A rather intriguing set of passages is contained in Revelation chapter 7. The first eight verses of that chapter refer to a very specific group of individuals. Those individuals are referred to as “servants of God” – and they are subsequently “sealed”  by an angel of God. Here are those eight verses:

Revelation 7:1-8 (ESV):

7 After this I saw four angels standing at the four corners of the earth, holding back the four winds of the earth, that no wind might blow on earth or sea or against any tree. ² Then I saw another angel ascending from the rising of the sun, with the seal of the living God, and he called with a loud voice to the four angels who had been given power to harm earth and sea, ³ saying, “Do not harm the earth or the sea or the trees, until we have sealed the servants of our God on their foreheads.” ⁴ And I heard the number of the sealed, 144,000, sealed from every tribe of the sons of Israel:

As noted above, Revelation 7 gives us a very specific number of individuals that are contained in this group – and that number is: 144,000.

Two Doctrines about the 144,000

Not surprisingly, there are many many different beliefs, among the various Christian denominations, about who, exactly, this group of “144,000″ represents. However, from my experience, there are two broad “categories” of doctrines about that group.

One of those doctrines states that the number 144,000 is completely literal. In other words, that doctrine states that there will be exactly 144,000 specific individuals, who will comprise that group. As a result, I call that doctrine the “completely literal” doctrine.

The other main doctrine states that the number 144,000 is completely figurative. In other words, that doctrine states that the “144,000″ number does not have any relation whatsoever to the actual number individuals who will comprise that group. As a result, I call that doctrine the “completely figurative” doctrine.

Exploring the “Completely Literal” Doctrine

First, let’s take a look at the completely literal doctrine. In other words, let’s consider the ramifications of the 144,000 number being the exact number, that will be a part of the “servants of God” group.

Take a look at Revelation 7:1-8 again. As listed, the 144,000 number is generated by assigning 12,000 individuals, from each of the 12 tribes of Israel. That is, there are 12,000 from the tribe of Judah, 12,000 from the tribe of Reuben, etc.

So, consider this: if the number 12,000 from each tribe is literal, then why wouldn’t the tribe, itself, also be literal? In other words, if we accept that Revelation 7 is completely literal, then not only will there be exactly 12,000 individuals from each tribe, but those individuals will also be literal Israelites! That is, the first group of 12,000 will be literal descendants of the man named Judah, the second group of 12,000 will be literal descendants of the man named Reuben, etc.

As a result, if Revelation 7 is completely literal, then that means that this group of 144,000 will only be comprised of Israelites – i.e., there will not be any gentiles in that group at all.

The reason why this is important is that many of the groups that hold the “completely literal” doctrine state that only the number 144,000 is literal. In other words, those groups claim that the  tribes of Israel that are listed are figurative. For example, Revelation 7:5 states that “12,000 from the tribe of Judah were sealed”. Some groups are very insistent that the “12,000″ is literal, but the “tribe of Judah” is figurative. In other words, those groups split up a single verse, into literal and figurative “halves”.

Certainly, there are some parts of Scripture that are literal, and some other parts that are figurative. However, splitting up a single verse into literal and figurative components indicates that one is trying to force Scripture into validating a preconceived doctrine.

Another item to  note is that there are quite a few numbers in Scripture, which have great symbolic significance. Some of those numbers are 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 10, and 40.

Two other numbers that are very symbolic in Scripture are: 12 and 1,000. The number 12 is used in many places, to denote “governmental perfection”. For example, there were 12 tribes of Israel, as well as 12 apostles. In addition, the number 12 appears quite frequently in the description of the New Jerusalem in Revelation 21. For example, there are 12 gates in the city, with 12 angels at the gates.

In addition, the number 1,000 has great significant in Scripture – and in at least some cases, that number is used in a very figurative sense. For example, Psalm 84:10 states “A day in your courts is better than a thousand elsewhere”; and 2 Peter 3:8 says “with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day”. So, in those cases, the number 1,000 is used to denote “a very large number”.

So, in Revelation 7, we see that for each of the 12 tribes, there are 12,000 individuals sealed – for a total of 144,000 individuals. Of course, 12,000 is 12 times 1,000. In other words, we have the number 12 – which often represents governmental perfection, multiplied by 1,000 – which often represents a very large number. As a result, it is certainly possible that the 12,000 from each tribe is a figurative number – and that, in turn, would mean that the overall 144,000  number is figurative as well.

It appears to me that a good general rule to use, to determine if a given passage is literal or figurative, is to examine the context of the passage in question. So, let’s take a look at Revelation 7 again. The very first verse of that chapter tells us that there are “four angels standing at the four corners of the earth, holding back the four winds of the earth”. So, can we take that verse literally? For example, are there literally four corners of the earth? Of course not – the earth is mostly spherical in shape; and there are no “corners” on a sphere. Similarly, there are not literally four winds that blow upon the earth. Finally, note that 4 angels + 4 corners + 4 winds = 12. In other words, verse 1 contains yet another reference to the number 12, in Revelation 7.

So, overall, it appears to me that the number 144,000 is most likely a figurative number – i.e., that the size of the “servants of God” group will not be exactly 144,000 individuals. This is especially true due to all of the other figurative references in Revelation – e.g. the “stars of the sky falling to the earth” in Rev 6:13, and the “woman clothed with the sun” in Rev 12:1.

Exploring the “Completely Figurative” Doctrine

Some other Christian groups have a much different belief about the 144,000 individuals listed in Revelation chapter 7. Basically, those groups believe that that the 144,000 represent every Christian who has ever lived.

One of the reasons that those groups give for this belief is that Revelation 7 continues on, after verse 8, to describe a much larger group of people. Here is the remainder of Revelation 7 – verses 9 through 17:

Revelation 7:9-17 (ESV):

⁹ After this I looked, and behold, a great multitude that no one could number, from every nation, from all tribes and peoples and languages, standing before the throne and before the Lamb, clothed in white robes, with palm branches in their hands, ¹⁰ and crying out with a loud voice, “Salvation belongs to our God who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb!” ¹¹ And all the angels were standing around the throne and around the elders and the four living creatures, and they fell on their faces before the throne and worshiped God, ¹²  saying, “Amen! Blessing and glory and wisdom and thanksgiving and honor and power and might be to our God forever and ever! Amen.”

¹³ Then one of the elders addressed me, saying, “Who are these, clothed in white robes, and from where have they come?” ¹⁴ I said to him, “Sir, you know.” And he said to me, “These are the ones coming out of the great tribulation. They have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.

So, some Christian denominations believe that the “144,000″ mentioned in verses 4 through 8 are a reference to the “great multitude” in verses 9 through 12. In addition, those groups then identify the great multitude as being all Christians who have ever lived.

Another item to note is that most of the groups who hold this belief also espouse the “eternal security” doctrine – a.k.a. “once saved, always saved”. In other words, these groups state that if a person has ever accepted Jesus as his Lord, then that person is guaranteed to be saved – even if the person later rejects Jesus.

As a result, according to these groups, the “144,000″ refers to all people who have ever accepted Jesus as their Lord. So, let’s explore that belief.

First of all,in many places the New Testament appears to refer to a subset of Christians, who will be given authority to rule in the Kingdom with Jesus. Take a look at some examples:

Matthew 19:27-30 (ESV):

²⁷ Then Peter said in reply, “See, we have left everything and followed you. What then will we have?” ²⁸ Jesus said to them, “Truly, I say to you, in the new world, when the Son of Man will sit on his glorious throne, you who have followed me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel. ²⁹  And everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or children or lands, for my name’s sake, will receive a hundredfold and will inherit eternal life. ³⁰ But many who are first will be last, and the last first.

Revelation 20:4-6 (ESV):

⁴ Then I saw thrones, and seated on them were those to whom the authority to judge was committed. Also I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for the testimony of Jesus and for the word of God, and those who had not worshiped the beast or its image and had not received its mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years. ⁵ The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended. This is the first resurrection. ⁶  Blessed and holy is the one who shares in the first resurrection! Over such the second death has no power, but they will be priests of God and of Christ, and they will reign with him for a thousand years.

Luke 12:32-34 (ESV):

³²  “Fear not, little flock, for it is your Father’s good pleasure to give you the kingdom. ³³  Sell your possessions, and give to the needy. Provide yourselves with moneybags that do not grow old, with a treasure in the heavens that does not fail, where no thief approaches and no moth destroys. ³⁴  For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.

The above passages are very instructive. First, the passage Matthew evidently refers to two separate “groups” of Christians – one group which has the apostles in it; and the other group which consists of all other followers of Christ. The primary difference between the two groups is that the “apostles’ group” is given the authority to rule with Christ (i.e., to “judge the twelve tribes of Israel”…), but the other group is not given that authority.

The passage in Revelation also appears to divide up Christians into two distinct groups. Again, the first group is given the authority to rule with Christ, while the second group is not given that authority. The first group consists of people who were explicitly granted the authority to rule with Jesus, and people who were martyred for the sake of Jesus. This definitely appears to indicate that not all Christians will rule with Jesus – because if they will, then why would Scripture explicitly mention that martyrs for Jesus will rule with him? In other words, why make a point about Christian martyrs ruling with Jesus, if all Christians (not just martyrs) will rule with him?

Finally, the passage in Luke also refers to the group of Christians who will receive authority to rule with Jesus. In that passage, the group in question is referred to as the “little flock”. The reason why that is important is because currently, about 2.2 billion people identify themselves as Christians. It strains credulity to imagine that a group of that size would be referred to as a “little” flock. Not only that, but almost one third of the total world population identifies as Christian. In other words, the total non-Christian population is only about twice as large as the total Christian population. One might expect that the total population would be hundreds (if not thousands) of times larger than a “little flock”.

As a result, it certainly appears to me that the “144,000″ group does not refer to all Christians – instead, it appears to only refer to a subset of Christians.

Conclusion

As mentioned above, Revelation 7 describes a group of 144,000 servants of God – 12,000 from each of the 12 tribes of Israel. There are two broad doctrines about the identity of that group of “144,000″:

- Some groups believe that that group consists of 144,000 literal individuals, from all nations (not just Israelites).

- Some other groups believe that the 144,000 refers to all Christians who have ever lived, throughout history.

From what I can see, the truth lies somewhere in between those two extremes.

Basically, Scripture appears to indicate that there will be two separate “groups” of Christians – a “little flock”, and a “great multitude”. The primary difference between those two groups is that the little flock will be given authority to rule with Jesus, during the millennium – while the great crowd will not have that authority.

So, the 144,000 appears to refer to the “little flock” group. The number 144,000, itself, is probably not literal – i.e., there will probably not be exactly 144,000 members in that group. (I suspect that there will actually be many more people in that group than 144,000.)

However, the number 144,000 is significant, in relative terms. In other words, that number refers to the fact that the size of the little flock will be much smaller than the size of the great crowd. As mentioned previously, there are about 2.2 billion people in the world who identify as Christians. So, even if the little flock turns out to have 100 million people in it, 100 million is still a relatively small number, compared to 2.2 billion.

Of course, the above information raises another question – who, exactly, is going to be a part of the “little flock”? In other words, which Christians will be placed in the little flock – as opposed to being a part of the great multitude?

From what I can see, it appears that God is only “calling” a minority of people during this age – probably a relatively small minority. So, I suspect that the 144,000 group is comprised of those individuals who were “called” by God – and who responded to that call. (Just because God calls a person, that does not necessarily mean that a person will respond to it.)

For more information, the following two posts go into great detail, about the concept of God only “calling” a minority of people during this age:

God’s “Call” to Salvation (part 1)

God’s “Call” to Salvation (part 2)

He intends to accomplish this task through His agent, Jesus the King, whom He will send to establish his reign on the last day. Jesus is uniquely qualified to administer the world’s government because of his proven character and track record, having always resisted temptation and obeyed his Father. He is of royal blood, having descended from the great Kings of Judah and Israel like David and Hezekiah. Even so, God’s grand idea is not limited to reestablishing the Davidic dynasty in Israel; rather, Israel will become the chief of nations and the center of a new global system. Jesus will sit upon the throne of David in Jerusalem, but his reign will extend over all nations, tribes, peoples, and languages.

When Jesus returns, he will defeat evil and resurrect the people of God who are presently sleeping in their graves. Thus the righteous will stand up once more and enjoy life on earth once again—this time in a resurrected body. That is not to say they will be in a different body; it will be their body but with some significant upgrades. Although Scripture does not spell out the capabilities of the resurrected body in detail, we do know it will neither break down nor suffer death (two major problems in our current experience). Resurrected people will be able to eat, recognize one another, and enjoy the delights of earth as it was in the beginning. The citizens of God’s kingdom will live in harmony with one another and the earth and participate in God’s grand restoration project until everything is fit for God Himself to come down and dwell here forever.

God’s dream for the future is not to hold disembodied souls in a tractor beam stare for all eternity or to be locked into a never ending song service. In contrast, the kingdom of God is much more “down to earth” than that. People will till the ground, plant crops, and enjoy the harvest. The prophets talk about how the earth will produce bountifully and even the deserts will become lush with sundry plants and flowers. The world will still experience time, and people will move through space using standard bipedal locomotion (i.e. walking, running, etc.). The goal is not to become conglomerated and melted into one collective consciousness, nor does the Bible ever mention teleportation or flying around. No, the kingdom is simply the same as our present world minus all of the problems. God will fix war, disease, famine, death, earthquakes, oppression, domestic violence, corrupt governments, and sin of all kinds.

Although this vision of the future is biblical, logical, and incredibly attractive, many ancient Christians did not like it. Sadly, the kingdom of God was rejected by a small group of educated, affluent, and influential Christian thinkers. The first time the historical records provide us with a glimpse of non-kingdom believers is in the middle of the second century—more than a century after Christ—when the Christian Platonist philosopher Justin Martyr writes of some who do not believe God will restore Jerusalem to its former glory. He says such non-kingdom believers are not mainstream or orthodox but that they are still considered fellow Christians. From at least the second century up until at least the fifth century, Christians of both opinions lived side by side and occasionally engaged in dialogue over this important issue.

By analyzing the arguments of Christians who contest the kingdom, I have identified their three primary reasons for rejecting an earthly hope: they thought it was too crude, too hedonistic, and too Jewish. These rationales are significant since they are largely to blame for Christianity going astray on this issue and embracing instead the heaven-at-death idea. If we can overcome these objections, we will be on solid ground to reclaim God’s original hope for the world and to help others see what happened. Sometimes a biblical argument is not enough to convince someone. However, if we can tell the story of how the Church got off track on this issue as well, heaven-at-death believers may find themselves more persuaded to believe in the kingdom.

The first of the three reasons why some Christians rejected the kingdom of God was because they regarded it as crude, unsophisticated, and unworthy of God. From Origen of Alexandria to Augustine of Hippo, educated, elite Christian thinkers routinely derided an earthly hope as foolish. This was probably because ancient science, heavily influenced by Plato’s philosophy, thought of the world as an inferior copy of a higher eternal realm. According to them, change was one of the most significant problems with the world and human experience. Ancient thinkers had a strong bias against transience, preferring instead immutability. Based on Aristotle and Ptolemy’s astronomy, they thought of the universe as a series of concentric circles, the center of which was the earth. We occupy the lowest level of being where coarse and unrefined matter undergoes constant flux. From hourly temperature variation to daily day and night cycles to monthly seasonal changes, this lower realm is characterized by instability and unpredictability. However, as one looks up to the higher orbits of the moon and sun and beyond, he notices that the farther one moves away from the earth, the more stability objects appear to enjoy. The stars in particular were lauded for their fixed nature, never moving with respect to each other, but rotating as a whole in an utterly predictable manner. They thought the stars were made of finer, thinner matter, which gave rise to their characteristic fixed nature. Beyond the stars exists the realm of God and the forms, the blueprint for every type of object on earth. Since education in the Greco-Roman world was essentially the same as studying the works of Greek philosophers along with the myths of old, wealthy Christians—who could afford such training—were predisposed to reject an earthly hope. The idea seemed crass—as if God would imprison His people in the lowest level of existence, composed of the thickest matter and subject to constant flux forever. Because this seemed incoherent, they developed a variety of interpretational strategies to deal with the passages that seemed to identify earth as the site of ultimate redemption.

As with the science of the universe so with the science of the body, privileged Christians of antiquity generally disparaged the human body and regarded pleasure as inherently suspect. Christians from Gaius of Rome to Jerome of Bethlehem indicted kingdom believers on the charge of hedonism (i.e. believing pleasure is the primary aim). Heaven defenders appealed to the hope of eating rich foods and drinking aged wine at the banquet feast as evidence that fleshly appetites rather than spiritual aspirations motivated kingdom believers. Such rhetoric found traction in the culture of the time, at least among educated people, because everyone just “knew” that seeking pleasure was problematic whereas denying one’s carnal impulses was virtuous. Furthermore, they regarded the body itself as the prime culprit since it was from the body, not the mind, that desires welled up and temptations sprang forth. At least since the time when Plato wrote about Socrates’ death, philosophers have regarded the body as a prison for the soul, a constant source of interruption, and the prime problem in this life. The goal is to escape the body with all of its attendant vices and flit off to the realm of pure knowledge to contemplate God and matters of importance without interruption forever. This is not to say that everyone in the Roman Empire routinely denied themselves pleasure, but an incredibly wide swath of educated thinkers believed indulging in pleasure was not ideal, and they admired those few ascetics who led consecrated lives devoid of all gratification. Philosophers like Plotinus and his disciple Porphyry repeatedly derided the body as the source of carnal desires. Furthermore, the Stoics, the most influential of the philosophical schools of antiquity, based their whole approach to life on denying and detaching themselves from personal desire of all kinds. Christianity from the second century onward imbibed this tonic of austerity and set about outdoing the pagans in strict discipline and asceticism. As a result, many elite Christians found the idea of living in physical bodies forever, eating quality meat, and enjoying the fruit of the vine, singularly unpalatable. Those who believed in the kingdom were labeled pleasure seekers (hedonists) and summarily dismissed as immature carnal Christians who had not yet ascended beyond the lusts of the flesh to the higher plane of spiritual satisfaction.

Beyond cosmology and hedonism, the kingdom was also rejected on the grounds that it was too Jewish. Although the situation is much different today, in the first few centuries after Christ, Jews greatly outnumbered Christians and generally enjoyed more social acceptance in society. By the third century the unhappy memories of the failed Jewish revolts had given way to economic growth and optimism. However, for Christians, the Jews’ very existence confronted them with two major questions. If Jesus really was the prophesied Jewish Messiah, then why did his own people still reject him? If Jesus was the king then why did he not establish the messianic kingdom and rescue the Jews from their oppressors? The standard Christian strategy—at least from the third century onwards—was to accuse the Jews of hardheartedness and allege that they read Scripture according to the letter rather than the spirit. Origen, who heavily endorsed this stereotype, claimed that Jews interpreted prophecies according to the surface meaning whereas Christians penetrated deeper to gain spiritual insight. Allegory, the way of reading sacred texts where everything represents something else, had been pioneered centuries earlier as a way to read Homer’s epic works: the Iliad and the Odyssey. By the time Christianity was in a dead-lock with Judaism, allegory had become a standard strategy the educated employed to smooth out otherwise embarrassing texts. However, those Christians—and there were many—who believed in the coming kingdom of God were a major roadblock to this approach since they read the biblical prophecies literally. One pastor in Lower Egypt even wrote a book called Against the Allegorists wherein he demonstrated the superiority of reading the Bible literally and defended the kingdom. However, to the allegorists the notion that a Jewish king would rule in Jerusalem over a restored Israel appeared too Jewish since it played right into the objection that Jesus could not have been the Christ because he did not bring a physical, political kingdom. Eventually, Christians who believed in biblical hope were labeled Judaizers. (In the Bible, Judaizers were those who strove to make Gentile converts keep the Law of Moses.) By the late fourth century, anyone who believed in an earthly kingdom was lambasted and libeled for Judaizing, even though there is no evidence that kingdom believers advocated Torah observance.

What I find so fascinating, living more than a millennium later, is that although these three reasons are completely obsolete, Christianity still retains the heaven-at-death doctrine instead of believing in the coming kingdom on earth. We no longer have a bias against change—as if transience is inherently flawed; we no longer assume all pleasure is inherently tainted—as if having a glass of wine would be a sin; we no longer repudiate an idea for being too Jewish—as if to read Scripture according to its surface meaning was inferior to making up our own “deeper” private interpretations. These objections to the kingdom are now hopelessly outdated. If anything, culture has so shifted that the opposite of each of them is favored today. So if the Bible supports the kingdom, at least when we assume it means what it says, and no one any longer takes the reasons for rejecting it seriously, then why does mainstream Christianity hold to an anti-change, anti-pleasure, anti-Jewish understanding of the hope? Why not return to the ancient conception so well expressed by the prophets of old like Isaiah and Daniel—a dream of the future where the wolf dwells with the lamb, where the Son of Man is King of over all nations, where the people of God enjoy quality food and wine on His sacred mountain, where the saints are empowered to reign with the Son of Man forever. Why not dream along with the seers, allow ourselves to be wooed by God’s grand vision, and return to the original plan of global restoration and redemption?

June 2-3 (Saturday and Sunday)
8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m.
DoubleTree by Hilton,6505 Interstate 35 North
Austin, Texas

Reservations: 1-800-347-0330 or visit webpage at tinyurl.com/austinconference

Come and join us in Austin, Texas for a weekend focused on who our God is. I will be speaking twice on the history of the Trinity in the 4th and 5th centuries. Anthony Buzzard will also be there along with the usual presenters. If you live in or near the Austin area, please consider coming!

One item that Scripture makes abundantly clear is the following admonition: Believers must avoid idols. Both the Old and New Testaments contain numerous commands to not make or worship idols – and they also describe the consequences of breaking those commands. For example, consider the following passages:

Exodus 20:4-6 (ESV):

⁴  “You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. ⁵  You shall not bow down to them or serve them, for I the Lord your God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and the fourth generation of those who hate me, ⁶ but showing steadfast love to thousands of those who love me and keep my commandments.

Leviticus 26:1 (ESV):

¹  “You shall not make idols for yourselves or erect an image or pillar, and you shall not set up a figured stone in your land to bow down to it, for I am the Lord your God.

Deuteronomy 4:25-26 (ESV):

²⁵ “When you father children and children’s children, and have grown old in the land, if you act corruptly by making a carved image in the form of anything, and by doing what is evil in the sight of the Lord your God, so as to provoke him to anger, ²⁶ I call heaven and earth to witness against you today, that you will soon utterly perish from the land that you are going over the Jordan to possess. You will not live long in it, but will be utterly destroyed.

Acts 15:28-29 (ESV):

²⁸ For it has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay on you no greater burden than these requirements: ²⁹  that you abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols, and from blood, and from what has been strangled, and from sexual immorality. If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well. Farewell.”

1 John 5:21 (ESV):

²¹ Little children, keep yourselves from idols.

1 Corinthians 6:9-10 (ESV):

⁹ Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, ¹⁰ nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.

There are many, many additional passages, which are very similar to the ones above – i.e., they all prohibit believers from having anything to do with idols.

As a result, it appears to me that – at a minimum – any objects which represent pagan gods should not be present in a believer’s home. For example, if a Christian brings a statue of the pagan goddess Aphrodite into his home, then that certainly seems to violate the above commands – even if the Christian does not literally bow down to the statue.

Another item to consider

From the information above, it looks pretty clear that God wants His followers to avoid idols. However, that raises a question – why, exactly, does God want us to avoid them? Is it solely because God is “jealous” for our worship – as Exodus 20:5 states? Or could it be that there is an additional reason why God warns us to avoid idols?

As it turns out, some Christian groups have a very definitive answer to that question. Basically, from what I have seen, some Christian groups have the following basic belief:

If an idol is present in a person’s home, then it will be relatively easy for demons to attack the people who live in that home.

In other words, the basic belief is this: if an idol is present in a home, then it will be easier for demons to attack the people who live in that home, than it would have been if the idol had not been present.

To put it another way, the mere presence of an idol in a home facilitates demonic influence in that home – regardless of whether anyone actually worships the idol.

The Christian groups that share the above belief usually provide many testimonials from believers, which appear to support that belief. Here is a general example, of the types of information that these testimonials usually contain:

- For several years, an unbelieving husband and wife tried to have a baby, but they were unsuccessful. In fact, the wife was never even able to conceive.

- Then, at one point in time, the husband and wife both became devout Christians.

- After becoming Christians, the couple realized that they had an idol in their home – an idol of a pagan goddess. As soon as they made that realization, they threw out the idol – in fact, they physically removed the idol from their home.

- Finally, very shortly after removing the idol from their home, the wife became pregnant – and she subsequently gave birth to a healthy baby.

The above scenario certainly seems to suggest that the presence of the idol was preventing the wife from becoming pregnant. From that, some people extrapolate that the presence of the idol was allowing demons to torment the couple – and in this case, the demons were preventing the couple from having a baby.

So, let’s explore the above belief. In other words, let’s try to determine if Scripture provides any support, for the belief that the presence of idols makes it easier for demons to attack people.

The Scriptural description of idols

First, let’s take a look at the Scriptural description of idols, to determine if idols – by themselves – have any “power”. Consider these passages:

1 Samuel 12:21 (NIV):

²¹ Do not turn away after useless idols. They can do you no good, nor can they rescue you, because they are useless.

Psalms 135:15 (ESV):

¹⁵  The idols of the nations are silver and gold,
the work of human hands.
¹⁶ They have mouths, but do not speak;
they have eyes, but do not see;
¹⁷ they have ears, but do not hear,
nor is there any breath in their mouths.
¹⁸ Those who make them become like them,
so do all who trust in them.

Isaiah 44:9-11 (ESV):

⁹  All who fashion idols are nothing, and the things they delight in do not profit. Their witnesses neither see nor know, that they may be put to shame. ¹⁰  Who fashions a god or casts an idol that is profitable for nothing? ¹¹  Behold, all his companions shall be put to shame, and the craftsmen are only human. Let them all assemble, let them stand forth. They shall be terrified; they shall be put to shame together.

Isaiah 45:20 (NIV):

²⁰ “Gather together and come;
assemble, you fugitives from the nations.
Ignorant are those who carry about idols of wood,
who pray to gods that cannot save.

1 Corinthians 8:4 (ESV):

⁴ Therefore, as to the eating of food offered to idols, we know that “an idol has no real existence,” and that “there is no God but one.”

All of the above passages state that idols, themselves, do not have any “power” at all. Basically, those passages describe idols as being “useless”, “profitable for nothing”, and “having no real existence”.

As a result, it certainly appears that idols, by themselves, do not have any ability to affect people. In other words, it appears that the mere presence of an idol in a home – all by itself – will not cause demons to become “attracted” to that home.

The reason why this is important is because some Christian groups believe that the presence of an idol in a home can cause problems for the householders, even if they do not even know that the idol is in their home!

For example, consider the following scenario: I move in to a new home; and – completely unknown to me – a statue of a pagan god is hidden away in a dark corner of the basement. Some Christian groups believe that the presence of that idol will automatically “attract” demons to my home – despite the fact that I am not even aware that the idol is there. However, the Scriptural passages above state that idols, by themselves, are “useless” and “nothing” – and as a result, in this scenario, it appears that the idol would not have any effect on me. (Of course, if I ever found the idol in the basement, then I would definitely need to get rid of it.)

Idols as a “snare” to people

The section above indicates that idols, by themselves, cannot affect us. So, does that mean that there is no danger whatsoever involved in associating with idols? Consider the passages below. Psalm 106 contains a brief “history” about many of the times that the Israelites fell away from worshiping God. Here are some excerpts from Psalm 106:

Psalm 106:19-22 (ESV):

¹⁹ They made a calf in Horeb
and worshiped a metal image.
²⁰ They exchanged the glory of God
for the image of an ox that eats grass.
²¹ They forgot God, their Savior,
who had done great things in Egypt,
²² wondrous works in the land of Ham,
and awesome deeds by the Red Sea.

Psalm 106:28-29 (ESV):

²⁸ Then they yoked themselves to the Baal of Peor,
and ate sacrifices offered to the dead;
²⁹ they provoked the Lord to anger with their deeds,
and a plague broke out among them.

Psalm 106:34-39 (ESV):

Verses 19 through 22 refer to Exodus 32, when the Israelites created – and worshiped – a golden calf, while Moses was receiving the commandments from God on Mt. Horeb (i.e., Mt. Sinai).

Verses 28 and 29 refer to Numbers 25, when the Israelites were drawn away by nearby Moabite women, to worship the idols of the pagan god Baal of Peor.

Finally, verses 34 through 39 refer to the Israelites’ conquest of Canaan; primarily as described in the book of Joshua. God told the Israelites that they must completely destroy the tribes that were living in Canaan, but the Israelites did not do so. As a result, the Israelites gradually began to worship the idols of those tribes – and that idol worship eventually led them to even sacrifice their own children to idols.

All of the above accounts contain the following basic steps:

1. People explicitly decided to keep idols in their midst.

2.  Eventually, being in such close proximity to idols tempted the people to worship those idols.

3. That idol worship then led the people to commit horrific sins – including sacrificing their own children to idols.

Basically, in each of the above cases, idols acted as a “snare” to people (as Psalm 106:36 states). In other words, the idols, themselves, did not have any “power” – but the fact that the idols were in such close proximity to people  acted as a “temptation” to those people. This is similar in principle to an alcoholic keeping a bottle of wine in his house; or a compulsive gambler living across the street from a casino – the wine and the casino do not have any “power” in and of themselves; but they can act as a temptation to people.

Conclusion

As noted in the introduction, Scripture contains numerous passages, which explicitly tell believers that they must avoid idols. As a result, it appears to me that Christians should never bring statues of pagan gods into their homes – simply because God told us to avoid idols.

Of course, that raises the question: why did God tell us to avoid idols? As it turns out, there are many passages in Scripture which provide an answer to that question. Basically, being in close proximity to idols can act as a “temptation” to people. In other words, if people explicitly decide to associate themselves with idols, then that can eventually lead them to worship those idols. That worship, in turn, can lead people to commit heinous sins.

In essence, Scripture tells us that idols, themselves, do not have any power – but if people knowingly and willingly associate with idols, then that association can be a “snare” to them.

There are some Christian groups who have an alternate belief about idols. Basically, some groups state that idols, themselves, have the power to “attract” demons. As a result, those groups state that if an idol is present in a person’s home, then it will be very easy for demons to attack that person – even if the person does not even know that the idol is present in his home!

It appears to me that this alternate belief is not supported by Scripture. Basically, Scripture goes out of its way to tell us that idols are “useless”, “profitable for nothing” and even “having no real existence”. As a result, Scripture certainly seems to contradict the view that an idol – all by itself -  can allow demons to attack people living nearby; even if the people in question are not aware of the idol’s existence. (If idols did have such power, then I would expect to see some examples of that power in Scripture – but I have not found any such examples.)

In any case, the “bottom line” to this issue is the same as mentioned in the introduction: Believers must avoid idols!

2012 THEOLOGICAL CONFERENCE

5/3/12 – 5/6/12

Norcross, GA

“We are not far from our 21^st annual “Theological Conference.” (Do not for a moment let that title deter you. “Theology” has become a dirty word in some circles, but is only the study of God and His will.) Do come, and bring your friends.

As I revisit some of the remarkable and very moving faith stories presented over the years, I am impressed with all the good things that have been reported by those from all parts of the world who have attended. Now that we have the amazing gift of Internet technology, the talents of skilled believers allow us to film the proceedings for posterity. This enables the work of the conference to be permanently available on websites. The fruits of the conference stretch far beyond the brief time we have together at Simpsonwood. Please join this team effort. This year Dr. Dale Tuggy, Professor of Philosophy at The State University of New York (SUNY Fredonia) and a committed unitarian, has agreed to be among our speakers.

The fact is that fellowship with others of the same faith is a vital necessity for our communal and individual growth. Please do make the effort (and sacrifice) to bless us with your presence. Some may wish to be baptized. Baptisms in the scenic river close to Simpsonwood have always been moving occasions for us all. You may wish to give your “faith story.” Some of you will be meeting fellow unitary monotheists, Gospel of the Kingdom believers for the first time. Others will renew long-held friendships.

We do hope that you will be able to make the trip and be inspired by the various speakers.”

Our emphasis is on presenting the faith to the world as our necessary participation in the Great Commission given us by Jesus. The Kingdom of God must be preached worldwide, Jesus said, and only then will the end come (Matt. 24:14). We need to consider our individual part in that effort. The arrival of the tool of the Internet makes Matthew 24:14 possible in a brand new way. We have exciting new websites to report, and a gifted younger generation is adding their skills to the important issue of making public the saving truths we hold in common. Also, my 10-minute video “Jesus is Still a Jew” at youtube.com now has about 75 pages of comment in the form of concise statements of our common beliefs. Along with huge increase of public exposure, “Abrahamics” are increasing their influence, but we need to do much more. The Great Commission remains a large task! The opposition is daunting, making our effort a kind of David and Goliath exercise!

For MORE details, costs, and how to attend, please visit the following link – http://focusonthekingdom.org/conf2012.htm.

Biblical Unitarianism from the Early Church through the Middle Ages

by Mark M. Mattison

The term “biblical unitarianism,” as used in this journal, denotes a non-Trinitarian theology which is consistent with the inspired Word of God. It is our belief that this understanding of the Scriptures is not new, but has been propagated at various times and places throughout church history. The purpose of this article is to lay a foundation for the future discussion of this topic.
 
First, however, we must define our terms.

The term “psilanthropism” is inappropriate as a description of our Christology. Though some of the theologies discussed here may be appropriately labeled “psilanthropist,” it should be noted that biblical unitarians have always been accused of making Christ a “mere man.” This is less than fair. A man who, from the moment of His creation, is the only begotten or unique Son of God, who alone has been miraculously born of a virgin, who alone has led a sinless human life, and who has been raised immortal, is hardly a “mere man.”
 
The term “Adoptionist” will be used in its broadest sense. Technically, the term denotes a Christology held by some eighth-century Spanish bishops who regarded Jesus as a man “adopted” by the Son. More generally, it is used of any Christology which regards Jesus as an exalted man. It is often used in a derogatory sense with the implication that Jesus became the Son of God at his resurrection, transfiguration, baptism, or birth. We believe, with Matthew (1:16, 20) and with Luke (1:35), that Jesus was created the Son of God at His conception. For the purposes of this article, we will use the term to describe any Christology which denies the preexistence of Jesus.
 
As we will see, unitarianism and Adoptionism were not absent in the early Christian Church. At times these tendencies found expression in what we would characterize as biblical unitarianism, a theology which regards the Father as the only true God and Jesus as the only begotten Son of God who was born of a virgin and who died on the cross for our sins.
 
JEWISH CHRISTIANITY

“Jewish Christianity” is notoriously difficult to define,1 and it is used in a variety of ways. For the purposes of this study, we will define Jewish Christianity as the earliest stratum of the Christian Church (the first Christians, including most of the authors of the New Testament, were Jews) as well as the heterodox Jewish Christians of the second century and beyond.2
 
The Church Fathers, who are notoriously untrustworthy in this area, collectively describe five types of heretical Jewish Christians: Cerinthians, Symmachians, Elkesaites, Nazoraeans, and Ebionites.
 
Though Cerinthus is characterized by later Fathers as a Jewish Christian and a Millenarian (a tradition traceable to Caius claimed that Cerinthus was the author of Revelation), the earliest and most reliable sources depict him as a thorough-going Gnostic with few Jewish tendencies (cf. Irenaeus,Adv. Haer., I.26.1). We may therefore conclude that there never was a heterodox Jewish Christian group known as Cerinthians.3
 
It appears that the Symmachians also existed only in the minds of the heresiologists. Most probably Symmachus was actually an Ebionite and a distinct group of Jewish Christians known as Symmachians never existed, though the fact that Jewish Christians used Symmachus’ translation of the Old Testament may have encouraged early Christians to invent the label.4
 
The syncretistic Elkesaites did have Jewish Christian tendencies, but it appears (in spite of Epiphanius’ speculations) that these Jewish apocalypticists were only later influenced by Jewish Christian groups of the Jordan river. It is therefore questionable that they can be fairly identified as a Jewish Christian sect.5
 
The Nazoraeans’ theology does not appear to have been objectionable to early Christians, though of course their adherence to the Laws of Moses was not appreciated by the “orthodox” Church. Jerome testifies that “they believe in Christ, the Son of God born of Mary the virgin, and they say about him that he suffered and rose again under Pontius Pilate, in whom also we believe, but since they want to be both Jews and Christians, they are neither Jews nor Christians.”6 Jewish Christians were typically excluded from both the “orthodox” Church and the synagogues and therefore formed a sort of “middle ground.”
 
The Ebionites are described as strict unitarians who denied the deity of Christ, repudiated Paul, and practiced the Laws of Moses. Though many of them denied the Virgin Birth, both Origen (Contra Celsus V.61) and Eusebius (Eccl. Hist. III.27.1-6) admit that some of them accepted the doctrine. The most reliable authorities on the Ebionites were Irenaeus (who knew a group in Rome), Origen (who knew a group in Egypt), and Epiphanius (who possessed several Ebionite writings from beyond the Jordan, including the Preachings of Peter, the Ascents of James, and a Gospel).7 There appear to have been differences between these various groups of Ebionites, and one wonders if perhaps they were not a homogeneous group. Some scholars suggest “that ‘Ebionites’ was just one appellation (among others, particularly ‘Nazoraeans’) of Jewish Christians and, moreover, that the Jewish Christians included a variety of groups and communities.”8
 
Very few Jewish Christian writings have been preserved. We know that they tended to use different versions of Matthew’s Gospel, sometimes written in Hebrew or Aramaic and sometimes edited. The Jewish Christian document known as the Preachings of Peter is believed to have been used in the writing of the Recognitions of Clement and the Clementine Homilies, fourth-century novels that preserve some Jewish Christian doctrines. Another Jewish Christian document, the Asce nt s of James, is generally believed to be quoted in Recognitions I .33-71.

In the final analysis, we know very little about Jewish Christianity. That there was no uniform Jewish Christian theology is obvious. We do know that Jewish Christians tended to be unitarians who observed the Torah and practiced circumcision. Some of them denied the Virgin Birth, but some affirmed it. They tended to deny the preexistence of Christ.9 Some of them denied the authority of Paul, but others recognized the existence of a genuine Gentile Church. In the 47th chapter of his Dialogue with Trypho, Justin Martyr writes of Jewish Christians who do not require Law-keeping from Gentile Christians. In his estimation they are “kinsmen and brethren” in Christ.10 This conciliatory attitude, of course, did not last long in the Church.
 
Though many of these Jewish Christians obviously do not reflect the attitudes and practices of the Apostles (many of them are closer in spirit to Paul’s Judaizing opponents), they must be given credit for preserving some of the original New Testament doctrines in the face of an increasingly paganizing “orthodox” Church. Where Jewish Christian influence is most prominent, Christians tend to emphasize the humanity of Christ (and often the unitary nature of God) as well as a literal hermeneutic of the Scriptures. Jewish Christianity lasted for centuries in the East and was particularly strong in Antioch.11
 
ANTIOCHENE CHRISTIANITY

The Christians at Antioch have long been commended for their literal hermeneutic in contradistinction to the allegorizing hermeneutic of the Alexandrian Christians. Another fundamental difference has been noted between the two schools: while the Alexandrians emphasized the deity of Christ, the Antiochenes emphasized His humanity. These Antiochene traditions can be traced to the first century. Peter, who was revered by Jewish Christians, himself had a “low” Christology, as Luke records.12
 
Early in the second century, Ignatius of Antioch criticized Jewish Christians in his epistles to the Ma g n esia n s and the P h iladelphians, but he appears to have been fighting a losing battle. Ignatius’ “high” Christology does not appear to have been the norm at Antioch. Theophilus of Antioch, an apologist of the late second century, was profoundly influenced by Jewish Christianity.13 He portrays Christ primarily as a man through whom God reveals Himself.14

Despite his distinction of being the first Christian writer known to use the term Trinity, it is hard to regard Theophilus as a trinitarian at all. His God is rather a Unity with ill-defined offshoots or personified qualities.15 After three quarters of a century we find similar ideas occurring and gathering new force in the theology of Paul of Samosata.16

PAUL OF SAMOSATA

Paul of Samosata, the bishop of Antioch from 260 to 272, was also influenced by Jewish Christian monotheism.17 Though it is difficult to reconstruct Paul’s theology from the fragmentary sources at our disposal, it appears that Paul was a strict unitarian.18 Though he appears to have approved of the homo ousia doctrine, he asserted that the Word lacked subsistence (i.e., he did not believe the Word to be a hypostasis). For Paul, the Word was not a person but an attribute of God which indwelt the man Jesus. “For Paul, God and his Word are one (homo ousios) without differentiation, and to affirm the preexistence of the Son is to profess two Sons, two Christs; Jesus is a uniquely inspired man.”19 Though he was of course accused of making Jesus “a mere man,” he did believe that Christ was born of a virgin and that He conquered sin. Philip Schaff describes Paul’s doctrine and compares it to that of the later Socinians: He denied the personality of the Logos and of the Holy Spirit, and considered them merely powers of God, like reason and mind in man; but granted that the Logos dwelt in Christ in larger measure than in any former messenger of God, and taught, like the Socinians in later times, a gradual elevation of Christ, determined by his own moral development, to divine dignity. He admitted that Christ remained free from sin, conquered the sin of our forefathers, and then became the Saviour of the race.20 Paul of Samosata was a dynamic Monarchian in that he explained the Sonship of Christ in the language of Adoptionism. In this he stands firmly in the tradition of the Jewish Christian monotheists and can be classified as a biblical unitarian.21
 
MARCELLUS AND PHOTINUS

Though he consciously tried to avoid philosophical speculation and to rely solely on the Scriptures, Marcellus of Ancyra’s theology was not as biblical as that of Paul of Samosata. Marcellus was a spokesman for the Nicene party in the hom oousios conflict of the fourth century. Though he believed that God was “an indivisible Monad” or “a single person” and that the Word lacked subsistence and could not be called a Son until the Incarnation, his theology was much closer to the “economic Trinitarianism” of Irenaeus, Hippolytus, and Tertullian.22 Marcellus believed that at the creation and in the Incarnation the Monad “expanded” into a Dyad, then into a Triad in the outpouring of the Spirit. After the Judgment, he believed, the Triad would once more become a Monad. Chadwick writes: To Marcellus the unity of God was prior to all plurality: in himself God is one, and he is only ‘three’ in a relative sense because of his activity in creation and redemption. … any distinction between Son and Father is only temporary and relative to the created order.23 Marcellus’ denial of the subsistence of the Word but affirmation of the economic unfolding of the Trinity places him closer in spirit perhaps to Sabellius than to Paul of Samosata.
 
Marcellus’ disciple Photinus of Sirmium, however, placed this doctrine of the nonsubsistent Word firmly in the context of a biblical unitarianism by combining with it a form of Adoptionism. For Photinus, denial of the subsistence of the Word was an affirmation of the true humanity of Christ. Sozomen testifies that Photinus “acknowledged that there was one God Almighty, by whose own word all things were created, but would not admit that the generation and existence of the Son was before all ages; on the contrary, he alleged that Christ derived His existence from Mary” (Ecc. Hist. IV.6). Sozomen adds that both the Nicaeans and the Arians equally opposed this doctrine.
 
Photinus’ critics rightly compared his teaching to that of Paul of Samosata and classified him with the Jewish Christian “heretics.” Jerome writes that “Photinus of Gallograecia, a pupil of Marcellus, and ordained bishop of Sirmium, attempted to introduce the Ebionite heresy.”24 Though Photinus denied the preexistence and deity of Christ, it should be noted that he apparently did not deny the Virgin Birth, despite Marius Mercator’s objection to the contrary. Since Epiphanius would surely have attacked Photinus if the latter had in fact denied Christ’s miraculous conception, the allegation should probably be considered an embellishment.25 The seventh book of Augustine’s Confessions further implies that the Photinians did affirm the Virgin Birth.
 
Photinus was officially condemned four times before he was successfully ousted, though he appears to have been returned to his see during Julian’s reign. Julian praised Photinus for denying that God had ever entered the womb.26 With the accession of Valentinian in 364, however, he was again deposed, and he died in exile twelve years later. Though he wrote extensively, none of his works have survived.
 
To support the doctrine that Christ did not preexist his birth, the Photinians cited 1 Corinthians 15:45, in which Paul states that Christ was preceded by Adam (cf. Epiphanius,Panari on, 71.3). Scriptural texts which may seem to teach Christ’s celestial origin, the Photinians explained, in reality refer to the celestial origin of Christ’s teaching and power. They cited Isaiah 44:6 in defense of their strict monotheism: “This is what the LORD says—Israel’s King and Redeemer, the LORD almighty: I am the first and the last; apart from me there is no God” (NIV).
 
ADOPTIONISM THROUGH THE MIDDLE AGES

Adoptionism survived in Armenia and Byzantium in the form of Paulicianism, a movement which kept early Syriac Christian traditions alive for several centuries. Though the Paulicians were so named because of their theological affinities with Paul of Samosata, there is no compelling reason to regard the Antiochene heresiarch as their progenitor.27 Their rejection of Rome’s authority, dependence upon the Scriptures, practice of adult baptism, disregard for icons, and insistence that Jesus was a man adopted by God reflect early Christian attitudes.28 In the ninth century, many of them exchanged their Adoptionist doctrine for a revived gnostic dualism complete with a docetic Christ, though Adoptionism survived in some Paulician circles for another millennium.29 Though the Paulicians should probably not be considered as strict biblical unitarians any more than, say, Theodotus the leatherworker,30 it is nevertheless significant that a consistent tradition maintaining Jesus’ humanity can be traced throughout Church history.

This tradition survived in other circles also. In 431, Marius Mercator wrote of a Sardician bishop, Bonosus, who with Marcellus and Photinus was supposedly a follower of Ebion, the legendary founder of the Ebionite sect. His followers, the Bonosians, are found in Spain and southern Gaul until at least the seventh century. These Adoptionists (who, incidentally, practiced rebaptism) were characterized as Photinians by their contemporaries.31 In 675, the Synod of Toledo reacted against them by declaring that Christ was the Son of God by nature, not by adoption.
 
This assertion was denied a century later by Elipandus and Felix, two Spanish bishops to whose doctrine the title “Adoptionist” properly belongs. Their popular theology was close to Nestorianism, to which their opponents traced their heresy. It is in fact unclear whether their reformulation of the Chalcedonian “two-nature” doctrine of Christ was dependent on Nestorianism, Antiochene Christology (such as that of Theodore of Mopsuestia), or some other source. It is doubtful that their Adoptionism was derived from the Bonosians, who were biblical unitarians.
 
Elipandus and Felix taught that the eternal Son of God, the second person of the Trinity, adopted the man Jesus at the latters’ baptism. Their Christology, like that of the Paulicians, has little to commend it apart from its insistence on the true humanity of the man Jesus. Adoptionism does not appear to have lasted long after the death of these bishops, but traces of their Christology can be found throughout the remainder of the Middle Ages. Peter Abelard and his followers temporarily revived Adoptionism in the twelfth century, and Duns Scotus (1300) and Durandus a S. Porciano (1320) used the term “adopted Son” in a qualified sense.32 The Spanish Adoptionists’ assertion that the human Jesus was the Son of God “not by nature, but by grace”33 sounds remarkably like Michael Servetus’ statement that Christ is God “not by nature but by grace” (On the Errors of the Trinity, p. 12b). Of the Adoptionist heresy, Albert Newman has written: This controversy extended far into the Middle Ages and may have persisted in some of the sects until the time of the Reformation and later. It is probable that the Christology of the Antiochene school was directly or indirectly influential in the Adoptionist Christology.34 This assertion, while tantalizing, is probably too optimistic. Though it is tempting to draw a direct line from the New Testament through Jewish Christianity, Antiochene Christology, Spanish Adoptionism, and the unitarianism of the Radical Reformation, to the biblical unitarian churches of the present day, we would probably not be justified in doing so.
 
CONCLUSION

Though we may not be prepared at this point to postulate an unbroken chain of biblical unitarianism from the days of the Apostles to the present day, we may conclude that the doctrine has not been absent throughout church history. Various Jewish Christian sects, some of the Antiochene bishops (such as Paul of Samosata), Photinus of Sirmium, Bonosus and the Bonosians of Spain and southern Gaul, and others have recognized the fact that God is absolutely one and that His Son, Jesus Christ, is the virgin-born, exalted, sinless man who became our substitutionary atonement. The Church of God of the Abrahamic Faith’s claim for the historicity of one of its cardinal doctrines is therefore vindicated.

FOOTNOTES
 
1Cf. Various definitions in the Encyclopedia of Early Christianity, ed. Everett Ferguson, New York & London: Garland Publishing, Inc., 1990, sv. “Jewish Christianity”; A.F.J. Klijn, “The Study of Jewish Christianity,” New Testament Studies, Vol. 20, 419-431; Stanley K. Riegel, “Jewish Christianity: Definitions and Terminiology,” New Testament Studies, Vol. 24, 410-415; J. Munck, “Jewish Christianity in Post-Apostolic Times,” New Testament Studies, Vol. 65, 103-116; Bruce J. Malina, “Jewish Christianity or Christian Judaism: Toward a Hypothetical Definition,” Journal for the Study of Judaism, Vol. 7, No. 1, 46-57; R. A. Kraft, “In Search of ‘Jewish Christianity’ and its ‘Theology,’” Recherches de Science Religieuse, Vol. 60, No.1, 81-92.
2 The more general Jewish Christian ideas as described by J. Daniélou may then be considered “Judaeo-Christian.”
3A. F. J. Klinjn and G. J. Reinink, Patristic Evidence for Jewish-Christian Sects , Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1973, 3-19.
4 Ibid., 52-54.
5 Ibid., 54-67.
6 Ibid., 201.
7 Ibid., 68-71.
8 Encyclopedia of Early Christianity, s.v. “Ebionites.”
9Cf. Recogn itions I.45 for an exception.
10 It should be noted that in the next chapter Justin mentions Gentiles who believe Jesus to be the Christ yet “a man among men.” Who were these apparently “Adoptionist” Christians? Justin does not tell us. Like unitarians generally, these believers in the true humanity of Christ have been largely passed over in silence.
11Cf. R. M. Grant, “Jewish Christianity at Antioch in the Second Century,” Recherches de Science Religeuse, Vol. 60, 97-108; Paul J. Donahue, “Jewish Christianity in the Letters of Ignatius of Antioch,” Vigiliae Christianae, Vol. 32, 81-93; Robert R. Hann, “Judaism and Jewish Christianity in Antioch: Charisma and Conflict in the First Century,” The Journal of Religious History, Vol. 14, No. 4, 341-360.
12 Robert M. Grant, Gods and the One God, Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1986, 124, 125.
13Cf. Grant, “Jewish Christianity,” 106.
14 Grant,Gods, 128-133.
15 Thophilus writes of “the Trinity of God and his Word and his Wisdom” (To Autolycus, II.15).
16D. S. Wallace-Hadrill, Christian Antioch: A Study of Early Christian Thought in the East, Cambridge University Press, 1982, 69.
17Cf. Henry Chadwick, The Early Church, New York: Penguin Books, 1967, 114.
18 Earle E. Cairns, Christianity Through the Centuries, Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1954, rev. 1967, 111, 112; Philip Schaff, History of the Christian Church, Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B.Eerdmans Pub. Co., 1910, Vol. 2, 575, and J. N. D. Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines, San Francisco: Harper & Row, Publishers, 1978, 117-119 affirm Paul’s unitarianism. D. S. Wallace-Hadrill, 72ff. and R. V. Sellers, Two Ancient Christologies, London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 1954, 118ff., 130ff. prefer not to classify Paul as a unitarian. But, as Kelly demonstrates, the fragments which depict a debate between Paul and Malchion are untrustworthy and appear to have originated in Apollinarian circles (158, 159). Further, though later fathers classified Paul with Sabellius and Marcellus, his earliest critics characterize him rather as an Adoptionist (cf. Kelly, 119).
19 Chadwick, 114.
20 Schaff, 575.
21 We would hasten to add that we do not condone any moral problems that Paul may have had, though it is not clear whether his opponents were completely honest in their allegations.
22 See Kelly, 240, 241. 9
23 Chadwick, 135.
24 Klijn and Reinink, 213.
25Cf. Lydia Agnew Speller, “New Light on the Photinians: The Evidence of Ambrosiaster,” Journal of Theological Studies, Vol. 34, No. 1, 102.
26 Ibid., 104.
27 Nina G. Garsoian, The Paulician Heresy, Paris: Mouton & Co., 1967, 230.
28Cf. Monroe E. Hawley, “The Key of Truth,” Restoration Quarterly, Vol. 24, No. 1.
29 Malcolm Lambert, Medieval Heresy: Popular Movements from Bogomil to Hus, New York: Holmes and Meier Pubs., 1977,
30 Theodotus was a dynamic Monarchian who taught that the Christ descended on the man Jesus at the latter’s baptism (cf. Hippolytus, Refutation of all Heresies, VII.23). This form of Adoptionism is far closer to the gnostic Christology criticized by John (cf. 1 John 2:22; 4:2) than biblical unitarianism.
31 The New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge, ed. Samuel Macauley Jackson, s.v. “Bonosus and the Bonosians.”
32 Schaff, Vol. IV, 517.
33 Albert Henry Newman, A Manual of Church History, Philadelphia: The American Baptist Publication Society, 1899, rev. 1942, Vol. 1, 357. 34Ibid., 358.

One of the most famous individuals in the book of Genesis is Joseph – the first son of Jacob and Rachel. The account of Joseph’s life begins in Genesis chapter 37 – and that account continues all the way to the very end of Genesis, in chapter 50.

Of course, quite a bit of information is contained in chapters 37 through 50. However, here is an extremely brief summary of Joseph’s life:

1. Joseph is the “favorite son” of his father, Jacob.

2. In dreams, God reveals to Joseph that he will eventually obtain a position of authority over his brothers – despite the fact that ten of his brothers are older than him.

3. Joseph’s older brothers become very angry with him – primarily because they do not believe that they will ever have to serve Joseph. As a result, Joseph’s brothers betray him – and sell him to slave traders.

4. Joseph is then taken to Egypt, and he undergoes many trials there. However, God is with Joseph; and therefore, Joseph ends up victorious over his trials.

5. This victory allows Joseph to become the “second in command” of Egypt – second only to Pharaoh. In that position, Joseph is able to save his family – and the people of Egypt – from starving to death in a severe famine.

This concise summary of Joseph’s life bears a striking resemblance to the events in Jesus‘ life. Consider these examples about Jesus’ earthly ministry:

1. Jesus is the “favorite son” of his father, God.

2. Though prophecy, God reveals to Jesus that he will eventually obtain a position of authority over his brothers (the Jews) – despite the fact that there are many older (and supposedly wiser) Pharisees and Sadducees.

3. Some of the Jews become very angry with Jesus – primarily because they do not believe that they will ever have to serve Jesus. As a result, those Jews betray Jesus – and turn him over to the Romans.

4. Jesus then suffers many trials at the hands of the Romans, culminating in his death by crucifixion. However, God is with Jesus; and therefore Jesus ends up victorious over his death – when God resurrects him.

5. This victory allows Jesus to become the “second in command” of the universe – second only to God. In that position, Jesus is now able to save his family (the Jews) – as well as everyone else – from eternal death.

The “famine program” in Genesis 47

As mentioned above, Joseph saved his family – and the Egyptians – from a severe famine. The following passage describes the exact events that occurred, when Joseph saved the Egyptians from that famine.

Genesis 47:13-28 (ESV):

¹³ Now there was no food in all the land, for the famine was very severe, so that the land of Egypt and the land of Canaan languished by reason of the famine. ¹⁴  And Joseph gathered up all the money that was found in the land of Egypt and in the land of Canaan, in exchange for the grain that they bought. And Joseph brought the money into Pharaoh’s house. ¹⁵ And when the money was all spent in the land of Egypt and in the land of Canaan, all the Egyptians came to Joseph and said, “Give us food. Why should we die before your eyes? For our money is gone.” ¹⁶ And Joseph answered, “Give your livestock, and I will give you food in exchange for your livestock, if your money is gone.” ¹⁷ So they brought their livestock to Joseph, and Joseph gave them food in exchange for the horses, the flocks, the herds, and the donkeys. He supplied them with food in exchange for all their livestock that year. ¹⁸ And when that year was ended, they came to him the following year and said to him, “We will not hide from my lord that our money is all spent. The herds of livestock are my lord’s. There is nothing left in the sight of my lord but our bodies and our land. ¹⁹ Why should we die before your eyes, both we and our land? Buy us and our land for food, and we with our land will be servants to Pharaoh. And give us seed that we may live and not die, and that the land may not be desolate.”

²⁰ So Joseph bought all the land of Egypt for Pharaoh, for all the Egyptians sold their fields, because the famine was severe on them. The land became Pharaoh’s. ²¹ As for the people, he made servants of them from one end of Egypt to the other. ²²  Only the land of the priests he did not buy, for the priests had a fixed allowance from Pharaoh and lived on the allowance that Pharaoh gave them; therefore they did not sell their land.

²³ Then Joseph said to the people, “Behold, I have this day bought you and your land for Pharaoh. Now here is seed for you, and you shall sow the land. ²⁴ And at the harvests you shall give a fifth to Pharaoh, and four fifths shall be your own, as seed for the field and as food for yourselves and your households, and as food for your little ones.” ²⁵ And they said, “You have saved our lives; may it please my lord, we will be servants to Pharaoh.” ²⁶ So Joseph made it a statute concerning the land of Egypt, and it stands to this day, that Pharaoh should have the fifth; the land of the priests alone did not become Pharaoh’s.

²⁷ Thus Israel settled in the land of Egypt, in the land of Goshen. And they gained possessions in it, and were fruitful and multiplied greatly. ²⁸ And Jacob lived in the land of Egypt seventeen years. So the days of Jacob, the years of his life, were 147 years.

Summary of Genesis chapter 47

Here is a basic summary of the “famine program” events in Genesis 47:

- Joseph provided grain to the people of Egypt during the famine. Of course, that grain was then used to make bread. So, in essence, Joseph provided bread to the people of Egypt.

- During the famine, Joseph gained control over the entire land of Egypt – because the people of Egypt were eventually forced to sell their land to Joseph, in order to purchase grain.

- After Joseph gained control over Egypt, he did not retain that control for himself. Instead, he turned over that control to the ultimate ruler of Egypt – Pharaoh.

- There are two specific groups of people, who were not forced to sell their land to Joseph. One group was the priests of On. They were not required to sell their land, because they received an automatic allotment of grain from Pharaoh. The other group was Joseph’s relatives – the descendants of Jacob (i.e., Israel). Jacob and his descendants were actually given land to settle in, in the region of Goshen.

Is anything similar to Genesis 47 going to happen in the future?

At first glance, it appears that Joseph “took advantage” of the Egyptians during the famine – i.e., that he used the famine as a tool, to wrest the Egyptians’ money, livestock and land from them. However, is it possible that there is a “deeper meaning” in that passage? In particular, since many of the events in Joseph’s life are prophetic of Jesus’ life, is it possible that something similar to the events in Genesis 47 will occur with Jesus, in the future?

Let’s take a look at the events of the famine, and see if there are any “parallels” to them in Scripture.

First off, Joseph provided bread to the Egyptians. So, consider these verses about Jesus, in the context of providing bread:

John 6:35,51,58

³⁵ Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me shall not hunger, and whoever believes in me shall never thirst.

⁵¹ I am the living bread that came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever. And the bread that I will give for the life of the world is my flesh.”

⁵⁸  This is the bread that came down from heaven, not like the bread the fathers ate, and died. Whoever feeds on this bread will live forever.”

Jesus, himself, is the spiritual “bread of life”. So, in a sense, Jesus is also providing bread to people – because followers of Jesus will obtain everlasting life.

In addition, Jesus was born in the city of Bethlehem. The Hebrew words for Bethlehem are beit lechem – which means house of bread.  In this context, that meaning would refer to a place (house) where sustenance (bread) originates.

As a result, it certainly appears to be “by design” that Jesus – the bread of life – was born in Bethlehem – the house of bread.

Another item about Genesis 47 is that Joseph gained control over the entire land of Egypt. So, consider these passages, which refer to Jesus, in the context of gaining control over land:

Isaiah 42:1,4 (ESV):

¹ Behold my servant, whom I uphold,
my chosen, in whom my soul delights;
I have put my Spirit upon him;
he will bring forth justice to the nations.

⁴ He will not grow faint or be discouraged
till he has established justice in the earth;
and the coastlands wait for his law.

Daniel 7:13,14 (ESV):

¹³ “I saw in the night visions,

and behold, with the clouds of heaven
there came one like a son of man,
and he came to the Ancient of Days
and was presented before him.
¹⁴  And to him was given dominion
and glory and a kingdom,
that all peoples, nations, and languages
should serve him;
his dominion is an everlasting dominion,
which shall not pass away,
and his kingdom one
that shall not be destroyed.

Zechariah 9:9,10 (ESV):

⁹  Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion!
Shout aloud, O daughter of Jerusalem!
Behold, your king is coming to you;
righteous and having salvation is he,
humble and mounted on a donkey,
on a colt, the foal of a donkey.
¹⁰  I will cut off the chariot from Ephraim
and the war horse from Jerusalem;
and the battle bow shall be cut off,
and he shall speak peace to the nations;
his rule shall be from sea to sea,
and from the River to the ends of the earth.

Luke 1:30-33 (ESV):

³⁰ And the angel said to her, “Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God. ³¹ And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus. ³² He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. And the Lord God will give to him the throne of his father David, ³³ and he will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of his kingdom there will be no end.”

The above passages (along with many others) indicate that when Jesus returns, he will gain control over the entire earth. In other words, Jesus will obtain a position of authority over all the lands of the earth – similar to the way that Joseph obtained a position of authority over the land of Egypt.

In addition, note that in Genesis 47, the Egyptians did not give up their land immediately. Instead, the people first gave up their money, and then their livestock, before finally giving up their land. This may also be a foreshadowing of the future; because currently, only a minority of humans are willing to sincerely follow Jesus.

So, when Jesus returns, there will probably be many people who will not be willing to submit to Jesus’ rule immediately. As a result, those people will presumably need to go through a gradual process of “giving up” their resistance to Jesus – similar to the way that the Egyptians needed to give up their money and their livestock, before finally giving up their land.

Genesis 47 also states that Joseph did not retain control over Egypt for himself – instead, he handed over that control to Pharaoh. In fact, Genesis 47 states “Joseph bought all the land of Egypt for Pharaoh” and “The land became Pharaoh’s“.

It makes sense that Joseph would turn over control of the land of Egypt to Pharaoh – because Pharaoh was the ultimate ruler of Egypt. In other words, even Joseph was still in subjection to Pharaoh.

So, consider the following passage, which describes Jesus during the Kingdom of God age, in the context of handing over control:

1 Corinthians 15:24-25,27-28 (ESV):

²⁴ Then comes the end, when he [Jesus] delivers the kingdom to God the Father after destroying every rule and every authority and power. ²⁵ For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet.

²⁷ For “God has put all things in subjection under his feet.” But when it says, “all things are put in subjection,” it is plain that he is excepted who put all things in subjection under him. ²⁸ When all things are subjected to him, then the Son himself will also be subjected to him who put all things in subjection under him, that God may be all in all.

The above passage tells us that after Jesus’ 1000 year rule, Jesus will hand over control of the kingdom to God. Jesus will do this because God is the ultimate ruler of the kingdom – and because Jesus, himself, is in subjection to God. In other words, Jesus is the “second in command” of the Kingdom of God – similar to the way that Joseph was second in command of Egypt.

Finally, Genesis 47 describes two specific groups of people who did not lose their lands, during the famine. One group is the priests of On, and the other group is Joseph’s relatives – the Israelites.

So, consider the following passages, about two specific groups of people who will have an “inheritance” in the Kingdom of God:

Group 1:

1 Peter 2:9-10 (ESV):

⁹ But you [Christians] are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for his own possession, that you may proclaim the excellencies of him who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light. ¹⁰  Once you were not a people, but now you are God’s people; once you had not received mercy, but now you have received mercy.

Revelation 5:8-10 (ESV):

⁸ And when he [Jesus] had taken the scroll, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb, each holding a harp, and golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints. ⁹ And they sang a new song, saying,

“Worthy are you to take the scroll
and to open its seals,
for you were slain, and by your blood you ransomed people for God
from every tribe and language and people and nation,
¹⁰ and you have made them a kingdom and priests to our God,
and they shall reign on the earth.”

Revelation 20:6 (ESV):

⁶  Blessed and holy is the one who shares in the first resurrection! Over such the second death has no power, but they will be priests of God and of Christ, and they will reign with him for a thousand years.

Group 2:

Jeremiah 23:3-8 (ESV):

³  Then I will gather the remnant of my flock out of all the countries where I have driven them, and I will bring them back to their fold, and they shall be fruitful and multiply. ⁴ I will set shepherds over them who will care for them, and they shall fear no more, nor be dismayed, neither shall any be missing, declares the Lord.

⁵  “Behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will raise up for David a righteous Branch, and he shall reign as king and deal wisely, and shall execute justice and righteousness in the land. ⁶ In his days Judah will be saved, and Israel will dwell securely. And this is the name by which he will be called: ‘The Lord is our righteousness.’

⁷  “Therefore, behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord, when they shall no longer say, ‘As the Lord lives who brought up the people of Israel out of the land of Egypt,’ ⁸ but ‘As the Lord lives who brought up and led the offspring of the house of Israel out of the north country and out of all the countries where he had driven them.’ Then they shall dwell in their own land.”

Isaiah 43:1,5-7 (ESV):

¹ But now thus says the Lord,
he who created you, O Jacob,
he who formed you, O Israel:
“Fear not, for I have redeemed you;
I have called you by name, you are mine.

⁵  Fear not, for I am with you;
I will bring your offspring from the east,
and from the west I will gather you.
⁶ I will say to the north, Give up,
and to the south, Do not withhold;
bring my sons from afar
and my daughters from the end of the earth,
⁷ everyone who is called by my name,
whom I created for my glory,
whom I formed and made.”

Zechariah 8:7-8 (ESV):

⁷ Thus says the Lord of hosts: Behold, I will save my people from the east country and from the west country, ⁸ and I will bring them to dwell in the midst of Jerusalem. And they shall be my people, and I will be their God, in faithfulness and in righteousness.”

Group 1, above, refers to followers of Christ – i.e., Christians. Those Christians are referred to as “priests of God”, and a “royal priesthood”. In addition, those Christians will rule with Jesus, for 1000 years.

So, it appears that the account of the priests of On, in Genesis 47, represents a foreshadowing of  Christians in the kingdom of God – because Christians will be the priests in the Kingdom.

Group 2, above, explicitly refers to Israelites – especially to Jews. Of course, Jesus, himself, is a Jew – i.e., he is a descendant of Judah. As a result, the people in group 2 are literally relatives of Jesus.

So, it appears that the account of Joseph’s family obtaining land to settle on, in Genesis 47, is a foreshadowing of Jesus’ family (the Jews) obtaining land to settle on, during the Kingdom of God.

Conclusion

Here is a concise summary, of the “links” that I can see between Genesis 47 and the Kingdom of God:

- In Genesis 47, Joseph provided people with physical food;

- In the Kingdom of God, Jesus will provide people with spiritual food.

- In Genesis 47, Joseph gained control over all the land of Egypt;

- In the Kingdom of God, Jesus will gain control over all the lands of the earth.

- In Genesis 47, after Joseph gained control over the land of Egypt, he handed over that control to the ultimate ruler – Pharaoh;

- In the Kingdom of God, after Jesus gains control over the earth, he will hand over that control to the ultimate ruler – God.

- In Genesis 47, the two groups of people that did not have their lands confiscated were: Joseph’s relatives, and the priests of On;

- In the Kingdom of God, the two groups of people that will not have their “inheritance” confiscated will be: Jesus’ relatives (the Jews), and the kingdom age priesthood (Christians).

As a result, it certainly appears to me that the events described in Genesis 47 “foreshadow” events that will occur, in the Kingdom of God.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9s35gPxYYcI&feature=player_embedded

Biblical Common Sense – Death – An ENEMY!

The Apostle Paul in 1 Corinthians 15:26 says: “The last enemy that will be abolished is death.” Now everyone knows what an enemy is. It is someone or something that harms or opposes us.  However the typical sentiment one hears at a mainstream Christian funeral is that death has taken the deceased to a “better place”.  Other variants often expressed can be “God has called so and so home”, or “The Lord needed another member of heaven”.  But does anyone stop and think about what this actually means?  Such ideas mean that death isn’t so bad.  For the saved, death would be taking us to the best possible place we could ever hope to be!

Yet Jesus himself does not seem to view death as such a friend.  He sure seems to view death as a bitter enemy.  When Jesus’ friend Lazarus died and Jesus saw Lazarus’ sister Mary crying and distraught he never told her to cheer up that her brother was off in a “better place”.  No Jesus himself “groaned in the spirit and was troubled” (John 11:33).  And then “Jesus wept” (John 11:35). [For a detailed account of all the important truths of John Chapter 11, please read my Life after Death – According to Jesus & Martha paper here on KR.]  Then the night before his crucifixion Jesus was “very distressed & troubled” (Mark 14:33) in thinking about his death and even prayed to God if there was any other way to accomplish his mission (Mark 14:36). And finally on the cross just before succumbing to death, Jesus cries the cry of anguish and despair from Psalm 22:1 by crying out “My God, My God, Why have you forsaken me?”. This verse that Jesus spoke is meaningless if at death he was going to immediately be transported up to heaven with God.  Instead he should have said something along the lines of “I’ll see you in a few Dad!”.

Anyone with basic common sense and some direct experience of life knows death is not a friend. Death is indeed a bitter enemy. All living creatures have an instinctive fear of death. Scripture plainly describes death in non-friendly terms. King David wrote that in death nobody can praise God and that death makes us utterly and totally silent (Psalm 115:17), and that there’s no way to remember God or give him any praise (Psalm 6:5) in death. Job wrote that in death a man “lies down and does not rise until the heavens are no longer” (Job 14:12). The awful power of death is even said to be wielded by the devil (Heb 2:14). Yet we are assured in Isaiah of death one day being swallowed up in victory (Isaiah 25:8/1 Cor. 15:54), and that this will be brought to pass at Jesus’ return (1 Cor 15:23). Then at long last death will be permanently eradicated in the lake of fire (Rev 20:14).

All of this along with common sense should tell us that death is not a friend that gives us a pleasant limo ride to God’s “Pearly Gates”. Enemies do not do the grand act of kindness in giving us our greatest hopes and dreams. No an enemy robs us and takes from us the greatest things of value we have. That cruel enemy by the name of “Death” does this all too well. It robs us of all we are. It removes us from life.

Biblical Common Sense Series:

1. Intro

Jesus:

2. Jesus – God’s Son

3. Jesus – “This is MY Son”

4. Jesus – The Anointed of God

5. Jesus – The Messiah is suppose to be…

6. Jesus – Jesus Was Seen!

7. Jesus – Two Adams

8. Jesus – Not Equal, Not the Same!

Death:

9. Death – Patterns of Adam & Eve

10. Death – Who Possesses Immortality?

11. Death – Death is an End!

12. Death – You Shall Surely NOT Die!

13. Death – Usage of the Sleep Metaphor

14. Death – An ENEMY! (current page)