INSIDE

° Letters to the Editor . . 2

° Temple and Antichrist . 12
° Questions & Answers . 14
° They’ve Put God
in a Box! . . . . . . . . 31

Volume 4, Number 1 January 1993

Did You Mean That Literally?

A notion has been floating around acceded. I’m referring to that nebulous differently after a short survey of the his-
Christian circles for some years now that belief that masquerades as a legitimate tory of biblical interpretation. Of course,
would be downright humorous to any and viable Christian doctrine under the you may be one of those so enamored by
True Believer who knows Early Church rubric “literal interpretation of the Bi- current tradition that you place no value
history—if it weren’t for its incredibly ble.” at all on what the Early Church believed.
sinister downside. You’ve probably If you have uncritically accepted In that case you should stop reading right
heard it eloquently propounded by some that belief in one of its more irrational, now. You’ll find little to interest you in
fervent proponent at one time or another. metamorphic stages where everything in this article.
Some of you may even think you believe the Old Testament can only be under- Not only did Early Church leaders
it, not knowing exactly to what you have stood “literally,” perhaps you’ll think not hold such an absurd belief, they re-
jected it outright. Furthermore, belief in
the validity of what is today known as
“literal interpretation” held no wide-
The Origen of Folly spread currency in the Church until just
over a hundred years ago.
(This article is intended as a follow-up to the lead article in this is- That’s right, the absolute insistence
sue—“Did You Mean That Literally?” You should read that article first.) on literal interpretation of the Scriptures
Before you get out your red marker to correct any misspelling in the head- is a relatively new idea as far as Chris-
line above, let me explain. During the mid-to-late second century, Satan brought tianity is concerned. So if you place any
various forces to bear on the orthodox Church simultaneously. Political perse- value at all on the beliefs of traditional
cution and the worldly behavior of some Church leaders were just two of the Christianity, especially those held by the
pressures put upon it. The most devastating, yet least understood, satanic influ- Early Church, you’d best look closely at
ence the Church felt was the corruption of The Apostolic Teaching by the teach- what you have read or heard about literal
ings of heretics who interpreted the Scriptures for themselves. The threat posed interpretation. This particular tenet is not
by heresy contaminating the Truth led the Church into an ever-increasing reli- an outright lie, but in some of its current
ance on the “rule of faith”—that is, an abbreviated doctrinal statement of formulations, it’s certainly a distortion
faith—rather than complete reliance on the in-depth instruction of Believers in of the Truth.
The Apostolic Teaching. Hence, over time, and as fewer and fewer Church lead-
ers were thoroughly instructed in The Apostolic Teaching, more and more of The
Teaching was lost and replaced by near-truth, half-truth, or outright lies.
Traditionally Speaking
Another obvious, but little recognized, development also occurred within Before we begin our investigation
the orthodox Church during that same time frame: Church leadership was be- into the history of biblical interpretation,
coming more and more the occupation of philosophers trained in the exegetical a few words about tradition are in order.
methods of interpretation used by the various schools of Greek philosophy. The There are three things anyone seeking
philosophical baggage these men brought with them from their former tradition the Truth should keep in mind regarding
ultimately proved too much for The Apostolic Teaching, and it began to suc- tradition. The first is that, to some de-
cumb to their intellectual speculation, the very thing for which the orthodox gree, we have all grown up as the intel-
Church had earlier condemned the Gnostics. (See “Gnostic Beliefs and Early lectual product of our religious
Church Teaching,” The Voice of Elijah, October 1991.) environment (or lack thereof). Most peo-
See Origen on Page 22 See Literally? on Page 4
2 January 1993

Published Quarterly
by Voice of Elijah, Inc.

M. H. Clay,
Executive Editor
1992 was a good year for all of us at The Voice of Elijah. Not All Israel
Sara Brooks,
Is Israel was at the printer when the year began. In May, The Advent of Christ
Managing Editor
and AntiChrist was published and made available to Monthly Contributors.
Volume 4 Shortly thereafter we were able to make available a condensed version of that
Number 1 book, The AntiChrist, to all subscribers. Those three books and the numerous
January 1993 articles that have come out this last year have given True Believers some meat
in their diet. In addition, these publications—The Advent of Christ and
All correspondence should be ad- AntiChrist especially—provided Larry with new insight into his calling and
dressed to: the ministry of The Voice of Elijah. I encourage you to read “Questions &
Voice of Elijah, Inc. Answers” in this issue for more on that subject.
P.O. Box 28201
We are now looking forward to reaching out with God’s Word in 1993
Dallas, TX 75228
and beyond. One thing that you shouldn’t expect to see from The Voice of
Elijah this year is a “lightening up” of the articles. If you recall, last January
Subscription rates: we informed subscribers that The Elijah Project intended to, and I quote,
(1 year, U.S. Funds) “‘lighten up’ the content of the articles in the newsletter.” Obviously, that
U.S. $24.00 didn’t happen. The information Larry is presenting has proven to be too im-
Canada $30.00 portant for a superficial treatment. He has found it requires in-depth cover-
Abroad $50.00 age just to convey the basic message. There is already so much that isn’t
being said because of time and space restrictions. I believe it would be un-
fair to those of you who are True Believers if we did “lighten up.” Besides,
Articles published
more people have written to say they like the newsletter as it is than have to
by permission of
say they don’t. Therefore, you can look forward to more articles with the
The Elijah Project.
same in-depth coverage you’ve learned to expect from us. They may take a
little longer to read, but the benefits always exceed the cost.
Except when otherwise noted,
Scripture taken from the God willing, 1993 should finally see the publication of The Mystery of
NEW AMERICAN STANDARD BIBLE, Scripture (among other things). We received a letter just the other day ask-
© 1960, 1962, 1963, 1968, 1971, 1972, ing about this publication:
1973, 1975, 1977, 1987, 1988. I’m waiting for the book I ordered … I know that you said the book
The Lockman Foundation. would be ready for mailing in the 4th quarter of this year, 1992. The
Used by permission. book to which I refer, is, The Mystery of Scripture.… I’ll be watching
my mail box for the book!
Bolded Scripture reflects the Neal M., Groveton, TX
emphasis of the author. I know many of you are asking the same question, so I decided to in-
clude an excerpt from the letter Michael Clay wrote to our Monthly Contri-
Copyright © 1993, 2008 butors in the December 1992 issue of The Voice of Elijah Update:
by Voice of Elijah, Inc.
If you are growing as impatient to see a copy of The Mystery of Scrip-
ture as I am (and I’m sure many of you are), I can assure you the wait
will eventually be well worth it. But as I’ve heard Larry say many
times—“all in God’s time.” For the past several weeks, he has been
wrestling with several hundred Old Testament texts that he must use to
show you how Israel lost The Teaching of Moses concerning Jesus
Christ. Just recently he told me a bit about the meaning of the two idi-
January 1993 3

oms “to walk in The Way” and “to depart/turn aside knowledge of The Teaching of the Prophets to write
from The Way,” as well as other idioms that are re- the book myself.
lated to those particular idioms.
That being the case, we decided to make the book a
As I talked with Larry about his progress in writing joint project. I would continue to do research and
The Mystery of Scripture, I found myself amazed at present my findings to Larry for review. He would
the amount of information he has assembled. You tell edit any accompanying text I wrote and would also
me. What would you think The Mystery of Scripture, write a section dealing with the Old Testament pro-
The Way of the Lord, Antiochus Epiphanes, and phetic message. We now believed the book would
Clement of Alexandria have in common? After just a cover 150 pages or so, and the publication date was
short conversation, I came away astounded by the duly postponed to the second quarter of this year (un-
sudden awareness that there is much more to the til after Larry had finished Not All Israel Is Israel).
Scriptures than I would have ever imagined. And I’ve You should understand, however, that we were still
known about The Teaching for over ten years! That’s thinking the only accompanying text would be a brief
why I’m anxious to learn all the details. commentary providing the reader an historical con-
text for reading the selected passages.
From what I gather, Larry has a long way yet to go
before he can put all the information into a form we Then came the information you found in the April
can easily digest. Be patient. I believe you will even- 1992 issue of the newsletter. That was followed
tually see a huge body of evidence that supports the shortly thereafter by the publication of The Advent of
premise that Israel (and the Church) lost knowledge Christ and AntiChrist. The information in those two
of (“turned away from”) The Teaching of Moses. It publications shocked all of us here at The Voice of
will probably become so obvious to many of you that Elijah. We have understood for several years that
you begin to wonder why nobody has seen it before. our role in the over-all plan of God is to assist Larry
Who would have thought the following verse contains in the fulfillment of his calling. But, as Larry ex-
two Hebrew idioms with precise meaning: plained in the preface to The Advent of Christ and
AntiChrist, we have never known the why of this min-
“Therefore, you shall keep the commandments of the
istry. When the information concerning the Antichrist
Lord your God, to walk in His ways and to fear Him.”
came out this past spring, it brought home to us the
(Deuteronomy 8:6)
reality of the imminent Return of Jesus Christ and the
It may surprise you to learn that originally, The Mys- fact that every True Believer will soon have to make
tery of Scripture was slated for publication in Janu- some crucial decisions concerning what they believe
ary of 1991 (the same time Not All Israel Is Israel was to be the Truth. The truly remarkable things Larry
to be published). Since the book is now nearly two saw in the literature and history of the
years overdue, I thought you might be interested in Intertestamental Period also helped us to identify and
knowing why it is taking so much longer than define some of Satan’s goals in these final days. (See
planned. So let me give you a summary of the pro- “Questions & Answers,” The Voice of Elijah, April
ject’s evolution. 1992.) That abruptly changed the focus of our minis-
try and gave it new urgency.
When the idea of the book was conceived, I was going
to write it. And it wasn’t even going to be a book. It As you now know, if what we believe is true, The Ad-
was intended to be just a booklet that presented se- vent of Christ and AntiChrist contains information vi-
lected passages from Jewish Apocalyptic literature, tal to any Believer who is serious about preparing for
from the writings of the Gnostics, and from the Early the Return of Jesus Christ. All of that information
Church Fathers. It would (hopefully) show you that surfaced, however, only after Larry started looking
The Teaching of the Gospel of Jesus Christ hidden in closely at the Jewish Apocalyptic and Early Church
the Old Testament was known to Israel prior to the literature himself in preparing to write The Mystery
revelation Jesus gave the Apostles in the first century. of Scripture. I doubt anyone else would have seen the
At first, we expected it to be fifty to seventy pages. significance of what Irenæus and Hippolytus had to
However, before long I had assembled a large say about the Antichrist. I had read the same material
amount of relevant material, and a lot of it contained in the research I had done for The Mystery of Scrip-
statements beyond my own ability to understand. ture, and I saw nothing of real value in what they had
Consequently, it soon became evident, as I discussed written. However, now that Larry has provided com-
my research with Larry, that I did not have sufficient mentary on what they wrote, it all makes perfect
4 January 1993

sense. That’s just like everything else I’ve learned so far: once the evi-
Literally?
From Page 1
dence is presented, the conclusions speak for themselves.
By the time The Advent of Christ and AntiChrist was published, it was
obvious to me that Larry was going to have to research and write the en- ple are open-minded enough to admit
tirety of The Mystery of Scripture. If there were specific points to be that. It’s rather difficult to deny inas-
drawn from the texts I had assembled, he was going to have to study much as the facts are rather obvious.
those texts himself. So, I gave him the notes I had made, and we set a Most Christians remain Christian in their
fourth quarter publication date. Well, now the fourth quarter is almost beliefs, Jews remain Jewish, Muslims
over, and we still have no final manuscript ready to print. From what I cling to Islamic doctrines, etc.
hear, the publication has now ballooned to more than 300 pages and That predisposition holds true for
could well be on its way to two volumes of 250 to 300 pages each. various divisions within a religion as
well. Therefore, the Catholic often re-
As you can see, our projected publication date has slipped more than a mains Catholic, the Sunni Muslim re-
few times already, but I honestly expect to see a copy of the book(s) by mains Sunni Muslim, the Reformed Jew
next summer. I know the wait will be worth it, and as Larry said in the remains Reformed, etc.
last issue of The Voice of Elijah Update: All the above being the case, we can
say generally that the tradition we learn
That’s what true faith is all about—faithfully, patiently waiting for the first tends to determine what we believe.
One Who was, and is, in Himself the embodiment of the totality of The Therefore, if the religious belief system
Teaching. you now have includes literal interpreta-
(The Voice of Elijah Update, November 1992, p. 12) tion as a foundational tenet, you may find
it difficult to read this article. If you love
Again, that was taken from the December 1992 issue of The Voice of
the Truth, however, you’ll just have to
Elijah Update. We sincerely apologize for the delay in releasing The Mys-
face the facts: The tare seeds sown in the
tery of Scripture. However, it sounds like this particular publication is go- Church by the Adversary can sometimes
ing to be exciting for all of us. But if you have grown tired of waiting for be found in the most unlikely places. Al-
your copy, just write us, and we’ll promptly return the money you sent. though fundamentalist Christian beliefs
As 1993 begins, those of us at The Voice of Elijah trust that, over the most nearly represent the historic Truth of
coming year, many more True Believers will gain access to this newsletter Christianity, those beliefs are not entirely
and the other publications we make available. We know the information we free from Satan’s corruption.
The second point that should be ob-
provide will become ever more important to True Believers who are seeking
vious to any student of religion is that ev-
to overcome the world in these Last Days. That’s why I was heartened that
ery religious tradition changes over time.
some of you gave gift subscriptions to The Voice of Elijah to those on your There are at least two sources for the
Christmas list. If you find value in what you read here, I encourage you to transformation of religious beliefs.
continue making this information available to others you know who might There is, first of all, an external threat
also recognize its value. Talk to them about The Voice of Elijah. Let them posed by new converts. Former religious
read yours. Or, send us their names and addresses. We’ll be glad to send them beliefs and old social customs can some-
information about The Voice of Elijah. We’ve added a new section to the or- times prove hard to relinquish. That’s
der form at the back of the issue just for that purpose. With your help I know why converts who switch from one reli-
we can reach every True Believer with The Teaching before it’s too late. gion to another often take with them a bit
of their old mind-set. Consequently, you
I can’t close without briefly mentioning the subject matter of this is- can find in the history of the Christian
sue—the interpretation of the Scriptures and the role it played in the Church numerous cases where one indi-
Church’s loss of The Apostolic Teaching. I think you will be amazed to vidual or group of individuals produced
learn how Satan has used individuals and their various methods of interpre- a distortion of Christian tradition by
tation in his attempt to make an accurate understanding of the Scriptures im- syncretistically blending it with some
possible. Thankfully, he has failed. And now True Believers are going to other religion or using it for their own
understand the Truth in spite of all that he could do. Have a joyous New psychological gain.
Year (“walking in” The Light of the Truth). Christianity, and Protestant Chris-
tianity in particular, being as missions
oriented as it is, has had a fairly steady
influx of new converts over the last three
hundred years. Every convert has had the
potential to take traditional Protestant
Christian belief in some new direction.
January 1993 5

“The Protestant tradition itself was established by men like Martin Luther
(ca. 1483–1546) and John Calvin (1509–1564) during the Protestant
Reformation because they realized the Catholic Church had
strayed from the tradition of the Early Church.”
Many did just that. We’ll find that to be what was regained during the Protestant store the original tradition of the Early
the case with the different beliefs con- Reformation. For example, from the Church. It should be obvious to all (but is-
cerning interpretation of the Scriptures. time of Johann Arndt (1555–1621), and n’t) that all factions of the Holiness
(See “The Origen of Folly” in this issue.) especially since John Wesley Movement of last century, including the
The second source of change can be (1703–1791), holiness-minded folk Pentecostals, have now settled into a con-
an internal impetus originating within a have argued True Believers should ad- tented reliance on their traditional beliefs
particular Christian tradition. Adherents here not only to the Truth recovered dur- and Church norms. For many, Christian-
of a religion are sometimes influenced by ing the Reformation, but should also ity has become nothing more than the ulti-
the beliefs of another religion. Therefore, return to an even earlier Christian tradi- mate “feel good” experience, with little if
they can appropriate alien concepts which tion. (See “One Train. One Track. Two any of the Holiness Movement’s original
they integrate into their own religion in Rails.” The Voice of Elijah, January emphasis on the holiness of the Believer.
much the same way as new converts. We 1992.) That is the basic call issued in this Although all the Reformers in the
will find examples of this also in connec- article. Now is the time for all who love history of the Protestant Church who
tion with the origin of the Church’s varied Truth to return to their Root(s). emphasized personal holiness failed to
beliefs concerning methods of biblical in- restore the tradition of the Early Church,
terpretation. For the most part, they bor- “It should be obvious they should be commended for recogniz-
rowed their methodology from Greek ing the Church had lost more than what
philosophy and from the Jews. to all (but isn’t) that the Protestant Reformation was able to
Although the internal push for all factions of the restore—a certain something that robbed
change can be detrimental to the integ- the Church of the spiritual vitality of that
rity of the tradition, it has often had a Holiness Movement first-generation Church.
positive effect. So we can also find ad- The suspicion that the Church
herents of Christianity who realized the … have now settled lacked something special most often
Church had lost something. Seizing on into a contented came from True Believers’ inner yearn-
that perceived deficiency, they set out to ing for a fuller spiritual life than what
reform the tradition they received and re- reliance on their they were able to experience by worship-
store the tradition of an earlier time. For ping among those perfectly content to
example, the Protestant tradition itself
traditional beliefs and trust in a particular doctrinal or liturgical
was established by men like Martin Lu- Church norms.” tradition rather than trusting in a per-
ther (ca. 1483–1546) and John Calvin sonal relationship with the Living God.
(1509–1564) during the Protestant Ref- The Fathers of the Protestant Refor- Over the last fifty years the
ormation because they realized the Cath- mation based their reform movement in Protestant reform movement has faltered.
olic Church had strayed from the large part on the writings of St. Augus- Now Pretenders talk about “church re-
tradition of the Early Church. (See “The tine, a prominent theologian who lived newal” as though more whitewash on the
Protestant Confession: The Church Lost around A.D. 400. However, John Wes- wall were the answer. In contrast to the
The Teaching,” The Voice of Elijah, ley (1703–1791) sought to take his con- thousands of new converts who joined the
January 1992.) Hence, they sought to re- verts all the way back to the “New reform movements of past centuries, it
form the Roman Catholic Church from Testament Church.” He failed. Yet has become increasingly more common
within, and they continued to work nearly two hundred years later his ideas for a small group of just a few poor souls
within the Church until they were finally about holiness and sanctification were to set out on their own, trying to reestab-
forced to separate from their mother tra- foundational to the Pentecostal move- lish the New Testament Church. Most
dition. They then established churches ment’s attempt at Church reform. That’s have succeeded only in establishing a sin-
that adhered to the reformed tradition of why you see Pentecostal churches today gle independent church. Sadly enough,
the new Protestant Church. bearing the appellation “Full Gospel even these people soon grew weary of
The Reformation mind-set of the Church.” They thought what they found their quest for the Truth because they had
founders of the Protestant Church is still described in the Book of Acts was the to- no idea where to look.
an integral part of the Protestant heri- tality of that other “something” the Early Most often, even the most ardent re-
tage. That’s why the Protestant Church Church had lost. Not so. formers returned to established church
has continued to spawn reform move- The Pentecostal and Neo-Pentecos- norms. Unfortunately, along the way
ments. Quite often these new Reformers tal movements were part of the last major these “seekers” often fell prey to huck-
have sought to recover more Truth than attempt by the Holiness Movement to re- sters and charlatans who offered only the
6 January 1993

“You see, God has a BUT IN VAIN DO THEY WORSHIP ME, “For {as} the heavens are higher
TEACHING AS DOCTRINES THE than the earth,
‘Way’—a tradi- PRECEPTS OF MEN.’ So are My ways higher than your
tion—to which He has Neglecting the commandment of ways,
God, you hold to the tradition of And My thoughts than your
always intended His men.” He was also saying to them, thoughts.”
“You nicely set aside the command- (Isaiah 55:6–9)
people would adhere, ment of God in order to keep your
but they never have.” tradition. For Moses said, ‘HONOR There are a few key words in that
YOUR FATHER AND YOUR MOTHER’; passage one needs to understand before
widespread “feel good” religion you see and, ‘HE WHO SPEAKS EVIL OF FATHER the full import of Isaiah’s statements is
all around you. OR MOTHER, LET HIM BE PUT TO felt. But the only term significant for our
The third and final thing to remem- DEATH’; but you say, ‘If a man says to purposes here is the term way. Although
ber about tradition is that God does not {his} father or {his} mother, any- it isn’t obvious, Isaiah has in mind one
always have the same positive feelings thing of mine you might have been particular way—The Way of the Lord.
toward it that we do. That is especially helped by is Corban (that is to say, (See The Mystery of Scripture.) For now,
the case when it is nothing but the tradi- given {to God}),’ you no longer per- just think of way as meaning “tradition”
tion of men. Isaiah warned us about blind mit him to do anything for {his} fa- and you’ll come close to Isaiah’s mean-
adherence to tradition: th e r o r { h is } m o th e r ; { th u s } ing.
invalidating the word of God by You see, God has a “Way”—a tradi-
Then the Lord said, tion—to which He has always intended
your tradition which you have
“Because this people draw near His people would adhere, but they never
handed down; and you do many
with their words have. He established it in Israel through
things such as that.”
And honor Me with their lip The Teaching of Moses at the time of the
(Mark 7:5–13)
service, Exodus from Egypt. Israel constantly
But they remove their hearts far abandoned God’s tradition, however, so
from Me, God found it necessary to send His
And their reverence for Me “Tradition founded on Prophets to restore it time and again dur-
consists of tradition learned anything other than ing Israel’s long history in the Promised
by rote, Land.
Therefore behold, God’s Truth falls far The Jews “turned away from”
I will once again deal marvelously God’s tradition for good at the time of
with this people, wondrously short of God’s favor.” Antiochus Epiphanes (167 B.C.). But
marvelous; God reestablished His tradition in the
And the wisdom of their wise men We can see from these two passages Church when Jesus Christ revealed The
shall perish, that God does not have a problem with Teaching to His Apostles. Unfortu-
And the discernment of their tradition as such, but with man’s tradi- nately, the Church soon “turned away
discerning men shall be tion when it differs from the Truth of the from” God’s tradition just as Israel had
concealed.” Word of God. We should keep that in done so many times before. The current,
(Isaiah 29:13–14) mind. God’s tradition is acceptable; prevalent belief in literal interpretation
man’s tradition isn’t. Isaiah said as much of the Hebrew Scriptures is little more
Jesus seconded that opinion in some in another passage as well: than mute testimony to that sad fact.
of His statements to the Pharisees, leav-
ing us little doubt that tradition founded Seek the Lord while He may be
on anything other than God’s Truth falls found; Interpretation,
far short of God’s favor: Call upon Him while He is near. Smurpretation
Let the wicked forsake his way,
And the unrighteous man his Before 1850, the origin of a new
And the Pharisees and the scribes
thoughts; Protestant denomination or doctrinal
asked Him, “Why do Your disciples
And let him return to the LORD, emphasis could often be traced to the
not walk according to the tradition
And He will have compassion on separation of True Believers from cold
of the elders, but eat their bread with
him; orthodoxy after an outpouring of God’s
impure hands?” And He said to
And to our God, Holy Spirit. (See “The Protestant Con-
them, “Rightly did Isaiah prophesy
For He will abundantly pardon. fession: The Church Lost The Teach-
of you hypocrites, as it is written,
“For My thoughts are not your ing,” and “One Train. One Track. Two
‘THIS PEOPLE HONORS ME WITH THEIR
thoughts, Rails.” as well as the illustration on p. 8,
LIPS,
The Voice of Elijah, January 1992.) But
BUT THEIR HEART IS FAR AWAY FROM Neither are your ways My ways,”
from late last century until now, the
ME. declares the LORD.
January 1993 7

“Virtually no one in Protestant Christianity today bothers to base his

interpretive methodology on the writings of anyone prior to
the Protestant Reformation (1517).”
source of denominational division most basis for any of three other possible time. But twelve hundred? Don’t be ri-
frequently has been rooted in disagree- meanings. diculous!
ment over doctrine. These disputes have However, the Protestant Reformers Therefore, let’s say we are truly in-
invariably boiled down to a difference of took the basics of Aquinas’ interpretive terested in determining whether a cur-
opinion regarding whose method of in- methodology as it existed in their day rent tradition that pins its hopes on a
terpreting Scripture was (or is) correct. and forged it into what has been called a strictly literal interpretation of the
And don’t you know Satan loves the “grammatical-historical” method. Un- Hebrew Scriptures is founded on the
controversy. fortunately, that method was later dis- Truth of God’s Word. Where should we
The argument regarding the recti- torted into a strictly literal method of begin?
tude of one interpretive methodology or interpreting Scripture. The obvious place to start is by com-
the other is interesting only because the The adamant insistence on the lit- paring the earliest written records left us
basis for the claim regarding the ortho- eral interpretation of Scripture is unfor- by the Early Church with The Teaching
doxy of one position over the other sel- tunate because, unless you are able to set we find in the Scriptures. Why so? Be-
dom goes back more than a few hundred aside that theory as it is understood by cause even if the Early Church lost The
years. Lutheran theologians appeal to the many today and see things from the per- Apostolic Teaching as I have repeatedly
w r itin g s o f Martin Lu th er (ca. spective of Early Church writers, many asserted (see “Jesus Talks About the
1483–1546); Reformed theologians ap- of the statements made by them appear to Mystery,” The Voice of Elijah, January
peal to the writings of John Calvin be plucked right out of thin air. Nothing 1991; “Where Are Jesus’ Disciples?”
(1509–1564); and Methodists appeal to could be further from the Truth. The Voice of Elijah, April 1991; and
th e w r itin g s o f J o h n W e s le y “The Protestant Confession: The Church
(1703–1791). “It would seem that if Lost The Teaching,” The Voice of Eli-
Virtually no one in Protestant Chris- jah, January 1992), it would probably
tianity today bothers to base his interpre- one is serious about have taken some time for that loss to oc-
tive methodology on the writings of cur.
anyone prior to the Protestant Reforma-
one’s claim to an Therefore, not only are the chances
tion (1517). Those who do rummage orthodox method of fairly good that some remnant of the
around in earlier writings of the Chris- Truth of The Apostolic Teaching could
tian Church normally halt at the writings biblical interpretation, be found in the writings of the Early
of Thomas Aquinas (ca. 1225–1274), al-
though a few will also throw a line
one would base that Church Fathers, it is even more likely
that we could find some evidence of the
around the views of John Chrysostom claim on the method of method of biblical interpretation pre-
(A.D. 349–407) and Jerome (ca. A.D. ferred by Early Church leaders. Let’s
347–420).
interpretation take a look.
The tendency to not venture back to be found in the In this survey of the history of bibli-
much beyond Aquinas is not surprising cal interpretation, I have chosen for the
since the publication of Aquinas’ Early Church.” most part to quote from R. Grant & D.
Summa Theologica (1266–1273) pro- Tracy, A Short History of the Interpreta-
vided the basis for modern theories of in- It would seem that if one is serious tion of the Bible, Fortress: Philadelphia,
terpretation, including the literal about one’s claim to an orthodox method 1984; and K. Froehlich, Biblical Inter-
interpretation theory. (Note the date well of biblical interpretation, one would base pretation in the Early Church, Philadel-
folks. That’s twelve centuries after the that claim on the method of interpreta- phia: Fortress Press, 1984. The bolding
Apostle Paul wrote his letters found in tion to be found in the Early Church. I’m found in those quotes is my own (for em-
the New Testament. It’s also nearly six not talking about thirteenth-century phasis). If you are interested in reading
hundred years before the literal interpre- Christianity (Aquinas), or even late further on the subject, I recommend you
tation theory gained widespread accep- fourth-century Christianity (Jerome and read these two first. Then continue your
tance.) John Chrysostom). I’m talking about study by reading any of the others listed
Most people don’t even bother ap- Christianity from the time of the Apos- in the bibliography on page 11.
pealing to the views of Thomas Aquinas tles to the late second century.
because the theory of biblical interpreta- If we’re going to be reasonable
tion he propounded in his Summa about it, let’s be reasonable. Interpretive The Big Three
Theologica was not a strictly literal ap- methods could easily have changed even Three Church Fathers have long
proach. It only emphasized that the lit- by the end of the second century. Facts been recognized as having stood firmly
eral sense of Scripture should be the are facts. Two hundred years is a long on the side of Christian Orthodoxy dur-
8 January 1993

“These Early Church Fathers are unanimous in their belief that the only
legitimate interpretation of the Scriptures is no interpretation at all.”

ing the second century. These three are Notice that the authors of this quota- other way than by those very
Justin Martyr (ca. A.D. 100–165), tion, in spite of what Irenæus has written, churches which the apostles founded
Irenæus (ca. A.D. 130–200), and want to view what he has written from in person, by declaring the gospel to
Tertullian (ca. A.D. 155–after 220). their own perspective—that is, from the them directly themselves, both vivâ
However, we should also mention that perspective that interpretation of Scrip- voce [Editor: i.e., by the spoken
Tertullian tarnished his reputation some- ture was viewed as necessary and good word] as the phrase is, and subse-
what later in his life by quitting the or- by the Early Church. Taking that as their quently by their epistles. If, then,
thodox Church in disgust and joining the starting point, they believe Irenæus must these things are so, it is in the same
Montanist Christians. As we will find have had some personal method of inter- degree manifest that all doctrine
later, he may well have had good reason. preting the Scriptures. which agrees with the apostolic
And contrary to what has been thought, churches—those moulds and origi-
that action may well represent his strong nal sources of the faith must be
convictions that the Truth of The Apos- “Tertullian, who was reckoned for truth, as undoubtedly
tolic Teaching he understood was being
irretrievably contaminated by error
writing some one containing that which the (said)
churches received from the apos-
taken over from Greek philosophy. (See hundred and seventy tles, the apostles from Christ, Christ
“The Origen of Folly” in this issue.) from God. Whereas all doctrine must
All three of these Early Church Fa- years after the death be prejudged as false which savours
thers are unanimous in their belief that and resurrection of of contrariety to the truth of the
the only legitimate interpretation of the churches and apostles of Christ and
Scriptures is no interpretation at all. Did Jesus Christ (ca. A.D. God. It remains, then, that we dem-
you get that? They believed that the sol-
emn duty of the Church leaders of their
200), had no interest onstrate whether this doctrine of
ours, of which we have now given
day was not to “interpret” Scripture at all in interpreting Scrip- the rule, has its origin in the tradi-
but to accurately “understand” and teach
ture for himself.” tion of the apostles, and whether all
The Apostolic Teaching.
other doctrines do not ipso facto pro-
Furthermore, these three are unani-
ceed from falsehood. We hold com-
mous in their belief that the only way to These scholars fail to understand munion with the apostolic churches
acquire an accurate “understanding” of that the “rule of faith” mentioned by
because our doctrine is in no respect
The Apostolic Teaching was to be taught Early Church writers had nothing at all to
different from theirs. This is our
by a Teacher in the apostolic succession. do with interpretation; it had only to do
witness of truth.
By that they meant a Teacher who had with the standard the Early Church ap-
been taught the Church’s accurate un- (Tertullian, On Prescription Against
plied in its quest for the recognition and
derstanding of Scripture by a teacher Heretics, 21)
rooting out of false teaching. Tertullian’s
who was recognized and accepted as view, like that of Justin Martyr, agrees
having been taught accurately: Y o u c a n s e e f r o m th is th a t
with Irenæus:
Tertullian, who was writing some one
Above all for Irenæus, who is defend- hundred and seventy years after the
Since the Lord Jesus Christ sent the
ing the mainstream of Christian faith death and resurrection of Jesus Christ
apostles to preach, (our rule is) that
against able enemies, there is one (ca. A.D. 200), had no interest in inter-
no others ought to be received as
standard of correct interpretation. preting Scripture for himself. He wanted
preachers than those whom Christ
The standard is the rule of faith as to learn the Truth of the Old Testament
appointed; for “no man knoweth the
preserved in churches in the apos- Gospel of Jesus Christ from those who
Father save the Son, and he to whom-
taught in churches established by the
tolic succession. … The teaching of soever the Son will reveal Him.” Nor
Apostles themselves. His arguments
the apostles is the true understand- does the Son seem to have revealed
against the Gnostics clearly demonstrate
ing of the Bible, and if anyone Him to any other than the apostles,
he had no interest in interpreting Scrip-
wishes to learn this true under- whom He sent forth to preach—that,
ture for himself:
standing he should read the scrip- of course, which He revealed to
tures with the presbyters of the them. Now, what that was which they
According to Tertullian, arguing with
church, with whom is the apostolic preached—in other words, what it
Gnostics about scriptural interpreta-
doctrine … All other interpretations was which Christ revealed to
tion is useless. Even an agreed canon
have fallen from the truth. them—can, as I must here likewise
and common exegetical methods do
(Grant & Tracy, p. 50–51) prescribe, properly be proved in no
not guarantee unambiguous results for
January 1993 9

“Not only did Irenæus believe the meaning of the Scriptures had
been hidden, he also did not believe anyone could uncover
that meaning by doing his own interpretation.”
there is always room for heretical in- What then was these three men’s Martyr:
tentions to dictate the agenda. Thus, understanding regarding that Teaching?
the true battlefield is not interpretation Did they believe, as many believe today, By many passages of scripture, un-
but the very right to use Scriptures at that the message of Scripture could be derstood typologically, Justin shows
all. Apostolic Scriptures belong to the easily understood by any Christian that Jesus was … Messiah.
apostolic church. The Gnostics with (scholar or unlearned layperson alike) (Grant & Tracy, p. 45)
their claim to secret traditions have no who wanted to read and interpret Scrip-
right to use them, for only the public ture on his own? Absolutely not.
succession of teaching in the aposto- All three of these men forthrightly “All three of these
lically founded churches can be the state the message of the Hebrew Scrip-
measure of apostolicity and therefore tures had been concealed in parables and
men forthrightly state
of correct interpretation …. We meet enigmatic statements. Furthermore, they the message of the
here a profound suspicion toward a believed an understanding of that mes-
professional exegesis which made the sage was definitely known only in the Hebrew Scriptures had
churches founded and taught by the
unending search for truth a method-
Apostles because Jesus had revealed the
been concealed in
ological principle. The Gnostics used
Matt. 7:7 as their warrant: “Seek, and meaning of Scripture to the Apostles parables and
you will find.” For Christians, alone (Lk. 24:27, 44–45). Scholars have
Tertullian maintains, the search has long recognized that, for Irenæus: enigmatic statements.”
ended; true faith has been found and
must only be defended against its ero- The Old Testament is full of types. To give you some idea of the under-
sion by illicit curiosity. For both The “treasure hidden in a field” standing of Old Testament prophecy that
Irenæus and Tertullian, illicit curios- (Matt. 13:44) is Christ hidden in the these men had, Justin Martyr says this:
ity is the true danger of a Gnostic her- scriptures and made known through
meneutics of inquiry.… The protest types and parables. “Again in Isaiah, if you have ears to
of the late-second-century fathers, (Grant & Tracy, p. 48) hear it, God, speaking of Christ in
however, could not stem the tide of the parable, calls Him Jacob and Israel.
times. Professional, scientific herme- Not only did Irenæus believe the He speaks thus: ‘Jacob is my servant,
meaning of the Hebrew Scriptures had I will uphold him; Israel is mine elect,
neutics was the wave of the future.
been hidden, he also did not believe any- I will put my Spirit upon Him, and He
(Froehlich, p. 14–15)
one could uncover that meaning by do- shall bring forth judgment to the Gen-
ing his own interpretation: tiles. He shall not strive, nor cry, nei-
Tertullian, like Justin Martyr and
Irenæus, argued that the unity of belief ther shall any one hear His voice in
The Old Testament texts themselves the street: a bruised reed He shall not
exhibited by the apostolic churches was
speak of hidden truth that must be break, and smoking flax He shall not
proof of their apostolic descent. All three
saw the apostolic churches as the only le- unlocked. Jews are reading them quench; but He shall bring forth judg-
gitimate repository of The Apostolic but do not have the explanation. ment to truth: He shall shine, and
Teaching. Christians possess the key in the shall not be broken till He have set
coming of Christ which unlocks all judgment on the earth. And in His
the mysteries … from beginning to name shall the Gentiles trust.’”
“Tertullian, like Justin end …. The same argument refutes (Justin Martyr,
the Gnostics. If the Jews have no Dialogue With Trypho, cxxiii)
Martyr and Irenæus, key, the Gnostics fabricate their
argued own. Irenæus first criticizes their Those of you who have read Not All
hermeneutical principle: they cut up Israel Is Israel can understand why Justin
that the unity of the beautiful mosaic of God’s re- Martyr would say the Prophets refer to Je-
sus Christ as Israel. But even without that
belief exhibited by the vealed economy and reassemble the
understanding it is obvious that Justin
pieces into their own myths …
apostolic churches (Froehlich, p. 13–14) Martyr, like Irenæus and Tertullian, did
not believe that God intended the prophe-
was proof of their The same belief in the hiddenness of cies of the Old Testament to be under-
apostolic descent.” the scriptural message was held by Justin stood “literally” in the way many today
10 January 1993

“There is an unstated assumption today that the Early Church, like us, had
no certain understanding of the message of the Old Testament other than
what we find recorded in the New Testament. That is not so.”
claim. These three believed the Prophets allegoroumena, here translated “alle- Note carefully what Paul says about
made parabolic statements that were to gorically speaking.” That term refers to a preaching the things that had been re-
be understood allegorically. That agrees type of allegorical interpretation that was vealed to him by Jesus Christ. The un-
with the Apostle Paul’s statement con- well known in his day: derstanding he gained by revelation was
cerning his understanding that the story of not limited to the things he wrote in his
Sarah and Hagar had some sort of allegor- The word meant allegorically letters to the churches. By no means! He
ical meaning: (allegoroumena) is from a verb taught the Early Church far more than
commonly used by Greek interpret- those few things we find recorded in the
Tell me, you who want to be under ers, especially by Stoics who inter- New Testament Scriptures. That is an
law, do you not listen to the law? For preted allegorically and explained important point to keep in mind if you
it is written that Abraham had two away the myths concerning the gods. are seeking knowledge of the Truth.
sons, one by the bondwoman and one According to these exegetes, some of There is an unstated assumption to-
by the free woman. But the son by the whom were Paul’s contemporaries, day that the Early Church, like us, had no
bondwoman was born according to “saying one thing and signifying certain understanding of the message of
the flesh, and the son by the free something other than what is said is the Old Testament other than what we
woman through the promise. This is called allegory.” They proceeded to find recorded in the New Testament.
allegorically speaking: for these interpret Homer, for example, as if it That is not so. The New Testament had
{women} are two covenants, one were an allegory. They looked for not even been written when Paul first
{proceeding} from Mount Sinai hidden mysteries under the outward started preaching.
bearing children who are to be forms. Consequently, Paul taught from the
slaves; she is Hagar. Now this Hagar (Grant & Tracy, p. 19) Hebrew Scriptures because those were
is Mount Sinai in Arabia, and corre- the only Scriptures available. And the
sponds to the present Jerusalem, for message he taught the Early Church will
she is in slavery with her children. “Many of the Old soon be seen by True Believers to be
But the Jerusalem above is free; she both intricate and detailed. We will show
is our mother. For it is written,
Testament passages how that is in future publications.
“REJOICE, BARREN WOMAN WHO with literal meaning The point to be remembered here is
DOES NOT BEAR; not that the Apostles and Early Church
BREAK FORTH AND SHOUT, YOU WHO describe historical Fathers understood the Scriptures to
have no literal meaning at all, because
ARE NOT IN LABOR;
FOR MORE ARE THE CHILDREN OF
events that were them- they certainly did. The point is rather that
THE DESOLATE selves orchestrated by they understood there was also, along-
THAN OF THE ONE WHO HAS A side passages with literal meaning, pas-
HUSBAND.”
God as parabolic sages containing an allegorical meaning
And you brethren, like Isaac, are pantomime.” that was intentionally hidden in para-
children of promise. But as at that bolic images—images that have long
time he who was born according to been called “types” even by those who
the flesh persecuted him {who was It should be clear that Paul did not insist on literal interpretation.
born} according to the Spirit, so it is mean, by his use of that term, to imply Moreover, many of the Old Testa-
now also. But what does the Scrip- that he used any allegorical methodol- ment passages with literal meaning de-
ture say? ogy to interpret the Scriptures himself. scribe historical events that were
“CAST OUT THE BONDWOMAN AND Why would he? He plainly says he themselves orchestrated by God as para-
HER SON, gained his understanding of the Old Tes- bolic pantomime. [See “The Parabolic
FOR THE SON OF THE BONDWOMAN tament by revelation: Pantomimes of Jesus Christ,” The Voice
SHALL NOT BE AN HEIR WITH THE of Elijah, January 1991; “The Passover
SON OF THE FREE WOMAN.” For I would have you know, breth- Parable,” The Voice of Elijah, July
So then, brethren, we are not chil- ren, that the gospel which was 1991; and “They’ve Put God in a Box!
dren of a bondwoman, but of the preached by me is not according to (Or So They Think)” in this issue.] Con-
free woman. man. For I neither received it from sequently, those who want to insist on
(Galatians 4:21–31) man, nor was I taught it, but I re- “literal interpretation” of the Scriptures
ceived it through a revelation of Je- while advocating “typological interpre-
In explaining his understanding of sus Christ. tation” are not only demonstrating their
this passage, Paul used the Greek term (Galatians 1:11–12) ignorance of the history of biblical inter-
January 1993 11

pretation, they are also contradicting The words here translated “as a His Apostles—The Apostolic Teaching.
themselves. type” say literally (if you want to insist Their testimony is equally clear as
The evidence for the Early Church on the literal sense of Scripture) “in a to their understanding that the Old Testa-
belief in the parabolic meaning of Scrip- parable” (e)n parabol$=). That is be- ment Gospel message concerning Jesus
ture is overwhelming. It is stated repeat- cause the biblical account to which this Christ had been hidden in parables. That
edly throughout the earliest Christian passage refers sets forth a parabolic pan- does not offer much encouragement to
writings. But you don’t even have to go tomime orchestrated by God just as those today who want to insist on a
outside the New Testament to find that many of the passages in the Old Testa- strictly literal interpretation of the Scrip-
view expressed. The writer of the Book ment record historical events that are tures. As a matter of fact, it’s enough to
of Hebrews knew it to be so as well: parabolic pantomimes. (See the articles discourage anyone who seeks the Truth
last referenced.) Along those same lines, from offering his own off-the-cuff opin-
By faith Abraham, when he was the author of the Book of Hebrews also ion as to the meaning of Scripture. But
tested, offered up Isaac; and he who understood that the Tabernacle itself was fools walk in.…
had received the promises was offer- part of a parable (parabolh) ordered by
ing up his only begotten {son}; it was God (Heb. 9:9). (Now, after this brief survey of the
he to whom it was said, “IN ISAAC From all this one can clearly see that Early Church Fathers and the New
YOUR DESCENDANTS SHALL BE for nearly two centuries the Early Testament, we are ready to take a
CALLED.” He considered that God is Church Fathers did not believe their task quick tour of Church history to see
able to raise {men} even from the was to interpret the Scriptures. Instead, how we got where we are today. For
dead; from which he also received they were committed to teaching the un- that tour, see “The Origen of Folly”
him back as a type. derstanding of the Old Testament that in this issue.)
(Hebrews 11:17–19) they knew Jesus Christ had revealed to

Annotated Bibliography
Source Comments
Bunyan, John, The Annotated Pilgrim’s Progress (Chicago: ✓ A good example of allegory.
Moody Press, 1980)
Froehlich, Karlfried, Biblical Interpretation in the Early Church ✓ A fairly balanced investigation into Early
(Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1984) Church interpretive techniques.
Grant, Robert & Tracy, David, A Short History of the ✓ Possibly the best survey of the history of
Interpretation of the Bible (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1984) biblical interpretation in the Church.
Kaiser, Walter C., Jr., Toward An Exegetical Theology: Biblical ✓ This book and the article following provide a
Exegesis For Preaching and Teaching (Grand Rapids: Baker Book good introduction and insight into the
House, 1981) difficulties encountered by conservative
________, “Interpreting the Old Testament,” The Proceedings of scholars who are seeking to understand the
the Conference on Biblical Interpretation (Nashville: Broadman Old Testament.
Press, 1988), pp. 65–91
Kugel, James L. & Greer, Rowan A., Early Biblical Interpretation ✓ A survey of the interpretion found in Early
(Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1986) Church literature.
Longenecker, R.N., Biblical Exegesis in the Apostolic Period ✓ An excellent example of how The Apostolic
(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975) Teaching is ignored by scholars.
Marsden, George M., Fundamentalism and American Culture— ✓ A decent treatment of the recent origins of
The Shaping of Twentieth-Century Evangelicalism: 1870–1925 some fundamentalist Christian beliefs.
(New York: Oxford University Press, 1980)
Rogers, Jack B. & McKim, Donald K., The Authority and ✓ These two have a not-so-hidden agenda.
Interpretation of the Bible: An Historical Approach (New York: Not good for hard facts.
Harper & Row, 1979)
McCown, Wayne & Massey, James Earl, Eds., Interpretating ✓ An example of an appeal to a specific
God’s Word For Today (Anderson, Indiana: Warner Press, 1972) Reformer’s interpretive technique.
Wilken, Robert L., John Chrysostom and the Jews (Berkeley: ✓ An excellent snapshot of fourth-century
University of Chicago Press, 1983) Christianity in and around Antioch.
12 January 1993

Temple and Antichrist

Just for the sake of argument, let’s say you were Satan the son of lawlessness, because he is unable to give life.
and, by telling everyone they should interpret the Scriptures For behold I will tell you his signs so that you might
for themselves, you had successfully destroyed the unity The know him. He is a … skinny-legged young lad, having a
Apostolic Teaching provided the Early Church. Everybody tuft of gray hair at the front of his bald head. His eye-
had now begun using Origen’s new allegorical methodology brows will reach to his ears. There is a leprous bare spot
to come up with their own interpretation of key passages of on the front of his hands. He will transform himself in the
Scripture. (See “The Origen of Folly” in this issue.) There- presence of those who see him. He will become a young
fore, the acceptance of your lie by Church leaders had, almost child. He will become old. He will transform himself in
immediately, plunged the Church into complete confusion. every sign. But the signs of his head will not be able to
Under those circumstances, what specific information would change. Therein you will know that he is the son of law-
you want to discredit or bury so deeply that (you hoped) it lessness.
would never be recovered? How about that part of The Apos- (“The Apocalypse of Elijah,” 3:1–18.
tolic Teaching which speaks specifically concerning you? From J.H. Charlesworth, The Old Testament Pseud-
Wouldn’t you zero in on the understanding that you will epigrapha, New York: Doubleday, 1983)
eventually come in the person of the Antichrist as the messiah
Amazingly, the writer of this bit of fantasy was appar-
of the Jews and rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem? Surely you
ently also aware that the Antichrist would rebuild the Tem-
would want to suppress that!
ple in Jerusalem and take his seat there because he expects
Think about it carefully. If you were Satan and you had
the appearance of Elijah and Enoch after the Antichrist “has
no way of knowing exactly when Jesus Christ would return,
revealed himself in the holy place.” He says:
but you knew that before He did, you would be cast out of
Heaven with no place to go except into this realm as the Then when Elijah and Enoch hear that the shameless
Antichrist, wouldn’t you be working to successfully orches- one has revealed himself in the holy place, they will
trate your final stand against God? (See Rev. 12:9, and The come down and fight with him ….
AntiChrist or The Advent of Christ and AntiChrist.) Cer- (Charlesworth, “The Apocalypse of Elijah,” 4:7)
tainly you could see your deception would depend on the
Church being unable to recognize you and see through your This writer’s omission of any overt reference to the re-
charade. It seems logical that you would want Christians to building of the Temple in Jerusalem is significant because
completely discard the vital information they had concern- we know that, during the third century, Church leaders be-
ing you. gan to use the ruins of the Temple as evidence that God had
Well, congratulations! You were successful. That is ex- abandoned the Jews and was now working solely with the
actly what happened. The Church almost immediately re- Church. They were arguing (correctly) that the Church was
the continuation of Israel, but their argument depended on
jected the coherent explanation Irenæus and Hippolytus had
the Temple in Jerusalem remaining in ruins. In other words,
received from the Apostle John through Polycarp concerning
if the Temple were ever rebuilt, Church leaders would lose a
how to recognize the Antichrist when he appears—that is,
major pillar in their argument concerning the Church’s posi-
that he will destroy the rulers of Egypt, Libya, and the Sudan
tion vis-à-vis the Jews. Consequently, many Christians be-
before rebuilding the Temple in Jerusalem and taking his seat
gan to argue vehemently that the Temple would never be
there, pretending to be the messiah of the Jews. That should
rebuilt. By the end of the third century A.D., the understand-
come as no surprise. After Origen’s novel theory of interpre-
ing that the Antichrist would rebuild the Temple had been
tation made Truth a matter of conjecture, “private” interpreta-
turned completely upside down:
tions of the Books of Daniel and Revelation abounded.
Hippolytus, along with the understanding of The Apos- Christians knew that the first temple, the temple of Solo-
tolic Teaching he had, died sometime around A.D. 235. Less mon, had been destroyed but that at a later time it was
than forty years later (before A.D. 275), the anonymous rebuilt. The destruction of the second temple, the one
writer or editor of the “Apocalypse of Elijah” offered the standing during the lifetime of Jesus was, however,
following ridiculous explanation as to how Christians thought to be different. It would never be rebuilt; its de-
would be able to recognize the Antichrist: struction was permanent…. Not all Christians agreed
… the son of lawlessness will appear, saying, “I am the on the precise interpretation of the details, … but most
Christ,” although he is not. Don’t believe him! … He agreed that Daniel 9 prophesied a permanent cessation
will multiply his signs and his wonders in the presence of of sacrificial worship in Jerusalem.… The interpreta-
everyone. He will do the works which Christ did, except tion of the prophecy in Daniel was confirmed by the
for raising the dead alone. In this you will know that he is words of Jesus in Matthew 24:1–2. “Jesus left the temple
January 1993 13

and was going away, when his disciples came to point tempt—no less a leader than John Chrysostom himself
out to him the buildings of the temple. But he answered stated:
them, You see all these, do you not? Truly, I say to you,
“Christ built the Church and no one is able to destroy it;
there will not be left here one stone upon another, that
he destroyed the temple and no one is able to rebuild it.”
will not be thrown down.” This warning of Jesus was
(John Chrysostom, Jews and Gentiles, 16; 48.835,
taken to be a prophecy that the temple would never be
From Wilken, p. 131)
rebuilt.… By the time that Julian became emperor in
361 … this interpretation of the temple in Jerusalem Where do you suppose the Church got a doctrine that
was firmly fixed in the Christian consciousness and was so completely in contradiction to the clear and logical
handed on to new converts through the catechetical understanding of the Book of Daniel presented by Irenæus
tradition.… The passage of time, by then almost three and Hippolytus? It originated with none other than that mas-
centuries, the ancient word of Daniel, the prophecy of ter of folly himself, Origen:
Jesus, and the spread of Christianity supported the And any one who likes may convict this statement of
view that Jerusalem would never again belong to the falsehood, if it be not the case that the whole Jewish na-
Jews and that the temple would never be rebuilt. tion was overthrown within one single generation after
(R.L. Wilken, John Chrysostom and the Jews, Berkeley: Jesus had undergone these sufferings at their hands. For
University of California, 1983, pp. 137–38) forty and two years, I think, after the date of the crucifix-
In A.D. 361, history took a decided turn for the worse, ion of Jesus, did the destruction of Jerusalem take place.
as far as Christians were concerned—Julian became em- Now it has never been recorded since the Jewish nation
peror of the Roman Empire. He ruled just over a year and a began to exist, that they have been expelled for so long a
half, but during that time, he published a major refutation of period from their venerable temple-worship and ser-
Christian doctrine, and set out, in A.D. 363, to personally vice, and enslaved by more powerful nations; for if at
disprove the Christian belief that the Temple in Jerusalem any time they appeared to be abandoned because of
would never be rebuilt. To do that, he decided to allow the their sins, they were notwithstanding visited (by God),
Jews to return to Jerusalem and rebuild the Temple: and returned to their own country, and recovered their
possessions, and performed unhindered the obser-
The emperor Julian well understood the significance of vances of their law. One fact, then, which proves that
the city of Jerusalem for Christian piety and the temple Jesus was something divine and sacred, is this, that
ruins for Christian apologetics. Raised a Christian, he Jews should have suffered on His account now for a
had heard Christians speak about the temple in Jeru- lengthened time calamities of such severity. And we say
salem and the prophecies in the Scriptures that the with confidence that they will never be restored to their
temple in Jerusalem would never be rebuilt. In his book former condition.
… Julian offered a full-scale refutation of Christianity. (Origen, Against Celsus, Book iv, Chap. xxii)
… a close reading of the fragments of this book shows
that his case against Christianity is intimately linked to What a piece of stinking garbage! Origen’s argument is
the legitimacy of Judaism. as phony as a three dollar bill. He wrote this (ca. A.D. 248)
(Wilken, p. 138) shortly after Hippolytus died (ca. A.D. 235). So, if he had
any interest in learning The Apostolic Teaching, he had ac-
The Temple was never rebuilt. Work began in the cess to what Hippolytus had already written in his Treatise
spring of A.D. 363, but Julian died in battle a few weeks on Christ and Antichrist. Moreover, Origen had heard
later and, after his death, the project was dropped. However, Hippolytus lecture in Rome in A.D. 212. But Origen chose
Julian’s actions are enlightening, because more than any to disregard The Teaching of those who understood The Ap-
other person in the ancient world, he fit the Early Church’s ostolic Teaching and come up with his own understanding
description of the Antichrist. Yet Church leaders of his day of the Scriptures. That was more gratifying to this philoso-
seem completely unaware of that fact. Instead, they were pher’s obviously large and well-massaged ego.
thoroughly shaken because Julian had threatened their be- If Origen’s teacher, Clement of Alexandria, had sought
lief that the Temple would never be rebuilt. So complete was to thoroughly master and teach only The Apostolic Teaching
their loss of The Apostolic Teaching that: that Pantænus taught instead of wandering off into the writ-
In the Christian mind, the attempt to rebuild the temple ings of Philo of Alexandria, perhaps Origen would not have
in Jerusalem was a profound attack on the truth of been able to so completely lead the Church astray. One thing
Christianity. is clear enough, however. The Church was on the right track
(Wilken, p. 130) when it attempted to convict him of heresy. If Marcion (see
“The Origen of Folly” in this issue) was, as Polycarp called
These false beliefs were so firmly entrenched in the him, “the First-born of Satan,” Origen was definitely his
Church that in A.D. 386—just 151 years after Hippolytus second son. ■
died and twenty-three years after Julian’s failed at-
14 January 1993

uestions
&
The year has gone by in such a blur that I don’t ac-
tually remember many specific events. But I suppose
one event that stands out above the rest is a letter you re-
nswers ceived from a subscriber sometime in February or
March. As I recall, he asked several questions, includ-
The Voice of Elijah publishes articles based ing something about the Book of Daniel and the feasts
on the findings of The Elijah Project, a private of Israel. I also believe he asked the questions because
research group headed by Larry D. Harper. In he sincerely wanted to know. At least that’s the way I
this column we seek answers to general-interest took them. So I set out to incorporate those answers
questions concerning the findings, purpose, and into articles for April’s issue. Trying to answer those
philosophy of this project. questions was the beginning of what has proven to be a
continuous investigation into the psyche of Satan and
the awesome wisdom of God.

Editor: This has been an incredible year for all of us Editor: Whoa! I can see where the information in
here at The Voice of Elijah. We’ve not only seen the The AntiChrist and The Advent of Christ and
publication of three books by The Elijah Project and AntiChrist would give you some insight into Satan’s
been able to read the articles written for this newslet- personality, but you finished those books early this
ter, we’ve also seen the formation of a group of past summer; so you’re obviously referring to some-
Monthly Contributors who are able to read even thing more than that. What do you mean?
more information published every month in The
Voice of Elijah Update. Those Monthly Contribu- Elijah: It isn’t easy for me to explain because I still
tors are now, at least in part, also helping us finance don’t fully understand the implications of all that I see.
a videotape ministry that will allow us to present in- Let me put it this way. If you think of God as the source
formation more effectively through videotaped semi- of all Truth about Himself and Satan as the source of all
nars. But that’s all still to come. Looking back over lies, and if you understand just a little of the Old Testa-
the past year, what one thing would you say was the ment Gospel of Jesus Christ hidden in the Hebrew
most significant event for you? Scriptures, you can then begin to analyze specific his-
torical events in terms of the goals and objectives Satan
Elijah: That’s difficult to say. So many things have had obviously set out to accomplish over the past three to
a definite effect on my understanding of the Scriptures, four millennia. The fascinating thing is how Satan
my calling, the history of the Jews and of the Church, worked not in terms of hours or days but in terms of
etc. At the beginning of the year I had only a vague idea centuries and millennia. If you keep all that in mind,
of what God had called me to do. Now I know more you can usually identify one specific individual with
specifically what I am about. When the year began, I whom some erroneous idea originated. You can then
also had what I thought was a manageable task in writ- trace that concept as it was developed by a group of in-
ing The Mystery of Scripture. Now I’m trying to stay dividuals whom Satan duped into believing a lie in or-
afloat in the deluge of information I have to somehow der to achieve his desired results later on. That provides
shoe-horn into that publication. And more information you absolutely phenomenal insight into Satan’s
is surfacing all the time. The research I did for this issue method of operation. It’s just like the Apostle Paul said:
raised all sorts of questions about the Early Church Fa- Satan disguises himself as a messenger of light because
thers. I have to find answers to those questions before I that which is most nearly true is sometimes the most
can finish that book. effective lie. [Editor: 2 Cor. 11:14]
January 1993 15

Editor: In light of things you’ve written for this is- what Origen did resulted in the Church’s loss of The
sue, you’re probably talking about how the Church Teaching. But Satan had for centuries carefully crafted
lost The Teaching. the lies inherent in the various schools of Greek philos-
ophy. He planned all along to use at least one of them in
Elijah: That’s only part of what I see. The loss of The response to any situation that might result from the
Apostolic Teaching is just one in a long series of skir- coming of Jesus Christ. Then, as the Book of Daniel re-
mishes that often broke out into open warfare between veals, he worked, as he always has, behind the scenes to
Truth and error. The battle between the two began in influence the course of history so that it turned out to
the Garden of Eden with the Truth Eve had and the lies his liking. [Editor: Dan. 10:13] He did that by working
the Serpent told her. The conflict moved from there out with specific individuals in the various countries of the
into the world with the dispute between Cain and Abel, ancient Near East. You have to understand that Satan
and through the Flood with the deliverance of Noah. has always had some knowledge of what God intends
Satan initiated his lies again after the Flood, and that re- to do. But he has never had full knowledge. That is be-
sulted in the folly of Ham. (Incidently, there is a lot coming more obvious to me with every new insight I
more to that particular event than meets the eye.) Then gain into The Teaching of Moses and The Teaching of
God responded with His promise to Abraham and Is- the Prophets. However, Satan has never believed that
rael’s Exodus from Egypt. his ignorance means his fate is a foregone conclusion.
The point is, Truth and error have been constantly But I have a hunch he is beginning to sense it is now.
at war throughout history, not just in our own time. It is
no casual statement that Jesus made when He said, “I Editor: Why do you say that?
am The Way, and The Truth, and The Life.” [Editor:
John 14:6] He was referring to Himself as the embodi- Elijah: I’m only speculating about Satan’s position here,
ment of The Living Word of God which is, when prop- so don’t hold me to it. But Satan has obviously known all
erly understood, The Way, The Truth, and The Life. along God hid the Gospel message concerning Jesus
[Editor: John 1:1–5] The conflict between The Truth of Christ in the Old Testament. He also understood God
the Living Word of God and the lies of Satan is, in fact, had hidden that message in order to mock what the an-
the central question with which history is concerned cient Canaanites had done with their own mythological
from Satan’s point of view. Obviously, God has a far texts. I mention those texts because it’s been clear to me
different agenda. He intends to save a remnant of man- for several years that the Ugaritic—the
kind through their belief in His Truth. But Satan is Canaanite—mythological texts that archaeologists dis-
more myopic in his approach. His only question is: covered at Ras Shamra some sixty years ago had an in-
Will Truth triumph or will error? He believes error will tended meaning that went far beyond the superficial
win. meaning of the text. I’ve spent countless hours going
If you look around you, you can see why he would over those texts and reading the scholarly literature writ-
think that. Lies, half-truths, and confusion are every- ten about them, but I could never figure out how the
where. And it has been that way for most of the history Canaanites meant their poetic mythology to be under-
of mankind. But the promise of God to us is that His stood. I’ve also known for nearly fifteen years that those
Truth will ultimately prevail—not just the half-truth on Canaanite texts were playing with some of the same idi-
which Satan thrives but pure, unadulterated Truth. That oms you can find in the Old Testament Scriptures—idi-
will be difficult for most in our time to accept. It’s not oms that I’ll be explaining to your subscribers and/or
surprising. If you are Satan’s offspring—and most to- Monthly Contributors over the next several years. But I
day are—half-truths are close enough to the Truth. But still couldn’t grasp what the Canaanite authors were do-
then, Satan is the ultimate fool. It’s only logical he ing with their poetry until I discovered that the founder
would engender fools. of Greek Stoic philosophy—a man named Zeno—was a
Actually, I had several specific events other than Phoenician. The significance of that is, Phoenician is
the Church’s loss of The Teaching in mind as well. just another way of saying “Canaanite.”
There are more than two thousand years of conflict be- In my research recently, I found that Zeno and sev-
tween God and Satan that people must understand be- eral other Phoenician philosophers had migrated to
fore they can fully appreciate why an Early Church Athens shortly after Alexander the Great made Greece
leader named Origen would rush head-long into using the world power of the ancient world. These Phoeni-
the allegorical method of interpretation first introduced cian philosophers preached a prophetic and paradoxi-
by the Greek Stoic school of philosophy. It is true that cal message in which they advocated that the Greeks
16 January 1993

should interpret the Homeric myths as allegory. That’s been planning concerning the rebuilding of the Temple
when I realized the Ugaritic mythological texts should and the focusing of the worship of God on himself.
be understood as having some sort of allegorical mean- [Editor: See The AntiChrist or The Advent of Christ and
ing. These Phoenician philosophers were simply tell- AntiChrist.]
ing the Greeks to treat the Greek poetic mythology the Now consider this: I’ve already shown in Not All
same way the Canaanites did theirs. In other words, the Israel Is Israel that, according to what the Apostle Paul
Canaanite priesthood had done much the same thing understood, the Jews have been “cut off from Israel”
with their mythology as John Bunyan did in Pilgrim’s and that only Jesus Christ remains as the sole remain-
Progress and C. S. Lewis did in his Pilgrim’s Regress. ing member “in Israel.” Therefore, Jesus Christ is the
They had concealed the meaning of their myths about only “Israel” that exists today. I showed that using
the gods in allegory, never intending the texts to be un- nothing but an explanation of the idiom “cut off from
derstood literally. Israel” and the literal meaning of the biblical
Once I saw all that, I realized God had probably text—with not much, if any, fancy exegesis. So Satan
duped Satan into believing a lie. It appears that Satan has already lost the one thing he has been fighting most
has assumed all along that God had somehow hidden desperately to conceal from True Believers: The Jews
The Mystery of the Old Testament Gospel of Jesus who have lived since Jesus Christ was crucified are not
Christ in allegories just as the writers of Canaanite my- the Corporate Israel mentioned by the Prophets! Jesus
thology had done. That’s why, over the centuries, Sa- Christ Himself is that “Israel” because all other Jews
tan has tried to thoroughly discredit any understanding have been “cut off from” Corporate Israel. Conse-
of the Old Testament that includes what people call “al- quently, they stand outside of Corporate Israel, on
legorical interpretation.” He began by working through equal footing with unregenerate Gentiles, as far as God
Origen to introduce the ridiculous notion that individu- is concerned.
als could decipher the Hebrew Scriptures by using an Satan is in for some even more incredible losses in
allegorical methodology. the days, months, and years to come. For example, it
Over the past century and a half, however, Satan can also be shown without any special exegetical tech-
has been emphasizing to fundamentalist Chris- nique that, even according to the foolishness of literal
tians—that is, those most likely to be True Believ- interpretation, the Old Testament contains specific, de-
ers—that “literal interpretation” is the only legitimate tailed information concerning the virgin birth of Jesus
method of biblical interpretation. Unfortunately for Christ as the Messiah of Israel who would, in Himself,
him, he has also gone along more or less willingly become “all Israel.” And most of that information isn’t
while God has worked through various scholars since even in the Prophets! It’s in the historical books! And
the Reformation to establish the validity of a “gram- everyone knows history books should be understood as
matical-historical” methodology. I assume that’s be- having literal meaning. That information should, more
cause he thought the grammatical-historical than anything else, convince anyone who is honestly
methodology would be as useless as a strictly literal seeking to know the Truth that what I teach is true.
methodology in any attempt at understanding the Old All this “exegetical” rigamarole that has long been
Testament Gospel of Jesus Christ. advocated by the best and brightest of Christian theolo-
In other words, Satan has apparently believed for gians is mostly hocus-pocus anyway. You don’t have
nearly twenty-five hundred years that by discrediting to be any great exegete to understand the morning
allegorical interpretation he could effectively put the newspaper, so why should you have to do exegetical
message of the Old Testament beyond any hope of re- cartwheels in order to understand the Hebrew
covery. But he was taken in because he failed to under- Scriptures? The only reason theologians have found it
stand that much of The Mystery hidden in the Old necessary to argue over which special exegetical tech-
Testament is not sealed in allegory. It’s sitting right out nique should be used to interpret the Scriptures is be-
in full view, easily accessible even to those who want to cause the Church lost its understanding of The
insist on a literal interpretation of the Old Testament. Apostolic Teaching.
Stop and think for just a minute what all that When theologians found they couldn’t recover the
means. The main reason Satan has insisted on a literal meaning of the Hebrew Scriptures because they had
interpretation of the Old Testament is because he wants been sealed, they started debating about which method
Christians to read the prophecies of the Old Testament of interpretation delivered the best guess. Now that the
and automatically understand every mention of “Is- seals are being removed, however, the only valid
rael” as “the Jews.” That’s crucial to what he has long method for “interpreting” the Hebrew Scriptures is go-
January 1993 17

ing to be the same method you use for “interpreting” malities associated with a defect in the renal concen-
any other piece of literature: You won’t need to do trating ability of the kidneys. The reader must first have
exegetical handstands to “interpret” it; you will just a basic understanding of medical terminology and the
read it and understand it, provided you know what it’s subject matter being discussed in the article. A special-
talking about. If it is historical text, you will read it like ist in kidney research could easily read such an article
you would any history book. If it’s poetry, you will and fully understand what he or she read, whereas you
read it like you would read poetry. If it’s prophecy, you and I would have difficulty grasping even the general
will read it like you would any other prophetic text. concepts.
How that is will become apparent soon enough. Once The same is going to be true of the Hebrew Scrip-
you understand the idioms and images they use, the tures. If you don’t know what the Prophets are talking
Prophets don’t speak ambiguously most of the time. about, or you don’t understand the technical terms they
Since much of the Old Testament is a historical ac- used, you certainly won’t understand what they said. If
count, it only makes sense to begin by reading those you know what they are talking about and you under-
parts first. The only problem with that is the fact that stand the technical terms they used, however, the
even the historical text is full of Hebrew idioms and meaning of what they wrote will be obvious to you just
technical terms that are repeated over and over and over by reading a literal translation of the Hebrew text. The
throughout the text, mockingly challenging the reader translation doesn’t even have to be all that precise. A
to unlock and comprehend their meaning. If you under- general translation will get the point across well
stand the meaning of those idioms and technical terms, enough in most cases. That’s why Justin Martyr
however, you can generally understand what you read. thought the Greek translation he read was inspired—he
But if you don’t understand their meaning, you won’t understood what he read.
understand. It’s that simple. Also, you won’t have to be some sort of intellec-
That’s why the Early Church Fathers were so ada- tual giant to understand the Prophets. Look at the
mant about the understanding of the Old Testament Apostle Peter. He was an uneducated fisherman, but
they knew they had gained from the Apostles. It was he understood the message of the Greek Old Testa-
obvious to them they had been instructed accurately as ment. He even wrote a couple of books of the New
to the meaning of the Hebrew idioms, the parabolic im- Testament in which he relates a few things about what
agery, and the various technical terms. It’s also obvi- he understood. Yet some of the statements he made
ous from what they have written that they were right. have confused scholars for centuries. So contrary to
It’s even obvious from the Gnostic texts discovered at what theologians today would have you believe, you
Nag Hammadi that some of the heresies making the won’t need a Ph.D. to qualify to do any “exegesis” of
rounds in the Early Church were based on a smattering the Scriptures. It’s not going to be all that compli-
of the Truth. That’s what made them so threatening to cated. They just think it is because they don’t under-
The Apostolic Teaching. It all goes back to what I said stand what the Scriptures say. But then I seem to recall
about Satan masquerading as a messenger of light. God promising to make fools of this world’s wise
However, I’ve said all that just to say that the key to men. [Editor: He’s alluding to Isa. 29:9–14. See also 1
understanding the message of the Hebrew Scriptures Cor. 1:18–21.]
doesn’t lie in some elaborate theory of exegetical inter- Does that make sense? If you have the required
pretation. It lies in the mind-set of the reader. That’s mind-set, you will be able to read and understand a lit-
why Luke says Jesus “opened their minds to under- eral translation of the Old Testament. If you don’t,
stand the Scriptures.” [Editor: Luke 24:45] He super- you won’t; not because it is sealed, but because you
naturally gave His Apostles the mind-set they needed don’t know what it’s talking about. Providing the op-
to be able to read the Old Testament with understand- portunity for True Believers to understand the things
ing. He didn’t take the seals off the Scriptures at that they need to know is part of my ministry: I’m here to
time, however. They have remained sealed with seven “restore the hearts of the sons to the fathers.” [Editor:
seals, awaiting our own time. But now, once those seals He’s alluding to Mal. 4:6 and the fact that the ancients
have been permanently removed, reading the Hebrew thought the seat of the mind was the heart.] Only a few
Scriptures is going to be just like reading any other are going to accept what I have to teach, however, so
piece of technical literature. For example, I doubt seri- only a few are going to understand. But from God’s
ously that the average person on the street could pick point of view those few are “the Many” who will have
up and read an article discussing some arcane aspect of “insight” in the Last Days. [Editor: He’s alluding to
hypercalcemia or hypokalemia, the two major abnor- Dan. 12:3, 10.]
18 January 1993

Editor: You’ve talked about idioms and parabolic of the idioms in any language. Try to take the idioms in
images since the day I first met you over ten years the story literally. It goes something like this:
ago. Can you give us some idea of how the message
of the Old Testament could be hidden so completely It was obvious to everybody in the small town that
yet still be so easy to understand once you under- the boy gave the old couple headaches. The two had
stand the meaning of the idioms? banged their heads against the wall for years, con-
stantly walking on eggshells, knowing the boy would hit
Elijah: Sure. An idiom is just an expression that says the ceiling at the least provocation. They kept hoping he
one thing and means something other than what the would eventually get his act together and stand on his
own two feet. He never did. High school hadn’t been his
words literally say. The Russian comedian Yakov
cup of tea; so his heart hadn’t been in it. He had looked
Smirnov has made a career out of taking English idi-
down his nose at homework. He found it beneath him.
oms literally. For example, he has joked about how we
But the problem wasn’t just with the boy alone.
say, “I’m behind you all the way.” He says something
Rather than stand their ground, the old couple threw up
like, “In Russia we don’t like people who are behind their hands and stuck their heads in the sand. They let
you all the way,” referring to the fact that under com- him use the family car. Consequently, he was always
munist rule the KGB followed people around. out burning up the road instead of carrying his own
We have hundreds, if not thousands, of idiomatic weight. Eventually, he dropped out of school and spent
expressions in English. Every language has them. So his days hanging around the pool hall, always looking
even those who insist on literal interpretation would for some poor sucker he could fleece. Fortunately for
look like fools if they denied ancient Hebrew had them the old couple, war broke out. When the boy signed up,
as well. It’s clear from just a superficial reading of the they patted themselves on the back and even threw a
text that you find idioms used throughout the Hebrew party when he left, not so much for him as for
Scriptures. The only question that remains to be an- themselves.
swered is what all those individual idioms mean. Boot camp was hell for the boy, but before long he
Scholars have worked on them for centuries, trying to thought he knew the ropes. He started going on sick call
precisely fix their meaning. Sometimes they have been every day, trying to get a medical discharge. He wasn’t
successful. Sometimes they haven’t. pulling the wool over anyone’s eyes, however; they
You can often tell where scholars don’t have a clue could see right through him. And it all went in his file.
as to the meaning of an idiom simply because they have After he shipped out to the front, he should have seen the
translated it literally. However, they have done that oc- writing on the wall and realized his goose was cooked,
but he didn’t. He was always in the first wave to hit the
casionally even when an idiom’s meaning is obvious.
beach because his commanders had no stomach for his
Consequently, English-speaking people have been
shenanigans. Sure enough, his number came up. The
able to borrow idioms from the Hebrew Scriptures. For
poor stiff got out all right—six feet under.
example, what does it mean to “steal someone’s
After the boy bought the farm, the old lady immedi-
heart”? Obviously that expression can’t be taken liter- ately saw dollar signs. She thought she and the old man
ally. It’s an idiom. In English, we normally use it in the would live on easy street. But the old man had long been
context of a romantic relationship between a man and a a pack rat, and the leopard wasn’t about to change his
woman: “She stole his heart.” In the Hebrew Scrip- spots. However, the old fellow kicked the bucket not
tures, however, it meant to influence someone to be long afterward, and that left the old woman with more
loyal to you rather than loyal to someone else. You can dough than a bakery. The old man had firmly believed
see that even though they translated the idiom literally. in term life. Consequently, from her point of view, he
[Editor: 2 Sam. 15:6] Here’s another romantic idiom had kicked one big bucket full of cash her way, and she
we use: “He swept her off her feet.” Should that be was determined to live high on the hog. It was all going
taken literally? Of course not. It’s an idiom. And unless to be icing on her cake. After all, she told herself, she
you understand the meaning of the idiom, you won’t had only put up with the miserly old codger all those
understand what has been said. years because society demanded it of her. He had long
Can you imagine the ridiculous understanding been an albatross around her neck, but she had paid her
people would have of the things we say and write if dues. Consequently, the fox was now in the hen house
they took every idiom literally? I’ve been putting to- and ready for chicken dinner.
gether a silly little story for some time now that strings The town folk soon saw where the boy had gotten
several idioms together to illustrate the idiocy of any- his lack of common sense. Rather than walking the
straight and narrow, the old woman went wild. She
one who would insist on a strictly literal interpretation
January 1993 19

started throwing money around like she was crazy. Prophets have said, however, you can see the seething
Maybe she was. If she wasn’t to begin with, she cer- wrath of God smoldering in their words. I pity anyone
tainly was later on. She dropped a stitch one day that who understands the Old Testament message because
caused it all to come unraveled. After that she was of what I teach and yet still continues to teach others
clearly one brick shy of a full load. what they think the Scriptures say. God does not take
The roof caved in after she went looking for some- His Truth so lightly. The Word of God is a dou-
thing flashy she could use to tool around town with the ble-edged “Sword” that will eventually slice the un-
kids. Imagine, a woman her age! Unfortunately, the learned to pieces if they use it without understanding
dealer saw her coming a mile away, and he sold her a
their solemn obligation to first learn how to “rightly di-
lemon. It was the most beautiful thing the woman had
vide” it. [Editor: He’s alluding to Heb. 4:12, Matt.
ever seen, and she savored the aroma of it, but it was
24:51, and 2 Tim. 2:15.]
lemon through and through. It wouldn’t even peel out the
way she thought it should. However, that wasn’t the only
Another thing your readers need to know about idi-
fly in the ointment. She often found herself without trans- oms in general is the fact that they are quite often tied to
portation because her beloved lemon was always in the the imagery of some particular custom. Therefore, their
shop overnight for this or that. Therefore, she sat home specific meaning is quickly lost when that custom
sipping lemonade, longing to be out painting the town. ceases to be practiced. Also, idioms sometimes con-
When the old woman finally realized she had been tinue to be used with a meaning that has been expanded
taken to the cleaners, and her lemon wasn’t going to to include similar, but different, circumstances. There
satisfy her pent-up appetite for the best this life had to are, for example, three different English idioms that use
offer, her devastation was total. It left such a bitter taste the term gauntlet: “throw down the gauntlet,” “take up
in her mouth that she spent the rest of her life shuffling the gauntlet,” and “run the gauntlet.” I venture to say
around muttering something about sour grapes and most people today don’t know the background and
rotten apples. original meaning of these idioms. They only know how
they are used today, if they are familiar with them at all.
I’ve included colloquial expressions along with So you can see how one could easily use any one of the
more formal idioms in this story just to show you that idioms to speak specifically concerning the original
we don’t restrict ourselves to speaking literally. There- custom and leave people wondering what they meant.
fore, we can’t honestly require that of the Prophets That is exactly the type of thing the Prophets of the Old
through whom God spoke. Also, I haven’t played Testament have done.
around as much as I could have with the various idi- All three of these English idioms were originally
oms. By contrast, the Prophets play around with the idi- tied to specific images related to customary practices of
oms of the Hebrew Scriptures all the time. They do it so English-speaking people in past centuries. Yet we
much, in fact, that if you don’t understand what they don’t even use the term gauntlet today except in these
are doing, you won’t have any idea what they are talk- idioms and as a technical term. There are, in fact, two
ing about, much less what they have said. The Prophets different original meanings for the term. One refers to a
often do more or less what I did with the two idioms part of a suit of armor worn by knights in medieval
“kick the bucket” and “buy a lemon”: They play with times. The other refers to two rows of men holding
the literal image associated with the idiom. You can see weapons and facing each other. You can see, therefore,
from the story how that could mislead people who that if your intent was to totally confuse someone, you
don’t understand the meaning of the Hebrew idioms in could talk about both of those images at the same time.
the first place. They could easily be lead to believe the
Prophets are talking about a literal “bucket” or Editor: We could go on with this at some length, but I
“lemon” when in fact their statements relate to the want to ask you the question I mentioned in the July
meaning of the idiom. issue, even though some of our subscribers are not
Some of what the Prophets have done would be aware of the specific things you have written re-
amusing except for the hard edge of mockery their cently for The Voice of Elijah Update, things that
words have for those who aren’t interested in under- have happened almost immediately after they were
standing the Truth. They knew the fools of this world, published. How do you feel when you see things
not wanting to understand, would have a field day dis- come to pass just the way you’ve written or said they
torting their statements, running off in all directions, would? Also, how does it make you feel when you see
making pious-sounding statements that are ultimately the list of things you have said would happen keep on
pure folly. When you begin to understand what the growing?
20 January 1993

Elijah: It doesn’t make me feel much one way or the statement is “individuals.” Everybody wants to main-
other. I’m just giving people my best guess based on tain their independence, so they have no commonality
things I have read in the Scriptures. I don’t claim to be a with other Believers. The unity of the Church doesn’t
Prophet predicting current events. I’ve never spoken or even exist except as literary fiction. How can it? Those
written any of those things in the name of the Lord, and who worship together don’t all have the same concept
I’ve been wrong often enough. Even if I had claimed to of Who God is, or the same view concerning what He
be predicting things and they came to pass every time has done, so how can they even be said to worship the
just as I stated, True Believers would find that fact to be same God? I have no doubt God will rectify that
totally irrelevant. They are more interested in learning situation, at least as far as True Believers are
the Truth of the Word of God. And that Truth has its concerned, before the Return of Jesus Christ.
own means of confirmation. They don’t need me to Before the Early Church lost The Apostolic Teach-
provide some external sign to validate it for them. ing, True Believers knew and agreed completely on their
The Word of God will handle the validation of its knowledge of the God Who is because they understood
Truth all by itself just as it did in the Early Church. and believed the Gospel message the Prophets hid in the
Contrary to what Satan assumed when he started Hebrew Scriptures. And their belief that there was but
spreading his lies among the Greek philosophers one Truth to be found there provided them the basis for a
twenty-five hundred years ago, God had the conclusion unity that goes far beyond any that has existed in the
already worked out and written down. All we’re going Church since that time. Consequently, God performed
to do now is show people how they can read it for them- marvelous works among them because of their unity. By
selves. If they believe what they hear from me, and then contrast, many today who have but a small part of God’s
live according to what they learn from the Word, well Truth are, I am sure, already being taken in by the lying
and good. If they don’t…? That won’t be my fault. I signs and wonders of Satan as he prepares them for his
will have done what I was called to do. Pretenders can appearance. [Editor: He’s alluding to 2 Thess. 2:9.]
and will fend for themselves. Therefore, God must restore The Teaching as the basis
For the benefit of your Monthly Contributors, I’ve for the Church’s unity of belief before He begins work-
been stressing in The Voice of Elijah Update that the ing to restore the commitment of love and respect that
understanding I have of God’s purpose in these Last True Believers should have for one another. It may be
Days relates entirely to the message of the Old Testa- difficult to imagine that God could accomplish such a
ment concerning The Way. It is a most unfortunate cir- work in these days. Nonetheless, I have no doubt that
cumstance that the Church turned away from The Way True Believers will once again be able to state with con-
so long ago. But even more unfortunate is the fact that fidence that they do indeed:
the normal response of True Believers today when they
walk in a manner worthy of the calling with which
hear what happened is to deny it. Even those who will
you have been called, with all humility and gentle-
admit the evidence indicates it did happen, still won’t
ness, with patience, showing forebearance to one
accept responsibility for it. They want to attribute
another in love, being diligent to preserve the
blame only to those individuals who influenced the
unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.
Church so that The Apostolic Teaching was lost.
(Ephesians 4:1b–3)
That is also unfortunate, but only because God
does not view the situation as we do. The guilt of the How can I be so certain? That’s easy. The Apostle
Early Church was not individual; it was corporate. The Paul goes on to tell you:
entire Church—past, present, and future—became
{There is} one body and one Spirit, just as also you
guilty because the leadership of the Church at that point
were called in one hope of your calling; one Lord,
in time ignored smaller problems until the accumula-
one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all
tion of those smaller problems made it impossible for
who is over all and through all and in all. But to
them to respond to the phenomenal challenge pre-
each one of us grace was given according to the
sented by the ignorant assertions of Clement of Alex-
measure of Christ’s gift.
andria and Origen. Nobody has that corporate
(Ephesians 4:4–7)
mentality today. But they are nonetheless guilty, just as
guilty as those who were directly responsible. To the True Believers are individuals, but “grace has been
minds of all today, the Church is nothing more than an given” to each one so that, as Paul goes on to say, we
eclectic gathering of individuals who get together on can all:
Sunday morning to worship God. The key word in that
January 1993 21

attain to the unity of the faith, and of the knowl- But rather for hearing the words of the L ORD.
edge of the Son of God, to a mature man, to the And people will stagger from sea to sea,
measure of the stature which belongs to the full- And from the north even to the east;
ness of Christ. They will go to and fro to seek the word of the
(Ephesians 4:13b) LORD,
That spiritual growth is possible only through an But they will not find {it}.”
understanding of the Old Testament Gospel message (Amos 8:11–12)
that alone provides us the true “knowledge of the Son The only appropriate response for those who are
of God,” the One Who said He was “The Way, and The True Believers today is to pray as Daniel prayed, freely
Truth, and The Life.” Despite the best that Satan can acknowledging that we have not, as the corporate re-
bring against it, The Way is going to be restored. And pository of God’s Spirit:
anyone who wants to “walk in The Way” will be able to
do so. But whoever rejects it has thereby rejected The “obeyed the voice of the LORD our God, to walk in
Truth and will never experience the fulness of The Life His teachings which He set before us through his
that God has to offer. I realize that first step is a giant servants the prophets.”
step, but look at it logically: Anyone who is unwilling (Daniel 9:10b)
to admit the Church departed from The Way will have “The Many” will do just that. And before long,
no reason to return to it. those True Believers who repent as God requires will
There’s a certain amount of corporate-mindedness come to understand and experience what the Prophet
that’s necessary before anyone will be willing to admit Hosea spoke parabolically about our own time:
they, as an individual, share in the corporate guilt of the
Church. Yet without that admission of guilt, one can “Come, let us return to the LORD.
never return in humility, with a whole heart, to The For He has torn {us}, but He will heal us;
Way of the Lord. That’s why it’s obvious that only True He has wounded {us}, but He will bandage us.
Believers will return to the Lord. Pretenders will be He will revive us after two days;
more interested in maintaining their individuality, fol- He will raise us up on the third day
lowing their own “way,” finding their own “truth.” That we may live before Him.
They don’t understand that Jesus Christ died to deliver So let us know,
us from that futility. The Prophet Isaiah stated it let us press on to know the LORD.
succinctly: His going forth is as certain as the dawn;
And He will come to us like the rain,
All of us like sheep have gone astray, Like the spring rain watering the earth.”
Each of us has turned to his own way; (Hosea 6:1–3)
But the LORD has caused the iniquity of us all
To fall on Him. Just tell your readers to think parabolically. Elijah
(Isaiah 53:6) brought the rain that ended the famine in the days of
Jezebel, the whore who seduced the sons of Israel to
Isaiah wrote those words some twenty-seven hun- worship gods of their own imagination in his day, be-
dred years ago concerning the waywardness of Israel, fore he fled to the Mountain of God. Parabolically
the Corporate Son of God, in his own day. Yet they ap- speaking, it will be so again. And although it will take a
ply equally as well to the Church, the Body of Christ, while to prepare it all, ambrosia will again grace the
the Corporate Son of God in our own day. We are no “table” of the Lord that is being prepared so the Be-
different from them. We turned aside from The Way loved of the Lord can “dine” in the presence of her ene-
just as they did. In our case, however, God refused to mies. [Editor: He’s alluding to Psalm 23:5 and
send His Prophets to restore The Way because of His Deuteronomy 32:13.] Just tell them to remember Lot’s
anger. Instead, He did just as Amos, speaking para- wife. [Editor: He’s alluding to Luke 17:32.] And re-
bolically, said He would: mind them that once they start to flee from that great
“Behold, days are coming,” city—the “whore”—to the Mountain of God, not to
declares the Lord GOD, look back. There’s nothing worth remembering in
“When I will send a famine on the land, Sodom. [Editor: He’s alluding to the symbolism men-
Not a famine for bread or a thirst for water, tioned in Revelation 11:8.] ■
22 January 1993

stood as they were explained by Church lieves that all scripture speaks in a
Origen leaders who had been trained in The Ap- mysterious language of symbols …
From Page 1 ostolic Teaching, not interpreted accord- (Grant & Tracy, p. 55)
ing to some interpretive methodology.
One of the first and most renowned That’s interesting, isn’t it? Clement
Greek philosophers to become a Chris- may not have been trying to defend his
tian was Justin Martyr (ca. A.D.
The Smoking Gun own method of interpreting the Hebrew
100–165). To his credit, however, Justin Pantænus (A.D. 130?–200?) was Scriptures at all. He perhaps only wanted
appears to have submitted himself to the one of the next philosophers to take up to validate the understanding of the He-
leadership of the Church and to have set the mantle as resident Church philoso- brew Scriptures he had learned in the
about the task of learning The Apostolic pher after the execution of Justin Martyr Church by appealing to an already estab-
Teaching from them. From his writings, in A.D. 165. Sometime around A.D. 185, lished allegorical methodology.
it seems he did a fairly commendable job Pantænus established a catechetical However that may be, his work tells
of it, even though one can still find in his school in Alexandria, Egypt. That school us that well over a hundred and fifty
writings traces of doctrine more charac- became considerably more reputable un- years after Jesus Christ revealed the
teristic of Greek Middle Platonic and der the leadership of one of his pupils, meaning of the Hebrew Scriptures to His
Stoic philosophy than of The Teaching. Clement of Alexandria (ca. A.D. Apostles, the leaders of the orthodox
Justin Martyr’s stature in the Early 150–215). Consequently, by A.D. 200, Church still had no clearly defined
Church is amply demonstrated by the Clement was hard at work training other exegetical principles. That’s because
fact that both Irenæus and Tertullian Christians in “Christian philosophy.” they were not doing their own interpreta-
(who detested philosophy) borrowed Like Justin Martyr before him, tion of the Scriptures. Their task, as they
from his works. Justin’s one obvious Clement left us his own apologetic work clearly explain in their writings, was the
mistake, if indeed one could call it that, (Stromateis) in which he had attempted accurate transmission of The Apostolic
was to use his former training in the to make Christianity more acceptable to Teaching. (See “Did You Mean That Lit-
philosophical arts as a tool for defending the educated people of his day. The real erally?” in this issue.)
Christian beliefs against those in the edu- significance of his work, however, is that
cated ruling class who considered Chris- in it he sets forth an exegetical methodol- “Clement borrowed
tianity more barbaric than Greek and ogy others could use for interpreting the
Roman religions. But a more important Hebrew Scriptures. freely from the works
result of his work appears to have been No Church leader before Clement
the establishment of philosophical train- had ever sought to explain the interpreta-
of a Jewish
ing as a legitimate pursuit of Christian tive methodology whereby they gained philosopher who had
leaders. their understanding of the parables of
Justin Martyr’s most well-known Scripture. Church historians do not fully been a contemporary
work is his treatise Against Trypho (ca. appreciate the fact that they had no of Jesus Christ.”
A.D. 153). Church historians normally exegetical methodology because they
give it low marks as an apologetic work, were not interpreting Scripture. Some Guess where Clement got the alle-
however, in part because he does not ex- scholars can even see that perhaps Clem- gorical methodology he used? From the
plain his exegetical methodology. They ent was not trying to interpret Scripture: Jews! That’s logical, isn’t it? If the lead-
fail to understand he had none. For ers of the Church had no exegetical
Justin, the Scriptures were to be under- It was Clement of Alexandria, how- methodology of their own, Clement
ever, who first among Christians un- would have had to go looking or else
“Well over a hundred dertook to justify and explain the construct his own. Who outside the
and fifty years after meaning of the allegorical method. Church would have already developed
And yet his thought is hardly ever an exegetical methodology that could be
Jesus Christ revealed systematic. He is not attempting to used for interpreting the Old Testament?
construct a theological system in the
the meaning of the light of his interpretation of scrip-
The Jews, of course. They had been in-
terpreting the Hebrew Scriptures for
Hebrew Scriptures to ture, but simply to use scripture to il- themselves ever since they lost their un-
lustrate his already formed thought. derstanding of The Teaching at the time
His Apostles, He had apparently come to Chris- of Antiochus Epiphanes some 350 years
the leaders of the tianity through teaching which he previously. (See “Questions & An-
accepted without much question. swers,” The Voice of Elijah, April
orthodox Church still And when he tries to find this teach- 1992.)
ing expressed in the words of scrip- To make his point concerning the
had no clearly defined ture he begins to develop a theory of logic he found in The Apostolic Teach-
exegetical principles.” the symbolism of the Bible. He be- ing, Clement borrowed freely from the
January 1993 23

“Clement understood the message of Scripture included allegory,

and the Jews of his day were not particularly keen on the
allegorical interpretation of the Hebrew Scriptures.”
works of a Jewish philosopher who had borrow the exegetical methodology of you have to think in terms of the types
b e e n a co n t e m p o r a r y o f Je s u s the Jews of his own time? Why? Because and symbols that are widely recognized
Christ—Philo of Alexandria (ca. 30 Clement understood the message of as an integral part of allegory. (See
B.C.–A.D. 40). We know Clement bor- Scripture included allegory, and the “They’ve Put God in a Box! (Or So They
rowed Philo’s methodology because he Jews of his day were not particularly Think)” in this issue.)
often included lengthy passages from keen on the allegorical interpretation of During Clement’s tenure at the
Philo’s works in which he changed little, the Hebrew Scriptures. catechetical school in Alexandria, he had
if anything at all: The Jews favored a literal interpre- th e g o o d f o r tu n e ( o r m isf o r-
tation of the Old Testament. That’s not tune—Church leaders read it both ways
The fact that Clement, particularly in surprising. Church leaders had been ar- later on) to train a bright young student
the Stromateis, is dependent on Philo, guing for more than a century and a half named Origen (ca. A.D. 185–254), a stu-
was established … and has been re- that, according to The Apostolic Teach- dent who eventually replaced him as the
confirmed by many modern studies. ing, the Church was allegorically (para- school’s teacher. That was unfortunate.
(A. Van den Hoek, Clement of Alex- bolically) the true Israel. Clement wanted to show how The Apos-
andria and His Use of Philo in the That is significant. For well over a tolic Teaching could have been gained
Stromateis, Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1988) century after the death of the Apostles, from the Scriptures using the exegetical
Early Church leaders understood that, methodology of Philo. Origen had much
according to The Apostolic Teaching, the greater ambitions.
“For well over a Church, not the Jews, is Israel. Further- Origen freely used the allegorical
century after the death more, for over sixteen centuries after methodology he learned from Clement
that, the Church continued to believe the to interpret the Old Testament message
of the Apostles, Early Church, not the Jews, was the chosen for himself. He only felt compelled to
People of God. Doesn’t that make you abide by the expectation that his teaching
Church leaders wonder how and when some came by the remain within the limits of the abbrevi-
understood that, lie that the Jews are the continuation of ated “rule of faith” the Church had devel-
Israel? It happened just over a hundred oped as a safeguard against heresy. That
according to The years ago. Now, isn’t that interesting? left him plenty of room to interpret the
Apostolic Teaching, You’d never suspect that was so to hear Scriptures as he saw fit. And interpret he
them tell it. But Satan has always had his did. In fact, he opened the floodgates of
the Church, not the agents. Or isn’t it lying when people who speculation so wide that, over the next
don’t know pretend they do and say century and a half, the Church lost all but
Jews, is Israel.” things with no concern for whether or a bare minimum of its understanding of
not they have ever been part of the his- The Apostolic Teaching. (See “Temple
Clement didn’t obtain his under- toric doctrines of Christianity? and Antichrist” in this issue.)
standing of the Old Testament message The Jewish view is understandable. At the same time that Clement of Al-
by using the exegetical methodology of They could hardly be expected to appeal exandria was using philosophy to fuel
Philo. As he explains, he learned that to any methodology that could be used to the rocket and prepare the launchpad for
from Pantænus, whom he respected and prove they were not the legitimate con- the Church’s all but instantaneous depar-
admired. However, he apparently tried tinuation of Israel. That’s just one of the ture from The Apostolic Teaching, his
to validate his understanding of The Ap- reasons why Clement had to go back to
ostolic Teaching by laying out a consis- the writings of a Jewish philosopher who
tent allegorical methodology to show had written well over a century before. “Origen freely used
how the Church could have attained its Another reason is that the Early the allegorical
understanding of the parables of Scrip- Church’s understanding of the Scrip-
ture. Even in that attempt we know he tures was, at least in part, parabolic. methodology he
adopted Philo’s exegetical methodology Since a parable is just a specific form of
and, it seems, some of Philo’s interpreta- allegory (see “They’ve Put God in a
learned from Clement
tions as well. That was a mistake. Box! (Or So They Think)” in this issue), to interpret the Old
Why do you think Clement found it Clement appealed to Philo’s method of
necessary to borrow an allegorical meth- interpretation because it was allegorical. Testament message for
odology from a Jewish exegete who had That is also significant. If you want to himself.”
lived in an earlier era? Why didn’t he understand the parables of Scripture,
24 January 1993

“Theologians slight the writings of those who understood at least some of

The Apostolic Teaching and latch on to the writings of a man
who pulled ideas out of thin air!”
contemporary Tertullian and other reasons) later sought to have him posthu- of his time. This was no small
Church leaders were warning all who mously tried on charges of heresy. achievement. His successors built
would listen about the dangers inherent When the leaders of the Church ac- upon the foundations which he had
in appropriating anything that philoso- cepted Origen’s assertion that he knew laid …
phy had to offer. Fighting desperately to of an exegetical methodology whereby (Froehlich, p.18)
preserve the Truth, Tertullian and his individual Church leaders could inter-
brethren were instead looking strictly to pret the meaning of the Scriptures for Foundations? What a joke! His was
The Apostolic Teaching for their under- themselves, it sounded the death knell a foundation built on sand! [Editor: He’s
standing of the Old Testament: for the concept of one Truth in Scripture alluding to Jesus’ parable about the
that had for nearly two hundred years re- houses built on rock and sand—Matthew
Tertullian set forth orthodoxy as the mained inherent in The Apostolic Teach- 7:24–27.] It’s little wonder that Christian
norm of the interpretation of scrip- ing. It also, almost overnight, destroyed leaders soon saw their primary responsi-
ture in the period before Origen be- the doctrinal unity that Justin Martyr, bility to be the interpretation of the
came prominent.… Tertullian Irenæus, and Tertullian had so highly Scriptures rather than the transmission
detested philosophy and regarded it touted as a primary evidence that the ap- of The Apostolic Teaching. All too soon
as the mother of heresy. The authori- ostolic churches still understood the opinionated individuals everywhere felt
tative interpretation of scripture was Truth Jesus Christ had revealed to His fully qualified to put their own interpre-
intended to bypass the questions of tation of the Scriptures above the rem-
philosophical interpreters. nants of The Apostolic Teaching that can
(Grant & Tracy, p. 77)
“Scholars still don’t still be found in the works of Justin Mar-
understand tyr, Irenæus, Tertullian, and even
You can see even in this quote the Origen’s contemporaries—Hippolytus,
bias of the authors. They approve of the that Origen opened the disciple of Irenæus (see The Advent
exegetical practices that Christian phi- of Christ and AntiChrist or The
losophers introduced into the Church.
Pandora’s box.” AntiChrist), and Cyprian, the disciple of
Consequently, they cannot understand Tertullian. Their disregard for the under-
why Tertullian and his fellow Believers Apostles. It is no wonder the Church has standing these men had remains with us
had no interest in interpreting the Scrip- been plagued by schism and doctrinal still today.
tures for themselves. They also fail to controversy. Yet scholars still don’t un- True to the muddled thinking so
understand the havoc Origen wreaked by derstand that Origen opened Pandora’s characteristic of sinful humanity, the
undermining the very foundation of the box. Notice how the author of the fol- writings of Origen are now widely
unity of the orthodox Church. lowing quote gives him his unqualified praised as being more “scholarly” than
Tertullian and his kindred brethren approval: the writings of those who came before
must have recognized they were fighting him in the Church. Can you believe it?
a losing battle in their efforts to preserve Origen’s biblical writings had an im- Theologians slight the writings of those
the existence of The Apostolic Teaching mense impact on later theology.… who understood at least some of The Ap-
in the Church. That may well have con- Searching the biblical texts for clues ostolic Teaching and latch on to the writ-
tributed to Tertullian’s decision to quit to their higher spiritual meaning be- ings of a man who pulled ideas out of
the Church in A.D. 207 and join the came the normative task of the thin air! But that’s understandable. He’s
Montanist Christians, perhaps believing Christian exegete, and with this task one of their own.
them to be a better repository for The Ap- came the appropriation of the full ar-
ostolic Teaching he knew and loved. We
probably will never know.
senal of Hellenistic allegorical tech- Literal Interpretation?
niques: the philological study of
We do know, however, that Origen words and phrases, etymology, nu- You’re Kidding!
ignored the anti-philosophy wing of the merology, figuration, natural sym- If Early Church leaders until the
Church and their loudly voiced warnings bolism, etc. One may deplore the time of Origen believed the Old Testa-
concerning the dangers of dabbling in “loss of spontaneity” . . . which this ment should, at least in part, be under-
Greek philosophy. He continued on his new emphasis entailed. Neverthe- stood allegorically, what was their view
way undeterred. Unbeknownst to him, less, Origen paved the road for of those who interpreted the Scriptures
however, he unleashed the Baskerville Christian hermeneutics as a profes- by a strictly literal method? It was a most
hounds of Christendom. With poetic jus- sional and scientific enterprise fully vehement rejection. That was so, how-
tice, the Church (mostly for the wrong in tune with the scholarly standards ever, not because the exegetical method-
January 1993 25

ology stressed literal interpretation, but Christian theologians who in later centu-
because it involved interpretation. The ries favored a more literal methodology “Origen ignored
Early Church leaders rejected allegorical to counter the disastrous effects of the anti-philosophy
interpretation of Scripture as well, again Origen’s allegorical methodology.
not because it was allegorical, but be- However, the grounds on which the wing of the Church
cause it had been gained by someone’s Church rejected Marcion’s method of in-
“private” interpretation (2 Pet. 1:20). terpretation certainly does not bode well
and their loudly
Their own understanding of Scripture for them. The Early Church rejected voiced warnings
was that some passages had literal mean- Marcion’s literal interpretation of the
ing and others had parabolic meaning. Scriptures not because it was literal, but concerning the
Furthermore, they forthrightly claimed because it was his own personal interpre- dangers of dabbling
they had gotten that literal/parabolic un- tation. How do you think those Early
derstanding of the message of the Scrip- Church leaders would feel if they knew in Greek
tures from the Apostles. the Church has been out flapping in the
The first Christian exegete to use a breeze for centuries because of Origen’s
philosophy.”
strictly literal methodology in his own folly?
interpretation of the Old Testament You can get some idea of Marcion’s exception of the erudite scholar Jerome
Scriptures was the (soon-to-be) heretic standing in the eyes of the Early Church (ca. A.D. 347–420), adherents of the
Marcion (A.D. 100?–170?) sometime from the moniker given him by Polycarp Antiochene school of interpretation.
around A.D. 140. He was charged with (A.D. 70/82–156/168), the godly patri- They seem to have favored a literal
teaching heresy and excommunicated method of interpretation, at least in part,
from the orthodox Church in A.D. 144. as a way to correct some of the obviously
Marcion immediately formed a sep-
“The first Christian fantastic interpretations that were di-
arate “Church” based strictly on the be- exegete to use a rectly attributable to the allegorical
lief that Paul was the only legitimate methodology of Origen:
Apostle. (See “Did the Gnostics Really strictly literal
Know?” The Voice of Elijah, October methodology in his There can be little doubt that the
1991.) Marcion’s choice of the literal hermeneutical theories of the
method of interpretation appears to have own interpretation of Antiochene school were aimed at the
been prompted primarily by his aversion excesses of Alexandrian spiritualism.
to the allegorical understanding of the
the Old Testament Careful textual criticism, philological
Old Testament voiced by the orthodox Scriptures was the and historical studies, and the culti-
Church leadership. That also confirms vation of classical rhetoric had been
for us that the Early Church had an alle- (soon-to-be) heretic the hallmark of the pagan schools in
gorical understanding of the Scriptures Marcion.” the city. Christian exegetes followed
in his time: in the same path. Modern biblical
arch of the Church at Smyrna. Polycarp scholars have sometimes praised the
Marcion not only rejected the Old called Marcion the “firstborn of Satan.” sober attention given to the literal
Testament as a Christian book; he (See addendums to “The Letter of the sense by the Antiochene exegetes as a
insisted on a literal interpretation of Smyrnæans” in The Advent of Christ and model for today.
it in order to emphasize its crudity. It AntiChrist, p. 28.) That was because, by (Froehlich, p. 20)
was not a Christian book, and in his interpreting the Scriptures for himself
opinion no allegorical exegesis rather than teaching The Apostolic Isn’t that disgusting? Just as Clem-
could make it one. Teaching, he was introducing heresy ent of Alexandria and Origen had so
(Grant & Tracy, p. 43) into the Church. What do you suppose many years before, these Church leaders
Polycarp would have called Origen had got their interpretive methodology from
Marcion’s exegetical methodology he known what Origen accomplished? Greek philosophers. Consequently, it
does not legitimately represent those And what would he have thought of the was not a strictly literal methodology.
ridiculous ideas being touted in the They did admit to a higher sense in
“The earliest Church today with total disregard for Scripture (theoria) which they were
whether or not they have ever been part never able to completely differentiate
orthodox advocates of of historic Christian beliefs? from the allegorical sense (allegoria)
a literal interpretation The earliest orthodox advocates of a stressed by Origen. However, it is also
literal interpretation of the Scriptures ap- clear these Church leaders were moved
of the Scriptures peared in the late fourth century—only in the direction of a more literal method-
appeared in the late after Origen opened the doors of the ology by the large and influential Jewish
Church to individual interpretation of population centered in and around
fourth century.” Scripture. These literalists were, with the Antioch:
26 January 1993

“After Origen introduced his allegorical methodology, some of the

interpretations Christian leaders offered for the Hebrew
Scriptures tended to be more fantastic than realistic.”
The earliest Antiochene exegesis the late patristic period and in the gesis on the historical sense of the Old
which we possess, an interpretation M id d le Ag e s , a sy s tem o f Testament. This emphasis … perme-
of Genesis by Theophilus of Antioch, allegorization was developed ac- ates the work of Andrew of St. Victor.
is largely derived from Jewish teach- cording to which four meanings were He constantly stresses the importance
ers. to be sought in every text. Sometimes of the historical sense of scripture as
(Grant & Tracy, p. 63) there were as many as seven, but the his Jewish contemporaries have un-
more normal number of senses was derstood it.… At times Andrew’s inter-
Even Jerome (ca. A.D. 347–420), four. est in Jewish interpretations led him to
“the ablest scholar that the ancient West- (Grant & Tracy, p. 85) disregard the exposition of his Chris-
ern Church could boast” (W. Walker, A tian predecessors.
History of the Christian Church, New You can see from this how, without (Grant & Tracy, p. 84)
York: C. Scribner’s Sons, 1970, p. 158), the understanding provided by The Ap-
was convinced by his Jewish teachers ostolic Teaching, allegorical interpreta- What a sad state of affairs! Not only
that he should reject the allegorical tion could allow lies and half-truths to did the Church turn away from and even-
methodology of Origen and take up the run rampant in the Church. That is ex- tually abandon The Teaching Jesus had
literalist approach of the Jews. Note that actly what the Antiochene literalists re- revealed to His Apostles, but they also
the bias of the author in the following acted against. After Origen introduced turned again and again to the very reli-
quote is toward literal interpretation: his allegorical methodology, some of the gion whose understanding of the He-
interpretations Christian leaders offered brew Scriptures Jesus had rejected as
Under the influence of his Jewish for the Hebrew Scriptures tended to be nothing more than a “tradition” of men!
teachers Jerome turned from more fantastic than realistic. It’s no won- (See the quotation of Mark 7:5–13 in
allegorization to an increasing re- der the learned scholar Jerome opted for “Did You Mean That Literally?” in this
spect for the literal meaning of scrip- a literal methodology as well. issue.) However, the Church’s imbecilic
ture. And it is likely that wherever the trips to the broken cistern hewn out by
influence of the synagogue was felt the Jews didn’t stop there. [Editor: He’s
by the church the interpretation of “Although the alluding to Jer. 2:12–13.] They are still
scripture had a tendency toward lit- allegorical method of occurring in our own time.
eralism. The tendency of Christian scholars
(Grant & Tracy, p. 63) interpretation since the loss of The Apostolic Teaching
has always been a willingness to appro-
Jerome’s most lasting impact on the
prevailed in the priate Jewish methods of interpretation
Church proved to be his insistence that Church, from time to and accept the Jewish understanding of
the Old Testament was to be interpreted the Hebrew Scriptures to legitimize their
literally. It should be noted here, how- time there was a own methodology and interpretation.
ever, that Jerome’s contemporary and resurgence of the Their actions are little more than a tacit
the favorite Father of the Protestant Re- admission that they believe the Church
formers—St. Augustine—remained literal method, lost its own understanding of Scripture.
firmly in the allegorical camp: After all, they have reasoned, the
primarily when Jews must have held on to a better under-
Only when he discovered the alle- Jewish influence was standing of the Old Testament than the
gorical method of interpreting the Church did. Little do they realize the
Old Testament was he able to be- brought to bear.” Jews have retained even less of The
come a Christian. Teaching they were given than Chris-
(Grant & Tracy, p. 78) Although the allegorical method of tians have. At least the Church still un-
interpretation prevailed in the Church, derstands Jesus Christ is the Messiah of
Over the next eight hundred years from time to time there was a resurgence Israel predicted by the Prophets. The
the literal method of interpretation had of the literal method, primarily when Jews are still expecting another messiah!
minimal influence on the Church: Jewish influence was brought to bear on Finally, a somewhat modified ver-
one individual or the other: sion of the literal method of interpreta-
The most important and characteris- tion found a most able proponent in the
tic method of biblical interpretation in the twelfth century there was some s c h o la s tic, Th o m a s A q u in a s
… was not literal but allegorical. In emphasis in Jewish and Christian exe- (1225–1274). Although Aquinas had no
January 1993 27

inkling as to how the message of Scrip- Jesus had given the Apostles The
ture had been hidden in parables, his Apostolic Teaching through revelation “Aquinas believed
view regarding the meaning of Scripture because the meaning of the Hebrew there was a
is not far removed from that of Justin Scriptures had been sealed. (See The
Martyr, Irenæus, and Tertullian. Mystery of Scripture.) But the Church fundamental literal
Aquinas believed there was a funda- had long since turned away from its un-
mental literal sense to Scripture on derstanding of The Apostolic Teaching.
sense to Scripture on
which one could base an allegorical Consequently, that Teaching could only which one could base
sense, a typological sense, and a spiritual be restored by one to whom God chose
sense. By contrast, the Early Church Fa- to give the same revelation He had given an allegorical sense, a
thers would and did insist that a particu- the Apostles, or else (as is now the case) typological sense, and
lar passage of Scripture has but one by the removal of the seals so the Scrip-
meaning, either literal or parabolic. tures could be read like any other book. a spiritual sense.”
(See, for example, Irenæus, Against Her- That solemn reality would not change
esies, 33:4; The Advent of Christ and even after the leaders of the Protestant tural statement to that effect. [See
AntiChrist, p. 94 ff.) Reformation recovered a smattering of “They’ve Put God in a Box! (Or So They
It had taken the Church just over one the Truth of The Apostolic Teaching by Think)” in this issue and The Mystery of
thousand years of “walking” in its own reading the writings of St. Augustine and Scripture.] In fact, we find exactly the
“ways” before it was finally able to reign the New Testament. As you may recall, opposite clearly stated in Scripture:
in the ludicrous allegorical methodology the New Testament Scriptures were
first introduced to the Church by Clem- never sealed (Rev. 22:10). I have also spoken to the prophets,
ent of Alexandria. Of Aquinas’ monu- And I gave numerous visions;
mental work, Summa Theologica, it can And through the prophets I gave
be said with some relief:
Since the Reformation parables.
The Protestant Reformers’ view re- (Hosea 12:10)
This marks theology’s declaration of garding the interpretation of Scripture
independence from the allegorical was a foregone conclusion. They needed Furthermore, the total absence of al-
method. the Scriptures as a final authority—an legorical meaning is not how all the Re-
(Grant & Tracy, p. 90) authority higher than that of the Pope and formers viewed Scripture:
the Roman Catholic Church. Hence,
The Truth is, it hardly mattered. they saw the need for a somewhat literal, After 1517, when Luther definitely
Whether one used an allegorical or literal rather than the usual allegorical, under- broke with the Roman church, he
method of interpretation, the meaning of standing of Scripture: ceased to make use of allegorization,
Scripture would remain sealed to even and insisted on the necessity of “one
the most inquiring minds until the time The church was not to be the arbiter simple solid sense” for the arming of
came for the seven seals of Scripture to of the meaning of scripture, for scrip- theologians against Satan. He ad-
be removed. (See “Did Jesus Leave a ture, the word of God, was the mits the existence of allegories in
Will?” The Voice of Elijah, July 1991.) church’s judge. Naturally the re- scripture, but they are to be found
formers insisted on an historical, lit- only where the various authors
“It had taken the eral, grammatical understanding of intended them.
the Bible as they came to believe that (Grant & Tracy, p. 94)
Church just over one a new authority must be set up to op-
thousand years of pose the authority of the church. So for Luther at least, the problem of
(Grant & Tracy, p. 92–3) how to interpret the Scriptures centered
‘walking’ in its own on determining whether the original au-
Here we begin to see the original ba- thor intended his words to be understood
‘ways’ before it was sis for the theory of literal interpretation. literally or allegorically (parabolically).
finally able to reign in The theory originated in a desire to ex- That is a far different thing than saying
clude allegorical meaning from the the Old Testament can only be inter-
the ludicrous Scriptural message. And it is precisely preted literally.
on that point that one can show the the- In the centuries since the Protestant
allegorical ory ultimately flounders. If God has spo- Reformation, however, biblical interpre-
methodology first ken in the Scriptures (and indeed He tation has come a long way. The rise of
has), and if we can ourselves write alle- Rationalism saw an even greater empha-
introduced to the gorical compositions, we cannot say sis on the need to determine the intent of
Church by Clement of God would not also choose to speak in the biblical author through a logical
allegories (or parables) through His method of interpretation based on rea-
Alexandria.” Prophets without some specific Scrip- son. Thus, scholars during this era
 28

The Teaching of Moses

All Israel Turns Aside From The Way ca. 1400 B.C. Established The Way for Israel
ca. 1300 B.C.
(Judges 2:17)
All Israel
Returns to The Way ca. 1050 B.C. Samuel Restores The Way
Solomon (and All Israel )Turn Aside From The Way ca. 950 B.C. (1 Samuel 12:23)
(1 Kings 11)

Israel
Judah
Stubbornly Rebellious
Remnant of Israel
“cut off from” Israel Hosea Declares Northern Kingdom
Remains in Judah ca. 722 B.C.
“cut off from” Israel
(Hosea 1:3–9)

(Southern Kingdom)

(Northern Kingdom)
Stubbornly Rebellious Remnant of Israel
“cut off from” Israel Returns to The Way ca. 520 B.C. Haggai and Zechariah Restore The Way
(Zechariah 7:8–8:13)

The Pharisees (and all Israel) Turn Aside From The Way ca. 141 B.C.
(Dead Sea Scrolls)
Stubbornly Rebellious Remnant of Israel

The Jews
“cut off from” Israel Returns to The Way ca. 27/30 B.C. John the Baptist Restores The Way
(Matthew 3:1–3) The Teaching of Jesus Christ

(The Truth and The Life)

ca. A.D. 30/33 Reestablished The Way for Israel
(Luke 24:44–48)

Origen (and All Israel ) Turn Aside From The Way ca. A.D. 200
(Early Church Fathers)

The Church
Stubbornly Rebellious Remnant of Israel
“cut off from” Israel Returns to The Way ca. A.D. 2000 Elijah Restores The Way
(Malachi 3:1) The Return of Jesus Christ
ca. A.D. ???? Marks the End of The Way for Israel
January 1993

(Revelation 19:17–21)
January 1993 29

“Scholars concluded the logical way to determine what any author meant
was to take into account the grammatical principles of the language and
the historical circumstances in which the literature had been written.”
worked to construct a rational herme- them to practice their craft without the biblical text was not, for example, really
neutic—method of interpretation—that strictures placed on them by Rational- Moses or Isaiah, but some anonymous
could be applied not just to the Bible but ism. editor who compiled texts written by
to all other literature as well. Scholars until Johann Semler various unknown writers. These texts,
Scholars concluded the logical way (1725–1791) were in agreement on the they said, included myths, saga, legends,
to determine what any author meant was need for determining what the author of a folk tales, the kitchen sink, and just about
to take into account the grammatical text meant. Semler, however, emphasized anything else that could be used to dis-
principles of the language and the histor- that there were two meanings for any credit the historical account given in the
ical circumstances in which the literature given text—what the author meant, and biblical text.
had been written—that is, according to a what the text means to the reader. Semler These bizarre liberal theories con-
“grammatical-historical” methodology. was followed immediately by Friedrich cerning the historical circumstances in
Amazingly, that is not far removed from Schleiermacher (1768–1834) who went which the biblical authors wrote the
the views of the Reformers themselves. further and said it doesn’t matter what the Scriptures were prompted primarily by
It also agrees with the views of the Early author meant, it is only important what the publication of Darwin’s theory of
Church Fathers. the written text means to the reader. evolution. After Darwin’s theory was
After the Reformation, the refine- published, it became sort of a fad in aca-
ment of the grammatical-historical demia for scholars to look for evolution
methodology made great strides. The ba- “The advocates of everywhere and in everything. So before
sic principles of that method of interpre- literal interpretation long, some knucklehead came up with a
tation were set forth by William Ames theory in which the historical account
(1576–1633) in a book on interpretive are intent on found in the biblical text evolved from
principles that was (during the seven- saga, myth, heroic epic, and folk tale.
teenth century) used as a textbook at prejudging what God The foolishness swept through the aca-
Harvard. Ames argued, in agreement may or may not have demic world like wildfire.
with the Early Church Fathers and the The amazing thing is, to this day,
Protestant Reformers, that there could be meant in any given such theories remain foundational to the
but one meaning to any given biblical imaginary biblical history crafted by lib-
text. His work was continued by Johann
passage of Scripture.” eral biblical scholars. Consequently,
Ernesti (1707–1781) who argued, quite many academic journals are little more
logically, that the one meaning of a text You can see that Schleiermacher than comic books filled with esoteric ar-
ultimately had to be determined by what and Semler were trying to get back to ticles founded on theories that should
the original author meant. Origen’s allegorical methodology with- have collapsed under their own weight
Note that well. The advocates of lit- out the restrictions imposed by that long ago. You probably won’t hear these
eral interpretation are intent on prejudg- methodology. If it doesn’t matter what fairy-tale theories expounded from the
ing what God may or may not have an author meant, the interpreter can say pulpit because if ordinary folk knew
meant in any given passage of Scripture. anything he thinks and use biblical text what many ministers today believe about
They contend one must presume He has for support. If you see a lot of that non- the Bible, and why, they would surely
spoken literally unless overwhelming sense going on today, you now know the die laughing. No, these rarefied theories
evidence forces them to admit otherwise. source. are reserved primarily for the ears of stu-
Consequently, they have made them- Satan wasn’t through working to dents of seminaries and institutions of
selves the final judges of The Word. roll back the gains made by the higher learning.
What do you suppose God would have Protestant Reformers, however. Toward Liberal goofiness notwithstanding,
us do when the judges are blind? the end of last century, he launched a conservative Christians who stood
The emphasis on the necessity to de- massive attack on several fronts. First, firmly in traditional Christian beliefs
termine what the original author meant liberal scholars began to explain away were shaken by the suddenness of the
later proved to be too much for what has the biblical account of Creation and liberals’ decision to build elaborate theo-
now become the liberal wing of the other miraculous events described in the ries on the basis of Darwin’s postulate
Church. When some scholars began to biblical text. To do so, they built dubious concerning evolution. They found them-
sense they would never be able to pull hypotheses concerning the historical cir- selves scurrying to defend their beliefs
back the veil of secrecy that covered the cumstances of the biblical text. The one by any and all means necessary.
biblical text, they began to conjure up that finally took root and grew like a To their credit, some scholars, pri-
speculative theories that would allow weed was one in which the author of the marily those associated with Princeton
30 January 1993

“ If you are seeking to know the Truth, you will find it only when you
are willing to admit the Church has done exactly what the
Old Testament tells us Israel did before.”
Seminary around the turn of the century, concerning the Second Coming of Jesus also believe in Santa Claus and the
continued to build on the common sense Christ. Never mind the fact that, until Easter Bunny. Satan has his ways; and he
approach of the grammatical-historical John Nelson Darby (1800–1882) pro- isn’t about to stop now.
method. Over the past century, the spiri- moted his Dispensational theory Many fundamentalists today who
tual descendants of these scholars have throughout North America, the Church d o n o t o th e r w ise h o ld to th e
established a rather solid hermeneutic had always considered itself to be the dispensational system have uncritically
based on rational principles. (See, for ex- continuation of Corporate Israel. accepted as fact the dispensational view
ample, W.C. Kaiser, Jr. Toward an Note that well; it’s a fact. The belief regarding God’s dealings with the Jews
Exegetical Theology, Grand Rapids: that the Jews are still Israel has had wide at the end of the “Church Age.” They
Baker, 1981.) Using grammatical-histori- currency in the Church only since the for- look forward to the rebuilding of the
cal principles of interpretation, these mation of the Niagara Bible Conferences Temple in Jerusalem as a good thing. As
scholars would have been able to deter- in 1876. So if you place any value at all on you can see from the writings of the
mine the meaning of the Scriptures, had it the historic doctrines of Christianity, you Early Church, that belief will ultimately
not been for the seven seals God had have to suspect this particular doctrinal prove deadly. (See The AntiChrist or
placed on the text of Scripture and the system is Satan’s trojan horse. The Advent of Christ and AntiChrist.)
blinders imposed by their slavish defense N o d o u b t m u c h o f w h a t th e
of the Christian tradition they received. Dispensationalists expect will come to
Other less learned members of the “Satan has been pass in one way or another. But will that
Protestant Church, however, went look- working from within be in fulfillment of God’s Truth, or will it
ing for other ways to defend their beliefs. be in accord with Satan’s lie? You must
Since these people were for the most part the Church to shape decide, because you alone are responsi-
laymen, they were completely unaware ble for what you believe.
of the basic issues at stake in the ongoing
fundamentalist If you are seeking to know the Truth,
academic debate over the correct method Christian beliefs so you will find it only when you are willing
of biblical interpretation. They were also to admit the Church has done exactly
unenlightened as to the views of the that they agree with what the Old Testament tells us Israel did
Protestant Reformers and the historic Jewish expectations.” before: They refused to follow God by
views of the Church. Consequently, they passing along The Apostolic Teaching He
were totally ignorant of the fact that the At about the same time that Chris- had given them. (See The Mystery of
consequences of their untaught pro- tians went looking for some way to de- Scripture.) That doesn’t mean God
nouncement on the issue might have fend against the satanic onslaught ceased to work with the Church. It just
far-reaching and deleterious effects on initiated by novel liberal theories of the means we who are True Believers in this
future generations of Believers. In short, Scripture, the Jews were beginning to generation are now standing in the midst
they were fertile soil for Satan’s tares. look forward expectantly to the fulfill- of what is, for the most part, an apostate
Guess what these folk found when ment of their own “Zionist” interpreta- Church. No wonder you see such bicker-
looking for a ready defense against the tion of Scripture. (See the discussion of ing and carrying on!
idiotic notions of liberal professors? Jewish Zionism in “Touch Not the Wouldn’t it be great to fellowship
They found a literal method of interpre- Lord’s Anointed,” The Voice of Elijah, with True Believers who exhibit the unity
tation similar to that espoused by the October 1990.) According to that under- of the Early Church? If you feel that way,
Jews! Amazing coincidence, isn’t it? standing of Scripture, the Jews are the Is- keep one simple fact in mind: The Early
Sadly enough, it was also part of a sys- rael the Prophets of the Old Testament Church had unity only because True Be-
tem of biblical interpretation in which predicted will be restored to the Prom- lievers had but “one faith” —that is, one
the Israel of the Prophets must always be ised Land before their messiah comes to understanding of the Old Testament Gos-
the Jews, never the Church. That system, rebuild the Temple. pel message of Jesus Christ. Therefore,
known as “Dispensationalism,” pro- Isn’t that interesting? You can see the unity the Early Church knew would
moted a tidy eschatology that would later how Satan has been working from within only be possible today if we could some-
fit together perfectly with Jewish expec- the Church to shape fundamentalist how regain The Apostolic Teaching that
tations concerning their messiah. Christian beliefs so that they agree with was the original basis for it. Not likely, is
Since the beginning of the twentieth Jewish expectations. If, after learning all it? But who knows? The One who walked
century, the dispensational theory of bib- this, you still think the convergence of all on the Sea once can certainly do it again
lical interpretation has had a strong influ- these erroneous ideas at one point in his- should He decide. (That’s intended para-
e n c e o n f u n d a m e n ta lis t v iew s tory is sheer coincidence, you no doubt bolically.) ■
January 1993 31

They’ve Put God in a Box!

(Or So They Think)
When at the first I took my pen in hand plexed scholars for centuries. Should it be taken as political
Thus for to write, I did not understand allegory satirizing politicians of his own day? And if so, to
That I at all should make a little book what extent? The answer died with Jonathan Swift.
In such a mode; nay, I had undertook So those who insist on a strictly literal interpretation of
To make another; which, when almost done, the Scriptures have no leg to stand on. They want God to be
Before I was aware, I this begun. their own personal jack-in-the-box—a god who will say
And thus it was: I, writing of the way only what they can readily understand—so they contend
And race of saints, in this our gospel day, He could not have produced an allegorical work. However,
Fell suddenly into an allegory the Almighty God is not so easily contained. He has deci-
About their journey, and the way to glory, sively stated in Hosea 12:10 that the statements He made
(John Bunyan, The Annotated Pilgrim’s Progress, through the Prophets were parabolic. Since the parable is a
Chicago: Moody Press, 1980, p. 13) specific type of allegory, God has told us the statements He
has made in Scripture should, at least in part, be understood
With those words John Bunyan (1628–1688) intro- allegorically. Therefore, we already know the Scriptures
duced his allegorical tale titled Pilgrim’s Progress, in which contain allegory. The only questions that remain to be an-
he described an imaginary dream he had about his own (or swered concern where, how, and the extent to which the
the Christian’s) conversion and spiritual walk with God. Scriptures should be read as one would read allegory/para-
Throughout his work Bunyan used various images drawn ble. The answer, you will find, is rather remarkable.
from the Scriptures to symbolically represent Christ, confor-
mity to external morality, the promises of God, etc.
Bunyan’s allegorical fiction is part of a genre of litera-
Check Again; He’s Not in There!
ture known as “medieval allegory.” Included in that same To some extent, I’ve just been playing devil’s advo-
category is the 13th century Roman de la Rose, a French di- cate in the articles for this issue in order to draw attention to
dactic (teaching) poem about the art of winning a woman’s the inane claim made by those who demand a strictly literal
love, and Chaucer’s Parliament of Fowls. More recent ex- interpretation of the Scriptures. In truth, the grammati-
amples of allegorical literature include Nathaniel Haw- cal-historical method of interpretation will produce results
thorne’s Scarlet Letter (1850), Herman Melville’s Moby not much different than those obtained by the literal
Dick (1851), Albert Camus’ The Plague (1948), and even method of interpretation simply because it demands that
George Orwell’s Animal Farm (1945). historical texts be understood to have literal meaning.
The popular Christian author C.S. Lewis, who was a However, the grammatical-historical method of interpreta-
specialist in medieval allegory, chose to describe his own tion begins by insisting that the author’s intent, rather than
conversion in an allegorical work with the title Pilgrim’s the reader’s presupposition—for example, literal meaning
Regress (1933)—a title based directly on Bunyan’s work. only—must ultimately determine the meaning of any
Some even believe his seven volume work, The Chronicles given text. Consequently, that approach allows for the pos-
of Narnia, is an attempt at teaching the Truths about Chris- sibility that the entirety of the Old Testament could be a
tianity through allegory. However, Lewis denied they were uniquely written allegory/parable. And indeed it is.
ever intended as such. Over the next few years I must, by God’s design, show
you how the Old Testament speaks specifically concerning
the birth, life, and death of Jesus Christ, the Messiah of Is-
Oh! Your Box Has a Hole in It? rael. I will do so, all the while abiding by the rules of the
The very existence of a genre of literature known as al- grammatical-historical method of interpretation—that is,
legory presents a serious problem for those who insist the the same method you would use to read and understand any
Scriptures can only be interpreted literally. If men can cre- other literature. However, I cannot affirm I used that meth-
ate allegorical literature, how can anyone dogmatically as- odology to obtain my own understanding of Scripture be-
sert that God would not choose to do the same? They can’t. cause I’m not certain how I came by it. I doubt I’m
Neither can they prove He hasn’t. Without some word intelligent enough to have figured it out on my own, yet I
from the author himself, we are easily left wondering must have done so because I cannot tell you anyone ever
whether or not a particular work is intended to be read as al- explained it to me. But then, others won’t see anything spe-
legory. That has already been proven by Jonathan Swift’s cial in what I teach anyway, so what’s the fuss? Just this:
well-known Gulliver’s Travels (1726). That work has per- Those of you who find a basic logic in what I teach should
32 January 1993

know the Truth. My insight into what God has concealed in erature has a fundamental didactic (teaching) purpose. If,
the Hebrew Scriptures is inextricably intertwined with my in fact, the purpose of the Scriptures is to teach, what better
calling. Since I don’t fully understand either one as yet, I way could God have chosen to accomplish His purpose
can only tell you the things you will see in the Scriptures than to use a literary genre specifically suited to the task?
have come to me over the past several years (and are still The allegorical method of interpretation espoused by
coming) in bits and pieces. I can definitely tell you, how- Clement of Alexandria and Origen—the dolt who fol-
ever, that those things did not come to me by revelation. lowed in Clement’s footsteps—appeared to them to be a
There is no need for revelation in our own day because the method perfectly fit for interpreting the Scriptures. (See
Lamb of God is now removing the seven seals that have “The Origen of Folly” in this issue.) After all, The Apos-
(until now) firmly sealed the Hebrew Scriptures (Rev. 5:1 tolic Teaching they had opportunity to hear taught from the
ff.). All that aside, however, nothing changes the fact that Scriptures to some extent resembled the Greek philosophy
those who come to the Scriptures with any presupposition, they learned elsewhere. It especially (by Satan’s design)
whether it be the literal interpretation theory or some other, resembled the philosophical fabrication that supposedly
have not come to listen and to learn but rather to speak their had been derived from Greek mythology by the Stoic phi-
own minds. Such individuals are seeking to put God in a losophers who interpreted myth as allegory. So these two
box of their own making. Consequently, they are, as the bumpkins disregarded the obvious differences between the
writer of the Book of Proverbs has so eloquently put it, two genres and jumped in with both feet. But they ignored
fools. They will never understand the Truth. one simple fact: The Bible is not myth; it is history.
The insistence on literal interpretation arose last cen-
tury among relatively unlearned laymen whose primary
Maybe You Need a Bigger Box? concern was to protect the distinction between myth and
Parable as a literary form is normally classified as alle- history. It did so, however, to the detriment of the gram-
gory; but it is a specific type of allegory. The basic distinc- matical-historical methodology that had, by that time, long
tion between the two is important for an accurate been advocated by dedicated Christians who were also ed-
understanding of the Gospel message of Jesus Christ that is ucators in institutions of higher learning. Consequently,
hidden in the Hebrew Scriptures. An allegory is an ex- the ignorant insistence on the literal interpretation of the
tended metaphor—a metaphor crafted into a story. By con- Scriptures has long since done more harm than good.
trast, a parable is an extended simile—a simile put in story Clement and Origen also failed to recognize one other
form. To define that further, a metaphor is an implicit COM- crucial distinction between the Scriptures and mythology.
PARISON between two things, “flint-rock eyes”; whereas a The message of the Scriptures was not hidden in allego-
simile is an explicit COMPARISON, “eyes hard as flint-rock.” ries/parables woven into its text. By no means! The Mys-
That tells us the parables recorded in Scripture do not carry tery of Scripture was hidden in parables that had been
just an implicit allegorical COMPARISON; they convey an woven into the very fabric of time—parables acted out in
explicit parabolic COMPARISON. Therefore, the parables of historical events that were then recorded in Scripture as
the Scriptures will not contain a vague and general COM- history. (See “The Parabolic Pantomimes of Jesus Christ,”
PARISON of two things. Their COMPARISON will be found to The Voice of Elijah, January 1991, and “The Passover
be both detailed and specific. Parable,” The Voice of Elijah, July 1991.) Incidentally,
One should also understand that a writer uses an alle- the biblical text that records those historical events clearly
gory/parable to intentionally conceal, and at the same time has literal meaning—that is, the text means exactly what it
cryptically reveal, his message. Hence, it is the ideal form says. The historical events themselves, however, give the
to use when one wants to make statements in situations text an allegorical/parabolic significance. And that signifi-
where the Truth is best left somewhat veiled. That was of- cance can sometimes only be understood in the light of
ten reason enough for an author to write political allegory other biblical texts that tell you WHY those events are sig-
in ages past. Such writers found it wiser to state one’s nificant. In other words, the significance of the parabolic
views enigmatically and live to write again than to state pantomime may or may not have been known to those
those same views forthrightly and face the executioner. We whom God used to act it out.
will discover the reason God chose to conceal the Old Tes-
tament Gospel of Jesus Christ in the symbolism so charac-
teristic of allegory was to provide convincing validation of
Some Things Don’t Fit in Boxes!
His message for those True Believers who seek to know An accurate understanding of the parabolic panto-
and understand the Truth in our own day. You who are mimes found described and discussed (by the Prophets) in
God’s Own will eventually find that to be so because, as the Scriptures revolves completely around the distinction I
with any literature written as allegory, the message of the made in Not All Israel Is Israel (p. 112, 120 ff.) between the
Scriptures is easily comprehended when the author’s pur- meaning of biblical statements and their significance. The
pose is known and his allegorical/parabolic symbols are meaning of a text relates directly to WHAT one finds writ-
understood. Furthermore, the allegory/parable genre of lit- ten; the text’s significance pertains to WHY God deemed it
January 1993 33

important enough to ensure it was written. Historical recorded there were thoughtfully orchestrated through
events are WHAT we find most often recorded in the Scrip- God’s direct intervention in human affairs. That tells us He
tures, and the author clearly meant them to be understood intends us to understand He influenced those historical
as literal events. (Notice that comes close to stating—but events so as to produce a parabolic pantomime. Conse-
doesn’t—that the text must be understood literally.) How- quently, the events themselves provide parabolic imagery
ever, quite often the reason WHY those historical events that points us toward some specific historical event yet to
were recorded for us in the Scriptures has to do specifically come. As parabolic pantomime, the record provides a
with the fact that they were directed by God Himself in or- COMPARISON that will tell us how two different historical
der to produce parabolic pantomime. Therefore, the reason events are ALIKE. Let’s see how that is.
WHY the historical events were recorded gives added sig- As I mentioned in Not All Israel Is Israel (p. 14 ff.), the
nificance to WHAT the text says. focus of the historical account describing the circum-
In the Apostle Paul’s remarks in the fourth chapter of stances of the birth of Ishmael and Isaac revolves around
Galatians we find an excellent example of how a parabolic the question, “Who will inherit the promise?” We must
pantomime should be understood: keep that in mind as we study these two passages because it
is precisely the point of Paul’s discussion in Galatians as
Tell me, you who want to be under law, do you not listen well. Therefore, we already know we are dealing with an
to the law? For it is written that Abraham had two sons, explicit parabolic COMPARISON that is going to tell us ex-
one by the bondwoman and one by the free woman. But actly how Isaac’s position as the sole heir of the promise is
the son by the bondwoman was born according to the LIKE the position held by Jesus Christ as the sole Heir of
flesh, and the son by the free woman through the prom- the promise. The COMPARISON will also tell us how
ise. This is allegorically speaking: for these {women} Ishmael’s exclusion from the promise is LIKE the Jews’ ex-
are two covenants, one {proceeding} from Mount Sinai clusion from the promise. We can only provide a brief ex-
bearing children who are to be slaves; she is Hagar. planation of the underlying parabolic COMPARISON here,
Now this Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia, and corre- but a more complete explanation will follow—eventually.
sponds to the present Jerusalem, for she is in slavery
with her children. But the Jerusalem above is free; she is
our mother. For it is written,
You’d Best Forget the Box!
“REJOICE, BARREN WOMAN WHO DOES NOT BEAR; In the historical account recorded in the Book of Gen-
BREAK FORTH AND SHOUT, YOU WHO ARE NOT IN LABOR; esis, we find, first of all, that God gave Abraham a promise
FOR MORE ARE THE CHILDREN OF THE DESOLATE (Gen. 12:1–3). Later, when Abraham became concerned
THAN OF THE ONE WHO HAS A HUSBAND.” about who would inherit the promise when he died, God
And you brethren, like Isaac, are children of promise. promised him he would have a son who would inherit
But as at that time he who was born according to the (Gen. 15:1–6). Next, Abraham had a firstborn son,
flesh persecuted him {who was born} according to the Ishmael, who was born to Sarah’s maidservant, Hagar.
Spirit, so it is now also. But what does the Scripture say? Abraham immediately assumed Ishmael would inherit
“CAST OUT THE BONDWOMAN AND HER SON, God’s promise. Over Abraham’s protest, however, God
FOR THE SON OF THE BONDWOMAN SHALL NOT BE AN HEIR said the promise would go instead to a son yet to be born to
WITH THE SON OF THE FREE WOMAN.” Sarah—Isaac (Gen. 17:1–21). Finally, on the day that
So then, brethren, we are not children of a bondwoman, Isaac was weaned, Sarah demanded that Abraham disin-
but of the free woman. herit Ishmael because of Hagar’s contemptuous attitude
(Galatians 4:21–31) towards her. Abraham was undecided as to what he should
do until God intervened and confirmed Sarah’s demand
Did I miss something? Isn’t Paul COMPARING the was in accord with His Own purpose (Gen. 21:8–12). From
Church—the Body of Christ—to Isaac, and the Jews to beginning to end, we find the historical events recorded in
Ishmael? Isn’t he saying the Jews have been “cast out” LIKE Genesis 12:1–21:12 were shaped and controlled by God.
Ishmael was, and the Church—the Body of Christ—is now Consequently, they carry all the tell-tale signs of parabolic
the sole heir of the promise LIKE Isaac was? Sure he is. And pantomime—historical events orchestrated by God to
if you have read Not All Israel Is Israel, you already know teach some specific lesson and, at the same time, show how
WHY he would say that. The Jews have been “cut off from one set of historical circumstances is LIKE another future
Israel” and Gentiles have been “grafted into Israel”—that set of historical circumstances.
is, into Jesus Christ, the sole remaining member of Corpo- Paul, looking at the account, knew full well that Jesus
rate Israel. But what does Paul mean by stating the account Christ was the sole Heir of the promise just LIKE Isaac had
in Genesis can be understood as “allegorically speaking” to been in his own day. Paul also knew the Jews had lost pos-
show this to be so? To answer that, one needs to look at the session of the promise by being “cut off from Israel.” That
historical events to which he refers. If you carefully scruti- was LIKE Ishmael being disinherited—“cut off from” the
nize the account in Genesis, you will discover the events people of God—in his own time. Therefore, Paul used the
34 January 1993

parabolic pantomime God had provided in the Book of in conformity to the laws of the covenant Corporate Israel
Genesis to make his point: “Don’t you realize God has made at Sinai. Paul was using the parabolic imagery pro-
stated through the parabolic pantomime of Ishmael and vided by the account of Ishmael and Isaac to refute those
Isaac that the firstborn son of Abraham (the Jews) who was who insisted Christians must be circumcised and become
born to the bondwoman (the Mosaic Covenant) would lose part of the physical descendants of Abraham. His argu-
possession of the promise so that the promised Heir (the ment is short and to the point: “Ignore the Judaizers. They
resurrected Body of Jesus Christ) born to the free woman are seeking to retain their outward identity as Jews, not re-
(the New Covenant) would gain sole possession of the alizing the Jews have lost possession of the promise by be-
promise as God intended all along?” Paul used the account ing ‘cut off from Israel.’ In that, they are just LIKE Ishmael.
of Ishmael and Isaac to emphasize the point he stated ear- Jesus Christ and all who are ‘in Him’ now have possession
lier: “The Jews, who are counting on the covenant they of the promise. You who are ‘in Christ’ are just LIKE Isaac
made at Sinai, have lost the promise. Jesus Christ, who is and do not need the external rituals of the Mosaic law to
the Heir God promised Abraham, has retained it”: impress upon you the Truth concerning Jesus Christ
through their parabolic pantomime. You now have the
Now the promises were spoken to Abraham and to his
Spirit within you to accomplish that.”
seed. He does not say, “and to seeds,” as {referring} to Paul’s refutation of the Judaizers was blunt, to say the
many, but {rather} to one, “and to your seed,” that is, least. He claimed they—like those Jews who remained bla-
Christ. What I am saying is this: the Law, which came tantly non-Christian—were still depending on their physi-
four hundred and thirty years later, does not invalidate a cal lineage—that is, their descent from their earthly mother
covenant previously ratified by God, so as to nullify the Jerusalem (the Mosaic Covenant). Christians, however,
promise. For if the inheritance is based on law, it is no have become members of the Body of Christ—the continu-
longer based on a promise; but God has granted it to ation of Corporate Israel—by being born of their heavenly
Abraham by means of a promise. Why the Law then? It mother Jerusalem (the New Covenant). They are members
was added because of transgressions, having been or- of Jesus Christ, the true Israel, and have no more need for
dained through angels by the agency of a mediator, until the physical trappings of the Jews, who are depending on
the seed should come to whom the promise had been their physical descent from Abraham. Paul’s warning to
made. Now a mediator is not for one {party only}; the Galatians was harsh: “If you choose to go along with
whereas God is {only} one. Is the Law then contrary to the Judaizers and be circumcised, you are joining the Jews,
the promises of God? May it never be! For if a law had and they have been ‘cut off from Israel.’ Therefore, to ob-
been given which was able to impart life, then righteous- tain salvation you must earn it by keeping the entire Law”:
ness would indeed have been based on law. But the
Scripture has shut up all men under sin, that the prom- It was for freedom that Christ set us free; therefore
keep standing firm and do not be subject again to a
ise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who
yoke of slavery. Behold I, Paul, say to you that if you re-
believe. But before faith came, we were kept in custody
under the law, being shut up to the faith which was later ceive circumcision, Christ will be of no benefit to you.
to be revealed. Therefore the Law has become our tutor And I testify again to every man who receives circumci-
{to lead us} to Christ, that we may be justified by faith. sion, that he is under obligation to keep the whole Law.
But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a You have been severed from Christ, you who are seek-
tutor. For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ ing to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace.
Jesus. For all of you who were baptized into Christ have For we through the Spirit, by faith, are waiting for the
clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor hope of righteousness. For in Christ Jesus neither cir-
Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is nei- cumcision nor uncircumcision means anything, but
ther male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. faith working through love.
(Galatians 5:1–6)
And if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s
offspring, heirs according to promise. Just a few things for future reference: Paul has taken
(Galatians 3:16–29) the parabolic imagery concerning our parabolic “mother,”
the heavenly Jerusalem, from parabolic statements the
Prophets made. That’s WHY he quotes Isaiah 54:1 in
Trapped in Their Own Box! Galatians 4:27. So the entirety of what Paul has said con-
If you have read and understood Not All Israel Is Is- cerning the Jews and the Body of Jesus Christ won’t be
rael, you can understand Paul’s argument. You should also completely clear to you until you understand the parabolic
be aware, however, that Paul’s purpose in writing his letter imagery that lies behind the prophetic message concerning
to the Galatians was to refute the claims of a group of Jews (1) the two women—the Virgin and the Whore; (2) the
known as Judaizers. Those Jews insisted (since they be- Body of Jesus Christ; and (3) the Mountain of God. But if
lieved the Church was Corporate Israel) that gentile Chris- you want to know the Truth, you will. All in God’s good
tians must be circumcised and observe the Jewish festivals time. Unless you foolishly bring a box. ■
 Why Not? Scripture Songs
If you find The Voice of Elijah beneficial to you
in your own walk with the Lord, won’t you please join
with us and make this ministry your own? Everybody
Volumes 1 & 2
can do something. Some can do more than others.
The Word of God is easier to memorize when it has
Please do what you can:
been set to music. That’s why The Elijah Project has
taken key passages from the Prophets and the Psalms,
☞ Pray for our work. combined them with catchy melodies, and produced
Scripture Songs, Volumes 1 & 2. Not only will they
☞ Tell others. keep a song in your heart, they will help you hide the
☞ Give a gift subscription Word of God away also.

to a friend.
☞ Give Not All Israel Is Israel
to a friend.
☞ Give a one-time gift.
☞ Become a Monthly
Contributor.
Thy Word have I hid in mine heart,
Time is short. Much remains to be done. Please That I might not sin against Thee.
stand with us in this ministry. Contributions are Psalm 119:11
tax-deductible. 100% of all contributions go to out-
reach. No salaries are paid. To Order, use the Order Form

What You Don’t Know Can Sometimes Hurt You!

Did you know that for over one hundred and fifty years all the leaders of the Early Church
understood there was but one correct understanding of the message of the Old Testament?
Were you also aware that all Christians in the Early Church respected and recognized their
leaders as having the God-given authority to teach the correct understanding of God’s Word
to His People? Can you believe none of these men interpreted Scripture for themselves?
Obviously, that doesn’t describe the Church today. With a church on every corner
preaching a different interpretation of Scripture and believers picking and choosing as
they deem fit, it doesn’t seem possible it could have ever been otherwise, does it?
Yet it was a reality in the Early Church for well over a century. So, what happened?
If you thrive on the constant bickering and fighting found in the Church of today, that
question isn’t even relevant. Obviously, you believe you can go right on arguing your way
to the Truth. But some of us don’t.

• If you look around you in the Church today, and things

just don’t seem quite right, this book is for you.
• And if you believe the Scriptures should have
but one clear message, this book is for you.
• And if you believe it only makes sense that the Church
took a wrong turn somewhere along the way, this book is for you.

Things aren’t right in the Church today. And there is but one simple message
to be found in the Bible. And the Church did take a wrong turn quite some time back.
Around A.D. 200, the Church did exactly what the Old Testament tells us Israel did
before: It turned away from The Apostolic Teaching. So, if you want to know the Truth,
this book is for you. Order your copy now. Why should The Mystery of Scripture To Order, use the Order Form
remain a mystery any longer?
 Who is Israel?

✡
According to Scripture, Israel is the descendants
of Jacob, heir to God’s promise to the patriarchs,
Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. But did you
know that Scripture also says an

✡
individual could be “cut off from”
Israel?
Today, the nation of Israel—the Jews living
in the land occupied by biblical Israel—
claim to be Israel, heirs to the promises
God gave to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.
But are they really?
The
Elijah
Project

What if all Israel was “cut off?”

John the Baptist warned it could happen. (Matt. 3:10)
The Apostle Paul said it did happen. (Rom. 11:11–24)

Here for the first time ever, in simple, easy-to-read English, one book finally explains
this intricate message of Scripture hidden for so long in the Hebrew idiom. Read and
discover for yourself how Not All Israel Is Israel.

To Order, use the Order Form