The Death of Deutero- and Trito-Isaiah

The heart of typology is representation, and representation is the heart of sacrifice.

A great deal of so-called theology seems to me to be a waste of time, breath and ink. Theologians and commentators insist on applying a “lens” to Scripture, or building a case from cherry-picked particulars or accumulations of fragmented data, when the answer to the debated question is staring right back at them. Literary structure should be the first recourse, not the last. When it comes to the Bible, literary structure is the label on the tin.

You must be logged in to see the rest of this post.

Join now for a year for $15!

Alpha and Omega

Since the sacred architecture of the Jew-Gentile social structure set up in Daniel was a spiritual expansion of the previous physical sanctuaries, we should not be surprised to find its shape serving as the foundation for the New Testament. Since the Holy Place symbolised the court of the King of Heaven, the Tabernacle sheds some helpful light on Jesus’ cryptic description of judgment from His throne in Matthew 25. It not only becomes clear why the Lord uses sheep and goats as symbols for Gentile nations, but their locations and destinies bring to an end a narrative thread which can be traced back to Genesis 4.

Matthew 25:31-46 is the “Judges” step of the Covenant Ethics component of Matthew’s five-fold Covenant progression. You can see where this passage fits in the overall structure here.

Following on from Matthew 24, its fulfilment is clearly first century, describing a judgment which would take place within a generation. Concerning the context and purpose of the passage, Chris Wooldridge wrote in a guest post:

In his covenant with Abraham, God had promised that nations would be blessed and cursed through him. In 70 AD, the Abrahamic covenant came to an end and the blessings and curses were distributed. Nations were resurrected, stood before Christ in heaven and were judged in accordance with their treatment of the people of Abraham. Israel herself would be judged in accordance with her treatment of the apostolic church. The blessing would take the form of reigning with Christ in heaven for the remainder of the new covenant era (Revelation 20:4-6). The cursing would take the form of returning to the grave in “shame and contempt” (Daniel 12:2) to await the end of the new covenant and eternal destruction in the lake of fire.

In context, this speech is a prediction of the judgment of the oikoumene [1], the final stage in what we refer to as the “Old Covenant.” All nations would be judged, yet, as we shall see, both the symbols Jesus uses and the pattern of Jesus’ words are very obviously Jewish.

A Ram and a Goat

The events leading up to AD70 avenged the blood of all the prophets beginning with Abel. In the primeval world, and in Temple architecture, this blood is tied to the demarcations of “Land” (both the Land outside Eden, and later the Land promised to Abraham), not the Garden or the World. Since the entire empire was considered part of the household of God during this era, instead of using the “World” beasts of Daniel 7 in Matthew 25 to describe the nations of the oikoumene, Jesus uses the sacrificial “Land” animals of Daniel 8. Concerning these symbols in Daniel, James Jordan writes:

Daniel sees two animals. They are not beasts this time, but sacrificial animals: a ram and a goat. They represent Persia and Greece. Each morning and each evening Israel would offer a lamb (Exodus 29:38-42). This fact is central to the present vision, and will explain why Persia and Greece are pictured as flockmembers. The flock of God is no longer only Israel, but also the nations of the God-established Oikumene, though not yet the whole world.

The ram of Persia has two horns, one behind the other. The one in back is later, but is also longer. The first horn is Media, the second Persia, but it is one ram. The ram conquers to the west, north, and south; since it comes from the east it does not need to conquer to the east. God gives everything to the ram, and lets it rule the world (vv. 3-4, 20).

Then a male goat comes from the west, as the ram came from the east. They collide, and the goat is utterly victorious. The goat’s swift advance represents the amazing progress of the conquests of Alexander the Great. The great horn between the goat’s eyes is Alexander himself, but the horn is broken very quickly, because Alexander died at the age of 30. Then four new horns arose and took over Alexander’s empire.

Then a little horn grew up out of their midst. This is usually considered to represent Antiochus IV Epiphanes, ruler of the Northern part of Alexander’s broken empire. I shall argue below that it is actually a symbol of the Herodian line. The little horn’s oppression of the saints is then described (vv. 9-14, 23-26).

The Lord tells Gabriel to explain the vision to Daniel. Gabriel explains that this vision pertains to the time of the end. The end of what? The end of the first creation, which came to a full close in AD70. Gabriel identifies the ram and the goat, and gives more information about the Herods (vv. 15-26)…

…we need to note that the ram and goat, or he-goat, are not “beasts” or wild animals, but “cattle” or domestic animals, and in particular they are animals used in the Levitical worship system. The ram, or male sheep, is required for the Trespass or Desanctifying offering, which is performed to cover high-handed sins, sins that in some sense put blood on the hands that needs to be washed off. The he-goat is required from a civil officer (hence, from a king) for a Sin or Purification offering, which is performed to cover sins of wandering (“inadvertency”), sins that in some sense put dirt on the feet that needs to be washed off. (Leviticus 4-5.)

The Passover ritual could use either a male sheep or a he-goat that was one year old (Exodus 12:5).

Perhaps more importantly, however, is what we find in Numbers 28-29, which is that on every important festival occasion, both a ram and a he-goat were brought to the altar.

As has been pointed out by Rodriguez, this is all related to the Continual of verses 11-12. The Continual, or tamid, is sometimes taken only for the evening and morning daily offerings, and this is indeed implied in verse 14 (“2300 evenings morning”). But the word is also used for all the continual daily activities in the Holy Place: the continual facebread, the continual incense, the lamp, and the fire in the altar.

What is the theology behind this imagery? It is this: The calling of Israel was to pray for and bring offerings near to God on behalf of the nations of the world. The ox was particularly for the High Priest and for Israel as a whole (Leviticus 4). But the daily offerings and the continual annual cycle involved the nations of the world, especially after the establishment of the Oikumene. The meaning is this: As long as the Jews are faithful and pray for the nations, offering rams and he-goats for the imperial leaders, then they will have good rams and he-goats as emperors. First the ram of Persia would come and deliver them from Babylon. Then, when the ram had ceased to do God’s bidding, a buck from Greece would arise and deliver them from Persian oppression (see Zechariah 9:1–8). But after the Greek deliverance, there would come a time when some evil Horn would wreck the Continual offerings. Such an evil Horn can only be a Jewish, and indeed priestly person, because no one else could wreck the system. Some pagan king putting a temporary halt to the offerings would count for nothing in God’s eyes. It was only His anointed priests who could defile the worship. In other words, the fact that the Horn is able to wreck the sanctuary and pervert the Continual makes clear that he symbolises, at least in part, a Jewish priestly power. [2]

Although Jesus uses similar sacrificial animals, His words concerning the judgment of the nations have a different purpose from Daniel 8. He is not speaking of separating Persians from Greeks. Greece conquered Persia, but those empires are not mentioned. Both animals were acceptable sacrifices, but Jesus accepts one and not the other.

As Jordan notes, the sheep concerned high-handed or deliberate sin (bloodied hands) and the goat concerned wandering astray (dirty feet).

Sheep: High-handed Sin
Goat: Wandering Astray

In Jesus’ day, the Jewish leaders were guilty of deliberate sin, since they possessed the words of God but instead taught their own distorted laws, misleading the people. It was the Jewish people who were guilty of “inadvertent sin,” since they were kept in ignorance, under the heavy burdens of the Oral Law, by their leaders. [3] Yet the leaders of Israel were to consider their people as brothers.

The Least Of My Brothers

An Israelite could take Gentile slaves, but not Hebrew ones. This was because Israelites were freedmen, and they would remain free as long as they faithfully served God, their heavenly master.

“If your brother becomes poor and cannot maintain himself with you, you shall support him as though he were a stranger and a sojourner, and he shall live with you. Take no interest from him or profit, but fear your God, that your brother may live beside you. You shall not lend him your money at interest, nor give him your food for profit. I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt to give you the land of Canaan, and to be your God.

“If your brother becomes poor beside you and sells himself to you, you shall not make him serve as a slave: he shall be with you as a hired servant and as a sojourner. He shall serve with you until the year of the jubilee. Then he shall go out from you, he and his children with him, and go back to his own clan and return to the possession of his fathers. For they are my servants, whom I brought out of the land of Egypt; they shall not be sold as slaves. You shall not rule over him ruthlessly but shall fear your God. 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. You may make slaves of them, but over your brothers the people of Israel you shall not rule, one over another ruthlessly. (Leviticus 25:35-46)

Taking a Hebrew brother as a slave began with Jacob’s debt slavery to Laban and continued with the sale of Joseph by his brothers. This was an issue close to the Lord’s heart. Under King Zedekiah, the Jewish aristocracy reneged on the oath they had taken to release their Hebrew slaves. At heart, Israel had become another Egypt. This was the last straw before the destruction of Judah by Nebuchadnezzar.

The word that came to Jeremiah from the Lord, after King Zedekiah had made a covenant with all the people in Jerusalem to make a proclamation of liberty to them, that everyone should set free his Hebrew slaves, male and female, so that no one should enslave a Jew, his brother.

And they obeyed, all the officials and all the people who had entered into the covenant that everyone would set free his slave, male or female, so that they would not be enslaved again. They obeyed and set them free. But afterward they turned around and took back the male and female slaves they had set free, and brought them into subjection as slaves.

The word of the Lord came to Jeremiah from the Lord: “Thus says the Lord, the God of Israel: I myself made a covenant with your fathers when I brought them out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage, saying, ‘At the end of seven years each of you must set free the fellow Hebrew who has been sold to you and has served you six years; you must set him free from your service.’ But your fathers did not listen to me or incline their ears to me. You recently repented and did what was right in my eyes by proclaiming liberty, each to his neighbor, and you made a covenant before me in the house that is called by my name, but then you turned around and profaned my name when each of you took back his male and female slaves, whom you had set free according to their desire, and you brought them into subjection to be your slaves.

“Therefore, thus says the Lord: You have not obeyed me by proclaiming liberty, every one to his brother and to his neighbor; behold, I proclaim to you liberty to the sword, to pestilence, and to famine, declares the Lord. I will make you a horror to all the kingdoms of the earth.” (Jeremiah 34:8-17)

Sheep and goats are “brother” animals, different yet closely related, hence the need for a discerning shepherd to separate them. The Passover lamb could be either a sheep or a goat (Exodus 12:5), but the Firstfruits sacrifice could only be a sheep, and after the bull sacrificed for the priesthood, the Atonement offerings could only be goats. This seems to indicate that the spiritual character (or office) of a man is indiscernible at birth and only becomes apparent as he matures. Before God, is he a sheep or a goat, a priest or a king?

It seems that sheep picture the priestly head, which is why Jesus has hair as white as wool (Firstfruits). Goats picture the Covenant body (Atonement), which is why Jacob wore goatskin on his arms. Government is a robe which sits upon one’s shoulders. So the sheep pictures the Church and the goat pictures the State. The sheep dies in the stead of a blameless priest for the high-handed sin of Adam in the Sanctuary, a sin committed in full knowledge of the truth. The goat dies in the stead of a faithful king who serves his people rather than lording over them like Pharaoh.

Jacob the shepherd was the priestly brother. Sheep’s wool is soft and was used for clothing. Esau the hunter was the kingly brother. Goat hair is course and was used for tents. Goats are “hairy ones” like Esau. Peter Leithart writes:

Esau is a “hairy man” (sa’iyr), something we learn only when Jacob dresses himself in goat hair to approach his father (Genesis 27:11, 23). Jacob becomes a hairy one, subbing in for his brother. The only other use of the word in Genesis is in 37:31, where it describes the “kid” killed to fool Jacob into thinking that Joseph has died. Both passages involve substitution, and both involve deception of a father.

Leviticus 16 is the great chapter about hairy goats. The word is used 14x in the chapter to describe the two goats used in the day of atonement rite. On the day of “coverings,” Israel is covered with goat skin to receive the blessing of the firstborn; on the day of coverings, a hairy kid is killed in place of the beloved son. [4]

I believe this is the background for the distinction between sheep and goats in Matthew 25. It is a division between the nations within God’s extended household (the oikoumene), those with a priestly character towards the “least” of Jesus’ brothers, and those who were tyrants and abused them as slaves.

By the time of this judgment, heredity had become meaningless. It did not matter whether a nation was Jewish or Greek. Descended from Esau, the Edomite Herods and all those who served them had aligned themselves with Rome. This judgment concerned not the circumcision of the flesh, but the circumcision of the heart. The nations (including Israel) who abused the true Jews were repeating the sins of Edom, the false brothers who not only refused to feed Israel in the wilderness, but also looted Jerusalem after its sacking and enslavement by Babylon.

Moses sent messengers from Kadesh to the king of Edom: “Thus says your brother Israel: You know all the hardship that we have met: how our fathers went down to Egypt, and we lived in Egypt a long time. And the Egyptians dealt harshly with us and our fathers. And when we cried to the Lord, he heard our voice and sent an angel and brought us out of Egypt. And here we are in Kadesh, a city on the edge of your territory. Please let us pass through your land. We will not pass through field or vineyard, or drink water from a well. We will go along the King’s Highway. We will not turn aside to the right hand or to the left until we have passed through your territory.” But Edom said to him, “You shall not pass through, lest I come out with the sword against you.” And the people of Israel said to him, “We will go up by the highway, and if we drink of your water, I and my livestock, then I will pay for it. Let me only pass through on foot, nothing more.” But he said, “You shall not pass through.” And Edom came out against them with a large army and with a strong force. Thus Edom refused to give Israel passage through his territory, so Israel turned away from him. (Numbers 20:14-21)

Because of the violence done to your brother Jacob,
shame shall cover you,
and you shall be cut off forever.

On the day that you stood aloof,
on the day that strangers carried off his wealth
and foreigners entered his gates
and cast lots for Jerusalem,
you were like one of them.

But do not gloat over the day of your brother
in the day of his misfortune;
do not rejoice over the people of Judah
in the day of their ruin;
do not boast
in the day of distress.

Do not enter the gate of my people
in the day of their calamity;
do not gloat over his disaster
in the day of his calamity;
do not loot his wealth
in the day of his calamity.

Do not stand at the crossroads
to cut off his fugitives;
do not hand over his survivors
in the day of distress.

For the day of the Lord is near upon all the nations.
As you have done, it shall be done to you;
your deeds shall return on your own head.

(Obadiah 10-15)

The First Shall Be Last

All this background sits behind Matthew 25, which is not only near the end of the Bible, it speaks of the end of the Abrahamic Covenant, with its blessings and curses upon surrounding nations depending on their treatment of his children.

However, to make sense of where Jesus positions the separated oikoumene ”livestock” — the goats on His left and the sheep on His right — we must briefly trace it back even further, to the first brothers, Cain and Abel.

Due to Adam’s failure to submit to God as a priest, true kingdom was denied him. Blood was required to enjoy continued fellowship with God. Likewise, Cain usurped the ministry of his priestly brother. Cain, the firstborn, was disinherited by God. It is Christ who reveals to us that Abel, and all those like Him, would inherit the kingdom.

The Tabernacle is cruciform, and therefore humaniform. In this Man’s left hand is priesthood, the Table of bread and wine. In his right hand is kingdom, the Lampstand. Yet in Matthew 25, the priestly sheep are on the right, and the kingly goats are on the left. The first is last, and the last is first, an ironic take on the usurping of priesthood committed by Cain, who was supposed to make his offering after Abel. The “earth” is taken from the kings and given to the priestly, the meek. The inheritance is taken from the Esaus and given to the Jacobs. The “hairy ones” who refused to aid their suffering brothers are exiled forever.

There is a “chiastic” form to this brother-swap, which Jesus employs in the shape of Matthew 23:12:

This is precisely what we see in Genesis 48, when Jacob, whose eyes are failing, blesses Joseph’s sons:

And now your two sons, who were born to you in the land of Egypt before I came to you in Egypt, are mine; Ephraim and Manasseh shall be mine, as Reuben and Simeon are. And the children that you fathered after them shall be yours. They shall be called by the name of their brothers in their inheritance… And Joseph took them both, Ephraim in his right hand toward Israel’s left hand, and Manasseh in his left hand toward Israel’s right hand, and brought them near him. And Israel stretched out his right hand and laid it on the head of Ephraim, who was the younger, and his left hand on the head of Manasseh, crossing his hands (for Manasseh was the firstborn)… And Joseph said to his father, “Not this way, my father; since this one is the firstborn, put your right hand on his head.” (Genesis 48:5-6; 13-14; 18)

Matthew 25 is about tyrannical “kings” being butchered and given to sacrificial flames, and faithful servant-kings inheriting their houses and vineyards. As it was concerning the rich man and Lazarus within Israel, so would it be with the “ecumenical” nations over whom Christ, the First and the Last, was now enthroned.

In part 2, we will look at the Covenant structure of the passage and its allusions to the Ten Commandments.

_______________________________________
[1] Oikoumene means “inhabited world,” related to the extent of the realm or domain of a single code of law.
[2] James B. Jordan, The Handwriting On The Wall: A Commentary On The Book Of Daniel, 416-421.
[3] See When Judaism Jumped The Shark.
[4] Peter Leithart, Scapegoat.

James Kirk learns via Vulcan mind meld that he will never marry.

Now as a concession, not a command, I say this. I wish that all were as I myself am. But each has his own gift from God, one of one kind and one of another. (1 Corinthians 7:6-7)

Reliance upon rules and regulations is a sign of immaturity. There’s nothing wrong with them, of course, just as there is nothing wrong with the “gutter guards” used to keep the ten pin bowling ball moving towards the pins for children’s parties at the bowling alley. Likewise, there was nothing wrong with creeds, rosary beads or religious paintings in their early days. They were simply mnemonic devices for the illiterate. But, just as it was with the Pharisees in the first century, these lifeless, inflexible “stoicheia” become a problem when they turn into legislation and become mandatory. Failing to tithe one’s kitchen herbs leads to certain destruction. The celibacy of certain prominent men in the Bible is part of this discussion. The question is not “Is celibacy holier than marriage?” but why were these spiritual giants, including Jesus, celibate at all?

This post has been slain and resurrected for inclusion in my 2015 book of essays, Inquietude.

You must be logged in to see the rest of this post.

Join now for a year for $15!

Why are there four Gospels? There would be so much less confusion — and theological spade work — if there were just the one. The most obvious answer is that each one was written for a different audience, as described here. The least obvious answer is that God was not only writing the commandments in human flesh, He was also “measuring out” the architecture of the Tabernacle in humanity.

You must be logged in to see the rest of this post.

Join now for a year for $15!

At that time the Lord said to Joshua,
“Make flint knives and circumcise
the sons of Israel a second time.”
(Joshua 5:2)

Was Israel disobedient in its failure to circumcise every male born in the wilderness? The Lord never chastised them for this. If this lapse in the practice of circumcision was in the plan of God, what was the purpose of that plan? The example which first comes to mind is the circumcision of the firstborn son of Moses in Exodus 4:24-26.

This post has been slain and resurrected for inclusion in my 2015 book of essays, Inquietude.

You must be logged in to see the rest of this post.

Join now for a year for $15!

The final vision of Ezekiel is one of the most hotly debated passages in the Bible. Since the structure described has never been built, those who take the passage as fulfilled in history believe it to be figurative. However, the building is described in such careful detail that common sense suggests that something else is going on. The precise measurements remind us of the instructions given concerning the Tabernacle and Solomon’s Temple for the purpose of physical construction. Is Ezekiel’s temple a false prophecy, or does it describe a third, and as yet unbuilt, Temple in Jerusalem?

You must be logged in to see the rest of this post.

Join now for a year for $15!

“But Peter said, ‘I have no silver and gold, but what I do have I give to you.”’ (Acts 3:6)

Israel consistently failed to keep the final feast, the Feast of Sukkot, because she took her calling to be elitist rather than priestly. She thought her calling, gifts and purification were for herself, rather than for the healing of the nations.

Part I   Part II

This brings us to the New Testament, and the final years of the Mosaic Law. Jesus was dealing with the house of Israel but also with Gentiles, as a precursor to the ministry of the apostles. His ministry, like that of Moses, included the appearance of the glory cloud at significant moments. Through Jesus’ atonement for sin, Israel was about to enter into God’s rest. This time, it was the heavenly country perceived by all the saints, not a temporary house of branches like Canaan. However, this Feast of Clouds would require temporary shelters to become “houses of fire,” as a witness to the glory of God in His people.

The first sign was the Day of Pentecost. A single house was filled with a mighty, rushing wind, signalling the presence of God, just as His presence moved into the Tabernacle and Solomon’s Temple once His instructions had been obeyed. The Spirit anointed human lampstands with oil and tongues of fire measured out Yahweh’s architecture not in gold or silver (Acts 3:6) but in human character restored to health.

In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, rise up and walk!” And he took him by the right hand and raised him up, and immediately his feet and ankles were made strong. And leaping up he stood and began to walk, and entered the temple with them, walking and leaping and praising God. (Acts 3:6-8)

However, this Pentecostal house was but a single house. A greater sign was required to indicate that the third promise to Abraham was finally being fulfilled: the blessing to all nations. After Pentecost, Acts records four events where entire households were visited by God. These correspond to the four “Altar horn” corners of the Land, whose territory was later expanded into four Gentile beasts as guardian cherubim around God’s throne. It appears that they correspond these four Gentile empires, but also to the four gospels, which are the horsemen of the apocalypse. Now that Christ had ascended, the four horns of atonement had become four winds of the Spirit.

This final “household” sign is also the point at which Paul completes his official witness to Jewish synagogues. Maintaining their allegiance to Herodian worship, they have become houses filled with demons, strange fire. At Maturity, the Bible Matrix pattern moves from head to body, from Israel to the nations, from heaven to the filling of the sky and the sea.

These “household conversions” were clearly not the norm, because the fact that all believed before they were baptized is specifically mentioned in three of the four instances. (The fact that it is not mentioned in the case of Lydia is beside the point, since Acts makes clear what were the qualifications for baptism, and it was not membership in a believing household.)

Moreover, the normal effect of the Gospel was a house divided. Jesus had stated that the Gospel would be a sword: “…a man’s enemies will be those of his own household.” (Matthew 10:36) To claim that these miraculous events are the norm to support an unbiblical agenda is akin to claiming that the apostolic gifts continued unabated after the destruction of the Temple (which was also heralded with miraculous signs), or that all babies in the womb are filled with the Spirit as was John the Baptist. If a signpost is the norm, it isn’t a signpost. It’s a fencepost.

So, what was the purpose of these four “household” events?

The movement in each is from a faithful household head who believes to an entire body of believers (including family members and servants), just like the initial “house-filling” of Pentecost was being measured out “architecturally” across the empire. Each event also incorporates a Jewish witness and Gentile “sponsors,” Graeco-Romans who bring their glory into the Church. The first and last are vindications of prior belief of entire households (Day 1 and Day 4), and the other two are conversions of entire households.

These believing households were four horns which put the old Israel, the Jewish rulers who rejected Pentecost, on the Altar, ready for the fires of the Roman armies.

These believing households were also four compass points on a new Israel, four Tabernacles at an empire-wide Feast of Clouds. They were a Pentecostal sign to the Jews that their Abrahamic ministry to the nations had been fulfilled. The transformation of these signature Gentile households into “booths” meant condemnation for Herod’s “Tabernacle.” As it was with Peter’s speech on the Day of Pentecost, and the miraculous apostolic gifts, these new hybrid (mixture) houses were a warning to Jews during the “overlap” of Covenant administrations between AD30-70. This was the final stage of the Abrahamic Covenant before it was finished. It could at last be seen that all of Israel’s history was prefigured in her festal calendar (see Bible Matrix).

We don’t hear about household conversions after Acts 18. It was an “Abrahamic” sign, but the end of Abraham, not a new beginning. Israel was finally purified, the ungodliness banished from Jacob (Romans 11:27) and she had completed her ministry. The only “household of faith” mentioned after this is the gathering of believers.

So then, as we have opportunity, let us do good to everyone, and especially to those who are of the household of faith. (Galatians 6:10)

So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God… (Ephesians 2:19)

As Revelation 2 shows us, every Church is a household with its own fire, a Lampstand de-centralized and able to multiply across the world. But these lamps are trimmed and oiled by Jesus, who judges them first, nipping their sins in the bud, and then judges the house where they were allowed to become full grown.

For it is time for judgment to begin at the household of God; and if it begins with us, what will be the outcome for those who do not obey the gospel of God? (1 Peter 4:17)

The Black Sabbaths were over for everyone except the old tent of God, whose priests and kings had kindled a strange fire and become a new Egypt. She would lose her lampstand be burned with fire. The gloom of utter darkness had been reserved for her wandering stars. The day had dawned and the entire world was now filled with light. And all Jerusalem, once the Abrahamic navel of the world, was a barren womb shrouded in the darkness of an empty tomb.

_____________________________________________
[1] Ascension concerns the blameless man bound and exalted, like Joseph or Daniel. The correspondence for Greece might have something to do with the rescue of Jerusalem from an invading Alexander.

Flavius Josephus in “The Antiquities of the Jews” Book XI, chapter VIII, p 350. Tells this story of Alexander the Great arriving in Jerusalem:

“And when he (the High Priest) understood that he (Alexander the Great) was not far from the city (Jerusalem), he (the High Priest) went out in procession with the priests and the multitude of citizens. The procession was venerable, and the manner of it different from that of other nations … and when the Phoenicians and the Chaldeans that followed him (Alexander the Great), thought that they should have liberty to plunder the city, and torment the high priest to death, which the king’s displeasure fairly promised them, the very reverse of it happened; for Alexander, when he (Alexander the Great) saw the multitude at a distance, in white garments, while the priests stood clothed in fine linen, and the high priest in purple and scarlet clothing, with his miter on his head, having the golden plate whereon the name of G-d was engraved, he (Alexander the Great) approached by himself, and adored that name (the name of G-d), and first saluted the high priest. The Jews also did altogether, with one voice, salute Alexander, and encompass him about; where upon the kings of Syria and the rest were surprised at what Alexander had done, and supposed him disordered in his mind (They thought Alexander was crazy for bowing before the High Priest). However, Parmenio alone went up to him (Alexander the Great) and asked him how it came to pass that, when all others adored him, he should adore the high priest of the Jews? To whom he replied, “I did not adore him, but that G-d who hath honored him with his high-priesthood; for I saw this very person in a dream, in this very habit (high priestly garment), when I was at Dios in Macedonia, who, when I was considering with myself, how I might obtain the dominion of Asia, exhorted me to make no delay, but boldly to pass over the sea thither, for that he (G-d) would conduct my army, and would give me the dominion over the Persians; whence it is, that having seen no other in that habit (high priestly garment), and now seeing this person in it, and remembering that vision, and the exhortation which I had in my dream, I believe that I bring this army under the divine conduct, and shall therewith conquer Darius, and destroy the power of the Persians, and that all things will succeed according to what is in my own mind.”

There is a tradition that says when the high priest met Alexander the Great outside Jerusalem that he took with him the book of Daniel and showed Alexander the prophecy concerning him. It is said that this so moved Alexander that he went to the temple to offer a sacrifice and worship God. [link]

[2] Justus means “upright, just,” and Crispus means “curly headed.” Perhaps the combination of priesthood and kinghood in the Great Shepherd (Revelation 1:13-14).

Busts of Vespasian and Titus in the British Museum

or The Coming of the Father and the Son

The chief priests answered,
“We have no king but Caesar.”
So he delivered him over to them to be crucified.
(John 19:15-16)

Is there any significance in the fact that apostate Jerusalem was destroyed by two generals, a father and a son, founders of a new Roman dynasty?

PART I – ANALYSIS OF GABRIEL’S PROPHECY IN DANIEL 9

Daniel 9 follows the sevenfold Covenant structure. [1]

The chapter begins with the words of an earthly angel concerning Israel’s past 70 year captivity (70 referring to the bull sacrifices of Booths, and also to the number of Sabbaths being restored to the abused Land of Canaan), and it ends with a heavenly angel’s exposition of Israel’s seventy week (490 year) future.

So, the final section concerns Israel’s Succession under the Restoration Covenant, as the Israel of the “latter days,” the period of the “resurrected” Temple. Gabriel’s speech itself follows the same structure, predicting the Alpha and Omega of a new Jerusalem.

Creation – Ark / Light / Sabbath – Genesis

The first takes the past 70 Sabbaths and projects this multiplied shabua into the future, hence the phrase is literally “seventy sevens.” Since this concerns the redemption of Israel from bondage (through vengeance), this is also an allusion to Lamech’s vengeance in Genesis 4:24 (and by extension, Jesus’ mercy in Matthew 18:22). Notice the holy city as the Bride at Sanctions.

Division – Veil / Waters / Passover – Exodus

Notice that this second stanza of the final cycle corresponds to the second cycle of the chapter: Daniel’s confession of Israel’s sin. Vision and prophecy, the “eye and tooth” (sight and speech witnesses), the curses of the Mosaic Law, would finally be sealed up, themselves cursed, buried, covered on the final day of coverings.

Ascension – Altar & Table / Land & Fruits / Firstfruits – Leviticus

Ascension, as usual, brings the opening of the Covenant scroll. James Jordan’s translation of this section was very helpful. It allowed me to see that the seven weeks concerned the “sacrificial head” of Israel, and the remaining weeks her new ministry of witness among the Gentiles. The structure here alludes to both the Creation Week and also Israel’s festal calendar.

Testing – Lampstand / Rulers / Pentecost – Numbers

Testing, as is common, is only a three-and-a-half. Like Adam, Israel will fail the test at the centre of history. The rebuilding in line 2 seems odd until we understand that the erection of the altar by Ezra (priestly head) and the wall by Nehemiah (kingly body) reinstituted the Jew-Gentile divide. The reference to plaza (or street) and moat images Jerusalem, the holy city, as a Tabernacle, a tent with a cleansing laver of living water. Moreover, and more cleverly, it also alludes to the Land and the Sea on Day 3.

Maturity – Incense /Swarms / Trumpets – Deuteronomy

The work of Ezra and Nehemiah will be reversed by the anointed one (“Messiah”). His cutting off will render the altar obsolete. Then the coming commander will tear down the walls which Nehemiah’s men, with swords and trowels, built up. There is a double witness here (as is common, again!), a vision and a prophecy, but we shall deal with that in part II. Also, if we align these seven lines with a different fractal, the first seven books of the Bible, the “coming commander” corresponds to the “Captain of the Lord’s hosts” in Joshua.

*City and Sanctuary alluding to David and Solomon at “Ruling Lights” was a bit of a squee moment.

Conquest – Laver / Mediators / Atonement – Joshua

The “Social” flood here corresponds in this structure to the Physical flood in the cycle from Adam to Noah. It is “The Great Day” of coverings. The Temple was unprotected when it was vacated by the Spirit. Ezekiel saw the glory depart under the Old Covenant. Under the New Covenant, the Shekinah was the indwelling Spirit in Christians gradually barred from meeting in the Temple. Jordan wisely observes that the destruction of the Temple was never a sin of the Gentiles, but a punishment for the sacrileges of the priesthood. [2] Aptly, Gabriel has moved back to a fivefold “closed” scroll. The waters would close, like the veil of the abyss, over the Herodian Pharaohs who sewed the torn veil back together.

Glorification – Shekinah / Rest / Booths – Judges

The “wing” refers to the “corner” of Israel’s priestly robes, and thus appears in the Atonement line of this stanza. Israel’s priesthood and the Roman destroyer seem to be conflated here, as cause and effect.

It is strange that this mention of the Covenant being ratified comes at the end, but not strange that the final desolation ends the process. What is going on here?

*  *  *  *  *

PART II – THE SPLIT FULFILLMENT OF THE PROPHECY AS A DUAL WITNESS

“Come, let us go down…” (Genesis 11:7)

The clueless see Genesis 11:7, among other verses, as evidence of polytheism in ancient worship of Yahweh. The literary structure makes it plain that the “us” is an allusion to the legal testimony of two witnesses required to make an executable judgment. (Abel’s blood cries from the ground at the same point in that structure.) The witnesses are revealed to us now as the Father and the Son.

However, under the New Covenant, it is no longer the Father and the Son who are the witnesses but the saints. This is possible because the saints have now witnessed both the Father and the Son.

Whoever has seen me has seen the Father…
Whatever you ask in my name, this I will do,
that the Father may be glorified in the Son.
(John 14:9, 13)

When the Son forgave the “sin of wandering astray” committed by the Jewish people (under the leadership of godless rulers), the cycle given to us in Daniel 9 at Maturity was divided in two. It became a three-and-a-half. Instead of the entire city and Sanctuary being destroyed, the judgments were limited to warnings, to signs. Only the veil was torn in the Sanctuary. Only the rocks were split on the mountain. The next three and a half years saw a witness to the Jews, the fire of Pentecost, and ended with the judgment of a Herod whose voice the people claimed to be that of a god. But another Herod replaced him. The full judgment was postponed. As the apostles testify,

If the Lord of hosts had not left us offspring, we would have been like Sodom and become like Gomorrah. (Romans 9:29)

The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance… And count the patience of our Lord [towards Israel] as salvation. (2 Peter 3:9, 15)

So, there is a “postponement” of the seventieth week, but only for one generation. Is there a precedent for this? Yes. In the postponement of Israel’s conquest of the promised Land due to their lack of faith. The delay was the same period, around 40 years. [3] This allowed time for the Lord to take a remnant of Old Israel’s flesh and create a new generation according to the Spirit.

This is precisely the delay we witness in the book of Revelation. Four angels are ready to wipe Jerusalem off the face of the Land, but they are told to wait until the saints are sealed, martyred and ascended. Only then is there “no more time,” no more delay.

This brings us to roles of General Vespasian and his son General Titus as earthly servants of the Father and the Son in heaven. It seems that just as God referred to King Nebuchadnezzar as His “servant” in the destruction of the city and the Sanctuary (Jeremiah 25:9), this role would be reprized as the last of the four empires completed its guardian role of the people of God. Only, the Jews were no longer the people of God. The Church was.

This week it has been reported widely that one Joseph Atwill, an American Bible scholar, is visiting the UK to present his controversial theory that the Gospels were the invention of the Roman aristocracy, namely, Titus, to pacify zealous Jews.

Atwill asserts that Christianity did not really begin as a religion, but a sophisticated government project, a kind of propaganda exercise used to pacify the subjects of the Roman Empire. “Jewish sects in Palestine at the time, who were waiting for a prophesied warrior Messiah, were a constant source of violent insurrection during the first century,” he explains. “When the Romans had exhausted conventional means of quashing rebellion, they switched to psychological warfare. They surmised that the way to stop the spread of zealous Jewish missionary activity was to create a competing belief system. That’s when the ‘peaceful’ Messiah story was invented. Instead of inspiring warfare, this Messiah urged turn-the-other-cheek pacifism and encouraged Jews to ‘give onto Caesar’ and pay their taxes to Rome.” [4]

As one reviewer summarizes: “According with Atwill, the main purpose behind Titus concocting the Gospels was to defuse the virulency of the Sicarii movement (backing Jesus) and to convince the Judaics that the God-Messiah they were expecting was non other than Titus himself and ‘to give Caesar what belongs to Caesar’; in short, to defuse the rebellion in Judea and turn the revolting Judaics into pacifist subjects of Rome and the God-Caesar.”

To make his case, Atwill’s book, Caesar’s Messiah, has to deliberately leave out much of the New Testament from discussion. It is likely all the bits he cut out and left on the floor were picked up by Reza Aslan for his book Zealot, which is just as one-eyed, and its premise just as ridiculous.

However, unlike Aslan, Atwill, educated by Jesuits in Japan, does have a gut sense of the way the Scriptures speak. The latest edition “adds Atwill’s latest discoveries of numerous parallel events in sequence which ultimately reveal the identity of the true authors of the Gospels.” One review criticized some of his more minor typological observations (which would actually be standard fare around here!) yet it is Atwill’s major observation which I find astounding. Being an atheist, and also apparently unaware of the explicit and implicit Hebraic structures of the New Testsament, he comes to the wrong conclusions. Yet the truth he has uncovered is worth sharing here because it sheds some light on this twice mentioned “commander” in Daniel 9.

Atwill’s most intriguing discovery came to him while he was studying “Wars of the Jews” by Josephus [the only surviving first-person historical account of first-century Judea] alongside the New Testament. “I started to notice a sequence of parallels between the two texts,” he recounts. “Although it’s been recognised by Christian scholars for centuries that the prophesies of Jesus appear to be fulfilled by what Josephus wrote about in the First Jewish-Roman war, I was seeing dozens more. What seems to have eluded many scholars is that the sequence of events and locations of Jesus ministry are more or less the same as the sequence of events and locations of the military campaign of [Emperor] Titus Flavius as described by Josephus. This is clear evidence of a deliberately constructed pattern. The biography of Jesus is actually constructed, tip to stern, on prior stories, but especially on the biography of a Roman Caesar.”

How could this go unnoticed in the most scrutinised books of all time? “Many of the parallels are conceptual or poetic, so they aren’t all immediately obvious. After all, the authors did not want the average believer to see what they were doing, but they did want the alert reader to see it. An educated Roman in the ruling class would probably have recognised the literary game being played.” Atwill maintains he can demonstrate that “the Roman Caesars left us a kind of puzzle literature that was meant to be solved by future generations, and the solution to that puzzle is ‘We invented Jesus Christ, and we’re proud of it.’” [4]

So, if a typology-savvy reader overlays Josephus’ The Wars of the Jews onto the ministry of Jesus Christ, a “third text” will appear. Atwill takes great pains in his attempt to prove that Titus was the predicted “son of man.” Despite his backward conclusions, I believe he is onto something. There is a very fine correspondence. The delayed role of the first “commander” in Daniel 9 was completed in the second. The conquest of Jerusalem did indeed follow a “deliberately constructed pattern,” but it originated in heaven, not on earth. The priestly campaign of Jesus, under the authority of the Father, led to the kingly campaign of Titus, under the authority of his father. [5] The seventieth week occurred twice because of the longsuffering of God, who always requires a double witness. [6]

________________________________________
[1] For a structural analysis of the entire book, see Daniel’s Long Shadow. Also, James Jordan’s commentary on Daniel, The Handwriting on the Wall, is a must have. Forget the rest.
[2] See James B. Jordan, The Abomination of Desolation, Part 1.
[3] See The End of Shadows.
[4] Ancient Confession Found: “We Invented Jesus Christ.”
[5] For a brief historical rundown on the destruction of Jerusalem, see Sin City – 1.
[6] This also allowed Jesus to fulfill the “head and body” pattern predicted in Daniel 7. The High Priest approached the veil twice on the Day of Atonement: once for the priesthood, and a second time, “in like manner,” for the people. In the middle of the “first” 70th week, the head was cut off. In the middle of the “second” 70th week, it was the body, the martyrs, who were cut off. This is the structure of the Book of Revelation.

“God’s word is His presence, when delivered in a true setting.”

by James B. Jordan. Biblical Horizons No. 245

“And hearkened Zerubbabel son of Shealtiel,
and Joshua son of Jehozadak, the great priest,
and all the remnant of the people,
to the voice of Yahweh their God,
and to the words of Haggai the prophet,
just as Yahweh their God had sent him;
and the people feared the presence of Yahweh.
“Then Haggai, the messenger of Yahweh, said
in a message of Yahweh to the people,
saying,
“I am with you — a statement of Yahweh.”
And Yahweh stirred up the spirit of Zerubbabel
son of Shealtiel, governor of Judah,
and the spirit of Joshua son of Jehozadak, the great priest,
and the spirit of all the remnant of the people;
and they came and did work on the house of
Yahweh of Armies, their God,
on the twenty-fourth day
of the sixth month,
in the second year of King Darius.

(Haggai 1:12-15)

While it makes for a bit of an awkward English sentence, it is important to see that the first word in verse 12 is “hearkened.” The obedience is instantaneous. We read at the end of the verse that the people feared, or respected, the presence of Yahweh, which in this case means the words of Haggai.

God’s word is His presence, when delivered in a true setting. God had placed his “Name” in the Temple built by Solomon: “My Name shall be there” (1 Kings 8:29). When carried to Babylon, the Levites asked “How can we sing Yahweh’s song in a strange land”; how can we sing the Temple psalms away from the Name in the Temple? (Psalm 137:4). In Psalm 138:2 David gives an answer:

I bow down to Your holy temple,
And I give thanks to Your Name,
For Your lovingkindness and for Your faithfulness,
Because You have magnified Your Word over all Your Name.

Indeed, as David continues in Psalm 139:8, “If I make my bed in Sheol, You are there.” Wherever God’s Word is, His Name-Presence is.

In verse 13, Haggai is called “the messenger of Yahweh.” This is the same word as “Malachi,” My Messenger. It is also the word translated “angel” when referring to spirit-beings. In Genesis 28:12 Jacob saw angels moving between heaven and earth. Similarly, God’s prophets are consulted by Him and carry His words to earth (Amos 3:7; 7:1-8; Genesis 20:7; 18:20-33). In Acts 6:15 the Jews saw the face of Stephen as the face of an angel, which means that when they killed him they were killing God’s messenger, killing the manifestation of God’s very presence in their midst. The Jews should have “feared” the Lord through Stephen as their forefathers had feared Yahweh through Haggai, Yahweh’s messenger/angel.

In verse 9 the “statement of Yahweh” had been one of judgment, but now in verse 13 it is one of blessing. “I am with you” is Immanuel, God With Us, God’s presence among us.

Verse 14 tells us that “not by might, nor by power, but by My Spirit” the Temple is built (Zechariah 4:6). In Zechariah this is the message to Zerubbabel the Davidic Temple-builder. Here it is a blessing to all the people. Interestingly, in Exodus 31 :3ff. it is only Bezalel and some associates of his who are filled with the Spirit to build the Tabernacle. Now in this more glorious time it is all the people who are stirred by the Spirit.

What does this mean for us today? We should consider that before Solomon built the first physical Temple in Jerusalem, a generation earlier David had set up a temple of psalmody around the house(s) of God. (Ark and Tabernacle were separate at this time.) God was enthroned on the praises of His people (Psalm 22:3). Those praises were the psalms.

Uh, yes. The psalms.

In heaven, right now, Jesus is singing the psalms to God the Father. He is not singing metrical paraphrases. He is “chanting” the psalms as they are written.

The gift of tongues is given to the Church to enable us to translate the Bible into all languages, improving those languages over time. We can chant the psalms in English or in any other language in union with Jesus.

So-called “metrical psalms” are fine as sermons based on the psalms, but they are not psalms. You have to be a in a strange mental state to think that they are the same as actual psalms. Anybody with half a brain can tell that they are not.

So, if God’s true temple is a house of music, where is it today? I attended Reformed Theological Seminary in Jackson, Mississippi, and also Westminster Theological Seminary in Philadelphia, Pemisylvania. There was chapel every day. Not once was there any psalm singing. And these places advertised themselves as conservative and orthodox! (Which is some ways they were, but not at this point.) Historically, chanting the psalms along with Jesus has been central to Christian worship. In historic monasteries, all 150 psalms are sung every week!

So Haggai asks us: Is now the time for you to have your 35-inch flat-screen television and your microwave, while the house of God is lifeless and desolate? Do you not care about all the suffering Christians around the world who need you to stand before God during the Lord’s Day and chant the psalms, especially the imprecatory ones? Should you not be building the house of God, that house of prayer and psalms?

Biblical Horizons is published occasionally, funds permitting, by Biblical Horizons, P.O. Box 1096, Niceville, Florida 32588-1096. www.biblicalhorizons.com Anyone sending a donation, in any amount, will be placed on the mailing list to receive issues of Biblical Horizons as they are published.

Is dispensationalism a theological framework or a hermeneutical approach?

Dispensationalism pretends to be a “literalistic” hermeneutical approach, but it is in fact a contrived framework which results from a single, fundamental error. The fact that this error is so foundational is the reason why its “prophetic plan” is so complicated.

The basic error bookends the Christian Church:

1. The Jew-Gentile division was permanent, thus:
2. The current Christian priesthood is temporary, thus:
3. The current priesthood must be removed and the Aaronic one reinstated at some point.

The entire prophetic framework is really just this three-fold lens which, to maintain the basic tenet, misclassifies great sections of the Bible. It also necessitates an incredibly fragmented approach to Bible history and the biblical texts.

Most if not all of the post-exilic promises of restoration in the prophets are removed from their historical context and applied to the modern state of Israel, and all of the predictions concerning the destruction of Jerusalem in AD70 in Daniel and the New Testament are applied to some future event.

For instance, the invasion Israel by Gog and Magog in Ezekiel 38-39 is taken to be a modern invasion of Israel (the identity of the invaders is always taken from the current news headlines). However, the structure of the book and the content of the chapters shows it is a prophecy of the events in the book of Esther (un-walled cities, Haman-Gog / Haman the Agagite, etc.), a proposed slaughter and plundering of all Jews between India and Ethiopia. This victory was the vindication of a resurrected Israel before all nations — back then.

The misinterpretation allows authors to write best-selling books about a coming invasion, and republish them every few years with different villains.

Also, since the Revelation is “level-pegged” step by step with Ezekiel (but concerning the second temple instead of the first), Revelation uses Gog and Magog as an allusion to describe the end of this current age (in which God is working behind the scenes as He did in Esther). Dispensationalists believe these passages speak of the same battle, even though the specifics are very different.

The idea of “dispensations” is not unbiblical, but the cycle of the various covenants must be taken as a progression. It is chiastic, but it is progressive, and the prophets always allude to previous cycles to explain what is coming — such as the wolf and lamb, the branch, etc. (from Noah) to explain the restoration of the Land of Israel from beneath the flood of the nations. Its failure to understand allusions to previous events means that the allusion is often taken to be another prophecy concerning the same event.

Because the events of the Jewish war are seen as merely a postponement, dispensationalists have a terrible time with the book of Hebrews. It doesn’t fit their system at all. It’s like looking at green through a red filter. It just comes up black. Their interpretive grid acts as a “Mosaic veil.”

It is ironic that it is not the current priesthood of all nations which is bookended by the “one-nation” Aaronic priesthood. It is the other way around. Circumcision was a temporary division, beginning with the blessing of Abraham by Melchizedek (a Noahic priest “of all nations”) and ending with a new Melchizedekian priesthood of all nations, the Church of Christ.

So it is not:

ONE NATION – ALL NATIONS – ONE NATION

but

ALL NATIONS – ONE NATION – ALL NATIONS

For more on this (and a nifty diagram), see chapter 38 of God’s Kitchen, “The Forbidden Feast.”

The downside of dispensationalism is that is has no mind for types and symbols (at least not ones concerning Israel). The upside is that all the dispensationalists I have known have a very high regard for Scripture and Bible chronology.

For the antidote to this doctrinal delusion, see James B. Jordan, The Future of Israel Re-examined.