{"id":19194,"date":"2017-04-12T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2017-04-12T05:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/sugar-land-bible-church.local\/sermon\/the-coming-kingdom-014\/"},"modified":"2017-04-12T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2017-04-12T05:00:00","slug":"the-coming-kingdom-014","status":"publish","type":"sermon","link":"https:\/\/slbc.org\/es\/sermon\/the-coming-kingdom-014\/","title":{"rendered":"The Coming Kingdom 014"},"content":{"rendered":"","protected":false},"featured_media":0,"template":"","book":[94],"series_event":[470],"sermon_service_type":[474],"speaker":[6],"class_list":["post-19194","sermon","type-sermon","status-publish","hentry","book-ephesians","series_event-the-coming-kingdom","sermon_service_type-wednesday-evenings","speaker-dr-andy-woods","no-post-thumbnail"],"acf":{"sermon_title":"The Coming Kingdom 014","sermon_date":"20170412","sermon_month":"4","sermon_year":"2017","sermon_notes":4550,"sermon_slides":4549,"sermon_mp3":4551,"sermon_id":"41217193223","series_or_event":470,"service_type":[474],"speaker":6,"books_of_the_bible":94,"chapter_and_verse":"3:5","sermon_transcript":"Andy Woods\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 The Coming Kingdom\n\n4-12-17\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Ephesians 3:5\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Lesson 14\n\nLet\u2019s open our Bibles to the book of Ephesians, chapter 3 and verse 5.\u00a0 I\u2019d like to spend just a couple of minutes reviewing.\u00a0 We\u2019re continuing to work through this subject of the kingdom, trying to figure out what does the Bible say about the kingdom.\u00a0 We started in Eden where the kingdom was established and lost; it was established through Adam, being ruled by God and he in turn ruled creation.\u00a0 And that was lost in Genesis 3 when Adam started listening to creation instead of governing it for God.\u00a0 So the moment that happens is the moment that the kingdom disappears from the earth, so the goal of the Bible is how that kingdom is going to be restored to the earth one day.\n\nAnd it\u2019s in the Abrahamic Covenant that we learn that God calls a nation aside to be His instrument through which His kingdom program is going to be brought back to the planet.\u00a0 So the Abrahamic Covenant gives to Israel ownership of three things; those are land, seed and blessing.\u00a0 Six hundred years later the Mosaic Covenant, given at Sinai, gives the nation of Israel what relative to her blessings?\u00a0 Possession, so she\u2019s always the owner but will she possess what she owns; she has to meet a condition, she has to enthrone the king of God\u2019s own choosing.\u00a0 And once Israel does that she will be the owner and the possessor which means the kingdom will be established on the earth.\n\nThen the kingdom is divided and we\u2019ve got to keep our eye on which part of the division?\u00a0 North or south?\u00a0 South because the south has a special tribe in it called the tribe of Judah, and Genesis 49:10 tells us that the kingdom program is going to come through Judah.\u00a0 [Genesis 49:10, \u201cThe scepter shall not depart from Judah, Nor the ruler's staff from between his feet, Until Shiloh comes, And to him shall be the obedience of the peoples.\u201d]\u00a0 Judah, as you know from Sunday mornings, is taken into Babylonian captivity for 70 years and that starts a time period called the times of the Gentiles, when the kingdom is gone from the earth.\u00a0 The kingdom sort of returned in limited form over Israel only in the days of Moses but once the times of the Gentiles start and the Shekinah glory of God leaves the temple (and Ezekiel talks about this in Ezekiel 8-11) the kingdom is gone and the kingdom is not going to be restored until the Shekinah glory of God returns to the temple in the millennium.\n\nSo in the meantime Israel, while the kingdom is absent, is being trampled down by various Gentile powers and that process is going to continue; it started with Nebuchadnezzar and it continues right on up to the dethronement of the antichrist in a second coming.\u00a0 So during this whole period of time, and we\u2019re in that time period right now, the kingdom is not cancelled but it\u2019s in a state of postponement.\u00a0 And this is where the prophets get out their paint brushes and they paint a picture of what the kingdom is going to be like one day when the nation of Israel is in repentance and the kingdom comes.\u00a0 And that\u2019s why the prophets function as a light shining in a dark place.\n\nThen the nation of Israel, or Judah really, returns to the land of Israel, after 70 years and what empire allowed them to get back into their land?\u00a0 The Persian Empire, the Medes and the Persians, and they\u2019re in the land for 400 years, which is a long time.\u00a0 America has only been here for 200 plus years; they were in the land for 400 years.\u00a0 Persia was replaced by Greece, Greece was replaced by Rome as different empires trampling down the holy people during the times of the Gentiles.\u00a0 And then one day the King shows\u00a0 up and that\u2019s where the New Testament picks up in Matthew.\u00a0 Jesus is the King that they\u2019re supposed to enthrone and He showed right up on time, He had the right genea\u00adlogical pedigree, and had the nation of Israel enthroned him right then and there hypo\u00adthetically the times of the Gentiles would have ended; the Shekinah glory of God would have come back into the temple and the millennial kingdom would\u00a0 have started.\u00a0 And that\u2019s what\u2019s meant in the expression \u201crepent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.\u201d\n\nBut we know from the gospels that story, they turned down the offer and they said we will not have this man to reign over\u00a0 us.\u00a0 So God is never caught off guard by anything; He used that rejection to start a time period called the interim age\u00a0 which is a time period that we\u2019re in now; it\u2019s the time period between the two advents of Christ when the kingdom is absent.\u00a0 And what we\u2019re starting to learn about now is a description of this interim age.\u00a0 The interim age is not the kingdom.\n\nNow when I say the kingdom is absent today I\u2019m not saying God is not working; He clearly is working but He\u2019s working in a special way which doesn\u2019t have any correspondence to the description we get of the kingdom.\u00a0 So the interim age has two parts to it and these take place, they overlap, they take place simultaneously.\u00a0 The first big part of the Bible to deal with the interim age is the interadvent age which Jesus describes in eight parables in Matthew 13.\u00a0 So in Matthew 13 He gives you basically eight parables and if you understand those, and most people don\u2019t, most people have very wrong definitions of most of them as I\u2019ll show you, but if you understand them you can understand exactly what God is doing today, even though the kingdom is absent or in postponement.\n\nAnd part of that picture is a unique new man that started on the day of Pentecost, that will end with the rapture, called the church, which we are all part of.\u00a0 The church age has been going on for 2,000 years; Jesus never talks about the church at all in early Matthew and it\u2019s not until you get to the very end of Matthew, towards the end, chapter 16, when it\u2019s very clear that the nation of Israel has rejected the offer of the kingdom, the offer is rescinded, it won\u2019t be reoffered until a distant generation of Israel, who will one day receive it.\n\nSo that\u2019s God going to do in the interim?\u00a0 Jesus, for the first time talks about something He\u2019s never talked about before, and no one in the Old Testament talked about it, called the church, and He makes this statement: \u201cI will build My church and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it,\u201d Matthew 16:18.\u00a0 When He says, \u201cI will build My church\u201d the verb tense is future, so obviously the church didn\u2019t exist when He made that statement.\u00a0 So He\u2019s is hinting at something totally new.\u00a0 So the interadvent age, described in eight parables, and then the church age, if you understand those two concepts it shows you what God is doing today.\u00a0 And those two concepts are not to be confused with the kingdom.\n\nSo before we get into that, I\u2019m going to start with the Matthew 13 parables and we\u2019ll work through those and then we\u2019ll get into the description of the church but before we even get into that what I was doing last time was offering five preliminary observations about this interim age that we are now in.\u00a0 The first two and a half we\u2019ve covered and so we\u2019re going to pick it up with what a mystery is.\u00a0 But you recall we talked about that this is an authentic age; it\u2019s a real period of time that Jesus began to talk about in the parable of the minas; a mina is like a monetary denomination that you\u2019re entrusted with to invest on behalf of the King while the King is not here.\u00a0 And he told that parable of the minas because it says there in verse 11 of Luke 19, while they were listening to these things Jesus went on to tell them a parable because He was near Jerusalem and they supposed that the kingdom of God was going to appear immediately.\n\nSo even though the nation has rejected the offer of the kingdom\u2026 by the way, do you remember what chapter in the Bible that is, where they rejected the offer of the kingdom?\u00a0 Matthew 12.\u00a0 Even though Matthew 12 has happened they\u2019re still people that think man, He\u2019s going to go into Jerusalem and set up the kingdom right away.\u00a0 So to correct their misunderstanding He gives them this parable where there\u2019s a long period of time and the king is gone for a long period of time and people are to invest what He\u2019s given them during His absence, but one of these days Luke 19:15 will occur where He\u2019s going to come back and hold people accountable for how they invested His money.\u00a0 [Luke 19:15, \u201cWhen he returned, after receiving the kingdom, he ordered that these slaves, to whom he had given the money, be called to him so that he might know what business they had done.\u201d]\n\nAnd that\u2019s really the first hint you have of this interim age.\u00a0 So it is a very real period of time that Jesus began to articulate as it became clear that the nation was not going to receive their King and consequently their kingdom.\n\nNumber 2, it\u2019s an age of time caused by Israel\u2019s unbelief.\u00a0 Now all the way back in the sixth century Daniel predicted this.\u00a0 He referred to \u201cMessiah the Prince.\u201d\u00a0 [Daniel 9:25, \u201cSo you are to know and discern that from the issuing of a decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until Messiah the Prince there will be seven weeks and sixty-two weeks; it will be built again, with plaza and moat, even in times of distress.\u00a0 [26] Then after the sixty-two weeks the Messiah will be cut off and have nothing, and the people of the Prince who is to come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. And its end will come with a flood; even to the end there will be war; desolations are determined.\u201d]\n\nHe indicated\u2026 now why is Jesus called Messiah the Prince and not Messiah the King?\u00a0 He doesn\u2019t have His kingdom because Daniel is clear that the nation would reject it, so He remains to this day a Prince and not a King.\u00a0 Daniel says the Prince is going to be cut off (that\u2019s His crucifixion) and inherit nothing.\u00a0 \u201cInherit nothing\u201d means the King will not receive the kingdom at His first advent.\n\nSo God took lemons and turned them into what?\u00a0 Lemonade.\u00a0 So God used Israel\u2019s unbelief to orchestrate the next phase of His plan which is this interim age.\u00a0 So this is how big God is; He takes decisions that His own creatures make against Him and He uses that rebellion, which is an act of their own free will, to accomplish His purposes.\u00a0 Now who can do that other than God?\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 And that\u2019s why I have this quote by Lewis Sperry Chafer where he says, \u201cGod only knows beforehand the choice His creatures will make, but is Himself able to work in them both to will and to do of His own good pleasure.\u201d So the stage of time that we\u2019re in is something that God always knew He was going to start but He used Israel\u2019s unbelief to start it.\n\nAnd this age of time is not only an authentic age, it\u2019s not only an age caused by Israel\u2019s unbelief but it\u2019s called a mystery age.\u00a0 Now remember the two things that go on in the mystery age; the eight parables of Matthew 13 and what else?\u00a0 The church.\u00a0 Both concepts are called mysteries.\u00a0 Matthew\n\n13:11 refers to the eight parables describing the advent age as a time of mystery or mysteries, kingdom mysteries.\u00a0 And then Paul describes the church in the book of Ephesians as a mystery,\u00a0 Ephesians 3:9.\u00a0 [Ephesians 3:9, \u201cand to bring to light what is the administration of the mystery which for ages has been hidden in God who created all things;\u201d]\n\nSo the big question then becomes what is a mystery?\u00a0 And the mistake people make is they define mystery by how it\u2019s used in English rather than Greek.\u00a0 You all know that the Bible wasn\u2019t written in English originally, right?\u00a0 It was written in Greek.\u00a0 So the problem with us is we come to the word \u201cmystery\u201d and we put our own meaning into it so we think mystery is something that has to be searched out with great diligence to understand what it means.\u00a0 So if you\u2019re watching a mystery movie you don\u2019t know who the bad guy is until the last five minutes.\u00a0 Have you ever watched Colombo<\/em>, I mean, it was like the last two and a half minutes when everything came together.\u00a0 You had to invest half an hour, an hour, how long do those go?\u00a0 An hour, right, not that it matters, to figure out who the bad guys was.\u00a0 So that\u2019s what we think mystery means because that\u2019s how we use the word in English.\n\nBut in Greek it doesn\u2019t mean that at all.\u00a0 What it means is a brand new disclosure that\u2019s out in the open but it\u2019s never before been disclosed.\u00a0 So that\u2019s why I have this quote from Vine and his complete Expository Dictionary of Old Testament and New Testament Words.\u00a0 [Vine\u2019s Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words<\/em>]\u00a0 He\u2019s defining for us what a mystery is.\n\nSo let\u2019s focus on the church for a minute.\u00a0 What is so mysterious about the church?\u00a0 What is new about the church that\u2019s never been normative before in all of God\u2019s dealings?\u00a0 Here Paul tells us what the mystery is.\u00a0 He calls the church a \u201cmystery\u201d twice, and in verse 6 he says, \u201cto be specific, that the Gentiles are fellow heirs and fellow members of the body, and fellow partakers of the promise in Christ Jesus\u2026.\u201d\u00a0 That\u2019s the mystery.\u00a0 The mystery is God today, beginning on the day of Pentecost and continuing today, has created a new spiritual man called the church.\u00a0 And in this new man called the church Jew and Gentile are on equal footing as joint heirs or co-heirs in Jesus Christ.\u00a0 So no longer is it the way it was in Old Testament times when Israel was the preeminent servants of God.\n\nIn Old Testament times, like in the case of Ruth, Ruth 1:16, to walk with God you had to convert to Judaism and become a what?\u00a0 It\u2019s called a proselyte. So Ruth, a Moabitess, became a proselyte to her mother, Naomi, as Naomi is returning from Moab back to the land of Israel when she said \u201cYour people shall be my people, and your God will be my God.\u201d \u00a0[Ruth 1:16, \u201cBut Ruth said, \u2018Do not urge me to leave you or turn back from following you; for where you go, I will go, and where you lodge, I will lodge. Your people shall be my people, and your God, my God.\u2019\u201d]\u00a0 So she\u00a0 assimilated into the Jewish culture; she became, for all intents and purposes Jewish even though she was not a physical descendant of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, she submitted to the Jewish language, submitted to the religious institutions of Judaism. \u00a0And that\u2019s how it worked in the Old Testament.\n\nWell, in the age of the church that\u2019s not how it works.\u00a0 To be right with God you have to believe in the Lord Jesus Christ and\u00a0 you\u2019re brought into this new man consisting of Jews and Gentiles together on equal footings.\u00a0 So the days are gone when you have to convert to Judaism to grow as a believer in the Lord and His truth.\n\nNow when Paul uses the word \u201cmystery\u201d and I showed you where he used it, in Ephesians 3:3-6, it\u2019s the Greek word musterion<\/em>, what meaning is Paul pouring into that phrase?\u00a0 The meaning he\u2019s using is the only place \u201cmystery\u201d is found in the whole Old Testament.\u00a0 We have what\u2019s called the Septuagint which is the Greek translation of the Old Testament Hebrew Bible translated by 70 scholars in 70 days about 200 years before Christ walked this earth.\u00a0 So 200 years before Jesus showed up you have a Greek translation of Hebrew Bible.\u00a0 And of course the Septuagint was necessary because Alexander the Great made Greek the lingua franca<\/em>, known language, of the ancient world and so people wanted to read Hebrew Bible in Greek and so there was this translation called the Septuagint.\n\nAnd you go through the whole Septuagint and the word \u201cmystery\u201d is only used in one chapter in the whole Septuagint; it\u2019s in Daniel 2.\u00a0 It\u2019s the Aramaic word raz<\/em>, translated musterion<\/em>, and it\u2019s used in reference to the revelation that God gave to Daniel about Nebuchadnezzar\u2019s dream.\u00a0 Remember how we have studied Nebuchadnezzar\u2019s dream on Sunday mornings?\u00a0 Remember what Nebuchadnezzar said?\u00a0 The wise men said well tell us the dream and we\u2019ll give you the interpretation.\u00a0 What did Nebuchadnezzar say?\u00a0 You tell me the dream and the interpretation and the wise men, of course, couldn\u2019t produce this but Daniel could because God gave it to him.\u00a0 And when this revelation is given to Daniel it\u2019s described, and this is the only place in the whole Septuagint where the word mystery is used, the Greek word musterion<\/em>.\u00a0 Daniel describes this revelation as a mystery.\u00a0 Now that mystery has to be something never known before now disclosed, right?\u00a0 Because Nebuchadnezzar not only didn\u2019t give Daniel the interpretation he didn\u2019t even give him the dream.\u00a0 So the whole thing that Daniel received is something hidden but now brought into the open.\u00a0 Now that\u2019s the only time\u00a0 you\u2019re going to find the word musterion<\/em> in the whole Septuagint.\n\nPaul, a devout Jew, is using this definition of mystery when he talks about the church as a mystery.\u00a0 So just as this vision here was something totally unknown but now revealed to Daniel that\u2019s what the church is.\u00a0 The church is something totally unknown to man; God always knew He\u2019d start the church but He never revealed it to anybody.\u00a0 But now it\u2019s a mystery, it\u2019s been brought out into full disclosure and so that word \u201cmystery\u201d becomes very, very important when understanding what God is doing in the present age through the church.\n\nNow having said all that, that\u2019s review, I want to cover two battleground passages; I want to cover tonight Ephesians 3:5 and also Romans 16:25-26 and so let\u2019s take a look at Ephesians 3:5 first.\u00a0 Notice what it says here:\u00a0 Paul is describing the mystery of the church and he says this: \u201cwhich in other generations was not made known to the sons of men, as\u201d the Greek word haws<\/em>, meaning comparison, \u201cas it has now been revealed to His holy apostles and prophets in the Spirit;\u201d so by using that comparison Paul is comparing two things: what was known in prior times versus what is known today.\n\nNow there is a massive movement in the church today, it\u2019s been going on really since around the 1600\u2019s called Reformed Theology and they detest our view that the church is something never before revealed.\u00a0 They believe that there is elements of the church all the way in the Old Testament, right up to the present; it\u2019s just in our age it becomes fuller known.\u00a0 That\u2019s what\u2019s called Reformed Theology.\u00a0 So what we believe here is the two peoples of God idea; God has a plan for Israel and God has a plan for the church.\u00a0 Right?\u00a0 Just like a talented author can bring together various subplots and weave them together beautifully, that\u2019s what God is doing with Israel and the church.\u00a0 We don\u2019t believe in one people of God, we believe in two peoples of God because God is a God of diversity and variety.\u00a0 This is why Paul, in Ephesians 3, calls God\u2019s plan \u201cthe manifold wisdom of God.\u201d\u00a0 [Ephesians 3:10, \u201cso that the manifold wisdom of God might now be made known through the church to the rulers and the authorities in the heavenly places.\u201d]\u00a0 Manifold means multicolored, like the colors of a rainbow.\n\nSo today God is dealing on the earth with the church; that\u2019s not what He did in the Old Testament, He was dealing with Israel.\u00a0 And that\u2019s not what He\u2019s going to do when the church is gone, He\u2019s not going to be dealing with the church, He\u2019s going to be dealing with national Israel.\u00a0 So that\u2019s basically what you call the two peoples of God idea.\u00a0\u00a0 Now Reformed theology comes along and says no, there\u2019s sons, one people of God; and I always say well can\u2019t we have a little variety in God, I mean, there\u2019s male and female, isn\u2019t God a God of variety?\u00a0 No two of our fingerprints are alike.\u00a0 Can\u2019t we have a little bit of variety in God?\u00a0 Doesn\u2019t God have a plan for the angels, the good angels and the fallen angels and humanity?\n\nThe idea that I\u2019m espousing, you have to understand it\u2019s fought against very aggressively because people have already made up their mind there\u2019s one people of God, so they\u2019re on a perpetual quest to see the church in the Old Testament.\u00a0 And at my Alma mater, it\u2019s tragic for me to even talk about it, there\u2019s a movement that started in the late 1980\u2019s called progressive dispensationalism which to me is neither progressive nor dispensational; it\u2019s one of the most misnamed movements in the history of mankind as far as I can tell.\u00a0 It\u2019s not progressive because it\u2019s regressing back to Reformed theology and it doesn\u2019t hold to the tenants of dispensationalism either, the two peoples of God idea.\u00a0 Now we get this two peoples of God idea through a literal approach to the whole Bible.\n\nSo progressive dispensationalists are into this mindset where they want to build a bridge to the Reformed community, so the key phrase that\u2019s used is common ground, we want to find common ground with Reformed theology.\u00a0 So progressive dispensationalists are people that used to hold the dispensational view that I\u2019m espousing, that\u2019s been espoused by John Walvoord, Dwight Pentecost, Charles Ryrie, it\u2019s what Dallas Seminary was started on, and they said no, we went to Europe, we studied in Europe, we know better and what we\u2019re going to do is we\u2019re going to build a bridge to the Reformed community and we\u2019re going to go into the middle somewhere.\u00a0 And it\u2019s sort of a way to get academic respectability.\u00a0 You can\u2019t be invited to the big conferences and published in the prestigious journals and books and so forth unless you give ground to the Reformed community on certain points.\u00a0 And so I like to call it middle ground mania.\n\nSo one of the things progressive dispensationalists started to do is they would say well the church, it\u2019s revealed in the Old Testament, it\u2019s just not realized until the New Testament.\u00a0 The Reformed community says the church has always been in the Old Testament, some of them trace it all the way back to Abraham, some even go back to Adam right after he got out of the Garden of Eden and put his clothes on, they say the church started.\u00a0 Now immediately you should have a problem with that because Jesus said \u201cI will build My church\u201d indicating the church didn\u2019t exist yet when Jesus made that statement so how could it have existed in the Old Testament?\n\nAnd a giant semantical game is being played here, with this word \u201cas.\u201d\u00a0 So here is the big debate, as Paul is contrasting what is revealed now with what was known or not known in prior generations; the big debate is the word \u201cas.\u201d\u00a0 Is this a comparison of degree or is this a comparison of kind?\u00a0 A comparison of degree would favor Reformed theology; a comparison of kind would favor dispensational theology.\u00a0 What is a comparison of degree?\u00a0 A comparison of degree is like this: I say to Michael Jordan, I\u2019m not as good a basketball player as you are, so I\u2019m a basketball player, you\u2019re a basketball player, but you\u2019re better (and by the way, you get paid a lot more money) but I\u2019m still a basketball player.\u00a0 So it\u2019s comparing the degree of basketball playing ability.\u00a0 So the Reformed camp is saying that is what is happening here in this comparison, it\u2019s just a comparison of degree.\n\nWhat I\u2019m saying is it\u2019s a comparison of kind; he\u2019s not comparing degree he\u2019s comparing kind.\u00a0 It\u2019s like saying this: let\u2019s say I never played basketball and I say to Michael Jordan you\u2019re a basketball player and I\u2019m not.\u00a0 I\u2019m no longer comparing degree but I\u2019m comparing kind.\u00a0 Do you see that?\u00a0 And I think what\u2019s happening here in this comparison is it\u2019s a comparison of kind, not degree.\u00a0 If I\u2019m right on this then the church never existed anywhere in the Old Testament.\n\nNow the big argument is when you look at this word \u201cas\u201d they say the normal comparison in the Bible is a comparison not of kind but degree so therefore that\u2019s what\u2019s happening here.\u00a0 The problem is, that may be true, the normal comparison is a comparison of degree but there are comparisons of kind in the Bible, aren\u2019t there, with the comparison \u201cas.\u201d\u00a0 For example, in Acts 2:15 Peter says, \u201cFor these men are not drunk as\u201d same word that we\u2019re\u00a0 using in Ephesians 3:5, \u201cthese men are not drunk as you suppose, for it is only the third hour.\u201d\u00a0 So what he is comparing here is drinking early in the morning to non-drinking.\u00a0 See that?\u00a0 So that\u2019s not a comparison of degree but it\u2019s a comparison of kind.\u00a0 He\u2019s not saying there was some drinking earlier but now there\u2019s more. That would be a comparison of degree.\n\nSo it is true comparisons of degree are the most prominent use of \u201cas\u201d but there are comparisons of kind.\u00a0 So the big question is, is Ephesians 3:5, as Paul is comparing what had been revealed about the church in prior ages to what is revealed about the church now, is he making a comparison of degree or a comparison of kind.\u00a0 Now how do you suggest we answer that question since both can be used in the Bible.\u00a0 What are the three rules of Bible study?\u00a0 Context, context, context!\u00a0 And I\u2019m convinced as you look at this context he is not making a comparison of degree at all; he\u2019s making a comparison of kind and what he is saying is the church never ever existed in prior ages but now it\u2019s been disclosed.\u00a0 He\u2019s not saying the church was sort of there but now it\u2019s really here.\n\nNow why would I say that?\u00a0 I say that because of context; look at Ephesians 3:9, he says, \u201cand to bring to light what is the administration of the mystery which for ages has been\u201d what? \u201chidden in God\u201d what was the church?\u00a0 Hidden.\u00a0 You couldn\u2019t discover the church through normal human philosophy if you wanted to; it was something that God hid away in the prior age.\u00a0\u00a0 But now Ephesians 3:5 says, \u201cwhich in other generations was not made known to the sons of men as it has now been\u201d what? \u201crevealed to His holy apostles and prophets in the Holy Spirit.\u201d\n\nThe Greek word \u201crevealed\u201d there is apokalupt<\/em>\u014d<\/em> which means to uncover and to unveil.\u00a0 The word kalupt\u00f3<\/em> without a prefix there as it\u2019s transliterated simply means to cover.\u00a0 So if you add \u201ca<\/em>\u201d there, alpha, the Greek letter \u201ca<\/em>\u201d, it doesn\u2019t mean to cover, it means to uncover.\u00a0 Can you think a book of the Bible that has this name, that sounds this way?\u00a0 The Book of Revelation which is called the revelation, what\u2019s the noun translated revelation?\u00a0 It\u2019s apocalypse, apok\u00e1lupsis<\/em> which means to what? Unveil, to disclose.\u00a0 And that\u2019s why I get a little bit short-tempered with people that tell me the book of Revelation can\u2019t be understood.\u00a0 Why can\u2019t it be understood?\u00a0 Well, because of all the symbols in it.\u00a0 Then why did God call the book the uncovering if it can\u2019t be understood.\u00a0 It\u2019s very name means by following certain Bible study methods you can understand the book of Revelation.\n\nJohn Calvin wrote commentaries on every book of the Bible except one, The Book of Revelation, because he felt no one could understand it so why write a commentary on a book you can\u2019t understand.\u00a0 Yet the reality of the situation is the very name revelation means uncovering, it means unveiling, God wants it understood.\u00a0 And the killer is you get to Revelation 22:16, as Jesus signs off and says preach these things in the\u2026 anybody know?\u00a0 Preach these things in the seminaries, preach these things to the theologians, preach these things to the really smart people\u2026 it doesn\u2019t say that at all, it says preach these things in the churches.\u00a0 The expectation of God is that He wrote a book that could be understood, it\u2019s accessible to anybody that wants to understand it.\u00a0 That is the word that Paul is using to describe this new revelation of the church called an apokalupt<\/em>\u014d,<\/em> meaning in prior ages it was covered.\u00a0 It was veiled.\u00a0 This is not a comparison of degree here, this is a comparison of kind.\n\nThen in Ephesians 3:5 he says, \u201cwhich in other generations was not made known to the sons of men as it has\u201d what? \u201cnow been revealed,\u201d that\u2019s the Greek word nun<\/em> which the scholars, the grammarians tell us that\u2019s in the emphatic position meaning it was unknown in prior ages but now <\/u>it\u2019s unveiled.\u00a0 And that same word \u201cnow\u201d is also used in Ephesians 3:10 which says this: \u201cSo the manifold wisdom of God might now\u201d same word, same emphatic position, \u201cmight be made know through the church to the rulers and the authorities in the heavenly places.\u201d\u00a0 See that?\n\nThe angels, before this disclosure of the church, didn\u2019t know anything about the church. Not only did humanity not know anything about it but the angels themselves didn\u2019t know anything about it and that\u2019s why the New Testament always portrays the angels as watching.\u00a0 They\u2019re just blown away by what God is doing in this new man called the church.\u00a0 That\u2019s why Peter, 1 Peter 1:12 talks about how they stoop over and observe with great intensity, because the angels understand the holiness of God, because what did the seraphim say day and night?\u00a0 \u201cHoly, holy, holy is the Lord God Almighty.\u201d \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0[1 Peter 1:12, \u201cIt was revealed to them that they were not serving themselves, but you, in these things which now have been announced to you through those who preached the gospel to you by the Holy Spirit sent from heaven-- things into which angels long to look.\u201d\u00a0 Revelation 4:8, \u201cAnd the four living creatures, each one of them having six wings, are full of eyes around and within; and day and night they do not cease to say, \u2018HOLY, HOLY, HOLY is THE LORD GOD, THE ALMIGHTY, WHO WAS AND WHO IS AND WHO IS TO COME.\u2019]\n\nThe angels understand the creative power of God because Job 38:4-7 says the angels did what when God created the cosmos?\u00a0 They began to praise the Lord.\u00a0 [Job 37:4-7, \u201cWhere were you when I laid the earth\u2019s foundation?\u00a0 Tell me, if you understand.\u00a0 [5] Who marked off its dimensions? Surely you know! Who stretched a measuring line across it?\u00a0 [6] On what were its footings set, or who laid its cornerstone\u2014[7] while the morning stars sang together and all the angels shouted for joy?\u201d]\n\nAnd the angels also understand the judgment of God because who lost his position as one of the angels?\u00a0 Lucifer and a third of them fell with Lucifer.\u00a0 So the angels are not omniscient beings; they\u2019re created beings so they have to learn just like we do.\u00a0 So they have seen God\u2019s creative power, they\u2019ve seen His judgment, they\u2019ve seen His holiness but here\u2019s a part of God\u2019s nature they haven\u2019t seen yet\u2014His grace.\u00a0 And so as the angels watch God at work in the church, as the grace of God has been poured out in super abundance they just can\u2019t believe what\u2019s happening and so they\u2019re just sitting there watching all the time, observing, because God is using the present church age to fill out or fill in the gaps of angelic theology.\u00a0 That\u2019s a pretty awesome thing, isn\u2019t it?\n\nSo the angels themselves didn\u2019t know anything about the church; now it\u2019s been disclosed and they\u2019re watching because they\u2019ve never seen anything like this before and they\u2019re learning about God\u2019s character.\u00a0 I\u2019m just giving you context explaining why this is a comparison of kind that Paul is making here.\n\nPaul also says in Ephesians 3:5, \u201cwhich in other generations was not made known to the sons of men, as it has now been revealed to His holy apostles and prophets in the Spirit;\u201d now \u201cmade known\u201d there I have the Greek word there [gn\u014driz\u014d<\/em>], that verb is in the passive voice.\u00a0 You say well who cares?\u00a0 The passive voice means the subject receives the action.\u00a0 The active voice means the subject does the action.\u00a0 Jane threw the ball would be active there.\u00a0 Jane threw the ball to Bill, Bill is passive, he\u2019s receiving.\u00a0 So this knowledge that Paul had he did not generate.\u00a0 That would be in the active voice.\u00a0 He is the recipient of this knowledge.\u00a0 Do you see that?\u00a0 Which means Paul couldn\u2019t have figured out this mystery unless it had been disclosed from God (that\u2019s the significance of the passive voice there) any more than Daniel in Daniel 2 could have under\u00adstood that vision and the interpretation of the vision if God had not unfolded it.\n\nNow the dead giveaway in all of this is the book of Colossians; the book of Colossians and the book of Ephesians go together hand in glove.\u00a0 Both books were written by Paul about the same time, around 60-61 from Rome; he is writing them at the same time and he\u2019s writing them to Ephesus, Ephesus to Ephesus, and Colossians to Colossae, and those two churches are separated probably by less than a hundred miles.\u00a0 Colossians talks about Jesus as the head; Ephesians talks about Jesus body, the church.\u00a0 So head\/body, they go together don\u2019t they?\u00a0 Head is dealt with in Colossians; body of Christ is dealt with in Ephesians.\u00a0 So you can use Colossians to inform yourself about statements that are mentioned in the book of Ephesians.\n\nSo Ephesians 3:5 goes together with Colossians 1:26 which also talks about the mystery. [Ephesians 3:5, \u201cwhich in other generations was not made known to the sons of men, as it has now been revealed to His holy apostles and prophets in the Spirit;\u201d]\u00a0 Paul says [Colossians 1:26], \u201cthat is, the mystery which has been hidden\u201d look at that, \u201cfrom the past ages and generations, but\u201d now we don\u2019t have the contrastive \u201cas\u201d here but we have the conjunction \u201cbut\u201d so it\u2019s still functioning as a contrastive, \u201cbut has now been manifested to His saints.\u201d \u00a0So Colossians helps us understand Ephesians, that the mystery was hidden but now by way of contrast it has been fully disclosed.\n\nSo what is the BLT, the Bottom Line Time?\u00a0 What is Paul doing in Ephesians 3:5 through the comparison \u201cas\u201d as he\u2019s comparing what was known in past ages about the church versus what is known today.\u00a0 He is not making a comparison of degree; he is making a comparison of kind.\u00a0 Now what drives me to that conclusion since there are comparisons of degree in Scripture?\u00a0 Context drives me that way.\u00a0 And I\u2019ve given you all of the details of the supporting context.\n\nSo what I\u2019m trying to say is Reformed theologians, progressive dispensationalists, people that want to find the church in the Old Testament can yammer on all they want but the laws of Greek grammar will not allow that theological conclusion.\u00a0 That is a theological proposition that they have come up with that they are foisting upon the text and that\u2019s no way to develop your theology.\u00a0 You want to get your theology from the text.\u00a0 This idea that the church is found in the Old Testament is not supported at all by some kind of comparison of degree that Paul is allegedly making in Ephesians 3:5.\u00a0 And so if you understand this is a comparison of kind it rules out Reformed theology, it rules out progressive dispensationalism, it pushes you in the direction of traditional dispensationalism, the two peoples of God concept.\n\nBy the way, you might say well what does this have to do with the rapture?\u00a0 Everything!\u00a0 The church cannot be in the tribulation period because the tribulation period concerns who?\u00a0 Israel.\u00a0 The church was a mystery when God was dealing with Israel.\u00a0 There\u2019s a seven year aspect of Daniel\u2019s clock still yet future for Israel.\u00a0 We\u2019ll be covering it on Sunday mornings, it\u2019s the 70th<\/sup> week of Daniel which concerns Israel.\u00a0 Now everybody today on Youtube and the internet is all saying we\u2019re going to go through the tribulation period.\u00a0 Let me ask you a question.\u00a0 How could the church be in the tribulation period when the church was a total mystery in Old Testament times and in the tribulation period God is fulfilling a final Old Testament week dealing with Israel?\u00a0 How could the church be in that time period if you understand that the church was never in God\u2019s program with Israel, it\u2019s something totally new.\u00a0 Are you with me?\n\nSo watch this very carefully, what you believe about ecclesiology, the doctrine of the church, controls your understanding of eschatology, the doctrine of the end times.\u00a0 I\u2019m about as committed as a person can be to the pre-trib rapture position and I\u2019ve heard all the arguments but the argument that pushes me in the direction of pretribulationalism is an ecclesiological argument.\u00a0 And it relates to how I\u2019m understanding \u201cmystery\u201d here.\n\nSecond battleground passage.\u00a0 Go over to Romans 16:25-26, Paul the apostle says this at the end of Romans: \u201cNow to Him who is able to establish you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery which has been kept secret for long ages past, [26] but now is manifested by the Scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the eternal God, has been made known to all the nations, leading<\/em> to obedience of faith.\u201d\u00a0 Now you\u2019ll notice in this verse, you see the word \u201cmystery\u201d?\u00a0 See how Paul defines it?\u00a0 Something \u201ckept secret for long ages past, but now is manifested in the Scriptures.\u201d\u00a0 Now\u00a0 progressive dispensationalists come along and these are folks that want to find the church in the Old Testament.\u00a0 I gave you the quote from Bob\u00a0 Saucy, the three principle spokesman for progressive dispensationalists, Robert Saucy who died recently so he\u2019s with the Lord now so now he knows better.\u00a0 My professor, Darrell Bock, nice guy until you disagree with him, and then the third was a man named\u2026 I never had any contact with Craig Blaising who gone from Dallas Seminary over to the big Baptist School, Southwestern. \u00a0And so those three men have, through their academic writings, have promoted this idea of progressive dispensationalism.\n\nSo enter the picture, Romans 16:25-26, here\u2019s the way progressive dispensationalists handle this passage, they say mystery, we see the word \u201cmystery\u201d there, but notice that this mystery concerns Jesus Christ and it concerns the Scriptures of the prophets and they interpret Scriptures of the prophets as Old Testament Scriptures, and they say you see, Jesus is in the Old Testament so therefore a mystery is something revealed\u2026 you know, we find prophecies about Jesus in the Old Testament, Isaiah 53, Jesus is something\u2026 therefore a mystery is something that has been revealed in the Old Testament but not fully realized, and this becomes their favorite verse to negate the understanding of mystery that I\u2019m giving you.\n\nSo Darrell Bock writes this: \u201cA normal, contextual, and historical reading of the phrase, shows, then, that the most natural reading of this benediction is to see a reference to the prophetic Hebrew Scriptures here. . . . If this is so, then mystery, at least in this Romans context\u201d watch this very carefully, \u201cmust refer not to totally new truth, but to truth that was already somewhat revealed in those Scriptures<\/em>.\u201d\u00a0 And because they interpret Scriptures as Old Testament Scriptures and mysteries used and we have prophecies about Jesus in the Old Testament, they say oh, you guys that are into traditional dispensationalism, you don\u2019t understand the word \u201cmystery.\u201d\u00a0 It doesn\u2019t refer to something brand new; it refers to something revealed but now realized.\u00a0 And this becomes the tool that they are using to find the church in the Old Testament.\n\nLet me tell you something about this verse; their whole argument disintegrates if you interpret Scriptures of the prophets not as Old Testament Scriptures but as what?\u00a0 New Testament Scriptures.\u00a0 If\u00a0 Paul, when he uses this expression \u201cScriptures of the Prophets\u201d is talking about New Testament Scriptures, not Old Testament Scriptures, then the word \u201cmystery\u201d that he\u2019s using here is exactly the same as he uses it everywhere else, in Ephesians, in Colossians.\u00a0 Now you say well this can\u2019t refer to the New Testament, it says Scriptures of the prophets.\n\nDid you know there are New Testament prophets?\u00a0 Ephesians 2:20, \u201cHaving been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets,\u201d so there \u201cprophets\u201d is used not in the Old Testament sense but in the what?\u00a0 The New Testament sense.\u00a0 Paul in Ephesians 3:5 says, \u201cwhich in other generations was not made known to the sons of men, as it has now been revealed to His holy apostles and prophets\u201d there he\u2019s connecting prophets with New Testament apostles; a New Testament prophet is someone who gave New Testament revelation, just like an Old Testament prophet is someone who gave Old Testament revelation.\n\nNow are there scholars out there that will take Romans 16:25-26 and interpret Scriptures of the prophets, not as the Old Testament but as the New Testament?\u00a0 You would never think so in what Darrell Bock says here, and this is what these new brand of scholars do: they make a statement, they ignore all of the scholarship that has preceded them and because they say things in such an authoritative way and because they\u2019re considered more enlightened, having been trained in Europe, people take their word for it, when the fact of the matter is in my book, I think it\u2019s chapter 9, I found two old refutable scholars from prior ages, one is named Stifler, wrote a well-known commentary on the book of Romans [The Epistle to the Romans, by James F. Stifler] another one\u2019s name is Godet, French, [The Fr\u00e9d\u00e9ric Louis Godet Commentary].\u00a0 He wrote a very well-known commentary on Romans.\u00a0 I extensively quote them and I show that these guys interpreted Scriptures here as New Testament Scriptures rather than Old Testament Scriptures.\n\nSo here I am in a doctoral class, Darrell Bock is in front of the class, going on and on about how traditional dispensationalists don\u2019t understand the word mystery, we all know that Jesus was revealed in the Old Testament, so finally I got enough courage, I put up my hand and I said you know your whole argument disappears if you understand that Scriptures of the prophets is New Testament Scriptures and not Old Testament Scriptures.\u00a0 And as God is my witness this is what happened, this is in a class full of people, he yells back at me almost like someone hit him in the ankle with a hammer or what, he yells back at me and he goes \u201cTHERE WEREN\u2019T ANY SCRIPTURES WHEN PAUL WROTE THIS!!!\u201d\u00a0 In other words, there weren\u2019t any New Testament Scriptures when Paul wrote this and so since he yelled I wasn\u2019t going to sit and carry on like this with him in the classroom but see, this is how ideas get fossilized, is the challenger is immediately screamed at, yelled at, bullied, and the message was very clear, you\u2019re not to challenge me on this point.\u00a0 So I backed off.\n\nBut the fact of the matter is his statement that he made that day, there were no New Testament Scriptures when Paul said that is totally errant; it is completely false.\u00a0 Now how do I know that?\u00a0 Because I\u2019ve studied, as he no doubt has, Darrell Bock is ten times the scholar I\u2019ll ever be, but that doesn\u2019t make him right on everything.\u00a0 I have respect for him in a lot of different areas but not what they\u2019re doing here with the word \u201cmystery,\u201d and not in this war that they\u2019re waging perpetually against traditional dispensationalism.\n\nWhen you go through the chronology of Paul\u2019s letters what you\u2019ll discover is Paul wrote 13 letters; Romans would be number 6, so before Paul penned Romans 16:25-26 he had already written Galatians, he had already written the two Thessalonian letters, he had already written the two Corinthian letters.\u00a0 I\u2019ll bet you dollars to donuts that James had already been written by this time so there were Scriptures from the New Testament on the books in a canon that was gradually developing, it certainly wasn\u2019t complete yet, that I think Paul was referring to here when he says \u201cscriptures of the prophets.\u201d\n\nNow what Darrell Bock does and what he did to me that day is he tried to connect (after he yelled, there were not) he tried to connect Romans 16 with Romans 1.\u00a0 Romans 1, Paul starts off with a reference to the Scriptures, in this case it\u2019s the Old Testament Scriptures, and then he turns around and he says you know what?\u00a0 If Paul started the book with Old Testament Scriptures what\u2019s he doing in Romans 16?\u00a0 He\u2019s referring to the Old Testament Scriptures too.\u00a0 The reality of the situation is Romans 1 and Romans 16 are night and day; they are dealing with two different issues entirely.\u00a0 Romans 1 is the beginning of the book, Romans 16 is the end of the book.\u00a0 Romans 1 is an introduction; Romans 16 is the doxology.\u00a0 Now the word \u201cmystery.\u201d\u00a0 Do you find that in Romans 1?\u00a0 It\u2019s not in Romans 1, is it?\u00a0 But where is it?\u00a0 In Romans 16.\n\nYou\u2019ll notice the Davidic lineage of Jesus Christ is carefully documented in Romans 1, Jesus is called a descendant of David according to the flesh.\u00a0 [Romans 1:3, \u201c<\/em>concerning His Son, who was born of a descendant of David according to the flesh.\u201d]\u00a0 There\u2019s context supporting the idea that the Scriptures of Romans 1 are Old Testament Scriptures but is Jesus ever referred to through His Davidic lineage in Romans 16?\u00a0 He never is.\u00a0 Beyond that, notice the word \u201choly,\u201d \u201choly\u201d modifies the word \u201cScriptures\u201d in Romans 1, \u201cwhich He promised beforehand through His prophets in the Holy Scriptures.\u201d [Romans 1:2]\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 So we know what Scriptures He\u2019s talking about, \u201cthe Holy Scriptures\u201d which most understood as the Old Testament.\u00a0 Do you find the word \u201choly\u201d modifying \u201cScriptures\u201d here in Romans 16?\u00a0 It\u2019s not happening.\n\nBeyond that, now this isn\u2019t clear in your English translations but it\u2019s clear in your Greek translations and see this is what Geode and Stiffler are pointing out, these are all the things that Darrell Bock just ignores.\u00a0 The definite article is used before the word Scriptures in Romans 1 but the definite article \u201cthe\u201d is not used before the Scriptures in Romans 16, it\u2019s translated that way in English but when you study it in Greek you won\u2019t find a definite article in front of the word Scriptures.\u00a0 Beyond that the word \u201cprophets\u201d in Romans 1 is used as a noun but in Romans 16 the word \u201cprophets\u201d is used as an adjective.\n\nWhat prophets is He talking about in Romans 1? Old Testament prophets.\u00a0 What prophets is he talking about in Romans 16?\u00a0 New Testament prophets, the kind that Paul is explaining in Ephesians 2:20 and in Ephesians 3:5.\u00a0 [Ephesians 2:20, \u201chaving been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus Himself being the corner stone.\u201d\u00a0 Ephesians 3:5, \u201cwhich in other generations was not made known to the sons of men, as it has now been revealed to His holy apostles and prophets in the Spirit;\u201d]\n\nIt mentions the Scripture.\u00a0 What Scripture is it talking about in Romans 1?\u00a0 Old Testament Scriptures.\u00a0 What Scripture do you think he\u2019s talking about in Romans 16?\u00a0 The New Testament Scriptures, four of which, I think five of which letters Paul had already written, that was gradually coming into existence.\n\nWhen you look at what Paul says, he says thigs like \u201cnot me but the Lord,\u201d it\u2019s very clear that Paul, when he wrote the New Testament, felt that his writings were on equal par with anything found in the Old Testament.\u00a0 So Paul will make a statement like this in Romans 11:25, \u201cFor I do not want you, brethren, to be uninformed of this mystery-- so that you will not be wise in your own estimation-- that a partial hardening has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in;\u201d\u00a0 Paul says the church age will end when the last Gentile comes to faith.\u00a0 Then (I would put the rapture right there) then God will turn back to the nation of Israel and remove their hardening, which is only partial.\u00a0 Now the relationship between the last Gentile coming in and God\u2019s concluding the church age before He turns His attention back to national Israel, that is a mystery, meaning something brand new.\n\nThese were the kinds of things that the Apostle Paul was receiving from the Lord and that\u2019s why he puts his own writings on equal par with the Old Testament and actually calls them Scriptures.\u00a0 That\u2019s why he uses the expression \u201cmy gospel\u201d in Romans 16.\u00a0 These are things that God is showing Paul uniquely, the expression \u201cmy gospel\u201d would refer to this mystery that he\u2019s just learned.\u00a0 You don\u2019t find the expression \u201cmy gospel\u201d back in Romans 1, 2 and 3.\n\nSo what then is the BLT, Bottom Line Time.\u00a0 Here\u2019s the bottom line: Romans 16 through its reference to Christ as the mystery, as revealed in the Scriptures, is not talking about Old Testament Scriptures.\u00a0 If he\u2019s talking about Old Testament Scriptures then\u00a0 you can start to play games with the word mystery; maybe mystery is something revealed but not realized, which is the direction progressive dispensationalists want to go.\u00a0 Their theology is riding on this verse.\n\nAnd I think that\u2019s why I got barked at that time in class, because I was pulling loose a thread that could have been instrumental in deteriorating their whole tapestry and he didn\u2019t want to let that out of the box; he didn\u2019t want the other students in class to think the idea had any credibility so you get this very sharp retort.\u00a0 And by the way, when people are like that with you that\u2019s kind of a clue from the Holy Spirit that you\u2019re on the right track because if what he\u2019s so worried about to get emotional over this, it\u2019s like dealing with an evolutionist when you show them there\u2019s no such thing as a missing link.\u00a0 They get outright emotional because their whole worldview is based on this missing link, that\u2019s how they dismiss God.\u00a0 And if you start to pull loose a thread here and there they understand in their own mind that their tapestry can disintegrate just like that.\u00a0 So they push any conflicting ideas out of their mind; they wreck your career, they won\u2019t let you teach in their schools, and so forth.\n\nSo the BLT, Bottom Line Time is Scriptures of the prophet\u2019s here is a reference to New Testament Scriptures, a canon that was partially complete, not yet complete, and I\u2019ve explained why Romans 1, referring to Old Testament Scriptures is completely different than Romans 16 referring to New Testament Scriptures.\u00a0 So you can\u2019t simply make the case that Romans 1 is Old Testament Scripture so that\u2019s what Romans 16 must mean.\n\nSee, to me the whole thing makes perfect sense; Paul has explained how Christ came into the world at the right time in fulfillment of Old Testament Scriptures, Romans 1, but now we have further revelation of the church age which God used the Apostle Paul to explain, so Paul would end, not with a reference to Old Testament Scriptures but New Testament Scriptures because he\u2019s the emissary or the intermediary of God that God is using to reveal these things.\u00a0 So the BLT, the bottom line time is Scriptures of the prophets here is a reference to New Testament Scriptures, which means that that word \u201cmystery\u201d is exactly the same meaning as it has everywhere else in Paul, a new truth never before disclosed.\n\nSo those are the two great battleground passages concerning Ephesians; the contrast in Ephesians is not a comparison of degree but what?\u00a0 Kind.\u00a0 And Romans 16:25-26 is not referring to Old Testament Scriptures and thereby changing the word mystery; it\u2019s referring to New Testament Scriptures, a New Testament canon is gradually developed.\u00a0 Now I know that\u2019s information overload but I want you to understand that your belief in a dispensational system is not some hokey thing; it is rooted in very careful exegesis of the Biblical text.\u00a0 People like to make you feel like you\u2019re a member of the flat earth society, that you believe in two peoples of God and a pretrib rapture, and the church is not something found in the Old Testament.\u00a0 You need not feel that way.\u00a0 There is careful exegesis that has gone into this system that we believe in and teach here and promote.\u00a0 I was going to make a few other preliminary remarks but I\u2019m way over time so I\u2019ll make those next week, so I\u2019ll stop talking at this point and open it up for Q and A.","series_sermon_number":""},"aioseo_notices":[],"aioseo_head":"\n\t\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t