Biblical Framework
Charles Clough
Lesson
157
Turn to Rom. 8:28 again; we’ve gone over it a
number of times so that you’ll be familiar with it just by sheer
repetition. This is one of those basic
promises of the Word of God, “We know that God causes all things to work
together for good to those who love God, to those who are the called according
to His purpose.” You may have a
translation that differs slightly because there’s a little textual difference, but
it’s another example of textual differences don’t make doctrinal differences.
We’ve been going over the faith-rest
approach; we said it consists of three steps and these can be done in a matter
of minutes, seconds, or sometimes it takes hours because you’ll get hit with a
problem that you have to struggle a little bit to walk by faith. But the steps are always the same. The first step is you grab hold of a promise
in the Word of God; the second step you prayerfully examine it, and the third
step is that you get to the point where you can honestly believe it. We have to be honest, sometimes we don’t get
to step three right away. We say we
can, but do we really believe
it.
Rom. 8:28 is a good illustration of why
sometimes it’s hard to do to get to step three. What we’ve been emphasizing is that we’ve kind of added an aspect
to this second step, which I’m going to call closure because I want to
illustrate how that process works.
Let’s say we have a situation, you remember, maybe driving down the street,
at your desk, out walking, whatever, and you remember Rom. 8:28, “All work
together for good,” or “God causes all things to work together for good to them that love God, to them that are
called according to His purpose.” You
remember that and then this situation that’s in your life, you begin to try to
enclose that situation, that problem, that trouble, and encompass it inside the
promise, so that the promise has larger dimension than the problem is, so it
encompasses it. We went through some of
this last time.
I want to take what we did last week and show
how you can perform this closure on the situation. Clearly one of the prominent
features of Rom. 8:28 is the first part, that “all things work together for
good,” qualified by a subset of people, those that believe in Jesus
Christ. The question is, and where this
problem gets difficult to trust, honestly trust, is when you have a bad thing
happen. It could be a personal crisis,
it could be a crisis in someone else’s life, but it’s something that challenges
your ability to say that this nasty thing, this mess, is working together for
good. It gets back to the fact that
what you’re grappling with once again is the old evil problem. This thing comes
up to haunt us, as it were, we’re all creatures in the fallen world; which view
are we believing? The flesh is
programmed by everything in the world to believe the second view, not the first
view. The second view is that good and
evil are inseparable forever, and they never have been separated, never are
going to be separated, they aren’t separated now and the universe is not
inherently good, it’s just a mix of good and evil.
Whereas in the Biblical worldview God
originally created all things good. God Himself, never was a time, never will
be a time when there’s any evil or injustice with God, that’s His
character. He is the same yesterday,
today and forever, He never changes. So
that’s stable. In the creation we have
a point of the fall; we also have a point of the judgment when good and evil
are to be separated. That’s the big
picture, but now when it comes to applying a promise in an actual situation,
we’re trying to get to the point where we trust that there is a plan and that
it is good, and that it is working in this circumstance, whatever the
circumstance is.
Again going back to the Creator/creature
distinction; we bring the Creator/ creature distinction into all this. This is key to the whole thing, that’s the
essence of the Biblical view over against all pagan views. We have the Creator, we have the creature,
and we have this line because there are two levels to reality. There is His level and there is our level,
and you can’t mix them. In the
mentality of the Spirit, when we do this the right way, and what we’re trying
to get at personally is where we can say that there is a rational and ethical
justification for whatever this thing is.
What do we mean by rational and ethical? Let me explain something. Rational means
that it is logical and that it makes sense and can be thought through. That’s what we mean by rational
justification; it’s not a pretend or make-believe, or some chaotic role of the
dice. It is rational, can be thought
through, discussed, a rational and ethical, meaning that it is right and true
and just. The battle always is, you can
think of Job, the classic illustration, Job’s struggle is is he or is he not
going to trust that there is a rational and ethical justification for this
crisis or this series of crises that he’s coping with. The argument is yes there is, but, and this
it the big but, that rational and
ethical justification is at the Creator’s level, and we may or may not be
brought into it. Sometimes we can
glimpse a lot of it, sometimes we can’t glimpse any of it, and the issue always
is does He know what He’s doing, and is He a good God? That’s the whole point here, does He know
what He’s doing and is He a good God?
Satan tried to attack Adam and Eve on that
point, right from the very start of history—God is a bad mean God, and if God
was a good God He’d let you do anything your heart desired and He’s after you
so He set some bounds and limits, bad God.
It’s always the character of God.
So the issue is, and we quoted Abraham in Gen. 18:25, “the Judge of all
the earth shall do right.” That’s a
good Bible verse. That’s a good
promise to remember because it makes sense, it’s clear, it’s easy to remember
and you find yourself reverting back to that, “the Judge of all the earth shall
do right.” Abraham had to cope with
that when he was doing intercessory prayer over Sodom and Gomorrah. God, will you save it, Lot’s there, his
family is there, are you going to save the city? Finally after all the bargaining, Abraham comes to a resolution
where he can trust a promise of Scripture.
But he comes to that, probably through a lot of thought and prayer, he
finally gets to the point where he can say “the Judge of all the earth shall do
right.”
That’s where it is, that’s the anchor and
that’s where the battle is. To get to
that point the Bible gives us help. We
have on the graph two areas where you’ve got a lot of help in Scripture. One is at the cross itself, because one of
the arguments against Christianity and one of the satanic temptations is to say
God is sovereign, everybody agrees, oh yeah, God is sovereign, He can do
anything, omnipotent? Yeah. Does He love you? If He is sovereign, and He is omnipotent, and this mess is
happening, how can you say God is a God of love? Don’t you have, in other words, a conflict internal to your whole
belief system that there’s a conflict going on here between God’s sovereignty
and His omnipotence on one hand and His love on the other? It’s a classic place where non-Christians
attack with vehemence our position, because they allege that there’s a conflict
between the attributes that the Bible claims God has. Inherently in the Scripture, faced with this tragedy or this
circumstance that’s bugging you, you’re thrust against this temptation to
believe there’s a conflict going on.
One partial answer to that is look at the
cross of Christ because in the cross God resolved an apparent conflict to Old
Testament saints. Old Testament saints
could not resolve the issue of justice and grace. They knew on the one hand that their sins couldn’t be forgiven
without blood atonement; they knew on the other hand “God be gracious to me,”
you’ve got to be gracious to me because no man can stand in your sight. They had no real answer as to how those two
attributes come into play. That’s the
trouble with every non-Christian religion, whether it’s Islam, Mormonism,
Jehovah Witnesses, Buddhism, Hinduism, whatever, they all suffer right here
because they can’t get forgiveness and justice together. Islam always makes Allah forgive you if your
good deeds outweigh your bad deeds, but that’s just an arbitrary forgiveness,
what’s the basis that Allah can do that?
Well, he just does it. Why does
he do it, how can you claim that Allah is holy and righteous and uncompromising
his justice if you’re going to argue that without blood atonement he forgives
you. It’s not problem, just a bloodless
thing, nobody pays anything, no sacrifice, nothing. But my good works… no, suppose you have zero good works, suppose
you have a million good works, the issue is over here what about the violations
to Allah’s holiness?
In the Old Testament, how did the Old
Testament saints have to cope with life? They had to trust that the attribute
of God’s justice and the attribute of His love manifested in grace somehow
worked together, and they didn’t know how.
But this side of the cross as New Testament saints we can say yeah, with
Paul, “He can be just and the justifier.”
He can be just, that is His attribute of justice remains unthreatened,
and he can justify, that is He can be gracious to us and give us righteousness
and forgiveness. We know that now
because of the cross. So why does this
help us in a problem up here? Because
it shows us that once there was an apparent conflict and God resolved it in an
amazing way. Therefore, do we suppose
that maybe someday we’ll see how those things play together in this particular
tragedy that we’re talking about? Yeah,
because the precedent for diminishing these apparent contradictions has already
been worked out in one vast area by the cross of Christ. Since the precedent has been set over here,
we can trust it over here. That’s the way our God works. It’s a battle.
Then the Bible, as we said, there are at
least nine rationales as to why a particular tragedy happens. People always say why does this happen? We gave four reasons why tragedy happens
that are directly the consequence of human actions: the fall is one, genetic
defects, death, physical, the mess in the environment, all of that was the
result of a human choice. Don’t blame
God; it was the consequence of the human choice. Well God shouldn’t have put Adam there and set it up like that.
Why not? He gave us responsibility.
Everybody wants to flee responsibility, it’s always somebody else’s fault, not
mine. The four rationales that are
direct consequence rationales mean number one, there was a fall, Gen. 2, God
said in the day that you eat you’re going to die. Does God mean what He says or not? We’re not going to have a recount to go over the fall again
because somebody screwed up and couldn’t understand what the word meant.
The second thing is “whatsoever a man sows,
that shall he also reap,” Gal. 6:7. So
we have disobedience leads to suffering, self-induced misery explains a lot of
suffering… a lot of
suffering. Then we came upon the fact
that you can have self-induced misery by association with others that are
involved and you’re kind of corporately adhering to them, etc. so there’s
number three which is a second version of number two.
Then there’s the fourth rationale, why there
is hell. Why is there hell? Why do people wind up in hell? The consequence of a decision, a decision to
say that I don’t need a substitutionary blood atonement, I don’t need Jesus
Christ, I don’t need God’s grace. Why am I in hell? Because I made a decision.
Did God twist my arm to make that decision?
No He didn’t, it’s a decision that I have made. Those are four parts of the positive
rationale.
We had five reasons why tragedies happen and
they cannot be directly traced to anything you do. This blows people away to even think this way because we are so
groomed, like the disciples, Lord, did this man sin that he was born
blind? In our rationale we want to
somehow say this tragedy is due to that cause and there’s a connection here
between them. But the Bible says there
are at least five reasons why tragedies occur that are not related directly to
something in the immediate environment.
One of those is because God is trying to wake
somebody up to believe in Jesus Christ.
That’s the evangelistic call.
Paul was an example of that. Did he suffer on the Damascus road? Yeah. Why? Because God was calling him. Did people in the Old Testament suffer
because God had to get their attention?
Yeah, it’s the old 2 x 4 on the side of the head to get attention.
That’s one reason why and it’s not related to an immediate disobedience, it’s
just we’re fat, dumb and happy non-Christian’s waltzing along and God says time
to wake up, and wham. That’s one of
five reasons.
There’s a second reason why, Psalm 119:71
which says “It is good that I’ve been afflicted that I might learn Thy
statutes.” The idea there is that God
will bring suffering and trials to grow us.
It’s not related to some sin that we’ve done, it’s not because you
disobeyed yesterday at 3:00 o’clock and today you’re clobbered. It isn’t that simple. It may just be that that is to nudge further
spiritual growth, and it’s a loving act, to train.
A third reason, the third, fourth and fifth
are all witnessing reasons; think of to whom we witness or to whom this can be
a demonstration. Point three would be a
witness to non-Christians and we gave 1 Tim. 1:16, and example to them who will
believe in the future. So a non-Christian
may be looking at you in the middle of a suffering situation and you may not
even realize that they’re looking at you.
But they are, they’re trying to observe what you are made out of, and
when the see the spiritual adherence to Scripture, the manifestation of the
life of Christ, then they’re attracted to Christ and the gospel. So the third reason a witness to a
non-Christian.
A fourth reason is a witness to other
believers to encourage them. That’s 2 Cor. 1; comfort others with the comfort
wherewith you have been comforted.
Because you’ve gone through a tragedy, you’ve through life, you’ve got
knocked in the side of the head and here’s this other Christian in a mess and
you can kind of come along side of them in a way that nobody else can. Somebody else can’t do what you can do because
God had you go down this path, suffering this, suffering that, learning this,
learning that, claiming this promise, claiming that promise, falling down,
picking yourself up, confessing sin, moving on, going through all that. And do you know what? It fits what’s going on over here. That’s the fourth of the disconnected
reasons as a witness to other believers or as a help to other believers.
The most mysterious one is Eph. 3:10 which
we’ll get into more as we delve further into the Church Age and that is the
manifold wisdom of God is being learned by angelic observers to us. In some way they are standing by, invisible,
watching us and learning by watching us and the Lord work with us about the
manifold wisdom of God. So there’s nine
rationales here as to why that suffering may be rationally and ethically
justifiable. These are all the tools
that are available in the text of Scripture.
You don’t need a book on psychotherapy; you don’t need a course in
psychiatry; you don’t need all the gobblety-gook that goes on in the name of
counseling. All we really need is this
fundamental tool of the faith-rest approach and working through this and you
get better at it as you go along, until the Lord gives you a bigger trial.
That’s the nice way of doing it.
Now let’s look what a mess it is if you try
not to do it that way. Let’s look at
the mentality of the flesh. Here’s an
example of what I want to introduce tonight.
Here’s an example of closure.
What I’m going to do is show you why the grass is not greener on the
other side of the fence. Up to now
we’ve said we have a promise and the battle is to trust this promise. The problem is that as we are battling this
we can be tempted to look off, wandering if there’s another possible approach,
what does the world have to offer here.
It can be peripherally in our vision and as long as it’s peripherally in
our vision we’re not focused. That’s
why I’ve added this, this closes off that kind of stuff, because the best way
of coping with that if that’s the problem is to turn right around and say okay,
what does the world system have to offer.
Let’s confront it eyeball to eyeball.
You want to tempt me, okay, what have you got to offer here.
What we’re doing here is we’re looking the
world, the flesh and the devil right in the eyeball, eyeball to eyeball and
we’re saying what do you have to offer in this situation? If you divide the population up
statistically and they saw the issue of evil, suffering or sorrow, probably
less than 1% would say well that’s okay, I don’t really believe in evil, it’s
just an imagination. There really are
some people like that, in the Christian Science area, Mary Baker Patterson
Glover Eddy, she denied the existence of evil, denied this thing of sickness,
it’s all in your head, until she had her teeth filled. The point is that some
people do believe this, but not many, and if they do, then they don’t have a
problem because they’re not bothered by it.
But most people see a tragedy, they see a
heartache, a disaster, a mess, they’re going to say it’s wrong. Watch this! If somebody is facing a disaster
they may be angry at you, they may be angry at God, they may be angry at the
gospel, they’re ready to blow you away with all kinds of argument and flack,
but do you know one thing—they’re mad at the presence of evil. You may never have thought about this but
this is very encouraging, because if they’re mad at the presence of evil, what
they just admitted? They’ve admitted to
the Biblical worldview that evil is abnormal.
They’ve admitted that it isn’t just passive and oh well, the universe
just evolved over millions of years and it’s going to be evil, it was evil, it
always will be evil so I just have to ride the sled. No, they don’t want to ride the sled. This is something BAD, and when they get mad that something is
bad, guess what they say? That it’s
evil. It’s not by a vote, it’s not
because 51% of the people say its bad, you get that slick answer in some
academic classroom somewhere, it’s the corporate morays. Bologna it’s the corporate morays. If you step on your toe and they say it’s
wrong, and the whole class votes it’s okay to step on your toe, does that make
it right for you? No, you’re going to
protest that because you know somehow it’s wrong and you’re mad at it.
So you know it’s not by vote, you know it’s
not private choice, it’s not that you don’t personally like it, it’s bigger
than that, it’s that it’s violating some standard of justice, something’s
wrong, and it’s not just social convention.
So there’s a secret admission of Bible truth every time somebody gets
mad at evil. Every time somebody says it’s bad and I’m angry and I want
justice, that’s a good sign because it means at least the conscience is going
bing bing bing bing, evil is abnormal, evil is abnormal, evil is abnormal, you
should be mad, you should be mad, you should be mad. Take heart, that’s not the problem. The problem isn’t that they’re mad or that you’re mad, if you’re
in this mode of thought, there’s something else at work here. Now watch.
Inside the soul there is a tremendous
conflict that develops right here. This
is, as the old saying goes, this is an irresistible force meeting an immovable
object because there’s no resolution to this particular conflict. As long as this conflict goes on in the soul
there is absolutely no answer to it.
While admitting that it’s bad that evil and tragedy is a violation of
some standard that is not by vote, by private choice or by convention, there’s
a desire for a rationale and ethical justification. Why is that? Because
God’s given us a mind and a conscience and it’s working, it wants to know why
did this thing happen and it’d better be a good reason this baby died or this
poor child suffered like he did. That’s
the cry of a person with a mind that’s active and a conscience that’s
active. But what happens in the flesh
and where sin enters into this is that whatever rational and ethical
justification that goes on, it’s got to be justified to the creature. It’s got to be down here; You got a reason
God, You bring it down here and I’ll check it out. That’s what’s wrong.
There’s an amazing sub feature to this. Let me play with this for a few seconds and
then I’m going to show you something even more startling. The desire is to bring down whatever this
reason and justice is and we’re going to plop it right here on the table, I
want to examine it and I’ll decide whether it’s right or wrong. That’s the battle, that the creature is
going to be the judge of God here, and God has no right to… whatever reasons
He’s got, He has no right to withhold those reasons from my investigation. Think about the book of Job. In the beginning of the book we get a little
insight as to why Job had his trials, with Satan, etc. But does Job ever find that out in the rest
of the book? What is the end of the
book of Job? Does he say oh, I
understand now, Satan came in and had a conference with You yesterday. No, Job’s never brought into that
discussion. How does the book of Job
end? He said I’ve just been uttering
words without knowledge, I shut my mouth, I don’t know what I’m talking
about. What has happened to Job? Boing, he suddenly realized that
justification may always be unavailable and he’s got to trust the Lord with it.
We want to pull it down and we want to
justify it to the creature. Here’s the coup’de grace with this whole
process. Think of what in our flesh we
want to do. We want to bring God’s
plan, we want to bring His whole rationale down here on the table so we can
check it out. What did Eve do in the
garden? When faced with Gen. 2, “in the
day that you eat thereof you’re going to die” and Satan says “in the day that
you eat thereof you’re not going to die.”
So Eve had God and she had a creature, and she wanted to make both of
them equal, of equal authority and lay them on the table so she could check it
out. Here’s where the coup de grace is, this action in our
rebellious sinful hearts is precisely a replay of the fall of man in Eden. That
is exactly what Eve did so in the cry in the battle that’s going on it’s a
replay of the original fall.
So somebody that’s angry because something
has happened, rightfully so, but at the same time they’re angry that
something’s happening makes the simultaneous argument that they are not going
to trust God or anything else until He answers to me. And the moment they do that they have part of the evil problem
right there, they are the problem! So
ironically in objecting to evil, they create some more, because all they’re
doing in their hearts of hearts is redoing and replaying Adam and Eve all over
again. This shows that there is not an adequate answer to cope with these
tragedies outside of Scripture. This is
what I mean by closure. It’s a
self-refuting argument; it’s internally contradictory on a way and a plain that
is way beyond anything that the Bible has.
We’ve been dealing with the ascension and
session of Christ and we’ve looked at some of the Psalms where the New
Testament authors have brought in this material. There is a correction on page
9, where it says “Paul in application alters the verb ‘receive’ in Psalm 68:18
to receive,” it should be give. Another
error, page 14, there is no Heb. 2:26 no matter what version of the Bible you
have you won’t find Heb. 2:26, it’s Heb. 9:26.
We dealt with Dan. 7, now let’s turn to the book
of Psalms and look at Psalm 2. What are
we doing? We’re going to Old Testament
passages, very key Old Testament passages that the New Testament authors
appropriated and used to explain the session of Christ, because again to draw
the picture, we have the mount of ascent, the Lord Jesus Christ ascends, a
cloud takes Him up and He disappears.
The resurrection appearances cease, there are not more resurrection
appearances of Christ walking on earth, He disappears and invisibly moves
somewhere to the throne of God. Since
this is not observed historically, this aspect to the Lord Jesus after the
cloud receives Him has to be taught to us through imagery given in the pages of
God’s Word, and the images that the New Testament authors have picked, Daniel
7; Psalm 2 and Psalm 110. There are
others but these are three key ones that we’re looking at.
Many of you will be familiar with this but
the key passage is Psalm 2:6, “But as for Me, I have installed My king upon
Zion, My holy mountain.” That’s God speaking. In verse 7 the speaker, it
alternates between the king and God, and in verse 7 it’s the king speaking,
whoever this king is, this royal son, “I will surely tell of the decree of the LORD: He said to
Me, ‘Thou art My Son, today I have begotten Thee.’ [8] Ask of Me, and I will
surely give the nations as Thy inheritance, and the very ends of the earth as
Thy possession, [9] Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron, Thou shalt
shatter them like earthenware. [10] Now therefore, O kings, show discernment; take
warning, O judges of the earth. [11]
Worship the LORD with reverence, and rejoice
with trembling. [12] Do homage to the Son, lest He become angry, and you perish
in the way, for His wrath may soon be kindled.
How blessed are all who take refuge in Him!”
The picture of Psalm 2 is that of the royal
son of David; to the west of the mount of ascent you have Mount Zion, the
valley Kidron runs between them, and on that western mountain is where the
temple was. We saw the picture of David
taking the ark up there at the end of the conquest period, Jehovah came up in
the form of the ark. David started meditating on that and the Holy Spirit spoke
to him, and it took David down the corridors of history over centuries of time
until he could see the Messiah and the Messianic age. It was connected to him because God had promised what in the
Davidic Covenant? What kind of a dynasty would David have in contrast to the
dynasties of all the other kings of the earth including Saul? It would be a dynasty that would never
end. There’s only two ways you can have
a dynasty that won’t end. You can have
an infinite number of successors or you can terminate the dynasty in a person
who has eternal life. So the Davidic
Covenant promises the son of David will one day come and the dynasty will be
forever protected and will become the world dynasty.
At this point we have to sort through things
very carefully because there are those with various prophetic viewpoints that
insist that Jesus Christ today, sitting at the Father’s right hand, is actually
fulfilling the Davidic Covenant reigning from Mount Zion. Obviously He’s not in Jerusalem. Jesus is not on Mount Zion tonight.
Therefore Jesus is not on Mount Zion tonight but He’s fulfilled the Davidic
Covenant, now all of a sudden the Davidic Covenant has become spiritualized and
turned into a metaphor. No, it’s going
to be a literal Davidic Covenant, it’s going to reign on earth. The one thing that we noticed about this
Psalm is in verse 6 when it says “I have installed My King on Mount Zion” it
means Zion of David, it doesn’t mean the Lord’s throne. That’s Zion, the physical literal Mount Zion
that you could fly a airplane over or you can see on your approach to David Ben
Gurion Airport. That’s the Mount Zion
meant in verse 6. That is not being
fulfilled today, the King is not on that mountain reigning.
However, verse 7 speaks, again in its vision
way, “I will tell of the decree of the LORD … Thou art My
Son, Today I have begotten Thee.” The
idea is that whoever this king is, we’ll call this king the ideal king, this
ideal king carries on a conversation with God, and Psalm 2 while it looks at
this king as he has come back to Mount Zion also adds the fact that God has
decreed certain things to happen through the king. In verse 8 one of the things that is to happen to that king is
the king is supposed to pray and he is supposed to ask the Lord to give him the
earth. He is supposed to be asking the
Father to give him his inheritance. And
when the king gets the inheritance then he will rule. Verse 9 says you will
“break them with a rod of iron, you will shatter them like earthenware,” in
other words, there is to be a physical, political military, as it were, take
over of all the nations by the son of David.
You have to be careful here, do you see why
we prefaced what we’re doing here; we went through premillennialism,
amillennialism, postmillennialism and I warned you about something. Do you remember when I said beware of
replacement theology. What did we say
replacement theology was? The Church
takes the place of Israel; the Church replaces Israel. If you look at verses like 9, if the Church
replaces Israel you can very easily get a triumphalism in which the Church
conquers the world for Christ, and postmillennialists believe that. There are many postmillennialists that
believe right now the Mosaic Code is the only law to be respected on this
planet, it should be imposed on America, it should be imposed on all nations,
and we should revert back to stoning.
We should do everything according to that Mosaic Law Code because it
stands for all time. And they will not
be content until they politically…it’s almost like Islam and Jihad. There’s
something true about what they’re trying to do. There’s something true, we’ll get to it but that isn’t it.
Verse 9 is talking about Jesus Christ when
Jesus Christ returns to set up His Kingdom that is what He’s going to do; He’s
going to judge the world. There’ll be no doubt about it. So what are we saying? We’re saying that
Psalm 2 depicts the greater son of David, who we know is the Lord Jesus Christ;
it’s saying certain things about the Lord Jesus Christ. It’s saying in verse 6 that one day He will
reign from Mount Zion on earth physically.
Verse 9 says that He will have a global reign and power. But, in verse 7-8 there’s something that
Jesus does with the Father and in prayer that the Lord Jesus Christ in prayer
is asking the Father to give Him the nations as an inheritance. Quite obviously
the Father hasn’t given Jesus the nations as an inheritance yet. So verse 7-8 point to something. Between the time of the session, the session
of the Lord Jesus Christ when He sits down at the Father’s right hand until the
time when He reigns, full power with all of His crowns so it’s manifested on
earth, there is a time interval. And
during that time interval God the Son is asking God the Father to give Him the
nations for an inheritance. He’s
praying that prayer.
So the Church Age is in here. This sets up something for the Church Age. We
saw a little bit of that when we dealt with Psalm 68. Eph. 4 uses Psalm 68. Go
to Eph. 4 again; hold the place in Psalm 2.
Eph. 4 is Psalm 68. It says in
verse 8-11, when it’s talking about gifted people to the Church it says, verse
8, we said this is a good example of apostolic exegesis. The apostles didn’t give book reviews, they
went to the text of the Old Testament and they taught it word by word. “Therefore it says, ‘When He ascended on
high,” he’s quoting the text of Psalm 68, “He led captive a host of captives,
and He gave gifts to men.’” We said
that’s a picture of Jesus Christ ascending in victory of some sort and He gets
booty from the defeated foes and instead of receiving booty like an ancient god
would have been dramatized to show, instead of receiving booty He takes the
booty and then He gives it to the Church.
What constitutes the booty?
Money? No, what is the booty? Gifted men.
So what this is is that the Lord Jesus Christ
is asking the Father for this future Kingdom, and these prayers are being
executed every moment of the Church Age.
Every time someone trusts in the Lord Jesus Christ he becomes a POW away
from the kingdom of darkness into the kingdom of light. Jesus Christ has just captured another
one. The picture here is a war going
on, with the gospel and that as one person trusts in Christ they are translated
from the kingdom of darkness to the kingdom of light, they become a prisoner of
war, the cosmic war that Jesus is reigning, and He is waging. And what does Jesus do? He takes these prisoners of war and He gives
them gifts and He gives them back to His Church. So we have something going on in this Church Age.
That’s Psalm 2, and while we’re looking at
Psalm 2 notice it talks about I will reign and “break them with a rod of
iron.” Turn to Rev. 2:27 so you can see
how that same imagery, the rod of iron is used by the New Testament
authors. Verse 26, “And he who
overcomes, and he who keeps My deeds until the end,” and in the context this is
all the churches of the book of Revelation in Asia Minor there, and He’s giving
them promises about the future. [blank
spot, ]
… you will see in the margin, in fine print,
and we’ll have to use the bifocals to see, you will notice that that is Psalm 2
that is quoted there. “…to Him I will
give authority over the nations, [27] And He shall rule them with a rod of
iron, as the vessels of the potter are broken to pieces, as I also have
received authority from My Father.” To
make sense of that verse, go back in your mind to what we did with Daniel
7. What did we say the Son of Man
referred to? Remember those visions of
Daniel and we saw the Son of Man, and the Son of Man equals the leader plus the
people. All those images are dual
images, they include Jesus but they mean more than that. And here you see in
verse 26-27 how closely the people, the saved people of the Church Age are
identified with this King.
The point I’m making right now is in verse 27
there’s the rule with the rod of iron, it’s not happening today, it’s happening
at the end time, in the future. So
that’s the idea of Psalm 2. Psalm 2 is an image Psalm for this process all
through the Church Age.
Now let’s go to Psalm 110. This is the most quoted Psalm in the New
Testament. The New Testament authors dwell on this Psalm again and again, they
went back to it. It is just loaded with
all kinds of prophetic material. We’re
not going to even come close to exhausting it.
All we’re doing is skimming these to get the general idea of the imagery
that the New Testament authors used to understand Jesus in His session. Who wrote the Psalm? David.
It was written at the height of the kingdom. If David is the highest authority in the kingdom, who was David’s
Lord? Jesus, this verse in the Gospels,
He played with the Pharisees with this one.
He said who do you think Psalm 110:1 is? Huh? Who’s David’s
Lord?
Psalm 110:1, “The LORD says to my
Lord,” so there you have the Old Testament instance of plurality in the
Godhead, that people say doesn’t exist. They haven’t read Psalm 110:1
carefully. “The LORD says to my
Lord: Sit at My right hand,” now look at this, “Sit at My right hand, until” until “I make Thine enemies a footstool
for Thy feet.’” So here’s a picture of
the Lord Jesus at the Father’s right hand, staying there in heaven, not on
earth, until something happens, “until Thine enemies are a footstool for Thy
feet.” [2] “The LORD will stretch
forth Thy strong scepter from Zion, saying, ‘Rule in the midst of Thine
enemies.’ [3] Thy people will volunteer freely in the day of Thy power” and now
it goes into an exposition of getting Israel involved with it.
Verse 4, “The LORD has sworn and
will not change His mind, Thou art a priest,” notice this, verses 1-3 are
kingly duties, and now in verses 4 and following he’s talking about being a
priest. Was David a priest? Was he in the tribe of Aaron? No, he was in the tribe of Judah. He wasn’t a Levite; he couldn’t have been a
Levitical priest. But the fact of the
matter is David seemed to exercise quasi priestly authority when he sacrificed
to the Lord when the ark went up, but he did so not because he was trying to
compete with the Aaronic priesthood, it was because he was exercising another
strange kind of priesthood, this one.
“The LORD has sworn and will not change
His mind, Thou art a priest forever according to the order of
Melchizedek.”
That’s very illuminating that the Messiah,
which would be the object of Psalm 110, His priesthood is a Gentile
priesthood. That’s strange. Not a Jewish priesthood, a Gentile
priesthood, because Melchizedek was who?
Melchizedek preceded Abraham.
What was Melchizedek doing in history when he blessed Abraham? It was like he was handing the torch of
God’s light from whatever kind of administration God had in the dispensation
from Noah to Abraham, however His Word was transmitted, however the believers
were organized, something changed as the civilization became paganized. Abraham
was called out to start a counterculture, and the guy that handed the baton was
Melchizedek. Melchizedek is an emblem
of the Gentile original core of authority in civilization because Melchizedek
was a king and a priest together.
Remember, he had bread and wine, but he also was the king. So you had,
so to speak, originally in civilization the church and state were kind of
together in these people. That’s probably one reason why it paganized very
rapidly, not separating the powers.
By the way, just a footnote, you are about to
witness in our nations history, probably, a debate over the existence of the
electoral college, because the two-bit commentators and talking heads all think
that it’s an evil. It wasn’t an
evil. The electors is a feature, a
wonderful and marvelous feature in our country’s history put there by men who
were consciously Biblical. Some of them
were unconsciously Biblical, they were unbelievers personally, but the Word of
God so influenced the generation of the founders of this country that they
realized that everybody was a miserable sinner and left to any of ourselves we
would wind up debauching ourselves and wrecking government and becoming a
little two bit kingdom like they had just come out of in Europe. And they were not interested in perpetuating
that mess.
Therefore the founding fathers said because
we are all depraved miserable sinners we’re going to put controls in the
government. We are not going to have a
direct democracy. A direct democracy comes out of pagan Athens and the Greek
city states, it is not American, it is pagan direct democracy. And the reason its pagan is because it
exalts the deity of the mob.
Democracies always wind up degenerating into the rule of the mob, and
the founding fathers knew that they did not want this country ruled by mobs,
therefore they broke it up to make it difficult to do. So they formed a republic in which these
powers are separated. If you read
Francis Schaeffer you’ll see what he says about Switzerland, they were so
serious about separating the executive, legislative and judicial they separated
them geographically, put one in one city, one in another city, and one in
another city. They wouldn’t even have
them all in the same city because they didn’t want the guys conniving with each
other. That’s how suspicious they were
of the political system.
So our country was founded with a deep and
profound suspicion of the political process and what fallen men would do with
it, so they put all these road blocks in there. Some people don’t like the roadblocks now so we have a couple of
Senator elects wandering around the country going to try to campaign to get the
electoral college… but that’s a direct assault on a Biblical understanding of
human nature. A true believer in
democracy does not believe in the sin nature of men. Think about that. If you
believe in a pure and simple democracy you have a very naïve view of man, you
probably believe in the goodness, everybody’s got good in their heart so
everybody’s going to vote good. That’s
not Biblical so the founding fathers built that in, they built a constitution
which acted actually… do you know what the whole idea of the constitution was?
It’s really very parallel to the early Puritan churches.
What do you suppose was the analogue to the
constitution in the church? The
Bible. They got the idea that you had
to have an abiding law so that one generation could save it for the next; you
could have cross-generational communication because this didn’t change. So enamored with this they decided they’d
have sort of a political version of the Bible which was the constitution. And they set up all kinds of problems in it
so you couldn’t amend it very easy, and that was to sort of act… you know a
flywheel, so that you couldn’t have jerks like this in society, the flywheel
kind of smoothed things over so it’s very, very difficult to mess with it.
The diabolical thing in our day is that this
and the constitution have both been sort-changed by a very simple satanic
tactic and the tactic is to interpret everything allegorically. Once you interpret the Bible allegorically
it’s useless, you might as well chuck it.
And once you have a group of lawyers who do not believe in a literal
hermeneutic of the law, the constitution is worthless because it means whatever
the court said it meant last week at 2:00 o’clock. It’s just plastic, it’s rubber.
So the Bible and the constitution can be turned into rubber and into
useless documents by a foolish hermeneutic or an approach to how you interpret
it.
Psalm 110 is the definition of Jesus Christ’s
priesthood and that priesthood and the kingship can be legitimately combined;
the powers can be legitimately combined in Him. Why? How can all the
powers of government be entrusted to Him?
Because He’s resurrected and sinless.
That’s why the Church of Jesus Christ in the millennial kingdom actually
will be acting as the political leaders of the earth and the globe because at
that time we will be resurrected and incorruptible. That’s the only way you can
get concentration of power is to have incorruptible people doing it. That’s why this priest, this Melchizedek
priest, combines all the powers.
But the idea, to get back to our theme, is
that Jesus Christ became this priest and began exercising it, apparently here,
or at least in His humanity here, He might have exercised it in His
preincarnate nature before. But Psalm
110 like Psalm 2, like Daniel 7 all argue that there’s this time interval and
something is going on that’s very, very interesting in the Church Age that has
something to do with Jesus Christ conquering the nations, and yet not conquering
them in a political way.
We’ll close by looking at the chart on page
13, and there is a verse that I want you to see in the New Testament, Eph.
1:20. The chart on page 13 gives you
those three passages we studied, and it divides up the accomplishments of the
session and the accomplishments still awaited.
The first column, the accomplishments of the session they’re finished as
of the completion of the First Advent of Christ. All those things going on in the second column are not finished
until the Second Advent of Christ. So
the inter-advent age, the Church Age separates those two columns.
When the New Testament authors used this Old
Testament imagery, they did one thing that’s not in the Old Testament
directly. It’s there by inference and
they made it explicit. Eph. 1:20 is
one of dozens of verses we could go to, but look at it, see if by observing
verse 20-21 you can spot what Paul has done, what new information does he tell
us about Christ. Let’s read it through
slowly. “Which He brought about in
Christ, when He raised Him from the dead,” we know that, that was the
resurrection, “and seated Him at His right hand in the heavenly places,”
there’s the session, now look at what he does when he explains the implications
of Christ’s session. He says He is “far
above all rule and authority and power and dominion, and every name that is
named, not only in this age, but also in the one to come. [22] And He put all
things in subjection under His feet,” who do you suppose Paul refers to in
verse 21 when he says “all rule and authority and power and dominion,”
especially after the word that closes out verse 20.
How does verse 20 end? He is where? He is in the heavenly places.
And it’s there where He is over all principalities and powers. If you took a concordance and checked out
principalities and powers you’d know what we are talking about. It’s the angelic forces that operate in
history. Remember Daniel, remember what
he prayed? Gabriel came to him and he
had a big fight with the king of Persia, and it wasn’t the human king of
Persia. The human king of Persia didn’t
have any anti-air defense. That was
another thing going on behind the political scene, and the Biblical picture is
that history has an appearance to it, a material, political, physical
appearance, and we live in an appearance, every day of our lives we’re working
on a [can’t understand word] that appears the way it is. But the New Testament adds another thing
here. It’s adding that behind this
appearance there is a reality and most of that reality we do not observe and
does not appear to us.
Whatever Jesus is doing at the Father’s right
hand is vitally related to this reality going on that doesn’t appear. There’s something going on, shall we say, in
the background and as Christians that’s what we want to do, as we move into
this Church Age we’re going to pull this curtain back a little bit on this
unseen world and this unseen angelic conflict because that is one of the
reasons for the existence of the inter-advent period. Is Jesus doing something? Yes.
Is history accomplishing something from moment to moment? Yes.
Is it that the Kingdom is being advanced? Yes. How? It’s something related to our existence as
believers and Christians and united together in the body of Christ. That’s the
theme that we’ll move on to as we get into the next section.
-----------------------------------
Question asked: Clough replies: The question is interesting in light of the
analogue of the marriage, the groom and Christ, and the close relationship
between Jesus Christ and the believers that the role of the King in the Kingdom
includes the King’s bride, and you’ll see this gradually emerge as we go on
through this. What I’m trying to get
across in this session is we’re starting now with Christ’s position. We want to
firmly establish and get a hold of Christ’s position because we’re going to get
into what does it mean to be “in Christ.”
The content of what that means isn’t really substantive until we know
what Christ is, what is He doing, where is He located physically tonight. And what big thing is He doing. We want to
get that kind of in our minds fixed and the session is the event that gives you
the imagery to do that. The next event
coming up is Pentecost and the baptism of the Holy Spirit and the coming of the
Spirit to the Church, and that sometimes because it’s more glamorous and people
talk about it more, that tends to eclipse the emphasis on the ascension and
session of Christ, and I’m trying to balance it, so that when we get to
Pentecost, yeah, Pentecost is Pentecost, but Pentecost is the arrival of the
Spirit sent by whom? From where? We want to put Pentecost in perspective
here; it carries out something that started at the session.
Question asked: Clough replies: She’s bringing up the point that in Romans
it talks about the blindness in part is come to Israel until the fullness of
the Gentiles come in, and that’s another very important commentary over this
inter-advent age of what’s going on in the inter-advent age. She used the words “rescue mission” to the
Gentiles, to bring them into the kingdom, and it is that. And that’s why, precisely because of that
that when you read these Biblical images of conquest you need to realize that
the conquest that is going on is directed at what holds the Gentiles in
dominion. In other words, Christ has
enemies tonight and the enemies aren’t, in one sense, the enemies are not the
unsaved, they’re the principalities and powers that control this world
system.
Remember, the only reason we become
Christians is because the gospel has been pumped our way, and we take for
granted… we take for granted that the gospel is just kind of oh well, the
gospel came my way, yeah. We forget
that to get the gospel to us took something, and that Satan opposes that. This is why Satan opposed Paul on his
missions. What does he say? Satan hindered him from coming to certain
places. Why? Because what did Satan know Paul would do if he got to those
certain places? He would bring the
gospel with him. The Bible says who is
it that seeks to take the Word of God out from the human heart just as soon as
it’s delivered. Unseen principalities
and powers.
We’ve very naïve and in the 20th
century, 21st century “modern man” (quote unquote) actually it’s
quite reversed the way he thinks.
Modern man thinks he’s very sophisticated and the ancient people were
stupid, I mean these poor stupid people in the Bible days were just so
superstitious that they believed all these fairy stories. Well, we’ve got our own fairy stories. I don’t think anybody in the ancient world
thought men came from apes? You
know. They would really have a laugh over
that one. In fact I’m told by
missionaries who have told, in Indonesia, the guys in the New Tribes they told
the natives about what we believe, “we” being the country, and the west because
the natives wanted to know what western culture was like, yeah, we believe that
men come from monkeys, they weren’t saying Christians believe that, they were
just saying that’s what our culture teaches.
And the natives probably died laughing because they couldn’t believe,
they’d never heard that one, they thought that was a good one.
We’re not the sophisticates of history and
we’ve lost a lot. It’s true we don’t
want to be spirtists, we don’t want to be preoccupied with the principalities
and powers, but the New Testament talks about them and the place the New
Testament appears to talk about them the most is when it talks about the
session of Christ. It talks about He
ascends, He pulls rank on them, He outranks them. He has the high ground, and
it’s encouraging to know that, that in all the chaos of history, the apparent
chaos of history, who is it that reigns and who is in place right now and to
whom do the angelic powers, ferocious though they may be, and they are, because
what image does Paul say Satan is? A
roaring lion. He’s not going around
knocking on doors, he’s busting them down.
So he’s ferocious but he’s outranked.
Jesus Christ has the high ground, he’ll never capture it, he can’t push
Jesus off that high ground. That’s
comforting and that gives content when we get into the Holy Spirit does this,
and the Holy Spirit does that and all the rest of it in the Church Age, all that
is kind of involved in this intrigue that’s going on.
Later we’ll see passages like in Rom. 8, the
passage where it says the Holy Spirit makes intercessions for us, and what does
it say, “with groanings that cannot be uttered.” People have taken that to mean that this is some esoteric thing
that’s going on. If you look up the
word “groanings that cannot be uttered,” it’s a word in the Greek language
that’s used for secret fraternities.
And the idea wasn’t that it was a non-human word, it was because of
security, because if you have a group fraternity or a club or a mystical cult
and they kept security over their terminology, and that was the deal. It was unutterable because it was classified
information. You add that meaning into
Romans 8, look what it does. In that
passage the Holy Spirit is praying from us to the Father, and He’s praying over
what in the context? He’s praying over
our weaknesses, He’s praying over things in our life, He’s praying for us to be
sanctified, and the Bible says that He’s praying on a secure channel. That’s the way we would say it in our high
communication age, a secure channel.
Now that’s interesting, why is the Holy
Spirit not praying in an unsecure channel?
See this relates to something that’s going on with the Church that it’s
sort of this one-upmanship that Satan’s in a position of a reactor. He can’t really initiate things; he’s going
around the world trying to put out fires because he can’t get into these
channels that are going on linking the believers with the Lord Jesus
Christ. The conversation is going on
right now between the Holy Spirit and… you know, you’d probably be scared to
see what He’s praying about us. But
He’s praying for your sanctification, for my sanctification, but He’s doing it
in such a way that it’s not being heard by certain individuals and that tells
us there’s a war going on here. And
there’s security, what we call in the military OpSec, Operation Security. Why do you need operation security if there
are not enemies around, clandestine hearers that might, knowing the prayer,
anticipate [can’t understand word] answers to that prayer. So it’s part of the big war, part of the
cosmic thing that’s going on and it keeps the initiative in Jesus Christ’s
camp. Jesus always initiates, Satan
always comes in with a counterfeit afterwards and you can see it in church
history. Every time the Holy Spirit does a work, Satan does a counterwork.