Messianic prophecy and typology

Tags

biblical typology, hermeneutics

Leer en español

The following is an excerpt from the new edition of volume 3 of my Interpretive Guide to the Bible (print book; pdf).

Many verses in the Psalms are quoted in the New Testament as prophecies of the Messiah (Christ). In some instances, such as Psalm 2 and Psalm 110, the psalms quoted are direct prophecies of future events. See the comments on these psalms for challenges to the view that they are direct prophecies. However, in many other instances a psalm in which David is describing his personal experiences is quoted in the New Testament as a prophecy of Christ’s experiences. For example, in Acts 2:25-31 Peter quotes Psalm 16:8-11 as a prophecy of the resurrection of Christ, even though that psalm seems to be describing David’s experiences. It should be noted that Peter’s quotation of this psalm was not his own invention, but was likely an interpretation which Jesus taught the disciples directly after His resurrection (Luke 24:44-47), and certainly was something Peter was led by the Holy Spirit to teach. Some Christian interpreters have tried to argue that all the messianic prophecies in the Psalms are to be understood as speaking exclusively of Christ and not of David. Evangelicals who are influenced by higher criticism often argue that these psalms were intended only to speak of David (or an anonymous “psalmist”) in their original context, which seems to make the New Testament references to them as prophecies erroneous. However, there is a better way to make sense of both these psalms and their New Testament quotations.

Definition of typology

The seemingly indirect prophecies of the Messiah in the psalms are best understood through the hermeneutics of prophetic typology. Typology is the study of types. The English word “type” is derived from the Greek word τύπος, which means “pattern.” However, this Greek word is not used in the New Testament as a technical hermeneutical indicator of typological structures the way the English word “type” is used. Further, even this hermeneutical sense of the word “type” is outdated in modern English; the word “prototype” (or “archetype”) would be clearer, but “type” is still the word used in hermeneutical discussions. A good working definition of typology comes from Horne’s nineteenth century work:

A type, in its primary and literal meaning, simply denotes a rough draught, or less accurate model, from which a more perfect image is made; but, in the sacred or theological sense of the term, a type may be defined to be a symbol of something future and distant, or an example prepared and evidently designed by God to prefigure that future thing. What is thus prefigured is called the antitype.

Thomas Hartwell Horne, An Introduction to the Critical Study and Knowledge of the Holy Scriptures (4th ed.; London: T. Cadell, 1823), 2:649.

The validity and importance of typology

The numerous citations of typological relationships in the NT shows that typology is indeed a valid mode of interpretation, for which we need only discover its governing hermeneutical principles. There are some passages in the NT wherein a typological relationship is explicitly recognized, such as that of Melchizedek and Christ (Heb 5:10; 7:1-17), David and Christ (Acts 2:25-34), and Christ and the Passover lambs (John 1:29, 36; 1 Cor 5:7). At other times, a typological relationship is not explicitly stated, but a parallel is drawn between an OT reality and an NT reality such as the tabernacle and sacrificial system (cf. Col 2:17; Heb 10:1). Typology is particularly important for understanding how the Old Testament foreshadows and anticipates the person and work of the Messiah.

The Old and New Testaments are linked through the fulfillment of OT promises in the NT, which verifies that Christianity is the continuation of the Jews’ religion in a perfected form, not a heretical cult. Typological relationships form part of this linkage. Much of the Old Testament points to and is fulfilled in the New Testament, and the New Testament is dependent on the Old Testament.

One reason why the Bible uses typology is that object lessons are a particularly helpful teaching tool. It is easier for people to understand theological truth when they can see a model of that truth, rather than being taught the principles or prophecies abstractly. Typology also shows how God uses historical events to prepare the world for future events in His plan.

Identification of biblical types

Three characteristics are shared by all legitimate types in the Bible: promise-fulfillment, functional correspondence, and historicity.

First, the promise-fulfillment criterion means that the antitype must in some way fulfill the type. This implies that:

1. There must be a prophetic promise which links type and antitype. This promise must be left unfulfilled or partially unfulfilled by the type. The historical role of the type must be incomplete and look toward a future fulfillment. A genuine OT typological structure must contain specific promises which point to a fulfillment in a specific antitype, and not just general promises which could have many potential fulfillments. Excessive typology tends to overlook this criterion. Many interpreters identify types on the basis of similarities and patterns, without the presence of an associated prophecy.
2. Typological indicators should be present in the original OT context. The only way the NT can legitimately claim fulfillment of an OT type is if the typological structure is recognizable from exegesis of the OT text using the literal hermeneutic. The NT simply recognizes what was intended in the OT text all along. If a type can only be recognized on the basis of NT revelation, then in what sense is it a prefigurement? Views of typology which define a type on the basis of a list of correspondences which can only be recognized retrospectively miss an “awareness of the fundamental direction in which revelation points.” (Philip E. Powers, “Prefigurement and the Hermeneutics of Prophetic Typology” [PhD dissertation, Dallas Theological Seminary, 1995], 175.)
3. A type must precede its antitype in history. Since a type is a prophetic anticipation of an antitype, it must precede the antitype in history.
4. A type must be prepared and designed by God to represent its antitype. Since a type is a prophetic object lesson, God must shape history in such a way that the type takes on essential characteristics of the antitype.

Second, the functional correspondence criterion means that the type must have the same historical function as the antitype. Specifically, the type must have the function, role, or office which is noted in the prophetic promise that connects the type with the antitype. As an example, a messianic type must occupy a messianic office or function, though the Messiah occupies this role in a greater and fuller way than the type. Thus, David and Melchizedek both occupied a messianic office/function. Functional correspondence is a necessary part of typology because a type must lack completion in itself and look forward to a goal to be fulfilled in an antitype, which is by definition greater and fuller than the type. When the antitype arrives, the need for the role played by the type is done away, and the antitype replaces the function of the type. An example of the way this works is that when Christ died, the whole sacrificial system of the Mosaic Law was fulfilled and ceased to operate in a legitimate manner. Excessive typology tends to focus on corresponding external elements between a proposed type and antitype while ignoring the need for identity in office/function and the inherent deficiency of the type. The retrospective recognition view of typology also encounters problems with the functional correspondence criterion, since the antitype seems to provide the model for recognizing the type. However, by the very definition of typology, “it is the type that points toward the antitype, not the antitype which points back toward the type” (Powers, “Prefigurement and the Hermeneutics of Prophetic Typology,” 181), and therefore the type must have some function or office that is incomplete and awaits completion in an antitype.

Third, the historicity criterion means that both the type and the antitype must be real historical entities, not mere literary inventions. Historicity is a problem in modern critical scholarship, which tends to view supposed literary motifs almost as typological indicators. See further, W. Edward Glenny, “The ‘People of God’ in Romans 9:25-26” Bibliotheca Sacra 152 (Jan.–Mar. 1995): 56.

Categories of typology

Biblical types can be divided into three major categories: legal types, prophetical types, and historical types.

1. Legal types are rituals or symbols in the Mosaic legal system that prefigured a future entity or event, usually the person and work of the Messiah. An example of a legal type is the lambs sacrificed on Passover, which foreshadowed Christ’s death on Passover as the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world (John 1:29, 36; 1 Cor 5:7). The fulfillment of the types of the Law in the person and work of the Messiah is central to the theology of the NT, and forms a bridge between the Old Testament and the New. It is evident that the sacrifices in the Law were functionally incomplete, since they had to be repeated every year. Hebrews 10:1-18 connects this functional deficiency with messianic prophecies to argue that Christ’s death is the antitype of the Mosaic sacrificial system.
2. A prophetical type is an action or object lesson deliberately portrayed by a prophet to symbolize a future event. An example of this is Isaiah walking naked and barefoot to portray the captivity of Egypt (Isa 20:1-6). While all typology is prophetic, this category of typology refers to direct and deliberate portrayals of future events by a prophet. It can be debated whether prophetic object lessons designed to portray future events should be classified as types or symbols.
3. Historical types are what most people think of when they think of typology. Horne defines historical types as “characters, actions, and fortunes of some eminent persons recorded in the Old Testament, so ordered by Divine Providence as to be exact prefigurations of the characters, actions, and fortunes of future persons who should arise under the Gospel dispensation” (Thomas Hartwell Horne, An Introduction to the Critical Study and Knowledge of the Holy Scriptures [4th ed.; London: T. Cadell, 1823], 2:651). An example of a historical type is David’s experiences in Psalm 22 that are cited in the Gospels as fulfilled in Christ’s experiences (Mark 15:34; John 19:23-24).

Erroneous approaches to typology

The most common error made in recognizing types is the idea that parallels alone indicate the existence of types, with the result that interpreters find far too many types. Powers comments:

The greatest confusion in the area of biblical typology comes as a result of the broad application of the term to a variety of literary and historical situations simply because a recurring pattern is recognized. Thus any repetition of word, symbol, event, person, genre, or theological theme is prone to be explained by typology and all those characteristics associated with typological structure are then applied to elicit a new or fuller meaning of the original text. The problem becomes acute when those typological characteristics are attached to literary structures or historical situations creating meanings which are no longer supported by the textual evidence, and so are not a part of the author’s intended meaning. For some, typology has no bearing on the meaning of the text, but is simply a recognition of a pattern by subsequent interpreters. For others, typology is a method of exegesis; and for others still, it is not a method of exegesis, but part of the author’s intended meaning.

Powers, “Prefigurement and the Hermeneutics of Prophetic Typology,” 293-94.

The main problem with identifying types solely on the basis of similarities between two entities is that it adds to the Bible a claimed meaning that is not stated in the biblical text (i.e., the criteria of promise-fulfillment and functional correspondence are not met). Such identifications of types are subjective decisions made by the interpreter, which cannot be validated objectively. Traditionally, one of the main motives for excessive typology (“hyper-typing”) has been the Christo-centric hermeneutic—the theological proposition that every portion of the Old Testament is designed to point to Christ. Because many portions of the Old Testament are not directly about Jesus Christ, interpreters have to posit typologies and allegories in these portions in order to find a prophetic link to Christ. However, the Bible nowhere affirms the Christo-centric hermeneutic, and this supposedly spiritually-minded method of interpretation is exegetically and theologically erroneous. There is a sense in which all of history before the cross was preparing the world for the incarnation of Christ, and all of history afterward is leading to Christ’s second advent, but most of the particulars in history do not directly foreshadow the person and work of the Messiah.

As a reaction to hyper-typing and extreme allegorism, Bishop Herbert Marsh, writing in the early nineteenth century, proposed the following rule: only types that are specifically recognized in the New Testament may be considered valid. This rule has been followed by many evangelical interpreters since Marsh’s time. However, this approach is problematic because it is too minimalistic. The recognition in the New Testament of types in various Old Testament passages points to the existence of typology in whole classes of passages, and not just ones specifically cited by the New Testament writers. In many instances, it seems that the NT writers are not recognizing types through direct revelation from God, but through the application of hermeneutical principles. Recognition of these principles should allow other interpreters to identify other types. For example, Colossians 2:17 and Hebrews 9:11 and 10:1 indicate that many aspects of the Mosaic Law point to the person and work of the Messiah, but do not individually list each type and antitype. Another example is the clear typological connection between Antiochus IV Epiphanes and the eschatological antichrist in Daniel 8 and 11, which is at best only alluded to in the New Testament. A further problem with both the maximalist and the minimalist approaches to typology is that they only recognize typology retrospectively, which reverses the direction of prophecy and revelation.

A third erroneous view of typology is the view of unbelieving or liberal Bible scholars, who reject the possibility of genuine prophecy because it would imply the supernatural activity of God. For these critics, therefore, all prophetic typology is invalid as authentic prophecy, and what is called “typology” is nothing more than allegory or analogy. Parallels between characters in the OT and characters in the NT are seen as merely accidental, and not as intentional prophetic foreshadowings. If the critics always stated their position as a stark denial of the supernatural, of course it would not attract evangelical adherents. However, critical Bible scholars often use language that sounds very similar to the language used by evangelical scholars, hypothesizing “typological” relationships based on an analysis of recurring words or motifs in order to find “the real meaning” of the text below its surface meaning. What they seldom say is that they do not believe the Bible is historically reliable, or prophetic of future events, or inspired by the Holy Spirit of God. Too many evangelical scholars are analyzing the biblical text using critical methods of intertextual connections (source criticism) and motifs (literary criticism), among other methods that undermine literal interpretation and faith.

Too many evangelical scholars are also influenced by the claim of critical scholarship that the typological interpretation of Old Testament passages in the New Testament is an application of first century Jewish hermeneutical methods that were essentially allegorical. While an analysis of such Jewish hermeneutical methods as Pesher and omnisignificance would require a separate treatise, it may briefly be stated that the NT handles the OT differently than it is handled in the literature of rabbinic Judaism and the Qumran cult. The NT understanding of Scripture was shaped by the person and work of Jesus Christ, as the NT writers saw how Christ fulfilled prophecy and typology. Importantly, Jesus’ disciples learned how to interpret Scripture the way Jesus interpreted it, which was often different from the prevailing understanding of the Bible in contemporary Judaism. Wherever Jesus commented on a specific OT text, the apostles would follow His interpretation—and where He made general statements about Scripture, they applied the principles He gave to specific passages. Even the apostle Paul, who was thoroughly steeped in Judaism, says that immediately after his conversion he went away to Arabia to be taught directly by the Holy Spirit (Gal 1:16-17), and he says he counts his background in Judaism as loss for Christ (Phil 3:4-8). The NT views the Jewish interpretation of the OT as flawed because it fails to recognize the fulfillment of messianic promises in the person and work of Jesus Christ (2 Cor 3:14-16). One important difference between rabbinic exegesis and NT exegesis is that the NT use of typology takes into account the whole context of an OT passage. The linking of texts on linguistic similarities, apart from the historical setting and literal meaning of the texts, is not a characteristic of NT exegesis. In summary, the NT sees itself as a continuation of OT revelation, and sees a movement in revelatory history which culminated in the coming of the Messiah. The NT’s recognition of typology in the OT is therefore rooted in the meaning of the OT text and a belief in its fulfillment in the person and work of Jesus Christ. This is far different from contemporary first century methods of Jewish exegesis.

Messianic typology in the Psalms

Several verses in psalms of David are cited in the New Testament as typological prophecies of Christ, most notably portions of Psalm 16 and Psalm 22. David functioned as a type of Christ because of the Davidic Covenant, in which God promised to David that his dynasty and throne would continue forever, implying that the Messiah would be one of his descendants and would rule from his throne. Peter states the typological connection directly in Acts 2:30-31. There are some personal experiences of David in the psalms that he described in metaphorical language that Christ experienced literally, such as having his hands and his feet pierced by his enemies (Ps 22:16). David’s son Solomon also appears to function as a type of Christ in Psalm 45, since he was a son of David who ruled Israel from David’s throne. It is noteworthy that the New Testament never cites a psalm ascribed to another author as typological of Christ. This shows that the New Testament writers have paid attention to the historical context of the material they are citing as typological, and are not merely citing convenient parallels. In fact, David had some experiences that were typological of the Messiah’s experiences, and he was led by the Holy Spirit to describe these experiences in language that was metaphorically true of himself but literally true of the Messiah.

Enjoy this content? Buy me a coffee, or support this blog via a PayPal donation.

Profecía mesiánica y tipología

Tags

hermenéutica, tipología bíblica

Read in English

Este post es un extracto de mi Guía interpretativa para la Biblia (libro impreso; pdf de Salmos).

Muchos versículos de los Salmos son citados en el Nuevo Testamento como profecías del Mesías (Cristo). En algunos casos, como el Salmo 2 y el Salmo 110, los salmos citados son profecías directas de eventos futuros. Ver más adelante los comentarios sobre estos salmos para una refutación del punto de vista de que no son profecías directas. Sin embargo, en muchos otros casos, un salmo en el que David describe sus experiencias personales es citado en el Nuevo Testamento como una profecía de las experiencias de Cristo. Por ejemplo, en Hechos 2:25-31 Pedro cita el Salmo 16:8-11 como una profecía de la resurrección de Cristo, aunque ese salmo parece estar describiendo las experiencias de David. Cabe señalar que la cita de Pedro de este salmo no fue su propia invención, sino que probablemente fue una interpretación que Jesús enseñó a los discípulos directamente después de Su resurrección (Lucas 24:44-47), y ciertamente fue algo que Pedro fue guiado por el Espíritu Santo a enseñar. Algunos intérpretes cristianos han tratado de argumentar que todas las profecías mesiánicas en los Salmos deben ser entendidas como hablando exclusivamente de Cristo y no de David. Los evangélicos que están influenciados por la alta crítica a menudo argumentan que estos salmos solo tenían la intención de hablar de David (o un “salmista” anónimo) en su contexto original, lo que parece hacer que las referencias a ellos en el Nuevo Testamento como profecías sean erróneas. Sin embargo, hay una mejor manera de dar sentido a estos salmos y sus citas en el Nuevo Testamento.

Definición de tipología

Las profecías aparentemente indirectas del Mesías en los Salmos se entienden mejor a través de la hermenéutica de la tipología profética. La tipología es el estudio de tipos. La palabra en español “tipo” se deriva de la palabra griega τύπος, que significa “patrón”. Sin embargo, esta palabra griega no se usa en el Nuevo Testamento como un indicador hermenéutico técnico de estructuras tipológicas de la forma en que se usa la palabra en español “tipo”. Además, incluso este sentido hermenéutico de la palabra “tipo” está desactualizado en el español moderno; la palabra “prototipo” (o “arquetipo”) sería más clara, pero “tipo” sigue siendo la palabra utilizada en las discusiones hermenéuticas. Una buena definición práctica de tipología proviene de la obra de Horne del siglo xix:

Un tipo, en su significado primario y literal, simplemente denota un borrador sin pulir o modelo menos exacto, a partir del cual se extrae una imagen más perfecta; pero, en el sentido sagrado o teológico del término, un tipo puede definirse como un símbolo de algo futuro y distante, o un ejemplo preparado y evidentemente diseñado por Dios para prefigurar ese algo futuro. Lo que de ese modo es prefigurado se denomina antitipo.

Traducido de Thomas Hartwell Horne, An Introduction to the Critical Study and Knowledge of the Holy Scriptures (4.^a ed.; London: T. Cadell, 1823), 2:649.

La validez e importancia de la tipología

Las numerosas citas de relaciones tipológicas en el Nuevo Testamento muestran que la tipología es de hecho un modo válido de interpretación, por lo cual sólo necesitamos descubrir sus principios hermenéuticos rectores. Hay algunos pasajes en el Nuevo Testamento en los que se reconoce explícitamente una relación tipológica, como la de Melquisedec y Cristo (Hebreos 5:10; 7:1-17), David y Cristo (Hechos 2:25-34) y Cristo y los corderos pascuales (Juan 1:29, 36; 1 Corintios 5:7). Otras veces, no se establece explícitamente una relación tipológica, sino se dibuja un paralelo entre una realidad del Antiguo Testamento y una realidad del Nuevo Testamento, por ejemplo, entre el tabernáculo y el sistema de sacrificios (cf. Colosenses 2:17; Hebreos 10:1). La tipología es particularmente importante para comprender cómo el Antiguo Testamento prefigura y prevé la persona y obra del Mesías.

El Antiguo Testamento y el Nuevo Testamento están conectados a través del cumplimiento de las promesas del Antiguo en el Nuevo, lo cual corrobora que el cristianismo es la continuación de la religión de los judíos en una forma perfeccionada, no un culto herético. Las relaciones tipológicas forman parte de este vínculo. Gran parte del Antiguo Testamento apunta y se cumple en el Nuevo Testamento, y el Nuevo Testamento es dependiente del Antiguo Testamento.

Una de las razones por las que la Biblia usa la tipología es que los ejemplos prácticos son una herramienta de enseñanza particularmente útil. Es más fácil para las personas comprender la verdad teológica cuando pueden ver un modelo de esa verdad, en lugar de que se les enseñen los principios o las profecías de manera abstracta. La tipología también muestra cómo Dios usa los eventos históricos para preparar al mundo para eventos futuros en Su plan.

Identificación de tipos bíblicos

Todos los tipos legítimos en la Biblia comparten tres características: promesa y cumplimiento, correspondencia funcional e historicidad.

Primero, el criterio de promesa y cumplimiento significa que el antitipo debe cumplir de alguna manera el tipo. Esto implica que:

1. Debe haber una promesa profética que conecta el tipo con el antitipo. El tipo debe dejar esta promesa incumplida o parcialmente incumplida. El rol histórico del tipo debe estar incompleto y orientarse hacia un cumplimiento futuro. Una estructura tipológica genuina del Antiguo Testamento debe contener promesas específicas que apuntan a un cumplimiento en un antitipo específico, y no solo promesas generales que podrían tener muchos cumplimientos potenciales. La tipología excesiva tiende a pasar por alto este criterio. Muchos intérpretes identifican tipos sobre la base de similitudes y patrones, sin la presencia de una profecía asociada.
2. En el contexto original del Antiguo Testamento deben estar presentes indicadores tipológicos. La única forma en que el Nuevo Testamento puede afirmar legítimamente el cumplimiento de un tipo del Antiguo Testamento es si la estructura tipológica es identificable a partir de la exégesis del texto del Antiguo Testamento usando la hermenéutica literal. El Nuevo Testamento simplemente identifica la intención que tenía el texto del Antiguo Testamento desde el principio. Si un tipo solo puede identificarse sobre la base de la revelación del Nuevo Testamento, ¿en qué sentido es una prefiguración? Los puntos de vista de tipología que definen un tipo sobre la base de una lista de correspondencias que solo pueden identificarse retrospectivamente pierden una “conciencia de la dirección fundamental a la que apunta la revelación”. (Traducido de Philip E. Powers, “Prefigurement and the Hermeneutics of Prophetic Typology” [PhD disertación, Dallas Theological Seminary, 1995], 175.)
3. Un tipo debe preceder a su antitipo en la historia. Dado que un tipo es una anticipación profética de un antitipo, debe preceder al antitipo en la historia.
4. Un tipo debe ser preparado y diseñado por Dios para representar su antitipo. Dado que un tipo es un ejemplo práctico profético, Dios debe moldear la historia de tal manera que el tipo adquiere características esenciales del antitipo.

El segundo criterio, la correspondencia funcional, significa que el tipo debe tener la misma función histórica que el antitipo. Específicamente, el tipo debe tener la función, rol o posición que se indica en la promesa profética que conecta al tipo con el antitipo. Como ejemplo, un tipo mesiánico debe ocupar una posición o función mesiánica, aunque el Mesías ocupa este rol de una manera superior y más plena que el tipo. Así, tanto David como Melquisedec ocuparon una posición/función mesiánica. La correspondencia funcional es una parte necesaria de la tipología porque un tipo debe carecer de culminación en sí mismo y aguardar que la meta sea cumplida en un antitipo, el cual por definición es mayor y más completo que el tipo. Cuando llega el antitipo, se elimina la necesidad del rol desempeñado por el tipo y el antitipo reemplaza la función del tipo. Un ejemplo de la manera como esto funciona es que cuando Cristo murió, todo el sistema de sacrificios de la ley mosaica se cumplió y dejó de operar de manera legítima. La tipología excesiva tiende a centrarse en los elementos externos correspondientes entre un tipo propuesto y un antitipo, ignorando la necesidad de identidad en la posición/función y la inherente deficiencia del tipo. El punto de vista de comprensión retrospectiva de la tipología también encuentra problemas con el criterio de correspondencia funcional, ya que el antitipo parece proporcionar el modelo para identificar el tipo. Sin embargo, por la definición de tipología, “el tipo es el que apunta hacia el antitipo, no el antitipo el que apunta hacia el tipo (hacia atrás)” (traducido de Powers, “Prefigurement and the Hermeneutics of Prophetic Typology,” 181), y por lo tanto el tipo debe tener alguna función o posición que está incompleta y espera ser completada en un antitipo.

El tercer criterio, la historicidad, significa que tanto el tipo como el antitipo deben ser entidades históricas reales, no meras invenciones literarias. La historicidad es un problema en la erudición crítica moderna, que tiende a ver los supuestos motivos literarios casi como indicadores tipológicos. Ver más, W. Edward Glenny, “The ‘People of God’ in Romans 9:25-26” Bibliotheca Sacra 152 (Jan.–Mar. 1995): 56.

Categorías de tipología

Los tipos bíblicos se pueden dividir en tres categorías principales: tipos legales, tipos proféticos y tipos históricos.

1. Los tipos legales son rituales o símbolos en el sistema legal mosaico que prefiguraban una entidad o un evento futuro, generalmente la persona y obra del Mesías. Un ejemplo de un tipo legal es los corderos sacrificados en la Pascua, que presagiaban la muerte de Cristo en la Pascua como el Cordero de Dios que quita el pecado del mundo (Juan 1:29, 36; 1 Corintios 5:7). El cumplimiento de los tipos de la Ley en la persona y obra del Mesías es central para la teología del Nuevo Testamento y forma un puente entre el Antiguo y el Nuevo Testamento. Es evidente que los sacrificios en la Ley eran funcionalmente incompletos, ya que tenía que ser repetidos cada año. Hebreos 10:1-18 conecta esta deficiencia funcional con profecías mesiánicas para argumentar que la muerte de Cristo es el antitipo del sistema mosaico de sacrificios.
2. Un tipo profético es una acción o demostración práctica representada deliberadamente por un profeta para simbolizar un evento futuro. Un ejemplo de esto es Isaías caminando desnudo y descalzo para representar el cautiverio de Egipto (Isaías 20:1-6). Si bien toda tipología es profética, esta categoría de tipología se refiere a representaciones directas y deliberadas de eventos futuros por parte de un profeta. Se puede debatir si las demostraciones prácticas proféticas diseñadas para representar eventos futuros deberían ser clasificadas como tipos o símbolos.
3. Los tipos históricos son los que la mayoría de la gente piensa cuando piensan en tipología. Horne define los tipos históricos como “personajes, acciones y circunstancias de algunas personas eminentes registradas en el Antiguo Testamento, ordenadas por la Providencia Divina como para ser prefiguraciones exactas de los personajes, acciones y circunstancias de las personas futuras que deberían surgir bajo la dispensación del Evangelio” (traducido de Thomas Hartwell Horne, An Introduction to the Critical Study and Knowledge of the Holy Scriptures [4.^a ed.; London: T. Cadell, 1823], 2:651). Un ejemplo de un tipo histórico es las experiencias de David en el Salmo 22 que son citadas en los Evangelios como cumplidas en las experiencias de Cristo (Marcos 15:34; Juan 19:23-24).

Planteamientos erróneas sobre la tipología

El error más común que se comete en el reconocimiento de tipos es la idea de que los paralelos por sí solos indican la existencia de tipos, con la consecuencia de que los intérpretes encuentran demasiados tipos. Powers comenta:

La mayor confusión en el área de la tipología bíblica surge como resultado de la amplia aplicación del término a una variedad de situaciones literarias e históricas simplemente porque se reconoce un patrón recurrente. Por lo tanto, cualquier repetición de palabra, símbolo, evento, persona, género o tema teológico tiende a ser explicada por la tipología y todas aquellas características asociadas a la estructura tipológica son entonces aplicadas para obtener un significado nuevo o más completo del texto original. El problema se agudiza cuando esas características tipológicas se unen a estructuras literarias o situaciones históricas creando significados que ya no están respaldados por la evidencia textual y, por lo tanto, no son parte del significado concebido por el autor. Para algunos, la tipología no influye en el significado del texto, sino que es simplemente el reconocimiento de un patrón por parte de los intérpretes posteriores. Para otros, la tipología es un método de exégesis; y para algunos otros, no es un método de exégesis, sino parte del significado concebido por el autor.

Traducido de Powers, “Prefigurement and the Hermeneutics of Prophetic Typology,” 293-94.

El principal problema con la identificación de tipos únicamente sobre la base de similitudes entre dos entidades es que añade a la Biblia un significado supuesto que no está declarado en el texto bíblico (es decir, no se reúnen los criterios de promesa y cumplimiento y correspondencia funcional). Las identificaciones de tipos de esa manera son decisiones subjetivas tomadas por el intérprete, que no pueden ser validadas objetivamente. Tradicionalmente, uno de los motivos principales para la tipología excesiva (“hiper-tipificación”) ha sido la hermenéutica cristocéntrica, la proposición teológica de que cada porción del Antiguo Testamento está diseñada para apuntar a Cristo. Puesto que muchas porciones del Antiguo Testamento no se refieren directamente a Jesucristo, los intérpretes tienen que plantear tipologías y alegorías en estas porciones para encontrar un vínculo profético con Cristo. Sin embargo, la Biblia en ninguna parte afirma la hermenéutica cristocéntrica, y este método de interpretación supuestamente de mentalidad espiritual es exegética y teológicamente erróneo. En cierto sentido, toda la historia antes de la cruz estaba preparando al mundo para la encarnación de Cristo, y toda la historia posterior conduce a la segunda venida de Cristo, pero la mayoría de los detalles de la historia no prefiguran directamente la persona y obra del Mesías.

Como reacción a la hiper-tipificación y al alegorismo extremo, el obispo Herbert Marsh, escribiendo a principios del siglo xix, propuso la siguiente regla: solo los tipos que son específicamente reconocidos en el Nuevo Testamento pueden considerarse válidos. Esta regla ha sido seguida por muchos intérpretes evangélicos desde la época de Marsh. Sin embargo, este enfoque es problemático porque es demasiado minimalista. El reconocimiento en el Nuevo Testamento de tipos en varios pasajes del Antiguo Testamento apunta a la existencia de tipología en clases enteras de pasajes, y no solo en aquellos específicamente citados por los escritores del Nuevo Testamento. En muchos casos, parece que los escritores del Nuevo Testamento no reconocen los tipos mediante la revelación directa de Dios, sino mediante la aplicación de principios hermenéuticos. El reconocimiento de estos principios debería permitir a otros intérpretes identificar otros tipos. Por ejemplo, Colosenses 2:17 y Hebreos 9:11 y 10:1 indican que muchos aspectos de la ley mosaica apuntan a la persona y obra del Mesías, pero no enumeran individualmente cada tipo y antitipo. Otro ejemplo es la clara conexión tipológica entre Antíoco IV Epífanes y el anticristo escatológico en Daniel 8 y 11, que a lo sumo, solo es aludido en el Nuevo Testamento. Otro problema tanto con el enfoque maximalista como con el minimalista de la tipología es que solo reconocen la tipología retrospectivamente, lo cual invierte la dirección de la profecía y la revelación.

Una tercera visión errónea de la tipología es la opinión de los eruditos bíblicos liberales o no creyentes, que rechazan la posibilidad de una profecía genuina porque esta implicaría la actividad sobrenatural de Dios. Para estos críticos, por tanto, toda tipología profética es inválida como profecía auténtica, y lo que es llamado “tipología” no es más que una alegoría o una analogía. Los paralelos entre los personajes del Antiguo Testamento y los del Nuevo Testamento se ven como meramente accidentales y no como prefiguraciones proféticas intencionales. Si los críticos siempre declararan su posición como una clara negación de lo sobrenatural, por supuesto esta no atraería seguidores evangélicos. Sin embargo, los eruditos críticos de la Biblia a menudo usan un lenguaje que suena muy similar al usado por los eruditos evangélicos, hipotetizando relaciones “tipológicas” basados en un análisis de palabras o motivos recurrentes para encontrar “el significado real” del texto debajo de su significado superficial. Lo que rara vez dicen es que no creen que la Biblia es históricamente confiable, o profética de eventos futuros, o inspirada por el Espíritu Santo de Dios. Demasiados eruditos evangélicos están analizando el texto bíblico utilizando métodos críticos de conexiones intertextuales (crítica de fuentes) y motivos (crítica literaria), entre otros métodos que socavan la interpretación literal y la fe.

Muchos eruditos evangélicos también están influenciados por la afirmación de la erudición crítica de que la interpretación tipológica de los pasajes del Antiguo Testamento por el Nuevo Testamento es una aplicación de los métodos hermenéuticos judíos del primer siglo que eran esencialmente alegóricos. Si bien un análisis de métodos hermenéuticos judíos como pésher y omnisignificación requeriría un tratado separado, se puede afirmar brevemente que el Nuevo Testamento maneja el Antiguo Testamento de manera diferente a como lo maneja la literatura del judaísmo rabínico y la secta de Qumrán. La comprensión de las Escrituras por el Nuevo Testamento fue moldeada por la persona y obra de Jesucristo, ya que los escritores del Nuevo Testamento vieron cómo Cristo cumplió la profecía y la tipología. Es importante destacar que los discípulos de Jesús aprendieron a interpretar las Escrituras de la manera en que Jesús las interpretó, lo que a menudo era diferente de la comprensión predominante de la Biblia en el judaísmo contemporáneo. Dondequiera que Jesús comentó un texto específico del Antiguo Testamento, los apóstoles seguirían Su interpretación, y donde Él hizo declaraciones generales sobre las Escrituras, ellos aplicaron los principios que Él dio a pasajes específicos. Incluso el apóstol Pablo, quien estuvo completamente inmerso en el judaísmo, dice que inmediatamente después de su conversión se fue a Arabia para ser enseñado directamente por el Espíritu Santo (Gálatas 1:16-17), y dice que cuenta su experiencia en el judaísmo como pérdida por Cristo (Filipenses 3:4-8). El Nuevo Testamento considera la interpretación judía del Antiguo Testamento como defectuosa porque no reconoce el cumplimiento de las promesas mesiánicas en la persona y obra de Jesucristo (2 Corintios 3:14-16). Una diferencia importante entre la exégesis rabínica y la exégesis del Nuevo Testamento es que el uso de la tipología en el Nuevo Testamento tiene en cuenta el contexto completo de un pasaje del Antiguo Testamento. La vinculación de textos sobre similitudes lingüísticas, aparte del contexto histórico y el significado literal de los textos, no es una característica de la exégesis del Nuevo Testamento. En resumen, el Nuevo Testamento se ve a sí mismo como una continuación de la revelación del Antiguo Testamento, y ve un recorrido en la historia reveladora que culminó con la venida del Mesías. El reconocimiento que hace el Nuevo Testamento de la tipología en el Antiguo Testamento se basa, por lo tanto, en el significado del texto del Antiguo Testamento y en una creencia en su cumplimiento en la persona y obra de Jesucristo. Esto es muy diferente de los métodos contemporáneos de exégesis judía del primer siglo.

Tipología mesiánica en los Salmos

Varios versículos de los salmos de David se citan en el Nuevo Testamento como profecías tipológicas de Cristo, sobre todo porciones del Salmo 16 y del Salmo 22. David funcionó como un tipo de Cristo debido al Pacto Davídico, en el cual Dios le prometió a David que su dinastía y trono continuarían para siempre, implicando que el Mesías sería uno de sus descendientes y gobernaría desde su trono. Pedro declara la conexión tipológica directamente en Hechos 2:30-31. Hay algunas experiencias personales de David en los Salmos que él describió en lenguaje metafórico que Cristo experimentó literalmente, como que sus enemigos le traspasaron las manos y los pies (Salmo 22:16). Salomón, el hijo de David, también parece funcionar como un tipo de Cristo en el Salmo 45, ya que fue un hijo de David que gobernó a Israel desde el trono de David. Cabe mencionar que el Nuevo Testamento nunca cita un salmo adscrito a otro autor como tipológico de Cristo. Esto muestra que los escritores del Nuevo Testamento han prestado atención al contexto histórico del material que están citando como tipológico, y no están simplemente citando paralelos convenientes. De hecho, David tuvo algunas experiencias que eran tipológicas de las experiencias del Mesías, y fue guiado por el Espíritu Santo a describir estas experiencias en un lenguaje que era metafóricamente verdadero para él mismo, pero literalmente verdadero para el Mesías.

¿Disfrutaste este contenido? Invítame a un café o apoya este blog haciendo una donación a través de PayPal.

Arameo: la tercera lengua de la Biblia

Tags

arameo bíblico

Read in English

El arameo ha sido en cierto modo una lengua olvidada en los estudios bíblicos, excepto en un nivel académico muy alto. El Nuevo Testamento está escrito en griego; casi todo el Antiguo Testamento está escrito en hebreo, aunque la traducción griega del Antiguo Testamento (la LXX) es importante para los estudios bíblicos. Sin embargo, 268 versículos fueron escritos en una lengua llamada arameo.

Las porciones de la Escritura que fueron escritas en arameo son Esdras 4:8–6:18 y 7:12-26 (67 versículos), Daniel 2:4b–7:28 (200 versículos), Jeremías 10:11, así como varios nombres propios y palabras y frases aisladas dispersas por el Antiguo y el Nuevo Testamento. A pesar del hecho de que solo un pequeño porcentaje de la Escritura está escrito en esta lengua, la porción aramea de la Biblia es desproporcionadamente significativa debido a la importancia del libro de Daniel para la profecía bíblica. El arameo también es importante para los estudios del Nuevo Testamento, ya que varias citas directas de Jesús, y de otros, se conservan en el arameo original que fue hablado por los judíos palestinos del periodo del Segundo Templo. Los versículos del Nuevo Testamento que incluyen palabras arameas transliteradas por letras griegas son: Mateo 5:22; 27:46; Marcos 5:41; 7:34; 10:51; 14:36; Juan 1:42; 20:16; Hechos 9:36, 40; Romanos 8:15; 1 Corintios 16:22; Gálatas 4:6.

En el Antiguo Testamento, cuatro versículos hacen referencia directa a la lengua aramea: 2 Reyes 18:26, Esdras 4:7, Isaías 36:11 y Daniel 2:4. Cada uno de estos versículos llama «arameo» al arameo (אֲרָמִית, una forma adverbial de אֲרָמִי), unas pocas versiones en español lo traducen como «siriaco». El arameo es llamado «hebreo» (Ἑβραΐς o Ἑβραϊστί) en el Nuevo Testamento, ya que era la lengua de los hebreos (Juan 5:2; 19:13, 17, 20; 20:16; Hechos 21:40; 22:2; 26:14). Algunas traducciones más recientes traducen la palabra griega para «hebreo» en estos versículos como «arameo», lo cual reconoce que estos versículos se refieren a la lengua que ahora llamamos arameo.

El arameo era originalmente la lengua de los arameos, que estaban conformados por tribus que vivían junto al río Éufrates. Dos de las tribus más prominentes eran los sirios al noroeste, y los caldeos al sudeste. La palabra arameo deriva de Aram, un hijo de Sem que fue el progenitor de los arameos. En las etapas más tempranas de la historia del arameo, la lengua solo se hablaba en lugares arameos, incluyendo el área donde vivía Labán (cf. Génesis 31:47; Deuteronomio 26:5). Sin embargo, a medida que los sirios y los caldeos ganaron prominencia en el antiguo Oriente Próximo, su lengua se consolidó como una lengua internacional de comercio y diplomacia, desplazando gradualmente al acadio. El acadio seguía siendo la lengua oficial del Imperio neoasirio, aunque 2 Reyes 18:26 indica que el arameo ya se estaba consolidando como lingua franca del antiguo Oriente Próximo hacia el año 700 a. C. Cuando los caldeos posteriormente conquistaron Asiria, era natural que usaran su propia lengua ―el arameo― como la lengua administrativa del Imperio neobabilónico, en lugar de adoptar el acadio. Esa es la razón por la que Daniel 2:4 dice que los sabios de Babilonia se dirigieron al rey en arameo, y por eso la siguiente sección del libro de Daniel está escrita en arameo. Tras la conquista de Babilonia por Persia, los persas también eligieron el arameo como la lengua administrativa oficial de su vasto imperio. Es por eso que las porciones de Esdras que registran la correspondencia oficial están escritas en arameo.

En la época en que se escribieron los libros de Daniel y Esdras, la mayoría de los judíos hablaban y entendían tanto el hebreo como el arameo. Entendían el hebreo como la lengua hablada en el hogar, entre ellos y en la lectura de las Escrituras, mientras que el arameo era la lengua hablada en la sociedad en general. Con el tiempo, el arameo reemplazó al hebreo como la lengua principal hablada por los judíos que vivían en Palestina y regiones al este. Los judíos no habían aprendido arameo en Palestina (cf. 2 Reyes 18:26), pero tuvieron que aprenderlo en el exilio, ya que era la lengua de sus captores. Por lo tanto, las partes del Antiguo Testamento que fueron compuestas en arameo se escribieron en esa lengua como resultado del cautiverio babilónico.

Debido a esto, el arameo era la lengua materna de nuestro Señor; el hebreo rara vez se usaba como lengua hablada por los judíos del siglo I d. C. Hay varios lugares en los que los escritores del evangelio conservan citas de Jesús en el arameo original, entre ellos Su clamor desde la cruz: Eloi, Eloi, ¿lama sabactani? (Marcos 15:34). Estas palabras expresaron los sentimientos más profundos de Cristo en un momento de gran angustia y emoción personal. El hecho de que dijera estas palabras del Salmo 22:1 en arameo, en lugar del original hebreo o de la traducción griega de la Septuaginta, muestra que el arameo era la lengua que Él conocía más íntimamente. Así que, el Nuevo Testamento conserva palabras arameas porque el arameo era la lengua materna de los judíos palestinos en el siglo I d. C.

(Desde el descubrimiento de los Rollos del Mar Muerto se ha debatido hasta qué punto el arameo había desplazado al hebreo en Palestina en el siglo I d. C. Sin embargo, las inscripciones del siglo I d. C. en Palestina están casi exclusivamente en arameo (o griego), y Jesús usa constantemente el arameo, en lugar del hebreo. Jesús probablemente entendía hebreo, pero como una lengua literaria, más que hablada. También habría conocido el griego y lo habría hablado en algunas ocasiones (como cuando trataba con los gentiles), pero se habría sentido más cómodo en arameo.)

El griego del Nuevo Testamento fue influenciado por el arameo, por lo que contiene algunos modismos y formas de expresión arameas, como la frase «respondió y dijo». Aunque el grado de influencia aramea en el griego del Nuevo Testamento ha sido objeto de mucho debate, se puede decir que el estilo del griego del Nuevo Testamento está semitizado en un grado u otro. Pero no es cierto que partes del Nuevo Testamento hayan sido escritas originalmente en arameo, como algunos han afirmado. No se ha descubierto ningún manuscrito de ninguna parte del Nuevo Testamento que esté escrito en el dialecto arameo palestino judío que hablaban Jesús y los apóstoles.

Después de la resurrección de Jesús, el dialecto siriaco del arameo se convirtió en la lengua de la Iglesia siria. El arameo también siguió siendo una lengua importante para los judíos. Por eso existen dos importantes traducciones arameas del Antiguo Testamento: los Tárgumes (Targumim) judíos y la Peshitta siriaca. Existen varias versiones siriacas importantes del Nuevo Testamento. Gran parte de la literatura rabínica judía, y casi toda la literatura cristiana siria, fue escrita en arameo. Algunos de los Rollos del mar Muerto también fueron escritos en arameo.

Tanto el arameo como el hebreo son lenguas semíticas occidentales. Por lo tanto, el arameo y el hebreo comparten muchas de las características lingüísticas y modos de expresión. En general, la gramática y la morfología hebreas son más parecidas a las protosemíticas, especialmente en sus patrones de vocalización, aunque el arameo tiene un complemento más completo de diferentes formas verbales. Entre las características distintivas del arameo están el uso frecuente del participio para un verbo finito, la partícula polivalente דִּי, el uso de un signo postpositivo de determinación en lugar de un artículo definido prepositivo, y modismos como «hijo de hombre» (para «hombre») y «respondió y dijo» (para «dijo»). Debido a la importancia del arameo en el periodo del Segundo Templo, el hebreo comenzó a escribirse gradualmente en letras arameas durante esa época, y el hebreo ha usado la escritura cuadrada aramea desde entonces. Sin embargo, el siriaco y otros dialectos del arameo usan escrituras diferentes, mientras que los Tárgumes tienen un sistema de puntuación que difiere de la puntuación masorética del Antiguo Testamento.

(La escritura cuadrada aramea también es conocida como la «escritura judía», la «escritura cuadrada», la «escritura asiria» o el «alefato cuadrado». Las tres etapas del desarrollo de esta escritura en Qumrán se denominan «escritura arcaica» (250-150 a. C.), «escritura asmonea» (150-30 a. C.) y «escritura herodiana» (30 a. C. – 70 d. C.). A pesar de la prevalencia de la escritura cuadrada en la escritura hebrea, se encontraron doce fragmentos de Qumrán escritos en una escritura paleohebrea similar a la escritura hebrea original en la que se escribió la mayor parte del Antiguo Testamento, mientras que otros manuscritos de Qumrán utilizaban la escritura cuadrada para el texto del cuerpo principal y la escritura paleohebrea para el nomina sacra. Ver E. Tov, Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible (3.^a ed.; Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2012), 206-7.)

Una de las peculiaridades del arameo bíblico es que nunca se usa el nombre divino יהוה (Yahvé). Por alguna razón, este nombre solo fue usado en hebreo. Sin embargo, el término אֱלָהּ שְׁמַיָּא (el Dios del cielo) aparece con mucha frecuencia en arameo, mucho más que en hebreo. También es interesante que no existen libros del Antiguo Testamento escritos completamente en arameo. Al parecer, se trata de mantener el carácter del Antiguo Testamento como un texto hebreo.

Debido a la larga historia lingüística del arameo, y al diverso número de grupos que lo han hablado, existe una gran variedad de dialectos arameos, de los cuales el siriaco es el más destacado. Alrededor del ochenta por ciento de los escritos arameos existentes están en siriaco, una lengua que aún se habla (en varios dialectos) y se usa en la liturgia de algunas iglesias orientales. También existen claras diferencias entre los distintos periodos cronológicos del arameo. Aunque los eruditos críticos han intentado negarlo durante mucho tiempo, el arameo tanto de Daniel como de Esdras es del dialecto arameo clásico que se usaba entre los siglos VI y IV a. C. Es distinto tanto del arameo de Qumrán como del arameo palestino judío del siglo I d. C.

Mientras que el hebreo se usaba con moderación fuera de la Biblia y de la nación de Israel, el arameo tenía un uso muy amplio. Existe un corpus enorme de literatura aramea. Desde aproximadamente el año 600 a. C. hasta el 700 d. C., el arameo fue la lengua comercial principal del antiguo Oriente Próximo. También era la principal lengua hablada en Palestina, Siria y Mesopotamia en la época de Cristo. El arameo solo fue desplazado por el árabe cuando los musulmanes conquistaron Oriente Próximo, aunque la lengua nunca se extinguió del todo y aún se habla en determinados lugares de Siria, Irak, Irán, Turquía y en comunidades de la diáspora de todo el mundo. El arameo es posiblemente la lengua con el registro escrito continuo más largo del mundo. Debido al amplio uso del arameo fuera de la Biblia, rara vez hay dudas sobre el significado de palabras o construcciones en arameo bíblico, ya que hay muchas oportunidades de investigar la lengua en la literatura extrabíblica.

Aunque solo existe una cantidad limitada de material bíblico compuesto en arameo, la influencia de la lengua aramea se siente en todo el Antiguo y el Nuevo Testamento, ya que estuvo presente en el trasfondo desde Génesis hasta Apocalipsis. El arameo también ocupó un lugar destacado en la Iglesia primitiva y en el judaísmo posbíblico. Pero en la medida en que se usa directamente en la Biblia, el arameo es la lengua del cautiverio y del Redentor.

Nota final: El arameo es una lengua mucho más transversal que el griego o el hebreo. Es de gran interés para los estudios del Antiguo Testamento, el Nuevo Testamento, los estudios intertestamentarios, los estudios judíos, la patrística, la teología histórica, la arqueología, la semítica, la historia del Oriente Próximo y los estudios sobre Oriente Medio. Como puente entre diversos campos de estudio y lengua original de partes importantes del Antiguo Testamento, el arameo es una lengua muy útil de conocer. Para consultar recursos recomendados para el estudio del arameo bíblico, ver este post. La siguiente es una bibliografía de recursos disponibles en español:

• Ribera-Florit, Josep. Guía para el Estudio del Arameo Bíblico. 2.^a ed. Madrid: Sociedad Bíblica, 2005. ISBN: 9788480830706. Ver más: Logos; WorldCat; sitio web del autor.
• Greenspahn, Frederick E. Una Introducción al Arameo. 2.^a ed. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 2003. Edición en español traducido y adaptado por David Baer y publicado bajo licencia de Society of Biblical Literature a Software Bíblico Logos. Disponible en Logos.
• Fohrer, Georg. Diccionario del hebreo y arameo bíblicos. Berlin: De Gruyter, 1982. ISBN: 9783112307366. Disponible de De Gruyter, Google Play, Amazon (US), Amazon (ES) y Barnes & Noble; ver WorldCat para la disponibilidad en bibliotecas.
• Ortiz, Pedro. Léxico hebreo-español y arameo-español. Madrid: Sociedad Bíblica, 1997. ISBN: 8480830727. Disponible de archive.org y Logos.
• Swanson, James. Diccionario de idiomas bíblicos: Arameo (Antiguo Testamento). Traducido por Alejandro Peluffo. Editado por Rubén Videira Soengas y Guillermo Powell. Lexham Press, 2014. Disponible en Logos.
• Vocabulario Arameo Bíblico: Todas las palabras arameas del Antiguo Testamento. Lenguas de la Bíblia y el Corán. Andalus Publications, 2021. ISBN: 9798734586037. Disponible de Amazon (US) y Amazon (ES).
• Ver también: Vega María García González, “Viscasillas y Goñi: el arameo bíblico en España entre el XIX y el XX”, disponible en Academia.edu.

¿Disfrutaste este contenido? Invítame a un café o apoya este blog haciendo una donación a través de PayPal.

Update on my projects/raising support

Tags

commentary-on-revelation, fundraising

Happy 2024! In this post, I would like to share the projects I am working on in order to update my readers and seek support. My goal is to get to 50 members (monthly supporters) on Buy Me a Coffee, in order to enable me to keep moving forward on my projects.

In 2023, my blog received 85,140 views and 63,867 visitors. Below are images of the most popular posts in 2023 and all-time, along with statistics about referrers.

The projects I am seeking support for are:

1. I am writing what I believe is a groundbreaking commentary on the book of Revelation, which I intend to make available for free download. See this information sheet and these sample draft chapters: Introduction, 1, 4, 5, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, Excursus on Babylon the Great, 17, 18, 19, 20. I have seen an increasing need for teaching on biblical prophecy and would like to focus more of my time and energy on this subject. My article on Babylon the Great is currently getting more than 3,000 views per month, mainly from Google searches. People are coming to the conclusion on their own that the United States is Babylon the Great, and are searching Google for more information, since they don’t get help from their pastors or study Bibles or commentaries. People also have a sense that events in Israel and Ukraine are somehow related to biblical prophecy, and that God is somehow at work, and that His plan is in the process of being fulfilled, but they are not sure how to connect the dots.
2. I would like to continue publishing revised editions and Spanish translations of my 8-volume Interpretive Guide to the Bible, which was originally published in 2014 and is available for free download. The first two volumes have been revised and translated into Spanish. April 2024 update: a revision of the third volume (Job-Song of Songs) has been published (Amazon; pdf) along with a Spanish translation.
3. Because of the need for biblical teaching on prophecy at this critical time, I would like to not only publish a written commentary, but also write more blog articles, such as on the relevance of prophecy to current events in Israel and Ukraine, and the relationship of digital currency to the mark of the beast. To reach a wider audience, I would eventually like to begin publishing videos, on platforms such as YouTube, Rumble, and/or Telegram. (YouTube is by far the most popular, but has a history of restricting Christian content.) Some topics for my videos could include the identification of Babylon the Great with the United States, the identification of Darius the Mede, the origin of languages according to the Bible, and general Bible teaching (sermons). I could also potentially do livestreams on YouTube or Telegram to respond to questions.
4. I do a lot of volunteer or low-pay ministry work. This includes teaching and preaching in churches, in both Spanish and English; academic presentations, including a presentation on Biblical Aramaic that I am preparing for this year’s translation consultant seminar at Bibles International; responding as I am able to comments on my blog and direct messages regarding various biblical and theological issues; and keeping certain blog posts regularly updated, such as my posts on Darius the Mede and Resources for Biblical Aramaic. I also recently did an interview for Daily Dose of Aramaic that is available on YouTube and Vimeo.

The main platform I have been using to receive donations is Buy Me a Coffee. One-time donations are much appreciated, but monthly memberships give me more consistent financial support and allow me to better plan large projects. My current goal is to get 50 monthly supporters or to raise monthly support of $1,000, which based on my current monthly expenses would allow me to dedicate about half of my time to volunteer projects. I can also receive contributions via PayPal, and I have an Amazon wish list.

Many thanks to all who donate, and to those who have donated in the past. All the work that I do is not just my work, but is a team effort, and my supporters are part of my team, for the glory of God! I receive messages on a weekly basis from people who say they have been helped by my materials; the books and articles on my blog, website, and Academia.edu page together receive well over 1,000 views per week. I hope that all of my supporters will feel that they are an integral part of this ministry.

“This is My body”: The symbolism of communion

Tags

consubstantiation, transubstantiation

[Leer en español]

During the Last Supper, Jesus took a loaf of bread and broke it, saying to the disciples, “Take, eat; this is My body.” This story is told multiple times in the New Testament, such as in Matthew 26:26: “While they were eating, Jesus took [a loaf of] bread and blessed [it] and broke [it]; and giving [it] to the disciples, He said, ‘Take, eat; this is My body’ ” (cf. Mark 14:22; Luke 22:19; 1 Cor 11:24). This article will examine the symbolism of communion (a.k.a. “the Lord’s Supper” or “the Eucharist”), with a special focus on the meaning of the phrase “this is My body.” But before explaining how communion is to be correctly understood, this article will examine a common but incorrect interpretation of communion, and will explain why it is erroneous.

The Catholic understanding of communion (Eucharist) is centered on a doctrine called “transubstantiation.” There is also a similar Lutheran doctrine called “consubstantiation.” According to the doctrine of transubstantiation, when the priest consecrates the bread and wine during the Mass, the bread and wine are transformed into the actual body and blood of Christ, changing their substance, while maintaining the appearance and taste of bread and wine. This doctrine claims to interpret literally the phrase “this is My body.”

There is, however, a linguistic problem with the argument that the only literal interpretation of the phrase “this is My body” is that the communion bread is literally transformed into the body of Jesus. The problem is that the semantic domain of the verb “to be” in English is not exactly the same as the semantic domain of the verb εἰμί in Greek. Ancient Greek did not have a verb equivalent to the English verb “to represent.” Because of this, the verb “to be” (εἰμί) is often used in Greek where in English we would use the verb “to represent.” In other words, the verb εἰμί in Greek includes the semantic function of the English verbs “to be” and “to represent.”

There are many examples of this use of the verb “to be” (εἰμί) in the New Testament. Galatians 4:25 is a clear example. In the NASB, that verse contains the phrase, “this Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia.” Obviously Hagar is not literally Mount Sinai in Arabia—Hagar is a woman! For this reason, the CSB translates the phrase this way: “Hagar represents Mount Sinai in Arabia.”

The book of Revelation frequently uses the verb “to be” (εἰμί) in the sense of “represent.” For example, Revelation 19:8 says in the NASB, “the fine linen is the righteous acts of the saints.” Obviously fine linen cannot literally be the righteous acts of the saints. Thus, the CSB translates this phrase, “the fine linen represents the righteous acts of the saints.”

Another example is Revelation 17:12, which says in the NASB, “The ten horns which you saw are ten kings.” A king cannot literally be a horn, so the NABRE translates this phrase, “The ten horns that you saw represent ten kings.”

To cite only one more example from the book of Revelation, Revelation 17:15 says in the NASB, “The waters which you saw where the harlot sits, are peoples and multitudes and nations and tongues.” Once again, it is not possible to interpret the metaphor literally, which is why the NABRE translates the verse this way: “The waters that you saw where the harlot lives represent large numbers of peoples, nations, and tongues.” See also Revelation 1:20; 17:9-10, 18.

Jesus also frequently used the verb “to be” (εἰμί) to make a metaphorical comparison, especially when interpreting His parables. An example is Mark 4:15-20, which says in the NASB, “These are the ones who are beside the road where the word is sown; and when they hear, immediately Satan comes and takes away the word which has been sown in them. In a similar way these are the ones on whom seed was sown on the rocky places, who, when they hear the word, immediately receive it with joy; and they have no firm root in themselves, but are only temporary; then, when affliction or persecution arises because of the word, immediately they fall away. And others are the ones on whom seed was sown among the thorns; these are the ones who have heard the word, but the worries of the world, and the deceitfulness of riches, and the desires for other things enter in and choke the word, and it becomes unfruitful. And those are the ones on whom seed was sown on the good soil; and they hear the word and accept it and bear fruit, thirty, sixty, and a hundredfold.” The NLT changes the verbs to “represent”: “The seed that fell on the footpath represents those who hear the message, only to have Satan come at once and take it away. The seed on the rocky soil represents those who hear the message and immediately receive it with joy. But since they don’t have deep roots, they don’t last long. They fall away as soon as they have problems or are persecuted for believing God’s word. The seed that fell among the thorns represents others who hear God’s word, but all too quickly the message is crowded out by the worries of this life, the lure of wealth, and the desire for other things, so no fruit is produced. And the seed that fell on good soil represents those who hear and accept God’s word and produce a harvest of thirty, sixty, or even a hundred times as much as had been planted!” See also Matthew 13:19-23, 37-39.

Thus, the use of the verb “to be” (εἰμί) in Greek with the meaning of “represent” is well documented. “This is My body” means “This represents My body,” since Christ distributed to the disciples pieces of a loaf of bread; the disciples did not cut off pieces of Christ’s body. It is also clear that the bread and wine in the Catholic Mass never loses the physical properties of bread and wine, which means it does not change its substance and become flesh and blood. Nevertheless, all English Bible translations have “this is My body” so as not to contradict the doctrines of transubstantiation and consubstantiation. In the same way, when Jesus said regarding the cup, “This is My blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many” (Mark 14:24), the meaning is, “This represents My blood of the covenant.”

The doctrine of transubstantiation is based on a simple linguistic error. The theologians of the Roman Catholic Church did not recognize the linguistic phenomenon whereby the Greek verb “to be” (εἰμί) is used to signify a metaphorical connection, and they also lacked the common sense to see that the literal interpretation of this metaphor does not make sense. Thus, the Catholic Church finally declared in the Council of Trent that “this is My body” must mean that the bread in the Eucharist is literally changed into the body of Jesus. Nevertheless, a basic understanding of language use and of the Greek language is sufficient to refute the supposed exegetical basis of the doctrine of transubstantiation.

Transubstantiation is not merely a theoretical error—it has significant practical implications, implications that have to do with salvation. A logical implication of transubstantiation would be that Christ is resacrificed every time that Christians celebrate communion. (This is why the bread and wine are placed on an altar in the Catholic Mass.) Moreover, if Christ is resacrificed in the communion service, this would imply that participation in communion is necessary in order to receive the benefits of Christ’s sacrifice, i.e., the forgiveness of sins. A person would have to physically eat the body of Jesus and drink His blood in order to receive God’s saving grace. These theological implications are clearly contradicted by many verses in the New Testament. Nevertheless, many people think that their participation in communion (or the Eucharist) gives them forgiveness of sins, and this is exactly what is said in the liturgy of some churches.

The Bible teaches clearly that we receive the forgiveness of all of our sins at the moment of our conversion, including all of our past, present, and future sins. Acts 10:43 says, “To Him all the prophets bear witness, that everyone who believes on Him receives forgiveness of sins through His name.” Acts 13:38-39 says, “Therefore let it be known to you, brethren, that through Him forgiveness of sins is proclaimed to you, and through Him everyone who believes is freed from all things, from which you could not be freed through the Law of Moses.” Romans 8:1 says, “Therefore there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.” Romans 10:9 says, “if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.” There is no verse anywhere in the New Testament that says that forgiveness of sins is received through participation in communion.

The Bible teaches that God’s saving grace is received through faith, not through communion. Ephesians 2:8-9 says, “For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not by works, so that no one may boast.” Romans 5:1-2 says, “Being therefore justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ; through whom also we have had our access by faith into this grace wherein we stand; and we rejoice in hope of the glory of God.”

The Bible also teaches that Christ was sacrificed once for all time, which means it is not possible to resacrifice Christ in a communion service. Hebrews 10:12-14 says, “but He, having offered one sacrifice for sins for all time, sat down at the right hand of God, waiting from that time onward until His enemies be made a footstool for His feet. For by one offering He has perfected for all time those who are sanctified.” First Peter 3:18 says, “For Christ also died for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, so that He might bring us to God.” Romans 6:9 says, “knowing that Christ, having been raised from the dead, is never to die again; death no longer has dominion over Him.”

So the bread and the cup in the communion service are symbols, and the Bible explains the symbolism. When Christians eat the communion bread, they are portraying their spiritual union with the body of Christ. First Corinthians 10:17 says, “Since there is one bread, we who are many are one body; for we all partake of the one bread.” (In the first century, communion was celebrated with a single loaf of bread, which was broken apart, and a piece distributed to each believer.) When Christians drink from the communion cup, they are portraying their participation in the benefits of Christ’s death, especially the forgiveness of sins. Matthew 26:27-28 says, “And when He had taken a cup and given thanks, He gave it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you; for this is My blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for forgiveness of sins.” (In the first century, communion was celebrated with a single cup, from which each believer drank a little.)

Thus, we do not participate in communion in order to receive God’s saving grace or the forgiveness of sins. Communion is a ritual for believers, that we do in order to show that we already are part of the body of Christ, and we already have full forgiveness of sins through the death of Christ. Communion is also something that we do in order to proclaim visually to the world the theological truths of the gospel. First Corinthians 11:26 says, “For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until He comes.”

In conclusion: the bread and the cup are representations of the body and blood of Jesus; they are not the actual flesh and the actual blood of Jesus. Communion is a commemoration of the earthly life and death of Christ; it is not a resacrifice of Christ. Christ said, “Do this in remembrance of Me” (1 Cor 11:24-25), not “do this to resacrifice Me” or “do this to obtain forgiveness of sins.” We learn better when we can learn visually and physically, so it is a great blessing that Christ has given us a visual, tangible, and simple way to portray and proclaim the profound theological truths of the gospel. When we participate in communion, we are proclaiming that Christ delivered up His body and shed His blood in our behalf, we are saying that we have received complete forgiveness of sins through His death, and we are showing that we are part of the body of Christ—that is, the church.

Enjoy this content? Buy me a coffee, or support this blog via a PayPal donation.

“Esto es Mi cuerpo”: El simbolismo de la santa cena

Tags

consubstanciación, consustanciación, transubstanciación, transustanciación

[Read in English]

En la Última Cena, Jesús tomó una hogaza de pan y la partió, diciendo a los discípulos, “Tomad, esto es Mi cuerpo”. Esta historia se relata varias veces en el Nuevo Testamento, como en Marcos 14:22: “Y mientras comían, Jesús tomó pan y bendijo, y lo partió y les dio, diciendo: Tomad, esto es mi cuerpo” (cf. Mt. 26:26; Lc. 22:19; 1 Co. 11:24). Este artículo examinará el simbolismo de la santa cena, con un enfoque en el significado de la frase “esto es Mi cuerpo”. Pero antes de explicar la visión correcta de la santa cena, el artículo examinará una visión equivocada de la santa cena, y explicará por qué es equivocada.

La visión católica de la santa cena se centra en una doctrina que se llama “transustanciación” (transubstanciación); también, hay una doctrina luterana similar que se llama “consustanciación” (consubstanciación). Según la doctrina de la transustanciación, cuando el sacerdote consagra el pan y el vino en la misa “cambian milagrosamente su substancia para transformarse realmente en el cuerpo y la sangre de Jesús”,^[1] aunque mantienen la apariencia y el sabor de pan y vino. Esta doctrina fue desarrollada a partir de una interpretación supuestamente literal de la frase “esto es Mi cuerpo”.

Sin embargo, hay un problema lingüístico con el argumento que dice que la única interpretación literal de la frase “esto es Mi cuerpo” es que el pan en la santa cena literalmente se convierte en el cuerpo de Jesús. El problema es que el campo semántico del verbo “ser” en español no es exactamente igual al campo semántico del verbo εἰμί en griego. El griego antiguo no tuvo un verbo equivalente al verbo “representar”, por eso el verbo “ser” (εἰμί) en griego es frecuentemente usado donde en español usamos el verbo “representar”. En otras palabras, el verbo εἰμί en griego abarca la función semántica de los verbos “ser” y “representar”.

Hay muchos ejemplos de este uso del verbo “ser” (εἰμί) en el Nuevo Testamento. Gálatas 4:25 es un ejemplo claro. Ese versículo dice en la Reina Valera: “Agar es el monte Sinaí en Arabia”. Obviamente Agar no es literalmente el monte Sinaí en Arabia, Agar es una mujer. Por eso, La Palabra de Dios para Todos traduce el versículo así: “Agar representa el monte Sinaí en Arabia”.

El libro de Apocalipsis usa frecuentemente el verbo “ser” (εἰμί) en el sentido de “representar”. Por ejemplo, Apocalipsis 1:20 dice en la Reina Valera: “las siete estrellas son los ángeles de las siete iglesias, y los siete candeleros que has visto, son las siete iglesias”. Sin embargo, las siete estrellas que Juan vio en su visión no eran literalmente siete ángeles; representaban siete ángeles. Asimismo, los siete candeleros (candelabros) que Juan vio no eran literalmente siete iglesias; representaban siete iglesias. Entonces, la Traducción en Lenguaje Actual traduce el versículo así: “Las siete estrellas representan a los ángeles de las siete iglesias, y los siete candelabros representan a las siete iglesias”.

Otro ejemplo: Apocalipsis 19:8 dice en la Reina Valera: “Y a ella se le ha concedido que se vista de lino fino, limpio y resplandeciente; porque el lino fino es las acciones justas de los santos”. Obviamente el lino fino no puede ser literalmente las acciones justas de los santos. Por eso, la Nueva Versión Internacional traduce el final de este versículo así: “El lino fino representa las acciones justas de los santos”.

Otro ejemplo es Apocalipsis 17:12, que dice en la Reina Valera: “Y los diez cuernos que has visto, son diez reyes”. Un rey no puede ser literalmente un cuerno, por eso La Palabra traduce el versículo así: “Has visto también diez cuernos. Representan a diez reyes”.

Asimismo, Apocalipsis 17:15 dice en la Reina Valera: “Las aguas que has visto donde la ramera se sienta, son pueblos, muchedumbres, naciones y lenguas”. Otra vez, no es posible interpretar la metáfora de manera literal, por eso la Traducción en Lenguaje Actual dice: “Los ríos que has visto, y sobre los cuales está sentada la prostituta, representan a pueblos y gente de diferentes idiomas y países”. Ver también Apocalipsis 17:9-10, 18.

Jesús también usó frecuentemente el verbo “ser” (εἰμί) para hacer una comparación metafórica, especialmente cuando interpretaba Sus parábolas. Un ejemplo es Mateo 13:37-39, que dice en la Reina Valera: “El que siembra la buena semilla es el Hijo del Hombre. El campo es el mundo; la buena semilla son los hijos del reino, y la cizaña son los hijos del malo. El enemigo que la sembró es el diablo; la siega es el fin del siglo; y los segadores son los ángeles”. La versión La Palabra cambia el verbo en algunas ocasiones. Dice: “El labrador que siembra la buena semilla es el Hijo del hombre, y el campo es el mundo. La buena semilla representa a los que pertenecen al Reino, y la cizaña representa a los que pertenecen al diablo. El enemigo del dueño, aquel que sembró la cizaña, es el diablo; la siega representa el fin del mundo, y los segadores son los ángeles”. Realmente, cada ocurrencia del verbo “es” o “son” en estos versículos puede ser traducida “representa” o “representan”. Ver también Mateo 13:19-23; Marcos 4:15-20.

Entonces, el uso del verbo “ser” (εἰμί) en griego en el sentido de “representar” está bien documentado. “Esto es Mi cuerpo” debe significar “esto representa Mi cuerpo”, dado que lo que Jesús dio a los discípulos era piezas de una hogaza de pan, los discípulos no cortaron piezas del cuerpo de Jesús. También, es claro que el pan y el vino que son consagrados en la misa católica nunca pierden las propiedades físicas de pan y vino, no se convierten en carne y sangre. Sin embargo, todas las traducciones de la Biblia en español dicen “esto es Mi cuerpo” para no contradecir la doctrina de la transustanciación. De la misma manera, cuando Jesús dijo sobre la copa “Esto es mi sangre del nuevo pacto, que por muchos es derramada” (Mr. 14:24, RVR60), significa “Esto representa Mi sangre del nuevo pacto”.

La doctrina de la transustanciación está basada en un error lingüístico simple. Los teólogos de la Iglesia católica no reconocieron el fenómeno lingüístico por el cual el verbo “ser” (εἰμί) en griego es usado con el significado de una conexión metafórica, tampoco tuvieron el sentido común para ver que la interpretación literal de esta metáfora no tiene sentido. Por eso, la Iglesia católica finalmente declaró en el Concilio de Trento que “esto es Mi cuerpo” debe significar que el pan de la santa cena literalmente se convierte en el cuerpo de Jesús. Sin embargo, un conocimiento básico del uso del lenguaje y de la lengua griega es suficiente para refutar la supuesta base exegética de la doctrina de la transustanciación.

La transustanciación no es solo un error teórico, sino que tiene implicaciones prácticas grandes, implicaciones que tienen que ver con la salvación. Una implicación lógica de la transustanciación sería que Cristo es resacrificado cada vez que los cristianos celebran la santa cena. Esta es la razón por la que los elementos de la misa se ponen sobre un altar. Además, si Cristo es resacrificado en la santa cena, eso implicaría que la participación en la santa cena es necesaria para recibir los beneficios del sacrificio de Cristo, es decir, la remisión de pecados. Alguien necesitaría comer el cuerpo de Jesús y beber Su sangre físicamente para recibir la gracia salvadora de Dios. Estas implicaciones teológicas de la transustanciación son contradichas claramente por muchos versículos en el Nuevo Testamento. Sin embargo, muchas personas piensan que su participación en la santa cena o la eucaristía les da la remisión de pecados, también la liturgia de algunas iglesias dice eso.

La Biblia enseña claramente que recibimos la remisión de todos nuestros pecados en el momento de nuestra conversión, incluyendo nuestros pecados pasados, presentes y futuros. Hechos 10:43 dice: “De éste dan testimonio todos los profetas, que todos los que en él creyeren, recibirán perdón de pecados por su nombre”. Hechos 13:38-39 dice: “por medio de él se os anuncia perdón de pecados, y que de todo aquello de que por la ley de Moisés no pudisteis ser justificados, en él es justificado todo aquel que cree”. Romanos 8:1 dice: “Ahora, pues, ninguna condenación hay para los que están en Cristo Jesús” (la segunda mitad de este versículo en la RVR60 no se encuentra en los mejores manuscritos). Romanos 10:9 dice: “si confesares con tu boca que Jesús es el Señor, y creyeres en tu corazón que Dios le levantó de los muertos, serás salvo”. No hay ningún versículo en el Nuevo Testamento que diga que la remisión de pecados se recibe a través de la participación en la santa cena.

La Biblia enseña que la gracia salvadora de Dios es recibida por medio de la fe, no por medio de la santa cena. Efesios 2:8-9 dice: “Porque por gracia sois salvos por medio de la fe; y esto no de vosotros, pues es don de Dios; no por obras, para que nadie se gloríe”. Romanos 5:1-2 dice: “Justificados, pues, por la fe, tenemos paz para con Dios por medio de nuestro Señor Jesucristo; por quien también tenemos entrada por la fe a esta gracia en la cual estamos firmes, y nos gloriamos en la esperanza de la gloria de Dios”.

La Biblia también enseña que Cristo fue sacrificado una vez para siempre, por eso no es posible resacrificar a Cristo en la santa cena. Hebreos 10:12-14 dice: “pero Cristo, habiendo ofrecido una vez para siempre un solo sacrificio por los pecados, se ha sentado a la diestra de Dios, de ahí en adelante esperando hasta que sus enemigos sean puestos por estrado de sus pies; porque con una sola ofrenda hizo perfectos para siempre a los santificados”. Primera de Pedro 3:18 dice: “Porque también Cristo padeció una sola vez por los pecados, el justo por los injustos, para llevarnos a Dios”. Romanos 6:9 dice: “sabiendo que Cristo, habiendo resucitado de entre los muertos, no volverá a morir; ya la muerte no tiene dominio sobre El” (LBLA).

Entonces el pan y la copa de la santa cena son símbolos, y la Biblia explica el simbolismo. Al comer el pan en la santa cena estamos representando nuestra unión espiritual con el cuerpo de Cristo. Primera de Corintios 10:17 dice: “Siendo uno solo el pan [lit., “la hogaza”], nosotros, con ser muchos, somos un cuerpo; pues todos participamos de aquel mismo pan”. (En el siglo primero, la santa cena fue celebrada con una sola hogaza, la cual se partía y los trozos eran distribuidos a cada creyente.) Al beber de la copa en la santa cena estamos representando nuestra participación en los beneficios de la muerte de Cristo, especialmente la remisión de pecados. Mateo 26:27-28 dice: “Y tomando la copa, y habiendo dado gracias, les dio, diciendo: Bebed de ella todos; porque esto es mi sangre del nuevo pacto, que por muchos es derramada para remisión de los pecados”. (En el siglo primero, la santa cena se celebraba con una sola copa, de la cual cada creyente bebía un poco.)

Entonces no participamos en la santa cena para recibir la gracia salvadora de Dios o la remisión de pecados. La santa cena es un rito para los creyentes, que hacemos para mostrar que ya somos parte del cuerpo de Cristo y ya tenemos la remisión completa de pecados a través de la muerte de Cristo. La santa cena también es algo que hacemos para proclamar al mundo visualmente las verdades teológicas del evangelio. Primera de Corintios 11:26 dice: “Así, pues, todas las veces que comiereis este pan, y bebiereis esta copa, la muerte del Señor anunciáis hasta que él venga”.

En conclusión: el pan y la copa son representaciones del cuerpo y de la sangre de Jesús, no son el verdadero cuerpo y la verdadera sangre de Jesús. La santa cena es una conmemoración de la vida terrenal y la muerte de Cristo, no es un resacrificio de Cristo. Cristo dijo “haced esto en memoria de mi” (1 Co. 11:24-25), no “haced esto para resacrificarme” o “haced esto para obtener la remisión de pecados”. Aprendemos mejor cuando podemos aprender visual y físicamente, por eso es una gran bendición que Cristo nos haya dado una manera visual, tangible y sencilla para representar y proclamar las profundas verdades teológicas del evangelio. Cuando participamos de la santa cena, estamos proclamando que Cristo entregó Su cuerpo y derramó Su sangre para nosotros, estamos diciendo que hemos recibido la remisión completa de pecados a través de Su muerte y estamos mostrando que somos parte del cuerpo de Cristo, es decir, la iglesia.

¿Disfrutaste este contenido? Invítame a un café o apoya este blog haciendo una donación a través de Paypal.

---

^[1] Pablo Alberto Deiros, “Transubstanciación”, en Diccionario Hispano-Americano de La Misión, nueva edición (Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, 2006).

How many people will be saved?

Tags

number of people in heaven, number of people in the new earth, population of heaven, population of the new earth

Jesus famously said in Matthew 7:13-14, “Enter through the narrow gate; for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and those who enter through it are many. For narrow is the gate and constricted is the way that leads to life, and those who find it are few.” True believers have always comprised a small minority of the world’s total population. But how many people will spend eternity on the new earth that is described in Revelation 21:1–22:5? Will the new earth be filled with people, or will it be sparsely populated? Conversely, how many people will spend eternity in the lake of fire (Rev 20:15)?

The first step to finding the answer to these questions is to calculate how many people have ever lived. A frequently cited study by Toshiko Kaneda and Carl Haub claims that there were about 100 billion people born between 4000 BC and AD 1900. From 1900 to 2022, there have been about 12.5 billion live births. The study’s estimate of population in recent times is quite accurate, due to the availability of census figures and written records of births and deaths. The study’s estimate of population in ancient times is based more on archaeological studies than on written records. For very ancient history, the study is based on evolutionary assumptions. These assumptions create inaccuracies, but the study may nevertheless be used to reasonably approximate the number of births in the ancient world. The study doesn’t recognize that the human race began with the creation of Adam and Eve around 4174 BC. It doesn’t recognize that there was a huge population boom in the 1,656 years of antediluvian history, during which physical conditions were ideal and people had the genetic potential for extremely long lifespans, though this potential was somewhat offset by the violence which filled the earth (Gen 6:11). The study doesn’t recognize that global population was reduced to eight people in the Flood in 2518 BC, or that the population of the world boomed again after the Flood and the dispersion of the nations from Babel. Nevertheless, the study’s assumption of a sizable and gradually increasing world population from 4000 BC to 2000 BC might result in a similar overall birth count as actually occurred in the two cycles of population booms from a single initial family. For now, the study by Kaneda and Haub furnishes the best available estimate of live births from 4000 BC to AD 1900. If anything, its numbers are likely to be on the low side, since population estimates by archaeologists are consistently far lower than written records of population size, including the censuses recorded in the Bible. The study by Kaneda and Haub also excludes miscarriages, stillbirths, and abortions. If children are given a soul at conception, miscarriages alone would greatly increase the total human population in eternity, since some modern studies estimate that as many as 30 percent of pregnancies end in miscarriage. More will be said later in this article regarding the eternal destiny of persons who died as babies or as young children.

It is harder to estimate how many people will be born between 2022 and the second coming of Christ. There are currently 140 million births per year, and global population growth is slowing. On the other hand, advances in medical technology may significantly lower death rates. Revelation 9:13-21 describes how an alliance of Asian countries will deploy a 200-million man mechanized army at the midpoint of the tribulation period, which indicates that global population will expand significantly between 2022 and the tribulation period. There are good reasons to believe that we are currently living in the end times, but that some prophesied changes must occur in the world before the rapture will happen. If the second coming were to occur about 100 years from today, after a significant world population increase, perhaps there will be a total of 140 billion births from creation to the second coming.

Before we try to estimate the population of the world during the millennium (the 1,000 years between the second coming of Christ and the final judgment), let us try to calculate how many persons from the era of world history before the second coming will be saved. Although initially Adam and many of his descendants were believers, the people of the earth rebelled against God as their numbers began to multiply, and in the end only Noah and his family were spared the judgment of the world in the Flood (Genesis 6). The number of believers from the antediluvian era must therefore be numerically small, perhaps around 50,000. After the Flood, the entire world initially had knowledge of the true God, but when their population increased they rebelled against Him at Babel and were scattered to the points of the compass (Gen 11:1-9). Most of the world quickly fell into the darkness of paganism, with a minority of true believers remaining in the ancient Near East. God chose Abraham to be the progenitor of a people set apart unto Himself, who would preserve truth in a world of darkness and would be the people of the promised Messiah. Thus, from the time when Jacob and his family entered Egypt until the death of Christ the majority of believers in the world were likely Jewish, although at most times in the history of the nation of Israel only a minority of the Jews were truly saved. The population of believers in the world was thus very small during the Old Testament period—a minority of a nation which comprised only a small percentage of the earth’s total population. By the time of the New Testament, there were synagogues throughout the Mediterranean world and the Near East, and there were many Gentile proselytes, but they were still likely outnumbered by Jews. If there were an average of 20,000 new believers every year from 1900 BC to AD 33, this would result in about 40 million believers from this era. We could estimate the number of believers from the era from Adam to Christ as somewhere between 10 million and 50 million, the majority of these being Israelites.

Christianity started small, but spread quickly thanks to the work of Holy Spirit and the missionary zeal of the apostles who had seen the resurrected Christ. In spite of fierce persecution, Christians comprised around 10 percent of the Roman Empire—6 million persons—by the year AD 300. There were also millions of Christians outside of the Roman Empire, in places such as Armenia and Mesopotamia. By the mid-fourth century Christians were the majority in the Roman Empire, numbering more than 30 million, and their numbers continued to climb during the Byzantine Period, although these statistics may include large numbers of heretics, such as Arians. As Late Antiquity gave way to the Medieval Period, the number of professing Christians continued to grow, but the gospel preached by the church (both Western and Eastern) was corrupted, and an ever-decreasing percentage of those who professed Christianity were genuinely saved. Medieval Christians eventually evangelized all of Europe, though largely with a false gospel. Christian communities existed in parts of Asia and Africa, but these groups were generally small in number and some were heretical sects. Over time, the majority of historically Christian communities in the Middle East and North Africa became predominantly Muslim, and vast portions of the globe remained completely unevangelized. The number of true believers from the Middle Ages was likely quite small (cf. Rev 3:1), less than the number of true believers in the early church and the Byzantine church. From the day of Pentecost in Acts 2 until the Protestant Reformation, perhaps there were 100 million to 400 million true believers.

The age of discovery and colonization providentially coincided with the Protestant Reformation and the rediscovery of the gospel of salvation by grace through faith, apart from works. As it became possible for Westerners to travel to the farthest reaches and deepest interiors of the globe, Protestants launched great missionary endeavors. As a result, the number of evangelical Christians in the world greatly increased in the 18th, 19th, and 20th centuries, in spite of government persecution and opposition from false churches and cults. As of May 2023, Operation World estimates that 32.3 percent of the world’s population (2.6 billion) is nominally Christian and 7.9 percent of the world’s population (635 million) is evangelical, of whom Charismatics and Pentecostals comprise a large proportion. However, counting the number of people who will go to heaven is not as simple as adding up the number of evangelicals, since many people who identify as evangelical Christians are not truly saved, and there are some genuine believers who are not members of evangelical churches. Nevertheless, it may be said that there are more true believers alive in our day than in any previous era of world history, both because world population has grown exponentially, and because the true gospel has been preached to all the nations. Possibly there have been around 1 billion people saved from the Protestant Reformation to 2022.

It is obvious that hostility to Christianity, the Bible, and God is greatly increasing in the world today. This opposition is led by powerful forces centered in the United States, including America’s big tech companies, its financial corporations, its other global corporate powerhouses, and the United States government. The Bible foretells a great worldwide rebellion in the last days, like the rebellions which led to the Flood and the mixing up of human language at Babel (2 Thess 2:3; 2 Tim 3:1-9, 13; 2 Pet 3:3-6; Jude 17-19). The Bible also warns of a falling away within the church in the last days (Rom 11:19-22; 1 Tim 4:1-3; 2 Tim 4:3-4; Rev 3:14-22). The book of Revelation also prophesies a murderous worldwide campaign of persecution against Christians which is driven by Babylon the Great/the United States (Rev 17:6; 18:20, 24; 19:2). Thus, the percentage of true believers in the world is likely near its peak, and can be expected to decline in the future. Perhaps there will be another 500 million people saved between 2022 and the start of the tribulation period. Fortunately, the world will be reevangelized during the first half of the tribulation period (Matt 24:14; Mark 13:10; Rev 7:1-8; 14:6-11). While some of these new converts will survive the tribulation period, the number who are martyred just during the first part of the tribulation period is reported by John to be greater than any man could count (Rev 7:9)—and therefore greater in number than the army of 200 million that he later reports (Rev 9:16; cf. Rev 5:11). Possibly there will be 1-2 billion new converts during the tribulation period.

It is thus clear that the vast majority of believers from creation until the second coming of Christ will be saved near the end of this age of world history. The total number of believers from Adam to the second advent may be about 3-4 billion, comprising about 2-3 percent of the total human population. While 3-4 billion is a sizable number of people, it is a small proportion of the total human race.

The population of the world from creation to the second coming of Christ is not the entire human population, however—there will be an additional 1,000 years of world history, the millennium, in which Jesus Christ will rule the world from the throne of David. Believers who survived the tribulation period (cf. Zech 14:16; Matt 25:34) will bear abundant offspring, repopulating the earth. The earth’s population will grow exponentially during the millennium, as there will be very little death and high fertility rates (cf. Isa 65:20-22; Mic 2:12; Zech 2:1-4; 8:4-5). Infant mortality will likely be almost nonexistent during the millennium. By the end of the 1,000 years, the earth will likely be at its saturation point (cf. Gen 1:28; 9:1, 7; 22:17; Rev 20:8). The vast majority of the people in the nations of the world will follow Satan in a rebellion at the end of the millennium, revealing that they are unbelievers (Rev 20:7-10). However, all the Jews will remain loyal to God, since the New Covenant will guarantee the salvation of all the Jews during the millennium (Jer 31:31-34; 32:38-40; Ezek 11:19-20; 36:25-27; Zeph 3:13; Rom 11:26-27; Rev 20:8-9).

As for what the population of the millennial earth may be, we can only make an educated guess. According to Zechariah 13:8-9, one-third of the Jews will survive the tribulation period (and will accept Jesus as the Son of God and the promised Messiah). If there are around 12 million Jews in land of Israel at the start of the tribulation period, this means 4 million will survive. While the survival rate of Gentile Christians will presumably be lower (cf. Matt 24:22; Mark 13:20), there will also be a much greater number of Gentile converts in the tribulation period (Rev 7:9-17). Presumably there will be somewhere between 10 million and 50 million Gentile Christians who survive the tribulation period and enter the millennium in mortal bodies. This number may be higher if babies and young children who had unbelieving parents also enter the millennium. Calculating a 5 percent annual population growth rate over 1,000 years from an initial population of 20 million would result in a final population of 33 billion. This is calculated as 20,000,000 x (1 + 0.05)¹⁰⁰⁰; see the Population Growth Calculator. This figure does not seem too high for a recreated earth in which virtually the entire planet is habitable and food is abundant; in fact the millennial population could be even higher than this.

The rebellion at the end of the millennium will show that only a small remnant of the Gentiles who are born in the millennium will be true believers; however, all the Jews will remain faithful to their God. If there are 30 billion people alive on the earth at the end of the millennium, perhaps 3 billion of these are Jews, leaving 27 billion Gentiles. If between 7 and 8 percent of the Gentiles are truly saved and refuse to join the final rebellion, this would add another 2 billion believers. According to this scenario, there would be about 5 billion believers and about 25 billion unbelievers alive on the earth at the end of the millennium. The number of people who die during the millennium will presumably be much lower than the number who are alive at the end.

There is, however, one more factor to consider when calculating the number of people from the total human population who will inhabit the new earth. There are various biblical indications that babies and children who die before reaching the age where they could understand the gospel clearly will be saved (2 Sam 12:23; Job 3:11-19; 10:18-22; Eccl 6:3-5; 1 John 2:2); nowhere does the Bible say that persons who die as babies will spend eternity in the lake of fire. The reason why the Bible never states directly that babies and young children who die will be saved is because the practical implications of such a statement would be disastrous. If the Bible had stated explicitly that infants who die will go to heaven, many people would justify infanticide on this basis. If people knew that children would go to heaven if they died before reaching the age of accountability, but would go to hell if they died without responding to the gospel after reaching the age of accountability, some professing Christians would kill babies and children as a means of saving their souls. Some Christian kings in the Middle Ages would have slaughtered pagan infants; some Christian soldiers in pagan lands would have no compunction about killing the children of unbelievers; some Christian social activists might advocate the abortion of atheists’ babies; and perhaps some Christian parents would even kill their own rebellious children to ensure they get to heaven.

Before modern times, about one-third of children died in infancy or in early childhood. It is unknown how God calculates the “age of accountability,” but it is noteworthy that before the twentieth century about half of all children died before reaching puberty. It is clear from these statistics that children who have died in the womb, in infancy, or before reaching the age of accountability are far more numerous than adult believers from creation until the second coming of Christ. (Infant mortality will presumably be very low in the millennium, and may also have been low in the antediluvian era.) There may be 50 billion persons who died as babies or children from creation until the second coming of Christ, and these will receive eternal life in the new earth. There will also likely be about 100-200 million babies and young children below the age of accountability at the end of the millennium. Because of these children, the population of the new earth will be impressively high and diverse—there will be tens of billions of glorified saints, including persons from every tribe, tongue, people, and nation and from every era of history. The number of people who will be thrown into the lake of fire for eternity is almost certainly higher, but probably only by a ratio of 2:1 or 3:1—not by the 20:1 or 50:1 ratio that might be the case if only adult believers were granted entrance into the new earth. Thus, a significant portion of the human race will live for eternity on the new earth, and children who died before reaching the age where they could reasonably be expected to comprehend and believe the gospel will comprise the bulk of the population of the new earth in eternity. However, adult believers will receive rewards which those who lacked the capacity to believe will not receive.

To answer the question posed at the beginning of this article, an estimate of the number of saved people who will inhabit the new earth for eternity is approximately 60 billion, calculated as follows: 40 million believers from the Old Testament era + 300 million believers from the day of Pentecost to the Protestant Reformation + 1 billion believers from the Protestant Reformation to 2022 + 500 million believers from 2022 to the start of the tribulation period + 1.5 billion believers from the tribulation period + 5 billion believers from the millennium + 50 billion who died before reaching the age of accountability. The number of people in the new earth may thus be about a third of the total number of people who will ever live, which I have estimated to be around 180 billion. If miscarried babies are to be included, both the number of inhabitants in the new earth and the number of people who have ever lived should be about 30-40 billion higher—about 100 billion persons in the new earth, out of a total human population of about 220 billion. A disproportionate number of the adult believers in the new earth will be Jews, who will likely number several billion by the end of the millennium, which explains why the New Jerusalem has such enormous dimensions (Rev 21:16). But these are only very rough estimates; we will learn the true numbers in the by-and-by.

Postscript: The material in this article is taken from my research for a commentary on Revelation that I am writing. I am currently looking for more monthly supporters or one-time donations to help further this work. Sample chapters: Revelation 16 and Revelation 20. I intend to make the entire commentary available for free download when it is finished.

Enjoy this content? Buy me a coffee, or support this blog via a PayPal donation.

The second dispensation: theocracy, not conscience

Tags

Age of Innocence, early dispensations

“Dispensation” is a term give by theologians to the eras of redemptive history described in the Bible. A clear example of a dispensation is the period during which the Law was in effect, from the covenant God made with Israel on Mount Sinai until the death of Christ and the beginning of the church. Within each dispensation, God prescribes different means by which believers are to demonstrate their faith in Him; however, dispensations are not different methods of salvation, which has always been by grace through faith.

While the New Testament clearly distinguishes between the Age of the Law and the Church Age, the most popular modern list of dispensations comes from the Scofield Reference Bible, which was published in the early twentieth century. In this study Bible, C. I. Scofield, building on the work of earlier dispensational theologians, lists seven dispensations. He calls the first dispensation “Innocence.” This was the time from the creation of man until the fall of man. The second dispensation, extending from the fall of man until the flood of Noah, is labeled “Conscience” by Scofield. The idea behind this name is that man had little or no direct revelation from God, and therefore could only be guided by his conscience in moral and spiritual matters. Proponents of this idea hypothesized that people who lived during this period had a much stronger (more reliable) conscience than people do today, which made it possible to live merely by conscience. Somehow human souls were gradually weakened during that early period, so that people gradually lost the sensitivity of their consciences.

However, when we examine the biblical description of the period between the Fall and the Flood, it does not match the theory that this was the Age of Conscience. For one thing, Cain murdered his brother Abel in cold blood and showed no remorse afterward (Gen 4:8-9)—hardly the behavior of someone who had an extremely sensitive conscience. More importantly, the antediluvians did have clear and direct revelation from God. Before the Fall, God conversed directly with Adam and Eve every evening in the garden of Eden (Gen 3:8; cf. Ezek 28:13), and it is very likely that God revealed to them the story of creation that is recorded in Genesis 1:1–2:3, among other things. Adam and Eve, in turn, must have spoken of these things to their children. There were also prophets in the antediluvian world. Jude 14 mentions that Enoch was a prophet, and Genesis 6:13-22 describes revelation that Noah received directly from God. Dreams and visions were another possible source of revelation; Job 33:14-18 indicates that God commonly revealed things to people in dreams during the most ancient periods of human history.

However, there was another revelation of God in the antediluvian world that many Christians have never heard of, although it is described in Genesis 3–4. To understand what this was, let us look first at Genesis 3:24, which says, So He drove the man out; and at the east of the garden of Eden He placed the cherubim and the flame of a sword that turned every direction to guard the way to the tree of life. Evidently the garden of Eden had an entrance on its east side. After Adam and Eve were expelled from the garden, the cherubim were stationed at its entrance in order to prevent man from eating the fruit of the tree of life. The cherubim were openly manifested in their awesome glory, in order to dissuade men from trying to enter the garden.

The cherubim are very interesting creatures. Technically, they are not angels, but are a different order of celestial beings. In the book of Revelation, the cherubim are called “living creatures.” In Isaiah 6:2 they are called “seraphim,” which means “flaming ones.” Each time that the cherubim are described in the Bible, there are four of them, and they are situated around the throne of God, one on each side, with the throne of God above them in the center. The cherubim support the throne from underneath and from the sides, and function as guardians to protect the holiness of God’s throne from intruders. Given the fact that the cherubim have the responsibility to protect the throne of God, they must be the most powerful created beings, with Michael the archangel likely the only angel who is equal to them in power.

Interestingly, the function of cherubim as guardians of the throne of God is reflected in the material culture of the ancient Near East. Many royal thrones in the ancient Near East included winged guardian figures supporting the throne from its sides (examples). In Assyria, massive human-headed winged bulls called kāribu or lamassu were carved beside royal gates to represent guardian spirits. Since Noah and his sons actually saw the cherubim before the flood, they must have described their appearance and function to their descendants and helped them make depictions of cherubim. Cherubim were also depicted in the tabernacle and temple and above the ark of the covenant because these beings accompanied God’s presence (Exod 25:18-22; 26:1; 1 Kgs 6:23-29). An ivory carving from Samaria apparently depicts a cherub, and may reflect the way these creatures were carved in Solomon’s temple.

Ezekiel 28:13-14, which describes the origins of Satan, says he was originally created as “the anointed cherub who covers.” This indicates that God originally created five cherubim—four around the throne, supporting it from below, while hovering above the throne was a special cherub who occupied the most privileged position in all of creation. It is most unfortunate that this specially anointed cherub became filled with pride because of his exalted position and his great power and glory, and craved to take the throne of God for himself, in order to govern the universe himself and receive the worship of all creation (Isa 14:12-14). This cherub became Satan, the great opponent of God. When he decided to rebel against God, he left his station above God’s throne and persuaded large numbers of other angels to follow him instead of God (Rev 12:4). Satan then organized his forces and attempted to overwhelm the angels and cherubim who had remained loyal in order to break through to God’s throne and take it for himself. He lost the battle and was cast out of heaven to the earth for a time, where he proceeded to tempt Eve to sin, leading to the fall of the human race. The spiritual war on earth, fierce as it is, really is only a proxy war in the main conflict between Satan and God (Gen 3:15). At the end of history, when the antichrist is seizing power on earth, Satan will make one final attempt to storm heaven with his angels and drive God off His throne, and when he loses that battle, he and his angels will be cast out of heaven for all time (Rev 12:7-9).

There are many Bible verses which say that God is enthroned above the cherubim (e.g., 2 Sam 6:2; 2 Kgs 19:15; 1 Chr 13:6; Pss 18:10; 80:1; 99:1; Isa 37:16). Particularly clear is Ezekiel 1, in which Ezekiel gives a detailed report of a vision of cherubim that he saw (cf. Ezek 10:20). In Ezekiel 1:26, he describes seeing God the Father on His throne above the cherubim. When John describes the living creatures (cherubim) in Revelation 4:6-8, they are likewise stationed permanently around the throne of God.

If the principal function of the cherubim is to protect the throne of God, this implies that when the cherubim were placed at the entrance to the garden of Eden after the fall of man, the throne of God must also have been there, with the presence of God manifested in some way above the cherubim. Before the Fall, God spoke openly with Adam and Eve every evening (Gen 3:8; cf. Ezek 28:13), so it makes sense that they would be able to communicate directly with God afterward as well. It is significant that the entrance to the garden was on its east side, since the tabernacle and the temple were also oriented toward the east (cf. Num 3:23, 38; Ezek 10:19), and the glory of God will enter the millennial temple through its east gate (Ezek 43:1-5). The place in front of the entrance to the garden of Eden was therefore a holy place, in which people could reverentially approach God in order to speak to Him, to worship Him, and to offer sacrifices.

The narrative of Genesis 4 assumes that the reader understands this, although it does not directly say that the divine presence was manifested above the cherubim, and that this was a place where people offered sacrifices to God and spoke with Him. Genesis 4:3-7 reads, Now it came to pass at the end of certain years, that Cain brought some of the produce of the land as an offering to Yahweh. And Abel, on his part, brought some of the firstlings of his flock and of their fat portions. And Yahweh had regard for Abel and for his offering; but He did not show regard for Cain or for his offering. Then Cain became very angry, and his countenance fell. And Yahweh said to Cain, “Why are you angry? And why has your countenance fallen? If you do well, will it not be lifted up? And if you do not do well, sin lies at the door; and its desire is for you, but you must rule over it.” Presumably Adam, Eve, and their children worshiped God at the entrance to Eden every Sabbath (when they were not working), or perhaps every day, with Adam offering sacrifices on behalf of the entire family. When Cain and Abel reached the age of adulthood, God asked them for the first time to bring their own sacrifices to Him as an expression of their personal faith. God asked them to sacrifice a specific kind of animal, but Cain was too proud to purchase an animal from his brother, so he took some his own vegetables instead and offered them to God. When the text says that “Cain brought . . . an offering to Yahweh,” this means that Cain brought his offering to the place where God was manifested. This was the same place where Abel “brought” his offering. Cain and Abel could not offer their sacrifices in the place of their choosing, but rather had to bring their offerings to a specific place, literally in front of the throne of God. God indicated in some way that He accepted Abel’s offering—possibly by consuming it with fire—but He rejected Cain’s offering. God then spoke directly to Cain, rebuking him and instructing him. God also gave Cain specific directions for how he ought to behave himself and worship; Cain was not dependent on his conscience to form his own ideas about was constitutes correct morality and worship.

Cain was extremely irritated by the fact that God accepted his brother’s sacrifice but not his own, and he was very envious of his brother. Cain killed Abel in the field while he was working (Gen 4:8), and apparently buried his body to conceal the murder. Afterward, Cain returned to the presence of God, thinking that God did not see what he had done because the murder was committed out of sight of the divine presence (cf. Gen 3:8). When Cain spoke with God in Genesis 4:9-15, we know that he had gone to the place of the divine presence, because Genesis 4:16 says that Cain went out from the presence of Yahweh. Genesis 4:9-15 says, And Yahweh said to Cain, “Where is Abel your brother?” And he said, “I do not know. Am I my brother’s keeper?” And He said, “What have you done? The voice of your brother’s blood is crying to Me from the ground. And now you are cursed from the ground, which has opened its mouth to receive your brother’s blood from your hand. When you work the ground, it will no longer yield its strength to you; you will be a vagrant and a wanderer on the earth.” And Cain said to Yahweh, “My punishment is greater than I can bear. Behold, You have driven me out today from the face of the ground, and I will be hidden from Your face. I will be a fugitive and a wanderer in the earth; and it will come to pass, that whoever finds me will kill me.” So Yahweh said to him, “Therefore whoever kills Cain, vengeance will be taken on him sevenfold.” And Yahweh put a mark on Cain, so that no one who found him would kill him.

These verses reveal that the place of the divine presence in front of the garden was not only a place to sacrifice and worship God and speak with Him—it was also a place where God pronounced judgment on people for their sins. God declared Cain’s guilt and punished him, then promised to punish seven times more severely anyone who would kill Cain. When Cain’s descendant Lamech killed a man in self-defense, he also appealed to God to vindicate and protect him, rather than appealing to a human judge (Gen 4:23-24). In the absence of human government, God took responsibility to judge murderers, which was possible to do before the Flood because the cherubim and the divine presence were openly visible. It is interesting that Cain was worried about the nature of his punishment because it implied that he would have to live far from the divine presence. Given that everyone now knew that Cain had murdered Abel, someone might kill Cain in retribution, thinking that God could not see or judge the murder if it occurred far from the place where His presence was manifested.

Genesis 6:3 is also significant in this regard. In the King James Version, that verse reads, And the Lord said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years. The Hebrew text of this verse is difficult, and there are various interpretations of it. According to one interpretation, “My spirit” (lowercase) is not the Holy Spirit, but is rather the human soul, which God has put in the bodies of men. God is saying that He will not continue to fight against human beings indefinitely, because they have mortal bodies, and He will kill them all in 120 years.

Another interpretation retains the wording of the KJV, but capitalizes the word “Spirit.” In accord with the idea that the second dispensation was the Age of Conscience, the Holy Spirit was using men’s consciences to fight against their desires, by bringing conviction of sin. However, we have already seen that men were not guided merely by their consciences during the second dispensation, but were given much specific instruction by God. A more basic problem with this interpretation of Genesis 6:3 is that the Hebrew verb used in this verse means “judge,” not “contend.” (The root דון is an earlier or variant form of דין.)

The best translation of Genesis 6:3 is, And Yahweh said, “My Spirit will not judge among men forever, since he is flesh; yet his days will be a hundred and twenty years.” The meaning of the verse is that God was acting as Judge of the human race during this period, in the absence of human governments. As the wickedness of the antediluvian world grew worse and worse, God issued a judicial decree that the antediluvian race would only remain for 120 more years. After the Flood, God delegated the responsibility to punish crime to human governments. The Flood destroyed the garden of Eden, and the tree of life was taken to heaven, where it is today according to the book of Revelation (2:7; 22:2, 14, 19). There was therefore no need for the cherubim to remain stationed on the earth, and both the cherubim and the throne of God ascended to heaven. After the Flood, in Genesis 9:1-7, God gave a commission to Noah and his sons, and to their descendants after them. This commission included the command to kill murderers, which meant that God was delegating the responsibility to execute justice to human government. Genesis 9:6 says, Whoever sheds man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed; for in the image of God He made man. With this command a new dispensation begins, one in which man will have the responsibility to execute justice and worship God without a visible manifestation of God. Since man was created in God’s image, he is capable of acting as a judge on God’s behalf.

Taking into account all the passages considered above, the second dispensation should be called “Theocracy,” not “Conscience.” The period of world history between the Fall and the Flood was an era during which God governed the world directly, and men saw God openly and conversed with Him directly. Angelic activity in the world was also much more open and visible (Gen 6:1-4). It is certain that the antediluvians did not have knowledge of certain theological subjects which were revealed later (e.g., the church, the rapture, etc.), but neither were they primitive people who had virtually no direct revelation and depended on their consciences to form their own ideas about morality and worship. They needed instruction about God, just as we do, and they received such instruction, although by different means.

What happened when the population of the earth expanded and began to spread out, so that many people lived in places that were geographically distant from the place where God’s presence was manifested? Genesis 4:25-26 gives the answer: Then Adam knew his wife again, and she bore a son. And she called his name Seth, for [she said], God has appointed me another offspring instead of Abel; for Cain killed him. And to Seth also was born a son; and he called his name Enosh. Then men began to call on the name of Yahweh. The meaning of the last part of verse 26 is that when the population of the earth expanded in the process of time, people began to pray to Yahweh. They recognized that God could hear them cry out to Him, even though they were too far from the entrance of Eden to be able to physically approach the place where the divine presence was manifested. It can be assumed that God responded to people’s prayers in dreams or visions (cf. Job 4:12-13; 33:14-18), or by prophets or angels. It can also be assumed that God punished crimes that occurred far from the entrance to Eden. However, the human race must have multiplied dramatically in the 1,656 years between Creation and the Flood, and perhaps the physical distance of most people from the divine presence was a factor in the general rebellion of the human race that developed throughout that period of history (Gen 6:5, 11-12).

One might assume that the Bible is our only source of information for the antediluvian era, but, surprisingly, it is not. The most ancient written records and oral traditions from other cultures also have stories of creation, a global flood, an ark, and the dispersion of peoples after God/the gods changed human language. While the details of these traditions are unreliable and mixed with paganism, there is a true history behind the legends. Some of these early traditions contain descriptions of the period before the Flood. Of particular interest is the Egyptian Book of the Heavenly Cow, which describes how the sun god, Re, once ruled the world directly as king of both man and the gods during an age in which all was orderly and perfect, and death did not yet exist. Then man rebelled against Re, and Re ordered the goddess Hathor to annihilate the human race; however, Re saved a remnant, keeping Hathor from killing every human being. Re also created the netherworld at the time when Hathor annihilated most of the human race, and Re populated the netherworld with serpents. After the reordering of the world, Re withdrew to heaven and delegated governance of the world to lesser deities and to Pharaoh, who was considered the son and successor of Re, his representative ruler on the earth. (See Erik Hornung, The Ancient Egyptian Books of the Afterlife, trans. David Lorton [London: Cornell University Press, 1999], 149-151.) This story sounds like a reflection of Genesis 1–9, as it parallels the introduction of human government after the Flood in the biblical account. The Sumerian creation myth, Eridu Genesis, also describes a time when the gods ruled mankind, before the scepter of kingship descended from heaven and human kings were allowed to govern the world on behalf of the gods. This also seems to reflect the fact that during the period of world history between the Fall and the Flood, God, rather than human rulers, judged and punished crimes committed by men in the world.

Enjoy this content? Buy me a coffee, or support this blog via a PayPal donation.

Why I believe in the pretribulational rapture

The rapture is one of the most important, most controversial, and most poorly understood eschatological doctrines. In this post, I would like to explain from the Bible the reasons why I believe in the pretribulational rapture of the church.

The word “rapture” refers to a “carrying away” or a “snatching away.” The English word “rapture” comes from the Latin noun raptura, which is etymologically related to the Greek verb ἁρπάζω that is used in 1 Thessalonians 4:17. The rapture is an event in which Christ will descend from heaven to the sky above the earth, accompanied by a trumpet blast and the shout of the archangel Michael (1 Cor 15:52; 1 Thess 4:16). Both living and deceased Christians will instantaneously be given glorified resurrection bodies and will be caught up into the clouds, where Christ will lead them back to heaven. Only Christians will see Christ at that time, though the entire world may hear the trumpet blast.

As its name suggests, pretribulationism teaches that the rapture of the church will occur just before the start of the tribulation. The tribulation is a seven-year period corresponding to Daniel’s seventieth week that occurs immediately prior to the second coming of Christ. Before establishing the timing of the rapture, it is imperative to first establish that the coming of Christ for the rapture of the church is an event that is distinct from the second advent, and therefore the rapture is not posttribulational. There are three passages in the New Testament that teach about a return of Christ that is different from the second coming. These three passages are John 14:1-3, 1 Corinthians 15:51-52, and 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18 (see also Rev 4:1).

John 14:1-3

In the Upper Room discourse, which begins in John 13:31, Jesus is preparing the eleven disciples for His departure. At the end of John 13, Jesus mentions that He is going away, which prompted a confused reaction from Peter, who did not understand why he could not go with Jesus. Jesus proceeds to explain in John 14:1-4 that He is not going on an earthly journey, but on a journey to the Father, where He will prepare a place for them, and where they will be reunited forever. In John 14:2-3, Jesus says, In my Father’s house are many dwelling places. If it were not so, I would have told you, for I go to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I am coming again, and will take you to Myself; that where I am, there you may be also. Jesus says He will take the disciples (who are Church Age believers) to Himself and will take them to the place where He is, to His Father’s house. The Father’s house is the place where God the Father dwells, which is heaven. In other words, Jesus will come to earth, will resurrect the disciples and (by extension) all those who are part of the church (He is not just coming for the Eleven—cf. John 12:26), and will take them to heaven. In contrast, at the second coming, Jesus will come to the earth and stay on the earth. He will establish an earthly kingdom, and therefore will not take the saints back to heaven with Him, but will instead give them an earthly inheritance. These contrasts demonstrate that it is impossible that John 14 is speaking of a resurrection at the second advent.

1 Corinthians 15:51-52

The second of the three major rapture passages is 1 Corinthians 15:51-52. That passage reads as follows: Behold, I tell you a mystery: we will not all sleep, but we will all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised incorruptible, and we will be changed. In verse 51, Paul says that the resurrection of believers he describes in these verses is a “mystery,” meaning that it is something that was not previously revealed. It cannot therefore occur in conjunction with the second advent, which is spoken of throughout both the Old and New Testaments. The rapture was not revealed in the Old Testament, even if it could be deduced by implication, because it is something that is specifically for the church, and not for Israel. Thus, the translation of living saints to heaven is never revealed in the Old Testament, either. These verses also add the important detail that both dead and living believers will be raised, which creates a serious problem for posttribulationism—there would be no one left to enter the millennium in a mortal body if all believers are given glorified bodies and all unbelievers are killed. More will be said about this problem later on, as it is one of the chief difficulties in the posttribulational system. Thus, there are three reasons why 1 Corinthians 15:51-52 must be speaking of the rapture: it is presented as a mystery; it includes the resurrection of Church Age saints (“we”); and it includes the resurrection both of the living and the dead. Note that the “last trumpet” is not the seventh trumpet, which is sounded at the midpoint of the tribulation (Rev 11:15), nor is it the trumpet that is sounded at Christ’s second coming (Matt 24:31)—it is rather the last trumpet for Christians, or the trumpet blast which signals the end of the Church Age.

1 Thessalonians 4:13-18

The last of the three major rapture passages is 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18. Verse 13 reads, But we do not want you to be uninformed, brothers, about those who are asleep, so that you may not grieve as do the rest, who have no hope. The Thessalonians, like the Corinthians (1 Cor 15:12, 18), did not know that dead believers would be resurrected. This is interesting in light of 1 Thessalonians 1:10 and 5:1-2, which state that the Thessalonians were fully aware of apostolic teaching concerning the second coming of Christ, and they were in fact waiting for His coming. Thus, they correctly understood that living believers would be saved alive at the second coming, but they did not know what would happen to those who died beforehand. Paul teaches them about the rapture because that is when all Church Age believers will be raised.

Verse 14 continues: For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so God will bring with Him those who have fallen asleep in Jesus. The term “in Jesus” refers only to the church, not to OT saints. Thus, this passage is describing a resurrection of Church Age believers only. This is different from the second coming, since Daniel 12:1-3 asserts that OT saints are raised at the end of the tribulation period. Verse 15: For we say to you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive, who remain until the coming of the Lord, will not precede those who have fallen asleep. Again, this is a resurrection in which both living and dead believers are raised, so if it was posttribulational there would be no one left to populate the millennial kingdom with mortal bodies. Verses 16-17: For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trumpet of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. Then we who are alive, who remain, will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air; and so we will always be with the Lord. Notice that in the coming of Christ that Paul describes, believers will meet the Lord in the air. This is in contrast to descriptions of the second coming, in which the saints are portrayed emerging from heaven to return to the earth with Christ (Rom 8:19; Col 3:4; 1 Thess 3:13; Jude 14-15; Rev 19:14). How could the saints come from heaven with Christ if they are not raptured until He comes? First Thessalonians 4:16-17 says we will meet the Lord in the air after He has already descended from heaven. The rapture therefore must happen at a different time than the second advent, before the second advent.

Finally, in v. 18, Paul writes, Therefore comfort one another with these words. In both the Old Testament and the New Testament, the nation of Israel is warned about the sufferings they will endure during the tribulation period. The church is not. When Paul tells the Christians in Thessalonica that the coming of the Lord will be a great comfort to them, he does not say anything about it being preceded by the tribulation period, which would not be so comforting. He does not warn them to be on the alert for Christ’s coming lest they be judged, or to watch for the signs Christ is just about to return, or to prepare to endure the turmoil of the tribulation period—which is completely unlike the Olivet Discourse and other second coming passages.

It is also interesting that Paul says the Thessalonians were ignorant about Christ’s coming for His church, yet he says in the very next paragraph that they were not ignorant about the second coming. He says in 5:1-3, But concerning the times and the seasons, brothers, you have no need for anything to be written to you. For you yourselves know perfectly well that the day of the Lord comes like a thief in the night. When they are saying, “There is peace and security,” then sudden destruction comes on them, as labor pains on a pregnant woman; and they will not escape. Paul also referenced the second coming twice before in this letter, in 1:10 and 3:13, and he speaks as though the Thessalonians knew about it. This demonstrates that the rapture is an event that is distinct from the second coming.

None of the rapture passages contains any description whatsoever of the judgment of the wicked, or indicates that there is a judgment of the world at the time of the rapture. There is no indication that Christ is coming to set up His kingdom at that time. There is no judgment of Satan, Israel, the nations, the antichrist, or the false prophet. The world and the universe are not destroyed. All that happens is the resurrection of Church Age saints. On the other hand, every passage that describes the second coming describes the cataclysmic judgment associated with it, while none of the second coming passages describes a resurrection of living believers or even a resurrection of Church Age saints. All of the major second coming passages are set in the context of the end of the tribulation period, while none of the rapture passages says a word about the tribulation period. The rapture and the second coming are therefore two distinct events, and the rapture is not posttribulational. Other distinct characteristics of the rapture include its description as a mystery and the return of Jesus Christ to heaven afterwards.

The distinction between Israel and the church

Having established, then, that the rapture is an event that is distinct from the second advent, and that precedes the second advent, let us now consider the evidence that the rapture occurs before the tribulation period, i.e., immediately prior to the start of Daniel’s seventieth week. One of the strongest arguments for this is the distinction between Israel and the church. Israel is still God’s chosen people (Gen 17:7-8, 19; Isa 49:14-15; 54:10; Jer 31:35-37; 33:23-26; Rom 11:1, 28-29). He has not abandoned them—in fact, He has brought them back to their land and protected them there. But during the Church Age—the time from Pentecost until the rapture—Christ is building His church primarily through Gentiles (Acts 13:45-48; 28:28; Rom 10:20-21). The church is never called “Israel” in the Bible, and Israel is never called “the church,” since these are two distinct entities, although of course some Jews are also part of the church.

Daniel 9:24-27 outlines God’s program for the people of Israel and the city of Jerusalem from the issuing of the decree to rebuild Jerusalem until the coming of the messianic kingdom. The length of His program is seventy weeks of years, or 490 years: “Seventy weeks are determined for your people and for your holy city. . . ” (Dan 9:24). Sixty-nine weeks, or 483 years, completed the time from the issuing of the decree until the crucifixion of Jesus by the Jewish people and their leaders (cf. Zech 12:10; Matt 27:24; Acts 2:36; 4:10). After Israel rejected the Messiah, God temporarily switched the primary dispensational focus of His program to the Gentiles, who form the bulk of the church. Since Daniel 9:24-27 is a prophecy of God’s program for Israel, the Church Age is not included in the seventy weeks; there is only an indefinite gap. According to Daniel 9:27, God’s program for Israel is finished in one week, the seventieth week, which is the tribulation period. Hence, God will resume His program for Israel seven years before the second advent, or at the beginning of the period we call the tribulation. The resumption of God’s program for Israel implies the removal of the church, for God has made the church the focus of His salvific program in this age. Pretribulationism is the only view of the rapture that maintains the unity of Daniel’s seventieth week as a time when the dispensational focus of God’s program returns to Israel.

According to Romans 11:25-26, Israel has experienced a partial hardening “until the fulness of the Gentiles has come in.” After that, their hearts will no longer be hardened, and “all Israel will be saved.” The fulness of the Gentiles comes in when the church is taken to heaven at the rapture. Hence, God will resume His program for Israel immediately after the rapture. That this is immediate is proved by the use of the word “until” (ἄχρι) in Romans 11:25: if Israel’s partial hardening occurs only until the rapture, then it is taken away immediately afterward (“. . . and so all Israel will be saved”—v. 26).

That God will resume his program for Israel immediately after the rapture can be deduced logically, even apart from Romans 11:25-26. God would not remove the church unless there were some people of God to replace it with, for He will not cease to work His program. There is only one candidate for the replacement of the church, and that is Israel (Rom 11:23-24). Hence, when the church is removed, its role is restored to Israel. Again, Daniel 9:27 shows that God’s program for Israel is finished in one week, or seven years.

All the biblical descriptions of the tribulation period show that it is focused on Israel, not on the church, and therefore the church must be removed at the start of the tribulation. The first three chapters of the book of Revelation mention the church some 19 times, yet the church is not mentioned one time in Revelation 4–19, which describes the tribulation period. However, 144,000 evangelists from the twelve tribes of Israel are given a prominent place in Revelation 7 and 14, and Revelation 11 describes ministry of the two witnesses in the city of Jerusalem. Satan singles out Israel for special persecution in Revelation 12, and Israel is specially protected by God. The main battle at the end of the tribulation period is centered in the land of Israel (Rev 16:16). Zechariah 12–14 speaks of ethnic Jews living in Jerusalem at the time of the final battle, with Christ returning to rescue His people and destroy their enemies (cf. Dan 12:1). Passages in Revelation 4–19 contain many references to “saints” and “the elect,” but not to “the church” or those who are “in Christ.” Revelation 19 refers to the bride of Christ, but this is a reference to saints who are in heaven, not on earth. The indication, then, is that the focus of God’s program will return to Israel in the tribulation period. This is confirmed by the Olivet Discourse (Matthew 24–25; Mark 13; Luke 21) and numerous passages in the Old Testament that describe the tribulation as a time of great persecution for Israel. Not one of the many passages in the Bible which describes the tribulation even mentions the church. Zechariah 12–13 describes how many Jews will die in the tribulation, but a remnant will repent and be saved. Daniel 9:24-27 presents the tribulation as the final seven years of God’s program for Israel in this age. Jeremiah 30:7 calls the tribulation “the time of Jacob’s trouble.” How can the tribulation be called “the time of Jacob’s trouble” if it is really the time of the church’s trouble? Both the OT and the NT warn the nation of Israel time and again of the things it will suffer during the tribulation period, yet the church is not warned one time.

Because of these problems, most posttribulationists are not dispensational, and those who are have to hold that there is a gradual transition between the Church Age and a return to the time of God’s primary dispensational focus on Israel. Only pretribulationism makes a clear distinction between dispensations and allows for a Jewish millennium.

Posttribulationism

The major alternative to pretribulationism is posttribulationism. The ideas of a midtribulational rapture, a partial rapture, and a pre-wrath rapture have not enjoyed the widespread support accorded to both pretribulationism and posttribulationism because there is no hint anywhere in Scripture of a coming of Christ during the tribulation period. A coming that ends the tribulation period is clearly taught, but posttribulationism denies that this is a separate event from the rapture. One reason why posttribulationism has been so popular over the centuries is that it is required by the amillennial and postmillennial systems of theology. If the church is defined as believers of all ages, then those who have “fallen asleep in Jesus” (1 Thess 4:14) includes Old Testament saints. Thus, there can be no special rapture for those saved after the day of Pentecost in Acts 2. There is no separate rapture in eschatological systems other premillennialism. On the other hand, the dispensational understanding of Scripture requires some point at which the Church Age ends and God’s program reverts back to Israel.

The arguments given above for pretribulationism are implicitly arguments against posttribulationism. However, a few problems specific to the posttribulational scheme may be noted.

Probably the largest problem with posttribulationism is that it does not allow for unresurrected people to enter the millennial kingdom, because all believers are raised at the rapture and all unbelievers are killed at the second advent. There are a great number of passages which assert that only believers will enter the kingdom, e.g., Ezek 20:33-38; Matt 5:20; 25:31-46; John 3:3; 1 Cor 6:9-10; Gal 5:19-21; 1 Thess 5:3. Possibly the clearest passages are Matthew 13:40-43 and Matthew 25:31-46. The rapture passages assert that both dead and living believers are raised and glorified (1 Cor 15:51-52; 1 Thess 4:16-17). Hence, if the rapture occurs at the end of the tribulation, everyone who enters the millennium does so in an immortal resurrection body.

This is a problem because there are many passages that indicate the presence of people in unresurrected bodies in the millennium. Isaiah 65:20 speaks of people dying in the millennium. Isaiah 65:23 and Ezekiel 47:22 speak of people in the millennial kingdom begetting children, and this is implied in various other verses (Isa 11:6-8; 61:9; Jer 30:19-20; 31:8, 13, 27, 34; Ezekiel 46:16-18; Zech 2:4). Ezekiel 44:22 describes men taking wives in the kingdom. According to Matthew 22:30, marrying and begetting offspring cannot be done in the resurrection body. Various verses describe sacrifices for sin in the millennium (Ezek 40:39; 43:18-27; 44:29; 45:13-25), and acts of sin the millennium (Zech 5:1-4; 14:17-19), showing that there are people in the kingdom who have not yet experienced the perfect sanctification that comes with glorification. Revelation 20:7-9 describes a great rebellion at the end of the millennium in which an innumerable number of people will turn against Christ and assault Jerusalem, resulting in the deaths of all those who have rebelled. This rebellion shows not just that there are mortal men in the millennium, but also that there are unsaved mortal men. The only way the unbelievers could have gotten into the kingdom is by procreation, since only the saved will enter the millennium.

Besides these problems, there are passages that directly state that some people will survive the tribulation period and the second coming. Zechariah 14:5 describes believers fleeing on foot after Christ has returned at the second advent. Daniel 12:1, Zechariah 14:16, and Micah 4:2-3 also refer to survivors of the tribulation period.

Posttribulationists have never been able to resolve the problem of how mortal men enter the millennium, nor can they, for their scheme simply falls apart at this point. The suggestion that some Jews repent as Christ is descending contradicts various verses which teach that there can be no repentance after the midpoint of the tribulation is reached or a person receives the mark of the beast (2 Thess 2:9-12; Rev 14:9-12). When the second coming begins, it is too late to repent; men’s fates are sealed (Matt 7:21-23; 25:10-12, 41-46; Rev 6:12-17).

The major biblical argument for posttribulationism is the claim that the Bible only presents one return of Christ. However, the passages analyzed above describe a return of Christ that is not visible to the entire world, in which Christ does not return all the way to the earth and does not judge the earth. Another argument for posttribulationism that is that pretribulationism is a recent invention, and the church has always believed in posttribulationism. Walvoord notes that “in offering this argument, posttribulationists generally ignore the fact that modern forms of posttribulationism differ greatly from that of the early church or of the Protestant Reformers and are actually just as new or perhaps newer than pretribulationism” (John Walvoord, The Blessed Hope and the Tribulation, 145). Specifically, the strain of posttribulationism that holds that the tribulation is a future seven-year period of time differs from the historic view of most theologians in church history, who spiritualized the tribulation and held that the entire Church Age is the tribulation period. Also, while John Nelson Darby claimed to have developed his teaching on the pretribulational rapture directly from the Bible, it is clear that there were other pretribulationists before Darby, such as a Baptist preacher named Morgan Edwards. Farther back in time, in the early Middle Ages, a document called Pseudo-Ephraim expresses a belief in the pretribulational rapture. Beatus of Liebana, who published the final edition of his Commentarius in Apocalypsin in 786, mentions the “rapture” as if it were common knowledge. See also Francis Gumerlock’s 2002 article and 2013 article, and William Watson’s book Dispensationalism before Darby. On the other hand, prophecy tends to become clearer as the time of fulfillment nears, so the increased popularity of pretribulationism in our day should not be surprising.

Posttribulationists claim that the doctrine of a pretribulational rapture rests on very shaky grounds because it is based largely on inference. However, inferences are different than assumptions, and posttribulationism rests on many unsupported assumptions or assertions. Posttribulationists assume that the church will go through the tribulation period, even though none of the terms that are typically used to refer to the church is used with reference to the saints who are alive during the tribulation period. Posttribulationists have never been able to explain why New Testament writers such as Paul do not warn the church to prepare for the tribulation period, with all of its perils. It seems that the passages in which Paul describes the rapture ought to include a description of the terrible tribulation that will precede it, if indeed the rapture is posttribulational. Another assumption made by posttribulationism is that saints will rise from the dead to meet Christ as He is coming down from heaven. This is never explicitly stated, and in fact Revelation 20:4-6 proves that dead tribulation saints will not be raised until the judgment which follows the second coming. If the rapture is posttribulational, then there is no reference whatever to it in the book of Revelation, in spite of the lengthy, detailed, and sequential presentation of end time events in that book.

Another problem with posttribulationism is that it cannot explain the differences between descriptions of the second coming and descriptions of the rapture. These differences have already been noted. The differences between the coming of Christ for the church and the second advent are very significant, and posttribulationists have not given an adequate explanation for how they can be considered identical.

A final problem with posttribulationism is that it contradicts the premillennial dispensational understanding of Scripture, which is based on a literal understanding of Scripture. If the rapture is posttribulational, it is impossible for there to be people with mortal physical bodies in the millennium, and therefore it is impossible for there to be a literal, physical thousand-year reign of Christ on the earth. No one who believes in a literal millennium can accept a posttribulational rapture without a serious contradiction. Denying the millennium is a major problem, because both the Old and New Testaments are filled with descriptions of a lengthy, literal, earthly kingdom, and Revelation 20 says no less than six times that it will last one thousand years. A denial of the millennium also has much more serious consequences in terms of one’s view of God’s fulfillment of His covenants with Israel, and the completion of Christ’s redemptive work.

Posttribulationism also contradicts dispensationalism in that there is no clear break between the end of the Church Age and the renewal of Israel as the focus of God’s dispensational program. No posttribulationist theologian makes a clear distinction between Israel and the church, which is the sine qua non of dispensationalism. In no way can a dispensationalist accept a posttribulational rapture without seriously contradicting himself.

Posttribulationism also has major practical implications. Should we start digging bunkers and building up a seven-year supply of food to survive the tribulation? Should we try to figure out if the tribulation has already started and whether we should be looking for signs that the second coming is about to happen? Posttribulationism also leads logically to a denial of premillennialism and dispensationalism, thereby undermining a literal approach to interpreting Bible prophecy. I will close with a quote from John Walvoord: “The evident trend among scholars who have forsaken pretribulationism for posttribulationism is that in many cases they also abandon premillennialism. . . . It becomes evident that pretribulationism is more than a dispute between those who place the rapture before and after the tribulation. It is actually the key to an eschatological system. It plays a determinative role in establishing principles of interpretation which, if carried through consistently, lead to the pretribulational and premillennial interpretation” (Walvoord, The Blessed Hope and the Tribulation, 166).

Enjoy this content? Buy me a coffee, or support this blog via a PayPal donation.

Psalm 50: A call to authentic worship

Probably most Christians are familiar with the biblical statement, “He owns the cattle on a thousand hills.” However, most Christians know very little about the psalm in which this statement is made, which is Psalm 50. Psalm 50 contains a significant message, but is poorly understood and largely neglected apart from the single familiar verse it contains. The message of Psalm 50 is that worshiping authentically means serving God from the heart and keeping His commandments; no one will please God merely by performance of religious rituals. Believers must not substitute the formalities of worship for a life of worship, and unrepentant hypocrites must realize that no one will be saved by an insincere profession of faith or by joining an assembly of believers.

In Psalm 50, the psalmist Asaph, who is called “the seer” in 2 Chronicles 29:30 (cf. 1 Chr 25:1-3), reports a vision of God coming to judge His people. This judgment scene was real in the sense that Asaph saw it, but he was the only one who saw it. The judgment he saw was therefore like a report card, rather than the final judgment.

Psalm 50 begins with the issuing of a summons: God, [even] God, Yahweh, has spoken, and summoned the earth from the rising of the sun to its setting (v. 1). God sends out a summons to the entire earth for all of his saints to be gathered to a great assembly; however, this summons is heard only in the vision seen by the prophet Asaph. Thus, this psalm reveals what God would say to His people if they were physically assembled in His visible presence.

In verses 2-3, Asaph describes how he saw God coming to the great assembly: Out of Zion, the perfection of beauty, God has shined forth. Our God comes, and does not keep silence; a fire devours before Him, and it is very tempestuous around Him. God flashes forth in a dazzling blaze of glory from His dwelling place (Zion) to call His people to a great assembly—not to the final judgment, but to an interim evaluation. When God’s glory is visibly manifested, as Asaph sees it, it is with a fearful and fiery tempest (cf. Exod 19:16-19; Deut 9:3; Pss 18:13; 97:2-5; Dan 7:10; Nah 1:2-8; Hab 3:3-5). The Lord is a stronghold to those who take refuge in Him (Nah 1:7), but is an all-consuming fire toward His enemies in the day of His wrath (Nah 1:8; cf. Lev 10:2; Ps 21:9; Heb 12:29).

In verse 4, God calls witnesses to the judgment scene: He calls to the heavens above, and to the earth, that He may judge His people. Under the Mosaic Law, two witnesses were required to render a judicial sentence (Deut 19:15). Here, heaven and earth are called to be witnesses at a judgment of God’s people. The earth will witness to the works of man, and the heavens to the righteousness of God (cf. Deut 31:28; Pss 19:1; 97:6). Although the call of inanimate objects to bear witness sounds like a metaphorical personification, every human action does in fact effect a change on the physical world, while God’s righteousness has a corresponding effect on the heavenly world; they both, therefore, contain a record which constitutes evidence in a court of law. Likewise, both are in fact capable of responding to commands from their Creator (cf. Gen 1:11-18; Matt 8:26-27).

Verse 5 gives the content of the summons: Gather My saints together to Me, those who have made a covenant with Me by sacrifice. God’s saints, that is, those who have set themselves apart to Him through covenant sacrifice, are to be gathered together out of all the earth to a great assembly. As will be seen, this group includes all who profess to be God’s people, and within this group are both true believers and those who have made an insincere profession of covenant loyalty. God’s covenant with Israel was originally made at Sinai (Exod 24:1-8), but each individual Israelite (or proselyte) had to confirm his own participation in the covenant by means of repeated sacrifices (a covenant was confirmed with the shedding of blood—cf. Heb 9:18-20).

The introduction to the judgment scene is completed in verse 6 by a call to the heavens, i.e., the universe: And the heavens will declare His righteousness; for God Himself is judge. Selah. God has called the heavens as a witness in this grand courtroom scene to affirm His righteousness, and therefore His fitness to judge. The order of the physical universe attests to the moral perfection of its Creator.

The earth now having, in the vision, produced God’s people and the evidence of their works, the trial begins. God first addresses the people as a whole in verse 7, calling them to attention: Hear, O My people, and I will speak; O Israel, and I will testify to you: I am God, [even] your God. The reason why the people must pay attention is that the Speaker is God. Not only is He God, He is specifically the God of His covenant people. Therefore, He will hold the people accountable to keep their covenant obligations—toward God (vv. 7-15), and toward man (vv. 16-21).

Before criticizing His people for what they were doing wrong, God first affirms them for what they were doing right. In verse 8, He says, I will not reprove you for your sacrifices; and your burnt offerings are continually before Me. The Law prescribed a “continual burnt offering,” which was presented each day in the morning and evening, in addition to regular sacrifices to be repeated each sabbath, each new moon, and on feast days (see Numbers 28). During the time of David and Solomon, when this psalm was composed, the morning and evening sacrifices were duly offered each day, and so were the prescribed sacrifices at the feasts.

However, sacrifice is not ultimately what God values; what He values is righteousness in the heart, as verse 9 explains: I will take no bull out of your house, nor male goats out of your pens. If the people were told that God wanted something from them, they would probably assume that He wanted one of their animals for a sacrifice. This is, after all, what they were accustomed to giving God. However, as God begins to explain in this verse, He does not need our material goods, our money, or our animals. He is totally sufficient in Himself, and He owns everything (cf. Job 41:11). What He really wants is our hearts.

In verses 10-12, God reminds the Israelites that the world is His: For every beast of the forest is Mine, the cattle on a thousand hills. I know all the birds of the mountains; and the creatures of the field are Mine. If I were hungry, I would not tell you; for the world is Mine, and the fullness thereof. The bulls that the Israelites brought to the temple every day were already God’s before they even sacrificed them. If God were hungry—a ridiculous idea, but here hypothetically stated for sake of argument—He certainly would not be dependent upon man for food, since He owns all the sustenance in the entire world.

In verse 13, God asks a rhetorical question to drive the point home: Will I eat the flesh of bulls, or drink the blood of goats? As a spiritual being, God has no need for physical sustenance. More than this, God is the Creator of all things and is ontologically independent from all else (cf. Job 34:13-15; 35:5-8). It is God’s creatures who are dependent upon Him, not Him on His creatures (cf. Acts 17:24-25). While the pagans did in fact speak of their gods getting hungry if sacrifices were not offered, the true God says such an idea is absurd. God did not command the Israelites to offer sacrifices because He has physical needs.

In our own day, many people think that God needs their money. Christian organizations think that the key to increasing the effectiveness of their ministries is raising more money. However, a focus on money typically weakens organizations spiritually, as the materialistic philosophy of wealthy donors and businessmen becomes the philosophy of the ministry (cf. Matt 6:24; 19:20-24; Mark 4:19; Luke 8:14; 18:24; 1 Tim 6:9-10; Heb 13:5; James 5:1-4; 1 John 2:15-17). The first century church grew without substantial financial patronage, which shows that the Lord does not need money. What the Lord really needs, if we may speak of Him as needing something, is the hearts of people. God works through people to do great things, and it seems that He especially blesses when His people are of ordinary means. While God certainly wants believers to give to full-time Christian ministers and to needy brothers, He is able to provide for His own even if the people fail to give as they ought or if they have little to give. A Christian organization that raises money by giving special honor and favors to the rich (contra James 2:1-13) is weakening its ministry, not increasing its effectiveness.

The assertion in verses 8-13 that God does not need animal sacrifice begs the question for the Old Testament worshiper: What is it, then, that God wants? Verse 14 gives the answer—God wants us to offer Him our hearts. Offer thanksgiving to God, and pay your vows unto the Most High. Offering “thanksgiving” refers to a metaphorical sacrifice, the substance of what is represented by ceremony—a verbal expression of a true heart of devotion toward God. What God wants is worship from the heart, not empty ritual (cf. Ps 69:30-31; Hos 14:2). Paying vows to God is another expression of heartfelt worship, since vowing was entirely voluntary; however, once a vow was made, it had to be kept, or “paid” (cf. Deut 23:21; Eccl 5:4-5).

In verse 15, God promises to be faithful to those who honor Him from the heart: And call on Me in the day of distress: I will deliver you, and you shall honor Me. Most people who hold to some sort of belief in God will cry out to Him for help when they are in trouble, but God does not deliver all who do so. Psalm 50 teaches that God only responds to those who honor and obey Him. Many people seek to use God as a tool to help them get what they want, but they refuse to submit to God’s directions regarding how to live and think. For those who do obey God and are delivered from trouble by Him, the proper response is to “honor,” or glorify, God. Praising God for deliverance implies that the help He gives man is entirely by grace, and not by earned merit for man’s righteousness, as later rabbinic Judaism would come to teach.

Beginning in verses 16-17, God addresses a group of hypocrites who had made a formal profession of faith and were participating in the rituals and ceremonies of Judaism, but who had denied the faith through their actions: But to the wicked God says, “What are you doing, declaring My statutes, and having taken My covenant in your mouth, since you hate instruction, and cast My words behind you?” The focus of vv. 7-15 was on the means of fulfilling the greatest commandment: “You shall love Yahweh your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your might” (Deut 6:5). Israel was formally keeping the rituals of sacrifice prescribed in the Law, but had made ceremonial acts of religious devotion their primary focus, rather than the inner righteousness of the heart. Within Israel, a second, smaller group of people had also formally placed themselves under the covenant through religious ceremonies, but this group believed they could receive the blessings promised in the covenant without obeying the moral stipulations of the Law. Thus, the message of vv. 16-21 concerns the second greatest commandment: “You shall love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18). The failure of the hypocrites to love their neighbors demonstrated their abrogation of the whole Law. Verse 17 accuses the hypocrites of casting God’s words behind their back, which means they are living and acting in complete disregard of God’s commands.

In verses 18-20, God makes specific accusations against the hypocrites: When you saw a thief, you consented with him, and you joined in with adulterers. You have given your mouth to evil, and your tongue frames deceit. You sit [and] speak against your brother; you slander your mother’s son. Not only have hypocrites broken the seventh and eighth commandments (Exod 20:14-15), they have openly approved of stealing and adultery. They have deliberately caused harm with their mouth and have spoken lies. They have even committed the ultimate treachery by publicly defaming their own brothers.

God concludes His message to the hypocrites by assuring them in verse 21 that He will judge them: These things you have done, and I kept silence; you thought that I am surely such a one as yourself. But I will reprove you, and set [your deeds] in order before your eyes. The fool ignores God’s Word and lives as if God does not exist and the day of judgment will never come. However, the reason for the delay in God’s judgment is not indifference, but longsuffering. God knows exactly what the hypocrites have been doing, and He will present their deeds before them at the judgment, exposing them as frauds. In fact, if this were an actual day of judgment, rather than a judgment in vision alone, the hypocrites would be destroyed immediately after the evidence was duly exhibited. God’s longsuffering is often misinterpreted as indifference, but in fact God is just—unlike the hypocrites—and He will settle accounts on a future day of judgment.

The psalm ends in verses 22-23 with an epilogue of warning and promise: Now consider this, you who disregard God, lest I tear you in pieces while there is no deliverer: he who offers thanksgiving honors Me; and to him who orders his way rightly I will show the salvation of God. The hypocrites disregard God (cf. Ps 10:4), but in God’s mercy they have only been condemned in this vision, giving them time to repent before the final judgment. While many wicked men believe they can get away with their misdeeds because of their smarts and strength, God warns them that no one will be able to save them in the day of His wrath. However, those whose faith is sincere—as demonstrated by going beyond the mere formalities of worship to live a life of praise and obedience to God—will obtain God’s salvation.

Psalm 50 is thus a strong Old Testament call to have a faith that is genuine, rather than trusting in membership in a covenant community and performance of covenant rituals for salvation. Faith that is unaccompanied by works is dead, and cannot save (cf. Rom 2:17-29; James 2:14-17). Further, salvation is an individual matter, not a corporate decision. The man who numbers himself among God’s people but is wicked in character must repent of his sins and glorify God in order to escape the coming judgment.

It is well known from the New Testament that the rabbis and Pharisees of the intertestamental period made Judaism a religion of external and largely manmade laws which emphasized outward acts of legal conformity, thereby passing over the need for inner righteousness. However, this form of Judaism should in no way be superimposed on the Old Testament, for there are a great many Old Testament verses which directly clarify the primacy of heart righteousness over sacrifice (1 Sam 15:22; Pss 40:6-8; 51:16-17; Prov 21:3; Isa 1:11-20; Jer 7:22-23; Hos 6:6; Mic 6:6-8).

The great paradox of Psalm 50 is that it was not written by a man who was opposed to ritual. The inspired superscription of Psalm 50 reads, “A Psalm of Asaph.” Asaph was a Levite whom David appointed to lead worship before the ark in Jerusalem (1 Chr 16:4-7, 37). We know that Asaph also ministered during the early part of Solomon’s reign (2 Chr 5:12). It is possible that Psalm 50 was composed while Solomon’s temple was being built, or at the time of the dedication of Solomon’s temple (959 BC). If this is the historical setting, then Psalm 50 was intended to function as a warning against misuse of the temple for hollow ritualism. It would be a temptation for the Israelites to think that because they had a beautiful temple and wonderful rituals—and they were performing all the rituals—that God was pleased with them. It is a temptation for us, as well, to think that because we have been baptized, and we attend church, and we sing songs of praise to God, and we participate in the rite of communion, and we give money to the church, and we celebrate Christmas and Easter, that God is pleased with us (cf. 1 Cor 13:3). We must remember that there is an authentic and an inauthentic way to worship, and that authentic worship, as an expression of authentic faith, honors God in all of our life, and not just in specific acts of worship within the church.

Enjoy this content? Buy me a coffee, or support this blog via a PayPal donation.