Rock Island
Page 23
31-34,
‘Behold, the days come, sayeth the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah: not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers, in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of Egypt; which My covenant they broke… but this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days sayeth the Lord, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and I will be their God and they shall be My people. And they shall teach no more every man his neighbor, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, sayeth the Lord: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.’
Jeremiah is not the only Hebrew prophet who tells of such a covenant which consists of God putting His law inside people.
Isaiah 59. 20-21,
‘The Redeemer will come to Zion, and to those who turn from transgression in Jacob,” says the LORD. “As for Me,” says the Lord, “this is My covenant with them: My Spirit who is upon you, and My words which I have put in your mouth, shall not depart from your mouth, nor from the mouth of your descendants, nor from the mouth of your descendants’ descendants,” says the LORD, “from this time and forevermore.”’
Ezekiel 36. 24-28,
‘For I will take you out of the nations. I will gather you from all the nations and bring you back into your own land…I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit in you; I will take the heart of stone out of your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. I will put My Spirit within you and cause you to walk in My Statutes, and you will keep My statutes and do them…you shall be My people, and I will be your God.’
Christians don’t believe that the above scripture refers to the gathering of the Jews in the Holy Land after the Babylonian Captivity, because Christians do not believe the prophecy was fulfilled after the Babylonian Captivity. Jesus was crucified 2,000 years ago, and Christians do not believe that those who approved that He be crucified understood and obeyed the Divine Law! Christians believe that Ezekiel 36. 24-28 will be fulfilled later. But there are two parts to Ezekiel 36. 24-28. There is the first part, God will gather the Jews in the Holy Land, which looks a lot like Zionism, and then the second part, the Jews will receive the Divine Law.
‘I haven’t said anything about Adam, Eve, Noah, Abraham, so this is a very brief paraphrase of the Old Testament. To paraphrase the New Testament you should first recall two scriptures from the Old Testament. Psalm 2 mentions that the Son is begotten by the Father. The word ‘begotten’ implies that the Son has more or less the same ‘DNA’ as the Father. Since the Father is God then the Son is also God. Isaiah 9. 6 specifically calls the Son the ‘Mighty God’.
Isaiah 9. 6,
“ For unto us a Son is born, unto us a Son is given; and the government will be upon His shoulder. And His name will be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.”
Obviously, Psalm 2 and Isaiah 9. 6 don’t prove that Jesus is the Divine Son mentioned in Psalm 2 and Isaiah 9. 6. This requires further investigation. Chapter 3 of Constitutional History of the Western World gives some of the evidence for Christianity. The clearest scriptures from the New Testament telling us that Jesus is God, the Divine Son, are John 1. 1-14, Colossians 2. 8-10 and 1 Timothy 3. 16. It’s true Jesus made some self-deprecating remarks – “why do you call me good, no one is good except God” – nevertheless, there’s nothing wrong with a little self-deprecation.
‘In any event, this new covenant which God writes on the hearts of His people - recalling Jeremiah 31. 31-34, Isaiah 59. 20-21 and Ezekiel 36. 24-28 - has various names: the True Faith, the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the New Law, the Divine Law etc.
The scriptures tell us you don’t want to fall away from the True Faith. 2 Thess 2 mentions a falling away, and a man of sin, a son of perdition – presumably this is the Antichrist mentioned in 1 John 2. 18, who is presumably the beast mentioned in Revelation 19. 19. If you believe St. Paul is trustworthy in 2 Thess 2, why would you reject what he says in 2 Thess 1. 8? Here Paul mentions hellfire for those who do not know God and who do not obey the Gospel of Jesus Christ. 2 Thess 1. 8 is rather like John 15. 6 – those who do not abide in Christ are gathered up like sticks and given to the flames. And John 15. 6 sounds a lot like Luke 13. 3 – the message of which is Repent or Perish. So, to attain heaven and to escape perdition, you want God’s divine law, the True Faith, inscribed on your heart. And you don’t want to fall away from the True Faith. Galatians 1. 8-12 is the verse which tells Christians to keep all of St. Paul’s words, just as John 14. 23-26 is the verse which tells Christians to keep all of Christ’s words. You can find two options for these verses. Galatians 1. 8-12 is either untrustworthy or else it trustworthy. It either leads people to perdition or else it doesn’t lead people to perdition. John 14. 23-26 is either untrustworthy or else it is trustworthy. It either leads people to perdition or else it doesn’t lead people to perdition.
The foundations for the True Church begin with Matthew 16. 13-19. This is the famous scripture where Jesus says He has founded His church on a rock and the gates of hell will not prevail against it. This is reinforced by John 14. 23-26 – those who love Christ keep His words, such as the words He spoke in Matthew 16. 13-19. Revelation 20. 15 mentions a Book of Life. Those who have their names in the Book of Life are the True Church. So as stated above, Chapter 3 of Constitutional History of the Western World gives some of the standard evidence for Christianity. Chapter 2 of the same book deals with the sign of the cross. And Chapter 1 gives lots of evidence saying the Church of Rome and the Eastern Orthodox Church lead people to perdition, because both have fallen away from the True Faith, and neither is the True Church, the Church which Christ founded on a rock. There would be no reason for Protestantism to exist if either the Church of Rome or the Eastern Orthodox Church was the Church which Christ founded on a rock. We got into the nasty shouting match earlier over the sign of the cross. But we have two interesting theories. One says that all of the evil perpetrated by people under the sign of the cross over the centuries is irrelevant in judging the sign of the cross, because the cross is sacred in the eyes of God. The other theory says that the evils perpetrated by people under the sign of the cross over the centuries is reflected in the sign of the cross, because the cross is not sacred to God.
Paul Johnson writes in ‘A History of Christianity’, p. 273,
‘In the West, the clergy had begun to assert an exclusive interpretive, indeed custodial, right to the Bible as early as the ninth century; and from about 1080 there had been frequent instances of the Pope, councils and bishops forbidding not only vernacular translations but any reading at all, by laymen, of the Bible taken as a whole…attempts to scrutinize the Bible became proof presumptive of heresy - a man or woman might burn [at the stake] for it alone.’
I continue - ‘I got no end of these sorts of extracts. I respect Galatians 6.14 and Philippians 3. 18. I agree the cross of Christ is sacred. But this means Christ’s sacrifice on the cross is sacred, this is a spiritual thing, and it doesn’t mean that a material cross, a pagan instrument of torture, or a representation of the same, is sacred to God. The Nazis committed evil for a few years and we say the Nazi swastika reflects their evil. The evil under the sign of the cross goes on for century after century. Christ and the apostle never said a material cross is sacred. It’s insanity to think the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob would say that a pagan instrument of torture, or a representation of one, is sacred. Christ’s sacrifice on the cross is sacred, of course, but material crosses and the sign of the cross are not sacred.’
The audience is now insisting I’m an arrogant fool again, and they are in no mood to listen to my act, which is to push two ideas on people: the first idea says if you put the mark of a cross on your forehead during the Great Tribulation then you’re going to burn in hell forever, beca
use you’re putting the mark of the beast on your forehead, see Revelation 13 and 14. The second idea I’m pushing says that if I’m wrong about the cross, if it is a sacred symbol, though I insist it is evil, then, provided it is indeed sacred to God, it is most likely this seal of God mentioned in Revelation 9, and if you have this seal of God on your forehead then you will be spared months of painful torment, as described in Revelation 9. I’m not quite dogmatically insisting that the cross is the mark of the beast, as that is adding to the Book of Revelation, and the last verses in Revelation describe curses on those who add or subtract from that book – but it is permissible to concoct theories about what the Book of Revelation means. So by piling up facts from history I’m trying to convince people that the evils from people carrying crosses over the centuries is reflected in the sign of the cross, therefore the cross is evil, therefore it is the main suspect for the mark of the beast, or, if you don’t buy that, then you might buy the idea which says the cross is the sacred seal of