A great deal has happened since I last wrote in the blog. But the most traumatic was the death of my brother, John who died of cancer on the 25th of May 2010.

So it might be for John that I'm writing this and then again I might just think it's for John. How would I know?

So what am I writing about today?

I'm writing about the following:

a. Why did God create a people for himself? What was the purpose?

b. Prophesying a finished product.

Gen 3:14,15

14 So the LORD God said to the serpent, "Because you have done this, "Cursed are you above all the livestock and all the wild animals! You will crawl on your belly and you will eat dust all the days of your life."

15 "And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring ^{a]" style="font-size: 0.75em; line-height: 0.5em; ">}and hers; he will crush ^{b]" style="font-size: 0.75em; line-height: 0.5em; ">}your head, and you will strike his heel."

Here's the reason that I think this is a messianic passage and what it means:

I think first of all that God is talking to a real serpent. Why? because he is going to crawl on his belly all the rest of his days. I don't know any passage of scripture that tells me that Satan crawled on his belly and ate dust all his life. So he must have been talking to the snake. I think God's focus changes now onto the one who caused all this to happen, Satan, because He says I will put enmity between you and the woman. Note here that he doesn't say " i will put enmity between you and women." He also doesn't use a phrase which I would have used "I will put enmity between your species and mankind or the human race." No he says "I will put enmity between you (The devil or Satan) and the woman."

Which woman was this? It was Eve. So this womans offspring and Satan's offspring were to be at war with each other and their offspring were going to be at war also. But, you might interject here and say but Eve was the mother of all. You might say, she was the first woman so it stands to reason that her off spring would be at war with Satan. That's a good point but it doesn't make sense.

Read again verse

¹⁵ And I will put enmity

between you and the woman,
and between your offspring ^{a]" style="font-size: 0.75em; line-height: 0.5em; ">}and hers;
he will crush ^{b]" style="font-size: 0.75em; line-height: 0.5em; ">}your head,
and you will strike his heel."

Surely the 4th line should read. The women will crush your off springs head

and you will strike her heel?

I'm not going to get into the offspring of Satan because it would take too long to explain but suffice it to say that it does mention the offspring of Satan. Or the decedents of Satan.

I believe the latter part of this passage is referring to two particular individuals one being Mary and the other being Jesus.

Read Revelation 12:3-9

³Then another sign appeared in heaven: an enormous red dragon with seven heads and ten horns and seven crowns on his heads.⁴His tail swept a third of the stars out of the sky and flung them to the earth. The dragon stood in front of the woman who was about to give birth, so that he might devour her child the moment it was born. ⁵She gave birth to a son, a male child, who will rule all the nations with an iron scepter. And her child was snatched up to God and to his throne. ⁶The woman fled into the desert to a place prepared for her by God, where she might be taken care of for 1,260 days.

⁷And there was war in heaven. Michael and his angels fought against the dragon, and the dragon and his angels fought back.⁸But he was not strong enough, and they lost their place in heaven. ⁹The great dragon was hurled down—that ancient serpent called the devil, or Satan, who leads the whole world astray. He was hurled to the earth, and his angels with him.

I have read some of the best commentaries on this passage and they say it refers to the church. that the child who is born is the Church. But how do they make the child represent the Church? I don't know. It seems quite clear to me that the woman is Mary and the child is Jesus. She gave birth to a son, a male child, who will rule all the nations with an iron scepter. Of course if you believe that the book of Revelation is still to be fulfilled then you will have a problem with that passage but if you believe as I do that the book of Revelation was written before the destruction of Jerusalem and was written about the period prior to and up to the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 then it isn't a problem.

So Satan was going to meet his match somewhere in the future and his adversary was going to be a male.

Moving on.

God had some kind of plan in his head. He had to to fix this problem of sin in the lives of these people. How to do it Mmmm. Oh yes I will, in the future, bring to the earth some one who will deliver them from sin. But, he thinks, it can't be just anyone, it must be some one who can show these beings that I have created what I expect from them. Oh wait he thinks to himself, they all ready know what I expect and they couldn't live up to my expectations.

I know I'll come down to the earth when the time is right and I will personally deliver them from this bind that they have got themselves into.

So God chooses a group of people to be "His" people a people through whom the messiah would be delivered, ready to come to earth, as a human being and deliver them from their sin.

Well to make a long story even longer the people just stuff it up all the time they can't keep their hands off of the treasures around them. They can't even do the simplest things without getting something wrong and what's worse is they think that they are special people. They have become arrogant and think that God owes them for all the things they have done for him.

Then about BC400 Malachi is out shopping and he gets a message on his mobile

Malachi 4:1-5

"Surely the day is coming; it will burn like a furnace. All the arrogant and every evildoer will be stubble, and that day that is coming will set them on fire," says the LORD Almighty. "Not a root or a branch will be left to them. ² But for you who revere my name, the sun of righteousness will rise with healing in its wings. And you will go out and leap like calves released from the stall. ³ Then you will trample down the wicked; they will be ashes under the soles of your feet on the day when I do these things," says the LORD Almighty.

⁴ "Remember the law of my servant Moses, the decrees and laws I gave him at Horeb for all Israel.

⁵ "See, I will send you the prophet Elijah before that great and dreadful day of the LORD comes. ⁶ He will turn the hearts of the fathers to their children, and the hearts of the children to their fathers; or else I will come and strike the land with a curse."

Matt 11:13 -15

John was Elijah. Jesus said John the baptizer is Elijah. Don't take my word for it. Read it.

¹³For all the Prophets and the Law prophesied until John. ¹⁴And if you are willing to accept it, he is the Elijah who was to come. ¹⁵He who has ears, let him hear.

Now while you were reading that passage did you happen to notice this bit: For all the Prophets and the Law prophesied until John. All, All, All the Prophets and the law. Let me just rewrite that. All, All, All the Prophets and the law. prophesied UNTIL John. I don't know how to make it any clearer. After John there were no more prophets.

And one more thing in Luke 21:22 Jesus says:

²²For this is the time of punishment in fulfillment of all that has been written.

Did you read that bit in there that said " in fulfillment of all that has been written."

Jerusalem (destroyed and never rebuilt) in AD70 was the fulfillment of all that was written. There was and never will be any prophesy fulfilled after AD 70

Matt 11:10 - 17

'I will send my messenger ahead of you,
who will prepare your way before you.'^{c]" style="font-size: 0.75em; line-height: 0.5em; ">} ¹¹I tell you the truth: Among those born of women there has not risen anyone greater than John the Baptist; yet he who is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he. ¹²From the days of John the Baptist until now, the kingdom of heaven has been forcefully advancing, and forceful men lay hold of it. ¹³For all the Prophets and the Law prophesied until John. ¹⁴And if you are willing to accept it, he is the Elijah who was to come. ¹⁵He who has ears, let him hear.

¹⁶"To what can I compare this generation? They are like children sitting in the marketplaces and calling out to others:
¹⁷" 'We played the flute for you,
and you did not dance;
we sang a dirge
and you did not mourn

I can't write it any clearer

God said in Malachi to the chosen people get your sinning over with because I'm coming. This is your last chance the Messiah is coming in judgement on you or he's coming to reward you.

Luke writes ²²For this is the time of punishment in fulfillment of all that has been written.

The Dragon, Serpent of old the Devil and Satan of the Revelation

The Dragon , the serpent of old, the Devil and Satan

Why is there so much violence in heaven?

Why does the God that Christendom believes in allow the saved to be attacked so much?

Those questions may sound like I don’t believe in God. Well what I don’t believe in is the God that Christianity puts forward as the God that I must believe in to be saved. Let me try to explain why.

Please read the following passages:

Revelation 12:3 -17. 13:4-7: 17:14. 19:11-19

I’m assuming that you have read them.

The majority of Christians that I have known believe that Revelation is dealing with events in the future. So, all of the events that we read in Revelation have yet to happen. I know that some believe that chapters 1- 3 are dealing with the days that the Christians were living in back in the latter days of the 1^st century but that they also had prophetic applications for today.

I am also aware, incredulously, that some Christians have never read the book of Revelation. And some have read it once and didn’t understand it so they never went back to it.

Let’s now look at

Revelation 12:3 -17

Dragon only appears in the NT and then only in Revelation, Vine’s dictionary of Bible words says that the word means a “Mythical Monster so called because of its keen sight” verse 9 says that this dragon was called “That ancient serpent called the devil, or Satan,…”

Who was the serpent of old or the ancient serpent? Most people and that, at one time included myself, will take you to Genesis 3:1 and point out that:

1 The serpent was the devil or the serpent of old or Satan because:

a. It could talk.

b. That it was disobedient to God

c. That it had arms and legs and walked.

And I used to be a follower of that line of thinking until I read it again. This is what I came up with:

1 The serpent was an ordinary serpent because:

a. Genesis 3:1 says that it was a wild animal

b. Nowhere in the OT are we told that before the fall animals couldn’t talk. After all didn’t God parade all the animals before Adam to find a partner for him.

c. Before it was cursed by God. It may have had another form of mobility at least it may have walked on two or four legs we don’t know. What we do know is it didn’t crawl on it’s belly.

d. After the curse it would act like the type of animal that we know as a snake or a serpent crawling in the dust.

Where do we read in the Bible that Satan or the Devil crawled in the dust? I don’t believe that the serpent of old refers to the serpent of Genesis 3. What do I think Revelation 12:9 refers to then? I don’t know yet but I do believe that it doesn’t refer to Genesis 3:

Just as a side I'd like to look at the book of Job

Some say that the book of Job predates Genesis and when you read it you might see why. But my belief is that Job was around when Abraham was around.

But it doesn’t matter because Job came after Adam and therefore it was after Satan or the serpent had been cursed

In the book of job we read where the angels are gathered together God says to Satan, who by the way is still walking around heaven freely and this is after Genesis 3 when the serpent or Satan is supposedly in God's bad books, Have you considered my servant Job? God asks Satan. Job was a faithful believer he had been richly rewarded by God for his faithful service. Satan points out to God that he is possibly only a good servant because He, God, gives him riches and everything and so Satan says if you took that away from him then he wouldn’t be the faithful servant that you, God, thinks he is. Satan has supposedly been cursed but here he is wondering around heaven like he's one of the angels which if you read Job ch 1 that is what Satan is, an angel. Now this seems strange to me that he is cursed to crawl on his belly and yet he is walking around heaven and the earth.

Now God gives permission for Satan to do his worst on job but he tells him that he can’t kill him. But eventually Job loses everything he has but he still won’t blame God, but he does ask for an explanation for all that’s happened to him. Now I have a problem with this contest. Two powerful beings one is the creator of the whole universe and the other a powerful Angel able to command armies (see Job) and is able to travel between heaven and earth, set out, one of them to bring this mere mortal to his knees and the other allowing it to happen and, it seems to me, just to prove a point.

Does it sound like the Gods we read about in the Greek legends where the Gods are jealous of each other and so they destroy a mere mortal just to satisfy their egos? The book ofJob comes awful close to it

Next week I will look at the Dragon of Revelation.

Dragon found in Revelation 12:3 "Then another sign appeared in heaven: an enormous red dragon with seven heads and ten horns and seven crowns on his heads."

We need to listen to what the Pollies are not saying

Why do we let the Pollies get away with their double talk? We all know they do it. We need to listen to the words they use and then we need to listen to what they are not saying.

We need to tell them, let your Yes be Yes and your No be No. They are very good at spin doctoring. That's the new catch phrase for "Don't let the dumb voter know what we really mean"

Have you noticed how quiet our government has gone on the issue of water in our rivers?

In the meantime we still haven't received our 175 Gigaliters of water which Mr Mike Rann said he had negotiated about 3 months ago this was after we had been told a week prior to this that another pollie had secured us 175 Gigaliters of water to fill the lower lakes. I add that up and I get 350 Gigaliters. Now we are told that they are negotiating to get some of the flood water from NSW and Qld. What I want to know is WHEN DO WE GET THE 350 Gig that you promised us? And does anyone remember the $10 million that was given to John Howard to do something with the rivers just before he lost office?

In his "Ramsay News" which I get once every 4 years. And there isn't a lot in it for 4 years work.

On page two of four in the 5th paragraph in bold letters Mr Rann states.

"THE STATE GOVERNMENT IS DELIVERING 700 MORE POLICE".

Now that line categorically states that Mr Rann's government is delivering 700 more police. Now this sounds good doesn't it? 700 more police on the beat. But if you read a little further on you will see that Mr Rann didn't lie he just messed around with the words a little.

In the 7th paragraph on the same page you will read:

"Since 2002, we've recruited an extra 600 police officers with more on the way. By mid 2010 we will employ an additional 100 Police officers"

So Mr Rann when you say that your Government is delivering "700 more Police" you don't mean 700 more you mean 100 more

You see when you say the word "More" in the setence it means "in addition to". Now what you did Mr Rann is you stated that you are going to supply us with 700 MORE police. If you had dropped the "more" in that sentence and said "The state government is delivering 700 police. And then "clarified" by saying since 2002 etc.. It's still misleading but it's a little closer to the truth.

I would also like to know how many of those 700 police were used to fill the gaps left by those who no longer work for the police force. From 2002 till 2010 how many police officers left the force or were moved up through the ranks. Our 600 police might not look so good.

In 2007 the Rann Government posted this:

A new police station has been officially opened at Golden Grove in Adelaide.

More than 60 officers will be based there.

The police station will also serve areas including Para Hills, Ingle Farm and Mawson Lakes.

Premier Mike Rann says the complex will help meet changing community needs.

"Golden Grove is a rapidly-developing area. Just a massive change in population in the last 15 years," he said.

"We thought it was very appropriate to locate the new police station here."

But Mr Rann, you closed the Police Station at Para Hills, Which was already serving Para Hills, Ingle Farm and Mawson Lakes.

Why didn't you build another one in Golden Grove and leave the one at Para Hills?

The Last Days

Isaiah 2:2

In the last days the mountain of the LORD's temple will be established as chief among the mountains; it will be raised above the hills, and all nations will stream to it.
My good friend Ernest James Smith let me borrow a DVD the other day so that I could listen to a couple of lectures on the 70AD theory. I won’t mention who it was because I don’t think the lecturer did really well. He started out with a strong positive voice but ended up mumbling his way through what could have been a really great lesson, had he stuck to his original instructions to his students that it’s important to know who is speaking to whom in the scriptures. This person mentioned the last days. What he said about them is not important. But when he spoke about the last days he said we were in the last days. No explanation was given as to how he arrived at this important conclusion.
So I asked myself “When did the Last Days start and if they ended, when did they end and if they didn’t end how do they affect us today? I also wanted to know. “The last days of what?” In other words if we are or were in the last days they had to be “The last days of something.” Following you will find some scriptures where “The last days” appear.
Isaiah 2:2
In the last days the mountain of the LORD's temple will be established
1. Hosea 3:5 They will come trembling to the LORD and to his blessings in the last days.
Hosea 3:4-5 (in Context) Hosea 3 (Whole Chapter)
2. Micah 4:1
[The Mountain of the LORD ] In the last days the mountain of the LORD's temple will be established Micah 4:1-3 (in Context) Micah 4 (Whole Chapter)
3. Acts 2:17
"In the last days, God says, I will pour out my Spirit on all people.
4. 2Timothy 3:1
[Godlessness in the Last Days ] But mark this: There will be terrible times in the last days.
2 Timothy 3:1-3 (in Context) 2 Timothy 3 (Whole Chapter)
5. James 5:3
Your gold and silver are corroded. Their corrosion will testify against you and eat your flesh like fire. You have hoarded wealth in the last days.
James 5:2-4 (in Context) James 5 (Whole Chapter)
6. 2 Peter 3:3
First of all, you must understand that in the last days scoffers will come, scoffing and following their own evil desires.
2 Peter 3:2-4 (in Context) 2 Peter 3 (Whole Chapter)

The OT passages are quite obviously messianic prophecies and I have already dealt with that in a previous blog where I make the statement that Jesus came to fulfill the law and the prophets.

So if the OT prophecies were already fulfilled then they were already in “the last days.”
There is something else that I feel is overlooked when reading the scriptures “what is the passage saying?”

Acts 2:17 " In the last days, God says, I will pour out my Spirit on all people.” What is this scripture saying about the last days? It’s saying “In the last days.” Not at the start of the last days. The last days have already started because God says “in the last days.”
So the people living around the time that Jesus came to fulfill the prophets were living in the last days. But how do we know when they started.
To understand this we need to know "the last days of what?"
It isn’t hard to work it out. If you open your bible to the last book of the OT Malachi and turn to chapter 4

Malachi 4 is the last thing that God, through his prophets, says to the Israelites. For 400 years God is silent.

He doesn’t use the phrase “The Last Days” but God talks to them about the great and terrible day of the Lord.
Verse 1. “The day is coming” and “the day which is coming”
Verse 3. “On the day that I do this.”
Verse 5. “Before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the lord”
Now I’ll grant you this that this doesn't speak of the Last days but it sounds like a countdown to me.

So I believe that the last days started when God stopped communicating with the Israelites

Luke 21:22 “For these are the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled…”

Now look at that passage. Doesn’t it say that that these are the DAYS of vengeance?” And doesn’t it also say “all things which are written may be fulfilled?” So if everything which is written was going to be fulfilled. Don't you think that they would be the last days?

More importantly God says that “These are the days of vengeance.” God is coming to make the Israelites pay.
Yes as bad as that sounds, the time is up for the Israelites.
God warned them in Malachi and in Daniel 9:24 "For your people and for your holy city, to finish the transgression, to make an end for sins etc..."
I believe God is telling the people in Malachi that it's time to end their sinful ways. Why? Because he's had enough of their sinful dis respective ways.

The destruction of Jerusalem was the ultimate end.
And I believe that the destruction of Jerusalem was the end of "the last days"

But what about the "Last Days" that our preacher, minister, priest etc.. tell us we are living in?

Well all I am going to say about that is that sometimes I'm right.
Next time
Terry

When will our Premier keep his promise of water?

You know it's a funny thing politics, it makes one feel all powerful alongside the feeling of impending doom.

So as soon as a party is elected, instead of running the state, they plan for the next election so that they have a better chance of holding on to power.

Now, it's my naive opinion that if the Pollies did what they said they were going to do then we the public, the voters would vote them back in again. It makes sense. The Pollie says "We will, when we are elected, feed the hungry and abolish all child poverty and create full employment. Blah, blah, blah..." Now just suppose that by some sort of incredible and yet unbelievable miracle, we believed this Pollie and when he takes up the government role he takes the bull by the horns and within the second year of being in office the government accomplishes it's goal of having full employment, no child is living in poverty and the soup kitchen lines are no longer used.

Would you vote for them at the end of their term to re-govern us? I would and I wouldn't care if they were Lib. Lab, Greens, Democrats or National party. They would get my vote because they did what they said they were going to do

So why do Pollies believe that we the public, the voters are so stupid that they will promise anything to get into power?

Here's a question. Why can't Pollies answer a question with a yes or a no? They have been pulled up by radio and TV announcers on numerous occasions and they still arrogantly refuse t answer with a yes or a no. Why? because they believe that's what we want. Isn't it about time we put them in their place? Correct me if I'm wrong but don't they work for us?

It's my opinion that Pollies lie because they think that they need to. It's their belief that we expect them to lie or to promise us things that they know are unattainable.

They also believe that we will accept those lies. Why do they believe that will accept their lies?

Because, dear reader, that's just what we do. We set out to the polling booth believing nothing that the pollies have promised us.

Our mind set is that Polititions are going to lie to us. Now that is a very sorry state to be in.

If we don't expect our Polititions to tell us the truth or if we don't believe the spiel they are spinning us, why don't we take them to task over it. After all they are in our employ not the other way round. Polititions work for us. And when they lie about projects real or imaginary they are telling us that they have no respect for us.

You may or may not be familiar with the problem we are having with the river Murray.

Well let me fill you in with what I think about this situation:

a. While John Howard was Prime Minister does anyone remember the 10 million dollars he was given to solve the Murray problem. Where is the $10 million? If it's spent where is the water that he promised. It never arrived.

b. Just recently it was recorded in the Sunday Mail that our Premier Mike Rann had just negotiated with the water holders up river for them to release 175 Gl of water down the river. Then last week we hear one of the water protection minsters has negotiated a sweet deal with the Water Retainers in NSW and in Vic and that sweet deal is that 175 Gl of water will be sent down the river and into the lower lakes. That's a guaranteed 175 Gl into the lower lakes.

Now, Premier Rann says that he's negotiated a set deal and the Water Protection Minister has negotiated a sweet deal then we should be getting 175 gl + 175 gl + the excess water which the minister said was to guarantee the 175 gl that is to flow into the lower lakes I calculate that to be 350+gl of water coming down the Murray.

Well I say where is the water? They say it takes months for the water to flow through the Murray Darling basin. but does anyone remember how long ago the floods came to Southern Queensland and NSW? Well it must be at least 6 months. So where is the water?

Who is holding all that flood water?

While our Pollies play politics with our lives someone up river is hoarding water and our state government don't really care about the water in the Murray. They are so short sighted and because it doesn't concern them. That's right it doesn't concern the Pollies because when they retire after only working 9 years in government they will retire with a hefty pension and a superannuation that will see them set up for life and able to buy the water that will not be flowing down the river but will have to be bought from an overseas profiteer for exorbitant prices that you and I on a pension won't be able to afford. That's right the desalination plant or rather one of the many will be financed by overseas investors.

Anyway back to the water from the Murray.

The Murray is in very poor condition. The people who live and make a living on the Murray know what's happening but are they heard? The pollies come down in their droves when there is a photo opportunity (take note of how many times you see Mike Rann near the river if there's

a camera nearby) and they do the lie bit and tell us what they think we want to hear then they leave and, believe me they don't give the river another thought.

Our pollies think more about a bike race than they do about being responsible government. They think more about getting their pictures in the press than they do about creating a state that we are not selling to overseas business.

I believe that we have more clout with the government that we have ever had before. We can clog heir email in boxes with emails about our concerns. And it doesn't take long for a reply either. I know I've done it.

The future of Prophecy

Welcome back to the blog.

Well I'm sitting here in front of this screen trying to decide what to say this week. Well, not really what to say but how to say it.

I was going to recap my last entry but that would be a waste of time because you should read it rather than me re-opinion it. (That's not a real word i just made it up)

Malachi Is the last book in the OT and in it we read how God is fed up with the priests for the sloppy way they treat God. 2:1ff

Why don't you take a minute or two and read the whole of Malachi it's only 4 chapters long and only has 3 pages. OK I'll wait for you.

Malachi was written about 400BC and if you have read it you probably got the idea that it is God's final message to Israel. He's telling them to cleanup their act or else. Chapter 4:6 contains the or else. verse 6 ...or else I will come and strike the land with a curse.

1. Or else

2. I will come

There is no third option. God says mend your ways or I will come.

But it would seem that God wanted to play fair. It seems that he wanted to warn them and warn them and warn them. He was going to give them every chance to change their ways. Remember that God had been doing this since he brought the nation into being. So he says in Malachi 4:5 "See I will send you the Prophet Elijah before that great and dreadful day of the Lord comes." then he tells them "He (Elijah) will turn the hearts..." etc.

But isn't Elijah with God 2 Kings 2:11,12. Yes but not dead. The OT records show Elijah as having been taken up to God but it says nowhere that he died.

I want you to note that in Malachi God is angry at the priests and if you read through the NT Jesus doesn't call the common people vipers and all those other things. Jesus is angry with the spiritual leaders. Who are the ones who oppose Jesus' teaching and healing? Not the common people but the leaders and teachers and priests.

In the last part of Malachi ch 4; God says "I will send you the prophet Elijah before that great and dreadful day of the Lord comes"

Now if Elijah didn't come then we are still waiting for that day aren't we. Well Israel is anyway. I say Elijah did come. Matt 17:10-13 and it's clear in verse 12 where Jesus says "But I tell you Elijah has already come..." then the disciples understood that Jesus was talking about John the Baptizer. But maybe you need more proof. Matt 11:13-15 says that if you accept it he is the Elijah who was to come. Who was this person? John the baptizer..

This passage is also proof that the Law and the Prophets have been fulfilled. Matt 11:13 says clearly "For all the prophets and the Law prophesied until John.

Are you one of the Christians who still believe that Jesus is still coming ie. in his second coming?

Why is Jesus coming back a second time?

Just one more thing:

Luke 21:22 Jesus is speaking to his disciples when he says in verse 20 " When you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies.

It didn't read "when those in the future...

He said When you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies you will know that its desolation is near. Then verse 22 says clearly "For this is the time of punishment in fulfillment of all that has been written"

So where does that leave us now?

Do you still say that prophecy isn't fulfilled?

Next time I'm going to write about the last days. Just how long were the last days

Did Jesus come only to the Jews

Some more on why I think that Jesus came in AD70

Jesus is quite clear when He tells his disciples in Matt 5:17 - 20 that he didn't come to abolish the law and the prophets. No, he says I have come to fulfill the law and the prophets.

A little explanation for those who don't know. (those who do know can put your feet up for a minute or two.)

The Old Testament was never written for the Gentiles (People who were not Jews. People like you and me) Therefore it was written for the Jews. We were never commanded to follow the Law. The Law was given to Jews by God through Moses. This is the Law that Jesus came to fulfill. The one we know as containing the 10 commandments. It wasn't only the 10 commandments that were contained in th law. There were laws about how sacrifices, laws about how to treat non Jews in your home There were laws on almost everything but none of them were written for us, the gentiles. Now what some people forget is that the New Testament isn't a part of the Old Testament. One person tried to tell me that it was an extension of the Old Testament. Well it isn't an extension of the Old Testament although some of it's writings such as Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were written concerning the time of the OT but they were not written in the time of the OT they were probably written sometime after but before the fall of Jerusalem in AD70.

Confused yet?

I hope I've made it clear that the OT laws were written for the Jews and only for the Jews. Now Jesus mentions the Law and the Prophets.

So what were the prophets that Jesus says he came to fulfill.

I don't have the space here or the time to go into all the prophets but I' try to explain them as well and as unconfusing (if there is such a word) as possible

The Prophets were men and women sent by God to warn the Jews of impending calamities, or Judgments that were coming on them. God also used Prophets to correct peoples behaviours. In other words they were God's messengers to the Jews. Not to the Gentiles (You and I) Daniel was a prophet if you get the chance to read Daniel it's a very interesting book

Jesus said that he had come to fulfill the law and the prophets.

So what is the difference between abolishing the law and the prophets and

fulfilling the law and the prophets?

What would Jesus do to abolish the law and the prophets? Well I really don't know because he didn't abolish them. He could have passed a law stating that the law was now abolished and so too the prophets. You see I don't know how he would do it because he didn't do it. He said I haven't come to abolish the law but to fulfill it so too the prophets.

Now what do you do to fulfill the law and the prophets?

What does fulfill mean? My Funk and Wagnalls says that to fulfill means to bring about the accomplishment of something. With out making you think that I know more than I do the Greek word used in this particular passage means quite simply to "fill up" or to "make full" that's all it means.

So, Jesus was going to bring about the accomplishment of the law and the prophets.

Jesus also says in Matt: 5'18 "I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the law until everything is accomplished".

I have heard it said by those who say that the law is still to be abolished that Matt 5:18 proves that Jesus didn't accomplish all that he had planned to do because Matt 5 says that it wouldn't be accomplished until heaven and earth had passed away.

But is that what it's saying?

It sounds to me like he's emphasizing the importance and the completeness of what he has come to do. He is saying also that it will be completely fulfilled or nothing will be done. He 's saying that he would not take the slightest stroke of a pen and not the smallest letter will be taken away until everything is accomplished.

So Jesus is saying quite clearly here that the law would not change in the smallest way until all of it had been fulfilled. Or as Matt 5 puts it until everything is accomplished.

I've labored that point a bit.

But there is one more scripture that I'd like to look at Matt 15:24 Jesus says here "I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel. (Jews)"

If Jesus had said "I was sent to the lost sheep of Israel" it could have had a different meaning but he say's. "I was sent ONLY to the lost sheep of Israel" And that word "Only' makes it exclusive.

It means he wasn't sent to the Gentiles.

I'll leave it there and take it up again next week

Terry