Natural Israel Not My Glory (2 of 5)

.

Part Two: What God’s Word Affirms

In part two of Showers’ The Facts and Flaws of Covenant Theology, he starts off by saying that the assertions of Covenant Theologians that the concept of "the Church" as being made up of all Old and New Testament Jews, and as well as Gentiles sometimes even in the Old Testament (and of course in the New Testament as well), that such an idea of a people of God from both the Old and New Testaments called "the Church" didn’t even actually begin to exist until Christ had actually stated, “I will build My church” (Mat. 16:18). And Showers bases this upon the fact that the verb “will build” is future in tense, not past tense. But it would stand to reason that Christ wouldn’t say “I have built My church,” but that He is still going to build it from thereon forward. Indeed, it is the very building that Abraham and all of the Old Testament saints through eyes of faith are said to have looked forward to (cf. Heb. 11:10). Even in Revelation and throughout the New Testament epistles, the Church, or these “called-out” ones made up of Old and New Testament saints, are said to be both the temple and the city of God now called New Jerusalem (or the building of God). In fact, the heavenly Jerusalem that Paul speaks about in Galatians chapter four with regards to her being the mother of us all, John says in in Rev. 21–22 that she, spiritually, has gates with the names of the twelve Jewish tribes on them, along with twelve foundation stones with the names of the twelve Jewish apostles on them. This building of Christ’s has been going on for a long time. Clearly, this can only mean that the Church is, spiritually speaking, Jewish inwardly in nature as Paul said in Rom. 2:29, and that she is made up of both Old and New Testament saints. And the reason that we know this is "the Church" universal is because the Lord tells John that she is “the wife, the bride of the Lamb” (Rev. 21:9–10). In this building or household of God, New Testament saints are joined with Old Testament saints such as Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and form the Israel of God not born after the flesh, but born after the Spirit. As such, all Gentiles as citizens who live and minister in this city and temple become as even naturally born Israelites who minister and live in this city and temple, and are thus likewise privileged to even take on the name “Israel.” In God’s sight there is absolutely no physical difference whatsoever between Jews and Gentiles. As such, Gentiles in Christ are no longer called “dogs,” whereas all those who are actually outside of this hand-picked group by God are indeed now called “dogs” (cf. Rev. 22:15), something that I mentioned earlier that both God and Paul called all unbelieving Jews in Isaiah 56:10-11 and in Philippians 3:2.

God (or Christ) has been building this building of His all along with all such "children of promise" who have been “called-out” in both the Old and New Testaments. And He will continue to do so until the door of this great ark of opportunity of salvation is closed. God has been building this building since the beginning of time, and will continue to do so until there is no more building to be done and the last stone has been set in place in this glorious building made without men’s hands.

In this second part of Showers’ five-part series, like the JW’s, Showers craftily attempts to convince the unstudied and unwary Christian that a distinction or a line of demarcation is drawn in the sand, that is to always separate and distinguish natural Israel and promises supposedly associated only with them, apart from the Church who receives only spiritual or heavenly promises. And he attempts to erect this dividing line or division based upon a few ideas that are common with all natural thinking and reasoning Jews. Some are novel with him, while others are what mainline dispensationalists and even messianic Jews have also always believed in, even in accordance with the words of dispensationalist Lewis Sperry Chafer:

The dispensationalist believes that throughout the ages God is pursuing two distinct purposes: one related to the earth with earthly people and earthly objectives involved which is Judaism; while the other is related to heaven with heavenly people and heavenly objectives involved, which is Christianity. [1]

It is upon this basis that Showers first of all states that this group of "called-out ones" (or “the Church”) only had its beginning when Christ first began to formulate this New Testament group of called-out ones.

Secondly, Showers states the Church is never referred to as a singular “nation,” whether in the Old or New Testament, but is always referred to as those who came out of “nations” (plural), never to become a nation (singular).

Thirdly, he asserts natural Israel is called God’s wife, whereas the Church is never referred to as God’s wife.

Fourthly, he says God still has a future seven-year tribulation for natural Israel, often erroneously referred to as Jacob’s trouble, where an Antichrist figure will set up a covenant with the Jews in a supposed third rebuilt temple, causing their sacrifices to cease after 3½ years based upon an erroneous interpretation of Dan. 9:27. Of course, all of this presupposes that there will be yet another rebuilt temple sanctioned by God no less, along with the reinstating of the animal sacrifices. And of course all of these individuals also believe that once this "third" temple is destroyed, that even a fourth literal temple with attending literal animal sacrifices, festivals and Sabbaths, etc., patterned after Ezekiel’s vision in his last eight chapters, will also be built by God and Christ no less with all natural Jews at the start of a future earthly millennium.

Fifthly, Showers and all dispensationalists say that Christ will rule on a throne on earth from this "fourth" rebuilt stone temple with natural Israel, as opposed to ruling from a throne in heaven with His Church. In fact, in part five of Showers’ series, he makes the remarkable claim that Christ isn’t even now seated on a throne in heaven at all, but just sitting next to the Father at His right hand. If this doesn’t disturb the thinking Christian, I don’t know what will. To say that Christ is seated next to the Father, but not on a throne, is ridiculous. What is He seated on? Is it just a meager stool or chair? I mean, really, it just goes to show you how far one will actually go, who dethrones Christ to make Him fit into their own theological framework. And, honestly, isn't that what all natural Jews have done. You've heard them for yourselves: “We have no king but Caesar!” (Jhn. 19:15). Showers is in good company. They may be his “friends,” and he theirs. But they are not Christ's, or ours. At least not until they say, “Blessed is the King, the Coming One, who comes in the name of the Lord” (Lk. 19:38, lit. trans.)

And sixth, Showers assumes that the restoration of all things will be with these natural Jews on the earth (and with future Gentiles who get saved and are literally circumcised in their flesh according to Ezk. 44:9), when the truth is that Christ is restoring things even now as we speak in and through His people in a kingdom that does not come with natural observation, with all of it to be finalized and completed at His Second Coming. All the Scriptures that dispensationalists use to prove a future for natural Israel in their small pittance of a land, have either already been fulfilled, or will be fulfilled on a more grander scale in the person and work of Christ and His New Testament church. As said earlier: The meek will inherit the earth (or land)! And Paul says that “the world” is now ours![2] And it is these issues that I will address point by point below.

With regards to the first point, Showers claims in his article that Acts 11:15 establishes “the beginning” of God’s building program with the Church by the fact that Peter says the Holy Spirit fell on the Gentiles as well as on the Apostles “at the beginning.” But this has nothing to do with the formation of God’s “children of promise” from both Jews and Gentiles called the Church (or “called-out ones”), but rather with Peter only referring to the promised outpouring of the Holy Spirit which actually began to be “in” God’s people, as opposed to just being “with” them or “on” them as Christ had stated prior to Pentecost (cf. Jhn. 7:38-39; 14:16-17).

With regards to the second point, another way that Showers fails to prove that there is to be a stated difference by God between natural Israel and the Church is to claim that “in the Old Testament Israel was a nation” and that in the New Testament “the church is never called a nation, rather an assembly or gathering of believers from many nations,”[3] (plural). But both Jesus and Peter actually do refer to the Church as “a nation” in Mat. 21:43 and 1Pet. 2:9–10. And it was Jesus who said it was the Church (comprised of both Jews and Gentiles) that would be the ones to actually sit and feast with the nationhood of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in the kingdom; whereas, the Jews born only according to the flesh would be “cast out” from such a nationhood (Mat. 8:11–12; Lke. 13:28–29). Again, this is the very same thing Paul has said of the earthly Jerusalem along with her children in Gal. 4:30, with natural Israel also likened to the bondslave Hagar and her child which is to be “cast out,” not to be a part of the nationhood of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. And this spiritual nationhood of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is now also inclusive of all Gentiles whom God also calls to be such children of Abraham by faith.

How does Showers get around these words of Peter? He says that Peter's words in 1Pet. 2:9-10 refer ONLY to Jews, and not to Gentiles at all. He writes:

Since Peter likely was writing to Jewish believers, he would have found it natural to use the Old Testament titles of Israel. Peter was not teaching that the church has appropriated the Old Testament titles of Israel; rather, he used words his Jewish audience would readily identify with. [4]

Again, can Showers really be serious here? You bet he is! All the titles that Peter describes here of “a chosen generation” (or “race”), “a royal priesthood,” “a holy nation,” and “His own special people” (or “a people of God's own possession”) all have to do with that which is applicable only to Jews. And Showers does this in order to prove that Gentiles cannot be called names or titles that he believes strictly belong to natural Jews, especially when it comes to calling them “spiritual Jews,” or “spiritual Israel” and the like. Showers and all dispensationalists want to reserve all of these names and titles only for ethnic Jews, with the Gentiles being treated no more and no less than slaves who are exempt of such titles and honors. Is this what Christ and His apostles believed in? Not on your life! And what about the titles Peter's uses in verse 5 of “living stones,” “a spiritual house,” and “a holy priesthood” who offer up “spiritual sacrifices? Are these titles reserved only for ethnic Jews? I will let you be the judge. Anyone who believes what these men believe and teach, needs to have their heads examined. Seriously.

Additionally, while it may be granted that Peter was an apostle to the Jews, his epistles don't address them as such. He frequently uses terms that apply to both Jewish and Gentile believers, and rightly so. In 1Pet. 1:1, they are “God's elect, strangers in the world...who have been chosen according to the foreknowledge of God”; in 4:16, they are “Christians”; in 5:2, they are “God's (or Christ's) flock” of whom Christ is the “Chief Shepherd” (v. 4); in 5:13, Peter grants “Peace to all of you who are in Christ”; in 2Pet. 1:1, Peter's epistle is “to those who through the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ have received a faith as precious as ours”; and in 1:10, they are “brothers” in Christ. Clearly, Peter's epistles are not written in a partisan manner just to Jewish believers, but to all who believe—“to all who are in Christ.”

No doubt, the passages in Exodus that Peter is referring to in chapter 2, he actually applies to the Church (or “Christians”) made up of both Jews and Gentiles, and not just to natural Israel, as Showers erroneously contends. For Peter qualifies all this by saying, “Once you were not a people, but now you are the people of God; once you had not received mercy, but now you have received mercy” (1Pet. 2:10). If Peter was referring strictly to natural Jews here (or "Jewish believers"[5] as Showers puts it in part four of his series) and not to Gentiles, then how does this explain Peter’s words, “Once you were not a people, but now you are the people of God”? If all natural Jews are the people of God, as Showers and all dispensationalists claim they are, then how is it that Peter can say that ALL the people who make up this “holy nation” were never before the people of God? It is because anyone, whether natural Jews or Gentiles, were never God’s “children of promise” until separated by God by His Spirit and exercised a faith in Him to believe in Him, even as our father Abraham did. As such, Abraham is our father, not theirs! And as mentioned earlier, both Paul and Jesus affirmed this very same truth.

God through Jeremiah has similarly stated: “‘Go through her vineyards and ravage them, but do not destroy them completely. Strip off her branches, for these people do not belong to the Lord. The house of Israel and the house of Judah have been utterly unfaithful to me,’ declares the Lord” (5:10). And again, “Among My people are wicked men who lie in wait like men who snare birds and like those who set traps to catch men. Like cages full of birds, their houses are full of deceit; they have become rich and powerful and have grown fat and sleek. Their evil deeds have no limit; they do not plead the case of the fatherless to win it, they do not defend the rights of the poor. Should I not punish them for this? declares the Lord. Should I not avenge Myself on such a nation as this? A horrible and shocking thing has happened in the land: The prophets prophesy lies, the priests rule by their own authority, and My people love it this way. But what will you do in the end?” (5:26–31). And again, “And though a tenth remains in the land, it [the land] will again be laid waste. But as the terebinth and oak leave stumps when they are cut down, so the holy seed will be the stump in the land” (Isa. 6:13). And even in our day it is declared: “The remnant of Israel, the survivors of the house of Jacob, will no longer rely on him who struck them down but will truly rely on the Lord, the Holy One of Israel. A remnant will return, a remnant of Jacob will return to the Mighty God. Though your people, O Israel, be like the sand by the sea, only a remnant will return. Destruction has been decreed, overwhelming and righteous." (Isa. 10:20–21). This last prophecy was used by Paul in Rom. 9:27 in his day to establish all who are God’s “children of promise” by faith alone in Christ alone that he just got through earlier talking about in verse 8. And just as God reserved for Himself 7,000 in Elijah’s day, “so also,” says Paul, “at the present time there is a remnant chosen by grace” (Rom. 11:4, 5).

Among natural Israel in the past there were those who said they were Jews, but were not. Even Jesus said so in Rev. 2:9 and 3:9. Inwardly they were ravenous wolves. So too in the Church there are those who say they are Christians, and are not. They too are wolves all dressed up in sheep’s clothing. This was always true among the Israelites in the past, and it is no less true among the Church today. And that is why God could say through Jeremiah, “Among My people are wicked men.” Among His “remnant” chosen by grace there are wicked men who spoil the flock in order to carry away disciples after themselves. And sadly, many of God’s true people have been deceived by such false prophets and teachers and have come to “love it this way,” just as in Jeremiah's day. But my mission is to undo what these enemies of God’s flock have done and set God’s people free from the deceptive lies of these false prognosticators and teachers.

Like Ishmael of the past, these supposed brothers of ours mock and laugh at what is being depicted in this article before us as truth. And with that said, sincere believers in the truth have always been more mistreated and oppressed by religious brethren from within their own ranks, than by atheists and those from without. This was true as far back as Cain with Abel, the Jews with the prophets, and as well as false brethren masquerading as true brethren from within the Church. Even Paul had more trouble with the Judaizers of his own flesh and blood than he actually did with the Romans. As James Montgomery Boice succinctly notes, “Today the greatest enemies of the believing church are found among the members of the unbelieving church, the greatest opposition emanating from the pulpits and church hierarchies.”[6]

When Paul quoted Gen. 21:9–10 in Gal. 4:30 concerning Hagar and Ishmael being cast out, the Jews (and even Showers as you will soon see later in this article) generally understand this incident in Genesis as God’s rejection of the Gentiles from being heirs together with natural Israelites, but Paul turns it all around and applies this rejection to all natural unbelieving Jews, to the exclusion of all believers in God and in Christ who are God’s true “children of promise” like Isaac. Like Ishmael who persecuted Isaac, along with the Jewish opponents of Paul in his day, the Jews of today and even such supposed Christian brothers as Showers, are infuriated to no end that natural Jews could be likened to Ishmaelites who are only to be “cast out” and not among those who are to be blessed along with Isaac. But Paul’s point should be well taken, not harshly criticized (which possibly says something about those who do). God does not look on physical descent to qualify one as a child of God and of promise. The true sons of Abraham are those who are born by the power of the Spirit of God from above.

In Mat. 21:43, where Jesus says the kingdom of God would be taken away from natural Israel and given to another “nation” who will produce its fruit, Showers pulls another sleight-of-hand in part three of his series claiming,

Throughout the first part of His ministry on Earth, Jesus preached, "Repent, for the kingdom is at hand!" He offered the restored [natural] Kingdom of God to Israel if the people repented of their sins and accepted Him as their Savior and Lord.[7] 

No He didn’t! He offered what His Jewish apostles and believers who were His chosen "children of promise" in fact received; a kingdom that is not of this world and that does not come with observation. Nothing more, and nothing less! These first Jewish believers and Israelites indeed “repented of their sins and accepted Him as their Savior and Lord.” The rest were “cast out.” All Israel was never saved in the past and all Israel will never be saved in the future. Only a remnant, even as Christ’s first Jewish believers, will be saved by grace. This is the "all Israel" that God saves. The rest are left to themselves only to become more hardened (cf. Rom. 9:17ff; 11:7ff).

If what Showers has stated above doesn’t disturb the thinking Christian, just listen to these remarks by him:

Christ’s use of nation in Mat. 21:43 refers to the future generation of Jewish people who will accept Him and bear the fruit of the restored Kingdom [on earth]. Christ chose the word nation rather than generation because He knew the Jewish people [natural unbelieving Jews] would soon be scattered; and He wanted to note a future day when [natural] Israel would be a nation, accept Him as Messiah, and usher in the restored Kingdom of God [on earth]….Jesus emphasized that, because the Jewish generation alive during His First Coming refused His offer of the restored Kingdom [on earth], God would take the Kingdom [on earth] from them and give it to a future Jewish nation that will accept Him.[8]

To get around these words of Christ in Mat. 21:43 as referring to the nationhood of Christians, from both Jews and Gentiles, Showers is forced to press a meaning upon Jesus' words that is out of character with the Spirit of Christ. Showers says that since the Jews as a nation did not repent, Jesus is saying that they would be judged accordingly, but then He “concludes by promising a future day when a new generation of national Israel will repent and accept Him as Messiah.”[9]

Yep, you heard him for yourself. Because of Showers a priori theological biases, like the JWs and Mormons, he is forced to read into Jesus' words something that just isn't there. It is the “twisting” of the Scriptures that Paul warned us about, and the “cleverly invented stories” that “bring the way of Truth into disrepute” that Peter said to avoid (2Pet. 1:6; 2:2). All such individuals are “teachers who will exploit you with stories they have made up” (2Pet. 2:3).

Clearly, the “nation” that Jesus is describing isn’t a future restored natural Jewish nation on earth who believe in Him when they physically see Jesus and, whereas, “seeing is believing,” but it is all about Jews and Gentiles who make up this one holy nation formed in Christ who see Him through eyes of faith. One God, one Lord and one Shepherd, with one people, one flock and one nation! This is what all the prophets were talking about when Israel and Judah would one day become one stick or one flock with one Shepherd, along with the Gentiles no sooner joining them. God’s true people are not two separate and distinct peoples that form two separate and distinct groups. And surely not one natural nation of Israelites distinct from both Jews and Gentiles in Christ from a multitude of nations that form no unified nation at all. On the contrary, Gentile believers from all over the world come out of a multitude of nations to form one unified nation under God with all Jewish believers. Out of the two, Christ joins the two to form one new man and one nation in Him. With the spiritual Israel of God of old made up of all true Old Testament saints or believers, the Gentiles have become no longer foreigners and strangers to the covenants of promises, but fellow citizens with this one nation and household of faith.

Showers again continues along this same line of thinking above with such similar nonsense as:

At most, they [Peter, Christ, and the Scriptures] teach that the church shares the spiritual promises given to Abraham. This is inclusion of the church, not exclusion of [natural] Israel.”[10]

Do you see what he has just done here? He almost makes it sound like the Church is just a bunch of Gentiles to the exclusion of natural Jews or Israelites! On the contrary, the Church, made up of both natural Jews and Gentiles who are God’s chosen “children of promise,” are the only ones who do actually share in the spiritual promises by faith given to Abraham the father of faith—to the exclusion of all natural reasoning and unbelieving Jews who are of their father the Devil. God has never rejected His people out of both Jews and Gentiles whom He foreknew and has set His electing love upon in order to be saved. Israel according to the Spirit has never been excluded by God, only Israel strictly according the flesh is excluded. Again, unbelieving natural Jews and Gentiles are the seed of the Serpent as opposed to all of God’s true “children of promise” who are the seed of the woman.

And, by the way, the “inclusion of the church” isn’t only the inclusion of Gentiles, it is the assembly of all saints from both the Old and New Testaments that is also inclusive of both natural Jews and Gentiles. Again, natural Israelites are excluded only when such are determined by God not to be His “children of promise” like Ishmael and Esau, as opposed to Isaac, Jacob and all the rest of us.

Furthermore, Showers wants to make it sound like spiritual promises are given to Gentiles whereby natural promises are given only to natural Israelites. But the natural types were to only precede the spiritual antitypes to come with the natural giving way to that which is spiritual. Everything natural was a shadow of that which was ultimately to be seen as heavenly and spiritual. Nothing more and nothing less is to be garnered from all of this. And everything that God had promised “in the natural” to His “children of promise” among those who were natural Israelites in the past He has fulfilled with all such people, right down to ultimately making them one stick in Christ. All that was typical in the natural was to be superseded by that which is spiritual. That which is now wholly to be understood as spiritual is not to give place again to that which was natural and which, again, only in fact really pointed to that which was spiritual. And it isn’t that we are not blessed in this life, Jesus said we would be (cf. Mk. 10:30; Lke. 18:30). But for us it is more about the afterlife when all that we know of naturally in this life will all some day pass away.

Now the problem with Showers is that he (as well as with most of his dispensational friends) is Arminian in his theology and does not have a proper biblical perspective on unconditional election as outlined and taught in the Bible. Many dispensationalists believe God chooses to elect people after He sees them deciding for Christ, not before the fact as God clearly illustrates for us in His sovereign choice (or election) of Isaac and Jacob as His “children of promise” before either of them were born, or had any say so in the matter. Israel according only to the flesh is not, nor ever was, a part of this assemblage of God and of Christ that has been formed by God since the time of Adam and Eve, and even before creation! As John in chapter one of his gospel, and Paul in chapter nine of Romans say: it is not according to natural descent. It never was and never will be. But Showers and all dispensationalists say that God’s choice of Israel is according to “natural” ethnicity (or something foreseen in them), and that being a natural Jew is extremely vital and important to any of them being saved at all. When are such men as Showers going to get it? But you know, the natural Jews in Paul’s and Christ’s days just didn’t get it either. So it stands to reason that we will always have those who have crept into the Church, as before, and who will affirm the very same things as they did back then. It happened in the past, it is happening in the present, and it will continue to proliferate in the Church well on into the future. There will always be false brethren, false prophets and false teachers placed side by side with those in the Church by the father of all lies that are deceived and deceiving others. Satan, through men like Showers, wants to belittle the Church as the true people of God and place more of an importance and significance upon natural Jewish ethnicity than even what God has Himself tolerated to be placed upon them. They are not all Israel which are of Israel, but it is only “the children of promise who are counted for the seed” of Abraham (cf. Rom. 9:8b). Are you beginning to see this brethren? Oh, I hope that you do! All of us who have faith in Christ (not them) are God’s chosen seed of Israel’s race, the ransomed from the fall. Hail Him who saved you by His grace, and crown Him Lord of all!

With regards to the third point, another way that Showers attempts to erect a dividing wall or partition between natural Israel and the Church is by making the remarkable statement that, “Scripture calls Israel the wife of God (Isa. 54:5–6) but calls the church the Bride of Christ (Rev. 21:9; 22:17).[11] But if he had only read a little bit further in Rev. 21:9, instead of listening to just what others have said to him, he would have seen that this verse goes on to say that the Church is said to not only be the bride, but “the wife of the Lamb.” Natural Israel was only a wife to God in type, married to Him in a works-oriented covenantal relationship; whereas, the Church is the spiritual Israel and wife of God in Christ by grace alone through faith alone.

I suppose though that Showers would counter all this with the fact that Israel was called the wife “of God,” whereas the Church is called the wife “of Christ.” But, again, this would be the same logic that the Jehovah’s Witnesses use in trying to disprove Jesus is Jehovah or Jehovah is Jesus. But as we all very well know, whatever is said of God (Jehovah) is said of Christ, and vice-versa. In Acts it says God has ransomed us with His own blood. But I thought it was Christ’s blood that ransomed us? Clearly, to speak of one is to speak of the other; unless, of course, one denies that Christ is God incarnate. Showers house of cards that he has been attempting to build all along is showing clear signs of weakness and beginning to topple. And only a few more breaths (or words) from this article will eventually blow it all down.

On the fourth point, Showers says God still has a separate plan for the natural nation of Israel by the fact that Scripture claims there is to be a supposed future seven year tribulation in which an Antichrist figure from the revived Roman empire is suppose to make a seven year covenant with Israel, and then cause sacrifices and offerings to cease in the middle of this supposed covenant that he is to establish with them. And since it is an Antichrist figure who causes both “sacrifice and offerings to cease,” then this also naturally presupposes that a third temple must be rebuilt. These assumptions, taken from Dan. 9:26–27, is the only Old Testament prophecy that they use to base their fictitious notions upon. The New Testament verses that they normally use are in Mat. 24, 1Ths. 2 and Rev. 11. But Matthew 24 predicts not a future restoration for Israel, but only their desolation in 70 AD by the Romans, in accordance with the prophecy that Jesus was referring to in Dan. 9:26–27. Neither Daniel or Christ are talking about two desolations at two different times, one in 70 AD and another one in the future. They are both talking about one desolation that occurred in 70 AD. And Jesus’ analogy of a fig tree budding (or any tree for that matter according to Lke. 21:29) as a tell-tale sign of what was to come, wasn’t to be understood of the establishing of Israel as a nation, but were to be the tell-tale signs that would lead up to natural Israel's impending desolation as a nation in their not-so-distant future. This alone disproves what these so-called “brethren” are saying about the temple being rebuilt in the future as nothing more than false prophecy and false teaching. These words of Christ teach just the opposite of what they so adamantly claim! And as far as 2Ths. 2 and Rev. 11 goes, they do not depict (nor presume) that a future literal temple will be rebuilt; for both Paul and John have had in mind all along since the passing away of the types and shadows of Judaism, Christ and His Church, which is now God’s “temple” which is measured, protected and accounted for; and wherein the antichrist spirit attempts to take up his seat and desecrate God’s spiritual temple (or the Church),[12] with his false doctrines, practices and lies; blaspheming all that is called God, and even setting himself up as God in Christ’s temple as the sovereign determiner of his own destiny, as all Arminians sitting in the Church do today. Dispensationalists have even changed the law of God (or His Truth) to reflect on times and seasons that are supposedly appointed only for natural Jews in the future, as opposed to what God has appointed all along only for His Church that is comprised of all Old and New Testament saints, whether they be Jews or Gentiles.

And as far as a future seven-year tribulation during a supposed seven-year covenant made by an Antichrist with the Jews in a rebuilt temple is concerned, it is a wholesale fabrication and lie based entirely upon the misinterpretation, misunderstanding and misrepresentation of Daniels’ seventieth week in his Seventy Weeks prophecy. “He” that confirms or gives strength to a covenant for a period of seven years, causing both bloody and non-bloody sacrifices to cease 3½ years from its commencement, is the Messiah (or Christ), not an Antichrist; with the subject pronoun “he” in verse 27 having as its antecedent the more distant subject noun, “Messiah.” The “prince” in verse 26, although also the Messiah in context (cf. v. 25), is not a “subject” noun that is to be linked with the personal “subject” pronoun “he” who confirms a covenant in verse 27. The “people” of the Prince are the closest “subject” noun to “he,” with the “Prince” here (though a “noun” no less at that) being the object of preposition to the people, or an object noun, and not a subject noun at all. And the “people,” though the “subject” in that sentence, can’t be the “subject” antecedent noun to “he” because “people” is in the third person plural form. “He” is a first person, singular, masculine, subject pronoun that agrees with the more distant antecedent, singular, masculine subject noun “Messiah.” And the reason that I believe “he” in verse 27, is not linked with “prince” in verse 26, is to show that the Messiah as Prince who does the work of destroying the city and sanctuary with the people is to be differentiated from His work as the Messiah the High Priest who is “cut-off” and sacrifices Himself for His people. One idea or aspect of the Messiah’s work is to be linked with His work as Judge, the other with His work as The Suffering Servant. And so the latter portion of verse 26 is a parenthetical statement sandwiched in between all of this which stops to explain the Messiah’s work as Judge for being cut-off in the first part of verse 26, with the narrative continuing with His work as the atoning sacrifice that puts an end to Old Testament ceremonial sacrifices. And, of course, what follows in verse 27 as the result of this confirming of the covenant by Christ—once the Seventy Weeks are fulfilled—is a further explanation of the desolations that were decreed and only briefly described for us in the latter part of verse 26. God is no longer bound by covenant to “natural” Israel. That covenantal relationship was abolished in Christ who superseded that Old Covenant. As such, there are no more Tabernacle’s of Moses or Temple’s of Solomon to be built along with the reinstitution of all of those animal sacrifices. Those days are over with and of an era gone by. Literal land promises made to Abraham and all of his seed were fulfilled. But mind you, it was not to his natural seed alone that these promises were fulfilled to, but to all the “children of promise” who descended from him such as Moses, Joshua, Samuel, David, etc., and all the prophets. “Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, ‘And to seeds,’ as of many; but as of one, and to thy seed, which is Christ” (Gal. 3:16, KJV). And if ye be Christ’s, then are ye Abraham’s seed and heirs according to the promise” (v. 29). Could anything be anymore clearer? “It is not the natural children who are God’s children, but it is the children of the promise who are regarded as Abraham’s offspring” (Rom. 9:8). These are the true children and descendants of Abraham—bar none! And anything “everlasting” that was ever said to Israel in the past is only to be realized in all of God’s “children of promise” apart from all children born only according to the flesh. Time and space will not permit me to go into more detail than what has been stated above with regards to Dan. 9:26–27. But for further thoughts and analysis on all of this, I defer my readers to my book: The People of the Prince, the Coming One!

With regards to the fifth point, Showers all along claims that Christ will rule on a throne on earth with natural Israel as opposed to ruling from a throne in heaven with His Church. And as I said earlier, in part five of Showers’ thesis, he makes the remarkable claim that Christ isn’t even now seated on a throne in heaven at all, but just sitting next to the Father at His right hand. Here are his own words for you to read for yourself:

Jesus said [in Mat. 19:28] that He will sit on the throne of His glory, a throne that will bring Him honor. Nowhere does Scripture say He sits on a throne in heaven. Rather, it teaches that He is seated at the right hand of the Father’s throne. The throne of Christ’s glory is earthly. It will be located in Jerusalem where He will rule over Israel and the world. Jesus did not ascend to that throne at His First Coming. Thus, if He is to be faithful to His words, He must yet sit on His throne in Jerusalem.[13]

Notice that Christ’s throne is “earthly” and to be located literally “in Jerusalem” where He will rule over ethnic Israel and the unsaved Gentle world. Born-again saints are in heaven, suspended in the air in a supposed literal city called New Jerusalem made of literal gold and precious stones, where, in the words of dispensationalist Lewis Sperry Chafer again, “never the twain…shall meet.” At least not at that time (for some believe they will after the millennium is over). Additionally, Showers states that Jesus never ascended to a throne in heaven. His throne is to be only on earth. And, if Christ is going to be faithful to His words (as Showers’ carnal thinking deduces), “He must yet sit on His throne in Jerusalem.”

As has been already noted, Christ himself stated that He is “not of this world” and that His kingdom is “not of this world” and that it does not come “with observation,” as the other kingdoms of this world do. Christ's kingdom is a kingdom that is not to be seen with the natural eye. One must be born-again even to “see” this kingdom (Jhn. 3:3). And this is also what Christ meant when He told the Jews, “You will not see Me again until you say, ‘Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord.’” This is clearly articulated for us in Luke, when after Christ had said these words to them, He likewise said: “If you, even you, had only known on this day what would bring you peace, but now it is hidden from your eyes” (Lke. 19:28–44; esp. v. 42). And, again, “The knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of heaven has been given to you [His disciples], but not to them….Though seeing, they do not see; though hearing, they do not hear or understand….But blessed are your eyes because they see, and your ears because they hear” (Mat. 13:11, 13, 16). Clearly, Christ had much more in mind in all of these verses than just seeing with the natural eye.

Additionally, with regards to Christ ruling and reigning as other worldly kings dwelling in the literal city of Jerusalem someday, we have already noted that Christ now dwells in His spiritual Jerusalem, the bride and wife of the Lamb―His Church! If, according to Paul in Galatians, natural Jerusalem (or Israel) has been forsaken and “cast out,” not to share in the inheritance with God’s true and holy saints and “children of promise,” what does that say for Christ someday ruling and reigning in the natural city of Jerusalem over natural Israel in the future? He didn't want to then, He doesn’t want to now, and He won’t in the future! End of story. It is a figment of one’s own carnal and vain (and even a natural Jew’s) imagination. This was true in Christ's day, as it is even now with dispensationalists and the Jews in our day.

In referring to Revelation 20, nothing is said about a reign by Christ here on earth―it is an inference, at best. But what it does say is that the “souls” of martyrs, and of those who did not worship the Beast, reign as judges more likely from heaven than from earth, being seated together with Christ as Judge in heavenly places. And understanding, according to Christ, that His kingdom, rule and reign is not of this earth, all this begins to make more sense that we are talking about departed souls and not about those who are physically ruling and reigning here upon the earth. There is mention later in Rev. 20: 7-9, at the end of this heavenly reign of Christ's, about Satan being released to impose harm and danger upon God's saints who are living here upon the earth, but this is to be understood no differently than what is going on even now, yet on a more grander scale as in the days of the early church under Rome's power. Additionally, Christ Himself said that if His kingdom was of this world that His servants would indeed fight for Him as all other earthly kings’ servants do for them (cf. Jhn. 18:36). Conversely, dispensational premillennialists, such as Showers, assert that Christ not only offered a natural kingdom to the Jews to begin with, and for which they rejected, but will indeed in the future establish that kingdom, that is of this world, and in which His servants will fight for Him in a future literal battle between His people and the literal armies of Gog and Magog. All this is utter nonsense. And it is even as David Brown of Jamieson, Fausset and Brown commentaries once again notes:

The moderns, for the most part, expect the restoration of the Jews to Palestine, and their supremacy over the nations of the earth; [and] while the early chiliasts [among the early church fathers] appear to have agreed with their opponents that Christianity had forever abolished Jewish peculiarities, though they were termed Judaizers, this was not, so far as I can observe, because they contended for any millennial supremacy of Jews over Gentiles, but because their system Judaized Christianity itself…. 

[These are] your curious and restless spirits who feed upon the future. These are charmed with the multifarious details of the millennial kingdom. They are in their very element when settling the order in which these events shall occur, separating the felicities of the kingdom into its terrestrial and celestial departments respectively, sorting the multitudinous particulars relating to the Ezekiel and Apocalyptic cities—and such like studies. For such minds, whose appetite for the marvelous is the predominant feature of their mental character, and who live in a sort of unreal world—for these, the confused and shadowy grandeur of a kingdom of glory upon earth, with all that relates to its introduction, its establishment, its administration, and its connection with the final and unchanging state, opens up a subject of surpassing interest and riveting delight—the very food which their particular temperament craves and feeds on. And, to mention no more, there are those who seem to have a constitutional tendency to materialize the objects of faith, and can hardly conceive of them save as more or less implicated with this terrestrial platform. Such minds, it is superfluous to observe, will have natural affinity with a system which brings glory to the resurrection-state into immediate and active communion with sublunary affairs, and represents the reign of those who neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven, as consisting in a mysterious rule over men in the flesh, who [do] eat and drink, buy and sell, plant and build, marry wives, and are given in marriage. To set about proving to persons of this cast of mind that premillennialism will not stand the test of Scripture, is like attempting to rob them of a jewel, or to pluck the sun out of the heavens. To such minds, any other view of the subject is perfectly bald and repulsive, while theirs is encircled with a glory that excelleth. To them it carries the force of intuitive perception; they feel—they know it to be true.[14]

In speaking of Revelation 20, John says he saw thrones and they which sat upon them. And everywhere in Revelation where a “throne” is mentioned, it is in heaven, not on earth. And John says they are occupied with those souls who die in the Lord after having been martyred for their faith and who had not worshiped the beast or his image evidently while still living here on earth. Clearly, these are the souls of all who have died in the Lord and who have gone on to be with the Lord in heaven, and which Scripture elsewhere attests to. For even Jesus has said, “to him who overcomes, I will give the right to sit with Me on My throne, just I overcame and sat down [past tense] with My Father on His throne” (Rev. 3:21). And these are also all the ones that He had earlier encouraged to “be faithful even to the point of death, and I will give you the crown” (2:10).

An earthly throne of Christ is completely out of character with Christ and His kingdom. It is a carnal and earthly notion born not from above. And if it is to be on earth, how many thrones do you suppose will be all over the earth for all of these billions and trillions of people to sit upon? All of this borders on the absurd and is not to be taken literally. Like the JW’s, men such as Showers want to argue over words and trip-up the unsuspecting and unwary Christian over all the finer details of the trees, without really seeing the bigger picture of the forest and beyond.

Furthermore, this idea of Christ not now being seated on His throne next to the Father is just absolutely heretical to me. Again, are we reading the words from born-again Christians here, or from a bunch of people who are more akin to the Jehovah’s Witnesses? It just might as well be the Jehovah’s Witnesses who are saying all of these things. Both are just as blind to the truth. And with both there is just no end to the demeaning of Christ and what He purposed and came to do. There is more natural things to be understood and going on here with these people than anything spiritual at all. And they downplay the spiritual, giving more precedence and weight to that which is carnal and natural. This is simply nothing short of amazing to me!

With regards to Jesus now being seated upon a throne in heaven, and not later upon the earth, the Scriptures are overwhelmingly replete with such examples of Christ’s present rule and reign, with Rev. 3:21 cited above as just one glaring example. For instance, the Bible also says, now, not later, that Jesus is the King of kings and Lord of lords. For anyone to not to say this of Christ now is suspect of even being a Christian. And furthermore, a king without a kingdom and a throne is no king at all! Such a king is one only in theory, not in practice. In fact, he can’t even rightly be called “king” until he is ruling and reigning over a kingdom from a throne. And so for Jesus not to be seated now a throne, he would be a king only in theory, not in practice. And so with no kingdom or throne Christ is really no king.

But God’s Word on the matter begs to differ. In Luke 19:12–27, in the parable of The Ten Minas, Jesus clearly refers to himself as a King (or “a man of a noble birth,” as He refers it) who goes to a distant country (the land of Palestine in this case) to receive a kingdom (as someone has who reigns over others) and then to return from whence He came. He asks of those in this distant country (the natural Jews in this particular instance) to put to work what He was commissioning them to do until He returned at a later time. “But His subjects hated Him and sent a delegation after Him to say, ‘We will not have this Man to reign over us [i.e., be our king]’” (v. 14, WBT). Verse 15 goes on to say: “And it came to pass, that when He had returned [to heaven], having received the kingdom, then He commanded these servants to be called to Him, to whom He had given the money, that He might know how much every man had gained by trading.” Some (such as His Jewish Apostles) worked with what He had left with them to use, others (natural unbelieving Jews) did not. And it is these “others” to whom Christ says, “But those My enemies, who would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before Me” (v. 27, WBT). And this is exactly what happened in 70 AD under the Romans, not so dissimilar to His judgments pronounced to them in Mat. 21:41 in the parable of The Tenants, in Mat. 22:7 in the parable of The Wedding Banquet, and later again in Lke. 19:43–44. And in Mat. 22:7, in the parable of The Wedding Banquet, Jesus says “the King was enraged. He sent His army and destroyed those murderers and burned their city.” These were the Roman armies that destroyed those murderous Jews, burned up their city and desecrated and leveled their temple. Jesus as the King of all kings seated at the right hand of power was “seen” by these Jews no less as the Judge of all the earth in a way that they had not expected to see Him come. But have no doubt about it, He came alright just as He said He would come for them to “see” once He was seated upon His throne. And He must now rule and reign until He has put all enemies, including Satan, under His feet (cf. 1Cor. 15:25).

In the above parable in Luke, Christ receives a kingdom with the accolade from the people in His triumphal entry mentioned just a little bit later: “Blessed is the King, the Coming One in the name of the Lord” (Lke. 19:38, lit. trans.). It is important for us to notice here that the kingdom that Christ says He came to receive in Luke is clearly not to oversee an earthly kingdom as dispensationalists unwarily claim. For if it was, Christ would not be saying here that He received that for which He came to receive, but something other than what He came to receive, which, according to dispensationalists, was no kingdom at all; at least not in the sense that they understand Christ was to receive it. But, clearly, what Christ has received now as King is a kingdom that He himself had later told Pilate, “is not of this world” (Jhn. 19:36). “So you’re a king then, says Pilate” (v. 37a). Jesus answered, “You are right in saying I am a King. In fact, for this reason I was born, and for this I came into the world…” (v. 37b). Take note that Christ said He is a King in a kingdom that is “not of this world” and that it is “for this reason” He was born and it was “for this” that He came into the world to receive, which is exactly what Luke says in the parable of The Ten Minas above. No other carnal or worldly “reason,” as Christ most assuredly has stated to us, is justified. And such wisdom is justified only of her children and never of such natural reasoning and thinking men such as Showers or those scribes and Pharisees of Christ’s day who were only earthly, sensual and influenced by the doctrines of demons rather than by the words of Christ or of God. As I said before, such “friends of Israel” are truly no friends of Christ. They are anti-Christs.

Jesus as the second person of the triune Godhead was always a King with a kingdom, but in the New Testament and upon the cross He overthrows and dismantles the kingdom of darkness and of death, subduing the power and authority that Satan had over people’s lives, so that at His resurrection He could take those who were held captive all their lives in Sheol in Abraham’s bosom directly into heaven. Christ “led captivity captive,” so the Scriptures say, giving gifts unto men. Christ came that He might destroy him who had the power of death, that is the Devil, in order that He might free those who all their lives were in bondage in their flesh to sin and to death. Showers asks for a “dethroning of Satan over the earth”; I give you the C. O. C. or, the Cross of Christ, where He is now seated far above all principalities, powers, mights and dominions. The strong man (Satan) has been bound in order that Christ might spoil his goods, which is to release many people out of darkness and bring them into the light.

As I said before, Christ (or God; it makes no difference for they are both one and the same) has always been a King; not in theory, but in practice. To speak of one, is to speak of the other. And to argue that God is now seated on a throne but Christ isn’t, is in essence to put oneself in the same camp and class with the JW’s and the Jews who attempt to demean and belittle Christ's equality with the Father. They are all bent on doing everything in their power to discount that God and Christ are co-equals. And Showers, I’m afraid, stands guilty of this same persuasion, though for different reasons. And there is just no end as to what these individuals will say in order to put Christ more on par with the world and their kingdoms and idealism’s, rather than with God and His world, His idealism’s and His kingdom. But enough of this nonsense of theirs. Let us first of all see what the Old Testament has to say about this heavenly King through the words of the Psalmists.

Psalm 11:14 says, “The Lord is in His holy temple; the Lord is on His heavenly throne” (Psm. 11:4). And again, “You have sat on Your throne judging righteously….The Lord reigns forever; He has established His throne for judgment. He will judge the world in righteousness; He will govern the peoples with justice” (Psm. 9:4, 7, 8). From where is Christ or God doing all of this? From heaven, of course! And again, “I lift up my eyes to You, to You whose throne is in heaven” (Psm. 123:1). And again, “The Lord has established His throne in heaven, and His kingdom rules over all” (Psm. 103:19). From where and over who? His kingdom from His throne in heaven rules over all, both in heaven and in earth! This is the kingdom of God and of heaven that Christ spoke about with His throne in "heaven," not on earth! And again, “How awesome is the Lord Most High, the great King over all the earth…For God is the King of all the earth…God reigns over the nations; God is seated on His holy throne…the kings of the earth belong to God; He is greatly exalted” (Psm. 47:2, 8–9). The triune Godhead sat as King and Judge in heaven over all back then, sits as King and Judge in heaven over all now, and will continue to sit as King and Judge in heaven well into the future. The Triune Godhead has always been, and always will be, the one true King of kings and Lord of Lords over both heaven and earth. He is the One who was, who is, and who is to come.

Now one of the most dramatic and even shocking universalizations of the promises given to Abraham, and then through David of his restored kingdom through Christ, occurs in James’ interpretation of Amos 9:11ff at the Jerusalem council in Acts 15:15–18. James declares that the in-gathering of the Gentiles to be no less than the rebuilding, restoration and expansion of the house (or “tabernacle”) and kingdom of David that God had promised to restore one day.[15] This restoration promised to David in Amos is to be understood as having as its foundation the original covenantal promise made to David in 2Sam. 7:10–16, wherein on his throne God would place one of his sons “to establish the throne of his kingdom forever” (v. 13). And it is to be with the spiritual seed, not the natural seed.

Of note on all of this is how the author of Hebrews himself takes up this prophecy in 2Samuel 7 and 1Chronicles 17 as ultimately being realized in the present enthronement, rule and reign of Christ when he states of these Old Testament verses with regards to Christ how that God would “be His Father, and He will be my Son” (1:15), and how that, “Your throne, O God, will last forever and ever” (v. 8). This is the “everlasting throne” promised to one of David’s sons that the author of Hebrews had just finished stating was what Christ has now sat down upon “at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven” (v. 3). And it is Peter who elaborates on this idea even further in Acts 2:28–36, when he speaks of David’s ascension to a throne on earth as opposed to a throne that was to be sat upon by Christ in the very heavens themselves: “For David did not ascend [to a throne] in heaven, and yet he said, ‘The Lord said to my Lord: ‘Sit at My right hand until I make Your enemies a footstool for Your feet.’’ Therefore, let all Israel be assured of this: God has made this Jesus whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ” (vv. 34–36). This is significant for all of us to realize. God has made Jesus both Lord (or King) and Messiah.

And get this! Don’t miss this vital piece of information: In Rev. 3:7 Christ says He now (not later) holds “the key of David,” in order to bind and loose what He wants to bind and loose in His kingdom, the very same “key of David” to bind and loose that was given to one of David’s former natural descendants, Eliakim, who functioned as a palace administrator under Hezekiah’s rule and reign (cf. Isaiah 22:20–24). If Eliakim could have had so much power over David’s house, how much more so Christ who was a very successor to David’s throne? What was true of Eliakim with the authority and power of David, as represented by this “key” of power to be an administrator over David’s house, is no less true of Christ now in heaven who is actually seated on David’s throne which has been extended and placed in heaven over all principalities, powers, might and dominions. Not only over the earth, but over all the heavens as well! And it is in this very same chapter in Revelation that Christ affirms of all us who overcome while now living here on earth, even as He overcame while living here on earth: “I will give you the right to sit with Me on My throne, just as I overcame [past tense; aorist active indicative] and sat down [past tense; aorist active indicative] with My Father on His throne. He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches” (vv. 21–22). Are YOU “hearing” this? Christ is now sitting with the Father “on His throne.” But Shower’s and all dispensationalists say He isn’t. Have no doubt about it, Christ as the descendant and greater Son of David and even David’s Lord, is the King of all kings that sits on a throne “forever and ever” as was ultimately promised to David in 2Sam. 7 and 1Chron. 17; not only over the earth, but over the heavens and earth; with the earth said to be His “footstool” in Isaiah 66:1 and Mat. 5:35 and never His throne! And of such a kingdom as this, which is truly “not of this world,” there will be no end!

Not only does Peter say above that what David understood of Christ being seated on his throne was to be evidenced in His resurrection and being seated at the right hand of the Father, but Peter also says that this particular aspect of Christ’s kingdom rule and reign was to continue “until I make your enemies a footstool for Your feet” (Acts 2:35). This concept is repeated throughout the writings of Christ and the apostles in Mat. 22:43–45; 1Cor. 15:27; Eph. 1:22; and Heb. 1:13; 10:12–13. In fact, in 1Cor. 15:27, which reads, “He has put all things in subjection under His feet” (NAS), the word “subjection,” is the Greek verb upetaxen, which is an aorist active indicative. And this means (as the NAS bears this out above) that it is an actual reality having been inaugurated in the past by the subject of this verb, God Himself. The author of Hebrews goes on to say how we do not presently “see” everything in subjection to Him, but that we do see Jesus “crowned” right now with glory and honor (Heb. 1:9). Just because we don’t physically “see” things right now as we think they should be, this doesn’t mean that they aren’t, or won’t be. The end is inevitable at the end of Christ’s present, and not future, rule and reign over heaven and earth. Christ is now “crowned” a King with a kingdom, seated on a throne in heaven with the Father and on the Father's throne at that! Not just as some queen with her king, but as a co-regent and co-equal with the Father. And the Scriptures go on to say that we too are even now seated together with Christ (Eph. 2:6). This is why in Revelation 20 John saw thrones and they that sat on them. These are the “thrones” that “in Christ” we now sit on, but will one day be physically seated upon when we die and go home to be with the Lord. Remember what Christ said? “I will give you the right to sit with Me on My throne…”

Acts 5:31 likewise affirms of Christ’s present rule and reign: “God has exalted Him to His own right hand as PRINCE (Ruler) and Savior.” And Mark says that “after the Lord Jesus had spoken to them, He was taken up into heaven and He sat at the right hand of God” (16:19). Col. 3:1 says that Christ is “seated at the right hand of God”. And Eph. 1:20 says, “He raised Him from the dead and seated Him at His right hand in the heavenly realms, far above all rule and authority, power, and dominion, and every title that can be given, not only in the present age but also in the one to come.” Eph. 2:4 again likewise says, “God raised us up with Christ and seated us with Him in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus.” And Heb. 8:1 says, “We do have such a High Priest, who sat down at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in heaven, and Who serves in the sanctuary, the true tabernacle set up by the Lord, not by man.” So does one still think that Christ is going to come back to earth and build another “copy” of the “true tabernacle” and “sanctuary” that is in heaven from which He is now ruling and reigning, and then come back to rule and reign on a literal earthly made throne in a literal stone temple or sanctuary in the literal city of Jerusalem over natural Israelites born only according to the flesh? And in His glorified body at that? All that has been said above refutes such an idea. Christ is ruling and reigning from heaven on His throne in heaven with Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, Elijah, David and all of us, never to reign on earth with Israel according to the flesh. Such carnal, unbelieving “subjects” of God or Christ's kingdom (Mat. 8:12) are “killed” before Him (Mat. 21:40-41; 22:7; Mk. 12:9) and “cast out” from before His presence, “never to share in the inheritance with the freewoman’s son” (Gal. 4:30).

In Heb. 1:13, God likewise affirms of Christ: “…Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet.” Heb. 12:2 says, “Who for the joy set before Him endured the cross…and sat down at the right hand of the throne of God.” Rev. 1:5 again says that He is “the Ruler of the kings of the earth” right now, not later! He rules over “the earth” now, and adds, “has made us to be a kingdom and priests before God” (v. 6). Rev. 4:2, 9–11 also adds: “At once I was in the Spirit, and there before me was a throne in heaven with someone sitting on it…..Whenever the living creatures give glory, honor and thanks to Him who sits on the throne and who lives for ever and ever, the twenty-four elders fall down before Him who sits on the throne, and worship Him who lives for ever and ever. They lay their crowns before the throne and say: ‘You are worthy, our Lord and God, to receive glory and honor and power, for you created all things, and by your will they were created and have their being.’” No one, to my knowledge, doubts that this is referring to Christ, unless, of course, you are someone like Showers, the Jehovah’s Witnesses and all dispensationalists who cannot see the forest for all the trees and who stumble over Christ’s words and the meaning behind His words.

As noted above, Heb. 1:3–4 says that “He sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven” and “became as much more superior to the angels as the name He has inherited is superior to theirs,” God calling Him His “Son” (v. 5), His “firstborn” (v. 6), and saying, “Let all God’s angels worship Him” (v. 6). To this “Son” we noted before God as saying: “Your throne, O God, will last forever and ever, and righteousness will be the scepter of your kingdom. You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness; therefore God, your God, has set you above your companions…” (vv. 8–9). He is not to sit or be seated below the heavens, the angels, or here on earth; He is to remain “above” them all! And He is not just seated theoretically, but literally “at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven.” So it is of extreme importance here to realize that the earth is His “footstool,” never to be His throne, as the Scriptures everywhere attest; and even “the clouds are the dust of His feet” (Nah. 1:3).

Heb. 6:19–20 continues upon this very same theme above, affirming that Christ “entered on our behalf” into the inner sanctuary in heaven behind the curtain, “exalted above the heavens” (7:26), as all kings rightly are “above” all of their subjects. In chapter 9:12 it also says, “He entered the Most Holy place.” And Heb. 10:12–13 repeats the fact mentioned earlier in chapter eight that “He sat down at the right hand of God” and “since that time He awaits for His enemies to be made His footstool.” This is Christ’s throne beloved. This is where He rules and reigns from, both now and forever more. Not in a Holy Place on earth in a literal stone temple “copy” made with men’s hands, but in the very real and enduring Holy of Holies in heaven itself is Christ now seated between the cherubim in heaven. Christ is not coming back to the earth to sit in a carnal, worldly “type” or mere “shadow” that He instituted to point to Him and to heaven. Perish such a thought.

Since from what time do the New Testament epistles say that Christ does await for His enemies (including Satan) to be made His footstool? “Since that time,” according to Heb. 10:13, when He began to sit down in heaven on His throne in the inner sanctuary and in the Most Holy place above made without men’s hands. This verse unequivocally states that He will be there until the last of His “enemies” (which includes, “death,” would it not?), will be made His footstool. That will conclude or be the end of this current administration of Christ’s reign. Upon His ascension to His throne, Christ our Melchizedekian High Priest “was sacrificed once to take away sins…and He will appear [once again] a second time, not to bear sin, but to bring salvation to those who are waiting for Him” (Heb. 9:28). There is no third or fourth time, beloved, but only a “second” time—the blessed Second Coming! He came the first time, atoned for our sins, and sat down on David’s throne to rule and reign from heaven until He comes a “second” time to judge the earth and bring salvation. At His “second” coming the last of His enemies will be made His footstool, and all His saints will receive their resurrected and glorified bodies with all others being cast forth with their bodies into the eternal lake of fire.

With regards to the sixth point, Showers assumes that the restoration of all things will be with the re-gathering of all natural Jews on the earth someday. But such an ideology misses entirely the distinction the Bible makes between natural Israel and spiritual Israel; between the children of the bond woman and the children of the free woman; between the seed of the Serpent verses the seed of the woman; and between all natural descendants of Abraham verses all of his true “children of promise.” Viewed as such, there is no longer any future for natural Jews born only according to the flesh. Outside of faith in Christ, there never was nor ever will be. It has always been only for a small remnant saved by grace from out of both Jews and Gentiles. Literal temples with animal sacrifices are a thing of the past. They were terminated and superseded at the Cross of Christ. And preserving a natural gene pool in the past, in God’s sight, meant nothing to Him other than for the reason of manifesting His Lamb that would take away the sin of the world via Abraham’s natural bloodline; with even those of that preserved bloodline to be those whom God chose to be His “children of promise”―every single one of them! Not because they were necessarily physically Jews, but just for the fact that God chose to do it in this manner as originally promised to Abraham; and even as far back as with Adam and Eve in Genesis 3:15. There is no longer any reason to preserve a natural posterity. And other than for the reasons just cited, Israel according to the flesh had no special privilege or place with God other than blessings for obeying the Mosaic covenant and curses for disobedience. For if they had had such a special privilege and place, Christ would have made sure to have saved all Israel at His first coming and throughout the ages, just like those who say that He will do for them before His Second Coming. But He didn’t do it then, and He won’t in the future. For not all Israel according the flesh is the Israel according to “promise.” Since virtually everyone interprets “the fullness of the Gentiles” in Rom. 11:25 as referring to the full number of elect Gentiles throughout history who are “children of promise” (see Gal. 4:28), is it not also likely that the “the fullness” of Israel in Rom. 11:12 refers to the full number of elect Jews throughout history who are also “children of promise”? I think the answer is self-evident. Any other interpretation of Romans 9-1l will not suffice. “At the present” (11:5) and “now” (11:30-31) there is a remnant according to the election of grace, not en-mass later, separate and distinct from the Church.

To be sure, Showers’ references to Christ’s supposed rule and reign of “regeneration” for natural Israel in the future in Mat. 19:28, and in what Peter refers to as the “restoration of all things” in Acts 3:18–21, is not inclusive of people who are not God’s "children of promise," whether they be Jew or Gentile. Peter made this poignantly clear in 1Pet. 2:9–10 that the chosen people, royal priesthood and holy nation of a people belonging to God are all those “who were not a people, but now are the people of God.” And this agrees with Paul’s, “they are not all Israel which are of Israel” (Rom. 9:6). Only a “new creation” in Christ made up of both the circumcised and the uncircumcised are this chosen seed of Israel’s race (cf. Gal. 6:15–17; I will address these verse later in part five).

In the New Testament, especially, the terms “Israel,” “twelve tribes,” “circumcision,” “temple,” “Jerusalem,” “Mt. Zion,” “the priesthood,” “sacrifices,” “stones,” “a stone,” “a chief cornerstone,” “pillars,” etc., all now take on a spiritual meaning and idea in the person and work of Christ. Earthy Jerusalem typified the heavenly Jerusalem; the earthly temple, the heavenly temple; the natural priesthood, a spiritual priesthood; and even natural Israel was typical of a spiritual Israel. And literal festivals, sacrifices, and Sabbaths as well, all take on a whole new meaning in Christ. They were all earthly, carnal, types, copies and representations of that which was heavenly—mere shadows of the spiritual realities found in Christ. This is what God told Moses when He gave him the blueprints for the Tabernacle in the wilderness; and the author of Hebrews substantiates all of this in every detail. So when Christ spoke in Mat. 19:28 of sitting on the throne of His glory with the twelve apostles also sitting on twelve thrones with Him judging the twelve tribes of Israel, He had in mind Israel not according the flesh, but Israel according to the Spirit, with the twelve tribes being situated on the north, south, east and west of the Tabernacle of Moses all figuratively portraying in a similitude all of God’s chosen people coming from the four corners of the earth—the Israel of God which is not all Israel according to the flesh (see also Mat. 8:11–12 and Lke. 13:28–29 for Christ referring also to this very same idea that He even spoke of through His prophet Isaiah in Isa. 43:5–9 and 49:11–12).

So for Showers to make the claim “that all Israel,” or all natural Jews in the future, “will be regenerated”[16] is just simply not true. It never was in the past and it surely won’t be in the future. And furthermore, “all Israel will be saved,” according to Paul in Rom. 11:26 was never to be construed of as every single Jew being saved in a future seven-year tribulation and on into a future earthly millennium. Such a notion borders on the absurd, and is not in-line with Paul’s overall teaching in Romans 9–11 that only those who are God’s elect remnant and “children of promise” (9:8) out of both Jews and Gentiles (cf. Gal. 4:28) are counted or reckoned for the seed of Abraham. God doesn’t have two peoples, one natural people comprised of all ethnic Jews, and one spiritual people comprised of all Jews and Gentiles in Christ. It can only be one or the other, not both; with the latter being wholly on the side of truth.

Again, what Christ has to say here in Mat. 19:28 has nothing whatsoever to do with Israel according to the flesh, let alone to all natural Jews being regenerated in the future as Showers claims. To be sure, the “regeneration” that Christ is talking about here is the same one mentioned only one more time in the New Testament that Paul talks about in Tit. 3:5 of, “the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Ghost,” as a confirming witness to the words of our Savior of the age of His children being born-again, or regenerated (Gk. palingghenesia; from palin, “again” and genesis, “birth”).

When Christ speaks of this period of people being born-again, He says it would be when He would be seated on the throne of His glory. This occurred upon His ascension to His throne after His resurrection that Peter describes of David also saying about Christ one day sitting on his throne, in heaven, immediately upon His resurrection and ascension to His throne in Acts 2:30–36. This is not some future sitting on a throne—let alone on earth—but is now, and in heaven. And although many commentators have considered this idea of the word “regeneration” here, they haven’t been able to make heads or tails of it one way or another due to the fact that they have not quite understood what to think about Christ saying that He would come in His kingdom with power and on the throne of His glory seated at the right hand of the Father. They have stumbled over this important interpretive key to the puzzle here, having placed this enthronement of Christ’s off into the future at the end of this age, rather than at the beginning of His present rule and reign with Him now indeed being seated at God’s right hand. And until one crosses over this hurdle, they will inevitably stumble over Christ’s words here and venture down a path that is not of His choosing.

In Mat. 16:28 (along with Mk. 9:1 and Lke. 9:27) and Mat. 26:64 (along with Mk. 14:62 and Lke. 22:69), Jesus told some of His disciples that they would not die before seeing Him come in His kingdom and power, and that the Sanhedrin from that time in which He spoke those words to them would “henceforth” (or, lit., from that time forward) see Him seated at the right hand of God and coming on the clouds of heaven; a seating “at the right hand of God” that Mark later says occurred right after Christ’s parting words to His disciples (16:19). And many Scriptures have already been cited from the New Testament epistles that affirm this very same idea. What Christ is stating here in these verses speaks volumes of His current rule and reign. And the “sign” of Him being “in heaven” in Mat. 24:30 (not on earth mind you), was to be “seen” by His disciples and the Sanhedrin no less in His coming on the clouds[17] of the Roman armies with power to sack Jerusalem in 70 AD; in addition to giving His Holy Spirit of washing and "regeneration" along with the power to inaugurate His kingdom. Christ’s Second Coming, not predicted here in these verses, is to come later when the last enemy to be destroyed will be death at the resurrection of the just and the unjust at the last trump.

And as far as Showers claiming that those who believe in Covenant Theology don’t hold out a restoration of the entire heavens and earth some day in the future, just the opposite is true. Rom. 8:21–22 is often cited by those who believe in Covenant Theology for such a persuasion to the contrary, albeit not referring to Christ ruling from an earthly throne upon the earth in a future millennium, but realized at His Second and final Coming when He makes all things new. And the verses that Showers refers to in Isa. 2:2–4; 9:6–7; 11:2–5, 6–9; 33:24; 35:5–6; 55:13; Ezk. 34:25–29 and 47:1–12, in the greater contexts in which he extrapolates these verses from, have nothing whatsoever to do with a future reign of Christ as King on the earth, but with His present rule and reign as King now from heaven. Even Isaiah 65–66 has nothing to do with Christ reigning as King on the earth someday in the future, but only denotes with parabolic and figurative language of what is taking place right now in His kingdom. Such men as Showers are taking all of these things too literally, and are again stumbling over God’s and Christ’s words, which is to be expected of all those who have not had the eyes of their understanding enlightened. All such people are still dull of hearing and slow of learning, having eyes in which they do not see and ears in which they do not hear. And whereas they ought to by now be teachers, they have need that someone teach them again what these first principles or teachings of Christ—as laid out in the tabernacle of Moses and the temple of Solomon—are really all about. The fact that Christ said His kingdom is not a literal kingdom of this world whereby men would physically fight for Him, should lead us all to believe that we must, by the very nature of the case, look for another meaning when it comes to reading such verses above. Christ's apostles eventually did, we must as well. We must begin to “see” things as they began to see them; things that are of a spiritual and ethereal nature, not of a carnal and earthly one.

Click here for part three.



Footnotes:

[1] Lewis Sperry Chafer. Dispensationalism (Dallas Seminary Press, 1936), p. 107.

[2] See 1Cor. 3:22.

[3] Israel My Glory. The Facts and Flaws of Covenant Theology, Part 2. Nov./ Dec. issue 2011, Vol. 69, Number 6, p. 21.

[4] Israel My Glory. The Facts and Flaws of Covenant Theology, Part 4. Mar./ Apr. issue 2012, Vol. 70, Number 2, p. 34, col. 3, par. 7. Italics mine.

[5] Israel My Glory. The Facts and Flaws of Covenant Theology, Part 4. Mar./ Apr. issue 2012, Vol. 70, Number 2, p. 34, col. 3, par. 3ff.

[6] The Expositor’s Bible Commentary. Frank E. Gaebelein, gen. ed. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan), vol. 10, p. 485.

[7] Israel My Glory. The Facts and Flaws of Covenant Theology, Part 3. Jan./Feb. issue 2012, vol. 70, #1. p. 28. Words in brackets mine.

[8] Ibid. Words in italics his, words in brackets mine.

[9] Ibid.

[10] Israel My Glory. The Facts and Flaws of Covenant Theology, Part 4. Mar./Apr. issue 2012, vol. 70, #2. p. 35. Words in brackets mine.

[11] Israel My Glory. The Facts and Flaws of Covenant Theology, Part 2. Nov./Dec. issue 2011, vol. 69, #6. p. 21.

[12] With the temple of God now being understood by Paul as the Church, it stands to reason in understanding what Paul is describing here in Thessalonians as something similar to what happened with the old literal temple made of stone which was a type not only in its glorification, but in its desecration and desolation as well. Whether from within Israel’s own ranks, or from without, the temple of God was always in some manner or form being desecrated or defiled. So too, in the Church, there are those from within and without who attempt to set themselves up within her midst and desecrate or defile her in some manner or form. This can be either through false doctrine through the commandments and teachings of men, through unholy living, or by the world trying to influence and take over the Church and make her conform to their image and likeness, rather than after God’s. This occurs because Paul says they “love not the truth” in order to be saved and delivered. And they also love to have their ears tickled with false and fanciful theories about the future. As a result, God sends them a strong and powerful delusion so that they would rather believe a lie than to believe in the truth. This has been going on since the formation of God’s spiritual temple through Christ and His apostles, right up until this present time with the leaven of Judaism and of false brethren within our midst; with unholy living being acceptable as the norm; and with the Church becoming a political and social entity that is being fashioned after the likeness of the other kingdoms of this world. In the end, all such people will be condemned who have not believed in the truth, but have delighted in all such wickedness. They prefer lies over truth; they revel in being recognized more as sinners rather than as saints; and they take pride and glory in buildings made of stone and in exerting their influence over others as the Gentiles of this world also love to do. As such, their god is their own bellies. They are more like the world rather than like Christ. And these people “love” it this way!

[13] Israel My Glory. The Facts and Flaws of Covenant Theology, Part 5. May/June. issue 2012, vol. 70, #3. p. 34. Words in brackets mine. This is the verse Showers had just referred to in reference to his statement here being cited.

[14] David Brown. Christ’s Second Coming: Will It Be Premillennial? (Edinburgh: Johnstone & Hunter, 1856), Intro., pp. 7, 9, 10.

[15] Amos’ prophecy of David’s tent being repaired and rebuilt with its borders being enlarged in order “that they may possess the remnant of Edom and all nations that bear My name” (9:12), was to also include the rest of those things declared in his prophecy of,

when the reaper will be overtaken by the plowman and the planter by the one treading grapes. New wine will drip from the mountains and flow from all the hills. I will bring back my exiled people Israel; they will rebuild the ruined cities and live in them. They will plant vineyards and drink their wine; they will make gardens and eat their fruit. I will plant Israel in their own land, never again to be uprooted from the land I have given them, says the Lord your God (vv. 13–15).

What is being depicted here of reapers overtaking plowman and those treading grapes before they are even planted goes beyond anything that is to be understood naturally here. As I stated earlier, God states things in such a way in order to let us know that He is not talking about literal plowman plowing and literal harvesters harvesting, but of a time when those of us would say not that there are four months until the harvest, but that the fields are already ripe for harvesting even now (cp. Jhn. 4:35). And the “new wine” is not literal wine as many have mistakenly supposed, but is the “new wine” of the Holy Spirit that is placed into the “new wine skins” that Jesus described to us. And, also, who is not to say that even the “ruined cities,” “vineyards,” and “gardens” are those whom the apostles and others have rebuilt and planted and who as their plowman “drink their wine” and “eat their fruit” even as the ox that treads out the corn?

But even if the rest of these verses in Amos were to be understood in a literal manner, they can only be understood as being realized under our New Covenant with Christ in which this tabernacle of David is now being said to be restored and going beyond Israel’s borders to possess even the remnant of Edom (or the Gentiles).

Interestingly, Isaiah depicts some of these exact same ideas that Amos talks about above with similar expressions and wording found in chapter 61; and which began to be fulfilled in the days when Christ stood up in the synagogue and announced that He would preach the good news to all those who were poor in spirit; binding up the brokenhearted; proclaiming freedom for the captives; and release from darkness for the prisoners. All such converts Isaiah says would be called, “oaks of righteousness, a planting of the Lord for the display of His splendor” (v. 3). And it is of these converts in our days that he continues to write about and say:

They will rebuild the ancient ruins and restore the places long devastated; they will renew the ruined cities that have been devastated for generations. Aliens [Gentile converts] will shepherd your flocks; foreigners [again, Gentile believers] will work your fields and vineyards. And you will be called priests of the Lord, you will be named ministers of our God. You will feed on the wealth of nations, and in their riches you will boast. Instead of their shame My people will receive a double portion, and instead of disgrace they will rejoice in their inheritance; and so they will inherit a double portion in their land, and everlasting joy will be theirs….For as the soil makes the sprout come up and a garden causes seeds to grow, so the Sovereign Lord will make righteousness and praise spring up [like plants] before all nations. (vv. 4–7, 11; bracketed words mine).

This is where dispensationalists would accuse us who believe in Covenant Theology of spiritualizing all those texts that seem to be so obviously understood by the untrained eye as that which is to be interpreted literally. But the rebuilding of David’s tabernacle that also seems to be “so obviously” as understood “literally,” according to the inspiration of James, is not. And it is only because of this that we would even attempt to interpret the remainder of Amos’ prophecy as also that which is not to be understood literally, but were literal words used by God to describe something that is to be only spiritually discerned. And there are many more such occurrences in the all of the prophet’s writings that would lead us also to interpret things in this manner, or at least to begin to point us in that direction.

Jesus’ own interpretation and application of Malachi’s prophecy of the coming of Elijah before the coming of the day of the Lord as being John the Baptist is just one glaring example of this. And in knowing that there would be those who would have a very difficult time in believing or receiving that, Christ said, “If you can receive it, he is the Elijah who was to come” (Mat. 11:14; 17:12). John was the one whom his father Zechariah had received a word of the Lord from the angel saying that he would come “in the Spirit and power of Elijah” (Lke. 1:17). And yet even for all this, there are still the carnal thinking and reasoning literalists today who believe that this prophecy must still be literally interpreted and fulfilled in the physical return of Elijah the prophet some time later in our future.

Dispensationalist are very troubled by the words of Amos being quoted by James as applying to the ingathering of the Gentiles with believing Israelites as the rebuilding of David‘s tabernacle or house. It just doesn’t quite fit so well into their “literal” hermeneutic. So they attempt to side-step or skirt the truth that James is proclaiming in Acts 15, in a vain attempt to put off this rebuilding of David’s tabernacle in the future with the natural Jews in Palestine in a future rebuilt temple and in a kingdom that is upon the earth. For they claim that when James says, “after this I will return and rebuild,” that he meant some time long after his day and some time later in our future. But this is not what James meant at all. He is quoting the words of Amos as Amos spoke them back in his day and from that time going forward. The prophet Amos, in chapter 9:8-10, had just described the calamities which would come upon the nation of the Jews by their being scattered and driven away. But after that (Heb: “on that day,” v. 11, that is, the day when God should revisit them and recover them) He would, as also in the words of Isaiah 11:1, restore them through a Branch from the root of Jesse that had been felled like a great tree. James understood this as referring to the times of the Messiah, and to the introduction of the gospel to the Gentiles to make them citizens and fellow-heirs with believing Israel. And so the passage of Amos 9:12 is rendered to read in the Septuagint: “that the remnant of men, and all the Gentiles upon whom My name is called, may earnestly seek Me, saith the Lord who does all these things.”

It is natural to presume that men who do not have the eyes to see, or the ears to hear, that they would be inclined to believe as they do without God’s Spirit illuminating them. It was no different in Christ’s day, and it is no different today. “Shall we pluck out these tares,” we might ask! “No,” says Christ, “leave them alone until the end.” Every man shall give an account for what he has said and done.

[16] Israel My Glory. The Facts and Flaws of Covenant Theology, Part 2. Nov./Dec. issue 2011, vol. 69, #6. p. 22.

[17] Often “clouds” in the Old Testament prophets is a descriptive or figurative term used by the Lord to depict the clouds of devastating armies He would use to mete out His judgments upon other nations. The prophets speak of the Lord riding on these “clouds” to bring swift destruction upon an unruly nation. For example, in Isaiah 19:1, the prophet says the Lord will ride on a swift cloud and come to Egypt. Here God refers to His imminent judgment upon Egypt as Judge and King (or as, “the Lord”) and describes it in terms of coming on a “cloud.” Clouds are often referred to in the Scriptures as either that which bestows a blessing, or that which bestows devastation and destruction, as storm clouds often bring. Here God is likening His judgment to a storm cloud that brings with it devastation (see also Jer. 11:16; 23:19; 25:32; 30:23 and Isa. 30:30).

Again, Ezekiel writes concerning Egypt and her surrounding allies:

Wail and say, “Alas for that day!” For the day is near, the day of the Lord is near—a day of clouds, a time of doom for the nations. A sword will come against Egypt, and anguish will come upon Cush. When the slain fall in Egypt, her wealth will be carried away and her foundations torn down. Cush and Put, Lydia and all Arabia, Libya and the people of the covenant land will fall by the sword along with Egypt….Thebes will be taken by storm….Dark will be the day at Tahpanhes when I break the yoke of Egypt….She will be covered with clouds (30:1–5).

Here we see such judgment depicted by stormy, gloomy “clouds…of doom,” and referred to also as “the day of the Lord”; common wording used throughout Scripture depicting God’s wrath being meted throughout history upon ungodly people. And it was to be meted out by “the sword” of the invading army of the Babylonians (vv. 4, 10–12), one of God’s four sore judgments as described in Ezk. 14:21.

And also notice the wording “she will be covered with clouds.” Not too soon afterward do we read also in Ezekiel where God says He will bring Gog and his armies against Israel “advancing like a storm; you will be like a cloud covering the land….You will advance against my people Israel like a cloud that covers the land” (38:9, 16).

The “clouds” referred to earlier that God said Egypt would be “covered” in, were the hordes of the armies of king Nebuchadnezzar that were to sweep over the land of Egypt, just like here in Ezekiel 38, where they are described as the armies of Gog. Literal, white, puffy clouds are not what the Lord is referring to here. He is using the imagery of “storm” clouds as figurative language to describe judgments that were about to come upon these nations via other nations.

Once again the Word of the Lord states: “Look! He advances like clouds, His chariots come like a whirlwind” (Jer. 4:13). Here in this context God is referring to the Babylonians (“from the north,” v. 6) that He was going to use “to advance like clouds” and judge Israel with. In Isaiah 19, as noted above, this judgment of the Lord is also said to be advancing and “coming on a cloud” via the Babylonians against Egypt.

Other places where similar imagery is used is: Isa. 5:30; 14:31; 28:2; 29:6; 30:30; Jer. 25:32; Psm. 83:15. In none of these verses are we to get the impression that God, or anyone else, is to literally come on clouds, winds, or stormy tempests. Clearly, the Lord is using such imagery to express certain ideas and concepts about Himself to others. In Gen. 11:5, God said “He came down to see the city,” or in Ex. 3:8, “I am come down to deliver thee.” But in none of these places are we to understand that the Lord “visibly” came down, but He did “come down” nevertheless.