March 1996

1) War Against the Family
2) Disney: Pocahontas
3) Book Review: The Rapture Plot

The Strengthened State

     The Lord is strict in Lev 18 chapter to protect the family. The first part of Lev 18 dealt with inner-family evils; now the Lord deals with evil from outside the family, vv. 20-23. Significantly, there appears to be almost as many laws protecting the family unit as there are protecting the relationship with the Lord. Moreover, note there are no laws protecting the state. MY! HOW FAR WE HAVE COME FROM GOD’S WORD.

     What is happening?

     It is easy, therefore, to see what is going on around us. As the family disintegrates, the state is strengthened. Hence, it is to the state’s advantage to not only permit activities that weaken and destroy the family, e.g., drugs, pornography, abortion, but the state might even lead in destroying the family unit, e.g., antichrist [statists] education of all kinds - sex education; drug education; sodomite education in "alternate life-styles;" rebellion education, call this number if you feel your parents abuse you; death education, visit the funeral home and write your own obituary [then we wonder why so many suicides among young people]; teaching facts without God, which only makes man more effective in his rebellion against God; teaching the THEORY of evolution that man is simply an animal walking upright. Other areas of state sponsored and financed measures to destroy the family include: a welfare system that pays for children out of wedlock; a tax system that penalizes marriage; laws that support and encourage sodomy and murder/abortion, and an endless list of other anti-family "laws" and activities not only condoned by, but sponsored by the state in its war against God.

     The enemy of all righteousness is neither asleep nor loafing on the job. He is alert to every opportunity to move against God wherever man ignores the Word of God. We will mention that he has the God-given authority to take over areas forsaken by Christians, 2 Ti 2:26, &c. In other words, he knows that the Kingdom of God on earth is built on strong family units, or the Lord God would not have made such a big issue of the family; he knows that the Lord emphasized and strengthened the family, not the state; he knows that a strong, oppressive state depends on weak families; he knows the desires of carnal men [see Rom 8:7, the minding of the flesh, marg and 1 Cor 3:1-3], and if he can make sin convenient and attractive, family members will follow after evil, undermining the family. He knows the Word of God and that the result of families weakened by sin will be just as the Lord promised in 1 Sam 8: a strengthened, oppressive state, a "One World Government" if you please. Strong Christian family units (as defined in places such as Lev 18, Eph 6 and Col 3) are the major obstacles to rebuilding Babel. Thus the all out attack against Biblical family unit.

     Have you noticed the consistent, open attack against Godly family relations on prime-time TV sitcoms? The warfare against Godly family units could not be more open: It is everywhere one turns. Sadly, Christians either do not know there is a war going on, or they ignore the fact there is a war: They live and act like Christianity is a shot of immunity against the vain words and philosophies of evil men; they seem to feel (presume)that as Christians they can willingly and knowingly expose themselves and their children to antichrist words and philosophies from various sources with God’s protection.

Eph 5:6, 7 Let no man deceive you with vain words: for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience. {disobedience: or, unbelief} Be not ye therefore partakers with them.

     In Ephesians chapter 5, Paul not only gives laws to protect the family, but he speaks against several more things that will fit into the context of the family: covetousness, foolish talking, inconvenient jesting and general uncleanness. In vv. 6, 7, he points out that the wrath of God cometh upon the children of disobedience, and that Christians are not to partake of the mentioned sins. The warning is that if Christians fail to keep the laws protecting the inner man and the family unit, God will move against them; 1 Sam 8 tells us that He moves against the sins of His people through strong, oppressive civil authorities.

     Remember Balaam and Balak? Balak, King of Moab, saw that God’s people, having defeated the Amorites, were too strong for him, so he hired Balaam to curse Israel, Numbers 22-24. Unable to curse God’s people to give Moab the upper hand on the battle field, Balaam taught Balak how to weaken God’s people from within, so God’s hand would be against His own people, Rev 2:14. [See also Num 31:16; Mic 6:5; 2 Pet 2:15; Jude 11.] Balaam taught Balak to weaken Israel’s family unit by sending Moab’s women among them, Num 25. [V. 3, and the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel. One can only imagine how Moab’s females looked and acted in order to attract Israel’s men to them. Notice that the attractive females on the sitcoms are the ones taking the lead in seducing the males; the sitcoms make it appear that such seductions are simply a natural part of life, as are sodomite "relationships."]

     Thus Israel of old illustrates what Paul meant in Eph 5:6 & 7, when he said that the wrath of God cometh upon the children of disobedience. The enemy knew then and he knows now that if he can undermine the family unit, he has God’s hand against His own people.

     Building Churches

     My wife and I attended a funeral of a beloved friend, a college instructor who introduced us several years ago. At the funeral, I overheard one pastor tell another about his goal to build a church and his need to increase by 10 families a year. The two then discussed building churches. The phrase catching and retaining my attention was, "build a church." What, may we ask, has happened to building families and building up people in the Word of God and faith? Maybe it was just a phrase, or maybe the pastor really meant what he said, but we all know of churches that try to have something for the family every night of the week. They even borrow huge sums of money to build "family centers." What is wrong with making the home the "family center?" The excuse we encounter is, "Well, they will just stay home and watch TV, so we try to give them something godly to do here on the premises." Maybe if individuals and families were built up in the Word of God and the Christian faith, we would not have to worry about what they do at home. Has the "megachurch" become as much an enemy of the Godly family unit as are "sitcoms?"

     "Building churches" means that the messages from the pulpit must consistently be motivational and/or evangelistic, viz., the pressure is always on to get the 10 new families, or the goal (mortgage payment!!) will not be met. Families are used, consequently, to build the church, rather than the church used to build families in the Christian faith. The pressure is on, so there is little or no time, motivation nor energy to systematically teach God’s Word.

     Balaam taught Balak to move against the Christian family, i.e.,Israel, and then God Himself would move against His people. This pastor personally knows of churches that appear to be well instructed by Balak: The churches themselves move to destroy the family by providing something every night for every member of the family, encouraging each member to go his or her own way to do his or her own thing.

     Numbers 25, however, did not leave God’s people in the hands of the enemy: The sin was dealt with by God’s appointed judges exercising righteous judgment according to the Word of the Lord, v. 5. Then the chapter closes with the Lord’s command to vex those who worked to destroy the family. God’s people were commanded to be hostile toward the Midianites, and smite them. The reason is given in v. 18, For they vex you with their wiles... Thus God’s people were told to war against those working to destroy the family by teaching Israel to commit fornication.

     Notice the next chapter, Num 26, opens with the people preparing for war. The weakened family strengthened the enemy’s hand, but when the sin was dealt with, God’s people were strengthened.

     Though Paul did not tell God’s people to smite the promoters of the destruction of the family, he certainly did command they beware and even avoid where possible those working and teaching against the Christian family unit, Col 2:8; 1 Ti 1:6; 6:20; 2 Ti 2:16; Tit 1:10; 3:9, &c.

     Sad to say, however, the TV shows militating against the Christian family unit are the top rated shows, and the churches attempting to replace the family, urging the family to build around the church, are the churches that are, as a rule, attracting the families. Can we complain about the strengthened state that militates against the family when we tolerate and support "Christian" works that strengthen themselves by undermining the family?

     The Lord Jehovah gave an abundance of laws pertaining to, and protecting/strengthening the family. One will not find one law where the church or state is strengthen at the expense of the family. Notice, furthermore, that midst the laws in Lev 18 protecting the family is found v. 21:

"And thou shalt not let any of thy seed pass through the fire to Molech, neither shalt thou profane the name of thy God: I am the LORD. {Molech: Gr. Moloch}

     John Gill, 1696-1771, makes this important point long before the modern state as we know it:

Ver. 21. And thou shalt not let any of thy seed pass through the fire to Molech, &c.] The name of an image or idol, according to Aben Ezra, who observes, that their wise men interpret it as a general name for everyone whom they made to reign over them; and it is right, he says, that it is the abomination of the children of Ammon, and so the same with Milcom, 1Ki 11:5; and with Baal, as appears from Jer 32:35; and they are both of much the same signification, the one signifies a king, the other a lord; and perhaps is the same with the Melicarthus of Sanchoniatho {y}, who is also Hercules; to whom Pliny says {z} that the Phoenicians offered human sacrifices every year: of Molech,...

     because the word "fire" is not in the original text, some, as Aben Ezra observes, explain the phrase, "let to pass through", of their causing them to pass from the law of God to the religion of Molech, or of devoting them to his service and worship; but the word "fire" is rightly supplied, as it may be from #De 18:10; and the same writer says, the phrase to pass through is the same as to burn; but though this they sometimes did, even burn their infants, and sacrificed them to idols, 2Ch 28:3 Ps 106:37,38 Eze 16:20,21; yet this seems to be something short of that, and to be done in the manner, as Jarchi and other Jewish writers {a} relate; who say, the father delivered his son to the priests (of Molech) and they made two great fires, and caused the son to pass on foot between the two fires, which was a kind of a lustration, and so of a dedication of them to the idol; though it must be owned that both were done; yea, that both the phrases of passing through the fire, and of burning, are used promiscuously of the same, see 2Ki 16:3; compared with 2Ch 28:3 and also Eze 16:20,21; and they might be both done at different times, or the one previous and in order to the other; and perhaps they might cause the child so often and so long to pass through the fire, as that at last it was burnt and destroyed:

neither shall thou profane the name of thy God; who had given them children, and to whom they ought to have devoted them, and in whose service they should have trained them up to the honour of his name; but instead of that profaned it, by the above idolatrous and cruel usages:

"I am the Lord; who would avenge such a profanation of his name."

[{y} Apud, Euseb. Praepar. Evangel. l. 1. p. 38. {z} Nat. Hist. l. 36. c. 5. {a} Ben Melech in loc. Kimchii Sepher Shorash. rad. Klm.]
It is interesting that v. 21 is placed in the midst of the laws protecting the family.

     Fire to Molech... Could mean a literal fire into which children were cast, seemingly the standard understanding. But also, Molech, according to both Gill and the Treasury of Scriptural Knowledge, "signifies a king, or governor, or similar import with Baal, lord, or governor..." [Online Bible, CDROM, v. 6.30.]

     V. 21 is placed in the midst of the laws concerning the family; therefore, the law in v. 21 further protects the family: It clearly protects the family’s children from being turned over to the pagan gods, e.g., the state, education, mammon, religion, &c.

     Vv. 24-28, iniquity done in secret cries out to God for public vengeance, for the land to "spew out" its inhabitance:

     What evil there is in lukewarmness in His sight may be inferred from the use of this expression in Rev. iii. 16- the very expression applied to the most abominable state of society that could be imagined! O man, are you pleasing the world? Are you content with a hope? Are you going as near as possible to the world? Are you a decent, moral, nay, highly-respected professor, who avoids being over-zealous? Satisfied with being, as you think, saved, though still unholy? Are you trying to gain both worlds? Are you thinking to walk on to heaven in a way that is scoffing world will not discover? Then, tremble! He will as assuredly spue thee out of His mouth as if thou hadst all the lusts of lustful Canaan! [Bonar]

     Accordingly, the terrible natural disasters taking place at the end of this present millennium are a result of the public acceptance of the glorified attacks against God’s order for the family; they are the God- promised results of the lukewarm Christianity and ungodly paganism that permeates our social order. Those who listen to Rush Limbaugh know that he continually, and rightly, "attacks" the lack of good morality in the Clinton Administration. But he, like most other people, lays the blame for America’s moral ills at the "top," giving the impression that if the lack of morality can be dealt with at the "top," the "bottom" will fall into line; however, that is not at all what the Word of God even implies.

     Certainly, God requires all authority to live Godly, but we see from Lev 18:24-30, that the previous laws were given to individuals, applying to EVERYONE who lived in the land, Israelite and non-Israelite alike—there could be no exceptions. The individuals were responsible to keep themselves pure. Notice, moreover, that individual, private, personal sins have national repercussions - God’s law controls what takes place in the bedroom: Prevalent private sins among the people, Christians and non Christians, result in national judgments - the land wars against its inhabitants. The Lord promises to judge the private evils of individuals; He promises to use the land to judge the evil. War against the family is war against God; war against God is war against God’s law; war against God’s law is war against God’s creation; God’s creation will win.

     The sins the Lord spoke against in this section were, evidently, common practice in both Egypt (where they just came from) and in Canaan- where they were headed. So to prepare His people for what they were about to face, the Lord gives what is found in Lev 18: He warns His people to remain free from the sins of the surrounding pagans, and He warns of the results if they do not heed the warning. We should point out that only by the grace of God will one remain free and above the mentioned sins.

     Either we will have strong families according to Lev 18, Eph 6 and Col 3, or we will have a strong state, attempting to be not only father and mother to every person in the world, but also the lord of the whole earth; furthermore, we will have a strong creation, warring against sinful man, e.g., several "100 year floods" within just a very short time.

     All society (church, state, work place, &c.) must protect, support and strengthen the family, or God Himself will move:

Eph 5:6, 7 Let no man deceive you with vain words: for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience. {disobedience: or, unbelief} Be not ye therefore partakers with them.

 

     Most of us quickly read over the Old Testament sacrificial laws with no thought of their significance for Christians, reading them simply because it is our "duty" as God’s people to read all of His Word. And, besides, we want to be able to tell everyone we read the Bible through once a year. But these passages contain great amounts of hid treasures of the Lord’s wisdom for those willing to slow down and seek, for out of these passages cometh knowledge, wisdom and understanding of the Lord, Pro 2:1-12. How can Christians expect to keep God’s paths of judgment, understanding righteousness, and equity; yea, every good path when they quickly skip over passages they find uninteresting?

     If God’s Old Testament ordinances pertaining to the remission of sin are not understood, then it is IMPOSSIBLE to understand the work of Christ for His people in the New Testament; it is IMPOSSIBLE, moreover, to understand the relationship of Christ and His followers to the Mosaic law. What do we think Paul was talking about in Ephesians 4:14 [That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive...]? Obviously, the teachers of v. 11, were teachers of the Old Testament Scripture, for there was no New Testament when Paul wrote to the church at Ephesus. Paul warns of the danger of people not being stablished in the faith of Christ as revealed in the Old Testament:

Col 2:6-8 And this I say, lest any man should beguile you with enticing words. For though I be absent in the flesh, yet am I with you in the spirit, joying and beholding your order, and the stedfastness of your faith in Christ. As ye have therefore received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk ye in him: Rooted and built up in him, and stablished in the faith, as ye have been taught, abounding therein with thanksgiving. Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.

     The faith in Christ that firmly established these people was faith in Christ as He was proclaimed from the Old Testament. The above passage in Colossians clearly tells us that those not rooted and built up in Christ (as revealed in the Old Testament) are in grave danger of being spoiled through philosophy and vain deceit and slick words. In fact, Paul warns the Roman Christians to mark those who try to separate the Old Testament Christ from a New Testament christ, (sic) for the Christ Whom Paul preaches is found in the Old Testament, Rom 16:17, 18. See also, 2 Cor 11:3, 4; Gal 1:6, 7; 3:1, &c.

     Those who despise the Old Testament Word of God no doubt deny the fact that Paul referred primarily to the Old Testament Word of God in 2 Tim 2:15-19. Paul tells Timothy that if he is not throughly equipped from the Old Testament Scripture, he is in danger of being caught up in profane and vain bablings, which will increase unto more ungodliness.

     Paul’s warning to Timothy is quite extensive, dominating both letters to Timothy. Actually, he identifies those who come in the last days preaching a soothing gospel of Christ without the Old Testament with Jannes and Jambres who withstood Moses, 3:8. These false teachers have corrupted the gospel of Christ as revealed through Moses. See also, Heb 13:9; 2 Pet 2; 1 Jo 2.

     The Ephesus Christians were equipped by the Old Testament Scripture to stand firm against the worship of Diana, Acts 19:24ff. Is it any wonder that "Christians" are following after the pagan gods around them when they have been removed from the primary source of strengthening doctrine, the Old Testament?

     One final word of introduction: The Apostle John warned God’s people to try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world, 1 John 4:1. The standard for trying the spirits was, as now, according to the Old Testament revelation of Christ.

     False doctrines, including extremely corrupt understandings of the gospel of Christ and of the Mosaic law, abound. If one will examine the followers of corrupt doctrines, he will find that many sincere folks follow them because they do not know nor understand the Word of God, i.e.,the truth the New Testament authors built upon, the Old Testament law of Moses, the prophets and the psalms, Luke 24:44-48. We will examine both laws, for they go hand in hand: the law of atonement and which of the Mosaic laws are fulfilled in Christ.

     One of the clearest Old Testament presentations of the doctrine of Christ and the law preached by men such as Paul is found in Lev 16. The offerings presented herein had to be made regularly for both the high priest and for the people. The New Testament gospel of the substitutionary death of Christ cannot be understood apart from these Old Testament sacrifices. Undeniably, when people are cut off from the Old Testament laws of atonement, they are easily led astray by false gospels such as, "Ask Jesus into your heart," "Turn your life over to God," "Yes, you must have faith in Christ, but you must also do...," &c.

     There have been many messages about the scapegoat, which we will not develop. What we do want to examine, however, is the offering for atonement. Evidently, the high priest made two trips into the holy place: one for his sins and one for the sins of the people. He was alone in the tabernacle of the congregation until the atoning offering was made. The New Testament has a great amount to say about the Lev 16 law placed upon Aaron and his sons after him,

Heb 2:17 Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto [his] brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things [pertaining] to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people.
Heb 5:3 And by reason hereof he ought, as for the people, so also for himself, to offer for sins.
Heb 6:19 Which [hope] we have as an anchor of the soul, both sure and stedfast, and which entereth into that within the veil;
Heb 9:3 And after the second veil, the tabernacle which is called the Holiest of all;
Heb 9:7 But into the second [went] the high priest alone once every year, not without blood, which he offered for himself, and [for] the errors of the people:
Heb 9:12 Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption [for us].
Heb 9:25 Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others;
Heb 9:26 For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.

     The Leviticus 16 requirement upon the high priest to present the blood of the sacrifice upon the altar and upon and before the mercy seat, vv. 15-19, is one of the clearest pictures of the work of Christ in Scripture; therefore, it is given in great detail. Moreover, this is one of the laws clearly fulfilled by Christ, no longer to be followed because of Him. In fact, following this law emphatically denies the Lord.

     There are those who look forward to another "dispensation" when this [Lev 16] and other sacrifices will be renewed in Israel. Yet the same group denies the validity of the 10 Commandments - they are no better than the Papist who desire to have literal offerings and sacrifices. Any hope of reimposed, renewed, carnal ordinances speaks of the work of the great deceiver. There are those who deny the validly of the moral law of God, i.e. the Ten Commandments, yet look forward with great anticipation to a supposed renewal of the ordinances that spoke of the coming work of Christ, which ordinances were done away with by Christ, Col 2:13, 14. We certainly find it amazingly strange that there are professed Bible Scholars, claiming to know Scripture, who say that Christ fulfilled (did away with) God’s moral and civil code, yet deny that Christ forever did away with the ordinances of the law - the sacrifices and offerings pointing to His finished work.

     Eph 2:15, defines ordinances as those things contained in the commandments that brought the sinner into fellowship with the Father, so making peace between the sinner and God; those things being the sacrifices and offerings that provided Old Testament atonement for the sinner, v. 14: For he, Jesus, is our peace. V. 16 clearly states that the law of the commandments done away with by the work of Christ was the law which reconciled man to God, the law contained in ordinances. The moral law NEVER reconciled man to God, nor was it meant to.

     V. 15, enmity, refers to the ceremonial law, which created enmity between:

     1) Christ and the law - it spoke of and pointed to Christ, and was, therefore, a friend of Christ. But after Christ came and did the work assigned to Him by the Father, that same law became His enemy. The law of commandments contained in ordinances clearly showed God’s hatred of Sin, requiring a blood sacrifice. [Gill] But after Christ, man sees God’s hatred of sin by what sin required of the Son in His blood sacrifice.

     2) the natural man and God - The natural man found that law a great burden and weariness to the flesh by its many and troublesome rites. [Gill] Christ did away with those rites.

     3) Jew and Gentile - It separated them into two distinct classes of people. All are now one in Christ.

     4) liberty and bondage - It was weak, deficient, unprofitable and beggarly, Gal 4:9. Christ provides liberty, but, obviously, that liberty is within the bounds of what is pleasing to the Spirit in word, thought and deed.

     5) God and man - It required a human priest to approach God, Lev 16. Christ became that High Priest, the only Mediator between God and man, 1 Ti 2:5. Christ reconciled Jews and Gentiles; Christ reconciled God and man, and so making peace through His blood, Col 1:20, Heb 13:20, &c. Eph 2:16, Christ reconciled divided mankind into one body, His body, the Church, Eph 4:4, Col 3:15, Rom 12:4, &c.

     However, the enemies of God and Christ contend that the enmity was between Christ and the law of the commandments, i.e., the Ten Commandments, which were subsequently abolished (antinomians insist) in Eph 2:15 by Christ’s work. But the antinomian heresy is not new. Tertullian [A.D. 145-220] confronted it almost two thousand years ago. Writing on Ep 2:15, he said:

     ... For the Creator’s righteousness no less than His peace was announced in Christ, as we have often shown already. Therefore he says: "He is our peace, who hath made both one" (2), that is, the Jewish nation and the Gentile world. What is near, and what was far off now that "the middle wall has been broken down" of their "enmity," (are made one) "in His flesh." (3) But Marcion erased the pronoun His, that he might make the enmity refer to flesh, as if (the apostle spoke) of a carnal enmity, instead of the enmity which was a rival to Christ. (4) And thus you have (as I have said elsewhere) exhibited the stupidity of Pontus, rather than the adroitness of a Marrucinian, (5) for you here deny him flesh to whom in the verse above you allowed blood! Since, however, He has made the law obsolete (6) by His own precepts, even by Himself fulfilling the law (for superfluous is, "Thou shalt not commit adultery," when He says, "Thou shalt not look on a woman to lust after her;" superfluous also is, "Thou shalt do no murder," when He says, "Thou shalt not speak evil of thy neighbour,") it is impossible to make an adversary of the law out of one who so completely promotes it. (7) "For to create (8) in Himself of twain," for He who had made is also the same who creates (just as we have found it stated above: "For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus"), (9) "one new man, making peace" (really new, and really man- no phantom - but new, and newly born of a virgin by the Spirit of God), "that He might reconcile both unto God" (10) (even the God whom both races had offended - both Jew and Gentile), "in one body," says he, "having in it slain the enmity by the cross." (11) Thus we find from this passage also, that there was in Christ a fleshly body, such as was able to endure the cross. "When, therefore, He came and preached peace to them that were near and to them which were afar off, (we both obtained) access to the Father, " Being "now no more strangers and foreigners, but fellow-citizens with the saints, and of the household of God" (even of Him from whom, as we have shown above, we were aliens, and placed far off), "built upon the foundation of the apostles" (12) (the apostle added), "and the prophets;" these words, however, the heretic erased, forgetting that the Lord had set in His Church not only apostles, but prophets also... [Fathers, III.467. CDROM.]

     The whole of Eph 2 explains how the work of Christ fulfilled all the things of the law that provided for atonement, cf. Lev 16:15ff, He 9:7ff., &c.

     Observe Hebrews chapters 9 & 10:

     1) 9:1, the major theme of these two chapters is the first covenant as revealed in ordinances (ceremonies, marg.) of divine service. That is to say, the rites, rituals, ceremonies, offerings and sacrifices as pertaining to the worldly sanctuary that was built according to God’s commands to Moses in the wilderness.

     2) 9:2ff., all the things which took place in that worldly tabernacle, the meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances (rights, or, ceremonies, marg.) were no more than a figure for that which was to come, Christ, vv. 9-11.

     3) 9:10, God’s plan was to only impose the ceremonies commanded through Moses upon man until the time of reformation, Christ.
Reformation: "1) in a physical sense, a making straight, restoring to its natural and normal condition something which in some way protrudes or has got out of line, as broken or misshapen limbs; 2) of acts and institutions, reformation." [Used only this one time in the New Testament.]

     They (the Mosaic rites, ceremonies, &c.) were a very imperfect way of restoring the fellowship with Jehovah God that Adam lost through his disobedience. Furthermore, Christ restored all creation, including mankind, to the way it was meant to be, i.e., willing, joyful, obedient servants of Jehovah God. The actual complete reformation has not yet been accomplished, but it will, 1 Cor 15:27, 27 [For he hath put all things under his feet...].

     4) 9:14, the sacrifice of Christ did what the imperfect blood sacrifices of the law could not do: purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God.

     5) 9:25, 26, whereas the Old Testament high priest was commanded by God to enter many times into the worldly sanctuaryonce a year actually, and make the sacrifice often, Christ only made one sacrifice and entered one time into the heavenly holy place.

     6) 9:26, in the end of the world: the end of the Hebrew world as represented by ordinances - the shedding of the blood of bulls and goats for the remission of sin. Christ came once at the end of the Hebrew world, and He will come again at the end of time, v. 28.

     7) 10:1, The law refers to the ordinances, requiring the shedding of the blood of sacrifices as commanded through Moses in the worldly sanctuary. This law’s only connection to the moral law commanded through Moses is that the moral law revealed the helpless, sinful nature of man and his need for a blood sacrifice to atone for his sins. 10:10, The moral law never did nor does it now sanctify the lost sinner before God: Only the blood sacrifice could/can do that, and Christ’s blood sacrifice dealt with the problem once and for all.

     8) 10:2ff., because the Old Testament sinner could only find atonement for (not removal of) his sins, he could not find a clear conscience. Only the work of Christ in our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, 10:22.

     9) 10:12, 13, Christ’s enemies will be conquered from heaven. 10:16, tells us that the means of conquering those who are at war against the God of Heaven is by the sword, the Spirit of God using the Word of God, writing His laws into their hearts, and in their minds. The work of Christ, applied by faith by the Holy Spirit, causes their past sins and iniquities to be removed forever.

     Thus Christ fulfilled what the prophets foretold: He fulfilled all the carnal ordinances that spoke of His work to come, doing away with them forever, and Christ fulfilled (kept) all the moral law as given in the Commandments, thus enabling His people to keep the moral law, 1 John.

     Yes, He did away with the law, i.e., the law concerning the meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances imposed upon God’s people through Moses. But those things were only imposed until the time of Christ and His reformation. Any effort whatsoever to impose any kind of carnal ordinance upon mankind in the name of "the God of the Bible" clearly and firmly denies Christ: It is the spirit of the antichrist.

     One may rightly say: "OK, so the moral laws of God are still in effect. How do commands such as Thou shalt not kill apply to abortionists and to the parents who kill their unborn children? How does Thou shalt not steal apply to the IRS?" Developing the implications of these laws into current social situations is a responsibility not only of pastor-teachers, but it is a responsibility of every Child of God. Each person will answer to his own master, and no one will answer in his or her place: How did each as an individual Christian study and develop God’s Word in each area of his or her life and thought? God does not speak and lead everyone along the same road though the general law applies to everyone. In other words, theft of individual property is always wrong, but the proper response to that theft by the one being stolen from could well be different in each individual’s life, and each individual still please the Lord.

First, failure to understand the atoning sacrifices, such as commanded in Lev 16, permits many false gospels to creep in, which are no gospels. Undeniably, when people are cut off from the Old Testament laws of atonement, they are easily led astray by false gospels such as, "Ask Jesus into your heart," "Turn your life over to God," "Yes, you must have faith in Christ, but you must also do...," &c.

     The gospel of Christ preached by the first evangelists, Paul, John, Matthew, Luke, &c., was very simple: Trust Christ and His substitutionary payment for your sins just as the Old Testament saints had to trust that the blood sacrifices atoned for their sins:

     Try to fit the idea of "Ask Jesus into your heart" into the law of the atoning sacrifice of the Old Testament. Did the Lord tell the people to ask the bullock ot come into their heart or to turn their lives over tho the bullock? The only thing which will work according to the OT sacrificial law is trust in the sinless sacrifice to pay the sin debt in the place of the repentant sinner. All of the Lord’s statements (such as John 3) must be viewed in the light of the OT sacrificial law. [The OTHER jesus - THE GOSPEL PERVERTED, by this writer. We desire to get as many of this little booklet out to "Christian" leaders as possible. The corrupt gospel offered in the ACE curriculum motivated this little booklet several years ago. Order a supply.]

vImplicit in this justification is the substitutionary sacrifice for sin sincerely offered as noted in Ps 51:16-19. The righteousness of God’s heirs of salvation is the righteousness of the Messiah attributed to them by God through faith in the redemptive work of Messiah in which God declares them righteous only because of the grace provided through that redemptive work. [Theological Word Book of the Old Testament, 755, Moody Press.]

     The removal of the Old Testament from man’s rule of life allowed many foolish and hurtful doctrines to invade the Church. The most devastating effect, obviously, was cutting off the meaning and implications of the atoning sacrifice of Christ from its roots in the Mosaic law, allowing all kinds of false "gospels" (which falsely assure of salvation) to proliferate.

     Second, failure to understand the atoning sacrifices, such as commanded in Lev 16, permits antinomian heresies to prevail, saying that the law that was done away with by the work of Christ was everything delivered to Moses at the mount, rather than only the ordinances speaking of the coming work of Christ. The division (destruction) of God’s Word permitted J.N. Darby to say,

[W]e are not under law but under grace. We do not sin because we have died with Christ... The absolutely clear and perfect light is found in the New Testament alone; but the Old, if we have learned to distinguish between the dispensation under which the saints lived in those times, furnishes very fine examples of faith... [Letters of J.N. Darby, II.108, 109. From London, 1870.]

     The sad thing is that professed Christians gladly accepted what he promoted around the world.

     As a concluding note: This pastor finds it extremely inconsistent that there are those who deny the validly of the book of Hebrews for non- Hebrews- Gentiles. Yet many of those same people contend that one day the Hebrew nation (if such a thing exists) will reconstruct a worldly sanctuary and impose again the carnal ordinances of the Old Testament law and sacrifices. How inconsistent can one get? On one hand, they deny the validity of Hebrews to non-Hebrews, and on the other, they deny the validity of Hebrews to Hebrews by insisting on (and, yes, even financing) a rebuilt worldly sanctuary.

     How can we expect God to act toward a "Christianity" that blatantly denies the finished work of Christ for both "Jews and Gentiles," expecting, in many cases, the Lord Jesus Christ to place His blessings upon a renewed sacrifice?

     Christians must study all of God’s Word to show themselves approved unto God: If they do not study the seemingly insignificant laws and precepts in passages such as Lev 16, they will be led astray by the smooth words of those who despise the total of God’s Word.

     Disney’s new film Pocahontas has a "pantheistic, environmentalist worldview mixing New Age thinking and Native American animistic religious beliefs," according to Movieguide. Grandmother Willow- an ancient talking tree that speaks only to those whose hearts are pure, tells Pocahontas that sacred spirits fill the earth, rocks, wind, sky, plants, and creatures. Disney has ignored her life’ s most controversial event - she converted to Christianity, took the name Rebecca, then married John Rolfe, and soon afterward died of smallpox during a visit to England (Christian News, 7/17/95). [Folks who have seen the film report there are subtle whispers telling Pocahontas to take here cloths off.]

     In other news from Disney, AFA says that the use of the "f" word by Donald Duck in a children’s cartoon is "very sick humor" and that the cartoon should be pulled by the Walt Disney Company. "That Disney would promote this kind of language to small children is very sick humor," said Donald E. Wildmon, president of AFA.

     WDIV-TV reporter Emory King in Detroit first broke the story of the popular Disney cartoon character using profanity. Wildmon said he did not believe the story until AFA secured a video and listened to the dialogue. AFA says Disney should pull the video from stores nationwide. Wal-Mart, the nation’s largest retailer, has already pulled the video. Ken Green at Disney’s corporate communications office in Burbank, California, told AFA that he was unaware of the allegations.

     Wildmon said that the cartoon is part of the Walt Disney Cartoon Classics series entitled "Fun On the Job." The particular segment where the profanity occurs is entitled "Clock Cleaners." When the clock Donald Duck is working on comes to life and begins to taunt him, the famous Disney character responds: "F"- you!"

     "This is simply another incident where Disney has signed their work with an obscenity," Wildmon said. "The best thing parents can do is to stay away from Disney products."

     AFA says the use of the "f" word in the Donald Duck cartoon is only the latest in a growing list of anti-family incidents by the company that has long been a stalwart of family entertainment. The company has recently extended insurance benefits to live-in homosexual partners while denying benefits to unmarried heterosexual couples; has welcomed the observance of a gay-pride day at its theme parks; has distributed several sexually explicit and anti-Christian films; and has promoted cruise and theme park vacations that involve alcohol use and gambling. In addition, Disney allowed a convicted child molester to direct its recent movie Powder.

     AFA, along with other organizations, is promoting a boycott of Disney products and theme parks. [AFA JOURNAL, MARCH, 1996. PO Drawer 2440, Tupelo, MS 38803. Sadly, Disney has become a major producer of films that intentionally undermine Christianity and the family. Disney will become much worse since it has bought a major network. He is now probably the biggest promoter of sodomy and immoral behavior in the entertainment industry - as many as 40% of Disney’s 63,000 employes are sodomites, ed. IT IS NOT THE DISNEY WE GREW UP WITH]]

     There are many books on the market that do excellent jobs tracing the history of what has been called, "Fundamentalism," as propagated by Brethren teachers such as H.A. Ironside, W.E. Vine and C.H. Mackintosh- Loizeaux Brothers could be considered the "official" publishers of Brethren material, and popularized by men such as D.L. Moody and C.I. Scofield. In an extremely well documented book, "The Rapture Plot," Dave MacPherson, by researching the original British documents, traces the origin of modern millenarianism - which centers around teaching of a "secret rapture of the saints," a "church/Israel ‘distinction,’" and a "literal rather than figurative or spiritualized fulfillments" of prophecy. [Plot, 198, Roots, 13. We have provided some other facts and sources that also document what MacPherson is presenting, filling in some blank places.]

     MacPherson shows that the ideas did not originate with the Brethren though the Brethren tried desperately (plotted) to cover up the source and credit Darby with the new ideas, hence, "The Rapture Plot." After all, how many men are willing to admit they are following a woman’s teaching given while she was in a trance? [Plot, 93.]

     As early as 1825, Edward Irving was "declaring that the ‘first- fruits’ are ‘gathered before the harvest which immediately precedeth (sic) the treading of the wine-press of wrath.’" [T]he Irvingites clearly taught pretrib as early as September 1830. [Plot, 199, 151.] The reader might be interested to know that after Irving was locked out of his Presbyterian Church in 1832 where tongues and "supernatural" healings first occurred, he founded the Catholic Apostolic Church with "Drummond, Cardale, Taplin, and about eight hundred others..."[Who Was Who, 211.] Irving was an extremely popular British speaker: As he traveled the land, his prophetic views drew great crowds.

     Darby did not come out of the Church of England until 1827, and Irving was already teaching the basic doctrine latter claimed by Darby. "[E]arlier 19th century writers had uniformly agreed that pretrib was Irvingism’s important contribution and hallmark..." William Kelly (1820-1906), with Darby’s permission, edited, (actually, revised) Darby’s works to make them read as though the millenarian ideas were new with Darby:

1. The Irvingites publicly taught a pretribulation rapture long before Darby did.

2. The underlying "truths" (such as the church/Israel dichotomy) that supposedly led Darby to pretrib were taught earlier by others, one of whom was led to pretrib by these "truths." The same "truths" were used for support only after pretrib was established. The Irvingites were led to pretrib by Old Testament and New Testament symbols including the Jewish feasts, the two witnesses, and the man child - symbols adopted by Darby latter on.

3. If Darby had been the first to clearly teach pretrib or "truths" leading to it, he would have had no need to overstate his earliest development when reminiscing in later years.

     Later 19th century scholars, aware that Irvingism never needed later reminiscences to "clarify" its own early development, uniformly credited the Irvingites with dispensationalism’s chief features including the pretrib rapture.

          4. Twentieth century Darby defenders, evidently dissatisfied with Darby’s att..

['Document Archive']   ['Home Page']   ['The Biblical Examiner']