"Them bones, them bones, them dry bones..."

Ezekiel 37:11 Then He said to me, “Son of man, these bones are the whole house of Israel; behold, they say, ‘Our bones are dried up and our hope has perished. We are completely cut off.’ 12 “Therefore prophesy and say to them, ‘Thus says the Lord GOD, “Behold, I will open your graves and cause you to come up out of your graves, My people; and I will bring you into the land of Israel. 13 “Then you will know that I am the LORD, when I have opened your graves and caused you to come up out of your graves, My people. 14 “I will put My Spirit within you and you will come to life, and I will place you on your own land. Then you will know that I, the LORD, have spoken and done it,” declares the LORD.’” (Emphasis mine.)

Matthew 27:52 The tombs were opened, and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised; 53 and coming out of the tombs after His resurrection they entered the holy city and appeared to many. (Emphasis mine.)

I don't recall anyone ever pointing this out, I'm sure it has been in some commentary somewhere...It seems to me that the graves were opened in fulfillment of this prophecy. I have wondered for a long time, the significance of the dead saints being raised and walking through Jerusalem. But it seems that the prophecy was for those in whom God would put His spirit and that He would make them to walk upon the land of Israel. This prophecy is characteristic of many Ezekiel passages which refer to the New Covenant. In this case the only "saints" that could be raised were O.T. believers/saints. But in other passages where promises are given to the living, it appears that they are to the Jewish Christians and "Gentile" Christians; given our N.T. understanding of the mystery which is Christ in us...Every Christian truly is a "Jewish" Christian...This goes against our modernistic thinking, though; but Paul said it:

Romans 2:28 For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh. 29 But he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that which is of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter; and his praise is not from men, but from God.

If I could summarize; there is only one sense to the prophetic passages but there can be many applications. Thus, either the specifically Jewish orientation of the prophecy contains the real sense with the fact that all Christians are "true Jews" as an application or else the sense is really going for a promise aimed at all believers in the N.T. era with an application specifically directed at the Jews. Divorcing non-Jewish Christians from the promises in the O.T. Prophets seems to result in misapplication of the texts or maybe even missing the real sense of the passages; I withhold any conclusions either way on my part as of yet.

Why we fail

We fail because we do not think covenantally. Most evangelical Christians would be hard pressed to even describe what the covenant is...let alone to think in terms of it. I have described the covenant in an earlier post...

Where is the wisdom in that?

Is it wise for a young Christian to be attempting to tackle the most difficult book in the Bible to exegete? Does the fact that it is so mysterious have any strange attraction? Of course it does. So what does one do when you get this 'end-times bug?' You read a good book, that's what I did. A book that clears the apocalyptic haze not muddies the water...that is what is needed. With no knowledge of the Greek language, without establishing the interpretive hermeneutics, without consulting the works of the respected authorities; where does one intend to go?

Update: This is especially true for those intending to working as a minister of the Gospel...First things first:
1. Survey the broad themes; become a student, learn.
2. Study in greater detail; become a scholar, find out what others have learned.
3. Research the minutiae; become an expert, understand its grave implications.
Explain, Interpret, Exegete. There is a [super-]natural order to things...follow it.

Ignorance is no excuse.

Recently, someone I know was accused, in an informal debate, of making the Bible mean whatever he wanted it to mean and ignoring what it plainly said.

Now listen closely, have you ever said something but did not actually mean what you say? Why? Maybe you were using a figure of speech or exaggerating for effect or trying to get a reaction out of someone. Was the Bible not written down by men who also used these common elements? Especially, in the prophetic literature...you have lots of verses which are obviously not supposed to be taken at face value (i.e. Jesus is not a real lamb 'standing as if slain,' but we get the metaphor).

This is naturally followed by the next question; how do you interpret the figures not so obviously interpreted? But the fallacy in the question is easily exposed. The obviousness or not is a very subjective assertion; what is obvious to one may not be obvious to another. Thus we must go back to a principle which changeth not: that is that Scripture interprets Scripture.

The fact is that very little in Biblical exegesis does not rely on another passage from the Bible. Incredible as it seems, ignorance of what the Bible says in all of its boring glory does not allow for speculative interpretations nor does it excuse one for falsely accusing a brother who has the Biblical knowledge on which an interpretation depends when you do not...

'The Boys'

Now, I haven't posted photos on here in a while for a reason...But I thought this one had to be posted...My two Covenant boys learning to obey mommy and daddy so that they may live long...

Does God promote cannibalism?

Ezekiel 5:9 'And because of all your abominations, I will do among you what I have not done, and the like of which I will never do again. 10 'Therefore, fathers will eat their sons among you, and sons will eat their fathers; for I will execute judgments on you and scatter all your remnant to every wind.

What we see here is an example of God's pronouncement of judgment. In other passages we see the same curse mentioned...but why was this curse added to the Deuteronomy curses in the first place? If nothing else, because God knew the future. Note that He says that He has not actually brought this curse to bear before and that He will do so in a very specific capacity and that He will never do so again (which could be figurative, in order to emphasize the gravity of the situation). It is an earthly judgment reserved for the severest of offenses: rejecting God and whoring after other gods. The next question is, when was/will this fulfilled?

The Word of God?

What is the Law-Word of God? Is it the KJV, NASB, or NIV? Is it the manuscripts in Latin, Greek, Hebrew, Aramaic, et al.? Are all of them the Law-Word of God or none of them?

For one who holds to the inerrancy and infallibility of the Law-Word of God, these questions may seem disconcerting.

I am currently studying this issue to have my conscience settled and for a paper I will write on the topic (makes my work light since I want to know the information). Here I will lay out some of my thoughts on the subject.

I heard first the arguments for the priority of the Greek from which the KJV was written. I was led to believe that the Greek manuscripts which were translated from until the last century were the pure text and that the more recently discovered manuscripts had been edited, for instance, by gnostic sects which had hidden them away and had incidentally preserved them.

The first books that I picked up on the subject of text versions were both arguing against modern translations. Their method was to compare the English KJV translation to other modern English translations. They argued that other versions significantly reduced verses in support of, most notably the doctrine of Christ's deity. They argued for a majority text tradition and invoked the theory of providential preservation.

More recently I have read a book by D.A. Carson on textual criticism. I took him to be Reformed Presbyterian initially but I don't know how he could have some very liberal leanings as far as altering Scripture is concerned and still be "Reformed." I thought he made many good points and nearly convinced me to be a textual critic...compelling anyways. But the more I look into it, the approach of textual criticism seems be atheistic as if somehow you can approach the issue neutrally...Oh sweet autonomy!

KJO proponents are on an extreme position. Proponents of the critical-text are on an extreme position. Proponents of the priority of the Majority/Byzantine text-type take external science into account as well as internal theological evidence. They seem to moderate the two extremes in a healthy way. It would place one much closer to KJO to side for the Majority text, but these are generally God-fearing evangelical Christians, than the textual-critics side, which is the side of intellectualizing to a fault the issue in question. Apparently, as one was wont to say, simple issues like evolution have been settled by science but are not accepted by some religious types. Well, I'm a religious type that will never accept an unproven theory as equivalent to experimental science.

Other issues I had with the Alexandrian prioritists were the use of statistical analysis, evolutionary concept of memes, mathematical analysis, etc as intellectual arguments. Sure, that is what is used in science but the Law-Word of God is not a scientific derivative and should not be treated as such.

I think the issues of theology, psychology, geography, history/tradition etc play a role as well as scientific modes of inquiry. Let us not use one to the exclusion of the other, but let us take both when they can both be of assistance and see where they lead us.

Let 'em breathe, let 'em live.

Jeremiah 20:17 Because he did not kill me before birth, So that my mother would have been my grave, And her womb ever pregnant.

I really think this provides some grotesque imagery in consideration of one of America's favorite past-time: abortion. Abortion is "killing before birth." No denying that. Even if it isn't murder, it is killing something that was alive...

But it is murder and that's what makes it worse. You have turned an instrument of life into a chamber of death. God gave sexual intercourse, a wonderful thing, between a man and his wife. This act serves a two-fold purpose: bonding the couple and producing offspring. Lord knows that if sex wasn't how children were made and they were made in some neutral fashion as to be a chore, then we as a human race would've died out long ago by disobeying His command to be fruitful and multiply.

The womb ought to be a haven not a hades, safe not sheol, help not hell, peaceful not purgatory, life not death...

The curse of wealth.

1 Timothy 5:16 If any woman who is a believer has dependent widows, she must assist them and the church must not be burdened, so that it may assist those who are widows indeed.

Who is the Church? And why are Christians so financially burdened? Do we not want to be in the position to assist when called upon? There is no excuse for the Church of Christ to be impotent today given our improved wealth and standard of living, as compared to the first century Church for instance.

The more we have, the more we want. Christians need to stop being so fearful when talking about money. They need to avoid beggars in clerical robes and give to the real beggars. They need to help when it is in the power of their hand to do it. Christ will come back and we will reconcile all accounts with Him. Christians also need to tithe. Don't be fooled by my soft way of making that last statement.

The FED; Beginnings

http://www.garynorth.com/public/4188.cfm