Biblical Commentary - Tumblr Posts

Daniel 12:1-2 Confirms the Messianic Resurrection of Isaiah 2:19

By Author Eli Kittim

In Chapter 12 and verse 1, Daniel prophesies the death and resurrection of a great prince named Michael—meaning “who is like God”—at the end of days. He writes:

“At that time Michael shall stand up, The great prince who stands watch over the sons of your people; And there shall be a time of trouble, Such as never was since there was a nation, Even to that time. And at that time your people shall be delivered, Every one who is found written in the book. And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, Some to everlasting life, Some to shame and everlasting contempt” (Dan. 12:1-2, NKJ).

The 'Septuagint,' an early Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible, translates the Hebrew word 'amad' (“stand up”/arise) with the Greek word 'παρελευσεται,' meaning to pass away: "ἡ γῆ παρελεύσεται NAS: and earth will pass away, KJV: and earth shall pass away, INT: the earth will pass away." So Daniel is telling us that at the time of the end, when there will be great turmoil and distress upon the earth, Michael—after passing away ('παρελεύσεται')—will arise from the dead in order to energize the general resurrection of the dead (και ἐν τῷ καιρῷ ἐκείνῳ ἀναστήσεται [anastēsetai] Μιχαὴλ ὁ ἄρχων ὁ μέγας; Theodotion)! What does all this mean?

Daniel 12:1-2 reaffirms the last-days-resurrection theme found in Isaiah 2:19 and Hebrews 9:26-27. Therefore, Christ’s resurrection could not have happened two thousand years ago, as most people believe:

"[These] men … have gone astray from the truth saying that the resurrection has already taken place" (2 Tim. 2:18).

"In deference to Biblical usage, we are not denying John’s proclamation of 'Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh' (2 John 1:7), but rather qualifying it in terms of its chronological relevance. In other words, we deny the timing of this event; not the event itself!"

Eli of Kittim

"In some cases, predictions about the [OT] suffering servant are immediately next to prophecies about King Messiah, without any mention of a more-than-two-thousand-year gap between them (e.g., cross-reference Isaiah 61:1 ff and Jesus’ commentary in Luke 4:21)."

Satan and His Kingdom: What the Bible Says and How It Matters to You. Dennis McCallum 38.

No Old Testament passage indicates that Messiah will come twice.

--Dennis McCallum, theologian

In Isaiah’s writings, 'the Day of Judgment' and 'the year of salvation' not only appear repeatedly within the same verses, but they also refer to the same exact date! Here is an example. The Messiah declares: ‘For the day of vengeance was in My heart, and My year of redemption has come’ (63:4; cf. Isa. 34:8).

Eli of Kittim

Jesus is a Gentile: The Evidence from the Gospels

By Award-Winning Author Eli of Kittim

In the New Testament, there are various ways in which Jesus is portrayed as a non-Jew. One of those depictions can be found in the Gospel of Matthew, which tells us right up front that Jesus does not come from the Kingdom of Judah (from the Jews) but rather from the region of Galilee (from the Gentiles; cf. Luke 1:26):

“Galilee of the Gentiles– THE PEOPLE WHO WERE SITTING IN DARKNESS SAW A GREAT LIGHT, AND THOSE WHO WERE SITTING IN THE LAND AND SHADOW OF DEATH, UPON THEM A LIGHT DAWNED.” (Matthew 4:15-16).

The Biblical scholar G.A. Williamson (translator of Eusebius’ The History of the Church: From Christ to Constantine) states that Jews formed only a minute portion of the Galilean population, and they were seldom seen in the province. Williamson also says that “the region was entirely Hellenistic in Sympathy.” He goes on to say that all of these facts are well-known to Christian scholars, yet they insist that “Christ was a Jew”.

According to 1 Kings chapter 9, King Solomon rewarded a Phoenician ally (King Hiram I) with twenty cities in the region of Galilee. So ever since the 10th century BCE, the land of Galilee was settled by foreigners and pagans. Galilee was once part of the Northern Kingdom of Israel. This kingdom fell into obscurity not only because much of its population was deported after the Assyrian invasion of 722 BCE, but also due to eight centuries of acculturation. Accordingly, in New Testament times, it had become the land of the Greco-Roman world (i.e. the land of the Gentiles)! That’s why it was known as “Galilee of the nations” (Isaiah 9:1)! This conclusion is archaeologically supportable. Jonathan L. Reed—professor of New Testament and Christian Origins, and a leading authority on first-century Palestine archeology—writes, “In fact, not a single synagogue from the first century or earlier has been found in Galilee” (Crossan, John Dominic, and Jonathan L. Reed. “Excavating Jesus.” San Francisco: HarperCollins, 2001, p. 25). Since then, only a few synagogues have been excavated in Galilee, with some possibly having been built after the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 CE, discoveries which in and of themselves hardly prove the existence of large Jewish communities in Galilee during the first half of the first century CE. Conversely,  all but two tribes remained in the southern kingdom of Judah—-namely, the tribes of Judah and Benjamin (Ezra 1:5)—-which alone, strictly speaking,  represent the term “Jews.” The term “Jew” (an abbreviation of the term “Judah”) was a geographical term which referred to those who came from the kingdom of Judah. In the New Testament story, however, Jesus is not called Jesus-of-Judah but rather “Jesus of Galilee” (Matthew 26:69)! As we will see, this is an extremely important piece of information!

Throughout the gospels, Christ is constantly at odds with the Jews, and even with Judaism itself—whether it be the Law of Moses, Jewish messianic prophecies, Jewish tradition, custom, culture, beliefs, and the like—that it is not difficult to see that he is not one of them. For example, the under mentioned verse exemplifies that Jesus was certainly not a Jew who studied under rabbis, as tradition holds. In the gospel story, he urges the disciples to completely disassociate themselves from the teachings of the Jews:

“Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees.“ (Matthew 16:11).

The Jews were of the opinion that the Messiah would come from Bethlehem, and from the Jews, as we continue to believe today. But they were in for a shock and were quite horrified to learn this was not the case. That’s the reason why John inserts this profound exclamation that comes from one of his characters:

“Nazareth!” exclaimed Nathanael. “Can anything good come from Nazareth?” (John 1:46).

The rift between Jesus and the Jews is once again evoked when Christ forbids the disciples from being called “Rabbi,” the traditional title of a Jewish scholar or teacher, especially one who studies or teaches Jewish law. Instead, he commands them to call him “teacher” (didaskalos)—a Hellenistic title—and not “rabbi”:

“Don’t let anyone call you ‘Rabbi,’ for you have only one teacher.” (Matthew 23:8).

What is worthy of notice is the fact that the gospels often do not present Jesus as a Jew, but rather as a Galilean—(“Jesus of Galilee” Matthew 26:69)—and a Samaritan (John 8:48) at that. In other words, Jesus is portrayed as a Gentile.

In his exhaustive book, “The Birth of the Messiah,” scholar Raymond E. Brown points out that biblical genealogies are important because the ancestors of a family line exemplify character traits or attributes that foreshadow something characteristic or stereotypical about a later figure. A genealogy, after all, is meant to show that someone has the right family credentials and is descended from a unique lineage. Yet, Raymond Brown is not exactly sure why four *foreign women* are mentioned in Matthew’s genealogy, and what their significance is in Matthew’s portrayal of Jesus. The answer is obvious. The 4 *foreign ancestors* of Christ exemplify that he, too, is a foreigner! Moreover, Professor Bart Ehrman asserts that both Matthew and Luke are recording the genealogy of Jesus through Joseph. Accordingly, the epiphany in the gospels that Jesus is not really Joseph’s son drives home the notion that his genealogy is not derived from the Jews (see the analogy between Jesus and Melchizedek in Heb. 7.2-6 in which the former is likened to the latter, “who does not belong to their [Jewish] ancestry,” implying that “the Son of God” is therefore not descended from the Jews either). This allusion becomes evident in another passage in which Jesus refutes the notion that he is the son or the descendent of David (the King of the Jews):

“Now while the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them a question: What do you think about the Messiah? Whose son is he?” They replied, “He is the son of David.” Jesus responded, “Then why does David, speaking under the inspiration of the Spirit, call the Messiah ‘my Lord’? For David said, The LORD said to my Lord, Sit in the place of honor at my right hand until I humble your enemies beneath your feet.’ Since David called the Messiah ‘my Lord,’ how can the Messiah be his son?” No one could answer him. And after that, no one dared to ask him any more questions.” (Matthew 22:41-46).

John’s gospel, in particular, shows that Christ’s teaching is not derived from the Jews, and that his origin or identity even defies the biblical expectations of a Jewish Messiah. For instance, Christ breaks the Law (John 5:16), and consequently the Jews want to kill him. That is why Jesus completely dissociates himself from the Jews by teaching and performing miracles exclusively in Galilee of the Gentiles (John 7:1). In fact, through the dialogues, the gospel suggests the unthinkable. Remember that there are no unnecessary words in the gospels. Every word is important. So, why does the gospel repeatedly emphasize the conflict between Jewish messianic expectations and the fact that Jesus does not meet them? Not only that, but John tells us explicitly that Jesus will not be found among the Jews, but among the Greeks! Jesus tells the Jews,

“’You will search for me but not find me. And you cannot go where I am going.’ The Jews said to one another, ‘Where does this man intend to go that we will not find him? Does he intend to go to the Dispersion among the Greeks and teach the Greeks?’” (John 7:34-35).

This dilemma between a Jewish and a Gentile Messiah is ever-present in John’s gospel. Jesus does not appear to come from the Jews and thus seems to defy scriptural expectations:

“Others said, ‘He is the Messiah.’ Still others asked, ‘How can the Messiah come from Galilee?’ ‘For the Scriptures clearly state that the Messiah will be born of the royal line of David [from Jews], in Bethlehem, the village where King David was born.’ So the crowd was divided about him. Some even wanted him arrested, but no one laid a hand on him.” (John 7:41-44).

In the following verse, we are told that none of the rabbis of Judaism can accept Jesus’ teaching—for his teaching is definitely not Judaic and even appears to contradict scripture. The Jews further imply that Christ’s followers are Gentiles, for they clearly do not know the Law of Moses:

“’No one of the rulers or Pharisees has believed in Him, has he?’ ‘But this crowd which does not know the Law is accursed.” (John 7:48-49).

A few verses later, the Jews go on to say,

“Search the Scriptures and see for yourself–no prophet ever comes from Galilee!“ (John 7:52).

These inclusions in the text by the gospel writer John clearly give us a different perspective on Jesus the Messiah, as far as his origin or identity is concerned. If he were Jewish, the Jews would certainly have accepted him, celebrated him, and honored him as one of their own. We therefore come to realize why they dislike him so intensely and why he offends them throughout the gospel stories. Because he is a Gentile!

Similarly, in Luke 4:23-29 the Jews became enraged because Jesus said that Elijah was sent to the Gentiles, not to the Jews–implying that he himself turns from Jews to Gentiles. John Dominic Crossan writes, “In that case, Jesus’ turn from Jews to Gentiles is cause rather than effect of eventual rejection and lethal attack” (Excavating Jesus,  p. 28).

This theme reminds us of the stories of Joseph and Moses (two messianic stand-ins who are also rejected by their “brothers,” the Jews)—and who are portrayed in the Bible as living and reigning in Egypt (the land of the Gentiles). By analogy, Matthew has Christ supposedly going to Egypt in order to make this connection and to show us that he’s the new Moses:

“OUT OF EGYPT DID I CALL MY SON.” (Matthew 2:15).

Thus, all these messianic figures, including Jesus, are essentially depicted as Gentiles! That’s precisely why Cyrus, a gentile, is called God’s Messiah in Isaiah 45.1! Not to mention that King David himself was not a Jew; he was a Moabite! Similarly, in Isaiah 46:11, God says: I have chosen “a man for My purpose from a far-off land” (cf. Matt. 28:18; 1 Cor. 15:24-25). This motif is also seen in Matthew 21:4-5 and John 12:14-15, which portray Jesus as a Gentile in fulfillment of Zechariah’s (9:9) prophecy. That’s because in Biblical nomenclature, the ox represents Israel, while the ass represents the Gentiles. Thus, the symbolism of the Messiah entering the holy city and riding on a donkey represents Jesus' Gentile ancestry! Paul’s emphasis of this point—which constitutes “the mystery that has been kept hidden for ages and generations, but is now disclosed to the Lord’s people” (Colossians 1:26)—about Christ’s identity bears repeating:

“Therefore I will praise you among the Gentiles; I will sing hymns to your name.” Again, it says, “Rejoice, O Gentiles, with his people.” And again, “Praise the Lord, all you Gentiles, and sing praises to him, all you peoples.” And again, Isaiah says, “The Root of Jesse will spring up, one who will arise to rule over the nations; the Gentiles will hope in him.” (Romans 15:9-12).

The gospel of John makes clear that Jesus’ teaching is a serious threat to the Jews because it completely nullifies Judaism, as well as the Jewish temple—so much so that the Sanhedrin fears that this Gentile (non-Jewish) teaching will cause the entire nation to fall:

“So the chief priests and the Pharisees gathered the council and said, “What are we to do? For this man performs many signs. If we let him go on like this, everyone will believe in him, and the Romans will come and take away both our place and our nation.” (John 11:47-48).

Of further interest is the dichotomy between Jesus and his Jewish audience, one in which there is a clear “I versus you” mentality running throughout the text. Jesus separates himself from the Jews by addressing them as if they were not his own people—“Your” nation, “Your” ancestors, “Your” fathers, “Your” prophets, “Your” Law, etc.—making it abundantly clear that there is a clear distinction between Jesus and the Jews:

1) “Jesus answered them, ‘Is it not written in YOUR Law…?’” (John 10:34, emphasis added).

2) “YOUR own law says that…” (John 8:17, emphasis added)

3) “I know YOU are descendants of Abraham, but you are trying to kill Me because My word is not welcome among you.” (John 8:37, emphasis added).

4) “YOU are doing the works of your own father.“ (John 8:41, emphasis added).

Also notice that while arguing with the Jews—who seek to kill him because they claim he is a Gentile—Jesus does not refute that he is a Gentile, he only refutes the idea that he has a demon:

“The Jews answered him, ‘Are we not right in saying that you are a Samaritan [Gentile] and have a demon?’ Jesus answered, ‘I do not have a demon, but I honor my Father, and you dishonor me.’” (John 8:48-49).

So, in John’s gospel, Jesus is called a ‘Samaritan’—a Greek—and he does not appear to deny it. Further evidence that Jesus is not a Jew can be ascertained from the fact that, in the gospel story, he is not tried in a Jewish court but rather in a Roman—one which was reserved exclusively for Gentiles; that is, for Roman and Greek citizens! Neither was he killed by stoning, which was the traditional custom for killing a Jew. Moreover, some church fathers (e.g. Clement of Alexandria) have claimed that the name “Ιησους” (i.e. Jesus) has a Greek origin, not a Hebrew one. All these clues purvey insights and teachings about a Gentile Messiah who does not conform to our rather facile biblical expectations. In fact, both Jesus and all of his disciples come from Galilee. Ironically, only one of his disciples is a Jew who comes from Judah: the one who betrays him!

Furthermore, the New Testament could not have been written by devout Jews because devout Jews would not have written in Greek. It was forbidden for them to do so. Nor could they have written such articulate, refined Greek. From the earliest times, devout Jews could only read Hebrew. During the Babylonian exile, the Jews wrote in Aramaic. During Hellenistic times, even though the official language was Greek, devout Jews continued to write in Aramaic and could not have written in Greek for fear of being dejected from their sect or congregation! Besides, ever since the overthrow of the Syrian-Greek Empire in the land of Israel, the Jews hated anything to do with the Greeks.

So, who else is left who could have written the New Testament in Greek? Answer: Greeks! And there are more epistles written to Greeks than to any other race. In fact, most of the New Testament books were written in Greece: Romans, 1 & 2 Corinthians, Galatians, 1 & 2 Thessalonians, 1 Timothy, Titus, the book of Revelation, and possibly others as well! None of the books of the New Testament were ever written in Palestine. Not even the Letter of James. According to scholars, the cultivated Greek language of the Epistle of James could not have possibly been written by a Jerusalem Jew!

It is also important to note that when the NT authors quote from the OT, they often quote from the Septuagint, an early Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible, and not from the original Hebrew scriptures per se. This may indicate that the NT authors were not familiar with the Hebrew language. For example, when they quote Jeremiah or refer to Joshua (Acts 7:45; Heb. 4:8) in the NT, they use the Septuagint (the Greek text) as their source (scholarly consensus). This lends plausibility to the argument that the NT authors were not Hebrews but Greeks! And scholars now tell us that these NT authors were writing from different parts of the world, not from Palestine.

And why didn’t the New Testament writers finish God’s story in Hebrew? What better way to persuade Jews that Jesus is the messianic fulfillment of Jewish Scripture than to write it in the Hebrew language, which Jews could both read and understand? But they didn’t! The reason for this is Jesus. Apparently, he is not Jewish; he is Greek! So, the story must be written in Greek to reflect its main character, the God man, Jesus the Christ. Furthermore, if he were Jewish, he would have said I am the Aleph and the Tav. Instead, he uses Greek letters to define the divine “I AM”:

“I am the Alpha and the Omega,” says the Lord God.” (Revelation 1:8).

The following verse shows that we are on the right track. John the Revelator is not in Greece by accident. He is there BECAUSE (for the reason that) it has everything to do with the SPECIFIC ACCOUNT of Jesus, which is revealed to him by the word of God:

“I, John … was on the island called Patmos [in Greece] BECAUSE of the word of God and the testimony of Jesus.” (Revelation 1:9, emphasis added).

If we sum up our findings, we could say with confidence that the mystery of Jesus’ non-Jewish identity is revealed even in the gospels. And the gospel mystery of Christ’s identity is supported by no less an authority than Paul:

“This message was kept secret for centuries and generations past, but now it has been revealed to God’s people.” (Colossians 1:26).

In his in-depth-Bible-study video called “Breaking the Sound of Silence,” distinguished scholar Brant Pitre agrees that “the mystery which was kept secret for long ages but is now disclosed and through the prophetic writings is made known to all nations” (Rom. 16.25b-26a) is exclusively referring to a *revelation* of Jesus’ *identity* that was previously unknown! That’s why “the mystery which was kept secret for long ages” needed to be revealed. Because we could not have possibly known this truth from any available sources (biblical or otherwise) except by way of divine revelation! There is much more proof in the Bible that Jesus is Greek (and not Jewish). But this evidence cannot be reproduced here, given the limited scope of this article.

.

Jesus Revealed: In the Fulness of Time, In the End Times, or in Due Time

By Goodreads Author Eli of Kittim

Sadly, we have confused biblical literature with history, and turned prophecy into biography. In the end, the New Testament (NT) gospels appear to be non-historical stories—borrowed to a large extent from the Old Testament (OT)—giving us the Messianic prophecy through an apocalyptic narrative, whereas the NT epistles (or letters) and the book of Revelation, which are NOT stories, reveal the real Jesus and tell a different story. And although I'm not Jewish, I do agree with the Jews on one point. In fact, I'm the first author, as far as I know, who legitimately fuses the messianic expectations of the Jews with Christian scripture! In my view, both the OT and NT say the SAME THING: the Messiah comes "once in the end of the world" (NT, Hebrews 9:26)!

Messiah Revealed: In the End Times

According to the NT itself, Jesus will come once, for the first time, in the "last days" (Hebrews 1:1-2), or "at the consummation of the ages" (Hebrews 9:26). The King James Version says that Christ will die as the atonement for sin "ONCE IN THE END OF THE WORLD" (Hebrews 9:26)! Without putting a spin on it, we must conclude that the church has CHANGED what the Bible ACTUALLY says, and has therefore handed us the wrong information about the precise timing of the messiah's momentous coming to earth. I present multiple lines of evidence to buttress my argument. As for my conviction that Jesus did not come the first time, this comes primarily from the New Testament epistles (Hebrews 1:1-2, 9:26; Galatians 4:4; Ephesians 1:10; 2 Thess. 2:7; 1 Corinthians 15:8, 19, 22-26, 54-55) and the book of Revelation (Rev. 6:2; 12:1-5, 19:10-11, 22:7), as well as from the Old Testament where the Messiah is depicted as dying (Zephaniah 1:7; Zechariah 12:8-10) and being resurrected (Isaiah 2:19; Daniel 12:1-2) on the Day of the Lord, or in the last days:

"Once IN THE END OF THE WORLD hath he [Jesus] appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice [death] of himself" (King James, Hebrews 9:26, emphasis added).

The original Greek New Testament says:

“νυνϊ δε απαξ επι ϲυντελεια των αιωνων ειϲ αθετηϲιν τηϲ αμαρτιαϲ δια τηϲ θυϲιαϲ αυτου πεφανερωται.” (Hebrews 9:26, Codex Sinaiticus, Greek NT).

Translation: “Once in the conclusion of the ages [in Greek the word αιωνων/’ages’ also means ‘centuries’] has he [Christ] been made manifest, to put away sin through the sacrifice of himself.” (Hebrews 9:26, Codex Sinaiticus).

Here, the phrase sinteleia ton aionon does NOT imply dispensations, speculative covenants or anything else. The word "aionon" refers specifically to chronological time, and it means "ages" or centuries, whereas the term synteleia means "conclusion," "consummation," or "end." Put together, it simply means at the "end" or at the conclusion of all the ages. That’s why the King James Version translates it as, “In the end of the world.” In other words Christ appears ONCE AND FOR ALL (hapax), not twice, to atone for sin by sacrificing himself “in the end of the world.” If you try to manipulate the verse by claiming that the end of the world was 2000 years ago, that would be nothing short of insanity! A similar phrase, ϲυντελειαϲ του αιωvos, can be found in the Gospel of Matthew chapter 28 and verse 20:

"διδαϲκοντεϲ αυτουϲ τηριν παντα οϲα ενετιλαμην ϋμιν και ϊδου εγω ειμι μεθ υμων παϲαϲ ταϲ ημεραϲ εωϲ τηϲ ϲυντελειαϲ του αιωvos.”

Translation: American Standard Version “Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I commanded you: and lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world.”

Therefore, it is unquestionable that the Greek phrase ϲυντελειαϲ του αιωvos (Matthew 28:20) means “in the end of the world.” And if that’s the case, and it is, then the reference to Jesus being manifested once επι ϲυντελεια των αιωνων to die for the sins of the world (Hebrews 9:26) would certainly mean that his death occurs “Once in the end of the world” and not 2,000 years ago as is currently assumed! The overall meaning of Hebrews 9:26 is that Christ will die for the sins of the world at the final point of time! Read what the text ACTUALLY says: The New American Standard says "at the consummation of the ages." The Jerusalem Bible renders it "at the end of the last age," whereas the King James version translates it "in the end of the world." It's abundantly clear what it means. I've already presented numerous verses that support this view. Here's another:

"God, after He spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways, in these LAST DAYS has spoken to us in his Son" (Hebrews 1:1-2, emphasis added).

Once again, in Greek, the "last days" are written as ep escaton ton imeron, where ep escaton means in the last, or in the final, or in the end, and where the term "imeron" refers to chronological days... The meaning is quite clear and resonates among all these verses: Jesus is manifested once and for all (απαξ) in the end of the world to die and save mankind! This is reiterated in 1 Peter 1:5, Apokalufthinai en kairo escato, which means “is revealed in the last days.” The Greek word escato means “last” and it is the same term from where we get the word eschatology. You can speculate all you want on what it means and come up with your own erroneous version of the Bible. I choose to believe EXACTLY what the Bible says WITHOUT INTERPRETING IT, changing it, or manipulating it, which would be equivalent to falsifying it!

Christ Revealed: In the Fulness of Time

Do you know what the fulness of the time means? Read Ephesians 1:10 where "the fullness of the time" means the END OF THE WORLD, confirming Hebrews 9:26 and Hebrews 1:1-2. Ephesians 1:10 reads:

"With a view to an administration suitable to the fullness of the times, that is, the summing up of all things in Christ, things in the heavens and things on the earth."

WITH A VIEW TO AN ADMINISTRATION SUITABLE TO THE FULLNESS OF THE TIMES: eis oikonomian tou pleromatos ton kairon where the term kairoi refer to the passing of chronological “times” or “seasons,” and where the word fullness means "completion." So the Bible ITSELF defines the idiomatic phrase, the fullness of the time as “the summing up [or “conclusion”] of all things… things in the heavens and …on the earth.” In other words, we need not speculate because Ephesians 1:10 clearly defines “the fullness of the times” as an idiom that refers to the END OF THE WORLD.

Now read Galatians 4:4--which uses the same CONSISTENT idiom--to find out exactly when Christ is incarnated:

“But when THE FULNESS OF THE TIME came, God sent forth his Son, born of a woman…” (Galatians 4:4, emphasis added).

Thus, Christ is incarnated during the fulness of the time, or, as Ephesians 1:10 illustrates, at the end of time—“To be put into effect when the times reach their fulfillment—to bring unity to all things in heaven and on earth under Christ" (Ephesians 1:10, NIV)! The Greek text does not allow any room for confusion since to pliroma tou chronou (the fulness of the time) clearly indicates a distinctive chronological time period. In Greek, the term "Chronos" means chronological time. And pliroma means "completion." Thus, it means that at the completion of time, or when time has reached its “fulness,” Christ will be incarnated! No wonder there is a prophecy of Christ’s birth in the prophetic book of Revelation chapter 12:1-5!

Knowing this, we cannot manipulate or violate scripture in any way. We must allow scripture to define its own terms because these same terms are repeated consistently throughout the Bible! Therefore, Scripture's own definition of the fullness of the time is actually the end of the world, when all things will be summed up in Christ!!! Similarly, Acts 3:19-21 says,

“Repent ye therefore … and he [God] shall send Jesus Christ, which BEFORE was preached unto you: whom the heaven must receive [or cannot receive] until the times of restitution of all things [meaning, until the end of the world], which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began.” — Acts 3:19-21, King James, emphasis added

Here's what it means: The preaching of Jesus precedes his arrival! Moreover, Peter says that Christ “Was foreknown indeed before the foundation of the world, but was manifested at the end of times for your sake.” (1 Peter 1:20). In Greek, it reads: “Fanerothentos de ep escaton ton chronon,” Ep Escaton means "during the last" and "chronon" implies chronological years, which literally means that Jesus is manifested during the last years, or at the final point of time. It fits perfectly with what Peter has been saying all along, such as “apokalufthinai en kairo escato" (1 Peter 1:5), which means “revealed in the end times.”

Jesus Revealed: In Due Time

Now, concerning the under mentioned verse, don’t let the past tenses fool you. Remember that past tenses—such as “Christ died for our sins”—do not necessarily refer to past history. Just read Isaiah 53 and you’ll see why. It is filled with past tenses—“He was despised and rejected by mankind,” “But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities,” (53:3-5) etc.—and yet Isaiah is not recounting a past event but writing about a future PROPHECY! Similarly, Paul states: “For when we were yet without strength, IN DUE TIME Christ died for the ungodly.” (Romans 5:6, emphasis added) In Greek, it reads:

Eti gar christos onton imon asthenon kata kairon iper asevon apethanen. Textus Receptus

KATA KAIRON means "at the right time" or “in due time” or season. (Strong, G2540). Now, why would Paul use this phrase KATA KAIRON (meaning, that Christ died at the right time or when the time is ripe) to refer to a past event? It doesn't make any sense at all unless he is in line with what Peter (1 Peter 1:5, 20) and Hebrews (1:1-2, 9:26) say about Christ being revealed and DYING during the end times.

Here's a scholarly rendering of the phrase "IN DUE TIME" (KATA KAIRON):

“In 1 Clement 24:2 [Apocrypha] we read: IDOMEN AGAPHTOI THN KATA KAIRON GINOMENHN ANASTASIN, "We should consider, beloved, the resurrection that happens KATA KAIRON." "...the resurrection that Happens … "at the right time" or "at the right season" --Bart D. Ehrman (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill).

That is, "The resurrection that comes when time is ripe for it" --Carl W. Conrad (Department of Classics/Washington University).

In other words, this phrase--"IN DUE TIME Christ died for the ungodly” (Romans 5:6)--implies that Christ dies for the ungodly "when the time is ripe for it," or as other passages suggest, during the fulness of the time (Gal. 4:4; cf. Eph. 1:10), at the end of times (1 Peter 1:20); “revealed in the end times" (1 Peter 1:5), in the last days (Heb. 1:2), or "IN THE END OF THE WORLD." (Hebrews 9:26). It's as if God is screaming at deaf ears...

In the New Testament epistles, we find yet another epiphany:

“You greatly rejoice … that the proof of your faith … may be found … at the revelation of Jesus Christ; and though you have not seen Him, you love Him, and though you do not see Him now, but believe in Him, you greatly rejoice. … As to this salvation, the prophets who prophesied of the grace that would come to you made careful search and inquiry, seeking to know what person or time the Spirit of Christ within them was indicating as He [the Holy Spirit] PREDICTED the sufferings of Christ and the glories to follow” (1 Peter 1:6-11, emphasis added).

1 Peter 1:7 exhorts us to have faith so that we are ready “at the revelation of Jesus Christ,” which apokalifthinai en kairo eshato or is “revealed in the last days” (1 Peter 1:5). Moreover, observe that “the sufferings of the Messiah and the glories that would follow” are PROPHECIES or PREDICTIONS (1 Peter 1:10-11), NOT historical events!!! Notice also that the disciples “preached the gospel to you by the Holy Spirit sent from heaven” (1 Peter 1:12)—not by historical reports! This passage tells you unequivocally that the revelation of Jesus—including his sufferings and glory—are for an appointed time in the future: "For it is the Spirit of prophecy who bears testimony to Jesus" (Rev. 19:10), NOT history! Here's an excerpt from my book (The Little Book of Revelation) that offers further clues:

"Paul, the author of numerous NT letters, explains how Jesus “appeared to Cephas [Peter], then to the twelve,” and finally “to more than five hundred brethren [believers] at one time” (1 Cor. 15:5-6). But then he says: “and last of all, as it were to one untimely born, He appeared to me also” (1 Cor. 15:8). In other words, Paul is stating that Christ “was seen by me also, as by one born out of DUE TIME” (1 Cor. 15:8, NKJ, emphasis added). Similar to other eyewitnesses whom he cites earlier, Paul did not behold Christ in the flesh (Gal. 1:15-16), but in a vision (Acts 9:3-7) that delivered him prematurely, so to speak, before the appointed time of salvation."

As for the so-called witnesses, may I remind you that the Holy Spirit who teaches men is also called a Witness or "The Witness” (1 John 5:8-12)! Moreover, we are told:

"But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all the truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come [future events]." (John 16:13)

Conclusion: the Jesus account is not historical, but prophetic! But this does not mean that the gospels are manufactured. It simply means that they are rehashed OT stories that foreshadow the Messianic prophecy. And they are inspired by God! It’s as if history is written in advance before it happens:

“Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done” (Isaiah 46:10).

Russia: The Origin of the Biblical Antichrist

By Author Eli Kittim

This paper is an excerpt from Eli Kittim’s book, The Little Book of Revelation: The First Coming of Jesus at the End of Days.

Daniel has a follow-up vision of a mighty ram, followed by a male goat that attacks and overwhelms it (8:3-7). In time, the goat’s horn [power] was broken; and in its place there came up four conspicuous horns (8:8). Daniel recounts the oracle:

'And out of one of them came forth a rather small horn which grew exceedingly great toward the south, toward the east, and toward the Beautiful Land [Israel]. And it grew up to the host of heaven and caused some of the host and some of the stars to fall to the earth, and it trampled them down. It even magnified itself to be equal with the Commander of the host [God]; and it removed the regular sacrifice [Holy Communion] from Him, and the place of His sanctuary [Church] was thrown down' (8:9-11).

The angelic messenger named Gabriel appears once again and interprets the vision to Daniel (8:16). Gabriel says: ‘Son of man, understand that the vision pertains to the time of the end’ (Dan. 8:17). The celestial being now begins to expound the oracle:

‘Behold, I am going to let you know what will occur at the final period of the indignation [God’s wrath], for it pertains to the appointed time of the end. The ram which you saw with the two horns represents the kings of Media and Persia. And the shaggy goat represents the kingdom of Greece, and the large horn that is between his eyes is the first king [Alexander the Great]. And the broken horn and the four horns that arose in its place represent four kingdoms which will arise from his nation [Hellenistic Empire], although not with his power. And in the latter period [in the last days] of their rule, when the transgressors [the succeeding empires] have run their course, a king will arise insolent and skilled in intrigue. And his power will be mighty, but not by his own power, and he will destroy to an extraordinary degree and prosper and perform his will’ (Dan. 8:19-24).

In chapter 11, Daniel receives additional information concerning the previous vision:

‘But as soon as he [Alexander the Great] has arisen, his kingdom will be broken up and parceled out toward the four points of the compass, though not to his own descendants, nor according to his authority which he wielded; for his sovereignty will be uprooted and given to others besides them [the Greeks]’ (11:4).

In Daniel chapter 2 (the statue vision), the Antichrist, who mingles ‘in the seed of men’ (2:43), comes from the part of the Roman Empire which is represented by the symbol of iron (2:40-43), namely, the Byzantines. But in Daniel chapter eight, he arises out of one of the four successors of Alexander the Great. As you will see, both lines of succession are correct and coalesce so as to give us a more precise understanding of where the Antichrist comes from.

Following Alexander’s death, the heirs to the Hellenistic Empire were called the Diadochi, which means ‘successors’ in Greek. The four Generals alluded to by scripture appear to be Ptolemy, Seleucus, Cassander and Lysimachus, all of whom had ruled over different Hellenistic Kingdoms after the partition of the Empire (Fruchtenbaum, Arnold G. The Footsteps of the Messiah: A study of the Sequence of Prophetic Events. [Tustin: Ariel, 1990], p. 20). The book of Daniel clearly indicates that the smallest territory in land size, held by one of these four generals, denotes the symbolic ‘small horn’ (the Antichrist) of the end times (8:8-9). Interestingly, the text also states that this small territory cannot possibly come from Alexander’s ‘own descendants,’ namely, the Greeks (11:4). Historically, Greece was conquered by the Romans in the 2nd century B.C., and so their empire came to an abrupt end.

On that account, in order to locate the actual place that represents the little horn, we must search elsewhere. By implication, Cassander, who controlled Macedonia and most of Greece, must be ruled out of the equation. On the other hand, Lysimachus’s terrain, which originally consisted of the tiny area called Thrace, is the only one to qualify as the smallest amount of land size in comparison with the other Hellenistic Kingdoms. If you recall, Daniel mentioned that the little horn ‘grew exceedingly great toward the south’ and ‘toward the east’ (8:9). Evidently, after the major Battle of Ipsus in 301 B.C., Lysimachus gained vast amounts of land to the south and to the east, as he was awarded Anatolia for his decisive allied victory. By that time, General Lysimachus had become a very wealthy and powerful man, as he presided over all aspects of life, political and otherwise, within the geographic region we now call Asia Minor. He also founded his capital at Pergamum, in modern-day western Turkey, where all his wealth was kept.

Anatolia then becomes the seat of the Ottoman Empire, which destroyed the last remaining vestige of the Roman Empire in 1453 of the Common Era. By the late 19th century, the Turks were in turn defeated by Imperial Russia through various wars, but especially after the Russo-Turkish War of 1877-1878 A.D. If we trace the succession of empires that supplant one another in the region denoted by the symbol of the little horn – namely, Thrace and Asia Minor – we will notice a sequence that begins with General Lysimachus and continues on with the Byzantine Romans, whose capital (Constantinople) was actually situated within the former’s domain. Next, the Ottoman Turks come forth from this same territory and are subsequently defeated by the Great Russian Empire. Since Lysimachus represents the little horn, we can trace the roots of the Antichrist from this foregoing General all the way up to Russia, the so-called Third Rome. It is for this reason, no doubt, that the book of Revelation features ‘Pergamum’ as the place ‘where Satan’s throne is’ (Rev. 2:12-13) located, indicating not only the origin of the little horn, but also the succession of empires that lead to his proverbial doorstep. In this respect, the small horn, the kingdom of Lysimachus, becomes a key piece of the puzzle that decidedly affirms the link that leads to the Antichrist (Dan. 8:9-12). That is to say, the Lysimachaean province gave rise to the Byzantine and Turkish empires, and in the process of usurping the latter, the modern Russian Empire was born.

Ezekiel, a dominant force in Jewish apocalyptic literature, prophesies that ‘in the latter years’ a mysterious ‘prince of Rosh’ and ‘Meshech’ will come ‘from the remote parts of the north,’ from ‘the land of Magog,’ to invade Israel, ‘whose inhabitants have been gathered from many nations’ (Ezek. 38:2, 8). It is customary for scholars to identify the abovementioned locations with modern day Russia, which will be in league with many nations during its latter-day military campaigns. Historical investigations reveal that the term ‘Rosh’ is derived from the tribe of the ‘Rus’ who migrated from Scandinavia and founded Russia (Kievan Rus) roughly around the 10th century of the Common Era. By the same token, the term ‘Meshech’ originates with the clan whom the Greeks called ‘moshoi,’ and whence the name Moscow is traced.

The Septuagint, an early Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible, translates the term ‘Rosh’ (Ezek. 38:2) with the Greek word ρως, which stands for Ρωσία (the Greek word for Russia). The earlier Ezekiel quotation referred to ‘the land of Magog.’ In ancient times, it comprised the lands where the Scythians once lived, and thus represents contemporary Russia. In his sobering book, the biblical scholar Arnold Fruchtenbaum provides a supplementary elaboration of Ezekiel 38:

‘The identification of Magog, Rosh, Meshech, and Tubal is to be determined from the fact that these tribes of the ancient world occupied the areas of modern day Russia. Magog, Meshech and Tubal were between the Black and Caspian Seas which today is southern Russia. The tribes of Meshech and Tubal later gave names to cities that today bear the names of Moscow, the capital, and Tobolsk, a major city in the Urals in Siberia. Rosh was in what is now northern Russia. The name Rosh is the basis for the modern name Russia. These names, then, cover the modern territories of northern and southern Russia in Europe and Siberia to the east in Asia’ (Footsteps of the Messiah 70).

In addition, Ivan the Great adopted the official emblem of the Byzantine Monarchy: the double-headed eagle. He then went on to marry Sophia Paleologue, the niece of the final Byzantine ruler Constantine XI. In the aftermath of the Ottoman Turks’ conquest of the Eastern Roman Empire and in an effort to salvage the last vestiges of Christianity, Ivan designated Moscow as the Third Rome in 1497 A.D. In effect, Moscow became the offspring of the Roman Empire; heirs to the legacy. Russia, then, becomes the link of the little horn (Antichrist) to the Roman Empire (cf. Daniel 7:7-8 f.).

The celebrated seer Nostradamus confirms this conclusion and gives us an insightful clue in this regard:

‘The great Empire of the Antichrist will begin where once was Attila’s empire and the new Xerxes will descend with great and countless numbers’ (The Prophecies, Epistle to Henry II).

Maps that show the extent of Attila’s empire reveal that it comprised areas of the former Soviet Union and modern-day Russia. Moreover, Nostradamus calls the Antichrist the new Xerxes. The differences between Russia and Persia (modern-day Iran) are worlds apart! Nevertheless, Nostradamus pierces through the opaque veil of prophecy to glimpse an intimate alliance built for conquest: ‘Arabs will be allied with the Poles’ (The Prophecies, Century 5, Quatrain 73). The term Poles refers to those who dwell in ‘the remote parts of the north’ (Ezek. 38:6, 15). Here, following, is a prophecy that might lend support to the idea that a military buildup in Asia could ignite the end of the world:

‘When those of the arctic pole are united together, Great terror and fear in the East’ (The Prophecies, Century 6, Quatrain 21).

Realized Eschatology versus Future Eschatology

By Author Eli of Kittim

Realized eschatology is a term in Christian theology used to describe the belief that the end times (or latter days) have already happened during the ministry of Jesus. According to this position, all end-time events have already been “realized” (i.e., fulfilled ), including the resurrection of the dead, and the second coming of Jesus.

This view is the culmination of poor methodological considerations, misapplication of proper exegetical methods (i.e. literary context /detailed exegesis), and a confusion of terms and context. The under-mentioned examples typify this confusion:

Example A) “Dear children, this is the last hour; and as you have heard that the antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come. This is how we know it is the last hour” (1 John 2:18).

Example B) “In the past God spoke to our ancestors through the prophets at many times and in various ways, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son…” (Hebrews 1:1-2).

Here, without a proper understanding of context, we are led to believe that John is referring to the “last days” as occurring in or around the 1st century CE. These types of verses have misled many to follow Preterism, a doctrine which holds that biblical prophecies represent incidents that have already been fulfilled at the close of the first century. Unfortunately, the same type of misappropriation of scripture has given birth to “realized eschatology.”

Notice that in Example A, John states that “it is the last hour.” The context implies that there are two possibilities within which this phrase can make scriptural sense. Either John is literally referring to the 1st century as being the last or final hour of mankind (which would include the coming of the Antichrist, since John mentions him), or the overall context of this and other texts is, strictly speaking, an eschatological one in which all these events take place in the future, and not during John’s lifetime.

As I have shown in earlier works, scriptural tenses that are set in the past, present and future do not necessarily correspond to past, present or future history respectively. What is more, logic tells us that “the final point of time” represents the end of the world. Yet there are future events that are clearly described in the past tense. For example, “He [Christ] … was revealed at the final point of time” (1 Pet. 1:20, NJB, emphasis added). In a passage that deals exclusively with the great tribulation of the end times, we find another future event that is described in the past tense; it reads: “From the tribe of Judah, twelve thousand had been sealed” (Rev. 7:5, emphasis added). Isaiah 53 is a perfect example because we can demonstrate that Isaiah was composing a prophecy, at the time he penned this text, which was saturated with past tenses.

In Example B, we face a similar dilemma. The author of Hebrews combines the idiomatic phrase “last days” with the present tense “these,” which implies several things:

1) The phrase “in these last days” gives us the impression that the “last days” may have started or occurred during the author’s lifetime.

2) It implies that Jesus not only appeared, but he appeared specifically “in these last days.”

3) The phrase “in these last days” might simply be an allusion to the days just mentioned. It’s like saying, concerning the days in question, or with regard to the days that we are describing, rather than a reference to the present time.

So, at first sight, there seems to be some basis (biblical support) for a realized-eschatology interpretation. However, upon further scrutiny, we find many outright logical fallacies (a logical fallacy is, roughly speaking, an error of reasoning) that cannot possibly be true. For example, how can the last days of the world occur in the 1st century CE if nineteen plus centuries have since come and gone? It would be a contradiction in terms!

Moreover, these positions flatly contradict not only the broad scriptural context of the term “last days” and its cognates (i.e., “the time of the end” Dan. 12:4), but also certain definite future events, such as the “great tribulation” (Matt. 24:21; cf. Daniel 12:1-2) and the coming of the “lawless one” (2 Thess. 2:3-4; cf. Rev. 13), which clearly have yet to occur. Therefore, the so-called “realized” eschatological interpretations involve logical fallacies, blatant misappropriation of future events, methodological errors, misapplication of proper exegetical methods, and misinterpretation of tenses with regard to proper eschatological context.

Contradiction notwithstanding, many have endorsed these false teachings. Daniel 12 and Matthew 24 are two examples that demonstrate beyond a shadow of a doubt that “the time of the end” is radically different than what these interpreters make it out to be, namely, a first-century occurrence. These views (regarding the last days as eschatological events that occurred in the 1st century CE) display, for lack of a better term, an eccentric doctrine. They are patently ridiculous!

The same holds true in the gospel of John. Jesus says:

“Truly, Truly, I say to you, the hour is coming and now is, when the dead will hear the voice of the son of God; and those who hear will live” (John 5:25).

The phrase “and now is” implies that this particular time period is happening now. However, notice a clear distinction between the hour that is here and “the hour that is coming” when the dead will rise again (in the under mentioned verse). These two time periods are clearly not identical because the events to which the latter prophecy points have yet to happen:

“Do not marvel at this; for the hour is coming in which all who are in their graves will hear his voice, and come forth, … those who have done good, to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil, to the resurrection of condemnation” (John 5:28-29).

The context of John 5:25 ff. is ultimately based on future history (i.e., history written in advance), but the author reinterprets it through a theology. On what basis am I making these claims? Since I concluded that “realized eschatology” is seemingly erroneous, we now have to consider its opposite, namely, the view that the last days are really referring to literal future events, and not to the time of Antiquity.

One illustration of this view is in the context in which Jesus’ earthly appearance is contemporaneous with Judgment Day. Jesus uses the present tense “now” to indicate that his manifestation on earth is for the purpose of Judgment, and the overthrow of Satan:

“Now is the time for judgment on this world; now the prince of this world will be driven out” (John 12:31).

Jesus’ use of the word “now,” in connection with the removal of Satan and Judgment, would indicate that his earthly appearance (as described in the gospels) is a reference to a future event, one that could not have possibly happened in Antiquity.

Another example shows that Christ’s generation (as described in the gospels) is the last generation on earth. During his eschatological discourse, Christ uses the words “this generation” to refer to his audience. He says,

“Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened” (Matthew 24:34).

In the following verse, Jesus uses the words “some who are standing here” to signify his audience. Interestingly enough, Jesus implies that his audience (or generation) is the one related to the end times. The idea that Jesus’ audience (as described in the gospels) represents the last generation on earth that would see Jesus coming in the clouds is furnished in the gospel of Matthew:

“Truly I tell you, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom" (Matthew 16:28).

The notion that some of Jesus’ followers would not die before they saw him coming in glory cannot be attributed to the 1st century CE. It can only be ascribed to a future event, since Jesus has yet to come in his glory! These verses would strongly suggest that the account of Jesus (as described in the gospels) is really in the context of a future event rather than one that occurred in the 1st century of the Common Era.

In conclusion, scriptural tenses that are set in the past, present and future do not necessarily correspond to past, present or future history respectively. What is more, both scripture and logic tell us that “the final point of time” represents the end of the world, and therefore this “end time” period could not have possibly happened during the 1st century CE.

There are also gospel materials, which indicate not only that Jesus’ audience represents the last generation on earth, but that Jesus’ manifestation on earth signifies the immediate removal of Satan and the commencement of Judgment. Add to this material the original Greek texts—with multiple references to Jesus appearing “once at the consummation of the ages” (Heb. 9:26; cf. Luke 17:30; Heb. 1:1-2; 1 Pet. 1:5, 20; Rev. 12:1-5) or at the end of human history—and the eschatological context of the “last days” finally comes into view as a future reference!

The Greek New Testament Prophesies the Birth, Death, and Resurrection of Christ in the Last Days

By Author Eli Kittim

Theological Narrative versus Expository Writing in the New Testament

In order to procure accurate information from our interpretative methods, we must first differentiate between “theological narrative” and “expository writing” in the New Testament, which represent two distinct genres.

In narrative writing, the author’s main purpose is to tell a story using characters and dialogue. In the New Testament, the gospels employ this literary technique in an attempt to portray Jesus as the Messianic fulfillment of the Jewish prophecies. That is to say, the gospel “story” now becomes the fulfillment of the earlier Messianic promises of Jewish scripture. That is why the genealogy of Christ is inserted in the gospel texts: to ensure that this connection is established. But in order to do so, the gospel writers actually borrow a great deal from Hebrew scripture and tell a story, using characters and dialogue, which is wrapped in theological language. That’s why we do not encounter these “theological” themes in any of the epistles. For instance, the epistolary authors never once mention the nativity of Jesus, the virgin birth, the flight into Egypt, the star of Bethlehem, the magi, or even the city of Bethlehem as Jesus’ birth place. Therefore, we must come to realize that the gospels are “theological narratives,” not necessarily historical accounts, especially since we now know that the gospel authors were not eyewitnesses of these events, given that they composed their texts sometime around 70-100 CE. And like any good story, they are filled with drama, conflict, and intrigue. The gospel narratives are “characteristic” of situations and events that take place at some unspecified time, as reflected in the idea that Jesus died to redeem us. The timeline of the gospel events is thus in a transhistorical context, or within the context of the entire human history, not just past history.

On the other hand, the epistles (or “letters” of the New Testament) use “expository writing.” Expository writing’s main purpose is to explain. It is a subject-oriented writing style, in which authors focus on a given topic or subject without narrative embellishment or story-telling. The epistolary authors, for example, furnish the reader with relevant spiritual facts and principles but do not include dialogue or characters. So then, if we are to understand the mystery of Christ’s revelation, we must first differentiate between “theological narrative” and “expository writing” in the New Testament. Why? Because the authors of the epistles seemingly contradict the gospels since they allude to Christ’s revelation as occurring “once at the consummation of the ages” (Heb.9:26), or in the “last days” (Heb. 1:1-2), so that the correct timing of Christ’s coming suddenly becomes an open question! But if we realize that there is a clear line of demarcation between “theological narrative” (gospels) and “expository writing” (epistles), the hermeneutical problem ceases to exist and the text resolves itself into a meaningful and “inspired” manuscript.

The second thing that we must do is to challenge the kind of historical interpretation that affords little attention to the issue of translation. The New Testament was originally written in Greek (scholarly consensus). In order to engage in deep biblical exegesis, we must first understand what the original New Testament epistles (“expository writing”) have to say about the timing of Christ’s incarnation. So, let’s dive headfirst into the discussion to uncover the facts and clear the air. I will present the Greek text so that you can go over it and form your own conclusions.

The Greek Text: In the Fullness of Time Jesus is Born

In the Greek text, Romans 5:6 makes it quite clear that Christ died (ἀπέθανεν) at some unspecified time of human history by using the phrase κατὰ καιρὸν, which means “according to the right time,” or at the appropriate time, and does not necessarily refer to past history. http://biblehub.com/interlinear/romans/5-6.htm

Similarly, Galatians 4:4 tells us that when the “right time” or, more specifically, “the fullness of the time” had come, Christ was incarnated, “having been born of a woman” (γενόμενον ἐκ γυναικός). In Greek, “the fullness of the time” is τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ χρόνου. The term πλήρωμα means fulness or completion while the term χρόνου refers to chronological time. It literally means when time reached its fullness or completion. http://biblehub.com/interlinear/galatians/4-4.htm

The consistency of biblical terms allows scripture to define itself. Rather than imposing our own speculations on the text (eisegesis), we should allow the Bible to interpret its own terms (exegesis) so that our interpretations and conclusions are accurate and in line with it.

Accordingly, Ephesians 1:10 defines the idiomatic phrase “the fullness of the times” (τοῦ πληρώματος τῶν καιρῶν, which we encountered in Galatians 4:4) as the summing up (ἀνακεφαλαιώσασθαι) of all things in Christ (τὰ πάντα ἐν τῷ Χριστῷ), the things in the heavens (τὰ ἐπὶ τοῖς οὐρανοῖς) and the things upon the earth (καὶ τὰ ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς). In short, the designation “the fullness of the time” refers to the period of time when all things, both in the heavens and upon the earth, will conclude in Christ. In other words, τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ χρόνου refers to the completion of time, which is another way of saying “the end of the world.” Yet, surprisingly, according to Galatians 4:4, this is also the time of Christ’s incarnation! http://biblehub.com/interlinear/ephesians/1-10.htm

Using the “expository writing” of the epistles rather than the “theological narrative” of the gospels as our basis for procuring accurate information from our interpretative methods, we find overwhelming evidence pertaining to the incarnation of Christ at the end of days. But there is more.

Christ’s Resurrection in the Last Days

The Septuagint, an early Greek translation of Hebrew Scripture, was heavily relied upon by the New Testament authors when quoting from the “Old Testament” (which in Hebrew is called “Tanakh”). That’s why it’s important to study the Septuagint. For instance, one of Isaiah’s prophecies says that “In the last days the mountain [Messiah] of God will appear and will be exalted above the hills [human powers], and all gentile nations will flow to it” (2:2). The Septuagint translates it as follows:

Εν ταις εσχαταις ημεραις εμφανες το ορος κυριου και ο οικος του θεου επ’ ακρων των ορεων και υψωθησεται υπερανω των βουνων και ηξουσιν επ’ αυτο παντα τα εθνη (Isaiah 2:2).

Once again, notice the allusion to the Messiah becoming apparent (εμφανες) in the last days (Εν ταις εσχαταις ημεραις). The word εσχαταις means last (from where we get the term “eschatology”), while the term ημεραις refers to chronological days (⬇️ see Isaiah 2.2 LXX ⬇️):

But something far more interesting is mentioned by Isaiah in chapter 2. If we drop down to Isaiah 2:19, we get a picture of the great tribulation or the great ordeal of the end times:

“Men will go into caves of the rocks, and into holes of the ground before the terror of the LORD, and before the splendor of His majesty, when He arises to make the earth tremble.”

Here’s the translation from the Septuagint:

Εισενεγκαντες εις τα σπηλαια και εις τας σχισμας των πετρων και εις τας τρωγλας της γης απο προσωπου του φοβου κυριου και απο της δοξης της ισχυος αυτου οταν αναστη θραυσαι την γην.

(⬇️ see Isaiah 2.19 LXX ⬇️):

The game changer in this verse is the Hebrew term “qum,” which is rendered in English as “arises.” Interestingly enough, the Septuagint translates it as αναστη (from the Greek ανάσταση, which in this context means resurrection). Compare the Greek terms *ἀναστῇ* (Isa. 2.19 LXX), *ἀναστήσεται* (Th Dan. 12.1 LXX), and *ἀναστήσονται* (Dan. 12.2 LXX), all of which refer to an eschatological *resurrection* from the dead! This gives us a completely different interpretation concerning the timing of the Lord’s (Messiah’s) resurrection, namely, as taking place in the end times. What’s more, Isaiah doesn’t just say that the Lord arises and then quietly goes away, but that he “arises to make the earth tremble”:

“Men will go into caves of the rocks, and into holes of the ground before the terror of the LORD, and before the splendor of His majesty, when He arises [from the dead] to make the earth tremble.”

There is support for this conclusion in Romans 15:12, a verse which is basically quoting from Isaiah. It reads:

“And again Isaiah says, ‘There shall come the root of Jesse, and he who arises to rule over the Gentiles, in him shall the Gentiles hope.”

The key phrase, here, is “he who arises to rule over the Gentiles.” Firstly, notice that he (Christ) who arises does so with the express purpose of imposing his will upon the Gentiles. That is to say, he arises and does not wait for a two-thousand-year interim to transpire; rather, he arises to rule as king over the nations. And since we know that Isaiah is referring to the last days, as mentioned earlier, it is appropriate to note how the Greek New Testament interprets Isaiah’s prophecy. Secondly, the original Greek New Testament uses the word ἀνιστάμενος (similar to the αναστη of the Septuagint) to define what Isaiah means by the word “arises.” The term ἀνιστάμενος is derived from the Greek ανάσταση, which means resurrection:

Καὶ πάλιν, Ἠσαΐας λέγει, Ἔσται ἡ ῥίζα τοῦ Ἰεσσαί, καὶ ὁ ἀνιστάμενος ἄρχειν ἐθνῶν. http://biblehub.com/interlinear/romans/15-12.htm

Thus, it’s perfectly clear that Isaiah’s use of the term “arises”—translated by both the Septuagint and Paul as “resurrection”—refers to the Messiah’s resurrection at the end of days.

Moreover, 1 Corinthians 15:23 tells of the sequence of resurrection events in the last days without any mention of a more-than-two-thousand-year gap between them; that is, between the resurrection of Christ and that of the rest of the dead. We know this because immediately following the resurrection sequence, the text concludes:

“Then comes the end, when He [Christ] delivers up the kingdom to the God and Father, when He has abolished all rule and all authority and power” (1 Corinthians 15:24).

But what do the previous verses say about the sequence of resurrection events just before the end comes? 1 Corinthians 15:20 says—in a timeless context—that “Christ is raised from the dead, the first fruits of those who are asleep.” Here’s the verse in Greek:

Νυνὶ δὲ Χριστὸς ἐγήγερται ἐκ νεκρῶν, ἀπαρχὴ τῶν κεκοιμημένων. http://biblehub.com/interlinear/1_corinthians/15-20.htm

But now the text becomes very specific in explaining the sequence of resurrection events that take place just prior to Christ’s kingly rule over “all authority and power” at the end of days. 1 Corinthians 15:23 tells us that the first-fruit [to be raised from the dead] is Christ; next, those who belong to Christ are resurrected, in his presence; “then comes the end” (1 Corinthians 15:24):

Ἀπαρχὴ Χριστός, ἔπειτα οἱ τοῦ Χριστοῦ, ἐν τῇ παρουσίᾳ αὐτοῦ (1 Corinthians 15:23). http://biblehub.com/interlinear/1_corinthians/15-23.htm

Jesus Dies for the Remission of Sins at the End of Days

As odd as this may sound, the letter to the Hebrews states:

“God, after He spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways, in these last days has spoken to us in His Son” (Hebrews 1:1-2).

In the original Greek text, it is very clear that God speaks to mankind in the last days through his son, Jesus:

Ἐπ’ ἐσχάτου τῶν ἡμερῶν τούτων, ἐλάλησεν ἡμῖν ἐν Υἱῷ (Hebrews 1:2) http://biblehub.com/interlinear/hebrews/1-2.htm

The phrase Ἐπ’ ἐσχάτου τῶν ἡμερῶν literally means in the last days, or during the last age when time will reach its fullness or completion. The phrase ἐλάλησεν ἡμῖν ἐν Υἱῷ means that God spoke to us by or in his Son. In the context of prophecy, the tense ἐλάλησεν (spoke) should be understood in a timeless context, or within the context of the entire human history, not just past history, and especially so because these words are said to be spoken in the last days.

But there is a verse that stands out among the others as the one that unequivocally and categorically points to Christ’s sacrifice and death in the end of the world. The first part of Hebrews 9:26 attempts to explain that Christ does not die over and over again, nor offer himself as a sacrifice repeatedly. The second part of the verse instills the epiphany, namely, that Christ is offered once and for all, “to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself,” and that this event takes place not at the beginning of the ages, but rather at the “consummation of the ages” (NASV), or “in the end of the world” (KJV):

Νυνὶ δὲ ἅπαξ ἐπὶ συντελείᾳ τῶν αἰώνων, εἰς ἀθέτησιν τῆς ἁμαρτίας, διὰ τῆς θυσίας αὐτοῦ πεφανέρωται (Hebrews 9:26). http://biblehub.com/interlinear/hebrews/9-26.htm

Translation:

“Now, however, once and for all [ἅπαξ] in the end [or completion] of the ages, [Jesus] is revealed [πεφανέρωται] to put away sin, by the sacrifice of himself.”

There is a key phrase within this sentence that undoubtedly places the timeline of this event “in the end of the world,” as opposed to any other time period, because it comprises the words ἐπὶ συντελείᾳ τῶν αἰώνων. The term ἐπὶ means “in,” while the word συντελείᾳ refers to “completion” or “end.” The final word of the phrase is αἰώνων, which refers to chronological time and means “ages” or centuries in the modern sense. Simply put, the phrase ἐπὶ συντελείᾳ τῶν αἰώνων means at the end or at the completion of all the ages. This is another way of saying at the final point of time, in the last days, in the end times, or “in the end of the world.” The exact same phrase (sinteleias tou aionos) is used in Matthew 24:3 to refer to “the end of the age" (or the end of the world), when Jesus is asked, “What will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?” http://biblehub.com/interlinear/matthew/24-3.htm So, what does Hebrews 9:26 imply? That Jesus is revealed once and for all at the completion of all the ages to die for our sins!

1 Peter 1:5 says, “For [the] salvation is ready to be revealed in the last time.” The Greek text reads:

Εἰς σωτηρίαν ἑτοίμην ἀποκαλυφθῆναι ἐν καιρῷ ἐσχάτῳ (1 Peter 1:5) http://biblehub.com/interlinear/1_peter/1-5.htm

Once more, we read of Christ’s salvation as being revealed (ἀποκαλυφθῆναι) “in the last time” (ἐν καιρῷ ἐσχάτῳ), otherwise known as the end-time (or the last days).

1 Peter 1:20 drives home the same biblical notion that Jesus is revealed for the first time in human history in the end times. First, it makes a point of contrast between the foreknowledge of Christ before the foundation of the world and his actual manifestation or revelation in the end times:

Προεγνωσμένου μὲν πρὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου, φανερωθέντος δὲ ἐπ’ ἐσχάτου τῶν χρόνων (1 Peter 1:20). http://biblehub.com/interlinear/1_peter/1-20.htm

The term φανερωθέντος means “is manifested,” or “made manifest,” or “shall appear.” http://biblehub.com/greek/phanero_thentos_5319.htm

The phrase ἐπ’ ἐσχάτου τῶν χρόνων is a reference to the last days or end times because it literally means “in the last times.” Also, note that the word “times” (χρόνων) is referring to chronological times, ages, or years in the modern sense. http://biblehub.com/greek/chrono_n_5550.htm

However, the most profound statement of all is found in Revelation 19:10. There, we are told in no uncertain terms that the witnesses of Christ, indeed the entire New Testament testimony pertaining to the birth, life, death, and resurrection of Jesus is based on “prophecy” given by the “pneuma” or spirit of God. And then we begin to comprehend how the authors of the New Testament witnessed Jesus. In retrospect, the New Testament authors are bearing witness to Jesus Christ in the exact same manner as Paul. Everyone would agree that Paul never saw Jesus in the flesh. Yet, due to his personal revelations, Paul knew more about Jesus than anyone else! Revelation 19:10 says:

Ἡ γὰρ μαρτυρία Ἰησοῦ ἐστιν τὸ πνεῦμα τῆς προφητείας.

English translation:

“Indeed, the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.” http://biblehub.com/interlinear/revelation/19-10.htm

In other words, the biblical testimony of Jesus is a matter of prophecy, not history!

Who is the First Horseman of the Apocalypse?

By Author Eli of Kittim

There are No Counterfeit Signs in the Bible

There are no counterfeit signs found anywhere in the Bible. So why should this be a precedent? That is, why would a white horse (a symbol of purity and righteousness) represent something as black as hell? Is God deceiving us? Is it possible that white is really black or that good is really evil in the Bible? Is the Bible inconsistent in its use of imagery and symbolism when referring to good or evil? The mainstream view—which holds that the first horseman of the Apocalypse represents the Antichrist—would have to reservedly admit that it’s possible, only because that is the logical conclusion of a counterfeit sign found in Scripture. I disagree. The Bible says “Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness” (Isa. 5.20)! As a matter of fact, the white symbol of purity is consistent throughout the Bible. There are no counterfeit signs in Scripture. That’s why all references to God, Christ, or to the saints are always couched in white imagery. Here are some examples (italics mine):

Ecc. 9.8 - “Always be clothed in white, and always anoint your head with oil.”

Isa. 1.18 - “ ‘Come now, let us settle the matter,’ says the LORD. ‘Though your sins are like scarlet, they shall be as white as snow.’ “

Dan. 7.9 - “As I looked, thrones were set in place, and the Ancient of Days took his seat. His clothing was as white as snow; the hair of his head was white like wool.”

Mt. 17.2 - “There he was transfigured before them. His face shone like the sun, and his clothes became as white as the light.”

Mt. 28.3 - “His appearance was like lightning, and his clothes were white as snow.”

John 20.12 - “saw two angels in white, seated where Jesus' body had been.”

Acts 1.10 - “They were looking intently up into the sky as he was going, when suddenly two men dressed in white stood beside them.”

Rev. 1.14 - “The hair on his head was white like wool, as white as snow.”

Rev. 2.17 - “Whoever has ears, let them hear what the Spirit says to the churches. To the one who is victorious, I will give some of the hidden manna. I will also give that person a white stone with a new name written on it.”

Rev. 3.4 - “Yet you have a few people in Sardis who have not soiled their clothes. They will walk with me, dressed in white, for they are worthy.”

Rev. 3.5 - “The one who is victorious will, like them, be dressed in white.”

Rev. 3.18 - “I counsel you to buy from me gold refined in the fire, so you can become rich; and white clothes to wear.”

Rev. 4.4 - “Surrounding the throne were twenty-four other thrones, and seated on them were twenty-four elders. They were dressed in white and had crowns of gold on their heads.”

Rev. 6.2 - “I looked, and there before me was a white horse!”

Rev. 6.11 - “Then each of them was given a white robe, and they were told to wait a little longer.”

Rev. 7.9 - “After this I looked, and there before me was a great multitude that no one could count, from every nation, tribe, people and language, standing before the throne and before the Lamb. They were wearing white robes and were holding palm branches in their hands.”

Rev. 7.13 - “Then one of the elders asked me, ‘These in white robes—who are they, and where did they come from?’ “

Rev. 7.14 - “I answered, ‘Sir, you know.’ And he said, ‘These are they who have come out of the great tribulation; they have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.’ “

Rev. 14.14 - “I looked, and there before me was a white cloud, and seated on the cloud was one like a son of man.”

Rev. 19.11 - “I saw heaven standing open and there before me was a white horse, whose rider is called Faithful and True.”

Rev. 19.14 - “The armies of heaven were following him, riding on white horses and dressed in fine linen, white and clean.”

This is Irrefutable evidence, especially since Rev 19.11 explicitly says that the white horse represents Christ, and Rev. 19.14 claims that “the armies of heaven were following him, riding on white horses”. The Bible is seemingly designating what is considered to be good or pure through the nomenclature of symbols. Thus, from the perspective of Biblical symbolism, the white horseman cannot possibly represent the Antichrist.

Why is the White Horse of Rev. 6.2 the Only One Announced “in a voice like thunder”?

"I watched as the Lamb opened the first of the seven seals. Then I heard one of the four living creatures say in a voice like thunder, 'Come!'" (Rev. 6.1).

Notice that none of the other horses of the Apocalypse are announced “in a voice like thunder.” In 2 Samuel 22.14, we read: “The Lord thundered from heaven, and the Most High uttered His voice.” Rev. 4.5 describes what appear to be “peals of thunder” proceeding from the throne of God. In other words, the first horseman of Revelation 6.2 is the only one that seems to be announced by heaven itself, proceeding as it were out of the mouth of God.

The Diadem Versus the Stephanos Crown

In the Bible, the Diadem (Gk. diadema) represents the crown of a ruler, whereas the Stephanos is a wreath that symbolizes the crown of a champion or victor. Both Christ and Antichrist are said to wear diadems (diadema). Case in point: the so-called "Beast" (Antichrist) wears a diadema in Rev. 13.1. Similarly, in Rev. 12.3, the fiery red dragon has seven diadems (diadema) on his head to signify he is a ruler, just as Christ wears many crowns (diadema) in Rev. 19.12 because he is King of kings and Lord of lords. But Christ is also an overcomer, so he wears a stephanos crown as well! Stephanos “crowns” are typically worn by believers and victors in Christ. For example, in James 1.12, overcomers receive the stephanos crown of life. In 2 Tim. 4.8, overcomers who are victorious receive a stephanos crown of righteousness, just as in 1 Peter 5.4, God bestows on them the stephanos crown of glory. Similarly, in Rev. 2.10, victors in Christ are given a stephanos crown of life. This pattern is repeated in Rev 4.4 in which 24 elders are clothed in white robes having stephanos “crowns of gold on their heads.” In fact, the crown of thorns placed on Jesus’ head (Mt. 27.29) is also called a stephanos because of his victory over death that would follow. Moreover, those scholars who dismiss the idea that Christ wears a stephanos crown in the Bible can be directed to Rev. 14.14 wherein Christ is said to wear a golden stephanos crown. The Stephanos “crown” is therefore a symbol of victory for the believers in Christ. Accordingly, the Antichrist would not wear a stephanos crown.

What Does the Greek Word Νikao Mean in Rev. 6.2?

Καὶ εἶδον, καὶ ἰδοὺ, ἵππος λευκός, καὶ ὁ καθήμενος ἐπ’ αὐτὸν ἔχων τόξον; καὶ ἐδόθη αὐτῷ στέφανος, καὶ ἐξῆλθεν νικῶν, καὶ ἵνα νικήσῃ (Rev. 6.2).

Translation: “Immediately I saw a white horse appear, and its rider was holding a bow; he was given a victor’s crown and he went away, to go from victory to victory” (Rev. 6.2 NJB).

The words νικῶν and νικήσῃ that are used in Rev. 6.2 to refer to the actions of the rider of the white horse are based on the Greek word νικάω (nikaó, see Strong's G3528), which means to “overcome” or to be “victorious.” For example, Rev. 2.7 uses the same Greek word nikao (overcomes) when referring to the overcomers in Christ. Similarly, Rev. 2.11 says, “He who overcomes (nikao) shall not be hurt by the second death.” Furthermore, in Rev 2.17, he who overcomes (nikao) receives God’s hidden manna. This pattern is repeated over and over again. Rev. 2.26 similarly states, “And he who overcomes (nikao), and keeps My works until the end, I will give power over the nations” (see also Rev. 3.5, 12, 21). In Rev 5.5, Christ is worthy to open the scroll precisely because he “has prevailed” (nikao). For this reason, the word nikao, which is found in Rev 6.2, can only refer to an overcomer in Christ and cannot possibly be attributed to an Antichrist figure. What’s more, when Rev. 5.5 says that “the Lion . . . has overcome so as to open the book and its seven seals,” it is metaphorically referring to Christ initiating the final events on earth.

Conclusion

There are no counterfeit signs found anywhere in the Bible. That’s why all references to God, Christ, or to the saints are always couched in white imagery. What is more, the white horse of Rev. 6.2 is the only one that is announced “in a voice like thunder,” signifying that it is sanctioned by the Most High God. We have also seen that the stephanos “crown,” which is mentioned in Rev. 6.2 in reference to the white horseman, is a consistent symbol of victory in the Bible for the believers in Christ. Biblical studies of the Greek word nikao, which is found in Rev 6.2, have produced similar results, indicating that this word can only refer to an overcomer in Christ and cannot possibly be attributed to an Antichrist figure. Moreover, there are no hints given to suggest that the white horseman is a nefarious figure. For example, Revelation 6.8—in discussing the upcoming, end times wars and famines—makes no mention of the white horse at all, but begins rather with the second horse, the Red Horse: “And they were given authority over a fourth of the earth, to kill with sword and with famine and with pestilence and by wild beasts of the earth” (Rev. 6.8). Notice that the white horse is never mentioned in the aforesaid sequence. The war commences with the second horse (The Red Horse, which I believe represents the Antichrist): “And they were given authority over a fourth of the earth, to kill with sword [2nd horse/red horse: ‘and a great sword was given to him’ Rev. 6.4] and with famine [3rd horse/black horse] and with pestilence [4th horse/ashen horse] and by wild beasts of the earth.” The biblical term "victory" (nikao) is intimately associated with Christ's resurrection from the dead, which ultimately results in the conquering of death itself (see 1 Cor. 15.54, 57), while the metaphor of the bow represents God's covenant with the human race (see Gen. 9.13). Further evidence that the word “toxon” (bow) in Rev. 6.2 can mean “rainbow” comes from the Septuagint (LXX), an early Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible, which translates “rainbow” as “toxon” (bow) in Genesis 9.13! Accordingly, this brief study would strongly suggest that the white horseman is not the Antichrist, but Jesus Christ (cf. the white horseman in Rev. 19.11)! This constitutes further proof that Jesus is the first person to be revealed in the last days, who commences the sequence of end time events.

Biblical Sin: Not as Behavior but as Ultimate Transgression

By Author Eli Kittim

I think the Greek phrase χωρὶς ἁμαρτίας (i.e. “without sin”) in reference to Jesus in Hebrews 4.15 has been greatly misunderstood. If in this particular context the phrase “no sin” (2 Cor. 5.21) is referring to Jesus’ action or behavior, it contradicts many New Testament (NT) passages. One that immediately comes to mind is Jesus’ temptation in the wilderness by Satan. If Jesus is sinless in the sense that he is born without a sin-nature——and therefore incapable of committing a sin, as the church proclaims——then the so-called temptation of Jesus becomes absolutely meaningless because how can you “tempt” someone who, by definition, cannot be tempted? And would Jesus “be like His brothers in every way” (Heb. 2.17), fully human, if he was unable to be tempted? The answer is a resounding no! If by “sin,” the NT is referring to behavior, it would also contradict aspects of human nature and common knowledge. It would imply that in his human development, from childhood to adulthood, Jesus never made a mistake and was without error, which is patently ridiculous (cf. Luke 2.52; 18.19).

So, what does the NT imply when it refers to Jesus being “without sin”? I would like to suggest that this reference has nothing to do with Jesus’ actions or behavior but rather with the nature of his being. According to Robert Mulholland, a NT scholar, “sins” (in the plural) are behavioral symptoms whereas “sin” (in the singular), out of which these symptomatic behaviors and attitudes arise, is a question of being. In this sense, it is a throwback to the garden of eden and the “sin” of Adam and Eve. There’s no particular “action “ or “behavior” that is associated with their transgression except that they accepted the serpent’s advice and partook of the idiomatic apple. Similarly, although It would have been utterly impossible for Jesus to avoid sin as an activity or behavior, nevertheless he did not sin in his being because, during his temptation by Satan, he ultimately did not transgress the law of God as Adam and Eve had done! He kept it!

Just as “Adam’s one sin brings condemnation for everyone, … [so] Christ’s one act of righteousness brings [salvation] … for everyone” (Rom. 5.18).

What Does Galatians 4.4 Mean When it Says that Jesus is “Born Under The Law”?

By Author Eli Kittim

Kittim’s Futurist Eschatology

As you may know, my unique view is that Jesus has not yet come to earth and that he’ll make his first appearance “once in the end of the world” (Heb. 9.26b KJV) or in the “last days” (Heb. 1.2) or “at the final point of time" (1 Pet. 1.20 NJB)! So, before attempting to expound on what being “born under the law” means, let me briefly explain how Gal. 4.4 closely ties into my unique futurist view. I will briefly refer to my interpretation of Gal. 4.4 so that you can understand the basis of my hermeneutic, but will not delve into it at length.

Interpreting the Implicit by the

Explicit

We won’t be able to mine the depths of Scripture if we don’t allow the Bible to tell us what something means. We are accustomed to imposing our own presuppositions on the text (called “eisegesis”). That’s why the best interpretation is no interpretation at all! For example, since there is a verbal agreement between Gal. 4.4 and Eph. 1.9-10 with respect to the phrase, “the fullness of time,” we should allow the more explicit passage in Ephesians to interpret and define the more implicit one in Galatians. Ephesians 1.9-10 (NASB) reads thusly:

“He [God] made known to us the mystery of

His will, according to His kind intention

which He purposed in Him with a view to an

administration suitable to the fullness of the

times, that is, the summing up of all things

in Christ, things in the heavens and things

on the earth.”

In this case, the key word that gives us the meaning of “the fullness of time” in Ephesians 1.10 is the Greek term ἀνακεφαλαιώσασθαι (“summing up”). It means “completion,” “end,” “summary” (see Lampe, A Patristic Greek Lexicon, [Oxford: Oxford University, 1961], p. 106)! The didactic or exegetical principle is as follows: if this *time-period* or *timeline* in Ephesians refers to the final consummation and the conclusion of all things or the *summing-up* (ἀνακεφαλαιώσασθαι) of all things in Christ, both in the heavens and on the earth, then the same exact phrase in Galatians 4.4, given that it refers to the same temporal context, must have an identical meaning. And, if that’s the case, then the phrase should refer to the consummation of the ages, not to 2,000 years ago! Therefore, we have erred linguistically by attributing this eschatological expression to the time of antiquity! We have thereby misinterpreted the Greek text.

Is the Law Still Applicable in

Modern Times?

Now that we understand Galatians 4.4 as a reference to future eschatology, the question arises: how can Gal. 4.4 be a reference to modern times? In other words, how is the “law” still applicable in our day and age? More specifically, how do we interpret Gal. 4.4 when it says that God’s Son is “born under the law”? It’s a very good question. And it was asked by a member of the Eli of Kittim Bible Exegesis Group on Facebook.

Here’s the answer. The first thing to realize is that Galatians 4.4 is in fact referring to the Mosaic Law and depicts Christ’s birth as if it takes place under the law (ὑπὸ νόμον). The use of this often repeated term (νόμον) in the Bible ensures us that Gal. 4.4 is not referring to the natural law. It’s also important to understand that the Mosaic Law, including the 10 commandments, was not only intended for the Jews, it was meant to be the standard of morality for the entire human race. And we would be judged by it accordingly until the arrival of grace in Christ Jesus. So why are we told that Jesus is “born under the law”? The next verse tells us why:

“in order to redeem those who were under

the law, so that we might receive adoption

as children (v. 5).”

Has the Law Been Abolished or

Not?

Now, the Greek term νόμον is exclusively referring to the Moral Law (not the ceremonial or civic law). So, the Law was given to instruct us as to what is good and evil. However, according to the New Testament, only the *death* of Jesus can *abolish* the Law. [1] Nothing else. Therefore, if Jesus has not yet died, the law remains in effect. And if in fact Jesus has not yet died, then he will be born under the law in the fullness of time. Paul tells us that the “law of commandments contained in ordinances” was “abolished” (Gk. katargeo, which means “discarded” or “nullified”) by the *death* of Jesus (Eph. 2.14-15). However, the past tense “was” may be an English mistranslation because the temporal value of this verse hangs on the Greek verb καταργήσας, which does not necessarily refer to past history. But even with regard to translations that presuppose the past-tense “was” as the correct translation of καταργήσας (perhaps due to the past-tense ποιήσας [having made] from the previous verse [v. 14]), nevertheless the *time-of-the-action* still seems to be in a transhistorical context. I’ve mentioned numerous times that Stanley E. Porter, a top Hellenistic Greek linguist, assures us that “temporal values (past, present, future) are not established in Greek by use of the verbal aspects (or tense-forms) alone” (see Porter, Idioms of the Greek New Testament [2nd edn; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1999], p. 25)! In other words, past tenses do not necessarily imply past events. Isaiah 53 is a perfect example. Despite all of the past tenses, it is obviously a prophecy that Isaiah is writing about, at least from a Christian hermeneutical standpoint! So, returning to our main topic, according to Paul, only the death of Jesus can truly abolish the Law!

Paul’s Christ is Not Yet

Remember that in other places Paul suggests that the evidence for Jesus’ ransom is still future:

“Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be

testified in due time” (1 Tim. 2.6).

In 1 Cor. 15.8 (NRSV) Paul declares that Christ appeared to him “as to one untimely born,” that is, as if Paul were born before the time of Christ. And in Romans 5.6 the grammatical structure of the sentence appears in a transhistorical context and doesn’t necessarily warrant a reference to history. Paul employs the word ἔτι which implies not yet. So when Paul says that Christ “died” (απέθανεν), his death is in this transhistorical context! This is further confirmed by Paul’s use of the phrase κατά καιρόν, which means “at the right time” (cf. 1 Tim. 2.6), or at “the appropriate time,” in the sense that Christ died at some unspecified time of human history:

Ἔτι γὰρ ⸃ Χριστὸς ὄντων ἡμῶν ἀσθενῶν ἔτι

κατά καιρὸν ὑπὲρ ἀσεβῶν ἀπέθανεν (Rom.

5.6)!

Translation (NASB):

“For while we were still helpless, at the right

time Christ died for the ungodly.”

Similarly, Luke 17.30 also suggests that the Son of Man has not yet been revealed!

Only Jesus’ Death Can Abolish the

Law

Technically speaking, even the New Covenant (New Testament) is not ratified until the *death* of Jesus:

“This cup is the new covenant in my blood,

which is poured out for you” (Luke 22.20).

Hebrews 9.16-17 suggests that without the death of the testator the will (i.e., “testament”) is not yet in effect.

Hebrews 8:13 reads:

“When He said, ‘A new

covenant,’ He has made the

first obsolete. But whatever is

becoming obsolete and

growing old is ready to

disappear.”

We’re also told that the condemnation of the Law (the charges brought forth against us) would be nullified or cancelled as a legal code by Christ’s *death* (cf. Col. 2.13-14).

Galatians 3:23 reads:

“But before faith came, we were kept in

custody under the law, being shut up to

the faith which was later to be revealed.”

Galatians 3:24 explains:

“Therefore the Law has become our tutor

to lead us to Christ, that we may be

justified by faith.”

Thus, Galatians 3:25 declares:

“But now that faith has come, we are no

longer under a tutor [Law].”

Conclusion

It’s absolutely clear from the New Testament that without the *death* of Christ the Law is still in effect, as well as the charges levelled against humanity by its moral code. In other words, if Christ hasn’t died, then those who are reborn in Christ are retroactively *saved-by-faith-in-the-promises-of-God* but are not fully and literally saved yet. That’s why the Holy Spirit is given to regenerated human beings as a deposit, not as a full payment or reward:

“[He] set his seal of ownership on us, and

put his Spirit in our hearts as a deposit,

guaranteeing what is to come (2 Cor. 1.22

NIV).”

Nevertheless Paul seemingly says that he believes that Christ is able to protect what he has “entrusted to Him until that day” when he fulfills it and presumably *dies* for him:

“For this reason I also suffer these things,

but I am not ashamed; for I know whom I

have believed and I am convinced that He

is able to guard what I have entrusted to

Him until that day” (2 Tim. 1.12 NASB).

And when is that day? It is the day of Christ’s sacrifice and atoning death that transpires in “the fullness of time” (Gal 4.4; Eph. 1.9-10)! This eschatological motif is present throughout the New Testament: from Rev. 12.5 to Rev. 19.10 to Rev. 22.7 to 1 Jn 2.28, we constantly find the theme that Christ will appear “once at the consummation of the ages” to *die* for sin (Heb. 9.26b NASB), which is also confirmed in Eph. 1.10 and Gal. 4.4!

Therefore, if Jesus hasn’t died yet, we are all still under the Law. And thus if he appears “once for all at the end of the age” (Heb. 9.26b NRSV), then he, too, is “born under the law.”

Footnotes

[1] In using the term “abolish” I

don’t mean the eradication of

the moral standard completely.

Rather, I mean to abolish the

law as a soteriological means;

as a way to salvation, as well as

a means of condemnation.