King David's palace discovered? - Testimony Magazine

TESTIMONYFor the study and defence of the holy Scripture

Vol. 87 No. 1,029 August 2017

289

Also in this issue:Are you too ambitious? 278Your letters: more on the Holy Spirit 280Damascus and its history 284NEW SERIES: the cherubim 299

King David’s palace discovered?

Contents

http://testimonymagazine.com

Publication of articles in the Testimony does not presume editorial endorsement except on matters of fundamental doctrine, as defined in the Birmingham Amended Statement of Faith.

Publishing Editor:JEREMY THOMAS. 22 Kingswood Close, Kings Norton, Birmingham, B30 3NX. Tel. 0121 444 6810; email: [email protected]

Section Editors:DAVID BURGES. 7 Whitehead Drive, Wellesbourne, Warwick, CV35 9PW. Tel. 01789 842692; email: [email protected] Science; Archaeology

EDWARD CARR. 46 New Street, Donisthorpe, DE12 7PG. Tel. 01530 271522; email: [email protected] Exhortation

SHAUN MAHER. 5 Birch Court, Doune, FK16 6JD. Tel. 01786 842996; email: [email protected] Watchman

ERIC MARSHALL. The Pines, Ling Common Road, Castle Rising, King’s Lynn, Norfolk, PE31 6AE. Tel. 01553 631279; email: [email protected] Exposition

JOHN NICHOLLS. 17 Upper Trinity Road, Halstead, Essex, CO9 1EE. Tel. 01787 473089; email: [email protected] Reviews

JEREMY THOMAS (see above)Principles, preaching and problems

GEOFF HENSTOCK. 13 Alpha Crescent, Panorama 5041, S. Australia. Tel. 8277-0730; email: [email protected] Australia Editor; Prophecy

Testimony website:http://testimonymagazine.com

Articles for publicationArticles to be considered for publication are welcome and should be forwarded to the Publishing Editor (in Australia, the local editor) in the first instance.

Publishing Editor’s column 273The fruit of the vine

Eric Marshall 275Ambition

Geoff Henstock 278Your Letters

An unbiblical review 280The structure of 2 Peter 282

Damascus in history and prophecy (1)

Sid Levett 284Holiness

10. Christ: from holy to beyondJoe Harding 287

The stones cry outTrends and discoveries in

Bible archaeologyDavid Burges 289

The drying up of the Euphrates?

Shaun Maher 292Words from the mount and the cross (2)

Edward Carr 296

“I ascend unto my Father”Des Manser 297

The cherubim of glory1. The chariot of the

cherubimDavid Green 299

Jude: a study in threesDerek Palmer 302

Dealing with the big questions of life (Review)

Geoff Henstock 305Iron sharpens iron (4) 306The work of God on men’s hearts

4. Cleansing the heart from sinStephen Green 307

The words of the wise5. LazinessMark Vincent 311

Jewish scenes6. Jordan: theatre of

Aretas IV, PetraJeremy Thomas XIV

Contents

TESTIMONY

XIII

Testimony books

mailto:[email protected]










Testimony, August 2017 273Contents

Publishing Editor’s column

“For the kingdom of heaven is like a landowner who went out early in the morning to hire labourers for his vineyard. When he had agreed with the labourers for a denarius for the day, he sent them into his vineyard. And he went out about the third hour and saw others standing idle in the market place; and to those he said, ‘You also go into the vineyard, and whatever is right I will give you.’ And so they went. Again he went out about the sixth and the ninth hour, and did the same thing. And about the eleventh hour he went out and found others standing around; and he said to them, ‘Why have you been standing here idle all day long?’ They said to him, ‘Because no one hired us.’ He said to them, ‘You go into the vineyard too’” (Mt. 20:1-7, NASB).

Cover picture: “The Labourers in the Vineyard,” Parables series, Emily Honey

THE THEME OF Hebrews 11 is stated in its opening and closing verses:

“Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen. For by it the men of old gained approval . . . And all these . . . gained approval through their faith” (vv. 1,2,39).1

The chapter concerns faithful men and women of Old Testament times who found approval (“obtained a good report,” AV) with God on ac-count of the things they believed. And from the examples which the inspired author brings before us we see that the faith they displayed is a faith which changes lives—which changes a person’s relationship with God.

The topic of faith has been introduced at the end of the previous chapter, where the apostle reminds his readers, “we are not of those who shrink back to destruction, but of those who have faith to the preserving of the soul” (10:39). Clues within the letter indicate that the Hebrews were Jewish Christians, relatively recently converted from Judaism, and now suffering at the hands of other Jews. For them, therefore, the author’s exhortation to faith had great resonance, and the Old Testament examples he cites were particularly pertinent: just as they had demonstrated faith in difficult circumstances, so now must the Hebrews: “Therefore, seeing we have so great a cloud of witnesses surrounding us, let us also lay aside every encumbrance and the sin which so easily entangles us, and let us run with endurance the race that is set before us . . .” (12:1).

Faith in what?In what, specifically, were the Hebrews to have faith? In the Word of God—what God had said—just as the faithful of old had done. The examples in Hebrews 11 are numerous:• none of us was present to see “the worlds . . .

prepared by the word of God” (v. 3), yet we believe the biblical account of creation, trust-ing that God spoke these words of Scripture

• perhaps Noah had never set eyes on the sea, but by heeding the ‘divine warning’ (v. 7, NKJV) he and his family were able to escape God’s judgements on the world of his day

• Moses consciously chose to suffer alongside God’s people, and to reject all that Egypt could offer, because he relied on God’s promise of the Land to the fathers of the nation (vv. 25,26).

Each of these examples, and indeed every exam-ple of faith in the chapter, demonstrates conviction in something that God had said, evidenced by the way of life that these men and women lived as a result. Often they showed faith in what could not be seen:• “. . . not made out of things which are visible”

(v. 3)• “. . . things not yet seen . . .” (v. 7)• “. . . not knowing where he was going . . .

looking for the city which has foundations” (vv. 8,10).

1. Bible quotations are from the NASB except where otherwise stated.

TESTIMONY

Testimony, August 2017274 Contents

These people had viewed God’s promises with ‘the eye of faith,’ such that they were able to “[see] them and [welcome] them from a distance” (v. 13).

Not as the world thinksAnd so, for the Hebrews and for later generations of believers, the principle remains unchanged. Faith in the Word of God enables us to look backwards, to events which Scripture testifies occurred in ages past (v. 3), as well as forwards, to things which we believe will occur in the future. There are helpful paraphrases of verse 1 in some of the older commentaries:• “Faith is a confident anticipation of things

hoped for, a full persuasion of things not seen”2

• “Now faith is the giving substance to what is hoped for, the testing of things not seen”3

• Faith will “give present substance to the things which [are] proposed to [our] hope, and . . . supply conviction of the reality of those un-seen facts . . . making the future present, the unseen evident.”4

It follows that there is a duty for each believer to become personally acquainted with what God has said in the Scriptures. Reading God’s Word, and then demonstrating faith in it, makes it possible for us to please Him (v. 6).

This is not the way in which today’s world encourages us to think. The world likes to con-sider itself rational; it promotes an environment in which decisions about human life are made, generally speaking, based on what we can see for ourselves, certainly not on the basis of invisible things spoken by a God who Himself cannot be seen. But according to the teaching of Hebrews 11, to a man or woman of faith one’s own ob-servations may be irrelevant; he or she believes something because God has said it.

A case study—AbrahamOne of the apostle’s principal examples of faith in Hebrews 11, Abraham, is dealt with in some detail in Romans 4. Here Paul explains (put simply) how Abraham had his sins forgiven. He quotes from the record in Genesis 15:6: “For what does the Scripture say? ‘Abraham believed God, and it was credited [counted, reckoned] to him as righteousness’” (Rom. 4:3). This was the way in which Abraham was ‘justified.’

The point is more than an academic one, because Paul goes on to explain that only those who have the same faith as Abraham may obtain forgiveness for their sins: “For this reason it is by

faith, in order that it may be in accordance with grace, so that the promise will be guaranteed to all the descendants [seed, AV] . . . to those who are of the faith of Abraham” (v. 16). Hebrews 11:8 spoke of Abraham obeying the Word of God de-spite his not knowing where God would take him; now we have a further insight into his thought process at the time of the events of Genesis 15:

“In hope against hope he believed, so that he might become a father of many nations accord-ing to that which had been spoken, ‘So shall your descendants be.’ Without becoming weak in faith he contemplated his own body, now as good as dead since he was about a hundred years old, and the deadness of Sarah’s womb; yet, with respect to the promise of God, he did not waver in unbelief but grew strong in faith, giving glory to God, and being fully assured that what God had promised, He was able also to perform. Therefore it was also credited to him as righteousness” (Rom. 4:18-22).

Any analysis which Abraham might have made of his circumstances—his own age, Sarah’s age, the fact that Sarah had never been able to bear children—would have led him to the conclusion that what God had said to him was impossible. And it is not overstating things to say that, in that case, Abraham would not have had his sins forgiven. It is essential, therefore, that in our personal thinking we endeavour to remain alert to this principle, learning to identify instances when human reasoning is elevated above the plain meaning of the Bible text. Any ‘rational’ approach which requires the Bible to be fun-damentally reinterpreted, in ways in which it could not have been understood by those whom Scripture declares righteous, is not Hebrews 11’s definition of believing what God says.

Persecuted for righteousnessIn sharing Abraham’s hope we adopt his approach to what God has said, and accept the conse-quences of a faith in God’s Word which the world finds ridiculous. So be it, for this exactly matches the experience of many of those in Hebrews 11:

“others were tortured, not accepting their release, so that they might obtain a better

2. Translation by Brother John Thomas; see John Carter, The Letter to the Hebrews, The Christadelphian (1964), p. 128.

3. C. J. Ellicott, A Bible Commentary for English Readers, Cassell & Co. (1878).

4. Holy Bible with Commentary, vol. IV, John Murray (1881).


resurrection; and others experienced mock-ings and scourgings, yes, also chains and imprisonment. They were stoned, they were sawn in two, they were tempted, they were put to death with the sword; they went about in sheepskins, in goatskins, being destitute, afflicted, ill-treated (men of whom the world was not worthy), wandering in deserts and mountains and caves and holes in the ground” (vv. 35-38).

Such may be the cost of us getting this right—of simply believing what God has said. We should

expect this in light of the apostle’s testimony that the faithful will not be perfected “apart from us” (v. 40).

We need never be thrown off course if we find that God’s ways are contrary to those of the society in which we are asked to live out our dis-cipleship. This has often been the case for people of biblical faith. The experiences of the apostle’s supreme example of faith surely make this clear: “. . . fixing our eyes on Jesus, the author and perfecter of faith, who for the joy set before him endured the cross, despising the shame” (12:2).

The fruit of the vineEric Marshall

An earlier article1 considered the cup as a symbol of Jesus’ sacrifice. This article considers the significance of Jesus’ description of the contents of the cup as “the fruit of the vine.”

Exhortation

THE CUP is a metaphor for the experience of events and circumstances in life. The external pressure of such events and cir-

cumstances causes deep emotions and feelings that go beyond physical pain. The writer to the Hebrews alludes to this when he says of Jesus’ suffering: “for the joy that was set before him [he] endured the cross, despising the shame . . .” (12:2). The shameful treatment of Jesus, in addition to the physical pain of flogging and crucifixion, was designed to break his spirit of faithful obedience. The challenge for Jesus is felt in his strong dec-laration of intent when Peter attempted to resist his arrest: “the cup which my Father hath given me, shall I not drink it?” (Jno. 18:11); as also in his prayer in the garden: “O my Father, if this cup may not pass away from me, except I drink it, Thy will be done” (Mt. 26:42).

Although we often refer to the contents of the memorial cup as ‘wine,’ it is noteworthy that they are never so described in Scripture. Jesus gives two descriptions of the contents of the cup at the Last Supper. These are “this fruit of the vine” and “my blood of the new testament [covenant]” (in the Matthew and Mark accounts) and “the new testament [covenant] in my blood” (in the Luke account). Whilst it seems most likely that this cup

did contain wine, why is it that Jesus describes the contents of the cup as he does? Perhaps he is making a special point for believers to consider when they share the cup together.

The song of the vineyardIsaiah’s song of the vineyard provides a help-ful starting point for understanding the fruit of the vine. In chapter 5 the prophet describes the careful preparation of the land for a vineyard and the planting of choice vines. Naturally the owner of the vineyard expected to get a crop of good grapes, but he did not do so: “he looked that it should bring forth grapes, and it brought forth wild grapes” (v. 2). The word translated “wild grapes” gives the idea of poison berries, not simply poor-tasting grapes. It is also instruc-tive to note that the sole purpose of a vine is to produce fruit, for the wood has no functional use other than as firewood (Ezek. 15).

We are not left to expound this parable our-selves. It is expounded in Isaiah 5:7: “For the vine-yard of the LORD of hosts is the house of Israel, and the men of Judah His pleasant plant: and He looked for judgment, but behold oppression; for righteousness, but behold a cry.” The cry was the consequence of unrighteousness and oppres-sion—it characterised the attitude and lifestyle of the men of Judah. A similar situation is found in

1. “The cup,” Testimony, vol. 85, no. 1,011, Dec. 2015, p. 464.

Contents

http://testimonymagazine.com/issues/2015/12


the cities of the plain in the time of Abraham. The angel, speaking for God, said, “Because the cry of Sodom and Gomorrah is great, and because their sin is very grievous; I will go down now, and see whether they have done altogether according to the cry of it, which is come unto Me; and if not, I will know” (Gen. 18:20,21).

Hosea, speaking of the same period in Israel’s history as Isaiah does, says of them, “Israel is an empty vine, he bringeth forth fruit unto himself: according to the multitude of his fruit he hath increased the altars; according to the goodness of his land they have made goodly images” (10:1). Their fruit was the outcome of their attitude and behaviour reflected in what we might today term their ‘lifestyle.’ Jesus uses the same idiom in the Sermon on the Mount, for he says:

“Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them” (Mt. 7:15-20).

The parable of the husbandmenJesus developed Isaiah’s song of the vineyard in a parable spoken to the chief priests and elders who had challenged his authority to teach. His focus is on their responsibility for the nation. They are described as tenants (“husbandmen,” AV) of the vineyard, which belonged to the householder. This idea should have been known to the leaders of the nation, for God had said through Moses, “The land shall not be sold for ever: for the land is Mine; for ye are strangers and sojourners with Me” (Lev. 25:23). As leaders of the nation they were responsible for guiding the nation in God’s ways so that their behaviour and worship were godly. Sadly Jesus had to rebuke them during his ministry:

“Ye hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying, This people draweth nigh unto Me with their mouth, and honoureth Me with their lips; but their heart is far from Me. But in vain they do worship Me, teaching for doc-trines the commandments of men” (Mt. 15:7-9).

Such assessments of the nation had been a fea-ture of God’s work with His people through His

prophets, of whom it was true that “the husband-men took his servants, and beat one, and killed another, and stoned another. Again, he sent other servants more than the first: and they did unto them likewise” (21:35,36). Now that the Son was present they had opportunity to repent; but they would reject him and kill him. They would demonstrate that as a nation they were like the fruitless fig tree that had withered away at Jesus’ rebuke, and as a consequence they would be re-placed: “Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof” (v. 43).

The true vineAlthough Jesus is the son in the parable of the husbandmen he is also the fruitful vine in the vineyard of Israel. He had come in fulfilment of Isaiah’s prophecy, “And there shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a Branch shall grow out of his roots” (11:1). He was fruitful, for he was

“the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly, nor standeth in the way of sinners, nor sitteth in the seat of the scornful. But his delight is in the law of the LORD; and in His law doth he meditate day and night. And he shall be like a tree planted by the rivers of wa-ter, that bringeth forth his fruit in his season; his leaf also shall not wither; and whatsoever he doeth shall prosper” (Ps. 1:1-3).

He could truly say, “I do always those things that please Him” (Jno. 8:29).

Jesus refers to himself as the true vine: “I am the true vine, and my Father is the husbandman. Every branch in me that beareth not fruit He taketh away: and every branch that beareth fruit, He purgeth it, that it may bring forth more fruit” (15:1,2). In this illustration it is the disciples who bear fruit; but they must abide in Jesus and let his words abide in them. Their fruit must be the same kind of attitude and behaviour that Jesus showed in his life. To achieve maximum fruit-fulness branches will be purged. In the natural order vinedressers prune shoots to restrict excess vegetative growth to promote fruit development; similarly in the disciple’s life, divine providence through the circumstances of life can redirect us to more faithful behaviour. Paul confirms this when he writes, “And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to His purpose. For whom He did foreknow, He also did predestinate to be conformed to the image


of His Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren” (Rom. 8:28,29).

Being conformed to the image of God’s Son must be the outcome of abiding in him. Jesus expressed this idea of close fellowship in his prayer for his disciples. Speaking of those who would believe as a consequence of the testimony of the apostles, he said:

“Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word; that they all may be one; as Thou, Father, art in me, and I in Thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that Thou hast sent me. And the glory which Thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one: I in them, and Thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that Thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as Thou hast loved me” (Jno. 17:20-23).

This unity of purpose and behaviour is further developed by John in his First Epistle. He de-scribes in these words the fellowship that all disciples in all ages can share:

“That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life; (for the life was manifested, and we have seen it, and bear witness, and shew unto you that eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us;) that which we have seen and heard declare we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us: and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with His Son Jesus Christ” (1:1-3).

In Jesus the apostles saw “eternal life”—not im-mortality, but life lived as God intended. Those who seek to base their lives on the teaching and example of Jesus are in fellowship with him and are living eternal life, and will be made immortal in the Kingdom. As John also says in chapter 2:

“He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him. But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him. He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked” (vv. 4-6).

The new covenantOur New Testament considerations confirm those from the Hebrew scriptures: the fruit of the vine is about attitude and behaviour. It is to be closely

based on Jesus’ own attitude and behaviour—his ‘lifestyle of eternal life.’ It is not difficult to see how this relates to the other description that Jesus uses of the contents of the cup as “my blood of the new covenant.” Jeremiah describes the new covenant in this way:

“Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah: not ac-cording to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which My covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD: but this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put My law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be My people. And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know Me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more” (31:31-34).

It is belief in and understanding of Jesus’ death and resurrection that relates a person to the new covenant. We see in him the one for whom it is supremely true that God’s law was in his heart. His blood represents his life of delight in doing his Father’s will.

The life of faithIt might be thought that if a person could imbibe Jesus’ blood then this would give life—eternal life. Indeed, Jesus seems to teach this in his dis-course in John 6:

“Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day” (vv. 53,54).

It should be noted that eternal life needs to be lived now to qualify for resurrection at the last day. This ‘hard saying’ is, however, not to be taken literally, for Jesus said of the cup, “Drink ye all of it; for this is my blood of the new testa-ment [covenant], which is shed for many for the remission of sins” (Mt. 26:27,28). Since this was before his actual blood was shed, we under-stand Jesus to mean that the contents of the cup represented his blood. Jesus himself explained his hard saying with the words, “It is the spirit


that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life” (Jno. 6:63). The eating of Jesus’ flesh and the drinking of his blood are metaphors for taking his lifestyle into our lives by believing and acting on his teaching. Peter clearly understood this, for in response to Jesus’ question, “Will ye also go away?” he replies, “Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life. And we believe and are sure that thou art that Christ, the Son of the living God” (vv. 67-69).

When therefore we share the emblems of Jesus’ sacrifice it is not ritual for its own sake. It is a recalling to mind of the life of Jesus, his godly thinking and living. It is reminding ourselves of the eternal life that we should be living, the need to abide in him to bear fruit. For, as the apostle wrote, “I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me” (Gal. 2:20).

AmbitionGeoff Henstock

Principles, preaching and problems

AMBITION IS DEFINED as “ardent desire for distinction; aspiration (to be, to do); object of such desire.”1 In the modern Western

world ambition is highly desirable. Ambitious people are well-regarded because of their indus-try and diligence in the pursuit of their objectives. While these are qualities that we should be eager to cultivate, there is a need for balance in all things in the life of the believer.

When we think of an ambitious man of the world, we picture an individual devoting all his time and energy to ‘climbing to the top’ in the field in which he is engaged. His ambition drives him to seek additional professional or trade qualifications, and to work long hours with a view to attaining a more prestigious or a better-remunerated position, or even just the admiration of his peers. There are many cases, however, where such aspirations have been achieved at great cost to the spiritual wellbeing of the person concerned.

Negative ambitionIn discussing the challenge of ensuring that natu-ral, healthy desire does not become unbridled lust, Brother L. G. Sargent comments on the dangers for saints of worldly ambition:

“Ambition—‘the pride of life’—is no less a ‘lust’ than the ‘desire of the flesh.’ Rightly directed and controlled it provides a stimu-lus to effort, just as natural desire affords the means of ‘replenishing the earth.’ But ambition pursued for its own sake is no less

corrupting to the individual, and infinitely more ruinous to others—as millions of dead in war may witness. A certain calling may bring a man in contact with people wealthier and of higher social status than he is. If he is ambitious by temperament, a strong desire to be their equal may be aroused, and step by step he may become absorbed in trying to reach his mark. Once there, another level opens up beyond, and the striving may end only with death.”2

The death to which Brother Sargent refers is almost certainly the death of both the old and the new man in the case of the saint seduced by worldly progress and recognition.

John wrote of an ecclesia that was being ad-versely affected by one “Diotrephes, who loveth to have the preeminence among them” (3 Jno. v. 9). Such a desire is an unhealthy and unedifying ambition. Paul taught that there is no place in the ecclesia for those seeking pre-eminence, nor for competition between brothers. These things might be appropriate in a commercial or sporting context, but not in the ecclesia:

“Be of the same mind one toward another. Set not your mind on high things, but con-descend to [be carried with, mg.] things that are lowly. Be not wise in your own conceits” (Rom. 12:16, RV).

1. Concise Oxford English Dictionary.2. L. G. Sargent, The Teaching of the Master (1961), pp.

128–9.

Contents


Saints ought not to be striving for “high things.” That which is lowly should be the focus of their life in Christ. Above all, saints should be wary of their own wisdom and cleverness. This advice is a recipe for harmony and peace in the ecclesia, especially in an ecclesia like that in Rome which would have been comprised of a wide cross-section of society.

Positive ambitionWhile worldly ambition can be detrimental to the new man in Christ, there are forms of ambi-tion that are entirely appropriate for saints. An “ardent desire” can be a good thing if the object of the desire is spiritually beneficial.

The Greek word philotimeomai has a meaning that correlates closely with the English word ‘ambition’:1 to love honour or distinction; to be ambitious

or emulous2 to place one’s fame, glory in a thing, pride

oneself on it.3This word is used three times in the New Tes-tament. Given its meaning, it might come as a surprise to learn that in each case it is used to de-scribe a positive spiritual trait. Its first occurrence concerns Paul’s preaching of the gospel: “I make it my ambition to preach the gospel” (Rom. 15:20, ESV). At one time, Paul’s ambition was to rise to the top in the exclusive sect of the Pharisees, which would have been reflected in disdain for Gentiles. Having been converted, however, Paul was proud to be known for the fact that “from Jerusalem, and round about unto Illyricum, I have fully preached the gospel of Christ” (v. 19), and doing so “not where Christ was named” (v. 20), but rather in new territories not previously evangelised by others.

Having emptied himself of personal ambition, Paul was devoted only to serving God and his Lord Jesus Christ. Thus, when writing to the Corinthians, Paul said that “whether at home or exiled, we make it our ambition to please [God]” (2 Cor. 5:9, NJB).

The final use of philotimeomai is in Paul’s first letter to the Thessalonians, in a context which links our daily life in the world with our spir-itual life:

“make it your ambition [aspire, RSV] to lead a quiet life: you should mind your own busi-ness and work with your hands, just as we told you, so that your daily life may win the respect of outsiders and so that you will not be dependent on anybody” (1 Thess. 4:11,12, NIV).

Worldly ambition is the antithesis of leading a quiet life, being underpinned by self-promotion rather than self-restraint. In recommending a quiet life, Paul advises believers to focus on their own affairs and avoid developing a public profile. That Paul expects disciples to support themselves by working for a living indicates that it is not wrong for saints to acquire skills and qualifications that enable them to win and maintain employment.

We should not regard Paul’s instruction that disciples “work with [their] own hands” as man-dating that they pursue only manual trades. He is deliberately challenging the Greek culture in Thessalonica, which looked down on those who undertook menial tasks, regarding such work as suitable only for slaves. This attitude is still pre-sent in some sectors in modern Western societies, and saints should not buy into this elitist view. There is nothing wrong with suitably inclined brothers and sisters pursuing a professional career if they can do so without compromising their ecclesial service. Likewise, we should not regard as unworthy the jobs that involve manual labour: our Lord himself worked with his hands to support his mother and siblings (Mk. 6:3).

Each of these uses of philotimeomai is at odds with the ambitions of a worldly man. “The con-trast with the targets a worldly man sets himself could hardly be more striking.”4 These are the ambitions that should be pursued by the bond-slaves of Christ.

Striking a balanceFrom time to time there have been brothers and sisters who have argued that tertiary education is inappropriate for saints. There are spiritual risks that will be faced by those who attend institutes of higher learning, but there are also risks for those who attend trade schools or who limit themselves to unskilled labour. All avenues of employment present challenges; how we respond to those challenges is one way we give expression to “our ambition to please” God.

In the rapidly evolving conditions of modern economies, skills that once allowed someone to earn sufficient income so that they “will not be dependent on anybody” can quickly become redundant. Brothers and sisters so affected will be obliged to acquire new skills if they are to continue to comply with Paul’s instructions. This

3. Liddell and Scott’s Greek-English Lexicon.4. Harry Whittaker, Enjoying the Bible (1973), p. 225.


fact alone demonstrates that it cannot be inher-ently wrong to give attention to the acquisition of knowledge and skills.

Writing more than ninety years ago, Brother Islip Collyer very wisely argued for an appropri-ate balance in these matters:

“Perhaps there was a time in the Brotherhood when we were too little prepared for the pro-longation of mortality. It seemed unnecessary to prepare much for battling with a world that was so soon to pass. We are nearer to the end now but there is much more education in worldly wisdom. Sometimes, while older brethren are overworked, the young ones are too busy to render assistance—special stud-ies, the passing of examinations, the securing of necessary degrees. These are all limited objectives and unfortunately the final object to which they stand related is limited, too. But although these ambitions bounded by mortality are not the most obvious guides to

the Kingdom of God, there is no reason why they should lead anyone astray. Keep them all in the true line and then they may be even used as helps . . . We may desire to pass an examination, or to improve the home, or to give our children a better chance in the world than we had ourselves. These are all limited objectives. Let us take care that we keep them all in the true line, so that even if they fail to help they will not hinder.”5

As we await the return of our Lord and the realisation of those things we most “ardently desire,” let us heed Paul’s advice to Timothy to “Give diligence to present thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, handling aright the word of truth” (2 Tim. 2:15, RV) in those passages that provide lessons for our daily life.

5. Islip Collyer, Principles and Proverbs (1976), pp. 64–5.

An unbiblical reviewThank you for the critical appraisal of my booklet on the BASF.1 You make some valid points, but it would help to clarify the situation if you would comment on the following:1 You seem to claim that the work of the Holy

Spirit is solely to do with things miraculous, and that it was withdrawn at the end of the first century. As we read through Acts, how-ever, it seems clear that the 3,000 baptised on the Day of Pentecost did not have the ability to work miracles, so what did “the gift of the Holy Spirit” (Acts 2:38) mean to them?

2 John chapters 14–16 speak of the coming of the Parakletos—‘one called alongside to help’—and say that it dwells, resides and abides in the believer. Do you not think that the Parakletos is active in our lives today?

3 The epistles of Paul speak of the Holy Spirit sealing, leading, indwelling, grieving, fill-ing, strengthening, interceding, defending, bringing joy and peace, assisting in prayer. Do you not see this apostolic testimony as being applicable today?

But we may have to leave it to the Lord Jesus to resolve all our problems at his return.

Bill DavisonNottingham

ReplyI thank Brother Bill for his letter, and for the Christlike spirit he has shown in recent ex-changes. I am happy to try and respond to his questions in the pages of the magazine.

1. I said in my review: “Essentially the opera-tion of Holy Spirit in New Testament times was demonstrable either in miraculous events or in revelation being communicated to the speak-ers.” I believe this is a reasonable conclusion from the biblical evidence. We do not know for certain whether or not any of the 3,000 baptised on the Day of Pentecost ever received any of the miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit; it might be reasonable to suggest that some did (since the gifts appear to have been fairly widely available

1. “An unbiblical review,” Mar. 2017, p. 104.

Your Letters

Contents



in the first-century ecclesias—see 1 Corinthians 12–14), but Brother Bill is right that Acts provides no specific evidence of this. It cannot be that Peter was wrong in what he said, so what did he mean?

It should be noted how Peter’s argument in verse 38 continues into verse 39: “Repent, and . . . be baptised in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. For the promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off, as many as the Lord our God will call to Him-self.”2 Peter is quoting from part of Joel 2:32: “. . . for on Mount Zion and in Jerusalem there will be those who escape, as the LORD has said, even among the survivors whom the LORD calls.”3 “The promise” of which Peter speaks is therefore the same promise of which Joel wrote—deliverance from judgement on “the great and awesome day of the Lord.” This promise of salvation was now available to Peter’s audience of devout Jews (Acts 2:5) if they would believe that God had made Jesus of Nazareth “both Lord and Christ” (v. 36). The promise had been ‘given’ to Israel by the Holy Spirit in the words of the prophet Joel, and it had now been confirmed to Israel by the Holy Spirit in “Jesus the Nazarene, a man attested to you by God with miracles and wonders and signs which God performed through him” (v. 22).

I believe that the phrase “the gift of the Holy Spirit” (v. 38) should therefore be understood in the sense of ‘God’s promise of salvation given by the Holy Spirit.’ The Holy Spirit is the giver, not the gift. (What is done by the Holy Spirit is done by God, of course—it is His Spirit.) This reading is consistent with what I said in my review: “the Holy Spirit . . . was demonstrable . . . in revelation being communicated to the speakers.” In Acts 2 the Apostle Peter, speaking under inspiration himself, is expounding God’s gift of salvation as recorded in the Old Testament Scriptures, which were given by the Holy Spirit. Of course, this is by no means the only occasion on which the Bible speaks of God doing something by the Holy Spirit. There is an excellent example in two New Testament quotations of Psalm 95:11: “Therefore I swore in My anger, Truly they shall not enter into My rest.” Hebrews 3:7-11 attributes this passage to the Holy Spirit, and 4:3-5 attributes it to God.

We might find less difficulty with the words of Acts 2:38 if we keep in mind that the phrase “the gift of the Holy Spirit” is simply equivalent to “the gift of God,” which is used elsewhere in the New Testament of God’s promise of salvation (Jno. 4:10; Rom. 6:23; Eph. 2:8).

There is a construction similar to Acts 2:38 earlier in the same chapter: “having been exalted to the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, he [Jesus] has poured forth this which you both see and hear. For . . . David . . . says: ‘The LORD said to my Lord, “Sit at My right hand, until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet”’” (vv. 33-35). Again, Peter’s argument is carried forward by his use of the word “For.” It is true that God ‘promised’ the miraculous powers of the Holy Spirit to the Lord Jesus (Jno. 3:34; Mt. 28:18), but it may well be that Peter is now referring to the promises made to the Lord Jesus by the Holy Spirit, specifically in the other two prophecies quoted by Peter in his speech: Psalm 16 and Psalm 110. Respectively, these psalms promised to ‘David’s Lord’ resurrection from the dead and ascension to heaven.

2. For the best explanation I can offer Brother Bill on his second question, I refer him to the book ‘Spirit’ in the New Testament by Brethren Edward Whittaker and Reg Carr, published by The Tes-timony. This splendid work is still available, at the price of just £1 plus postage, from the usual sources—see the back cover of the magazine, or online at http://testimonymagazine.com/shop/books/spirit . The material in this book was first published in the Testimony in the early 1970s, when unsound views about the Holy Spirit were circulating. Unfortunately the Brotherhood is still troubled from time to time by such influence from Evangelical teaching.

Chapter 1 of this book closely examines the five sayings of the Lord Jesus in John 14–16 concerning the Parakletos (translated “Comforter” in the AV, and “Advocate” or “Helper” in other versions).4 I quote the final paragraph of this chapter:

“The vital conclusion to be drawn from this detailed study of the Advocate in promise and fulfilment is that every feature of its manifestation was of a miraculous character. The teaching about the Advocate is contained in the five sayings analysed, and each one of these separate passages has been found to

2. Bible quotations are from the NASB.3. Interestingly, in Acts 2:21 Peter has already cited the

first part of this verse as part of a longer quotation from Joel 2: “And it shall be that everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.” For the purposes of his exposition, Peter splits Joel 2:32 into two.

4. These are found in John 14:16,26; 15:26; 16:7.

http://testimonymagazine.com/shop/books/spirit

http://testimonymagazine.com/shop/books/spirit


involve the promise of miraculous, phenom-enal and supernatural help and guidance. An honest comparison of the promises made by Jesus about the Holy Spirit with their practi-cal fulfilment in the lives of the disciples who received the promises shows that the idea of the Comforter being a spirit of grace in the heart of all believers down the ages has no place at all in the teaching of the Lord. Such an idea can be shown, on the contrary, to have its origin in the philosophies of men.”

Perhaps the saying which most clearly shows what the Lord meant is John 14:26: “But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I said to you.” Only those who had heard Jesus speak could have his words brought to their remembrance. This precludes later generations of disciples.

Some of the objections received from read-ers when this series was first published in the magazine are addressed in the book’s appendix. Here the authors observe:

“. . . none of those correspondents who pro-pound the view that the Comforter’s ministry still continues has . . . come up with any Scriptural evidence to suggest that the Com-forter was to continue up to the present day in ‘non-miraculous manifestations’” (p. 158).

This is what is required for the alternative view of the work of the Comforter which I think Brother Bill implies in his question: unequivocal evidence from Scripture that this is how we are to understand the topic. Only sound exposition will lead us to sound conclusions on this topic.

3. One of the criticisms I made of Brother Bill’s booklet was that a number of passages of Scrip-ture are not read carefully enough. I fear there is more of the same in his third question. For instance, Scripture speaks of the Holy Spirit being grieved (Eph. 4:30) but never of it “grieving.” It may seem pedantic to point out such a slip, but there are potentially more serious examples of the same thing. I take it that the claim that Paul’s epistles “speak of the Holy Spirit . . . interceding [and] assisting in prayer” is an allusion to Romans 8:26,27; but this chapter says nothing about the Holy Spirit, a point I made in my review when I wrote of the failure to distinguish between the different ways in which the Bible uses the word ‘spirit.’ When Paul writes to the Romans of “the Spirit of God [dwelling] in you” (vv. 9,11), or of “being led by the Spirit of God” (v. 14), he simply

does not mean that the Holy Spirit takes posses-sion of a believer in some way to work directly on him. Romans 8 has been ably expounded in the literature of the Brotherhood, and there is perhaps some timely encouragement here for us to get acquainted (or reacquainted) with some of the ‘works of the Truth.’ Helpful in this regard are The Letter to the Romans by Brother John Carter and Clerical Theology Unscriptural by Brother John Thomas.

I would make the same observation as above with regard to some the other examples of “ap-ostolic testimony” advanced.

This would still leave a number which are open to valid exploration. (It would be helpful to have had specific Bible references for these, as they are likely to need case-by-case study rather than our applying a ‘blanket’ assumption as to what they mean.) The difficulty is that I am of-ten uncertain what Brother Bill means when he uses certain words and phrases, just as I was in my review. To ask whether I “see this apostolic testimony as being applicable today” is begging the question, therefore, because I suspect that I would not agree with Brother Bill on the nature of the apostles’ testimony. If the question is, ‘Do I believe that God uses the Holy Spirit directly on the mind of a believer, to provide some kind of divine guidance, or to influence or help him live the life required of him,’ then my answer is, ‘No—and I do not believe that this is how the Holy Spirit worked in the first century.’ Like the authors above, I think that the onus is on those who believe this to provide solid biblical evidence for their understanding.

I hope that this reply will provide some of the clarity that Brother Bill asks for. In conclusion, I refer readers to the Bible Student series “The work of God on men’s hearts” currently being reprinted in the Testimony. I also take the opportunity to thank those who have offered feedback on the review. All of this was supportive of the views I expressed.—Jeremy Thomas

The structure of 2 PeterI was very interested to see the Special Issue on the Epistles of Peter. I wonder if you would consider drawing attention to a proposal for the overall structure of 2 Peter. You will see that key words and phrases from chapter 1 recur in chapter 3 and give a symmetry to the epistle which centres on the warnings of the rise of false prophets and teachers.



A. 1:1-11: exhortation in light of the promises“Simon Peter, a servant and an apostle of Jesus Christ, to them that have obtained like precious faith with us through the righteousness of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ: grace and peace be multiplied unto you through the knowledge of God, and of Jesus our Lord, according as His divine power hath given unto us all things that pertain unto life and godliness, through the knowledge of Him that hath called us to glory and virtue: whereby are given unto us exceed-ing great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, hav-ing escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust. And beside this, giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue; and to virtue knowledge; and to knowledge temperance; and to temper-ance patience; and to patience godliness; and to godliness brotherly kindness; and to brotherly kindness charity. For if these things be in you, and abound, they make you that ye shall neither be barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. But he that lacketh these things is blind, and cannot see afar off, and hath forgotten that he was purged from his old sins. Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure: for if ye do these things, ye shall never fall: for so an entrance shall be ministered unto you abundantly into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.”

B. 1:12-21: remember the sure word of prophecy“Wherefore I will not be negligent to put you always in remembrance of these things, though ye know them, and be established in the present truth. Yea, I think it meet, as long as I am in this tabernacle, to stir you up by putting you in remembrance; knowing that shortly I must put off this my tabernacle, even as our Lord Jesus Christ hath shewed me . . . knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy [Spirit].”

C. 2:1-22: warning of false prophets“But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you . . .”

B’. 3:1-7: remember the sure word of prophecy“This second epistle, beloved, I now write unto you; in both which I stir up your pure minds by way of remembrance: that ye may be mindful of the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets . . . For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished: but the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.”

A’. 3:8-18: exhortation in light of the promises“But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some men count slackness . . . Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness, look-ing for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat? Nevertheless we, according to His promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness. Wherefore, beloved, seeing that ye look for such things, be diligent that ye may be found of Him in peace, without spot, and blameless . . . Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness. But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and for ever. Amen.”

Stephen PalmerCardiff

“. . . while externals such as Jerusalem and the temple might disappear, the underlying truths of the gospel preached to Abraham remained inviolate. There was no need for believers to despair as they saw these dramatic events unfold ing, because God was in control and, through Christ, had called them to a lively hope as constituents of the true temple of God, built upon the Lord Jesus Christ as the chief cornerstone.”

Testimony Special Issue Feed my sheep, May–June 2017, p. 161


Damascus in history and prophecy (1)Sid Levett

History

The ongoing civil war in Syria means that its capital, Damascus, is often in the news. This two-part article provides an overview of its history, and examines a prophecy of the city’s apparent destruction in Isaiah 17.

UPRISINGS IN TUNISIA in December 2010 led to the resignation of the nation’s presi-dent, who had ruled for twenty-three years.

This triggered similar protests in other Middle Eastern countries, most of them with similarly despotic leaders. The underlying causes of these protests, later labelled the ‘Arab Spring,’ included unemployment, the high cost of food, a lack of political freedom, and the corruption of political leaders and bureaucrats.

In all affected nations, protests were met with a strong response from the authorities. More surprisingly, they led ultimately to the removal of leaders in several countries, including Egypt, Libya and Yemen. Generally speaking, however, living conditions for ordinary people have not improved, and in some countries life has be-come much worse as sectarian groups battle for control. Despots and their oppressive regimes did at least restrict internal conflicts. Nations in the West struggle to understand the intensity of these rivalries and the level of retribution when opportunity arises. Continuing unrest in Libya and Yemen is evidence that the removal of such leaders does not necessarily resolve entrenched economic difficulties and sectarian issues in countries of this region.

SyriaAnd then there is Syria. Here hostility, retribu-tion and a desire to retain power at all costs have been taken to an unprecedented level. To Western minds it may be difficult to comprehend that a leader could impose such suffering on his own people, but President Bashir al-Assad is not the first to rationalise all such actions as justifiable to retain his power and position. Current estimates are that 4.8 million Syrians have fled to other

countries and that 6.6 million are internally displaced, many of whom have moved to the relative safety of Damascus. Estimates of the death toll vary, but Stephan de Mistura, the United Nations special envoy to Syria,

estimated in April 2016 that more than 400,000 Syrians had been killed since 2011. In addition, the destruction of entire neighbourhoods in several cities, particularly Aleppo, means that refugees have no home to which they can return even if the conflict is resolved.

What commenced as an uprising to oust Presi-dent Assad has degenerated into a complex civil war, with numerous groups vying for control. The West has so far kept out of direct involve-ment, partly from the lesson learned in Libya that disposing of leaders does not necessarily result in better conditions locally, and partly because there is no obvious alternative leader or political party. The USA is supporting certain rebel groups, Iran is overtly supporting Assad and, in 2015, Russia stepped in to provide direct military engagement to enhance her influence in the region and to protect her major naval base at Tartus on the Syrian coast. Also involved are ISIS, the Al-Qaeda-linked Al-Nusra Front, and the Kurds (mainly Sunni Muslims). The latter group concerns the Turkish government, which does not want to see Kurds controlling areas in Syria or northern Iraq. Overall, the war has created an almost incomprehensible complexity of relation-ships, which has highlighted the ineptitude of the United Nations in brokering a resolution.

The war in Syria has been reported extensively by the media over the past five years, astonishing us with man’s cruelty to his fellows, and gener-ating much discussion about Isaiah’s prophecy about the city: “Behold, Damascus will cease to be a city, and will become a heap of ruins. Her cities will be deserted for ever; they will be for flocks, which will lie down, and none will make them afraid” (17:1,2, RSV). We will return to a consideration of this prophecy after considering


other biblical references to Damascus and certain historical events that have set the scene for the circumstances that currently prevail.

The meddling of the WestThis is a topic of its own, so suffice to say here that nineteenth- and early twentieth-century draw-ing of borders by Britain and France sowed the seeds for discord between the various sectarian divisions within Islam as groups once separate were brought together to form new countries. A prime example is the merging in 1920 of the former Shiite and Sunni provinces of Mesopo-tamia to form Iraq, which was governed under Britain’s mandate.

The West’s appointment of a leader for Persia after the First World War reads like a story from the Boys’ Own Annual. The chief of British forces in Persia, Major General Sir Edmund Ironside, decided that Colonel Reza Khan Pahlavi of the Persian forces was ‘the right sort of chap’ for the role, and informed him, apparently without Brit-ish government endorsement, that Britain would not oppose him seizing power. This he did in 1921 in a military coup, subsequently declaring himself Shah of Persia. He was succeeded in 1941 by his son, who also took the title shah, but Shah of Iran, as the country’s name was changed in 1935. Both shahs were pro-Western, oppressed opposition, and lived lives of excess and profligate expenditure. This led to the Iranian revolution of 1979 and the establishment of an Islamic republic led by Grand Ayatollah Khomeini.

More recently, the US invasion of Kuwait in 1990 led to the formation of Al-Qaeda, while the 2003 invasion of Iraq encouraged the development of ISIS. Some political commentators consider that George W. Bush ignored State Department advice that the toppling of Saddam Hussein would lead to major unrest along sectarian lines. It seems that nothing changes.

Prescient observationsCriticism of the West’s meddling in the Middle East is not new, but advice has frequently been ignored, supposedly for the greater good of the Western nation concerned. In 1920, with Britain agonising over what to do with Mesopotamia (soon to be called Iraq), the region’s commissioner, Colonel Arnold Wilson, reported that the Kurds, who had expected to be given rule over their area, would “never accept an Arab ruler.” Wilson added that the Shiites would not accept domination by the minority Sunni community, yet “no form of

government has yet been envisaged, which does not involve Sunni domination.” In a comment that continues to resonate, he stated that the popula-tion was tribal “with no previous tradition of obedience to any government.”1 In response to Arab attacks against British forces, The Times of London opined: “How much longer are valuable lives to be sacrificed in the vain endeavour to impose upon the Arab population an elaborate and expensive administration which they never asked for and do not want?”2

It was all to no avail; the Mesopotamian prov-inces were merged to form the new nation of Iraq. At the prompting of T. E. Lawrence, Faisal Ali al-Hashimi was appointed ruler after a failed attempt to make him king of Syria. He ruled Iraq until his death in 1933 and was succeeded by his son, and then his grandson. The monarchy was deposed in a military coup in 1958.

Similar circumstances prevailed in Syria and Lebanon. The French became unwelcome admin-istrators of both countries by demanding that Britain should comply broadly with the carving up of the Ottoman Empire in accordance with the Sykes-Picot Agreement, which was subse-quently endorsed by the League of Nations. The scene was set for an Arab backlash, the results of which continue to the present time and bring us to a consideration of Syria and particularly the city of Damascus.3

Syria in historyThe outstanding feature of Syrian history is that, for most of its long existence, after developing from a city-state near Idlib around 3,000 BC, the nation has been ruled by numerous occupying powers, as the following overview attests:• From around 2000 BC: occupied by various

ancient nations—Hittites, Amorites, Sumer-ians, Canaanites and Phoenicians

• 1000 to 700 BC: ruled by Assyria• From 600 BC: under Babylonian control for

about seventy years (Jer. 49:23-27)• 539 BC: becomes part of the Persian Empire• 333 BC: conquered by Alexander the Great of

Greece• 64 BC: conquered by the Romans

1. David Fromkin, A Peace- to End All Peace, p. 450.2. Ibid., p. 452.3. For readers interested in further information on the

British and French division of the Middle East and the appointment of rulers, Kingmakers—the Invention of the Modern Middle East by Karl Meyer and Sharen Brysac is recommended.


• AD 395: Byzantine control after decline of Western Rome

• 634–1515: various Muslim Arab groups in control

• 1516–1917: part of the Turkish Empire under the Ottomans.

Damascus in ScriptureA traditional opinion, albeit one that cannot be confirmed, is that Damascus was founded by Uz, son of Aram, son of Shem. The city is mentioned some sixty times in Scripture. The first reference is in Genesis 14:15, when Abraham rescued Lot and his household from the four kings who had taken them captive. This precedes any reference to Jerusalem, which is not mentioned by that name until the time of Joshua—although it is usually understood to be the Salem of Melchizedek in Genesis 14, and we read of the early occupants, the Jebusites, in chapter 10.

David’s early conquests included the Ara-means, which enabled him to place a garrison in Damascus and to receive tribute from the Syrians (2 Sam. 8:6). This control over Syria did not last, and the nation became an ongoing threat to Israel. Another key reference is 2 Kings 8:7-15, where Elisha travels to Damascus to inform Hazael that his master, King Ben-hadad of Syria, will die and that Hazael will reign in his place.

A disconcerting event recorded in 2 Chronicles 28:5 shows that Judah’s dominion over Syria was long gone. King Ahaz was defeated in battle by the king of Syria, and many of the inhabitants of Jerusalem were taken captive to Damascus. This period was a low point for both the northern and southern kingdoms; verse 8 tells of Israel taking captive 200,000 people from Judah. The religious life of God’s people reached a nadir, and influence from Damascus was a contributing factor. Edom had defeated Judah and carried away captives, prompting King Ahaz to appeal to Assyria for help. His plan went horribly wrong when Assyria elected to afflict Judah rather than to provide support. Ahaz then made an even worse decision, offering sacrifices to the gods of Damascus—on the basis that they must be strong, since Syria had previously defeated Judah. Needless to say, assis-tance was not forthcoming. Scripture’s summing up is candid: “they were the ruin of him” (v. 23).

Further details of Judah’s dalliance with Da-mascus are provided in 2 Kings, where Ahaz’s complete disregard for the God of Israel is made apparent. Visiting Damascus, Ahaz saw an altar that appealed to him, so he arranged for the

precise pattern to be sent to Jerusalem. Ahaz had the new altar installed in place of the existing bronze altar, and demanded that it be used for the daily offerings (2 Kgs. 16:10-16). Discoveries in the region of pagan altars with a monarch’s image built into them have led some archaeologists to surmise that the Damascus altar may have been similar. If this was so, Ahaz’s enthusiasm in seen in an even worse light. The influence of Damascus on Israel over the centuries has been considerable, and in recent times Syria was one of the main protagonists in the wars of 1948, 1967 and 1973.

All New Testament references to Damascus involve the Apostle Paul. They include his con-version on the road to Damascus and subsequent events in the city, particularly his healing by Ananias and his preaching in the synagogues (Acts 9:1-22). After fleeing the city, Paul spent time in Arabia before returning to Damascus, apparently for a period of three years. From this we can assume that many converts were made there, probably resulting in the establishment of one of the very early ecclesias (Gal. 1:15-18).

Damascus in recent historyAs we have already observed, the history of Syria is one of frequent occupation by other nations. The twentieth century has been a period of consider-able turmoil, and for Syria’s capital Damascus in particular, as the following list demonstrates:• 1918: British and Allied forces enter Damascus

and end 400 years of Turkish rule• 1919: France occupies the country under the

Sykes-Picot agreement with Britain, and is granted a mandate by the League of Nations in 1923

• 1920s: Faisal appointed ruler; uprisings against the French take place

• 1941: occupied by British and French forces as part of Second World War operations

• 1946: Syria gains independence• 1948: Syria joins Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon and

Iraq to attack Israel• 1950s and 1960s: a number of anti-government

military coups attempted• 1967: Six-Day War against Israel; Syria a lead-

ing protagonist• 1973: Syria joins in the Yom-Kippur War

against Israel.It is interesting to note that Britain’s choice of Faisal as king of Syria, at the urging of T. E. Lawrence, did not work out as intended. He was appointed in March 1920 but ruled only until July when he was overthrown by the French. There


were, however, other nations to be handed out, and Faisal was made king of Iraq as a reward for the assistance provided by Arab forces in Britain’s war against the Turks. In truth Lawrence had always embellished the extent of Arab support, especially concerning their involvement in the capture of Damascus in 1918. The British plan endorsed by General Edmund Allenby was that Faisal’s troops should be first to enter the city, but, in the heat of battle, and with poor communica-tions, that did not happen: the Australian Light Horse entered first, followed by British troops. To achieve the intended outcome, an Arab ‘victori-ous entry’ was fabricated to take place three days later. Faisal was informed by Allenby that he was being appointed the administrator of Syria with French support. This was a surprise to Faisal, who had expected British backup.

The Assad eraIn many Middle East countries, the present rul-ers, or those deposed in recent years, took power

in military coups; this was so in Syria. General Hafiz al-Assad of the Syrian army seized control in 1971 and remained in office until his death in 2000, when his son, Bashar al-Assad, became president. The family is from the small Alawite sect of Shia Islam, in a nation where the majority are Sunnis. In these circumstances, the Alawite power-base has been maintained by the support of the military and by the ruthless crushing of internal dissent.

The Assads are alleged to have provided sup-port to external terrorist groups, including the PLO, Hezbollah and various jihadi movements. Ironically, the rebel groups currently fighting to depose President Assad are declared by him to be terrorists. His desire to maintain power at any cost has been apparent to the world since 2011, with relentless attacks upon the rebel groups and, apparently, the deliberate targeting of civilians in areas occupied by the rebels.

(To be concluded)

Exhortation

Holiness10. Christ: from holy to beyondJoe Harding

WE HAVE NOTED that Jesus Christ was, from conception, holy (Lk. 1:35), pro-vided in unique circumstances to offer a

way of escape from the inevitable condemnation of the flesh. According to the definitions we have explored so far, we must assume that, like any holy thing, he could have become defiled. The first thirty years of his life are a miracle of ‘keeping himself unspotted from the world.’ Scripture is mostly silent on this period.1

Then the Gospels record for us Jesus’ anoint-ing:

“And John bare record, saying, I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and it abode upon him. And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the

Holy [Spirit]. And I saw, and bare record that this is the Son of God” (Jno. 1:32-34).

There is a parallel with the dedication of the priests:

“and thou shalt anoint them, as thou didst anoint their father, that they may minister unto Me in the priest’s office: for their anoint-ing shall surely be an everlasting priesthood throughout their generations” (Ex. 40:15);“. . . neither shall [the high priest] go out of the sanctuary, nor profane the sanctuary of his God; for the crown of the anointing oil of his God is upon him: I am the LORD” (Lev. 21:12);“And the LORD spake unto Aaron, Behold, I also have given thee the charge of mine

1. Brother Melva Purkis in his book A Life of Christ dwells eloquently on these formative years.

Contents


heave offerings of all the hallowed things of the children of Israel; unto thee have I given them by reason of the anointing, and to thy sons, by an ordinance for ever” (Num. 18:8).

After thirty undefiled years, God’s designated High Priest was ready to begin his ministry of reconciliation.

CounterpartsIn his First Letter, John reassures his readers, “But ye have an unction from the Holy One, and ye know all things” (2:20). The passage contrasts with another spirit, the spirit of rebellion against the Anointed One, ‘antichrist,’ which cannot remain amongst the believers because it is of an entirely different character. Therefore, following its natural course, it departs their company. But true believers had received an unction—that is, an anointing—from the Holy One which had educated them fully in the ways and devices of the flesh. The pattern of dissent that would lead to apostasy bears a striking resemblance to the rebellion of Korah, Dathan and Abiram—a desire for kudos within the ecclesia without the accompanying spirit of contrition and discipline. (One of the main charges against Paul was ex-actly theirs: “Ye take too much upon you” (Num. 16:3)—a charge which Paul answers at length in his Second Letter to the Corinthians.)

John continues:“These things have I written unto you con-cerning them that seduce you. But the anoint-ing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him” (1 Jno. 2:26,27).

The phrase ‘Spirit-anointing’ is likely to arouse misunderstanding; too many Christian groups have adopted such language to describe a quasi-miraculous event by which the believer is in some way ‘taken over’ by God so that his life henceforth is not subject to his own control.

In our efforts to tread circumspectly around this difficult subject, we can lose sight of the necessary progression towards holiness, and the direct counterpart between the anointing oil of the Mosaic constitution and the anointing, by the Spirit of God, of Jesus Christ. This has to be so, if the pattern of the Law is to be maintained. No priest has the right to approach holy things without the sweet fragrance of the holy anointing oil upon him.

Flesh and spiritWithout wishing to become unduly sidetracked by this, it is a worthwhile study, particularly in the Gospel of John, to see the contrasting attitudes of flesh and spirit. John employs metaphors in abun-dance, likening the flesh to darkness, ignorance, blindness, earth, and so on, in contrast with the Spirit, which is light, purpose, perception, heaven. Importantly, John tells us:

“That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit” (3:6).

This statement is reinforced trenchantly by Paul in his Epistle to the Romans:

“the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be. So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God” (Rom. 8:7,8).

Spirit thinking turns human thinking on its head; but, without adopting God’s perspective on life, we cannot please Him. Instead we end up trying to satisfy the insatiable desires of the flesh—hence baptism, with its symbolic burial of the flesh, and the need for a new way of thinking, and the need to have created in us “a clean heart” (Ps. 51:10).2

Jesus had no need of baptism in the sense that we do, for he had no sins to forgive. But his baptism and the subsequent descent and abiding of the Holy Spirit (Jno. 1:32) was the counterpart to the anointing of the altar, elevating the status of Jesus’ sanctity from ‘holy’ to ‘most holy.’

“For he whom God hath sent speaketh the words of God: for God giveth not the Spirit by measure unto him” (3:34).

It follows naturally that Jesus performed his first miracle involving the stone water pots set aside “after the manner of the purifying of the Jews” (2:6). These were now redundant; the principles of the Law would see their fulfilment in the work of Christ. See what Luke and Mark choose to record first amongst the miracles of this most holy Son of God:

“And in the synagogue there was a man, which had a spirit of an unclean devil, and cried out with a loud voice, Saying, Let us alone; what have we to do with thee, thou Jesus of Nazareth? art thou come to destroy us? I know thee who thou art; the Holy One of God” (Lk. 4:33,34; see also Mk. 1:23,24).

Here is a man full of the uncleanness of the flesh. Whatever his mental condition might have been,

2. For more on these words from Psalm 51, see “The work of God on men’s hearts (4)” in this issue, p. 307.


he is a fitting choice to show the power of the Most Holy over the unclean.

“And Jesus rebuked him, saying, Hold thy peace, and come out of him. And when the devil had thrown him in the midst, he came out of him, and hurt him not. And they were

all amazed, and spake among themselves, saying, What a word is this! for with author-ity and power he commandeth the unclean spirits, and they come out” (Lk. 4:35-37; see also Mk. 1:25-27).

(To be continued)

The stones cry outTrends and discoveries in Bible archaeologyDavid Burges

Jerusalem named in ancient scroll

ISRAELI ARCHAEOLOGISTS have made public a fragment of an ancient text which con-

tains the earliest known Hebrew reference to Jerusalem outside of the Bible.1 The 11 cm × 2.5 cm (4.3 × 1 inch) piece of papyrus was recovered from thieves who had looted it from a cave in the Judean Desert and were seeking to sell it on the antiqui-ties market. Written in ancient Hebrew letters, it details the transfer of goods to storehouses in the city, and reads: “From the king’s female servant, from Na′arat, two jars of wine, to Je-rusalem.” Analysis of the style of the letters and radiocarbon dating suggest a date in the seventh century BC, at the time when the kings of Judah were successively Manasseh, Amon and Josiah. Only two other pa-pyrus fragments in Hebrew from this period have been found.

The document specifies the status of the sender of the ship-ment (the king’s female servant); the name of the town from which the shipment was dispatched (Na′arat); the contents of the vessels (wine); their number or

amount (jars) and their destina-tion (Jerusalem). Na′arat (AV, Naarath; NKJV, Naarah) is re-ferred to in the description of the border between the tribal areas of Ephraim and Benjamin: “Then it went down from Janohah to Ataroth and Naarah, reached to Jericho, and came out at the Jordan” (Josh. 16:7).2,3 The text clearly implies the importance of Jerusalem as the destination of the shipment.

Presenting the information, scholar Schmuel Ahituv also said that it was signif icant that the text features the ‘Ye-rushalem’ spelling of the city’s name that is more commonly found in the Bible. There are only four instances in the Bible, he noted, of Jerusalem being spelled ‘Yerushalayim,’ with an additional letter yod, the way it is pronounced in modern Hebrew.

Significantly, the scroll frag-ment was publicised by the Is-raeli Antiquities Authority shortly after the notorious UNESCO resolution claiming that the Jews have no historic links to the Tem-ple Mount in Jerusalem.4 The Israeli government was swift to claim the papyrus as forming a rebuttal of the UNESCO claim, while a Palestinian spokesman

Archaeology

1. Ilan Ben Zion, Times of Israel, 26 Oct. 2016: http://www.timesofisrael .com/oldest-hebrew-mention-of-jerusalem-found-on-rare-papyrus-from-7th-century-bce/

2. Bible quotations are from the NKJV.

3. The Oxford Bible maps show Naarah as located in the Jordan Valley, approximately six miles north of Jericho.

4. See Shaun Maher, “World Watch-man: A window on Israel,” Tes-timony, vol. 86, no. 1,021, Nov. 2016, p. 432.

5. See “The stones cry out,” sec-tion Archaeology and politics, Testimony, vol. 83, no. 988, Nov. 2013, p. 429.

6. Hershel Shanks, “The Interrupted Search for King David’s Palace,” Biblical Archaeology Review, Jul./Aug. 2016, p. 33, which reviews the academic excavation reports.

accused Israel of waging a cam-paign of “archaeological claims and distortion of facts.” So an archaeological discovery is once again being used as political football.5 But to Bible students it is one more small confirmation of the authen ticity of Scripture.

Seeking David’s palace6

THERE is great interest for Bible students in locating the

Contents

http://www.timesofisrael.com/oldest-hebrew-mention-of-jerusalem-found-on-rare-papyrus-from-7th-century-bce/









290 Testimony, August 2017Contents

sites in Israel associated with the lives of the notable characters recorded in Scripture. Places connected with David are of particular importance, in the face of the views of modern scholars who dismiss David and Solomon as mythical characters and deny the existence of a developed national administration in Jeru-salem in the eleventh and tenth centuries BC.7

In 2005 the Israeli archaeolo-gist Eilat Mazar of the Hebrew University began the excava-tion of a site on the spur to the south of Temple Mount, which she thought could be the former location of the palace built for King David by Hiram, king of Tyre (2 Sam. 5:11). The site is located directly above a large, curved, sixty-foot-high series of terraces on the steep east-ern side of the Kidron Valley, known as the Stepped Stone Structure. This is considered to be an infill and retaining wall, which plugs a natural gap in the bedrock of the eastern edge of the City of David. It is probably to be identified with the Millo,

around which David built (v. 9, “literally the Landfill,” NKJV mg.; “the supporting terraces,” NIV), and which was later rebuilt by Solomon (1 Kgs. 9:15,24).

Beneath layers from the Byzantine and Second Temple periods, Dr Mazar found the foundations of a large public building, which she termed the Large Stone Structure. Two notable finds at the site were of two seventh-century-BC bullae (clay seal impressions) bearing the names of Jehucal, son of Shelemiah, son of Shevi, and Gedaliah, son of Pashhur, both servants of King Zedekiah men-tioned in the book of Jeremiah (37:3 and 38:1), confirming the connection of this building with the royal administration. Later finds included a number of luxury items of Phoenician origin from the tenth century BC, which support the possible connection with David. The association of the royal palace with the Millo is strengthened by the two ac-counts in the Bible of the assas-sination of King Joash, who we are told was killed “on his bed”

(2 Chron. 24:25), in “the house of the Millo” (2 Kgs. 12:20).

Further excavation is report-edly restricted by the proximity of modern houses owned by both Jewish and Arab families. Furthermore, in 2007 attention shifted from the palace itself to the northern of two towers which flank the Stepped Stone Structure and which was in danger of imminent collapse. The excavation of this tower has been productive, however, yielding some valuable artefacts using the ‘wet sifting’ method that was developed to deal with the large piles of spoil from the illegal excavation beneath Tem-ple Mount by the Muslim Waqf authorities.8

Items found include more than a hundred bullae, mostly from a few hundred years after David, which suggests that they are the remains of a large administrative archive once stored in the pala-tial building above. One of these bears the name Ahimaaz, which occurs several times in the Bi-ble, but has not previously been found in an inscription. Interest-ingly, over 3,500 animal bones were recovered, mostly of sheep and goats and a small number of cattle, but unsurprisingly none of pigs. And, demonstrating a well-balanced diet, more than 3,000 fish bones were found, many of species imported from Egypt. Finally, over 100 bronze arrowheads, typical of those used by the armies of Babylon, were uncovered, resulting from the ferocious Babylonian assault

City of David: part of the ‘Stepped Stone Structure’ (Millo?); the northern tower is just beyond the right of the picture.

Ian Scott (CC BY-SA 2.0)/Wikimedia Commons

7. The discovery at Tel Dan in 1994 of an inscription bearing the title ‘house of David’ confirmed his existence.

8. See “The stones cry out,” section Seal of King Hezekiah discov-ered . . . , Testimony, vol. 86, no. 1,014, Mar. 2016, p. 98.




and destruction of Jerusalem in 586 BC.

Although certainty is not yet possible, evidence is accumulat-ing that, at the very least, the Large Stone Structure was an important public building in Je-rusalem from the time of David onwards, and very probably was the palace which features in the records of the life of King David, ‘the man after God’s own heart.’

Where the wall of Jerusalem was breached in AD 70

ISRAELI archaeologists have found the site of the fierce

battle where the Roman army bombarded and breached the walls of Jerusalem before con-quering the city and destroying the Temple of Herod in AD 70.9 The excavation was conducted by a team working for the Israeli Antiquities Authority on the con-struction site for a new art school in the Russian Compound area of Jerusalem.

The part of the wall that was breached was known as the Third Wall. According to ac-counts by the Jewish historian Josephus, this part of the wall, “beginning from the tower Hip-picus . . . reached as far as the north quarter of the city, and the tower Psephinus . . . and then extended to . . . the Monument of the Fuller at . . . the Valley of Cedron.”10 The wall was started by King Agrippa, and was origi-nally intended to protect a new quarter that developed outside the other two existing walls on the north of the city. It was completed two decades later as part of the preparations for the Jewish revolt against Rome.11

City of David: ‘Large Stone Structure,’ possibly David’s palace; the village of Silwan is in the background.

Deror_avi (CC BY-SA 3.0)/Wikimedia Commons

The site of the breach of the third wall was described by Josephus in his account of the siege of Jerusalem, which he witnessed as an assistant to the Roman general Titus, son of the Emperor Vespasian, but it had not previously been identified.

Remnants of the third wall were discovered by accident in the 1920s, fuelling a long debate over the wall’s course and where the Romans had entered the city. Among the new discoveries were the ruins of what the team believes was a watchtower used by the Jewish defenders that once jutted from the third wall during the Roman era.

The archaeologists also say that pottery discovered at the site suggests that this battlefield dates back to Roman times. Opposite the tower’s western facade were scores of bal-lista- and sling-stones that they attribute to Roman forces firing from catapults towards the wall. The bombardment was intended

to attack the Jewish sentries guarding the wall and provide cover to allow the Roman troops to break through the wall using battering rams, as described by Josephus.12

These latest discoveries serve to confirm the accuracy of Josephus’ description of the siege, the breaching of the city and its terrible aftermath. And those events in turn fulfil the sol-emn predictions and warnings by the Lord Jesus Christ, in his Ol-ivet Prophecy, of the impending fall of Jerusalem and destruction of the Temple (Mt. 24:15-22; Mk. 13:14-20; Lk. 21:20-24).

9. Peter Beaumont, The Guardian, 20 Oct. 2016: https://www.the guardian.com/science/2016/oct/20/israeli-archeologists-discover-titus-breached-jerusalem-walls

10. Josephus, Wars of the Jews, v.iv.2.

11. See “Jerusalem in New Testament times,” Oxford Bible Atlas, 2001, p. 96.

12. Op. cit. v.vii.2.

“But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation is near . . . For these are the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled” (Lk. 21:20,22, NKJV).

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2016/oct/20/israeli-archeologists-discover-titus-breached-jerusalem-walls





The drying up of the Euphrates?Shaun Maher

IN RECENT MONTHS President Erdoğan of Turkey has increased his rhetoric concern-ing Israel and specifically Jerusalem. This is

an interesting development, for we have good reason to believe that Turkey has an important role to play in the final phase of the times of the Gentiles. Whether this is as a primary player, or as an intermediate power that will ultimately be usurped by another, time will tell. The traditional view, as comprehensively expounded by Brother John Thomas in his short book Anatolia,1 is that Russia will swoop down into Turkey, and indeed Europe, uniting all the territory of the ancient Ro-man Empire under her authority. This view sees Turkey as a receding power that will be brought under the sway of Russian expansion. Other commentators focus primarily on the Arab na-tions but still recognise the role Turkey may play along with Russia—as described, for instance, by Brother Harry Whittaker.2 Whichever view one subscribes to, Turkey has some role to play. We should find it interesting, therefore, to pay close attention to recent developments involving Turkey, especially with regard to her relationship with Israel.

Recent developmentsThe traditional view of prophecy takes the ref-erence to the drying up of the Euphrates (Rev. 16:12) to be a symbolic description of the Otto-man power receding from the Middle East to make way for the first stage of the resurrection of the Jewish State prior to the return of Christ. This interpretation of Revelation 16 was held by Christians for centuries before the events actu-ally took place. Sir Isaac Newton, for example, lived at a time when the Ottoman Empire was at the peak of its power and influence, yet still viewed this prophecy as an indication that the Ottomans would be removed to make way for the re-establishment of the Jewish nation.3

It was not until two centuries later in 1917 that Jerusalem was taken from the Ottoman Turks

and came under British control. This interpreta-tion asserts that the next stage in this process is the continued recession of Turkish power and influence in the region, and ultimately complete capitulation in the face of an invasion by Russia to retake Istanbul (Constantinople).4 As things currently stand this may seem unlikely, but that does not mean that it will not happen. Alterna-tive views give a larger role to the Arab nations, based on a latter-day application of Psalm 83 and other passages. Whilst recognising her loss of control over the Holy Land at the beginning of the twentieth century, both interpretations see a role for Turkey in the alliance of nations arrayed against, first, the Jews and subsequently Christ himself.

President Erdoğan has been emboldened by his victory in April’s hotly disputed referendum. This handed him significant executive powers to transform Turkey from a parliamentary de-mocracy to a ‘presidential republic.’5 What this means in reality is a slide towards autocracy and further opportunities for Erdoğan to cement his grip on power. His authoritarian style has been displayed clearly in the extensive crackdown on all sources of opposition to him, following the attempted coup in July last year—a purge which went deep into the heart of Turkey’s civil service, its military, its education system and the media.6 We can expect any future opposition that offers the remotest challenge to Erdoğan’s power base

Watchman

1. John Thomas (1886), Anatolia, or Russia triumphant and Europe chained.

2. Harry Whittaker (1990), Jews, Arabs and Bible Prophecy, pp. 90–95.

3. https://isaac-newton.org/articles/4. John Thomas, op. cit.5. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/16/erdo

gan-claims-victory-in-turkish-constitutional-referendum6. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-07-

12/100-000-and-counting-no-letup-in-turkey-coup-purges-a-year-on

https://isaac-newton.org/articles/

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/16/erdogan-claims-victory-in-turkish-constitutional-referendum

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/16/erdogan-claims-victory-in-turkish-constitutional-referendum

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-07-12/100-000-and-counting-no-letup-in-turkey-coup-purges-a-year-on




to be similarly quashed. In all probability, Mr Erdoğan will now remain president until 2029.

Further afieldThis new authority has not only been exercised at home. Turkey’s covert support for the Islamic State (ISIS) group has been well documented in the media and has increased tensions in her rela-tions with Syria’s key ally Russia. The Kremlin caused a stir when in 2015 it published satellite images of columns of oil tankers queued at an ISIS-controlled depot in Syria. The same tankers then appeared to return, unhindered, across the border back into Turkey. Mr Erdoğan’s family has been accused of profiting from this illicit trade in oil.7 A Wikileaks email cache released in December 2016 also seemed to suggest Turkish involvement in trading oil with ISIS.8

Then there is Turkey’s relationship with Israel. Despite the restoration of diplomatic relations (after a six-year hiatus following Israel’s raid on a Turkish flotilla attempting to break the Gaza blockade, in which nine Turkish activists were killed), Erdoğan has stepped up hostility towards Israel and made no secret of his deep resentment of Jewish control over Jerusalem. In a recent speech at an event in Istanbul commemorating the capture of Constantinople (now Istanbul) from European Christians, Erdoğan called for Muslims to “liberate” Jerusalem from the Jews.9 In the same speech he made a direct reference to the capture of Jerusalem from the Crusaders by Saladin, and talked of the Islamic history of “conquest” and a desire to hoist Turkey back onto its feet and to see an Islamic flag flying over Jerusalem once more.

Although this speech was made in the context of an effort to raise support for Erdoğan’s ruling AK party in forthcoming Turkish parliamen-tary elections, they are not isolated comments. Speaking in May at a charity event discussing Palestinian economic development, he spoke out against what he considered human rights abuses by Israel, likening them to apartheid. He also condemned the Israeli government’s intention to pass an act of parliament restricting noise at places of worship, aimed at ending the use of loudspeaker systems on mosques to amplify the Muslim call to prayer. These are interesting criticisms following the recent purge of opposi-tion in Turkey and the ongoing sequestration of Christian places of worship by the government.10 In the same speech Erdoğan bemoaned the fact that relatively few Muslims visit Temple Mount compared with other pilgrimage sites, and urged Muslims around the world to swarm the site to preserve its Muslim identity.

Not just wordsTurkish interest in Israel and Jerusalem is not limited to words alone. In June members of

Supporters await the arrival of Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan for a referendum rally in Istanbul on 8 April 2017.© thomas koch/Shutterstock.com

7. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/wikileaks-turkey-isis-oil-minister-email-cache-leaks-claims-a7460736.html

8. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/wikileaks-turkey-isis-oil-minister-email-cache-leaks-claims-a7460736.html

9. http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/erdogan-calls-world-muslims-flood-jerusalems-iconic-mosque-protect-its-islamic-identity-1620641

10. http://www1.cbn.com/cbnnews/israel/2017/july/turkeys-islamist-leader-seizes-50-more-churches

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/wikileaks-turkey-isis-oil-minister-email-cache-leaks-claims-a7460736.html






http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/erdogan-calls-world-muslims-flood-jerusalems-iconic-mosque-protect-its-islamic-identity-1620641



http://www1.cbn.com/cbnnews/israel/2017/july/turkeys-islamist-leader-seizes-50-more-churches

http://www1.cbn.com/cbnnews/israel/2017/july/turkeys-islamist-leader-seizes-50-more-churches

Testimony, August 2017Contents

Israel’s parliament requested a session to discuss concerns over the growing Turkish investment and influence in east Jerusalem.11 Since 2004 there has been a steadily increasing flow of Turkish investment into projects and non-governmental organisations working in east Jerusalem, as well as significant investment in the Muslim authori-ties governing the Temple Mount ‘holy sites.’ A century on from the defeat and expulsion of the Ottoman powers, there is an increase in Turkish efforts to regain control and influence in Jeru-salem—to the disquiet of the Israeli authorities.

The Turkish Cooperation and Coordination Agency has invested millions of dollars in more than sixty projects in the Arab districts of the city, to the extent that Turkish flags and food are now commonplace in east Jerusalem and Mr Erdoğan is lauded by Arab inhabitants of the city. In a re-port prepared for the mayor of Jerusalem, Turkish influence was noted to have superseded that of Jordan, the traditional guardians of the religious sites on Temple Mount since 1948. This trend was manifested very publicly in May this year, when Muslim worshippers expelled the chief Jordanian qadi (the senior judge of the Sharia court) from Temple Mount, whilst, at the very same time, receiving with great pomp the Turkish minister of religious affairs.12

In a furious response to the tirade of criticism, Israeli government officials summoned the Turk-ish ambassador to demand an explanation for these outspoken criticisms. They countered the Turkish leader’s criticism with a jibe of their own about alleged recent human rights abuses in Tur-key, along with a reminder that Israel, as the only true democracy in the region, allowed freedom of worship for Jews, Christians and Muslims.13

Despite this unrelenting tide of anti-Israel rhetoric, Turkey needs Israel—especially Israeli energy. It could accurately be described as a love-hate relationship, albeit with much more emphasis on the hate. A deal worth many millions of dollars will be sealed later this year when the Turkish energy minister visits Israel. This deal will see the construction of a pipeline from Israel’s newly discovered gas fields to Turkey, as a means to supply gas to Turkey and on into Europe.14 This strategically significant arrangement will not only be extremely lucrative for both nations, but will also reduce Turkish and European dependence on Russian gas—a fact that will not have gone unnoticed by the Russians.

More from the UNAs if to compound Turkey’s criticisms and claims over Jerusalem, and to add insult to injury, in July UNESCO passed yet another controversial resolution regarding the status of the Tomb of the Patriarchs in Hebron15—this after the Octo-ber 2016 resolution which denied any historical

The Tomb of the Patriarchs at Hebron, the subject of a recent UN resolution demanding it be put under Palestinian Authority control.© mtsyri/Shutterstock.com

11. https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20170622-israel-worried-over-turkish-influence-in-east-jerusalem/

12. https://www.breakingisraelnews.com/88897/turkey -eclipsing-jordan-arab-claims-old-city-temple-mount /#6Bbl5zcTAliXtEfl.97

13. http://www.jpost.com/Breaking-News/Israel-summons-Turkish-envoy-after-Erdogan-remarks-on-Jerusalem -490199

14. http://www.timesofisrael.com/turkish-energy-minister-to-visit-israel-for-pipeline-deal/

15. http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2017/07/israel-palestinians-unesco-jerusalem-hebron-partiarch-cave.html

294 Contents

https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20170622-israel-worried-over-turkish-influence-in-east-jerusalem/

https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20170622-israel-worried-over-turkish-influence-in-east-jerusalem/

https://www.breakingisraelnews.com/88897/turkey-eclipsing-jordan-arab-claims-old-city-temple-mount/#6Bbl5zcTAliXtEfl.97



http://www.jpost.com/Breaking-News/Israel-summons-Turkish-envoy-after-Erdogan-remarks-on-Jerusalem-490199



http://www.timesofisrael.com/turkish-energy-minister-to-visit-israel-for-pipeline-deal/

http://www.timesofisrael.com/turkish-energy-minister-to-visit-israel-for-pipeline-deal/

http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2017/07/israel-palestinians-unesco-jerusalem-hebron-partiarch-cave.html




Jewish claims to Temple Mount.16 The latest resolution does not deny Jewish links to the site, but declares that the site of the tomb in the old city of Hebron is under the jurisdiction of the Palestinian Authority and should be returned to their control. As might be expected, this evoked an angry response from the Israeli government and many sectors of Jewish society in Israel and around the world.

Perhaps as a reminder to the world that they remain in control, the Israeli government re-sponded by cutting another million dollars from its contributions to the United Nations (adding to the six million already cut).17 In typically pro-vocative style, Prime Minister Benjamin Netan-yahu announced that the money would be used to fund Jewish heritage projects in and around Hebron. In a further snub to UNESCO, the day after the Hebron decision Netanyahu announced that a controversial visitor centre planned for east Jerusalem, adjacent to the City of David Archaeological Park, would now go ahead after being on hold for a number of years.18 This area is in what was, until 1967, an Arab neighbourhood of east Jerusalem.

Over the last fifty years a wealthy Jewish foun-dation has systematically bought up properties in this area and carried out an enormous excavation, which has revealed some remarkable finds. These discoveries have revealed a rich Jewish heritage, much to the ire of the Arab and Muslim nations, such as Turkey. The archaeological finds relate to Hezekiah’s Tunnel and its inscription, Jewish tombs dating back to the time of the kings, a palace-like structure thought by some to be King David’s residence,19 as well as many other sig-nificant discoveries. The new centre will be built on stilts above some of the existing excavations, and will provide facilities for visitors to the site.

Increasing isolationAll these developments illustrate the running controversy over the stewardship of the land of Israel and in particular Jerusalem—the “burden-some stone” (Zech. 12:3). The nations of the world have their attention focused on this problem,

many with less-than-honourable intentions. Turkey, led by its emboldened president, has become one of the principal contenders laying claim to God’s land. Sadly for them, we know how this will end. It seems that the Euphrates, despite already having receded considerably from the full extent of its Ottoman power, has not yet entirely dried up.

As for Israel, it may be that these are steps which will ultimately force the Jews further into isolation. It seems clear from passages such as Zechariah 12–14 that, in the end, Israel is alone with none to help her. It may be that, even in the face of the incredible recent UNESCO pronounce-ments, Israel’s belligerence and her refusal to cede territory will leave her without a friend in the world. Yet we know from other prophecies, such as that given to Balaam (Num. 23:7-10), that the Jews will ultimately fulfil their God-given destiny and be “a people dwelling alone, and not counting itself among the nations” (v. 9)20—in a positive sense. In this future state they will be sanctified and set apart as a people to serve the Lord, as a nation of priests to bring the peoples of the world into a harmonious relationship with their Creator. In that day Israel will no longer be considered a pariah; instead the nations will desire to “take hold of the robe of a Jew, saying, ‘Let us go with you, for we have heard God is with you’” (Zech. 8:23). Jerusalem will no longer be a “cup of stag-gering” (12:2), but the city will be associated with “joy, and her people [with] gladness” (Isa. 65:18). We pray that day may be near at hand, and that by God’s grace we will play a part.

16. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/oct/26/unes co-adopts-controversial-resolution-on-jerusalem-holy-sites-israel

17. http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4986097,00.html

18. http://www.jpost.com/Israel-News/Israel-to-complete-contested-east-Jerusalem-center-after-UNESCO-vote -499175

19. See Seeking David’s palace, “The stones cry out,” in this issue, p. 289.

20. Remaining Bible quotations are from the ESV.

“Newton does seem certain, however, that the conversion and return of the Jews would begin before Armageddon. In one place he lists a series of verses from the Major and Minor Prophets that he believes predict that this great battle would occur shortly after the conversion and restoration of Israel . . . Newton also believed that the Turkish Empire would remain until the end of the Jewish captivity, suggesting therefore that one could look for evidence of the demise of the former as a sign of the latter.”—Stephen Snobelen, ‘The mystery of this restitution of all things’: Isaac Newton on the Return of the Jews

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/oct/26/unesco-adopts-controversial-resolution-on-jerusalem-holy-sites-israel



http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4986097,00.html

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4986097,00.html

http://www.jpost.com/Israel-News/Israel-to-complete-contested-east-Jerusalem-center-after-UNESCO-vote-499175




Words from the mount and the cross (2)Edward Carr

“Blessed are they that mourn: for they shall be comforted” (Mt. 5:4);

“Woman, behold thy son! . . . Behold thy mother!” (Jno. 19:26,27).

THE SECOND BEATITUDE presents us with an interesting paradox: ‘Happy are those who mourn’—unexpected in itself—‘for

they shall be comforted’—seemingly at some point in the future. To lose those we love in death is a hard thing to bear. We know and un-derstand that it demonstrates our mortality and our frailty. It also demonstrates, as with the first beatitude, our need for God’s salvation. How is it, then, that mourners are happy? It is usual to explain the comfort provided in terms of a right understanding of the promise of resurrection in the last day, much as in Martha’s declaration of faith regarding her brother Lazarus:

“I know that he shall rise again in the resur-rection at the last day” (Jno. 11:24).

Yet often we find that this solid belief does not take away the void of the loss of the one who has died. Mary, and (although not explicitly stated) probably Martha also, quite naturally mourned the loss of their brother in spite of their conviction of the resurrection at the last day (v. 33).

Spiritually driven practical supportThe Lord’s example on the cross demonstrates not only the need to comfort with the prospect of future happiness at the resurrection, but also, in tandem with this understanding, to provide practical everyday support and comfort to those who mourn—‘Happy are they that mourn.’

Jesus’ mother Mary had been told over three decades before that “a sword shall pierce through thy own soul also” (Lk. 2:35). She was to lose her firstborn son to a work by which “the thoughts of many hearts may be revealed.” As she stood at the foot of the cross she witnessed the outworking of Simeon’s prophecy in a very real sense. Yet,

in her loss, the Lord could once more think of others before himself:

“When Jesus therefore saw his mother, and the disciple standing by, whom he loved, he saith unto his mother, Woman, behold thy son! Then saith he to the disciple, Behold thy mother! And from that hour that disciple took her unto his own house” (Jno. 19:26,27).

Jesus ensured that the ‘comfort’ of the beatitude (literally, the strength found by having one along-side) was shared by both mother and disciple. Together they could share their mutual sorrow. Together, too, they would share the joy of seeing their Master raised, as Jesus had said: “Verily, verily, I say unto you, That ye shall weep and lament, but the world shall rejoice: and ye shall be sorrowful, but your sorrow shall be turned into joy” (16:20).

The challengeAgain the Lord’s challenge is to go, take up our cross and follow his example.

If we ourselves are mourning, it may be that we have to allow the platitudes to wash over us and let brothers and sisters know what help is needed and what not. If we do not feel in a po-sition to accept what is offered, simple words of gratitude, or a smile (even through gritted teeth), followed by a spiritual boldness to say that help is not needed, will hopefully deter those who might otherwise become well-intentioned interferers!

When we know of those who mourn, although words of comfort regarding our future hope are appropriate, we ought to concentrate on the exam-ple left by the Lord—to be there for one another; to make one another happy by ‘being alongside.’ Genuine offers of practical help are useful, but let us not force help on those who don’t want it. Ask open questions that invite a full response—“What would you like me to do for you?”—and not closed ones—“Can I do anything?”—which invite only acceptance or refusal. And don’t

Exhortation


offer help if you can’t follow up on it (Mt. 21:28-30).

Whether help is needed, accepted or not, everyone can and should share together in their prayers.

Happiness in times of mourning should be twofold; in both we follow the example of the Lord Jesus. First, it is to be found in knowing that

Exposition

our Saviour is risen from the dead and that death itself will one day be no more—a fact known by Jesus, and one which sustained him (Heb. 12:1-3). Secondly, it is to be found in the mutual support offered (but not imposed) by those who hold the same hope, seen in the second saying from the cross. In these ways we can be comforted and our sorrow will be turned into joy.

“I ascend unto my Father”Des Manser

What was Mary meant to understand from the words Jesus addressed to her in John 20:17, and what was the reaction Jesus expected from the disciples when Mary delivered the message to them?

THERE HAS BEEN much discussion and conjecture over the years concerning the words of Jesus to Mary Magdalene, recorded

in John 20:17, when he revealed himself to her on his glorious resurrection morn. Opinions con-cerning their meaning have been offered from within and from outside our community.

A series of articles in this magazine in 2015 and 2016 under the theme “Mary’s untouchable Lord”1 offered several interesting points and typi-cal connections to other scriptures. This article will take another approach, from the viewpoint of the participants—namely Jesus, Mary and the disciples to whom she was to take the Lord’s mes-sage, “I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.”

The word ‘touch’A major question to be answered is, What was Mary to make of Jesus’ words, “Touch me not”? Did he mean, ‘Don’t touch me,’ ‘Don’t hold me,’ or ‘Don’t cling to me,’ which are some of the ren-derings of this phrase in various versions?2 The Greek verb used in John 17:20 is haptou. It occurs thirty-six times in the new Testament, uniformly translated “touch” in the AV—although when it occurs in 1 Corinthians 7:1, in the context of avoid-ing fornication, it undoubtedly means more than mere touching. Both Thayer and Vine, in their respective New Testament dictionaries, suggest

further meanings of ‘to cling, hold, to fasten to, or clasp.’ Thayer says that the Septuagint uses it to translate the Hebrew dabaq, meaning ‘to cleave to.’ Both lexicographers use John 20:17 as an illustration of this secondary use

of the Greek haptou!It is easy to understand why Mary, in a gesture

of spiritual love and joy on seeing her beloved Lord alive again, would make some gesture or attempt to embrace him. Wouldn’t we? Like the other disciples, she may well have thought that the Lord would now establish the Kingdom (Acts 1:6), or at least that they would now be able to resume the association with him that they had enjoyed during the past three-and-a-half years. But ‘No!’, said the Lord. Mary could not hold him here on earth, for he was to go to the Father—not immediately, but he would ascend to the Father’s right hand as the great High Priest after the order of Melchizedek, there “to appear in the presence of God for us” (Heb. 9:24).

The interval from the Lord being raised from death, by the angels who appeared to the women, to the putting on of immortality, is not revealed. There seems to be no reason, however, why the latter should be delayed. He was sinless, unlike us, who must go through the judgement process after our own resurrection.

1. Peter Heavyside, “Mary’s untouchable Lord,” Testi-mony, vol. 85, no. 1,010, Nov. 2015 to vol. 86, no. 1,018, Aug. 2016.

2. Rotherham: “Be not detaining me”; NASB: “Stop cling-ing to me”; ISV: “Don’t hold on to me”; NIV: “Do not hold on to me”; ESV: “Do not cling to me.”

Contents


What of defilement under the Law?Brother Thomas proposed that the reason why Je-sus did not allow Mary to touch him was because he had just emerged from the grave, and under the Law of Moses Mary would have been defiled by contact with him.3 Brother Roberts followed Brother Thomas’s line.4 One may be reluctant to differ from ‘the Doctor,’ but it is worth keeping in mind that, in the passage in question, he was contending against the doctrine of immortal emergence from the grave at the resurrection and using the case of the Lord as an example. There are other passages, however, that prove that the dead—including the Lord—do not awake from death as immortal beings (see, for example, 1 Cor-inthians 15:51-54). Brother Thomas need not have used the example of Mary not being permitted to ‘touch’ the Lord.

The ritual defilement of the Law does not enter into the situation, for several reasons:1 The types of defilement which put a person

outside the camp were leprosy, bodily issues and contact with a dead person (Num. 5:1-3). Jesus was alive, and had never been permitted to see corruption (Acts 2:31).

2 In Matthew’s Gospel Jesus touched, or was touched by, individuals who had experienced those conditions: a leper (8:3), the woman with the issue of blood (9:21), and Jairus’s daughter (9:25). Jesus defiled no-one, nor was he defiled by them; rather, he demonstrated that he had power over disease, sin and death, both then and in the age to come.

3 Defilement comes from within man, not from outside (Mk. 7:20).

4 “The handwriting of ordinances that was against us,” says Paul, was nailed to the Lord’s cross, and annulled by his victory over sin (Col. 2:14). All those in him are now free from any set of ritual laws.

5 It was Caiaphas and the priests who were concerned about being defiled, when they would not enter Pilate’s judgement hall when they delivered Jesus to the Roman governor (Jno. 18:28).

Mary’s role in the narrativeMark 16:9 tells us quite clearly that Mary Mag-dalene was the first to see the risen Lord. What an honour! She and the other Mary, the mother of Joses and James, are named by Matthew and Mark as having followed Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus as they buried the Lord. These two sisters then sat “over against the sepulchre”

(Mt. 27:57-61, Mk. 15:43-47), faithful to the last, and standing out above the men in the record of the Lord’s crucifixion and resurrection.5

Mary Magdalene, being familiar with the locality of the tomb, led the larger group of women on the resurrection morn. On seeing the stone removed she did not delay but ran to find Peter and John (Jno. 20:2). Here we have a brief glimpse of Mary, perhaps younger and fitter than some of the older women. It seems that Peter and John were abiding closer to the tomb than the other disciples, who were dispersed throughout Jerusalem. This is indicated by the statements concerning those who run to and from the tomb. The two disciples return to their home (v. 10), John believing but wondering, and Peter puzzled. Mary stays behind to vent her private grief, sob-bing tears which blind her to the extent that, in the half-light of the emerging dawn, she does not recognise Jesus until he speaks her name. What a poignant moment!

Now comes the main point of this article. What was it about the words Jesus told her to repeat that would cause the disciples to believe that she had indeed seen the Lord? The record does not specifically tell us that Mary came back to Peter and John, but this is implied. Luke records a solo visit to the tomb by Peter (24:12) which may support this premise, and Paul records a private appearance to Peter (1 Cor. 15:5).

The message Mary took first to Peter and John, and eventually to the others, was essentially this: Jesus is alive, I have seen him, and this is what he told me to tell you. He is ascending to his Father, not immediately, but he is going to his Father and your Father, and to his God and your God.

Familiar wordsWhere had they heard those words before? Eight times on the betrayal night as they left the up-per room and walked down the Kedron Valley to Gethsemane:• “I go to prepare a place for you” (Jno. 14:2)• “I go unto my Father (14:12)• “I go unto the Father” (v. 28)• “I go my way to Him that sent me” (16:5)• “I go to my Father” (v. 10)

3. John Thomas, Eureka, vol. 3 (1st edn.), p. 650.4. Robert Roberts, Nazareth Revisited (3rd edn.), pp. 236–7.5. Brother Roberts is particularly good throughout this

section in Nazareth Revisited, managing to make sense of the confusion surrounding these events.


• “ye shall see me, because I go to the Father” (v. 16)

• “Because I go to the Father” (v. 17)• “I leave the world, and go to the Father” (v.

28).The Lord first spoke of ‘going to his Father’ in the upper room (John 14 terminates in verse 31 with the words, “Arise, let us go hence”). The three synoptic Gospel writers are specific when recording events in the upper room, when the Lord initiated the memorials of bread and wine. They all say that those present were the twelve disciples (Mt. 26:20; Mk. 14:17; Lk. 22:14). We can conclude, then, that none of the women were present.

How was Mary Magdalene to know anything of the Lord’s repetition of the words “I go to my Father,” which she was now asked to convey to his disciples? As already suggested, she would have gone straight back to Peter and John, who where close by and had departed from the tomb only recently. Any doubts that Mary had indeed seen the Lord would be swept away. The disciples would recall the very words of the Lord which were in themselves proof that she had indeed seen him and that Jesus had spoken to her. Sadly, it appears that it was not until that evening, after

the two disciples had returned from Emmaus and Jesus appeared to the eleven and showed them his wounds, that an end was put to the doubts and questions arising from Mary Magdalene’s report. By that time, the other group of women whom Jesus met as they were returning to the city at the angel’s direction would have added their testimony.

ConclusionsThere are lessons to be learnt by modern disciples. Let us not be “fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken” (Lk. 24:25) as we see the signs of the nearness of his second coming to set up the Kingdom which the disciples looked for. Whatever else we may glean from the events of the resurrection morn, whether it be types and shadows of future events, studying comparative scriptures, or looking forward to our own salvation, we can also look at the narrative as it stands and marvel. If we do so, we will see that Jesus’ simple message to Mary was to tell her that he was going to his Father shortly, and that she was the one to reiterate that fact to his breth-ren to prompt their memories of his discourse to them three days previously, and to prove that Mary had indeed seen him and spoken to him.

The cherubim of glory1. The chariot of the cherubimDavid Green

What is a cherub and what are the cherubim?1 This series aims to provide a detailed examination of the references to the cherubim found throughout the Scriptures, including their alternative descriptions, such as “living creatures” and “seraphim.” Since Zechariah’s visions of horsemen and chariots are closely related to this subject, they will also be included at the end of this study.

IT IS CLEAR FROM the descriptions of the cherubim seen in vision by the prophets of God that they are symbolic beings associated

with God’s glory. This series therefore consists, to a large extent, of a study of the scriptural symbols involved in these descriptions. Since

it is not good practice to study any particular symbol in isolation from the other symbols with which it is associated, the intention is to offer a wider exposition and not to limit it to the cherubim alone.

Symbols, being verbal pictures, make a much greater impact and a more lasting impression on our

minds than straightforward statements of fact. However, effort is needed on our part to seek out

Exposition

1. The suffix -im in Hebrew words already indicates the plural, so the AV’s “cherubims” is tautological.

Contents


the underlying meanings of the use of symbols in Scripture, and their accompanying lessons, if we are to benefit from our Bible studies, for “It is the glory of God to conceal a matter, but the glory of kings is to search out a matter” (Prov. 25:2).2

Since this series covers a number of major vi-sions seen by different prophets, as well as types in the tabernacle and temple that foreshadowed the reality that is in Christ, there will be a degree of overlap resulting in some repetition of ideas and concepts. It is hoped that this repetition will be helpful rather than irritating, aiding retention in the reader’s memory.

References to the cherubimScriptural references to the cherubim are listed in Table 1.

God dwelling between the cherubimThere are seven passages of Scripture that speak of God dwelling “between the cherubim” (see Table 1). In each case the word “between” is in italics; other translations have “seated on” or “upon,” “enthroned upon,” “enthroned above” or other similar wording (see RV, RSV, JB, ESV). Since there is no preposition connected with cherubim in the Hebrew, it is also possible to speak of God ‘inhabiting’ or ‘dwelling among’ the cherubim.

Table 1 Scriptural references to the cherubimGen. 3:24 Cherubim with a flaming sword placed at the east of the Garden of

Eden to guard the way to the tree of life

Ex. 25:18-22; 37:7-9; Heb. 9:5 Golden cherub at each end of the mercy seat in the most holy place of the tabernacle; later described as “the cherubim of glory overshadowing the mercy seat”

Ex. 26:31; 36:8,35 Woven cherubim on the veil and the ten curtains of the tabernacle

Ex. 25:22; Num. 7:89 God speaks to Moses from between the cherubim

1 Sam. 4:4; 2 Sam. 6:2; 2 Kgs. 19:15; 1 Chron. 13:6; Ps. 80:1; 99:1; Isa. 37:16

God dwells between the cherubim

2 Sam. 22:11; Ps. 18:10 God rides a cherub to deliver David from his enemies

1 Chron. 28:18 David provided the gold for the construction of the golden chariot of the cherubim for the temple

1 Kgs. 6,8; 2 Chron. 3,5 Two large cherubim in Solomon’s temple, made of olive wood overlaid with gold

1 Kgs. 6,7; 2 Chron. 3 Cherubim carved on the temple walls, the doors leading to the most holy place, the temple doors and doorposts, and the ten carts that carried the lavers

Isa. 6:1-7 Isaiah’s vision of the seraphim (‘burning ones’)

Ezek. 1,8–11,43 Ezekiel’s visions of the living creatures in foursquare formation with their wheels, carrying high above them the glory of Yahweh seated on His throne

Ezek. 28:14,16 A “covering cherub” (NKJV); “guardian cherub” (ESV) 3

Ezek. 41:18-20,25 Cherubim carved on the walls and doors of the temple of the future age

Zech. 1:7-11; 6:1-8 Zechariah’s visions of horsemen and chariots

Rev. 4–7; 14:3; 15:7; 19:4 The four living creatures seen by the Apostle John

2. Bible quotations are from the NKJV unless otherwise stated.

3. This passage about the “covering cherub” will not be discussed in this series. For a detailed exposition, see my article “The covering cherub and the fall of Tyre (Ezekiel 28),” Testimony, vol. 76, no. 908, Sep. 2006, pp. 321–4.


The translation “between” is probably chosen because of the two passages which say that God spoke to Moses from “between” the two golden cherubim that were at either end of the mercy seat (Ex. 25:22; Num. 7:89). Presumably the other translations mentioned above depend on those passages that speak of God riding on a cherub and of Ezekiel’s vision of the cherubim carrying the enthroned glory of God (1:26-28; 11:22).

The chariot of the cherubim‘Cherub’ is the English form of the Hebrew word kerub,4 which some have suggested may have a punning connection with the Hebrew words rekeb, rekub and merkabah, meaning respectively ‘a mount,’ ‘something ridden’ and ‘a chariot.’ Both rekeb and rekub are frequently translated “chariot[s]” in the AV. The alternative word merka-bah appears in the phrase “the golden chariot of the cherubim” in 1 Chronicles 28:18 (ESV).

The glory of Yahweh is seen in Ezekiel’s first vision, enthroned above the cherubim, which move with their wheels (1:19,26-28), so that the cherubim form a kind of chariot for the glory of God to ride on, as also in 10:18,19 and 11:22,23. Interestingly, the rabbinical name for Ezekiel chapter 1 is Merkabah.

Two passages in the Psalms fit well with this idea of the cherubim being pictured as the divine chariot:• “And He rode [rakab] upon a cherub [kerub],

and flew” (Ps. 18:10)• “. . . who makes the clouds His chariot [rekub],

who walks on the wings of the wind, who makes His angels spirits, His ministers a flame of fire” (104:3,4).

Who or what do the cherubim represent?In Psalm 68:17 we read that “The chariots [rekeb] of God are twenty thousand, even thousands of thousands . . .” For the last phrase the AV has “thousands of angels” but a literal rendering is ‘thousands of changes.’ The word translated by the AV “angels” is shinan, which some have rendered ‘changed ones’ in reference to the redeemed, immortal saints. However, modern versions understand it to be a Hebrew idiom for repetition, and hence read “thousands of thou-sands” (see ESV). The AV’s “thousands of angels” appears to be based on a Targum paraphrase, which recognises that God works through His angels to deliver and protect His people and to destroy His enemies. In the future age, the redeemed, having been made equal to the angels

(Lk. 20:36), will assume the duties of the angels in helping Christ to subdue and rule the earth (Heb 2:5; Rev. 2:26,27).5

Clearly the cherubim, being God’s chariot, are symbolic beings. So whom do these symbolic beings represent? It seems reasonable to assume that in the past and present ages they represent God’s angels, His spirit ministers who are like flames of fire (Ps. 104:3,4). They are “the watch-ers” (Dan. 4:17), “the eyes of the LORD [that] run to and fro throughout the whole earth” (2 Chron. 16:9). This way of describing the angels matches the symbolic eyes that cover the cherubim both before and behind (Ezek. 1:18; 10:12; Rev. 4:6,8). The prophet Zechariah saw God’s angelic super–vision of the earth in terms of four horsemen (1:8-11) and four chariots (6:1-8). Since these are an alternative way of depicting the work of the cherubim, Zechariah’s visions will be discussed later in this series.

In past ages God manifested Himself through His angels to overcome human opposition and establish His purpose to fill the earth with His glory (Num. 14:21; Isa. 11:9; Hab. 2:14). In the present age the angels are under the supervision of the Lord Jesus (1 Pet. 3:22), but in the future age the glorified saints take over their cherubic duties (Heb. 2:5). The cherubim represent myriads of beings energised by God’s Spirit and acting in a united manner, be they the angels or the redeemed. As we shall see later, the visions of Isaiah, Ezekiel and the Apostle John, in which the cherubim appear, direct our attention to the redeemed rather than to the angels. Hence the features of the cherubim will be seen to point to the qualities, characteristics and duties of the resurrected saints who make up the one body of the multitudinous Christ.

UnityThis theme of unity in a multitude will be consid-ered more fully when we examine the details of the visions recorded by Ezekiel and John. How-ever, it is useful to mention at this point in our study of the cherubim that the living creatures seen by John expressly state that they have been

4. Transliterations of Hebrew letters to English vary according to the scheme used, since some Hebrew characters do not have exact equivalents in our al-phabet.

5. For an exposition of Psalm 68, see Richard Mellowes, The March of the Rainbowed Angel (Meli Publications, 2013), pp. 50–86 (reviewed in the Testimony, vol. 83, no. 989, Dec. 2013, pp. 470–2).




“redeemed . . . to God” by the blood of Jesus out of every nation and have been made kings and priests to reign on the earth (Rev. 5:8-10). In connection with this multitudinous aspect of the cherubim, it has been suggested that the word kerub may be derived from the prefix kay, meaning ‘like’ or ‘resembling,’ and rab, meaning ‘a multitude.’6

God’s dwelling between or among the cheru-bim parallels His dwelling in and among Christ and his saints (Ps. 68:18; Isa. 57:15; Jno. 14:23; 17:21; 1 Cor. 3:16,17; 2 Cor. 6:16; Rev. 21:3). God not only rides the cherubim, but also inhabits them, for they have become His dwelling place.

Due to God’s Spirit being in them (Ezek. 1:20), the cherubim displayed great glory accompanied with awesome power, which caused Ezekiel to fall on his face (v. 28; 2:1). Isaiah was likewise forcefully affected when he saw the vision of the seraphim and the King, high and lifted up (6:1,5).

(To be continued)

6. Henry Sulley, The Temple of Ezekiel’s Prophecy (5th edi-tion), p. 221, which uses the transliteration ca for ‘like’ and rub for ‘multitude,’ quoting from J. T. Bannister, Temple of the Hebrews, p. 150.

Exposition

Jude: a study in threesDerek Palmer

“The rule of three . . . is a writing principle that suggests that things that come in threes are . . . more satisfying or more effective than other numbers of things.”1

IN THIS STUDY we shall consider the series of triple phrases that many will have noted running through Jude’s short epistle. Jude’s

concern (v. 4) is:1 “certain men crept in unawares”2 “ungodly men, turning the grace of our God

into lasciviousness”3 those “denying our only Master and Lord,

Jesus Christ” (RV).We shall take Jude’s warnings, noting that he gives three examples with which he expects his readers to be familiar—three examples from Old Testament history.1 “the Lord, having saved the people out of the

land of Egypt, afterward destroyed them that believed not” (v. 5)

2 “the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, He hath reserved [kept, RV] in everlasting chains under dark-ness unto the judgment of the great day” (v. 6)

3 “Sodom and Gomorrha, [gave] themselves over to fornication . . . suffering the vengeance of eternal fire” (v. 7).

The second of these examples is of-ten taken as a reference to the sin of Korah, Dathan and Abiram, although evidence to support this interpreta-tion is usually lacking.

Looking for patternsWe shall look at the patterns in the rest of Jude’s letter, which contains a series of these triple statements that establish connections with the three example texts above. We shall try and see if the statements which appear first in each set of three combine to build up a united picture; if the statements which appears second in each set do the same; and so with the third. We shall then be able to see how this may provide convincing proof that the usual application of verse 6 to Korah, Dathan and Abiram can be confirmed.

Verse 8 introduces parallels that Jude intends to be seen as illustrative of those in verse 4 whom he considers to be corrupting influences in his own day. The detailed case he presents is full of warnings to succeeding generations, including our own, of the subtleties of wrong behaviour. These statements are listed below with

1. Wikipedia entry “Rule of three (writing),” accessed 20 Feb. 2017.

Contents

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_of_three_(writing)


suggestions of how they may relate to the three examples already seen in verses 5-7:1 “. . . dreamers [who] defile the flesh”—Israel

were brought out of Egypt to be a holy and separate people. From their first transgres-sion with the golden calf they compromised their ‘holy flesh’ (Ex. 32:25), and subsequent transgressions led to that entire genera-tion being “destroyed,” as described in Jude verse 5

2 “. . . despise [set at nought, RV] dominion”—this particular criticism is most potent in the case of Korah, Dathan and Abiram. Moses and Aaron had positions of leadership appointed by God. In claiming that Moses and Aaron had taken these positions upon themselves, because “all the congregation are [equally] holy” (Num. 16:3), Korah and his companions were indeed setting at nought not merely God’s chosen leaders but God Himself—in very truth they ‘despised dominion.’

3 “. . . speak evil of dignities”—the third exam-ple, in verse 7, was of Sodom and Gomorrah. Here indeed the account in Genesis 19 tells of two angels whom Lot entertains, and whom the men of Sodom clearly intend to defile.

Verse 9 simply but powerfully makes the point that even the archangel Michael, when confronted with similar disgraceful reactions as the three we have seen, did not dare to make a condemnatory statement, for “Vengeance is Mine; I will repay, saith the Lord” (Rom. 12:19). Our next set of three confirms this point, for Jude will tell us that these know only the thoughts of the flesh or of brute beasts, and that this leads to their destruction. (Further comment on this verse is omitted here, as our interest in this article relates only to the triple sequences in Jude.)1 “They have gone in the way of Cain” (v.

11)—those who left Egypt were given a law which specified offerings and the ways those offerings should be made. It is true, of course, that we have no record of Cain having been instructed with regard to offerings, but it is implicit in his rejection by God, for “sin is not imputed when there is no law” (Rom. 5:13). Those who came out of Egypt showed a complete lack of appreciation of God’s gifts, and for this they were destroyed.

2 “. . . ran greedily after the error of Balaam for reward”—it looks as though our argument regarding Jude’s sets of three fails at this point. But let us consider the argument a little further. Balaam’s overriding motivation was

greed. Clearly from the outset he wanted to go with Balak’s men to receive the wealth and position promised by Balak. Surely this was similarly the case with Korah and his com-panions. Far from Korah’s subtle argument that “all the congregation are holy” (Num. 16:3), Moses reveals his real motivation: “seek ye the priesthood also?” (v. 10).

3 “. . . perished in the gainsaying of Core [Korah]”—if our sequence is right, then this statement has to refer not to the incident of Korah but to Sodom and Gomorrah; these cities perished just as dramatically as Korah did. How can this be? The word translated “gainsaying” is not related to the getting of status but concerns the mode of perishing. The Greek word is antilogia. The perishing of Korah and company was unique: Scripture emphasises that they “went down alive into the pit”—and we shall come to that in our next set of three. But here, in contemplating Sodom and Gomorrah, the perishing of Lot’s wife was similarly notable. It too was the result of being ‘against the word‘ (antilogia), specifically against Yahweh’s word, “look not behind thee” (Gen. 19:17). Hers was a disobedience matched only by that of Korah and company.

Warnings for later generationsJude’s examples, which are also warnings to his readers and to us, are now evaluated in the next two closely connected sets of threes. First:1 “These are . . . hidden rocks in your love-

feasts” (v. 12, RV)—we are, of course, back with that generation who murmured in the wilderness and of whom Paul warned his readers, “Neither murmur ye, as some of them also murmured” (1 Cor. 10:10)—a rocky road indeed.

2 “. . . shepherds that without fear feed them-selves” (RV)—of all the examples this most clearly relates to the ambitions of Korah and company.

3 “. . . clouds they are without water, carried about of winds”—the men of Sodom revealed themselves clearly as lacking in anything that could relate to ‘the water of life,’ being driven purely by hedonistic principles of ‘What I want, I get.’

And the second set:1 “. . . trees . . . without fruit, twice dead, plucked

up by the roots” (v. 12)—of all God’s dealings with a succession of those who have rebelled and been punished, even to our day, of no


other period does the phrase “plucked up by the roots” fit so literally as of those who came out of Egypt and whose whole genera-tion (with the few exceptions we are aware of) perished during the forty years in the wilderness.

2 “. . . raging waves of the sea, foaming out their own shame” (v. 13)—in these words we get an insight into the emotions that motivated Korah and company, and that led to their ter-rible swallowing up in the earth from which they were removed.

3 “. . . wandering stars, to whom is reserved the blackness of darkness for ever”—the ‘stars’ of Sodom and Gomorrah suffered an exceptional end. Excavations at Sodom have revealed a scene that is perhaps inadequately expressed by the brief account in Genesis: “Then the LORD rained upon Sodom and upon Gomor-rah brimstone and fire from the LORD out of heaven” (19:24).2

These graphic accounts of the respective ends of those who oppose themselves and God are col-lated for us by Jude in verses 14 and 15.

Verse 16 brings us our next set of three:1 “murmurers”—so Paul describes Israel in the

wilderness (1 Cor. 10:10)2 “complainers”—so, clearly and especially,

were Korah and company (Num. 16:12-14)3 “walking after their own lusts”—no better or

more appropriate description could be found for the men of Sodom.

Verses 17 and 18 again find Jude applying these lessons for the benefit of his readers; but then, characteristically, he gives us another set of three in a few terse words. These, he says,1 “separate themselves” (v. 19)—the term has

almost an ironic touch if this is about the people who came out of Egypt by Yahweh’s mighty hand that He might separate them to be a people for Himself

2 are “sensual”—the word describes those who are motivated by self and the pursuit of self-interest, as was Korah

3 “having not the Spirit”—there was only one spirit in the men of Sodom, “the spirit of the beast that goeth downward” (Eccl. 3:21).

Concluding thoughtsI cannot claim that the argument is proven, but I suggest that it is worthy of consideration. The case appears to me to be strong that Jude intends his threes to be considered in this way.

We conclude with his last set of three, ad-dressed to “Him that is able to keep [us]” from the “falling” that was uppermost in his mind in verses 3 and 4:1 “able to keep you from falling” (v. 24)—so dif-

ferent from faithless Israel in the wilderness2 “and to present you faultless before the pres-

ence of His glory”—not like Korah, who marred and spoiled the privileged position he had as a Levite (Num. 16:9,10)

3 “faultless . . . with exceeding joy”—nothing could be further removed from the sins of Sodom.

So finally to Jude’s ascription of praise “to the only wise God our Saviour” (v. 25). Even this has three elements:1 “be glory and majesty”—offered to, but lost

by, those who were destined to wander forty years in the wilderness

2 “dominion and power”—sought by, but denied to, Korah and company

3 “both now and ever”—the sensuous sins of Sodom, still seen today, will soon be no more.

2. See Leen Ritmeyer, “Discovery of a lost city,” Testimony, vol. 83, no. 983, May–Jun. 2013, p. 240. This article in-terprets archaeological findings from the site of Sodom as evidence of the city’s destruction by a meteorite.

“For Jude Peter’s warnings had now come to the fore—note Peter’s future tenses. When we come to Jude, we note in contrast his present tenses. The connection with Peter is perhaps most strongly seen in Jude verse 18, where we read, ‘they [the apostles] told you there should be mockers in the last time.’ The Greek word for ‘mockers’ only ever occurs in one other place and that is in 2 Peter 3:3: ‘. . . knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts.’ The word ‘scoffers’ is the word that Jude quotes. The point has been made that Peter’s words are prophetic, whereas Jude is showing their fulfilment. All Scripture is given by inspiration, and here is New Testament Scripture coming to pass. Peter writes to encourage faithfulness, and Jude warns of the outcome of unfaithfulness.”—Abbreviated from notes by Derek Palmer




Dealing with the big questions of lifeGeoff Henstock

Life’s Biggest Questions.Brother Mark Vincent.Christadelphian Auxiliary Lecturing Society, 2016.137 pages.Available online at http://www.thechristadelphian.com/cals_lifes_biggest_questions.htmPrice: £1.50.

GOD’S MESSAGE has remained constant throughout the centuries, but those com-mitted to spreading that message need

to ensure that they present it in ways which are appealing and accessible to the communities with which they are seeking to engage. For over 100 years the Christadelphian Auxiliary Lecturing Society has sought to assist ecclesias and indi-vidual brothers and sisters to discharge their duty to preach God’s Word. One of the primary ways in which it has supported preaching is through the publication of affordable books and booklets.

The Society’s latest major publication is Life’s Biggest Questions, a 144-page book by Brother Mark Vincent published in 2016. This work has been enthusiastically received, and with good reason. It takes a systematic approach to iden-tifying major questions facing the world and men and women and then making a case for the Bible’s message of hope as the answer to these questions.

A modern styleIn thirty-five easily read chapters, the author builds a compelling case in a style that should ap-peal to modern readers. Two appendices complete the work; the first discusses in a remarkably suc-cinct way the credentials of the Bible as a divinely inspired text, while the second is a short list of publications recommended for further reading.

While the teaching of the Bible is the corner-stone of the work, Brother Mark draws upon an eclectic array of sources to add interest to the book. Presumably these are intended to reach out to readers with little or no background in Bible reading. How many comparable preaching books quote from such diverse sources as G. K. Chesterton, B. B. King and the songs of rock group Queen, while remaining focused on the Bible as the only reliable source of authority on life’s biggest questions?

Scripture quotations in the book are mostly from the ESV, which may be regarded as appro-priate given that the intended audience includes many who are not members of our community. In a few places, other versions are used. It is a pity therefore that, when John 3:16 is cited, the text used is the ESV even though it is deficient in its handling of this verse by failing to include the word ‘begotten’ (or an equivalent) when speaking of Jesus as God’s Son.

There are two stylistic matters which could have been handled differently:1 When compared with other preaching books

produced in our community over the years, there are relatively few citations from or refer-ences to the Bible text. While the text of the book is always faithful to the Bible, it seemed to me that there should have been more overt inclusion of Bible quotes to support the points being made.

Perhaps it was a deliberate decision to minimise the number of direct quotes in a concession to the hope that the book will be read by people with little awareness of the Bible; if so, I wonder whether this was a wise move given our community’s commitment to the Bible as the only source of authority in spiritual matters.

2 Much less seriously, an idiosyncratic feature of the author’s style is his use more than once of the word “both” to refer to three separate items. While that grated on me, it is

Review

http://www.thechristadelphian.com/cals_lifes_biggest_questions.htm





recognised that many other readers will not be so pedantic.

Chapter 24, entitled “Resurrection,” includes an argument from nature to bolster confidence in the reality of resurrection. Arguments like this based on ‘natural theology’ have a long and illustrious history and may well be valid, but one wonders whether they are more convincing to people who are already committed believers than they would be to people searching for the truth. The appeal of such arguments may also be greater to someone living in a cold, northern hemisphere climate than they are to readers living in, say, the tropics or even more temperate climates like Australia.

Ideal for preachingNotwithstanding these minor reservations, Life’s Biggest Questions is recommended heartily to ecclesias and individual brothers and sisters as a resource which will complement their preach-ing efforts. It would be an ideal book to offer interested friends, seminar attendees, young peo-ple, neighbours and work colleagues. The book would also be appropriate for placing in public libraries.

For a book of this size and standard, the cost is very modest. It is hoped that many copies will find their ways to those who are searching for the answers to life’s biggest questions while there is still time for them to repent and be baptised.

Iron sharpens iron (4)Letters between Brother John Carter and Brother Fred Chambers

Huddersfield. May 11/1913.Dear John.

Many thanks for list of passages supplied. Shall look forward to the promised notes on zoē etc.

My thirst for reading has just brought me into contact with a Mormon book entitled:– “A voice of warning & instruction to all people.” Author P. P. Pratt.1

The early part is much the same as any of our people might write & deals with prophecy. From the fact that much prophecy has been ful-filled, he shews that we can reasonably hope for the remainder to come to pass in due time. The Kingdom of God comes in for some explanation, which seems to be wide of the mark. He gives the four of the things necessary for a kingdom viz:– A king, officers, code of laws & subjects, but no mention is made of a land!

He takes the view that the kingdom of God was set up in the days of the apostles.

John proclaimed:– Repent ye for the kingdom of Heaven is at hand. Likewise also Jesus & his disciples. At the death of Jesus this message ceased. They were to tarry in Jerusalem until the kingdom was established. This establishment came about when Peter unlocked the door on the day of Pentecost.

I have read the account in Acts over again but fail to see any promise of a kingdom being established then, much less of it actually coming about. What Jesus did promise was the baptism of the Holy Spirit, which certainly came to pass.

The account of the origin of the Book of Mor-mon is interesting for its ingeniousness.

The alleged circumstances are as follows:–After the confusion of tongues, God led a

colony of people from Babel to America. They crossed in eight vessels & inhabited America 1,500 years. They were destroyed for their wickedness about 600 BC. A prophet (Ether) witnessed their destruction & wrote their history. This record was afterwards found by a colony of Israelites (descendants of the tribe of Judah Joseph) who came from Jerusalem about 600 BC. They gave rise to two nations, one called Nephites & the other Lamanites. The Lamanites became a sav-age people of whom the American Indians are a remnant. The Nephites were enlightened & civilised. They had visions & angelic ministra-tions. Jesus Christ also appeared to them after

1. A Voice of Warning, and Instruction to All People, or an Introduction to the Faith and Doctrine of the Church of Jesus Christ, of Latter Day Saints, first published in 1839.

Contents


his resurrection & delivered to them the Gospel. About AD 400 they fell into great wickedness & were finally destroyed by the Lamanites.

Mormon lived about this time (He was a Nephite.) He made an abridgement of the records of their history, & of the prophecies & Gospel revealed to them, as well as a history of his own time. This record fell into the hands of his son (Moroni) after his death, who made additions until the year 420 AD.

In order to preserve it from the Lamanites he made a box from 6 flags, hid the record inside & then buried the box in a hill near Manchester, New York State. It lay there until Sept. 22nd 1823 when it was found by Joseph Smith, Junr. The records were engraved on thin plates resembling gold, in Egyptian characters. These leaves were bound together making a book about 6 inches thick.

When people got to know of this discovery Joseph Smith seems to have had an exciting time of it, being waylaid on one occasion & afterwards hunted from his home. He escaped & commenced translating the records by the aid of the Urim &

Thummim, which had been buried with them.Several extracts which are given are almost

word for word with passages in the New Testa-ment.

The whole story would be more plausible if he could tell us where the original plates now are. Instead he remains discreetly silent.

At the same time he gives some curious in-stances of the finding of Hebrew manuscripts. One set, found by a farmer when ploughing, was found sewed between two pieces of thick raw hide. Three sheets were sent to Cambridge (one piece was torn to atoms by his neighbours) & were found to be quotations from Deut. 6 verses 4/9 & several others all in Hebrew characters.

These instances are given to prove that the early inhabitants of the land were of Hebrew origin, & I think it is worth while looking out for authoritative evidence both ways to see whether any reliance can be placed upon the idea. The ten tribes are lost. Is it not possible to locate some of them?

Yours sincerely in the bond of loveFred

The work of God on men’s hearts4. Cleansing the heart from sinStephen Green

THE RENEWAL of a man’s heart and its cleansing from sin is the work of God. We choose examples from the life of David in

the past and from the life of Israel in the future.

David’s prayer for cleansing and renewalPsalm 51, in accord with its title, is commonly believed to record David’s prayer of contrition after Nathan the prophet had brought home to him his great sin of adultery and murder in the matter of Bathsheba and Uriah the Hittite.

David prays: “Create in me a clean heart, O God; and renew a right spirit within me” (v. 10). David is clearly asking that God will change him

in some respect. Renewing a right spirit (“constant spirit,” AV mg.; “steadfast spirit,” RV mg.) seems to imply a renewal of attitudes and way of thinking to comply with God’s law and thinking. A clean heart seems to have a parallel meaning, referring to the purging of his understanding, thoughts and desires, that is, what he himself is as a person.

David had realised what he had become, recognising the sinful patterns of thought and action that had been strengthened by his sin. The realisation triggered his prayer for change. But how was the change to be made? There is nothing in the verse quoted which lays down how the change would come about, apart from

Exposition

Contents


the fact that God would have to be behind it. It certainly does not say in the psalm, or to my knowledge elsewhere, that God performed this purging of David’s heart and spirit by an action outside and altogether independent of David’s consciousness, as is sometimes speculated. The only hints provided in the psalm lead us to think of the purging being based upon David’s own repentance freely exercised and his sense of God’s forgiveness (vv. 17 and 1).

The psalm is David’s prayer for God’s mercy and forgiveness. As we read it, we see that some themes recur.1 Confession:

“I acknowledge my transgressions: and my sin is ever before me” (v. 3);“Against Thee . . . have I sinned” (v. 4);“The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit: a broken and a contrite heart, O God, Thou wilt not despise” (v. 17).

2 Washing:“Wash me throughly from mine iniquity” (v. 2);“wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow” (v. 7).

3 Cleansing:“cleanse me from my sin” (v. 2);“Purge me with hyssop” (v. 7);“Create in me a clean heart, O God; and renew a right spirit within me” (v. 10).

4 Blotting out:“blot out my transgressions” (v. 1);“Hide Thy face from my sins, and blot out all mine iniquities” (v. 9);“Deliver me from bloodguiltiness” (v. 14; with its reference to salvation, this verse also has a link to the two themes above).

The first of these themes is an activity of David. The last three of these are activities of God. The washing and the cleansing are activities which will act upon David. These two aspects relate Psalm 51 to the cleansings under the Law. No-table examples are the cleansing of those who had touched the dead (Num. 19), those who had contracted leprosy (Lev. 13, 14), and those who had a running issue (ch. 15). In all three cases the washing of the body and cleansing by sprinkling with the water of purification figure largely. The phraseology of the psalm ties in closely with these laws.

New Testament themes of cleansingIn the New Testament these themes are related to the blood of Christ as the effective medium of

God’s forgiveness for those baptised into Christ, of the washing away of sins (Acts 22:16) and of the answer of a good conscience (1 Pet. 3:21):

“the blood of Jesus Christ . . . cleanseth us from all sin” (1 Jno. 1:7,9);“if the blood of bulls and of goats . . . sancti-fieth to the purifying of the flesh: how much more shall the blood of Christ . . . purge your conscience from dead works . . . ?” (Heb. 9:13,14);“let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprin-kled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water” (10:22);“Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood . . .” (Rev. 1:5; see also 7:14).

These statements do not refer to literal washing in blood, but depend upon our knowledge of, and participation in, the sacrificial work of Jesus. The line of scriptural thought and interpretation of the Old Testament by the New which they follow indicates that David’s prayer for cleansing refers particularly to the cleansing of the conscience. Now the cleansing of the conscience must be based upon a realisation of the forgiveness of God; it cannot stand alone. Nor can a realisation of God’s forgiveness appear without God having said that He will forgive. And in David’s case, he was indeed told of God’s forgiveness: “The LORD also hath put away thy sin” (2 Sam. 12:13).

We may feel that there must be something more to Psalm 51:10 than the cleansing of the conscience, particularly in the second half of the verse: “renew a right [or constant] spirit within me.” Perhaps there is. There must have been some deterioration in David’s life and attitude leading up to his great sin, and the act itself would have weakened his subsequent self-control. It would be reasonable to understand this verse, and also verse 6, as a prayer to God for a renewal of attitudes and the learning of a better way. No doubt it can be understood thus. However, such a request does not call for an independent act of God directly changing David’s character. A look at the historical record will help us to see the hand of God at work upon David, renewing a right spirit within him.

The creation of a clean heart and the renewal of a right and steadfast spirit must be based upon a broken spirit, a broken and contrite heart (v. 17). Such is true repentance, and is the means by which God desired Israel to reach “a new heart and a new spirit” (Ezek. 18:30,31), as we


saw in an earlier article in this series. Reading the historical record in 2 Samuel 12, we can see how God achieved this spirit in David, first by sending Nathan the prophet and later through the trouble David had to endure. With cunning parable Nathan stirred David to anger (v. 5), forc-ing David to consider seriously the charge against himself, bringing him to confession of sin (v. 13), and finally producing a broken and contrite heart.

The historical recordThe rest of David’s life was full of trouble, begin-ning with the death of the child. The words of the Lord were fulfilled to the letter: “the sword shall never depart from thine house” (v. 10). The continual affliction helped to maintain David’s humility and renew the steadfast spirit for which he prayed. Amnon’s forcing of Tamar; Absalom’s murder of his brother; David’s loss of his son in exile; Absalom’s conspiracy, rebellion and death; Shimei’s cursing and affliction of David in flight; pestilence among the people after David’s further lapse in numbering Israel; and finally, when David was very old, Adonijah’s attempt to usurp the crown—all these had their effect upon David. Some of his troubles mirrored David’s own sin of adultery and murder, continually reminding him and renewing that broken and contrite spirit for which he had prayed.

As Nathan foretold, David’s own wives were taken by Absalom, who adulterously and openly lay with them in the sight of all Israel. Thus God reminded David of why he was in trouble. David had to flee the luxuries of the court and live again in fear of pursuit, as in the days of Saul. In this way God once more taught David to depend on Him, renewing that right attitude which pleases God. The whole episode of Absalom’s rebellion must have greatly distressed David. It involved betrayal by friends such as Ahithophel, whose counsel he had trusted, and treason of a son whom he loved greatly. Even when the battle was won, all that David could cry was, “O my son Absalom, my son, my son Absalom! would God I had died for thee, O Absalom, my son, my son!” (18:33). In the death of Absalom and all these other events David could see the effects of his sin, and they formed a pungent reminder that helped to bring to fruition his prayer in Psalm 51.

The cleansing of IsraelThe cleansing and renewing work of God is also seen in His care for Israel. We have previ-ously referred to God’s appeal to Israel to make

themselves a new heart and a new spirit (Ezek. 18:31). In Jeremiah’s prophecy God promises to bring the first captivity in Chaldea back to the land of Israel and to “give them an heart to know Me” (Jer. 24:6,7). Later in the prophecy, we are shown that the change would be a co-operative activity. Both parties have freedom of action:

“For thus saith the LORD, That after seventy years be accomplished at Babylon I will visit you . . . And ye shall seek Me, and find Me, when ye shall search for Me with all your heart” (29:10,13).

Any interpretation of Jeremiah 24 must therefore allow for Israel’s willing search with all their own heart, not one given them by direct implant.

Another example of God’s cleansing work will be seen in the future when Israel’s sins are removed. In Ezekiel’s prophecy God promises to gather Israel from the nations, and He says:

“I will put a new spirit within you; and I will take the stony heart out of their flesh, and will give them an heart of flesh: that they may walk in My statutes, and keep Mine ordinances, and do them” (11:19,20).1

But he indicates in the next verse (v. 21) that the heart of some will not renew. They have a choice and can walk after their own heart, but they will be suitably recompensed if they do.

In Ezekiel 36 Israel are once again the subject of similar thoughts. The Lord God will gather them:

“Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean: from all your filthiness, and from all your idols, will I cleanse you. A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh” (vv. 25,26).

Similarly, in Jeremiah 31 God speaks of writing His law in their hearts:

“But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put My law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be My people . . . for they shall all know Me . . . for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more” (vv. 33,34).

1. It may be that this passage foretells the first return under Zerubbabel and Ezra (see Ezra 7:10), in which case Ezekiel 11 lines up with the previous reference to Jeremiah 29 rather than with those that follow (Ezekiel 36 and Jeremiah 31).


The covenant mentioned is called “a new cov-enant” in verse 31. This suggests we look in the New Testament for an explanation of the ideas these passages contain.

The new covenantEzekiel 36, Jeremiah 31 and possibly Ezekiel 11 ultimately refer to the time of God’s Kingdom when Israel is to be restored. However, all three passages have application now to those, both Jew and Gentile, who turn in faith to the new Israelitish covenant in Christ.

The passages from Ezekiel 11 and 36 are linked with 2 Corinthians 3:3 by the phrases “stony heart” and “heart of flesh,” as, of course, is the passage from Jeremiah 31 by the phrase “write it in their hearts.” In writing to the Corinthians Paul explains that the believers form the letter (“epis-tle”) of Christ written in their hearts with the spirit of the living God. This was accomplished through Paul, whose sufficiency to perform this was of God because he was made an able minister of the New Covenant (vv. 2-8).

The new spirit of Israel we may expect to be created by similar means. If preparatory work is needed to soften the hearts in Israel, it could follow a pattern something akin to that by which God renewed a broken and contrite spirit in David. The prophet Zechariah describes such an event (12:9-14), when they see the one whom they pierced.

The passage from Jeremiah 31 is quoted at length in Hebrews 8. Its terms are subsequently contrasted with the Old Covenant in chapters 9 and 10. In these chapters the theme of remission of sins is taken directly from Jeremiah 31, but the themes of sprinkling and cleansing belonging to Ezekiel 36 are also used by the writer to the He-brews, who relates their effectiveness exclusively to the blood of Christ. We have already looked at these in connection with Psalm 51 and the purging of David’s conscience. The purging of our conscience through the offering and blood of Christ is an essential part of that relationship

with God which we have through Christ as the mediator of the new covenant (Heb. 9:11-15). On the basis of this covenant God no longer remem-bers our sins and iniquities (10:14-18); we have boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus; and our hearts are sprinkled from an evil conscience, our bodies being washed with pure water (vv. 19,22).

Soon the new covenant will apply to Israel as a whole nation, not just to individuals as now. But when that happens, the cleansing referred to in Ezekiel 36 will mean more than the cleansing of the conscience of those who hear God; it also in-volves purging out the rebels. Ezekiel 20 explains:

“And I will bring you into the wilderness of the people, and there will I plead with you face to face. Like as I pleaded with your fathers in the wilderness of the land of Egypt, so will I plead with you, saith the Lord GOD. And I will cause you to pass under the rod, and I will bring you into the bond of the covenant: and I will purge out from among you the rebels, and them that transgress against Me: I will bring them forth out of the country where they sojourn, and they shall not enter into the land of Israel” (vv. 35-38).

Under the new covenant the relationship with God is based on “a true heart in full assurance of faith” (Heb. 10:22). This is how one becomes a true Israelite under the covenant. God puts His laws into our hearts and writes them in our minds by a combination of preaching His Word and bringing us to experiences which make us realise our dependence upon Him and our need to obey Him. God puts no difference between the Jews and the Gentiles, purifying the hearts of both by faith (Acts 15:9). When the natural nation of Israel come under the new covenant, it will be because their hearts have been purified by faith, and the rebels who refused have been purged out.

The next article will look at how God teaches us to keep His ways, and the Psalms will again be the source of much of our study.

(To be continued)

“. . . it would first seem advisable to clarify as far as possible the meaning of the adjective ‘Holy’ that so often qualifies the word ‘Spirit.’ In the Old Testament there are three such cases (Ps. 51:11; Isa. 63:10,11), and these occurrences have often been used to buttress the claim that the Spirit has moral or ethical qualities associated with it. But this is to mis-construe the basic meaning of the word ‘Holy,’ which in Hebrew . . . means ‘set apart,’ ‘cut off,’ ‘separate,’ and is primarily used in Scripture in connection with things chosen by God for His service and use.”

Edward Whittaker and Reg Carr, ‘Spirit’ in the New Testament, p. 110.


The words of the wise5. LazinessMark Vincent

TWO OF THE Words of the Wise relate to this topic, the first of them Word number 5:

“Seest thou a man diligent in his business? he shall stand before kings; he shall not stand before mean men” (Prov. 22:29).

The ESV renders “diligent” as “skilful,” which lays bare a dichotomy: which is more important, skill (talent) or hard work (discipline)? Generally speaking you need some of both. One who is mo-tivated, diligent and skilful will not stand before “obscure men” (ESV) but will be appropriately elevated, even to the presence of kings.

There is no place here, then, for the lazy. Skill does not develop without practice, and practice requires diligence and application. Idle people simply will not do it; they are not able to look past the short-term suffering or inconvenience for the long-term gain. What is needed is application and commitment. The job needs to be done.

The fifth item in the appendix to the Words of the Wise (24:23-34) takes a similar theme, but from the opposite angle and in a much more extended saying:

“I passed by the field of a sluggard, by the vineyard of a man lacking sense, and behold, it was all overgrown with thorns; the ground was covered with nettles, and its stone wall was broken down. Then I saw and considered it; I looked and received instruction. A little sleep, a little slumber, a little folding of the hands to rest, and poverty will come upon you like a robber, and want like an armed man” (vv. 30-34, ESV).

The very slowness of the saying adds to its im-pact. Just to read it seems to be to slow down into take-it-easy, contemplative mode. The neglected and desolate nature of the field is gradually and painstakingly unfolded, and the sluggard’s slum-ber is depicted in a manner which is slow and easy and tends towards the soporific.

What our sluggard is doing instead of attend-ing to his field is not stated immediately; all that is revealed is his absence and the consequent dilapidated state of his field. Is he in bed? Is he out partying—wasting his substance on riot-ous living, not realising that the tank will soon be empty with no means to replenish it? Is he

concocting unrealistic dreams and schemes? Is he just out for coffee with friends—a ‘good-time Charlie,’ happy to chat and pass the time of day but not actually to do anything which produces something? Is he a victim of Parkinson’s law—one who simply finds his day filled with a miscellany of activities, but lacking the ability to prioritise his time so that the important things get taken care of? He doesn’t cultivate his land; he doesn’t weed it, prune it or protect it, so the curse has taken over and he has not stood against it. Through inertia this happens; it’s automatic—the way of things. Only resolute activity will overcome the inevitability of the cursed ground. Entropy and chaos will take over where energy and order once reigned.

It is at this point the fulcrum of the passage is to be found. It is no use observing things un-less we learn the lessons from them and bring the point home. This is what the wise man now does—seeing, considering, looking and receiving instruction (notice the sequence of four verbs hard on one another’s heels).

It is only at this point that we discover the reason why the garden has been left untended: the proprietor was having a nap! Such naps can be literal or metaphorical, of course; there are all kinds of ways of ‘nodding off’ from what we are meant to be doing and finding ourselves distracted by something else. What is described on the surface of the text, however, is a literal nap.

It is deftly depicted. A pleasant nap is the thing that has brought such desolation. It seemed such a little thing—and so pleasant too! As the nap is described, one finds oneself cosily snuggling down as one reads it. It is only a little indulgence (note the threefold use—“a little . . . a little . . . a little”), yet it is a mortal enemy. A little of this and that where it should not be quickly grows into something big—and then it will be too late. Laziness is like a highwayman, a robber by the wayside, taking us for all we are worth when we least expect it.

Thus the ugly awakening—the shocking inter-ruption which brings personal calamity, loss and, potentially, devastation. There is simply too much at stake to be lazy.


Subscriptions Secretary: Mrs Sarah Marshall, 2 Longridge Road, Woodthorpe, Nottingham, NG5 4LX. Tel. +44 (0)115 859 9297email: [email protected]

Subscriptions are obtainable from our website, http://testimonymagazine.com, through the agents listed below, or from the Subscriptions Secretary, to whom all correspondence relating to the issue of the magazine (including change of address) should be addressed.

Prices and AgentsUNITED KINGDOM£28 for a regular annual subscription or e-magazine.Student rate (25 yrs or under): £14.Apply to: Subscriptions Secretary (see above) Remittances payable to THE TESTIMONY (CHRISTADELPHIAN)

AUSTRALIASurface mail subscription or e-magazineAus$52 (Student rate $26; Airmail $95).Mrs Beth Symes, PO Box 388,Gembrook, VIC 3783.Tel. (03) 5967 7069 email: [email protected] payable to TESTIMONY MAGAZINE

CANADASurface mail subscription or e-magazineCan$51 (Student rate $26; Airmail $99).Mrs Linda Fairhurst, Box 204, Rolling Hills, Alberta, T0J 2S0. Tel. (403) 964-2900; email: [email protected] payable to MRS L. FAIRHURST

NEW ZEALANDSurface mail subscription or e-magazineNZ $59 (Student rate $30; Airmail $116).Philip Walker, “Christadelphians”,PO Box 458, Palmerston North 4440.Tel. (6) 354 0396; Fax (6) 354 0395email: [email protected] payable to TESTIMONY MAGAZINE

SOUTH AFRICAPlease apply for rates and method of payment to the Subscriptions Secretary (see left).Remittances payable to THE TESTIMONY (CHRISTADELPHIAN)USASurface mail subscription or e-magazineUS $47 (Student rate $24; Airmail $95).Mrs Celia Coleman, 22450 Schoenborn Street, West Hills, CA 91304-3318. Tel. (818) 596 0905 email: [email protected] payable to CELIA COLEMANEUROPE AND ALL OTHER COUN-TRIESSurface mail subscription or e-magazine£32 Sterling (Student rate £16; Airmail £45).Apply to Subscriptions Secretary (see above).Remittances payable toTHE TESTIMONY (CHRISTADELPHIAN)

TRIAL SUBSCRIPTIONSA free three-month trial subscription may be obtained from the Subscriptions Secretary.

COMPLAINTS/QUERIESPlease address any complaints or queries to the Subscriptions Secretary, who will be pleased to investigate and arrange for replacement of faulty or missing copies.

BACK COPIESBack copies are available for the last two years. Please apply to the Subscriptions Secretary.

BINDERSThese hold two years’ magazines, and cost £4.25 + postage. Apply to Peter and Norma Forbes (see back cover).

OTHER PUBLICATIONSFor a list of previous years’ Special Issues available, please apply to the Subscriptions Secretary, to whom all orders should be sent.

SUBSCRIPTION DETAILS for 2017

Published on behalf of The Testimony Committee (Christadelphian) by Jeremy Thomas, 22 Kingswood Close, Kings Norton, Birmingham, B30 3NX, UK • Printed by Reflex Litho Ltd., Thetford, Norfolk.

Registered Charity No. 225908.







Contents XIV

“A ROSE-RED CITY half as old as time”—so did the nineteenth-century English clergyman John William Burgon fa-

mously describe Petra, one of the best-known archaeological sites in the Middle East. Petra was the capital of the kingdom of the Nabateans, located to the south and southeast of the land of Israel, which incorporated the territory of Old Testament Ammon, Moab and Edom. In the Bible Petra is known as Sela (Isa. 16:1; both names mean ‘rock’); its name was changed to Joktheel by King Amaziah of Judah (2 Kgs. 14:7). Other traditions connect Petra with certain Old Testa-ment events—one of the mountains overlooking Petra, for example, is Jebel Nebi Harun, allegedly “Mount Hor by the border of the land of Edom” (Num. 20:23, NASB) on which Aaron died.

The Nabatean kingdom enjoyed periods of great prosperity during its 400-year history, and at times its influence on its Jewish neighbours was considerable. Petra reached its apogee during the reign of King Aretas IV Philopatris (‘friend of his people’, r. 8 BC–AD 40). Under his patron-age the city was beautified with colossal public buildings, including the theatre of Petra (above). Carved out of the mountainside, on the site of an earlier necropolis which was destroyed for the

purpose, the theatre contains forty-five rows of seats divided into three horizontal sections and six vertical ones. Estimates of its capacity vary but are typically around the 6,000 mark.

We encounter King Aretas IV twice in the New Testament, once by name and once indirectly. Under him an ethnarch exercised authority in Damascus. The Apostle Paul writes to the Cor-inthians of having to escape from him by being let down from the city walls in a basket (2 Cor. 11:32,33). Opinion is divided on whether Nabatean troops controlled the whole city, or whether the ethnarch’s jurisdiction extended only to the Na-batean community present in Damascus.

Phasaelis, the daughter of Aretas, was the first wife of Herod the Tetrarch (Herod Antipas). Herod divorced her in order to marry Herodias, who had been married to his half-brother Philip. For this he earned a public rebuke from John the Baptist (Mt. 14:1-4; Lk. 3:19), which led to John’s imprisonment. Repudiated by her husband, Phasaelis returned to her father. According to Josephus, in revenge Aretas dispatched troops into Herod’s territory and inflicted a military defeat on him. Herod appealed to Rome for help. A Ro-man invasion of Nabatea was halted only by the death of the Emperor Tiberius.—Jeremy Thomas

Jewish scenes6. Jordan: theatre of Aretas IV, Petra

Contents


TESTIMONY BOOKS

One man’s pilgrimage: under God’s good hand. 88 pages. £2.00.

Testimony Handbook of Bible Principles. 197 pages. £2.00.

Family Trees of the Tribes of Israel. 117 pages. £5.50.

Moses: Earth’s Meekest Man. 172 pages. £2.50.

Paul’s Epic Journey to Rome. 153 pages. £6.00.

The Pen of a Ready Writer. 272 pages. £2.50.

Daniel’s Last Prophecy. 141 pages. £7.50.

Man and Woman. 122 pages. £0.50.

“In the nurture and admonition of the Lord.” 196 pages. £8.50.

The Exodus – A Commentary on Exodus 1–15. 237 pages. £1.00.

For the Study and Defence of the Holy Scripture:

Volume 1. 236 pages. £5.00.

Volume 2. 207 pages. £8.50.

Volumes 1 & 2 together. £10.00

All titles postage extra. Available from Peter and Norma Forbes, 16 Mountfields Drive, Loughborough, LE11 3JE; tel. 01509 232214; email [email protected]; or from http://testimonymagazine.com/shop/

‘Spirit’ in the New Testament. It is a fundamental characteristic of the Christadelphian body that the Scriptures are approached as God’s revelation to man, able to be understood by the appli-cation of the mind to its contents. Salvation is dependent on the understanding and belief of its basic principles, and the appli-cation of its teaching to daily life. The Christadelphian approach to Scripture is to assume nothing from outside knowledge, and to eschew any belief in a direct influence or Spirit from God that provides instruction or moral strength. This book is a compila-tion of articles from the Testimony by Brethren Edward Whittaker and Reg Carr on this important subject. £1.00.

Contents


http://testimonymagazine.com/shop/books


http://testimonymagazine.com/shop/

King David's palace discovered? - Testimony Magazine

Documents

Transcript of King David's palace discovered? - Testimony Magazine