Zohran Mamdani, AOC, Ilhan Omar, and Jasmine Crockett the Gifts that Keep on Giving
The Chief – February 25, 2026
Promises to Abraham Past or Future
William – February 24, 2026
I Thessalonians 4:15-17
Yep, it came up at the Bible study last night that I don’t believe in Scofield’s theological system. People were shocked. We keep reading in the Minor Prophets about the “Day of the Lord” and I asserted that in most cases the day of the Lord is history not a near coming, future event.
The study leader rightly asked me about 1 Thessalonians 4: 13-18. I know this is a difficult passage to discuss so I told him that I would have an answer for him next week. He agreed. Below is my attempt to address his question.
13 But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope. 14 For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him. 15 For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep. 16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: 17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord. 18 Wherefore comfort one another with these words.1 Thessalonians 4:13–18.
As pointed out during my research, the better question is not what is my understanding of I Thessalonians 4, but what is the Bible’s understanding? My frustration is that people cannot deal correctly with the Scriptures when they already have their minds made up as to what it means. You cannot find the Darby/Scofield/Dispensational/Premillennial view in Scripture unless you assume it ahead of time and then cherry pick passages to support it; part of this is by excluding or dismissing passages that conflict with these assumptions.
Three Often Cited Proofs of Rapture
While I Thessalonians 4 is used as a proof text of the Rapture doctrine, it is often coupled with a portion of Matthew 24 and an observation about Revelation. You can think of these as the three legs of the stool supporting the Rapture.
I will comment briefly on Matthew and Revelation and then return to I Thessalonians.
Usually, followers of Scofield couple the belief in the Rapture with this passage in Matthew 24: 37-42.
37 But as the days of Noe [Noah] were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. 38 For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, 39 And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. 40 Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left. 41 Two women shall be grinding at the mill; the one shall be taken, and the other left. 42 Watch therefore: for ye know not what hour your Lord doth come.
Matthew 24:37–42.
In Noah’s day, the righteous were preserved in the ark while the evil men were literally washed away. During the Exodus, the evil men died in the wilderness and the righteous entered the promised land. The New Testament repeatedly promises the world to the righteous and not after the end of all things. The meek will inherit the earth not the wicked. This is a consistent theme in Psalms. Thus, the Matthew passage really says that the evil folks will be done away with (raptured if you will) and the faithful will remain on the earth.
Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth.
Matthew 5:5.
But the meek shall inherit the earth; And shall delight themselves in the abundance of peace.
Psalm 37:11.
It is ours to enjoy now not in the afterlife. We rule and reign with Christ, now not after death.
For evildoers shall be cut off: But those that wait upon the LORD, they shall inherit the earth. For yet a little while, and the wicked shall not be: Yea, thou shalt diligently consider his place, and it shall not be.
Psalm 37:9-10.
Wait on the LORD, and keep his way, And he shall exalt thee to inherit the land: When the wicked are cut off, thou shalt see it.
Psalm 37:34.
Now ye are full, now ye are rich, ye have reigned as kings without us: and I would to God ye did reign, that we also might reign with you.
1 Corinthians 4:8–6:2.
We, as believers, will judge the world and even angels.
2 Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters? 3 Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more things that pertain to this life?
1 Corinthians 6:2–3.
If we suffer, we shall also reign with him: if we deny him, he also will deny us:
2 Timothy 2:12.
26 And he that overcometh, and keepeth my works unto the end, to him will I give power over the nations: 27 And he shall rule them with a rod of iron; as the vessels of a potter shall they be broken to shivers: even as I received of my Father. 28 And I will give him the morning star.
Revelation 2:26–3:21.
And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth.
Revelation 5:10.
These are now promises, not something for the afterlife. Believers rule the world with Christ now.
Just because Christians do not believe the Bible does not make it’s promises untrue. Unbelief is a denial of God’s promises. Sadly, too many followers of Christ think our world belongs to Satan, a defeated foe by the power of the Cross. Jesus is ruling and reigning now. How people miss the importance of the Ascension of Christ is truly remarkable. How they can think Jesus is on the throne now but not ruling is horrifying. Why else were we commanded to pray that, “Try will be done on earth as it is in Heaven.”
The third leg of the Rapture stool is literally an argument from silence; namely, the church is never mentioned in the book of Revelation after chapter 3. John only mentions local congregations in chapters 2 and 3 and makes zero references to the Universal Church anywhere in Revelation. The word “church” never appears again in Revelation but clearly the church is mentioned throughout the book by other names. To claim that the Church no longer exists or is annihilated after chapter 3 is nonsense. Arguing a doctrinal proof on the basis of a word not being in the text is stupid. Here are a few other examples of this fallacy.
Love is never mentioned in the book of Ruth.
God is never mentioned in the book of Esther.
Sex in never mentioned in the Song of Solomon.
Church is not mentioned in the first 15 chapters of Romans.
Thus, whether the word “church” (ecclesia meaning assembly) is mentioned throughout Revelation, the book is clearly about Christ and His Bride the Church.
Appeals to Matthew 24 commenting “.. as in the days of Noah …” or missing the word “church” after a certain point in in Revelation, do nothing to strengthen claims that the Bible teaches the Rapture doctrine. Can we let Scripture interpret Scripture and using only the Bible find a better explanation as to what is happening in I Thessalonians 4?
What is Not Found in I Thessalonians 4
I found two great quotes on the topic that I wish to cite here.
In a debate on eschatology with Dave Hunt, I challenged him to point to one verse that taught a pre-tribulation rapture. He immediately appealed to I Thessalonians 4:16-17. Read it for yourself. The idea of a pre-tribulation rapture must be assumed by the reader and imposed on the text. Sound biblical interpretation, however, requires textual proof before a doctrine can be formulated.
Most postmillennialists and amillennialists teach that I Thessalonians 4:16-17 relates to the general resurrection of the saints. The text simply describes the raising of those who are “in Christ.” No mention is made of the church being raptured either before, during, or after a tribulation period. Nothing in the text points to a tribulation period.
[Last Days Madness, Gary Demar (2024), page 223.]
Even pre-tribulation dispensationalists admit the novelty of this position [the rapture]:
It is scarcely to be found in a single book or sermon through the period of 1600 years! If any doubt this statement, let them search … the remarks of the so-called Fathers, both pre and post Nicene, the theological treatises of the scholastic divines, Roman Catholic writers of all shades of thought, the literature of the Reformation, the sermons and expositions of the Puritans and the general theological works of the day. He will find the “mystery” conspicuous by its absence.
[Harry A. Ironside, The Mysteries of God (1908), p 50.]
Here is a dispensationalist admitting that there is “scarcely” any historical evidence to support the position. He’s too generous. There is no evidence. So where does a dispensationalist get this doctrine? Thomas Ice, a fervent proponent of dispensationalism, writes that the theory is based on “deduction”:
A certain theological climate needed to be created before premillennialism would restore the Biblical doctrine of the pretrib Rapture. Sufficient development did not take place until after the French Revolution. The factor of the Rapture has been clearly known by the church all along; therefore, the issue is the timing of the event. Since neither pre nor posttribs have a proof text for the time of the Rapture (unless the promise made to the church in Rev. 3:10 is an exception which promises deliverance—the Rapture—from the future tribulation before the seven-year period begins), then it is clear that this issue is the product of a deduction from one’s overall system of theology, both for pre and posttribbers.
[Thomas D Ice,The Origin of the Pretrib Rapture Part II (1989), p5.]
What an admission! A pillar doctrine of dispensationalism does not have a single text to prove it. Dispensationalism’s process of “deducing” the rapture theory is this: First, create the system; second, create the doctrines to make the system work; third, claim to have restored “the Biblical doctrines of the pretrib Rapture,” which is based on a “deduction from one’s overall system of theology” because there are no verses that teach it; fourth, imply that the early church, the “apostles of the apostles,” knew nothing of this foundational doctrine. Bizarre. Millions of Christians today hold to a system of interpretation (dispensationalism) that does not have one verse to prove one of its foundational doctrines, the pre-tribulation rapture of the church, the concept that makes dispensationalism dispensational. This system of interpretation is a theological house of cards.
[Last Days Madness, Gary Demar (2024), page 224-225.]
Folks, Ironside and Ice are heavy hitters in the dispensationalist camp, The admissions that they make are not to be lightly dismissed.
If you don’t know Thomas ice, here is some relevant info from Wikipedia.
Ice is a proponent of dispensational premillennialism. He was the executive director of the Pre-Trib Research Center on the campus of Liberty University in Lynchburg, Virginia. The research center was founded in 1994 by Tim LaHaye and Ice to research, teach, proclaim, and defend pre-tribulationism. The center currently sponsors prophecy meetings and conferences and provides speakers for the purpose of discussion and lecture on the topic of pre-tribulationism.
If you don’t know Harry A ironside, here is some relevant info from Wikipedia.
(October 14, 1876 – January 15, 1951) was a Canadian–American Bible teacher, preacher, theologian, pastor and author who pastored Moody Church in Chicago from 1929 to 1948.
Ironside believed that the church is parenthetical, which was something not revealed in the Old Testament, and at some point God will rapture the church before the great tribulation, during which he will again focus on the nation of Israel.
Along with others such as Cyrus Scofield, he was influential in popularizing dispensationalism among Protestants in North America. Despite his lack of formal education, his mental capacity, photographic memory and zeal for his beliefs caused him to be called “the Archbishop of Fundamentalism”.
Ironside was one of the most prolific Christian writers of the 20th century and published more than 100 books, booklets and pamphlets, a number of which are still in print. One editorial reviewer wrote of a 2005 re-publication, “Ironside’s commentaries are a standard and have stood the test of time.”
So what did Scofield claim about I Thessalonian 4?
Scofield, asserts in his only footnote on I Thessalonians 4:
(4:17) This central passage on the blessed hope of the Church includes: (1) reassurance (vv. 13-14); (2) revelation (vv. 15-17, setting forth the return of Christ, the rapture of the Church, and the reunion of all believers); and (3) comfort (v. 18).
Scofield is very silent on a doctrine that is a cornerstone of his theological system. Weird. The chief proof text of the Rapture is given one footnote of one sentence in his Bible. No mention of judgment, great tribulation, antichrist, or any of the other things often talked about in the wake of the Rapture. Scofield just assumes it. Thomas Ice deduces it.
If not The Rapture, Then …
If I Thessalonians 4 is not the Rapture of popular understanding, then what is happening in this text?
Not much if the Westminster Confession of Faith is any metric.
Chapter XXXII
Of the State of Men after Death, and of the Resurrection of the Dead
Article II
At the last day, such as are found alive shall not die, but be changed: and all the dead shall be raised up, with the selfsame bodies, and none other (although with different qualities), which shall be united again to their souls forever.
This Confession, which I suspect is like many others from the Reformation era, simply cites I Thessalonians 4:17 as a proof text for resurrection on the last day. This article of the Confession parrots part of the Nicene Creed.
We look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come.
This more traditional view is echoed by David Chilton in Days of Vengeance.
There is thus to be a resurrection at the end of history, at the Second Coming of Christ on the Last Day (John 6:38-40, 44, 54; Acts 24:15; 1 Thess. 4:14-17). But before that final resurrection there is another, a First Resurrection: the resurrection of “Christ the first fruits.” He rose from the dead, and resurrected all believers with Him. Note: St. John does not say that the believer himself as such is resurrected, but that he has a part in the First Resurrection. He is sharing in the Resurrection of Another-the Resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ.
[David Chilton, Days of Vengeance (1987), p. 517.]
The Hope of Israel and the Nations
It seems that many non-dispensational folks don’t expend a lot of theological energy on I Thessalonians since all it says is Jesus will come back some day, raise sleeping saints, and then the living will join him. Often it is assumed that this will happen at the end of all things but there is another possibility.
I found a transcript of a different and more nuanced point of view on this passage. The paper is linked here and cost $2.95. The paper makes a biblically defensible argument for a third possible understanding of the Thessalonian passage. Participants are Gary DeMar as interviewer and Kim Burgess as guest.
Burgess’ point of view is that the Old Covenant is types and shadows; materials representations of spiritual reality, while the New Covenant is the spiritual reality. Burgess cites examples of the New Covenant being spiritual as John 4, the woman at the well “you will never thirst”; John 3, “ye must be born again”; and John 6, “labor for meat that endureth to everlasting life.” The spiritual reality of the New Covenant is illustrated in Paul’s letter to the Galatians.
22 For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman. 23 But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise. 24 Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar. 25 For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children. 26 But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all. 27 For it is written, Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not; break forth and cry, thou that travailest not: for the desolate hath many more children than she which hath an husband. 28 Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise. 29 But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now. 30 Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman. 31 So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman, but of the free. Galatians 4:22–31.
In the paper, they argue for the nearness of the coming of the Lord in judgment. Part of that coming involves the Old Covenant saints being released from Sheol and being brought into heaven. (The subject of 1 Corinthians 15.) Further that the meeting with the Lord in the air or in heavenly places is a transfer in status from the Old to the New Covenant order.
Kim: In the transition to the New Covenant order we see that a switch has taken place from the physical or material hermeneutic (e.g., the physical and visible temple or mountain) to the “Spiritual” or “heavenly” hermeneutic (cf. the heavenly Jerusalem and Zion of Hebrews 12:22). Paul uses these two modifying terms quite deliberately in 1 Corinthians 15:44-49. In 1 Thessalonians 4:16 we still have the language of “the Lord coming down” in Exodus 19:20 (see also “the glory of the Lord” resting on Mt. Sinai in Ex. 24:16-17), but the text does not actually say He came down to Earth in the flesh or that He was to appear there physically/bodily. That is an assumption that we read into the text while hardly being aware that we are doing it. He was to “come down or descend” and the saints—the dead and the living—were to go to “a meeting” with Him “in the air.” We will come back soon to the meaning of “in the clouds” and “in the air.” The point for now is that this is the Spiritual and heavenly reality (the antitype) of what was formerly, in the Old Testament, a physical type.
Kim: It is the all-too-common physical (bodily) rapture mentality of Dispensationalism that tends to get hold of us if we are not careful and re-wires our brains to think that Paul is describing people being moved bodily from point A to point B geographically, in this case from earth to heaven, but it is just not so here in 4:17. It is a spiritual transition from death to Life (i.e., eternal Life in Christ) that is in view.
Kim: Let’s get back to verse 17. The English translation I am using (NASB) reads “to meet the Lord in the air,” but, in the Greek, it is actually a noun and not a verb: “to a meeting of the Lord in the air.” That noun is ἀπάντησις (apantēsis) and refers to “a meeting.” Do you know where else this same noun is used? It’s in Matthew 25:1 and 6 about the five foolish and five wise virgins going out to “a meeting of the bridegroom.” This is the same “meeting” as in 4:17. It is a wedding theme. See Revelation 19:5-9 for more detail. This “meeting,” I believe, is what John calls “the marriage supper of the Lamb.”
Gary: Mike Sullivan brings out the wedding parallels found in Matthew 24-25 and 1 Thessalonians 4-5 in the section below from his extended chart on the topic.
Paul’s use of the trumpet and the cloud in I Thessalonians 4:16 is a direct reference to the Glory Cloud in Exodus and also the arrival of the Holy Spirt on Pentecost (Acts 2). David Chilton, quoted earlier, called the Glory Cloud “God’s mobile home” and cites Merideth Kline’s Images in the Spirit which documents the Cloud’s appearance in Scripture from Genesis to Revelation.
As added support to the claim that 1 Thessalonians 4 is about an event in the First Century, look also at II Thessalonians Chapter 1.
6 Seeing it is a righteous thing with God to recompense tribulation to them that trouble you; 7 And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, 8 In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: 9 Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power; 10 When he shall come to be glorified in his saints, and to be admired in all them that believe (because our testimony among you was believed) in that day. 11 Wherefore also we pray always for you, that our God would count you worthy of this calling, and fulfil all the good pleasure of his goodness, and the work of faith with power: 12 That the name of our Lord Jesus Christ may be glorified in you, and ye in him, according to the grace of our God and the Lord Jesus Christ.
2 Thessalonians 1:6–12.
Paul promises the Thessalonians that they, in the First Century, will get relief from persecution. Using language typical of biblical prophets, Paul promises that Jesus will use flaming fire to take vengeance on the godless who will be punished with everlasting destruction and simultaneously, the saints will be glorified. So, did the Thessalonians get relief as Paul promised, or did he lie?
Another passage also says Jesus will deliver Paul’s Thessalonian readers from the wrath to come.
10 And to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead, even Jesus, which delivered us from the wrath to come.
1 Thessalonians 1:10.
The Thessalonians were promised deliverance from the “wrath to come.” It was a near event, not one two thousand years away. These promises of relief are very similar to those given to the seven churches in Revelation chapters 2 and 3.
Conclusion
Using only Scripture as your guide, there is zero biblical warrant for the Rapture doctrine. Only by bringing a pre-existing system to the pages of Scripture can you assume a Rapture doctrine exists somewhere in the Bible. Thomas Ice admits that the Rapture is “deduced” and not actually found in the Bible. If you say something loud enough and often enough people tend to believe it. Its just as true in theology as it is in politics or the media.
The trumpet in 1 Thessalonians 4:16, as shown by Mike Sullivan’s chart, is the same as the trumpet in Matthew 24:31. Kim Burgess elsewhere states that the trumpet in 1 Corinthians 15:52 and Revelation’s 7th trumpet are the same event as well. Four passages, same trumpet, same event. Whether past or future, I think Burgess is correct about all four verses are the same event.
I think there is a good argument, that during the coming of Jesus in the judgment of 70 AD, that 1 Thessalonians 4: 13-17 was fulfilled. Others believe the passage in 1 Thessalonians 4 occurs at the end of time. Either way, there is no need for a Rapture as understood in the Premillennial/Dispensational system. When the central event of a theological system must be assumed because there are no proof texts for it, then it is time to reevaluate the position.
As for my opinion on the text, I’m inclined to go with DeMar and Burgess. Jesus judged Jerusalem in 70 AD but continues that rule and judgment today. It is an ongoing process that will culminate in a final resolution in the future.
For the earth shall be filled with the knowledge of the glory of the LORD, As the waters cover the sea.
Habakkuk 2:14.
The Ayatollah is Dead … That’s a Great Thing!
In case you missed it, a horrible, terrible, no-good human being assumed room temperature this past weekend. Iran’s Supreme Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was killed. Dead, like a door nail! The strikes were coordinated with Israel in a much broader sense, it’s a full-on war in Iran in my humble opinion.
I’ll touch more on the war below, but I want to put out some very disturbing info I saw in my newsfeed over the weekend.
I saw an article about how the merry band of losers, California Democrats, our so called leaders, were upset with the result. Yeah, I’m serious. They expressed anger with the Ayatollah being killed. Adam Schiff, Eric Swalwell, Gavin Newsom, Nancy Pelosi, and Ami Bera were all upset that the War Powers Act was not used. Again, I’ll touch on that later, but I want to point out, Ayatollah Khamenei is directly and indirectly responsible for thousands of US and Israeli deaths over the years. He literally bank rolled; Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthi’s to name a few terror proxies. The groups are not militaries; they simply fire rockets at other countries and do not care in the slightest about casualties of innocent civilians. Check out the atrocities carried out by Hamas in Israel October 7th. Yes, folks these Democrats are actually sad this guy is dead, more so they are furious Trump did it! Rush Limbaugh was correct back in the day when he stated that Democrats cry whenever an evil dictator dies. The Iranian regime is famous for suppressing free speech, using nasty propaganda, wantonly killing, using hospitals and schools as human shields to protect military installations, and worse yet quite literally saying they want to wipe Israel off the map, and encouraging folks to say, “Death to America.” The Ayatollah started a massive government crackdown about a month ago and authorized the killing of tens of thousands of his own people who were protesting! Again, Democrats are mourning his loss, not celebrating those that want freedom.
While I understand the Democrat position on this (attack without authorization), I need folks to understand this was the only way this was going to go. Iran never negotiated in good faith with the US or the nuclear coalition, and they were never going to. They wanted a bomb, they hate Israel. Donald Trump might be a real good negotiator but eventually anyone gets to a point where dialogue ends and action is needed. It was always going to end this way.
Israel and the US moved in and took out quite a few targets almost instantly. Khamenei met his fate shortly thereafter. Actually, I believe we took out over 100 top Iranian Republic Guards over the first 4 days of this operation. As to be expected, the Iranians were pissed and have essentially lobbed missiles in every direction around them! Very dumb move. Their strikes have hit; Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, and Qatar with rumors that Saudi Arabia and United Arab Emirates have been targeted or hit as well. Way to get all your Muslim brothers ticked at you! At the time of me writing this, it actually sounds like these nations may even join the bombing in Iran.
What is happening in Iran right now is also to be expected. Folks, Iran does not have advanced military capabilities, but they thought they did. They purchased the same hi-tech weapons from China as Venezuela did to protect their airspace from US and Israeli stealth aircraft. Thus, state-of-the-art Chinese military assets have had their butts kicked twice in about as many months by President Trump. Iran simply cannot go toe-to-toe with the USA or Israel. It’s been proven time and again. We literally went through their air defenses like a hot knife through butter, heck Kuwait shot down 3 of our planes by mistake, Iran has shot down none. The IRG has been decimated, the only thing now is how long will this last?
Regarding the war itself, if you actually want something to be upset about, our intelligence is either way off, or we were lied to. You may recall the bombing operation of their nuclear sites, where Trump claimed they were completely obliterated. Well, now we were being told Iran was a week away from having a nuclear bomb. Which was true? I think the bombing earlier this year didn’t obliterate anything; it was a waste. I do think Iran was close to a bomb, but I’m going to be honest, I’m starting to not trust Israel. I think we just got dragged into another long, drawn-out war. Oh, Israel announced they are going “boots on the ground” in Lebanon.
If you want to be upset about something, be upset about that above. What is the end game? We took out their leader, now what?
As far as the fringe Left and fringe Right complaining about the War Powers Act, when is the last time we actually declared war? It was World War II. Yep, that’s right, almost 100 years ago. There was no declaration of war for Korea, Vietnam, the global war on terror, Granada, Gulf War I or II, the Balkin States, Libya, or anything else our country has done militarily. My point is, by the time the House has a hearing, then the Senate takes the matter up, many weeks will go bye. Rand Paul, Liz Warren, and others can get on a soap box and drag this thing out forever. Had Trump not acted, and without Congress being notified before military action began, then the nuclear sites could have had the materials moved, the Ayatollah could be on the move, and the actionable intelligence would have been worthless. We had the info, we moved in, we crippled the power structure in Iran for the time being.
What is the answer? I am not totally sure. Who rises to power in Iran? I do know one thing, if the Ayatollah remaining in power was the answer, I don’t want to know the question. If you think the Ayatollah should still be alive, or that we acted illegally, you have a big dump in your pants. If you really want to die on this hill, you can argue about the War Powers Act or if we had to take Khamenei out, but it’s over now so it just seems wrong to start playing what if.
The Chief
PS Yes, America will be more dangerous in the near term. Whether you engage in conspiracies or not, it is believed there are Iranian sleeper cells here in the US. Things could get violent soon. Remember we took out Ayatollah; they have been trying for the better part of a year to get Trump.
Jesus is Israel
I know that Dispensationalists frequently miss the mark on biblical theology. They like to beat the strawman of “Replacement Theology” when they are the only ones that teach a form of it. They switch out the Old Testament Jews with the Church in the mythical (mythical because it doesn’t really exist) Eschatological Parenthesis of the Church Age.
In their system, God quits dealing with the Jews once they reject the offer of the Kingdom of God that Jesus and John the Baptist offered in the First Century. God, frustrated by the liberal use of freewill to reject His plan, then pivots to Plan B, the Church Age. At the end of time, God will Rapture all the Christians off the planet which terminates Plan B. God then returns to His original plan. Then He promptly kills off 2/3 of the Jews. Then the pride of the remaining Jews will be broken and then they will all convert to belief in Jesus. Once, the Jews are sufficiently calibrated, Jesus will return to rule for 1,000 years sitting on a literal throne in Jerusalem.
Folks, this is way better than Ray Bradberry or Phillip K. Dick could ever imagine. Tens of millions of Evangelical protestants believe everything I just said and then some. They think all the above can be found in the pages of the Bible. It can’t unless you use lots of glue, scissors, paste, and imagination. Oh, and discard most of the Bible in the process. No worries though. They are hell bent of defending this escapist trash as the Gospel.
Thankfully, you don’t have to be stuck in denial of the ramifications of the Great Commission.
Today’s lesson is from the book of Matthew. It teaches that Jesus is the true Israel. This being true, then His followers are part of the true Israel too. This is yet another way of showing that God took a remnant from Old Covenant Israel and grafted in the Gentiles. This New Testament Body of Christ is the true Israel. This is yet another rebuttal to the charge of Replacement Theology that Dispensationalists try to level against their opponents. I talked about the Body of Christ being a continuation of the OT believers and its expansion to include Gentiles in my previous post. This post will be about Matthew and his teaching that Jesus is the true Israel.
And when they were departed, behold, the angel of the Lord appeareth to Joseph in a dream, saying, Arise, and take the young child and his mother, and flee into Egypt, and be thou there until I bring thee word: for Herod will seek the young child to destroy him. When he arose, he took the young child and his mother by night, and departed into Egypt: And was there until the death of Herod: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, Out of Egypt have I called my son.
Matthew 2:13–15.
Here is the Old Testament reference.
When Israel was a child, then I loved him, And called my son out of Egypt.
Hosea 11:1.
OK, you need to ask yourself if Matthew was just being cute by emphasizing the “out of Egypt I called my son” or if he made a mistake in an effort to come up with a fulfilled prophecy concerning Jesus, or did he really mean that Jesus is the true Israel?
Well, yep, Jesus is the true Israel was his point. That is why he includes the account of the temptation in the wilderness. Jesus wandered about in the desert for forty days, the children of Israel wandered about for forty years. Jesus passed his time of testing, but Israel failed and wandered 40 years as a result.
So, Jesus was the true Israel, and his followers are the true Israel.
Here is how Logos Bible Software summarizes the idea that Jesus is the True Israel.
Search criteria > Jesus is the true Israel
Jesus embodies the role Israel failed to fulfill—he succeeds where the nation disobeyed, demonstrating faithful obedience where they rebelled.[1][2] This identity emerges through Matthew’s deliberate recapitulation of Israel’s foundational narrative. Matthew applies Hosea 11:1 (“Out of Egypt I called my son”) to Jesus and structures his Gospel to mirror Israel’s exodus from Egypt, crossing of the Red Sea, wilderness temptations, and arrival at Mount Sinai to receive the law.[1]
The theological significance runs deeper than mere historical parallels. As God’s Son, Jesus reflects his Father’s character and ways, proving himself the true Israelite through obedience to the law where Israel disobeyed and submission to God’s will where they rebelled.[1] Where Israel failed the desert temptations, Jesus remained faithful to God.[3] Jesus is not simply Israel’s savior; he embodies what Israel was meant to be.[1]
This fulfillment extends to Israel’s covenantal purpose. As the true Israelite, Jesus stands on God’s side, championing his cause and embodying his character, becoming the true covenant partner through his fully human trust and obedience.[1] He fulfills this role not for himself but for the faithless covenant partner—achieving righteousness and obedience on behalf of God’s people through his representative work.[1] Paul develops this concept by presenting Jesus as Abraham’s seed who truly inherits the covenant promises, stepping into the position of those under the law to redeem them and realize the blessings in himself.[3]
[1] Michael D. Williams, Far as the Curse Is Found: The Covenant Story of Redemption (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing, 2005), 225.
[2] Barry E. Horner, Biblical Israel: The Anti-Judaic Incursion of Process Biblical Theology (Barry E. Horner, 2021), 91.
[3] S. Motyer, “Israel (Nation),” in New Dictionary of Biblical Theology, ed. T. Desmond Alexander and Brian S. Rosner (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2000), 585.
If you are interested, I got this blog idea from Doug Wilson and then looked it up on Logos as a second witness.
Why is Fast Food so Expensive
Noticed the price of fast food lately? Wonder why it is so expensive? Wonder what happened to portion sizes? Wonder why Chili’s and Applebee’s can sling a cheaper meal and they are full service?
Well strap in, it’s going to be a rough ride!
While this blog is mostly based out of California, I am sure in your local town that you have noticed similar issues.
Quick history lesson, about 2 years ago the People’s Republic of California agreed to raise the minimum wage for fast food workers to $20 an hour. Keep in mind the minimum wage for other workers is currently $16.50 per hour. Fast food is hard to define in a sense, I would say any quick service restaurant with the large portion of their locations having a drive thru. I say large portion because we have 1 Chipotle and 2 Panda Express stores that have drive thru’s but the lion’s share of them do not.
This caused some issues for both types of stores; fast food and fast/casual eateries. First of all, most fast/casual think Chipotle and Chili’s types likely didn’t start at $20 an hour, their fast-food counterparts did. So, they had to work through some staffing issues.
Now a couple of years later, we can see where the carnage from this law is laid.
I am checking the KFC website right now, and an 8-piece bucket, no sides or beverage is running $25. Actually $24.59 but I digress. My colleague and I used a coupon where the same 8-piece bucket is $13.99. As you can see it’s now quite expensive, oh and the pieces of chicken are small, I could have knocked off all 8 on my own.
(Editor’s Note: occasionally, KFC coupon prices on their bulk mail fliers are actually more than the regular price they charge at their store.)
Let us compare KFC to the Chili’s located just down the road from my office. Here at Chili’s, they are willing to do a burger, fries, soda, and either a salad or chips and salsa for $11. Chili’s is a sit-down place, so I know tax and tip will be added but it’s a far cry from KFC. Oh, the chips and salsa are bottomless and they even insisted I leave with a bagof chips and a pint of salsa! Oh, Red Robin has a similar deal of a burger, soda, and unlimited fries. Again, it’s a sit-down place. No coupon required by the way!
So how can Chili’s/Red Robin do it you ask? Their stores are bigger, have a full kitchen. and lot’s of waitstaff!
Several factors actually.
First, fast-food places do not serve alcohol, this is a huge advantage as chances to upsell a more expensive drink add a massive advantage! Your typical alcoholic beverage is $10 give or take, so in essence your ticket doubled. Bringing to point #2. The longer you linger in the booth, the more dessert starts to look good. Ah, now let us add the chocolate brownie at about $9. Your lunch just became $30. But I digress, as most likely do not do this! #3 is the menu is far more complex at the sit-down restaurant. Sure, you went in there for the loss leader, but you spied that steak, or pile of nachos that look better. Well, that’s not part of the meal deal and thus more expensive ticket.
At fast food, the upsell chances are minimal. Sure, offer me the meal deal of fries and a coke for an extra $7, not going to happen when you want $25 for 8 pieces chicken. At that price, I’m washing it down with water from the tap. The other massive disadvantage is fast food is supposed to be… well fast. I do not want to linger in the drive thru, get me my meal so I can get back on the road. This is another issue as we waited nearly 12 minutes at KFC to get our order in the drive thru. Fast is key, whereas at Chilis I am not in a big hurry.
Fast food, having to be offered as cheap as possible, is another way they are behind the eight ball. As a result, they must walk a fine line on who they hire/how many they hire, again fast food is supposed to be cheap! Quality of product, as I mentioned, the pieces of chicken resembled a pigeon more than a chicken. Wendy’s has since switched to cheap shredded lettuce rather than leaf lettuce. Most places charge for sauces now. Last time I was at Burger King, my Whopper was gray, it almost appeared boiled or microwaved. It didn’t taste like much. Oh, and the Whopper, fries, and drink “meal” was about $18.
In business school they teach you, quality, price, service…. Pick 2/3. As it’s impossible to hit on all 3. The problem here is, they have now made it very hard to hit on even 1. $18 for a meal deal is a ton of money…. Oh, and in my opinion, horrific quality to boot. $25 for 8 pieces chicken that really cannot even be shared by 2 is bad as well. Fast food used to be an asset, a light and quick way, to sling a meal on the cheap. It’s the opposite now. Our Governor and the older generation of bleeding hearts, want fast food to be a career, as such, the food is priced how it is. Oh, and the minimum wage for fast food went up to, I believe, $20.70, so your meal just got more expensive. As such, the operators have tried to hold the line on price, but have resorted to cheap quality food, or very slow service.
It will not get better, actually it’s gotten far worse.
Wendy’s recently announced the closure of 350 stores this coming year. Jack in the Box closing 150-200. The carnage has started. They simply cannot compete. If you supported the fast-food minimum wage hike and relied on them for your food to boot, you reap what you sow!
Johnnie Does
Zohran Mamdani, AOC, Ilhan Omar, and Jasmine Crockett the Gifts that Keep on Giving
Before you ask why I am praising this merry band of whackos, maybe ask yourself the same question. Folks, politics have taken a wild turn in the last 12 years. Actually, make it 20 years! The Tea Party started all of this with the rise of “Republican” political types who simply voted NO on everything… ala Ted Cruz. I use air quotes because I do not think these types are actually Republicans, they must regurgitate the talking points on the TV. Then came Donald Trump, and the rise of the politician who actually did what he said he would do! It was also the rise of the MAGA movement, which I struggle to define as MAGA folks are all over the place and are typically only single-issue voters. President Trump winning and the rise of his supporters also gave rise to whackos on the Left side of the aisle.
I call their movement MEGA. As in MEGA sized government. They have their supporters.
I recall the day when Gavin Newsom, the mayor of San Francisco, was a left-wing whacko; however, the names above make him look almost sane. I think that is the whole point of his candidacy for President.
I work with someone who openly declares the above group needs to be voted out and shut up. This could not be more stupid, but when you can only repeat what info Sean Hannity gives you, I’m not surprised. Crockett is a nut, AOC is usually spouting off garbage that is not remotely true, and outside her enclave of New York City, she is basically unelectable. Omar loves defending Somalians who are ripping off our government; it’s actually quite laughable. None of those mentioned so far would bit’sllowed in the Democrat party years ago, but like the GOP, they have changed and not for the better.
Mamdani on the other hand is a totally different brand of crazy. One who may well take down some Democrats in New York and possibly nationwide. Mamdani ,during a heavy snow fall, did not open the warming centers in New York City. As a result, 19 homeless people froze to death. Maybe this is their way of handling the homeless now that their plans have mostly been exposed as a grift. Mamdani has now gone after the governor of New York, in essence, with a threat of a large property tax increases if she doesn’t levy a tax on billionaires. Folks, a tax on property will be devastating to New York City.
Check it out…
In 2026, the average annual property tax in New York City is approximately $10,311, with an effective tax rate of about 1.90% for a typical home. While New York State’s average effective rate is 1.45%, NYC often has a higher tax burden, with median bills often exceeding $6,500-$12,000 depending on location and property type.
Increasing that will cause a large number of people to leave the City, not to mention the exodus already taking place.
Mamdani’s ideas, as stated above, make Gavin Newsom look like a moderate in comparison. Heck, all of the above electeds are starting to make Gavin look and sound reasonable. As a result, I would suggest to fellow Republicans, keep those electeds in power. Depending on the tea leaves you read, the election and control of Congress may hang in the balance…. Why not give us an edge based on the comments made by these crazies? Heck, I would toss a camera and a microphone in front of each of them daily to get their latest political takes.
Silence them at your own peril. The target of these political types are the broke, uneducated, criminal types, and illegal aliens. Not a group I would want to ally with. My prediction, Mamdani spends New York City into a fiscal cliff of epic proportions in a couple years! Tie the milestone around the necks of the far Left! Heck even the center Left. I want to make known just how whacky these types are.
The Chief
PS my rational is because we have some whackos on our side as well. The fewer on our side the better. Oh, having the Broad Squad wearing “Fuck ICE” buttons and yelling “K.K.K.” at the State of the Union speech last night was really classy as well.
Zionism and Scofield
Folks, a bedrock belief of the Scofield Reference Bible is Zionism. Scofield taught that Jesus offered the Kingdom of God to the Jews. The First Century Jews rejected it, and God went to Plan B, the Church. Sometime in the future, God will remove the Church (via a secret rapture) and then get back to dealing with the Jews. This is actual Replacement Theology. Scofield’s followers claim they oppose Replacement Theology but theirs is a strawman argument used to silence those that disagree with their extrabiblical views. Scofield is the one that replaces Israel with the Church. The Bible clearly teaches that the Church is the true Israel created from a remnant of Israel that later had Gentiles grafted into it.
For if the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead? For if the firstfruit be holy, the lump is also holy: and if the root be holy, so are the branches. And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree, wert graffed in among them, and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree; Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee. Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be graffed in. Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear: For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee.
Romans 11:15–21.
Included with Scofield’s view is a rebuilt Temple in Jerusalem, renewal of sacrifices in said temple, a worldwide tribulation, a worldwide political dictator commonly known as The Antichrist, lots of dead Jews, and if Hal Lidsey and others are to be believed, a thermonuclear war ending with Jesus sitting on an earthly throne in Jerusalem. Part of Scofield’s system is that God is not done with the Jews and has not kept His Word to them to fulfill the promises made to Abraham. (I mostly rebuked this in my last post.)
Bless Those That Bless You
I would like to look again at Genesis chapter 12. Specifically, what Scofield does with the initial promise to Abram.
“I will make you into a great nation, and I will bless you; I will make your name great, and you will be a blessing. I will bless those who bless you, and whoever curses you I will curse; and all peoples on earth will be blessed through you.”
Genesis 12:2-3. NIV
The following is from Scofield’s footnotes on this verse. I am starting at point 3 since it is the thing you hear most often parroted by his vast array of followers.
(3) Promises to Gentiles. (a) “I will bless those who bless you” (Gen. 12:3). Those who honor Abraham will be blessed. (b) “And whoever curses you I will curse” (Gen. 12:3). This was a warning literally fulfilled in the history of Israel’s persecutions. It has invariably fared ill with the people who have persecuted the Jew—well with those who have protected him. For a nation to commit the sin of anti-Semitism brings inevitable judgment. The future will still more remarkably prove this principle.
Scofield then lists a set of verses that he claims support his claim. Five of the seven passages are directly related to the restoration of Israel after the Babylonian Captivity and are thus one-time events which were already fulfilled. The only other Old Testament verse is Deuteronomy 30: 7 KJV
“And the LORD thy God will put all these curses upon thine enemies, and on them that hate thee, which persecuted thee.”
In context the verse is saying that God will use Gentile nations to judge (punish) Israel for violating the Covenant (see Deuteronomy 28: 15-68) and then God will judge the nations that he used to punish Israel.
The outlier to these verses is his reference to Matthew 25:40, 45 which have nothing to do with Abraham or Israel. Sorry but these references in Matthew are completely unrelated to the topic.
And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me
Matthew 25:40 KJV.
Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me.
Matthew 25:45 KJV.
The bottom line of his footnote is that Genesis 12:2-3 has nothing to do with Israel since Israel (Jacob) was not a glimmer in anybody’s eye yet. In fact, at this point in the story, Abraham was still Abram and had yet to enter into a Covenant with God. Scofield has done sleight of hand and gotten away with it.
His supporting verses are just crap. He is blowing enough smoke that he hopes his claim will be convincing. I find it curious that he doesn’t quote the obvious story of Balaam being hired to curse Israel if this passage truly means what he claims.
The other passage that gets quoted often to bolster Zionism is this one.
The Peace of Jerusalem
“Pray for the peace of Jerusalem: They shall prosper that love thee.”
Psalm 122:6.
Thus, if you support Jerusalem and by extension, Israel, God must bless you. On the other hand, if you oppose Jerusalem then God will punish you. This is taken literally by Scofield led Zionists to be true today even though the biblical nation of Israel was wiped off the map 2,000 years ago and the Old Testament worship ceased forever at that point. The current nation, established in 1948, is not based on the Bible or the law of Moses, instead it is a secular State, but is viewed by many as biblically relevant anyway. Modern Israel’s mere existence is cited as irrefutable proof that Jesus will return any minute.
At one time, Iraqi leader, Sadam Husain, had wanted to restore the city of Babylon. If he had changed the name of the country to Babylon, would all the old biblical passages be recycled again to somehow be relevant in the 21st Century just because of a name change?
The other question that should occur in your mind is why does a literal city in Jerusalem matter at all once you have read the New Testament? The Old Covenant is physical and tangible while the New Covenant is Spiritual.
Somehow Scofield and his minions skip the necessary verses because they don’t fit their presuppositions. The fact is that their best exegetical tool is a pair of household scissors. That way they can cut out the verse they want while simultaneously discarding the limitations of the context and then can make an isolated passage mean whatever they want.
Let’s add a few New Testament passages to the mix.
For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman. But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise. Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar. For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children. But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all. For it is written, Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not; break forth and cry, thou that travailest not: for the desolate hath many more children than she which hath an husband. Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise. But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now. Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman. So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman, but of the free.
Galatians 4:22–31.
So, we, as Christians, belong to the Jerusalem that is above, not the earthly one which is a city of slaves since it is filled with the offspring of Hagar (Agar).
But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels, To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect,
Hebrews 12:22–23.
In biblical theology, there is the type/antitype model. The type is often an earthly shadow of a heavenly reality. The heavenly reality is the antitype. Likewise, the physical, earthly Jerusalem is a foreshadowing of the heavenly City, the real Jerusalem.
And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.
Revelation 21:2.
And he carried me away in the spirit to a great and high mountain, and shewed me that great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God,
Revelation 21:10.
If you follow this type/antitype theme, you will find that the New Testament Zion and Jerusalem are spiritual realities that were foreshadowed by earthly, Old Testament counterparts. So, when you pray for the peace of Jerusalem in our time, it is really a prayer for God to bless His Church not that he blesses a piece of dirt in Palestine. The piece of dirt in Palestine is just dirt, not something with any spiritual significance. Old Covenant Israel is dead and buried and has been since 70 A.D. whether Scofield or Ted Cruz or Mike Huckabee say differently.
Conclusion
There is nothing special about the Jews in God’s plan, they come to God on the same basis as everyone else; namely, faith in Jesus Christ or not at all. The current and very secular nation of Israel has zero to do with biblical prophecy. All promises in the Old Testament that were made to national Israel were fulfilled long ago. It is a myth that any promises to Old Covenant Israel remain unfulfilled.
Scofield frequently ignores history to force already fulfilled prophecy into the future. Like, many before him, he ignores the time markers given in Scripture because they don’t fit with his presuppositions. I will look more at these areas in upcoming installments.
Promises to Abraham Past or Future
I was going to write a single blog post of the topic of Zionism and America, but the task is just too darn long, so I am opting to break it into smaller pieces. Each part will stand on its own. I don’t know how consistent that I will be working on this, but right now I feel like getting it started.
My purpose in writing this is to prove that most of what Evangelical Christians claim as future prophecy was fulfilled long ago and thus their worldview is hopelessly broken. Perhaps a few will be honest enough to look at the source material and believe it once their presuppositions have been shown to be faulty.
First up is the issue of God’s promises to Abraham. Lest you think this is just a theoretical exercise, check out this article.
[Mike] Huckabee also defended the historical and theological claim that present day Israel is the Israel of the Bible, as have GOP U.S. Senators Ted Cruz of Texas and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina. Huckabee said the Bible would justify Israel’s seizing territory in the Middle East from the Euphrates River in Iraq to the Nile in Egypt.
Huckabee Defends Pollard Meeting, Says God Promised Israel the Entire Middle East
As he did during his testy exchange with Cruz, Carlson pressed Huckabee on the meaning of Genesis 15:18: “To thy seed will I give this land, from the river of Egypt even to the great river Euphrates.”
That would include the “entire Middle East,” including Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia, Carlson said. In other words, whole countries.
“It would be a big piece of land,” Huckabee agreed:
“But here’s the point. … This particular area that we’re talking about now, Israel, is a land that God gave through Abraham to a people that he chose. It was a people, a place, and a purpose. We can look at it that way.”
Carlson insisted that Huckabee explain what “land” he meant. “Does Israel have the right to that land? Because you’re appealing to Genesis, you’re saying that’s the original deed?” Carlson asked.
Huckabee: “It would be fine if they took it all.”
- What are the promises that God made to Abram?
- Were these promises fulfilled?
- Is the modern nation of Israel biblically relevant?
God’s first promise to Abram is when Abram was called by the Lord.
Now the LORD had said unto Abram, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father’s house, unto a land that I will shew thee: And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing: And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.
Genesis 12:1–3.
I plan to have more to say on portions of this passage in a later post. In Genesis 15, God makes a covenant with Abram. Later God changes his name to Abraham.
Here is the first promise, Abram’s seed (descendants) will be as numerous as the stars.
And, behold, the word of the LORD came unto him, saying, This shall not be thine heir; but he that shall come forth out of thine own bowels shall be thine heir. And he brought him forth abroad, and said, Look now toward heaven, and tell the stars, if thou be able to number them: and he said unto him, So shall thy seed be. And he believed in the LORD; and he counted it to him for righteousness.
Genesis 15:4–6.
The next promise that God gave Abram was a land grant. The caveat was that the land could not be inherited for four hundred years. This is a prophecy of the captivity in Egypt.
And he said unto Abram, Know of a surety that thy seed shall be a stranger in a land that is not theirs, and shall serve them; and they shall afflict them four hundred years; And also that nation, whom they shall serve, will I judge: and afterward shall they come out with great substance. And thou shalt go to thy fathers in peace; thou shalt be buried in a good old age. 16 But in the fourth generation they shall come hither again: for the iniquity of the Amorites is not yet full.
Genesis 15:13–16.
Later, the land grant is given more specifically.
In the same day the LORD made a covenant with Abram, saying, Unto thy seed have I given this land, from the river of Egypt unto the great river, the river Euphrates:
Genesis 15:18.
So, God in Genesis chapters 12 to 15 made Abraham three promises, That he would have many offspring, that the nations of the earth would be blessed, and that a parcel of land would be given.
When God late announces that Abram will be the father of Isaac, he changes his name to Abraham and his wife then becomes Sarah.
As for me, behold, my covenant is with thee, and thou shalt be a father of many nations. Neither shall thy name any more be called Abram, but thy name shall be Abraham; for a father of many nations have I made thee. And I will make thee exceeding fruitful, and I will make nations of thee, and kings shall come out of thee. And I will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee. And I will give unto thee, and to thy seed after thee, the land wherein thou art a stranger, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession; and I will be their God.
Genesis 17:4–8.
Nations Blessed
Per the New Testament, the ultimate fulfillment of the world being blessed by the seed of Abraham was found in Jesus Christ.
Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ. Galatians 3:16.
Land Promise
Later, the land promise is affirmed to Josua.
Every place that the sole of your foot shall tread upon, that have I given unto you, as I said unto Moses. From the wilderness and this Lebanon even unto the great river, the river Euphrates, all the land of the Hittites, and unto the great sea toward the going down of the sun, shall be your coast.
Joshua 1:3–4.
Joshua, at the end of his life gives a different description of the Promised Land.
And ye have seen all that the LORD your God hath done unto all these nations because of you; for the LORD your God is he that hath fought for you. Behold, I have divided unto you by lot these nations that remain, to be an inheritance for your tribes, from Jordan, with all the nations that I have cut off, even unto the great sea westward. And the LORD your God, he shall expel them from before you, and drive them from out of your sight; and ye shall possess their land, as the LORD your God hath promised unto you.
Joshua 23:3–5.
When Joshua died, Israel controlled both sides of the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea. That seems a far cry from the Euphrates.
Now therefore fear the LORD, and serve him in sincerity and in truth: and put away the gods which your fathers served on the other side of the flood, and in Egypt; and serve ye the LORD.
Joshua 24:14.
However, what is the “other side of the flood”? Oh, wow! It’s the Euphrates River. So the promise was fulfilled just as God had promises Abraham.
But wait, there’s more.
David smote also Hadadezer, the son of Rehob, king of Zobah, as he went to recover his border at the river Euphrates.
2 Samuel 8:3.
King David recovered his border at the Euphrates River.
For he [Solomon] had dominion over all the region on this side the river, from Tiphsah even to Azzah, over all the kings on this side the river: and he had peace on all sides round about him.
1 Kings 4:24.
Solomon ruled it too. So, Israel conquered the land to the Euphrates and held it for many years.
And the LORD gave unto Israel all the land which he sware to give unto their fathers; and they possessed it, and dwelt therein. And the LORD gave them rest round about, according to all that he sware unto their fathers: and there stood not a man of all their enemies before them; the LORD delivered all their enemies into their hand. There failed not ought of any good thing which the LORD had spoken unto the house of Israel; all came to pass.
Joshua 21:43–45.
Offspring as the Stars
Their children also multipliedst thou as the stars of heaven, and broughtest them into the land, concerning which thou hadst promised to their fathers, that they should go in to possess it.
Nehemiah 9:23.
Thy fathers went down into Egypt with threescore and ten persons; and now the LORD thy God hath made thee as the stars of heaven for multitude.
Deuteronomy 10:22.
Conclusion
God fulfilled all the promises made to Abraham.
Blessed be the LORD, that hath given rest unto his people Israel, according to all that he promised: there hath not failed one word of all his good promise, which he promised by the hand of Moses his servant.
1 Kings 8:56.
The Old Covenant is over and decisively so in 70 A.D; God divorced Israel, the Great Harlot, Babylon where Christ was crucified. Beginning at Pentecost, God took a new people from Israel, starting with a remnant. Later Gentiles were grafted into the cultivated olive tree (Israel). A new assembly (ecclesia) of New Testament believers arose during the last days of Israel. This is the new bride of Christ, the Church. Thus, the Church is the true Israel, the offspring of Abraham and Jacob.
Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel: Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called. That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.
Romans 9:6–8.
Know ye therefore that they which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham. And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed. So then they which be of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham.
Galatians 3:7–9.
And if ye be Christ’s, then are ye Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.
Galatians 3:29.
Maintaining the land promised to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob was contingent of obedience of God’s Covenant. Moses and Joshua both knew that eventually Israel would disobey and be taken to foreign lands as punishment. A remnant would eventually return, and they were. In the final days, Israel chose Caesar over Christ. “We have no king but Caesar” and then “His blood be upon us and our children.” Jesus told them that their house would be left to them desolate and not one stone would be left upon another but by then their fate was sealed.
Huckabee, Cruz, Graham, and the rest of the disciples of Scofield are wrong but given a choice between their presuppositions and the actual text of the Bible, they can only see Scofield’s Notes. Their willful ignorance results in a fatal case of paralysis for the progress of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
The Supreme Court got it Really Right
I have been told by many so called conservatives that the courts only strike down Republican laws, never Liberal ones. This is patently untrue, but I cannot control the way you think as you have been programmed by tv media to think the way you do.
The Constitution says that taxes must originate in the House of Representatives, not the Senate, nor by Executive Order from the Executive branch. The reason for this is our Founders set up a process where checks and balances are a thing. Large states like California, Texas, and Florida get a large says about matters in the House, while small states like Rhode Island, the Dakota’s, and Montana can hold a larger say in the Senate on matters. The Executive branch is not allowed to issue Executive Orders on certain things; they must originate in the House.
“Sorry rules are rules.”
The Constitution states that Congress has the power: “To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;”
Oh, isn’t that the rallying cry of the Tea Party, far right types whenever the Liberals are in control of things? It’s all about the Constitution.
As William wrote in his blog, if Congress did its job, we would not be here. This has gone back to at least the W. Bush presidency, we no longer have a budget, we do Executive Orders and Continuing Resolutions; neither of which is authorized by the Constitution. We fund the government for around 60-90 days at a time.
This Executive Order gambit has taken on a life of its own; due to Congress not doing its job.
The problem is actually a bi-partisan one. Both parties do it. When one party controls the White House, the other party, if they control Congress, digs in and refuses to pass any legislation that helps the party in power. As a direct result, the White House does executive Orders to go around Congress. Then it is essentially up to the courts to litigate it.
Typically, the process works this way. The party out of power (not the White House), finds a friendly judge, said judge rules it unconstitutional and blocks it. Then the President, via the Department of Justice, appeals the ruling to Appeals Court. When that occurs, the Executive Order, could be allowed to continue pending appeal outcome, which is what typically occurs. In the case of tariffs, it was allowed to continue. The appeals court will rule (it’s typically a random 3 judge panel, not one judge). If the outcome is not to the liking of one party or the other, it can be sent to the Supreme Court. If the Court agrees to hear it, they usually issue a stay and allow the law/regulation to remain in place until they rule on its legality. The Supreme Court ruled today, 6-3 saying tariffs done by Executive Order are illegal.
In closing, I will say this, regardless of your belief on tariffs, I have made mine known previously, this is a big win for the rule of law. Just imagine for a minute if the Supreme Court ruled the other way, it opens Pandora’s Box for the other party to do the same on their legislative priorities. If that were to occur, what is the point of Congress? Trump is aiming his anger at the Court; he should be aiming his anger at Congress.
By The Chief
Supreme Court Tells Congress to Do its Job
The US Supreme Court just struck down President Trump’s ability to set tariff rates with other countries. The vote was 6 to 3. I never could figure the Constitutional basis that gave Trump this power. Yes, it was good from a fiscal point of view, but …
This ruling essentially told the do-nothing Congress, this characterization is true of both parties, that they must do their job. Congress has been a broken and failed institution for my entire adult life and then some.
Trump has proved that tariffs can be an effective way to generate revenue, they were for most of the country’s history and could be again. The Court has said that Congress needs to lead. Constitutionally, that is a correct statement, but in reality, it is not likely to happen.
This ruling is also good because the Court is politely saying that rule by Executive Order must have limitations. If Congress had any genitals, rule by Executive Order would be illegal.
Protestants Acting Stupidly
Early this morning on good ‘ole Facebook, I came across a bunch of posts blasting the idea of Ash Wednesday. I decided to write a blog on this subject, and I’ll be darned if I can find any samples now. But I will fire away on my thoughts and keep looking for examples.
“Ash Wednesday is a holy day of prayer and fasting in many Western Christian denominations. It is preceded by Shrove Tuesday and marks the first day of Lent: the seven weeks of prayer, fasting, and almsgiving before the arrival of Easter.”
This is another religious lie of the Roman Catholic Church to enslave people to works righteousness rather than the freedom of biblical grace and mercy of the gospel! Ephesians 2:8-9
First, why is it OK for Protestants to celebrate Christmas and Easter and then dis the folks that they stole the holidays from to start with? Ash Wednesday is just as much part of the Church calendar as Christmas and Easter.
Folks, it’s a much better argument that Jesus was born in September, on or about the Day of Atonement, than anything that places his real date of birth near December 25th. I have a video by some Protestants arguing vigorously that Jesus was born on the traditional date of Christmas (12/25) but really their evidence is thin.
Easter, in the spring, is a much better and firmer argument but the date of Easter is rarely near the Passover, at least in current reckoning. Since at least three different calendars were used, I can understand the confusion. (oh, the calendars are Julian, Gregorian, Jewish)
Just so you know, the Church calendar was created many centuries ago and goes beyond the year 8,000. They have much more faith in the providence of God and our mission as Christians than the current crop of believers today with their any minute Rapture.
The presumption, by the posters that I saw who were attacking Ash Wednesday, is that they have everything right and those following the Church calendar, especially Roman Catholics, are heretics, syncretizes, or out right pagans. Their basic argument was that Lent and Ash Wednesday are not in the Bible.
Mark 7:9 “He was also saying to them, “You are experts at setting aside the commandment of God in order to keep your tradition.”
On Photo: The Catholic Ash Wednesday ceremony is pure witchcraft” Andre Salloum
Hey, Protestants! The following are not in the Bible either:
Grape Juice For Communion.
Anything Less Than Weekly Communion.
Baby Dedication.
Baptism By Immersion.
Age Of Accountability.
The Rapture.
Walking an isle or the “Sinner’s Prayer”
But most of you practice these things as if they were found in the KJV.
Why is it wrong to commemorate the 40 days that Jesus suffered in the wilderness as a preparation for celebrating his passion and death? Nobody says you have to do it, but what about Christian liberty? Why is it wrong for believers to reflect a little on what it cost God to come as a man to save you from your sins? Oh, for you that don’t know, Sundays are exempted from the 40-day calculation, since it is a day of worship.
Back in December, I went to church with my parents. I attended their once Baptist and now nondenominational church. The pastor bragged about how he didn’t follow the traditions of men but only the Scriptures. Meanwhile, everything in the bulletin or their service was a tradition of men. They were dispensational/premillennial in their eschatology. A Tradition of man unknown to the church until the 1830’s. They had a Baptist during the service. It was by immersion. Not in the Bible. It was a “believer’s baptism”. Again, this is not the biblical norm, the exception was the Ethiopian eunuch, typically, the practice was that whole families baptized on the basis of the father, who was head of the household, professing faith. In such cases, children, spouses, and servants were all baptized because of the man’s profession of faith. Then there was an assortment of ministries which were unknown until the time of Chrles Wesley. Oh, to this pastor, the world belongs to Satan until some future time. God was only the savior of your soul; the rest was not God’s concern. Again, not in the Bible. Lastly, they sang zero hymns from or based on the book of Psalms. God gave us a song book but we never use it.
So yeh, mister Protestant, tell me how that whole thing is going for you? I have my disagreements with Rome too but most of the Protestant folks out there are theologically no better. They just like their heresies better than those of the other guys.
Oh, just so you know, using either geography or raw numbers, more Christians celebrate Lent than don’t. The Roman Catholic Church, Orthodox, and some Protestants including Anglican, Lutherans, celebrate Lent. That leaves Christians in and around the Presbyterian and Baptist denominations as the outliers.
Folks, this is a stupid thing to argue about. Why must we unchurch everyone else to advance our ideas? It gets old really fast. If you have the time to beat up on your fellow Christians then it means you aren’t facing the right way to fight the enemy, just sayin’.