Daily WebLogs

Email, Print, Share. CLICK HERE.

Lessons from the Past, Part 2

Apr 22, 2014

When God first conscripted me for spiritual warfare, I was totally unaware of what was happening. I knew virtually nothing of spiritual warfare, except for what I had read in Norman Grubb’s book, Rees Howells, Intercessor, in 1972. But that book had made little sense to me, because it was beyond my experience. It was only when I experienced it for myself in 1981-1983 that I understood.

The original prayer battle from Nov. 12, 1981 to Jan. 27, 1982 was followed by a series of battles in the heavens over a period of years. We knew our adversary only as the “Broken Cross System.” That name was used on account of the original demonic formation that was seen in a vision. It was seen as a fleshly, corrupted church system, empowered by a rebellious church.

I knew that I had been set free by the prayer efforts of the Net of Prayer as they followed the leading of the Spirit. Others had their own stories to tell as well. But in those days the most frustrating thing was that we could never achieve full victory. Final victory was always thwarted by “church decision.” None of us really understood why. We only knew that the Net of Prayer could not override church authority.

Years later, the Father gave me the revelation that King Saul was a type of the church, and that he had been given 40 years to rule, which prophesied of 40 Jubilees since Pentecost in 33 A.D. This was a huge revelation, for it explained why the Net of Prayer could not overrule church decisions. We were like David, who fought many wars against the Philistines on behalf of Saul, while being harassed by the very man who had been given the authority to win those battles. As long as Saul was king, David could win battles, but he could never obtain full victory. David was not yet king.

Saul “died” on May 30, 1993, which was Pentecost that year. It was the 40-Jubilee anniversary of the coronation of the church in Acts 2. My training period ended some months later on Nov. 12, 1993, and so the Jubilee Prayer Campaign was the first (as far as I know) to be conducted after “David” (the overcomers as a body) was crowned king.

Even then, “David” only had partial authority as king, for as you recall from 2 Samuel 5:5, he ruled only one tribe for 7½ years. Therefore, from May 30, 1993 to Nov. 30, 2000, we functioned as an army under the partial authority of “David.” We then received the full authority to complete the warfare, and we did so in 2001.

The spiritual warfare that was done throughout the year 2001 is just now (in 2014) manifesting in the world. Why now? Because it is the end of the time of dominion for the “little horn.” The reign of prophetic Saul is the church that corrupted itself throughout the past 40 Jubilees. Each year in the life of Saul prophesied of a corresponding Jubilee cycle in church history.

When we overlay the life of Saul upon the “little horn” of Daniel’s prophecies, we see that there is a very large overlap of 1480 years, as I have explained elsewhere. The little horn is the religious beast that arose out of Rome, the fourth beast empire. It is the beast that made war on the saints (Daniel 7:21), even as Saul had persecuted David in the parallel prophecy.

Even so, it was not until the middle of the most recent Passover conference that I finally saw the connection between the little horn and the Broken Cross System. While discussing the word with friends on the night of April 19, 2014, I recalled the fact that the main goal of the Broken Cross System in the original battle in Nov. 1981 was to make “war on the saints.” I wrote of this in chapter 1 of The Wars of the Lord, and yet I had not made the connection until now.

This is a major revelation. It tells me that the entire time of spiritual warfare since Nov. 12, 1981 until now has been waged against the little horn of Daniel 7:21. The Net of Prayer was unable to overcome the enemy, because, as Daniel says, the little horn was able to overpower the saints until the arrival of the Ancient of Days (or the Transferrer of Days, as the CV renders it).

I now understand that this was a reference to the transfer of authority from the house of Saul to the house of David, as well as from the little horn to the saints of the Most High. Daniel 7:13 and 14 says,

13 I kept looking in the night visions, and behold with the clouds of heaven One like a Son of Man was coming, and He came up to the Ancient of Days and was presented before Him. 14 And to Him was given dominion, Glory, and a kingdom….

The “Son of Man” is Christ, who told Caiaphas in Matthew 26:64 that He would come in the clouds of heaven as the fulfillment of this verse. Even so, it is not only Jesus Himself, but His body—the overcomers, the “David” company. The second coming of Christ is not only about Jesus, the individual Head. He does not come by Himself but with the saints (Revelation 19:14) and “in His saints” (2 Thessalonians 1:10).

By observing actual events in recent years, we are able to see, however dimly yet, how He is coming in us. We represent prophetic “David,” as opposed to Saul. We represent also the “saints,” as opposed to the little horn. I believe this will culminate with a historic fulfillment of the feast of Tabernacles, when the body of Christ has been given the same spiritual flesh that Jesus had when He arose from the dead. Only then will the Head be able to be transplanted on the body without taking anti-rejection drugs, so to speak.

In light of where we find ourselves in the prophetic history of the Kingdom, it is important for us to know how to be one of those “saints” who are given the dominion mandate at the end of the time of the little horn. What is it that qualifies a person to receive such a mandate from the throne of God? I have already answered that question in two earlier weblogs.



There are many groups who are contending for the dominion mandate. First, there are all of the denominations that are said to be “the true church,” including the Roman Church. But there are other religions as well, each of which believes that it will win in the end. Each religion has its own path, which it believes will lead to the desired goal. The Bible sets forth its own path in the revelation of the feast days and in the distinction between the way of flesh and the way of spirit.

The path is set forth in many biblical stories, which prophesy in allegorical form for those who have ears to hear. One of the most prominent of these prophecies is the story of Hagar and Sarah and their sons, Ishmael and Isaac. The Apostle Paul interpreted that story allegorically (Galatians 4:24), calling Hagar an allegory of the Old Covenant and Sarah an allegory of the New Covenant.

They are also pictures of the old and new Jerusalem (Galatians 4:25, 26).

Their sons too have allegorical significance. Isaac represents the “children of promise,” while Ishmael represents those “born according to the flesh,” i.e., by natural childbirth.

The Old Covenant saw the fulfillment in fleshly terms. Hagar and Ishmael were cast out, and Sarah and Isaac remained to inherit the promises. But under the New Covenant, Paul tells us to “cast out the bondwoman and her son” (Galatians 4:30). He was not telling the church to cast out all Arabs descended from Hagar. In fact, he was not talking about Arabs but fleshly Jews whose “mother” was Jerusalem. He instructed the church to become citizens of the New Jerusalem with its New Covenant. In other words, don’t consider the old fleshly Jerusalem to be your “mother,” for if Hagar is your mother, then you are only a spiritual Ishmaelite and cannot inherit the Kingdom.

When we dig deeper into the mind of Paul, we see how he again treats this topic in Romans 9:6-8,

6 But it is not as though the word of God has failed. For they are not all Israel who are descended from Israel; 7 neither are they all children because they are Abraham’s descendants, but “through Isaac your descendants will be named.” 8 That is, it is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God, but the children of the promise are regarded as descendants.

There was a time long ago when I tried hard to interpret this in an Old Covenant manner, in accordance with my peers. I failed miserably. Paul’s definition of “the children of the flesh” was not those who were genealogically descended from Hagar herself, but rather those who laid claim to the old Jerusalem (“Hagar”) as their mother. One cannot interpret Romans 9 without the assistance of the “allegory” in Galatians 4.

The final key is in Romans 7, where Paul speaks of the two “I’s” of his identity. He understood that he had a flesh identity and a spiritual identity, one from Adam and the other from Christ. In chapter 10 of my first volume on Paul’s Epistle to the Saints in Rome, I paraphrased Paul’s comments on the two identities in Romans 7:15-20,

15 For that which my Adamic “I” does, Christ in me does not know intimately, nor does it approve, nor even does it recognize. For my Adamic “I” does not practice the things that Christ in me wills to do, but my Adamic “I” does the very thing that Christ in me hates.

16 But if my Adamic “I” does the very thing that violates the will of Christ in me, my Christ “I” agrees with the Law (in its sentence of death upon the Adamic “I”), confessing that the Law is absolutely correct in its judgment.

17 So now, it is not even “I” doing such lawless things, but the sin [sinful “I”] that indwells me.

18 For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my fleshly “I”; for the wishing [“willing”] is present in my Christ “I”, but the doing of the good is not.

19 For the good that my Christ “I” wills to do, my Adamic “I” does not; but my Adamic “I” practices the very evil that my Christ “I” does not will to do.

20 But if my Adamic “I” is doing the very thing that my Christ “I” does not will to do, my Christ “I” is not really even the one doing it, but sin which dwells in my Adamic “I.”

Paul’s fleshly “I” is what he was given through his natural birth and genealogy back to Adam. However, Paul chose to identify with the New Creation “I” which he had received by the Holy Spirit. In this spiritual manner, which was allowed by the law, He received a new Identity. This new identity did not eliminate his fleshly identity, but it did give Paul (and us) the legal status as an inheritor of the promises of God.

Christ is the only Inheritor of the Kingdom, and we can be co-heirs with Him if we are part of His body. Since many throughout history could claim genealogical status as a descendant of Adam, Abraham, or Jacob-Israel, the question is whether this fleshly status has ever qualified anyone as an inheritor of the promises of God.

Paul looked at the idolatrous history of those rebellious people and called them “children of the flesh.” He looked at the chief priests in Jerusalem, who ministered in a beautiful temple, and he called them children of Hagar, not on account of their genealogy, but because they were “children of the flesh.” They were allegorical (or legal/spiritual) Ishmaelites insofar as their legal status with God was concerned. Their chief characteristic was their desire to persecute the children of promise. Of all men, Paul understood this most clearly, having been a chief persecutor in his early days.

In other words, Paul’s fleshly “I” persecuted the saints, but after Paul began to identify himself by the New Creation “I,” he joined the company that was being persecuted.

In later centuries, as the church became more corrupt and fleshly, it too made war on the saints as the little horn. It does not matter how glorious the church was in its beginning or in the first century as seen in the book of Acts. Carnal religion can be found everywhere, even in the church. It is a fact of life. Our calling, however, is to find the path that Paul and others set forth for us in the Scriptures.

Two paths are set before us: the first Adam and the “last Adam” (Christ, 1 Corinthians 15:45). The first path is by fleshly descent from our natural fathers; the second is by spiritual descent from our Heavenly Father. We had no voice in choosing our father by the flesh, but the law provides a second path to sonship. This second path is allowed by law, and is therefore a legal way to be an adopted son.

This is explained in greater detail in the New Testament writings, as I have shown, provided we have a New Covenant perspective of the law. So choose wisely which “I” is the real you, and make that declaration before the divine court. Your words will determine your legal status before God and will affect all of your actions on earth.

This is the second part of a series titled "Lessons from the Past." To view all parts, click the link below.

Lessons from the Past

Sharing / Blog Info

Category: Teachings
Blog Author: Dr. Stephen Jones