Dr. Couch, what is going on in Revelation 11?
ANSWER: To measure the temple means that God is about to do something with it. There will be a rebuilt temple in the messianic kingdom when Christ returns. This measuring is telling us that the Lord is going to restore the activity in the temple during that period.
The second half of the tribulation is described with the "forty-two months" as mentioned in v. 2. The tribulation lasts seven years. The two witnesses are given authority to testify by doing incredible things on the earth. The entire world apparently will see those things. When the two witnesses are killed the whole world sees their dead bodies. See verse 9. This would have to be by television.
Two witnesses are important because the Old Testament speaks of the necessity of two witnesses in order to confirm a testimony. See Deut. 17:6; 19:15; Num. 35:30.
You mentioned the fact that there are many views about chapter 11 but more than likely they do not take the Bible literally. By taking it literally, we come to the right answers.
The "kingdom of the world" would be the antichrist's kingdom mentioned in Dan. 7:23. Christ's kingdom will replace it when He comes back.
Don't listen or read the covenant guys. Only premillennialists and dispensationalists take the Bible at fact value. The others cannot be trusted. Thanks for asking. --Dr. Mal Couch (3/12)
Showing posts with label prophecy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label prophecy. Show all posts
Wednesday, March 21, 2012
Friday, February 17, 2012
Is There a Seven Year Tribulation?
Dr. Couch, there are some who say that the Bible does not teach a seven year tribulation. A friend, a post-tribulationalist, denies such. What do we say?
ANSWER: We just look at the Bible! Many such folks just can't read very well. Daniel's Seventy-Week prophecy in 9:24-27 make it clear that there is a seven year tribulation. Daniel uses "a week" or "a seven" to describe the 490 years determined on the nation of Israel. The last "week" or seven years is yet to take place. Daniel says the antichrist "will make a firm covenant with the many for one week (seven years) but in the middle of the week, he will put a stop to sacrifice ..." (v. 27). All scholars, no matter what their persuasion, believe this is a seven year period, and it is the period of the seven years of wrath that will fall upon the earth, bring a punishment to the nations, and a purge to the people of Israel.
This is repeated in the book of Revelation but the numbers are explained differently. For example, in 11:2 it says "They will tread under foot the holy city for forty-two months" (or seven years). And the Jewish people "will be nourished for one thousand two hundred and sixty days" (or seven years) (12:6). She will be nourished "for a time and times and half a time, from the presence of the serpent" (or seven years) (v. 14).
Finally, the antichrist will have authority to act for "forty-two months" (or seven years) (13:5).
Check out the commentaries of Dr. Paul Benware (Scofield Ministries), Dr. John F. Walvoord, Dr. Merrill Unger, Dr. Mal Couch (Revelation handbook), Dr. Ed Hindson, Dr. Robert Thomas, and others.
Read the good guys, not the guys who don't know what they are talking about!
Thanks for asking.
--Dr. Mal Couch (2/12)
ANSWER: We just look at the Bible! Many such folks just can't read very well. Daniel's Seventy-Week prophecy in 9:24-27 make it clear that there is a seven year tribulation. Daniel uses "a week" or "a seven" to describe the 490 years determined on the nation of Israel. The last "week" or seven years is yet to take place. Daniel says the antichrist "will make a firm covenant with the many for one week (seven years) but in the middle of the week, he will put a stop to sacrifice ..." (v. 27). All scholars, no matter what their persuasion, believe this is a seven year period, and it is the period of the seven years of wrath that will fall upon the earth, bring a punishment to the nations, and a purge to the people of Israel.
This is repeated in the book of Revelation but the numbers are explained differently. For example, in 11:2 it says "They will tread under foot the holy city for forty-two months" (or seven years). And the Jewish people "will be nourished for one thousand two hundred and sixty days" (or seven years) (12:6). She will be nourished "for a time and times and half a time, from the presence of the serpent" (or seven years) (v. 14).
Finally, the antichrist will have authority to act for "forty-two months" (or seven years) (13:5).
Check out the commentaries of Dr. Paul Benware (Scofield Ministries), Dr. John F. Walvoord, Dr. Merrill Unger, Dr. Mal Couch (Revelation handbook), Dr. Ed Hindson, Dr. Robert Thomas, and others.
Read the good guys, not the guys who don't know what they are talking about!
Thanks for asking.
--Dr. Mal Couch (2/12)
Wednesday, February 15, 2012
"The Kingdom of God" Present in the Church Today
Dr. Couch, Millard Erickson says that "the kingdom of God" over which Christ reigns, is present in the church. What do you say?
ANSWER: Erickson has not read carefully. The kingdom of God and the kingdom of heaven are two ways of describing the millennial kingdom. I proved this clearly in my book "An Introduction to Classical Evangelical Hermeneutics." Dr. Walvoord had not seen this before, and before he endorsed my book, agreed with what I had written. As you know he was an outstanding prophecy scholar. This is a book that is making clear interpretation of the Bible. And, it is one of the few interpretative books now available.
Thanks for asking.
--Dr. Mal Couch (2/12)
ANSWER: Erickson has not read carefully. The kingdom of God and the kingdom of heaven are two ways of describing the millennial kingdom. I proved this clearly in my book "An Introduction to Classical Evangelical Hermeneutics." Dr. Walvoord had not seen this before, and before he endorsed my book, agreed with what I had written. As you know he was an outstanding prophecy scholar. This is a book that is making clear interpretation of the Bible. And, it is one of the few interpretative books now available.
Thanks for asking.
--Dr. Mal Couch (2/12)
Friday, December 16, 2011
Post-Tribulation and the Rapture
Dr. Couch, it seems as if the post-tribers are against the rapture doctrine because they say that Psalm 110:1 teaches that Christ remains in heaven until His enemies are subdued and then He comes back to earth again. What do you say?
ANSWER: They practice what I call "wooden-headed" interpretation. The Psalm 110 passage has to do completely with the issue of His coming to earth to reign. They cannot prove by the passage that He never leaves heaven to gather upwards His church saints in order to get them out of the way for the tribulation. They have a problem, I don't! All of the rapture passages are clear. (Look in the archives in this website. I have an exegesis on almost all of the rapture passages!)
God gathers His own up to Himself. And again, don't mix dispensations. Psalm 110 has to do with His coming millennial kingdom reign. The rapture issue has to do with the church.
The post-tribers have to answer what it means when Paul says "Then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them (the resurrected) in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and thus we shall always be with the Lord" (1 Thess. 4:17). I can read! And I know the difference between up and down. He does not come down to reign. We go up to meet Him in the air. We take the Bible verses where we find them. We OBSERVE, OBSERVE, OBSERVE!
The reason we go up is obvious from 5:9. Paul writes, "For God has not destined us for wrath, but for obtaining salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ." The church does not go through the wrath. And the wrath is the entire seven year period, not just the last half. We know this from Jeremiah 30:6-7. The "Birth Pangs" (v. 6) refer to "that day." And "that day" is "great" in a singular sense (v. 7). The church does not go through part, any part of, the tribulation. We are rescued from all of it! This is further explained in 1 Thessalonians 1:10: "Jesus, who delivers us from the wrath to come," all of it!
Only premillennialists practice good hermeneutics and sound observation. The other guys get very sloppy! And remember, when you work so hard to deny the obvious, you have a hidden agenda. What is their agenda? Usually, it is that they just don't like the doctrine of the rapture, and, they just don't like dispensationalism, though they really can't tell you why.
Thanks for asking.
Dr. Mal Couch
ANSWER: They practice what I call "wooden-headed" interpretation. The Psalm 110 passage has to do completely with the issue of His coming to earth to reign. They cannot prove by the passage that He never leaves heaven to gather upwards His church saints in order to get them out of the way for the tribulation. They have a problem, I don't! All of the rapture passages are clear. (Look in the archives in this website. I have an exegesis on almost all of the rapture passages!)
God gathers His own up to Himself. And again, don't mix dispensations. Psalm 110 has to do with His coming millennial kingdom reign. The rapture issue has to do with the church.
The post-tribers have to answer what it means when Paul says "Then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them (the resurrected) in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and thus we shall always be with the Lord" (1 Thess. 4:17). I can read! And I know the difference between up and down. He does not come down to reign. We go up to meet Him in the air. We take the Bible verses where we find them. We OBSERVE, OBSERVE, OBSERVE!
The reason we go up is obvious from 5:9. Paul writes, "For God has not destined us for wrath, but for obtaining salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ." The church does not go through the wrath. And the wrath is the entire seven year period, not just the last half. We know this from Jeremiah 30:6-7. The "Birth Pangs" (v. 6) refer to "that day." And "that day" is "great" in a singular sense (v. 7). The church does not go through part, any part of, the tribulation. We are rescued from all of it! This is further explained in 1 Thessalonians 1:10: "Jesus, who delivers us from the wrath to come," all of it!
Only premillennialists practice good hermeneutics and sound observation. The other guys get very sloppy! And remember, when you work so hard to deny the obvious, you have a hidden agenda. What is their agenda? Usually, it is that they just don't like the doctrine of the rapture, and, they just don't like dispensationalism, though they really can't tell you why.
Thanks for asking.
Dr. Mal Couch
Tuesday, September 27, 2011
Is Gog the Anti-Christ?
Dr. Couch, could Gog be the anti-christ in Ezekiel 38?
ANSWER: No, not really. First, he is only over the land of Magog (and he is also the prince of Rosh, Meshech, and Tubal) and not the entire world, or the Roman empire, as all believe he will be, from what is said in Revelation. The description of him does not match up with Revelation 13 or any other thing describing him in Revelation. In Ezekiel 38 his description is too limited. The event of Gog and Magog is confined and is not universal as played out in Revelation.
Thanks for asking.
--Dr. Mal Couch (9/11)
ANSWER: No, not really. First, he is only over the land of Magog (and he is also the prince of Rosh, Meshech, and Tubal) and not the entire world, or the Roman empire, as all believe he will be, from what is said in Revelation. The description of him does not match up with Revelation 13 or any other thing describing him in Revelation. In Ezekiel 38 his description is too limited. The event of Gog and Magog is confined and is not universal as played out in Revelation.
Thanks for asking.
--Dr. Mal Couch (9/11)
Thursday, September 22, 2011
"The Rest of Her Seed"
Dr. Couch, who are 'the rest of her seed' in Revelation 12:17? Are these the church saints?
ANSWER: No. At this point, remember the world is deep into the tribulation. The church saints have been raptured. The "her" is not the church, "she" is Israel that Satan is trying to destroy. Remember context, context, context!
The Jewish people keep God's commandments and hold to the testimony of Jesus as well. Thomas says rightly "this sequence says rather plainly that 'the rest of her seed' is none other than the 144,000." He adds, "The rest of her seed as the 144,000 Israaelites who were sealed in chapter 7. These have the distinction of being active witnesses throughout the world during the last three and one half years before Christ returns."
Thanks for asking.
--Dr. Mal Couch (9/11)
ANSWER: No. At this point, remember the world is deep into the tribulation. The church saints have been raptured. The "her" is not the church, "she" is Israel that Satan is trying to destroy. Remember context, context, context!
The Jewish people keep God's commandments and hold to the testimony of Jesus as well. Thomas says rightly "this sequence says rather plainly that 'the rest of her seed' is none other than the 144,000." He adds, "The rest of her seed as the 144,000 Israaelites who were sealed in chapter 7. These have the distinction of being active witnesses throughout the world during the last three and one half years before Christ returns."
Thanks for asking.
--Dr. Mal Couch (9/11)
Saturday, July 23, 2011
Image of the Beast
Dr. Couch, did the religious beast make an image of the beast in Revelation?
ANSWER: We all get a little confused about this issue because of 13:14-15. It is the people who construct an image of the beast but the verses say: "There was given to the (religious) beast to give breath to the image of the beast, that the image of the beast might even speak and cause as many as do not worship the image of the beast to be killed." And "he causes all, the small and the great, and the rich and the poor, and the free men and the slaves, to be given a mark on their right hand, or on their forehead."
So while the religious beast does not build the image of the beast he still causes apparent "miracles" to happen through it that fools the people of the earth! We sometimes have a slip of the tongue in how we speak of the image. The bottom line, the people build the image—the religious beast manipulates it and deceives the people.
Thanks for asking.
—Dr. Mal Couch (7/11)
ANSWER: We all get a little confused about this issue because of 13:14-15. It is the people who construct an image of the beast but the verses say: "There was given to the (religious) beast to give breath to the image of the beast, that the image of the beast might even speak and cause as many as do not worship the image of the beast to be killed." And "he causes all, the small and the great, and the rich and the poor, and the free men and the slaves, to be given a mark on their right hand, or on their forehead."
So while the religious beast does not build the image of the beast he still causes apparent "miracles" to happen through it that fools the people of the earth! We sometimes have a slip of the tongue in how we speak of the image. The bottom line, the people build the image—the religious beast manipulates it and deceives the people.
Thanks for asking.
—Dr. Mal Couch (7/11)
Friday, July 22, 2011
Turning Against Israel
Dr. Couch, I'm convinced that more and more churches are turning against Israel, some even denying that they even existed. What do you say?
ANSWER: This is a sign of the times. I firmly believe we are deep into the apostasy of the church whereby they are turning away from the truth, and the faith, just as the Bible predicted. While I'm not a date setter, I think we're closer to the rapture then we could believe. I think churches have three distinct messages today. (1) the gospel of salvation in Christ, (2) the issue of total depravity and the sinfulness of man, and (3) the doctrine of biblical prophecy. I would also include the fact that the churches should be teaching what is happening in our culture as a warning to our people. This is why elders are also to be called Episcopas, that is we are to be "overseeing" what is coming and giving a warning to the congregation.
Thanks for asking.
—Dr. Mal Couch (7/11)
ANSWER: This is a sign of the times. I firmly believe we are deep into the apostasy of the church whereby they are turning away from the truth, and the faith, just as the Bible predicted. While I'm not a date setter, I think we're closer to the rapture then we could believe. I think churches have three distinct messages today. (1) the gospel of salvation in Christ, (2) the issue of total depravity and the sinfulness of man, and (3) the doctrine of biblical prophecy. I would also include the fact that the churches should be teaching what is happening in our culture as a warning to our people. This is why elders are also to be called Episcopas, that is we are to be "overseeing" what is coming and giving a warning to the congregation.
Thanks for asking.
—Dr. Mal Couch (7/11)
Saturday, July 16, 2011
Signs of the Rapture
Dr. Couch, are there any signs that the rapture may happen soon?
ANSWER: The Bible gives no signs for the rapture of the church, though there are some markers that may indicate we're getting closer. In other words, we're getting closer to the coming tribulation because the Jews are back in the land as prophesied. And the rapture takes place just before the tribulation.
The apostle Paul said that he was in a period of apostasy but he also spoke of a future and final apostasy that would come in the last days. "The Spirit says that in later times some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to deceitful spirits ..." (1 Tim. 4:1). "Realize that in the last days difficult times will come. For men will be lovers of money ..." (2 Tim. 3:1). These days obviously come upon the people before the rapture. I believe we are in these times now, so the rapture is soon.
The order then is: 1. apostasy, 2. rapture, 3. tribulation, 4. return of Christ and the establishment of the kingdom. The key to all of this is that Israel will be back in the land, which it is now!
I believe there are two stages in the end-time apostasy. There is (1) the falling away (the apostasy) of the church, and, (2) the cultural apostasy, when the culture gets worse because the light of the church has gone out.
The cultural apostasy is described in 2 Timothy 3:1-9. "For MEN (the lost, not the church) will be lovers of money, boasters, arrogant, revilers, etc." (v. 2). The church apostasy is described in 2 Timothy 4:3-5. "For the time will come when they will endure sound doctrine, … they will turn away from the truth ..." (v. 4). Church apostasy: "They will fall away from the faith ..." (4:1).
We are now going into the church apostasy AND the cultural apostasy. The culture is getting worse because the churches are no longer influencing the culture. When I was growing up cultural apostasy was held back by the churches. There was prayer before sports events. TV stations opened and closed with pastoral devotionals and prayer. But no more! There was prayer over the PA system at school, along with Bible reading brought by the Student Council. There were musicals for Christmas and for Easter at the public schools. The Gideons could pass out their Bibles at school.
Yesterday, New York state endorsed same-sex marriages, so cultural apostasy is growing rapidly. A sign that we are getting closer to the rapture, though I'm not a date-setter. These are indicators that we're getting closer to the total collapse of the culture, and thus the rapture is nearer than before!
We have some witnessing tracts that can help people with these issues. God bless and thanks for asking.
—Dr. Mal Couch (7/11)
ANSWER: The Bible gives no signs for the rapture of the church, though there are some markers that may indicate we're getting closer. In other words, we're getting closer to the coming tribulation because the Jews are back in the land as prophesied. And the rapture takes place just before the tribulation.
The apostle Paul said that he was in a period of apostasy but he also spoke of a future and final apostasy that would come in the last days. "The Spirit says that in later times some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to deceitful spirits ..." (1 Tim. 4:1). "Realize that in the last days difficult times will come. For men will be lovers of money ..." (2 Tim. 3:1). These days obviously come upon the people before the rapture. I believe we are in these times now, so the rapture is soon.
The order then is: 1. apostasy, 2. rapture, 3. tribulation, 4. return of Christ and the establishment of the kingdom. The key to all of this is that Israel will be back in the land, which it is now!
I believe there are two stages in the end-time apostasy. There is (1) the falling away (the apostasy) of the church, and, (2) the cultural apostasy, when the culture gets worse because the light of the church has gone out.
The cultural apostasy is described in 2 Timothy 3:1-9. "For MEN (the lost, not the church) will be lovers of money, boasters, arrogant, revilers, etc." (v. 2). The church apostasy is described in 2 Timothy 4:3-5. "For the time will come when they will endure sound doctrine, … they will turn away from the truth ..." (v. 4). Church apostasy: "They will fall away from the faith ..." (4:1).
We are now going into the church apostasy AND the cultural apostasy. The culture is getting worse because the churches are no longer influencing the culture. When I was growing up cultural apostasy was held back by the churches. There was prayer before sports events. TV stations opened and closed with pastoral devotionals and prayer. But no more! There was prayer over the PA system at school, along with Bible reading brought by the Student Council. There were musicals for Christmas and for Easter at the public schools. The Gideons could pass out their Bibles at school.
Yesterday, New York state endorsed same-sex marriages, so cultural apostasy is growing rapidly. A sign that we are getting closer to the rapture, though I'm not a date-setter. These are indicators that we're getting closer to the total collapse of the culture, and thus the rapture is nearer than before!
We have some witnessing tracts that can help people with these issues. God bless and thanks for asking.
—Dr. Mal Couch (7/11)
Tuesday, July 12, 2011
Timeline of Prophecy in Psalm 83
Dr. Couch, where would you place Psalm 83 in Bible prophecy?
ANSWER: I have dealt with this question before. It prophesies about the nations saying "Come, and let us wipe Israel off as a nation that the name of Israel be remembered no more." Then the tribal peoples of the Arabs are mentioned.
Along with one of my old professors, Dr. Merrill F. Unger, I hold to the possibility that it could take place before the Rapture of the church. Thus, it could happen before Gog and Magog (the Russian invasion of Israel) and as mentioned, before the Rapture. Too, of course, before the Tribulation.
Thanks for asking.
—Dr. Mal Couch (7/11)
ANSWER: I have dealt with this question before. It prophesies about the nations saying "Come, and let us wipe Israel off as a nation that the name of Israel be remembered no more." Then the tribal peoples of the Arabs are mentioned.
Along with one of my old professors, Dr. Merrill F. Unger, I hold to the possibility that it could take place before the Rapture of the church. Thus, it could happen before Gog and Magog (the Russian invasion of Israel) and as mentioned, before the Rapture. Too, of course, before the Tribulation.
Thanks for asking.
—Dr. Mal Couch (7/11)
Friday, July 1, 2011
Progressive Revelation, Covenant Theologians, and Dispensationalists
Dr. Couch, what does Progressive Revelation have to do with the differences between Covenant theologians and dispensationalists? They see the covenant blessings promised to Israel as given to the church whereby we are heirs of those prophecies.
ANSWER: The word heir or inheritance are two Greek words put together meaning: "to legally call," "to legally designate." Almost all the verses using the word is referring to salvation not to all the covenant promises to Israel. I know of no NT verses that say the church is inheriting the land promises. It is true that the church will be in the millennium but the church today is not the kingdom, the millennium!
Dispensationalist are correct: Christ is not today reigning over the world through Israel in the Holy Land, there is not a restored earthly temple today, as Ezekiel indicates in chapters 40-48.
We premillennialists are in the right camp. We hold what the early church held to and what the pious orthodox Jews believed (and still believe); they still hold to Israel as being restored (as prophesied). The Jews are coming to Christ (as prophesied), a world war is near (as prophesied).
There is nothing that we "spiritualize" but the Covenant theologians must spiritualize (the kingdom) which we do not. We then do not have two phases of interpretation. We are consistent with literal interpretation. In fact, I believe it was Ladd who said, "If we held to literal interpretation as the premillennialists do, we would hold to their same position." Right on!
The issue is not about Progressive Revelation or about the word "heir." The issue is about being consistent with interpretation. And it is about seeing the clear distinction between Israel and the Church! The church is not Israel. Some of the covenant guys say "the church is in Israel in the OT." This is clearly not so!
Those of you who have my Hermeneutics book need to read the long quotes on pages 12-13, and pages 182 through the middle of 189.
My Hermeneutic book answers all of these issues. The book is used in many Bible colleges and seminaries. Several Covenant men reviewed my book and could not answer my charges against their views. I believe it answers all their errors about interpretation.
Thanks for asking.
—Dr. Mal Couch (7/11)
ANSWER: The word heir or inheritance are two Greek words put together meaning: "to legally call," "to legally designate." Almost all the verses using the word is referring to salvation not to all the covenant promises to Israel. I know of no NT verses that say the church is inheriting the land promises. It is true that the church will be in the millennium but the church today is not the kingdom, the millennium!
Dispensationalist are correct: Christ is not today reigning over the world through Israel in the Holy Land, there is not a restored earthly temple today, as Ezekiel indicates in chapters 40-48.
We premillennialists are in the right camp. We hold what the early church held to and what the pious orthodox Jews believed (and still believe); they still hold to Israel as being restored (as prophesied). The Jews are coming to Christ (as prophesied), a world war is near (as prophesied).
There is nothing that we "spiritualize" but the Covenant theologians must spiritualize (the kingdom) which we do not. We then do not have two phases of interpretation. We are consistent with literal interpretation. In fact, I believe it was Ladd who said, "If we held to literal interpretation as the premillennialists do, we would hold to their same position." Right on!
The issue is not about Progressive Revelation or about the word "heir." The issue is about being consistent with interpretation. And it is about seeing the clear distinction between Israel and the Church! The church is not Israel. Some of the covenant guys say "the church is in Israel in the OT." This is clearly not so!
Those of you who have my Hermeneutics book need to read the long quotes on pages 12-13, and pages 182 through the middle of 189.
My Hermeneutic book answers all of these issues. The book is used in many Bible colleges and seminaries. Several Covenant men reviewed my book and could not answer my charges against their views. I believe it answers all their errors about interpretation.
Thanks for asking.
—Dr. Mal Couch (7/11)
Monday, June 20, 2011
Land of Israel is Land-less in the New Testament
Dr. Couch, what do we say to those who say the "land of Israel" is not mentioned in the New Testament? And thus, the covenant that will be fulfilled is "land-less" in the New Testament?
ANSWER: First of all, we do not have to track with those who make the New Covenant spiritual only. Because the land is not mentioned in the NT only proves our point. For the Gentiles now, we benefit by the NT but the church does not receive the land. All the promises about the land are made in the OT and they are still there. They are going to be fulfilled! The land does not have to be mentioned in the NT in order to be fulfilled. The OT promises are still valid and will come to pass just as they were prophesied.
However, having said that, I contend that the land is mentioned in the NT when it is mentioning the New Covenant for Israel. We read in Romans 11:26, which is quoting Isaiah 59:20, "Thus all Israel will be saved, just as it is written, 'THE DELIVERER WILL COME FROM ZION, He will remove ungodliness from Jacob, ..." Notice that it says "from Zion." is "ek" which means clearly "out of," or "away from."
But the Hebrew text of the Isaiah 59:20 passage says "a Redeemer will come TO Zion." The Hebrew word TO should be translated "FOR, FOR THE SAKE OF Zion." The consistent and normal reading of Zion means "Jerusalem, Israel, or the Land of Israel." Even the old scholar Nicoll writes:
"Paul is thinking of the historical people. Israel as a nation a part of the Messianic kingdom, is the content of his thoughts."
When Paul quotes the New Covenant in Romans 11:27: "This is My covenant with them, when I take away their sins," part of the context of the New Covenant, given there in Jeremiah 31:31-40, the prophet mentions the land issue. Jeremiah writes in that context: "When the city [of Jerusalem] shall be rebuilt" (v. 38), and "the valley … and the fields as far as the brook Kidron (which is on the East of Jerusalem), "to the corner of the horse Gate toward the east, shall be holy to the Lord, it shall not be plucked up, or overthrown anymore forever" (v. 40). This is part of the context of the New Covenant. Read Jeremiah 31:31-40.
Christ fulfills the Davidic covenant as mentioned in Luke 1:31-33. "The Lord God will give Him (Mary's Son) the throne of His father David." This then is expanded in Psalm 132 that makes it clear that this Covenant is fulfilled in Zion, "the Lord's resting place," and there "Your sons will keep My covenant (the Davidic), "For the Lord has chosen Zion; He had desired it for His habitation." "This will be a place for the Lord, a dwelling place for the Mighty One of Jacob" (v. 5). ALL OF THIS IS ABOUT THE LAND! We don't need the Land to be mentioned again in the NT!
In Matthew 25:31-45 A LAND is clearly implied when the Kingdom is mentioned (v. 34). "The Son of Man will come in His glory … and will sit on His glorious throne" (v. 31) with all the nations gathered before Him (v. 32). This implies a place, a location, a geographic site, a headquarters, A LAND!
The resurrected come to life and "reign with Christ for a thousand years" (Rev. 20:4, 6). Where is it that they are reigning if not in the kingdom land? The forces of God and Magog "surround the camp of the saints and the beloved city, ..." (20:9). What is the beloved city, and where is it, if not in the city of Jerusalem during the kingdom reign? Is not this the LAND?
The prophecy of John the Baptist is given to us in Luke 1:76-77. This is a quote and a fulfillment of Malachi 4:5-6 which partly reads that John will turn the hearts of the children to their fathers "lest I come and smite the LAND with a curse."
So much about the LAND is implied and understood by the reader except those who want to get rid of such a reference. The land is the kingdom, and the kingdom is the land!
Thanks for asking.
—Dr. Mal Couch (6/11)
ANSWER: First of all, we do not have to track with those who make the New Covenant spiritual only. Because the land is not mentioned in the NT only proves our point. For the Gentiles now, we benefit by the NT but the church does not receive the land. All the promises about the land are made in the OT and they are still there. They are going to be fulfilled! The land does not have to be mentioned in the NT in order to be fulfilled. The OT promises are still valid and will come to pass just as they were prophesied.
However, having said that, I contend that the land is mentioned in the NT when it is mentioning the New Covenant for Israel. We read in Romans 11:26, which is quoting Isaiah 59:20, "Thus all Israel will be saved, just as it is written, 'THE DELIVERER WILL COME FROM ZION, He will remove ungodliness from Jacob, ..." Notice that it says "from Zion." is "ek" which means clearly "out of," or "away from."
But the Hebrew text of the Isaiah 59:20 passage says "a Redeemer will come TO Zion." The Hebrew word TO should be translated "FOR, FOR THE SAKE OF Zion." The consistent and normal reading of Zion means "Jerusalem, Israel, or the Land of Israel." Even the old scholar Nicoll writes:
"Paul is thinking of the historical people. Israel as a nation a part of the Messianic kingdom, is the content of his thoughts."
When Paul quotes the New Covenant in Romans 11:27: "This is My covenant with them, when I take away their sins," part of the context of the New Covenant, given there in Jeremiah 31:31-40, the prophet mentions the land issue. Jeremiah writes in that context: "When the city [of Jerusalem] shall be rebuilt" (v. 38), and "the valley … and the fields as far as the brook Kidron (which is on the East of Jerusalem), "to the corner of the horse Gate toward the east, shall be holy to the Lord, it shall not be plucked up, or overthrown anymore forever" (v. 40). This is part of the context of the New Covenant. Read Jeremiah 31:31-40.
Christ fulfills the Davidic covenant as mentioned in Luke 1:31-33. "The Lord God will give Him (Mary's Son) the throne of His father David." This then is expanded in Psalm 132 that makes it clear that this Covenant is fulfilled in Zion, "the Lord's resting place," and there "Your sons will keep My covenant (the Davidic), "For the Lord has chosen Zion; He had desired it for His habitation." "This will be a place for the Lord, a dwelling place for the Mighty One of Jacob" (v. 5). ALL OF THIS IS ABOUT THE LAND! We don't need the Land to be mentioned again in the NT!
In Matthew 25:31-45 A LAND is clearly implied when the Kingdom is mentioned (v. 34). "The Son of Man will come in His glory … and will sit on His glorious throne" (v. 31) with all the nations gathered before Him (v. 32). This implies a place, a location, a geographic site, a headquarters, A LAND!
The resurrected come to life and "reign with Christ for a thousand years" (Rev. 20:4, 6). Where is it that they are reigning if not in the kingdom land? The forces of God and Magog "surround the camp of the saints and the beloved city, ..." (20:9). What is the beloved city, and where is it, if not in the city of Jerusalem during the kingdom reign? Is not this the LAND?
The prophecy of John the Baptist is given to us in Luke 1:76-77. This is a quote and a fulfillment of Malachi 4:5-6 which partly reads that John will turn the hearts of the children to their fathers "lest I come and smite the LAND with a curse."
So much about the LAND is implied and understood by the reader except those who want to get rid of such a reference. The land is the kingdom, and the kingdom is the land!
Thanks for asking.
—Dr. Mal Couch (6/11)
Friday, June 10, 2011
Old Covenant Obsolete
Dr. Couch, the writer of Hebrews quotes Jeremiah 31:31-34 in Hebrews 8 regarding the New covenant "with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah," saying the New covenant has made (past tense) the Old covenant (the Mosaic Law) obsolete. Does that imply that believers today in the Church age are part of the New covenant?
ANSWER: You hit the nerve when it comes to interpreting the book of Hebrews. I have contended for years that the book is aimed not at the church but at the Jews who have not trusted in Christ. The book then is an apologetic, a polemic, aimed at causing the unbelieving Jews to turn to Jesus. Most of my theology buddies do not agree with me but the greatest Greek teacher of the last century, Dr. Kenneth Wuest who taught at Moody Bible Institute, does agree. This is his view also. I came to my position way before I read what Wuest said. (I came to my position by translating the entire book of Hebrews in graduate school. You will probably not meet any Bible teachers who have translated Hebrews. Most men have poor language training and have not gone through the book in Greek.)
How would you explain:
"Today if you hear His voice, Do not harden your hearts as when they provoked Me, as in the day of trial in the wilderness. … Therefore I was angry with this generation … As I swore in My wrath, they shall not enter My rest. And to whom did He swear that they should not enter His rest, but to those who were disobedient (disbelieving)? And so we see that they were not able to enter because of unbelief. Therefore, let us fear lest while a promise remains of entering His rest any one of you should seem to have come short of it" (3:7-4:1).
Some teachers take a mediating position and say that the book is aimed at both saved and unsaved Jews. I don't think that is defense-able.
The book of Hebrews is full of what is called "the warning passages" that some men say are just warnings to believers written in strong language. They are trying to make Hebrews fit into their mold but it won't do it! We study the Bible by strong OBSERVATION, OBSERVATION, OBSERVATION! Some of the church fathers also saw that the book was probably written to lost Jews. They were correct.
Without taking too much time to explain all of my view, I will just say that the church does indeed benefit by the New covenant but it won't be fulfilled by the Jews until they enter the kingdom and turn to Christ as their Savior. That's when it is fulfilled! Today, we receive forgiveness of sins and we receive the promised Holy Spirit, as given in the New covenant. We are not promised land promises. That is reserved for the Jews when the kingdom arrives.
You need my book entitled "The New Covenant". This will explain all of this to you.
Thanks for asking.
—Dr. Mal Couch (6/11)
ANSWER: You hit the nerve when it comes to interpreting the book of Hebrews. I have contended for years that the book is aimed not at the church but at the Jews who have not trusted in Christ. The book then is an apologetic, a polemic, aimed at causing the unbelieving Jews to turn to Jesus. Most of my theology buddies do not agree with me but the greatest Greek teacher of the last century, Dr. Kenneth Wuest who taught at Moody Bible Institute, does agree. This is his view also. I came to my position way before I read what Wuest said. (I came to my position by translating the entire book of Hebrews in graduate school. You will probably not meet any Bible teachers who have translated Hebrews. Most men have poor language training and have not gone through the book in Greek.)
How would you explain:
"Today if you hear His voice, Do not harden your hearts as when they provoked Me, as in the day of trial in the wilderness. … Therefore I was angry with this generation … As I swore in My wrath, they shall not enter My rest. And to whom did He swear that they should not enter His rest, but to those who were disobedient (disbelieving)? And so we see that they were not able to enter because of unbelief. Therefore, let us fear lest while a promise remains of entering His rest any one of you should seem to have come short of it" (3:7-4:1).
Some teachers take a mediating position and say that the book is aimed at both saved and unsaved Jews. I don't think that is defense-able.
The book of Hebrews is full of what is called "the warning passages" that some men say are just warnings to believers written in strong language. They are trying to make Hebrews fit into their mold but it won't do it! We study the Bible by strong OBSERVATION, OBSERVATION, OBSERVATION! Some of the church fathers also saw that the book was probably written to lost Jews. They were correct.
Without taking too much time to explain all of my view, I will just say that the church does indeed benefit by the New covenant but it won't be fulfilled by the Jews until they enter the kingdom and turn to Christ as their Savior. That's when it is fulfilled! Today, we receive forgiveness of sins and we receive the promised Holy Spirit, as given in the New covenant. We are not promised land promises. That is reserved for the Jews when the kingdom arrives.
You need my book entitled "The New Covenant". This will explain all of this to you.
Thanks for asking.
—Dr. Mal Couch (6/11)
Thursday, June 9, 2011
Salvation: The Most Important Doctrine
Dr. Couch, the Reformed folks say salvation is the most important purpose and doctrine in the Bible. Dispensationalists say that there are many other doctrines that God makes important in Scripture. How would you answer what Paul says in 1 Corinthians 15:3: “I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures ...” It seems as if salvation is the most important doctrine. How do you answer?
ANSWER: If you look carefully at verses 1 & 2 you see that Paul is discussing the issue of believing, and on the issue of believing, he points out that he received the real scoop about what salvation is all about. He then defines salvation for those who believe in verses 3-8. His description and definition is complete and full in these verses. In this passage he does not address the other important doctrines we find in the Word of God. And there are many. But notice carefully something.
When he writes “I delivered to you as of first importance ...” the word “first” is protois. In the Greek lexicon, when this word is without an article and without a noun attached it means “absolutely.” By the way, the translators have added the word “importance.” It is not in the Greek text. So it should read: “I delivered to you THE FIRST, the MOST ABSOLUTE, when it comes to the issue and the definition of salvation.” He is not saying that this is the “First” most important doctrine in all of the Bible but it is the most important description when he is going to write about salvation.
We let the Bible speak to us; we don't tell the Bible what to say or believe, it tells us! Dispensationalists are correct in our understanding of what the Word of God is saying. The Bible IS dispensational. And, there are many doctrines that are equally important in the Scriptures that we have to heed. By the way, I believe our message today is two-fold: (1) The doctrine of salvation, and (2) The doctrine of the literal, historic, and actual return of Christ to come to the earth to reign and rule. History is going to cave in, collapse. Only when Israel's Messiah arrives will right be restored. Our Savior is the promised King who is soon to come to the earth as prophesied.
Thanks for asking.
—Dr. Mal Couch (6/11)
ANSWER: If you look carefully at verses 1 & 2 you see that Paul is discussing the issue of believing, and on the issue of believing, he points out that he received the real scoop about what salvation is all about. He then defines salvation for those who believe in verses 3-8. His description and definition is complete and full in these verses. In this passage he does not address the other important doctrines we find in the Word of God. And there are many. But notice carefully something.
When he writes “I delivered to you as of first importance ...” the word “first” is protois. In the Greek lexicon, when this word is without an article and without a noun attached it means “absolutely.” By the way, the translators have added the word “importance.” It is not in the Greek text. So it should read: “I delivered to you THE FIRST, the MOST ABSOLUTE, when it comes to the issue and the definition of salvation.” He is not saying that this is the “First” most important doctrine in all of the Bible but it is the most important description when he is going to write about salvation.
We let the Bible speak to us; we don't tell the Bible what to say or believe, it tells us! Dispensationalists are correct in our understanding of what the Word of God is saying. The Bible IS dispensational. And, there are many doctrines that are equally important in the Scriptures that we have to heed. By the way, I believe our message today is two-fold: (1) The doctrine of salvation, and (2) The doctrine of the literal, historic, and actual return of Christ to come to the earth to reign and rule. History is going to cave in, collapse. Only when Israel's Messiah arrives will right be restored. Our Savior is the promised King who is soon to come to the earth as prophesied.
Thanks for asking.
—Dr. Mal Couch (6/11)
Wednesday, June 8, 2011
Wonders in the Sky Above
Dr. Couch, it seems that Acts 2:19-20a is saying that the “wonders in the sky above” all take place “Before the great and glorious Day of the Lord.” Is that what the passage is saying?
ANSWER: Not really. This is why it is imperative that those of us who want to be teachers MUST translate both the Hebrew and Greek texts in order to really understand what is going on in the Bible. Unfortunately, we are not training men today to work the text and be engineers of the Scriptures. We are losing it, and in my opinion, we will never get it back with the present generation.
I've recently been teaching Acts and have done a lot of translation work on Acts 2. “Before the great and glorious Day of the Lord” is important. “Before ...” sounds as if those terrible things happen just prior to the beginning of the Tribulation, the Wrath, the Seven Year Tribulation. But the key is the Greek word “Before” which is the word “Prin.” In Hebrew, where the passage comes from in Joel 2:31, the word is the particle the “Lamed” (the Hebrew letter L) that often means “to, toward.” But here, there is something else going on. The perfect illustration is with Psalm 12:7 which should read: “Silver purified in the workshop AS TO EARTH, or, IN REGARD TO EARTH.” Or, “in relation to earth.”
The passage in Acts 2:19-20 then should read: “I will grant wonders in the sky above, and signs on the earth beneath, blood, and fire, and vapor of smoke. The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, “(Before) IN REFERENCE TO, IN REGARD TO the great and glorious Day of the Lord [which] shall come ...”
In my commentary series, Steven Ger on the passage makes a great statement:
“The new era commenced as the New Covenant began to be fulfilled with Jesus' distribution of His Spirit on Pentecost. This view is careful to recognize that there has been no fulfillment, in any sense, of any portion of the second segment (vv. 19-21) of Joel's prophecy. These astronomic cataclysms are to occur immediately prior to the inauguration of the messianic kingdom. It was obvious to every Jew standing in the Temple … that these signs and wonders were still to be fulfilled. Yet the promise of these cataclysms, cited by Peter, would have been compelling incentive to urge the assembled crowd to positively respond to their messiah.”
In other words, these signs are part of the Day of the Lord, they launch the Day of the Lord, or they certainly begin the Day of the Lord. They are not “outside” of that Day!
I hope this helps. Thanks for asking.
—Dr. Mal Couch (6/11)
ANSWER: Not really. This is why it is imperative that those of us who want to be teachers MUST translate both the Hebrew and Greek texts in order to really understand what is going on in the Bible. Unfortunately, we are not training men today to work the text and be engineers of the Scriptures. We are losing it, and in my opinion, we will never get it back with the present generation.
I've recently been teaching Acts and have done a lot of translation work on Acts 2. “Before the great and glorious Day of the Lord” is important. “Before ...” sounds as if those terrible things happen just prior to the beginning of the Tribulation, the Wrath, the Seven Year Tribulation. But the key is the Greek word “Before” which is the word “Prin.” In Hebrew, where the passage comes from in Joel 2:31, the word is the particle the “Lamed” (the Hebrew letter L) that often means “to, toward.” But here, there is something else going on. The perfect illustration is with Psalm 12:7 which should read: “Silver purified in the workshop AS TO EARTH, or, IN REGARD TO EARTH.” Or, “in relation to earth.”
The passage in Acts 2:19-20 then should read: “I will grant wonders in the sky above, and signs on the earth beneath, blood, and fire, and vapor of smoke. The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, “(Before) IN REFERENCE TO, IN REGARD TO the great and glorious Day of the Lord [which] shall come ...”
In my commentary series, Steven Ger on the passage makes a great statement:
“The new era commenced as the New Covenant began to be fulfilled with Jesus' distribution of His Spirit on Pentecost. This view is careful to recognize that there has been no fulfillment, in any sense, of any portion of the second segment (vv. 19-21) of Joel's prophecy. These astronomic cataclysms are to occur immediately prior to the inauguration of the messianic kingdom. It was obvious to every Jew standing in the Temple … that these signs and wonders were still to be fulfilled. Yet the promise of these cataclysms, cited by Peter, would have been compelling incentive to urge the assembled crowd to positively respond to their messiah.”
In other words, these signs are part of the Day of the Lord, they launch the Day of the Lord, or they certainly begin the Day of the Lord. They are not “outside” of that Day!
I hope this helps. Thanks for asking.
—Dr. Mal Couch (6/11)
Friday, May 6, 2011
Zephaniah 1
Dr. Couch, is Zephaniah 1 about judgment events in Zephaniah's day or is it about the future coming tribulation, the Day of the Lord?
ANSWER: Many are confused with this issue in the book. You got it right in that "the Day of the Lord" is indeed the tribulation. The apostle makes this clear. He writes: "You yourselves know full well that the day of the Lord will come just like a thief in the night" (1 Thess. 5:2). For the world, THEY, will say "Peace and safety! Then sudden destruction will come upon THEM (not us, the church saints) suddenly like birth pangs upon a woman with child; and THEY (the lost) shall not escape."
But back to Zephaniah 1, there is something important to notice. 1:2-4a. The Lord will bring universal judgment upon the world: "I will remove all things from the face of the earth," and "I will remove man and animal, and birds of the sky, and the fish, and I will cut off man from the face of the earth."
But then Zephaniah comes back to the context of his day. God will stretch out His hand against Judah and Jerusalem (v. 4a), and, He will judge the pagans (Baal), "the remnant from this place (the holy land)." Thus, "the day of the Lord is near … it is against 'all the people of Canaan'" (v. 7). This is "a punishment on that day" (v. 10a); it "will come about at that time" (v. 12a).
However, note the change in 1:14. "Near is the GREAT day of the Lord." Having translated the passage from Hebrew I noted that it should best read:
"Imminent (in duration) [is] the Day of the Lord, the GREAT (Ha'Ga'Dol)."
This is the only place in Zephaniah where GREAT is used. The other references to "the Day of the Lord" probably are referring to what happened in time past, but then, "the GREAT DAY" would be the terrible tribulation of the end times. But look what is said in verses 15-16:
"A day of wrath is that day, a day of trouble and distress, a day of destruction and desolation, a day of darkness and gloom, a day of clouds and thick darkness, a day of trumpet and battle cry" (vv. 15-16).
Compare this with Jeremiah 30:3-8: "For the days are coming" … a sound of terror, of dread, and there is no peace, a woman in childbirth (the birth pangs), all faces turn pale, Alas! For that day is GREAT, there is none like it; it is the time of Jacob's (Israel's) distress (or tribulation), it shall come about in that day ..."
The BIRTH PANGS are clearly about the tribulation just as Christ and Paul say: "It is the beginning of the birth pangs, there will be a great tribulation, such as has not occurred since the beginning of the world until now, nor ever shall be" (Matt. 24:8, 21). And Paul adds, "The day of the Lord will come upon them suddenly like birth pangs upon a woman with child; and they (the lost in the world) shall not escape" (1 Thess. 5:3).
So, Zephaniah has several stages. But the Great Day of the Lord would specifically be the future tribulation. Zephaniah concludes:
"On the day of the Lord's wrath; and all the earth will be devoured in the fire of His jealousy, for He will make a complete end. Indeed a terrifying one, of all the inhabitants of the earth" (1:18).
Thanks for asking.
—Dr. Mal Couch (5/11)
ANSWER: Many are confused with this issue in the book. You got it right in that "the Day of the Lord" is indeed the tribulation. The apostle makes this clear. He writes: "You yourselves know full well that the day of the Lord will come just like a thief in the night" (1 Thess. 5:2). For the world, THEY, will say "Peace and safety! Then sudden destruction will come upon THEM (not us, the church saints) suddenly like birth pangs upon a woman with child; and THEY (the lost) shall not escape."
But back to Zephaniah 1, there is something important to notice. 1:2-4a. The Lord will bring universal judgment upon the world: "I will remove all things from the face of the earth," and "I will remove man and animal, and birds of the sky, and the fish, and I will cut off man from the face of the earth."
But then Zephaniah comes back to the context of his day. God will stretch out His hand against Judah and Jerusalem (v. 4a), and, He will judge the pagans (Baal), "the remnant from this place (the holy land)." Thus, "the day of the Lord is near … it is against 'all the people of Canaan'" (v. 7). This is "a punishment on that day" (v. 10a); it "will come about at that time" (v. 12a).
However, note the change in 1:14. "Near is the GREAT day of the Lord." Having translated the passage from Hebrew I noted that it should best read:
"Imminent (in duration) [is] the Day of the Lord, the GREAT (Ha'Ga'Dol)."
This is the only place in Zephaniah where GREAT is used. The other references to "the Day of the Lord" probably are referring to what happened in time past, but then, "the GREAT DAY" would be the terrible tribulation of the end times. But look what is said in verses 15-16:
"A day of wrath is that day, a day of trouble and distress, a day of destruction and desolation, a day of darkness and gloom, a day of clouds and thick darkness, a day of trumpet and battle cry" (vv. 15-16).
Compare this with Jeremiah 30:3-8: "For the days are coming" … a sound of terror, of dread, and there is no peace, a woman in childbirth (the birth pangs), all faces turn pale, Alas! For that day is GREAT, there is none like it; it is the time of Jacob's (Israel's) distress (or tribulation), it shall come about in that day ..."
The BIRTH PANGS are clearly about the tribulation just as Christ and Paul say: "It is the beginning of the birth pangs, there will be a great tribulation, such as has not occurred since the beginning of the world until now, nor ever shall be" (Matt. 24:8, 21). And Paul adds, "The day of the Lord will come upon them suddenly like birth pangs upon a woman with child; and they (the lost in the world) shall not escape" (1 Thess. 5:3).
So, Zephaniah has several stages. But the Great Day of the Lord would specifically be the future tribulation. Zephaniah concludes:
"On the day of the Lord's wrath; and all the earth will be devoured in the fire of His jealousy, for He will make a complete end. Indeed a terrifying one, of all the inhabitants of the earth" (1:18).
Thanks for asking.
—Dr. Mal Couch (5/11)
Monday, April 25, 2011
The Great Tribulation
Dr. Couch, I have been told that the second half of the 70th week of Daniel is actually the Great Tribulation. I am confused because there is tribulation occurring between chapter 6 and the vials, though it seems to be the wrath of Satan. Also, many used the Westcott & Hort text. Should we trust scholars who don't seem to be "born again"?
ANSWER: I will handle your last question first. Scholars who are not born again can be just as objective with factual material as one who is born again. Being born again gives us a spiritual understanding of things but not necessarily an "up" on objective, factual things. Every week I use my Hebrew Grammars, Jewish commentaries, and Jewish lexicons, all written by men who are not born again. So, what is your point? I can learn objective facts from them just as well as from Christians. You have clearly been misled by someone!
I am not clear as to what your point is on what you first wrote. So I will simply address the issue of the Great Tribulation. The Great Tribulation (Matt. 24:21) is not a technical expression but a description of the fact that the tribulation will get worse as it goes along. I think those who try to make it a technical expression are wrong. In the Greek text there is no article before the adjective "megale" (great). The article "a" has been supplied but there is no "the." Great Tribulation then is indefinite. Many scholars miss this but since I have had more graduate Greek than anyone, I didn't miss this!
Walvoord calls the Great Tribulation a "specific period of time," while this is true, in that things get worse at the last half of the tribulation, it still should not be considered a technical period.
Thanks for asking.
—Dr. Mal Couch(4/11)
ANSWER: I will handle your last question first. Scholars who are not born again can be just as objective with factual material as one who is born again. Being born again gives us a spiritual understanding of things but not necessarily an "up" on objective, factual things. Every week I use my Hebrew Grammars, Jewish commentaries, and Jewish lexicons, all written by men who are not born again. So, what is your point? I can learn objective facts from them just as well as from Christians. You have clearly been misled by someone!
I am not clear as to what your point is on what you first wrote. So I will simply address the issue of the Great Tribulation. The Great Tribulation (Matt. 24:21) is not a technical expression but a description of the fact that the tribulation will get worse as it goes along. I think those who try to make it a technical expression are wrong. In the Greek text there is no article before the adjective "megale" (great). The article "a" has been supplied but there is no "the." Great Tribulation then is indefinite. Many scholars miss this but since I have had more graduate Greek than anyone, I didn't miss this!
Walvoord calls the Great Tribulation a "specific period of time," while this is true, in that things get worse at the last half of the tribulation, it still should not be considered a technical period.
Thanks for asking.
—Dr. Mal Couch(4/11)
Saturday, April 16, 2011
Islam or Rome?
Dr. Couch, I have heard some say that Daniel's fourth empire is Islam not Rome. They quoted Justin Martyr and Iranaeus to prove their point. What do you say?
ANSWER: Some rabbinical scholars say the same thing. They say the fourth empire in Daniel 7:7 is not Rome but the powers of present Islam. They actually say it is Edom which represents the Arabs of present day Jordan, and thus pictures the Islamic peoples. This is not an uncommon view for some Jewish interpreters.
However, the more common view is that Rome is represented here and not Islam. The reason is that this is a united "beast" and not a conglomeration of Arabic peoples gathered under the umbrella of Islam. Verse 23 says "The fourth beast will be a fourth kingdom (not a collection of peoples) on the earth, which will be different from all the other kingdoms, and it will devour the whole earth and tread it down and crush it." This beast is also made up of "ten horns and ten kings" (v. 24).
The description of this kingdom is spelled out in 2:40-43. This does not seem to be a religious movement such as Islam but a distinct nation. While the word "Rome" is not in any of the passages, all evidence leads to the great power that follows Greece, the Roman Empire. I believe the most common view follows history, and that would make this great power Rome not simply the forces of Arabic nations driven by the Islamic religion.
There is no doubt that Muslims will play a key role in the tribulation but so will other forces and powers and nations that are not mentioned in Scripture. The best view still remains Rome!
Thanks for asking.
—Dr. Mal Couch (4/11)
ANSWER: Some rabbinical scholars say the same thing. They say the fourth empire in Daniel 7:7 is not Rome but the powers of present Islam. They actually say it is Edom which represents the Arabs of present day Jordan, and thus pictures the Islamic peoples. This is not an uncommon view for some Jewish interpreters.
However, the more common view is that Rome is represented here and not Islam. The reason is that this is a united "beast" and not a conglomeration of Arabic peoples gathered under the umbrella of Islam. Verse 23 says "The fourth beast will be a fourth kingdom (not a collection of peoples) on the earth, which will be different from all the other kingdoms, and it will devour the whole earth and tread it down and crush it." This beast is also made up of "ten horns and ten kings" (v. 24).
The description of this kingdom is spelled out in 2:40-43. This does not seem to be a religious movement such as Islam but a distinct nation. While the word "Rome" is not in any of the passages, all evidence leads to the great power that follows Greece, the Roman Empire. I believe the most common view follows history, and that would make this great power Rome not simply the forces of Arabic nations driven by the Islamic religion.
There is no doubt that Muslims will play a key role in the tribulation but so will other forces and powers and nations that are not mentioned in Scripture. The best view still remains Rome!
Thanks for asking.
—Dr. Mal Couch (4/11)
Saturday, March 26, 2011
Jewish Commentaries on Daniel's Seventy Weeks
Dr. Couch, what do the Jewish commentaries say about Daniel's Seventy-Weeks in Daniel 9:24-on?
ANSWER: As you know I have all of the Jewish Soncino commentaries on the OT. I'm the only guy who has them that I know of. Generally, I appreciate what they say but often they try to get rid of messianic statements, but not always.
How sick do you want to get? On this Daniel 9 passage the Rabbis go nuts in order to rid the passage of leading to the coming of Christ, however, in a weak moment, they say: "On 'everlasting righteousness' in v. 24, they say "Commentators interpret this as an allusion to the Messianic era."
But then they go on and go crazy. On v. 26 they write (after the threescore ...") This brings the period down to the Maccabean age. According to another calculation, its terminus is the destruction of the Second Temple."
And on "an anointed one," they write "Some authorities see a reference to king Agrippa who lived at the time when the Second Temple was destroyed. Others think of Onias III who was High Priest until deposed by Antiochus Epiphanes in 175 BC; he was assassinated four years later."
On "war" in v. 26 they say "The final war against Gog and Magog which will herald the coming of the Messiah (Ezek. 38-on), or the war of Antiochus against the saints."
On "firm covenant" in v. 27 they write "If the prince is Antiochus, the allusion will be to the co-operation he obtained from the apostate hellenizers among the Jews; if to Vespasian, ..."
On "wing of detestable things" in v. 27 they say "This is one of the most baffling passages in the book. The Jewish commentators take wing as a figure of speech signifying an elevated position and render: 'upon an elevated position among detestable things, an image which causes appallment ."
On v. 25 on "to restore and to build Jerusalem" they write "The Hebrew verb is commonly used of bringing back captivities, hence it probably refers here not to the city but its exiled inhabitants." (But the passage just mentioned Jerusalem!!!!)
On "one anointed" they say "Probably Cyrus is intended, but explained by others as Zerubbabel or Jeshua the son of Jozadak, the first High Priest after the return from captivity."
In other words, the Rabbis on Daniel are all over the place. For the most part they try to escape a messianic reading. THEIR INTERPRETATIONS MAKE NO SENSE!
Thanks for asking,
Dr. Mal Couch (3/11)
ANSWER: As you know I have all of the Jewish Soncino commentaries on the OT. I'm the only guy who has them that I know of. Generally, I appreciate what they say but often they try to get rid of messianic statements, but not always.
How sick do you want to get? On this Daniel 9 passage the Rabbis go nuts in order to rid the passage of leading to the coming of Christ, however, in a weak moment, they say: "On 'everlasting righteousness' in v. 24, they say "Commentators interpret this as an allusion to the Messianic era."
But then they go on and go crazy. On v. 26 they write (after the threescore ...") This brings the period down to the Maccabean age. According to another calculation, its terminus is the destruction of the Second Temple."
And on "an anointed one," they write "Some authorities see a reference to king Agrippa who lived at the time when the Second Temple was destroyed. Others think of Onias III who was High Priest until deposed by Antiochus Epiphanes in 175 BC; he was assassinated four years later."
On "war" in v. 26 they say "The final war against Gog and Magog which will herald the coming of the Messiah (Ezek. 38-on), or the war of Antiochus against the saints."
On "firm covenant" in v. 27 they write "If the prince is Antiochus, the allusion will be to the co-operation he obtained from the apostate hellenizers among the Jews; if to Vespasian, ..."
On "wing of detestable things" in v. 27 they say "This is one of the most baffling passages in the book. The Jewish commentators take wing as a figure of speech signifying an elevated position and render: 'upon an elevated position among detestable things, an image which causes appallment ."
On v. 25 on "to restore and to build Jerusalem" they write "The Hebrew verb is commonly used of bringing back captivities, hence it probably refers here not to the city but its exiled inhabitants." (But the passage just mentioned Jerusalem!!!!)
On "one anointed" they say "Probably Cyrus is intended, but explained by others as Zerubbabel or Jeshua the son of Jozadak, the first High Priest after the return from captivity."
In other words, the Rabbis on Daniel are all over the place. For the most part they try to escape a messianic reading. THEIR INTERPRETATIONS MAKE NO SENSE!
Thanks for asking,
Dr. Mal Couch (3/11)
Wednesday, March 23, 2011
Prophesy in the Dispensation of the Church
Dr. Couch, I've heard you say that in the NT there is no one who prophesied except the apostles and also Agabus (Acts 11:28). But is this true?
Yes, this is true, but I was talking about the dispensation of the church. There are those who were under the dispensation of the law, mentioned in Acts 1, who were able to give prophetic utterances, such as Zacharias (Luke 1:67), Simeon (2:25) and Anna (v. 36). Of Simeon it was said "The Holy Spirit was upon him" (v. 25).
But you cannot find the average Christian, once you get into the dispensation of the church, who prophesied into the future. There were prophets who were "teaching" prophets but not giving prophecy into the future.
Remember, the key to understanding the Bible has to do with OBSERVATION! We observe what the text is saying. We don't come to the Bible with our preconceived ideas; we let the Bible speak to us—we do not tell it what to say!
Key words for Bible study are: OBSERVATION, INTERPRETATION, and APPLICATION. And, the word CONTEXT is also most important. If we do not interpret by Context we will get terribly confused!
Thanks for asking.
Dr. Mal Couch (3/11)
Yes, this is true, but I was talking about the dispensation of the church. There are those who were under the dispensation of the law, mentioned in Acts 1, who were able to give prophetic utterances, such as Zacharias (Luke 1:67), Simeon (2:25) and Anna (v. 36). Of Simeon it was said "The Holy Spirit was upon him" (v. 25).
But you cannot find the average Christian, once you get into the dispensation of the church, who prophesied into the future. There were prophets who were "teaching" prophets but not giving prophecy into the future.
Remember, the key to understanding the Bible has to do with OBSERVATION! We observe what the text is saying. We don't come to the Bible with our preconceived ideas; we let the Bible speak to us—we do not tell it what to say!
Key words for Bible study are: OBSERVATION, INTERPRETATION, and APPLICATION. And, the word CONTEXT is also most important. If we do not interpret by Context we will get terribly confused!
Thanks for asking.
Dr. Mal Couch (3/11)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)