Q. Do you think the Rapture is imminent? Part 1

A. That is a controversial and complicated question that I don't think I can settle in this forum, but I will try and give what insight I can. First, let's look at the what imminent means. Imminent means "likely to occur or threatening to occur." In other words, could the rapture occur at "any moment" and that there are no prophesied events that have to happen? No, I don't believe that is true so I do not believe that the rapture is imminent. It seems the teaching of the imminent return goes back to a man named John Darby in the 1800's so this teaching has not been around that long. There are many good people who believe it and many who do not. If you do not believe in a pre-tribulation rapture than you don't believe in the imminent return either. Here is why I don't believe that the coming of the Lord in the Rapture is imminent. In the Bible, the redemption is playing out according to a very intricate plan and that means that there are certain times and seasons that the Lord carries out certain aspects of it. We see the blue print of His 7000 year plan in Genesis 1 and the creation week.Yes, that means that the heavens and the earth are less than 6000 years old right now, but that is another story. Later, in Leviticus 23 we have seven festivals given that are very prophetic in the life of the coming Messiah. These festivals of God have fulfillments in the history of Israel but there are deeper meanings. I have covered these in previous articles but I will list them again. Passover has to do with deliverance from Egypt through the blood of the lamb. The next day started Unleavened Bread and that lasted 7 days. During that week First Fruits was celebrated and that dealt with the plucking up of the first ripe barley sheaves and bringing them to the Lord. Fifty days later Shavuot was celebrated. After the summer growing period and on the first day of the seventh month another festival was celebrated called Yom Teruah, or Rosh ha Shanah as it is called today. This started the civil year and it had themes related to weddings, coronation of the king, resurrection and judgment. Ten days later was Yom Kipper and that is where the High Priest entered the Holy of Holies with the blood of a bull and goat and atoned for the sin of the nation. Five days after that Sukkot was celebrated and this was done to commemorate the years in the wilderness so people made "sukkahs" or booths to live in for a week. This overview is very basic and there are many books one can get that will take you into much more detail but it will suffice for now. Anyway, these festivals had to happen on certain days and they played out in the life of Yeshua as well. The first coming of Yeshua was not imminent and neither will the Rapture or the Second Coming to this earth to reign after the tribulation. All this will play out according to God's timing and plan. Yeshua came along the first time "in the fullness of time" and there was great expectation. He was crucified on Passover, buried on Unleavened Bread, was resurrected on First Fruits and sent the Holy Spirit on Shavuot. We are at the end of the summer growing period now and if the Lord fulfilled the first four festivals on the very day according to the biblical calendar, then it would be reasonable to believe that the last three will be fulfilled on the very day as well. Next week I will pick up here with a quick overview of the themes and idioms of Yom Teruah, Yom KIppur and Sukkot and try to explain that the coming of the Lord will happen according to a very orchestrated biblical blueprint and that the teaching if "immanency" could not be true. Yeshua's coming is fixed in time and there is no "tarrying" on His part, there is nothing we can do to speed it up or slow it down but that it will occur just like events in His first coming. Everything had to be in place for Him to come including the politics, certain people had to be born, the land, the Temple and so many other factors. Next week we will continue with this theme and show why His coming is not imminent, show how certain events in politics, certain people, the land and the Temple Altar have to be in place and a few other things so hopefully all this will clarify a few things for you.

Click here for Part 2

Were the food laws in Leviticus 11 and Deut 14 given for health reasons? Part 2

This week we are going to continue with the topic of clean and unclean food and are they for health reasons. Last week we established the fact that God did not give these laws for health reasons. We then talked about what clean and unclean related to, and that was ritual purity as it related to entering the Temple, touching any holy object set apart for Temple worship and what disqualified a priest from serving in the Temple. None of these things was considered sin, but knowing you were unclean and entering the temple, or touching a holy object or serving in the Temple was. The fact is, nobody claiming to keep the food laws of the Bible really does. If you say you keep them, you cannot go into a restaurant and eat and come away a “keeper” of the food laws. If you have gone into someone’s house and eaten you cannot come away a ”keeper” of the food laws. Any stove, utensil, plate, counter-top, table that has had unclean meat touch them contaminates anything else that touches unless it undergoes a ritual immersion (Lev 11.32-35). A stove cannot be immersed but torn down and destroyed if it ever had unclean meat on it. Now, since there is no Temple, holy things or priesthood these laws are simply not in force. So, what Messianic and Christian people do is just ignore the rigorous restrictions because they interfere with their “lifestyle” where they think they are Torah observant. They say that we should follow the list but that ritualistic part about the stove, utensils, pots and so on can be ignored. They say God gave the list for health reasons but there is no evidence for this, even amongst Jewish authorities. As we said last week, how can a person who was contaminated by unclean meat be decontaminated simply by the setting of the sun? They recognize that the Old Testament says nothing about the food laws and health reasons. Some say “unclean” has to do with sanitary reasons but that is not true. Tahor (clean) and tamai (unclean) are never used to designate physical, hygienic cleanliness or not. They are always understood as purity and defilement in a “ceremonial” (as relating to the Temple) sense and ritual acceptability, not moral. The laws in Leviticus 11 and Deut. 14 differ somewhat because conditions/animals in the wilderness will differ from those in the land, that is all. The food laws in the Bible are ritualistic. If not, Paul would have never instructed the Corinthians to “eat whatever was in the meat market” because none of that meat was ritually clean, even if you ate beef, chicken or anything on the clean list. Nothing we buy in the meat markets today is clean, so those who think they are following the Dietary Laws of the Old Testament aren’t really observing them. If you eat in a restaurant or someone’s home, in nearly all the cases the meat is ritually unclean according to the Torah (Lev 11.35). There is so much more to this subject but I hope this clears up a few things for you as far as the food laws for health reasons.

Q. Were the food laws in Leviticus 11 and Deut 14 given for health reasons?

A. No, health has little to do with these laws. Some say this is the reason to follow these laws today but did the Lord actually institute these laws for health reasons? Did He give the dietary laws for hygienic purposes and the unclean animals were never intended for human consumption? What does unclean mean to begin with? All these questions will be answered in the next few articles. But to answer your question, let’s go to Leviticus 11.8 where it says one is not to eat or touch the carcass of these creatures or you would become “unclean.” In v 25 it says that if you touched them you were to wash your clothes (immersion) and be unclean until evening. In v 40 it says if a clean animal died of itself and a person ate it he was told to wash his clothes and be unclean until evening. If hygienic “uncleanliness” were meant, how could a man be hygienically “decontaminated” simply by the setting of the sun? This would mean that he was in an unhealthy state just before the sun went down, but just after the sun set he instantly was in a healthy state. This clearly is not what the Lord was saying in these laws. These laws were given in a ritual, ceremonial sense and has nothing to do with physical. So in answering that question, it brings several other issues that we will begin to deal with. The Bible teaches that all people are sinners, even believers. Anyone who casually studies the Word understands this point. This means that no believer is a “keeper” of biblical law and most people know this. What I have taken issue with is those who say they “keep” the Law and at the same time violate it in other areas. The dietary laws of the Bible are violated by the very people who say they keep them, and that’s what we will talk about. As I have said before, the food laws are found in Lev 11 and Deut 14. God said certain animals with cloven hoofs and chew the cud were “clean” and those that didn’t were “unclean.” All fish with scales and fins were clean and those that didn’t were unclean. Insects of the locust family were clean. Any creature that did not meet the “clean” criteria was considered ”unclean.” These laws came from God and many debate about them even today. Some say they should be kept today and others say we don’t have to because “Jesus set us free from the Law.” Well, what does all this mean? The word “clean” in Hebrew is “tahor” and “unclean” is “tamai” and these words have nothing to do with physical or moral uncleanliness, they are to be understood as ceremonial or ritual. But what does that mean? Something clean and unclean related to three things in the Bible. If one was unclean, they could not go into the sanctuary, touch holy things and if a priest, participate in the services. Uncleanliness was not sin because Yeshua was unclean many times and we know he was without sin. In these food laws, you will not see that being unclean was sin, it’s simply not there. Clean and unclean relate to sanctuary purity. With that said, next week we will pick up there and relate this to the dietary laws and hopefully shed some light on a very misunderstood subject.

The Earth is 4.5 billion years old ?

Q. I heard a Bible teacher say last week that the earth is 4.5 billion years old and if you didn’t believe that you were ignorant. What is your opinion on this?

A. There are some who still believe that the Earth is millions of years old. It is called the “Gap” theory. They say that between Gen 1.1 and 1.2 there was a “gap” and something happened and God had to recreate the earth. Basically, they believe in a pre-Adamic race and that can be the basis for some prejudicial views of the other races as being inferior to others. Some just have never studied it and just repeat what they have been told for years, but what does the Bible really say. First of all the theory is unscientific. The Gap Theory was a Christian attempt to reconcile the creation account with long periods of time in the Theory of Evolution. But, evolution itself is a theory and totally unscientific, defying the second law of Thermodynamics which basically says that things get worse as they get older, not better. Secondly it is unscriptural. The Gap Theory would describe Adam walking around on top of a giant, fossilized animal graveyard. Over 800 billion skeletons exist in the Karro formation in South Africa alone. However, Paul says in Romans 5.12 through 8.22 that man’s sin brought death into the world, even of animals. I Cor. 15.21 also says the same thing. Third, it is unnecessary. The most natural interpretation of Gen 1.1-2 is taking it at face value. One of the rules of Biblical interpretation is to take a verse literal unless the context tells you otherwise. Gen 1.1 becomes of summary statement of creation and the remaining verses tell you how He did it. Now. Here are some arguments in support of the gap theory and then arguments against it. In Gen 1.2 it says “without form and void” and that speaks of judgment. However, in other passages it simply means “space” (Job 26.7;Deut 32.10;Job 6.18, 12.24;Psa 107.40). Those “for” will say but the verb “was” in Gen 1.2 should be translated “became.” However, the Hebrew “ Hayeta” (was) is found 264 times in the Tanach and 258 times it is translated “was.” The Hebrew verb of being for “became” is ‘haphek.” They will say that there is a difference between “bara” (created) in Gen 1.1 and “asah” (made) in Gen 1.7. However, these verses are used synonymously. In Gen 1.21 “God created “(bara) and “God made” (asah) in Gen 1.25. In Gen 1.26 “Let us make man” (asah) with “So God created” (bara) in Gen 1.27. They then would point out that “darkness” indicates judgment in Gen 1.2. However darkness here is simply the absence of light and it is spoken of as “good” (Psa. 104.20,24). Lastly, some will say the Hebrew word “male” should be replenish indicating that the world was once filled. However, the Hebrew word “male” almost always means “to fill” (Exo 40.34;1Kings 18.33;Psa 107.9).

Creation science and even secular science have confirmed over and over again that the Earth is much younger than what was once thought. The current erosion rate of Niagara Falls, the dust that has accumulated on the surface of the Moon, the development of languages and archeological finds have all confirmed this. But the God Himself says that He created the heavens and the earth in six days (Ex. 21.12-17). Also, the creation narrative itself disproves long periods of time. For instance, how could God create the vegetation and plants on the third day and they survive for millions of years without the sun, which wasn’t created until the fourth day? The answer is God did it in six, literal 24 hour days and there is an eschatological reason why. In Psa. 90.4 it says that a day is like a thousand years and a thousand years like a day and that is Hebraic poetry but it is alluding to something, which is called “the
Seven Thousand Year Plan of God” but that is another subject for another time. Hopefully, this evidence will help you in understanding the Creation story and show you that far from being ignorant, you have solid, biblical ground to stand on when discussing this subject.

Q. What does it mean when 1Cor 12.22 says that tongues is for the unbeliever?

A. To understand what this means, we have to go up to v 21 and see that Paul is quoting Isa 28.11. In the context of the verse, Isaiah says that the Lord had spoken plainly to the people through the prophets, in their own language, so that even a child could understand, but they didn’t listen. So, He threatens them with another method. He would speak to them through the Babylonians and the Medes when they take the city. Later it would be the Greeks and Romans as history plays out up to the first century. Now, there was no reason for the Corinthians to be so desirous of “tongues” because they have been used by God in “punishment” form, not in a way of blessing. Let me give an example of this. In Acts 2. 1-4 we have the Holy Spirit given to believers who were gathered in the Temple on the Feast of Shavuot, or “Pentecost.” This was the day that God gave the Law at Mt Sinai (Exo 19.1-17). In v 5-11 the unbelievers in Yeshua were amazed because these disciples were speaking the known languages from wherever they were from. In v 12-15 they wondered what all of this was about and starting in v 16-36 they were told by Peter that it was a sign from God that the Spirit was being poured as another proof that Yeshua was the Messiah who was delivered up to them according to a predetermined plan and they murdered him, but God raised him from the dead. The tongues prompted their questions and Peter was able to preach to them in a language they all could understand. In v 37-41 the people are shocked and they ask what they should do. You see, the tongues got their attention. Peter tells them to repent of their sins and be immersed (baptized) and receive the Holy Spirit. So, being in the Temple, they go over to the mikva’ot (immersion baths) located at the southern end of the Temple mount and three thousand were saved/baptized. Now, what is interesting is that when the Law was given at Mt Sinai, three thousand people were killed (Exo 32.28). In Acts 2, they are gathered in the Temple on the day they celebrated the giving of that Law and three thousand people are saved. You see, the Law in and of itself cannot save anyone, it kills, but the Spirit of God gives life. In short, the people Isaiah was dealing with rejected the plain truth given by the prophets. Because they rejected it, God allowed strange tongues through the Babylonians to enter the city and take the people captive. They would believe the prophets now because of the strange tongues they were hearing in the streets. In Acts 2, the people were rejecting the plan truth given by the prophets again, and ultimately the Messiah Himself. As a result, they hear tongues in the city again as a sign of judgment. The people need to repent and accept Yeshua as the Messiah, corporately as a nation. But, we know they don’t and in 70 AD God sends a foreign nation with foreign tongues against them (Rome and all her auxiliaries), like the Babylonians, and destroys the city and the Temple. Not by coincidence. The Babylonians and the Romans take the city and destroy the Temple on the same day of the Jewish calendar, the 9th of Av. So, that is why Paul says that tongues are a sign for the unbeliever. There is much more to this but I hope this helps.

Hades / Sheol study continued, Pt. 2...

This week we are going to continue with the question about what Sheol is and why it is not the grave. Sheol is described as a shadowy, dark place (Job 10.21-22, Psa 143.3) and located under the earth (Job 11.8, Isa 44.23,57.9, Ezek 26.20, Amos 9.2). These are figures of speech that indicate it is not a part of “this world” and it has an existence of its own in another dimension. It is a place to reunite with people (Gen 15.15,25.8,35.29.37.35, 49.33, Num 20.24-28,31.2, Deut 32.50,34.5,2Sam 12.23). This cannot be referring to a mass grave. It had a high and a low section (Deut 32.22). The condition of man in sheol is a “rephaim” or a disembodied spirit (Job 26.5, Psa 88.10,Prov 2.18,9.18,21.16, Isa 14.9,26.14-19). People can converse and make moral judgments and are conscious (Isa 14.9-20,44.23,Ezek 32.21. What you can experience in physical life like marriage, business and a knowledge of the living is not possible (Psa 6.5, Ecc 9.10). They experience God’s anger (Deut 32.22) and are in distress (Psa 11.6.3). They also experience pain (Job 26.5). In the Tanach, or Old Testament, the righteous and the wicked went to sheol and God began to reveal to his people that they would be taken to God’s presence (Gen 5.24, Heb 11.5, 2 K 2.11, Psa 49.15,73.24). Sheol is open to God’s sight (Job 26.6, Psa 139.8).

The Greek word for Sheol is Hades and in the Septuagint (LXX) Sheol is referred to 71 times. 64 times it is Hades and the other 7 it uses a translation of other Hebrew words meant to shed light on what Hades is. Not once is Hades equal to the grave or unconsciousness but it is always understood as the abode, or realm, of the dead. It does not mean death in Greek (thanatos) or grave (mneema) and not hell (gehenna) or heaven (ouranos). Now, the New Testament picks right up with these concepts in the Tanach (OT). We come to the story in Lk 16.19-31 of Lazarus and the rich man. We see there are two compartments called torment, where the unrighteous went and Abraham’s Bosom where the righteous went (before the resurrection). This was a story built around historical characters which was a common rabbinical technique, using the dialogue method to get across the concept that there is no escape from torment, no second chance. We must believe the Scriptures in this life. As I stated before, before the resurrection, believers and unbelievers were sent there (Jn 3.13). After that the righteous went to heaven (2Cor 5. 6-8, Phil 1.23-24, Rev 6.9-11). Yeshua went there (Acts 2.31, Eph 4.8-10) and he met the thief there (Lk 23.43). He did not go to heaven until after he received his body in the resurrection (Jn 20.15-18). Then paradise was taken out of Hades and made a part of the third heaven (2 Cor 12.2-4). The wicked descend to Hades, in torment to await eternal punishment (2 Pet 2.9). When the Yom ha Din (day of judgment) comes, Hades will be emptied and its inhabitants stand before God (Rev 20.13-15). Now, there is a Catholic doctrine called Purgatory which says that when a believer dies his soul must be “purged” and punished for unresolved venial (not as serious as a mortal)sin before one can enter heaven. This erroneous concept is based on a misunderstanding of 1 Cor 3.15 but this concept is not biblical because the penalty for our sin has already been paid (Rom 5.8). The teaching of Purgatory is a man-made dogma and there is no such place and it has no connection with the concept of Sheol we have been discussing. So, currently, Hades is a temporary, intermediate state between death and the second resurrection where the wicked go. Hades is without paradise now. Hades will be “emptied” into the Lake of Fire at the second resurrection of unbelievers. Next week we will conclude Sheol and hades and discuss paradise and gehenna (hell).

Q. I am very confused about what Hades is. Some say it is the grave and others say it isn’t. Is Hades the same as the grave? Pt. 1

A. No, Hades is not the same as the grave. Some denominations teach this and it stems from a basic confusion of terms and bad Bible translations. People need to look up the words and meanings in concordances and lexicons and this would go a long way in clearing up some of these issues. We should never argue over translations because that is what they are, translations. And translations are predicated on who translates, what their knowledge of the biblical languages are, social issues of the time and other criteria. There are several translations out there that are terrible and they contribute to so much misunderstanding. That’s why looking the words up for yourself and studying their meanings for yourself can go a long way. But, textual criticism is another issue. Let’s deal with what Hades is and isn’t. Hades is the Greek word for the Hebrew “sheol” and it is used 66 times in the Old Testament as the “netherworld” or “abode of the dead” and it cannot mean “grave” even though the King James translation translates it 31 times as “grave”, 31 times as “hell” and “pit” 3 times. The Hebrew word for grave is “kever” and the biblical authors did not view sheol and kever as synonymous. In Isa 14.19 the king is thrown out of kever into sheol, for example. A group of Hebrew scholars were commissioned to translate the Hebrew Tanach (OT) into Greek and this took some time, but the work was completed before 132 BC. Because there were 72 scholars who contributed,the work was called the Septuagint, abbreviated to LXX. In the LXX, sheol is never translated “mneema”, or grave in Greek. Kever is never translated as “hades” either. Kever is the fate of the body, sheol is the fate of the spirit. (Ps 16.8-11, Phil 1.23). Sheol is under the earth (Isa 14.9;44.23;Ezek 26.20;31.14,16,18, 32.18,24; Psa 63.9;139.8;Gen 37.34-35). Those in sheol are conscious (Isa 44.4-7; 44.23;Ezek 31.16;32.21). There are at least 19 contrasts between kever and sheol:

1) Can’t bury in sheol (Gen 23.4,6,9,19,20, 49.30-31).

2) Kever (graves) can be plural, sheol is never plural.

3) Grave is localized, sheol is accessible anywhere.

4) You can purchase and sell a grave, sheol can’t (Gen 23.4-20).

5)You can own a grave, sheol can’t be owned.

6) You can choose a grave (Gen 23.6), sheol can’t

7) You can drop a body into a grave (Gen 50.13), but you can’t with sheol.

8) erect a monument over a grave (Gen 35.20), but in sheol you can’t.

9) you can open and close a grave (2 K 23.16), sheol is never or closed by man.

10) you can touch a grave (Num 19.18), you can’t touch sheol.

11) a grave is ritually unclean, sheol no

12)you can enter and leave a grave (2 k 23.16), sheol no

13) you can uncover and remove bodies (2 K 23.16)), sheol no

14) you can beautify a grave (Gen 35.20), sheol no.

15) you can rob and defile a grave (Jer 8.1-2), but not with sheol.

16) A grave can be destroyed, but sheol can’t be by man.

17) a grave can be full, sheol never (Prov 27.20).

18) you can see a grave, sheol no.

19) you can visit a loved one, but not in sheol (Job 17.16;Isa 38.10).

Next week, we will pick up on this question and start with what sheol is, which is described as a shadowy, dark place (Job 10.21-22, Psa 143.3) and “down under the earth” (Job 11.8; Isa 44.23, 57.9) and not a part of this world. We will then continue on with what the Greek term ‘hades” means and it how the meanings in the New Testament basically pick up where the Old Testament leaves off. We will also talk about “Paradise” and “Gehenna” as well. Hopefully,once you study all this out there will be no questions about these terms and what the Bible has to say on the issue.