The Olivet Discourse: The Trumpet Blast

In their accounting of the Olivet Discourse Matthew and Mark describe, briefly, the gathering of the saints by Christ at the end of age. Luke, however, is silent on the subject. I've written elsewhere about how this gathering relates to the timing of the Rapture of the Church, so I won't touch upon those considerations here. Suffice it to say, the discourse merely states that the ultimate gathering of the elect will happen at the end of the Tribulation, and gives us some sense of how.

Specifically, the Son of Man will send angels to assemble the saints from everywhere in heaven and earth. The bifurcation in the description is important: one aspect of the gathering is earthly, the other aspect heavenly. The expression, "from the four winds" refers to the four compass directions and entails every place on earth; "from one end of heaven to the other" refers to the realms beyond the skies and is heavenly. We would have to assume that at least the dead in Christ were part of the heavenly group, but there is no textual reason why it wouldn't or couldn't include the already raptured.

Those gathering angels are sent with a trumpet call, which might lead the inquiring reader to ask, "Exactly which trumpet blast might that be?" A succession of seven trumpet calls are mentioned in Revelation but none of them are associated with the gathering of the saints. I do not believe they are what is referenced by Christ in the Olivet Discourse. A last trump is mentioned in 1 Corinthians 15:52, and is definitely associated with the Rapture, but I don't believe that it is associated with the seven trumpets of Revelation either.

The seventh trumpet of the Apocalypse leads to more tribulation (i.e, the seven bowls) rather than the Return of Christ after tribulation is finished. The seven trumpets are not referenced anywhere else in scripture (even though modeled in a sense at Jericho), and I do not think the Apostle Paul would have even known of them when writing to the Corinthians in 55 CE (at the latest). John wrote the Apocalypse in 95 CE, and I doubt the Apostle Paul had the same type of revelation or awareness of detail as John would have prior to him receiving his vision on Patmos. There is just no good reason to associate the last trump of 1 Corinthians with the seven visionary trumpets of Revelation.

Last (Koine: esxate, meaning final, extreme) certainly implies more than one, but if it's not referring to the series of seven in the Apocalypse, then what is it referring to? Perhaps Israel's mandate to use trumpets during the exodus can provide some insight.

A long trumpet blast, not followed by another, in other words, the last signal trump sounded meant all Israel was to gather. It seems reasonable to me that Paul could have had this in mind when writing to the Corinthians (or even that a succession trumpet blasts were signaled when they set out by camp, the last signaling that all Israel was on the move). If so, then Paul was merely relying upon that imagery in conjunction with the word "last" to get across the sense of totality and finality in God's people moving into their eternal state, rather than connecting this to any series of trumpet blasts.

So, at the end of this age, immediately after the Great Tribulation, there will be an actual trumpet blast, unconnected to the seven visionary blasts of the Apocalypse, which signals the final ingathering of the saints in heaven and on earth to be with Christ. All the faithful dead will have been raised at that time, and those alive and remaining will have been changed. That doesn't mean that some of either category won't have been raised or changed before, only that all those that will be will have been so at that particular time.

The Open Door to Heaven

"After these things I looked, and behold, a door standing open in heaven..."      Rev 4:1 NASB

The Apostle John looked up after his visionary experience as an amanuensis, saw an opened door in the heavens and heard the now familiar voice of his visions calling to him, presumably, through it. We're not told what caught his attention first: the appearance of the opened door, or the voice beckoning him. It really doesn't matter. A new phase in his visionary experience was beginning, and its significance would soon be apparent.

The opened door in the heavens most readily signifies access to what normally would be inaccessible to mankind. In this particular instance that represents access to two things beyond human purview: 1) the throne room, or very presence, of God; and 2) the future. God has to open the door to the experience of either, or the heavens remain closed. So, even though it is not specifically mentioned in the text, that door had to have been opened by Jesus, a key bearer who opens what no one else can open or close.

Doors, opened or closed, serve a variety of roles in the Apocalypse, but the basic concept is the same regardless--doors represent a barrier only authority or power can open. There are doors only God can open (like the one in question), and there are doors that God does not (cannot?) open. That would seem an odd thing, a door barring God, but the Apocalypse represents such a thing existing. Jesus stands knocking, in that case, waiting for the invitee to open the door. The implication for monergism, perseverance, and the whole of Calvinism is troubling, to say the least.

"Come up here," though in the form of a command, was more along the lines of divine commentary and was specific to John (singular). It cannot be related to the Rapture, nor really, to anyone else's access to God or heaven, whether by prayer or other means. Immediately, John was transported beyond the door into the midst of whatever it was opened to reveal. The surroundings were obviously symbolic because God (the Father and the Spirit) were represented tangibly when they are actually incorporeal, and Jesus was represented as a lamb rather than the corporeal form he has taken.

The purpose of John's visionary translation was to find out what things take place after the things he had already been shown. Those things were contained in the opening vision of Christ and the Letters to the Seven Churches. It stands to reason, it seems to me, that this particular sequential characteristic undermines viewing the Letters as representing successive ages of the Church. Instead, the Letters, all of them together, must have had reference to something that could have been existent in the time of John and before the bulk of what is revealed as happening afterward according to the stated purpose of the command.

The Two Witnesses of the Apocalypse

"Who are those guys?" students of prophecy wonder in regard to the two witnesses of the 11th chapter of the Revelation. We are given only a few details concerning these cryptic figures: they prophesy for three and a half years at the end of time; they fulfill the prophecy of Zechariah; they are powerfully anointed as attested by signs and wonders; their ministry and death will occur in Jerusalem; they are hated and feared by the world; and they are raptured by God, publicly, after being dead for three and a half days. There have been interesting guesses about who they might be offered through the ages, but I know who they are with certainty!

How? You might ask. Well, I Corinthians 15 gives us all the information we need to figure it out! We are told there that Christ is the first one who defeated death and received an imperishable body. Furthermore, we are told that no one can go into eternity in perishable flesh and blood inherited from Adam. All born of Adam must die and/or be transformed into a new body following after the model of Christ in order to enter eternity with God. The old cannot inherit the new.

That produces a problem with the biblical record when one remembers the stories of Enoch and Elijah. They were taken by God to be with him while they were still alive in Adamic flesh, before Christ arose. Therefore, according to I Corinthians 15, they are not prepared for, nor can they enter into eternity until they put off their old bodies and rise in new ones untainted by Adam's fall. Somehow, either by an transformation akin to the Rapture of the Church (which not revealed in the Word), or by returning to earth and going through "normal" processes, Enoch and Elijah have got to be transformed. 

We have known that Elijah is in the mix forever, but the identity of the other witness has caused incredible speculation in the church. It really did not need to, for the Apostle Paul told us what we needed to know in order to identify both of them conclusively. Enoch and Elijah may have been enjoying the last few thousand years in the presence of God well enough, but they can't go into eternity the way they are. For their own good, and for the good of the Jews alive during Daniel's 70th week, those guys need to come back to earth, and then, they need to die!

My Theological Presuppositions

Presuppositions are those predispositions, even prejudices, that we come to the examination of any new knowledge already possessing, which affect our interpretation of that knowledge. In other words, we have some ideas about things which act as givens as we build understanding of new things. We can be unaware that we possess them and incognizant of how they color our understanding of things. We even have presuppositions about God, which affect our interpretation, acceptance or, God forbid, rejection of scripture.

I am no different than anyone else in this regard. My experiences and exposures, reactions to and ruminations upon life before the Bible was in the picture color the picture of God painted after I encountered him in the scriptures. For instance, I can remember, long before I was saved, walking down my street as a twelve year old on a sunny, breezy day, when something about the color and shape and way the leaves were fluttering on a maple tree struck me with the intense conviction that there had to be an intelligent, creator God. Prior to that, I didn't think there was one, but regardless, it was not the Bible that informed that new supposition.

That experience led me to reach out to God, to attempt the occasional talk with him, even though reading the Bible was the furthest thing from my mind. I would ask the "God out there" on those occasions about things, and I took the sudden inspirations that followed in my mind as responses from him. Sometimes, the inspirations came apart from any question on my part. I believed I was learning about God from God, even though I was fifteen before I understood who Jesus truly was (that's another story), and 19 before I started reading the Bible in any serious measure.

Sadly, it was actually some time from the moment I knew who Jesus was until I was willing to drop it all and follow him (a bit over 5 years). In my very first days of actually following Jesus, I had an encounter with him in my bedroom that left an impression on me that I'm still under. My experiences, before and after, have left me with with some presuppositions concerning God that (even though these convictions existed before I began to study the Bible) have proven serviceable in the time since when I've been studying the Bible.

Let me share some with you...

We can personally interact with God. God speaks to us today, not just to folks a long time ago in a culture far, far away.

Jesus Christ is the only visible God we will ever see--God in the flesh. The Father and Spirit are incorporeal and never will be discernible through the auspices of electromagnetic radiation (though they may choose to affect the visual realm). Jesus is the only means of knowing God and to know him is to know God.

The Bible is the infallible Word of God, preserved to us inerrant by God's oversight. It was inspired by God, not created by men. If we want to know with confidence what God wants to do in our lives, the Bible is the only place to look.

Freedom of will is the essential distinction between humanity and all other creatures. It is entailed in being made like unto God and is necessary to choice, purpose, and love. Eternity will not result in an abrogation of free will but in the harmonization of it with that of God.

Do you know what some of your presuppositions concerning God are? Have they proven serviceable or a hindrance in your journey with Christ?

Entropy, Zombies, and Eternal Life

en·tro·py  

  [en-truh-pee]  Show IPA

noun

1) In Thermodynamics:
   a. on a macroscopic scale, a function of thermodynamic variables, such as temperature, pressure, or composition that is a measure of the energy that is not available for work during a thermodynamic process. A closed system evolves toward a state of maximum entropy.
   b. in statistical mechanics, a measure of the randomness of the microscopic constituents of a thermodynamic system. Symbol: S
2) In Data Transmission and Information Theory: a measure of the loss of information in a transmitted signal or message.
3) In Cosmology: a hypothetical tendency for the universe to attain a state of maximum homogeneity in which all matter is at a uniform temperature (i.e. heat death).
4) a doctrine of inevitable social decline and degeneration.

Entropy is a death principle. On a large enough scale, everything is winding down and does not have the ability to wind itself back up. The spring is springing and eventually will be sprung, for nothing in all of creation can reset itself to what it was before. Something would always be lost in the effort. Even if it could "come back to life" it would be less than life--zombie life, only a shadow of its former self.

The classic proof of First Cause is true: the caused cannot cause itself. Therefore, to observe, not only the self-initiated return to a former state, but an improvement in that state is an evidence of something truly supernatural. The resurrection of Jesus Christ is such a circumstance. Not only did he come back from death, he came back better--more powerful and not subject to death again.

One could dismiss such an occurrence because he or she was not there to see it. But for those who cannot shake eyewitness testimony, nor the need to explain the rise of Christianity in a hostile, pagan world, Christ's entropy-defying defeat of death and his return, not to zombie life but to eternal life, becomes the central event in human existence. Even more than that, it becomes the window to heaven and the gate to eternal life. Open up the shade and crack open the door, the world may offer zombiism at best, but light and life await you in Christ.

Living in the Future Backwards

Hebrews 11.

Part of faith is embracing a picture of what life could or will be, but isn't at the moment. That is not to say that what could be is relegated to the distant future, but just to say that it isn't in this instant. In this regard faith is sort of like living currently by rules and reality that don't exist now. Living in the moment as if what isn't in the moment is.

Now that could seem a disingenuous mantra, but I take it (at least in part) to be something of what it means to be in the world, but not of it. Without faith, all one has it what is: with faith, one embraces the sovereignty of God and the possibilities entailed therein. I do not believe Christians are meant to go about spouting positive confessions, that in truth are just false confessions (e.g. one who has a fever who says his temperature is normal is lying, not positively confessing), but neither do I believe that we should sit back and take it as if God isn't in charge and hasn't made promises to those who trust him.

We have been redeemed and translated into a kingdom where there is no sickness or death, no class or gender divisions, no racial divides and no sin. Where the light is the Lord himself and there is no cause for sorrow. Part of being God's people in the here and now is appropriating the earnest of our inheritance in the there and then. In that respect, faith is not just about slugging through the now while looking forward to a better future, but also living in the future, backwards.

What Happens After We Die: Final Thoughts

I think the scriptures are reasonably clear about what happens when people die. The body turns back to dust in death and the soul departs to one of two places. For the believer (or the immature child of a believer) the soul is ushered into the presence of God, where he or she stays until the Rapture. For the unbeliever, their soul is placed into Sheol (in Greek, Hades), under some duress (if the story of the rich man and Lazarus was intended to describe the afterlife factually).

At the end of time God will raise all the dead who had not been raised up to that point. Everyone of them, soul reunited with body, will be brought before God's judgment bench for final disposition. Those written in the Lamb's Book of Life are taken into eternity with Christ, those that are not are judged by their works and thrown into the appropriately heated place in the Lake of Fire. The conditions of all parties is final and eternal.

We cannot be essentially destroyed; we cannot have our wills co-opted and still be what God made us to be; the unrepentant among us cannot be allowed to roam free. What can be done with the likes of man after death and for eternity? Those that repent and embrace Christ can be cleansed and remade and then freed to live in agreement with God. Those that do not repent must be locked forever into an environment that will keep them from expressing their sinfulness.

Annihilation is clearly unscriptural; universalism is as well; inclusivism is and isn't at the same time. For the incapable children of believers, inclusivism is absolutely true. For the incapable among unbelievers there is some reason to be optimistic that it might be true. For what I'll call "noble savage inclusivism," the doctrine can only betray the semi-pelagianism of the one promulgating it, and it is patently untrue.

When we get to eternity, I am sure there will be surprises concerning who made it and who did not. There is no reason not to think that we will find the odd unknown walking the golden streets, who far from the climes of the Levant, was visited by God (like Abram), repented and put trust in him as a result. While I'm satisfied admitting my necessary ignorance in the matter and leaving it to the judge of all the earth to do right, I am certain that there will be no post-mortem grace, nor will any idolater see the kingdom of heaven.

What Happens After We Die: Inclusivism II

We continue our talk on what happens after we die by delving further into the subject of inclusivism, which posits that people who do not know Christ directly or perfectly will be included in the salvation he has wrought.

Even the case of the immature and the infirm being included in salvation is anything but airtight. At best a hopeful biblical principle, rather than an explicit statement, can be derived for their salvation. As I see it, three possible grounds exist for inclusivism concerning the immature and infirm: (1) infants have nothing to repent of and so would be included in Christ's resurrection; (2) the immature and infirm are not able to apprehend creation's witness of God, are not truly able to meet the condition of salvation (faith in Christ), and so would be included in the provision of atonement which was made for everyone; and (3) the children of a believer are included in the the body of Christ unless they decide not to believe.

I do not see how infants could have anything of which to repent. Even though they are born into sin and death, separated from God, they have not sinned personally. They have not even had the opportunity to ignore God's witness in creation, so including them in judgment would seem a travesty of justice. It is a God-given principle that children are not made to pay for the sins of their fathers, so it would appear they must be safe.

We do have some disturbing precedents in scripture, however. I wonder, how many infants died in the Flood, or why infants and children were killed by the invading Israelites under the command of God? It seems evident to me that there are mysteries in understanding how God views the situation of children. I search in vain for that one clear, unequivocal passage of scripture that answers these questions.

To me, inclusivist doctrines purporting to understand what God will do in these instances reflect more what the author would like God to do than they report what God said he would actually do. Given Christ's universal atonement, I see the logic in formulating an exclusion to the condition of faith in Christ for those incapable to express such faith through disability. What I do not see is that clearly demonstrated by scripture.  

What Happens When We Die: Universalism

I've been exploring what happens after we die, which I continue now by looking into the thought of universalism, which suggests that Christ's salvivic work will be applied to all humans at some point.

Immortality in freedom is impossible for those who are not submitted to God. Can God in his omniscience and omnipotence allow that which is anti-God, that which is evil, to exist and still be God? I don't think so-- minimally, that would be saying that he is not sovereign, ultimately that would make evil intrinsic to him. For evil to remain in what God created would mean that it was reflective of him, that it is one of his attributes.

I've already said the ship has sailed on the possibility of annihilating mankind because we are made in his image, and ensouled by his very breath. I also think the ship has sailed on God enforcing his will on people as if it was their own. We are made like unto God with freedom of will (apart from which there can be no sin or godly love). God could manipulate us, of course, but the cost would be effacing his image in us, which is not his stated will. We are not made of a substance that can be made to do what someone else wants it to and still be in the image in which we were made--God is not of that nature and neither are we.

I have said before that Universalism should be the logical conclusion of Calvinism (insofar as one abides by the meanings of words, that is). To my reckoning, universalism, inclusivism and Calvinism make the error of positing that God will by fiat transform the lost. Though the lost did not want what God wanted nor do as God would have them do, they will because God will make them do so. If Adam and Eve did not live that way in Eden, that is not the way those in God's image live at all. It never has been true on earth and never will be true in the heavenlies!

Granted, some Universalists envision the flames of hell as producing the most beneficial change (repentance) in the those being toasted--God as the ultimate Skinnerian, I suppose; an evangelical approach to purgatory, perhaps. Not only is there not so much as a peep about such a conception in the scriptures, the Apocalypse seems to render the difference between those inside the New Jerusalem and those outside with finality. We have this life until we die to change our minds about God, through the Gospel and the conviction of the Holy Spirit we have our opportunity.

Purpose in Relation to Adam

Genesis 1:26-3:15

Adam was not the ultimate picture of God's purpose. If he was, the promise of eternity would look like Eden: it does not. Adam, Eve, the first heavens and earth were but the beginning of the revelation in time of God's purpose. Everything from the beginning in time to its end moves toward that purpose.

Adam, untainted by sin, does, however, reveal something of God's purpose with man:

• Man was in creative partnership with God (Adam named the animals);
• Man was free to do as he pleased as long as what he pleased was not in direct opposition to what God pleased;
• Man was empowered to make up his own mind about God's thoughts;
• The knowledge of good and evil would have been shared with man once man had decided to go with God (I acknowledge this point is speculative on my part).

Adam, in failure, was the testing prototype and role model that taught us the lesson that trusting in God rather than our own wits, or the gossip of the Devil, is the way to life. That his failure was not the end was announced in God's curse upon the Serpent. Hope was birthed, now that he knew death, that if he ever had the opportunity at redemption, he'd go with God.

Chronology of Apocalypse: Eternity

After Jesus crushes the rebellion at the end of the Millennium, the final disposition of all things (judgment) will be made. First, the Devil is thrown into the Lake of Fire without further delay (and I would conclude all the demons with him). The Lake of Fire is a condition of torment prepared for rebellious spiritual beings, but is capable of receiving physical subjects as well. There is no escape from, nor cessation of its condition--it is an eternal, perfect state.

Hades is emptied as the dead remaining there are raised to life (body and soul reunited) to face judgment. The sea is mentioned as holding the dead separately from Hades, which is more significant of the bodies which are being restored than it is to the souls of the drowned. Sheol/Hades was never a place of ultimate punishment, but more akin to a storage area for disembodied souls. The natural (created) condition of human beings is physical and spiritual, and all the dead will be returned to that condition before judgment takes place. So, at this time everyone who ever lived will be in their natural condition, ready to face final disposition.

Judgment will by two kinds of books. One is the Book of Life, the others are the Books of Record (my name, not the scriptural name). If one's name is not found in the Book of Life, the Book of Records will determine the nature of judgment against that individual (i.e. how hot will be their eddy in the Lake of Fire). If one is found in the Book of Life, the Book of Records will determine the nature of rewards that one will experience in God's presence (i.e. our normal conception of heaven). Either way, it is true faith in Christ which is the marked difference between one class and the other.

Anyone raptured prior to the Millennium (the Church, the 144,000, the martyred mark resisters) has nothing to fear at all from this judgment, for they all are already in their eternal condition, which is alive with Christ. The dead raised in order to face this judgment are in a heap of trouble, by and large, I'm not certain any of them will escape judgment. Their works will not excuse any of them, and only those who died during the Millennium, unmarked, could possibly have true, saving faith in Christ (otherwise they'd have been raptured). Those found in the Book of Life enter eternity with Christ, those not are thrown in the Lake of Fire to burn eternally.

Everything that had to do with this current, temporal, existence is then done away with: Death and Hades and the damned are thrown into the Lake of Fire, and in a flash, the heavens and earth are made new (no death, no entropy).  God's habitation, the heavenly Mount Zion, the New Jerusalem, descends upon the new Earth, and eternity as it should be takes flight. No Devil, no demons, no death, no disease, and no damned will be there anywhere but bound in the roiling fires of the Lake. The righteous in Christ live on forever, free to move about the cabin, and enjoy the adventure with our heavenly pilot.

A Garden Too Small

I've heard more than once in my lifetime the thought that eternity would be, in effect, a return to Eden--perfection of physical being in a perfect physical world, sans Satan, sin and death. There are a few problems with that idea, however. If Adam fell in Eden, what would keep us from doing the same in heaven? We like to blame our sinfulness on our nature, but Adam did not have that nature and he sinned. I know the Devil was in the mix, but he was only toying with what was there. The Devil only expedited things.

As weird as it might seem, I believe Jesus, like Adam, could have fallen while walking on earth. In emptying himself of his divine prerogatives and stepping into our world as one of us, he identified thoroughly with us (except of course, without innate sinfulness). His victory over sin and death would be illusionary, rather than worthy, if he did not actually have anything at risk and the deck was stacked. He truly was a second Adam, but with a whole lot more knowledge than the first. He very well could have fallen in that limited, fleshly nature. Thank God he did not!

The only effective difference I see between Jesus' experience in the flesh and Adam's before the Fall was the knowledge of what was in man. I know that Christ had divine character which could handle the image of God, but to say their respective success and failure occured merely because Jesus was God and Adam was not comes close to denying Jesus' truly human nature and experience. So Jesus, the Son of Man, understood what the cost of sin was for man through personal experience and observation whereas Adam did not. Jesus did not sin and Adam did. When we are like Jesus, rather than Adam, we will not sin either because we know too.

What then will keep us from sinning in eternity? Puppet strings? No, Jesus did not have them, the Father certainly doesn't, and when we see Jesus in "heaven" we will be like him. What turns us to willing cooperation and agreement with God in heaven is knowing absolutely the futility of going it on our own. Oh, we will have a Christlike affection for our Father, no sinful flesh to battle (although we will have flesh), and no Devil trying to deceive and distort things, but we will not be forced to be godly and walk in God's will. That would run counter to what God ultimately intends for us.

To achieve that our hearts and minds will have to work in tandem with God. They will have to be harmonious, even synchronous with his. All that we think will have to be what he thinks and all that we want will have to be what he wants. We'll have to know even as we are known. We will be one. There is no clue that Adam ever had this possibility in Eden, even if the Devil had not been in the picture (although that tree was there for a reason). So Eden never was our ultimate destination that Adam unfortunately screwed up, and Eden will not be what we regain for eternity. It was far too small a garden anyhow!

The Seven Churches of the Apocalypse

In the first verse of the Apocalypse, John identifies the intended audience of the prophecy as the servants of Jesus Christ. That is a broad and universal designation which refers to the Church, the entire corpus of the body of Christ, everywhere at any time. In fact, all those who are servants of Jesus Christ, living and the dead, are the Church of the Firstborn

In the formal epistolary salutation starting in v. 4, John specifies his audience as the seven churches in the province of Asia. In doing so, he was not suddenly shifting his perspective from the broad to the specific (i.e from everywhere to the province of Asia), but was introducing symbolism to refer to the same audience he mentioned in v.1. The seven churches in Asia represent the entire church of Jesus Christ.

When a numeric like seven is repeated descriptively, as it is in v.4 , there is no way to miss its obvious symbolic implications. Throughout the scriptures, not just in the Apocalypse, this number is used to indicate completeness, or entirety (e.g. this). Seven days completed creation, seven has stood for completion in regard to God's work ever since. The only question to answer in regard to the symbolism of v.4, is to what entirety or completion does it refer?

I would say the force of both references (v. 1 and 4) is meant to convey that the address is to all the church throughout all time. That discounts the preterists viewpoint, for the scope was not limited to the Roman persecution of the ancient church, but addressed to the church throughout the ages covered by the prophecy. When the final judgment and the resurrection are mentioned as a piece in the continuum, how can can such a narrow time frame be justified?

Furthermore, it discounts interpreting the letters to follow as successive ages of the Church, for the churches are addressed corporately as a whole in chapter one. True, they will be dealt with in isolation from each other in the body of the letters to follow, but contemporaneously--distinct but at the same point in time. Whereas the seals, trumpets and vials have a time progression built into them (one is broken, blown, poured after another) the letters do not. They were sent out at once, together, to be read by all simultaneously.

The seven churches are both real and representative. Real in that there were seven such churches in John's day that faced issues such as written about in the letters. Representative as demonstrated by the symbology: not of periods of time, but of differences in the character of typical local churches which make up the one church universal. The seven churches, then, is merely a synecdoche which refers to the entire church through all time. 

Satan's Antichrist Scheme

The one word that describes Satan, as well as any could, is proud.

Hubris led him to the conclusion that he could manage things as well as his Creator, even better, and he was more worthy of adulation too-- the ultimate narcissist. He thought this way despite being in the very presence of God and being graced with great intelligence. When you experience the Almighty as he actually is, and then come to think as Satan did, nothing remains that God could show of himself that could alter that opinion. The Devil was intractably lost as were all those angelic beings that rebelled with him.

Even apart from that rebellion, Satan cannot ever learn from his mistakes. Pride hardens the categories and seizes the mind, and dooms the prideful to endlessly repeat the same errors. Satan is a one-trick pony, forever trying to accomplish his aims by using the same means over and over again. Since the Fall, he keeps working the same tired plan in an attempt to thwart God's ultimate aim of redeeming mankind from the Fall. 

In his mind, the Devil cannot conceive of an invention of his failing.

In the garden, God announced the protoevangelium, the first gospel message, in the midst of his curse upon Eve. A glimmer of hope for humanity, it spelled the Devil's doom. It was cryptic enough for the Devil not to fathom, even though I think he understood it much better than we often do. I think he grasped that it was the woman's child, not the man's, and he seemed to pick up God's subtlety in the using a collective singular noun (seed) with a singular masculine pronoun (he). That meant one particular son was in view rather than offspring in general, a point Paul was able to apply to God's promise to Abraham as well. 

I'm absolutely certain that Satan picked up on this by the time the promise was reiterated in substance to Abraham. Why? Because it's revealed in his strategy of dealing with that promise--namely hijacking it. The basic outline of the plan he developed involves displacing the seed promised through Eve and Abraham (and Isaac and Jacob since they were the heirs of the promise) and undermining the place of the Jews as the seedbed. So his plan focused on substituting a seed for the seed and the destruction of the Jews as the seedbed.

Up in smoke goes the plan of God, at least in the mind of the Devil. A flawed strategy for sure, but one which the Devil's pride causes him to repeat over and over again. By the end of time, he will have tried it eight times! In the last couple of iterations he comes closer than ever to succeeding, but in the end, Christ steps in and throttles his efforts. This is what I call, the Antichrist Scheme.

In the 17th chapter of the Apocalypse, through the use of the symbolic imagery of the seven heads of the Scarlet Beast, John spells out the efforts made to ply this scheme throughout all redemption history. Up to the time of the writing of the Apocalypse, so in past history, five iterations of the scheme had been attempted. At the time of writing, effort number six was winding up. Efforts seven and eight were coming in the future (so some time after 95 AD). 

The efforts all centered around dispossessing or disposing of the Jews, and then, if he got that far, offering his shill as the "God-man". The gospel promise, which was funneled through Abraham and accrued to the benefit of all mankind, had to be undermined, undone and displaced. Some schemes got farther than others, but all fail, ultimately, because of divine intervention. Six are actually recorded in scripture and attempt #8 (the last) is defeated by the physical return of the Lord Jesus Christ.

Satan's Attempts at the Antichrist Scheme

The five kings who are fallen, and the one who is:

1) Egypt under Pharaoh at the time of the Exodus (ca. 1446 BC)

This was an attempt to undermine the gospel promise by destroying the promise of land to Israel (the seedbed). If one aspect of God's promise is derailed, all promises are called into doubt. God may call his Son from Egypt, but if one doesn't trust God's word of promise, one can never be redeemed. So God raised up Moses and Joshua who led the people to Canaan by divine interventions and thwarted this attempt.

2) Assyria under the dynasty of Sargon II (ca. 722 BC)

The ten northern tribes of Israel (Samaria) were exiled from the promised land (seedbed) and an attempt was made to besiege Jerusalem and destroy Judah (under Sennacherib, Sargon's son). God intervened in response to Hezekiah's prayer, and Judah was delivered and stayed in the land insuring that a remnant survived to see the promise.

3) Babylon under Nebuchadnezzar (ca. 586 BC)

In his third foray into Judah in 19 years, Nebuchadnezzar destroyed Jerusalem, razed the Temple, and deported what was left of the population after the siege and two earlier deportations (605 and 597 BC). Thus, the Babylonian Captivity began; it was not ended until God intervened by appointing Cyrus to deliver the captive Jews (539 BC). Had God not sent Cyrus, the Israelites would never have returned to the promised land, and God's promise would have blown away like dust in the wind. 

4) Persia under the influence its highest noble, Haman (ca. 475 BC)

Though a "champion" of Israel under Cyrus and other emperors who followed, under Xerxes (Ahasuerus, and particularly his prime minister, Haman) Persia became a murderous foe of the Jews. Haman scheduled the slaughter and plunder of all the Jews throughout the empire and the hanging of his archrival, Mordecai. God raised up Esther for such a time as that and through her intervention and God's favor, turned the plot back on Haman's head. If Haman had been successful, there would have been no Jews left to receive God's promise

5) Seleucid Empire under Antiochus Epiphanes (ca. 165 BC)

Dubbbed, "the King of the North" by Daniel, under Antiochus, this kingdom  attempted to eradicate Jewish customs, to destroy all the Bibles (scrolls) it could, and modeled the abomination of desolation which the Antichrist will replicate in the Great Tribulation. God intervened by granting the forces of the Maccabees a stunning, upset victory which resulted in the purification of the Temple (which is celebrated in Hanukkah), and eventually, independence for Israel (after 40 years of war). Antiochus sought the complete assimilation of the Jews into his Greek, pagan Empire which would have destroyed the seedbed Messiah was to be planted in.

6) Rome under Tiberius, Vespasian and Hadrian (ca. 33-135 AD)

The Messiah, the promised seed, began proclaiming his gospel of salvation during the reign of Tiberius. Satan had unsuccessfully tried to kill Jesus as an infant through Herod's demented decree to slaughter the innocents. He would continue to press that effort during Jesus' ministry, apparently succeeding through the betrayal of Judas and the sentence of Roman Procurator, Pilate. Killing the seed would definitely destroy the promise and open the way for the Devil to accomplish his aims, but God raised Christ from the dead and overturned Satan's plan. 

When the forces of Roman General Titus (under Emperor Vespasian) finally broke into the besieged city in 70 AD, no stone was left unturned in Jerusalem. The Temple was utterly destroyed, the city was left an uninhabitable ruin. It forced a depopulation of the city by the Jews for some time, but in 135 AD, after another rebellion by the Jews against Rome (Emperor Hadrian), Jews were banned by law from the environs of Jerusalem all together. Thus they became another part of the Diaspora. Perhaps this seems irrelevant in light of Jesus' death and resurrection, but that still left the unbelieving Jews bereft of promise, and all Jews without a homeland. 

God's promises get fulfilled, or the one who promised them isn't God-- he's either too powerless to be God, or too unrighteousness.

God's intervention had already delivered the promised seed (Jesus), which provided redemption to all who believe on him. With that, one might suppose that the Devil was a pound shy and a day late in his efforts, but sin and death have continued on since then, and the Devil still roams about seeking someone to devour. Why? Because nothing is complete without the Jews. Though the focus of God's redemptive work shifted to the Gentiles after the Jews' rejection of Christ, undermining the promise of land still holds the potential of taking the promise of the seed with it in the minds of humans who still need to believe in Messiah in  order to be saved.

The king who is to come for a short time, and the eighth:

7) Germany under Adolph Hitler (ca. 1933 AD)

Apart from world domination, Hitler's aim was to eradicate the Jews, once and for all. He had them systematically rounded up within his domains (which was where most Jews lived at the time) and killed approximately two-thirds of them. The unseen hand of God guided the situation into the defeat of the Nazis and set off a migration, unexpected by the world, of Jews to their ancient homeland in Palestine. The end result was resurrection of the nation of Israel in May, 1948.

After the failure of seven schemes, the Devil actually found himself in the worst situation ever, with Israel reestablished and the gospel reaching into all the world, EVEN AMONGST THE JEWS! He has one more flare to fire, and it will be the one that gives him the greatest whiff of victory but then suddenly delivers the most crushing defeat.

8) The Ten Horns under the Antichrist (ca. SOON!)

After the cataclysms of the Epic of Magog and the Sixth Seal, the Antichrist will step into the vacuum created by them and establish his hegemony over ten nations in his region. He will sign a treaty with Israel establishing peaceful relations for seven years and which grants Israel the right to rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem.

As the Temple is nearing completion,* and similar to Antiochus Epiphanes before him, he will enter the Temple, curtail expected activities, install his False Prophet as high priest and idol of himself as the object of worship, and kill those (they'll be Jews) who refuse to worship him as God and take his mark of submission. He will be defeated and destroyed by the Return of Christ.

In his pride the Devil has attempted to one-up God over and over again, only to fail over and over again to achieve his ultimate aim. Even at the end of time, when he knows failure awaits him, his pride will compel him to bang his head against that wall one more time. He'll get farther than he ever did before, but end, nonetheless, in dismal failure just like every time before. 

*Since the only acceptable sacrifice before God (the Lord Jesus Christ) has already been offered and received, and that sacrifice was so perfect in its qualities that one offering was sufficient for all time for all people, I do not expect that God will allow any sacrifice of a lesser, and at best presaging nature, to be offered in his name again.

Identifying the Seals of the Apocalypse

The Seals of the Apocalypse

In Revelation 5 we have that grand scene in the throne room of God, where no one but the Lamb was found worthy to take the scroll. He had successfully redeemed mankind by his own blood, and thereby proved his worthiness to be the heir to power, wealth, wisdom, strength, honor, glory and praise. The scroll represented the consummation of all redemptive history, God's master plan to save the lost human race. Each seal broken was a witness to the Lamb's legitimacy to rule and reign in that ultimate place.

We know that Jesus ascended to heaven shortly after his resurrection, only to return shortly thereafter to reveal himself to his disciples and ready them for the task ahead of them. It seems to me, the prophetic scenario in Revelation 5 would have to represent the moments immediately after Christ's resurrection when he ascended to his Father, entered the throne room, and, having completed his mission as the Redeemer of Mankind, received the scroll. His return to the disciples, though not included in the prophetic scene of that chapter, becomes the perfect segue into the First Seal, since the Great Commission is what that is all about (as we shall see).

#1 - The White Horse

Where in the Bible, and especially in the Apocalypse, was the color white ever used symbolically for anything other than good? The answer: never! The white horse does not represent anything evil, such as the Antichrist, the idea itself is ridiculous if one gives it any thought at all. No, this seal represents the church being turned loose on the Great Commission (ca. 33 AD). Its breakage initiates the Church Age, really, the Age of the Gentiles.

#2 - The Red Horse

The color invokes the thought of blood. Fittingly, the rider is tasked with taking peace away from the earth. To understand this image, we cannot overlook the "world" in which John and the early church existed. It was a Roman world, ruled by the strong-armed, yet prospering comfortably within the steadying hands of the Pax Romana. Into that "tranquility" dropped the Emperor Commodus, after which everything began swirling down the commode. The red horse represents the loss of the Pax Romana (ca. 192 AD).

#3 - The Black Horse

Grain was effected by the famine unleashed by this rider, but not oil and wine. Why? The crops that produce oil and wine were grown in more southerly climes than was grain. The implication is that this broken seal effected northerly climes more than southerly ones. Factor in the color, which speaks of the loss of sunlight and warmth, and out pops the Little Ice Age as the proximate cause of the shortage. The black horse itself represents the Great Famine, ca. 1315 AD.

#4 - The Pale Horse

Even though this rider has the power to kill by sword and famine, like the two before it, its unique claim to fame is the decimation of one fourth of earth's population by the added means of pestilence and wild beasts. The combination of details could not describe better in condensed, artistic language the outcome of the bubonic plague. It was world-wide, borne by rats, and caused enough chaos in its wake to produce war, anarchy and famine. Most importantly, it killed a fourth of the population of the entire earth. The jaundiced horse represents the Black Death (ca. 1347 AD).

#5 - The Martyrs

Often, the assumption is that martyrdom was a phenomenon of the early church, but point in fact, the numbers of martyrs were not large then. That changed with the advent of Protestantism in the sixteenth century, when a sudden uptick in the numbers of martyrs rose precipitously to become a flood of multiplied thousands. The rate is still escalating today-- it must be getting downright crowded under that altar! Why doesn't God step in and put an end to it? It's a full number thing again. Suffice it to say, this seal represents the increase in martyrdom that began with the Reformation (ca. 1520 AD).

These five seals are historical to us. Their initial breaking unleashed something that still reverberates in the warp and woof of current events. For instance, the church is still actively engaged, and more successfully than ever, in winning the world to Christ; the world, particularly the Mediterranean world, has never been as peaceful again as it was before the unleashing of the red horse; severe grain famines have occurred over and over again since the black horse went riding; frightful pandemics seem to cycle through regularly since the pale horse first clip-clopped over planet Earth; and martyrs are being killed today at record pace though that "seal was broken" 500 years ago.

Let's get on wtih the rest of the seals which remain prophetic.

#6 - The Volcanic Cataclysm
The text does not mention a volcano, it just seems to describe one to me. From pyroclastic material falling from the skies (stars), to pyroclastic flows (rolling clouds), to ash choked skies (blackened sun, red moon), to moving mountains and islands, the description seems to fit. This, of course, is not your grandmother's volcano (like Krakatoa), this is something more akin to Toba or perhaps Yellowstone. People survive the cataclysm with the anticipation of the immediacy of God's wrath. If the Antichrist needs a story to cover the disappearance of the Church, this would fit the bill!

The Rapture
This is more akin to an inset, or an interlude, within the narrative of the sixth seal. The four angels holding back the winds refers to the events of verses 6:13-14, and makes the inset a snapshot taken as those events began. In the moment of earthly time that it takes the events of the inset to occur, the marking angels complete their task (v. 7:3). Then, time and space (the winds) are no longer held at bay and destruction continues. Both aspects (A and B below) of the inset are set off by the phrase, "after this" and reveal those who are ready (ie. truly believing in Christ) as the 70th week begins:

A) 144,000 Jews are sealed on earth, and remain there, and

B) Gentile saints are translated out from the Tribulation to the throne room of God.

#7 - The 70th Week of Daniel

This seal, when broken, hands off the flow of end time events to the Seven Trumpets and the Seven Vials. It points to the same period as the 70th Week of Daniel, which is also divided into two. So, the Trumpets represent the first half, the Vials the second half of the 70th week, which is often referred to as the Great Tribulation.

That's my take on the Seven Seals. I think it makes sense. When it comes to the Revelation, my firm belief is that it should make sense, to any of God's servants. It should make sense to you. I hope this helps.

Worship: Arson or Spontaneous Combustion

Worship.

The source of conflict in the modern church disproportional to the amount inspired by the Holy Spirit about it in the New Testament.

Among the more charismatic of us, it can take on a mystical, superstitious, or even shamanistic flavor if it's seen as the means of conjuring up the presence of God. Among the less charismatic, it is just part of the package of techniques employed to appeal to this generation of potential pew sitters. In way too many churches it's nothing more than a crowd-warming preliminary to the supposedly more important art of the preacher. In the more liturgical among us it has no separate identity at all, everything that happens is part of the "worship service."

What do we actually know from scripture about the practice of worship in the church? We know Jesus and the disciples sang a hymn after the Lord's supper. We know that songs in tongues and in understood languages were part of the corporate worship at Corinth and, presumably, elsewhere. We know worship was participative, consisting of individual and corporate expression simultaneously. 

And... [insert drum roll] we know that there was no recognized gift of worship leading. We do have that wonderful instance where the curtain to the heavenlies is pulled back to reveal that loud, boisterous worship is part of the milieu of the throne room of God. Beyond all this, we really know very little, but that's not nothing. Honestly, our practices in contemporary worship are more informed by the Old Testament and our present culture than they are by the New Testament— is that really an issue?

Just for the sake of clarity, let me propose a definition of worship:

Worship is those acts, both inward and outward, that focus attention specifically on God and thereby distill within the soul an awareness of his presence and that arouse reverence and adoration toward him and elicit surrender to him.

If we combine that definition with the New Testament understanding of what it means to be born again, it seems to me that worship teams (bands, leaders, choirs, combos, or whatever) should never be considered the sources, igniters or elicitors of worship. We already bear the presence of God within us, so why would we need to be "inspired" to experience it? If someone requires such an inspiration, it would raise questions regarding whether or not they were truly born again!

If we are depending on the skill of a worship leader to get us into the "presence of the Lord," worship is not what's happening-- emotional manipulation is.

What happens in worship gatherings today often resembles rock concerts and stage shows more than it does the throne room of God. It is a cheer-led spectacle of star power, a clamor of flesh and self-indulgence. Nonetheless, please, don't take this as a critique on the type or style of music being used. That is inconsequential. The problem exists whether country, classical, or pop music is being used,

At best, worship leaders are nothing more than accompanists, a utilitarian backdrop to what's happening among the folk, between the folk and God. Therein lies the problem with much of what is supposedly worship today— is something happening between the folk and God? We can't make people know God, love him, or express true worship to him. It has to come from them because of what God has done in them. Choreographing a Kumbaya moment is for summer camp, not the church of Jesus Christ!

Worship ought to be more like spontaneous combustion than arson. 

Sadly, there's getting to be fewer and fewer who understand the difference.

What Makes Us Saints?

I've stated that what makes us sinners is that we were made with Godlike abilities in God's image, but, not being God, we possess no ability to control them. Only God can do the God thing, so in effect, the tiger was too big for our tank. We can't blame God for sharing that image with us, his vision for us is astonishing and generous, but it's not something that can be achieved with him going one way and us going another.

What can be done to rectify the situation and bring us back into the promise? 

Apart from judicial concerns (not to minimize them in any respect) it requires the machinery of our souls to be rebuilt and thereafter, to be operated on a new basis. That entails enduing God's image with God's Spirit, which we get a taste here and now, and at the catching away, remolding new flesh untainted by sin and the curse as a home for that image. Afterwards, that which is in God's image will walk on for eternity in absolute agreement with God-- on every issue, inclination, desire, and action, everything! That is sainthood.

Because God completes the good work he begins when he infuses his Spirit in the born-again, the born again are considered saints now. Everyone of them.  

If all this sounds weird to you, realize that, that is the model of Jesus Christ himself. He walked conceived by Spirit, endued with the Spirit, and in absolute agreement with his heavenly Father in every respect. That is what life as God's image is supposed to look like. It is what heaven will be like. To the degree that one can't embrace this model, he or she will look more like a sinner (supposedly saved by grace) than a saint.

On the other end of the spectrum, I think it is a misconception to adopt Miserable Worm Theology. What we start out as doesn't define us before God, but what we will end up as. It is not humility for the born again to think themselves worms before God, but lack of vision. That won't inspire anyone to walk in the Spirit-filled fullness Christ purchased for us. Since Christ has done so much to make us new, shouldn't we embrace what it is that makes us saints, and be glad, rather than slithering, stuck in an old way of life that's nothing more than yesterday's news?

Faith Is a Reaction, Not a Work

What child has not garnered impish delight in suddenly jumping out from some dark hiding place and yelling, "Boo!" Rolling on the floor in laughter over the bizarre behavior of the victim-- screaming, throwing hands in the air, taking a swing at unseen attackers, dropping stuff, spewing unpleasantries-- the perpetrator reaps ghoulish delight over the victim's reactions. Some of the accosted do nothing at all to the perplexity and consternation of their prodder. Bummer!

Who can blame the victims when they do act in such uncharacteristic or even ill-mannered ways? After all, it was just a reaction, not premeditated, not intended, not necessarily reflective of their disposition at all. It just happened: an action and an equal and opposite reaction. We're all wired to react to stimuli, we'd probably be dead if we didn't, but each of us reacts differently.

I see faith in God, at least it's initial stage, in a similar vein. It is a metaphysical reaction by people to a word from God. Faith, it seems to me, starts with a head turn in response to God’s tap on one’s metaphorical shoulder. Abraham, the model for what faith can accomplish, found his one day when God’s word came to him and he believed. I believe everyone is wired with this capacity, hence God's command that all respond coupled with the outpouring of His spirit on all flesh. 

Everyone, however, reacts with varying degrees of responsiveness. Some, like the unmoved prudes in the example above, don't give so much as a rise to the word’s impetus. Others go hog wild. God's word, the seed of transformation, falls upon varying kinds of the soil of faith in its hearers, the rain of the Spirit falling on all. The result: abundant fruit to hard indifference. Does the soil have something to say about it's response? I think it does, but even if you don't, the principle of faith generation is the same regardless.

The Bible leads me to understand that faith is not a work, hence the contrast in that all too famous passage (as well as this one). Works are the fruit of will exerting effort, whereas faith is the soul's reaction to God's interposition. Faith is a reaction, not a work. We have all heard faith described as a leap, which is a reasonable perception, so long, that is, as one envisions that leap as resulting from the Holy Spirit saying, "Boo!".