TRUTH CHRISTADELPHIAN GLEANER · The recent revelation by Dmitry Medvedev of the doc-trinal stance...

Volume VII, Issue No. 4

VOLUME VII ISSUE NO. 4, 2008

“Buy the truth and sell it not; Also wisdom, and instruction, and understanding.”

Proverbs 23:23

CHRISTADELPHIAN TRUTH GLEANER BIBLICAL ~ HISTORICAL ~ CURRENT

The Medvedev Doctrine The Medvedev Doctrine “Be thou prepared, and prepare for thyself…”(Ezekiel 38:7).

Volume VII, Issue No. 4 2

CHRISTADELPHIAN TRUTH GLEANER

CONTENTS • Gleanings: Birth of the Emphatic Diaglott………………....…...…………….…......p. 2

• Watchman, What of the Night? The Medvedev Doctrine…..………..……….p. 3 • Study Series: The Glory of Yahweh Revealed Through the Heroes of Israel, Part 8 - Judges Chapter 3…………………………….…………..……..p. 16 • Fundamental Questions and Answers: When Does the Stone Strike the Image?.……………...………….…………...…......p. 22 • Exposition: A House of Prayer for All People (Part 2)…...……..……...…...….p. 25

Birth of the Emphatic Diaglott Taken from “The Restitution”, November 28, 1906, as quoted in “A Man in Love with the Word of God” by Stephen Hill.

“While I was a boy, my father put me into the 'Gospel Ban-

ner' Office to learn the printing business. It was during this time that the 'Emphatic Diaglott' was translated and printed. I can now in my mind's eye see my Uncle Benjamin, sitting at his desk, making a literal word for word translation of the New Tes-tament. I remember seeing the Greek type arrive from Eng-land. Many readers of the Diaglott, may not be aware that my Uncle not only translated the Diaglott, but took charge of the mechanical work as well. He electro-typed the entire book him-self. The following was the process he followed.

“As each page of the Diaglott was put into type, he took an

impression of the page of type in wax. This wax mold was then black-leaded with very fine blacklead dust. He had a vat con-taining acid. In this acid, he hung a copper plate, and also the wax mold, before he went home at night. In the morning he would find the wax mold would be covered with a thin sheet of copper.

“This acid dissolved the copper, and the black lead at-

tracted it to the wax mold. He then made metal plates out of melted metal and fastened the copper sheet upon it. He then printed the first edition of the book, from these plates, on a hand press. I used to ink the plates, by a soft roller, while he worked the press. Thus, from Geneva as the early gospel cen-ter, issued one of the most useful aids for Bible study, that ever issued from the press, in any section of this country.”

W. H. Wilson


The recent revelation by Dmitry Medvedev of the doc-trinal stance to be undertaken by Russia in foreign policy was certainly no great surprise (Stratfor, Sept. 2008, Geopolitical Intelligence Report by George Friedman). Embittered by her demise as a superpower, Russia is now poised to recapture the glory reached under the Commu-nist regime. In fact, ever since the days of Tsar Peter the Great (1682-1725), Russia has been a constant menace to the nations on her western, eastern and southern borders. However, it is becoming more and more evident that Russia's view now comprehends a more global perspec-tive. This is what we anticipate as we peer through the prophetic lens of Ezekiel, where, in the 38th chapter, he reveals an autocratic regime allied in a confederacy of European and middle-eastern nations bent on Israel’s de-struction. How they achieve such an alliance through po-litical and socio-economic channels is the substance of the new Russian doctrine guided, no doubt, by the Elo-him. Here we quote from Ezekiel as though he were ad-dressing us today in context with the current names of the countries and territories that are the subject of the proph-ecy:

And the word of the LORD came unto me, saying,

Son of man, set thy face against Gog, the lands of Cen-tral Europe between the Baltic, Adriatic and Black Seas, the chief prince of all the Russian territories from the Dniester River to the Bering Sea, and prophesy against him, And say, thus saith the Lord GOD; Be-hold, I am against thee, O Gog, the chief prince of all the Russias: And I will turn thee back, and put hooks into thy jaws, and I will bring thee forth, and all thine army, infantry and mechanized divisions equipped with the heaviest armaments, even a great company of sol-

diers and weaponry skilled in modern warfare on the field of battle: All the Shea of Iran, Iraq, and Libya with them; all of them with their armies: France and all of Western Europe; North Central Asia from the Cau-cuses Mountains to the Dardanelles, and all their armed forces: and many people with thee. Be thou pre-pared, and prepare for thyself, thou, and all thy com-pany that are assembled unto thee, and be thou a guard unto them (Paraphrase of Ezek. 38:1-7). During the Communist era beginning in 1917, and

even now, Russia has utilized secret diplomacy, peace overtures in the U.N., political interference, and outright threats to advance her position. Winston Churchill once described this complex giant as a “riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma.” The Medvedev doctrine fits well into this description. Even though Medvedev's for-eign policy seems benign on the surface, many followers of Russia point out that her past and recent history says otherwise. Her policies have long been puzzling and per-plexing to world leaders because of a hidden agenda which was not always immediately discernible.

According to the Stratfor article by George Friedman

entitled The Medvedev Doctrine and American Strategy, “The Georgian conflict was not an isolated event. Rather, Medvedev is saying that Russia is engaged in a general redefinition of the regional and global system. Locally, it would not be correct to say that Russia is try-ing to resurrect the Soviet Union or the Russian Empire. It would be correct to say that Russia is creating a new structure of relations in the geography of its predeces-sors, with a new institutional structure with Moscow at its center. Globally, the Russians want to use this new regional power (and substantial Russian nuclear assets) to be part of a global system in which the United States loses its primacy.”

Introduction

“For the vision is yet for an appointed time, but at the end it shall speak, and not lie: though it tarry, wait for it; because it will surely come, it will not tarry” (Hab. 2:3).

The Medvedev Doctrine Bro. Darrell Pye

Watchman, What of The Night?


In effect a line has been drawn in the sand which will separate the northern powers confederated under the Rus-sian Gog of Ezekiel's prophecy, encompassing much of Shea Islam in opposition to the southern powers of the Tarshish nations who will occupy Israel and the areas to the south, or the Sunni Arab emirates encompassing Jor-dan and all of Arabia. The Medvedev Doctrine will un-doubtedly serve to accelerate this division and position the nations for the battle of Armageddon which will fi-nally deliver Israel from the hands of her enemies. A dis-cussion of the latter-day antagonists and their north and south alignment will follow in a future article, LORD willing. To gain an understanding of his uniquely “Russian perspective” we would first like to present a brief outline of Medvedev's life and career leading to his sudden rise to power as President of the Russian Federa-tion.

Referring to the web site, ‘Faces of World Rulers, Leaders, Presidents & Dictators at www.planetrulers.com, Dmitry Medvedev was born in Leningrad, Soviet Union (now Saint Petersburg, Russia) on September 14, 1965. Medvedev's parents were both university professors. He received a frugal soviet up-bringing. “At the age of 23, he chose to be baptized into the Russian Orthodox Church, which held no favor with the Soviet government of the times. As a student, Medve-dev supplemented his stipend by working in construction and as a street cleaner.” He married Svetlana, who he met in seventh grade, in 1982. “Today, Medvedev has one son Ilya, born in 1996.”

Education “Medvedev entered law school at Leningrad State

University in the fall of 1982. More than a decade apart, both Medvedev and Putin took courses from Anatoly Sob-chak, an outspoken democrat and the future Mayor of St. Petersburg. He graduated in 1987 then decided to con-tinue on to a doctorate which he completed in 1990. He specialized in private, corporate and securities law.”

Medvedev's Career Before the Presidency We will make several quotes pertaining to Medvedev's

early career, which has been rather extensive. Please visit www.planetrulers.com, for further details.


Medvedev' s Early Life

“Putin and Medvedev worked together closely for years. As Sobchak busied himself writing the consti-tution of the Russian Federation and laying the legal foundation for the new government, running the city fell to deputies like Putin. A city council member at the time said Putin made the decisions while Medve-dev did the legwork. Putin sold off city property and liaised with foreign officials. Medvedev provided le-gal advice, extended his private interests and contin-ued to teach law at his alma mater. They remained with the city government until 1996 when a former deputy, Vladimir Yakovlev, ran against Sobchak rid-ing a wave of corruption charges and ousted him from office.

“…In 2000, Medvedev became chairman of the

board of directors at the state-controlled gas monop-oly, Gazprom. He was the board's deputy chairman from 2001 to 2002 before resuming the chairmanship. ... From 2005 to 2007, with Medvedev at the helm, Gazprom was at the center of the 'gas wars' with Ukraine and Belarus. Russia's state-owned energy giant with market capitalization of $345 billion, now supplies over 30% of Europe's gas needs [and 50% of Europe’s energy needs in total, and growing. This company will undoubtedly use its energy supplies as a weapon when dealing with perceived enemies.]

“…For most of his professional career, Medvedev

has been a behind-the-scenes player, known mostly to those paying attention as a business ruler and behind-the-scenes government worker. That all changed in November 2005, when Putin appointed Medvedev to a specially created post as first deputy prime minister



Let us now look at the five points outlined by Stratfor which comprise the Medvedev Doctrine as Medvedev himself defines them:

At first glance, this appears to be a noble goal of any country desiring to take its place as a peaceful contributor in the world order of things. But within what framework is this concept of international law to be practiced? We have no doubt that it will be practiced within the auspices of the United Nations (U.N.)!

Dore Gold, former Israeli ambassador to the U.N.,

wrote in his book Tower of Babble, that “The U.N. was designed to fill a unique role. It was supposed to create international standards that would help shape a more stable world order. The U.N. Charter specifically em-powered the U.N. Security Council to determine whether an act of aggression had taken place (Article 39). The mandate was clear but unfortunately the U.N. has not been able to follow that mandate consistently. The prob-lem is that the U.N. Security Council is not a court that determines the guilt or innocence of states by trying to use objective legal criteria. It is first and foremost a po-litical body, and it has been grossly inconsistent in judg-ing cases of aggression. Moral relativism (truths are relative and may vary according to the individual, place or time) was an inevitable by-product of the U.N.'s work; often the attacker was not treated very differently from the victim of aggression.”

Kofi Annan, Secretary – General of the U.N. declared

in charge of five national projects. Two months ear-lier, Putin had outlined the national projects which focused on domestic development. Medvedev took the lead and the national projects garnered enormous media attention on state-run television.

The 2008 Election

“The appointment as first deputy prime minister made Medvedev the early favorite to succeed Putin as president. He enjoyed extensive exposure and favor-able media coverage as a result of the national pro-jects. Billions of dollars were apportioned for the do-mestic welfare undertakings to improve health care, education, housing and agriculture. [Hence, with all of this state backed media and populus backing, Med-vedev was elected President of Russia on March 2, 2008. On May 7th Dmitry Medvedev took an oath as the third President of the Russian Federation.]

Medvedev's Political Philosophy “Medvedev's policy style can be summed up as a

kind of controlled liberalism, where the state becomes involved only in cases where the problem is too big or the stakes are too high for private enterprise to suc-ceed, i.e., when the state risks losing control over a strategic sector of the economy.

“…Medvedev hasn't taken up Putin's mantle of

'sovereign democracy,' a term used to describe de-mocracy managed by domestic interests, for Russia. The idea arose during Putin's second term. ‘I still don't like this term. In my opinion as a lawyer, play-ing up one feature of a full-fledged democracy - namely the supremacy of state authorities within the country and their independence (from influences) out-side the country – is excessive and even harmful be-cause it is disorienting,’ Medvedev said in a July 2007 interview.

“…As Ariel Cohn noted in an article in The

Henry Jackson Society Publication on January 7, 2008: ‘The Medvedev appointment also means that Putin and Medvedev have cut a deal with the power-ful Seloviki (men of power), which includes the se-cret police generals who supervise the security ser-vices and the armed forces. These men wanted Putin to stay as president in order to keep their powerful posts at the top of the national bureaucracy and lu-crative positions as heads of state-owned energy and

arms-trading companies. They also are the main power behind Russia's anti-American and anti-western policy. Their influence is not likely to vanish, as Putin remains Prime Minister and shares many of their anti-American positions and Medvedev will depend on their support’.” [Mr. Cohen is Senior Research Fellow in Russian and Eurasian Studies. This article was first published by the Heritage Foundation.]

Medvedev Doctrine Number 1:

First, Russia recognizes the primacy of the fundamental principles of international law, which define the relations between civilized peoples. We will build our relations with other countries within the framework of these principles and their concept of international law.


that a permanent system was therefore needed to bring justice to individuals who had committed atrocities against mankind, genocide or war crimes. A conference was held in Rome in 1998 from June 15 to July 17 to reach an agreement on these princi-ples. Finally on July 17, the statute creating the ICC or International Criminal Court was approved by a vote of 120-7, with 21 states abstaining. From its very inception, the ICC's credibility was in question especially since the U.S. voted against the Rome Stat-ute. The Rome Statute was orchestrated by the committee of the whole which consisted of states from the Third World, South America and the European Union and was under the chairmanship of Canada. The U.S. had some grave concerns in regard to the authority that the Rome Statute gave the ICC. “With its claim to universal jurisdic-tion, the new U.N. body could reach into any U.N. member state and lodge claims against its citizens. It could for example, pull American citizens outside the protection umbrella of the U.S. Constitution, whether the U.S. Government agreed or not ” (Tower of Babble, Dore Gold, p. 178).

On December 31, 2000, in one of his last acts as presi-

dent, Bill Clinton ordered the signing of the Rome Statute of 1998. It was a shocking move even though Clinton did not recommend it to be sent to the Senate for considera-tion until some of the flaws were fixed. But on May 6, 2002, President George W. Bush notified the U.N. that the U.S. would not approve the Rome Statute. As a result,

“In April, 2003, a coalition of legal experts and hu-

man rights organizations announced that it was pre-paring to go to the ICC to prosecute the U.S. for al-leged war crimes during the Iraq war. Because the U.S. Government had not ratified the Rome Statute, the group said it would bring its case against America's ally Great Britain, which had signed the treaty. In January 2004, the president of one organization push-ing to prosecute the case against Britain made the group's anti-American agenda clear: 'The U.K. is like the Achilles heel of getting at the United States'. “Almost from the beginning, politically motivated

groups were looking to extend the jurisdiction of the international court as far as possible to continue their campaign against the U.S. and the war on terror. Hoo-


ver Institution research fellow Arnold Beichman ar-gued that these cases were examples of the naked anti-Americanism that infects so many in the international community... It was fitting, Beichman said, that on the same day the coalition of lawyers and human rights organizations first announced its plans to press a war crimes case against the U.S. and Britain, the U.N. nominated the following countries for membership on its Human Rights Commission: Cuba, North Korea, Iran, The Democratic Republic of Congo, Egypt, Nige-ria, Russia and Saudi Arabia. That was the same 'Human Rights Commission' that in 2003 had been chaired by Libya. “With an international organization that turned a

blind eye to tyrants' human rights abuses and that un-blinkingly elevated rogue dictatorships and state spon-sors of terrorism to its so called Human Right Commis-sion, how could an observer reasonably expect its judi-cial arm to deal justly with those who have committed crimes against humanity?” (Tower of Babble, Dore Gold, pp. 191-192).

As we consider these developments, we do so with Is-

rael ever in our mind’s eye, for it is against Israel that these nations will direct their ire, both before and after the arrival of Messiah in Jerusalem to make his claim as

The U.N. - an international organization that turns a blind eye to tyrants’ human rights abuses and that unblink-ingly elevates rogue dictatorships and state sponsors of terrorism.


Lord of all the earth. Preliminary to this will be a weak-ening of the power and prestige of those nations that heretofore have been Israel’s protectors. When the crises arrives and the King of the North and all his bands de-scend upon the tiny nation of Israel, the Tarshish nations with her “young lions” will not be in a position to oppose the interests of the northern confederacy with any effect, or in time to make a stand against them. Therefore they are consigned to enquire, “Art thou come to take a spoil? hast thou gathered thy company to take a prey? to carry away silver and gold, to take away cattle and goods, to take a great spoil?” (Ezek. 38:13).

According to Jed Babbin, former U.S. Deputy Under-

secretary of Defense: “The most obviously broken pillar of the U.N. is the

General Assembly… The U.N. has become a place where many countries seek to achieve a lynching of the U.S. by resolution. Those resolutions come from the General Assembly... Under the U.N charter, the Gen-eral Assembly is supposed to be a forum for debate of any issues that may effect the peace and security of the world ...The U.N. changed for the worse in 1968, when the Third World nations figured out that through sheer num-bers they could control the U.N. General As-sembly and use their majority to shakedown the United States, Britain, Japan, and other developed nations. ...They formed the 'Group of 77', and in 1973...they declared economic war [including an oil embargo] on the devel-oped nations and stated that The Third World must look on the U.S. and the old imperial powers as its real enemies and ...must rail against injustice in two pariahs...South Africa and Israel - and accept injustice anywhere else...and that ideology was quickly and thor-oughly implemented” (Inside The Asylum, Jed Babbin, pp. 62-64) .

In 1975, the Soviet Union convinced the Afro-Asian bloc to support the trumped-up charge that “Zionism is Racism”. This resolu-tion (Resolution 3379) attacked the very legiti-macy of the only national movement that had been recognized by both the League of Nations and, ironically, the U.N. It was revoked at the end of the Cold War, but it exemplifies how the U.N. can be used as a legal tool spotlighting

Israel but disregarding vast human rights violations of its accusers. Also ignored were the human rights abuses in China and Syria, while over a thirty-five-year period, the U.N. Human Rights Commission devoted almost 30% of its resolutions to railing upon Israel (many sponsored by Catholic France). Is it any wonder that the U.S has voted “No” on so many U.N. resolutions?

The failures of the U.N. in keeping international peace

have resulted in global chaos. In 2003, Iraq repeatedly and flagrantly violated basic human rights and had actu-ally used weapons of mass destruction but the U.N. did nothing to enforce the Security Council’s sixteen resolu-tions against them. The terrorist attacks against the U.S. on September 11, 2001, were followed by the U.N. Secu-rity Council adopting Resolution 1373 as a denunciation of international terrorism, as it expressly forbade states to harbor terrorist organizations. A week later the U.N. General Assembly overwhelmingly elected Syria to sit on the Security Council, a known sponsor of terrorism.

The reason that the U.N. does nothing to combat terror-


U.N. Resolution 3379 declared that Zionism is Racism

U.N. Resolution 3379 declared that Zionism is Racism


ism is because they have never been able to define what terrorism really is. Its involvement in the first Arab-Israeli war planted the seeds for repeated rounds of con-flict, as the armistice system that it created failed to stop the repeated attacks into Israel that eventually deterio-rated into full-scale wars. Other failures by the U.N. have cost many thousands of lives in the Balkans; some 800,000 Tutsis were slaughtered in Rwanda; and the U.N.'s failure there led five Central African countries to invade the Democratic Republic of Congo, where some 2.5 million died in four years. War in that region is still taking its toll in 2008.

Despite these failures, the U.N. is still held in high re-

gard and is viewed by many as the final authority in all international disputes. The emphasis on “international law, which defines the relations between civilized na-tions,” as noted by Mr. Medvedev, needs to be high-lighted. This is an indirect slap at the actions of the U.S. in regard to bypassing the U.N. on major issues like the Iraq war. Mr. Medvedev appears to be claiming that Rus-sia is acting as a civilized nation but the U.S. and her al-lies are not. Thus we have further evidence that Russia is using the Medvedev Doctrine in order to discredit the U.S and her allies, including Israel, considered to be a geo-graphic extension of western colonialism standing in the way of world peace.

Ever since the end of the Cold War and the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russia has been striving to re-define its foreign policy directives. The Cold War period was a time of prestige and power for the Soviet Union. It was a bipolar world where world politics were determined by the United States and the Soviets. Never before had the Soviet Union been one of the two power centers of global politics.

She also represented the communist ideology which

was in opposition to western democracy and also sup-ported a number of allies. This all changed with the fall

of the Soviet Union. Currently, Russia is not without sev-eral distinct advantages among which is control of the largest territory on earth. Russia is also a permanent member of the U.N. Security Council whose role is to intervene militarily to preserve world order. These along with her enormous nuclear arsenal (40 to 50% of the world's nuclear weapons) makes it unlikely that Russia would permanently agree or accept the claim that the U.S. is the only super power which can dominate on a global scale. Therefore the idea of having several centers of power (multi polar) in the world is more acceptable to Russia than being a lesser partner under the unipolar world order (i.e., the U.S. alone). Therefore, Russia is no longer willing to accept the unipolar strategic dominance of the global power system by the United States.

Russia envisions a greater role for itself in the global

system and will use the multi polar system in order to offset American dominance until the time is right to ful-fill its foreordained destiny as noted in Ezekiel 38:1-7. The current global financial earthquake, no doubt a work of the Eloah, is hastening the time, when in fact, Russia will dominate Europe, while Great Britain, The United States, and their Young Lions along with Israel, are mar-ginalized in the Geo-political heavens.

When Russia says that it has no intention of isolating itself, it clearly indicates that Russia will play an ambi-tious even aggressive role in international affairs. Friendly relations with other nations will depend on their conduct toward Russia and not just on the behavior of Russia itself.

In 2002, relations between the U.S. and Russia were at

an all-time peak. However, Russia began to look at its relationship with the U.S. and western nations and came to the conclusion that it was basically unequal and an-tagonistic. This realization was a major turning point as



The world should be multi polar. A single pole is unacceptable. Domination is some-thing we cannot allow. We cannot accept a world order in which one country makes all the decisions, even as serious and influential a country as the United States of America. Such a world is unstable and threatened by conflict.


Russia does not want confrontation with any other country. Russia has no intention of iso-lating itself. We will develop friendly relations with Europe, the United States, and other countries as much as is possible.


Russia now believes that it can better serve its own inter-ests if it follows its own course. “Be thou prepared [to establish, fix], and prepare for thyself...” (Ezek. 38:7). This policy impacts upon the last two points of the Med-vedev Doctrine which analysts consider the most impor-tant aspects of Russia's foreign policy and will be consid-ered next.

As noted earlier, 2002 was a good year for relations between Washington and Moscow. Putin had accepted U.S. actions over the previous three years that included the bombing of Serbia and the occupation of Kosovo. Further the U.S. had accused Russia of war crimes in Chechnya, and the U.S. also rescinded the Anti-Ballistic

Missile Treaty, established a military presence in Central Asia, began to train and equip Georgia's armed forces, and completed the largest ever expansion of NATO that included three former Soviet states, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. Many events, therefore, were responsible for convincing Russia's leaders that its relations with the U.S. were inherently unequal and antagonistic. Of special importance was the encouragement of Georgia and Ukraine to become NATO members, the installation of missile defenses in Poland, challenging Russia's domi-nance in Central Asia and the Caucasus, recognizing Kosovo's independence from Serbia, and badgering Mos-cow about democratic reforms.

These western and decisively anti-Russian directives

have left Moscow with no choice but to declare that Rus-sia will act speedily to protect its citizens and business interests “abroad” (or globally) with military force if nec-essary. “…And be thou a guard [to watch, hedge about, protect] unto them” (Ezek. 38:7).

It is notable that there is a significant population of

Russians in Israel, sons and daughters of the Orthodox Church who are making quite a foothold in the land. Re-cently, in an effort to placate the Russians after the Geor-



Protecting the lives and dignity of our citi-zens wherever they may be is an unquestion-able priority for our country. Our foreign pol-icy decisions will be based on this need. We will also protect the interests of our business community abroad. It should be clear to all that we will respond to any aggressive acts committed against us.


gian War incident where Israel was caught providing military intelligence and hardware to the Georgians, Is-raeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert spearheaded a Cabinet decision to transfer parts of a downtown Jerusalem com-plex to Russian control and ownership. The area in ques-tion is part of the area known as the Russian Compound wherein is the Russian Orthodox Church of the Holy Trinity. In addition, Olmert's government has approved the purchase of a large tract of land to Russia near the Dead Sea for a planned resort. This will add legitimacy to the same argument that preceded the Crimean war, when the Tsar claimed that Russia must protect the “holy shrines” and Russian citizens living in Palestine.

When the Soviet Union collapsed, many of the former

states were given the chance to enjoy the benefits of be-coming “westernized”. This created a crises for Russia when these former Soviet States began to prosper and look westward for membership in the European Union and NATO. In reaction to this threat to Russia's power

and influence, Vladimir Putin began to raise the stakes globally when in Au-gust, 2007, he announced that Soviet long-range nuclear bombers would resume patrols off the U.S. Atlantic coast, which really aggravated the U.S. during the Cold War. Though the significance of this action may not be perceived by the United States as a serious threat, it makes a clear state-ment about Russia's ambitions. To this the Russians have added to their stra-tegic portfolio military and economic assistance to Libya and Venezuela. In late 2007, Putin promised retaliation for U.S. plans to base components of a missile shield in Eastern Europe. He stated, “I can assure you that such steps are being prepared and we will take them.” An article in the Arkansas Democrat Gazette on November 6, 2008, outlines the steps that Putin was considering. The article is entitled, “Russia to put short range missiles near Poland to counter U.S.,” written by Steve Gutterman and Vladimir Isa-chenkov of the AP.

From Moscow - “Russia will deploy short-range missiles near Poland to counter U.S. military plans in eastern

Europe, President Dmitry Medvedev said Wednesday. In his first state of the nation speech, Medvedev blamed Washington for the war in Georgia and the world finan-cial crisis and suggested 'it was up to Washington to mend badly damaged ties' ...Medvedev used the speech...to cast Russia as a nation threatened by en-croaching American military might... From what we have seen in recent years – the creation of a missile defense system, the encirclement of Russia with military bases, the relentless expansion of NATO – we have gotten the clear impression that they are testing our strength, Med-vedev said. He signaled Moscow would not give in to western calls to pull troops from Georgia's breakaway regions of Abkhazia and South Ossetia”.

Medvedev Doctrine #4: Analyzed by Dr. Subhash Kapil

In regard to the global effects noted in the fourth point of the Medvedev Doctrine, a written paper (No. 2879) by


The government of Israel handed over ownership of the Sergei Court-yard site on Heleni Hamalka Street in Jerusalem to the Russian govern-ment in July 2008, following extensive discussions between the two gov-ernments. The Sergei Courtyard is named after Sergei Alexandrovich, the heir apparent of Czar Nicholas II.

The Russian press reported that Vladimir Putin had allocated 10 million

rubles (about $430,000) for the renovation and preservation of the Ser-gei Courtyard. Israeli Prime Minister, Ehud Olmert travelled to Russia to sign the final agreement in person.

The Russian Compound: The Russian Orthodox

Church of the Holy Trinity, Jerusalem, under the watchful eye of the Russian Federation


Dr. Subhash Kapila, dated October 13, 2008, is very in-formative. The author is an International Relations and Strategic Affairs Analyst and is the Consultant for Strate-gic Affairs with South Asia Analysis Group (Sections of the paper will be cited in our discussion. Paper 2879, may be read in its entirety at: http://www.southasiaanalysis.org /papers29/paper2879.html .)

In regard to what he calls “Russia's Monroe Doctrine: The Global Implications”, the following is a summary of Dr. Kapila's conclusions in regard to this matter:

i. “Russia – United States relations once again would

enter a strategically competitive if not confronta-tional state.”

ii. “Russia and the U.S., consequently, would harbor

heightened threat perceptions of each other. Stra-tegic mistrust would prevail.”

iii. “Russia and the U.S. would not enter into a direct armed conflict. Their strategic rivalries and tus-sles would be executed through ‘proxies’ in stra-tegic regions of the world.” [This writer's note: That is, until Russia makes its move into the Holy Land.]

iv. “Russia is likely to indulge in a rapid military re-

armament build-up to lessen its differentials in military balance with the U.S.”

v. “The NATO military alliance enlargement will prompt the enlargement of the Shanghai Coopera-tion Organization and the Russian Collective Se-curity Treaty Organization.”

vi. Russia would attempt “forward military presence

deployments in regions strategically sensitive to the U.S.”

“All in all, at the global level, the revived Cold War

would generate turbulence and instability in the Middle East, East Asia and even Eastern Europe as Russia strategically challenges the U.S.

“The global strategic impact of the Russian Monroe

Doctrine would weigh heavily on the United States’ global image of unquestioned leadership. The United States today is in a state of 'imperial overstretch' and its options to effectively deal with Russia's revived challenge are limited. Today Russia can generate more

strategic irritants globally for the United States than America can do so in response. “Politically, the global impact of the Russian Monroe

Doctrine can be expected to weigh heavily on the At-lantic Alliance and the new found American allies in Eastern Europe. Political ties could loosen and alli-ance unity fray when country-specific challenges are posed by Russia's resurgence to U.S. allies.


Tupolev Tu-22M3 Long-range Strategic Bomber/missile carriers and other aircraft resumed flights in 2007 far beyond Russia’s borders as part of Putin’s strategic initiative to “protect Russia,” Soviet style.


“Russia today enjoys significant economic leverages in the energy sector which it can employ decisively to modulate comprehensively the policies of U.S. allies both in Europe and Asia Pacific. Besides, in the ensu-ing strategic confrontation that may ensue, even with a drop in oil prices, Russia would not be constrained in use of its economic leverages resting on the energy sec-tor nor would its strategic armament plans be re-stricted.”

We take these “privileged interests” to mean “Russian style ambitions” hearkening back to the rule of the Tsars, with specific regard to the Will of Peter the Great and his vision of an eastern hemisphere with centers of power in Moscow, Constantinople and Jerusalem, dominated en-tirely by the Russian people. Medvedev concluded, “These are the principles I will follow in carrying out our foreign policy. As for the future, it depends not only on us but also on our friends and partners in the interna-tional community. They have a choice” (Stratfor, 9/2/08, The Medvedev Doctrine and American Strategy, by George Friedman).

Russia Back on Course

U.S. and Russian relations steadily improved between the fall of communism in 1991 and the friendly meetings be-tween Presidents Bush and Putin during most of 2008. This was a brief honeymoon period when peace seemed possible between the big pow-ers and democracy was in the

ascendancy. But events even before 2008 initiated by the U.S. and western democracies began to rile Russia and its leaders as we have noted. The final action which set Russia back on course was its invasion of Georgia on August 7th of 2008. Russia claimed that this attack was a result of Georgia's surprise attack on the breakaway en-clave of South Ossetia. This five-day war left hundreds dead and thousands of refugees. It brought U.S. and Rus-sian relations to its lowest point since the Cold War days.

George Friedman of the Stratfor consulting group

summed up the situation: “The Russian invasion of Geor-gia has not changed the balance of power in Eurasia. It simply announced that the balance of power had already shifted. The United States has been absorbed in its wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as potential conflict with Iran and a destabilizing situation in Pakistan. It has no strategic ground forces in reserve and is in no position to intervene on the Russian periphery.”

Russian leaders point to NATO's recognition of Kos-

ovo's independence from Serbia, a move that they greatly opposed, as justification for their invasion to stop Geor-gia from taking control over the regions of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. The real problem for Russia was that Georgia controls strategic oil and gas pipelines from Azerbaijan, which wind their way through Turkey to the Mediterranean and offer Europe a degree of independ-ence from Russian energy blackmail.

Some observers believe that Russia provoked Georgia

into making a move into South Ossetia, and that Russia


Medvedev Doctrine Number 5: The Regional Implications: As is the case

of other countries, there are regions in which Russia has privileged interests. These re-gions are home to countries with which we share special historical relations and are bound together as friends and good neighbors. We will pay particular attention to our work in these regions and build friendly ties with these countries, our close neighbors.

A Russian convoy in route through the Kodori Gorge in South Ossetia, Georgia, announcing that the balance of power in Eurasia has shifted toward Moscow.


was simply looking for excuse to take action. Both Geor-gia and the Ukraine have been seeking NATO member-ship, and Putin was in no mood to have Ukraine, once called the breadbasket of Russia, continue its move to join. This action by Russia will undoubtedly be very ef-fective in limiting or eliminating the rush by Russia's for-mer territories to apply for NATO membership.

Medvedev Doctrine #5: Analyzed by Dr. Subhash Kapila

We now quote from the section entitled “Russia's Mon-roe Doctrine: The Regional Implications.”

“The regional implications of the Russian Monroe

Doctrine needs to be primarily examined in the context of the United States overall military and political strat-egy directed toward Russia in the post-Cold War era of the 1990's and thereafter.

“…The essentials of the United States post-Cold War

strategy against Russia were as follows: 1) Establish a U.S. military presence in Central Asia; 2) Prevent a Russian foothold in the Middle East and Gulf Region more specifically; 3) Eastward creep of NATO to Rus-sia's doorsteps; 4) Dilute or neutralize Russia's lever-ages over Central Asia and Caucasus energy resources.

“…The Russian Monroe Doctrine when fully effective

would greatly neutralize U.S. strategy objectives out-lined above. The U.S. military presence today in Cen-tral Asia is nominal. With these regions claimed by

Russia as ‘privileged interests’ the United States may be hard-pressed to keep its military presence in Central Asia. “…Syria seems to be emerging as hosting a major forward military pres-ence to Russia on the Mediterranean littoral in exchange for Russian mili-tary hardware. The naval base at Tar-tus is being upgraded for the Russia Navy. “…The most notable impact in the Middle East of Russian Monroe Doc-trine has been in Israel. Israeli mili-tary advisers were in Georgia with U.S. military advisers till the Russian military intervention. With Israeli in-

telligence getting an indication of Russian military in-tervention, Israel military advisers were hastily with-drawn [although some of Israel’s most sensitive mili-tary hardware (pilotless combat drones) was captured by the Russians]. Israel is acutely aware that Russia could generate a host of strategic and military prob-lems for Israel, should Israel not be careful in respect-ing Russian strategy sensitivities. Israel is reported to be assuaging Russian concerns on this count [as previ-ously mentioned].

“…The eastward creep of NATO seems to have been

halted in its tracks even before the Georgian interven-tion. Germany and other European nations effectively blocked the question of admission of Ukraine and Georgia into NATO strongly advocated by the United States.

“…Regionally, the major impact of the Russian Mon-

roe Doctrine will be on the Atlantic Alliance. Europe's major nations like Germany and France do not share American perspectives of Russia. Historically, it needs to be remembered that Russia was a very much Euro-pean country, much before the United States emergence as a nation. Europe today needs Russia in more ways than one and both sides are conscious of this strategic reality.

“…Russia's next steps in enlarging her sphere of in-

fluence could extend to countries as far as Cuba, Vene-zuela and re-establishing presence in Cam Ranh in Vietnam.”


Below, the Machatz-1, a more sophisticated Israeli drone than those captured by the Russians during the invasion of Georgia. Israel’s military technology sector is one of the most advanced in the world and would be a prize for the Russian Autocrat.


Confirming the above analysis, an Associated Press article, which appeared in The Canadian Press dated Sep-tember 8, 2008, stated that Russia will send a naval squadron and long-range patrol planes to Venezuela this year for a joint military exercise in the Caribbean. There is no mistake that this move was in reaction to the U.S. deployment of warships to deliver aid to the former So-viet nation of Georgia, a month after the Russian inva-sion. Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez declared that stronger ties between his country and Russia “will help build a multi polar world” – a team the two al-lies use to describe their shared opposition to what they claim is “U.S. global domination.” Russia is also willing to help Venezuela develop nuclear energy.

Meanwhile in the Middle

East, Debka file of Sept. 12 reports that Moscow’s reno-vations of the Syrian port of Tartus continue on schedule. This port will provide Russia

with its first long-term naval presence on the Mediterra-nean to challenge the U.S. Sixth Fleet. Navy Admiral Vladimir Vysotsky, and his Syrian counterpart, Gen. Taleb al Barri, are working on details for the outfitting of Tartus port to accommodate increased Russian fleet Mediterranean missions not far from Israel's shores.

Back in Moscow Russian foreign minister Sergei Lav-

rov continues talks with Iranian foreign minister Manouchehr Mottaki on the completion of the Bushehr nuclear power plant by the end of the year. Debka file 2nd half of August: “In aligning with Tehran and Damas-cus, Moscow stands not only against America but also Israel.”

From about 1991 to 2003 it was beginning to look as though the identification of Russia as the Gog of Ezekiel 38 was on somewhat shaky ground. However, there is one sure way to rightly divide the events of any age. Be-lievers should never allow current events to interpret scripture, but scripture must be used first and foremost to interpret current events. Many times in history political events have seemed to turn against the expectations of believers. But Yahweh's Word will always direct one's path in the right way and prevent disappointments when the use of current events as a guide supersedes scripture.


Russian and Iranian technicians work inside the reactor building of the Bushehr nuclear power plant in southern Iran. When Putin visited Tehran in 2007, it was the first visit of a Russian head of state to Iran since 1943.

Russian and Iranian technicians work inside the reactor building of the Bushehr nuclear power plant in southern Iran. When Putin visited Tehran in 2007, it was the first visit of a Russian head of state to Iran since 1943.

Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez with Rus-sian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin in Moscow discussing deployment of Russian planes, ships and nuclear technology in the western hemisphere in reaction to U.S. aid to former Soviet satellite Georgia.

Conclusion: Scripture, The Key to Understanding Current Events


The Medvedev Doctrine serves to articulate the great changes which have been developing in world affairs since 2002. It appears that a democratic Russia which was searching for peace and alignment with the West has been caught in a subterfuge. Russia's true goal is to become a superpower again, and she will use whatever means necessary to accomplish this goal. It appears that the Medvedev Doctine is more of a Vladimir Putin concoction due to the veiled military threats. Putin believes that Russia can better serve its own interests if it follows its own course. That course has been revealed to be aggressive, as points 4 and 5 of the Medvedev Doctrine indicate. Russia is now re-arming to a great extent and will begin challenging the U.S. on many fronts. In September, 2008, Russia announced it would increase its military budget by 26 percent to a record $50 Billion. “Russia recently held her first major war exercises in the last twenty years on the borders near Kazakhstan. The exercise named Ex. Mobility 2008 was attended by President Medve-dev and other Russian dignitaries. The military sce-nario was of a local conflict in Russia's vicinity escalat-ing into an all out war with land, sea and air dimensions between Russia and the West” (Dr. Subhash Kapila, Pa-per No. 2879).

This chilling military action portends Russia's attack on

the Holy Land against Israel and the ensuing success in preventing the Tarshish nations from helping as Ezekiel 38:11-13 states: “...And thou shalt say, I will go up to the land of unwalled villages; I will go to them that are at rest, that dwell safely, all of them dwelling without walls, and having neither bars nor gates, To take a spoil, and to take a prey; to turn thine hand upon the desolate places that are now inhabited, and upon the people that are gathered out of the nations, which have gotten cattle and goods, that dwell in the midst of the land. Sheba, and Dedan, and the merchants of Tarshish, with all the young lions thereof, shall say unto thee, Art thou come to take a spoil? hast thou gathered thy company to take a prey? to carry away silver and gold, to take away cattle and goods, to take a great spoil?”

Believers down through the ages have hoped and

prayed that their day would witness the second advent of Jesus Christ. It appears that it may happen in the near fu-ture due to the great increase in the signs of the times that fall into place as perceived through our prophetic lens. The events heralding our Lord's return are ominous, fore-boding and unrecognizable to the world at large. Scrip-ture informs those which have been called, that the Lord's

return will be as a thief to the Babylonian community and her adherents, but not to the Christadelphian believer. “But ye, brethren, are not in darkness, that that day should overtake you as a thief. Ye are all children of light, and children of the day; we are not of the night, nor of darkness. Therefore, let us not sleep, as do others, but let us watch and be sober. For they that sleep sleep in the night; and they that be drunken, [lacking scriptural un-derstanding] are drunken in the night” (I Thess. 5:4-7).

Christadelphians have been blessed with a scripturally

accurate understanding of latter-day events for over 160 years. The writings of Brother Thomas are so sound that it appears they were penned in our day. A careful perusal of his writings will not only assist a believer in doctrinal understanding but will help prevent a truth-seeker from losing the fire of his or her convictions.

“And take heed to yourselves, lest at any time your

hearts be overcharged with surfeiting, and drunken-ness, and cares of this life, and so that day come upon you unawares. For as a snare shall it come on all that dwell on the face of the whole earth. Watch ye there-fore, and pray always, that you may be accounted wor-thy to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the son of man” (Luke 12:34-36).


Political analysts often compare Putin to his dark predecessors of the Soviet Era. In turn, President Med-vedev is said to be a puppet of Putin. The Bible prophets reveal the truth: the system that governs Russia will be autocratic, militaristic, and bent on world domination.


Outline

XVIII. Introduction XIX. Ehud, The United One XX. The Two-Edged Sword

XVIII. Introduction Reference reading: Judges 3:12 through 3:30.

The life of Ehud, like Othniel, reveals the manner in which Yahweh has worked with Israel to continue the development of a righteous seed to glorify His name in the earth for the Kingdom age.

The characters and events in this true story are no less significant than that of Othniel. Indeed, these men were men of sign. A “man of sign” is someone whose appear-ing is significant in spiritual matters. Yahweh raised up Ehud to set things aright in Israel, but Ehud also repre-sented a future savior and deliverer of all time, one who was promised by Yahweh, and that man was the Lord Jesus Christ.

“Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign;

Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel [God [is] with us]” (Isa. 7:14). “And Simeon blessed them, and said unto Mary his mother, Behold, this child is set for the fall and ris-ing again of many in Israel; and for a sign which shall be spoken against” (Luke 2:34).

Let us now consider the players and circumstances of

this account and how they combine into a parable that builds upon the former, a repeated pattern as the beat of the drum that confirms the authenticity of the Divine message; it is no accident of history, but prophecy acted out in the lives of both the wicked and the faithful that we may manifest the righteousness of Yahweh according to His Word and His will.

XIX . Ehud, The United One

“And the children of Israel did evil again in the sight of the LORD” (Jud. 3:12). Judgment this time came in the form of Eglon, king of Moab, whose name means fat bull-calf.

Eglon invaded Israel from east of the river Jordan, and set up his headquarters in the city of palm trees. We know this to be Jericho, for Deuteronomy 34:3 reads in part: “And the south, and the plain of the valley of Jeri-cho, the city of palm trees.” But when Israel had de-stroyed Jericho upon first entering the Land, Joshua had proclaimed a curse upon whoever would rise up and re-build the city. “And Joshua adjured them at that time, saying, Cursed be the man before the LORD, that riseth up and buildeth this city Jericho” (Jos. 6:26).

The children of Israel were enslaved by the fat bull-calf of Moab, until after they had served for eighteen years, when they again cried unto Yahweh. Fortunately, “The LORD is merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and plen-teous in mercy. He will not always chide: neither will he keep his anger for ever” (Psa. 103:8-9). Thus a deliverer was sent. This is the same word used to describe Othniel – the Hebrew word yasha – which means savior.

The savior sent this time was Ehud, “the son of Gera, a Benjamite, a man lefthanded.” Ehud means united, or one, Benjamin means son of the right hand, and Gera means enmity, and comes from a primary root meaning to drag off roughly, or to destroy.

Think back to Genesis 3:15: “And I will put enmity be-tween thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.” Even before considering the parable of Ehud, just by using the meanings of the names provided, we see the Gospel message revealed in his mission: a son of the right hand will arise out of enmity and unite all Israel against the fat (or fleshy) adversary. Ehud was the savior raised by Yahweh to deliver His people from their adver-

The Glory of Yahweh Revealed

Through the Heroes of Israel

Part 8 - Judges Chapter 3 ~ Triumph through Faith vs. Weakness of the Flesh ~

Bre. Al Bryan and Bryan Cram



sary. We just noted that the name Benjamin means son of the right hand, helping to confirm the prefiguring of Christ by Ehud (Psa. 110:1). “Ye shall see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven” (Mark 14:62).

Let’s consider in a little more detail Eglon, the king of Moab, the adversary of Israel. There is plenty written concerning the Moabites prior to their resurfacing here in the Book of Judges. Most notably we recall an earlier Moabite king – Balak – who repeatedly bribed the false prophet Balaam in an attempt to curse Israel and drive them out of the land.

We stated earlier that Eglon means fat bull-calf, and he was, according to the scriptures, “a very fat man.” Strong’s Concordance defines this word fat as “fleshed,” and how fitting this definition is in the parable of Ehud (Gal. 5:19-21). The principle of Sin is well represented in the fat, or fleshy, Eglon. Paul wrote that “in [the] flesh dwelleth no good thing”, and we know that “Sin in the

flesh” had to be condemned. This would happen through “God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh” (Rom. 8:3), His son Jesus Christ, a deliverer for mankind raised up by Yahweh.

Scripture states that Eglon was indeed a king, and he subjugated the children of Israel, he ruled over them, and he forced them to pay tribute. Continuing the type, Sin is portrayed by Paul as an oppressive ruler in the fifth chap-ter of Romans when he writes that “sin hath reigned unto death” (v. 21), a subjection with which all mankind must contend unto death.

Just as Eglon temporarily ruled over the children of Is-rael, so too does sin reign over us… unto death! Without the inclusion of the deliverer in our lives through bap-tism, we would have no hope. But the Bible confirms our hope, for “all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness” (Rom. 11:26).


Jericho: The City of Palm Trees

Noted as one of the oldest cities in the world, Jericho is an oasis situated on the rim of the western Jordan Valley. This photograph looks over the lush land-scape of Jericho eastward toward the desert. It was here that the prophet Elijah would heal the waters of the spring that fed the city centuries after Ehud over-threw the reign of the Moabites (2 Kings 2:19). It was here that our Lord would heal blind Bartimaeus (Mark 10:46) and where Zacchaeus would run before Je-sus and climb into a sycamore tree (Luke 19:1-5).


~ The Sword of Ehud~


Left: Canaanite weapons from the 1st millennium B.C. These two-edged short swords excavated in Israel may give some insight as to the actual weapon used by Ehud - conceal-able, yet deadly.

JUDGES - PLATE NO. 11

Ehud means “United”, or “One”. He is described as a man left

handed, a son of Gera, and of the tribe of Benjamin. Gera means to “drag off roughly” or “destroy.” Benjamin means “son of the right hand”, a foreshadowing of Christ and all of Yahweh’s sons by adoption (Rom. 8:15). Jesus Christ, the Son of the right hand (Benjamin), having overcome the flesh will unite the Redeemed of all ages as one immortal host depicted by Ezekiel’s Cherubim. This immortal host will overthrow the kingdoms of the Gentiles defeating all the enemies of Israel at the conclusion of the seventh apocalyptic trumpet.

Ehud defeated Eglon with a two-edged sword that was hidden. What

type of hidden sword do believers of God’s Word carry with them? He-brews 4:12 provides an answer. In the future, the beast nations of the

Gentiles who come against Israel to destroy her will be destroyed them-selves by a hidden force that they know not (Hab. 3:3-4; Psalm 83:2-4). Thus, the Saints will use the sword, a symbol of war, to defeat the nations and establish the kingdom of God (Rev.19:11-16). Israel itself will become a “sword” in the hand of the Messiah for this purpose (Jer. 51:20-24). All these things are represented by the sword of Ehud.



XX. The Two-Edged Sword

Eglon was slain with a two-edged dagger. The transla-tion “dagger” doesn’t really give the full impression. The weapon used by Ehud was a short sword designed for stabbing rather than slashing. It had to be small enough to conceal under his raiment, yet large enough to deliver a fatal blow. It is recorded that his sword was a cubit in length (approximately 18 inches), thus qualifying it for its purpose. The length, however, is not what is impor-tant. Its mission, and the fact that it had two edges, be-comes our primary concern.

The Hebrew word for “dagger” is kheh'-reb and means a cutting instrument such as a knife, sword, or other sharp implement. The word comes from the root khaw-rab'; which adds a rich significance to its use in the par-able of Ehud. Khaw-rab' is an action word that indicates to desolate, to destroy, or to kill. Thus is Ehud’s sword brought to life. We conclude that his sword had a purpose: its mission was to destroy.

In Judges 3:20 we read that “Ehud came unto [Eglon] as he was sitting [alone] in a summer parlour… and Ehud said, I have a message from God unto thee. And [Eglon] arose out of his seat.” What was this “message”? The message that Ehud deliv-ers to Eglon is in the form of the two-edged sword, fatally thrust deep into the flesh of the Moabite king.

The Apostle Paul counsels the believer to take unto himself “the whole armour of God,” including “the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God” (Eph. 6:16).

“The word of God is quick, and power-ful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asun-der of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart” (Heb. 4:12). In the parable of Ehud we see that the

Word of God is quick and powerful. In the hands of the deliverer it would be used to redeem Yahweh’s people, “that through death he [that is, the greater Ehud] might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil” – or Sin personified in Eglon.

In the hands of the individual believer, the sword of the Spirit is a weapon by which the flesh of sin is cut off. Paul writes to the Romans, “For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live. For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God” (Rom. 8:13-14). And again to the Colossians, “Mortify therefore your members which are upon the earth; fornication, un-cleanness, inordinate affection, evil concupiscence, and covetousness, which is idolatry: For which things’ sake the wrath of God cometh on the children of disobedi-ence” (Col. 3:5-6).

Hence, the “sword with two edges” used by Ehud fore-

shadows perfectly the Gospel message that has been pro-claimed throughout the ages – the Things Concerning the Kingdom of God (Psa. 149:5-9) and the Name of Jesus


B. Norraba

Moabites invade

the land



JUDGES - PLATE NO. 12

~ Eglon: the Fat Bull Calf~


Eglon, like Chushan-rishathaim, personifies sin. But instead of be-ing “double wicked”, Eglon is described as “Very Fat”! His kingdom was Moab, Ammon, and Amalek, the three peoples that opposed Israel when they came out of Egypt. Thus, Eglon and his kingdom represent the manifestation of sin in the flesh, or the serpent’s seed, which is at enmity with God. Eglon means “Fat (or fleshy) Bull Calf”, a beast!

The Psalms declare that “man being in honor [even a king] abideth not: he is like the beasts that perish” (Psalm 49:6-20). In Daniel chap-ter 7, Daniel sees a vision of four beasts that represent the kingdoms of men throughout history guided only by the will of the flesh, with the fourth beast being an amalgamation of all the ill effects of the former. Not surprisingly, the nations of Europe today represent themselves as a large bull ridden by a woman (Rev. 17:1-3). These nations are re-building Babylon the Great much like Eglon rebuilt Jericho, a cursed city. This should remind us of Eglon, the Bull Calf, who will be de-feated by a great hero of Israel.

The image of the woman (Europa) riding the beast (Zeus) was well known in 96 A.D., when the Apocalypse was revealed

to the Apostle John and can be traced to Crete, the mythological origin of Europe. Modeled after me-

dallions from ancient Greece, the symbol now represents modern Europe as foretold 2000

years ago in Revelation chapter 17 where a woman is said to ride the beast; the beast be-ing the great and terrible fourth beast from Daniel’s menagerie. Daniel and John’s vision will be fulfilled following the return of Jesus Christ to the earth when the Papacy finally achieves that which, heretofore, has been so

elusive: control of Europe and power to briefly rule (for “one hour”, or 30 years- Rev. 17:12)

over the nations when the Papacy incorrectly identifies the Messiah and the Redeemed as the

anti-Christ. It is then that Yahweh’s two-edged sword, after the type of Ehud, is unsheathed, and at last de-

stroys the Fat Bull Calf of Roman apostasy (Rev. 19:15).

The “Bull Calf” of Modern Europe


Christ (Rev. 1:12-15), manifested in believers called to be sons of the right hand.

In relation to “the Name of Jesus Christ” revealed in the Book of Judges we see a personal application to Jesus in Ehud’s use of the two-edged sword. The drama of the sin power Eglon being sawn asunder by the Word of God was re-enacted early on in the ministry of the Lord Jesus. Matthew, Mark and Luke each record the temptation of Christ in the wilderness in which he achieves a personal victory over sin. And how was this victory attained?

In each temptation the record reveals that Jesus con-

fronts the adversary with the words “it is written.” It was Jesus’ skillful use of the Word of God (the allegorical two-edged sword) that ensured victory during this period. It was a victory that would not be undone (Rom. 6:9-10). The details of Eglon’s death reveal how deeply the sword of the Spirit penetrates, and that the blow once struck by Christ would not be undone.

Ehud’s initial visit to pay tribute presented no opportu-

nity for his destruction of Israel’s oppressor, so he and his company left Jericho. But sending the others with him on their way, Ehud “turned again from the quarries that were by Gilgal,” and returned to Eglon’s palace with “a secret [message]” for the king… a message from God.

“The quarries” was not a random place for Ehud to turn around. The name implies idolatry, and literally means carved (or graven) image. He was called in part to lead the Israelites away from idolatry. It was also sig-nificant in that it would have reminded Ehud of his mis-sion to “cut off the flesh.”

When the Israelites first crossed over the river Jordan and entered the Promised Land, they first encamped at Gilgal. It was here that several faithful events took place under Joshua's leadership upon entering into the Prom-ised Land. The Passover was reinstated after 38 years of neglect, the manna ceased to be provided, and sin was cut off (Josh. 5:2). Therefore, seeing the carved stones of idolatry set up in a place symbolically associated with the cutting off of flesh, Ehud seemingly was inspired to com-plete his mission, and destroy the sin-power Eglon with the sword of the Spirit (Judges 3:26-28). Their savior re-turned to where the Israelites had been hiding, awaiting his sign. At long last he came, blowing a trumpet, pro-claiming that Yahweh had delivered their enemies into their hands. The children of Israel charged down the mountain with great zeal and destroyed the idolatrous Moabites.

The sounding of a trumpet is associated with the sec-ond advent of Christ and the subsequent events of judg-ment and warfare that will ensue upon the earth.

“In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed” (1 Cor. 15:52).

“And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a

trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect [Jews dispersed throughout the world] from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other” (Matt. 24:31).

The march of the Rainbowed angel and the subsequent

work of the Multitudinous Christ are foreshadowed in the triumphant actions of the Israelites under Ehud. Shortly after the sounding of the trumpet, the judgments of the nations will begin. “And they slew of Moab at that time about ten thousand men, all lusty, and all men of valour; and there escaped not a man” (Judges 3:29). “Lusty” implies fat, or fleshy… and not one of the wicked es-caped. So it shall be when the trumpet blows and the greater Ehud begins executing his judgment upon the wicked: the ultimate manifestation of Sin in the flesh shall not escape.

“And the seventh angel sounded; and there were great voices in heaven, saying, The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever. And the four and twenty elders, which sat before God on their seats, fell upon their faces, and worshipped God, Say-ing, We give thee thanks, O Lord God Almighty, which art, and wast, and art to come; because thou hast taken to thee thy great power, and hast reigned” (Rev. 7:15-17).

Bibliography for this Series: Joshua: His Life and Times, by Bro. John Ullman The Joshua Expositor, by Bro. H.P. Mansfield The Revelation Expositor, by: Bro. H.P. Mansfield The Gospel in the Book of Judges, by Bro. Ian Giles The Judges, by Christadelphian Scripture Study Service The Story of the Bible, Volume Two, Logos Publications The Moody Bible Atlas, by Barry J. Beitzel Wikipedia at www.wikipedia.org Encyclopedia Britannica Antiquities of the Jews, by Flavius Josephus



cies were given. This vision, being the foundation of all prophecy, requires us to ensure that our interpretation of all other visions and prophecies fit into this framework, for they simply give us further details of the prophetic outline set forth here, and we are told “the dream is cer-tain, and the interpretation thereof sure” (Dan. 2:45). With that introduction, let us consider the prophecy.

Nebuchadnezzar saw one colossal image composed of

various elements. It is thereby revealed to us that the im-age represents one great dominion which shall be “broken to pieces together” (Dan. 2:35), and therefore must stand together “in the latter days” (Dan. 2:28). The various metallic elements of the image represent the various forms of human organization that the “Kingdom of Men” has assumed over history, while the image as a whole represents the “Kingdom of Men” as it shall be found at the apocalypse of Jesus Christ. The historic as-pect of the image may be summarized as follows:

• The golden head represents Babylon (Dan. 2:36-38). • The breast and arms of silver represent Media and

Persia (Daniel 2:39). • Take note of the term “after thee shall arise another

Kingdom” in this and subsequent verses. This phrase tells us of a distinct change in the form of this King-dom.

• The brazen belly and sides represent Greece (Daniel

2:39; note another distinct change to “another third kingdom of brass”).

• The iron legs represent Rome with its eastern and

western division (Daniel 2:40; note here yet another distinct change to a “fourth kingdom”).

• The iron and clay feet and toes represent the divided

Roman Empire (Daniel 2:41-43).

Note that in the description of the feet and toes, there is not another distinct “fifth” kingdom defined. We are sim-ply told “The Kingdom shall be divided” (vs. 41). What


“Thou, O king, sawest, and behold a great image. This great image, whose brightness was excellent, stood before thee; and the form thereof was terrible. This image's head was of fine gold, his breast and his arms of silver, his belly and his thighs of brass, His legs of iron, his feet part of iron and part of clay. Thou sawest till that a stone was cut out without hands, which smote the image upon his feet that were of iron and clay, and brake them to pieces. Then was the iron, the clay, the brass, the silver, and the gold, broken to pieces together, and became like the chaff of the summer threshingfloors; and the wind carried them away, that no place was found for them: and the stone that smote the image became a great mountain, and filled the whole earth” (Daniel 2:31-35).

The prophecy from which we have just quoted is the backbone of the prophetic Word. It stands as the skeletal frame upon which all the other prophecies of the scrip-tures fit. The teaching of this 2nd chapter of Daniel is a fundamental of the one faith, representing the consum-mation of the age-old battle between the Seed of the woman and the Seed of the serpent; the battle of the Spirit versus the Flesh. Here we are shown this battle on its grandest scale, the Kingdom of men versus the King-dom of God, wherein the latter kingdom becomes a great mountain filling the whole earth. This is the Hope of Is-rael.

Because the image of a man was incapable of revealing

all the details Yahweh wished to communicate to us con-cerning the Kingdom of Men, further visions and prophe-

~ Fundamental Questions And Answers ~

When Does the Stone Strike the Image? Bro. Adam Kuipers


Kingdom was to be divided? It must be the one most recently mentioned in the context, the “fourth” Roman “Kingdom”.

All these various forms of the “Kingdom of men”

have individually existed throughout the ages. As one form passed, the next came and assimilated its territory and character, most notably a variation of its religion which is consistently some adaptation of Pantheism [the belief in a multiplicity of gods]. This fact is par-ticularly evident in the description of the Fourth Beast in Daniel 7:19, which had iron teeth and brass nails, and also Revelation 13:2 where it is described as “like unto a leopard,” with the feet of a bear and the mouth of a lion. By such symbols it is revealed to us that in this beast are incorporated assorted attributes of its predecessors.

The Stone represents Christ and the glorified saints (Dan. 2:44-45). This power is also referred to as the Cherubim (Ezek. 10:1), the son of Man (Rev. 1:13), the Rainbowed Angel (Rev. 10:1), and Michael (Dan. 12:1). When does the stone smite the image? We in-quire not after what time in general history, but what time in relation to other events in the last days? This may at first seem like an insignificant question with an obvious answer, but as we look at the latter end of the image, we will find all of the final events intercon-nected. For example:

• The Kingdom of God cannot begin to fill the earth

until the initial blow to the image. The “mustard seed” to which the Kingdom is likened is planted by that event, and thenceforth proceeds to grow. That mustard seed is planted in Israel, which is the “first dominion” of the Empire of the Lamb.

• The global regathering and restoration of Israel

“with a mighty hand, and with a stretched out arm, and with fury poured out” (Eze. 20:34) cannot commence until the image is smitten. This is an intricate part of the growth of the Stone into a mountain.

• The “Everlasting” or “Mid-heaven Gospel” (Rev.

14:6-7) which is the final ultimatum offered to the nations before “Mystery Babylon” is destroyed, cannot be preached throughout the world, as this is part of the growth of the Stone.

Now, IF we believe the image is smitten when Christ

and the Saints attack Papal Europe, then none of the

preceding events will have yet taken place. Contrawise, IF we believe that the Stone smites the image when Christ and the saints deliver Jerusalem (as we rightly should), then the power which is then besieging the Jews must be properly represented by the image that Nebuchadnezzar dreamt.

From the preceding examples we hope all can see that

one change in our understanding of the Truth creates a domino effect. We cannot change one part of the Truth without affecting another. This is true for first principles, and this is true for our prophetic doctrines connected to these first principles; for the consummation of this proph-ecy in Daniel 2 IS the Hope of Israel, and the stone becom-ing a great mountain IS the fulfillment of the Abrahamic


NEBUCHADNEZZAR’S IMAGE: Reference Works: Elpis Israel page 334-338; Eureka Vol. IIIA Red Edition, Page 151

HEAD OF GOLD

BABYLON B.C. 610-542

BREAST/ARMS of SILVER

PERSIA B.C. 542-334

THIGHS OF BRASS

GREECE B.C. 334-67

LEGS OF IRON

ROME B.C. 67-493 A.D.

FEET OF IRON AND CLAY

DIVIDED NATIONS OF EUROPE

A.D. 493-ADVENT


For back issues of the Christadelphian Truth Gleaner and for ordering Study Book-lets, please visit: www.truthgleaner.com or write [email protected]

Listen to On-line Audio @ www.phanerosis.org

completed while the Stone power is being perfected, i.e., while the saints are gathered to the Judgment Seat. It is to finally be destroyed by Christ and the Saints to such an extent that “no place” will be found for it.

Fifth: We have a parallel prophecy in Daniel 11:40-

12:1 against the “King of the North”, who comes with the same people, to the same place, and is destroyed by the same (Stone) power. Upon Daniel’s visions of this day he tells us “My cogitations much troubled me, and my coun-tenance changed in me, but I kept the matter in my heart.” This we must do also, brethren. Perhaps from time to time we read over these events superficially and go on with our day, but we, as Daniel, ought to keep this matter in our heart, “for out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaketh” (Matt. 12:34). If we look to-ward this day and dwell upon it, we will certainly order our words and steps in such a way that we shall be counted among the wise, which “shall shine as the brightness of the firmament” (Dan. 11:3).

We look forward with anticipation not only to the de-

struction of the sinful governments and religions of the earth, but to the day when “all the earth shall be filled with the knowledge of the glory of Yahweh, as the waters cover the sea”. This, brethren, is the day of which the Psalmist spoke when he wrote “This is the day which Yahweh hath made,” and truly, “we will rejoice and be glad in it” (Ps. 118:24).


Covenant through Jesus Anointed and his glorified breth-ren enthroned in Zion. Seeing the extensive perversion caused to the growth of the Stone power by moving the event of the Stone’s impact to any time other than the saving of Jerusalem, we hope that all can see that this is the time that the image receives its initial blow. We must now only identify the image’s latter day representative.

We would quickly note that if one were to believe that

the aggressor which Christ and the saints destroy (as the stone power) upon their entrance into Israel is but an “Arab power”, then one would be required to accept that the Image represents an “Arab Confederacy”. This we strongly reject, and offer the following as the only logical explanation.

First: Nebuchadnezzar was told “there is a God in

heaven that revealeth secrets, and maketh known to the king Nebuchadnezzar what shall be in the latter days. Thy dream, and the visions of thy head upon thy bed, are these...” What Nebuchadnezzar saw was to take place in the latter days. This great image is to stand united to re-ceive its destruction, to be “broken to pieces together”. As such, this image represents the gentile “kingdom of men” under the banner of a dominant world power, styled “a head of gold”.

Second: In its servitude are a multiplicity of Gentile

nations who have adopted for its religion the pantheon of deities stemming from Roman, Greek, and Babylonian superstition, hence styled by Daniel as a “God of Forces” or, in other words, the worshipers of guardian Saints as many as the stars of heaven. These are those same powers that dominate the Eurasian Continent from Spain to Siberia, immersed in the philosophy of the Greeks mingled with false Christianity, not Islam.

Third: This image has never stood as it was seen in the

vision, nor does it yet today. However, it will be consoli-dated as required by the vision as all the elements are de-stroyed together concurrent with the advent of Messiah.

Fourth: In Ezekiel 38-39 we have a prophecy which

directly corresponds to this vision. Gog, or Russia, is there said to overrun, “rob”, “spoil”, and carry “into cap-tivity” Israel with an amalgamation of the nations repre-sented by the image Nebuchadnezzar saw. Zechariah chapter 14 opens with a description of the same confeder-acy in the midst of their transgression. This confederacy of the nations represented by the image is likely to be


dates Brother Sulley’s conclusions. An annotated sketch of Brother Sulley’s cross section of the Temple (Figure 12) will be needed to help clarify the various points from where our dimensions are taken. Our approach will con-sider two separate proofs. The steps of each proof can be summarized as follows:

Proof One (outlined)

1. Calculate the diameter of the circular Temple Building and with this data determine the circum-ference of the Temple Building.

2. Using the detailed dimensions given for the con-

struction of the Temple’s structure and passage ways, verify they equal the circumference.

3. Calculations 1 and 2 being equal we will have sub-

stantiated that the configuration of a round building exactly meets the individual detail provided by the measuring angel and thereby validating Brother Sulley’s findings.

Proof Two (outlined)

1. Calculate the radius of the Tem-ple Building’s inner and outer en-trance doors from the center point. 2. The widths being given for the entrance doors on either wall, use geometry calculations to validate that a circular building with Brother Sul-ley’s layout matches the specified dimensions. Let us now proceed with the arithmetic in depth. PROOF ONE

The prophecy describes the Tem-ple as having two porches, one on either side of the Temple Building. These porches are separated from the Temple Building by a space called “the place that was left” (Ezek. 41:11) abbreviated by Brother Sulley as “the Place Left.” The features of


In our previous installment we considered the man of Brass as he ushered Ezekiel in vision around the various structures of the future Temple to be built in Jerusalem. In this second portion of our review, we will examine the arithmetical evidence alluded to in the prophecy from which Bro. Henry Sulley formed his conclusions and has so enlightened our understanding and appreciation of Yahweh’s future house of prayer.

THE ARITHMETICAL PROOF

Throughout the last chapters of Ezekiel the measuring angel provides Ezekiel with many dimensions. To this point, our article has not considered these dimensions; however, the circular nature of the Temple (the House) is such a profound departure from previous scholars that an in-depth numerical study is appropriate because it vali-

A House of Prayer for all People (Part 2) A House of Prayer for all People (Part 2) The Temple of Ezekiel’s Prophecy A review of Brother Henry Sulley’s book

first published in 1887

By Bro. Scott Cram

FIGURE 12

Porch Chambers/Galleries Porch

the Place Left the Place Left

Ezek. 41:10, 15-15

Ezek. 40: 48-49; 41:2, 11

Ezek. 41:6-12

Ezek. 41:13 The House

The Wall of the House Ezek. 41:6

Holy

(Ezek. 42:13)

Sulley’s Base Line

(The circular line for Sulley’s measurements; also the inner-most end of the wall for the Ribs, a wall which is perpendicular to Sulley’s Base Line)

Most Holy

(Beginning at the Juncture of the Place Left and the House’s vestibule Entrance)

Separate Place

(Ezek. 41:13)


segments plus the two and a half cubits on either side yields a center to center dimension of 25 cubits for each of the 30 openings, the total equaling 750 cubits. Sub-tracting this number from our calculated circumference of 6,974 cubits yields a remaining dimension of 6,224 cubits to be accounted for.

The inner porch columns are indicated by the measur-ing angel to be 16 cubits center to center, which is also the centering dimension for the chambers/galleries adja-cent to the inner porches. Brother Sulley also refers to these chambers/galleries of the Temple Building as vaults due to the nature of their roof/ceiling structure. To deter-mine the number of vaults for the entire circular structure we divide the remaining circumference dimension of 6,224 cubits at the Base Line by 16 cubits; 16 cubits be-ing the dimension of each vault. The result is exactly 389 vaults. Thus, the entire circumference requires 389 vaults distributed in 30 sub-building segments of the circular Temple Building. Given that these calculations exactly


the porch are described in their separate parts but not given any particular convenient name for reference so Brother Sulley suggests an appropriate name for refer-encing the juncture where the “the place that was left” adjoins the porch as the “Base Line” (Figure 12 and 13; see The Temple of Ezekiel’s Prophecy [TTOEP], page 43).

We first begin by calculating the diameter of the circu-

lar Temple building at its “Base Line.” The given meas-urements of the outer and inner courts and their respec-tive gate buildings plus the elements of the Temple Building to the point of its “Base Line” total 390 cubits on either side (Figure 16 and TTOEP, page 48).

Thus, 390 times 2 subtracted from the overall width of

the Sanctuary of 3,000 cubits leaves 2,220 cubits as the diameter of the circle a circle named by Sulley as the “Base Line” of the Temple Building (Figure 13 and 16). With this calculated diameter of 2,220 cubits we can next determine the circumference of the “Base Line” circle, which will also represent the length of the “Base Line.” Such calculation yields 6,974 cubits (formula is C = πd; Fig-ure 16).

Setting this number aside for the moment,

we will now consider some of the other di-mensions the measuring angel provided re-garding the Temple structure and determine if we can validate the circumference dimen-sion of 6,974 cubits. We are given the floor layout dimensions for the Porch and the adja-cent Temple Building which are the two ele-ments on either side of Brother Sulley’s Base Line.

Referring to Figure 14, the covered open-

ing between the circular Temple Building

FIGURE 13 - Partial Cross Section of the Sanctuary

390 Cubits

Sulley’s Base Line is a circle with a diameter of

2,220 Cubits

500 Reeds = 3000 Cubits

FIGURE 14

One Segment of the Circular Temple Building

Innermost end for

the Wall for the Ribs

= 2,220 Cubits Dia.

Sulley’s Base Line


41:6-12 Brother Sulley determines this wall is 90 cubits in length (TTOEP, page 47-48). We will use this Wall for the Ribs as a reference for these cal-culations.

The inner door layout is shown enlarged in Fig-ure 15. The innermost end of the Wall for the Ribs coincides with Brother Sulley's Base Line circle which we calculate to be a radius of 1,110 cubits from the center point of the circular Temple Build-ing (the radius being equal to one half the diameter of 2,220 cubits calculated in Figure 16). To this we must add 10 cubits to extend our radius to the centerline of the inner-doors. This results in a final radius calculation of 1,120 cubits for the inner-door of 6 cubits width. This number becomes the numerator in our ratio.

Similarly the radius of a circle passing through the cen-ter of the outer-door posts (thus the outer doors) on the outer side of the Temple Building is obtained by adding the length of the Wall for the Ribs of 90 cubits to the al-ready determined Base Line circle radius of 1,110 cubits for a total of 1,200 cubits. Because of the exact symmetry of the Temple Building, we must subtract the 10 cubits because the outer wall is a reverse image of the inner wall shown in Figure 15. Ten cubits is the distance from the outermost end of Wall for the Ribs to the centerline


match the specifications and being calculated from them, Brother Sulley concludes that a correct representation has been found of the size and configuration of the House of Prayer for all people to be erected in Jerusalem when the Messiah returns to reign over the whole world. PROOF TWO

A collaborating proof is found by considering the measurements given for the doorways of the Temple Building in Ezekiel 41:3. “Then went he inward, and measured the post of the door, two cubits; and the door, six cubits; and the breadth of the door, seven cubits.” “Breadth” is elsewhere rendered in the Scriptures as “largeness” and “wideness” (Strong’s H7337). Accord-ingly, Brother Sulley finds a more compatible rendering of this verse consistent with the concepts set forth as be-ing, “…measured…the door, six cubits, and the large-ness of the door, seven cubits [e.g., that is the enlarged or larger door].” This rendering now suggests there were two doorways – one 6 cubits and a second 7 cubits in width. Validating a 6 cubit inner door and 7 cubit outer door will be our second proof.

To do this we will use a simple geometric ratio calcula-tion; the radii from the center of the circle to the two doorways in question located in the inner wall and the other in the outer wall of the Temple Building. The mathematical proof is developed thus.

In Figure 15 the Wall for the Ribs is the wall (shown as a heavy black line) on either side of the covered open-ings and is essentially the end wall of each of the sub-building sections of the Temple Building. From Ezekiel

FIGURE 15

One segment of the Circular Temple Building

Wall of the House

Innermost end of the Wall for the Ribs. The center of the door is 10c from this wall.

FIGURE 16 - Temple Diagram

6,974c Circumference = 30 Openings, plus 389 Vaults

(C = πd)

The Wall for the Ribs (90 Cubits in length)

Doors

Covered Opening

The Base Line

The Base Line

6c 2c

Base Line

1,120

c to I

nner

Door

1,190

c to O

uter

Door


THE TOPOGRAPHICAL SITE OF THE TEMPLE

Brother Sulley places the House of Prayer on the to-pography of Jerusalem in his Plate XIII (Figure 19, Page 24). He relies on Jeremiah’s words from Jer. 31:31-40; especially verses 38-40, “Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that the city shall be built to the LORD from the tower of Hananeel unto the gate of the corner. And the measuring line shall yet go forth over against it upon the hill Gareb, and shall compass about to Goath. And the whole valley of the dead bodies, and of the ashes, and all the fields unto the brook of Kidron, unto the corner of the horse gate toward the east, shall be holy unto the LORD; it shall not be plucked up, nor thrown down any more for ever.” From this, he constructs the site plan of the Sanctuary.

The colors and capital letters placed over Brother Sul-ley’s sketch represent:

GREEN (Dashed) = valleys of Hinnom and Kidron. RED (Building) = the Sanctuary structures.


of the outer doors. Subtracting the 10 cubits from the outer radius of 1,200 cubits yields 1,190 cubits for the radius from the center point of the circular Temple Building to the centerline of the outer door of 7 cubits width. Thus, 1,190 Cubits is the de-nominator in our ratio (Figure 17 and 18).

Next, the posts of the building (noted as “6c col-umn base” in Figure 15) are each 6 cubits square regardless of their location in the Temple Building whether on the inner wall or outer wall where our doors in question are located. Also, the same is true with the door posts (noted as “2c door post” in Figure 15). Because these dimensions do not vary, we must add them to each door width prior to our calculation.

The inner-door calculation is considered first be-cause its dimensions have been clearly given and recorded in the KJV. For the 6 cubit inner-door we add ½ of the column base on each side of the door (3 Cubits x 2) , plus the door post on both sides of the door (2 Cubits x 2) , plus the door itself (6 Cubits). This totals 16 cubits as shown in Figure 17.

The circumferences of the two circles are proportionate

to their radii, and therefore any segments of the two cir-cles preserve the same ratio. A simple ratio calculation will determine the corresponding arc for the outer side will be 17 cubits exactly (without decimals, see Figure 18). Since the posts of the Temple on each side are of equal size, the difference between inner dimension of 16 cubits and outer dimension of 17 cubits must be made up by the extra width of the door opening on the outer side of the Temple. The outer side result of 17 cubits when reduced by the dimensions of the column bases and door posts equals 7 cubits; the width of the outer-door (See “Y”, Figure 17). This precisely equates to what Ezekiel 41:3 indicates: “Then went he inward, and meas-ured the post of the door, two cubits; and the door, six cubits [inner-wall door]; and the breadth [largeness or larger] of the door, seven cubits [outer-wall door].”

As a result, a Circular inner Temple having a 6 cubit

width inner door (or gate) and a 7 cubit width outer door (separated by 70 cubits) is the only possible geometry that will work to explain Ezekiel’s measurements. Hence, these two remarkable calculated proofs of the circular building mathematically support the accuracy of the in-terpretation of the prophecy; that the Most Holy is a mountain surrounded with a circular Temple Building.

FIGURE 17

3 + 2 + 6 + 2 + 3 = 16

3 + 2 + Y + 2 + 3 = X

FIGURE 18: PROOF OF CALCULATION 1,120c

1,190c 16c X =

X = 17c

Width

“X”

Width

“Y”

6c

Doors


sites traditionally known as the Hill of Zion and Mount Moriah -- Zion occupying the center of the square.

Now, it is testified that Jerusalem shall be rebuilt upon her own heap, or hill. “Thus saith the LORD; Behold, I will bring again the captivity of Jacob's tents, and have mercy on his dwelling places; and the city shall be builded upon her own heap, and the palace shall remain after the manner thereof” (Jer. 30:18).

Some interesting features become apparent when draw-

ing a site plan of the Sanctuary. A little to the north of the Sanctuary upon the knoll just above what is called “Jeremiah’s Grotto” at the point marked LETTER F is

the spot where many believe Jesus was crucified and is today known as “The Gar-den Tomb” (Figure 20). The fury of those who hated him expended itself here. It was here the Roman soldiers cast lots for his coat and parted his garments amongst them. He suffered at this place “without the gate” and his grave was nigh unto the place where he was crucified.

This scene of his death will doubtlessly be outside the Temple limits specified by Ezekiel. Unless shattered by the Olivet earthquake, the rock upon which the Lord was crucified will be equally well known to the Temple worshippers as to us. Now, at this place on the north side of the Sanc-tuary, the sacrificial offerings of the future age will be slain, because the sacrificial blocks are at the gates on the north side.

It is fitting that the site of our Savior’s


LETTER A. “The tower of Hananel” is supposed to have stood at the northeast corner of the Haram area. LETTER B. “The gate of the corner” points from the north, and continued straight onward until it reaches the “hill Gareb.” LETTER C. “Hill Gareb”, now called the “Mount of Offence.” Brother Sulley says, “Whether the ‘Mount of Offence’ is the same as the ‘hill Gareb,’ I know not.” It appears as though the geometry supports his conclusion, however. LETTER D. Next we know from Jeremiah that “The whole valley of the dead bodies, and of the ashes, and of all the fields unto the brook of Kidron,” is the valley of Hinnom. The description requires “D” to be inside the Sanctuary because this area is described as “holy unto the LORD.” LETTER G. The “Mount Zion” hill is the highest point of the city, and it is fitting that the Mountain of the LORD be then synonymous with and overlay Mount Zion. Taking this highest point (G) as a center, the encir-cling ring, or the Most Holy, may be drawn. The radius of the inner circle, as developed in the previous section is 1,110 cubits, and the distance from this circle to the inner buildings flanking the inner court is an additional 210 cubits. Completing the sketch we have Brother Sulley’s rendering. It will be seen that this square encloses the

FIGURE 19

FIGURE 20

The Garden Tomb

N


Commentators have always been puzzled by the occurrence of the word tabernacle in this verse, but the difficulty disappears when we dis-cover that the “Temple” is one thing and the “tent” another, and that their juncture occurs at the posts of the Temple Building closest to the cen-ter of the circle adjacent to the Place Left (known as “The Wall of the House”, see Figures 12 and 21).

The Tent is a feature of the Most Holy predicted in the prophecy of Isaiah 4:3-6, “And it shall come to pass, that he that is left in Zion, and

he that remaineth in Jerusalem, shall be called holy, even every one that is written among the living in Jerusalem: When the Lord shall have washed away the filth of the daughters of Zion, and shall have purged the blood of Jerusalem from the midst thereof by the spirit of judg-ment, and by the spirit of burning. And the LORD will create upon every dwelling place of mount Zion, and upon her assemblies, a cloud and smoke by day, and the shining of a flaming fire by night: for upon all the glory shall be a defense [canopy]. And there shall be a taber-nacle [tent] for a shadow in the daytime from the heat, and for a place of refuge, and for a covert from storm and from rain.”

The fulfillment of this prophecy shows that the area of the Most Holy will possess similar properties to that of a tent in the form of a canopy. “Defense” in verse 5 is the Hebrew chuppah (Strong’s H2646) meaning a canopy. Strong’s furthermore indicates this word is derived from chaphah (Strong’s H2645) which is a prime root mean-ing to cover; by implication to veil, to encase, protect and is rendered as ceil, cover, overlay in the KJV.

The prophecy also foretells an unprecedented manifes-

tation of glory when Israel is restored. The coming glory was typically portrayed in the tabernacle in the wilder-ness and in Solomon’s Temple. “Then a cloud covered the tent of the congregation, and the glory of the LORD filled the tabernacle. And Moses was not able to enter into the tent of the congregation, because the cloud abode thereon, and the glory of the LORD filled the tab-ernacle. And when the cloud was taken up from over the tabernacle, the children of Israel went onward in all their journeys: But if the cloud were not taken up, then they journeyed not till the day that it was taken up. For the cloud of the LORD was upon the tabernacle by day, and


sacrifice and resurrection be a reminder to those pilgrims as they enter or depart the Sanctuary.

There, in memory of the sacrifice of our Lord, the shed-ding of whose blood taketh away the sins of the world, the blood of thousands of bullocks, rams, and lambs will be poured out. The offenders will be able to say, “Here he was put to death; here he was crucified: here his blood was shed for sin. He was offered as the Lamb of God to take away sin. Through him we confess our sins. Accept our sacrifice, O Lord: forgive our sin.”

The outer court of the Sanctuary on the eastern side

will probably cover the site of the Garden of Gethsemane as it does in the sketch. The site of this oft-frequented resort of the Lord may still be held sacred to him and his disciples.

THE MOST HOLY

The Most Holy is the area circumscribed by the “wall of the House” as defined by its posts and columns. “Afterward he brought me to the temple, and measured the posts, six cubits broad on the one side, and six cubits broad on the other side, which was the breadth of the tabernacle” (Ezek 41:1). The use of the word tabernacle in the KJV is misleading. It should be tent. Only 3 times in 345 uses of this Hebrew word is it rendered tabernacle. “Tabernacle” is the Hebrew word sukkah (Strong’s H5521) and means a hut or lair and is rendered else-where as booth, cottage, covert, pavilion, tabernacle, and tent. The word is derived from a verb meaning round, or ring shaped. Thus, from Ezekiel 41:1, the posts of the Temple structure encircling the hill form the limit or boundary of that part of the Sanctuary called the tent (Figure 21).

FIGURE 21 - The Most Holy

The Cloud of the LORD Tent

The Wall of The House


CONCLUSION

Brother Sulley’s own words that “the period of the world’s history, then, is favorable to the supposition that Ezekiel’s vision will be understood” are realized by his work, The Temple of Ezekiel’s Prophecy. This article has only captured a small portion of the overall study, yet it is hopefully sufficient to encourage the reader to “earnestly contend for the faith which was once deliv-ered unto the saints” for the joy that we might be blessed to worship in this marvelous Temple to come, even a House of Prayer for all People.

“And it shall come to pass in the last days, that the

mountain of the LORD’s house shall be established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow unto it. And many people shall go and say, Come ye, and let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths: for out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem” (Isa. 2:2-3).


fire was on it by night, in the sight of all the house of Is-rael, throughout all their journeys” (Exod. 40:34-38; see also Num. 14:10, 16:42; 2 Chron. 5:13-14).

But as then, so in its future manifestation, this glory is

not to be fully exposed to view. It is to be covered or sur-rounded by a means of shielding. Ezekiel sees this glory entering the house and filling the central part of the inner court in Chapter 43:2, 5, 8. There is a veiling of this great manifestation of glory from those without and that is what is portrayed by Brother Sulley’s sketch on the cover of his book. In his Sanctuary perspective sketch, possibly overlooked is the cloud with its brilliance. Often mis-taken as rays of sunshine, it is actually an attempt to cap-ture the “tent” and its radiance: “A cloud and smoke by day, and the shining of a flaming fire by night.” The drawing below is an altered composite of Brother Sulley’s art work showing what it might be like as one approaches the circular inner court building and peers through the covered openings between the sub-building sections of the Temple Building. What a privilege and honor to be in the presence of the Hill of Yahweh and all His glory with His might and power in the cloud and fire seen through the covered opening.



Truth Gleaner Publications 10101 Venango Lane

Richmond, VA 23236-3612

E-mail Address: [email protected]

“Buy the truth and sell it not; Also wisdom, and instruction,

and understanding.” Proverbs 23:23

Truth Gleaner Publications Committee Bro. Albert B. Bryan Publishing Editor Bro. Alex Briley Biblical Allegories Section Bro. Rodney Dodl E-mail Distribution Bro. Scott Huie Secretary Bro. Don Northey Historical Section Bro. Tom Northey Ask for the Old Paths Section Bro. Darrell Pye Watchman Section

Hard Copy Mail Subscription (4 Issues): $16.00 U.S. International: $20.00, U.S. funds

E-mail Edition: FREE

Please direct all correspondence, subscriptions and book orders to Truth Gleaner Publications at the address below.

TRUTH CHRISTADELPHIAN GLEANER · The recent revelation by Dmitry Medvedev of the doc-trinal stance...

Documents

Transcript of TRUTH CHRISTADELPHIAN GLEANER · The recent revelation by Dmitry Medvedev of the doc-trinal stance...