BEAR WITH ME

      About the dating of Clement: I first began to rethink the dating of his epistle when I encountered some articles touting this earlier date. Then I read Clement’s actual Epistle more carefully, paying close attention to the Greek. I am now totally convinced of an earlier, pre-AD70 date, and that on several counts. Notice especially the following: Clem 5:1 – 6 But, to pass from the examples of ancient days, let us come to those champions who lived nearest [ENGISTA] to our time. Let us set before us the noble examples which belong to our generation. By reason of jealousy and envy the greatest and most righteous pillars of the Church were persecuted, and contended even unto death. Let us set before our eyes the good Apostles. He goes on to describe the exemplary testimonies and martyrdoms of Peter and Paul. Notice that he uses the word “ nearest “. If he was writing in the 90s, a generation later, he would not have used that term. But, on the contrary, he...

History of an Error: Wrong dates can lead to Bad Theology This post is helpful background to understanding a certain error that has crept into modern eschatology. A seemingly trivial point actually has profound Christological application. But before we get to the application, the error has to be corrected. They don’t usually. But in the case of Archbishop William Ussher and his dates that did happen. Or at least, let us say, it needlessly obfuscated an already complicated problem. However, as we shall see, the original obfuscation started happening thousands of years before Ussher. But first the more recent error: In 1701, thanks to a well-meaning scholar, Church of England’s Bishop William Lloyd , the English Bible began to be side-noted with dates. These dates were based on Ussher’s chronology of a half-century earlier. Throughout the Bible Lloyd faithfully followed Ussher dates – – – except where he didn’t. Case in point is the passage that describes, as I had earl...

  The Incarnation is the Son's demonstration and display of the perfection of the Father in familiar flesh. God knows where we live, and gave us the Gospel to lead us to the Way, the Truth and the Life. Christ's life not only guides us to the way, but made possible for us, through faith in Him, to walk in that way. His grace gives light and life. He is the Demonstration of a faithful life lived toward God in a contrary world of men.   Augustine framed it well, "The thing to be known is, whither we are to go, and by what way;" and immediately after infers, that "the surest way to avoid all errors is to know him who is both God and man. It is to God we tend, and it is by man we go, and both of these are found only in Christ." - Augustine, "The City of God", Book 11, Chapter 2   But our blessings are not only for ourselves, otherwise we would be as the lepers in the Old Testament story, who, in finding both deliverance and gold, said "We do not w...

 I think that we Christians – like everyone else – have a hard time of thinking outside the box, so to speak. Or outside the body , I should say. It is hard to see beyond our own frame of reference. However I do not think that the body that Christ showed immediately post-resurrection is the same body He had – has now – post ascension. I think the locked door encounter, John 20:24-29 , was still part of His Incarnational mission, the “ days of His flesh ” , as Hebrews 5:7 puts it. I think there is a hint of this also in 1 Tim. 3:16 (ESV) “Great indeed, we confess, is the mystery of godliness: He was manifested in the flesh, vindicated by the Spirit, seen by angels, proclaimed among the nations, believed on in the world, taken up in glory.” These are all in the past tense , or at least, because the last of the six events is clearly in the past the preceding five ought to refer to events before it. In the light of Hebrews 2:14 I am convinced that Christ being in the flesh was mis...

  Rev.15:3 and Deuteronomy 32 Then I saw another sign in heaven, great and marvelous: seven angels having the seven last plagues, because in them the wrath of God has been completed. And I saw something like a glassy sea having been mixed with fire, and those who prevailed over the Beast, and over his image, and over the number of his name, standing on the glassy sea, having the harps of God. And they sing the song of Moses, the servant of God, and the song of the Lamb, saying: “Great and marvelous are Your works, Lord God Almighty! Righteous and true are Your ways, O King of the nations! Rev. 15:1-3 Look at your study Bible at this passage and you will most likely be given Exodus 15 as a cross-reference, not Deuteronomy 32 . Most commentaries likewise follow suit. Just to give one instance, John Gill says this (emphasis mine): “Revelation15:3 And they sing the song of Moses the servant of God,…. Not that in Deuteronomy 32:1 but that in Exodus 15:1 and the sense is...

  I remember this man at my yard sale in Winston-Salem over thirty years ago. He saw a number of commentaries I had for sale, stood facing me, his legs in a stance like he was braced for a hurricane. He pointed his finger at me and challenged, "What is your position on Acts 2:38 !?" I forget what I answered, or what he answered, except that it was somewhat abrasive. He was poised for a hermeneutical harangue. But it is funny that I still remember him after all these years. Maybe because it reminds me of an attitude that I have seen all too often. I have done it myself: Started a discussion and downgraded to an argument . I have slowly come to understand that the people I learn the most from are those gentle spirits that shine more light then generate heat . And there are good verses on this topic. "But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control;"...

There is something both incongruous and fitting about that title. The expected word after “ ruins ” might have been “ rebuilt ”, not “ righteousness ”. But the very fact that the metaphor seems jarring points out just how different this new kingdom is: It is a spiritual kingdom. The main excellence of this kingdom, the main distinguishing mark, is true righteousness. In this sense it is totally different, not only from the earlier Zion, but all other earthly kingdoms. It is something truly new. But there is also continuity. It is a kingdom with roots in the past, already fore-typed unmistakably in earlier times. The best features of the old Kingdom of Israel were sure prophecies of the better Zion that was to come. Christ assured His disciples that they, once well-taught, will be “like a householder who brings out of his treasure things new and old.” [1] 4. And they shall rebuild the old ruins, They shall raise up the former desolations, And they shall repair the ruined c...

A Promise God Never Made and A Prophetic Application Overlooked   First, the verse, “If My people who are called by My name will humble themselves, and pray and seek My face, and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin and heal their land.”   This verse is, first of all – as it is often presented – a promise never made. “ “I … will heal their land” As I said, these applications are arrived at by seeing this verse as self-contained. One well-meaning pastor even makes this verse part of his “single, stand-alone Scripture series”! But to see any verse – especially one like the present – as stand-alone is a recipe for exegetical disaster. Context, always helpful for understanding “Then the LORD appeared to Solomon by night, and said to him: ‘I have heard your prayer, and have chosen this place for Myself as a house of sacrifice.”, vs. 12. Looking at this context we see that God’s oft-quoted “I will hear from hea...

Why did God say to Adam that he would die on the day that should he eat of the forbidden fruit when he clearly did not die on that day? It never seemed quite satisfactory that God meant that he would only begin to die after the Fall happened, that Adam would not die until almost a millennium later . I am not denying that this was also true, that there was certainly a great change in all of nature, including humanity, from that very time of disobedience. But this does not really account for all of what was implied in the divine prohibition. And it dances around the phrase "in that day". First of all , there must be a distinction between what God threatened and what He carried out . Second , we do not need to go far afield to imagine what the Hebrew here might mean. We have the context to guide us. Specifically, in order to know what is meant by " in that day " we only need to see how the phrase is used in a nearby parallel verse. Satan told Eve, Gen. 3:5: ...

Yes, but what does this mean ? It is a shame that Hebrews is so often neglected by many Christians. They don’t know what they are missing. I can’t speak for others, but the reason why I had earlier read sparingly from it for a long time is because I thought it was mainly “Jewish stuff”, written for those who came to Christ from a Jewish background. Well, yes and no. It is that – and much more. Hebrews not only leads Jews to Christ, it also makes the Old Testament come alive. It Christianizes much of the Old Testament. Here again are the first verses of Hebrews, now including the third verse: “God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets, has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, through whom He also made the ages (aeons); who being the brightness of His glory and the express image of His person, and upholding all things by the word of His power, when He had by Himself purge...

As I think about this passage I cannot help but think about other connections. The following applications I will not be dogmatic about, but I offer them for your consideration. The Jews brought the woman to be judged but the judgment turned against them. Jerome and Ambrose both brought up the connections with Jer. 17:13 and 17:1. The Jews in John 8 departed (just like those in the Jer. passage). They could have stayed and been forgiven. And I wonder if there is not a connection with here with Daniel 5 . There the writing was on the wall of the palace in Babylon. Here it is on the Temple floor. Both are from the hand of God. "He that is without sin, let him cast the first stone." The only one without sin that day was the One who spoke this. Jesus, alone, had the right to cast the first stone, which He did not, of course. But about forty years later He did. The adulterous woman repented on that day and turned from her sin. But the adulterous men that day - m...

The very title of this article is a sort of half-truth.[1] It is certainly the starting point of the story but the context and outworking point to a larger sin and judgment than that of this one woman. The men who cornered her and dragged her up to the Saviour (and where was the man?) wanted to make the story all about her and about the predicament they thought they would land the Teacher in. If He exonerated the woman He would go against Moses and the Scriptures He himself said could not be broken. If He agreed to her stoning then He placed himself in opposition to the Romans, who alone claimed the right to inflict capital punishment. They saw this as an easy win either way. But Jesus surprised them with His answer. He wrote on the ground. Silent. This act puzzled them. It has also puzzled countless writers ever since. The translators of the KJV unhelpfully provide the gloss “as though He heard them not” . Other commentaries suggest various other guesses which are point...