Category Archives: Creation

October 8, 2023 · 10:00

Spit In The Eye

When he had thus spoken, he spat on the ground, and made clay of the spittle, and he anointed the eyes of the blind man with the clay, (John 9:6)

Jesus performed many healing miracles during His time of ministry on earth. The miracles were not only an expression of His compassion for the hurting, but they served as evidence of who He was according to predictive prophecy.

John the Baptist, who baptized Jesus, recognized who He was. “And John bare record, saying, I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and it abode upon him. And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost. And I saw, and bare record that this is the Son of God” (John 1:32-34, emphasis mine). Later, John was imprisoned by Herod Antipas, and he started having doubts about the authenticity of Jesus. In order to reassure himself that he had baptized the right man, he sent his disciples to verify that Jesus was indeed the expected Messiah. Responding to their questions, “Jesus answered and said unto them, Go and shew John again those things which ye do hear and see: The blind receive their sight, and the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, and the deaf hear, the dead are raised up, and the poor have the gospel preached to them” (Matthew 11:4-5, emphasis mine).

Jesus quoted prophecy with which John would be familiar as proof of who He was. “Then the eyes of the blind shall be opened, and the ears of the deaf shall be unstopped. Then shall the lame man leap as an hart, and the tongue of the dumb sing: for in the wilderness shall waters break out, and streams in the desert” (Isaiah 35:5-6, emphasis mine). “Thy dead men shall live, together with my dead body shall they arise. Awake and sing, ye that dwell in dust: for thy dew is as the dew of herbs, and the earth shall cast out the dead” (Isaiah 26:19, emphasis mine). “The Spirit of the Lord GOD is upon me; because the LORD hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound” (Isaiah 61:1, emphasis mine).

Jesus performed many miracles proving His power and divinity. So many were His miracles that of Him that the Gospel writer, John said, “And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen” (John 21:25).

Blindness was one of the more common healings Jesus performed. In most cases, Jesus simply spoke the word and the blind were healed. For example, the first restoral of sight recorded by Matthew was of two blind men. “And when Jesus departed thence, two blind men followed him, crying, and saying, Thou Son of David, have mercy on us. And when he was come into the house, the blind men came to him: and Jesus saith unto them, Believe ye that I am able to do this? They said unto him, Yea, Lord. Then touched he their eyes, saying, According to your faith be it unto you. And their eyes were opened; and Jesus straitly charged them, saying, See that no man know it” (Matthew 9:27-30, emphasis mine). On another occasion, Matthew records, “Then was brought unto him one possessed with a devil, blind, and dumb: and he healed him, insomuch that the blind and dumb both spake and saw (Matthew 12:22, emphasis mine). In most cases, the healing required faith on the part of the recipient, but in this case, it was the faith of those who brought the demon possessed man to Jesus.

Many more examples could be cited of Jesus healing the blind simply at His word. However, two cases recorded in the Gospels stand out among the others for the “unorthodox” method Jesus employed in healing the blindness. One is recorded in Mark’s Gospel and the other in John’s.

“And he cometh to Bethsaida; and they bring a blind man unto him, and besought him to touch him. And he took the blind man by the hand, and led him out of the town; and when he had spit on his eyes, and put his hands upon him, he asked him if he saw ought” (Mark 8:22-23, emphasis mine). This was not an instantaneous healing as in other cases where Jesus healed with just His word. At first the man’s vision was unclear. “And he looked up, and said, I see men as trees, walking. After that he put his hands again upon his eyes, and made him look up: and he was restored, and saw every man clearly.” (Mark 8:24, emphasis mine). Could Jesus not have just spoken the word, as He had on other occasions, and healed the man’s blindness instantly? This has puzzled commentators through the years. Adam Clark suggests, “Our Lord could have restored this man to sight in a moment; but he chose to do it in the way mentioned in the text, to show that he is sovereign of his own graces; and to point out that, however insignificant means may appear in themselves, they are divinely efficacious when he chooses to work by them.”[1] That seems like a reasonable conclusion, but why here and not in all cases?

Albert Barnes is equally puzzled. “Why this was done is not known. It was evidently not intended to perform the cure by any natural effect of the spittle. It was to the man a “sign,” an evidence that it was the power of Jesus. The eyes were probably closed. They were perhaps “gummed” or united together by a secretion that had become hard. To apply spittle to them – to wet them – would be a “sign,” a natural expression of removing the obstruction and opening them. The power was not in the spittle, but it attended the application of it.”[2] This too seems a reasonable explanation, but why spit; why not water or olive oil?

Matthew Henry probably offers the best explanation. “That Christ used a sign; he spat on his eyes (spat into them, so some), and put his hand upon him. He could have cured him, as he did others, with a word speaking, but thus he was pleased to assist his faith which was very weak, and to help him against his unbelief. And this spittle signified the eye-salve wherewith Christ anoints the eyes of those that are spiritually blind.”[3] It is true that Jesus, by the faith of the recipients, healed immediately. But here the blind man was brought to Jesus; he did not come of his volition. Furthermore, Jesus took him by the hand and led him out of the city. This act initiated the man’s trust in the Healer. Spitting into his eyes further convinced the man that Jesus was doing something. At first, he is vision was blurred, but it was better than before. This too served to further increase his faith in Jesus’ healing touch. The second time Jesus touched his eyes, his vision was fully restored.

John records the other vision restoration by spittle in John 9. In this account, Jesus was in Jerusalem, possibly on the Feast of Tabernacles.[4] As he walked in the vicinity of the Temple, He saw a man that was blind from birth.[5] The text implies that Jesus knew that the man was blind from birth, but how the disciple knew is not clear for they asked Him, “Master, who did sin, this man, or his parents, that he was born blind?” (John 9:2). They had the common understanding that such tragedies came as a result of sin. Jesus assured them that neither was the case, “but that the works of God should be made manifest in him” (v. 3). With that, Jesus proceeded to restore the man’s vision. “When he had thus spoken, he spat on the ground, and made clay of the spittle, and he anointed the eyes of the blind man with the clay, And said unto him, Go, wash in the pool of Siloam, (which is by interpretation, Sent.) He went his way therefore, and washed, and came seeing” (John 9:6-7, emphasis mine).

This is another sight restoration that puzzles the commentators. Why would Jesus employ such methods? It could not have been to prove anything to His disciples; they had already seen Him heal blindness. If the purpose was merely to show that sin was not the cause of the man’s blindness, He could have healed him as He had done others. Besides applying mud spitballs to the man’s eyes, Jesus encouraged the man’s faith by sending him to wash in the Pool of Siloam.

Without consulting other commentaries, I suspect I know the reason behind Jesus’ method. (I could be wrong, of course, but I think I have good reason for my conclusion.) Jesus is the Creator. “All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made” (John 1:3). “For by him [Jesus] were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: (Colossians 1:16).

With that understanding, we can look back to Genesis. “And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul” (Genesis 2:7). God “formed” man out of dirt. The Hebrew word translated “formed” is yâtsar, which Strong’s defines as “to mould into a form; especially as a potter.” By implication, it required God (Jesus) to form and shape the human body out of moist clay.

Coming back to the blind man’s condition, John records that he was “born blind.”[6] That leads me to suspect that the man may have been born with a birth defect where his eyeballs did not develop completely or did not develop at all. The fact that Jesus made clay with His spittle harkens back to the original creation account. Here, Jesus created the missing eyeballs out of the clay. In this, Jesus demonstrated to His disciples and to us in a very clear and visual object lesson that He is the Creator God.

There is physical blindness that impairs the victim from seeing the physical world. There is also a spiritual blindness that impairs the sinner from seeing the spiritual world. Jesus heals both kinds of blindness, but of the two, spiritual blindness is the more severe, for it leads the victim to an eternity separated from the only One that can heal. Reader, if you do not know Jesus, you are spiritually blind. Come to Jesus and be forever healed of that blindness. Read my page on “Securing Eternal Life.”

Notes:

[1]  Adam Clarke, LL.D., F.S.A., (1715-1832), Adam Clarke’s Commentary on the Bible, (Published in 1810-1826; Public Domain).

[2]  Albert Barnes, Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible, (Published in 1847-1885; Public Domain).

[3]  Matthew Henry, Matthew Henry’s Commentary on the Whole Bible, (Published in 1708-1714; Public Domain).

[4]  John 7:2

[5]  John 9:1

[6]  John 9:19

Comments Off on Spit In The Eye

Filed under Apologetics, Bible, Christianity, Creation, Gospel, Theology

Tagged as , , , , , , ,

July 30, 2023 · 10:00

A New Creation

And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea. (Revelation 21:1)

With the Great White Throne Judgment[1] out of the way, sin has been purged from the earth. However, the creation was cursed with Adam’s sin, and even with the near Edenic conditions of the Millennial reign of Christ, the planet retains remnants of the curse. God told Adam, “… cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life; thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field” (Genesis 3:17-18). The purging of the curse will come by fire. The Apostle Peter writes, “But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up” (2 Peter 3:10, emphasis mine). Earth, i.e., the planet, will not cease to exist, for God promised that it would exist forever. The psalmist states, “[God] Who laid the foundations of the earth, that it should not be removed for ever” (Psalm 104:5, emphasis mine).

God, speaking through the Prophet Isaiah, says, “For, behold, I create new heavens and a new earth: and the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind” (Isaiah 65:17, emphasis mine). The Hebrew word translated as “create” is bârâ’, and it is only used when referring to God’s creative power. “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth” (Genesis 1:1) ex nihilo, out of nothing, with only His spoken word. John witnesses fulfilled prophecy when he reports, “And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea” (Revelation 21:1).

However, this time God does not need to create out of nothing. All the raw materials already exist, they only need to be purified by fire and reconstituted. Indeed, John does not see the creation of a new heaven and new earth, but rather a heaven and earth that have been made new, i.e., renovated. What is conspicuous in this New Heaven and New Earth is the absence of a sea. Often in Revelation, the “sea” is used in reference to the masses of people,[2] and sometimes they are those that are “the lost.” Since the lost were sentenced to an eternity in the “lake of fire,” it is possible that “no more sea” refers to these. We see that reaffirmed a few verses down. “But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death” (Revelation 21:8). However, “the sea” more often refers literally to Earth’s large bodies of water.[3] Here too, the word can be taken literally. That raises the question, how can the earth function without water? I believe Dr. Henry M. Morris, Jr. provided the best explanation.

There will, in fact, be no need for a sea on the new earth. The present sea is needed, as was the original antediluvian sea, as a basic reservoir for the maintenance of the hydrologic cycle and the water-based ecology and physiology of animal and human inhabitants of the earth. In the new earth, however, there will be no animals at all, and presumably all the men and women who live there will have glorified bodies with no more need of water. Their resurrected bodies will be composed, like that of the Lord Jesus, of flesh and bone (Luke 24.39; Philippians 3:21) but apparently with no need of blood (1 Corinthians 15:50) to serve as a cleanser and restorer of the body’s flesh as at present. This, in turn, eliminates the major need for water on the earth (blood is about 90 percent water, and present-day human flesh is about 65 percent water).[4]

For those who might lament the absence of oceans and all the aquatic activities that go along with that, the New Heaven and New Earth will more than make up for the lack of seas. As we consider the features of the New Heaven and New Earth, we need to keep in mind that John was literally at a loss for words to describe what he witnessed. The place is too wonderful to be expressed in human language, so John could only use the words available to him in his time.

The Apostle Paul experienced what he called the “third heaven.” The experience so overwhelmed him that he could not tell whether the experience was actual or a vision. Speaking of himself in the third person, he said, “And I knew such a man, (whether in the body, or out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;) How that he was caught up into paradise, and heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter” (2 Corinthians 12:3-4, emphasis mine).

“And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband” (Revelation 21:2). Before going to the cross, Jesus promised, “In my Father’s house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also” (John 14:2-3). This is the place of which Jesus spoke. It comes down from heaven to the newly re-created earth, and it is unimaginably beautiful like “a bride adorned for her husband.”

“And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God” (Revelation 21:3). A “tabernacle” is literally a tent designed for portability. However, the deeper meaning is that of a “habitation” or a “dwelling place.” I have always maintained that “Zion” is a name referring to the dwelling place of God. In the Old Testament (OT), Jerusalem is often referred to as Zion, as is the mountain upon which the Temple stood. Hence, when people speak of Zion, they are thinking of either Jerusalem or the Temple. However, the name comes from the fact that God chose that place as His earthly dwelling. “So shall ye know that I am the LORD your God dwelling in Zion, my holy mountain: then shall Jerusalem be holy, and there shall no strangers pass through her any more” (Joel 3:17, emphasis mine). Now, “the New Jerusalem,” the new Zion, descends from heaven where God will dwell among His children.

“And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away” (Revelation 21:4). All the things that cause pain, sorrow, and tears no longer exist. How many of us can recall even one day without experiencing any of these things? I dare say that even if such days come on occasion, they are rare indeed. In the New Jerusalem, such days will be the norm, and all things that cause tears, sorrow, and pain will not even come to mind.

“And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful. And he said unto me, It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of life freely. He that overcometh shall inherit all things; and I will be his God, and he shall be my son. But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death” (Revelation 21:5-8, emphasis mine).

“He that sat upon the throne” is Jesus. I do not like “red letter” Bibles that supposedly print the words of Jesus in red letters, because that often tends to be subjective based on the editor’s understanding of the text. These verses are a perfect example. I recently bought a new KJV Bible. I bought the Bible online, so I was not able to examine it closely before buying it, and when it arrived, I discovered that it is a red-letter edition. In my new Bible, the words of the person speaking are not in red print indicating that the person speaking is God the Father, not Jesus. However, in my e-Sword ™[5] electronic Bible, the words of the speaker in this passage are in red print, suggesting that it is Jesus speaking. My old KJV Bible is all black lettering. It leaves it to the Holy Spirit working in the reader to make that determination. Anyhow, I long ago determined that the speaker is indeed Jesus. The first indication is that John sees Him sitting upon the throne. Jesus said that “God (the Father) is a Spirit” (John 4:24). The Father does not have a physical form that He can be seen occupying a single place. After that, the speaker says, “Behold, I make all things new.” Jesus is the Creator,[6] and He is the One that promised to prepare a place for us.[7] Then, the speaker identifies Himself as, “the Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end,” the same title with which Jesus first introduced Himself to John[8] in the Book of Revelation.

Jesus is the Word of God;[9] therefore, the words He speaks “are true and faithful.” God’s Word never fails. To those who “thirst” for life, i.e., eternal life, He will give “of the fountain of the water of life freely.” This could be an actual fountain of water, but it is more likely symbolic of eternal life continually springing forth without end. Jesus made the same claim to the Samaritan woman at the well. “But whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life” (John 4:14, emphasis mine). Those that enter the New Jerusalem are the “overcomers.” They will inherit “all things,” and He will be their God, and they will be His children. The Apostle Paul explains it in legal terms. “And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together” (Romans 8:17, emphasis mine). “All things” belong to Him, and as His children, we jointly inherit “all things” with Him. “But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death” (Revelation 21:8, emphasis mine). No extra commentary is needed here.[10]

Revelation 21:9-21 describes the appearance of the New Jerusalem. I will leave the text of the passage to the reader. The description was clearly beyond John’s language to describe. Its beauty is obviously beyond words. It is not some ethereal, misty, dreamlike apparition. It is a real, physical, three-dimensional place, exceeding the most beautiful city on Earth built by man. The dimensions are given as 12,000 furlongs square or 1500 miles per side. (21:16). Because the width, length, and height are all equal, some have suggested that it is a cube. However, others have suggested a four-sided pyramid with the throne of God, from which the river of living water flows, is at the apex (22:1). Whether cubical or pyramidical, its height (1500 miles) extends to what we now recognize as outer space. If superimposed on the United States, its footprint (2.25 million square miles) would extend from Maine to Florida, and from the Atlantic coast to 600 miles west of the Mississippi River.[11] Clearly, there is sufficient space for every believer that has ever lived. I would be amiss to venture at a number, but surely it must be in the billions.

“And I saw no temple therein: for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it. And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof” (Revelation 21:22-23, emphasis mine). In the previous chapters, we saw that “heaven” was arranged in a manner for which the earthly Temple was patterned.[12] In the New Jerusalem, the Temple is no longer needed. The earthly Temple had the Holy of Holies where the presence of God dwelt, and no man could enter there, except for the high priest and that only once a year on the Day of Atonement. In the New Jerusalem, God dwells with and among His people without restrictions. The sun and moon are not seen in the New Jerusalem, because the glory of God and the Lamb overwhelm the light they produce. That does not mean the sun and moon cease to exist. Remember that the New Jerusalem comes out of heaven down to Earth. It does not occupy the entire surface of the earth (which has no sea), so outside its gates, there will still be a need for the sun and moon.

“And the nations of them which are saved shall walk in the light of it: and the kings of the earth do bring their glory and honour into it. And the gates of it shall not be shut at all by day: for there shall be no night there. And they shall bring the glory and honour of the nations into it” (Revelation 21:24-26, emphasis mine). Apparently, the New Earth will have people living in it outside the gates of the New Jerusalem, none of whom were sentenced to the “lake of fire.” Those are all excluded as Jesus said, “But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death” (Revelation 21:8). The “fearful” are those who were timid to identify with Christ. Of them, Jesus said, “Whosoever therefore shall be ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation; of him also shall the Son of man be ashamed, when he cometh in the glory of his Father with the holy angels” (Mark 8:38). The “unbelieving” are simply those who rejected the Gospel and Jesus’ free gift of salvation. There is only one way to obtain eternal life and that is through faith in Christ. Jesus said, “I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me” (John 14:6, emphasis mine). In the Law of Moses, several practices were considered unclean and an abomination to the Lord. However, two extend beyond the Mosaic Law and are a perpetual abomination to the Lord; they are homosexuality[13] (actually, any sexual perversion) and idolatry.[14] The “abominable” are also prone to the other sins listed: murderers, whoremongers, sorcerers (i.e., drug abusers), etc. All of these reside in the eternal lake of fire and have no place in the New Earth and New Jerusalem.

The word “nations” here is the Greek word ethnos from which we get our English word “ethnic” referring to “people groups.” The New Earth and New Jerusalem will be populated by people from every ethnic group on this present earth. The children’s chorus “Jesus Loves the Little Children” that says “red and yellow, black and white, they are precious in His sight” will be perfectly demonstrated in the New Earth and New Jerusalem. Evidently, there will be “kings” over the various groups and they will “bring their glory and honor into it.” I do not believe this is a tribute or sacrifice of any sort, but just their presence as the representatives of “the redeemed” will give glory and honor to the Lord and to the city. Mankind contributes nothing toward his salvation.[15] It is all by the grace of God, and all the glory goes to Him. The inhabitants of the New Earth have constant access, in and out, to the New Jerusalem. The gates of pearl are never shut (21:21).

“And there shall in no wise enter into it any thing that defileth, neither whatsoever worketh abomination, or maketh a lie: but they which are written in the Lamb’s book of life” (Revelation 21:27, emphasis mine). Only those whose names are written in the Lamb’s Book of Life, those to have their glorified bodies, bodies free from sin, sickness, and death, bodies that are ageless, will reside in the New Earth and New Jerusalem.

“And he shewed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb. In the midst of the street of it, and on either side of the river, was there the tree of life, which bare twelve manner of fruits, and yielded her fruit every month: and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations” (Revelation 22:1-2, emphasis mine). Since there is no sickness or death in the New Earth and New Jerusalem, the need for “water of life” and a “tree of life” is perplexing. Dr. Morris[16] gave a good explanation for not having the need for a “sea,” so, why the need for water at all? Dr. Morris suggests …

Although the text does not say so, we are probably justified in inferring that this river (like the river in Eden which was its typological forerunner) parts “into four heads” (Genesis 2:10), which in turn descends from level to level, providing abundant water for every need (aesthetic as well as physiological) of the residents of the city. [What physiological needs we will have, I do not understand since earlier he said our glorified bodies would have no need for water.]

Eventually, it’s four distributaries will, presumably, reach ground level and then flow out through the four walls of the city, north, south, east, and west whence it, like the eyes of the Lord, will “run to and fro throughout the whole earth” (2 Chronicles 16:9). Since there is “no more sea” (Revelation 21:1) the inexhaustible waters of this mighty river will supply whatever hydrologic needs the new earth may have. There surely will be an abundance of luxurious grasses and herbs and trees everywhere, as in the original “very good” created world (Genesis 1:11, 31), and the whole earth will be a well-watered paradise of abundant resources and fulfilling ministries for the servants of God.[17]

The text says that the leaves of the Tree of Life are for “the healing of the nations.” The Greek word translated as “healing” is therapeia and it means “service rendered by one to another” or “household service.” There is no sickness in the New Earth and New Jerusalem from which to be healed; therefore, a better understanding is that “the leaves of the tree were for the service of the nations.”[18]

“And there shall be no more curse: but the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it; and his servants shall serve him: And they shall see his face; and his name shall be in their foreheads. And there shall be no night there; and they need no candle, neither light of the sun; for the Lord God giveth them light: and they shall reign for ever and ever” (Revelation 22:3-5, emphasis mine). The curse[19] has been purged by fire.[20] In our natural, physical state, we cannot see God and live.[21] However, that is not so with our glorified bodies; we “shall see His face” in all of His resplendent glory. “There shall be no night there,” i.e., in the New Jerusalem because the glory of the Father and of the Son will illuminate the entire place. However, as I stated before, the sun and moon will still light the New Earth, outside the city walls. The earth will still continue its annual orbit around the sun, and its rotation will continue to give day and night to the remade planet. However, within the New Jerusalem, the light of God and the Lamb will outshine the sun. And we “shall reign forever and ever” with Him.

Please, come quickly, Lord Jesus!

Reader, what do you think? Do the New Heaven, New Earth, and New Jerusalem sound like a good place to spend eternity? You will spend eternity somewhere, either in God’s new creation or in the lake of fire. There are no other options. If you want eternity in the New Earth with access to the New Jerusalem, then your name must be recorded in the Book of Life, and there is only one way to ensure that your name is written in that book. If you do not know the Savior, do not wait any longer. The time is short. Please read my page on “Securing Eternal Life.”

 Notes:

[1]  Revelation 20:11-15

[2]  Revelation 4:6; 13:1; 15:2

[3]  Revelation 5:13; 7:1-3; 8:8-9; 10:2, 5, 6, 8; 14:7; 16:3; 18:17, 19, 21

[4]  Henry M. Morris, Ph.D., The Revelation Record, (Tyndale House Publishers, Carol Stream, Ill, 1982), p. 437.

[5]  e-Sword: Free Bible Study for the PC

[6]  John 1:3; Colossians 1:15-17

[7]  John 14:2-3

[8]  Revelation 1:8

[9]  John 1:1

[10]  Heaven | Ernie’s Musings (erniecarrasco.com)

[11]  Clarence Larkin, The Book of Revelation Illustrated, (Rev. Clarence Larkin Estate, Philadelphia, 1919), p. 205.

[12]  The Seventh Seal | Ernie’s Musings (erniecarrasco.com)

[13]  Leviticus 18:22; 20:13

[14]  Deuteronomy 7:25

[15]  Ephesians 2:8-10

[16]  Morris, p. 437.

[17]  Ibid, p. 464.

[18]  Ibid, p. 466.

[19]  Genesis 3:17-18

[20]  2 Peter 3:10

[21]  Exodus 33:20

5 Comments

Filed under Apologetics, Bible, Christianity, Creation, End Times, Eschatology, Gospel, Heaven, Hell, Rapture, Salvation, Second Coming of Christ, Theology

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , ,

December 11, 2022 · 10:00

The Fullness of Time

Adoration of the Child

But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons.  (Galatians 4:4-5)

It’s that time of year again; Christmas is in the air. Regardless of your perception of Christmas – it’s too commercial, it’s under attack, it’s just a pagan celebration dressed up in Christian garb, etc. – it is altogether appropriate that Christians set time aside to commemorate the first advent of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

At this time we remember the miraculous conception and birth of God made man (John 1:14), but too often our focus shifts away from the significance of that event to the sappy sentimentality of the Nativity scene. As sweet as the image of a cuddly infant lying in a feeding trough adored by loving parents and worshipped by shepherds and wise men may be, the fact remains that this baby was God clothed in human flesh. The thought that the Creator condescended to take the form of His fallen creation (Philippians 2:7) to redeem as many as would receive Him (John 1:12), should leave us awestruck.

This was no afterthought on the part of God. In my article, “Why Satan?,” I address the issue of why God allowed sin in the first place, but along with the possibility of sin, God provided a way out (Hebrews 4:3; Revelation 13:8). From the very beginning there was the promise of a Savior (Genesis 3:15). Eve understood this promise, and at the birth of her first-born she rejoiced, “and said, I have gotten a man from the LORD” (Genesis 4:1). The literal translation of the Hebrew actually says “I have gotten a man Yahweh (the Lord).” She believed that she had given birth to the Savior according to the promise of God. But the time was not right. God wanted His creation, man in particular, to “be fruitful and multiply” (Genesis 1:28; 9:1). Abraham “Who against hope believed in hope, that he might become the father of many nations, according to that which was spoken, So shall thy seed be” (Romans 4:18).  That promise was not only for Abraham, “But for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe on him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead; Who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification” (Romans 4:24-25). For “The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance” (2 Peter 3:9). So, when the time was right, God entered the world He created (John 1:3) as a helpless baby – fully God and fully man – to give up His life to buy back and restore His fallen creation. “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life” (John 3:16).

Very soon, at the fullness of time, He will return for His own as He promised: “And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also” (John 14:3). So, regardless of your perspective on Christmas, as Christians it is a good time to remember that baby in the manger was God who came to die for us that we may live with Him, and soon we will be with Him.

1 Comment

Filed under Apologetics, Christianity, Christmas, Creation, Current Events, End Times, Evangelism, Gospel, Heaven, Religion, Second Coming of Christ, Theology

Tagged as , , , , , , , , ,

December 4, 2022 · 10:00

Miracle of the Incarnation*

Baby Jesus in Manger

And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth”

(John 1:14).

At Christmastime many of us take time to reflect on the birth of Christ and the miracle of His incarnation; but His birth was not a miracle.  Jesus came into this world like billions of babies before Him and like billions of babies after Him.  Yes, the angels announced His birth to humble “shepherds abiding in the field, keeping watch over their flock by night” (Luke 2:8), and some magi saw “His star in the east” and came “to worship Him” (Matthew 2:2); but His birth, as special as it was, was no miracle.  A line in a favorite Christmas carol says, “The cattle are lowing, the dear baby wakes; but little Lord Jesus no crying He makes.” That is a sweet sentiment, but it is completely false.  Jesus cried at His birth just like any other baby.  He wet and soiled his diapers, just like any other baby.  He took nourishment from Mary’s breasts as any baby would from its mother.  There was nothing miraculous in any of that.

The miracle was not in His birth, but in His incarnation as a zygote in a virgin’s womb.  Skeptics challenge this on the impossibility of a virgin conceiving without the natural function of a man, but the impossibility of such a thing is what qualifies it as a “miracle.”  Mary expressed the same concerns when the angel relayed the news of her impending pregnancy.  The angel assured her that “with God nothing shall be impossible” (Luke 1:37).  This was in keeping with and in the fulfillment of Isaiah’s prophecy saying “Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel” (Isaiah 7:14).  Critics will point out that the Hebrew word translated “virgin” here is ‘almā, which strictly translated means “young woman.”  However, the translators of the Septuagint translated the same Hebrew word into the Greek parthenos, which has no other meaning than “virgin.”  This is the same Greek word that Matthew uses when he points to the fulfillment of Isaiah’s prophecy: “Behold, a virgin [parthenos] shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us” (Matthew 1:23).

Another problem arises with Jesus’ lineage.  He was prophesied to be in the line of David the king (2 Samuel 7:12-13, 16).  This promise was confirmed to Mary by the angel Gabriel: “He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David” (Luke 1:32).  Matthew presents an ancestral line (Matthew 1:1-17) that disagrees with the ancestral line presented by Luke (Luke 3:23-38).  Matthew traces Jesus’ genealogy through Joseph, His adoptive father.  This line is the “legal” line to the throne of David; however, this line had been cursed by God at the time of Jehoiachin (Coniah) shortly before Judah fell to the Babylonian empire.  Jeremiah records: “Thus saith the LORD, Write ye this man [Coniah] childless, a man that shall not prosper in his days: for no man of his seed shall prosper, sitting upon the throne of David, and ruling any more in Judah” (Jeremiah 22:30).  Luke, on the other hand, records Jesus’ genealogy through Mary who takes a branch through Nathan, another son of David.  This line escaped the curse.

That resolves the legality issue of Jesus’ right to David’s throne, but now we have another problem.  Since the conception was “parthenogenetic,” that would imply that Jesus received at least part of His genes (His DNA) from Mary.  Mary, being human, is under the curse of original sin, as we all are.  That being the case, Jesus could not be the sinless sacrifice required to atone for our sin.  The Roman Catholic Church recognized this dilemma early on and attempted to resolve the problem by proclaiming Mary sinless.  To achieve this status, they further proclaimed that she was immaculately conceived, i.e., she too was virgin-born.  That begs the question then, how was Mary immaculately conceived, if her mother had a sin nature?  And what about her grandmother, and her great-grandmother, etc.  If one follows that line of reasoning to its logical conclusion, one comes to Eve in the Garden of Eden, and it is generally accepted that Eve sinned.  The solution cannot be in Mary’s sinless nature, for she, herself, was in need of a Savior.  “And Mary said, My soul doth magnify the Lord, And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour” (Luke 1:46-47).

The truth is, that if one of Mary’s ova was used in the conception, Jesus would have inherited our sin nature.  Even half of a sin nature is full of sin for “a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump” (Galatians 5:9).   In his book, The Chemistry of the Blood (Zondervan, 1943), Dr. M. R. DeHann attempted to resolve this problem based on the idea that it is the blood that makes atonement for sin (Hebrews 9:22).  He concluded that since the embryo develops its own blood, and since there is no blood exchanged between the embryo and its mother, therefore Jesus’ blood was sinless.  At first sight, this may look like a good solution, however, the embryo develops its own blood based on the genes that it gets from its parents.  There is no DNA in red blood cells, but there is DNA in an ovum, and Mary’s ova were contaminated.

The only reasonable solution that remains is that Jesus’ earthly body was a wholly (and yes, “holy”) and unique creation without the inherited sin nature of any human parent.  Understandably, the objection immediately arises that He, therefore, could not really be considered fully human.  To answer that objection, we must recall the creation of the “first Adam” (Genesis 1:27; 2:7).  God created man from the dust of the ground, including his DNA.  There was no human agent required for this process.  It should not be a stretch, therefore, to accept that God created an entirely new body for the “Second Adam.”  It should also not stretch the imagination, in our technological age, to understand that this new creation was implanted into Mary’s womb to be carried to term.  Mary was the “surrogate” mother of Jesus.  She contributed none of her DNA to give Him life, and therefore she contributed none of her sin nature.  Mary’s little lamb was truly “without blemish and without spot” (1 Peter 1:19).  Conceived in this way He was “holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners” (Hebrews 7:26), and because He developed in the womb from a zygote, He was “made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people” (Hebrews 2:17).  Jesus understood this. Once …

While he yet talked to the people, behold, his mother and his brethren stood without, desiring to speak with him.  Then one said unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy brethren stand without, desiring to speak with thee.  But he answered and said unto him that told him, Who is my mother? and who are my brethren?  And he stretched forth his hand toward his disciples, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren!  For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother (Matthew 12:46-50)

There is substantial scriptural support for the argument that Jesus’ body was an entirely new creation.  He “was made in the likeness of men” (Philippians 2:7).  Before His condescension, in conversation with His Father “he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me” (Hebrews 10:5).  It was the Divine plan from the beginning that the Savior “Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world” (1 Peter 1:20) would come to be the ransom for our sin.  Paul tells us that “The first man [Adam] is of the earth, earthy: the second man [Jesus] is the Lord from heaven” (1 Corinthians 15:47).  John tells us that “The Word was made flesh” (John 1:14).  This is as it should be “For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive” (1 Corinthians 15:22).

The miracle was the incarnation, not the birth.  It is an awesome thing to consider that the Creator of heaven and earth, would prepare for Himself a body of the same kind as His creation, begin life as a single human cell, go through the process of development in the womb of a virgin girl, pass through the birth canal, gasp for His first breath, grow up as a child and experience all the bumps and bruises of growing up, grow into manhood, only to give His life in the place of His fallen creation, so that we might experience life eternal with Him.  Who could conceive such a plan except a loving God!  It is too marvelous for words.

Merry Christmas!

*NOTE: This article was inspired by my Sunday school teacher and friend, Henry M. Morris III, D.Min., in a lesson he presented to our class on December 16, 2012.  Dr. Morris is CEO of the Institute for Creation Research, Dallas, Texas.

2 Comments

Filed under Apologetics, Christianity, Christmas, Creation, Gospel, Religion, Salvation, Theology

November 6, 2022 · 11:00

Who Got It Right?

After the Flood_Joseph_Anton_Koch

For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.. (Matthew 5:18)

Someone wrote to me with the following question: “Just wondering if you have done any research into the first civilization, according to science, known to man the Sumaritans [sic]. Their writings contain the original creation story that Moses and many others passed down?”

This is a common question that stems from the study of early world history that is based on evolutionary thinking. The inquirer is assuming that because the Sumerians wrote on clay tablets which have been preserved for thousands of years, that theirs is the oldest known written language, and that other cultures were incapable of writing.

The people before the Flood where highly intelligent people (Genesis 4:22-24) and probably had other methods of writing. It is quite possible that Noah had written records handed down from Adam, who died only a few hundred years before Noah was born. Noah’s grandfather, Methuselah, was alive around 250 years before Adam died. It is very possible that pre-Flood people wrote on papyrus or something like it so the genealogical record could be passed on. We might also consider the fact that God only gave Noah some general instructions for constructing the Ark (Genesis 6:14-16). I am sure you would agree that drawing out floor plans on clay tablets would have been rather cumbersome. So it seems reasonable that Noah had something more functional on which to draw his plans for the Ark.

The inquirer’s suggestion is based mostly on assumptions made by secular archeologists. Archeology is not an exact “science;” it is a “forensic” science that is highly subjective. Most secular archeologists are biased on the side of evolution, which influences their perception of what they discover. They assume that man “evolved” 100,000 years ago, and did not become “civilized” until sometime around 10,000 B.C. to 8000 B.C.

Since these “scientists” make assumptions based on evolutionary thinking, it is only fair that I be allowed to make some assumptions based on the biblical record. I am going to assume that Noah carried some sort of “paper” records on the Ark and continued to copy those records using the same medium. Paper records would not last thousands of years like those written on clay tablets, therefore, from our perspective, it “appears” that the Sumerian clay tablets are the oldest written record when in fact they are not, and they were actually pretty crude methods of writing even for their time. I will further assume that Noah and his descendants through Shem had more advanced methods of writing, albeit less durable than clay tablets. Writing on paper (papyrus) would require continual copying in order for the records to be preserved. Now, since no one can really corroborate either assumption, I will suggest that my assumption is just as valid as that of the evolutionary archeologists.

Having said that let me also suggest that the Sumerians, by the time they recorded their origins account and Flood story, had a distorted memory of those events. It is often suggested that Moses borrowed the Flood account from the Epic of Gilgamesh. But when one compares the Ark of Gilgamesh with the Ark of Noah, the two are completely different vessels. In fact, Gilgamesh’s Ark is built in the shape of a cube which would render the vessel extremely unseaworthy, while Noah’s Ark (or a model of it) has been laboratory tested and shown to be incredibly stable. What this shows is the Sumerians got it wrong and the Bible got it right.

The nature of such questions is the result of Satan’s unchanged tactic revealed in Genesis 3:1-5: (1) Create doubt in God’s Word: “Yea, hath God said …?” (2) Deny the veracity of God’s Word: “Ye shall not surely die,” and (3) Accuse God of keeping one from something better: “For God doth know that … ye shall be as gods.” His methods have not changed in over 6000 years, and sadly, even Christians fall for his lies. But the Author of the Bible says, “Till heaven and earth pass, one jot [the smallest letter in the Hebrew alphabet] or one tittle [the smallest distinguishing mark of a Hebrew letter] shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled” (Matthew 5:18). So, who got it right? Would you rather believe the words of men, or the Word of God?

 

8 Comments

Filed under Apologetics, Christianity, Creation, Evolution, Religion, Theology

Tagged as , , , , , , ,