THE COVENANT MESSENGER

New Articles Coming Soon

2009-10-24T17:50:00.000-07:00

Soon The Covenant Messenger will resume publishing new articles related to the topic of fulfilled Bible prophecy. During the decade of the 1990's many subscribers awaited anxiously to receive each edition of the magazine. This was in the days before the explosion of growth took place as thousands from around the world were coming into contact with Covenant Eschatology. These were exciting days as believers met together in conferences and in small group Bible studies. Entire churches were affected by the message as ministers, elders and Bible Class teachers were beginning to learn the truth.

Today, the electronic media is the best option to communicate will people immediately. We hope that our former readers will once again join with the next "generation" of Preterists raising their voices in praise and adoration of God.

Covenant Rationality

2008-08-17T13:33:00.000-07:00

[EDITOR'S NOTE: This article first appeared in the August 15, 1992 edition of Living Presence magazine, then edited and published by Max R. King from Warren, OH. It was his gentle spirit and kind encouragement that provided the motivation for a young minister of the gospel to explore all aspects of Covenant Eschatology. One month later, following the appearance of this article, our family moved to California to begin working with a small congregation of believers who were convinced that all of God's promises have been fulfilled.--Larry Siegle]

Truth must be the firm foundation upon which genuine faith is built. To settle for anything less than absolute truth is to compromise. The admonition of the apostle Paul to the church in Thessalonica still rings true today: "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good" (I Thessalonians 5:21 ASV). Therefore, any teaching that cannot be examined in the light of God's word and proven to be true must be rejected. "Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits, whether they are of God; because many false prophets have gone out into the world" (I John 4:1).

Jesus promised his followers, ". . . If you abide in My word, you are My disciples indeed. And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free" (John 8:31,32). These verses teach that truth is objective, and can be "known" with absolute certainty. Moreover, obtaining a correct understanding of the truth is essential for one's salvation (John 17:3, 17; I Timothy 2:4). Faith, when produced in the hearts of people, comes only from the fountain of God's word and no place else (Romans 10:17).

When engaging in the pursuit of truth, the law of rationality must be applied. The law of rationality says that one should draw only those conclusions that are warranted by the evidence.' This means that the Bible must be understood within the context of its own historical framework before one seeks to make an application to the present time. It therefore follows that no verse can mean today what that verse never meant. The role of exegesis has always been to extract from the text, and not read into it, adding some concept foreign to the original meaning.

This principle is valid when applied to any subject about which the Bible teaches, including the study of biblical Eschatology. To abandon the law of rationality in favor of emotional arguments can only lead one down the pathway of spiritual darkness. "To the law and to the testimony! If they do not speak according to this word, it is be cause there is no light in them" (Isaiah 8:20). Therefore, when one takes a subjective approach in his study of biblical Eschatology, the result is often the acceptance of error instead of truth.

HISTORIC PERSPECTIVE
It was during the early years of this century that premillennialism made its entrance into the churches of Christ. Great men of faith, such as Foy E. Wallace Jr., arose to the occasion and stood against this outbreak of "millennial madness." The subject was widely discussed and debated in various locations around the United States. It was the firm conviction of these brethren that truth could always stand the test of honest investigation. As a result, today there are only 76 churches of Christ that hold to the premillennial theory of prophetic interpretation.

The most common view held among churches of Christ today is that of amillennialism. This system of interpretation takes a semi-preterist approach to Bible prophecy. Most amillennialists hold that "some," but not "all" Bible prophecy has reached its consummation. Thus, a "gap" of thousands of years is left between the "already" and the "not yet" of prophecy. For many, this "gap" has produced a lack of understanding of what redemptive history is all about. In fact, most Christians have never studied Eschatology, and do not understand the basic elements of it.

Although most people are inclined toward a futurist view of the second coming, the final Judgment, and the resurrection of the dead, there is much uncertainty and speculation when they seek to explain what they believe about these end-time events, and how they are to take place. The false premise that end time events relate to the termination of the material universe is based, primarily, on incorrect reasoning.

The time has arrived for Bible students to examine the traditional view of Eschatology in the light of redemptive history. If the amillennial view is accurate, then those who espouse it must be willing to "prove" it from the Scriptures, setting aside all "emotional arguments" (I Thessalonians 5:21). The law of rationality demands such to be the case! On the other hand, if Covenant Eschatology, which sees the consummation of redemptive history as a present reality is accurate, then those who espouse such a view must be willing to "prove" it from the Scriptures (I Thessalonians 5:21).

PROBLEMS WITH PREMISES
Logically, when one begins with a wrong premise, the conclusion to which he arrives also will be wrong. For example, it is a common assertion that with the return of Christ comes the end of the material universe. To what false conclusion has such an assertion led?

Most liberal theologians have impugned the credibility of the New Testament simply because of this materialistic concept of fulfillment: "The problem of Eschatology grew out of the fact that the expected end of the world failed to arrive, that the `Son of Man' did not appear in the clouds of heaven, that history went on . . ." [2] Does the fact "that history went on" prove conclusively that the "end of the world failed to arrive," and that the "Son of Man" did not appear in the "clouds of heaven"? Or instead, could it be that such a conclusion is based upon mere assumption rather than sound biblical exegesis? The inherent danger of beginning with the wrong premise is that it often leads one to the wrong conclusion!

The false premise that end-time events relate to the termination of the material universe is based, primarily, on incorrect reasoning. Solomon wrote, "One generation passes away, and another generation comes; but the earth abides forever" (Ecclesiastes 1:4). Was not Solomon seeking to contrast the unstable and transitory nature of man with the stable and everlasting nature of that which God creates? Even if the material universe were to end at some future time, what would such a passing have to do with the fulfillment of redemptive history?

Therefore, Covenantal salvation is related to the working out of spiritual realities that find their completeness in Christ (Colossians 2:17; Hebrews 8:5, 10:Iff; Ephesians 1:3).

The problem of sin relates not to rocks, trees, birds, and animals; but rather to man's spiritual nature and standing before God. To Old Testament Israel, the prophet Isaiah affirmed, "But your iniquities have separated you from your God; and your sins have hidden His face from you" (Isaiah 59:2). Since the problem of sin and separation from God relates to spiritual matters, would not one logically look for redemptive history to be concerned with spiritual things, rather then the physical elements of creation?

The Old Testament promises given to Abraham had both physical and spiritual aspects (Genesis 12:1-3). Within the physical realm of fulfillment, the fleshly "seed-line" would eventually lead to the arrival of Messiah. "Now to Abraham and his Seed were the promises made. He does not say, `and to seeds,' as of many, but as of one, `and to your Seed,' who is Christ" (Galatians 3:16). The physical lineage of Abraham was necessary for the bringing of Christ into the world, "born of a woman, born under the law" (Galatians 4:4; Genesis 3:15).

However, it would be a mistake to conclude that the Abrahamic promises were limited only to those who were his fleshly descendants (Matthew 3:9; John 8:33). Through the nation of Israel and its law covenant were the physical aspects of the Abrahamic promises fulfilled (Joshua 21:43-45; 23:14). However, this aspect of fulfillment only served as the vehicle from which the spiritual fulfillment would proceed (Galatians 3:24-29).

Those who lived during the first century were seeing redemptive history unfold before their very eyes! With the death of Jesus on the Cross, and his subsequent resurrection and ascension, a course of events was set into motion, which would forever change the course of human history. The transition period between the Cross and A.D.70 saw the Old Covenant finally bow in total subjection before the New. The apostle Paul, writing of this covenantal change, observed, "For if what is passing away was glorious, what remains is much more glorious" (II Corinthians 3:11).

The promises made to Abraham were ... completely fulfilled, as those who lived under the Old Covenant were being "transformed" (1I Corinthians 3:18) or resurrected from that mode of existence and given New Covenant life in Christ (I1 Corinthians 5:17; Romans 6:3-5). The physical "elements" of Judaism were about to "pass away with a great noise and ... melt with fervent heat" (11 Peter 3:10), while spiritual Israel was about to enter into its fullness of everlasting glory and exaltation (I Thessalonians 4:17; John 14:3; 11 Peter 3:13; Revelation 21,22).

Therefore, Covenantal salvation is related to the working out of spiritual realities that find their completeness in Christ (Colossians 2:17; Hebrews 8:5; 10:1 ff, Ephesians 1:3). When one is able to see the true premise upon which salvation is built, everything else falls easily into place. It is not valid reasoning to reject A.D. 70 as the second coming of Christ simply because "history went on." A.D. 70 marked the end of the Jewish age (Matthew 24:3) and the complete fulfillment of all that had been prophesied in the Old Testament (Luke 21:22). The very heart of redemptive history involve the working out of mankind's salvation through the historic frame-Work of Old Testament Israel (Genesis 12:1-3; John 4:22).

CONCLUSION
The law of rationality demands an examination of all the evidence before drawing a conclusion. The mistake in failing too see the spiritual fulfillment of the promises might lead to the conclusion that such promises have not yet reached their consummation. This proves that a false premise can, and often does, lead to faulty conclusions. In addition, emotional attachment to the traditional views on Eschatology cannot serve as proof positive that such views are true. Only through careful application of sound principles of interpretation (hermeneutics) can one be sure one is fulfilling his responsibility to "prove all things" (I Thessalonians 5:21) and to "test the spirits" (I John 4:1).

While the brotherhood is full of men who would advocate logic and its manifold application to spiritual matters, it seems that few are willing to do so when dealing with the subject of Eschatology. If people only had a willingness to look at Covenant Eschatology with an open heart, along with an open Bible! Truth never has anything to fear from honest investigation, and only the truth has the ability to make one free (John 8:32). To understand Bible prophecy one must learn to practice Covenant Rationality!

Footnotes
1 Thomas B. Warren, Logic and the Bible. (Jonesboro, Ark: National Christian Press, 1982), p.14.
2 Rudolf Bultmann, History and Eschatology: The Presence of Eternity, (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1957), p.38.

Editor's note [written by Max King]: Larry Siegle was born in Hamilton, Ohio, and reared in Denver, Colorado. After attending Pikes Peak Community College, where he majored in Communications, he worked in radio and managed a station in West Texas. In 1986 he attended Bear Valley Bible School, after which he worked with the Church of Christ in Olathe and in Topeka, Kansas. In 1989 he enrolled in the Memphis School of Preaching, graduating in June 91. Since then he has preached for the Gregg Avenue Church of Christ in Florence, SC. Currently he is in the process of moving to Pinole, CA, to take up work with the church there the first of September. We welcome Larry to the staff of The Living Presence, and feel blessed to have a man of his talent and commitment to the Word of God communicating the Gospel of God's Covenant blessings to the world.

"But of that day and hour..."

2008-06-08T08:04:00.000-07:00

[EDITOR'S NOTE: The following article written by Max R. King was first published in the Vol. 3, No. 3 issue of TCM in appearing in March 1994. This was taken from a series called, Essays in Eschatology, published by the Parkman Road Church of Christ].

In an effort to find two different end times in Christ's Olivet discourse, some claim Christ knew when Jerusalem would fall, hence the day and hour not know in Matthew 24:36 (and the things mentioned in the following verses) refer to another coming of Christ. This raises some pertinent questions. First, if Christ knew at that time the day and hour of Jerusalem's fall, why did he give "signs" whereby his disciples could know that "the end is not yet" (v6), and know when it would be "near, even at the doors" (v33)? Why couldn't they just mark A.D. 70 on their calendars, if already the day and hour were known?

Second, if verse 36 refers to another coming because the day and hour were unknown, then how could Christ know it could not occur during the time (40 years) prior to Jerusalem's fall? Third, even more puzzling, why should his disciples "watch" and "wait" with intense expectation (Luke 21:34-36; I Cor. 1:7, 8; I Thess. 1:10; Heb. 10:25; Jas. 5:8, 9; I Pet. 1:13; 4:7, 13-19; II Pet. 1:19; Rev. 1:1-3) for another coming that could not possibly take place until after A.D. 70? If it is argued that they did not know Jerusalem would stand that long, then it follows that nothing forbids verse 36 from referring to the fall of Jerusalem (Luke 21:22-33).

The truth is, there is not the slightest hint of two age-ending comings of Christ in New Testament Scripture, with the day and hour of one coming known but unknown with respect to the later coming. The destruction of the temple, the consummation of the age, the coming of Christ (Matt. 24:1-3), the coming of the end (v14), the fulfillment of all things written (Luke 21:20-22), and the coming of the Kingdom of God in power (v31) stand united within the clearly stated timeframe, "this generation shall not pass away, till all be fulfilled" (v 32). It was "the day and the hour" (not the "generation") that was unknown at the time Christ talked with his disciples about the passing of the Old Testament economy. Some of them would live to see that day (Matt. 16:27, 28; Mark 9:1), particularly the apostle John (John 21:21-24; Rev. 1:1; 22:6-10). That was the "great and glorious day" (Acts 2:20) for which the disciples watched and waited. It's inconceivable that Peter exhorted Christians of his day to "gird up" and "hope to the end" of the Christian age rather than the Jewish age. In receiving the salvation promised and prophesied in the Old Testament (I Pet. 1:9-13). That would not be a very high appraisal of the completeness of Christ's "more excellent ministry" under the new and "better covenant" (Heb. 8:6). As soon as this long awaited "more glorious" age began (even before the old passed away), the disciples were taught to watch, wait, hope and even pray (I Cor. 16:22) for Christ to come and bring to an end that which he died to establish. Does that make sense?

The Longest Hour

2008-06-06T21:27:00.000-07:00

[EDITOR'S NOTE: This article, written by Larry Siegle appeared in the very first issue of The Covenant Messenger, September 15, 1992. The simplicity of the presentation strikes at the very heart of why preterist theology is a sound approach to the study of Bible prophecy. Some of the points from the original article are developed more fully in this updated version of the original article].

James Burton Coffman in his commentary on the espistle of First John dates the book between A.D. 60-65 [1]. It was his conviction that all of the inspired books of the New Testament were completed "before the fall of Jerusalem in 70 A.D.," a fact many expositors have been reluctant to admit [2].

The dating of First John could well have a profound effect on the manner in which one interprets the message of the book itself. If the book is dated prior to the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70, then logically its message may have reference to that very event. However, if the book is dated after A.D. 70, its message would refer to events related to some other time-frame. Therefore, determining the actual dating of the book is quite important for proper exegesis of the message therein contained. Internal evidence suggests strongly that the epistles written by the apostle John contain the identical subject matter, and were written during the same period as II Peter, Jude, and II Timothy. All four of the inspired writers address "false teachers" whose pattern of behavior and characteristics are similar in nature--and written in that period of time identified as the "last days" of the Jewish age (II Tim. 3:1, 2; II Pet. 3:3; Jude 17-18) [3].

THE NEW TESTAMENT "TIME STATEMENTS"
Those who are familiar with Covenant Eschatology (the biblical view that all prophecy was fulfilled by A.D. 70), are well acquainted with the New Testament 'time statements' and their overall significance in understanding the meaning of Bible prophecy.

John the Baptizer foretold of a fiery judgment that was "soon" to come on the Jewish nation for their rebellion against God and the rejection of Christ as Messiah (Matt. 3:7-11; 23:39; Mark 11:9, 10). Jesus warned the people that the city of Jerusalem would soon face God in judgment with the Roman armies acting as the Divine Executioners (Matt. 23:31-36; Luke 21:20-22).

The time limitation for these events to occur would be within the span of a "generation." "Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all these things are fulfilled" (Matt. 24:34). The testimony of secular historians is more than abundant with documented references to what took place in confirming the accuracy of everything Jesus had prophesied. "All" was fulfilled just as He said it would be, in the way He said it would be!

In thid connection, the expectation of the return of Christ comes into focus. When Peter, James, John and Andrew inquired about the destruction of Jerusalem they phrased the question this way: "...Tell us, when will all these things be? And what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?" (Matt. 24:3; Mark 13:3, 4; Luke 21:7). There is no indication that the disciples present, or that Jesus Himself had any other event than that which would be fulfilled in A.D. 70 in view. The question as recorded in Mathew's account would have been understood by the Jewish audience to whom it had been directed. They would have better understood the concept of His "coming" as referring to that which would occur at the end of the Jewish age--and not to something destined to happen thousands of years in the future.

Regarding the events surrounding the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70, Jesus used apocalyptic language to describe what is commonly referred to as His "second advent": "Then they will see the Son of Man coming in a cloud with power and great glory" (Luke 21:27). The dark "clouds" of national judgment would soon loom just over the horizon for those rebellious, first century Jews. The Kingdom of God would finally be manifested with "power" forever vindicated over the Jewish adversaries (Matt. 16:27, 28; Mark 8:38-9:1).

That the coming of Christ in the destruction of Jerusalem is a central focus of New Testament writers cannot be denied. On the day of Pentecost, the apostle Peter quoted the prophecy of Joel 2:28ff, and applied it to the "last days" of Judiasm (Acts. 2:16-21). On that same day, Peter warned the Jews who listened intently to the words of his message to, "...Be saved from this perverse generation" (Acts 2:40) It was "this perverse generation" to whom Jesus had referred previously that would soon face God in national and spiritual (covenantal) judgment. The apostle Paul, speaking in the city of Athens, indicated the nearness of the impending judgment: "Because He did set a day in which He is about to judge the world in righteousness, by a man whome He did ordain, having given assurance to all, having raised him out of the dead" (Acts 17:31 YLT). The "world" under consideration was that of covenant Israel. Who more than the Jews were opposed to the message that Jesus Christ had been raised from the dead? What better proof of the authenticity of His resurrection than for the foretold destruction of Jesusalem to take place exactly as He had predicted, within the "generation" Jesus said would not pass away until "all these things are fulfilled" (Matt. 24:34)?

When James, the fleshly half-brother of Jesus wrote his epistle in A.D. 61, his expectation was that the coming of Christ was close "at hand." To those first-century saints who were suffering intense persecution, he wrote: "Therefore, be patient, brethren, until the coming of the Lord...Establish your hearts, for the coming of the Lord is at hand...Behold, the Judge is standing at the door" (James 5:7-9). What possible comfort could it have been to these suffering saints to know that Jesus was coming thousands of years in the future? To reach such an absurd conclusion is to destroy the very argumentation of James! He told them specifically to "be patient,"--that is, to hang on, because the time of the deliverance was close "at hand" (Luke 21:28).

The apostle Peter, feeling the urgency of the time in which he lived, wrote: "But the end of all things is at hand; therefore be serious and watchful in your prayers" (I Pet. 4:7). His call to watchfulness no doubt reminded him of the admonition given to the disciples by Jesus Himself: "Therefore, watch for you do not know the day or the hour in which the Son of Man comes" (Matt. 25:13).

The writer of Hebrews told the Jewish Christians to remain steadfast, and to not fall away from their faith--returning to an Old Covenant system that could never save them. His admonition was based upon the nearness of the coming of Christ. "For you have need of endurance, so that after you have done the will of God, you may receive the promise: For yet a little while, and He who is coming will come and will not tarry" (Heb. 10:36, 37). Earlier in this same chapter, the writer exhorted his audience to not give up the habit of assembling together. Why? Because "...you see the Day approaching" (Heb. 10:24, 25). The "day" under consideration was the coming of Christ in A.D. 70 with "power and great glory" (Matt. 24:30; Luke 21:27).

The apostle John did not speak of the "last days" in his writings as did others since the proximity and time perspective were different. Instead, he spoke of having finally arrived at the "last hour" of prophetic time (I John 2:18).

If the "last hour" does not refer to the nearness of expectation with respect to time, within the constraints of that "generation" then the New Testament time statements are unintelligible and had absolutely no real meaning to those to whom they were first addressed.

Logically, either God has faithfully kept His word, or humankind has been in the midst of history's "longest hour" since the first century A.D.! Does it not seem far more reasonable to conclude that these and the other powerful statements in the New Testament had reference to the A.D. 70 fall of Jersualem and not to some other "yet future" day, thousands of years later?

When the apostle John received the "Revelation of Jesus Christ" (Rev. 1:1), He understood the nearness of the return of the Lord. At the conclusion of the book Jesus pronounced His intention to come soon: "Surely I am coming quickly." The response of John was, "Even so, come, Lord Jesus!" (Rev. 22:20). No room can be found in this dialogue to infuse thousands of years into the equation. Jesus promised to return, and return He did, at the destruction of Jerusalem!

Those who await some "yet future" second coming of Jesus Christ do so in vain. The "last" prophetic "hour" has long ago past and humanity has been ushered into a "new heavens and a new earth wherein dwells righteousness" (II Pet. 3:13; Rev. 21:1ff). The integrity of the word of God stands sure despite the efforts of skeptics unwilling to accept the meaning of the text and the time-frame in which it was written and fulfilled. May God awaken the hearts of those weary and discouraged who have not yet come to embrace the beauty and reality of all that God has promised. May each of us strive to see time as God sees it and not according to the traditions and precepts of men.

=====
END NOTES:
[1] James Burton Coffman, James, 1 and 2 Peter, 1, 2, and 3 John, Jude (Abilene, TX: A.C.U. Press, 1979), 349.
[2] Ibid.
[3] Arthus Ogden, The Development of the New Testament (Louisville, KY: Ogden Publications, 1983) 47-48.