Church Reversion, Continued
Nov 21, 2007
When I speak of the Passover Age, the term itself is to be understood in relation to the Pentecostal Age and the Tabernacles Age. But there is another way to look at this, a way which is more familiar: Old Testament time and New Testament time.
In most people's eyes, the Old Testament extends back from the cross; the New Testament extends forward from the cross. But if I were to use the term "Old COVENANT" and "New COVENANT," these times frames take on new significance.
The Old Covenant was instituted by Moses, not by Adam, and it reached its culmination at the cross when Jesus was crucified. And so, technically speaking, the Passover Age is nearly identical to the time of the Old Covenant. The New Covenant time, however, covers both the Pentecostal Age and the Tabernacles Age. The New Covenant began with Pentecost but is completed with Tabernacles, insofar as its manifestation is concerned.
And so, when I speak of the Passover method of conquering Canaan, I really mean an Old Covenant method, which is by the fleshly arm of military might. Even though God had told Joshua to do it that way, and though God certainly was there to ensure military success, even so, we cannot take this method to be divinely sanctioned today. Under the New Covenant, we are expected to possess a greater weapon, having better armor, as Paul says in Eph. 6:11-17.
When we were children, our parents allowed us to do things in an imperfect way, because we were not capable of more. They winked at our childish ways. But when we became adults, more was expected of us, and if we revert to childish ways, the law frowns upon us and treats us rather shabbily. So it is with God. The military conquest of Canaan was suitable under the Old Covenant, given the fact that Israel had refused the Sword of the Spirit (the voice of God) at Mount Sinai.
But after receiving the Sword of the Spirit in the upper room (Acts 2), more was expected of Christians. This greater responsibility involved an entirely new method of conquest, as well as a greater territory. Instead of being called to kill the Canaanites by the sword, Christians were called to baptize all nations into the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ by the power of the Sword of the Spirit.
The difference between these two swords is seen in the fact that at Sinai, the Levitical priests took physical swords and killed 3,000 people after they were found worshipping the golden calf (Ex. 32:28). But at Pentecost, the Melchizedek priests took their spiritual swords to the streets and converted 3,000 people--death by baptism. This was done by Melchizedek priests under a New Covenant, using a Spiritual Sword. Their sword was much sharper than Joshua's under the Old Covenant. Heb. 4:12 describes it:
"For the Word of God is living and active and sharper than any two-edged sword, and piercing as far as the division of soul and spirit, of both joints and marrow, and able to judge the thoughts and intents of the heart."
Try doing all that with a physical sword! It will not work.
As long as the Church was oppressed by the Roman government, it had no sword with which to defend itself. It never occurred to Christians to foment a revolution to overthrow Rome. Instead, they complied with the Divine Plan. In Daniel's day it was shown by revelation that the iron kingdom of Rome would be given dominion over God's people until the time that the jurisdiction would pass to the saints of the Most High.
When Constantine began the process of giving dominion to the Church, Christians assumed themselves to be the "saints of the Most High." It never occurred to them that they might be the "little horn." (By the same blindness, they identified with David, rather than King Saul.) They did not realize that this "little horn" was actually the Roman Church that would come out of the RomanEmpire. Instead, the Christians assumed that the time of the little horn had already been fulfilled, and that now the jurisdiction was being passed to the Church.
Blindness, of course, is part of how God fulfills prophecy without us realizing it. Once the assumption was made that the time of the "little horn" was past, the Church began to move toward persecuting "heretics," meaning anyone who thought differently. Many, of course, really were heretics, but as the Church itself manifested more and more the rebellion of King Saul, its prototype, it eventually began to persecute "David" as well.
"David" is represented by the overcomers in the types and shadows, for he was crowned on a Jubilee, whereas Saul was crowned on the day of "wheat harvest," or Pentecost (1 Sam. 12:17).
When the Church began persecuting the overcomers, it fully began to manifest not only the character of Saul but also the "little horn," which was to wage war against the saints and overcome them (Dan. 7:21).
Here is where it is important to understand the book of Revelation, for it continues where Daniel leaves off. It shows the outworking of the plan over a period of 1,260 "days" (years, really). I did a more complete study of the Book of Revelation a few years ago in a series of about 30 bulletins (Foundation For Intercession). These are still posted online.
It has been my observation that when Christians lack the Holy Spirit, they look for a carnal solution as a secondary option. But because the carnal option is not very biblical in itself, they justify it by asking God's blessing upon the carnal option. "Lord, bless my sword, that it may smite your enemies." When the New Covenant does not seem to work, we tend to revert back to Old Covenant methods.
The real solution would be to fast and pray and seek God's face until we receive power from on high. But that takes too long and is too troublesome for most Christians. Furthermore, the path back to the New Covenant is not easy, for it was abandoned long ago. In my opinion, the Church will not find that path easily, but will have to fight carnally until it is exhausted and realizes that there is no hope left. Only then will they truly be ready to trust in God's deliverance.
Meanwhile, the Church justifies and supports the Zionists in their Old Testament methods in fighting the Palestinians. Many think that it would be wrong for Christians to murder Palestinians, but it is morally acceptable for Jews to do this. They base their beliefs on the idea that the New Covenant is for Christians, while the Old Covenant is for Jews. So they identify the Palestinians with the Canaanites of old, and identify the Jews with the Israelites under Joshua.
This idyllic view justifies much sin and does not understand that Yahweh the Lawgiver was Jesus Christ in a pre-existent form. "Yahweh has become my Yashua" [salvation], both Exodus 15:2 and Isaiah 12:2 prophesy. Jesus came to explain the Law, not to put it away (Matt. 5:17). And so my intent has been to explain how Yahweh and Jesus can appear to be so different and yet be One. One of the greatest keys is to understand that the physical sword was given to Israel ONLY BECAUSE they had rejected the greater Sword of the Spirit at that first Pentecost at Mount Sinai in Exodus 20. Theoretically, if Israel had been able to accept Pentecost in Moses' day, there would have been no Canaanite genocide, for they would have all been converted by the power of God, repenting on their faces for their idolatry and wicked practices.
But in the divine plan, Pentecost was reserved for the time AFTER the cross. The revelation has been given, and we are now responsible for it. Once we understand the problem, we then know how to pray and what to repent of. We can then seek God's face until He pours out His Spirit from on high.
Dr. Stephen Jones