 |
|
|
Something BIG is in the air! 1994 is going to be a pivotal year. I can FEEL it--you can feel it--numerous Christian leaders and prophets of the Lord are declaring it! Pastor John Hickle of Christ Church, Los Angeles, received a word from the Lord that evil will be ripped from the land in June.
-- Paul Crouch, March 1994, TBN Newsletter
|
|
| |
Contexts for “Universalistic” Texts: part 3 (Is.53:6)
Posted on Tuesday, October 25 @ 10:27:53 PDT by Chris Charles |
|
Erick submitted: "“All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned, every one, to his own way; and the LORD has laid on Him the iniquity of us all.” (Is. 53:6)
This is the third article in a series meant to engage the contexts of the verses that are sited in support of a universal atonement/reconciliation.
I am seeking only to address the most popular texts in an effort to be brief - the first article was regarding 1 Jn. 2:2, and the second 1 Tm. 2:4-6. To reiterate my position I am of the conviction that Christ died for all peopleS without distinction NOT all people without exception, and I believe that the Scriptures support this; however, there are not a few verses that are often brought up against the doctrine of particular redemption that must be addressed. Therefore, what I’m seeking to provide is a remedy for the Preterist Universalist proof-text through Biblical context.
Conceptually, it is not odd for the preterist to see “global” or “world” language used in a limited sense, and logically it is easy enough to see that one could refer to every people without singling out every person, but the task remains to show that the Scriptural evidence (particularly in regards to these “universalistic” texts) is more in line with an ethnic-inclusive redemption plan than a omni-individual plan. Admittedly, these articles are not explicitly arguing the positive case FOR particular redemption, but simply demonstrating that preterist Universalists are overlooking key contextual clues for understanding these most beloved verses leading to a disingenuous representation of the Biblical authors’ original intent.
From the perspective of this “particularist” the glorious mystery revealed in the New Testament that took the limits off of covenant union with YHWH and extended it to all nations must now unfortunately be spoken of as “limited” in contrast to what the New Testament authors never meant to teach, i.e. that reconciliation was guaranteed to every individual regardless of faith in God’s only begotten Son. It is my contention that it is more correct to speak of the classic doctrine of “Particular Redemption” as extensive, and universal reconciliation in all its forms as “hyper”-extensive – that is, taking the New Testament doctrine of a multi-national Covenant “Israel” rooted in faith and redefining it as an omni-individual Covenant enjoyed regardless of faith. The passage in question cannot be used to support “hyper-extensivism,” yet as we will discover, it is glorious in its own right as a precious promise of an inclusive salvation to come with the Christ of God who inherited the nations.
To begin, we must ask, “What would compel a student of God’s word to consider that Isaiah 53:6 may be speaking in terms of the elect from all nations, and not universal redemption for all individuals, or even redemption for all physical Jews?” In answer will note that there are several reasons, the first coming from the previous chapter when the author states, “YHWH has made bare His holy arm in the eyes of all the nations; and all the ends of the earth shall see the salvation of our God” (52:10). And in verse 15 he continues, “So shall he sprinkle [or “startle”] MANY nations. KINGS shall shut their mouths at Him…” The “kings’” astonishment over the news of Christ demonstrates that Isaiah has in mind a world-wide dissemination of the gospel, and we know that the ultimate prophetic fulfillment of these verses was accomplished through the first century missionary journeys of Paul et. al., and so very early on Isaiah sets the stage for an international “report” that will astonish the nations. Similarly, we saw in 1 Tm. 2:2 Paul requesting that prayers and intercessions be offered for these kings so that among other things the Church could in essence be fruitful and multiply among the Gentiles (Paul’s target audience (2:7)).
Another clue in discerning the message of Isaiah 53:6 is found in 53:11, 12 “By His knowledge My Servant will justify MANY for He will bear THEIR iniquities…And He bore the sin of MANY, and made intercession for the transgressors”? The Septuagint states it as follows:
“The Lord also is pleased to take away from the travail of his soul, to show him light, and to form him with understanding; to justify the just one who serves many well; and he shall bear their sins. Therefore he shall inherit many, and shall divide the spoils of the mighty; because his soul was delivered to death; and he was numbered among the transgressors; and he bore the sins of many, and was delivered because of their iniquities.”
We must ask ourselves if “many” has now been redefined apart from the “nations” it was previously referring to - the “heathen” which the Son would inherit (Ps. 2:8). It may be possible that it is a different qualitative group than the “many nations” in 52:15, but we must not be too hasty in making such a separation. We find keys to unlocking this mystery from several New Testament passages. The language we find in Isaiah sounds very similar to that of Heb. 9:28 regarding Christ bearing the sins of the “many.” And, who is this “many” that Christ died for in Hebrews? We don’t have to wonder, or guess, the author of Hebrews tells us plainly within the discourse, he states, “For by one offering He has perfected forever those who are being sanctified [i.e. set apart for salvation of the soul (Heb. 10:39)].” In Hebrews it is only those marked out for salvation through Christ’s Priesthood that is included in the congregation of the “many.”
It is this “many” that Christ has in mind when he institutes the Lord’s Supper, saying, “For this is My blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many for the remission of sins” (Mt. 26:28 cf.20:28). This forgiveness of sins only came to those who “drank the blood” and “ate the flesh” of the Son of Man, and no others. “Many” in this case is therefore an extensive term in regards to its multi-national connotation, but it’s also an exclusive term in its reference to those in Christ. We see Paul using the term “many” primarily in a multi-national sense in Rm. 5:15 when talking about Adamic sin being spread to all peopleS. In a verse that is classically (yet hastily in my opinion) applied to every individual Paul states, “For if by one man’s offense many died, much more the grace of God and the gift by grace of the One Man, Jesus Christ abound to [the] many…For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so also by one Man’s obedience [the] many will be made righteous (Rm. 5:15, 19).
Paul is teaching nothing new here, but simply reiterating Isaiah’s doctrine that “All we [every race] like sheep have gone astray” (cf. 1 Pt. 1:2; 2:21-25 spoken to the Jewish “elect”). The Jews were a chosen race but they like the Gentiles were under sin, and God “does not show [racial] partiality” (Rm. 2:11; 3:9). As a Calvinist one might be temped to state that “the many” is a word that “limits” the work of Christ, but technically in context it was a word used by the authors to “extend” the work of Christ to nations beyond Israel. But again, to make an ethnically inclusive term for all peopleS into an individually inclusive term for all people is not being fair to the original intent of the apostle Paul’s doctrine of the “mystery,” i.e. that the Gentiles (a qualitative NOT quantitative term) would be part of “Israel” (a covenantal term).
Someone may say, “In Is. 54 Isaiah speaks of God as being “Israel’s Redeemer,” and who but every national fleshly Jew would he be referring to? Certainly this at least means that regardless of the number of Gentiles at least ALL fleshly Israelis will be reconciled, that Christ is the Redeemer of ALL physical Israel?” But is this really the case? No! Again, we find out in the New Testament that the people associated with Isaiah are ONLY the “elect” children of the heavenly Zion (cf. Is. 52:7-10 cf. Hb. 12:22), and that THESE are the people (according to Paul) that Isaiah himself has in mind when he tells the barren woman to “sing” only a few verses later (Is. 54:1). To Paul, “ALL Israel” is the elect Jew and the elect Gentile. Concerning the gospel some Jews were made enemies of God for the elect Gentiles’ sake, but concerning the election (i.e. of that particular nationality/race) some Jews were beloved by God for the sake of the patriarchs. In saving all of the elect Jews and Gentiles God in Christ saves ALL ISRAEL.
You will recognize this particular verse (Is. 54:1) from Galatians 4:27 when after teaching the Gentile Christians that the apostate Jews where NOT heirs of the prophetic promises for redemption, and that those Jews were in bondage and to be “cast out,” (i.e. not enjoying the redemptive benefits of the New Covenant including reconciliation) he then tells these Galatian believers, that, “the Jerusalem above is free and the mother of US ALL, for it is written: Rejoice [Sing]…” Now, here again ALL must mean ALL OF THE ELECT from every nation because it makes absolutely no sense to state that this ALL is omni-individual or in reference to every Jew when it is specifically juxtaposed to the Jewish “children of the bondwoman.”
Therefore, when we come to Is. 53:6 in particular we find the author at the end of a long discourse that preaches (among other things) judgment upon the Old Covenant nation of Israel - interspersed with glimmers of hope for the humble - we should not think to ourselves that Isaiah is suddenly changing his tune to grant the wicked of his day or any other era some type of a post-mortem and/or “last days” second chance (which would seem to be necessary in the Preterist Universalist’s scheme for all those who died in their wickedness prior to the Parousia) though he does promise hope to the Commonwealth as a nationality in general. In light of the many warnings about trusting in ones national heritage for salvation in the New Testament we should not, indeed we cannot, accept as an option that being born Jewish granted one a free ticket to eternal life and therefore a RECONCILIATORY relationship to God. Even under the Old Covenant the High Priest’s work was not valid for the Jew who sinned presumptuously, or was cut off from his people (Nm. 15:30-31), so we “go beyond the Scriptures” to make the benefits of Christ’s atonement extend to those who live and die in rejection of the High Priest, the Covenant Community, the Sacrifice, and the gift; and be sure “reconciliation” is a benefit derived from the cross and priesthood of Christ.
When Isaiah states that God would lay upon the suffering servant “the iniquity of us all” the Spirit has in mind not every Jew, nor every individual per se, but every nation and people who all share in corruption. This included men like the Ethiopian eunuch who (though a worshiper of YHWH) was confused over the meaning of Isaiah 53, and though - it could be argued - unable to be considered a part of the “assembly of YHWH” according to Law (Dt. 23:1), would now be ushered into the Presence of God through faith in Christ (Act. 8:37). This gospel proclaimed by Paul was what excited the Gentiles in Antioch and repulsed the Jews, namely that, “through this Man is preached to YOU [Jews] the forgiveness of sins; and by Him EVERYONE [Jew AND Gentile] who BELIEVES is justified from all things from which YOU [Jews] could not be justified by the Law of Moses… So when the Jews went out of the synagogue, the Gentiles begged that these words might be preached to them the next Sabbath” (Act. 13:38-39,42) The Jews eventually rejected Paul’s multi-national gospel while the Gentiles rejoiced as Paul continued to preach from Isaiah (Act. 13:47). Paul’s message was clear, no faith equals no justification, and without being justified before God the Judge one is not reconciled to God the Creator. What upset the Jews about Paul’s gospel were the implications, i.e. not that every individual could be justified before God, but that GENTILES could be, and that apart from the Law.
All of these considerations should influence our interpretation of Is. 53:6. I do pray that the Preterist Universalist will reconsider using this particular verse to support their claim of universal individual reconciliation; for only those who have their iniquities placed upon Christ can be reconciled to God, and this particular passage (as well as 1 Jn. 2:2, and 1 Tm. 2:4-6) does not teach that Christ’s atonement was for every individual, but “all” peopleS. As full-preterists we have many issues to debate and implications to explore, and keeping an open mind is essential to this process, however, as long as THESE particular passages are foundational to the Preterist Universalists’ view, that view will be undermined. In other words, if the Bible does teach Preterist Universalism we cannot conclude (in light of their contexts) that it is taught in THESE passages. Therefore, without extending reconciliation beyond the scope of the divine Author’s intent, let us rejoice in the God who reconciles without national distinction all those individuals who have been given to His Son.
Erick Blore
"
|
| |
|
^^Go to Top -  E-mail to Friend -  Print -  View PDF -  Subscribe -  Comments RSS
Re: Contexts for “Universalistic” Texts: part 3 (Is.53:6) (Score: 1)
 by MichaelB on Tuesday, October 25 @ 13:11:55 PDT
(User Info | Send a Message) | Good article Erick. Look what we see in Isaiah 54.
Isaiah 54
1 "Sing, O barren woman,
you who never bore a child;
burst into song, shout for joy,
you who were never in labor;
because more are the children of the desolate woman
than of her who has a husband,"
says the LORD.
It is quoted again in Galatians 4
Galatians 4
25Now Hagar stands for Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to the present city of Jerusalem, because she is in slavery with her children. 26But the Jerusalem that is above is free, and she is our mother. 27For it is written:
"Be glad, O barren woman,
who bears no children;
break forth and cry aloud,
you who have no labor pains;
because more are the children of the desolate woman
than of her who has a husband."
28Now you, brothers, like Isaac, are children of promise. 29At that time the son born in the ordinary way persecuted the son born by the power of the Spirit. It is the same now. 30But what does the Scripture say? "Get rid of the slave woman and her son, for the slave woman's son will never share in the inheritance with the free woman's son."
What was the inheritance...
Matthew 25
34"Then the King will say to those on his right, 'Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world.
|
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
- by Erick on Tuesday, October 25 @ 16:27:39 PDT
- by Ed on Tuesday, October 25 @ 16:59:03 PDT
- by MichaelB on Tuesday, October 25 @ 19:23:22 PDT
- by MichaelB on Tuesday, October 25 @ 19:46:10 PDT
- by Ed on Wednesday, October 26 @ 05:14:07 PDT
- by MichaelB on Wednesday, October 26 @ 08:57:12 PDT
- by Ed on Wednesday, October 26 @ 13:20:00 PDT
- by Erick on Tuesday, October 25 @ 20:34:06 PDT
- by Virgil on Tuesday, October 25 @ 20:46:21 PDT
- by Erick on Wednesday, October 26 @ 06:57:26 PDT
- by Ed on Wednesday, October 26 @ 05:21:25 PDT
- by Erick on Wednesday, October 26 @ 07:20:35 PDT
- by Ed on Wednesday, October 26 @ 13:12:25 PDT
- by Erick on Wednesday, October 26 @ 13:52:26 PDT
Your Bottom Line –- in a nutshell (Score: 1)
 by davo on Wednesday, October 26 @ 05:22:12 PDT
(User Info | Send a Message) |
Erick: …we should not think to ourselves that Isaiah is suddenly changing his tune to grant the wicked of his day or any other era some type of a post-mortem and/or “last days” second chance (which would seem to be necessary in the Preterist Universalist’s scheme for all those who died in their wickedness prior to the Parousia)
Erick: In light of the many warnings about trusting in ones national heritage for salvation in the New Testament we should not, indeed we cannot, accept as an option that being born Jewish granted one a free ticket to eternal life…
This then is clearly where the rubber hits the road – this in a nutshell is the basis of your articles – your issue with what you see as "a post mortem second chance" i.e., "a free ticket to eternal life…".
Consistently your arguments are against generic universalism; yet taking into account the 'end of the ages' can you show me, a PANTELIST, from Scripture how you delineate this idea that either eternal conscious torment or annihilation awaits POST MORTEM any who otherwise in your scheme of things DO NOT how ever it is you determine it, meet the grade and are thus summarily dismissed by God. Many "judgment" passages are easily explainable in terms of temporal i.e., physical cessation of existence, as to what can be seen as consequences as per actions, as was applicable to that end of which Jesus addressed, i.e., the end of the Mosaic economy as typified by Temple and Priesthood etc.
Where is it necessitated that the "inheritance of the kingdom" CONTEXUALLY is dependant on post mortem for fulfillment, surely the opposite is true – the context of Matthew 25 where such is taught is implicit that it was a "this generation" reality based around WORKS of righteousness, or the lack thereof. Rewards FOR righteous deeds were guaranteed for both the dead AND the living i.e., pre mortem – DEATH was NOT a qualifying agent for rewards, the Parousia was.
Further, you still ignore the Scriptures that give a clear understanding that "eternal life" as Jesus speaks of it, as NOT being a "free ticket" post mortem into life after life after death, but rather as a present relationship with God in this life, as per Jn 17:3; 1Jn 5:13; Jn 20:31.
Again, what Scriptures are you relying on to indicate a qualifying / disqualifying regime for post mortem life with God?
davo – pantelism.com –
"And He Himself is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the whole world." 1Jn 2:2
|
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
- by Erick on Wednesday, October 26 @ 08:20:33 PDT
Who's Proof Text? (Score: 1)
by davo on Wednesday, October 26 @ 18:37:39 PDT
(User Info | Send a Message) |
Ok, so maybe those questions were a bit too difficult for you – and yet no doubt your post mortem view is the underlying driving force of your conclusions.
Erick: I am seeking only to address the most popular texts in an effort to be brief… Therefore, what I’m seeking to provide is a remedy for the Preterist Universalist proof-text through Biblical context.
…the context of Is. 53:6 in constructing a Biblical preterist paradigm, and its context does not (as you et. al.) teach omni-individual reconciliation, period.
Erick, you say you have been to my site [pantelism.com] and read my article etc, but who exactly are you sighting as evidence for your treatment of Isa 53:6 as a most popular proof text for those you designate as PU – me, Ed, Barry, Paige…?? Who is it that has given this major treatment of Isa 53:6 you speak of and that subsequently needs your remedying and addressing? Do tell.
Correct me if I'm wrong Erick – but could it be that you alone have simply created this as a "proof-text" in seeking to present what you see as a case for challenging what you see as a basic generic universalistic flaw?
Erick: …though he does promise hope to the Commonwealth as a nationality in general.
And IT IS THIS HOPE that you have woefully NOT understood i.e., Israel's national resurrection [Eze 37:1-14] through Christ and the first-fruits. What was "limited" was the call of the elect in the ministering of their national restoration, a restoration that was by way of divinely intended extension, to entail the reconciliation of ALL God's creation as is indicated through the inclusion of Gentiles into the outworking of the redemptive-reconciliatory plan [Act 15:14].
The context of Isa 53 is Israel's sin bearing suffering servant – Israel's Redeemer. The "all we" etc of verse 6 is applicable to Israel as the context of the passage shows:
Isa 53:8 He was taken from prison and from judgment, and who will declare His generation? For He was cut off from the land of the living; for the transgressions of My people He was stricken.
Thus the many whose sins He bore – the transgressors among whom He was numbered [verse 12] was Israel. In turning away their transgression i.e., the ungodliness from Jacob [Rom 11:26-27] He became their Redeemer, as per the Scriptures [Lk 1:68; Mt 1:21]. THEN through the Resurrection He became the world's Lord – he needs no-one's "invitation" to be their Lord – the Father has designated Him as so, no if's, but's or maybe's [Act 2:36]. Thus Israel's redemption [all Israel] became the world's reconciliation – and all this was outworked through Christ and His elect first-fruit saints.
Erick: Even under the Old Covenant the High Priest’s work was not valid for the Jew who sinned presumptuously, or was cut off from his people (Nm. 15:30-31)…
Sorry Erick but you are letting your presuppositions drive your interpretation – the text says no such thing. What it does indicate was that there was a terrible and permanent consequence for blasphemous actions i.e., the forfeiture of physical life – BEYOND that YOU are reading into the text what IS NOT there.
Erick: When Isaiah states that God would lay upon the suffering servant “the iniquity of us all” the Spirit has in mind not every Jew, nor every individual per se, but every nation and people who all share in corruption.
So, are you making a case that "some" somehow did not "share in corruption"?? – as the greater whole quite obviously encompasses the lesser few. Let me ask you this. Jesus we are told came to seek and save that which was lost:
1] Who then was lost? – if you say "everyone", then…
2] Did Jesus s
Read the rest of this comment... |
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
- by Erick on Thursday, October 27 @ 17:17:12 PDT
- by davo on Thursday, October 27 @ 22:12:22 PDT
- by Erick on Friday, October 28 @ 12:39:15 PDT
- by Virgil on Friday, October 28 @ 06:01:40 PDT
- by Erick on Friday, October 28 @ 14:40:53 PDT
| 
|
