A Sweet Savor Contact Miscellaneous Audio Messages Penmen

Comments from "The Remnant" Volume 21, No. 4 - July-August, 2007.

This is a continuation of attempting to prove that the "Principles" of "The Remnant" concur with the eschatalogical view of "Premillennialism."  What is very interesting to me is that there is nothing specific to the view of "Premillennialism" in the "Principles" whatsoever.  

In this volume the writer is up to Principles 5 & 6.  These principles are:

"5 - The eternal personal election of the redeemed in Christ, before the world began, and their eternal, vital union with Him; their number is fixed, certain, and sure, and can neither be increased nor diminished; their fall in their federal head Adam into spiritual death, total depravity, and just condemnation; their utter inability to recover themselves from this fallen state;

6 - The blood atonement and redemption by Jesus Christ are for the elect only, and are both efficacious and effectual in accomplishing the will and purpose of God to reconcile His people unto Himself;" [1]

You will notice in number 5 that the term "...eternal, vital union with Him..." is used very clearly.  And yet there appears to be a flat out denial of this wonderful truth in this present paper.  On page 3 there is a list of some points.

"The eternal personal election of a fixed number
Redemption in Christ
Eternity - before the world began
The vital union of Christ and His people ..."

What stood out to me is what was missing from the wording of the list above.  Notice it does not say "The eternal vital union of Christ and His people" but simply says "The vital union of Christ and His people."  Now I first thought that maybe this was a typo or an oversight.  But reading the rest of the article, I am now persuaded that this is a denial of this truth.  Right underneath this list in the middle of the paragraph though the writer does say; "The eternal election of God's people and their eternal union with Christ;..."  But this is the only statement of the kind and I think you will see that the rest of the article doesn't support this.

On page 6 under the subtitle of "2. Satan was a part of God's will and purpose" it says:

""Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding.

Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it?  Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof;  when the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?" (Job 38.4-7)

From ancient times until around the 600s AD. the saints of the Old Testament and those of the early church (for six centuries) understood "the sons of God" in this text (and in Genesis 6.2-4, Job 1.6, 2.1, and 38.7) to be the angelic hosts [2].  The New Testament references to the sons of God (John 1.12, Romans 8.14-19, Philippians 2.15, 1 John 3.1-2) were uniformly understood to be God's saints born from above into the kingdom of God.  Only after the 600s AD, when the allegorical errors of Origen, the Gnostics, and Augustine had taken root and begun to flourish in the state "church," did the "interpretation" of the Old Testament "sons of God" begin to be "interpreted" as God's earthly elect from among mankind. The introduction of this new "interpretation" led to two major heretical doctrines: (a) that the saints eternally existed prior to creation, and (b) that saints become angels when they are transported to heave."

I realize that the writer is not talking about the vital unity of the elect with Christ in this section.  But letter "a" is of a concern to me.  To say that the saints did not eternally exist prior to creation is to deny the "ETERNAL" vital unity of the elect with Christ.  My first thought was that maybe he meant that it is a heresy to say that the saints eternally existed prior to creation in a bodily form or spiritual form to which I would agree with.  But that is not what is stated here.  And then when you take what is stated in the subtitle of "D. Vital union of Christ and His people", it is of more concern to me that indeed there is a denial of the eternal vital unity.  

"By man's carnal reasoning, manifest never more plainly than in Arminianism, men read of being "in Christ" and reason that if mankind fell in Adam, then they must somehow get themselves from their fallen state "into Christ."  In the mind and purpose of God, however, there never was a time when His people were viewed as being separate from Christ.  They were chosen in Him before the world began (Ephesians 1.4) and do not need to "get into" Him.

"...the power of God; Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began...  (2 Timothy 1.9)."  Two things are here before us: (a) He saved us according to His own purpose, and (b) His grace was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began.  The elect have eternally been represented by Him.

"In hope of eternal life, which God, that cannot lie, promised before the world began (Titus 1.2)": Were you there, before the world began, to receive the promise of eternal life?  No.  Only God alone was present when He counseled and covenanted with Himself.  Christ was there, representing His people, to receive that promise for them.  That is part of the eternal covenant, God's eternal counsel." (underline emphasis added - Tom)

If Christ only represented His people then they were not IN Him. If they were not IN Him in seed form, then they are not eternal and therefore how can Christ give ETERNAL life to someone who was not there from eternity? Remember that eternity is both forward and backward.  Did Adam simply represent all of mankind or did he have their seed within him?  Is Scripture wrong when it states that Levi also payed tithes to Melchisedec when he was still in Abraham?  Or did Abraham simply represent Levi?  Were God's elect "chosen IN Christ" from all of eternity or were they "chosen BY Christ" as Him representing them?

On another note: In the same subtitle above but on pages 5-6 it says:

"In the final judgment of the devil, who is named Lucifer and Satan, God's wisdom, holiness, righteousness, justice, and wrath against all sin and reprobated sinners will be fully manifested and vindicated.  Those men "ordained to this condemnation" will follow Satan into the lake of fire, where "the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night (Revelation 14.11)," showing God's holiness, righteousness, and justice.

Note that "day and night" continue "forever and ever [Greek, eis aionas aionon, to the ages of the ages]."  In the original languages, God means what He says and says what He means.  Do not play word-games with Scripture trying to make for ever and ever or day and night mean something other than exactly what the Book says."

My thoughts here were what about when Christ said, "My kingdom is not of this world"?

Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence. (John 18:36)

Did Jesus not mean that His kingdom was not of this world?  Or did He mean just for then and that it will be in the future.  As the writer said "Do not play word-games with Scripture..."

And last but not least; on page 7 under the subtitle of "Will the Lord cast off for ever?" it says;

...doth His promise fail for evermore?  Can any one of His promises fail, "when God made promise to Abraham, because he could swear by no greater, he sware by himself, saying, Surely blessing I will bless thee, and multiplying I will multiply thee (Hebrews 5.13f)"?  Is that promise now to be watered down and given away to the Gentiles?  Cannot the God who chose the nation of Israel deliver them from their blindness, saving them as a nation?" (underlining added - Tom)

And then in the same section but on the next page (page 8) it says;

"Men have thought that this fixed number of God's saints primarily refers to the church as we know it.  In a sense that might well be so, if we are given to remember that it also refers to the saints from Adam and Eve on, God's Old Testament "church" (Acts 7.38), all the elect of God in every age, including "the ages [plural] to come (Ephesians 2.7)."  Therefore, the number will include the elect among national Israel who will be converted by the appearing of their Messiah, the Lord Jesus Christ; and it will include whoever else is embraced in God's election within the ages to come after the end of this "present world [eon, age] (Titus 2.12)." (underlining added - Tom)

Isn't it stated in the first quote above that the Lord will save Israel as a nation?  And yet in the second quote it makes mention of the elect AMONG national Israel.  Which is it?  Will ALL of Israel as a nation be saved or just the elect AMONG the nation?

These are just some thoughts and observations that I hope and believe that the Lord has granted me.  You may not agree nor understand and that is your perogative.  I by no means am attempting to persuade nor convince anyone of anything.  But I do feel that these inconsistencies are important enough to be here on this site.

In hope,
Tom Adams
6/29/07

______________________________

1 - The Remnant - A statement of Principles - always on the back page
2 - No proof was given for this statement.  I am not debating it, I just would like the proof shown also.