What does it mean “not have looked on” in Obadiah 1:12? By Jack Kettler
“But thou shouldest not have looked on the day of thy brother in the day that he became a stranger; neither shouldest thou have rejoiced over the children of Judah in the day of their destruction; neither shouldest thou have spoken proudly in the day of distress.” (Obadiah 1:12)
Obadiah’s prophecy is against Edom, and this is established by Matthew Henry’s Concise Commentary:
“This prophecy is against Edom.” (1)
Introduction:
A number of dates have been given for the prophecy of Obadiah. But, more than likely, it was written after Jerusalem fell to the Babylonians in 586 B.C., prior to the fall of Edom in 553 B.C. In Obadiah’s prophecy, he condemned the Edomites, descendants of Jacob’s brother Esau for delighting in the destruction of Judea by the Babylonians.
Key Themes:
Judgment is coming to Edom in particular.
Edom and other nations will experience God’s judgment.
Every effort of a man trying to be safe from judgment will fail.
Israel’s enemies will be put to shame.
God’s justice is stringent and just.
Finally, Israel will experience God’s deliverance.
Future restoration, Yahweh will establish His eternal kingdom.
To answer the beginning question about looking on the Strong’s Lexicon will be consulted:
Verb – Qal – Imperfect Jussive – second person masculine singular
Strong’s Hebrew 7200: 1 to see, look at, inspect, perceive, consider 1a) (Qal) 1a1) to see 1a2) to see, perceive 1a3) to see, have vision 1a4) to look at, see, regard, look after, see after, learn about, observe, watch, look upon, look out, find out 1a5) to see, observe, consider, look at, give attention to, discern, distinguish 1a6) to look at, gaze at 1b) (Niphal) 1b1) to appear, present oneself 1b2) to be seen 1b3) to be visible 1c) (Pual) to be seen 1d) (Hiphil) 1d1) to cause to see, show 1d2) to cause to look intently at, behold, cause to gaze at 1e) (Hophal) 1e1) to be caused to see, be shown 1e2) to be exhibited to 1f) (Hithpael) to look at each other, face.”
As seen from Strong’s gloat, (tê·re) is a better translation of the Hebrew word.
The Pulpit Commentary agrees with Strong’s Lexicon on the translation of tê·re:
“Verse 12. – The prophet complains of the malignant neutrality of the Edomites. Thou shouldest not have looked. In this and the two following verses, al with the future is wrongly translated. It should be rendered throughout, “do not look,” “do not rejoice,” etc. Obadiah, in view of the past behaviour of Edom, and looking forward to another and more fatal conquest of Jerusalem, warns the Edomitas against repeating this malicious conduct. Septuagint, μὴ ἐπίδης. Gaze not with pleasure, feast not thine eyes (Micah 7:10). The day of thy brother; i.e. when some great event befell him – explained further in the next clause. Compare “the day of Jerusalem” (Psalm 137:7). In the day that he became a stranger; Septuagint, ἐν ἡμέρα ἀλλοτρίων, “in the day of strangers;” Vulgate, in die peregrinationis ejus. The Anglican and Vulgate Versions signify, “in the day that he was carried captive into strange lands;” but most probably the expression should be rendered, “in the day of his calamity.” Rejoiced over (comp. Job 31:29; Proverbs 17:5; Micah 7:8). Spoken proudly; literally, make thy mouth great; Septuagint, μὴ μεγαλοῥῤημονῇ, “do not boast;” Vulgate, non magnificabis os tuum. Utter a flood of mocking words, probably accompanied with derisive grimaces. There is a climax in this verse – first the complacent look, then the malicious pleasure, then words of insult and derision. Obadiah 1:12”
The Pulpit Commentary suggests that (tê·re) can be translated “do not boast,” is supported by the context.
The three questions in closing:
The phrase “not have looked on” can better be translated as “gloat” or “do not boast” in Obadiah 1:12.
Who is Obadiah speaking to in 1:12? The prophet is speaking to the people of Edom, warning them of coming judgment. In addition, who is Edom’s brother? Edom’s brother was Esau, who was the brother of Jacob, and who was the father of the nation Israel, and at this point in time, referred to Judah, which suffered judgment by the Babylonians.
“Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.” (2 Timothy 2:15)
Notes:
Matthew Henry, Concise Commentary, Obadiah, (Nashville, Tennessee, Thomas Nelson), p. 1392.
H. D. M. Spence and Joseph S. Exell, The Pulpit Commentary, Obadiah, Vol. 14., (Grand Rapids, Michigan, Eerdmans Publishing Company reprint 1978), p. 4.
Mr. Kettler has previously published articles in the Chalcedon Report and Contra Mundum. He and his wife Marea attend the Westminster, CO, RPCNA Church. Mr. Kettler is the author of books defending the Reformed Faith. Books can be ordered online at: https://www.amazon.com/Books-Jack-Kettler/s?rh=n%3A283155%2Cp_27%3AJack+Kettler
“Dr. Jason Lisle holds bachelor of science degrees in physics and astronomy from Ohio Wesleyan University, as well as a master’s and Ph.D. in Astro-physics from the University of Colorado in Boulder. As a creation scientist Dr. Lisle effectively communicates a broad range of topics from in-depth presentations of distant starlight, Einstein’s relativity, and problems with the big bang to topics from astronomy and general science to apologetics and dinosaurs.”
What others are saying:
“You will never think the same way again after reading this masterful book – and you will never dialogue with non-believers in the same way. You will gain a confidence in your faith that you probably have never experienced, and you will become much more emboldened in your Christian faith.” – Ken Ham, President/CEO of Answers in Genesis, Creation Museum, Ark Encounter
“Woe to the Evolutionist: This is a comprehensive apologetic rooted in the unassailable transcendental argument for God’s existence. The self-refuting nature of popular philosophies like empiricism and naturalism demonstrates the power of the author’s approach.”
“Common fallacies, informal and formal logic, and training on how to recognise these in the evolutionist’s arguments is laid out. The ‘live’ correspondence case studies at the end are excellent for this purpose.”
“While some might doubt the usefulness of this kind of apologetic for witnessing, by “de-focusing” or “setting-the-scene” as wide as possible with a stranger (i,e, at the “worldview” level), a launching pad is made to get to the gospel. Without this, one may start off in an irrelevant rabbit hole and lose the moment.” – Paul Artale
“Simply, this is one of the most sound and biblically supported arguments I’ve ever encountered. I’m a firm believer that studies Earth sciences and this just strengthens my walk even more. It showed me I don’t have to try to present tons of evidence to justify my beliefs, it only takes an argument to overcome the argument. Seriously, what upholds immaterial laws? Or how does random chance events account for the orderliness we observe? I guess you won’t see what you’re not looking for… I know, works both ways. Christ please help our disbelief.” – C. Bess
A Review:
This reviewer had the opportunity to attend a live lecture where Dr. Lisle presented the key points from his book, “Ultimate Proof of Creation.” While holding a Ph.D. degree in Astrophysics, Dr. Lisle can stand on the stage with anyone in the scientific world. In addition, the author has distinguished himself as a capable theologian and philosopher. In his lecture, Dr. Lisle brought down to a laymen’s level an understanding of presuppositional or worldview apologetics.
Presuppositional apologetics was developed by Cornelius Van Til at Westminster Theological in Philadelphia. According to Van Til, Dr. Greg Bahnsen was his star student and a popularizer of Van Til’s work. Dr. Lisle credits Dr. Bahnsen for his understanding of presuppositional apologetics. This reviewer has read every book and class syllabus published by Van Til. In this reviewer’s opinion, Dr. Lisle has brought presuppositional apologetics to the laymen’s level like no one before him.
Chapter Layout:
“Contents Foreword by Ken Ham Introduction 1. The Nature of Evidence 2. Resolving the Origins Debate 3. Illustrations of the Ultimate Proof 4. Reasoning with the Critic 5. The Procedure for Defending the Faith 6. The Place of Evidence 7. Logical Fallacies — Part I 8. Logical Fallacies — Part II 9. Closing the Loopholes 10. Apologetics in the Bible Conclusion”
Dr. Jason Lisle, The Ultimate Proof of Creation (p. 3). Master Books. Kindle Edition.
In Chapter One, the author uses the following example to set the stage for delving into the nature of evidence and how evidence is interpreted within the framework of a worldview:
“For this origins debate, I will be using DNA, fossils, and rock layers to support my position,” said the evolutionist. “That’s odd,” said the creationist. “That’s exactly what I was going to use to support my position!”
Dr. Jason Lisle, The Ultimate Proof of Creation (p. 15). Master Books. Kindle Edition.
In the above example, two educated individuals are looking at the same evidence and yet, coming to radically different interpretations of the data.
How to know what is the best worldview. In the following citation, building the irrefutable case that the Biblical worldview is the only view that explains the as we know it:
“In order for a worldview to be rationally defensible, it must be internally consistent. But just because a worldview is self-consistent does not necessarily mean that it is correct. There is another criterion as well. A rational worldview must provide the preconditions of intelligibility. These are conditions that must be accepted as true before we can know anything about the universe. The preconditions of intelligibility are things that most people take for granted.”
Dr. Jason Lisle, The Ultimate Proof of Creation (p. 47). Master Books. Kindle Edition.
The author further develops the assertion from the above citation:
“The argument is that the Bible’s account of origins (along with its other accounts) must be true — not that people must profess or believe it to be true. Only the God described in the Bible can provide the rational foundation for the things we take for granted. Without God’s Word, we would have no good reason to believe in the preconditions of intelligibility: the basic reliability of memory and senses, laws of logic, uniformity of nature, morality, personal dignity and freedom, and so on. Thus, we would be unable to justify our beliefs about anything whatsoever.”
Dr. Jason Lisle, The Ultimate Proof of Creation (p. 51). Master Books. Kindle Edition.
The author examines the preconditions of intelligibility from every possible angle and summarizes what makes a worldview work:
“Preconditions of intelligibility include things like laws of logic, uniformity of nature, and absolute morality. Without a rational basis for the preconditions of intelligibility, the unbeliever cannot really know anything by his own worldview.”
Dr. Jason Lisle, The Ultimate Proof of Creation (p. 121). Master Books. Kindle Edition.
One of the great values of the book is that it interacts with virtually every possible objection, some hypothetical and others drawing upon correspondence with real people. The reader is trained on how to spot arbitrariness and inconsistencies in the non-Christian worldview, along with various types of logical fallacies used by a critic. The objections are refuted logically and in such a way as to give the reader an easy way to incorporate Dr. Lisle’s gold mine of argumentation into their apologetic ministry.
In closing:
Dr. Lisle’s book is nothing short of a tour de force.
The thesis of the book can be summoned up as the Biblical worldview is true because of the impossibility of the contrary. After reading Dr. Lisle’s book, the reader will most certainly agree.
Usually, after a review, the reader is encouraged to have this book in their home library. In this case, it can be said that it might be a sin if the apologist does not have this book in their library.
Dr. Lisle’s website is a great resource https://creation.com/dr-jason-lisle. For those interested, Dr. Lisle’s book has a companion DVD that can be obtained at Amazon.
“Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.” (2 Timothy 2:15)
Mr. Kettler has previously published articles in the Chalcedon Report and Contra Mundum. He and his wife Marea attend the Westminster, CO, RPCNA Church. Mr. Kettler is the author of books defending the Reformed Faith. Books can be ordered online at: Amazon
“Surely the Lord GOD will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets.” (Amos 3:7)
Is Amos 3:7 a directive for all time or just for the people of Israel?
If this directive in Amos is the norm for the New Covenant, then there should be some directive in the New Testament reaffirming this or something in the text itself indicating that Amos 3:7 is perpetual. It should be noted at the outset that there is nothing in Amos 3:7 that indicates the text is to be understood as binding in the New Testament times. One would have to read this into the text of Amos.
In the Old Testament, there are everlasting or perpetual covenants. How does the New Testament handle these covenants?
The Older and New Covenant a necessary digression:
There is continuity in the covenants, and there is a discontinuity between the covenants.
Believers should presume that stipulations that are said to be everlasting or perpetual in the Old Testament continue since the Covenant of Grace in both the Older Covenants and New are, in substance, the same. It should be noted that there are continuities moving from the Old into the New Covenant, and there are also discontinuities. Discontinuities between covenants also can manifest themselves as the changing of forms and beneficiaries.
In the Old Testament, many of the Covenants were said to be everlasting or perpetual. For example:
“Wherefore the children of Israel shall keep the sabbath . . . for a perpetual covenant. It is a sign between me and the children of Israel for ever: for in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested, and was refreshed.” (Exodus 31:16-17)
The Sabbath Day and the Lord’s Day:
The discontinuity is that the day has been changed to the first day of the week in celebration of the resurrection of Christ. The continuity is that God’s people are to still honor Him by resting for our labors after six days of work. (Hebrews 4:9)
Another example is Passover and the Lord’s Supper:
The discontinuity is that the New Covenant church no longer celebrates the Passover feast. The continuity is that all of the Older Covenant feasts, including the Passover, find fulfillment in the Lord’s Supper.
And then, Circumcision and Baptism:
The discontinuity is that circumcision of the flesh is no longer required in the New Covenant. The continuity is that circumcision is replaced by baptism in the New Covenant era as the mark of the covenant, and the beneficiaries are expanded. In addition, with respect to continuity, the recipients of circumcision were infants, and likewise, the recipients of baptism are infants as far as covenant households are concerned.
Without recognizing these distinctions, the Scriptures would be hopelessly contradictory. Therefore, it can be concluded that the Old Testament Covenants and New Testament Covenant are the same in substance but different in form.
Does the discontinuity continuity motif apply to Amos 3:7?
Missing from Amos 3:7 is any language that implies the directive is everlasting beyond the close of the Old Testament.
The answer is no when using the time-tested method of allowing the Scriptures to be the best interpreter of Scripture.
The writer of Hebrews answers to question definitively:
“And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone.” (Ephesians 2:20)
The New Testament prophets were replaced by the teaching elder or pastor.
James Bannerman, in his two-volume The Church of Christ, explains why prophets were needed in the early Church but no longer today:
“It is not difficult to see the foundation laid in the circumstances of the apostolic church for the necessity and the use of this is special class of office-bearers. Our Lord had himself told his disciples shortly before his death, that he had many things to tell them, which at that moment they were not able to bear (John 14:25ff.; 16:12–14). The revelation of his mind and truth was left by him incomplete when he departed from this world to the Father. It remained incomplete until the canon of Scripture was closed, and the entire revelation of God, as we now have it, was committed to writing.”
“The earliest of the canonical books of the New Testament was not written until some years after the ascension of Christ; and the latest of them was not added until probably a generation had well-nigh passed away after that event. In the interval, the revelation of God remains unfinished; while from the difficulty of transcribing and disseminating in manuscript the copies of the books that partially made up the New Testament volume, before its completion there must have been, in many churches of the early Christians, a want felt of any authoritative record of the Divine mind and will.”
“The living Word of prophets, inspired by God to declare his truth, was the instrumentality employed by him to supply that want in the apostolic Church. The Apostles indeed have the same word of revelation that the prophets enjoyed. The prophesying of the Apostles supplied for a time, to the extent to which their personal presence could reach, the want of the written and inspired standard before the canon closed. But the number of the apostles admitted of no increase, while in the rapid spread and prevalence of early Christianity there were multitudes added to the church daily of such as should be saved.”
“And hence the necessity of another order of office-bearers, suited to the extraordinary emergency, and to the transition state of the Christian church, who should, by means of personal revelation granted to them, and personal prophesyings emitted by them, become the teachers of the early converts, when they have no other adequate source of information and instruction in Divine things. The necessity for such extraordinary instrumentality ceased when the canon of scripture was closed. The written word in the hands of the Christian churches superseded the need of revelations and prophets. Both in their character of foretellers of future events, and in their character of inspired preachers of divine truth, the order of New Testament prophets was temporary, and did not outlive the apostolic age.” (1)
In closing:
The canon of Scripture is closed. Therefore, the office of the Old Testament prophet during the interim period of the 1st Century, both the office of the Apostles and prophets, ended.
In answer to the question in the title of this study, there is no reason to believe that God speaking to His prophets is a norm for the New Testament times. On the contrary, the New Testament affirms a system of Church government that is led by elders or presbyters, not by prophets or a prophet.
“Christ, as our Redeemer, executes the offices of a prophet, of a priest, and of a king, both in his estate of humiliation and exaltation.” (Westminster Shorter Catechism, question 23)
Christ Himself superseded the temporary role of the prophets, which pointed to Him.
The Catechism is supported by the writer of the Hebrews:
“God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son.” (Hebrews 1:1)
“Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.” (2 Timothy 2:15)
Notes:
1. James Bannerman, The Church of Christ, Vol. 1, (Edmonton, AB Canada, Still waters Revival Book, reprint edition 1991), p. 233-234.
Mr. Kettler has previously published articles in the Chalcedon Report and Contra Mundum. He and his wife Marea attend the Westminster, CO, RPCNA Church. Mr. Kettler is the author of books defending the Reformed Faith. Books can be ordered online at: Amazon
When and how is Joel 2:28-29 fulfilled? By Jack Kettler
“And it shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh; and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, your young men shall see visions: And also, upon the servants and upon the handmaids in those days will I pour out my spirit.” (Joel 2:28-29)
Introduction:
Joel calls the people of Judah and Jerusalem to cry and return to the Lord during a calamity. A locust plague had ruined the planted fields.
Major motifs:
Day of the Lord; Repentance; The Lord in their midst.
The promise of future blessings and an outpouring of the Spirit will ensue upon repentance.
Future or fulfilled?
In a rather simplistic fashion from the Dispensational “Never Thirsty” website one reads:
Bible Question:
What is the biblical meaning of Joel 2:28-3:21? — Is it about the Tribulation?
Bible Answer:
The meaning of Joel 2:28-3:21 will be explained in three parts. This passage is a future prophecy about the return of Jesus Christ, the battle of Armageddon (Joel 3:1-17) and it ends with the 1,000-year, earthly kingdom (Joel 3:18-21). Here is Joel 2:28-32.
The above interpretation is the product of a preconceived theological system imposed on the text. As will be seen below, the Apostle Peter gives the Scriptural interpretation of the text in the book of Acts.
In contrast to the dispensational theory noted above, two classic commentators put forth the traditional interpretation.
Starting with Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers, one reads:
“(28) I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh. — Holy Scripture is itself the interpreter of this most weighty promise. St. Peter’s quotation and application of it in the Acts is its commentary. “Afterward “—LXX., after these things becomes in the apostle’s mouth—“in the last days”—i.e., in the Christian dispensation, when, after the punishment of the Jews by the heathen, their king came—“my Spirit”—St. Peter renders “of my spirit,” after the LXX., indicating the gifts and influences of the Holy Ghost—“upon all flesh”—i.e., without distinction of race or person—“they of the circumcision were astonished because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.” The outward manifestation of these gifts, as shown on the Day of Pentecost, in accordance with this prediction, was gradually withdrawn from the Church; the reality remains.” (1)
Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible informs the reader:
“And it shall come to pass afterward, …. After the teacher of righteousness has been sent, and a plentiful rain of the Gospel has been let down in the land of Judea, in the ministry of John the Baptist, Christ and his apostles, and such a comfortable enjoyment of the blessings of grace in it, and the knowledge of God by it; and after the wonderful work of redemption wrought by Christ. R. Jeshua in Aben Ezra and Jarchi both say this prophecy refers to time to come; and Kimchi observes, that the phrase is the same with “in the last days”; and so the Apostle Peter quotes it, Acts 2:17; a phrase, as the above writer observes, which always signifies the days of the Messiah, to which he applies these words; and so do other Jewish writers, both ancient and modern (o); and there is no doubt with us Christians that they belong to the times of Christ and his apostles, since they are by an inspired writer said to be fulfilled in those times, Acts 2:16; here some begin a new chapter;”
“that I will pour out my Spirit upon all flesh; not on such whose hearts are made tender as flesh, according to Ezekiel 36:26; as Jarchi; for the Spirit must be given first to make the heart such; nor only upon men in the land of Israel, a place fit to prophesy in, as Aben Ezra and Kimchi; but upon all men, as this phrase frequently signifies; see Isaiah 40:5; that is, all sorts of men, Jews and Gentiles, men of all nations; and such there were on the day of Pentecost, when the Spirit was poured down upon the apostles, and the grace of the Spirit was given to many of all nations; though that was only the beginning of the fulfilment of this prophecy, which quickly had a further accomplishment in the Gentile world; and denotes the abundance of the gifts of the Spirit, both extraordinary and ordinary, and of his grace, and the blessings of it, bestowed on them;”
“and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy; as Agabus, Barnabas, Simeon, &c. and the four daughters of Philip the evangelist, Acts 11:28;”
“your old men shall dream dreams, your young men shall see visions; as Ananias, Peter, Paul, John, and others, some in their elder, some in their younger years, Acts 9:10; though prophecy, dreams, and visions, being the usual ways of conveying knowledge, here signify that the knowledge of men in Gospel times should be equal to, yea, exceed, whatever was communicated to men in the highest degree in former times: John the Baptist was greater than any of the prophets, and yet the least in the kingdom of heaven was greater than he, Luke 7:28.”
“And it shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour {q} out my spirit upon all flesh; and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream {r} dreams, your young men shall see visions:”
“(q) That is, in greater abundance, and more broadly than in times past. And this was fulfilled under Christ, when God’s graces and his Spirit under the Gospel were abundantly given to the Church; Isa 44:3 Ac 2:17 Joh 7:38-39.”
“(r) As they had visions and dream.”
In closing:
Joel 2:28 and “The Day of the Lord” [Yahweh] were fulfilled at Pentecost. So Peter said in Acts that the outpouring of the Holy Ghost on the first Pentecost after Christ’s resurrection.
The Apostle Peter connects Joel 2:28 to the Pentecost:
“But this is that which was spoke by the prophet Joel: And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams: And on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy. And I will shew wonders in heaven above, and signs in the earth beneath: blood, and fire, and vapour of smoke: The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before that great and notable day of the Lord come. And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.” (Acts 2:16-21)
Zechariah connects “The Day of the Lord” with the destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD:
“Behold, the day of the Lord cometh, and thy spoil shall be divided in the midst of thee. For I will gather all nations against Jerusalem to battle; and the city shall be taken and the houses rifled, and the women ravished; and half the city shall go forth into captivity, and the residue shall not be cut off from the city.” (Zechariah 14:1-2)
Malachi predicted that “Elijah” the prophet was to come before “The Day of the Lord”:
“Remember ye the law of Moses my servant, which I commanded him in Horeb for all Israel, with the statutes and judgments. Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord: And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse.” (Malachi 4:4-6)
Therefore:
“The Day of the Lord,” as seen in Joel, Zechariah, Malachi, and Peter, are the same and speak to the events that happened leading up to the fall of Jerusalem in the First Century. Moreover, the expression “The Day of the Lord,” as seen above, is historical and does not have to be interpreted as events at the end of the world. “The Day of the Lord” and other phrases can be understood to refer to the last day of the older covenant with Israel.
Fulfilled prophecy is faith-building, whereas futuristic speculative predictions are just that, speculations.
“Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.” (2 Timothy 2:15)
Notes:
1. Charles John Ellicott, Bible Commentary for English Readers, Joel, Vol.5, (London, England, Cassell and Company), p. 443.
2. John Gill, Exposition of the Old and New Testaments, Joel, (Grace Works, Multi-Media Labs), p. 36.
Mr. Kettler has previously published articles in the Chalcedon Report and Contra Mundum. He and his wife Marea attend the Westminster, CO, RPCNA Church. Mr. Kettler is the author of books defending the Reformed Faith. Books can be ordered online at Amazon:
“And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.” (Daniel 9:27)
Is this passage talking about Christ’s work establishing and ratifying the New Covenant or a future anti-Christ?
Historically, Daniel 9:27 was believed to be a prophecy about the New Covenant. In the present, primarily due to Dispensational theology, what was seen as the fulfillment of the glorious work of Christ, the understanding has not been reversed, making the prophecy into futuristic speculation about an anti-Christ. In this study, a classic commentary and a current source will provide the approach to the text in question to learn if it is about Christ and His establishment of the New Covenant. The futuristic approach to the text is prophetic speculation. If the text is indeed about Christ’s work in the First Century, turning the subject of the text into the work of an anti-Christ seems almost blasphemous.
A bio about the classic commentator:
Matthew Poole was Born in York, England, in 1624 and educated at Emmanuel College in Cambridge. He became minister of St. Michael-le-Quernes, London, in 1648 and devoted himself to the Presbyterian cause.
C. H. Spurgeon said of Poole’s commentary:
“If I must have only one commentary, and had read Matthew Henry as I have, I do not know but what I should choose Poole. He is a very prudent and judicious commentator… not so pithy and witty by far as Matthew Henry, but he is perhaps more accurate, less a commentator, and more an expositor.”
Poole is considered one of the great Puritans, and few names will stand so high as Poole’s in the Biblical scholarship of Great Britain.
Matthew Poole’s Commentary explains the Daniel text as follows:
He: this”
he is not Titus making truce with the Jews, which he did not, though he endeavoured to persuade them that he might spare them. I say then with Graser, Mede, and others, that this he is the Messiah, and the covenant he confirms is the new testament or covenant, called therefore the covenant of the people, Isaiah 42:6 49:8; and the Angel of the covenant, Malachi 3:1; and the Surety of the covenant, Hebrews 7:22; and the ancient rabbins called the Messias xrk a middle man, or middle man between two.
Quest. How did Christ confirm the covenant?
Answ. 1. By testimony,
(1.) Of angels, Luke 2:10 Mt 28;
(2.) John Baptist;
(3.) Of the wise men;
(4.) By the saints then living, Luke 1:2;
(5.) Moses and Elias, Matthew 17:3;
(6.) Pharisees, as Nicodemus, John 3:2;
(7.) The devils that confessed him.
2. By his preaching.
3. By signs and wonders.
4. By his holy life.
5. By his resurrection and ascension.
6. By his death and bloodshed.
Shall confirm the covenant; rybgh he shall corroborate it, as if it began before his coming to fail and be invalid.
With many; noting hereby the paucity of the Jewish church and nation, compared with the great increase and enlargement by believing Gentiles throughout all nations and ages of the world, Isaiah 11:9 49:6 53:11,12 54:2,3 Mr 16:15 Acts 13:46: q.d. With many Jews first and last, and with many more of the nations, yea, with the many whom the rabbins and Pharisees despise as the rabble, the common people, Isaiah 42:3 Matthew 21:31 John 7:48,49 1 Corinthians 1:26,27.
For one week; by a figure, take the greater part of the whole, he shall, though rejected by the chief and bulk of the Jewish nation, yet make the new testament prevail with many in that time, i.e. at the latter end of the seventy weeks.
The sacrifice and the oblation to cease; zebach and mincha, bloody and unbloody, to cease. i.e. all the Jewish rites, and Levitical ceremonious worship, i.e. by the burning of the temple before the city was taken, for they were only to offer sacrifice in the temple, nor had they wherewithal in the siege. Yet is there more in it than this, viz. that the Lord Jesus, by his death, and by the execution of his wrath, and abrogate and put an end to this laborious service, and made it to cease forever.
For the overspreading of abominations, he shall make it desolate; desolate for the wing, for the manifold and great abominations stretching, and our text hath it well overspreading. This abomination was the Roman army with their eagles, and with their superstitious rites in approaching to besiege and subdue any place; and this is executed by Christ upon them, Matthew 22:7, when he is called a King sending forth his armies, and destroying the murderers that destroyed him, and burning their city, and their coming is Christ’s coming, Malachi 3:1,2Jo 21:22 Jam 5:7; therefore it is said here,
he shall make it desolate. Even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate: here all this is made the effect of God’s decree, and therefore irrevocable. This word shomen notes that this people were bewitched, sottishly superstitious, wanderers, banished, the astonishment and scorn of the world; all which did justly and dreadfully befall them, and they verify it to this day.
They that will curiously search further into the seventy weeks and other numbers in Daniel, and have leisure and skill, let them read Graserus, L’Empereur, Wasmuth, Mede, Willet, Wichmannus, Sanctius, Rainoldus, Pererius, Derorlon, Broughton, Liveleius, Helvicns, Calovius, Geierus. &c. Read also Joseph Med. p. 861, &c., and Bail. p. 180, &c. This scripture shows the coming of the Messiah so clearly, his sufferings, and the wrath of God so severely upon the Jews for it, that it thoroughly confutes their unbelief; and fully confirms our faith in Jesus Christ.” (1)
Geneva Study Bible
“And he {a} shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to {b} cease, {c} and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.
(a) By the preaching of the Gospel he affirmed his promise, first to the Jews and after, to the Gentiles.
(b) Christ accomplished this by his death and resurrection.
(c) Meaning that Jerusalem and the sanctuary would be utterly destroyed because of their rebellion against God, and their idolatry: or as some read, that the plague will be so great, that they will all be astonished at them.”
Gary DeMar provides insight on how to understand the text:
“The beginning point would be indicated by the commandment to restore Jerusalem (v. 25), an event that was accomplished, a century after Daniel, in the reign of the Persian, Artaxerxes I (465–424 B.C.), under Nehemiah (444 B.C.). But there had been an earlier attempt, in the same reign, to restore the city’s walls, which had been thwarted by the Samaritans (Ezra 4:11–12, 23). This attempt seems to have been made under Ezra (458 B.C.; cf. 9:9), on the basis of the extended powers granted him in Artaxerxes’ decree (7:18, 25, even though nothing explicit is said about restoring Jerusalem). Daniel then went on to predict that from this commandment, to the Messiah, would be ―seven weeks, and three score and two weeks‖ (9:25), or 69 weeks of years, equaling 483 years. From 458 B.C. this brings one to A.D. 26, the very time which many would accept for the descent of the Holy Spirit upon Jesus Christ and the commencement of His incarnate ministry.” (2)
DeMar continues:
“Verses 26 and 27 then describe how, in the midst of the final week (that is, of the last seven-year period, and therefore in the spring of A.D. 30), He would bring to an end the Old Testament economy by His death. There could hardly have been a more miraculously accurate prediction than was this! The 490 years then conclude with the three and a half years that remained, during which period the testament was to be confirmed to Israel (cf. Acts 2:38). It terminated in A.D. 33, which is the probable date for the conversion of Paul. At this point the Jews, by their stoning of Stephen, in effect cut themselves off from the eternal blessings of inheritance under the newer testament (cf. Rev. 12:6, 14); and shortly thereafter, within that generation, the Romans destroyed Jerusalem, A.D. 70.” (3)
Jeffrey S. Krause from his thesis at Liberty University School of Religion of the Bible, A Historical Survey of the Daniel’s “Seventy Weeks” and its Complete Fulfillment within the Generation of Christ:
Daniel 9:24-27 Exegesis:
“Having noted the identity of the ―anointed one, the prince‖ already in verse 25, it is now necessary to demonstrate the identity of the ―prince‖ of verse 26. In Dan. 9:24-27, ―the Prince‖ is said to bring in ―everlasting righteousness‖ and to ―atone for iniquity. Here, the ―anointed one‖ (the Prince) will be ―cut off‖ (v. 26), and the people of the ―Prince‖ will destroy the city and bring an ―end to sacrifices.‖ The ―end to sacrifices‖ follows the ―firm Covenant‖ made with the many for one week. This account, then future, is undoubtedly speaking of the life and ministry of the ―anointed Prince‖ Jesus Christ. First, contextually, there is no warrant to assume that ―the people of the prince to come‖ is the ―Anti-Christ. There is nothing in the text that allows the insertion of an unqualified individual. Rather, the Lord Jesus is referred to as the ―Prince‖ (dygn – hgoumenou) and the ―Messiah‖ or ―anointed one‖ (xyXm – cristou) both individually (v. 26) and in connection with one another (v. 25). As it has been demonstrated, verse 25 connects these two titles ―anointed one, the Prince‖ with verse 26 referencing the individual titles of
―anointed one‖ (crisma) and ―people of the Prince to come‖ (hgoumenw tw ercomenw). These accounts are describing the same individual in the person of the Messiah Himself. Again, in the LXX, verse 25 reads ―cristou hgoumenou‖ with verse 26 rendering the same Messiah the Prince in individual fashion; ―crisma kai krima ouk estin en autw kai thn polin kai to agion diafqerei sun tw hgoumenw tw ercomenw…‖ Meaning, there is exegetically no warrant to alter the identity of the latter prince from that of the first. The ESV rendering of verses 25-26 proclaims;”
Know therefore and understand that from the going out of the word to restore and build Jerusalem to the coming of an anointed one, a prince, there shall be seven weeks. Then for sixty-two weeks it shall be built again with squares and moat, but in a troubled time.26 And after the sixty-two weeks, an anointed one shall be cut off and shall have nothing. And the people of the prince who is to come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. Its end shall come with a flood, and to the end there shall be war. Desolations are decreed.17
“Noting thee afore mentioned text, the first instance of the ―anointed one, a prince‖ as noted, is undoubtedly speaking of the Lord Jesus Christ. However, those in the Dispensational community wish to assert the latter citation of ―the prince‖ as future Anti-Christ. But the question must be asked, what is the contextual warrant for such an insertion? Where does this previously unmentioned, unqualified character come from on a contextual and exegetical basis? Separated by only one verse and 29 words in the ESV, the ―anointed one‖ Jesus Christ is again mentioned in verse 26. Likewise, only one verse and forty-four words later, the ―prince, who was previously recognized as the Messiah in verse 25, is again mentioned. It was the Messiah, the Prince who did in fact establish a ―firm Covenant‖ (v. 27) with the many in Matthew 26:26-28;”
Now as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and after blessing it broke it and gave it to the disciples, and said, “Take, eat; this is my body.” And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, saying, “Drink of it, all of you, for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. (Emphasis Added)18
“Point in fact, even the Greek wording is identical between the LXX and the N.A. 27, with the former reading; ―kai dunamwsei diaqhkhnpollois‖ (And he shall strengthen covenant with the many – Dan. 9:27, LXX) and the latter rendered as ―διαθήκης τὸ περὶ πολλῶν“ (the new covenant, the one for many – Matt. 26:28, N.A. 27).19 This is a perfect correspondence that points to the verse 26 ―Prince‖ as the Lord Jesus Christ Himself (the one who will make Covenant). Hence, fulfillment is seen within the Biblical witness where the Lord Jesus, via His then pending sacrifice, made Covenant with the many who will believe or rather, the elect of God.”
Next, Daniel 9:26 declares that the ―cristou‖ would be cut off; the very message that the four Gospels relay to the reader. Jesus was point in fact, cut off in the middle of the final week, with the duration of His ministry lasting three and one half years. This cutting off was His crucifixion by the nation that rejected Him, the people of Israel; “Shall I crucify your King?” The chief priests answered, “We have no king but Caesar.”16 So he delivered him over to them to be crucified.20
“The ―end of sacrifices‖ was symbolized in Matt. 27:51 with the tearing of the Temple curtain; ―And behold, the curtain of the temple was torn in two, from top to bottom. And the earth shook, and the rocks were split. However, it was not until the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70, when Herod’s Temple was destroyed, an act that ended the sacrificial system, that this prophecy was fully consummated (within the very generation of Jesus’ prediction); as prophesied by the Lord Jesus in Matt. 23:38-24:34 and in particular, Matt:24:1-2;”
Jesus left the temple and was going away, when his disciples came to point out to him the buildings of the temple. But he answered them, “You see all these, do you not? Truly, I say to you, there will not be left here one stone upon another that will not be thrown down.”
“This is the very same Temple21 that Jesus exited after pronouncing the ―Seven Woes upon Israel and proclaiming;”
Therefore I send you prophets and wise men and scribes, some of whom you will kill and crucify, and some you will flog in your synagogues and persecute from town to town, so that on you may come all the righteous blood shed on earth, from the blood of innocent Abel to the blood of Zechariah the son of Barachiah, whom you murdered between the sanctuary and the altar.
Truly, I say to you, all these things will come upon this generation. “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to it! How often would I have gathered your children together as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you would not! See, your house is left to you desolate. For I tell you, you will not see me again, until you say, ‘Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.’ (Emphases Added) 22
“Hence, clarity is found in the disciple’s question; “Tell us, when will these things be, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the close of the age?” Meaning, when will be the end of the Jewish age or economy.”
20 John 19:15 ESV
21 i.e. Herod’s Temple
22 Matt. 23:34-39 ESV. It is evident from the Lord’s usage of the second person plural that these events were to happen to the people to whom He was speaking with; the Jews of that generation and era. It is that current generation that was to suffer the vengeance of the Lord and whose house was to be left desolate. The Lord Jesus capstones this truth by the words; ―…all these things will come upon this generation.
“Next, the text of Daniel 9:24 foretells of the ―prince‖ as being the one who is to; ―make reconciliation for iniquity and bring in everlasting righteousness…‖ And again, this is the very thing that happened due to the finished work of Christ Jesus on the cross; by His very act of being ―cut off. Paul tells the reader;
―For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, now that we are reconciled, shall we be saved by his life‖ (Rom. 5:10 ESV). And again;
―All this is from God, who through Christ reconciled us to himself and gave us the ministry of reconciliation‖ (2 Cor. 5:18; c.f. 2 Cor. 5:20, Eph. 2:16, Col. 1:20, 22). Do any orthodox Christians doubt that Christ’s perfect sacrifice, obtained through faith, reconciles all iniquity committed? Justification being a legal decree by God in declaring the sinner ―right‖ or ―righteous, points back to the fulfillment of the Covenant of Works by the Lord Jesus Christ Himself. What Adam did not do, Christ fulfilled and the sinner is saved by the active obedience of Christ Himself.23 Likewise, it is Christ’s vicarious suffering that enacts the ―passive‖ obedience unto the sinner; an act accomplished on the cross for the elect. In sum, it is Christ’s righteousness that covers the transgressions and iniquities of the elect. The New Testament saints look back to the finished work of Christ in both the active and passive sense. Likewise, Christ’s active and passive obedience are retroactive to the Old Testament saints, who found salvation in the then coming Messiah. Both of these factors ―make reconciliation‖ for all who will believe; an act predicted in (but not limited to) Daniel 9:24.24”
“Likewise, it is ―Messiah the Prince‖ that brought in ―everlasting righteousness. Isaiah 9:6-7 speaks specifically of the connection to the enthronement of Jesus Christ with the bringing in of everlasting righteousness;”
For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government shall be upon his shoulder, and his name shall be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. Of the increase of his government and of peace there will be no end, on the throne of David and over his kingdom, to establish it and to uphold it with justice and with righteousness from this time forth and forevermore. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will do this.25
23 ―Therefore, as one trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all men. For as by the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man’s obedience
the many will be made righteous. ‖ (Rom. 5:18-19 ESV).
24 See Isaiah 53
“Meaning, it is Christ Himself who is the everlasting righteousness; it is not the state or current condition or climate of the world itself. It is His Kingdom that is in view in Daniel 9:24 and it is in this Kingdom where He, the Christ, will be seated on the throne of David. This is the very point that Peter makes in Acts chapter 2:23-36. Jesus is currently seated at the right hand of the Power in Heaven and is currently reigning as King and Lord. The government is currently upon Jesus’ shoulders via His ascension to the Ancient of Days (Daniel 7:13-14, c.f. Matt. 24:30), an event that happened within the final week of Daniel’s four hundred and ninety years! Thus, there is perfect correspondence with both the atoning sacrifice of Christ and His righteousness as the covenant head within His Kingdom. This correspondence transfers to the Daniel 9:24 text in perfect harmony. Thus, again the author’s thesis is confirmed via the Biblical witness. As previously stated, if there is sound Biblical evidence to show the congruent nature of the Seventy Weeks, then this understanding, based on the witness of the Bible itself is to be preferred. All the while noting that the 9:24-27 text shows no sign of a ―gap‖ within the text itself. Point in fact, Daniel parallels his prophecy with that of Jeremiah 25:11-13. The Daniel prophecy is a type of the exile condition that he himself was in and that Jeremiah predicted. But one must ask, was there a ―gap‖ or
―parenthesis‖ within Daniel’s captivity? No there was not! Therefore, with Daniel’s prophecy being a type of Jeremiah’s, then the pattern of Jeremiah 25 would dictate the nature of Daniel’s prophecy itself. If there is no parenthesis in Jeremiah’s prophecy, then there was not to be a parenthesis within Daniel’s and the preteristic nature of the prediction is seen and the current argument is upheld.”
The Abomination of Desolation:
And after the sixty-two weeks, an anointed one shall be cut off and shall have nothing. And the people of the prince who is to come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. Its end shall come with a flood, and to the end there shall be war. Desolations are decreed. And he shall make a strong covenant with many for one week, and for half of the week he shall put an end to sacrifice and offering. And on the wing of abominations shall come one who makes desolate, until the decreed end is poured out on the desolator. (Daniel 9:26-27 ESV)26
25 Isa. 9:6-7 ESV
“The prophetic announcement by the prophet Daniel as to the nature and end of Geo-political Israel is here predicted in verses 26-27 of chapter 9. Here the prophet foretells of the ―people of the prince and their utter destruction of the city and the Temple itself. As previously noted, there is no contextual or exegetical basis for separating the “prince” of verse 26 with that of verse 25. Noting the relationship between the princes of verses 25 and 26, it is justified to proclaim that this is an obvious reference to the Lord Jesus Christ Himself. The narrative of verse’s 26-27 fit within the character of events foretold by the Lord Jesus Himself during His earthly ministry;”
So when you see the abomination of desolation spoken of by the prophet Daniel, standing in the holy place (let the reader understand), then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. Let the one who is on the housetop not go down to take what is in his house, and let the one who is in the field not turn back to take his cloak. And alas for women who are pregnant and for those who are nursing infants in those days! Pray that your flight may not be in winter or on a Sabbath.27
“In the afore mentioned passage, the Lord Jesus references Daniel 9:26-27. Here it must first be noted that the Lord uses the second person plural ―you‖ in reference to His audience. This is consistent throughout the whole of Matthew 23-24 where the Lord first uses ―you‖ in reference to the audience of the Jews to whom He is condemning. Later in Matthew 24, the Lord uses the second person plural to describe the disciples in direct relation to the corresponding and pending events;”
Jesus left the temple and was going away, when his disciples came to point out to him the buildings of the temple. But he answered them, “You see all these, do you not? Truly, I say to you, there will not be left here one stone upon another that will not be thrown down. As he sat on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to him privately, saying, “Tell us, when will these things be, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the close of the age?” And Jesus answered them, See that no one leads you astray. (Emphasis Added)28
26 Dan. 9:26-27 ESV
27 Matt. 24:15-20 ESV
28 Matt. 24:1-4 ESV (4)
In closing:
That Christ fulfilled, Daniel 9:26-27 is nothing short of astonishing in light of the exact details of the prophecy. The Daniel 9 prophecy is the same as prophecies regarding the “Virgin Birth,” and Christ’s Crucifixion.
A fulfilled prophecy that is as exact in its fulfillment demonstrates that the Bible is what it claims to be, the Word of God. No other religious book can claim and back it up with detailed precision as to the fulfillment.
Many Old Testament verses refer to the Messiah or His work, numbering into the hundreds. Moreover, Jesus fulfilled at least 300 prophecies from the Old Testament.
Are there prophecies in the Bible about the anti-Christ or the Devil? There are descriptive texts, but are there prophecies? Why would there be? The Scriptures point believers to Christ, not the anti-Christ. Although, Daniel 9:26-27 is difficult grammatically to understand. Nevertheless, to make this into a prophecy of a coming anti-Christ is fundamentally wrong in the context of the totality of Scripture.
In Matthew 5:17, Jesus said that he came to “fulfill the law and the prophets.” He came to fulfill the Scriptures, all of which testified of Himself. To interpret Daniel 9:27 as the anti-Christ is to reject Matthew 5:17. (Bolding and underlining emphasis mine)
“Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.” (2 Timothy 2:15)
Notes:
1. Matthew Poole’s Commentary on the Holy Bible, Daniel, Vol. 2, (Peabody, Massachusetts, Hendrickson Publishers, 1985) p. 839.
2. DeMar, Gary, Last Day’s Madness: Obsession of the Modern Church, (Powder Springs, GA: American Vision, 1999) p. 327.
3. DeMar, Gary, Last Day’s Madness: Obsession of the Modern Church, (Powder Springs, GA: American Vision, 1999) p. 327.
4. Jeffrey S. Krause, A Historical Survey of the Daniel’s “Seventy Weeks” and its Complete Fulfillment within the Generation of Christ, Liberty University School of Religion Bible 450-B07
Mr. Kettler has previously published articles in the Chalcedon Report and Contra Mundum. He and his wife Marea attend the Westminster, CO, RPCNA Church. Mr. Kettler is the author of books defending the Reformed Faith. Books can be ordered online at: https://www.amazon.com/Books-Jack-Kettler/s?rh=n%3A283155%2Cp_27%3AJack+Kettler
“Greg L. Bahnsen was an influential Calvinist Christian philosopher, apologist, and debater. He was an ordained minister in the Orthodox Presbyterian Church and a full time Scholar in Residence for the Southern California Center for Christian Studies. Bahnsen graduated from Westminster Theological Seminary where he simultaneously received the Master of Divinity and Master of Theology degrees. He later received his Ph.D. from the University of Southern California. He is the author of Always Ready, Presuppositional Apologetics: Stated and Defended, Van Til’s Apologetic: Readings and Analysis, and innumerable essays and articles.”
What others are saying about Greg Bahnsen’s apologetic work:
Therefore, in light of the fact that Dr. Bahnsen passed almost twenty years ago, some of the younger readers may not understand the intellectual impact that he made. It would be apropos to list a few thoughts that others are saying about Bahnsen’s theological, philosophical, and apologetic work.
“Bahnsen does a masterful job of systematizing the central themes in Van Tils thought and follows them with carefully selected passages from Van Tils books, essays, syllabuses, articles, lectures and so on.” – Anthony B. Bradley Presbyterion
“It is most welcome…to have this massive volume of readings and analysis of [Van Tils] publications by his former student and a first-rate thinker in his own right…. This book will be of great benefit to mature theological students who wish to engage secular and other pagan ideologies in contemporary society.” – E. Earle Ellis Southwestern Journal of Theology
“This is the late Dr. Bahnsen’s testament to today’s defenders of the truth. It is an encyclopedic synthesis of the thought of Cornelius Van Til, who was arguably the most original apologist of the twentieth century. In the grand tradition of the Sentences of the fathers, this study will be a standard for years to come.” – William Edgar
“Greg Bahnsen’s book on Van Til has been eagerly awaited. It is certainly Bahnsen’s best and most important book, and it is an invaluable guide to Van Til’s thought. I disagree with Bahnsen on some matters, but I would never want to be without this resource. It is a virtually encyclopedic exposition of what Van Til said, with many helps to interpretation. You must have this book if you are serious about trying to understand Van Til’s thought.” – John M. Frame
“Greg Bahnsen was a brilliant scholar. But this is an inadequate description of what he had to offer the church. The value of his work was not merely academic (though it was that also); it was intensely practical. His ability to analyze the “logic” of unbelief and demonstrate its foolishness, and set forth the gospel as the only intellectually honest alternative, was unsurpassed. When it came to apologetics, Greg was in a class all of his own.” – Stephen C. Perks, Director, Foundation of Christian Reconstruction
“For those who want to understand Van Til, whether to agree or disagree, at least two things are both essential and too often neglected. The first to read Van Til, the second is to read Greg Bahnsen.” – Dr. Scott Oliphant, Assistant Professor of Apologetics, Westminster Theological Seminary, Philadelphia
“Dr. Greg L. Bahnsen (1948-1995) provided perhaps the clearest, most faithful, and most powerful advancement of Cornelius Van Til’s presuppositional apologetics of anyone. This statement holds true both for Bahnsen’s written scholarly work as well as his practical applications in both formal and informal debates and exchanges. Those knowledgeable of Van Til’s “Copernican Revolution” in Christian apologetic method will understand the enormity of this compliment to Greg Bahnsen. Those not formerly introduced to Van Til or Bahnsen will understand shortly after beginning this volume—for this book presents the most clear, systematic, and rigorous statement and defense of Van Tillian presuppositional apologetics written to date (vii).” – Joel McDurmon, Reviewing Bahnsen’s Presuppositional Apologetics: Stated and Defended
Who was Cornelius Van Til, since his name comes up in so many comments about Bahnsen?
Cornelius Van Til Cornelius Van Til (1895-1987), born in The Netherlands, was a Christian philosopher, Reformed theologian, and presuppositional apologist. Influenced: Greg Bahnsen, John Frame, Francis Schaeffer, R. J. Rushdoony, Richard L. Pratt Jr.
Van Til was influenced by: Herman Bavinck, B. B. Warfield.
A Review:
Chapter lineup:
1. Answering Fools According to Their Folly – 1
2. Prejudicial Conjecture and Philosophical Baggage – 17
3. Inconsistent and Fallacious Arguments – 35
4. Unbelief and Its Consequences – 57
5. The Preconditions of Intelligibility – 74
6. Proof and Persuasion -87
7. The Evolutionary Worldview – 107
8. The Problem of Evil – 127
9. Circular Reasoning – 168
Questions for non-believers of any persuasion:
· Are they being arbitrary?
· Are there inconsistencies in what they are saying?
Dr. Bahnsen provides numerous examples in real-world interactions with non-believers of every stripe and color and how to use these questions, and how to adapt them to different situations.
One of the many highlights of this book is the Transcendental Proof of God’s Existence:
“A transcendental proof argues from the impossibility the contrary, saying, ‘You have an ultimate presupposition. I have an ultimate presupposition. And the problem with yours is that if what you are saying is true, we can’t prove anything. Nothing would be intelligible, nothing would make sense on your presupposition.’” (pp.97-98)
A presupposition can be understood as a starting axion or a grid or glasses of one’s worldview in the reasoning process. Reasoning includes how one interprets evidence within a worldview.
In this work, Dr. Bahnsen interacts with the atheistic philosophers Anthony Flew and Bertrand Russell in this book and destroys their arguments. As an aside, Anthony Flew was probably the top British atheistic philosopher. A number of years after Greg Bahnsen passed, Anthony Flew rejected atheism.
Dr. Bahnsen shows how only the Christian worldview provides the necessary preconditions of intelligibility, such as the laws of logic that are abstract and universal entities, and how the atheistic worldview rejects these and, as a consequence, the possibility of logic, and therefore, any kind of meaningful debate. (p. 98)
The transcendental argument stated by Bahnsen:
“1. God is a necessary precondition for logic and morality (because these are immaterial, yet real universals).”
“2. People depend upon logic and morality, showing that they depend upon the universal, immaterial, and abstract realities, which could not exist in a materialist universe but presupposes (presumes) the existence of an immaterial and absolute God.”
“3. Therefore, God exists. If He didn’t, we could not rely upon logic, reason, morality, and other absolute universals (which are required and assumed to live in this universe, let alone to debate), and could not exist in a materialist universe where there are no absolute standards or an absolute Lawgiver.”
Conclusion:
“The transcendental proof for God’s existence is that without Him it is impossible to prove anything. The atheist world view is irrational and cannot consistently provide the preconditions of intelligible experience, science, logic, or morality.” – Greg Bahnsen
The book under review does not require a college degree to understand. There is a helpful glossary of terms for each chapter. For the average layman, this book is well within their grasp.
In closing:
Against All Opposition: Defending the Christian Worldview, Volume One of the Bahnsen Apologetic Trilogy
The Impossibility of the Contrary, Volume Two of the Bahnsen Apologetic Trilogy
This trilogy of books should be in every church library, and everyone interested in apologetics should have them in a prominent place in their home library.
End of review
If the reader interested in apologetics has not heard the “Great Debate” between Bahnsen and Stein, there is no accuse not listening several times to soak it all in.
“When we go to look at the different world views that atheists and theists have, I suggest we can prove the existence of God from the impossibility of the contrary. The transcendental proof for God’s existence is that without Him it is impossible to prove anything. The atheist world view is irrational and cannot consistently provide the preconditions of intelligible experience, science, logic, or morality. The atheist world view cannot allow for laws of logic, the uniformity of nature, the ability for the mind to understand the world, and moral absolutes. In that sense the atheist world view cannot account for our debate tonight.” – Greg Bahnsen from “The Great Debate”
Scroll down for a special section of Greg Bahnsen quotes.
“Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.” (2 Timothy 2:15)
Mr. Kettler has previously published articles in the Chalcedon Report and Contra Mundum. He and his wife Marea attend the Westminster, CO, RPCNA Church. Mr. Kettler is the author of books defending the Reformed Faith. Books can be ordered online at Amazon.
Bahnsen Quotes:
“Without faith, there is no proper understanding by which a man can judge. As Augustine well said, ‘I believe in order to understand’.” – Greg L. Bahnsen, Presuppositional Apologetics: Stated and Defended
“There is no way to use non-Christian language and logic to arrive at Christian utterances, conclusions, and behavior.” – Greg L. Bahnsen, Presuppositional Apologetics: Stated and Defended
“We must not be satisfied to present Christianity as the most reliable position to hold among the competing options available. Rather, the Christian faith is the only reasonable outlook available to men.” – Greg L. Bahnsen, Presuppositional Apologetics: Stated and Defended
“Christianity is reasonable in virtue of the impossibility of the contrary.” – Greg L. Bahnsen, Presuppositional Apologetics: Stated and Defended
“Paul sets forth the attitude to which the defender of the faith must be committed: “Let God be found true, but every man a liar.” – Greg L. Bahnsen, Presuppositional Apologetics: Stated and Defended
“When an apologist attempts to be autonomous in his reasoned argumentation he indicates that he considers God to be less certain than his own existence and that he places greater credence in his independent reasoning than in God’s Word.” ― Greg L. Bahnsen, Presuppositional Apologetics: Stated and Defended
“By reversing the proper order of things, the non-presuppositional apologist sees submission to God’s Word as secondary, rather than primary, sees demonstration as the basis for faith, sees independent argumentation rather than the Holy Spirit as the source of conviction, and therefore advances the destruction of his own defense of the faith.” – Greg L. Bahnsen, Presuppositional Apologetics: Stated and Defended
“To reject revelational epistemology is to commit yourself to defending the truth of autonomous epistemology.” – Greg L. Bahnsen, Presuppositional Apologetics: Stated and Defended
“Non-presuppositional defenses of the faith tend to be too concessive to the unbeliever’s aim and aim to simply show Christianity as probably true. They do not leave the unbeliever ‘without excuse,’ but suggest implicitly that he has the prerogative and ability to stand in judgement over God’s own Word.” – Greg L. Bahnsen, Presuppositional Apologetics: Stated and Defended
“Since the fall of man was ethical in character (not metaphysical) the unregenerate and regenerate share the facts of the world and the rules of thought, but their interpretation and use of them are far from neutral.” – Greg L. Bahnsen, Presuppositional Apologetics: Stated and Defended
“There are no facts or uses of reason which are available outside of the interpretive system. The argument must pit the unbeliever’s system of thought as a unit against the believer’s system of thought as a unit. Their overall perspectives will have to contend with each other.” – Greg L. Bahnsen, Presuppositional Apologetics: Stated and Defended
“There is no man made in the image of God and living in God’s world, whatever God’s attitude toward him and his own feelings about Christ, who does not know the living and true God, his Creator. All men have the requisite knowledge of God to make them eternally responsible before Him; this was true in the Garden, and it does not cease to be true after the fall. Sin or no sin, special revelation or no special revelation, all men inescapably know their God.” – Greg L. Bahnsen Presuppositional Apologetics: Stated & Defended
What does the stone in Daniel 2:35 signify? By Jack Kettler
“Then was the iron, the clay, the brass, the silver, and the gold, broken to pieces together, and became like the chaff of the summer threshingfloors; and the wind carried them away, that no place was found for them: and the stone that smote the image became a great mountain, and filled the whole earth.” (Daniel 2:35)
An understanding of the image in Nebuchadnezzar’s Dream made of gold, silver, brass, iron, and clay represent is important to understand the significance of the stone is warranted.
According to Matthew Henry’s Concise Commentary, it is learned:
“This image represented the kingdoms of the earth, that should successively rule the nations, and influence the affairs of the Jewish church. 1. The head of gold signified the Chaldean empire, then in being. 2. The breast and arms of silver signified the empire of the Medes and Persians. 3. The belly and thighs of brass signified the Grecian empire, founded by Alexander. 4. The legs and feet of iron signified the Roman empire. The Roman empire branched into ten kingdoms, as the toes of these feet. Some were weak as clay, others strong as iron.” (1)
Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible provides the most detailed account of the Daniel passage:
“Then was the iron, the clay, the brass, the silver, and the gold, broken to pieces together, …. The feet, the basis of the image, being broken, the whole body of it fell, and with its own weight was broken to pieces; an emblem this of the utter dissolution of all the monarchies and kingdoms of the earth, signified by these several metals:
and became like the chaff of the summer threshing floors; which is exceeding small and light:
and the wind carried them away, that no place was found for them; for the several metals, and the monarchies signified by them, which were no more: the allusion is to the manner of winnowing corn in the eastern countries upon mountains, when the chaff was carried away by the wind, and seen no more:
and the stone that smote the image became a great mountain, and filled the earth; Christ’s kingdom, from small beginnings, has increased, and will more and more, until the whole earth is subject to it: this began to have its accomplishment in the first times of the Gospel, especially when the Roman empire, as Pagan, was destroyed by Constantine, and the kingdom of Christ was set up in it; and it received a further accomplishment at the time of the Reformation, when Rome Papal had a deadly blow given it, and the Gospel of Christ was spread in several nations and kingdoms; but it will receive its full accomplishment when both the eastern and western antichrists shall be destroyed, and the kingdoms of this world shall become the Lord’s and his Christ’s, Revelation 11:15.” (2)
The picture of a relatively small stone in Daniel 2:35, growing to become a mountain, is indeed strikingly similar to the parable of the mustard seed:
“Another parable put He forth unto them, saying, the kingdom of heaven is like to a grain of mustard seed, which a man took, and sowed in his field: Which indeed is the least of all seeds: but when it is grown, it is the greatest among herbs, and becometh a tree, so that the birds of the air come and lodge in the branches thereof.” (Matthew 13:31-32)
Israel was an insignificant people in contrast with the Roman empire. Jesus was born in Bethlehem, an insignificant village.
In conclusion:
The Kingdom of Christ was supernatural in its origin. Insignificant in its humble beginning in the manger in Bethlehem. Nevertheless, His Kingdom is ordained to be universal in its scope of influence and power. And furthermore, the stone in Daniel 2:25 signifies Christ and His Kingdom.
Daniel’s stone and the mustard seed of Matthew are pictured in other places using Old Testament typology:
“And it shall come to pass in the last days, that the mountain of the LORD’S house shall be established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow unto it.” (Isaiah 2:2)
“But in the last days it shall come to pass, that the mountain of the house of the LORD shall be established in the top of the mountains, and it shall be exalted above the hills; and people shall flow unto it.” (Micah 4:1)
Indeed, Christ, the Lord shall reign forever and forever!
“And he shall reign over the house of Jacob forever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end.” (Luke 1:33)
“Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.” (2 Timothy 2:15)
Notes:
1. Matthew Henry, Concise Commentary, Daniel, (Nashville, Tennessee, Thomas Nelson), p. 1338-1339.
2. John Gill, Exposition of the Old and New Testaments, Daniel, (Grace Works, Multi-Media Labs), p. 42-43.
Mr. Kettler has previously published articles in the Chalcedon Report and Contra Mundum. He and his wife Marea attend the Westminster, CO, RPCNA Church. Mr. Kettler is the author of books defending the Reformed Faith. Books can be ordered online at: https://www.amazon.com/Books-Jack-Kettler/s?rh=n%3A283155%2Cp_27%3AJack+Kettler
Why is the valley of Achor said to be a door of hope in Hosea 2:15? By Jack Kettler
“And I will give her, her vineyards from thence, and the valley of Achor for a door of hope: and she shall sing there, as in the days of her youth, and as in the day when she came up out of the land of Egypt.” (Hosea 2:15)
Introduction:
Hosea prophesied during the latter half of the eighth century B.C. (753–722). The time period was a very difficult time in Israel’s history. The setting is right before the Northern Kingdom went into exile.
Hosea’s addressees were the Northern Kingdom. Israel is mentioned numerous times in the book. The burden of Hosea’s prophecy was to see Israel repent and turn back to God.
The reader learns about Hosea’s family in chapter 1:1-3:5. God ordered Hosea to marry an adulterous wife. It is recorded that his wife Gomer was a “whore” in Hosea 1:3. Hosea’s children were each given a symbolic name representative of the ominous prophetic message. Warnings and promises for Israel are covered in chapters 4:1-14:9.
Hosea describes Israel’s unfaithfulness. God uses this symbolism to say that Israel is like a licentious wife. However, Israel’s unfaithfulness is not enough to deplete God’s redeeming love. Israel remained God’s chosen people.
In Hosea 2:15, the valley of Achor is mentioned and historically means trouble. So how can Hosea now say it is a door of hope?
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges answers this question:
“15. I will give her, her vineyards from thence] So soon as she has left the wilderness (‘from thence’), Jehovah will restore to her the vineyards which he had taken away (Hosea 2:12).”
“the valley of Achor for a door of hope] Whereas the first Israelites had to call their first encampment after crossing the Jordan the valley of Achor or ‘Troubling’ (Joshua 7:26), their descendants shall find the same spot a starting point for a career of success. Another prophet praises the same valley for its fertility (Isaiah 65:10).”
“she shall sing there] Or, ‘thereupon’. Alluding to the songs of Moses and Miriam in Exodus 15:1 (see Hosea 2:21, where, as St Jerome with Jewish writers points out, the same verb is used of Miriam’s ‘answering’ the song of Moses). But antiphonal singing is not suitable here, and much less in Hosea 2:23-23 (where A. V. arbitrarily alters the rendering of the verb). Render, she shall respond there Theod. ἀποκριθήσεται, Aq. ὑπακούσει, which however St Jerome explains, ‘præcinentibus respondebit concinens’. The heart of Israel shall be softened, and she shall be responsive to the divine call, as in ‘the days of her youth’ (comp. Jeremiah 2:2), when she came out of Egypt.” (1)
Isaiah describes the blessings God will bestow upon Israel in the valley of Achor.
“And Sharon shall be a fold of flocks, and the valley of Achor a place for the herds to lie down in, for my people that have sought me.” (Isaiah 65:10)
Matthew Poole’s Commentary agrees and further elaborates:
“And I, reconciled to her, will give her, her vineyards; will both settle her, and abundantly enrich her with blessings, as the phrase implieth.
“From thence; either from the place of their exile and sufferings, or from the time of their hearkening to the Lord speaking to them in their distresses and sorrows; or if it refer to Hosea 2:12, it is a promise to comfort them under that threat which swept away the blessings of vines mid fig trees in their own land, and here is a promise of vineyards to them from the time of their repentance, and from the place where they are captives.”
“The valley of Achor; which was a large, fruitful, and pleasant valley near Jericho, and on the very entrance into the land of Canaan, where after forty years’ travels and sorrows Israel first set foot on a country such as they expected.”
“For a door of hope: as that valley was a door of hope to Israel then, by that Israel saw that he should enjoy the Promised Land; so, would God deal with repenting Israel in the times here pointed at.”
“She shall sing praises to their God for his mercies, and sing forth their own joys too, and answer each other, sing in responses, as the word signifieth.”
“As in the days of her youth: as that age is most jocund, and expresseth it by singing, so shall it be as renewed youth to Israel, full of blessings from God, and full of praises to God.”
“When she came up out of the land of Egypt: this passage explains the former; their youth is a time somewhat like the time of their coming out of Egypt, their mercies now like the mercies of that time, and their joys and songs shall be like too. However, these things were fulfilled to the type, whose repentance and return to God is not very eminent, they are all fully made good to antitype Israel, the church of Christ, in spiritual blessings, chiefly here intended.” (2)
In conclusion:
Barnes’ Notes on the Bible in greater detail explains the Messianic blessings that will be poured out upon the faithful of Israel:
“And I will give her, her vineyards from thence – God’s mercies are not only in word, but indeed. He not only speaks to her heart, but he restores to her what He had taken from her. He promises, not only to reverse His sentence, but that He would make the sorrow itself the source of the joy. He says, I will give her back her vineyards “thence,” i. e., from the wilderness itself; as elsewhere, He says, “The wilderness shall be a fruitful field” Isaiah 32:15. Desolation shall be the means of her restored inheritance and joy in God. Through fire and drought are the new flagons dried and prepared, into which the new wine of the Gospel is poured.”
“And the valley of Achor for a door of hope – (Literally, “troubling”). As, at the first taking possession of the promised land, Israel learned through the transgression and punishment of Achan, to stand in awe of God, and thenceforth, all went well with them, when they had wholly freed themselves from the accursed thing, so to them shall “sorrow be turned into joy, and hope dawn there, where there had been despair.” “Therefore, only had they to endure chastisements, that through them they might attain blessings.” It was through the punishment of those who “troubled” the true “Israel,” the destruction of Jerusalem, that to the Apostles and the rest who believed, the hope of victory over the whole world was opened. “Hope.” The word more fully means, a “patient, enduring longing.” To each returning soul, “the valley of trouble,” or the lowliness of repentance, becometh a door of patient longing, not in itself, but because “God giveth” it to be so; a longing which “reacheth on, awaiteth on,” entering within the veil, and bound first to the Throne of God. But then only, when none of the “accursed thing” Joshua 7:11-15 cleaveth to it, when it has no reserves with God, and retains nothing for itself, which God hath condemned.”
“And she shall sing there, as in the days of her youth – The song is a responsive song, choir answering choir, each stirring up the other to praise, and praise echoing praise, as Israel did after the deliverance at the Red Sea. “Then sang Moses and the children of Israel this song unto the Lord. I will sing unto the Lord, for He hath triumphed gloriously. And Miriam the prophetess the sister of Aaron, took a timbrel, and all the women went out after her. And Miriam answered them, sing ye to the Lord, for He hath triumphed gloriously” Exodus 15:1, Exodus 15:20-21. So the Seraphim sing one to another, holy, holy, holy Isaiah 6:3; so Paul exhorts Christians “to admonish one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in their hearts to the Lord” Colossians 3:16; so the Jewish psalmody passed into the Christian Church, and the blessed in heaven, having on the Cross passed the troublesome sea of this world, “sing the new song of Moses and of the Lamb” Revelation 15:3.”
“She shall sing there – Where? There, where he “allureth” her, where He leadeth her, where He “speaketh to her heart,” where He in worketh in her that hope. There, shall she sing, there, give praise and thanks.”
“As in the days of her youth – Her “youth” is explained, in what follows, to be “the days when she came up out of the land of Egypt,” when she was first born to the knowledge of her God, when the past idolatries had been forgiven and cut off; and she had all the freshness of new life, and had not yet wasted it by rebellion and sin. Then God first called “Israel, My firstborn son. My son, My firstborn” Exodus 4:22. “She came up” into the land which God chose, out of Egypt, since we “go up” to God and to things above; as, on the other hand, the prophet says, “Woe to those who go down to Egypt” Isaiah 31:1, for the aids of this world; and the man who was wounded, the picture of the human race, was “going down from Jerusalem to Jericho” (Luke 10:30; see the note above at Hosea 1:11).” (3)
“Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.” (2 Timothy 2:15)
Notes:
1. Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges, by, by T. K. Cheyne, Hosea, (Cambridge University Press, 1898), e-Sword version.
2. Matthew Poole’s Commentary on the Holy Bible, Hosea, Vol. 2, (Peabody, Massachusetts, Hendrickson Publishers, 1985) p. 855-856.
3. Albert Barnes, THE AGES DIGITAL LIBRARYCOMMENTARY, Barnes’ Notes on the Bible, Hosea, Vol. 10 p. 52.
Mr. Kettler has previously published articles in the Chalcedon Report and Contra Mundum. He and his wife Marea attend the Westminster, CO, RPCNA Church. Mr. Kettler is the author of books defending the Reformed Faith. Books can be ordered online at: https://www.amazon.com/Books-Jack-Kettler/s?rh=n%3A283155%2Cp_27%3AJack+Kettler
Unicorns andKJV-Onlyism an introductory fact sheet By Jack Kettler
The writer of this fact sheet has written 15 books on theology and uses the KJV. Nevertheless, this writer does not subscribe to KJV-Onlysim. Just because someone prefers the KJV does not make them a KJV-Onlyist.
What is KJV-Onlyism?
King James Onlyism refers to a dogma that demands that all Christians must use the King James Version of the Bible solely. Some adherents go so far as to say that the KJV translators were divinely inspired. For those, it is asked how they know this. Did they pray about it and get an answer like the Mormons?
After interacting with some onlyists, there is confusion about where the authority lies. Is it in the Greek (Textus Receptus) and Hebrew (Masoretic) manuscripts or in the KJV? This writer had one onlyist say the KJV was better than the Textus Receptus end of the debate.
Without using the pejorative “conspiracy theorist.” nevertheless, KJV-Onlyism tends to operate in terms of a sinister plot of wicked people that are evil people changing the Bible. In addition, these same unnamed individuals intentionally mistranslate the Bible in order to insert false teachings into the sacred text.
It is readily admitted that there are many horrendous translations, but it does not follow that because some are bad, and all are bad. To believe this is to believe a non-sequitur.
Questions that arise:
If KJV-Onlyism is true, why did God wait for 1600 hundred years to reveal this translation? In striking similarity with the Mormon claim that God could not find anyone to restore the church for 1800 years.
What about all of the non-English speaking people around the world? One onlyist said they could use the Internet to solve this problem. But, unfortunately, for many, this would not have helped in light of the short time the Internet has existed. Also, what about the Indians living in the jungles of South America with no electricity?
A textual issue:
Is one manuscript text better than many manuscripts? At first, one manuscript a person may think that one is better. However, this is not the case. For Islam and Mormons, the true copy of their ex-biblical revelations, the Koran, and the Book of Mormon are in heaven, conveniently where these alleged texts cannot be analyzed. In Islam, there is only one approved text of the Koran; all other versions were destroyed.
Why multiple manuscript sources are better than one:
“If one has few manuscripts of a work from antiquity, textual variations can be a real problem. But the more manuscripts you have from a wide range of locations and from early on in the text’s transmission, the better off you are. And all scholars agree that of all ancient documents, without doubt the single earliest, best, and most widely attested document is the New Testament.” Comparison of the New Testament to other documents of that age does not even seem fair. While the average work of antiquity has no witnesses until five hundred years after its production, the New Testament boasts numerous witnesses within the first hundred years, and many more within two hundred more years, from a wide geographical area. As noted, we have entire copies of the complete New Testament from as early as the start of the fourth century, and papyri fragments of individual books have been dated to the earliest years of the second century, an unheard-of treasure trove, historically speaking. As these earlier and earlier manuscripts have been found, they have shown that the text popular in the medieval period is not radically altered but is the very same primitive text of the New Testament.[ 183] No evidence exists of major alterations seeking to remove doctrines, insert beliefs, and the like.[ 184] Any fair analysis of the text’s transmission reveals that its scribes sought to the very best of their ability to transmit it accurately.[ 185] – White, James R. What Every Christian Needs to Know About the Qur’an (p. 231). Baker Publishing Group. Kindle Edition.
Assuming what needs to be proved:
In the more extreme varieties of KJV-Onlyism, one encounters circular reasoning when the topic of other translations comes up. For example, if another translation reads differently than the KJV, the promoters will say the newer translation is in error. The fallacy of this is assuming what they need to prove. This is otherwise known as the fallacy of begging the question, which occurs when an argument’s premises assume the truth of the conclusion instead of supporting or proving it.
Were the KJV translators KJV-Onlyists?
The original KJV translators in 1611 did not hold their translation as inerrant or inspired. For example, the Preface of the original KJV- entitled The Translators to the Reader – explains:
“As Saint Augustine saith, that variety of Translations is profitable for the finding out of the sense of the Scriptures.” Documents of the English Reformation, Edited by Gerald Bray p. 434.
Some onlyists think the KJV translators were inspired to do a perfect translation, which would be “God’s preserved word for the English-speaking people.” There is no hint that the KJV translators thought they were the only inspired group of translators. Instead, they saw themselves as imperfect human translators trying to do their best. They said:
“Neither did we think much to consult the Translators or Commentators…neither did we disdain to revise that which we had done, and to bring back to the anvil that which we had hammered.” Excerpted from an article by Dr. Robert Joyner titled “Is the King James Version the Only Divinely Inspired Version?”
The KJV translators certainly were not “King James Onlyists.” For example, they wrote:
“Variety of translations is profitable for the finding out of the sense of the Scriptures…” “Using other versions is one of the best ways to study the Bible because different translations reveal the different shades of meaning found in the original texts.” Excerpted from an article by Dr. Robert Joyner titled “Is the King James Version the Only Divinely Inspired Version?”
If there is one error in the translation of the KJV, how can this be explained by the onlyists?
“His glory is like the firstling of his bullock, and his horns are like the horns of unicorns: with them he shall push the people together to the ends of the earth: and they are the ten thousands of Ephraim, and they are the thousands of Manasseh.” (Deuteronomy 33:17 KJV)
“His glory is like a firstborn bull, And his horns like the horns of the wild ox; Together with them He shall push the peoples To the ends of the earth; They are the ten thousands of Ephraim, And they are the thousands of Manasseh.” (Deuteronomy 33:17 NKJV)
The word unicorn is a poor translation. Unicorns do not exist! What would an onlyist say to this?
Strong’s Concordance gets it correct, and the NKJV uses the better translation of רְאֵם (reem), a wild ox:
Many more examples like this can be shown. Putting two translations side by side, highlighting a difference, does not prove anything. All this shows that the translation of certain words is different. Exegetical work must be done.
Most people have heard of the Wycliffe Bible translators. It may come as a shock to the onlyists, but today the Wycliffe translators, as a rule, use the Westcott-Hort or United Bible Societies Greek text. In the past, many of the Wycliffe translators favored the Majority Text.
In conclusion:
This writer is not accusing the onlyists of being a cult. However, when interacting with some onlyists, they certainly appear to have cult like traits by not seriously interacting with non-onlyists. Furthermore, in light of the fact that for most of church history, the KJV Bible did not exist, to now maintain a KJV-Onlyist position is preposterous.
It is freely admitted that there are bad translations. Nevertheless, the Bible does not command the use of any specific translation or prohibit the production of other translations. The existence of multiple manuscripts has always been considered an apologetic strength. Consulting a variety of translations in Bible study seems prudent. Trying to box fellow Christians into using one translation that is 400 years old is misguided and exhibits the spirit of sectarianism. Onlyism must be lonely, or as Roy Orbison sang, “only the lonely.”
An attempted response:
Some of the readers may have followed a recent thread where several individuals engaged an individual who is promoting a highly sectarian and divisive theory about the only translation that is supposedly approved by God for believers, namely, KJV-Onlyism. Upon reflection, this individual’s approach can be described as non or subpar scholarship coupled with an unending series of logical fallacies. The most common was the fallacy of begging the question. This occurred repeatedly when the individual’s argument’s premises assumed the truth of the conclusion, instead of proving it.
Other fallacies that occurred in this thread were hasty generalizations, or an appeal to authority, the individual claimed an authority figure’s expertise to support a claim despite this expertise being irrelevant or overstated. Circular arguments were used and is one that uses the same statement as both the premise and the conclusions, in which no new information or justification is introduced. Non-sequiturs were used repeatedly.
Tragically, the individual had no idea how to exegete a word appearing in the Biblical Hebrew or Greek text. For example:
“His glory is like the firstling of his bullock, and his horns are like the horns of unicorns: with them, he shall push the people together to the ends of the earth: and they are the ten thousands of Ephraim, and they are the thousands of Manasseh.” (Deuteronomy 33:17 KJV)
“His glory is like a firstborn bull, And his horns like the horns of the wild ox; Together with them He shall push the peoples To the ends of the earth; They are the ten thousands of Ephraim, And they are the thousands of Manasseh.” (Deuteronomy 33:17 NKJV)
The word unicorn is a poor translation.
Strong’s Concordance gets it correct, and the NKJV uses the better translation of רְאֵם (reem), a wild ox:
“reem: a wild ox
Original word: רְאֵם
Part of Speech: Noun Masculine
Transliteration: reem
Phonetic Spelling: (reh-ame’)
Definition: a wild ox.”
The individual said that there are creatures that exist with only one horn. This response did not show exegetically how the Hebrew reem: a wild ox is better-translated unicorn.
And finally, this individual’s arguments did not show how those that use the NKJV or the ESV, or the NASB would put one who believes the gospel into danger of hellfire and thus can be dismissed as a schismatic practice and those advocating it should be avoided.
“Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.” (2 Timothy 2:15)
Mr. Kettler has previously published articles in the Chalcedon Report and Contra Mundum. He and his wife Marea attend the Westminster, CO, RPCNA Church. Mr. Kettler is the author of books defending the Reformed Faith. Books can be ordered online at: https://www.amazon.com/Books-Jack-Kettler/s?rh=n%3A283155%2Cp_27%3AJack+Kettler
In Lamentations 2:15, what is a lament, and what is signified by wagging the head? By Jack Kettler
“All that pass by clap their hands at thee; they hiss and wag their head at the daughter of Jerusalem, saying, is this the city that men call the perfection of beauty, the joy of the whole earth?” (Lamentations 2:15)
What is a lament? A lament is a fervent emotional expression of grief or sorrow.
Background
In 586 B.C., the King of Babylon, Nebuchadnezzar, destroyed Jerusalem. Jeremiah did not perish in the destruction of Jerusalem under the Babylonian King. Instead, God spared Jeremiah and had him record his sorrow for the utter ruin of Jerusalem.
Modern-day prosperity teachers would no doubt have difficulty with a lament. Nevertheless, a lament is not unique to Jeremiah and other Old Testament prophets.
What would be prophetic about Jeremiah’s lament as a weeping prophet?
“Oh, that my head were waters, and mine eyes a fountain of tears, that I might weep day and night for the slain of the daughter of my people!” (Jeremiah 9:1) (emphasis mine)
Jesus has been described as the weeping Savior because, on many occasions, His sorrow was visible.
“And when he was come near, he beheld the city, and wept over it.” (Luke 19:41)
Jesus laments the future destruction of Jerusalem and especially His sufferings in Matthew 23:37-38.
“O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not! Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.” (Matthew 23:37-38)
“Then saith he unto them, My soul is exceeding sorrowful, even unto death: tarry ye here, and watch with me.” (Matthew 26:38)
In the above passages from Matthew, the reader sees Jesus lamenting Jerusalem’s coming destruction by the Romans in 70A.D. and His suffering on the cross.
Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers pictures the enemies of Jerusalem:
“(15) All that pass by. – The triumphant exultation of the enemies of Zion came to add bitterness to her sorrows. They reminded her of what she had been in the past and contrasted it with her present desolation.
The perfection of beauty . . . – Like phrases are used of Zion in Psalm 48:2; Psalm 50:2; of Tyre in Ezekiel 27:3. Now that beauty was turned into squalor and desolation.” (1)
At the start, it was asked what does wagging head convey.
“All that pass by clap their hands at thee; they hiss and wag their head at the daughter of Jerusalem, saying, is this the city that men call the perfection of beauty, the joy of the whole earth?” (Lamentations 2:15)
In particular, note Matthew 23:39:
“And they that passed by reviled him, wagging their heads.” (Matthew 23:39)
To “wag” the head is a typical gesture of mockery or derision.
In closing:
In light of God’s love for Israel, His righteous judgment and sorry are seen in Jeremiah’s lament. Jeremiah’s lament stands out as a type of Christ sharing the pains of believers.
“Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.” (2 Timothy 2:15)
Notes:
1. Charles John Ellicott, Bible Commentary for English Readers, Lamentations, Vol.11, (London, England, Cassell and Company), p. 18.
Mr. Kettler has previously published articles in the Chalcedon Report and Contra Mundum. He and his wife Marea attend the Westminster, CO, RPCNA Church. Mr. Kettler is the author of books defending the Reformed Faith. Books can be ordered online at www. Jack Kettler .com
The Religion That Started in a Hat 