Is Romans 10 Calling Us to Send Out Missionaries?

One of the things we do on this blog is take commonly quoted bible verses and passages and put them back in their contexts. This practice is an important part of "rightly dividing the Word of Truth" (2 Tim 2:15). We are called in this age to "study to show [ourselves] approved unto God," and we are to be "workmen" in that endeavor. 

Another way to translate and understand this command is that we must "strive" to "cut straight lines" in scripture. This is a marked change from the Lord's promise to his disciples that they will be given understanding and even the words to speak when necessary (Luke 12:11-12). We only note these things to again point out the differences in the current age as compared to the Acts age and compared to the earthly ministry of the Lord Jesus.

So, in the spirit of looking at passages and verses in their contexts (seeking to rightly divide them), let's look at a very popular verse/passage used to teach that "churches" (as they are called) should be sending out missionaries. In a previous study we noted that God is never without a witness. We have that as a backdrop as we look closely at the context of today's verse/passage under review, Romans 10:11-21.

For the Scripture says, “Whoever believes in Him will not be ashamed.” For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek, for the same Lord over all is generous toward all who call upon Him. For, “Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved.”

-Romans 10:11-13 

We start with the idea that those who seek rescue (in any form) must believe, and in believing call upon the name of the Lord. This is possible for Jews who have been given the Law and the oracles of God and for Gentiles we are without the Law or the oracles of God. 

We have seen elsewhere that while God is fully reconciled to all men through Christ (2 Cor 5:18-19), the call today is for men to therefore, by an act of the will, be reconciled to God (2 Cor 5:20-21). And while we are given this ministry of reconciliation, whether we are obedient or not, God has his witness and man is without excuse. Even the Gentiles who do not have the Word of God are without excuse.

The invisible things about Him—His eternal power and deity—have been clearly seen since the creation of the world and are understood by the things that are made, so that they are without excuse. 

-Romans 1:20

When we continue in Romans 10, we encounter the verses that launched many a missionary meeting or fundraising drive.

How then shall they call on Him in whom they have not believed? And how shall they believe in Him of whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear without a preacher? And how shall they preach unless they are sent? As it is written: “How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the gospel of peace, who bring good news of good things!"

-Romans 10:14-15

In light of what we've seen in Romans 1, we could stop here and conclude from just that passage that all have heard of God through his creation. But Romans 10 doesn't leave us there. The question posed here about a preacher is answered if we only keep reading. The answer is not "unless the missionary committee raises enough funds, men can never know the truth!" Yet this is a summation of how this passage is often taught from our pulpits.

Paul will, as his manner was in his Acts (Jewish) Age epistles, turn to the prophets to answer his own question.

But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Isaiah says, “Lord, who has believed our [Israel's] report?” So then faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God. But I say, have they not heard? Yes, indeed: 

“Their voice went into all the earth,
and their words to the ends of the world... 

-Romans 10:16-18

You will also hear in the missionary appeal, verse 17, that "faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of God." The witness of Creation is not "the word of God." This verse is aimed at Israel. We must see the juxtaposition of the Word of God and the argument. Faith does come by hearing and hearing is through the Word of God, but let's not miss the BUT in the argument. While the former is true, Paul argues that those not under the sound of the prophets (the gentile nations STILL heard from God). To Israel was given the word of God (Romans 9). They were given the calling of being priests for the nations (Exodus 19). In that calling they had the advantage of having the oracles of God. But even in their failing, the gentile was never left without hope.

What advantage then does the Jew have? Or what profit is there in circumcision? Much in every way! Chiefly because the oracles of God were entrusted to them [the Jews].

-Romans 3:1-2

We've noted in other studies how Paul, when witnessing to Gentiles in Athens, does not invoke the prophets or quote scripture. But he does quote a pagan poet. Paul's witness is creation there.

Then Paul stood in the middle of the Areopagus, and said: “Men of Athens, I perceive that in all things you are very religious. For as I passed by and looked up at your objects of worship, I found an altar with this inscription: TO THE UNKNOWN GOD. Whom you therefore unknowingly worship, Him I proclaim to you. “God who made the world and all things in it, being Lord of heaven and earth, does not live in temples made by hands. Nor is He served by men’s hands, as though He needed anything, since He gives all men life and breath and all things. He has made from one blood every nation of men to live on the entire face of the earth, having appointed fixed times and the boundaries of their habitation, that they should seek the Lord so perhaps they might reach for Him and find Him, though He is not far from each one of us. ‘For in Him we live and move and have our being.’ As some of your own poets have said, ‘We are His offspring.’ “Therefore since we are the offspring of God, we ought not to suppose that the Deity is like gold or silver or stone or an engraved work of art or an image of the reflection of man. God overlooked the times of ignorance, but now He commands all men everywhere to repent. For He has appointed a day on which He will judge the world in righteousness by a Man whom He has appointed, having given assurance of this to all men by raising Him from the dead.”

-Acts 17:22-31

Whereas all the world has the witness of creation and thus all the world is without excuse regarding their need in acknowledging God, only to Israel was given the oracles of God. We must always keep in mind that words like "saved" or "eternal life" must be understood in context of the plan and purpose of God in mind. This is easily seen with the word "saved." One can be "saved" from a shipwreck or "saved" from the sword. One can also be "saved" from being cast out of the earthly kingdom or "saved" from the penalty for sin (death and decay). Etc.

Just to illustrate this, let us look at "saved" in Acts 27.

And as the sailors were seeking to escape from the ship, when they had let down the skiff into the sea, under pretense of putting out anchors from the prow, Paul said to the centurion and the soldiers, “Unless these men stay in the ship, you cannot be saved.”

-Acts 27:30-31

No one is using this verse to teach redemption from the penalty of sin by staying in a ship. Even in the immediate context, Paul clearly has in mind only physical salvation from death. 

But let us continue in Romans 10.

But I say, did Israel not know? First, Moses says:

“I will make you [Israel] jealous by those who are not a nation,
and by a foolish nation I will anger you.”

-Romans 10:19 

Did Israel not know what? Paul is asking if Israel was left without instruction as to their calling regarding their witness to the gentile nations. No. They knew their calling. He quotes here from Deuteronomy 32 which contains a scathing rebuke of Israel for her idolatry. Israel in her jealousy and hatred of Gentiles failed in her calling. But God does not fail the gentiles 

Paul continues his argument in Romans 10 by pointing Israel to her scriptures and to how he still reaches the gentiles without the nation.

And Isaiah is very bold and says:

“I was found by those who did not seek Me;
I revealed myself to those who did not ask for Me.”[Isaiah 65:1]

But to Israel He says:

“All day long I have stretched out My hands
to a disobedient and contrary people.”[Isaiah 65:2]

-Romans 10:20-21

We are still in context of the need for a messenger in Romans 10. Israel had that message. They had the Law and the Prophets. Israel did know (or should have known) their calling as priests for the nations. 

Moses went up to God, and the Lord called to him from the mountain, saying, “Thus you shall say to the house of Jacob and tell the children of Israel: You have seen what I did to the Egyptians, and how I lifted you up on eagles’ wings, and brought you to Myself. Now therefore, if you will faithfully obey My voice and keep My covenant, then you [Israel] shall be My special possession out of all the nations, for all the earth is Mine. And you will be to Me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.’ These are the words which you shall speak to the children of Israel.”

-Exodus 19:3-6 

In a future study we will look at Isaiah 61 in full. The Lord reads from this chapter in his first public appearance in Luke 4:17-19 in the synagogue. The Lord ministered to Israel alone (Matthew 15:24) and there declared a partial fulfillment of the prophecy.  Leaving that thought there, we note this later in the chapter regarding a future, cleansed Israel.

For I, the Lord, love justice,
I hate robbery in the burnt offering;
and I will faithfully give them their recompense
and make an everlasting covenant with them.
Their descendants shall be known among the Gentiles
and their offspring among the peoples.
All who see them shall acknowledge them
because they are the descendants whom the Lord has blessed.

-Isaiah 61:8-9 

The future New Covenant (Jeremiah 31) with Israel is pictured here. After Israel's time of cleaning in the Great Tribulation, cleansed of her idolatry and unbelief, God will restore the Kingdom in Israel (Acts 1) and Israel will take her place at the head of the nations. This is where the judgment of the Sheep and  the Goats of Matthew 25 comes in (regarding the Lord's "brethren," Israel). We note these things addressed elsewhere as there is so much damage tradition and superstition have done to the practice of rightly dividing the Word of Truth, we find it necessary. 

Let us return to the practice of Paul and the Apostles in the Acts age when Romans 10 was written.

The Lord and the Apostles to the Circumcision, as well as Paul in his full Acts ministry, pointed Israel to her prophets repeatedly. Even without the prodding, they should have known their Messiah and their calling. And some did recognize him. 

When they had traveled through Amphipolis and Apollonia, they came to Thessalonica, where there was a synagogue of the Jews. According to his custom, Paul went in, and on three Sabbaths he lectured to them from the Scriptures, explaining and proving that the Christ had to suffer and to rise from the dead, and saying, “This Jesus, whom I preach to you, is the Christ.” Some of them were persuaded and joined with Paul and Silas, including a great crowd of devout Greeks and many leading women.

-Acts 17:1-4

The Roman Centurion in Matthew 8 came to the Lord from outside Israel. The Lord noted his act of faith and declared that some of "the sons of the Kingdom [Israel] will be cast into outer darkness" while some Gentiles will sit and "eat with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in the Kingdom." Men today want to make the "outer darkness" into some mythical place of fiery torture by God. But the Lord is quite clear here. That place is where "sons of the Kingdom" will be cast. It is on the earth. It will be outside of the Kingdom and land promised to Israel.

There was no appeal to the prophets for Gentiles. Israel was given the markers of the Messiah. At his trial, Paul made no appeal to what we call New Testament scriptures. He testified that he spoke nothing against what Moses and the Prophets said would come.

Philip found Nathanael and said to him, “We have found Him of whom Moses in the law, as well as the prophets, wrote, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph.” 

-John 1:45


“Do not think that I shall accuse you to the Father. There is one who accuses you—Moses, in whom you [Israel] trust. For if you believed Moses, you would believe Me, for he wrote of Me. But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe My words?” 

-John 5:45-57

Therefore having obtained help from God, I continue to this day, testifying both to small and great, saying nothing but what the prophets and Moses said would happen 

-Acts 26:22

As we continue in Romans 10, Paul again turns to the prophet Isaiah.

And Isaiah is very bold and says:

“I was found by those who did not seek Me;
I revealed myself to those who did not ask for Me.”

-Romans 10:20 

This verse clearly is a reference to gentiles; gentiles who were not seeking the Messiah as revealed to Israel in scripture. We are told that to find we first must seek. Gentile believers were seeking, but not seeking according to the witness of Moses and the Prophets as Israel was called to do.

Paul quotes the first half of Isaiah 65:1. We are not going to examine that whole chapter, but let's look at a bit of the context in Isaiah verse 65:1-2.

“I was sought by those who did not ask for Me;
I was found by those who did not seek Me.
I said, ‘Here I am, here I am,’ To a nation that was not called by My name.

 I have spread out My hands all day
to a rebellious people [Israel]
who walk in a way that was not good,
after their own thoughts

When we're in the prophets, as when we are in the Acts and in the Acts Age epistles of Paul, we see the distinction between God dealing with Israel [Jews] and God dealing with Gentile nations and individual Gentiles in light of the Plan for the Earth. God went after Gentiles. He sought among the Gentiles those who would answer his call as witnessed in Creation after Israel's failure. 

Note that in his quotation of Isaiah 65:1-2 how Paul selectively leaves out the second half of verse 1 before quoting verse 2 in Romans 10:21. Paul adds a note to be sure we know God was speaking expressly to Israel alone in her unique calling. He quotes here the first half of Isaiah 65:2 as a contrast.

But to Israel [alone] He says:

“All day long I have stretched out My hands
to a disobedient and contrary people.”

-Romans 10:21

We remember that Paul was utterly clear in Romans 9 to whom [present tense at the time of the writing of Romans] God entrusted his earthly calling.

I am speaking the truth in Christ, I am not lying; my conscience testifies with me in the Holy Spirit, that I have great sorrow and continual anguish in my heart. For I could wish that I myself were accursed from Christ for my brothers, my kinsmen by race, who are Israelites, to whom belong the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the service of God, and the promises, to whom belong the patriarchs, and from whom, according to the flesh, is Christ, who is over all, God forever blessed. Amen.

-Romans 9:1-5

 

When we see the distinctions and lines that God has drawn and which scripture rightly divided reveals, we can see the full argument Paul is making. 

 

How then shall they [Gentiles] call on Him in whom they have not believed? And how shall they believe in Him of whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear without a preacher?...

So then faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God. But I say, have they not heard? Yes, indeed: 

“Their voice went into all the earth,
and their words to the ends of the world... 

 Israel was called to be the witness to the nations. They failed in that calling. But when Paul asks if "they" have heard and quotes Palm 19:4. We must note, from the full context (that a Jew would know) that the "they" that have heard are gentile nations and the "they/their" speaking and proclaiming and voicing are the heavens and the skies (i.e. Creation).

The heavens declare the glory of God;
the skies proclaim the work of his hands.
Day after day they pour forth speech;
night after night they reveal knowledge.
They have no speech, they use no words;
no sound is heard from them.
Yet their voice goes out into all the earth,
their words to the ends of the world.

-Psalm 19:1-4

The argument Paul is making in Romans 10:14-15 is not that the missions committee needs to raise funds for missionaries (although there is nothing wrong with that), but rather that while Israel failed in her calling to witness to the nations, God did not the fail the nations as they  have creation witnessing to them.

Paul asks, "have they not heard?" and he emphatically points to scripture to say that even without human voices, even in Israel's failure, "yes indeed" the nations have heard. 

In the Acts, God offered "the restoration of the Kingdom in Israel" (Acts 1) and "the restoration of all things" (Acts 3) to Israel if she repented. When she failed to listen, God grafted in Gentiles into the promises in the Kingdom for the sole purpose of making Israel jealous. When none of this worked, God revealed a new heavenly plan to Paul in the Book of Ephesians  and put the earthly plan on hold. 

[The risen Lord Jesus] presented Himself alive after His passion by many infallible proofs, appearing to them for forty days, and speaking concerning the kingdom of God. Being assembled with them, He commanded them, “Do not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, of which you have heard from Me. For John baptized with water, but you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days from now.” So when they had come together, they asked Him, “Lord, will You at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?”

-Acts 1:3-6

“Now brothers [Men of Israel, v.12] , I know that you acted in ignorance, as did also your rulers. But what God foretold through all the prophets, that His Christ should suffer, He thus fulfilled. Therefore repent and be converted, that your sins may be wiped away, that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord, and that He may send the One who previously was preached to you, Jesus Christ, whom the heavens must receive until the time of restoring all things which God spoke through all His holy prophets since the world began.

-Acts 3:17-21

For this cause I Paul, the prisoner of Jesus Christ for you Gentiles, if you have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me to you-ward: how that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery; (as I wrote afore in few words, whereby, when you read, you may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ) which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit; that the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel: whereof I was made a minister, according to the gift of the grace of God given unto me by the effectual working of his power.

-Ephesians 3:1-7 [this is not part of the earthly plan, but of the current heavenly calling]

Romans 10 is not about the missionary committee. It is part of Paul's argument for the calling of the Gentiles into the earthly promises to Israel for the purpose of making Israel jealous. The goal is to bring Israel to repentance so she can take her place in the earthly plan of God. That repentance is yet future and part of an age to come.  

Paul is telling Jews that despite their disobedience, God has reached the Gentiles. They have heard.

 

The False Choice and Logical Fallacy of a Jew Hater

Will you bow down to the Jewish Zionists and deny Jesus is the Messiah OR will you become a fellow cast-off with Jesus, as this man born blind and healed by Jesus had to do, and be disowned by your own family and friends, and potentially lose everything? 

-Created4Health dot org

The full article in which this quote is pulled is linked above if you desire to read all of it. I pulled out this false conclusion of his to make several points about current antisemitism in the professing "church" and among professed believers (current and past). 

The writer apparently doesn't like Jews. Yes, that's an opinion, but it doesn't take long on his site to determine that's it's not an unfair assessment. But you may draw your won conclusions upon visiting.

First, we must recognize that in the current age, with Israel set aside and all being considered Gentiles for the sake of the revelation of the Mystery, that those promulgating the Jewish rejection of Christ are, in fact, the enemies of Christ. We also note that those pushing Jewish ordinances inside or outside Christendom are also enemies of Paul's revelation. 

But while acknowledging that, we also note very strongly that the plan of God for the earth (covering the vast majority of scripture including the gospel accounts, the Acts, and the epistles of the Acts age) is very much centered on the physical children of Abraham. We have covered that in many other places, so we will leave that there and only point to a couple of foundational verses (out of many) along this line.

Then Jesus said to the [Gentile] woman, “I was sent only to help God’s lost sheep—the people of Israel... “It is not right to take the children’s bread and to throw it to dogs.””

-Matthew 15:24,26b

For I could wish that I myself were accursed from Christ for my brothers, my kinsmen by race, who are Israelites, to whom belong the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the service [priesthood] of God, and the promises, to whom belong the patriarchs, and from whom, according to the flesh, is Christ, who is over all, God forever blessed. Amen.

-Romans 9:3-5

Now I say that Jesus Christ has become a servant to the circumcision for the truth of God, to confirm the promises made to the fathers [patriarchs; ancestors].

-Romans 15:8

The Lord was sent to redeem Israel and bring in her kingdom, on earth, centered in Jerusalem. That is what he taught the Apostles after his resurrection (Acts 1:3-6) as the 12 will sit on 12 thrones judging the 12 tribes of Israel (Matthew 19:28). We will be starting and building on that foundation.

In the question posed above at Created4Health, we are offered a false dichotomy

It's a false choice in two ways: 

1. he is essentially arguing that all Zionists (anybody who believes God promised a physical land to Abraham and a physical kingdom to David's offspring)  is quote "bow[ing] down to Jewish Zionists." This would include the chosen Apostles of Christ, by the way, including Peter.
2.  he argues that anyone who believes in the land and Kingdom promises (like the Apostles did) is one who denies Jesus is the Christ 

As we shall see, he (as well as Calvin) insult and demeans the very chosen Apostles to the Circumcision. Apostles chosen and commissioned by Christ himself. God did not abandon or condemn Israel in the Acts age and neither did the Apostles.

On the contrary, they saw that I was entrusted with the gospel to the uncircumcised, as the gospel to the circumcised was to Peter. For He who worked effectively in Peter for the apostleship to the circumcised worked effectively in me toward the Gentiles. When James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, understood the grace that was given to me, they gave to Barnabas and me the right hand of fellowship, that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised.

-Galatians 2:7-9

For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ. For it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.

-Romans 1:16

As to his stated argument, I'm not sure how believing God will eventually keep his promises regarding the land, the Kingdom, and the covenants (which are Israel's alone, Romans 9, etc.), the owners being his earthly people (and people are free to believe this interpretation or not), somehow means I am denying Christ is the Messiah? That's a rather harsh charge. It doesn't bother me as it is a false choice and I am fairly confident that God is a God who will keep his promises. 

His argument is self-serving to say the least. It falls into the "have you stopped beating your wife?" category of questions.

I've read the prophets and the New Covenant. I am convinced God will restore the Kingdom in a believing, cleansed Israel in a future age. That is, I believe the prophets are clear.

The writer of the article (and related site owner) must have as low opinion of the scripturally enlightened  (Luke 24:25) and chosen Apostles of the Lord, who were taught for 40 days by the risen Lord about the Kingdom in which they will sit in 12 thrones judging the 12 tribes (Mat 19:28). We noted these passages already. The only way to get around the literal nature of these verses and the natural conclusion of the chosen Apostles of Christ is to accuse these men of ignorance and as did Calvin.

Let's take a rather amazing look at what Calvin wrote about the Apostles:

He showeth that the apostles were gathered together when as this question [about the restoration of the kingdom in Israel] was moved, that we may know that it came not of the foolishness of one or two that it was moved, but it was moved by the common consent of them all; but marvelous is their [the Apostles'] rudeness, that when as they had been diligently instructed by the space of three whole years, they betray no less ignorance than if they had heard never a word. There are as many errors in this question as words. They ask him as concerning a kingdom; but they dream of an earthly kingdom, which should flow with riches, with dainties, with external peace, and with such like good things; and while they assign the present time to the restoring of the same. They desire to triumph before the battle; for before such time as they begin to work they will have their wages. They are also greatly deceived herein, in that they restrain Christ’s kingdom unto the carnal Israel, which was to be spread abroad, even unto the uttermost parts of the world. Furthermore, there is this fault in all their whole question, namely, that they desire to know those things which are not meet for them to know. No doubt they were not ignorant what the prophets did prophesy concerning the restoring of David’s kingdom, they had oftentimes heard their Master preach concerning this matter. Lastly, It was a saying common in every man’s mouth, that, in the most miserable captivity of the people, they should all be comforted, with the expectation of the kingdom that should be. Now, they hoped for the restoring hereof at the coming of the Messias, and hereupon was it that so soon as the apostles saw their Master Christ risen from the dead, they straightway began to think thereupon; but, in the meantime, they declared thereby how bad scholars they were under so good a Master.

-John Calvin (excerpt, Commentary on Acts 1:6), emphasis added

Such blasphemy against the chosen twelve. And if the opening argument from Created4Health is true, the Apostles were thus "denying Jesus is the Messiah." Peter, in Acts 3 will go on to offer "Ye men of Israel" the "restoration of all things" should they repent. No gentiles at Pentecost. No gentile having any gifts of the Spirit at this point (and that means believing gentiles). When a Gentile does receive the "same gifts" as the Jews, the Apostles are "astonished" and then go out and preach "to Jews only." Were they denying the Lord Jesus is the Christ?

And those of the circumcision who believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Gentiles also. [Note: before they were baptized].

-Acts 10:45


And as I [Peter] began to speak, the Holy Spirit fell upon them [Gentiles], as upon us [Jews] at the beginning. Then I remembered the word of the Lord, how He said, ‘John indeed baptized with water, but you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit.’ If therefore God gave them [Gentiles] the same gift as He gave us when we believed on the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I that I could withstand God?” When they [Jews] heard these things they became silent; and they glorified God, saying, “Then God has also granted to the Gentiles repentance to life.” Now those [Jews] who were scattered after the persecution that arose over Stephen traveled as far as Phoenicia, Cyprus, and Antioch, preaching the word to no one but the Jews only.

-Acts 11:15-19

As Calvin holds the Sermon of the Mount being somehow given to a Gentile "Church," (I do not) and as one who believes in bodiless eternal fiery torment as he did (I do not) his condemnation of the Apostles even more amazing (horrifying). He calls them bad scholars, greatly deceived, rude, ignorant, and foolish. That is, he is ironically calling the chosen Apostle of Christ "fools." 

 And whoever says to his brother, ‘Raca!’ shall be in danger of the council. But whoever says, ‘You fool!’ shall be in danger of hell fire.

-Matthew 5:22 

Calvin in his own words, says of verse in Matthew 5 warning against calling a brother "a fool":

He who shall say to his brother Christ assigns three degrees of condemnation besides the violence of the hands; which implies, that this precept of the law restrains not only the hands, but all affections that are opposed to brotherly love. “Those who shall only be angry with their brethren, or treat them with haughty disdain, or injure them by any reproach, are murderers.” Now, as it is certain that the word Racha occupies an intermediate place between anger and openly reproachful language, I have no doubt that it is an interjection of contempt or disdain. Though Christ adjudges to the hell of fire none but those who break out into open reproach, we must not suppose, that he declares anger to be free from a similar punishment; but, alluding to earthly judgments, he assures them that God will judge and punish even concealed anger.  But, as he who manifests his indignation by bitter language goes farther than this, Christ says, that that man will be held guilty by the whole heavenly council, that he may receive severer punishment.

-John Calvin (excerpt, Commentary on Matthew 5:22), emphasis added

The writer of the article quoted at the start must really not like Paul either. For that matter, he must really really hate the twelve who went to Jews only (Acts 11:19, I've done the math here, Acts 11 comes after Acts 2 and the falling of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost). As noted, I guess he believes he knows better (as Calvin seems to know) what the risen Lord taught the enlightened and chosen Apostles of Christ for 40 days about the restoration of the Kingdom in Israel (Acts 1:3-7) despite not having heard one word! Nothing the Lord taught them alone is recorded for us. How does Calvin or anyone today conclude that the Apostles were wrong in their conclusion? Christ certainly does not correct or chastise them, our Lord merely tells them that they are not to know the timing of the event.

[The Lord Jesus Christ] said to them [the Apostles], “It is not for you to know times or seasons which the Father has fixed by his own authority."

-Acts 1:7 

As I read it, Calvin and many others not only accuse the Apostles of stupidity, they have to assume that they somehow know what the Lord's teachings about the Kingdom during those 40 days must be. Again, any are free to disagree with my interpretation, but I certainly wouldn't conclude that if you disagree, that means you are somehow denying Jesus is the Christ. But I would say that they are blaspheming the Apostles.

Accusing the Apostles of ignorance concerning teachings that are (a) only for the Apostles for which (b) we have no record and arguing that if we agree with their conclusion we are somehow denying Jesus is the Christ is a terribly self-serving Logical Fallacy and conclusion.

Ironically, the writer accuses the Pharisees of a logical fallacy when they attempted to ignore the Lord's arguments and presented him with a false dichotomy. From the article linked above:

they did what the servants of Satan always do when they cannot win a debate based on merit, and instead resorted to personal attacks against Jesus, and slandered his character. 

His false choice slanders anyone who believes God will someday "restore the Kingdom in Israel" including the Apostles of Christ! 

We do not currently live in the age wherein Israel is to have their kingdom restored (that was put on hold at the end of the Acts age), but if the author and accuser of the Apostles wants to embrace the Book of Romans as for himself and as for this current age, I would offer this bit of advice:

For if the firstfruit is holy, the lump is also holy; and if the root [Israel] is holy, so are the branches [Jews] . 17 And if some of the branches [Jews] were broken off, and you [Gentiles], being a wild olive tree, were grafted in among them  [Jews], and with them became a partaker of the root [Israel's promises] and fatness of the olive tree, 18 do not boast against the branches [Jews] . But if you do boast, remember that you do not support the root  [Israel] , but the root  [Israel]  supports you. 19 You will say then, “Branches were broken off that I might be grafted in.”20 Well said. Because of unbelief they were broken off, and you stand by faith. Do not be haughty, but fear. 21 For if God did not spare the natural branches  [Jews], He may not spare you [Gentiles] either. 22 Therefore consider the goodness and severity of God: on those who fell, severity; but toward you, goodness, if you continue in His goodness. Otherwise you also will be cut off.  23 And they also, if they do not continue in unbelief, will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again. 24 For if you [Gentiles] were cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and were grafted contrary to nature into a cultivated olive tree  [Israel] , how much more will these  [Jews], who are natural branches, be grafted into their own olive tree?

-Romans 11:16-24

• do not boast against the branches [Jews].
• Do not be haughty [against the branches], but fear.
• Otherwise you also will be cut off.

Anyone is free to interpret that passage anyway he likes. But interpreting it as Gentiles grafted into Israel for the Holy Spirit, scripturally stated purpose "to make Israel jealous" (Romans 10:19, 11:11, 11:14) does not mean I have chosen to deny Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living God! 

And truly Jesus did many other signs in the presence of His disciples, which are not written in this book; but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name.

-John 20:30-31

I didn't know hating Jews or denying the hope of their earthly kingdom was a requirement to make that choice. If it were, as Calvin charges, and as "Created4Health" (also "Health Impact News") accuses, the twelve were denying Christ, not true believers, and headed for the fires of [man's traditional] hell.

Such blasphemy!

If the author quoted at the start does somehow believe Israel has a future in the land (and maybe he does), does he believe the mechanism for Israel to be in the land to experience the tribulation and cleansing is stated clearly in scripture? If so, make the argument without concluding that anyone who disagrees with you is thus denying Jesus is the Christ. If he doesn't think Israel has a future, that would be odd. Looking at other article from his site he obviously holds to a future Antichrist.

As I would interpret it, he most likely is participating in Jewish ordinances (Lord's Supper, Baptism) which I believe are in opposition to Paul's revelation for this age. I think I have a biblical argument for that. I believe he is in disobedience to the calling of this age. But I wouldn't create a false choice of either agreeing with me OR you are siding with Satan and denying that The Lord Jesus is the Christ. I wouldn't even deign to judge him as that is the Lord's prerogative.

His false choice is self-serving and contemptable.

Why Every True Believer is a Dispensationalist

Please note that I am not arguing that only self-identified dispensationalists are the only true believers. What I am saying is that even those who say they despise and reject dispensationalism are, in fact, dispensationalists whether they like it or not. This is assuming they actually believe in redemption by grace alone through faith alone.

In the comments section at a news/commentary site, an atheist (who was openly politically conservative and MAGA, not just some left wing troublemaker) started posting scriptures. He was holding Christians to their stated belief that all the Bible is for them. Here is one passage he chose:

As for your male and female slaves whom you may have: you may buy male and female slaves from among the nations that are around you. You may also buy from among the strangers who sojourn with you and their clans that are with you, who have been born in your land, and they may be your property. You may bequeath them to your sons after you to inherit as a possession forever. 

-Lev 25:44-46a

I added verse 46a to highlight that this was a "forever" statute and unless you understand what "forever" means in scripture, you will have to deal with all the "forever" passages. But that's another topic for another time. And he could have picked verses even more troublesome for the "church = Israel" believer.

One believer unbelievably responded that this verse sounded like Islam not Christianity. Well, thanks for falling into his trap, my friend. 

“You shall [Thou shalt] have a place outside the camp, and you shall go out to it. And you shall have a trowel with your tools, and when you sit down outside, you shall dig a hole with it and turn back and cover up your excrement. Because the Lord your God walks in the midst of your camp, to deliver you and to give up your enemies before you, therefore your camp must be holy, so that he may not see anything indecent among you and turn away from you. 

-Deuteronomy 23:12-14

This one is also a Bible command ("You SHALL..."). Honestly, there are far more extreme examples from the Law the atheist could have chosen, but he settled for this one. Anyway, the simple explanation is that, like the Law (including the 10 commandments), these commands are for Israel and they are part of a specific, earthly covenant. 

Israel's covenant is an earthly compact which involves a specific earthly hope. This and other "commands" were not given to Adam, Abel, Seth, Methuselah, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, etc. The very foundation of dispensationalism (in general) is that while all scripture is FOR, it's not all TO us. It's not even all FOR Israel in what we call the "Old Testament."

To help illustrate this fact, let is look at a rather obvious "bible command" (a very specific one at that) that can easily be see to have limited application. It applies neither to us today nor ever to Israel (despite being part of the Pentateuch).

Make an ark of cypress wood for yourself. Make rooms in the ark, and cover it inside and out with pitch. And this is how you must make it: The length of the ark will be three hundred cubits, the width of it fifty cubits, and the height of it thirty cubits

-Genesis 6:14-15

No Christian sect or seminary teaches this is for all believers of all ages and applicable in our day. But we must not miss that there are THREE reasons for this.

1. God is clearly speaking directly to Noah (subject of the command)
2. There is no flood coming (condition for the command)
3. The earth is being cleansed (the focus of God's plan and action)

The same concept for certain commands works with promises such as the specific promise to the twelve in Matthew 18:28 that the twelve will sit on twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel in the Kingdom (regeneration). Clearly spoken to them. There are not an unending number of thrones. "Twelve" is not some euphemism for "untold millions." The land and the nation of Israel in her promised earthly kingdom is in sight (the future regeneration).

Jesus said to them, “Truly I say to you, in the regeneration, when the Son of Man sits on His glorious throne, you who have followed Me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.

This is obviously in the gospel accounts. This promise is yet future to our age today. We cannot somehow dismiss its specificity or substitute some sort of "spiritual" thrones, tribes, or Kingdom. The only way to understand the commands to Noah and the promises in the gospels to the chosen apostles is to understand them in the context of the plan in sight.  

Note what we are told in John 15:16 (which is not some Calvinistic choosing of all believers of all ages, but a specific choosing of the twelve). And despite the twelve being "chosen" by Christ himself, Judas will lose his position as elder (his office) and as a future ruler in Israel despite being chosen. How does this fit "election" as it is commonly taught? And do we really believe that the Lord will do whatever any believer asks merely if he asks in His name?

You did not choose Me, but I chose you, and appointed you, that you should go and bear fruit, and that your fruit should remain, that the Father may give you whatever you ask Him in My name. 

-John 15:16

Jesus answered them, “Have I not chosen you, the twelve, and yet one of you is a devil?” He spoke of Judas Iscariot, the son of Simon. For it was he who would betray Him, being one of the twelve. 

-John 6:70-71

“Brothers, this Scripture had to be fulfilled, which the Holy Spirit previously spoke by the mouth of David concerning Judas, who became the guide to those who seized Jesus... “For it is written in the Book of Psalms,

‘Let his habitation become desolate,
and let no one live in it,

and,

‘Let another take his office.

-Acts 1:16, 20

The objection might be raised that the Lord Judas was a deceiver. Yet that foreknowledge does not negate that he was chosen nor that he has all the same gifts the others had and was to be treated the same as all the chosen.

These twelve Jesus sent out, and commanded them, saying, “Do not go into the way of the Gentiles, and do not enter any city of the Samaritans. But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. As you go, preach, saying, ‘The kingdom of heaven is at hand.’ Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, raise the dead, and cast out demons. Freely you have received, freely give. “Provide neither gold nor silver nor copper for your purses, nor bag for your journey, nor two tunics, nor shoes, nor even staffs. For the workman is worthy of his keep. “In whatever city or town you enter, inquire in it who is worthy. And live there until you leave. When you come into a house, greet it. If the house is worthy, let your peace come upon it. But if it is not worthy, let your peace return to you. Whoever will not receive you, nor hear your words, when you depart out of that house or city, shake off the dust of your feet. Truly I say to you, it will be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah on the Day of Judgment than for that town.

-Matthew 10:5-15

Israel had commands on how to build and move the tabernacle. Then Israel had commands on how to build the temple, etc. The commands concerning the tabernacle were put aside in light of the temple. Then Israel lived without a temple again when the first temple was destroyed. Then they built another temple, etc. Adam, Abraham, etc. had no tabernacle or temple, etc. So, even within ages "forever" commands and "You shall" commands changed.

Now, I could reference many more verses that nobody (well, almost nobody) is teaching that we should be obeying merely because "it's a Bible command!" or that the statute is said to be "forever."

The atheist in our account did not limit himself to random verses in the Old Testament. He turned to John 14 and quoted a verse similar to what we have seen in John 15.

Whatever you ask in my name, this I will do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son. If you ask me anything in my name, I will do it. 

-John 14:13-14

For this one (John 14), the atheist asked the Christians why they're not at hospitals healing kids. We could add additional scriptures to this. Isn't this a promise made by the Lord Jesus to all his followers as some claim? This promise is found in John 14, 15, and 16. Yet those who claim the earthly ministry of the Lord to Israel and  the promises to the twelve for themselves fail to claim all the commands and neither do they claim all the promises. They pick and choose what they like as they accuse those of us who are labeled "ultra-dispensationalists" as the ones denying all the Word of God.

They choose being chosen for themselves, but ignore the fact that God does not do everything they ask in His name. The obvious "failure" of this promise to work essentially always in this age is explained away by such trite excuses that none of the billions of asks are actually "in His name." 

We look at similar "red letter" words of our Lord (again, the horrible practice of printers separating out the words spoken by the Lord Jesus by printing them in red). Why are they not in children's hospitals laying hands on the sick? We could also quote James 5:14 (an epistle specifically addressed to "the twelve tribes scattered abroad") along these lines.

And these signs will accompany those who believe: in my name they will cast out demons; they will speak in new tongues; they will pick up serpents with their hands; and if they drink any deadly poison, it will not hurt them; they will lay their hands on the sick, and they will recover.”

-Mark 16:17-18

Is anyone sick among you? Let him call for the elders of the church, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord. 

-James 5:14

Matthew 10 states that the sent one will not only heal the sick, but raise the dead. 

And proclaim as you go, saying, ‘The kingdom of heaven is at hand.’ Heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse lepers, cast out demons. 

-Matt 10:7-8

The "you" here is again specific to the twelve as are the Lord's words in John 14-16.

We must also distinguish what "the kingdom of heaven" and "the gospel of the kingdom" are in Matthew (as opposed to the Gospel of Grace, etc.) and the future position of the chosen twelve. If we do not we are left with this "bible command" unanswered today. Now, the obvious objection is that he is clearly speaking to the twelve. Well, yes, but very few will apply that to the other commands and promises given only to the twelve.

To argue this is to acknowledge that not all the Bible (even the gospels) is TO us. We cannot claim all the commands or promises before the Law was given, in the Law itself, in the earthly ministry of the Lord, or in the Acts and Acts-age epistles. 

A personal favorite "command" of the Lord Jesus (in red letters):

“Fear not, little flock, for it is your Father's good pleasure to give you the kingdom. Sell your possessions, and give to the needy. 

-Luke 12:33-34

The generally Leftist, progressive "red letter Christians" seem to ignore that one. The other ones they conveniently ignore are the Lord's comments on gentiles in Matthew 10 and Matthew 15. The Lord clearly excludes gentiles from the preaching of the Kingdom in both chapters and agrees that gentiles are "little dogs" while Israel are the "children" and their "masters" in the latter. He clearly states he was sent ONLY to Israel and rejects the cries of a gentile who tries to call him "Son of David." 

Can we imagine that when the Lord Jesus was preaching the Gospel of the Kingdom in Matthew 4 and 9 that he was preaching salvation by grace through faith in his death, burial, and resurrection? When he tells his disciples (whom he sent out in Matthew 10 to preach to Jews only) that he must go to Jerusalem, not only do they not believe him, Peter says it shall not be so! 

The Gospel of the Kingdom is not the gospel we preach to all men today.

And we don't have the space to get into the Acts and Acts epistles.

It is my contention that many people either (a) will not consider the faith or (b) that some professed believers will even leave the faith because they do not know what to do with all the commands and all the promises of scripture. They cannot possibly obey all the commands and they do not see the fruition of all the promises. 

They fail to "rightly divide the Word of Truth" (2 Tim 2:15) or "compare the things that differ" (Phil 1:10). Sadly, this is because the young believer is not taught how to rightly divide. He is often told that if he doubts a promise, God has rejected him. For some that leads to an enslavement to fear for others they recognize the almost universality of that state and determine the Bible is a lie.

Does anyone dare quote Jeremiah 29:11 (many a professed believer's "life verse") to those parents in Texas who lost their precious little girls in the recent flood? I don't know if any has done this, but that verse is plastered on many a wall in many a church and in many youth retreat centers. We ask again, how many have it as his/her "life verse"?

For I know the plans I have for you, declares the Lord, plans for welfare and not for evil, to give you a future and a hope.

Here it is in contemporary English:

I will bless you with a future filled with hope—a future of success, not of suffering.

Do you claim this for your life today, dear friend?

It is the height of cruelty to tell every believer today this future promise to national Israel is theirs to claim now. Again, such wrong division will lead unbelievers to mock God and the faith and cause some believers to fall away. 

And even when some believers, even the most hardcore dispensationalist-mocking believers, come to these scriptures they do not claim all the promises and certainly not all the commands. This makes them dispensationalists whether they like it or not. Unfortunately, having such disgust for the word, they do their best to try and wrest what they can from scripture. The convenient parts anyway.

As the original translators of the King James Bible have done in their chapter headings, many Christians take scripture and argue "cursings for Israel" and "blessings for the Church" to excuse the obvious difficulties in the text. Some use it as an excuse for their anti-Semitism. Anti-Semitism is another excuse to hate dispensationalism for them. They cannot stomach that God will fulfill his earthly promises to an earthly people (the true offspring of Abraham).

For I could wish that I myself were accursed from Christ for my brothers, my kinsmen by race, who are [still] Israelites, to whom belong the adoption, the glory, the covenants [plural, old and new], the giving of the law, the service of God, and the promises, to whom belong the patriarchs, and from whom, according to the flesh, is Christ, who is over all, God forever blessed. Amen. 

-Romans 9:3-5

 

Israel was not put aside at the cross. They were very much in the forefront to the end of the Acts age and they will be again when God turns his attention back to his earthly plan. 

--------------------------------------------

Israel in the Present Age

Living in the Great Parenthesis of our Age

Believers and Antisemitism Because of Wrong Division

Israel According to the Flesh

\

God's Plan for Israel

The Kingdom of God, God's Plan for the Earth

The Theological Rot Caused by Heaven/Hell and Saved/Lost Thinking

But I say to you that whoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment. And whoever says to his brother, ‘Raca,’ shall be in danger of the Sanhedrin. But whoever says, ‘You fool,’ shall be in danger of hell fire.

-Matthew 5:22

When one fails to recognize that God had plans for different spheres of blessings and tries to interpret every passage through the prism of either being "saved or lost" or as speaking of "heaven or hell," he misses almost all the Bible is seeking to teach. This is because the vast majority of scripture is dealing with God's plans for the restoration of Paradise, the restoration of the earth (and related heavens), and the restoration of the Davidic throne and the Kingdom in Israel.

The Lord came to the people of Israel alone to announce that gospel of the Kingdom.  

Jesus went throughout all the cities and villages, teaching in their [Israel's] synagogues, preaching the gospel of the kingdom, and healing every sickness and every disease among the people [Jews].

-Matthew 9:35

These twelve Jesus sent out, and commanded them, saying, “Do not go into the way of the Gentiles, and do not enter any city of the Samaritans. But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. As you go, preach, saying, ‘The kingdom of heaven is at hand.’ Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, raise the dead, and cast out demons. Freely you have received, freely give.

-Matthew 10:5-8


But He answered, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.”

-Matthew 15:24

This calling to Israel alone continued into the Acts Age after the risen Lord taught the enlightened Apostles (who are promised to one day sit on twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel, Matt 19:28; Luke 22:29-30) about the restoration of the Kingdom in Israel (Acts 1:3-8). Even after the Lord grafted in Gentiles to the blessings of Israel in Acts 10 (not unto Life, as that was always available to Gentiles by faith) for the sake of making Israel (still around in the Acts age) jealous (Rom 10:19; Rom 11:11-14). We have covered that elsewhere yet refer to it here to help with context.

As the Lord gives his well-known and oft-quoted "Sermon on the Mount" (Matthew chapters 5-7), he makes a statement regarding "hell." Although the verse may be quoted often, I don't see too many preachers applying it as stated. It seems to contradict the gospel of the free grace of God. Well, it certainly does if one rips it from its context, applies the Greek mythical understanding of the afterlife to it, and ignores the plan for the earth as laid out in the prophecy of Isaiah. 

We have covered the interpretation of Matthew 5:22 previously and point the reader HERE if he is interested in that study. Today, we want to look at how some of the luminaries of evangelical history missed this passage because of their insistence on seeing every verse as dealing with personal redemption and as an instruction for attaining heaven.

The Jewish teachers had taught, that nothing except actual murder was forbidden by the sixth commandment. Thus they explained away its spiritual meaning. Christ showed the full meaning of this commandment; according to which we must be judged hereafter, and therefore ought to be ruled now... We ought carefully to preserve Christian love and peace with all our brethren; and if at any time there is a quarrel, we should confess our fault, humble ourselves to our brother, making or offering satisfaction for wrong done in word or deed: and we should do this quickly; because, till this is done, we are unfit for communion with God in holy ordinances. And when we are preparing for any religious exercises, it is good for us to make that an occasion of serious reflection and self-examination. What is here said is very applicable to our being reconciled to God through Christ. While we are alive, we are in the way to his judgement-seat; after death, it will be too late. When we consider the importance of the case, and the uncertainty of life, how needful it is to seek peace with God, without delay!

-Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary on the Bible

I hate to use this word, but this explanation is utter nonsense in light of the context of the passage. How can one recognize that the Lord is referencing statements made to "our brethren" in a "Christian" context and then not even address the reference to "hell fire?" Let alone Henry's complete omission of the reference to the Sanhedrin. If the one "sin" leads to a reckoning before some sort of supposed Christian Sanhedrin here, why would the other be some post-death judgment? And again we ask why he fails to explain the use of "hell"? 

How is the reader looking for the true meaning of these warnings supposed to understand Henry here? The result of the sin of being in a quarrel with a brother is being unfit for communion and then facing that sin at the Judgment Seat? This gives no explanation of the warning of "hell fire." It opens up the reader to the false doctrines of sacramentalists and other works-oriented salvation systems. 

The reference to supposed "Christian ordinances" like "communion" is dragged out of the next verse in the passage and assumed to be the equivalent of the "altar." The following is the New American Bible (Revised) translation which transliterates the Greek words "Sanhedrin" and "Gehenna" in the English. 

 

You have heard that it was said to your ancestors, ‘You shall not kill; and whoever kills will be liable to judgment.’ But I say to you, whoever is angry with his brother will be liable to judgment, and whoever says to his brother, ‘Raqa,’ will be answerable to the Sanhedrin, and whoever says, ‘You fool,’ will be liable to fiery Gehenna. Therefore, if you bring your gift to the altar, and there recall that your brother has anything against you, leave your gift there at the altar, go first and be reconciled with your brother, and then come and offer your gift. 

 

Matthew Henry isolates these warnings and tried to drag them into a "church" of his own making. To do so he has to ignore the context of the Lord's earthly ministry and all the earthly promises to Israel and to the David. This does violence to the text. 

If he wanted to try and find some application for us today, perhaps he could do that. But to interpret the passage as for today while ignoring the obvious reference to the Valley of Hinnom in Israel's history and in her prophets is unforgivable and has led many astray. Such thinking may lead to a denial of the finished work of Christ.

In his opening commentary on the Beatitudes in Matthew 5, Henry immediately drags in a Gentile church unknown to the context and nowhere in sight in the Lord's earthly ministry. This confusion, denying the Lord's own words in the book, has caused not only a simple confusion among God's people today, but a confusion that brings into doubt the victory won in the Lord's resurrection.

 

Our Savior here gives eight characters of blessed people, which represent to us the principal graces of a Christian.

-Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary on the Bible

Matthew Henry mirrors much of Calvinistic thought on the passage. I shouldn't be so hard on him. At least he tried to address it. Many commentaries basically skip over it. Now let us turn to John Wesley and Arminian thought to illustrate that this error is not unique to Matthew Henry or to Calvinism.

Hell fire — In the valley of Hinnom (whence the word in the original is taken) the children were used to be burnt alive to Moloch. It was afterward made a receptacle for the filth of the city, where continual fires were kept to consume it. And it is probable, if any criminals were burnt alive, it was in this accursed and horrible place. Therefore both as to its former and latter state, it was a fit emblem of hell. It must here signify a degree of future punishment, as much more dreadful than those incurred in the two former cases, as burning alive is more dreadful than either strangling or stoning. [emphasis mine]

-John Wesley's Explanatory Notes on the Bible

Wesley makes no attempt to explain the warning in regard to Gehenna fire. He imposes on the text a metaphor for the common understanding of the Greek mythical "hell" yet without cause. He assumes a fiery place where bodiless "souls" are tortured by God. But worse than that, he assumes (since the passage is a warning to "brothers") that this warning is relevant to those in Christ in this age.  

This is where the Reformation went off the rails very early on. William Tyndale recognized the error in believing in bodiless souls (either in man's heaven or in his hell). It was and is a diminishing of the resurrection (Christ's and ours). This idea of bodiless souls inflicted on Christ's ministry to Israel in the context of the covenants and promises to her (Romans 9) has done great harm to believers over the centuries. So much so that we have become dependent on a priest-class to explain these seemingly contradictory ideas to us. 2 Tim 2:15 is dead. 

Study to show yourself approved by God, a workman who need not be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

-2 Timothy 2:15

I would also note here that in the next two verses in the passages concerning taking a gift to the altar, Wesley is silent. The reader (if he has surrendered his study to the commentator) is left with no context for taking a gift to the altar. But perhaps that's better than those who have tried to equate it with the Lord's Supper or some other supposed "Christian" ordinance. In any case, the Body or the current calling has no ordinances. The ordinances of Israel stood between the Jew and Gentile both under the Law and after the grafting in the Acts age and Acts age epistles.

For He is our peace, who has made both groups [Jews and Gentiles] one and has broken down the barrier of the dividing wall, by abolishing in His flesh the enmity, that is, the law of the commandments contained in ordinances, that in Himself He might make the two into one new man, thus making peace, and that He might reconcile both to God into one body through the cross, thereby slaying the enmity.

-Ephesians 2:14-16 (written Post Acts)

And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He has resurrected together with Him, having forgiven you all sins. He blotted out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us and contrary to us, and He took it out of the way, nailing it to the cross.

-Colossians 2:13-14

Finally, I turn to A.C. Gaebelein, a traditional, Acts 2 dispensationalist. While he gets closer to the correct interpretation, in my opinion, he still tries to apply today (although without doing as much violence to the current calling or to the gospel of grace.

“Whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca (a word embodying hatred and contempt) shall be called before the Sanhedrin; but whosoever shall say, Fool, shall be subject to the penalty of the hell fire.” It will be so, no doubt, when the kingdom will be come into the earth; swift judgment will overtake the offender. But the words lay bare the heart and show the impossibility of man to stand before God, who judges the heart, in their own righteousness. The believer being the partaker of the divine nature, is righteous and loves his brother. Only the reception of eternal life, which is Christ Himself, can produce righteousness and love. “Whosoever has been begotten of God does not practice sin, because His seed abides in him and he cannot sin, because he has been begotten of God. In this are manifest the children of God and the children of the devil. Whoever does not practice righteousness is not of God, and he who does not love his brother” (1 John 3:9-11). The believer walking in the Spirit will in no way fulfill flesh’s lust. [emphasis mine]

- Gaebelein's Annotated Bible 

 

Here Gaebelein rightly points us to the conditions in the future earthly kingdom in Israel. But he fails to sufficiently distinguish it from the gospel of grace. As we have seen repeatedly, Believers are capable of all sorts of wickedness, sins damnable under the Law. 

We must be very clear to distinguish between interpretation and any possible application to our lives today. All scripture is profitable, but in many cases the profitability is seeing the nature, omnipotence, omniscience, and workings of God, not in trying to fit ourselves into a passage. 

The Error in the Apostles' Creed

One of the sad ironies of the Evangelical community is the rejection of the foundational doctrine of Sola Scriptura (by the Scriptures Alone). We noted in a previous post how those hardcore Reformed believers at The Dissenter (formerly Reformation Charlotte) invoked "Sacred Tradition" (by name) in their ill-focused defense of church buildings.

The level of incredulity this former Catholic had when he read the words "Sacred Traditions" as a supposed defense of truth by heresy hunters like those at The Dissenter is off the charts. How far have we fallen? How much blood of believers has been shed over the truth of Sola Scriptura for even the most hardcore Reformed to invoke the Catholic doctrine of "Sacred Tradition" as defense of truth?

But there is another insidious error which permeates the professing church, the error of the so-called Apostles' Creed. It is held almost as if it's scripture, yet the very first line is heretical.

Jesus said no to the devil's offer, but the bishops of the Christian church in the fourth century said yes, and Christendom was born.

It's staggering how many people hold the "Early Church Fathers" essentially on the level of scripture. This exaltation of these corrupters of the faith is frightening, but it explains much of why many fail to "rightly divide the Word of Truth" and fail to understand the message of the Mystery revealed to Paul in Ephesians for this current age. Even Calvin himself questioned the ECF, something many of his followers refuse to do. 

As noted, the very first line of the creed is in error.

I believe in God the Father almighty,
Creator of heaven and earth.

Scriptures teaches that all things were created by the Son.

his dear Son: in whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins: who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: for by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: and he is before all things, and by him all things consist. 

-Col 1:13-17

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

-John 1:1-3

Etc.

Even Calvin understood this.

The design is, to show it to have been necessary that the restoration of mankind should be accomplished by the Son of God, since by his power all things were created 

-Calvin's Commentary on the Bible (John)

 

I challenge anyone who fellowships at an assembly of believers that uses the Apostles' Creed to point out this error to your pastor or to the elders. I'm almost certain that nothing will change, and "Sacred Tradition" and "Early Church Fathers" will be held as equal to or even above scripture itself.

For those keeping score at home, the Nicene Creed makes the same error. 

This Reformed Chart Accidentally Confirms the Dispensational Position

Reformed extremists like to post this chart. Actually, it's one of the best arguments for the Right Division position! It's not perfect, of course, and it makes a few assumptions. I'll just point out one issue. 

Number 16 argues that Ephesians and 2 Cor teach the same body/bride. However, Corinthians teaches local bodies which have their own head and Ephesians teaches a single (male) body with Christ as the head.

And if the ear should say, “Because I am not an eye, I do not belong to the body,” it would not for that reason stop being part of the body. 

-1 Corinthians 12:16

Ephesians uses the picture of the place of the wife, but it does not teach that the Body is the Bride. Let's look at their reference, 

Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.

-Ephesians 5:22-24

This teaching is for wives to submit to the headship of their husbands AS Christ is head of the Church. It does not equate the wife with the Church. The passage states that Christ is head of "his Body." 

We'd have to go to the prophets and the Revelation from here to establish that Israel was and will be again the wife of the Lord ("Virgin Israel" again). Too much for this short study. Simply put,  we are the Body (singular) made up of Jew and Gentile (with no distinctions unlike in the Gospels and Acts Age) with Christ as the Head. The hope of the Body is "in the heavenly places" and not in the land nor in the New Jerusalem (which is figured as wife as it is the hope of the Overcomer in Israel). 

I saw the Holy City, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride beautifully dressed for her husband.

The New Jerusalem  ("the city whose builder and maker is God" that Abraham hoped for as taught in Hebrews 11) comes down to earth. It is a heavenly city, it is a reward, it has the names of the 12 tribes and 12 Apostles to the Circumcision (not Paul) on it. The 12 Apostles will "sit on 12 thrones judging the 12 tribes of Israel." It is an earthly hope. Our hope is in "the far above the heavens."

Jesus said to them, “Truly I say to you, in the regeneration, when the Son of Man sits on His glorious throne, you who have followed Me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel. 

-Matthew 19:28

And now I stand on trial for hope in the promise made by God to our fathers, 7 to which our twelve tribes hope to attain, as they earnestly serve God day and night.  

-Acts 26:6-7

One of the seven angels who had the seven bowls full of the seven last plagues came to me and said to me, “Come, I will show you the bride, the wife of the Lamb.”  And he carried me away in the Spirit to a great and high mountain, and showed me the Holy City, Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God, having the glory of God, her light like a most precious jewel, like a jasper, clear as crystal. It had a great, high wall, with twelve gates, and at the gates twelve angels, and on the gates the names of the twelve tribes of the sons of Israel were written: three gates on the east, three gates on the north, three gates on the south, and three gates on the west. The wall of the city had twelve foundations, and on them were the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb. 

-Rev 21:9-13

Note the verse in Acts is very late in the book. And at that trial, Paul testified that he taught nothing you could not find in Moses and the Prophets (the Hebrew canon). This differs from Ephesians wherein he writes under inspiration that he was given a special revelation unknown to  the Prophets. 

I continue to this day, testifying both to small and great, saying nothing but what the prophets and Moses said would happen  

-Acts 26:22

At the end of the Acts, Paul says he was in chains "for the hope of Israel." In Ephesians, after the "wall of partition" is removed, he says he is in prison "for you gentiles." 

The earthly hopes and promises (restoration of Paradise, the promised land) were revealed since the foundation of the ages, but the heavenly hope of Ephesians for The Body was hidden. 

To me [Paul], the very least of all saints, this grace was given, to preach to the Gentiles the incomprehensible riches of Christ, and to reveal for all people what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the ages has been hidden in God, who created all things through Jesus Christ

Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ: according as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation [overthrow] of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love

The Kingdom hope was spoken FROM the foundation (overthrow).

Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world

As we have seen repeatedly, the promises to Israel (the Parousia of the Lord and the restoration of the Kingdom in Israel) spoken by the Prophets, spoken by Christ, promised by Peter in the Acts age, and expected in the Acts epistles of Paul are exemplified in the chart above. 

There are other assumptions in the chart we could dissect. For instance, the use of the word "church" is deceptive. The word ("ekklēsía") means a called out company and is used of a mob and of local councils in the Acts, but the translators try to hide the word as it conflicts with their theology. We also see this in James. In both places, the Reformed translators use the word "assembly." In the Acts they avoid the word "church" and in James they avoid the word "synagogue." Anything to deny Israel her promises and covenants. 

So, Israel was a called out company, the local gatherings of Jewish and grafted in Gentile believers were called out companies and "the body, the church" of this age is a called out company. And, again, if we understand the expectation and hope of the Acts age was the same as the earthly hope of Israel, the chart confirms the consistent dispensational position.  

How Right Division Saves Us from Being Duped by Charlatans (My Testimony)

This event early in my Christian life when I was not yet grounded helped start me on the road to a more sound understanding of scripture and the will of God for this current age. It was one of my early experiences that reminded me that just because someone had a title, it doesn't mean they are my authority. The seeds of "studying to show [myself] approved unto God" (2 Tim 2:15) were starting to germinate. 

In  the Fall of 1991, when I was first shocked out of my Catholicism and religious self-righteousness, and struggling with a parallel deep depression, I was so hungry for anything "Christian" that one of the first books I read was "Good Morning, Holy Spirit!" by Benny Hinn. The charismatic/Pentecostal wing of Christendom was the most prominent wing on television and radio in those days.

I was so hungry in my new faith that I was watching and listening to Christian radio programs, TV programs, and messages available on tapes and CDs. Thankfully, I had developed and early, rudimentary skepticism (after all, I'd been living a 25 year religious lie to that point), but I was not well grounded.

One radio program I regularly listened to was a ministry by a local "evangelist" He was essentially the typical, rural Southern preacher that we'd all seen in popular culture parodies. This "man of God" was going to have a Friday night revival in Thomasville, NC (a small town about 25 miles away from Greensboro in a rural county to our southwest). He would advertise on his radio broadcast," Come and meet God in Thomasville!"

So, I went to meet God in Thomasville. I drove down to Davidson County in the pouring rain and found the small building where I was going to "meet God." It was just behind one of the many barbeque joints in the town. (Fortunately, Thomasville has some of the greatest barbeque in the world, so it wasn't a complete loss.)

After dinner ("supper" in Thomasville), I took my place in that small building. The room where God was apparently accepting visitors was on the ground floor of a nondescript structure with about 40 (as I recall) movable chairs split in two groups of 20 with an aisle between. There were about 25 people in there and a very small band in the corner. There wasn't really an "altar" or platform, but a small raised area up front (about 6" high, IIRC). In any case, there was an area up front separated from the rest of the small room.

The evangelist, in full white suit, preached his message (from a verse in the KJV, of course). I'm guessing he was Matthew 18:16. He kept saying we need to be "Ek-stablished in the Word!" Just like that "EK-stablished in the Word!" as he walked up and down the small aisle. Don't remember anything else from his message.

The time came for prayer. He went up front, the music started, and some jaunty song about "sending that ol' Devil down!" was in full swing. As I did at any meeting I attended in those days, I was right up front. Again, a relatively small crowd, so it wasn't that difficult.

All around me, people dancing and jumping and singing. One man crumpled up his pack of cigarettes and threw them up on the small stage (big deal in North Carolina!). The preacher was doing his deep growling and loud praying over the small throng. Then he started to my right and was praying over individuals.

OK, here he comes. I'm gonna get to meet God. I'm gonna get my prayer answered. My fiancée is going to come back to me (her leaving the source of my depression)! He extends his hand over the first guy and prays loudly (music still going, still sending that ol' Devil down), touches him on his forehead, he faints backward. Guy to my immediate right is next. Same shtick. He falls.

Now, we pause to remind our audience, I was not yet familiar with being slaughtered by the Spirit (I know it's "slain" but I call it slaughtered). So, when he prays over me, and then hits my forehead, I do not fall back. He keeps pushing on my forehead, I just keep praying. Finally, he and the two guys behind me, finally move on to the guy on my left. He falls on cue.

I left a bit confused. Ironically, the first place I fellowshipped (and where I was baptized, a HUGE deal for an ex-Catholic as it's essentially the spiritual death penalty) was an Assemblies of God (on advice from the 700 Club). Lovely people. Small church. Very important in my first steps outside of Rome. But, fortunately, I didn't just swallow anything I heard (still don't). It was a positive experience, until the barking started. But that's another story for another time. 

I should say the dog barking from some claiming to be overcome by the Holy Ghost was the last straw in a series of experiences that moved me closer to the principles of Right Division. Hearing incoherent babblings and repetitive vocal emissions that I was supposed to believe was some heavenly language turned me into skeptic. I never "spoke in tongues" myself, and it seemed to me that the tongues of Pentecost and the Book of Acts were known languages (but what I did I know, I didn't have a seminary degree!).

I was invited by a friend to attend a small Plymouth Brethren assembly in south Greensboro. I attended a Friday-Saturday mini-conference on the topic of dispensationalism (Classic, Acts 2 dispensationalism, but a vey helpful introduction to the idea). The confusing world of Benny Hinn and his ilk started to make sense to me. There was some sort of mass hypnosis going on. Many sincere folks in that movement, to be sure. But when I stepped back and compared what I saw in that world with what I saw in scripture, something was wrong.

Eventually, even in an Acts 2 Classic dispensationalist construct, I could not make heads or tales of the Book of Acts or a number of passages in the epistles. One book which helped me immensely in trying to understand the Book of Matthew had been A.C. Gaebelein;s commentary on the gospel account. I still highly recommend it. But it didn't really help with the post-Gospels period.

Next, I found "The Silence of God" by Robert Anderson in our Plymouth Brethren Assembly library and that moved my understanding a little farther down the road. I'll skip to the end here and just note that it was actually in an online Southern Baptist forum that I met a man named Paul (ironically) who introduced me to a 6-part series on the Book of Acts by Stuart Allen. This started me on my road of personal study (comparing scripture with scripture) whereby I developed my own understanding of the Mystery revealed to the Apostle Paul in Ephesians for the Post-Acts age. The separation of God's plans for the earth from his plans for the far above the heavens opened my eyes to greater understanding.

Today, as super cessationist (I think John Macarthur is too charismatic on this point!), I am in little danger from the likes of Hinn, Copeland, Bickle, etc. That does not mean that I do not love my Charismatic brethren (and sistren). I love many of the Calvary Chapel teachers, for example. I can still find value in many different corners of Evangelicalism.  I'm just not looking for anything from them in regard to rightly dividing the Book of Acts or from the Gospels in the current age. I believe I have a better understanding of the covenants of scripture, but that does not mean that I cannot find conviction in a teaching on the Christian life, for example.

I'm still a little miffed that Benny Hinn got some money from me purchasing his book! 

Study to show yourself approved unto God, a workman that need not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

For a video walkthrough of the entire Bible, checkout my 7-part series:

The Bible from 30,000 Feet (Playlist)

For a much shorter overview of studying scripture for yourself, 

please try my 2-part podcast:

The Sick and Dead Connected to the Lord's Supper in 1 Cor 11

I recently saw on social media a defense of the lack of sickness and death today connected to the Lord's Supper as Paul warns the body in Corinth in 1 Cor 11.It was argued that Paul is referring to general drunkenness and overeating as the cause of death and, thus, Paul's warning.  People to this day do not necessarily die from these activities. Some live very long lives. Paul's warning in 1 Cor 11 is clearly in regard and in context to the Lord's Supper.

"For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation [condemnation] to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body. For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep. For if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged."

The modifier is "unworthily" which required self-examination and self-judgment. If I'm a drunkard and then judge myself as such, am I excused from any bodily damage from alcohol abuse because I judged myself? It does not fit either common sense or the text.

I do not hold that this ordinance is for this age (it is the Passover as the Lord said it was and it certainly is connected with the New Covenant which is for Israel), but on its own, the passage is addressing specific behavior at a specific time and place.

"For in eating every one taketh before other his own supper: and one is hungry, and another is drunken. What? have ye not HOUSES to eat and to drink in?"

If it's a general warning about drunkenness, why does Paul care if they have homes to do it in? Are they excused from bodily harm if the eating and drinking is done in the home?

God KILLED Ananias and Sapphira for lying to the Holy Spirit (Acts 5). That was a condition in that age. It was for all, not just for them.

"And great fear came upon ALL the church, and upon as many as heard these things."

 

Do we hold this is for today? Is this still happening? If not, why not? It's the same issue. People are not dropping dead for lying to the Holy Spirit in this age and people are not getting sick and dying because they take the Lord's Supper "unworthily" in this age.

"Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, UNWORTHILY, shall be GUILTY of the BODY and BLOOD of the LORD."

That's not getting sick because of overeating. That's a very specific condemnation.

Strong's: unworthily = anaxios = irreverently.

Is it irreverent to be overweight? Unhealthy, yes, but irreverent? Try teaching that from the pulpit. The conditions of the Acts Age and the earthly hope are not longer applicable, so there is an attempt to explain away things like the killing of Ananias and the sickness and deaths at the Lord's Supper.