The Scofield Reference Bible

Posted on February 11, 2020 by russellmckinney

C.I. Scofield was one of the most influential Bible teachers America has ever produced. Of all the study Bibles and reference Bibles ever printed, none have had the impact of his Scofield Reference Bible. The work first appeared in 1909, and then Scofield himself, with the help of a committee, revised it in 1917. Since then millions of copies of it have been sold around the world. A new revision, called The New Scofield Reference Bible, was published in 1967 and has proven to be popular itself, but some Christians still prefer the original edition.

Several features made the Scofield Reference Bible such a hit. First, it provided commentary notes — Scofield called them “helps” — to aid the reader in understanding what he or she was reading. These “helps” included word definitions, doctrinal summaries, etc. While this type of feature is quite common in Bibles today, it definitely was not in the early 1900s. Second, the Scofield Bible featured a cross-referencing system that enabled the reader to trace certain Biblical topics throughout the pages of scripture. Like following the links of a chain, the reader could turn to passage after passage and find out what each passage had to say about the same topic. Third, the work also included Archbishop James Ussher’s system of dating the years of Biblical history.

Still, as important as these features were, what created the most buzz about the Scofield Reference Bible was its inclusion of two controversial teachings. First, Scofield was an advocate of the “gap theory” interpretation of Genesis 1:1-2. This theory holds that the earth of Genesis 1:1 was as God originally intended, complete with a pre-Adamic race, but that something happened — i.e. the fall of Satan — that ruined that earth and left it as the decimated wasteland described in Genesis 1:2. According to Scofield, this ruined earth existed in its wrecked state for untold eons of times, perhaps many millions of years, before God went to work reconstructing it. Consequently, the Scofield Reference Bible taught that the days of the creation week as recorded in Genesis 1:3-31 are not so much the days of “creation” as they are the days of “recreation” or “restoration.”

The second controversial teaching the Scofield Reference Bible promoted was “dispensationalism.” According to this teaching, while God always remains the same, He chooses to work in different ways in human history to accomplish His plans. Scofield called the various eras of these differing ways “dispensations” and listed seven such eras: the dispensation of Innocence (Genesis 1:1-3:7); the dispensation of Conscience/Moral Responsiblity (Genesis 3:8-8:22); the dispensation of Human Government (Genesis 9:1-11:32); the dispensation of Promise (Genesis 12:1-Exodus 19:25); the dispensation of Law (Exodus 20:1-Acts 2:4); the dispensation of Grace/The Church (Acts 2:4-Revelation 20:3); and the dispensation of the Millennial Kingdom (Revelation 20:4-6).

It was Scofield’s “dispensationalism” that prolifically introduced the evangelical world to the ideas that God isn’t finished with the nation of Israel and that one day Jesus will visibly return to walk this earth again and establish His millennial reign wherein He will reign over the earth for 1,000 years from His throne in Jerusalem. The latter teaching is known as premillennialism. Also, as part of Scofield’s whole approach to prophecy, his reference Bible included J.N. Darby’s teaching concerning the pre-tribulation Rapture of the church.

Nowadays, teachings such as dispensationalism, the premillennial return of Jesus, and the pre-tribulation Rapture of the church are commonplace, having been made well known by noted Bible teachers such as Harry Ironside, John Walvoord, Charles Ryrie, J. Vernon McGee, Tim Lahaye, David Jeremiah, John MacArthur, Jimmy Deyoung, and a whole host of others. But make no mistake, it was the Scofield Reference Bible that established that entire line of interpretation as solid and reputable and set the stage for such best-selling books as Hal Lindsay’s The Late, Great Planet Earth and the entire Left Behind series.

I myself teach the dispensational/premillennial/pre-tribulation Rapture line of interpretation, and while I agree with many others that C.I. Scofield’s “gap theory” take on Genesis chapter 1 isn’t correct, I can still appreciate the man’s work and how it changed the landscape of American theology. It’s not an exaggeration to say that the Scofield Reference Bible invented the modern-day “study Bible” and in so doing paved the way for the vast assortment of such Bibles that are on the market today. So, if you have any kind of study Bible on your shelf, you owe a debt of gratitude to C.I. Scofield. Needless to say, he poured countless hours of work and study into producing his Bible, and just as needless to say, God rewarded his efforts in monumental ways the waves of which continue to roll today.

Posted in Bible Study, Christ's Second Coming, Christ's Return, Prophecy | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Old As Methuselah

Posted on February 8, 2020 by russellmckinney

So all the days of Methuselah were nine hundred and sixty-nine years, and he died. (Genesis 5:27, N.K.J.V.)

Have you ever heard the saying, “He’s old as Methuselah?” If you are old enough yourself (pun intended), you probably have. But did you know that Methuselah’s life was all wrapped up in a certain prophecy?

Before I get to the prophecy, though, I should probably say something about how those folks who lived before the flood of Noah were able to live such long lives (Genesis 5:1-32): Adam’s 930 years, Seth’s 912 years, Enosh’s 905 years, Cainan’s 910 years, Mahalalel’s 895 years, and Jared’s 962 years. The explanation almost certainly involves the “firmament” (K.J.V., N.K.J.V.) that is mentioned in Genesis 1:6-8. (For the record, other translations go with the word “expanse” (N.A.S.B., H.C.S.B., E.S.V., C.S.B.), “dome” (N.R.S.V.), or “vault” (N.I.V.) rather than “firmament.”)

When God first created the earth on Day 1 of the creation week, the planet was completely covered in water (Genesis 1:1-2). Obviously God had created all that water simultaneously with creating the planet itself. Later on Day 1 (Genesis 1:3-5) He created light — a light source different than the sun, which wouldn’t be created until Day 4 — to separate the light (Day) from the darkness (Night).

Then came Day 2. On that day God cut a firmament (expanse, dome, vault) right through those deep waters that were covering planet earth (Genesis 1:6-7). The waters that got caught under the firmament were left to cover the earth and become the planet’s ocean waters after God gathered them together and allowed the dry land (which had been there all along, buried under all that water) to appear (Genesis 1:9-10). As for the waters that got trapped above the firmament, they were left to hang up there in the earth’s troposphere (the lowest region of the earth’s atmosphere, extending upward from the earth approximately 6 miles) or perhaps in its stratosphere (the next highest region, extending upward approximately 33 miles). The Bible doesn’t specifically describe God converting all that water up there into some type of vaporous form, but many believe that He did.

What this great atmospheric canopy of water would have done was provide a protective shield for the earth. As such, it would have filtered out ultraviolet radiations and cosmic rays from outer space. Additionally, it would have turned the earth into something of a global greenhouse that probably maintained a uniformly pleasant temperature all over the world. There would have been no great air-mass movements either, a fact that might have prevented the hydrologic cycle that produces our rains today from kick-starting. This could explain why it didn’t rain upon the earth before the flood of Noah (Genesis 2:4-6).

Whatever the exact set-up of the pre-flood earth was, it was surely very different than the one we now experience. All that changed, though, via the great flood. It was during that flood that God released all of that water that had been trapped above the firmament, and those waters poured down upon the earth as the rain of the flood. In Genesis 7:11, the Bible refers to this as “the windows of heaven” (K.J.V., N.K.J.V.) being opened. By coupling this idea up with Genesis 1:8, which says that God called the firmament “heaven,” we learn that during the great flood God opened the firmament and allowed all that water trapped above it to be released. This explains why the life spans in the post-flood world, a world with a starkly different climatology and environment, curtailed sharply very quickly.

But now let’s get back to Methuseleh. I wonder, do you know what his name literally means? The name consists of the Hebrew verbs muth, which means “die” or “dead,” and shalach, which means “sent.” Thus, the name means “When he dies, it shall be sent.” And what would be sent when Methuseleh died? Yep, you guessed it. By doing all the math that is provided to us by the dates, genealogies, and life spans recorded in Genesis chapters 1-5, we find that Methuselah died the same year the flood hit.

And isn’t it just like God to let a man whose very name carried such a prophecy live to be the oldest human being ever? God is so, so, so merciful, patient, and longsuffering with the human race, isn’t He? A couple of New Testament verses directly apply here, and I’d like to offer them as the close to this post. As you read them, try to let them become ingrained in your mind, so much so that you remember them the next time you hear someone say, “He’s old as Methuselah.”

…when once The Divine longsuffering waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared…” (1 Peter 3:20, N.K.J.V.)

The Lord is not slack concerning His promise as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance. (2 Peter 3:9, N.K.J.V.)

Posted in Creation, God's Love, God's Timing, God's Wrath, God's Judgment, God's Mercy, Prophecy | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Who Are the Preterists?

Posted on February 6, 2020 by russellmckinney

The word “preterism” finds its roots in the Latin word praeter, which means “past.” Thus, the preterist interpretation of The Revelation is that most of the book’s prophecies have already been fulfilled in the past. This makes preterists the opposing camp to futurists, who believe that most of the book’s prophecies remain to be fulfilled in future days.

And when, according to preterists, were those prophecies fulfilled? The answer is: in A.D. 70 when the Romans destroyed Jerusalem, burned the Jewish temple, and killed literally millions of Jews in the process. While there is a difference in the belief systems of “full” and “partial” preterists, preterists more or less believe that chapters 5-11 of The Revelation describe the early church’s victory over Judaism, chapters 12-19 describe its victory over pagan Rome, and chapters 20-22 describe its glory in light of these victories. As for the gruesome persecutions spoken of in such detail by the book, preterists assign those to the reigns of the Roman emperors Nero and Domitian. The full (hyper) preterist will even contend that Jesus returned at the time of the destruction of Jerusalem but that His return was not a physical one but, instead, one akin to God “visiting” certain Old Testament cities and kingdoms by raising up enemy armies to conquer them.

In keeping with this general approach to scripture, preterists also apply non-traditional definitions to other prophetic events. For example, to the preterist:

  • The “last days” spoken of in the New Testament refer to the final days of God’s covenant with Israel rather than the final days of human history as we know it.
  • The resurrection of the dead is the resurrection of a deceased person’s soul from the realm of the dead (Sheol in the Old Testament, Hades in the New Testament) rather than the physical resurrection of the body.
  • The 1,000 years of Christ’s reign on earth (Revelation 20:1-7) shouldn’t be taken as a literal number but instead as a symbolic way to describe the entirety of the time between the beginning of the church age and the time of Christ’s bodily return to the earth.
  • The passing away of the first heaven and the first earth and the institution of a new heaven and a new earth (Revelation 21:1-2) are symbolic of the annihilation of God’s old covenant with Israel and the beginning of His new covenant with the church (Christians).

By saying that God’s covenant with Israel ended with the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70, preterists find agreement with a teaching known as “replacement theology,” which maintains that the church has replaced Israel in God’s plan. Under “replacement theology,” whatever promises remain unfulfilled from the covenant agreement God made with Abraham and Abraham’s genetic descendants (the Jews) will be fulfilled in Abraham’s spiritual descendants (Christians). In other words, God is done with Israel and has no plans to ever work through that nation again.

In their attempts to provide scriptural support for the interpretation that most of The Revelation has played out already, preterists point to various passages. Here are some of them:

  1. In Revelation 11:1-2, the apostle John is told to measure the temple of God. Whereas futurists take this command to refer to a new Jewish temple that will be built either before the seven-year tribulation period or during it, preterists understand the command to refer to the Jewish temple that was destroyed in A.D. 70.
  2. In Matthew 24:34, as part of Christ’s most detailed teaching on future events, He says, “…this generation will by no means pass away till all these things take place” (N.K.J.V.). Futurists take the term “this generation” to mean the generation that is alive on earth when the tribulation period begins, but preterists take it to mean the generation of Christ’s chosen 12 apostles.
  3. In Matthew 16:28, Jesus says to His apostles, “Assuredly, I say to you, there are some standing here who shall not taste death till they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom” (N.K.J.V.). Here again, preterists go with a highly literal interpretation of this promise rather than the interpretation futurists favor, which finds the promise’s quick fulfillment in the experience Peter, James, and John had with Jesus shortly afterward on the Mount of Transfiguration (Matthew 17:1-13).
  4. In 1 Peter 4:7, Peter says, “…the end of all things is at hand.” This is similar to other passages such as James 5:8-9 — which says the coming of the Lord is “at hand” and “the Judge is standing at the door” — and Revelation 22:12 and 20, where Jesus says, “I am coming quickly.” Preterists contend that such passages simply cannot be explained by a return over 2,000 years delayed. Futurists, on the other hand, understand the passages to mean that Jesus could return at any moment even though He hasn’t done so yet. Futurists note that even under the preterist interpretation of Christ returning “spiritually” in A.D. 70 by way of the Romans destroying Jerusalem, that event didn’t take place until a full forty years after Christ’s death, burial, and resurrection. Furthermore, in Isaiah 13:6 the prophet Isaiah says of the Babylonian empire, “Wail, for the day of the Lord is at hand! It will come as destruction from the Almighty” (N.K.J.V.) even though Babylon’s fall to the Persians wouldn’t actually happen until some 200 years later.
  5. In 2 Corinthians 5:17, the apostle Paul explains that if a person is in Christ, that person is a new creation. Preterists seize upon this description to draw a direct correlation between the idea of the Christian being a new creation and Revelation 21:1-2 speaking of a new heaven and a new earth. Futurists, of course, reference 2 Peter 3:7-13 as a parallel passage and go with a literal interpretation of the old being replaced by the new.

And so, in the end, what are we to do with preterism? The answer is that there are just too many crippling problems with the system for us to embrace it as the correct interpretation of The Revelation. Basically, it’s one of those belief systems that seems fairly plausible at first glance but upon closer examination is proven to be severely lacking.

First and foremost is the problem of the date when The Revelation was written. For preterism to be the truth, the book must have been written sometime prior to Jerusalem being destroyed by the Romans in A.D. 70. If the book was written after that date, it means the so-called “prophecies” were in actuality historical events, not future ones.

But what date do the vast majority of Biblical scholars (conservatives and liberals alike) ascribe to the writing of The Revelation? A date of A.D. 95-96. To say that such a date is a colossal problem for preterists is a landmark understatement. Actually it’s nothing less than an end-game kill shot.

As for support for the A.D. 95-96 date, it is immensely impressive, coming from notable early church “fathers” such as Justin Martyr (A.D. 140), Irenaeus (A.D. 180), Clement of Alexandria (A.D. 200), and Tertullian of Carthage (A.D. 220). For example, Eusebius recorded that the apostle John wrote The Revelation on the island of Patmos in A.D. 95-96 and returned from the island following the death of the Roman emperor Domitian.  Likewise, Irenaeus — who was a disciple of Polycarp, who was a disciple of the apostle John himself — stated that John wrote the book toward the end of Domitian’s reign, returned from Patmos, and lived in Ephesus until the reign of Trajan, who became the Roman emperor in A.D. 98. These words from Irenaeus carry serious weight with Bible scholars because, as is also the case with Justin Martyr, many of The Revelation’s original readers were still alive during the lifetime of Irenaeus.

Additionally, there are certain internal matters embedded in The Revelation that make an early date for the book’s writing a virtual impossibility. For example, Jesus tells the church of Ephesus, “You have left your first love” (Revelation 2:4). Okay, so why is this simple statement a problem for preterists? Well, if The Revelation was written before the destruction of Jerusalem — written let’s say in approximately 64-65 A.D. — that would mean that the church of Ephesus lost its love for Jesus just 35 years or so after His ascension. Such a thing seems odd in light of the fact that Paul and Peter were both still alive at that time and Paul states in Colossians 1:23 that this was an era when the gospel was preached to “every creature under heaven.”

Similarly, Christ’s words to the church of Laodicea present an even greater problem to those who require an early date for the writing of The Revelation. While Jesus described that church as being wealthy and having need of nothing in terms of worldly goods (Revelation 3:17), history records that a great earthquake completely decimated the city of Laodicea in A.D. 62. Are we to believe, then, that those citizens rebuilt that city to a state of wealth and prominence in a span of just a few years? Surely it would have taken them much longer to get the city back to such a level, and that fits in nicely with a date of A.D. 95-96.

And then, of course, there are all the obvious contradictions to preterism. I mean, if Satan is currently bound (Revelation 20:1-3) I’d hate to see what the world would look like if he was running loose. Also, if this is the “kingdom age” in which Jesus is ruling and reigning over the world by way of the church, then somebody needs to tell the world because they certainly aren’t being obedient subjects. Seriously, such talk is absolute nonsense.

Oh, and as for that whole thing about the resurrection of the dead being a spiritual type deal rather than a literal one, preterists might want to read Paul’s take on that in 1 Corinthians 15:12-19. More to the point, they should read what he said about Hymenaeus and Philetus and their teaching that the resurrection is already past (2 Timothy 2:15-18). You see, that whole “spiritual resurrection” false teaching has actually been around for a long, long time.

In conclusion, despite the fact that the preterist take on prophecy seems to be gaining some momentum today, especially with younger Christians, it remains a thoroughly cracked foundation upon which to build a worldview. It makes the destruction of Jerusalem vastly more important than God ever intended it to be, and it symbolizes the intricately described events of The Revelation to such a degree as to allow them to refer to just about anything. As for me, I’d much rather get to heaven and have God rebuke me for interpreting the Bible too literally than have Him ask me, “Why did you take as symbolic those things that I clearly meant to be literal?” That’s why I’m still expecting all the events of Revelation chapters 4-22 to play out in a highly literal way in days to come, and I’m advising you to do the same.

Posted in Christ's Second Coming, Christ's Return, Prophecy, Resurrection | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

How God Can Use Your Patmos

Posted on February 3, 2020 by russellmckinney

The apostle John lived into his eighties, perhaps into his nineties, and in so doing easily outlived all the other apostles. And how did he spend his “senior citizen” years? Post-Biblical church history provides strong documentation that he lived and ministered in Ephesus for approximately the last quarter of his life. This explains why it is commonly believed that he wrote his three epistles — 1 John, 2 John, and 3 John — and his gospel of John while he was living in that city.

But he didn’t write The Revelation there, did he? That book was written while he was spending time as a prisoner on the island of Patmos. As he says in Revelation 1:9, he was there because of the word of God and the testimony of Jesus Christ. To find out what he meant by that we again look to post-Biblical church history. There we learn that the Roman emperor Domition, as part of his persecution of Christians, sentenced the elderly John to the Roman penal colony located on that island. Putting it simply, old John was on Patmos because he preached Jesus.

What’s noteworthy about all this is that in God’s plan John couldn’t receive The Revelation while he was in Ephesus. If we are correct in assuming that John wrote his other four books in Ephesus, that obviously indicates that his situation in that city was conducive for writing those books. But when it came time for him to receive and write The Revelation, God said, “To get this one written, John will have to be in a much less comfortable circumstance and setting.” I don’t mean to imply that God caused John’s arrest and sentencing or that God was even pleased with Domitian’s actions, but I am saying that God used Domitian’s sinful treatment of John in His plan to get the book of The Revelation written.

Think about an orange that has all kinds of sweet-tasting juice inside it. How do you get all that juice out of that orange? You squeeze the orange. As you squeeze, you find that some of the juice comes out easily without much pressure being applied, but once you get most of the juice out you have to squeeze really hard to extract those last precious drops. Well, John was kind of like an orange. His gospel and his three epistles dripped out of him while he was living in Ephesus, but to get The Revelation out of him God had to allow him to be squeezed a whole lot harder by life.

The takeaway is that oftentimes God’s deepest spiritual insights are only found on one of life’s barren, rocky islands. I guess I would describe it like this: There are “gospel/epistle” stations in your life, and then there are “Revelation” stations, and those “Revelation” stations usually involve God either leading you to a tough spot or allowing you to be taken there. You see, it’s in those spots that you’ll get squeezed the hardest, and God will be able to pull stuff out of you that otherwise would remain locked deep inside you.

It’s often been said that we learn more from our bad experiences than we do our good ones, and that we grow more in the valley than we do on the mountaintop. With this in mind, if you currently find yourself in a very trying circumstance or setting, you should lean on Jesus all the more and allow Him to minister not only to you but through you while you are there. I realize that what I’m saying doesn’t make for easy application, but the question you need to be asking in your difficulty isn’t, “Lord, why is this happening to me?” (even though that might be a perfectly legitimate question). Instead, the better question is, “Lord, what new spiritual insights do you want to show me here and how do you want me to put them to use?” Trust me, you start asking that question and you’ll start getting some serious answers.

Posted in Adversity, Character, Complaining, Disappointment, Faith, Faithfulness, God's Work, Influence, Ministry, Patience, Persecution, Perseverance, Problems, Service, Spiritual Warfare, Sports, Suffering, Trials, Trusting In God, Waiting | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

7 Bible Reasons For a Pre-Tribulation Rapture

Posted on February 1, 2020 by russellmckinney

I’m currently preaching a prophecy series at the church, and it has gotten me neck-deep in the subject as my study is awash in prophecy books and commentaries on The Revelation. As part of the overflow from all my recent studying, I thought I’d devote a handful of posts to dealing with a few prophetic issues. For this first post, I’ll share the Biblical evidence that supports the idea that the Rapture will take place before the coming tribulation period begins. This interpretation is called “The Pre-Tribulation Rapture.”

Reason #1 has to do with the overall chronological layout of the book of The Revelation. In the first three chapters of the book, the word “church” is used seven times and the word “churches” is used twelve times. However, after the end of chapter 3 neither word is used again until one of the last verses of the book’s last chapter: verse 16 of chapter 22. Even then the word “churches” is used only to refer back to the seven churches to which Jesus instructed the apostle John to write. This means that in chapters 6 through 19, the chapters in which the seven-year tribulation period is laid out in detail, not one reference is made of the church.

Reason #2 goes right along with reason #1. In chapters 4 and 5, The Revelation places the church squarely in heaven before the tribulation period begins in chapter 6. In those chapters, the church is represented as the group called the 24 elders. We know this group represents the church because of the white robes they wear (Revelation 3:5; 19:8), the thrones upon which they sit (Revelation 1:6), and the song they sing to Jesus (The Lamb) in Revelation 5:9:

And they sang a new song, saying: “You are worthy to take the scroll, And to open its seals; For You were slain, And have redeemed us to God by Your blood Out of every tribe and tongue and people and nation. And have made us kings and priests to our God; And we shall reign upon the earth.” (N.K.J.V.)

Reason #3 involves the revealing of the Antichrist. In regards to that revealing, 2nd Thessalonians 2:7-8 says:

For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only He who now restrains will do so until He is taken out of the way.  And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord will consume with the breath of His mouth and destroy with the brightness of His coming. (N.K.J.V.)

The term “the lawless one” is clearly a reference to the Antichrist. But who is the one who now restrains and will do so until he is taken out of the way? He is God the Holy Spirit. And since God the Holy Spirit dwells inside each Christian, the passage seems to refer to Christians being taken out of the way.

Okay, so how would such a removal take place? The answer is, the Rapture. Notice that the passage plainly says of the Holy Spirit’s removal: …And then the lawless one (the Antichrist) will be revealed. The teaching is that the Antichrist cannot be revealed until the Holy Spirit is taken out of the way, and that means that Christians, each of whom is indwelt by the Holy Spirit, must be taken out of the way.

Reason #4 comes from a certain promise that Jesus made to the church in Philadelphia.  He said to them:

“Because you have kept My command to persevere, I also will keep you from the hour of trial which shall come upon the whole world, to test those who dwell on the earth.” (Revelation 3:10, N.K.J.V.)

What’s interesting about this verse is that in the days when the church in the ancient city of Philadelphia actually existed, there was no “hour of trial” that came upon “the whole world.” Yes, those Christians of Philadelphia were definitely persecuted under the rule of the Roman empire, but that empire didn’t rule over the entire world. Therefore, it seems that Jesus meant for His promise to reach into a future time. When we couple this up with the fact that it is commonly believed that He intended for the seven churches of The Revelation to symbolize all of the churches throughout the entire age, we begin to understand how His promise could be applicable to a future time and a future church.

Coming at this issue another way, many excellent commentators also interpret the seven churches to be symbolic of the various eras of the church age — the early church (33 A.D. to 100 A.D.) being the era of Ephesus, the next era (100 A.D. to 313 A.D.) being the era of Smyrna, etc. On this topic, J. Vernon McGee has voiced an interesting thought. His contention was that Jesus specifically addressed His promise to keep the Philadelphia church from the hour of trial (the tribulation period) because the Philadelphia era is when the Rapture will occur. This, according to McGee, will leave the Laodicean era (which is the next one after Philadelphia and the last one of the seven) to the apostate church that will be “Christian” in name only. In other words, he believed that the Laodicean church symbolized the false church that will congregate each Sunday during the tribulation period. As possible evidence for this interpretation, Jesus does say that He will vomit the Laodicean church out of His mouth, which evidently meant that He would have nothing to do with it.

Reason #5 why we are correct in saying that the Rapture will take place before the tribulation period is similar to reason #4. Just as Jesus spoke to those Christians of Philadelphia about a way of escape from the tribulation period, He spoke similar words to His audience in Luke 21:36. In His conclusion to a teaching about the tribulation period, He said to those people:

“Watch therefore, and pray always that you may be counted worthy to escape all these things that will come to pass, and to stand before the Son of Man. (N.K.J.V.)

It doesn’t take much of a leap of logic to deduce that the way of escape to which He was referring is the Rapture. And how much of the tribulation period will Christians miss because of the Rapture? Jesus says, “…that you may be counted worthy to escape all these things that will come to pass.”

Reason #6 encompasses all the passages of scripture that teach that Christians are not under any kind of condemnation from God and will never have to experience any of His wrath. These verses (all from the N.K.J.V.) are relevant to this topic because the tribulation period is described as the time when God will pour out His wrath upon the earth (Revelation 6:16-17; 11:18; 14:10,19; 15:1,7; 16:1,19; 19:15):

  • Much more then, having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from wrath through Him. (Romans 5:9)
  • There is therefore now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus, who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit. (Romans 8:1)
  • For they themselves declare concerning us what manner of entry we had to you, and how you turned to God from idols to serve the living and true God, and to wait for His Son from heaven, whom He raised from the dead, even Jesus who delivers us from the wrath to come. (1 Thessalonians 1:9-10)
  • For God did not appoint us to wrath, but to obtain salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ, who died for us, that whether we wake or sleep, we should live together with Him. (1 Thessalonians 5:9-10)

Again, since The Revelation specifically speaks in ten passages of the wrath of God being poured out upon the earth during the tribulation period, it is obvious that the snatching away of Christians must take place before that period begins.

Reason #7 why we know that the church will not go through any of the tribulation period is found in all the New Testament passages that teach that those early Christians were looking for Jesus Christ rather than the Antichrist. The list of such passages is numerous (all of these from the N.K.J.V.):

  • And now, little children, abide in Him, that when He appears, we may have confidence and not be ashamed before Him at His coming. (1 John 2:28)
  • …and when the Chief Shepherd appears, you will receive the crown of glory that does not fade away. (1 Peter 5:4)
  • Therefore be patient, brethren, until the coming of the Lord. See how the farmer waits for the precious fruit from the earth, waiting patiently for it until it receives the early and latter rain. You also be patient. Establish your hearts, for the coming of the Lord is at hand. (James 5:7-8)
  • 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, looking for the blessed hope and glorious appearing of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ… (Titus 2:11-13)
  • I urge you in the sight of God who gives life to all things, and before Christ Jesus who witnessed the good confession before Pontius Pilate, that you keep this commandment without spot, blameless until our Lord Jesus Christ’s appearing. (1 Timothy 6:13-14)
  • I thank my God always concerning you for the grace of God which was given to you by Christ Jesus, that you were enriched in everything by Him in all utterance and all knowledge, even as the testimony of Christ was confirmed in you, so that you come short in no gift, eagerly waiting for the revelation of our Lord Jesus Christ… (1 Corinthians 1:4-7)
  • For as often as you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death till He comes. (1 Corinthians 11:26)
  • For our citizenship is in heaven, from which we also eagerly wait for the Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ, who will transform our lowly body that it may be conformed to His glorious body, according to the working by which He is able even to subdue all things to Himself. (Philippians 3:20-21)
  • When Christ who is our life appears, then you also will appear with him in glory. (Colossians 3:4)
  • For they themselves declare concerning us what manner of entry we had to you, and how you turned to God from idols to serve the living and true God, and to wait for His Son from heaven, whom He raised from the dead, even Jesus who delivers us from the wrath to come. (1 Thessalonians 1:9-10)
  • Let your gentleness be known to all men. The Lord is at hand. (Philippians 4:5)
  • For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first. Then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And thus shall we always be with the Lord. (1 Thessalonians 4:16-17)

In conclusion, some sincere Christians say, “But the church (Christ’s bride) must be purged before she can be joined to Christ. She must be made clean, and her garments must be made white. And that can only happen if she experiences all or some of the tribulation period. That will be her purging.”

My response to these well-meaning folks would be to remind them that Christians have been dying for 2,000 years now. That means that a large percentage of the church is already in heaven and all those believers up there never got purged by going through any tribulation period. It seems absurd, then, that God would exclusively reserve the purging of the tribulation period for a group of Christians who just happen to be living on earth right before the tribulation period begins. No, as these seven pieces of scriptural evidence prove, the Rapture will occur before the tribulation period begins. That’s what John, Peter, James, and Paul were expecting, and it’s what we Christians today should be expecting as well.

Posted in Christ's Return, Church, Coming Judgment, Prophecy | Tagged , , , , | 10 Comments

Having Good Spiritual Leadership Isn’t Enough

Posted on January 30, 2020 by russellmckinney

The pastor is usually the first person who gets blamed when a church takes a downturn. And, admittedly, many times the pastor is the problem. That’s just a plain fact. There are, however, two other facts that are just as plain. Fact #1: The pastor isn’t always the reason for the downturn. Fact #2: Having good spiritual leadership isn’t enough to keep a church from hitting the skids. This brings us to the church of Ephesus.

As the capital city of the Roman province of Asia Minor (modern Turkey), Ephesus was one of the leading cities of the ancient world. The city’s massive harbor and coastal roads made it the most easily accessible city in Asia Minor and as such a center of commerce. Furthermore, the great temple of Diana (Artemis), which was one of the seven wonders of the ancient world, was located there, and that made the city a religious center as well. At its height, Ephesus boasted a population of over 300,000 people.

The Bible’s first specific mention of Ephesus is found in Acts 18:19. The apostle Paul is traveling with Aquila and Priscilla, a married couple he has recently met in Corinth (18:1-3). Like Paul, Aquila and Priscilla are tentmakers by trade. The group arrives in Ephesus and Paul immediately heads to the local synagogue to teach the Jews about Jesus (Acts 18:18-19). His ministry is well received there and he is asked to stay on a while, but he declines the invitation because he has committed himself to returning to Jerusalem to observe the coming Feast (probably the Feast of Passover) (Acts 18:20-21). As he departs Ephesus, though, he does two things. First, he promises that if it’s God’s will he will return to the city one day. Second, he leaves Aquila and Priscilla there to continue the spark of ministry he had begun.

All indications are that Aquila and Priscilla remained in Ephesus, worked as tentmakers, and housed a church in their home (1 Corinthians 16:19). Scripture never uses the title “elder” (“pastor,” “bishop,” “shepherd,” “overseer”) in reference to either one of them, but they were instrumental in helping an eloquent Jew named Apollos, a man well learned in the Old Testament scriptures, come to a full and correct understanding of the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus (Acts 18:24-28).

Sometime later, Paul made good on his promise to return to the city, and at that time he took over the leadership of the fledgling church (Acts 19:1-10). He remained there for a total of three years and God worked all kinds of unusual miracles through him (Acts 19:11-20; 20:31). In typical Paul fashion, he left the city in the wake of a virtual riot that was stirred up by Demetrius, a silversmith who made his living fashioning silver shrines of the goddess Diana (Artimus).

Upon Paul’s departure for Macedonia, he turned the reins of the spiritual leadership of the church in Ephesus over to his young protege, Timothy (1 Timothy 1:1-3). Unfortunately for students of the Bible, it is here that the scriptural record of the spiritual leadership in Ephesus runs dry. Timothy most likely remained on in Ephesus for a while, but all we know for sure is that a few years later Paul wrote Ephesians, his letter to the church in Ephesus. That would have been sometime around 60 A.D. give or take a couple of years either way, which would have been approximately six to eight years after his first visit there.

Here is where the apostle John likely comes into the picture. Post-Biblical church tradition consistently states that John ministered at Ephesus into his advanced age and probably wrote his three epistles of 1 John, 2 John, and 3 John there. According to the same church tradition, he was arrested in Ephesus by the Romans during the reign of the emperor Domitian and banished to the island of Patmos, where he wrote The Revelation sometime around 94-96 A.D.

By putting all this information together, we learn that the church in Ephesus had a rich background in regards to spiritual leadership. Despite this background, however, what is it that Jesus says to the Ephesian church in The Revelation? After complimenting the church for their labor, patience (perseverance, endurance), intolerance of evil doers, and spiritual discernment concerning genuine and false apostles, Jesus says, “Nevertheless I have this against you, that you have left your first love” (Revelation 2:4, N.K.J.V.). He then encourages them to repent and get back to doing their first works or else He will remove their lampstand from its place, which means that they will cease to exist as His church (Revelation 1:12-13, 19-20).

At the time Jesus spoke those words the church in Ephesus was only about 40 years old. And while any city’s “church” (singular) in that day was the sum total of all the city’s small house churches (Romans 16:3-5; 1 Corinthians 16:19; Colossians 4:15; Philemon verses 1 and 2), surely having the likes of a Paul, a Timothy, or a John serving as the spiritual leaders in a city would ensure that the overall church there wouldn’t lose its love for Jesus, right? Wrong. Just four decades into its existence, the church in Ephesus was already veering off course.

If this proves nothing else, it proves that having good spiritual leadership isn’t enough for a church to avoid backsliding. If all the church history about John and Ephesus is true, how it must have broken John’s heart to hear Jesus utter those solemn words about the church in Ephesus, “You have left your first love.” Surely John hadn’t taught them to lessen their love of Jesus. Neither had Paul or Timothy, for that matter. But it had happened. Somehow, someway, somewhere along the line, it had happened.

So, the next time you hear of some local church backsliding, declining in attendance, or getting caught up in a scandal, don’t just automatically assume that the spiritual leadership there must be the problem. Perhaps it is, but it could just as easily be that the leadership is what has been keeping the problem from bubbling to the surface until now. Any pastor’s leadership is only as good as his church’s followship, and sometimes that followship really does leave a whole lot to be desired.

Posted in Church, Leadership, Ministry, Pastors, Preaching | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

The Song of Solomon (post #3 of 3)

Posted on January 28, 2020 by russellmckinney

I opened for my beloved, but my beloved had left; he was gone. My heart sank at his departure. I looked for him but did not find him. I called him but he did not answer. (Song of Solomon 5:6, N.I.V.)

A honeymoon night that is filled with lustful passion and sexual relations? That’s expected. But a marriage that maintains that level of passion and sex? That’s not expected. So, would Solomon and his wife, The Shulamite, be able to keep the fires of romance burning red hot? Let’s find out.

When last we left the couple, they had just gotten married and consummated their marriage. The wedding feast was in full swing, and the sexual relationship between the newlyweds was idyllic. It is at this point, however, that Solomon (the writer of The Song of Solomon) takes the story in a different direction.

The Shulamite goes to bed one night but Solomon isn’t with her. That night she has a dream in which she hears him knocking at her door, asking her to open for him (5:2). She wants to be with him, but she hesitates to go to the door because she has already undressed for the evening (5:3-4). It isn’t long, though, before her desire to be with him compels her to rise from her bed and open the door (5:5).

As the dream continues, she opens the door only to find that Solomon has already left (5:6). After calling to him and receiving no answer, she ventures out into the city in an effort to find him. Jerusalem’s nightwatchmen, not realizing who she is, mistake her for a spy or an intruder and strike her (5:7). Realizing that she can’t find Solomon on her own, she then asks the young women of Jerusalem to find him and tell him that she is lovesick for him (5:8). Keep in mind now that this is all still a dream.

Her request of the young women prompts a dialogue between her and them. They ask her, basically, “What makes your beloved so special that we should go looking for him?” (5:9). Her answer comes by way of a lengthy description of his physical attributes. He is white and ruddy and has wavy black hair (5:10-11). He has dove’s eyes, attractive cheeks, and lips that drip with liquid myrrh (5:12-13). His hands are rods of gold, his body is carved ivory, his legs are pillars of marble, his mouth his sweet, and he is altogether lovely (5:14-16). Still, though, despite this vivid description of Solomon’s impressive physical appearance, the relationship The Shulamite has with him isn’t just based upon sex or lust. No, he is also her friend (5:16).

Impressed by her answer, the young women ask, “Where has your beloved gone that we may help you find him?” (6:1). In response, The Shulamite tells them that he has gone to tend his garden and feed his flock (6:2-3). This means that he is away on business. Her answer indicates that Solomon has left her in the royal palace in Jerusalem while he has taken a trip to tend to some of his gardens and flocks (Ecclesiastes 2:4-7). It’s probable that he has gone to the hill country of Shunem, the area where he and The Shulamite first met and fell in love.

While this account of The Shulamite’s difficult night, complete with a troubling dream, is similar to a night and a dream she experienced before they were married (3:1-5), it isn’t hard to understand that this section of The Song of Solomon is the book’s depiction of how life can come between a husband and a wife and keep them apart. In the case of Solomon and The Shulamite, the separation was physical, but any marriage counselor will attest that the separation can also be emotional. The potential hindrances to a married couple’s intimacy and sex life are many but one thing is for sure: the honeymoon period in which they can focus solely upon each other is over far too quickly!

Apparently, Solomon somehow receives word about his wife’s nightmare and acts quickly to reassure her that he still finds her wildly attractive. He does this by sending her a fresh round of praise for her beauty (6:4-10). He praises her eyes (6:5), hair (6:5), teeth (6:6), and temples (6:7) and calls her his “dove” (6:9) and “perfect one” (6:9). Clearly, he wants her to know that him being separated from her hasn’t diminished his attraction to her. If anything, it has made him desire her all the more. And what does The Shulamite do when she receives Solomon’s message? She promptly leaves Jerusalem and makes her way — no doubt traveling by royal escort — to where Solomon is (6:11-12). Solomon responds to the news of her coming by encouraging her to get there so that he and his friends can look upon her beauty (6:13).

Once The Shulamite arrives and she and Solomon are reunited, he takes his praise of her looks to an even higher level. Reading his praise through the lens of The New King James Version translation, we find that:

  • Her feet are beautiful in sandals (7:1).
  • The curves of her thighs are like jewels, the work of a skilled craftsman (7:1).
  • Her navel is a rounded goblet (7:2).
  • Her waist is like a heap of wheat (7:2).
  • Her breasts are like two fawns, the twin offspring of a gazelle (7:3).
  • Her neck is like an ivory tower (7:4).
  • Her eyes are like pools (7:4).
  • Her nose is like a tower (7:4).
  • Her head crowns her (7:5).
  • The tresses of her hair hold him captive (7:5).
  • Her stature is like that of a palm tree, the branches of which he wants to climb (7:7-8).
  • Her breasts are like clusters of fruit that he wants to grab (7:8).
  • Her breath is as sweet as apples (7:8).
  • The roof of her mouth is like the best wine (7:9).

Most any wife would be sexually aroused by such praise, and The Shulamite is no different. She invites Solomon to go with her out to the field and the vineyards (7:11-12). Once they find the best location, she will give her love to him (7:12). It will all be reminiscent of the romantic times they had shared outdoors before they were married (1:7-10; 16-17).

Another reason The Shulamite wants to take Solomon out to the field and the vineyards is because she is frustrated that she can’t shower him with physical affection in public. In those days, public displays of affection between family members were the only such displays deemed socially acceptable. This explains why she says to him, “Oh, that you were my brother…If I should find you outside, I would kiss you…” (8:1, N.K.J.V.).

Next, she talks about his left hand being under her head while his right hand embraces her (8:3). Previously when she mentioned him holding her this way they weren’t married (2:6), which explains why she followed it up by warning the young women of Jerusalem not to stir up or awaken love until the appropriate time (2:7, N.L.T.). Here again she offers that same warning (8:4) even though she and Solomon are now married and can sinlessly engage in sex.

Upon the return of Solomon and The Shulamite from their romantic day in the outdoors, the next voice we hear is the voice of a relative of The Shulamite. The relative asks, “Who is this coming up from the wilderness, Leaning upon her beloved?” (8:5, N.K.J.V..). The Hebrew word translated as “wilderness” in the N.K.J.V. and many other translations is midbar, and it can refer to a pasture or an open field. It’s the same Hebrew word that is used in verse 6 of chapter 3 in reference to where Solomon and his wedding entourage came from to retrieve The Shulamite for the wedding between her and Solomon. Therefore, the picture here is one of The Shulamite being hugged up to Solomon as they approach the house together following their day of alone time together. The relative then talks about being present when The Shulamite had been born (8:5), the implication being that the girl who had once been a baby has now obviously grown into a mature woman.

In the closing passages of The Song of Solomon, The Shulamite begs Solomon to set her as a seal upon his heart and continue to love her with a love that cannot be quenched or drowned (8:6-7). The Shulamite’s brothers then chime in with a word about how they will treat another sister of theirs, a younger one, when she comes of age. If she is a wall who resists the sexual advances of men before marriage, they will bless her, but if she is promiscuous they will keep close tabs on her at home (8:9).

The Shulamite, in looking back upon her own youth, affirms that she herself was such a wall and that her chastity was rewarded in her adulthood by how Solomon now looks upon her (8:10). She mentions Solomon’s vineyard at Baal Hamon, which might indicate that the two of them had first met at that site (8:11). Finally, the book closes with Solomon requesting to hear The Shulamite’s voice (8:13) and her requesting that he come to her with the speed of a gazelle or a stag (8:14). After being temporarily separated for a time due to the business of life, the two have now come back together and are as eager to be with each other as ever.

Isn’t that a perfect way to end such a love song? After all that praising of his wife’s looks, Solomon has now reached a level where he simply longs to hear her voice. And that’s a very important level to reach in marriage because, let’s face it, looks fade over the years. As for her, the song concludes with her encouraging him to make haste to get to her. Is this a reference to her desire to have sex with him? It could be, but it might just mean that she merely wants him by her side whatever she is doing. After all, the two were friends as well as lovers (5:16).

So, it’s here that we will leave Solomon and The Shulamite. Like all good fairy-tale romances, their relationship ends with a “happily ever after.” While it’s highly doubtful that in reality the couple’s relationship remained on such a lofty plane, we should let The Song of Solomon stand as it is written. After all, with the scores of accounts of bad marriages out there, it’s good to find one that depicts God’s ideal for marriage. Can you imagine what our world would be like if all our marriages were like the one described in The Song of Solomon? Divorce, adultery, and spousal addiction to pornography would be virtually non-existent, marriage counselors would be put out of business, and our societies would revert back to a time when marriage was the foundation upon which they stood. Will we ever reach such a state? I doubt it. But that doesn’t mean that all of us married folks should ever stop striving for it. Even if we never attain it, our marriages will surely be all the better for the effort.

Posted in Husbands, Marriage, Series: "The Song of Solomon", Sex, Wives | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

“Christian Verses” Podcast: Psalm 119:105

Posted on January 25, 2020 by russellmckinney

The Old Testament was originally written in Hebrew (with just a handful of passages written in Aramaic), and the New Testament was written in Greek. So, unless you can read those languages, you need an English translation of the Bible. But which translation is right for you? After all, there are several of them out there these days. In the new podcast, Malcolm and I engage in a very down-to-earth, practical discussion regarding this topic. If you are serious about Bible study, or even if you are simply wanting to get started with Bible study, our conversation can help you. Here’s the link to the podcast:

Posted in Bible Study, King James Only, Scripture, The Bible | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

The Song of Solomon (Post #2 of 3)

Posted on January 24, 2020 by russellmckinney

Come out to see King Solomon, young women of Jerusalem. He wears the crown his mother gave him on his wedding day, his most joyous day. (Song of Solomon 3:11, N.L.T.)

The Song of Solomon gives us King Solomon’s God-inspired account of his courtship and marriage to a woman he calls The Shulamite. The term “Shulamite” likely indicates that this young woman lived in Shunem in the hill country a few miles north of Jerusalem (6:13). King Solomon owned a vineyard there at a site called Baal-Hamon and leased it out to workers (8:11). He also owned land in that region, land upon which he grazed a large flock (1:7). The Shulamite’s family had vineyards and a flock there as well (1:6; 1:8; 8:12), and it was in this hill country that Solomon and The Shulamite first met and fell in love.

As the book begins, the couple have just met. 32 of the book’s first 39 verses are spoken by The Shulamite. For starters, she wants Solomon to kiss her over and over again (1:2) and draw her away unto himself (1:4). As she says, “Oh, that the king would bring me to his chambers” (H.C.S.B.). She is beautiful, but she worries that he will be turned off by the fact that her skin has become too tanned and dark from working in her family’s vineyard (1:5-6). She expresses this worry by comparing her own appearance to a vineyard and saying, “They (her family) made me the keeper of the vineyards, but my own vineyard (my appearance) I have not kept.”

Next, she wants Solomon to tell her where he feeds his flock and where he lets it rest at noon. Why does she want this information? It’s because she wants to come see him in innocence rather than acting like one of the prostitutes of the time who veiled themselves to hide their face (1:7). Solomon answers her question by playfully telling her to find him as she grazes her little flocks in the footsteps of his large flock (1:8). It is also at this point that he extends to her the first of many compliments by comparing her to a beautiful mare standing among Pharaoh’s chariots, chariots that were always pulled by stallions rather than mares (1:9-10). I myself wouldn’t advise a man to compliment a woman by comparing her to a horse, but, hey, it worked for Solomon.

In verse 12, The Shulamite poetically speaks of how she will send forth the fragrance of her perfume to entice Solomon while he sits at his table. In other words, she hopes that he will remember the sweet smell of her perfume even after he has returned to his palace in Jerusalem. Then she compliments him by describing him as “a bundle of myrrh” (N.K.J.V.), “a cluster of henna blooms” (N.K.J.V.), and a man she wishes would lie all night between her breasts.

On and on the love-struck banter goes like that. Solomon tells her that she is fair and has dove’s eyes (1:15), and she responds by telling him that he is handsome and pleasant (1:16). Then she figuratively refers to the grassy sites where they rendezvoused for their romantic meetings. She calls those sites their green “couch” (N.A.S.V.) and adds in that the sites are surrounded by cedar trees and fir trees that she calls the “beams of our houses” (1:16-17, N.K.J.V.). It is as if she is imagining how wonderful it would be to reside in an actual house as Solomon’s wife. The fact that she says “his fruit was sweet to my taste” (2:3, N.K.J.V.) shows that they kissed at those outdoor sites up there in that hill country.

With all this romantic rendezvousing taking place, it isn’t long before Solomon formally invites The Shulamite to dine with him in the banquet room of his palace (2:4), and it is following that meal that their intimacy gets perilously close to the sin of premarital sex. As Solomon places his left hand under her head and embraces her body firmly with his right hand (2:6), The Shulamite feels the inner temptation to let things go too far. This prompts her to warn the young women of Jerusalem: “Do not stir up or awaken love until the appropriate time” (2:7, N.L.T.). She herself has now experienced firsthand just how difficult it is to stop the lust train once it has built up steam.

Following the meal in Solomon’s palace, The Shulamite returns to her home and the winter months fall upon the land. The indication is that the couple don’t see each other during those days. But once the winter is past it doesn’t take Solomon long to make his way back to The Shulamite’s home. Sure, he’s returned to the hill country to check on his flock but he’s also come to see her. Verses 8 and 9 of chapter 2 quote her describing him as a young stag who comes leaping and skipping to her house. Once there, he asks her to come away with him and enjoy the pastoral wonders of Israel in the springtime as he feeds his flock (2:10-17). The renewed romance once again flames the fires of passion within The Shulamite and causes her to spend a terrible night in bed alone longing for Solomon to be with her. She even dreams of going into the city of Jerusalem, searching for him, finding him, and taking him back to her family’s home (3:1-4). That long night prompts her to repeat her warning to the young women of Jerusalem: “Do not stir up or awaken love until the appropriate time” (3:5, N.L.T.).

This time around, though, she won’t have to wait long for the word “marriage” to enter the relationship. One day not long after that wistful night here comes King Solomon, decked out in his royal regalia, smelling of myrrh, frankincense, and fragrant powders (3:6). He is escorted by sixty of his most valiant men, each of whom carries a sword and is an expert in warfare (3:7-8). Solomon himself is seated upon a wooden chair that is covered in silver, gold, and the color purple (3:9-10). This, of course, is the royal procession by which Solomon has come to take The Shulamite to Jerusalem to officially become his bride. This explains why the following verse (3:11) quotes The Shulamite as encouraging the daughters of Zion (Jerusalem) to come out and see King Solomon on his wedding day as he wears his royal crown.

Once the wedding has taken place, the next chapter (chapter 4) is a full chapter about the honeymoon night of sex that Solomon and The Shulamite enjoy. In verses 1-5, he lavishes praise upon his new spouse for her exquisite beauty as few body parts from her upper torso escape his glowing report. He mentions: her dove’s eyes (4:1); her dark hair (4:1); her white teeth (4:2); her scarlet lips (4:3); her lovely mouth (4:3); her pleasing temples (4:3); her regal neck (4:4); and her soft breasts (4:5). Following all this sweet talk, he describes her virginity as an enclosed garden, a shut-up spring, and a sealed fountain. (4:12). The Shulamite, for her part, expresses her readiness to lose that virginity by saying, “Blow upon my garden that its spices may flow out, and let my beloved come to his garden and eat its pleasant fruits” (4:16). Is all this racy stuff? You bet. But it isn’t sinful. These are simply two newlyweds who are about to enjoy the God-approved intimacy of holy matrimony.

Not surprisingly, the next passage brings past-tense language from Solomon as he says, “I have come to my garden” (5:1). He then tells his friends who have attended the royal wedding and stuck around to enjoy the wedding feast, “Eat, O friends! Drink, yes, drink deeply, O beloved ones!” (5:1, N.K.J.V.). And it is here that we will leave the couple until next time. The courtship, the marriage, and the consummation of the marriage are now finished, and the only question left to be asked is, “Will the couple’s fires of romance continue to burn red hot or will the tedious days of marriage turn those fires into dying embers?” That’s the question that I’ll answer in my next post as we finish up the book by walking through chapters 5-8. So until then, I hope you’ll stay tuned……

Posted in Husbands, Marriage, Series: "The Song of Solomon", Sex, Wives | Tagged , | Leave a comment

The Song of Solomon (Post #1 of 3)

Posted on January 22, 2020 by russellmckinney

While the king is at his table, My spikenard sends forth its fragrance. A bundle of myrrh is my beloved to me, That lies all night between my breasts. (Song of Solomon 1:12-13, N.K.J.V.)

God never intended for “sex” to be a dirty word. As a matter of fact, sex was one of His primary reasons for giving the bodies of Adam and Eve different parts. Seriously, when He said to that married couple, “Be fruitful and multiply” He meant for them to do that by having a lot of sex. That alone should be enough to make the case that God is pro sex.

However, it should also be understood that God never intended for sex to be exclusively for the purposes of reproduction. No, the experience of pleasure comes into play, too, as sex provides an outlet for the physical lusts and desires that are part and parcel to the human experience. If you need more proof that God meant for sex to be about more than procreation, let me introduce you to The Song of Solomon.

The Bible tells us God gave Solomon wisdom and understanding that made him wiser than all men (1 Kings 4:31). To go along with that wisdom, He also gave him “a largeness of heart like the sand on the seashore” (1 Kings 4:29, N.K.J.V.). By combining all that wisdom with all that largeness of heart — to say nothing of his untold wealth — Solomon was able to live life to the fullest more than anyone in history.

Out of all his wisdom and largeness of heart, Solomon spoke 3,000 proverbs (hundreds of which have been preserved in the Bible’s book of Proverbs) and wrote 1,005 songs. Of those 1005 songs, it seems he considered the love song The Song of Solomon his best. This would explain why the opening words of the book read: “The song of songs…” That phrase is also why most modern translations of the Bible entitle the book The Song of Songs rather than The Song of Solomon.

Whichever title you prefer, the book is a love song Solomon wrote when he ruled over the united nation of Israel that had been left to him by his father, King David. Writing under the divine inspiration of God (2 Timothy 3:16), Solomon fills the book with poetic language, metaphors, and imagery from that part of the world. If the book held no other value, it would be significant in that it mentions 21 species of plants, 15 species of animals, and uses 49 Hebrew words that occur nowhere else in the Old Testament.

While the book mentions a few other groups of lesser characters who play minor roles in the story, first and foremost it is centered around two people: The Beloved (Solomon) and The Shulamite (Solomon’s wife). In passage after passage, the couple passionately and lustfully pine for each other in a manner that is sensual and even downright erotic. But there is no sin involved at any point. Despite the fact that the couple obviously like each other’s looks, they restrain themselves during their courtship and only engage in sexual relations once they are married.

It strikes many people as odd that a man such as Solomon, who had 700 wives and 300 concubines (1 Kings 11:1-3), could write so beautifully about a monogamous relationship. Primarily, two possible explanations have been offered for this apparent contradiction:

  1. Many believe The Shulamite was Solomon’s first wife. If this was the case, his relationship with her would have come before he took up with all those other women and allowed them to turn his heart away from God. The Shulamite would have been the wife of his youth he speaks of in Proverbs 5:15-20 and Ecclesiastes 9:9.
  2. Others believe the book’s reference to 60 queens and 80 concubines (Song of Solomon 6:8) indicates that Solomon already had 140 other sexual partners before he married The Shulamite. While the language used to describe these 140 other women doesn’t explicitly say they were Solomon’s women, it is easy to make that leap of logic. If the 140 women were indeed Solomon’s wives and concubines, it would likely mean the courtship and marriage he experienced with The Shulamite was the most pure, idyllic, and innocent he ever knew. This theory is bolstered by the fact that many of Solomon’s marriages were nothing more than political arrangements to foreign women, alliances that helped him expand his empire (1 Kings 3:1; 11:1-3).

In the next post from this short series, we’ll begin our walk through The Song of Solomon. By devoting a few posts to this book, I trust we will be brought to a new appreciation of what God’s plan for sex in marriage looks like and sounds like. It’s a shame the church has allowed the world to have all the “fun” (for lack of a better word) with sex. God isn’t nearly as staid and boring as He is made out to be, and if The Song of Solomon is any indication, He wants husbands and wives to not only have sex but look forward to it and enjoy it. So, does that pique your interest in this book? If it does, then please join me for the next couple of posts as we do a closer examination of this typically unexamined book.

Posted in Husbands, Marriage, Series: "The Song of Solomon", Sex, Wives | Tagged , , | 1 Comment