National Debt and the Bible

Time goes by fast! It is now several decades since I helped Mr. Dave Balsiger find good Scripture references for an Election Guide he was preparing to publish. He had a number of critical issues listed, and I helped him select appropriate Scripture for each.

One of the topics was the NATIONAL DEBT.

Shortly after the Guide was published, I heard it reviewed by Forest Boyd, news commentator on the SRN News, then aired over the Moody Broadcasting Network.

Mr. Boyd had just one comment. He said, “I don’t think the Bible has anything to say about the National Debt.”

Goes to show what is oftentimes the case–he did not read the evidence I gave from the Bible before he formed his opinion. Or, he retained his mistaken opinion even after being shown the evidence.

Here is the evidence:

Deuteronomy 28:12 The LORD shall open unto thee his good treasure, the heaven to give the rain unto thy land in his season, and to bless all the work of thine hand: and thou shalt lend unto many nations, and thou shalt not borrow.
Deu 28:13 And the LORD shall make thee the head, and not the tail; and thou shalt be above only, and thou shalt not be beneath; if that thou hearken unto the commandments of the LORD thy God, which I command thee this day, to observe and to do them:

If the nation will follow the principles stated in God’s Word, the Bible, it will prosper and have no problem related to debt.

Otherwise:

Deu 28:43 The stranger that is within thee shall get up above thee very high; and thou shalt come down very low.
Deu 28:44 He shall lend to thee, and thou shalt not lend to him: he shall be the head, and thou shalt be the tail.

Now try to tell me that the Bible does not address the issue of the national debt!

Clearly it does.

And what has now happened to us exactly fits what the Bible says would happen if we persist in not following the principles in the Bible, God’s Word.

Some might wish to argue that those threats and promises were made to the nation of Israel under the Law, so they do not apply to us.

But consider this verse from Psalm 9:17,

Psa 9:17 The wicked shall be turned into hell, and all the nations that forget God.

Psalm 9:17 does NOT say “and all the tribes of Israel that forget God.” It says nations, and that includes us.

If we as individuals and as a nation learn what is God’s will as it is taught in the Bible, and do all that we can to abide by that will, we too will be blessed. If we do the contrary, we will be cursed.

Clearly, in the Bible, national debt is a curse.

We have gotten ourselves into this mess because of a failure on all parties’ part to tell the truth. We have been living a lie.

Right now, this very day, President Obama and administration officials are using lies as scare tactics to force Congress to give in and authorize raising the debt ceiling.

Administration officials and media reporters all are telling us that not to raise the debt ceiling will result in our defaulting on our debt obligations and the consequent lowering of the country’s credit rating.

That is a flat-out lie.

The Constitution and its Amendments and existing federal law stipulate that before anything else is paid, interest on our debt gets paid first. There is enough continuing tax revenue even in this down economy to keep those payments up even if we do not raise the debt ceiling.

What this nation most needs, besides getting back to God and His Word, is a real shake-up and shake-out of the financial system.

The banking establishment, justly called the “banksters,” have been robbing us blind to line their own pockets. The very large banks knowingly made loans to people during the housing bubble, people they did not verify as to whether they could pay back the debt. Banksters thought it did not matter. Houses were going up on an ever rising spiral in value. They knew it was a “bubble,” but there were profits to be made. Then when the bubble was about to burst, the “banksters” howled that they were “too big to fail.”

Anyone who has read The Secret of Jekyl Island knows that the “banksters” have used this ploy before, the exact words.

Currently, if banking institutions kept honest books using honest accounting methods, the large banks in this country would certainly be shown to be insolvent.

We will never solve our economic problem by delaying tactics. We can’t keep “kicking the can down the road.” The problem needs to be addressed carefully now. The lies must stop. We might yet have just a ghost of a chance to at least control the deflation of the current debt bubble. If we keep delaying, it is likely that we will have an uncontrollable outright collapse of the entire financial system and economy.

If you violate the “law of gravity” you will likely suffer some painful damage. If you violate the laws of mathematics, you will be in serious trouble. I trust the Federal Reserve Chairman and the Treasury Secretary are losing much sleep these nights. Of all people, they must know mathematics is against them, and the longer they delay adopting painful and stringent measures to halt the process now underway, the more painful will be the damage when the final tipping point is reached. Their current strategies are clearly a failure. Papering over the problem does nothing to solve it, but exacerbate it.

We need to re-instate the Glass–Steagall Act immediately. Banks have no business engaging in risky investments backed on our dime. That caused the first Great Depression. It is now at the heart of this one.

We need to provide American manufacturers and companies in general a “level playing field.” No company should be allowed to export labor to other countries to exploit the wage differential between our country and countries whose wages amount to slave labor.

How to do it? Insist on true reciprocity. If a nation like China wishes to sell products made there to us, they can only do so under the same privileges and conditions that they allow us to sell products to them.

We need to reverse the flight of jobs via so-called “outsourcing” from this country. How to do that? Simple. Grant companies who bring those jobs back, and those companies that have kept jobs here, a very major tax break–like freedom from any corporate taxes for companies that restore jobs to or keep jobs in America.

What is called “Free Trade” is not Free Trade at all. It does not currently require reciprocity. It must. It allows wage arbitrage and environmental regulation arbitrage. If a company finds it saves lots of money to take advantage of slave labor, require them to pay a hefty import tariff to equalize the effect. If a company wants to pollute foreign countries, make them pay more than the equivalent saved in tariff. Simply don’t let wrong-doing be profitable.

If we brought back fairness and equality (or maybe, established it for the first time), and by granting tax advantages for those who do what is right, perhaps then companies could afford to pay a genuine living wage and reverse the downward spiral we’ve seen in employment.

The Bible clearly tells us that “the way of transgressors is hard” (Proverbs 13:15) and “be sure your sin will find you out” (Numbers 32:23).

It also says:

2Ch 7:14 If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.

This promise, of course, applies directly to Israel. But its principles apply to us. Until very recently it was my understanding that this verse really did not apply to us. But after repeated queries and challenges from my dear wife, I decided I had better study this out again and settle the issue once and for all. I think I spent the whole day studying the cross references to this verse, starting with those given in The New Treasury of Scripture Knowledge and Nelson’s Cross Reference Guide to the Bible. That day I greatly expanded the number of cross references given for this passage in those two Bible study reference sources. I am now fully convinced by Scripture itself that this promise in God’s Word is for us too.

Here are those newly-expanded cross references for 2 Chronicles 7:14,

14. If. Ge +4:7. On this text, Thomas Scott, in Scott’s Commentary, remarks: In the best state of nations favored with revelation, there has hitherto been a succession of prosperity, ingratitude, corrections, repentance, forgiveness, renewed mercies and prosperity, and renewed ingratitude and forgetfulness of God. Yet the Lord delights in those places where his ordinances are maintained and attended on, in some measure of purity and consistency. But in cases of apostasy, or general profaneness, or hypocrisy, he will glorify his justice by tremendous judgments upon those, who have thus abused his mercies, and forfeited their privileges, making them a warning to others, if not an infamy among the heathen. Let us then stand in awe of him; watch against all sin; and copy the examples of the most approved of his saints, in the brightest parts of their characters (vol. ii. p. 472, American edition, 1864). Surely the principles behind the blessings (Dt 28:1-14) and cursings (Dt 28:15-68) given to the nation of Israel are in force among not only Israel but the nations of the world, extending to the curse of mounting national debt and economic decline (Dt 28:44). This passage provides God’s recipe for genuine revival. That revival must start with serious attention to continuing systematic, personal, real Bible study (See the Notes at 2 K 12:13 and He 6:9). my people. Some questions have been raised about the applicability of this verse: are these promises only for natural, that is, national Israel, or are they valid for us today? The following Cross References should settle the issue once and for all. Is 63:19. 65:1. Ac 15:17. Ro +*15:4. Ep 2:12. 1 P **2:9, 10. Re 1:5, 6. which are called by my name. Heb. upon whom my name is called. 2 Ch 6:33mg. Nu +*6:27. Dt 28:10. Is 63:19mg. Je *15:16mg. humble. T#1366. 2 Ch *6:37-39. 12:6, 7, 12. *33:12, 13, 18, 19, %23. *34:27. Le *26:40, 41. Dt *4:29, 30. *30:1-6. Jg 20:26n. 1 K 21:27-29. 2 K 22:18, 19. 1 Ch 17:16. 29:14. Jb 7:7, 18. 40:3-5. 42:5, 6. Ps 9:12. 22:6. *25:9. 34:18. +35:13. 42:5. 51:17. Ec 5:2. Is 57:15. 66:2. Je 1:6. 45:3. La 3:20. Ezk *33:11. Da %5:22. +**10:12. Jl 2:13. Mi +*6:8. Zc *12:10. Mt 8:8. Lk *18:13. 22:41, 42. 2 C *7:10. Ja *4:9, 10. 1 P 5:6. and pray. T#1388. 2 Ch 20:9. Dt 4:29-31. 2 K 20:1-5. Ps 17:1. *145:18, 19. Is **26:8, 9. 58:9. Je **29:13. Ho 7:14. Mt 23:14. Mk *11:23, 24. Lk 22:44. Jn 11:33. Ac 9:11. 1 T **2:1-4. He *10:22. seek my face. FS22A4, Ge +19:13. T#1386. 1 Ch 16:11. **28:9. Jb 8:5, 6. Ps +**9:10. 27:4, 8. Pr 2:4-6. 8:17. Is *26:9. 45:19. **55:6, 7. *56:6, 7. Je *29:13. 50:4, 5. La 3:40, 41. Ho 5:6, 7, *15. Am 5:4-6. Mt 7:7, 8. Lk *11:9, 10. He *11:6. turn from. The mercies of God to sinners are communicated in a manner suited to impress all who receive them, with the most profound reverence of his majesty, justice, and holiness (Ge +**18:25n); thus leading them to unite humble confidence with fear of offending so holy a God. Especially, whoever beholds, with true faith, the divine Savior agonizing and dying for man’s sin, will, by that view, find his godly sorrow enlarged (2 C 7:10), his hatred of sin increased (Ps 119:104), his soul made more watchful, and his life more holy: and they are speculating hypocrites, who profess to expect salvation by the cross of Christ, while the world has their hearts, and sin is allowed in their habitual conduct (Scott, references added). T#607. 2 K 17:13. Ps 34:18. 51:17. 147:3. Pr *28:13. Is *55:6, 7. 59:20. *66:2. Je +35:15. Ezk 18:27-30. Ho *6:1-3. Jl *2:12, 13. Zc 1:3. Mt 5:3, 4. Lk +13:3. *15:21-23. Ho 5:15. Ac 3:19-21. Ja +4:10 (T#357). then will I hear. The Lord’s ready answers to our prayers should animate us to repeat, with deeper reverence and more lively gratitude, our praises of his mercy (Scott). 2 Ch 6:27, 30, 39. Ps 91:15. Is *30:18. +*65:24. Je *33:3. Zc *13:9. Jn 15:7. Re *3:20. forgive their sin. The most endearing displays of the love of God, rightly understood, speak terror to hypocrites and presumptuous offenders (2 C 5:11); but the most tremendous discoveries of his righteous vengeance need not discourage the upright, humble believer. Every token of his favor should enlarge our hearts in his service: and those who are inspired with zeal for his glory, and who taste the joy of his salvation, will never think too much time or expense can be bestowed in communion with him and his saints, provided other duties be not neglected (Scott). Ex 34:7. Ps +**103:3. Is *1:18. 43:25. 44:22. 59:1, 2. Je +*31:34. Ho **5:15. *6:1. Zp 3:15. Mt 9:2. Lk 24:47. Ac +**3:19-21. +*10:36, 43. Ja 5:15. 1 J **1:7, 9. heal their land. T#1640. 2 Ch 6:28-31. *30:20. Ex +*15:26. Nu 14:11-13, 19. 2 S 24:15-17. Ps 60:2. Is 11:6. 27:6. 30:26. *35:1. 53:5. Je 8:22. *33:6. 51:9. Am +*9:13-15. Ml 4:2. Mt +*19:28. Ac +**3:19. Ro +*8:19, 21. Re +*22:3.

You will not likely find this number of cross references given for this passage anywhere else. You will surely be blessed in your study of God’s Word if you take the time to look up these passages carefully in your own Bible.

I have found it helps to have one Bible open to this verse (2 Chronicles 7:14), while I use a smaller Bible to turn to each of the references. If you have access to a Bible program such as the e-Sword program, freely available for download at www.e-sword.net, it may be easier to type the references in one at a time to read the corresponding verse. Feel free to make full use of these references in your personal Bible study or ministry, but remember that they are under copyright, so they must not be used in commercial publications without written permission from the copyright holder.

This entry was posted in Politics and the Bible and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

41 Responses to National Debt and the Bible

  1. A. Way says:

    Interesting – you quote Deuteronomy. You know we are not under those laws any longer. You told me yourself!

  2. Jerry says:

    Dear A. Way,

    I was just waiting for you to say that!

    But as you know, there are some principles that seem to hold true for all time, and for all nations.

    That is why I cited Psalms 9:17,

    Psa 9:17 The wicked shall be turned into hell, and all the nations that forget God.

    Notice, too, one major difference. The Deuteronomy passage addressing national debt is not written to or of individuals, but the nation. The principles behind the blessings and cursings have application to the nations, as well as Israel itself.

    Unlike the Ten Commandment Law, which has been “nailed to the cross,” and so voided or cancelled for believers under Grace, the blessings and cursings still apply to Israel. We can learn from them. God gave Israel some very good advice. We can benefit from that advice too.

    But though the Ten Commandment Law has been cancelled for believers under grace (John 1:17), the Holy Spirit so arranged the content of the Bible that just NINE, and only nine of those Ten Commandments are repeated as Commands under Grace.

    I wonder if in your long years of deep Bible study if you ever happened to notice which one of the Ten Commandments is not reiterated under Grace?

    That is really a most significant fact of Bible knowledge you really need to know and recognize as to the implications to be drawn from that fact.

    This one important fact ought to throw your entire belief system into disarray, because what you believe cannot be made to “fit” that fact.

  3. A. Way says:

    Nice try Jerry. 😉 The example of Jesus shows us that He kept the Sabbath. He even showed he expected the Sabbath to be kept, Matthew 24:20. The disciples keeps the Sabbath after Jesus’ ascension. That should call your beliefs into question, yet you deny the clear text of scripture. Amazing.
    —————————————-
    Matthew 24:20 KJV But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day:

  4. A. Way says:

    Here is a question for you Jerry – do you keep the dietary laws? Or do Christians not need to keep them? Is the prohibition on pig still valid? Or has that one been nailed to the cross? What say ye?

  5. Jerry says:

    Dear A. Way,

    The dietary laws do not apply to Christians under Grace.

    I like questions like that where the answer is straightforward and easy!

  6. Jerry says:

    Dear A. Way,

    As for Matthew 24:20, that applies to the perception of Jews before 70 AD who, still bound by such stipulations regarding a “Sabbath day’s journey” would consider this an additional concern. Does not apply to Christians under Grace whatsoever.

    In context, Jesus lists several difficulties which might be encountered, like travel in winter, pregnant or nursing mothers, and the like, all of which would add to the difficulty of effecting escape from the impending decimation and desolation of Jerusalem and the nation by the Romans.

    Furthermore, the gates of cities and towns were closed on the Sabbath, so that would make effective escape from the impending disaster even more difficult.

    So, for these reasons, the mention of Sabbath in this context has no bearing upon believers under Grace being still held to keeping the Fourth Commandment.

    The example of Jesus did indeed show that He kept the Sabbath, for until the Cross He was under the Law, and is the only one who ever perfectly kept it. The Law is now fulfilled in and by Christ. His direct in-person revelation to Paul asserts unequivocally that the Ten Commandment Law, including the Fourth Commandment, was “nailed to the cross,” so no Christian under Grace is any longer bound to that Law. We are, as Paul clearly states, “no longer under the law,” but he carefully clarifies that we are not “without law,” but rather “under the Law to Christ,” being under His commandments for moral guidance and direction.

    I carefully listed the Ten Commandments above, and for each Commandment I gave the Bible reference for its restatement under Grace. The Fourth Commandment contains the “[empty set],” meaning in plain English (in case you didn’t get it before) that the Fourth Commandment is nowhere in Scripture repeated as a command for believers under Grace.

    This one FACT of Scripture ALONE fully demolishes your position, and this fact ought to haunt you.

    There is no “thus saith the Lord” under Grace requiring or urging Sabbath day worship upon believers under Grace.

  7. A. Way says:

    The dietary laws do not apply to Christians under Grace.

    I like questions like that where the answer is straightforward and easy!

    In a word – hogwash. 🙂 The same principles of money, apply to the dietary laws. They were given for the health of the people and would be applicable to all nations. In fact, God compromised on diet (think of the quail) just as He did with divorce. Why? Because of the hardness of the people. The Bible is clear what the original diet was (Genesis 1) and what the diet will become (Isaiah 11 particularly verse 7). The type as seen in Manna shows what direction a healthy diet would be. John the Baptist was a “vegan”. Christians today say “we can eat anything we want”. And their health shows that they do eat everything and suffer the consequences.

  8. Jerry says:

    Dear A. Way,

    Under Grace we are entirely free to eat all foods:

    1Ti 4:1 Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;
    1Ti 4:2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;
    1Ti 4:3 Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.
    1Ti 4:4 For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving:
    1Ti 4:5 For it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.
    1Ti 4:6 If thou put the brethren in remembrance of these things, thou shalt be a good minister of Jesus Christ, nourished up in the words of faith and of good doctrine, whereunto thou hast attained.
    1Ti 4:7 But refuse profane and old wives’ fables, and exercise thyself rather unto godliness.

    Just because we are allowed under Grace freedom to choose whatever foods we like, that does not mean it is necessarily always wise to make some of the food choices some folks do.

    I would imagine I am as informed about this subject of diet and nutrition as you may be. Like I told my father many years ago (and it made him extremely angry when I said this, nevertheless, without meaning any disrespect at all, I said) “I read more by accident than you do on purpose.” That is still true.

    The divine inspiration of the Mosaic Revelation to me is absolutely proved by the superb wisdom revealed about dietary matters. Moses was far and away, humanly speaking, ahead of any of his contemporaries in other nations. That ought to shut the atheists up, but they don’t notice.

    I read a book some years ago titled None of These Diseases. I think it may have been written by a Christian medical doctor. The copy I read was in paperback (and I absolutely hate paperbacks with a passion, because they don’t hold up to repeated use) and if I once owned it, I have not been able to find it in my collection here.

    The passage I cited above from Scripture I am sure you knew was immediately forthcoming. I believe it settles the issue doctrinally completely in my favor. But I surely do advocate careful nutrition. Not eating the right foods can cut years, even decades, off the length of your life, which is irresponsible in the extreme.

    If people lived like my wife and I do, the hospitals would go broke, doctors would be out of business, and the government would have solved the burgeoning problem of the national debt crisis, for we would not need Medicare or Medicaid at all.

  9. A. Way says:

    Jerry said:

    The passage I cited above from Scripture I am sure you knew was immediately forthcoming. I believe it settles the issue doctrinally completely in my favor.

    You are the perfect reader, how can I disagree? But I disagree. The word translated “meat” in 1 Timothy 4:3 is “broma”, literally, it means food. So let’s look at this verse again:

    1 Timothy 4:3-4 NASB men who forbid marriage and advocate abstaining from foods which God has created to be gratefully shared in by those who believe and know the truth. (v4) For everything created by God is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with gratitude;

    In the portion talking about food, it is talking about what God created for food. What did God create as food?

    Genesis 1:29-30 NASB Then God said, “Behold, I have given you every plant yielding seed that is on the surface of all the earth, and every tree which has fruit yielding seed; it shall be food for you; (v30) and to every beast of the earth and to every bird of the sky and to every thing that moves on the earth which has life, I have given every green plant for food”; and it was so.

    So everything that God created for food should be received with thanksgiving. The Bible prophesies that all creation will be returned to the original diet.

    That said, most Christians do violate the NT with respect to diet.

    1 Corinthians 10:31 AKJV Whether therefore you eat, or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God.

    Romans 12:1 NASB Therefore I urge you, brethren, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies a living and holy sacrifice, acceptable to God, which is your spiritual service of worship.

    The next verse in Romans 12 is interesting:
    Romans 12:2 NASB And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, so that you may prove what the will of God is, that which is good and acceptable and perfect.

    Now many Christians conform to this world. Majority?

  10. Jerry says:

    Dear A. Way,

    By a common figure of speech, in the Bible the word “meat” often has reference to food.

    Paul is saying that those who would regulate what we eat as a matter of religious doctrine are false teachers who have fallen from the faith. They are apostates.

    But the Old Testament was “written for our learning,” Paul said so himself, so indeed we can learn principles of finance and other matters that will be beneficial for us to follow.

  11. A. Way says:

    One thing I find interesting, you accuse me of being legalistic. But many Christian’s belief is why Jesus had to die is a very legalistic view.

    Change subject, the Sabbath is present in the NT. Please consider: Revelation 11:19 ESV Then God’s temple in heaven was opened, and the ark of his covenant was seen within his temple. There were flashes of lightning, rumblings, peals of thunder, an earthquake, and heavy hail.

    Now, what was INSIDE the Ark of the covenant? Manna, Aaron’s rod that budded, and the tables of stone with the 10 commandments. And what did the 10C include? This imagery of John’s is showing that the Ark of the covenant that the law was still the foundation of God’s government, and included all 10.

  12. Jerry says:

    Now that is a real stretch.

    You cannot use apocalyptic imagery to undo the plain divine revelation given for believers of this age as directly revealed by our Lord Jesus Christ personally to the Apostle Paul and included in the epistles for our direction in following Paul as he followed Christ.

  13. A. Way says:

    It is not a stretch at all. The book of Revelation is a revelation of Jesus Christ. The imagery of the Ark in heaven is important. The 10C were placed INSIDE the Ark. Why? This is a demonstration that they were to be written on the heart. This is New Covenant imagery. Christ said, Matthew 5:17 AKJV “Think not that I am come to destroy the law…” Paul said, Romans 3:31 AKJV “Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yes, we establish the law.” The New Covenant is this: Jeremiah 31:33 ESV “But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the LORD: I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts. And I will be their God, and they shall be my people.” Christ same not to destroy the law, but to write it on our hearts and minds, in order that the righteous requirements of the law could be fulfilled in us! We would be the able to keep the law. Romans 8:1-4 ESV There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. (v2) For the law of the Spirit of life has set you free in Christ Jesus from the law of sin and death. (v3) For God has done what the law, weakened by the flesh, could not do. By sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, he condemned sin in the flesh, (v4) in order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit. So Revelation 11:19 is not a stretch at all, if you understand Christ’ mission, to rewrite the law into sinful man. And that imagery in Revelation includes the 10C.

    Revelation continues, Revelation 12:17 AKJV “And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.” The only commandments written by the finger of God were the commandments written on tables of stone. It is these that were placed inside the Ark, which was a pattern of that in heaven.

    Another name for the New Covenant would be, “the plan of redemption”. This is the covenant that Adam would have received. It is only called new because it was ratified, after the old, and that by the death of Christ. The problem with the Old Covenant which God created, is that the people rejected it.

    Now, to think that the 4th commandant is not quoted in the NT ignores the following verses. First, here is the 4th commandant from Exodus 20:8-11 KJV Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. 9 Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: 10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: 11 For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.

    Now, compare this with the following verses:
    Colossians 1:16 AKJV For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:

    Revelation 10:6 AKJV And swore by him that lives for ever and ever, who created heaven, and the things that therein are, and the earth, and the things that therein are, and the sea, and the things which are therein, that there should be time no longer:

    Revelation 14:7 AKJV Saying with a loud voice, Fear God, and give glory to him; for the hour of his judgment is come: and worship him that made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters.

    Acts 17:24 AKJV God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwells not in temples made with hands;

    Ah, and he does not dwell in a temple made with hands. And in his temple, is the Ark of the Covenant, which contained the tablets of stone with the 10 commandments, which included the Sabbath.

    Revelation 14:12 ESV Here is a call for the endurance of the saints, those who keep the commandments of God and their faith in Jesus.

    Revelation 12:17 AKJV And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.

    Revelation 22:14 AKJV Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.

  14. Jerry says:

    Dear A. Way,

    When you are blinded by error, you apparently cannot perceive the truth.

    The point at issue is, the Fourth Commandment is never cited or alluded to in the New Testament as a commandment addressed to believers under Grace.

    Allusions to Creation you said yourself in the text of the Fourth Commandment relate to the Creation Account in Genesis. So that may well be the point of the allusions you cite, not a veiled reference to the Fourth Commandment.

  15. A. Way says:

    Who is blind? The Ark of the Covenant is seen in the temple of God in Heaven, Revelation 11:19. Your interpretation of Daniel’s 70 week prophesy has caused to reject the a large portion of the book of Revelation as relevant to Christians. Your “unannounced” time gap in Zechariah 9:9,10 fails as verse 9 is talking about the middle of the 70th week.

    Yes, the verses I quote talk about creation! The Sabbath as given in Exodus 20 tells us that it is God that did the creation, with no help from man, God did it himself. The Sabbath as given in Deuteronomy 5 talks about how it was God that took the people out of Egypt, and it was the power of God alone that did it. Salvation is the work of God we can not save ourselves, it is only through faith in the one that has the power to save. Exodus 31:13 AKJV Speak you also to the children of Israel, saying, Truly my sabbaths you shall keep: for it is a sign between me and you throughout your generations; that you may know that I am the LORD that does sanctify you.

    Your interpretation of prophesy denies that Christians are the children of Israel, and if I’m wrong, please correct me. You see fulfillment of prophesy in the modern day literal genetic Israel. Galatians 4:22-31 AKJV For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a female slave, the other by a free woman. (v23) But he who was of the female slave was born after the flesh; but he of the free woman was by promise. (v24) … (v28) Now we, brothers, as Isaac was, are the children of promise. (v29) … (v31) So then, brothers, we are not children of the female slave, but of the free. Galatians 3:28-29 AKJV There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for you are all one in Christ Jesus. (v29) And if you be Christ’s, then are you Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.

    Therefore, your interpretation of prophesy, makes the imagery in Revelation 11:19 not relevant. I have no idea what you think this means.

    Is it time for each of us to shake the dust off?

  16. Jerry says:

    Dear A. Way,

    If my interpretation of prophecy makes the imagery of Revelation 11:19 not relevant, so in like manner, I suspect your interpretation of prophecy directly contradicts the literal meaning of Revelation 11:15.

    Be that as it may, I just read the following posted comment below an article, a comment that is most interesting, and I think likely correct:

    Suzanne Dingus · Top Commenter · Hood College

    Juliet, you are correct regarding Western believers, who have no excuse for following Camping. (The same may be said for Western Jehovah’s Witnesses, Mormons, Roman Catholics and Seventh Day Adventists … as Mr. Prasch says, no one joined any of these false “churches” simply by reading the Bible; they must first fall victim to false teaching). But you’ve missed the point Mr. Prasch was making re: the Hmong believers. They are unsophisticated and their pastors are not experienced, capable teachers. That is why Mr. Prasch traveled to them to TEACH THEM how to identify false prophets.

    See the article and the quotation at the following link:
    http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=321837

    Now, I think the command to “shake the dust off” is directed by Jesus to his Apostles to be exercised by them against those who would not receive them.

    On this website at least, you certainly have been received. I enjoy your challenges, find them very helpful and informative, and as you well know, I have repeatedly encouraged you to keep them coming.

    If I truly were to believe you are entirely in error, there would be no point for me to encourage your participation.

    I have repeatedly stated here and elsewhere that I go by what the Bible actually teaches. But I require interpretation to comply with the now 23 rules of interpretation I have posted in the October 2010 archives. I believe in testing interpretations by those rules, and, it goes without saying, by the Bible itself. I believe in going by “the Bible alone and in its entirety,” an expression I learned from Mr. Harold Camping, who made the statement many times over shortwave radio on WYFR. On that point Mr. Camping is most certainly correct.

    I have said that I am open to the Bible. I am open to learning something new whenever I read and study the Bible. I have asserted that some times when I learn something new that requires a correction of my previous understanding.

    In the last couple of days I was kindly sent a PDF file by a Bible scholar who had asked me if I had ever read Mr. Beale’s Commentary on the Book of Revelation. I do not have that commentary, so appreciate receiving the portion from that commentary that discusses Revelation 1:19.

    Beale presents a number of views about that verse, including the view I hold, and after fairly presenting them, proceeds to point out the difficulties in each view, then presents his own view. Beale’s view is grounded in the language of the original text. He points out that John is making several allusions in Revelation chapter 1 to the language of Daniel chapter 2.

    Beale wishes to assert that the book of Revelation is not strictly patterned in accordance with the statement in Revelation 1:19. He claims there is a mixture of material throughout the book of Revelation in each of its parts which refers sometimes to the past, to the present of John’s day and original readers, and to the unrealized future. On this point I think Mr. Beale is correct, since in the letters to the Seven Churches there is reference made to things which are clearly future and have not transpired even yet in our day. Mr. Beale does not believe in Futurism.

    I was gratified to see that Mr. Beale made careful use of the allusions in John to the very language of Daniel as it is given in the Septuagint. I have already placed a special sign for citations in the book of Revelation, and nearly all Mr. Beale identified are so marked in The New Treasury of Scripture Knowledge.

    After carefully reading Mr. Beale’s scholarly argument, I am not prepared to make the leap he does, namely, deriving a new and different structure for the book of Revelation based on John’s use of Daniel 2 and other Daniel passages. Such an observation does not meet the test that it would or could be grasped and so understood by the original audience to whom John wrote (this relates to my Rule 4), and I wonder if John himself would have so understood the quotations he is making in that sense and for that purpose, a purpose Beale seems to affirm involves John deriving the structure for his book from the structure present in the sources of his quotations from them.

    To accept Beale’s argument as conclusive, I would have to make a more thorough study of the use of citations in the New Testament from the Old. But my study of this matter is already close to complete, as a study of the indexes and notes in the New Treasury of Scripture Knowledge would demonstrate to any careful reader. So far, I think Mr. Beale has taken a leap that goes beyond what the evidence he marshals justifies. But now that I know of his position, I’ll be on the more careful watch to see if his position is indeed sustained upon my further study of how the Bible quotes itself.

    Now you see that while I am always open to new learning, and open to changing my position on my understanding of a particular Bible issue, I don’t rush to change what I presently believe when I know it is based on many years of painstakingly careful Bible study.

    But that I do make changes you know very well, because since having these discussions with you I have now corrected my understanding of the Sabbath issue as it pertains to the book of Genesis. I have learned it is not mentioned there at all, nor is their one speck of evidence that the ordinances later associated in Scripture with the Sabbath Law, like a day of complete rest, every week, on the same day, are present anywhere in the Narrative of the book of Genesis.

    You have responded most interestingly to this point I have made. You said the Sabbath is not mentioned in Joshua or Judges either. That may well be the case, but it does not affect the argument, because we know, in terms of chronology, that by the time of the events in those books, the Sabbath Law had been established at the time of the giving of the Manna, a time which clearly comes before the time of those books, so no one is arguing whether the Sabbath was a part of the Law of God then, for clearly it was, whether mentioned or not in those narratives. You also pointed out that there is no mention directly of David keeping the Sabbath in the Psalms. But my same point would handle that, too, I believe.

    But to get to the very core and crucial heart of the matter: have you ever, as a result of your own independent study of the Bible, come to a new understanding from Scripture that results in your changing your mind about something you believed before?

    Though I have not previously commented on this, you have stated a couple of times that you are seeing that the Feasts of the Lord were fulfilled by our Lord Jesus Christ by what he accomplished at the First Advent, therefore observing them would not be obligatory for Christians now.

    That bit of evidence from you lets me know that you are, indeed, a careful student of the Bible, open to changing your position when sufficient evidence warrants such change.

    That is a good thing.

    That makes it wise and profitable for us to keep talking!

    I am sure we both have much to learn about the precious truths in God’s Word.

  17. A. Way says:

    What? If Revelation 11:15 is literal ( and I believe that to be true ), then Revelation 11:19 is just as literal. Again, you have shown no level of interpretation of what the Ark of the Covenant and its various parts mean. You have completely ignored it. And you can’t.

    You also have not answered Zechariah 9:9-10, which you tried to challenge me with, particularly when Zechariah 9:9 must be in the middle of the 70th week as it fits Daniel 9:27 perfectly. So your challenge fails.
    ——————————————
    Zechariah 9:9 KJV Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion; shout, O daughter of Jerusalem: behold, thy King cometh unto thee: he is just, and having salvation; lowly, and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt the foal of an ass. (Triumphant entry into Jerusalem, just before the crucifixion)

    Daniel 9:27 KJV And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate. (Sacrifice ceases in the middle of the 70th week = crucifixion).

  18. Jerry says:

    Dear A. Way,

    Please be patient with me. I am only as far as Jeremiah 44 today in my vast project to greatly expand cross references for Bible study.

    I am nowhere near the book of Revelation.

    I am not even near the book of Zechariah.

    You are assuming what needs to be proved when you assert that Zechariah 9:9 takes place in the middle of Daniel’s 70th week.

    Daniel’s 70th week has no bearing upon the issue. Go back and read Daniel more closely. It speaks of the Messiah being cut off after the 69th week, not during the Seventieth Week or in the middle of the Seventieth Week. The crucifixion and this entire Church Age takes place in the unannounced interim (the time gap) between the end of the 69th week and the start of the yet future 70th week. Any suggestion that the 70th week immediately succeeds the 69th without any interval between requires the interpreter to disregard too many standard principles of interpretation, and so the view is arbitrary and mistaken. It is arbitrary because it grasps at the straws of spiritualization of what is meant to be literal text. It is arbitrary because it disregards the rules of grammar. It is arbitrary because it makes unjustifiable identities with events in Acts to mark the alleged end of the 70th week. It is proven arbitrary because interpreters of the school which hold this view are in wide disagreement about what marks the close of the 70th week, and even its start.

    The notion that the Messiah made a Seven Year Covenant which He broke in the middle of that week is ludicrous. There is no record in the New Testament that the Messiah made a Seven Year Covenant at all, let alone one which was then interrupted in the middle of the seven years, or broken by the Messiah: God does not break the Covenants which He makes (Malachi 3:6). But that seems to be the view of those who hold to your view that the Seventieth Week is contiguous with the preceding 69. The action spoken of in Daniel 9 has to do with the Antichrist, not the Messiah. I have written a solid and extensive note in the New Treasury that covers this adequately.

    Your interpretation of Daniel 9:27 is mistaken, and is answered by my note in the New Treasury. Your interpretation involves disregard of the grammar of the original text involving pronoun reference. Your interpretation disregards the most fundamental rule on my list of 23 rules, Rule 1, about maintaining a consistent literal interpretation for prophetic passages that is the same as used for non-prophetic passages. You can’t mix and match to suit your interpretative whim.

    Your interpretation both denies and disregards the existence of those unannounced time gaps in Bible prophecy. I gave you the most extensive listing of these you can find anywhere, I’m quite sure (showing I indeed have studied the entire text of Scripture to spot them). The first gap on the list is at the passage in Isaiah 61, demonstrated by our Lord Jesus Christ Himself when He “closed the book” and ended His reading on the Sabbath Day in the middle of a connected passage. See my note in the New Treasury at Luke 4:18. Jesus said, in so many words, “this day is this prophecy fulfilled in your ears.” He had read as far as the words “To preach the acceptable year of the Lord.”

    What follows in the Isaiah 61:2 are the words “and the day of vengeance of our God.”

    There is obviously a time gap between those two clauses in the same sentence, the reason for Jesus stopping mid-sentence where He did, for it would not be possible to assert of the latter clause what he did of the first.

    Failure to see and acknowledge the existence of this most obvious time gap in prophecy between two adjacent clauses of the same sentence is the result of willful blindness and obstinacy.

    But I have not reached the book of Daniel either in my work on cross references. The Lord willing and enabling, I plan to do an extensive re-study of Daniel when I get to it, hopefully later this year.

    I am pleased to see that you acknowledge a belief in Revelation 11:15 as interpreted in a literal manner. Does that apply to Revelation 11:18 as well?

    Where is the Ark of the Covenant once so revered in Israel today? Has it been lost? Might it yet be found again? Is it permanently gone from this earthly scene?

    And as for that Ark in the temple in heaven, was that the pattern that Moses was shown, upon which the earthly ark was constructed?

    And just because the Ark on earth contained the two tablets of stone containing the Ten Commandments written by the finger of God himself, and so the Ark in heaven might also contain the backup copy, how does that negate the divine revelation given by our Lord Jesus Christ Himself personally to the Apostle Paul in the revelation of the Grace of God which has done away, for true believers in this age, and “nailed to His cross,” all Ten of those commandments which were against us?

  19. ken sagely says:

    mr way i have appreciate your comments on the different scripture questions that have come up. i have question for you. you have focused alot on keeping the 4th commandment the sabbath and that it is for today. my question what about the other 6 days in your understanding to the christian walk! what are you learning from the word that you could share with us and we with you. i think thats how we can be benefit for each others study of the word. i was in bible study several years ago and an older man at the time was there and were studying the book of colossians and we came to col 2/13 the last part of the verse really seem to open up to him “having forgiven you all trespasses”, he said he had read that many times b4 the spirit seemed to just open his eyes this wonderful truth this time. thats what i mean i hope you will continue share your thoughts not only on the keeping the sabbath!

  20. A. Way says:

    The “unannounced” gap still makes me laugh. The 70 week prophesy fits history past perfectly. It predicts the start of the Messiah’s preaching. It predicts perfectly the year of the crucifixion. It is part of the 2300 day prophesy, which predicted the time of the end perfectly. The year the 2300 day prophesy ended is a most notable year for religious history. That year saw the rise of Darwinism, atheism, dispensationalism, antinomianism, Quakers, Mormons, Babism, Spiritualism, even Morse code was first used to send a message from Baltimore to Washington, and that message was, “What hath God wrought”. God’s truth would now start to go the whole world.

  21. Jerry says:

    Dear A. Way,

    I have not reached Daniel yet. I am about to start Jeremiah chapter 45.

    As for those unannounced time gaps, I have given you the one Jesus calls attention to in Luke 4:18 where he stopped reading in the middle of the sentence.

    If that doesn’t convince you, your mind and heart and eyes need to be more open to what is clearly the truth.

    Wild speculations and spiritualization of Scripture don’t fit the Rules of Interpretation, and therefore are very unlikely in the extreme to represent truthful and accurate handling of the Word of God.

    You and Ken posted at nearly the same time, so you may not yet have noticed his comment. I like Ken’s idea. Feel free to share some fresh non-denominational insight you have received from your reading and study of God’s Word.

  22. A. Way says:

    Ken said: “my question what about the other 6 days in your understanding to the christian walk!”
    What does scripture say about the other 6 days? Exodus 20:9 AKJV “Six days shall you labor, and do all your work:” We are given 6 days to do our own work. But the 7th is the Sabbath of the Lord = The Lord’s Day. I’ve shown this to be true from scripture, and there is NO support for the “Lord’s Day” in Revelation 1:10 to be Sunday. The Sabbath was created for MAN, not just Israel, at creation. Jerry use to believe this, he no longer does. Ignoring the fact that it is described in Genesis 2:2-3. If this is not the Sabbath, the WHY is that in scripture?

    I don’t take one commandment above another. But it is the 4th that has the most attack and rejection, so yes, I’m more vocal about it, at least with Jerry, :-). Have you ever asked the question, why was the Sabbath created? It was made for man, Mark 2:27. Why? Because we needed it. The first reason is that it remind us of creation and who our Creator is. Has the creator been forgotten today? YES. Try to publish a scientific paper is you are a known young earth creationist! Many Christians today are rejecting the Bible’s statements on creation. If the Sabbath had been kept as God created it, there would never have been an atheist. The Sabbath should be the best day of the week. Many people have a false idea that the Sabbath is a boring day. Nothing could be farther from the truth.

    The Sabbath should be on our thoughts all through the week, planning for that day. All necessary work should be done in preparation for the Sabbath. The Sabbath is not a day for ordinary work such as cleaning cloths or house, or even cooking. That is not to say one can not warm up food, and do dishes. But the focus of the day is not on the ordinary, but the extra-ordinary, GOD. Christians today that “keep” Sunday, usually do it by going to church, then watching football, or other. The true meaning of Sabbath is lost. The Sabbath makes GOD the focal point for all our activities.

    Colossians 2:13 AKJV “And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, has he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;” YES! And what are our trespasses? How are they defined? THE LAW. As Paul says: Romans 7:7 AKJV “What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. No, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, You shall not covet.” We know what our trespasses are by the law. Colossians 2:14 tells us that the condemnation of the law is removed if we are in Christ, baptized in Him, Colossians 2:12. The law is not gone. Should be then sin? God forbid says Paul. Romans 6:15 AKJV “What then? shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid.” Was Paul including the 4th commandment? Yes! And here is the point, if you know what you should keep the 4th, and do not, then what? Acts 17:30 AKJV “And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commands all men every where to repent:” Revelation 22:14 AKJV “Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.” Doing His commandments to not save you. You are saved by Christ. The repeating of the 10 commandments in Deuteronomy, and the reason to keep the 4th commandment, tells us that it was God that delivered the people from Egypt, and God alone. We are ransomed, delivered, saved, by God. When Jesus completed His work, and died on the cross, he then completely rested, on the Sabbath. The keeping of Sabbath is a mark that God is the one that sanctifies us. Ezekiel 20:12 AKJV “Moreover also I gave them my sabbaths, to be a sign between me and them, that they might know that I am the LORD that sanctify them.”

  23. ken sagely says:

    mr a way in isa 50/4″ the lord god hath given me the tongue of the learned, that i should know how to speak a word in season to him that is weary”. when i was in college i had a christian friend who used to ask me if there were any promises from gods word that i had been claiming? that used to really encourage me and i shared some with him and he with me,we encouraged each other. you see i think there are alot of weary believers out there and the word of god is the only thing that can meet there spirtual need. jerry shares in his book ntsk that when he looked all the cross rfs at ii tim 1/7 it really encouraged him and he started really studying his bible as much as 3 hrs a day. i was encouraged from that to start studying the bible using the ntsk and my bible day by day. i praise the lord for that!

  24. A. Way says:

    Jerry – understand the “rules” of interpretation are your rules. “The Rules” are really “Jerry’s Rules”. Not that they are necessarily wrong, but they are one man’s thoughts of how things should be done. Perhaps we should call them Jerry’s LAWS. Am I under grace with you?

    Luke 4:18 proves your interpretation of Daniel’s 70 week prophesy how? Certainly, Christ stopped short in this recitation of quoting all of Isaiah 61:2. He stopped short of saying, “and the day of vengeance of our God”. But He did quote it here, Luke 21:22, “and the day of vengeance of our God”. What was he saying in these quotations? There will be “favor” with those that accept the Messiah, and “vengeance” for those that reject Him. Matthew 23:36-38 KJV Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation. (v37) O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not! (v38) Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.

  25. A. Way says:

    Mr. Ken – I’m sure the ntsk can be useful to one starting out studying the Bible. Today however there are many tools that are very useful and much faster. Most Bible software today has search functions and dictionaries which I find very useful. You can generate a cross-reference to every occurrence of a given word in a split second. You can then read the reference in context, and not with the bias of the author who may have added their own commentary. One can read the meaning of words from the original languages in multiple dictionaries. These too can have their biases. But reading a variety helps me, and also reading a variety of Bible versions.

    A couple of the rules I go by in Bible study are:

    Scripture must be its own expositor, since it is a rule of itself. If I depend on a teacher to expound to me, and he should guess at its meaning, or desire to have it so on account of his sectarian creed, or to be thought wise, then his guessing, desire, creed, or wisdom, is my rule, and not the Bible. Proof, Psalms 19:7-11; Psalms 119:97-105; Matthew 23:8-10; 1 Corinthians 2:12-16; Ezekiel 34:18-19; Luke 11:52; Matthew 2:7-8.

    To understand doctrine, bring all the scriptures together on the subject you wish to know; then let every word have its proper influence; and if you can form your theory without a contradiction, you cannot be in error. Proof, Isaiah 28:7-29; Isaiah 35:8; Proverbs 29:27; Luke 24:27; Luke 24:44-45; Romans 16:26; James 5:19; 2 Peter 1:19-20.

    God has revealed things to come, by visions, in figures and parables; and in this way the same things are oftentime revealed again and again, by different visions, or in different figures and parables. If you wish to understand them, you must combine them all in one. Proof, Psalms 89:19; Hosea 12:10; Habakkuk 2:2; Acts 2:17; 1 Corinthians 10:6; Hebrews 9:9; Hebrews 9:24; Psalms 78:2; Matthew 13:13; Matthew 13:34; Genesis 41:1-32; Daniel 2:1-49; Daniel 7:1-28; Daniel 8:1-27; Acts 10:9-16.Does God do anything “unannounced”? There are so many stories in the OT which are a type of things to come. Manna for example!

    Every word must have its proper bearing on the subject presented in the Bible. Proof, Matthew 5:18.

    Nothing revealed in the Scriptures can or will be hid from those who ask in faith, not wavering. Proof, Deuteronomy 29:29; Matthew 10:26-27; 1 Corinthians 2:10; Philippians 3:15; Isaiah 45:11; Matthew 21:22; John 14:13-14; John 15:7; James 1:5-6; 1 John 5:13-15.

    If a word makes good sense as it stands, and does no violence to the simple laws of nature, it is to be understood literally; if not, figuratively. Revelation 12:1-2; Revelation 17:3-7.

    There are a few more. From the Bible, “The Lord’s Day”, in Revelation 1:10, and using the Bible only, the only conclusion can be that this was the Sabbath. It was not a Sunday, for no where in the Bible is Sunday ever referred to as the Lord’s day. Only the Sabbath is every spoken about as being the Lord’s. Jerry claims that the 4th commandment was given only to the Jews. Should I believe him? Or should I believe scripture? I go with scripture. Isaiah 56:6-8 KJV Also the sons of the stranger, that join themselves to the LORD, to serve him, and to love the name of the LORD, to be his servants, every one that keepeth the sabbath from polluting it, and taketh hold of my covenant; (v7) Even them will I bring to my holy mountain, and make them joyful in my house of prayer: their burnt offerings and their sacrifices shall be accepted upon mine altar; for mine house shall be called an house of prayer for all people. (v8) The Lord GOD which gathereth the outcasts of Israel saith, Yet will I gather others to him, beside those that are gathered unto him.

  26. Jerry says:

    Dear A. Way,

    You have raised some interesting points.

    1.

    Jerry – understand the “rules” of interpretation are your rules. “The Rules” are really “Jerry’s Rules”. Not that they are necessarily wrong, but they are one man’s thoughts of how things should be done. Perhaps we should call them Jerry’s LAWS. Am I under grace with you?

    Yes, the 23 Rules of Interpretation as I have given them in the Archives for October 2010 are indeed my rules. Others have stated similar rules, but many of these stem from what I wrote as a teenager to guide my own Bible study. When teaching English, I observed that they could be adapted to guide the proper interpretation of all literature, and I especially used them to help my students discern between good and better interpretations of a poem. A professor in Wayne State University’s Graduate School was rather horrified at my approach, but I have not budged in my opinion that these rules are correct and useful for that purpose. Sometimes, in some things, the student may be wiser and more learned than the professor. What I have posted on this Real Bible Study site is my newest combined formulation of what I had created along this line before.

    You are always “under grace” with me; I trust that you are also “under grace” with our Lord, and that He will help you to understand the New Testament concept of “grace,” especially in the light of the new revelation given personally to Paul by our Lord Jesus Christ and now written for our learning.

    2.

    Luke 4:18 proves your interpretation of Daniel’s 70 week prophesy how?

    I returned to Luke 4:18 as absolutely certain PROOF that there are unannounced time gaps in Bible prophecy.

    Jesus stopped his reading from Isaiah 61 in the middle of a sentence because what He immediately stated about that prophecy,

    Luk 4:21 And he began to say unto them, This day is this scripture fulfilled in your ears.

    was only applicable, chronologically speaking, to the portion He read on that day. On that day it would not have been true to say what he said about the first half of the sentence to also say that the second half of the sentence was fulfilled in their ears:

    Isa 61:1 The Spirit of the Lord GOD is upon me; because the LORD hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound;
    Isa 61:2 To proclaim the acceptable year of the LORD, and the day of vengeance of our God; …

    When Jesus was reading to them in the synagogue, He indeed could “proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord.” It was not His appointed message at that time to proclaim “the day of vengeance of our God” because clearly it could not then have been said “this day is this Scripture fulfilled in your ears.” That proclamation, as to its proper timing, was reserved until later.

    This proves, for any rational reader of this text, that there is and necessarily must be an unannounced time gap between those clauses.

    This explains why Jesus stopped, and must have stopped reading where He did. This fact establishes that there can be and, upon careful searching of the Scripture we learn there actually are a number of Bible prophecies which contain an unannounced time gap within or between the sentence or sentences that contain the prophecy.

    Some prophecies in the Old Testament regard nations or cities. Perhaps the most famous of these prophecies are the prophecies about the city of Tyre. If you study the prophecies in Scripture about this city, you will find them expressed in more than one verse, and when you study the fulfillment of the predictions, you will learn that the fulfillment took many separate events spanning many centuries to be completed. All the predictions regarding that city were not fulfilled at the same time. Thus, there were unannounced time gaps between different segments of the predictions about the city of Tyre.

    So for those who have made an actual study of Bible prophecy, the concept of unannounced time gaps within the statement of a prophecy is accepted and well understood.

    I gave you a rather complete listing of the prophecies I have found that have such unannounced time gaps within them.

    I used the testimony of Luke 4 to demonstrate beyond any question that there are unannounced time gaps in Bible prophecies because Jesus himself demonstrated the case and made this clear for all time to come by his action of stopping his reading in the middle of a sentence.

    The fact that Jesus found such a prophecy should alert us that there may well be more, and that by study, if there are such, they can be found. I studied these, and have given you the full list as I have it so far. There is a possibility that there may be more examples in the Bible that I have not yet found.

    You cited Luke 21:22 in an attempt to refute my assertion:

    Luk 21:20 And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.
    Luk 21:21 Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto.
    Luk 21:22 For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled.

    When Jesus spoke these words, it is clear he was predicting a future event, an event he could not have spoken of as being fulfilled this day in your ears on the day He was reading from Isaiah 61:1, 2a in the synagogue as reported in Luke 4.

    So the text you cited does not contradict but establish my assertion regarding unannounced time gaps present in a number of Bible prophecies, for it proves the truth and correctness of what I asserted, since the event Jesus predicted occurred approximately 40 years later at the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD, and 40 years does constitute a gap of some time between the prediction and its fulfillment. What Jesus spoke of in Luke 4:18 quoting Isaiah 61:1, 2a was fulfilled in their ears that very day. The clause He did not read from Isaiah 61:2b was not fulfilled until approximately 40 years later, and it may be that there is more that remains to be fulfilled that pertains to this prediction that will be fulfilled at the Second Advent of Christ during the time of the Great Tribulation described in Revelation chapters 6–19. See also Isaiah 59:17 and 63:4, which clearly place “the day of vengeance” at the Second Advent of Christ, made even clearer when the context of these two passages is read carefully.

    Therefore, Luke 4:18 and context establishes the legitimacy of my claim to the existence of unannounced time gaps in Bible prophecy. If it could properly be contended that there are no such unannounced time gaps in Bible prophecy, then of course my contention that there is a time gap between Daniel 9:26 and Daniel 9:27 could not possibly be correct. But it has been proven that there are such time gaps within and between statements of Bible prophecy, so that objection has been totally removed.

    I have proven in my discussion in a prior post almost immediately above that the events of Daniel 9:27 are not past, but future, and have therefore not been fulfilled yet.

    Here is the most relevant portion of that post:

    You are assuming what needs to be proved when you assert that Zechariah 9:9 takes place in the middle of Daniel’s 70th week.

    Daniel’s 70th week has no bearing upon the issue. Go back and read Daniel more closely. It speaks of the Messiah being cut off after the 69th week, not during the Seventieth Week or in the middle of the Seventieth Week. The crucifixion and this entire Church Age takes place in the unannounced interim (the time gap) between the end of the 69th week and the start of the yet future 70th week. Any suggestion that the 70th week immediately succeeds the 69th without any interval between requires the interpreter to disregard too many standard principles of interpretation, and so the view is arbitrary and mistaken. It is arbitrary because it grasps at the straws of spiritualization of what is meant to be literal text. It is arbitrary because it disregards the rules of grammar. It is arbitrary because it makes unjustifiable identities with events in Acts to mark the alleged end of the 70th week. It is proven arbitrary because interpreters of the school which hold this view are in wide disagreement about what marks the close of the 70th week, and even its start.

    The notion that the Messiah made a Seven Year Covenant which He broke in the middle of that week is ludicrous. There is no record in the New Testament that the Messiah made a Seven Year Covenant at all, let alone one which was then interrupted in the middle of the seven years, or broken by the Messiah: God does not break the Covenants which He makes (Malachi 3:6). But that seems to be the view of those who hold to your view that the Seventieth Week is contiguous with the preceding 69. The action spoken of in Daniel 9 has to do with the Antichrist, not the Messiah. I have written a solid and extensive note in the New Treasury that covers this adequately.

    Your interpretation of Daniel 9:27 is mistaken, and is answered by my note in the New Treasury. Your interpretation involves disregard of the grammar of the original text involving pronoun reference. Your interpretation disregards the most fundamental rule on my list of 23 rules, Rule 1, about maintaining a consistent literal interpretation for prophetic passages that is the same as used for non-prophetic passages. You can’t mix and match to suit your interpretative whim.

    Your interpretation both denies and disregards the existence of those unannounced time gaps in Bible prophecy. I gave you the most extensive listing of these you can find anywhere, I’m quite sure (showing I indeed have studied the entire text of Scripture to spot them). The first gap on the list is at the passage in Isaiah 61, demonstrated by our Lord Jesus Christ Himself when He “closed the book” and ended His reading on the Sabbath Day in the middle of a connected passage. See my note in the New Treasury at Luke 4:18. Jesus said, in so many words, “this day is this prophecy fulfilled in your ears.” He had read as far as the words “To preach the acceptable year of the Lord.”

    What follows in the Isaiah 61:2 are the words “and the day of vengeance of our God.”

    There is obviously a time gap between those two clauses in the same sentence, the reason for Jesus stopping mid-sentence where He did, for it would not be possible to assert of the latter clause what he did of the first.

    Failure to see and acknowledge the existence of this most obvious time gap in prophecy between two adjacent clauses of the same sentence is the result of willful blindness and obstinacy.

  27. A. Way says:

    Who said God broke a covenant. What a twisting of what I said… THAT is why people need to study this material for themselves.

    Isaiah 61:2 has no bearing on the 70 week prophesy. Isaiah 61:2 was a continuum. The 70 weeks are a continuum. Not a fracture. There is no precedence for a break in the time line in the Bible.

  28. A. Way says:

    The wages of sin is death. A person sins, but does not die. Is that a break in the timeline? Under your interpretation it is. But it is not. It is a continuum. Just as Isaiah 61 and Luke 14.

    The 70 week prophesy had a definite starting time. It was a continuum, and it matches history perfectly.

    Interpretation of fulfilled prophesy:
    To know whether we have the true historical event for the fulfillment of prophecy: If you find every word of the prophecy (after the figures are understood) is literally fulfilled, then you may know that your history is the true event; but if one word lacks a fulfillment, then you must look for another event, or wait its future development; for God takes care that history and prophecy shall agree, so that the true believing children of God may never be ashamed. Psalms 22:5; Isaiah 45:17-19; 1 Peter 2:6; Revelation 17:17; Acts 3:18.

  29. Jerry says:

    Dear A. Way,

    You certainly are most free to be wrong or mistaken.

    Denial of my proof does not refute it.

    To suggest there is no time gap in the prophecy at Isaiah 61:1, 2 is nonsense, contradictory to the FACTS as I carefully presented them, and you know it.

    You claimed further above that:

    I’m sure the ntsk can be useful to one starting out studying the Bible. Today however there are many tools that are very useful and much faster. Most Bible software today has search functions and dictionaries which I find very useful. You can generate a cross-reference to every occurrence of a given word in a split second. You can then read the reference in context, and not with the bias of the author who may have added their own commentary.

    Apparently you have little or no understanding of what cross references are. You cannot “generate them” using a computer. If you knew what they were, you could not make such a statement.

    You seem to have never used The New Treasury of Scripture Knowledge, certainly not enough to understand its function and purpose.

    The New Treasury of Scripture Knowledge is widely available in Bible software, so as for speed of use, it is just as fast as the other sources you described, but does much more, and does many things those sources cannot match.

    You repeatedly imply and sometimes actually assert that there is bias to be found in the cross reference material in The New Treasury of Scripture Knowledge and/or Nelson’s Cross Reference Guide to the Bible.

    I doubt you have ever found any, for you seem not to have used or to be using either of these two resources for your own Bible study. But if you have found some bias, kindly furnish a specific example by chapter and verse and page number, and I’ll take a careful look at what you think you may have found.

    You claim to want to use unbiased resources, yet you know very well that the resources you do use are very biased, and like you, harp on one Bible theme to the exclusion of all else, a violation, of course, of the Rule of Interpretation I have given that states that only when the balance of Bible truth matches the balance of what we say in its behalf are we correct.

    I quoted the statement of Mr. D. M. Canright, who astutely noticed in his own study of the Bible, and particularly the New Testament, especially the epistles of Paul, that Paul directly mentions the Sabbath but once in his 14 epistles (and that to condemn it, Colossians 2:16), though Seventh Day Adventists constantly harp on the issue.

    You did not take kindly to what Mr. Canright testified, though you know it is the truth. Instead, you faulted me for citing him without attribution. Yet how did you know virtually instantly that the quotation was from him? I would judge that not one Christian in 10,000 or maybe even 100,000 could have made that connection. Then you faulted his character, by presenting with approval the lies the Seventh-day Adventists continue to spread about him, even making reference to a book written by his alleged secretary. You asked me if I am a “Canright scholar.” I indicated that while I am not, I was personally acquainted with Mr. Douty, who most certainly was a “Canright scholar,” whose home I often visited in East Lansing, Michigan. I posted a considerable extract from Mr. Douty from his chapter about that alleged secretary. Did you read what I posted? I doubt it. You need to.

    The sources you use, if from the Seventh-day Adventist Church or any of its authors, are most certainly biased.

    Neither The New Treasury of Scripture Knowledge nor Nelson’s Cross Reference Guide to the Bible contain any such denominational bias as the sources you rely on for your understanding of the Bible contain.

    In all kindness, let me suggest again that you learn to study the Bible alone on Robinson Crusoe’s Desert Island, using a plain text Bible, then progressing to the use of the approved unbiased resources I have named in detail more than once.

    You cannot hope to learn the truth of the Bible from biased denominational resources. You must go to the Bible itself. Make full use of such cross reference resources as The New Treasury of Scripture Knowledge or Nelson’s Cross Reference Guide to the Bible. Feel free to use other English translations. I recommend the ESV and the CEV, the KJV, and even the NIV. The NIV contains excellent cross references that are unrelated to those in the NTSK or NCRG.

    I hope you will get into the Bible itself and study some of its other themes, not just the favorite theme of your chosen denomination.

    Then, as always, feel most free to share what you have freshly learned from your study of God’s Word apart from denominational resources.

  30. A. Way says:

    You said: “Neither The New Treasury of Scripture Knowledge nor Nelson’s Cross Reference Guide to the Bible contain any such denominational bias as the sources you rely on for your understanding of the Bible contain.” This claim is just that. A piece here, and a piece there can produce a product that has the claim that it is not any denomination. I seriously doubt that you came up with your theory of futurism all by yourself. Can you in clear conscience tell that you have? How about Revelation 1:10, if you were on a desert island, with no other contact, what day would you have guess that to be, certainly not Sunday. If you truly understood the Jewish system of worship and the feast days and what they represent, what day would you celebrate year to year for the resurrection? Certainly not Sunday as it breaks the type completely. There is no basis in Jewish worship for the celebration of Sunday. Yet you say I’m harping on a single issue, when this particular issue goes against all the Jewish types. Easter, which completely breaks the type which is Passover, masks the true by having “good Friday” and “resurrection Sunday”. What happened to the Sabbath? It is completely ignored. This is exactly what the adversary is trying to do, to draw all true worship away from the Creator and Savior.

    Here is a quote – do you know it? “We should not take the testimony of any man as to what the Scriptures teach, but should study the words of God for ourselves. If we allow others to do our thinking, we shall have crippled energies and contracted abilities. The noble powers of the mind may be so dwarfed by lack of exercise on themes worthy of their concentration as to lose their ability to grasp the deep meaning of the word of God. The mind will enlarge if it is employed in tracing out the relation of the subjects of the Bible, comparing scripture with scripture and spiritual things with spiritual. ”

    Published cross references are only one tool, they are not “THE” tool. And they do contain the bias of the editor.

    You have visited a “Canright scholar”. Perhaps you also have been biased. Have you done any serious study of the other side, and done so from a clean slate? I doubt it as you acknowledged you did not understand the Jewish ceremonial system. A system that is central the the OT. That is central the the whole theme of salvation. A system that only can explain Christ’ mission and work. A system that is key to understanding prophesy. But that is my opinion. Everyone needs to study it for themselves.

  31. Jerry says:

    Dear A. Way,

    You are indeed faithful to your chosen “hobbyhorse”!

    Have you read what I posted from Mr. Douty regarding Canright’s alleged secretary?

    I think you are drawing the majority of your information from “poisoned wells” that are neither honest nor truthful.

    As for me not understanding the Jewish system of feasts, etc., I do own several entire books devoted to these and have read them several times over through the years. This may be more non-denominational reading on this subject on my part than you have done. I was encouraged by my elderly friend Uncle Frank to engage in these studies, and I am glad that at that time I heeded his call to obtain the books then available on the subject. So, if you check out The New Treasury of Scripture Knowledge indexes and cross references, you will see that I did indeed do my homework. It is clear that you have not done yours.

    You ask, “Have I done any study of the other side?”

    Unfortunately, I must answer yes to your question. My good local friends Jim and Barb have asked me to read a stack of Seventh-day Adventist literature which they have kindly shared with me. Immediately before me is a series of DVD videos which I have been carefully reviewing, taking extensive notes as I view each presentation. I also own the volume that is, in essence, the “supreme authority” regarding official Seventh-day Adventist church doctrine. It is a book titled Seventh-day Adventists Answer Questions on Doctrine: An Explanation of Certain Major Aspects of Seventh-day Adventist Belief. It was published in 1957 by the Review and Herald Publishing Association, Washington, D.C. It is 720 pages long.

    But that is like asking me have I read unbiased material “on the other side” supporting Jehovah Witness teaching. Yes, unfortunately, I have. I hardly need to list the titles of their literature I possess and have found it necessary to study. I have encountered many Jehovah’s Witnesses in person, but I have never met a single Seventh-day Adventist in person.

    From the standpoint of engaging in Real Bible Study as advocated here, and advocated in the Bible itself (John 5:39. 2 Timothy 3:15-17), neither of these groups has any possibility of being correct in terms of what the Bible itself teaches. Neither group demonstrates the balance of emphasis in doctrinal teaching that the Bible itself presents to the ordinary reader using a plain text Bible on Robinson Crusoe’s Desert Island.

    Now you tell me I must be biased indeed to have come up with the notion that Revelation 1:10 pertains to worship on Sunday.

    How about Revelation 1:10, if you were on a desert island, with no other contact, what day would you have guess that to be, certainly not Sunday.

    No one in their right mind would come up with the suggestion that on Patmos John was worshiping on the Seventh Day Jewish Sabbath. As I said before, if one had to determine a day of the week that allegedly is referred to in Revelation 1:10, one would have to choose the First Day of the week, that day being designated in early Christian literature as the Lord’s Day, just as the Communion service is designated the Lord’s Supper (from what I’ve read, the same Greek word and construction). But you seem to keep forgetting that I have suggested that a better understanding might well be to regard the reference to be made to the eschatalogical “Day of the Lord” as it would be designated in the idiom of the Greek language. But it will be some while yet before I reach the book of Revelation in my renewed study of the cross references.

    You once again assert,

    Published cross references are only one tool, they are not “THE” tool. And they do contain the bias of the editor.

    Now it is your turn to supply evidence to back your claim that they “do contain the bias of the editor.” Chapter, Verse, and Page Number please.

    I’m not talking about my explanatory notes (Nelson’s Cross Reference Guide to the Bible contains just the cross references, for example), but your claim to bias in the cross references themselves. As you know, or maybe you don’t, the references were taken from the margin of Scott’s Commentary, and he assembled those from Canne, Browne, Blayney, and others largely from the center column references in Oxford or Cambridge Bibles for which they furnished the cross references given in those Bible editions. I supplemented those references with any unique references in The Commentary Wholly Biblical and The New Testament with Fuller References, supplemented especially in the Old Testament with references and name definitions given in Robert Young’s Concise Critical Comments, a handbook supplementary to Young’s Literal Translation of the Bible. Now, I have named specifically the sources I used. Kindly provide actual evidence, not mere assertion, to demonstrate bias in the cross references as I have presented them.

    You can’t, and you know it. I’ve certainly called your bluff on this one. It remains for you to see if you can call my bluff! I invite you to do so.

    From what you have said so far about the nature of cross references, it is clear you have made little or no use of them, or if you’ve used them, you do not understand how they work to illuminate every verse in God’s Word, the Bible.

    Early in my Christian life when I began to use The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge, I was greatly blessed and encouraged when I looked up the references to 2 Timothy 1:7. Not long after, I was delighted by studying the cross references given at Colossians 1:10.

    I earnestly invite you to make a careful study of the references given at these two passages. May be for the first time in your life you will see just how wonderful and encouraging this method of Bible study can be.

    The Bible is an inexhaustible resource, given for us for our spiritual food. Using cross references serves to emphasize in a balanced manner the entire truth of God. Cross references are themselves an inexhaustible study resource that will get you into God’s Word itself, uninfluenced by denominational and sectarian bias found in most, but certainly not all, other sources.

    There are certainly other methods of Bible study. I encourage everyone to use a variety of approaches to studying God’s Word. I have done so most extensively. Remember I reported Dr. Howard Schoof of the Detroit Bible College, later Tyndale College, telling me when I showed him my written Bible studies (upon his request), saying “Jerry, you are one in a million.” These were NOT cross reference studies. I mentioned before that that statement has haunted me ever since. That ought not to be so. Everyone ought to be carefully studying the Bible for themselves.

    But still, the one method of Bible study that is applicable to every verse and passage in the Bible is cross reference Bible study, so I believe it is most fundamental to start there.

  32. Jerry says:

    Dear A. Way,

    Reading your comment again, I especially noticed this statement:

    I seriously doubt that you came up with your theory of futurism all by yourself. Can you in clear conscience tell that you have?

    In my reading and study of the Bible alone and in its entirety, and in my early study of the Bible doing word studies, chapter studies, book studies, and character studies, then learning about the value and necessity of making use of extensive cross references (I had for some years been penciling them in the margin of my plain text Bible as I found them), I always understood that the book of Revelation talked about the future. So, in reading the Bible for myself, apart from any commentaries, and especially apart from any denominational resources, I certainly did develop a belief in what I afterwards learned is called Futurism. I did possess a wide margin loose leaf Scofield Reference Bible, but I could not come to follow his specific division of Scripture into seven distinct dispensations, reasoning that one would not be driven to that specific division of God’s Word by studying a plain text Bible alone.

    I suppose none of us are born in a vacuum, and none of us can read in a vacuum, but I think I come pretty close to having had an unbiased understanding of the Bible from an early time in my life when I began to read the Bible seriously for myself, and found Christ as my Savior entirely apart from any church or denomination, simply by reading a pocket New Testament repeatedly until the Holy Spirit enabled me to understand the plan of salvation, and my need to receive Christ personally, which I did on Saturday, November 7, 1953, while delivering papers for my Detroit Shopping News paper route that morning, thinking about the verses I had read. I stopped under a little oak tree on Lumpkin Street and prayed, and have been absolutely assured of my personal salvation ever since.

  33. A. Way says:

    You proved my point! You said: “As I said before, if one had to determine a day of the week that allegedly is referred to in Revelation 1:10, one would have to choose the First Day of the week, that day being designated in early Christian literature as the Lord’s Day” You can not connect Revelation 1:10 with Sunday from the Bible. Can’t be done! And anyone in their right mind would have to conclude that the only day that God ever called His Holy day was the Sabbath. No, I have not forgot you alternative view that Revelation 1:10 was talking about some day in the future, but the sentence construct is in the present. And of course, it fits the type. Just as Manna fits the type. And you reject the Manna type… My “hobby horse” is not just the Sabbath, it is the Law of God. It is who is the creator. He is the central focus of my life. Period.

  34. Jerry says:

    Dear A. Way,

    You have an interesting “hobbyhorse” indeed. The trouble is, it does not match what the Bible teaches now that our Lord Jesus Christ has come.

    Should I make my “hobbyhorse” to be grace? Perhaps that would be more Scriptural.

    Joh 1:17 For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.

    I am hoping to hear from you soon that you have studied the cross references for 2 Timothy 1:7 and Colossians 1:10 as given in The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge, or The New Treasury of Scripture Knowledge, or Nelson’s Cross Reference Guide to the Bible.

    May I suggest that looking up the cross references in a printed Bible rather than on a computer screen would be much more beneficial, because as you read the Scripture reference on the printed page of your Bible, your eye can instantly see the immediate context, which always is a good idea.

    May the Lord add His blessing to your independent study of His written word as you read and contemplate the connections displayed in the cross references for 2 Timothy 1:7 and Colossians 1:10.

    I have absolutely no ulterior motive in suggesting these two particular verses. I suggest them because they were a great blessing and encouragement to me when I began studying the cross references in The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge, and I know they will be a blessing and encouragement to you too.

  35. A. Way says:

    You will recall, we have differences in other major topics. What happens when you die for example. You claim we are immortal, but the Bible says we are not, that only God is immortal. The teaching on hell! There is no eternally burning hell taught in the Bible where souls are tortured for eternity. Now that’s justice. You have even hinted at one topic we have not discussed and that is baptism, how it should be done. Thou shalt have no other gods before Me, or I’ll burn you in hell for eternity. How kind.

    Romans 2:4 NET Or do you have contempt for the wealth of his kindness, forbearance, and patience, and yet do not know11 that God’s kindness leads you to repentance?

    It is His kindness that draws to repentance.

  36. Jerry says:

    Dear A. Way,

    You have broached some most interesting topics.

    What do you believe about the subject of baptism? That ought to be a neutral enough subject to explore any differences we might have in an amicable manner. Perhaps on that issue we can begin to determine just who has the truth on the matter of the mode of Christian baptism.

    Feel free to bring forth your arguments so we can discuss them.

  37. A. Way says:

    It’s your blog.

  38. Jerry says:

    Dear A. Way,

    You commented just above,

    You have even hinted at one topic we have not discussed and that is baptism, how it should be done.

    How do you believe baptism should be done? Feel free to state your view, and if you have a chapter and verse reference to confirm your view, include that too. Or is the position you hold just based on man-made tradition? I’m sure the Bible must say something about it, though it might not be found in the Ten Commandments.

  39. Jerry says:

    Link to original post: https://realbiblestudy.com/?p=180

    I trust that anyone and everyone who happens to read this far in this discussion will note the following:

    (1) Brother A. Way has not yet indicated that he has taken the time to do a current study the cross references given for 2 Timothy 1:7 and Colossians 1:10 as I have suggested. It would surely do him and anyone else who might happen to read here a world of spiritual good to do so.

    I do understand that Brother Way is likely to be a very busy man, and I genuinely appreciate the significant time he has invested in reading and commenting here. His participation has greatly encouraged me to engage in much Bible study that I would likely have missed doing were it not for his encouragement.

    (2) Brother Way has not yet provided an example of a set of cross references in The New Treasury of Scripture Knowledge or Nelson’s Cross Reference Guide to the Bible by sharing with us the Book, Chapter, Verse, and Page Number involved that he believes display bias. I suspect he has not done so because he cannot do so, but he is most welcome and encouraged to prove me wrong on this point.

    (3) I encouraged Brother Way to begin a discussion about the mode of Christian Baptism. The only response he seems to have made is to say “It’s your blog.”

    He has as of yet made no further response on this discussion thread.

    I suspect that Brother A. Way is a “one issue man,” equipped to discuss any issue that directly ties into his favorite theme, the Seventh-day Sabbath of the Fourth Commandment. Brother A. Way seems ready to discuss any other doctrine of his favorite denomination too, and I look forward to further discussions on all these topics.

    But here is the issue: even his favored denomination takes a position on the subject of the mode of Christian baptism, reflected by what mode they use in practice. This, therefore, ought to be a fair and reasonable subject for discussion here. What mode does Brother A. Way believe is the proper mode, and on what Scriptural basis?

    But so far, the silence is deafening!

    But I look forward to his considered responses should he ever happen to notice this reminder of “unfinished business.”

  40. A. Way says:

    Ah – baptism. This has finally been shown, that Jerry did not come to his ideas of Baptism by Bible study alone, but by the published works of another. Jerry did not find his ideas of Baptism on a desert island. G. W. Hughey. Infant baptism and sprinkling. See it all here: https://realbiblestudy.com/?p=426

  41. Jerry says:

    Dear A. Way,

    What I am advocating here about Real Bible Study is that we first garner all we possibly can by means of independent Bible study for ourselves (1) starting by the careful repeated reading of God’s written Word from a plain text Bible; (2) making such use of non-denominational unbiased study aides as exhaustively complete concordances like Strong’s, lexicons, sources of fuller cross references like The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge, The New Treasury of Scripture Knowledge, and Nelson’s Cross Reference Guide to the Bible, as well as works devised for topical Bible study like The Thompson Chain Reference Bible, Nave’s Topical Bible and the Nave’s Study Bible, and the New Topical Textbook.

    All these and more are permitted when visiting Robinson Crusoe’s Desert Island for genuinely independent Bible study. Independent of what? You guessed it–“Independent of what any author, teacher, religious leader, or human institution says about the Bible.”

    Now, after one has done this basic footwork in the study of the Bible, and the study of a specific topic in the Bible, it is certainly permissable to check the results of this independent study by consulting scholars who have published the results of their study of the subject. Now that you have first done your own study independently as far as you could go, you are better prepared to learn something new from other scholarly resources with this advantage: you can check up on the correctness of the scholar’s presentation, and/or you can learn something new from what the scholar has discovered that you missed in your own studies.

    Just this past week, I took a brief break in my work on my project to expand the cross references available for Real Bible Study to read from Boyce W. Blackwelder’s work, Toward Understanding Romans. I read at the bottom of page 58 this sentence:

    In Ro 11:5-7 Paul makes a distinction between “the election” and “Israel,” i.e. between those who by faith have obtained righteousness, and “the rest,” i.e. those who, as a result of unbelief, were blinded. Therefore when Paul speaks of the salvation of “all Israel” in the context of Ro 11:26, he means spiritual Israel. This is the only possible interpretation in the light of the fact that part of literal Israel experiences hardness (vs. 25).

    But here is the verse itself:

    Rom 11:26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:

    The glaring error in Dr. Boyce’s assertion and interpretation is that he fails to account for the rest of the verse containing a quotation from Old Testament prophecy from Isaiah 59:20, 21.

    Therefore, Boyce is absolutely wrong in his interpretation of Romans 11:26.

    How do I know for sure he is wrong? I have personally studied these prophetic matters thoroughly and therefore I can spot a mistaken interpretation. When an interpretation like Boyce’s fails to account for all that is stated in a verse, let alone the immediate context, and the general drift of the Apostle Paul’s argument in his letter to this point, his interpretation is not in accord with what the Bible itself actually says.

    Boyce is an excellent Greek scholar, but he falls short in his understanding of the figures of speech in the immediately surrounding context, as well as the prophetic context which Paul is affirming, namely, that God’s Covenant Promises are irrevocable (Romans 11:29).

    So, returning to the issue of ritual water baptism and Hughey’s work on The Scriptural Mode of Christian Baptism that Uncle Frank loaned me to read, it ought to be clear that from my prior independent study of the Bible, I was even back then able to judge carefully the validity of what I read, just as I did this past week when I judged the validity of what I read in Boyce’s otherwise generally excellent work on Romans.

    Notice that the very title of Hughey’s work lets the reader know that he addresses the scriptural mode of Christian baptism.

    I have asserted that all modes are possible, but not all modes are equally correct. I have stated there is not so much as even ONE example in the whole of Scripture of immersion of persons in water for any religious purpose whatsoever.

    All Mr. A. Way needs to do to refute my claim is simply produce that apparently very elusive ONE example of immersion from Scripture itself, and he will have proven my position about immersion to be wrong. Remember, the example must be provable, not merely assertion.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Connect with Facebook

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.