The Release of “The Controversy of Zion and the Time of Jacob’s Trouble”
Good news! The book “The Controversy of Zion and the Time of Jacob’s Trouble” has gone to print. This means that it will be available next month. I’ll keep you posted on the details.
You can read excerpts that are being tweeted daily over at @CntrvrsyOfZion on Twitter.
Gleaning from J. C. Ryle on Prophecy, Jewish Evangelism, and the Pitfalls of Allegorizing the Scriptures According to Reformed Eschatology
In researching for The Controversy of Zion and the Time of Jacob’s Trouble I spent a lot of time scouring J. C. Ryle’s writings (1816-1900). The first Anglican Bishop of Liverpool in the mid-1800′s deserves to be heard.
Along with contemporaries Charles Spurgeon (a Baptist from London), Robert Murray M’Cheyne, Horatius Bonar, and Andrew Bonar (all Presbyterians from Scotland), Ryle stood out from the pack of Reformed Theologians who used allegory and “spiritualization” (their word) to reinterpret prophecy divesting Israel of their national destiny as foretold by the prophets and apostles. Below are selections from one of his books Coming Events and Present Duties (1879) [1] in which he appeals to the Church concerning the illegitimacy of this sort of modification and revision, particularly as it relates to Jewish evangelism (“…to the Jew first…” according to Rom. 1:16, Acts 3:26, 13:46).
“I believe we have fallen into an error parallel with that of our Jewish brethren, an error less fatal in its consequences than theirs, but an error far more inexcusable, because we have had more light. If the Jew thought too exclusively of Christ reigning, has not the Gentile thought to exclusively of Christ suffering? If the Jew could see nothing in Old Testament prophecy but Christ’s exaltation and final power, has not the Gentile often seen nothing but Christ’s humiliation and the preaching of the gospel? If the Jew dwelt too much on Christ’s second advent, has not the Gentile dwelt too exclusively on the first? If the Jew ignored the cross, has not the Gentile ignored the crown? I believe there can be but one answer to these questions. I believe that we Gentiles till lately have been very guilty concerning a large portion of God’s truth. I believe that we have cherished an arbitrary, reckless habit of interpreting first advent texts literally, and second advent texts spiritually. I believe we have not rightly understood “all that the prophets have spoken” about the second personal advent of Christ, any more than the Jews did about the first. And because we have done this, I say that we should speak of such mistakes as that referred to in our text with much tenderness and compassion.
You would probably tell the Jew that Jesus of Nazareth was the Messiah promised in the Old Testament Scriptures. To those Scriptures you would refer him to for proof. You would show him Psalm 22, Isaiah 53, Daniel 9:26, Micah 5:2, Zechariah 9:9 and 11:13. You would tell him that in Jesus of Nazareth those Scriptures were literally fulfilled. You would urge upon him that he ought to believe these Scriptures, and receive Christ as the Messiah. All this is very good. So far you would do well. But suppose the Jew asks you if you take all the prophecies of the Old Testament in their simple literal meaning. Suppose he asks you if you believe in a literal personal advent of Messiah to reign over the earth in glory, a literal restoration of Judah and Israel to Palestine, a literal rebuilding and restoration of Zion and Jerusalem. Suppose the unconverted Jew puts these questions to you, what answer are you prepared to make?
Will you dare to tell him that Old Testament prophecies of this kind are not to be taken in their plain literal sense? Will you dare to tell him that the words Zion, Jerusalem, Jacob, Judah, Ephraim, Israel, do not mean what they seem to mean, but mean the Church of Christ? Will you dare to tell him that the glorious kingdom and future blessedness of Zion, so often dwelt upon in prophecy, mean nothing more than the gradual Christianizing of the world by missionaries and gospel preaching? Will you dare to tell him that you think it “carnal” to expect a literal rebuilding of Jerusalem, “carnal” to expect a literal coming of Messiah to reign? Oh, reader, if you are a man of this mind, take care what you are doing! I say again, take care.
Do you not see that you are putting a weapon in the hand of the unconverted Jew, which he will probably use with irresistible power? Do you not see that you are cutting the ground from under your own feet, and supplying the Jew with a strong argument for not believing your own interpretation of Scripture? Do you not see that the Jew will reply, that it is “carnal” to tell him that the Messiah has come literally to suffer, if you tell him that it is “carnal” to expect Messiah will come literally to reign? Do you not see that the Jew will tell you, that it is far more “carnal” in you to believe that Messiah could come into a world as a despised, crucified Man of sorrows, than it is in him to believe that He will come into the world as a glorious King? Beyond doubt he will do so, and you will find no answer to give. Reader, I commend these things to your serious attention. I entreat you to throw aside all prejudice, and to view the subject I am dwelling upon with calm and dispassionate thought. I beseech you to take up anew the prophetical Scriptures, and to pray that you may not err in interpreting their meaning. Read them in the light of those two great polestars, the first and second advents of Jesus Christ. Bind up with the first advent the rejection of the Jews, the calling of the Gentiles, the preaching of the gospel as a witness to the world and gathering out of the election of grace. Bind up with the second advent the restoration of the Jews, the pouring out of judgments on unbelieving Christians, the conversion of the world and the establishment of Christ’s kingdom upon earth. Do this and you will see a meaning and fullness in prophecy which perhaps you have never yet discovered.
I am quite aware that many good men do not see the subject of unfulfilled prophecy as I do. I am painfully sensible that I seem presumptuous in differing from them. But I dare not refuse anything which appears to me plainly written in Scripture. I consider the best of men are not infallible. I think we should remember that we must reject Protestant traditions which are not according to the Bible, as much as the traditions of the Church of Rome.
I believe it is high time for the Church of Christ to awake out of its sleep about Old Testament prophecy. From the time of the old fathers, Jerome and Origen, down to the present day, men have gone on in a pernicious habit of “spiritualizing” the words of the Prophets, until their true meaning has been well nigh buried. It is high time to lay aside traditional methods of interpretation, and to give up our blind obedience to the opinions of such writers as Poole, Henry, Scott and Clarke, upon unfulfilled prophecy. It is high time to fall back on the good old principle that Scripture generally means what it seems to mean, and to beware of that semi-skeptical argument, “Such and such an interpretation cannot be correct, because it seems to us ‘carnal’“!
It is high time for Christians to interpret unfulfilled prophecy by the light of prophecies already fulfilled. The curses of the Jews were brought to pass literally: so also will be the blessings. The scattering was literal: so also will be the gathering. The pulling down of Zion was literal: so also will be the building up. The rejection of Israel was literal: so also will be the restoration.”
—————————-
[1] Republished as Are You Ready For The End Of Time? (Fearn, Scotland: Christian Focus, 2001).
Honeymooning in Rome, Arab Rage, and the Destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D.
HONEYMOON IN ROME
In 2006 I married my best friend and the love of my life, Anna Beth Kennedy. Through a number of providential twists and turns we were married just outside Edinburgh Scotland. It was the greatest day of my life. Our plan was to honeymoon in Edinburgh and to enjoy 3 weeks exploring Scotland. But when friends of ours who lived in France urged us to take advantage of Europe while we were “in the area,” we hopped on a plane.
From Edinburgh we flew to Paris. From Paris we caught a train to Aix en Provence. And after soaking up the sights, sounds and smells of the southern coast we made our way through Italy. Our first stop was Rome. We had heard some horror stories about Rome from other travelers who said it was “dirty,” “crowded,” “expensive” and “ugly compared to the rest of the country.” I’m glad we didn’t listen to them. Exploring Rome was one of the most amazing experiences of my life.
On our first day touring the city we walked through the Colosseum and the old city that surrounds it. Just outside the Colosseum stands the Arch of Titus that depicts the Roman sack of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. Carved into the Arch are soldiers pillaging the Jewish Temple and carrying off the spoils of war; trumpets, basins, menorahs, and riches. Anna and I stood there with the Colosseum to our back and the Arch of Titus before us pondering the significance of the city that was once the capital of the known world and power of Jesus’ words in Luke 19 where the Roman invasion was prophesied as judgment upon Israel for their rejection of Him:
41 And when he drew near and saw the city, he wept over it, 42 saying, “Would that you, even you, had known on this day the things that make for peace! But now they are hidden from your eyes. 43 For the days will come upon you, when your enemies will set up a barricade around you and surround you and hem you in on every side 44 and tear you down to the ground, you and your children within you. And they will not leave one stone upon another in you, because you did not know the time of your visitation.” (Luke 19:41-44)
With the smell of Italian coffee and pizza from nearby vendors filling the air I stared at the monument with holy fear and reverence. While it was a trophy for the Romans attesting to their victorious suppression of the Jewish revolt, I also understood it as a testament to the faithfulness of God to fulfill His word. Inwardly I trembled as I meditated on Jesus’ declaration of judgment in Luke 19 and gazed upon the material evidence of its fulfillment. I’ll never forget that day. And I’ll never read Luke 19 the same ever again.
A FORGOTTEN PART OF THE STORY
The destruction of the Temple in 70 A.D. is one of the most important events in Jewish history. Historians and Bible scholars rightly make much of this monumentally significant military conflict. But all too often a central part of the story is overlooked – who was responsible for the violence against the Jews.
It is widely believed and generally assumed that the Romans were responsible for the horrific scourge of the Holy City (hence the Arch of Titus sculpted by the Romans and placed outside the Roman Colosseum). But this is not true.
In his book Wars of the Jews, Josephus records the carnage in vivid and gut-wrenching detail. In Chapter 4 of Book 6 he recalls the burning of the Temple:
And now a certain person came running to Titus, and told him of this fire… whereupon he rose up in great haste, and, as he was, ran to the holy house, in order to have a stop put to the fire; after him followed all his commanders, and after them followed the several legions, in great astonishment; so there was a great clamor and tumult raised, as was natural upon the disorderly motion of so great an army. Then did Caesar, both by calling to the soldiers that were fighting, with a loud voice, and by giving a signal to them with his right hand, order them to quench the fire….
Titus supposing what the fact was, that the house itself might yet he saved, he came in haste and endeavored to persuade the soldiers to quench the fire… yet were their passions too hard for the regards they had for Caesar, and the dread they had of him who forbade them, as was their hatred of the Jews, and a certain vehement inclination to fight them, too hard for them also… And thus was the holy house burnt down, without Caesar’s approbation.
Two things in this record surprised me the first time I read them. First, Titus did not give the order to destroy the Temple. He actually attempted to salvage it when soldiers set fire to it. The phrase “without Caesar’s approbation” is of critical historical importance. The Roman Emperor was not responsible for the destruction of the “holy house.” Second, it was “hatred of the Jews” that instigated the violence. Anti-semitic rage was behind the famous scourge. This too is historically significant.
But what I find most provocative about the leveling of the sanctuary was not that the Emperor tried to stop it or that hatred of the Jews was that which motivated the invading enemy. What surprised me most was reading that Romans–that is, Italians–were not the ones ultimately responsible. Josephus explains that when the armies were moving in on the city many of the Jews within the walls decided to surrender and desert their homeland. Knowing that they would be searched and robbed they swallowed their coins and jewelry hoping to pass it after escaping. Their escape plan failed. Josephus records what he calls the most “terrible” “misery” that “befell the Jews” during the invasion. Those that attempted to surrender were slaughtered. And then:
…the multitude of the Arabians, with the Syrians, cut up those that came as supplicants, and searched their bellies. Nor does it seem to me that any misery befell the Jews that was more terrible than this, since in one night’s time about two thousand of these deserters were thus dissected. [1]
Contrary to popular belief, the suffering of the Jews under the heavy hand of the Roman Empire was the result of Arab anti-semitism. The “people” (Dan. 9:26) who desecrated the Temple and inflicted unimaginable violence upon the sons and daughters of Abraham were not Italians. They were Arabian and Syrian legions employed by the Roman Empire.
Joel Richardson has promoted this neglected perspective of the drama of 70 A.D. He writes [2]:
Sara Elise Phang, Ph.D. author of Roman Military Service, ideologies of discipline in the late Republic and early Principate (Cambridge University Press, 2008)… validates these facts [that Arabs were responsible for the destruction of the Temple] stating that: “Recruitment underwent major shifts from Italy in the early first century A.D. to the frontier provinces in the latter first and second centuries” (Phang page 19). In fact, as Phang reveals, Roman scholars are now in universal agreement that the overwhelming majority of the soldiers that attacked Jerusalem were Eastern provincial recruits:
That Italians were increasingly replaced in the legions during this period by provincials is in itself no longer a novelty among scholars… In the East, that is Asia Minor, Syria and Egypt, it seems clear that local recruitment was well under way under Augustus [d.14 A.D.], so that by his death only a very small number of legionaries derived from Italy or indeed any of the western provinces… Under Nero [d. 68A.D.], when the eastern legions required supplementation…it was to Cappadocia and Galatia that [Rome] looked for recruits. This was doubtless standard procedure. [The] legions of the East consisted largely of “orientals” (Middle Easterners) (Phang 57-58).
The ancient enmity between Isaac and Ishmael was at the heart of the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. And it will be at the heart of the future time of Jacob’s trouble (Jer. 30:7) when the controversy will finally be settled. [3]
5 Because you cherished perpetual enmity and gave over the people of Israel to the power of the sword at the time of their calamity, at the time of their final punishment, 6 therefore, as I live, declares the Lord God, I will prepare you for blood, and blood shall pursue you; because you did not hate bloodshed, therefore blood shall pursue you. (Ezekiel 35:5-6)
______________________________
[1] The Wars of The Jews, History of the Destruction of Jerusalem By Flavius Josephus Trans. William Whiston BOOK V: Chapter 13: Paragraph 4
[2] “Daniel 9:26 – The People of the Prince Who is to Come.”
[3] See Zechariah 12:2-3, 9; 14:1-3; Joel 3:1-16; Psalm 83; Daniel 11:21-12:4; Ezekiel 38-39
9 Foundational Truths About Israel (Romans 11:25-32)
1. Gentiles have a Propensity to Arrogance (v. 25a)
2. Israel has been partially hardened in unbelief (v. 25b)
3. Israel’s hardness is temporary – “until” (v. 25c)
4. The hardness will continue until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in (v. 25d)
5. All Israel will be saved when the fullness of the Gentiles has come in (v. 26)
6. All Israel will be saved when Jesus returns and vindicates the Covenant (v. 26b-27)
7. Thus Israel are to be considered our “beloved” “enemies” (v. 28)
8. The gifts and callings of God towards Israel are irrevocable (v. 29)
9. Israel was hardened because God loves mercy (v. 30-32)
