The Acts Transition, Part 8

You may listen to the audio version of this study on SoundCloud.

Today we pick back up in our study through the book of Acts 2:15-16 where it says, For these are not drunken, as ye suppose, seeing it is but the third hour of the day. But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel; Peter first addresses the mockers and assures them that what they had just witnessed was a true move of God and not the result of drunkenness.

On another note, I believe this verse is truly the source of much erroneous teaching in the church today. Why? - Far too many doubt that poor old Peter knew what he was talking about. Their bone of contention is the latter part of the verse when he said, "This is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel." To me, that is just as wrong as those who say that he also got ahead of himself in choosing Matthias. No, Peter knew exactly what he was saying and his language was emphatic. If we start correcting Apostles, where is that going to leave us?

VERSES 17-18: And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams: And on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit, and they shall prophesy: Peter is now going to quote verbatim the prophecy of Joel 2:28-32. It must be clearly understood what Peter is doing in these verses because too many do not get it. He is, for the first time, legitimately offering the Kingdom to the nation of Israel. Some will argue otherwise and say that it had already been offered in the Gospels. No, not even possible because Hebrews 9:15-17 says, And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance. For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator. For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth. These verses make it clear that the Kingdom could not have been offered until after the crucifixion, let alone rejected. This is a great misunderstanding in my opinion in the modern church. Yet, when you start questioning the assumptions, people start looking at you like you are a heretic! In any wise, the Kingdom offer was rejected, Israel blasphemed the Holy Spirit just as Christ mentioned in Matthew 12:32, and it was postponed.

VERSES 19-20: And I will shew wonders in heaven above, and signs in the earth beneath; blood, and fire, and vapour of smoke: The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before that great and notable day of the Lord come: This is where many today will say that Peter should have stopped in his quotation of the passage, but he knew full well what he was doing, I dare say more so than any of us. His full expectation was that once Israel had accepted their Messiah, Daniel's 70th Week would commence (Tribulation), followed by the Second Coming, and the establishment of the Kingdom. I would argue that his epistles are saying the same thing as well. He preached and lived the Kingdom Gospel (see previous studies).

VERSE 21: And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved. We must remember that Peter, being a good dispensationalist, was thinking and speaking chronologically, i.e., first, the pouring out of the Spirit on the day of Pentecost, followed by signs, and wonders then and in the Tribulation, the Lord would return, and those who call upon the name of the Lord would be saved. The last part foreseeing salvation in the Millenium.

The Acts Transition, Part 7

You may listen to the audio version of this study on SoundCloud.

We pick up our study through the book of Acts in Acts 2:5 today.

VERSE 5: And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven. Notice that this verse tells us that those who were present were only Jews. These Jews were men who had come out of every nation under heaven to Jerusalem for the mandatory feast days. These included Pesach (Passover), Shavuot (Weeks or Pentecost), and Sukkot (Tabernacles or Booths). At this point, we must remember that the Jews had been scattered to the nations as a result of the diaspora (the dispersion) after the fall of the Northern Kingdom in 723 BC. There was also no doubt some expectations in regard to the messianic prophecies that were most likely fueled by possibly the wise men who had come earlier, Simion's statement in Luke 2:25, and maybe the study of the faithful in regards to Daniel's prophecies in Daniel 9:24-27. Jerusalem must have been abuzz.

VERSES 6-11: Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language. And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans? And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born? Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judaea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia, Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes, Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God. Immediately what happened was noised abroad. The term has nothing to do with the modern sense of abroad. The sense here is that of a rumor.

Notice the multitude in v.6. This is referring to the Jews that were just mentioned in v.5. They were amazed and marveled because all of those filled with the Holy Ghost and speaking in other tongues were Galileans, but each of them was hearing in their native tongues in which they were born. Remember, these Jews were from all over the known world who were in Jerusalem for the feasts. Notice that everyone present for this event were Jewish, either naturally born or proselytes (v. 10). In other words, this was not a Gentile event.

VERSES 12-13: And they were all amazed, and were in doubt, saying one to another, What meaneth this? Others mocking said, These men are full of new wine. Notice that there are two responses to this event: those who doubted and those who mocked. On a side note, that is exactly what happens today in regards to how people respond to God. The word doubt more so implies that they were perplexed more than that of being skeptical. They simply did not know what was going on. On the other hand, the mockers out-of-hand rejected the event as being a work of God.

VERSES 14-15: But Peter, standing up with the eleven, lifted up his voice, and said unto them, Ye men of Judaea, and all ye that dwell at Jerusalem, be this known unto you, and hearken to my words: For these are not drunken, as ye suppose, seeing it is but the third hour of the day. At this point, Peter, being the designated spokesman for the group, as appointed by Christ himself in Matthew 16:17-19, stands up to explain just what is going on. And notice, who he is addressing. He is addressing the Jews that had assembled in Jerusalem and had just witnessed this outpouring of the Holy Spirit. His first concern was to refute the mockers who had assumed that the event had occurred because of drunkenness.

Dispensationalism, Part 3

You may listen to the audio version of this study on SoundCloud.

The next essential belief to dispensationalism is that Israel and the church are distinct and cannot be identified as one with the other. All dispensationalists agree that the church is not a new Israel as those of the covenant persuasion insist. Dispensationalists may disagree as to some specifics, but none of them, unless seriously confused, embrace "replacement theology" or what is also called "supersessionism".

The greatest argument for this is the fact that the term "Israel" is used seventy-three times in the New Testament and it is always, without fail, referring to ethnic Jews. Some will contend that Paul's use of the term "Israel of God" in Galatians 6:16 is referring to the church. However, the context clearly dictates that he is not referring to the church, but instead to believing Jews that had rightly rejected the teaching of the Judaizers.

Those who believe that the church is the new Israel say that this exchange if you will, happened on the day of Pentecost. But strangely enough, even after Pentecost, there is always a distinction made between Israel and the church. In the book of Acts alone, the term "Israel" occurs twenty times and the church term church (ekklesia) occurs nineteen times. Yet, the two are always kept distinct This is just further proof that the church is not Israel and never will be. Those who confuse the two will forever be inconsistent in their view of Scripture and God's distinct plan for both.

Are We Living in the New Covenant?

You may listen to the audio version of this study on SoundCloud.

The question that I posed to my Bible study last week was simple, "Are we living in the New Covenant?" After all, in all of our Bibles, there is a page between Malachi and Matthew which clearly says, "New Testament" which means New Covenant.

First, we must understand that the New Covenant was a promise that God gave to the nation of Israel that he would bring them back unto their land where they would realize the blessings promised to their fathers (Luke 1:72-75). The beginnings of this covenant are found in Deuteronomy 30:1-9 where God promises he will: have compassion on them (30:3), gather them together from out of the nations (30:3-5), allow them to dwell in the promised land (30:3-5), circumcise their heart so they can obey the commandments (30:6-8), and make them plenteous in every work of their hands (30:9).  The end result would be that the covenant would provide for their redemption and institute what was needed to begin God’s plan for blessing the "kindreds of the earth" through their priesthood (Gen 12:3, 22:18, Acts 3:25). In other words, what Israel failed to accomplish on their own under the Old Covenant, God would provide for them under the new.

The prophets also reminded the Jews of the promised New Covenant when Jeremiah says in Jeremiah 31:31, "Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:”. He also goes on to describe how God will put his "law in their inward parts" and will "remember their sin no more" (Jeremiah 31:33-34). Ezekiel also describes the supernatural empowerment that will accompany the New Covenant as he writes, “And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them" (Ezekiel 36:27). Ezekiel goes to mention how God will do several things that Jeremiah also mentioned when he said that He will gather them from all countries (36:24), allow them to dwell in the Promised Land (36:28), multiply the fruit of the tree and the increase of the field, and they would receive no more reproach from the heathen (36:30).

Also, in the book of Romans, Paul says that Jesus was a minister to the circumcision to "confirm the promises made unto the fathers" (Romans 15:8). Hebrews tells us that Jesus came as the mediator of the New Covenant. Jesus testified to just that during the Passover supper with the disciples when he described the symbolism of the meal when he said, "For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins” (Matthew 26:28). Christ spent his earthly ministry preparing his followers for the coming Kingdom and the New Covenant by teaching them about the law and how they would receive supernatural empowerment that he would send to do so in John 14:26 and Matthew 6:24-33. Hebrews also tells us that the new covenant could not be in force until after Christ died when it says, "For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth” (Hebrews 9:17). So, when Jesus died, he sent down the "Comforter" who would prepare them for the New Covenant with power to enter the kingdom (John 14:26).

It is the same "better covenant" that the author of Hebrews refers to in Hebrews 8:6 when he says, "But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.” Also, it must be understood that before He  could bring in the new covenant, Israel's past transgressions under the old covenant had to be redeemed according to Hebrews 9:15 where the author said, "And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance."

Are we living in the new covenant? No, we are not. While it was offered, it was never realized because the nation of Israel rejected the message and the Messenger. As a result, God raised up the Apostle Paul to reveal the mystery of the church which will continue until "the fullness of the Gentiles be come in" (Romans 11:25-27), during which time He will reconcile the world back to Himself apart from any covenant or special people (2 Cor 5:19). During this current dispensation, believers receive the benefits of the redemptive work of Christ on the cross outside of any covenant relationship. Today there is neither Jew nor Gentile. Paul said that "God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all” in Romans 11:32.

Dispensationalism, Part 2

You may listen to the audio version of this study on SoundCloud.

Picking up in our study of dispensationalism, we continue to look at the essential beliefs of this lens of Biblical interpretation. Last time, we looked at essential belief that the primary meaning of any passage in the Bible is found in that passage of the Bible. The New Testament does not reinterpret or transcend the passages in the Old Testament in any way that would override or cancel the original intent of the author. Again, that is a high view of Scripture that simply means that the author said what he meant and meant what he said when he said it and who he said it to.

Today, we look at the next essential belief which is that types do exist but national Israel is not an inferior type that is superseded by the church. That just simply means that the church never replaces Israel. The study of typology is a special kind of symbolism. A symbol is something that represents something else. We can define a type as a “prophetic symbol” because all types are representations of something yet future. For example, Adam is a type of Jesus as we are told by the Apostle Paul in Romans 5:14 and 1 Corinthians 15:45. The flood of Genesis 6-7 is used as a type of baptism 1 Peter 3:20-21, etc. Another way of putting it is that types by definition involve God intended correspondences between Old Testament persons, places, things, and events with New Testament realities.

Those who do not embrace dispensationalism in favor of covenant theology will say the exact opposite and say that Old Testament types do indeed superceed New Testament realities. For example, they will say that Old Testament Israel was a type of the church and now everything that was for them has transitioned to the church. In other words, the church has replaced Israel. They say that this happened on the day of Pentecost. Dispensationalists categorically reject that notion.

The bottom line is that we believe that God made unconditional covenants and promises to Israel that must be and will be fulfilled. In Jeremiah 31:35-37, it says, "Thus saith the Lord, which giveth the sun for a light by day, and the ordinances of the moon and of the stars for a light by night, which divideth the sea when the waves thereof roar; The Lord of hosts is his name: If those ordinances depart from before me, saith the Lord, then the seed of Israel also shall cease from being a nation before me forever. Thus saith the Lord; If heaven above can be measured, and the foundations of the earth searched out beneath, I will also cast off all the seed of Israel for all that they have done, saith the Lord." That sounds like a pretty iron-clad promise to me. Also, Paul said in Romans 9:4-5, "Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises; Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed forever. Amen." As dispensationalists, we believe God's very integrity is in question here. Why would God make promises to one group, pull the proverbial carpet out from under them, and give them to another? Seriously?

Paul said in Romans 11:28-29, "As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers' sakes. For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance." He says that God's promises are without repentance. That means irrevocable. Paul told the Galatians that once a covenant "has been ratified, no one sets it aside or adds conditions to it (Galatians 3:15). Some will argue that the covenants made to Israel were only for that generation to which he made it. No, the Bible makes it clear that the covenants were trans-generational Deutoronomy 30:1-10 and Leviticus 26:40-45. Also, the salvation and restoration of Israel are reaffirmed over and over in the New Testament (Mat 19:28; 23:39; Acts 1:6; 3:19-21; and Rom 11:26-27). If Israel is the transcended type that those of the covenant theology persuasion say, why does the New Testament make so much about Israel's glorious future? The obvious answer is that Israel still has a glorious future and they are wrong.