“What makes Michael Bull’s books both brilliant and maddening is their conciseness.”

What makes Michael Bull’s books both brilliant and maddening is their conciseness. Writing as a graphic-artist, he lays out the text, and in fact the whole book, in a form that takes the shape of his subject. On one hand, this book on the Revelation is easy to read. In fact, the first half of the book is a summary of the whole Bible and how the shape of creation in Genesis shapes the rest of the text. This is called the “Matrix” pattern. He explains how these themes are repeated and applied to different circumstances. The second half of the book applies this “Matrix” to the book of Revelation. This means he has expertly condensed a monumental amount of information into those last a hundred pages or so! In many ways, this book is much more like brilliant lecture notes that allow you to explore a topic more fully on your own… after you have been introduced to the topic.

This book can be maddening to read, so you have to know that it is worth it. And it is worth it. Beside the format, another aspect that can make this book maddening is that you have to suspend all your preconceived notions about “End Times.” Debates such as those about “Post-Trib” or “Pre-Trib” that are so divisive, yet they are not easily avoided. While I agree with most of Michael’s points in the book, some of his statements struck me as cryptic and sent me searching for substantiation. Sometimes I could make the connections, sometimes I couldn’t. This could fuel his critics.

The book is maddening, but it is brilliant. Even if you don’t understand or agree with much in Michael’s premises, the connections he makes with the texts is rewarding. Any one of his outlines can yield a wealth of biblical insight… and I find that more valuable than having someone confirm what I might already think. While I agree with most of the conclusions of this book, I am sure these “Matrix” outlines (“T.H.E.O.S.”) will be valuable even to those who hold a different dispensational view of history. I think Michael is really onto something by seeing Moses as Revelation’s major interpreter.

For me, I found the book more rewarding and understandable read in light of where it is going. It may have been helpful to have included a section titled, “How to use this book.” I suggest reading chapter 5 and then the last two chapters (13 & 14) right after the introduction, before reading the rest of the book. This will clear your mind of how he sees the big picture fitting together. The rest of the book backs up that vision. I highly recommend this book. It is a much needed word that brings a fruitful simplicity to the text and answers many critics’ complaints about the Bible.

You can read the introduction to Moses and the Revelation here.

“Bull models while he interprets. In other words, one must watch Bull’s visual interpretation in order to understand it.” Mark Tubbs’ review of Moses and the Revelation.

I may have been able to live my life comfortably ensconced in conceptually-based academia if it hadn’t been for the biblico-theological work of James B. Jordan. Like other Jordan readers, I now think in patterns and symbols where I used to think only in words and ideas. When first reading his seminal book Through New Eyes and his various articles, I recall wishing that certain sections – paragraphs, descriptions, lists, etc. – would have been accompanied by visual illustrations. To be fair, Through New Eyes includes ample diagrams. But it fell to graphic designer and theological blogger Michael Bull of the Blue Mountains (almost sounds like something out of Tolkien, doesn’t he – perhaps a long-lost cousin of Beorn?) near Sydney, Australia, to build upon Jordan’s insights in a more visual manner using advanced graphic design technology.

Let it be known (should anyone care) that I am not by nature a visual learner, never mind a visual artist. When learning I engage better with swaths of text than with diagrams, and when teaching college classes I try to avoid drawing anything but simple illustrations on the whiteboard. But what is nonetheless clear to me, at a foundational level, is Revelation’s inherent visual nature. Its words cohere to create a panorama of interplay between heaven and earth. Likely no one will object to those foregoing statements. But what if I said Revelation ought to be explained according to its nature? That is, the structure(s), patterns, and symbols ought to be an integral part of how Revelation means, part and parcel of what Revelation means theologically? Mike Bull has given us such a resource, demonstrating how such interpretation can be done. His is not the last word on Revelation, and he would be the first to say so, while simultaneously defending his interpretations.

But Bull does not stop at visual representation of Revelation’s content. His effort is not a mere repackaging of Revelation, but an unveiling of it using the Pentateuch (more accurately, the Heptateuch, Genesis through Judges) as a control. Many interpreters throughout the centuries have sought to interpret Revelation’s images; some have even made recourse to other parts of the biblical canon for further illumination. But to my knowledge, none have used the beginning of the Bible, into which divine inspiration embedded and uncovered the very structure of the universe and its history, to inform their interpretation of Revelation’s darker sayings – and let’s be honest, almost of all of Revelation consists of darker sayings. Certainly none have wedded such a canonically-oriented approach to graphic design brilliance.

Those trained in other academically-accepted types of biblical interpretation may pooh-pooh Bull’s approach as allegory or some sort of Bible code. They may say Bull is a quack, not a sage. And while it may be true that Bull occasionally sees more in the text than is actually there, I hold that it’s far worse to stop short of mining the Bible for all its worth than to make warranted correlations when and where the Bible sets a good and faithful precedent. In other words, Marsh’s Dictum handcuffs interpretation, whereas Bull’s approach enables it. We are always free to toss out interpretations that do not hold up to scrutiny. Scripture is not a china shop, paraphrasing Jesus (John 10:35).

Bull models while he interprets. In other words, one must watch Bull’s visual interpretation in order to understand it. A novice reader without any prior exposure to his writings may want to pause after Part 1, at page 78, to at least take in his primer Reading the Bible in 3-D, and more preferably, his entire range of Bible Matrix books. For what it’s worth, I myself read Bull’s writings slowly, especially when he is working out a chiasm, and I have read much of what he has published in print and on the web. And a caveat: while I did spend more time on Mike’s book on Revelation than I normally do on a regular text-based book, I haven’t made an in-depth study of most of the chiasms he sees in Revelation.

This brings me to the practical matter of how I would go about using this book, besides personal study. As a college instructor, one of my standard questions while reading any book is how I would employ it in a college course: as required or recommended reading, as a teaching resource, or in the form of juicy excerpts? A few years ago I assisted a colleague in choosing textbooks for an undergraduate course on Revelation, which included Apocalypse and Allegiance by J. Nelson Kraybill (Brazos, 2010), Reversed Thunder by Eugene H. Peterson (HarperOne, 1991), and The Triumph of the Lamb by Dennis E. Johnson (P&R, 2001). While I wouldn’t envision assigning Bull’s entire book as a course text, I can certainly see the benefit of working through a chiasm or two every time the class meets.

I end with a few keys to benefitting from this book, appropriately conveyed in bullet-point format:

• Use it as a launch pad for the study of Revelation, not as the final word;
• Remember that “Moses” comes first, both in the book’s title and in the Bible;
• If you need help, the author is more than happy to help (follow him on social media).

“No one makes it in the jump program on their first try, not even Neo.” Jacob Gucker’s review of Moses and the Revelation.

As a librarian at a theological seminary, I see books on Revelation and “End-times prophecy” frequently. Every time a pastor downsizes his personal library we get at least a few books in this vein and most of them are ephemeral and embarrassing. Michael Bull’s “Moses and the Revelation” is the sort of book I might overlook. It is self published. It lacks the marks of “scholarly” work, and it is filled with structural outlines that seem to make little sense as I peruse the book. Nevertheless, this book is both enriching and accessible for those who read in order to think.

The book is more accessible to certain people. Anyone who has read and enjoyed James B. Jordan and Peter Leithart, among others who view the Bible through a maximalist lens, will gain something from this book. Click “buy” if this is you. People who tend to read the Bible in large chunks at a time over many years will also have a leg up here.

The trick to reading this book successfully is to avoid the temptation to classify it or backwards-engineer Bull’s structural outlines right away. Try to look at the forest first, and then the trees. As an academic with both a Master of Divinity degree and a Master of Library Science degree, this is my tendency, and the book will not blossom for anyone who is looking to stack this book up with the others in this or that school of thought. Was it Søren Kierkegaard or Wayne Campbell who said, “If you label me, you negate me?” At any rate, he says where he’s coming up front. Like the book of Revelation itself, Bull is all about unveiling, not obscuring.

If you have no idea what Bull’s “Bible Matrix” is all about, he tells you. If you still don’t know what it’s all about, keep reading. No one makes it in the jump program on their first try, not even Neo. You don’t even have to believe in it. I’m not sure I do yet and I approve of this book whole-heartedly. I will say that the book of Revelation is a wonderful choice for explaining the Bible Matrix hermeneutic. It was somehow easier to approach the Bible Matrix through this book than Bull’s initial Bible Matrix book, which I also tried to backwards engineer the first time I opened it. If the Bible does have DNA and it can be seen with human eyes, the book of Revelation is certainly a place where it ought to be found. Furthermore, anyone who asks you to consider the book of Revelation in light of the first five books of the Bible is a good shepherd.

Avoid the temptation to read this book without opening the Bible. Don’t even try. In fact, read or skim through Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, and Deuteronomy and then read Revelation in a single sitting. Then, read this book with your Bible open and you will be richly rewarded.

If I have any complaints it is that the information in this book is worthy of being more thoroughly explained, but perhaps that’s just my tendency to revere massive tomes of theology. Nevertheless, may this sort of writing about the Bible increase.

So often the book of Revelation is treated like a prize in an Indiana Jones story…

Steven Opp’s review of “Moses and the Revelation.”

“It belongs in a museum!”

This is what Indiana Jones always tells the villain who is attempting to steal the priceless artifact.

I remember as a kid watching these movies and finding myself sometimes sympathizing with the bandits. If I had worked hard to unearth a valuable relic, I’d want to keep it for myself too, either as a trophy or to sell and get rich. I thought noble-minded Indy was being a stick in the mud.

But if you watch the films through to the end, you find that the stick in the mud always turns into the only ladder to heaven, faithfully walking in fear of the supernatural power of the living God while serving as a priestly mediator in order to cover the ones he loves, the real treasures.

So often the book of Revelation is treated like a prize in an Indiana Jones story. It is either left buried in the ground because it is too hard to understand, or it is made into an idol and like a Nazi power grab used to build a fantasy world, treated as a generator of grandiose theories or as a magical conduit of secret knowledge. Moses and the Revelation is Mike Bull’s way of bravely snatching the jewel back and telling us in no uncertain terms, It belongs in a museum!

By returning the book to its home with the rest of the Bible, Bull prevents us from making too much or too little of it as he dusts off its glitter while reconnecting it to its golden roots. In its proper place as the finale of a singular story with every line an echo or spin-off of something said elsewhere in the Word, Bull helps us see that while Revelation is fascinating, it is not an enigma. Its truest value is not in its “standing out” but in its “fitting in.” Bull shows us that the glory of Revelation, what makes it authentically heavy, is that it is deeply connected to the other texts and to first century history. This makes it much more difficult to run away with and use to fashion renegade doctrines.

Moses and the Revelation accomplishes two things. First, it takes the polish off of a lot of the exciting interpretations of Revelation you may be familiar with. It is much less interested in the headline news and much more interested in the Pentateuch. Like reluctant Indy in The Last Crusade chasing after his father’s dream, you are forced to go on the quest with the one you are all too familiar with, none other than Moses. And Moses has always seemed to take the fun out of things, what with all his bizarre interest in how to chop up animals or arrange furniture in the tabernacle.

But if you hang in there and give the old lawgiver a listen, you will find that Revelation is deeper and richer than you ever imagined. You will discover, like John did, that the words are not just meant to be read and interpreted, but are to be eaten. When you partake of Revelation in connection to the rest of the Bible the way that Bully serves it up, your mind will be molded by the ancient structures and symbols, and you yourself will become the thing of value because you are walking in step with the cadences of Christ. And thereafter whenever conversations arise among friends about what is going on in the last book of the Bible, you may be chided as the stick in the mud who wants to return the thing to the Gospels, to the Prophets, to the Torah.

But you’ll find that at the end of the day you will be the one with his feet firmly on the ground, standing fast when the catastrophes of bad exegesis crumble around you.

You can read the introduction to Moses and the Revelation here. You can purchase the book in paperback or for Kindle here.

“Mike Bull has, once again, provided us with a unique tool for assisting us with reading the Bible. This time it comes in the guise of what essentially amounts to a guidebook for what has been forever-branded as the most difficult part of the Bible to understand.”

Jared Leonard’s review of “Moses and the Revelation.”

Imagine stumbling across this book in your search for more books to help you study your way through Revelation. You know, from past studies, that Revelation is the most Old Testament book in the New Testament but your brow is furrowed anyway because Moses isn’t often brought up in this context, at least not with top billing. It’s true that there are some parallels between Genesis and Revelation, but beyond that what does Moses have to do with things at the end? Turns out, he has quite a few interpretive tricks tucked away in his writings. Here are a few tips to help you leverage this wonderful tool Mike has laid on the table for you:

First, put all your study books and commentaries on Revelation away; go stick ’em back on the bookshelf, you won’t need them for now and there’s a good chance that, after this book, more than half of your collection will be put in your next garage/yard sale or taken to the nearest used books store. Don’t put away your Bible though! You will need it. Alright? Alright. Now, the reason for this step will be clear once you make your way through the brief introduction, suffice it to say here that Moses, being channeled through Mr. Bull, will be your new teacher on how to read and understand the last prophecy of Jesus. Oh, and make sure the Bible you are using is a) not a study Bible (because the notes will lead you astray!) and b) not a Bible you have written in yourself (because your notes will lead you astray!).

Next, have a notebook and a pen (or their digital equivalents) handy, unless you are one of those strange folks who like to write in your books. Even if you are such a person, take notes on the notebook first! You will need to go through this book a few times and the notes from your first read may not be compatible with your notes from your second read, so if you’ve written them in your book (or in your Bible) then you may need to do some striking; I’m just trying to save you some trouble here. Also, there are a ton of charts throughout the book and writing some of them out yourself is a helpful way to begin visualizing the text of the Bible, seeing how the pieces fit and flow together.

Thirdly, the book is divided into two parts. The first part is your interpretive re-education and the second part is applying that new education to the Revelation itself. Don’t move on to the second part until you have a mostly coherent grasp of the first part. Jumping into Revelation without understanding the patterns is a lot like being told to explain how a tapestry was crafted without having any knowledge about weaving. Moses (part one) gives us the warp-and-weft process so we can really get the full experience of being exposed to (and by) the contents of Revelation.

Fourth, don’t get discouraged if you can’t immediately see what is so “obviously clear” to Mike. This book has to break through centuries of Western culture’s theological and philosophical rust (hence why I suggested putting your other books away). It’s a rust so thick and seemingly ever-present that we don’t even notice it anymore, it’s just the way things are. But rust is a hindrance to movement and the removal process is never easy, or gentle. The end result, however, is always a magnificent freedom and it’s a freedom that will allow you to continue pursuing the greater glories buried in the depths of the Bible.

Lastly, take this blueprint and use it everywhere else in the Bible and outside the Bible too. Moses not only gives us the keys to understanding Revelation and everything that leads up to it, but also to having a biblical perspective on everything that has happened since the close of the canon. Why are America and Europe on the cultural paths they are on now? Because that’s how God adds to his kingdom. Every major cultural failing has brought about the growth of the Church. And every rising of the cultural phoenix brings us closer to the last cycle, after which there are no more fiery deaths (or serpents).

Don’t miss out on this chance to revolutionize your reading of Revelation!

You can read the introduction to Moses and the Revelation here. You can purchase the book in paperback or for Kindle here.

If we want to understand the book of Revelation, we must remember that it is at the end of the Bible, not the beginning.

There are many conflicting ideas concerning what this intriguing and terrifying book is about, but the Revelation is in fact a denouement, a revelation, of the natural world, like the last act of a whodunit.

To solve the case, we are going to call on the testimony of an expert witness: the prophet Moses. The events, characters and patterns established in the Torah are not only the foundation of the Old Testament prophets but also the keys to this enigmatic final prophecy.

The last book of the Bible cannot be understood without the first books of the Bible.

Coming soon – Moses and the Revelation: Why the end of the world is not in your future.

Satan is currently bound from gathering the nations in kingly rebellion so that Jesus might gather them in priestly unity.

Everything which Scripture records for us, no matter how mundane or mysterious, exists as part of a process of growth to maturity. This transformation is achieved through relationships established by a Father who delights in His Son and rewards His faithfulness as “seed” with abundant fruit.

History is thus written in “harvest cycles,” and each of these ends with blessings and curses. As in Eden, after a period of silence which allows the righteous and the wicked to fulfill their potential, the Lord comes suddenly (Revelation 22:10-11). As in Eden, He inspects and collects the fruit and gives His trees a pruning. In history, each cycle lasts approximately 400 to 500 years, since that is the time it takes for a new Word to finish its work in a culture. From our beginning in Adam, these cycles also appear to come in pairs, a Forming and a Filling, resulting in “themed” millennia.

Continue reading at Theopolis Institute.

Reformed theology is the best school in which to learn about covenant theology, yet it is also the worst place to learn about New Covenant theology. Why is this so?

Reading a to-and-fro between a baptist and a paedobaptist recently, it struck me that despite the fine manners and scholarly diligence on display in the responses of both gentlemen, neither of them really had a grip on what they were dealing with.

The prime example was the way in which each relied on the Abrahamic Covenant to support his case. The paedobaptist accused the baptist of spiritualising this covenant, while the baptist accused the paedobaptist of “carnalizing” it. Both of them were cherrypicking in order to support their take on God’s covenants in general.

Now, theologians love to generalise in order to avoid doing the grubby work of dealing with specifics, and one ubiquitous theological meme, dripping with clever evasiveness, is the statement that there is both continuity and discontinuity between each covenant, or each stage of the overall covenant of God with men. Apparently there is some entirely arbitrary “spectrum” of relevance in each covenant, and we are supposed to isolate the elements which are common to all covenants to discover what a covenant is. Then we can figure out whether “covenant membership” is based on faith, or heredity, or tribe, or all of the above.

“…both sides get an F when
it comes to covenant theology.”

On the “baptistic” side, things tend to slide into a realm where the physical rites, baptism and communion and even corporate worship, are considered to be less important than “my personal relationship with Jesus.” The New Covenant sign is “faith,” but since true faith expresses itself in willingness to submit to discipleship under Christ’s representatives, in examination of heart, in a desire to be with other saints, in prayer and good works and in legal testimony before the Church and the world, this error is easy to deal with.

On the “paedobaptistic” side, the focus on the rites, the “covenant signs,” leads to:

a) an illogical splitting of the sacraments in the withholding of communion until a baptised child comes of age;

b) united paedosacraments which merely serve as a legalistic “claim” upon the baptizand until they are truly born again; or

c) united paedosacraments which somehow regenerate the receiver without any requirement of actual repentance.

As I have written elsewhere, each of these three conclusions is an attempt to deal with the doctrinal fallout of the errant rite of paedobaptism in a slightly different way. The conflation of circumcision and baptism necessitates the redefinition, or scapegoating of something, somewhere. In order to preserve the tradition, the scapegoat chosen for sacrifice is either the necessity of personal conversion (and the redefinition of “faith”), or the global nature of the New Covenant, or the efficacy of the sacraments.

However, both sides, baptistic and paedobaptistic, get an F when it comes to covenant theology. The baptists are right when it comes to the necessity of hearing the Gospel and responding in faith as the defining characteristic of a Christian, but generally they have little idea of what a covenant with God actually is. “Covenant” is just a word to describe God’s “agreement” with Noah, Abraham and Moses. There is little understanding of a covenant as a process, with delegated authority, rules for success, desired results and accountability, and a use-by date. It is these “missional” elements which are the things common to every biblical covenant, yet somehow these are totally overlooked in the continuity/discontinuity debate.

“…the solution is an aspect
which both sides in this debate,
as far as I know, have either failed
to discern or failed to apply.”

The paedobaptists, generally speaking, at least understand what a biblical covenant is. The problem is that since they are stuck with their baptismal tradition, they pick the Abrahamic Covenant as their benchmark for covenants. This renders them enemies of many fundamental differences between the various covenants, which are simply the result of the fact that each covenant has a different mission. They are so keen on the maintenance of the notion of a “Covenant people” delineated by a sign that they force the covenants both before and after the Abrahamic Covenant into the Abrahamic mold. The rainbow is turned into a “sign” upon Noah and his family, when in fact it was a sign upon all creation, one which endures to this day. New Covenant baptism is turned into a “corporate” sign upon all members of a believing household, either conferring “covenant membership” (legalistic accountability) or “infusing” some level of faith without the hearing of the Gospel.

Paedobaptism is a mongrel of a doctrine, an ugly mix of conflicting designs and crossed purposes, which is why its meaning is impossible to define or agree upon even among those who practice it. But it gets worse. For some paedobaptists, the fact that there was no sign of “Covenant membership” upon females under the Abrahamic Covenant, as they believe there is under the New Covenant, means that they go looking for one. Some have suggested that the Levitical “purity rites” for Israelite women served as a sign of membership in some fashion. But although this is a rare assertion, it does demonstrate just how far off the track people will go when following an errant doctrine to its logical conclusion. Since every person within their imagined New Covenant boundary must be “stamped” by Jesus with their “hybridised” New Covenant baptism, this leads them to seek something similar under the Abrahamic Covenant when clearly there was no such thing. For a start, the Levitical rites can have no bearing on membership of the Abrahamic Covenant because they were not instituted until Moses, four centuries later. Females were under the Abrahamic Covenant without any personal sign. Even more inconveniently, there was no personal sign upon anyone whatsoever under the Noahic and Adamic Covenants. They have allowed the stipulations and purpose of the Abrahamic Covenant to distort their comprehension of the New Covenant, and then their perverted understanding of the New Covenant requires the distortion the Abrahamic Covenant. This is not “Covenant continuity” but enforced “equalisation,” the theological equivalent of gender neutrality. It is a wilful twisting of the Scripture to defend the indefensible, bordering on the brand of hermeneutical travesty committed by the Roman Catholic Church in defence of its own coercive and highly imaginative traditions. Yet regardless of how much they must sacrifice, doctrinally-speaking, and how many ludicrous notions they must consider to maintain this shibboleth, they consistently refuse to question their devotion to this age-old household god. I find this incomprehensible.

However, for two thousand years in God’s economy (not today), one was either a Jew or a Gentile, either in Abraham or not, so there clearly was some kind of “membership.” Is there a way that we can understand the history of the greater Covenant, taking into account each of its varied stages, including the ways in which each stage uniquely complements and contrasts with the others, that enables us to discern both what is continuous or discontinuous and why? Most certainly there is, and the solution is an aspect which both sides in this debate, as far as I know, have either failed to discern or failed to apply.

“In some sense, only a twist on
the Copernican revolution in
covenant theology can unite
the schizoid sacramentology
of the modern Church.”

When Covenant history is diagrammed by the experts on both sides, it is inevitably linear. This is understandable, since history itself is linear. But a journey from the boundary of our solar system to the heart of our sun is also linear, although the solar system itself is not. My assertion here is that the various covenants throughout history are not segments but spheres, not lines but layers. Passing from the orbit of Mars to the orbit of the Earth does not render the orbit of Mars redundant or non-existent.

Likewise, we must understand that the establishing of the Abrahamic Covenant did not nullify the Noahic. The Covenant with Noah was in full force in its original form at least until the end of the Abrahamic Covenant in AD70, for the Gentiles were still obliged to keep its basic stipulations. This fact was the basis for the judgment of James at the Jerusalem Council of the Church in Acts 15. There was no need to put believing Gentiles under the Law of Moses. Nor was there any need to circumcise them as members of the Abrahamic extended family, the dispersed tribal nation of Israel. Yet, (and what follows here we must understand if the disgusting fissures in our sacramental unity are to be closed and healed) these Gentiles were still “under Covenant,” just not the Abrahamic one. This is because the Abrahamic Covenant did not exist after the Noahic Covenant, nor even alongside it, but within it, just as the orbit of the Earth exists within the orbit of Mars. In some sense, only a twist on the Copernican revolution in covenant theology can unite the schizoid sacramentology of the modern Church.

Since Covenant history resembles the medieval concept of the celestial spheres,¹See also String Theory the “outer limits” consist of the reach of the covenant intended to be ratified in Adam. The word “covenant” is never used of Adam, and this is because he failed to qualify for kingdom. The word is not used until God spoke to Noah, the first man to qualify as a righteous judge, a man who could legally represent God on earth because he was found faithful in the eyes of heaven. However, the curse of death remained. This was because the Noahic Covenant was ratified within the Adamic one. All men were still in Adam.

“…the Mosaic Covenant
was ratified not in opposition to 
but within the Abrahamic one.”

When Noah’s offspring sinned in ways that can be corresponded to the offspring of Adam, another global deluge was on the horizon, covenantally-speaking: the destruction of all flesh. To keep the promises to Noah, God divided humanity in two in Abraham. However, the Noahic order of priest-kings, such as Melchizedek and Jethro and Job, still ministered among the Gentile nations as “sons of God,” which may explain the persistence of accounts similar to the early chapters of Genesis not only in the Ancient Near East but also in just about every culture around the world. Every human being was still a “member” of Adam, and a “member” of Noah, yet only those in Abraham’s household were members of this new genealogical-tribal covenant. Noah was not replaced. Like Adam, he was “divided” that he might later be conquered and glorified.

The main players in the Abrahamic line reversed, in many ways, the failures of Noah’s sons, but in Moses they were brought to maturity, both in size (as a nation) and accountability (in ministry). Israel was baptised into Moses and another covenant was established, and here we see centuries of wasted ink revealed for what they are as we understand that the Mosaic Covenant was ratified not in opposition to but within the Abrahamic one. Every Israelite was still in Adam, and still in Noah, and of course in Abraham, but not every Israelite was a member of the tribe of Levi. The Levitical order served within Israel as yet another layer, smaller and with even more concentrated standards of purity. Within the tribe of Levi, only males of a certain physical and moral standard were permitted to serve as priests, and even then under a roster of temporary vows, a division between the common and the uncommon in holy office. Then, of course, there was the High Priest, the focal point of this particular layer, but even here, since the Aaronic order was genealogical, God made a covenant within it, giving Phinehas the succession since he was found faithful.

This layered “geocentric” process can also be observed in the developments or refinements in the sacrificial praxes. Adam was to offer himself, but judgment for his failure was stemmed by God‘s mercy in the first substitutionary sacrifices. They were slain and offered whole but not burnt. The first burnt offering — or “ascension” — was presented by Noah, picturing his office as a mediator with authority from the heavenly court. Humans were now permitted to eat flesh, but not blood. In Abraham, picturing the division between Jew and Gentile, certain animals were chosen by God and cut in half by Abraham. Under the Levitical Law, animals were not only presented and cut to be offered by fire, but the various parts were allocated to different purposes, places and people. In a sense, the move towards the High Priesthood of Aaron was a cutting away at the flesh of Adam (or his substitutes) to get to the heart of the matter.

But of course, history did not stop there. The temple and priesthood were glorified under the inspired administration of King David, and here we observe yet another “eternal” covenant. Of course, you should by now understand that the Davidic Covenant existed within Adam, Noah, Abraham, and the Law of Moses (as expressed in the Psalms), being “under”, that is, accountable, to all of them, as they related to, operated within, mediated for and expounded upon each other. The holy center of this new, smaller, even purer, orbit, was not the hearing of the laws under priesthood but the incarnation of the law in true kingdom.

Following the failure of Israel’s kings, there was another division, and another covenant, this time with Jeroboam. His “orbit” was actually outside, larger than, the covenants with Levi and David, and his envy of their centrality was at the heart of his rebellion and idolatry. This envy was also at the heart of the rebellion of Korah, who apparently believed that every tribal leader in Israel should be a priest-king after the order of Melchizedek/Noah.

After the exile, a “new covenant” was established under Ezra and Nehemiah, Zechariah and Haggai, as predicted by Jeremiah.²See Jeremiah”s New Covenant. The priesthood would serve as keepers for the Davidic line, and now every Israelite, not just the priests, was required to prove his genealogical heritage. The latter prophets rail against the sins which led to the downfall of the previous kingdom, and this newly restored Israel, like the second generation in the wilderness, avoided the idolatries and adulteries of their forefathers. But the point here is that even this “new” covenant was ratified within all the previous ones.

Now we reach the center of this grand celestial construct, and it is of course the New Covenant in the blood of Christ, a covenant which was ratified within all the other covenants and yet fulfilled and succeeded them. In His baptism He was Noah, with the witness of the dove (Creation – Day 1). In His death, He was the circumcision of Abraham, cut off for the world (Division – Day 2). In His Ascension (Day 3), as the Lamb worthy to open the scroll, He was Moses on the mountain, receiving the Law of the Spirit. At Pentecost, He brought the kingdom of God, the law in the hearts of men (Testing – Day 4). In the testimony of the apostles, He was Israel scattered among the Gentiles, establishing New Covenant synagogues (Maturity – Day 5). In the destruction of Jerusalem, He was a new Israel freed from idolatry and adultery under “Babylon” (Conquest – Day 6). And with the covenantal knife finally reaching the heart of the matter, the construction of the Bride was complete, and it is in this light that we must understand the marriage feast of the Lamb in Revelation 19 as already fulfilled in history (Glorification – Day 7). All the old demarcations were eradicated, or more correctly, transformed.

Since our High Priest has entered into and recast the fiery center of the system, the entire Old Testament history is now a magnificent, seven-ringed “armillary sphere,” wheels within wheels, an apparatus of heavenly measurement which incorporates and employs in perfect harmony the specific authority of each of Jesus’ major Covenantal predecessors. It is now we who must follow Him from that center, from personal conversion into our families, tribes and nations to the outer limits, where the final enemy, death, will be destroyed, and the universe will be renewed. But all of these elements are already “in Christ” and thus already in our hands. In Emmanuel, God is with us, not only in our hearts, but to go up and possess our inheritance.

“All men, women and children
were always under covenant
with God in some form…”

The conclusion concerning “Covenant membership” and the concept of “Covenant children” in the binary sense as understood by many paedobaptists is that these were uniquely Abrahamic features and obligations, earthly stoicheia, carnal elements serving as stand ins for the heavenly parts of a much greater picture. Now it makes sense why God kept “moving the goal posts,” each level of promise and inheritance becoming redundant with the call to sacrifice it for something greater. Even Abraham understood that Canaan and his offspring were only object lessons for the possession of a heavenly country as tried, qualified and glorified sons of God, enthroned with Christ for rest and rule.

All men, women and children were always under covenant with God in some form, and the notion that baptism, especially paedobaptism, puts people “into the covenant” is absurd. Baptism is the foundation not for life, but for a life of service, of ministry, of accountability and discernment as a “son of God,” just as it was for the world under Noah, and for Israel under Moses.

All people, including all children, even the yet unborn (who cannot be paedobaptized if miscarried), have everything they could possibly have in the Gospel of Christ. The death of Jesus put them into this covenant, under obligation to the great High Priest and King of Kings, and also under His mercy. To limit His jurisdiction to some renovated or hybridised version of the Abrahamic demarcation is to grossly misunderstand Covenant history, defining the glorious New Covenant by one facet of its construction. Our “Covenant community” is not in here. It is out there.

This is why Reformed theology is the best school in which to learn about covenant theology, yet it is also the worst place to learn about New Covenant theology.

The abandonment of the Son by the Father is made palpable not in the crucifixion of His body, since He willingly laid down His life, but in the darkness which covered the Land for three hours. But perhaps this darkness was a sign of the Father’s nearness rather than His distance.

Matthew, Mark and Luke document the darkness which covered the Land during the last three hours of Jesus’ life, and so do three extra biblical historians, Thallus, Phlegon and Africanus. But what was its purpose? It is wise to look for typological precedents for events in the Gospels, since Jesus fulfilled the Law and the Prophets. Concerning darkness we have the primeval world before the creation of light (Genesis 1:2), and the darkness which covered Egypt as the ninth plague (Exodus 10:21-23).

The details of this plague are interesting, since this was “a darkness to be felt” and “nor did anyone rise from his place for three days.” Only the land of Goshen where the Israelites dwelt was given light. Thus, the three hours of darkness at noonday were a sign of the coming three days in which Christ would be covered by the darkness of the tomb. But there is another instance of darkness and light as a judgment in Exodus, and that occurred at the Red Sea crossing (Exodus 13:19-20). The pillar of cloud gave light to the Israelites but the Egyptians were left in the dark. Thus the two were kept separate throughout the night.

My assertion here is that the darkness in each case was a visit from the glory cloud, the “mobile tabernacle” which served as God’s chariot until the Day of Pentecost. It was presumably this cloud which is described in Genesis 3:8, which would be better translated as “And they heard the sound/voice of the Lord God coming to the garden in the breath/spirit of the day and they hid themselves…” It is likely that this visitation was similar to the cloud which descended upon Sinai and upon the mount of transfiguration. It is also likely the same cloud which, when opened, provided a glimpse into heaven at the baptism of Jesus (with its allusion to Genesis 1, the Spirit hovering over the deep), at His ascension, and again at the martyrdom of Stephen. The Lord always comes “with” or “in” clouds, and when He does, He comes to judge.

Of course, judgment does not necessarily mean punishment. The Lord came down to judge Babel, Egypt and Sodom, and it each case the result was cursing. In the case of Ezekiel, it seems the prophet was actually taken up in or by the chariot in Spirit that he might witness the sins of Jerusalem, God and a “son of man” serving as two legal witnesses, explaining the phrase “Come, let us go down…” in Genesis 11:7, when God brought confusion. The pillar of cloud also brought confusion upon Pharaoh’s armies, and it was likely present when the armies of Midian were confused under the watch of Gideon. But when the cloud came upon the Tabernacle and Temple, upon the Son, and upon His saints on the Day of Pentecost, as a mighty, rushing wind, the Lord was happy to bless. The arrival of the chariot of God, unlike the chariot of Pharaoh, is a chariot which brings not only vengeance but also redemption. It is the chariot of the almighty ga’al, the one who bears a two-edged sword to slay the wicked and cut the bonds of the righteous.

So, is it beyond possibility that the chariot of God was the cause of the three hours of darkness, recorded across the oikoumene, while Christ was on the cross? After all, the final chapters of Ezekiel present this Jew-Gentile social construct as a temple, with the Land of Israel as its holy altar. The Lord was coming to His temple to inspect it for “leprosy.” According to the Law, the leprosy had to be cut out, but if it returned, the house would be destroyed. Jesus was crucified “outside the camp,” like a leper (see Leviticus 14, and The Leprous House). He was the one being “cut out” that the house might be spared. But as Jesus predicted, the cleaned house would be filled with even worse demons (see Seven Spirits More Wicked), and its response to being cleansed would be a return to corruption in an even greater way. The Veil of the Temple was torn, but when the Lord later returned “in the clouds” the Temple was torn down. Not one stone was left upon another.

And he shall break down the house, its stones and timber and all the plaster of the house, and he shall carry them out of the city to an unclean place (Leviticus 14:45)

This means that the entire Land was under judgment, and Jesus was at the center of the court. He had been condemned by the High Priesthood (Garden), by Herod (Land) and by Pilate (World), the entirety of the oikoumene “Tabernacle.” Now He was being judged by heaven, and for the will of heaven be done on earth required the “bowing of the heavens,” that is, a visit from the heavenly court via the glory cloud, a symbolic reunion of the waters above and below in a prefiguring of final judgment (see “Bowing the Heavens” in my book Inquiétude for more discussion.) God was visiting the Garden, and Adam was exposed in His court. The events that transpired recapitulate those of Psalm 18 – including the earthquake –with one major difference: the Father did not hear, and did not deliver, the Man who cried out to Him.

The cords of death encompassed me;
the torrents of destruction assailed me;
the cords of Sheol entangled me;
the snares of death confronted me.

In my distress I called upon the Lord;
to my God I cried for help.
From his temple he heard my voice,
and my cry to him reached his ears.

Then the earth reeled and rocked;
the foundations also of the mountains trembled
and quaked, because he was angry.

Smoke went up from his nostrils,
and devouring fire from his mouth;
glowing coals flamed forth from him.

He bowed the heavens and came down;
thick darkness was under his feet.

He rode on a cherub and flew;
he came swiftly on the wings of the wind.
He made darkness his covering, his canopy around him,
thick clouds dark with water.

What does this mean for the significance of the three hours of darkness? That the Christ who “became sin for us” was trodden underfoot like an enemy, or a serpent, the blood upon the kapporet, the footstool of God (see Peter Leithart, The Footstool of His Feet.) To conquer sin, He became sin. To make His enemies His footstool (Psalm 110:1; Luke 20:43; Hebrews 10:13), He would first be trampled underfoot, and it would please the Lord to bruise Him (Isaiah 53:10). The holy presence which overshadowed Mary at Jesus’ conception (Luke 1:35) now overshadowed the entire nation at His death.

This abandonment of the Son by the Father was not “spatial” but legal. The Father presided over the Son in the seat of Moses, surrounded by a great cloud of witnesses. This courtroom “betrayal,” a perjury in the sense that He changed His previous testimonies concerning the blamelessness and authority of the Son, was as close-to-home as the kiss of Judas. In this final act, the Father crossed the floor and stood with Judas, with Ananias, with those who beat, spat upon and ridiculed Jesus, with Pilate, with the crowd, and with the thief who cursed Him on the cross.

The word “sacrifice” connotes the idea of “near bringing” (see James B. Jordan, Leviticus 1:2). It was this reversal of judgment, through substitutionary atonement, that the angels “standing at the four corners of the Land,” those who stood prepared to vindicate the Son by immediately destroying the city and the Land (as predicted in Daniel 9:25-26), were told: “Do not harm the land or the sea or the trees until we put a seal on the foreheads of the servants of our God” (Revelation 7:1-3).

At the Day of Pentecost, the brightness of the cloud was visited upon those who believed, and the darkness of strong delusion upon those who refused to believe. In the Gospel, this dividing “sword” was extended right across the empire. This “visitation” by the Spirit, whose indwelling turned every believer into a chariot (epitomised and signified in the miraculous travel of Philip in Acts 8:38-39), explains the inspiration and perseverance of the Jew-Gentile saints and the strong delusion which confused and confounded their Jew-Gentile enemies, who turned on each other, eventuating in their destruction at the coming of Christ with all His martyred sons, including Abel (Matthew 23:35), on white horses as a cloud of “witnesses” (martyrs) against the first century “Babylon.” These saints were God’s chariot.

Therefore, since we are surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses, let us also lay aside every weight, and sin which clings so closely, and let us run with endurance the race that is set before us, looking to Jesus, the founder and perfecter of our faith, who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is seated at the right hand of the throne of God. (Hebrews 12:1-2)

“Based on covenant history, the fact that God’s words now enrage His enemies is not a sign of failure. It is a sign of their imminent doom.”

With same sex marriage now legalized in many Western countries, and militant Islam ravaging the East, Christians might be wondering what God is doing. With the repeated failure of predictions of an imminent second coming, is the Bible any help to us at all in predicting what will happen next? I believe it is.

And Herod and Pilate became friends with each other that very day,
for before this they had been at enmity with each other.
(Luke 23:12)

The New Testament writers often quote the Old Testament in crazy ways because they understood that God’s covenants are “harvest cycles.” They could refer to events in previous covenants and say, “Look, it’s happening again! See how God reunited Israel? Now He is reuniting Jew and Gentile!” (Hebrews 8:7-13)

The moral degradation of Western culture and the rise of militant Islam make perfect sense when understood in the light of sacred architecture and the “harvest” process it represents. So we will take a brief look into the Holy Place of the Tabernacle, observe how this pattern shaped the events of the first century, and quickly trace it to the madness of our own day.

The Holy Place

In the Holy Place were three articles of furniture which represented three offices: Priest, King and Prophet. These three describe a process of maturity. The Priest listens, the King acts, and the Prophet speaks. This is what was required of Adam in the Garden of Eden, and it also gives us three clear stages in the history and literature of ancient Israel.

The Table of Showbread is the Priest (manna and grapes in the wilderness), the Lampstand is the King (the light of the law for wisdom in governing) and the Incense Altar is the elders who advise in the courts of heaven and guide history on earth. Of course, Christ is the first one who truly united these three offices.

Since the Tabernacle layout is cross-shaped, these three items are two hands, left and right, and the bosom or breastplate in the center. This is why Christ holds seven stars in His right hand in Revelation 1 (the church rulers). He is the Tabernacle fulfilled. As His body, Christians are a royal priesthood, a combination of priest and king with a voice from heaven.

The First Century

The conflict between Priesthood and Kingdom, Church and State, can be traced throughout Scripture, seen very clearly in the hatred of Abel by Cain, and Jacob by Esau, and in the Egyptians’ regard of shepherds as detestable (Genesis 46:34). However, only a faithful combination of Priesthood and Kingdom results in a voice that is truly Prophetic. This is why the Ascension of Christ was followed by the Day of Pentecost and resulted in both the apostolic witness and the New Testament document.

However, Priesthood and Kingdom often collude against the true prophets. That is always the nature of Babel. The Jews hated the Romans, and yet Herod and Pilate became friends over the crucifixion of Christ. This was repeated “institutionally” a generation later, when Herodian worship (left hand) and Neronic rule (right hand) joined forces against the Christian church, the Body of Christ.

The Global Church

All of this helps us to understand the major tensions in the world today. On one hand, we have Islam, an insane parody of Priesthood, a religion which prohibits the wine, women and song of adulthood, everything Kingly and Prophetic. Holiness comes via coercion. One must listen and not question. It is a religion which puts everyone under the sword, a tyrannizing order like that of the Pharisees and Herods in first century Jerusalem. It expresses itself through bloodshed, circumcision for males and females, violence against girls and women, and jihad.

On the other hand, we have the Secular West, which no longer listens to God and has given itself to “kingly” sins, murder and adultery, the amassing of gold and war horses, and the infant sacrifice of abortion. Secular humanism is Kingdom taken to the extreme, the “guns, girls, and gold” prohibited by Moses (Deuteronomy 17:14-20) and amassed by Solomon, which began the downfall of Israel.

Islam and Secularism are vehemently opposed. Like the Roman Empire, secularism calls Muslims to assimilate. Like Jews under the Law of Moses, this is something Muslims under Sharia law are unable to do. In the wisdom of God, the two sides are forever set at enmity. One claims divine authority (Priesthood), the other claims infinite wisdom (Kingdom). Both invent history in order to claim the future (Prophecy).

In between these two perversions, one of Priesthood and the other of Kingdom, we have the Christian Church, a Body which unites true Priesthood and true Kingdom, a royal priesthood given the task of divine testimony to the world. Like Herod and Pilate, the only thing Islam and Secularism have in common is a hatred for Christianity, the fragrant bride in the bosom of Adam, the supernatural institution which, by the Spirit of the ascended Christ, is truly Prophetic.

It is easy to blame the Church for the degeneration of Western culture, but the prophetic witness in our culture has in reality been reasonably consistent. Based on Covenant history, the fact that God’s words now enrage His enemies is not a sign of our failure. It is a sign of their imminent doom.

Romans 1 tells us that cultural homosexuality is a sign of the end of a culture, the final proof that it has gone insane. But subsequent chapters also describe the hypocrisy and futility of a carnal priesthood. Paganism and Judaism were castrated forever, their “ministries” replaced by the enthronement of the fragrant firstborn from the dead.

This explains the natures of Islam and Secularism. In this age, everything is Christian. With paganism and Judaism disempowered, to have any real longevity, any idolatry must now be a distorted form of Christianity. Islam is Christianity without sacrament, without grace. Secularism is Christianity without discipline, without self-government. Islam and Secularism are thus the bipolar moods of Christless Christianity, schizoid faces of a global perversion of the prophetic Gospel. Christians in the East testify like Elijah against false Priesthood. Christians in the West, like the angels sent to Sodom, testify against false Kingdom. Sacrament and Govern-ment can only be united under the Word by the Spirit.

But both extremes are not only the enemies of the Gospel, they are the results of the Gospel. Islam and Secularism are rebellion against Christ taken to its logical conclusion in opposite directions: legalism or licentiousness. With no spiritual weapons, both “hands” are reduced to bearing the sword in their respective ways. They can be united only in death, and their current victories are suicides in disguise. As it was in the first century, the only solution to the enmity is faith in Christ.

The Whole World in His Hands

When God’s people persevere, God confuses their enemies and sets them against each other. Rome devoured Jerusalem, and then the New Jerusalem devoured Rome. The prophetic voice of Christ and His martyrs was vindicated. Released from the trappings of the old order, and possessing both the divine authority of the Jew and the earthly abundance of the Gentile, the Gospel began its transformation of the empire.

What does the future hold? If the events of the first century are repeated, the false kings will destroy the false priests, but the false kings will be entirely shaken up in the process, being humbled that they might bow the knee to Christ. Many saints will die but through their testimony they will eventually conquer the false kingdom from the inside. The Future belongs to the Bride.

When Sodom was destroyed, Sarah conceived. When Israel committed similar sins, Ruth and Hannah conceived. In God’s kingdom, the last days are only ever the last days of the old order. A bipolarity of Priesthood and Kingdom expressed in global culture means some kind of Prophetic resurrection across the world is at hand, a Christendom more faithful, wiser, and bigger than even the saints could imagine, the next “growth ring” of the kingdom of God.

The inheritance of Jesus includes both East and West, just as it included Jew and Gentile, set in opposition by the Law: divide and conquer, circumcise and baptize.

For he himself is our peace, who has made us both one and has broken down in his flesh the dividing wall of hostility by abolishing the law of commandments expressed in ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace, and might reconcile us both to God in one body through the cross, thereby killing the hostility. (Ephesians 2:14-16)

With the Spirit of God in us, and the lessons of the millennia, God’s thoughts are not so high above ours any more. And that was always the plan: that all His people might be Prophets, wise as serpents and harmless as doves.

This essay is from Inquiétude: Essays for a People Without Eyes. The original version was published at Theopolis Institute.