The Messianic age and eating pig

I read a book about the life of the Jewish Fridericus Ragstat a Weille (1648-1729). When it cames to the difficulties when he was going to become a Christian, he took some encouragement from what he said a text from some rabbinical scripture which states that in the days of the Messiah it would be even allowed to eat pork.

The writer of the book gives this reference: jalkoet chadasch,fol.182, pag.2-36. (pronounced in Dutch) I’ve looked a bit around with Google and didn’t find the resource. However I have found this: “Jalkut Kodosh” (later cited “Jalkut Kadash” and “Talkut Kadash”): Yalqut Khadash, a seventeenth-century anthology of Kabbalistic material. I don’t know if this is right hint.

I would like to read this reference to be sure of this. Maybe someone of my readers does know something about it. Where can I find/read these texts?

John and Yeshua the baptists

Last weeks my attention was at the baptism issue several times. I realized more and more that there’s being a twofold dimension in baptism. In short, John and Yeshua are to be distinguished, I think. John was doing the baptism with water which was merely a sign, or manifestation of a decision of the inner heart. What John was doing was the human part. As he said himself: [I do it with water but] He shall baptize you with the holy Ghost and with fire. (Mat.3:11) That gives clearly a second baptism, those of Yeshua.

The first baptism was not something new in the second temple period. It was a common practice to baptize. But with the baptism of Yeshua we see something very special, something very new. A miracle happened. The son of G-d was baptized with the baptism of Righteousness. (Mat.3:15) He was coming to be the Servant of G-d who bears his people through the baptism of dead. (Col.2:10-11) The Righteous One enabled with the Holy Spirit to wash all the sins away from his people. Then, with the baptism of His Spirit a newborn one is there, under the new covenant, manifesting itself in the inner heart and coming out with a new will and good deeds etc. This certainly is not due to a personal act of baptism, but divine. It differs from the first, the personal baptism of John. However, I would not say that it is not related to each other.

I think they belong to each other; baptism has two parts in it. What we see and what we can’t see.

I would like to say something more on the covenantal view here.

The great emphasize on the covenant which is given by the Reformed tradition (following the Roman Catholics) diminished inevitably the personal character of baptism. And with the covenant a promise is introduced with respect to infant baptism. This covenant and promise theology inevitably resulted in a twofold dimension of the covenant: the outward in inward covenant (as is said) which correlates with the circumcision of the flesh and the heart.

Why does the Reformed tradition give such a great emphasize to the covenant issue with respect to baptism? I think the theology of Paul gives the building blocks for it. His bold statement in Col.2:10-13 (having been buried with him in baptism) put the whole issue of baptism into the Paschal redemption which is the covenant relationship.

It’s a difficult topic but interesting, because Yeshua said: “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved.” (Mark16:16)

How do you practice baptism?

Recently I spoke to a good (messianic) friend of mine about water baptism. 
He said baptism was a common ritual to purify yourself to be able to be holy and e.g. to enter the holy temple at Pesach or other feasts. In its original Jewish meaning it is quite different as in the Christian tradition. I would like to write down some of my thoughts about baptism. 

First I will distinguish two parts of the view on baptism.

1. the personal repentance view
2. the covenant view

Most interesting for me is to find out what the original meaning of baptism is. It was not a covenant matter, although it was not wholly apart from it. The covenant sign was definitely the circumcision. Also a bar mitzvah and other things like that belonged to entering or a renewal of the covenant. But baptism is a personal expression of purifying the body and soul for G-d in a most honestly repentance before G-d’s face. Baptism in the Jewish way is a private act. Three witnesses are there to watch. John 1:35-36 shows two disciples, besides John the Baptist, which makes three. Such a personal act is hardly comparable with the common church tradition. John was applying the baptism of water for faithful people to let them do a personal repentance. Then they were able to enter the covenant and the Messianic age, what was expected.

But there was more to say about that. It was a sign of the great Baptizer who was to come and would baptize with the Holy Ghost and with fire. (Mat.3:11) To enable his people to enter the renewed temple. So there is a twofold dimension in it. A personal repentance and baptism which is showed to the public, and a personal baptism of fire which is mysterious for the public. So we can take a personal baptism or mikveh everytime we want or we think we need it, but a baptism of fire from Yeshua is once and forever. And hence, I think, the covenantal aspect comes in picture.

Along with the church tradition of (infant) water baptism, the covenant view came more and more in picture. This was given so much emphasis that infants were being baptized and hence baptism was merely a covenant matter. Presbyterian and Reformed Christians developed the Covenant Theology to base their case for infant baptism. This has put the church in such a difficult position, that, I can tell you, even only in the Netherlands it resulted in tens of divisions from the 19e century until now. And the end isn’t yet there. A men made church would be left because of it. Because men will let the true church appear, rather than G-d will do that. It’s true, we couldn’t keep the covenant. Even as the old people of Israel couldn’t do that. We always will fail. How sad! It’s true, only grace, grace from the G-d of the covenant of Israel will renew the covenant, the faith and the true love. When He is going to establish, then a new thing will be created which will glorify HaSjem and his Messiah Yeshua. That was done by John the baptist and it will be done in our days. A new covenant will be made personal. But that’s another thing then water baptism. It’s difficult for me to connect the covenant to water baptism.

My own Reformed Christian heritage gives me along the personal also the covenant view. Without that it wouldn’t be so difficult. Maybe you would say just let your covenant view go, it’s just church tradition and never taught by Yeshua or the disciples. Yes, that could be true. But it isn’t as easy as it seems. Because the covenant view has biblical support as well. Baptism fits perfectly in the model of Pesach. I showed that in my other post: we are baptized into Christ’s dead. In the New Testament however, there is no mention about the covenant but related to eucharist or the festival of commemorating Pesach. There Yeshua said “This is my blood of the New Testament (new covenant) which I shed for many”. So the connection of Pesach with Baptism will make the covenant view. But to say that every newborn child is automatically into the covenant, isn’t that too much said?

In the Reformed churches often is spoken of an inward part of the covenant and an outward part. The outward part means that you are baptized but not reborn. When an inward covenant belongs to you, you are saved. That distinction is seen both in baptism and eucharism.

Tzedakah, Righteousness

I always struggled with a Roman view on judgement which concealed the original Hebrew meaning of this word. This Hebrew word, one of the most important keywords of the bible, means doing right, doing good.
- righteousness in government of judge or law
- righteousness in a case or cause
- righteousness in vindication or salvation etc.

In a synagogue you probably will find a box to put money in, with the word Tzedakah on it. In fact that has nothing to do with money, but it has to do with charity. It is a way of doing something righteous.

But what is righteousness then?

Do justly, love mercy (Micha 6:8) Learn to do well; seek judgment, relieve the oppressed, judge the fatherless, plead for the widow. (Is.1:17-18) He (God) doth execute the judgment of the fatherless and widow, and loveth the stranger, in giving him food and raiment. (Deut.10:18)

That’s what we have to do. It’s all based on the very first commandment: Love your God and your neighbour. And what is the righteousness of God? Here often a western understanding goes biased. Here often is handled the Roman rule of just: We have a law and those who act against it are to be punished.

That definitely doesn’t fit the meaning of Tzedakah. Tzedakah goes far beyond that. When Tzedakah comes from heaven it is always intertwined with merci, goodness, kindness, compassion. And not only that. G-d is not only righteous because he prefers good or even because he punished evil, he is essentially righteous because he comes  to the aid of those who are suffering, who have no hope if he does not deliver them. G-d’s righteousness cannot be separated from his saving activity. [1] Salvation (Yeshua in Hebrew) is in the meaning of Tzedakah.

Tzedakah is often related with justice or judgement. The judgement of the righteousness. It is also several times translated as justice. (15x in the KJV, 128x as righteousness) But the Hebrew word for judgement is different, it is Mishpat.

When G-d is to judge people in showing his righteousness, it always has in it that G-d wants to deliver the poor and the weak. That is the first thing we have to keep in mind. And when we do not listen and repent, then there’s punishment. See psalm 36:6: Thy righteousness is like the great mountains; thy judgments are a great deep: O LORD, thou preservest man and beast. There is not stated “to punish”, but “to preserve”.

And that is what I would like to say. G-d’s righteousness and judgement is not to eleminate humanity, but to establish it.

A Tsedek is a person who fullfil the Law/Torah. And the Torah is based on Love. And therefore the judgement (Mishpat) of a tsedek is never without Love.

___________________

[1] Contours of Pauline theology, Tom Holland, p.158

Charter for Compassion

Another attempt is made to reach a better human life. Karen Armstrong is launching a project together with the main world religions. After A common Word from Muslims, now a new voice is heard, Charter for Compassion, calling to have compassion to other people. It states: The principle of compassion lies at the heart of all religious, ethical and spiritual traditions, calling us always to treat all others as we wish to be treated ourselves. That sounds very familar!

It is based on Torah, based on the common known Golden rule of Hillel:

Once there was a gentile who came before Shammai, and said to him: “Convert me on the condition that you teach me the whole Torah while I stand on one foot. Shammai pushed him aside with the measuring stick he was holding. The same fellow came before Hillel, and Hillel converted him, saying: That which is despicable to you, do not do to your fellow, this is the whole Torah, and the rest is commentary, go and learn it.”

Hopefully many would render this practice, and would be drawn closer to Yeshua, the great Example. The One we are in need of. I think his Word of Life is still penetrating global humanity before the Sjofar sounds.

Being baptized without a ritual, but through Yeshua’s dead

Gal.3:27 “For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.”

I am reading a book of Tom Holland, Contours of Pauline Theology. He argues that the theology of Paul is about the Second Exodus or New Exodus, a second Pesach. Paul uses the model of the Exodus in his writings, especially in the letter to the Romans, according to Tom Holland.Interesting point is his view on baptism. Baptism which is spoken of in the New Testament is corporate and it is done with the dead of Christ. The community is baptized into Christ’s dead.

“As Moses, in the Exodus out of Egypt, took the people of God, for they were united with him through baptism, so Christ takes those who have been baptized into union with him from the realm of sin and death. This baptism into Christ took place in his exodus, (Luke 9:31) in his coming out of the realm of Sin and death. It was a baptism into his death that all believers experienced, in the same historic moment.” (p.151)

We are no longer in the corporate body of sin (Rom.6:6) [1] (first Adam) but in the body of Christ. (second Adam)

“What I am arguing for is that the baptism passages which we have considered are speaking neither about water baptism nor even of Christ’s baptism into his sufferings, even though these are important related themes, but about a baptism modeled on the baptism of Israel into Moses when Israel came into a covenant relationship with Yahweh through the representative He had appointed.” (p.151)

This brings me to say that water baptism is only a sign to confess one’s conversion and relationship to Yeshua the Messiah, which took place before. Not water baptism, but the conversion makes sense. The choice of man does make sense. Hence I am speaking of the good choice. A good choice comes from HaSjem. He encourage His children-to-be to make a good choice. That choice begins with an out coming of sin and grasping the of the promise of life. (Blood on the doorpost) and it is final made up with a personal covenant between the soul and HaSjem. (Receiving of the Torah) This signing of the contract for eternal life does take a complete amount of time. (7×7 weeks, according to the time between Pesach and Shawuot) It always is done perfect. A half completed contract could not exist. It is a divine process guided by the Holy Spirit. A man is not able to this but by the almighty arm of HaSjem working out great miracles. The enemy, who is also active here, must leave. (Waters)

The model of the Exodus gives us a pattern of the real true baptism.

Real baptism is done by HaSjem with Yeshua. And it has to be done with us. All who are dealing with it, are entering a new covenant, a state of being born-again, dying in the old body of sin and rising up into a new body, full of love and holiness for HaSjem. Water baptism is an old Jewish cleaning ritual, however it has a very rich meaning. In the time of Yeshua it was becoming a sign. In essence it points back to the redemption of the people of Israel through the Red See in connection with Pesach (forgiveness of sin) before and Shavuot (entering the covenant) after it.

To learn more about water baptism, a good article has been written by Ceil Rosen of Jews for Jesus. I’ve found many nice articles, all on Messianic websites and all pointing back to the Mikve and Mayim Chayim and its meaning.

Maimonides said: “By three things did Israel enter into the Covenant: by circumcision, and baptism and sacrifice. Circumcision was in Egypt, as it is written: ‘No uncircumcised person shall eat thereof’ (Exodus 12:48). Baptism was in the wilderness, just before giving of the Law, as it is written: ‘Sanctify them today and tomorrow, and let them wash their clothes’ (Exodus 19:10). And sacrifice, as it is said: ‘And he sent young men of the children of Israel which offered burnt offerings’ (Exodus 24:5)”
This matches with the main parts of the Heidelberg Cathechism: Misery of man (the Law), Deliverance and Thankfulness.

Yeshua did it all, and in him we are being baptized.

“I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.”  (John.14:6)

____________

[1] Tom Holland clearly points out that the body (here) means corporate, chapter 5 – The Paschal Community and the Body of Sin. Book is full text available online here.

About the New Covenant

Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah. (Jer.31:30)
הִנֵּה יָמִים בָּאִים, נְאֻם-יְהוָה; וְכָרַתִּי, אֶת-בֵּית יִשְׂרָאֵל וְאֶת-בֵּית יְהוּדָה–בְּרִית חֲדָשָׁה

The covenant has caused a lot of controversies in church history. The church spoke many times about the covenant but it often ended up in disagreement. For me, as a remnant of the Protestant tradition, I learned some clear sayings in the period of the 17e -18e century by e.g. Calvin, Owen, Brakel and others. After that era, clearness disappeared more and more. But all leaders and denominations deal with the same problems: they want to see the things you can’t see. They utilized the Roman-Greek way to make things clear. And the problem is they propagate a covenant in which you enter by birth. They correlate the Jewish covenant of circumcision with baptism. And they argue, as a result, to baptize children too. So if you are born from a father and mother who believe and are consequently “grafted in the Jewish olive tree”, you are into the covenant. And when you are in the covenant, you receive the sign of the covenant: baptism, a few weeks after birth.

When you do this practice, your are instantly confronted with the huge warn from the apostle Paul to the Galatians. The warning that the sign of the covenant (circumcision) nothing has to do with entering the real covenant of grace, the new covenant.

However, many churches did and yet do give value to this (ethnical) covenant.

In contrast with the huge amount of books written by church members, it’s funny that the Apostolic Writings mentions very little about the covenant.

1.) Mark, Math. and Luke: This is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many. Repeated by Paul, 1Cor.11:25.
2.) In Galatians the covenant with Abraham.
3.) In Hebrews the covenant with Israel, the Torah.

Yeshua spoke about his blood being the new covenant, and the writer of Hebrews spoke about the new covenant, besides the old, related it to the words of the prophet Jeremiah and compared it with the blood of Yeshua. Paul in Galatians only spoke about the covenant with Abraham, but with an allegory pointed out to the new covenant.

The new covenant is effectuated by blood. Once the blood comes upon the soul, it is established. This is nothing new, we’ve seen this before. The people of Israel said “We will hear and do” and offered sacrifices to God, and then Moses sprinkled the people with blood to seal the covenant. (Ex.24:8)

To enter the new covenant we have to be circumcised of the heart and baptized with the spirit of fire. Those people are new-born ones. They enter the covenant of grace of Yeshua the Messiah. They are not merely came to the mount Sinai of thunders and fire (Hebr.12:18) but came to the Heavenly Judge, the almighty King and also their own Father full of love and His son full of grace. Surrounded by angels seeing the Living One and say: woe to me because I’m a sinner. They “are come unto mount Zion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to innumerable hosts of angels, to the general assembly and church of the firstborn who are enrolled in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect, and to Jesus the mediator of a new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling…” (Hebr.12:22-24)

And then, what are they going to say? Am I going to give my whole live to Him? Sure! Sure I will do that! I love You and I will always do what You want me to do! I’ll sign the covenant and whenever I draw away from your law, correct me and guide me on your preferred way and teach me how to follow. I will do al You want me to do. And this (I think you can see so) is the new covenant. Initiated by HaSjem, signed with heart and soul of the individual. Caused baptism and full repentance.

Now a have a question. What is the value of the old covenant, the physic line of Abraham and Israel? Because the world and specially the church wondered about the establishment of the state Israel in 1948. We couldn’t get around that fact and must agree that there were some special promises in the covenant with Abraham. Paul argued to the Galatians that you don’t need it to get to be saved, but what is the benefit of the “ethnic” covenant?

__________________
PS: An easy article for more about biblical covenants you can find here. I think there are two main covenants, those with Noah (7 commandments) and those with Abraham/Israel (Torah) renewed with Yeshua.

Jesus as an idol

How is it possible to idolize Jesus? I asked myself: What do we understand by Jesus? Or Yeshua or whatever you call him. (I prefer his Jewish name Yeshua, so I will use that.) The question is what do we think who is Yeshua? Many people would answer the Messiah, the Son of God. And there would be some Christians who would say I know him. And a very few would say “I really know him but many others don’t.” But again, what do we understand. With a wrong understanding we may end up in idolatry.

I am concerned of the Yeshua about who is spoken, would be the right Yeshua. Him that is true. I think that the church has developed a man-made Yeshua. The church, by many doctrines and dogma’s to avoid deviation and apostasy, they became apostasy themselves by philosophy of man. Most known example is the doctrine of trinity. I would not say whether such doctrines are good or not. The problem is that we have to deal with an opinion about Yeshua which is not good, at least if I look around me. We have learned a lot about Yeshua, but what did we learn from the only G-d? Did He show us his salvation? His real Yeshua? A man who is drawn towards G-d is facing One G-d, who shows Himself as a righteous G-d. That causes a humble man convinced to be a sinner, who ask forgiveness. And in answer of doing good works, he begins to understand he couldn’t do anything on his own. He loses everything of his own and becomes more and more a subject of Yeshua, because He is the image of G-d which is going to be established in the sinner. His eyes are opened to look and he wants to see the mystery.

But about the right look on Yeshua, it’s not easy to draw a figure of him. Neither in mind, as certainly not on scripture. And how does it relates to the commandment “Do not make idols”? To know him the eyes must be opened first. It’s certainly a mystery that G-d brings a sinner to Him by grace. But it’s also certain that G-d is revealed in Yeshua. Only a right look on Him, the Savior, would often give the experience which would say: I have nothing. You, G-d, have it all, I not. And you have it all for me, I know, You did let me know it, but for now I am missing you, please have mercy, I love you. That’s it: LOVE. Love for G-d and love for your neighbor. And love for his Torah, John explained this in his letters by mention to love your brother and obey his law. As James do.

For me, such a confession of having nothing is far more worthy than the many who say: “I know Yeshua! He is my savior and I can tell you everything about him! And if you want to know him, listen to me and I’ll explain it. And if I can’t convince you, read the doctrines of my church!” Does he has the true one? Otherwise he’s serving an idol.

How do we understand the true Messiah? John wrote at the end of his first letter: “We know that the Son of God has come, and has given us an understanding, that we know him who is true, and we are in him who is true, in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life. Little children, keep yourselves from idols. Amen.”

And James, who mention Yeshua only one time in his letter (except its opening), he says:”My brethren, hold not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, [the Lord] of glory, with respect of persons.” (James2:1) I agree that conform the following context it is meant for persons as you and I, but it does not necessarily exclude the person Yeshua as a human being. Many people saw Yeshua when he lived on earth, but they didn’t saw him real, as the true one. Thomas was not convinced by seeing the person Yeshua alone. Until it came from heaven, as it were, he was and said: My Lord and my G-d. (John20:28) Who knows Him without divine revelation? Yeshua said: “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father who is in heaven.” (Math.16:17)

John Howe, Expectations of the Spirit in the latter days

As I said in my last post, many old English theologians gave clear explanations on bible texts concerning the future. John Howe (died 1705) is one of them and he wrote 15 sermons on Ezekiel 39:29. “Neither will I hide my face any more from them; for I have poured out my Spirit upon the house of Israel, saith the Lord Jehovah.” This treatise was added later to “all the works of John Howe” by John Evans in 1725. You can find it here in a copy from 1835.

I’ll summarize some beautiful sayings here. He expected a prosperous state of the nation of Israel and the church (body/people of Christ) before the end of time, e.g. when the conversion of the Jews takes place, as he said. “We can not in a few words have a fuller account given of a happy state.”

He points out (Sermon1):
—1. The import of this negative expression, “Neither will I hide my face any more from them ;” and,
—2. How to understand the subject of the promised favour here, as it is designed by this name, “the house of Israel.”

He said about point 1:

It must mean, that He would put them into a prosperous condition; the course of his providence toward them should be such as would import favour and kindness to them. And, it imports the permanency and settledness of this happy and prosperous state ; that it should not be a short, lucid interval only; but through a very considerable and continued tract of time this should be the posture and course of his providence towards them.

And point 2 about the house of Israel, he said:

I doubt not but that it hath a meaning included, as it is literally taken, of that very people wont to be known by that name, the house of Israel, the seed of Jacob. But I as little doubt, that it hath a further meaning too. And it is an obvious observation, than which none more obvious, that the universal church, even of the Gospel constitution, is frequently in the prophetical scriptures of the Old Testament represented by this, and by the equivalent names of Jerusalem and Zion, and the like.

He shows that the chapters 36-39 of Ezekiel spoke of the people of Israel. (Sermon2) He said the following will happen to that people:

1. Their reduction from their captivity; that they shall all be brought back and gathered out of the several heathen nations of the world, where they were scattered and dispersed to and fro.
2. The reparation of all desolation, the great building of their wasted cities.
3. The great fruitfulness of their land. I will not direct you to the particular passages, where these things are mentioned; but you may at your leisure view over these chapters, and you will find them all.
4. The great multiplication and numerousness of their inhabitants.
5. Their most entire victory and conquest over their most potent and troublesome enemies.
6. Their entire union among themselves, under one king ; as you may see in the 37th chapter. The making of that scattered people entirely one, that so divided people, so broken from themselves, Israel and Judah, one stick in God’s own hand. And,
7. God’s owning them visibly as his people, and taking them anew into covenant with himself, having pardoned their iniquities, and cleansed them from all their filthiness and their idols, and so restored the relation between himself and them. Certainly the concurrence of all these things cannot but make a very happy state.

In Sermon 5 he argues that family order and religion will be restored by the Spirit in the latter days.

I make no doubt, but when it shall be so, this will be found to do a great deal towards the reviving and restoring religion amongst men. There will be a time, when it shall be said severally and singly concerning the families of Israel, that God is the God of all their families, (as it is in Jer. xxxi. 1.) and they shall be his people; so as that the relation shall not be only with the bulk and body of the people in gross, but even with particular families. And this, it is said, should be in the latter days, if you look back to the close of the foregoing chapter, chap. xxx. 24. In the latter days, ye shall consider it. And at the same time, saith the Lord, will I be the God of all the families of Israel, and they shall be my people. And it is said, it should be at such a time, as wherein there should be planting of vines upon the mountains of Samaria, (chap. 31:5.) and when the watchmen upon the mount Ephraim should cry, ” Arise ye, and let us go up to Zion, unto the Lord our God ;” (ver. 6.) when the people of Ephraim, that is, of the other ten tribes that use to go under that name, and those that did belong to Samaria, should go to Zion, as heretofore; a thing which certainly hath not yet been.

John Howe is very clear in his expectation of the conversion of the Jews and a very happy and fruitful Jewish nation extended with the gentile nations. One big family with in particular a relationship with God.

Such numerous accessions to the church (read to the followers of Yeshua, JW) by the power of the Holy Ghost in converting work

would take place. (Isaiah 54:1) And about the community/ecclesia of the latter days he said:

There should be a far greater fruitfulness, than in the time of their more formed, stable church state, when they appeared a people in covenant-relation, married to God.

The numerous increase of converts

is most emphatically signified by the apt and elegant metaphor used Psalm 110:3. Where it is said the subjects of Christ’s kingdom should be multiplied ‘as dew from the womb of the morning.’ That is a vast and spacious womb; imagine, how innumerable drops of dew distil out from thence; such shall the multitude of the converts be.

He argues further that there would be a great calling. Many scriptures

seem to intimate, that there shall be a time of far more general calling, than hath been hitherto; when the receiving and gathering in ‘of the Jews shall be as life from the dead,’ as a resurrection from the dead, Rom. 11:15.

If you like this, I suggest to read sermon 5 (preached 1679), pag. 576-579, The work of the holy Spirit in reference to the Christian church, All the Works, John Howe, New York, 1835.

He closed with a little prayer:

Lord, that Spirit of thine that shall one day so flow down upon the world, may not I have some portion of it to answer my present necessities? and that Spirit, that can new-make the world, that can create new heavens and a new earth, cannot that new-make one poor soul! cannot it better one poor heart? – To have a new heart and a right spirit created and renewed in us, is better to us, than all the world; and we have no reason to look up diffidently and with despondency, but with hearts full of expectation. He will give his Spirit to them that ask him.

Exposition on Revelation, by Wilhelmus à Brakel

From his book “The Reasonable Service”

Wilhelmus a Brakel, died in 1711, wrote a big part on the Revelation in his by the reformed church of the Netherlands common known work “The Reasonable Service”. (De Redelijke Godsdienst) He was a Dutch pastor in Rotterdam

Wilhelmus à Brakel (1635-1711)

and one of his beauties is that he expected a national repentance and return of the Jews to their promised land Israel. While Palestine at that time still was a dessert under reign of the Ottomans, he just read Roman 11 as what it states. He was not alone, dr. M van Campen wrote an interesting (Dutch) dissertation on (positive) opinions on the Jews by reformed theologians of the 17^th and 18^th century: “Gans Israel” (whole Israel). And I can’t omit to say that at the same time many English Puritans had very good insights on the prophecies on Israel. I think they had it even more than the Dutch theologians. Sadly enough there wasn’t paid attention to it by the church. Millennianism wasn’t accepted by the mainstream. Even in this very day many (pastors) are afraid of being tagged as a millennialist. Brakel was a historical millennialist though. He was very clear in his expectation of a peaceful dynasty of the community of Christ, for a time of 1000 years. This was very diminished in the church. And how sadly is this: the english translator Bartel Elshout of The Reasonable Service has omitted this beautiful exposition of hundreds of pages on Revelation. So (I think) we have it only in Dutch. You can find a free copy of the missing section (Deel III) in two parts here and here.

I’ll give a few points of the last chapters of his book concerning the Revelation.

First he describes the common sights and events John saw.

Then he’s arguing that the 7 letters aren’t 7 eras and aren’t prophetical. The author is the Messiah and the purpose is to teach the communities.

After that, he comes to the part of the prophecy (the revelation of Yeshua) which describes the future. This main part exists of the three images which are: the seals, the trumpets and the bowls as three sequential periods:

1. The church (community of Christ) under the heathen Caesars +- until 325 CE.
2. The church under the antichrist (the Pope/might of Cath.church) for a period of 1260 years.
3. The church in its free state, first struggling under the 7 bowls and finally rules with Christ.

Interesting is his explanation of the 5^th and the 6^th bowl of the wrath of G-d.

- By the fifth he expected the fall of the beast i.e. the might of the (Catholic) church. This happened with the Enlightenment and the French Revolution.

- By the sixth he expected a fall of the great Ottoman empire. He said it has to happen for enabling the Jews to return to their promised land. And so it happened. In 1870 the Ottoman empire was drawn back to their current borders. And through very difficult times though, the state of Israel was established in 1948.

Brakel was very sure about the coming repentance of the Jews and the return to their land. He said: I don’t know what will happen first, repentance or returning. But both will happen. And it will cause, he said, repentance of “kings and people around Israel”. That would be the beginning of the time (millennium) of the what he called: “glorious state of the Church”. The Church written with a capital was meant to be the community of true believers at that time, the mystical body of God. (Ef.4) It would be a time when Yeshua is King, honored and obeyed by all the nations.

If you want to get more of this, I recommend to read The Rise and Fall of Papacy by Robert Fleming. For example, he predicted the decline of the influence of the Roman church about 100 year prior to the events. He stated it would start in 1794 which correlates with the French Revolution and it would be completed by around 1848 which was the year that the papacy was forced to leave Rome. And very interesting are the works of the great sir Isaac Newton. He spend most of his life not on physics, but on theology. Recently his manuscripts are available at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem under the name Newton’s secrets. And at The Newton Project, were you can find his “Observations upon the Prophecies of Daniel, and the Apocalypse of St. John” e.g.