New occasional series: The correspondence

44
TESTIMONY For the study and defence of the holy Scripture Vol. 86 No. 1,015 April 2016 156 Also in this issue: Ruth: a pattern of Christ’s work of redemption 132 Israel, Palestine and the two-state solution 138 Good soil? 147 A rod out of the stem of Jesse 154 New occasional series: The correspondence of John Thomas

Transcript of New occasional series: The correspondence

Page 1: New occasional series: The correspondence

TESTIMONYFor the study and defence of the holy Scripture

Vol. 86 No. 1,015 April 2016

156

Also in this issue:

Ruth: a pattern of Christ’s work of redemption 132Israel, Palestine and the two-state solution 138Good soil? 147A rod out of the stem of Jesse 154

New occasional series:The correspondence

of John Thomas

Contents

Page 2: New occasional series: The correspondence

Publication of articles in the Testimony does not presume editorial endorsement except on matters of fundamental doctrine, as defined in the Birmingham Amended Statement of Faith.

Publishing Editor:JEREMY THOMAS. 22 Kingswood Close, Kings Norton, Birmingham, B30 3NX. Tel. 0121 444 6810; email: [email protected]

Section Editors:DAVID BURGES. 7 Whitehead Drive, Wellesbourne, Warwick, CV35 9PW. Tel. 01789 842692; email: [email protected] Science; Archaeology

EDWARD CARR. 46 New Street, Donisthorpe, DE12 7PG. Tel. 01530 271522; email: [email protected] Exhortation

SHAUN MAHER. 5 Birch Court, Doune, FK16 6JD. Tel. 01786 842996; email: [email protected] Watchman

ERIC MARSHALL. The Pines, Ling Common Road, Castle Rising, King’s Lynn, Norfolk, PE31 6AE. Tel. 01553 631279; email: [email protected] Exposition

JOHN NICHOLLS. 17 Upper Trinity Road, Halstead, Essex, CO9 1EE. Tel. 01787 473089; email: [email protected] Reviews

JEREMY THOMAS (see above)Principles, preaching and problems

GEOFF HENSTOCK. 13 Alpha Crescent, Panorama 5041, S. Australia. Tel. 8277-0730; email: [email protected] Australia Editor; Prophecy

Testimony website:http://testimonymagazine.com

Articles for publicationArticles to be considered for publication are welcome and should be forwarded to the Publishing Editor (in Australia, the local editor) in the first instance.

Publishing Editor’s column 121Mary’s untouchable Lord

Part B: “As I received of my Father”2. The testimony of Psalm 89 (part 2)Peter Heavyside 123

Perfect peace2. Shalom: a word study

(part 1)Derek Palmer 125

Your LettersWhat do jodhpurs say about a man? 126Beyond where Kedron’s waters flow 130Samuel’s tribe 131

Ruth—drama of redemptionJoe Harding 132

The prophecy of Amos (2)Kenneth Camplin 135

The two-state solution: back on the agenda

Shaun Maher 138The patient waiting for Christ (Review)

John Nicholls 141

A Babylonish garmentGeoff Henstock 143

Genesis 1–2Order and contentPeter Heavyside 144

The Parable of the SowerGary Penn 147

The sincerity and truth of Exodus 11–13

1. Exodus 11:1–12:36Sam Day 149

The stem of JessePhilip Conrad 154

The letters of John Thomas to Alexander Campbell (1)

Reg Carr 156Prayers to God

Adah Jones 158At the memorial meeting

13. The serving brothers and sisters

George Booker 159Istanbul scenes

4. The Egyptian ObeliskJeremy Thomas VIII

Contents

TESTIMONY

VII

Testimony books

Page 3: New occasional series: The correspondence

Testimony, April 2016 121Contents

Publishing Editor’s column

“Now the LORD said to Moses, ‘Rise early in the morning and present yourself before Pharaoh . . . and say to him, “Thus says the Lord, ‘Let My people go, that they may serve Me. For if you do not let My people go, behold, I will send swarms of flies on you and on your servants and on your people and into your houses; and the houses of the Egyptians will be full of swarms of flies, and also the ground on which they dwell. But on that day I will set apart the land of Goshen, where My people are living, so that no swarms of flies will be there, in order that you may know that I, the LORD, am in the midst of the land. I will put a division between My people and your people. Tomorrow this sign will occur.’”’ Then the LORD did so” (Ex. 8:20-24, NASB).

Cover picture: “Flies,” Plagues series, Abigail Halstead

THE INSPIRED WRITER of the third Gospel introduces us to the Lord Jesus Christ in a particular way. To begin, there are the Lord’s

first recorded words—his only recorded words from the first thirty years of his life—when he was found by Joseph and Mary, back in the temple precincts in Jerusalem: “Why is it that you were looking for me? Did you not know that I had to be in my Father’s house?” (2:49).1 Next come his responses to the devil’s three temptations in chap-ter 4, each riposte consisting of a quotation from his Father’s Word in Deuteronomy. Thirdly, also in Luke 4, comes the incident in Nazareth when “he entered the synagogue on the Sabbath, and stood up to read. And the book of the prophet Isaiah was handed to him. And he opened the book . . .” (vv. 16,17). Luke paints us a consistent picture of Jesus, whether as a child, or in private during his wilderness temptations, or at the start of his public ministry, steeped in his understanding of his role, and equipped by the Scriptures for the work required of him by his Father.

This Gospel ends in a similar way, with a further indication of how well the Word had equipped Jesus for this work, as he converses with the two disconsolate disciples on the road from Jerusalem to Emmaus: “Then beginning with Moses and with all the prophets, he explained to them the things concerning himself in all the Scriptures” (24:27); and later that same day with the eleven: “These are my words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all

things which are written about me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled” (v. 44). Thus the Holy Spirit neatly ‘bookends’ Luke’s Gospel, depicting Christ hav-ing full recourse to the Old Testament Scriptures that foretold his mission and ministry in such detail.

‘I am the Christ’The account of the Nazareth incident is helpful for us to appreciate the spirit and understanding of the Lord as he began his ministry. His chosen reading was from what we know as Isaiah 61:

“The Spirit of the Lord GOD is upon me, because the LORD has anointed me to bring good news to the afflicted; He has sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim lib-erty to captives and freedom to prisoners; to proclaim the favourable year of the LORD . . .” (vv. 1,2).

It has been suggested that this portion of Isaiah was part of the appointed Scripture reading for the day, according to one system in use at the time. However, the fact that the Lord specifically “found the place where it was written” (Lk. 4:17) may indicate that the Lord deliberately selected this passage, which spoke eloquently of his role as the one anointed by Yahweh to bring His message of liberty. In effect, this was an explicit declaration by Jesus that he was the Christ of

1. Bible quotations are from the NASB.

TESTIMONY

Page 4: New occasional series: The correspondence

Testimony, April 2016122 Contents

God: “Today this Scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing” (v. 21).

Christ’s work foretoldAcquainted as he was with the specific prophecies of his work, and with the other passages to which they alluded, what ideas may have been in the Lord’s mind as he began his preaching to those in the city “where he had been brought up” (v. 16)?

First there is a direct quotation from the Law of Moses. The Law provided that every fiftieth year should be a jubilee. In this year property had to be returned to its former owner, the land lay fallow and slaves were set free. In the words of Leviticus 25:10: “You shall . . . consecrate the fiftieth year and proclaim a release through the land to all its inhabitants.” The wording is identical to Isaiah 61:1: “to proclaim liberty to captives.” The law of the jubilee therefore anticipated Messiah’s work of securing forgiveness of sins for the people of God. To forgive is essentially to release someone from an obligation they are under. Matthew’s record of ‘the Lord’s prayer’ refers not to trespasses but to debts: “forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors” (6:12).

Psalm 69 provides a second connection with Isaiah 61, the Lord’s chosen reading. This psalm of David is messianic (verse 4 is quoted in John 15:25, verse 9 in John 2:17). Messiah, in distress, calls out to God for deliverance: “But as for me, my prayer is to You, O LORD, at an acceptable time; O God, in the greatness of Your lovingkindness, answer me with Your saving truth” (v. 13). The corresponding phrase is in Isaiah 61:2: “. . . to proclaim the favourable year of the LORD.” As he began his public ministry in Luke 4, then, Jesus would have been aware of his dependence on his Father if His work of salvation was to be ac-complished.

Thirdly, it was Isaiah’s prophecy which pro-vided the Lord Jesus with God’s response to ‘his’ prayer in Psalm 69. Here, in one of Isaiah’s four ‘Servant Songs,’ Yahweh’s chosen Servant declares his conviction in his vocation: “The LORD called me from the womb; from the body of my mother He named me . . . the LORD . . . formed me from the womb to be His Servant, to bring Jacob back to Him” (Isa. 49:1,5). And the Servant was assured: “Thus says the LORD: ‘In a favourable time I have answered you, and in a day of salvation I have helped you; and I will keep you and give you for a covenant of the people . . .’” (v. 8). In a beautiful juxtaposition of passages, Messiah calls to Yahweh for his

salvation in Psalm 69, and Yahweh answers Mes-siah’s prayer in Isaiah 49.

Doubtless these were among the Scriptures uppermost in the Lord’s mind, then, as he read from the synagogue scroll in Nazareth.

A ministry of reconciliationAnother quotation consolidates the links between the Old Testament passages mentioned, and also draws us into the work of Messiah. Speaking of God’s salvation in Jesus, the Apostle Paul says: “Therefore if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creature; the old things passed away; behold, new things have come” (2 Cor. 5:17). Then note the key word as Paul continues: “Now all these things are from God, who reconciled us to Himself through Christ and gave us [the apostles] the ministry of reconciliation, namely, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and He has com-mitted to us the word of reconciliation” (vv. 18,19). The forgiveness of our sins accomplished by the death and resurrection of our Lord ‘reconciled’ us to God; and this same work of reconciliation was at the heart of the apostles’ work.

But this is a work not limited to the apostles: “Therefore, we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God were making an appeal through us; we beg you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God” (v. 20). God’s gracious work of salvation is a work which requires the participation of those whom God is willing to save. Thus Paul invites the Corinthians: “And working together with him, we also urge you not to receive the grace of God in vain”—and then comes the quotation again—“for He says, ‘At the acceptable time I listened to you, and on the day of salvation I helped you.’ Behold, now is ‘the acceptable time,’ behold, now is ‘the day of salvation’—giving no cause for offence in anything, so that the ministry will not be discredited” (6:1-3).

The ministry of reconciliation begun by God in giving His Son, and furthered by the apostles in the first century, is one to which we, as benefi-ciaries of God’s grace, must put our hands. We do so, in the words of Paul’s exposition, by “giving no cause for offence”—by putting no grounds for stumbling in the way of our brother or our sister. If we desire to live out the principles of ‘liberty’ and ‘release’ found in the passages we have considered, then we will no longer have occasion to hold each other under any obliga-tion, and we will show to one another the same generous forgiveness which God has shown to us.

Page 5: New occasional series: The correspondence

Testimony, April 2016 123Contents

Mary’s untouchable Lord— an exposition of John 20:17Part B: “As I received of my Father”2. The testimony of Psalm 89 (part 2)Peter Heavyside

Continuing our consideration of Psalm 89, why was it Ethan the Ezrahite whom God chose to make known Psalm 89?

ONE REASON for God’s choice of Ethan as the inspired writer of Psalm 89 is that Ethan himself reinforces the assurance

to be gained from remembering the covenant of promise to David and, more particularly, the ark’s ascent into Jerusalem. How is this so?

Ethan the EzrahiteEthan was a contemporary of David and of the Levitical family of Merari, one of three appointed by David “in charge of the service of song in the house of the LORD” (1 Chron. 6:31; 15:17,19).1 The opening verse of Psalm 89 shows that Ethan, in part, was fulfilling this service of song, because he says, “I will sing of the steadfast love of the LORD, for ever.” Significantly for this exposition, Ethan and his brothers were appointed “after the ark rested” in the house of the Lord (1 Chron. 6:31). Now the ark had rest after its ascent into the place David had prepared for it in Jerusalem.

We can draw this conclusion from our earlier considerations. One of the songs of ascents we explored commemorated this period of David’s life, and we saw that when the ark of the Lord’s strength ‘rose up’ into the place prepared for it by David, this is described as going “into [the LORD’S] rest” (Ps. 132:8, AV). This is also confirmed by the prophecy at the earliest jour-neys of the ark: “when it rested, [Moses] said, Return, O LORD, to the ten thousand thousands of Israel” (Num. 10:36). Thus the appointment of Ethan to the service of song “in the house of the LORD” (1 Chron. 6:31; Ps. 122:1) followed the

rising up and ascent of the ark into the place prepared for it by David (2 Sam. 6:16,17). The Lord’s selection of Ethan as singer reinforces Psalm

89’s focus on the recent ascent of the ark into its rest and the covenant of promise given to David subsequent to this.

Consideration of the major themes of Psalm 89 and its writer has shown that the significance of the psalm for its historical setting, the terrifying wars of 2 Samuel 10 and 1 Chronicles 19, can be understood only from a contemplation of this ascent of the ark into Jerusalem and the subse-quent promise to David. This provides edifying assurance of God’s faithfulness to His covenants of promise, such that, notwithstanding present tribulations, His people can trust in Him for ever. This association of the psalm with the ascent of the ark is as we would have expected from Jesus’ use of the phrase, “my Father, my God” (Ps. 89:26) at a time in his life which was prefigured by the events referred to in the psalm. We are now in a position to examine the contextual setting for these words that Jesus quotes.

“My Father, my God”The expression Jesus quotes is found in the sec-tion of the psalm in which the Lord speaks for the second time (vv. 19-37). In this second decla-ration the Lord narrates His work of raising up David His anointed through the covenants of promise. But after His opening words, in which He recounts His historic choice and anointing of

Exposition

1. Bible quotations from the ESV unless otherwise indi-cated.

Page 6: New occasional series: The correspondence

Testimony, April 2016124 Contents

David (vv. 19,20), from verse 21 onwards the Lord speaks (still using the language of the covenant of promise) of what He will continue to do for His anointed in the future. In the psalm’s historical context, this is the Lord’s assurance that He has not forsaken His covenant of promise to David, even though it seemed otherwise from the wars of 2 Samuel 10 and 1 Chronicles 19.

Yet there is more to the language of promise than this. The Lord also speaks of the one in whom He establishes His covenant of promise to David; that is, Psalm 89:19-37 is a prophecy about the Lord Jesus Christ. This is obvious from Jesus’ appropriation of these words to himself in John 20:17; but this identification is also evidenced clearly within the psalm. The one who cries “my Father, my God” is described in terms that are plainly prophetic of Jesus; he is described as “exalted . . . chosen from the people . . . I have anointed him . . . in [the LORD’S] name shall his horn be exalted . . . firstborn . . . his throne as the days of the heavens” (vv. 19,20,24,27,29).

This portrayal is unmistakably of our Lord. The apostolic use of verse 27, “Jesus Christ . . . the first begotten of the dead” (Rev. 1:5, AV),2 shows that the timing of this part of God’s dec-laration is at the resurrection of Jesus, the ‘birth’ of the Son of God from the dead, and being made God’s firstborn at that time. As was noted earlier, Jesus’ appropriation to himself of the words “my Father, my God” when speaking of his ascension, shows that verse 26 likewise has fulfilment after his resurrection. The words are associated with Jesus’ ascent to his Father the same day. This is consistent with what we have seen from our consideration of major themes in Ethan’s song, and of the writer himself.

FulfilmentNow let us turn our attention to what is signified by our Lord Jesus Christ in his reference to Psalm 89 in John 20:17. It is noteworthy that the words the Lord quotes from Psalm 89:26 are embedded within an expression which is first- and second-person dialogue. Speaking to the Father, the spirit of Christ in the psalmist says, “You are my Father, my God, and the Rock of my salvation.” The Lord’s association of these words with instructions to his disciples concerning his imminent ascension informs us that this dialogue between the Father and His Son in verses 26 and 27 was fulfilled the

same day as Jesus’ resurrection, when he stood before God. This conclusion will be reinforced when we consider the second of the prophecies to which Jesus directs our attention.

Thus when Jesus spoke with Mary, he antici-pated crying the words of verse 26 to his Father after his ascent to heaven. He gives voice to this expectation in his instruction to Mary: “go to my brothers and say to them, ‘I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God’” (Jno. 20:17). When the Lord stood before his Father in heaven, this anticipation was fulfilled. Seeing the Father face to face, he cries to Him, as Psalm 89 informs us, “You are my Father, my God, and the Rock of my salva-tion.” And the psalm informs us prophetically that the Father responds. The following verse (v. 27) describes God’s response to the Lord Jesus’ cry. The Father’s answer to “my Father, my God,” confirming the Son’s perfect fulfilment of his Fa-ther’s will, is, “I will make him the firstborn, the highest of the kings of the earth.” This is fitting when we recall that one of the things that God promised to David concerning his seed was, “I will be to him a father, and he shall be to Me a son” (2 Sam. 7:14). Is there any other prophecy in which we see the Father speaking to His Son using such first- and second-person dialogue? Is there any other prophecy of the Father respond-ing to His Son’s triumphant cry when he stands before Him in heaven?

As mentioned earlier, Jesus directs our atten-tion to another prophecy about him which, when considered together with Psalm 89:26, enables us to gain further understanding of the dialogue that took place between the Father and the Son on his victorious ascension into heaven. By following the weave of the second of these two connected prophecies, we witness the Father giving voice to His response to Jesus’ triumphant cry. Through the privilege granted to us of understanding some of this dialogue, we learn further significance in what was accomplished by the Lord at his ascent.

(To be continued)

2. There are multiple uses of Psalm 89 in Revelation 1:5, confirming that “first begotten” (Rev. 1:5) references “firstborn” (Ps. 89:27). For example: “the faithful wit-ness” (see Ps. 89:37, RV); “the prince of the kings of the earth” (see Ps. 89:27).

“I will sing of the steadfast love of the LORD, for ever; with my mouth will I make known Your faithfulness to all generations” (Ps. 89:1, ESV).

Page 7: New occasional series: The correspondence

Testimony, April 2016 125Contents

Perfect peace2. Shalom: a word study (part 1)Derek Palmer

Words rarely translate exactly from one language to another. We will all have heard brethren say, “Strong’s says this word can mean . . .”, and perhaps give a number of variants. This does not mean that we can choose any of the variants to suit our argument. It means that those variants express nuances of the original word, and a proper translation will seek to embrace all those nuances.

TO UNDERSTAND what shalom means, and why some versions render “peace offering” as “fellowship offering,” and really to grasp

what statement our offerer intends to make, we shall embark on a journey of discovery that I think will be profitable. To benefit fully, you need to participate.

What is peace?First, be brave and write down your own simple definition of the word ‘peace,’ how you would define it in everyday use. You now have a refer-ence point to compare as we follow the way the word shalom, so often translated as ‘peace,’ is used in the Bible.

Consider now the following (underlined) occurrences of shalom and then compare your original definition. If necessary, modify it.• Genesis 15:15: “And thou [Abraham] shalt go

to thy fathers in peace”• Genesis 29:6: Jacob to the shepherds: “Is he

[Laban] well?”• 1 Samuel 17:18: Jesse to his son David: “. . .

look how thy brethren fare”• 2 Samuel 18:29: “Is the young man Absalom

safe?”You might decide that health and welfare was the common factor of shalom in these passages. But now consider the following group, which includes some related words:• Joshua 8:31: Moses’ command to make “an

altar of whole [unhewn, RV] stones”• Ruth 2:12: Boaz to Ruth: “a full reward be

given thee”

• Nehemiah 6:15: Nehemiah’s great work: “So the wall was finished”

• Psalm 41:9: David of Ahithophel: “. . . mine own familiar friend, in whom I trusted”

• Jeremiah 13:19: Of Judah: “. . . it shall be wholly carried away cap-tive.”

That shalom can relate to inanimate objects as well leads us to rethink our definition, and with it to consider afresh what the statement our offerer was making when he offered his shalom (peace) offering.

Trying to find a ‘common denominator’ phrase that will fit the passages we have seen is not easy, but clearly shalom has to embrace all these uses.

There is a phrase that will cover all the pas-sages, a phrase that is memorable because it is scriptural, although I am sure it was not intended as a definition of shalom: “But let patience have her perfect work, that ye may be perfect and entire, wanting nothing” (Jas. 1:4).

To be “perfect and entire, wanting nothing” could well have been a good assurance to Abra-ham in Genesis 15; it can equally well apply to Jacob’s query about Laban (had he lost his sight, hearing, a limb or faculties?); it also meets Jesse’s concern as to whether his sons lack anything, and David’s concern for Absalom.

It explains too, in the second group, the use of shalom for stones that are complete, with no chips broken off; for Boaz’s words to Ruth that she should have all her needs met; for the repair-ing of the wall of Jerusalem being complete; for David’s friend as the one he felt ‘at one’ with; and for the entirety of Judah’s captivity.

Not least, it helps us to understand the state-ment that the offerer of the peace offering was so desirous of making to God: ‘I want to be at one with You; I don’t want anything to come between us; I want to have true and complete fellowship with You.’

Exposition

Page 8: New occasional series: The correspondence

Testimony, April 2016126 Contents

The city of peaceBefore we return to the peace offering, there are two interesting sidelights that this digression into shalom provides.

Another occasion where shalom occurs is when Abraham returned from the battle of the kings and paid tithes to Melchizedek, king of Salem. ‘Salem’ is again from our root word shalom. Melchizedek was “priest of the most high God” (Gen. 14:18). The city over which he reigned was a city whose name indicated an ideal towards which all true priests work and which Melchizedek ruled, a city that through its priest was complete and entire, in need of nothing, a city called Shalom. Our great High Priest, after the order of Melchizedek, is to reign over just such a city, a city perfect and entire, in which nothing will be wanting—the New Jerusalem, in which will exist nothing that is offensive to God.

This opens up, too, a fresh way of looking at the name Jerusalem. The frequently heard translation of the word as ‘City of Peace’ now needs rethinking; not just because the second of

the words that make it up is shalom (which we have had to redefine), but because the first word, yara, does not, and never could, mean ‘city.’ The first part of the name indicates ‘to flow,’ much as a flight of arrows might flow down upon an op-posing army, or like the water that flowed from under the temple in Ezekiel’s vision in chapter 47. If we take this latter illustration, what is the characteristic of those waters that flowed forth? Its purpose is, as Ezekiel describes it, that “every thing shall live whither the river cometh” (v. 9). That is to say, wherever these waters come their function is to make complete and entire, to re-move want. Jerusalem will then literally be the place where waters of wholeness, or shalom, flow forth, a prophetic view which will soon become a reality.

Shalom, then, in living up to its fuller meaning, is opening our eyes to larger truths and helping us to see our distant predecessor in Leviticus in a warmer light, as we identify with what he was wanting to express when he stood before the tabernacle with his peace offering.

(To be continued)

What do jodhpurs say about a man?

The thrust of Brother Luke Buckler’s article “What do jodhpurs say about a man?”1 is that we should read material that will “explain the world of the Ancient Near East as the Bible’s original audience perceived and experienced it” (p. 77). The subtitle of the article is, “Why a bit of history is good,” and if that was all that the article advocated, it would be fine. What it does, in fact, is direct the reader to material which is highly critical of our belief that the Bible is the wholly inspired Word of God.

The article argues that “trying to understand a biblical text against the incorrect background will almost always skew our understanding of God’s Word” (p. 75). If this is true, then a great deal of historical knowledge must be necessary before we can understand the Truth. The Bible teaches that God created man in His image, that man sinned, and that God brought forth a plan of salvation which involved the death of His Son.

In return we need to manifest faith, be baptised, walk in the light, and wait for the coming of the Lord from heaven to establish God’s Kingdom on the earth. These things do not need “interpreting” (p. 75); they are facts, clearly stated in the pages of the Bible. They constitute the gospel, and are a revelation from God in language calculated by Him to make us “wise unto salvation” (2 Tim. 3:15; see also Acts 20:32).

The examples given on page 76 do not demon-strate the alleged need for historical and cultural knowledge, as claimed on page 75. With regard to the atoning work of Jesus, Archbishop Anselm was simply not reading Scripture in context, and those involved with the ‘Jesus Seminar’ evidently did not read and believe the text of the Gospels. These issues have nothing to do with history or culture.

One does not need a historian to explain that “Even if things were not always bellicose during

1. Feb. 2016, p. 75.

Your LettersContents

Page 9: New occasional series: The correspondence

Testimony, April 2016 127Contents

Jesus’ time, they were nonetheless far from bucolic . . . It was an atmosphere in which politics and religion were almost always mixed, and messianic claims, actions or ideas were normally viewed by those in power as threats to the political status quo” (p. 76). All one has to do is to read care-fully the text of the Gospels, where an accurate picture of life in the Land in those days, and of the character of Jesus, has been revealed to us by the inspiration of God in the writers.

The section entitled “Mind the gap” (p. 76) is self-contradictory. Either there are “inspired au-thors of the various books of the Bible” who wrote exactly what God determined was necessary for all generations who would read the words, or “the authors naturally left many things unsaid which we, in the twenty-first century, would find useful to know”—both of these statements cannot be true. We might want to know many things about certain incidents in the Bible, but God has revealed everything we need to know for salvation.

The section “Advice and resources” has a number of telling comments and caveats:• “. . . it ‘is important to consult recent, well-

researched works because of the explosion of information uncovered in the last few decades’” (p. 77).

• “Avoid fringe scholars . . . and sources with an obvious bias . . . Take care to evaluate the merits of any material before using it” (p. 77).

• “Of course, for all these recommendations the usual caveats apply: sometimes, for example, they might contain incorrect ideas about the gospel” (footnote 23, p. 77).

• “. . . ‘consult at least three different commen-taries. Beware of theological bias . . .’” (p. 78).

These statements show that the material being recommended to help us understand the histori-cal and cultural background to a Bible passage is a minefield of conflicting views, doctrinal errors and the opinions of men about the Word of God. The advice given is based on accepting only the current consensus amongst academics and scholars. One of the dangers of this is that the consensus changes rapidly—the article admits that books soon become outdated. In contrast, God does not change, and our duty is to listen to Him, obey His voice, and model our thinking on His, not on the theories of man. The natural man is in darkness and requires God to enlighten him: “For Thou wilt light my candle [lamp, RV]: the LORD my God will enlighten my darkness” (Ps. 18:28).

Five times in footnotes the article refers the reader to a website which is highly critical of sound articles by a number of brethren. It teaches that the AV, Strong’s Concordance and Thayer’s Lexicon are out of date and unsuitable for Bible study. The glossary section of the website con-tains a number of definitions of Bible-related words, but there is not a single quotation in this section from a Christadelphian writer. I do not believe this is a website which Christadelphians should be consulting for information on how to understand the Bible better.

The article suggests reading online reviews as a help to evaluating the material that is available. One problem with this advice is that the reviews are likely to be written by those who agree with the current consensus of opinion on the Bible, and may not therefore identify faults in the material reviewed. If these writers and reviewers place the books of the Bible in the wrong chronologi-cal context and imply that the Israelites copied or borrowed their God-given religious practices from local peoples, then this material is of no help at all. Israel were specifically told by God: “Take heed to thyself . . . that thou enquire not after their gods, saying, How did these nations serve their gods?” (Deut. 12:30). Material which suggests that Israel drew their religious concepts from surrounding nations appears to encourage belief in the very thing that God forbade.

Brother Buckler’s article directs readers to his website, where he has posted links to reviews of some of the books recommended. I checked the review of Eerdman’s Dictionary of the Bible and then read its first article, on Aaron. The Diction-ary supports the ‘documentary theory’ of the writing of the Pentateuch,2 and alleges that the Books of Chronicles were written after the exile. This is all standard scholarly opinion, but not true, and not helpful to the serious Bible student. The entry on Daniel states: “The book of Daniel was completed in the second century BC [and] was written to encourage Jews who were being persecuted by the Seleucid king Antiochus IV Epiphanes.” Again, this is the current consensus

2. “The documentary hypothesis . . . proposes that the Torah (the first five books of the Bible) was derived from originally independent, parallel, and complete narratives, which were subsequently combined into the current form by a series of redactors . . . As a form of historical criticism, the hypothesis was developed in the 18th and 19th centuries from the attempt to understand the discrepancies in the biblical text.”—Wikipedia definition

Page 10: New occasional series: The correspondence

Testimony, April 2016128 Contents

view, but, according to Matthew 24:15, not the teaching of the Bible.

One review of John Walton’s book Ancient Near Eastern Thought and the Old Testament contained this statement: “Here we have an important re-versal . . . In Israel the historiography purports to be from the Deity, whereas in the Ancient Near East the royal inscriptions serve as communica-tion to the deity.” By use of the word ‘purports’ the writer demonstrates that he does not believe that the Bible is a wholly inspired revelation from God to man and that it is therefore on a different plane from all other writings. Why should we be encouraged to read this material? Warnings against it would be more appropriate.

Bernard BurtCoventry

Brother Luke Buckler’s article extolling the vir-tues of external resources in our understanding of Scripture needs to be read with care. Whilst it is true that factual detail can help to corroborate Scripture and sometimes helps to explain the nu-ances of certain passages, the extent to which the article exhorts us to utilise modern commentaries is, in my opinion, exaggerated.

There are many areas of Brother Buckler’s arti-cle that could be challenged, and I will therefore have to be selective in my comments:1 Under the subheading “Historical context”

the conclusions of a medieval archbishop who writes about the atoning work of the Lord Jesus are quoted as a warning against not understanding the death of Jesus “in its own historical setting of the first century” (p. 75). But is it not highly probable that the arch-bishop had long-held apostate views on the atonement doctrine, and that he was simply expressing them in a particular way? Brother Buckler asks us to accept that the archbishop’s conclusions about the death and resurrection of the Lord Jesus were influenced by the cul-ture of his day, but this is unlikely to be the case as these erroneous views had been held by many for centuries prior to medieval times. The need for the death of the Lord Jesus is ex-plained throughout the pages of Scripture, and it is wholly unnecessary to unearth anything in the way of external historical facts to arrive at a correct understanding of the doctrine of the atonement.

2 On page 76 there is a paragraph reminding us how we have traditionally valued and used external resources to aid our understanding

of Scripture. The specific example given is that history shows that the Trinity was not a first-century doctrine, which is accompanied by general comments relating to our commu-nity’s fondness for archaeology and history. Admittedly these external sources can be of value, but only those that are factual. Factual information may well serve to enhance our existing overall appreciation of Scripture, but such is secondary and supplementary to the text of Scripture itself, where our efforts and concentration should be centred. Brother Buckler encourages “more . . . of the same” and, by virtue of the recommendations he supplies, considers that newer publications are better. Consulting reviews of some of the recommended books, I wonder why they would ever find space on anyone’s bookshelf. To quote from two reviews of John Walton’s Ancient Near Eastern Thought and the Old Testa-ment:

“[Walton’s] synopsis of comparative Old Testament studies begins with the resur-gence of Egyptian and Mesopotamian ar-chaeological studies during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. He then moves on to discuss the impact of Friedrich Del-itzsch’s lectures concerning how the writ-ers of the Old Testament borrowed from extrabiblical sources set the stage for many secular ideologies removing the special rev-elation aspect from the Bible. This allowed two things to take place. First, it brought out the comparative study of the Bible into a critical realm; and second, it made Assyri-ology, Egyptology, and Hittitology serious academic disciplines which have greatly enhanced modern man’s understanding of these ancient cultures.”“While Walton discusses several forms of Old Testament study, his opinion favors comparative studies.”

From this review we can see that, as Walton favours “comparative studies,” he is not an advocate of total “special revelation.” Verbal inspiration of Scripture has therefore been discarded.

From Walton’s book itself we have this quote:

“Understanding the genre of a piece of literature is necessary if we desire to per-ceive the author’s intentions. Since perceiv-ing an author’s intentions is an essential ingredient to the theological and literary

Page 11: New occasional series: The correspondence

Testimony, April 2016 129Contents

interpretation of a text, we recognize that understanding genre contributes to legiti-mate interpretation.”

But this is just circular reasoning.Another source recommended in the article

is Bailey’s Jesus through Middle Eastern Eyes: Cultural Studies in the Gospels, from which the following is an extract:

“Early illuminated manuscripts of the Gos-pels often contain a drawing on the first page of an angel dictating to the Gospel author. On the popular level, in certain circles, there is an unspoken yearning for the certainty that comes with the Islamic understanding of inspiration. But our Greek text does not allow for such a theory. [Bai-ley then suggests a four-stage process for inspiration.] With these stages in mind, it is necessary to discuss the inspiration of the Gospels as a process that took thirty to fifty years plus to complete” (p. 19).

Whatever the mechanics of inspiration were—and we have to confess that we may not always know precisely—what we do know is that “All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for cor-rection, for instruction in righteousness: that the man of God may be perfect, throughly fur-nished unto all good works” (2 Tim. 3:16,17). This passage is informing us that there is no doubting of the words or weakening of the message; but modern commentators do not concur with our understanding of verbal inspiration. Inspiration is not a process, as Bailey’s book suggests, but a communication of the mind of God into the mind of man for the purpose of writing down God’s chosen words. It does not take a period of thirty to fifty years for God to cause His servants to write down His selected words.

3 Also on pages 76–7, Brother Buckler suggests that the writers of the Bible “initially wrote to readers from their own culture” and in so doing “left many things unsaid which we, in the twenty-first century, would find use-ful to know.” He deduces from this that, for today’s readers of the Bible, who “don’t share a common culture or understanding with the people from ancient times . . . there may be a distance, a gap, between their knowledge and ours. As we have seen [assuming this relates to the medieval archbishop, there is actually no proof], this gap can have implications for interpretation. To help bridge this gap, we can

benefit from resources that explain the world of the Ancient Near East as the Bible’s original audience perceived and experienced it.” Ac-cording to this logic, as Scripture was inspired by God and revealed over a period of time, it is possible that all subsequent generations would suffer from the same ‘problem’ of the knowledge gap, and would be bereft of the tremendous resources only recently available. Were all subsequent generations so seriously disadvantaged? Did they really find Scripture incomprehensible? This reasoning serves to weaken the teaching that “whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning, that we through patience and com-fort of the scriptures might have hope” (Rom. 15:4).

4 All Christadelphian doctrines are based on a belief of the self-sufficient, inspired Word of God. Our nineteenth-century brethren laid down these key fundamental truths from the very inception of the recovery of the Truth. The suggestion that our understanding of Scripture may be enhanced by recently writ-ten, speculative publications seems to me a serious departure from the advice of Scripture itself: “To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them” (Isa. 8:20). Any book which proffers the view that the Bible comes in part from man is to be read with the utmost caution, if at all—particularly where the main thrust of the publication is to demonstrate human input in what should be regarded as divine revelation.

Philip WeatherallDaventry

Editorial commentI thank Brother Burt and Brother Weatherall for their letters. Their emphasis on the ultimate au-thority of the written Word of God, revealed in the Scriptures—“wholly given by inspiration of God in the writers, and . . . consequently without error in all parts of them,” as the Brotherhood’s principal statement of faith puts it—is right. We lose sight of this foundation belief at our spir-itual peril.

It may be beneficial for readers to consult the February article to note what the author said. Brother Buckler did not suggest that the back-ground historical information he referred to was necessary for understanding the Truth as we believe it; his basic point was that there is a

Page 12: New occasional series: The correspondence

Testimony, April 2016130 Contents

considerable amount of such material available which can help the Bible reader in coming to a fuller understanding of it. This is a different matter from accepting the ‘clearly stated facts’ which constitute the first principles of our faith.

Whilst it is undeniable that the Gospels paint “an accurate picture of life in the Land in those days”—being infallible, they could not do anything else—this does not mean that there is nothing more that can be learned about first-century Judea from other, uninspired sources. Such sources have not been produced by the Spirit of God in the writers; but, provided that the pre-eminence of Scripture is always upheld, and that we remain alert to any implications for the things we believe, it is not unreasonable to refer to other material that can fill out our un-derstanding of things which the Holy Spirit has not revealed to us. This is all we do when, for example, we consult and quote from the unin-spired writings of Josephus, or use the evidence of archaeology in support of the veracity of the Bible. The question of whether or not what we are reading comes from a Christadelphian source is surely not a deciding factor. The very translations of the Word of God on which we rely to learn the Truth, and the main concordances and lexicons we use to try and understand it better, were (I presume) all produced by those whose doctrinal positions we could not share.

I do not agree that there is a contradiction between belief in the inspiration of the writers of the Bible and an acknowledgement that there are things which these writers left unsaid. Again, these are two different matters. The inspired Scriptures do contain things that we could wish had been revealed more fully. Doubtless the Corinthian believers knew exactly what the Apostle Paul meant by being “baptized for the dead [plural]” (1 Cor. 15:29), but we do not know with certainty. The Holy Spirit inspired Paul to write these words, but not to explain them in any more detail than is preserved in his epistle.

Brother Burt is right to sound a warning against “doctrinal errors and the opinions of men,” the dangers of which are timeless. To be fair to Brother Buckler, however, he himself sounded such a warning in footnote 23 of his article (p. 77): “Of course, for all these recommendations the usual caveats apply: sometimes, for example, they might contain incorrect ideas about the gospel.” On this point, my reading is that Brother Buckler and Brother Burt are saying the same thing.

In the time available, I have not been able to ascertain whether John Walton uses the word “purports” in the pejorative sense in which Brother Burt understands it.

As every issue of this magazine states, “Publication of articles in the Testimony does not presume editorial endorsement except on matters of fundamental doctrine, as defined in the Birmingham Amended Statement of Faith.” This qualification extends to online material which is doctrinally unsound. The letters from Brother Burt and Brother Weatherall are timely, given that the Internet is being used by some within the Brotherhood to promote views of the Bible which, in the view of the editors, cannot be reconciled with the BASF. I am grateful to them for the opportunity to emphasise the paramount importance of the doctrine of the inspiration of Scripture.—J.D.T.

Beyond where Kedron’s waters flow

I much appreciated Brother George Booker’s recent article on Kedron1 and would like to add to his comments a further aspect.

Jesus left the city of Jerusalem via Kedron and, although not explicitly stated, it seems to me likely that, when he was escorted back into the city by those who arrested him, he would have taken the same route—he crossed over Kedron.

Strong’s Concordance suggests that the name ‘Kedron’ is connected to a root word meaning to be ashy or dark-coloured, by implication to mourn in sackcloth. This idea is borne out by the refer-ence to Kedron in the time of Josiah. Here Josiah burned the Asherah pole he had removed from the temple, casting its ashes on the graves there (2 Kgs. 23:6). Kedron became the place in which rubbish (including human bodies) was deposited and burned. There is an allusion to this idea in Malachi 4:3, now referring to a future time: “And ye shall tread down the wicked; for they shall be ashes under the soles of your feet in the day that I shall do this, saith the LORD of hosts.”

This victory over the wicked will be possible only because Jesus has already achieved it. He literally went down to the dried-up brook Kedron; then, in crossing it, he trod death underfoot, symbolically ‘treading down the wicked’ who

1. “Beyond where Kedron’s waters flow,” Mar. 2016, p. 89.

Page 13: New occasional series: The correspondence

Testimony, April 2016 131Contents

Samuel’s tribeThe recently concluded series “What portion have we in David?” by Brother Nathaniel Ritmeyer, exploring the divisions between Israel and Judah that eventually led to the Divided Kingdom, has been both interesting and instructive.

An important correction is required, however, to a paragraph in Part 4,1 in which it is stated that David of Judah was anointed by Samuel, the son of Elkanah, “an Ephraimite” (1 Sam. 1:1), an act which may have been viewed by the northern tribes as betrayal. In fact Samuel and his father were Levites, of the family of Kohath, as their two genealogies, recorded in 1 Chronicles 6:16-28,33-38, make clear. Samuel’s grandson was Heman, one of the singers. In 1 Samuel 1:1 both the AV and the ESV read “Ephrathite,” as in the Hebrew text, but the NASB, the version used by the author, follows the RV in reading “Ephraimite,” presum-ably because of the location of their home town Ramathaim Zophim, located, as the verse says, in Mount Ephraim.

When we look at the allocation of the tribes in Joshua, however, we find that part of the lot of the

Kohathites was indeed located in the territory of Ephraim (21:20-22), although Ramathaim (‘twin hills’) was not one of the original four designated cities. The appellation ‘Zophim’ clearly relates the origin of this city to Samuel’s ancestor Zuph (1 Sam. 1:1), who presumably had extended the area in Ephraim occupied by the Kohathites. The Oxford Bible Atlas locates Ramathaim in the west of the tribal area of Ephraim, and only a few miles from Aphek and Ebenezer, which both feature prominently in the story of Samuel (4:1; 7:12). That ‘Ramathaim’ was routinely abbrevi-ated to ‘Ramah’ is shown by comparing 1 Samuel 1:1 with verse 19; Samuel’s home should not be confused with Ramah in Benjamin. In this regard it is noteworthy that, when Saul and his servant were seeking his father’s lost asses (9:3ff), they encountered the Seer in “the land of Zuph” (v. 5) and “went up the hill to the city” (v. 11), thus corroborating the identity of Samuel’s home as Ramathaim Zophim.

As to why Elkanah the Levite should be re-ferred to as an Ephrathite, this may well mean that at one time he had lived in Bethlehem Ephratah. This is not as unlikely as it may sound when we remember that just such a Levite had lived in Bethlehem before moving to Mount Ephraim and subsequently becoming ‘priest’ to the tribe of Dan (Judg. 17:7-13; 18:19,20), while another Levite, “sojourning on the side of Mount Ephraim,” took a concubine from Bethlehem-judah (19:1) as a prelude to the events that led to civil war among the tribes. Clearly there was a regular association of the Levites between these two places, on each side of the tribal divide.

David BurgesLeamington Spa

1. “Possible reasons for rivalry,” Feb. 2016, p. 61.

were but ashes in God’s sight. He then ascended to Jerusalem, knowing that this was to be the scene of his victory over death. The serpent was crushed under Jesus’ heel.

Brother George ended his article by pointing out that the old creation was in its death throes and the new was about to arrive—the new day was on the horizon and was about to dawn when the Sun of Righteousness arose from the grave with healing in his wings.

Ken TrelferRockingham Forest

Next issue of the TestimonyIf the Lord will, the next issue of the magazine will be this year’s Special Issue. As is the custom, this will consist of a double-length magazine of approximately eighty pages, and will do service for the months of May and June. In practical terms, the work involved in producing the Special Issue means that it is not expected to be published until early June. Please would subscribers be patient, therefore, and not contact the Subscriptions Secretary (or their local agent) in the meantime. The usual monthly issues of the magazine will then recommence in July.

The topic for this year’s Special Issue is, “Transformed by the renewing of your mind— living according to godly wisdom.” It will contain a number of expositional and practical articles on this topic, which is vital to all who seek to “stand fast in one spirit, with one mind striving together for the faith of the gospel” (Phil. 1:27).

The opportunity is taken to thank all those who have contributed to this year’s Special Issue.

Page 14: New occasional series: The correspondence

Testimony, April 2016132 Contents

Ruth—drama of redemptionJoe Harding

Details in the scriptural account of the experiences of Ruth and her close associates help to reinforce the book’s status as a pattern of Christ’s work of redemption.

WE MAY BE FAMILIAR with the allegory of the book of Ruth: a woman forsaking her natural family to join the family

of God, one member of which redeems her to become his bride. Such language prefigures the outworking of God’s plan with mankind through Christ and his chosen Bride, drawn out of the nations. But the book of Ruth contains a number of other crucial factors that indicate that events have been recorded for very good reasons. For example, look at the last word of the book—the name David. The inspired writer drops this like a bombshell into the tale of simple village folk. David—the warrior-king, the empire-builder, the poet, the priest, the singer, the songwriter—the greatest of the kings of Israel. Suddenly the book of Ruth takes on an importance out of all propor-tion to its size.

The position of the book between Judges and Samuel is no coincidence either. For Judges has related the indecent events at Gibeah, with its pointed parallels with Sodom. And from this place will come, in Samuel, the antitype of David, King Saul (whose name is uncomfortably close to the word sheol). So the revelation of God provides us with the background to these two diametri-cally opposed characters, the ‘man of hell’ and the man after God’s own heart.

Will you go away?The story begins with exile. The Promised Land is left, and the refugees struggle in a foreign country. Elimelech is not the weak man that we might assume. He, Naomi and their two sons “continued” in Moab (1:2), but it was not until Elimelech died that the sons married Moabite women—the order of events suggests that Elime-lech was resolute enough to ensure no interaction between his family and the surrounding women-folk. But when he was gone, both the sons made seemingly unwise marriages. Bearing in mind

the reputation of “the daughters of Moab” in inciting Israel to immorality and idolatry (Num. 25:1), we can con-jecture Naomi’s despair that her sons are joined to these godless women.

But here is an exhortation against prejudice. For in fact we see two remarkably loyal women. Both Orpah and Ruth “lifted up their voice, and wept,” not once, but twice (Ruth 1:9,14). This was no counterfeit show of distress. They genuinely loved Naomi. For ten years this family had stuck together, and it takes much urging on Naomi’s part to try to persuade her daughters-in-law to part company from her.

This is a reflection of something Christ did with his disciples. Having fed 5,000, Jesus launched into deeply controversial teaching about eating his flesh and drinking his blood (Jno. 6:49-58). It was social suicide, guaranteed to revolt any Jew of orthodox upbringing. It is as though Jesus was raising obstacles for his fol-lowers. He was forcing them to count the cost of being his disciples. When he said to his remaining disciples, “Will ye also go away?” (v. 67), he was not fishing for sympathy. He was asking them to decide carefully. Note the echo of Naomi’s words: “Turn again, my daughters: why will ye go with me?” (Ruth 1:11). The Lord’s question is one we have each answered individually. But it helps to retrace the thought process that led to our decision to be baptised. ‘Why are we going into a situation which, according to human logic, holds no immediate promise? Why continue along a path that is humanly pointless?’

Seeing things according to such reasoning, Orpah departed. But Ruth resisted Naomi’s ef-forts to deter her: “Intreat me not to leave thee, or to return from following after thee: for whither thou goest, I will go; and where thou lodgest, I will lodge: thy people shall be my people, and thy God my God: where thou diest, will I die, and there will I be buried” (vv. 16,17). And she followed it with an oath, the like of which has also been uttered by Saul, David, Jonathan, Solomon, Abner and others: “the LORD do so to me, and more also, if ought but death part thee and me.”

Exhortation

Page 15: New occasional series: The correspondence

Testimony, April 2016 133Contents

This is the first recorded use of the oath in such a clear form. Was Ruth its author? She invokes God’s name. This is a solemn, binding oath, which speaks volumes of the young woman making it. It also speaks volumes of Naomi. Ten years in an alien land, surrounded by the daughters of Moab, and cast-iron witness of Jewish devotion to God emerges. Ruth, like Boaz’s mother Rahab, has cast in her lot with the tribes of God. She saw in Israel the chosen people, and wanted ‘in.’

Bread and wineIsrael recovers from many years of famine as God has opened the windows of heaven: “. . . and they came to Bethlehem in the beginning of barley harvest” (v. 22). It is a time of plenty, and intricately folded up within the food references is the person of Boaz. His first words to Ruth guarantee drink: “. . . when thou art athirst, go unto the vessels, and drink of that which the young men have drawn” (2:9)—again reminis-cent of the words of Christ himself: “If any man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink” (Jno. 7:37). Boaz offers provision when Ruth is thirsty, but then offers more—a meal of bread and wine (Ruth 2:14), serving her himself. As she leaves to resume work, the tenderness of his feelings for her is apparent as he charges his servants to drop handfuls for her on purpose. Small wonder that Ruth exclaims, “Why have I found grace in thine eyes, that thou shouldest take knowledge of me, seeing I am a stranger?” (v. 10).

Notice the fullness of Boaz’ answer: “It hath fully been shewed me, all that thou hast done unto thy mother in law since the death of thine husband: and how thou hast left thy father and thy mother, and the land of thy nativity, and art come unto a people which thou knewest not heretofore” (v. 11). Yet he has only just met her. How much of this could he have gleaned from the reapers? Notice his question to them: not ‘Who is she?’ but ‘Whose is she?’ (v. 5). To whom does she belong? Boaz’ primary concern is Ruth’s owner-ship. Ruth’s reputation has been blazed abroad since her arrival in Bethlehem, and Boaz wants to know more—with a view, to put it awkwardly, of ownership.

Ownership is a major theme of the book, as is borne out by Boaz’ subsequent imperatives. He commands his young men not to molest her. He sets a boundary around Ruth—‘Do not leave my land. Stay with my people, work amongst them. Do not stray onto others’ land.’ After all, this is the time of the Judges, with its marauding bands of

enemies and indigenous peoples roaming abroad, and the abomination of Gibeah still woven into the landscape of a backsliding nation. A young woman would be an easy target.

DiscernmentIs this sounding as if Boaz is a man tongue-tied with shyness? Or, rather, is he acting decisively in favour of someone who has attracted him even before he met her? How often did the hopeful mothers of Bethlehem send their maiden daugh-ters on errands to Boaz’s farm? Perhaps there was a steady trickle of damsels trying to catch the eye of this reticent but eminently eligible bachelor.

But Boaz is discerning. He is interested not in any wife. He applies his ear to the rumours of Ruth’s character and likes what he hears. When he sees her, his joy is complete. She is respectful, not brazen or dressed to allure like the notorious Moabite women. She is every bit as sincere and virtuous as he has heard. His heart is stolen and he immediately takes steps to claim her. ‘Be where I can see you and care for you,’ is effectively what he commands. And at every point he loads her with blessings of food.

Deuteronomy 15:1-4 seems to resonate in Boaz’ greeting to his servants and their reply: “The LORD be with you . . . The LORD bless thee” (Ruth 2:4). Boaz was not a priest authorised to bless, so was he invoking the Law in his treatment of Ruth and Naomi (see Deut. 15:7,11)? Are we at the time of the seven-year release, with Boaz even more conscious of the needs of the poor in the Land? Being a man of greater insight, he had no qualms over opening his hand wide even to the Gentiles in their midst.

Joining the familyThe feast of the Passover is the time at which the barley is gathered, a busy time for any farmer. The barley must be threshed and the grain stored. Then the wheat harvest, which leads up to Pente-cost, must be completed. But surely Boaz, with all his farmhands to help, can find a few moments to arrive at the door of Naomi’s house, to make his intentions known. Is he too much a farmer to want a wife? Why can he be stalling?

Naomi acts. Naomi’s strategy is risky, and in light of the infamous ‘daughters of Moab’ slur it could have ruined Ruth’s reputation had it backfired. Look at what she proposes to Ruth (Ruth 3:3,4):• make yourself appealing in appearance and

fragrance

Page 16: New occasional series: The correspondence

Testimony, April 2016134 Contents

• wait until he is inebriated• spy out where he settles down to sleep• lie down at his feet.There can be no question of impropriety in what she is suggesting—Naomi and Ruth were woman of high moral calibre. But these actions are, never-theless, suggestive of the actions of a harlot. Ruth is being asked to play out the role of a woman of low character, and she agrees. Note the words of the people: “And all the people that were in the gate, and the elders, said, We are witnesses. The LORD make the woman that is come into thine house like Rachel and like Leah, which two did build the house of Israel . . . and let thy house be like the house of Pharez, whom Tamar bare unto Judah, of the seed which the LORD shall give thee of this young woman” (4:11,12). Why do the people recall these women? What do they have in common?

Tamar, Judah’s daughter-in-law, had been promised Judah’s third son as husband, but Judah reneged on the promise, and Tamar dressed as a harlot at the wayside and waited for Judah, to obtain a child by him. In a demonstration of steaming hypocrisy, when he discovers she is pregnant, Judah sentences her to death. Tamar was gambling with her life to be joined to this family. Leah usurped her sister to obtain a hus-band, similarly wanting desperately to be united with Jacob’s family. And add to this Boaz’s own mother Rahab, a professional harlot, prepared to betray her people and city in order to be joined with the Lord’s nation.

All these women saw that, in the nation of Israel, and even in the family of Jacob, God was working towards a goal. Tamar saw it and was ready to risk her life to be part of that family. Leah was ready to endure a loveless marriage and household acrimony to be included. There is a common thread of urgency in their actions. They see God working and they contribute what only they, as women, can—a child in the line of promise. This is what Ruth and Naomi are working towards. They cannot afford to let the opportunity slip. In an act surely calculated to remind Boaz of the clear-sighted (but ill-reputed) women of his own lineage, Ruth ‘acts the harlot.’ It is strange that Boaz does not recognise her when he awakes. Had Ruth covered her face like a harlot?

Three reasons for waitingBut why did Boaz wait until now? His strategy is not a spur-of-the-moment plan. He has thought

this out in every detail. There are three pos-sibilities. First, he waited for Ruth to make her move. He has laid his cards on the table; he has demonstrated his desire to own her and provide for her, but he will not coerce her. It is Ruth’s own words (3:9) that demonstrate her need of his protection. This is the way Christ works in our lives. He knocks, but does not push the door. He spreads a table, but does not compel us to eat. He offers protection, but must leave the response to us. But once that declaration is made, redemption is swift to follow.

The second possibility: this is a period dur-ing which Boaz has been busy. For when Ruth makes herself known to him, he demonstrates an intimate knowledge of her character (vv. 10,11). He has observed her closely, delighting in her obedience to his wishes, her consistency of be-haviour. She presents only one face, and it is the face of a woman of outstanding integrity. And in Boaz’ words the whole of Bethlehem resounds to the praise of this lovely Gentile woman. He has allowed time for her example to permeate this corner of Israel, so blighted by violence and corruption. She shines brightly without his as-sistance. The calling of the Gentiles by grace was well in hand even then.

But the third possibility lends yet more drama to this book. Boaz knows of the prior claim of the unnamed near kinsman, and it is by no means a foregone conclusion that he will drop his claim. How has Boaz agonised over this moment! As a man of absolute principle he knew that there was a legal obstacle to their union, and even if no-one else was aware, Boaz would not sweep this under the carpet. So he watches, his love for Ruth deepening with his apprehension that she might slip through his fingers. But the mo-ment the impediment is removed, he delays no longer.

Three turning pointsThere are at least three points of crisis in this book: the point when Ruth chooses to resist all Naomi’s reasoning to depart and return to her own people; the point at which Ruth is discovered by Boaz lying at his feet; and the moment when the near kinsman decides whether to uphold or relinquish his claim.

In our spiritual allegory, who is this unnamed near kinsman? He has prior claim to Naomi’s land and Ruth’s person. He can redeem the former but not the latter. In Scripture a parcel of land can prefigure the Kingdom: Abraham buys a burial

Page 17: New occasional series: The correspondence

Testimony, April 2016 135Contents

plot; Jeremiah buys a field. These are tokens of conviction in God’s promise of resurrection. Un-der the Law an individual could redeem land at a set price. The Kingdom is ostensibly the domain of the righteous, as judged by the law. But the Law cannot redeem the person.

Here is the final urgency. Imagine Boaz’ heart thumping wildly as the kinsman chews over the prospects. Will he or won’t he? ‘Yes,’ he says, ‘I will redeem the land’ (v. 4). Then he is made aware of the ‘small print.’ More cogitation, but he balks at owning the Gentile, the Moabitess. He cannot. His reputation will not suffer it. Suggestion has it that he already has a wife and shudders at the thought of a Gentile second wife in his house-hold. Boaz is unmarried. Let him shoulder the burden. “Therefore the kinsman said unto Boaz, Buy it for thee” (v. 8). We can almost see the light in Boaz’ eyes.

LessonsWhat have we learned from this exquisite love-story?

Redemption is a drama, a personal transaction between Christ and the individual. It is not auto-matic; it depends on our choices at the beginning and our subsequent behaviour. Ruth made the right initial choice, but it was her example and

character that drew the admiration and love of her redeemer.

Just as Boaz was not passive, so Christ is ac-tive in our lives, motivated by a love for us and his Father, to present us without spot or blemish to himself. But in presenting ourselves to Jesus in need of his redemption, we are reassured that his human lineage was equally flawed and fault-ridden.

Redemption may be a legal term, but it involves heart-stopping moments of tension. How often are we aware of the fragility of our relationship with Christ? The claim of the near kinsman is strong, the contract between the Law and the sinner absolute and irreversible. “The soul that sinneth, it shall die” (Ezek. 18:20). Only a com-plete transfer of ownership can redeem us from that contract.

And the work of Boaz on Ruth’s behalf had unexpected consequences. Naomi, her ‘pleas-antness’ initially turned to ‘bitterness,’ with no prospect but a lonely, childless old age, becomes a mother again. Here, at the end of redemption, is resurrection. As this child of the promised line is placed in her arms, she is told: “And he shall be unto thee a restorer of thy life, and a nourisher of thine old age . . .” (Ruth. 4:15). And he is called Obed—servant.

The prophecy of Amos (2)Kenneth Camplin

Prophecy

The concluding part of this overview of the prophecy of Amos begins by considering the prophet’s two ‘woes.’

IN AMOS 4 PARTICULARLY, the prophet refers to the way in which the Lord used natural dis-asters such as famine, drought, blight, mildew,

plague and earthquake, as well as their enemies, to bring Israel to their senses and to repentance. The Lord appeals to the people in chapter 5 not to be associated with the apostate shrines at Bethel, Gilgal and Beer-sheba, but to “Seek the LORD and live” (v. 6) and “Seek good, and not evil, that you may live; and so the LORD, the God of hosts, will be with you, as you have said” (v. 14).1

Amos announces God’s coming judgement to the northern kingdom. It appears that he is the first prophet to use the term ‘the day of the

Lord,’ which became important within future prophetic and apocalyptic lit-erature. The people understood this

phrase to refer to judgement on the surrounding nations and a day of victory for Israel, when God would deliver them from their enemies. The prophet retorts, “Woe to you” (v. 18), because the people had no realistic idea of what they were asking. Unless they became morally good, there would not be a ray of joy or hope, but it would be a day of doom and darkness. It would be a great shock to those who stuck to the popular idea of deliverance, because that ‘day’ really meant divine judgement and justice for their own iniquity.

1. All Bible quotations from the ESV.

Contents

Page 18: New occasional series: The correspondence

Testimony, April 2016136 Contents

In 6:1-3, the second ‘woe’ conveys warnings to the leaders in Israel and Judah about being com-placent and smug, when injustice and immorality were rife in both nations. ‘You are putting off thinking about punishment,’ says Amos, in ef-fect, ‘but actually by your foolish behaviour you are bringing the day of doom nearer. The LORD God of Hosts will raise a nation to punish you.’

Religious rituals and apostasyThe Israel that Amos warned of coming judge-ment was flourishing, peaceable, prosperous and well armed. To all outward appearances it was outstandingly religious. The adulation of Baal in Judah and Israel had been suppressed by Jehu and Elisha (recorded in 2 Kings 9 and 10), but serious idolatry continued within both nations. Amos urged them not to worship the idols of Bethel, Gilgal or Beer-sheba. At these centres people were offering tithes every three days, thanksgivings with leaven, and free-will offerings (Amos 4:4,5).

Adoration of Molech, the abominable god of the Ammonites, persisted. Associated as it was with the sacrifice of children as burnt offerings, worship of this god was forbidden absolutely in the Law: “Any one of the people of Israel or of the strangers who sojourn in Israel who gives any of his children to Molech shall surely be put to death” (Lev. 20:2). Amos’s references to Molech and Rephan (5:25-27) is quoted by Stephen from the Septuagint in his speech recorded in Acts 7 (v. 43). (It is significant that Rephan is the name of an Egyptian god associated with the planet Saturn, the god of war.)

The people of Israel sinned again and again, and indulged in outrageous practices, such as socialising with temple prostitutes in a contempt-ible manner—a man and his son frequenting the same girl. When they worshipped their false gods, they lay down near the altar on clothes that had been taken by pledge. These garments

act of insolence against their special vow? Amos warned them that the Lord hates false worship and would not listen to their hymns of praise, but regarded them as a noisy nuisance. The Lord despised their feast days and sacred gatherings. He would not accept their burnt offerings, grain offerings or ‘fattened peace offerings’ (5:22). The nation would be punished severely, because it defiled God’s holy name by worshipping idols and distorting His law.

The five visionsThe nature of God’s judgements is portrayed in symbolic form in five visions (chs. 7–9). First (7:1-3) and second (vv. 4-6) are the creation of a plague of locusts and the preparation of a life-destroy-ing drought (represented by fire). The prophet pleaded with the Lord not to turn against Israel. The Lord relented and did not carry out the plan.

The third vision (vv. 7-9) was of the Lord check-ing a wall that had been straight because it had been built with a plumb line, only to find that the plumb line now showed it to be crooked. This vi-sion represented the sinfulness of Israel, and the Lord declared that the nation and the dynasty of King Jeroboam would be destroyed. Significantly, on this occasion Amos did not appeal for mercy; the judgement would be final.

These words of the prophet reached the ears of Amaziah, who was probably the chief priest at the shrine in Bethel (vv. 10-17). He told Jeroboam of Amos’s ‘treasonable action,’ and then gave or-ders that Amos was not to prophesy in Bethel, and should hasten back to Judah. Amos retorted that he was not a professional seer, but had been specially called by God to prophesy against Israel. He accused Amaziah of interference, and declared that the priest and his family would suffer terribly in the looming warfare.

The next vision (8:1-3) was of a basket of ripe summer fruit, which represented the people

Apostate shrines at the time of AmosDanShrine created by Moses’ grandson Jonathan (Judg. 18:30,31)Elevated to a national shrine by Jeroboam I (1 Kgs. 12:28-30; Amos 8:14)

Bethel and GilgalConnected by a main roadCentres of Jeroboam’s rival cult (Amos 4:4; 5:5,6; 7:10; Hos. 4:15,16)

BeershebaAmos 5:5; 8:14

were stolen, in defi-ance of the teaching in Exodus 22:26,27 (endorsed by Jesus in Matthew 5:40).

Wine that had been pilfered in lieu of a fine was pre-sented as an offering to their god. Was it also stolen wine that was given to the Nazirites, as an

Page 19: New occasional series: The correspondence

Testimony, April 2016 137Contents

of Israel, who were now all set for retribution because of their evil practices. Amos drew atten-tion to prevalent attitudes that were particularly distressing. He addressed those business people who could not wait for religious festivals and the sabbath to come to an end so that they could resume the practice of selling grain and trading wheat. These people were not content with law-ful and reputable practices; they used inaccurate weighing scales and measly measures, and sold wheat that others would class as sweepings and garbage. The underlying principles of the Law in relation to the system of justice had been perverted and poisoned, resulting in resentment and despair (vv. 4-8). The prophet laid bare the materialism which permeated the whole of Israel and Judah, and which divided those societies. He gravely rebuked the luxurious lifestyles, and he reproached injustice and repression with severe indignation.

The Lord declared that He would not defer their punishment again. In addition to a literal famine, the nation would experience “a famine . . . of hearing the words of the LORD” (v. 11). The people would wander everywhere “[seeking] the word of the LORD, but [would] not find it” (v. 12). The final vision (9:1) is of the Lord standing by the altar and shouting, ‘Strike the doorposts.’ The sanctuary would be destroyed with the worship-pers inside. Even those who tried to run away would not escape the fury of God, who would eliminate all sinners in the nation and destroy all sinful kingdoms. However, a remnant would be left, as He had so often promised, for He would “not utterly destroy the house of Jacob” (v. 8). The house of David would be restored as the true Israel of God and embrace the remnant of faithful Gentiles.

Restoration and blessingsIt is significant that, after all the warnings of the forthcoming destruction of Israel because of wickedness, Amos is compelled, by his resolute faith in the Lord’s loving kindness and mercy, to render to the nation a further vision—the true hope for this people. Thus the faithful remnant was comforted in a time of distress by the assur-ance that a time of rejoicing would surely come. Salvation would be realised through the throne of David, in whose line Christ was to come and fulfil the promise of the conversion and restora-tion of the Jews and the inclusion of the Gentiles (vv. 11,12). This passage was quoted by James at the Jerusalem Council when he endorsed Peter’s

declaration that God is taking from the Gentiles a people for Himself (see Acts 15:13-18).

In Amos 9:11-15 the prophet presents a pithy yet wonderful word picture of the Kingdom of God on earth. There will be unmatched produc-tivity from the land, with an abundance of good things, the rebuilding of cities and the creation of gardens and vineyards. Amos was mindful of the prophecy in Leviticus 26:3-5,9-11, which tells of a prosperity that will be wholly beyond nature, for seedtime and harvest will overlap if Israel obeys God’s decrees. Is this also indicative of the great spiritual blessings of grace and mercy that will accrue from obedience? When Amos foretells the restoration of “the tabernacle of David” and a return of former glories, he is speaking of the spiritual restoration of Israel in the same vein as Jeremiah 31. Amos had foretold “a famine . . . of hearing the words of the LORD” (8:11), but now he declares the repeal of that sentence, and foretells not only the richness of God’s gifts but also their unbroken endurance.

Lessons for todayPaul in 2 Timothy 3 and 4 describes in a very perceptive and incisive manner the world in which we live, and implies that in the last days it is going to be very difficult to be a Christian. In several aspects this is not unlike the situation in Israel and Judah at the time of Amos. These words to Timothy are often applied to those outside the Truth, but we should recognise that several of these comments could apply to us today. Our personal associations, and our behaviour with our fellows, both those in the faith and those in the world, should reflect God’s values. However, we too can convey the impression of being de-vout and pious while having something of the Pharisees about us. We must avoid being hypo-critical, and do our utmost to prevent the values and influences of an acquisitive and humanistic society permeating our Brotherhood.

Taking a global view of our community today, we see that there is a vast gulf between compara-tively rich brothers and sisters in the Western world and those who are poor, particularly in the developing world. Unquestionably there are serious problems associated with marked cultural differences, but it is incumbent upon all of us to accept responsibility for the spiritual, physical and material welfare of our fellow believers, espe-cially those who are deprived, wherever they live.

Guiding principles are manifest in the Apostle Paul’s explanation and organisation of the ‘great

Page 20: New occasional series: The correspondence

Testimony, April 2016138 Contents

collection’ for the poor believers in Judea. Our love for God will determine our whole attitude to life and will find expression in service to others. We are to worship God in spirit and in truth, and serve Him by dealing justly and honestly with our fellow men. We live in this present world and have to ‘occupy until he come,’ but we have also to be ready to meet him. This implies that we must be prepared to relinquish our grip on the things of this world.

ConclusionIn what was in reality an act of great mercy and grace to a people who time after time had spurned and defied Him, God raised up the prophet Amos to appeal to them to repent of their self-righteous sins and idolatry. However, at the beginning of the prophecy punishment was pronounced on the neighbouring pagan nations for their gross wickedness. After Amos had declared God’s judgements on the nations that surrounded Is-rael, he turned his attention to Israel and Judah and held them accountable for the ill-treatment of their own people. They had repeatedly failed to embrace God’s model of justice, and had lost

the concept of caring for one another. The people appeared to be religious by their observance of rituals, but this worship was superficial. The discipline executed by the Lord in the form of famine, drought, plagues, death and ruin failed to compel the people to repent.

The prophet sees a right relationship with God as paramount, and makes the appeal, “Seek good, and not evil, that you may live; and so the LORD, the God of hosts, will be with you, as you have said” (5:14). Israel and Judah were looking for the ‘day of the Lord,’ but Amos indicated that they would be shocked when it arrived, for they were unrealistic in their expectations. Nevertheless, he presents a picture of the restoration of Israel and Judah and the inclusion of Gentiles hallowed in the glories of the restored Kingdom.

We too are waiting for the Day of the Lord, but we must examine ourselves in order to have a clear idea of our responsibilities. The underlying principles of the teachings of Moses, the prophets, the Lord Jesus Christ and the apostles regarding both beliefs and practices must be cherished and safeguarded.

(Concluded)

Watchman

The two-state solution: back on the agendaShaun Maher

A NEW PUSH FOR A SOLUTION to the Ar-ab-Israeli conflict was launched in March, being led by the USA. As Barack Obama

draws to the end of his presidency he is expected to push hard for progress towards the two-state solution, according to multiple sources.1,2,3 France has joined the initiative, and is working with the USA to develop a UN Security Council resolu-tion to set parameters for talks, including key outcomes for both sides in the dispute.4 The core points include the usual contentious issues: ces-sation of Jewish settlement building on contested land, surrender of the right to return for Arabs, and the right for any newly formed Arab state to claim East Jerusalem as its capital.

We have been here before, and shall have to wait and see how things proceed; but as we see this renewed focus on the peace process, and in particular the status of Jerusalem, it is important to reflect once more on the words of the prophet Zechariah as he describes Jerusalem prior to the second coming of Jesus:

1. http://www.jpost.com/Arab-Israeli-Conflict/Report-Obama-considering-peace-push-including-UN-Security-Council-resolution-447211

2. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-357529673. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/mar/08/binya

min-netanyahu-turns-down-meeting-barack-obama4. http://www.reuters.com/article/us-israel-palestinians-

france-idUSKCN0WG2H8

Contents

Page 21: New occasional series: The correspondence

Testimony, April 2016 139Contents

“Behold, I will make Jerusalem a cup of drunkenness to all the surrounding peoples . . . I will make Jerusalem a very heavy stone for all peoples; all who would heave it away will surely be cut in pieces, though all nations of the earth are gathered against it” (12:2,3).5

This prophecy should lead us to expect increasing global tension over Jerusalem as we draw closer to the return of our Master; claim and counter-claim, from Jews and Arabs alike, for the right to govern Jerusalem will not go away. That is exactly what we should expect to see as we draw closer to our Lord’s coming. The battle for Jerusalem will only intensify, as the nations of the world become more embroiled in seeking a human solution to this intractable dispute. Ultimately, we know that neither of these descendants of Abraham is in the right, for ultimately this is God’s city, “the city of the great King” (Mt. 5:35). May He soon send His Son to claim it and usher in a new age of peace and righteousness.

Friend or foe?The UN also has the two-state solution as one of its top priorities for 2016, meaning that the USA and France will find plenty of support for their initiative within the UN leadership and the majority of member states. As we have noted before, there are only a few nations amongst the

193 member-states of the UN that actively support Israel; the rest either abstain or vote against the Jewish state. Even the UK, a nation presumed to be an ally of Israel, has a record of ambivalence towards anti-Israeli sentiment at the UN. In recent years the UK has mainly either abstained or voted with pro-Palestinian resolutions. There was even a symbolic House of Commons vote in 2014 to officially ‘recognise’ the Palestinian state. This pattern of behaviour is not new and dates back even to the UN partition plan which established the Jewish state in 1947. At the termination of the British mandate over Palestine, the British government of the day abstained in the vote to form Israel and proved positively obstructive to the interim UN administration, refusing to assist with the transition to Jewish and Arab rule. With friends like this, who needs enemies?

Peace with securityWhen the time is right, God will allow men to proceed with their plans. We must assume that the only reason why the intention of the nations to divide God’s land once more has been unsuc-cessful until now is because the time is not yet right. The determination to impose the two-state solution has been growing again in recent

Nickolay Mladenov, UN Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process and Personal Representative of the Secretary-General to the Palestine Liberation Organization and the

Palestinian Authority, briefs the UN Security Council on 24 March 2016.© UN Photo/Manuel Elias

5. Bible quotations are from the NKJV.

Page 22: New occasional series: The correspondence

Testimony, April 2016140 Contents

The UN proposal for the partition of Palestine, adopted by the UN on 29 November 1947.(Public domain, from an original UN map)

Page 23: New occasional series: The correspondence

Testimony, April 2016 141Contents

months,6,7 and we expect such a move to lead to disastrous consequences for the Jewish people.

As in the time of Isaiah (30:1-7; 31:1,2) and Jeremiah (17:5,6; 42:9-16), when Israel put their trust, not in the Lord, but rather in their own strength, looking to earthly allies for support, disaster came upon them. And so it will be that they are humbled once more before they look on him whom they pierced and mourn (Zech. 12:10).

During March, Israeli Prime Minister Ben-jamin Netanyahu spoke of a new era in Israel’s relationship with her Arab neighbours and the potential for this to drive improved internal Arab-Israeli relations.8 This warming of relationships has in part been driven by Israel’s burgeoning finds of gas and oil in the eastern Mediterranean. Could it be that we are on the verge of a shift in Arab-Israeli relations that will lead to a period of peace and prosperity for Israel and her neigh-bours? It looks possible.

With the fragile ceasefire holding in Syria and the surprise announcement of the withdrawal of Russian forces,9 the balance of power in the region may start to shift again. The prophet Ezekiel seems to describe a scenario where the northern confederation of nations is ‘turned around’ (38:4) with ‘hooks’ in their jaws to draw them back down onto the mountains of Israel. The nation is described as dwelling “safely” (v. 8) and “a peaceful people” (v. 11). Neither of these words can be applied to the Jewish people at present,

for they are fearful of terrorist attacks both from within and from without, and they are worried about the aggressive posturing of surrounding nations—not least the Iranian nuclear program. This fear of internal and external threats has led to Israel being the most militarised nation on earth, according the to the Global Militarisation Index.10 During her short existence in the modern era she has fought seven external wars and four large-scale internal military operations11—hardly a picture of “a peaceful people.”

An eastern Mediterranean energy boom could well drive closer relations between Israel and her neighbours, and increased prosperity in the region as a result. Such could be the scenario that brings about the secure, peaceful and prosperous nation described in Ezekiel 38, and which draws Gog and his allies down to take a spoil. We watch and pray with earnest expectation and hope in our hearts.

6. http://www.un.org/press/en/2016/sc12219.doc.htm7. http://english.alarabiya.net/en/News/middle-east/2016

/03/14/Kerry-Two-state-solution-needs-global-push.html8. http://www.timesofisrael.com/netanyahu-hails-dramatic-

warming-of-israel-arab-ties/9. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/mar/14/vlad

imir-putin-orders-withdrawal-russian-troops-syria10. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_

Global_Militarization_Index11. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_Is

rael

The patient waiting for ChristJohn Nicholls

Milestones to the Kingdom: a review of the world events of 2015 in the light of Bible prophecy.Don Pearce.Christadelphian Scripture Study Service, January 2016.96 pages.Available in the UK from Don Pearce, 76 High Street, Hillmorton, Rugby CV21 4EE.

Single copy £4.10; two to four copies £3.70 each; five or more copies £3.00 each, all post paid.Other countries: CSSS, 85 Suffolk Road, Hawthorndene, South Australia 5050, Australia (www.csss.org.au) or local agents.

THROUGHOUT THE AGES, Christ’s serv-ants have prayed for his return to raise the dead and sit on the restored throne of

David in Jerusalem. Their cry has been, “How long, O Lord?” Over the past year, world events have moved so rapidly and dramatically that the time of patient waiting must surely be close to its end. In Milestones 2015 Brother Don Pearce

Review

Contents

Page 24: New occasional series: The correspondence

Testimony, April 2016142 Contents

has again sifted faithfully through world events to show how God’s hand has been active in the nations as the denouement of His great purpose draws closer.

After a useful synopsis, and a glance back thirty-five years to the wise words of Brother Graham Pearce in Milestones 1980, Brother Don looks at how the Hebrew prophets foresaw the people of Israel prior to the great Gogian invasion. Ezekiel 39:26 suggests that the time of peace and security comes about by “Israel’s own prowess and negotiations, but is abhorrent in God’s eyes because man-made treaties are being substituted for faith in their God” (p. 15). Isaiah 2:6-9 may be another prophecy of the time before Gog comes down, and Brother Don expounds this and Isaiah 10.

Other prophecies speaking of Israel before the invasion include Joel 3, Revelation 16 and Ezekiel 38, also expounded in the light of current events. Further prophecies, each meriting a chapter of their own, are Balaam’s ancient third and fourth blessings in Numbers 24, and it is exciting to read how, 3,400 years ago, the Almighty placed on record in great detail the future triumph of Israel over her enemies.

Russia entrenches herself in SyriaChapter 5 concerns perhaps the most dramatic of the year’s happenings, Russia’s move into Syria at the request of President Assad, ostensibly to fight Daesh (ISIL), but in reality to fight Assad’s enemies. “In one fell swoop, the chess master stroked Russian public opinion, drove a wedge into NATO, and pushed America further into the shadows of irrelevance. Russia is now king in the Middle East” (p. 27). Putin brings with him his Christian faith. He has tried to bring church and state together in Russia, and is a self-professed champion of persecuted Christians in Syria and the Middle East.

Brother Don discusses the Russian Orthodox Church. He also provides fascinating information concerning Putin’s personal friendships and deal-ings with Jews, including his developing relation-ship with Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel’s prime minister. In accordance with Daniel’s prophecy that the king of the north will have many ships in his invasion of the Middle East, Russia is re-building her navy, and has consolidated her hold on the port of Sevastopol by the takeover of the Crimean peninsula.

Russia is also developing her relationship with Germany through gas sales, and her ties with Iran

have grown markedly following the lifting of the West’s sanctions against Iran. Ezekiel 38:5 sug-gests that Iran is a close ally of Gog, who also is a “guard” to the nations listed in this verse. Brother Don suggests that Russia can have a moderating influence on Iran’s policies and actions against Israel, before the “evil thought” (v. 10) takes hold in Gog’s mind. This could bring about the “dwell-ing safely” before the great invasion.

Chapter 6 discusses in detail how Russia controls Syrian port facilities and airfields and has moved men and equipment into bases in Syria. Russia has fired cruise missiles from the Caspian Sea, and deployed advanced fighter and bomber aircraft in its operations against Assad’s enemies. She poses a threat to US hegemony in the Middle East.

France, Russia, Israel and BritainAfter the terrorist atrocities by Daesh in Paris, France appealed for help and is now actively supporting Russia’s bombing campaign in Syria. France is latter-day Gomer (v. 6) alongside Gog in the invasion. Brother Don has an interesting chap-ter on “Men’s hearts failing them for fear,” which includes discussion of the rise of anti-Semitism across the world. Jews are leaving Britain in larger numbers than for many years, and much more so in France and other European countries.

In his chapter on the Israeli economy, Brother Don highlights the enormous effects that the discovery of gas fields under Israel’s Mediterra-nean territorial waters has had. Russia may help Israel to develop these, and Russia has told Israel, ‘We will make sure there will be no provocation against the gas fields by Hezbollah or Hamas. Nobody messes with us!’ Oil has also been found under the Golan Heights.

Other schemes are mentioned by Brother Don, who has been able to ferret out numerous fascinat-ing facts about Israel. One very moving piece was a report (almost verbatim) of a speech made in the United Nations on 1 October by Mr Netanyahu. Despite her enemies, “The people of Israel live!” he said—albeit with no acknowledgment of the unseen hand of the Almighty, who has gathered and kept His people “as a shepherd doth his flock . . . and ransomed him from the hand of him that was stronger than he” (Jer. 31:10,11). Israel’s godless alliances with the nations are considered, before the author turns to Britain and her role in God’s purpose. The issue of the forthcoming referendum and Britain’s possible exit from the European Union is discussed. The outcome lies,

Page 25: New occasional series: The correspondence

Testimony, April 2016 143Contents

not in the hands of the British electorate, but in Him who “ruleth in the kingdom of men, and giveth it to whomsoever He will” (Dan 4:17). British foreign policy will certainly be different from Europe’s, whatever the outcome of the refer-endum. The final chapters of the booklet deal with the EU, the Palestinian issue and Pope Francis.

The reviewer has thoroughly enjoyed reading and reviewing this booklet, and it is not hard to

get caught up in the excitement of seeing so much prophecy being fulfilled. But, as Brother Don says in the final chapter, “Exhortation: caught away!”, we need to repent of dead works and develop a living faith, putting God’s principles into practice in the things we do.

This booklet is commended all those who pa-tiently wait for Christ. May they find in it much to benefit them.

A Babylonish garmentGeoff Henstock

IN THE SEPTEMBER 2015 Testimony it was noted that Achan had been attracted to a “Babylonish garment [mantle from Shinar, NASB]” (Josh.

7:21), which he found in Jericho.1 He purloined this garment along with some silver and gold. The point was made that it is hard to account for the presence of such a garment in Jericho unless it had some religious significance. Excava-tions in Jericho have provided evidence that supports this conclusion.

Archaeologists have discovered in the ruins of Jericho evidence of the influence of Babylonian religion. In their book on the excavations of Jericho, John Garstang and J. B. E. Garstang describe the layout of a shrine that was discovered in the city, including a diagram showing the following:

“On the bottommost [layer], forming part of the original plan of the city, was found a small shrine. This was of Babylonian charac-ter, having a relatively large dais at one end and a continuous ‘mastaba’ seat built against the walls.”2

This suggests that there were devotees of Babylo-nian worship in Jericho. Presumably that is why a religious robe from Babylon found its way to Jericho.

It would seem that, when Israel was sacking the city, Achan came across this robe used in Babylonian worship. Perhaps this garment ap-pealed to him because he was seduced by the lavish trappings of pagan worship, in contrast

to what he may have regarded as the more austere worship of Israel under the Law of Moses.

Archaeology

Plan of a Babylonian shrine discovered at Jericho.

(Taken from The Story of Jericho)

1. “Studies in faith at Jericho (1) Achan,” Sept. 2015, p. 341.

2. John Garstang and J. B. E. Garstang, The Story of Jericho, London, 1940, pages 78–9.

Dais

Mastaba seat

“So Joshua sent messengers, and they ran unto the tent; and, behold, [the garment] was hid in his tent, and the silver under it” (Josh. 7:22).

Contents

Page 26: New occasional series: The correspondence

Testimony, April 2016144 Contents

Genesis 1–2Order and contentPeter Heavyside

The third in this occasional series of articles addressing the challenges of theistic evolution to Genesis 1–2 examines the order of events in these chapters.

Exposition

THERE IS A THIRD REASON frequently served up by theistic evolutionists1 to sus-tain their claim that the two creation stories

in Genesis 1 and 2 “cannot be harmonised” and “were never intended to be.” This is that these two records “have distinct descriptions of what happens next, both in order and content.”2 To substantiate this argument, the two chapters are summarised in sequenced stages and contrasts are drawn between them.

Genesis 1 is summarised as having two stages in the following sequence:• first, God creates the habitable space—light,

separation of waters, dry land (days one to three)

• secondly, He fills the space—plants, heavenly lights, sea and sky creatures, land animals, and humans (male and female) together at the end (days four to six).

Genesis 2 is summarised by four stages in the following sequence:• first, God creates man before there is any plant

life• secondly, He creates a garden and puts the

man to work there• thirdly, God creates animals for the man as

helpers• fourthly, not finding a suitable helper among

the animals, God forms the woman out of the man’s side (rather than forming humans together on the sixth day as in chapter 1).

Based on these summaries, the theistic evolution-ary reading of Genesis 1–2 is that the sequential order of creation laid out in chapter 1 is completely overturned in chapter 2. For example, while man is made last in chapter 1, he is made first in chapter 2. Furthermore, this reading claims that chapter 1 portrays the creation of man and

woman concurrently, while chapter 2 has them formed separately.

Fundamental to the theistic evolu-tionary argument here is that Genesis 1 and 2 are coextensive geographically

and chronologically:• the “garden” of chapter 2 is presumed to be

coextensive with the “dry land” of chapter 1• the creative work of chapter 2 is presumed to

take place across the six days of chapter 1.

Misreading upon misreadingWe have already seen, however, that this is not an accurate reading of the text.3 Rather, Genesis 2:4ff deals with the Lord God’s completion of His creative work on the sixth day, a completion that awaited the creation of man. Furthermore, we have seen that chapter 2 presents a different perspective from the account of chapter 1, one in which the garden of chapter 2 is a part of the earth of chapter 1 now set aside for man’s service.4 As we trace through these theistic evolutionary readings of Genesis 1 and 2, we witness misread-ing of the text compounding earlier misreadings.

Nevertheless, the third and fourth stages of this reading of chapter 2 are new aspects that do need to be evaluated:• What are we to make of the claim that the

animals of verse 19 were created after man, whereas chapter 1 says that they were created before man?

• What are we to make of the assertion that the creation of male and female together in chapter 1 is contrary to the woman being made separately, out of the man’s side, in chapter 2?

1. Also known as ‘evolutionary creationists.’2. For example, http://biologos.org/blogs/archive/israels-

two-creation-stories-part-1 (referenced 30 Nov. 2015).3. “Genesis 1–2: the duration of creation,” vol. 85, no.

1,009, Oct. 2015, p. 397.4. “Genesis 1–2: portrayals of the beginning,” vol. 86, no.

1,013, Feb. 2016, p. 70.

Page 27: New occasional series: The correspondence

Testimony, April 2016 145Contents

The animalsAre the animals “formed” and named in 2:19,20 the same animals as those “made” in 1:20-25? Or, akin to the vegetation specifically created for the garden,5 are these domesticated animals specifically created to pertain to the garden in which Adam is appointed to serve? If they are the same animals:• Does 2:19,20 record that the order of creation

of man and the animals is indeed different from what we see in Genesis 1, as claimed by theistic evolutionists? or

• Are these verses a parenthetic retrospection on the animals’ earlier creation, to provide some background and explanation about the suitability of “a helper fit for [the man]” (2:18)?6

When we examine chapter 2’s reference to the animals we find a strong correspondence with the language and terminology of 1:20-25:

had said unto Abram . . .” (12:1, AV), it is evident that the AV accurately catches the tense of the opening Hebrew verb because:• the content here includes the command that

Abraham leave his country, Ur of the Chal-deans (11:28,31), and we have the prior record of Abraham leaving Ur and travelling to Haran en route to Canaan;

• 12:4 refers to Abraham’s obedience to the divine command: “So Abram went, as the LORD had told him”; and yet this departure has already been narrated in 11:31;

• consequently the AV rendering of 12:1 ac-curately captures the pluperfect sense of the record.10

Thus, since the verb form and syntax of “Now the Lord God had formed . . .” (2:19, NIV) is the same as “Now the Lord had said unto Abram . . .” (12:1, AV), and since the narrative logic of Genesis

1–2 demands it (assum-ing that the animals of 2:19,20 are the same as those in 1:20-25), the pluperfect sense of 2:19 as a flashback to chapter 1 is seen to be a proper reading of this verse.

Domesticated animalsBetween 1:20-25 and

2:19,20 we also see changes in the language used of the animals’ origins and habitat, consistent with the change of perspective from earth to garden that we saw in chapter 2’s account of man’s formation:11

Genesis 2:19,20 Genesis 1:20-25

beast [hyt] beast [hyt]beasts [hyt]

bird of the heavens [ʽwp hšmym]birds . . . the heavens [ʽwp . . . hšmym]bird [ʽwp]birds [hʽwp]

living creature [npš hyh] living creatures [npš hyh]

livestock [hbhmh] livestock [bhmh]

Genesis 2:19,20 Genesis 1:20-25out of the ground [mn h’dmh] Let the earth bring forth [tws’ h’rs]

beast of the field [hyt hśdh] beast of the earth [hyt ’rs]beasts of the earth [hyt h’rs]

This consistency of language across 1:20-25 and 2:19,20 could suggest that these two records speak of the same animals. If this is the correct reading, is the order of creation represented in chapter 2 in conflict with what we see in chapter 1, or are we to read 2:19,20 as a flashback to the animals’ earlier creation?

Theistic evolutionists pre-empt the latter reading by claiming that a ‘pluperfect’ rendering of 2:19, such as we find in the NIV,7 is not war-ranted because the ‘simple past’ is used in the Hebrew throughout chapter 2.8 But this is a simplistic handling of Hebrew verbs, for which attention to contextual reference, narrative logic and syntax is also required in order to determine grammatical tense.9

The significance of these aspects can be seen from considering a later passage in Genesis, where a verb with precisely the same form and syntax is used and obviously has the pluperfect sense. When Scripture records, “Now the LORD

5. Ibid.6. Bible quotations are from the ESV unless otherwise

stated.7. “Now the LORD God had formed out of the ground . . .”8. For example, http://biologos.org/blogs/archive/israels-

two-creation-stories-part-1 (referenced 30 Nov. 2015).9. See, for example, C. John Collins, “The wayyiqtol as

‘pluperfect’: when and why” in Tyndale Bulletin 46.1 (1995), pp. 117–140 (available at http://www.tyndale-house.com/tynbul/library/TynBull_1995_46_1_08_Col-lins_WAYYIQTOL_Pluperfect.pdf).

Page 28: New occasional series: The correspondence

Testimony, April 2016146 Contents

Within this change of perspective we saw that “field” is employed for the first time as a part of the “earth” of Genesis 1 in relation to Adam’s formation and his appointment to serve in the garden. While the ground featured previously in 1:25, this was to characterise the behaviour of the animals, not to describe the material from which they were made as in 2:19. On the other hand, the formation of the animals “out of the ground” resonates strongly with Adam’s origins in verse 7.

These details powerfully suggest that the ani-mals of verse 19 are different animals from those in 1:20-25, and that, consistent with a major theme of chapter 2, they are domesticated animals as-sociated with the field and garden in which Adam was appointed to serve, and created specifically for this purpose. Such a reading would also ex-plain the mention of the birds being formed out of the ground. The need for an explanation of this detail arises from the fact the birds of chapter 1 are portrayed as swarming, associated with the waters, on day five (v. 20) and not as being brought forth from the earth on day six (v. 24). If 2:19 describes a special creation of domesticated animals on day six, separate from the animals of 1:20-25, then these apparent discrepancies are removed.12

Finally, if this reading is correct then the tense in the first verb in 2:19 (“Now the LORD God had formed . . .”, NIV) is rendered irrelevant in the argument suggested by theistic evolutionists.

PurposeEither of the possible readings considered above shows that the claim of theistic evolutionists—that chapter 2 presents a different and conflicting order of creation from that in chapter 1—is wrong. Furthermore, the pursuit of a historical reading of Genesis 1–2 by theistic evolutionists, in order to find disharmony between the two chapters, overlooks the spiritual meaning that God intends us to take from the formation of the animals in 2:19: namely, that these animals share some commonality with Adam himself, being made from the same stuff as he. Other scriptures make just this point about the hopelessness of sinful man:

“. . . what happens to the children of man and what happens to the beasts is the same; as one dies, so dies the other. They all have the same breath, and man has no advan-tage over the beasts, for all is vanity” (Eccl. 3:19).

Furthermore, we are to learn from this that what sets us apart from the animals is not the stuff from which we are made, but the image and likeness of God. And in seeking a “helper fit for [the man]” (Gen. 2:18) it was only with such things that one could be found.

The womanWhat are we to make of the theistic evolutionary assertion that the creation of male and female together in Genesis 1 is contrary to the woman’s being made separately out of the man’s side in chapter 2?

If one were asked for a summary of chapter 2, it would be reasonable to state that it is about the creation of man and woman. Consequently, it is entirely reasonable to employ the words of 1:27, “male and female He created them,” to sum-marise the events of 2:7,18-22. It stretches credulity to claim that the records in chapters 1 and 2 are in conflict. Such an argument seems very much like special pleading.

Purpose againYet again, therefore, the pursuit of a theistic evolutionary argument misses the point of the differing details in Genesis 1 and 2 concerning the creation of man.

As we have seen previously,13 while 1:26-28 describes the glorious purpose that God has for His creation, with mankind at creation’s head, chapter 2 moves on to describe essential means to that end. The profound “mystery” (Eph. 5:32) portrayed in Genesis 2:18-25 is that God’s purpose of mankind filling the earth and showing forth His image and likeness will finally be realised only through the work of the true husband in reconciling God and man. The truth of this work of reconciliation is founded on the historicity of God’s formation of Adam and

10. Any residual doubt about this is authoritatively re-moved by Stephen’s Spirit-filled testimony that “The God of glory appeared to our father Abraham when he was in Mesopotamia, before he lived in Haran, and said to him, ‘Go out from your land and from your kindred . . .’” (Acts 7:2,3).

11. Peter Heavyside, op. cit.12. Likewise, a common criticism of Genesis 2:19 that there

is no possibility that Adam could name all the species of animals created in chapter 1 within a single day (day six) is removed; if the reading of 2:19 is properly about domesticated animals only, the population of animals paraded before Adam is significantly reduced.

13. Peter Heavyside, op. cit.

Page 29: New occasional series: The correspondence

Testimony, April 2016 147Contents

the making of the woman out of his rib. As the gospel record tells us, “beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, [Jesus] interpreted to [the

disciples] in all the Scriptures the things concern-ing himself”—including that Christ must suffer (Lk. 24:27).

The Parable of the SowerGary Penn

The Parable of the Sower speaks powerfully of our responsibility to preach the Word to all people, and also of our own response to the Word sown in our hearts.

MARK 4 OPENS with Jesus beside the Sea of Galilee, teaching those who will hear. As he speaks, more and more people join

to listen, until the crowd grows to “a great mul-titude” (v. 1). To enable yet more to listen, Jesus enters a boat and moves away from the shore, out into the lake, from where more can hear his teaching.

Jesus teaches them using parables, stories that involve everyday things, to which the multitude, consisting of all kinds of people of different back-grounds, jobs and intellectual abilities, would be able to relate. Although these stories could, on the surface, seem simple and mundane, for the astute listener there was always something more. With careful contemplation, these seemingly simple tales have profound meanings, both for the listener in Jesus’ day and for us today.

Different responsesThe Parable of the Sower is straightforward. A sower goes out to sow. In the days before indus-trial sowing, this was a labour-intensive exercise, where, with a bag of seed carried on the shoul-der, the sower would walk laboriously up and down, scattering the seed on ground that had been prepared. In the parable the sower appears indiscriminate, ‘broadcasting’ the seed every-where, on soil of all types. Seed goes first onto the “wayside,” the path near the field, compacted by many people walking on it. For seed that falls here, there never is any chance of germination and growth, and it is soon eaten by birds. Other seed falls on rocks and among thorns. Although there are initial signs of growth here, given the nature of the soil and other conditions no fruit is produced; the plants die or are choked. The seed

that falls on good ground is the seed that, as the listeners would expect, brings forth fruit.

A sceptic listening to Jesus might soon become critical of the parable. One can im-agine him thinking, ‘Jesus has got it all wrong.’ A real sower would take care to spread the seed only on the good soil. The sower in Jesus’ parable seems wasteful, and his work not good enough. A good sower would never be so careless as to throw seed on the pathway or on rocks.

What is the lesson? The only explanation that Jesus provides to the crowd is in verse 9: “He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.” Again we can picture the sceptic thinking, ‘What on earth does he mean by that?’ Unimpressed, confused and disappointed, the sceptic would leave.

By comparison the earnest disciple, knowing that the Lord would say nothing that was unim-portant, might contemplate the deeper meaning of his words. So it is with all Scripture. It can be read in ways that only gloss over the surface, to be ignored or criticised by the sceptic. But to those who take the time to consider prayerfully the wonder of God’s Word is revealed the marvel of salvation and life everlasting to the honour and glory of God.

Different types of soilWhat happens to such earnest disciples? Verse 10 is particular: “And when he was alone, they that were about him with the twelve asked of him the parable.” It is evident that Jesus was not physi-cally alone—others were with him. The Greek word translated “alone” has the idea of an empty expanse. At the start of the chapter the crowds were so great that Jesus had to leave the shore to teach them. Now, in comparison, there was an ‘empty expense’ on the Galilean shore. Many had left. Only the twelve disciples remained, with those earnest listeners who wanted to know more.

Exhortation

Page 30: New occasional series: The correspondence

Testimony, April 2016148 Contents

These asked Jesus about the parable. Matthew’s account provides more detail of the nature of the question: “And the disciples came, and said unto him, Why speakest thou unto them in parables?” (13:10). Jesus replies in Mark 4:11,12: “Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God: but unto them that are without, all these things are done in parables: that seeing they may see, and not perceive; and hearing they may hear, and not understand; lest at any time they should be converted, and their sins should be forgiven them.” Jesus’ reply quotes from Isaiah 6:9,10 (which Matthew specifically mentions): “And he said, Go, and tell this people, Hear ye indeed, but understand not; and see ye indeed, but perceive not. Make the heart of this people fat, and make their ears heavy, and shut their eyes; lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and convert, and be healed.” In the passage upon which Jesus draws, why is there this comment that the heart of God’s people is ‘made fat’?

There is a possible connection in Moses’ final message to the children of Israel, at the end of the exodus journey from Egypt: “But Jeshurun”—a symbolic name for Israel, meaning ‘upright one’—“waxed fat, and kicked: thou art waxen fat, thou art grown thick, thou art covered with fatness; then he forsook God which made him, and lightly esteemed the Rock of his salvation” (Deut. 32:15). Perhaps this provides us with an insight into events beside the Sea of Galilee, and why Jesus taught in parables. Jesus has assumed the role of the ‘rock’ of God’s salvation, and again, from within the same nation, he encounters people just as sceptical of his words as Israel had been of God’s words to them on the exodus journey, and who responded with equal unbelief in His Word, now communicated in the teaching of Jesus.

But to disciples who trembled at the Word of God, Jesus explains the parable. Its lessons are simple. The sower is not specifically identified, perhaps because in one sense we are all ‘sowers.’ But the seed is specified. It is the Word of God: “The sower soweth the word” (Mk. 4:14). This is the seed that we have been given to sow. At the end of the same Gospel, Jesus commanded his disciples then and us today: “Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every crea-ture. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned” (16:15,16). We are to sow the seed provided; we are not to substitute other seed for it—to use a modern metaphor, to attempt spiritual ‘genetic

modification’ by changing or ‘improving’ the message. “The law of the LORD is perfect” (Ps. 19:7). Who are we to think that we can improve what God has already made perfect?

Modern applicationsThere is also a tremendous lesson in the seem-ingly wasteful way in which the seed is sown. Like the sower, apparently allowing the seed to fall generously, we are to preach to “all the world.” It is not for us to pick and choose to whom we preach, or to attempt to guess who might respond. Paul uses another appropriate gardening analogy in 1 Corinthians 3:6, where he comments, “I have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase.” It may be that by the involvement of a variety of individual brothers and sisters God gives the increase. We need to make sure that we spread the seed of the Gospel at every opportunity.

As for the sower in the parable, the response to our sowing will be different from different people. The shallow, rocky type of soil shows not only that some who hear will later turn away in the times of difficulty that the Word brings them, but also that the path may be difficult for those who sow. The fires of trial and affliction may come upon us, too, and our own road may be hard. How do we cope in such situations? By ensuring that we always drink deeply from the water of the Word. Jesus told the woman at the well of Samaria, “Whosoever drinketh of this [natural] water shall thirst again: but whosoever drinketh of the water [of God’s Word] that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life” (Jno. 4:13,14).

The challenge of the practical living of the Truth in these last days is real, as shown by the thorny ground. Here “the cares of this world, and the deceitfulness of riches, and the lusts of other things entering in, choke the word, and it becometh unfruitful” (Mk. 4:19). In the days just prior to the return of Christ, we need to be particularly mindful of this challenge. Later, Jesus spoke a similar warning to those who live immediately before his return:

“And take heed to yourselves, lest at any time your hearts be overcharged with surfeiting, and drunkenness, and cares of this life, and so that day come upon you unawares. For as a snare shall it come on all them that dwell on the face of the whole earth. Watch ye therefore, and pray always, that ye may be accounted

Page 31: New occasional series: The correspondence

Testimony, April 2016 149Contents

worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of man” (Lk. 21:34-36).

How do we remain mindful of this day of our Lord’s return? In the same way as the earnest disciples who first heard the Lord’s parable, and who were able to perceive its deeper message: by being of a humble and contrite spirit, and trembling at God’s Word (see Isa. 66:2) in obeying His commandments.

May we be like the good soil of the parable; those who, having received the Word sown in

our hearts, hear it, and allow it to work in our lives so that we may bring forth the fruits of the spirit: “love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness [and] temperance” (Gal. 5:22,23).

Such is the “fruit” (Mk. 4:20) to be ‘brought forth’ according to the best of our ability, as unto the Lord. In so doing, we shall be able to produce fruit not only now, but also, by God’s grace, in the Kingdom of our Lord and Christ for ever-more. “He that hath ears to hear, let him hear” (v. 9).

The sincerity and truth of Exodus 11–131. Exodus 11:1–12:36Sam Day

This important section of Scripture describes the institution of the Passover meal and the seven days of the Feast of Unleavened Bread, the tenth plague, and the much-anticipated deliverance from Egypt. But one of the first things we notice is the considerable repetition of subjects, to the point that it is difficult to follow or identify a train of thought. However, what at first may seem disorganised, disjointed and repetitious is in fact finely crafted literature. The beauty of these literary structures is a further indication of the divine inspiration of Scripture, and the structures themselves help us interpret the text.

IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING the account of the first nine plagues of Egypt in Exodus 7–10 are three verses that appear to be out of place.

The last verse of chapter 10 seems to conclude Moses’ interview with Pharaoh, for chapter 11 begins: “And the LORD said unto Moses . . .” By verse 4, however, Moses is again speaking with Pharaoh: “And Moses said . . .” We know this because verse 8, at the end of Moses’ words, states, “And he went out from Pharaoh in a great

anger.” Verses 1-3 therefore ‘interrupt’ the dialogue between Moses and Pharaoh.

These three verses form a special passage because they repeat the mes-sage that Moses received from God when he was in Midian:

“And the LORD said unto Moses, Yet will I bring one plague more upon Pharaoh, and upon Egypt; afterwards he will let you go hence: when he shall let you go, he shall surely thrust you out hence altogether. Speak now in the ears

of the people, and let every man borrow of his neighbour, and every woman of her neigh-bour, jewels of silver, and jewels of gold. And the LORD gave the people favour in the sight of the Egyptians. Moreover the man Moses was very great in the land of Egypt, in the sight of Pharaoh’s servants, and in the sight of the people” (11:1-3);“And I am sure that the king of Egypt will not let you go, no, not by a mighty hand. And

Exposition

Contents

Page 32: New occasional series: The correspondence

Testimony, April 2016150 Contents

I will stretch out My hand, and smite Egypt with all My wonders which I will do in the midst thereof: and after that he will let you go. And I will give this people favour in the sight of the Egyptians: and it shall come to pass, that, when ye go, ye shall not go empty: but every woman shall borrow of her neighbour, and of her that sojourneth in her house, jew-els of silver, and jewels of gold, and raiment: and ye shall put them upon your sons, and upon your daughters; and ye shall spoil the Egyptians” (3:19-22).

Three things that God tells Moses in chapter 3 are repeated in chapter 11, as shown in Table 1 above. First, Pharaoh lets the people go after the final plague (11:1); secondly, Israel spoil the Egyptians, taking their silver and gold (v. 2); and thirdly, “the LORD gave the people favour in the sight of the Egyptians” (v. 3).

However, it is not until 12:31-36 that any of these things actually happens, as also shown in Table 1. In other words, the promise of 3:19-22 is repeated in 11:1-3 and fulfilled in 12:31-36. So the section from 11:1 to 12:36 is ‘framed’ by the promise made to Moses in chapter 3. This framework sets the boundaries of a chiastic struc- ture.1

The death of the firstbornImmediately after 11:1-3 the interview between Moses and Pharaoh, which deals with the warn-ing of the death of the firstborn, continues. The account of the fulfilment of these events comes in chapter 12 (see Table 2 opposite), immediately before the verses 31-36 we have considered above.

The last part of each of these passages high-lights the extreme contrast between Israel and Egypt. Not even a dog barked at an Israelite, but every single Egyptian household mourned the loss of a firstborn child.

The work is doneAfter the prediction of the death of the firstborn, chapter 11 ends with two verses that do not ap-pear to follow chronologically. The phrase “And Moses and Aaron did all these wonders before Pharaoh” (v. 10) refers back to the nine plagues of chapters 7–10, so verses 9 and 10 are summarising everything that Moses and Aaron have done so far. Notice that these two verses come immedi-ately after the section dealing with the warning of

Table 1 Pharaoh gives in and the spoiling of the EgyptiansExodus 11 Exodus 12v. 1 “And the LORD said unto Moses, Yet will I

bring one plague more upon Pharaoh, and upon Egypt; afterwards he will let you go hence: when he shall let you go, he shall surely thrust you out hence altogether”

vv. 31-33 “And he called for Moses and Aaron by night, and said, Rise up, and get you forth from among my people, both ye and the children of Israel; and go, serve the LORD, as ye have said. Also take your flocks and your herds, as ye have said, and be gone; and bless me also. And the Egyptians were urgent upon the people, that they might send them out of the land in haste; for they said, We be all dead men”

v. 2 “Speak now in the ears of the people, and let every man borrow of his neighbour, and every woman of her neighbour, jewels of silver, and jewels of gold”

vv. 34,35 “And the people took their dough before it was leavened, their kneadingtroughs being bound up in their clothes upon their shoulders. And the children of Israel did according to the word of Moses; and they borrowed of the Egyptians jewels of silver, and jewels of gold, and raiment”

v. 3 “And the LORD gave the people favour in the sight of the Egyptians. Moreover the man Moses was very great in the land of Egypt, in the sight of Pharaoh’s servants, and in the sight of the people”

v. 36 “And the LORD gave the people favour in the sight of the Egyptians, so that they lent unto them such things as they required. And they spoiled the Egyptians”

1. For an explanation of this feature, see Stephen Palmer, “Chiasmus in all the Scriptures?”, vol. 85, no. 1,010, Nov. 2015, p. 436.

Page 33: New occasional series: The correspondence

Testimony, April 2016 151Contents

the death of the firstborn, and parallel the verse that comes immediately before the section that actually records the death of the firstborn: “And the children of Israel went away, and did as the LORD had commanded Moses and Aaron, so did they” (12:28) (see Table 3 below). At first sight the order of the verses may seem awkward, but they make good sense if this whole section of Exodus is understood to have a chiastic structure, as we shall explore.

The Passover lambThe next section, 12:1-27, deals with the informa-tion given to Moses and Aaron and the people concerning Passover. This information occurs in two blocks, verses 1-14 and verses 21-27, which are separated by information concerning the Feast of Unleavened Bread. In other words, God first

gives instructions regarding the Passover lamb; then He gives instructions regarding the feast; then Moses relays to the elders of the people in-struction regarding the Passover lamb. Thus the two sections on the Passover lamb are in parallel within the chiastic structure (see Table 4 over- leaf).

Whilst these two sections are not ‘balanced’ in terms of number of verses, we can see from Table 4 that they follow the same pattern and can each be split into four subsections. The first is about choosing the lamb and killing it; the second is about what Israel are to do or not do during Passover; the third is about what God did dur-ing Passover; and the final section is about how Israel were to keep the Passover as a memorial and an ordinance always, and were to teach it to their children.

Table 2 The death of the firstbornExodus 11 Exodus 12v. 4 “And Moses said, Thus saith the LORD,

About midnight will I go out into the midst of Egypt . . .”

v. 29a “And it came to pass, that at midnight . . .”

v. 5a “. . . and all the firstborn in the land of Egypt shall die . . .”

v. 29b “. . . the LORD smote all the firstborn in the land of Egypt . . .”

v. 5b “. . . from the firstborn of Pharaoh that sitteth upon his throne, even unto the firstborn of the maidservant that is behind the mill; and all the firstborn of beasts”

v. 29c “. . . from the firstborn of Pharaoh that sat on his throne unto the firstborn of the cap-tive that was in the dungeon; and all the firstborn of cattle”

v. 6 “And there shall be a great cry throughout all the land of Egypt, such as there was none like it, nor shall be like it any more”

v. 30a “And Pharaoh rose up in the night, he, and all his servants, and all the Egyptians; and there was a great cry in Egypt . . .”

v. 7 “But against any of the children of Israel shall not a dog move his tongue, against man or beast: that ye may know how that the LORD doth put a difference between the Egyptians and Israel”

v. 30b “. . . for there was not a house where there was not one dead”

Table 3 The work is doneExodus 11 Exodus 12vv. 9,10 “And the LORD said unto Moses, Phar-

aoh shall not hearken unto you; that My wonders may be multiplied in the land of Egypt. And Moses and Aaron did all these wonders before Pharaoh: and the LORD hardened Pharaoh’s heart, so that he would not let the children of Israel go out of his land”

v. 28 “And the children of Israel went away, and did as the LORD had commanded Moses and Aaron, so did they”

Page 34: New occasional series: The correspondence

Testimony, April 2016152 Contents

The overall chiastic structurePiecing together the information we have con-sidered so far, the following layout shows the structure of Exodus 11:1 to 12:36:

A 11:1-3: Pharaoh gives in and the spoiling of the Egyptians.

B 11:4-8: the death of the firstbornC 11:9,10: the work is done

D 12:1-14: the Passover lambE 12:15-20: the Feast of Unleavened Bread

D’ 12:21-27: the Passover lambC’ 12:28: the work is done

B’ 12:29,30: the death of the firstbornA’ 12:31-36: Pharaoh gives in and the spoiling of the Egyptians.

Table 4 The Passover lambExodus 12:1-14 Exodus 12:21-27vv. 1-6 “And the LORD spake unto Moses and

Aaron . . . Speak ye unto all the con-gregation of Israel, saying, In the tenth day of this month they shall take to them every man a lamb, according to the house of their fathers . . . and the whole assembly of the congregation of Israel shall kill it in the evening.”

v. 21 “Then Moses called for all the elders of Israel, and said unto them, Draw out and take you a lamb according to your families, and kill the passover”

vv. 7-11 “And they shall take of the blood, and strike it on the two side posts and on the upper door post of the houses . . .”

v. 22 “And ye shall take a bunch of hyssop, and dip it in the blood that is in the bason, and strike the lintel and the two side posts with the blood that is in the bason; and none of you shall go out at the door of his house until the morning”

vv. 12,13 “For I will pass through the land of Egypt this night, and will smite all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, both man and beast; and against all the gods of Egypt I will execute judgment: I am the LORD. And the blood shall be to you for a token upon the houses where ye are: and when I see the blood, I will pass over you, and the plague shall not be upon you to destroy you, when I smite the land of Egypt”

v. 23 “For the LORD will pass through to smite the Egyptians; and when he seeth the blood upon the lintel, and on the two side posts, the LORD will pass over the door, and will not suffer the destroyer to come in unto your houses to smite you”

v. 14 “And this day shall be unto you for a memorial; and ye shall keep it a feast to the LORD throughout your generations; ye shall keep it a feast by an ordinance for ever”

v. 24 “And ye shall observe this thing for an ordinance to thee and to thy sons for ever”

The whole section is revealed to be a chiasm, with a passage on the Feast of Unleavened Bread at its centre.

Chiasms within chiasmsRemarkably, the passage concerning the seven days of the Feast of Unleavened Bread (12:15-20) is not only at the centre of the chiasm, but is also a chiasm itself, as the following layout shows:

A v. 15: “Seven days ye shall eat unleavened bread”

B v. 15b: “even the first day shall ye put away leaven out of your houses: for whosoever eateth leavened bread from the first day until the seventh day, that soul shall be cut off from Israel”

Page 35: New occasional series: The correspondence

Testimony, April 2016 153Contents

14th Nisan 15th Nisan 16th Nisan 17th Nisan 18th Nisan 19th Nisan 20th Nisan

Night Day Night Day

Death of firstborn

Egyptians spoiled

Exodus begins

Passover, 1st day of feast

2nd day of feast 3rd day of feast

4th day of feast

5th day of feast

6th day of feast

7th day of feast

Lamb killed; Passover meal prepared

C v. 16: “And in the first day there shall be an holy convocation, and in the seventh day there shall be an holy convocation to you; no manner of work shall be done in them, save that which every man must eat, that only may be done of you”

D v. 17a: “And ye shall observe the feast of unleavened bread”

E v. 17b: “for in this selfsame day have I brought your armies out of the land of Egypt”

D’ v. 17c: “therefore shall ye observe this day in your generations by an ordinance for ever”

C’ v. 18: “In the first month, on the fourteenth day of the month at even, ye shall eat unleavened bread, until the one and twentieth day of the month at even”

B’ v. 19: “Seven days shall there be no leaven found in your houses: for whosoever eateth that which is leavened, even that soul shall be cut off from the congregation of Israel, whether he be a stranger, or born in the land”

A’ v. 20: “Ye shall eat nothing leavened; in all your habitations shall ye eat unleavened bread.”

The chiasm is to be understood as follows:• A and A’ each stipulate the simple command-

ment that unleavened bread must be eaten.• B and B’ both refer to the removal of leaven

from the Israelites’ houses and the cutting off of a soul from the congregation if he refused to do so.

• C and C’ both make mention of the beginning and end of the feast.

• D and D’ both contain the commandment to “observe.”

• Finally E, the centre, tells us that Israel was delivered from Egypt on “this selfsame day.”

Being the centre of the entire passage from 11:1–12:36, this sentence is evidently important. But why is it important? Which day is it referring to, considering that Israel had to eat unleavened bread for seven days?

Dating the feast of unleavened breadThe week of unleavened bread started at sunset on 13/14 Abib (later called Nisan) and continued until sunset on 20/21 Abib (12:18), the Jewish day beginning at sunset. The lamb was killed in the evening at the very beginning of the fourteenth, and the Passover meal was eaten during that same night of the fourteenth: “And they shall eat the flesh in that night . . .” (v. 8). God killed the first-born at midnight on the fourteenth whilst Israel ate the Passover meal: “And it came to pass, that at midnight the LORD smote all the firstborn in the land of Egypt” (v. 29). No-one was allowed out of his house until the morning: “none of you shall go out at the door of his house until the morning” (v. 22).

Not until dawn on the fourteenth did the Israelites leave their houses to spoil the Egyp-tians: “And the children of Israel did according to the word of Moses; and they borrowed of the Egyptians jewels of silver, and jewels of gold, and raiment: and the LORD gave the people favour in the sight of the Egyptians, so that they lent unto them such things as they required. And they spoiled the Egyptians” (vv. 35,36). This must have taken place during daylight on the fourteenth, so that Israel could leave on the fifteenth: “And they departed from Rameses in the first month, on the fifteenth day of the first month; on the morrow after the passover the children of Israel went out with an high hand in the sight of all the Egyptians” (Num. 33:3).

So Israel began their exodus from Egypt at the beginning of 15 Abib at night. The diagram below sets out the order of events:

Page 36: New occasional series: The correspondence

Testimony, April 2016154 Contents

Sincerity and truthWhat we have shown so far is that 15 Abib was the night on which Israel left Egypt, and that the importance of this night is emphasised by its position at the centre of the structure of Exodus 11 and 12. But what did the Feast of Unleavened Bread teach Israel, and why was it so important?

The Apostle Paul takes up the language of these events: “Know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump? Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passo-ver is sacrificed for us: therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth” (1 Cor. 5:6-8). The Passover lamb therefore prefigures Christ; leaven represents malice and wicked-ness; and unleavened bread represents sincerity and truth. Fornication, greed, extortion, idola-try, covetousness and other evils (vv. 9-11) are things that we need to get rid of so that we might be ‘sincere’ and ‘true’ to God’s ways in our lives.

This is exactly what Israel were to do. Paul’s inspired words echo the words of Joshua, who at the end of his life gathered together the tribes of Israel to rehearse to them all that God had done for them from the days of Abraham until that present time, including their exodus from Egypt. God had done so much for Israel; time after time He had delivered them from their enemies. Now Joshua tells the people exactly what their response should be: “Now therefore fear the LORD, and serve Him in sincerity and in truth: and put away the gods which your fathers served on the other side of the flood, and in Egypt; and serve ye the LORD” (Josh. 24:14).

Israel was to put away the things of Egypt and serve the true God in sincerity and truth. The things of Egypt corresponded to the leaven which had to be put away during the Feast of Unleavened Bread, and that unleavened bread represented serving God in sincerity and truth. This is why the feast is at the heart of the chiasm in the Exodus narrative. The Passover sacrifice is not enough; we have also to forsake the things of Egypt throughout our journey to the Kingdom.

(To be concluded)

The stem of JessePhilip Conrad

This brief study investigates the reason for the expression “the stem of Jesse” in Isaiah 11:1. This is the only mention of Jesse which is not connected with the life or genealogy of David. A little digging reveals a deliberate contrast with another detail in the prophecy—a contrast with hope for a glorious future.

IN THE YEAR THAT King Uzziah died, the prophet Isaiah was given a symbolic vision of the glorified Christ1 seated on a throne, with

the skirts of his garments filling the temple (6:1-5). This was a direct contrast with Uzziah’s abortive attempt to fulfil the promise of Psalm 110 and become a king-priest after the man-ner of Melchizedek. When Uzziah went in to burn incense in the temple, he was struck with leprosy, and could no longer officiate as king.

At its simplest level, the vision was an assurance from God that His promise of a king-priest would nev-ertheless be kept in due time, despite Uzziah’s failure. There are several other allusions in Isaiah 6 to Uzziah’s downfall.

A later prophecyIsaiah 7, however, refers to a later period of Judah’s history, and commences a separate section of Isaiah’s prophecy. Wicked King Ahaz, grandson of Uzziah, is on the throne, and the kingdom is threatened by the confederacy of Israel and King Rezin of Syria to the north. Isaiah is sent,

Exposition

1. See John 12:39-41, which quotes Isaiah 6:10.

Contents

Page 37: New occasional series: The correspondence

Testimony, April 2016 155Contents

with Shear-jashub his son, to reassure Ahaz. Ahaz is commanded to ask for a sign from God, but refuses, so the sign of the virgin is given. Chapter 8 warns of the waters of “the river” (the Euphrates, the symbol of Assyria), which would overflow its banks because Ahaz and his people had “[refused] the waters of Shiloah that go softly” (the message of hope spoken by Isaiah as he stood at the conduit of the upper pool in chapter 7).

The prophecy progresses through chapter 8, still speaking of the same events, and into chap-ter 9, where it reaches its climax in verse 7 with the promise of the birth of the son who would reign from the throne of David for ever. Rezin and Syria feature again in the next section of prophecy, which runs from 9:8 to 10:4, with the repeated refrain, “For all this His anger is not turned away, but His hand is stretched out still” (9:12,17,21; 10:4). The remainder of chapter 10 is a prophecy against the “Assyrian.” In verses 21 and 22 the phrase “The remnant shall return,” which is the meaning of Shear-jashub, helps to confirm that all these prophecies are connected, running from chapter 7 to chapter 10.

Two trees cut downHaving established that chapters 7–10 form a single section of Isaiah’s prophecy, we note that there is a marked contrast between the end of chapter 6 and the end of chapter 10. The earlier section concluded in 6:13, with the words of God to the prophet:

“But yet in it shall be a tenth, and it shall re-turn, and shall be eaten: as a teil tree, and as an oak, whose substance [stock or stem] is in them, when they cast their leaves [Heb., when they are cut down]: so the holy seed shall be the substance thereof.”

In contrast, the next section concludes in 10:34:“And he shall cut down the thickets of the forest with iron, and Lebanon shall fall by a mighty one.”

The two chapters therefore both refer to trees which are cut down: the first is an oak and the second appears to be a cedar (the tree for which Lebanon is renowned). But these trees have a key physiological difference. If you cut an oak down to its stump it can grow again; but a cedar will not. The ‘remnant’ language is repeated several times through these chapters in Isaiah, and in 6:13 it is specifically associated with the stump of the oak tree. This stump therefore represents the remnant of God’s people.

When, then, in 11:1 we read of the stem (or root stock) of Jesse, we are reading about the very stump that was left in the ground in 6:13—“the holy seed shall be the substance [stock or stem] thereof.” Ezra the scribe identified this “holy seed” (Ezra 9:2), recognising it as the remnant that returned from captivity, just as God had promised before they even went to Babylon. From this holy seed would come the Branch, the true holy one, who would give life to the remnant of God’s people. The name Jesse means ‘extant.’ On their return from exile, the stem or stump of God’s people was extant, still there, and from this remnant the promised Branch would arise.

The Branch sprouts from the stumpOn Judah’s return from Babylon, God reminds them of Isaiah’s promise of the Branch in the words He gives to the prophet Zechariah:

“Hear now, O Joshua the high priest, thou, and thy fellows that sit before thee: for they are men wondered at [Heb., men of sign]: for, behold, I will bring forth My servant the BRANCH” (Zech. 3:8.)

Notice the deliberate echo back to Isaiah 8:18: “Behold, I and the children whom the LORD hath given me are for signs and for wonders in Israel from the LORD of hosts, which dwelleth in mount Zion.”

In the promise that “a Branch shall grow out of [Jesse’s] roots” (11:1), the word translated ‘grow’ means ‘to bear fruit.’ There is another Hebrew word for ‘grow,’ which means ‘to sprout or grow up’ (see Jer. 33:15; Zech. 6:12), but the word that Isaiah uses means specifically ‘to bear fruit.’ The tree of Judah would therefore be made ‘fruitful’ again by the Branch that would come from its roots. That Branch is the Lord Jesus Christ, who describes himself as “the root and the offspring of David” (Rev. 22:16). The Assyrian cedar would be cut down, never to sprout again, but the oak of Judah would regrow and become fruitful.

Micah declares that there will be a latter-day ‘Assyrian’ (5:5,6), who will come against Israel as the ancient Assyrian did. This suggests that the pattern which unfolded with the Assyrian of old will be seen again. God will bring him into the Land (Ezek. 38:9), but he will not acknowledge God. It will be “in his heart to destroy and cut off nations not a few” (Isa. 10:7). God will destroy him “both soul and body” (v. 18),2 never to rise again. The remnant of Israel will then return to

2. This appears to be the basis for the Lord’s words in Matthew 10:28.

Page 38: New occasional series: The correspondence

Testimony, April 2016156 Contents

the Land and be fruitful. God’s anger will finally be turned away (12:1), and He will comfort His people (40:1,2).

Humility before exaltationThere is another reference to the Branch in Zechariah 6:12,13. Here it will be helpful to bear in mind where our story began, shortly after the death of the failed king-priest Uzziah.

“Thus speaketh the LORD of hosts, saying, Behold the man whose name is The BRANCH; and he shall grow up out of his place, and he shall build the temple of the LORD: even he shall build the temple of the LORD; and he shall bear the glory, and shall sit and rule upon his throne; and he shall be a priest upon his throne: and the counsel of peace shall be between them both.”

The Branch from the stem of Jesse will at last fulfil the promise of Psalm 110, which Uzziah failed to fulfil.

Clear within Isaiah’s prophecy of the Branch that would grow from the stump of Judah is the principle of humility before exaltation (see 1 Pet. 5:6). This is reinforced by a consideration

of what Jesus had to experience before he could be glorified. He would “grow up before [God] as a tender plant, and as a root out of a dry ground” (Isa. 53:2), in sharp contrast to the beauty of the cedar of Lebanon, renowned for its majesty and strength. In the days of his flesh, Jesus would have none of that; he would be “cut off out the land of the living” (v. 8), suffering “the consumption decreed” upon man (10:22) from the beginning of creation; yet ultimately it would “overflow with righteousness,” and Jesus would be raised from the dead.

When Jesus returns to the earth as King, he will rule in righteousness over all the earth. His Kingdom will be spectacular, like the greatest and most beautiful tree of all, in whose branches the birds can rest (Mt. 13:31,32). To that Kingdom both Jews and Gentiles have access (Isa. 11:10), by faith and by the grace of God.

In that day may we be given the opportunity to “Sing unto the LORD; for He hath done excel-lent things: this is known in all the earth. Cry out and shout, thou inhabitant of Zion: for great is the Holy One of Israel in the midst of thee” (12:5,6).

The letters of John Thomasto Alexander Campbell (1)Edited and annotated by Reg Carr

This new occasional series consists of the fifteen surviving letters of Brother John Thomas to Alexander Campbell. Their relationship was a critical part of Brother Thomas’s search for Bible truth, and therefore forms a relevant background to the work of a man whose labour, under the good hand of God, was instrumental in the birth of the Christadelphian movement.

SHORTLY AFTER HIS BAPTISM in 1832 in Cincinnati, Ohio, at the hands of the Campbellite evangelist Walter Scott (no

relation of the more famous novelist!), the twenty-seven-year-old Dr John Thomas was introduced to Alexander Campbell, one of the principal leaders of the so-called ‘Restoration movement,’

a Christian religious revival which at the time of Dr Thomas’s arrival in America was sweeping through the more established churches there. Preferring to call himself and his ad-herents ‘Disciples of Christ,’ or simply ‘Christians,’ Campbell (1788–1866) was a Scots-Irish immigrant who became an ordained Baptist minister in the

United States shortly after he joined his father Thomas there in 1809. The Campbells, father and son, stressed reliance on Scripture and em-phasised the importance of a return to original Christianity as found in the New Testament. It was this that made the new movement attractive to the newly arrived Dr Thomas, who, on his

History

Contents

Page 39: New occasional series: The correspondence

Testimony, April 2016 157Contents

storm-ridden journey to America, had vowed not to rest until he had satisfied himself as to the truth about God and His purpose. In 1832—the same year in which Dr Thomas was baptised into this nondenominational ‘church’—the Campbells and their fellow-believers had combined their efforts with those of Barton W. Stone and his followers in Kentucky, as a result of which the whole group has sometimes subsequently become known as the ‘Stone-Campbell movement.’

Seventeen years senior to Dr Thomas (who was born in 1805), Alexander Campbell was a forceful speaker and writer who undertook much preaching work during his many itinerant tours of North America, and who edited two principal journals, the Christian Baptist (1823–30) and the Millennial Harbinger (1830 onwards). Dr Thomas was taken to meet Campbell during the spring of 1833, and he stayed with him in Bethany, Vir-ginia, for several months before moving on to Philadelphia and then to Richmond, where he settled for a while in the early summer of 1834. The two men initially hit it off, and for a while Dr Thomas was content to learn from Campbell, from Walter Scott, but especially from the Scrip-tures, which he devoured avidly. Both Campbell and Scott had a high opinion of this young, well-educated and zealous English convert, and they clearly had high hopes for his future contribution to the Reformation movement.

It proved not to be long, however, before the Doctor began, through his own deeper reading of Scripture, to take issue with a number of Camp-bell’s teachings, because he found them, despite all the movement’s claims to be Bible-based, to run counter to the clear and simple gospel mes-sage preached by Jesus and his apostles. The more Dr Thomas read for himself, the more al-ienated he became from the Campbells and their acolytes, with the result that, after several years of disagreement and contention, the inevitable separation came on a range of issues of integral importance to the ancient apostolic teaching.

The letters, however, will speak for themselves, as they enable us to watch the initially close relationship between Alexander Campbell and Dr Thomas gradually unwind and deteriorate, through recrimination and bitterness, to the point of separation.

Note: while for the sake of historical accuracy the original text of Dr Thomas’s letters has been adhered to as far as possible, it has occasionally been necessary to amend some of the highly idiosyncratic use of punctuation, as well as to

rationalise the occasional inconsistencies of spell-ing and capitalisation. It is not always easy to know whether some of these irregularities were the Doctor’s own or were introduced by the printers and missed at the proofreading stage. The Doctor’s handwriting was often fiendishly difficult to read, and it deteriorated further as he grew older. American spellings, even where inconsistently used, have been left in place, partly as a reminder of the fact that the letters were written in the USA.

* * * * *

Letter 1: written from Philadelphia during December 18331 and addressed to

Alexander Campbell in Bethany, Virginia

BROTHER CAMPBELL,The above2 is a fair specimen of the pantheistic3 religion of the nineteenth century in the New World. Every sect in the religious world has its system to which it does homage: thus love of system, instead of the love of Christ, reigns pre-dominant within. The love of place,4 however, is even stronger than the love of system, and the sentiments of the above extracts are a faithful representation of the religious pantheism, or sectarian infidelity, which prevails and is so accommodating that the truth shall be told in

1. Dr Thomas’s letter and the two short pieces which ac-companied it were published by Alexander Campbell in his Millennial Harbinger (vol. 5, no. 1 (Jan. 1834)), pp. 26–27.

2. “The above,” sent to Alexander Campbell by Dr Thomas, and published with his letter, was an extract from the National Intelligencer, in which an anonymous writer called ‘A Listener’ extolled the virtues of the Rev. Thomas H. Stockton, of the Methodist Church of Georgetown, DC, as the ideal candidate for appoint-ment as Chaplain to the US Congress.

3. It seems likely that the Doctor was using the term ‘pantheistic’ to refer disapprovingly to the desire of many of the established church leaders to regard all those calling themselves ‘Christian’ as part of a single world religion and all acceptable to God. There are many echoes of this in the ecumenical movement of the twentieth and twenty-first centuries also.

4. The word ‘place’ here is used in the sense of ‘situation,’ as in appointment to high office (which is what the extract from the National Intelligencer was about). In other words, Dr Thomas was accusing the Methodists of being mostly interested in the promotion of their favoured minister to a position of distinction in the nation’s political arena.

Page 40: New occasional series: The correspondence

Testimony, April 2016158 Contents

Congress in so delicate a manner as not to offend the legislative ear polite.5 Happily, brother, we belong not to the religious world, which is truly a world dead in trespasses and sins; we claim a higher standing, no less than the citizenship of the little kingdom of Jesus, viewed as it now is, but [also] of his great and glorious dominion as it will hereafter be. For this let us be thankful and rejoice exceedingly!—What follows6 will, perhaps, exhibit the foregoing in its true light.J.T., M.D.7

6. “What follows” was Dr Thomas’s own tongue-in-cheek parody of the extract from the National Intelligencer. Entitled ‘Chaplain to the Roman Senate,’ the Doctor’s praise for the virtues of the Apostle Paul as the best possible candidate for appointment as ‘High Pontiff’ of the Imperial Roman Senate (!) was a sustained and highly amusing ‘spoof’ which revealed something of the lighter side of the Doctor’s pen.

7. At the time of writing this letter and the pieces that topped and tailed it in Campbell’s Harbinger, Dr Thomas was twenty-eight years old and had been baptised for little over a year. As Campbell quickly recognised, this young recent ‘convert’ to Campbel-lism was not going to hide his light under a bushel! Less than six months after this letter, in fact, Dr Thomas began to publish his own religious monthly magazine, the Apostolic Advocate, the first number of which appeared in May 1834 while he was still in Philadelphia.

5. Dr Thomas may well have written ‘politic’ in his original manuscript; but ‘polite’ appears in the printed version and is possibly a printer’s (and proofreader’s) error.

Prayers to GodUntil about fifteen years ago I believed that God guided the general direction of our lives but not the detail. However, my brother told me that a brother in his ecclesia said that he never worried about finding a parking space in town be-cause the angels always found him one! We viewed this concept with amusement rather than with credulity. However, since that time we always found a parking spot wherever we went. I related this story to my husband when we married, and we have observed the same result. Are the angels trying to tell us something? After sixteen years I feel that it cannot be coincidence and I now conclude that God is interested in us in every detail of our lives, and that we can be helped relative to the degree in which we believe that He will help. Other brothers and sisters have said the same.

There have been occasions when I have mislaid some object or document. After looking in every place that seemed logical, I have, in desperation, appealed to God in prayer and very shortly afterwards the item is found. I ask myself, Why do I still doubt?

When Jesus cursed the fig tree, he said, “Have faith in God . . . whosoever shall say unto this mountain, Be thou removed, and be thou cast into the sea; and shall not doubt in his heart, but shall believe that those things which he saith shall come to pass; he shall have whatsoever he saith” (Mk. 11:22,23). Although there is probably a direct reference to the situation of Israel, is Jesus using an extreme example to show to us that the scope of things we might ask for is unlimited? Our earthly parents are pleased if we discuss our problems with them, and they desire to help us to solve them. Why should we think that our heavenly Father is not interested if we take them to Him in prayer? The answer may not always be what we want, but God can see what is good for us in the long term. God requires that we should develop characters fit for the Kingdom and our route may not always be pleasant. Very often we can look back on our lives and see that events which have happened to us have turned out for our good, or for the good of those around us.

Adah Jones

Page 41: New occasional series: The correspondence

Testimony, April 2016 159Contents

At the memorial meeting13. The serving brothers and sisters

THE SERVING BROTHERS at a memorial meeting ought to remember that they are not just ‘waiting tables’. They are more like

pallbearers at a funeral, because they carry the objects that represent the body and blood of a Saviour who died for them and for us.

More than this, serving brothers are also like best men at a wedding. They are the companions of the Bridegroom. They are the friends of the one who has promised to come again in power and glory, to ascend the throne of God in His Kingdom, and to call all his followers to the great wedding of the Lamb and his Bride. So, in a small way even now, the serving brothers have the joyful duty of being heralds who announce Christ’s return and his coming Kingdom.

How you stand, and how you walk down the aisle, can convey either that you truly care about what you are doing, or, perhaps, that you are only fulfilling one more duty, and can scarcely wait until you are finished. Your attitude, the way you handle yourself—what is called ‘body language’—can help to remind others of how important this service is, and why we are doing it.

As for everyone else: if you sit on an aisle, be sure that there are no books or feet or other items that might obstruct the serving brother, or cause him to stumble, as he moves from row to row.

SistersUnder this heading, we can also mention the ‘serving sisters’ who prepare the memorial table ahead of time. The seriousness and care with which they do this should be similar to that with which the brothers carry out their serving duties. In each case they are handling the body and the blood of our Lord. Of course, the bread isn’t the literal body of Christ, and the wine isn’t his literal blood. But you are handling what is spiritually the body and blood of Christ, and, as we’ve said earlier, the spiritual truth is the most important reality.

In each case, the serving sisters, as well as the serving brothers, are performing a small but essential role in the greatest drama ever acted out in this world. The sisters (or brothers) who prepare the emblems on Sunday should regu-larly check the condition of the plates, cups and cloths, and keep them clean. They should also check regularly to be sure that there is enough wine and bread.

Sometimes I think of these things as I pass the bread and wine up and down the rows of our meeting hall. There is something about this duty which is so serious, so solemn, that it is like standing at the crossroads of life and death and looking both ways.

But there is also something else about this part of our service which should fill us with joy: we the serving brothers (or the serving sisters) are holding and sharing and remembering together the one who will come to set us all free, to wipe away all tears, to swallow up death in victory, and to bring everlasting joy to a troubled world. There is an old hymn—I wish we sang it. One verse goes like this:

My life flows on in endless song.Above earth’s lamentationI hear the sweet though far-off hymnThat hails a new creation:Through all the tumult and the strifeI hear the music ringing;It finds an echo in my soul—How can I keep from singing?

A funeral, and a king coming in royal glory. We must try to put these two ideas together, and hold both at the same time. If we can do that, then we are close to understanding what we do. When we prepare or serve the emblems, or partake of them, we are seeing the terrible death of a perfect man. But at the same time we can rejoice, because before our very eyes a new creation is dawning in his resurrection and his promise: “I will come again.”

George Booker

“The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ? For we being many

are one bread, and one body: for we are all partakers of that one bread” (1 Cor. 10:16,17).

Page 42: New occasional series: The correspondence

Testimony, April 2016160 Contents

Subscriptions Secretary: Mrs Sarah Marshall, 2 Longridge Road, Woodthorpe, Nottingham, NG5 4LX. Tel. +44 (0)115 859 9297email: [email protected]

Subscriptions are obtainable from our website, http://testimonymagazine.com, through the agents listed below, or from the Subscriptions Secretary, to whom all correspondence relating to the issue of the magazine (including change of address) should be addressed.

Prices and AgentsUNITED KINGDOM£28 for a regular annual subscription or e-magazine.Student rate (25 yrs or under): £14.Apply to: Subscriptions Secretary (see above) Remittances payable to THE TESTIMONY (CHRISTADELPHIAN)

AUSTRALIASurface mail subscription or e-magazineAus$48 (Student rate $28; Airmail $91).Douglas Bailey, 33 Margaret Street,Port Augusta, SA 5700.Tel./Fax (08) 8641 3212 Mobile 0439 990 413email: [email protected] payable to D. BAILEY

CANADASurface mail subscription or e-magazineCan$47 (Student rate $28; Airmail $95).Mrs Linda Fairhurst, Box 204, Rolling Hills, Alberta, T0J 2S0. Tel. (403) 964-2900; email: [email protected] payable to MRS L. FAIRHURST

NEW ZEALANDSurface mail subscription or e-magazineNZ $59 (Student rate $35; Airmail $116).Philip Walker, “Christadelphians”,PO Box 458, Palmerston North 4440.Tel. (6) 354 0396; Fax (6) 354 0395email: [email protected] payable to TESTIMONY MAGAZINE

SOUTH AFRICAPlease apply for rates and method of payment to the Subscriptions Secretary (see left).Remittances payable to THE TESTIMONY (CHRISTADELPHIAN)USASurface mail subscription or e-magazineUS $47 (Student rate $28; Airmail $95).Mrs Celia Coleman, 22450 Schoenborn Street, West Hills, CA 91304-3318. Tel. (818) 596 0905 email: [email protected] payable to CELIA COLEMANEUROPE AND ALL OTHER COUN-TRIESSurface mail subscription or e-magazine£32 Sterling (Student rate £18; Airmail £45).Apply to Subscriptions Secretary (see above).Remittances payable toTHE TESTIMONY (CHRISTADELPHIAN)

TRIAL SUBSCRIPTIONSA free three-month trial subscription may be obtained from the Subscriptions Secretary.

COMPLAINTS/QUERIESPlease address any complaints or queries to the Subscriptions Secretary, who will be pleased to investigate and arrange for replacement of faulty or missing copies.

BACK COPIESBack copies are available for nearly all months over the last sixty years. Please apply to the Subscriptions Secretary.

BINDERSThese hold two years’ magazines, and cost £4.25 + postage. Apply to Peter and Norma Forbes (see back cover).

OTHER PUBLICATIONSFor a list of previous years’ Special Issues available, please apply to the Subscriptions Secretary, to whom all orders should be sent.

SUBSCRIPTION DETAILS for 2016

Published on behalf of The Testimony Committee (Christadelphian) by Jeremy Thomas, 22 Kingswood Close, Kings Norton, Birmingham, B30 3NX, UK • Printed by Reflex Litho Ltd., Thetford, Norfolk.

Registered Charity No. 225908.

Page 43: New occasional series: The correspondence

Contents

ANOTHER COLUMN—OF SORTS. This one is a misfit, not designed for ancient Constantinople, but looted from Egypt. It

commemorates Pharaoh Thutmosis III’s military campaigns in Canaan and across the Euphrates in the mid-fifteenth century BC. It was one of two obelisks taken, in the fourth century AD, from Thebes (the ‘No-amon’ of Nahum 3:8), possibly by the last pagan emperor of Rome, the splendidly named Julian the Apostate, nephew of Constantine, to grace major cities of the empire, and to symbolise Rome’s dominance of even the mighty Egypt.

One obelisk was erected on the spina or central barrier of the Circus Maximus in Rome, but now stands beside the Lateran Palace, the official

residence of the bishops of Rome (the popes) before they moved to the Vatican. The other ob-elisk, originally up to sixty metres tall, was shipped to Constantinople. On arrival there, the obelisk broke and was left lying on the seashore until 390, when the surviving topmost portion, about twenty metres tall, was erected on the spina of the city’s ‘hippodrome’, or chariot-racing track, by Emperor Theodosius I (‘the Great’). Theodosius was the last sole ruler of the whole Roman Em-pire, east and west. It was he who made apostate Christianity the official, ‘Catholic’ religion of the empire, favouring Nicene theology, with its Trini-

tarian understanding of Christ, over the Arian view, which is closer to biblical teaching on Christ’s nature.

The hippodrome of Constan-tinople was far more than a sporting venue.1 It was con-nected to the imperial palace, and here crowds would gather to express their support for the

emperor, or (more often) their political grievances. Here the Emperor Justinian, builder of Hagia So-phia,2 brutally suppressed the Nika revolt of 532, in which perhaps half the city was destroyed by fire and 30,000 rebels were put to the sword. The hippodrome was the scene of bloodshed again as recently as 12 January this year, when an ISIS suicide bomber killed twelve foreign tourists standing alongside this very obelisk.

The obelisk stands on a marble base with carved scenes of imperial ceremonies on each side. Most interesting, from a biblical point of view, is the northwest face. This shows Valentinian II and Theodosius I, the augusti (senior emperors) of the Western and Eastern Roman Empires respectively, and Theodosius’ sons Honorius and Arcadius, their cæsars (junior emperors). The iconography neatly depicts the split of the Roman Empire into two geographic halves, seen by some as a fulfilment of the symbol of the two iron legs of Nebuchadnezzar’s image in Daniel 2. Beneath the imperial box kneel Persians and Goths, bringing tribute to this “fourth kingdom . . . as strong as iron” (v. 40).—Jeremy Thomas

VIII

Istanbul scenes4. The Egyptian Obelisk

1. There are excellent reconstructions, showing the ob-elisk, at http://www.byzantium1200.com/hipodrom.html

2. See inside back cover of the January magazine.

Page 44: New occasional series: The correspondence

http://testimonymagazine.com

TESTIMONY BOOKS

One man’s pilgrimage: under God’s good hand. 88 pages. £4.50.

Testimony Handbook of Bible Principles. 197 pages. £5.50.

Family Trees of the Tribes of Israel. 117 pages. £5.50.

Moses: Earth’s Meekest Man. 172 pages. £5.50.

The Pen of a Ready Writer. 272 pages. £6.99.

Daniel’s Last Prophecy. 141 pages. £7.50.

Man and Woman. 122 pages. £1.50.

God’s Purpose with Israel. 112 pages. £3.80.

‘Spirit’ in the New Testament. 185 pages. £4.00.

The Exodus – A Commentary on Exodus 1–15. 237 pages. £5.99.

For the Study and Defence of the Holy Scripture: Volume 1. 236 pages. £5.00.

For the Study and Defence of the Holy Scripture: Volume 2. 207 pages. £8.50.

All titles postage extra. Available from Peter and Norma Forbes, 16 Mountfields Drive, Loughborough, LE11 3JE; tel. 01509 232214; email [email protected]; or from http://testimonymagazine.com/shop/

Paul’s Epic Journey to Rome. Luke’s narrative of the eventful sea-voyage of the Apostle Paul from Caesarea to Rome, con-tained in chapters 25 to 28 of the Acts of the Apostles, is brought vividly to life in the pages of this book, with authoritative insights into key issues such as the shipping and commerce of the ancient world, the weather conditions and topography of the Mediterranean, and the precise identification of the place of Paul’s shipwreck on Malta. At the same time, a fascinating pic-ture emerges of the growing first-century Christian community, with pen portraits of Paul’s helpers, of Luke ‘the beloved physi-cian,’ and of the centurion Julius, who successfully conveyed Paul and Luke to Rome through many adventures. £6.00.

Contents