Prophetic Tool Chest Chapter 12

Elijah Vs. The False Prophet

CHAPTER TWELVE

ELIJAH VS. FALSE PROPHET

The Dragon is Paganism, the Beast is the Papacy, and the False Prophet is apostate Protestantism. Did God, in His foreknowledge of the trinity of evil, determine that He would send a warning to the world about the great false religious system? Yes, Malachi 4:5, 6 says that God would send Elijah the prophet. Who is Elijah the prophet in the last days? We are going to see that Elijah represents God’s last day Church. It is a Church that comes in the spirit of Elijah and proclaims a message similar to what Elijah proclaimed to ancient Israel: that we must abandon sun worship and return to the commandments of God; it is a prophetic movement that reveals the trinity of evil as the apostate Babylon worshipping Satan on world wide Mt. Carmel; moreover, it is a movement that God has sent into the world to prepare people for translation [as Elijah himself was translated] into heaven at Christ’s second coming.

Old Testament Histories Applied Symbolically To The Church

In the first block of this course, we have demonstrated that ancient Israel, in its local settings, served as a type of the Church in its worldwide settings. We see this pattern in the seven churches. John uses seven literal Churches of his day and applies symbolical language to represent seven periods of Church history. Let us immediately underscore this principle of interpretation with the church of Pergamos. The church of Pergamos spans a period of approximately A.D. 325 – 538. Pergamos was known as the seat of Satan (Rev. 2:13). The “Seat of Satan,” as a label, undoubtedly points to the fact that in this time frame, the Chaldean priesthood, which became so prominent in Rome, became concentrated in the Papacy, for it was in this time frame that the Papacy began its ascension to power with the ideological platform of Paganism. Revelation 12 uses the Dragon to represent, not only all the seven successive pagan kingdoms, but also the Pagan Roman Empire. We have learned that the Dragon (Paganism and Pagan Rome) gave its seat to the Beast (the Papacy). The pattern of Revelation 12 and 13 coincides well with the depiction of Pergamos, for it was in that Era that the Papacy received her seat from the Dragon. John shows that the church of Pergamos held the doctrine of Balaam and the Nicolatians. Numbers’ 22 – 24 show that Balaam was a prophet who was seduced by greed. Balaam’s avariciousness led him to compromise truth with falsehood. Balaam’s goal was to entrap Israel into sin in order that he may acquire wealth from the side of Satan. Both Balaamism and Nicolatianism, in the context of history, depict religious compromise with Paganism and worldliness. The following citation is a good demonstration of the compromise in the church of Pergamos:

Little by little, at first in stealth and silence, and then more openly as it increased in strength and gained control of the minds of men, the mystery of iniquity carried forward its deceptive and blasphemous work. Almost imperceptibly the customs of heathenism found their way into the Christian church. The spirit of compromise and conformity was restrained for a time by the fierce persecutions which the church endured under paganism. But as persecution ceased, and Christianity entered the courts and palaces of kings, she laid aside the humble

By D. S. Farris1

1

PROPHETIC TOOL CHEST

simplicity of Christ and his apostles for the pomp and pride of pagan priests and rulers; and in place of the requirements of God, she substituted human theories and traditions. The nominal conversion of Constantine, in the early part of the fourth century, caused great rejoicing; and the world, cloaked with a form of righteousness, walked into the church. Now the work of corruption rapidly progressed. Paganism, while appearing to be vanquished, became the conqueror. Her spirit controlled the church. Her doctrines, ceremonies, and superstitions were incorporated into the faith and worship of the professed followers of Christ. This compromise between paganism and Christianity resulted in the development of the "man of sin" foretold in prophecy as opposing and exalting himself above God. That gigantic system of false religion is a masterpiece of Satan's power—a monument of his efforts to seat himself upon the throne to rule the earth according to his will (E. G. White, The Great Controversy, 47, 48).

John used a historical reality of Israel’s past to describe spiritual, worldwide conditions in the church of Pergamos. This was also the case with John’s description of Thyatira. The church of Thyatira spanned a period of approximately A.D. 538 – 1500. The symbols in this letter describe the Papacy in her reign of spiritual darkness. The problem that is seen in Thyatira is the tolerance of Jezebel. It is written in 1 Kings 16 – 21 and 2 Kings 9 that Jezebel was a heathen woman who worshipped the sun. When Jezebel married Israel’s king, Ahab, and influenced him to follow after the pagan deities, she established 850 Baal priests as spiritual authorities and instituted a state religion that required the whole nation of Israel to worship the sun. Those Israelites who chose not to participate in sun worship were persecuted and killed. Obviously, John uses Jezebel, a historic figure in Israel’s history, as a symbol within the church of Thyatira to show that sun worship and pagan idolatry had infiltrated Christianity.

The system of Jezebel is the system of 666 (see chap. 6). The system of Jezebel is the Papacy, and this system ruled from A.D. 538 – 1798 (the Beast that was); then the Papacy received a deadly wound that kept its power in check from A.D. 1798 – 1929 (the Beast that is not); finally, since 1929, the Papacy has grown substantially (the Beast that yet is). That the symbol of Jezebel is homogeneous with the Papacy can be visualized by means of correlating Revelation 2 with the Harlot in Revelation 17. Revelation 2:22, 23 depict Jezebel lying in a bed waiting to commit adultery, and Jesus promised that Jezebel’s children would be killed with death. Similarly, Revelation 17:2 – 5 describe the Harlot as committing fornication with the kings of the earth and being the MOTHER OF HARLOTS. In other words, the Harlot has offspring which themselves are harlots. During the 1,260 years of Papal supremacy Jezebel was symbolical of the Papacy. In modern times—meaning the time frame of Papal restoration—Jezebel symbolizes all of fallen Christendom. In modern times the Papacy and her daughters, in the Protestant world, are also described as Babylon. Revelation 16:19 describes Babylon as being divided into three parts. The three parts of Babylon are described in verse 13: The Beast, The Dragon, and The False Prophet. Paganism, Catholicism, and apostate Protestantism constitute Babylon; thus, all three religious systems are implicated in the terminology, Jezebel. The reason that the book of Revelation applies both Babylon and Jezebel interchangeably to represent the fallen religious world is simply because; Jezebel’s religion—in Old Testament times—was another form of the Paganism from Babylon. Therefore, John, in Revelation, applies names from the ancient world—as they apply to Paganism—to the modern religious world, because the same idolatry continues.

Copyright 8/27/03 2

2


Interpretational Problems To Avoid

How do some Bible teachers misinterpret key terminologies of prophecy? Notice the following observation:

Babylon was a literal city (2 Kings 20, 24, 25; 2 Chr. 36; Ezra 5; Isaiah 39; Jer. 27 – 29, 50 – 52; Dan. 2 – 7) that sat on the literal Euphrates River (Gen. 2:14; 15:18; Deut. 1:7; 11:24; Jer. 13:4 – 7; 46:2, 6, 10; 51: 63).

Question: Who was Babylon antagonistic to in the Old Testament?

Answer: Literal Babylon on the literal Euphrates was antagonistic to the literal city of Jerusalem (2 Sam. 15:29; 2 Kings 21:4, 7; 24:14; 1 Chr. 6:32; 23:25; 2 Chr. 6:6; Ezra 1:2; Neh. 2:11; Matt. 23; Luke 2:22, 42, 43).

Jezebel was a literal woman in the Old Testament (1 Kings 16:31; 18:4, 13; 19:1, 2; 21: 11 – 25)

Question: Who was Jezebel antagonistic to in the Old Testament?

Answer: Jezebel was antagonistic to the literal man, Elijah (1 Kings 17 – 21; 2 Kings 1, 2; 3:11; 9:36; 10:10, 17; 2 Chr. 21:12).

Some Bible teachers accept that Babylon is symbolic but insist that the Euphrates and the city of Jerusalem must be interpreted as literal. Likewise, some teachers interpret Jezebel symbolically but insist that Elijah must come literally. This is inconsistent! The history of Babylon on the Euphrates is inextricably connected to Jerusalem, and the history of Jezebel is inextricably connected to Elijah. In other words, the elements of these typologies within the framework of their histories—when applied to an antitypical interpretation—must maintain their unity in symbolism. Babylon (Rev. 17, 18) and the Euphrates River (Rev. 17:15) are both interpreted as symbolic by John. Babylon represents world wide spiritual apostasy in the three religious movements: Paganism, Catholicism, and Protestantism; and the Euphrates River, which Mystical Babylon sits on, represents the masses of humanity, not a literal river. Therefore, Israel must be interpreted symbolically as the worldwide body of faithful Christians with the actual city of Jerusalem in heaven, not a literal building in the Middle East.

If we are to understand who Elijah is in the last days, first of all, we must realize that John applied a symbolic interpretation to the other backgrounds surrounding Elijah—such as Jezebel. Since John applied “Jezebel” symbolically to represent the apostasy of Christianity, then it only makes sense, based on a consistent methodology, to interpret “Elijah” as a worldwide reformation from apostasy.

Elements Of The Historic Elijah

Where is the promise of Elijah’s coming? Malachi 4:5, 6 says:

By D. S. Farris3

3


Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord: And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse.

In order to understand what the coming of Elijah will be in the last days, we must understand the historical background of the actual Elijah the prophet. What was the problem in Elijah’s day? 1 Kings 16:30 – 33 reveals:

And Ahab the son of Omri did evil in the sight of the Lord above all that were before him. And it came to pass, as if it had been a light thing for him to walk in the sins of Jeroboam the son of Nebat, that he took to wife Jezebel the daughter of Ethbaal king of the Zidonians, and went and served Baal, and worshipped him. And he reared up an alter for Baal in the house of Baal, which he had built in Samaria. And Ahab made a grove; and Ahab did more to provoke the Lord God of Israel to anger than all the kings of Israel that were before him.

In Elijah’s day, Israel was in apostasy; they were worshipping Baal. God sent Elijah to tell king Ahab that that there would be three and a half years of famine as a result of the apostasy (1 Kings 17:1; Luke 4:25). Following the time of famine in Israel, 1 Kings 18:1 says, “And it came to pass after many days, that the word of the Lord came to Elijah in the third year, saying, Go, show thyself unto Ahab; and I will send rain upon the earth.” What happened when Elijah and Ahab met again? 1 Kings 18:17 – 19 says:

And it came to pass, when Ahab saw Elijah, that Ahab said unto him, Art thou he that troubleth Israel? And he answered, I have not troubled Israel; but thou, and thy father’s house, in that ye have forsaken the commandments of the Lord, and thou hast followed Baalim. Now therefore send, and gather to me all Israel unto mount Carmel, and the prophets of Baal four hundred and fifty, and the prophets of the groves four hundred, which eat at Jezebel’s table.

The problem in Elijah’s day was that Israel had forsaken the commandments of God and worshipped the sun. According to the record, Elijah called all of Israel and the Baal priests to Mt. Carmel for a contest. 1 Kings 18:23 – 46 show that the contest consisted of the Baal priests calling fire down from heaven to consume the sacrifice; they attempted this all day long to no avail. At the evening Elijah took twelve stones and built the Alter of the Lord, and he made a trench around the Alter. Elijah then had four barrels of water poured over his bullock three times. So much water was poured over the alter that the trench around the alter filled up with water. Elijah then said a prayer to God, and fire came down from heaven and devoured the Alter and licked up the water out of the trench. The final result was that the Baal priests were slaughtered for their inculcation of national apostasy.

Copyright 8/27/03 4

4


Antitypical Elijah Portrayed Through Historical Prophetic Picture

How are the last days similar to Elijah’s day? When we understand the historical approach to the seven churches, seals, and trumpets, we find an antitypical pattern of the events in Elijah’s day. As Elijah appeared to Israel after the three and a half years of famine (Luke 4:25) to contend with sun worship, so the antitypical Elijah appeared after the three and a half prophetic years of Jezebel supremacy in the Papacy. When we understand that Jezebel is a symbol of the Papacy during the 1,260 years, and when we understand that Jezebel after 1929 represents a resurrecting Papacy with her Protestant daughters; we must conclude that Elijah’s appearance must be sometime during the final resurrection of Papal power. We have clear indication of this pattern in the historical prophetic constructs that have been applied throughout this course. We are now going to see how the coming of Elijah can be illustrated through the depiction of the 2300 years of Daniel 8.

The 2,300 years of Daniel 8 commenced with the 70 weeks or 490 years of Daniel 9 (see chap. 2). Between the finality of the 70th week in A.D. 34 and the finality of the 2,300 years in 1844, existed the first phase of the Abomination of Desolation in the Papal power for 1,260 years; this is the antitypical three and a half years of spiritual famine over Jezebel’s kingdom. Knowing that Revelation—Church history—is structured in the format of the sanctuary leads us to the conclusion that 1844 signifies a second work in the priestly ministry of Christ. We see 1844 as the beginning of the “time of the end” and Christ’s work in the Most Holy place of the heavenly sanctuary. This is the antitypical Day of Atonement (Leviticus 16) where judgment begins with the household of God. In the antitypical Day of Atonement—like its type in ancient Israel—the LAW of God comes into focus, for we are to be judged by the Perfect Law of Liberty, says James 2:10 – 12. Because of the seriousness of this time frame, God rose up Elijah as a movement with a message to combat the Jezebel system of sun worship that arose again after 1929, which is being authenticated by the False Prophet.

Thyatira

538 1500 1750 1844

The Key of David that opens

the door of the Most Holy

2300 Years

3. 5 Prophetic Years of Jezebel Rule

1798

1453 1844

391 years of the Sixth Trumpet

Rev. 3: 7

Thyatira Sardis Philadelphia Laodicea

Day of the Seventh Trumpet

1929 2002

Worldwide

Mt. Carmel

By D. S. Farris5

5


Before we say anymore about the antitypical Elijah, we must confirm three important correlations:

(1) The 2,300 years are inextricably connected to the Daily, which was trodden down by the Antichrist;

(2) Both the finality of the 2,300 years and the opening of the little book of Daniel 12 have their focal point in the time of the end—after the taking away of the daily; and thus

(3) The little book of Daniel 12 is inextricably connected to the Daily and the 2,300 year prophecy.

Concerning the first correlation, notice the following scriptures:

Daniel 8:13. Then I heard a holy one speaking; and another holy one said to that certain one who was speaking, "How long will the vision be, concerning the daily sacrifices and the transgression (Heb. Pesha: “transgression, rebellion”) of desolation (Shamem), the giving of both the sanctuary and the host to be trampled under foot?14. And he said to me, "For two thousand three hundred days; then the sanctuary shall be cleansed (Tsadeq: “to be put or made right").

Dan. 11: 31. And forces shall be mustered by him, and they shall defile the sanctuary fortress; then they shall take away the daily sacrifices, and place there the abomination (Shiqquts) of desolation (Shamem).

Matthew 24:15. Therefore when you see the abomination (Gr. Bdelugma: “foul thing, detestable thing) of desolation (Eremosis: “making desolate”),' spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place whoever reads, let him understand.

In both chapters’ four and five, we have confirmed that the daily of Daniel 8:13 points to the continual priestly ministry of Christ, which was trodden down for the 1,260 years of Papal supremacy. This time frame—the first phase of the abomination of desolation—is within the 2,300-year prophecy; therefore, the daily is inextricably connected to the 2,300 years. In the second correlation, we find that both the opening of the little book of Daniel 12:4 and the finality of the 2,300 years are to meet fulfillment at the “time of the end.” How is this the case? Daniel 12:11, 12 says:

11. And from the time that the daily (Tamid) sacrifice is taken away, and the abomination (Heb. Shiqquts: “Detested thing”) of desolation (Heb. Shamem: “to be desolated, appalled”) is set up, there shall be one thousand two hundred and ninety days. 12. Blessed is he who waits, and comes to the one thousand three hundred and thirty-five days.

From the time that the daily, which pertains to the 2,300 years of Daniel 8, began to be taken away, which began in 508 (through the Franks), there were two time periods until

Copyright 8/27/03 6

6


the end: the 1,290 and the 1,335. The 1,290 extend to 1798 and the 1,335 extend to 1843. Daniel 12:13 brings us to the conclusion that the end of the 1335 is “the end of days” or the end of these time prophesies, which indicates the time of the end. Notice that Daniel 12:11 – 13 connect the “taking away of the daily” with the 1,335, which ends at approximately the same time the 2,300 years end. This leads us to the third correlation: that the little book is inextricably connected to the Daily and the 2,300-years. Daniel 12:5 states that there is a little book that is sealed till the time of the end. In other words, the little book is not to be opened and understood until the time of the end. This correlation only needs simple logic. Notice the following propositions:

(1) Within the context of Daniel 12, both the little book and the 1,335 have their focal point at the time of the end.

(2) The 1,335 began commencement when the daily—inextricably connected to the 2,300 years of Daniel 8—began to be taken away.

(3) Both the 1,335 and the 2,300 years end in 1843/1844.(4) 1844 is obviously the time of the end.(5) Because the little book is not to be opened until the time of the end, the little book is

inextricably connected to the 2,300-year prophecy.

27

31

34

Ephesus Smyrna Pergamos Thyatira Sardis Philadelphia Laodicea

1844

2,300 years until sanctuary is cleansed ( Dan. 8: 14 )

Little Horn

Three Horns

538

1, 290 years

1798

Papacy Rules

100 313

1st seal 2nd seal 3rd seal 4th seal 5th seal 6th seal 7th seal

( Rev. 2 and 3 )

( Rev. 5 and 6 )

( Rev. 8 and 9 ) ( Rev. 11: 19; 15: 5 - 8 )

( James 1: 25; 2: 8 - 12 )

( Rev. 6: 9; 11: 1, 2 )

( Baptism )

( THE SPIRITUAL DAVIDIC SANCTUARY )

plucked up

7 Horns left

17501500508

1, 260 years

1,335 years

Now, let us recapitulate the preceding information with additional elaborations. Daniel 8:17 states that the vision (the all out vision of succeeding events leading to the completion of the 2,300 years) pertains to the time of the end. Daniel 12:4 indicates that

By D. S. Farris7

7


a little book was to be sealed until the time of the end. In other words, both the 2,300 years and the little book point to the time of the end. We find a connection of both Daniel 8 and 12 in Revelation 10. Compare Revelation 10:1, 2, 5, 6 with Daniel 12:5 – 7; the angels in view are almost identical. The angel of Revelation 10 is depicted as possessing a little book in his hand. This is the little book of Daniel, the 2,300. Revelation 10:6, 7 indicate that at that point in time, “there will be time no longer.” In fact verse 7 shows that at that time, “the day of the voice of the seventh angel” had begun commencement. In looking at Daniel 8 and 12 with Revelation 10, we can say that Revelation 10 confirms the finality of the 2,300 as being the time of the end and the beginning of the day of the seventh angel (Christ). Logically, whatever time frame Revelation 10 has in mind, this time frame is the fulfillment of the prophecy of Daniel 12, which points back to the 2,300 years of Daniel 8.

When we apply the historical method of interpretation to the trumpets, we find out some astounding probabilities of 1844 being significant to Revelation 10. Some Historical commentators on the sixth trumpet of Revelation 9:15 recognize this trumpet as pointing to the overthrow of Constantinople in 1453 by the Ottoman Turks. The prophecy reveals that the effects of the sixth trumpet were to extend for: the hour (15 days), the day (one year), the month (30 years), and the year (360 years) = 391 years and 15 days. 391 years from the overthrow of Constantinople—in 1453—extend to 1844. Note: Immediately after visualizing the historical account of the 6th trumpet we run directly into Revelation 10, an account that fulfills the vision of Daniel 12, which leads back to Daniel 8. Well did Maxwell point out in his GOD CARES series in the BOOK OF REVELATION that the Book of Revelation is set up in units. Chapters’ 8 – 11 represent a unit in the book Revelation. Revelation 8 and 9 cover six of the trumpets, which stretch from Jerusalem’s destruction, in A.D. 70, to 1844. Revelation 10 confirms 1844. Revelation 11 recapitulates the 1,260 years of Papal supremacy within the picture of the trumpets and focuses on the French Revolution—leading up to the 7th trumpet (Rev. 11:15) with the letting loose of the 7th plague (verse 19).

This unit speaks loudly to the point that Revelation 10 initiates the time of the end or the “day of the voice of the seventh angel” which meets its conclusion in Revelation 11. Moreover, the Church era of Philadelphia (A. D. 1750 – 1844) in Revelation 3:7 brings to light the opening of the door of “something” with the key of David. In Revelation 11:19—after 1844 (Rev. 10)—we see a vivid picture of the “Ark of God’s Testament,” something that belongs in the Most Holy Place. When we take the sixth church era, the structure of Revelation 8 – 11, Revelation 10 in conjunction with 391 years from 1453 – 1844, and all these correlations with Daniel 12—leading back to Daniel 8, we say that these concepts profoundly paint a very clear picture of the importance of 1844 in the word of God.

Copyright 8/27/03 8

8


The Significance Of Revelation 10 In The 19th Century

Revelation 10:8 – 11 points us to a great event, which happened in history, an event that pertains to the date of the fulfillment of this prophecy. The angel of Revelation 10 is described as standing on the sea and on the earth. Since “sea” and “earth” are both being used together in the context of this prophecy, this may point to a symbolic interpretation. The angel is standing on the vast population of the Old World and standing on the scarcely populated area of the New World. The angel is described as placing his right foot on the sea, first; and then placing his left foot on the earth, second. This points to the Great Advent Awakening at the commencement of the 19th

century, which began in Europe, and then spread to America. After the French Revolution and the fall of the Papacy, the clergy in Europe took great interest in the prophecies pertaining to Christ’s second

coming. One of the main focal points in both the Old and New World on prophetic fulfillment was the year 1844. We learn:

This discussion of the 2300 years was not confined to a few enthusiasts but became the prevailing concern of a growing number of leading minds in religious thought . . .men in Great Britain and America came separately to similar conclusions (Leroy froom Prophetic Faith Of Our Fathers, Vol. 3, 272).

The new focal point of prophetic study and concern—the terminus of the 2300 years, leading to the cleansing of the sanctuary, whatever that might be, to occur around 1843, 1844, or 1847—had now reached the proportions of an international quest. The caliber of these expositors and their geographical spread are noteworthy. Aside from British writers those works were read and reprinted in America, writers in various lands sounded the same note—in Germany, Holland, Switzerland, India, Africa, Western Asia (Froom, Prophetic Faith Of Our Fathers, Vol. 4, 301. Emphasis mine).

During the Advent Awakening in Europe, some historical Protestant interpreters began to accept the premillennial doctrine of Christ’s second coming—in place of postmillennialism. These historicists became known as, British Literalists. Froom gives an excellent definition of British Literalism as follows:

By D. S. Farris9

9


[Historic premillennialists believed:] Antichrist, developed during the Christian Era, is to make a final assault on the church just before the advent. At the close of this great tribulation Christ comes, the dead in Christ rise, the living righteous are transformed, the Jews repent and believe, and all are taken up to meet the Lord in the air. Then Christ and the saints descend, Antichrist is destroyed, the wicked are condemned to eternal punishment, Satan is bound, and the millennial kingdom is set up. At the close of the millennial period Satan is loosed, the nations follow him in rebellion and are destroyed by fire. Then the resurrection of the wicked and the final judgment are followed by the new heaven and earth and the eternal kingdom (Prophetic Faith Of Our Fathers, Vol. 4, 416).

British Literalists visualized in the date, 1844, the coming millennium and the return of the Jews to the land of Palestine. What were British Literalists? They were historicists that applied a literal interpretation of Old Testament prophecies concerning Israel. The premillennial historic view on prophecy made its way to America in the Millerite movement. What was the difference between Millerism and British Literalism?

It was chiefly the Judaistic nature of the millennial kingdom on earth that was to draw the line between the Literalists and the Millerites in the 1840’s; Historicism was not the primary issue. That is why in the early 1840’s the Millerites could regard Literalists, on the whole, as brethren and colleagues in the fight against the “spiritualizing” interpretations of the postmillennialists (Prophetic Faith Of Our Fathers, Vol. 4, 426).

It is noted in history that there were a multitude of views proclaiming the possibilities of 1843, 1844, and 1847 as significant dates in relation to Daniel 8. In both Europe and America there was great expectation for the conclusion of world affairs in these years. In the United States William Miller (1782 – 1849) led a huge movement called, the Advent Movement, which expected the return of Jesus in 1844. When the Millerites in America did not witness Christ’s second coming in 1844, they were extremely disappointed, and they received a great amount of ridicule. Both the historical literalists in Europe and the Millerites in America experienced a great “let down” in their own expectations of the dates that were seen as the fulfillment of the 2,300 years. This gave room for the growth of the new developing dispensational futurist system.

During this time frame—before, and especially after the great disappointment, British Literalists had begun to go to great extremes in their literalistic approach on Israel’s prophecies and became—what we know today—dispensationalists. The further they entrenched themselves into extreme literal interpretations pertaining to Israel’s distinction, the more problems they found in Historic prophecy. When the Oxford Tractarian movement began to spread the doctrine of the psudepigraphal, Jesuit system of futurism, and when these ideas made way to the Powerscourt Conference, the way was paved for the acceptance of futurism as a befitting prophetic construct for the extreme literalism that was made to apply to the nation of Israel.

It is astounding that dispensationalists like to portray Adventists as being a heterodox—sometimes cult—movement because Adventists apply the date, 1844, as significant to Bible Prophecy. Dispensationalists often ridicule Adventists of being a movement that came from a gross error of predicting Christ’s second coming, and that they changed the purpose of that date to save face. We have this to say:

Copyright 8/27/03 10

10


(1) The prediction of 1844 as being the second coming of Christ, or a date that pointed to a great event of “some kind” in history, is not an idea indigenous to Millerism. That was an idea that existed among a multitude of scholars throughout the globe.

(2) As far as committing the gross error of predicting Christ’s second coming, are we to begin our deprecating frowns with Miller and the other scholars who used 1844 as a date of importance? Or, should we begin our frowns down with Hippolytus (see chap. 8) who was the first one to predict—concretely—Christ’s second coming in A.D. 500, a result of pseudepigraphal, extra-biblical errors. In my personal experience with dispensational futurists, they never even touch on Hippolytus, for he is considered one of the great progenitors of futurism. I have heard it said that the acceptance of the date, 1844, as pertaining to the second phase of Christ’s priestly ministry—opposed to it being Christ’s second coming—is the “greatest face saving lie” of Adventism.

Such innuendo from dispensationalists hardly distinguishes them in the realm of superior theological knowledge, considering the fact that their system of futurism is, in essence, based on a construct totally concocted with the predilection that Christ’s second coming would take place in A.D. 500—all based on pseudepigraphal myths. The fact of the matter is, the whole system of futurism is based on the error of predicting Christ’s second coming in A.D. 500—all for the sake of keeping the Beliar myth attached to the 70 weeks of Daniel 9 and keeping the pseudepigraphal messianic age connected to the Beliar myth. Dispensationalists would do well to drop the 1844 argument, for their arguments against the reasons of the 1844 Millerite movement are the very reasons for their theological existence as futurists.

The difference between the 1844 reason for predicting Christ’s second coming and the dispensational reason are based on two different realms of thinking: The 1844 reason was based on a misunderstanding of the “cleansing of the sanctuary” in the logical sequence of historic prophecy; while on the other hand, Hippolytus’s reasons were based on pseudepigraphal mythology. Which is worse? Miller proceeded on the basis of Biblical facts that seemed to point to an incorrect conclusion. Hippolytus proceeded from Jewish and Pagan mythology.

(3) Dispensationalists, with their pseudepigraphal, Jesuit, Zionist theological construct cannot even begin to understand the reasons why Miller, like many others, would come to a conclusion that 1844 is significant, because dispensationalists do not have perspicacious insight on the internal correlations of events in historic prophecy. They cannot visualize the logic of the parallelisms in the all out blue print of the connecting perfections of prophetic fulfillments—fulfillments based on the nature of God (Rev. 1:4, 8, 19). Dispensationalists, as long as they continue down the path of Loyola, cannot and will not understand these depths. The fact is Miller, like many others, understood the historic blue print of prophecy to a large degree. In their estimation: the 42 months of Papal supremacy during the Church period, the seals, and the trumpets had and were being fulfilled. To them 1844 was a date based on the logical connection between Daniel chapters’ 8 and 9. It was a date based on the logical projection of the 70 weeks.

By D. S. Farris11

11


70 Weeks (Daniel 9: 24 - 27)

34

31

27

69 Weeks

1, 260

or

42 months

The Papacy Lisbon earthquake 11 - 1 -1755

Sun Dark = Dark day 5 -19 - 1780

Moon to Blood 5 - 19 - 1780

Stars fell 11 - 13 - 1833

Seals

Trumpets

Churches

1844

2300 Years (Daniel 8)

MILLENNIUM

Sixth Seal

For Miller and others, it was logical to conclude—in light of all the other fulfillments of Bible prophecy—that 1844 had to be the great consummation of prophecy. From Miller’s point of view, under the sixth seal Christ would return. Miller believed that a large part of the sixth seal had just previously been fulfilled. Just 10 years before the date, 1844, there had been the greatest meteor shower that the world had ever seen. Elijah Burritt in Geography of the Heavens, p. 157 says, “The most sublime phenomenon of shooting stars (November 13, 1833) . . .covered no inconsiderable portion of the earth’s surface . . .covering the entire vault of heaven with myriads of fire balls.” Miller, in realizing this fulfillment in conjunction with the dark day and Lisbon earthquake, realized that the next event under the sixth seal was the second coming of Christ. The cleansing of the sanctuary in 1844, as applied to Christ’s second coming, seemed like the logical conclusion in light of the preceding fulfillments.

Even British Literalists visualized 1844 as the restoration of the Jews’ temple and the millennial period, which coincides with the idea of “consummation.” Dispensationalists have not even begun to understand the depth of the reasons why many historicists came to certain conclusions on prophecy, because dispensational futurism, as a system, overlaps the research inherent in the Church age, a research that is extremely necessary in an understanding of prophecy. So, it is obvious why the ideas of Miller or early British Literalists could never really be understood in this age of lethargy where the essence of what most people hear in Christendom is “hand me down” theology from the Jesuits—all for the sake of disguising the totalitarian principles of Popery.

Elijah Came Out Of The Advent Movement

The fact of the matter is that 1844 was and is very significant. It was misunderstood, not chronologically so much, but rather it was a date that was misunderstood conceptually. Concerning the Advent movement in America we read:

When the final disappointment came, there were two obvious courses open to those who refused to throw away their faith entirely and brand the whole message as a delusion. Something clearly was wrong: Either the time was a mistake, in which case the 2300 days had not yet ended, or else the period had ended but the event anticipated was wrong (Froom, Prophetic Faith, Vol. 4, 830).

The Millerites attempted to resolve their problem in 1845 at the Albany Conference. Out of this conference there came about three divisions. Two of them were: The Evangelical


12


Adventist body and the Advent Christian Church. These groups abandoned the importance of 1844 and did not proceed to find more prophetic light on this date. The third group did continue to emphasize this date and found new revelation as to 1844’s true meaning. This third group consisted of Sabbatarian Adventists, which latter became known as Seventh Day Adventists. This group realized that the sanctuary of Daniel 8 pointed to the heavenly sanctuary, whereas Miller interpreted the sanctuary as the earth. William Miller believed that the cleansing of the sanctuary pointed to the cleansing of the world with fire. Sabbatarian Adventists, after more research, realized that the sanctuary in Daniel 8 was homogeneous with the sanctuary in the book of Hebrews. As we analyzed in chapter four, the sanctuary in Daniel 8 points to the heavenly sanctuary of the Melchizedek priesthood being fulfilled in Christ.

After the great disappointment of 1844, in that Christ did not return, many of the historic literalists in Europe abandoned this date as anything significant; they abandoned it for the extreme system of dispensationalism. The Millerites divided up into three groups; the first two also abandoned this prophecy, like the European literalists. Seventh Day Adventism, then, becomes the focal point of the issue at hand. We see it this way: When Revelation 10:8 – 11 talks about the little book (the 2,300) being eaten and making the belly bitter; this points us to the great disappointment. The greatest part of the disappointment concerning the date, 1844, was felt in America—in the Millerite Movement. The Millerites preached the message of the 2300-year prophecy with power that shook North America; in this respect the little book “was in their mouth sweet as honey.” But their misunderstanding of the prophecy caused the bitterness of the disappointment. Revelation 10:11 tells us that this message—the message of the little book—must again be prophesied before many peoples, nations, tongues, and kings. The first two branches of Adventists out of the Albany conference did not continue this message; therefore, the third group is the group who has and will prophecy AGAIN the real message of the little book.

When Daniel 8:14 states that after 2,300 years, the sanctuary will be RESTORED; this restoration points to the restoration of the twofold aspect of the sanctuary: God’s sanctuary in heaven—the Davidic temple where Jesus is high priest—and the spiritual sanctuary on earth—the Church, which is now the Israel of God. Both sanctuaries are inextricably connected. The restoration of the heavenly sanctuary is accomplished by the restoration of the earthly sanctuary. In other words, after 1844 God was to restore the Church sanctuary on earth by raising up a movement that teaches the message of the little book—the sanctuary. This movement was destined to be a people that restore the Gospel in its pure form. This remnant movement, by restoring all the truth, will lighten the earth with God’s glory—bringing glory to God in heaven.

God’s remnant Church is described in Revelation 12:17; 14:12; and 19:10. God’s remnant Church keep all of the commandments—including the fourth commandment. And why would they? They keep the seventh day Sabbath, because the Sabbath is the SIGN of the Everlasting Covenant. They are also described as “having the testimony of Jesus Christ.” This is the spirit of prophecy. This means that God’s remnant will have a correct understanding of prophecy, and will also possess the “voice of prophecy” in their movement. We find this in Adventism. We emphasize this: Seventh Day Adventism rose up out of the movement mentioned in Revelation 10. Adventism is the only movement that teaches the 1844 sanctuary message; Adventism teaches the

By D. S. Farris13

13


restoration of all God’s commandments; and Adventism has the correct understanding of prophecy. Adventism, we assert, represents the rising of Elijah the prophet, which came after the three and a half prophetic years of Jezebel rule in the Papacy.

Thyatira

538 1500 1750 1844

2300 Years

3. 5 Prophetic Years of Jezebel Rule

1798

1453 1844

391 years of the Sixth Trumpet

Sardis Philadelphia Laodicea

Day of the Seventh Trumpet

1929 2002

WorldwideMt. Carmel

Thyatira

Dragon, Beast, False Prophet

SUN WORSHIP

Spiritual Famine From The Early Rain

Elijah comes in the form the Seventh Day Advent

Movement

In a different study we cover the historical approach on Revelation and illustrate that the feast system of Leviticus served as a type of the Church period. Pentecost was a feast that commemorated the spring harvests. Pentecost, as described in Acts 2, was the former rain of the Holy Spirit. During the 1,260 years of Jezebel rule (the Papacy), there was a spiritual famine for Biblical truth. Sun worship dominated the teachings of the Catholic Church. Under the third seal, there is mentioned that there was a scarcity of wheat and barely. The scarcity of the wheat and barely point back to the spring harvest, which was the former rain of the Spirit at Pentecost. Under the third seal, there is mention that the oil and the wine were not to be lost sight of. This points to the fall fruit harvest in the feast system; this points to the latter rain. In the antitypical day of Atonement—since 1844—we have in focus the prospect of the Latter Rain which is to bring about the final harvest of saints for the Feast of Tabernacles, the Feast which will take place with Jesus in heaven after the second coming.

As Elijah came after the three and a half years of famine to contend with the Baal priests on Mt. Carmel, God has sent the Adventist message to the world, after the three and a half prophetic years of Papal or Jezebel rule to warn the world about spiritual world wide Carmel. The issue in our day is like that of Elijah’s day; the issue revolves around keeping the commandments—opposed to sun worship.

As we saw in chapter 9, “The Mark of The Beast,” Sunday serves as the sign of the Dragon covenant of pagan idolatry. It is a day that points to the numerical system of 666, found in the sun’s rotation in the Zodiac. The Sabbath is the sign of God’s Everlasting Covenant with spiritual Israel, and Sunday is the sign of the pagan system of sun worship completely manifested in Catholicism and apostate Protestantism. God sent the Seventh Day Advent Church to warn the world that we are in the antitypical Day of Atonement when the Law of God becomes the extreme focus (Rev. 11:19). It is this Day of Atonement when the Sabbath—being the sign of the Everlasting Covenant—becomes the great focal point of loyalty to God.


14


ELIJAH MOVEMENT Vs. THE FALSE PROPHET ON THE ISSUE OF LAW

One of the greatest errors of fallen Christendom is the notion that the 10 commandments are abolished or either applies specifically to the Jew. Coupled with this notion is the idea that the seventh day Sabbath applies only to the Old Covenant or only to the Jew. As we have analyzed in chapter five, it was the little horn (The Papacy) who thought to change times and laws. Christ said in Matthew 5:17 – 19 that not the least bit of the law have passed away. Nevertheless, dispensationalists—along with many other evangelicals—attempt to justify the works of popery with their cherished Jesuitical theologies. Clear statements, like Matthew 5:17 – 19, are wrestled into insignificance by popular theology. Specifically, dispensationalism by nature is a system that is honed—by means of compartmentalized dispensations—to remove the Sabbath out of the Church dispensation. Dispensationalism is a clever work that inadvertently justifies the work of Rome, while pretending to maintain distance from Rome. Dispensational focus on Futurism leads multitudes away from realizing that the Papacy is the Antichrist, while Dispensationalism itself argues in favor of the Papal Sabbath. This point on top of all that has been said in this course is the reason that we know dispensationalism to be one of the main components of the False Prophet. It is in the very action of the Little Horn and his attempt to change God’s times and laws that we find the issues revolving around the Seal of God and the Mark of the Beast. The Elijah movement not only exposes the Beast and his attempt to add, subtract, and rearrange God’s law, but the Elijah movement exposes the deceit and slyness of the False prophet in his attempt to justify the Beast.

Revelation 12:17 and 14:12 emphasize that God’s remnant people will keep the commandments, for the antitypical Elijah knows the meaning of Revelation 22:14: “Blessed are those who do His commandments, that they may have the right to the tree of life, and may enter through the gates into the city.” The Elijah Movement tells the world that God’s commandments are very important, while on the other hand; the False Prophet tells the world that Elijah is a liar, and the False Prophet says that the law is abolished. Walter Martin has told the world in his book, The Kingdom Of The Cults, the following: “The Adventist’s contention, therefore, concerning the eternal nature of the Decalogue and the time of its application to man, are mere conjecture” (Kingdom Of The Cults, 493). Martin says this in the context of arguing against the “dual law argument,” which we will talk about in following pages, and Martin argues that the whole of the law—including the 10 commandments—are abolished. In other words, Martin attempts to refute the Adventist belief that the 10 commandments are eternal or everlasting. Martin is not merely attempting to refute some sect of Christianity—sequestered in a bubble of heterodoxy—as he politely attempts to impugn the Adventist position; but rather, Martin is trying to refute the Elijah message and God Himself. Martin constantly, in his work, with a polite but arrogant overtone, says that Adventism is destroyed; but as we saw in chapter 10, Martin’s theory of the authentication of Sunday through the apologists was rather destroyed, and so it will be in this argument. The eternal nature of the 10 commandments is not merely an argument of Adventism, but is the binding fabric of God’s universe—described in the Bible. Let us prove this with the following observation:

By D. S. Farris15

15


The Perpetuity Of The Law—In The Blue Stone

In the vision of Ezekiel 1, we see a picture of God and His throne. Verse 4 says, “And I looked, and, behold, a whirlwind came out of the north, a great cloud, and a fire infolding itself, and a brightness was about it, and out of the midst thereof as the color of amber, out of the midst of the fire.” Verses’ 26 – 28 says:

And above the firmament that was over their heads was the likeness of a THRONE, as the appearance of a SAPPHIRE STONE: and upon the likeness of the throne was the likeness as the appearance of a man above upon it. And I saw as the color of amber, as the appearance round about within it, from the appearance of his loins even upward, and from the appearance of his loins even downward, I saw as it were the appearance of fire, and it had brightness round about. As the appearance of the bow that is in the cloud in the day of rain, so was the appearance of the brightness round about. This was the appearance of the likeness of the glory of the Lord. And when I saw it, I fell upon my face, and I heard a voice of one that spake. (Compare this with Rev. 4:1 – 3)

Intermingled with this sight in Ezekiel’s vision there is mention of wheels (Verses’ 15 – 17). We learn in Daniel 7:9 that God’s throne has wheels. Wheels on God’s throne indicate that his throne moves. Notice the following analysis:

(1) God’s throne has the appearance of SAPPHIRE (Blue Stone).(2) God’s throne has wheels; thus, His throne travels.(3) God’s throne also has the appearance of a fiery cloud.

Why are these deductions significant? We learn that the throne of God led the children of Israel to Mt. Sinai. Exodus 13:21, 22 says, “And the Lord went before them by day in a pillar of a cloud, to lead them the way; and by night in a pillar of fire, to give them light; to go by day and night: He took not away the pillar of the cloud by day, nor the pillar of fire by night, from before the people.” The throne of God traveled to Mt. Sinai, and this mountain became the location of God’s sanctuary (Ex. 15:13, 17). Exodus 15:13 calls the mountain “God’s Holy Habitation.” Verse 17 says, “Thou shalt bring them in, and plant them in the mountain of thine inheritance, in the place, O Lord, which thou hast made for thee to dwell in, in the Sanctuary, O Lord, which thy hands have established.” Hebrews 8:5 states that Moses made the earthy sanctuary “according to the pattern showed to him in the mountain.”

Up to this point, what are we demonstrating? We are demonstrating that the Blue Stone, God’s throne, and God’s sanctuary are inextricably connected to each other. According to 1 Chronicles 28, when David gave Solomon the pattern of the sanctuary that was to be built, in verse 18 David explained that the pattern of the Ark of the Covenant was “for the pattern of the chariot of the cherubims, that spread out their wings, and covered the ark of the covenant of the Lord.” This depiction looks similar to the depiction in Ezekiel 1. The chariots represent the wheels of God’s throne. Therefore, God’s throne, which had traveled to Mt. Sinai, possessed the Ark of the Covenant, and Moses built Israel’s sanctuary on the basis of what he saw in the mountain. Why is this significant? Exodus 24:9 – 12 states:


16


Then went up Moses, and Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel: And they saw the God of Israel: and there was under his feet as it were a paved work of a sapphire stone, and as it were the body of heaven in his clearness. And upon the nobles of the children of Israel he laid not his hand: also they saw God, and did eat and drink. And the Lord said to Moses, come up to me into the mount, and be there: and I will give thee tables of stone (The Heb. indicates: “tables of the stone.”), and a law, and commandments which I have written; that thou mayest teach them.

The law of God was taken from the BLUE SAPPHIRE stone, which God was standing on. The law was taken from God’s throne. This indicates that God’s law is the foundation of His government. The fact that the law was written with the finger of God in the stone from His throne indicates the perpetuity of the law. This is why Psalm 111:7, 8 says, “The works of his hands (Ex. 31:18) are verity and judgment; all his commandments are sure. They stand fast for ever and ever, and are done in truth and uprightness.” In Matthew 5:17 Jesus Himself said that he did not come to destroy (Gr. Kataluo: “dissolve” “demolish” “loosen down”) the law; but rather, He came to fulfill (Gr. Pleroo: “to accomplish” “to carry through to the end” “to do”) the law.

Question: How important is the law? James 1:25 says that we are to “look intently” (Gr. Parakupto: “To stoop over” or “to bend down to examine something with precision.”) into the “Perfect Law of Liberty.” James 2:8 – 12 shows that the Perfect Law of Liberty is the 10 commandments. In fact, we will be judged by this Law, says James. Ecclesiastes 12:13, 14 are in perfect correlation with James in that we will be judged by the law. Hebrews 8:4, 5 clearly show that the Mosaic sanctuary was an “example and shadow of heavenly things.” We have discovered in chapter four that there is very much a heavenly sanctuary. If the Mosaic was a type of the Heavenly, then there must be an original copy of the Law in heaven. Revelation 11:19 says, “And the temple of God was opened in heaven, and there was seen in his temple the ARK of his TESTAMENT: . . .” Revelation 15:5 gives us

more insight as to what is involved with this Ark in heaven: “And after that I looked, and, behold, the temple of the tabernacle of the testimony in heaven was opened.” What is the Testimony? Exodus 24:16: The Lord told Moses, “And thou shalt put into the ark the testimony which I shall give thee (see also verses’ 21, 22).” Notice that the Testimony goes into the Ark. Exodus 31:18 says: “And he gave unto Moses, when he had made an end of communing with him upon mount Sinai, two tables of testimony, tables of stone, written with the finger of God (see Ex. 32:15; 34:29).”

By D. S. Farris17

17


Revelation 11:19 and 15:5, 8 clearly illustrate that there is a heavenly Ark with an original copy of the two tablets of testimony. What is the Testimony in the Ark in heaven? The Perfect Law of Liberty is the Testimony, and James 1:25 says that we are to “look intently” into that law, for we will be judged by that Law (James 2:8 – 12). This is why Revelation 22:14 says, “Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.” Therefore, we can conclude even further that when God made Moses the two Testimonies out of the Blue Sapphire Stone from the throne, this was a law of perpetuity.

In light of this section, Martin’s statement, “The Adventist’s contention, therefore, concerning the eternal nature of the Decalogue and the time of its application to man, are mere conjecture, becomes vain, for it is impossible for the works of God’s hand—written in the blue stone—to “stand fast forever and ever,” according to the Psalmist, only to be abolished because the False Prophet movement wishes it so. In Matthew 5:17, Jesus said that He did not come to do away with the law, but to fulfill (Pleroo: “do” “fill up”) the law. Romans 8:4 tells us that the righteous requirements of the law are to be fulfilled (Pleroo) in those who are walking in the Spirit. As Jesus fulfilled the law in His perfect life of obedience, He desires that His people fulfill the law through a consecrated life of self-denial. This is why Jesus said in John 15:10: “If you keep my commandments, you shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father’s commandments and abide in His love.” 1 John 2:3 – 7 clearly shows that we must keep God’s commandments. Verse 6 says—in the context of keeping His commandments—that if we say we abide in Christ, we should walk as He walked. How did Jesus walk? John 15:10: Jesus kept His Father’s commandments, and we are to keep the commandments of Christ (John 14:21). There are those who say that Christ’s commandments are different from the Father’s. Such reasoning divides Christ from the Father falsely. 1 Corinthians 10:1 – 4 says Christ was the Rock that followed the children of Israel; consequently, He was also the lawgiver. Christ did not come to institute a separate list of commandments, from what He instituted at Sinai; Christ simply enlarged the 10 commandments to include far more details in defining sin (see Galatians 5:19 – 22). James 4:12 says, “There is one (not two) lawgiver, who is able to save and to destroy.”

1 John 2:7 speaks about the Old Commandment that we had from the beginning. What is John talking about? 2 John 4 – 6 explain that the “old commandment, which we had and heard from the beginning, is love that walks after the Father’s commandments.” 1 John 2:24 states that we will continue in the Son and the Father if we have this love which walks after the Father’s commandments. Note: Love is the fulfilling of the Law (see Rom. 13:8 – 10; 1 John 3: 22 – 24; 5: 2, 3). In the context of scriptures, such as 1 John 2:3, 4; 3:22, 24; 5:2, 3, which emphasize keeping God’s commandments, Martin argues:

To support their argument that a Christian must obey the commandments, Adventists and other Christian bodies cite such passages…We, too yield to the authority of those verses; but the fallacy of the position lies in the concept that the word “commandments” always refers to the Ten commandments, which they maintain are “the moral law of God.” This claim cannot be substantiated from scripture, in fact, it is contradicted by the Bible (Kingdom Of The Cults, 491).


18


We ask the reader to please compare the above argument from Martin with the following illustration in Matthew 19:16 - 19:

16. Now behold, one came and said to Him, "Good Teacher, what good thing shall I do that i may have eternal life?"17. So He said to him, "Why do you call me good? No one is good but One, that is, God. But if you want to enter into life, keep the commandments."18. He said to Him, "Which ones?" Jesus said, "You shall not murder, you shall not commit Adultery, you shall not steal, you shall not bear false witness19. Honor your father and your mother, and, you shall love your neighbor as yourself."

Apparently, Jesus really meant what He said in Matthew 5:17 - 19, because Matthew 19:16 - 19 confirms His thoughts all the more. Martin argues that the commandments of God in the New Testament cannot be the 10 commandments, for Martin emphasizes: “By ‘the righteousness of the law’ and the fulfillment of the law, Christ and all the New Testament writers mean not the Ten Commandments but the eternal law of love” (Kingdom Of The Cults, 492). Martin of course bases this statement on Matthew 22:37 – 40 which emphasizes that “to love God” and “to love man” fulfills the law, or that the whole of the law rests on these two commandments. Yes, the Decalogue is summed up by these two commandments, but what Martin has failed miserably to understand is that these two commandments would not exist if there were no Decalogue. Why? The first four commandments are based on love towards God, and the last six commandments are based on love to man. Martin, in essence, tells us that the two great commandments have no internal definition. In other words, Martin makes the two great commandments a form of lawless love, for, idolatry, taking God’s name in vain, committing murder, committing adultery, and etc—being the internal definition of the two great commandments—no longer has any meaning.

According to this “no law theory” we don’t know what it means to love God and to love man. Martin’s confusion is glaring where he says, “We have seen that the greatest of all commandments is not included in the Decalogue or ‘moral law.’ And yet upon this great commandment, love for the Lord and for one’s neighbor, ‘hang all the law and the prophets’” (Kingdom Of The Cults, 493). Martin’s argument is amazing, because he says that the greatest of all commandments is not in the Decalogue, when in fact, the Decalogue defines the greatest of all commandments. As we are going to see in further pages, dispensationalists apply sessions of theological jugglery around this bald face contradiction.

The problem with Martin, like many evangelicals who advocate the “no law theory,” is that he would have us believe that James 1:25; 2:9 – 12 and Revelation 11:19 are imaginary texts and do not exist. These scriptures, along with all that has been shown, depict that God’s heavenly sanctuary contains the “Ark of His Testament,” the very original which Moses patterned the earthly sanctuary (Hebrews 8:4, 5). Are we to dream that God’s ark contains AIR in it, or shall we come to the logical conclusion that the original copy of the Decalogue is contained there, for it was James who said that we will be judged by the “Perfect Law Of Liberty”—quoting commandments from the Decalogue.

By D. S. Farris19

19


Law And Grace Cannot Be Separated

In contrast to the worldwide Mt. Carmel baal preachers, the Elijah movement knows that law and grace are inextricably tied together. In reference to Christians keeping the Law, Cyrus Scofield says, “The Christian is not under the conditional Mosaic Covenant of works, the law, but under the unconditional New Covenant of grace” (The Scofield Reference Bible, Ft. notes on Ex. 20, 95). Clarence Larkin defines Scofield’s thought with more clarity where he says, “to join “Law” and “Grace” is to unite what God has forever separated” (Dispensational Truth, 31). These statements are what the Elijah movement calls “Untempered Mortar,” meaning, “that which is improperly worked, and will not therefore hold together or stand the test.” Larkin’s statement is neither Biblical nor logical, for we cannot say that we have grace unless there is still a law. We only have Grace, because there is still a law. Romans 4:15 tells us that the “law works wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression.” Romans 5:13 says, “Sin is not imputed when there is no law.” Here is the logic that reveals the ludicrousness of separating Law from Grace:

Romans 4:15

(1) If there is no law, there is no transgression.(2) There is transgression (3) Therefore, there must be law.

Romans 5:13

(1) When there is no Law, sin is not imputed.(2) Sin is imputed. (Otherwise, there would be no need for the Great White Throne Judgment.)(3) Therefore, there is a law.

The reason Paul stated proposition one in each of the above arguments is simple. 1 John 3:4, Romans 3:19, 20, and 7:7 – 13 teach that sin is the breaking of the law. Without law, we would not know what sin is. We know that sin exists; therefore, there must be a law. To teach that the Law is separate from Grace is beyond stupid.

In the antitypical fulfillment of the contest between Elijah and Jezebel, the baal priests and preachers tell Elijah that the Ten Commandments are not important. The baal preachers tell Elijah the following: “Don’t you know that we are not under the Law.” Note: The term “under the law” is a very misunderstood term in spiritual Babylon. It must be realized that Paul was speaking to societies who were UNDER the jurisdiction of Rome, and Roman society was over half slavery. Paul used terms that the people could understand, for many of the people he taught were UNDER a slave master. The term UNDER is indicative of being a slave or being held in bondage by something. The confusion in Christendom over the law is based primarily on a misunderstanding of the Gospel. We must now take some time to discuss this matter.

Justification Does Not Abolish The Law


20


In Revelation 14:12, the saints are described as not only keeping God’s commandments, but having the faith of Jesus. The Faith is indicative of the Gospel. In other words, John emphasizes that the Gospel will produce commandment keeping in the saints of the last days. This is undoubtedly why Paul, in Romans 3:31, emphasizes that the faith does not abolish the law, but rather establishes (builds it up) the law. Regardless of the clarity of these scriptures, the baal preachers of worldwide Mt. Carmel attempt to synthesize the phrase, “not under the law,” into a definition that is antagonistic to the unity of all the scriptures.

The term Under The Law indicates a state of bondage. How did the law keep mankind in bondage (see Heb. 2:15)? Romans 6:23 says, “The wages of sin (law breaking) is death.” As we saw in chapter 2—dealing with the 70th week of Daniel 9—every person is born into a humanity (Psalm 51:5), the Adamic nature, which stands condemned under the law. On top of this, every human being has his or her own personal sins. The whole human race is under the law in that the law holds mankind in condemnation to die (see Ezekiel 18:4). Jesus, however, has made it possible for all men to be delivered from being UNDER the CONDEMNATION of the law. How? Galatians 3:13 says, “Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is everyone that hangeth on a tree.” The curse of the Law is death, and Jesus was made a curse for us. Galatians 4:4 says: “But when the fullness of the time had come, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the law.” Jesus was born into the world in the same predicament as the human race—under the law. How did Jesus make deliverance from being under the law possible? Jesus, in his humanity, gave the Law the requirements it asks for.

The law requires two things: (1) Perfect Obedience; (2) Perfect Justice (The soul that sins must die.). How did Jesus accomplish the first requirements of the Law? Jesus obeyed the Law perfectly in His life on earth (Hebrews 7:24-26). How did Jesus accomplish the second requirement of the Law? The works of Christ disqualify Him from the Perfect Justice of the law; however, Galatians 4:4 says that Christ was born under the law; this can only indicate that His humanity was under the law.

The fact that Christ obeyed the Law perfectly and the fact that Christ crucified the Adamic nature on the cross allows Him to be our substitution. Faith in the life, death, burial, and resurrection of Christ allows one to enter into the Everlasting Covenant. In this Covenant, through Faith in Christ as Savior, we are given the imputed righteousness of Christ as a free gift (see Romans 3:18-24). This is what it means NOT to be UNDER the law: Free from the condemnation by means of the imputed righteousness of Christ.

But does the grace of imputed righteousness (Justification) abolish the law? Popular theologians would have us believe that this is the case. They often use texts such as Romans 3:28: “Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith apart from the deeds of the law.” Popular Bible teachers want scriptures such as Romans 3:28 to prove their position, but it cannot, because Paul teaches the exact opposite in the context of Romans 3. In Romans 3:31, Paul says, “Do we then make void the law through faith? Certainly not! On the contrary, we establish the law.” Very clearly the Bible teaches that the Christian cannot be Justified (to be set right or accounted as righteous) by the works of the Law, for the Christian is Justified through the righteousness of Christ; hence the Christian possesses imputed righteousness by the grace of God through faith in

By D. S. Farris21

21


Christ. However, the fact that the Christian possesses imputed righteousness—apart from works—does not abrogate the law, for in Romans 3:31 Paul makes this clear.

That Justification does not abolish the Law is seen in other Pauline scriptures. Romans 7:1 – 4 illustrate that before a man is married to Christ, he is married to the Law. (Of course man is married to the law through the Adamic nature and personal sins.) While being married to the Law, the Law has power to place man under condemnation (Rom. 7:7 – 13); for the job of the Law is to reveal sin (Rom. 3:19, 20). This is the reason that Paul emphasizes the marriage between sinful man and the perfect Law as dysfunctional, so in Romans 7:1 – 4 Paul brings into focus a very important issue: If the law were to die, man could be set free from the condemnation of the Law. Does Paul conclude that freedom came by means of the death of the first Husband, the Law, which Paul defines as Good and Holy (Rom. 7:12)? No! Paul says that those who accept Christ have died; and therefore can be legally married to Christ (Gal. 3:23 – 25). But in this illustration, notice that in freedom from the condemnation of the Law (Justification), the Law did not die (Matt. 5:17); and not so much as a hair of the first Husband’s head died (Matt. 5:18). Thus, the first Husband (the Law) still exists, and he can indeed have dominion over those who are not married to Christ. With this in mind, it becomes very important to conceptualize what it means to be married to Christ—in order not to be married to the Law.

Sanctification Upholds The Law

For the Christian, death to the law and marriage to Christ is freely given to him through the imputed righteousness of Justification, but Paul also emphasizes “death to the law” and “marriage to Christ” through imparted righteousness. Paul says in Romans 7:1 that the law has dominion over those who are still ALIVE. Paul says this in respect to what he says in chapter 6, that Christians are to be crucified to the “Old Man.” Romans’ 6 and 7 emphasize crucifixion, not only through imputation as described in Romans 5:12 – 20, but impartation as the means of being divorced from the Law. Romans 7:5, 6 says:

For when we were in the flesh, the motions of sins, which were by the law, did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death. But now we are delivered (Gr. Katargeo: Abolished) from (Apo: Away from) the law, that being dead wherein we were held (Katecho: “to hold back” “to hinder” “to restrain”); that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter.

In Christ—through imputed righteousness—we have been abolished away from the law’s condemnation. But with freedom from condemnation, there is also mentioned in Romans 7:5 the fact that the law revealed sin WHEN WE WERE in the flesh; meaning, we are to be set free from the flesh and sin, which is the breaking of the law. So, with freedom from condemnation, there must also be freedom from sin. (see Rom. 8:10 – 14; 1 John 3:5 – 9). This unequivocally proves that the free gift of justification must be followed by an experience that abolishes the Old Man of sin. Walter Martin argues:

The concept of law in Seventh-day Adventism, then, leads them to the un-Biblical and at times legalistsic position that although they are “under grace,” by failing to “keep the commandments” they are in danger of coming “under law” again. The word of God, however, describes the Christian under grace as “dead


22


to the law” and “alive unto God” (Galatians 2:19), and nowhere is it taught that one can “come alive” again so that the function of law is resumed (Kingdom Of The Cults, 494. Emphasis mine).

In other words, according to Martin: once a Christian possesses the imputed righteousness of Christ, he can never again be implicated under the Law—regardless of what he does. Martin's argument inadvertently says that once one receives Salvation, he can never lose it. Unfortunately, Martin has failed miserably to grasp the Biblical truth and necessity of ABIDING in Christ. The Greek word is: Meno (meaning: to remain; not to depart). What does it mean to abide in Christ? 1 John 2:6 says, "He who says he abides in Him ought himself also to walk just as He walked." What does it mean to walk as the Lord? Notice 1 John 3:6: "Whoever abides in Him does not sin. Whoever sins has neither seen Him nor known Him." According to this clear example, we must eliminate sin (known sin) out of our lives. We must take heed to the warning Jesus gave in John 15:6: "If anyone does not abide in Me, he is cast out as a branch and is withered; and they gather them and throw them into the fire, and they are burned." The seriousness of this matter is also stated in Hebrews 10:26, 27 "For if we sin willfully after we have received the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins. But a certain fearful expectation of judgment, and fiery indignation which will devour the adversaries." Martin wants us to believe that our salvation is secure regardless if we turn our backs on God, but this is not the case. Notice also 2 John 1:8, 9: "Look to yourselves that we do not lose the things we worked for, but that we may receive a full reward. Whoever transgresses and does not abide in the doctrine of Christ does not have God. He who abides in the doctrine of Christ has both the Father and the Son" The Bible is clear! If we do not abide in Christ, we lose our relationship with Christ and find ourselves under the law.

Martin also used Galatians 2:19 to support his argument, but Galatians does not support him. Galatians 5:18 – 26 teach that if we walk in the spirit, we are not under the law. If we arbitrarily walk in the flesh in an anti nomos (law) mindset, we are under the law. 1 John 2:4 says, “He who says, "I know Him," and does not keep His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.” Martin’s theory says, in effect, that a Christian is “alive unto God” and “dead to the law,” even if He chooses to reject sanctification. What Martin, like many who advocate the “no law theory,” have failed to emphasize is that “not being under the law” and “alive unto God” through Justification is inextricably tied to “not being under the law” and “alive unto God” through sanctification. Notice the following scriptures in Romans 6:

13. Neither yield ye your members as instruments of unrighteousness unto sin: but yield yourselves unto God, as those that are alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness unto God. 14. For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace. 15. What then? Shall we sin (break the law) because we are not under the law, but under grace?16.God forbid. Know you not, that to whom you yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants you are to whom you obey; whether of sin unto death, or obedience unto righteousness.

By D. S. Farris23

23


Martin’s theory: “nowhere is it taught that one can “come alive” again so that the function of law is resumed” does not correlate with the Bible, for Romans 8:12, 13 says: “Therefore, brethren, we are debtors—not to the flesh, to live according to the flesh. For if you live according to the flesh you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live.” Now, before proceeding any further, let us look at another statement made by Martin, where he says, “Now although Seventh-day Adventists affirm that law-keeping cannot merit salvation, nevertheless they teach that by breaking the law one forfeits salvation” (Kingdom Of The Cults, 490). Martin’s allegation can be true or false—depending on which context we are dealing with law breaking. The Bible divides this issue between “the Christian struggle as humans” (as is described in Romans 7) and “cheap grace”(as is described in Romans 6).

In the context of the Christian struggle over the flesh, Paul’s emphasis is not salvation through works (Eph. 2:9, 10; Rom. 3:28); his emphasis is salvation that leads to works; meaning, Justification that produces Sanctification (Titus 3:5 – 7). This principle is emphasized by Paul in Titus 2:11, 12: “For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men, teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly in the present age.” “Salvation that leads to Works” opposed to “Salvation by Works” is also emphasized by Paul in Romans 7:6 where he says, “we will keep the law in the newness of spirit and not in the oldness of the letter.”

In 2 Corinthians 3:3 we read: “Forasmuch as you manifestly declared to be the epistles of Christ ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in fleshly tables of the heart.” The law is not to be merely an object outside of our minds that we attempt to obey through dead works (Heb. 9:14). The law of God is to be placed in the mind and heart (Heb. 8:10); then and only then, will “the righteousness (Dikaioma: “requirements” “ordinance”) of the law be fulfilled (Pleroo: “done” “filled up”) in us who walk not after the flesh, but after the spirit (Rom. 8:4).” Ephesians 2:10 is in perfect correlation with Romans 8:4; that God desires us to fulfill the law by means of “becoming a partaker of the divine nature” (2 Peter 1:4). Galatians 2:20 emphasizes this principle as: “not I, but Christ.” “Not I” means that we put to death the Old Man; “But Christ” means that we accept His grace in our lives to walk in the new man “which is created in righteousness and true holiness” (Ephesians 4:21 – 24). This in effect is what it means to ABIDE in Christ.

It must be emphatically stated that, in the context of the Christian struggle over the flesh, though the platform of Justification does not give the Christian a license to trample upon the divine precepts, God is a Being of infinite mercy, and He understands that we are incapable in and of ourselves to perform the righteous requirements of the law. This is why He gave us the Holy Spirit, and even with the Spirit, Sanctification is a growth process. The issue is not whether or not we become perfect; the issue is our attitude about sin. Are we willing to be crucified to the flesh, the world, and the devil? Are we willing—through Christ’s imparted righteousness—to allow Jesus to work through us? In this context, Martin’s allegation towards Adventism is not correct, for though there are some Adventists who fit Martins description, the whole of Adventism does not believe that personal sins—in the struggle of overcoming—perpetually forfeits salvation.


24


However, in the context of “cheap grace,” which teaches that we can accept Jesus as Savior and then deny him as Lord by continuing to live as the pagans (James 2:14 – 26; 1 John 3:5 – 9), we do agree with Martin’s allegation against Adventism. The Adventist position is in agreement with Jesus Himself where He says in Matthew 5:19 that if one breaks the least of His commandments and teaches others to do the same, they will be called the least in God’s kingdom; and that does not mean low status in God’s kingdom; that means low status outside of the sea of glass. This is something that all evangelicals who advocate the “no law theory” aught seriously to consider, for the perfidious theology of the “no law theory” is akin to the Gnostic heresy of the early centuries, and is now cloaked with dispensational technicalities of semantic Jugglery.

The False Prophet’s Jugglery With The Decalogue

It is through the meticulously constructed system of dispensationalism that the devil has attempted to justify the Papacy in the face of Elijah. Dispensationalists in an attempt to justify their neglect to honor the fourth commandment go to great lengths to exclude the Sabbath in every age except for the Jews. They teach:

The command to observe the Sabbath was given to Israel Exclusively. It was not given to the Gentiles. It was given to Israel as the “SIGN” of the “Mosaic Covenant.”

...the “Sabbath” does not belong to the Church, and is not to be observed by Christians, for the “Sabbath Day” is a part of “The Law,” and Christians are not under “Law,” but under “Grace.”

If Christians are under obligations to keep the “Jewish Sabbath,” then they are under the Jewish “Ceremonial Law” and should observe all ordinances and Feast Days of the Jewish Ritual (Clarence Larkin, Dispensational Truth, 31).

Dispensationalism, as we have analyzed in chapters’ 1 – 4, is a meticulously constructed theory of racial and theological divisions—superimposed on the Bible. It is a system that divides what God has not divided and brings together what God has divided. Dispensationalists try to justify the belief that the Sabbath does not belong to the Christian by teaching that the Sabbath belongs to the law, and the law is not for the Christian, but for the Jew. This has already been proved false. Is “thou shalt not kill” or “thou shalt not commit adultery” or “thou shalt have no other gods before me” only for the Jew? Of course not! Then it is senseless to separate the Sabbath from the rest of these commandments. Matthew 5:18 and Ecclesiastes 3:14 state that none of the law would pass away. Though this makes complete sense on the basis of Biblical unity, dispensationalists have created additional theories to compensate for their apparent contradictions.

On pages back we showed how Martin emphasized that the 10 commandments are not the commandments of the New Testament; however, in another place Martin says, “9 of the commandments are enunciated in the New Testament” (Kingdom Of The Cults, p. 490). Similarly, Ralph Riggs, tells us: “The Commandments, with the exception of the

By D. S. Farris25

25


fourth, were carried over and repeated in the New Covenant” (Dispensational Studies, 91). In other words, God had to abolish the 10 commandments in order that He could reinstate 9 of them. Said another way, God had to abolish the 10 commandments in order to eliminate the Sabbath, then, He could reinstate 9 of them. Do dispensationalists understand the words of Jesus in Matthew 5:18 that not one iota of this law will pass away? Apparently not! So, they concoct theological jugglery as was just cited. Does the jugglery stop here? No! They go even further. Dispensationalists, when confronted with Matthew 5:18, then take a new stance; they acknowledge that the Law has not changed; they just say that it belongs only to the Jew. Dispensationalists say the law is preserved in whole for Israel, but when they are confronted about adultery, murder, or idolatry, they all the sudden accept 9 of the commandments, but insist the Sabbath is completely Jewish. This is chicanery! This is exactly what Jesus warned against in Matthew 5:19 and also James 2:10.

Though dispensationalists say the law has not changed for the Jew in any detail, when confronted with 9 of the commandments, as applicable to the Church, the fourth commandment has changed for the Church. These men cannot get their theology straight. The reason for this confusion is simple. Dispensationalism was created by the devil to inadvertently justify the Papacy’s changing of God’s law. We have already seen that dispensationalism justifies Catholicism through the futurist system, and it justifies the Zionist conspiracy, which is used as a tool to create the New World Order. Dispensationalism, while appearing not to agree with Popery, supports Popery in all aspects of the great deception; consequently, this system represents one of the main ideologies that cause the world to worship the first Beast in Revelation 13. It is dispensational anti nomos theology that has paved the way for evangelicals to trample upon God’s law in the sight of Papal wants.

The False Prophet’s Jugglery With The Laws To Abrogate The Sabbath

Dispensationalists tell us that the institution of law in the Mosaic covenant is divided in the following way:

1. The Moral Law. Ex. 20: 1 – 26. This consists of the Ten Commandments.2. The Civil Law. Ex. 21: 1 – 24: 18.3. The Ceremonial Law. Ex. 25: 1 – 40: 38. This includes the Tabernacle, the Priesthood, and the order of service. The “Sign” of this Covenant is the Sabbath. Ex.31: 12 – 18 (Clarence Larkin, Dispensational Truth, 150).

It is good that dispensationalists can indeed see the divisions between the Moral and Ceremonial laws. The preceding citation is accurate in that the laws were divided. However, the inaccuracy of dispensationalism comes to view in the following statement:

If Christians are under obligations to keep the “Jewish Sabbath,” then they are under the Jewish “Ceremonial Law” and should observe all ordinances and Feast Days of the Jewish Ritual (Clarence Larkin, Dispensational Truth, 31).

Dispensationalists try to insist that the Sabbath is ceremonial in nature. Clarence Larkin states that the Law was divided between Moral, Civil, and Ceremonial. If the Moral law


26


of 10 commandments can be mutually excluded from the Civil and Ceremonial laws, and the 7th day Sabbath is within the moral law; then there is no justification to remove the 4th

commandment from one institution to the next? Though the Mosaic system of the three laws was jointly exhaustive, God placed the Sabbath in the 10 commandments as mutually exclusive from the other laws. Let us raise the question: What is the main difference between the moral and ceremonial laws? Notice the following illustration:

The Moral Law The Ceremonial Law

Is called the royal law. James 2: 8 Is called the law in ordinances. Eph. 2: 15Was spoken by God. Deut. 4: 12, 13 Was spoken by Moses Lev. 1: 1 - 3

Was written by God on tables of stone. Was the handwriting of ordinances.Ex. 24: 12 Col. 2: 14

Was written with the finger of God on Was written by Moses in a book. stone. Ex. 31: 18 2 Chron. 35: 12

Is to stand forever. Psalm 11: 7, 8 Was nailed to the cross. Col. 2: 14

Was not destroyed by Christ. Was abolished by Christ. Eph. 2: 15Matt. 5: 17

Was to be magnified by Christ. Was to be taken out of the way by Isaiah 42: 21 Christ. Col. 2: 14

Gives knowledge of sin. Was instituted in consequence of sin.Rom. 3: 20; 7: 7 Lev. 3 - 7

Was placed in the ark. Ex. 40: 20 Was placed in the side of the ark.1 Kings 8: 9; Heb. 9: 4 Deut. 31: 24 – 26

With such clarity, as is described by the preceding illustration, dispensationalists should have no problems in realizing that the Sabbath is not a ceremonial law, but yet they still insist the Sabbath is ceremonial. It must be emphasized, before proceeding any further on this matter, that dispensationalists, though they can mutually exclude the laws in citations to clarify points of theological interest; they visualize the ceremonial and moral laws as only one Jewish law jointly exhaustive. This is emphasized by Martin where he says, “We do not mean that the law has no moral and ceremonial aspects, for it has, but they are only aspects, not separate codes or units” (Kingdom Of The Cults, 486). We do not argue that the ceremonial and moral laws were jointly exhaustive within the Mosaic covenant. However, that these laws were not mutually exclusive within the jointly exhaustive system of law, we do argue against; for it was God Himself that ordained the distinctions noted in the preceding illustration.

That contextual relationships with the word “law” distinguish between the moral law and the ceremonial law can be visualized in Matthew 5:17 – 29. When Jesus said that he did not come to do away with the law, He was speaking of the 10 commandments,

By D. S. Farris27

27


for he deals with issues that revolve around adultery and murder—two commandments out of the 10. The context of the chapter demands that Jesus was speaking about the 10-commandment law. The same principle can be applied in Romans 3, for Paul speaks of the law that reveals sin; the 10 commandments reveal sin. This is why, in verse 31, Paul emphasizes that the law is not abolished. Martin argues that such distinctions are fictitious:

If, however, the ceremonial law and the Decalogue are inextricably bound together, and if both are referred to as “the law,” the distinction which the Adventists and others make between them is fictitious. To prove this is to nullify their interpretation concerning “the moral law” (Kingdom Of The Cults, 486).

If there are no distinctions between the moral and the ceremonial laws, as dispensationalists maintain, then the Bible contradicts itself; for Ephesians 2:15 and Colossians 2:14 say the law is abolished, while Matthew 5:17 – 19 and Romans 3:31 say the law is not abolished. Dispensationalists—through their methods of interpretation—would have us believe that the Bible says: “The law is abolished”; “the law is not abolished”; “the law is abolished”; “the law is not abolished”; and on and on. We have emphasized from the beginning of this course that dispensationalism is a system of self-contradictions. Dispensationalism by nature is a systematic methodology—superimposed on the Bible—that creates a superfluity of oxymorons. As the “Four pillars” were clearly revealed to be a complete contradiction to, not only to the Bible, but also within dispensationalism itself, so it is with the issue of the law. Here is the problem with dispensationalism:

Dispensationalism THE BIBLE

The Rapture is secret The Rapture is visible Christ’s second coming is split in two There is one phaseThe Day of the Lord is different from the Day of Christ Both Days are identicalThere are two first resurrections There is only oneThere are two New Covenants There is only one There are two gospels There is only oneThere are two distinct thrones There is only oneThere are two kingdoms There is only one. The Jews are God’s chosen people Distinctions are abolishedThere are two seeds of promise There is only oneThe Sabbath is done away Not one iota passed awayThe ceremonial laws are to be reinstituted. They are abolished

What is amazing is the fact that dispensational theology says that the moral and ceremonial laws are one law…abolished by Christ; but yet, they insist that the ceremonial law is to be reinstituted during the millennium for national Israel. This is a bald face contradiction to Colossians 2:14 and Ephesians 2:15. In other words, dispensational theology juggles the scriptures to suit its superimposed design for Zionism. Not only do dispensationalists—by asserting that the laws have no distinctions—make the scriptures say, “the law is abolished”; “the law is not abolished”; the “law is abolished”; “the law is not abolished,” but they go even further into jugglery and blatantly contradict Colossians 2:14 and Ephesians 2:15 and say that the very laws, which Paul said are abolished, will


28


be reinstituted; and moreover, dispensationalists take the law (Matthew 5:17 – 19) that Jesus said would not be abolished, and abolish it. In all truth, this worthless Gnostic theology has only one real purpose—to eliminate the Sabbath—and they “dance between the rain drops”—even when the contradictions are glaring.

It is a fact that God’s moral law of 10 commandments is not to be abolished by any human hand. When God took the blue stone from His throne and—with His finger—wrote the 10 commandments, He was writing a perpetual law that could not be abolished. Neither are we to imagine that, some how, the fourth commandment has been chiseled out of the Decalogue. We agree that the ceremonial laws have been abolished (Col. 2:14; Eph. 2:15), but not the moral law (Matt. 5:17 – 19). Martin’s argument, “The Adventist insistence that there are two separate codes of laws, the moral and the ceremonial, and the former is in effect today and the latter was abolished at the cross, finds, we believe, no exegetical or theological basis in Scripture,”(Kingdom Of The Cults, 493) is obliterated by Paul himself:

Ephesians 2:15 having abolished in His flesh the enmity, that is, the law of commandments contained in ordinances, so as to create in Himself one new man from the two, thus making peace,

Colossians 2:14 Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross.

The phrase “in ordinances” distinguishes—in a mutually exclusive framework—a distinction between certain laws. Therefore, categorically, we must conclude that the ceremonial, shadow, or ordinance laws are distinct from the moral law. This logical conclusion eliminates the idiotic result of: “The law is Abolished”; “The law is not abolished,” an outcome—in the hand of the “no law” theorists—which makes the Bible a grotesque monstrosity. In all the main themes of Scripture, dispensationalists contradict the plain utterances. Throughout this course we have demonstrated this fact, and so it is with the issues of the Law and the Sabbath.

Shadow And Ordinance As Terms

There are 2 terminologies—classifications—that contain within their brackets the Ceremonial laws: The words’ “ordinances” and “shadow.” Let us now define these terms. Exodus 25:9, 40 tell us that the sanctuary materials were made after a pattern (Heb. Tabnith, “Form, plan, figure, image”). We learn in Hebrews 8:5 that the Old Testament sanctuary was an example (Gr. Hupodeigma, “Imitation, representation, figure, copy”) and shadow (Gr. Skia, “An image cast by an object and representing the form of that object”) of heavenly things. In essence, a shadow is something that serves as an image of a future reality. A shadow—being an image—finds its consummation or finality once that reality has come into being. The whole Mosaic sanctuary service—with its ordinances, laws, and sacrifices pointed to Jesus. When Jesus died on the cross, the Jewish nation no longer needed to sacrifice animals, for the animal sacrifices were a shadow—an image—that found their consummation at Calvary. Now, with this in mind, let us underscore which law was a shadow.

By D. S. Farris29

29


Hebrews 10:1 For the law, having a shadow of the good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with these same sacrifices, which they offer continually year by year, make those who approach perfect. 2 For then would they not have ceased to be offered? For the worshipers, once purified, would have had no more consciousness of sins. 3 But in those sacrifices there is a reminder of sins every year. 4 For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and goats could take away sins. 5 Therefore, when He came into the world, He said: "Sacrifice and offering You did not desire, But a body You have prepared for Me. 6 In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin You had no pleasure. 7 Then I said, 'Behold, I have come -- In the volume of the book it is written of Me -- To do Your will, O God.' " 8 Previously saying, "Sacrifice and offering, burnt offerings, and offerings for sin You did not desire, nor had pleasure in them" (which are offered according to the law), 9 then He said, "Behold, I have come to do Your will, O God." He takes away the first that He may establish the second.

The commandments: “thou shalt have no other gods before me”; “thou shalt not make graven images”; “thou shalt not kill”; “thou shalt not steal”; and ect cannot be described as shadows that reach an end at the cross. These laws are the basis of the Christian faith. Indeed there is a distinction between the 10 commandments and the shadow laws. Therefore, in light of the fact that the Sabbath was placed by God—not Moses—into the 10 commandments, perspicuously shows that it is not ceremonial in nature but moral in nature.

Ceremonial Sabbath Issues

Now that we have discovered that the Moral and Ceremonial laws are ultimately different, we can now proceed to deal with the issue of the Sabbath. Dispensationalists believe that the 7th day Sabbath no longer applies today, for they believe that the Sabbath was a ceremonial law. One of the main scriptures that is used for this argument is Colossians 2:16, 17 which says, “So let no one judge you in food or in drink, or regarding a festival or a new moon or sabbaths, which are a shadow of things to come, but the substance is of Christ.”

Undoubtedly, Colossians 2:14, 20 – 23 indicate that the shadow or ordinance law is the law in question in this chapter. Could it be that the Sabbath or Sabbaths (plurality or singularity is irrelevant, for God has used plurality for the 7th day Sabbath—Ezekiel 20:12, 20 and singularity for the ceremonial Sabbaths Lev. 23) in question here belong to the shadow laws that were abolished. The context of the chapter demands this outlook; moreover, Colossians 2:16 actually connect “festivity” and “new moons” with the Sabbaths in question. Let us ask: Are there Sabbaths of festivity that revolve around the new moons?

NKJ Leviticus 23:

1 And the LORD spoke to Moses, saying,


30


2 "Speak to the children of Israel, and say to them: 'The feasts of the LORD, which you shall proclaim to be holy convocations, these are My feasts.

The Seventh Day Sabbath

3 Six days shall work be done, but the seventh day is a Sabbath of solemn rest, a holy convocation. You shall do no work on it; it is the Sabbath of the LORD in all your dwellings.

Note: First God set in perspective the Seventh day Sabbath before explaining the additional ones.

Passover and Feast of Unleavened Bread

4 These are the feasts of the LORD, holy convocations which you shall proclaim at their appointed times. 5 'On the fourteenth day of the first month at twilight is the LORD's Passover. 6 'And on the fifteenth day of the same month is the Feast of Unleavened Bread to the LORD; seven days you must eat unleavened bread. 7 'On the first day you shall have a holy convocation; you shall do no customary work on it. 8 'But you shall offer an offering made by fire to the LORD for seven days. The seventh day shall be a holy convocation; you shall do no customary work on it.' "

Firstfruits (Fall harvests)

9 And the LORD spoke to Moses, saying, 10 "Speak to the children of Israel, and say to them: 'When you come into the land which I give to you, and reap its harvest, then you shall bring a sheaf of the firstfruits of your harvest to the priest. 11 'He shall wave the sheaf before the LORD, to be accepted on your behalf; on the day after the Sabbath the priest shall wave it. 12 'And you shall offer on that day, when you wave the sheaf, a male lamb of the first year, without blemish, as a burnt offering to the LORD. 13 'Its grain offering shall be two-tenths of an ephah of fine flour mixed with oil, an offering made by fire to the LORD, for a sweet aroma; and its drink offering shall be of wine, one-fourth of a hin. 14 'You shall eat neither bread nor parched grain nor fresh grain until the same day that you have brought an offering to your God; it shall be a statute forever throughout your generations in all your dwellings.

The Feast of Pentecost

By D. S. Farris31

31


15 ' And you shall count for yourselves from the day after the Sabbath, from the day that you brought the sheaf of the wave offering: seven Sabbaths shall be completed. 16 'Count fifty days to the day after the seventh Sabbath; then you shall offer a new grain offering to the LORD. 17 'You shall bring from your dwellings two wave loaves of two-tenths of an ephah. They shall be of fine flour; they shall be baked with leaven. They are the firstfruits to the LORD. 18 'And you shall offer with the bread seven lambs of the first year, without blemish, one young bull, and two rams. They shall be as a burnt offering to the LORD, with their grain offering and their drink offerings, an offering made by fire for a sweet aroma to the LORD. 19 'Then you shall sacrifice one kid of the goats as a sin offering, and two male lambs of the first year as a sacrifice of a peace offering. 20 'The priest shall wave them with the bread of the firstfruits as a wave offering before the LORD, with the two lambs. They shall be holy to the LORD for the priest. 21 'And you shall proclaim on the same day that it is a holy convocation to you. You shall do no customary work on it. It shall be a statute forever in all your dwellings throughout your generations. 22 ' When you reap the harvest of your land, you shall not wholly reap the corners of your field when you reap, nor shall you gather any gleaning from your harvest. You shall leave them for the poor and for the stranger: I am the LORD your God.' "

Blowing Of Trumpets

23 Then the LORD spoke to Moses, saying, 24 "Speak to the children of Israel, saying: 'In the seventh month, on the first day of the month, you shall have a sabbath-rest, a memorial of blowing of trumpets, a holy convocation. 25 'You shall do no customary work on it; and you shall offer an offering made by fire to the LORD.' "

Day of Atonement

26 And the LORD spoke to Moses, saying: 27 "Also the tenth day of this seventh month shall be the Day of Atonement. It shall be a holy convocation for you; you shall afflict your souls, and offer an offering made by fire to the LORD. 28 "And you shall do no work on that same day, for it is the Day of Atonement, to make atonement for you before the LORD your God. 29 "For any person who is not afflicted in soul on that same day shall be cut off from his people. 30 "And any person who does any work on that same day, that person I will destroy from among his people.


32


31 "You shall do no manner of work; it shall be a statute forever throughout your generations in all your dwellings. 32 "It shall be to you a sabbath of solemn rest, and you shall afflict your souls; on the ninth day of the month at evening, from evening to evening, you shall celebrate your sabbath."

Feast of Tabernacles

33 Then the LORD spoke to Moses, saying, 34 "Speak to the children of Israel, saying: 'The fifteenth day of this seventh month shall be the Feast of Tabernacles for seven days to the LORD. 35 'On the first day there shall be a holy convocation. You shall do no customary work on it. 36 'For seven days you shall offer an offering made by fire to the LORD. On the eighth day you shall have a holy convocation, and you shall offer an offering made by fire to the LORD. It is a sacred assembly, and you shall do no customary work on it. 37 'These are the feasts of the LORD which you shall proclaim to be holy convocations, to offer an offering made by fire to the LORD, a burnt offering and a grain offering, a sacrifice and drink offerings, everything on its day – 38 'besides the Sabbaths of the LORD, besides your gifts, besides all your vows, and besides all your freewill offerings which you give to the LORD.

Spring Harvests

39 ' Also on the fifteenth day of the seventh month, when you have gathered in the fruit of the land, you shall keep the feast of the LORD for seven days; on the first day there shall be a sabbath-rest, and on the eighth day a sabbath-rest. 40 'And you shall take for yourselves on the first day the fruit of beautiful trees, branches of palm trees, the boughs of leafy trees, and willows of the brook; and you shall rejoice before the LORD your God for seven days. 41 'You shall keep it as a feast to the LORD for seven days in the year. It shall be a statute forever in your generations. You shall celebrate it in the seventh month. 42 'You shall dwell in booths for seven days. All who are native Israelites shall dwell in booths, 43 'that your generations may know that I made the children of Israel dwell in booths when I brought them out of the land of Egypt: I am the LORD your God.' " 44 So Moses declared to the children of Israel the feasts of the LORD.

The Sabbath or Sabbaths of festivity in Colossians 2:16—and in light of the contextual framework of the chapter in distinguishing shadow or ordinance as the criteria for

By D. S. Farris33

33


membership—indicates that Paul could have been dealing with the Judaizers (or a mystical sect like the Essenes). These were Jewish Christian converts who—after accepting Jesus—continued to observe the ceremonial laws and Sabbaths. In Romans 14:1 – 6, Paul was dealing with a similar problem. It is without doubt that—according to Leviticus 23—special diets were connected with the festival Sabbaths. In Romans 14 we have both concepts being discussed. The Sabbath of Creation cannot be rightly applied as a ceremonial ordinance. Why? Genesis. 2:1 – 4 and Exodus 20: 8 – 11 indicate that the Sabbath was instituted before the fall of man. The whole ceremonial law came as a result of sin.

Dispensationalists are in great error, for the Sabbath was an institution and a sign of God’s creatorship. The ceremonial laws were instituted in consequence of sin. The ceremonial laws with the ceremonial Sabbaths are not homogeneous with the Sabbath of creation. Dispensationalists are taking an institution, such as the Sabbath of creation, and removing it from its place of essence. The Sabbath pointed to God’s perfect work in the creation, before sin ever came into the world. The Sabbath also points to the second creation, which will be perfect (Isaiah 66). The two creations represent two works of perfection followed by the Sabbath as the sign of these perfections. Between the two creations, we have the work of redemption, which the Sabbath followed. When Jesus finished the work of redemption (John 19:30; 17:4) on Friday, He—in death—kept the Sabbath. On Sunday morning, Jesus resurrected to soon begin His work as High Priest in the heavenly sanctuary. The Lord Himself has always begun working on the first day of the week to rest on the seventh day. Dispensationalists take an institution that belongs to God’s perfect works, and they make it into an injunction for Judaism, and worse, an injunction that points to sin. Dispensationalists have this issue, like many other issues, the exact opposite of what it really is.

THE FALSE PROPHET PARALLELS ELIJAH

When Adventism, the movement of Revelation 10, was arising out of the earth (New World); the False Prophet ideological foundation was arising out of the sea (Europe). The Oxford Tractarian movement, a Jesuit operation, paved the way for the acceptance of Jesuit futurism among the clergy of European literalists who would soon abandon the historical approach to the 2,300 years of Daniel 8. In the West, after the bitter disappointment, Seventh Day Adventists were rising up as the movement who would prophecy, again, the meaning of the little book. The Oxford movement, along with the dispensational futurist system that came out of the Powerscourt Conference, was the inception of the Voice of the False Prophet. The dispensational system did not make tremendous gains until it was brought to the United States through C. I. Scofield. From 1910, when Scofield introduced the Jesuit system of futurism to the United States, to the present day, this system has become the popular system of interpretation among many evangelicals.

Why did God bring Adventism into being? He brought Adventism into being because of the prevailing system of sun worship that exists in the world. The Papacy is completely a sun worshipping system. At the same time, both Revelation 3 and 17 tell us that the Papacy has daughters. Who are the daughters? The daughters are those who originally came out of Papal Rome for the sake of truth, but did not continue to gain more


34


light, and as a consequence, have again—through Jesuitism—been subverted back to the Papacy. God foresaw that after the three and a half years of prophetic rule under the Jezebel system of Popery, there would be a contest on spiritual, worldwide Mt. Carmel. God rose up the Advent movement, as the Elijah message, to lead the world out of sun worship. What did the devil do? He immediately—during the time of the rising up of the Elijah message—began to corrupt evangelicals into a system that would—latter towards the end of time—be used as a mechanism to justify the Papacy in the face of Elijah.

Elijah is telling the world the following: that the Papacy is the Antichrist and the representative of the Dragon system from Babylon; that the antitypical Day of Atonement commenced in 1844; that the antitypical Day of Judgment of the saints has begun; that obedience to the perfect Law of Liberty is the fruit of Justification by faith; that the 7th

day Sabbath is the outward sign or the Seal of the Gospel experience in the lives of believers.

On the other hand, the False Prophet is telling the world the following: that the Papacy is not the Antichrist; that the Jesuit systems of interpretation are correct; that the law is abolished; that Sunday—666 day—has God’s approval through the testimony of early Roman Christianity; that the ecumenical movement with Rome in the third millennium is the only way Christendom can overcome the world.

Note: At This Point Study Chapter 12 Diagram Carfully.

The preceding diagram demonstrates that as the Movement of Revelation 10 was coming into being, which is the Elijah Movement, the False Prophet Movement was coming into being as well. As we saw in the chapter 9, the United States represents the two-horned Beast who rose up out of dry land in the time frame when the Papacy was receiving her wound. We have already identified the fact that evangelicals are working with the Papacy in politics. So, False Prophet, as a terminology, clearly points to the religious aspect of the United States, which, though is implicated to the U.S., does extend throughout the world; for the counterfeit religion of the False Prophet is going throughout the world just as the Elijah message is.

Knowing these facts, we ask: Is it astonishing how the dispensational movement parallels the Advent movement? Is it not interesting how in 1901 and 1906—prior to the making of the Scofield Bible (1910)—American Pentecostalism came into being, a movement that would inevitably become the spiritual authentication of the Jesuit system of futurism and other counterfeit doctrines. Is it coincidental that shortly after the Scofield, Jesuit system came to America that in 1929 the Papacy began its healing process? Is it coincidental that the Vatican ecumenical conferences came into being after 1929, while a resurgence of Neo-Pentecostalism came into being affecting both Catholics and Protestants—leading into ecumenical ties? Is it coincidental that from the time of President Regan to the present day, ecumenism has increased to tremendous heights—after the fact that dispensationalism and Pentecostalism had time to germinate between 1929 to the present day? Is it coincidental that after the Vatican and American alliance was formed in 1984, the CC was formed in 1989 with the purpose of getting both Evangelicals and Catholics to work together to change government policy? We say this with great emphasis: THESE THINGS ARE NOT COINCIDENTAL.

In the preceding chart we see in a “nut shell” a panoramic view of the germination

By D. S. Farris35

35


of the False Prophet. What took place in the Irvingite Movement between 1830 – 1834 with tongues, and how tongues authenticated dispensational futurism, served as a prototype of what would take place in the two-horned Beast (America). When Revelation 13:13 speaks about the fire that deceives men through miracles and causes the world to follow the first Beast, this points to the false latter rain of the Charismatic movement—intimately connected with ecumenism, which leads back to Rome. Adventism, as the antitypical Elijah, is faced by worldwide Mt. Carmel where, this time, fire (counterfeit Holy Spirit) appears to be brought down from heaven by the Baal priests. Adventism, as the antitypical Elijah, will be used by God to usher in the genuine latter rain. This will be done right before and during the final harvest, a harvest that will bring many out of spiritual Babylon.

Conclusion

Adventism is the Elijah movement that exposes the sun worship in Christendom and calls the world to come out of the Dragon (Paganism in its own form) and the Beast (the Papacy). Dispensational futurism is the False Prophet Movement that inadvertently tells the world that it is okay to stay in Rome and to continue in sun worship. We ask people to open their eyes on this matter. Futurism was developed to destroy the identification of the Papacy as the Antichrist; dispensationalists advocate this false doctrine. Zionism is a tool of the Jesuit Order to create geopolitical situations for the New World Order; dispensationalists are supporting this deception with Zionist theology. The Papacy thinks that she can change God’s law; dispensationalists inadvertently support this. Everything Rome has done to thwart God’s truth, dispensationalism justifies in an elusive way—pretending to differ from Rome, but in reality, serves as a bridge back to Rome.

One may ask the question: What about non-dispensational evangelicals who work with the ecumenical movement, are they apart of the False Prophet? Perhaps, however, it cannot be emphasized enough that dispensationalism is the main component of the deception. One may ask another question: “What about the Mormons, Jehovah Witnesses, and other false churches in Christendom, don’t they play a part too?” Do they play a part? We look for the movement that has had the greatest impact on America with her relation with Rome. The Dispensational political machine meets this mark, and the majority of evangelicals in America are supporting this delusion. The branches of “so called” false churches, just cited, play a very insignificant role in comparison to the Evangelical and Catholic coalition. What is extremely amazing is the fact that while many evangelicals are excoriating Jehovah Witnesses, Mormons, and others as being cults, they themselves form the greatest deception within the framework of the trinity of evil. They appear to represent the gospel, but when one digs deep into the underlying issues—behind the threshold of appearances—it becomes obvious where they stand. For example, the book The Kingdom Of The Cults, written by Walter Martin lists and elucidates on the religions just mentioned as being cults. But yet this book does not mention Popery or Catholicism and its ties with sun worship. How is it that a book of this magnitude can dismiss, from elucidation, a monstrosity such as Rome. Papal Rome is the Beast and the system of 666, yet we cannot find this truth in the Kingdom of the Cults. How sad! How really sad! That men of the intellects and sincerity of W. Martin, when writing a book about cults,


36


can leave out the largest and most dangerous occult system in the world. Many evangelicals have been paralyzed because of the Jesuit systems of prophetic interpretation; they are not perceiving the big danger in Rome and they are not ascertaining the part which they themselves are playing in prophecy. The “so called” orthodox churches can sit all day long, 365 days a year telling everyone to avoid the J W and Mormon Churches, but yet, if their doctrines and political aspirations are in accordance with the Beast, what purpose does such judgment serve?

Works Cited

Froom, Leroy. Prophetic Faith Of Our Fathers (Washington D.C.: Review And Herald, 1946), Vol. 3

Froom, Leroy. Prophetic Faith Of Our Fathers (Washington D.C.: Review And Herald, 1954), Vol. 4

Larkin, Clarence. Dispensational Truth (Philadelphia, Pa.: Clarence Larkin Est. 1918, 20)

Martin, Walter. Kingdom Of The Cults (Minneapolis Minnesota: Bethany House Pub. 1965, 1977, 1996)

Riggs, Ralph M. Dispensational Studies (Springfield, Mo: Gospel Pub. 1977)

Scofield, Cyrus I. The Scofield Reference Bible (New York Oxford University Press, 1909, 1917)

Return to Prophetic Toolchest Main Page

By D. S. Farris37

37

http://hearingthetruth.org/

http://hearingthetruth.org/

Documents

Prophetic Tool Chest Chapter 12