Awaken Bible Prophecy Update 5-1-24 – Engaging the Text; Asking Pertinent Questions

This concept of engaging the text, i.e. the Biblical text, and asking pertinent questions about it has been floating around in my head for the past week or so following my Prophecy Update from last Wednesday in which I commented about House Speaker Mike Johnson.  If possible, without directly getting too deep into the one Biblical issue I raise periodically that causes angst and pushback, I hope in this Commentary to suggest a method of examining God’s Word more fully so as to really think about what it says.  In fact, I want to make the subject somewhat broader by looking at several Biblical issues that seem to cause people to studiously avoid deeper inspection and understanding.

There are three of these items I want to discuss.  They are:

• Gods mentioned in the Bible
• Promises to Israel vs to the church
• If-then consequences in the Old versus New Testaments

Transcript:

This concept of engaging the text, i.e. the Biblical text, and asking pertinent questions about it has been floating around in my head for the past week or so following my Prophecy Update from last Wednesday in which I commented about House Speaker Mike Johnson.  If possible, without directly getting too deep into the one Biblical issue I raise periodically that causes angst and pushback, I hope in this Commentary to suggest a method of examining God’s Word more fully so as to really think about what it says.  In fact, I want to make the subject somewhat broader by looking at several Biblical issues that seem to cause people to studiously avoid deeper inspection and understanding.

There are three of these items I want to discuss.  They are:

• Gods mentioned in the Bible
• Promises to Israel vs to the church
• If-then consequences in the Old versus New Testaments

We’ll dive into this momentarily.  First we’ll pray and read from God’s Word.

<PRAY>

Scripture:

John 14:23-24

Jesus answered him, “If anyone loves me, he will keep my word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our home with him. Whoever does not love me does not keep my words. And the word that you hear is not mine but the Father’s who sent me.

Engaging the Text; Asking Pertinent Questions

• My original intent for this was to be a shorter Commentary.
• As has also happened in the last couple weeks, the article grew longer than I thought it would, and it became an Update, which is my longer format.

• There are three directions I want to go with this as we discuss what it means to engage Scripture and seek to understand it better with somewhat of a Socratic Q&A method.

• Let’s see where this leads us.

#1 – Gods mentioned in the Bible

• If you’re a true Bible-believing Christian, you know that there is only One God who, incomprehensibly to us, is comprised of Three Persons: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
• Yet throughout Scripture we continually run into verses that mention other gods.
• This troubles people.
• As a result, over the years, many have attempted to dismiss this idea through the process of eisegesis.
• Say what?

• Exegesis is the proper way to read and understand the Bible.
• In that process, we allow Scripture to speak for itself and make the determination as to what God is actually conveying.

• Eisegesis occurs when we read into the Bible what we think and want a passage to say.
• In other words, we determine what Scripture says based on our biases.
• If we don’t like a particular verse, then we make it fit our preconceived notions.
• Obviously this can be problematic.
• Nothing like having Gary’s version, Robert’s understanding, and Ella’s prejudices, instead of the very Word of God as He intends.
• To a large extent, I think this has plagued these issues I’m discussing today.

• The big, elephant-in-the-room passage where eisegesis has been the malpractice for years is Genesis 6:1-4.
• I’ve talked about this many times.
• In fact, I was pleased to hear the other day from the mother of a family we’re close to – and also do Bible Study with – that her homeschool daughter, when confronted with a lesson about this that has clearly been debunked, was able to recall my numerous discussions about this (i.e. my harping on it?) and refuted it.
• She not only knew that what the study text said was wrong, but also why.

• Here is this passage:

When man began to multiply on the face of the land and daughters were born to them, the sons of God saw that the daughters of man were attractive. And they took as their wives any they chose. Then the Lord said, “My Spirit shall not abide in man forever, for he is flesh: his days shall be 120 years.” The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of man and they bore children to them. These were the mighty men who were of old, the men of renown.

• This is what the homeschool study text said:

The idea of the “sons of God” being angels has the least basis in Scripture. Angels having sexual relations with humans is foreign to all of the rest of Scripture, God’s wrath is described as being directed against the sins of humans, not angels.

It seems best to understand the “sons of God” as humans, probably men who had been godly (and perhaps who were the descendants of Seth) who wrongly wanted to take materially-minded women as their wives. Their children, the mighty men, might have devoted their efforts to increasing their own power and prestige instead of honoring the Lord.

• So, let’s engage the text and ask a few questions.
• What does the Genesis passage actually, literally say?
• It speaks about the sons of God.
• What is it about this that bothers folks?
• Is it that God has what are considered other divine sons besides His only begotten Son?
• Hmmm, maybe that’s the problem.
• If Jesus is God’s only Son based on John 3:16, then it’s obvious there cannot be other sons in the heavenly realm – right?

• Not so fast.
• In this famous verse, what we read as “only begotten” is the Greek word monogenés (Strongs #3439).
• It indeed means how it’s been translated.
• But, it also means “unique” or “one-of-a-kind.”
• When we consider the word and the verse in this light, what do we come to understand?

• Jesus as God’s Son is unique above all His other sons; indeed, He is one of a kind.
• What does that do for our textual interpretation?
• It enables us to see that God has many sons; in fact, they are the heavenly host.
• But Jesus stands out as different.
• In this respect, when we come across “sons of God” in the New Testament, referring to those of us as born-again believers and children of God, we gain a more expansive perspective of how God views all of His creation.

• Thus, we don’t have to go down the road in the Genesis passage of making up things that aren’t in the text.
• Sons of God literally means – wait for it . . . sons of God.
• This allows us to gain greater insights into the numerous other passages throughout Scripture that refer to either the sons of God or other (little “g”) gods.
• This understanding then allows us to read many such verses with clarity.
• Here are a couple specific verses in this respect:

Psalm 135:5

For I know that the Lord is great,
    and that our Lord is above all gods.

Psalm 136:2

Give thanks to the God of gods,
    for his steadfast love endures forever.

• These gods are not figments of the Scripture writers’ imagination.
• They were and are real.
• They are sons of God who rebelled to make themselves gods in their Father’s place.
• Knowing this, we gain much insight into the rest of the Bible
• Furthermore, we can read about the Nephilim and realize that they really were the offspring of the fallen sons of God who procreated with human women to make these abominations – all as part of Satan’s eons-long plan to usurp the power and authority of God Himself.

#2 – Promises to Israel versus to the church

• This also has been a common theme in my writing.
• A great number of pastors, churches, and theologians have embraced the concept of Replacement Theology.
• This posits that all the many promises God made to Israel in the Old Testament are meant solely for the church today.
• In this flawed understanding, Israel is now an afterthought in God’s workings in this earth.
• What He called His Chosen People and Israel as the Promised Land are no more important than any other people or nation.

• This is why we have very prominent voices on the Right who profess themselves as Christians but deny Israel.
• I’ve commented previously on Mike Adams and Stew Peters in this respect.
• Here are a few quotes from a recent article Mike Adams just wrote:

Today the death count stands at 35,000+ and Israel insists it is still bombing Gazans to death as an act of “self-defense.”

As Israel’s true intentions became impossible to ignore — the complete extermination of the Palestinian people — it was also impossible not to conclude that Israel was engaged in acts of genocide. Modern-day war crimes, intended to exterminate an entire ethnic group of people, so that Zionists could steal their land, water and resources.

Israel is a nation of extreme hatred and violence, run by murderous war criminals who act daily on a deeply evil intent to achieve the genocidal extermination of the Palestinian people.

It is now abundantly obvious that Israel’s genocidal nature is incompatible with sustainable human civilization (or even regional peace), and that the escalatory actions of Israel (such as bombing Iran’s consulate building in Damascus) are so extremely dangerous that far from being “America’s greatest ally,” Israel has actually become America’s most dangerous enemy. [emphasis in original article]

• This is where Replacement Theology leads.
• Mike Adams has chosen to believe the Hamas death count, when it is fully known how deceptive this terrorist organization is.
• Israel has proven to take the most precautions ever known in the history of warfare to prevent civilian casualties.
• If Adams listened to the reasoned voice of someone like John Spencer, who is a recognized authority on urban warfare, then he would be confronted by the fact that civilian deaths are about on a 1:1 ratio with Hamas deaths.
• The 35,000 number Adams bandies around is so wrong as to be ludicrous.

• But look at how this man describes Israel.
• There is no Godly understanding here whatsoever, no recognition that Israel is a land and people placed there by God, and as such, have certain Godly rights.
• As such, just as in the past God commanded Israel to devote to destruction certain cities or factions, i.e. the complete annihilation of her enemies, that kind of action against Hamas would not necessarily be incorrect today
• What God decrees should be done
• Otherwise, consequences accrue because of disobedience

• For all his Biblical ignorance and his stand against what God loves, maybe Mike Adams should go camp out with the antisemitic, Jew-hating, Hamas-loving campus protestors.
• He’s now got 40-some colleges to choose from.
• He’d find plenty of common ground with them.

• Where do Israel’s rights come from?
• They are directly, specifically stated in the Bible.
• Let’s check out a few passages.

Genesis 12:2-3

And I will make of you a great nation, and I will bless you and make your name great, so that you will be a blessing. I will bless those who bless you, and him who dishonors you I will curse, and in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed.”

• What is this nation?
• Who will God bless or curse, and why?
• If anyone or any other nation blesses the nation on whom God has placed His Name, i.e. Israel, then He will bless them.
• On the contrary, if they curse what He considers holy, they will earn His curses.
• That’s a dangerous place to be, Mike Adams.

Genesis 15:18

On that day the Lord made a covenant with Abram, saying, “To your offspring I give this land, from the river of Egypt to the great river, the river Euphrates,

• Who is God giving this land to?
• What land is it?
• Who actually owns the land in the first place and has the right to do with it whatever He pleases?

Psalm 33:12

Blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord,
the people whom he has chosen as his heritage!

• And what is that nation?

Psalm 135:4

For the Lord has chosen Jacob for himself,
Israel as his own possession.

Psalm 135:12

and gave their land as a heritage,
a heritage to his people Israel.

Deuteronomy 32:8-9 (ESV)

When the Most High gave to the nations their inheritance,
when he divided mankind,
he fixed the borders of the peoples
according to the number of the sons of God.
But the Lord’s portion is his people,
Jacob his allotted heritage.

• That nation is Jacob, a.k.a. Israel.
• Here we actually see that God placed His divine sons over the other nations, but He Himself appointed Israel as His very own.
• FYI – these sons sadly all rebelled against God, seeking their own glory as gods, rather than pointing the people of those nations back to their heavenly Father as He intended them to do.
• This remains the situation today in the world and the reason it is so anti-God and Christ-rejecting.

Isaiah 11:10-11

In that day the root of Jesse, who shall stand as a signal for the peoples—of him shall the nations inquire, and his resting place shall be glorious.

In that day the Lord will extend his hand yet a second time to recover the remnant that remains of his people, from Assyria, from Egypt, from Pathros, from Cush, from Elam, from Shinar, from Hamath, and from the coastlands of the sea.

Isaiah 44:21

Remember these things, O Jacob,
and Israel, for you are my servant;
I formed you; you are my servant;
O Israel, you will not be forgotten by me.

Isaiah 49:6

[God] says:
“It is too light a thing that you should be my servant
to raise up the tribes of Jacob
and to bring back the preserved of Israel;
I will make you as a light for the nations,
that my salvation may reach to the end of the earth.”

Isaiah 62:12

And they [the daughter of Zion, i.e. the people of Israel] shall be called The Holy People,
The Redeemed of the Lord;
and you shall be called Sought Out,
A City [i.e. Jerusalem] Not Forsaken.

• There are many more passages of promise by the Lord to Israel.
• Will those in the church really try to appropriate God’s Word for Israel to themselves and deny what God Himself has declared?
• Perhaps pastors promoting Replacement Theology should actually read the Bible, then read it again and again until the Holy Spirit works in them to convict their hearts of their grievous sin against God’s people of Israel.

• In fact, wouldn’t it be nice if Mike Adams actually read God’s Word along with all the deceived pastors out there spouting this nonsense and took it to heart?

#3 – If-then consequences in the Old versus New Testaments

• This likewise is a theme of mine dealt with in many Commentaries, but let me hopefully approach this slightly differently than in the past.

• In my Prophecy Update from last week, I discussed Romans 11:21-23:

For if God did not spare the natural branches, neither will he spare you. Note then the kindness and the severity of God: severity toward those who have fallen, but God’s kindness to you, provided you continue in his kindness. Otherwise you too will be cut off. And even they, if they do not continue in their unbelief, will be grafted in, for God has the power to graft them in again.

• So, let’s ask some questions.

• Who is Paul addressing?
  • Romans 11:13: Gentile believers.
• Who are the natural branches?
  • Jews
• God didn’t spare the natural branches in their unbelief.
• Will He spare those grafted in, i.e. Gentile believers?
  • No
• What happened to the Jews in their unbelief, i.e. their rejection of Jesus as Messiah?
  • They were cut off
• What does it mean to be cut off?
  • It is complete detachment, as having been pruned from the vine
  • Romans 15:2: Every branch in me that does not bear fruit he takes away
  • Takes away in this verse is the Greek word airó (Strongs #142) which means “to raise, lift up, take away or remove”
  • If it’s removed, is it not cut off?
  • How does this compare with 1 Corinthians 5:2: Let him who has done this [act of sexual immorality] be removed from among you.
  • In the same vein what does John 15:6 say? If anyone does not abide in me he is thrown away like a branch and withers; and the branches are gathered, thrown into the fire, and burned. 
  • If a branch, i.e. a believer, has been cut off because he does not abide in the vine, i.e. Jesus, and does not return/repent so as to be grafted back in, what happens to him?
  • Is he not thrown in the fire and burned?
  • Just like the situation in Corinth, was not the believer cast from the congregation so that Satan would deal with him in order for him to repent, and so return to fellowship in the church?
  • But here’s the key question: What happens in these instances if the believer does not repent, i.e. he no longer abides in Jesus, and does not take the necessary act of contrition so as to come back to Him?
  • What if the Corinthian man continues to abide in his sexual immorality and so remains in an unrighteous condition after having been given the merciful opportunity to mend his ways and return to the Lord?
  • What does 1 Corinthians 6:9 tell us?
  • Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, 
  • Am I misunderstanding the implication?
  • Somebody help me out here
  • If a person has gone down this road and chooses not to repent and return from his grievous sin against God, doesn’t the text tell us that he will be considered as unrighteous among the unbelievers for their sexual immorality?
  • Thus, would he not be numbered among those who do not inherit the kingdom of God?
  • What am I missing?
• Yet, as Paul says in the Romans 11 verses, if they do not continue in their unbelief, will be grafted [back] in
• Praise God!
• In His mercy, He makes a way back regardless of far we’ve fallen
• But to find that path home to Him, isn’t it necessary for the person to no longer continue in unbelief?
• If he refuses and thus chooses to reject God’s offer of forgiveness, how does he enter His kingdom?
• Doesn’t a logical progression of examining the consequences lead to a deadly conclusion?
• We’re engaging the text here, trying to understand it as it is written and intended
• We’re asking reasonable, pertinent questions
• What do you think, those of you who are listening to this or reading the transcript think?
• If you believe my conclusions are incorrect, I ask you to engage this text to show me the error of my interpretation

• Briefly, we’ll look at just one more, this from the Old Testament.

• Let’s consider 1 Samuel 15:1-23, although we’ll just note a few verses.
• This is the narrative of Saul’s fall from God’s grace after he’d been anointed as the first king of Israel by the prophet Samuel.

• God told Saul to kill ALL the Amalekites and to devote them to destruction, i.e. to annihilate every single man, woman, child, and beast among them.
• Instead, Saul kept King Agag alive, along with the livestock.
• Saul argued to Samuel that he actually kept God’s commands, obviously deceiving himself.
• He claimed that by his keeping the livestock, he could sacrifice them to the Lord.
• To this delusion, God made His famous declaration through the prophet in 1 Samuel 15:22-23:

“Has the Lord as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices,
as in obeying the voice of the Lord?
Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice,
and to listen than the fat of rams.
For rebellion is as the sin of divination,
and presumption is as iniquity and idolatry.
Because you have rejected the word of the Lord,
he has also rejected you from being king.”

• What is it that we learn here?
• What is necessary from God’s perspective to be in right relationship with Him?
• If someone rebels against God and purposefully rejects obedience to Him, to what does God liken this?
• What becomes of the person who has thus rejected the Word of God, and what He intends through its declaration?
• What happened to Saul?
• Do you think that Saul, in his grievous sin against God in which He accused Saul of partaking in witchcraft, entered the kingdom of God?
• If you believe that he did, what is your rational, Biblical basis for this?

• I’m not even going to answer these questions.
• I’ll let you work through them in their if-then sequence along with the consequence

• Now, let’s take this a step further as we engage the text and ask pertinent questions.
• Is God the same yesterday, today, and forever?
• Has the way that He administers justice changed from OT times to NT times?
• If so, why and how?
• If your answer is because Jesus came and changed everything, then how is it that Paul told his young protégé in 2 Timothy 2:16-17 that:

All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.

. . . and why did Jesus say in Matthew 5:17-20 the following?

“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished. Therefore whoever relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.

• If what the Law and the Prophets said continued to be completely valid when Jesus came, then wouldn’t it stand to reason that the typology we see and use all the time in reference to other aspects of our Biblical understanding likewise apply here?

• What was it Jesus said in these verses in Matthew 5?

. . . whoever relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven

• What does that mean?
• Doesn’t it fulfill the word that Paul gave Timothy, for one?
• Does it also not mean that the consequences reaped from of old still have the same endpoint today?
• If not, why not?

• Going back to Romans 11 discussed earlier, doesn’t this same logic apply from the OT to the NT?
• Did God change how he metes out consequences?
• Has the law of sowing and reaping changed such that if a person chooses deliberate disobedience to God and continues in that way that God will overlook the consequences of this because he was once saved?

• Listen, I of all people don’t have all the answers.
• I’m not a theologian, and I don’t have that kind of background training.
• The one thing I’ve done very consistently and persistently over the years since the Lord mercifully drew me to Himself for salvation is to read His Word in season and out of season.
• I’m not so great at memorizing, and I can’t always tell you exactly where to find certain verses in the Bible.
• However, because I’ve applied myself diligently to God’s Word, He has graciously shown me much depth in it.
• He has given me a great deal of understanding of Scripture and of the larger Biblical narrative.
• To that end, He’s given me the ability to explicate and articulate much of His Word through these Commentaries, and to place much of this within the prophetic context.

• One thing I’ve always said in doing this is that one of my objectives is to encourage people to think.
• Just as important is to warn where God tells us we should take heed.

• Why is it merciful and loving to born-again believers to overlook their blatant trespasses against God?
• Did Jesus do that with the Pharisees?
• Did Samuel do that with Saul?
• Why should we ignore the warning Paul gave to the sinful man in Corinth and the consequences of his continued actions contrary to God’s Word?
• Does obedience to God mean anything?
• Is there any point to our having a righteous fear of God who can throw both body and soul into hell?
• Or is that just an empty threat?

• Do you think that the unrighteous will inherit God’s kingdom?
• Do you think that someone who chooses a path of disobedience to God because he wants to do what he wants to do will be someone that even desires to enter God’s kingdom?
• Isn’t he really in a state of apostasy?
• If a person purposefully chooses to reject God so as to enjoy the lusts of the flesh and never repents despite having been saved and warned repeatedly, what happens with him given the declaration in 1 Corinthians 6:9:

Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral

• Is this a true statement that stands or is it not?
• Can someone who is born-again become unrighteous in God’s eyes?
• Isn’t that the question?
• If not, how do you justify that?
• If so, isn’t there a serious consequence to this grave disobedience?
• Back to the first Scripture we read today, can someone be saved yet not love Jesus?
• Or, can he be saved and fall out of love with Jesus?
• Is that a possibility in the world so beset with sin and depravity?

• To this end, I’m simply asking that when we read God’s Word, let’s not overlook what its implications are.
• Let’s look at the flip side.
• If the Word warns us, then what happens if we don’t heed the warning?
• Where is the logical end of this situation?

• Let’s not excuse people when God doesn’t.
• Should we love them and because of that warn them?
• But let’s not fall back into justification of them if they are living in disobedience, and tell them that everything will be fine.
• In my reading that’s not what God says.
• Why should we say it if He doesn’t?