by Benedict Soghie | Apr 12, 2019 | Christian Religion, Faith
Most people are aware of the traditional portrayal of the image of Jesus. The long haired white man most commonly used by the vast majority of the Christian world today. It doesn't take too much investigation or common sense to come to the realization that this image is not and in no way can be what the actual Jesus who walked the earth 2000 years ago looked like.
There is however a movement that claims that Jesus was not only not white but in fact Jesus was black. Many parts of this movement also claim that Abraham, Isaac and Jacob were also black as are the “true” Israelites.
This writing is not intended to prove that Jesus or anyone else was any specific colour it is solely intended to answer the biblical verses used by those that claim that Jesus was black and that the Bible depicts him as such. Here I will only be answering the biblical evidence for the physical appearance of Jesus and nothing more.
There are in fact only 2 passages of the Bible that are offered as evidence that Jesus himself was black based on the description of Jesus given in the Bible.
The first and most often used passage is in the book of Revelation.
Revelation 1- 14 His head and his hairs were white like wool, as white as snow; and his eyes were as a flame of fire; 15 And his feet like unto fine brass, as if they burned in a furnace; and his voice as the sound of many waters. 16 And he had in his right hand seven stars: and out of his mouth went a sharp twoedged sword: and his countenance was as the sun shineth in his strength.
So it is claimed that Jesus had hair like wool which is used to demonstrate the tight curly afro hair of black people and also that his colour was that of brass with this meaning Jesus was of a dark brown colour.
So lets see if the claim stands up to scrutiny.
The first thing that we need to understand is that this ISNT actually Jesus that is being described although it does resemble the image of Jesus.
The simple fact is that when John turns to see who was talking to him in revelation he actually sees one LIKE unto the son of man, NOT the son of man himself We are told this in the 2 previous verses
Revelation 1- 12 And I turned to see the voice that spake with me. And being turned, I saw seven golden candlesticks; 13 And in the midst of the seven candlesticks one like unto the Son of man, clothed with a garment down to the foot, and girt about the paps with a golden girdle.
John actually saw an Angel. This was the angel that Jesus has sent unto John. This is made very cleat at the beginning of the book of Revelation.
Revelation 1-1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John
God gave the revelation of Jesus that God gave him, Jesus gave it to his angel and the Angel went and gave it to John. So when John is spoken to and turns to see who it is it is this angel that he sees. Now the angel looked LIKE the son of man so the description of what the angel looked like was a representation of what the son of man looked like but wasn't actually Jesus.
What is more important to notice is that this depiction of Jesus in Revelation is referencing aresurrected Christ after he has ascended to heaven. This is Jesus in his glorified body. There is no reference whatsoever to the body of Jesus that walked the earth as a Jewish man before his death burial and resurrection. To try and link the reference in Revelation to the physical man Jesus is a complete and utter distortion of scripture and is either due to a lack of study or a purposeful deception.
But let's continue and analyze the description itself.
Let's start with the claim that Jesus had afro style hair.
Revelation 1- 14 His head and his hairs were white like wool, as white as snow; and his eyes were as a flame of fire;
This verse states his hair was WHITE like wool not that his hair was like wool. The comparison is regarding the colour not the texture. To further illustrate the whiteness rather than the texture we then have a 2nd comparison with snow, both are referring to the colour not what it looked like. It must also be noted that it doesn't just make reference to his hair but his head also. Not only is his hair white but also his head I have yet to see a black man with a white head.
Furthermore why is it only the first part of the verse is used as evidence. If the first part of the verse is used to prove the way that Jesus physically looked like then why wouldn't the second part also be used, “his eyes were as a flame of fire”. How many black men have eyes as a flame of fire. Im yet to meet any man regardless of colour that possesses this physical attribute although it could be argued this could be referencing a red eye colour possessed by those who are albino but this would be assumption rather than fact and most advocates of a black Jesus do not use the second part of the verse in their argument.
Then we have verse 15
Revelation 1- 15 And his feet like unto fine brass, as if they burned in a furnace; and his voice as the sound of many waters
It is this verse that is used to demonstrate the dark skin colour of Jesus. The claim being made that Jesus had feet the colour of brass that had been burned in a furnace. Therefore Jesus had dark “burnt” colour skin.
So lets again analyze what the verse actually says against the claim.
The verse starts by saying “And his feet like unto fine brass”. Notice the word fine before the word brass. The colour was like fine brass not burnt brass. Fine brass (polished) is not brown or black but a golden or yellowish colour
The Greek word translated “fine brass” is chalkolibanÅ orichalcum, meaning a fine metal, or frankincense of a yellow color.
The verse then states “as if they burned in a furnace” (present tense) so the colour is linked to BEING burned in a furnace not having already been burned in the furnace. The Greek word here is πεπυρωμÎνης pepyrÅmenÄ"s this is the perfect participle from of the word πυρáω pyroÅ. It literally means made to glow.
Anyone that has seen metal being burned in a furnace will know that it causes a very bright white/yellow light. So bright in fact that those working with the metal in the furnace wear special eye protection goggles. We must also take the second part of the verse and apply this as well. “and his voice as the sound of many waters”. Can this really be stated of black men, or any man for that matter.
Again the claim just doesn't hold up under scrutiny. The scripture is simply twisted or misrepresented in order to make it appear to be saying something that is actually isn't.
Both the eyes like fire and the feet like fine brass are stated again in revelation 2-18
Revelation 2-18 And unto the angel of the church in Thyatira write; These things saith the Son of God, who hath his eyes like unto a flame of fire, and his feet are like fine brass;
The description of Jesus continues on in verse 16 although this is not quoted by those who use verses 14 and 15 but as verse 16 is a continuation of the description we must also look at what it says and be consistent and apply this in the same way as verses 14 and 15.
Revelation 1- 16 And he had in his right hand seven stars: and out of his mouth went a sharp twoedged sword: and his countenance was as the sun shineth in his strength.
Here Jesus is depicted with a twoedged sword coming out of his mouth. “and out of his mouth went a sharp twoedged sword”
I am yet to find anyone that can give a convincing argument as to why this would be referencing a black man, I don't think I need to offer any other statement than this but if we are going to take part of the description as literal we must take ALL the description as literal as we have no indication that any is meant to be taken non literally while other parts are. To state some are literal and others are not is to make personal assumptions that are not indicated in the text itself.
Then we have “and his countenance was as the sun shineth in his strength.”
Countenance being the Greek word áψις opsis meaning the features, outward appearance his face his look was like the sun in its strength meaning in its brightness.
The outward appearance of Jesus was like the sun in its brightness. We see this kind of reference when Jesus appeared to Saul (who became Paul) on the road to Damascus.
We are told about Jesus appearing before Saul in acts 9
Acts 9 - 1 And Saul, yet breathing out threatenings and slaughter against the disciples of the Lord, went unto the high priest, 2 And desired of him letters to Damascus to the synagogues, that if he found any of this way, whether they were men or women, he might bring them bound unto Jerusalem.
Saul saw a light from heaven.
Acts 9- 3 And as he journeyed, he came near Damascus: and suddenly there shined round about him a light from heaven: 4 And he fell to the earth, and heard a voice saying unto him, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? 5 And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest: it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks.
When Saul/Paul recounts the event we are told that the light was above the brightness of the sun.
Acts 26-13 At midday, O king, I saw in the way a light from heaven, above the brightness of the sun, shining round about me and them which journeyed with me. 14 And when we were all fallen to the earth, I heard a voice speaking unto me, and saying in the Hebrew tongue, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks. 15 And I said, Who art thou, Lord? And he said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest.
The word “above” in the above the brightness of the sun is the Greek word áπáρ hyper meaning above, beyond, greater than
The brightness of Jesus being beyond the brightness of the sun.
Jesus calls himself the light of the world
John 8-12 Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life.
When we go back to acts 9 we see that Saul/Paul was actually blinded by this light for 3 days.
Acts 9- 9 And he was three days without sight, and neither did eat nor drink.
In the new Jerusalem there is no need for the sun as The lamb, Jesus, is the light thereof.
Revelation 21- 23 And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof. 24 And the nations of them which are saved shall walk in the light of it: and the kings of the earth do bring their glory and honour into it.
Jesus is the brightness of the glory of God
Hebrews 1-3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;
At the transfiguration of Jesus, Peter James and John saw a vision of Jesus in his glorified body.
Matthew 17- 1And after six days Jesus taketh Peter, James, and John his brother, and bringeth them up into an high mountain apart, 2 And was transfigured before them: and his face did shine as the sun, and his raiment was white as the light.
Again we are told that the face of Jesus did shine as the sun.
The Prophet Daniel saw the glorified Jesus during a vision he was given. He described the appearance of what he saw.
Daniel 10-6 His body also was like the beryl, and his face as the appearance of lightning, and his eyes as lamps of fire, and his arms and his feet like in colour to polished brass, and the voice of his words like the voice of a multitude.
Again we see that the feet (and this time arms also) were as POLISHED brass not burned brass. The Hebrew word translated as polished is qÄ-lÄl; ×Ö×ÖÖ'× which means burnished which literally means to be polished. This again would mean a golden/yellowish colour not a dark brown one.
We must also again be consistent. If we are going to use one part of the description in this verse we must also use all the description in this verse. The body is likened to beryl. The Hebrew word translated as beryl is ×ÖÖ×Ö×Ö×××× tarshish which means a yellow or golden precious stone most likely to be a yellow jasper.
The face is as the appearance of lightning and the eyes as lamps of fire. None of which has any likeness to a black man.
The use of these verses to show that Jesus was a black man work only if you take the representation of the verses by those making the claim, without any investigation into what the verses are actually saying, ignore parts of the verses and misrepresent them in a way that allows you to represent them in a way to support the claim. This is either through ignorance or dishonesty, either way the claim the Bible describes Jesus as being black is incorrect.
by Benedict Soghie | Apr 12, 2019 | Christian Religion, Faith
Repentance is a common theme throughout the New Testament and central to the gospel message. John the Baptist was the first to declare “Repent, for the kingdom of God is at hand! (Matt 3:2).” Jesus echoed this charge in Matt 4:17. In Mark 6:12 Jesus sent out the disciples to preach that…”people should repent.” Jesus sums up the gospel in Luke 24:46: “…and thus it was necessary for the Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead the third day, and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name to all nations…” After Jesus’ ascension Peter preached repentance in his first and second sermons (Acts 2:38, 3:19) and wrote in 2 Peter 3:9 of God’s desire that “…all should come to repentance.” Paul also taught that “(God) …commands all men everywhere to repent… (Acts 17:30).”
Jesus’ teaching in Luke 13:2-5 illustrates the life or death importance of repentance in the gospel message. Speaking about the death of a certain people…”Do you suppose that these Galileans were worse sinners than all other Galileans, because they suffered such things? I tell you, no; but unless you repent you will all likewise perish.“ So it is that repentance is not only an integral part of the gospel message but an absolutely necessary step in the salvation process. But what does repentance really mean?
During Jesus’ ministry he often battled with the pious Pharisees, who placed the cleanliness of the outside of the cup above that of the inside. When He pronounced in Matt. 9:13 that He “did not come to call the righteous, but sinners, to repentance”, Jesus makes it crystal clear that he is not interested in “religion” but rather, he is interested in the heart.
When I was a child and I got my hand caught in the proverbial cookie jar, I could be very apologetic and I could be truly sorry for the disappointment or embarrassment that my action caused and the consequence that it led to. In actuality, I was sorry for being caught. And I say that because my heart wasn’t truly turned away from myself and my own will and desires, toward a heart of obedience to my parents. That kind of sorrow does not lead to genuine, permanent change. Rather, it reeks of self-interest and it was never very long before my true colors made another appearance, proving my human nature remained in control.
Believing that Jesus is God and even admitting that I have offended Him with my sin is not enough. There must be a change of mind and heart. James 2:19 says: “You believe that there is one God. You do well. Even the demons believe--and tremble.” True, godly repentance is the humble admission, before a holy God that I have sinned and that I am personally responsible for that sin; that Christ died for my sin and that He wants to rule my life and that I am willing to submit to His authority. This recognition produces sorrow and shame in the truly penitent heart and brings about a change of direction; a turning away from your sin and a turning toward God and his righteous nature.
This process of surrender begins at salvation but is really a life-long process of confession. Surrender to Christ doesn’t mean you become sinless but it does mean that when you fall you don’t indulge the behavior but rather you recognize it as sin and grieve your weakness and disobedience and return to the Lord. In the gospel of Matthew (3:8) we are admonished “…to bear fruits worthy of repentance.” What are the fruits worthy of repentance? A changed life - true repentance results in action.
by Benedict Soghie | Apr 12, 2019 | Christian Religion, Faith
Since circumcision was so very important under the Old Covenant, why is circumcision of the heart taken so lightly nowadays under the Renewed Covenant?
"A man is not a Jew if he is only one outwardly, nor is circumcision merely outward and physical. No, a man is a Jew if he is one inwardly; and circumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the written code..." Rom. 2:28-29
"For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form, and you have been given fullness in Christ, who is the head over every power and authority. In him you were also circumcised, in the putting off of the sinful nature, not with a circumcision done by the hands of men but with the circumcision done by Christ, having been buried with him in baptism and raised with him through your faith in the power of God, who raised him from the dead. When you were dead in your sins and in the uncircumcision of your sinful nature, God made you alive with Christ. He forgave us all our sins, having canceled the written code, with its regulations, that was against us and that stood opposed to us; he took it away, nailing it to the cross." Col. 2:9-14
I wondered if the fact that there are “carnal Christians” and what I have often referred to as “theological Christians” for lack of a better term, has anything to do with circumcision of the heart. Both types of professing Christians may know a lot and do lots of good deeds, but something is missing in their witness. I have always referred to that missing element as supernatural heart surgery performed within them that makes all the difference. It is time for me to find out the truth.
2 Timothy 3:7 comes to my mind: “who are always learning but never able to come to full knowledge of the truth.” (CJB)
- Born again = salvation = conversion = professing belief in Yeshua haMashiyach (Jesus Christ); Ruach haKodesh = Holy Spirit
- When does the Ruach haKodesh (Holy Spirit) begin to dwell within the believer? (Immediately at the moment of being born again
, at or after baptism, a process that takes place over time?) At the moment of TRUE conversion –Ephesians 1:13(CJB) “Furthermore, you who heard the message of the truth, the Good News offering you deliverance, and put your trust in the Messiah were sealed by him with the promised Ruach HaKodesh”
(NASB) “In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your
Salvation - having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise”
There is a distinct difference between the Ruach haKodesh indwelling us and the Spirit filling us. The filling of the Ruach haKodesh was something used by YHWH since the Old Testament times. (Deuteronomy 34:9; 1 Samuel 19:18-24; Luke 1:15) After the death and resurrection of Yeshua the Ruach haKodesh continued to fill people including Paul (Acts 13:9), Peter (Acts 13:52), and the other disciples (Acts 15:32). This is much different than the indwelling of the Spirit experienced by all TRUE believers. He will never leave TRUE believers. (John 14:16)
CONCLUSION: We must ask for Him to dwell in us. (Luke 11:13) The work of the Ruach haKodesh is to write Torah in the inward parts, which is confirmed by the appearance of “fruits” of the Spirit. In other words, each one of us must prepare a place in our hearts to welcome the Ruach haKodesh. The scriptures tell us that the Ruach haKodesh “indwells” us at the moment of TRUE conversion. (Ephesians 1:13)
- When does circumcision of the heart take place? How? (
Immediately at the moment of being born again, at or after baptism, a process that takes place over time?)
Short answer – after a person has become a believer in Yeshua, and enough time has passed that his faith has grown through study, and a TRUE lifestyle change is evident. It is NOT the same as being “born again”.
Long answer – Paul enlightened people to the fact that circumcision comes after faith, after a person believes, after they have made a lifestyle change: “And the father of the circumcision; not to them only who are of the circumcision, but to them also who fulfill the steps of the faith of our father Awraham in (his) uncircumcision.” Romans 4:12 (AENT) Note from the AENT: “Rav Shaul is teaching that Awraham’s physical circumcision came after he believed, after he had faith, after his heart was circumcised, in opposition to a contemporary false teaching that circumcision should come first before belief or faith. At no time does Rav Shaul ever discount physical circumcision; he simply rejects false religious traditions that turned circumcision into a device to control new converts.”
According to the illustration YHWH gives us in the Old Testament circumcision is not optional, and failure to do so was grounds for exclusion from the Old Covenant. Since YHWH consistently shows us physical illustrations all through the Old Testament (the Old Covenant) so that we can understand the same principle in the spiritual sense under the Renewed Covenant, to discard the spiritual fulfillment and reality would defy one of YHWH’s great attributes – His unchanging consistency.
In keeping with physical circumcision of the Israelite people, several comparisons can be made. Some are:
- Circumcision was performed on the eighth day after birth, not right away after the baby was born.
YHWH lovingly nurtures us for a time (comparable to the eight days after physical birth), working in our lives to prepare us for His dealings.
- Physical circumcision is the cutting off of flesh that is unnecessary.
Likewise YHWH cuts off what is unnecessary, spiritually.
- The eighth day signifies a new beginning – something is different after circumcision.
Spiritual circumcision is the removal of the old fleshly nature, which begins at conversion, continues through baptism (which becomes the “sign” of the Renewed Covenant), and will be a continuous spiritual work in us throughout our lives.
- Priests circumcised the Israelite baby boys.
In the same manner YHWH does not ask us to spiritually circumcise ourselves. The Ruach haKodesh does it. This is to teach us to YIELD to His Spirit. (Romans 2:28-29; Colossians 2:9-14)
In Colossians 2:9-14 circumcision is the common theme, both physical and spiritual; but Paul also brings in baptism and says that a circumcision takes place at that point. Some of the old flesh nature is cut away and the Spirit of YHWH is passed on to us. Baptism then becomes the “sign” of the Renewed Covenant, just as circumcision was the “sign” of the Old Covenant. Paul says something happens in our lives when we yield to baptism in faith. Again it is obvious that scripture is speaking as if the conversion was genuine. If a person obediently yields to baptism in faith and understanding, a spiritual work would take place in his or her life without a doubt. However, when there is no evidence of a life change, there has been no spiritual circumcision and thus no conversion.
- Why did Yeshua say that many will say “Lord, Lord, etc.” in Matthew 7, and then tell them that He never knew them? How could they cast out devils and heal in Yehua’s name if He never knew them?
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary
“23. And then will I profess unto them—or, openly proclaim—tearing off the mask.
I never knew you—What they claimed—intimacy with Christ—is just what He repudiates, and with a certain scornful dignity. "Our acquaintance was not broken off—there never was any."
depart from me—(Compare Mt 25:41). The connection here gives these words an awful significance. They claimed intimacy with Christ, and in the corresponding passage, Lu 13:26, are represented as having gone out and in with Him on familiar terms. "So much the worse for you," He replies: "I bore with that long enough; but now—begone!"
ye that work iniquity—not "that wrought iniquity"; for they are represented as fresh from the scenes and acts of it as they stand before the Judge. (See on the almost identical, but even more vivid and awful, description of the scene in Lu 13:24-27). That the apostle alludes to these very words in 2Ti 2:19 there can hardly be any doubt—"Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are His. And, Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity."
The name of Yeshua carries so much power that even devils tremble - “You believe that "God is one"? Good for you! The demons believe it too - the thought makes them shudder with fear!”
James 2:19 (CJB)
So should the focus on this passage be on why those who will enter are able to do so rather than those who are denied entry? There is a simple answer to the question, “who among those who say "Lord, Lord…" will enter? And that answer is, “those who do the will of the Father.”
Those who TRULY place their trust completely in Yeshua haMashiyach have done the will of the Father and have already passed from death to life (John 5:24 CJB “Yes, indeed! I tell you that whoever hears what I am saying and trusts the One who sent me has eternal life -- that is, he will not come up for judgment but has already crossed over from death to life!”) and will not come into judgment regarding their eternal destiny (John 3:18 CJB “Those who trust in him are not judged; those who do not trust have been judged already, in that they have not trusted in the one who is God's only and unique Son.”)
But those who seriously seek answers are still left with the questions, who are those who Yeshua will turn away and why are they being turned away? Am I one who will be one who is denied by Yeshua? – Especially after pondering the unpopular fact that circumcision of the heart is not immediately accomplished at the moment one is born again. There are undoubtedly those who will use the power of Yeshua’s name for profit, their own glory, etc. probably knowing He is not really their Lord. But the very saddest case of all will be hearing the words, “Lord, Lord have we not prophesied, cast out demons, and done many wonders in Your name" coming from the mouths of people who in this life were pastors, evangelists, Bible teachers, even missionaries who endured great difficulties in the mission fields. They may have baptized hundreds and done many good deeds. And Yeshua does not question whether they did those things or not, but denies them entrance to the Kingdom because they failed to trust in Yeshua haMashiyach only and thereby failed to do the will of the Father. This would be an example of assuming one’s heart is circumcised at conversion so spiritual growth is not pursued.
Carnal Christians and theological Christians are “nominal” Christians. Nominal Christianity cannot save. Yeshua does not dwell in their hearts (That Christ may dwell in your hearts by faith” Ephesians 3:17 GNV) nor do they have His mind (“For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he might instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ.” 1 Corinthians 2:16 GNV) Judgement day will find them trying to justify themselves because of their own good works and neglecting the only “work” that matters to YHWH, “to have faith in the One He sent.”
Then I had a quick “leftover” thought.
Is “sanctification” the same thing as “circumcision of the heart”?
Easton’s Bible Dictionary says: “Circumcision as a symbol shadowing forth sanctification by the Holy Spirit has now given way to the symbol of baptism. But the truth embodied in both ordinances is ever the same, the removal of sin, the sanctifying effects of grace in the heart.”
It all boils down to Acts 4:13 – “…they were amazed, and began to recognize them as having been with Jesus” (NASB). As Charles Spurgeon wrote, basing a sermon on this scripture, “A Christian should be a striking likeness of Jesus Christ. You have read lives of Christ, beautifully and eloquently written, but the best life of Christ is His living biography, written out in the words and actions of His people. If we were what we profess to be, and what we should be, we should be pictures of Christ; yea, such striking likenesses of Him, that the world would not have to hold us up by the hour together, and say, "Well, it seems somewhat of a likeness;" but they would, when they once beheld us, exclaim, "He has been with Jesus;”
by Benedict Soghie | Apr 12, 2019 | Christian Religion, Faith
Jesus said “As Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of a huge fish, so the Son of Man will be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.” Matthew 12:40. Jesus was three days and two nights in a tomb, in the heart of the earth, in a dark place. The third night had to have been the night before, to make it three in a row because after He rose there would be no more night for Him. Jesus was in a dark place from the time Judas went out from the place where Jesus and His disciples were eating supper to the time of His rising from death making it three nights and three days. Thursday night, the night of the last supper, Friday He was crucified and died and placed in a tomb and Friday night, Saturday and Saturday night still in the tomb, and very early Sunday morning still in the tomb.
During His last meal with His disciples, Jesus dipped a piece of bread giving it to Judas Iscariot.” As soon as Judas had taken the bread, he went out. And it was night.” John 13:30. ‘It was night’ is loaded with meaning. It was the beginning of the end for Jesus, and the first of three nights and three days of darkness.
Even before Judas returned with the armed crowd to arrest Jesus, He began going through extreme stress. “Being in agony, He prayed more earnestly. Then His sweat became like great drops of blood falling down to the ground.” Luke 22:44. Hematohidrosis is when blood vessels dilate and burst moving into sweat glands. It can happen when a person is going through great stress or just after. Then the person sweats blood. Jesus was under huge duress if He was sweating great drops of blood. Tremendous pain.
After His arrest “Jesus said to the chief priests and officers of the temple guard, “This is your hour – when darkness reigns.” Luke 22:53. God appointed these dark times for Jesus.
He spent one night, Thursday night under arrest before Caiaphas, the elders and the scribes. The next day He was tried and died and then He spent two nights in a tomb.
Jesus met with a lot of unjust harm. He was picked up by an armed mob, Caiphas tried bringing some charge against HIm, along with the scribes and elders. He was sent to Herod to be examined, and then to Pilate who finally gave the order to execute Him because He wanted to please a bloodthirsty crowd. People were hitting Jesus with the palms of their hands, mocking Him, and whipping Him. To cap it all they crucified Him leaving Him to die a slow death on a cross in public place where many people could see Him. He did it all for us so that we might live.
by Benedict Soghie | Apr 12, 2019 | Christian Religion, Faith
In Galatians 6:15-16 the apostle Paul writes to the churches in Galatia:
“15 For neither is circumcision anything, nor is uncircumcision, but what counts is a new creation. 16 And those who will walk by this rule, may peace and mercy be upon them, that is, upon the Israel of God.”
My translation here depends on matters to be discussed below, as I will explain in due course.
There is a big debate about what Paul means by “the Israel of God” in v. 16. Some Christians say that it refers to the church. Others say that it refers to ethnic Israel as a whole. And another group says that it refers to all Jewish Christians.
In this article, I will try to determine which of these interpretations is correct. And then I will say something about why this is important.
PRELIMINARY POINTS
Before getting into the main part of the discussion, there are two preliminary points that I need to make about this passage.
The identity of “those who will walk by this rule”
Firstly, we need to consider who “those who will walk by this rule” in v. 16 refers to.
“This rule” is very probably the whole principle of v. 15: “neither is circumcision anything, nor is uncircumcision, but what counts is a new creation.” Much less probably, “this rule” refers specifically to the new creation.
Regardless of which of these options is correct, however, Paul clearly understands “those who will walk by this rule” as Christians who are doing the will of God.
Simplifying a little, then, but not in a misleading way, we can say that “those who will walk by this rule” refers to the church. There is wide agreement about this.
The Greek word kai
Secondly, I need to say a few words about the Greek text in the second half of v. 16.
I have translated v. 16 in this way:
“And those who will walk by this rule, may peace and mercy be upon them, that is [kai], upon the Israel of God.”
The Greek word that underlies my translation of “that is” is kai. In this translation, kai is being used in what is known as an explicative or epexegetic sense. This means that what comes after the kai gives more information about what is referred to before the kai.
The explicative use of kai is fairly uncommon in the New Testament, but it does occur (e.g., in Mark 1:19; 1 Corinthians 15:24; Colossians 1:2). For the reasons that I will give below, I have chosen to understand kai as explicative in Galatians 6:16.
However, this is not the only potential way that kai could be translated. This word more commonly means “and,” and we could potentially translate v. 16 in this way:
“And those who will walk by this rule, may peace and mercy be upon them, and [kai] upon the Israel of God.”
If kai is explicative, meaning “that is,” then “those who will walk by this rule” are the same group of people as “the Israel of God.”
But if kai means “and,” there are two potential options:
Either (i) “those who will walk by this rule” is a separate group of people from “the Israel of God,” or (ii) Paul narrows his focus as he moves from “those who will walk by this rule” to “the Israel of God,” he uses “and” loosely, and he understands “the Israel of God” to be part of “those who will walk by this rule.”
Actually, it gets even more complicated than this, because I think the translators of some English versions of the Bible that translate kai as “and” did actually understand “those who will walk by this rule” and “the Israel of God” to be the same group.
Anyway, I don’t want to get into a long discussion of exactly how to translate and the meanings of Greek and English words here. The key point I am making is that it is potentially possible to understand the Greek of v. 16 in any one of three ways:
(a) “those who will walk by this rule” is the same group as “the Israel of God.” If so, then, because “those who will walk by this rule” is the church, as we saw in the first preliminary point, “the Israel of God” would be the church.
(b) “those who will walk by this rule” and “the Israel of God” are separate groups. If so, then “the Israel of God” would be ethnic Israel. It is true that some ethnic Jews in Paul’s day were Christians (as is also true today), so some people would have fallen into both categories. But Paul could loosely be referring to the church and ethnic Israel as separate groups of people.
(c) “the Israel of God” is part of “those who will walk by this rule.” If so, “the Israel of God” would be all Jewish Christians.
The Greek will allow any one of these three options, although some have more natural Greek than others as we will see below.
INTERPRETING “THE ISRAEL OF GOD”
We are now ready to begin trying to determine what “the Israel of God” in Galatians 6:16 refers to.
As we have seen, there are three options:
(1) It refers to the church.
(2) It refers to ethnic Israel as a whole.
(3) It refers to all Jewish Christians.
Which, then, is the correct interpretation?
It does not refer to all Jewish Christians
To begin with, we should reject the view that “the Israel of God” refers to all Jewish Christians, i.e., option (3):
First, there is the minor point that this would involve using kai, meaning “and,” in quite an unusual way to refer to a part of the entity mentioned before the kai.
Second, having invoked a blessing of peace and mercy on “those who will walk by this rule,” i.e., on the whole church, it looks very strange for Paul then to partly repeat himself by invoking this blessing again on the Jewish part of the church.
Third, one of Paul’s main aims in Galatians has been to show that Gentile Christians are on an equal footing with Jewish Christians. In Galatians 3:28 he has said that in Christ, “there is neither Jew nor Greek [i.e., Gentile].” And in Galatians 6:15 he has just said, “neither is circumcision anything, nor is uncircumcision.” Having said that Christian identity is not dependent on ethnicity, it would be very strange for Paul then to invoke a blessing specifically on the Jewish part of the church.
We should therefore reject the view that “the Israel of God” refers to all Jewish Christians.
A reference to the church is to be much preferred
We are left, then, with interpreting “the Israel of God” as the church or as ethnic Israel. If “those who will walk by this rule” are the same group as “the Israel of God,” then “the Israel of God” is the church. And if “those who will walk by this rule” are a separate group from “the Israel of God,” then “the Israel of God” is ethnic Israel.
In favor of seeing a reference to ethnic Israel is the fact that the word kai, which I discussed briefly above, far more often means “and” than it means “that is.” Furthermore, the Greek expression tout’ estin is more commonly used to mean “that is.”
However, the combined weight of the counter arguments is much more impressive:
(a) First, there is the minor point that when Paul adds “of God” to “Israel,” he is probably hinting that he is using the term “Israel” in an unusual way. It seems likely that he means something along the lines of “what God really regards as Israel,” which would be something other than ethnic Israel.
I am not suggesting that Paul is implying that ethnic Israel no longer has validity in God’s sight. Nor am I suggesting that the church has replaced ethnic Israel in the purposes of God. But Paul does most naturally seem to be saying that there is a non-literal kind of Israel that is more significant than ethnic Israel. It is well worth noting that he makes almost exactly this point in Romans 2:28-29.
(b) Second and much more importantly, there is Paul’s blessing to consider. In this passage he invokes God’s peace and mercy on the Israel of God.
However, a large majority of ethnic Jews alive at the time Paul wrote Galatians did not accept Jesus as Messiah, and Paul (rightly) saw this as rebellion and as a grievous sin (e.g., Romans 9:3; 1 Thessalonians 2:14-16). It therefore seems strange that he would invoke God’s blessing on ethnic Israel in their rebellion.
This becomes even stranger when we note how Paul’s invocation of peace and mercy on the Israel of God is parallel to his invocation of peace and mercy on those who will walk by this rule, i.e., the church:
The first point to note here is that the peace and mercy Paul invokes on the church seems to be specifically because of the salvation they have in Christ.
At the beginning of this letter, in Galatians 1:3, he has already said:
“Grace and peace to you from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.”
The grace and peace Paul refers to in 1:3 is because the Galatians are saved. So surely the peace and mercy he invokes on those who will walk by this rule, i.e., on the church, in 6:16 also has to do with the fact that they are saved.
Yet if the Israel of God in 6:16 were a reference to ethnic Israel, Paul’s invocation of blessing on the Israel of God would not be because they were saved, but it would be a kind of hope that they might become saved. So in one breath Paul would be invoking two very different kinds of blessing, one based on salvation and a second that is just a hope for salvation. And without any hint in the context that a second kind of blessing is in view, this looks very awkward.
A consideration of Paul’s blessing, then, counts strongly in favor of seeing “the Israel of God” as a reference to the church.
Therefore, in view of points (a) and (b), but especially (b), it looks much better in the context to understand “the Israel of God” as referring to the church.
WHY THIS IS IMPORTANT
If in this verse Paul is describing the church as the Israel of God, as he seems to be, it would mean that he is referring to the church as a kind of spiritual Israel.
There are, in fact, many other biblical passages which teach that the church is spiritual Israel (e.g., Romans 2:25-29; 9:6; Philippians 3:2-3; James 1:1; 1 Peter 2:9). This is a major New Testament theme. And Galatians 6:16 adds to the weight of evidence for this theme.
In Christian theology today, the movement known as dispensationalism is very popular. In the most common form of this movement, a clear distinction is made between God’s purposes for ethnic Israel and His purposes for the church. This thinking denies that the church is spiritual Israel.
Those who claim that Israel and the church have distinct purposes in God’s plans are actually making a big mistake. And I don’t think there is any evidence that any Christians before the 19th century believed this anyway.
It is not my intention in this article to discuss the relationship of Israel to the church. My goal has been much more limited. I have simply tried to show that Galatians 6:16counts as a strong piece of evidence that the Bible describes the church as spiritual Israel. And because it describes the church in this way, that counts against the view that God has distinct plans for Israel and the church.
