Truth Magazine

By H.E. Phillips

The attitudes of preachers have gone far in destroying the effectiveness of gospel preaching. If any group should understand and appreciate the story of the cross it should be those men who devote their lives to the proclamation of the gospel of Christ. But it is sad to note that many of these men have departed from the simple gospel and no longer contend for the faith once delivered.

I call your attention to a few among preachers’ attitudes which have developed to hinder the progress of the Lord’s work.

1. The modern preacher has come to judge that only the “educated” can preach. I am not against secular education. I believe it is helpful in any work, but to say that only the “educated” can preach is a serious mistake. Some of the most effective and greatest preachers of the gospel had little more than an 8th grade education. No, they were not great in the wisdom of the world, but they knew what God’s word said.

Many are the congregations who will not allow one to preach who does not have a college education with at least two degrees. In this their only desire is to have an educated man to compete with the denominational world. Brethren, the gospel is enough. The gospel is powerful enough to silence any denominational preacher. One is a gospel preacher if he preaches the gospel of Christ, whether he has a “LL.D”, “D.D.” or “Ph.D.” or not.

2. The attitude of “big” and “little” preachers is a great hindrance to the cause of Christ. Never was such an idea further from the spirit of Christ than this one. There are a few preachers among us who have classed themselves as “big” preachers. The common is far below him in every respect. The picture of these “big” preachers is given in Luke 18:9-14 in the Pharisee who thought of himself so far above the humble publican. Every gospel preacher should follow Paul and count everything as loss (even “bigness”) that he may gain Christ. When any preacher, I care not how much ability he has, grows in his own estimation to be above others, he immediately loses his power as a gospel preacher.

3. A few preachers have the attitude toward the gospel that if they can originate some new thing in the church they become a leader of men and great in the sight of God. As someone has said: “Anything new is not true, and anything true is not new,” as applied to the gospel of Christ. A safe and sound gospel preacher is one who preaches just what the apostles preached by the power of the Spirit of God. Many departures from the truth originated in some preacher’s desire to become known among the brethren. A few clamorous preachers have succeeded in leading a few brethren into digression, but the truth is against them and they shall fall.

4. The attitude of some preachers is to please the congregation at all cost. They have a “job” and must keep it. Paul told of those to come who would not continue in sound doctrine, but would heap to themselves teachers to tickle their ears and soothe them in their sin. If the sin of adultery exists in a church the preacher must not preach against that. And so on it goes through the whole catalogue of sin.

It is rather amusing, but sad, to go many places and find the local preacher tactfully informing you certain things not to preach on. You can be sure that is the thing to preach on, for that congregation certainly needs it. A preacher who will sell out to a group of sinners for a salary is no better than Judas who sold the Lord into the hands of the enemy.

Brethren, the masses love the truth. I speak of the church. You may gain temporary favor of a few people in sin by such preaching, but you lose the favor of God. That is a bad deal. The truth is all that will save. Preach it in season and out of season, without fear or favor. If a church is in sin and asleep spiritually, do not hesitate for one moment to cry aloud against such sin. If you, as a preacher, are driven from the church, shake the dust from your feet and go on to other places with the same gospel truth. You will be assured that you love praise of God more than praise of man. We dare not “sugar-coat” or “soft-pedal” the power of God to save. Expose error wherever you find it, whether in the church or out. Do not be blinded by the love and praise of the spiritually dead.

5. Another attitude of many preachers is that of compromise. The “union” loving preachers, willing to concede a principle of truth to gain popularity, are very dangerous. There is not a possibility of the least bit of compromise with God’s truth. Christ prayed for unity among brethren upon the authority of his word. No other standard will do.

Recently in this column there appeared an article entitled “‘That They All Might Be One.” I received two or three letters referring to different parts of the article, calling in question “Premillennialism” and the “Word of God as the basis of unity.” It was suggested in one of these letters that a compromise with “antis,” “Premillennialists,” “instrument users” (Musical instruments), etc., could be effected by each giving a little and allowing each to believe and practice what he believes the Bible to teach. No preacher ought to have the audacity to sell a principle of truth to gain the favor of those in error. The Bible doesn’t teach a series of doctrines differing one from the other. It teaches just one doctrine – the doctrine of Christ. Where two differing doctrines are taught, one is necessarily wrong. To close our eyes to this and cry for a compromise is both cowardly and dangerous to our soul’s salvation. Do not yield a scriptural principle in compromise to obtain popularity and favor of men.

6. The last attitude I mention in this study is that of many preachers, especially young men, who are looking for a “soft job.” When someone tells you gospel preaching is easy you can mark it down that person doesn’t know what gospel preaching is. It is one of the hardest and most continuous works one can find. There is nothing easy about real gospel preaching.

This is the general idea of most church members. All a preacher has to do is preach no more than two 20 or 30 minute sermons on Sunday, teach a 30-minute class on Wednesday night, and “call on” a few of the members during the week. The rest of the time he has for pleasure and entertainment. Far too many preachers follow out this idea at many churches. They sleep until about noon every day, make a few “pastoral calls,” play golf or go fishing in the afternoon, attend a movie or some social party in the evening, and his day is finished. On Saturday he opens a “canned sermon” and is ready for Sunday. This is about as near gospel preaching as any denominational preacher gets.

A gospel preacher has about 12 to 18 hours each day, seven days a week, every week in the year, to work. Several hours each day should be spent in Bible study and prayer. Each sermon should be filled with convincing truth. Daily preaching and teaching should be done. Every opportunity, every available source should be used to tell the story of Christ.

When the attitude of the church as well as the preacher turns to the desire to save men and women from the awful suffering that is sure to come from a sinful and neglectful life, then the church will grow as in the days of the apostles. Let the elders, preachers and Christians demand an uncompromising, plain, simple, righteousness and forceful gospel without fear or favor. Then and only then will we invoke the blessings of Almighty God.

Guardian of Truth XXXIII: 20, pp. 611-612
October 19, 1989

By Ron Halbrook

On the baseball field Pete Rose was a smashing success, but in the game of life Peter Edward Rose has been a crashing failure. Rose, dubbed “Charlie Hustle, ” played baseball with such zeal and abandonment that it seemed to be the only thing that mattered in his life. He holds 19 major-league records and is the all-time leading hitter.

The baseball Commissioner’s office faced Rose on 20 February 1989 with charges that he had violated baseball’s Rule 21 against misconduct which reflects on the game. Gambling has a corrupting influence on all sports and Rose was guilty on both legal and illegal gambling. After denying all charges on 20 February, in the face of evidence presented to him by the Commissioner’s office on 20-21 April he admitted betting on sports other than baseball. On 9 May the Commissioner’s investigator submitted evidence detailing 412 wagers by Rose between 8 April and 5 July 1987, including 52 bets on the Cincinnati Reds (the team managed by Rose from August 1984). The report concluded that Rose is an avid, high stakes gambler.

Finally, on 24 August the baseball Commissioner announced that Rose was banned from baseball for life for dishonoring the game. “The banishment for life of Pete Rose from baseball is the sad end to a sorry episode,” Commissioner Giamatti said. “One of the game’s greatest players has engaged in a variety of acts which have stained the game. And he must now live with the consequences of those acts” (Houston Chronicle, 25 Aug. 1988, p. IA).

Sports can provide clean recreation and reinforce such values as persistence and hard work toward a goal, but America has too often made sports into a religion and sports heroes into gods. Athletic prowess and fame are not the marks of a truly successful life. Writers for the Associated Press noted under the banner “Charlie Hustle: Once a hero, now a wilted Rose,” “With baseball came the fast lane – fast money, fast cars, fast women. It all seemed to end so fast, too” (BrazosportITX] Facts, 27 Aug. 1989, p. 2B). The seductive temptations and sinful passions of this world all-too-soon pass away, “but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever” (1 Jn. 2:15-17). If lasting happiness and satisfaction cannot be found in sports, where then are they found? “Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man” (Eccl. 12:13).

If gambling is the “clean,” “honest,” and “moral” activity it is claimed to be by its defenders, if it is “wholesome” family fun as is implied by churches and the Knights of Columbus who use it for fund raising, why does it have such a corrupting influence on sports and such a debilitating impact in the lives of people? If we truly love God, we must love our neighbor as ourself. This love is embodied in the law of God, teaching us, “Thou shalt not steal . . . . Thou shalt not covet. . . . Love worketh no ill to his neighbor: therefore love is the fulfilling of the law” (Matt. 22:37-40; Rom. 13:8-10).

Gambling corrupts and debases the soul because it violates the demands of love and respect for our fellow man. It is an exercise in covetousness which causes us to try to take base gain from others. Rather than trying to bless our fellow man while also feeding our own family, as is done in honest labor and in the honest exchange of goods and services, gambling is an effort to take and to get without regard to the welfare of others (Eph. 4:28). It is “every man for himself!” The more we exercise our hearts in such a philosophy, the more we become debased, immoral, and driven by ungodly passions.

This debasing influence is passed from one generation to another as the iniquities of the fathers are visited upon the children “unto the third and fourth generation” of them that disobey and hate God (Exod. 20:5). Where did Pete Rose learn his passion for gambling? A bartender in Pete’s old neighborhood in Cincinnati said, “Pete’s dad would bet on which cube of sugar a fly would land on” (Houston Chronicle, 25 Aug. 1989, p. 8C). Pete was devoted to his dad, who took him to the horse track when he was a small child. Like father, like son! Some of us fathers desperately need to wake up and begin leading our children in the paths of righteousness (Eph. 6:4).

Little League baseball can be an excellent activity for young boys, but it too is stained and dishonored in many communities by the use of raffles to raise money. “Raffle” comes from “a dice game” and means “a lottery in which the prize is won by one of numerous persons buying chances” (Webster). Little League can ask for donations as gifts based on love for our youth without enticing people to wager in the hope of getting a prize. The raffle is degrading to Little League, to our community spirit, and to the boys who are sent out selling tickets as the agents of a lottery.

Guardian of Truth XXXIII: 20, pp. 609, 631
October 20, 1989

By Mike Willis

“Hope” is the happy combination of desire plus expectation. Many of us desire things we never expect and most of us expect things we never desire. Hope, however, is the combination of desire and expectation. The Lord has given his people “one hope” (Eph. 4:4) which is described as. the “anchor of the soul” (Heb. 6:19). Here is the beautiful passage from Hebrews:

Wherein God, willing more abundantly to shew unto the heirs of the promise the immutability of his counsel, confirmed it by an oath: that by two immutable things, in which it was impossible for God to lie, we might have a strong consolation, who have fled for refuge to lay hold upon the hope set before us: which hope we have as an anchor of the soul, both sure and steadfast, and which entereth into that within the veil; whither the forerunner is for us entered, even Jesus, made an high priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek (Heb. 6:17-20).

This sure and steadfast hope enables us to persevere in the midst of adversity.

Hope: Based on God’s Word

The author of Hebrews reminds us that the Christian’s hope is based on “two immutable things in which it is impossible for God to lie.” When God gave the promises to Abraham, he promised to bless all nations through his seed; to give greater certainty to the promise, God swore with an oath saying, “By myself have I swom, saith the Lord” (Gen. 22:16). God’s oath was a condescension to men to whom “an oath for the confirmation is to them an end of all strife” (Heb. 6:17). “Wherein God, willing more abundantly to shew unto the heirs of the promise the immutability of his counsel, confirmed it by an oath” (Heb. 6:18).

We who are Christians are heirs of that promise – a promise from God confirmed by an oath. The certainty of its being fulfilled rests on two immutable things: (a) God’s promise and (b) God’s oath. God cannot lie (Tit. 1:2). Hence, we have grounds for our hope – the immutable word of God.

Parents were exhorted to teach their children the Lord’s commandments “that they might set their hope in God, and not forget the works of God, but keep his commandments” (Psa. 78:7). God is described as the “hope of Israel” (Jer. 14:8; 17:13). In the midst of life’s uncertainties, there is only one fixed, immutable thing to which we can tie our hopes – God! All else may fail us before life is over.

Hope: an Anchor to the Soul

The Hebrews passage describes hope as the anchor of the soul. The metaphor compares the Christian to a boat on the sea; the Christian is on the sea of life. There are storms which threaten to drive his ship from its port – the storms of persecution, adversity, doubt, death, etc. Just as the boat’s anchor reaches down to the bottom of the ocean and out of sight, the Christian’s anchor ascends out of sight into heaven where it is there fixed.

To serve any purpose, an anchor must hold. It must be “sure and steadfast.” When sailors cast out an anchor, they want it to take hold on the bottom of the sea to prevent drifting, to keep them from being driven upon rocks which might destroy their ship. The Christian’s hope also must be “sure and steadfast.” It must hold.

A Christian’s hope serves to give him stability in the midst of the storm. During the storm, his ship may drift a little, but the fixed anchor will bring him back to his moorings. I have witnessed hope sustaining a Christian during the storm. In the midst of conflict, a Christian with fixed and rooted hope will stay faithful to God. A friend of mine experienced adversity when his child became deathly sick; for several weeks she lay in coma while her parents prayed. Not once did their faith waver as did Job’s wife who advised her husband to “curse God and die.” Not once did they quit. Rather, their hope sustained them through the storm.

Will Your Anchor Hold?

There are other hopes that men have. Job describes those who make gold their hope (Job 31:24). Others make power and strength their hope. These are the wicked concerning whom the wise man said, “The hope of the unjust men perisheth” (Prov. 11:7).

Because some anchor their soul with the wrong hope, Priscilla J. Owens wrote the song “We Have An Anchor.”

Will your anchor hold in the storms of life,

When the clouds unfold their wings of strife?

When the strong tides lift and the cables strain,

Will your anchor drift, or firm remain?

We have an anchor that keeps the soul

Steadfast and sure while the billows roll,

Fastened to the rock which cannot move,

Grounded firm and deep in the Savior’s love.

The Christian’s hope will anchor the soul, bringing him safely through every trial and temptation of life.

The Christian’s Hope

The Christian’s hope is a hope which the gospel gives. It is “the hope which is laid up for you in heaven, whereof ye heard before in the word of the truth of the gospel” (Col. 1:5). The only means of attaining this hope is through Christ -“Christ in you (is) the hope of glory” (Col. 1:27). What is this hope?

1. It is the hope of the resurrection. Paul described it as “the hope and resurrection of the dead” (Acts 23:6). In the resurrection chapter (1 Cor. 15), he pointed men to the resurrection of the body. As he spoke of the death and resurrection of the body, he said, “It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption: it is sown in dishonor; it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power: it is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body” (15:4243). Earlier he said, “If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable” (15:19). Indeed, “the righteous hath hope in his death” (Prov. 14:32).

As we lay our loved ones in the tomb, we do not despair, although we sorrow.

For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him. For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep. For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord. Wherefore comfort one another with these words (1 Thess. 4:14-18).

The hope of the gospel is the hope of resurrection. Indeed, the Lord brought life and immortality to light through the gospel (2 Tim. 1:10).

2. It is the hope of eternal life in heaven. Our resurrection is not to another period of earth life. It is a resurrection to eternal life with God in heaven – “to an inheritance incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fadeth not away, reserved in heaven for you, who are kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation ready to be revealed in the last time” (1 Pet. 1:3-5). It is resurrection to abide forever in the presence of the Lord (Rev. 21:3) where “God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain” (Rev. 21:4). It is a resurrection to “rest from their labors” (Rev. 14:13). It is a resurrection to drink the water of life (Rev. 21:6) and to eat of the tree of life (Rev. 22:2).

Those Who Have No Hope

The Scriptures tell us of those “which have no hope” (1 Thess. 4:13; Eph. 2:12). Hope is given to us through Christ Jesus when we obey the gospel. Those who have never obeyed that gospel are without hope. Let us not lose sight of this truth.

Funerals for the dead are difficult to conduct at best. Some who preach funerals appear to give little thought to the impression they leave on the living; when a preacher leaves the impression that those who have never obeyed the gospel have reason to hope for eternal life, he does the living an injustice. In a moment when every mind is concentrated on the frailty of man and thinking of the eternal destiny of man, a preacher should be careful not to leave the impression that a person can live the life of the wicked and have the hope of a Christian! The hope of eternal life is reserved for Christians – those who have trusted in Jesus for salvation.

Those who have lived their lives without regard to their obligations to God, who never had time to attend worship services, who rarely ever contributed a dollar to the church for the spread of the gospel, who “have their portion in this life” (Psa. 17:14), who are so consumed “getting all the gusto they can out of life,” and who have died are those whom the Bible describes as “having no hope” (1 Thess. 4:13). Let us not deceive the living by leaving an impression at their funeral that there is reason to hope for eternal life for these people. There is no hope!

Conclusion

A faithful Christian has full assurance in the hour of his death based on his hope. This is demonstrated by the words which Paul wrote when his death was imminent. He wrote, “For I am now ready to be offered, and the time of my departure is at hand. I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith. Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day: and not to me only, but unto all them also that love his appearing” (2 Tim. 4:6-8). His confidence, serenity and peace of mind in the face of his death are evidences of his hope, for he knew that “to die is gain” (Phil. 1:21). To die was to “be with Christ, which is far better” (Phil. 1:23).

Do you have this hope?

Guardian of Truth XXXIII: 20, pp. 610, 630-631
October 19, 1989

By Joe Price

On November, 1987, I participated in a lectureship with brethren Robert W. LaCoste and Harry Osborne at the Sierra Vista church in Enumclaw, Washington. We were asked by that church to present a series of lessons on the second coming of Christ, because of the doctrine which was affecting brethren in that church and that region. The doctrine which was and is having a destructive effect is formally referred to as “Realized Eschatology,” or informally as the “A.D. 70” doctrine. Several brethren were confused over the Bible’s presentation of the Lord’s promised return as a result of this doctrine’s influence. Since this lectureship, I have continued to hear of the attempted spread of this doctrine. Because of the serious effect this heresy has had upon individuals and entire churches, it is necessary that it be exposed for what it is – a perversion of the gospel of Christ (Gal. 1:6-9). To engage in such an endeavor is mandated in Scripture (Jude 3-4). It is always right to expose error, protect the innocent, and turn away from divisive doctrines (Rom. 16:17-18). Our motive must be love for truth and for the souls of men. Our objective must be to warn and correct, using God’s word as our standard (2 Tim. 2:24-26; 4:1-5).

During the Enumclaw lectureship mentioned above, Harry Osborne and I had an opportunity to discuss this subject with two men who defended the A.D. 70 doctrine. On that occasion, these men set forth the basic position of the doctrine, namely, that the final coming of Christ and the promised resurrection (1 Thess. 4:16; 1 Cor. 15) occurred in 70 A.D. Such a doctrine has far reaching consequences upon the faith of Christians! If it is true, then all who hope in the actual, bodily, personal return of Jesus are deceived (1 Thess. 4:16). If it is true, then we cannot expect our bodies to be raised to immorality when Jesus comes (1 Cor. 15:22-23,51-54). If this doctrine is false, then those holding it have erred, and are guilty of overthrowing the faith of others, as were Hymenaeus and Philetus, who also said “the resurrection is past already” (2 Tim. 2:16-18). There is no middle ground!

What Is Realized Eschatology?

As James Orr says, “By ‘eschatology,’ or doctrine of last things, is meant the ideas entertained at any period on the future life, the end of the world (resurrection, judgment . . . ) and the eternal destinies of mankind” (James Off , International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Vol. 11, p. 972). “Realized” signifies accomplishment; hence, Realized Eschatology is a doctrine of completed last things. According to its interpretation of the Bible, the end times were realized and accomplished in 70 A.D. at the destruction of Jerusalem. In fact, we are told by a major proponent of this doctrine that “the fall of Judaism (and its far reaching consequences) is, therefore, a major subject of the Bible” (Max R. King, The Spirit of Prophecy, p. 239). (For an excellent review and rebuttal of this book, see “The Preterist View Heresy [I-VIII],” Bill Reeves, Truth Magazine, Vol. XVII, No. 9-16 [4 Jan.-22 Feb., 19731.) We are told that the second coming of Christ occurred at 70 A.D., at which time every spiritual blessing was perfected and made available to the world. Due to fundamental failures in sound, biblical interpretation, Christians are being taught that all prophecy of end-time events was fulfilled in 70 A.D., and to look beyond that date for the personal coming of Christ and the bodily resurrection of mankind followed by a judgment, is without biblical authority. Here is a sampling of this basic viewpoint of the doctrine from King’s The Spirit of Prophecy:

“There is no scriptural basis for extending the second coming of Christ beyond the fall of Judaism” (p. 105).

“. . . the end of the Jewish world was the second coming of Christ” (p. 81, emp. King’s).

“Prophecy found its complete fulfillment in the second coming of Christ, and now may be regarded as closed and consummated” (p. 65).

Thus, the s cond coming of Christ is made equal with the “fall of Judaism” (the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D.). To King, and some misguided brethren today, we dare not look to our future in, anticipation of the coming of the Lord! All prophecies relating to it were fulfilled in 70 A.D.! Now, when it is shown that the personal, bodily return of our Lord is described in terms which cannot apply to the events of 70 A.D., the error of this doctrine will be fully exposed.

Did Jesus Come In the First Century Following His Ascension?

There is ample evidence in the word of God that Jesus did indeed come in some sense (or senses) in the first century. For example, he came in his kingdom (Matt. 16:28) with power (Mk. 9:1) on the day of Pentecost (Acts 1:4-5,8; 2:1-4,33). Now, look how Jesus described the sending of the promised Comforter (the Holy Spirit) in John 14:18: “I come unto you.” Surely no one will conclude that this must mean a bodily coming of Jesus! How would he come? Not bodily, but representatively, through the Holy Spirit whom would send (Jn. 15:26). Again, in Matthew 24:29-30, Jesus taught that during that generation (24:34) “they shall see the Son of man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.” The context of Matthew 24 tells us how they would see him. The context of the chapter is the destruction of Jerusalem. Unquestionably, Jesus did not appear, bodily in 70 A.D. when Jerusalem fell. Instead, Matthew 24:30 speaks of his presence in Jerusalem’s judgment. He authorized it and brought it to pass (cf. Isa. 19:1). They would see or discern his presence when this destructive judgment occurred. Yes, Jesus Christ came in judgment in 70 A.D., but it was not his bodily return! Similar language is used to describe his coming in judgment against the powers persecuting the saints in Revelation 1:7 (cf. Rev. 19:11-21). None of these “comings” of the Lord prevent a future coming of Christ in bodily form at the end of time!

The A.D. 70 doctrine would make every mention of the “coming of the Lord” or “day of the Lord” mean the same event, regardless of its usage in context. It is a fact of biblical interpretation that the same phrase can have different meanings. For example, take the expression “laid hands upon.” In Acts 4:3, it means to arrest, in Acts 13:3, it means to commend; in Luke 13:13, it means to heal, in Acts 8:17 and 19:6, it means to impart spiritual gifts. To arbitrarily assign one meaning to this phrase every time it is used would result in absurdity! Yet, this is exactly what the A.D. 70 doctrine does with “coming of the Lord” and “day of the Lord.”

The problem with limiting the coming of the Lord to 70 A.D. is demonstrated by at least three passages in the New Testament:

(1) Consider Acts 1:9-11, where angels tell the apostles that Jesus “shall so come in like manner as ye beheld him going into heaven” (v. 11, ASV). In what manner did Jesus go into heaven? Jesus ascended into heaven actually and personally, in his resurrected body (Lk. 24:39). In Acts 1:9-11, five words are used which emphasize that actual sight was involved on this occasion. His apostles “were looking” as Jesus was taken up (v. 9). A cloud received Jesus “out of their sight” (v. 9). The apostles were “looking steadfastly into heaven” when two men in white appeared to them (v. 10). These messengers asked the apostles, “Why stand ye looking into heaven?” (v. 11) And finally, the apostles were assured that Jesus would return in like manner as they had “beheld him”‘ going into heaven (v. 11). The apostles actually saw Jesus’ bodily ascension. This is the manner in which he will return (1 Thess. 4:16-17). Jesus did not come in bodily form, nor was he personally seen io the events of the coming of the kingdom (Matt. 16:28; Jn. 14:18), the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. (Matt. 24:30), or in the defeat of the persecuting powers of Revelation 1:7. Christ’s personal, bodily return is yet future!

(2) Next, consider 2 Peter 3:5-7, 10-11, where the A.D 70 advocate “spiritualizes” away the meaning of the word of God. By his word, God created and then destroyed the world with water. By that same word of God, the heavens and earth which now exist are stored up for fire, awaiting a day of judgment against ungodliness.

For this they wilfully forget, that there were heavens from of old, and an earth compacted out of water and amidst water, by the word of God; by which means the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished: but the heavens that now are, and the earth, by the same word have been stored up for fire, being reserved against the day of judgment and destruction and ungodly men. . . . But the day of the Lord will come as a thief; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall be dissolved with fervent heat, and the earth and the works that are therein shall be burned up (2 Pet. 3:5-7,11).

The A.D. 70 advocates try to make the heavens and earth (v. 7, 10), which shall meet a fiery end, the Jewish economy (as do the Jehovah’s Witnesses). But, this is to no avail. The world which was overflowed with water is now stored up for fire. This fiery judgment shall occur on “the day of the Lord” (v. 10), as his “coming” (v. 4). Was the world of Noah’s time actually flooded? Then the world which now -exists shall actually be destroyed wit h fire! If this verse had been fulfilled in 70 A.D., none of us would be here!

The abuse of this passage illustrates the error in biblical interpretation which is present in this system of error. As D.R. Dungan notes:

Many seem disposed to regard themselves as at liberty to make anything out of the Bible which their theology may demand or their whims require. And if, at any time, they find a passage that will not harmonize with that view, then the next thing is to find one or more words in the text used elsewhere in a figurative sense, and then demand that such be the Biblical dictionary on the meaning of that word, and hence that it must be the meaning in that place (Hermeneutics, p. 217).

The A.D. 70 doctrine attempts this with “the day of the Lord” and his “coming” in 2 Peter 3:4-11, but it finds no support here!

(3) 1 Corinthians 15 teaches a future, bodily resurrection from the dead. While the A.D. 70 doctrine says the resurrection is past already (having occurred in 70 A.D.), this passage decisively refutes that claim. To the Realized Eschatologist, the primary meaning of 1 Corinthians 15 is the resurrection of Christianity out of Judaism, not the resurrection of mankind at the personal return of Jesus Christ. To briefly set forth their case, hear Max King on what is resurrected in 1 Corinthians 15:

“Next (1 Cor. 15:35-44 – jp), Paul answers questions concerning how the dead are raised and with what body they come forth. The primary application (emp., jp) deals with the development and rise of the Christian system itself, with a secondary application belonging to believers and their state within the system. The natural body that was sown (verse 44) answers to the fleshly or carnal system of Judaism in which existed prophecies, types, and patterns from which came the spiritual body designed of God. . . . The natural body (emp., King’s), receiving its death blow at the cross and beginning then to wax old and decay (Heb. 8:13), became a nursery or seed-body for the germination, growth, and development of the spiritual body by means of the gospel.

“Thus, out of the decay of Judaism arose the spiritual body of Christianity (emp., jp) that became fully developed or resurrected by the end-time. Hence, this is the primary meaning of Paul’s statement (emp., jp), ‘It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body and there is a spiritual body'” (The Spirit of Prophecy, pp. 199-200).

The assumed definitions and applications in that quotation alone show the subjective nature of this doctrine! The Scriptures are twisted to say what has already been decided, namely, that Christianity arose out of Judaism, an event which we are told was completed in 70 A.D.! I cannot think of a better illustration of 2 Peter 3:15-17! Can you?

In 1 Corinthians 15, Paul answers the teaching by some “that there is no resurrection of the dead” (v. 12). He does this by first establishing the validity of the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ (vv. 14 1). Then, he presents the consequences of denying the resurrection of the dead (vv. 12-34). Next, he anticipates objections of bodily resurrection (vv. 35-50). Finally, he praises the victory over death God gives us in Christ through the resurrection (vv. 51-58). The very thing defined in this chapter is denied by the A.D. 70 doctrine, namely, a future, bodily resurrection] To demonstrate this as the central theme of the chapter, consider w. 20-23. Here, the bodily resurrection of all mankind is said to be based upon the bodily resurrection of Christ! The resurrected Christ is the first fruits of the dead (vv. 20,23). The offering of first fruits under the law of Moses was the choicest and earliest ripe crop (Num. 18:12; Exod. 23:16,19), indicating that all the crop which followed belonged to God (cf. Deut. 26:2-11). Also, we should note that the crop which followed was of the same kind or type as its first fruits. In like manner, the resurrection of Christ from the dead is an assurance and guarantee that all who die shall be raised. And, we are assured that our resurrection will be the same kind as his. As surely as bodily death come to all because of Adam’s sin (Gen. 3:19), bodily resurrection will come to all because of Christ’s bodily resurrection (vv. 21-22). This reveals his power and preeminence over death (cf. Jn. 5:28-29; Col. 1:18; Rev. 1:18). Thus, Paul defends the doctrine of bodily resurrection from the dead upon the basis of Christ’s bodily resurrection. The later fruit (resurrection of all the dead at Christ’s coming) must be the same of fruit as the first fruits, namely, bodily resurrection! Jesus’ body was raised from the dead, and our bodies shall be raised, too. Nowhere do we discover a Judaism-Christianity contrast in 1 Corinthians 15. That can only be found in the imagination of the A.D. 70 advocates!

The attempt to assign to 70 A.D. every end-time event (including the final coming of Christ, bodily resurrection and the judgment) cannot be supported by Scripture. It is completely refuted by Acts 1:9-11, 2 Peter 3:1-11, and 1 Corinthians 15. But, why this fascination with the date of 70 A.D.? In out next article, we will see the answer to that question.

Guardian of Truth XXXIII: 19, pp. 592-594
October 5, 1989