Art Katz's Eschatology

Brother Art Katz, whose sermons have been a tremendous source of blessing to many across the world, and have also been featured via this web site, espoused a rather "unique" perspective on the last days. His challenging and unconventional point of view that few hold too has no doubt been a source of controversy and confusion. His view point on these things have caused many to either love him or hate him. Sometimes his eschatological perspective has become a matter of discussion in the forums over the years. Many have expressed a desire to study his perspective in more detail, but have lacked the time necessary to work their way through the Scriptures, and wrestle with many of the texts he spoke on or made reference to.

Having been enriched by Art's perspective, and having done much of the homework myself over the years, I have decided to put together a collect of "proof texts" that I see as teaching many of the themes Art spoke on. This list is by no means exhaustive, nor are my comments on the quoted passages very detailed. However, these are some of the passages I believe to be essential in understanding these issues.

Most of my citations come from the Old Testament, not because Art didn't teach considerably on this topic from the New Testament, but simply because those texts he taught on in the New are generally easier to find because of the greater familiarity of many with the New Testament over the Old. I draw heavily from the writings of Isaiah.

Be blessed in the fruits of this labor. Study and show yourself approved :-)

###Key Eschatological Texts###

*Genesis 12:1-3
The Gospel; God’s eschatological purposes announced to Abraham through His covenant.

*Genesis 17:1-8
Promises reaffirmed and expanded.

*Deuteronomy 28-32
The blessings and curses of the Old Covenant announced; Song of Moses used to remind God’s rebellious people of their error.

*Isaiah 2:1-4
Jerusalem will be the center of the universe and source of universal blessing. The law will go forth from Zion.

*Isaiah 4:1-6
The Messianic Branch that will sprout, and the fire baptized remnant that will be purged and saved.

*Isaiah 11
Jesse’s Offspring & the Second Exodus.

*Isaiah 49 (especially 1-13, 22-26)
The Messianic Servant and His eschatological mission: Demonstrate the righteousness of God in the salvation of the Gentiles, and the salvation of the Jews.

*Isaiah 60-66
All of this section should be read together so that the “weight” of it sinks in. It is full of great detail regarding God’s ultimate dealings with Israel and the rest of the world. This is an absolutely crucial section of Scripture to digest and consider.

*Jeremiah 30-31
The time of Jacob’s trouble; God’s chastisement through exile; Restoration and Second Exodus, Grace in the wilderness; New Covenant established to cure Israel of its apostasies.

*Ezekiel 37
The Valley of Dry Bones, a picture of Israel’s eschatological death and resurrection. New Covenant announced.

*Daniel 2
The kingdom of God that is coming will be victorious.

*Daniel 9-11
A timeline of last day events, with many references to the coming anti-Christ.

*Daniel 12
Israel’s last days “distress” that empties them of their human strength and power; Resurrection foretold.

*Zechariah 12-14
God enters into His controversy with the nations by making Jerusalem a cup of reeling the causes all nations to be gathered against it for war. But in this war, God through an act of grace causes the Jews to look upon their crucified Messiah, and find salvation.

*Matthew 24
Christ’s words on the last days, with some commentary on Daniel’s outline of the last days.

*Romans 11-12:1
The Church that provokes Israel unto jealousy so as to be saved, and its relationship to the resurrection of the dead.

*2 Thessalonians 2:1-12
Paul’s “little apocalypse.”

*Revelation 12
The anti-Christ and his attack against Israel and the Church.

*Revelation 20
The millennial reign of Christ and the two resurrections.

*Revelation 21
The new heavens and earth.

What is the thrust of his view point? Like a covenant theology foundation with a pre-mill stance?

I'm not so sure there is an easy way to neatly categorize Art's eschatology into any particular theological school without doing serious injustice to it. He is pre-mil and post-trib. I suppose one could say he has covenant theology views, but one could also say he embraces some dispensational views.

Art believes that God chose to bless this world through the seed of Abraham, chiefly in the person of Jesus Christ, but also through the Jewish nation as a whole. Though the Jews as a whole have never, and are not presently living up to their Divine calling, Art believes that by means of chastisement, the tribulation period, and through the agency of a prophetic Church that has come of age, God will eventually restore His people so that they can fulfill their calling, and embrace the Messiah whom they have corporately rejected up until this point in history.

The purpose of this plan is to ultimately demonstrate the wisdom of God, His righteousness, and to teach us the true nature of grace and salvation, so that His name might ultimately be glorified.

In brief, this is a very rough summary of Art's perspective. He was not alone in it, but he definitely has become it's chief spokesman.

Interesting. Do you know who the main influencers of his life are?

He's pretty well read, so, everybody, lol. But so far as I've traced his theological influences, individuals such Adolph Saphir, David Baron, and George Ladd were major influences I know just off the top of my head.

also Karl Barth.

by Giggles on 2010/1/9 3:57:26 Interesting. Do you know who the main influencers of his life are?

[b]A:[/b] What have been some of the key influences that have helped you to form your worldview? Firstly, people.

[b]Art:[/b] I am hard-pressed to think of any outstanding influence that has come through men. I have been grateful for pastors, ministers, and publishers over the years, but I cannot think of a single formidable personality, someone like an A.W. Tozer; however, I would say the brother from New Zealand in Palmerton North, Ken Wright, is probably one of the singular influences to bring a degree of balance and fatherly warmth to me at a stage when I was yet a bit up in arms and needed to be quieted in a right way. I have always enjoyed my time with him, his counsel with me, and he was a real benevolent influence. I could probably think of others, but it would take some time.

[b]A:[/b] Okay, then, what about literature?

[b]Art:[/b] Watchman Nee, A.W. Tozer, Berkhoff, the Dutch theologian, and, principally now in the most recent years, Karl Barth, have all influenced me with their work. I especially love Barth’s books; he has been a great influence. Then, of course, Paul himself has influenced me through his Epistles. I could think of a number of other authors over the years that have been significant, usually theologians who are not well known. I love Charles Spurgeon, of course; Spurgeon’s Treasury of David, his commentary on the Psalms, has been a great blessing for me. I have a German theologian, Hans Joachim Kraus, who is also the author of a commentary that has been a blessing from yet another perspective, not so much inspirational, but more scholarly. Walter Brueggemann, an American theologian of the Old Testament and the Psalms, has been a significant influence. I am thinking of the German Old Testament scholars and the Hebrew scholars like David Baron and Adolf Saphir. Their commentaries on Israel and the Messianic prophecies are excellent.

[url=http://web.archive.org/web/20060503210955/www.benisrael.org/articles/art_biog_interv.htm]An interview with Alistair Reese, New Zealand, April 2001[/url]

In other places he also mentions T.A.Sparks.

Karl Barth? Are you kidding?

ginnyrose

Ginny,

Barth and Katz may look like apples and oranges, but their hermeneutical method is identical, even if that method led them to some very different conclusions.

There is probably no danger of diverting this thread from Katz to Barth, so let me squeeze this in...

Barth taught that the Old and New Testaments are the record of God's revelation to man, but rejected the doctrine of inerrancy. This forced him to reject the evangelical method of interpretation which dissects verses under a microscope and bases entire teachings on a single verb or preposition, and then hopscotches thru the Bible, stringing verses together like a paper chain.

Katz also takes a more "professional" approach, viewing the Bible as a historical survey of God's progressive revelation. Most Messianic Jews read the scriptures this way.

Karl Barth? Are you kidding?

It should be noted that Katz's fondness for Karl Barth came out of Katz's misunderstanding of Barth's Neo-Orthodox thrust. Katz was definitely not neo-orthodox. He seemed to genuinely misunderstand Barth as being an evangelical theologian. He never seemed to connect the dots with his understanding of Barth. The same can be said of some of the other German theologians he read. I think sometimes he simply allowed the wonderful things that these liberal scholars said to outshine the awful things they said. Katz definitely ate the meat and spit out the bones in regard to them.

And it should be noted that these liberal German scholars are worth studying from time to time, so long as one reads them in the right context, and remove the liberal theology that tends to connect their theology together. I've personally read several of Barth's books, and found them profitable for study and reflection. Indeed, picking out the errors of his books was sometimes a very difficult thing to do, and I can definitely see how Katz considered Barth to be one of us. The same can be said about Walter Bruggerman, who is an outstanding Old Testament scholar par excellence. Even though you will not hear a pure and unadulterated word of God from these men, you still do hear the echo's of God speaking in what they say. One just needs to be very discerning when reading their works.

EDIT: Forgot to pray before posting.

So, how close is theology becoming a philosophy?

Sounds to me to be a very dangerous thing to do - to study a 'liberal' theologian and not expect it to undermine the clear teaching of the Word, or influence you in how you will understand the WORD. Is this not like going to "Olive Garden" to eat with a gift certificate but choosing instead to go through the garbage dumpster instead to find your meal?

ginnyrose

Ginny

Most liberal theology is garbage; Barth wasn't THAT bad. He wasn't Olive Garden either. He was White Castle.

Anyway, Jimmy, can you recommend which sermon or article is the best introduction to Katz's eschatology?

Anyway, Jimmy, can you recommend which sermon or article is the best introduction to Katz's eschatology?

Really, to some degree, you can pick just about any Art Katz sermon available on SI to listen to. His eschatology was the thread that linked almost every one of his sermons together. It's hard to find a sermon, especially anything after 1980, that didn't somehow touch on a topic that spoke about the ultimate plans and purposes of God.

Any sermon about anything "Jewish" or regarding "Israel" will probably do. His series on the Holocaust is good. Ezekiel 37 and the Valley of Dry Bones. Christus Victor. Just about anything from the 2006 Prophetical School series will do. Israel and the Suffering Servant. The Mystery of Israel and the Church. Israel and the Nations. The God of the Nations. Israel in Flight. Endtime Overview. Latent Anti-Semitism. The Coming Holocaust. Praying for the Peace of Jerusalem. etc. etc.

So many could be picked from. Many have asked me for a list from time to time, and I always manage to repeat different sermons, usually depending on what I've most recently listened to (I sometimes go back and listen multiple times to messages I've heard him preach). Really, when in doubt, just randomly pick a sermon from the hundreds he preached. He had a great burden for the great themes of the faith, and usually managed to see them in their eschatological context.

When I say randomly pick one, I'm not just being cute either. I've generally found that though Art sometimes repeated himself, each time he spoke seemed to be a unique "event" where something real and tangible took place each time he spoke.

I wonder if a better word to describe how people integrated themselves into how Art saw things was "Affected." I do not think he was a disciple of any one man at all. As a matter of fact listening to his sermons frustrated me for a while because he is not easy to pin down. Just when I thought I had him boxed he would jump out again...and it would startle me every time.

This only makes sense though in lieu of the things he talked about a lot. He commonly refereed to the idea of the Apostolic function of being Fully Orbed.

*Isaiah 2:1-4

Jerusalem will be the center of the universe and source of universal blessing. The law will go forth from Zion.

Jimmy, what Jerusalem would that be, and what Zion, according to the apostles of the New Covenant?

Heb. 12.22

Jimmy, what Jerusalem would that be, and what Zion, according to the apostles of the New Covenant?

Heb. 12.22

According to the apostle Paul, in Romans 15:8 it is taught that Christ confirmed the promises made to the Fathers. Thus, Isaiah 2 speaks of the Zion the Lord will establish when he rules and reigns from Jerusalem here on earth in the age to come. It's a city whose architect and builder is God (Hebrews 11:10), to which Abraham looked for, to which we will partake of in the age to come when we are resurrected from the grave. Heaven is not where God is taking us to be, but we will be bodily resurrected to rule and reign here with Christ, not only through the millennium, but through all eternity.

According to the apostle Paul, in Romans 15:8 it is taught that Christ confirmed the promises made to the Fathers. Thus, Isaiah 2 speaks of the Zion the Lord will establish when he rules and reigns from Jerusalem here on earth in the age to come. It's a city whose architect and builder is God (Hebrews 11:10), to which Abraham looked for, to which we will partake of in the age to come when we are resurrected from the grave. Heaven is not where God is taking us to be, but we will be bodily resurrected to rule and reign here with Christ, not only through the millennium, but through all eternity.

I understand this point of view, Jimmy, and I think it is a sad one, a very short-sighted one. If this is what Art Katz taught, how does this differ from Scofield's dispensationalism? I would have thought Katz had better eyesight than that.

No, the City Abraham looked for is not one made of wood and stone: it's that heavenly Zion that comes down from God out of Heaven, the Bride of the Lamb (Rev. 21.2). And we know the Bride of the Lamb is the church of Jesus Christ comprised of both Jew and Gentile (for in Christ there is no difference).

And Isaiah Ch. 2... about the LORD's house being established in the top of the mountains, and being exalted above the hills, and the Law going forth, not from Mount Sinai now, but from Mount Zion, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem... this began to happen-- notice I say BEGAN: there is much yet to be fulfilled-- on the day of Pentecost when the Lord Jesus Christ, seated on the throne of David in the heavenly Zion at the right hand of His Father, sent the Spirit to His waiting disciples: "the law of the Spirit of Life in Christ Jesus."

...Yes, Jesus Christ confirmed the promises God gave the fathers. But the sons of the fathers weren't too happy with the way He did that. The way He did it was not all that well received by most of them.

...How we need grace to see through the eyes of the Spirit of God!

I understand this point of view, Jimmy, and I think it is a sad one, a very short-sighted one. If this is what Art Katz taught, how does this differ from Scofield's dispensationalism? I would have thought Katz had better eyesight than that.

Great question. There are elements of dispensational thought found it Art's teachings, which initially turned me off from him. However, I discovered that he cannot be pegged down as a dispensationalist in any proper understanding of the term. Even individuals like Walter Kaiser, Jr, a prominent Old Testament scholar recognizes these things. Just because individuals such as Katz (or myself), recognize the eventual literal fulfillment of these promises doesn't mean one is a dispensationalist.

For a dispensationalist will eventually assert that there are two peoples of God with two different sets of promises and purposes. They will assert a false dichotomy between a heavenly people with heavenly promises, and an earthly people with earthly promises. They assert a violent dichotomy between the Church and Israel. This dichotomy is a false one. We maintain there is one people of God, and one plan and purpose of God for all people. That plan and purpose, however, has always been wrapped up in God's elect nation, who have been called as a people to serve as the medium of the blessings of God to this world through the gospel. His earthly people with their earthly promises are called to be a heavenly people that dispense heavenly promises. The two were never designed by God to be separated from one another.

That is why God entered into covenant with Abraham, that through his seed living in the land God promised, that these things might ultimately come to pass. God's ultimate purposes with Christ and the gospel, and the heavenly blessings He ultimately wishes to dispense to all of humanity cannot be fully dispensed in the abundance He wishes to bestow them in this present evil age. Indeed, it cannot happen until Jerusalem becomes the praise of the earth! In part, we have experienced a down payment of the good things to come in the here and now through the gospel, by means of the Holy Spirit. But we look forward to another age in which we will be raised in new bodies, to experience the fullness of that blessing in our glorified state. And in that age, Jerusalem will be the capitol of the world, from which our King reigns on the throne of David. It will indeed be a heavenly city, a city the patriarchs looked forward to. But it will not be a city that dwells in the upper stratospheres of heaven as it presently does. Rather, it will a city that exits here on earth, with all the blessings that accompany it. It will be a city whose architect and builder is God.

We maintain there is one people of God, and one plan and purpose of God for all people. That plan and purpose, however, has always been wrapped up in God's elect nation

What nation would that be? It is the one holy nation comprised of both Jew and Gentile, according to the apostle Peter (1 Pt. 2.9).

His earthly people with their earthly promises are called to be a heavenly people that dispense heavenly promises. The two were never designed by God to be separated from one another.

That's right (Eph. 2.15). In the Cross, our Lord Jesus Christ broke down the wall of partition between Jew and Gentile, creating in Himself of the two ONE NEW MAN, so that now in Christ there is "no difference" between Jew and Gentile (Rom. 3.22, Rom. 10.12, Acts 15.9). ...So that both Gentiles and Jews are partakers together of the SAME promises (Eph. 3.6).

That being so, do I, a Gentile, have some little plot of land somewhere over there in Israel?

Or does this all, in its FULFILLMENT, pertain to another "land," a heavenly? (Heb. 11.16)

And this of course is speaking of something far more than just "dying and going to Heaven." It is our spiritual heritage in Christ, and we are to seek to enter it NOW.

That is why God entered into covenant with Abraham, that through his seed living in the land God promised

Again, what land? Heb. 11.16

And what Seed would that be (according to the apostle Paul, that is)? (Gal. 3.16, Gal. 3.29).

Rather, it will a city that exits here on earth, with all the blessings that accompany it. It will be a city whose architect and builder is God.

Yes, it will indeed be here on the earth. But just as Babylon is a spiritual city right here on the earth (and all over the earth) so is Jerusalem a spiritual city, a heavenly city right here in the earth that shall ultimately be over all the earth. (So that I can be dwelling in Jerusalem right where I live, wherever I live!) It's a spiritual City, not that old Jerusalem over there in Israel. In fact even the prophets of old (with pretty good eyesight, I would say) at times called the earthly Jeruslaem "the daughter of Zion" (Isa. 37.22). The mother is the true Jerusalem, the heavenly Jerusalem, which is above, "the mother of us all" (Gal. 4.26).

Yes, that old city shall be included, but the Jerusalem which is the City of God is not one with foundations and walls of earthly stone. It's made of Spiritual stones (you and me and all believers whether Jew or Gentile) ...stones who are just like the Rock Himself (1 Pt. 2.4,5).

How awesome this all is! :)

Sorry for the delayed response. I'm pretty busy and could only write this response in small chunks on my lunch break at work :-)

Re: ADisciple

What nation would that be? It is the one holy nation comprised of both Jew and Gentile, according to the apostle Peter (1 Pt. 2.9).

Moses was showing the nation of Israel the calling to which the Lord had summoned it to in its election, to make them distinct from all other nations. Peter cited this text and appropritately applied it to everybody within the Church. Why? Because the Church has replaced Israel in the plans of God? Hardly. The Church is bound up in its identification with national Israel in the plan of God, and cannot be distinguished from it, as is commonly done in dispensational and replacement theologies.

We as Gentiles have been "grafted in among them," (Romans 11:17) that is, the natural branches, the nation of Israel. We as Gentiles who by our unbelief were formerly "excluded from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers to the covenants of promise," (Ephesians 2:12) have now been "brought near" (Ephesians 2:13) by the blood of Christ, and as a result have been made "one new man." (Ephesians 2:15) Is that "one new man" separate and entirely apart from the nation of Israel and it's calling? No! The "one new man" is who the fallen branches of the nation are called into partaking of. We who were formerly "strangers and aliens" have now become "fellow citizens with the saints, and are of God's household," (Ephesians 2:19) and are such because of the mystical union we share with Christ, who is ultimately Israel, the seed of the promise made to Abraham. We have been brought into the household and family of God, through the Spirit of adoption, which has made us sons and daughters of God.

You may still be in doubt with what I say. But have you thought about how it is we as Gentiles are able to be made partakers of the New Covenant? Has God established the New Covenant on an individual basis with all of humanity in Christ? Not according to the Scriptures. According to the prophet Jeremiah, the New Covenant which God has made was made with the nation of Israel. ""Behold, days are coming," declares the LORD, "when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah." (Jeremiah 31:31) And in case one is tempted to spiritualize this prophecy to mean something else, the Lord makes it clear by refering to the new nations, "the house of Israel" (the northern kingdom) and "the house of Judah" (the southern kingdom). The only reason we as Gentiles can partake of the New Covenant is because of the identification we have with the nation of Israel, having been grafted into it. We partake in the "covenants of promise" made with the seed of Abraham through our union with Christ, who is the ultimate seed.

That being so, do I, a Gentile, have some little plot of land somewhere over there in Israel?

Again, what land? Heb. 11.16

If they don't, then God is a liar. But because God is not a man that He should lie, we know that in the age to come they will indeed receive the land God promised to them, and that they looked forward to receiving by faith. They knew it would never come in their life time, thus, they recognized they must receive it in the age to come, and such, they knew it must ultimatley be of a heavenly origin. It will be of a heavenly origin no doubt, but it's heavenly origin does not replace the fact that it will be positioned in the geographical place that God outlined to Abraham (Genesis 13:17)

but I do believe that Jesus Christ is the fufilment of all things Israel. As you said, He is ultimately Israel. Well, I don't think we can have it both ways.

Indeed, Christ is ultimate Israel. Isaiah's "Servant Songs" (Isaiah 40-53) make that abundantly clear. But what we must also understand that part of His Messianic task as the "Servant" of the Lord, "Israel," is to do something that has yet to be worked out in redemptive history. And that is ultimately the everlasting securing of the geographical and heavenly land that was promised to the patriarchs, but also, the national salvation of all of the remnant of Israel at the end of the age. I don't have time to go verse by verse through the following passage, but I would highly commend to you a detailed study of Isaiah 49, which outlines these things wonderfully.

Consider some of the following verses that describe this Messianic task:

49:5 And now says the LORD, who formed Me from the womb to be His Servant, To bring Jacob back to Him, so that Israel might be gathered to Him (For I am honored in the sight of the LORD, And My God is My strength), 6 He says, "It is too small a thing that You should be My Servant To raise up the tribes of Jacob and to restore the preserved ones of Israel; I will also make You a light of the nations So that My salvation may reach to the end of the earth."

49:8 Thus says the LORD, "In a favorable time I have answered You, And in a day of salvation I have helped You; And I will keep You and give You for a covenant of the people, To restore the land, to make {them} inherit the desolate heritages;

And just in case anybody forgot, I would point you to the list of Scriptures I originally posted at the start of this thread. I would encourage you to go carefully through the passages I cited. While not by any means exhaustive, I believe they are crucial passages needed to understand many of the issues brothers such as Art raised.

For in doing so, one can end up developing a theology in which the Church somehow replaces Israel

Hi Jimmy. No, the church does not replace Israel. The church BECOMES the new Israel, which includes an elect remnant of Jews to whom are added elect Gentiles. THIS is the church of Christ: both believing Jews AND believing Gentiles.

It is God's new creation Man. As I quoted earlier, Christ in the Cross broke down the middle wall of partition dividing Jew and Gentile, "for to make (Gk. create) in Himself of twain ONE NEW MAN" (Eph. 2.15).

In the new creation there is no difference between Jew and Gentile any more. "For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth anything, nor uncircumcision, but a NEW CREATURE. And as many as walk by this rule, peace be on them, and mercy, and upon the ISRAEL OF GOD" (Gal. 6.15,16).

Who is the Israel of God, then? Those whether Jew or Gentile who are walking according to a New Creation Law, the law of the Spirit of Life in Christ Jesus.

And so God hath not cast away His people, whom He foreknew (Rom. 11.2). What He did was make a New Covenant with them (as you pointed out) "with the house of Israel and the house of Judah," and then brought the Gentiles in to that New Covenant with them, making them partakers with them of His heritage in Christ Jesus... "that the Gentiles should be FELLOWHEIRS, and of the same body, and partakers of His promise in Christ by the gospel" (Eph. 3.6).

It is a hard thing to believe, I know, and so much teaching still refuses to accept what the apostles clearly taught... that in Christ Jesus there is no longer any difference between Jew and Gentile (Rom. 10.12, Rom. 3.22, Acts 15.9). God has created a NEW MAN.

...God loves the Jews equally as He loves the Gentiles. And so He does not have something less for them than He has for us. He does not have for "the church" a rich heavenly heritage, making us "heirs of God and joint-heirs with Christ" (Rom. 8.17) ...but the Jews just get an acreage in Palestine.

Even the patriarch Abraham saw further than that. You quoted the verses about him being a stranger in the land of promise. But somewhere along the way those early fathers caught a glimpse of a higher vision, and so the apostle said, "But NOW..." (notice that word NOW) "...they desire a better country, that is an heavenly..." (Heb. 11.16). It is that Land of our heritage in Christ Jesus. Both Jews and Gentiles TOGETHER become heirs of... what? Of GOD Himself?

Surely... in the light of that, why would they even want an... acreage?

You may still be in doubt with what I say.

We agree on that one, Jimmy. :) The land is a spiritual land, the City a spiritual City. The scriptural principal given by the apostle Paul is, "Howbeit, that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual" (1 Cor. 15.46). We see in the Old Testament a natural, an earthly presentation of many things. But with the coming in of the Kingdom of God, the law and the prophets pass away (Lk. 16.16). That is... not that they are totally abandoned, completely shredded; rather, they come into their own now, they are fulfilled, swallowed up, in great, great spiritual REALITY.

And just in case anybody forgot, I would point you to the list of Scriptures I originally posted at the start of this thread. I would encourage you to go carefully through the passages I cited. While not by any means exhaustive, I believe they are crucial passages needed to understand many of the issues brothers such as Art raised.

And so, Jimmy, if I am reading your heart aright... I want to be sensitive to your desire on this thread, that you simply want to present Art's eschatology for others to examine. Perhaps you weren't expecting or wanting anyone to question his views? (I guess you've gathered I don't accept that his view is in line with that of the apostles of the New Covenant.)

...I know there is a lot of haziness about these things. I anticipate the Lord will clear it all up in His time! Thanks for the opportunity to share, Jimmy.

Surely... in the light of that, why would they even want an... acreage?

Instead of trying to go point by point in response, I think I'll just cut to the chase: What is this "spiritual city" and "spiritual land" we are to "inherit?" If we are to be physically resurrected, are we not going to live here on earth in the age to come? When Christ said some will rule over 10 cities and other 5, did he not actually mean tangible places with actual geographical locations? Will we not have a physical dwelling place during that age? Will we not rule and reign with Christ for 1,000 years before the new heavens and new earth are established?

If this is indeed the case, then why are you so opposed to the idea of God giving to the Jews in the age to come the land he actually promised to give them? Hebrews 11 teaches very firmly that Abraham actually temporarily sojurned in the land he hoped by faith to receive in the age to come. He knew however, it would only come by means of his resurrection. If it wasn't actually in the geographic location that God had him walk and promised to him, but is instead some sort of intangible mystical spiritual land, how is it that Abraham and the patriarchs are ever have said to sojourn in "the land" of promise?

I'm sorry, but I just don't get what you are getting at. It really doesn't make any sense to me. I'm happy to hear whatever your explination to these things are, but, honestly, I feel your spiritualization and allegorization of these things has made God the giver of empty promises that don't have anything tangible to them.

I just don't get it :)

And so, Jimmy, if I am reading your heart aright... I want to be sensitive to your desire on this thread, that you simply want to present Art's eschatology for others to examine. Perhaps you weren't expecting or wanting anyone to question his views? (I guess you've gathered I don't accept that his view is in line with that of the apostles of the New Covenant.)

...I know there is a lot of haziness about these things. I anticipate the Lord will clear it all up in His time! Thanks for the opportunity to share, Jimmy.

:)

Due to another brother's request via private e-mail, who is trying to wrestle with Art's eschatology, my original intent was simply to post a small collection of Scriptures that I believe are essential to understanding Bible prophecy and Art's point of view, so that others could be good Bereans and understand these things for themselves.

I do happen to ascribe to Art's eschatological system. I used to not to. But after listening to what he had to say on the topic on many times, and having examined thoroughly the Scriptures for myself to see if the things he said were true, I have become convinced. Due to my schedule, it wasn't my original intention to dive into a discussion on the topic. But with that said, it is a topic I am more than happy to discuss, and welcome any debate on these issues.

I believe with all my heart that it is crucial we grasp these issues as a church. For when God finally does wind everything up, these issues will be brought by God to the attention of not only the church, but the entire world. I believe with all my heart that we can expect the eventual destruction of modern day Jerusalem and Israel, and yet again another holocaust that forces the Jews into a massive global flight to the uttermost ends of the earth. Why? Because God ultimately has a plan for the eventual salvation of the natural fallen branches. And without their salvation at the end of the age, there could be no resurrection of the dead.

But that salvation won't come without a great burning and purging. And it won't come without a witness that the church gives to fallen Israel as it flees from the things to come upon her. And all of this is calculated by God in His wisdom to release the ultimate blessings given by the Lord through the gospel in the ages to come, with the Jews resettled into their desolated cities, and living securely in the land God promised to the fathers. Everlasting joy shall be upon their heads, and so shall all of Israel be saved.

What is this "spiritual city" and "spiritual land" we are to "inherit?"

This isn't all that easy to answer in 25 words or less... but the City is the new Jerusalem that comes down from God out of Heaven (Rev. 21.2). It's the Tabernacle of God with men. It's His New Creation order (Rev. 21.1) here upon the earth. His will in Heaven, in all its fulness here upon the earth.

In The Revelation we are told this city's dimensions are 12,000 furlongs wide by 12,000 furlongs long... and it is also 12,000 furlongs high. (That's something like 1,500 miles on a a side, and also 1,500 miles high, according the the NASB. But that misses the significance of the actual number 12,000.)

What this means is... it's interesting to note that the dimensions of the Holy of holies in the old tabernacle were 10 x 10 x 10, and in Solomon's temple were 20 x 20 x 20... and so some have suggested that the City of God is actually the Holy of holies, His own throne room and dwelling place now greatly enlarged. I believe that's right. And I think Jer. 3.17 speaks of the same.

And the Land is actually Christ Himself, our heritage. "Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in the heavenlies in Christ" (Eph. 1.3).

Paul the apostle shows that the exodus of Israel from Egypt and their entrance into their earthly heritage is an "example" for us, "upon whom the ends of the ages are come" (1 Cor. 10.11). Our heritage is not a natural land (Canaan) but a heavenly. (And once again I am not just talking about dying and going to Heaven: I am talking of entering and possessing that heritage NOW while we are still on earth.)

some sort of intangible mystical spiritual land

I feel your spiritualization and allegorization of these things has made God the giver of empty promises that don't have anything tangible to them.

That's the sad thing, Jimmy. Spiritual reality is far from intangible and mystical. It's REAL. It's the true reality, far more real than the ground you and I are walking on.

In fact Paul said in the passage I referred to that the Israelites coming out of Egypt drank of a "spiritual Rock that followed them, and that Rock was Christ" (1 Cor. 10.4).

He is a spiritual Rock. Spiritual. Not mystical, not ethereal, not intangible, but SPIRITUAL. REAL.

Peter also talks of "a spiritual house," and "spiritual sacrifices" (1 Pt. 2.5). Not intangible, but spiritual.
A spiritual house: not made of wood and stone, but of Living Stones, just like that Rock. A spiritual house.

And spiritual sacrifices. Not bulls and goats... but our own bodies (Rom. 12.1), sanctified by Holy Spirit (Rom. 15.16).

...So, spiritual blessings. A spiritual Rock. A spiritual house. Spiritual sacrifices.

A spiritual City, and a spiritual Land.

Not ethereal, intangible, mystical, but REAL.

Jimmy, have you read any of Stephen Sizer on this issue of Zionism?

Do you believe it is God's plan to wipe out the Palestinian Arabs so that Israel can have "its" land back?

To me, this poses a big problem considering all the Christian (who no one can argue are God's elect, being true Israel according to faith) Arabs sharing this land with Christ-hating Israelites.

The view propounded by Art Katz had nothing to do with Zionism, he despised how the Jews treated the Palestinians. Yet he would have explained how Zionism fit into the backslidden state of Israel. Like I said before, you cannot fit Art in ANY category. It would not be through a political Israel that Israel would inherit the land, but through National Jacob being tried through the fires of the cross, they would become true Israel. Do not confuse his eschatology with politics, that would be to completely miss the point. This thread has barely even scratched the surface of his views. I would recommend listening to his speakings a while before even really assuming you understand what he talked about.

Jimmy was trying to give people like me a structural biblical basis from where to Bereanize Art's views coming from the perspective that you already had a grasp on his eschatology. At least I think that was what Jimmy was trying to do, please forgive me brother if I have overstepped you.

I have listened to over 40+ of his prophetic, Israel dealing sermons, and am just barely wrapping my mind around it all. Please listen to them before you jump to conclusions. As it seemed to be one of Art's entire purposes in life to scour away at many of men's traditions as it pertains to these end-time issues.

I am not presuming to know what Art Katz believed, and was not trying to confuse politics with theology, so forgive me if that's what I've done. I was actually trying to draw that very distinction by forcing a clarification of what has been put forth. Our theology is not just mystical thoughts, but has very real consequences in this life. If our theology results in fighting for a Zionist state, then that is incredibly problematic (which is what Sizer spends much time trying to correct).

But it sounds that Katz did a good job of separating all those issues out? Good to know.

It has been a blessing to view this thread and see different perspectives with it remaining so civil for so long :-) Not very common here! Jimmy has done a good job of keeping the focus on clarifying and examining, as opposed to debate over personal viewpoints!

Thank you all.

Yes, Art did a superb job of separating the issues. With the precision of a brain surgeon He explored so many facets of this discussion that it would require reading every written transcript of his sermons to come to a complete understanding of what he believed. I see what you were trying to do now BeYeDoers and appreciate it.

It is fundamentally from the very nature of God displayed through the Cross that all of Art's beliefs were filtered. It is in this hermeneutic that almost every form of eschatology out there fails to recognize, and Art was Supremely jealous over this concept above all others. Where many see the cross as an historical event, Art recognized it for what it was...an eternal display of WHO God is, and how He relates to His creation.

Before listening to Art I had kind of become all but agnostic about the study of end things...I now see why, so many of the views I looked into were neglecting this precious issue of the cross.

(Quote from ADisciple)
Hi Jimmy. No, the church does not replace Israel. The church BECOMES the new Israel, which includes an elect remnant of Jews to whom are added elect Gentiles. THIS is the church of Christ: both believing Jews AND believing Gentiles.

It is God's new creation Man. As I quoted earlier, Christ in the Cross broke down the middle wall of partition dividing Jew and Gentile, "for to make (Gk. create) in Himself of twain ONE NEW MAN" (Eph. 2.15).

In the new creation there is no difference between Jew and Gentile any more. "For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth anything, nor uncircumcision, but a NEW CREATURE. And as many as walk by this rule, peace be on them, and mercy, and upon the ISRAEL OF GOD" (Gal. 6.15,16).

Who is the Israel of God, then? Those whether Jew or Gentile who are walking according to a New Creation Law, the law of the Spirit of Life in Christ Jesus.

And so God hath not cast away His people, whom He foreknew (Rom. 11.2). What He did was make a New Covenant with them (as you pointed out) "with the house of Israel and the house of Judah," and then brought the Gentiles in to that New Covenant with them, making them partakers with them of His heritage in Christ Jesus... "that the Gentiles should be FELLOWHEIRS, and of the same body, and partakers of His promise in Christ by the gospel" (Eph. 3.6).

It is a hard thing to believe, I know, and so much teaching still refuses to accept what the apostles clearly taught... that in Christ Jesus there is no longer any difference between Jew and Gentile (Rom. 10.12, Rom. 3.22, Acts 15.9). God has created a NEW MAN.

...God loves the Jews equally as He loves the Gentiles. And so He does not have something less for them than He has for us. He does not have for "the church" a rich heavenly heritage, making us "heirs of God and joint-heirs with Christ" (Rom. 8.17) ...but the Jews just get an acreage in Palestine.

Even the patriarch Abraham saw further than that. You quoted the verses about him being a stranger in the land of promise. But somewhere along the way those early fathers caught a glimpse of a higher vision, and so the apostle said, "But NOW..." (notice that word NOW) "...they desire a better country, that is an heavenly..." (Heb. 11.16). It is that Land of our heritage in Christ Jesus. Both Jews and Gentiles TOGETHER become heirs of... what? Of GOD Himself?

Surely... in the light of that, why would they even want an... acreage?

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You may still be in doubt with what I say.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

We agree on that one, Jimmy. :) The land is a spiritual land, the City a spiritual City. The scriptural principal given by the apostle Paul is, "Howbeit, that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual" (1 Cor. 15.46). We see in the Old Testament a natural, an earthly presentation of many things. But with the coming in of the Kingdom of God, the law and the prophets pass away (Lk. 16.16). That is... not that they are totally abandoned, completely shredded; rather, they come into their own now, they are fulfilled, swallowed up, in great, great spiritual REALITY.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Amen, ADisciple.

Endtimes becomes a little more easier to understand when you understand more of the New Covenant

Endtimes becomes a little more easier to understand when you understand more of the New Covenant

Yes, that says it well. It's through the "glasses" of the New Covenant that we must view all things now. The Old Testament must be read and understood through the eyes of the New.

Nice to see someone else who shares this understanding!

The Old Testament must be read and understood through the eyes of the New.

Yes, but we can't let this hermeneutic cause us to rewrite the Old. We also have to read the New with the Old as a foundation. The New Testament writers wrote with the OT scriptures and all of its histories, theologies, and words very much in the mind of their readers. This was the context in which these people lived.

God's revelation to us is progressive, which means that more and more is revealed over time, but also that it BUILDS upon itself.

Yes, but we can't let this hermeneutic cause us to rewrite the Old. We also have to read the New with the Old as a foundation. The New Testament writers wrote with the OT scriptures and all of its histories, theologies, and words very much in the mind of their readers. This was the context in which these people lived.

Yes that's right. And if you read the places in the New Testament where the apostles quoted from the Old, you discover the spiritual reality God had in mind in the first place when He inspired the Old.

Did the apostles "rewrite the old"? By no means. But it is somewhat staggering at times, the way they-- with the help of the Holy Spirit-- interpreted it.

Not ethereal, intangible, mystical, but REAL.

Yes... REAL. And those spiritual realities will ultimately be demonstrated in a real way and in a physical tangible way. It'll be demonstrated in it's fullness in the ages to come, chiefly through the restoration of the natural branches, as Jerusalem sits as the capitol of the world with the Lord Jesus sitting as King. We'll see the fullness of those realities, of which Paul emphatically taught we only experience partially in this age, but will experience fully in the age to come. But the fullness of those spiritual realities cannot be unleashed from heaven until God establishes Jerusalem as the praise of the earth, with Jesus ruling and reigning for a thousand years.

Many of you keeping using the word "spiritual." But may I suggest to you that the word the way you use it is entirely empty of meaning unless God does these "spiritual" things in the "natural" realm. That is why in the age to come we are physically raised from the dead, and don't just spend eternity floating around on some cloud somewhere playing our harps with the angels. These things are so spiritual that He establishes Jersualem as the capitol of the world, and reigns from there. These things are so spiritual that He establishes the Jew in the land promised to everywhere Abraham physically walked upon and sojourned in.

The "spiritual" view that I see proposed here doesn't give me anything I can wrap my head around. I still don't understand what it is this "spiritual" state will be like in the age to come. Not to sound rude, but do you even understand what you are proposing? I still am unsure myself of what exactly you are proposing. I just don't get it. There is talk about "real" things. But so far I've not seen anything proposed that is tangible. Indeed, I still can't identify what it is you expect for the next age? I wonder, do you even believe there will be a physical resurrection? And if so, where will those who are raised live? And if they are to live somewhere, then why do you believe God doesn't plan on giving that area in geographical Palestine to Abraham and his kids, just as He swore to do?

My contention is that in the ages to come, if it doesn't demonstrate itself physically, then it isn't really spiritual. As taught in John 1, Jesus is Jacob's ladder. He is the bridge between heaven and earth. He makes it possible to experience the realities of heaven here on earth. He does so in part in this age, and it's fullness in the ages to come.

Jimmy, have you read any of Stephen Sizer on this issue of Zionism?

No, I'm not familiar with him. Neither Art nor I are a fan whatsoever of the carnal Zionism which exists today. God is not interested in establishing this carnal political movement as the praise of the earth. He is intereted in only destroying it and bringing it to death. But in doing so, He plans to breathe resurrection life into the dust of the earth so as to cause that which is created of Him to live.

Endtimes becomes a little more easier to understand when you understand more of the New Covenant

Indeed, and the New Covenant was established with the purposing of saving the Jew and bringing them back again into the land in the age to come.

Not to spam, but earlier I posted the following, and would really encourage everybody in this thread to really re-consider the following:

I don't have time to go verse by verse through the following passage, but I would highly commend to you a detailed study of Isaiah 49, which outlines these things wonderfully.

Consider some of the following verses that describe this Messianic task:

49:5 And now says the LORD, who formed Me from the womb to be His Servant, To bring Jacob back to Him, so that Israel might be gathered to Him (For I am honored in the sight of the LORD, And My God is My strength), 6 He says, "It is too small a thing that You should be My Servant To raise up the tribes of Jacob and to restore the preserved ones of Israel; I will also make You a light of the nations So that My salvation may reach to the end of the earth."

49:8 Thus says the LORD, "In a favorable time I have answered You, And in a day of salvation I have helped You; And I will keep You and give You for a covenant of the people, To restore the land, to make {them} inherit the desolate heritages;

A couple deductions from these verses.

1) In verse 5, Jesus acknowledges part of His Messianic mission and task is to bring unrepentant Israel back to the Lord.

2) In verse 6, Jesus in fulfilling His Messianic task will take the Lord's salvation to the ends of the earth (Gentile mission).

3) In verse 8, Jesus is given as a covenant for the Jews, "to restore the land, to make them inherit the desolate heritages." Thus, part of the New Covenant the Lord made in the very person of Christ is for the purpose of causing the Jew to permanently inherit the land promised to Abraham and His children, the land that was destroyed by the Assyrians and Babylonians.

This is a major Messianic passage that needs to be rightly considered.

BeYeDoers asked:

Jimmy, have you read any of Stephen Sizer on this issue of Zionism?

Do you believe it is God's plan to wipe out the Palestinian Arabs so that Israel can have "its" land back?

To me, this poses a big problem considering all the Christian (who no one can argue are God's elect, being true Israel according to faith) Arabs sharing this land with Christ-hating Israelites.

Areadymind answered:

The view propounded by Art Katz had nothing to do with Zionism, he despised how the Jews treated the Palestinians. Yet he would have explained how Zionism fit into the backslidden state of Israel. Like I said before, you cannot fit Art in ANY category. It would not be through a political Israel that Israel would inherit the land, but through National Jacob being tried through the fires of the cross, they would become true Israel. Do not confuse his eschatology with politics, that would be to completely miss the point. This thread has barely even scratched the surface of his views. I would recommend listening to his speakings a while before even really assuming you understand what he talked about.

I have listened to over 40+ of his prophetic, Israel dealing sermons, and am just barely wrapping my mind around it all. Please listen to them before you jump to conclusions. As it seemed to be one of Art's entire purposes in life to scour away at many of men's traditions as it pertains to these end-time issues.

Very well said brother, you took my words.
It's interesting that many believe that 1948 was year when God fulfilled the prophecy when He will gather finally the Jews into the land, but that's far from the truth, I believed the same once, but not anymore. Reading and listening to Art, and studying some history behind Zionism and the Synagogue of Satan and who all are behind the present day state of Israel, opened my eyes greatly. So many Christians today thinking that when they support the present state Israel, they are in God's favor, and the truth is just the opposite.

Art Katz in one interview said that this present state is made just to be destroyed again.

Here is one sermon where Art is speaking about the present state of Israel - [url=https://www.sermonindex.net/modules/mydownloads/singlefile.php?lid=10808&commentView=itemComments]Israel 1948 What was God doing by Art Katz[/url]

And also a book that is really eye opening -

[url=http://web.archive.org/web/20071222091130/www.benisrael.org/writings/online_books/holocaust_where_was_God/shoah_contents.html]The Holocaust: Where Was God?[/url]

But I will quote Areadymind again,

This thread has barely even scratched the surface of his views. I would recommend listening to his speakings a while before even really assuming you understand what he talked about.

KingJimmy said:

Neither Art nor I are a fan whatsoever of the carnal Zionism which exists today. God is not interested in establishing this carnal political movement as the praise of the earth. He is intereted in only destroying it and bringing it to death. But in doing so, He plans to breathe resurrection life into the dust of the earth so as to cause that which is created of Him to live.

Yes, exactly.

It was very interesting to me when I read that such people exists:

http://www.jewsagainstzionism.com/
http://www.nkusa.org/

These people are orthodox Jews, they are still blind to the gospel, but it was surprising to see them saying that they should not be brought into the land by a political means and wars, but they are scattered among the nations because of their sins, and only God through His redemptive power will bring them back, through His ways, not wars or politics.

Dear ADisciple, you said:

In the Cross, our Lord Jesus Christ broke down the wall of partition between Jew and Gentile, creating in Himself of the two ONE NEW MAN, so that now in Christ there is "no difference" between Jew and Gentile

It is a hard thing to believe, I know, and so much teaching still refuses to accept what the apostles clearly taught... that in Christ Jesus there is no longer any difference between Jew and Gentile (Rom. 10.12, Rom. 3.22, Acts 15.9). God has created a NEW MAN.

Apostle Paul in other place said:

Gal 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

You are very right when you say that there is no difference [i]in Christ[/i] i.e. our access and salvation in Him.
But, this does not eliminate the [i]different[/i] purposes and tasks of the Jews on the earth, as it does not eliminate the different purposes and tasks of the males and females here on earth. The task of the wife is to submit to her husband etc This is not eliminated, although "all are one in Christ Jesus. " Could you see the point?

Dear ADisciple, I believed as you do all my life, and I am so sorry for that, because I robbed God of His Word. Why? Because of this kind of spiritualizing the Scriptures i.e. it is not what is written, it is something else, and this something else could be anything else, for me this, for other something different, you can play with allegories as much as you want. We are to be spiritual men, but to be a spiritual men with spiritual understanding that does mean that you are doing or understanding things according to the Spirit, spiritual thing could be to go dig the garden all day, if that's what the Holy Spirit wants from you, the spiritual thing is not something that flows in the air. I am so sad about this wrong understanding that I had once.

I have so much to say and share, I have spent two years in deep study and agony just on this subject. But forgive me that I am not able much to write now and be involved in the forums.

Have you studied the history of how and when this alegorization and spiritualizing came to be? The facts that you will discover are astonishing. Beginning with Origen, Constantine, Augustine, Catholic Church and their influence on Calvin, Luther and the Reformation, and respectively their influence on today's thinking in most evangelical churches. Believe me, the facts are amazing. I was shocked. I am talking here mainly about their eschatological view, and their view on Israel, Jews and God's Kingdom. But of course this doesn't stop there.

And when you will see this, you will see many Scriptures, I mean hundreds upon hundreds, mainly the prophetic Scriptures, how come to their place, and you will see that they don't contradict with what Paul and others wrote, but are in wonderful balance. Otherwise, you will need to say of "hundreds" that they are not what is written, but something else.

Brother Eli has compiled pretty much good collection of articles on this subject:

http://olivetdiscourse.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=section&id=6&Itemid=43

If you would like to talk and hear more about my personal experience, please write me a PM and maybe we can exchange something more.

P.S. Many are quoting Jeremiah 31:31-33, but are stopping just there, but if you continue to read until the end of the chapter, there are quite staggering words by the Lord, how can this be spiritualazed? Jer. 31:35-37; It's so clear and simple, if one read it without prejudice. Also

Jer 33:20-26; Isa 54:9, Isa 54:10 etc

Hi Tearsofjoy:

I do appreciate the tender tone of your post.

But, this does not eliminate the different purposes and tasks of the Jews on the earth, as it does not eliminate the different purposes and tasks of the males and females here on earth. The task of the wife is to submit to her husband etc This is not eliminated, although "all are one in Christ Jesus. " Could you see the point?

I certainly understand your point. But I don't accept that the Jews on earth have what you call a different purpose and task.

Paul the apostle was himself a Jew, as were Peter and John, who were responsible for a large portion of our New Testament. And what purpose do we find them opening up for both Jew and Gentile alike in the New Covenant? From Paul we discover that we, Jews and Gentiles TOGETHER are "built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the chief corner stone, In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord, In whom ye also are builded TOGETHER an habitation of God in the Spirit" (Eph. 2.20-22).

It's this that God is working toward: the unveiling of His own habitation in the earth, His own dwelling place, a Temple made of living stones of which Jesus Christ is the chief cornerstone, a Temple builded TOGETHER of both Jew and Gentile believers alike. It is ONE PURPOSE for both Jew and Gentile: His eternal purpose in Christ Jesus our Lord (Eph. 3.11).

This is what Paul called the "FELLOSHIP of this mystery" (Eph. 3.9)-- and what an awesome holy mystery it is. It was the chief burden of the apostle Pauls' ministry, a revelation He received from God (Eph. 3.3). The FELLOWSHIP of the mystery: Jew and Gentile TOGETHER.

"...That the Gentiles should be FELLOWHEIRS, and of the SAME BODY, and partakers of His promise in Christ by the gospel" (Eph. 3.6).

...That's New Covenat truth, and it just causes me to tremble.

Because of this kind of spiritualizing the Scriptures i.e. it is not what is written, it is something else, and this something else could be anything else, for me this, for other something different, you can play with allegories as much as you want.

God forbid that I or any other man should do that... and try to make things say anything we please. We'll be judged for that. No, we must see through the eyes of the Holy Spirit Himself. What HE intended in the scriptures, the way HE spiritualizes them, is the only right interpretion.

We are to be spiritual men, but to be a spiritual men with spiritual understanding that does mean that you are doing or understanding things according to the Spirit, spiritual thing could be to go dig the garden all day, if that's what the Holy Spirit wants from you

That's right on.

Have you studied the history of how and when this alegorization and spiritualizing came to be?

No, but please don't do me the disservice of lumping me in with all that. I seek very diligently with the help of the Holy Spirit to hold close to the way the apostles interpreted Scripture. And actually Paul himself uses the word allegory, saying that the whole story of Sarah and Hagar was an allegory of the two covenants (Gal. 4.24).

And when you will see this, you will see many Scriptures, I mean hundreds upon hundreds, mainly the prophetic Scriptures, will come to their place, and you will that they don't contradict with what Paul and other wrote, but are in wonderful balance. Otherwise, you will need to say of "hundreds" that they are not what is written, but something else.

Actually they have come into place for me. Not that I understand it all by any stretch, but I see a beautiful harmony in the scriptures of the Old Testament when-- with the help of the Holy Spirit who inspired them in the first place-- I shine the light of the New Covenant on them. In that Light, I see what HE intended when He inspired them in the first place.

Many are quoting Jeremiah 31:31-33, but are stopping just there, but if you continue to read until the end of the chapter, there are quite staggering words by the Lord, how can this be spiritualazed? Jer. 31:35-37; It's so clear and simple, if one read it without prejudice.

Verse 37 promises that God will never "cast off all the seed of Israel."

And that is absolutely right. He hath not cast of His people whom He foreknew (Rom. 11.2). What He did was make a NEW covenant with them... and in infinite grace bring the Gentiles in to share it with them! I'm GLAD for that! Oh, I am glad for that! :)

...How awesome all this is!

But the fullness of those spiritual realities cannot be unleashed from heaven until God establishes Jerusalem as the praise of the earth, with Jesus ruling and reigning for a thousand years.

...We are back to my question, Jimmy. What City would that be?

Many of you keeping using the word "spiritual." But may I suggest to you that the word the way you use it is entirely empty of meaning unless God does these "spiritual" things in the "natural" realm.

I agree with you fully. God's plan is to reveal spiritual reality right here in the earth where it is needed.

These things are so spiritual that He establishes the Jew in the land promised to everywhere Abraham physically walked upon and sojourned in.

Actually God did that when He brought the people into the land of Canaan. The earthly type was fulfilled.

But David, while actually dwelling in that land of Promise, still called himself "a sojourner" (Ps. 39.12).
Not only that, he said all his fathers also were sojourners.

Why? I suggest it is because along with Abraham they had caught a glimpse of "a better country," and a City whose architect and builder is God (Heb. 11.16).

The question is, have WE seen that City?

The "spiritual" view that I see proposed here doesn't give me anything I can wrap my head around. I still don't understand what it is this "spiritual" state will be like in the age to come. Not to sound rude, but do you even understand what you are proposing? I still am unsure myself of what exactly you are proposing. I just don't get it.

I understand where you are coming from, Jimmy, and I respect that. I'm not sure I can say more than I have said already. I think if you will review my posts with an open and honest heart, and take them before the Lord, you would see this is not something I myself am "proposing," but is the substance of New Covenant revelation.

I wonder, do you even believe there will be a physical resurrection?

I'm sorry you would even think it necessary to question that. You must be misunderstanding me at a pretty deep level.

I still can't identify what it is you expect for the next age

Maybe that's because I am anticipating in THIS age a lot that many have relegated to the next (including the first resurrection).

He makes it possible to experience the realities of heaven here on earth. He does so in part in this age, and it's fullness in the ages to come.

I fully agree. It's just that there is far more to be revealed in this age than is generally accepted and taught.

...And if we are not seeing eye to eye on things like this, we will continue to forbear one another in love, won't we.

...We are back to my question, Jimmy. What City would that be?

Again, that would be Jerusalem. But where you and I differ here, so far as I have understood you, is that you believe these spiritual realities and this spiritual city will exist without any consideration whatsoever of Jerusalem. I'm saying they will not exist apart from it. So far as I have understood you, you are proposing an "either...or" solution, whereas I am proposing a "both...and" solution.

Actually God did that when He brought the people into the land of Canaan. The earthly type was fulfilled.

This is a common misconception. God's bringing the Jews into the land of Canaan was definitely a fulfillment of His promises to Abraham. But it was not the ultimate fulfillment, and it has never been fully realized at any time in all of history. Indeed, the promise cannot ever be fully fulfilled until we enter the next age, after the resurrection of the dead. Why? Because the promise was not to just Abraham's children that they would possess the land, but the promise was to Abraham HIMSELF, that he would possess the land. This, according to Hebrews 11, Abraham never did. Rather, he merely lived as a sojourner in the land promised to him by God. It is a land he will indeed inherit in the age to come, when his dead body is quickened to life, and he is raised from the dead. He died in hope of this very thing.

Not only that, he said all his fathers also were sojourners.

Indeed, David recognized he and others have merely been sojourners here on this earth and in this life. They have recognized they are just people who are passing through this life, and that in this life, there is nothing here that is lasting. They recognize they are not of this world and that their citizenship is ultimately a heavenly one. However, with that said, David's usage of this word is not used in the same context of Hebrews 11 in regard to Abraham. Abraham was literally a sojourner in the land of promise. He was a man who lived in a tent, wandering around as a nomad in the land God had promised him. The only part of the land that he could ever claim for himself was the place he buried his wife, Sarah.

No doubt, Abraham like David was also merely a sojourner in this world. But again, the word usage is different. Indeed, the way you are using the word sojourner in Hebrews 11 in regard to Abraham is simply allegorical. Contextually, that cannot be justified in this instance. We must not spiritualize the plain and literal meaning of words unless it is demanded by it's context. In this context, "Abraham lived as a sojourner in the land of promise" can only mean one thing, as I have to this point explained.

Why? I suggest it is because along with Abraham they had caught a glimpse of "a better country," and a City whose architect and builder is God

Indeed, but that "better country" and "city whose architect and builder is God" is actually a physical city in a physical land, that God Himself will build. This of course, cannot be divorced from the spiritual application, that we as Christians are the city of God. But again, what I propose is a "both...and," not "either...or."

I'm sorry you would even think it necessary to question that. You must be misunderstanding me at a pretty deep level.

I asked more-so rhetorically. I don't have any reason to doubt you believe in a literal and physical bodily resurrection. I'm simply attempting to drive home a point. If there is to be a bodily resurrection from the dead, then where will people live? If people are to live in a geographical places in their physically resurrected bodies, then why are you opposed to God partitioning off a geographical location to give exclusively to the Jews? And being that a lot of the writings of the Old Testament prophets are obsessed with God's people living forever in the land, along with the spiritual blessings, it's not too great a jump in thought to conclude: Yes, God will make Jerusalem the praise of the earth, and Jesus will reign from that very place as the capitol of the world.

I sincerely don't understand why you wish to downplay the thrust of Scripture in this regard. Especially when it is in these very things, this Divine object lesson and drama that will unfold in redemptive history, that God's glory is chiefly demonstrated. It is in these very things that the spiritual realities find their greatest revelation.

I fully agree. It's just that there is far more to be revealed in this age than is generally accepted and taught.

I agree, there is a lot more to the "already" that we as Christians need to be made aware of, and that many fail to realize and understand. But it is not in this life only that we have hoped in Christ. There still remains a great deal of things that are "not yet," that will never happen until the age to come. The Holy Spirit who has been given to us though, has given us a taste of what is to come. But it is merely a taste. There is so much more glory to follow, and that we need to look forward to and anticipate.

...And if we are not seeing eye to eye on things like this, we will continue to forbear one another in love, won't we.

Amen. Please don't mis-understand me as looking to create strife over this issue. Whatever disagreements we may have on this issue, we are still part of the same family of God :-)

Just an exhortation on this topic, since I started this thread initially, while everybody is more than welcomed to give their two cents on these issues, if you wish to fruitfully contribute to this ongoing conversation, I would encourage you to only do so if you have listened carefully to at least a dozen or so Art Katz sermons on these topics. It is was my intent that this thread focus on Art Katz's take of things, so as to better aid individuals on here to understand his point of view (whether you agree with it or not).

As previously said, I do happen to agree with Art's take on things, and I would consider myself one of a few spokesmen of this point of view. I am more than happy to elaborate as best I can by the grace of God on these issues. But, being that Art had a very unique expression and manner of speaking, and understood these issues at a depth I've yet to penetrate, I would much rather you listen to him than me. I am more than happy to help you understand what he says if you should have any questions, and help put things in perspective, as he had such a "high" manner of speaking, and sometimes needs to be "translated" by others. Think of me as somebody who wants to help you chew.

Preferably, I would like to answer any questions anybody may have in regard to the list of Scriptures I cited at the start of this thread. Let's be good Bereans :-)

:)

*edited*

Tears of Joy, I use to believe like you do because I then, did not understand the mystery that Paul shared and the New Covenant.

Please meditate on the scriptures that ADiciple shares. I'm definetly not a teacher so its hard for me to explain certain topics like this one. But, ADisciple is doing a great job. He's not trying to be so spiritual with this, but seeing the word by the Spirit and not the letter as many have intrepreted endtimes thru the old testament covenant instead of the new. I even find that many Christians are even more under old testament covenant (not that they try to keep all 6 hundred something laws) than the New which has kept many under law and condemnation.

Nice hearing from you again. Its been a long time since I've been on S.I. or read anything on it.

Even if we do not agree on this, we have the cross to fellowship in :) But, I do pray that your eyes will be enlighten to this topic:)

Peace, Lisa

He's not trying to be so spiritual with this, but seeing the word by the Spirit and not the letter as many have intrepreted endtimes thru the old testament covenant instead of the new.

Sister Lisa, I would encourage you to consider a passage that, in spite of my having cited it multiple times in this thread, has altogether been ignored. It's a new covenant passage from the Old Testament, where Jesus Himself states His eternal purpose is to save the Jews and bring them back into the land of Israel. See my comments earlier on Isaiah 49:5-8, where this very thing is said.

But where you and I differ here, so far as I have understood you, is that you believe these spiritual realities and this spiritual city will exist without any consideration whatsoever of Jerusalem.

No, Jimmy, if you recall my earlier post, I said the spiritual City the new Jerusalem will be all over the earth, just as Babylon is all over the earth. We don't seem to have any trouble recognizing that "Babylon" is not just a geographical city, but a spiritual "city" that ruless over the whole world, religious, political, economical.

In like manner the new Jerusalem is to be all over the earth, so that I can be dwelling in Jerusalem right where I live here in North America. And so the new Jerusalem would certainly compass that old earthly city in Palestine.

This is a common misconception. God's bringing the Jews into the land of Canaan was definitely a fulfillment of His promises to Abraham. But it was not the ultimate fulfillment

That's right. It was but a "type," a shadow, a prophecy actually, of the true Rest... which is not for some other dispensation and age, but for TODAY. "For if Joshua had given them rest, then would he not afterward have spoken of another day" (Heb. 4.8).

What day? "TODAY, if ye will hear His Voice..." (Heb. 3.7).

The land of Canaan typified the ultimate Rest in the Spirit God has for His people-- and both Jew and Gentile alike (who believe in Jesus) are His people, the ones He has in mind when He says, "There remaineth therefore a Rest to the people of God" (Heb. 4.9).

Yes, God will make Jerusalem the praise of the earth, and Jesus will reign from that very place as the capitol of the world

You are probably going to get tired of me if I say one more time that Jerusalem IS the capitol of the world, where our Lord Jesus Christ reigns RIGHT NOW. He sits upon the throne of David in Zion right now. He sits on the greatest throne in the universe right now (Ps. 2.6, Ps. 110.1,2). Right now, all power is given unto Him in heaven AND in earth (Mt. 28.18). He has it all right now.

And ultimately that throne and City is going to come down upon the earth, all over the earth, and cover the earth with the glory of God as the waters cover the sea.

By the way I haven't overlooked your comments about Isa. 49. I know I haven't picked up on that, but it's just because I can't seem to get you (and Art Katz) over "the hurdle" ...so that you can see how the New Covenant swallows up the law and the prophets, and brings them into a greater, fuller, deeper spiritual reality.

As Isaiah himself said, "For brass I will bring gold, etc." (Isa. 60.17). In restoration, God gives GREATER than his original promise. He takes things "to the next level," as they say.

As he said also to Ezekiel, "I will do BETTER unto you than at your beginnings" (Ezek. 36.11).

ADisciple,

I think I am coming along with understanding what you are saying. Thanks for the clarification. It seems we are closer in agreement than I originally thought. At least, I hope we are!

In like manner the new Jerusalem is to be all over the earth, so that I can be dwelling in Jerusalem right where I live here in North America. And so the new Jerusalem would certainly compass that old earthly city in Palestine.

I totally agree! The promises concerning Abraham and the land are not limited to just the geographical land itself. As Paul stated in Romans 4:13, the promise to Abraham was ultimately to make him an heir of the entire world! The blessing that was to be released through him was always global in it's scope, from the very beginning. It would be a universal blessing that transcended everything. The prophets confirmed this notion as well. However, with that said, even with this universal blessing being unleashed, the locus of that blessing is to be found in the Jewish people inheriting the land promised to Abraham in the ages to come.

You are probably going to get tired of me if I say one more time that Jerusalem IS the capitol of the world, where our Lord Jesus Christ reigns RIGHT NOW. He sits upon the throne of David in Zion right now. He sits on the greatest throne in the universe right now (Ps. 2.6, Ps. 110.1,2). Right now, all power is given unto Him in heaven AND in earth (Mt. 28.18). He has it all right now.

Again, I totally agree. And this is where I part company with those in the dispensational camps that do not teach that Christ is currently occupying the throne of David. There is only one throne for Christ to occupy. However, even with His present occupation of that throne, it is clear that while He sits and rules and reigns right now, not all things have been submitted themselves to that rule. Thus, we are still to look forward to the ages to come, when all things will be subjected to Him.

By the way I haven't overlooked your comments about Isa. 49. I know I haven't picked up on that, but it's just because I can't seem to get you (and Art Katz) over "the hurdle" ...so that you can see how the New Covenant swallows up the law and the prophets, and brings them into a greater, fuller, deeper spiritual reality.

Art and I would fully agree that the New Covenant is more glorious than the Old, and that it swallows up the law and the prophets. As you show, the law and the prophets knew it would be this way too. So, their prophecies were not made unaware of the deep spiritual reality and power that the New Covenant would bring. They anticipated them every step of the way. But in their anticipation, and their seeing of this "swallowing," they still saw that God intended to save all of Israel one day, and have a second exodus that would bring them from the nations whereto they had been scattered, to permanently settle them in the land and cities that had been given to them by promise. They saw that the fullness of the realities you speak about, would be chiefly demonstrated and released in these very actions of God in the ages to come. Indeed, apart from these things, the fullness of these realities can never be truly realized.

Well, Jimmy, as I read your post I was initially hopeful you might be understanding what I was saying, till I came this:

However, with that said, even with this universal blessing being unleashed, the locus of that blessing is to be found in the Jewish people inheriting the land promised to Abraham in the ages to come.

Who are "the Jewish people" (according to the apostle Paul, that is)?

May I let you in on a secret? I myself am Jewish! Yes, it's true!

"But he is NOT a Jew which is one outwardly... But he IS a Jew who is one inwardly, and circumcision is that of the heart..." (Rom. 2.28,29).

And I am an Israelite (Gal. 6.15,16).

I am Abraham's seed, and an heir according to the promises (Gal. 3.29).

Jimmy we MUST come up into the spiritual reality the old testament scriptures spoke of. I was glad for the day when I saw by revelation of the Spirit (backed by the Scriptures of course) that, as a true Israelite, the old testament scriptures were MINE!

Again, I totally agree. And this is where I part company with those in the dispensational camps that do not teach that Christ is currently occupying the throne of David. There is only one throne for Christ to occupy. However, even with His present occupation of that throne, it is clear that while He sits and rules and reigns right now, not all things have been submitted themselves to that rule. Thus, we are still to look forward to the ages to come, when all things will be subjected to Him.

I certainly do agree with you on this. He sits upon the throne of David in Zion right now, ruling at the Father's right hand on the throne of the Kingdom with all power in Heaven and in earth. He rules IN THE MIDST of His enemies... and we will yet see them ALL made the footstool of His feet... and this, I'm inclined to think, in THIS age yet!

But in their anticipation, and their seeing of this "swallowing," they still saw that God intended to save all of Israel one day, and have a second exodus that would bring them from the nations whereto they had been scattered, to permanently settle them in the land and cities that had been given to them by promise.

Again, I think this is a short-sighted understanding of what City and Land God intends to gather His elect unto. "All Israel," you know, includes the elect Gentiles as well (Rom. 9.23-26).

Certainly, Jimmy, there is coming a time when in a powerful operation of the Spirit of God, the natural branches of the olive tree of Israel (which tree includes many Gentile believers) ...there is coming a time when the natural branches, "if they abide not still in unbelief" (Rom. 11.23) (...so there is a CONDITION: it isn't just automatic: they must turn and BELIEVE) ...but there is coming a time when the natural branches, those who do turn and become believers in the Lord Jesus Christ, are grafted back into the olive tree. It will be so awesome and powerful a move of the Spirit that Paul could only call it "life from the dead."

But there is no intimation in Paul's discourse on this (Romans Chapters 9 through 11) that all these natural branches will be gathered to one geographical place in the earth, even though wherever they are they will be home at last in the Olive Tree Himself.

...And I'm not sure I understand just how it will happen. "Life from the dead," Paul says. Did he mean Life from those who were formerly Gentiles... and who now impart the resurrection Life of Jesus to the "natural branches"? (Don't know. Just wondering about this.)

Jimmy, I wonder if I could recommend some reading to you. I'm not the only one who thinks along these lines, and in fact I am grateful to many others of far greater stature than myself whose eyes the Lord has graced to see things from the persective of His New Covenant.

--If you can get a copy of the Journal of George Fox (the early Quaker apostle) I highly recommend that.

--Also The Gospel of the Kingdom, by Philip Mauro (although Mauro did not embrace the pentecostal move when God released it. But even so this book is one of the best I've read on this subject.)

--T. Austin Sparks has some great illumination on this as well, but I don't have the references at my finger tips. You can search them out on the website under his name.

--I also highly recommend George Warnock's writings. Interspersed in many of them you will find as clear a teaching on this matter as you will find anywhere. The Feast of Tabernacles is good. But more particularly, read From Tent to Temple, the chapter on the Tabernacle of David, giving close attention to the secions, A New Tent on Mount Zion, reading on to Why Mount Zion?, The Tabernacle of David to be Rebuilt, The Jerusalem Controversy, The Good Olive Tree, and The Kingdom of Heaven.

You can find it here: [url=http://www.georgewarnock.com/]George Warnock's writing From Tent To Temple[/url]

Blessings to you, Jimmy!