MORNING SPIRITUAL DIARY FOR 3/28/2026
9:30 AM
I continue this morning to quote
from John MacArthur’s commentary intitled “Excursus: Why Every Self-respecting Calvinist Must Be a
Premillennialist.”
“How about James, the head of the
Jerusalem church? Was he amillennial in
his view? Acts 15—“James answered,
saying, ‘Brethren listen to me. Simon
has related how God first concerned Himself about taking from among the
Gentiles a people for His name. With
this the words of the Prophets agree, just as it is written,” After these
things I will return, and I will rebuild the tabernacle of David which has
fallen, and I will rebuild its ruins, and I will restore it, so that the rest
of mankind may seek the Lord, and all the Gentiles who are called by My name,
says the Lord, who makes these things known from long ago” ‘ “(vv. 13-18).
“The acceptance of the Gentiles is
not the cancellation of promises to Israel.
After Gentile conversion, after the times of the Gentiles are over, God
will rebuild the tabernacle of David that is fallen—rebuild its ruins and
restore it. Davidic covenant promises
and Messianic promises will be fulfilled.
“Maybe the writer of Hebrews was an amillennialist:
“When God made the promise to Abraham, since He could swear by no one
greater, He swore by Himself, saying, ‘I will surely bless you and I
will surely multiply you.’” (Heb. 6:13)—I will, I will; no hesitation. And he calls on our understanding of
swearing. “Men swear by one greater
than themselves, and with them an oath given as confirmation is an end of every
dispute. In the same way God, desiring
even more to show to the heirs of the promise the unchangeableness of His
purpose, interposed with and oath” (vv. 16-17).
God swears or makes an oath.
And “it is impossible,’ the next verse says, “for God to lie.”
“Maybe the apostle Paul was the first
amillennialist: “What advantage has
the Jew? Or what is the benefit of
circumcision? Great in every
respect. First of all, that they were
entrusted with the oracles of God. What
then? If some did not believe, their
unbelief will not nullify the faithfulness of God. Will it? May it never be!” (Rom. 3:1-4). And this is where Paul [the amillennialist]
would have said, “Absolutely…absolutely; it nullifies the promise of God; unquestionably,
it nullifies the promise of God.” But it
doesn’t say that.
“Romans 9:6-8 says, “But it is
not as though the Word of God has failed.
For they are not all Israel who are descended from Israel [that is to
say, they’re not all true Israel, that is believers]; nor are they all children
because they are Abraham’s descendants, but ‘through Isaac your descendants
will be named. ‘ That is, it is not the
children of the flesh who are children of God, but children of promise are
regarded as descendants.” There are
children of God has elected to fulfill His promise in. And He goes on to describe it, saying
something as blatant as this: Jacob I
loved,” verse 13, “but Esau I
hated.” Verse 15: “ I will have
mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have
compassion.” Verse 16: “It does
not depend on the man who wills or the man who runs, but on God who has mercy.” Verse 18: “He has mercy on whom He
desires, and He hardens whom He desires.”
This is back to the whole idea of sovereignty again.
“Just because there are some Jews
who don’t believe does not nullify the faithfulness of God. Just because there are some that God chooses,
doesn’t mean that He’s not going to choose a whole duly constituted generation of
Jews to fulfill His promises.
“And then perhaps most notable,
Romans 11:26; All Israel will be saved.”
How can we interpret that?
One way. Someone tells me that’s
not Israel? Where in the text does it
say it’s not Israel? I would understand
if it said, “And God has cancelled His promises to Israel.” But verses 26-27 say, All Israel will be
saved; just as it is written, ‘The deliver will come from Zion, He will remove
ungodliness from Jacob. This is My
covenant with them, when I take away their sins.’”
“Yes, they are enemies at the present time. But that is for the sake of the Gentiles,
verse 29, “the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable,” which
brings us back to where we started.
“If it depended on the Jews to obey
on their own, it was impossible from the start.
Only the One who made the promise can enable the obedience that is connected
to the fulfillment of the promise.
“So when Jonathan Edwards wrote
this: “Promises that were made by the
prophets to the people of Israel concerning their prosperity and glory are
fulfilled in the Christian church according to their proper intent,” I say, “where
did he get that? Where did that come
from?” It didn’t come from any passage
that I can find.”
“Let me just conclude with some
effects. I’d suggest for you reading, Israel
and the Church by Ronald Diprose. It
first appeared in Italian as a Ph. D. dissertation and has no connection to
traditional dispensationalism. It’s a
really, really fine work on replacement theology. It shows the effect of this idea upon the
church of the Dark Ages, explaining how the church went from the New Testament concept
of the church to the sacerdotal, sacramental, institutional system of the Dark
Ages that we know as Roman Catholicism. Diprose lays much of that at the feet
of replacement theology, which rises out of Augustine and a few before him.
“Where did the church ever come up
with altars? There’s no altar in the New
Testament. Where did the church ever
come up with sacrifices? Where did the
church ever come up with a parallel sign to circumcision? Where did the church ever come up with a
priesthood? Where did the church ever
come up with ceremony and ritual and symbolism?
Where did the church ever come up with the idea that we should reintroduce
mystery by speaking in a language that the people there couldn’t
understand? And we replace preaching
with ritual.
“From the formation of the church in
those early centuries to the system of Roman Catholicism, all the trappings fit
Old Testament Judaism. And the hierarchical,
institutional, nonpersonal, nonorganic, sacerdotal approach to the church,
Diprose traces largely to the influence of causing the church to be the new
Israel. Replacement theology justifies
bringing in all the trappings of Judaism.
“Another effect of replacement
theology is the damage it does to Jewish evangelism. Here’s a little scenario. Someone is talking to a Jew and saying, “Jesus
is the Messiah.”
“Really; where’s the kingdom?
“Oh, it’s here.”
“Oh, it is? Well why are we being killed all the
time? Why are we being persecuted and
why don’t we have the land that was promised to us? And why isn’t the Messiah reigning
in Jerusalem, and why isn’t the peace and joy and gladness dominating the
world? And why isn’t the desert
blooming?”
“O no, you don’t understand. All that’s not going to happen. You see, the problem is you’re not God’s
people anymore. We are.”
“Oh, I see. But this is the kingdom of Jews are being
killed and hated and Jerusalem is under siege.
This is the kingdom? If this is
the kingdom, Jesus is not the Messiah.
Can’t be. It’s ludicrous.”
“No matter how many wonderful
Jewish-Christian relationships we try to have with rabbis, this is a huge bone
in the throat. Why can’t Jesus be the
Messiah? Because this isn’t the kingdom. Unless we can say to a Jew, “God will keep
every single promise He made to you and Jesus is your Messiah. But look at Psalm 22, Isaiah 53, and
Zechariah 12:10 and understand that He had to come and die to ratify the New
covenant before He could forgive sin—but the kingdom is coming.”
“That we have a chance to
communicate. The rest doesn’t make
sense. Now if we get election right—the divine,
sovereign, gracious, unconditional, unilateral, irrevocable election—then we
get God right. And we get Israel
right. And we get eschatology
right. And guess what?—then we can just
open our Bibles and preach our hearts out on the text and say what is
says. We don’t have to scramble around
and find some bizarre interpretation.
“Get it right and God is
glorified. Get it right and Christ is
exalted. Get it right and the Holy
Spirit is honored. Get it right and Scripture
is clear. Get it right and the greatest
historical illustration of God’s work in the world is visible. Get it right and the meaning of mystery in
the New Testament is maintained. Get it
right and normal language is intact—Scripture wasn’t written for mystics. Get it right and chronology of prophetic
literature is intact. Get it right and shut
out imagination from exegesis. Get it
right and the historical worldview is complete.
Get it right and the practical benefit of eschatology is released for
our people. Get it right.
“Kingdom theology of the eschaton is
the only view that honors sovereign, electing grace; honors the truthfulness of
God’s promises; honors the teaching of the Old Testament prophets and the
teaching of Jesus and the New Testament writers, which will allow Christ to be
honored as supreme ruler over His creation, now temporarily in the hands of
Satan. And the earthly, millennial kingdom, established at Christ’s return, is
the only and necessary bridge from temporary human history to eternal divine
glory. Let’s make our churches second
coming churches and make our lives second coming lives.”
Well this is the end of this very informative
sermon, and it is my prayer that all who read it will be better off for reading
it, and that it will bring honor and glory to the Lord Jesus Christ. This evening I will begin my study on the
second chapter of the gospel of Luke.
Spiritual
meaning for my life today: Trust the Lord to use what I write
on my Spiritual Diaries to bring glory to the Lord.
My
Steps of Faith for Today: I trust the Lord that as He sends
this sermon around the world that His Son, the Lord Jesus Christ will be
honored. 3/28/2026 11:10 AM
No comments:
Post a Comment