...that we've been here to get to this
place, and thankfully the work here, the Holy
Spirit has revealed to us that this work...
Amen.
All right, again, back to Genesis 19, Genesis
19, 17.
We'll read the verse, then I'll probably depart
from the verse a little bit and get
back to it.
It's the way I usually do.
A little side trip here, pick up a
few things, come back to it, another side
trip.
Sometimes I find that people learn a little
more on my side trips, my rabbit trails,
so forth, and they might, if I didn't
do them, or sometimes I can pick up
a few things.
So they're not of really no benefit.
They're there for a reason.
Give me a little time to think, too,
while I'm going down something I already know.
Genesis 19, 17.
And it came to pass, when they had
brought them forth abroad, that He said, Escape
for your life.
Run for your life.
Don't look back.
Don't stay in the plain.
Escape to the mountain.
Run to the mountain.
If you don't, you'll be consumed.
That's what the verses say.
Now, notice we have a plain and we
have a mountain.
Scripture is filled with metaphors, other forms of
word pictures.
And here we have two metaphors.
It's evident what's meant by the plain.
It's evident what's meant by the mountain.
Now, God has an affinity for the use
of...
Excuse me, let me get a drink, maybe
clear my throat.
Let's try it again.
God has an affinity for the use of
metaphors, numbers, types, parables.
Some metaphors are used at the beginning of
Scripture.
We're seeing a couple here.
You really find metaphors perhaps used a little
more extensively as you get more into Scripture.
And when you get to the book of
Revelation, you'll find them used over and over
and over.
Note, let me just call attention to some
things from the book of Revelation so you'll
see what I'm saying.
You need not turn there, but you'll recall
these if you're familiar with the book of
Revelation.
In Revelation chapter 1, you have, let's just
call attention to two metaphors.
You have golden candlesticks and the seven stars.
Now, are you left to your own interpretation
as to seeking to decipher what is meant
by the seven golden candlesticks and the seven
stars?
If so, you could come up with any
multiplicity of interpretations depending upon the individual looking
at it and deciding what he wanted to
make it.
But that's not the way Scripture is set
up.
When God uses metaphors, He makes it clear
within the context or elsewhere what is meant
by the metaphor.
In Revelation 1, He uses seven candlesticks.
The seven candlesticks are what?
The seven churches that He's about to delineate
through seven epistles in chapters 2 and 3.
And the seven stars are the angels that
have been placed over these seven churches.
And when you get into these seven epistles,
they're addressed to the angel of the church
of Ephesus, Myrna, Pergamos, and so forth.
Now, don't make the mistake of associating these
angels with the pastors of these churches.
That's a mistake that many commentators make.
I'm not sure why they make it.
Because there is no such thing in the
New Testament as a pastor of a church.
In the New Testament, any church you find
had pastors.
There is no such thing as a pastor,
per se, of a church.
The New Testament ideology is more than one
pastor in a particular church.
And that will tell you right away that
the pastor of the church is not being
addressed through the use of angel.
Now, the word angel is used in the
sense of messenger.
It's used of men several times in the
New Testament.
That's very true.
It's used in that respect, but it's used
much more often of an angel.
He is a messenger.
Other tasks apply to the individual.
Or he has been assigned by the Lord
for certain specific reasons that may not be
a messenger.
But there is no other way you can
really look upon the first three chapters of
the book.
The use of angel relative to the churches.
Other than that God has placed over each
particular church an angel.
Angels are ministering.
I'm quoting out of Hebrews 1.
Angels are they not all.
That is referring to angels.
Ministering spirits sent forth to minister literally on
behalf of those who are about to inherit
salvation.
And who are these individuals that angels are
ministering on behalf of relative to salvation?
They are the ones making up the churches.
So your picture is God working through angels.
There is an angel over a particular church.
Then under that you have individuals making up
the church itself.
Angels ministering on behalf of these individuals who
are about to inherit salvation.
I will not go into that further, but
I just want to call that to your
attention for further study via our discussion of
metaphors.
Revelation 12 is a classic example of metaphors.
We have a woman, a dragon, and a
man child.
The woman is not a literal woman.
It is a metaphor used of Israel.
Now interestingly enough Israel is more than a
woman.
Israel is of course the wife of Jehovah.
Today the adulterous wife who has been driven
out among the Gentiles to effect repentance.
We talked about that last hour.
Israel is also God's first born son.
Because it is only sons who rule.
And within the human realm it is only
first born sons who rule.
Now Christians today to complete this whole picture.
The Spirit of God has been sent into
the world to call out a bride for
His son.
That is God has sent His Spirit into
the world to call out a bride for
His son.
Because His son cannot rule apart from having
a bride.
This is a principle set forth in the
opening chapters of Genesis.
In other words the son is really in
no position to rule today.
The Spirit of God calling out a bride
to complete the son, the bride of the
body.
The bride presented back to the son to
complete the son exactly as the first Adam.
The bride removed from his body presented back
to Adam to complete Adam.
In order that Adam could sit on the
throne as one complete person.
And I believe I will be talking, in
fact I know I will.
I will just drop a discussion of Adam
at that point and deal with it a
little more extensively.
Either in this or the next lesson.
As the first man, let me just say
this before I leave it.
As the first man was to sit on
the throne as one complete person.
And he must to sit there as a
complete person, he had to sit there with
his wife.
So with the second man, the last Adam,
there has to be a wife there with
the son.
He cannot sit there alone.
That is why the Spirit of God is
in the world today calling out a bride
for the son.
The marriage will occur, of course, in connection
with the judgments during the tribulation.
But the woman in Revelation 12.
The woman is identified.
There is no question about who the woman
is.
She is identified through certain things stated about
her in the chapter.
So you do not have to surmise.
The dragon, the dragon is specifically stated to
be Satan.
The man-child, so many make the mistake
of identifying the man-child with Christ.
And going back 2,000 years and trying
to bring something that happened 2,000 years
ago into something that really is yet to
happen.
Israel bringing forth the man-child in the
middle of the tribulation.
And the man-child is identified.
There is no question about that.
The man-child is identified as first fruits
out of the nation of Israel.
It is identified as the 144,000 who
will proclaim the message of the kingdom throughout
the earth to the Gentiles during the last
three and a half years of the tribulation.
So these metaphors are identified.
In chapter 13, you have two beasts.
You have a beast out of the sea,
a beast out of the land.
Metaphors used.
In Daniel, it is beasts relative to Gentile
power.
This is the last of the beasts.
The final form of Gentile world power out
of Daniel.
Beast and his false prophet.
He is a Gentile coming out of a
Gentile land.
And the false prophet, another beast coming out
of...
It is really translated earth, I believe, in
most versions of Scripture.
It is the same word for land.
It can be translated either land or earth.
This apparently is a Jewish connection seen in
Revelation 13.
I made the mistake years ago identifying the
first beast, not necessarily separate from the second,
but trying to put them together and saying
that the first beast would be Jewish, an
Assyrian Jew coming out of a Gentile land,
but be Jewish.
No, that is not the way it is.
The first beast will be a Gentile coming
out of the borders of the old kingdom
of Assyria out of a Gentile land.
The second beast will come out of the
land of Israel and form the Jewish connection
and possibly be very instrumental in this first
beast making the seven-year covenant with Israel.
Chapters 17 and 18, again, numerous metaphors used
in those chapters.
You have a harlot.
You have a beast.
You have waters.
You have fire.
But they are identified.
The waters where the harlot sits are peoples,
multitudes, nations, and tongues.
So you know what the waters represent.
The beast, that is the same beast out
of chapter 13.
The beast out of the sea, the Gentile
final Assyrian, the Gentile world ruler of the
end time.
The harlot, a lot make the mistake of
associating that with the Roman Catholic Church or
the Roman system, a governmental system.
It has nothing to do with either.
Bear something in mind about what you are
finding in the book of Revelation.
There is nothing in that book that does
not have its roots in the Old Testament.
Now you could find the Roman, well, I
am not sure you really could.
You can find it in history, but not
necessarily Old Testament history.
That is a governmental form of the Roman
Empire.
You could never find the Roman Catholic Church
in Old Testament history.
And so many want to make the harlot
the Roman Catholic Church, especially individuals who have
been saved out of the Roman Catholic Church,
because they want to see that church burn.
I mean, it is something ingrained within them.
They just have a hatred for the Church
of Rome because they realize how they were
blinded for years and years, and all at
once the light comes on, say, relative to
eternal salvation, not necessarily relative to the word
of the kingdom.
It is Protestantism that has blinded the eyes
of individuals in the ongoing aspect of the
gospel message.
You see, the gospel, there is one gospel
that has different aspects to it.
Salvation by grace, then we come into another
aspect of the gospel.
The complete gospel has to do with the
complete salvation of man.
But the harlot can be none other than
Israel through things stated in the chapter.
And the fire has to do with bringing
Israel to the place of repentance, the harlot
being burned, that having to do with harlotry
done away with.
Now it sees, I won't go into it
further than that, but it sees things that
God deals with through this type of language
in Scripture, through metaphors.
Now, he has an affinity for numbers.
This is the way Scripture starts out, six
and seven days.
We have a creation, we have a ruin
of that creation.
God restores this ruined creation over six days'
time and rests the seventh day.
The foundation for the whole of Scripture is
established, set, in an unchangeable fashion at that
point.
And from that point forward, the rest of
the Scripture is commentary, building upon the foundation
which has already been established.
Now, I made some statement about the Creation
Research Society, and I didn't go on and
talk about it.
I don't like to say anything ill-will
about another group.
But let me clarify something that I somewhat
left hanging in a message, maybe it was
last yesterday in Barksdale.
I just alluded to this group that there
was something wrong with the way they looked
at Genesis 1.
And what's wrong with it?
They're in existence to form an apology, first
of all.
They're in existence to form an apology for
that which needs no apology.
And they begin their apology by destroying the
foundations upon which that for which they are
seeking to form an apology rests.
Now, if that sounds like a bunch of
double talk, what I'm saying is, they're seeking
to provide a defense for this Scripture through
scientific means.
This Scripture doesn't need any defense.
It will defend itself.
It's like a lion.
Turn him loose.
He'll defend himself.
You don't have to try to defend him.
But they insist upon a creationist look at
Genesis 1.
It's not days of restoration.
In fact, you have to have a degree,
a master's degree, in a scientific field to
belong to their group.
If you don't have the master's degree, you
can't belong, and there's one other stipulation.
You have to look upon Genesis 1 as
days of creation, not restoration.
That destroys the whole foundation upon which Scripture
is built.
That's what I'm saying.
They begin their apology through destroying the very
foundation upon that for which they're seeking to
present an apology rests.
But let's drop that at that point.
I just wanted to clarify what I was
referring to, and I don't mind if some
of them hear this.
They may need to hear this.
But I've tried to talk to some of
them, and it's like trying to talk to
some of the Christians about the Word of
the Kingdom.
They're not interested.
So let's let it go at that.
Numbers.
You keep going from Genesis 1 and 2.
And I'll be over in chapter 8 toward
either the end of this message or the
other, and I'll show you something about numbers
and so forth.
And during the time of the flood.
But if you follow this ideology through how
God uses numbers, you find specific numbers used
over and over.
For example, let's state it this way.
3, 7, 10, 12, and 40.
Those would be complete numbers.
And you find those used over and over
again.
Three is the number of divine perfection.
Seven is the number.
It shows the completeness of that which is
in view.
It's the number God uses, pointing to the
seventh day.
Six is man's number.
And if people don't believe there's significance in
numbers, they might want to take a look
at Revelation 13 and what God Himself has
to say about the number six.
The man of sin.
His number will be 666.
I had a Bible teacher in 1958.
I believe he had the best thing to
say about that number I've ever heard.
People try to identify the Antichrist.
They've been trying it for years.
They've tried every president we've had.
John Kennedy, Ronald Reagan, all of them.
They've tried to identify these presidents or associate
them with the Antichrist.
Prince Charles was associated with the Antichrist.
That's in modern times.
You back up behind that.
Kissinger, by the way, was an Antichrist.
On and on and on and on.
They come up with these ideas.
But this Bible teacher had this to say.
He said, I can tell you exactly who
the Antichrist will be.
He said, there's no question about it.
You read the latter end of the 13th
chapter of the book of Revelation.
His number is 666.
And that is specifically stated to be the
number of a man in that chapter.
The person who has wisdom, let him have
understanding.
It's the number of man.
He says, here is who the Antichrist will
be.
One short of perfection.
Three is the number of divine perfection.
He'll look upon himself as God.
He'll be the nearest thing that man can
associate with God.
But he's still a man.
He didn't go on to say those things.
He just pointed out the three statements I
made.
Here's his identity.
And that's it.
That's what Scripture has to say about his
identity.
The number is 6 and 7.
Six, of course, is man's number.
Seven, God's number.
And it's at the end of six days
that Christ took Peter, James, and John upon
the mountain.
We're going to see the mountain has to
do with the kingdom.
These numbers are significant.
Don't overlook the significance of numbers in Scripture.
Don't overlook the significance of types.
I just don't understand the ideology that people
have relative to types.
They're not taught.
Individuals are afraid of them.
They come up with the idea that only
certain types exist.
They must specifically be stated to be a
type.
Else they cannot be a type.
And on and on and on.
They say types break down.
Well, if types break down, then God made
something which was imperfect.
God made the type.
He made the antitype.
He made the type perfect.
He made the antitype perfect.
How do you find perfection in one and
imperfection in the other?
It's as F.G. Meyer stated, types are
like mathematics.
If a person had the knowledge to deal
with them, as God sees the types, He
could carry them to the nth degree, and
they would never break down.
They break down in man's finite mind.
Now, if people want to say that the
Bible has to specifically say that something is
a type before we deal with it as
a type, I have no qualms with that.
Because all I have to do is take
Scripture and compare it with Scripture, put a
few Scriptures together, and it's very easy to
show that all history is interwoven, that is,
types have been interwoven throughout all Old Testament
history.
Let me turn that around and say that
there is no such thing as Old Testament
history separated from typology.
It is a very simple matter to take
and put Scripture together and see that this
is the case.
So, like I say, I have no problem
with that.
All you have to do is put 1
Corinthians 10, verses 6-11, Luke 24, where
Christ, dealing with the two disciples on the
road to Emmaus, began at Moses and the
prophets and expounded unto them in all the
Scriptures.
Not in the Scriptures all, but in all
the Scriptures the things concerning Himself.
All of the Old Testament Scriptures are about
Christ.
The story of Joseph is about Christ.
There is no specific statement anywhere in Scripture
that states that Joseph is a type of
Christ, that he is a statement in those
words.
But, you start putting these Scriptures together, and
you know that the life of Joseph is
dealing with Christ.
How in the world can a person go
through Genesis 37-45 and not see Christ
on almost everything that is stated?
The whole story of Christ is told.
That is, from the time He came seeking
His brethren, to out in the Messianic era,
to the time that He dealt with His
brethren again.
And on beyond that, when His brethren went
forth proclaiming, Joseph is alive, and He is
governor over the entire earth.
Jesus is alive, and He is governor over
the entire earth.
This is a message Israel is going to
go forth proclaiming one day.
This is in the account of Joseph.
How do they miss it?
I will never know.
It is beyond me.
But they do.
Parables.
There is another thing.
There is an expression.
Well, the statement is that you can only
teach one central truth from a parable.
Parables are given to teach one central truth.
You cannot go into detail on parables.
I am not sure what this means, but
I have seen it in print.
Do not try to make parables walk on
all fours.
Somebody will have to explain that to me.
I know what the man is trying to
say.
He is trying to say that you can
only derive so much from a parable.
Do not try to go beyond what you
can derive.
Well, parables are like types.
If you had the mind to do it,
you could carry that to the nth degree.
Let me explain what a parable is.
It is so simple, and then you will
not have trouble with parables.
Parables are given to explain.
They are not given to hide anything.
Christ never tried to hide things.
Parables are given to explain.
Now, the Greek word is just like our
English word.
The English word is taken from the Greek
word.
The Greek word is parabale.
It is a compound word.
Para is alongside.
Bale is to cast or to throw, to
place.
It is one truth placed alongside what you
placed alongside of.
Well, there has to be a prior existing
truth.
It is placed alongside of a prior truth
to help explain, provide further commentary on that
prior truth.
That is all a parable is.
It is not a heavenly story with an
earthly meaning.
It is one truth placed alongside of a
prior existing truth.
And if you want to call it a
heavenly story, then the whole Bible would have
to be classed in that same category.
You cannot have one in one category and
one in the other.
And, of course, the origin of this is
from heaven.
It is directed to man in order that
man might understand God's plans, purposes, etc.
Now, be careful not to force meanings into
metaphors.
Types, parables, numbers.
Compare Scripture with Scripture.
Sometimes what is meant by the metaphor is
right within context.
Sometimes not so.
Insofar as, say, the candlesticks, seven candlesticks in
the first chapter of the book of Revelation,
it explains what the seven candlesticks represent.
But if you take a verse like Isaiah
chapter 2, the mountain of the Lord's house
shall be established at the top of the
mountains.
Well, there are metaphors used there.
The mountain of the Lord's house.
You have a double.
You have mountain and house.
Well, a house, that is simple.
You compare Scripture with Scripture.
A house has to do with people like
the house of Israel.
Or it can have to do with a
family.
The house of David.
Things of that nature.
But the mountain of the Lord's house.
Neither metaphor is explained within the context.
But they are dealt with after a certain
fashion enough times in Scripture that there can
be no question relative to what is meant
by these metaphors.
A mountain represents or signifies what?
It signifies a kingdom.
Now let me put that in English without
the metaphors.
The kingdom of the Lord with His people
will be elevated above all world kingdoms in
that date.
The Lord's kingdom above all.
I was reading one commentary on Isaiah 2.
The man failing to recognize metaphors.
He should have known better.
He has a degree out of a leading
seminary.
He has been writing and studying for years.
But his commentary on Isaiah 2.
He said apparently the Lord's kingdom will be
placed at the top of earthly mountains.
That is not what is being dealt with.
Mountain is used as a metaphor.
It is talking about the kingdom.
The kingdom of the Lord will be placed
above all other earthly kingdoms.
The Lord's kingdom of course will cover the
entire earth.
He will rule from this central point.
Israel will rule from this central point.
Christ and His bride ruling from a heavenly
point.
Christ having a dual reign in that respect.
But the kingdoms of this world looked upon
in a lesser sense.
In a sub sense.
The kingdom of the Lord looked upon ruling
over all.
In a superior, a higher sense.
I have quoted Isaiah 2 and Daniel 2.
The stone cut out of a mountain.
This is right at the end of Gentile
world power.
The power is represented by an image.
A head of gold.
Breasts and arms of silver.
Belly and thighs of brass.
Legs of iron.
Feet part of iron and part of clay.
It goes all the way from Nebuchadnezzar to
the final form of Gentile world power.
To the man of sin.
Antichrist.
And the stone.
What does the stone point to?
It is another metaphor pointing to Christ.
Pointing to His kingdom.
The stone cut out of the mountain.
It is not cut out of a valley.
It is cut out of a mountain.
Without hands.
Man has nothing to do with it.
It is God who will bring this into
being in that day.
The stone cut out of the mountain without
hands.
Strikes the image where?
At the head?
Breasts?
No.
At the feet.
The final form.
And the whole image is destroyed.
From the head of gold and so forth.
All of the previous form of Gentile world
power will be incorporated in the final form.
All of the previous forms in the final
form.
That is seen in both Daniel 2 and
Daniel 7.
Where this 2600 or so year period of
Gentile world power is seen under the heading
of four beasts.
Rather than four parts of an image.
And destruction there occurs at the end.
The latter part of just like in the
first in Daniel 2.
Strikes at the feet.
It occurs following the four beasts.
At the end of the picture.
It occurs at the end of the days.
At the end of the time.
Immediately before the Messianic era.
Ezekiel 28.
Turn to Ezekiel 28.
I want to show you an interesting verse.
Many people overlook something here.
In Ezekiel 28.14. I'll wait just a
minute and let everyone turn.
I want you to see this.
Ezekiel 28.14. Thou art the anointed cherub
that covereth.
It's talking about Satan.
And I have set thee so.
Note who has placed Satan in power.
It's God.
In accord with what we saw in Daniel
4.
I'm the one who placed you in power.
Thou wast upon the holy mountain of God.
See a metaphor is being used there.
It's not talking about a literal physical mountain.
Thou wast upon the holy mountain of God.
You walked up and down in the midst
of the stones of fire.
You were perfect in your ways from the
day that you were created.
So you know that it's not a man.
Only Adam was created.
Until iniquity was found in you.
Look down in the latter part of verse
16.
I will cast thee as profane out of
the mountain of God.
See, this earth forms one mountain within the
kingdom of God.
Satan placed over this mountain, over this kingdom.
The Lord placed him over this kingdom.
The Lord is going to cast him out
of this kingdom.
And he is going to place man in
the position which Satan at one time occupied.
And here's another interesting thought.
When Christians appear before the judgment seat of
Christ, works will be tried through fire.
Decisions, determinations will be effected.
But it is not Christ who places Christians
in positions of power.
God alone reserves that position unto himself.
If a Christian is found worthy, it is
God who will place that Christian in the
position he will occupy during the Messianic era.
God will place his Son, that is, he
will remove Satan his angel.
He will place his Son and Christians in
specific positions in accord with findings at the
judgment seat.
Back to Genesis 19.
I wanted to show you that about the
mountain in Ezekiel 28 relative to the kingdom,
the way it's used.
I might ought to digress a little bit
at this point before we get into something
in Genesis.
No, let me call attention to what I
want you to see in Genesis 19 first.
I've saved this for this study.
Then I'm going to digress and go back
to Genesis 8.
Now the King James, Genesis 19, 17, down
in the verse, the fourth part of the
five commands.
The fourth command, escape to the mountain.
Does anyone want to read out of their
NASB?
I know what it says.
I don't have to have you read.
You can just look at it yourself.
Escape to, not mountain, but mountains.
Escape to the mountains.
The NIV reads the same way.
Would you like to know how the Hebrew
text reads?
Would you like to know how the Septuagint,
which is the Greek version of the Old
Testament, reads?
They both read the same way.
They read mountain, not mountains.
They read singular.
The plural use of mountain destroys the whole
of the text.
Now why the translators wanted to translate a
singular word plural, I have no idea.
But they did it in the NASB.
They did it in the NIV.
For some reason the King James translators, though
they were lacking in some places, they have
it exactly right here.
Escape to the mountain.
It's singular.
The Lord's kingdom is singular.
Isaiah 2.
The mountain of the Lord's house.
Not the mountains of the Lord's house.
The mountain of the Lord's house.
Shall be established at the top of the,
now we're plural, mountains.
You see, sub-kingdoms.
The kingdoms of this world.
Satan rules today over one kingdom.
With many sub-kingdoms.
Christ in that coming day will rule in
one kingdom over sub-kingdoms.
It's one mountain placed over many mountains.
Now we are to escape not to the
many mountains.
We are to escape to the mountain.
Alright.
I wanted to show you that.
Then just sit back and relax a little
bit.
Well, you might want to turn to Genesis
8.
I may want to show you something.
Just sit back and let me talk for
a little bit.
On the Noachian flood.
It was the second month, the 17th day
of the month.
God allowed waters to begin coming down.
Noah, his family, animals safe in the ark.
The door had been shut for a few
days.
He allowed the water, he opened the windows
of heaven.
The floodgates of heaven.
Water started pouring out of these floodgates.
Now this is not water taken up into
the atmosphere via evaporation.
Like rain such as we have today.
The atmosphere can only hold so much water.
If you have the atmosphere completely saturated today.
And you have it desaturated via rain.
Say over a very short period of time.
You will have about seven, eight inches fall.
That's all the atmosphere can hold.
In the pre-flood world, there were vast
amounts of water above the atmosphere.
You're told that in Genesis 1.
Vast amounts of water above the atmosphere.
There were vast quantities of water below the
surface of the earth.
Now there were two sources of water for
the flood.
God opened the windows of heaven.
Just like opening a window and just letting
this water pour out.
The water came from above.
And he opened the earth up.
Allowed water to begin gushing out from below.
So the water coming up, the water coming
down flooded the earth.
How high the Antediluvian mountains were.
We have no possible way to even begin
to ascertain.
They could have been just a few thousand
feet.
The highest mountain could have only been say
5,000.
Something like that.
We didn't have mountains like the Himalayas and
so forth in the Antediluvian world.
It seems evident from the way God brought
about a restoration.
Which I'll get to in a little bit.
But this continued to happen.
The word that's used for rain is in
the Hebrew text it has to do with
torrential rain.
It probably far exceeds any downpour that you've
seen today.
When a thunderstorm comes through and you just
have torrential rain.
It's probably far in excess of that along
with the waters coming up.
The waters probably rose at a rapid rate.
You had mass chaos undoubtedly in those days.
Man and animals seeking higher ground.
At the end of 40 days the highest
hill on earth was covered.
Now what happened?
There's another number in scripture.
40.
You see 40 is used numerous times.
Christ was tempted throughout a 40 day period.
Moses was on the mount 40 days.
Christ had a 40 day period in his
post resurrection ministry.
40 has a meaning.
It has to do with a complete number.
So at the end of a complete numerical
sequence.
The highest hill on the earth at the
end of 40 days.
It was covered to a depth of about
25 feet.
That's all right.
I can't think of the word.
But in the text one word is used.
It's about 25 feet.
Let me find that word right quick.
Let's see.
Rain was upon the earth 40 days 40
nights and 12 cubits.
That's the word I was trying to use.
It's down in verse 27.
It was covered to a depth of 15
cubits which is about 25 feet roughly.
But what happened at the end of 40
days?
Now people have the idea that the rain
stopped and so forth.
That's not true.
The rain continued.
Nothing really happened in the way of the
rainfall coming down and the subterranean water coming
up.
It just gives a point where the highest
hill under heaven was covered at the end
of a complete period of time.
Torrential rain continued to come down for another
110 days.
Subterranean water continued to come up for another
110 days.
It was at the end of 150 days
that God closed the windows of heaven, stopped
the subterranean water from coming up.
And the ark rested at the end of
150 days.
Look at Genesis 8.4. The ark rested
in the seventh month on the 17th day
of the month.
Note the flood.
The water began coming down the second month,
the 17th day.
So we're five months later, 30 days to
the month, 150 days.
The ark rested in the seventh month on
the 17th day of the month upon the
mountains of Ararat.
And the word mountainary is plural.
It's translated correctly.
And sometimes, now sometimes, a plural use is,
there is a plural use, say, would be
used to denote a particular point.
This wouldn't be out of place with the
way the Hebrew text sometimes uses, say, a
plural but pointing to a certain spot on
the mountains.
And almost any commentator you go to, they're
going to tell you that at the end
of the 150 days, the ark rested on
the top of a mountain within the Ararat
range.
Ararat was a range of mountains upon the
mountains of Ararat.
But did it rest upon the mountains at
the end of 110 days?
Think about it a little bit.
At the end of 40 days, the waters
had risen sufficiently to cover the highest hill
on earth.
And this wasn't necessarily one of the Ararat
mountains or hills.
The torrential rain continued to fall for another
110 days.
Waters continued to come up for 110 more
days.
How could the ark still be right above
the highest point on earth to rest at
the end of the 150th day, like it
states here?
Well, something is wrong.
Because over two months later, Noah sent out
a dove, and the dove couldn't find any
dry land around the ark.
That is, something is wrong.
If the ark rested on this mountain and
the water started to go down at the
end of the 150th day, as soon as
God closed the floodgates of heaven, stopped the
water from coming up, the waters began to
go down.
How did they go down?
Did the water begin to evaporate?
Bear something in mind.
If the water began to evaporate, you'd get
seven or eight inches of drop.
Then you'd have rain come down, and the
water of the level would come back up.
Down about eight, seven or eight inches, up
back and forth.
Do that forever.
You'd have a shoreless ocean.
Something else happened.
Well, I believe it's Psalm 108 tells you.
It's right in there.
We can look it up later.
God began to raise landmasses, began to lower
other landmasses, which we know today as ocean
basins.
The water rushing out into these ocean basins,
the water began to go down through that
means.
Now, if God did that and began to
raise landmasses, and the ark was sitting right
on this mountain peak, and it rested there,
at the point God began to even raise
this mountain more, and Noah sends out a
dove over two months later, and the dove
can't find any dry land around the ark,
there's something wrong.
There's something wrong with the translation.
Let's take a look at verse 4 again.
The ark rested on the seventeenth day of
the month.
See that word, upon?
Go back to verse 8, where it states
that God made a, this is the word
spirit, it's the word ruad that translated spirit
in Genesis 1-2.
God is about to restore a ruined creation.
How does He restore a ruined creation?
The spirit of God moves in Genesis 1
-2, and that's the way He's about to
restore it here.
God made a ruad, His spirit, to pass
over.
Now, note the word over.
That's the same word that's translated upon in
verse 4.
It's a little Hebrew word pronounced, the best
we can do is pronounce it owl, like
an owl in a tree, a bird.
It's al in Hebrew.
There's a couple, let's see, there's a, well,
we have to put vowels in the Hebrew.
I was trying to think if there was
an intranslatable part of that word.
But that's the best you can do.
It's just a little two-letter word.
And it means upon, over, above.
It can mean any one of those.
And the exact understanding and meaning of the
word has to be determined by the context.
It's used in Genesis 1 of birds flying
over the earth.
The picture here contextually on both sides of
Genesis 8-4, what you have read before
this time, what you read after this time,
that's my cell ringing in there, I'll get
it in a little bit.
What you read after this time will tell
you that the word in Genesis 8-4
must be translated over, not upon.
At the end of 150 days, the ark
rested over, at some point over, the Ararat
mountain range.
Now look at the symbolism within the picture
this will present.
I've gone through all of that to present
a picture that you will miss entirely if
you have the ark resting on the mountains
of Ararat at the end of 150 days.
The ark was resting at a point over
these mountains.
It's simply placing the ark relative to the
Ararat range.
It may have been, it could have been
thousands of feet down to that range.
We're not told.
It was somewhere far above the Ararat range.
We have Noah and his family inside the
ark.
Noah representing the nation of Israel being saved
through the flood, through the destruction that is
about to come.
Mountains, note, he's placed above the mountains.
Mountains representing world kingdoms that will exist during
the Messianic era.
And Israel will be placed above these kingdoms.
That's the picture you have at the end
of this destruction.
And that is exactly what will occur at
the end of the destruction out ahead.
And you could continue this in Genesis 9
relative to what we see there.
And I'm going to leave the story at
that point.
And I believe I'll probably wait until tomorrow
to come back and go through Genesis 1
-11 and very briefly tie all of this
together.
And I'll deal with just a little bit
of this very briefly again tomorrow.
And I'll not deal with it to any
extent since I've dealt with it today.
But I want to tie the whole of
Genesis 1-11 together and show you how
God uses types, metaphors, numbers, etc.
to provide a complete sequence of what He
is about to reveal in His Word from
one end to the other.
Now let me hurry through this.
In fact, I've deviated from my outline quite
a bit.
Let me somewhat stay with it because I
want to point out that in Genesis 1,
God created man with a purpose and view.
He created a man in the image and
likeness of God, an entirely new creation in
the universe, created for the stated purpose of
having dominion for the first time in the
history of the universe.
It's possible that the earth was created, that
the whole universe was not created at one
point in time.
It's possible that the earth was later created,
say, at a later point in time.
I wouldn't discount that.
Probably I'd go along more with the idea
that the whole of the universe created at
once.
It's immaterial.
But for the first time in the history
of the whole of the universe, particularly the
earth within the universe, God had an individual
created in His image and likeness that could
rule within His kingdom.
And this individual was created to rule first.
He was created for a dual purpose.
He was created to first rule one province
in this kingdom.
And after that, after He ruled with Messiah,
that is, the man, Christ Jesus, with His
bride, after this man ruled for 1,000
years, bringing a chaos back into a cosmos,
bringing that which had been ruined back into
that which was no longer a ruin, then
the kingdom would be delivered up to the
Father that God might be all in all.
You'll find that in 1 Corinthians 15.
Then you find the new heavens and the
new earth.
The new earth could very well be much
larger than the present earth.
It apparently will be to accommodate the new
Jerusalem, which is a rather large city, some
1,500 miles on the side, 1,500
miles high.
Those are roughly because we translated cubits into
miles.
God will move His throne from the point
it exists today to the new earth.
There will be the throne of God and
of the Lamb.
Christ with His bride will continue to rule,
but their rule will not be over this
earth.
Their rule then will extend out in the
universe.
What position man will occupy in that day?
I have no idea.
I answer a lot of questions these days
by saying, well, what does the Bible say
about it?
Well, I don't know.
I don't know where the Bible says anything
about it, but I'd like your opinion.
What good does my opinion do?
It doesn't do any good.
The Bible really doesn't say what position man
will occupy in that day, so let's leave
it alone.
There seems to be no question.
I'll just surmise just a moment, but still
not go beyond Scripture.
Angels rule out there today.
There seems no indication that anything will change
within the angelic rule, so apparently man will
occupy some position between, say, God and angels.
I'm just saying apparently.
I don't know, but I'm not taking it
beyond that.
You really don't have anything to study on.
I don't say you can study that out,
but Scripture doesn't have anything you can study
out along that line.
Now, man's fall was with a view to
the kingdom.
Satan, the incumbent ruler, brought about man's fall
in order that man may no longer be
able to replace him.
Now, let me point out a common fallacy.
It's commonly believed that Satan wrested the scepter
from man, that God created man, gave the
scepter to man.
Satan came in, took the scepter from man.
That can't be true at all.
Note who it is that places rulers and
removes rulers.
That would be working outside of what has
already been recorded.
That is, it is only God who can
place a ruler.
It is only God who can remove a
ruler.
Satan at one time sought to exalt his
throne.
He sought to usurp God's authority, his position,
in this respect.
He didn't succeed at all.
God didn't immediately take the scepter from man.
He refused to allow Satan to exalt his
throne.
He had placed Satan over this earth, but
now Satan was a fallen ruler.
Now Satan must rule with the knowledge that
he one day will be replaced.
But the biblical principle is that the incumbent
ruler continues to hold the scepter until his
replacement is on the scene and ready to
take the scepter.
That's why Satan still has the scepter.
His replacement, Christ, could come on the scene
today, but Christ doesn't have a bride to
reign with him.
Therefore, it's not time.
It's not God's time.
But one day it will be God's time.
Then the man will come forth, the man
Christ Jesus, with his bride.
Then the scepter will be taken.
God will remove the incumbent ruler and place
the coming ruler.
You see how silly it is to say
that Satan came in and took the scepter
from man.
That's totally non-biblical.
It's a non-biblical way of looking at
the matter, which has been clearly explained elsewhere
in Scripture.
Now note this.
Satan had to bring about man's fall before
he ever took the scepter.
If man had ever taken the scepter, it
would have done no good for Satan to
bring about his fall because the kingdom would
already have been taken from Satan.
And even if Satan did bring about his
fall, all you would then have was a
fallen ruler, just like you have a fallen
ruler today, who would be biding his time,
awaiting God replacing him.
Man never held the scepter.
He couldn't have held the scepter.
Satan held the scepter in the beginning.
No change took place at man's fall.
But Satan knew that he had to bring
about man's fall before he ever took the
scepter.
And he did.
Then God set about to redeem man in
order that man might one day be in
a position to take the scepter.
We'll perhaps go into that a little bit
more tomorrow within another frame of reference.
Man's redemption, of course, just as his creation,
is with a view to the kingdom.
Anything you deal with in relation to man,
that is saved man.
It's really unsaved man too.
It's with a view to the kingdom.
Unsaved man is led to a saving knowledge
of Christ with a view to something beyond
that saving knowledge or salvation by grace.
He's been saved for a purpose.
So you can extend this throughout the whole
of mankind.
A kingdom is in the offing.
A kingdom is lying out there.
We have a kingdom present which one day
will come under the rule of man.
I see that I had all of this
in my notes to tie these chapters together
today.
Let me do it tomorrow.
It's just a little bit too much tomorrow
morning.
It's a little bit too much to do
today.
I may do it at the beginning of
the message tomorrow.
I may do it somewhere in the message.
But I'll put it in there.
We might have a message that's a little
bit longer tomorrow.
But let's go ahead and bring this to
a close.
I've been speaking long enough.
I think I've given you enough food for
thought.
And I know my former pastor, A.
Edwin Wilson, I don't know.
This is no reflection on anyone.
But he would speak so long and he'd
just stop.
He would say, an eight-ounce glass will
only hold eight ounces.
Let's think about it.
Come back tomorrow when you have a little
bit of space.
Our Father, we're thankful that, again, that you've
allowed us to look into your word.
I ask that you might take your word,
that individuals might be receptive to your word.
Take your word, bear it home.
To receptive individuals, I say, as the Spirit
takes this word, directs, leads, guides.
For it's in Christ's name, amen.
Let me just take a second to mention
a couple of things.
We're finishing up here just a little bit
earlier than what we had expected.
And so we want to take advantage of
that like this.
Probably we're not really hungry enough to eat
yet.
But we do have some delicious barbecue that
we hope you'll stay for.
But rather than just put it out right
now, let's do this.
We've heard some wonderful things from Arlen.
You notice when Arlen delivers a message, for
me what it's like is getting a lot
of wonderful tune-up on my vision of
Scripture.
And I haven't mentioned this to Arlen yet,
so we're not going to put him on
the spot.
We'll leave it completely up to him.
But if in the time that we have
in getting ready to put food out, we
all can have this time to just get
to know each other better and to have
some fellowship.
And I hope we won't ignore the things
that we've been hearing.
Sometimes it's in the fellowship that we start
to crystallize things that we've heard and questions
that we might have.
And rather than just subject Arlen to a
barrage of questions which can be confusing for
everybody, if you do have a question that
you'd like to hear more about, let's try
this out.
Write it down.
I'll give those to Arlen and let him
decide if he feels like addressing any of
those or not.
He may not feel like it's something that
would be beneficial to get into.
But if he does feel like giving us
a little bit further word on anything that
we might write down for him to consider,
we could only benefit.
So let's use this time to fellowship and
keep this in mind.
We don't always have each other together like
this.
And we also don't always have Arlen with
us.
And so rather than just now begin to
talk about gardening and every other kind of
thing we might think of, let's do what
we can to take full advantage of this.
And in a little while, we will begin
to put out the food.
Meanwhile, walk around, stretch your legs, get to
know each other.
And then we'll come back again and just
see if Arlen feels like dealing with any
questions that we might have.
We won't tax you, Arlen, if you do
feel like it or you don't.
It's just completely up to you.
Yeah, I figured that.
I don't want to put you on the
spot.
So we'll just wait and see.
All right.
I hope you will hang around, everybody that
can, and eat this barbecue dinner we're going
to have.