103 Bless the Lord, O my soul,
And all that is within me, bless His holy name.
² Bless the Lord, O my soul,
And forget none of His benefits;
³ Who pardons all your iniquities,
Who heals all your diseases;
⁴ Who redeems your life from the pit,
Who crowns you with lovingkindness and compassion;
⁵ Who satisfies your ^[a]years with good things,
So that your youth is renewed like the eagle.

⁶ The Lord performs ^[b]righteous deeds
And judgments for all who are oppressed.
⁷ He made known His ways to Moses,
His acts to the sons of Israel.
⁸ The Lord is compassionate and gracious,
Slow to anger and abounding in lovingkindness.
⁹ He will not always strive with us,
Nor will He keep His anger forever.
¹⁰ He has not dealt with us according to our sins,
Nor rewarded us according to our iniquities.
¹¹ For as high as the heavens are above the earth,
So great is His lovingkindness toward those who ^[c]fear Him.
¹² As far as the east is from the west,
So far has He removed our transgressions from us.
¹³ Just as a father has compassion on his children,
So the Lord has compassion on those who ^[d]fear Him.
¹⁴ For He Himself knows ^[e]our frame;
He is mindful that we are but dust.

¹⁵ As for man, his days are like grass;
As a flower of the field, so he flourishes.
¹⁶ When the wind has passed over it, it is no more,
And its place acknowledges it no longer.
¹⁷ But the lovingkindness of the Lord is from everlasting to everlasting on those who ^[f]fear Him,
And His ^[g]righteousness to children’s children,
¹⁸ To those who keep His covenant
And remember His precepts to do them.

¹⁹ The Lord has established His throne in the heavens,
And His ^[h]sovereignty rules over ^[i]all.
²⁰ Bless the Lord, you His angels,
Mighty in strength, who perform His word,
Obeying the voice of His word!
²¹ Bless the Lord, all you His hosts,
You who serve Him, doing His will.
²² Bless the Lord, all you works of His,
In all places of His dominion;
Bless the Lord, O my soul!

Well, the Lord bailed me out again, at least it seems unless the unexpected happens today. I was on that verge of panic and desperation yesterday, about to put myself into afib again stressing out over something dumb that I did the night before and I was worried about the consequences of it. Woke up 2AM worrying about it. I keep quoting Paul in Philippians 4: ⁶ Be anxious for nothing, but in everything by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known to God. ⁷ And the peace of God, which surpasses all ^[d]comprehension, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus” but it doesn’t remove the dark cloud hanging over me. I tell myself that the potential problem is not even serious, and is fixable even the worst occurs, but that doesn’t help either. I was expecting another fretful night before I could find out the consequences, but the Lord gave me relief yesterday out of the blue.

He has done that so many times! I usually think of this Psalm after each time. I think of verse 4: “He redeems me from the pit”. I don’t know what pit David was referring to. The commentaries say that the word means “destruction, the grave, the pit of corruption (Ps 16:10)” and would refer to the many times God rescued David from potential death. I apply the verse to any danger or problem, big or small, that the Lord delivers me from. Thank you Lord, for rescuing me again!

But then I start reading the whole Psalm. Even on my worst day, the Lord has blessed me with so many blessings, but I “forget his benefits”. Usually we think of “benefits” like those offered at my job: health insurance and a retirement plan. I get those benefits every month and I take them for granted. I do that with God unfortunately. David lists several benefits. Forgiveness . Physical healing. Love and compassion. Good things. Renewal of strength. I get all those every day. Thank you Lord.

David cites what God told Moses in Exodus 34 ⁶ Then the Lord passed by in front of him and proclaimed, “The Lord, the Lord God, compassionate and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in lovingkindness and ^[d]truth; ⁷ who keeps lovingkindness for thousands, who forgives iniquity, transgression and sin; yet He will by no means leave the guilty unpunished, visiting the iniquity of fathers on the children and on the grandchildren to the third and fourth generations.” Moses wanted more intimate knowledge of God to help him with the burden of leading the rebellious Israelites. God told him to get behind a rock, and the Lord passed by while giving Moses this summary of His attributes. Moses only saw his “back side”, some glory brightness no doubt, but not the full glory of God which no man can see. David seems to be thinking about these attributes when he says that the Lord has removed our sins as far as the east is from the west. East and west are simply directions that extend indefinitely. Since they go in opposite directions, the distance between them can’t even be defined as it is infinite. I can’t think of an illustration of infinity any better than that! I am such a sinner, and yet the grace of God forgives me each day. Thank you Lord.

He has compassion on s as a father has for his children. A good, loving father will always have compassion on his children even when they don’t deserve it. A father will bail his drug addicted son out over and over, trying to rescue him. He will sympathize with and help his irresponsible daughter who messes up in life over and over. He grieves over bad things in the lives of his children, even if they bring those things on themselves due to bad behavior. Can you think of a better illustration of compassion than that? I can’t. He knows our frame, out physical weaknesses, because He knows that He made us as weak, imperfect humans. He formed us in our mother’s womb and we are his offspring. He sympathizes with our weaknesses. He even came to earth in His Son Jesus to share those same temptations, to empathize with us. When I am struggling with stress, I wish I could just relax in His love and compassion, casting my anxiety over to Him, let my mind be at peace and at ease. With the help of the Spirit, I’m sure that I could. So why don’t I quit trying to control things and surrender control to God. Why don’t I quit relying on the flesh and rely on the Spirit?

David closes pointing out the sovereignty of God over the whole world. He calls on all the angels and all creation to serve Him and bless Him. Our days are passing quickly ,like the flowers in a field. As I get older, I think how quickly time has flown. It seems like yesterday that my wife and I were getting on a plane to go do mission work in Trinidad, West Indies, but that was 45 years ago. My parents are dead (but alive in eternity where they will never die), and my wife’s parents are in their 90″s with failing health and alzheimers (her did). It seems like yesterday that I could drop by my mom’s apartment here in town and watch TV with her for a whle. No matter what she was watching, she would hand me the channel changer and tell me to change the station to what I wanted to watch. She put my needs and wants above her own all my life (which maybe explains why I am so selfish). She was so proud of my accomplishments. I still have her scrap book where she would save newspaper or church bulletin clippings about our mission work. She thought I was the best preacher in the world and the best Bible scholar in the world. She lifted herself out of the poverty of her childhood and the depression, got her teaching degree, became one of the best 1st grade teachers in Alabama for 50 years back when teachers got about $7,000 per year. She would cook us a full breakfast, drive 40 minutes to her school, drive home, cook us a full supper (we never ate out), and keep the house clean. She was a Type A workaholic, which is where I get mine from. She could paint several rooms in a house in no time. When we would visit, she would jump up and within 30 minutes or so have a full wonderful meal ready. When she retired, she was able to do her first love which is study the Bible. She knew the Old Testament better than any preacher I have ever known. She would write copious notes on what she was studying (I still have a lot of her “studies” she wrote up with her pen). She had an amazing memory. She loved her grandchildren, great grans, and great great grans. She kept in touch with them constantly.

It seems like yesterday that my dad got a lung disease at age 72 (lived 2 years after that) and we would visit him. He knew nothing but hard work all his life at minimum pay, but worked overtime hours to support his family. He was forever helping people fix something. When he died, about 600 people signed the register at the funeral home. He never led a prayer in church, only knew one prayer at home (God is great, God is good, let us thank Him for our food), and we never talked about spiritual things or prayed together, but I knew he loved me. He never missed one of my baseball games. When I had problems working as a principal in a Christian school, I would fret and worry until I called him and he would say, “we’ll fix it in the morning”, and I could sleep that night- and he would get up in the morning with a plan and fix it! I miss just watching him ride on his ’62 Ford tractor (he was raised in the country during the depression, picking cotton and planting crops and he loved his tractor more than anything he owned, including his modest house). I still have that tractor. Some guys at church got it running for me and they cut 5 acres of church wild grass with it, and that makes me happy. He loved to fish, and we had great experiences fishing that I will never forget. Fishing is to me like shopping is to my wife. I can remember catching a 7 pound bass and a 3 pound crappie at Smith Lake when I was 17 years old (50 years ago) like it was yesterday.

Pardon me for getting personal with these tributes to my parents. But that is another one of the great blessings God has given me. And now He has blessed my wife and I with 3 godly children whom I am very proud of. My parents never said, “I love you” or hugged, but I know they did love me. It is still hard for me to express love, but I am so blessed: all 3 of my children end every conversation with “I love you”. I am surrounded with the lovingkindness of God and the love of family and friends. I don’t know why I am so grumpy, but I kinda enjoy it. The end.

First of all, this is just a discussion with a lot of opinion, so don’t think that I am saying that I have the exact correct formula for doing church. What would “doing church” even mean? We Christians are the church, so I guess it should be about “being church”. But “doing church” must mean how we run the church business that it has become, how we do assemblies, how we are organized, etc.

First, the church is those saved by grace through faith in the atoning sacrifice of Jesus on the cross. In Acts 2, Peter preached the first full gospel sermon (Jesus had just died and been raised 50 days before). 3,000 repented and were baptized that day and received the forgiveness of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:38). They thus became the church that Jesus promised to build in Matthew 16 ¹⁸ I also say to you that you are ^[l]Peter, and upon this ^[m]rock I will build My church; and the gates of Hades will not overpower it. ¹⁹ I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven. Peter had indeed used those “keys” and opened the door for them to enter the church kingdom of God. So what did they do as a church after that. Acts 2 ⁴⁴ And all those who had believed ^[ar]were together and had all things in common; ⁴⁵ and they began selling their property and possessions and were sharing them with all, as anyone might have need. ⁴⁶ Day by day continuing with one mind in the temple, and breaking bread ^[as]from house to house, they were taking their ^[at]meals together with gladness and ^[au]sincerity of heart, ⁴⁷ praising God and having favor with all the people. And the Lord was adding ^[av]to their number day by day those who were being saved. The temple was still Jewish and they were not having church services in the temple. No doubt they were just sharing their new faith among themselves and those who would listen in the temple courts when they could, but probably not very openly. But notice they shared their possessions and they shared their meals. No doubt, sharing meals was in the homes where they would probably meet for house churches. So, in gneral what did they do? Acts 2:42 ⁴² They were continually devoting themselves to the apostles’ teaching and to fellowship, to the breaking of bread and ^[ao]to prayer.That is such a simple formula of 4 things. The apostles’ inspired teachings, which would be new additions to the OT, became their main study. Fellowship is koinonia, a sharing, and they now shared a common salvation and Father. The breaking of bread would probably include both common meals and the Lord’s Supper. 1 Cor 11 indicates that they took the Lord’s Supper during a meal called a “love feast”. Probably they took the Lord’s Supper often when they gathered in a home.

The Lord’s Supper as described in the Didache (about 100 AD) is summarized in H J DeJonge, The Early History of the Lord’s Supper. He says that the early church met on Sunday evening (Roman time and our time) to take the agape love feast meal and Lord’s Supper jointly, as in 1 Cor 11. After all, until Constantine made Sunday a holy day, most Christians would have worked on Sunday and would have met for assemblies in homes on Sunday night in honor of Jesus being raised on the first day of the week. In the period from AD 30-70, the early mainly Jewish church would have meet on Saturday evening because their first day of the week would begin at dark on Saturday evening. As time went on and after the destruction of the temple in 70 AD, the church tried to separate itself from Judaism and moved services to Sunday evening, Roman time (and our time). Then later Sunday became a more holy day and they could meet on Sunday mornings as we do today. No doubt they took the Lord’s Supper when they met on Sunday mornings every week. But did they take the Supper more often than that? From DeJonge: “The introduction of the eucharist in the morning Services occurred not later than the end of the Second Century. Obviously, many Christians felt that one eucharist a week was not enough. Out of sheer desire for the community with the Lord and fellow Christians, they began to celebrate it twice or more times a week early in the mornmg. Hippolytus’ Traditio Apostolica records eucharistic services on all days of the week (including Sundays), before working hours.” By the 3rd century, the agape love feast is separated from the Lord’s Supper and taken at different times. I read where one of the church councils forbade taking the agape feast because it was causing problems as in 1 Cor 11.

I would prefer to take the Supper, or Eucharist, every Sunday morning since that’s when our church assembles. But I would not be opposed if our home study groups took the Supper when they met in homes, such as my group does on Wednesday night. Did Jesus not say, “as oft as you do this”? It appears that the early church took the Supper when they met on the first day of the week, but why would that example bind us to do it that way and no other way? We must be very careful when we make apostolic example the only way to do something. A lot of “inference” gets into the discussion. So, the early church probably met in homes as often as they could and took the Supper often when they met in homes, and of course, on Sunday when they could all come together in some central location of probably a wealthier member in town. In Caraccas, Venezuela, for a time the church did that. The various house churches that met in different parts of the city would come together once a month to a central rented hall location for a joint fellowship of all the Christians in the city. I guess we kinda do that when we have small groups meeting in homes during the week but then we come together on Sunday for our big assemblies.

It is interesting to observe the difference between the “big assemblies” at the “church building” and the assemblies in the homes. The key to both should be edification of the church. 1 Corinthians 14 ²⁶ What is the outcome then, brethren? When you assemble, each one has a psalm, has a teaching, has a revelation, has a tongue, has an interpretation. Let all things be done for edification.” Of course, those were all “miraculous” gifts given to different members for edifying one another, which was especially important back then since they did not have the completed NT. In our house group, it is pretty simple. We practice Acts 2:42: study of the word, fellowship, a meal (we don’t do the Supper but we could), and prayer. We don’t have “miraculous” gifts, but we do have different members with different gifts and talents and we use those gifts to edify one another. I “moderate” Bible study, the ladies cook and serve a meal, and we encourage and edify one another. No one gift dominates. I do not preach a 30 minute sermon. We don’t have a praise team. The women can talk, share, and even teach truths to us although they respect the role of male leadership in the group. I can’t imagine our house group deciding to hire a preacher for the group or having a praise team. Everyone is a participant, some more than others.

Now look at the difference when we move that house church group to a church building and add other groups. It is much harder to do what we do on Wed night with a much bigger group on Sunday morning. We can’t expect it to have the same simplicity. But notice: we pay a preacher to give us a 30 minute sermon with no discussion of the points (and he is not inspired like the miraculous teachers in the first century so he is just giving us his opinions and philosophy). He might be very good (or not) but we no longer have the mutual edification using many gifts. 1 Cor 14 even comments on this: ²⁹ Let two or three prophets speak, and let the others pass judgment. ³⁰ But if a revelation is made to another who is seated, the first one must keep silent. ³¹ For you can all prophesy one by one, so that all may learn and all may be exhorted; ³² and the spirits of prophets are subject to prophets”. Why would the Spirit tell one of his Spirit inspired prophets to quit speaking, sit down, and give his time to the next prophet? Apparently, the first prophet had gone past the Spirit message he had been given, and it was time to let the 2nd prophet give his Spirit message. Again, the idea was mutual edification using many gifts, and not one gift dominating the time and importance. But that’s what happens in most church building assemblies. The church comes to rely on the preacher instead of using its many gifted individuals.

How could we do the church building assembly for better mutual edification? It’s hard. Some suggestions. 1) Maybe you do need a praise team to help the bigger group learn and sing songs and parts. 2)Some really talented singers could even do a solo, quartet, etc. that would really edify the group. Of course, if you aren’t opposed to using musical instruments, you could use gifted musicians also. 3) You could have a time set aside for prayers. Even bring up those who need special prayer to the front and let the big group know what to pray for. Those who choose to could come up front and join that person in praying for them. 4) You could have 5-10 minutes of “meet and greet” time. That would be totally unnecessary in our Wed night group as we have already been meeting and greeting for an hour while we eat before we start our formal Bible study, but it might be very appropriate for a big church building group with visitors and members that you don’t know very well, a chance to fellowship outside of your small group. 5) You could have a regular schedule of reading through the Bible with the passages on the screen. 1 Timothy 4 ¹³ Until I come, give attention to the public reading of Scripture, to exhortation and teaching. Some churches have a brief Bible reading before the sermon, and that is good. But we probably should make the reading a lot longer and the sermon a lot shorter. 6) A really good teacher could give a brief teaching from some passage in the reading (that’s what the Jews did in their synagogue worship), explaining the text (correctly, I hope) and suggesting ways to apply the text to our lives. But keep it brief. Save the long Bible study for the Bible classes we usual do before or after the assembly. 7) One of the shepherds could share things from his particular shepherding group or ministry that would exhort others and help members to know what is going on in other groups and ministries. 8) You can bring the children up to the front and do a little something with them. That makes them feel like part of the assembly because usually they are told to just sit quietly and they don’t get anything out of most of what we do in the assembly. 9) You can, of course, do the Lord’s Supper. It would be great to do it as part of a love feast, but that is difficult for a big church. I know we have a meal after the assembly every week, and we could do the Supper as part of that meal, but we haven’t come to that practice yet. So we do the cracker and juice thing like the Catholic mass without the transubstantiation (i.e. the bread becomes the body of Jesus and the wine becomes the blood of Jesus). We try to say a few comments before the Supper to get us in the right state of mind, but the whole process is flawed. 1 Corinthians 10 ¹⁶ Is not the cup of blessing which we bless a sharing in the blood of Christ? Is not the ^[e]bread which we break a sharing in the body of Christ? ¹⁷ Since there is one ^[f]bread, we who are many are one body; for we all partake of the one ^[g]bread. The Supper should give us the same feeling of sharing a common love that a happy family meal does at home, but too often it becomes just a ritual with emphasis on what it does for me only. 10) Lastly, someone pointed out to me that edification should involve emotion! Emotion on the part of those leading or using their gifts, and emotion of the part of those being edified. The mutual edification should stir us up, move us to empathize and sympathize, excite us, encourage us, rebuke us, correct us, make us happy, make us cry, stimulate our thinking, stimulate us to good works, etc. Hebrews 10 ²⁴ and let us consider how to stimulate one another to love and good deeds, ²⁵ not forsaking our own assembling together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another; and all the more as you see the day drawing near.

Admittedly, it is difficult to do all these suggestions if you have a church of 800 members! But we must try. A lot of churches are losing members to the more “exciting” churches, which tells us that our traditional assemblies might not be as edifying as in the past. That doesn’t mean they are bad. It just means that we maybe need to get more in touch with what edifies our members since the main goal of assemblies is edification.

First, the only evidence for the 96 AD date of writing of Revelation is from a statement from Irenaeus in about 180 AD. The statement supposedly says that John saw the revelation vision in the latter part of the reign of the emperor Domitian (about 96 AD). It is unclear from the Greek words if he was saying that John saw the vision at that time or if John was seen at that time, so the statement in untrustworthy right off the bat. Plus he is relying on a childhood memory of what Policarp, a disciple of John, told him, so how reliable can that be? Plus, he had a “chiliasm” view of Revelation, believing that Jesus would come to reign on earth for a thousand years, which I do not believe is correct, as you will see later in this article. Point is, his false interpretation of the book could have influenced him against accepting an early before 70 AD date of writing. Plus, Robert Young (the Young’s Analytical Concordance Robert Young) said that part of Nero’s name was Domitius and that Irenaeus could have actually been referring to Nero and not Domitian. We can’t answer all these doubts, but dating the book from a dubious statement he made is not very convincing if there is plenty of internal evidence that contradicts that date, and there is. Many of the church fathers after him took the 96 AD date based on his statement without any other supporting evidence. They were simply relying on what Irenaeus said. Also the late date proponents talk a lot about the persecution of Christians under Domitian, but there is scant evidence, if any, of such persecution. But, as I will show later, the persecution of Christians is not the main theme of the book, although it is included.

So what evidence do we have for the date of writing before 70 AD? Plenty. We can’t rely on what church fathers thought about the date (we have shown that we don’t trust Irenaeus) but there were early church fathers who dated the book before 70 AD in the reign of Nero. Among them were Epiphanes (315-403 AD), Andreas of Capadocia (500 AD), Arethas (540 AD), and others. Kenneth Gentry lists 145 scholars who advocate an early dating of Revelation, including the great church historian Philip Schaff, and others such as F.F.Bruce, Alfred Edersheim, and Milton Terry (late 1800’s). James Stewart Russell in The Parousia (late 1800’s) takes the early date (read this book online if you haven’t; it is a great book, the primer for preterism).

One of the most interesting evidences is the Muratorian Canon of 170 AD. In chapter 3 of the Muratorian fragment, it says, ” Paul, following the rule of his predecessor John, writes to no more than seven churches by name, in this order:” and then names the 7 churches Paul wrote to. That is, John wrote to the 7 churches in Asia (Revelation 2 and 3), and Paul, whether intentionally or not, wrote to 7 churches (and the fragment names them) just like John did. Revelation would have to have been written before Paul finished writing to his 7 churches for this to be true (and Paul died in 68 AD so Revelation had to be written before 68 AD), which is what the Muratorian fragment is saying. This gives us an external dating of the book before 70 AD that offsets the 180 AD statement of Irenaeus.

Read this article: Research insights into the Date of Revelation By Dr. Richard J. Krejcir for some of these points. One amazing evidence to me is the translation of the NT canon into the Syriac languages. Most of these early translations were written in the late first century or the 2nd century. The “Syriac version” of the New Testament, which dates back to the slate first century AD or second century A.D., states that Revelation was written during the reign of Nero making a date of 64-68 A.D. the date of writing. Also, the “Aramaic Peshitta” version has a remark that places its date prior to 70 A.D. In that translation the title page of Revelation states this work of John was written right after the reign of Nero.

A quote, attributed to Papius (130 AD), states that John the Apostle was martyred before the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. This quote is very important. He says that the brothers James and John both suffered martyrdom, just like Jesus predicted in Mark 10 ³⁹ And Jesus said to them, “The cup that I drink you shall drink; and you shall be baptized with the baptism with which I am baptized.” The “baptism” was a baptism of death by martyrdom. We know James was beheaded by Herod in 62 AD (Acts 12) but we trust Jesus that John was also martyred at some time. Papias affirms this no later than 130 AD. We don’t know what he knew about the death of John, but he says that John died a martyr at the hands of the Jews. We can easily see that happening before 70 AD, but it would be hard to see that happening around 100 AD if John indeed lived that long. The Catholic tradition is that John lived till about 100 AD in Ephesus and died a peaceful death! That totally contradicts what Jesus said. I would prefer to believe what Papias said! Thus, John died before 70 AD and obviously wrote Revelation before 70 AD. That also tells us why John did not write any inspired books after 70 AD. I have always wondered why, if he lived till 100 AD, that he did not write a follow up letter talking about how Jesus’ predictions were fulfilled in 70 AD and how the temple was destroyed, but of course this explains why. He was dead by 70 AD. BTW Jesus did say: John 21 ²² Jesus *said to him (Peter), “If I want him (John) to remain until I come, what is that to you? You follow Me!” ²³ Therefore this saying went out among the brethren that that disciple (John) would not die; yet Jesus did not say to him that he would not die, but only, “If I want him to remain until I come, what is that to you?” If Jesus’ 2nd coming was in 70 AD, then that makes sense that John lived right up to that 2nd coming in 70 AD but died a martyr at the hands of the Jews around that time before they lost all their power. BTW, if John wrote Revelation in 96 AD, why did he not mention the destruction of the temple and Jerusalem that would have happened 26 years earlier? Surely, he would have talked about that momentous event! Actually the whole book is about that event, but in the book he is predicting the event to be in the near future, not past. Also, in Revelation it claims that Jesus is coming “quickly. If the book was written in 96 AD, how did Jesus come quickly after that date. If the book was written before 70 AD, then He did come quickly after that date, i.e. in 70 AD. Of course, some say “quickly” just means suddenly, but read the context. He says the things in the book will happen shortly, and follows that up with “Jesus is coming quickly”. Also, he tells some of the churches to repent or else “Jesus is coming quickly” to punish them. What relevance would that have to them if it did not mean that He was coming shortly in their time frame. Those who take the early date who are not preterists would still have trouble dealing with this “coming quickly” statement, but it fits the preterist view perfectly.

Clement of Alexandria (150-215 AD) makes an interesting comment: “the Apostle John. For when, on the tyrant’s death, he returned to Ephesus from the isle of Patmos.  The problem is determining who he was referring to as the “tyrant”. Many of the early historians and church fathers referred to Nero as the tyrant. Clement also said “for the teaching of our Lord at His advent, beginning with Augustus and Tiberius, was completed in the middle of the times of Tiberius. And that of the apostles, embracing the ministry of Paul, end with Nero.” This seems to indicate that Nero believed that the inspired writings of the apostles ended by the end of Nero’s reign which ended in 68 AD. I agree that all 27 of the NT books were written before 70 AD.

Another interesting thing I read. in the article by Krejcir: “Nero Caesar exiled John on the island of Patmos. Nero died in 68 AD, and according to Roman law, those banned by a prior Caesar would be released by the succeeding Caesar. Thus, John would have been released from Patmos around 68 AD. ” (John himself mentions he was at Patmos when he received the Revelation). I haven’t seen this law verified but it sure fits John being released from Patmos and the Jews killing him (as Jesus predicted) within the next 2 years after he was released.

But the most impressive evidence for the early date is the internal evidence. 1) Rev 17 ¹⁰ and they are seven kings; five have fallen, one is, the other has not yet come; and when he comes, he must remain a little while. The woman harlot, drunk with the blood of the apostles, prophets, and saints, is riding on the beast (Rome). The beast has 7 kings: 5 had fallen or died at the time of writing, and “one is” (that would be the emperor reigning at the time of writing). There is debate over who was considered the first king or emperor. Josephus several times in Antiquities clearly calls Augustus the 2nd emperor, which means he considered Julius Caesar the first emperor. Other much later historians said Augustus was the first emperor, but I will trust what Josephus said because he lived in the first century and he would know who everyone, including John, considered to be the first emperor, which was Julius. With Julius as the first, Claudius would be the fifth and last of the dead emperors who had “fallen”, and Nero would be the “one is”, the 6th emperor or king, i.e. the emperor reigning at the time of writing. Nero died in 68 AD, so that dates the book before 68 AD. The one would would reign for a “little while” would be the 7th emperor Galba who only reigned a few months. As a matter of fact, Galba, Otho, and Vitelleus all 3 only reigned a few months each in 69 AD before Vespasian, the 10th emperor started reigning in 69 AD and reigned till 79 AD. The beast in Rev 17 had 10 horns, and that would be the first 10 emperors of Rome, i.e. Julius through Vespasian. That also corresponds with the 10 horns of the iron beast in Daniel 7, which was Rome. Then there was a little horn after those 10, which would be Titus who was sent by Vespasian his father to siege and destroy Jerusalem and the temple, which he did in 70 AD. He was called a “little horn” because he would be an emperor later (79-81 AD) but was not an emperor when he destroyed Jerusalem in 70 AD.

2) The identity of the “great city” and the harlot woman with the name Babylon on her forehead is important. Rev 17 ¹⁸ The woman whom you saw is the great city. I.e., the woman riding on the beast Rome. She is also called a harlot. Also Rev 17 ⁵ and on her forehead a name was written, a mystery, “BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND OF THE ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH.” ⁶ And I saw the woman drunk with the blood of the ^[d]saints, and with the blood of the witnesses of Jesus. So the woman is the great city who is Babylon. Rev 11⁸ And their dead bodies will lie in the street of the great city which ^[f]mystically is called Sodom and Egypt, where also their Lord was crucified. That tells us that the great city, Babylon, was Jerusalem where Jesus was crucified. Thus the great city is not Rome, although one could see why many would think that with Rome being the capital of the empire. In Rev 17, the woman harlot first comes out riding on the beast, but by the end of the chapter, the beast (Rome) turns on the harlot (Jerusalem) and burns her with fire. That is exactly what Rome did in 70 AD. Up until the 60’s AD, Rome did not persecute the church. The main persecution of the early Jewish church was from non-believing Jews. But when the Jews rebelled against Rome in about 66 AD, that began the wars of the Jews as recorded by Josephus. So, the woman = the harlot = the great city = Babylon = Jerusalem (where the Lord was crucified). The great city Babylon (Jerusalem) is destroyed (70 AD) and there is a great celebration over her fall in ch 18.

3) The theme of the book of Revelation is the “avenging of the blood of the apostles, prophets, and saints”. Rev 18 ²⁰ Rejoice over her, O heaven, and you ^[w]saints and apostles and prophets, because God has ^[x]pronounced judgment for you against her.” Some say the theme is victory of the Christians over persecution, but usually that it because they think it was written in 96 AD during some Domitian persecution of the church. But since it was written before 70 AD, that changes everything on the theme. And then we read about the great city harlot Babylon woman Jerusalem being destroyed in the book, and we read Rev 18:20 and the theme becomes very clear. This theme in Rev 18:20 is the same thing Jesus said in Matthew 23 ³⁵ so that upon you may fall the guilt of all the righteous blood shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah, the son of Berechiah, whom you murdered between the ^[ab]temple and the altar. ³⁶ Truly I say to you, all these things will come upon this generation.³⁵ so that upon you may fall the guilt of all the righteous blood shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah, the son of Berechiah, whom you murdered between the ^[ab]temple and the altar. ³⁶ Truly I say to you, all these things will come upon this generation. The following chapter in Matthew is the famous Olivet Discourse in ch 24 about the destruction of Jerusalem that would happen within the generation of those he was speaking to. Matthew 24 ³⁴ Truly I say to you, this ^[x]generation will not pass away until all these things take place. The Jews had persecuted and killed the prophets during their entire history as a nation, for the most part. They would then kill the apostles, as in Acts 12 when Herod beheaded James. They killed the saints, as Paul did before he became a Christian. When Jerusalem was destroyed in 70 AD, Josephus says that a million Jews died in the city, and another 200,000 were enslaved. Truly, God used the Romans to avenge the blood of the prophets, apostles, and saints that they had shed. The harlot woman of Rev 17 who was drunk with that blood would be burned, destroyed. That is the real theme of the book.

I am firmly convinced that the internal evidence gives an early date of writing and far outweighs the statement by Irenaeus. When we correctly understand the theme of the book and date, the book becomes a neat conclusion to the entire Bible. Jesus said in Luke 21 ²⁰ “But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then ^[l]recognize that her desolation is near. ²¹ Then those who are in Judea must flee to the mountains, and those who are in the midst of ^[m]the city must leave, and those who are in the country must not enter ^[n]the city; ²² because these are days of vengeance, so that all things which are written will be fulfilled. There are no prophetic predictions in the OT or the NT that were to be fulfilled after 70 AD. Revelation 10 ⁷ but in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, when he is about to sound, then the mystery of God is finished, as He ^[b]preached to His servants the prophets. The mystery is the unknown plan of God as to how He is going to saved sinners. That mystery would be revealed to the inspired apostles. Ephesians 3 ^4 [a]By referring to this, when you read you can understand my insight ^[b]into the mystery of Christ, ⁵ which in other generations was not made known to the sons of men, as it has now been revealed to His holy apostles and prophets ^[c]in the Spirit; ⁶ to be specific, that the Gentiles are fellow heirs and fellow members of the body, and fellow partakers of the promise in Christ Jesus through the gospel. Colossians 1 ²⁶ that is, the mystery which has been hidden from the past ages and generations, but has now been manifested to His ^[ak]saints, ²⁷ to whom God willed to make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles, which is Christ in you, the hope of glory. One of the greatest passages is found in Romans 16 ²⁵ Now to Him who is able to establish you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery which has been kept secret for long ages past, ²⁶ but now is manifested, and by the Scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the eternal God, has been made known to all the nations, leading to obedience of faith; ²⁷ to the only wise God, through Jesus Christ, be the glory forever. Amen. Rev 10:7 says that this mystery was finished in 70 AD when the last predicted events of Revelation were fulfilled.

God created man in the Garden with the freedom to choose whether to eat from the forbidden tree or not. God wanted his creation to have that ability to choose rather than be robots programmed to be perfect. He wanted his creation to be free to choose to love him or not. I always compare this to my 3 children. They can choose to love me or not. It means something to me when they choose to love me, and they have chosen that. If they were robots programmed to love me, it would mean nothing.

Let’s dispel Calvinism quickly. TULIP. The “I” is irresistible grace”, i.e. the grace that saves a person cannot be resisted. The whole emphasis of the reformer Calvin’s Calvinism was to magnify the grace of God in salvation as opposed to the works system of salvation of Catholicism. According to Calvinism, man is born “T”, totally depraved in the inherited sin of Adam. Salvation does not depend on man’s choices or works or else it is not by grace. So, “U”, God unconditionally elects certain ones arbitrarily to be saved. The idea is that, if a man had to meet certain conditions to be saved, then it is not totally up to grace. Thus, “L”, limited atonement: since only certain ones are chosen, then Christ only died for that limited number, the elect. Those not of the elect are simply not able to choose to be saved since they are so totally depraved. What if they did want to choose to be saved? I guess Calvinism would say their depraved nature doesn’t even allow them to be able to do that. God has to send His Spirit to change the heart of the elect so they are able to choose to be saved. Even the elect can’t choose on their own. When God sends His Spirit on them to save them, they can’t resist. Thus “I”. Usually, this would be manifested by some Spirit given signs, feelings, etc. as proof that the person is one of the elect. Again, this system supposedly magnifies God’s grace, not our choices or works. Then, once a man is saved, “P”, perseverance of the saints: he can’t “fall from grace”. It doesn’t matter if he turns from sin or does good works, he will still be saved in eternity by God’s grace. God’s grace is so great that it can do that! Oh, Calvin said, it is good for the church and society for him to turn from sin and do good works, but not necessary for his eternal salvation.

BTW, Calvinism has a Bible passage to supposedly support each one of these tenets of TULIP, which I will not go into here, but each one of the 5 points contradicts other plain passages. Each of their verses isolated might seem to teach TULIP, but those verses must harmonize with all other verses, and they don’t. I leave the study of those verses for future study. But Calvinism basically takes away the freedom to choose, to really be free to choose whether to be saved or not. I had a friend once who, under the teachings of Calvinism, went to the “mourner’s bench” 2 or 3 times with a penitent heart, wanting to confess Jesus and be saved. He got no Spirit signs that he was the elect and went home discouraged, feeling unsaved and without hope of salvation. I studied with him one night. We read Peter’s first gospel sermon in Acts 2 where he preached the completed death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus. Many of the Jews asked, “What must we do to be saved?” Did Peter tell them “there’s nothing you can do to be saved; simply ask God to show you in some Spirit sign that you are the elect”? No, he told them, “Repent and be baptized for the forgiveness of sins, and you shall receive the gift of the Spirit” (Acts 2:38). It doesn’t sound like Peter was teaching Calvinism, does it? He says they are able to choose whether to repent and be baptized or not. He makes repentance and baptism conditions of receiving God’s saving grace and forgiveness. He leaves salvation open to anyone and not just a limited number. He makes the receiving of the Spirit something that happens after you have been forgiven, and not before forgiveness, which is the opposite taught in Calvinism. He doesn’t deal with “P”, but later in his writings in 2 Peter 2:20-22 he clearly teaches that false teachers who were once saved would be lost, 2 Peter 2:1 denying the Master who bought them, bringing swift destruction upon themselves. So he doesn’t preach the “P” either.

My friend I was studying with read Acts 2 with me. He looked at me, and said, to the best of my memory (it has been 45 years ago), “you mean, I have already repented of my sins, so all I have to do is be baptized and I will be forgiven and can feel and know that I am saved?”. I, of course, said “yes”. I baptized him that night. He then felt saved because Acts 2:38 says that he can know that he is saved. His baptism was not a work to earn salvation, as some might accuse me, or even Peter, of teaching. It was not something to do to show that you already have been saved by the “sinner’s prayer” that is often used by evangelicals. I mean, did Peter tell them, “just confess your sins and say the sinner’s prayer, confessing Jesus, and you will be saved”? No, he did not. Did Peter put some conditions of receiving the forgiveness of sins? Yes, repentance and baptism. If someone did not choose to meet those conditions, then he/she would not be forgiven. Are those 2 things clearly conditions of salvation? Yes. Does that make salvation any less by grace? No. If I offer you a sack with a million dollars in it, money you haven’t earned and can’t possibly earn working for me, but I tell you that you must trust me that the money is in the sack and you must reach out in faith to take the sack from my hands, and then it will be yours. So I put conditions on receiving the money and allow you to choose. So if you do choose to reach out and take the money, does that make it any less of a gift from me? Of course not. To me, that illustration explains it all. My friend the assurance of salvation for many years after his baptism before he died about 15 years ago. I believe he is enjoying eternal life. I am so glad that God let our paths crossed so I could help him understand the Scriptures and how to be saved more correctly. I wonder how many have given up on being saved because they have been taught Calvinism and got no sign that they were the elect?

Having said all that, back to the main point. All through the Scriptures, people are given the freedom to choose right or wrong, to be saved or not. Adam and Eve. Genesis 3 ⁶ When the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was desirable to make one wise, she took from its fruit and ate; and she gave also to her husband with her, and he ate. God then punished them because of their bad choices. James 1 ¹⁴ But each one is tempted when he is carried away and enticed by his own lust. ¹⁵ Then when lust has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and when sin ^[p]is accomplished, it brings forth death. Sounds like James says that Eve saw the fruit, lusted (wanted) it and chose to eat it out of her own lusts.

Joshua told the people they were free to choose to serve God or the gods of the Canaanites. Joshua 24 ¹⁵ If it is disagreeable in your sight to serve the Lord, choose for yourselves today whom you will serve: whether the gods which your fathers served which were beyond the River, or the gods of the Amorites in whose land you are living; but as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.”

Moses gave some strong sermons on the plains of Moab before he died. He warned them about repeating the sins of their fathers. He told them what God required for them to be blessed by God. But then he gave them the freedom to choose. Deuteronomy 30 ¹⁹ I call heaven and earth to witness against you today, that I have set before you life and death, the blessing and the curse. So choose life in order that you may live, you and your ^[w]descendants, ²⁰ by loving the Lord your God, by obeying His voice, and by holding fast to Him;

On Mt. Carmel, Elijah challenged Israel to choose to follow God or choose to follow Baal. 1 Kings 18 ²¹ Elijah came near to all the people and said, “How long will you ^[i]hesitate between two opinions? If the Lord is God, follow Him; but if Baal, follow him.”

Ezekiel 30 ³⁰ “Therefore I will judge you, O house of Israel, each according to his conduct,” declares the Lord God. “Repent and turn away from all your transgressions, so that iniquity may not become a stumbling block to you. ³¹ Cast away from you all your transgressions which you have committed and make yourselves a new heart and a new spirit! For why will you die, O house of Israel? ³² For I have no pleasure in the death of anyone who dies,” declares the Lord God. “Therefore, repent and live.”

Isaiah 65:12 I will destine you for the sword,
And all of you will bow down to the slaughter.
Because I called, but you did not answer;
I spoke, but you did not hear.
And you did evil in My sight
And chose that in which I did not delight.”

Jesus taught freedom of choice. John 7:17 ¹⁷ If anyone is willing to do His will, he will know of the teaching, whether it is of God or whether I speak from Myself. Yes, Jesus said in John 15:16 ¹⁶ You did not choose Me but I chose you… But that does not mean that the apostles did not willingly choose to leave their homes and occupations to follow him. Yes, Jesus said in John 6:44 ⁴⁴ No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him… But that does not mean that the person dos not want or choose to respond to the drawing of the Father.

Let’s clarify something about freedom of choice. You might not be able to choose your circumstances, but you are free to choose how to respond to them. Joseph was not free to choose whether to go to Egypt or not; his brothers made that choice for him. But he was free to choose how to respond to being enslaved in Egypt to Potiphar and in prison 2 years. You can choose to respond to bad or difficult or even tragic circumstances in your life in faith and God will bless you. Or you can choose to. respond in bitterness, self pity, anger, even rejecting God.

So many things in life are based on our choices. My mother in law, who is always very happy and calm even in the worst of circumstances, always said, “People are about as happy in life as they choose to be”, and she is right on. Every day we can choose to rejoice in our salvation and the hope of eternal life and enjoy the day, looking for how God can use us to do His will. If things go bad, we can choose to do what James says: James 1 ² Consider it all joy, my brethren, when you encounter various ^[c]trials, ³ knowing that the testing of your faith produces ^[d]endurance. ⁴ And let ^[e]endurance have its perfect ^[f]result, so that you may be ^[g]perfect and complete, lacking in nothing. Just go with the flow, go with “God’s flow”. Look for the good in even the bad. Romans 8 ²⁸ And we know that ^[k]God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God. Even if you can’t find something good in tragedy, think about eternal life that is prepared for us where there is no more tragedy or pain or death or disaster or disease.

Choose to eat healthy and exercise. So much of our bad health is because we don’t choose to eat healthy or exercise. I have been on the Mediterranean diet for almost a year now.

The Mediterranean diet emphasizes:

• Eating primarily plant-based foods, such as fruits and vegetables, whole grains, legumes and nuts
• Replacing butter with healthy fats such as olive oil and canola oil
• Using herbs and spices instead of salt to flavor foods
• Limiting red meat to no more than a few times a month
• Eating fish and poultry at least twice a week
• Enjoying meals with family and friends
• Drinking red wine in moderation (optional)
• Getting plenty of exercise

I can testify that this diet has lowered my cholesterol, helped me lose weight and keep it off, and feel better about myself. I’m still grouchy, but that is probably because I choose to be! I can stay on this diet so much easier than other diets. I snack on almonds and walnuts at night, and popcorn, but I don’t eat supper. I wake up hungry but with my weight under control We truly “are what we eat”. I try to walk everyday, but the key is what we eat. I hear people talk about their high blood pressure, their borderline type 2 diabetes, being overweight, etc. So we look for a pill when most of their problems could be controlled by eating properly and exercising. But it’s our choice.

One of the greatest things a parent can do for his/her child is to teach them that their choices have consequences. So many parents bail their children out when they make bad choices, not allowing them to suffer the consequences of those choices. Eli rebuked his 2 evil sons, but he never made them suffer the consequences of their evil choices.

Well, this article started off emphasizing our freedom to choose to obey God and be saved or not, but I kinda got off track, huh? But life is about choices. And choices have consequences. So choose to obey God and receive eternal life, or choose to live in sin and receive the wages of sin, which is death. Jesus said in Matthew 16 ²⁴ Then Jesus said to His disciples, “If anyone wishes to come after Me, he must deny himself, and take up his cross and follow Me. ²⁵ For whoever wishes to save his ^[v]life will lose it; but whoever loses his ^[w]life for My sake will find it. ²⁶ For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world and forfeits his soul? Or what will a man give in exchange for his soul?

Deuteronomy 18 ¹⁵ “The Lord your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among you, from your ^[j]countrymen, you shall listen to him. Acts 3 ¹⁷ “And now, brethren, I know that you acted in ignorance, just as your rulers did also. ¹⁸ But the things which God announced beforehand by the mouth of all the prophets, that His ^[h]Christ would suffer, He has thus fulfilled. ¹⁹ Therefore repent and return, so that your sins may be wiped away, in order that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord; ²⁰ and that He may send Jesus, the ^[i]Christ appointed for you, ²¹ whom heaven must receive until the^[j]period of restoration of all things about which God spoke by the mouth of His holy prophets from ancient time. ²² Moses said, ‘The Lord God will raise up for you a prophet ^[k]like me from your brethren; to Him you shall give heed to everything He says to you. ²³ And it will be that every soul that does not heed that prophet shall be utterly destroyed from among the people.’ John 1 ¹⁹ This is the testimony of John, when the Jews sent to him priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, “Who are you?” ²⁰ And he confessed and did not deny, but confessed, “I am not ^[q]the Christ.” ²¹ They asked him, “What then? Are you Elijah?” And he *said, “I am not.” “Are you the Prophet?” And he answered, “No.” John 5 ⁴⁵ Do not think that I will accuse you before the Father; the one who accuses you is Moses, in whom you have set your hope. ⁴⁶ For if you believed Moses, you would believe Me, for he wrote about Me. ⁴⁷ But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe My words?”

Have you ever wondered why they asked John if he was “the prophet”? Not just a prophet, but “the prophet”? I’m not an authority on Judaism, so I don’t really know how many Jewish scholars expected Deut 18:15 to be fulfilled by the Messiah, although I did read that some did. But if Peter was speaking by inspiration (and he was) in Acts 3:17, then Jesus did fulfill Deut 18:15 and was “the prophet” Moses predicted. I doubt that would jump out at us as a Messianic prediction like some of the clearer ones, like Isaiah 53, Micah 5:2, etc., but it is still a Messianic prediction. When Jesus said that Moses wrote about Him (John 5:46), was He referring to Deut 18:15? Probably so. I can’t think of any where else in the Torah (the first 5 OT books) where Moses made a Messianic prediction, although there are indeed types (like the Passover Lamb) and the seed promise to Abraham (Galatians 3:16 that seed was Christ, the Messiah). Probably this prediction in Deut 18:15 is why the Jews came asking John if he was “the prophet” (John 1:21). Surely they were not just asking him if he was “a” prophet. Their next question, “are you Elijah?” tells us that they were looking for the fulfillment of Malachi 4: 5 ⁵ “Behold, I am going to send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and terrible day of the Lord. Of course, they expected Elijah himself to be raised and to come right before the “age to come” would begin, i.e. the Messianic Age. Jesus later told the apostles that John the Baptist was indeed the fulfillment of Malachi 4:5. Matthew 17 ¹⁰ And His disciples asked Him, “Why then do the scribes say that Elijah must come first?” ¹¹ And He answered and said, “Elijah is coming and will restore all things; ¹² but I say to you that Elijah already came, and they did not recognize him, but did ^[d]to him whatever they wished. So also the Son of Man is going to suffer ^[e]at their hands.” ¹³ Then the disciples understood that He had spoken to them about John the Baptist. So why did John tell the Jews that he was not Elijah? Because he was not the actual man Elijah raised that they were expecting. But Jews’ questions to John tell us that they were expecting some OT prophecies to be fulfilled, and that tells us that perhaps they were asking if John was the fulfillment of Deut 18:15 “the prophet”. I doubt if they were asking if he was the Messiah Himself. They were probably expecting some great prophet, like Moses, to come right before the Messiah would come (just as they expected Elijah to come).

Back to our main point, Jesus was “the prophet” predicted by Moses in Deut 18:15. We often think of Jesus as the Messiah, the Savior, the Redeemer, The Son of God, etc., but we usually don’t think of him as “the prophet”. The Muslims speak more of Jesus as a prophet than Christians do, although they believe (incorrectly) that he was just another prophet like Moses who brought some more of God’s word (though they say the Christians corrupted what Jesus taught by saying that Jesus taught that he was the Son of God). They would also say that he was not the last great prophet, but that Muhammed, the founder of Islam, was. But for Moses and Peter to call Jesus “the prophet”, what does that mean? Well, a prophet’s work was to speak the word of God to the people. Jesus did that. He often would tell the Jews that the words he spoke were not his words, but the words of the Father.

But how would the Jews know if someone who claimed to be a prophet was a true prophet or not? Deut 18 ²⁰ But the prophet who speaks a word presumptuously in My name which I have not commanded him to speak, or which he speaks in the name of other gods, ^[m]that prophet shall die.’ ^21 [n]You may say in your heart, ‘How will we know the word which the Lord has not spoken?’ ²² When a prophet speaks in the name of the Lord, if the thing does not come about or come true, that is the thing which the Lord has not spoken. The prophet has spoken it presumptuously; you shall not be afraid of him. There were 2 basic tests of a true prophet. 1) Did he teach something totally contradictory to other confirmed scripture? 2) Did all of his predictions (not just some) come true? If he ever predicted anything that did not come true, he was a false prophet and Israel did not need to fear any of his predictions against them.

Those 2 basic tests of a true prophet would still be true today, would they not? Tongue speaking was the original excitement of the charismatic movement in the early 1900’s. But much later in the century, the charismatic movement produced a wave of “prophets” who could supposedly predict future events or to predict events in a person’s future. Unfortunately, none of these so called prophets could predict the future with 100% accuracy and often predicted things that did not come true. They did not pass the Deut 18 true prophet test and thus were false prophets. I read where there was a prophets’ school where these so called prophets could learn how to discern whether what they were predicting was really from God or not. If they were true prophets, they wouldn’t have to do that. Then there have been the numerous “latter day prophets” of the last 2000 years, such as Ellen G. White of the 7th Day Adventists, Joseph Smith of the Mormons, Rutherford and Russell of the Jehovah’s Witnesses, and many, many more. All of them predicted things that did not come true and none of them predicted the future with 100% accuracy, and yet their followers still regard them as true prophets and their writings as equal in authority to the New Testament. There were inspired prophets in the first century church (Ephesians 4:12) just as there were inspired apostles and teachers. But after the first century and the cessation of the miraculous, there have been no true apostles or prophets. The Mormons even claim to have 12 apostles who have the same authority as the original apostles. Well I read where Jesus told the apostles that the Holy Spirit would guide them into all the truth. John 15 ¹³ But when He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth; for He will not speak on His own initiative, but whatever He hears, He will speak; and He will disclose to you what is to come. But I don’t read where Jesus gave any truth to any prophet or apostle after those original apostles and prophets. If one of these latter day prophets could pass the true prophet test and predict the future with 100% accuracy, then I might have to rethink all this, but they can’t.

Back to the main point about Jesus being a prophet. He spoke the words of the Father, but did He predict the future accurately to confirm that He was a true prophet? Yes He did. He predicted his death, burial, and resurrection on several occasions. He even predicted that his death would involve being lifted up from the earth. John 12 ³² And I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to Myself.” ³³ But He was saying this to indicate the kind of death by which He was to die. Of course, he was talking about being crucified. He predicted that Judas would betray Him. John 13 ¹⁸ I do not speak of all of you. I know the ones I have chosen; but it is that the Scripture may be fulfilled, ‘He who eats My bread has lifted up his heel against Me.’ ¹⁹ From now on I am telling you before it comes to pass, so that when it does occur, you may believe that I am He. He clearly tells them that he is predicting the future so that they can believe He is the Prophet when the event takes place.

But the most powerful and amazing prediction Jesus made over and over again was the prediction that the temple and Jerusalem would be destroyed within the lifetime of those He was speaking to. In the “Olivet Discourse” in Matthew 24, He predicted that and then said that it would happen before that generation passed away. Matthew 24 ³⁴ Truly I say to you, this ^[x]generation will not pass away until all these things take place. That word in the Greek “genea” always means a period of about 40 years or a group of people living in a period of about 40 years. It never means a generic race of people over a long period of time which is what some claim it means. The same author, Matthew, in Matthew chapter 1 lists the genealogy of Jesus in 3 sets of 14 generations and the meaning is obvious. The word was used in the same way we use the “baby boomers’ generation”, a group of people living at about the same time who in turn produced the next generation. Jesus predicted this event many times. His predictions were all made during His 3 year ministry around 30 AD. The temple and Jerusalem were destroyed by the Romans in 70 AD just as Jesus predicted. If that prediction did not come true, then Jesus should be declared a “false prophet”. But it did come true.

In Mark’s gospel, He made other amazing predictions. Mark 9:1 And Jesus was saying to them, “Truly I say to you, there are some of those who are standing here who will not taste death until they see the kingdom of God after it has come with power.” Mark 1:15 ¹⁴ Now after John had been ^[h]taken into custody, Jesus came into Galilee, ^[i]preaching the gospel of God, ¹⁵ and saying, “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God ^[j]is at hand; repent and ^[k]believe in the gospel.””Daniel had predicted that God would set up His kingdom in the days of the Roman Empire (Daniel 2:44). Jesus clearly predicted that kingdom to be established within the lifetime of those He was speaking to. Either that or, if it wasn’t established as He predicted, there must be some 2,000 year old people still alive today! That kingdom was a spiritual kingdom and it was established just a short time after Jesus spoke this. That kingdom was the church established as the apostles preached the gospel and baptized believers into that kingdom. And yet there are many who say the kingdom was not established as Jesus predicted. They say He “delayed” its establishment even though they have no passages in the NT where He said that. Their problem is that, like the Jews, they expect it to be a physical power type kingdom like Israel was in the OT under David, which it is not. But to the point again, if that kingdom was not established in the lifetime of those He was speaking to, then He is a false prophet.

Just one more “teaser” to get you thinking. In the only 4 times in the synoptic gospels (i.e. Matthew, Mark, and Luke) where Jesus predicts that He is coming back, i.e. His 2nd coming as we call it, Jesus said that His 2nd coming would be within the lifetime of those whom He was speaking to. Matthew 10:23 ²³ “But whenever they persecute you in ^[t]one city, flee to ^[u]the next; for truly I say to you, you will not finish going through the cities of Israel until the Son of Man comes. He was talking to the apostles who would be going through all Israel preaching the gospel after He died. Matthew 16 ²⁸ “Truly I say to you, there are some of those who are standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom.” Matthew 24 ³⁰ And then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of the sky with power and great glory. 4 verses after this, He said all these things would take place before the generation He was speaking to passed away. Matthew 26 ⁶⁴ Jesus *said to him, “You have said it yourself; nevertheless I tell you, ^[v]hereafter you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Power, and coming on the clouds of heaven.” Jesus told this to Caiaphas. What could Caiaphas have possibly seen that would fulfill this? It had to be when Jesus “came” in judgment on the wicked Jews, using the Roman Empire to destroy over a million of them.

I challenge you to find any passage in any of the synoptic gospels where Jesus predicted some “coming back” that would occur beyond the lifetime of those whom He was peaking to. So, He either fulfilled that prediction of else He is a false prophet. He did come in judgement on the Jews, using the Roman Empire. If we gave the synoptic gospels to someone who had never heard about Jesus or never read the gospels or never had someone tell them when this 2nd coming would occur, and if they read these 4 predictions, would they not judge Jesus to be a true prophet or not by whether He returned within the lifetime of those He was speaking to or not? Of course, we would. BTW the Muslims, Jews, and atheists all say Jesus was a false prophet because they don’t think His prediction came true. Their problem is that they don’t understand the figurative language of the Bible. His 2nd coming was imminent as He predicted, but it was not some “end of the earth”, body of Jesus coming as people have taught it to be. Christian preachers have confounded this problem by not understanding the fulfillment of the prediction, saying that He did not return soon as He predicted, that His 2nd coming is still in our future and here we are 2,000 years after Jesus made His prediction. Digest all that because it is very imporant that we show that Jesus was not a false prophet in any of HIs predictions, including His prediction that His 2nd coming would be imminent. BTW the apostles taught the same thing. Just one example: James 5 ⁸ You too be patient; strengthen your hearts, for the coming of the Lord is near. The 1st century early church expected His 2nd coming to be within their lifetime because that is what He and the apostles had told them. Either it happened as predicted, or Jesus and the apostles are false prophets! Period!

I hope this article has helped us appreciate Jesus as the Prophet of Deut 18:15. I hope it stimulates your thinking on some of the predictions that He made.

^{Psalm 37: 25} I have been young and now I am old,
Yet I have not seen the righteous forsaken
Or his ^[g]descendants begging bread. Psalm 72: ^4 [f]May he vindicate the ^[g]afflicted of the people, Save the children of the needy And crush the oppressor.¹² For he will deliver the needy when he cries for help,
The ^[q]afflicted also, and him who has no helper. ¹³ He will have compassion on the poor and needy, And the ^[r]lives of the needy he will save. ¹⁴ He will ^[s]rescue their ^[t]life from oppression and violence,
And their blood will be precious in his sight;

I read these passages and wonder how David can say these things. Did he not know that Doeg killed 85 priests because Ahimelech gave David the consecrated bread for his men? We look back on all the genocides in history and think, “How could men be so cruel?” We know that in the concentration camps they would often send the women and children directly off the train cars into the gas chambers. Did God rescue the oppressed? Many of them no doubt were Christians, although that. doesn’t make their deaths any more tragic than. the deaths of all the others. Children die of starvation and malnutrition by the thousands all over the world, or from polluted water, or from AIDS given to them by their parents. Does God not save the children of the needy?

We should point out that the promises of the Old Covenant were mainly physical blessings. Deuteronomy 7: ¹² “Then it shall come about, because you listen to these judgments and keep and do them, that the Lord your God will keep with you ^[aa]His covenant and ^[ab]His lovingkindness which He swore to your forefathers. ¹³ He will love you and bless you and multiply you; He will also bless the fruit of your womb and the fruit of your ground, your grain and your new wine and your oil, the increase of your herd and the young of your flock, ^[ac]in the land which He swore to your forefathers to give you. ¹⁴ You shall be blessed above all peoples; there will be no male or female barren among you or among your cattle. ¹⁵ The Lord will remove from you all sickness; and He will not put on you any of the harmful diseases of Egypt which you have known, but He will lay them on all who hate you. ¹⁶ You shall consume all the peoples whom the Lord your God will deliver to you; your eye shall not pity them, nor shall you serve their gods, for that would be a snare to you. Fruitful crops, fruitful wombs, protection from enemies, long life, no diseases or plagues. These are all physical blessings. Of course, Paul tells us that men like David also found spiritual blessings, i.e. the forgiveness of sins (Romans 4), but the main promises of the old covenant were physical blessings. I still wonder if there were no exceptions to this even in the Old Covenant. Did a child of a righteous man never die from hunger? Did every single crop planted yield a plentiful harvest? Did everyone live to an old age? Did no one ever get sick or have some disease? Apparently those would be exceptions and not the rule in the Old Covenant.

Do we have those same type promises in the New Covenant? Isaiah 53: 5 And by His scourging we are healed. This is talking about Jesus.Matthew 8: (Jesus) healed all who were ill. ¹⁷ This was to fulfill what was spoken through Isaiah the prophet: “He Himself took our infirmities and ^[s]carried away our diseases.” Is this promising physical healing for believers? Jesus did indeed heal a lot of physical sickness and diseases. Matthew says the fulfillment of Isaiah 53:4,5 is physical healing by Jesus. Peter seems to indicate that the fulfillment of this passage is in spiritual healing. 1 Peter 2: ²⁴ and He Himself ^[x]bore our sins in His body on the ^[y]cross, so that we might die to ^[z]sin and live to righteousness; for by His ^[aa]wounds you were healed. Even in the Old Testament, David spoke of this spiritual healing: Psalm 41: ⁴ As for me, I said, “O Lord, be gracious to me; Heal my soul, for I have sinned against You.”

If the New Covenant promised physical healing for all believers, then that simply has not been happening. I know a strong believer lady who has spinal bifida, and has been in a wheelchair most all her life. Why did God not heal her when she became a Christian. Please don’t give me that line that she doesn’t have enough faith.

I think I know why God changed the blessings from mainly physical in the OT to mainly spiritual in the NT. The Jews became proud and self righteous because of their special status and blessings. He had warned them in Deuteronomy 8 not to forget God when they entered Canaan and had ready to use vineyards, etc., but they did. That kind of a system can lead to pride, a sense of entitlement. God didn’t want that. He wanted humility. Jesus starts out, “Blessed are the poor, for they shall inherit the kingdom of heaven”. The poor, not the rich. “Blessed are those who are persecuted”. “Pray for your enemies”, not kill them. No more “holy wars” where God sends out armies to wipe out the Amalekites. God only wants the humble in his kingdom today. He doesn’t want anyone in it for health and wealth. As a matter of fact, that lady with spinal bifida is closer to God than most of us who have never had something like that. Instead of removing sickness as in the OT, God allows it in the NT and can even use it to help us grow closer to God. Look at Christians who have health and wealth. Many if not most of them trust in their riches and are very materialistic. Some who are wealthy use it for God, but many do not. They forget God. So, maybe my speculation helps explain why God changed blessings. Now we can focus on eternal life, not on this life.

Obviously, we don’t know his heart, but I wonder if he was ever had a good heart. We know how he ended up. The people wanted a king instead of judges, so God, even though He did not want a king because He was their king, gave them a king. Jacob had predicted that the rightful kings of the nation to be (Israel) would come from the tribe of Judah, but Saul was from the tribe of Benjamin. God knew that, so why would God make him the first king? Maybe he knew Saul had a bad heart and would use Saul to show the people that their request for a king was bad. As if God gave them what they wanted, not what He wanted, to teach them a lesson. Has that ever happened to you? You pray for something you want without asking God if it is what He wants? You get it and feel good, only to realize later when it turns out bad that your request was not what God wanted. James 3 ³ You ask and do not receive, because you ask ^[c]with wrong motives, so that you may spend it^[d]on your pleasures.

So God gave them what they wanted, and Saul, at least initially, sure fit the bill. 1 Samuel 9 Now there was a man of Benjamin whose name was Kish the son of Abiel, the son of Zeror, the son of Becorath, the son of Aphiah, the son of a Benjamite, a mighty man of ^[h]valor. ² He had a son whose name was Saul, a choice and handsome man, and there was not a more handsome person than he among the sons of Israel; from his shoulders and up he was taller than any of the people. Brave, tall, handsome. What more could you ask? He even seemed humble at first, 1 Samuel 9“Am I not a Benjamite, of the smallest of the tribes of Israel, and my family the least of all the families of the ^[l]tribe of Benjamin? Samuel gave him some signs (the finding of the lost donkeys). 1 Samuel 10 ⁹ Then it happened when he turned his back to leave Samuel, God changed ^[u]his heart; and all those signs came about on that day. ¹⁰ When they came to ^[v]the hill there, behold, a group of prophets met him; and the Spirit of God came upon him mightily, so that he prophesied among them. ¹¹ It came about, when all who knew him previously saw that he prophesied now with the prophets, that the people said to one another, “What has happened to the son of Kish? Is Saul also among the prophets?” God changed his heart! Whatever was lacking God changed his heart to accept being anointed king with all the responsibility involved in that. Plus, God gave him miraculous Spirit powers of prophecy! Whatever Saul might have been lacking initially, God gave him all he needed to succeed as the first king even though God did not want a king. It is not like God doomed him to failure before he even started. Maybe God knew how Saul would turn bad, but He gave him every chance to do good as king. Saul even seemed calm when certain worthless men did not want to accept him as king. 1 Samuel 10 ²⁷ But certain ^[z]worthless men said, “How can this one deliver us?” And they despised him and did not bring him any present. But he kept silent. Later, he tries to kill all his political enemies (mainly David), and does get Doeg to kill the 85 priests who gave David bread.

And God blessed him with a military victory at first. He gathered an army and defended the inhabitants of Jabesh-Gilead from the Ammonites who had threatened to put out the right eyes of all the men in the city. 1 Samuel 11 ⁶ Then the Spirit of God came upon Saul mightily when he heard these words, and ^[ac]he became very angry. Bold leadership. Form an army to defend against enemies. This was the main reason they wanted a king to begin with. 1 Samuel 8 ¹⁹ Nevertheless, the people refused to listen to the voice of Samuel, and they said, “No, but there shall be a king over us, ²⁰ that we also may be like all the nations, that our king may judge us and go out before us and fight our battles.” Saul even refused to allow his men to kill those who didn’t want him to be king. 1 Samuel 11 ¹² Then the people said to Samuel, “Who is he that said, ‘Shall Saul reign over us?’ ^[af]Bring the men, that we may put them to death.” ¹³ But Saul said, “Not a man shall be put to death this day, for today the Lord has accomplished deliverance in Israel.” Really a very good beginning. 1 Samuel 11 ¹⁵ So all the people went to Gilgal, and there they made Saul king before the Lord in Gilgal. There they also offered sacrifices of peace offerings before the Lord; and there Saul and all the men of Israel rejoiced greatly.

I encourage you to read 1 Samuel 12 at this point. Samuel tells the people that they have a history of disobeying God, and they have committed a great evil by asking for a king. If they and their new king commit evil, God will punish them as he has done in their past. But he gives them a choice. If they and their king do good, God will bless them even though they committed this great evil by asking for a king. Samuel calls for what must have been a terrible storm of thunder and rain for a whole day. The peopled were terrified. They ask Samuel to not stop praying for them. Samuel replied, 1 Samuel 12 ²³ Moreover, as for me, far be it from me that I should sin against the Lord by ceasing to pray for you; but I will instruct you in the good and right way. We should never cease praying for people, even those who seem to be hopeless. Keep teaching people, sowing the seed, and leave the harvest to God.

So what went wrong with Saul’s good beginning? When did it start to go bad for him as king? It started in 1 Samuel 13. Jonathon smote a garrison of the Philistines, which caused the Philistines to mount a very large force to attack Israel. Saul only had a standing army of 3,000 men so he called for help from the tribes but was vastly outnumbered. Samuel had told Saul to wait 7 days for him to come offer a sacrifice to God for a victory, but Saul panicked when his men kept deserting him, terrified of the enemy. Did Saul not remember the story of Gideon? God sent all the fearful men home, and Gideon ended up with an army of 300 with which God defeated 130,000 Midianites! If Saul had just trusted God, He would have given him a victory no matter how many men he ended up with! But he had a panic attack! Samuel was delayed past the 7 days, and Saul offered the sacrifice himself. I can understand that. I am a fearful person. I often panic and just feel like I have got to do something fast to solve a problem instead of patiently trusting God, waiting for God to help me. So did Samuel consider what Saul did a big deal? Yes! 1 Samuel 13¹³ Samuel said to Saul, “You have acted foolishly; you have not kept the commandment of the Lord your God, which He commanded you, for now the Lord would have established your kingdom ^[au]over Israel forever. ¹⁴ But now your kingdom shall not endure. The Lord has sought out for Himself a man after His own heart, and the Lord has appointed him as ruler over His people, because you have not kept what the Lord commanded you.”

Back to our original question. Did Saul start out with a good heart and turn bad? Or was his heart proud and unbelieving all along and this is the first time we see how his heart really was? Does it matter if we can answer that question? Probably not. He had the freedom to choose and made his own choices. Some Calvinists say, “once saved, always saved”. According to Calvinistic TULIP, the P is perseverance of the saints (the elect can’t fall from grace no matter what they do). So, when a person is saved, they will tell them they are part of the elect, usually shown that by some working of the Spirit (like with Saul prophesying). But if that person, a year later, turns from faith in Jesus and returns to a life of sin, what do they say? Some of them will say that person is still saved because he can’t fall from grace. The New Testament clearly teaches that a saved person can fall from grace. Galataians 5 ⁴ You have been severed from Christ, you who ^[b]are seeking to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace. 2 Peter 2 ²⁰ For if, after they have escaped the defilements of the world by the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in them and are overcome, the last state has become worse for them than the first. ²¹ For it would be better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than having known it, to turn away from the holy commandment handed on to them. ^22 [h]It has happened to them according to the true proverb, “A dog returns to its own vomit,” and, “A sow, after washing, returns to wallowing in the mire.” But some of them will say, “Oh, that person never was really saved to begin with”, even though they assured that person that he/she was saved a year before! The “once saved, always saved” doctrine is a very dangerous doctrine that could leave someone living in sin and lost, yet thinking he/she is still saved. There would be no need to repent if they can’t fall from grace and they could end up being lost forever. But if some will at least say that a “backslider” (one who has totally forsaken faith in Christ and is practicing sin willfully) will not be saved by grace, then I guess it doesn’t really matter if he was 1) never really saved or 2) was once saved but fell from grace.

So I guess it doesn’t matter if Saul was good at first but turned bad, or never was really good in his heart. So why ask this question? Because he made bad choices that caused him to end up bad, and we might make those same choices even if we did start out with a good heart. The final straw in God rejecting Saul as king came when didn’t kill all the Amalekites as God had commanded him. He spared King Agag and some of the animals to offer as a sacrifice (according to him). He argued with Samuel that he had obeyed God, but Samuel took this very seriously. 1 Samuel 15 ²² Samuel said, “Has the Lord as much delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices As in obeying the voice of the Lord? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice,  And to heed than the fat of rams. ²³ “For rebellion is as the sin of divination, And insubordination is as iniquity and idolatry. Because you have rejected the word of the Lord, He has also rejected you from being king.” Why is this such a big sin? It must be because of Saul’s heart. David commits a lot worse sins and is forgiven, but Saul is punished severely for his sin. David repented and asked forgiveness for his sin, but Saul argued with Samuel that he hadn’t even sinned. He did say “I have sinned” but that was after Samuel told him God was taking the kingdom from him. We trust in God’s grace to forgive us from all our sins, but we should try to obey God as closely as we possibly can. Grace doesn’t mean we can just carelessly pick and choose which commands to obey.

It was all down hill after that. Saul is filled with envy because of the praise David was getting from the people. God sends an evil spirit on him and he tries to kill David (even threw a spear at his son Jonathon) in the palace. He chases David for 10 years in the wilderness. David could have killed him twice, and both times Saul said he was sorry for trying to kill David but he continued to try to kill him. He orders Doeg to kill Ahimelech and 85 priests when Ahimelech gave David the consecrated bread for his starving men. He goes to a witch at Endor to get her to call up Samuel to tell him his fate because God has quit talking to him. Samuel tells him he will die the next day in battle, and he does. The Philistines cut off his head and hand his body on a wall. The men of Jabesh-Gilead (the ones Saul rescued) come and take his body off the wall, burn it, and bury his bones. What a sad ending to the first king of Israel. Maybe Paul said it best in 1 Corinthians 10 ¹²Therefore let him who thinks he stands take heed that he does not fall.

Samuel was the last judge. 1 Samuel 8 And it came about when Samuel was old that he appointed his sons judges over Israel. ² Now the name of his firstborn was Joel, and the name of his second, Abijah; they were judging in Beersheba. ³ His sons, however, did not walk in his ways, but turned aside after dishonest gain and took bribes and perverted justice. The people demanded a king “to be like the other nations”. You can understand their condemnation of Samuel’s sons, but God told Samuel that they were rejecting Him (God) as their king. The nation of Israel was a theocracy with God as its king from the very beginning. There was no earthly king or else God would have anointed one. Why do you think they would want a king? The bottom line is that they were continually disobeying God. God would send an enemy to punish them (that was the cycle over and over in the book of Judges). God would raise up a judge to deliver them, but they would just worship the gods of the Canaanites and repeat the cycle. So they are trying to come up with the best plan to defend themselves against enemies instead of just repenting and obeying God, their king. Other nations had kings who formed great armies, so Israel decided that they wanted a king to be like the other nations. Why did God give them a king if He was opposed to the idea? I am speculating here.

1) I think God felt that the best way to control this disobedient nation in the future would be with a king. The period of the judges was anarchy. In the appendix (Judges 17-21), it makes the comment: ⁶ In those days there was no king in Israel; every man did what was right in his own eyes (Judges 17:6). God started the nation in order to bring the Messiah through that nation, but if the anarchy seen in the Judges period continued, there would be no nation to bring the Messiah through. A king would often be a bad thing. God told Samuel to warn the people that a king would be such a burden on them that they would regret wanting a king. A king would take their sons for his army, their daughters for servants, take their lands, and take a tenth of their produce. Solomon did all these things and 10 of the tribes rejected him a king, although they continued having kings in their newly formed northern kingdom of Israel. 2 tribes, Judah and Benjamin, formed the southern kingdom of Judah. Judah would have 19 kings, most of them bad just like Samuel predicted. But several of them were good and did things that brought the nation of Judah back into obedience to God’s laws. For example, Hezekiah had the people celebrate the Passover in a way they had not done in a long time. Josiah finds the book of the Law while restroing the temple, and has the people read it throughout the land. Asa gets the people to make a covenant to obey God or die. The bad kings, like Manasseh, will bring the nation down into terrible sin. He himself offered his sons to the foreign gods and practiced witchcraft over his 55 year reign. But in spite of the bad kings, what would have happened if there were no kings at all, if the anarchy of the judges period continued. The kings would have armies as Samuel predicted, and God would even use those armies to defeat their enemies. God made Uzziah the king of Judah very strong militarily. He gave Asa’s army a victory over a million Ethiopians. Again, I am speculating, but I think God knew that the best way to keep the nation together until the Messiah would come would be to let them have their kings. If they would have obeyed God as their King, that would not have been necessary, but He knew they would always be rebellious.

2) God would use this earthly king as a type of His Messianic King Jesus in the distant future. After all, did Jacob not predict that the rightful kings would come through the tribe of Judah? Genesis 49 ¹⁰ “The scepter shall not depart from Judah, Nor the ruler’s staff from between his feet,
^[k]Until Shiloh comes, And to him shall be the obedience of the peoples. A scepter imply a king. Shiloh is most likely Jesus. All the kings from Judah would be preludes to God’s king Jesus that He would set over His eternal spiritual church kingdom. The kings of the northern kingdom did not come from Judah (neither did the first king Saul. The kings of Judah did come from Judah (as did David and Solomon). Judah would have kings until the captivity in Babylon (586 BC). There would be about 600 years with no king in Judah. Then Jesus would come to fulfill Genesis 49:10. Daniel 7 had predicted that God would make Jesus an eternal king over his eternal spiritual church kingdom: ¹⁴ “And to Him was given dominion,
Glory and ^[k]a kingdom, That all the peoples, nations and men of every^[l]language Might serve Him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion
Which will not pass away; And His kingdom is one Which will not be destroyed. This would be God’s eternal kingdom as predicted in Daniel 2:44 ⁴⁴ In the days of those kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom which will never be destroyed, and that kingdom will not be ^[av]left for another people; it will crush and put an end to all these kingdoms, but it will itself endure forever. It was that kingdom that both Jesus and John the Baptist predicted, “The kingdom is at hand” during the Roman Empire (the legs of iron on the statue that Nebuchadnezzar saw in a vision). It was that kingdom that Jesus predicted would be established in the lifetime of those listening to his voice. Mark 9:1 And Jesus was saying to them, “Truly I say to you, there are some of those who are standing here who will not taste death until they see the kingdom of God after it has come with power.” Most of the Jews expected an earthly kingdom and a king that would defeat their enemies and restore the kingdom to the power it had under David. But God wanted a spiritual kingdom. He told Pilate in John 18: ³⁶ Jesus answered, “My kingdom ^[k]is not of this world. If My kingdom were of this world, then My servants would be fighting so that I would not be handed over to the Jews; but as it is, My kingdom is not ^[l]of this realm.” ³⁷ Therefore Pilate said to Him, “So You are a king?” Jesus answered, “You say correctly that I am a king. Jesus would give the apostle Peter the “keys to the kingdom” in Matthew 16 ¹⁹ I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven. Peter would use those keys to open the door to entrance into that spiritual kingdom, the church, by preaching the gospel and telling them how to be saved and added to that church kingdom. Paul said in Colossians 1 ^13 [t]For He rescued us from the ^[u]domain of darkness, and transferred us to the kingdom of ^[v]His beloved Son, ¹⁴ in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.

Jesus gives an insightful parable in Luke 19:11-27. Some thought the kingdom would be established (even though they misunderstood the nature of it) “immediately”. Jesus had predicted that it was “at hand” and would be established before some of them died, but it would not be established fully the day he died or even in Acts 2 when Peter opened the door to enter the kingdom. In that parable in Luke, Jesus said that nobleman would go off to a far country to “receive a kingdom for himself, and then return to reign in that kingdom. That fits what Daniel 7 predicted to a tee. The Son of Man would go to the Ancient of Days to receive an eternal kingdom, and then return to reign in that kingdom. There was a transition period between the choosing of the king and his coronation. There was a transition period between the old kingdom and the final government of the new kingdom. That transition period would be from the beginning of the church in Acts 2 to the return of Jesus in the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD. The book of Revelation predicts that destruction of Jerusalem (and the temple) in 70 AD, and says in Revelation 15:11 “The kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and of His ^[j]Christ; and He will reign forever and ever.” Again, this fulfills Daniel 7 to a tee. It fulfills Genesis 49:10 also. So, God gave the nation a king as a prelude to his eternal king that he would send in Jesus over a thousand years later. I think he also wanted them to see the contrast between all their evil kings and His eternal righteous king Jesus. He wanted them to see that an earthly kingdom depending on earthly power was not the best way to go. Jesus said in Matthew 11 ¹² From the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven ^[n]suffers violence, and violent men ^[o]take it by force. Instead, a spiritual kingdom made up of only humble believers (not power seeking citizens) with Jesus as their king. A kingdom where the citizens would “turn their swords into plowshares” (Isaiah 2).

Aside from my speculation, I hope that my points are valid. I don’t pretend to know the mind of God or why He does what He does. Maybe Paul said it best in Romans 11:33 Oh, how great are God’s riches and wisdom and knowledge! How impossible it is for us to understand his decisions and his ways! But we have the advantage of looking back at the finished plan of redemption, the finished mystery. Revelation 10 ⁷ but in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, when he is about to sound, then the mystery of God is finished, as He ^[b]preached to His servants the prophets. We are not inspired like the apostle Paul, but we have his insight into the mystery (Ephesians 3 ^4 [a]By referring to this, when you read you can understand my insight ^[b]into the mystery of Christ) plus the fulfilled predictions of the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD. We get the best of both worlds, as they say.

Moses is indeed a case study in leadership. Are leaders born or developed? Probably both in most cases. Moses spent his first 40 years being raised as a son of Pharoah’s daughter in Egypt. Acts 7:22 ²² Moses was educated in all the learning of the Egyptians, and he was a man of power in words and deeds. BTW that contradicts Moses’ claim that he was “slow of speech” when God called him in the burning bush. We don’t know how he learned that he was a Hebrew, like the slaves: probably from his mother or sister? At the age of 40, he was ready to lead the slaves in an uprising, like Spartacus. Spartacus, a Thracian gladiator, led a successful slave uprising against the mighty Romans in 73 BC, although he eventually was killed by them. Acts 7 ²³ But when he was approaching the age of forty, it entered his ^[o]mind to visit his brethren, the sons of Israel. ²⁴ And when he saw one of them being treated unjustly, he defended him and took vengeance for the oppressed by striking down the Egyptian. ²⁵ And he supposed that his brethren understood that God was granting them ^[p]deliverance ^[q]through him, but they did not understand. Moses obviously planned to lead the slave uprising against the Egyptians using the sword, but the next day, he realized the salves weren’t with him on that idea. Acts 7: ²⁶ On the following day he appeared to them as they were fighting together, and he tried to reconcile them in peace, saying, ‘Men, you are brethren, why do you injure one another?’ ²⁷ But the one who was injuring his neighbor pushed him away, saying, ‘Who made you a ruler and judge over us? ²⁸ You do not mean to kill me as you killed the Egyptian yesterday, do you?’ ²⁹ At this remark, Moses fled and became an alien in the land of ^[r]Midian, where he became the father of two sons.

He fled to Midian, met his future father-in-law Jethro, became a shepherd, married Zipporah, had 2 sons, and apparently would have been totally content to spend the rest of his life in Midian. At the age of 80, God appeared to him in the burning bush and told him to go tell Pharoah to let His people go. Moses did not want to go. After making several excuses and objections, he finally agreed to go. But this time, he would lead with a staff instead of a sword. God would provide the miraculous power to free the slaves, not the power of Moses or the slaves. God would get the glory for defeating the Egyptians and humiliating the gods of the Egyptians. No one mentions who the god of Spartacus was, if indeed he worshiped a god. They only mention the bravery and leadership of Spartacus. Moses will get a lot of credit for freeing the slaves, but it is Moses’ God, YHWH, who gets the glory.

So he goes reluctantly goes back to Egypt to lead the slaves out. Pharoah refused to let the people go and made them make their brick quote finding their own straw, beating them. The slaves were angry at Moses. Moses complained to God: Exodus 5 ²² Then Moses returned to the Lord and said, “O Lord, why have You brought harm to this people? Why did You ever send me? ²³ Ever since I came to Pharaoh to speak in Your name, he has done harm to this people, and You have not delivered Your people at all.” He has not “bought into” the process God is using to free the slaves. Instead of telling the people to trust God’s plan and be patient, he complained and questioned God’s plan himself. At a seminar I attended, Lynn Anderson said that leaders have to change the belief system of the church before they can implement new ideas. He said that in reference to changing an eldership from a board of directors to an empowering, shepherding group of men. The elders must be ready to give up a controlling, often dictatorship, style of leadership but the flock must be ready to buy into that. Many still think of the elders as God’s way of controlling the flock, a small group of men controlling the decisions for the entire flock. Lynn gave an example of a church who went from just a few elders to over 40 elders, who changed the model of leadership. Well, the belief system of the slaves had not changed, so they were angry at Moses. Moses had not bought into God’s plan either!

But let’s give Moses credit. He continued on his mission, using his staff to pour out God’s destructive power on the Egyptians in the plagues. He boldly confronted Pharoah over and over until Pharoah finally allowed the slaves to go free after the 10th plague. You would think that the slaves were now sold on God’s plan, but as they were trapped beside the Red Sea with Pharoah in pursuit, ¹¹ Then they said to Moses, “Is it because there were no graves in Egypt that you have taken us away to die in the wilderness? Why have you dealt with us in this way, ^[ge]bringing us out of Egypt? ¹² Is this not the word that we spoke to you in Egypt, saying, ‘^[gf]Leave us alone that we may serve the Egyptians’? For it would have been better for us to serve the Egyptians than to die in the wilderness (Exodus 14:11-12).” Moses makes a great statement of faith: ¹³ But Moses said to the people, “Do not fear! ^[gg]Stand by and see the salvation of the Lord which He will accomplish for you today; for the Egyptians whom you have seen today, you will never see them again forever. ¹⁴ The Lord will fight for you while you keep silent (Exodus 14:13,14).” I wonder what he was thinking the Lord was going to do to protect them from the pursuing Pharoah’s army? But at least, he believed that God was going to do something great to deliver them. He doesn’t turn to the Lord and question the Lord like he did when Pharoah first refused to let the slaves go.

 ¹⁵ Then the Lord said to Moses, “Why are you crying out to Me? Tell the sons of Israel to go forward. ¹⁶ As for you, lift up your staff and stretch out your hand over the sea and divide it, and the sons of Israel shall ^[gh]go through the midst of the sea on dry land (Exodus 14:15,16).” It is as if the Lord is rebuking Moses for not coming up with the idea of parting the Red Sea with his staff! Great leaders will not only make a stand of faith when confronted with the enemy or problems, like Moses did, but they will also come up with innovative, God given, plans for “going forward” to overcome all obstacles and problems. Many congregations have split because of internal problems. The elders would not prayerfully come up with a God given plan to unite the flock in going forward to do the Lord’s work. Instead, it often became a power struggle over church politics and different ones pushing their own agendas and trying to control the flock. Maybe some suggested a plan to go forward, but the elders rejected that plan out of fear of losing control.

So they cross the Red Sea and maybe the people have finally bought into God’s power and plan. Exodus 14: ³¹ When Israel saw the great ^[gu]power which the Lord had ^[gv]used against the Egyptians, the people ^[gw]feared the Lord, and they believed in the Lord and in His servant Moses. But they hadn’t really fully bought in. When Moses was in on Sinai getting the 10 commandments, they make the golden calf. Moses intercedes for them, convincing God to spare them. Exodus 32: ³¹ Then Moses returned to the Lord, and said, “Alas, this people has ^[u]committed a great sin, and they have made ^[v]a god of gold for themselves. ³² But now, if You will, forgive their sin—and if not, please blot me out from Your book which You have written!” Instead of just complaining, reat leaders intercede for the failings and sin of the flock. Moses is bold in his intercession: “if you won’t forgive them, just blot me out of the book of life”.

God told Moses and the people to go on into the Promised Land but that He wouldn’t go with them. Exodus 33: ⁴ When the people heard this ^[aa]sad word, they went into mourning, and none of them put on his ornaments. ⁵ For the Lord had said to Moses, “Say to the sons of Israel, ‘You are ^[ab]an obstinate people; should I go up in your midst for one moment, I would destroy you. It is as if the Lord is saying, “I will get you into Canaan, but my presence can’t be with you for fear that I will destroy you because of your obstinance. It is better that I back away from you, get you into Canaan to fulfill the promise to Abraham, but not be with you for even a moment.” What a depressing flock! How many congregations sounds just like that. They exist and continue the church business, but you can tell that God’s presence is not among them. They have left their first love.

But Moses struggles with the burden of leading a flock without God’s presence. Exodus 33: ¹² Then Moses said to the Lord, “See, You say to me, ‘Bring up this people!’ But You Yourself have not let me know whom You will send with me. Moreover, You have said, ‘I have known you by name, and you have also found favor in My sight.’ ¹³ Now therefore, I pray You, if I have found favor in Your sight, let me know Your ways that I may know You, so that I may find favor in Your sight. Consider too, that this nation is Your people.” ¹⁴ And He said, “My presence shall go with you, and I will give you rest.” ¹⁵ Then he said to Him, “If Your presence does not go with us, do not lead us up from here. Do you hear what he is saying to God? “God, these are your people, not mine! We must have your presence.” An interesting passage in 1 Corinthians 14:24: ²⁴ But if all prophesy, and an unbeliever or an ^[l]ungifted man enters, he is convicted by all, he is called to account by all; ²⁵ the secrets of his heart are disclosed; and so he will fall on his face and worship God, declaring that God is certainly among you. Leaders should be concerned that those who attend their assemblies see and feel the presence of God. Too often, leaders are concerned about the superficial things, like the style of worship, the ability of the preacher, the things they use to draw new members, etc. Those things might be good, but does a visitor sense that the members are truly seeking God and bowing in homage to God, that it is not just a big show to draw new members and money.

In Exodus 34:29-35, we read about Moses’ face shining. The Lord would speak to him in the tent face to face. When Moses would come out and tell the people what God had said, his face would shine, showing the glory of the Lord in the words he was speaking. As he would finish speaking, he would put a veil on so the people would not see the shining as it went away. He didn’t want them to lose sight of the glory of what he had just told them. He would take that veil off the next time the Lord spoke to him, and repeat the process. Paul uses this event in 2 Corinthians 3:13-17 ¹³ and are not like Moses, who used to put a veil over his face so that the sons of Israel would not look intently at the end of what was fading away. ¹⁴ But their minds were hardened; for until this very day at the reading of the old covenant the same veil ^[e]remains unlifted, because it is removed in Christ. ¹⁵ But to this day whenever Moses is read, a veil lies over their heart; ¹⁶ but whenever a person turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away. The unbelieving Jews of his day would put a veil on so they could not see the fading glory of the old covenant of death as it was being replaced by the more glorious new covenant of life. The point I want to make out of this event is that Moses as a leader wanted the people to focus on the glory of the Lord in the word of God that he delivered to them. He didn’t want them to focus on his eloquence or appearance. When a leader has been in the word and in the presence of God, we should see a change in his countenance. He should be humbly moved by the words he is presenting, focused on God’s word and not fluffy illustrations or stories. Paul said in 1 Corinthians 2:1-5 And when I came to you, brethren, I did not come with superiority of speech or of wisdom, proclaiming to you the ^[a]testimony of God. ² For I determined to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ, and Him crucified. ³ I was with you in weakness and in fear and in much trembling, ⁴ and my ^[b]message and my preaching were not in persuasive words of wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power, ⁵ so that your faith would not ^[c]rest on the wisdom of men, but on the power of God.

The peak of Moses’ frustration seems to come in the wilderness.The people continually complained about having only the manna to eat. They wanted meat and fish and other foods, especially the rabble of Egyptians who came out of Egypt with them. Numbers 11:10- 15 ¹⁰ Now Moses heard the people weeping throughout their families, each man at the doorway of his tent; and the anger of the Lord was kindled greatly, and ^[j]Moses was displeased. ¹¹ So Moses said to the Lord, “Why have You ^[k]been so hard on Your servant? And why have I not found favor in Your sight, that You have laid the burden of all this people on me? ¹² Was it I who conceived all this people? Was it I who brought them forth, that You should say to me, ‘Carry them in your bosom as a ^[l]nurse carries a nursing infant, to the land which You swore to their fathers’? ¹³ Where am I to get meat to give to all this people? For they weep before me, saying, ‘Give us meat that we may eat!’ ¹⁴ I alone am not able to carry all this people, because it is too ^[m]burdensome for me. ¹⁵ So if You are going to deal thus with me, please kill me at once, if I have found favor in Your sight, and do not let me see my wretchedness.” Talk about leadership burnout! Talk about boldly telling the Lord just how you feel, boldly complaining to Him! The Lord does not rebuke him for this, but instead gives him some help. He takes of the miraculous Spirit power that Mosses has and puts it on 70 of the elders so they can take some of the load off of Moses. God will help leaders avoid burnout by giving gifts and ability to others who can help lead. But leaders must be willing and seek to delegate to others. That means giving up full control and power, which many leaders find difficult to do. Moses’ father in law Jethro had already given Moses advice in this matter. He met Moses as they came out of Egypt and saw that Moses was wearing himself out going all the judging in disputes among the people without any help. He told him in Exodus 18:18 ¹⁸ You will surely wear out, both yourself and ^[m]these people who are with you, for the ^[n]task is too heavy for you; you cannot do it alone. He persuaded him to appoint leaders over small and large groups and delegate authority to them to settle minor disputes, leaving only the major disputes or issues for Moses to deal with. Moses followed his advice. But even that was not enough, and God empowered the 70 elders to help Moses in Numbers 11. Paul told Timothy: ² The things which you have heard from me in the presence of many witnesses, entrust these to faithful men who will be able to teach others also (2 Timothy 2:2). Perhaps the most fulfilling ministry I have ever been engaged in was doing mission work in Trinidad, West Indies. There had been thousands of baptisms and many churches started, largely due to the work of Bob Brown. My co-worker and I went to Trinidad with a focus on training leaders for these new congregations. We conducted a full time school of preaching, but the best thing we did was probably the Saturday school where we taught indepth mini-courses to the local leaders, men and women who would continue their secular work but would be the leaders, preachers, and teachers in the congregations. After 3 years, we left. 45 years later, those men and women we helped train are still leading, and have trained other leaders, as Paul told Timothy to do. I am amazed at how we have built the American church around the paid professionals. One church had at least 4 great teachers who could have fled the flock on a rotating basis each month. So instead of using those men, that church hired a hundred thousand dollar plus preacher. After a few years, they replaced him with another professional. Big churches have become so dependent on very well paid professional youth ministers, worship leaders, etc. Then there is the support staff of paid secretaries, janitors, and all the things necessary to run the church business efficiently. And often churches do a great job of running the business. They even do a lot of good, teach the Bible, and do some mission work. But most of what they collect and spend is spent on themselves. There I am in Trinidad preparing leaders so they will not depend on paid preachers, which usually comes from money from the U.S., when we don’t even practice that in the U.S. We have gifted deacons who could work with the youth, but we hire professionals to do it. We assist them, but watch what happens when you change the professionals. Someone says, “but we are too busy to do all the leading without the professionals”. That tells you the problem right there. We have the wrong priorities. We are not developing and using leaders so we can use our assets to do the things the Lord really wants us to use them for. Children in 3rd world countries are dying for lack of clean water while we continue to expand and renovate our buildings. The salary of one preacher could drill many wells. I am obviously on a hobby of mine, so I guess I should stop here.

So the Lord told Moses to tell the people that he was going to give them meat, quail. Moses is still frustrated: Numbers 11 ²¹ But Moses said, “The people, among whom I am, are 600,000 on foot; yet You have said, ‘I will give them meat, so that they may eat for a whole month.’ ²² Should flocks and herds be slaughtered for them, to be sufficient for them? Or should all the fish of the sea be gathered together for them, to be sufficient for them?” ²³ The Lord said to Moses, “Is the Lord’s ^[o]power limited? Now you shall see whether My word will ^[p]come true for you or not.” Moses had another lesson to learn in leadership. The power of the Lord is not limited! Leaders should not plan based on the human assets, but on the Lord’s assets. The agony of the annual budget process. Deciding how much money the congregation will give and how it will be spent! Even haggling among some to get their share for their work or ministry. I guess that is necessary since it is a business and should be run efficiently. But leaders should envision what God wants the congregation to do, to prioritize, to spend their assets on. Then trust God to provide, and He will provide.

Leaders must be meek and humble. When Aaron and Miriam criticized Moses’ marriage to a foreigner (Zipporah, the Midianite), God struck Miriam with leprosy. Moses, instead of gloating over that, prayed for her and God only made her leprous for 7 days. I’m sure some other writer added this from Numbers 12: ³ (Now the man Moses was very humble, more than any man who was on the face of the earth.) I would say humility was the number one trait required of good leaders, wouldn’t you? They will be criticized. They will make mistakes. Moses actually was not supposed to marry a foreigner, so he was at fault here although Miriam’s main reason for criticizing was her envy over the authority God had given Moses. A great test of a leader is how do they handle criticism. Regardless of the motives of the one criticizing, they should see if the criticism is warranted, and if so, repent and correct it. If not, they should pray for the person and go to them to try to resolve it, but never take it personal.

Still during that 2nd year out of Egypt, Moses sent the 12 spies to spy out the land of Canaan. 10 of the spies came back saying Israel could not take the land because of the giants there; only Joshua and Caleb said they could. The people wanted to stone Moses and Aaron, choose new leaders, and return to Egypt. God told Moses that he was about to wipe out the whole bunch of rebellious, complainers and start over with Moses as the new seed line and nation. If Moses had not interceded for the people, God would have done that. Moses even made some arguments as to why God should not wipe them out, as if God didn’t think those things through already! He even reminded God that He had told him that He was forgiving (Exodus 34). So, instead of wiping them out, he sentenced all those over 20 to die in the wilderness wandering over the next 40 years. Leaders must be constantly in intercessory prayer, even for rebellious sheep. They must leave the judgment of sheep to God. But leaders should feel free to talk to God freely as Moses did, to even reason with God as to how they would like to see God act. Who knows how that might change God’s plans.

Don’t think that Moses was spineless, however. He became angry with Korah and the 250 men who rebelled against the authority of Moses and Aaron, especially Aaron’s special position with the priesthood. He did not intercede for them. He basically pronounced a death sentence from the Lord for them. Numbers 16 ²⁸ Moses said, “By this you shall know that the Lord has sent me to do all these deeds; for this is not ^[bw]my doing. ²⁹ If these men die ^[bx]the death of all men or ^[by]if they suffer the fate of all men, then the Lord has not sent me. ³⁰ But if the Lord ^[bz]brings about an entirely new thing and the ground opens its mouth and swallows them up with all that is theirs, and they descend alive into ^[ca]Sheol, then you will understand that these men have spurned the Lord.” Sometimes leaders have to practice 1 Corinthians 5 withdrawal of fellowship over some repeat offender in the flock who refuses to repent in order to get rid of a bad influence that might spread to others. That would be a last resort, of course, but might be necessary to protect the flock. It takes courage and it might make them look like they are not compassionate to some, but Paul told the Corinthians to do it. Here’s an example. A married brother has an affair with his secretary. Instead of repenting, he divorces his wife and marries the secretary. In just a few months, he joins another congregation who welcome him in spite of what he has done. They might argue that grace covers us today, but shouldn’t the leaders of the congregation confront this brother with his adultery?

The aftermath of the killing of Korah and 250 Levites is found in Numbers 17 ⁴¹ But on the next day all the congregation of the sons of Israel grumbled against Moses and Aaron, saying, “You are the ones who have caused the death of the Lord’s people.” The people are blaming Moses and Aaron for the death of those men! The Lord said: ⁴⁵ “^[cl]Get away from among this congregation, that I may consume them instantly.” But Moses again interceded for the people by getting Aaron to bring a censor with incense in it. He stood between the dead and the living and stopped the plague God was consuming the people with, but 14,700 died already.

But the peak of Moses’ frustration and burnout had to be in the 40th year after the condemned generation had died in the wilderness. Moses is now 120 years old. He just spent the last 40 years wandering around with these faithless, rebellious, complainers but now there is this new generation of those that were under 20 and those born during the 40 years. He is probably excited about finally going into the Promised Land. But then that new generation starts to complain about lack of water. He must have thought, “Here we go again. I can’t make it another 40 years in the wilderness punishing this group! Numbers 20 ³ The people thus contended with Moses and spoke, saying, “If only we had perished when our brothers perished before the Lord! ⁴ Why then have you brought the Lord’s assembly into this wilderness, for us and our beasts to die ^[r]here? ⁵ Why have you made us come up from Egypt, to bring us in to this wretched place? It is not a place of ^[s]grain or figs or vines or pomegranates, nor is there water to drink.” But God, in his patience, told Moses to speak to the rock, the rock which followed them and provided millions of gallons of water daily for them in the wilderness. Instead, Moses, to use common language, “lost it”. Numbers 20: ¹⁰ and Moses and Aaron gathered the assembly before the rock. And he said to them, “Listen now, you rebels; shall we bring forth water for you out of this rock?” Do you hear that? Shall “we” (Moses and Aaron) give you water? He was taking credit for it instead of giving God the glory. He not only hit the rock instead of speaking to it, but Psalm 106: They also provoked Him to wrath at the waters of ^[v]Meribah, So that it went hard with Moses on their account; ³³ Because they were rebellious against ^[w]His Spirit, He spoke rashly with his lips. Numbers 20: ¹² But the Lord said to Moses and Aaron, “Because you have not believed Me, to treat Me as holy in the sight of the sons of Israel, therefore you shall not bring this assembly into the land which I have given them.” I wonder how many times that type of thing has happened among leaders. They get frustrated and impatient and pound the pulpit with anger, lambasting the flock. Paul told Timothy who was confronted with many false teachers: 2 Timothy 2 ²⁴ The Lord’s bond-servant must not be quarrelsome, but be kind to all, able to teach, patient when wronged, ²⁵ with gentleness correcting those who are in opposition, if perhaps God may grant them repentance leading to the knowledge of the truth, ²⁶ and they may come to their senses and escape from the snare of the devil, having been held captive ^[i]by him to do his will. If a leader ever loses his temper, it’s a good sign that he is committing the same sin as Moses did.

Well, that was long! BTW, don’t fell sorry for Moses. Be glad for him. God told him in Deuteronomy 34: ⁴ Then the Lord said to him, “This is the land I promised on oath to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob when I said, ‘I will give it to your descendants.’ I have let you see it with your eyes, but you will not cross over into it.” He probably viewed the promise land with some disappointment, but he was truly blessed to be spared the next 7 years of fighting the Canaanites and the subsequent disobedience of the next generation. God buried him in an unknown spot and he went on to some form of hadean paradise to wait for his resurrection some day. The devil thought he should get the body of Moses for his sin, but Micheal the archangel rebuked him (Jude 1:9). He along with Elijah appeared with Jesus on the Mount of Transfiguration. Moses was perhaps the greatest leader of God’ people in the Old Testament. Hebrews 3 pays him a compliment: ⁵ Now Moses was faithful in all His house as a servant. We can learn so many lessons on leadership from Moses, especially we struggle with the burdens of leadership and when we are burned out.

What a strange title for a blog! First, let me say that I don’t take “happy pills” on a regular basis. I think we all know the danger of addiction to prescription drugs. By that I mean, any kind of anti-depressant or anxiety pill. I have taken a few at some times of extreme stress, and I don’t think that is any worse than using other drugs that we use. God put everything on earth for man to use and enjoy if he does so wisely and in moderation. But I hope I have the wisdom to realize when I am coming to rely on any drug.

What about alcohol? I understand the dangers of alcohol. The Bible warns us that “wine is a mocker”, and condemns drunkenness. But most of us admit that the Bible doesn’t condemn drinking alcohol in moderation. I think Jesus turned water into fermented alcoholic wine at the feast. How else could he man say that they had saved the best wine for last? Elders were to “not be given to much wine” (1 Timothy 3). There is simply no other way to interpret that than it means they could drink some wine but in moderation. Timothy seemed to stay away from alcohol for some unknown reason, but Paul told him to take a little wine for his stomach’s sake. Many studies have shown the value of a little red wine each day for the heart, so how could we argue if someone chose to drink a little wine each day for his health.

On the other hand, if this is a liberty issue, then I can also choose not to drink alcohol in any form. It might hurt my influence with the students I am trying to teach. It might. It might be that my family tends to have major problems with alcoholism and I am afraid that I could be predisposed to become addicted to alcohol. It might be that I chose carefully when and where to drink alcohol. I might choose to have a glass of wine at home with my wife, but refuse to drink with a bunch of people getting drunk at some party.

Thus, this article deals more with why I choose to take any kind of drug or not. The sad truth is that many times someone will drink or pop pills or smoke marijuana for the wrong reasons. They do so to drown out their worries, to relieve their stress, to mix with a certain social group, to deal with depression and fear, etc. If so, then those are not good reasons. That’s where our faith should be what we rely on, not drugs or alcohol. But the truth is, taking a pill or a drink is what we do in bad times. Read the Psalms as David fled from Saul for 10 years in the wilderness. A very difficult, stressful time for him, constantly on the edge of being killed by Saul., surrounded by Philistine enemies trying to mix with them, surrounded by those who would turn him in to Saul, trying to provide for 400 loyal men who are on the run with him, pretending to be mad so he would not be killed by the Philistines, dealing with guilt when he felt that he caused the death of 85 priests because Ahimelech had given him bread, etc. He would have spent 10 years without a permanent home, on the run like the old movie The Fugitive. Again, read the psalms and see how David finds the strength and peace of mind to make it through all that. For example, Psalm 63

O God, You are my God; I shall seek You ^[b]earnestly;
My soul thirsts for You, my flesh ^[c]yearns for You,
In a dry and weary land where there is no water.
² Thus I have seen You in the sanctuary,
To see Your power and Your glory.
³ Because Your lovingkindness is better than life,
My lips will praise You.
⁴ So I will bless You as long as I live;
I will lift up my hands in Your name.
⁵ My soul is satisfied as with ^[d]marrow and fatness,
And my mouth offers praises with joyful lips.

⁶ When I remember You on my bed,
I meditate on You in the night watches,
⁷ For You have been my help,
And in the shadow of Your wings I sing for joy.
⁸ My soul clings ^[e]to You;
Your right hand upholds me.

⁹ But those who seek my ^[f]life to destroy it,
Will go into the ^[g]depths of the earth.
^10 [h]They will be ^[i]delivered over to the power of the sword;
They will be a ^[j]prey for foxes.
¹¹ But the king will rejoice in God;
Everyone who swears by Him will glory,
For the mouths of those who speak lies will be stopped.

I should mention that there are a lot of things, in addition to faith, that will help someone deal with trouble, pain, and stress. Exercise, yoga, diet, etc. So don’t forget to use those non-drug things. But above, turn it over to God and trust that He will do what’s best. If he doesn’t remove the problem, He will give you the strength to handle the problem. Remember how much he cares for you.