Add/remove tags to this thread

Topic: 10) Restoration

Page 1 of 1  sorted by
Status: Offline
Posts: 939

10) Restoration


David Hill (29 Sep 2003) "The Theocratic Covenant (12)"

Being a critique of George Peters' Book The Theocratic Kingdom

R E S T O R A T I O N :

I have already provided quotes from the author and Scripture references to show that, when the nation is resurrected (Ez 37 - see post The Valley of Dry Bones), then so also will the Mosaic Covenant, and then the blessings of all three covenants will be realized by the inheritors during the Millennium and beyond (see his comments Vol 2 pg 117 which apply to this restoration of the Mos. Cov.). However, I would like to illustrate this further to set the stage for this section.

To this day I remember a discussion I had with an Amish friend in the Military, when we were talking about the Law, and he stated, "The Law was nailed to the Cross" in reference to Paul's words in Col 2:14. Well, I might ask, "What was nailed to the Cross?" and the answer is, obviously, Y'shua. Thus, Y'shua is the Law. So, for those who say that the Mos. Cov. is a permanently dead letter, I would ask this, "What happened to the Law three days later?" and, the answer is that it was resurrected. Thus, these three days became three of the Lord's days ("a thousand years in you sight is but one day"), and thus, on "the third day" (an incredible study in itself) the Law will be resurrected in the life of the nation ("Life from the dead" - Rom 11).

Why was Abraham heartbroken for three days (Gen 22:4)? Because the Heavenly Father of Many Nations was heartbroken for three days (Is 48:16-19).

Why was Isaac silent for those same three days? Because there was no Laughter in Israel for three days (John 16:21).

Why was Joseph justified on the third day (Gen 40:18)? Because the Dreamweaver Counted on that third day (Mt 27:62-66).

Why did Moses journey three days into the Barren Wilderness (Ex 3:18)? Because the Living Waters (John 4) were Drawn Out for three days (John 19:34).

Why did Joshua enter the promised land on the third day (Jos 1:11)? Because the Savior entered the Heavenly Land on the third day (John 20:17).

Why did Samson pose his riddle for three days (Jud 14:14)? Because the Shining One (Mt 17:2) had everyone puzzled for three days (Lk 24:21).

Why did they look for Elijah for three days (2 K 2:17)? Because they looked for Their God Yah for three days (John 7:33, 13:33).

Why was Jonah fasting and praying for three days? Because the Doves were mourning for three days (John 16:20)*.

Why was Ephraim raised up on the third day (Hos 6:2)? Because the Grain (John 12:24) was Fruitful on the third day.

Why was Saul blind for three days (Acts 9:9)? Because there was no Answer in Israel for three days (Mk 15:3-5, Acts 8:32, Is 53:7).

Why was David at Ezel for three days (1 Sam 20:19)? Because the Beloved had Departed for three days (Lk 9:31 "decease" = "Exodus").

So, why will Judah be restored on the third day (Ezra 10:6-9)? Because the Celebration was restored on the third day (John 16:22 see also Dt 33:7).

To my Jewish brethren I would ask, in reference to the last verse above by Moses: When was Judah ever separated from his people? For, even in exile and captivity he has always played a prominent, Kingly role in the life of the nation (like Daniel in Babylon). Thus, history testifies to the fact that the verse must be read Messianically as, "Hear, Y'hava, the voice of Judah and return him to his people." For those Jews who say (Vol 1 pg 378) that there is no "clear, unequivocal prophecy" from the Old Testament concerning the Second Advent of Messiah - here it is.

This application of the three days can be applied to the Resurrection itself (note Y'shua's reference to this same verse in John 10:18 - who do you think pointed out that interpretation to me?) and, as all the rest above, a second application can be made to the Return itself after three of the Lord's days for, Y'shua was (and is) The Son of God. Note also that this prophecy was not recorded in Jacob's blessing of the tribes, but comes to us from the Mosaic Economy, obviously, for a reason, I might add.

* On an extremely personal three-day-note (which I hesitate to include) : On the previous three days from "The third day of the third Jewish month in the year of our Lord 2,001" there were no terrorist attacks in Israel. This was during the heighth of the intifada, when there had been attacks every day. Yet for three solid days there were none (enough to make special notice of it over the radio). "How can the birds be singing on a day like this?" Christians would say that anyone who would blow themselves up to kill someone else is, obviously, suffering from Demonic Possession or Oppression. The Demons are typified by the Fowls of the Air in the Word (Mt 13:4,19 note especially Is 18:6). So, why were there no Birds "singing" in Israel for three days? Because the wrath of the Lamb was rekindled in those three days.

All of this is as powerful a statement as can be made (humanly speaking) to the Jews that Y'shua is the Son of God - following as it will upon the resurrection of those Jews and Christians believers who have accepted the New Covenant during those three days, and will go along way to prepare the nation itself, as a nation, to receive that same New Covenant (Zech 12 etc). Thus, I challenge them to find a more Scriptural description of all the covenants, including the New, as laid out in this series of posts and as it has been manifested in the history of their nation and that of Ephraim. The time is coming, very soon, when one will come unto you saying, "Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand, again, and this time, it ain't gonna be postponed!" (compare the Holy One Y'shua at the first offer of the New Covenant, and The Watcher Prince David of the second offer of the New Covenant in Dan 4 where Neba's seven insane years are a type of the Church Age and were held in abeyance to be fulfilled in the seven year tribulation or Time of Jacob's Trouble).

Then all eyes are going to be on you, and what you do with this man (Hos 2:16) Y'shua. On that day, when you "look upon me who you have pierced" and God then carves the Law on your heart, Paul says that it will be life from the dead (Rom 11, Ez 37). This is The Day that he also describes as all creation groaning until the Sons of God are revealed, and Peter as hastening unto The Day. I am here to tell you: that day is now. "Behold, now is the accepted time, now is Yom Y'shua" (Is 49, 2 Cor 6, Ps 95).

"Scott remarks that it denotes the restoration of a thing to the state from which it had fallen, and that it must include the Sec. Coming and the restoration of Israel. Dr. Bell says: "The word translated 'restitution' might berendered 'restoration'"...But what is to be restored, brought back to its former condition with increased glory? Gerok quotes Baumgarten as saying, "Nothing else than the Kingdom of Israel, the whole power and glory of the Israelite Kingdom." While Gerok justly observes that it includes more, as the prophets predicted, yet Baumgarten is right in laying stress on the restoration of the Theocratic Kingdom; for that is the burden of prophecy, that is the main, leading object to which the eye of faith and hope is directed." (Vol 2 pgs 465-6)

The first thing that we need to realize is that the descriptions of this Restoration in Ezekiel 40-48 are referring to a mortal Prince and people and Priesthood (not Glorified Saints), who live through the tribulation (Vol 3 pg 87).

"The Prince is a mortal man; for to him are ascribed "sons" to whom he may give gifts etc (ch 45:16 18), and he is exhorted not to do wrong...This Prince being thus mortal and un-glorified, is subject to sinfulness, for he is exhorted to offer "a sin offering" in behalf of "himself" as well as for all the people, which cannot be applied to Christ...The Theocratic rule here delineated is very different from that exhibited under Christ and His associated body of Rulers...The only answer that might be given is this: That this Prince is a mortal, ruling over the Jewish nation at its future restoration under - subject to - the Reign of Christ."

I hesitate to state the obvious because some, in the past, have misunderstood my viewpoint, or misinterpreted the Scriptures on this subject. However, because of its importance in this very subject of the Restoration, with Peters I conclude that, "Consideration urged that, as God proclaimed it, and frequently adverted to it, duty and faithfulness demanded its insertion as a testimony and warning to others." (Vol 2 pg 102)

It is obvious, as Peters stated, that this Prince cannot be Y'shua, and just as obviously, and for the exact same reasons, he cannot be King David himself (as Pentecost says in "Things to Come"), for in that day King David will be in a resurrected and glorified body as a citizen of the New Jerusalem (Heb 11:32, 12:1), and will not, at that time, sin or have offspring. The obvious reason why some propose this is because this individual is specifically mentioned by name in the Word.

Jeremiah records his name (30:9 - note the significance of his name being mentioned in the New Covenant passage and compare with Is 55:3 and see my post Theoferrum - "Let him who reads the letter execute the message"), and that God would raise him up. This is not referring to a resurrection, for God raised up Moses for the nation of Israel at the Exodus (Am 2:11), and Judges (Jud 2:16) and King David himself (2 Sam 23:1) and Y'shua at the First Advent (Lk 1:69).

Ezekiel (34:23-24, 37:24-25) also calls him by name and states that, as a shepherd he would feed God's flock under a "covenant of peace" and calls him a Prince. This is further detailed in Chapter 37, which is the chapter on this very Restoration of Israel (The Dry Bones and Two Sticks - again see my post Theoferrum for the perfect merging of these two sticks) and gives us a clue to his ancestry, for he will be descended from Judah and specifically from David (per Jer 33:21 - the New Covenant Passage again), on his father's side and from Ephraim on his mother's side (The Male Child of Rev as the 13th star must descend from Ephraim, the 13th tribe in order of birth and from Joseph, for this honor and blessing was given to him in the dream originally, and not to Judah or any other tribe - Gen 37:9). In this way, because both houses can claim him as their Prince, the nation is bonded together again and the enmity between them (Is 11:13) is ended. By the way, note that it is the LORD who is stating this and this is Y'SHUA; there is no other way to interpret these passages, and whoever would do so, inadvertently removes Y'shua's Divine Right to that position of Y'hova in the Word - they try to rob him of His Glory and not me (Job 34:33). [1]

Hosea (3:5) also names him and links it to "the latter days." There are many more passages in both the Old and New Testaments that confirm this teaching and add more details (Hos 1:11, Mic 5:3-6, Hab 3:13 etc), specifically to his position as Prince over reunited Israel, just as all the other mortal nations will have mortal Kings ruling over them, in submission to this Prince of Israel who is himself subject solely to Y'shua.

But note this: Y'shua had seen these prophecies in the Word and knew that they were not referring to himself or King David, therefore he rightfully understood that this person would be Prince over Israel in the end times and Millennium directly under Y'shua's rule, which is the only view that explains some of his statements in the New Testament referring to this individual (Mt 11:11, 17:20 - Zech 4:7, Mt 24:47 where "Household" is the Davidic Throne, Mk 4:31, Lk 6:48, Mt 13:52, Lk 10:22 - 1 John 4:12, Lk 12:43 - Rev 12:5 etc), including one very well known passage (John 5:43) which most (if not all) interpreters apply to the Antichrist, however it is assuredly (keeping the above Scriptures in mind and Y'shua's understanding of them) referring to Prince David (who offers the New Covenant to Judah the second time), and that is the passage that reads, "If another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive." Y'shua's name, as such, was not connected with these prophecies of this anointed, however, and this is the key, Y'shua saw himself in the prophecies wherever Y'hova is mentioned and thus "I am come in my Abba's name" because Y'shua is Y'hova (John 10:30, 8:58). See especially Zechariah 12:8-10 which completely proves my point, for Y'shua could not have interpreted that Messianic passage any other way then that he was the one whom they would "pierce" and that, therefore, he was Y'hova who was speaking (and in fact, since "no man has seen God at any time" - 1 John 4:12 spoken after the Revelation was received by the way - then every appearance of Y'hova in the Old Testament must be that of Y'shua himself, as stated in my post the Son of Man). And this was his Divine Right and legal title to the Theocratic Throne as Y'hova, born from the Loin's of David.

He, then, also knew that this Prince David could not claim any such Divine Right, and in fact, might not be able to prove his lineage from David (because of the coming destruction of Jerusalem and exile which he already knew would last about 2,000 years), or from Ephraim (because they were already lost and would continue as such for those same 2000 years), and thus (Zech 9:6-7) would have to fall back on the three prophets who called him specifically by "his own name" (thus see Mark 9:38-40). I believe that he is also called "a servant of Kings" in Isaiah which is exactly how he appears in Ez 40-48 (and my post Theoferrum) as a servant to Y'shua. Hence, he is commonly called the Prince, as opposed to Y'shua who is the King of Kings.

With all these in mind (that Y'shua is Y'hova in the Old Testament), then we see that the Vice Regency was established by the Mosaic Covenant (which answers Rabbi Bibas' question of "Two Rulers" - Vol 3 pg 88), for the mortal nation at Sinai, when they were so terrified by the presence of Y'shua in His Glory as Y'hova (as were the disciples Mk 9:6), that they requested Moses (a mortal man) to be their Daysman between themselves and God (Ex 20:19, Dt 5:23-33). But note especially that the Lord heard their request and said, "they have well spoken" and laments that they should always thus fear Him. So, the Lord then established the Vice Regency in the Theocracy which eventually became known as the Davidic Throne and Covenant - a mortal shepherd over a mortal nation, directly and solely under the authority of Y'shua bar Y'hova. Thus, the restoration of the Davidic Throne must include this Vice Regency; it can't be otherwise.

When we realize this (and that this was Y'shua and "He changes not"), then this Vice Regency in Ezekiel is a logical (and the only) conclusion to the prophecies, with the New Jerusalem on earth so paired with the Old Jerusalem (God's "footstool") as to be indistinguishable from it (note the plural Thrones in Ps 122:5 and "compact together" means a joining together as in a marriage), as Peters himself says.

"It is impossible to separate the Glorified (The King and Co-Rulers) from the unglorified, for they are united, the one as authoritative head and the other as specially exalted in view of this union (hence numerous prophecies make no distinction between the two, but speak of the nation as it shall be when restored and associated with the glorified seed of Abraham - which gives the Key to the magnificent language employed)...The relationship of the Jewish nation restored (mortal) to the glorified portion, is an inseparable union, and...the supremacy accorded to such a union necessitates that language of the prophets respecting the supremacy of the nation, as it shall be in the future, without discriminating; and...this supremacy (owing to Divine Ordering) pertain(s) to a nation which is described in conditions restricted to a mortal condition, and yet exalted to it in view of the overruling Divine Government instituted in its behalf under the rulership of the Glorified Messiah and his coheirs. Looking at only one side of the subject is doing violence to the unity of covenant and prophecy, which has two sides, a human and a divine." (Vol 2 pgs 97-100)

Thus his own words above perfectly meets his own objections to the Vice Regency as predicted in Ez 40-48 (below). This splendorous union of the Thrones of King Y'shua and Prince David is wonderfully explained in my posts the Theoferrum Crucibulum, for the mature Christian and Jews to contemplate. And this Vice Regency of Prince David to King Y'shua (Rev 3:21, 12:5 etc), as here presented, is portrayed in the Mountain Kingdom and the Stone Kingdom of Dan 2:34-35, 44-45, where the Mountain Kingdom is Y'shua and the Glorified Saints, forming a Kingdom already in existence at the end of the trib, which Peters makes note of.

"Such passages include the idea, that the authoritative manifestation of Theocratic Rule is exhibited, before it issues forth from the desert. It is a form ready for action before it emerges from the Wilderness. Considering the formation of the Theocracy with its added hosts of Kings and Priests in so isolated a place, secluded from the observation of the nations, and its sudden and overwhelming appearance, it may be a question whether Christ had not this initiatory stage in view when He told the Pharisees, "the Kingdom of God cometh not with observation" seeing that it is not only divinely instituted, but this is done in a secluded manner and place, so that when it appears it is already so organized as to be irresistible, etc." (Vol 3 pg 23)

And, in fact, this Mountain, which is emblematic of an existing Kingdom, is literally a reference to "The Throne of Glory" the New Jerusalem itself, when it is established on this earth at the start of the Millennium (Vol 3 pg 39). Thus, the Stone cut out of the Mountain, is the restoration of the Theocracy via the Davidic House and Covenant and its Vice Regency, because, "The change from a Stone to a Mountain is unsuitable to Christ." (Vol 1 pg 683). The restored mortal nation and its Capitol City the Old Jerusalem will be built up during the Millennium (Songs 8:8-14), into a Mountain (Kingdom) because of the Kingdom of Y'shua represented by this very Mountain.

This is why, throughout the Word, there are scattered references to the Lord having two armies (a Heavenly one that returns with Him as in Rev 19 etc, and an earthly one composed of mortals from Ephraim and Judah as in Zech 9:11-16 which is this Stone cut out of the Mountain). The 68th Psalm is a classic example, which Peters (quoting three different sources, one of which is a Jewish Rabbi - Vol 3 pg 20) says could be translated as, "The Horsemen of God are two companies of myriads" and may not Ezekiel 37 describe this earthly army, along with other passages in the Word (the Armies of the King in Matt 22:7 that exact justice on the murders, and notice especially Is 60:22 where a Small One (The Stone) becomes a "Strong Nation" which is exactly the same phrase used in Joel 2:5 as "A Strong Nation set in Battle Array," again a possible further reference to Ez 37). And in the chaos of those events, the ability of Prince David to be able to coordinate the earthy army in tandem with Y'shua and His Heavenly Army, would be of the utmost importance for the nation itself. This ability to communicate with the Lord is amply illustrated in my post Theoferrum. And, I might add, this dual army is exactly portrayed for us in the vision of George Washington and America's final battle where the Heavenly army assists the earthly army to rid the country of the enemy invaders.

The author rejects this Vice Regency solely because Christ is not "introduced" in the passages in Ezekiel which he should be if this is the Millennial Reign of Messiah (not-with-standing his additional arguments that have already been more than amply addressed - Vol 2 pg 207). However, Mr. Peters failed to realize that Y'shua is introduced (chap 43) for the Lord here is Y'shua, visiting the mortals from the New Jerusalem (see my post Mt. Zion). He then goes on to say, therefore, that this promise to Prince David in Ezekiel is simply conditional and because the Jews didn't repent (?) when they came back from Babylon, that the prophecy will never be fulfilled (even after stating that the Temple will be rebuilt "with a magnificence (see Is 60 etc) superior to the former" which he derived from Hag 2:9 - Vol 2 pg 496), which he then subsequently contradicts by stating that it will be fulfilled by the Church offering Spiritual Sacrifices (along with a whole host of other Millennial predictions that also are not conditional - Is 2:3, 60:1-22, 61:6, Jer 30:17-22, 33:18-21, Zech 14:16-21 which positively show the restoration of the Mos. Cov.) all of which he then lumps under the very technical and professional (please give me some authority) term "Hypocatastasis" (Vol 3 pg 89), which is nothing more than the Spiritualization (Hypercomatosis?) method of interpretation that he demolishes in Vol 1.

The conditionality of these passages is refuted by the same rebuttals presented respecting the same in the Mosaic Covenant, and we have removed the motivation and authority for making them conditional (for Y'shua is the main personage of the passages that the Prince and People are waiting for - chap 44). The reason the Scriptures could not be more specific was so that the Nation could be put in the most favorable position for repentance at the First Advent (Vol 1 pg 364) which would not have been possible if Ezekiel had described the Mill Glory of the Messiah, as such, here.

"The entire tenor of the prediction in its relation to the Prince, the Priests, the Sacrificers, etc., makes a decided impression that it describes a continuation of the Mosaic Ritual, not retrospectively or commemoratively but prospectively in the form instituted under Moses and retained by David (e.g. Ez 45:17-25)." (Vol 3 pg 87)

Here, it is clear from his own Literal Interpretation, that the Mosaic Covenant is restored during the (tribulation and) Millennium, including the animal sacrifices (though with some very interesting and prophetical changes...), which is the real reason that authors try to explain away these passages. For, we know from Barnabas (writer of Hebrews - see the Son of Consolation in the Biography Section) that it was never possible for the blood of animals to cleanse our spirits from sin, so they fail to see (now that the Sacrifice that can do so has been offered) why God would allow them to be restored which they consider a personal affront to God. However, they are not looking at this from God's perspective (through the Eternal Spirit - Heb 9:14), for this sacrifice in God's Eyes was "slain from the foundation of the World" (1 Pet 1:20). Thus, this sacrifice was the first sacrifice slain, and these people should actually be asking themselves, why did God allow animal sacrifices in the first place.

Part of the reason was as a "schoolmaster" to bring us (mortal men) to Messiah, which will still be true of those mortals born during the tribulation and Millennium. As some Theologians say, they were "prospective" looking forward (in our view) to the Cross, so, as some say, these are retrospective, looking back to his sacrifice, which is assuredly another part of the equation. Another part that all miss is that, when these sacrifices are restored, it is to supply the needs of the Priesthood, the Levites who have no inheritance in the land and must, therefore, derive their sustenance from the people of the nation. Also, they don't just go kill the animals and burn them up, but the Priests and People partook (1 Cor 9:13) of the Altar (how many cows does Burger King 'sacrifice' every day?). As long as the Levitical Priesthood lasts, then, to some extent, so too will the Tithes and Offerings and (temporarily) these Sacrifices.

The reason for their (temporary) cessation was because it would have been impossible for the Gentile Christians, in their totality, to make pilgrimage to Jerusalem three times a year to offer these sacrifices, along with the nation itself; thus, the logical conclusion and authoritative ordinance by the Apostles (Mt 16:19, Acts 15), that the Gentile believers did not have to fulfill the Levitical requirements. So, since Y'shua knew this, as well as the coming destruction of the Temple complex anyways (Dan 9), he made provision for this lack, which we call the Lord's supper, drawn from His Passover Sacrifice. It is also true that these same Gentile believers are predicted to receive their glorified bodies before this restoration, so that there will be no need, in this (near) future sinless condition to ever fulfill the Levitical ordinances. The Church, then, are the inheritors of the Kingdom, which is not the same as the mortals who are the subjects of the Kingdom ("flesh and blood can not inherit the Kingdom" - mortals). Thus, Peters quotes, "Tyng (He will come, pg 159) correctly observes: 'It is a very false representation of Scripture which pictures the Church as subjects of the Coming Kingdom. They shall indeed acknowledge a submission to their Lord, but toward the inhabitants of the earth they will assert a majesty. For this they will have been qualified by their glorification, and to this they have even now been assigned by prophecy and promise.'" (Vol 2 pg 574)

Thus, for the Church the Mos. Cov. has been set aside, but to the mortals of the nation during the tribulation and into the Millennium there will still be a need for this law of the schoolmaster to bring them to maturity in Messiah before their own glorification ( thus, mortals are servants to the Law and immortals are Sons of the Law - Gal 4:1-2 etc, and note the verse that says of this mortal nation that they will be circumcised in the flesh and in the spirit at that time Dt 30 etc).

Now, the need for provision in the Lord's Supper can be understood by Peter's word concerning how Baptism saves us, "not by putting away the sins of the flesh but by the answer of a clear conscience before God." Even though Y'shua's blood has cleansed our spirits from sin, the need for continual "foot washing" of the conscience in this (still) fallen world remains; the guilt (a product of the conscience - Watchman Nee "The Spiritual Man") still remains. The Key to understanding the ordinances of the animal sacrifices and the Lord's Passover is found here. This gives us something we can do to clear our consciences after Y'shua's blood has cleansed our spirits (implied in Heb 9:13 where "flesh" includes the mind or conscience - W. Nee). This then frees us for fellowship with him and each other as a community, and this will always be the case for mortals living in a fallen world, including during the Millennium. If a person understands this penitent sacrificial system, then there remains no problem with the reinstitution of them as is predicted in the Word. And, actually, this is the only logical explanation of why God allowed them in the first place. [2]


Page 1 of 1  sorted by
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.

Members Login

Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse
Powered by ActiveBoard