...You Have Done It Unto Me

Hebrews 6:4-6 is perhaps one of the most controversial passages of Scriptures found in the entire Bible. These mere three verses reads as this:

For it is impossible for those who have been enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost,

And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come,
If  they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.

Such words can cause such controversy within the Christian faith: One group says "Oh, these words mean that one can be convicted by the Holy Spirit and then reject the Gospel without ever being born again." While the other group says that these were true believers who had departed from the faith to such an extent, that they had crossed the point of no return, and they are lost forever, unable to repent.

And so the debate rages on. If you were to go to the Internet, and simply type in Hebrews 6:4-6, a whole list of websites would appear listed, all to do with these verses. And You Tube also, has countless videos of individuals talking to the camera, debating if one can lose his salvation after conversion, or not.

 

I have watched and listened to those who believe that these verses teach that salvation can be lost. They tend to look sad, as if apologetic, and none of these speakers had any edifying power. Rather, time and time again, they pull my spirit down whenever their videos of their speeches come across. And I'm not alone. Many years ago we as a Baptist Church in Bracknell had a visiting speaker from a Pentecostal church at another town a few miles down the road. This was in the mid 1970s, possibly 1975 or -6. Apparently our congregation was rather shocked as this preacher threw out any assurance of eternal salvation by using, among other Scriptures, Hebrews 6:4-6. The attitude of this guest speaker was one of smugness, as if delivering a basic truth which was meant to free each one of us from the shackles of deception, namely that we believed in eternal security of the saint. A few of us, including myself, complained to one of our deacons, which was passed on to the senior pastor, who himself was away preaching at another church that particular Sunday. Apparently, our guest speaker was barred from further preaching at our fellowship, as he was never seen again.

 

Hebrews 6:4-6 was also used by the leader of a small Pentecostal church which met at his home roughly about the same time, maybe up to two years later. He used it to prove that our salvation this side of death is not eternal and can be lost. But the biggest affray, leading to a near riot, took place at Minehead, Somerset in Spring 1994. There in front of a large auditorium, a Methodist minister used the same text of Scripture to explode the "myth" of Once Saved Always Saved, which he had abbreviated to OSAS as a further means to discredit its truthfulness. In all these cases, when a preacher delivers a message that salvation can be lost, it has always brought my spirit down and shackled me into bondage of fear, a direct opposite of edifying faith, and I found this to be universal among those who believe in salvation being eternally secure. The near riot in Minehead said it all. Had the message been edifying, the closing worship which followed would have resulted in adoration and rejoicing, with hands lifted up to a holy God. Instead a song was sung which was centred around Romans 8:39 where it says that nothing can separate us from the love of God, followed by a mass counselling session to allay fears. It goes to show how devastating such misapplied Scripture can bring!

 

Recently I read an article posted by a blogger who I follow on this site. What he wrote not only edified me, but confirmed what I believed for a very long time. That is, the letter in question is called To Hebrews - or Pros Ebraious in Greek. In other words, the letter was written to Jews, Jews, Jews! In every English Bible or New Testament, Hebrews, or To the Hebrews were adequate titles. What was the object of the whole letter? It was to contrast the finished work of Jesus Christ as the final fulfilment of all the Old Testament ordinances along with Temple furniture and regular rituals. The writer explains that these Temple ordinances had only a temporary effect in covering sin, and had to be repeated over and over again. But the Atonement which Jesus had accomplished succeeded in putting sin away forever, for all time, therefore making the Temple, its ordinations and rituals obsolete.

 

Before the Temple was flattened by the Romans in 70 AD, there were a number of Jews who were familiar with the teachings and fellowship of the churches, especially in Jerusalem, where on Pentecost and soon after, thousands became believers in Jesus Christ. But some of these Jews were not satisfied with doing away with the regular animal sacrifices, and after experiencing the new life among believers, decided to return to the Temple ordinances in order to be saved. To return to animal sacrifice meant that the crucifixion had failed to atone, and because of this, the death of Jesus was treated as of no effect, and something which could be trodden into the ground as a non-event. To them, Jesus was just a condemned criminal who bore his own shame. These Jews felt much happier in keeping with their sacrifices and Temple ordinances. Even in Judaism today, without the Temple and without sacrifices, rituals in synagogues are held, denying the effect of any Atonement Christ had made on the cross.

 

Have you ever sacrificed a bull on the Altar in Jerusalem? If so, then you have trodden underfoot the cross of Christ, putting him into open shame, because by doing you have denied his atoning effect. On the other hand, as a true believer, did you depart from the faith for a few hours, several days, months, or even years? Have you returned to the faith after decades in the desert? (I knew some who did.) If so then you have not trodden underfoot the Son of God. And will stick my neck out to declare that during your exile in the desert, you had never lost your salvation, as salvation is God's doing, not yours.

 

Yet there are scores of such well-educated teachers and preachers who claim they know the Bible inside out. They are often upheld by their supporters. The Methodist minister at Minehead was actually exalted by his followers to the status of a prophet, equal in authority to Isaiah, Jeremiah or Micah, an idea I have thoroughly opposed. Most, including myself, have tossed to and fro which of the two sides is right, for surely, both cannot be right. Years of one's Christian life can be wasted on such a debate, when he could have been spending his time serving God in a way that would have brought him the greatest honour. Instead, books were written, websites created, and videos shot, throwing theories and debates to and fro, and leaving me spiritually exhausted and often crestfallen.

 

Yet there are simple, straightforward principles the Bible outlines which is indeed pleasing to God. These are not debating doctrine but in actual doing of God's word. Doing - something which someone else will benefit, both physically and spiritually. For example, someone with an income sponsoring a child growing up in poverty in the Third World, particularly in Africa. This was something I began doing in 1997, after returning home from Australia, and receiving scores of leaflets from the Christian organisation, Tear Fund (now Compassion.) It took me weeks, even months of persuading, but eventually I got round to sponsoring. The first child had abandoned the project, the second child died soon after he was assigned to me, but the third I stuck with until he became of age. A beautiful relationship blossomed between us. By sponsoring him, he was delivered from poverty, went to school, received qualifications and, I believe, gone to university. Thus fulfilling what Jesus Christ had taught:

 

Inasmuch as ye have done it unto the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me. Matthew 25:40.

 

What I write here, I'm not trying to give myself credit, as at first I was unwilling to help. It took months of persuasion to change my mind, simply because by nature, I hate junk mail, and such leaflets tend to end up straight into the bin. But this goes to show the patient grace of God, who did not give up on me when I refused to respond, but in a way, kept on knocking, because at the end of the day he wanted to bless me. It was the patient enduring of God's part that had brought the blessing.

 

Only the day before I attended a Compassion conference in central London. Believe me, it was a real eye-opener! Here I learnt about the dreadful poverty such families grow up in. One was about a single mother of several children, each with a different father. I thought, "Oooooh!"

Then the speaker asked us all,

"Hands up if any of you felt judgement against this single mother."

Nobody raised their hands, but I knew that I should have done. The mental "Oooooh!" was a glint of mental judgement. Then the speaker went on:

"The only way that this mother could bring food into her house was by prostitution. She had no job, no income and often no food at all in her house. During those times she would boil some water in a pan just to give the impression of cooking. But she had nothing to cook. Prostitution was the only glimmer of hope for survival."

 

We were told that along with poverty, there was desperation, loss of hope and prone to illness, particularly AIDS. When one of her children received a sponsor, life for the whole family changed dramatically. Not only food and a chance of education arrived, but love and hope - and conversion to Jesus Christ as Saviour. The boy who grew up under my sponsorship also grew up spiritually, enough to send me encouraging Scripture, often when I needed to be encouraged. I'm looking forward to meet him one day in Glory.

 

Sponsoring a child is one of many of doing God's will. For me personally, learning to be patient, especially in checkout lines, is something I needed to put into practise, and believe me, it was not easy, and even at present, I'm prone to relapse. One of the more testing times is when a customer in front uses a lot of our time trying to redeem a few pennies from a voucher which the till does not accept, and talking continues on between client and teller. Or as a domestic window cleaner, a customer taking a long time to pay his fee, often days or even weeks, and we have a household budget to see to. In all these cases, I have discovered that patience is an oil which makes good relationships and does not put the client under duress. But patience is a virtue I can only acquire by being filled with the Holy Spirit. I believe that having good relationship with an unbelieving client not only avoids unnecessary conflict, but has a greater likelihood of bringing him to the knowledge of Jesus Christ.

 

The blogger who I follow had put out this test - if what you have read has edified you, then it's likely to be the true Gospel. In turn, anything which brings you down is most certainly a false gospel. I can see the wisdom in his words. After all, Jesus did say:

 

The thief cometh not, but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy: I am come that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly. John 10:10.

 

Now one can't argue over that, far less cause a riot.

Rapture? It had already Occurred - Twice!

This article is a response to one of our fellow Bloggers who recently wrote an article on why he believes there will be no future Rapture of the Church, which if re-worded, would mean no translation from earth to heaven of all believers, both from the Old Testament and the New, all believers who lived and died in the past and all believers who will be alive at the time of the event. Since there is a forum of comments, mostly agreeing with the author, it looks to me that there is wide support.

Therefore I wish to present why I do believe in a future translation, or Rapture, of all Christian believers sometime in the future which only God knows. Unfortunately, there had been attempts by advocates to guess the date of this event, the failure of it happening on such dates bringing disrepute to the doctrine, both from Christians and atheists alike, and the likes of "The Rapture Generation" highlighted by the likes of Hal Lindsey and Tim LaHaye becoming the butt of ridicule.

The idea of the Rapture originated from Plymouth Brethren John Darby who developed the "Dispensation Theory" which is to say, that the Bible divides the whole of human history into seven time periods, each period emphasising a facet in God's dealing with mankind. Although I have already shown what these periods were, it is worth highlighting them here:

1. Innocence - From the Creation of Man to the Fall
2. Conscience - From the Expulsion to the Flood.
3. Human Government - From the Flood to the call of Abraham.
4. Promise - From Abraham to the Exodus.
5. The Law - From Mt Sinai to the Crucifixion.
6. Grace - From the Resurrection to the Second Coming of Christ.
7. Kingdom - From the Second Coming to the Last Judgement and end of history.

Although there are seven divisions of time listed here, each period known as a dispensation personally I believe that there is only one dispensation - the Dispensation of Grace. In other words, from the Fall of Man in the beginning, to the end of history, a person has always had his sins forgiven by the unmerited mercy of God, through faith alone. This was as much true with Abel and Enoch as well as with Moses at Mt Sinai and with all true Christian believers today. The whole of Hebrews chapter 11 emphasise this single dispensation of grace through faith alone.

However, looking at how the doctrine of Dispensationalism originated, its history here is very controversial! It was Jesuit Francisco Ribera who in 1590 defended the Papacy from Protestants accusing the Church as being the Beast of Revelation 17 with the Pope as Antichrist. This form of accusation began with Martin Luther and John Calvin and their followers, who came to the conclusion after reading and studying the Bible for themselves. So Jesuit Riberia, who of course, was a Roman Catholic, used the Bible to formulate that the Antichrist was not the Pope, but a politician who will rise to power near the end of human history - from his standpoint in time, far into the future. Ribera's associate, fellow Roman Catholic Cardinal Bellarmine, backed Ribera's research and conclusions.

It was Plymouth Brethren John Nelson Darby who turned to Ribera's thesis of the future Antichrist as the foundation to build his Dispensationalist theory, which includes a future Rapture of the Church. But this is why this makes the whole issue rather colourful. It occurred in the early 19th Century, a time when there was a heavy anti-Catholic sentiment among Protestants, something which was the result of Luther's and Calvin's conclusions reached in studying the Bible. The church structure in which Darby led and worshipped was against the clergy/laity division, against tradition, against the display of crosses and other works of art, against the liturgy, against the adoration of Mary and certainly against the Roman Catechism of worship and service format, along with the rejection of the Pope and his authority - all of these accepted as the mainstream of Catholic church structure. Therefore Darby's acceptance of Ribera's thesis of a future Antichrist and then using it as a foundation to build his own Dispensationalist structure would have been extremely ironic, being so unlikely if not impossible - unless Darby recognised a high level of Biblical truth within Ribera's works, which would come to the admission that God spoke through the Roman Catholic Jesuit, much maligned by the Protestants of the day.

John Nelson Darby


But although I recognise Darby, Scofield and even Ribera's works as valid, my advocacy of the Rapture is based on a very important issue, and it is this:-

If God has not finished with the nation of Israel, and he has future plans for the Jews, then the Rapture of the Church will occur. But If God had forever finished with Israel, and the Church had replaced Israel, then the Rapture need not occur.

There is an intrinsic relationship between Israel and the Rapture. Does God have plans for the Jews in a national sense, or not? If not, and the Church as replaced Israel (a thesis known as Replacement Theory) then we have no need to be concerned about a future Rapture. But even if the Replacement Theory is proved to be correct, the fact that two "Raptures" or translations, had already taken place in human history. I am, of course, referring to the translations of Enoch and Elijah, the only two men in the whole of history to be taken alive to Heaven. The case of Enoch is endorsed in the 11th chapter of the Letter to the Hebrews (verse 5).

This may give a clue to the identity of the two witnesses narrated in Revelation chapter 11. These two will be killed by the future Antichrist after 42 months of ministry within the city of Jerusalem. One popular theory is that Moses will be one of the witnesses. I don't hold to that idea. The reason being would be that Moses would have to die twice, the first at the foot of Mount Nebo some 3,600 years ago, then again in the future at Jerusalem. No man had ever gone through such an ordeal, not even the Lord Jesus himself. Enoch qualifies as the ideal candidate, alongside Elijah, both have yet to experience physical death. But the point is: The Rapture is not beyond God's capabilities!

So why the Rapture? Well, let's go back to the beginning.

Because God loves mankind despite being sinful, he had chosen to give an area of land to Abraham, which is to be passed to Isaac and then Jacob, who was renamed Israel, the father of a new nation which will always bear his name. When the fledgling nation was in Egypt, they became slaves to Pharaoh, from whom God delivered through Moses. Later King Solomon son of David, built the first Temple on Mount Moriah, just north of the city of Jerusalem. With the completion of the Temple, God has made a conditional promise that there will always be a descendant to reign in the throne of his father David, as long as each King stays close to God and keep his Commandments. (1 Kings 9:1-9, 2 Chronicles 7:11-22).

But the condition was not met by either Solomon himself or by most of his subsequent kings. By 586BC King Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon razed Jerusalem to the ground, destroying both the city and Temple while the exiles were carried off to Babylon. This was the end of Israel as a Kingdom, and it will not be restored until after the second coming of Christ.

Jeremiah the prophet lamented over the destruction of his beloved city, even to the extent of writing a canticle, The Lamentations of Jeremiah. But God gave him some reassurances that if a man can count all the stars in heaven, or disrupt the rotation of the Earth, then will God forever abandon Israel for all what they has done (Jeremiah 31, the whole chapter). In verses 33 and 34, after the nation had been restored and all the exiles and of the Diaspora had returned to the land God had given to Abraham, there is a promise that God will renew the heart of every Israelite across the whole nation. This has not happened yet. In fact, the regeneration of the heart can only come about through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ their Messiah. To this day, the vast majority of the Jews remains in unbelief.

Then there is a large chunk of Scripture that makes up the last twelve chapters of the book of Ezekiel. This section alone occupies 15 pages of my KJV Bible, compared with the whole of the first letter to the Corinthians, which occupies 13 pages, and the whole of Romans, which also occupies 13 pages. In other words, the last twelve chapters of Ezekiel is longer than any of the New Testament epistles. Yet these chapters, as seen by many Christians who advocate the Replacement Theory, are not only ignored, but the truthfulness of these chapters seemingly denied.

What do these chapters tell us? That God has sworn to protect and glorify his own name, and for his own name's sake, he will bring back all the children of Israel to their homeland. This was written soon after the city of Jerusalem was destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar, and it does not fit in with the return of the exiles under Ezra and Nehemiah. This was because the vast majority of Jews remained where they were resettled, and were known as the Diaspora, still very much in force during the time of Pentecost of Acts 2.

Ezekiel chapters 36-39 gives the detail of all the Jews returning to their homeland. In 36:24-27 Ezekiel specifies the cleansing of each person's heart and the sprinkling of clean water, the removal of the heart of stone to be replaced with one of flesh. This is the regeneration, nationwide, of the heart which comes only through faith in Christ, confirming Jeremiah's prophecies. Along with the promise of heart cleansing, the restored nation will once more be a Kingdom, with Jesus himself as the King. (Ezekiel 37:21-25).

From chapter 40 onwards, Ezekiel gives a thorough description of a future Temple. Future from our own standpoint in time, because it does not fit with the Temple built by Ezra, which was embellished by Herod the Great before the birth of Christ. For a start, there will be no curtain separating the Holy of Holies from the rest of the structure, but a pair of beautifully panelled doors. Then in 43:1-7 we have the glory of the Lord enter the Temple from the east gate, his body parts (soles of his feet) described in verse 7, strongly indicating a risen and glorified Lord Jesus. This did not happen at the second Temple built by Ezra. Also, a river flows out of the Temple precinct to nourish the land of Judea and to sweeten the water of the Dead Sea, so that this presently desolate salt lake will become a habitation of fishes.

Then the priests who minister to the Lord will be the sons of Zadok, a descendant of Aaron. Now if this is all future from now, then it must be said that God has, and will preserve the descendants of Zadok, and it is well to say that Zadok's offspring are with us today! This is backed by the allotments given to all eleven tribes of Israel, something which never took place again after the Exile. Therefore it is safe to conclude that all twelve tribes of Israel are with us today, and only God knows which tribe every Jew belongs to.

Now, if we are to believe that there will be a future Temple to be built in Jerusalem, this present some massive problems. First of all, why should a Temple be built anyway? Did not Jesus Christ atone for all sin for all time? If so, then why the need for more sacrifices?

Now I will be honest here. I do not know why this Temple will be required. But this is a case of believing the Word of God, and submitting to what it says. If the Bible teaches that a future Temple will be built, then who am I to argue? This is a case where I must bow the knee, and my soul to yield to the authority of God's revelation. Trying to argue intellectually would be utterly foolish and bring no lasting fruit.

Then there is another big problem - the Islamic Dome of the Rock sitting spot on where the Temple will be. We know that in no way will the Arabs allow any Jews to lay their fingers on that mosque.

The Dome stood on Temple Mount for the last 600 years. As long as it stands, the Jews were not able to build the third Temple and offer sacrifices. I believe that God allowed this arrangement while the Bride of Christ, which is the Church, reaches its fulfilment. Only when the Church as reached the exact predetermined number will God allow the Temple to be built, and then come to rule the restored Kingdom of Israel from the Throne of David, which will be located within the Holy of Holies of the Temple itself.

When I spent a few months in Israel back in 1994, working as a volunteer at a Christian Conference Centre, I took the opportunity to look at a scale model of the Temple the Jewish people had in mind to build. The model was on public display within Jerusalem Old City, in the Jewish Quarter. There were a number of Orthodox Jews who were against the construction of the Temple but general public opinion seem to be highly favoured of the idea, hence the display.

But there were, and are, two obstacles blocking the project. One is the presence of the Church here on earth. It is to this, at present, where God is ministering, building a people for himself who will make up the Bride of Christ. When she is ready, she will be called up to heaven to marry her Groom. We call this calling to the wedding of the Lamb's Bride the "Rapture".

Then secondly, right on the site where the Temple needs to be built, stands the Islamic Dome of the Rock. This must be demolished, or at least relocated before any construction of the Jewish Temple can even begin. There is no way, at present, that the Arabs would even consider such an idea. Also, where at present, there is much disunity among themselves in the Muslim world, the very threat to the Dome of the Rock would quickly unite the entire Arab population to push Israel into the sea. It could even start a world war.

Therefore it must take an event of huge global proportions to get the Arabs to change their minds. This event is so terrifying, that global pandemonium will seize everyone still alive. The sudden disappearance of millions of people across the globe. The consequences of this will be so dreadful that countless multitudes will go insane due to unrestrained panic. The common explanation for this sudden phenomenon most likely to be an abduction of the human population by extraterrestrials to serve as slaves on another planet. Suddenly those who had remained behind are under the mercy of a power they have absolutely no control. Who will be next? Will more be snatched off this planet to populate another as slaves? It is then that a statesman will suddenly arise who will claim to be the intercessor between the remaining mankind and the alien power. The people will understand that they will be safe if they submit to this man. And he will instruct the Jews to demolish the Dome of the Rock to make way for the Temple, and not a single Arab will oppose him. His motive to build the Temple will be purely selfish. As he sees the construction taking place, this statesman anticipates the day he will stand at the imposing entrance and proclaim himself to be God! (See 2 Thessalonians 2:2-4.)

This, of course is just a scenario, but one that could be close to reality. But for Israel to take centre stage again, the Christian Church must be removed, and so it shall, to present herself as the glorious Bride, dressed in white and adorned for the Groom who will accept her as his own.

Maybe who knows, perhaps Ribera, Darby and Scofield did see something in the Bible after all, the restoration of Israel as a Kingdom once more.