Jesus has mentioned in the discourse so far in 24:2-31. So, according to this view, “all these things” is interpreted to include the destruction of the temple in AD 70 (24:15-20) plus the events of the end of the age (24:5-14 and 24:21-28) plus the sign of the coming (παρουσία) of the Son of Man (24:29-31). We also know that, according to the Lord Jesus (24:34), “all these things” will take place before “this generation” passes away. Thus, the interpretive task for this possible solution is to find a meaning for “this generation” that allows “all these things” to take place before “this generation” passes away.

How would we go about completing this “interpretive task?” In considering the phrase “this generation,” one well-known Bible teacher, who holds to the view that “all these things” includes all the events Jesus has mentioned in the discourse so far in 24:2-31, explained his position this way: “ ‘This generation’ in 24:34 cannot refer to the generation living at that (sic) time of Christ, for ‘all these things’ (vv. 15-31) did not ‘take place’ in their lifetimes; rather (it is) a reference to the generation alive at the time when those final hard labor pains (v. 8) begin.” To state this position in other words, we might say that, when referring to “this generation” in Matt. 24:34, Jesus was not speaking about “this generation” at all but was speaking about “that generation” who would be living many years in the future.

A SOLUTION THAT IS NOT A SOLUTION

In the attempt to maintain the necessary condition that Jesus is always true in His prophecies, this proposed solution has ignored the plain meaning of the inspired text of Matt. 24:34 and has imposed another meaning instead. In the inspired text, our Lord said, “This generation (Greek ἡ γενεὰ αὕτη) will not pass away until . . .” The only proper meaning of “this generation” in this verse is as a reference to the people who were living at the time Jesus spoke these words. The following observations support this statement.

  1. When speaking in terms of time, the word “this” (οὗτος in the Greek) refers to now or the current time. For example, Joshua 24:15 says, “Choose you this day whom you will serve,” meaning “Choose now.” By contrast, in temporal terms the word “that” (ἐκεῖνος in the Greek) refers to not-now. For example, in eschatology, the end of the age will occur on that day, which is not-now. Therefore, when Jesus speaks of “this generation,” He is referring to the generation living while He was speaking, that is, the generation living “now.”
  2. In Matthew 24:2-35, in every instance when our Lord speaks about the future, He uses the word “that” (plural of “that” is “those”). We read in 24:19 about “those days” in the future when Jerusalem is being destroyed. Again in 24:22 we twice encounter “those days” talking about the future days of the great tribulation. In 24:29, “those days” also refers to the future. Thus, if in 24:34 Jesus had intended to refer to a future generation, He would have spoken of “that generation.” Since Jesus speaks instead of “this generation,” we conclude that He is referring to the generation living while He was on earth.
  3. Aside from 24:34, the phrase “this generation” appears five other times in the gospel of Matthew, in 11:16; 12:41, 42, 45; and 23:36. The context of the first four appearances requires that Jesus is referring to the generation to whom He was speaking. In the fifth appearance (23:36), while it is not required that Jesus is speaking just to His own contemporaries, it is certain that He is not speaking to an unspecified group of people living thousands of years in the future. This evidence indicates that, in 24:34, Jesus is referring to the generation living when He made this prophecy.

This cumulative evidence leads to the conclusion that, when our Lord said, “This generation (Greek ἡ γενεὰ αὕτη) will not pass away,” He was certainly referring to the people who were living at the time He spoke these words. Since that is the case, we are forced to reject the first proposed solution and turn our attention to the second alternative.

“UNTIL ALL THESE THINGS TAKE PLACE”

In our study so far, we have reached an exegetical dead-end in trying to interpret “this generation” in any sense other than the normal, natural meaning. We have concluded that “this generation” is “the generation living at the time Jesus spoke these words.” Therefore we will now consider the other possible solution, namely, a correct understanding of the phrase “all these things.”

Admittedly, at first reading of Matt. 24:34, it seems that, when Jesus says “all these things” in this verse, He is referring to all the events that He has mentioned since the start of the discourse. But we will discover that, although this might be our first assumption, this is not the required interpretation.

WHAT WE KNOW SO FAR. We know, from our previous work, that “this generation” refers to the generation living when Jesus spoke these words. We also know, from 24:34, that “all these things” will take place before “this generation” passes away. So, to put this into concrete terms, we know that “all these things” will take place within the time span of a normal generation, say, the next thirty to fifty years. We therefore conclude that “all these things,” whatever that includes, will take place between AD 60 and AD 80.

This deduction is especially helpful because, in Matt. 24:3, the disciples had asked Jesus a “when” question regarding the destruction of the temple. The disciples’ question, “When will these things happen?” in 24:3 was prompted by Jesus’ statements in 24:2 about the destruction of “all these things” in the temple. We had mentioned earlier that, when the disciples asked, “When . . . what . . . what?” in 24:3, Jesus had answered “When . . . what . . . what” in 24:5-35 but, until 24:34, Jesus has not given the disciples a “when” answer. But now we observe that the only place in the discourse where Jesus offers a “when” answer is here in 24:34. That is, Jesus’ only guidance on when the temple will be destroyed is here in 24:34 where He says, “Before this generation passes away.” Of course, we also know something the disciples did not know. We know that the temple was, in fact, destroyed in AD 70, about forty years after Jesus spoke these words and therefore also before “this generation” passed away.

THE INTERPRETIVE TASK. All of this leads us to a “crisis of interpretation.” From what we know and what we have just deduced, we are persuaded that, in Matthew 24:34, Jesus is only prophesying the destruction of the temple in AD 70. Thus, the interpretive task becomes justifying our claim that “all these things” in Matthew 24:34 applies only to the destruction of the temple and does not include Jesus’ coming or the end of the age. We will offer three pieces of evidence which justify the claim.

EVIDENCE / THE CASE

Our first piece of evidence involves Matt. 24:33 and this verse’s role in the discourse.

33 so, you too, when you see all these things, recognize that He is near, right at the door. – Matthew 24:33 (NASB)

EVIDENCE OF MATTHEW 24:33. In Matthew 24:33, it is apparent that Jesus is answering the disciples’ question (24:3) about His return and, by association, about the end of the age, but there is nothing in this verse to suggest that He is saying anything about the destruction of the temple. This is especially informative for us since we now know that the destruction of the temple and the return of Jesus are separated by at least two millennia. This means that when Jesus refers to “all these things” in 24:33, He is only referring to “the sign of Your coming and of the end of the age” (24:3).

We can also see in 24:33 that Jesus is answering a “what” question, not a “when” question. The phrase, “When you see all these things,” refers to “what will be the signs” in 24:3, but it supplies no information about when. That means that from Matthew 24:5-33, Jesus has not answered the disciples’ question about “when” the temple will be destroyed. We suggest that the missing answer is supplied in Matthew 24:34.

TEXTUAL COMPARISON OF MATTHEW 24:2 AND 24:34. To review, in Matt. 24:2 Jesus predicts the destruction of the temple when “all these things” will be torn down. Then in 24:3, the disciples ask Jesus, “When will these things happen?” certainly in reference to the destruction of the temple. In 24:15-20, Jesus details what the destruction of the temple and Jerusalem will be like and finally, in 24:34, He tells the disciples when this event will happen. The verses are below. (NASB – any emphasis is mine)

And He said to them, “Do you not see all these things? Truly I say to you, not one stone here will be left upon another, which will not be torn down.” – Matthew 24:2

As He was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to Him privately, saying, “Tell us, when will these things happen, and what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?” – Matthew 24:3

“Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place.” – Matthew 24:34

COMMENTS / OBSERVATIONS ABOUT THE TEXT. Notice that the identical phrase, “all these things,” appears in both 24:2 and in 24:34. This could be interpreted as a rhetorical device to connect the two verses and to show that “all these things,” refers to the same things in both verses; namely, the destruction of the temple.

Also observe that in both 24:2 and in 24:34 Jesus uses the phrase, “Truly I say to you.” This is significant for two reasons. First, this phrase causes 24:2 and 24:34-35 to stand out and to show that they serve as bookends to this section (Matt. 24:2-35) of the Olivet Discourse about the events of the end times. The purpose of these “bookend” verses is to open the section and then to conclude the section. Here, Jesus opens the section predicting the destruction of the temple and concludes the section by telling when that destruction will take place.

But second, in this section of the Olivet Discourse (24:2-35), “Truly I say to you” appears only twice, only in 24:2 and in 24:34. As above with the phrase “all these things,” so also here this could be interpreted as a rhetorical device to connect the two verses and to show that they refer to the same things; namely, to the destruction of the temple.

These observations suggest that there are textual reasons to think that 24:34 is referring only to the destruction of the temple.

JESUS’ LIMITED KNOWLEDGE ABOUT THE TIMING OF HIS COMING. The third piece of evidence in favor of understanding “all these things” in 24:34 as referring only to the destruction of the temple has to do with what Jesus says about His own knowledge about the timing of His coming (παρουσία). Note that in Matt. 24:36, Jesus says that “Of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father alone.” Jesus is clearly speaking about His coming (παρουσία) and He admits that even He, the Son of God, does not know the timing of His coming or the timing of the end of the age. He therefore cannot make predictions about when all these things (including His coming) will take place. We conclude that, in Matthew 24:34, Jesus cannot be declaring that His coming will occur before this generation passes away, because He has admitted (24:36) that He does not know when His coming will occur. Because Jesus cannot tell the “when” of His coming or the “when” of the end of the age, the only “when” He can be giving in Matthew 24:34 is the timing of the destruction of the temple. So we conclude that all these things in 24:34 refers to all the events around the destruction of the temple.   

SUMMARY

Based on the work presented in this article, we conclude that all these things in Matthew 24:34 refers only to the events surrounding the destruction of the temple and does not refer to either the coming of Jesus or to the events of the end of the age.

Soli Deo gloria            rmb                 10/31/2023                 #676

Why do you want to go back into slavery? (Galatians 4:8-11)

POST OVERVIEW. A commentary on Galatians 4:8-11, where Paul, having just told the Galatians (4:1-7) about their adoption in Christ so that they have become heirs of God, again becomes amazed by their following the Judaizers into slavery to the Mosaic Law.

There will be an article in the future on Galatians 4:12-20.

This article is going to be a commentary on Galatians 4:8-11. Before we begin examining our intended passage, we want to briefly remember the main message of the letter and where we are in Paul’s argument.

ESTABLISHING THE CONTEXT FOR GALATIANS 4:8-11

THE OVERALL LETTER. Paul has written this letter to the Galatians because he has heard that they were abandoning the pure gospel of Christ-crucified and were instead being tempted by the Judaizers to add to their faith a slavish obedience to the Mosaic Law. The letter emphasizes that salvation is by faith alone apart from any “works of the Law.”

IMMEDIATE CONTEXT. The section that we are studying (Gal. 4:8-11) follows a passage in which Paul taught the doctrine that, by faith in Jesus Christ, the Galatians have become sons, and since they are sons, then they are heirs through God (4:1-7). When they worshiped pagan deities, they “were enslaved to the elementary things of the world” (4:3), but now, having heard the gospel and having believed the gospel, the Galatians have been set free from their sin by their faith in Christ. So, when Paul left the Galatians (Acts 14:22-23), they were established in the faith and were free from idols. But now, under the deception of the Judaizers, the Galatians are drifting back into slavery, this time to the Mosaic Law. Paul’s appeal to them is urgent and direct. He calls them to abandon this course of action and return to the crucified Savior.

BIBLICAL CONNECTION. Geographically, the maps in your Bible will reveal that the cities of Iconium, Lystra, and Derbe are all part of Galatia. These cities appear in Acts 14:1-24 when Paul and Barnabas visited Galatia on Paul’s first missionary journey. In our study we will connect the events of Acts 14 with Paul’s teaching in this section of Galatians.

8 However at that time, when you did not know God, you were slaves to those which by nature are no gods. 9 But now that you have come to know God, or rather to be known by God, how is it that you turn back again to the weak and worthless elemental things, to which you desire to be enslaved all over again? 10 You observe days and months and seasons and years. 11 I fear for you, that perhaps I have labored over you in vain. – Galatians 4:8-11

COMMENTARY

First, we need to observe that Paul is no longer teaching doctrine but is instead applying the doctrine he taught in 4:1-7. In the previous passage he established that, by faith in Christ Jesus, the Galatians are sons of God and heirs of God. But now he is going to apply this doctrine to their recent personal history to show the reason for his dismay at their interest in the Law.

4:8. Before they were believers (“at that time”), they were slaves to their pagan religions and to petty deities. We know that these so-called deities are really demons (1 Cor. 10:20) whose purpose is to enslave unbelieving humans in useless religious practices so that they will never come to the knowledge of the truth. These religious practices were the “elemental things of the world” of Gal. 4:3. Call this original state of unbelief “Slavery #1.”

4:9. “But now . . .” Now that the Galatians have believed in the Lord Jesus and have been baptized into Him (3:27), they are free from their slavery to false gods and useless religious practices. “Galatians! Don’t you understand what you have received in the gospel? Don’t you know that, when you believed in Christ as your Lord and Savior, you received ‘every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ’ (Eph. 1:3)? In Christ, you are free and blessed and have been adopted as sons and heirs of God. Now ‘you have come to know God, or rather to be known by God!’ There is no spiritual blessing that you lack. So, why turn back?”

But not only were the Galatians apparently turning back, but they were, incredibly, turning back again to “the weak and worthless elemental things, to which [they] desire to be enslaved all over again.” They were forsaking the freedom of salvation in Christ for the slavery of elemental things. Notice that both here and in 4:3, Paul refers to the “elemental things.” Both the religious slavery of keeping the Mosaic Law (4:9) and the slavery of idolatry and pagan worship (4:3) are based on “the elemental things.” What Paul is implying is that, in this world, there are many different varieties of “elemental things” which can draw us away from Christ. The common feature of these godless “elemental things” is that they seek to enslave their victims in the chains of human works rather than in the freedom of the finished work of Christ on the cross. The “elemental things” are from a common source and differ only in their method of achieving slavery. They may be the useless efforts to appease pagan gods or they may be the endless striving to keep all the commandments and the ceremonies of the Mosaic Law, but they are all the works of fallen man that rely on man’s efforts rather than on the sufficiency of Christ’s atonement on Calvary’s tree. All such striving after these “elemental things” is blasphemy, because “if righteousness comes through [man’s efforts], then Christ died needlessly” (Gal. 2:21). “For if [man’s works] were able to impart life, then righteousness would indeed have been based on [man’s works]” (3:21), and Christ’s death on the cross would have been unnecessary.

Thus, the Galatians were heading toward a new slavery, a slavery to the works of the Mosaic Law. This dangerous state of reliance upon man’s works we will call “Slavery #2.”

4:10. The Galatians were beginning to pay attention to the Jewish Old Testament calendar, which gave “days and months and seasons and years,” that needed to be observed. This example is given to point to a dangerous trend. First, they were Gentiles and did not need to obey any of the ceremonial laws of the old covenant. But second, and most importantly, no amount of obedience to the Law or observance of its ceremonies will ever atone for a single sin. For any believer to observe the Law in the hopes of being justified declares that the death of Jesus on the cross was deficient and that we must add to Christ’s work to be saved. This is why Paul is appalled at the Galatians’ behavior.

4:11. There is no doubt that Paul intends this verse to hit the Galatians with maximum shock value. He is communicating to them their danger in the most strident terms he can muster, expressing his fear for them in terms that call their salvation into question (“I have labored over you in vain”). As we consider this verse, any notion we might have that Paul was talking to the Galatians about some secondary issue is blown away. This drifting toward Slavery #2 is a matter of heaven or hell. In Gal. 5:2, Paul declares their peril in other words: “If you receive circumcision, Christ will be of no benefit to you.” Can there be anything more terrifying than to imagine that Christ is of no benefit to me? Paul is warning the Galatians, and thus warning all professing believers, that if you are relying on Christ’s death on the cross plus anything else for your salvation, you are in extreme peril. No matter what a person thinks or says, a person is either relying entirely on the finished work of Christ on the cross as the once for all atonement for all their sins OR that person is relying on their own works. Either you are completely trusting in Christ-crucified OR you are depending on your own efforts. Either you get to heaven because of Christ’s righteousness OR you hope to get there on your own. That is what is at stake in this letter.

APPLICATION

The doctrinal drift of the Galatians called their salvation into question, but we, too, need to make sure where we stand. Are we completely relying on Christ or are we hedging our bets with a confidence in our own human works?

In another post we will look at Galatians 4:12-20 to see how Paul further expresses his concern and love for these Galatian believers.

Soli Deo gloria            rmb                 10/23/2023                 #675

Why does Paul not explain the form of baptism? (Rom. 6:4)

POST OVERVIEW. An examination of why the apostle Paul did not explain the proper form of baptism nor define the proper subjects of baptism. This article will be part of a future book on the subject of baptism.

FORM INSTRUCTED IN THE LORD’S SUPPER

In 1 Corinthains 11:23-34, Paul goes to considerable length to explain how the Lord’s Supper is to be done. He talks about the bread, that it is broken as a representation of Christ’s body broken for us (11:24). Then the apostle talks about the cup (“the fruit of the vine” in Luke 22:18), that it represents the new covenant in Christ’s blood which has been shed for us (11:25). We take these elements in remembrance of Christ. Then Paul teaches the meaning of the Lord’s Supper, this taking of the bread and the cup. “For as often as you eat the bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until He comes” (11:26) Thus, in this fellowship meal, God’s people proclaim the Lord’s death until He comes. The point to notice, though, is that Paul is very careful to give instruction on the form of the Lord’s Supper. This must mean that the form is important and that there is one correct, God-given form to be followed. To do anything else and call it the Lord’s Supper would be unthinkable. Obviously, the form matters.

FORM EXPLAINED IN THE OLD TESTAMENT SACRIFICES

This precision of form was also a prominent part of the Old Testament sacrificial system. The instructions given to the priests for how the various sacrifices were to be done (Leviticus chapters 1-5) seem almost impossibly complicated. The burnt offerings, the peace offerings, the sin offerings, and the guilt offerings each had their own separate set of instructions, and the instructions within a particular offering (e.g., the sin offering) varied depending on what animal was being sacrificed. The procedures for the Day of Atonement in Leviticus 16 were so critical that the priest who did not follow the instructions to the letter would die in the temple. Following the God-given form was literally a matter of life and death. Obviously, the form mattered.

NO FORM GIVEN FOR BAPTISM

It is, therefore, very curious that Paul, in Romans 6:3-4, in this foundational doctrinal text about the meaning of baptism and about how baptism relates to our salvation and relates to the death, burial, and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ, does not give any instructions or guidelines for how baptism is to be done or about who the proper subjects of baptism are. Instead, Paul’s entire emphasis is on the meaning of baptism. Why is this so? Why no mention of form or subjects?

As we consider this question, we know that, if there had been confusion or controversy about the way baptism was done, or if some believers did baptism one way and other believers did baptism in an entirely different way, it would have been incumbent upon Paul, as an apostle and therefore as a final authority on baptism, to give authoritative instruction on this matter. But he doesn’t. In fact, there is not in this passage even a hint of explanation or discussion about these crucial questions of the prescribed form of baptism or the proper subjects of baptism. Remarkably, as we expand our search into the rest of the Pauline corpus and then into the entire New Testament, we search in vain for a single mention anywhere about these two questions. This would be a glaring oversight unless one of two things were true: either the form of baptism and the subjects for baptism (i.e., the people who were to be baptized) did not matter and was of no consequence, or there was universal agreement in all the churches “from Jerusalem and round about as far as Illyricum” (Romans 15:19) on the answers to these two questions.

Exploring the first option, we ask ourselves, “Is it possible that the form of baptism and the qualifications of the people being baptized do not matter?” Maybe Peter baptized three thousand people on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2) using one method of baptism but then used an entirely different means to baptize Cornelius and his friends in Acts 10. Maybe Paul, since he was going to the Gentiles, did something more “Gentile-oriented” when he baptized them. Maybe each apostle had his own form of “baptism” that he preferred and that he then taught to the people to whom he preached the gospel. Maybe Jesus had no particular form of baptism in mind when He commanded His church to make and baptize disciples until He returned at the end of the age (Matthew 28:19-20). Maybe.

Of course, this suggestion is beyond absurd. When the risen Lord Jesus Christ gave His Great Commission to His church, He commanded baptism of disciples. Our King thus explicitly declares the proper subjects of baptism (disciples), and it is certain that He also had a very specific form of baptism in mind. We can, therefore, reject the first option, that the form of baptism and the subjects of baptism do not matter. As with every other major component of our faith, there is an orthodox position that is given to us in the Scriptures and that we are obligated to obey. The form and the subject of baptism matters.

We are, therefore, led to conclude that there is no apostolic instruction about the form of baptism or about the proper subjects of baptism because there was universal agreement in all the churches, whether mainly Jewish or entirely Gentile, whether “barbarian, Scythian, slave or free” (Colossians 3:11), on the answers to these two questions. It is unnecessary to give instruction or correction when there is universal understanding and complete agreement. When the New Testament speaks about “baptize” or “baptism,” there was no ambiguity in anyone’s mind about what was being said. No one was asking for clarification or demanding that the author define their terms. There were no metaphorical quizzical expressions on people’s faces as they wondered what the writer or speaker meant. In the second half of the first century in any place that had been reached by the gospel, there was universal agreement on the form of baptism and on who got baptized. Believer and unbeliever alike understood that when a person believed in the Lord Jesus Christ and thus became a disciple of Jesus, the new disciple testified to their faith in Jesus by being publicly immersed under water and being raised to newness of life. No one was confused about that. That is the baptism that Jesus commanded, that was what the apostles taught and practiced as they established churches, and that was, therefore, what was universally understood and done. This explains why we have no scriptural instruction on the form of baptism.

A SUBMARINE LECTURE

Imagine we are visiting a classroom at the Naval Academy in Annapolis, MD, where the instructor is giving a lecture on submarines to these Navy officer trainees. Would the trainer spend the first third of his lecture telling these men what a submarine was and where a submarine operated? Of course not. That would be beyond absurd. There is universal agreement among all the men in that classroom of the word “submarine” and there is universal knowledge about where a submarine operates. The trainer is not going to waste time telling these naval officer trainees things that he should assume to be common knowledge. No one at the Naval Academy is confused about submarines.

Why is this? First of all, the word “submarine” itself supplies a description of the object. “Sub” means underneath something or below something. Anyone who speaks English knows that. “Marine” is a word that has to do with water, specifically anything associated with the sea. Thus, just by the word itself, “submarine” must be something that is under the sea. So, if these cadets knew nothing else about these things called submarines, they could figure it out just by their knowledge of English.

But also, these men are future Navy officers. They have immersed themselves in all things Navy because this is part of their identity. They have seen submarines in movies and magazines and books. They watched “The Hunt for Red October” five times. They have probably been onboard submarines and may have already taken trips on these vessels. All of this makes basic definitions an unnecessary waste of time. This also means that if the instructor begins telling these men things that are true of battleships and aircraft carriers but that have nothing to do with submarines, there will be mutiny in the classroom. They will not be convinced that a battleship is a submarine simply because the instructor insists that it is so.

THE ANALOGY WITH BAPTISM

Using this submarine illustration as an analogy will help us understand more about why baptism was so well understood during the apostolic era. In that time, the common language of the Mediterranean world was koine Greek. This was the language used for the New Testament. So, if someone in Rome were reading the letter of Romans to the church, the reader would have encountered the Greek word βαπτίζω (baptizo). This is a common word in the New Testament which anyone who knew koine Greek would understand as meaning “immerse” or “submerge.” Thus when the listeners hear the reader telling about “baptized into Christ Jesus” (Romans 6:3), they hear “ ‘immersed’ into Christ” or “ ‘submerged’ into Christ.” Even if they had never seen a baptism or heard anything else about baptizing, just because they knew Greek, they would know that baptism had something to do with immersing or submerging someone. That’s just what the word means.

(NOTE: I plan to write a future article speculating about why the original translators of the Greek New Testament into English chose to transliterate βαπτίζω rather than translate it.)

But also, the people who were listening to the Bible being taught and who were listening to βαπτίζω being used in epistles and in sermons were also those who had seen baptisms done. They would have been exposed to the practice of Christian baptism. They had witnessed that, when any person became a disciple of Jesus, that person made their commitment public by confessing Christ before the gathered church and then being immersed under the water and raised up out of the water. Their old life was gone, their “old man” had died, and they rose out of the water to a new life in Christ. The apostles had done that, now the elders of the church did that, and it was expected that, when anyone came to faith in Jesus, they would be baptized. There was no ambiguity or confusion. That was baptism. The word βαπτίζω means immerse, so the new believer was immersed into Christ.

CONCLUSION. Since the immersing of the new believer in water before the gathered church is the God-given means for Christian baptism, I appeal to those who practice a non-biblical means to abandon their disobedience and follow Christ’s command.

Soli Deo gloria            rmb                 10/6/2023                   #674

Romans 6:3-4 – Paul teaches meaning and form of baptism.

POST OVERVIEW. This article is the first in a series of articles on Romans 6:1-14. This section of Scripture is packed with theological truths, and in this series, we hope to explore many of these doctrines and to understand what Paul is teaching in this powerful section of Scripture.

This first article is focused mostly on Romans 6:3-4 where Paul teaches about the meaning and the form of baptism.

3 Or do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus have been baptized into His death? 4 Therefore we have been buried with Him through baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life. – Romans 6:3-4 (NASB)

As we move through the book of Romans, we must keep in mind that, as God’s chosen instrument (Acts 9:15-16), Paul the apostle is communicating divine truth. In other words, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, Paul is teaching unchanging doctrine. And in Romans 6:3-4, it is clear that the doctrine in view is baptism. In these verses, the apostle Paul gives his clearest teaching on the meaning of baptism and, by implication, its form. So, what does the apostle teach about the form?

THEN. From the pages of the New Testament, it is clear that the apostle Paul knew only one form of baptism, and that was the form which was inaugurated by John the Baptist and received by the Lord Jesus in His own baptism (Matthew 3:16), the form that, upon profession of faith, immerses the subject in water and then raises them up out of the water. This was certainly the baptism that Paul himself received (Acts 9:18). The point here is that, to Paul’s original audience in Rome or to any other professing believer who lived at that time, the only known baptism was the immersing in water of the believer upon the believer’s profession of faith. That’s what the apostles taught and that’s what the apostles did, so that was baptism. This baptism was the common experience of all believers. There simply was no other baptism in existence.

NOW. And there is no reason that baptism should be different for us today. Baptism is still the immersing in water of the believer upon the believer’s profession of faith in Jesus. This is the apostolic, God-given form of Christian baptism and is therefore the only acceptable form. Any “baptism” that deviates from this is meaningless and man-made and is done, whether knowingly or ignorantly, in disobedience to the one God-given ordinance. Only this baptism illustrates the theological truths about salvation taught in Romans 6 and in the rest of the New Testament. Therefore, the form cannot be changed. Anything else is simply not baptism.

What, then, are the theological truths taught in Romans 6 that are so well illustrated by immersion into water and being raised from the water? Discovering these theological truths will be the subject of the next several posts as we explore Romans 6:1-7.

Soli Deo gloria            rmb                 9/25/2023                   #673

Basic interpretive principles for Revelation 5-20, Part 2

POST OVERVIEW. The second in a two-part series of posts stating and justifying two key interpretive principles for Rev. 5-20 and presenting two crucial questions for applying these principles to a given text in Revelation. (The first post of this series was post #671.)

This second post is about Key Interpretive Principle #2, that the characters and events of Revelation chapters 5-20 are to be understood as symbolic and figurative, not literal.

INTRO. The purpose of this two-part series is to present two powerful principles for helping the Bible student interpret the visions in Revelation 5-20 and to explain two crucial questions which emerge from these interpretive principles.

TWO PRINCIPLES AND TWO CRUCIAL QUESTIONS FOR REVELATION 5-20

THE TWO KEY PRINCIPLES STATED. The two key principles are 1) Revelation 5-20 is not written in chronological order, and 2) our default assumption is that the characters and events of Revelation 5-20 are to be understood figuratively or symbolically, not literally.

In the previous post (#671), we stated and justified Key Interpretive Principle #1, that Revelation chapters 5-20 are not chronological. We now turn to Key Interpretive Principle #2, that the characters and events of Revelation chapters 5-20 are to be understood as symbolic and figurative, not literal.

JUSTIFICATION OF “NOT LITERAL, BUT FIGURATIVE AND SYMBOLIC.” Key Interpretive Principle #2: The default assumption is that the characters and events in Rev. 5-20 are to be understood figuratively or symbolically, not literally. To justify this principle, I refer the reader to a two-part series of articles on my blog site (Post #622, 2/16/2023 and #623, 2/16/2023), which addresses this precise subject. The essence of these two posts is expressed in the quote below from Post #623.

QUOTE FROM POST #623. “One of the most obvious features of these chapters (Revelation 4-20) is a continuous pouring forth of strange and powerful visions of angels and dragons and earthquakes and hailstones. Just speaking for me personally, I cannot imagine what a literal interpretation of these visions could possibly mean, so I have always thought that most of these were intended to be symbolic of other biblical realities. After all, Revelation is the ultimate example of the genre called biblical prophecy, and, as in all biblical prophecy, the symbolic and the figurative are common. So, while there are certainly parts of this section of Revelation that should be understood literally, the overwhelming majority of these chapters presents events and characters which only make sense if they are symbolic and figurative. In fact, the great challenge of interpreting Revelation 4-20 is determining the meanings of the many images and events that John records.

The following give evidence of the need for a symbolic or figurative interpretation.

  • The Lamb in Rev. 5:6ff
  • The seals of Rev. 5, 6
  • The four horsemen of Rev. 6:1-8
  • The 144,000 of Rev. 7:4-8; 14:1-5
  • The seven angels with the seven trumpets of Rev. 8-9
  • The star from heaven in Rev. 8:10; 9:1ff
  • The abyss (bottomless pit) and the smoke in Rev. 9:2-10
  • Locusts and scorpions in Rev. 9:3-10
  • Twice ten thousand time ten thousand horsemen Rev. 9:16
  • Kill a third of mankind Rev. 9:15 (2.5 Billion people??)
  • Two witnesses, fire flows out of their mouths Rev. 11:5
  • The woman Rev. 12
  • Red dragon Rev. 12
  • The beast Rev. 13:1-10
  • Another beast Rev. 13:11-17
  • The angel and the sickle Rev. 14:17-20
  • Seven angels with seven bowls Rev. 16:1-12
  • Armageddon Rev. 16:13-16
  • Scarlet beast and the woman Rev. 17:3-18
  • The destruction of Babylon Rev. 18
  • The Rider on the white horse Rev. 19:11-21
  • The angel from heaven Rev. 20:1-3
  • The dragon, the key, the chain, the abyss (bottomless pit) Rev. 20:1-3
  • Thousand years Rev. 20:2-7   [END QUOTE]

For those who desire to read the full posts, here are links to posts #622 and #623 on interpreting Revelation’s symbolism.  Post 622    Post 623

CRUCIAL QUESTION #2. Since most of the characters and events in Rev. 5-20 are understood figuratively and symbolically, the student of Revelation is compelled to frequently use their Bible study skills to ask and answer crucial question #2, “WHO OR WHAT does this symbol represent?”

AN EXAMPLE FROM REVELATION 20:1-3; WHO IS “THE ANGEL?”

My recent three-post study on Revelation 20:1-3 (posts #668, #669, and #670) was done to determine when in human history “the thousand years” occurs, but an important part of that larger study was identifying “the angel” in this scene in Rev. 20:1. To discover the identity of “the angel,” we employed crucial question #2, “WHO does this symbol (“the angel”) represent?” For an example of how the WHO crucial question is used, follow the link to post #668.

SUMMARY. Stating and justifying Key Interpretive Principle #2, that Revelation chapters 5-20 are figurative and symbolic, not literal. Also, presenting crucial question #2, “WHO OR WHAT does this symbol represent?”

Soli Deo gloria            rmb                 9/15/2023                   #672

Basic interpretive principles for Revelation 5-20, Part 1

POST OVERVIEW. The first in a two-part series of posts stating and justifying two key interpretive principles for Rev. 5-20 and presenting two crucial questions for applying these principles to a given text in Revelation.

This first post is about Key Interpretive Principle #1: Revelation 5-20 is not chronological.  

Interpreting and understanding the book of Revelation is a challenge for any student of the Bible. The rapidly changing scenes in Revelation and the visions of angels and dragons and beasts and creatures from the abyss can be very confusing. Where does the student begin?

The purpose of this two-post study is to present two powerful principles for helping the Bible student interpret the visions in Revelation 5-20 and to explain two crucial questions which emerge from these interpretive principles.

TWO PRINCIPLES AND TWO CRUCIAL QUESTIONS FOR REVELATION 5-20

TWO KEY PRINCIPLES STATED. The two key principles are 1) Revelation 5-20 is not written in chronological order, and 2) our default assumption is that the characters and events of Revelation 5-20 are to be understood figuratively or symbolically, not literally.

JUSTIFICATION OF “NOT CHRONOLOGICAL.” There are two features of the text that demonstrate that Rev. 5-20 is not read chronologically (Key Interpretive Principle #1). These features are, first, that there are similar or identical events and phrases which are repeated at several different points in these chapters, and second, there are some events that are clearly intended to be final that occur long before the end of the section. Examples of these follow.

REPEATED EVENTS AND PHRASES.

  • In 16:14, we see the beast and the kings of the whole world gathering together for the war of the great day of God; but in 19:19, we again see the beast and the kings of the earth “assembled” (same Greek word as “gather” in 16:14) to make war against Him who sat on the horse; and finally, in 20:8, the recently-released Satan comes out to gather the nations together for the war. These three verses say essentially the same thing about the same event, but they are in three different sections of Revelation. Conclusion? The text is not chronological.
  • In 14:8, we read, “Fallen, fallen is Babylon the great, she who made all the nations drink the wine of the passion of her immorality.” Then in 18:2-3, we read, “Fallen, fallen is Babylon the great! For all the nations have drunk the wine of the passion of her immorality.” Identical texts but separated by several chapters of intense activity means the book is not chronological.
  • In 7:9-17, we see “a great multitude” praising God who sits on the throne and praising the Lamb. Then in Rev. 19:1, we hear the loud voice of “a great multitude” worshiping God who sits on the throne (19:4). (See also “the voice of a great multitude” in 19:6.) This repeated scene takes place in the new heaven and new earth where all the redeemed are worshiping God and the Lamb forever, but these passages are far apart in the book. Also, these scenes take place in eternity in the new heaven and new earth. As such, they belong in chapters 21-22, not in chapters 7 and 19. When we see the same scene in different places, it means that the book is not chronological.
  • 6:14: “every mountain and island were moved out of their places.” 16:20: “every island fled away and the mountains were not found.” The identical event at two well-spaced places in the book means that the book is not chronological.
  • In 8:5, we read, “There followed peals of thunder and sounds and flashes of lightning and an earthquake.” But in Rev. 11:19 we find peals of thunder, flashes of lightning, and an earthquake. And in Rev. 16:18 we again have peals of thunder, flashes of lightning, and a great earthquake. The same event is found at three widely separated places in the text. This is more evidence that Revelation 5-20 is not read chronologically.

PICTURES OF FINAL JUDGMENT APPEAR LONG BEFORE THE END

  • Picture #1. Rev. 6:12-17. 6:12-14 is filled with images from “the day of the LORD” passages in the Old Testament. This scene is a picture of the end. Then in 6:15-17 we see “the kings of the earth” (see 16:14, 18:3, 19:19) hiding themselves from “the presence of Him who sits on the throne and from the wrath of the Lamb, for the great day of their wrath has come, and who is able to stand?” This is certainly the final judgment, yet, curiously, it is placed at the end of chapter 6. If the final judgment is presented in chapter 6, then Revelation is not chronological.
  • Picture #2. Rev. 16:17-21. In 16:17, a loud voice says, “It is done,” which also appears in 21:6 (new heaven and new earth). We have already mentioned the peals of thunder, etc. (11:19; 8:5). In 16:19, figurative “Babylon” receives the cup of the wine of God’s fierce wrath (also in 6:12; 14:19; 19:15). The tone of the passage is one of final judgment, but we are still in chapter 16, not at the end of chapter 20 or in chapter 21. As above, if the final judgment is presented in chapter 16, then Revelation is not chronological.
  • Picture #3. Rev. 19:11-21. The scene with the Rider on the white horse is the climax of the book of Revelation as the glorious Lamb comes from heaven to tread the wine press of the fierce wrath of God, the Almighty (19:15). To emphasize the finality of this event, in 19:21 we read, “And the rest were killed with the sword which came from the mouth of Him who sat on the horse.” If Revelation were chronological, this would be the end because there are no people living on earth after 19:21. But instead of the end coming here, we read of “the thousand years” (20:1-7) and of yet another war (20:8-9) and of Satan being thrown into the lake of fire (20:10) before we get to the great white throne (20:11-15). This is yet more evidence that Revelation is not read chronologically.

CRUCIAL QUESTION #1. Hopefully, by presenting this evidence, we have made the case that Revelation 5-20 should not be read chronologically. When we realize how not to read Revelation 5-20, our efforts at interpreting the text actually become easier because now, instead of trying to force these scenes into a bizarre chronological order, we can look carefully at the details of the text and at the interpretive clues that are available in the text and ask the crucial question, “WHEN does this event take place?” It is, therefore, incumbent upon the student of Revelation to become skilled at asking and answering crucial question #1, “WHEN does this event take place?”

AN EXAMPLE FROM REVELATION 6:12-17

To understand how to use the WHEN question, we will go quickly through an example. We have already mentioned Rev. 6:12-17 several times in this article, so let’s go there. In this passage, the Lamb breaks the sixth seal (the next to last seal, so we are probably nearing the end of the age) and we read of a great earthquake. (Think Rev. 16:18, which is in another “final judgment” passage.) The earthquake is followed by several “day of the LORD” events from the Old Testament. The sun became black (Joel 2:31; Matt. 24:29), the moon became blood, the stars fell from the sky, the sky was rolled up like a scroll (Is. 34:4), and every mountain and island was moved out of their place (Nah. 1:5; Rev. 16:20). Then notice at the conclusion of this pericope, we read (6:16-17) of the wrath of the Lamb. This is as clear a picture of the day of the Lord as we have in Scripture. The Lamb is certainly the Lord Jesus, the Rider on the white horse of Rev. 19:11-21, the Lord descending from heaven with a shout in 1 Thess. 4:16. This is the day of judgment, “that day,” when the wrath of God is poured out on the unrighteous. WHEN does the day of the Lord occur? We know that the Lord Jesus will return on the last day to destroy the unrighteous. Therefore, Rev. 6:12-17 is a scene from the last day of the age just before the great white throne judgment (Rev. 20:11-15).

For another extended example of using this crucial question #1, refer to my recent three-post study on Revelation 20:1-3 where we sought to determine WHEN in human history “the thousand years” occurs. (See posts #668, #669, and #670.) The WHEN question was used several times in this study.

SUMMARY. Stating and justifying Key Interpretive Principle #1, that Revelation chapters 5-20 are not to be read chronologically. Also, presenting crucial question #1, “WHEN does this event take place?”

Soli Deo gloria            rmb                 9/15/2023                   #671