January 2010
New article: One Reliable Sign of the End
Jan 30, 2010 · Posted in America Babylon, Resurrection 12 CommentsMore Bible Secrets
digg this
reddit this
Furl thisMark of the Beast: Literal or Sunday Worship?
Jan 15, 2010 · Posted in Bible, Prophecy, SabbathWhy People Fail to Understand Revelation (or the Bible)
When I was younger, I struggled to understand the Book of Revelation. It was so fascinating and cryptic that I longed to peek behind the veil of its sealed language. But I could not and nobody could help me.
Today, I do understand it very well and I consequently know why I failed to understand before. I had not learned back then that most of the Bible is more literal than we ever imagined. To read literal passages allegorically will lead you to wrong conclusions every time.
But it gets worse. These wrong conclusions will cloud your understanding of still other passages, kind of like a spreading infection. The false views you hold constantly contradict any true interpretations you think of or come across. Because you view truths as wrong, you reject or disregard them. As a result, you are unable to truly understand any of the deeper teachings or mysteries of the Bible properly. This includes the mysterious Book of Revelation.
The Mark of Beast and the Mark of Torah
Revelation’s Mark of the Beast is a good and instructive example in this regard.
Revelation 13:16-17 (HCSB) 16 And he requires everyone—small and great, rich and poor, free and slave—to be given a mark on his right hand or on his forehead, 17 so that no one can buy or sell unless he has the mark: the beast’s name or the number of his name.
This seems straightforward. A mark consisting of a name or number on either your forehead or right hand. The mark will serve kind of like a credit card does today. Without it you cannot buy or sell everything you want. For example, you cannot rent a car or good hotel room without a credit card.
However, how does your view of Revelation 13’s mark change when you incorporate these verses:
Exodus 13:9 (HCSB) Let it serve as a sign for you on your hand and as a reminder on your forehead, so that the Lord’s instruction may be in your mouth; for the Lord brought you out of Egypt with a strong hand.
Deuteronomy 6:8 (HCSB) Bind them as a sign on your hand and let them be a symbol on your forehead.
It is because of these commands that Orthodox Jews put phylacteries or little Torah scroll boxes and straps on their forehead and hands. That’s a literal interpretation. Yet, most instead see this verse as an injunction by God to make his instructions tied to your thought and your actions always.
Mark of the Beast: Spiritual Mark?
Don’t these verses sound similar to Revelation? They associate God’s commands with the forehead and hand. This can cause you to question your literal view of Revelation’s mark. Perhaps it is not a literal mark, but it is a spiritual mark. Perhaps the mark really represents obeying the commands of the Beast in place of God’s commands?
At least that’s what the Seventh Day Adventist church teaches. They consider the mark of the beast to be symbolic. The symbolic meaning to them is a law to keep Sunday, or “Sunday Law”. Of course, they are the biggest Christian group that believes we are required to keep a Saturday Sabbath. They believe keeping Sunday instead of Sabbath is a serious sin before God.
The SDA interpretation looks reasonable especially with its “let the Bible interpret the Bible” methodology. Yet we will see that it is no accident they spiritualize the mark as they do. Their Sabbath view helps them to gloss over some important differences between the marks of Revelation and Exodus.
Mark of the Beast: Literal Mark
Here’s the main problem with equating Exodus 13:9 with Revelation 13:16. Exodus is taking an abstract thing (God’s instructions) and asking them to be “frontlets”, a “sign” or a “memorial” between the eyes and the hand. The most reasonable way to view this is figuratively as a command to always think and do according to God’s instructions. It is not practical or useful to fit a tiny Torah scroll on those body parts and go around with them in the way all the time.
Revelation, on the other hand, is taking a physical thing (a mark on the skin) and specifying where it can be located on the body. Indeed, all incidences of “mark” in the contexts of Revelation treat it as a physical and visible thing that you receive from the False Prophet. Visibility is required for the mark to work in commerce. One cannot look at you and tell if you kept Sunday when deciding whether to sell you food.
Notice also that Exodus 13:9 does not says “right” hand. Exodus does not specify which hand because it would be odd to do this when either hand is associated with work or action.
Further, in Revelation the mark is always a “mark” on the skin. It is not sometimes a sign, a frontlet, or a “mark” like God’s commandments are characterized by the Torah itself. Revelation 13 even specifies the mark as the name or number of the beast. Names and numbers are commonly written down. They would even fit on a person’s forehead or skin. The definition of the mark as the name or number of the Beast hurts the SDA view. This plain explanation of the mark contradicts assigning any other explanation to it. Their case would be better if the mark was left ambiguous by Revelation. But it is not.
Thus, when we allegorize the mark as “deciding to rest on Sunday instead of Saturday”, we are choosing to ignore the most natural and reasonable interpretation of the mark of the beast. The mark is a mark on the skin consisting of the name or number of the beast.
So why choose the weaker allegorized interpretation. There must be some other benefit to the weaker view in order to choose it. For SDA’s this false view supports their Sabbath-keeping doctrine. It puts some additional importance and fear behind their teaching. I can imagine them thinking that by keeping sabbath today, they are antichrist-proofing themselves.
Conclusion
Only a sabbath-keeping religion would come up with the idea that the mark of the beast will be “keeping Sunday instead of Saturday”. This interpretation presupposes that sabbath is required by God and by not keeping it you are sinning before God. However, the sabbath was part of the Old Covenant made with the nation of Ancient Israel. SDAs rip this single command out of its original national context and transplant it upon believers today scattered outside the land of the Torah. Ignoring the context of a verse is not the way to to get to “the truth no matter what it says”, as our goal should be.
This goes back to my original point. When you have even one wrong doctrine (e.g. “sabbath is required”), it will lead you to reject the true meanings of other verses (e.g. the mark is the name or number of the beast) and create even more wrong doctrines (e.g. “the mark is keeping Sunday”). And all of these errors are based on not accepting the Bible for what it plainly says (e.g. the Torah is for the nation of Israel in the land of Israel, not for Gentiles today – Acts 15).
In covering this example, I have not meant to pick on the SDAs. Other groups come up with other meanings that break the literalness of the mark of the beast, too. Indeed, we all fall into allegorizing verses that were meant literally. Hopefully, the next time you catch yourself thinking a verse does not mean what it plainly says you will stop and ask yourself two questions.
- What doctrine do I hold that is causing me to think this verse is not literal?
- Have I proven through diligent study that that doctrine itself is really correct?
See also: Can you Take the Mark of the Beast Today?
12 CommentsMore Bible Secrets
“Pray that your flight not be…on the Sabbath day”?
Jan 11, 2010 · Posted in Discernment, Emails, End Times, SabbathA reader of my book asked me this very good question that many Christians wonder about when reading Matthew’s version of the Olivet Discourse:
IF the sabbath is no long in effect (Acts 15) how do we file away this:Matthew 24:20 – But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day:
Is this a Hint for Christians To Keep Sabbath?
Some Christians find Jesus’ mention of the Sabbath in this passage disturbing. It almost seems to be advising us to be careful to avoid trampling the Sabbath. Yet the Sabbath is a command most Christians associate with the lost legalistic Pharisees of Jesus’ day. Therefore the statement is problematic to many.
To be sure, Sabbath-keeping Christians often cite this verse as proof that even Gentile believers must rest on Sabbath today. “Why would Jesus tell us to pray to not have to leave on the Sabbath unless it was still a day of rest for all believers?”, they say.
Well that’s an excellent question. They probably are not going to like hearing what the statement meant to Jesus’ audience. However, most Christians will be glad to see how this verse is most readily understood in harmony with the rest of the Bible. The exercise will illustrate how many of these verses are best resolved through attention to grammatical, historical and whole Bible context.
A More Probable and Congruent Meaning
Here’s the problem with the first interpretation. Under the Torah, there is no prohibition against fleeing or fighting for your life on Sabbath. It is only a day of rest from your normal work. Defense of your country or travel was not a problem under the (original, pure) Torah. Therefore the mention of the Sabbath day causing hardship has nothing to do with any obligation for those of us fleeing to keep Sabbath.
However, culturally the nation in his day (as the Jewish nation today) did keep Sabbath. They did this not because it is required of them by God as evidenced by a prophet warning them to from Moses on. Those prophets and their warnings stopped with the exile of Israel and Judah (similar to how the shekinah glory left the temple then). Instead, they kept it as part of their tradition. Their religion of Judaism elevated these traditions to the status of the original Torah commands.
These embellishments that Judaism introduced included several commands that Jesus ignored. The washing of hands that they took issue with him over. And the rule of a “Sabbath’s day journey” limit on travel. Therefore, when Jesus mentioned avoiding Sabbath in the context of the prescribed speedy flight, Jesus’ audience knew immediately what he was talking about. Travel on Sabbath was problematic back then with the cultural restrictions.
Today, because of these same traditions, buses don’t run in Israel on Sabbath. Mostly only Arab-run taxis are available. It’s plain harder to travel there from Friday sunset until Saturday sunset today just as it was back in Jesus’ day. At least in the religious area of Jerusalem, or Judea this was true when I visited. Which is the specific area Jesus said we would be gathered to and needing to flee from in the end times.
This is why the Sabbath day is mentioned along with winter. Winter and sabbath days both present obstacles to fast, unencumbered travel on short notice. This was the whole point of the context of the Abomination of Desolation warning. If you do not accept his warning ahead of time and wait until you see the event happen before your eyes (“I’ll believe it when I see it”), you will then need to move so fast that you cannot even stop for supplies. If time is of the essence, then Sabbath day travel friction is a worry.
Other reputable commentaries agree this is likely the meaning:
What Christian Commentaries Say
New American Commentary on Matthew:
This reference to the Sabbath is found only in Matthew’s account. It would be natural for Matthew to include it for his more Jewish audience, but he does not thereby imply, as is often alleged, that he envisions Christians still keeping the Jewish laws. G. N. Stanton (“ ‘Pray That Your Flight May Not Be in Winter or on a Sabbath’ [Matthew 24.20],” JSNT 37 [1989]: 17–30) surveys the various options for interpreting this verse and concludes that the best approach understands that fleeing on the Sabbath would have antagonized the Jews further and increased persecution of believers.
MacArthur New Testament Commentary on Matthew:
Although Palestinian winters are mild compared to those in many parts of the world, even slightly inclement weather could be a hindrance when the Antichrist begins his final aggression against God’s people. Therefore Jesus said, Pray that your fight may not be in the winter.
Those seeking to escape should also pray that they will not have to flee on the Sabbath, when legalistic Jews who are not fleeing might try to stone or otherwise impede those whom they believe to be profaning the Sabbath—just as their forefathers had sought to stone Jesus for breaking their Sabbath traditions.
Jesus’ point was that no possession would be worth the risk of retrieving and no hindrance could be considered small. Because of the imminent unmatched terror, single-minded, undeterred flight will be the only order of the day.
Conclusion
Whenever we read a cryptic passage like this, we have to resist the temptation to jump to the conclusion that fits in with our doctrinal view. We have to put our bias aside and put on our detective’s hat. The Bible requires clear thinking and careful research. If we start with what the passage would have meant to the person saying it and also to his audience, we will be on our way to the correct answer.
Note: If you think that by writing this article it means I do not keep sabbath or am against keeping sabbath, then that conclusion would be just as shaky as the one this article argued against. =) This article is not making a statement for or against keeping sabbath. The point is only to correct a common case of taking a verses out of its context, masking its true intended meaning. For the record, according to Isaiah 58, the sabbath is a delight and blessing to keep whether it is required or not. Committing to resting one day a week recharges your batteries, relieves stress, gives space to reflect on the important things in life, and reconnect with your family.
4 CommentsMore Bible Secrets
The First Shall Be Last, the Last Shall Be First?
Jan 8, 2010 · Posted in Bible, EmailsA reader asked what Jesus meant when he said “The first shall be last and the last shall be first”. It is a good question because this proverb is used several times by Jesus in the Gospels. To properly understand his teaching, several such core concepts must be mastered, one at a time.
This proverb expresses a recurring theme in Jesus’ teaching of the counter-intuitive reversal of fortune that the Kingdom of God will deliver when it comes. There are three groups outlined by Jesus where this is demonstrated:
- Many Gentiles will achieve entrance in the Kingdom while large numbers of the chosen people of Israel do not enter. (Lk 13:28-30; Mt 20:1-16);
- Among Israel, the outcasts (tax collectors, sinners, and unlearned) would appear ahead of the religious (Pharisees, scribes, lawyers, priests, rich). (Mk 10:23-31; Mt 19:23-30; Luke 6:20; Luke 14:11)
- Those who suffer now will have comfort in the Kingdom but those who are rich and comfortable in this world will appear behind those who suffer now. (Lk 16:19-31)
The parable of “Lazarus and the Rich Man” (Lk 16:19-31) expresses this last point grandly, although most completely misread the parable as a complete and accurate depiction of life after death (which it is not; come on, burning in hell and wanting water for your tongue?). Most Christians completely miss that Jesus was drawing upon common Egyptian and Jewish concepts on the afterlife in order to make an important point on the Kingdom. He was not teaching us that we burn in hell when we die. All other teachings in the Bible on the afterlife contradict that conclusion.
The point he was making is again the reversal of fortunes and how what we should seek now is counter-intuitive or not what we naturally seek. This reversal does not even depend on righteousness vs. wickedness. Lazarus is not said to be a righteous man nor is the rich man called a sinner. Instead, one had suffering and the other comfort, respectively. After they both die, their situation is reversed in the next life. Lazarus is seen reclining with Abraham in the kingdom and the rich man is seen suffering outside in the common humanistic vision of a hell (not in a theologically correct unconscious separation from God – Ecc 9:5) .
Jesus is warning us through this parable and his saying “the first shall be last, and the last shall be first” that it does not matter who we are. No special favor is afforded by birth. We must seek the right things in this world, things that are counter-intuitive, so that in the next life, which is forever, we will benefit. These “riches in heaven” are won by seeking first the kingdom and his righteousness in this world (Mt 8:28). And many groups who you would think today have a corner on these riches, in reality will be nowhere to be seen in the Kingdom of God.
1 CommentMore Bible Secrets
